Today, the world has been treated to the latest ramblings from the most wanted terrorist, Osama bin Laden. It is nice that there has been an instant translation of what the terrorist beast had to say, particularly to us Americans. After reading the transcript http://FoxNews.com, I have one question?
Is Osama bin Laden a Democrat strategist? Or is he the real bankroller of MoveOn.org?
I mean, he has taken to almost any given Democrat talking point, even mentioning global "warming". Unbelievable!
bin Laden uses the term "neoconservative" like many Democrats, and Congressman Ron Paul, as if it is a profanity. That is in reference to Vice-President Cheney, former defense secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, and to that anti-"neoconservative" eeeviiillll one himself, former undersecretary of defense, Richard Perle. Why, bin Laden even accuses Mr. Rumsfeld of being behind the Vietnam war and the killing of 2,000,000 villagers.
Actually, we know that bin Laden would feel right at home with the anti-globalization crowd. bin Laden talks about the capitalist system making the world a "fiefdom" of the major corporations.
It is good to know that we, as a people but not all Americans, so believe in God, er Allah, that we put "In God We Trust" on our money.
Why, bin Laden also knows how fragile our soldiers are in the battlefield that is Iraq. bin Laden refers to a soldier named Joshua who has apparently spoken to the media about the conditions in Iraq-of course not in positive terms. If we are to believe the rantings of bin Laden, soldiers are either being blown up by mines all over the place, or killing themselves. It is any wonder there is any soldier left to do the fighting!
While he is not emphasizing the Democrat talking points, and this is the troubling part, bin Laden is making one of those pleas for us "heathens" to convert to Islam. Why, bin Laden is clever to point out that Mary and Jesus Christ are mentioned in the Koran. Of course, in the Koran, Jesus Christ is not the savior, but Mohammad.
It is really fascinating that this is coming now. And, the reason that the previous paragraph is important is the call to covert to Islam is exactly what Mohammad did just before attacking those that were not already Mohammedans. And that maybe that is what maybe the "high sign" to fellow terrorists to launch an attack. And, it is only days before the sixth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.
I do jest, somewhat, about bin Laden using Democrat talking points, but the real seriousness is towards the end of the screed. The plea for us "heathens" to leave our faith, I being a Christian, and convert to Islam. That is never a good sign.
I do not really think the bin Laden is behind the MoveOn.org crowd, but it is amazing that bin Laden has all this access to information in a cave in either Afghanistan or Pakistan. It does make one wonder.
Friday, September 07, 2007
Thursday, September 06, 2007
Can't Wait For bin Laden's Message To America
It appears that the world's most wanted terrorist, Osama bin Laden, has crawled out of one the caves along the Afghani-Pakistani tribal border region because he is promising to deliver a message to the American people to coincide with the sixth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C.
I CAN HARDLY WAIT!!!!
According to the SITE group website http://siteinstitute.org/, a known terrorist website has a notice and a photo of the cretin, bin Laden, and the photo appears that he has cooked up his facial hair to make himself look younger. That is a frightening thought!
So, what will the butcher of New York City and Washington D.C. have to say?
"Nanny, nanny, nanny goat! You can't catch me!"
Or maybe he will use this time to telegraph to his henchmen when to commit the next reign of terror.
Nobody really knows. But, why on the sixth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks and not on the more symbolic fifth anniversary? Maybe that would be too obvious.
All I know is that I do not want this mass murderer to overshadow the day that we, the people of the United States, can mourn and renew our resolve to catch and or, preferably, kill bin Laden and as many of his followers as we can.
It will not end the War Against Islamofacsist Terror, but it would be one helluva victory. And maybe it can happen on 9/11/07.
I CAN HARDLY WAIT!!!!
According to the SITE group website http://siteinstitute.org/, a known terrorist website has a notice and a photo of the cretin, bin Laden, and the photo appears that he has cooked up his facial hair to make himself look younger. That is a frightening thought!
So, what will the butcher of New York City and Washington D.C. have to say?
"Nanny, nanny, nanny goat! You can't catch me!"
Or maybe he will use this time to telegraph to his henchmen when to commit the next reign of terror.
Nobody really knows. But, why on the sixth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks and not on the more symbolic fifth anniversary? Maybe that would be too obvious.
All I know is that I do not want this mass murderer to overshadow the day that we, the people of the United States, can mourn and renew our resolve to catch and or, preferably, kill bin Laden and as many of his followers as we can.
It will not end the War Against Islamofacsist Terror, but it would be one helluva victory. And maybe it can happen on 9/11/07.
Don't Harp Too Much On Fred's Cancer
I notice that Hugh Hewitt http://hughhewitt.com has a post today on the possibility of now Republican presidential candidate's Fred Thompson's cancer recurring.
I for one do not think it is good to overemphasize that possibility. Look, anyone who has had any cancer has some chance that even with surgery of a recurrence of the cancer.
It is possible that the cancer could reoccur if Mr. Thompson wins the nomination and the presidency. Former President Reagan had colon cancer as president. It did not return while he was finishing his second term.
Unless Mr. Thompson and or the doctors are not being up front, and there is no reason to think anything different, one should not make it too much of an issue.
I know that if Mr. Thompson is the nominee, the Democrat will make it an issue and they will do so at their own peril. And, I think we Republicans should let the Dems make the issue, not us.
I for one do not think it is good to overemphasize that possibility. Look, anyone who has had any cancer has some chance that even with surgery of a recurrence of the cancer.
It is possible that the cancer could reoccur if Mr. Thompson wins the nomination and the presidency. Former President Reagan had colon cancer as president. It did not return while he was finishing his second term.
Unless Mr. Thompson and or the doctors are not being up front, and there is no reason to think anything different, one should not make it too much of an issue.
I know that if Mr. Thompson is the nominee, the Democrat will make it an issue and they will do so at their own peril. And, I think we Republicans should let the Dems make the issue, not us.
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Debate Anaylsis And Mostly Opinion
Tonight was another Republican presidential debate in New Hampshire and there was a winner and a real loser and all the candidates looked better in some ways, weaker in others.
Start with the loser. It was Fred Thompson. He really should not have been on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno. He could have done that tomorrow night. Mr. Thompson should have been right at the center of the Republican universe with the other candidates to show what he has got. A no-show will not go well with many of the candidate partisans.
The winner, and I hate to admit this and it is by default, Sen. John "F--- You" McCain. His talk about how to win in Iraq and the overall fight against the Islamofascists was very inspiring. However, what I just can not get away from Sen. "F--- You" McCain is that he makes me feel like he is a know-it-all and that he is smarter than you. That can be attributed to two things. Being in Washington way too long and that the overall attitude is what we expect from liberal, socialists, not a conservative. And the answers that he gave about the "comprehensive immigration reform" bill-scam were totally a sham. You know, no matter how much one dresses up a pig, it is still a pig. And, that was the "comprehensive immigration reform" bill scam.
The so-so had to be former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. I feel that he made inroads on domestic policy, but needed to be aggressive on the war in the Iraq theatre and less wanting to make alliances to defeat the Islamofacisists. But, I am always impressed by the fact Mr. Romney has his eyes on the overall picture. That we are fighting Jihaddists and they want to defeat us and we must defeat them first. Also, I think that he is somewhat hedging until we all hear the report by General David Petraeus and Ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker. The way that he talks about Iraq will be determined by that. Overall, Mitt is still my guy and will do better in the next debate.
One that I have to admit I have looked at a second time is former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee. Now, I do not think that he has a chance at the nomination, but his sharp wit and knowledge of issues and willingness to go into areas Republicans rarely go is impressive. And when Mr. Huckabee and the Republican answer to the Democrat wackadoo tandem of Congressman Dennis Kucinich and former Alaska senator Mike Gravell, ol' Ron Paul were going toe to toe over how the war in the Iraq theatre in the War Against Islamofacsist Terror I was impressed that Mr. Huckabee said that it is not just over winning elections that it is more important to follow our commitments and honor. Beautiful and accurate. And that is what separates most Republicans from most Democrats.
Congressman Duncan Hunter continues to be working towards being the next Defense Secretary in either a Romney or Thompson administration.
I still do not get the rationale for the candidacy of Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kansas). I think he needs to leave, but not like Sen. Larry Craig. I mean really leave.
Same for Congressman Tom Tancredo. Once the conversation gets away from illegal immigration, Congressman Tancredo just seems way over his head. A good congressman, but won't be a great president.
Then there is comic relief in Congressman Ron Paul. I mean, I like a lot of the positions that he takes, many unpopular, but he just does not get the epic battle of our time in the fight between civilization and the Islamofacsists. Just coming home will not end the war, only embolden those that see our weakness and will prey upon them. Like I wrote above, when a second-tier candidate like Mr. Huckabee can deliver the big smackdown over Iraq, I know this man is not presidential material.
I did not forget about former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani. But, I think he forgot to show up. He just seemed way off and was using his time as mayor of New York City as a crutch. If Mr. Giuliani wants to really be the Republican presidential nominee, he needs to show more fire and perform better than he did tonight. And when a questioner from the public asked about family values, Mr. Giuliani's answer was a big non-answer. And, like it or not, it will be the Achilles Heel of the Giuliani candidacy.
The three-team Fox News Channel questioners, Wendall Goler, Brit Hume, and Chris Wallace asked great questions. Even the people that Campaign Carl Cameron was getting to ask questions from the restaurant asked better ones than what will be asked at the moronic CNN/You Tube debate coming up.
All in all, Sen. "F--- You" McCain came up a winner by default. Mr. Huckabee looked very impressive and Mr. Romney had a so-so night, but no bad answers and some not so good ones.
Again, this field of Republican candidates is so vastly superior than any of the Democrat candidates. And with former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson entering the fray, it can only get better.
Start with the loser. It was Fred Thompson. He really should not have been on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno. He could have done that tomorrow night. Mr. Thompson should have been right at the center of the Republican universe with the other candidates to show what he has got. A no-show will not go well with many of the candidate partisans.
The winner, and I hate to admit this and it is by default, Sen. John "F--- You" McCain. His talk about how to win in Iraq and the overall fight against the Islamofascists was very inspiring. However, what I just can not get away from Sen. "F--- You" McCain is that he makes me feel like he is a know-it-all and that he is smarter than you. That can be attributed to two things. Being in Washington way too long and that the overall attitude is what we expect from liberal, socialists, not a conservative. And the answers that he gave about the "comprehensive immigration reform" bill-scam were totally a sham. You know, no matter how much one dresses up a pig, it is still a pig. And, that was the "comprehensive immigration reform" bill scam.
The so-so had to be former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. I feel that he made inroads on domestic policy, but needed to be aggressive on the war in the Iraq theatre and less wanting to make alliances to defeat the Islamofacisists. But, I am always impressed by the fact Mr. Romney has his eyes on the overall picture. That we are fighting Jihaddists and they want to defeat us and we must defeat them first. Also, I think that he is somewhat hedging until we all hear the report by General David Petraeus and Ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker. The way that he talks about Iraq will be determined by that. Overall, Mitt is still my guy and will do better in the next debate.
One that I have to admit I have looked at a second time is former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee. Now, I do not think that he has a chance at the nomination, but his sharp wit and knowledge of issues and willingness to go into areas Republicans rarely go is impressive. And when Mr. Huckabee and the Republican answer to the Democrat wackadoo tandem of Congressman Dennis Kucinich and former Alaska senator Mike Gravell, ol' Ron Paul were going toe to toe over how the war in the Iraq theatre in the War Against Islamofacsist Terror I was impressed that Mr. Huckabee said that it is not just over winning elections that it is more important to follow our commitments and honor. Beautiful and accurate. And that is what separates most Republicans from most Democrats.
Congressman Duncan Hunter continues to be working towards being the next Defense Secretary in either a Romney or Thompson administration.
I still do not get the rationale for the candidacy of Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kansas). I think he needs to leave, but not like Sen. Larry Craig. I mean really leave.
Same for Congressman Tom Tancredo. Once the conversation gets away from illegal immigration, Congressman Tancredo just seems way over his head. A good congressman, but won't be a great president.
Then there is comic relief in Congressman Ron Paul. I mean, I like a lot of the positions that he takes, many unpopular, but he just does not get the epic battle of our time in the fight between civilization and the Islamofacsists. Just coming home will not end the war, only embolden those that see our weakness and will prey upon them. Like I wrote above, when a second-tier candidate like Mr. Huckabee can deliver the big smackdown over Iraq, I know this man is not presidential material.
I did not forget about former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani. But, I think he forgot to show up. He just seemed way off and was using his time as mayor of New York City as a crutch. If Mr. Giuliani wants to really be the Republican presidential nominee, he needs to show more fire and perform better than he did tonight. And when a questioner from the public asked about family values, Mr. Giuliani's answer was a big non-answer. And, like it or not, it will be the Achilles Heel of the Giuliani candidacy.
The three-team Fox News Channel questioners, Wendall Goler, Brit Hume, and Chris Wallace asked great questions. Even the people that Campaign Carl Cameron was getting to ask questions from the restaurant asked better ones than what will be asked at the moronic CNN/You Tube debate coming up.
All in all, Sen. "F--- You" McCain came up a winner by default. Mr. Huckabee looked very impressive and Mr. Romney had a so-so night, but no bad answers and some not so good ones.
Again, this field of Republican candidates is so vastly superior than any of the Democrat candidates. And with former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson entering the fray, it can only get better.
Welcome To The Race, Fred!
Former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson made it semi-official tonight as he informally announced his Republican presidential campaign on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno.
I think that it is about time.
The race needs a little bit of Hollywood, the right kind of Hollywood with a mix of being in Washington and yet not part of Washington. Enter, Mr. Thompson.
Yea, Mr. Thompson will be compared to the man, former President Ronald Reagan, but Mr. Thompson will prove to be his own man.
An aside, the DDBMSM is already comparing Mr. Thompson to Mr. Reagan. Mr. Thompson is being accused of being lazy. Now, where have we heard that before about another actor who ran for high office? Oh, yes, Mr. Reagan himself. While Mr. Reagan was wilying away eight years in office, he defiantly remade tax policy and brought the former Soviet Union to it knees and was able to see it fall during the Bush 41 years. Yes, only a lazy Ronald Reagan could have done it!
Mr. Thompson, like all the other candidates, is not pure by any stretch of the imagination, but I think he will put the "We don't like any of the Republican candidates, can't there be more?" talk to rest. If Republican voters still do not like the choices, I guess we will have to dig Ronald Reagan out of the grave to satisfy those hold outs.
Now, Mr. Thompson will have to articulate the reasons he wants to be president and lay out the ideas that break him away from the rest of the pack.
