UN (useless nitwits) Commission on Human Rights

Whose rights? Why should you be surprised? Read Article 29(3) of the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Hillary says she "learned a lot."

Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton vowed Monday to create a universal health care system if elected, saying she "learned a lot" during the failed health care effort of her husband's presidency.

"We're going to have universal health care when I'm president _ there's no doubt about that. We're going to get it done," the New York senator and front-runner for the 2008 nomination said.

Is this what you're looking forward to?

Down envy, down, down!!!

It's a long, long way from my two M21 rifles. (one had a Starlight instead of the ART)

Tennessee, the home of SGTs York and Roark, and Ronny Barrett.

Of course I am, and you?

Notice to all small employers in Georgia:

Are you ready for Georgia State Senate Bill 150?

You have to read past the innocuous start that says "To amend Chapter 4 of Title 26 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to pharmacists and pharmacies, so as to require pharmacies to submit certain performance and cost data to the Department of Community Health" to find out that...

A pair of “Republican” state senators have decided that if you wish to offer medical insurance benefits, that you should have it administered by the state government and pay the government additional fees over your taxes and insurance premiums for the privilege.

In order to do this the state government will set up the “Georgia Health Insurance Exchange”as follows (check out 3 & 4 below):

33-62-5.
The exchange shall have the power to:
(1) Contract with vendors to perform one or more of the functions specified in Code Section 33-62-4;
(2) Contract with private or public social service agencies to administer application, eligibility verification, enrollment, and premium payments for specified groups or populations of eligible individuals or participating individuals;
(3) Contract with employers to act as the plan administrator for participating employer plans, subject to the provisions of Code Section 33-62-11, and to undertake the obligations required by federal law of a plan administrator;
(4) Set and collect fees from participating individuals, participating employer plans, and participating insurance plans sufficient to fund the cost of administering the exchange;
(5) Seek and directly receive grant funding from the United States government, departments or agencies of this state, county or municipal governments, or private philanthropic organizations to defray the costs of operating the exchange;
(6) Establish and administer rules and procedures governing the operations of the exchange;
(7) Establish one or more service centers within this state to facilitate enrollment;
(8) Sue and be sued or otherwise take any necessary or proper legal action; and
(9) Establish bank accounts and borrow money.

So you say “I don’t need the government to administer my health plan.” They have an answer for that:

33-62-14.
(a) A carrier shall not issue or renew an individual health benefit plan, other than through the exchange established under Code Section 33-62-2, after the first day of the plan year following the first regular open season conducted by the exchange in accordance with Code Section 33-62-6.
(b) A carrier shall not issue or renew a group health benefit plan to a small employer with 50 or fewer employees, other than through the exchange established under Code Section 33-62-2, after the first day of the plan year following the first regular open season conducted by the exchange in accordance with Code Section 33-62-6.

“Okay. Fine.” You say,”It’s too much trouble. I’ll just not offer medical insurance” They still have requirements (pay particular attention to (a)1):

33-62-13.
(a) Each employer in the State of Georgia shall annually file with the Commissioner a form for each employee employed within this state indicating the health insurance coverage status of the employee and the employee´s dependents, including the source of coverage and the name of the insurer or plan sponsor, and, if no coverage is indicated:
(1) The employee´s election, in lieu of insurance coverage, to post a bond or establish an account in accordance with Code Section 33-66-15;
(2) The employee´s election to apply or not apply for coverage through the exchange; and
(3) The employee´s election to be considered or not to be considered for any publicly financed health insurance program or premium subsidy program administered by this state.
(b) Each form shall be signed by the individual to whom it pertains.
(c) Each self-employed individual in this state shall annually file the same form with the Commissioner.

So everyone will need a bond or an account or insurance. I wonder if this applies to illegal immigrants?

Meanwhile for the big boys, something that would lower everyone’s costs will be available:

33-63-1.
The General Assembly recognizes the need for individuals, employers, and other purchasers of health insurance coverage in this state to have the opportunity to choose health insurance plans that are more affordable and flexible than existing market policies offering accident and sickness insurance coverage. Therefore, the General Assembly seeks to increase the availability of health insurance coverage by allowing insurers authorized to engage in the business of insurance in selected states to issue accident and sickness policies in Georgia.

