Here's the scenario. We have some MUSLIM pirates holding an AMERICAN merchant marine captain hostage on a small boat off the coast of the ungoverned country of Somalia. There's a nuclear powered American guided missile destroyer nearby. A show of weakness ... in other words, no action ... will encourage the MUSLIM pirates. What do you think Obama will do? Perhaps he'll be flown out to the destroyer so that he can deliver a symbolic bow to the pirates from the bridge.

By the way ... isn't this what the Navy Seals are for?

This is the U.S. Guided Missile Destroyer keeping an eye on the Muslim pirates. This is the old one. We'll leave it up as extra ship pr0n.

This is the U.S. Guided Missile Destroyer keeping an eye on the Muslim pirates.

Ever since Barack Obama's visit to Europe, there has been a lot of talk over "the bow." Have you heard about this? Obama met Saudi Arabian King Abdullah at the G-20 meeting in London. When Obama met the guy, he seemed to do some sort of bow.

And this has sparked outrage from the right. Praise from the Muslim world. And a lot of people left in the middle saying "who the hell gives a flying flip."

But there are pictures of Barack Obama doing his bow, non-bow, whatever you want to call it. So you can judge for yourself. But the White House has decided to respond to critics by saying that Barack Obama did not bow to King Abdullah. Their explanation is that Obama grasped King Abdullah with two hands but he is taller than the King therefore he had to lean over.

That, my friends, is nonsense. I've watched the video time after time. This wasn't a double gripped handshake, this was a bow. There's no question. Now you go ahead and figure out for yourself what this means ... but the President of the United States bowed deeply to the leader of a country that is a prime player in the generation of Islamic hatred toward the United States. Hatred and violence.

A sign of weakness? ANOTHER sign of weakness? Now what do you think?

Here we go again. At least George W. Bush and Barack Obama agree on this one.

Our economic downturn over the past year has certainly shown one thing. If you deny jobs to the illegals (the hell with this "undocumented" politically correct crap) they will head back from whence they came. As jobs have disappeared illegals have been heading back home. Now to the rational mind this would indicate that if we were to step up our enforcement at the job sites .. denying employment to people who are in this country illegally .. the problem would, for the most part, be self correcting.

Instead we have race pimps like Al Sharpton screaming "racial profiling" in Arizona and protests being staged against a Texas mayor who is demanding that all new employees hired in his city be screened for their immigration status. Oh ... and this stimulus bill? You do remember, don't you, that the Democrats refused to require that the federal e-verify program be used on projects paid for with stimulus money. That's the rule-of-law Democrats for you.

The New York Times is now reporting that President Obama is going to keep his campaign pledge - a pledge that got him the Hispanic vote -- to move forward on legal status for approximately 12 million criminal illegal aliens in this country. Yeah ... criminal. Ignore those absurd "we are not crooks" signs these illegals like to wave around. They violated the law when they came here. They violate the law when they stay here. They violate the law when they obtain jobs here. What do you need to define a criminal if breaking the law on multiple fronts isn't enough?

Think about this. (If you're a liberal, we'll use the word "imagine" instead of think.) We have millions of Americans out of work. The job market isn't exactly popping right now. And here comes the president with his wonderful idea of granting legal status to 12 million illegal, job-sucking aliens. Makes perfect sense, right?

Is Al Franken on the verge of being sworn in as the new Senator from Minnesota? His lead now is 312 votes out of 2.9 million cast. Incumbent Norm Coleman is going to probably need a court miracle to retain his seat.

You folks in Minnesota are beyond belief. How in the hell could you possibly vote for this footstool to be your Senator? I know this guy. I've seen him in action. I know of no bigger jackass in public life. Al Franken is a world-class purified jerk. You'll soon discover this if he is actually sworn in .. but it will take six years for you to correct your moronic actions.

He's going to be your burden and your embarrassment. Hope that works out for you.

As you can see, I'm really having trouble saying what I truly feel here.

Did you know that global warming has gotten so bad that our government wants to implement radical technologies in order to cool the Earth before we all disintegrate? Seriously, folks. This is the message coming from Obama's new science adviser John Holdren. He said that they are discussing the idea of geoengineering.

One option on the table includes shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere in order to reflect the rays of the run. Another is to create artificial trees that would suck up carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and store it.

The problem with all of these plans: they are expensive. And where would the government get the money to fund such schemes? Why the taxpayers, of course! But Holdren says that "We don't have the luxury of taking any approach off the table."

I don't believe Obama is really ignorant enough to believe this man-made global warming nonsense. His motives are purely political.

