Thursday, November 29, 2007

Crop Rotations at CNN GOP Boob Tube Debate

The lefties have the nerve to call Fox News "Faux News?"

Two weeks ago, CNN hosted a debate for the Democrat presidential candidates. It was softballs all the way. Last night, CNN hosted a debate for Republicans and they threw everything at them including the kitchen sink.

The GOP candidates had no problem dealing with difficult questions, but what marred the entire event was the number of questions submitted by people who were clearly Democrats with affiliations to the major Democrat candidates.

And as Michelle Malkin points out, it's not the plants tried to hide it. All CNN would have had to do is visit the blogs or You Tube sites many of these plants maintain to see that they were Obama, or Edwards or Hillary supporters.

Bad enough that Hillary Clinton can demand preferential debate treatment (and get it) from Wolf Blitzer, and that she plants questions at her own campaign appearances. But now she and the other Democrat wannabees are determined to plant noxious questions at GOP debates, no doubt to use later in their campaigns. The questions were also those which Dems have been using to manipulate the fault lines in the GOP, not illuminate the candidates positions on issues.

What's worse is that the questions asked are not even ones that have been part of the GOP campaign or have much relevance to GOP voters. The planted question about the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy by a retired military officer (who was flown to the debate at CNN's expense) now affiliated with Hillary Clinton's campaign would have been better directed to her. After all, it was her husband's administration, the one in which she claims so much experience, that reneged on an earlier pledge to admit openly gay persons to the military.

And the idiotic question from "Journey", the proud John Edwards supporter: "In the event that abortion becomes illegal and a woman obtains an abortion anyway, what should she be charged with, and what should her punishment be?" Journey should be locked up for asking such a stupid question. Perhaps she should ask John Edwards if he supports partial birth abortions where the babies brains are sucked out before the dead body is pulled from the womb?

Equal Time for GOP at Next Dem Debate?

Wouldn't you like to ask the Dems a few questions to counter the softballs? List your questions in the comment section.

Bill Hillary Clinton for President?

Funny how when Hillary Clinton gets into trouble she has to have her husband bail her out. Well, she's in trouble in Iowa and sometimes it would be better if she left Bill at home...

Thanks to Amy Proctor for the video.

Bill Clinton still seems to be struggling with the meaning of the word "is." Reality to both the Clintons is something so relative to their political needs at the moment I doubt they realize what they are saying half the time.

Of course they can count on Dem voters to go along with them and forget what they said last month, last year or when Bill was President. But the rest of us aren't so gullible.

Is Hillary Running or Is Bill?

In that same speech, Ron Fournier of the Associated Press notes that in the first ten minutes of Clinton's 50 minute speech "he used the word "I" a total of 94 times and mentioned "Hillary" just seven times in an address that was as much about his legacy as it was about his wife's candidacy."

Bill Clinton is a walking, talking reminder that if Hillary is elected the country will go directly back to the fool's paradise of the Clinton era where doubletalk, redefining reality, scandals and ineffectual and incompetent foreign policy were commonplace.

No thanks!

Wednesday, November 28, 2007

God Rewards President Bush and Right Wing Christians with Another Quiet Hurricane Season?

Or, is manmade Global Warming key to quieter hurricane season?

On Friday the Atlantic hurricane season ends. And it's another year of good news for those of us who live at the water's edge in the Hurricane Belt.

As was pointed out in the Veteran's Day Quick Takes, this hurricane season was second only to last year's 10 year record low for Hurricanes. Only one named storm touched the coast of the United States and it promptly downgraded to a tropical storm which provided much needed drought relief to millions in the Southeast.

It's entirely fair to draw two conclusions from this:

1. Back in August, one Bush-deranged lefty with more bile than brains predicted that Category 5 Hurricane Dean would strike Texas as "God's Wrath" for the people of the U.S. electing and re-electing President Bush:

"The Bible is filled with accounts of divine retribution and if there is one thing God ought to be pissed about ,(or at least embarrased about) it’s Baby Bush."
Since the opposite happened, using the theological calculus this lefty laid out we can only conclude that either God loves President Bush or he hates Mexicans more.

2. 2005 was a particularly bad year for Hurricanes affecting the United States. Both Hurricanes Rita and Katrina were used by environmental scaremongers who insisted that in future a greater number of powerful storms would assault the U.S. all because of manmade Global Warming (which they claim President Bush has ignored). So, if a prediction based on one year's storm records is valid, a conclusion based on historically low storm activity over the past two years must be twice as valid! Manmade Global Warming has decreased the number of hurricanes, particularly the number of strong storms affecting the United States.

Monday, November 26, 2007

Post Turkey Quick Takes

Setting the table for the week's discussion:

Democrats About to Claim Credit for Iraq Progress?

The New York Times has this interesting article which describes how Hillary Clinton was FOR sending more troops to Iraq before she was AGAINST the idea and is now coming full circle again and supporting the idea that we are winning. Hillary's not alone. All of the top Dem candidates are caught in a bind of their own making:

As Democrats See Security Gains in Iraq, Tone Shifts
New York Times
November 25, 2007

As violence declines in Baghdad, the leading Democratic presidential candidates are undertaking a new and challenging balancing act on Iraq: acknowledging that success, trying to shift the focus to the lack of political progress there, and highlighting more domestic concerns like health care and the economy.
But the changing situation suggests for the first time that the politics of the war could shift in the general election next year, particularly if the gains continue. While the Democratic candidates are continuing to assail the war — a popular position with many of the party’s primary voters — they run the risk that Republicans will use those critiques to attack the party’s nominee in the election as defeatist and lacking faith in the American military.
Meanwhile, Democrats continue to harp on the phony Iraq progress benchmarks that Democrats in Congress dreamed up to hamstring the President and snatch defeat from the jaws of Victory.

Charles Krauthammer takes that bit of idiocy on directly:

On Iraq, a State of Denial
By Charles Krauthammer
Real Clear Politics
November 23, 2007

It does not have the drama of the Inchon landing or the sweep of the Union comeback in the summer of 1864. But the turnabout of American fortunes in Iraq over the past several months is of equal moment -- a war seemingly lost, now winnable. The violence in Iraq has been dramatically reduced. Political allegiances have been radically reversed. The revival of ordinary life in many cities is palpable. Something important is happening.

And what is the reaction of the war critics? Nancy Pelosi stoutly maintains her state of denial, saying this about the war just two weeks ago: "This is not working. . . . We must reverse it." A euphemism for "abandon the field," which is what every Democratic presidential candidate is promising, with variations only in how precipitous to make the retreat.

How do they avoid acknowledging the realities on the ground? By asserting that we have not achieved political benchmarks -- mostly legislative actions by the Baghdad government -- that were set months ago. And that these benchmarks are paramount. And that all the current progress is ultimately vitiated by the absence of centrally legislated national reconciliation.
But does the absence of this deus ex machina invalidate our hard-won gains? Why does this mean that we cannot achieve success by other means?

Sure, there is no oil law. But the central government is nonetheless distributing oil revenue to the provinces, where the funds are being used for reconstruction.

Sure, the de-Baathification law has not been modified. But the whole purpose of modification was to entice Sunni insurgents to give up the insurgency and join the new order. This is already happening on a widening scale all over the country in the absence of a relaxed de-Baathification law.

As for federalism, the Kurds are running their own region, the Sunni sheiks in Anbar and elsewhere are exercising not just autonomy but control of their own security, and the southern Shiites are essentially governing themselves, the British having withdrawn in all but name.

Yes, a provincial powers law would be nice because it would allow for provincial elections. We should push hard for it. But we already have effective provincial and tribal autonomy in pivotal regions of the country.
Al-Qaeda in Iraq is in disarray, the Sunni insurgency in decline, the Shiite militias quiescent, the capital city reviving. Are we now to reverse course and abandon all this because parliament cannot ratify the reconciliation already occurring on the ground?

Do the critics forget their own arguments about the irrelevance of formal political benchmarks? The transfer of power in 2004. The two elections in 2005. The ratification of the constitution.
So, just as we have learned this hard lesson of the disconnect between political benchmarks and real stability, the critics now claim the reverse -- that benchmarks are what really count.
Campaign Trail Quickies

--Fred Thompson Not Finished

Yes, some GOP voters have been disappointed that the early hype about Fred Thompson's presidential campaign turned out to be that: just hype.