33-63-2.
The selected out-of-state insurers shall not be required to offer or provide state mandated health benefits required by Georgia law or regulations in health insurance policies sold to Georgia residents.

So the relief of the mandates is only allowed if the government takes over. When the government was busily installing those mandates, they were necessary, why aren’t they now?

And not only are unlicensed companies invited to the government’s all-you-can-stand porkfest but they are carving out other exceptions to the insurance law on the books:

33-62-12.
(a) In cases when a producer licensed in this state enrolls an eligible individual or group in the exchange, the plan chosen by each individual shall pay the producer a commission on premium either in an amount determined by the board of directors of the exchange or in the amount or amounts voluntarily agreed to by the various carriers and producers.
(b) In cases when a membership organization enrolls its eligible members, or the eligible members of its member entities, in the exchange, the plan chosen by each individual shall pay the organization a fee equal to the commission specified in subsection (a) of this Code section. Nothing in this Code section shall be deemed either to require a membership organization that enrolls persons in the exchange to be licensed by this state as an insurance producer.

It seems that the next great business opportunity in the state is to set up a Small Business Insurance Membership Organization and offer to refund 50% of commissions fees because commissions can not, by law be “rebated” even to the extent of buying a customer lunch.

I have to wonder if the "mergers and acquisitions" lawyer that sponsored this bill was involved in the Wellpoint buyout of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Georgia (this really sounds as though it was designed with considerable input from them)or if some insurance agent p*ssed in his Wheaties.

Update:
Senator Hill's Campaign Finance Data
Wellpoint's Plan Similarities

A message to CAIR and "The Religion of Peace"

The band's website is here.

Zucker takes on the Iraq Surrrender Group

Those who will not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. It's like deja vu all over again, and again, and again. Can anyone name any diplomatic successes (for the USA, that is) of any of the members of the Iraq Surrender Group?

The Pervert Prophet Video

I like it!

HillaryCare "...may be a bad dream for some."

I heard the Dhimmicretin candidate for lieutenant governor campaigning here in Atlanta, say that small employers couldn't buy health insurance and the dhimmicretins needed to help them. I am an insurance agent that specializes in entrepreneurial companies with less than 50 employees. I consider them small employers. Under current law, a group health insurance company is not allowed to refuse to offer coverage for employee groups from 2 to 50. The rate increase allowed for medical conditions existing in the group must be filed with the state insurance commissioner and the maximum ranges from 48% to 67% increases from the preferred rates. So just whom was he talking about? I don't think he knows other than it sounds good. Which I think is the actual condition of most people that blather about health insurance.

For example, I had a group of 35 that had three cases of HIV in the group. I was able to offer their group single rates from $175 per month to $320 per month. They chose the most expensive because they wanted the insurance company to pay the most. The company also paid all but $10 per month on the single rate. (The normal amount is 50% of the single rate.) The other thing that is worth noting is most people have higher deductibles on their car insurance than they do on their medical insurance, because they do not buy car insurance to pay for their oil changes, but they do buy medical insurance so that they can pay $20 instead of $60, for a physician to say. "Why yes, you do have a cold, no, you don't need antibiotics unless it gets worse, because you'll heighten your resistance to the antibiotics.”

Another thing they need to consider is this new health plan is going to be brought to you by the same people that brought you Medicare and HMOs. Oh did you forget that the much maligned HMO was a creation of the government? You ain't seen nothing yet.

Batiste and Eaton; My take on General stupidity

Flag officers can't imagine being manipulated and refuse to think that anything has changed since the last time they heard shots fired in anger (probably when they were lieutenants or captains). The one utterly asinine adaptation of the 80's & 90's was the concept of management replacing the quality of leadership. These PPRs (power-point rangers) would probably be halfway decent executives in mega-corps except their "management style" was cultured in an environment where disobedience could be punished by a lot more than "you're fired!" Even with that, there are few competing jobs with the same level of purpose.

I think that they actually thought that the Dhimmicretins were interested in what they had to say, or even more foolishly believed that if they had the right "hook", they would get all of their message out.

Do I think the war has been conducted well? No, but then again, I'm no politician, just an old, beat-up retired SF troop. A commenter on this post at Mudville Gazette said the war was won, I beg to differ. Victory only occurs when you have destroyed the will to resist so thoroughly that anyone that might bring the attention of the soldiers will be turned in or shot by his/her own compatriots to avoid the known consequences. An old saying when I heard it in RVN in the 60's. "When you've got'em by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow."

