I admit it. It was me. I said ‘retard.’

I heard this report on FOX News Radio driving with my dad this morning, and never have I had so much fun doing a search on a news Web site.

Apparently, some lawmaker in Upstate New York uttered the dreaded “R” word on an open mic during a roll call vote.

What was he thinking? It’s like the Special Olympics, or something.

Great pull-away quote: “If you think someone’s being an ass, just call them an ass! Don’t bring us into the discussion.”

Don’t know what’s best about that. The blatant hypocrisy (don’t call people mean names, but use this mean name!) or the fact that he’s admitting he’s a retard.

The key to this story, other than the laughs (“All I want is … re … shpect!”), is that the lawmaker the wheelchair brigade thinks said “retard” is Republican Majority Leader Dan Quatro. Had it been the Democratic leader, it would get shuffled under the special needs ramp.

After all, it was a Democratic president of the United States who went on “The Tonight Show” and made fun of the Special Olympics. The next day, Special Olympians weren’t banging their helmets on the White House door demanding respect. Obama walked it back, and it was done.

Would the same have happened if George W. Bush had made fun of retards?

I may be slow, but I doubt it. The Special Olympics has even launched a campaign to banish the word from the English language — like Al Sharpton tried to bury the “N” word (now that really was retarded).

And notice how the other utterance of the unknown lawmaker goes unnoticed. He said, “Jesus … retard.” To the PC police, it’s OK to take the Lord’s name in vain, but don’t you dare make fun of the tards.

What’s really impeding the development of this story is that whoever said it isn’t fessing up. Show some courage, man! How slow-witted can you be to just let the word “RETARD” reverberate through what must surely be the otherwise cognizant and reasonable legislative chamber?

Well, I’ll take the blame. I use the “R” word frequently. My guess would be on a daily basis — usually in reference to myself (Is that OK? Is it like a black person using the “N” word?).

Shoot, I’ve used it in print (even though my final assumption ended up being slightly wrong, but that just gets me in trouble with Halle Barry).

Or hey, can’t we all just live by the old addage: Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me (isn’t that what the safety gear is for, anyway?)?

The language police were ridiculous enough already. Now they’re coming after us riding motorized wheel chairs.


McCotter: ‘That’s what we do’

Thaddeus McCotter is quickly becoming my favorite member of Congress.

Here’s his floor speech from Today on the uprising in Iran. Below is the text … it’s definitely worth reading. Compare this to even the “stronger” statement of our wimpy-ass president today, and all you can do is shake your head in disbelief. How did the U.S. get to this point?

Her name was Neda. In Farsi, it means “the voice.” True to her name, she loved music; sought freedom; and she’s dead – shot down in the streets by the Iranian regime’s state sanctioned murderers. She must not have died in vain.

Today, Iranians and Americans face a generational chance for freedom – one that ensures a rogue regime’s implosion prevents a nuclear confrontation.

Regrettably, our president’s “post-American” foreign policy presumes talk can thaw the murderous mullahs’ hearts and attain a “grand bargain” for peace in our time; consequently, while Iranians demanded their freedom from a barbarous regime, the president vapidly opined: “It is up to Iranians to make decisions about who Iran’s leaders will be… We respect Iranian sovereignty.”

Then, as the crisis escalated, the president optimistically noted:

“You’ve seen in Iran some initial reaction from the supreme leader that indicates he understands the Iranian people have deep concerns about the election… And my hope is – is that the Iranian people will make the right steps in order for them to be able to express their voices, to express their aspirations.”

Tragically, the supreme leader’s deep concern drove him to step on the throats of pro-democracy demonstrators, like Neda.

Next, on June 20th, the president stated, “The universal rights to assembly and free speech must be respected, and the United States stands with all who seek to exercise those rights.” It was painfully evident just how far behind them he stood: “The last thing that I want to do is to have the United States be a foil for those forces inside Iran who would love nothing better than to make this an argument about the United States.”

With these contradictory statements of support and appeasement, the president returned to square one: “The Iranian people will ultimately judge the actions of their own government. If the Iranian government seeks the respect of the international community, it must respect the dignity of its own people and govern through consent, not coercion.”

In truth, the Iranian people have already judged the regime and found it wonting. The supreme leader, his cleric cronies and their puppet government have never respected the dignity of the Iranian people or governed through consent. This is why the regime stole the election and shoots peaceful, pro-democracy demonstrators. Implying otherwise mocks the Iranians risking and losing their lives for liberty.

As for the claim that American “meddling” in support of the demonstrators plays into the mullahs’ hands, the Iranian regime will claim this regardless, for as our president noted, “That’s what they do.”

Yet, what matters is not what the regime says about America, but what the demonstrators think about America. Presently, brave Iranians watch as our president still holds an open hand to the regime that opened fire on them…that opened fire on Neda. This is the passive, disastrous policy of Jimmy Carter that led to the rise of this rogue regime; not the courageous policy of Ronald Reagan that led to the demise of an evil empire.

The surest, safest termination of Iran’s nuclear weapons program and support of terrorism is to hasten this fanatical tyranny’s collapse by supporting its people’s liberty. Taking its rightful place amongst the community of free nations, a democratic Iran will necessarily realize and reverse the insanity of this terrorist regime’s homicidal obsession with nuclear weapons. Thus, for their liberty and our security, the United States and the world must do everything in our power to further the Iranian demonstrators’ sacred claim to freedom. We know Neda did.