But the opposite hype that Thompson's campaign is a total flop is also wrong. And Thompson took the matter on directly in this interview with Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday:

"If you look at the national polls, you'll see that I'm running second and have been running second for a long time.I'm running ahead of a guy who spent probably $50 million more than I have and been running for a year longer. If you look in South Carolina, I've either been leading or tied for the lead for a long, long time. I moved from fourth to third in Iowa, ahead of Rudy Giuliani."

Thompson's national ranking has been declining, but he does retain second place in the Real Clear Politics polling averages chart
and while his polling average in South Carolina has him third, the latest Rasmussen poll has him tied with Romney (who continues to come on strong in SC)

From the Mike's America archives: Fred Thompson Visits Mike's America

-- Novak: "Huckabee, the False Conservative"

Bob Novak reports that "real conservatives shudder" at the thought of Mike Huckabee as President:

Huckabee, the False Conservative
Real Clear Politics
By Robert Novak
November 26, 2007

...Huckabee is campaigning as a conservative, but serious Republicans know that he is a high-tax, protectionist, big-government advocate of a strong hand in the Oval Office directing the lives of Americans. Until now, they did not bother to expose the former governor of Arkansas as a false conservative because he seemed an underfunded, unknown nuisance candidate. Now that he has pulled even with Mitt Romney for the Iowa caucuses with the possibility of more progress, the beleaguered Republican Party has a frightening problem on its hands.
--Rudy: It's time to unmask Romney

Rudy: It's time to unmask Romney
By: Jonathan Martin
The Politico
Nov 26, 2007

WINDHAM, N.H. — In a big strategic shift, Rudy Giuliani hammered Mitt Romney’s record Sunday on three fronts, saying it was time to “take the mask off and take a look at what kind of governor was he.”

Using some of the toughest language of his campaign, Giuliani, in an interview with Politico, slammed Romney on health care, crime and taxes. At the same time he portrayed the one-time moderate as a hypocrite on a host of social issues who lives “in a glass house.” It was easily the most sweeping attack Giuliani has delivered against Romney in this campaign.

“He throws stones at people,” Giuliani said in an interview on his campaign bus. “And then on that issue he usually has a worse record than whoever he’s throwing stones at.”

The Romney camp responded by calling Giuliani's attack "nasty" and offering a point-by-point rebuttal.

When Mitt Romney visited Mike's America I noted that it didn't take any prompting for Mitt to go on the attack against Rudy. Seems to me that turnabout is fair play. Rudy has consistently avoided attacking his opponents, preferring to run against Hillary Clinton. But it's crunch time and Mitt is coming on strong in places like South Carolina where he now is tied with Fred in the latest Rasmussen Poll but leads in the overall RC Politics average.

Last, Not Least

-- Stem Cell Debate Over?
The End of the Stem-Cell Wars
A victory for science, for the pro-life movement, and for President Bush.
by Ryan T. Anderson
The Weekly Standard

The stem cell wars are over. Leading scientists are telling us that they can pursue the most promising stem cell research without using--much less killing--human embryos. This breakthrough enables researchers to create human embryonic stem cells directly from adult cells. In fact, the new method may actually prove superior to embryo-destructive alternatives. This is the biggest stem cell advance since James Thomson became the first scientist to isolate embryonic stem cells, less than a decade ago.
It also is illustrative of the politics of science. Had a President Gore or a President Kerry allowed the science to go forward without regard for moral principle, it would have set a terrible precedent. A Gore or Kerry presidency would have bestowed federal blessing and taxpayer funds on laboratory work predicated on the assumption that embryonic human beings can be treated as spare parts and that cloning to kill is acceptable.

But because President Bush stood his ground, we have avoided that moral catastrophe. Had Bush lost either election, or had he caved to pressure from those who slandered him as "antiscience," it is very possible that the new method of stem cell production--the new gold standard, in all likelihood--would never have been found. Most likely, science and the public would have accommodated themselves to the mass production and mass killing of human embryos.
--Biofuels Not The Panacea for Energy Independence?
Who's Fueling Whom?
Why the biofuels movement could run out of gas
By Richard Conniff
Smithsonian magazine
November 2007

...Over the past few years, biofuels have acquired an almost magical appeal for environmentalists and investors alike. This new energy source (actually as old as the first wood-fueled campfire) promises to relieve global warming and win back America's energy independence: instead of burning fossil fuels such as coal or oil, which fill the atmosphere with the carbon packed away during thousands of years of plant and animal growth, the idea is to extract energy only from recent harvests. Where we now pay larcenous prices to OPEC, we'd pay our own farmers and foresters instead.
So what's the hitch? Partly it's that bit about doing a little planning. The move to biofuels thus far looks more like a stampede than a considered program to wean ourselves from fossil fuels. Critics in the financial community have used words like "gold rush" and even the dreaded "bubble," fretting that "biofool" investors are putting too much money into new refineries, which could go bust as markets and subsidies shift or as technologies and feedstocks become obsolete.
--Man Now Threatening the Life of the Universe?

Question: How can liberals politicize this and how can the United Nations tax it?

Mankind 'shortening the universe's life'
By Roger Highfield, Science Editor
The Telegraph (U.K.)
Nov. 21, 2007

Forget about the threat that mankind poses to the Earth: our very ability to study the heavens may have shortened the inferred lifetime of the cosmos.

Parallel universe proof boosts time travel hopes
Quantum theory and relativity explained
Surfer Dude's Theory of Everything - The Movie

That does not mean the field of astronomy does direct harm. A universe with a truncated lifespan may come hand in hand with the ability of astronomers to make cosmological measurements, according to two American scientists who have studied the strange, subtle and cosmic implications of quantum mechanics, the most successful theory we have.

Over the past few years, cosmologists have taken this powerful theory of what happens at the level of subatomic particles and tried to extend it to understand the universe, since it began in the subatomic realm during the Big Bang.

But there is an odd feature of the theory that philosophers and scientists still argue about. In a nutshell, the theory suggests that quantum systems can exist in many different physical configurations at the same time. By observing the system, however, we may pick out one single 'quantum state', and therefore force the system to change its configuration.

Thursday, November 22, 2007

Mark Steyn's Thanksgiving

This is a day the rest of the world should be thankful for the United States!

Excerpting from a Mark Steyn column is difficult. You really must read the whole thing.

American Treasure
Giving thanks.
By Mark Steyn
National Review
November 18, 2007

...Well, Americans have a lot to be thankful for. Europeans think of this country as “the New World” in part because it has an eternal newness which is noisy and distracting. Who would ever have thought you could have ready-to-eat pizza faxed directly to your iPod? And just when you think you’re on top of the general trend of novelty, it veers off in an entirely different direction: Continentals who grew up on Hollywood movies where the guy tells the waitress “Gimme a cuppa joe” and slides over a nickel return to New York a year or two later and find the coffee now costs $5.75, takes 25 minutes and requires an agonizing choice between the cinnamon-gingerbread-persimmon latte with coxcomb sprinkles and the decaf venti pepperoni-Eurasian-milfoil macchiato. Who would have foreseen that the nation that inflicted fast food and drive-thru restaurants on the planet would then take the fastest menu item of all and turn it into a kabuki-paced performance art? What mad genius!

But Americans aren’t novelty junkies on the important things. “The New World” is one of the oldest settled constitutional democracies on earth, to a degree “the Old World” can barely comprehend. Where it counts, Americans are traditionalists. We know Eastern Europe was a totalitarian prison until the Nineties, but we forget that Mediterranean Europe (Greece, Spain, Portugal) has democratic roots going all the way back until, oh, the mid-Seventies; France and Germany’s constitutions date back barely half a century, Italy’s only to the 1940s, and Belgium’s goes back about 20 minutes, and currently it’s not clear whether even that latest rewrite remains operative. The U.S. Constitution is not only older than France’s, Germany’s, Italy’s or Spain’s constitution, it’s older than all of them put together. Americans think of Europe as Goethe and Mozart and 12th century castles and 6th century churches, but the Continent’s governing mechanisms are no more ancient than the Partridge Family. Aside from the Anglophone democracies, most of “the west’”s nation states have been conspicuous failures at sustaining peaceful political evolution from one generation to the next, which is why they’re so susceptible to the siren song of Big Ideas — Communism, Fascism, European Union. If you’re going to be novelty-crazed, better the zebra-mussel cappuccino than the Third Reich.

