SMACK MY BITCH UP

Someone my brother works with had WAY too much time on their hands and decided to create this image of my brother, G-Unit...

Yo, beyotch! Grab me a 4o and back that ass up, fo shizzle!!!!

EXACTLY WHY I WANTED COLTS TO WIN SUPER BOWL

TONY DUNGY. He is the main reason why I rooted for the Colts in the Super Bowl. Yes, I wanted to see Peyton Manning finally make it to the Bowl and win, thus officially earning the best QB in the NFL status. And yes, it was a great moment in NFL history for Dungy to be the first black coach to win the NFL Championship. I wanted the Colts to win because Coach Dungy is a Christian man, a man with a great deal of integrity and respectibility. I was most impressed with Coach Dungy's answer when he was asked about the "social significance' of his victory during the post-game show on CBS. He responded, "I'm proud to be representing African-American coaches, to be the first African-American to win this. It means an awful lot to this country. More than anything Lovie Smith and I (are proud) not only (to be) the first two African-Americans (in the Super Bowl) but CHRISTIAN coaches showing that you can win doing it the LORD'S way. And we're more proud of that." I admire him for not being afraid to speak of his strong faith in public and to put his faith in action as he coaches his team. According to Curt Smith, president of the Indiana Family Institute in Indianapolis (IFI), Dungy works with IFI projects defending the family and is "a comitted man of faith" who is "a wonderful role model for those in public life." Smith also said, "America is a culture that loves sports, and to have someone at the pinnacle of the top sport give a clear testimony and Christian witness, I think is just remarkable." And so do I. Congratulations, Coach Dungy!

DEMS TRYING TO SQUELCH FREE SPEECH?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her radical allies in the U.S. House want to impose burdensome regulations on grassroots activists and the lawmakers they hope to influence.
Earlier this month, the U.S. Senate rejected the grassroots provision in its lobbying-reform bill. Senate bill 1 initially included language that would have mandated oppressive reporting standards for grassroots-lobbying groups. That language was removed after hundreds of thousands of people complained to their Senators.
Tom McClusky, vice president for government affairs at the Family Research Council, said the Senate victory doesn't mean the issue is moot. He anticipates Pelosi, a California Democrat, will introduce a similar provision in the House.
"But the Pelosi bill is probably going to be even more onerous," McClusky said. "It's going to have a lot of reporting."
It would make grassroots organizations so busy with reporting every move they make, he said, that it would discourage them from doing anything to inform people about the issues.
"If I ran into a Hill staffer in the supermarket, I would have to report that to the federal government," he noted.
In the meantime, Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., has introduced ethics-reform legislation that takes aim at the executive branch.
Waxman claims his bill "promotes openness and accountability in government by banning secret meetings between lobbyists representing special interests and senior government officials." But experts say any citizen communication to a government official on a policy matter would require documentation in a public database.
Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee, said the bill would hamstring government officials when they feel the need to seek advice from outside sources.
"The individual contacted by the public official would be aware that their conversation would now become a matter of public record," he said. "The citizen might be unwilling to offer candid advice to the official, fearing negative ramifications for his business, his tenure prospects or his family relationships -- to cite just a few ways in which a 'chilling effect' would occur."
An e-mail sent by a concerned citizen, contact with a sign-holding protester, a casual encounter in a church pew -- all would be logged into a government database. Even advice from a spouse would be covered under Waxman's bill, Johnson said.
As the House prepares to look at the issue, Amanda Banks, federal analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said members need to attend to the real issue.
“Instead of focusing on the executive branch as the Waxman bill does, or on grassroots activism, as the Pelosi bill is expected to," she said, "the House should focus on the location of the real need for lobbying reform: the U.S. Congress.”

HOLY CALAMARI!

This huge squid was caught in early February in the Ross Sea off Antarctica by a New Zealand Fishing crew. It was weighed at 990 pounds, which if confirmed on shore would break the earlier record by 330 pounds. New Zealand Fisheries Minister Jim Anderton said that the squid is likely the first intact adult male colossal squid to be caught successfully. The frozen squid will be transported to New Zealand's national museum to be preserved for scientific study. Colossal squid are estimated to grow up to 46 feet long, can descend to 6,500 feet and are extremely agressive hunters. Steve O'Shea, a squid expert at the Aukland University of technology quipped "if calamari rings were made from this squid they would be the size of tractor trailers."