Further, in the grand strategy of our War for Freedom over terrorism, how we aid pro-democracy Iranians’ will remind the world who we are – we are Americans: the revolutionary children of freedom who have lived and died defending our liberty and extending it to the enslaved and oppressed. We will do no less today in support of our Iranian brothers and sisters.

Today, Neda’s voice calls to our consciences and warns that the fate of Iranians’ liberty is entwined with the fate of Americans’ security. We must not miss this generational chance for freedom – again one that ensures a rogue regime’s implosion prevents a nuclear confrontation; and that Neda and all liberty’s martyrs shall not have died in vain. As Americans, we must seize this moment and help Iranians seize their freedom.

That’s what we do.

Via Big Hollywood.


‘All Americans are with her’
… well, not all.

John McCain tells the story of Neda on the Senate floor. He ends his short speech saying, “All Americans are with her.” Well, it’s not exactly clear how much the American president is with her.

While Barack Obama’s statements on the protests in Iran have gotten progessively stronger, it’s taken him more than a week to find any strength in his stance.

Does the United States of America support freedom for Iranians or not? It’s a simple question. Barack Obama doesn’t seem to have an answer … and who knows, it could change tomorrow.

So the leader of the free world seemingly is OK — or at least is so weak he won’t speak against — with a totalitarian regime publicly executing a woman because she simply spoke out, asking that her government count her vote honestly.

Shameful (via Hot Air).


Krauthammer on Cairo speech: Abstract, vapid & self absorbed

Charles Krauthammer nails President Obama on his speech in Cairo earlier today.

The columnist says the speech had no real impact in terms of policy — mainly because it was “exceedingly weak on Iran.”

But in terms of philosophy, Krauthammer goes after the president for being so apologetic and touting moral equivalence between the Muslim world and the West.

He really gets going when it comes to what Krauthammer called an “oblique reference to oppression” of women.

On the one hand you’ve got a university somewhere where the womens lacrosse team is not getting the full funding under Title IX. On the other hand you’ve got women beaten in the street in Saudi Arabia for showing an ankle or stoned for adultery in Iran. It’s not exactly morally equivalent.



Laser-like focus on banking

Agree or disagree with Barack Obama’s policies (or lack thereof), the president needs to level with the American people.

While he’s out there saying the Constitution gives him the ability to walk and chew gum at the same time and his press secretary is extolling the virtues of dousing the entire house with water when the living room is on fire, Americans worried about their jobs and their retirements need the president to focus on the root of the current economic crisis: banking.

He’s not, and it’s making it look like he and his staff are “in over their heads” at the very least or at most deliberately ignoring the real problem so they can focus on their long term, left-wing agenda.

The economy during the last few decades has gone up and down based on a number of “bubbles” — remember the dot-com bubble of the late ’90s and early 2000s? Each time it restructured itself. This is certainly the case now. The credit bubble has burst (and frankly, in many ways that’s a good thing — houses were way overpriced and people who can’t pay back loans shouldn’t be offered them.). The president, just by telling the American people that — which would signal that he does understand the situation — could help stabilize the markets.

Tuesday morning’s discussion on “Morning Joe” bears watching (even though Mika was looped up some mood-altering, “Incredible Hulk” steroids). The clip is long, skip ahead to about five minutes to get to the real meat:

The president needs to say exactly what Joe said and stop brushing off the criticism that he’s not dealing with the economy appropriately. Americans can take it.

In fact, whoever runs Obama’s teleprompter should just transcribe it and put it in front of the president during his next public event. Here, I’ll do it for you, just copy and paste:

We are in a process of deleveraging. After 25 years of easy money and cheap credit, we are going to have to push the reset button … This reset button says you’re not going to have easy money anymore, you’re not going to have cheap credit. This is not going to be over in the next two years … We’re trying to clean up 25 years of reckless leveraging. …

Here’s the situation: You want things to get better in six months? They’re probably not going to get better in six months. Twenty-five years of leveraging is going to require me to give money to banks, along with the help of congress. We’re going to have to give them a lot of money, and we’re not going to ask those banks to let you borrow from them unless you can show that you can repay those loans.

Now friends, I understand that it would be more popular for me to say that we’re going to give more money to banks so that they can give you loans, but guess what? That’s how we got here in the first place!

You put out a fire by extinguishing its source, not by focusing your energy on planting bulbs in the garden to grow flowers in the spring.


‘The party’s merely the shell’

If there isn’t a bigger argument for keeping kids out of public schools, I don’t know what is.

Jonathan Krohn, a 13-year-old author, spoke at CPAC and apparently blew the roof off the place. This home-schooled kid has a stronger grasp of conservatism than most Republican Party leaders — John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Arlen Spector, Michael Steele, et. al. would be wise to take some lessons from Krohn.

As Krohn said:

There were too many people who threw this term conservative around who didn’t understand what they were talking about. They didn’t understand what conservatism was. They didn’t understand conservatism as a base of principle, but they understood it as a base of policy.

Krohn’s got a book out, “Define Conservatism : For Past, Present and Future Generations,” and a blog. He’s what one of my former editors would call “scary smart.”

He defines conservatism as respect for the constitution, respect for life, less government and personal responsibility.

With the current conservative leadership falling flat, there may be hope for the future.