It is so bad in the race for the New York state 23rd congressional seat that the former New York Republican governor, George Pataki, is endorsing the Conservative, Doug Hoffman, over alleged Republican Dede Scozzafava.
My advice to Mrs. Scozzafava, should she read this and take it, is to exit gracefully and throw your support to Mr. Hoffman. Your 15 seconds of fame are up. Even if the National Republican Congressional Committee, the Republican National Committee and Newt Gingrich do not see it, most conservatives and now Establishment Republicans do see it. Victory is not in the hands of you, Mrs. Scozzafava.
Now, true to being a "moderate" and or liberal in her case, Mrs. Scozzafava will not exit gracefully. She will take the RNCC and RNC cash and be nothing more than a spoiler, if even that.
Look, Mr. Pataki is as moderate Republican as it gets in New York state. Oh yes, at one time he was a pretty conservative state senator, but once he upset then Democrat Gov. Mario Cuomo in the infamous 1994 campaign, the conservatism went left. But again, for one of the moderate credentials that Mr. Pataki has to endorse Mr. Hoffman, it means that a New York Republican knows better than a former Speaker of the House that somehow got hoodwinked into undying support for an alleged Republican as Mrs. Scozzafava.
At this rate, Mrs. Scozzafava will be lucky to garner 20% of the vote in this Tuesday's special election to replace center-right now Army Secretary John McHugh.
But, just to remind Mrs. Scozzafava and those who want to discount Mr. Hoffman, give a few bucks over at his campaign so he can get the message out there.
And send a message to Dede Scozzafava. Please exit the race gracefully. NOW!
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Hoffman Surging-According To Daily Kos
Yea, yea, dismiss this poll at your own peril. Sure, it is commissioned by The Daily Kos people, but the fact is that Dede Scozzafava is going downhill and Doug Hoffman is surging.
The poll numbers are as follows:
Bill Owen (D) 33%
Doug Hoffman (C) 32%
Dede Scozzafava (R) 21%
Mr. Hoffman has gained nine points from the previous poll. Mr. Owens has gone down two and Mrs. Scozzafava has dropped nine.
Clearly local conservative Republican voters are turning to Mr. Hoffman. Remember, this is one of the rare conservative districts in New York state. The former congressman, John McHugh, has been the representative for 16 years and amassed a 73% American Conservative Union rating.
Mr. Owen may have hit his ceiling of natural, Democrat support. Mrs. Scozzafava is clearly losing Republicans. Conservatives, idependents and Republicans are flocking to Mr. Hoffman.
The lesson here is simple.
Do not let the New York state Republican party steamroll a loser candidate on the electorate. They need some serious reform in how a candidate is chosen when there is a special election. A two-tiered primary like here in California is what New Yorkers need. Yesterday.
GO DOUG, GO!
The poll numbers are as follows:
Bill Owen (D) 33%
Doug Hoffman (C) 32%
Dede Scozzafava (R) 21%
Mr. Hoffman has gained nine points from the previous poll. Mr. Owens has gone down two and Mrs. Scozzafava has dropped nine.
Clearly local conservative Republican voters are turning to Mr. Hoffman. Remember, this is one of the rare conservative districts in New York state. The former congressman, John McHugh, has been the representative for 16 years and amassed a 73% American Conservative Union rating.
Mr. Owen may have hit his ceiling of natural, Democrat support. Mrs. Scozzafava is clearly losing Republicans. Conservatives, idependents and Republicans are flocking to Mr. Hoffman.
The lesson here is simple.
Do not let the New York state Republican party steamroll a loser candidate on the electorate. They need some serious reform in how a candidate is chosen when there is a special election. A two-tiered primary like here in California is what New Yorkers need. Yesterday.
GO DOUG, GO!
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Radical Islam In Detroit
Today, a radical Islamic cleric was killed in a shootout with FBI agents serving a search warrant. No, it was not in Baghdad. Nor Kabul. Certainly not Kandahar. It was in Detroit, Michigan.
Luqman Ameen Abdullah was killed in the shootout in Dearborn, a Detroit suburb with one of the largest Arab populations outside of the Middle East. Oh, but Mr. Abdullah was not Arab but a Black American. And, is brand of radical Islam is American born and bred according to an Islamic prison chaplain.
According to Jimmy Jones, a professor of world religions at Manhattanville College and a longtime Islamic prison chaplain, "They're not taking their cues from overseas. This group is very much American born and bred."
That is what makes this disturbing.
While the Department of Homeland Security was busy warning us of those dreaded, eeevvviiilll, right-wing militia types, we are seeing radical Islam right under our noses.
Here is a little bit of the "theology" of Mr. Abdullah.
Abdullah preaches that every Muslim should have a weapon, and should not be scared to use their weapon when needed.
The group believes that a separate Islamic state in the U.S. would be controlled by Jamil Abdullah Al-Amin, formerly known as H. Rap Brown.
Beautiful!
Mr. Abdullah, also known as Christopher Thomas, was busy recruiting converts to radical Islam in the prison system. And there were at least a couple of dozen mosques under the control of the group Mr. Abdullah/Thomas led, known as Ummah.
Amazingly, none of the charges against Mr. Abdullah/Thomas included terrorism.
I know, Mr. Abdullah/Thomas must not have been right-wing enough for the Department of Homeland Security.
What this should be, but will not be, is a wake up call.
The real threat from within is not at the hands of fringe, right-wing kooks. It is at the hands of radical Islamics. Whether they are from abroad or homegrown. The threat is still there and we must be vigilant against radical Islam.
I think that the Department of Homeland Security ought to update their infamous report to include radical Islamics from within.
Luqman Ameen Abdullah was killed in the shootout in Dearborn, a Detroit suburb with one of the largest Arab populations outside of the Middle East. Oh, but Mr. Abdullah was not Arab but a Black American. And, is brand of radical Islam is American born and bred according to an Islamic prison chaplain.
According to Jimmy Jones, a professor of world religions at Manhattanville College and a longtime Islamic prison chaplain, "They're not taking their cues from overseas. This group is very much American born and bred."
That is what makes this disturbing.
While the Department of Homeland Security was busy warning us of those dreaded, eeevvviiilll, right-wing militia types, we are seeing radical Islam right under our noses.
Here is a little bit of the "theology" of Mr. Abdullah.
Abdullah preaches that every Muslim should have a weapon, and should not be scared to use their weapon when needed.
The group believes that a separate Islamic state in the U.S. would be controlled by Jamil Abdullah Al-Amin, formerly known as H. Rap Brown.
Beautiful!
Mr. Abdullah, also known as Christopher Thomas, was busy recruiting converts to radical Islam in the prison system. And there were at least a couple of dozen mosques under the control of the group Mr. Abdullah/Thomas led, known as Ummah.
Amazingly, none of the charges against Mr. Abdullah/Thomas included terrorism.
I know, Mr. Abdullah/Thomas must not have been right-wing enough for the Department of Homeland Security.
What this should be, but will not be, is a wake up call.
The real threat from within is not at the hands of fringe, right-wing kooks. It is at the hands of radical Islamics. Whether they are from abroad or homegrown. The threat is still there and we must be vigilant against radical Islam.
I think that the Department of Homeland Security ought to update their infamous report to include radical Islamics from within.
Congressman Steven LaTourette Speaks Truth To Power
If more Republican congressmen said what Ohio Rep. Steven LaTourette did today on the floor of the House of Representatives, the Democrats would be reeling even more than they are today. And it is over their inability to get their own act together on socializing medicine in the United States.
Somehow, the Obamawhore media is pinning the blame over the Democrat inability to nationalize the health care delivery on the Republicans.
Hello?
As Rep. LaTourette pointed out, the Democrats are in the majority in both Houses of congress. And also the White House.
Here are some of the highlights:
Mr Speaker. All through out history there’s been the big lie. And we got the big lie going here again. And it goes like this:
Republicans wont let us have health care reform. WAHHHH
Republicans are the party of no. WAHHHHHH
Why are Republicans stopping us from reforming health care? WAHHHHH
..We couldn’t stop a one car parade. This health care discussion is a fight between the left and the far left. And you know what? Sadly for the democratic majority they have people that think that this health care proposal proposed by the far left… is WACKY! It takes 500 billion dollars out of medicare . It does nothing with the lawyers as they file lawsuits and cause doctors to practice defensive medicine. This is a bad bill. They can’t even get their own team to row the boat. But they want to say Republicans don’t want to reform health care. WAHHHHHH
To me, the money line is this:
This health care discussion is a fight between the left and the far left.
Exactly!
The Democrat House, in which they have 257 seats, is fighting with themselves. Because of that fight, they can not and will not invite the Republicans to the socialization of health care delivery party. Because that would mean possibly letting the Republicans offer their ideas that actually may not be a total socialist disaster. It would mean-THE HORROR!-a real bipartisan bill.
But it will not happen.
And Rep. LaTourette pours some much needed firewater on the Democrat march to nationalizing health care delivery.
More Republicans need to speak truth to power. Rep. LaTourette did and should be commended.
BTW, does anyone think that if, God forbid, Dede Scozzafava should win the New York state 23rd congressional race, she would speak this truth to power?
And the crickets are still chirping.
HT: Mark Levin @ http://www.marklevinshow.com/
Somehow, the Obamawhore media is pinning the blame over the Democrat inability to nationalize the health care delivery on the Republicans.
Hello?
As Rep. LaTourette pointed out, the Democrats are in the majority in both Houses of congress. And also the White House.
Here are some of the highlights:
Mr Speaker. All through out history there’s been the big lie. And we got the big lie going here again. And it goes like this:
Republicans wont let us have health care reform. WAHHHH
Republicans are the party of no. WAHHHHHH
Why are Republicans stopping us from reforming health care? WAHHHHH
..We couldn’t stop a one car parade. This health care discussion is a fight between the left and the far left. And you know what? Sadly for the democratic majority they have people that think that this health care proposal proposed by the far left… is WACKY! It takes 500 billion dollars out of medicare . It does nothing with the lawyers as they file lawsuits and cause doctors to practice defensive medicine. This is a bad bill. They can’t even get their own team to row the boat. But they want to say Republicans don’t want to reform health care. WAHHHHHH
To me, the money line is this:
This health care discussion is a fight between the left and the far left.
Exactly!
The Democrat House, in which they have 257 seats, is fighting with themselves. Because of that fight, they can not and will not invite the Republicans to the socialization of health care delivery party. Because that would mean possibly letting the Republicans offer their ideas that actually may not be a total socialist disaster. It would mean-THE HORROR!-a real bipartisan bill.
But it will not happen.
And Rep. LaTourette pours some much needed firewater on the Democrat march to nationalizing health care delivery.
More Republicans need to speak truth to power. Rep. LaTourette did and should be commended.
BTW, does anyone think that if, God forbid, Dede Scozzafava should win the New York state 23rd congressional race, she would speak this truth to power?
And the crickets are still chirping.
HT: Mark Levin @ http://www.marklevinshow.com/
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Memo To Newt Gingrich: Get The Hell Out Of The New York State 23rd Race!
I like Newt Gingrich. He is one of the sharpest political minds on either side of the aisle. But, in his undying support for alleged Republican Dede Scozzafava in the New York state 23rd congressional race, he is dead wrong. And, here is a little memo for you, Newt.
GET THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY!
