USO Christmas Show

The United Service Organizations (USO) is hosting the Sgt Major of the Army 2006 Hope and Freedom Tour, which is currently touring Afghanistan. They stopped in Kabul a few days ago and put on a four-hour show in frigid temperatures. The performance was great; a real morale boost for the deployed troops here.

Here is a list of the performers:

Al Franken - political commentator and comedian
Leann Tweeden - model and television personality
Mark Wills - country singer
Keni Thomas - country singer and former Army Ranger
Shevy Smith - country singer
Darryl Worley - 6'6" tall country singer and restaurant owner
Washington Project - brother/sister hip-hop singers
All Army Band
Laura Beke and Shenythia Frazier - retired Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders

Links to photos from the show:
Darryl Worley and the Dallas ladies
Al Franken and Leann Tweeden
Keni Thomas and Shevy Smith

The Virginia DMV, again

This is what independent filmmakers do when they're bored. The zany guys at Daybyday just opened a huge can of worms with their latest project, the DMV Drivers License Prank. Each of these guys obtains a Virginia drivers license despite obvious, comical alterations to their looks. Check out the YouTube video. I almost fell out of my chair from laughing at the "kung-fu guy", Dave Stewart (funny things seem extra funny when you're in Afghanistan).



Okay, so these guys had some fun at the expense of some Virginia civil servants. However, if you're like me, you're starting to wonder about who else may be interested in a less-than-legit drivers license. Terrorists, perhaps? Two of the 9/11 hijackers obtained fraudulent Virginia licenses to help them in their terror plot (5/18/06 Humble Patriot column). They did not use spray-on hair or novelty teeth. The terrorists simply went to a 7/11 parking lot in Virginia, the same place the illegal immigrants use to get theirs.

According to an article in yesterday's Washington Times, the VA DMV has asked these guys to surrender their licenses and get new photos taken. No doubt this is embarrassing for the Virginia government. Hopefully it will catalyze some changes at their DMV.

Here's the other YouTube video:


Check out Michelle Malkin's column on the same subject.

Danny Bonaduce vs John Conner

Danny Bonaduce, the former child star who played Danny Partridge in The Partridge Family, gets a microphone shoved in his face while eating at a sidewalk cafe. The guy holding the mic is none other than John Conner of The Resistance Manifesto. Conner is probably hoping to get him to say something disparaging about President Bush or the war in Iraq. Here is the video, courtesy of You Tube:

I lump John Conner into a category I call the "Loose Change Nuts," conspiracy theorists who believe the 9/11 attacks were somehow orchestrated by the U.S. Government. Loose Change is a movie that presents some of these goofy theories. Some of these kooks, like Conner, believe the entire world is run by an intricate system of Satanic secret societies. No, I am not making this stuff up!

Mr. Bonaduce handled himself quite well in this verbal exchange, and gave Conner a simple lesson on the First Amendment. Way to go, Danny!

Humble Patriot's reading assignment:
Debunking 9/11 Myths

Just Say No to Pork

No, not the "other white meat." According to Wiktionary, the second meaning for "pork" is funding proposed or requested by a member of Congress for special interests or his/her constituency as opposed to the good of the country as a whole. That is the topic for today.

Lately there has been much obstreperous banter regarding earmarks, including the Bridge to Nowhere and the bribes-for-earmarks scandal that landed U.S. Rep Duke Cunningham in prison. However, not every earmark is considered pork, and not all pork arrives in the form of an earmark. The group Citizens Against Government Waste employs seven general conditions for a Congressional project to make it to their Pig Book: Not specifically authorized; Not competitively awarded; Not requested by the President; Greatly exceeds the President's budget request or the previous year's funding; Not the subject of congressional hearings; or Serves only a local or special interest. In 2006, 9,963 projects made it to CAGW's infamous Pig Book. These projects come with a hefty price tag for the taxpayer: $29 billion in 2006 alone. What are some of these projects? Here are a few of the most egregious, taken from the CAGW website: $13,500,000 for the International Fund for Ireland, which helped finance the World Toilet Summit; $6,435,000 for wood utilization research; $1,300,000 for berry research; and $500,000 for the Sparta Teapot Museum in Sparta, N.C. Remember, there are 9,959 wasteful expenditures that I am not listing here in the interest of brevity!

