A Very Good Day!

4 Bombing suspects-Caught
France expells 12 "Hate Preachers"

Overall, a very good day in Europe!

Now if only we could get around to kicking out our radical preachers...

If Cheney Runs For Pres. Helen Thomas Will Kill Herself

"The day Dick Cheney is going to run for president, I'll kill myself," she told the HILL. "All we need is one more liar."

CHENEY IN '08!!!

New Japanese Textbook Draws Fire

Tokyo's school board has adopted a new high school textbook that has some people upset:

TOKYO (Reuters) - Tokyo's education board adopted on Thursday a history textbook that critics say whitewashes past Japanese militarism for use at 26 junior high schools in the capital, a decision that could anger China and South Korea. Japan's Education Ministry in April approved a new edition of the textbook, written by nationalist scholars, sparking protests from China and South Korea where bitter memories of Japan's aggression before and during World War II persist.

Critics say the history textbook, sponsored by the Japanese Society for History Textbook Reform (Tsukurukai), plays down the 1937 Nanjing Massacre in China, ignores the sexual enslavement of women for Japanese soldiers and depicts Japanese wartime actions as aimed at liberating other Asian countries.

I agreed with everything this said until it came to this part:

Opponents of the textbook are worried that given the rise of what some see as nationalism in certain quarters of Japanese society, many state schools may adopt the textbook.

Why is it that they are afraid of the Japanese having "nationalism in certain quarters"? Are the Japanese afraid of themselves? Whats going on here?

[Thanks to Demicidal for emailing this story]

Semi-Breaking News: IRA to End "Armed Campaign"

This is extremely good news from Ireland:

The Irish Republican Army renounced violence as a political weapon Thursday and said it will resume disarmament, taking a dramatic step designed to revive Northern Ireland peace efforts after a 35-year conflict that killed and maimed thousands.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair called the move "a step of unparalleled magnitude," while Prime Minister Bertie Ahern of Ireland said it heralded "the end of the IRA as a paramilitary organization." The White House also welcomed the announcement.

The only problem now is that the IRA has a history of not fulfilling its promises on disarming or true peace agreements.

Gamemaker Sued Over Hidden "Sex" in GTA- San Andreas

For some reason, I knew this was going to happen:

"NEW YORK - A woman upset that she bought the video game "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas" for her 14-year-old grandson without knowing it contained hidden, sexually explicit scenes sued the manufacturer Wednesday on behalf of consumers nationwide.

Florence Cohen, 85, of New York, said in the lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan that the games manufacturer, Rockstar Games, and its parent company, New York-based Take Two Interactive Software Inc., engaged in false, misleading and deceptive practices.

She sought unspecified damages on behalf of herself and all consumers nationwide, saying the company should give up its profits from the game for what amounted to false advertising, consumer deception and unfair business practices."

Lets see, some grandma buys her 14 year old grandson a Grand Theft Auto video game. She sees the controversy and thinks "$$$$$".

I also like the "engaged in false, misleading and deceptive pratices" part.

She bought a game named after a FELONY for petes sake! What did she expect, Barney dancing with the oompa-lumpa's?

A short overview of what she bought (for her 14 year old grandson):

Grand Theft Auto is a game that gives the player's character points (in the form of cash, which can be spent in a variety of ways) for killing people, stealing cars (hence, Grand Theft Auto), doing jobs for gangs and contains lots of violence and some sexual scenes. What has everyone freaked out about this specific addition to the GTA series is that apparently a part of the game code contained a fragment that the development team thought was removed. When a specific "patch" was downloaded from the Internet, a scene of the player's character having sex with his girlfriend was unlocked and viewable.

Due to this fragment, the rating by the ESOB was changed from the original "M" for "Mature" to "AO" for "Adults Only". Most large chain stores (Walmart, Best Buy, Kmart etc) refuse to stock games rated "AO", so to avoid losing the money from not being able to sell their game, Rockstar and Take2 (the makers of the GTA series) are shipping new "sanitized" versions of GTA: San Andreas and have apologized for not finding the fragment of code.