Newt, this is astounding. The logic that you have used is, well perplexing.
Newt, you think that it is OK for some 11 county party chairs to force this liberal Republican on a conservative district? Do you not think that a real primary should have decided who the GOP candidate should have been? It appears that you forget that the formula that foisted Mrs. Scozzafava on the electorate reeks of Boss Tweed. It is certainly not a group up approach but a top down that gave those voters Mrs. Scozzafava.
Newt, how can you not realize that this "Republican", Mrs. Scozzafava, is so to the left of the average Republican voter that she supports card check? It is a huge attempt to circumvent the secret ballot and allow a simple majority of people to sign a card showing interest in a labor union within a given workplace. Oh, and it takes away the right of the secret ballot. It is totally unacceptable to see a Republican take such a position.
Newt, it is one thing to be "pro-choice", which is pro-abortion. But, for Mrs. Scozzafava to accept an award, the Margaret Sanger award given by Planned Parenthood, it is absolutely unacceptable.
Oh, remember, Mrs. Sanger is the founder of Planned Parenthood and a leading "light" in the Eugenics movement. Mrs. Sanger was a proponent of forced sterilization of "undesirables", as she and her ilk saw it. It was people like Mrs. Sanger that were inspirations for the likes of Adolf Hitler and Nazi race ideology.
Now, I support Republicans that win fair and square. Say what one will about the craziness that is California, but this crap does not happen here.
We have a primary that determines who a candidate will be. As I noted in another post, there is also a special election in the California 10th district on November 3. And there was a primary that lumped all the candidates on one ballot, no matter what party. Because there are usually so many running, it all but guarantees that there is a second round. Because the top candidate must get 50% plus one to win in the first round. Almost never happens. So the second round is traditional. A Democrat, a Republican and the usual third party likes. Thus, the people decide who the standard bearers will be.
New York state needs to take this approach for both the Democrat and Republican parties.
The same brain dead New York Republican party, which I still submit is on a death spiral to see if they can become as irrelevant as the Massachusetts Republican party, foisted another loser, Jim Tedisco, in another special election earlier this year.
Newt, I know that you are big on broadening the party. So am I. But, if it means running a moderate Democrat masquerading as a Republican, no thank you.
So, I ask you for the good of the Republican party and the voters of the New York state 23rd congressional race this, once again.
GET THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY!
GET THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY!
Newt, this is astounding. The logic that you have used is, well perplexing.
Newt, you think that it is OK for some 11 county party chairs to force this liberal Republican on a conservative district? Do you not think that a real primary should have decided who the GOP candidate should have been? It appears that you forget that the formula that foisted Mrs. Scozzafava on the electorate reeks of Boss Tweed. It is certainly not a group up approach but a top down that gave those voters Mrs. Scozzafava.
Newt, how can you not realize that this "Republican", Mrs. Scozzafava, is so to the left of the average Republican voter that she supports card check? It is a huge attempt to circumvent the secret ballot and allow a simple majority of people to sign a card showing interest in a labor union within a given workplace. Oh, and it takes away the right of the secret ballot. It is totally unacceptable to see a Republican take such a position.
Newt, it is one thing to be "pro-choice", which is pro-abortion. But, for Mrs. Scozzafava to accept an award, the Margaret Sanger award given by Planned Parenthood, it is absolutely unacceptable.
Oh, remember, Mrs. Sanger is the founder of Planned Parenthood and a leading "light" in the Eugenics movement. Mrs. Sanger was a proponent of forced sterilization of "undesirables", as she and her ilk saw it. It was people like Mrs. Sanger that were inspirations for the likes of Adolf Hitler and Nazi race ideology.
Now, I support Republicans that win fair and square. Say what one will about the craziness that is California, but this crap does not happen here.
We have a primary that determines who a candidate will be. As I noted in another post, there is also a special election in the California 10th district on November 3. And there was a primary that lumped all the candidates on one ballot, no matter what party. Because there are usually so many running, it all but guarantees that there is a second round. Because the top candidate must get 50% plus one to win in the first round. Almost never happens. So the second round is traditional. A Democrat, a Republican and the usual third party likes. Thus, the people decide who the standard bearers will be.
New York state needs to take this approach for both the Democrat and Republican parties.
The same brain dead New York Republican party, which I still submit is on a death spiral to see if they can become as irrelevant as the Massachusetts Republican party, foisted another loser, Jim Tedisco, in another special election earlier this year.
Newt, I know that you are big on broadening the party. So am I. But, if it means running a moderate Democrat masquerading as a Republican, no thank you.
So, I ask you for the good of the Republican party and the voters of the New York state 23rd congressional race this, once again.
GET THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY!
Yankees vs. Phillies In The World Series-YAWN!
Tomorrow night, the World Series begins and I can not think of two of the teams that I loath more than the Philadelphia Phillies and the New York Yankees.
Why do I loath the Phillies? Well, they are from Philadelphia. Enough said.
Why do I loath the Yankees? Well, that is because my father, may God rest his soul, was from Brooklyn and a Dodger fan true blue. And at some point in my childhood, it was passed down to me to do two things in life. Bleed Dodger blue and hate, viscerally hate the dreaded Yankees.
It took the Dodgers a while, but in 1956, they finally beat the dreaded Yankees in the World Series. And it was the one and only World Series championship for the borough of Brooklyn. And, two years later, the Dodgers and the cross-town rival New York Giants moved west to Los Angeles and San Francisco, respectively.
Anyhow, I am going to go with the Phillies in six games.
Yes, the Yankees are the best team that money can buy, but I saw a lot of real grit in these Phillies when they played my beloved Dodgers.
And I think Philly Grit will defeat the glitz of the Bronx Bombers.
Why do I loath the Phillies? Well, they are from Philadelphia. Enough said.
Why do I loath the Yankees? Well, that is because my father, may God rest his soul, was from Brooklyn and a Dodger fan true blue. And at some point in my childhood, it was passed down to me to do two things in life. Bleed Dodger blue and hate, viscerally hate the dreaded Yankees.
It took the Dodgers a while, but in 1956, they finally beat the dreaded Yankees in the World Series. And it was the one and only World Series championship for the borough of Brooklyn. And, two years later, the Dodgers and the cross-town rival New York Giants moved west to Los Angeles and San Francisco, respectively.
Anyhow, I am going to go with the Phillies in six games.
Yes, the Yankees are the best team that money can buy, but I saw a lot of real grit in these Phillies when they played my beloved Dodgers.
And I think Philly Grit will defeat the glitz of the Bronx Bombers.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Terrific! CNN Can Not Even Beat HLN
To be the trailblazer of a concept, 24-hour television news, and to be at the bottom of the barrel must be humiliating for CNN. But, they are trying to put a good face on it.
After all, CNN started as the only dog on the block. Then they decided to spin off and start a faster pace network, Headline News, now HLN. Then came along NBC, trying mightily to find its news presence on cable television. It had to eventually reinvent itself and it did, becoming MSNBC. But, in 1996, an upstart came along and has now changed the face of cable television news. And that would be the Fox News Channel.
After years of being the unchallenged leader in cable news, the upstart Fox News Channel became the number one cable news network in less than 10 years and on fewer cable and satellite systems. But worse, it is now being beaten by a network that they started, HLN.
The problem is that while CNN touts itself as a news network, it is not any different than what they criticize Fox News Channel as. A partisan network.
After all, it was a CNN "reporter" that was shocked, shocked I tell you, that Chicago did not make it past the first round of voting for the 2016 Summer Olympic games. And who can forget the gal that mocked the Tea Party protesters while "reporting". Those are but two obvious examples of a supposed serious news network pontificating rather than reporting. For the record, Fox News Channel does engage in debate shows, led by Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and Greta Van Sustren. But all their straight news shows are just that. News.
And because Fox News Channel dares to report on stories that CNN just lets languish, it becomes a credible news organization. Maybe not to the Dear Leader, President Obama, but to those that watch it.
One way that CNN can possibly reach beyond it fourth-place is to have a real prime time lineup.
Lets face it, they can not keep Larry King alive forever. So, get in with some hosts and have similar shows as Fox News Channel or MSNBC. After all, it was CNN that gave us the great show Crossfire. And the weekend show The Capital Gang. These are shows that worked. And can work again if CNN would give it a shot.
Sometimes, it takes going back to the future, so to speak, to get back on top. Whatever CNN is not doing is clearly not working.
But I rather enjoy seeing CNN at the bottom of the heap. It shows what happens when arrogance takes a front seat and success is ignored.
At some point, CNN is going to have to wake up and find a better formula if they want to get back in competition with Fox News Channel and MSNBC.
But in the mean time, it is great to see that the spinoff network, HLN, is beating CNN.
Terrific!
After all, CNN started as the only dog on the block. Then they decided to spin off and start a faster pace network, Headline News, now HLN. Then came along NBC, trying mightily to find its news presence on cable television. It had to eventually reinvent itself and it did, becoming MSNBC. But, in 1996, an upstart came along and has now changed the face of cable television news. And that would be the Fox News Channel.
After years of being the unchallenged leader in cable news, the upstart Fox News Channel became the number one cable news network in less than 10 years and on fewer cable and satellite systems. But worse, it is now being beaten by a network that they started, HLN.
The problem is that while CNN touts itself as a news network, it is not any different than what they criticize Fox News Channel as. A partisan network.
After all, it was a CNN "reporter" that was shocked, shocked I tell you, that Chicago did not make it past the first round of voting for the 2016 Summer Olympic games. And who can forget the gal that mocked the Tea Party protesters while "reporting". Those are but two obvious examples of a supposed serious news network pontificating rather than reporting. For the record, Fox News Channel does engage in debate shows, led by Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and Greta Van Sustren. But all their straight news shows are just that. News.
And because Fox News Channel dares to report on stories that CNN just lets languish, it becomes a credible news organization. Maybe not to the Dear Leader, President Obama, but to those that watch it.
One way that CNN can possibly reach beyond it fourth-place is to have a real prime time lineup.
Lets face it, they can not keep Larry King alive forever. So, get in with some hosts and have similar shows as Fox News Channel or MSNBC. After all, it was CNN that gave us the great show Crossfire. And the weekend show The Capital Gang. These are shows that worked. And can work again if CNN would give it a shot.
Sometimes, it takes going back to the future, so to speak, to get back on top. Whatever CNN is not doing is clearly not working.
But I rather enjoy seeing CNN at the bottom of the heap. It shows what happens when arrogance takes a front seat and success is ignored.
At some point, CNN is going to have to wake up and find a better formula if they want to get back in competition with Fox News Channel and MSNBC.
But in the mean time, it is great to see that the spinoff network, HLN, is beating CNN.
Terrific!
David Harmer For Congress In The California 10th
Because the focus has been on the barn burner of a race in the New York state 23rd congressional district, there is another race here in California that merits attention and maybe a huge steal for the Republicans.
It is the race in the California 10th congressional district.
It is another replacement race to succeed Ellen Tauscher, appointed by the Dear Leader, President Obama to be the Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security. And that is much like the New York state 23rd as it is a replacement race for John McHugh, appointed Army Secretary by the Dear Leader, President Obama.
The Democrats are running warhorse and current California Lt. Governor John Garamendi. He is always trolling for the next rung on the election ladder. But, Mr. Garamendi realizes that this is probably his best chance to continue in elected office.
