God Bless the Gurkhas

So, a Gurkha beheaded a Taliban fighter? What is the problem exactly? What do we need when fighting Jihadists? More bad asses like Gurkhas

 

Brits back down from crazy ROE interpretation

A GURKHA under investigation for beheading a Taliban gunman has been allowed back on normal duty. 

The Nepalese soldier faced court martial after he returned to base with the enemy fighter’s head in a bag and presented it to senior officers. 

He had decapitated the insurgent with his kukri machete, the traditional Gurkha weapon, during fierce fighting on the Afghan front line.

Gurkhas do not play. I am reminded of the story about the Gurkha that killed 30 Taliban “fighters” in Afghanistan. One officer commented “what made the Taliban think 30 of them could take a Gurkha?”

 

Your Blog Headline of the Day

I used to give this award out more often, but have been slacking on that as of late. today though, Donald Douglas posted THIS gem

Homosexuals Love Weiner!

Anthony Weiner came out for some gay pride love at the foreskin festival over the weekend.

At New York Magazine, “Anthony Weiner’s ‘Gay’ Pants Are the Talk of the Town.” And the New York Post, “Anthony Weiner in bid for gay vote as Christine Quinn wins major endorsement.”

A cock-waving adulterer? He should have the homosexual vote locked down!

Here are a couple of pics of Weiner, WITH pants thank God

anthony-weiner-lead-wenn20478390__oPt_zps2f59f4f1 Pants

 

They said if we elected Obama, the world would love us

Yeah, about that, Bob Belvedere says, ah, not so much

The world, especially Red China and Fascist Russia, have been humiliating The United States at will since this whole Snowden incident began.

Over at the New York Post, S.A. Miller reports on the latest round of ridicule:

snowdennow

Russian President Vladimir Putin yesterday told President Obama to take a flying leap by refusing to turn over spy-secrets leaker Edward Snowden — who for a third day remained lounging in a Moscow airport.

“Snowden is a free person,” Putin proclaimed during a news conference in Turku, Finland, where he feigned annoyance at getting dragged into the closely watched incident.

“I’d prefer not to deal with this issue at all,” he said. “It’s like shearing a piglet — too much squealing, too little wool.

“The sooner he chooses his final destination, the better it is for him and Russia.”

Putin rubbed Obama’s nose in the international mess, saying that Snowden “had not committed any crime” in Russia, because Snowden hadn’t passed through customs and remained in a transit area inside Moscow’s Sheremetyevo International Airport, which technically isn’t designated as “Russian soil.”

In other words, Putin sees Obama as a chump, and has zero respect for our president, but what of John “F—ing Kerry? Surely HE will make those Ruskies respect us

But Secretary of State John Kerry backed off from an embarrassing confrontation with Putin, appealing for “calm” and trying to stop the dispute with Russia from boiling over.

“I would simply appeal for calm and reasonableness in a moment where we don’t need to raise the level of confrontation over something as, frankly, basic and normal as this,” Kerry told reporters traveling with him in Saudi Arabia.

“We’re not looking for a confrontation” he said. “We’re not ordering anybody. We’re simply requesting, under a very normal procedure, for the transfer of somebody.”

Gee, John, why not offer Putin a back rub, or free ice cream, or maybe say please with sugar on top, WIMP! Bob sums it up very well

The weakness, it reeks.

Does Anthony Weiner have a hard on for a political return? UPDATED! First Weiner campaign video added

Anthony Weiner might be seeking the New York Mayor’s office next election. Will he run as a Democrat? Will the party support him? Or perhaps he might start a new party? The Trouser Snake Party? or the One-Eyed Monster Party? Or perhaps the Perverts Party?

Via NY Post:

Former Rep. Anthony Weiner is laying the groundwork for a political comeback, possibly as a startling addition to this year’s mayoral race, sources said yesterday.

Political insiders were abuzz at news that Weiner and his wife, Huma Abedin, had granted a lengthy magazine interview for the first time since his resignation in an embarrassing sexting scandal in 2011.

“The magazine piece is step one of a two-step process for him to run citywide this year,” said one Democratic Party source.

