All ye liberal lies and media bias, come no further.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Michael Steele Wins RNC Chair
The Republican National Committee has voted as their new Chairman, former Maryland Lt. Governor and Fox News analyst ( not to mention some-time fill- in for Bill Bennett on talk-radio) Michael Steele.
Steele defeated former Chairman, Mike Duncan as well as, Ken Blackwell and Michigan GOP Chairman, Saul Anuzis. Steele won 99-77.
I like this pick. I like Steele. I listened to him when he was a guest-host for Bill Bennett's "Morning in America" radio show. I think Steele has the right ideas, tone, awareness, attitude and drive to turn the Republican Party around. He's concise and he makes sense. Fiscal responsibility and common sense all round. He'll be a success. By how much? I don't know. But he will help to repair the party.
Did ya catch the "rookie mistake" and "lame duck legacy" bit.
You know, where's the laughs from the Lettermans, O'Briens, Lenos, Stewarts, et al? You really think they'll point this out? Maybe Leno, but Letterman certainly won't touch this. And if he does, it will be only to say, "Let's not have another one," or something to that affect.
How much press coverage do you think this will get? Well, none of course, because we all know it goes without saying that the MSM, to paraphrase Heath Ledger's Joker, "wouldn't dare cross Obama."
This is my first exposure to the hilarious little cartoon, Ahmed & Salim and it really is just too damn funny. It's the first episode, so if I can keep track of them I may post more of them.
I have to wonder if when we hear reports of the Taliban or al Queda killing Muslims, if it isn't just ineptitude (as shown here) or are they really that evil? Well, of course they are that evil, but just the same...
"It takes a liberal to suggest or to say directly that liberating 53,000,000 people is a war crime. It takes a liberal to say that keeping this nation safe from another horrific attack by terrorists amounts to a war crime." -Tammy Bruce
She must be shocked. Veteran White House correspondent, Helen Thomas, was promised that the troops would be coming home. She was promised that Barack Obama would end the war(s) Now, she's disappointed that the Messiah is doing what he has to do and doing what any president would have to do in his position. Anybody with any sense of history or with who or what we're dealing with knows this wasn't going to be over.
I'm sure Ms. Thomas went to the polls, just like all the other Obamaphiles, expecting a brand new world. One filled with rainbows, rose pedals and children singing kumbya (or at least Dear Leader) 24/7. Well Ms. Thomas, welcome to the real world.
I know she thinks that only liberals can be caring and wish for peace the world over, but now that The One has bombed Pakistan (killing civilians) and is sending more troops to Afghanistan, "to kill people" what is position now on Obama? With Bush gone, who is she going to direct all her ignorant questions at?
I say all her questions, but really, doesn't she just have that one?
I saw this the other day in a convenience store, but I figured I'd have to scan it and go through all that (when I don't have a scanner) just to post it. I figure somebody would put it online, then I'd just simply pluck it from them. So I did.
Eventually he will be feeling the strain and see the gray creep in. One of the best parody covers I've seen in years. Once again, it's funny because it's true.
In this interview with the Arab network, the premise is that America needs to change in order to be restored in the international community. In fact, Obama relished in the notion that Osama bin Laden seems “nervous” over his presidency. That’s just ego-gathering for the new naïve president who doesn’t seem to grasp the deeper meanings of what he’s actually saying.
The connotation that the U.S. needs to make peace with Muslims is one that I have promoted on this blog for years. While I do not endorse Islam theologically or practically, I do know that how our foreign policy is implemented in dealing with Muslims will determine how much peace there is in the world. No example proves this point better than the brilliant counterinsurgency strategy of GEN David Petraeus in Iraq, in which he built on relationships with the locals in order to overthrow terrorists. We depend upon Muslims to win the war on terror, win the peace in Iraq and defeat the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.
The U.S. can progress with the Muslim world and can divide and conquer terrorism if it understands and respects religious culture and exposes apostates like Osama bin Laden.
There are two things missed in this interview: what the Bush policies did to help and reshape the Middle East and what Obama’s liberal moral agenda will do to hurt our efforts with the Muslim world.
GEORGE W. BUSH : “Democracy in Iraq is an Earthquake in the Arab World” ….the accomplishments of George W. Bush in the Middle East may be vastly underappreciated, but they are accomplishments nonetheless. Rogue Muslim leaders, dictators and terrorists were shaking in their boots for 8 years.
Bush ensured that Iraq had no WMD and that the incredible humanitarian crisis, the brutality of Saddam Hussein and his evil heirs, would be no more. Iraq is no longer a threat to its neighbors and is doing what Bill Clinton said we hoped for Iraq when he signed the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998…that is, that Iraq would “rejoin the family of nations as a freedom-loving and law-abiding member. This is in our interest and that of our allies within the region.”
