April 30, 2008
But as we read into the article, the real story seems to tell us something else.
So what we are actually told in the story is that John McCain is essentially tied with both of his Democrat rivals. The Bush thing in the headline is essentially a red herring. Indeed, the information in the headline seems to match up pretty well with the number of folks who seem intent upon voting for the Democrat who gets their party's nomination -- they would never vote for McCain, and are simply parroting the talking points that the Democrats have put forward for the last few weeks.
Posted by: Greg at
09:59 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Indeed, even though Democrats have an 18-point advantage over Republicans in a generic presidential ballot test (51-33 percent), this latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey shows Obama besting McCain by only three points (46-43 percent) and Clinton topping the Arizona senator by only one (45-44 percent).
But then again, so is MSNBC.
Post contains 181 words, total size 1 kb.
[Ret. Col. Bud] Day relayed to me one of the stories Americans should hear. It involves what happened to him after escaping from a North Vietnamese prison during the war. When he was recaptured, a Vietnamese captor broke his arm and said, "I told you I would make you a cripple."The break was designed to shatter Mr. Day's will. He had survived in prison on the hope that one day he would return to the United States and be able to fly again. To kill that hope, the Vietnamese left part of a bone sticking out of his arm, and put him in a misshapen cast. This was done so that the arm would heal at "a goofy angle," as Mr. Day explained. Had it done so, he never would have flown again.
But it didn't heal that way because of John McCain. Risking severe punishment, Messrs. McCain and Day collected pieces of bamboo in the prison courtyard to use as a splint. Mr. McCain put Mr. Day on the floor of their cell and, using his foot, jerked the broken bone into place. Then, using strips from the bandage on his own wounded leg and the bamboo, he put Mr. Day's splint in place.
Years later, Air Force surgeons examined Mr. Day and complemented the treatment he'd gotten from his captors. Mr. Day corrected them. It was Dr. McCain who deserved the credit. Mr. Day went on to fly again.
McCain himself had been tortured and suffered grievous injuries after his capture by the North Vietnamese. They wanted to use him for propaganda purposes, but when he refused they made him suffer. Yet when he found one of his fellow prisoners suffering and in danger of being permanently maimed due to the sadism of their captors, McCain acted in the best tradition of our country by placing himself in danger to prevent that outcome.
There is more, much more, to this article – including the beautiful story of how the McCains came to adopt their daughter Bridget. I would only add to it that there was, in fact, a second baby girl who Cindy McCain brought back to the US for medical treatment – and the couple found another family to adopt that child as well. After reading this article, tell me that John and Cindy McCain, two decent people despite their past flaws and past mistakes, would not be the sort of First Couple who would make America proud.
H/T NRO's Campaing Spot, Hot Air
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary's Thoughts, third world county, Faultline USA, Right Truth, The World According to Carl, Shadowscope, The Pink Flamingo, Cao's Blog, , Democrat=Socialist, Conservative Cat, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Posted by: Greg at
10:48 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 492 words, total size 4 kb.
April 29, 2008
Liberal Democrat and (alleged) funnyman Al Franken gets to run for US Senate instead.
Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Al Franken, front-runner in the race to challenge Republican U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman, said on Tuesday that he has paid $70,000 in back taxes and penalties owed in 17 states, going back to 2003.Franken, who has earned income across the country for celebrity appearances and speeches, blamed his accountant of 18 years for failing to pay the appropriate taxes owed in each state.
The accountant, Allen Chanzis of New York, "just made a basic kind of error that had a lot of ramifications," Franken said.
Franken said that he paid federal and state taxes on all of his income, but that the accountant had failed to properly distribute the tax payments.
Yeah, that-'s it -- blame it on the accountants.
At best, it is an indication that Franken is out of touch with the realities of everyday life for real Americans -- and that he lacks the judgment to hire competent professionals to do his taxes or to make sure they are paid in a proper, timely fashion.
Still, Democrats are going to try t elect him to the US Senate in Minnesota.
If he were a Republican, they'd be demanding a special prosecutor and jail time in each of the 17 defrauded states.
Posted by: Greg at
10:44 PM
| Comments (33)
| Add Comment
Post contains 254 words, total size 2 kb.
DD, and 
PP, and 
, and 
), and Here's the heart of the statement from the press conference this afternoon.
You know, I have been a member of Trinity United Church of Christ since 1992. I have known Reverend Wright for almost 20 years. The person I saw yesterday was not the person that I met 20 years ago. His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate and I believe that they do not portray accurately the perspective of the black church.They certainly don't portray accurately my values and beliefs. And if Reverend Wright thinks that that's political posturing, as he put it, then he doesn't know me very well. And based on his remarks yesterday, well, I may not know him as well as I thought, either.
Now, I've already denounced the comments that had appeared in these previous sermons. As I said, I had not heard them before. And I gave him the benefit of the doubt in my speech in Philadelphia, explaining that he has done enormous good in the church. He's built a wonderful congregation. The people of Trinity are wonderful people. And what attracted me has always been their ministry's reach beyond the church walls.
But when he states and then amplifies such ridiculous propositions as the U.S. government somehow being involved in AIDS, when he suggests that Minister Farrakhan somehow represents one of the greatest voices of the 20th and 21st century, when he equates the United States wartime efforts with terrorism, then there are no excuses. They offend me. They rightly offend all Americans. And they should be denounced. And that's what I'm doing very clearly and unequivocally here today.
Unfortunately for Obama, none of that matters.
After all, Barack Obama is the guy who six weeks ago the speech">told us this about Jeremiah Wright.
I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother - a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.These people are a part of me. And they are a part of America, this country that I love.
Crazy Uncle Jeremiah is a part of Barack Obama -- and if he could not disown Rev. Wright six weeks ago, I don't see how we can accept the denunciation today. After all, nothing has changed from six weeks ago. The pastor has said nothing new. Unless, as Wright pointed out over the weekend, Barack Obama is just another politician doing what politicians have to do to get elected -- and in this case lying to the American public trying to save his opportunity to be president.
But I think that Barack Obama might have revealed his real reason for speaking out today. Referring to Wright's most NPC speech, he said, "It was a show of disprespect to me."
Yes, there we have it. This isn't about principle, this is about his own ego. He's lashing out at Wright out of personal pique, rather than principle.
Anyone else need evidence that Barack Obama is simply unfit to serve as President of the United States?
By the way, I think I've found a new theme song for the Obama campaign.
Posted by: Greg at
12:20 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 652 words, total size 4 kb.
April 28, 2008
But what it also did was inescapably bind Obama to Wright -- but as long as Wright remained in the background, there was hope that the controversy might go away.
After this past weekend, it won't. Between his Bill Moyers interview, Dalas Sermon, Detroit NAACP address, and National Press Club session, Jeremiah Wright is going to be a serious issue at least through the Democrat Convention -- and up to November, if Obama still wins the nomination.
Some, like Andrew Sullivan, are advising Obama to dump Wright completely.
But Wright's cooptation of
Obama for his own agenda - his assertion that Obama's distancing from
him is insincere - requires, in fact demands a response from Obama.Obama needs not just to distance himself from Wright's views; he needs to
disown him at this point. Wright himself, it seems to
me, has become part of what Obama is fighting against: the boomer,
Vietnam era's obsession with its red-blue, white-black, pro and
anti-America fixations. That is not what this election needs to be
about; and Wright's massive, racially divisive and, yes, bitter provocation
requires a proportionate response.We need a speech or statement from Obama in which he utterly repudiates this
poison, however personally difficult that may be, however damaging the
impact will be. The statement today will not do it. This is no longer about cynics trying to associate one
man's politics with another. It is now about Wright attempting to
associate himself and some of his noxious, stupid, rancid views with the likely
Democratic nominee. Wright has given Obama no choice - and he has also
given him another opportunity. He needs to
seize it.
I respectfully disagree.
Barack Obama had his chance to denounce, renounce, and repudiate Jeremiah Wright. Unfortunately for him, that opportunity was some six or seven weeks ago, when he made his overly-hyped speech on race. And I stated at the time, his failure to quit Trinity UCC and sever his relationship with Jeremiah Wright was a profound error. To do so now would be to prove Wright's words in the Moyers interview, that Obama is nothing but a politician doing what politicians do to get elected. As such, Barack Obama is permanetly -- and perhaps fatally -- damaged as a presidential candidate.
