Obama’s first executive orders are about to gives us a hint what the next four years will be like.
Presidents long have used executive orders to impose policy and set priorities. One of Bush’s first acts was to reinstate full abortion restrictions on U.S. overseas aid. The restrictions were first ordered by President Reagan and the first President Bush followed suit. President Clinton lifted them soon after he occupied the Oval Office and it wouldn’t be surprising if Obama did the same.
Because obviously the biggest failure of the United States over the last four years is neglecting our responsibility in eliminating the lives of unborn minorities in impovershed nations. Kill them all.
Is that our new message of “Hope” and “Change” to the World? God help us.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )
I think I keep hoping for some unknown conservative candidate to suddenly appear and give me somebody to vote for. Like the ghost of Ronald Reagan, perhaps.
What I want is a candidate that is socially and fiscally conservative. Socially conservative because, like it or not, the President sets an example for the morals of this country. Bill Clinton taught millions of middle schoolers that oral sex isn’t really sex, and an outbreak of oral sexual diseases broke out. He taught us that it’s ok to stretch the truth, it’s ok to lie by omission. I think a generation of dishonest youngsters are on the way. George Bush didn’t do that, but I feel misled; I thought “compassionate conservatism” was still conservatism. Under his leadership, Republicans spent money like drunken sailors. Whee!
When the Republican National Committe send their fundraising letters, I trash them. If they were conservative, I’d support them.
Duncan Hunter was my early favorite, but his campaign never got traction, and he’s dropped out. That left me choosing between Huckabee and Romney.
Huckabee is socially conservative. But is he fiscally conservative? His record as Arkansas governor doesn’t appear so. He’s all for mandating health goals. I don’t want the government involved to that level in my life. I also don’t think he has enough international experience. But I like him socially. I just can’t figure out why the second choice of Huckabee supporters is McCain.
And Romney is socially conservative. But fiscally, he too spends more than I’d like. But now he’s dropped out.
That leaves McCain, an unstable “maverick” that has done significant harm to conservatives. He dislikes evangelicals, he’s soft on border control, he co-sponsored that McCain-Feingold usurping of the First Amendment, he voted against tax cuts, and he was part of that group that unblocked the stalemate on judicial nominees. I *wanted* the stalemate; I disliked the fact the judicial committee could derail a nomimation and keep the full Senate from voting. McCain is a pain.
Look, a campaign slogan. McCain is a pain.
As of now, I don’t think Huckabee can make a comeback, and I’m not sure I’m sold out for him anyway. That leaves McCain.
Will I support him? McCain’s strongest suit is he is very strong on defense. To me, he’s weak on everything else. But compared to the socialist, defeatest Democrats, McCain looks comparitively good. Comparitively.
So when Romney dropped out earlier this week, there’s one less bad candidate to vote for. Now I only have to choose between three bad candidates: McCain, Clinton, Obama. With that poor selection, I’ll go with McCain.
I’m going to have to hold my nose and remember the alternatives are worse.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 5 so far )
Heh. And the left wing accuses the right wing of censorship. The Democratic party issues a veiled threat to ABC/Disney to cancel Sunday night’s 9/11 miniseries:
We therefore urge you to cancel this broadcast to cease Disneyâ€™s plans to use it as a teaching tool in schools across America through Scholastic. Presenting such deeply flawed and factually inaccurate misinformation to the American public and to children would be a gross miscarriage of your corporate and civic responsibility to the law, to your shareholders, and to the nation.
The Communications Act of 1934 provides your network with a free broadcast license predicated on the fundamental understanding of your principle obligation to act as a trustee of the public airwaves in serving the public interest. Nowhere is this public interest obligation more apparent than in the duty of broadcasters to serve the civic needs of a democracy by promoting an open and accurate discussion of political ideas and events.
Remember last October when CBS pulled the miniseries at the last moment due to conservative outrage? At the time, the left complained loudly that truth was being supressed and even if the miniseries wasn’t factual, it was still covered under some artisitic license.
The big difference this time is that Bill Clinton is defending himself, something the Alzheimer-suffering Reagan wasn’t able to do.
Update: Ah, here’s the story I was looking for. When CBS pulled the trash-tabloid story about Reagan without showing it, Tom Daschle called it “appalling.”
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Senate Minority leader Tom Daschle later called the decision to pull the show “appalling.” CBS “totally collapsed,” he told National Public Radio.
You probably know Cindy Sheehan was arrested and removed before the President’s State of the Union address last night. That wasn’t really a surprise – the surprise to me was that a U.S. Representative, Lynn Woolsey, gave her a ticket. Sometimes the Left is really… Left, you know? Cindy was removed by Capital Police because, well, because it wasn’t a State of Cindy speech last night.
Cindy’s posted about her experience on Michael Moore’s website. I’m going to nitpick only a couple of pieces in it:
At that time, I was wearing the shirt that said: 2,245 Dead. How many more?
I had just sat down and I was warm from climbing 3 flights of stairs back up from the bathroom so I unzipped my jacket. I turned to the right to take my left arm out, when the same officer saw my shirt and yelled, “Protester.”