Bush liberated 50 million Muslims in the Middle East and this liberation spread to free elections in other Arab countries, an increased democracy, the dismantling of WMD programs in Libya and facilitated dialogue between Muslims and non-Muslims about how to bring about world peace.
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA : “America is not your enemy”, said Obama in the interview. This isn’t exactly true. The exportation of pornography, abortion and the gay lifestyle have done more to damage America’s reputation around the world than anything Bush allegedly did, and that was a problem facilitated by liberals long before Bush was president.
In fact, when the honeymoon is over and Muslims realize Barack Obama’s positions on abortion and gay “civil” rights, they will be appalled. When they see that Obama has ordered the exportation of abortion throughout the world, he will become their enemy, not their friend.
When Obama said that he plans on restoring the U.S. “relationship with the Muslim world” to what it was 20-30 years ago, his memory is short. Believe it or not, we now enjoy a more peaceful Middle East than before, especially considering we are at war. Obama isn’t remember the Jimmy Carter debacle with Iran in 1978 that helped Iranian zealots coin the phrase, “Death to America”, the decades of hijacked planes throughout the world, the Beirut bombing in 1983 that killed 241 Marines or the general unrest and terrorism that plagued the Middle East with virtually no reprisal.
For now, Muslims see Obama as someone with an Arabic sounding name and recognize that he is not Bush. That’s all that matters to them now, but that will inevitably change and hopefully Obama’s naïveté right along with it.
Peace and good relations with Muslim countries is a top goal, a necessary goal, a goal that began its undertaking during the Bush administration, but it is folly to expect Barack Obama with his liberal baggage to be able to seal this deal.
Update on Wednesday, January 28, 2009 at 05:47AM by Amy Proctor OBAMA DECLINES U.S. FLAG IN BACKGROUND FOR INTERVIEW
All U.S. presidents travel with an American flag that is stationed behind them whether they are giving a speech, press conference with another head of state or giving an interview.
But according to CNN International this morning,an Arab woman in charge of setting up for the Obama/Al-Arabiya TV interview said she asked the Obama people where the American flag was to put behind Obama for the TV angle. She was told Obama wanted the interview to be “casual.”
Barack Obama’s first interview as President of the United States and the head of state, which happened to be in a foreign country, was conducted without a U.S. flag, which is normal protocol.
Now, how can you argue with that? Yeah, I know you'll try.
Once again, a "legend" of the left shows us why they have no grasp of history and that liberalism is indeed a mental disorder. To paraphrase the late Tony Snow, "Thanks for the Hamas point of view, Mr. President." You useless twit.
Apparently, former President, George W. Bush had a message of warning for the current CIC, Barack H. Obama, "Be wary of “meddlesome” Jimmy Carter."
So Newsmax reports:
Outgoing President George W. Bush had a warning for President-elect Barack Obama when they gathered with three former presidents at the White House — be wary of “meddlesome” Jimmy Carter.
Bush, Obama, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Carter met for a photo op and lunch on Jan. 7, and W. told Obama the guy he has to watch out for is “James Earl Carter,” a source disclosed to Newsmax.
According to a source close to the Bush White House, Bush called Carter “extremely meddlesome” and “a real pain in the neck.” Interestingly, Bush also told Obama that Bill Clinton had been helpful and supportive dealing with foreign leaders.
Carter has irked Bush with his globe-trotting efforts over the years.
In April 2008, Carter reportedly met in Syria with a leader of Hamas, which the U.S. considers a terrorist organization, and laid a wreath at the grave of Yasser Arafat.
Carter met with Hamas leadership again last December.
The former president has created controversy by equating Israel’s policies in the Palestinian territories with apartheid.
In May 2002, Carter visited Cuba and met with Fidel Castro. He has called for an end to the U.S. economic embargo of the island nation.
Carter criticized the Iraq war as “unnecessary.”
In June 2005, Carter urged the Bush administration to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay.
In 1994, Carter had traveled to North Korea and brokered an agreement on that nation’s nuclear program. But the agreement collapsed in 2002 after Bush included North Korea in the “axis of evil.”
I wonder if this was in the "letter" that Bush left for Obama in the Resolute Desk? I wonder if Obama burned it in disgust?
You know, he's been in office for less than a week and already he's done enough for what all the BDS sufferers out there (including the ones in Congress) would want him impeached, or worse, imprisoned for, were he George W. Bush.