So Americans should be thankful they have one of the last functioning nation states. Because they’ve been so inept at exercising it, Europeans no longer believe in national sovereignty, whereas it would never occur to Americans not to. This profoundly different attitude to the nation state underpins in turn Euro-American attitudes to transnational institutions such as the U.N. But on this Thanksgiving the rest of the world ought to give thanks to American national sovereignty, too. When something terrible and destructive happens — a tsunami hits Indonesia, an earthquake devastates Pakistan — the U.S. can project itself anywhere on the planet within hours and start saving lives, setting up hospitals and restoring the water supply. Aside from Britain and France, the Europeans cannot project power in any meaningful way anywhere. When they sign on to an enterprise they claim to believe in — shoring up Afghanistan’s fledgling post-Taliban democracy — most of them send token forces under constrained rules of engagement that prevent them doing anything more than manning the photocopier back at the base. If America were to follow the Europeans and maintain only shriveled attenuated residual military capacity, the world would very quickly be nastier and bloodier, and far more unstable. It’s not just Americans and Iraqis and Afghans who owe a debt of thanks to the U.S. soldier but all the Europeans grown plump and prosperous in a globalized economy guaranteed by the most benign hegemon in history.[read the whole thing]
Mike's America Gives Thanks

I know it is fashionable even among conservatives to occasionally bash President Bush for compromising too much on some issues, not enough on others. But there is one issue on which he has remained absolutely rock solid, even in the face of the most vicious, partisan, hate-filled opposition and that is the National Security of the United States.

Whether it's the war in Iraq, or our efforts to protect Americans here in the United States from further attacks we know President Bush will never waver, falter or compromise on that core issue.

It's clear that President Bush cares deeply for the safety of the American people. No better illustration of that than the photo at right of him hugging Ashley Faulkner, whom he met quite unexpectedly while on a campaign swing through Ohio in 2004. Ashley's mother was killed in the September 11th attacks and she had become emotionally withdrawn until President Bush took her in his arms, covering her head and held her close as Ashley's father, Lynn, took the photo.

This man cares! And for that and more I give thanks for President Bush!

Here's the story if you haven't heard it:

On a more personal note:

I give thanks to each of you who read and comment here at Mike's America. You, my online conservative friends, are the bedrock of this nation. You honor the sacrifice and service that have made this the greatest nation on earth blessed by freedom, opportunity and prosperity. You are an inspiration to me.

I even give thanks to the moonbat patrol. Without them to remind us what darkness and idiocy awaits those who slip loose from the moorings of our great American traditions, we might fail to remain watchful as well as thankful.

Happy Thanksgiving!!!

Wednesday, November 21, 2007

Bush Pardons Thanksgiving Turkeys

The annual White House Turkey pardon was on Tuesday. The turkeys "May" and "Flower" came from the Seger family farm in Dubois, Indiana.

But they should have named them Pelosi and Reid. I can't think of two bigger turkeys who desperately need forgiveness.

The turkeys continued to gobble throughout President Bush's remarks, causing some exasperation.

"Pelosi" is always a grandstander!

President Bush: "And so now I have a task, and that is to grant a full presidential pardon to May and Flower. They'll be shortly flown to Disney World, where they will serve as Honorary Grand Marshals for the Thanksgiving Day Parade. I hope that honor doesn't go to their head. (Laughter.) May they live the rest of their lives in blissful gobbling. And may all Americans enjoy a holiday full of love and peace. God bless you all."

"Reid" gets pardoned for being a fool!


Tuesday, November 20, 2007

The Windsor's Diamond Wedding Anniversary

Sixty years of entertainment!

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Service at Westminster Abbey for Diamond Anniversary
LONDON, ENGLAND - NOVEMBER 19: Members of the Royal Family attend a service of thanksgiving to celebrate Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh's Diamond Wedding Anniversary, at Westminster Abbey on November 19, 2007 in London, England. (Photo by POOL/Tim Graham Picture Library/Getty Images)

The Anniversary gives me the perfect excuse to share another look at the last of the lions of the 20th Century:

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Former Prime Minister Baroness Margaret Thatcher attends a service of thanksgiving at Westminster Abbey to celebrate the Queen and Prince Philip's Diamond Wedding Anniversary, November 19, 2007 in London, England. (Photo by Tim Graham/Getty Images)

As Mike's America readers know, I'm a big fan of Margaret Thatcher. I'll never forget seeing her at the White House with President Reagan or years later, bounding out of her car in front of her home in London. Ill health had slowed the Iron Lady down. But the metal of her mind is still rock solid as is the achievement and legacy of her remarkable time as Britain's Prime Minister and America's greatest friend.

New York Times Leaks the News:


The good news finally made it onto Page One, above the fold with photos!

Front Page, November 20, 2007

After years of downplaying, dismissing or ignoring every sign of progress in Iraq the New York Times has finally decided that enough is enough. With the last remaining shreds of their credibility and integrity at stake (not to mention their rapidly declining circulation) the Gray Lady knew it could no longer bury the good news from Iraq in the back pages.

Baghdad Starts to Exhale as Security Improves
New York Times
November 20, 2007

BAGHDAD, Nov. 19 — Five months ago, Suhaila al-Aasan lived in an oxygen tank factory with her husband and two sons, convinced that they would never go back to their apartment in Dora, a middle-class neighborhood in southern Baghdad.

Today she is home again, cooking by a sunlit window, sleeping beneath her favorite wedding picture. And yet, she and her family are remarkably alone. The half-dozen other apartments in her building echo with emptiness and, on most days, Iraqi soldiers are the only neighbors she sees.

“I feel happy,” she said, standing in her bedroom, between a flowered bedspread and a bullet hole in the wall. “But my happiness is not complete. We need more people to come back. We need more people to feel safe.”

Mrs. Aasan, 45, a Shiite librarian with an easy laugh, is living at the far end of Baghdad’s tentative recovery. She is one of many Iraqis who in recent weeks have begun to test where they can go and what they can do when fear no longer controls their every move.

The security improvements in most neighborhoods are real. Days now pass without a car bomb, after a high of 44 in the city in February. The number of bodies appearing on Baghdad’s streets has plummeted to about 5 a day, from as many as 35 eight months ago, and suicide bombings across Iraq fell to 16 in October, half the number of last summer and down sharply from a recent peak of 59 in March, the American military says.

As a result, for the first time in nearly two years, people are moving with freedom around much of this city. In more than 50 interviews across Baghdad, it became clear that while there were still no-go zones, more Iraqis now drive between Sunni and Shiite areas for work, shopping or school, a few even after dark. In the most stable neighborhoods of Baghdad, some secular women are also dressing as they wish. Wedding bands are playing in public again, and at a handful of once shuttered liquor stores customers now line up outside in a collective rebuke to religious vigilantes from the Shiite Mahdi Army.

Iraqis are clearly surprised and relieved to see commerce and movement finally increase, five months after an extra 30,000 American troops arrived in the country. But the depth and sustainability of the changes remain open to question.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Sunday, November 18, 2007

Dem Debate Ignores Terrorism Threat

Failure to see the danger is nothing new for Democrats!

Bill Clinton with his National Security Cabinet shows how seriously they took threats to our nation in the 1990's.

Despite a mortal terrorist threat against America, Dem contenders see no evil
Michael Goodwin
New York Daily News
November 18th 2007

Whew, that was a close one. We suffered a big attack and were in mortal danger for a while, but we are safe now. Thank God, the war on terror is over. There are no Islamic extremists. Homeland security is not an issue. The only problem in Iraq is how to get out.

