More evidence that those who go on about "global warning" are merely engaged in another effort to find an excuse to control our lives.
"Global warming" is globaloney.
Sunday, September 07, 2008
Friday, September 05, 2008
Civil Rights Attorney?
Just for grins, I decided to do a little research on Barry Obama's claim to have been a civil rights attorney.
Particularly since I am actually one.
Interesting results.
Searching on Westlaw, I searched the "allfeds" database (all federal courts) for "at("Barack H. Obama"). A search under at("Barack Obama") yielded no results.
There were seven reported decisions, all between April 1994 and January 1996.
Four were appeals, all in the Seventh Circuit. Nothing unusual for a Chicago attorney. Three were in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Again, not unusual.
Yet in not one of them was Obama listed as lead counsel, at least obviously. He was the second or third (and last) named attorney in each of the Seventh Circuit cases. He argued (and won) only one of them.
Civil rights attorney? Maybe. For about five minutes.
Particularly since I am actually one.
Interesting results.
Searching on Westlaw, I searched the "allfeds" database (all federal courts) for "at("Barack H. Obama"). A search under at("Barack Obama") yielded no results.
There were seven reported decisions, all between April 1994 and January 1996.
Four were appeals, all in the Seventh Circuit. Nothing unusual for a Chicago attorney. Three were in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Again, not unusual.
Yet in not one of them was Obama listed as lead counsel, at least obviously. He was the second or third (and last) named attorney in each of the Seventh Circuit cases. He argued (and won) only one of them.
Civil rights attorney? Maybe. For about five minutes.
Thursday, September 04, 2008
A New Leni Riefenstahl?
I guess I'm a little slow (those of you who will confirm that in comments need not), but this occurred to me yesterday:
Is David Axelrod --- producer of the Obamaganza rally at the end of the Democrat convention --- the Leni Riefenstahl of our time?
And no, I don't mean Barry Obama is a Nazi. What I mean is that Axelrod --- like Riefenstahl --- is packaging a local rabble-rouser of little accomplishments and dangerous ideas into an acceptable political product, with little more than smoke and mirrors.
The only difference? Riefenstahl was more talented. And did it in black-and-white.
H/T to Zimbio.com. Martyhef said it first.
Is David Axelrod --- producer of the Obamaganza rally at the end of the Democrat convention --- the Leni Riefenstahl of our time?
And no, I don't mean Barry Obama is a Nazi. What I mean is that Axelrod --- like Riefenstahl --- is packaging a local rabble-rouser of little accomplishments and dangerous ideas into an acceptable political product, with little more than smoke and mirrors.
The only difference? Riefenstahl was more talented. And did it in black-and-white.
H/T to Zimbio.com. Martyhef said it first.
Dime-Store Psychology To Camouflage Reactionary Liberalism
You've got to love the moonbatosphere. Checking Waldo Jaquith's indispensible Virginia Political Blog Aggregator, I came across this little gem, offering the dime-store psychoanalysis of those who dismiss the idiocy of the far Left through the device of sarcasm as demonstrating "an indirect form of anger."
Of course, the goal is to ascribe to your political opponents an unattractive characteristic. So much easier than addressing the merits of their arguments, don't you know.
Or worse yet, addressing the fact that your candidate is not only objectively unqualified for the office he seeks, but is an agent --- not of change --- but of reactionary Liberalism.
But what is perhaps most entertaining is the irony of the accusation, and the tactic. After all, taking a page from our friend, it is actually those who regularly demonstrate their affliction with Bush Derangement Syndrome who are the most "angry" people in politics.
I suppose that our friend is demonstrating what the psychological types call "projection."
Of course, the goal is to ascribe to your political opponents an unattractive characteristic. So much easier than addressing the merits of their arguments, don't you know.
Or worse yet, addressing the fact that your candidate is not only objectively unqualified for the office he seeks, but is an agent --- not of change --- but of reactionary Liberalism.
But what is perhaps most entertaining is the irony of the accusation, and the tactic. After all, taking a page from our friend, it is actually those who regularly demonstrate their affliction with Bush Derangement Syndrome who are the most "angry" people in politics.
I suppose that our friend is demonstrating what the psychological types call "projection."
Palin's Pimples Versus Obama's Carbuncles
It's been an amazing week. Perhaps to avoid the fact that it has become utterly clear that the choice facing Americans is between "the Hero" and "the Zero," the so-called "mainstream media" has savaged Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, John McCain's choice as Vice President.
I don't know what the actual figures are, but I think it has to be beyond question that the so-called "mainstream media" already has devoted more time to the family difficulties involving Palin's eldest daughter than it has over Senator Barry Obama's ties to admitted terrorist William Ayres, convicted felon and slumlord Tony Rezko, and race-baiting "minister" Jeremiah Wright.