But watch and see, if this case goes through you'll see more "lawsuits on the behalf of consumers everywhere". How many lawsuits can Rockstar and Take2 take? If they go under, it'll send a signal to everyone in the video game industry that you have to abide by granny's standards.

Protestors and Dissenters Arrested and Thrown In Jail

Breaking News!!! ANSWER, ACLU and MoveOn.org leaders where arrested recently because they planned to demonstrate at the French Embassy because Chirac hasn't been tough enough on the Iraq War!

Oh... no... wait a minute... that only happens in Communist countries... the very kind of government that they advocate as the solution to all our problems...

The real story? Fidel Castro arrested Cuban dissenters because they planned on demonstrating at the French Embassy.

Opposition figures in Cuba say at least 20 Cuban dissidents have been detained as part of a crackdown against the country's political opposition.

They are said to include the three main organizers of a public meeting of dissidents which took place in May.

The Cuban government has not confirmed the arrests.

The majority of those dissidents that are currently in custody were intending to take part in a protest outside the French embassy.

Why where they planning on protesting the French? Because the French government was going to soft on Castro.

Even the Cubans know that Communism isn't the answer, why doesn't Hillary know?

More London Bombs, A Man Shot On The Subway

London was the victim of more terrorist bombs and a man was shot by British police. The first thing that is surprising about this story is the fact that British police had weapons with them. Most of the time, British police the street unarmed with little more then a baton to protect them.

So either this is a radical change in British police tactics (which is completely possible) or (somewhat more likely to me) the police who chased the guy after he jumped the turnstiles where not your average, garden-variety constable. Even if the cops who shot the man where regular policemen, this is (as the Brits would put it) highly unusual.

Consider these facts and draw your own conclusions:

1. British policemen are rarely, if ever, armed. This time however, they had handguns.

2. British police being armed could be placed at the foot of recent terrorist activity, but not only where the British uniformed policemen armed, the undercover policemen where armed as well*.

3. Not only where the undercover policemen armed, but they where inside the subway and they fired inside the subway as well*.

My conclusion? The Brits had something they where preparing against, a third attack maybe? In any case, its one terrorist down. To any Brit cop out there, well done and if I had a spot of tea, I'd share.

* I am not an expert on British undercover police methods. I am drawing my conclusions based on what I know or have read about British policemen, so I may be wrong.

Update [7/23/05]:

Police Say Man Gunned Down Not Tied To Bombers

LONDON, July 23 - Scotland Yard admitted Saturday that a man police officers gunned down at point-blank range in front of horrified subway passengers on Friday had nothing to do with the investigation into the bombing attacks here.

The man was identified by police as Jean Charles de Menezes, a 27-year-old Brazilian, described by officers as an electrician on his way to work. "He was not connected to incidents in central London on 21st July, 2005, in which four explosive devices were partly detonated," a police statement said.

The article mentions that the man spoke perfect English, so unless the police never said "Halt" or "Stop" why didn't he stop?

And why was he running in the London subway with a bulky jacket on in the middle of summer?

Also, why did he jump the turnstile?

Hopefully, these questions will be answered by the Scotland Yard investigation.

Wow... This Guy Is Having A Good Effect

I was just listening to my local PBS show after the confirmation speech and they have two women on there, one a lib "He isn't on the side of female reproduction rights" and a conservative.

The lib started talking about Roberts "Lack of a paper trail" and the conservative lady said something that shocked me, she said (to the other lady!) that she only would have been satisfied with a canidate that agreed with her and that she shouldn't use a litmus test about a Supreme Court nominee!

Amazing, this is the first time I've heard a lib on TV getting smacked down!

If this is the new conservative then yes! Its about time!

SCOTUS Decided

Yup its Roberts.

Bush is praseing him now.

UPDATE 1:

39 cases before the Supreme Court? Impressive...