Wait, this is news to you? Then you didn't watch the Democratic debate Thursday. Or maybe you did watch, but since those unpleasant topics were completely or mostly ignored, you assumed the war was over and went to bed believing peace is at hand and Santa Claus is busy making toys at the North Pole.

It's not your fault. It's the Democratic presidential candidates who are sleepwalking through history.

As befitting a scrum with too many people and too little time, the debate touched on everything and illuminated nothing. Sen. Hillary Clinton made headlines by defending herself and for finally taking a position against driver's licenses for illegal immigrants, but the gaping hole was the absence of any serious reference to the war on terror. It's long been that way on the campaign trail, and now Dem debates reflect the dangerous drift.

A New York Times language tracker tells the tale. Neither "homeland security" nor "war on terror" were mentioned. Osama Bin Laden was a no-show and Al Qaeda got one mention. "Terrorism" got three, two of them by audience members asking questions, as did "extremists," with two of those in a single answer by Illinois Sen. Barack Obama. On the other hand, "health" got 45 mentions and "education" 20.

It is remarkable how far the party and much of the country have strayed from the national unity of 9/11 (three mentions). While Bush's flawed handling of Iraq is a main reason, the unwillingness to separate his failure from the overriding truths of the continuing terror threat will come back to haunt not only Democrats, but the nation.

Consider that what was once called a generational war against an existential threat is now by unanimous consent of the candidates only a misguided Republican war in Iraq that must be ended immediately. What was once a bipartisan concern about the new phenomenon of lethal nonstate actors such as Al Qaeda has been reduced to denunciations of waterboarding and attacks on the Patriot Act. Thursday produced only one reference to Islam — when Sen. Joe Biden complained that Bush acts as though America is at war with the whole religion.

The one mention of the troop "surge" came from New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson. He declared it "is not working," no matter what the facts say, and Obama made a similar point without using the word. Meanwhile, anything wrong in Iraq or the world is America's fault.

Threats from Iran were discussed, as was the crisis in Pakistan. But beyond the insufficient answers about those troubled nation states, answers best summed up by Clinton's promise of "aggressive diplomacy," whatever that means, the debate never touched the major development that even old Europe is taking seriously. The rise of backpack bombers and homegrown terror cells is a menace our allies are addressing and we are ignoring.

Last week, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced sweeping security measures that include searches and bag screenings at railroad terminals and car bomb barriers at airports and malls. Theaters, restaurants, hospitals, stadiums, schools and places of worship — any place where crowds gather — will get advice on how to train employees to carry out searches and evacuation drills, the Guardian newspaper reported. Other beefed-up measures focus on who is entering the country and where they go.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy told Congress that "we must fight terror together."

Germany is giving its security authorities more power after a group of Islamists were charged with violent plots and a government report said 900 members of Hezbollah were in the country. The sudden sense of danger is a shock, with one woman telling USA Today that Germany's refusal to fight in Iraq lulled the country into thinking Islamic terrorists would focus elsewhere; "we assumed that if we behaved well in the world, nothing would happen to us," the woman said.

Ah, if that woman lived here, she could run for President of the United States. I know which party would have made her feel right at home.

Saturday, November 17, 2007

Photo Captioning the Nevada Dem Debate

Rush Limbaugh comments on the Update: If you haven't heard the Don Clintononi spoof where Bill Calls Blitzer to thank him, here it is.

I had some photos left over from my post on the Democrat's Nevada debate coronation of Queen Hillary. That's as good an excuse as I need to pull out the online photo captioner and have some fun.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Dennis Kucinich: Phone Home!

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

That's not the only whopper she told on Thursday!

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Go Ahead: Put Words in their mouths!

Try your hand at captioning with the online Photo Captioner. Two methods: Save a photo to your computer, and upload or copy the URL of a photo from this page by copying the URL (right click on photo, then properties and copy URL) and pasting into the tab for URL.

And remember, be nice. Unless you are a female, take heed to the words of Kathleen Parker. Men are advised to avoid making the obvious caption or comment of the photo below:

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

I swiped this photo from Wordsmith:

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Of course men don't have that shield of decorum to fall back on so it's open season on Edwards and Richardson:
Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at PhotobucketPhoto Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Go ahead and give it a try. Drop the URL (right click, properties, copy URL& paste) of your finished photo in the comments section.

Friday, November 16, 2007

Hillary Wins the Parsing Debate by Default

It's not like she was that good. It's just that the rest were that bad!

Snow White and the Six Dwarves

Desperate to prevent another disaster like she suffered in the Oct. 30th debate in Philadelphia, Hillary was well rested, well prepped and ready to take on the "boys" in the Nevada debate. Unlike the Philadelphia debacle, she has apparently realized that her opponent in 2008 is NOT President Bush. In that last debate she trashed President Bush over 20 times. This time she saved most of her fire for the "boys."

And for the "boys", primarily Obama and Edwards, it was one of the few remaining chances they had to make a permanent dent in the Clinton momentum heading into Iowa, which is all the more crucial as Iowa polls show the top three candidates coming together towards a tie at approximately 24 % each.

No Question It Was Softballs For the Girl

The Clinton machine was ready and took precautions to warn CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer not to "Russert" Hillary. Wolf dutifully complied by offering mostly softballs and never once asked Hillary about the scandals which already make her campaign look more and more like a repeat of her husband's campaigns. No question about Chinese funny money fundraising. No question about the off limits papers at the Clinton Liebrary. No question about planting campaign questions at Hillary events. No question about why she changed her position on illegal immigrants getting driver's licenses.

The Clinton effort paid off. After the debate, a Clinton senior advisor said Blitzer: "was outstanding, and did not gang up like Russert did in Philadelphia. He avoided personal attacks, remained professional and ran the best debate so far.” Dick Morris saw it differently: "Blitzer checked his journalistic instincts at the door." I'd say Blitzer checked his integrity at the door too.

O-Bomb-A Needs License to Speak?

Instead, Clinton rivals Obama and Edwards seemed to be on the ropes. Obama was having his own Hillary moment. Take for example this early statement regarding Hillary:

OBAMA: ...What the American people are looking for right now is straight answers to tough questions, and that is not what we've seen out of Senator Clinton on a host of issues -- on the issue of drivers' licenses for illegal immigrants.

We saw in the last debate that it took not just that debate, but two more weeks before we could a clear answer, in terms of where her position was.
And contrast it with his later answer when asked whether HE supported driver's licenses for illegals:

BLITZER: All right. I want to just press you on this point, because it's a logical follow-up, and then I want to go and ask everyone.

On the issue that apparently tripped up Senator Clinton earlier, the issue of driver's licenses for illegal immigrants, I take it, Senator Obama, you support giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.

Is that right?

OBAMA: When I was a state senator in Illinois, I voted to require that illegal aliens get trained, get a license, get insurance to protect public safety. That was my intention.

And -- but I have to make sure that people understand. The problem we have here is not driver's licenses. Undocumented workers do not come here to drive.
They don't go -- they're not coming here to go to the In-N-Out Burger. That's not the reason they're here. They're here to work. And so instead of being distracting by what has now become a wedge issue, let's focus on actually solving the problem that this administration, the Bush administration, had done nothing about it.

BLITZER: Well, let's go through everybody because I want to be precise. I want to make sure the viewers and those of us who are here fully understand all of your positions on this barring -- avoiding, assuming -- there isn't going to be comprehensive immigration reform.

Do you support or oppose driver's licenses for illegal immigrants?

OBAMA: I am not proposing that that's what we do.

OBAMA: What I'm saying is that we can't...


No, no, no, no. Look, I have already said, I support the notion that we have to deal with public safety and that driver's licenses at the same level can make that happen.

But what I also know...

BLITZER: All right...

OBAMA: But what I also know, Wolf, is that if we keep on getting distracted by this problem, then we are not solving it.

BLITZER: But -- because this is the kind of question that is sort of available for a yes or no answer.


Either you support it or you oppose it.

The New York Times has an interesting tally of the word counts for each candidate reflecting their time speaking. Throughout the debate Obama spoke 3339 words, nearly 400 more than second place wordhog Hillary. Apparently, verbosity didn't help get his point across.

