 Click through to save this country!
| Tuesday, May 6, 2008 |
| News in Google |
Obama Strikes Back With Negative Ad New York Times By Ariel Alexovich As the campaigning for Indiana and North Carolina voters comes to a close, the Democratic presidential candidates are letting loose on one another over the TV airwaves. I thought Obama was a 'new' kind of politician (/snark). There's basically no way the DNC is going to let this man lose, it would kill the party. It will be bad enough for them when he wins, because Hillary will probably have a majority vote (All Votes Count! TM) when it is over. This is almost guaranteed to split the Democratic party (how bad, no one knows; they could all pull together in time for McCain in November), yet a Hillary win would tear the party much worse (affluent whites, blacks hardest hit).
'DC Madam' apologized to mom, sister in suicide notes The Associated Press TAMPA, Fla. (AP) - The woman known as the "DC Madam" apologized to her mother and sister in suicide notes, saying she couldn't bear going to prison and saw killing herself as the only "exit strategy. She vowed to never again go to prison, and she kept her word (although she also once said she couldn't imagine taking her own life). Hopefully the apology will help to close the chapter for the family and they will be able to take some solace in it.Labels: DC Madam, Democratic Primary, politics, suicide |
posted by Lord Nazh @ 07:18 | View blog reactions |
|
|
|
| Wednesday, April 9, 2008 |
| D trumps R (reporting) |
On the economy, make sure to follow the link to the good part of the post:
It’s the Politics, Stupid: Comparing Labor Market Data in 1996 and 2008
Democrats on the Economy in 1996: “Our economy is the healthiest it has been in three decades.” (President Bill Clinton, State of the Union Address, January 23, 1996)
Democrats on the Economy in 2008: “The bottom line is that this administration is the owner of the worst jobs record since Herbert Hoover." (Senator Charles Schumer, Press Release, March 7, 2008)
The Corner Via Flopping Aces; You can bet your last dollar that if BO or HC wins the next election, the economy will be turning around (in the media) no matter what the numbers say. Likewise if JM wins, the economy will slip into depression (with the same numbers). This is not a new phenomena, just one that people don't seem to believe; and unlike man-made global warming, this one is actually proveable hehLabels: democrats, economy, MSM, politics, republicans |
posted by Lord Nazh @ 19:51 | View blog reactions |
|
|
|
| Friday, March 28, 2008 |
| Democrat |
Good post on the recent dust-up of Hillary!Imagine you're applying for a really important job. You submit your resume listing your accomplishments and your skillset. This is the document that the employer has to go on when deciding if you get an interview and... ultimately... the job. What do you think would happen if the employer found out that you lied on your resume? I know that I would not get an interview, let alone the job. Which is why I'm curious as to why Hillary Clinton still has a snowball's chance for the democrat nomination given her most recent "whopper" of a lie. I know, a Clinton lying is not really a big shocker. But bear with me and you will be amazed at the way this woman can lie without any discernible physical indication that she is dissembling. Psychiatrists call that a mark of someone who is a Sociopath. I'll let you decide. Thai's Can't get him to post here at all (heh) but he's still alive and doing well... Give him a visit
Labels: Democratic Primary, politics |
posted by Lord Nazh @ 20:54 | View blog reactions |
|
|
|
| Saturday, March 22, 2008 |
| Crucify |
Frank Schaeffer's column at the Huffington Post is headlined:
This Good Friday Let Us Not Crucify Barack Obama Excuse me? Nobody is talking about crucifying anybody. It's just politics, Frank. The three remaining presidential candidates -- Obama, Hillary and McCain -- are all U.S. senators, and should they lose, they'll still be U.S. senators. So to suggest that criticizing them is akin to crucifixion is ... well, maybe it's not blasphemy, but it's pretty ridiculous.
Speaking of ridiculous, here's the first paragraph of Schaeffer's column: The Other McCain Great post on the left's obsession with their savior over at tOM (new site to me). Followed a link from Ace I think to get there and liked what I saw on this post and others.
It's scary just how much the liberals have invested emotionally in the Obamessiah meme and just what they will do to keep the train going. I realize that the Hildabeast can't win mathematically but neither can BO. It will take the 'free-will' super-delegates to win the D-nomination and one way or another some group will have a reason to be pissed when it's over.