Posted by: Greg at
10:40 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 460 words, total size 3 kb.
April 27, 2008
Republican presidential candidate John McCain on Sunday called Democratic rival Barack Obama insensitive to poor people and out of touch on economic issues.The GOP nominee-in-waiting rapped his Democratic rival for opposing his idea to suspend the tax on fuel during the summer, a proposal that McCain believes will particularly help low-income people who usually have older cars that guzzle more gas.
"I noticed again today that Sen. Obama repeated his opposition to giving low-income Americans a tax break, a little bit of relief so they can travel a little further and a little longer, and maybe have a little bit of money left over to enjoy some other things in their lives," McCain said. "Obviously Sen. Obama does not understand that this would be a nice thing for Americans, and the special interests should not be dictating this policy."
Remember - it isn't just the poor who spend a large amount of money on gas -- the middle class does as well, between work and recreattional activities.
And Obama's plan to support a tax increase on all Americans who pay income taxes -- not to mention the reimposition of income tax on lower middle class Americans whose tax liability was reduced to zero under the Bush tax cuts -- constitutes one more example of his lack of connection with the economic realities of average Americans.
But then again, this is the same Barack Obama who couldn't get by on the $58,000 salary from his part-time job, and whose wife has indicated how hard it is to live on between a quarter-million and half-million dollars a year. If you need a clue as to how far out of contact with the economic realities of most Americans Obama really is, that should do it.
Posted by: Greg at
10:32 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 332 words, total size 2 kb.
After an unsuccessful campaign for Congress in 2000, Illinois state Sen. Barack Obama faced serious financial pressure: numerous debts, limited cash and a law practice he had neglected for a year. Help arrived in early 2001 from a significant new legal client -- a longtime political supporter.Chicago entrepreneur Robert Blackwell Jr. paid Obama an $8,000-a-month retainer to give legal advice to his growing technology firm, Electronic Knowledge Interchange. It allowed Obama to supplement his $58,000 part-time state Senate salary for over a year with regular payments from Blackwell's firm that eventually totaled $112,000.
Hold on here for just a moment. Let's set aside the possible corruption angle here for a moment. Let's temporarily ignore the fact that Barack Obama was on the payroll of a campaign contributor for whom he was soliciting grant money from the state, and who made a campaign contribution once he got the grant. Let's just look at the part of the story I put in bold-faced type.
For his part-time job, Barack Obama was making $58,000 a year in taxpayer money -- and he could not not get by on that paltry amount. Never mind that he was making roughly twice the per capita income in his district (as a former Chicagoan, I'm well-aware of the area he represents and the poverty there). Never mind that the salary from his part time job put him above the average salary for teachers in the state of Illinois at that time by more than $10,000. And never mind that Michelle Obama was bringing home over $100,000 a year at the same time working in the corporate world that she now tells the little people to shun. He still needed to supplement the salary from his part-time job -- by taking cash from a political insider to use his office to get that contributor (eventually) over $320,000.
Barack Obama tries to present himself to us as the common man. He wants us all to believe that that he understands us and our struggles. This story proves that it isn't true. If you and your family can't make it on over $160,000 a year without supplementing your salary through a shady deal with a campaign contributor, you clearly aren't a man of the people -- and are instead a charlatan trying to fool the American people.
But no doubt we will hear from the Obama campaign that there is nothing wrong with Barack Obama's conduct here -- just like they continue to tell us about his financial dealings with Tony Rezko. But I think it is becoming obvious that Obama's character is a real issue from which his campaign desperately wants to distract the American people.
H/T Hot Air, Sister Toldjah
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary's Thoughts, 123beta, Right Truth, Maggie's Notebook, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Cao's Blog, Conservative Cat, Pursuing Holiness, D equals S, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, third world county, Nuke Gingrich, Woman Honor Thyself, McCain Blogs, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Gulf Coast Hurricane Tracker, , Stageleft, Right Voices, The Yankee Sailor, and Eric's Writing Corner, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Posted by: Greg at
07:07 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 560 words, total size 6 kb.
Yet somehow the practice in this country in recent decades has been to treat the participation of Americans in such activities as a threat to "good government" -- and burdensome campaign finance regulations have been imposed upon Americans which have the effect of criminalizing activities that our Founding Fathers would have recognized as clearly within the scope of the First Amendment.
George Will chronicles one of these cases -- a brutal act under color of law designed to suppress the speech of a band of neighbors concerned about the future of their neighborhood in Colorado.
Parker North is a cluster of about 300 houses close to the town of Parker. When two residents proposed a vote on annexation of their subdivision to Parker, six others began trying to persuade the rest to oppose annexation. They printed lawn signs and fliers, started an online discussion group and canvassed neighbors, little knowing that they were provoking Colorado's speech police.One proponent of annexation sued them. This tactic -- wielding campaign finance regulations to suppress opponents' speech -- is common in the America of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. The complaint did not just threaten the Parker Six for any "illegal activities." It also said that anyone who had contacted them or received a lawn sign might be subjected to "investigation, scrutinization and sanctions for campaign finance violations."
The First Amendment guarantees freedom of association, "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." The exercise of this right often annoys governments, and the Parker Six did not know that Colorado's government, perhaps to discourage annoyances, stipulates that when two or more people associate to advocate a political position, and spend more than $200 in doing so, they become an "issue committee."
Got that? Two people spending just $200 dollars together to participate in the electoral process constitutes a violation of the law unless they spend more to fill out and file paperwork registering them with the state and disclose incredible amounts of private information to the general public. What sort of information?
...they must report to the government the names and addresses of all persons who contribute more than $20; they must also report the employers of plutocrats who contribute more than $100; they must report non-cash contributions such as lemons used for lemonade, and marker pens and wooden dowels for yard signs.
Got that? For giving a mere $20 out of a sense of civic obligation, your name and address and political associations become a matter of public record. And if one gives the princely sum of $100, your employer will be disclosed to the general public. Gone are the days when good citizens at a community meeting can "pass the hat" and collect money to speak out on public issues -- reporting laws make those who conduct the meeting and the guy who owns the hat criminal.
Today's practices and laws are, dare I say it, unAmerican.
Let's look at the practices of our Founding Fathers.
Many of them wrote anonymous pamphlets published by anonymous supporters to advocate independence, the adoption of the Constitution, support for (or opposition to) the Jay Treaty, and the election/defeat of either Thomas Jefferson or John Adams in our first contested election.
I'll take their model of free speech above the regulated, domesticated and eviscerated counterfeit that the advocates of "campaign finance reform" and "public disclosure" advocate. The former is the free exercise of an unalienable right by a people fully possessing their liberty -- the latter the feckless submission of serfs to a to a ruling class that treats freedom as a revocable privilege. Would that this year's presidential race had a serious candidate who embraced the vision of the Founders regarding the First Amendment.
More At From On High.
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary's Thoughts, 123beta, Right Truth, Maggie's Notebook, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Cao's Blog, Conservative Cat, Pursuing Holiness, D equals S, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, third world county, Nuke Gingrich, Woman Honor Thyself, McCain Blogs, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Gulf Coast Hurricane Tracker, , Stageleft, Right Voices, The Yankee Sailor, and Eric's Writing Corner, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Posted by: Greg at
01:44 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 762 words, total size 7 kb.
April 25, 2008
BILL MOYERS:
In the 20 years that you've been his pastor, have you ever heard him repeat any of your controversial statements as his opinion?REVEREND WRIGHT:
No. No. No. Absolutely not.I don't talk to him about politics. And so he had a political event, he goes out as a politician and says what he has to say as a politician. I continue to be a pastor who speaks to the people of God about the things of God.
Yep, Jeremiah Wright has Barack Obama so neatly pegged – he’s just another politician who will do or say what he has to do to get elected, not a “new type of politician”. Maybe Wright should have preached more about “Thou shalt not bear false witness” than “God damn America” – it was certainly more needed by at least one of his parishioners.