So, I say it is about time and now the Republican race is shook up a bit and this diminishes the McCain candidacy even further.
I think that it is about time.
The race needs a little bit of Hollywood, the right kind of Hollywood with a mix of being in Washington and yet not part of Washington. Enter, Mr. Thompson.
Yea, Mr. Thompson will be compared to the man, former President Ronald Reagan, but Mr. Thompson will prove to be his own man.
An aside, the DDBMSM is already comparing Mr. Thompson to Mr. Reagan. Mr. Thompson is being accused of being lazy. Now, where have we heard that before about another actor who ran for high office? Oh, yes, Mr. Reagan himself. While Mr. Reagan was wilying away eight years in office, he defiantly remade tax policy and brought the former Soviet Union to it knees and was able to see it fall during the Bush 41 years. Yes, only a lazy Ronald Reagan could have done it!
Mr. Thompson, like all the other candidates, is not pure by any stretch of the imagination, but I think he will put the "We don't like any of the Republican candidates, can't there be more?" talk to rest. If Republican voters still do not like the choices, I guess we will have to dig Ronald Reagan out of the grave to satisfy those hold outs.
Now, Mr. Thompson will have to articulate the reasons he wants to be president and lay out the ideas that break him away from the rest of the pack.
So, I say it is about time and now the Republican race is shook up a bit and this diminishes the McCain candidacy even further.
Drudge Leaving Radio
Sad news as Matt Drudge is leaving the radio show that he hosts on Sunday nights http://newsmax.com. Mr. Drudge will be replaced by Cincinnati radio talker Bill Cunningham. He is a riot! If you have ever watched Mr. Cunningham on Hannity and Colmes, he literally tears Alan Colmes apart. Mr. Cunningham is a natural to replace Mr. Drudge. According to the Newsmax report, Mr. Drudge is going to concentrate more on the Drudge Report and other ventures. I for one will miss Mr. Drudge's humor and the way that he presents the stories on the Drudge Report. Also, Mr. Drudge called the Hurricane Katrina disaster before it slammed the Louisiana-Mississippi Gulf Coast.
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
Redoing The Electoral College
Here is California, there is a proposal that would end the current winner take all the electoral votes in the presidential election
According to the Pasadena Star-News http://pasadenastarnews.com, right now 49% of Californians favor the initive by Republican attorney and activist Thomas Hiltachk that would allocate the electoral votes based on the candidate that won one of the congressional districts rather than all votes going to whoever won the state as a whole.
In the 2004 election, Democrat John Kerry won California with 54% of the votes. But, President Bush carried 22 congressional districts. Thus, while Sen. Kerry would have still won, President Bush would still get the 22 electoral votes, which would have put President Bush's electoral vote total over 300.
Two other states, Maine and Nebraska, currently operate under this system. Because they are small states, there has not been a case in recent elections where that system made any kind of difference.
This is a much better proposal than what has passed in Maryland that would allocate the state's electoral votes to the winner of the national presidential vote. In the last election, if one follows this logic, all of Maryland's electoral votes would have gone to President Bush, even though Sen. Kerry won the votes in Maryland by a roughly 2-1 margin. That sounds like disenfranchisement and the reason they are thinking about doing this in Maryland is to abolish the electoral college entirely.
The California proposal does two things. First, it makes it meaningful for both presidential candidates, Democrat and Republican, to visit California on a more constant basis to shore up support. And, the electoral vote would just be broken down to reflect the popular vote of Californians. Everyone wins except those who want to eliminate the electoral college, which is mostly Democrats.
The reason the electoral college was enshrined into the constitution was intentional to make sure that large states would not have more power than smaller states to determine who would be president. It has worked well for over 200 years and can be tinkered a little, but not eliminated.
If this initiative makes the next California statewide ballot, it is a good compromise that is more important than where the state is on the party nomination process. It is worth looking at and as I see it should pass.
According to the Pasadena Star-News http://pasadenastarnews.com, right now 49% of Californians favor the initive by Republican attorney and activist Thomas Hiltachk that would allocate the electoral votes based on the candidate that won one of the congressional districts rather than all votes going to whoever won the state as a whole.
In the 2004 election, Democrat John Kerry won California with 54% of the votes. But, President Bush carried 22 congressional districts. Thus, while Sen. Kerry would have still won, President Bush would still get the 22 electoral votes, which would have put President Bush's electoral vote total over 300.
Two other states, Maine and Nebraska, currently operate under this system. Because they are small states, there has not been a case in recent elections where that system made any kind of difference.
This is a much better proposal than what has passed in Maryland that would allocate the state's electoral votes to the winner of the national presidential vote. In the last election, if one follows this logic, all of Maryland's electoral votes would have gone to President Bush, even though Sen. Kerry won the votes in Maryland by a roughly 2-1 margin. That sounds like disenfranchisement and the reason they are thinking about doing this in Maryland is to abolish the electoral college entirely.
The California proposal does two things. First, it makes it meaningful for both presidential candidates, Democrat and Republican, to visit California on a more constant basis to shore up support. And, the electoral vote would just be broken down to reflect the popular vote of Californians. Everyone wins except those who want to eliminate the electoral college, which is mostly Democrats.
The reason the electoral college was enshrined into the constitution was intentional to make sure that large states would not have more power than smaller states to determine who would be president. It has worked well for over 200 years and can be tinkered a little, but not eliminated.
If this initiative makes the next California statewide ballot, it is a good compromise that is more important than where the state is on the party nomination process. It is worth looking at and as I see it should pass.
Larry Craig: Stop And Just Leave Now
According to one of Sen. Larry Craig's top aides http://FoxNews.com, the Happy Footed senator may now be reconsidering the resignation statement from this past Saturday.
We can thank good ol' Arlen Specter for this latest development.
On Fox News Sunday this past week, Sen. Specter said that Sen. Craig should not have resigned and that he should, in fact, fight the plea deal he reached in Minnesota concerning the alleged trolling for sex in a toilet.
I am publicly begging Sen. Craig. For the good of the Republican party, the very tattered reputation of the senate, the good of the nation and most importantly, the well being of your wife, Suzanne and children and grandchildren, just leave now, with what is left of your reputation intact and fight to clear your name as a private citizen.
Now, I have thought about the fact that Sen. Happy Feet is telling the truth that he decided to plead guilty to the lesser charge to do two things. Put the matter behind him and to not satisfy the prurient curiosity of the Idaho Statesman newspaper and the human excrement of a "blogger", Mike Rodgers. But, he should have fought right then and there and never given in, even to a lesser charge.
Because of that, Sen. Happy Feet needs to leave office to clear his name. That will make the fact that he resigned after a very good senate career under duress less of a bad decision.
But, I do not think that Sen. Happy Feet should listen to the erstwhile Sen. Specter and stay and fight. Maybe Sen. Specter has his heart in the right place, and for the record he was the only senator to somewhat show some support for Sen. Happy Feet. But, there are larger issues at stake.
Sen. Craig alluded to the fact that the United States is at war and that these are serious times.
That and trying to clear your name would take up way to much of your time as a senator means you must not take back your resignation statement of this past Saturday and go and clear yourself. Think of the bigger picture, not just yourself.
We can thank good ol' Arlen Specter for this latest development.
On Fox News Sunday this past week, Sen. Specter said that Sen. Craig should not have resigned and that he should, in fact, fight the plea deal he reached in Minnesota concerning the alleged trolling for sex in a toilet.
I am publicly begging Sen. Craig. For the good of the Republican party, the very tattered reputation of the senate, the good of the nation and most importantly, the well being of your wife, Suzanne and children and grandchildren, just leave now, with what is left of your reputation intact and fight to clear your name as a private citizen.
Now, I have thought about the fact that Sen. Happy Feet is telling the truth that he decided to plead guilty to the lesser charge to do two things. Put the matter behind him and to not satisfy the prurient curiosity of the Idaho Statesman newspaper and the human excrement of a "blogger", Mike Rodgers. But, he should have fought right then and there and never given in, even to a lesser charge.
Because of that, Sen. Happy Feet needs to leave office to clear his name. That will make the fact that he resigned after a very good senate career under duress less of a bad decision.
But, I do not think that Sen. Happy Feet should listen to the erstwhile Sen. Specter and stay and fight. Maybe Sen. Specter has his heart in the right place, and for the record he was the only senator to somewhat show some support for Sen. Happy Feet. But, there are larger issues at stake.
Sen. Craig alluded to the fact that the United States is at war and that these are serious times.
That and trying to clear your name would take up way to much of your time as a senator means you must not take back your resignation statement of this past Saturday and go and clear yourself. Think of the bigger picture, not just yourself.
STOP THE TORTURE!!!
Currently, radio talker Hugh Hewitt http://hughhewitt.com, is torturing listeners by playing one of Sen. Hilary Clinton's speeches over the weekend in New Hampshire.
I think that we should call the United Nations and see if there is a provision in the Geneva Convention on this kind of torture!
The reason Mr. Hewitt is doing this is to wake conservatives up that this is what the at least four years of a Hilary Clinton presidency would be like.
It is frightening!
But, as an optimist, I believe that Sen. Clinton will turn off more voters than turn on. Really, she does not have the kind of rapport with people that the former President, William Jefferson Blythe Clinton, had with the voting public.
She is like the most annoying person one wants to hear. The nagging Mom, nagging wife, nagging sister. The list goes on.
I know that some are already giving the 2008 election to Sen. Clinton, but I am not there at all.
As I have been writing, the American people really want change. They know that will not happen with Sen. Clinton. I happen to think that Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill) will have a good shot even at winning the nomination. But, if Sen. Clinton should win, you read it here first, no VP spot for Sen. Obama. People need to get a clue. Sen. Clinton will not put up with anything that will overshadow her, and Sen. Obama will do it easily, just as Bill Clinton would do. One is enough, thank you.
Yes, I know so many who are Republicans keep saying there is not a candidate that suits them. I do not believe it for one minute.
Look, all you have in the Democrat side is Sens. Clinton and Obama. The rest are also rans.
In the Republican field, there is Sen. John "F--- You" McCain, former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney and now former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson. Even the Republican also rans like former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee and California congressman Duncan Hunter. Even our loon, Congressman Ron Paul is much more interesting than the two Democrat loons, Congressman Dennis Kucinich and former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel.
Yea, yea, the DDBMSM will cover like crazy for Hilary, but she has the highest negatives of any candidate, even worse than lovable former President Richard M. Nixon!
These things matter.
If you can take the torture, listen to Hugh Hewitt, hear the voice of Sen. Clinton and send some cash to the Republican candidate for president of your choice. For a bad Republican is better than Sen. Clinton any day!
I think that we should call the United Nations and see if there is a provision in the Geneva Convention on this kind of torture!
The reason Mr. Hewitt is doing this is to wake conservatives up that this is what the at least four years of a Hilary Clinton presidency would be like.
It is frightening!
But, as an optimist, I believe that Sen. Clinton will turn off more voters than turn on. Really, she does not have the kind of rapport with people that the former President, William Jefferson Blythe Clinton, had with the voting public.
She is like the most annoying person one wants to hear. The nagging Mom, nagging wife, nagging sister. The list goes on.
I know that some are already giving the 2008 election to Sen. Clinton, but I am not there at all.
As I have been writing, the American people really want change. They know that will not happen with Sen. Clinton. I happen to think that Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill) will have a good shot even at winning the nomination. But, if Sen. Clinton should win, you read it here first, no VP spot for Sen. Obama. People need to get a clue. Sen. Clinton will not put up with anything that will overshadow her, and Sen. Obama will do it easily, just as Bill Clinton would do. One is enough, thank you.
Yes, I know so many who are Republicans keep saying there is not a candidate that suits them. I do not believe it for one minute.
Look, all you have in the Democrat side is Sens. Clinton and Obama. The rest are also rans.
In the Republican field, there is Sen. John "F--- You" McCain, former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney and now former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson. Even the Republican also rans like former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee and California congressman Duncan Hunter. Even our loon, Congressman Ron Paul is much more interesting than the two Democrat loons, Congressman Dennis Kucinich and former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel.
Yea, yea, the DDBMSM will cover like crazy for Hilary, but she has the highest negatives of any candidate, even worse than lovable former President Richard M. Nixon!
These things matter.
If you can take the torture, listen to Hugh Hewitt, hear the voice of Sen. Clinton and send some cash to the Republican candidate for president of your choice. For a bad Republican is better than Sen. Clinton any day!
Sunday, September 02, 2007
Jim McGreevey A Priest?! HA! HA! HA!
As most of you know, I as a matter of principal am still a member of the Episcopal Church. It is a challenge for one that actually tries to really read the Holy Bible and use it as a guide. It is difficult to see the language change in the Book of Common Prayer that is absolutely pointless, but politically correct. But, knowing that one of the most corrupt politicians of the age, and no it is not a Clinton, is actually studying to become an Episcopal priest. That charlatan is none other than that "Gay American", former Democrat New Jersey governor, Jim McGreevey.
When I first heard of this, I was struck with utter disbelief. I could not imagine that even as the Episcopal Church continues it downward spiral towards insignificance, would fast track someone as awful a human being as Mr. McGreevey. But, he has been fast-tracked and in three years time may come to be known as Father, or Pastor Jim. On so many levels, it is so wrong.
Firstly, I do not know what diocese and church within that diocese is sponsoring Mr. McGreevey's time at the General Theological Seminary in New York City. I think that is very important. Since I am in the Diocese of Los Angeles, I know for a fact that one must go through intense counseling with a priest and even then go through what is called a discernment process that takes a year. Then, if one still feels called, they can go on to seminary. That is more like a four and a half to five year process.
Secondly, do those in charge really think that a man of Mr. McGreevey's huge deficits is ready to become a priest/pastor? I mean, the real reason that Mr. McGreevey "came out" was because as governor of New Jersey, he was involved in multiple corruption scandals and the threat of being "outed". Well, Mr. McGreevey chose to out himself and resign as governor and also divorce his unsuspecting second wife. One would think that the General Theological Seminary would like to know that he has some of his life in order before answering the call of God to become a priest/pastor. I tend to think that Mr. McGreevey does not have all of his own stuff together.
And, in the church's seemingly outreach to the gay and lesbian community, they will simply lower the bar and let ANYONE study for and eventually become a priest/pastor.
At the end of the day, I do not believe that Mr. McGreevey has the temperament nor moral compass to be a priest/pastor. It is on the basis of holding him accountable for the pain that he went out of his way to cause others, including two wives and children.
It is just absolutely unbelievable that in this age, the Episcopal Church has so lowered itself that it would let someone like Jim McGreevey anywhere near a seminary.
And the Episcopal Church wonders why it has troubles!