“He’s looking at public advocate and comptroller, but he really thinks he can use this to get back in and run for mayor.”

Weiner issued a terse “no comment” when asked about his plans.

Weiner has $4.3 million left in his campaign account, including $248,710 that would be matched 6-to-1 under the public-financing system.

Here is a possible campaign them song

UPDATE! This might be the model for the first campaign ad

Even Johnathan Alter is seeing how Team Obama operates

There is no part of the Constitution this deplorable administration respects. Gateway Pundit has more

The New York Post reported, via JWF:

Finally, this week, reporters are pushing back. Even Jonathan Alter — who frequently appears on the Obama-friendly MSNBC — came forward to say he, too, had been treated horribly by the administration for writing something they didn’t like.

“There is a kind of threatening tone that, from time to time — not all the time — comes out of these guys,” Alter said this week. During the 2008 campaign swing through Berlin, Alter said that future White House press secretary Robert Gibbs disinvited him from a dinner between Obama and the press corps over it.

“I was told ‘Don’t come,’ in a fairly abusive e-mail,” he said. “[It] made what Gene Sperling wrote [to Woodward] look like patty-cake.”

“I had a young reporter asking tough, important questions of an Obama Cabinet secretary,” says one DC veteran. “She was doing her job, and they were trying to bully her. In an e-mail, they called her the vilest names — bitch, c–t, a–hole.” He complained and was told the matter would be investigated: “They were hemming and hawing, saying, ‘We’ll look into it.’ Nothing happened.”

I knew the mask would slip if Obama was reelected, and here it is yet again. The radicalism exposed a bit more

 

Call it Inevitable: Mayor Douche Nozzle Bans 2 Liter Sodas with Pizza Orders

So how long till the Little Dictator tries to control how many twelve packs of soda his subjects may purchase?

Why do Bloomberg and his Democratic cohorts hate the poor so much?

The New York Post reported the following:

Take a big gulp, New York: Hizzoner is about to give you a pop.

Nanny Bloomberg unleashes his ban on large sodas on March 12 — and there are some nasty surprises lurking for hardworking families.

Say goodbye to that 2-liter bottle of Coke with your pizza delivery, pitchers of soft drinks at your kid’s birthday party and some bottle-service mixers at your favorite nightclub.

They’d violate Mayor Bloomberg’s new rules, which prohibit eateries from serving or selling sugary drinks in containers larger than 16 ounces.

Bloomberg’s soda smackdown follows his attacks on salt, sugar, trans fat, smoking and even baby formula.

The city Health Department last week began sending brochures to businesses that would be affected by the latest ban, including restaurants, bars and any “food service” establishment subject to letter grades.

And merchants were shocked to see the broad sweep of the new rules.

“It’s not fair. If you’re gonna tell me what to do, it’s no good,” said Steve DiMaggio of Caruso’s in Cobble Hill, Brooklyn. “It’s gonna cost a lot more.”

And consumers, especially families, will soon see how the rules will affect their wallets — forcing them to pay higher unit prices for smaller bottles.

Dear Governor Andrew “SCREAMIN” Cuomo

funny-picture-gorilla-flipping-the-bird1

Gun owners in New York have a message for you, you pathetic tragedy pimp

New York Governor Cuomo the Junior may have rushed throughhis new gun control law with such speed thatpolice will avoid its restrictions only through the blessed miracle ofselective enforcement, but he may have a little trouble getting the state’s firearms owners to attend his party. The new law requires owners of those scary-looking rifles known as “assault weapons” to register their property (amidst assurances that, oh no, the registration lists will never be used for confiscation), but gun rights activists are actively urging gun owners to defy the new mandate.

According to Frederic Dicker at the New York Post:

Assault-rifle owners statewide are organizing a mass boycott of Gov. Cuomo’s new law mandating they register their weapons, daring officials to “come and take it away,” The Post has learned.

Gun-range owners and gun-rights advocates are encouraging hundreds of thousands of owners to defy the law, saying it’d be the largest act of civil disobedience in state history.