Posted by: Greg at
09:56 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 194 words, total size 2 kb.
Winning in Pennsylvania has been good for Hillary Rodham Clinton's flagging finances.Clinton spokesman Phil Singer said Wednesday that the campaign was on track to raise $10 million through the Internet in the 24 hours since the candidate appealed for money in her victory speech Tuesday night. That would more than double her cash on hand.
Clinton fundraisers said they are seeing a new wave of interest from people wanting to help.
"My phone has been ringing off the hook," said Patricia Edington, an Alabama antiques appraiser and "Hillraiser," as Clinton calls those who pledge to collect $100,000 or more. "It was sort of drying up in south Alabama. I had turned over lots of rocks down here. But people have been calling this morning."
Let’s see – she’s won more popular votes than Obama (if you REALLY believe in counting all the votes), and states with enough electoral votes to win the presidency? Why shouldn’t people be giving her money, given that she is showing greater strength than Barack Obama?
Posted by: Greg at
09:38 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 193 words, total size 1 kb.
April 24, 2008
Posted by: Greg at
10:56 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 36 words, total size 1 kb.
Local criminal defense attorney and former U.S. Congressman Craig Washington was indicted Thursday on a charge of aggravated assault in connection with a New Year's Day shooting incident outside his law office.Washington, who was out of town when the indictment was unsealed, is accused of firing at Taylor Brooks, an 18-year-old senior at Cy-Fair High School. Bail was set at $30,000. An initial hearing will be scheduled once Washington surrenders and posts bail.
According to the police report on the incident, Brooks told officers Washington confronted him in the parking lot at the attorney's office in Midtown about 8:30 p.m.
As Brooks tried to drive away, Washington is alleged to have fired at his 2002 Chevrolet Camaro, with three bullets striking the passenger side. Brooks' friend, Evan McAnulty, 18, also was in the car at the time.
Brooks and McAnulty, a senior at Cy-Falls High School, declined to comment on the advice of lawyers.
Washington did not return a message left on his cell phone. An associate at his law office said the well-known local political and legal figure would not comment.
The charge in the indictment, handed up by a Harris County grand jury, is a second-degree felony punishable by a prison term of two to 20 years and a fine of up to $10,000.
Washington, a Democrat, represented the 18th Congressional District for five years before being ousted by Sheila Jackson Lee in 1994. Jackson Lee accused him of losing touch with his district. He also was hurt by adverse publicity concerning his financial affairs and a tax debt.
Personally, I don't know what is scarier -- the fact that this guy has a gun, that it took so long for the indictment to come down, or that the people of the 18th District thought he was even worse than Sheila Jackson Lee.
But this does help explain why Democrats are so in favor of gun control -- it isn't that they are afraid of what ordinary people of ordinary judgment will do. They are instead afraid of what unstable persons like themselves will do, and believe that the only way of keeping themselves from engaging in reckless, dangerous activity that threatens the lives of others is to ban handguns.
I wonder -- will the local Leftosphere again remain silent about misdeeds by one of their own?
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Rosemary's Thoughts, Right Truth, Maggie's Notebook, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Cao's Blog, Conservative Cat, Pursuing Holiness, D equals S, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Nuke Gingrich, third world county, McCain Blogs, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, , Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Posted by: Greg at
10:48 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 484 words, total size 5 kb.
Reid said he would consider writing a joint letter with Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) demanding that superdelegates make their endorsements public.“The three of us, we may write a joint letter [to superdelegates],” said Reid. “We might do individual letters. We are in contact with each other.”
Reid's comments suggest that the partyÂ’s top three officials are contemplating a high-level intervention if the primary season concludes in June without a nominee and many superdelegates still undecided.
Now let's get this straight. The DNC has a set of rules which allows superdelegates to decide their choice at any time. (For that matter, the rules allow any regular delegate to change their candidate preference at any time.) The only requirement is that they cast their vote at the convention.
But that isn't good enough for these leading Democrats. They are going to make a demand of these elected Democrats that is not contemplated by the party rules. What happens if, between the date of capitulation to the demand and the date of the convention, if a superdelegate (or a majority of superdelegates) has a change of heart? Will they then attempt to bind them to their June choice? Or will they instead create an even bigger problem when their anointed winner loses the vote for the nomination -- either to the other remaining primary contender or a drafted wild card like Al Gore?
These folks have screwed up the Democrat nomination process at every turn. Do you really think they are competent to run the country?
More At Hot Air
Posted by: Greg at
11:05 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 339 words, total size 3 kb.
April 23, 2008
It is the question that has hung over Senator Barack ObamaÂ’s presidential campaign, and it loomed large on Tuesday night after his loss to Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in Pennsylvania: Why has he been unable to win over enough working-class and white voters to wrap up the Democratic nomination?Lurking behind that question is another: Is the Democratic Party hesitating about race as it moves to the brink of nominating an African-American to be president?
No one, of course, is willing to note that the Deocrats have made identity politics their stock-in-trade for decades. And after appealing to blacks as blacks, Hispanics as Hispanics, gays as gays, and women as women, is it any surprise that white Democrats might decide that similar ethnic solidarity is a legitimate thing for them to embrace? After all, no one is daring to suggest hat there is anything wrong with a 92% black turnout for Barack Obama, is there?
And let's not forget that the Democrats have never managed to unite their party around a set of fundamentals that are universally embraced After all, it embraces race-baiting charlatans like Al Sharpton and Kluxers like Robert Byrd. It embraces the radical feminists and their pro-abortion agenda, but still has a sizable pro-life vote among Catholics. And as polls have shown time after time, a great many white voters reject affirmative action -- whether in college admissions, employment, or the nomination of under-qualified presidential candidates like Barack Obama.
Posted by: Greg at
10:11 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 291 words, total size 2 kb.
Gov. Sarah Palin was back at work Monday in Anchorage, holding a meeting on the proposed natural gas pipeline three days after giving birth to her fifth child.She and her husband, Todd, showed their new baby, Trig Paxson Van Palin, to a few reporters and photographers and answered questions about his condition and the sooner-than-expected delivery.
Trig has Down syndrome, a genetic abnormality that affects a child's intellectual and physical development, the governor confirmed.
"When we first heard, it was kind of confusing," Palin, 44, said. She called the revelation "very, very challenging" and said she initially felt sad.
But the family has worked through that. Palin said she and Todd feel blessed and chosen by God. With a big family including four older kids, grandparents, aunts and uncles, Palin said, they will have lots of support for what's ahead. In their eyes, she said, "he's absolutely perfect."
The oldest Palin kid, Track, is in the Army and texted his mother after learning the news with something to the effect of "This is just so cool -- I finally got my brother."
In a letter she e-mailed to relatives and close friends Friday after giving birth, Palin wrote, "Many people will express sympathy, but you don't want or need that, because Trig will be a joy. You will have to trust me on this." She wrote it in the voice of and signed it as "Trig's Creator, Your Heavenly Father."
"Children are the most precious and promising ingredient in this mixed-up world you live in down there on Earth. Trig is no different, except he has one extra chromosome," Palin wrote.
As for people who think a baby like Trig shouldn't even be born, look around, the governor wrote. Who is perfect or even normal?
![trig4634_bg2[1].jpg](http://rhymeswithright.mu.nu/archives/images/trig4634_bg2[1].jpg)
Indeed, all too many folks are willing to abstractly argue that a child like Trig Palin should have been aborted. One look at the baby picture that appeared in the press last week should be sufficient to dispel the notion that he is somehow less deserving of life than any other human being. And having worked for a time with Down Syndrome adults, I can tell you that their worth is no less than any other student I have taught or person I have known – indeed, I learned every bit as much from those clients as I did from many of my college professors, and cherish their memories in my heart so many years later.
This birth also raises an interesting issue. Sarah Palin has been mentioned by many Republicans as a possible pick for Vice President. Does the birth of a child – especially a special needs child – mitigate against her selection? Or does it increase her chances, given the impact that she would have upon many voters as a relatively young career woman who made a choice for life? An interesting question indeed.
