By
Conservatives buy a lot of books, probably as many if not more than liberals. And they buy a lot of them on Amazon.com.
So why is the online mega-bookstore website catering to liberals only in its first ever weekly online “television” series: “Amazon Fishbowl with Bill Maher“? (Highlights of the show are being shown, this week, at the Sundance Film Festival.) In case they hadn’t noticed, is a raving leftist.
Take Michelle Malkin, the top female conservative blogger vs. Ana Marie Cox, formerly the top female liberal blogger. Malkin’s book, “Unhinged,” out for months, has only fallen to #2033 on Amazon, as I write this. It’s been in the top 200 for months. Cox’s vapid book, “Dog Days“–out barely two weeks and getting a ton of hype in Mainstream Media that Michelle will never get by virtue of being a conservative–has already fallen to #1932 on Amazon. Yesterday, Malkin’s months-old book beat Cox’s new one (#1402 vs. #1732).

Bill Maher . . . . . . . Cox Book . . . . . . . Malkin Book
Certainly shows me the power of conservative-oriented book buyers. But Amazon isn’t listening. In response, Amazon is giving us a weekly serving of crotchety, ever-more-bitter, libertarian-turned-wacko-far-leftist Bill Maher. The show is sponsored by UPS.
Amazon claims the aim of the new Maher show is “to help our customers discover new books, films and music, and to help the creators of these works find new audiences.” What Amazon really means is to help liberal customers find liberal works on Amazon. That’s what Bill Maher does on his other show, and there’s no reason to think he’ll be “balanced” on this one.
USA Today reports that Maher will begin each Amazon show “with a short topical monologue about that week’s new media and pop culture offerings.” We’ve seen that before on his “Politically Incorrect” (on which I was a regular participant) and his current HBO show “Real Time.” The monologues, which are rarely funny, are usually rants mostly against conservatives and Republicans. Don’t expect the Amazon offering to be different.
Time for Amazon to serve up a conservative version of the Maher show (minus the rude, bitter, crotchety-ness) or risk alienating customers–who have other online book purchasing choices.

By
The Mainstream Media–dominated by liberals and loathe to call a spade a spade–is constantly searching for new euphemisms and epithets for the word “terrorist.”
In early November, we noted .
Apparently, that is now the euphemism of choice when it comes to thuggish Islamic terrorists off the African Coasts, particularly Somalia (the terrorists have ties to Al-Qaeda, which dominates Somali politics–as our troops discovered when they were sent there).
Over the weekend, the U.S. Navy boarded a cargo ship seized by the “pirates”-terrorists. They arrested the suspects, all of whom were Muslim Somalis and from Mogadishu (Remember Al-Qaeda’s “Black Hawk Down”?). They had a cache of arms and attack ships with rocket-propelled grenade launchers used to attack, commandeer, and capture ships.
Red is not blue. And these are NOT swash-buckling pirates. They are ISLAMIC TERRORISTS. “Militants”, “pirates”, whatever. Still waiting for the day that the press calls them what they are.

By
Today’s Wall Street Journal “Marketplace” Section has a very interesting story on the cover (can’t link–subscription only).
Apparently, Black workers are angry that they are now being passed over in favor of Hispanic workers for hiring and promotions. It’s all about filling affirmative action quotas, and now Blacks are not the favored minority. Hispanics are.
Set up an unfair system that is built on discrimination, and eventually, it will be unfair to and discriminate against you. In a merit-based system, that would NEVER be a concern . . . if you merit being chosen.

By
I almost forgot to recognize a very important anniversary. This past Friday was the 25th anniversary of the release of 52 Americans held hostage in Iran for 444 days by Islamic terrorists.
It’s especially important because one of their mad captors is now the mad leader of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, today. While our State Department claims he was not one of the captors, the surviving hostages, today, remember him. And I believe them. Not the liars and enablers at the State Department who are most often America’s enemies fondest allies.

Times Haven’t Changed:
U.S. Hostages in Iran Released 25 Years Ago Last Friday
When the hostages were released, they were shown video highlights of what they missed in America while they were being held hostage. Many said that the most touching highlight was the victory of the 1980 U.S. Olympic Hockey Team over the Communist Soviet Union, leading to an Olympic Gold Medal.
January 20, 1981 was also a great day in American history for another reason: Ronald Reagan–the greatest U.S. President in my lifetime–was sworn into office. I was only in elementary school, but I helped my father campaign for him, and it was the seed that planted my burgeoning conservative activism. Meeting President Reagan at the White House, a few years later, was one of the greatest experiences of my life.