When I first heard of this, I was struck with utter disbelief. I could not imagine that even as the Episcopal Church continues it downward spiral towards insignificance, would fast track someone as awful a human being as Mr. McGreevey. But, he has been fast-tracked and in three years time may come to be known as Father, or Pastor Jim. On so many levels, it is so wrong.
Firstly, I do not know what diocese and church within that diocese is sponsoring Mr. McGreevey's time at the General Theological Seminary in New York City. I think that is very important. Since I am in the Diocese of Los Angeles, I know for a fact that one must go through intense counseling with a priest and even then go through what is called a discernment process that takes a year. Then, if one still feels called, they can go on to seminary. That is more like a four and a half to five year process.
Secondly, do those in charge really think that a man of Mr. McGreevey's huge deficits is ready to become a priest/pastor? I mean, the real reason that Mr. McGreevey "came out" was because as governor of New Jersey, he was involved in multiple corruption scandals and the threat of being "outed". Well, Mr. McGreevey chose to out himself and resign as governor and also divorce his unsuspecting second wife. One would think that the General Theological Seminary would like to know that he has some of his life in order before answering the call of God to become a priest/pastor. I tend to think that Mr. McGreevey does not have all of his own stuff together.
And, in the church's seemingly outreach to the gay and lesbian community, they will simply lower the bar and let ANYONE study for and eventually become a priest/pastor.
At the end of the day, I do not believe that Mr. McGreevey has the temperament nor moral compass to be a priest/pastor. It is on the basis of holding him accountable for the pain that he went out of his way to cause others, including two wives and children.
It is just absolutely unbelievable that in this age, the Episcopal Church has so lowered itself that it would let someone like Jim McGreevey anywhere near a seminary.
And the Episcopal Church wonders why it has troubles!
Saturday, September 01, 2007
Now, What Will The Dinosaur, Drive-by Mainstream Media Have To Talk About-Maybe Hilary The Crook Clinton
Now that that Sen. Larry Craig saga is more or less behind us, what will the DDBMSM have to talk about before the report on progress in Iraq on or around September 15th?
Here is a suggestion.
How about how Sen. Hilary Clinton (D-New York) is already embroiled in another Democrat fundraising controversy? Sen. Clinton has not even become the Democrat nominee for president, which I still do not think she will get, and the tricks of the old man, former President William Jefferson Blythe Clinton are rearing its ugly head.
If you want a lot of info on this scandal of the Clinton campaign and Democrats et al, look for writings from John Fund at the Wall Street Journal http://online.wsj.com - you may need a subscription.
Funny, now who is the Party of Corruption?
One would think that the Democrats could have at least waited to get the White House back before returning to their old tricks!
Here is a suggestion.
How about how Sen. Hilary Clinton (D-New York) is already embroiled in another Democrat fundraising controversy? Sen. Clinton has not even become the Democrat nominee for president, which I still do not think she will get, and the tricks of the old man, former President William Jefferson Blythe Clinton are rearing its ugly head.
If you want a lot of info on this scandal of the Clinton campaign and Democrats et al, look for writings from John Fund at the Wall Street Journal http://online.wsj.com - you may need a subscription.
Funny, now who is the Party of Corruption?
One would think that the Democrats could have at least waited to get the White House back before returning to their old tricks!
A Fallen Man And Not A Good Day
This morning, Sen. Larry Craig did the right thing and resigned from the senate effective September 30. We should all hope that this ends the overblown public side of this very unfortunate event and possible series of events.
But, we who called for Sen. Craig to resign should not, and I mean not, be celebrating or happy in the least.
In many ways, this saga of Sen. Craig allegedly soliciting sex with another man at an airport men's room has made a lot of people talk on all sides. Remember, Sen. Craig plead guilty to a much lesser charge of disorderly conduct, not the actual act of solicitation. Judging by the transcripts and audio of the interrogation after Sen. Craig's arrest, not being a lawyer, I think he should have fought it. And it appears that the case was not all that strong because Sen. Craig was able without a problem to plead to a lesser charge.
But, what I think is very important to look at the greater issues of sleazy people who try to "out" alleged homosexuals they do not like because they do not support the "gay agenda", the importance of marriage and is this just another corrupt Republican that can't put his money where his mouth is on a serious issue such as marriage.
Mike Rogers is the most vile human form of excrement on God's green earth. After all, it is Mr. Rogers who is making a crusade to "out" alleged homosexuals because after all, they are living a lie, not being true to themselves by not being open about their sexuality and not supporting the left-wing "gay agenda", especially same sex marriage. Who in the hell is this Rogers to be the judge, jury and executioner on how people should live their lives?! Why doesn't some one look into this creeps life. Here is something that maybe shocking to Rogers. Some people are gay and lesbian and everyone knows it. Some of the same people do not think and or support same sex marriage for a variety of reasons. And, Rogers, there are some people who are bisexual, which you do not want to believe because in your sick, one or the other world, you can not recognize that there are people who may be sexual compulsive who do not care where or how or with who they get sex. That maybe Sen. Craig's problem. But because of this man, Rogers, blogging, which gives all of us who blog a bad name, he accused Sen. Craig of being a closet homosexual. And because of that, an excrement of a blogger, the local Boise newspaper, the Idaho Statesman http://idahostatesman.com felt the need to waste time and money and resources digging into Sen. Craig's sex life all the way back to when he was in college in 1967! And, the Statesman only printed the article because of the plea deal Sen. Craig agreed to and was made public in the Capital Hill newspaper, Roll Call on Monday.
So, why Sen. Craig? Because he opposes the left-wing homosexual agenda which is not focused on same sex marriage. A no-no in left-wing gayland. And, because if you are potentially in the closet about your sexuality, well they are there to help. By ruining you and also your family and children and in Sen. Craig's case, grandchildren. I am sure as I have read all kinds of comments in the blogoshphere that the pro left-wing gay rights crowd is very happy they have destroyed this man and family. Hmm, talk family values!
But, as a serious aside, this issue does raise the meaning of and carrying out of marriage.
As a Christian, I absolutely believe that marriage is between one man and one woman. Period. I also believe that is a sacrament ordained by God in Genesis and in Paul's letter to the Corinthians. Marriage is probably the most important act of giving one's self to another in all ways that we can do here on earth in our short time. In the Holy Bible, it says that the two flesh, man and woman, bond as one flesh in marriage. I take my marriage vows between Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast and I very seriously. And, because I am human, at times I do fall short and so does Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast. That is the way marriage is.
Some people want to redefine that view of marriage. At this time, it is people of the same sex. As an aside, I think it is good for those that are openly gay and lesbian and want to commit their lives to each other. It is better than trolling for sex any where, any time. But, to say that the relationship is exactly the same as my marriage, I just can not wrap around that. I think it is a fair compromise to discuss the concept of civil unions rather than use the M word to describe the relationship of same sex couples. Maybe as science tries to explain the whole of our bodies and brain, it will become more clear. Also, it is only within the last 20 years or so that many Americans are changing their general views of gay and lesbian people in general. By pursing something called same sex marriage, many activist groups are creating some thing to set back the rightful gains of people who are gay and lesbian. Time, and time again, voters in many states have said no to same sex marriage. In many of those same states, talk of civil unions is getting people less worried and thus real discussion can take place. The activists are pushing the envelope way too fast.
In the issue of just another sleazy Republican, if there is truth to what Sen. Craig has done in his life regarding his sexual exploits, then yes he is a "nasty boy" as Sen. Craig referred to former President Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky scandal. And, he did the right thing. Republicans, once they had control of congress ended up not being any better than the Democrats that controlled the House of Representatives for 40 years. We had Mark Foley, who BTW was never denying or affirming that he was gay, it was just there. And all tied to the Abramoff scandals. We Republicans had some bad apples and no one seemed to police them as they should. I would at this point refer you to my post of Friday, August 31 about, "Who Are These People We Elect To Public Office." I think that Republicans and Democrats do not have a whole lot to be proud of.
Both parties have sleeze and need to clean it up. Both parties need to set standards and yes high ones so that the public trust is not trashed by people who are there for their own personal gain and or to be perverts with power or all the negative things that go with being an elected public official. Because the Republican party has controlled the congress until the 2006 elections, there is still fallout from that. But, already there is a scandal brewing with Sen. Hilary Clinton and her fundraising. Here we go again!
But, all in all I really hope that Sen. Larry Craig can get the help that he needs and that he can repair the damage done to his wife and children and grandchildren. We always have to remember in these very serious debates we are not just talking in generalities but about people and when people are involved instead of a concept, we need to be very careful. And when we are talking concepts and understanding, do so not just to score points and make the other guy look bad. We all have our convictions and sometimes we fall short of what we really do believe. That is what I can take away from this, not good day in Idaho and the United States.
But, we who called for Sen. Craig to resign should not, and I mean not, be celebrating or happy in the least.
In many ways, this saga of Sen. Craig allegedly soliciting sex with another man at an airport men's room has made a lot of people talk on all sides. Remember, Sen. Craig plead guilty to a much lesser charge of disorderly conduct, not the actual act of solicitation. Judging by the transcripts and audio of the interrogation after Sen. Craig's arrest, not being a lawyer, I think he should have fought it. And it appears that the case was not all that strong because Sen. Craig was able without a problem to plead to a lesser charge.
But, what I think is very important to look at the greater issues of sleazy people who try to "out" alleged homosexuals they do not like because they do not support the "gay agenda", the importance of marriage and is this just another corrupt Republican that can't put his money where his mouth is on a serious issue such as marriage.
Mike Rogers is the most vile human form of excrement on God's green earth. After all, it is Mr. Rogers who is making a crusade to "out" alleged homosexuals because after all, they are living a lie, not being true to themselves by not being open about their sexuality and not supporting the left-wing "gay agenda", especially same sex marriage. Who in the hell is this Rogers to be the judge, jury and executioner on how people should live their lives?! Why doesn't some one look into this creeps life. Here is something that maybe shocking to Rogers. Some people are gay and lesbian and everyone knows it. Some of the same people do not think and or support same sex marriage for a variety of reasons. And, Rogers, there are some people who are bisexual, which you do not want to believe because in your sick, one or the other world, you can not recognize that there are people who may be sexual compulsive who do not care where or how or with who they get sex. That maybe Sen. Craig's problem. But because of this man, Rogers, blogging, which gives all of us who blog a bad name, he accused Sen. Craig of being a closet homosexual. And because of that, an excrement of a blogger, the local Boise newspaper, the Idaho Statesman http://idahostatesman.com felt the need to waste time and money and resources digging into Sen. Craig's sex life all the way back to when he was in college in 1967! And, the Statesman only printed the article because of the plea deal Sen. Craig agreed to and was made public in the Capital Hill newspaper, Roll Call on Monday.
So, why Sen. Craig? Because he opposes the left-wing homosexual agenda which is not focused on same sex marriage. A no-no in left-wing gayland. And, because if you are potentially in the closet about your sexuality, well they are there to help. By ruining you and also your family and children and in Sen. Craig's case, grandchildren. I am sure as I have read all kinds of comments in the blogoshphere that the pro left-wing gay rights crowd is very happy they have destroyed this man and family. Hmm, talk family values!
But, as a serious aside, this issue does raise the meaning of and carrying out of marriage.
As a Christian, I absolutely believe that marriage is between one man and one woman. Period. I also believe that is a sacrament ordained by God in Genesis and in Paul's letter to the Corinthians. Marriage is probably the most important act of giving one's self to another in all ways that we can do here on earth in our short time. In the Holy Bible, it says that the two flesh, man and woman, bond as one flesh in marriage. I take my marriage vows between Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast and I very seriously. And, because I am human, at times I do fall short and so does Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast. That is the way marriage is.
Some people want to redefine that view of marriage. At this time, it is people of the same sex. As an aside, I think it is good for those that are openly gay and lesbian and want to commit their lives to each other. It is better than trolling for sex any where, any time. But, to say that the relationship is exactly the same as my marriage, I just can not wrap around that. I think it is a fair compromise to discuss the concept of civil unions rather than use the M word to describe the relationship of same sex couples. Maybe as science tries to explain the whole of our bodies and brain, it will become more clear. Also, it is only within the last 20 years or so that many Americans are changing their general views of gay and lesbian people in general. By pursing something called same sex marriage, many activist groups are creating some thing to set back the rightful gains of people who are gay and lesbian. Time, and time again, voters in many states have said no to same sex marriage. In many of those same states, talk of civil unions is getting people less worried and thus real discussion can take place. The activists are pushing the envelope way too fast.
In the issue of just another sleazy Republican, if there is truth to what Sen. Craig has done in his life regarding his sexual exploits, then yes he is a "nasty boy" as Sen. Craig referred to former President Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky scandal. And, he did the right thing. Republicans, once they had control of congress ended up not being any better than the Democrats that controlled the House of Representatives for 40 years. We had Mark Foley, who BTW was never denying or affirming that he was gay, it was just there. And all tied to the Abramoff scandals. We Republicans had some bad apples and no one seemed to police them as they should. I would at this point refer you to my post of Friday, August 31 about, "Who Are These People We Elect To Public Office." I think that Republicans and Democrats do not have a whole lot to be proud of.
Both parties have sleeze and need to clean it up. Both parties need to set standards and yes high ones so that the public trust is not trashed by people who are there for their own personal gain and or to be perverts with power or all the negative things that go with being an elected public official. Because the Republican party has controlled the congress until the 2006 elections, there is still fallout from that. But, already there is a scandal brewing with Sen. Hilary Clinton and her fundraising. Here we go again!
But, all in all I really hope that Sen. Larry Craig can get the help that he needs and that he can repair the damage done to his wife and children and grandchildren. We always have to remember in these very serious debates we are not just talking in generalities but about people and when people are involved instead of a concept, we need to be very careful. And when we are talking concepts and understanding, do so not just to score points and make the other guy look bad. We all have our convictions and sometimes we fall short of what we really do believe. That is what I can take away from this, not good day in Idaho and the United States.
Friday, August 31, 2007
Who Are These People We Elect?
This Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho-not as of tomorrow) fiasco along with the other congressional scandals to many to write about and very bipartisan has led me to ask a fundamental question.
Who are these people that we elect to public office?
No one can say with a straight face that no one knew something about the antics of Sen. Happy Feet. I mean, a sleazy internet blogger, Mike Rogers, felt the need to "out" Sen. Happy Feet as a closeted homosexual, but worse for Sen. Happy Feet, as a congressman back in 1982, he felt the need to inform the media that he was not a homosexual. Reports were circulating about some congressmen, until then Congressman Happy Feet felt the need to go on immediate offense, unnamed involved in sexual relations of some kind with congressional pages. Eventually, the pages dropped the complaint as there was nothing to it. Again I ask, not a soul in congress and the senate did not know there was a cloud over Larry Craig, AKA Happy Feet? I do not think so.