“I’ve heard from hundreds of people that they’re prepared to defy the law, and that number will be magnified by the thousands, by the tens of thousands, when the registration deadline comes,’’ said Brian Olesen, president of the American Shooters Supply, one of the largest gun dealers in the state.

Dicker quotes a Cuomo administration official admitting, “Many of these assault-rifle owners aren’t going to register; we realize that.” Which means that state officials were merely posturing rather than entirely ignorant of history when they penned the law and jammed it through. As I’ve written before, gun laws traditionally breed massive levels of non-compliance — even in places where you might think people have no strong history of personal arms, or of resistance to the state, When Germany imposed gun registration in 1972, the country’s officials managed to get paperwork on all of 3.2 million firearms out of an estimated 17-20 million guns in civilian hands. Californians may have registered as many as ten percent of the “assault weapons” they owned when that state imposed registration in 1990 (though the New York Times put the figure rather lower, at about 7,000 out of an estimated 300,000 guns covered by the law).

 

Your Marxist Moron of the Day is Russell Simmons

Simmons believes he knows what will stop school shootings. Not armed guards, oh no! What we need in Simmon’s Utopia are unarmed “peace keepers”

“The recent Sandy Hook incident put gun violence in the forefront but there’s a Sandy Hook every weekend in Chicago,” Simmons said,according to The New York Post. “The Sandy Hook incident and other incidents like it are important and have brought this discussion to the forefront, but still it seems that these kids are left out.”

He asked for funding for nonprofit organizations to put the “peacekeepers” in the schools.

“We have the peacekeepers in 25 cities and they’re just getting started but they need funding as well. We have to fund these programs. All of our underserved communities are at risk and that means you’re at risk,” he said, according to The Post.

Peace keepers! What will they do, have pizza on hand for some crazed gunman? Maybe milk and cookies? They will sing songs of peace and social justice perhaps, soothing the would be killer. Good grief, how stupid is this man? Has he ever lived in the real world?

 

Boy, Bob Belvedere is going to get called a Homophobe for this post!

Bob Belvedere is not happy about the duds, and I mean DUDS, Team USA Olympic athletes are going to be sporting next month in London.  I must say, these clothes look ridiculous, in fact these get ups are even more wimpy, and yes, Bob, Gay, than those sweater vests Santorum wore during the campaign. The fact is Bob, who I never knew was  fashionista is right in his critique. I mean  look at these awful clothes.

From the New York Post, David Li and Andy Soltis reporting, we learn [tip of the fedora to the Drudge Report]:

Our Olympic heroes will be headed off to London this month — looking as if they’re decked out for a Hamptons lawn party.

Ralph Lauren yesterday unveiled the preppy parade uniforms that Team USA members will wear at the July 27 opening ceremony, stirring an uproar over pricey duds fit for a regatta.

The outfits include blue blazers, cream-colored trousers, white skirts — and berets.

“2012 US Olympic team is wearing berets. Really? America?” tweeted John Lee Rudnicki, a Los Angeles entertainment lawyer. “How many people in the US have you ever seen wear a beret? Five?”

“What the France?” tweeted Greg “Hollea” Rachal, a political activist and former Jacksonville, Fla., City Council candidate.

The company said the outfits embody “the spirit of American athleticism and sportsmanship.”

They embody the spirit of an America gone gay.

Yep, that last line is going to buy Belvedere some grief. I would have used the term douchetastic myself, but, Bob is his own guy.

But, I am not sure that many Gay people would dress like this! I mean these poor people look as if they are rejects from An Old Navy TV spot.

The John Derbyshire Derby?

I will admit that I cannot recall if I ever wrote one thing Derbyshire wrote. I likely did, but, that is beside the point. The bottom line is this, he wrote a column that touched on racial lines, and, as a Conservative,that can be extremely dangerous. Liberal columnists can get away with overtly racist words, Conservatives? Not even close. One of the biggest double standards, maybe the biggest, is what the Left and Right are allowed to say, or write about race. Derbyshire wrote some “controversial things” and now, National Review has booted him,which is their perfect right. My aim in this post is not to condemn The National Review, or Derbyshire.   My aim is to determine if, had Derbyshire written for this blog,would I have canned him for his piece. So,let us review the words that got Derbyshire 86ed.