We've been trying to win this war like most of my generation has raised children, with less discipline than is needed to housebreak a puppy.

Management is not the way to win this. Leadership in violence is. Let's do away with Carters EO that extended the previously banned "political assassination" to just "assassination" and start playing whack-a-mole with these "militia leaders" and "clerics" until we have a group more wanting to survive than to impose their will on anyone else. Maybe then they will quit piddling on the carpet.

Politicians should keep telling the media this

Why the media gets it wrong. If you didn't hear Mitt basically said as a response the the overblown statement-question:

Gov. Romney: Do you have a point on this?

Globe Reporter: I represent the people.

Gov. Romney: No, I represent the people…

*laughter from the crowd*

Gov. Romney: You represent the media.

Hey, Ditzy Twits! Listen & Learn!

Remember when you felt the need to discuss your politics onstage and considered it a violation of your free speech when the disapproval cost you? Have you seen how a grown-up handles disagreement? I don’t hear her whining.

Beccy Cole is an Australian singer, who, when she returned from entertaining the troops in the middle east found a letter from a fan, who did not agree with Australia's participation in the war. Beccy has previously commented, “I have a huge amount of respect for our forces, and I'm very proud of the great job they are doing there. Our job was to provide an entertaining break from their grueling routine, and from all reports, we succeeded. I'm happy to report that morale is high amongst the Aussies and if their hard work and commitment is anything to go by peace in the Middle East is achievable.”

Straw Poll

Where is the International Criminal Court on Assassination?

Oliver North makes the claim here, that “The tape of a former president arrogantly proclaiming on international television that he personally authorized the assassination of a foreign foe may be great stuff for the screenplay of "Rambo V," but U.S. and international law specifically forbid it.”

I was personally aware of the first two of the executive orders mentioned because of my military career that ended right after the second of them and Stansfeld Turner’s appointment to be DCI. However, I am not certain of which “international law” Oliver  North speaks. But, if we assume that assassination is against “international law”, shouldn’t all those people that have been braying that we should put our military under the jurisdiction of that august body be sending links to the videos of that interview to the Prosecutor’s Office of the International Criminal Court?

Murtha's lies keep unraveling

More reason to believe that Murtha was shooting from the lip in a purely partisan political attack on the Marine Corps.

There are former Marines and ex-Marines, guess which Murtha is referred to by current Marines?

Support Diana Irey to replace this doddering old fool.

Another Internet Test

You Are a Warrior Soul

You're a strong person and sometimes seen as intimidating. You don't give up. You're committed and brave. Truly adventuresome, you are not afraid of going to battle. Extremely protective of loved ones, you root for the underdog. You are picky about details and rigorous in your methods. You also value honesty and fairness a great deal. You can be outspoken, intimidating, headstrong, and demanding. You're a hardliner who demands the best from themselves and others. Souls you are most compatible with: Old Soul and Peacemaker Soul

What Kind of Soul Are You?

Death Tax Vampires

As an insurance agent that does estate planning as part of my business, I am adamantly opposed to the Death Tax because it is dual taxation. Your estate consists of possessions and earnings that have already been taxed. I think you should have the right to do with them as you will, with no interference, while you live or at your death.

I do think that capital gains are taxed fairly at this moment so I wouldn’t have a problem if basis were to remain the same when property was inherited and taxed at its eventual sale. But until a gain is actually realized why should an heir have to sell the company or the farm that was left to them to pay the taxes on a tranfer in which no gain was realized? Following is a letter to the New York Times that shows the self-interest of some in the financial community. Does this guy's clients really appreciate this pilot fish to the government shark attitude?

To the Editor:

As a financial adviser, I spend much of my time helping clients decide how to handle their estate tax liability.

I draw three boxes on a white board: family, charity, government. I then ask what percentage they want to give to each when they die.

Nearly everybody focuses on family and charity. In conjunction with their other advisers, I then create an estate plan that reduces or eliminates the government's share and redirects it to family or charity.

It's not that hard to structure an estate to avoid the tax. That's what the thousands of accountants, lawyers and financial planners do.