Or how about Sen. David Vitter (R-Louisiana)? Again, no one in congress, where he once served, and the senate knew a thing about the fact he was cavorting with women other than his wife and prostitutes at that? I do not believe that to be the case.
Let us not just dump on Republicans. There is the case of Louisiana Democrat Congressman William Jefferson. An aside, remember I noted in an earlier post that one thing bipartisan in Louisiana is corruption. Back to Congressman Jefferson. The good representative has found a way to put $90,000 in a freezer. Now there is new meaning to cold, hard cash! Again, I ask, no one, not one of Congressman Jefferson's colleagues knew of this? Of course not!
And, well there is a lot about Sen. Hilary Clinton (D-New York) that I can write about, but I only have so much time and space!
I ask my question again. Who are these people that we elect to public office?
I no of no group of 535 people, the number of congressmen and senators, that seem to either be oblivious to what others are doing, or not doing, and when the crap hits the fan, they run from a colleague under the microscope like they were the black plague. I know of no other group that seems to cover for each other and their deviant behavior of all kinds.
And that is the problem. And, I think part of the problem is we live in an age in which nobody wants to be "judgemental." "Judgemental" is a term that has been so abused that people seem to think that it means live it up with no consequences. But, because being "judgemental" is not in vogue, holding the said 535 accountable seems not to be either.
I can not believe that a Republican senator did not take Sen. Happy Feet by the shirt collar and say cool it with the trolling for sex in toilets.
I can not believe that a Democrat congressman did not do the same thing to Congressman William Jefferson and tell him not to take bribes and give the money back and while your at it, why do you not resign.
I think it is time for these people to hold each other accountable, whether it will be a Democrat to a Republican or a Republican to a Democrat. This is a non partisan issue. Just firing these scum come election time is not enough.
I know that we are not electing saints to public office but by God almighty, we should be able to find 535 decent people that will not be an embarrassment, whether it be trolling for sex in a toilet or freezing $90,000 in a freezer.
I wish ACCOUNTABILITY, not being judgemental, was a serious issue in the upcoming election season, but alas it will not be and we will elect these same clowns. And that means we will ask the same question maybe in another two years time. And that is too bad.
Who are these people that we elect to public office?
No one can say with a straight face that no one knew something about the antics of Sen. Happy Feet. I mean, a sleazy internet blogger, Mike Rogers, felt the need to "out" Sen. Happy Feet as a closeted homosexual, but worse for Sen. Happy Feet, as a congressman back in 1982, he felt the need to inform the media that he was not a homosexual. Reports were circulating about some congressmen, until then Congressman Happy Feet felt the need to go on immediate offense, unnamed involved in sexual relations of some kind with congressional pages. Eventually, the pages dropped the complaint as there was nothing to it. Again I ask, not a soul in congress and the senate did not know there was a cloud over Larry Craig, AKA Happy Feet? I do not think so.
Or how about Sen. David Vitter (R-Louisiana)? Again, no one in congress, where he once served, and the senate knew a thing about the fact he was cavorting with women other than his wife and prostitutes at that? I do not believe that to be the case.
Let us not just dump on Republicans. There is the case of Louisiana Democrat Congressman William Jefferson. An aside, remember I noted in an earlier post that one thing bipartisan in Louisiana is corruption. Back to Congressman Jefferson. The good representative has found a way to put $90,000 in a freezer. Now there is new meaning to cold, hard cash! Again, I ask, no one, not one of Congressman Jefferson's colleagues knew of this? Of course not!
And, well there is a lot about Sen. Hilary Clinton (D-New York) that I can write about, but I only have so much time and space!
I ask my question again. Who are these people that we elect to public office?
I no of no group of 535 people, the number of congressmen and senators, that seem to either be oblivious to what others are doing, or not doing, and when the crap hits the fan, they run from a colleague under the microscope like they were the black plague. I know of no other group that seems to cover for each other and their deviant behavior of all kinds.
And that is the problem. And, I think part of the problem is we live in an age in which nobody wants to be "judgemental." "Judgemental" is a term that has been so abused that people seem to think that it means live it up with no consequences. But, because being "judgemental" is not in vogue, holding the said 535 accountable seems not to be either.
I can not believe that a Republican senator did not take Sen. Happy Feet by the shirt collar and say cool it with the trolling for sex in toilets.
I can not believe that a Democrat congressman did not do the same thing to Congressman William Jefferson and tell him not to take bribes and give the money back and while your at it, why do you not resign.
I think it is time for these people to hold each other accountable, whether it will be a Democrat to a Republican or a Republican to a Democrat. This is a non partisan issue. Just firing these scum come election time is not enough.
I know that we are not electing saints to public office but by God almighty, we should be able to find 535 decent people that will not be an embarrassment, whether it be trolling for sex in a toilet or freezing $90,000 in a freezer.
I wish ACCOUNTABILITY, not being judgemental, was a serious issue in the upcoming election season, but alas it will not be and we will elect these same clowns. And that means we will ask the same question maybe in another two years time. And that is too bad.
Sen. John Warner Will NOT Seek A Sixth Term
According to Fox News Channel http://FoxNews.com, Virginia Republican Sen. John Warner will not seek a sixth term to the senate. That is good news. It is now time for Ed Gillespe to get in the primary race and keep this seat in Republican hands. I am afraid that if Congressman Tom Davis runs, this seat will be lost to the Democrats no matter who they run.
Thursday, August 30, 2007
The Fateful Report And Finally A Response From Pro-Surge Forces
Lost in the tabloid saga that is Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho-not much longer) is the fact that on or around September 15, General David Petreaus will deliver the much-anticipated report on the success of the military surge in the Iraq theatre in the War Against Islamofascist Terror.
The good news in that now, the DDBMSM will not be able to give the anti-war forces free reign to trot out their liars and charlatans and will be shadowed by a non-partisan group called Gathering Of Eagles. HT: Michelle Malkin http://michellemalkin.com. According to Mrs. Malkin, this is a coalition of Rolling Thunder, military bloggers and troop/war supporters.
Also under this umbrella are such groups as Move America Forward http://moveamericaforward.org, the Victory Caucus http://victorycaucus.com, Free Republic http://freerepublic.com and Vets For Freedom http://vetsforfreedom.com.
The goal is to shadow the fifth columnist Communist group ANSWER-Act Now to Stop War and End Racism that plans one of their creepy demonstrations on September 15. The ANSWER crowd will stage a "Die-In" in which some of the cretins will pretend that they are victims of the war in the Iraq theatre.
ANSWER also is active in finding disgruntled soldiers who are serving or who have served in the War Against Islamofascist Terror and making their dissenting views seem like the majority that are serving in the armed forces.
A point of note. No one put a gun to any one serving now in the armed forces to join. They were not drafted. If some joined thinking they were there for a cakewalk, well some one sold them a bill of goods. When one joins the armed forces, they do not get to pick and choose where they will or will not fight. If a policeman did not want to go to a certain neighborhood, there would be anarchy. Same for a fireman. Same for anyone who joins any group or organization. Same for the armed forces.
The ANSWER crowd, it should be noted, is very active in the pro illegal immigration movement and was very active in the infamous May Day national demonstrations of 2006. Do you note the day the ANSWER group and their hangers-on chose-May Day, the Communist "workers" holiday. Most of the participants had no clue about the real goals of ANSWER and their affiliates. Thus, most thought they were simply demonstrating for illegal immigrant "rights."
If it holds true that the pro-war forces are able to keep up with ANSWER there will be no way the DDBMSM can avoid covering them. I am sure they will try to make their voice seen as way out of the mainstream or wackos, take your pick!
We in the blogosphere must do all to support this effort so that the rest of America knows that ANSWER is not the only game in town and that once and for all, they will be challenged and that will be a great event for our brave troops and the United States.
The good news in that now, the DDBMSM will not be able to give the anti-war forces free reign to trot out their liars and charlatans and will be shadowed by a non-partisan group called Gathering Of Eagles. HT: Michelle Malkin http://michellemalkin.com. According to Mrs. Malkin, this is a coalition of Rolling Thunder, military bloggers and troop/war supporters.
Also under this umbrella are such groups as Move America Forward http://moveamericaforward.org, the Victory Caucus http://victorycaucus.com, Free Republic http://freerepublic.com and Vets For Freedom http://vetsforfreedom.com.
The goal is to shadow the fifth columnist Communist group ANSWER-Act Now to Stop War and End Racism that plans one of their creepy demonstrations on September 15. The ANSWER crowd will stage a "Die-In" in which some of the cretins will pretend that they are victims of the war in the Iraq theatre.
ANSWER also is active in finding disgruntled soldiers who are serving or who have served in the War Against Islamofascist Terror and making their dissenting views seem like the majority that are serving in the armed forces.
A point of note. No one put a gun to any one serving now in the armed forces to join. They were not drafted. If some joined thinking they were there for a cakewalk, well some one sold them a bill of goods. When one joins the armed forces, they do not get to pick and choose where they will or will not fight. If a policeman did not want to go to a certain neighborhood, there would be anarchy. Same for a fireman. Same for anyone who joins any group or organization. Same for the armed forces.
The ANSWER crowd, it should be noted, is very active in the pro illegal immigration movement and was very active in the infamous May Day national demonstrations of 2006. Do you note the day the ANSWER group and their hangers-on chose-May Day, the Communist "workers" holiday. Most of the participants had no clue about the real goals of ANSWER and their affiliates. Thus, most thought they were simply demonstrating for illegal immigrant "rights."
If it holds true that the pro-war forces are able to keep up with ANSWER there will be no way the DDBMSM can avoid covering them. I am sure they will try to make their voice seen as way out of the mainstream or wackos, take your pick!
We in the blogosphere must do all to support this effort so that the rest of America knows that ANSWER is not the only game in town and that once and for all, they will be challenged and that will be a great event for our brave troops and the United States.
This Larry Craig Thing Will Not Go Away
In the latest on the Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho-still believe not for much longer) saga, the transcript and tape of the police interview of Sen. Craig was released.
I have not heard but read the transcript http://abcnews.com and I am actually confused by the whole thing.
Firstly, why does the arresting officer, Sgt. Dave Karsina, make a point of saying that he does not call the media? That is not something I would say to a suspect that I am interrogating. Of course, I am not a police officer.
As Sen. Craig tells his side of the story, I almost feel sorry for this guy. I think he is NOT the brightest light bulb in the socket. You almost get the feeling this guy was harassed by bully's in school who probably called him names, which I will not put in here, but we all know what they are. At least twice, Sen. Craig makes a point of saying "I'm not gay." Sgt. Karsina tells Sen. Craig that he does not care about the sexual preference of his one way or the other.
As the interrogation continues, it appears that Sen. Craig irritates Sgt. Karsina. Of course it is the sgt's. job to get a confession out of any given suspect. And, Sen. Craig is not giving Sgt. Karsina what he wants.
Also, you get the feeling that Sen. Craig just wants the whole thing to end and get to wherever it was that he was going to, Boise, Idaho or Washington, D. C. So, Sen. Craig is not thinking and just is all over the place with his explanation of the events.
Another interesting something we did not hear. Supposedly, Sen. Craig whipped out, oh boy, what a choice of words! his business card which identified himself as a United States senator and Sen. Craig supposedly saying, "What do you think about that?" to Sgt. Karsina. It must have happened before the interrogation began. We may never know.
An aside. I think the vice squad and who works there at any given police department is the worst assignment any officer than get. I just can not image some one sitting in a toilet stall all day trying to nail people looking for anonymous sex. It is so creepy. But, it is possible that Sgt. Karsina misinterpreted what Sen. Craig was doing. It can happen.
Back to Sen. Craig. I really think that we will never know what was potentially going to happen. But, I still think that Sen. Craig should resign. If he does, he can fight this away from a media looking for more. He should do it for the sake of his family. I think there is something not altogether there with this guy. I tend to think that Sen. Craig may be one of those people who do not care where they get sex and with who. I tend to think that he is a bisexual. And to heterosexuals and homosexuals, that is the worst of both worlds. Hence, if that is the case with Sen. Craig, no wonder he has been trying to hide it all this time.
And to comment on another reprehensible man, Sen David Vitter (R-Louisiana). In an earlier post, I wrote that if he was a real man, he should resign. I stand by that. So what if the Democrat governor appoints another Democrat to fill that seat? The Republicans do not control the senate at this time anyway and that is not a good reason to give cover to one reprobate and sell out the other. Both Sens. Craig and Vitter should resign because both have lost the trust of the people who have elected them and while Sen. Vitter has not been charged with a crime, his mentor former congressman Bob Livingston, did not become speaker of the House when it came out his dalliances.
I just hope this story can die, and soon. There are really important things to write about. Please, Larry Craig and David Vitter, just go away.
I have not heard but read the transcript http://abcnews.com and I am actually confused by the whole thing.
Firstly, why does the arresting officer, Sgt. Dave Karsina, make a point of saying that he does not call the media? That is not something I would say to a suspect that I am interrogating. Of course, I am not a police officer.
As Sen. Craig tells his side of the story, I almost feel sorry for this guy. I think he is NOT the brightest light bulb in the socket. You almost get the feeling this guy was harassed by bully's in school who probably called him names, which I will not put in here, but we all know what they are. At least twice, Sen. Craig makes a point of saying "I'm not gay." Sgt. Karsina tells Sen. Craig that he does not care about the sexual preference of his one way or the other.
As the interrogation continues, it appears that Sen. Craig irritates Sgt. Karsina. Of course it is the sgt's. job to get a confession out of any given suspect. And, Sen. Craig is not giving Sgt. Karsina what he wants.
Also, you get the feeling that Sen. Craig just wants the whole thing to end and get to wherever it was that he was going to, Boise, Idaho or Washington, D. C. So, Sen. Craig is not thinking and just is all over the place with his explanation of the events.
Another interesting something we did not hear. Supposedly, Sen. Craig whipped out, oh boy, what a choice of words! his business card which identified himself as a United States senator and Sen. Craig supposedly saying, "What do you think about that?" to Sgt. Karsina. It must have happened before the interrogation began. We may never know.
An aside. I think the vice squad and who works there at any given police department is the worst assignment any officer than get. I just can not image some one sitting in a toilet stall all day trying to nail people looking for anonymous sex. It is so creepy. But, it is possible that Sgt. Karsina misinterpreted what Sen. Craig was doing. It can happen.