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Rosemary's Thoughts, Faultline USA, A Newt One- help us catch a monster, Adam's Blog, Maggie's Notebook, Right Truth, The Pink Flamingo, The Amboy Times, , Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Posted by: Greg at
11:07 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 569 words, total size 5 kb.
Unable once again to score a knockout, Sen. Barack Obama is likely to make his new negative tone even more negative -- with a sharp eye on trying to end the Democratic presidential nomination fight after the May 6 primaries in Indiana and North Carolina.Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's victory yesterday in Pennsylvania has only accentuated the quandary that Obama faces: Stay negative and he risks undermining the premise of his candidacy. Stay aloof and he underscores Clinton's argument that he will not be able to beat a "Republican attack machine" sure to greet him this summer.
Obama campaign manager David Plouffe indicated last night which of those options they would take. "We've done a lot of counterpunching. We've been swift and effective," he said. "For Democrats judging how we're going to perform as the nominee, we have been relentless."
Obama himself took up the cudgel after Clinton delivered a victory speech in Philadelphia devoid of attack lines. Without naming Clinton, he suggested in Evansville, Ind., that she is a captive to the oil, pharmaceutical and insurance lobbies, that she "says and does whatever it takes to win the next election," and that she exploits division for political gain.
"In the end, this election is still our best chance to solve the problems we've been talking about for decades -- as one nation, as one people," Obama said.
So for all the claims that he is a new type of politician, it looks like he is delivering the same old politics to the American people. But then again, who really believed that there was anything new or different about this inexperienced political hack? When the going gets tough, Obama acts like everybody else.
Posted by: Greg at
11:03 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 312 words, total size 2 kb.
April 22, 2008
Sen. John McCain has long said he is in robust health and is strong enough to hike the Grand Canyon, but he also is receiving what his staff Monday termed a "disability pension" from the Navy.When McCain released his tax return for 2007 on Friday, he separately disclosed that he received a pension of $58,358 that was not listed as income on his return.
On Monday, McCain's staff identified the retirement benefit as a "disability pension" and said that McCain "was retired as disabled because of his limited body movements due to injuries as a POW."
McCain campaign strategist Mark Salter said Monday night that McCain was technically disabled. "Tortured for his country -- that is how he acquired his disability," Salter said.
Certain types of military and veterans pensions are either partially or completely tax-exempt, depending on the seriousness of the disability. In McCain's case, the exemption is 100%.
But the LA Times (sister to the NY Times) is able to turn what is a pretty sick attack about taxes (McCain is following the law as passed by Congress before he was ever elected to office) on a pension received due to the horrific injuries he received while serving his country into something even more disgusting.
The fact that he is legally designated with a disability pension may raise further questions."It is a legitimate question to ask about the commander in chief: Is he fit to serve," said Robert Schriebman, a senior Pentagon tax advisor and tax attorney who recently retired as a judge advocate for a unit of the California National Guard.
So now we are getting an attack on the disabled -- especially disabled veterans. So much for supporting the troops.
And so much for the memory of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who led this country through the Depression and WWII in steel leg braces and a wheel chair. After all, neither he nor McCain has a disability that impacts the most essential part of the anatomy necessary to serve as president -- the brain.
Democrats have already begun a series of low-blow attacks upon John McCain and his military service. Now the press has done so as well. It strikes me as incumbent upon Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama -- not to mention every patriotic American -- to denounce these shameful efforts and instead honor John McCain for his service and dedication to this country.
A PERSONAL ASIDE: Growing up as a Navy brat, I had the good fortune to know one of the heroes who shared a cell with John McCain in Vietnam. I've heard some of the stories, and read others in the book written about his experiences. I've seen the scars that got shown in public, and heard about the ones that didn't from his sons. This hero of my youth is backing John McCain for President, as are an overwhelming number of their fellow POWs. It's testimonial enough for me.
H/T Hot Air
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Rosemary's Thoughts, Faultline USA, A Newt One- help us catch a monster, Adam's Blog, Maggie's Notebook, Right Truth, The Pink Flamingo, The Amboy Times, , Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Posted by: Greg at
10:44 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 553 words, total size 4 kb.
A closely fought Congressional contest over a Republican stronghold here was apparently left hanging on Tuesday, with the two top candidates likely to face a runoff next month.A conservative Democrat, Travis W. Childers, was seeking to wrest the open seat in the First Congressional District in northern Mississippi from Republicans who have held it since 1994. But Mr. Childers appeared to fall short, getting only 49 percent of the vote, according to The Clarion-Ledger of Jackson. The special election was to fill the unexpired term of Roger Wicker, who moved on to the Senate.
Mr. ChildersÂ’s leading opponent, Greg Davis, the Republican mayor of Southaven, a Memphis suburb, got 46 percent. Four other people were on the ballot.
A runoff will be held May 13 if official tallies show no candidate won more than half the vote. After that, Mr. Childers and Mr. Davis are running against each other again in the November general election.
Mr. Childers, who differed little on social issues from his Republican opponent, exemplified the DemocratsÂ’ strategy of running conservatives in red districts, a tactic that proved successful in the 2006 midterm elections. Its potential was underscored here on Tuesday with a strong showing by Mr. Childers, a veteran courthouse official, in a conservative area that gave 62 percent of its vote to President Bush in 2004.
What does this tell us? Mainly, it says that the Democrats really don't have a message or a platform that can appeal to Americans nationally. Rather than run a Democrat who espouses the values of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton (and there really isn's a dime's worth of difference between them), they continue to run candidates who espouse the GOP platform in conservative districts, making the issue one strictly of personalities.
The problem with this strategy is that if voters select such chameleons they empower not those who hold to their own core values, but those who oppose them. It would behoove voters in Mississippi (and elsewhere, like my own CD22 here in Texas) to pay attention to the party labels and vote accordingly.
Posted by: Greg at
10:25 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 377 words, total size 2 kb.
Hillary Clinton did manage to win by 10% in Pennsylvania -- but only after being up by 20 points in the polls as recently as two weeks ago.
Hillary Rodham Clinton won the Pennsylvania primary Tuesday, buoyed by support from women and blue-collar voters and pushing her duel with Barack Obama on to Indiana and North Carolina on May 6.Amid brisk turnout, Clinton won a victory that many polls had predicted and which the New York senator had to have. The ultimate margin hovered around double digits — Clinton led 55 percent to 45 percent with nearly 80 percent of the vote counted — but no matter the numbers, her campaign insisted that a victory was a victory, particularly amid a spending onslaught by a more financially more robust Obama campaign.
"Some counted me out and said to drop out," Clinton told cheering supporters. "But the American people don't quit. And they deserve a president who doesn't quit, either."
"Because of you, the tide is turning."
As a practical matter, this means that the Democrats will be battling for at least two more weeks, into Indiana and North Carolina on May 6. It means more time beating and battering each other rather John McCain -- doing for us Republicans some of the work that we will need to do in the fall. And most importantly, it takes the edge off of the Obama inevitability arguments that have been laid out.
And hillary has made it clear that she is fighting to the bitter end -- saying that the race isn't over until the status of the Michigan and Florida delegates is decided, something that won't happen until the convention under most scenarios.
Not that all the Democrat-leaning media likes yesterday's outcome.
The Pennsylvania campaign, which produced yet another inconclusive result on Tuesday, was even meaner, more vacuous, more desperate, and more filled with pandering than the mean, vacuous, desperate, pander-filled contests that preceded it.Voters are getting tired of it; it is demeaning the political process; and it does not work. It is past time for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to acknowledge that the negativity, for which she is mostly responsible, does nothing but harm to her, her opponent, her party and the 2008 election.
If nothing else, self interest should push her in that direction. Mrs. Clinton did not get the big win in Pennsylvania that she needed to challenge the calculus of the Democratic race. It is true that Senator Barack Obama outspent her 2-to-1. But Mrs. Clinton and her advisers should mainly blame themselves, because, as the political operatives say, they went heavily negative and ended up squandering a good part of what was once a 20-point lead.
Oddly enough, I have to both agree and disagree with the NY Times. I agree this campaign style is hurting the Dems -- but I'm not tired of it at all, and am rather enjoying it.
