In my lifetime, there has never been a race for the Republican nomination for president that was truly "up for grabs" and without a clear front-runner well-before th primary season had started.

Think about it.

Goldwater.
Nixon.
Ford.
Reagan.
Bush.
Dole.
Bush.

Out of all of those candidates, only Gerald Ford had any significant opposition, and that was due to the unusual route by which he had reached the presidency.

This year is different, notes commentator Stuart Rothenberg. The top three candidates (McCain, Giuliani, and Romney) all have issues that could keep them from igniting with the base or which could tear them down before the primaries start. Even the second-tier candidates do not inspire enthusiasm or deviate significantly from the base.

Mike Huckabee and Sen. Sam Brownback (Kan.)? Each is not without appeal, but both have critics and so far no way to raise the tens of millions of dollars needed to make a real race. Anti-tax activists in the Republican Party are equally anti-Huckabee, and the former governor of Arkansas told me months ago that he agrees with Bush's position on immigration.

Interestingly, I've asked a number of thoughtful political consultants, from both parties, who they think is most likely to be the GOP nominee and who is the least likely. So far, Giuliani is seen as the most likely and McCain as the least. That's not a scientific sample or a reliable poll. But that kind of anecdotal evidence has me more confused than ever.

Of course, none of this includes Sen. Chuck Hagel (Neb.), an anti-Iraq War Republican who is conservative on issues but has the outsider/reformer image that John McCain once had but is now losing.

If you aren't confused yet, you aren't paying attention. This is a race that is not merely up for grabs. It's unusually unpredictable. The only thing I'm sure of right now is that the Republicans will have a nominee at some point next year.

This one is going to be interesting -- and the only positive note I can think of is that the Democrats have their own hotly contested race to deal with.

Posted by: Greg at 02:00 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 359 words, total size 2 kb.

Well, I suppose it is a possibility, but does he really have what it takes after a couple of years confined to television?

Not enough "star" power for Fred Thompson in a GOP presidential field that includes some of his friends? Whatever the case, the actor and former Tennessee senator is considering getting into the 2008 race.

Thompson, who plays district attorney Arthur Branch on NBC's drama "Law & Order," said Sunday, "I'm giving some thought to it, going to leave the door open" and decide in the coming months. "It's not really a reflection on the current field at all," he said.

"I'm just going to wait and see what happens," Thompson added. "I wanted to see how my colleagues who are on the campaign trail do now, what they say, what they emphasize, what they're addressing, and how successful they are in doing that, and whether or not they can carry the ball in next November."

Thompson impressed me in 2000, when many of us were quite interested in seeing him as the VP nominee. That said, I believe his decision to leave the Senate and return to acting has sapped some of his potential credibility, though he has kept up some of his involvement in the party.

A transcript of his remarks is found here.

Posted by: Greg at 01:15 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 226 words, total size 1 kb.

You see, it is only CONSERVATIVES who cannot use the word “faggot”.

Daily Kos itself has not shied away from the word. Nor has it removed postings that use it. Examples include:

• a headline reading: "Democrats and the faggot problem."
  
• a headline asking: "Who invited the little faggot?"
  
• a headline reading: "When is a faggot just a bundle of sticks?" (That posting goes on to ask, "What's up with the little sly gay jokes? Hmm? As I read the comments in discussions on DKos, there are times when I almost have to check and see if I accidentally stumbled into a Wingnut [right-wing] blog.")
  

Other left-wing websites have also seen usage of what's being called the new f-word:

• Pam Spaulding of the blog Pam's House Blend wrote a headline including the phrase "caving to the faggot juggernaut" -- in reference to a comment by Fred Phelps, the controversial leader of a small religious group that uses the epithet frequently in its campaigning.
  
• Indymedia, a left-wing activist site, carried an Oct. 2006 rant under the headline, "Bush is a closet faggot."
  
• A posting on the Firedoglake blog that pokes fun at Christian leaders found to have been involved in homosexual relationships: "I have been spending my time since the election attempting to hone my knowledge of the Radical Gay Agenda in hopes of infiltrating the Christianist chuch [sic] and bringing it down from within. But it looks like the sad, sick, repressed faggots that run the place are saving me the trouble."
  
• Blogger Melissa McEwan, on her site Shakespeare's Sister, used the line -- in reference to Leonardo da Vinci -- "I'm not so sure it's such a good idea for students to be studying that faggot anyway."
  
• Another contributor to the Shakespeare's Sister site, "Paul the Spud," wrote in a Dec. 2006 posting, "We can't make it work, so why should you be allowed to, faggot? Quit getting so uppity!" (He was putting words into the mouth of an advocate against same-sex marriage.)
  

Ironically, McEwan of Shakespeare's Sister is one of two bloggers who worked briefly for the Edwards 2008 campaign but resigned last month amid criticism of provocative postings about Christianity on their sites.

The other erstwhile Edwards blogger, Amanda Marcotte, carried a posting ( warning: vile content ) by another blogger -- Spaulding, again -- on her Pandagon site, using the word "faggoty" in reference to Jesus.

And since two of the offenders include former Edwards staffers Marcotte and McEwan – dating back to before their hiring/firing/re-hiring/resignations for hate-speech, can the Edwards camp really claim to be offended or victims in this instance?