MURTHA USING BUDGET TO FORCE TROOPS HOME

According to an article in today's Tribune-Review, Rep. John Mutha ( I mean Murtha) is planning to limit President Bush's spending in an attempt to force him to bring our troops in Iraq home. Murtha has emerged as the leader of the Democratic opposition because of his control of the Pentagon's spending bills and his clout with Democrats regarding defense issues. Murtha will detail legislation by mid-March that will set stringent rules on combat deployments, such as how long troops can stay, the equipment they use and whether any money could be used to expand military operations into Iran. Murtha says that so few units could meet the high standards he wants in place that Bush will have no choice but to start bringing troops home and would not be able to keep some 160,000 troops in Iraq for months as he had planned. Murtha was quoted as saying that " this vote will be the most important vote in changing the direction of the war...the President could veto it, but then he wouldn't have any money." Does Mr. Murtha have any plans in place to deal with the fallout that will most certainly happen if the Bush administration is forced to withdraw our troops? Does he and his liberal cronies plan to use some type of diplomatic strategy in dealing with the Iraqi al-Qaida? What he and the other anti-war Dems are proposing is exactly what al-Qaida and other Islamist movements want! This is a critical time in history for the United States...we either emerge from this epoch in history as a strong, no-bullshit leader that does not cave in to terrrosism and pacifist rhetoric or we digress into fat, lazy, overindulgent losers who will, no doubt, be forever engaging these types of people.

PICTURE WORTH MORE THAN WORDS

HAPPY VALENTINE'S DAY

John 15:13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

UGLIEST OUTFIT I'VE EVER SEEN

I enjoy looking at the pictures of the best & worst dressed celebrities of the Oscars and Grammys, and this year was no exception. I thought Carrie Underwood, Mary J. Blige and Ludacris were some of the best, but what I am about to share with you is the absolute WORST ensemble I have ever seen in my entire life! This "Swamp Geisha" getup worn by Imogen Heap even whoops the shit out of the f*ing swan disaster that Bjork wore many Grammys ago in my opinion, but you be the judge (notice the rubber frog in her hand--WTF!!!!)

QUOTEWORTHY

"What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
-- Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775

OH NOOO! NOT KEANU!

I can't help it and I don't apologize that I like to keep tabs on some of the Hollywood stars, especially my favorite "hotties". The latest I've read is, according to Life & Style, Jennifer Aniston had a "secret date" with neighbor Keanu Reeves at her Hollywood Hills home in late December, not long after she announced her split from Vince Vaughn. I do like Jennifer and I thought that Vince was a complete disaster of a choice for a boyfriend, but I don't want her going out with Keanu! I don't want anybody to go out with him!
Keanu, she's not your type! She's too perfect, personable and bubbly! You need someone dark, moody and bizzare who can't act (like you). And Jen, go have a fistfight with Angelina and leave Keanu alone, OKAY?! Maybe Brad will kiss your boo-boos...

BANKRATE'S 9 WIERDEST TAX DEDUCTIONS

I just thought I'd add this one to my blog to alleviate some of your your tax time blues!

1. A man and his wife were meeting with their tax consultant who inquired about the mortgage deduction for the condo in Utah--of which the wife knew nothing about--the condo was set upfor the husband's mistress! Ooops!

2. One person tried to deduct day care expense for his/her dog. This person felt that the dog should not be alone and deserved day care.

3. A guy had rental property and tried to deduct a limousine charge in the year he got married by claiming that he had taken his renters out for a night on the town.

4. A young mother tried to list a $300 breast pump as a medical expense, but it was strictly for her convenience to operate since most pumps are around $50.

5. A landscaper who was under audit with the IRS had deducted the expense of their dog because he would pull the wagon on landscaping jobs. They felt he was out there helping. He may have been listed as an independent contractor.

6. A Hollywood set electrician tried to write off the cost of buying and renting movie videos and DVDs, and a professor of Italian culture and European art tried to deduct his theater and concert tickets.

