Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Sean Bielat is mounting a strong challenge against Barney Frank this November. Can you believe we are living in an age where powerful CongressRats like Barney Frank are in danger of losing their jobs?
A poll released today should have Barney Frank more worried than ever. Among 500 Bay Staters polled in late July, more than half said they were likely to vote against the incumbent Democrat in their district.
"[Obama's] education as a commander in chief with no experience in uniform has been a steep learning curve. He has learned how to salute. He has surfed the Internet at night to look into the toll on troops. He has faced young soldiers maimed after carrying out his orders. And he is trying to manage a tense relationship with the military..."
An amazingly enlightening article in the New York Times? Yes. Fascinating beach reading indeed...
For Obama, Steep Learning Curve as Chief in War.
The gist? Well, this shouldn't knock you off your chair or anything but Obama doesn't like being in charge of our Armed Forces. Obama isn't particularly good at being a Commander in Chief and has relied very heavily upon Robert Gates...who is leaving.
"Where George W. Bush saw the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan as his central mission and opportunities to transform critical regions, Mr. Obama sees them as “problems that need managing,” as one adviser put it...
"A former adviser to the president, who like others insisted on anonymity in order to discuss the situation candidly, said that Mr. Obama’s relationship with the military was “troubled” and that he “does’t have a handle on it.”
This line I found particularly troubling:
"With the economy in tatters and health care on his agenda, Mr. Obama was determined to keep the wars from becoming a major distraction."
"Reliant on Mr. Gates, Mr. Obama has made limited efforts to know his service chiefs or top commanders, and has visited the Pentagon only once, not counting a Sept. 11 commemoration. He ended Mr. Bush’s practice of weekly videoconferences with commanders, preferring to work through the chain of command and wary, aides said, of being drawn into managing the wars."
"Our Afghan policy was focused as much as anything on domestic politics,” the adviser said. “He would not risk losing the moderate to centrist Democrats in the middle of health insurance reform and he viewed that legislation as the make-or-break legislation for his administration.”
"Perhaps more important was his selection of General Petraeus to take over. The choice brings Mr. Obama full circle. As a senator, he opposed the Iraq troop increase led by General Petraeus, and the two had a wary encounter in Baghdad when Mr. Obama visited as a candidate in 2008. After Mr. Obama came to the White House, General Petraeus no longer had the regular interactions he had with Mr. Bush. “It’s an extraordinary irony,” said Mr. Riedel, the former Obama adviser. “He, like Bush before him, has put all his bets down on the table on one guy — and it’s the same guy.”
His team doesn't know if he's truly committed?! He still has a deep-seated doubt in the military? And this is all casually written in the NYT like it's a positive? Like we should be terribly impressed that he takes the time to Google certain military protocol and procedures? Then again, what do I know? I'm just a civilian...maybe the military prefers someone like Obama so they can play on his insecurities and men like Gates, McChrystal and Patraeus can get what they want for their men & women in uniform...
Thoughts from the Left: Guest post by Honest Partisan
By now, we've all heard the conservative/Republican case against everything from the Affordable Care Act to additional stimulus: our deficits are too big. Conservatives regularly cite the example of Greece, which faced default on its bonds, it was said, due to fiscal irresponsibility. The perversely infectious call for budget-tightening in the face of a terrible economy has set off a spiral of bad politics begetting bad economics and then back again: conservative Democrats have joined with Republicans to deny an extension of unemployment benefits.
One annoying thing about all of this is that, as amply demonstrated here, conservatives actually don't care about the deficit. I mean, they really don't care about it. They care about tax cuts. Especially for the wealthy.
This is part of a general pattern of conservatives claiming to oppose a policy ostensibly because it offends some immutable principle only to trash said principle when it's inconvenient. States' rights are supposedly so important that they trump civil rights legislation, but barely regarded when it comes to a federal ban on dilation-and-extraction abortion or federal pre-emption of state gun control laws. Original intent of the framers of the Constitution is supposedly important enough to trump New Deal legislation but jettisoned when it comes to affirmative action. The judiciary shouldn't be used as an end run around democratic results unless health care reform passes by congressional super-majorities.
To call this "hypocrisy" misses the point. The point isn't that the speakers aren't living up to standards they set for others. The point is that when people claim to predicate their substantive views upon neutral-sounding procedural principles, odds are they're lying. The federal government is not going to default on its bonds because the unemployed get temporary additional relief in the midst of appalling unemployment (a concern nowhere seen amid advocacy to repeal the estate tax, by the way). Republicans are either rooting for failure (all the better to stick it to Democrats in the midterms) or think that the unemployed are lazy.
Monday, August 30, 2010
"Estimates of the crowd size range from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of people. The U.S. Park Police no longer makes estimates, so there are no official estimates of events on the National Mall.
CBS News commissioned a crowd estimate by the company AirPhotosLive.com. The network reported that AirPhotosLive estimated the crowd at 87,000 people. But they noted that with a margin of error of 9,000, "between 78,000 and 96,000 attended the rally."
NBC Nightly News estimated the number of people in attendance as "tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands."