And the hypocrisy of the NY Times over the issue of negativity is rather striking, because the paper has engaged in just such substanceless attacks on John McCain several times in recent weeks. You would think the so-called "paper of record" would take its responsibility to real with issues rather than mean, vacuous stories that contribute nothing to the campaign.
Posted by: Greg at
10:12 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 556 words, total size 4 kb.
Who is El Sayyid Nosair?Well, I know him. I spent an awful lot of time around him. I know all about his background. So what if, upon being asked that question, I told you, “Oh, Sayyid — yeah, he’s an engineering student from Egypt who became a mechanic for the New York State courts.”
You might respond, “Wait a second. Wasn’t he the guy who murdered Meir Kahane (founder of the Jewish Defense League) in front of a room full of people at some hotel in Manhattan?”
“Oh, that. Yeah, well — but that was nearly 20 years ago.”
“And didn’t he, like, shoot a 70-year-old man who tried to block him from getting away?”
“I suppose.”
“… And then shoot it out on the street with a cop while about a thousand people buzzed around?”
“Technically speaking, it was a postal police officer, but I take your point.”
“Wasn’t Nosair pals with that big red-headed Egyptian guy whose picture they used to show on TV all the time?”
“Sure, Mahmud Abouhalima. He was a cabdriver from Brooklyn.”
“A cabdriver from Brooklyn? Wait a second. I remember this now. This Mahmud guy was here on some immigration scam, right?”
“Well, ‘scam’ is such a divisive term. He was legally in our country: he had a work permit under the Agricultural Workers Program.”
“Agricultural worker? In Brooklyn?”
“Er, yes, okay, but that just underscores that we have to do something to bring these people out of the shadows — ”
“Hold on. Didn’t Mahmud end up bombing the World Trade Center? Didn’t he work for that blind sheikh who kept telling everyone to kill all the Americans?”
“You mean Omar Abdel Rahman. Well, actually, he was a doctor of Islamic jurisprudence graduated from one of the world’s great universities — became a professor and a renowned expert in Muslim law. I don’t know why you keep dwelling on ancient history that distracts us from the real issues …”
Such inanity is not far from last weekÂ’s Philadelphia debate, when ABCÂ’s George Stephanopoulos displayed the audacity of hope that Barack Obama might try to explain his friendly relationship with Bill Ayers, a terrorist.
Now let’s be really honest here. No one would accept such a line of argument regarding Muslim terrorists like this motley cast of murderers discussed above. No politician would dare to attempt such an argument. And yet Barack Obama has the audacity to make such an attempt to do so in order to defend a long chain of personal, professional, and political associations with the “respected English professor who lives in my neighborhood.” It ought to be sufficient for any decent person to declare Obama unfit – after all, it isn’t like Ayers’ was living underground under an assumed name – he openly bragged about his terrorist acts, and the only contrition he showed was his regret that he failed to set off more bombs and do more damage. Obama is therefore incapable of arguing that Ayers was a changed man, the way that one can look at Watergate conspirator Chuck Colson and see a change of heart and break with past misdeeds.
And then there is these little details – ones which have nagged me from the back of my mind for some time now, and which I have resisted writing out of a desire not to engage in what some would call harsh, extremist rhetoric.
Ayers bombed the Capitol, Pentagon, and NYC Police headquarters. He was involved in a plan to bomb Fort Dix, seeking to blow up the officer’s club during a dance for officers and their wives – one that was averted when some of his co-conspirators accidentally detonated the nail-packed bomb (designed to inflict maximum human casualties) before it could be planted.
What was his motivation? Primarily, it was opposition to the Vietnam War and a desire to bring about its end by undermining the US war effort.
When one considers these facts, they add up to something much bigger than terrorism. Indeed, they add up to a singular offense, the only crime defined as such by the US Constitution itself.
Article III Section 3 Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
William Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, and the rest of their Weather Underground colleagues were engaged in nothing less than treason against the United States of America. Their acts cannot be defined as anything other than levying war against the United States in an attempt to give aid and comfort to America’s enemies in Vietnam. That isn’t me making some sort of half-assed leap to tar a political opponent – that is the only legitimate interpretation of the words and deeds of Ayers, Dohrn, and the rest of the Weather Underground.
Which again takes us back to the question of judgment on the part of the junior Senator from Illinois -- having maintained a long cordial relationship with an unrepentant avowed terrorist who he knew (or should have known) committed treason against the United States, is Barack Obama fit to be President of the United States and Commander-in Chief of the Armed Forces?
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Rosemary's Thoughts, third world county, Adam's Blog, The Pink Flamingo, Celebrity Smack, Gulf Coast Hurricane Tracker, Dumb Ox Daily News, Conservative Cat, Right Voices, D equals S, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Posted by: Greg at
10:48 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 971 words, total size 7 kb.
April 21, 2008
First, he is the champion of such schemes, having long been involved in imposing such political speech limitation schemes upon candidates for office and their supporters.
Second, he is behind in the race for money and this option will give him a big financial boost in the final two months of the campaign.
John McCain is abandoning any hope of catching the Democrats in fundraising.Based on new financial disclosure reports released Sunday, and interviews with his finance team, the Republican PartyÂ’s presumptive nominee will instead accept taxpayer money to finance his general election and share other costs with the Republican National Committee.
The strategy will allow McCain to stretch his campaign dollars by splitting the cost of television advertising and other campaign activity with the RNC.
But the decision also puts the Arizona senator at risk of being badly outspent – even with RNC help – by a Democratic nominee who will be allowed to spend as much as he or she can raise on the November race.
But there is also another advantage to doing this. Barack Obama stated early in the campaign that he would take public financing and accept the related spending limits in the event his Republican opponent did so. The Illinois Senator must now decide whether or not he will abide by that vow, or whether he will break his word tot he American people -- opening himself up to all sorts of questions regarding his integrity and trustworthiness.
Posted by: Greg at
10:18 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 264 words, total size 2 kb.
It's so easy. A friend sends an e-mail about the presidential campaign and you forward it to an office buddy.With that click of the mouse, you are at risk of being fired. For a Hatch Act violation.
E-mails, blogs and campaign Web sites can be cyber-traps for federal employees, especially those accustomed to using their government computer for personal matters, such as trading messages with children or sharing jokes with friends.
The Office of Special Counsel, an independent agency that investigates and prosecutes allegations of improper political activities by government employees, is getting calls these days from federal workers who are confused about the rules or worried they may have committed an "e-Hatch" violation, said Ana Galindo-Marrone, chief of the Hatch Act Unit at the OSC.
After all, I razzed him last year about some concerns I had related to precisely such issues, wanting to see him avoid running afoul with the law – one I’ve though overly broad since the days when I worked at the base PX and had to limit my activities with the College Republicans accordingly.
And then I saw this bit at the end of the story.
In recent months, Galindo-Marrone has been touring federal agencies, explaining that technology is increasing the ways that employees can get into trouble at their office desks.That is what happened to a NASA employee in Houston.
An OSC investigation found that in 2006 and 2007, the employee used his government e-mail account to coordinate and plan activities for a political group and to assist a candidate running for state representative while at his NASA office. He also made blog postings from work to promote campaigns of several candidates, and, at least twice in 2006, urged blog readers to make political contributions.
As a result, the OSC found him in violation of the Hatch Act. The employee was suspended for 180 days without pay.
The shock of recognition hit.
These were, in fact, the very issues I raised with my esteemed nemesis (and I do hold him in high personal regard).
To the degree that these efforts happened in the office, some action should have been taken. But the mere solicitation of political contributions on his blog on his own time should not be a violation of any law – it should be regarded as First Amendment protected political activity, as should every act of soliciting and donating of campaign contributions by individuals, subject to no limitation whatsoever by the government. I respectfully urge Congress to restore the right to freely participate in the political process to all federal employees.
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Rosemary's Thoughts, third world county, McCain Blogs, DragonLady's World, Maggie's Notebook, Right Truth, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Cao's Blog, Big Dog's Weblog, Conservative Cat, Right Voices, D equals S, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Posted by: Greg at
08:47 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 556 words, total size 5 kb.