Back to Sen. Craig. I really think that we will never know what was potentially going to happen. But, I still think that Sen. Craig should resign. If he does, he can fight this away from a media looking for more. He should do it for the sake of his family. I think there is something not altogether there with this guy. I tend to think that Sen. Craig may be one of those people who do not care where they get sex and with who. I tend to think that he is a bisexual. And to heterosexuals and homosexuals, that is the worst of both worlds. Hence, if that is the case with Sen. Craig, no wonder he has been trying to hide it all this time.
And to comment on another reprehensible man, Sen David Vitter (R-Louisiana). In an earlier post, I wrote that if he was a real man, he should resign. I stand by that. So what if the Democrat governor appoints another Democrat to fill that seat? The Republicans do not control the senate at this time anyway and that is not a good reason to give cover to one reprobate and sell out the other. Both Sens. Craig and Vitter should resign because both have lost the trust of the people who have elected them and while Sen. Vitter has not been charged with a crime, his mentor former congressman Bob Livingston, did not become speaker of the House when it came out his dalliances.
I just hope this story can die, and soon. There are really important things to write about. Please, Larry Craig and David Vitter, just go away.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Really Important Matters-The Dodgers And Angels And The Pennant Races
As I am already tiring of the Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho-though not much longer) saga, it is time to write about something of really great importance. The pennant races, of course.
As we leave the dog days of summer month of August, now is the time that the men are separated from the boys in who will make the playoffs in major league baseball.
Although my beloved Los Angeles Dodgers had been tanking recently, almost falling to the cellar with the hated San Francisco Giants, they have finally remembered how to win and have won four straight, including a sweep of the lowly Washington Nationals.
An aside. Does any one remember the old saying regarding the Washington Senators? It goes:
First in war, first in peace, last in the American league.
That was because the old Washington Senators, now the Minnesota Twins, usually shared the cellar with the equally hapless St. Louis Browns, now Baltimore Orioles or the, believe it or not, the Boston Red Sox.
Now, here is the change in the saying:
First in war, first in peace, last in the National league.
I could not resist!
Anyway, the Dodgers beginning to win some games hopefully will get them to first place in the National league West and the division title.
And the Anaheim Angels* are keeping up their winning ways dispatching the Seattle Mariners into wild card land. Of course, the Angels had to learn how to win from one of the great former Los Angeles Dodgers, their manager Mike Scioscia. No matter, they should easily win the American league West and that will, God be willing, get closer to the ultimate dream, a Freeway Series-Dodgers vs. Angels.
Yes, I know you east coast biased fans want some hideous Subway Series between the New York Mets and the dreaded New York Yankees. Better luck next year!
It is time for you east coasters to stop with the bias and give us west coasters a dream to come true.
Oh, and if it is the Dodgers and Angels, I will be for the Dodgers now that the Angels have a World Series under their belts. Last World Series title for the Dodgers? 1988. Time for another one for the boys in blue.
*-This blog will NEVER call the Angels the "Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim" or the "Los Angeles Angels" they are, here at least, the Anaheim Angels.
As we leave the dog days of summer month of August, now is the time that the men are separated from the boys in who will make the playoffs in major league baseball.
Although my beloved Los Angeles Dodgers had been tanking recently, almost falling to the cellar with the hated San Francisco Giants, they have finally remembered how to win and have won four straight, including a sweep of the lowly Washington Nationals.
An aside. Does any one remember the old saying regarding the Washington Senators? It goes:
First in war, first in peace, last in the American league.
That was because the old Washington Senators, now the Minnesota Twins, usually shared the cellar with the equally hapless St. Louis Browns, now Baltimore Orioles or the, believe it or not, the Boston Red Sox.
Now, here is the change in the saying:
First in war, first in peace, last in the National league.
I could not resist!
Anyway, the Dodgers beginning to win some games hopefully will get them to first place in the National league West and the division title.
And the Anaheim Angels* are keeping up their winning ways dispatching the Seattle Mariners into wild card land. Of course, the Angels had to learn how to win from one of the great former Los Angeles Dodgers, their manager Mike Scioscia. No matter, they should easily win the American league West and that will, God be willing, get closer to the ultimate dream, a Freeway Series-Dodgers vs. Angels.
Yes, I know you east coast biased fans want some hideous Subway Series between the New York Mets and the dreaded New York Yankees. Better luck next year!
It is time for you east coasters to stop with the bias and give us west coasters a dream to come true.
Oh, and if it is the Dodgers and Angels, I will be for the Dodgers now that the Angels have a World Series under their belts. Last World Series title for the Dodgers? 1988. Time for another one for the boys in blue.
*-This blog will NEVER call the Angels the "Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim" or the "Los Angeles Angels" they are, here at least, the Anaheim Angels.
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
No Tears For Michael Vick
Amazingly, many of the sports writers of the United States seem to have bought suspended Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vicks' pathetic explanation and apology for his role in bankrolling the illegal dog fighting enterprise.
Well, for one thing, Mr. Vick did not confess to the most important charge levelled against him. That he was the ringleader of the whole enterprise, not just the banker. No, Mr. Vick suddenly realizes that dog fighting is wrong. I believe that Mr. Vick came to that conclusion as one by one, his cronies were singing like canaries to the federal prosecutor and all pointing the finger, and it should have been the middle finger, and Mr. Vick.
Mike Vacarro of the New York Post http://nypost.com bought it hook, line and sinker from Mr. Vick. Mr. Vacarro wrote that we should have seen what he saw as he looked at Mr. Vick and the puppy eyes, not his line, my line, of sincere regret. I believe the regret was that Mr. Vick could not weasel his way out of it. Mr. Vick had to cop a plea. And the plea was to the least of the charges.
That is the problem. As his cronies were selling Mr. Vick out faster than the dog in the Bush Baked Beans television commercials, the prosecutor could have made Mr. Vick have to take the plea on the more serious charges. But, he did not and while Mr. Vick is probably going to serve some time in jail.
I hope while Mr. Vick is in jail, he reads the Holy Bible as he now claims he has found Jesus Christ, and understands what the human being's role is in relation to God giving us dominion over the animals. It is not to train dogs to fight each other and when one loses you hang, electrocute, or some other form of torture.
Yes, I am hard on Mr. Vick. It is because I do not believe that he is sincere. I think he is taking a page out of the Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) playbook and first denying all allegations, then copping a plea to a lesser charge, which Sen. Craig did in his little dalliance.
I will believe Mr. Vick when I see what he will do for abused dogs, especially pit bulls. If he shows compassion, and maybe starts a no-kill shelter for abused dogs, he will move up in my book. If not, no tears for Mr. Vick. Just contempt!
Well, for one thing, Mr. Vick did not confess to the most important charge levelled against him. That he was the ringleader of the whole enterprise, not just the banker. No, Mr. Vick suddenly realizes that dog fighting is wrong. I believe that Mr. Vick came to that conclusion as one by one, his cronies were singing like canaries to the federal prosecutor and all pointing the finger, and it should have been the middle finger, and Mr. Vick.
Mike Vacarro of the New York Post http://nypost.com bought it hook, line and sinker from Mr. Vick. Mr. Vacarro wrote that we should have seen what he saw as he looked at Mr. Vick and the puppy eyes, not his line, my line, of sincere regret. I believe the regret was that Mr. Vick could not weasel his way out of it. Mr. Vick had to cop a plea. And the plea was to the least of the charges.
That is the problem. As his cronies were selling Mr. Vick out faster than the dog in the Bush Baked Beans television commercials, the prosecutor could have made Mr. Vick have to take the plea on the more serious charges. But, he did not and while Mr. Vick is probably going to serve some time in jail.
I hope while Mr. Vick is in jail, he reads the Holy Bible as he now claims he has found Jesus Christ, and understands what the human being's role is in relation to God giving us dominion over the animals. It is not to train dogs to fight each other and when one loses you hang, electrocute, or some other form of torture.
Yes, I am hard on Mr. Vick. It is because I do not believe that he is sincere. I think he is taking a page out of the Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) playbook and first denying all allegations, then copping a plea to a lesser charge, which Sen. Craig did in his little dalliance.
I will believe Mr. Vick when I see what he will do for abused dogs, especially pit bulls. If he shows compassion, and maybe starts a no-kill shelter for abused dogs, he will move up in my book. If not, no tears for Mr. Vick. Just contempt!
Lots Of Thoughts On Senator Happy Feet*
*AKA Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho)
I will note this about Sen. Larry Craig. The man has some guts and or stupidity, take your pick, as today he went before the constituents of Idaho and the world and belabored that he was innocent of the charge he pled guilty to in Minneapolis, disorderly conduct. Hmm.
But I do think some serious questions need to be asked. I will preface that this is NOT a defense of Sen. Craig, more a wondering of the axe that is being grinded here.
Since the arrest of Sen. Craig occurred on June 11, 2007 and the plea arrangement was on August 1, 2007. Very important questions. The Idaho Statesman http://idahostatesman.com newspaper was conducting an exhaustive investigation of Sen. Craig. How come they did not know about this? Why was the newspaper Roll Call http://rollcall.com allegedly tipped off some time last week according to John McArdle, the reporter that broke the story, see also http://editorandpublisher.com? Was someone waiting for the right moment since this public record did not peak any one's curiosity? Why did not Sen. Craig mount the vigorous defense he showed today right after the arrest?
I think that the question that needs answers is why no one looked into Sen. Craig's arrest within hours. I mean we all knew about actor Mel Gibson and his anti-Semitic tirade when arrested for drunk driving almost as it happened!
None of what I have brought up can defend the senator. He is correct in saying he has caused a cloud over him and the people of Idaho. One thing for sure, when one pleads guilty without so much as a whimper, something is not right. I do not think that his defense of wanting the charge to go away so as to not embarrass his family is not really a good one. I think Sen. Craig is smarter than that.
A lot of physcho-babble will come out about the fact Sen. Craig is suppressing his homosexuality. But, here is a knuckle ball for you. What if he is not gay as he said today? What if he is a "switch-hitter" liking both men and women? Or, possibly worse, Sen. Craig could be a sex addict and does not care where he gets it, men or women?
All I can say is that I think in about two weeks, Sen. Craig will end this episode and tell the decent people of Idaho that he will not run for reelection in 2008 and that he will not finish his term. I hope that is what he does. And whatever the situation is, I sincerely hope Sen. Craig can get some help and healing for his family and himself.
I will note this about Sen. Larry Craig. The man has some guts and or stupidity, take your pick, as today he went before the constituents of Idaho and the world and belabored that he was innocent of the charge he pled guilty to in Minneapolis, disorderly conduct. Hmm.
But I do think some serious questions need to be asked. I will preface that this is NOT a defense of Sen. Craig, more a wondering of the axe that is being grinded here.
Since the arrest of Sen. Craig occurred on June 11, 2007 and the plea arrangement was on August 1, 2007. Very important questions. The Idaho Statesman http://idahostatesman.com newspaper was conducting an exhaustive investigation of Sen. Craig. How come they did not know about this? Why was the newspaper Roll Call http://rollcall.com allegedly tipped off some time last week according to John McArdle, the reporter that broke the story, see also http://editorandpublisher.com? Was someone waiting for the right moment since this public record did not peak any one's curiosity? Why did not Sen. Craig mount the vigorous defense he showed today right after the arrest?
I think that the question that needs answers is why no one looked into Sen. Craig's arrest within hours. I mean we all knew about actor Mel Gibson and his anti-Semitic tirade when arrested for drunk driving almost as it happened!
None of what I have brought up can defend the senator. He is correct in saying he has caused a cloud over him and the people of Idaho. One thing for sure, when one pleads guilty without so much as a whimper, something is not right. I do not think that his defense of wanting the charge to go away so as to not embarrass his family is not really a good one. I think Sen. Craig is smarter than that.
A lot of physcho-babble will come out about the fact Sen. Craig is suppressing his homosexuality. But, here is a knuckle ball for you. What if he is not gay as he said today? What if he is a "switch-hitter" liking both men and women? Or, possibly worse, Sen. Craig could be a sex addict and does not care where he gets it, men or women?
All I can say is that I think in about two weeks, Sen. Craig will end this episode and tell the decent people of Idaho that he will not run for reelection in 2008 and that he will not finish his term. I hope that is what he does. And whatever the situation is, I sincerely hope Sen. Craig can get some help and healing for his family and himself.
Monday, August 27, 2007
Sen. Craig, Please Resign
It appears that maybe the rumors of Idaho Republican senator Larry Craig are true. That at the very least he has tried to solicit sex in a men's room and that he may be gay.
Now, this is not to gay-bash. If Sen. Craig, who is married with children and even grandchildren, is in fact gay, he needs to come out and deal with it. It is not a good thing to be a George Michael and troll for sex in men's rooms.
According to court records, Sen. Craig was arrested for lewd conduct in public, in this case a men's room at the Minneapolis/St. Paul airport. That was in June. Sen. Craig did not fight the charge but pled guilty. Sen. Craig paid a fine and is on one year unsupervised probation. Question of the day. Did Sen. Craig think this would just stay somewhere in the ether and no one would find out? If so, Sen. Craig must resign on grounds of stupidity alone!
Why this is more important than just another pervert politico trolling for sex anywhere anytime is that a creepy guy named Mike Rogers makes a career out of trying to out Republican homosexuals in office that he feels are hypocrites for not supporting the left-wing gay and lesbian agenda. Mr. Rogers wrote about Sen. Craig in 2006. And no one really picked up on until now.
Unfortunately, in cases like this where there is smoke, there is fire. And that is what has happened with Sen. Craig.
Oh, Sen. Craig mounted a pathetic defense saying that he was trying to get rid of this but that he should have hired a lawyer to fight the charges. Do you think?!
Here is a memo to Sen. Craig. When you are charged with lewd conduct in a men's room and you do not think that you are guilty, you get a lawyer and fight the charges like hell. When you don't, you essentially admit to the act.
Also, I firmly believe that it is perverted to troll for sex in toilets, whether it is straight or gay. There is the old saying, get a room. Sen. Craig should have tried that.
So, I think that Sen. Craig either better offer a helluva better defense or get out now. Resign. And come clean if you are gay. I think you owe to your wife and family. It may be painful, but what you may be doing is worse.
Republicans can not turn a blind eye to this. Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell needs to step in if necessary. If we expect Democrats to have standards, we Republicans have to as well.
Please Sen. Craig, resign for the party and your own good.
Now, this is not to gay-bash. If Sen. Craig, who is married with children and even grandchildren, is in fact gay, he needs to come out and deal with it. It is not a good thing to be a George Michael and troll for sex in men's rooms.