Fox News, citing organizers, aired a banner characterizing it this way: "CROWD ATTENDING BECK RALLY ESTIMATED AT OVER 500,000." source)
CNN, ABC, MSNBC and the NYT's et al must have been scrambling for stories once they realized that Beck's rally hadn't produced any controversial sound clips or radical sign pictures (no signs were allowed). It seems they'll have to busy themselves with creating controversy over the size of the crowd and the fact that Al Sharpton had a rally to offset Beck's...but that sorta loses steam because Dr. Martin Luther King's niece was at the Beck rally and says, "her uncle would have approved."
Michael D. Shear wrote an article in the July 20th, 2010 publication of the Washington Post that, "President Obama and his political aides privately acknowledge that the government's decision to sue Arizona over its new immigration law is helping to fuel an anti-immigration fervor that could benefit some Republicans in elections this fall.
But White House officials have concluded that, over the long term, the Republicans' get-tough message is a major political miscalculation. They predict it will ultimately alienate millions of Latinos, the fastest-growing minority group in the nation.
West Wing strategists argue that the president's call for legislation that acknowledges the role of immigrants and goes beyond punishing undocumented workers will help cement a permanent political relationship between Democrats and Hispanics -- much as civil rights and voting rights legislation did for the party and African Americans in the 1960s."
And therein lies the crux of the issue as far as the Democrats are concerned, just as I have articulated repeatedly over the years. The Democrats are not trying to "help" illegal aliens in the United States strictly out of a sense of compassion or any other altruistic reason. In fact, if it were to become quite apparent that 70% of these illegal aliens entering this country were likely to vote for Republicans the next time amnesty rolled around, I guarantee you that the Democratic leadership would have made that border fence water tight, let alone people proof. Further, they would be prosecuting and deporting such folks found to be here illegally with extreme prejudice, if you will pardon the turn of phrase.
Instead, since the opposite is true and it seems that approximately 70% of illegals are more likely to favor the big government entitlement mentality of the Democratic Party, the Democrats are actively working to try and harness and capture this potentially huge voting block.
The Democrats then have developed a strategy to explain their actions, or lack thereof as the case may be. They give all of the oft-heard talking point platitudes like, "These people just want to have a better life," or such nonsense as "illegal aliens are essential to our economy and they do the jobs that other Americans no longer will." My favorite though is the statement of how we "need to get these people out of the shadows".
Indeed there is a kernel of truth to each of these reasons, but they are offset by the reality of the matter often times which shows that far more harm is done through allowing this illegal immigration to continue unabated with a wink and a nod from our President and Democratically-controlled Congress. Indeed, this mindset was inexplicably also adhered to by moderate Republicans and President George W. Bush as well, likely out of fear of alienating this huge potential future voting block.
Indeed, this Democratic strategy of non-enforcement of our existing immigration laws is nothing more that the deliberate attempt to try and dilute the GOP vote though.
Continuing from the Washington Post article, "Advisers to the president say his long-standing position on immigration is not motivated by presidential politics. But in a few years, they predict, the Latino population will surge in "red" states, where residents have traditionally voted for Republicans in presidential contests. States such as Texas, which has been a GOP stronghold for a generation, could become permanently "purple" tossups if Republicans do not repair their image."
As you can see, right from the donkey's mouth, the Democrats motives are for consolidation of power and not for any noble or altruistic reasons when it comes to allowing illegal aliens to flow into this country completely unabated. After all, the Democrats don't look at these people as illegal aliens, but rather as undocumented Democrats.
(You can read T. Paine daily at Saving Common Sense)
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Take the quiz (But, for the record, the number of FEET in a MILE is not common sense...)
This one was more of what I had in mind when thinking about "common sense" and...ooops...it would seem I have none.
|The common sense quiz!|
Your Score: 40%
Failure. What happened?
|Click Here to Take This Quiz|
Friday, August 27, 2010
A new Gallup poll is reporting that Muslim give Obama the highest approval ratings of all the major religions here in the U.S..
"The differences in Obama's approval ratings across the religious groups included in this analysis have held fairly constant across time, even as Obama's overall rating has fallen by 15 points between the first half of 2009 and the first seven months of this year. American Muslims -- in the news recently with the controversy over proposed plans to build an Islamic center and mosque near ground zero in New York City -- have given Obama his highest ratings in all three time periods: 86% in the first half of 2009, 83% in the second half of 2009, and 78% so far this year. Mormons have given Obama his lowest ratings across time, dropping from 43% in the first half of 2009 to 24% this year.
In addition to Muslims, Obama receives above-average ratings among Jews, those who identify with other non-Christian religious groups, and those with no formal religious identity. Obama gets lower-than-average ratings among Protestants. Catholics have given Obama slightly higher-than-average ratings last year and so far this year.
Obama has lost slightly more ground than average so far among Mormons, and has lost the least among Muslims." (source
I understand why Muslims would rate the President high and Mormons would rate him low. What I have a lot of trouble understanding is why Catholics and Jews would rate him high. President Obama is the most FAR LEFT President when it comes to ABORTION. I'm talking rated 100% by NOW And NARAL. Is it because there is a Catholic-Union correlation? And Obama has the worst ISRAEL policy...yet he still enjoys high approval ratings from the Jewish community...? Why?
