Sorry, girlfriend, but I don't buy it

Not for one damned minute.

I'm speaking of Misty Croslin, the girlfriend in the Florida abduction case of Haleigh Cummings. I don't buy her story for one single second. Every fiber of my being tells me that this bitch is lyin' outta her butt about the whole thing, and her recent attempt to throw suspicion off of her by throwing her cousin in Tennessee under the bus is a pathetic attempt at best, one which absolutely will prove to be fruitless.

So why don't I believe her? Here's why.

I've been interviewing suspects since 1975, and more recently I completed the Wicklander-Zulawski course on Interview and Interrogations, and in my humble opinion Misty Croslin is a walking, talking, living, breathing example of just about every 'dishonesty indicator' there is. First, there's the fact that on every spot I've seen her on, her face is all screwed up in supposed remorse, her voice is cracking and all that crap, but there's always one thing missing: tears. She has yet to shed a single visible tear, and unless somebody changed things while I was asleep, when you cry, you shed tears. But not Misty. Not in this case.

If I had a nickle for every theft suspect I've interviewed who tried the "fake crying" routine on me in order to garner sympathy, I'd be rich and retired.

Then there's the attempt to throw suspicion off of her by naming her cousin in Tennessee, even stating on the "Today" show yesterday that she "wasn't sure" if he was capable of doing this or not. Nice try, Misty, but just like your missing tears, it ain't workin'.

On top of all that, there are the physical indicators, the things she's unaware that she's doing. Things like not looking directly at people when talking to them, giving short, terse answers which evade the question, the way she holds her body, things like that. And anybody who's ever raised a child through the teenage years will automatically and unmistakably recognize the defiant, "screw you!" tilt of the head and pursing of the lips she showed on the "Today" show yesterday.

And on top of all that, there's one simple thing missing from her circus act that is always - ALWAYS - present when an innocent person is accused of a crime. When an innocent person is accused of a crime, their denials get louder and more angry as the accusations continue. It starts out with a simple, "I didn't do it," and eventually ends up with a fist-pounding, shouting, red-in-the-face, now-I'm-pissed "I DIDN'T DO IT!!!"

Haven't seen that from Misty, have we?

Oh, and let's not forget the fact that she's been given a polygraph test TWICE, and that the police will not discuss either one.

Wonder why she was given the test TWICE? I'll bet I know.

When all is said and done, when the body of this poor child has finally been found within two miles of her house (an educated guess on my part), the person going to jail for this heinous crime is going to be Misty Croslin.

And I hope she rots in Hell.

IHC

My Letter to the President

I said I'd publish it when I wrote it, so here it is. It just went out in today's mail.

President Barack Obama
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20500

February 16, 2009

Dear Mr. President,

I am writing this letter to express my frustration and utter outrage at the provisions in your stimulus package and the manner in which you allowed it to be rammed through Congress under the guise of "bipartisanship."

My frustration stems from the fact that as a result of your stimulus package, I will receive a whopping $32.00 extra each month in my paycheck. That, Mr. President, is barely enough to put sufficient gas in my car to keep me moving for a month. And if you allow the price of gas to continue to rise for no apparent reason other than allowing the oil companies to get rich off of the American public, it soon won't be enough to even do that.

Explain to me, please, how such a paltry sum of an extra $32.00 a month is supposed to "stimulate" me and the rest of the American people? Just how in the world is this supposed to help the economy?

My outrage comes from your total disregard of, lack of respect for, and outright dismissal of the sacrifices made by our men and women of the Armed Forces, both past and present. It is because of the sacrifices made by these men and women that you live in a country where you can even be nominated, much less elected, yet you allow your stimulus package to be so drastically cut as to nearly eliminate all funding for the Veteran's Administration. On top of that, you have allowed funding for the regular Armed Forces to be so drastically cut as to make even the most rudimentary of improvements to operations next to impossible.

Just how do you expect our nation to remain free if you treat the protectors of our nation in such a shoddy, disrespectful manner? The next time you, your wife, and your children are sitting around the dinner table in your nice, warm, comfortable and government-provided quarters, think about the men in uniform in Iraq who are sitting in a Hummer eating an MRE, or who are sitting in a foxhole doing the same thing. THEN you tell me that what you did with your stimulus package was right.

My outrage is also fueled by your administration's misuse and twisting of the term "bipartisan" when describing the manner in which your bill was completed. In case you missed it, with the exception of only three - THREE - Republicans, the vote for your bill was exactly along party lines. This is NOT "bipartisanship" in any manner.

The Democratic party - YOUR party - did the exact same thing the Republican party did when your predecessor was in office, and it's just as wrong now as it was then. You ran on a campaign of "change we can believe in;" is THIS your idea of "change?" Doing the exact same thing your predecessors did and running the government in the exact same way? It certainly isn't mine.

Personally, from what I've seen so far, I don't think we can "HOPE" for much of a "CHANGE" at all.