Mr. Garamendi is being opposed by David Harmer, the Republican.
The contrasts could not be greater between these two men.
Mr. Garamendi is running on the usual laundry list of Democrat issues. Interestingly, so-called health care "reform" is not at the top of Mr. Garamendi's issue list. Number one is education. And therin lies the problem. It is not and should never have been the federal government's job to fund and set education standards. Health care rank forth on the laundry list. But one that sounds like it came straight out of the Mainline Protestant Christian handbook is "social justice". It is the new cause du jour for the Democrat party.
Mr. Harmer on the other hand has a laundry list of his own. And, unlike Mr. Garamendi, Mr. Harmer gets to the heart of the matter in priority number one. Bailouts, Deficits and the National Debt. Mr. Harmer hits on the issue that has most Americans anxious in these times. Now Mr. Harmer knows that he must address similar issues that Mr. Garamendi does. But, Mr. Harmer is unapologetic about where he stands on education and so-called health care "reform".
Now, unlike Doug Hoffman in New York state, the California 10th is not all that friendly to Republicans. But, this is not a regular off-year election.
In the special election primary, something the New York state Republicans need to consider next time around, Mr. Harmer came within five percentage points of being the top vote getter. In a special election of this nature in California, all candidates are put on one ballot, regardless of party. If any candidate receives 50% plus one, there is no next round. That is the winner. But the well-known Mr. Garamendi only mustered 26% compared to Mr. Harmer at 21%. But, special elections always hinge on turnout. And, without a doubt, even in such a Democrat district, Republicans will be energized. And maybe able to sway just enough independents and a few Democrats to send a message to Washington. The history of this district is one that in recent elections have favored the Democrat party. Mrs. Tauscher won the last election with 65% of the vote.
But, the Dear Leader, President Obama, will not be on this ballot. But his policies will. And even in this solid Democrat congressional district, there is a chance that a Republican can pull off a huge upset. And it would be a huge upset. If Mr. Harmer were to win, he would be target number one for Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats. Period.
Here is one way to help. Get David Harmer some much needed cash. If you are in California, just show up and volunteer to help. And, this is of the utmost importance. Send a note to the National Republican Congressional Committee and its chair Pete Sessions. Tell them to stop wasting time and money on a sure loser, Dede Scozzafava, and instead fork some cash here in California to get some momentum to make an upset a real possibility. The fact that the NRCC is going to spend up to $300,000 to try to make a third-place loser respectable and not much to a candidate that has a real upset in his sights in unconsiable. And if you read the link about the NRCC, The Weekly Standard's John McCormick (Dede Scozzafava's favorite reporter!) makes the case that at least some of that money would be better spent in helping Mr. Harmer, who has a real shot at an upset.
Good people of the California 10th congressional district, I ask that you vote for David Harmer for congress. I know that your habits are more Democrat leaning, but in this case I ask that you make an exception and send a message to the Democrat congress and the Dear Leader, President Obama. We may kind of sort of like you, but we are sending Mr. Harmer as a trust, but verify congressman.
It is the race in the California 10th congressional district.
It is another replacement race to succeed Ellen Tauscher, appointed by the Dear Leader, President Obama to be the Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security. And that is much like the New York state 23rd as it is a replacement race for John McHugh, appointed Army Secretary by the Dear Leader, President Obama.
The Democrats are running warhorse and current California Lt. Governor John Garamendi. He is always trolling for the next rung on the election ladder. But, Mr. Garamendi realizes that this is probably his best chance to continue in elected office.
Mr. Garamendi is being opposed by David Harmer, the Republican.
The contrasts could not be greater between these two men.
Mr. Garamendi is running on the usual laundry list of Democrat issues. Interestingly, so-called health care "reform" is not at the top of Mr. Garamendi's issue list. Number one is education. And therin lies the problem. It is not and should never have been the federal government's job to fund and set education standards. Health care rank forth on the laundry list. But one that sounds like it came straight out of the Mainline Protestant Christian handbook is "social justice". It is the new cause du jour for the Democrat party.
Mr. Harmer on the other hand has a laundry list of his own. And, unlike Mr. Garamendi, Mr. Harmer gets to the heart of the matter in priority number one. Bailouts, Deficits and the National Debt. Mr. Harmer hits on the issue that has most Americans anxious in these times. Now Mr. Harmer knows that he must address similar issues that Mr. Garamendi does. But, Mr. Harmer is unapologetic about where he stands on education and so-called health care "reform".
Now, unlike Doug Hoffman in New York state, the California 10th is not all that friendly to Republicans. But, this is not a regular off-year election.
In the special election primary, something the New York state Republicans need to consider next time around, Mr. Harmer came within five percentage points of being the top vote getter. In a special election of this nature in California, all candidates are put on one ballot, regardless of party. If any candidate receives 50% plus one, there is no next round. That is the winner. But the well-known Mr. Garamendi only mustered 26% compared to Mr. Harmer at 21%. But, special elections always hinge on turnout. And, without a doubt, even in such a Democrat district, Republicans will be energized. And maybe able to sway just enough independents and a few Democrats to send a message to Washington. The history of this district is one that in recent elections have favored the Democrat party. Mrs. Tauscher won the last election with 65% of the vote.
But, the Dear Leader, President Obama, will not be on this ballot. But his policies will. And even in this solid Democrat congressional district, there is a chance that a Republican can pull off a huge upset. And it would be a huge upset. If Mr. Harmer were to win, he would be target number one for Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats. Period.
Here is one way to help. Get David Harmer some much needed cash. If you are in California, just show up and volunteer to help. And, this is of the utmost importance. Send a note to the National Republican Congressional Committee and its chair Pete Sessions. Tell them to stop wasting time and money on a sure loser, Dede Scozzafava, and instead fork some cash here in California to get some momentum to make an upset a real possibility. The fact that the NRCC is going to spend up to $300,000 to try to make a third-place loser respectable and not much to a candidate that has a real upset in his sights in unconsiable. And if you read the link about the NRCC, The Weekly Standard's John McCormick (Dede Scozzafava's favorite reporter!) makes the case that at least some of that money would be better spent in helping Mr. Harmer, who has a real shot at an upset.
Good people of the California 10th congressional district, I ask that you vote for David Harmer for congress. I know that your habits are more Democrat leaning, but in this case I ask that you make an exception and send a message to the Democrat congress and the Dear Leader, President Obama. We may kind of sort of like you, but we are sending Mr. Harmer as a trust, but verify congressman.
Doug Hoffman News Getting Better And Better
Yes, the news keeps looking up for the up-start Conservative Party candidate for the New York state 23rd congressional seat. Doug Hoffman actually leads in one poll. And Mr. Hoffman is getting endorsement after endorsement from many prominent conservatives and Republicans. The latest big-name endorsement is that of Minnesota Republican governor Tim Pawlenty.
Now, as far as the poll numbers, there are caveats.
One is that the sample is rather small. About 400 likely voters. But, it may be enough to get the Democrats in a lather as they are now running ads against Mr. Hoffman and not the anointed Republican candidate, Dede Scozzafaza.
Secondly, it should not be any sign for conservatives and Republicans opposed to anointed candidates to rest now. It only means that Mr. Hoffman is going to need more cash to get the message out to the voters of the New York state 23rd.
But, adding Gov. Pawlenty's name along with former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, Fred Thompson, Rick Santorum, Steve Forbes and Dick Armey and it is a reservoir of support that Mr. Hoffman needs to get over the finish line.
All this means that the Big Mo' is in the direction of Mr. Hoffman. The Democrat nominee, Bill Owens, is more or less in a holding pattern, trying to run out the clock. And the Republican anointed candidate? What is her name? Oh, yes! Dede Scozzafava.
And if anyone really thinks that the GOP anointed candidate, Mrs. Scozzafava is still in this race, read all the coverage over at The Other McCain. It includes spot on local, on the scene reporting.
There is one other aspect of this that needs to be exploited by the Hoffman campaign. That is that Mr. Hoffman fits the district much better than Mrs. Scozzafava and light years ahead of the Democrat, Mr. Owens.
The American Conservative Union gives the former congressman, John McHugh, a lifetime rating of 72% in 16 years as the representative from the New York state 23rd. There is no question that on issue after issue that Mr. McHugh ran and won on, Mr. Hoffman is the natural heir. Not a left of center Republican as Mrs. Scozzafava. And Mr. Owens? All Mr. Hoffman has to do is link Mr. Owens to the increasingly unpopular Dear Leader, President Obama.
The news is great for Doug Hoffman. And he needs our support more than ever. Give as much as you can to help Mr. Hoffman get the message out there and to win the New York state 23rd.
Now, as far as the poll numbers, there are caveats.
One is that the sample is rather small. About 400 likely voters. But, it may be enough to get the Democrats in a lather as they are now running ads against Mr. Hoffman and not the anointed Republican candidate, Dede Scozzafaza.
Secondly, it should not be any sign for conservatives and Republicans opposed to anointed candidates to rest now. It only means that Mr. Hoffman is going to need more cash to get the message out to the voters of the New York state 23rd.
But, adding Gov. Pawlenty's name along with former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, Fred Thompson, Rick Santorum, Steve Forbes and Dick Armey and it is a reservoir of support that Mr. Hoffman needs to get over the finish line.
All this means that the Big Mo' is in the direction of Mr. Hoffman. The Democrat nominee, Bill Owens, is more or less in a holding pattern, trying to run out the clock. And the Republican anointed candidate? What is her name? Oh, yes! Dede Scozzafava.
And if anyone really thinks that the GOP anointed candidate, Mrs. Scozzafava is still in this race, read all the coverage over at The Other McCain. It includes spot on local, on the scene reporting.
There is one other aspect of this that needs to be exploited by the Hoffman campaign. That is that Mr. Hoffman fits the district much better than Mrs. Scozzafava and light years ahead of the Democrat, Mr. Owens.
The American Conservative Union gives the former congressman, John McHugh, a lifetime rating of 72% in 16 years as the representative from the New York state 23rd. There is no question that on issue after issue that Mr. McHugh ran and won on, Mr. Hoffman is the natural heir. Not a left of center Republican as Mrs. Scozzafava. And Mr. Owens? All Mr. Hoffman has to do is link Mr. Owens to the increasingly unpopular Dear Leader, President Obama.
The news is great for Doug Hoffman. And he needs our support more than ever. Give as much as you can to help Mr. Hoffman get the message out there and to win the New York state 23rd.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Doug Hoffman For New York State 23rd Congressional District
This is one of the easiest endorsements your humble blogger can make because once again, a New York Republican party appoints a liberal to win a moderate congressional district while a real Republican, and conservative, may pull off a real upset.
I am formally endorsing Doug Hoffman for the New York state 23rd congressional election on October 24 over the "Republican" Dede Scozzafava.
Mr. Hoffman is running on the New York state Conservative party banner and is at least even with the "Republican" Mrs. Scozzafava. And yes, the Democrat, Bill Owens, is in the lead.
But, what the local Republican party did in forcing the liberal Mrs. Scozzafava on the Republican party is unconsiable and a reason, once again, to have a mechanism to actually have a voting nomination process. But, it is New York state and like everything else in the state, it barely runs half-assed.