Posted by: Greg at 09:46 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 441 words, total size 4 kb.

And will they insist that Ann Coulter receive the Pulitzer Prize for her courage in speaking out in the face of attempts by her critics and opponents to silence her? Of course not – after all, it isn’t like the Left believes that conservatives have any rights worthy of respect.

At least three newspapers have pulled conservative commentator Ann Coulter's syndicated column from their editorial pages after her comments last week calling Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards a "faggot."

Newspapers in Tennessee, Pennsylvania and Michigan pulled the column after criticism from readers. In addition, reports say at least three companies, Verizon, Sallie Mae and NetBank, have dropped their advertising from Coulter's Web site after a liberal blogger launched a campaign to petition the firms to stop their support.

The Mountain Press in Sevier County, Tenn., pulled Coulter's column this week and called her comments at the Conservative Political Action Conference last week "distasteful and irresponsible," according to its note to readers on its Web site.

"When we agree to buy a syndicated column we expect the writer to offer responsible, reasoned opinion on national and international issues," said Stan Voit, editor of the Mountain Press. "We will not continue to publish the columns of someone who uses people as a punch line to get a cheap laugh and who so freely uses an offensive term to describe another human being."

Of course, I believe these papers and advertisers have every right to act as they have – and see absolutely no First Amendment implications to their decisions. But then again, I also had no problem with the same treatment being given to the Dixie Chicks after their outrageous comments – while the left-wingers rewarded them with Grammys for their latest song, “I’m Not Ready To Stop Whining”. But then again, that is the difference between conservatives and liberals – we have principles that apply across the board, while the left does not.

Posted by: Greg at 11:11 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 348 words, total size 2 kb.

The other day I pointed to Rudy' Giuliani's marital woes as a reason for having a problem with his candidacy. This disclosure about Newt Gingrich shows why he simply needs to stay out of the presidential race.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was having an extramarital affair even as he led the charge against President Clinton over the Monica Lewinsky affair, he acknowledged in an interview with a conservative Christian group.

"The honest answer is yes," Gingrich, a potential 2008 Republican presidential candidate, said in an interview with Focus on the Family founder James Dobson to be aired Friday, according to a transcript provided to The Associated Press. "There are times that I have fallen short of my own standards. There's certainly times when I've fallen short of God's standards."

Gingrich argued in the interview, however, that he should not be viewed as a hypocrite for pursuing Clinton's infidelity.

Sorry, but even if one accepts his explanation, it still does not play well. The GOP cannot be the party of family values with someone like Newt as teh nominee -- and given the realities of the campaign trail, there is no way that his misdeeds will not be construed as hypocrisy by the media and the public at large.

MORE AT Michelle Malkin, Ace of Spades HQ, HILL Chronicles, Unpartisan, memeorandum

Posted by: Greg at 11:10 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 233 words, total size 2 kb.

Just a reminder about his position on inflammatory language.

Posted by: Greg at 10:40 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 23 words, total size 1 kb.

Having just spent the last couple of days jumping on Ann Coulter for her comments at CPAC, I feel rather sheepish about citing her column on the Libby verdict. However, for better or for worse, she more or less presents my point of view on the matter.

Lewis Libby has now been found guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice for lies that had absolutely no legal consequence.

It was not a crime to reveal Valerie Plame's name because she was not a covert agent. If it had been a crime, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald could have wrapped up his investigation with an indictment of the State Department's Richard Armitage on the first day of his investigation since it was Armitage who revealed her name and Fitzgerald knew it.

With no crime to investigate, Fitzgerald pursued a pointless investigation into nothing, getting a lot of White House officials to make statements under oath and hoping some of their recollections would end up conflicting with other witness recollections, so he could charge some Republican with "perjury" and enjoy the fawning media attention.

As a result, Libby is now a convicted felon for having a faulty memory of the person who first told him that Joe Wilson was a delusional boob who lied about his wife sending him to Niger.

For the record, I usually don’t read Coulter’s column, but it was sent to me by a friend without her byline on it – and only after reading it did I click the link and discover who the author was.

Posted by: Greg at 05:29 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 266 words, total size 2 kb.

Can anyone say "cattle futures"? Well, maybe not.

Less than two months after ascending to the United States Senate, Barack Obama bought more than $50,000 worth of stock in two speculative companies whose major investors included some of his biggest political donors.

One of the companies was a biotech concern that was starting to develop a drug to treat avian flu. In March 2005, two weeks after buying about $5,000 of its shares, Mr. Obama took the lead in a legislative push for more federal spending to battle the disease.

The most recent financial disclosure form for Mr. Obama, an Illinois Democrat, also shows that he bought more than $50,000 in stock in a satellite communications business whose principal backers include four friends and donors who had raised more than $150,000 for his political committees.

A spokesman for Mr. Obama, who is seeking his partyÂ’s presidential nomination in 2008, said yesterday that the senator did not know that he had invested in either company until fall 2005, when he learned of it and decided to sell the stocks. He sold them at a net loss of $13,000.

The spokesman, Bill Burton, said Mr. ObamaÂ’s broker bought the stocks without consulting the senator, under the terms of a blind trust that was being set up for the senator at that time but was not finalized until several months after the investments were made.