April 20, 2008
Many of the Democratic superdelegates who are still undecided say the most important factor in their decision is simple — they just want a winner in November.Problem is, after nearly four months of primaries and caucuses in 46 states, territories and the District of Columbia, they still aren't sure who that is, don't seem be in any hurry to make up their minds and aren't interested in any artificial process that might force them to choose between Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Most of the more than 100 undecided superdelegates who discussed their decision-making with The Associated Press in the past two weeks agreed that the primaries and caucuses do matter — whether it's who has the most national delegates or the candidate who won their state or congressional district. But few said the primaries will be the biggest factor in their decision.
"I think it's really important that we keep our eye on the prize, and the prize is the win in November," said Gail Rasmussen, an undecided superdelegate from Oregon.
Indeed, Rasmussen is articulating precisely the rationale that led the Democrats to create the superdelegates -- the notion that party officials and elected officials should serve as a brake upon primary voters whose enthusiasm for a candidate saying the right left thing in a way that attracts the party faithful but not the general public. One can argue whether such a brake upon popular will is appropriate (after all, listen to Dems rail against the electoral college), but it is how the system is designed to work. These undecided superdelegates should therefore be praised for taking their role so seriously.
Posted by: Greg at
10:05 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 302 words, total size 2 kb.
After all, it looks like it is more dangerous to be an American in Barack Obama's hometown than it is to be an American in Iraq. (H/T Urban Grounds)
A violent and deadly weekend continues in Chicago. At least 12 people have been shot, two of them killed, since Saturday morning. Two others were stabbed in a home invasion. This comes after at least 20 people were shot, four of them killed, from Friday night through early Saturday.
If this sort of carnage is still going on, it is clear that the American policy for pacifying Chicago has failed. I want to know the exit strategies proposed by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton -- and I want to know them now!
Posted by: Greg at
09:27 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 132 words, total size 1 kb.
During the 1996 Democratic convention in Chicago, Ayers and his wife, Weather Underground alumna Bernardine Dohrn, hosted a fundraiser at their Chicago home for Democrats Online.Lytel said Friday that no one from the Clinton White House showed up for the 1996 event.
He added, “I’m a Clinton supporter, but I think it’s the absolute height of stupidity” and “preposterous” for her to try to use the Ayers connection as a weapon against Obama. “This is an insane way for her to try to define her opponent.”
“I have no reason to think that Ayers is anything other than smart, skeptical American,” Lytel said. “He’s like anyone else who has activities in his past that might be embarrassing to them as a middle-aged person.”
Now hold on here one moment -- "activities in his past that might be embarrassing to them as a middle-aged person"?
We are talking about setting off bombs in the United States Capitol, the Pentagon, and New York City Police Headquarters. In other words, acts of terrorism, not youthful hijinks that cause one to blush and shake one's head in dismay over having been so foolish.
Am I willing to excuse Ayers and Dohrn for their advocacy of the oppressive Marxist-Leninist ideology that has killed more people than Nazism? Sure -- just as I hope folks are willing to forgive me for my youthful flirtation with the notion that we should adopt a socialized medical system like the ones that deliver substandard medical care in Canada and the UK. Young people sometimes adopt crazy ideas which they later recognize to be flawed.
But let's draw a distinction about activities. I had a string of relationships -- some meaningful, some not -- in which I rather callously broke hearts. I'm embarrassed by those. I have several nights when I had way too much to drink -- and which would be fodder for YouTube if they were to have happened today. There are things I said then which I would take back in a heartbeat if I could, because time has taught me lessons that I needed in my youth.
But for all my youthful follies, I didn't commit acts of violence in the furtherance of political goals. I may have picketed outside of abortion clinics, but I didn't blow them up. I may have objected to the methods of the police chief in our college town and appealed to the city council to fire him, but I didn't plant a bomb in the offices of the police department. I may have objected to Jimmy Carter's restoration of draft registration, but I did not attempt to destroy the building where the registration forms were processed -- even though it was around the corner from my place of employment.
Why didn't I do any of those things? Was it fear of embarrassment? No -- it was recognition that such actions would not have merely been criminal, they also would have been fundamentally immoral.
And to this day, Ayers and Dohrn remain unrepentant.
And are embraced by the political and social elite of Chicago, and by presidential candidate.
And let's be clear -- William Ayers is not embarrassed by his terrorist activities. If anything, he only repents his failure to commit more and bigger acts of terrorism.
“I don’t regret setting bombs,” Ayers told the Times. “I feel we didn’t do enough.”
'Nuff said.
UPDATE: Bravo, Senator McCain!
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Rosemary's Thoughts, The Random Yak, 123beta, Maggie's Notebook, Right Truth, Shadowscope, Oblogatory Anecdotes, Cao's Blog, The Amboy Times, Phastidio.net, D equals S, Chuck's Place, Nuke Gingrich, Wake Up America, Woman Honor Thyself, McCain Blogs, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, , Right Voices, and OTB Sports, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Posted by: Greg at
02:23 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 652 words, total size 7 kb.
April 19, 2008
His current column int he Orange County Register includes the above assertion in a fuller form -- and bears frequent repetition.
As for "gun-totin'," large numbers of Americans tote guns because they're assertive, self-reliant citizens, not docile subjects of a permanent governing class. The Second Amendment is philosophically consistent with the First Amendment, for which I've become more grateful since the Canadian Islamic Congress decided to sue me for "hate speech" up north. Both amendments embody the American view that liberty is not the gift of the state, and its defense cannot be outsourced exclusively to the government.
Indeed, Steyn pegs it. A government that is viewed as the source of liberty is one which can claim the authority to revoke those liberties as unnecessary. A government that is the sole defender of liberty is one which also assumes the right to squash those same liberties in the name of a greater interest. On this day, the 233rd anniversary of the Battles of Lexington and Concord, we find ourselves reminded that it was the attempt by the British government to seize the colonists' means of self-defense -- their guns, shot, and powder -- that brought about a Revolution.
Steyn's timely reminder fits well with the words chosen by a group of patriots the following summer -- words which have inspired those seeking freedom for over two centuries and in every corner of our world.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Endowed by our Creator.
Certain unalienable rights.
Let us not forget.
H/T Malkin
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Rosemary's Thoughts, The Random Yak, 123beta, Maggie's Notebook, Right Truth, Oblogatory Anecdotes, Cao's Blog, The Amboy Times, Phastidio.net, D equals S, Chuck's Place, Nuke Gingrich, Wake Up America, Woman Honor Thyself, McCain Blogs, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, , Right Voices, and OTB Sports, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Posted by: Greg at
12:46 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 406 words, total size 5 kb.
And it would appear that asking questions that do that raises the hackles of Obama supporters.
The political fallout from the Philadelphia faceoff between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton was all but eclipsed yesterday by a fierce debate about Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos.The ABC moderators found themselves under fire for focusing on campaign gaffes and training most of their ammunition on Obama. Huffington Post blogger Jason Linkins called the debate "utterly asinine." Washington Post television critic Tom Shales called the duo's performance "despicable." Philadelphia Daily News columnist Will Bunch said the moderators "disgraced the American voters, and in fact even disgraced democracy itself."
Tough crowd out there.
"I think the questions were certainly pointed -- tough at times, as they should be in a presidential debate -- but not inappropriate or irrelevant at all," Stephanopoulos said yesterday. "The questions have been part of this campaign and in the news. We did our job. You're not going to satisfy everyone."
In the first 40 minutes of Wednesday's two-hour Democratic debate, the moderators asked Obama about his remarks that small-town residents bitterly cling to guns and religion; the inflammatory sermons of Rev. Jeremiah Wright (Stephanopoulos followup: "Do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?"); why Obama doesn't wear an American flag pin; and his relationship with William Ayers, a former Weather Underground radical who has acknowledged involvement in several bombings in the 1970s.
In the only comparably aggressive question directed at Clinton, Stephanopoulos cited an ABC/Washington Post poll challenging her honesty and tied it to her false tale of having once come under sniper fire in Bosnia.
The reality is that Americans know all about Hillary, and don't like her. They know all about John McCain, and do like him. But Obama? He remains an unknown, and as such those debate questions were appropriate in terms of helping America take the measure of the man.