From my perspective, the estate tax is purely optional. So repeal is unnecessary except for the uninformed, the unfocused or those people who are unwilling to pay their financial planning team a little more to make the tax go away or be reduced.

People pay their professionals to avoid lots of income tax legally, and they do it every year. Why is it so hard for them to pay a little every few years to review the estate plan and avoid much or all of the estate tax?

Using this logic, we should push for income tax repeal as well. But that's another story.

Marc J. Lewyn
Atlanta, June 9, 2006

So basically the Death Tax is a tax on the dumb. But, not only are Mr. Lewyn’s services charged for, the products to accomplish it either costs something too, or demands that control of the earned assets be turned over to someone else. This Asshat says, pay me over and over (because the thieves keep changing the rules) so you won't have to pay tax on what you have already paid tax on. A recent case I know has a gentleman paying over $33,000 a year in order to replace the government’s vampire bite and get his estate proceeds going where I believe he should be able to direct them without this additional charge, which is just a different kind of tax only payable to the "thousands of accountants, lawyers and financial planners" membership in which the Asshat above is so proud of. Vultures.

The Death Tax is about envy, pure and simple. Sometimes I think the purpose is specifically punish those people that have the gall to earn enough to accumulate something even after all the reditributionist taxes are paid. The money goes right back into the economy either way. Do you want people making jobs or congressional rapscallions buying votes? That’s the decision. The congresscritters know what they want and only threatening them with retirement can sway most of them.

Is the NYT better than Murtha?

In a New York Times article published today, it quotes several sources to claim that while the investigation is not complete and while, “All of those who discussed the case had to be granted anonymity before they would talk about the findings emerging from the investigation”, several marines are likely to be charged with murder.

I sort of hate to come to the conclusion that I actually believe the NYT more than I believed Murtha when he was spouting off about this, but actually the NYT has written a less inflammatory if just as damning accusation. At least they are couching their terms more as we have come to expect of a liberal newspaper talking about criminals. At least they leave some room for the investigation to conclude.

That makes me ask, if we assume that Murtha were briefed officially before he took to the podium, why couldn’t he have behaved at least as well as the NYT? If he were briefed, he had to know what was coming, so, was he charging to the front of the hounds to yell “follow me!” and appear to be a leader? Was he trying to imply that only by his breaking the news would the investigation be made public? Or was it just the typical politician’s appetite for face time? Any ideas out there?

BTW, Calley should have fried. And so should any marines guilty of murder.

P.S. The campaign site for Murtha’s challenger is here.

Murtha: US troops" killed innocent civilians in cold blood".

The phrase “in cold blood” means with callous disregard or lack of emotion doesn’t it? Whatever the other circumstances, I doubt this very much. The “in cold blood” crack (crock, probably) is political hyperbole.

Over on ESPN we have “analyst” Deborah Robinson complaining that the Duke Lacrosse Team Captain is “tainting the jury pool” by doing a press conference after approximately 70 press conferences held by DA Nifong. Here we have John Murtha, a politician (once you become one of those, why should anyone believe you about anything?), who can have direct influence over a soldier’s career, making charges not yet adjudicated by a court martial board. I have sat on three boards, and I am incensed that this jackass is trying to make political hay before the facts are in.

Wasn’t the way that journalist was injured a while back was not by the IED but by small arms fire coming from surrounding houses immediately after the blast? The soldiers attacked the ambush and suppressed it. Is it just too much TV? Is that why the initiated don’t connect the blast and the followup fire into one event? The operating standard is to attack when you are drawing fire after the opening rounds of an ambush. The fastest way out is through.

Now consider construction values and the ammunition types that might be used to suppress that “possible” fire. I have participated in a “mad minute” put on as a demonstration at Ft. Sill in 1970. Four of us with M60 machine guns totally destroyed  a 10′x10′ brick building (all four walls) in less than sixty seconds. Our sweetness and light enemies do not tend to evacuate their womenfolk or their children from the line of fire and it is harder to see through walls than to shoot through them.