According to court records, Sen. Craig was arrested for lewd conduct in public, in this case a men's room at the Minneapolis/St. Paul airport. That was in June. Sen. Craig did not fight the charge but pled guilty. Sen. Craig paid a fine and is on one year unsupervised probation. Question of the day. Did Sen. Craig think this would just stay somewhere in the ether and no one would find out? If so, Sen. Craig must resign on grounds of stupidity alone!
Why this is more important than just another pervert politico trolling for sex anywhere anytime is that a creepy guy named Mike Rogers makes a career out of trying to out Republican homosexuals in office that he feels are hypocrites for not supporting the left-wing gay and lesbian agenda. Mr. Rogers wrote about Sen. Craig in 2006. And no one really picked up on until now.
Unfortunately, in cases like this where there is smoke, there is fire. And that is what has happened with Sen. Craig.
Oh, Sen. Craig mounted a pathetic defense saying that he was trying to get rid of this but that he should have hired a lawyer to fight the charges. Do you think?!
Here is a memo to Sen. Craig. When you are charged with lewd conduct in a men's room and you do not think that you are guilty, you get a lawyer and fight the charges like hell. When you don't, you essentially admit to the act.
Also, I firmly believe that it is perverted to troll for sex in toilets, whether it is straight or gay. There is the old saying, get a room. Sen. Craig should have tried that.
So, I think that Sen. Craig either better offer a helluva better defense or get out now. Resign. And come clean if you are gay. I think you owe to your wife and family. It may be painful, but what you may be doing is worse.
Republicans can not turn a blind eye to this. Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell needs to step in if necessary. If we expect Democrats to have standards, we Republicans have to as well.
Please Sen. Craig, resign for the party and your own good.
Gonzales A Victim Of The Left
I will preface this post by writing that I have not been a huge fan of soon to be former attorney general Alberto Gonzales. But, I will point out that Mr. Gonzales was not the worst attorney general and the real underlying reason he has been so vilified in the DDBMSM and by left wing Democrats is simple. He is the first Hispanic attorney general and he was appointed by a REPUBLICAN and that is a no-no in Leftyland.
In Leftyland, one who belongs to a "minority" group, eg, Hispanics, Blacks, women, homosexuals, and the list goes on, can not be a conservative and or worse, a Republican. Because you maybe a member of any of the just mentioned groups, you must be to the left and a Democrat. People like Mr. Gonzales have some kind of problem being a Republican and conservative.
Now, as noted, he has not been the best attorney general, but what he was accused of supposedly notoriously doing was nothing that other attorney generals have done in the past. Fire some United States attorneys, who serve at the pleasure of the president no matter who he or she may be. Mr. Gonzales was well within his rights to do that. The supposedly illegal wiretaps. Again, one could argue the merits or non-merits, but nobody would be upset if the attorney general was a Democrat and doing the same thing.
No Democrat would ever say that race played a role in driving Mr. Gonzales out of office, but clearly it was a part of this story.
Mr. Gonzales was clearly in over his head as the attorney general. Somebody more competent, and yes maybe Hispanic could have been appointed to the attorney general in the first place.
But, no matter what one's race is, incompetence can not be rewarded. And he needed to go. But, he was driven out more because he represented something that just drives the Democrat left crazy. Being a conservative Republican is more dangerous to these people than Osama bin Laden and al-Queda.
I am sorry that Mr. Gonzales needed to resign under such pressure. It will never be reported or admitted to, but the Democrat's real reason to drive Mr. Gonzales out was because he is a conservative, Hispanic Republican. How dare he actually think for himself!
In Leftyland, one who belongs to a "minority" group, eg, Hispanics, Blacks, women, homosexuals, and the list goes on, can not be a conservative and or worse, a Republican. Because you maybe a member of any of the just mentioned groups, you must be to the left and a Democrat. People like Mr. Gonzales have some kind of problem being a Republican and conservative.
Now, as noted, he has not been the best attorney general, but what he was accused of supposedly notoriously doing was nothing that other attorney generals have done in the past. Fire some United States attorneys, who serve at the pleasure of the president no matter who he or she may be. Mr. Gonzales was well within his rights to do that. The supposedly illegal wiretaps. Again, one could argue the merits or non-merits, but nobody would be upset if the attorney general was a Democrat and doing the same thing.
No Democrat would ever say that race played a role in driving Mr. Gonzales out of office, but clearly it was a part of this story.
Mr. Gonzales was clearly in over his head as the attorney general. Somebody more competent, and yes maybe Hispanic could have been appointed to the attorney general in the first place.
But, no matter what one's race is, incompetence can not be rewarded. And he needed to go. But, he was driven out more because he represented something that just drives the Democrat left crazy. Being a conservative Republican is more dangerous to these people than Osama bin Laden and al-Queda.
I am sorry that Mr. Gonzales needed to resign under such pressure. It will never be reported or admitted to, but the Democrat's real reason to drive Mr. Gonzales out was because he is a conservative, Hispanic Republican. How dare he actually think for himself!
Saturday, August 25, 2007
Romney Right About Abortion
In a recent interview with ABC news http://abcnews.com, former Massachusetts governor, Mitt Romney, said that he favors the individual states deciding abortion laws. For some inexplicable reason, people thought that Mr. Romney was changing his position on abortion. Actually, nothing can be further from the truth.
Mr. Romney is accentuating the end result of the supreme court eventually overturning the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision. What Roe vs. Wade did was take the issue of abortion away from the states, found that somehow murdering unborn babies is a "privacy" issue and nationalize it by making easy access to abortion the law of the land, no matter where one resides.
If President Bush gets another chance before leaving office in 2009 to nominate another supreme court justice, there is no doubt that within the next few years, the supreme court will hear a case and they will overturn Roe Vs. Wade and more than likely a slew of similar laws that usurped the right of the states to determine many laws. Thus, as far as a possible President Romney, the issue will be moot at the federal level.
Then what will happen? Exactly what Mr. Romney said and the best approach to eventually banning most abortions nationwide.
The states will determine abortion laws. Some states through their legislatures will lead to ban most abortions. Some will put very tight restrictions, but not outright ban abortions. Some states may even liberalize abortions even further than what the abominable Roe vs. Wade decision had in mind.
My thinking is that most southern states will ban most abortions. The Midwest and most of the Plains states will tightly restrict but not ban abortion outright. The rest of the states, like New York and more than likely California, decidedly Democrat leaning and very "blue" will mandate liberal abortion laws.
And that is what Mr. Romney was saying in favoring the states to determine abortion law. And Mr. Romney is more than likely correct in assessing that the majority of Americans are not yet ready for a wholesale ban on abortions. But, the good news is that majorities of Americans are not favoring abortion on demand and thus eventually a majority will favor some kind of ban on abortions. Then either a President Romney or another president can pursue a federal constitutional ban on abortion.
But, until the a solid, consistent majority of people in the United States are wanting to ban most abortions nationwide, Mr. Romney is correct in saying that it should be left up to the states once the abominable Roe vs. Wade decision is overturned.
Until Roe vs. Wade is overturned, we continue to be a nation that is not civilized in allowing abortion on demand. And we can not lie and say that many abortions are not done for convenience, or to the so-called mother and or very bad, irresponsible father and inconvenience. And there are not many done to protect the life of the mother. And there are not many done because a woman was raped or the even more evil act on incest.
Mr. Romney's position will lead to what some people would say are abortions that are rare. And in some parts of the United States within the laws of that state. Mr. Romney's position is a federalist position and not at all inconsistent with being pro-life. It is what will happen when a future supreme court stops the abomination called abortion on demand.
Mr. Romney is accentuating the end result of the supreme court eventually overturning the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision. What Roe vs. Wade did was take the issue of abortion away from the states, found that somehow murdering unborn babies is a "privacy" issue and nationalize it by making easy access to abortion the law of the land, no matter where one resides.
If President Bush gets another chance before leaving office in 2009 to nominate another supreme court justice, there is no doubt that within the next few years, the supreme court will hear a case and they will overturn Roe Vs. Wade and more than likely a slew of similar laws that usurped the right of the states to determine many laws. Thus, as far as a possible President Romney, the issue will be moot at the federal level.
Then what will happen? Exactly what Mr. Romney said and the best approach to eventually banning most abortions nationwide.
The states will determine abortion laws. Some states through their legislatures will lead to ban most abortions. Some will put very tight restrictions, but not outright ban abortions. Some states may even liberalize abortions even further than what the abominable Roe vs. Wade decision had in mind.
My thinking is that most southern states will ban most abortions. The Midwest and most of the Plains states will tightly restrict but not ban abortion outright. The rest of the states, like New York and more than likely California, decidedly Democrat leaning and very "blue" will mandate liberal abortion laws.
And that is what Mr. Romney was saying in favoring the states to determine abortion law. And Mr. Romney is more than likely correct in assessing that the majority of Americans are not yet ready for a wholesale ban on abortions. But, the good news is that majorities of Americans are not favoring abortion on demand and thus eventually a majority will favor some kind of ban on abortions. Then either a President Romney or another president can pursue a federal constitutional ban on abortion.
But, until the a solid, consistent majority of people in the United States are wanting to ban most abortions nationwide, Mr. Romney is correct in saying that it should be left up to the states once the abominable Roe vs. Wade decision is overturned.
Until Roe vs. Wade is overturned, we continue to be a nation that is not civilized in allowing abortion on demand. And we can not lie and say that many abortions are not done for convenience, or to the so-called mother and or very bad, irresponsible father and inconvenience. And there are not many done to protect the life of the mother. And there are not many done because a woman was raped or the even more evil act on incest.
Mr. Romney's position will lead to what some people would say are abortions that are rare. And in some parts of the United States within the laws of that state. Mr. Romney's position is a federalist position and not at all inconsistent with being pro-life. It is what will happen when a future supreme court stops the abomination called abortion on demand.
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Sign My Wife Up For Homeland Security!
Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast is almost ahead of the curve when thinking about potential terrorist targets.
Last month, Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast and I were in Vancouver, British Columbia and we took one the ferries over to Vancouver Island and took in the sites of Victoria, the provincial capital. We were on a small tour bus and we had to drive about a half an hour and almost back in the United States to catch the ferry. We just drove on to the ferry, no questions asked and walked around.
As an aside, this was a great ferry. It almost felt like being on a cruise ship. I would recommend taking it if you are ever in this area of Canada.
Anyway, about halfway into our 90 minute journey, Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast asked where was the security? I told her I did not know. So, she asked if I thought that with such laxed security, would it not be easy as can be for terrorists to wreak havoc. I said yes, it would.
Forward a month and back here in the United States and voila, a potential threat on the ferry system in Washington state.
There have been two men that look Middle Eastern and they have shown an unusual interests in the workings of one of the main ferries. This worried some people enough to take photos of the potential suspects and alert the authorities.
Another aside. Apparently the Seattle Post-Intelligencer feels no need to publish the photos in their fishwrap of a newspaper. They feel that it would be racial profiling. And they wonder why people are not reading newspapers.
Back to the terrorist threat.
Does the homeland security department realize that people like Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast are the kind of people that they need? It is people that are ahead of the curve and at the very least thinking about the potential.
Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast also likes to share the same theories when we attend sporting events. Again, she is right. Because sporting events tend to draw people to pay attention to the game at hand, almost no one would be paying attention if we took say the two men in Washington state and put them in Dodger Stadium and running the same questions to stadium personnel and maybe taking unusual photos.
Again, people like Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast are ahead of the curve.
It is not that I do not think about it. I do all the time and very glad that we have a president in George W. Bush who recognizes the threats and trying all he can to prevent them.
But, what needs to be done is for homeland security to find a way to harness the thoughts of people like Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast and use that to try to find ways to prevent the next potential terrorist attack.
Last month, Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast and I were in Vancouver, British Columbia and we took one the ferries over to Vancouver Island and took in the sites of Victoria, the provincial capital. We were on a small tour bus and we had to drive about a half an hour and almost back in the United States to catch the ferry. We just drove on to the ferry, no questions asked and walked around.
As an aside, this was a great ferry. It almost felt like being on a cruise ship. I would recommend taking it if you are ever in this area of Canada.
Anyway, about halfway into our 90 minute journey, Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast asked where was the security? I told her I did not know. So, she asked if I thought that with such laxed security, would it not be easy as can be for terrorists to wreak havoc. I said yes, it would.
Forward a month and back here in the United States and voila, a potential threat on the ferry system in Washington state.
There have been two men that look Middle Eastern and they have shown an unusual interests in the workings of one of the main ferries. This worried some people enough to take photos of the potential suspects and alert the authorities.
Another aside. Apparently the Seattle Post-Intelligencer feels no need to publish the photos in their fishwrap of a newspaper. They feel that it would be racial profiling. And they wonder why people are not reading newspapers.
Back to the terrorist threat.
Does the homeland security department realize that people like Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast are the kind of people that they need? It is people that are ahead of the curve and at the very least thinking about the potential.
Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast also likes to share the same theories when we attend sporting events. Again, she is right. Because sporting events tend to draw people to pay attention to the game at hand, almost no one would be paying attention if we took say the two men in Washington state and put them in Dodger Stadium and running the same questions to stadium personnel and maybe taking unusual photos.
Again, people like Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast are ahead of the curve.
It is not that I do not think about it. I do all the time and very glad that we have a president in George W. Bush who recognizes the threats and trying all he can to prevent them.
But, what needs to be done is for homeland security to find a way to harness the thoughts of people like Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast and use that to try to find ways to prevent the next potential terrorist attack.
More On The Innocent Victims Of Michael Vick's Side Business
As we speak, a judge will have to make a heartwretching decision on the fate of the 50 plus dogs that were saved from the Michael Vick side business, dogfighting.
As of this writing, no one has come forward to rescue the dogs and more than likely they will be euthanized. And no less than the most awful of the animal "rights" groups, PETA, says that the dogs are beyond rehabilitation and need to be euthanized. Really?
In one sense, the dogs are like humans in that they are not born to fight. These dogs were trained to fight. Yes, there is no doubt that these dogs can not be with other dogs and maybe with each other. But why can't PETA and the animal welfare groups get together and find a way to save the dogs?
There are many no-kill shelters that dogs live out their lives even if they are never adopted. Are there any for these kind of dogs? Could it be possible to create one so that these, the truly innocent victims of this horrible enterprise, be allowed to live out their days?
One reason that I want the dogs to live to remind people like Mr. Vick what havoc they have created to satisfy a bizarre satisfaction watching two, maybe more, dogs rip each other apart. And of course there is the betting. That is where the action really is.
These dogs were not born to be the fighters that they became. Some cretins created the viciousness that has potentially ruined these dogs.
Mr. Vick needs these dogs to be kept alive because they would serve as a reminder that he and all of us were given dominion over the animals by God. Not to abuse them, but to be shepherds to them.