My guess? They won't like what they see.
And I pose this question to you -- if Obama were a white man, would he be given a pass after attending Fred Phelps' Westboro Baptist Church for two decades? Would he not be questioned if he were friends with Olympic/abortion clinic/gay bar bomber Eric Rudolph? Wouldn't either of those associations be a deal breaker for most of the American public -- and for the American media?
Posted by: Greg at
06:24 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 441 words, total size 3 kb.
April 17, 2008
Republicans are no longer underdogs in the race for the White House. To pull that off, John McCain has attracted disgruntled GOP voters, independents and even some moderate Democrats who shunned his party last fall.Partly thanks to an increasingly likable image, the Republican presidential candidate has pulled even with the two Democrats still brawling for their party's nomination, according to an Associated Press-Yahoo! News poll released Thursday. Just five months ago — before either party had winnowed its field — the survey showed people preferred sending an unnamed Democrat over a Republican to the White House by 13 percentage points.
Also helping the Arizona senator close the gap: Peoples' opinions of Hillary Rodham Clinton have soured slightly, while their views of Barack Obama have improved though less impressively than McCain's.
The survey suggests that those switching to McCain are largely attuned to his personal qualities and McCain may be benefiting as the two Democrats snipe at each other during their prolonged nomination fight.
I think this voter sums up the reality of the situation quite well -- and demonstrates exactly what is happening among Democrats and those who earlier leaned that way.
"You can't trust Hillary and Obama's too young," said Pauline Holsinger, 60, a janitorial worker in Pensacola, Fla., now backing McCain who preferred an unnamed Democrat last fall. "I like him better, he's more knowledgeable about the war" in Iraq.
And let's face it -- Hillary remains a Clinton, and Obama remains an untested political neophyte who lacks the experience and seasoning necessary to be an effective president. What was the word a cycle or two back? Gravitas. Obama lacks it, while McCain has it in spades. When will that be a topic of discussion in the MSM -- or will it, since it hurts their anointed candidate?
Posted by: Greg at
10:16 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 343 words, total size 2 kb.
Sen. Barack Obama on Thursday suggested he doesnÂ’t see any point in having another debate with Democratic rival Sen. Hillary Clinton.Clinton has agreed to a debate next week, but Obama has not yet accepted the invitation.
At an appearance in Raleigh, North Carolina, Obama said he has a lot of campaigning to do in a limited amount of time.
Obama said he had agreed to an earlier debate, but Clinton declined that one.
“I’ll be honest with you, we’ve now had 21,” he said. “It’s not as if we don’t know how to do these things. I could deliver Sen. Clinton’s lines; she could, I’m sure, deliver mine.”
Gee, Senator, it is tough being the leading candidate for the nomination -- it means the candidate behind you has you in her sites.
Plus it must be a real shock to have journalists start asking you tough questions, not the sort of softballs you've fielded up until now.
Just wait until John McCain starts to hammer you on substance later on this year. You'll wilt like a week-old lettuce leaf in Death Valley, dude.
Maybe you can get William Ayers to blow something up for you -- just to distract from how weak and unqualified a candidate you really are.
Posted by: Greg at
10:08 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 257 words, total size 2 kb.
Gov. Rick Perry said today he will seek re-election in 2010, but an aide said nothing will be final about that decision until after next year's legislative session.Perry has been hinting that he will seek another term of office since even before he won re-election in 2006 with 39 percent of the vote. But his statements to reporters in Dallas today were the strongest to date, saying flatly that he will be a candidate.
As Perry exited a news conference at the Republican Governor's Association meeting in Grapevine, a reporter asked him if the 2010 Republican gubernatorial field would include him as well as U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst.
''I don't know about them, but it will be Perry in 2010,'' Perry responded, according to The Dallas Morning News and the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.
"I don't know about the other two. You need to ask them."
Asked whether he will run, Perry said, "Yes."
My personal inclination at this point is to support Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, but I would like to see how the field shapes up before making a commitment -- talk to me next spring for a firmer commitment. After all, I'm hearing at least one other candidate besides Perry, Dewhurst, and Hutchison will be seeking the office -- a Houston area state senator -- and I suspect that we could have more.
Why am I opposed to Perry? Weak efforts at tax reform that have saved no one money. His quick post-election flip-flop on border issues. His attempt to assume dictatorial powers to make law and appropriate money so that he could play doctor with every eleven-year-old girl in the state by mandating Gardasil on his say-so alone.
I think Rick Perry really doesn't understand the depth of the opposition to him and his pathetic efforts since the 2006 election.
Posted by: Greg at
11:21 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 329 words, total size 2 kb.
April 16, 2008
But the realities of Mr. Vo's Neighborhood are pretty wretched indeed, as documented by this commercial offering.
Interestingly enough, it isn't just the local bloggers who are silent. I've yet to read or hear a single word from a single Democrat in office here in Houston -- not even Mayor Bill White, whose police force Vo attempted to bully with a letter on official House stationery. Nice support for the boys in blue, Mr. Mayor!
But then again, you know the Democrat's position on such things.
H/T LST
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary's Thoughts, Right Truth, Adam's Blog, Shadowscope, Cao's Blog, D equals S, Chuck's Place, Nuke Gingrich, Allie is Wired, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Celebrity Smack, Wolf Pangloss, , Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Posted by: Greg at
11:16 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 159 words, total size 3 kb.
April 15, 2008
Damn damn damn!
Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter's cancer has returned. The five-term Republican said in a statement released by his office Tuesday that he was diagnosed with an early recurrence of Hodgkin's disease, which is a cancer of the lymph system.Specter, 78, underwent treatment for the same type of cancer in 2005 and was later given a clean bill of health. The statement said that the cancer was revealed in a medical scan but that he has no symptoms.
"I was surprised by the PET scan findings because I have been feeling so good," Specter said in the statement. "I consider this just another bump on the road to a successful recovery from Hodgkin's, from which I've been symptom free for three years."
In his recent book, "Never Give In: Battling Cancer in the Senate," Specter credited hard work with getting him through the cancer treatments.
"An illness like Hodgkin's serves as a reminder that we have a limited time _ and how our time can end when we least expect it," Specter wrote. "Moreover, the event of death could never eclipse what is most important, which is how we spend the time we have."
The statement released by his office said tests showed cancer in lymph nodes in his chest. A follow-up biopsy of one of the chest lymph nodes was positive for recurrence.
I've not always been a fan of Arlen Specter. indeed, i've supported his opponents more than once. But I do respect him as a man of honor and integrity -- and high personal decency. I rejoiced in his beating cancer before, and am saddened by this recurrence.
You are in my prayers, Senator -- because I truly believe that political differences don't matter when put up against the fight you are facing.
Posted by: Greg at
10:24 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 305 words, total size 2 kb.
Mr. Obama is not a hapless victim. His comments made for just the sort of rookie error that the Illinois senator is prone to make, and they have reinforced a feeling that he can be too aloof, or, yes, elitist. His attempts to explain himself have fallen flat, as have his insulting Annie Oakley jokes and demands to see pictures of Mrs. Clinton in a duck blind. Sexist jabs are as offensive as racist jabs.
Yeah, these are rookie mistakes.
And that is the problem. Obama is an unseasoned, unqualified rookie.
If he keeps saying and doing stupid stuff like this, it is clear that he is not qualified to sit in the Oval Office.
The Democrats are on the verge of offering us an untested neophyte. At least Hillary Clinton knows her ass from a whole in the ground. Barack Obama doesn't even have that going for him.
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary's Thoughts, Right Truth, Adam's Blog, Shadowscope, Cao's Blog, D equals S, Chuck's Place, Nuke Gingrich, Allie is Wired, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Celebrity Smack, Wolf Pangloss, , Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Posted by: Greg at
10:19 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 226 words, total size 3 kb.