I wore the shirt to make a statement. The press knew I was going to be there and I thought every once in awhile they would show me and I would have the shirt on.
These snippets show she still doesn’t understand why she was escorted out. The show wasn’t about her. The wife of Republican Representative C.W. Bill Young was also escorted out for wearing a t-shirt supporting the troops. I remember a man being escorted out during one of Bill Clinton’s State of the Union speeches. The President is required by the US Constitution to tell Congress about the State of the Union every year. It’s all about the President on that night.
I have lost my First Amendment rights.
I have some lawyers looking into filing a First Amendment lawsuit against the government for what happened tonight.
I don’t want to live in a country that prohibits any person, whether he/she has paid the ultimate price for that country, from wearing, saying, writing, or telephoning any negative statements about the government.
I think a lawyer would have a hard time proving that her First Amendment rights are being violated, especially when she’s posted everything she wanted to say the very next day. The fact that she can’t say it there and that particular time and be disruptive at a Presidential event is supported by a Supreme Court ruling placing a “reasonable time, place or manner” restriction on speech.
Read some of her ranting. Does she sound oppressed to you?Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 6 so far )
Some time in the 1990s, the annual spruce placed on the Washington Capitol grounds started being called the “Holiday Tree” instead of “Christmas Tree.” Nobody seems to know why it was changed, but it was at about the same time Bill Clinton was in the same city and struggling to keep his pants up. Coincidence? I think not.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
If it’s a spruce tree adorned with 10,000 lights and 5,000 ornaments displayed on the Capitol grounds in December, it’s a Christmas tree and that’s what it should be called, says House Speaker Dennis Hastert.
Hastert, R-Ill., in a letter to the Architect of the Capitol, recommended that the annual Capitol Holiday Tree, as it has been called the past several years, be renamed the Capitol Christmas Tree.
“I strongly urge that we return to this tradition and join the White House, countless other public institutions and millions of American families in celebrating the holiday season with a Christmas tree,” Hastert wrote to Architect Alan Hantman.
His office said the tree began to be referred to as the Holiday Tree in the 1990s. Spokesman Ron Bonjean said the reasons were unclear.
On Dec. 8 Hastert will flip the switch to light the tree, a 65-foot Engelmann Spruce from the Santa Fe National Forest in New Mexico. On Tuesday workmen were erecting the tree on the West Front of the Capitol.
I’m about to enter a period of extended hours at work, so I’m going to flood y’all with opinions today.
If there was ever a time in history to impeach a President of the United States, it would be now. In my opinion, it is two years too late. We should have done this before the election to spare the country the misjudgment, the incompetence and the malfeasance of this administration.
A couple of questions for the politically inept Barbra:
- Did you know your first name is misspelled?
- Wait, here’s a better question: to impeach somebody, there must have been a law broken. Bush hasn’t been indicted for anything, nor is there any hint an indictment is on the way. What law do you think Bush broke?
- Clinton committed perjury. Now there’s something impeachable. Did you support the impeachment of Bill Clinton?
- Why don’t you allow comments on your website?
I understand you’re disgruntled, Ms. Streisand. But “Disgruntling Barbra Streisand” isn’t an impeachable offense.
Thank god the media and the American public are finally waking up and asking the tougher questions now.
It’s the Almighty God with a capital “G”, Ms. barbra with a small “b”. And these “tougher questions” have been asked ever since we toppled Saddam Hussein and answered several times. Thank God that you’re not in charge of our judicial system where officials can be impeached for disagreeing with you.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 4 so far )
Linkfest for Wednesday:
- Michelle Malkin sheds light on how the anti-war bias of the liberal left newspapers is showing again. The NY Times uses selected quotes from a deceased serviceman’s letter to his girlfriend to make you think he’s regretting being in combat, while completely leaving out his pride in protecting America. Here’s what the Times wrote:
Sifting through Corporal Starr’s laptop computer after his death, his father found a letter to be delivered to the marine’s girlfriend. “I kind of predicted this,” Corporal Starr wrote of his own death. “A third time just seemed like I’m pushing my chances.”
And here’s the actual letter. Note the bolded part conveniently left out. The father of our serviceman is mad, and for good reason:
“Obviously if you are reading this then I have died in Iraq. I kind of predicted this, that is why I’m writing this in November. A third time just seemed like I’m pushing my chances. I don’t regret going, everybody dies but few get to do it for something as important as freedom. It may seem confusing why we are in Iraq, it’s not to me. I’m here helping these people, so that they can live the way we live. Not have to worry about tyrants or vicious dictators. To do what they want with their lives. To me that is why I died. Others have died for my freedom, now this is my mark.”
- One Hand Clapping notes that the closed door session yesterday forced by Senate Democrats was to get to the “truth” about Bush’s statements that led the US into war with Iraq, and provide multiple quotes from Bill Clinton urging war war with Iraq because of their WMD capability.
- Want the whole background on the Scooter Libby indictment and why Democrats are so mad? It’s because they haven’t proven there was a crime in the first place. Pardon my English has a great writeup.