The incoming Democratic leaders for the U.S. Congress claim they will remove all earmarks from the unfinished spending bills that the Republicans dumped in their laps before Congress adjourned for the year. Wow, that sounds like a step in the right direction, especially for the "tax and spend" party. My regular readers know most of my Humble ire is directed towards the left in general and the Democrats in particular. This time do the Dems deserve a pat on the back for this newfound budgetary restraint? I would love to say yes, but I remain dubious of their intentions. Some of the money will likely shift to programs the Democrats feel have been shortchanged from the President's budget.

As a Nation we simply must get a handle on government spending. Our demographics will shift as the baby boomers enter retirement and leave the workforce, causing tax receipts to decrease as Medicare and other expenditures increase. My Humble prediction is that the United States is headed for some serious budgetary problems, beginning in about ten years. I hope to be proven wrong.

Humble Patriot's Reading Assignments:
Dems to Wipe Out Pet Projects in Bills
Byrd to Give Up W.Va. Projects

Breyer and Scalia Debate the Constitution

For those who are interested in the Supreme Court, you may find this interesting. Justices Stephen Breyer and Antonin Scalia are the closest thing to polar opposites on the Court.

Justice Scalia is viewed as a "strict contructionist," although he objects to that description. He is more correctly described as a "textualist." Justice Scalia states, "the text should be interpreted neither strictly nor sloppily, but reasonably." Sounds reasonable to this Humble guy.

Justice Breyer is generally viewed as a liberal. He defers to Congress and even international law, and votes to overturn Congressional legislation at a lower rate than the other justices. When it comes to Constitutional issues, Justice Breyer considers "purpose and consequence."

The Federalist Society recently hosted a debate between these two gentlemen. Fortunately, it was not held at Columbia University, so nobody gets attacked or shouted-down. I enjoy listening to our brightest legal minds debate such important issues. This is the stuff that makes our Nation great.

Here is an excerpt from the event, courtesy of Power Line:

Pearl Harbor Day

Our greatest generation

Yesterday was Pearl Harbor Day, a day for remembrance of the Japanese attack that killed thousands of Americans and was the catalyst that began a very difficult war for the United States.

My father-in-law was a soldier in World War II, volunteering for the U.S. Army immediately after high school. I salute his courage, and I understand his "Greatest Generation." They chose to fight a terrible war overseas to prevent fighting a terrible war at home.

When the last of the enemy aircraft returned to their ships on that day, it was clear this was a Japanese victory. Four mighty U.S. battleships were sunk, including the USS Arizona. 2,403 Americans were killed and more than 1,100 were wounded. The Empire of Japan apparently wanted an all-out war with the U.S.

FDR responded on December 8th with a memorable speech to a joint session of Congress, calling 7 December 1941 "a date which will live in infamy." Congress declared war. It took awhile to build a suitable fighting force for the Pacific theater, while at the same time taking on the German and Italian Axis forces in Europe and Africa.

How did we fight the Japanese? U.S. Marines, supported by the U.S. Navy and U.S. Army Air Force, embarked on a difficult, bloody campaign of "island hopping." Our leathernecks took over New Guinea, Tarawa, Kwajalein, Eniwetok, Saipan, Tinian, Guam, Luzon, Iwo Jima, Okinawa, etc. More than 86,000 Marines were killed in action during this campaign.

Once we got a foothold on nearby islands such as Tinian, our Army Air Force began to bombard the Japanese where they lived. We set fire to Tokyo and Kobe. We nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Japan's dead numbered 3 million from four years of fighting. These actions forced the Japanese people to a humiliating surrender and established a certain credibility for the United States.