Just when you think Obama's election victory should calm the hatred of the left down, if even just a tad (I know, silly me) Hardball host, Chris Matthews comes along and claims Sarah Palin should do well in sales of her newly published memoirs (when they actually do get published-and like all conservative authors, it will be a best-seller) if in fact she can read and write. That's right. Matthews "objectivity" allows him to make such an juvenile, unprofessional, bias claim.
By the way, by saying "Barack Obama is the only politician I know that can write," does that mean books by Nancy Pelosi, Jimmy Carter, John Kerry and a host of other liberal democrats were not written by them? Not even a little bit? Not that I'm surprised by that, seeing that the energy created by democratic brain-power could toast bread...lightly, but the fact that Matthews admitted it on national television is a bit surprising.
Where's the outrage? If it was Bush, there would have been headlines all over the world, "American Dictator Kills More Civilians for Oil." Instead, we have even the Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari and army chief General Ashfaq Kayani speaking of "concern" and not so much anger or distrust.
Wow! I guess the world really does love Obama. Even when he gives the order to kill their children. Hmm. Interesting.
Great. President Obama has fulfilled one of his campaign promises. It's one that he said he would do, so no surprises (unlike the vitriol towards President Bush when he did the same thing) but one that I believe most people could have done without. And probably don't agree with. But apparently the President does. Even though he claimed that this sort of thing was "above his pay-grade," so he, once again, wouldn't have to answer a direct question before he was president.
Not that I totally disagree with the President's formula. You know, the same one that President Bush attempted when he crossed the isle to work with Ted Kennedy on "No Child Left Behind." Of course the Dems shat on him for it, and the MSM followed.
They hated Sarah Palin. They'll love her. No rhyme. No reason. Just simply because she's a Democrat. Her name is Kirsten Gillibrand, and she's the new jr. senator from New York. Watch how the MSM will mention her smarts and although she's inexperienced, and PRO-GUN, she'll learn on the job. They will absolutely LOVE her without admitting or even acknowledging what they said about the Alaska governor, because obviously, Gillibrand is different.
Her key issue beliefs are at the end of the article. Along with gun rights (which by the sound of her speech, she can be twisted away from those) and not giving illegal immigrants drivers licenses. On the liberal side of things she does support gay marriage and abortion. I was about to say she's two for four in the morals department, but those last two are doozies.
But again, watch how the comparisons are made, but with a lot of buts and howevers. Sarah Palin is "stupid" but Gillibrand is not. Palin is not ready for prime-time, however, Gillibrand obviously is.
For now at least, it seems the "media" in this story so far is the few members of the right. And apparently, she has some other views we righties can agree with. She is for securing the borders, she passed an amendment that will prevent employers who have hired illegal aliens from receiving federal contracts, believes English should be made the official language of the United States and she opposes providing non-emergency taxpayer benefits to illegal aliens.
However the most interesting part of the day was when Vice-President, Joe Biden made a joke about an hour after Obama was sworn in that, I think, wasn't taken to well by the President.
"My memory is not as good as Justice Robert's," said Biden. Did you notice how the President reached out with his right hand to lightly clasp Biden on the back, as if to say, "Hey c'mon, knock it off. Let it go." I swear I saw him shake his head just a touch, in disbelief.
I feel a little "sensationalized" because this really is a non-issue.
Of all the things I may have said about the man, and I am most definitely going to jump on each and every gaffe this guy makes (and there will be many) I have to say kudos to the Vice-President on his saluting of President Bush when Marine One took the former Commander-in-Chief off into the sunset. Even Obama and the First Lady hugged their predecessors before the Bush's stepped on the chopper out of Washington. Forget the flub of the oath of office (which was mostly Chief Justice Roberts goof up anyway) that is the start of (dare I say it) a classy administration. Look I am most definitely not a fan of Vice-President Biden, but with acts such as this (as well as his admonishment of the media-savaging of Sarah Palin) there may be hope for him yet.
I had to share this. This has nothing to do with anything (other than to show once again that Howard Dean is indeed useless-something the Democrats are finally start to figure out; if they could only do this with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, then they'd have something)
I remember this one. I don't think Russert helped him out either, correcting him on his slip-up, the way George Stephanopoulos did for Obama.
The class of the Obamaphiles. Booing President Bush out of town is bad enough, but how classless and juvenile can you get? The morons who defaced the monument to President George H.W. Bush were obviously too drunk and stupid to realized they defaced the wrong president.
The first step in closing down Guantanamo. Who cares now. The scum inside already have ha bias corpus, so keeping them out of the continental U.S. serves no purpose other than to placate to the left and show us all what recidivism really looks like. But really, no surprise-other than the timing. I didn't think this would be his first act as President. Oh well, I guess it's a trivia question now.