UPDATE 2:

He served with Democrat and Repub Presidents and Justice people? Hopefully that'll help in the Senate...

UPDATE 3:

Fairness and Civility from the Senate? Ha! Yeah, that'll happen...

UPDATE 4:

Now Roberts speaking. When the camera panned onto him when Bush was speaking about the Senate his expression kind of froze and he looked upset...

UPDATE 5:

It's over and the talking heads are talking...

Good luck to you Roberts, your about to be thrown into the most dangerous ocean in the world- its called the Senate.

Well Look What Happened While I Was Typing...

President Bush has chosen federal appeals court judge John Roberts, 50, as his nominee to the Supreme Court...

Well it seems that the right-side of the bloggers seem to like this guy. Drudge has a big "ABORTION WAR" on his site.

I was expecting Bush to do something soon about abortion. His base has been demanding Roe v. Wade overturned ever since 2000. Bush has got to know that the Dem's will lock this guy up for the next thousand years so it looks like Bush finally grew a spine.

Too bad its on this issue.

The American people support Roe v. Wade and they don't want it changed. If Bush and all Republicans don't want to get bit (Hello? Yes, this is 2008 and my good buddy 2006 calling) hard on this subject, we will all have to proceed very, very delicately on this topic. Smash mouth politics won't work here.

At lest, I don't think it will, maybe I'll be surprised.

Special Post! All things explained!

First thing you need to know is that I write better inspired. Second thing you need to know is that's why there isn't a lot of posts up.

Without further ado, here is my "Why?" post. In which that I answer all questions that I can think that anyone might ask about this blog.

Y'all better like it too, or else I might take a page out of Frank J.'s book. (No, not the girlfriend part, the last part...)

I've gotten sidetracked. Here's the d@mned post...

Why are you a blogger?

If you have a blog does that automatically make you a blogger? I hope so, because if not I messed up this dudes survey.

Anyway, I write on this blog to illustrate my points about why that Republicans are better then Democrats.*

*Not in every case as you will see later.

Why is this blog called "Almost A Democrat"?

Because it explains me in so many ways. And since this is my blog, it should reflect me. (There is a co-contributor, but for some reason he just leaves comments instead of posts)

I was almost a democrat. By that I mean that I could have become a democrat. I'm young, white, D.C. area, male. I'm not a Christian. I don't think GTA is the work of the devil and I don't burn books because they're "Harry Potter" books.

But back almost 4 years ago (I was 13, prime time for the dims to come and gotten me) something happened.

As many of you do also, I remember exactly where I was when I first heard about it and where I was when I saw the first images. I remember a lot about that day and I hope I never forget any of it.

The day that happened, the President came on the T.V. and said we would find out who did it and bring them to justice. When we found out who did it and where they where we went out to get them.

And the Democrats began complaining. They complained about every, possible, thing. I'm serious, they complained about how we shouldn't get involved, how we don't know what we're doing, etc.

I said on many an occasion, yes we know what we're doing. Its called payback, 3,000+ style.

Why did you start this blog?

Because I wanted to become cool like Frank J., John Hawkins, Matt Drudge, and Charles Johnson.

Or even a God such as, dare I invoke his name?, Glenn Reynolds.

A part of it is also the fact that I want to become President someday and I don't want people to be all like "Who is this guy?" or say "He's a faker!" or any such thing. Thus, my blog. This will (maybe) be a record to my early political years.

That plus the 2004 election made me more political then ever. So, viola! A political blog.

Isn't The Drudge Report a news site?

Yes, but does that make him less cool?

Isn't Frank J. a humorist?

Yes, but if I say lots of nice things about him maybe he'll tell me what "IMAO" means. That plus he frickin' hilarious! You ever read his "In My World"'s? Very funny stuff!

Why do you slant Conservative?

I most certainly do not, thank you very much. I am not a "Conservative" and I hope I never become one. I am a Republican. Yes, there is a difference. But that's a topic for a different post...