Now, I should note that I am not a vegetarian and I love meat. But, I know that those animals, cows and pigs mainly, are bred for the purpose of being a good dinner. And there are better ways that they can be killed to be made food for us humans. Again, that would fall under animal welfare and not rights.
As we humans have evolved, we have a better understanding of animals and particularly dogs and to a lesser extent, cats. And we have come to realize that they have a relationship with us. But, some people like Mr. Vick and his cronies did not and probably still do not get that. And that leads to what they did.
But the poor dogs that they abused should not suffer because of the heinousness of these men.
I wish those who have the means and ability will save these dogs.
Oh, and as far as PETA goes, some animal "rights" group they are as they have shown that they are the hypocrites we who favor animal welfare have always known they were.
As of this writing, no one has come forward to rescue the dogs and more than likely they will be euthanized. And no less than the most awful of the animal "rights" groups, PETA, says that the dogs are beyond rehabilitation and need to be euthanized. Really?
In one sense, the dogs are like humans in that they are not born to fight. These dogs were trained to fight. Yes, there is no doubt that these dogs can not be with other dogs and maybe with each other. But why can't PETA and the animal welfare groups get together and find a way to save the dogs?
There are many no-kill shelters that dogs live out their lives even if they are never adopted. Are there any for these kind of dogs? Could it be possible to create one so that these, the truly innocent victims of this horrible enterprise, be allowed to live out their days?
One reason that I want the dogs to live to remind people like Mr. Vick what havoc they have created to satisfy a bizarre satisfaction watching two, maybe more, dogs rip each other apart. And of course there is the betting. That is where the action really is.
These dogs were not born to be the fighters that they became. Some cretins created the viciousness that has potentially ruined these dogs.
Mr. Vick needs these dogs to be kept alive because they would serve as a reminder that he and all of us were given dominion over the animals by God. Not to abuse them, but to be shepherds to them.
Now, I should note that I am not a vegetarian and I love meat. But, I know that those animals, cows and pigs mainly, are bred for the purpose of being a good dinner. And there are better ways that they can be killed to be made food for us humans. Again, that would fall under animal welfare and not rights.
As we humans have evolved, we have a better understanding of animals and particularly dogs and to a lesser extent, cats. And we have come to realize that they have a relationship with us. But, some people like Mr. Vick and his cronies did not and probably still do not get that. And that leads to what they did.
But the poor dogs that they abused should not suffer because of the heinousness of these men.
I wish those who have the means and ability will save these dogs.
Oh, and as far as PETA goes, some animal "rights" group they are as they have shown that they are the hypocrites we who favor animal welfare have always known they were.
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Talkradio Talking About Pointless Poll
Today, the three talk shows that I listen to so far, Laura Ingraham, Dennis Prager, and Michael Medved, are talking about my post from yesterday concerning the comments from Pat Schroder about the the reading habits of conservatives and liberals.
It is so eye opening that people really think that it is true that liberals are smarter than conservatives. What I have noted time and time again, it is because of the smugness of liberals that they do themselves in. The average liberal today, who is really a socialist, wants to tell you what to think and or "bring you along" to their way of thinking because if you are a conservative, you are not thinking to begin with.
If you do not believe me, have a conversation with the average socialist today. See if they do not mock you and or what you believe.
That is exactly what Mrs. Schroder did in her stupidity by saying that liberals are smarter than conservatives. That liberals want to believe themselves.
But those of us who are conservative know better. We are smart and are much more willing to access the tools such as the Internet than many socialists. They are the ones that are fearful of modernity and technology. That is why maybe conservatives may not read books as much as socialists.
The talkers need to keep the conversation up. Conservatives should never let these knuckle-dragging socialists keep us down. Prove to them that we are indeed smart and smarter than the average socialist.
It is so eye opening that people really think that it is true that liberals are smarter than conservatives. What I have noted time and time again, it is because of the smugness of liberals that they do themselves in. The average liberal today, who is really a socialist, wants to tell you what to think and or "bring you along" to their way of thinking because if you are a conservative, you are not thinking to begin with.
If you do not believe me, have a conversation with the average socialist today. See if they do not mock you and or what you believe.
That is exactly what Mrs. Schroder did in her stupidity by saying that liberals are smarter than conservatives. That liberals want to believe themselves.
But those of us who are conservative know better. We are smart and are much more willing to access the tools such as the Internet than many socialists. They are the ones that are fearful of modernity and technology. That is why maybe conservatives may not read books as much as socialists.
The talkers need to keep the conversation up. Conservatives should never let these knuckle-dragging socialists keep us down. Prove to them that we are indeed smart and smarter than the average socialist.
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Mitt On The Move
The Republican Iowa Straw Poll results showing former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney the winner is having an effect.
Today in the Real Clear Politics http://realclearpolitics.com polling average for Republican presidential candidates, Mr. Romney is tied with Arizona senator John "F--- You" McCain for third place, both at 12.7%. And that puts Mr. Romney within striking distance to former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson, who is second at 17%.
The polling data is cumulative of many polls, it is not just one poll.
Since Mr. Romney won the straw poll, he is getting more scrutiny and his numbers are going up as more people see what he is all about.
The plan is working and look for Mr. Romney to keep going on the upward trajectory.
Today in the Real Clear Politics http://realclearpolitics.com polling average for Republican presidential candidates, Mr. Romney is tied with Arizona senator John "F--- You" McCain for third place, both at 12.7%. And that puts Mr. Romney within striking distance to former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson, who is second at 17%.
The polling data is cumulative of many polls, it is not just one poll.
Since Mr. Romney won the straw poll, he is getting more scrutiny and his numbers are going up as more people see what he is all about.
The plan is working and look for Mr. Romney to keep going on the upward trajectory.
How To Alienate Potential Customers
Leave to a left-winger to go out her way to alienate a potential customer base with a stupid comment that shows how these people really think.
Pat Schroder, a former Democrat congresswoman from Colorado is the president of the American Association of Publishers and in a recent interview http://breitbart.com said, I kid you not, that it is all Karl Rove's fault!
UNBELIVEABLE!
This is the beautiful quote from Mrs. Schroder:
"The Karl Roves of the world have built a generation that just wants a couple of slogans: 'Not, don't raise taxes, no new taxes.' "
So, according to Mrs. Schroder, those of us who are conservatives are so dumb and yuk yuk yuk that we only care about taxes and we all get our marching orders, blindly, from Karl Rove.
But, it gets better. Mrs. Schroder also went on to say that liberals tend to be policy wonks who "who can't say anything in less than three paragraphs. We really want the whole picture, want to peel the onion."
Again, liberals want to know more than conservatives who are morons and just led like robots.
What an anus Mrs. Schroder is!
It also goes to the heart of the mindset of the left. They really do believe that they are smarter than conservatives and one example is that they read more books than conservatives. Of course, Mrs. Schroder does not expand on what kind of books the intellectual giants are reading. Maybe they are reading romance novels.
All of this hyperbole is in response to a recent poll in which liberals claim that they read more than conservatives.
The poll was by AP-Ipsos, so that should tell one something.
According to the poll, 22% of liberals and moderates said that they have not read at least one book in the past year. Us ignorant conservatives come up with 34% who have not read a book within the past year.
So what? Liberals always want to show off how "smart" they are and will say they read more, are more culturally aware and all of that. I want to know what kind of books these people supposedly read? I think that makes a difference. Also, what the article pointed out is that the publishing industry is liberal dominated. So, the publishers tend to go after those they know will buy books. Have these same nimrods noticed celebrated conservative authors like Ann Coulter or Newt Gingrich, and many other conservative authors? Have these same nimrods noticed that there is niche book clubs like the Conservative Book Club or American Compass? And most damning, have they noticed because they have so ignored the conservative reader that there are publishing houses by and for conservatives such as Regenery? Probably not judging by Mrs. Schroder's moronic comments.
Yes, I am enraged because this is the canard of the left. We are dumb. We only care about taxes. We are easily lead.
Nothing is further from the truth.
Conservatives are thinking people who access a great deal of information to make our world view. We do read and you may notice that I have some book recommendations on this site. But, we also use the Internet and other sources to understand and thus have a world view. It is now apparent to liberals and instead of competing in the field of ideas, people like Mrs. Schroder like to mock us. It shows how ideologically bankrupt the left is.
Here is something for Pat Schroder and her ilk.
Keep offending potential readers. Make us more enraged. We need to have more conservative publishing houses so we can actually get our books out there so the public can read and judge for themselves. Since you think that we are morons, yuk yuk yuks and plain stupid that all we can comprehend is slogans, maybe you should publish a book of slogans. Oh, we would not know how to purchase them without help from Karl Rove.
Pat Schroder, a former Democrat congresswoman from Colorado is the president of the American Association of Publishers and in a recent interview http://breitbart.com said, I kid you not, that it is all Karl Rove's fault!
UNBELIVEABLE!
This is the beautiful quote from Mrs. Schroder:
"The Karl Roves of the world have built a generation that just wants a couple of slogans: 'Not, don't raise taxes, no new taxes.' "
So, according to Mrs. Schroder, those of us who are conservatives are so dumb and yuk yuk yuk that we only care about taxes and we all get our marching orders, blindly, from Karl Rove.
But, it gets better. Mrs. Schroder also went on to say that liberals tend to be policy wonks who "who can't say anything in less than three paragraphs. We really want the whole picture, want to peel the onion."
Again, liberals want to know more than conservatives who are morons and just led like robots.
What an anus Mrs. Schroder is!
It also goes to the heart of the mindset of the left. They really do believe that they are smarter than conservatives and one example is that they read more books than conservatives. Of course, Mrs. Schroder does not expand on what kind of books the intellectual giants are reading. Maybe they are reading romance novels.
All of this hyperbole is in response to a recent poll in which liberals claim that they read more than conservatives.
The poll was by AP-Ipsos, so that should tell one something.
According to the poll, 22% of liberals and moderates said that they have not read at least one book in the past year. Us ignorant conservatives come up with 34% who have not read a book within the past year.
So what? Liberals always want to show off how "smart" they are and will say they read more, are more culturally aware and all of that. I want to know what kind of books these people supposedly read? I think that makes a difference. Also, what the article pointed out is that the publishing industry is liberal dominated. So, the publishers tend to go after those they know will buy books. Have these same nimrods noticed celebrated conservative authors like Ann Coulter or Newt Gingrich, and many other conservative authors? Have these same nimrods noticed that there is niche book clubs like the Conservative Book Club or American Compass? And most damning, have they noticed because they have so ignored the conservative reader that there are publishing houses by and for conservatives such as Regenery? Probably not judging by Mrs. Schroder's moronic comments.
Yes, I am enraged because this is the canard of the left. We are dumb. We only care about taxes. We are easily lead.
Nothing is further from the truth.
Conservatives are thinking people who access a great deal of information to make our world view. We do read and you may notice that I have some book recommendations on this site. But, we also use the Internet and other sources to understand and thus have a world view. It is now apparent to liberals and instead of competing in the field of ideas, people like Mrs. Schroder like to mock us. It shows how ideologically bankrupt the left is.
Here is something for Pat Schroder and her ilk.
Keep offending potential readers. Make us more enraged. We need to have more conservative publishing houses so we can actually get our books out there so the public can read and judge for themselves. Since you think that we are morons, yuk yuk yuks and plain stupid that all we can comprehend is slogans, maybe you should publish a book of slogans. Oh, we would not know how to purchase them without help from Karl Rove.
Monday, August 20, 2007
Michael Vick Is Going To Get What He Deserves-But Is Still A Coward
I am in sheer rejoicing as it appears that Atlanta Falcon quarterback Michael Vick is going to plead guilty for his role in the great dogfighting caper. And it looks like he will serve roughly about one year as a guest of the federal government.
Now some would say that it is too much to actually put some one in federal prison for dogfighting. After all, it is a dumb animal and so what if he finished the dog off with a beating when hanging a fighting dog who lost a fight? Others would say that his animal, particular dog murder is a bad crime and that even the sentence that he will receive is not enough.
I for one believe in animal welfare, not animal rights. Thus, Mr. Vick clearly showed no welfare for a defenseless animal, or numerous dogs, for what he did in training the dogs to fight each other and when they lose, kill them.
At the end of the day, what this shows is that animal abusers like Mr. Vick and company are nothing but cowards. The only reason that Mr. Vick is pleading guilty is because his co-conspirators fell like a deck of cards, taking any deal that the feds offered and all pointing the finger to Mr. Vick.
It is not manly to take a dog, more than likely pit bull terriers, train it to fight to the death if for the sick entertainment of men who are not men, and when it loses to kill it in such a brutal manner. I mean, if the poor dog does not die from the hanging, beat the bitch or bastard to death. A real man-NOT!
As an aside, because of Mr. Vick and his cronies, they have perpetuated the myth that all pit bulls are bad dogs. They are bad when they are trained to be bad. Many pit bulls that I have encountered at our local dog park when we take our dog have been the friendliest and sweetest dogs in the whole park. I take Warren Eckstein's word about the fate of the pit bull http://thepetshow.com over excitable politicians who get excited about when there is a case of pit bulls doing bad things. They are trained to do it.
If Mr. Vick was a real man, when he was charged with his dastardly acts, he would have pleaded out then. But, he waited until he was the last "man" standing to plead out his case. And of course he offered the mandatory apology and the like. I believe they are called crocodile tears.
Now here is a real novel sentence for Mr. Vick and his cronies. How about a crew of the dogs that they trained to fight be put on them to do as they please. Maybe they will see what they hath wrought. But I doubt it.
Mr. Vick will serve time and probably be cut from the Atlanta Falcons, just in time for the opening weekend in September. But a man, a real man, he is not.
Now some would say that it is too much to actually put some one in federal prison for dogfighting. After all, it is a dumb animal and so what if he finished the dog off with a beating when hanging a fighting dog who lost a fight? Others would say that his animal, particular dog murder is a bad crime and that even the sentence that he will receive is not enough.
I for one believe in animal welfare, not animal rights. Thus, Mr. Vick clearly showed no welfare for a defenseless animal, or numerous dogs, for what he did in training the dogs to fight each other and when they lose, kill them.
At the end of the day, what this shows is that animal abusers like Mr. Vick and company are nothing but cowards. The only reason that Mr. Vick is pleading guilty is because his co-conspirators fell like a deck of cards, taking any deal that the feds offered and all pointing the finger to Mr. Vick.
It is not manly to take a dog, more than likely pit bull terriers, train it to fight to the death if for the sick entertainment of men who are not men, and when it loses to kill it in such a brutal manner. I mean, if the poor dog does not die from the hanging, beat the bitch or bastard to death. A real man-NOT!