Once again, the media is more interested in a Republican's personal pimples, while ignoring a Democrat's professional carbuncles.
What was that again about "right-wing media bias"?
I don't know what the actual figures are, but I think it has to be beyond question that the so-called "mainstream media" already has devoted more time to the family difficulties involving Palin's eldest daughter than it has over Senator Barry Obama's ties to admitted terrorist William Ayres, convicted felon and slumlord Tony Rezko, and race-baiting "minister" Jeremiah Wright.
Once again, the media is more interested in a Republican's personal pimples, while ignoring a Democrat's professional carbuncles.
What was that again about "right-wing media bias"?
Tuesday, September 02, 2008
So Much For Those Judgmental, Right-Wing Christians
Just a few hours after I posted my last, I got this from the Hon. Robert G. Marshall:
Must suck when the targets of your caricatures respond according to their principles, rather than your ridiculous smears of their true beliefs.
Of course, the far Left --- who rabidly defend the "right to choose" (so long as it applies to the right to choose to kill an innocent) --- cannot survive their own internal contradictions. For if you believe in a "right to choose," you must of necessity believe that there are circumstances in which the "choice" is appropriate.
So defenders of abortion must believe that there are time when abortion is the "right" choice.
But they never want to tell us when it is "the right choice."
Now, even unsophisticated thinkers can comtemplate such circumstances. For example, perhaps, when one is carrying a severely handicapped child? What qualifies? Tay-Sachs, a horrible genetic disease which condemns a child to a lingering death by the age of five? Cerebral palsy? Down's Syndrome, like little Trig Palin? A teenage pregnancy? Mere inconvenience?
The reason that Sarah Palin has to be destroyed is not because she is unqualified to serve as President, for she is. In fact, she's more qualified to serve than Barry Obama.
Sarah Palin must be destroyed because she's everything that so-called "Feminists" purport to stand for, but really don't. She has made a political career on her own merits, not riding on the coattails of her former-President husband, like Hillary Clinton. She's not a wealthy woman like Nancy Pelosi who demagogues about how the rest of us aren't surrendering enough of our income. She's the mother of five. She has exercised her choice to open her heart to a child facing challenges which most can only imagine. Living with Down's Syndrome cannot be easy, and I can speak from personal experience on the point, as I know a man with Down's.
In short, she's the purported "feminist" ideal, and rejects almost entirely the feminist ideology.
No wonder the far Left fears her so.
MARSHALL RIPS DEMOCRAT LIBERALS FOR ATTACKS ON PALIN’S DAUGHTER
Virginia Del. Robert G. Marshall on Tuesday (Sept. 2) blasted liberal Democrats for launching “vicious and outrageously personal political attacks” on the unmarried pregnant daughter of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, Sen. John S. McCain’s choice as his vice presidential running mate.
“Liberal Democrats affirm a right to privacy for any woman who wants to have a legal abortion, but they are granting no such privilege to Bristol Palin,” said Marshall, of Manassas, who has represented Northern Virginia’s 13th Legislative District in the state House of Delegates for 17 years.
“The Democrats excuse themselves from the sin of scandal, but they’re more than willing to use children as pawns on political chessboards. Like the Pharisees when they confronted Christ with a woman taken in adultery, whom they couldn’t have cared less about, Democrat liberals will use any means to try to take the gloss off John McCain’s smart vice presidential pick.
“These vicious and outrageously personal political attacks must stop.”
Marshall, chairman of the Life, Liberty, Property Political Action Committee, compared a May 31 statement by Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee, while he was campaigning in Johnstown, Pa., with that of Gov. Palin and her husband, Todd, on Monday when it became public that their 17-year-old daughter was pregnant.
“I’ve got two daughters,” Obama said in Johnstown when describing his position on abortion. “If they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”
Gov. Palin and her husband, on the other hand, on Monday issued a statement indicating they “are proud of Bristol’s decision to have her baby. She knows she has our unconditional love and support.”
Bristol Palin and Levi Johnson, 18, the father of their pre-born child, are planning to wed.
“The issue of life and abortion is playing out like a gigantic morality play on the American political stage,” Marshall said, noting that Gov. Palin is pro-life and gave birth to son Trig five months ago though prenatal tests indicated he would be born with Down syndrome.
“What happened to tolerance? What happened to understanding and forgiveness?
“The Palin family is showing real strength of character under stress, which is what you have left when things are not under your control, everything seems to be going wrong, and you have to make a decision. They’ve made the right one.”
Must suck when the targets of your caricatures respond according to their principles, rather than your ridiculous smears of their true beliefs.