Barack Obama's cap-and-trade plan has been floating around out there for a while. And I have told you several times how this scheme is nothing more than a tax increase, plain and simple. It increases taxes by creating a market for carbon emitted by companies, and these companies somehow have to recoup the costs to pay for these credits. How are they going to do this? Any logical business would increase prices for its customers.

And the Obama administration knows that this is the case. They have admitted that their plans to implement this cap-and-trade system will increase energy costs. Don't worry, Obama will make sure that the appropriate households aren't affected by these increasing costs. The plan is to use the revenue generated by the carbon trade system in order to "soften the impact of higher energy prices." But anyone worth more than the wheels on their house will not see any of these promised benefits. That's because the Obama administration says, "There will be those who are going to be vulnerable as we make this transition and ... we need to actually target the allowance value and revenues to those households, communities, and businesses."

Those who are "vulnerable" is just another way of saying .. those people who are poor and vote Democrat. Those people who can't afford to shoulder the burden of this society but are more than willing to reap the benefits of its massive government welfare system. Those are the people that the Barack Obama administration wants to aid in this transition. And are you really buying the fact that these government welfare checks to offset higher energy costs will only be temporary? No way. That's the beauty of government - once you get the people hooked on an entitlement program, you can never ever take it away and politicians will always have it as political leverage.

Speaking of entitlement culture. Our imperial federal government is trying to capitalize on your next right that must be protected by the Constitution .... Your right to high-speed, affordable Internet access!

You may think I am joking. But there are people out there who sincerely believe that they have the right to own a home and the government has the obligation to make sure that happens. And when it comes to Internet access, we are well on our way to enabling this entitlement mentality.

The FCC, by order of the Congress, has until February of 2010 to come up with a plan to address the issue of "Internet openness, definitions of affordability and what speeds are fast enough." According to whom, the government? So the government, rather than the private sector and the free market suddenly want its hand in determining what is considered "fast enough" Internet access what constitutes "affordable"? Also .. just how do you define "openness?"

It is the goal of the FCC to provide "all citizens" with "high-speed value-laden broadband." Thanks to Barack Obama's stimulus package, we are well on our way to achieving this.

Setting myself up for an "I told you so" here. The ultimate plan here will be for the government to begin controlling Internet content. Any decent Democrat would want this.

Here's a general rule of thumb with the politicians in charge of Washington today: most believe that the Constitution is a document that prevents them from doing what they think government ought to do. And when it comes to our Second Amendment, Nancy Pelosi and Eric Holder aren't going to let that silly little document get in the way of cracking down on gun trafficking to Mexico.

You may remember the other day; our Attorney General Eric Holder was asked if the administration would encounter constitutional issues as it tries to crack down on gun trafficking. His response was: "I don't think our Second Amendment will stand in the way of efforts we have begun and will expand upon."

Stand in our way? Since when has our Constitution or our Bill of Rights been something that is considered an obstacle or a barrier? Our Bill of Rights outlines the freedoms we hold that the government cannot infringe upon. That includes the right to bear arms. But to a Democrat like Eric Holder, this is a limitation of the boundless powers provided by government.

And Nancy Pelosi is right there by Eric Holder's side, saying that gun registration is at the top of her agenda. If you don't believe that registration precedes seizure, then you just aren't paying attention.

America's Earliest Terrorists - Lessons from America's first war against Islamic terror.

The Obama administration says that it is going to participate in direct group talks with Iran through the UN Security Council. Wonderful. Instead of strengthening the United States, let's strengthen the United Nations.

You'll be happy to know that our own government can't tell you, the taxpayers, how much of the $700 billion bank bailout will be spent.

Victor Davis Hanson has his latest column on the politics of blame. Everyone in Washington is pointing fingers, and no one is responsible. Maybe you, the voters, are responsible because you elected these people.

New Air America host Montel Williams wants Newt Gingrich to "shut up" before he starts a nuclear war.

Here's an article about the seven Democrat stooges who visited Fidel Castro in Cuba.

China is becoming the world's largest car market, surpassing the United States for the third month in a row.

You know times are tough when Nevada state legislatures call hookers to the state capitol to debate whether or not their profession should be taxed.

Government health officials in Massachusetts are going to require schools to send home reports to parents about their children's Body Mass Index measurements.

Government schools in Texas are considering an alternative grading system that would not dock grades for cheating or late assignments.

Take a look at what France is doing in order to combat Internet piracy. Coming soon to the United States.

What happens when a country decriminalizes drugs? Take a look at what happened in Portugal after five years.

Did you see the photos of this Atlantic Southeast Airlines/Delta Connection flight that was struck by lightning?