Does Rupert Murdoch Stand W/ Families of 9/11 Victims
Or With Ground Zero "Terror Dollars" Financier?
Some thoughts from THE LEFT: GUEST POST by Phillybits
"One has to ask if Rupert Murdoch, owner of News Corp, parent company of FOX News, stands with the families of the victims of 9/11 or if he stands with his #2 owner, Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, who owns seven percent of News Corp, and who has been shown to have:
directly funded [Imam Feisal Abdul] Rauf's projects to the tune of more than $300,000"... Prince Al-Waleed's personal charity, the Kingdom Foundation, donated $305,000 to Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow, a project sponsored by two of Rauf's initiatives, the American Society for Muslim Advancement and the Cordoba Initiative, which is building the Manhattan mosque.
That would surely be a huge insult to not only the families of the victims of the 9/11 attacks who are opposed to the Cordoba House being built at Ground Zero in Manhattan but any American who is opposed to the development as well.
All that said, I know of at least one person who should like to know where Murdoch stands: Pamela Geller of the Atlas Shrugs blog. Not only has she been leading the pack of opposition to the Manhattan community center and mosque project, but she has appeared on Murdoch's FOX News programming to discuss the controversy as well as posting on her blog informing her readers of the controversial funding by use of taxpayer dollars for the imam behind the plans for the center to tour Muslim regions of the world in an outreach effort.
I wonder if FOX News/News Corp pays Geller well whiles she's on to speak out against development of the mosque/community while it's #2 owner simultaneously is providing funding for it's development.
Thursday, August 26, 2010
As Democrat Max Baucus admits that he didn't read the Obamacare bill that "he wrote":
Speaking at a forum in his home state, Baucus and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius were asked by an audience member if they had read the whole bill and “if not, that is the most despicable, irresponsible thing.”
“I don’t think you want me to waste my time to read every page of the healthcare bill,” Baucus said. “You know why? It’s statutory language. ... We hire experts.” (source)
And as Democrat Michael Bennet Admits the country has "nothing to show" for all the stimulus spening and deficit creation:
...amidst all these things, I read the the GOP is in the middle of a "Civil War."
The latest examples of conservative insurgents' clout came Tuesday at opposite ends of the country. In Florida, political newcomer Rick Scott beat longtime congressman and state Attorney General Bill McCollum for the GOP gubernatorial nomination. And in Alaska, tea party activists and Sarah Palin pushed Sen. Lisa Murkowski to the brink of defeat, depending on absentee ballot counts in her race against outsider Joe Miller.
The GOP is likely to survive its bitter intraparty battles in such states as Alaska and Utah, even if voters oust veteran senators in both. But tea party-backed candidates might be a godsend to desperate Democrats elsewhere — in Nevada, Florida and perhaps Kentucky, where the Democrats portray GOP nominees as too extreme for their states." (source)
My first reaction was, 'We are?' I don't consider getting rid of the establishment or Hagel-esque Congressmen(women) a Civil War...just a past due chore. The Right has always complained about the Specters and the Hagels (and the McCains) of the party...that's nothing new, but they're finally doing something about it. It seems to me that the problems the Left is facing -both internally and with the country's perception of their failures since taking Congress in 2006 and the White House in 2008- seem much more insurmountable or much more like Civil War than our "Don't Tread on Me" mindset. It wouldn't be much of a Civil War since I'd wager 90% of the GOP feels the same way...but maybe I'm biased...
So, tomorrow night I finally take leave from Pennsylvania and all it's many summer smells and travel to the much needed oasis provided by the OBX beaches. I still have 17,000 things to do before we go and I haven't put together the guest posts that folks have kindly sent in yet... That means, if you have been tempted to send one but felt weird or shy --do it! Take this last post as a sign :) SEND ME your rant.
This year, I decided to treat myself to a new beach bag (any excuse for a new bag right?) I get many emails alerting me to online stores run by fellow bloggers, fellow conservatives or just entrepreneurs offering killer deals. So I went through my "stack of stuff" and found one such site: Simply Bags. I ordered this huge Damask bag with my name (I wanted Blonde Sagacity but it was too many letters) on a Friday and it came that Monday or Tuesday...QUICK! So I started thinking about all you guys out there scrambling for gifts that look like you put a little thought into them (I also get tons of emails about that believe it or not). What a perfect gift. Completely reasonably priced, personalized so she knows you didn't grab it off the shelf of the Halmark store 3 minutes before she came home and practical. Imagine all her girlfriends commenting on her cute bag and her saying YOU got it for her. Major points. The only problem you might have is that there are so so many great bags to choose from... And thanks to Bob at the site, I got to check "new beach bag" off that list of 17,000 things that need to get done before tomorrow night!
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
First, really? You're all still using "teabagger" in every other sentence? It wasn't really all that funny or witty for the first year you used it, but now it's just ridiculously played out. See, a joke is supposed to work on two levels like...the paddle my parents had when I was little. It said "the cute little deer with the bear behind" with a picture of a deer and a bear...and yet *I* was also the cute little DEAR with the BARE behind. See liberals...the play on words makes it funny/clever/cute. Tea Party supporters being called Tea Baggers...well, considering Tea bagging is a mainly homosexual sex act that is more about humiliation than satisfaction...is that what you want to do to the Tea Party folks...or are you doing the equivalent of calling someone a poopy head?