Of course, the far Left --- who rabidly defend the "right to choose" (so long as it applies to the right to choose to kill an innocent) --- cannot survive their own internal contradictions. For if you believe in a "right to choose," you must of necessity believe that there are circumstances in which the "choice" is appropriate.
So defenders of abortion must believe that there are time when abortion is the "right" choice.
But they never want to tell us when it is "the right choice."
Now, even unsophisticated thinkers can comtemplate such circumstances. For example, perhaps, when one is carrying a severely handicapped child? What qualifies? Tay-Sachs, a horrible genetic disease which condemns a child to a lingering death by the age of five? Cerebral palsy? Down's Syndrome, like little Trig Palin? A teenage pregnancy? Mere inconvenience?
The reason that Sarah Palin has to be destroyed is not because she is unqualified to serve as President, for she is. In fact, she's more qualified to serve than Barry Obama.
Sarah Palin must be destroyed because she's everything that so-called "Feminists" purport to stand for, but really don't. She has made a political career on her own merits, not riding on the coattails of her former-President husband, like Hillary Clinton. She's not a wealthy woman like Nancy Pelosi who demagogues about how the rest of us aren't surrendering enough of our income. She's the mother of five. She has exercised her choice to open her heart to a child facing challenges which most can only imagine. Living with Down's Syndrome cannot be easy, and I can speak from personal experience on the point, as I know a man with Down's.
In short, she's the purported "feminist" ideal, and rejects almost entirely the feminist ideology.
No wonder the far Left fears her so.
Ochildish
What does it say about a candidate when his most vocal, fervent supporters feel free to call the opposing candidate names? What does it say about a candidate whose most vocal, fervent supporters feel free to publicize the private facts about one of the children of his opponents?
What does it say when those most vocal, fervent supporters can praise a media type who questions the foreign policy questions of the bottom of an opposing ticket, while utterly ignoring the complete lack of similar qualifications at the top of theirs?
What does it say about a candidate whose most vocal, fervent supports praise his attestation that "I am my brother's keeper; I am my sister's keeper," while ignoring the fact that his biological brother is living in poverty in Africa on about $12 a year?
What does it say about a candidate who allows such individuals to act as smear merchants against his opposition? Remember, after all, these are the people who decry "Willie Horton" and "Swiftboating." Their silence in the face of the sleazy, slanderous moonbatosphere is both considered and deafening.
Now, I know that the boys and girls over at Ranting Kids ... er, Raising Dough, ... er, Raising Kaine ... er, "RK" bill themselves as "Virginia's Online Progressive Community," but what can we take from these examples?
It's pretty simple, really: "Virginia's Online Progressive Community" is peurile, sophomoric, and just plain mean.
And God forbid one should ever dare to offer a little reality. I was barred from posting comments a few months back for wholly content-based reasons.
Yeah, yeah, I know: it's their website, and I have no free speech rights on someone else's property. But I allow far Lefties to comment here, when rarely do they comment. So much for the Left being guardians of freedom.
Of course, those of us who understand them know better. After all, these are the people who are commenting about suggesting that .... well, let's just let Horse's Ass, or "Mule," or something like that speak for himself:
Have these people ever opened a Bible? Have they ever darkened the door of a church for any purpose other than the search for political power/votes?
One has to wonder. After all, it seems to me that one needn't have spent a great deal of time with one's body in church or nose in the Bible to have sensed just a little of the theme of "forgiveness" in the New Testament.
I can't say I'm surprised, though. After all, the single defining characteristic of the totalitarian, secular Left is the myth of human perfectability through the instrument of government. Proceed from that arrogant, delusional presumption, and it's easy to fail to recognize the need for God, and for forgiveness for sins. Indeed, "sin" becomes an obsolete notion, replaced by pathologies to be cured by pills, or surgery, or education, or --- most important of all --- more government.
And how does it apply to Sarah Palin's daughter (with due regard for her, I will not name her here)?
Well, you can savage the minor child of a Republican, particularly when you've constructed these elaborate fictions about your ideological enemies.
Witness the continued popularity of Ranting Kids ... er, Raising Dough, ... er, Raising Kaine ... er, "RK" among the moonbat Left.
What does it say when those most vocal, fervent supporters can praise a media type who questions the foreign policy questions of the bottom of an opposing ticket, while utterly ignoring the complete lack of similar qualifications at the top of theirs?
What does it say about a candidate whose most vocal, fervent supports praise his attestation that "I am my brother's keeper; I am my sister's keeper," while ignoring the fact that his biological brother is living in poverty in Africa on about $12 a year?