By
In November, we wrote about during Ramadan (“Desperate Hijab-encrusted Housewives”?).
Now, your tax dollars are going for an even “more noble” effort in the Palestinian Authority. You are funding MILLIONS ($2 MILLION to be exact) in campaign funds for terrorist group Fatah’s campaign in the Palestinian elections.
This is an outrage. Fatah was Yasser Arafat’s group. It has lots of blood on its hands, including the blood of two U.S. diplomats to Sudan–Cleo Noel and George Curtis Moore, tortured and beaten so badly to death that authorities could not tell which was the White man and which was Black. (Moore was the highest ranking Black U.S. foreign service officer at the time, serving as our Charge D’Affaires at the U.S. Embassy in Sudan.)

No Difference: Bush-Preferred Fatah Terrorist vs. HAMAS Terrorist
Fatah won’t denounce terror. Its Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade is responsible for a plethora of homicide bombings. So WHY are we funding their election campaign?
The absurd State Department, which runs the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID–which pays for the campaign and also paid for the soap opera), believes that HAMAS is a “more extreme” terrorist group. And since Fatah is Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas is part of terrorist group Fatah, well, then, we must support that terrorist group.
Sound logical to you? Me neither. Look at the pictures above. Do you see anything other than clothing color that makes one terrorist look like a more worthy guy? What ever happened to President Bush’s utterance of “Your either on our side or the terrorists’ side.” Now, he, his State Department, and–by force of taxes–we are all on the terrorists’ side. How nice.
And some people want Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice for President?
***UPDATE: One of these Fatah candidates, whose campaign WE ARE FUNDING, is named “Hitler” and is a member of Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade. How cute: We are funding Hitler’s campaign for office. Your tax dollars at work.

By
Remember the big hit sympathize-with-terrorists, moral equivalency movie “” was supposed to be? It’s sinking like a rock.
This weekend concluded week 5 of the Steven Spielberg box office failure. And whatta surprise?! “Munich” is now in 13th place, rapidly declining from 11th place, last week. The movie never made it into the top five, and dropped almost 40% in box office receipts compared with the previous weekend. So sad, too bad.
We’re counting the days until this silver screen stinker hits the $1 movies and then is dropped from theaters altogether. That’s not far off.
Meanwhile, Shlemielberg is on the defensive–so much so that he’s gone back on his promise to grant only ONE press interview–to TIME Magazine, back in December–regarding “Munich.” Shlemielberg granted an interview to Germany’s Der Spiegel, very fitting since Germany is the land that brought us both the Munich Massacre and the Holocaust. In the interview, Spielberg calls critics of “Munich,” like me, “extremists.”

Shlemielberg: Sympathizes w/Terrorists, But Calls Us “Extremists”
Clearly, however, the lackluster box office receipts–despite mega-hype for “Munich”–demonstrate that the real extremist is Shlemielberg and we critics of this fairy tale are very much in the mainstream. The marketplace bears that out.
Then, there’s Tony Kushner, the gay activist/screenwriter and open critic of Israel, who wrote “Munich”‘s screenplay screed. He, too, is on the defensive, including from members of his own family. He’s written an LA Times piece “defending” himself.
Shlemielberg and Kushner on the defensive, their outrageous movie a big failure. Sometimes the good guys do win.

By
Is it just me . . . or do you notice that ABC picks “coincidental” times to run certain programming?
When Stanley Tookie Williams was making his last pleas for clemency from California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, I for the then-yet-to-debut “Injustice,” and an episode about an innocent Black man wrongfully convicted of first-degree murder and fighting to prove it on the eve of execution. The episode wasn’t “Injustice”‘s debut episode. But ABC chose to run the lengthy trailers for a reason. His name was Tookie.
This weekend, ABC’s fictional programming took a similar turn, regarding the NSA’s wiretapping to stop terrorist plots. On Saturday Night, ABC ran the PRE-9/11 movie, “Enemy of the State“, about the NSA illegally wiretapping Americans. Interesting timing, given that the ACLU just filed a lawsuit against the NSA over its wiretapping, just last Monday. As the French might say, “Quelle coincidence!” (What a coincidence!)