- Rodney Olsen celebrates two years of faithful Christian blogging. Congratulations, Rodney!
Now, in the Ronnie Earle vs. Tom DeLay, Earle’s playing dirty. My prediction is that it will cost Earle his job eventually.
This “playing hardball” tactic is going to backfire on Earle eventually. It always does. DeLay hasn’t been convicted (almost wasn’t even indicted until Earle shopped for a more sympathetic grand jury), and DeLay is still a United States Senator and should be treated with respect. Earle’s trying to get a photo op by arresting DeLay, booking him and fingerprinting him.
It’s not like nobody knows who DeLay is or that DeLay might run. I suspect the two Secret Service agents following him around know where DeLay is.
And if you’re a rabid, foaming-at-the-mouth liberal that wants to see DeLay embarrassed as much as possible, consider the reversal: would you have also supported booking Bill Clinton, fingerprinting him and taking a mug shot when Republicans were after him?Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 4 so far )
Will Hurricane Katrina spell the end of George Bush’s Presidency? Almost certainly yes, with a few caveats.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
As the full horror of Hurricane Katrina sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if this is the end of George Bush’s presidency. The answer is almost certainly yes, provided that every copy of the US Constitution was destroyed in the storm. Otherwise President Bush will remain in office until noon on January 20th, 2009, as required by the 20th Amendment, after which he is barred from seeking a third term anyway under the 22nd Amendment.
As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if the entire political agenda of George Bush’s second term will not still be damaged in some terribly satisfying way.
The answer is almost certainly yes, provided that the entire political agenda of George Bush’s second term consists of repealing the 22nd Amendment. Otherwise, with a clear Republican majority in both Houses of Congress, he can carry on doing pretty much whatever he likes.
As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if the Republican Party itself will now suffer a setback at the congressional mid-term elections next November.
The answer is almost certainly yes, provided that people outside the disaster zone punish their local representatives for events elsewhere a year previously, both beyond their control and outside their remit, while people inside the disaster zone reward their local representatives for an ongoing calamity they were supposed to prevent. Otherwise, the Democratic Party will suffer a setback at the next congressional election.
As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if an official inquiry will shift the blame for poor planning and inadequate flood defences on to the White House. The answer is almost certainly yes, provided nobody admits that emergency planning is largely the responsibility of city and state agencies, and nobody notices that the main levee which broke was the only levee recently modernised with federal funds. Otherwise, an official inquiry will pin most of the blame on the notoriously corrupt and incompetent local governments of New Orleans and Louisiana.
As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if George Bush contributed to the death toll by sending so many national guard units to Iraq.
The answer is almost certainly yes, provided nobody recalls that those same columnists have spent the past two years blaming George Bush for another death toll by not sending enough national guard units to Iraq. Otherwise, people might wonder why they have never previously read a single article advocating large-scale military redeployment during the Caribbean hurricane season.
As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnist are asking how a civilised city can descend into anarchy.
The answer is that only a civilised city can descend into anarchy.
As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if George Bush should be held responsible for the terrible poverty in the southern states revealed by the flooding.
The answer is almost certainly yes, provided nobody holds Bill Clinton responsible for making Mississippi the poorest state in the union throughout his entire term as president, or for making Arkansas the second-poorest state in the union throughout his entire term as governor. Otherwise, people might suspect that it is a bit more complicated than that.
As the full horror of this sinks in, thousands of desperate columnists are asking if George Bush should not be concerned by accusations of racism against the federal government.
The answer is almost certainly yes, provided nobody remembers that Jesse Jackson once called New York “Hymietown” and everybody thinks Condoleezza Rice went shopping for shoes when the hurricane struck because she cannot stand black people.
Otherwise sensible Americans of all races will be more concerned by trite, cynical and dangerous political opportunism.
As the full horror of that sinks in, this columnist is simply glad that everybody cares.
I have trouble sympathizing with Bill Clinton.
WASHINGTON (AP) – Former President Clinton, defending his senator-wife’s statements on abortion, said Wednesday that Democrats are held to a double standard.
The comment came during remarks to Campus Progress, a left-leaning student group. He said young people in his party should speak directly to conservative voters.
He contended that Republicans have defined the abortion debate in a way that boxes in Democrats.
“So for example, if you’re a Democrat and you have sort of normal impulses, you’re a sellout, like when Hillary said abortion is a tragedy for virtually everybody who undergoes it, we ought to do all we can to reduce abortion,” Clinton said.
“All of a sudden,” he continued, the media began asking, “’Is she selling out? Is she abandoning her principles?’ But if John McCain, who’s pro-life, works with Hillary on global warming, he’s a man of principle moving to the middle.”
“It’s nuts,” the former president said.
If you lean right, you’ve known this for a long time – the liberal media applauds lefties, condemns righties. If you’re a righty moving to the center, yippee! But if you’re a lefty moving toward the center – even if you end up at the same position as the righty moving to the left – then boo, hiss.
I expected the media to hold its collective nose and pretend Hillary wasn’t trying to move to the right in preparation for a 2008 run for President, but it doesn’t appear the media is going to let her.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )
« Previous Entries