Okay, if you're wondering where that came from...the comments over at this post must have set me off a bit. Sometimes I just can't take the vapid discourse. Funny, Conservatives are supposed to be the rubes...
Anyway, you must read this post: Tea Party Leaders Criticize Beck’s 8/28 Rally: ‘All He’s Doing Is Trying To Use Us To Promote Himself’. The Author found one dude to say he was a Tea Party guy and then say he thinks Beck and the Restoring Honor rally is ridiculous... Yes, ONE dude. Not Tea party "Leaders") But this ONE GUY, of course, doesn't want his name used so he doesn't anger Glenn...(Glenn...aka Tony Soprano I guess?) Then he makes it seem like Conservatives are all split over Beck and the commenters lap it up like hungry little puppies. I can't decide whether it's eminently amusing or decidedly depressing...
"Forty-eight percent (48%) of U.S. voters now regard President Obama’s political views as extreme. Forty-two percent (42%) place his views in the mainstream, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.
By comparison, 51% see the views of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as mainstream. Thirty-five percent (35%) think Clinton’s views are extreme. Fourteen percent (14%) are undecided..." (source)
All the President's men must know that it's bad when not only are the continually having to remind the American people that Barack IS NOT a Muslim ("not that there's anything wrong with that"), but now the majority of the public think that Obama is "extreme" and Hillary is "mainstream." Maybe that was Hillary's plan all along. Use Obama to make her look "mainstream."
What will she do with the political clout she is recapturing? Will she wait it out until 2016 when she'll be almost 70? Will she replace Biden as Veep or will go for the gold and challenge Obama in 2012?
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
The article is entitled: "Dems Urge Obama to Take a Stand"
The gist of the article kinda goes like this... Wah, wah, wah, wah...
Okay seriously (though that was close). We know Obama has spent us into debt more than any other President, but didn't make his beliefs about the need for that debt clear enough. We know Obama has make the most progressive social/domestic changes of any President but we don't like that he vacillated on some of the more radical aspects of the sweeping change, etc. etc.
"...The president’s reluctance to be a Democratic version of Ronald Reagan, who spoke without apology about his vaulting ideological ambitions, has produced an odd turn of events: Obama has been the most activist domestic president in decades, but the philosophy behind his legislative achievements remains muddy in the eyes of many supporters and skeptics alike. There is not yet such a thing as “Obamism.” (source)
Robert Gibbs was right. I'm making a shirt.
The 9/11 Mosque Imam's wife has decided to throw her hajib into the ring and join the war of words over the proposed Muslim "cultural center" and Mosque at Ground Zero:
"We are deeply concerned, because this is like a metastasized antisemitism," said Daisy Khan, who is spearheading the project with her husband, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. "It's beyond Islamophobia. It's hate of Muslims." (source)
So, Ms. Kahn's empirical theory is: If you hate Jews a lot and long enough it'll spread through your whole body and turn into a hate of Muslims?
Luckily for his wife, her inane hypothesis will most likely be shadowed by new audio of her hubby, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf:
"What complicates the discussion, intra-Islamically, is the fact that the West has not been cognizant and has not addressed the issues of its own contribution to much injustice in the Arab and Muslim world."
He goes on to say that "Islam does not need a reformation." He's dropping some N-bombs and asking the crowd if they've seen Fahrenheit 911."(source)
You have to wonder why Pamela Geller (Atlas Shrugs) has done more research on this guy than the State Department --or Homeland Security.
Remember, there is no shortage of Mosques currently in Manhattan.
Monday, August 23, 2010
This morning I came across an article called "They Won't Build it":
"A growing number of New York construction workers are vowing not to work on the mosque planned near Ground Zero.
"It's a very touchy thing because they want to do this on sacred ground," said Dave Kaiser, 38, a blaster who is working to rebuild the World Trade Center site.
"I wouldn't work there, especially after I found out about what the imam said about U.S. policy being responsible for 9/11," Kaiser said..."
There's even a Hard Hat Pledge floating around cyberspace. It says there is a list of the Unions/Trades that refuse to participate, but I can't seem to find that...
I guess we'll have to wait and see who will prevail in our disagreement. Will the unions cave for the cash...? Stay tuned.
"After dutifully reporting even the smallest profits on their tax filings this year, a number — though no one knows exactly what that number is — of Philadelphia bloggers were dispatched letters informing them that they owe $300 for a privilege license, plus taxes on any profits they made.
Even though small-time bloggers aren't exactly raking in the dough, the city requires privilege licenses for any business engaged in any "activity for profit," says tax attorney Michael Mandale of Center City law firm Mandale Kaufmann. This applies "whether or not they earned a profit during the preceding year," he adds.