Clearly, today's political and military leaders could learn something from our actions in WW II. We have lost much of our hard-won credibility over the past 35 years. Our own press, referred to today as the mainstream media, is a virtual fifth column in every war we fight. The list of conflicts from which the U.S. has "cut and run" is growing long: Vietnam, Lebanon, Iraq in 1991, and Somalia. Current and future enemies of our great Nation see this not as compassion to be rewarded, but as a weakness to be exploited.

I believe I speak for all who fight for our freedoms when I say we need to persevere in every military action until we are victorious. Prematurely leaving these conflicts sends a message to every future Tojo, Hitler, and Bin Laden that we are weak. Even worse, it invalidates and insults the sacrifice of those who fought in these wars.

My Humble message to our current leaders, and the Iraq Study Group, is that victory in our War on Terror is absolutely vital for the prevention of future wars. The mere thought of a "dialogue" with Iran and Syria is ridiculous. They are a big part of the problem! Ahmadinejad and al-Assad are rubbing their hands with glee with the mere thought of sitting at the bargaining table with us.

During WW II the citizens of our great Nation cringed at the thought of losing to the Axis powers, which would subjugate future generations to the will of Tojo or Hitler. Today's citizens need to see the threat of Islamofacism for what it is, and knock off the hand wringing and defeatist talk. One thing you can depend on: your Humble Patriot will not submit.

Debra Burlingame Responds

Debra Burlingame is the sister of Charles "Chic" Burlingame III, the pilot of the American Airlines Flight 77 that was crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11. Ms Burlingame made a name for herself as a voice for those who opposed the International Freedom Center, the moonbat-inspired museum that would essentially insult the memories of the 2,749 people who died at the World Trade Center.

Ms Burlingame is an attorney and former flight attendant. She has a mastery of the English language, and her writing is often featured in the Wall Street Journal. She has a great response to the craziness revolving around the Flying Imams story. I have reprinted a portion of it; you may read the entire article at OpinionJournal.com.

The day we tell the captain of a commercial airliner that he cannot remove
a problem passenger unless he divines beyond question what is in that
passenger's head and heart is the day our commercial aviation system begins to
crumble. When a passenger's conduct is so disturbing and disruptive that
reasonable, ordinary people fear for their lives, the captain must have the
discretionary authority to respond without having to consider equal protection
or First Amendment standards about which even trained lawyers with the clarity
of hindsight might strongly disagree. The pilot in command can't get it wrong.
At 35,000 feet, when multiple events are rapidly unfolding in real time, there
is no room for error.

We have a new, inviolate aviation standard after 9/11, which requires that the captain cannot take that airplane up so long as there are any unresolved issues with respect to the security of his airplane. At altitude, the cockpit door is barred and crews are instructed not to open them no matter what is happening in the cabin behind them. This is an extremely challenging situation for the men and women who fly those planes, one that those who write federal aviation regulations and the people who agitate for more restrictions on a captain's authority will never have to face themselves.

Likewise, flight attendants are confined in the back of the plane with upwards of 200 people; they must be the eyes and ears, not just for the pilot but for us all. They are not combat specialists, however, and to compel them to ignore all but the most unambiguous cases of suspicious behavior is to further enable terrorists who act in ways meant to defy easy categorization. As the American Airlines flight attendants who literally jumped on "shoe bomber" Richard Reid demonstrated, cabin crews are sharply attuned to unusual or abnormal behavior and they must not be second-guessed, or hamstrung by misguided notions of political correctness.

Ultimately, the most despicable aspect about the imams' behavior is that when they pierced the normally quiet hum of a passenger waiting area with shouts of "Allahu Akbar"and deliberately engaged in terrorist-associated behavior that was sure to trigger suspicion, they exploited the fear that began with the Sept. 11 attacks. The imams, experienced travelers all, counted on the security system established after 9/11 to kick in, and now they plan not only to benefit financially from the proper operation of that system but to substantially weaken it--with help from the Saudi-endowed attorneys at CAIR.

US Airways is right to stand by its flight crew. It will be both dangerous and disgraceful if the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Transportation and, ultimately, our federal courts allow aviation security measures put in place after 9/11 to be cynically manipulated in the name of civil rights.