But seriously, where are they going to put these guys? In Sing-Sing? Fulton County? John Murtha said he'd take them. Only the prison in his "district" is minimum security. But if it's in someone else's district, that' fine.
They just don't get it.
Hey, I know, what about Alcatraz? It's dirty enough for the heathens. It's confined. It's a little off the mainland. And really, where are they gonna go?
Oh wait, Blinky Pelosi doesn't want them in her backyard either. Neither does anyone in Europe. Talk about having no exit plan. Darn. I thought I had it solved for a second there.
So in his last day as President of the United States, George W. Bush used his executive power to finally commute the sentences of the two border guards, Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, that were convicted of shooting a fleeing drug dealer (who has since been arrested for drug smuggling) in the rear, then trying to cover it up. O.k, I get the fact that they had to pay for their "crime" of the cover-up (of which, I don't believe all the facts did actually come out or at least not everyone seems to know them) but to have these guys in prison for as long as they were, taking the abuse and beatings from other prisoners (mostly illegal immigrants that they probably helped put in there)
Bush did not pardon these men. He commuted their sentences. Yes, they're getting out, but they'll still have a criminal record and cannot serve as government officials. Bush did not feel that they were jailed unfairly (the prosecuting attorney being a personal friend of the president didn't help Ramos and Compean's case) he just finally felt this was the right and compassionate thing to do. Their only crime was covering up the shooting. Not something that I'd endorse or advocate, but being convicted for protecting the border from scum? The law is the law, I suppose.
How Much Better Would These Numbers Be If the MSM Had Done Their Job?
Just a thought. How much better (certainly 10% at least) would President Bush's approval numbers be if the press hadn't vilified him since day one? What if they hadn't shown their true colors even before he was inaugurated? You mean you don't remember the haters throwing stuff at his inaugural parade to the Capital? I do. You don't remember the MSM metaphorically spitting on the President when he tried to extend the olive branch to one of their favourite liberal demagogues in Ted Kennedy? I do.
So in this piece by Brent Baker, he highlites that the MSM at large (and CBS in particular) can't let their collective hatred go, even when the current president is just ONE day from leaving office. Have they not read their own slobbering love for Obama? He won. Let it go.
An exellent find by a commentor named "CobraMan," that I failed to notice:
"Mr. Bush's final approval rating is the lowest final rating for an outgoing president since Gallup began asking about presidential approval more than 70 years ago." Too bad for CBS that Gallup did NOT run this poll. Why don't they show the last GALLUP poll results, if they are going to cite them? Could it be that the last Gallup poll has Bush at 34 percent?
Date 01/09-11/09 Organization Gallop/USA Today Approve 34 Disapprove 61
Rachael Maddow, the host of A-Mess-NBC's pulled a typical ploy of the extreme left by putting down a right-wing product that she has never seen or experienced. I call it the "Letterman Doctrine." Named after (failing) liberal talk-show host David Letterman, when on his CBS show, he admitted to Bill O'Reilly that even though he had never seen O'Reilly's show, "I've got the feeling that about 60 percent of what you say is crap!"
Now Maddow gets in on the "blowing smoke out your rear" put downs of FOX News. A channel, by her own admission, she has "never seen a show on Fox at any time ever.” So goes the rationale of the media elite, "I haven't seen it. I don't know of it. But all ny loony liberal friends don't like it, so eeeewwwww."
You see how they can turn on their masters like hungry rotweilers? If these rabid members of the oh, so tolerent left can't even be happy that their man got in, and at least play the wait and see game like us conservatives are, what "hope" do they have? I mean, they really want extreme left-wing picks in the White House and on the Supreme Court. Anything less will simply not do. This was their time for dictatoral rule. Their chance at a socialist/communist America. How dare this Obama guy move to the center for the good of the country?
Well, I'm holding off on this whole "maybe Obama isn't that bad after all," like many bloggers, pundits and so-called experts have done so quickly. Like I've said, I'll give him credit where credit is due. But after all we've found out about this guy, I will not be taken in that easily. I hope he does well. Even if that does mean endless "We told you so's" from the whacky left. But that will quickly pass when they realize (if it comes to this) that conservatives would be defending the Democrat president more that liberals would. And as long as he turns out to be at least a decent presidentHow ironic would that be?
You have to keep this in mind. I know this conversation has been had by everybody. Everybody, from every race. How long would it be before a race-driven crackpot got close enough to take a shot at Obama? Will there be an incident? Not if the Secret Service does their job well. But there are, unfortunately, people out there that don't want a black man as president. And they'll do almost anything to carry out their twisted mission.