So even if your blog collects a handful of hits a day, as long as there's the potential for it to be lucrative — and, as Mandale points out, most hosting sites set aside space for bloggers to sell advertising — the city thinks you should cut it a check. According to Andrea Mannino of the Philadelphia Department of Revenue, in fact, simply choosing the option to make money from ads — regardless of how much or little money is actually generated — qualifies a blog as a business..." (source)
I realize the Mayor is still smarting from his sugar tax being denied, and that the city is in dire straights when it comes to cash flow...but charging for the POTENTIAL of making money? Who doesn't have the POTENTIAL to make money? What about the Harvard grad turned carpenter...does he get taxed on what he SHOULD be making? How about me...a college grad turned stay-at-home-mom? Do I get taxed on the teacher's salary I should be pulling in?
No, I'm not one of the geniuses that reported $10 in Blogads and is now being charged $300. Unless you're Michelle Malkin et al, any ad revenue goes right back in for your domain name, photo hosts, chat boxes, etc. So there is never any 'revenue' to report...
Sunday, August 22, 2010
When: 10 a.m. – 1 p.m. on Saturday, August 28, 2010
Where can I find a bus leaving from my hometown?
Look at the BUS MAP from the FB page and type in your zip code...
Who are the speakers?
The speakers include representatives from SOWF, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Dr. Alveda King and Marcus Luttrell. Jo Dee Messina will be performing as well.
You CAN NOT bring signs to this rally.
Glenn Beck's 8/28 Restoring Honor Rally -official site
Of course this had to planned on my OBX week...Glenn Beck's rally and Yo Gabba Gabba Live in Philly BOTH when I'm away...
Anyone here going?
Saturday, August 21, 2010
"Julian Assange is wanted for two different issues, one of them is that he's suspected of rape in Sweden," said Karin Rosander, director of communications at the prosecutor's office.
Supporters of Mr Assange believe he has been the victim of a smear campaign to discredit him. The Wikileaks Twitter page dismissed the assault claims, which first appeared in Sweden's Expressen newspaper, as "dirty tricks"..." (source)
Leaking intelligence information that could put our troops in mortal danger aside, this due has given me the creeps since I saw him (and not just because he looks like Bill Maher's long lost twin...) Of course people will say this is "too convenient" but when has Sweden ever helped us or gotten involved?
Friday, August 20, 2010
Everyone keeps talking about the 1 in 5 Americans thinking that Obama is a Muslim, but for me the more telling number is that almost half the country has no idea what religion this President is.
"President Barack Obama is a Christian who prays daily, a White House official said Thursday, trying to tamp down growing doubts about the president's religion.
A new poll showed that nearly one in five people, or 18 percent, believe Obama is Muslim. That was up from 11 percent who said so in March 2009. The survey also showed that just 34 percent said Obama is Christian, down from 48 percent who said so last year. The largest share of people, 43 percent, said they don't know his religion.
White House spokesman Bill Burton said most Americans care more about the economy and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and "they are not reading a lot of news about what religion the president is." He commented on Air Force One as Obama headed for a vacation in Massachusetts on Martha's Vineyard.
Burton added, "The president is obviously a Christian. He prays everyday." (source)
The problem for the White House is...if the President was "obviously a Christian" half the country wouldn't be at a loss to name his religion and the rest wouldn't think he was a Muslim. Now, the one in five that say he's a Muslim might be savvy bloggers that know that the Muslim world considers him a Muslim because his father was a Muslim.
Count me among the 43% that doesn't know what religion he is. Reverend Wright's church, in which he sat for 20 years, had nothing to do with religion or Jesus Christ but political and racial activism. And Obama has spoken of a "collective salvation" which anyone that has actually read the Bible knows that there is no such concept mentioned or implied.
Abdul-Aziz al-Mutairi, 22, was left paralyzed and subsequently lost a foot after a fight more than two years ago. He asked a judge in northwestern Tabuk province to impose an equivalent punishment on his attacker under Islamic law..." (source)
Now, as tempting as the eye for an eye theory might sound...when you read the entire article, you can't help but get a rather medieval feel... And there are no details. Does Sharia 'eye for an eye' still apply if it was self-defense? Or an accident? I mean, under Sharia a women can be stoned for rape...
And, if this were done in the U.S., we'd only be punishing ourselves. He'd then be disabled and unable to work so he'd go on welfare and get all the best parking spots...
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Yesterday I posted about Maureen Dowd and CNN both criticizing President Obama for a lack of cohesion in his message. And then stranger things happened. This from Maureen Dowd's column yesterday:
"The war against the terrorists is not a war against Islam. In fact, you can’t have an effective war against the terrorists if it is a war on Islam.
George W. Bush understood this. And it is odd to see Barack Obama less clear about this matter than his predecessor. It’s time for W. to weigh in.
This — along with immigration reform and AIDS in Africa — was one of his points of light. As the man who twice went to war in the Muslim world, he has something of an obligation to add his anti-Islamophobia to this mosque madness. W. needs to get his bullhorn back out. (source)
Did your eyes just burn out of your head? MAUREEN DOWD calling for GEORGE W. BUSH to WEIGH IN on MUSLIM RELATIONS?!
But wait, it gets better...
CAIR is also asking for Bush to weigh in on the 9/11 mosque-to-be.