What does it say about a candidate who allows such individuals to act as smear merchants against his opposition? Remember, after all, these are the people who decry "Willie Horton" and "Swiftboating." Their silence in the face of the sleazy, slanderous moonbatosphere is both considered and deafening.
Now, I know that the boys and girls over at Ranting Kids ... er, Raising Dough, ... er, Raising Kaine ... er, "RK" bill themselves as "Virginia's Online Progressive Community," but what can we take from these examples?
It's pretty simple, really: "Virginia's Online Progressive Community" is peurile, sophomoric, and just plain mean.
And God forbid one should ever dare to offer a little reality. I was barred from posting comments a few months back for wholly content-based reasons.
Yeah, yeah, I know: it's their website, and I have no free speech rights on someone else's property. But I allow far Lefties to comment here, when rarely do they comment. So much for the Left being guardians of freedom.
Of course, those of us who understand them know better. After all, these are the people who are commenting about suggesting that .... well, let's just let Horse's Ass, or "Mule," or something like that speak for himself:
One can easily imagine how right-wing preachers would decry an out-of-wedlock pregnancy in the family of a Democratic candidate, exclaiming, while pounding on their Bibles, that the pregnancy sets a "poor example" for American teenagers. They would say that this is what can be expected from a family with "liberal" permissiveness. Well, I'm waiting to hear what the Bible thumpers say this time.Really, "Mule"? Can one? Well, only if one is so thoroughly steeped in the mythos of the far Left that one has to make it up.
Have these people ever opened a Bible? Have they ever darkened the door of a church for any purpose other than the search for political power/votes?
One has to wonder. After all, it seems to me that one needn't have spent a great deal of time with one's body in church or nose in the Bible to have sensed just a little of the theme of "forgiveness" in the New Testament.
I can't say I'm surprised, though. After all, the single defining characteristic of the totalitarian, secular Left is the myth of human perfectability through the instrument of government. Proceed from that arrogant, delusional presumption, and it's easy to fail to recognize the need for God, and for forgiveness for sins. Indeed, "sin" becomes an obsolete notion, replaced by pathologies to be cured by pills, or surgery, or education, or --- most important of all --- more government.
And how does it apply to Sarah Palin's daughter (with due regard for her, I will not name her here)?
Well, you can savage the minor child of a Republican, particularly when you've constructed these elaborate fictions about your ideological enemies.
Witness the continued popularity of Ranting Kids ... er, Raising Dough, ... er, Raising Kaine ... er, "RK" among the moonbat Left.
Monday, September 01, 2008
Sarah Palin And Unions
With the selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as John McCain's running mate (a selection I endorsed elsewhere, incidentally, as speculation was growing over the pick), it was announced that Palin was "a former union member and the wife of a proud union member [Todd Palin]."
Here's what Todd Palin's union's president, Leo W. Gerard, had to say about his wife's selection for the GOP ticket:
Soooo, one has to wonder: If still a "proud union member," will Todd Palin be exercising his "Beck rights" to prevent his union from using his dues to oppose the election of his wife as Vice President? Was he even aware of the fact that he could not be forced to be a union member, or to support the political and ideological activities of the Steelworkers union? Or is he among those many union "members" who have illegally been told that full membership --- and support for union political and ideological activities --- was required as a condition of continued empolyment?
I'd certainly be interested to the answers to these questions, and Mr. Palin's course of action if they are what I suspect them to be.
Here's what Todd Palin's union's president, Leo W. Gerard, had to say about his wife's selection for the GOP ticket:
"It is important to realize that while the governor’s husband is a member of a union, this does not automatically qualify her for an on-the-job training program to become a heartbeat away from the presidency. And while her husband is one of 850,000 dues-paying members of the steelworkers union, it does nothing to absolve Sen. McCain of his long history of anti-union sentiment and anti-worker actions, including continuously pushing an anti-working family agenda that:
*Opposes giving workers the right to bargain collectively;
*Jeopardizes retirement security by privatizing social security;
*Further threatens job security by signing more job-stealing trade deals without the regard to human rights and environmental abuses; and,
*Erodes the ability of working families to secure quality health care by taxing their employer -provided coverage for both active and retired workers.
McCain’s choice is another example of his poor judgment and his desire to play politics as usual. McCain-Palin is not a team that works for working families. The first-term governor’s record is thin and divisive. And John McCain has a life-long record of being for the rich and powerful. No union card can hide that any more than Ronald Regan's union card did."
Other unions like the Teamsters (its Local 959 is one of the most powerful in Alaska) have been no more pleased by this obvious pander, which seems to have been conceived in ignorance of Rule 34 of Republican National Committeeman Morton Blackwell's Laws of the Public Policy Process: "You cannot make friends of your enemies by making enemies of your friends."