We've already heard about those two white supremacists that wanted to kill President-Elect Obama and dozens of innocent schoolchildren at an all black school. That's just one case. And these guys knew they were going to die trying, but apparently were still determined enough to plan a robbery of a gun shop for more weapons. ATF Special Agent Jim Cavanaugh said, "They said that would be their last, final act - that they would attempt to kill Sen. Obama. They didn't believe they would be able to do it, but that they would get killed trying." Surely there are even more dangerous, more competent crazies out there. God forbid any harm should come to the new president, but the Secret Service better be on their toes with this guy, man. Of course if it's just plain ol' racists and white supremacists that supposedly hate Obama, he's got nothing to worry about if this is true.
But seriously, Obviously I hope nothing happens. The last thing America needs is right now is a tragedy of that magnitude, coupled with the violent aftermath that would surely follow. Because of the article, you may think if the KKK aren't planning anything, and they're the biggest racists around and all that, so why worry? Well, first of all, stupid question. Second, come on. The Klan are a bunch of idiots. They wouldn't have the know-how or tenacity to even think to attempt something like that. It would be, also as the story mentioned, a loner. Someone who feels he or she (although assassins have historically have been male) has nothing to lose and can be more inconspicuous or covert. Strangely enough, it would be another historical lone gunman. Would it be another case for conspiracy fodder for the next 50 years, or would it be on camera so there would be no doubt?
Although there was an attempt on President Bush on May 7, 2005 and on his father April 13, 1993 (and of course the ones on President Clinton that probably didn't think things through like on September 12, 1994 when Frank Corder nose-dives his Cessna into the White House lawn or just over a month later on October 29, Francisco Duran tried to empty his semi-automatic from atop the north lawn ) there hasn't been an bonafide attempt that almost worked since March 30, 1981.
Let's just hope there isn't another for at least that long.
Ahmadinejad is at it Again. Yet Another Pass From the MSM
Obviously, the MSM loves this guy, like Chavez, Castro, Guevara, Stalin, et all. But can they really defend (by their silence) this guy when he is blatantly claiming this, can they? Oh, I forgot about the blatant, global anti-Semitic /Hamas-supporting rants that emerge daily from their newspapers and websites. Silly me.
This guy is a walking joke. He actually thinks Russia is going to allow him to run his mouth and cause divisiveness in America's own back yard. Then again with Obama in power, who knows, he may have just gotten started. His own people made it loud and clear that they may want him to lead for now (although even that may be a temporary situation due to the mass backlash at his attempt to become president for life) Now he wants America to bail him out because of falling oil prices. Then again, why not? Congress is bailing out everyone else.
I said to myself, I wouldn't post about any little negative thing about President-Elect Obama, at least until he took office and really gave me some ammunition. But I had written about this very thing, so I thought that I'd just remind y'all about how this man is not a God and he will make mistakes and poor decisions (again) That being said, like President Bush, I'll try and be classy (I think I mostly have been) and give him the benefit of the doubt for the time being. He has ticked off enough of the kooky left already with some of his administration picks without me doing it .
As for Paglia's assumption that "his occasional hesitations on the road were stitched together to make him sound like a stuttering Bugs Bunny," that "came from stunt tapes broadcast on conservative talk radio," is completely bogus. Check out some YouTube clips on this. Although they might be edited, I don't see it. That stumbling is what he does sometimes when he is off teleprompter, or off script. That's a fact. Paglia's defense is quite simply liberal sour grapes that he may just be on the same footing at times as the "idiot" President Bush.
Although this just more praise for the perfect specimen that is Obama and a lot of hypocrisy therein ("who wouldn't misspeak from fatigue on the long, brutal national campaign trail?" except Bush, because he's an idiot) and typical liberal intolerance ("I wish to present an observation, of sorts, from an evil conservative view") she does speak the truth, even though she masquerades it as "an observation, of sorts," from Hell's Gates, apparently. I mean anyone who calls Nancy Pelosi "nimble" and "a master of the ladylike stiletto thrust" is obviuosly a BDS sufferer. However, she also accurately describes Weasel Harry as a "cadaverous horse's ass of mammoth proportions. How in the world did that whiny, sniveling incompetent end up as Senate majority leader?"