For example, I'm a Republican because of Bush. I'm not a Conservative because of Billy Graham.

---
Well I guess that's all the questions you all might have... What? You have more questions?!? This blogging thing is hard work... well put them in the comments and I'll look them over.

I Filled Out a Survey!

Yes, its true. Yours truely filled out his very first blogger survey!

I found out about it via John Hawkings over at Right Wing News. (An exellent blog by the way, one of my blogger Heros!)

Maybe I'll get a link out of it! I should really get a post up that explains my blog... I may have visitors.

Muslim Man Killed In UK

A Muslim man was killed in Britain over what the police think to be a hate crime. They are asking for witnesses and promise to prosecute the persons responsible for it.

Which is all well and good, but its not enough for the Muslim community. They want it labeled an "Islamophobic hate crime".

Bonus question for today; what's the difference between an Islamophobic hate crime and a regular hate crime? Answer: Islamophobic hate crimes look better in the statistics of ANSWER and the U.N.

I was slightly interested in this part of the Guardian report:

Muslim leaders last night said the killing and the fact that it was Islamophobic would heighten anxiety in their communities, which was already high before the London bombings and which has deepened with every report of attacks.

So... The question is why was anxiety high in a pre-bombing British Muslim community? What are they so afraid of? This isn't the Taliban where you get your head chopped off if you say the wrong thing, why are they afraid?

Also, this part interested me a little:

Mr Ali added that the murder would stoke fears among Britain's 1.6 million Muslims: "This has sent shivers down the community.

So let me get this straight...

1 person out of 1.6 million people are murdered and "it sends shivers down the community".

3,000+ people are murdered out of 300 million people and we are urged by the same people who have links to the murderers "(T)o avoid war as a response to the terrorist attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon"

Love the double standard here...

P.S. I've been reading the site that I quoted in "avoid war as a response" and I could write about 5 posts about what this ingnorant site has to offer. Maybe I will, maybe I won't...

Blair and his position in Europe: A In-Depth Look

"Tony Blair may not have the intention of ruining the European summit. But he has the power to do so. That's his strength,"- French newspaper Le Figaro

Europe has gotten away with a lot and now it'’s coming back to bite them in the butt. They recognize that Blair has the ability to kill their EU Constitution, Blair heads one of the only European economies that isn't in the... well I'll let you come up with the appropriate allegory, Blair has close ties (closer then all other European leaders, in fact) to Washington. You know, the place that gives European's money when they need it?

They know that Blair can kill what they want to live, they know he isn't going anywhere as long as his economy stays high; they know that he has a close relationship with the strongest, richest, most powerful country in the history of the world.

And what do you think they do to get Blair to see things their way, to get what they want?

They start making demands of him! They want Great Britain to give up its annual rebate from the EU! What is wrong with this picture? Someone has something you want and has the power to keep you from getting it so you start demanding him make an extremely unpopular political move?

Have they forgotten how to treat people that are more powerful then them? (Of course that'’s a rhetorical question, just look at how they treat America)

If someone has something you want and they can easily keep you from getting it, you try to wheedle it out of them, you ask politely if you can have it because they don't seem to be using it, if they say "Jump" then you say "How high?". You grovel, you beg, you plead, but you don't insult them, demand things of them and then expect them to give it to you!

I suppose the question isn't "Have they forgotten?", but when did they forget and why?

Europe has been so safe, secure, peaceful, quiet, inviting and just plain tranquil that they have forgotten a time when heads of state really did demand things and if they didn't get them they invaded your country, killed your people, beheaded you and then took your kingdom.

Heck, there has been wars fought over less then this and they make it seem like, "Oh yeah, we want this and this and oh why not? Toss in that as well."

There was a good quote (Isn't there always?) that covered this territory, "Never give an ultimatum if you can't afford to lose."

With Germany's and France's unemployment rates heading to (Or surpassing!) 15%, can France and German afford to lose more?

***Update: Fixed the French link