As a conservative, I'm loving every minute of it. The 'inclusive' left [heh that's like saying Islam is the Religion of Peace] is getting the stereotyping they deserve and the corner they've painted themselves into will be wet when it's over.Labels: Democratic Primary, democrats, politics |
posted by Lord Nazh @ 17:43 | View blog reactions |
|
|
|
| Friday, March 21, 2008 |
| Name that Party |
Not sure if editorials are game for this contest, I'll have to ask Don.STATE attorney general, Darrell McGraw has used his office to sue companies. He contracts the work to private lawyers who may pocket a third of any award. Many of these companies deserve to be sued. But instead of having the Legislature appropriate the winnings, the attorney general has been doing so. Daily MailIt's only 8 paragraphs or so, but I never did find out the party affiliation to the AG. And I think Don should be familiar with the media outlet :)
tag: name that party, daily mail, Don Surber, politics, Verlin Martin, Lord NazhLabels: name that party, politics |
posted by Lord Nazh @ 18:49 | View blog reactions |
|
|
|
| Thursday, March 13, 2008 |
| Taxes |
In a totally surprising move, Congress today showed that when W leaves they will raise our taxes enormously (/sarc).
Both the House and the Senate basically are telling the American people that no matter what you think of your current situation (or what the media tells you to think of it), just wait a little bit and it will get worse.
The Democrats promise to get the books back in the black while making each and every American pay more (the Senate wants some to pay more, and some not) while also raising unemployment and inflation. (ok I made the last part up, but if you take a slowing economy and jump taxes on it, guess what will happen) Of course these votes didn't actually mean anything, they were simply political in nature (which is actually the best kind of votes for us little people; the less that Congress of either stripe actually passes, the better).
The one bill that would have been great for the public probably won't pass however, the earmark one-year ban looks like it will die an agonizing death (hopefully they'll surprise me on that one). Why can't they simply take money from the people that keep bitching that taxes are too low? Do these people not realize that they can simply pay more? Maybe they should try that route.
Went out and played a round of golf today, first time in a couple years that I've been able to get out there. I won't put my score in here so I don't upset anyone (me), but it was fun and hopefully with me living in Decatur, I can do it more often. I need to light a fire under my co-bloggers to get more copy out here, but what can you do :) Yahoo
tag: taxes, Congress, budget, , earmarks, politics, Verlin Martin, Lord NazhLabels: congress, democrats, politics, taxes |
posted by Lord Nazh @ 20:31 | View blog reactions |
|
|
|
| Monday, March 3, 2008 |
| Chaos - thy name is the democrat convention |
So it appears that Barack Obama is going to win the democrat (not capitalized on purpose) nomination and send Hillary into a tizzy that she may never recover from (God willing).
Why would this happen you might ask? Well because democrats are too busy looking at the snake-oil salesman from Illinois with lover's eyes for the past month or so.
What this has done is to kill any momentum that Hillary had and made her look irrelevant and old.
But more importantly, because Hillary had a lead and because too many of the democrat primaries allowed the candidates to actually split votes, this means that the democrat Super Delegates will play a part in the nomination at the democrat convention.
What are Super Delegates you might ask? They are bigwigs in the democrat party ( Congressmen, Part Leaders, etc...).
Why are they important? Because at the convention these Super Delegates get to vote...
ANY WAY THEY WANT !!!
(ed. "Pledged delegates reflect the preferences of the voters, but are not actually legally bound to vote for the candidate they are pledged for." -wiki- it's not just the supers that get to vote how they want ;) --LN)
This means that if Obama and Clinton are tied. Or more ironically, if Obama narrowly leads the POPULAR VOTE with not enough delegates to win outright, Hillary still could get the nomination by swaying enough Super Delegates to vote for her.
What THAT means is that this would be a VERY MESSY democrat Convention.
And THAT ... has me wishing Hillary does well enough to pull close.
Get yer popcorn ready folks !!Labels: democrats, Hillary, idiots, Obama, politics, thaiphoon |
posted by Thaiphoon @ 21:18 | View blog reactions |
|
|
|
| Sunday, March 2, 2008 |
| Clinton vs Obama |
A story in the Washington Post describes the race for the Democratic primary very well in the south of Texas.
The story is 2 pages and talks of the 'rift' between father (Clinton) and son (Obama) and the plight of a town that the interstates passed by. There is talk of loyalty and change and all that goes with those concepts.
The most curious omission from the piece is anything at all to do with experience, positions on anything, or if said candidate could/would be any good in the office of President. I'd say that sums up the dilemma for most Democrats that I know today.
BROWNSVILLE, Tex. -- State Sen. Eddie Lucio Jr. pulled into the parking lot at Rudy's "Country Store" and Bar-B-Q one day last week in an old pickup truck worn by 237,000 miles. He winced as he stepped down from the driver's seat, evidence of two heart attacks and a recent hernia surgery.