WashPo columnist Eugene Robinson wrote: "I would love to hear from former President Bush on this issue. He held Ramadan iftar dinners in the White House as part of a much broader effort to show that our fight against the al-Qaeda murderers who attacked us on 9/11 was not a crusade against Islam. He was absolutely right on this point, and it would be helpful to hear his views."
Wait, I'm not done yet...
Former New Republic editor, Peter Beinart, wrote in the Daily Beast: ""Words I never thought I'd write: I pine for George W. Bush. Whatever his flaws, the man respected religion, all religion." [Bush] "used to say that the 'war on terror' was a struggle on behalf of Muslims, decent folks who wanted nothing more than to live free like you and me..."
Then after Harry Reid came out against the building of the mosque... yesterday, HOWARD DEAN came out against it. The Scream Dean siding with sane people? Kooky! This makes Chris Christie look even worse...
Gives you a bit of an eerie feeling doesn't it...?
The United States is not in the top 10 countries in the world, according to Newsweek. [source]
Well, Newsweek is crazy, but if it can convince a few of the blame America first club to leave and move somewhere in the top 10, then “Thank You!!!”
I’m still waiting for a few Hollywood types to make good on their promise to leave if Bush was elected… [source]
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
I am no fan of Maureen Dowd and throughout the Bush years I felt she was the embodiment of that catty girl we all know. The one that is always accusing everyone else of exhibiting her worst traits...
But the other day she wrote a piece called No Love From the Lefties that may have gotten dismissed as just another rant on Robert Gibbs. It's not. It's not even a 'professional left' diatribe against Obama. It's an insider report card on the state of the Democratic party (knowingly or unwittingly I'm not sure...)
The first thing that struck me was the ease in which she refers to Obama as a 'liberal.' Remember during the campaign when we called him that and we were just fear mongering?
Then there's this observation:
"Republicans often find a way to exploit their extremes for political advantage, while Democratic extremes typically do damage to a Democratic president."
What should this tell her? I realize she's in a NYC group think bubble, but isn't it obvious that this could only 'work' if the majority of the American people were behind the ideas/fears the Republicans are espousing and opposed to the extremes of the Left?
"There are deep schisms within the Democratic Party that were masked for a time, first by Bush and then by Obama’s election. Now that the Democrats have the presidency and the power and can enact legislation, it’s apparent that the word progressive is kind of meaningless."
Dowd uses the Tower of Babel analogy to describe the current state of the Democratic Party and I think that was incredible apropos (...though a BIBLICAL analogy from the Gray Lady's elite? What is the world coming to?)
"W.’s reign of error so enraged Democrats that they were bound by one desire: to get rid of him. Bush, Cheney and Rove inspired the Democrats to spawn a powerful lefty tower of babble led by Rachel Maddow, Michael Moore and the blogosphere."
Okay, so unfortunately we have to admit that content aside, she's a great writer...
"Obama got elected because of the clarity of his campaign and his speeches. But, surprisingly, he’s in some ways an incoherent president. He’s with the banks, he’s against the banks. He’s leaving Afghanistan, he’s staying in Afghanistan. He strains at being a populist, but his head is in the clouds."
Ouch. Maureen Dowd is calling you John Kerry in the NYT and that's gotta hurt. And, it's not an isolated incident. CNN has a piece today calling Obama's message "incoherent."
People, unless all of you sit out in 2012 because you don't like the GOP candidate (still haven't forgiven those of you that did it in '08) --the only way we can lose this is if Obama drops Biden and makes Hillary the Veep... Onward to 2012 (and NO MITT ROMNEY!)
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
"One of about every 12 babies born in the United States in 2008 was the offspring of unauthorized immigrants, a Pew Hispanic Center study released Wednesday concluded.
According to the study, an estimated 340,000 of the 4.3 million babies born in this country that year had parents who were in the United States without legal documentation.
The 14th Amendment to the Constitution stipulates that those children automatically become U.S. citizens, but some members of Congress are pushing to change that provision. That effort -- rooted in the debate over illegal immigration, particularly of people from Mexico -- has created some controversy."
I posted about this back in May when Duncan Hunter brought up the possibility of changing the 14th Amendment (which, obviously since it's an Amendment was already changed once...)
A few months ago, some may have considered this a non-issue or a scare tactic even...but I think the Pew Hispanic Center study results change that and highlight this issue as a viable debate this country MUST have. ONE in every TWELVE babies. No wonder this country is bankrupt...
It was bound to happen. No one can stand on a pedestal for long without faltering... The funny thing about politics is that sometimes trying to stay out of the fray gets you in just as much trouble as if you jumped right in. Christie and Obama have both made that very mistake when it comes to the 9/11 Mosque-to-be.