A disgruntled American citizen, Gulf War veteran, and Air Force retiree

I'm sure I'll get a reply; it'll be one of those "thank you for writing the President" form letters signed by some faceless, unknown aide, and it's highly unlikely that Obama will ever see my actual letter or the reply. But I wrote it and voiced my opinions, and that's what counts.

I strongly encourage any of you dear readers who are as disappointed at this BS as I am to do the same thing.

Today.

NOW.

I'll post the reply when it comes.

IHC

And I'm even LESS impressed today

Two posts in less than 24 hours....hmmm, must be something pretty interesting or important, huh? Well, it is, especially if you're homeless or a member of the U.S. Armed Forces.

The Senate has approved the final version of Obama's stimulus package, and I just read a news story on the "winners and losers" of the bill. At this point, I don't know if I'm appalled or just plain furious.

Hang on to your hat, my "brutha from anutha mutha," this one is really going to piss you off.

The final version of the stimulus package doles out 1.5 billion - that's billion - for "homelessness prevention," while it completely wipes out ALL items for Veterans Affairs and VA construction. The regular forces were the big losers, as well; the initial amount wanted for the military forces went from 3.45 billion to 1.45 billion - and that's for ALL of the services combined. Here's the story link:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/13/stimulus.winners.losers/index.html

So in short, our new administration places more value on the homeless having a nice, warm, comfortable bed to sleep in than it does the members of our Armed Forces and vets who have served honorably having a nice, warm, comfortable bed to sleep in. To me, the message is clear.

I've decided how I feel about this. I'm outraged, and when I get home from work tonight I'm going to be writing a few letters to some congressmen and our fearful leader and letting them know just what I think.

I'll publish the text of them here.

Time for work. Besides, my morning has already been ruined for me.

Oh, and for those of you who don't know, my "brutha from anutha mutha" of whom I spoke earlier is one of my closest, dearest friends who has a blog, Bulldog Chief. Here's the link to his blog:

http://www.motorcycleshavenodoors.blogspot.com/.

Enjoy!

IHC

"Change," huh? More like "small change..."

I was watching the local TV news this morning and of course, one of the topics of the day was the stimulus package currently being voted on in Congress. The newscaster threw out some statistics, one of which struck me like a bolt out of the blue. She said that when all was said and done, the much-lauded stimulus package would affect the people of South Carolina's income by adding a whopping $8.00 a week into our budget.

Eight dollars a week.

Are you kiddin' me? Eight bucks doesn't even fill the gas tank in my Saturn, much less stimulate me! How in the bloody hell is THIS paltry sum supposed to help me and the economy?

Shortly after that, it got worse - I was watching the "Today" show, and Meredith Viera - whom I cannot stand, by the way - was interviewing Obama's chief financial advisor, and she asked him straight out just how Obama's stimulus plan was going to help the average everyday citizen.

Now, in the first place, this guy that was being interviewed - I don't recall his name, but I'll never forget his face - was not the best speaker in the world. He was stiff, stumbling over his words, and rambling in his answers so that after 45 seconds of hearing him speak, you just wanted to smack him to get him to shut the hell up. So when Meredith hit him with this question, you could see it in his eyes and you could just hear the sounds of his thought train derailing inside his head.

He gave a rambling, nonsensical answer that in no way answered the question. Not even close by any standards. You could see by the smirk on Meredith's face that she knew she had nailed this guy on live nationwide TV, and that she was enjoying every second of it. (Which is the main reason I can't stand the bitch.)

But the point is, even Obama's chief financial advisor cannot answer the question of how this stimulus package will help the average citizen!

And THAT, friends and neighbors, alarms the crap outta me.

The Democrats in Congress were forced to eat crap from the Republicans for eight years, and even after they took control in the Congress two years ago they still weren't able to get anything done. Now that they have a clear majority in the Congress and a Democrat president, they're just elated with themselves and are trying very hard to make up for lost time. They took this stimulus package and crammed it so full of all of the pork that they'd been forced to sit on for the past eight years and tried to shove it down everyone's throat in the name of "saving the nation's economy."

Somebody tell me, please, how the funding of condom giveaway programs in public schools is going to help the economy. Last I heard, you couldn't eat condoms and they weren't being used as trading materials in lieu of cash.

The Democrats, led by the head rabid dog Nancy Pelosi, are acting like kids who haven't seen Santa Claus in eight years. (To steal a line from a story I read on CNN.com a few days ago.) Pelosi's attempt to shove all of the new pork down the Republican's throats under the disguise of "bipartisanship" is a weak, transparent attempt at best, and does little to hide how much she's enjoying finally having the upper hand.

Here's a clue for you, Ms. Speaker of the House: people don't like to have their noses rubbed in things any more than YOU do, and if you do that they'll do the exact same thing YOU did to THEM - they'll dig their heels in and stonewall your ass and everything you try to do. The "shoe of power" isn't the only one that's on the other foot now, you know.