Was it a “My Lai” moment? I don’t know, it could have been. Was it a doctrinaire attack through an ambush? I don’t know. It could have been. But my kneejerk reaction when Time magazine and a politician are on the same page is to cover my wallet and dive for cover. The fact that is still under investigation in this conflict means very little. With all the second-guessing being done by media, I’m quite sure the Marines want to dot every i and cross every t. Back in March, Lieut. Colonel Michelle Martin-Hing, spokeswoman for the Multi-National Force-Iraq, told Time the involvement of the NCIS (Naval Criminal Investigative Service) does not mean that a crime occurred. And she says the fault for the civilian deaths lies squarely with the insurgents, who "placed noncombatants in the line of fire as the Marines responded to defend themselves."

Let’s wait for the determination from the people who know something about warfighting and don’t stand to make political points by railing into any loose microphone.

I personally think he is maneuvering for political advantage by getting "face time" and counting on the public to never notice if the findings of the investigation don't lead to any charges. If charges are brought he will be the “crusading leader”. It will be a few months and will never be brought up by the Main Stream Media Party if charges aren't filed and it lasts long enough, only his opponent for November will bring it up and then we will hear from him about "ongoing investigation". So it is pretty much a win-win for him either way. A little sound and fury now may smudge his face time by the election but most voters (they have to be memory-challenged to have kept re-electing him anyway) won't remember it, just that he was "tellin' truth to Power" a few months ago. They'll never even remember what it was about.

The Thirteenth Solution

The Thirteenth Amendment to the US Constitution says:

• Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

• Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

The House bill wants to make illegal immigration a felony.

Many people have been saying “immigrants do work Americans won’t do.” (Leaving out, of course “at a price that is below market.”)

Gazing into my very cloudy Crystal Ball, I see a question. If a year of slavery was the sentence for illegally crossing the border, and the cheap employers could contract for the slave labor, would that satisfy the labor demand and discourage enough migration to satisfy every one?

Before you go too crazy on me, be aware that some of the immigrants in my family got their ticket from Ireland by volunteering for indentured servitude. Basically slavery with an expiration date.

A Kennedy being a Kennedy

The "late for a vote" routine is why they didn't give him a sobriety test. Article I Section 6 of the US Constitution says "Representatives shall ...be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session ... and in going to and returning from the same".

While you may volunteer to take a sobriety test, you may not be forced to give one without being arrested in any jurisdiction I’m aware of. Since his claim that he was “late for a vote” prevented him from being arrested, he was able to prevent any testing.

We have the same provision in the Georgia Constitution (it is supposed to prevent arrest by opposing political hacks influencing votes), and recently had a case where a state judge threw that defense out because of what time it was.

I think Kennedy had heard about that and used the "late for a vote" for the reason that (if he actually has read the Constitution instead of just watching it burn at Kennedy Coven Meetings) the "returning from" part might not be as familiar to junior officers and getting it on the record that he was impaired might be embarrassing to the boy.

BTW, doesn't DC have a "under the influence" statute? Here, prescriptions are included under the heading of influence.

Donations

Bryan at HotAir.com has an interesting post about sending the Bush Peso back in the business reply envelopes included when the Republican’ts send us those delightful four page surveys with the questions that illustrate the technique of piss-poor push polling. I wish I had registered on there in time to point out this other image that I send in the same envelope. The milk carton with the “have you seen me?” illustration of a spine pretty well sums it up.

Update: Pare Amnistia Ahora! The Cero Peso Campaign

Internet Tests

True English Nerd
You scored 78 erudition!

Not only do you know your subjects from your objects and your definite from your indefinite articles, but you've got quite a handle on the literature and the history of the language as well. Huzzah, and well done! The English snobs of Boston salute you.

Al Qaeda Has A Plan

From The Strategy Page

Al Qaeda has a plan, and it’s been published in a book (Al-Zarqawi: al Qaeda's Second Generation) by Jordanian journalist, Fouad Hussein. Several al Qaeda leaders were interviewed for the book, including al Qaeda’s man in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. The book is only available in Arabic, but it does lay out a very straightforward strategy for world conquest. Actually, it sounds a lot like what the nazis and communists had in mind last century. The only difference is that, while the nazis killed you for who you were, and the communists killed you for what you believed,al Qaeda kills you for religious differences. No matter which zealot gets you, you're still dead.

According to Fouad Hussein, al Qaeda has a seven phase plan for world conquest. It goes like this.

Phase 1, the “wakeup call.” Spectacular terrorist attacks on the West (like September 11, 2001) get the infidels (non-Moslems) to make war on Islamic nations. This arouses Moslems, and causes them to flock to al Qaedas banner. This phase is considered complete.