First Obama called it a "local issue" and now Christie said:
"...Given my last position, that I was the first U.S attorney post 9/11 in New Jersey. I understand acutely the pain and sorrow and upset of the family members who lost loved ones that day. At the hands of radical Muslim extremist. And their sensitivities and concerns have to be taken into account. Just because it’s nearly nine years later, those sensitivities cannot and should not be ignored. On the other hand, we cannot paint all of Islam with that brush…We have to bring people together. And what offends me the most about all this, is that it’s being used as a political football by both parties. And what disturbs me about the president remarks is that he is now using it as a political football as well. I think the president of the United State should rise above that. And should not be using this as a political football, and I don’t believe that it would be responsible of me to get involved and comment on this any further because it just put me in the same political arena as all of them..." (Read the full statement here)
I realize that New Jersey's Governor likes the 'I'm just here to fix Jersey' thing, and normally I get that, but come on. How many Jersey residents were killed on 9/11? How many Jersey residents currently work in NYC?
...And implying that those feelings of distaste about a mosque on the graveyard of 9/11 is a political stunt was a MAJOR no-no. These are REAL concerns. Truthfully building a Mosque there (with all the controversy that surrounds the Imam, etc) makes me feel a bit sick to my stomach --and what political gain will I garner from saying so?
Mark Levin has soundly scolded him. I hope he takes it to heart...I didn't want my romance with the big man to end this quickly...but I don't have much patience these days.
Monday, August 16, 2010
I would like to invite everyone in the Philadelphia area to the opening (I'll let you know the exact date) of the new Krispy Kreme that will be located on the 7800 block of Oxford Avenue.
The reason? Because the dregs from Local 98 (electricians union) have been picketing and accosting passerby's for a few weeks now. One tool even had the audacity to flip me the bird with a car full of kids when I refused to take his propaganda. What I found amusing about their print out (my mom took one) is it claims that people should boycott Krispy Kreme because --are you ready?-- the GC (General Contractor) was allowing anyone to bid all aspects of the job. REALLY GUYS? Boycott for fairness? Boycott for giving everyone the right to work? Boycott for refusing to pay bloated union prices?
Mind you, these same neanderthals were boycotting a local salon a few years back and when I spoke with the salon owner he told me THEY HAD BID HIS JOB AND SAID IT WAS TOO SMALL!
So, I'd like to thank Krispy Kreme...not only for producing a glazed doughnut that makes Dunkin' Donuts weep; but for understanding and embracing the many splendored joys of a FREE MARKET SYSTEM.
While reading through some articles/forums the other night trying to find out why, why, why we would ever trade Simone Gagne...I came across this:
The Chicago Blackhawks fan attended the team's annual fan convention on July 31 at the Hilton Chicago, which featured a display of trophies courtesy of the Hockey Hall of Fame in Toronto. Among the hardware was the Prince of Wales Trophy, given to the winner of the NHL's Eastern Conference each season.
Last season, that champion was the Philadelphia Flyers; so Millhouser was stunned and baffled to see the Washington Capitals' name etched on the trophy -- taking a photo with his Verizon Droid camera and Tweeting his reaction to his followers..." (source)
Love or hate the Flyers (I love them and you all hate them), you know they kicked some serious ass and defied all predictions to achieve what they did last season and this might have been an honest mistake...but knowing how the country feels about the Broad Street Bullies...we Philadelphians doubt it.
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Someone please explain how this makes sense? [source]
More wood for the fire (pun intended)… Government waste. Though this can’t be pointed directly at an elected official, I really hope that during the upcoming elections the electorate demands some accountability. The fact that we continue to see such huge amounts of waste and exorbitant spending during a time of unprecedented national debt is maddening. We are not going to spend our way out of this hole. Government cannot create anything through spending. The dollars that they spend are ours.
In a time where we see an ever increasing levels of nonsense and activism from judges, here’s one with some common sense. Judge Folino recently told Gary Mathews that he could not change his name to “Boomer the Dog” because it would cause confusion. He makes a good point- just imagine the 911 call… [source]. But Mr. Mathews isn’t too disappointed, he wasn’t confident in his chances going into it… and Judge Folino wrapped things up nicely in his ruling by simply stating: "Although Petitioner apparently wishes it were otherwise, the simple fact remains that Petitioner is not a dog.” Judicial common sense and clear thinking. Refreshing.
*I sooo wanted to put a link to that scene from "Coming to America" where they are in the barber shop discussing the Clay / Ali name change... but the only clips on Youtube of that part were dubbed in Hungarian or Spanish. If anyone finds one, let me know.
Friday, August 13, 2010
1. The Obama presidency is out of touch with the American people
2. Most Americans don’t have confidence in the president’s leadership
3. Obama fails to inspire
4. The United States is drowning in debt
5. Obama’s Big Government message is falling flat
6. Obama’s support for socialised health care is a huge political mistake
7. Obama’s handling of the Gulf oil spill has been weak-kneed and indecisive
8. US foreign policy is an embarrassing mess under the Obama administration
9. President Obama is muddled and confused on national security
10. Obama doesn’t believe in American greatness
And we'd be labeled ALARMISTS if we dared compare/connect our President with the 'Great Communist Revolutionary!' Calling him "ObaMao" on a Tea party sign would be labeled as incendiary by the Kos Kids and Gibbs would want us drug tested. Yet, here his is...in all his Red glory...considered a compliment there I'm sure.
"When U.S. Army Sgt. Neil Duncan got taken apart in the highlands of Afghanistan in 2005 -- his vehicle ran over a buried explosive and it "blew up right under me" -- he really wasn't picturing life without his legs.