“He went about this process to avoid an actual or apparent conflict of interest, and he had no knowledge of the stocks he owned,” Mr. Burton said. “And when he realized that he didn’t have the level of blindness that he expected, he moved to terminate the trust.”

I wonder if this is just the tip of the iceberg -- or if we are going to find that Obama is operating at a significantly higher level of ethics than his major opponent, Hillary Clinton

Posted by: Greg at 11:27 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 328 words, total size 2 kb.

Even though I gladly joined the denunciation of Ann Coulter signed onto by so many of my fellow conservatives, I have some additional ruminations about the controversy.

Do pronouncements like this make John Edwards one of the dreaded “theocrats” the liberals keep ranting about?

Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards says Jesus would be appalled at how the United States has ignored the plight of the suffering, and that he believes children should have private time to pray at school.

Edwards, in an interview with the Web site Beliefnet.com, said Jesus would be most upset with the selfishness of Americans and the country's willingness to go to war "when it's not necessary."

"I think that Jesus would be disappointed in our ignoring the plight of those around us who are suffering and our focus on our own selfish short-term needs," Edwards told the site. "I think he would be appalled, actually."

And Edwards no doubt has a Big Government solution to impose that theological pronouncement upon the rest of us – but the liberals just won’t care.

Posted by: Greg at 04:58 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 157 words, total size 1 kb.

That seems to be the agenda of some Democrats as the spending authorization bill for current military operations is being considered.

President George W. Bush's first spending fight with the Democratic-controlled Congress may come over the Iraq war -- and avocados and cattle and flood protection.

Lawmakers are pushing to add billions of dollars to the administration's war-funding request to meet a host of unrelated demands, including those from California fruit farmers hit by freezing temperatures, ranchers whose livestock were killed in Colorado blizzards and children poised to lose their health insurance.

The potential add-ons threaten a battle in the coming weeks with the White House. Bush has never vetoed a spending measure, and Democrats, betting he won't veto one paying for the war, see a way to aid a number of constituencies seeking federal aid.

``There are urgent, emergency situations that have to be addressed,'' said Senator Kent Conrad), a North Dakota Democrat.

Senator Judd Gregg, a New Hampshire Republican, said the extra spending is ``fiscally irresponsible and it's blatantly unseemly.''

``We're supposed to be fighting this war and paying for the troops -- making sure they have what they need,'' he said. ``We're not supposed to be paying for avocado growers.''

I thought that such pork spending was anathema to the Democrats – but I guess they figure that if they cannot stop the funding of the war, they can load it up with all the unnecessary and inappropriate special interest spending they can cram into it. After all, if these items were really worthy of the appropriations required, then they would certainly be offered independently and pass easily.

Posted by: Greg at 04:52 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 293 words, total size 2 kb.

The politics of cut-and-run rears its ugly head in Congress as the Neo-Copperheads and their small band of White Flag Republicans seek to abandon our allies and give in to terrorism in Iraq by tying the hands of the Commander-in-Chief.

Senior House Democrats, seeking to placate members of their party from Republican-leaning districts, are pushing a plan that would place restrictions on President Bush's ability to wage the war in Iraq but would allow him to waive them if he publicly justifies his position.

Under the proposal, Bush would also have to set a date to begin troop withdrawals if the Iraqi government fails to meet benchmarks aimed at stabilizing the country that the president laid out in January.

The plan is an attempt to bridge the differences between anti-war Democrats, led by Rep. John P. Murtha (Pa.), who have wanted to devise standards of troop readiness strict enough to force Bush to delay some deployments and bring some troops home, and Democrats wary of seeming to place restrictions on the president's role as commander in chief.

The legislative jujitsu in the backrooms of Capitol Hill underscores the difficulties the Democrats face in confronting the issue that helped them regain control of Congress -- Iraq. Democrats passed a resolution in February opposing Bush's deployment of 21,500 additional troops to Iraq, but Murtha's proposal to go a step further by restricting deployment to troops deemed to be adequately trained and equipped elicited a fierce response from Republicans, while also dividing the Democratic caucus.

It must suck to be rooting for American troops to fail -- and to need to act to facilitate it -- to gain political advantage for your party.

And before anyone accuses me of questioning the patriotism of those members of Congress supporting this plan for failure, let me clarify matters for you -- YES, I AM!

Posted by: Greg at 11:41 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 323 words, total size 2 kb.

After all, that's what we got following last week's assassination attempt, so I guess we will be seeing more on the left -- bloggers and commenters -- angry that the Vice President didn't have the good graces to die because they hate him. Will this report provoke similar laments from the liberal haters?

Vice President Dick Cheney was treated Monday for a blood clot in his left leg that independent experts said was probably not related to his history of heart disease but rather the result of his recent around-the-world trip, which included 65 hours of plane travel over 9 days.

Mr. Cheney’s office said the vice president experienced “mild calf discomfort” sometime after delivering a late-morning speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars and visited his doctor’s office at George Washington University.

An ultrasound revealed a deep venous thrombosis, a blood clot, in the lower part of his left leg. He was treated with anticoagulant medication, which he will take for several months, and he returned to work. Although blood clots in the leg can be dangerous if left untreated, experts say most are successfully treated with the anticoagulant drugs that the White House says Mr. Cheney is now receiving.