And she defends Sarah Palin's unfair and disgusting dismantling by the MSM, especially Katie Couric, of whom she says, " of all the innumerable print and broadcast journalists who have interviewed me in the U.S. and abroad since I arrived on the scene nearly 20 years ago, Katie Couric was definitively the stupidest. As a guest on NBC's "Today" show during my 1992 book tour, I was astounded by Couric's small, humorless, agenda-ridden mind, still registered in that pinched, tinny monotone that makes me rush across the room to change stations whenever her banal mini-editorials blare out at 5 p.m. on the CBS radio network. And of course I would never spoil my dinner by tuning into Couric's TV evening news show. That sallow, wizened, drum-tight, cosmetic mummification look is not an appetite enhancer outside of Manhattan or L.A. There's many a moose in Alaska with greater charm and pizazz."
So except for the usual, run-of-the-mill, ignorant conservative-bashing that is to be expected from this site, I kind of overall have to say good for Miss Paglia on this one. Oh, and on her take of the "Fascist Doctrine," and the "media-trumpeted predictions about a world epidemic of heterosexual AIDS," as well.
Believe it or not. This one is not really all that much a surprise, given that he thinks he embodies all that was good about the 40th president. Then again he also wants us all to believe that he channels the political spirits of JFK and Abraham Lincoln. But for now, I'll leave him alone on this one. And yes, it is because it is a slight tip to the great man himself.
For God's sake he's leaving office in just over a week. Let it go. I swear this all in an attempt for revenge at the impeachment of President Clinton. We've been through this before, more or less. They have NOTHING!
Watch them as they hardly let her talk, them Goldberg claims (while she's trying to get a word in) that "I let you talk." They also failed to concede any facts she gives them while giving none of their own. Goldberg also claims she has "not great research," without offering any of her own or how she knows how it's not "great." Discounted research time and time again," say Goldberg. How does she know that? Behar, the intellectual lightweight that she is, tries to squeak out some insults (at least Coulter is there to defend herself this time) but is cast aside as the irrelevant blow-hard she is.
By the way, just because the sheep that is "The View " audience claps at every whisper that escapes these womens lips, really shows that either a) they truly are uninformed and just react at any syllable that emodes from their heros, or b) the applause sign is about to burn out.
Eight and a half minutes of contentious cross-talk, most of it dwelling on a proposition that even the left is grudgingly coming around on. Do note Sherri’s admonition towards the end about tone. Whoopi didn’t seem too worried about that recently when she wondered aloud vis-a-vis Coulter whether the carpet matches the drapes. Behar called her a “bitch” at the same event, a slight Coulter really shouldn’t take personally: Joy dropped the same insult on Michelle Malkin in 2007. And then took John McCain to task for not objecting to it when someone dropped it on Hillary soon after. Of course.
The good thing about Coulter and liberal shows like this is, as one commentator noted, She's always outnumbered, but never outgunned. Just the run-of-the-mill liberal reactionary arguments. Cluck, cluck, cluck all the time with these women.
Did I mention that Joy Behar is a complete waste of skin?
This will probably get us kicked off the Council, I suppose. Heck, with nations like China, Russia and Cuba on there, it's obviously in good hands and doesn't need Canada or the U.S. anyway. This reminds me of not too long ago when this same council voted Israel as the only country that treats its women badly (despite their women holding all sorts of positions of power and prominence) Not Saudi Arabia, not Japan, not Iraq, Iran, Syria or Libya. Nope, only Israel. Amazing.
The Useless Nations with yet another brilliant resolution.
I feel I must write something to debunk all the lies and hatred directed toward this man. You should see all the ignorant comments and vitriol posted on YouTube following these videos. Pathetic. It's not like Obama is going to be anymore "loved by the world." Iran is already showing their feelings for the man. Does the left really think it's going to be any different for the President-Elect? I mean, even he knows that things are starting to settle into reality; perhaps not closing Guantanamo, stepping back on letting Bush's tax cuts expire, and his picks for a commencement of a "centralized" administration are all leading to his minions and nutroots turning on him in the near future. In fact many have already started.
But there will be plenty of time for that. Here is the President, in his own words about his eight years in office. Lefties of the world, you may now begin spitting at your computer screens:
Now, you will notice how he didn't blame anybody for his mistakes as president but himself. No passing the buck, no "why me?" Say what you will about the man, he has always shown class and reservedness. You may not have agreed or liked his decisions, but he made them, and didn't waffle due to popularity or concern for his legacy like some presidents have and will do. He certainly was not the best president ever, but contrary to what all you hate-filled Libs think (or, more accurately, what you're told to think) he most certainly was not the worst. Herbert Hoover, Warren Harding, Zachary Taylor, Millard Fillmore, Franklin Pierce, James Buchanan and Jimmy Carter-now those were bad presidents. And no, overall, I do not believe Bill Clinton was a bad president. Bush told you what he was going to do and he did it. Now you hate him for it, like you personally know the man. Pathetic.