7. An individual who bred dogs was looking for a tax deduction, so he thought that he would give one of his dogs to the Humane Society and take a deduction for it. They were valuable dogs but he bred it, so he could not take a tax deduction for it.

8. A male model wanted to write off his entire wardrobe because he needed to look good all the time.

9. This one is my fave--An Amish guy tried to take a deduction for his tricked-out buggy, which came equipped with dash lights, kick plates, tinted windshield, speedometer, hydraulic brakes and dimmer switches. The standard buggy costs $2,675; this pimped-out version ran $3,545.

LATEST FEMINIST LIBERAL BULLSHIT

Liberals Push Women's Treaty by Pete Winn, associate editor. Document gives U.N. committee authority to dictate family policy.
Senate Democrats may be on the verge of resurrecting a treaty that could be used to require U.S. compliance with liberal policies, such as a right to abortion and legalization of prostitution. The treaty -- the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) -- was signed by President Carter in 1980, but was never ratified by the U.S. Senate and has been in limbo ever since. More than 180 countries have ratified the treaty, which established a United Nations committee to monitor participation in CEDAW . "What happens is that each of these countries has to appear before a panel of 'experts' at the United Nations… to explain how they are implementing the treaty," said Austin Ruse, who heads the Washington, D.C., office of the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute. The committee monitors everything from relationships between husbands and wives, to educational content in the schools, to employment and hiring practices --- even how many women are elected to local state and national offices. Abortion is a key issue for the committee. "They have directed 37 countries to change their laws on abortion," Ruse said. "What we could easily see, if we ratify CEDAW, is pressure to strike down parental-notification laws, to strike down laws against partial-birth abortion, to strike down any regulation on abortion drugs like RU-486." Abortion isn't the only issue the committee has spoken on. It also directed China to legalize prostitution -- even though the treaty condemns it. "They directed Kyrgyzstan to legalize lesbianism," Ruse said. "They criticized Belarus for establishing Mother's Day because they said Mother's Day promotes 'a negative cultural stereotype.' They directed Libya to reinterpret the Koran to fall within committee guidelines. They criticized Ireland for allowing the Catholic Church to have too great a say in public policy." Thomas Jacobson, Focus on the Family Action's liaison to the United Nations, describes CEDAW as "The Equal Rights Amendment on steroids." "It would subject every family, school and business -- as well as every county, state and local office -- to oversight by United Nations 'experts.' " Jacobson said the original intent was to eliminate real discrimination against women, but it has become a politically correct nightmare. "The first article of it says that making any kind of distinction (between men and women) is to be construed as 'discrimination,' " he said. "That's crazy." Ruse said left-leaning groups are pushing the Senate for quick consideration and a ratification vote -- perhaps as early as March. "We believe CEDAW will be low-hanging fruit for the new Democratic majority in the Senate," he told CitizenLink. "They are under a lot of pressure from radical feminists in the United States to put it to a vote. At this point, I think that they probably have the votes to pass it." Ruse said he has no doubt that if the U.S. signs on, the U.N. committee would, at some point, say that social conservatives -- the so-called 'Christian Right' -- have too much say in American public policy. "This is an out-of-control U.N. committee, the members of which hardly anybody can name," he concluded. Jacobson, meanwhile, called CEDAW, "un-American and unconstitutional." "We fought the War of Independence to be exactly that -- independent, to be free to govern ourselves and to not have a foreign power dictating our personal and internal affairs" he said. David Wagner, associate professor of law at Regent University Law School, said if the Senate ratifies it, the treaty would take effect. But President Bush could refuse to send it back to the U.N. -- or could even remove President Carter's signature "There is some precedence for that," Wagner told CitizenLink. "We 'un-signed' the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. In 1978, President Carter himself repudiated the Taiwan Relations Act, which was a treaty with Taiwan that had been ratified by the Senate. The courts refused to hear a legal case about his power to do so, saying they couldn't answer the question." Ruse and Jacobson warn that the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., is being pressed for a vote on March 8 -- International Women's Day. TAKE ACTION Please contact your senators and insist that they oppose CEDAW. In addition, please ask President Bush to consider removing the President Carter's signature from the treaty