Soooo, one has to wonder: If still a "proud union member," will Todd Palin be exercising his "Beck rights" to prevent his union from using his dues to oppose the election of his wife as Vice President? Was he even aware of the fact that he could not be forced to be a union member, or to support the political and ideological activities of the Steelworkers union? Or is he among those many union "members" who have illegally been told that full membership --- and support for union political and ideological activities --- was required as a condition of continued empolyment?
I'd certainly be interested to the answers to these questions, and Mr. Palin's course of action if they are what I suspect them to be.
Sunday, August 31, 2008
You Really Want To Go There?
Lowell Feld, the chief moonbat at Ranting Kids ... er, Raising Dough ... er, Raising Kaine ... er, "RK," has decided to start a series on "Republican elected women" he deems "more qualified to serve as Vice President of the United States than Sarah Palin." Since the cowardly Feld requires registration to comment on his website, and I offer a little too much truth for the Virginia blogosphere's leading moonbattery (it's kind of like an aviary), I'll have to offer my response here.
That's too rich. Dems nominate for President a man who's not even qualified for the office he holds now, put at the top of their ticket a man with less executive experience than the woman at the bottom of ours, and Lowell wants to play the experience game?
Please, Lowell. Indulge yourself.
And while you're at it, Lowell, please don't forget to mention how many of those Republican woman are, likewise, more qualified to be at the top of our ticket than the Dalai 'Bama is to be at the bottom of yours.
That's too rich. Dems nominate for President a man who's not even qualified for the office he holds now, put at the top of their ticket a man with less executive experience than the woman at the bottom of ours, and Lowell wants to play the experience game?
Please, Lowell. Indulge yourself.
And while you're at it, Lowell, please don't forget to mention how many of those Republican woman are, likewise, more qualified to be at the top of our ticket than the Dalai 'Bama is to be at the bottom of yours.
Friday, August 29, 2008
Today, I Am Officially Old
Yup. Gotta admit it.
Turns out Sarah Palin, John McCain's choice as running mate, is younger than I am.
While we graduated from high school in the same year, she is five months younger than I.
Damn.
Turns out Sarah Palin, John McCain's choice as running mate, is younger than I am.
While we graduated from high school in the same year, she is five months younger than I.
Damn.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
A Very Politically Incorrect Victory Lap
Americans Misti May-Treanor and Kerri Walsh took gold a few minutes ago in women's beach volleyball at the Beijing Olympics, beating the premier Chinese team, repeating their accomplishment at the 2004 Athens Olympics, the first ever to repeat for gold in this event. They've not lost a set in more than a year.
What was interesting was their comments after their victory. First, Kerri Walsh pointedly said "Thanks, Mr. President," doubtless referring to President George W. Bush's famous visit with the women and the photograph taken with them, in their very skimpy uniforms.
Then, asked what was next for them, both women basically said that they wanted to go home and make babies.
One can only imagine the savaging they will take from the moonbatosphere for these variations from acceptable public discourse.
As for me, way to go, ladies. You may be the best ever in your event. You've made us all proud.
What was interesting was their comments after their victory. First, Kerri Walsh pointedly said "Thanks, Mr. President," doubtless referring to President George W. Bush's famous visit with the women and the photograph taken with them, in their very skimpy uniforms.
Then, asked what was next for them, both women basically said that they wanted to go home and make babies.
One can only imagine the savaging they will take from the moonbatosphere for these variations from acceptable public discourse.
As for me, way to go, ladies. You may be the best ever in your event. You've made us all proud.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Obama And The "Unpatriotic" Smear
No, the smear isn't that the McCain campaign is calling Barack Hussein Obama, or Barry Obama, or the Dalai 'Bama, "unpatriotic."
No, the smear is Obama's whining about being called "unpatriotic."
Gee, Barry, who --- precisely --- is calling you "unpatriotic"? When? Where? Is your concern about the issue that someone serious is actually doing it?
Then again, perhaps we can play homo advocate for a minute. Applying their smear/reasoning, we should conclude that Obama worries about being called "unpatriotic" because of his own insecurities and fears that he actually is unpatriotic.
In reality, as far as I know, it's not the McCain campaign making such accusations, or any other serious GOP organization, for that matter. Now, I suppose that a few bloggers, or radio talk show hosts, or others might be doing so --- I wouldn't; I think you're a moron, not a traitor, and besides, I'm not even sure what you mean by the term --- but serious people don't take them any more seriously than the name-calling in the far-Left moonbatosphere supporting your candidacy.
In fact, the first serious item coming upon a Google search of "Obama unpatriotic" was a reference to your whining speech yesterday.