Eleven county Republican chairs agreed to put up Mrs. Scozzafava for the GOP. Mr. Hoffman appearantly came in second in the "race" to replace now Army Secretary John Mc Hugh. And, not unlike the last time the insiders put up their favorite candidate, they lost a clear Republican-leaning seat that the Democrats kept when Kristen Gillibrand was appointed to the senate.
Remember Jim Tedisco?
Mr. Tedisco was the New York state Republican that ran against Democrat Scott Murphy for Mrs. Gillibrand's congressional seat. Mr. Tedisco was chosen by the New York Republican party and not unlike Mrs. Scozzafava, ran a poor campaign and Mr. Murphy is now the Democrat replacement for Mrs. Gillibrand's seat.
The New York state GOP is truly a glutton for punishment. It is as if they are deliberately trying to compete with the Massachusetts GOP for state-wide irrelevancy.
In a congressional district clearly conservative, why does a bunch of Republican good ol' boys pick a "Republican" that is to the left of the Democrat challenger? Can not answer that one. But, because Mr. Hoffman has done the honorable thing and taken the Conservative party banner, he has a real shot at winning this race. And sending a shot across the bow of the New York state Republican party.
On the issues, here is a snap-shot of Mr. Hoffman.
* Is against the so-called economic "stimulus" that the Dear Leader, President Obama, and congressional Democrats foisted upon the American people.
* Is against the moronic Crap and Trade bill that has been slithering around the congress.
* Is pro-life.
* Is not for same-sex marriage.
* Opposes the so-called health-care "reform" working its way through congress.
* Opposes tax-hikes to bridge the federal budget deficit.
Again, this is a snap-shot and details are on Mr. Hoffman's website.
In fact, Mrs. Scozzafava is opposite on all the issues from Mr. Hoffman.
Which leads to the obvious question.
Is not a vote for Dede Scozzafava the same as that of the Democrat Bill Owens?
Of course it is.
A vote for Doug Hoffman is a vote to send a conservative to congress.
And in this case, a conservative is much more important than a Republican.
Therefore, I urge all New York 23rd congressional district voters to vote for Doug Hoffman, Conservative for congress.
I am formally endorsing Doug Hoffman for the New York state 23rd congressional election on October 24 over the "Republican" Dede Scozzafava.
Mr. Hoffman is running on the New York state Conservative party banner and is at least even with the "Republican" Mrs. Scozzafava. And yes, the Democrat, Bill Owens, is in the lead.
But, what the local Republican party did in forcing the liberal Mrs. Scozzafava on the Republican party is unconsiable and a reason, once again, to have a mechanism to actually have a voting nomination process. But, it is New York state and like everything else in the state, it barely runs half-assed.
Eleven county Republican chairs agreed to put up Mrs. Scozzafava for the GOP. Mr. Hoffman appearantly came in second in the "race" to replace now Army Secretary John Mc Hugh. And, not unlike the last time the insiders put up their favorite candidate, they lost a clear Republican-leaning seat that the Democrats kept when Kristen Gillibrand was appointed to the senate.
Remember Jim Tedisco?
Mr. Tedisco was the New York state Republican that ran against Democrat Scott Murphy for Mrs. Gillibrand's congressional seat. Mr. Tedisco was chosen by the New York Republican party and not unlike Mrs. Scozzafava, ran a poor campaign and Mr. Murphy is now the Democrat replacement for Mrs. Gillibrand's seat.
The New York state GOP is truly a glutton for punishment. It is as if they are deliberately trying to compete with the Massachusetts GOP for state-wide irrelevancy.
In a congressional district clearly conservative, why does a bunch of Republican good ol' boys pick a "Republican" that is to the left of the Democrat challenger? Can not answer that one. But, because Mr. Hoffman has done the honorable thing and taken the Conservative party banner, he has a real shot at winning this race. And sending a shot across the bow of the New York state Republican party.
On the issues, here is a snap-shot of Mr. Hoffman.
* Is against the so-called economic "stimulus" that the Dear Leader, President Obama, and congressional Democrats foisted upon the American people.
* Is against the moronic Crap and Trade bill that has been slithering around the congress.
* Is pro-life.
* Is not for same-sex marriage.
* Opposes the so-called health-care "reform" working its way through congress.
* Opposes tax-hikes to bridge the federal budget deficit.
Again, this is a snap-shot and details are on Mr. Hoffman's website.
In fact, Mrs. Scozzafava is opposite on all the issues from Mr. Hoffman.
Which leads to the obvious question.
Is not a vote for Dede Scozzafava the same as that of the Democrat Bill Owens?
Of course it is.
A vote for Doug Hoffman is a vote to send a conservative to congress.
And in this case, a conservative is much more important than a Republican.
Therefore, I urge all New York 23rd congressional district voters to vote for Doug Hoffman, Conservative for congress.
Some Of The Dear Leader's More Pressing Matters As Afghanistan Withers
Came across this interesting post from Jim Geraghty over at The Campaign Spot and it is rather amusing that the Dear Leader, President Obama, seems to have a lot of time for many activities. But not to respond to Gen. Stanley Mc Chrystal and his request for 40,000 additional troops in the Afghanistan theatre in the War Against Islamofacsist Terror.
Now, I agree that some of the activities are important as the Dear Leader, President Obama, must fulfill the duties of not just being commander-in-chief, but as head of state.
But, five Democrat party fundraisers?!
And flying over to Copenhagen, Denmark, to get America's face bitch-slapped in Chicago's quest for the 2016 Summer Olympics?!
The funny thing is that it appears that there is no hurry to come to a decision on this matter.
But, by golly, we damned well better hurry up, ready, fire, aim, and get the health care delivery in the United States under government control.
While many more American soldiers continue to give their lives in a war that seems to be withering, somehow this is a smart use of the Dear Leader, President Obama's, so-called "smart power".
At the very least, the Dear Leader should make public how serious he takes the war in the Afghan theatre. He needs to show more meetings with the military that is on the ground and involved in the day-to-day in the Afghan theatre. And, the Dear Leader, President Obama, needs to be meeting more with Gen. Mc Chrystal to determine if 40,000 more troops is what is really needed to blunt the resurgence of the Taliban.
Oh wait, I am sorry, but we have the remember that there are "moderate" Taliban that may even be brought into government in Afghanistan.
Really?!
The Dear Leader, President Obama, needs to get the hell out of campaign mode and man up to being the commander-in-chief. Stop with the fundraising. Get to it as to what the policy will be in the Afghan theatre. Get a number of troops that will be needed and what will the long-term strategy be in Afghanistan.
Maybe the Dear Leader, President Obama, is asking the Stanley Cup champion Pittsburgh Penguins for some advice on what to do in Afghanistan.
Now, I agree that some of the activities are important as the Dear Leader, President Obama, must fulfill the duties of not just being commander-in-chief, but as head of state.
But, five Democrat party fundraisers?!
And flying over to Copenhagen, Denmark, to get America's face bitch-slapped in Chicago's quest for the 2016 Summer Olympics?!
The funny thing is that it appears that there is no hurry to come to a decision on this matter.
But, by golly, we damned well better hurry up, ready, fire, aim, and get the health care delivery in the United States under government control.
While many more American soldiers continue to give their lives in a war that seems to be withering, somehow this is a smart use of the Dear Leader, President Obama's, so-called "smart power".
At the very least, the Dear Leader should make public how serious he takes the war in the Afghan theatre. He needs to show more meetings with the military that is on the ground and involved in the day-to-day in the Afghan theatre. And, the Dear Leader, President Obama, needs to be meeting more with Gen. Mc Chrystal to determine if 40,000 more troops is what is really needed to blunt the resurgence of the Taliban.
Oh wait, I am sorry, but we have the remember that there are "moderate" Taliban that may even be brought into government in Afghanistan.
Really?!
The Dear Leader, President Obama, needs to get the hell out of campaign mode and man up to being the commander-in-chief. Stop with the fundraising. Get to it as to what the policy will be in the Afghan theatre. Get a number of troops that will be needed and what will the long-term strategy be in Afghanistan.
Maybe the Dear Leader, President Obama, is asking the Stanley Cup champion Pittsburgh Penguins for some advice on what to do in Afghanistan.
Bakc In The Saddle
Ahh, after a long weekend Christian retreat-more on that later-it time to get back to the computer and, as usual, there is a lot to pontificate about!
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Do-It-Yourself Teleprompter-What Would The Dear Leader Do?
This story is about a television station in the Washington, D. C. area that is going to have their on-air news anchors operate the teleprompters themselves.
This leads to the obvious question.
What would the Dear Leader, President Obama, do if he had to read and operate his teleprompter?
HT: Drudge Report @ www.drudgereport.com
This leads to the obvious question.
What would the Dear Leader, President Obama, do if he had to read and operate his teleprompter?
HT: Drudge Report @ www.drudgereport.com
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Socialzed Medicine Passes Senate Hurdle
In the continuing attempt by congressional Democrats and the Dear Leader, President Obama, to socialize medicine and make it bad for all, a key senate vote occurred today and to no one's surprise, it passed.
The so-called Baucus Bill, an $840,000,000,000 boondoggle that will force Americans to buy health insurance made it out of the Senate Finance Committee on a 14-9 vote.
One senator, Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), had to the courage to vote no. It is not that he is against socializing one-sixth of the American economy. But he has the wisdom to realize that now, in the midst of crushing recession, may not be a great time to propose such a scam.
But, as one givith, one taketh and our greatest RINO in the senate, Olympia Snowe (RINO-Maine), voted for the scam. Oh, she gave a weak qualifier.
"I can't vote for a public option."
But, the dear RINO will vote for a scam that will, in the end, make the public option, socialized medicine, a reality.
The approach being taken by Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) is to create a labyrinth that makes it impossible to figure out whether or not one will be able to keep the health insurance that they have. Most through their employers. And again, it depends on huge cuts to Medicare. Cuts that the so-called American Association of Retired Persons, aka AARP, will benefit from. Oh, darn, what Sen. Baucus won't tell is that AARP backs this legislation because they sell, ta da, health insurance. Specifically, MediGap insurance. And, well, those dastardly Medicare cuts will by coinkidink help AARP sells it MediGap insurance.
Which leads back to Sen. Rino, er Snowe.
Once again, a wuss buckles under and throws logic under the bus and votes for something that is clearly a train wreck in the making.
I advise that those who are frustrated with those like Sen. Snowe, et al, should take a look at Not One Red Cent. Because while she is not up for re-election, there are other senate Republicans. And they should not look to Sen. Snowe for any guidance whatsoever. They need to get a back bone and stand up to this power grab by the Democrat party.
This is a big vote, but no where near the final vote.
Time for the Tea Party Express to start firing up the locomotive and get busy back to work on those who want to forfeit the future of this Great Land for alleged security now.
The so-called Baucus Bill, an $840,000,000,000 boondoggle that will force Americans to buy health insurance made it out of the Senate Finance Committee on a 14-9 vote.
One senator, Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), had to the courage to vote no. It is not that he is against socializing one-sixth of the American economy. But he has the wisdom to realize that now, in the midst of crushing recession, may not be a great time to propose such a scam.
But, as one givith, one taketh and our greatest RINO in the senate, Olympia Snowe (RINO-Maine), voted for the scam. Oh, she gave a weak qualifier.
"I can't vote for a public option."
But, the dear RINO will vote for a scam that will, in the end, make the public option, socialized medicine, a reality.