I will comment as I see a need to

Bob Belvedere has a link to the column. Lets see what it says shall we? Here it is,in its entirity

“Sean O’Reilly was 16 when his mother gave him the talk that most black parents give their teenage sons,” Denisa R. Superville of the Hackensack (NJ) Record tells us. Meanwhile, down in Atlanta: “Her sons were 12 and 8 when Marlyn Tillman realized it was time for her to have the talk,” Gracie Bonds Staples writes in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

Leonard Greene talks about the talk in the New York Post. Someone bylined as KJ Dell’Antonia talks about the talk in The New York Times. Darryl Owens talks about the talk in the Orlando Sentinel.

Yes, talk about the talk is all over.

There is a talk that nonblack Americans have with their kids, too. My own kids, now 19 and 16, have had it in bits and pieces as subtopics have arisen. If I were to assemble it into a single talk, it would look something like the following.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

(1) Among your fellow citizens are forty million who identify as black, and whom I shall refer to as black. The cumbersome (and MLK-noncompliant) term “African-American” seems to be in decline, thank goodness. “Colored” and “Negro” are archaisms. What you must call “the ‘N’ word” is used freely among blacks but is taboo to nonblacks.

“There is a talk that nonblack Americans have with their kids, too.”

(2) American blacks are descended from West African populations, with some white and aboriginal-American admixture. The overall average of non-African admixture is 20-25 percent. The admixture distribution is nonlinear, though: “It seems that around 10 percent of the African American population is more than half European in ancestry.” (Same link.)

(3) Your own ancestry is mixed north-European and northeast-Asian, but blacks will take you to be white.

(4) The default principle in everyday personal encounters is, that as a fellow citizen, with the same rights and obligations as yourself, any individual black is entitled to the same courtesies you would extend to a nonblack citizen. That is basic good manners and good citizenship. In some unusual circumstances, however—e.g., paragraph (10h) below—this default principle should be overridden by considerations of personal safety.

(5) As with any population of such a size, there is great variation among blacks in every human trait (except, obviously, the trait of identifying oneself as black). They come fat, thin, tall, short, dumb, smart, introverted, extroverted, honest, crooked, athletic, sedentary, fastidious, sloppy, amiable, and obnoxious. There are black geniuses and black morons. There are black saints and black psychopaths. In a population of forty million, you will find almost any human type. Only at the far, far extremes of certain traits are there absences. There are, for example, no black Fields Medal winners. While this is civilizationally consequential, it will not likely ever be important to you personally. Most people live and die without ever meeting (or wishing to meet) a Fields Medal winner.

(6) As you go through life, however, you will experience an ever larger number of encounters with black Americans. Assuming your encounters are random—for example, not restricted only to black convicted murderers or to black investment bankers—the Law of Large Numbers will inevitably kick in. You will observe that the means—the averages—of many traits are very different for black and white Americans, as has been confirmed by methodical inquiries in the human sciences.

(7) Of most importance to your personal safety are the very different means for antisocial behavior, which you will see reflected in, for instance, school disciplinary measures, political corruption, and criminal convictions.

(8) These differences are magnified by the hostility many blacks feel toward whites. Thus, while black-on-black behavior is more antisocial in the average than is white-on-white behavior, average black-on-white behavior is a degree more antisocial yet.

(9) A small cohort of blacks—in my experience, around five percent—is ferociously hostile to whites and will go to great lengths to inconvenience or harm us. A much larger cohort of blacks—around half—will go along passively if the five percent take leadership in some event. They will do this out of racial solidarity, the natural willingness of most human beings to be led, and a vague feeling that whites have it coming.

(10) Thus, while always attentive to the particular qualities of individuals, on the many occasions where you have nothing to guide you but knowledge of those mean differences, use statistical common sense:

(10a) Avoid concentrations of blacks not all known to you personally.