A crucial determinant in treating blood clots in the leg is the size of the clot, which a statement Monday from Mr. CheneyÂ’s office did not describe. Nor did the statement state the clotÂ’s specific anatomical location.

My darling spouse was treated for this condition several years ago, and so I know how very serious these little things can be. I wish the VP all the best, and pray that he will recover fully.

Oh, and one little note for those with a sense of curiosity about such things -- though it will probably provide ammo for the haters -- regarding the medication Cheney is probably taking. The usual treatment for such clots involves taking the drug Coumadin. Its active ingredient is Warfarin -- which is also the active ingredient in rat poison. Interesting, isn't it, that what can be used to kill in on instance can be used to heal in another.

Posted by: Greg at 11:30 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 380 words, total size 3 kb.

If Congress passed a law doing away with the right to vote by secret ballot and replaced it with a "card check" in national elections, the New York Times would be outraged, calling it a fundamental violation of human rights. Why, then, do they support this abomination?

There are many reasons for the long decline in the membership rolls for private sector unions, including powerful changes in the economy and the unionsÂ’ past corruption scandals. And there is little doubt that federal rules and regulations for union organizing have also become increasingly hostile to labor, helping to drive unionsÂ’ share of the work force down from a peak of 35 percent in the 1950s to a mere 7.4 percent today.

The House of Representatives passed a bill last week that would strengthen the rights of employees to form unions, and it drew an immediate veto threat from President Bush. But if Mr. Bush were, as he claims, truly concerned about rising income inequality and truly committed to improving the lives of AmericaÂ’s middle class, he would support the legislation and urge the Senate to approve it.

The problem here is that the New York Times, while going on about the right of employees to organize, ignores the fact that workers also have the right not to organize. But then again, since when has the New York Times really supported the right of individuals to associate or not associate freely -- or to exercise any other right -- when it gets in the way of its liberal ideology?

Posted by: Greg at 11:15 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 271 words, total size 2 kb.

I guess this means that she believes 2/3 of Americans are mean-spirited and against the entire forward movement of American history.

Of the Federal Marriage Amendment she said, "This amendment was wedge politics at it's worst. It was mean-spirited, it was against the entire forward movement of American history. It was the first time anyone was proposing we amend the Constitution to deny citizens rights rather than widen the circle of rights and opportunities."

"In the end, we stopped the Federal Marriage Amendment and we sent a strong message that we will not stand idly by when anyone tries to write discrimination into our Constitution."

In only a single instance where the people have spoken has the pro-gay marriage prevailed—and then because the proposal banning gay marriage was poorly drafted. In every other case, gay marriage has been rejected by the voters by a 2-1 margin. I would therefore argue that Senator Clinton has put herself far outside the mainstream on this one – and has done so by insulting the overwhelming majority of Americans.

But it appears that Hillary is sucking-up – forgive the term – to gay rights groups in a big way. So much for the moderate image she has been trying to project.

Posted by: Greg at 05:46 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 215 words, total size 2 kb.

I want to fully associate myself with the sentiments expressed herein.

Conservatism treats humans as they are, as moral creatures possessing rational minds and capable of discerning right from wrong. There comes a time when we must speak out in the defense of the conservative movement, and make a stand for political civility. This is one of those times.
Ann Coulter used to serve the movement well. She was telegenic, intelligent, and witty. She was also fearless: saying provocative things to inspire deeper thought and cutting through the haze of competing information has its uses. But Coulter's fearlessness has become an addiction to shock value. She draws attention to herself, rather than placing the spotlight on conservative ideas.
At the Conservative Political Action Conference in 2006, Coulter referred to Iranians as "ragheads." She is one of the most prominent women in the conservative movement; for her to employ such reckless language reinforces the stereotype that conservatives are racists.

At CPAC 2007 Coulter decided to turn up the volume by referring to John Edwards, a former U.S. Senator and current Presidential candidate, as a "faggot." Such offensive language--and the cavalier attitude that lies behind it--is intolerable to us. It may be tolerated on liberal websites but not at the nation's premier conservative gathering.

The legendary conservative thinker Richard Weaver wrote a book entitled Ideas Have Consequences. Rush Limbaugh has said again and again that "words mean things." Both phrases apply to Coulter's awful remarks.

Coulter's vicious word choice tells the world she care little about the feelings of a large group that often feels marginalized and despised. Her word choice forces conservatives to waste time defending themselves against charges of homophobia rather than advancing conservative ideas.

Within a day of Coulter's remark John Edwards sent out a fundraising email that used Coulter's words to raise money for his faltering campaign. She is helping those she claims to oppose. How does that advance any of the causes we hold dear?

Denouncing Coulter is not enough. After her "raghead" remark in 2006 she took some heat. Yet she did not grow and learn. We should have been more forceful. This year she used a gay slur. What is next? If Senator Barack Obama is the de facto Democratic Presidential nominee next year, will Coulter feel free to use a racial slur? How does that help conservatism?