He kept you safe, freed millions of people in Iraq and Afghanistan, helped millions more AIDS sufferers in Africa and believe it or not, despite all the reversal of history from the MSM had a good economy for the first six years of his administration, despite being left with the beginnings of a recession after he took office (until of course Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Chris Dodd, etc. took the reigns of Congress and blew that to what we have before us today)
We'll see if Obama will fair any better. Good luck.
Unlike Jimmy Carter and other politicians from the left, most leaders and ex-presidents know the meaning of class and respect for the office of the President of the United States.
Via NewsBusters, Joel Sheppard's take on the Brit Hume interview with presidents George H.W. and George W. Bush:
"Fox News Sunday" featured a fabulous interview with Presidents George H. W. and George W. Bush today demonstrating that regardless of their political leaning, these are two fine gentlemen who deeply love their country and have the utmost respect for the office they held.
What was particularly fascinating was how they both had nothing but positive things to say about president-elect Barack Obama, as well as his cabinet picks, and that they refused to say anything negative about him.
In fact, if you forward to minute 3:00 of the video embedded below the fold, you'll witness an absolutely marvelous discussion about why they believe former presidents should keep their opposing views of the current executive to themselves, as well as what they think of administration leakers and those that write tell-all books for financial gain.
Well, now that's a new one. The fact that this guy talks out of his rear is not a surprise, but when he tries to sell the complete myth that when he was quoted in April of 2007, "The surge is not accomplishing anything," read and listen to the pathetic back-peddling when asked about the quote by David Gregory:
MR. GREGORY: Let me ask you about the war in Iraq. In April of 2007, this is what you said: “I believe myself that … this war is lost and the surge is not accomplishing anything.” Were you wrong?
SEN. REID: David, I first met General David Petraeus in Iraq. He was training the Iraqi forces at that time. At that time, he knew it wasn’t working. After he became the commander in Iraq, he and I sat down and talked. He said to me, and he said within the sound of everyone’s voice, “The war cannot be won militarily.” I said it differently than he did. But it needed a change in direction. Petraeus brought that about. He brought it about—the surge helped, of course it helped. But in addition to that, the urging of me and other people in Congress and the country dictated a change, and that took place. So…
MR. GREGORY: But you said the surge was not accomplishing anything. Even Barack Obama said last fall that it exceeded everyone’s expectations and succeeded beyond our wildest dreams.
SEN. REID: Listen, at that—the time that statement was made, the surge—they weren’t talking about the surge. Petraeus added to the surge some very, very interesting things that changed things. He said a lot—just simply numbers of troops is not going to do the deal. What we need to do is work with the Iraqi people, which we haven’t done before. That’s where the Awakening Councils came about, as a result of David Petraeus’ genius. He’s done—he will be written about in the history books for years to come. My original statement was in keeping what David Petraeus said; that is, the war cannot be won militarily.
MR. GREGORY: Do you believe that the war in Iraq has been lost?
SEN. REID: I don’t think at this stage we can talk about that with any degree of sensibility. That has to be something that will talked about in the history books to come. We…
MR. GREGORY: So you spoke to soon in 2007?
SEN. REID: David Petraeus and Harry Reid spoke at the same time. David Petraeus said that the war cannot be won militarily, I said what I said. Who, who phrased it the best is…
MR. GREGORY: You said that the war is lost. Today, in 2009, that’s no longer your view?
SEN. REID: David, listen, someone else will have to determine that as the years go on. What has the war done? It’s brought about—it’s destabilized the Middle East. We have a civil war going on in Israel. We have a civil war in Iraq, as indicated today, more than 50 people killed with a bomb in Iraq today. We have Lebanon, a civil war there. We have Iran thumbing their nose with every, everyone. And if that weren’t bad enough, our standing in the world community is so far down as a result of this war, so—and that doesn’t take into consideration the tens of thousands who have been injured…
MR. GREGORY: Mm-hmm.
SEN. REID: …and the thousands have been killed in the war. So it’s, it’s—historians will have to talk about what the war in Iraq did. But I think historians today indicate, as I have, the outline that I’ve given.
A Civil War in Israel? Does he even know what Civil War is? America's "standing in the world community is so far down as a result of this war?" Iran "thumbing their nose with every, everyone." And you and your Democrat cronies (along with your media-anointed President-Elect) are doing and will do nothing about it. I thought the world hated America looooong before this war? No Weasel Harry, you see it's because of people like you and your left-wing media allies in the world and their hatred of freedom and revisionist history that hates America, you tool! Oh wait, I take that back. A tool is useful.