Five years later, the double amputee is calling from a hotel in Arusha, Tanzania. His arms ache; so do his stumps.
He and two other former soldiers, three men with one leg between them, have just come down from summiting 19,340-foot Mount Kilimanjaro, the highest peak in Africa. You read correctly: Three soldiers, one leg. Mountain climb.
The trio of Duncan (a 26-year-old Minnesotan, now in college in Colorado) and former Army sergeants Dan Nevins (39, lost both legs in Iraq, native of California) and Kirk Bauer (62, lost one leg in Vietnam, lives in Ellicott City) made their six-day ascent as part of the Warfighter Sports Challenge, a series of seven extreme events for permanently disabled veterans..." (source)
Thursday, August 12, 2010
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs:
“I hear these people saying ]Obama's] like George Bush. Those people ought to be drug tested. I mean, it’s crazy.” “[The "Professional" Left] will be satisfied when we have Canadian healthcare and we’ve eliminated the Pentagon. That’s not reality.” “They wouldn’t be satisfied if Dennis Kucinich was president.”
They were mad he said it, and then mad he stood by it.
...Meanwhile, I think it's one of the first lucid moments Gibbs has had since he manned this post.
It is clear that the Post Office is a failed business model. UPS, FedEx, DHL and others are collectively kicking the tail of the USPS. Should the Post Office be bailed out? Not at the expense of the taxpayer. If there was another, more creative solution, I could support that….
For many years, Dave Ramsey has advocated stuffing the credit card applications you receive in the mail with as much other junk mail and send them back. I used to do this from time to time… take all the junk mail you get, remove your name from stuff, put it all in the return envelope to the credit card company, and mail it back.
This article recommends doing the same thing, but beyond sticking it to the ultra-aggressive credit card marketing machine, it points out that it also would help the USPS make up for the 3.5 billion (yes, 3,500 million dollars) that it has lost in the last 3 months (if everyone was doing it). Simple, brilliant, grass-roots.
"Veteran actor James Caan let people in on a little secret last week. After 46 successful years among Hollywood’s most outspoken liberal stars, he’s speaking up about breaking the mold.
“I'm an ultra conservative,” he said at Moet & Chandon’s 6th Annual Hollyshorts Film Festival Opening Night Celebration in Los Angeles.
“I'm not a G** damn Hollywood liberal, I'm not,” he said, adding he only watches Fox News.
Caan, who was at the event promoting his involvement with the online platform Openfilm.com, also added that he doesn’t think Hollywood actors need to comment on every single political issue. When Pop Tarts questioned him on California courts deeming Proposition 8, which bans same sex marriage, “unconstitutional,” he preferred to keep his lips sealed.
"I don't want to comment on that. I'll let those other geniuses do that – all those actors who like to find a stage to push their agendas,” he said. “They don't have political science degrees... I certainly don't. I'll leave it to Sean Penn or Barbara Streisand to comment on that." (source)
There are sane people in Hollywood, they're just the non-annoying ones that are there acting instead of pontificating on the many joys of Hugo Chevez...
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
I read an article this morning that debated whether now was the right time to draw down in Iraq, with the political situation still up in the air, violence on the uptick, and some Iraqis asking for us to stay. [source]
The failure thus far to form a government in Iraq is terrible. Every day I listen to complaints from my Iraqi counterparts about the politicians’ failure to come to an agreement. It has been 5 months since millions of Iraqis risked their lives and turned out to vote. In March I watched the election from a UAV feed- US forces did not roll into sector at all that day… there was so much Iraqi security that some elderly walked the long distances (vehicles were not allowed to move off of major highways) to get to the polling sites (too excited to wait for the buses and trucks that were arranged to give elderly a ride). Whole families, kids and all, walked to the poles, not dissuaded by the occasional explosion… Similar conditions in the US would result in zero turnout, but I digress.
All of that in exchange for almost half a year without political decision. The feeling here amongst my Iraqi partners is that none of their “leaders” will acquiesce and allow the other party a chance to form a government because they are all corrupt and their collective hands are stuck in the cookie jar. While the citizenry waits, the government is largely inactive. Today, Ramadan is here; a religious month of fasting during which nothing will get done.
The Iraqi Security Forces that I work with want us to stay. A buddy of mine sat in on a briefing between an Iraqi General and one of our Generals (neither of them at the top of the chain of command or in decision making positions) who asked for us to stay for another 10 years. Clearly that is not going to happen. Truthfully, from where I sit, the Iraqis are doing well enough on their own, asking for and receiving little if any help operationally from us. That being said, they still like having us around and are nervous about our departure. Violence is up, and I do think it will get worse before it gets better, the insurgents no doubt emboldened by our departure. If the government supports the Iraqi Security Forces (Army, Federal Police, and Iraqi Police) they will be fine, but the Ministry of Interior is failing miserably at that with regard to the FP and IP as we speak.
So though I agree with the article in the sense that President Obama has seemingly ignored Iraq, and believe that the bottom line is that we can’t afford to stay at war much longer, not with the crippling entitlement spending and economic policies that have been (and continue to be) put into place by this administration, and the last…