And innocence is?

Those on the Left often claim that the proper response to terrorism is police action.

Is it?

The problem is that police action does not effectively deter crime, it only attempts to catch and punish the criminals for society. Hopefully the threat of capture and punishment deters crime and hopefully the criminals can be reformed and returned to society.

But police action doesn't work when the "criminals" don't care if they are captured. Indeed, these "criminals" capture themselves by committing suicide when the fly airplanes into buildings, blow up cars in crowded shopping markets and wear explosive belts into cafes and other stores.

Like it or not, the issue becomes:

Shall I wait until thousands of my innocent fellow citizens are dead from a terrorist attack,?

Or shall I try and disrupt the terrorists efforts by attacking them and those who support them?

It becomes then a terrible Hobson's choice. Innocent people, men, women and children will die either way.

The question is, innocent Americans or innocent "others?"

Most Americans would say, "Better them than me and my family." But let's take it a bit further.

Who is the least "innocent?"

Is it the citizens of the country that, though imperfect, has done more than any other country in the history of mankind to advance tolerance and human rights? And who have paid a terrible price in lives and treasure to defeat three "isms" that killed perhaps 100 million?

Or is it the citizens of the countries that are ruled by governments and a religious law that enabled the terrorists and created societies that tolerated honor killings, no rights for women, hanging of gays, etc?

Given that the citizens of America cannot change the countries creating such evil without attacking them, and given that the citizens of the countries described have not changed them, it is obvious that the citizens of those countries bear responsibility for the actions of the terrorists, although the individuals condemn the terrorists and would live in peace with the world. It is then, the lack of action that is the problem.

The bottom to all of this is that Islam must reform itself. That is up to individual Muslims. Until then we have every right to attack and kill those who would attack and kill us.

If innocents die it is the fault of the terrorists and the innocents who allow the terrorist to live in their midst.

This is unfair to the individuals. But life is not fair.

Theme also posted on The Tennessean.

Slate play's the race card for Hussein

If the Hussein campaign isn't playing the race card, then you will find media members who are so far in the tank for Hussein that they will never see daylight again doing it for him.

This from Slate.

If you break the numbers down, the reason Obama isn't ahead right now is that he trails badly among one group, older white voters. He does so for a simple reason: the color of his skin.

Yeah. You have to watch us older white voters. We're skeptical of all politicians, but especially politicians with no experience who associate with America haters and who demonstrate their dumbness by telling us to inflate our tires to solve the energy crisis.

The rest of you dummies can get smashed on "change" and "hope" kool aid. We know that "hope" must be translated into hard work and that cancer is nothing more than uncontrolled and undefined change.

There is one issue, however, that the tanked writers never mention. That's Hussein's 90% to 95% support from blacks.

What would they call that if whites had voted that way??

a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

You can't have it both ways, dear chums. Can you?

Fun and Games with Hussein - Is he or isn't he??

Now we have Democrats saying that Hussein should not be allowed to run.

Don't you just love it??

Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania – 08/21/08) - Philip J. Berg, Esquire, [Berg is a former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania; former candidate for Governor and U.S. Senate in Democratic Primaries; former Chair of the Democratic Party in Montgomery County; former member of Democratic State Committee; an attorney with offices in Montgomery County, PA and an active practice in Philadelphia, PA, filed a lawsuit in Federal Court today, Berg vs. Obama, Civil Action No. 08-cv-4083, seeking a Declaratory Judgment and an Injunction that Obama does not meet the qualifications to be President of the United States. Berg filed this suit for the best interests of the Democratic Party and the citizens of the United States.“Eighteen million Democratic Primary voters donated money, volunteered their time and energy, worked very hard and then not only supported Senator Clinton, but voted for her and often recruited other supporters as well. All the efforts of supporters of legitimate citizens were for nothing because this man lied and cheated his way into a
Philip J. Berg, Esquire stated in his lawsuit that Senator Obama:

1. Is not a natural-born citizen; and/or

2. Lost his citizenship when he was adopted in Indonesia; and/or

3. Has dual loyalties because of his citizenship with Kenya and Indonesia.

Berg stated: “I filed this action at this time to avoid the obvious problems that will occur when the Republican Party raises these issues after Obama is nominated.

Link