Senator John McCain offered the broadest look yet at his economic policies in a speech here Tuesday, calling for tax cuts, a freeze of discretionary spending for a year, higher premiums for better-off Medicare recipients and elimination of federal gas taxes this summer to reinvigorate the sagging economy.Mr. McCain, who made no mention of his previous pledge to balance the budget by the end of his first term, outlined a long list of tax cuts he favored in the speech, which was delivered on the deadline for filing taxes. He called once again for making the Bush tax cuts, which he voted against, permanent, and for cutting corporate taxes, phasing out the alternative minimum tax and doubling the value of exemptions for each dependent to $7,000 from $3,500. He also proposed giving people the option of using a simpler, shorter tax form.
One of Mr. McCain’s tax proposals would take effect even before the Republican Convention: he called on Congress to suspend the 18.4 cent a gallon federal gas tax from Memorial Day until Labor Day. Mr. McCain said that doing so would provide “an immediate economic stimulus,” but some environmentalists said that the change might encourage more people to use their cars, while Mr. McCain has made combating global warming central to his campaign.
Given that both leading contenders for the presidency propose to tax the American people into prosperity by letting the Bush tax cuts for every American expire, we have an amazing dichotomy. And given the calls of Democrats to lower the cost of gasoline, the opportunity to bring about a 5% decrease in gas prices without government interfering with the market, every Democrat should be on board with that gas tax proposal -- if they really believe that lowering gas prices is a good thing. After all, gas taxes are highly regressive and hit the working poor hardest.
Posted by: Greg at
10:01 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 350 words, total size 2 kb.
Take this example from one of our local Dem bloggers, who is also a head of a local Democrat organization and a close personal friend of our not-for-long Congressman, Nick Lampson.
John Coby said...If voters could think, McLame wouldnt have a chance.
6:30 PM
Now we'll let the insulting nickname for a dedicated public servant and war hero go, because Democrats don't believe in things like respect for veterans. It is the disrespect for the voters -- apparently he doesn't believe that most Americans are very smart, so they have to be ruled by their betters, folks like himself and Obama.
So remember, Americans -- and especially Texans -- what Democrats really think about you. They think you are stupid if you vote against them -- and hope you are stupid enough to vote for them.
Posted by: Greg at
02:01 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 164 words, total size 1 kb.
April 14, 2008
“I do not want to be, don’t intend to be, won’t be on [McCain’s] ticket,” she told the Associated Press in an interview in Alabama today where she received an honorary degree from Air University at Maxwell-Gunter Air Force Base.“It’s time for me to do something else,” she added, saying she would return to Stanford University after the Bush administration leaves office next January.
Rice praised Sen. McCain, of Arizonia, as “an amazing man” with “great intellect” but said the last time she spoke with him was last month after his passport file had been breached…
“We’ll see in a few year’s what I do. But I — this is not the time for me,” she told the AP.
I would have liked to see her on the ticket, but I don't know that she would balance out McCain's policy strengths, though she would bring ethnic, gender, and age differences to the ticket that cannot be ignored. But would her more moderate social credentials have harmed her candidacy?
Interestingly enough, though, the statement does leave open some interesting possibilities for 2012...
H/T Hot Air
Posted by: Greg at
10:03 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 210 words, total size 2 kb.
Interesting, isn't it, that the local lefties are so silent when it is one of their own who is facing tie in jail -- and for engaging in gun violence, no less.
Tsk! Tsk! Tsk!
State Rep. Borris Miles was indicted Monday on two counts of deadly conduct stemming from complaints he brandished a pistol and made threats at a pair of parties last December.Miles, D-Houston, is expected to turn himself in this week, prosecutor Paul Doyle said. Bail has been set at $2,000. If convicted, each count of the Class A misdemeanor carries a punishment range of up to a year in jail and a $4,000 fine.
Ben Hall, an attorney for one of the people who accused Miles of threatening him, said the two counts stem from two incidents.
In the first, Miles is accused of showing a pistol and threatening TSU regent Willard Jackson and his wife during a Rockets/Mavericks game at the Toyota Center, Hall said.
He said the second count is connected to an incident later that night in which Miles is accused of displaying a pistol and forcibly kissing another man's wife while crashing a party at a St. Regis Hotel ballroom.
Hall said his client, party host David Harris, decided to press charges after a drunken Miles shocked guests with loud, profane language, grabbed his face and planted a Godfather-style "kiss of death" on his cheeks. Harris also said Miles handed him a pistol and declared, "You don't know what I'm capable of doing."
Harris said he thought the grand jury made the right decision but said it was not a happy day for anyone involved.
Fortunately this clown lost in the primary, but a number of our local liberal bloggers actually endorsed his reelection, despite the fact that Miles' behavior was already public knowledge. Seems they didn't like the other candidate, who had shown a willingness to work with the GOP leadership of the Texas House -- proving once again that when a liberal says they support "bipartisanship" they really mean "Republicans surrendering to Democrats".
But imagine the uproar if Miles had been a Republican. I'm quite sure that the Houston leftosphere would be in rare form, denouncing the behavior of a "bitter Republican gun nut" and talking about the arrogance of power. Considering how upset they got over Chuck Rosenthal's dirty emails, you'd hope they might have a few words over the indictment of a legislator who made terroristic threats to political opponents.
I guess not -- it's apparently not a problem when Dems do it.
Posted by: Greg at
09:15 PM
| Comments (35)
| Add Comment
Post contains 440 words, total size 3 kb.
Talk about an ineffective, incompetent Senator! Here's hoping that he draws a challenger on the GOP side.
Shout it with me, folks:
RUN, MITT, RUN!
H/T The Corner & Hot Air
Posted by: Greg at
11:11 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 53 words, total size 1 kb.
The co-founder of the radical anti-war group Code Pink has “bundled” more than $50,000 for Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign, and pro-troops groups are demanding that he return the money.Jodie Evans, a Code Pink leader, gathered at least $50,000 from friends and associates and donated it to Obama’s presidential campaign, according to information compiled by the nonpartisan watchdog group, Public Citizen.
Evans and her son, a student who lives at her Southern California address, each also gave the maximum individual allowable donation of $2,300 to Obama’s campaign.The donations have raised questions about Obama’s association with the more radical elements of his base. Code Pink has harassed, vandalized and impeded military recruiters across the United States in a campaign it calls “counter-recruitment.” The group also gave $600,000 to the families of Iraqi terrorists in Fallujah, whom it called “insurgents” fighting for their homes.
The Code Pinkos have, of course, a right to participate in the political process. However, Barack Obama has a responsibility to disassociate his campaign from those who attack our military – unless he supports those efforts.
After all, if he wants to argue that he is fit to be the commander-in-chief of our brave men and women in uniform, he can prove it by rejecting those who major political activity is undermining the troops.
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Is It Just Me?, Rosemary's Thoughts, third world county, Right Truth, DragonLady's World, The World According to Carl, DragonLady's World, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Celebrity Smack, , , Conservative Cat, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Posted by: Greg at
09:00 AM
| Comments (40)
| Add Comment
Post contains 360 words, total size 4 kb.
Reflecting on the late Pincham, Wright said his faith “was not the jingoistic, chauvinistic ‘you’re either with us or against us’ demonizing kind of faith.” Wright said Pincham was friends with “Jews, Muslims, rabbis, imams, fathers in the Catholic church and [Louis] Farrakhan in the Islamic faith.”
Well letÂ’s consider how that faith was lived out. I seem to recall this little incident from the past.
[Pincham] won seats on the circuit and appellate courts in Chicago and was not afraid of controversy, such as the time he suggested that anyone south of Madison Street who did not support Mayor Harold Washington should be hanged.
Did you get that, folks – failure to vote for the correct candidate should be grounds for lynching. Interestingly enough, the Illinois Courts did not consider that grounds to deem him unfit to serve as a judge – but I wonder if they would have ruled the same way if he had been a white man.
You see, it is no wonder that a short time later that Pincham joined Wright’s church – after all, he came from the same violent, hate-mongering mind-set as the pastor. Seems to me that there is a pattern here – especially as we hear more and more racist comments come out of the mouth of another member of Trinity UCC, Senator Barack Hussein Obama.
Birds of a feather flock together.
Posted by: Greg at
08:56 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 276 words, total size 2 kb.
71 queries taking 0.2692 seconds, 378 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