Blitzer then turned to the other candidates on the licenses for illegals issue: (Dodd: NO, Edwards: No) before turning back to Obama and finally getting a "Yes." Hillary was smart enough to say "NO" without equivocating as did Biden. Kucinich and Richardson were both "Yes."

Hillary Smacks Pretty Boy Edwards

When John Edwards had his turn at bat he pointed out Hillary flip flops on Social Security and Iraq before saying: "the most important issue is, she says she will bring change to Washington while she continues to defend a system that does not work, that is broken, that is rigged and is corrupt, corrupted against the interest of most Americans and corrupted."

The Clinton Playbook: Avoidance of Accountability Raised to An Art Form

As both Clintons do whenever they are criticized, Hillary responded true to form.

HILLARY: "Wolf, I've just been personally attacked again....I don't mind taking hits on my record, on issues, but when somebody starts throwing mud, at least we can hope that it's both accurate and not right out of the Republican playbook because what I -- (cheers, applause) -- what I believe is important is that we put forth what we stand for. I have been active for 35 years. The American people know where I stand.

You know, Senator Edwards raised health care again. When Senator Edwards ran in 2004, he wasn't for universal health care. I'm glad he is now. But for him to be throwing this mud and making these charges, I think, really detracts from what we're trying to do here tonight. We need to put forth a positive agenda for America."

Haven't we heard a variation of that before? Sounds an awful lot like "I need to get back to doing the work of the American people." Standard Clinton fare; when things get hot accuse your opponent of "throwing mud" or "the politics of personal destruction." And notice how she always works in an attack of her own. Of course, it's not "throwing mud" if SHE is doing it.

Clinton Again Plays Gender Card While Denying She is Doing So

Later, Hillary was asked is she was "exploiting gender as a political issue?"

Her reply was classic Clinton:

Hillary:"...I'm not playing, as some people say, the gender card here in Las Vegas. I'm just trying to play the winning card...I understand, very well, that people are not attacking me because I'm a woman; they're attacking me because I'm ahead...Harry Truman famously said, "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. And I feel very comfortable in the kitchen. And I'm going to withstand the heat."
But of course the minute the heat gets turned up Hillary accuses her opponent of a "personal attack."

CNN Reporter Campbell Brown followed up on her question: "What did you mean at Wellesley when you referred to the "boy's club"?

Hillary answers: "Well, it is clear, I think, from women's experiences that from time to time, there may be some impediments."

Hillary never loses a chance to play the victim card.

[NOTE:If you haven't seen the video of this segment, use this interactive video/transcript feature from the NY Times. Click on "The Gender Question."]

What's More Important: Protecting American Lives or Vague Notions of Human Rights?

The debate wasn't an entire evening of Hillary, Hillary, Hillary. There was plenty of time for the also rans to prove why no Democrat can be trusted in the Oval Office.

On a question about Pakistan and U.S. Support for our ally General Musharraf, Democrats let us know that the disastrous Carter Doctrine of supporting human rights over the safety and security of Americans is alive and well.

Wolf Blizter put it directly to Governor Bill Richardson:
BLITZER: What you're saying, Governor, is that human rights, at times, are more important than American national security?


Never mind that this same attitude in the Carter Administration led to Iran becoming the very seed bed of Islamic evil that has killed hundreds of Americans since the Ayatollahs took over in 1979 and held our embassy personnel hostage for 444 days.

This is the same attitude among Democrats who would offer American constitutional protections to terrorists and deny government officials the ability to use aggressive interrogation techniques that have saved thousands of lives in the past six years.

How is it defending "human rights" when the consequence of such shortsighted views means more Americans will lose their right to live?

Iraq Surge Success: Democrats in Denial

When asked about General Petraeus and the success of the surge that is evident to nearly everyone but Democrats running for President Congressman Kucinich replied: "The occupation is fueling the insurgency." Really? If anything, the "insurgency" is nearly dead.

Obama also had problems with this question. While saying our troops were "doing a magnificent job" he also fails to see the bottom up progress so evident in the neighborhoods of Baghdad and nearly all the tribal regions. Obama is also pushing the quagmire in Afghanistan theme. No doubt his promise to invade Pakistan, which he reiterated during the debate will get the job done without unduly impacting the human rights of the terrorists in Waziristan.

Edwards May Regret Nixing Fox News Nevada Debate

Readers may recall that John Edwards nixed the Fox News debate in Nevada planned for last August at the behest of liberal hate mongers at the Daily Kos . That turns out to be a huge mistake. Clearly the Clinton News Network ended up putting Edwards and Obama in a negative light when compared to their queen and master.

Swift Kids for Truth Go After John Edwards

We can't pick on Hillary ALL the time:

Wednesday, November 14, 2007

Question to McCain on Hilton Head: "How do we beat the bi#*h?"

While I was at the more refined private gathering for Presidential candidate John McCain, at another nearby function on Hilton Head Island area resident Linda Burke asked McCain:

"How do we beat the b....?" referring to Hillary Clinton.

Video here.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Tuesday, November 13, 2007

Britain's Prime Minister Brown Feeling Left Out of Sarkozy, Merkel, Bush Lovefest?

First Nicolas Sarkozy, the new President of France declares in a joint address to Congress that "America can count on France."

Two days later the German Chancellor Angela Merkel drops in at President Bush's ranch for a sleepover.

So perhaps the British Prime Minister wanted to join in by offering this:

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Britain's Prime Minister Gordon Brown (C) delivers his speech at the Lord Mayor's Banquet at Guildhall in central London, 12 November 2007. TOBY MELVILLE/AFP/Getty Images
Lord Mayor's Banquet Speech
10 Downing Street transcript
November 12, 2007

..."It is no secret that I am a life long admirer of America. I have no truck with anti-Americanism in Britain or elsewhere in Europe and I believe that our ties with America - founded on values we share - constitute our most important bilateral relationship. And it is good for Britain, for Europe and for the wider world that today France and Germany and the European Union are building stronger relationships with America."
And echoing what Sarkozy and Merkel told President Bush about Iran, Prime Minister Brown said "Iran has a choice - confrontation with the international community leading to a tightening of sanctions or, if it changes its approach and ends support for terrorism, a transformed relationship with the world."

Meanwhile, both Bill and Hillary Clinton continue to insist that America's standing in the world has been damaged by President Bush and only THEY can restore it!

Yeah, that's what we need to restore America's image: more Europeans making jokes about a stain on a blue dress!

Monday, November 12, 2007

John McCain Visits Mike's America

"Straight Talk" for Conservatives...

John McCain visited Mike's America Lowcountry neighborhood today and had some straight talk for conservatives.

U.S. Presidential candidate Senator John McCain being introduced by hostess Paula Bethea on November 12, 2007. Senator McCain's mother Roberta is to the left. Photo by Mike's America

This event was similar to the meeting with New York Governor Pataki last year as it was held at a fine private home with a small number of people. As Senator McCain began his remarks he quipped: "Hillary Clinton wants every American to have a home. I believe every American should have a home like this one."

Senator McCain then introduced his mother Roberta, who is 95 but had no trouble standing in for McCain's wife Cindy who injured her knee and will have surgery soon. Later during his remarks his cell phone rang. McCain quipped again as he pointed out that it's "not my wife Cindy;" a humorous contrast with Rudy Giuliani whose wife Judith has a habit of ringing him while he is giving a speech.

McCain Honors Veterans in Beaufort

Earlier in the day McCain led a wreathe laying ceremony (AP photo right) at the nearby Beaufort National Cemetery where American war dead are interred dating back to the Civil War and including those who sacrificed their lives for freedom in Iraq.

To the Hilton Head event he brought with him two friends, Capt. Dale Lewey who served with him in the U.S. Navy and Col. George McKnight (USAF retired), who was a fellow Prisoner of War in Vietnam.

McCain: "We are succeeding in Iraq"

McCain remarked that at the Beaufort cemetery a Bald Eagle overflew the ceremony. That for him was a symbol of the "resurgence of patriotism and love of country" that is surging now that "we are succeeding in Iraq."

