Yahoo! News - Cosby Has Harsh Words for Black Community: "'Let me tell you something, your dirty laundry gets out of school at 2:30 every day, it's cursing and calling each other n------ as they're walking up and down the street,' Cosby said during an appearance at the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition & Citizenship Education Fund's annual conference. "
========
Hurrah for Bill Cosby! A black man needed to say this, and Cosby has found the courage to say it. He is probably the best one who could. If a WASP like me said it, it would immediately be labeled anti-black and racist. Blacks have been using racist arguments for years, aided and abetted by many of their black leaders who ought to know better. But we are in danger of losing a whole generation of black children, if we cannot get them away from destructive rap, gangsta mentality, and hatred of whitey. There is no future in that. Thank God for Bill Cosby.

See Ed Koch on Michael Moore at Very Bad Figs.

OpinionJournal - Featured Article: "The instant reading of yesterday's Supreme Court rulings on terror suspects is that they were, as the Associated Press asserted, 'a setback to the Bush Administration's war against terrorism.' After reading the opinions, we'd say it's more accurate to call them a modest but important victory for the Presidency."
--------------
The talking head called it a disastrous defeat for the President, but when have the facts bothered them? Every victory, no matter how small or how large, can be turned into a defeat by the biased liberal media. Read this article for a different perspective from that of Dan Rather.

Dennis Prager: Chicago Tribune and WLS-TV revel in humiliation: "Remember Richard Jewell, the guard at the 1996 Atlanta Summer Olympics who discovered a pipe bomb minutes before it exploded? Though one person was killed, Jewell saved many lives. Yet, he went from hero to villain three days later when the news media announced he was an FBI suspect and then camped across from his apartment day and night, pointing their high-powered cameras at his door. His life was dissected in the media, where he was regularly humiliated for living with his mother and other implied failures. Eighty-eight days later, he was cleared of any suspicion."
-----
Dennis Prager strikes again: A deft skewering of the arrogance of the print and tv media, who can and do destroy lives with all the emotion of a sadistic boy ripping the wings and legs off a fly, and then watching it try to squirm.

Today's media is not the cure for oppressive and arrogant government, but the cause of it. Newspaper and tv people are educated with the same liberal philosophy as those who seek to use government to advance their own social and elitist goals. Both come away with anti-Christian and anti-American ideas, despising the heritage of Christianity and American constitutionalism. The only checks and balance they exercise are against people who believe the Bible and the constitution of the United States. They defend, cover up, and nurture their liberal corrupt buddies in government. You don't have to look far for examples: Teddy Kennedy, Bill Clinton, and Robert Byrd. Republican Bob Packwood was driven from office for far milder sexual harrassment offenses than Bill Clinton, and Trent Lott was deprived of leadership for far less racism than Robert Byrd. Richard Nixon was not nearly as corrupt as Ted Kennedy, and has engaged in far more vitriol against conservatives from Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas to George W. Bush than ever Dick Cheney. Who get's condemned for using the "F" word?

If it had not been for Rev. Carl McIntire's resistance to the "Fairness Doctrine"--subsequently repealed under Ronald Reagon--the triumph of the liberal press, in bed with corrupt liberal politicians, would have been complete. Instead, we have seen the rise of talk radio, which has tipped the scale a bit, but not much, from the heavy-handed one-sided bias of the print and tv media. McIntire's resistence cost him his seminary, his radio empire, and his entire ministry. I was and am not a supporter of Carl McIntire, but his liberty to speak and minister was robbed by the liberal media, to their shame and curse.

There is a new breeze blowing north of the border. Not a gale, certainly, but a bit of fresh air, that is welcome after the stifling liberal pseudo-moralism of the past. Elections in the people's republic north of the border, sometimes called Canada, have denied the liberals an outright majority, and so they will have to seek alliance with someone in order to erect a government. This will probably take place with the ultra liberals, which will pull the liberals farther to the left, more out of touch, losing more support for them.

They have always been a little daft north of the border, preaching moral platitudes [made-up morality that is only a faint shadow of a once-biblical faith], always a bit insecure because they know that their liberty is protected by the might of the United States. From time to time they sniff self-rightously about their horrid and unrefined neighbor to the south, but mostly it does no harm.

It is a different story when they lend whatever remnant of moral influence they have to hinder the War on Terror. The hatred that Islamic militants have toward the United States is based upon the fact that our culture, the best and the worst of it, is not based on the Koran. Neither is Canada's. Do Canadians think that the Islamists will run away at the sight of the Mounties?

But as I said. There is a faint breeze blowing.

Let's see now. The most popular movies of recent history (I did not see them, and do not expect to}, are

The Passion. This is a sadistic and brutal account of what some very evil people did to Jesus of Nazareth.

Farenheit 9/11: This is a sadistic and brutal account of what some really stupid people would like to do to President George Bush.

Note: I would not compare Dubya with my Savior, for that would be blasphemy, but it is fair to compare the movies, isn't it? I wonder how many people wept through both of them, and for what reasons. Did they eat popcorn through both of them? Did they want to upchuck over man's inhumanity to man?

I know why people hate Jesus Christ. His goodness is a rebuke to wickedness. But why do they hate George Bush? Because the one, who is a sinner, has expressed faith in the Other, the Savior of sinners?

Just wondering.

New York Post Online Edition: postopinion: "Sadr's predictable failure has not captured the headlines in the West largely because it confounds the doomsayers who cannot stomach the fact that Iraq could be liberated and put on the path of democracy by 'the arch-villain America' led by 'a brainless good-for-nothing' like George W. Bush. "
===========
Wouldn't it be a great thing if the major TV and print media would tell the story about what is going on in Iraq, rather than just serving as propaganda outlets for the Democratic National Committee. Over the past week they have been condemning Cheney for telling the Democrats where to get off in no uncertain terms. They are blaming Bush for not living up to his promise to "change the tone in Washington." It goes this way, you see. Democrats and their supporters like Al Gore and Michael Moore and Teddy [under the bridge] Kennedy can refuse all judicial nominations, accuse Bush of lying, stupidity, and other monstrous crimes against the US and humanity, and if any Bush supporter answers back, then they are at fault for not "changing the tone."

Ah, for a headline something like this, "In spite of continued and wide-spread attempts by President Bush, a most decent and kindly man, to change the tone in Washington, Democrats continued their venomous and bitter attacts against the man they hope to replace in the White House this fall." Oh well. Who expects truth from the party of Bill Clinton?