The approach being taken by Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) is to create a labyrinth that makes it impossible to figure out whether or not one will be able to keep the health insurance that they have. Most through their employers. And again, it depends on huge cuts to Medicare. Cuts that the so-called American Association of Retired Persons, aka AARP, will benefit from. Oh, darn, what Sen. Baucus won't tell is that AARP backs this legislation because they sell, ta da, health insurance. Specifically, MediGap insurance. And, well, those dastardly Medicare cuts will by coinkidink help AARP sells it MediGap insurance.
Which leads back to Sen. Rino, er Snowe.
Once again, a wuss buckles under and throws logic under the bus and votes for something that is clearly a train wreck in the making.
I advise that those who are frustrated with those like Sen. Snowe, et al, should take a look at Not One Red Cent. Because while she is not up for re-election, there are other senate Republicans. And they should not look to Sen. Snowe for any guidance whatsoever. They need to get a back bone and stand up to this power grab by the Democrat party.
This is a big vote, but no where near the final vote.
Time for the Tea Party Express to start firing up the locomotive and get busy back to work on those who want to forfeit the future of this Great Land for alleged security now.
Rush Limbaugh And The National Fools, Er, Football League
It is pathetic that the commissioner of the National Football League, Roger Goodell, would be so easily manipulated by two of the great race hucksters of our time. But, it appears that Mr. Goodell is by his initial opposition to a group that includes radio talker Rush Limbaugh wanting to buy the beleaguered St. Louis Lambs, er Rams NFL entry.
I think I would like to focus on this little ditty from Mr. Goodell:
"I've said many times before we're all held to a high standard here."
Sure, Roger!
Yes, like allowing a convicted criminal, Michael Vick, to return to playing in the National Football League.
Like allowing owners to move their teams in the middle of the night, not so much as a warning. This is in reference to Robert Irsay, who moved the Baltimore Colts to Indianapolis. And Art Modell who took the beloved Cleveland Browns off to Baltimore in similar fashion.
Speaking of the new incarnation of the Browns, how about their trade of Braylon Edwards to the New York Jets? Oh, forgot to mention that Mr. Edwards is under investigation for punching a man outside of a nightclub?
And there is Plaxico the Straight Shooter, Burris. What a dolt!
Yes, Roger, ya' all are held to such a high standard, right?!
While Mr. Goodell denies that he has knowledge of the pressure being put on by Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, there is no question that the two worst race hucksters of the era are ramping it up and making some NFL owners uncomfortable with the thought that Rush Limbaugh will potentially have a piece of an NFL team.
In classic "drive-by" form, one of the NFL's notorious owners, Jim Irsay, son of Robert, said that he will vote against a group that Mr. Limbaugh is part of. Here is some of the "reasoning":
"I would not be in favor of voting for him," Irsay said. "I could ask Tony Dungy, Jim Caldwell, Dwight Freeney and consult with them, but there have been comments that have been made that have been inappropriate, incendiary and insensitive. It's bigger than football. We have to watch the words that we say.... Sometimes privileges in life do get lost. I would not feel comfortable.
"I've met Rush only once and he seemed like a nice guy. But when you see the comments that are out there, I would not be comfortable. I myself couldn't be in favor of voting for him.... We've got to watch our words in this world and our thoughts because they can do damage."
Yes, so can a creep like Michael Vick, who is getting a hero's welcome in Philadelphia, right?
Now, there are non-attributal quotes that have been alleged to been said by Mr. Limbaugh. The actual and most famous, I am sorry to write, was correct.
In 2003, Limbaugh resigned from ESPN after making controversial comments about McNabb, the quarterback for the Philadelphia Eagles. Limbaugh said on the network's studio show that "the media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well. There is a little hope invested in McNabb, and he got a lot of credit for the performance of this team that he didn't deserve. The defense carried this team."
At the time, Mr. McNabb was not doing all that well. And, as I have noted, many in the sports media are left of center. One can point to the worst of this class, the always overrated and not all that knowledgeable Keith Olberman. And yes, many a writer spends a helluva lot of time worrying about race. It is a favorite past time of the left in this nation. And, Mr. Limbaugh called them out on it.
Would I have said the same thing if I was in Mr. Limbaugh's position? No, I would not have used a spot at ESPN for clear social commentary. He could have done that on the radio show. But, he did not back down nor should have. But, he realized that maybe he and ESPN were not a good fit.
But, turn down someone who would have the cash to buy a team because he actually had the testicles to, oh how I love to write this, speak truth to power? Only the NFL would be so moronic to potentially do that.
Or how about DeMaurice Smith, the executive director of the NFL Players Association. He said that he has "reservations" in a memo circulated to player on the union's executive committee.
Why? Because Mr. Limbaugh is not a panty-waist like so many other people now a days? Hmm, maybe the real worry is that Mr. Limbaugh would not be so easy to roll over when the player's union puts pressure in renegotiating a contract down the road.
The fact that the NFL commissioner is all but laying down a marker against the bid of Mr. Limbaugh and David Checketts, owner of the St. Louis Blues hockey team shows how easily intimidated these people are. OOOOH! Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton raise their bloody hands in opposition and made up quotes circulate about alleged quotes made by Mr. Limbaugh and Mr. Goodell raises the white flag. Oops! Bad choice of words. Sorry, the surrender flag.
That is why Mr. Goodell is the leader of not the National Football League but the National Fool's League.
I think I would like to focus on this little ditty from Mr. Goodell:
"I've said many times before we're all held to a high standard here."
Sure, Roger!
Yes, like allowing a convicted criminal, Michael Vick, to return to playing in the National Football League.
Like allowing owners to move their teams in the middle of the night, not so much as a warning. This is in reference to Robert Irsay, who moved the Baltimore Colts to Indianapolis. And Art Modell who took the beloved Cleveland Browns off to Baltimore in similar fashion.
Speaking of the new incarnation of the Browns, how about their trade of Braylon Edwards to the New York Jets? Oh, forgot to mention that Mr. Edwards is under investigation for punching a man outside of a nightclub?
And there is Plaxico the Straight Shooter, Burris. What a dolt!
Yes, Roger, ya' all are held to such a high standard, right?!
While Mr. Goodell denies that he has knowledge of the pressure being put on by Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, there is no question that the two worst race hucksters of the era are ramping it up and making some NFL owners uncomfortable with the thought that Rush Limbaugh will potentially have a piece of an NFL team.
In classic "drive-by" form, one of the NFL's notorious owners, Jim Irsay, son of Robert, said that he will vote against a group that Mr. Limbaugh is part of. Here is some of the "reasoning":
"I would not be in favor of voting for him," Irsay said. "I could ask Tony Dungy, Jim Caldwell, Dwight Freeney and consult with them, but there have been comments that have been made that have been inappropriate, incendiary and insensitive. It's bigger than football. We have to watch the words that we say.... Sometimes privileges in life do get lost. I would not feel comfortable.
"I've met Rush only once and he seemed like a nice guy. But when you see the comments that are out there, I would not be comfortable. I myself couldn't be in favor of voting for him.... We've got to watch our words in this world and our thoughts because they can do damage."
Yes, so can a creep like Michael Vick, who is getting a hero's welcome in Philadelphia, right?
Now, there are non-attributal quotes that have been alleged to been said by Mr. Limbaugh. The actual and most famous, I am sorry to write, was correct.
In 2003, Limbaugh resigned from ESPN after making controversial comments about McNabb, the quarterback for the Philadelphia Eagles. Limbaugh said on the network's studio show that "the media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well. There is a little hope invested in McNabb, and he got a lot of credit for the performance of this team that he didn't deserve. The defense carried this team."
At the time, Mr. McNabb was not doing all that well. And, as I have noted, many in the sports media are left of center. One can point to the worst of this class, the always overrated and not all that knowledgeable Keith Olberman. And yes, many a writer spends a helluva lot of time worrying about race. It is a favorite past time of the left in this nation. And, Mr. Limbaugh called them out on it.
Would I have said the same thing if I was in Mr. Limbaugh's position? No, I would not have used a spot at ESPN for clear social commentary. He could have done that on the radio show. But, he did not back down nor should have. But, he realized that maybe he and ESPN were not a good fit.
But, turn down someone who would have the cash to buy a team because he actually had the testicles to, oh how I love to write this, speak truth to power? Only the NFL would be so moronic to potentially do that.
Or how about DeMaurice Smith, the executive director of the NFL Players Association. He said that he has "reservations" in a memo circulated to player on the union's executive committee.
Why? Because Mr. Limbaugh is not a panty-waist like so many other people now a days? Hmm, maybe the real worry is that Mr. Limbaugh would not be so easy to roll over when the player's union puts pressure in renegotiating a contract down the road.
The fact that the NFL commissioner is all but laying down a marker against the bid of Mr. Limbaugh and David Checketts, owner of the St. Louis Blues hockey team shows how easily intimidated these people are. OOOOH! Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton raise their bloody hands in opposition and made up quotes circulate about alleged quotes made by Mr. Limbaugh and Mr. Goodell raises the white flag. Oops! Bad choice of words. Sorry, the surrender flag.
That is why Mr. Goodell is the leader of not the National Football League but the National Fool's League.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Pawlenty Gaining McCain "Strategists"-What Can Go Wrong?!
In a disturbing sign that Minnesota Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty is serious about running for president, he is making his first mistake. Seeking "strategists" from the beleaguered campaign of Republican 2008 nominee, Sen. John "F--- You" McCain.
Ok, there is the fact that Gov. Pawlenty made the mistake of being one of the earliest supporters of Sen. "F--- You" McCain and his quest for the White House. But, does that mean that he should be seeking those that clearly were a problem to the senior Solon from Arizona?
There are the usual suspects. On economics, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, and wait and see who else lurks in the Pawlenty corner.
My guess is that this roils the Republican grass roots. And hurts Gov. Pawlenty among this group that he will desperately needs to gain the GOP presidential nod in 2012.
Allahpundit asks, and I am not certain if this is sarcasm, but why former presidential candidate Mitt Romney does not go after these people.
Because Mr. Romney knows losers when he sees them.
And so does the rest of the potential field in 2012.
The last thing that the Republican party needs is any memories of how wonderful Team McCain was. Because of their tactical and just plain blunders, Mr. McCain is still Sen. "F--- You" McCain. Well some of the blame was the candidate himself.
And, if Gov. Pawlenty wants to pattern himself after Sen. "F--- You" McCain, he might as well not enter the race.
Here is hoping that Gov. Pawlenty has the good sense to rid himself of this cancer before his campaign gets off the ground.
Ok, there is the fact that Gov. Pawlenty made the mistake of being one of the earliest supporters of Sen. "F--- You" McCain and his quest for the White House. But, does that mean that he should be seeking those that clearly were a problem to the senior Solon from Arizona?
There are the usual suspects. On economics, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, and wait and see who else lurks in the Pawlenty corner.
My guess is that this roils the Republican grass roots. And hurts Gov. Pawlenty among this group that he will desperately needs to gain the GOP presidential nod in 2012.
Allahpundit asks, and I am not certain if this is sarcasm, but why former presidential candidate Mitt Romney does not go after these people.
Because Mr. Romney knows losers when he sees them.
And so does the rest of the potential field in 2012.
The last thing that the Republican party needs is any memories of how wonderful Team McCain was. Because of their tactical and just plain blunders, Mr. McCain is still Sen. "F--- You" McCain. Well some of the blame was the candidate himself.