He amplified that point again by saying "we're doing a heck of a lot better" to the point where Iraqis in Ramadi recently had a 5k race down a street that was once known as "IED ally" (video here). McCain noted that "you didn't see that on CNN."

The job in Iraq is still "long, hard and tough" said McCain. And while the Maliki government and the national police are "not performing...local government is!"

And McCain made a prediction that "Americans will begin withdrawing" soon from Iraq.

Senator McCain pointed out that he had advocated since 2004 for the surge strategy that is currently showing such impressive results. And he credited the team of General Petraeus, who he regards as an excellent strategic thinker, paired with General Odierno, the "West Point football player" tough guy.

Moving ahead to future challenges McCain reiterated that we "need a bigger Army and a bigger Marine Corps." The Senator listed future trouble spots including "Pakistan, Iran and Syria" and made the point that deterrence, not war, is the best weapon. "A sizable enough U.S. military capability will make the Iranian leaders think twice."

South Carolina a Must Win for McCain

Once the uncontested front runner in South Carolina, Senator McCain's campaign has slid from 28% in Real Clear Politics SC poll averages to 4th place at 12%. "We need to win South Carolina," said McCain who added "we can win South Carolina...we have to get out the vote....I'm counting on winning South Carolina."

Why is he so confident? McCain said: "I am the only conservative that can beat Senator Clinton." And he backs up that contention by citing the most recent Rasmussen poll showing McCain beating Hillary 47 to 45%.

McCain admits that losing would be hard. He recalls what happened after he lost South Carolina in 2000, which assured the nomination of President Bush: "I slept like a Baby" he quipped. "I slept like a baby and woke up crying every two hours."

Tough Question from Mike's America

Q. Following Senator McCain's remarks he invited questions from the group. I introduced my question by saying: "Many conservatives in South Carolina were disappointed because you and Senator Graham (McCain's SC Co-Chairman) 1. participated in the "Gang of 14" to block the "nuclear option" and break the filibuster of President Bush's judicial nominees, 2. highlighted the "torture" of terrorist detainees weeks before the 2006 election and 3. Your previous stand on immigration." I also mentioned that many conservatives felt that they "could not trust" Senator McCain and I asked: "What can you say to them so they give your campaign another look?"

His answer was direct and clear:

"If you don't agree with the "Gang of 14" solution then I am not your candidate and you should vote for someone else."

Senator McCain went on to highlight the fact that under the Gang of 14 solution, the Senate did confirm conservative judges like Alito and Roberts. He went to say "I shudder to think what would happen if we had pulled the trigger on the nuclear option and one day Hillary Clinton was appointing judges." He asked me: "would your blogging friends still want to blow up the Senate" if Hillary Clinton was in charge? If so, I am not their candidate!

On immigration, Senator McCain admits that he's learned his lesson. "Americans want a secure border first" he said, because they "have no confidence, no trust in government" to implement a workable comprehensive reform. Under McCain's plan "border state governors will certify" whether or not the border is secure.

On torture: Senator McCain points out that "I have the same position as Colin Powell and many military leaders...those who have served will understand...Colin Powell said we had a 'higher obligation' and the morality" to distinguish ourselves from Pol Pot in the Killing Fields of Cambodia and the Burmese government that recently waterboarded protesting monks.

McCain emphasized the point that if we do it to the enemy, they will do it to us.

Q. Next, Tom Hatfield, Vice Chairman of the Beaufort County GOP asked if Senator McCain supported the Fair Tax, which is very popular in the South. You'll see Fair Tax supporters at nearly every campaign event in the Lowcountry of South Carolina this year.

McCain said that "As President, I would sign the Fair Tax bill into law" if it passed. But he has major reservations regarding the plan and directed those who want to know more to the Wall Street Journal article by Bruce Bartlett, "Fair Tax, Flawed Tax." Senator McCain is in favor of some form of "fairer, or flatter" tax and in an Iowa appearance, this video captures what he told us in South Carolina.

Q. Another participant said "10% of lifelong Republicans are fed up" with the way the party and our leadership have conducted themselves.

Senator McCain answered "I understand why they are dispirited. We built a "Bridge to Nowhere" in Alaska. I would veto big spending bills. Then he turned again to Mike's America and said: "tell the bloggers no other candidate can match my record as a fiscal conservative."

He also wished to highlight to bloggers his "National Security record with 20 years experience." He understands what it takes to "secure this nation and needs no on the job training. If National Security is important to you then, I'm your guy."


The great thing about a small event like this is that the question and answer session is more like a conversation. You get a much better feel for the candidate's character, sense of humor and sincerity in a small gathering like this than you might at some outdoor event or crowded restaurant with 20 people shouting questions.

Senator McCain lived up to his reputation for "straight talk" and his positions are crystal clear. He certainly is NOT trying to tell people what he thinks they want to hear.

At no time did he attack his rivals. He did not even mention them by name.

My only disappointment is that Senator McCain didn't bring the "Straight Talk Express" bus with him from New Hampshire. Instead, he had a large recreational vehicle parked in front of the house. But that's forgiven by the following:

Priceless Campaign Moment: McCain Mom Goes Toe to Toe with Mike's America Mom

Later, as people went up to get autographs from Senator McCain (yes I did) I went over to say hello to Roberta McCain, 95 years young.

I told her that my parents are visiting South Carolina and since her son John brought her to this event, I had brought my mother. Mrs. McCain insisted I introduce her and the two were kind enough to pose for my readers!

More in this series:

Old Glory Knows a Phony When She Sees One

American Flags used as stage props at Hillary press conference tumble to the ground as she turns to face them!

Will the guy or gal who didn't "weight the bases enough" suddenly disappear?

U.S. Code Title 36, Chapter 10, Section 176 "Respect for the Flag" part b states:

"The flag should never touch anything beneath it, such as the ground, the floor, water, or merchandise."

What's next for Hillary? Bald Eagles targeting her campaign bus?

Sunday, November 11, 2007

Veteran's Day Quick Takes

A week's worth of blogging in one post!

Cruising Crawford with the German Chancellor

One rule of U.S. diplomacy is that if you do something nice for the French, you must also do something nice for the Germans. Following in the wake of the full red carpet treatment laid out for French President Sarkozy (State Dinner toast and photos) Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, got a special perk with an overnight stay at the Bush's Prairie Chapel Ranch (satellite image) outside Crawford, Texas.

On Friday, after picking up Ms. Merkel at the helicopter pad in the President's white Ford pickup truck, they motored through the ranch. Later during the visit they dined on hamburgers and since Chancellor Merkel originally came from Hamburg Germany, she announced she felt right at home.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

What better way to start the weekend in Crawford, Texas than go cruising in your truck with the German Chancellor. Just to make sure things don't get too whacky, you can see Laura sitting in the back seat.

It wasn't all fun and games at the Ranch. The two leaders held a joint press conference on Saturday (text). Among the issues discussed were Germany's troops in Afghanistan, German efforts to aid reconstruction in Iraq, sanctions on Iran and perhaps most interestingly: efforts to reform the feckless United Nations Security Council.

Can we now, once and for all put to rest the big lie by Democrats from Carter, Clinton (both Bill and Hillary), Kerry on down that President Bush has damaged our alliances around the world?

Since the U.S. and our allies invaded Iraq in 2003 nearly every major Western democracy has elected, re-elected, or in the case of Britain transitioned, to leaders who are pro-Bush and pro-American. If you need a further reminder of this reality, review the photos of the incredible visit President Bush made to Albania and the other capitals of Eastern Europe last Summer.

And even more encouraging: dangerous despots like Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, who has aligned closely with Iran, are being isolated. Curt posts that the Spanish King Juan Carlos went so far as to tell Chavez to "shut up" in a public meeting at the Summit of Latin American, Spanish and Portuguese leaders in Chile.

All of the above must really gall moonbat lefties who refuse to see any good to come out of the Bush Administration. Maybe we need to invite King Juan Carlos over to offer similar advice to the Democrats!