(10b) Stay out of heavily black neighborhoods.

This seems pretty racist at first glance, but, trust me most people, note I did not say most White people, but most people, regardless of race would avoid Inner-City neighborhoods. I am not sure what Derbyshire means by “heavily Black neighborhoods. but, I will assume he is referring to the inner city, where crime rates are generally very high.

(10c) If planning a trip to a beach or amusement park at some date, find out whether it is likely to be swamped with blacks on that date (neglect of that one got me the closest I have ever gotten to death by gunshot).

Does this seem racist to me, yes, I must be honest, it does

Again, this sounds racist. Is he advising his kids to avoid rap concerts? That would be pretty good advice, but that, to me anyway, has more to do with the gang/thug element, and there are plenty of non-Blacks that fit that decsription

(10e) If you are at some public event at which the number of blacks suddenly swells, leave as quickly as possible.

Again, I would have to read Derbyshire’s mind to be certain of his meaning, but, I would advise his kids the same way. I managed a restaurant in downtown Dallas for several years. And, once  a year, the Hoop-It-Up event was held around this restaurant. Every year, toward the end of the day, as the games were ending, large groups of kids, almost all Black would descent on the area. The Dallas Police were there, in force, and talking to some of the officers, not all White by the way, I learned that there was reason to be concerned about gang violence.

(10f) Do not settle in a district or municipality run by black politicians.

This one is, to me, just stupid. I might advise his kids not to live in heavily Democratic districts, but that has zip to do with race.

(10g) Before voting for a black politician, scrutinize his/her character much more carefully than you would a white.

Horse shit! Scrutinize EVERY politician, regardless of race. Maybe Derbyshire forgets that there are far more White Liberal politicians than Black Liberal politicians.

(10h) Do not act the Good Samaritan to blacks in apparent distress, e.g., on the highway.

(10i) If accosted by a strange black in the street, smile and say something polite but keep moving.

I would advise this tactic, no matter who was accosting me.

(11) The mean intelligence of blacks is much lower than for whites. The least intelligent ten percent of whites have IQs below 81; forty percent of blacks have IQs that low. Only one black in six is more intelligent than the average white; five whites out of six are more intelligent than the average black. These differences show in every test of general cognitive ability that anyone, of any race or nationality, has yet been able to devise. They are reflected in countless everyday situations. “Life is an IQ test.”

Yes, that is racist, no doubt. Now, I would say that the Left has targeted Blacks, and other minorities for decades. The Left has, to great effect, convinced Blacks that EVERYTHING revolves around their skin color, especially anything negative. The Left has done this to indoctrinate Black Americans. Their desire is to embitter Blacks, and convince them that they are perpetually victimized by racism, and that the only by voting Democrat can they ever move forward.

This indoctrination has, I believe, made Black Americans far too focused on their skin color. In my experience, White people are far less concerned about their pigmentation than are Blacks. I blame decades of Liberal propaganda for that.

(12) There is a magnifying effect here, too, caused by affirmative action. In a pure meritocracy there would be very low proportions of blacks in cognitively demanding jobs. Because of affirmative action, the proportions are higher. In government work, they are very high. Thus, in those encounters with strangers that involve cognitive engagement, ceteris paribus the black stranger will be less intelligent than the white. In such encounters, therefore—for example, at a government office—you will, on average, be dealt with more competently by a white than by a black. If that hostility-based magnifying effect (paragraph 8) is also in play, you will be dealt with more politely, too. “The DMV lady“ is a statistical truth, not a myth.

Once again, give me a break! at this point, I would say that if Derbyshire wrote for me, he would be toast.

(13) In that pool of forty million, there are nonetheless many intelligent and well-socialized blacks. (I’ll use IWSB as an ad hoc abbreviation.) You should consciously seek opportunities to make friends with IWSBs. In addition to the ordinary pleasures of friendship, you will gain an amulet against potentially career-destroying accusations of prejudice.