In short, the smear is not McCain calling Obama "unpatriotic." The smear is Obama's unfounded and specious accusation that McCain's legitimate questions about Obama's judgment, wisdom, and woeful inexperience are merely a challenge to his patriotism.
I don't expect that anyone in the so-called "main-stream" media will ever ask the Dalai 'Bama to put up (with specificity about who and when such accusations have been made) or shut up.
Then again, I never recall the so-called MSM ever asking John McCain to specify how money had corrupted the process, or required surrender advocates to tell us when the Bush Administration attempted to link 9/11 to Iraq.
The reason? Well, first, members of the MSM don't care what the answers are.
Perhaps more importantly, the sneaking suspicion or actual knowledge that the answer to the questions are, in each case, "Well, never."
No, the smear is Obama's whining about being called "unpatriotic."
Gee, Barry, who --- precisely --- is calling you "unpatriotic"? When? Where? Is your concern about the issue that someone serious is actually doing it?
Then again, perhaps we can play homo advocate for a minute. Applying their smear/reasoning, we should conclude that Obama worries about being called "unpatriotic" because of his own insecurities and fears that he actually is unpatriotic.
In reality, as far as I know, it's not the McCain campaign making such accusations, or any other serious GOP organization, for that matter. Now, I suppose that a few bloggers, or radio talk show hosts, or others might be doing so --- I wouldn't; I think you're a moron, not a traitor, and besides, I'm not even sure what you mean by the term --- but serious people don't take them any more seriously than the name-calling in the far-Left moonbatosphere supporting your candidacy.
In fact, the first serious item coming upon a Google search of "Obama unpatriotic" was a reference to your whining speech yesterday.
In short, the smear is not McCain calling Obama "unpatriotic." The smear is Obama's unfounded and specious accusation that McCain's legitimate questions about Obama's judgment, wisdom, and woeful inexperience are merely a challenge to his patriotism.
I don't expect that anyone in the so-called "main-stream" media will ever ask the Dalai 'Bama to put up (with specificity about who and when such accusations have been made) or shut up.
Then again, I never recall the so-called MSM ever asking John McCain to specify how money had corrupted the process, or required surrender advocates to tell us when the Bush Administration attempted to link 9/11 to Iraq.
The reason? Well, first, members of the MSM don't care what the answers are.
Perhaps more importantly, the sneaking suspicion or actual knowledge that the answer to the questions are, in each case, "Well, never."
If It's Kaine
As Barack Hussein Obama milks the veepstakes for all that it is worth (not that there's anything wrong with that), speculation abounds that he will select Governor Timmy! as his running mate.
All well and good. But if Governor Timmy! is selected to run for Vice President, he should resign from his current office.
Never mind that Virginia deserves another Governor; at a minimum, Virginia needs a full-time Governor, particularly in light of recent budget difficulties. After all, Virginia Attorneys General typically resign to seek their party's nomination for Governor.
Sooooo, if Governor Timmy! wants to become the junior member of the least-qualified national ticket in modern American history, he should surrender his office and commit to that quest his full attention.
Hey, at least he has some executive experience.
H/T to Riley at Virginia Virtucon for the graphic.
Charity Begins With The Family
Apparently, Barack Hussein Obama's half-brother lives in a shack in Kenya on less than $1 a week.
Soooo, this (BHO) is the crypto-Socialist who believes that "the rich" aren't shelling out enough for his vote-buying schemes ... er, "social welfare" programs?
Message to the socialist Democrats: don't soak me for more unless you're taking care of your own.
H/T to the Drudge Report.
Soooo, this (BHO) is the crypto-Socialist who believes that "the rich" aren't shelling out enough for his vote-buying schemes ... er, "social welfare" programs?
Message to the socialist Democrats: don't soak me for more unless you're taking care of your own.
H/T to the Drudge Report.
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Moonbat Attacks!
You know how you can tell you're getting to a Democrat. He whiiiiiiiiiines!
One could make a full-time job responding to the moonbattery of the far Left. Most times, it's just not worth the time or trouble.
But little "Truth-teller" over at Democrat official Clifford Garstang's --- or is that Clifford Claven? --- Cobalt6 blog is simply beyond the pale. Now, I suppose he can name-call as much as he wants, since it's not like he does much more than whine about the post he attacks (oddly, one in which I am pointing out an unfair question asked about the Obama campaign, and one which implies that he was associated with John Edwards' sleazy behavior). In fact, Garstang can and has done so here, a privilege he doesn't extend to those who don't register for his website.
But this is certainly odd: he notes that I "claim[] to be a lawyer, but that Alex Davis/Jonathan Maxfield used to claim that as well."