Phase 2, the “eye opening.” This is the phase we are in, where al Qaeda does battle with the infidels, and shows over a billion Moslems how it’s done. This phase is supposed to be completed by next year.

Phase 3, “the rising.” Millions of aroused (in a terrorist sense) Moslems go to war against Islam’s enemies for the rest of the decade. Especially heavy attacks are made against Israel. It is believed that major damage in Israel will force the world to acknowledge al Qaeda as a major power, and negotiate with it.

Phase 4, “the downfall.” By 2013, al Qaeda will control the Persian Gulf, and all its oil, as well as most of the Middle East. This will enable al Qaeda to cripple the American economy, and American military power.

Phase 5, “the Caliphate.” By 2016, the Caliphate (one government for all Moslem nations) will be established. At this point, nearly all Western cultural influences will be eliminated from Islamic nations. The Caliphate will organize a mighty army for the next phase.
Phase 6, “world conquest.” By 2022, the rest of the world will be conquered by the righteous and unstoppable armies of Islam. This is the phase that Osama bin Laden has been talking about for years.

Phase 7, “final victory.” All the world’s inhabitants will be forced to either convert to Islam, or submit (as second class citizens) to Islamic rule. This will be completed by 2025 or thereabouts.

Nothing really new in all this. Al Qaeda has been talking openly about this (the global Islamic state) for years. These Islamic terrorists are true believers. God is on their side, and they believe all obstacles will be swept aside by the power of the Lord. Will al Qaeda’s plan work? Ask the nazis and communists.

Abu Bakar Bashir Speaks

The convicted and currently imprisoned (but not much longer, his sentence was just reduced) leader of Jemaah Islamiyah, al-Qa'eda's branch office in Indonesia has this to say about us:

“If they want to have peace, they have to accept to be governed by Islam.”

Somebody should tell the “peace activists” that their freedoms to be idiots just might be impaired.

Plain and Simple

“There are many trouble spots across the world but, as a general rule, even if one gives no more than a cursory glance at the foreign pages, it's easy to guess at least one of the sides: Muslims v Jews in Palestine, Muslims v Hindus in Kashmir, Muslims v Christians in Nigeria, Muslims v Buddhists in southern Thailand, Muslims v (your team here). Whatever one's views of the merits on a case by case basis, the ubiquitousness of one team is a fact.”

Mark Steyn

Anyone remember the joke that ends “… that’s because we ain’t played Cowboys and Muslims yet”?

Women in White Houses

I just assumed that “Commander in Chief” was to be a Hillary ’08 campaign piece, and as such didn’t even bother. Seems as though I was correct.

Ben Johnson writes in FrontpageMag.com,
'Last night, “Commander in Chief” portrayed conservatives as ruthless, power-hungry, militaristic, Bible-thumping, sexist bigots. The New Republic observed, “the show's partisan bias is comically unsubtle.”’

John Fund in his OpinionJournal.com piece writes,
“Mr. Lurie insists that red-state viewers need not shun the show. He admits that he "can't write to a belief system that I can't swallow myself," but he says that he has hired some conservative writers to make up for his deficit. Not that a balanced approach was evident at last week's series-celebrating parties, in Washington and New York, hosted by the feminist White House Project.”
And,
“Mr. Lurie acknowledges that his TV series is a direct descendant of his film "The Contender," which starred Joan Allen as a Democratic senator who becomes a piñata for conservatives during her confirmation hearings to replace a deceased vice president. This movie was such an egregiously crude version of the "virtuous liberal vs. conservative slime-ball" genre that Gary Oldman, one of the movie's stars, called it "a piece of propaganda" designed to help Al Gore.”

However the Instawife(Dr Helen) has an interesting take on it here.

UPDATE: A castmember heard from.
UPDATE VIDEO: Real Media or Windows Media

Compare and Contrast

Haven’t I been told by the effete elitists that we should be more like the oh so cultured Europeans? And, that anyone resisting the multi-cultural balkanization of the US is a barbarous troglodyte?

I am awaiting the sputtering, stammering, spurious comparison of this and this. Of course, to most of them Spain has been at fault for holding on to Ceuta and Melilla since they kicked the Moors (read Islam) out hundreds of years ago.