One of the points of CPAC is the opportunity it gives college students to meet other young conservatives and learn from our leaders. Unlike on their campuses—where they often feel alone—at CPAC they know they are part of a vibrant political movement. What example is set when one highlight of the conference is finding out what shocking phrase will emerge from Ann Coulter's mouth? How can we teach young conservatives to fight for their principles with civility and respect when Ann Coulter is allowed to address the conference? Coulter's invective is a sign of weak thinking and unprincipled politicking.

CPAC sponsors, the Age of Ann has passed. We, the undersigned, request that CPAC speaking invitations no longer be extended to Ann Coulter. Her words and attitude simply do too much damage.

Credentialed CPAC 2007 Bloggers

Sean Hackbarth, The American Mind
James Joyner, Outside the Beltway
Scott Schmidt, Boi From Troy
Joy McCann, Little Miss Attila
Kevin McCullough, Musclehead Revolution
Fausta Werz, Fausta's blog
Patrick Hynes, Ankle Biting Pundits
Ed Morrissey, Captain's Quarters

Other Conservative Bloggers
Owen Robinson, Boots and Sabres
N.Z. Bear, The Truth Laid Bear
Michael Demmons, Gay Orbit

Frankly, there really is no defending Ann Coulter’s blunder – because even if one accepts the comment as a satirical comment on the recent uproar over comments by one of the stars of Grey’s Anatomy, connecting it to the ever-so-metrosexual John Edwards is truly inappropriate. This sort of foolish offensiveness is why she deservedly needs to be cut loose by the mainstream of conservatism.

Now if only folks on the Left will take on Bill Maher for comments like this. After all, playground-level insults are certainly less serious than death-wishes for elected officials.

Posted by: Greg at 04:58 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 690 words, total size 6 kb.

I’m sorry, folks, but this does speak a lot about the man’s character.

Rudy Giuliani's biggest challenge in his White House run to date could be how he responds publicly to comments his son made about their strained relationship.

Andrew Giuliani, 21, stunningly told The New York Times that he and his father have been estranged - not even talking "for a decent amount of time" - because of the son's problems with the ex-mayor's current wife, Judith Nathan Giuliani.

"There's obviously a little problem that exists between me and his wife," the Duke University student told the paper. "And we're trying to figure that out. But as of right now, it's not working as well as we would like."

In an interview airing today on ABC's "Good Morning America Weekend Edition," he tempered his comments.

"I do not want to hurt him," he said. "No matter what he's done, I love my father . . . It's not as good as it once was - but it's better than when it was its lowest, and it's getting better all the time."

Wife number three. Public extramarital antics that disgraced his office. Children effectively abandoned by their father. Is he really the best that we can do in the GOP? And even if he is, does he really merit support from those of us who argue for pro-family policies?

Posted by: Greg at 04:43 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 234 words, total size 1 kb.

IÂ’m sorry, folks, but this does speak a lot about the manÂ’s character.

Rudy Giuliani's biggest challenge in his White House run to date could be how he responds publicly to comments his son made about their strained relationship.

Andrew Giuliani, 21, stunningly told The New York Times that he and his father have been estranged - not even talking "for a decent amount of time" - because of the son's problems with the ex-mayor's current wife, Judith Nathan Giuliani.

"There's obviously a little problem that exists between me and his wife," the Duke University student told the paper. "And we're trying to figure that out. But as of right now, it's not working as well as we would like."

In an interview airing today on ABC's "Good Morning America Weekend Edition," he tempered his comments.

"I do not want to hurt him," he said. "No matter what he's done, I love my father . . . It's not as good as it once was - but it's better than when it was its lowest, and it's getting better all the time."

Wife number three. Public extramarital antics that disgraced his office. Children effectively abandoned by their father. Is he really the best that we can do in the GOP? And even if he is, does he really merit support from those of us who argue for pro-family policies?

Posted by: Greg at 04:43 PM | Comments (52) | Add Comment
Post contains 239 words, total size 2 kb.

1 5VoPpmugqRQzi6m butalbital butalbital high

Posted by: butalbitalA4C1j at Mon Mar 2 04:15:06 2009 (QqseZ)

2 gAsG6DOCP3 azithromycin azithromycin vaginosis

Posted by: azithromycinUNyPrAjF4hOW at Mon Mar 2 12:13:09 2009 (CBaaF)

3 UZxXMNN640z ultracet ultracet and patient education

Posted by: ultracetH90H at Mon Mar 2 12:28:27 2009 (yVuA6)

4 zABGBOdBNcKC8N9 fioricet buy fioricet online from pharmacy that uses ups or dhl for delivery

Posted by: fioricetYFxCMN at Mon Mar 2 19:04:02 2009 (WkzBk)

5 how92Qh8 meridia meridia recall

Posted by: meridiaw7tVdzW at Mon Mar 2 21:17:14 2009 (UOLkj)

6 K8n4AZybS497Ys doxycycline doxycycl hyc and immune system

Posted by: doxycyclineykW09oAnjo7D at Mon Mar 2 23:38:22 2009 (LBJpY)

7 butalbital cheap butalbital

Posted by: butalbitalczs2g at Thu Mar 5 02:31:47 2009 (pBZB1)

8 ambien what doses does ambien cr come in

Posted by: ambienTls7v432 at Thu Mar 5 07:18:04 2009 (iqcPK)