(14) Be aware, however, that there is an issue of supply and demand here. Demand comes from organizations and businesses keen to display racial propriety by employing IWSBs, especially in positions at the interface with the general public—corporate sales reps, TV news presenters, press officers for government agencies, etc.—with corresponding depletion in less visible positions. There is also strong private demand from middle- and upper-class whites for personal bonds with IWSBs, for reasons given in the previous paragraph and also (next paragraph) as status markers.

(15) Unfortunately the demand is greater than the supply, so IWSBs are something of a luxury good, like antique furniture or corporate jets: boasted of by upper-class whites and wealthy organizations, coveted by the less prosperous. To be an IWSB in present-day US society is a height of felicity rarely before attained by any group of human beings in history. Try to curb your envy: it will be taken as prejudice (see paragraph 13).

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

You don’t have to follow my version of the talk point for point; but if you are white or Asian and have kids, you owe it to them to give them some version of the talk. It will save them a lot of time and trouble spent figuring things out for themselves. It may save their lives.

As I said, the part about Blacks being “less-intelligent” is something I find offensive, and needless. Although, I will note that if this column had been written by a Black Liberal, and the column had been directed towards Whites, the “outrage” would have been non-existent. As I wrote earlier, the double standard on race in America is absurd. Liberals are ALLOWED to be openly racist, Hell, they are applauded for it many times.

That is my take, here is what others are saying

Stacy McCain notes the narcissism of many on the Left and their exploitation of race.

In a society where traditional institutions of moral authority are decadent or discredited, individuals engage in self-righteous political gestures to demonstrate (to themselves, if to no one else) their own superior virtue. Liberal policies appeal to such impulses, e.g., Dick Durbin: “I may be a corrupt swine, but I drive a hybrid!” or Alec Baldwin: “I may be a vicious bully, but I’m all about a woman’s right to choose!

Controversies that involve race, even indirectly, have often been hijacked by this sort of liberal crusader mentality, as in the infamousDuke University lacrosse team “rape” scandal, where certainty of the guilt of the accused was a kind of moral litmus test. People who had nothing to do with Duke University, people who had never been within a hundred miles of Raleigh, N.C., nevertheless presumed to know that the lacrosse players were guilty and excoriated anyone who did not join them in denouncing the perpetrators of this alleged atrocity.

What you learn, if you observe this tendency long enough, is that the people who delight in pointing the accusatory finger — racist! sexist! homophobe! — are generally engaged in an exhibition of moral narcissism, trying to fill the “hole in their soul” with self-righteousness by gestures intended to prove their own superior virtue. Not only are theynot racist (or not sexist, etc.), but they are anti-racist (or anti-whatever) and are courageously donning their shining armor and mounting their horses to lead a crusade against the Evil Menace.

Heroism on the cheap, as it were.

Stacy also has a nice round up as well

Donald Douglas wonders why Derbyshire put this piece out

Bob Belvedere defends Derbyshire as a good and decent man

Jeff Goldstein notes the racial fear mongering angle and defends Derbyshire as well. He also makes a couple of excellent points about the Left’s oft-spoken desire top have a “dialogue on race”

First, let me say this: Derb’s article is “controversial” in the same way Juan Williams’ noting that he gets a bit frightened on a plane when he sees Arabs in the row in front of him tugging at their vests was controversial. Meaning, it was honest — and as such, it was not sufficiently filtered for a media climate where political correctness still provides the parameters for what is and isn’t acceptable.

Eric Holder famously noted that we’re afraid to talk about race in this country. Derbyshire proved he, at least, isn’t. And his comrades are crawling over themselves to gain distance.

And the reason is, Holder, the left, the “pragmatic” right — they don’t really want to talk about such things. They only want to talk about the need to talk about such things, while simultaneously demonizing any real attempts to do so. An easier way to bank some cheap grace you won’t find in a PC-soaked society.

Some of what Derbyshire said in his article I didn’t agree with; some of what he argued I take no position on, because I’d need to see the evidence cited expanded on a bit and given a more rigorous test; and as a practical rhetorical matter, I think Derbyshire did himself no favors by singling out blacks. But what is indisputable is that the article is set up as a talk he’d have with his kids about race, and the opinions he’s formed — and that he’d pass on to his children — are his, while the reasons he’s developed them he sourced w/ links. That is, he tried (within the constraints of the format) to show his work.