And, if Gov. Pawlenty wants to pattern himself after Sen. "F--- You" McCain, he might as well not enter the race.
Here is hoping that Gov. Pawlenty has the good sense to rid himself of this cancer before his campaign gets off the ground.
Sunday, October 11, 2009
The Los Angeles Episcopal Diocese Ill-Gotten Gain
Some time tomorrow, the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles will receive the keys of St. Luke's In-The-Mountains Anglican church. And the name will revert to St. Luke's In-The-Mountains Episcopal church. And the diocese will have a Pyrrhic victory over one of four churches that left the Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Los Angeles over the drift of the church as a whole.
Yes, in the mainstream media, you will read that the reason that St. Luke's, St David's in North Hollywood, All Saints in Long Beach and St. James in Newport Beach left the Episcopal Church is over the ordination of the openly gay bishop, Vicki Gene Robinson in the Diocese of New Hampshire. And there is some truth to it. But it is not nearly the only reason that these churches have left the denomination.
The Episcopal Church in general seems to be on a Jihad of any point of view that holds to the three legs of Anglican theology. Scripture, Tradition and Reason. It appears that much of the clerical and lay leadership are relying solely on the Reason leg. Because in many cases, Scripture and Tradition are thrown out the window.
An example is here in Los Angeles.
The diocesan bishop, The Rt. Rev. J. Jon Bruno recently apologized for religious discrimination and attempts to convert Hindus. Now, apologizing for religious discrimination is totally acceptable and maybe a correct aspect of the message of reconciliation. But, what followed is totally incompatible with a traditional understanding of Christianity. And the sacrament of Holy Communion in particular. From the linked article:
All were invited to Holy Communion, after the Episcopal celebrant elevated a tray of consecrated Indian bread, and deacons raised wine-filled chalices.
In respect to Hindu tradition, a tray of flowers was also presented. Christians and Hindus lined up for communion, but since Orthodox Hindus shun alcohol, they consumed only the bread.
During the service, the two faiths also blended practices during the handling of an icon of Jesus.
The Rev. Karen MacQueen, an associate priest at St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Pomona, who was the celebrant, carried the icon, a large painted image, during the procession. She placed it before the altar.
The Diocese of Los Angeles' ecumenical and interfaith officer called the service unprecedented for the Episcopal Church. American canon law forbids the distribution of the consecrated elements to the un-baptized, but no sanctions have been levied on those bishops and clergy who regularly violate these rules.
Yea, no kidding about the violating of clear rules as to who can partake in the Holy Communion. Because it is one of the two great sacraments our church upholds (Baptism the other), one would think that a Christian bishop would uphold the basic tenant that a baptized Christian is the only ones that can partake in the Holy Communion.
Don't be silly! It is just some archaic rule. Come on, we have to be hip, with it. Who cares?
This is an example of what St. Luke's Anglican church was up against when it voted to break with the Los Angeles diocese and with the Episcopal Church.
There are many others. This example is just a recent one that has traditionalists reeling as the Episcopal Church continues to drive over the cliff. And those of us that remain are becoming increasingly aware that the church really does not want to know that we are a part of it.
So, while the diocese spent millions of dollars to regain a property, it is losing the battle of souls. It is losing the potential to spread the message of the Gospel to all parts of the world. After all, it is known as the Great Commission:
"Go ye therefore and teach all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" Matthew 28: 19
What the diocese message seems to be is that one, do not actually believe in anything traditional. It is not compatible with the new direction of the church. Two, do not even think that leaving the Episcopal Church and take the property with you. It does not matter that those that started the particular church may actually have wanted you to do what you did, in the name of believing in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Three, we will spend all our money if we have to to get it back.
No question, they did just that. And, next Sunday Bishop Bruno will lead a phony St. Luke's back into the diocesan fold. For how long is any one's guess. There is no way that the leadership will be able to gain enough members to be as well as it was when it left the Episcopal Church and prospered as an Anglican church. And, the dreaded money.
So, yes the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles gained back St. Luke's in La Crescenta. But at a price that will prove to be one not worth it in the long run.
Yes, in the mainstream media, you will read that the reason that St. Luke's, St David's in North Hollywood, All Saints in Long Beach and St. James in Newport Beach left the Episcopal Church is over the ordination of the openly gay bishop, Vicki Gene Robinson in the Diocese of New Hampshire. And there is some truth to it. But it is not nearly the only reason that these churches have left the denomination.
The Episcopal Church in general seems to be on a Jihad of any point of view that holds to the three legs of Anglican theology. Scripture, Tradition and Reason. It appears that much of the clerical and lay leadership are relying solely on the Reason leg. Because in many cases, Scripture and Tradition are thrown out the window.
An example is here in Los Angeles.
The diocesan bishop, The Rt. Rev. J. Jon Bruno recently apologized for religious discrimination and attempts to convert Hindus. Now, apologizing for religious discrimination is totally acceptable and maybe a correct aspect of the message of reconciliation. But, what followed is totally incompatible with a traditional understanding of Christianity. And the sacrament of Holy Communion in particular. From the linked article:
All were invited to Holy Communion, after the Episcopal celebrant elevated a tray of consecrated Indian bread, and deacons raised wine-filled chalices.
In respect to Hindu tradition, a tray of flowers was also presented. Christians and Hindus lined up for communion, but since Orthodox Hindus shun alcohol, they consumed only the bread.
During the service, the two faiths also blended practices during the handling of an icon of Jesus.
The Rev. Karen MacQueen, an associate priest at St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Pomona, who was the celebrant, carried the icon, a large painted image, during the procession. She placed it before the altar.
The Diocese of Los Angeles' ecumenical and interfaith officer called the service unprecedented for the Episcopal Church. American canon law forbids the distribution of the consecrated elements to the un-baptized, but no sanctions have been levied on those bishops and clergy who regularly violate these rules.
Yea, no kidding about the violating of clear rules as to who can partake in the Holy Communion. Because it is one of the two great sacraments our church upholds (Baptism the other), one would think that a Christian bishop would uphold the basic tenant that a baptized Christian is the only ones that can partake in the Holy Communion.
Don't be silly! It is just some archaic rule. Come on, we have to be hip, with it. Who cares?
This is an example of what St. Luke's Anglican church was up against when it voted to break with the Los Angeles diocese and with the Episcopal Church.
There are many others. This example is just a recent one that has traditionalists reeling as the Episcopal Church continues to drive over the cliff. And those of us that remain are becoming increasingly aware that the church really does not want to know that we are a part of it.
So, while the diocese spent millions of dollars to regain a property, it is losing the battle of souls. It is losing the potential to spread the message of the Gospel to all parts of the world. After all, it is known as the Great Commission:
"Go ye therefore and teach all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" Matthew 28: 19
What the diocese message seems to be is that one, do not actually believe in anything traditional. It is not compatible with the new direction of the church. Two, do not even think that leaving the Episcopal Church and take the property with you. It does not matter that those that started the particular church may actually have wanted you to do what you did, in the name of believing in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Three, we will spend all our money if we have to to get it back.
No question, they did just that. And, next Sunday Bishop Bruno will lead a phony St. Luke's back into the diocesan fold. For how long is any one's guess. There is no way that the leadership will be able to gain enough members to be as well as it was when it left the Episcopal Church and prospered as an Anglican church. And, the dreaded money.
So, yes the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles gained back St. Luke's in La Crescenta. But at a price that will prove to be one not worth it in the long run.
Facebookers Need To Face Facts On Dear Leader's Award Of Nobel Prize
I actually took some time to write comments over at my Facebook page and one was the incredulousness of the Dear Leader, President Obama, being awarded the Nobel Prize*.
I got a lot of reaction.
But the one that got me thinking is the one that an old high school buddy wrote:
Carlos Santellanes
Sure he earned it.... if a DOORKNOB had gotten elected after G.W.B.... the DOORKNOB would have gotten the Nobel Peace Prize. It's the Norwegians way of saying "F" YOU BUSH and the WHOLE REPUBLICAN PARTY!!! It's really simple.
So, that is what the Nobel Prize has become? A "F--- you" to a former president of the United States?
To those on the left, and my old friend, Carlos, I am afraid that is what such awards should be. More repudiation of the eeevvviiilll George W. Bush.
But, the Nobel Prize has been one that has awarded based on actual accomplishment. Not the hope of potential accomplishment.
Again, I noted some reasoning why this award of the Nobel Prize to the Dear Leader, President Obama, was a joke.
And why this is dangerous in relation to a serious decision that the Dear Leader, President Obama, has to make concerning the Afghanistan theater in the War Against Islamofacsist Terror.
The Nobel Committee will have a difficult time justifying handing an American president a "peace" award when he sends as many as 40,000 American soldiers to fight against the truly evil Taliban and their lecherous hangers-on, al-Qaeda.
Now, for all of my dislike of former president Jimmah Carter, at least he does have a track record of trying to bring about peace. Especially in the Middle East. After all, he did bring together the late Egyptian President Anwar Sadat, and the late Israeli Prime Minister, Menachem Begin, and open up peace talks. The talks resulted in Israel giving the Suez Peninsula back to Egypt. But, importantly it started diplomatic relations between Egypt and Israel. And eventually, Israel and Jordan. And they are still on to this day.
That is some kind of accomplishment. And, it was done without the use of force.
Again, what has the Dear Leader, President Obama, done in regard to international peace?
N O T H I N G !
Which leads me to ask those this.
Do you really think this award should have been given to a president that has not accomplished anything significant in any area of governance, let alone in international relations? And a follow up. Should awards of this nature be given just to rub a former leader's nose in the dirt?
Then if you do, God help you.
I stand by my comments.
That this is a joke. That the Dear Leader, President Obama, was awarded the Nobel Prize.
*Because of the nature of this year's recipient of the award, I can not, in good conscience, refer to it as the Nobel Peace Prize.
I got a lot of reaction.
But the one that got me thinking is the one that an old high school buddy wrote:
Carlos Santellanes
Sure he earned it.... if a DOORKNOB had gotten elected after G.W.B.... the DOORKNOB would have gotten the Nobel Peace Prize. It's the Norwegians way of saying "F" YOU BUSH and the WHOLE REPUBLICAN PARTY!!! It's really simple.
So, that is what the Nobel Prize has become? A "F--- you" to a former president of the United States?
To those on the left, and my old friend, Carlos, I am afraid that is what such awards should be. More repudiation of the eeevvviiilll George W. Bush.
But, the Nobel Prize has been one that has awarded based on actual accomplishment. Not the hope of potential accomplishment.
Again, I noted some reasoning why this award of the Nobel Prize to the Dear Leader, President Obama, was a joke.
And why this is dangerous in relation to a serious decision that the Dear Leader, President Obama, has to make concerning the Afghanistan theater in the War Against Islamofacsist Terror.
The Nobel Committee will have a difficult time justifying handing an American president a "peace" award when he sends as many as 40,000 American soldiers to fight against the truly evil Taliban and their lecherous hangers-on, al-Qaeda.
Now, for all of my dislike of former president Jimmah Carter, at least he does have a track record of trying to bring about peace. Especially in the Middle East. After all, he did bring together the late Egyptian President Anwar Sadat, and the late Israeli Prime Minister, Menachem Begin, and open up peace talks. The talks resulted in Israel giving the Suez Peninsula back to Egypt. But, importantly it started diplomatic relations between Egypt and Israel. And eventually, Israel and Jordan. And they are still on to this day.