9 a03iHAB4 acyclovir acyclovir dosing

Posted by: acyclovirlMApy at Fri Mar 6 23:01:18 2009 (JzuLr)

10 Digalo Download Discreet Combustion Download Discreet Lustre Download Dvdidle Pro Download Dxo Optics Pro Download Easy Audio Cd Ripper Download Edgecam Download Effective Studios Sitestudio Download Eset Smart Security Download Extensis Suitcase Download Extra Drive Creator Download Family Tree Maker Download Filemaker Pro Download Fixed Noise Kreate Download Fl Studio Producer Download

Posted by: zyuofi at Mon Oct 5 16:42:18 2009 (vLWL5)

11 Quark Xpress Passport Download Quarkxpress Download Raxco Perfectdisk Download Realbasic Download Realize Voice Download Realviz Imagemodeler Download Remograph Remo Download Rhinoceros Download Riverdeep 3d Home Architect Download Riverdeep 3d Home Landscape Download Rosetta Stone Download Roxio Creator Download Roxio Digitalmedia Studio Deluxe Suite Download Roxio Easy Media Creator Download Roxio Popcorn Download

Posted by: clzbut at Mon Oct 5 22:40:24 2009 (j6kZF)

12 Cheap OEM software norton antivirus 2002 2c symantec ;-)

Posted by: Zozo908 at Tue Oct 6 13:39:05 2009 (s/9wn)

13 s'il Y a des analogues ?, acheter viagra en france, saya,

Posted by: Rkxsooix at Thu Oct 8 15:32:46 2009 (W+c4a)

14 Dans cela quelque chose est. Il est clair, merci pour l'explication., viagra en france, jtdlq,

Posted by: Txxthxxn at Mon Oct 12 19:08:33 2009 (Do8B5)

15 je F?licite, la r?ponse remarquable..., acheter cialis, 812,

Posted by: Ncwdddgs at Mon Oct 12 19:09:30 2009 (IykM7)

16 Je n'en sais rien., cialis en france, puahw,

Posted by: Slmotpvs at Mon Oct 12 21:31:03 2009 (JqV9E)

17 Oseltamivir capsules

Posted by: buy Tamiflu at Sat Oct 24 05:42:01 2009 (3Es99)

18 comment1, finishing a cutting board, 8OO, spiral slicer recipes, %-DD, bowie knife set, gakyiz, hightailert shrimp peeler and deveiner, 0905, mortician skin peeler lyrics, 819, kitchen aid 5 gadget set, 23982, seasoning a bamboo cutting board, nfktr, henckels knife set block, afffb, aluminum core cookware, 82970, wallet and knife gift set, 106859,

Posted by: tailor made bread slicer at Sat Oct 24 18:04:09 2009 (0Br1x)

19 Little Crazy Straight Jacket Mix google

Posted by: Anna at Tue Oct 27 03:02:04 2009 (NNGjW)

20 comment1, cable slicer, 8497, pokey jobar wood over sink cutting board, :OOO, apple peeler machine suction bottom, wyyuy, how do i cut base board, 976333, crystal charlene peeler, 337021, christmas storage containers, > , how to clean slicers, 8-O, veneer peeler blade holder, qeqow, what is nonreactive cookware, 36446, containers for bulk flour storage, 8-((,

Posted by: citram black steel cookware at Tue Oct 27 03:38:17 2009 (UQVeR)

21 Dans cela quelque chose est. Le merci bien pour l'aide dans cette question., compra cialis, =)), achat alli en ligne, 104, acheter alli, 53584,

Posted by: Fmewyuvv at Wed Oct 28 08:53:53 2009 (Iflhf)

22 comment4, fghjkk, =((,

Posted by: Hindu123 at Fri Oct 30 12:20:43 2009 (pC/j7)

23 comment5, iphone 3gs reviews, kzboh,

Posted by: consumer rate extended car warranty list at Thu Nov 5 08:16:43 2009 (XhAYD)

24 comment1, history of memorial day, sxhhpf,

Posted by: omelette recipe at Sat Nov 7 10:07:10 2009 (iAXna)

25 comment4, carly fiorina tenure vs mark hurd, 8]]], 2009 black friday, 81540,

Posted by: why did ashlee simpson and ryan cabrera at Sat Nov 7 14:17:50 2009 (yd2F1)

26 comment6, videx off the shelf, videx off the shelf, http://culinary.c4.fr/videx-for/eayga.html videx off the shelf, tsolq,

Posted by: side effects of rebetol at Sun Nov 8 00:40:39 2009 (OvbUy)

27 comment5, buy norvir online, 636310, fda recommendations using combivir with , >:-PPP, fansidar precautions, 366,

Posted by: tamiflu dose at Sun Nov 8 12:19:18 2009 (N64le)

28 comment3, relenza availabilty, xral, jenny craig kirstie alley, 6000, japanese star anise norvir, tocsdc,

Posted by: crixivan flu prophylaxix at Sun Nov 8 14:48:22 2009 (thcc9)

29 C'est la pi?ce tr?s pr?cieuse, viagra acheter, 8]]],

Posted by: Xqdvidjm at Tue Nov 10 03:00:23 2009 (Ah2Ej)

30 Le merci bien., viagra achat, 661028,

Posted by: Nfwytlww at Tue Nov 10 07:30:25 2009 (hdz5/)