Dan Riehl notes the Left’s misguided attack on Derbyshire

the left is always screaming racism, often even when it hasn’t been proven to exist – as in the recent case of Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman. Even the media falsely screamed it. So, along comes Derbyshire and, I don’t know, confesses it, on his part? And all the left can do is scream, get him! Silence him! He must be fired!! What does that solve? It’s as if the left wants it to appear as though America doesn’t still struggle with racial issues … except when seizing upon an incident, or issue they think they can exploit for political gain. Frankly, they’re even trying to do that here,

Sad that  the Left whines about a need to talk about race, when in fact they only want to have THEIR slanted view heard. As for me, maybe I am just different, but skin color means little to me, of the five closest friends I have had in my adult life one is Korean, one Fillipino, and one is Black. I never saw them as a “color” or an “ethnicity”. I saw them as people, nothing more. I truly believe most of us, of all races are the same way.

One very bad man

Chris Kyle is a Navy Seal sniper, with over 160 kills to his credit

Navy SEAL sniper Chris Kyle has the nickname “the legend.” It’s a title given to him by his fellow soldiers. And once you hear his story, you’ll understand why.

Kyle is the “deadliest in U.S. history,” the New York Post says. So how many kills have earned him that designation? Just 160. He details many of them — and many other stories — in his new book, “American Sniper,” which hits bookstores today.

For example, he recalled taking out seven insurgents in Fallujah around Thanksgiving 2004:

It’s November 2004. Thanksgiving time. The second battle of Fallujah has launched, and Kyle is swaddled in silence atop an upturned baby crib, studying the enemy through a Nightforce 4.5-22 power scope attached to a .300 Win Mag rifle.

He’s feeling badass.

“We just got word that the president of Iraq said that anyone left in the city is bad — meaning, clear to shoot,” he recalled for The Post. “From that point on, every fighting-age male was a target.”

That was just fine with Kyle, who spent five weeks in the hideout, protecting Marines on the ground and bagging seven confirmed kills — adding to his official total of 160, making him the deadliest sniper in US history.

“After the first kill, the others come easy. I don’t have to psych myself up, or do anything mentally — I look through the scope, get the target in the cross hairs and kill my enemy before he kills one of my people,” Kyle writes in his new autobiography [...] .

Warren Buffet you hypocrite!

President Barack Obama and Warren Buffett in t...

Image via Wikipedia

Shared sacrifice? Try paying the taxes you owe Mr. Buffet!

Remember when Warren Buffett — a staunch Obama supporter — said that rich people like him would be willing to pay more taxes to help out? If you do, it will probably shock you that his company, Berkshire Hathaway, has back taxes dating back to 2002.

The New York Post explains:

That’s right: As Americans for Limited Government President Bill Wilson notes, the company openly admits that it owes back taxes since as long ago as 2002.

“We anticipate that we will resolve all adjustments proposed by the US Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) for the 2002 through 2004 tax years … within the next 12 months,” the firm’s annual report says.

It also cites outstanding tax issues for 2005 through 2009.

Rumor confirmed. People prefer NOT watching the Cleveland Browns play football, not trick or treating and not going to church to listening to the Obamassiah

OUCH!

(DC Examiner)- Yesterday, Obama staged a rally at Cleveland State University. Unlike the 2008 era of hopenchange, Obama spoke to an auditorium that had thousands of empty seats. The New York Post notes that event organizers are making excuses for the poor attendance:

Shortly before his election two years ago, Obama drew a crowd of 80,000 in Cleveland.

Organizers of yesterday’s event tried to explain away the row after row of unoccupied seats by saying the president was competing with football, church and Halloween parties.

The RNC retorts — “So we’re clear, the event started at 3pm. Most church services were over, trick-or-treating hadn’t yet started and the Cleveland Browns had a bye week. There’s a simple truth, one the Democrats will do anything not to admit: voters just don’t like President Obama and his job-killing agenda.”