That is some kind of accomplishment. And, it was done without the use of force.
Again, what has the Dear Leader, President Obama, done in regard to international peace?
N O T H I N G !
Which leads me to ask those this.
Do you really think this award should have been given to a president that has not accomplished anything significant in any area of governance, let alone in international relations? And a follow up. Should awards of this nature be given just to rub a former leader's nose in the dirt?
Then if you do, God help you.
I stand by my comments.
That this is a joke. That the Dear Leader, President Obama, was awarded the Nobel Prize.
*Because of the nature of this year's recipient of the award, I can not, in good conscience, refer to it as the Nobel Peace Prize.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Friday, October 09, 2009
Even The Obamawhore Media Can Not Believe The Dear Leader Awarded Nobel Prize And Other Reactions
I have already made my thoughts on the Dear Leader, President Obama, being award the Nobel Peace Prize. So, I thought that I would link many of the reactions across the spectrum.
I will begin with this thought.
The awarding of the Nobel prize to the Dear Leader, President Obama, is a bridge too far for some of the staunchest defenders of the Dear Leader.
That would be the Obamawhore media.
Consider this little column by Peter Beinart, an intellectual Obamawhore if there ever was one. And the money quote? Here it is:
I like Barack Obama as much as the next liberal, but this is a farce.
As they say, read the whole thing.
Ruth Marcus is no right-winger. But her comments are biting. And accurate. And, Mrs. Marcus makes a point about the other two sitting American presidents to win the Nobel prize. They are Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. Both were in their second terms and both had made a significant contribution to p e a c e.
Do you think that a writer for the left-wing Guardian newspaper in London, England is a right-winger? No, I do not think so either. But Michael Tomasky makes the case that the Dear Leader should not have accepted the Nobel prize. For the reason that most of us are wondering. What in the hell has he done to earn it?
Even the the ol' gray lady herself, The New York Times, leading print Obamawhore daily, couches its coverage with what can only be described as a "huh?"
But I am a blogger. And a conservative one. So, I am very interested in the reaction of those on my side of the aisle.
So, here are some links for you to go to and enjoy:
The Other McCain and his "Memo To Oslo" is an instant classic.
The Ace Of Spades gives this abomination the flaming skull treatment. And I kind of think it is too good for the Dear Leader, President Obama.
Gateway Pundit has a wonderful headline and gets a double link for the latest posting on this dreaded subject
Rightwingsparkle notes the obvious. That even the left is stunned that the Dear Leader, who has done nothing, nothing, gets the Nobel prize.
Ed Morrissey notes what I note. That the left is wondering why the Dear Leader is being awarded a Nobel prize.
BTW, why do I not write Nobel Peace Prize? Because I think that one should do something concrete to earn such a prize. Not be a teleprompter dummy and speechifying platitudes. So, it can not be called a Nobel Peace Prize for a year. Until they get their act together next time around.
Prof. Donald Douglas over at American Power notes the obvious. One last slap in the face of The Liberator, former President George W. Bush. Liberating 50,000,000 people from the brutality of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein in Iraq is not really peaceworthy to the Nobel prize committee.
Leave it to Jim Geraghty over at The Campaign Spot to make a case for. . .Libya, and by extension Mohmmar Qaddafi to be awarded the Nobel prize! It falls into the read the whole thing category. And Mr. Geraghty links to the also-rans for the Nobel prize. Many, many more worthy than the Dear Leader, President Obama.
Oh, According To Nikki gives the award the proper name that it deserves. And while she is at it, she offers another potential candidate for maybe next year's Nobel prize. OUCH!
Hugh Hewitt offers some wishful thinking about the meaning of the Nobel award going to the Dear Leader. The Nobel prize is a double-down that the Dear Leader, President Obama will not send the 40,000 additional troops to stem the Taliban tide in Afghanistan.
There is so much more out there. I urge you to read both supporters and opponents of the Dear Leader, President Obama and their reactions. One common thread is "Why?" Why, indeed.
I will begin with this thought.
The awarding of the Nobel prize to the Dear Leader, President Obama, is a bridge too far for some of the staunchest defenders of the Dear Leader.
That would be the Obamawhore media.
Consider this little column by Peter Beinart, an intellectual Obamawhore if there ever was one. And the money quote? Here it is:
I like Barack Obama as much as the next liberal, but this is a farce.
As they say, read the whole thing.
Ruth Marcus is no right-winger. But her comments are biting. And accurate. And, Mrs. Marcus makes a point about the other two sitting American presidents to win the Nobel prize. They are Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. Both were in their second terms and both had made a significant contribution to p e a c e.
Do you think that a writer for the left-wing Guardian newspaper in London, England is a right-winger? No, I do not think so either. But Michael Tomasky makes the case that the Dear Leader should not have accepted the Nobel prize. For the reason that most of us are wondering. What in the hell has he done to earn it?
Even the the ol' gray lady herself, The New York Times, leading print Obamawhore daily, couches its coverage with what can only be described as a "huh?"
But I am a blogger. And a conservative one. So, I am very interested in the reaction of those on my side of the aisle.
So, here are some links for you to go to and enjoy:
The Other McCain and his "Memo To Oslo" is an instant classic.
The Ace Of Spades gives this abomination the flaming skull treatment. And I kind of think it is too good for the Dear Leader, President Obama.
Gateway Pundit has a wonderful headline and gets a double link for the latest posting on this dreaded subject
Rightwingsparkle notes the obvious. That even the left is stunned that the Dear Leader, who has done nothing, nothing, gets the Nobel prize.
Ed Morrissey notes what I note. That the left is wondering why the Dear Leader is being awarded a Nobel prize.
BTW, why do I not write Nobel Peace Prize? Because I think that one should do something concrete to earn such a prize. Not be a teleprompter dummy and speechifying platitudes. So, it can not be called a Nobel Peace Prize for a year. Until they get their act together next time around.
Prof. Donald Douglas over at American Power notes the obvious. One last slap in the face of The Liberator, former President George W. Bush. Liberating 50,000,000 people from the brutality of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein in Iraq is not really peaceworthy to the Nobel prize committee.
Leave it to Jim Geraghty over at The Campaign Spot to make a case for. . .Libya, and by extension Mohmmar Qaddafi to be awarded the Nobel prize! It falls into the read the whole thing category. And Mr. Geraghty links to the also-rans for the Nobel prize. Many, many more worthy than the Dear Leader, President Obama.
Oh, According To Nikki gives the award the proper name that it deserves. And while she is at it, she offers another potential candidate for maybe next year's Nobel prize. OUCH!
Hugh Hewitt offers some wishful thinking about the meaning of the Nobel award going to the Dear Leader. The Nobel prize is a double-down that the Dear Leader, President Obama will not send the 40,000 additional troops to stem the Taliban tide in Afghanistan.
There is so much more out there. I urge you to read both supporters and opponents of the Dear Leader, President Obama and their reactions. One common thread is "Why?" Why, indeed.
The Dear Leader Wins The Nobel Peace Prize Tee Hee!! Tee Hee!!
UPDATE:
The laughs just keep coming, courtesy of the Democrat National Committee. I guess any opposition to the Dear Leader, President Obama, equals siding with the terorrists. Hmm, where did I hear this before? Oh, yes, when we were pointing out that not supporting the troops actually doing the work to defeat the terrorists and their allies. No, I am sorry, I will support the troops, oppose the Dear Leader's policies!
I really believe that today must really be April Fools Day. I mean, it is the only logical explanation to the fact that the Dear Leader, President Obama, has been awarded the-I can't write this without spilling coffee on the keyboard-Nobel Peace Prize!
For what, pray tell?!
Even the headline in the link asks the very same question.
Obviously, the Nobel committee has lowered their standards because they could not actually find a real accomplishment that the Dear Leader, President Obama, has done.
Look, just being the first Black elected to the presidency, while a wonderful accomplishment in and of itself, is not something to award a peace prize for. And while the Dear Leader says that he wants to work on a nuclear-weapon free world (good luck with that!) and peace in the Middle East, one should ask for an actual accomplishment in any of those areas.
I actually believe one should be award a prize based on an accomplishment, not the hope of something.
For instance, in baseball, the winner of the Cy Young award is usually the best pitcher in either the American or National league. It is awarded at the end of the season. It is awarded based on a given pitcher's record, earned run average, strikeouts. In other words, for accomplishment, not the hope of an accomplishment.
Or when the league Most Valuable Player is awarded, it is based on performance.
Hello?!
Yes, the Dear Leader, President Obama, should be embarrassed that he has been awarded a prize based on nothing to speak of. And an over $1,000,000 cash to boot.
Well, all I can write is Happy April Fool's Day! Oh, too bad it is actually October 9!
The laughs just keep coming, courtesy of the Democrat National Committee. I guess any opposition to the Dear Leader, President Obama, equals siding with the terorrists. Hmm, where did I hear this before? Oh, yes, when we were pointing out that not supporting the troops actually doing the work to defeat the terrorists and their allies. No, I am sorry, I will support the troops, oppose the Dear Leader's policies!
I really believe that today must really be April Fools Day. I mean, it is the only logical explanation to the fact that the Dear Leader, President Obama, has been awarded the-I can't write this without spilling coffee on the keyboard-Nobel Peace Prize!
For what, pray tell?!
Even the headline in the link asks the very same question.
Obviously, the Nobel committee has lowered their standards because they could not actually find a real accomplishment that the Dear Leader, President Obama, has done.
Look, just being the first Black elected to the presidency, while a wonderful accomplishment in and of itself, is not something to award a peace prize for. And while the Dear Leader says that he wants to work on a nuclear-weapon free world (good luck with that!) and peace in the Middle East, one should ask for an actual accomplishment in any of those areas.
I actually believe one should be award a prize based on an accomplishment, not the hope of something.
For instance, in baseball, the winner of the Cy Young award is usually the best pitcher in either the American or National league. It is awarded at the end of the season. It is awarded based on a given pitcher's record, earned run average, strikeouts. In other words, for accomplishment, not the hope of an accomplishment.
Or when the league Most Valuable Player is awarded, it is based on performance.
Hello?!
Yes, the Dear Leader, President Obama, should be embarrassed that he has been awarded a prize based on nothing to speak of. And an over $1,000,000 cash to boot.
Well, all I can write is Happy April Fool's Day! Oh, too bad it is actually October 9!
Wednesday, October 07, 2009
Great News! Gov. Benedict Arnold Endorses Obamacare
I am a bit late on this one, but once again our illustrious, "Republican" governor, Benedict Arnold Schwarzenegger, kicks conservatives and real Republicans to the curb and comes out in support of the Dear Leader, President Obama, and his attempt to socialize medicine in the United States.
Nice.
As if there are not enough problems that Gov. Benedict Arnold has made for the once Golden State, he wants to force the specter of socialized medicine on the rest of the United States.
Gov. Benedict Arnold has now once and for all abandoned any pretense that he is a conservative let alone a Republican. But, it does remind me of who Gov. Benedict Arnold regards as one of his political heroes. The late President Richard Nixon.