Outrage over Musharraf, Silence over Chavez

Speaking of Venezuela's newly minted dictator, isn't it odd that "news" media in the United States focuses almost exclusively on the turmoil in Pakistan and has barely mentioned, if at all, the violence in Venezuela?
A Tale of Two Coups
By Oliver North
Real Clear Politics
November 09, 2007

WASHINGTON -- It's been a tough week for democracy and American diplomacy. In Pakistan, President Pervez Musharraf pulled a coup against himself, and U.S. diplomats apparently were stunned. In Venezuela, President Hugo Chavez pulled a coup against his countrymen, and U.S. diplomats once again, well ... were stunned. The difference in political attention and media coverage accorded these two affairs has been -- for lack of a better word -- stunning.
Last week, Venezuela's rubber-stamp legislature approved 69 constitutional changes drafted by their party boss, Hugo Chavez. If affirmed by referendum on Dec. 2, the amendments would dramatically expand the powers of Venezuela's chief executive, permit the government to seize private property without court approval, virtually eliminate civil liberties and allow Chavez to serve -- like Kim Jong Il in North Korea -- as president for life. To make this deal attractive to the people, the Venezuelan workday officially would be shortened to six hours.

On Wednesday this week, while Presidents Bush and Sarkozy toured George Washington's gardens and Congress mulled the means of tightening the screws on Pakistan, more than 80,000 people took to the streets of Caracas to protest the Chavez coup. When students gathered on the campus of Central University and refused to disperse as ordered by police, the cops and National Guard troops pulled back allowing goons from Chavez's United Socialist Party, many wearing ski masks, to open fire on the student gathering.

Despite numerous accounts of the Caracas clashes in the Latin American and European media -- even the BBC -- there has been scant coverage in the U.S. media -- and almost no mention of Chavez's machinations by our diplomats. The protests in Pakistan, including pitiful pictures of jailed lawyers, have gotten almost as much ink and airtime in the U.S. as the Hollywood writers strike. President Bush even called Musharraf to tell him to take off his uniform and hold elections as promised. Yet official Washington has been practically mute in criticizing Chavez. Why the difference?
Joe Lieberman Describes the Defeatist Democrat Disease

It was a tough week for Democrats whose heads are still stuck in the sands of defeat in Iraq.

First, the New York Times had to bury the story which opened with this paragraph:
American forces have routed Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, the Iraqi militant network, from every neighborhood in Baghdad a top American General said today, allowing American troops involved in the 'surge' to depart as planned.
Rich Galen noticed the starkness of the words:
Routed. Every. Planned.
Not "making headway against." Routed.
Not "some neighborhoods." Every.
Not "leave in disgrace." Depart as planned.
Yet, even as we observe Veterans Day honoring the service and sacrifice of our veterans, Democrats continue to deny that the surge is working and dismiss any idea that progress is being made in Iraq?

What's their problem? Have they just been so poisoned by hate and a lust for power that they have finally gone crazy?

Joe Lieberman has the answer. The following are excerpts of a speech he delivered on Thursday to the John Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies:

"The Politics of National Security"
Excerpts of an address by Senator Joseph Lieberman (Independent- CT)
Full transcript
November 8, 2007

“Since retaking Congress in November 2006, the top foreign policy priority of the Democratic Party has not been to expand the size of our military for the war on terror or to strengthen our democracy promotion efforts in the Middle East or to prevail in Afghanistan. It has been to pull our troops out of Iraq, to abandon the democratically-elected government there, and to hand a defeat to President Bush.

“Iraq has become the singular litmus test for Democratic candidates. No Democratic presidential primary candidate today speaks of America’s moral or strategic responsibility to stand with the Iraqi people against the totalitarian forces of radical Islam, or of the consequences of handing a victory in Iraq to al Qaeda and Iran. And if they did, their campaign would be as unsuccessful as mine was in 2006. Even as evidence has mounted that General Petraeus’ new counterinsurgency strategy is succeeding, Democrats have remained emotionally invested in a narrative of defeat and retreat in Iraq, reluctant to acknowledge the progress we are now achieving, or even that that progress has enabled us to begin drawing down our troops there.”

“[T]here is something profoundly wrong—something that should trouble all of us—when we have elected Democratic officials who seem more worried about how the Bush administration might respond to Iran’s murder of our troops, than about the fact that Iran is murdering our troops.

There is likewise something profoundly wrong when we see candidates who are willing to pander to this politically paranoid, hyper-partisan sentiment in the Democratic base—even if it sends a message of weakness and division to the Iranian regime.”
Ouch! That has to leave a mark!

Campaign Trail Quickies

--Elect Hillary, Get Bill Too (and all that goes with him?) Hillary Clinton had a bit of trouble on the campaign trail ever since her disastrous debate performance on October 30th. So what's the first thing a tough female candidate and lifelong advocate of feminism does when in trouble? She calls in her lying, cheating husband to save her. Bill Clinton has been barnstorming Iowa in the last week (lock up your daughters) and went so far as to compare Edward's or Obama's comments on Hillary to the Swift Boat attack ads that were so successful in unmasking the true character of 2004 presidential candidate John Kerry.

At least that over the top remark took the focus off Hillary, but did it help Hillary to refocus the nation's attention on Bill? Bill's very public activity in Hillary's campaign can't help but remind voters about the scandal plagued Clinton Administration even as Hillary continues to be faced with questions about more recent fundraising scandals.

As a follow-up, see Peggy Noonan's latest: "Things Are Tough All Over But Mrs. Clinton is no Iron Lady.

--John McCain Brings in the Big Guns: Mama!

You know John McCain is feeling the heat when he brings in his 95 year old Mother Roberta to help campaign for him.

Roberta did get in a bit of hot water when she made the following comment about McCain's rival Romney and the Salt Lake City Olympics: ""As far as the Salt Lake City thing, he's a Mormon and the Mormons of Salt Lake City had caused that scandal. And to clean that up, again, it's not a subject," Roberta McCain said.

It was a reminder about the early corruption which plagued the Salt Lake City Olympics before Romney, a fellow Mormon, was tapped to clean up the mess.

No doubt that Roberta's direct, frank approach may be John McCain's inspiration for the much ballyhooed "Straight Talk Express."

Oklahoma Implements Model Immigration Control Law

This should be a model for every state and the Federal government as well!

Oklahoma Implements Toughest US Measures Against Illegal Immigrants
By Greg Flakus
Voice of America News
05 November 2007

The state of Oklahoma has begun implementing a new law that is described as the toughest in the nation against illegal immigrants. Supporters of the law say it will reduce crime and curb use of taxpayer funded services by people who have no right to be in the United States. But Latino groups, joined by civil rights groups and churches say the new law is fostering discrimination. VOA's Greg Flakus has more in this report from Houston.

The new law makes it illegal to hire, transport or house an illegal immigrant and authorizes police in Oklahoma to assist federal immigration authorities in enforcing U.S. immigration law. The law also denies state services to undocumented aliens and imposes penalties on employers who hire them.
Weather Channel Founder: Global Warming ‘Greatest Scam in History’

The global warming debate gets hotter every day!

Global Warming ‘Greatest Scam in History’By John Coleman
November 7, 2007

It is the greatest scam in history. I am amazed, appalled and highly offended by it. Global Warming; It is a SCAM. Some dastardly scientists with environmental and political motives manipulated long term scientific data to create an illusion of rapid global warming. Other scientists of the same environmental whacko type jumped into the circle to support and broaden the “research” to further enhance the totally slanted, bogus global warming claims. Their friends in government steered huge research grants their way to keep the movement going. Soon they claimed to be a consensus.

Environmental extremists, notable politicians among them, then teamed up with movie, media and other liberal, environmentalist journalists to create this wild “scientific” scenario of the civilization threatening environmental consequences from Global Warming unless we adhere to their radical agenda. Now their ridiculous manipulated science has been accepted as fact and become a cornerstone issue for CNN, CBS, NBC, the Democratic Political Party, the Governor of California, school teachers and, in many cases, well informed but very gullible environmentally conscientious citizens. Only one reporter at ABC has been allowed to counter the Global Warming frenzy with one 15 minute documentary segment.