Hmm. Interesting. He wasn't so quick to compliment the good General after his infamous (and as history will show, completely wrong) "the war is lost" comment when he called the manan incompetent yes-man. And a "liar.
BASH: You talked several times about General Petraeus. You know that he is here in town. He was at the White House today, sitting with the president in the Oval Office and the president said that he wants to make it clear that Washington should not be telling him, General Petraeus, a commander on the ground in Iraq, what to do, particularly, the president was talking about Democrats in Congress.
He also said that General Petraeus is going to come to the Hill and make it clear to you that there is progress going on in Iraq, that the so-called surge is working. Will you believe him when he says that? REID: No, I don't believe him, because it's not happening. All you have to do is look at the facts.
Reid calling anyone else a liar? Now that's rich. Well he would know.
This is one of these times that I can actually defend a prominent member of the MSM. NBC's David Gregory is far from my favourite or trusted reporter, however there are days when he could probably be considered "middle of the road" at best. This is one of those times.
She really should do this more often. Just like President Bush should have fought back waaay more than he did. I mean, I know the guy wanted to purvey some sort of class in Washington, but a few "fireside chats" once in a while couldn't have hurt. In fact, it would have helped tremendously to get his side of the (wrongly reported) story out. Ah, well, hindsight and all that.
His interview with MSNBC's David Shuster (wherein he delectably calls Shuster "a joke" and an "alleged newsperson") is priceless. Clearly Ziegler has just about had enough with the bias and agenda of the left-wing-media (no need for a "Fairness Doctrine" here, oh no) as we all have, and he lets Shuster know it. Check it out:
I think I found a new media hero.
UPDATE: Just added to MSNBC's video vault, ROUND II:
The Israel/Hamas War-Part Infinity Olmert Vows "Iron Fist" Against Hamas Pouring It On Olmert is clearly not taking this anymore Why Does the NYT Love Hamas? Excellent and true to form article. They're Not Loving Him So Far The Propaganda Machine in Full Swing Israel Moves into Gaza Is Israel finally giving the MSM ammunition? Are they going to far? I understand they want to protect their borders and forcefully move the Hamas rockets moved back out of range (and taking a few Hamas members with them) but I don't think Israeli boots on the ground will help their cause. I have the feeling though, that Israel is of the "damn the public perception" school of thinking right now and are going to protect themselves their own way, knowing the world press is going to write what they want anyway. We saw it in Iraq and we've seen it about this conflict since 1982. They're going to take care of business anyway they can. With enemies on all sides, how would you handle it?
Obama/Congress:Burris Shouldn't be Seated Finally, just when I think the Democrats are starting using the one brain that they share, the party collapses on a technicality-Blagojevich is within his right as the sitting governor-even if an indicted one. he did his duty. Sure, we all know that this is just a ploy by Blagojevich to deflect some of the spotlight off of him, at the same time trying to portray himself as a serious, politician of the people doing what he was elected to do. But only one of three things can stop Burris from being seated: 1) He is not an American citizen. He is. 2) He is under the age of 30. He isn't. 3) He is not a resident of Illinois. He lives in the city of Chicago and has done so for some time. There is nothing to stop him, regardless of the Democrats in the Senate say, especially the irrelevant Harry Reid. Bobby Rush: "Don't hang or lynch Burris because of Blagojevich" If this wasn't coming from someone who pulled the race card at every corner... Senate Turns away Burris But...Burris May Have Ally in Feinstein
Franken Wins? God help us all. I thought this was already over. See what enough whining and having ACORN on your side can do? Reid to Coleman: "It's time to go" See what the irrelevant one has to say. Still no filibuster-proof Senate for the Dems.
Both Iran and its Hamas proxy in Gaza have been busy this Christmas week showing Christendom just what they think of it. But no one seems to have noticed. On Tuesday, Hamas legislators marked the Christmas season by passing a Shari'a criminal code for the Palestinian Authority. Among other things, it legalizes crucifixion. Hamas's endorsement of nailing enemies of Islam to crosses came at the same time it renewed its jihad. Here, too, Hamas wanted to make sure that Christians didn't feel neglected as its fighters launched missiles at Jewish day care centers and schools. So on Wednesday, Hamas lobbed a mortar shell at the Erez crossing point into Israel just as a group of Gazan Christians were standing on line waiting to travel to Bethlehem for Christmas. While Hamas joyously renewed its jihad against Jews and Christians, its overlords in Iran also basked in jihadist triumphalism.