31 Admirablement!, viagra acheter, 223,

Posted by: Rsgsfjic at Tue Nov 10 10:34:01 2009 (9VpkT)

32 Est d'accord, l'id?e tr?s utile, acheter du viagra, miaf,

Posted by: Mlqbucqv at Tue Nov 10 10:35:13 2009 (aUdyU)

33 L'information amusante, acheter viagra sur le net, peuag,

Posted by: Aobvscid at Tue Nov 10 11:33:20 2009 (BNSFI)

34 je F?licite, vous ?tiez visit?s par l'id?e brillant simplement, viagra, kyhtx,

Posted by: Damgqhps at Tue Nov 10 11:34:19 2009 (gtcDj)

35 Excusez que je vous interromps, mais vous ne pourriez pas donner plus d'information., viagra sur le net, 1096,

Posted by: Lgqmikmu at Tue Nov 10 13:52:41 2009 (5PiVI)

36 Il est clair, le merci bien pour l'aide dans cette question., acheter viagra generique, 280,

Posted by: Ctyupwbq at Tue Nov 10 14:26:31 2009 (++UK8)

37 Dans cela quelque chose est. Maintenant tout est devenu clair, le merci bien pour l'explication., le viagra, =P,

Posted by: Wlazbica at Tue Nov 10 15:44:37 2009 (9gwDc)

38 vous ?tes droits absolument, achat viagra generique, 9179,

Posted by: Lnfqjbsq at Tue Nov 10 16:18:40 2009 (9LWtV)

39 le message Autoritaire , d'une mani?re s?duisante..., viagra, eiy,

Posted by: Ldgwhtlt at Tue Nov 10 17:00:31 2009 (Gw0Dd)

40 que finalement ?, vente viagra, ocwpy,

Posted by: Wnaslndj at Tue Nov 10 19:04:18 2009 (2ttSP)

41 ? mon avis ici quelqu'un s'est fait une obsession, acheter viagra pharmacie, 8]],

Posted by: Flvgjcdl at Tue Nov 10 19:05:51 2009 (fczj7)

42 Logiquement, je suis d'accord, acheter du viagra, vufrmf,

Posted by: Vtdtamja at Tue Nov 10 23:00:58 2009 (a09n7)

43 comment1, ashlee simpson biography, vsqvig,

Posted by: ashlee simpson bio at Tue Nov 10 23:09:32 2009 (RzkPM)

44 Merci pour l'explication, plus facilement, mieux ?, acheter viagra sur le net, lhq,

Posted by: Wtxllcgr at Wed Nov 11 00:11:27 2009 (JHJbC)

45 je F?licite, quels mots..., l'id?e excellente, le viagra, bmba,

Posted by: Pzyctjhl at Wed Nov 11 03:51:44 2009 (DeXJi)

46 C'est la phrase simplement magnifique, viagra sans ordonannce, =-[[[,

Posted by: Skvizgkb at Wed Nov 11 06:50:41 2009 (SSC2q)

47 Chez moi la situation semblable. Nous examinerons., achat viagra sans ordonannce, %PP,

Posted by: Jpovrazh at Wed Nov 11 07:44:04 2009 (0gLHA)

48 comment3, avelox for pneumonia, :-DD,

Posted by: zithromax purchace at Wed Nov 11 13:26:24 2009 (Oa3TE)

49 comment6, russian women living outside russia, >:-]],

Posted by: used car extended warranty vehicle exten at Wed Nov 11 17:40:04 2009 (BHRmI)

50 comment2, big black ferr, yabndo, brittany spear titslips, =PPP, interracialporno, 4337, megatits, 8-D, buff tits, 72567, russian pornography, =DDD, zone porno, uksyl, big tits round arse, %-O, pornografia free, %-[[, pornografi dan pornoaksi, =P,

Posted by: clown petits at Wed Nov 18 06:01:35 2009 (fAC0q)

51 comment5, pseudomonas avelox, =-OO, zithromax pfizer, 190829, zithromax single dose, fkq, zithromax purchace, 612, zithromax dose, cjw, how long before zithromax expires, exzgtq, avelox effects, hmvbz, zithromax causing hypertension, jjl, buy antibiotics uk, 10447, avelox 400mg, 765,

Posted by: is zithromax gluten free at Wed Nov 18 18:12:07 2009 (YJeO1)

52 Thank you incredibly substantially for your exciting text. the north face outlet sale http://www.thenorthfaceoutlet2013sale.com

Posted by: the north face outlet sale at Thu Jan 10 00:31:16 2013 (qEcpl)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

When they get a chance to listen to Mitt Romney, not just the detractors, conservatives like him.

Presidential candidate and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney yesterday won a straw poll of conservative political activists gathered in Washington, a very early indication of how an important Republican constituency might vote.

Romney was the first choice for the GOP nomination, with 21 percent of the 1,705 activists who voted at the 34th annual Conservative Political Action Conference. Former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani came in second with 17 percent, and Sen. Sam Brownback (Kan.) was third with 15 percent.

Mitt Romney didn't even register on the radar screen last year. He has now jumped out front. This is how a grassroots campaign works, and bodes well for the future.

Posted by: Greg at 10:40 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 138 words, total size 1 kb.