ABC’s Hollywood Paranoia Tries to Obscure REAL Enemies of the State
But in the movie, the “evil” NSA doesn’t just wiretap. NSA officials, run amok with unlimited power to spy on Americans, murder a Republican Senator who won’t vote for expanded surveillance and wiretapping authority. They murder an environmental expert who accidentally tapes the incident. They murder an innocent woman working as a crack detective for a labor lawyer (played by Will Smith), who accidentally gets the tape. (The lawyer’s wife is an ACLU lawyer. Another coincidence?) They try to murder the lawyer and turn his life upside down.
In the end, all the evil NSA employees are killed or prosecuted. And expanded wiretapping is tabled. The movie’s posters say, “It’s not paranoia if they’re really after you.”
But, as I wrote above, “Enemy of the State” was written and appeared in theaters in 1998, well before 9/11. ABC is still living–with that movie–in a pre-9/11 world. In that film, the enemies were villains in the NSA. In today’s REAL world, the enemies are plaintiffs in the ACLU lawsuit filed against the NSA. They are not nice, innocent Will Smith-esque labor lawyers and Lisa Bonet-style girl Fridays. As I , they are lying lawyers and admitted funders of Hezbollah.
Incidentally, the same year “Enemy” was released, the movie, “The Siege” also hit the silver screen. Its premise–that Arab Muslim terror cells are in America and would actually blow up buildings in New York–was protested by Arabs and Muslims across America (even though the movie was overly sympathetic to them, not America) because that would NEVER happen. But you don’t see ABC broadcasting that movie, also a box office hit (like “Enemy”).
And you never will. That’s not the political message ABC wants to take with its deliberate choice of programming. (Don’t forget the pro-Hillary “”–with ratings in the toilet now that liberal hype for the show has died down.)
Remember that, the next time you make a deliberate programming choice with your remote control. No-one’s telling you to boycott ABC’s Superbowl telecast. That would be unAmerican.
But, as for the rest of ABC’s choices, send the network a message that you’re tired of ABC playing politics. Besides, “The Bachelor” is just awful.
(To protect our interests as U.S. citizens against the NSA, .)

By
Friday’s Washington Times cited and excerpted my column, “” in the “Inside Politics” column, by Greg Pierce. Here’s what he wrote:

Pants on fire
The American Civil Liberties Union has filed a lawsuit against the federal government over the National Security Agency’s monitoring of terror suspects’ communications, and commentator Debbie Schlussel has some interesting details about the ACLU-backed plaintiffs at her site, www.debbieschlussel.com.
“I’m referring to ACLU lawyers Noel Saleh, Mohammed Abdrabboh, and Nabih Ayad … attorney William Swor, a member National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, and Nazih Hassan–all named in the lawsuit,” Miss Schlussel writes. “They are exactly the kind of people whom the federal government SHOULD be watching, but probably isn’t.”
Miss Schlussel had written a column about Mr. Abdrabboh’s work as a lawyer representing terrorism suspects. She said that in a grievance filed against her last year “designed to deny my right to free speech,” Mr. Abdrabboh wrote: “Without hesitation, I affirmatively state that I have never represented anyone accused of terrorism or money laundering. I can also affirmatively state that I have never represented or consulted with anyone accused/suspected/indicted of money laundering, let alone money laundering to finance al Qaeda.”
That’s a flat lie, Miss Schlussel says: “In fact, Mohammed Abdrabboh represented Gamil Manea Ahmed Al-Najar, arrested in December 2002 … for operating a money-laundering business, Najjar Money Transfer … one of six businesses believed to have transmitted as much as $50 million per year to Yemen, in violation of the Patriot Act and other reporting requirements.” And federal officials told her that, indeed, they suspected the laundered money was going to al Qaeda-connected terrorists.

BTW, Mohammed Abdrabboh represented another Muslim Arab, also accused of operating a money-laundering business and caught in the same raid that netted the arrests. What a liar!

By
Hmmm . . . . Need more reasons to convince America’s left-leaning daughters and effeminate sons not to major in the so-called major, “Women’s Studies”? And sociology and anthropology, too? (If the college kids you know are neither left-leaning nor males effeminate, then this is not aimed at you.)
Take Brandy M. Britton, who earned her doctorate at the University of California, San Francisco, and was a professor at the University of Maryland-Baltimore–where she taught women’s studies.
She founded the Institute for Women and Girls Health Research out of her home. Also, out of her home, she worked as a prostitute. Cost: Up to $2,500. Services and rates were posted online.
Another lesson that would make PUTA (People for the Unethical Treatment of Animals and humans) proud: Be kind to animals. Britton was caught after multiple complaints about her animals–two pet pigs.
In her women’s studies pursuits, Britton–known as an expert on violence against women–won a $515,232 grant from the National Institutes of Health on the “Impact of Violence on Women’s Drug Use and HIV Risk.” But she falsified data on the project.
Maybe they should change the name of the major from “women’s studies” to “women’s prostitution, taxpayer rip-offs, and phony studies.”

By
For the past two weeks, many bloggers have e-mailed us that they’ve tried to post trackbacks on this site, but that the trackbacks were not posting. We checked and it was not working. But we fixed it over the weekend, and you can now, once again, post trackbacks to this site. Thanks for your understanding during the last two weeks, during which this feature was not working.