I do not oppose environmentalism. I do not oppose the political positions of either party. However, Global Warming, i.e. Climate Change, is not about environmentalism or politics. It is not a religion. It is not something you “believe in.” It is science; the science of meteorology. This is my field of life-long expertise. And I am telling you Global Warming is a non-event, a manufactured crisis and a total scam. I say this knowing you probably won’t believe a me, a mere TV weatherman, challenging a Nobel Prize, Academy Award and Emmy Award winning former Vice President of United States. So be it. [more]
The number of eminent scientists and meteorologists who have debunked the massive socialist inspired lie that is man made global warming continues to grow. They can't all be working for big oil!

More recent Global Warming news:

Scaremonger Hurricane Predictions Wrong AGAIN!

Speaking of global warming scaremongers, you would have thought they would have learned their lesson after wrongly predicting 2006 would be as bad a hurricane season, or worse, than 2005 which was the most active Atlantic hurricane season in recorded history, and brought us Katrina and Rita. 2006 turned out to be the quietest hurricane season in ten years with no hurricane making landfall on the mainland United States.

With just days to go in the 2007 season, the average predictions of 8 hurricanes and 4 major hurricanes is again WRONG! So far, there were 5 named hurricanes and only 2 major storms. Only one, Hurricane Humberto, made landfall on the mainland of the United States and promptly weakened below hurricane force. One unfortunate death was the result, but also much needed rain helped alleviate drought stricken areas of the Southeast.

More hurricanes and more intense hurricanes was said to be proof that manmade global warming was having an adverse effect on our climate and would ultimately be payback for ignoring the problem. Since that conclusion was based on one year's storm activity in 2005 can we now say that two years of record breaking minor storm activity proves just the opposite?

Ask your favorite global warming Nazi for the answer to that!

Observing Veterans Day

Honoring veterans is something we should do every day!

Vice President Cheney observes Veterans Day at Arlington National Cemetery, November 11, 2007:

Vice President Dick Cheney delivers remarks Sunday, Nov. 11, 2007, during Veterans Day ceremonies at Arlington National Cemetery in Arlington, Va. "Gathered as we are today in a time of war, we're only more sharply aware of the nation's debt to the members of the armed forces," said the Vice President, adding, "They are constantly in our thoughts." White House photo by David Bohrer

Excerpt from Vice President Cheney's remarks:

America may be a country founded in revolution, but we've never been a warrior culture. We are a democracy, defended by volunteers. We're a peaceful nation, with friends to the north and the south of us, and great oceans to the east and the west of us. Yet these blessings alone have never been enough to assure safety at home or peace in our world. At times in our history, arms and ideologies have been massed against us, and we have heard the call to bring freedom, new hope, and healing to afflicted peoples.

America has faced these challenges, often at very high cost. We see part of that cost right here on the hills of Arlington. And the legacy of the American armed forces is truly extraordinary. They've thrown back tyrants, liberated death camps, carried out heroic rescues, and kept the peace in volatile regions. Above all, they have kept us free in the land we call home -- free to live as we see fit, free to work, and worship, and speak our minds, and choose our own leaders. All of this, we owe to the men and women who have taken that oath to defend America. And may the rest of us never take them for granted.

Gathered as we are today in a time of war, we're only more sharply aware of the nation's debt to the members of the armed forces. They are constantly in our thoughts. Our gratitude extends to their loved ones, because military service is often a family commitment, and they, too, are giving up a lot for the good of our whole nation. [full text here]

Vice President Dick Cheney lays a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier during Veterans Day ceremonies, Sunday, Nov. 11, 2007, at Arlington National Cemetery in Arlington, Va. White House photo by David Bohrer

Veteran Warren G. King, Sr. of Nashville, center, salutes with fellow veterans Sunday, Nov. 11, 2007, during Veterans Day ceremonies at Arlington National Cemetery in Arlington, Va. White House photo by David Bohrer

Thursday, November 08, 2007

Mitt Romney Visits Mike's America

Romney: "A Yankee with Southern Values?"

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Mike goes eyeball to eyeball with candidate Romney on Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, Wednesday, November 7. Above, Romney answers Mike's Question asking what assurance Romney could provide conservatives that if elected, he would govern as the conservative. Photo by Mike's America

On the same day Rudy Giuliani cancelled a visit to Mike's America so he could accept the endorsement of conservative Christian leader Pat Robertson, Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney dropped in instead.

Around noon on Wednesday, Governor Romney arrived at "Stacks" Restaurant (no, it's not a knockoff of Hooters, Stacks serves pancakes) on Hilton Head Island. Romney campaign planners were pleasantly surprised when twice the number of people expected showed up to meet Mitt and hear him speak.

Mitt delivered his standard stump speech citing the three pillars of his plan for America: 1. Strengthen our military (100,000 more troops and upgraded equipment) 2. Strengthen our economy (No taxes on savings or investments for those under $200,000 income) and 3. Strengthen our families (support traditional marriage).

The crowd, packed in like sardines and composed mainly of Senior Citizens, was politely enthusiastic. Many later said they thought Romney was the best conservative running and they trusted he would make a good President.

The following video clip by Michael Edenfield, online editor of the Island Packet gives you a taste of the event:

Later at an outdoor press briefing (1 minute 5 seconds into above video) A reporter asked Mitt how he would win over South Carolina's social conservatives. He instantly went on the attack against Rudy Giuliani saying that he didn't think "The Republican Party is going to choose a pro-choice, pro-gay Civil Union candidate to lead our party."

Mike's America asked the follow-up question (paraphrasing) "We've been disappointed in candidates who run as conservatives then compromise our values with Democrats. How would you assure South Carolina conservatives that you would govern as a conservative if elected President?"

Video Update: Mitt Answers Mike. WSAV in Savannah, Georgia was kind enough to post the answer to Mike's question as a web exclusive. Click here to view. The video opens with Mitt describing his conservative bona fides in answering the question, then moves indoors for an extended video excerpt from Mitt's Stump speech providing further details on his three pronged plan to 1. strengthen our military, 2. strengthen our economy and 3. strengthen Americas' familes.

His answer was more a laundry list of conservative positions rather than any assurance on how he would govern. Perhaps a better answer might be to point to his accomplishments in Massachusetts achieved even with the handicap of a state legislature where Democrats hold a super-majority in both houses.

However you look at it, the question is a difficult one to answer and that's why I ask that to all of the candidates if given the chance. Many conservatives are wary of politicians who tell us what they think we want to hear, which makes that question all the more valid. And Mitt did claim in his speech to be a "Yankee Governor with Southern values" while admitting when he goes to Iowa he is a "Yankee with Heartland values" and tells the folks back in New England he's a "Yankee with Yankee values."

Three Way Horse Race in SC About to become Two Way or Romney Runaway?

The latest South Carolina polling averages from Real Clear Politics show Romney edging up significantly to take the lead while top rivals Giuliani and Thompson are both down slightly. There is also some buzz on the national political scene that Thompson is not catching fire and that the GOP contest may come down to a two man race between Romney and Rudy.

On Hilton Head, Romney dodged a question about Mike Huckabee and focused his attack solely on Rudy. Jonathon Martin, who writes for the Politico, also attended Wednesday's event and reports the Rudy campaign response:

Giuliani spokeswoman Maria Comella responded to Romney's jab by noting that Romney himself had previously been pro-choice and favorably disposed to civil unions. “It would seem someone forgot to show Mitt Romney today’s USA/Gallup survey, Comella said. " It's clear that Republicans across the board are supporting the experienced candidate who actually sticks with his positions and has used conservative principles to get results."

Romney: No More Mr. Nice Guy?

Romney is clearly taking off the gloves and going after Rudy. In a mailing to Iowa voters (photo) Romney slams New York as a Sanctuary City for illegal aliens with the direct implication that Rudy is to blame. "Cracking Down on Illegal Immigration" was the title of a more positive mailing in South Carolina, which also highlighted Romney's record and conservative credentials.

Decision Time for Mike's America

In a few weeks it will be time for me to make up my mind and declare myself in support of one of the GOP candidates. I've been fortunate to meet and question the top three personally and the subliminal vibe gained from that is what is helping me make up my mind.

Previous Visits in this series:

fsg053d4.txt Free xml sitemap generator