Now, when Sen Teddy Kennedy died many of us were reminded that Mr. Nixon actually supported a government takeover of health delivery while he was president. That would have been a disaster then as it is sure to be now. And remember, many a liberal think that Mr. Nixon was not all that bad of a president. And why not? After all, he was implementing their agenda as president.
But back to Gov. Benedict Arnold.
How can anyone support a government takeover of health care delivery without trying out some real free-market reforms? And claim to have any Republicanism?
Gov. Benedict Arnold, who I regretfully voted for twice, is what happens when Republicans are told to support a moderate. He lectures us about the need to "grow", re: become more liberal. And that big government is A-OK. It is that Republicans can manage it better than Democrats.
Right!
We have a primary coming up to replace Gov. Benedict Arnold in 2010. Not soon enough! And the three candidates better not support big government at any level. We need less government at all levels. The one candidate that addresses that with seriousness will be the Republican nominee. And we better not be convinced to nominate another big-government moderate.
Other wise, we get governors like Benedict Arnold who end up endorsing the largest federal power grab in American history.
HT: The Corner @ www.nationalreview.com/thecorner
Nice.
As if there are not enough problems that Gov. Benedict Arnold has made for the once Golden State, he wants to force the specter of socialized medicine on the rest of the United States.
Gov. Benedict Arnold has now once and for all abandoned any pretense that he is a conservative let alone a Republican. But, it does remind me of who Gov. Benedict Arnold regards as one of his political heroes. The late President Richard Nixon.
Now, when Sen Teddy Kennedy died many of us were reminded that Mr. Nixon actually supported a government takeover of health delivery while he was president. That would have been a disaster then as it is sure to be now. And remember, many a liberal think that Mr. Nixon was not all that bad of a president. And why not? After all, he was implementing their agenda as president.
But back to Gov. Benedict Arnold.
How can anyone support a government takeover of health care delivery without trying out some real free-market reforms? And claim to have any Republicanism?
Gov. Benedict Arnold, who I regretfully voted for twice, is what happens when Republicans are told to support a moderate. He lectures us about the need to "grow", re: become more liberal. And that big government is A-OK. It is that Republicans can manage it better than Democrats.
Right!
We have a primary coming up to replace Gov. Benedict Arnold in 2010. Not soon enough! And the three candidates better not support big government at any level. We need less government at all levels. The one candidate that addresses that with seriousness will be the Republican nominee. And we better not be convinced to nominate another big-government moderate.
Other wise, we get governors like Benedict Arnold who end up endorsing the largest federal power grab in American history.
HT: The Corner @ www.nationalreview.com/thecorner
Tuesday, October 06, 2009
Meg Whitman And Her "Voting" Record
Meg Whitman is one of three announced candidates for the Republican nomination primary for governor in California. The other two are the current insurance commissioner, Steve Poizner and former congressman Tom Campbell.
I think that any of the three would make a great governor for California.
But Meg Whitman has a "voting" problem.
Or, should I write, a lack of voting problem.
You see, Mrs. Whitman did not even register to vote until 2002. OK, that is not a real crime. She should have registered to vote whenever she was able to where ever she lived. But, the real crime is that Mrs. Whitman did not register as a Republican until 2007. That is a real problem considering that Mrs. Whitman did not even register to vote until 2002. Before signing up as a Republican, Mrs. Whitman was a "Decline to state" or independent voter. Do we know whether or not she supported former President George W. Bush in 2004 or not? What had she done for other Republican candidates once she did sign on the Republican line in 2007?
It will agree that it is a distraction. But, it is one of her own making.
In the linked story above, Mrs. Whitman tried to avoid any discussion of the issue whatsoever. Mrs. Whitman simply apologized for not being a voter sooner and tried to leave it at that.
Uh, hello?!
Rule number one in politics. Never, ever let such an issue gain traction.
Oh, but it has. And it gives a serious plus to the Poizner campaign.
And another issue is dogging the Whitman campaign.
The fact that she lent some support for the disgraced former "Green Jobs" Czar, Van Jones.
The fact that she is a Kool-aid drinker and believes in a "green" economy, and by extension, Globaloney Warming.
Here is the quote that Matthew Cunningham has text of:
"There’s a guy over in Oakland, I think his name is Van Jones. And he and I were on a cruise last summer in the Arctic, on climate change. And I got to know him very well. And a lot of the work he’s doing to enfranchise broader communities I’m a big fan of. He’s doing a marvelous job… I’m a huge fan of his. He is very bright, very articulate, very passionate. I think he is exactly right."
OK, Mr. Cunningham does not think that there is an indication that she supports Mr. Jones radical present views. But, read the quote again. She uses the buzz words of the Globaloney Warming cult. And the money ending words: "I think he is exactly right".
Look, we already have a governor, Benedict Arnold Schwarzenegger, that buys into the Globaloney Warming cult. We certainly do not need another one in the person of Mrs. Whitman.
The sparse voting and seeming support for a radical as Van Jones may not kill the nascent campaign of Mrs. Whitman. But, she is going to have to deal with these issues head on. Mrs. Whitman has to do a real job convincing Republican primary voters that she is not a closet Democrat a la Benedict Arnold. And that she will not endorse the crackpot views of the Globaloney Warming cult, hook line and sinker.
So far, I can not say that I am all that impressed. But, she has a lot of time. And, I have not endorsed any one for the Republican nod for governor. Again, all three have to be an improvement over Gov. Benedict Arnold. But, Mrs. Whitman needs to set herself apart from the field. And, being a warmed-over, female Gov. Benedict Arnold ain't gonna impress the conservative majority of California Republicans.
I think that any of the three would make a great governor for California.
But Meg Whitman has a "voting" problem.
Or, should I write, a lack of voting problem.
You see, Mrs. Whitman did not even register to vote until 2002. OK, that is not a real crime. She should have registered to vote whenever she was able to where ever she lived. But, the real crime is that Mrs. Whitman did not register as a Republican until 2007. That is a real problem considering that Mrs. Whitman did not even register to vote until 2002. Before signing up as a Republican, Mrs. Whitman was a "Decline to state" or independent voter. Do we know whether or not she supported former President George W. Bush in 2004 or not? What had she done for other Republican candidates once she did sign on the Republican line in 2007?
It will agree that it is a distraction. But, it is one of her own making.
In the linked story above, Mrs. Whitman tried to avoid any discussion of the issue whatsoever. Mrs. Whitman simply apologized for not being a voter sooner and tried to leave it at that.
Uh, hello?!
Rule number one in politics. Never, ever let such an issue gain traction.
Oh, but it has. And it gives a serious plus to the Poizner campaign.
And another issue is dogging the Whitman campaign.
The fact that she lent some support for the disgraced former "Green Jobs" Czar, Van Jones.
The fact that she is a Kool-aid drinker and believes in a "green" economy, and by extension, Globaloney Warming.
Here is the quote that Matthew Cunningham has text of:
"There’s a guy over in Oakland, I think his name is Van Jones. And he and I were on a cruise last summer in the Arctic, on climate change. And I got to know him very well. And a lot of the work he’s doing to enfranchise broader communities I’m a big fan of. He’s doing a marvelous job… I’m a huge fan of his. He is very bright, very articulate, very passionate. I think he is exactly right."
OK, Mr. Cunningham does not think that there is an indication that she supports Mr. Jones radical present views. But, read the quote again. She uses the buzz words of the Globaloney Warming cult. And the money ending words: "I think he is exactly right".
Look, we already have a governor, Benedict Arnold Schwarzenegger, that buys into the Globaloney Warming cult. We certainly do not need another one in the person of Mrs. Whitman.
The sparse voting and seeming support for a radical as Van Jones may not kill the nascent campaign of Mrs. Whitman. But, she is going to have to deal with these issues head on. Mrs. Whitman has to do a real job convincing Republican primary voters that she is not a closet Democrat a la Benedict Arnold. And that she will not endorse the crackpot views of the Globaloney Warming cult, hook line and sinker.
So far, I can not say that I am all that impressed. But, she has a lot of time. And, I have not endorsed any one for the Republican nod for governor. Again, all three have to be an improvement over Gov. Benedict Arnold. But, Mrs. Whitman needs to set herself apart from the field. And, being a warmed-over, female Gov. Benedict Arnold ain't gonna impress the conservative majority of California Republicans.
Friday, October 02, 2009
The Dear Leader In Copenhagen-A Waste Of Time And I Told You So!
Today, the Dear Leader, President Obama, got a nice big slap in the face as the International Olympic Committee told him and his Chicago cronies, thanks but no thanks and they will not get the 2016 Olympics as your humble blogger predicted.
I am not clairvoyant, but I do know that an international group that has a slew of communist, socialist, Islamic and other varieties of loons will use any opportunity to rub the United States nose in the dirt. And, the Dear Leader, President Obama, thought that somehow, if he just went over to Denmark and made a case that his charm would win the day.
NOT!
Since the Dear Leader, President Obama, has spent the first nine months of his presidency on the Apologize For America World Tour, a change of pace had to be made. He had to talk up the United States. And his adopted home town of Chicago. Why the Dear Leader, President Obama, even trotted out First Lady, Michelle, and good pal Oprah Winfrey in this attempt to try some Chicago strong-arm on the International community.
And, not even the IOC would have anything to do with it.
And Chicago did not even make out of the first round of voting.
The tea leaves were in place by the IOC making the winner, Rio de Janiero, Brazil.
By Rio getting in the last round of four, a perfect way to eventually award the games to a South American nation.
The United States did not have a chance. No matter what city was in the running.
But do not buy any spin from Team Obama.
This is a humiliating defeat for the Dear Leader on the world stage.
The fact that the Dear Leader, President Obama, put his own prestige and that of the United States on the line on a day that American unemployment edged up to 9.8% shows a leadership very much out of touch and having it priorities bass ackwards.
The Dear Leader, President Obama, wasted about a day of his life he will never get back. It was a vain attempt to sell a skeptical world that Chicago could host a Summer Olympic Games. And it was a waste of time.
I am not clairvoyant, but I do know that an international group that has a slew of communist, socialist, Islamic and other varieties of loons will use any opportunity to rub the United States nose in the dirt. And, the Dear Leader, President Obama, thought that somehow, if he just went over to Denmark and made a case that his charm would win the day.
NOT!
Since the Dear Leader, President Obama, has spent the first nine months of his presidency on the Apologize For America World Tour, a change of pace had to be made. He had to talk up the United States. And his adopted home town of Chicago. Why the Dear Leader, President Obama, even trotted out First Lady, Michelle, and good pal Oprah Winfrey in this attempt to try some Chicago strong-arm on the International community.
And, not even the IOC would have anything to do with it.
And Chicago did not even make out of the first round of voting.
The tea leaves were in place by the IOC making the winner, Rio de Janiero, Brazil.
By Rio getting in the last round of four, a perfect way to eventually award the games to a South American nation.
The United States did not have a chance. No matter what city was in the running.
But do not buy any spin from Team Obama.
This is a humiliating defeat for the Dear Leader on the world stage.
The fact that the Dear Leader, President Obama, put his own prestige and that of the United States on the line on a day that American unemployment edged up to 9.8% shows a leadership very much out of touch and having it priorities bass ackwards.
The Dear Leader, President Obama, wasted about a day of his life he will never get back. It was a vain attempt to sell a skeptical world that Chicago could host a Summer Olympic Games. And it was a waste of time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)