Well here's a little news flash, Cliffy: people listed as "counsel of record" (and scheduled to argue) before the United States Supreme Court don't merely "claim" to be lawyers; they are lawyers.
Now, I realize that the nature of the blogosphere and those who assume anonymous or pseudonymous persona might cause a certain skepticism, and here, I certainly respect a healthy skepticism. But I've been around the Virginia blogosphere a long time; people know me; I've even broken bread with no less a member of the Democrat blogosphere than Ben Tribbett. Even a Google search would make it pretty clear that I am who I say I am.
In short, Cliffy, your alter-ego or colleague might want to check easily-ascertainable facts before he questions someone's credentials, something he ironically does behind a cowardly cloak of anonymity. Not that such treatment and respect for others would be characteristic, or even expected from the far-Left slander machine.
But it would constitute simple decency. As would banning "Truth-teller" from your blog for his misdeed. Again, not something I expect from the likes of you or your website, Cliffy, 'specially since you endorse "Truth-Distorter's" tomfoolery.
Of course, our friend Carl Kilo pretty much gets it right.
One could make a full-time job responding to the moonbattery of the far Left. Most times, it's just not worth the time or trouble.
But little "Truth-teller" over at Democrat official Clifford Garstang's --- or is that Clifford Claven? --- Cobalt6 blog is simply beyond the pale. Now, I suppose he can name-call as much as he wants, since it's not like he does much more than whine about the post he attacks (oddly, one in which I am pointing out an unfair question asked about the Obama campaign, and one which implies that he was associated with John Edwards' sleazy behavior). In fact, Garstang can and has done so here, a privilege he doesn't extend to those who don't register for his website.
But this is certainly odd: he notes that I "claim[] to be a lawyer, but that Alex Davis/Jonathan Maxfield used to claim that as well."
Well here's a little news flash, Cliffy: people listed as "counsel of record" (and scheduled to argue) before the United States Supreme Court don't merely "claim" to be lawyers; they are lawyers.
Now, I realize that the nature of the blogosphere and those who assume anonymous or pseudonymous persona might cause a certain skepticism, and here, I certainly respect a healthy skepticism. But I've been around the Virginia blogosphere a long time; people know me; I've even broken bread with no less a member of the Democrat blogosphere than Ben Tribbett. Even a Google search would make it pretty clear that I am who I say I am.
In short, Cliffy, your alter-ego or colleague might want to check easily-ascertainable facts before he questions someone's credentials, something he ironically does behind a cowardly cloak of anonymity. Not that such treatment and respect for others would be characteristic, or even expected from the far-Left slander machine.
But it would constitute simple decency. As would banning "Truth-teller" from your blog for his misdeed. Again, not something I expect from the likes of you or your website, Cliffy, 'specially since you endorse "Truth-Distorter's" tomfoolery.
Of course, our friend Carl Kilo pretty much gets it right.
Monday, August 18, 2008
Obama Announces Veep Choice!
And it's Hillary Clinton.
In related news, Obama also announced the appointment of a food taster, a designated staffer to start all automobiles, another to open all door handles, and a fourth to insure no bombs are planted under his toilet (see Lethal Weapon II).
OK, for the humor challenged, this is a joke.
In related news, Obama also announced the appointment of a food taster, a designated staffer to start all automobiles, another to open all door handles, and a fourth to insure no bombs are planted under his toilet (see Lethal Weapon II).
OK, for the humor challenged, this is a joke.
Monday, August 11, 2008
This Isn't The Association That Hurts Him
As I watched the weekend talking heads on John Edwards' political suicide, one question I heard --- "What effect will this have on Barack Obama's candidacy?" --- struck me as very odd.
Other than the possibility that Edwards was being considered as a running mate (well, so much for that), I just couldn't figure this one out. What? Had Edwards been shtupping Michelle Obama? Being that it's Democrats, was he shtupping --- or being shtupped by --- Barack himself? That's certainly not the story, as I understand it.
As with any raging Socialist, I've little use for Barack Obama. But among his many sleazy associates, John Edwards is probably the least of them.
At least Edwards' sleaze was limited to personal corruption, not public corruption.
Now, hanging Weatherman terrorist William Ayers or race-baiting minister and confidante the "Rev." Jeremiah "God damn America!" Wright around the Dalai 'Bama's neck is perfectly appropriate. Maybe even convicted felon and Obama contributor Tony Rezko, since Obama had business dealings with him. Obama has a long trail of association with a virtual rogues' gallery of deeply sleazy associates.
But John Edwards? Not unless an Obama was involved in his illicit activities.