As an aside, because of Mr. Vick and his cronies, they have perpetuated the myth that all pit bulls are bad dogs. They are bad when they are trained to be bad. Many pit bulls that I have encountered at our local dog park when we take our dog have been the friendliest and sweetest dogs in the whole park. I take Warren Eckstein's word about the fate of the pit bull http://thepetshow.com over excitable politicians who get excited about when there is a case of pit bulls doing bad things. They are trained to do it.
If Mr. Vick was a real man, when he was charged with his dastardly acts, he would have pleaded out then. But, he waited until he was the last "man" standing to plead out his case. And of course he offered the mandatory apology and the like. I believe they are called crocodile tears.
Now here is a real novel sentence for Mr. Vick and his cronies. How about a crew of the dogs that they trained to fight be put on them to do as they please. Maybe they will see what they hath wrought. But I doubt it.
Mr. Vick will serve time and probably be cut from the Atlanta Falcons, just in time for the opening weekend in September. But a man, a real man, he is not.
Sunday, August 19, 2007
The BBC-This Is What Happens When Media Is Government Controlled
Beatiful! The British Broadcasting Corporation thinks that it is apporpriate to keep a comment on it's website for weeks refering to Jesus Christ as a Ba------. Yes, the poster was correct to refer to Jesus as fatherless in earthly terms, but Jesus did have a father-God. It is that kind of ignorance or intentional blasphemy that the Beeb finds a-ok. Now, what if there was a poster refering to Mohammed, the founder of Islam as a pedophile? How long would that stay on the website? An aside, in the United Kingdom, every television or radio is subject to a government tax and that in turn keeps the BBC in business. I shudder to think that if the left in the United States got their way, and broadcasting was like that what our news would look like. Oh, I forgot. It is called NPR.
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
Friday, August 17, 2007
Romney Wins Illinois Straw Poll
Yes, I know that most of you did not know about the Illinois Straw Poll and I must confess, neither did I. But, there was one for Republican Day at the Illinois state fair http://cnn.com, and former Massachusetts governor, Mitt Romney, won with ease.
Mr. Romney had over 40% of the vote. No question that Mr. Romney got this from the win last Saturday in the Iowa Straw Poll.
It will be these kind of victories that may not seem much at the time, but will be key points in this death march to the Republican presidential nomination.
Remember that a win is a win and we who support Mr. Romney know that where there are more of these the wins, the polling numbers will go up and he will get that much closer to the current front runner, former New York City mayor, Rudy Giuliani.
Mr. Romney had over 40% of the vote. No question that Mr. Romney got this from the win last Saturday in the Iowa Straw Poll.
It will be these kind of victories that may not seem much at the time, but will be key points in this death march to the Republican presidential nomination.
Remember that a win is a win and we who support Mr. Romney know that where there are more of these the wins, the polling numbers will go up and he will get that much closer to the current front runner, former New York City mayor, Rudy Giuliani.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
I Like Mike, But Mitt's My Guy
Yesterday, radio talker Michael Medved http://michaelmedved.com all but came out endorsing former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee for the GOP presidential nomination. I like Mike, but Mitt's my guy and for the same reasons that Mr. Medved tacitly endorses Mr. Huckabee.
The most likable aspect about Mr. Huckabee is that he is a regular guy. He is the first in his family to not only graduate from high school but from college as well. Like another regular guy, former president Ronald Reagan, he graduated from a little-known college. Mr. Huckabee's college was Ouachita Baptist University while Mr. Reagan's was Eureka College and a part of the Disciples of Christ denomination which Mr. Reagan was raised.
Another good thing about Mr. Huckabee, and I think a real important aspect of what all on the Republican side need to listen to. Mr. Huckabee says about himself "I am a conservative but I am not mad at anyone." Many conservatives seem to forget that Mr. Reagan also was a conservative and not angry. Angry conservative Republicans will not get beyond dog-catcher as angry Democrats. If that was the case, we would be talking about President Howard Dean.
But, there are quite a few downsides that I see as stunting the case for Mike Huckabee.
Mr. Huckabee is an ordained Southern Baptist minister. I have no problem and former president Bill Clinton was a Southern Baptist. But an actual minister will only exacerbate the bloody culture wars and turn off more voters than turn on. In the case of Mitt Romney, he too is a minister but not in the same sense as Mr. Huckabee. Mormon men in good standing are ministers, not paid, and as in the case of Mr. Romney he rose to the rank of bishop which is the equivalent to a diocese in the Roman Catholic and Episcopal churches. So, both men are men of faith and controversial ones at that. But, one is ordained and one is not and not as obvious and while that may sound bad, it is true.
Another aspect of Mr. Huckabee is that he is proud of his record as a politician. And, regrettably that is part of the problem. We need a non-politician type at this point. All of the Democrat candidates for president are government and big to bigger government type. The advantage of Mr. Romney is that he has been in the private sector and thus has had to meet a payroll. He knows the bad effects of big government.
Most importantly, Mr. Huckabee can not run from the fact he has raised taxes as governor of Arkansas. Mr. Romney not only did not raise taxes as governor of Massachusetts, but cut the size of the state government in one term.
Taxes are as important as social policy. Mr. Romney has been consistent on both and I for one accept the fact he has come around on the issue of life.
MIke Huckabee is a good guy, but I think that the Republicans and the nation needs someone like a Mitt Romney in this crucial juncture in American history. I hope that Mr. Romney has a place for Mr. Huckabee in his administration.
The most likable aspect about Mr. Huckabee is that he is a regular guy. He is the first in his family to not only graduate from high school but from college as well. Like another regular guy, former president Ronald Reagan, he graduated from a little-known college. Mr. Huckabee's college was Ouachita Baptist University while Mr. Reagan's was Eureka College and a part of the Disciples of Christ denomination which Mr. Reagan was raised.
Another good thing about Mr. Huckabee, and I think a real important aspect of what all on the Republican side need to listen to. Mr. Huckabee says about himself "I am a conservative but I am not mad at anyone." Many conservatives seem to forget that Mr. Reagan also was a conservative and not angry. Angry conservative Republicans will not get beyond dog-catcher as angry Democrats. If that was the case, we would be talking about President Howard Dean.
But, there are quite a few downsides that I see as stunting the case for Mike Huckabee.
Mr. Huckabee is an ordained Southern Baptist minister. I have no problem and former president Bill Clinton was a Southern Baptist. But an actual minister will only exacerbate the bloody culture wars and turn off more voters than turn on. In the case of Mitt Romney, he too is a minister but not in the same sense as Mr. Huckabee. Mormon men in good standing are ministers, not paid, and as in the case of Mr. Romney he rose to the rank of bishop which is the equivalent to a diocese in the Roman Catholic and Episcopal churches. So, both men are men of faith and controversial ones at that. But, one is ordained and one is not and not as obvious and while that may sound bad, it is true.
Another aspect of Mr. Huckabee is that he is proud of his record as a politician. And, regrettably that is part of the problem. We need a non-politician type at this point. All of the Democrat candidates for president are government and big to bigger government type. The advantage of Mr. Romney is that he has been in the private sector and thus has had to meet a payroll. He knows the bad effects of big government.
Most importantly, Mr. Huckabee can not run from the fact he has raised taxes as governor of Arkansas. Mr. Romney not only did not raise taxes as governor of Massachusetts, but cut the size of the state government in one term.
Taxes are as important as social policy. Mr. Romney has been consistent on both and I for one accept the fact he has come around on the issue of life.
MIke Huckabee is a good guy, but I think that the Republicans and the nation needs someone like a Mitt Romney in this crucial juncture in American history. I hope that Mr. Romney has a place for Mr. Huckabee in his administration.
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Why The Left Does Not Get The Effects Of Illegal Immigration
The New York Times, the ol' gray lady, had another story today about an illegal immigrant http://lauraingraham.com. This is not just another illegal immigrant. This is the mother of one of the outstanding suspects in the execution slaying of three college students in Newark, New Jersey.
The story is the problem. Where is the story about the family of one of the three that were murdered, execution style on their knees? I am still looking for it.
Places like the New York Times on the left and libertarians from Cato Institute on the right never like to talk about this aspect of illegal immigration and the cost to society that what we have now and amnesty will do. What they will do is demonize those of us that want strong border enforcement, workplace enforcement and where I may part with some conservatives, higher legal immigration quotas. They will say and write how nativist and racist we are. But, that is further from the truth.
The reality is the infamous MS13 gang that came from El Salvador is rampant in many big cities in the United States. Newark is no different but maybe worse because of the flight of the middle class. According to the latest statistics available, 60% of family households are headed by a single mom-no dad in the picture.
When whole gangs can control whole neighborhoods of any city and many members are illegal aliens, that is a cause and effect. When the illegal gangbanger is arrested by police, processed and in the criminal justice system, they are in our jails and prisons. On the American taxpayer's dime. And these creeps are using the jails and prisons to recruit new gangbangers. They are right up there with the radical Islamics using the jails and prisons for new members.
When those in Washington get out of their rarefied air and go back to their states and really talk to constituents, not the hand-picked suck ups, they may come to realize that "comprehensive immigration reform" needs to start with border enforcement, workplace enforcement and automatic deportation of criminals. The rest can fall into place and everyone, over time, can be happy.
But, those who see illegal immigrants as new voters or cheap labor are both short sided and putting at risk the majority of Americans who have to live day to day with what our immigration "policy" hath wrought. When will the New York Times have that article? . . .
The story is the problem. Where is the story about the family of one of the three that were murdered, execution style on their knees? I am still looking for it.
Places like the New York Times on the left and libertarians from Cato Institute on the right never like to talk about this aspect of illegal immigration and the cost to society that what we have now and amnesty will do. What they will do is demonize those of us that want strong border enforcement, workplace enforcement and where I may part with some conservatives, higher legal immigration quotas. They will say and write how nativist and racist we are. But, that is further from the truth.
The reality is the infamous MS13 gang that came from El Salvador is rampant in many big cities in the United States. Newark is no different but maybe worse because of the flight of the middle class. According to the latest statistics available, 60% of family households are headed by a single mom-no dad in the picture.
When whole gangs can control whole neighborhoods of any city and many members are illegal aliens, that is a cause and effect. When the illegal gangbanger is arrested by police, processed and in the criminal justice system, they are in our jails and prisons. On the American taxpayer's dime. And these creeps are using the jails and prisons to recruit new gangbangers. They are right up there with the radical Islamics using the jails and prisons for new members.
When those in Washington get out of their rarefied air and go back to their states and really talk to constituents, not the hand-picked suck ups, they may come to realize that "comprehensive immigration reform" needs to start with border enforcement, workplace enforcement and automatic deportation of criminals. The rest can fall into place and everyone, over time, can be happy.
But, those who see illegal immigrants as new voters or cheap labor are both short sided and putting at risk the majority of Americans who have to live day to day with what our immigration "policy" hath wrought. When will the New York Times have that article? . . .
Monday, August 13, 2007
An Anglican FINALLY Stands Up To Spong
I am so happy! Finally, an Anglican bishop with guts. Too bad he is in Australia.
The Anglican Archbishop of Sydney, Australia, The Rt. Rev. Peter Jensen, said that the Heretic, former Bishop of Newark, New Jersey, The Rt. "Rev." John Shelby Spong, can not speak or preach in any of the churches in his jurisdiction. HOORAY!
You know "Bishop" Spong. He denies the Virgin Birth. He says that Christianity must change all traditional belief or "die." Now, as if it is not enough, "Bishop" Spong is selling a new book essentially denying the deity of Jesus Christ in "Jesus For The Non-Religious."
Ol' "Bishop" Spong will not be satisfied until he destroys Christianity from within. It does not help Archbishop Jensen that the Archbishop of the Australian Anglican Church, The Most Rt. Rev. Phillip Aspinell, was the one who invited "Bishop" Spong to Australia to peddle the latest dreck from such a heretic.
But, Archbishop Jensen is standing up to his boss and will not allow "Bishop" Spong to pollute his diocese.
I do not usually want to stifle meaningful debate, but there is no debate when the opponent, in this case "Bishop" Spong, does not even believe the basics of the Christian faith. That is why I refer to John Shelby Spong as bishop in quotation marks. If he does not believe in the basics of the faith, I do not think he deserves the honorific bishop.
"Bishop" Spong all but bankrupted the Diocese of Newark, closed well over half the Episcopal churches within the diocese and lost somewhere in the neighborhood of 40% of the flock in his ignoble tenure as "Bishop".
Yet, most of the Episcopal leadership think he is a serious man when he is nothing but a buffoon that attracts the DDBMSM types and fringe people. People in the pews raise a collective sigh at the mention of his name.
So, it takes an archbishop in Sydney, Australia to essentially say, enough is enough. Now, when will the first Episcopal bishop say enough is enough? Don't hold your breath!
HT: Stand Firm
The Anglican Archbishop of Sydney, Australia, The Rt. Rev. Peter Jensen, said that the Heretic, former Bishop of Newark, New Jersey, The Rt. "Rev." John Shelby Spong, can not speak or preach in any of the churches in his jurisdiction. HOORAY!
You know "Bishop" Spong. He denies the Virgin Birth. He says that Christianity must change all traditional belief or "die." Now, as if it is not enough, "Bishop" Spong is selling a new book essentially denying the deity of Jesus Christ in "Jesus For The Non-Religious."
Ol' "Bishop" Spong will not be satisfied until he destroys Christianity from within. It does not help Archbishop Jensen that the Archbishop of the Australian Anglican Church, The Most Rt. Rev. Phillip Aspinell, was the one who invited "Bishop" Spong to Australia to peddle the latest dreck from such a heretic.
But, Archbishop Jensen is standing up to his boss and will not allow "Bishop" Spong to pollute his diocese.
I do not usually want to stifle meaningful debate, but there is no debate when the opponent, in this case "Bishop" Spong, does not even believe the basics of the Christian faith. That is why I refer to John Shelby Spong as bishop in quotation marks. If he does not believe in the basics of the faith, I do not think he deserves the honorific bishop.
"Bishop" Spong all but bankrupted the Diocese of Newark, closed well over half the Episcopal churches within the diocese and lost somewhere in the neighborhood of 40% of the flock in his ignoble tenure as "Bishop".
Yet, most of the Episcopal leadership think he is a serious man when he is nothing but a buffoon that attracts the DDBMSM types and fringe people. People in the pews raise a collective sigh at the mention of his name.
So, it takes an archbishop in Sydney, Australia to essentially say, enough is enough. Now, when will the first Episcopal bishop say enough is enough? Don't hold your breath!
HT: Stand Firm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)