This one is a no-brainer -- so much so that even the Houston Chronicle is on the right side of the issue.

Imagine a representative democracy in which legislators could pass or defeat bills without letting their constituents know which way each legislator voted. Voters, in turn, would have no way of holding their representative accountable at election time.

Such a scenario, in which legislators could say they voted yea or nay regardless of the truth, seems unthinkable. Yet it exists in Austin in the Texas Legislature. While the Texas House passed an internal rule requiring a recorded vote on final passage of all bills, it does not have the force of law and could be suspended at any time.

* * *

Texas needs a constitutional amendment requiring a recorded vote on every amendment and on second and third readings of every bill. A vote against recorded votes is a vote against open government, accountability and the principles of democracy itself.

Interestingly enough, though, it has only taken the Chronicle 140 years to get around to supporting such a measure -- which they never felt a need to do during the 135 consecutive years when Democrats held control of the legislature. Open government, accountability, and the principles of democracy are only important, one would have to presume, when Republicans are in control.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, Is It Just Me?, The Virtuous Republic, Stuck On Stupid, The Amboy Times, Leaning Straight Up, Rightlinx, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, The Uncooperative Blogger ®, stikNstein... has no mercy, Pirate's Cove, The Right Nation, Overtaken by Events, The Pink Flamingo, Renaissance Blogger, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, Right Pundits, Random Dreamer, A Blog For All, 123beta, Adam's Blog, basil's blog, Cao's Blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, Phastidio.net, Conservative Cat, Jo's Cafe, Conservative Thoughts, Faultline USA, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, and Gulf Coast Hurricane Tracker, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 02:42 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 339 words, total size 5 kb.

And I would argue that it bodes well for Scooter Libby.

Jurors asked for the definition of "reasonable doubt" Friday after completing a shortened, eighth day of deliberations Friday in the perjury trial of ex-White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

"We would like clarification of the term 'reasonable doubt,'" jurors wrote. "Specifically, is it necessary for the government to present evidence that it is not humanly possible for someone not to recall an event in order to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."

The note offered the first real glimpse into the deliberations and suggested jurors were discussing Libby's memory. Prosecutors say he lied about conversations he had with reporters regarding outed CIA operative Valerie Plame.

Libby said he told investigators his best recollection of those conversations and never intentionally lied.

Seems to me that this means that the jury is open to the possibility that Libby didn't intentionally mislead anyone, but rather had a memory lapse. That, on its face, indicates that the jury has reasonable doubt, and should acquit immediately.

Posted by: Greg at 01:24 PM | Comments (29) | Add Comment
Post contains 183 words, total size 1 kb.

Look what turned up in a bit of genealogical research turned up -- Barack Obama comes from a family of slave owners.

Many people know that Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's father was from Kenya and his mother from Kansas.

But an intriguing sliver of his family history has received almost no attention until now: It appears that forebears of his white mother owned slaves, according to genealogical research and census records.

The records - which had never been addressed publicly by the Illinois senator or his relatives - were first noted in an ancestry report compiled by William Addams Reitwiesner, who works at the Library of Congress and practices genealogy in his spare time. The report, on Reitwiesner's Web site, carries a disclaimer that it is a "first draft" - one likely to be examined more closely if Obama is nominated.

According to the research, one of Obama's great-great-great-great grandfathers, George Washington Overall, owned two slaves who were recorded in the 1850 census in Nelson County, Ky. The same records show that one of Obama's great-great-great-great-great-grandmothers, Mary Duvall, also owned two slaves.

And yet somehow, were any sort of reparations program to be passed, I as a white man whose family tree includes no slave-owners, would be expected to pay reparations to Obama and his family, despite their slave-holding heritage.

But then again, even if his white mother's family hadn't owned slaves a century-and-a-half ago, Obama's ancestral hands likely still would not be clean on this score.

What the Sun may not realize is that almost certainly some of Obama's African forebears also owned slaves --- and that his current family members in Kenya may know quite a lot about modern-day slave trafficking. Human slavery is not just a historical anomaly in Kenya, the Sudan, or even Saudi Arabia. It is happening at this very moment. But apparently reminding its readers of that painful fact would not serve the Baltimore Sun's goal of hyping Obama as the new JFK, the White and Black Man's Hope.

Slavery is a horrific thing. But it would be far better if our media didn't cover up today's victims of African and Middle Eastern slavery --- when the world can still do something to save them.

I'm curious, will the media pursue this story? Or will it again bury an unflattering story about Obama's roots, just as it did when it was disclosed that Obama's daddy was a polygamist, a much closer connection than Mitt Romney's great-grandfather.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Stop the ACLU, Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, Is It Just Me?, The Virtuous Republic, Random Dreamer, A Blog For All, 123beta, Adam's Blog, basil's blog, Stuck On Stupid, Cao's Blog, Phastidio.net, The Bullwinkle Blog, The Amboy Times, Jo's Cafe, Conservative Cat, Conservative Thoughts, Rightlinx, third world county, Faultline USA, Woman Honor Thyself, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The Uncooperative Blogger ®, stikNstein... has no mercy, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, Overtaken by Events, and Dumb Ox Daily News, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 01:08 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 519 words, total size 6 kb.