Other than the possibility that Edwards was being considered as a running mate (well, so much for that), I just couldn't figure this one out. What? Had Edwards been shtupping Michelle Obama? Being that it's Democrats, was he shtupping --- or being shtupped by --- Barack himself? That's certainly not the story, as I understand it.
As with any raging Socialist, I've little use for Barack Obama. But among his many sleazy associates, John Edwards is probably the least of them.
At least Edwards' sleaze was limited to personal corruption, not public corruption.
Now, hanging Weatherman terrorist William Ayers or race-baiting minister and confidante the "Rev." Jeremiah "God damn America!" Wright around the Dalai 'Bama's neck is perfectly appropriate. Maybe even convicted felon and Obama contributor Tony Rezko, since Obama had business dealings with him. Obama has a long trail of association with a virtual rogues' gallery of deeply sleazy associates.
But John Edwards? Not unless an Obama was involved in his illicit activities.
Sunday, August 10, 2008
Another Example of Democrat Mindlessness
It seems that the Virginia Komsomol ... er, "Young Democrats Labor Caucus" ran a food bank for Verizon strikers, based upon the possibility of an impending strike called by their monopoly bargaining representatives.
Now, no word on the merits or demerits of the relative positions being taken by either of the parties to the negotiations is provided. No word on whether Verizon is being unreasonable, or whether the relevant Communications Workers of America (CWA) and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) locals are making unreasonable demands akin to those currently coming home to roost in the American automobile industry.
Simply reflexive support of a labor union, and an effort to facilitate its efforts.
'Bout what I'd expect from Democrats.
Now, no word on the merits or demerits of the relative positions being taken by either of the parties to the negotiations is provided. No word on whether Verizon is being unreasonable, or whether the relevant Communications Workers of America (CWA) and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) locals are making unreasonable demands akin to those currently coming home to roost in the American automobile industry.
Simply reflexive support of a labor union, and an effort to facilitate its efforts.
'Bout what I'd expect from Democrats.
Saturday, August 09, 2008
Clifford Garstang Responds
A little earlier today (before I took my oldest WMD (H/T bwana) ... er, son to the Redskins game, I posted this little item about a post appearing on a moonbat ... er, Democrat blog. Now, normally, I would probably have just left a comment, but since this Democrat blogger (like many others) demands registration as a condition of commenting, I decided to make my own post.
Now, never mind that the gentleman in question never bothered to establish whether the church he was criticizing had anything to do with putting the sign up (it apparently has been taken down).
Mr. Garstang instead decided to throw out an accusation of racism. He apparently considers a reference to "Black churches."
What; predominately Black churches don't exist? Democrat candidates don't flock to them in the weeks leading up to elections? Democrat campaigns have not verifiably provided "walking around money" to Black (or African-American) preachers? The media frequently reports that the most segregated hour is when Americans attend worship. Now, that's not the case in my church, nor in many churches I know in Prince William, including the one attended by my sons' godparents.
I've approved his comment (since I despise the bile anonymity promotes, I reserve the right to reject comments by anonymous/pseudonymous posters) on the theory than friends and readers will recognize that this accusation says more about Mr. Garstang's character than it could ever distort mine among those familiar with facts.
Now, never mind that the gentleman in question never bothered to establish whether the church he was criticizing had anything to do with putting the sign up (it apparently has been taken down).
Mr. Garstang instead decided to throw out an accusation of racism. He apparently considers a reference to "Black churches."
What; predominately Black churches don't exist? Democrat candidates don't flock to them in the weeks leading up to elections? Democrat campaigns have not verifiably provided "walking around money" to Black (or African-American) preachers? The media frequently reports that the most segregated hour is when Americans attend worship. Now, that's not the case in my church, nor in many churches I know in Prince William, including the one attended by my sons' godparents.
I've approved his comment (since I despise the bile anonymity promotes, I reserve the right to reject comments by anonymous/pseudonymous posters) on the theory than friends and readers will recognize that this accusation says more about Mr. Garstang's character than it could ever distort mine among those familiar with facts.
Democrat Hypocrisy, Volume 9,746
It appears that Sixth Congressional Democrat Committee member Cliff Garstang is up in arms about a church which has a Bob Goodlatte for Congress sign on its property. He says "IRS take note."
No word on how the sign got there.
One presumes that Mr. Garstang will exhibit similar high dudgeon when Democrat candidates like Mark Warner, Barack Obama, and others start making campaign appearances in Black churches as the election draws near.
Or will he?
No word on how the sign got there.
One presumes that Mr. Garstang will exhibit similar high dudgeon when Democrat candidates like Mark Warner, Barack Obama, and others start making campaign appearances in Black churches as the election draws near.
Or will he?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)