All in all, I'm still hoping that Obama can do some real good for the country, but to be 100% honest I'm not impressed. I'm not impressed with his poor choices for cabinet nominees, I'm not impressed with his whining about "I inherited this problem," I'm damn sure not impressed with his stimulus package, and I'm not impressed at his failure to reign in Mad Dog Pelosi. Yeah, I know it's only been three weeks or so since the election, and that's not really enough time to get anything positive done.

But look at all of the NON-POSITIVE things he's managed to accomplish.

Let's all hope it gets better from here, for the sake of the nation.

IHC

I just don't understand this.....

I'm kinda short on time today, so I'll try and keep this short.

I am absolutely amazed at the number of people out there - "Obamabots," I've heard them called - who are still so fixated on placing blame and name-calling when it comes to the current economical crisis and the "fix" that our fearful leader is proposing. All I hear is, "Well, the economy is all Bush's fault!" and "Well, it took eight years of Bush to get us into this mess!" and "Well, it's all the Republican's fault because they won't back Obama's stimulus package!"

How about this, people - how about a little LESS dwelling on the past and placing of blame and a little MORE fixing of the problem? Sure, Bush screwed things up, but he didn't do it alone and he didn't do it in eight years. What was done to our economy was a team effort, and the players were: the President, the Congress, Wall Street, and Big Business that was more concerned with personal profits, wealth, and bonuses than they were about the economy.

Note, please, that I did NOT name any political parties in that statement. Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, whatever - ALL of them are to blame!

The facts are this: Bush isn't President any longer, so get off that, willya? Obama is President, and it's up to him and his administration to fix it. Continually lamenting and crying about who got us where is like standing on the deck of a sinking boat, crying about it sinking and doing nothing while the water is rising around you.

And as for the proposed "fix," I'll say this: it stinks. Typical Democrat solution which has NEVER worked - throw money at the problem and it'll go away.

Hasn't worked before, won't work now. And personally, I think Obama's big downfall will be Nancy Pelosi - if he could just muzzle that rabid dog he'd be fine, maybe. But at least he'd stand more of a chance then than he does now with her doing her damndest to alienate the Republican half of Congress.

Out of time here...more thoughts on the "stimulus" package and Pelosi later.

IHC

American History 101: Abraham Lincoln

In all of American history, there are few other figures whose accomplishments and reputation have been so grossly misrepresented and blown out of proportion by the politically correct forces among us than "The Great Emancipator," Abraham Lincoln. And the sad thing is, with this particular person it's been going on since April 14, 1865 and has reached a point now where the persona of Lincoln has taken on nearly mythical proportions. This has been emphasized again in the press in the past few weeks when the press made such a hullabaloo about then-President Elect Obama visiting the Lincoln Memorial. I mean, really - would he have gotten that much coverage if he'd visited the Washington Monument instead? And then there's the location he chose for his pre-inauguration bash - yep, you guessed it. The Lincoln Memorial.

So let's take a quick peek at just what this Northern-styled, mythical "Great Emancipator" was really like, and what he really thought about equality among whites and blacks, shall we? (For those of you who subscribe to the mythical Lincoln persona, this would be a good time for you to move on to another web site because you're about to get your feelings hurt.)

"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything." The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume III, "Fourth Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Charleston, Illinois" (September 18, 1858), pp. 145-146.

I guess that pretty much sums up just what he thought of his black brothers and the thought of them being equal, huh? The negroes are okay people, but he wouldn't let his sister marry one. If someone in this day and age were to utter anything even close to the next to last line about white being assigned the superior position in regards to race, just what would we call him? Does the term "RACIST" come to mind?

"I have never said anything to the contrary, but I hold that notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I hold that he is as much entitled to these as the white man. I agree with Judge Douglas he is not my equal in many respects---certainly not in color, perhaps not in moral or intellectual endowment. But in the right to eat the bread, without leave of anybody else, which his own hand earns, he is my equal and the equal of Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man. " The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume III, "First Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Ottawa, Illinois" (August 21, 1858), p. 16.

Okay, I see. The negro has the same rights as you according to the Declaration of Independence, but you're still superior to him in moralality or brains. There's that pesky term again, you know, the one that begins with "R."

"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause." The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume V, "Letter to Horace Greeley" (August 22, 1862), p. 388.

This is my all-time favorite Lincoln quote, because it shows what he really thought about slavery. As shown by his own words, he no more cared to free the slaves than the Southern people did. In 1862 when he was getting his collective ass kicked on every battlefield in the South and the Northern newspapers were openly questioning his war efforts, he knew he needed something to get the support of the people back on his side. So in his desperation and going against his true feelings about slavery, he issued the now infamous Emancipation Proclamation. He knew that slavery was THE one topic on which NO ONE in the North of any real clout would disagree on with him, and he was right. From that day in September 1862, the war became a war to free the slaves and ceased being a war to preserve the Union, which was Lincoln's objective from the start.

Keep in mind, won't you, that the words in quotation marks I've posted above are not MY words nor my interpretation of words, but they are DIRECT QUOTES from Lincoln himself, taken from 100% reliable and unimpeachable sources - his own letters and writings.

So much for "The Great Emancipator."

Class dismissed!

IHC