Doctors had ordered him to stay home, but he refused to watch Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's Texas campaign deteriorate from his couch. Lucio, 62, planned to use his influence across the Rio Grande Valley to save her. State Rep. Eddie Lucio III, 29, arrived in a new Saab compact with a Barack Obama bumper sticker on the rear window. A few months ago, when he applied the decal, friends heckled him. His endorsement of Obama alienated some constituents in a Latino district thick with Clinton loyalists. Career suicide, some colleagues called it. Now, Lucio hoped to prove his instincts right. Washington Post Staff Writer
tag: Democratic primary, Obama, Clinton, feelings, Verlin Martin, Lord NazhLabels: Democratic Primary, politics |
posted by Lord Nazh @ 15:57 | View blog reactions |
|
|
|
| Wednesday, December 19, 2007 |
| Ron Paul |
(head over to Conservatism with Heart for this also) A couple of good posts about Ron Paul on the 'net today. First by Don Surber on Paul's poll ratings:Good news
Gallup shows Ron Paul tied with Alan Keyes.
Republicans can relax. The latest Gallup Poll shows the viral video candidate Dr. Paul is tied with the goofball Keyes at 3% each. It is Dean ‘04 all over again with another Internet-driven campaign that is going nowhere fast. Don Surber Next is the case against Paul by Professor Bainbridge: Click for the rest of the story
tag: policy, poll ratings, Professor Bainbridge, Don Surber, Ron Paul, Verlin Martin, Lord NazhLabels: politics, Presidential campaign, Republican primary |
posted by Lord Nazh @ 07:00 | View blog reactions |
|
|
|
| Saturday, November 10, 2007 |
| Illegal Immigration Control = Racist? |
Yep! Just one big happy political party destined to run the table over there. With things in Iraq getting better, it's more difficult to bash Bush. Maybe they've resorted to eating their own. As regards the Netroots greater influence, I've yet to see convincing evidence that most of America responds to the type of negative emotions associated with so much of their posturing.[link] I'll let you go over to Dan's place and read the quote (and of course no linky to Kos)
tag: racism, politics, Dan Riehl, Blogpower, Lord NazhLabels: politics, Racism |
posted by Lord Nazh @ 16:06 | View blog reactions |
|
|
|
| Sunday, September 23, 2007 |
|
Gracchi has tagged me with the 'First Political Memory' meme...
My first real political memory was the Presidential race of 1980 when Jimmy Carter was running against Ronald Reagen and Iran was holding Americans hostage.
I didn't really grasp what was going on, but I vividly remember the talk around the community of having to goto war to get the hostages back if Carter won the Presidency again.
I'm not going to tag anyone else :)Labels: politics |
posted by Lord Nazh @ 16:02 | View blog reactions |
|
|
|
| Tuesday, September 4, 2007 |
| Silly Season (politics) |
September 3, 2007
And they're off (but the race began long ago)
Indianapolis Star
Dan Balz
6 questions to ponder on traditional campaign starting date
WASHINGTON -- Labor Day is the traditional starting date for presidential campaigns, but Labor Day the year before the election?
That's the reality of the 2008 campaign, a contest that has been barreling ahead since January. What happens from here on will matter far more than what has happened up to now, but the first eight months of 2007 have delivered on predictions that this would be one of the most interesting and consequential campaigns of modern times.
On the Democratic side, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York remains the front-runner, but Barack Obama's prodigious fundraising and passionate crowds continue to make the Illinois senator an intriguing rival. Former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina has staked his hopes on Iowa, and so far Iowans remain open to him. The rest of the Democratic field is starting to make noise, though their odds remain long.
For Republicans, the contest is about to change with this week's entry of former Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee. He will join former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Sen. John McCain of Arizona and maybe former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee in a contest still in search of clarity and definition.
To help make sense of what has happened and where things may be heading, think of the next four months -- until January, when actual voters will finally start to make choices that count -- in terms of six questions. For answers to them, we sought out strategists in both parties, based in Washington and around the country, some of whom spoke only if they were not identified.
For them -- and for the campaign itself -- today marks a moment when the pace quickens and the stakes increase. (link) Great write-up on what will define a 'great' race to the Whitehouse. It still doesn't feel right that the campaign began in January, but now it's getting to be crunch time. There's still plenty of time for the candidates to position themselves (although for most, their positions would be hard to change now), and there really is no telling in this internet age just what will happen next.
Hillary is the odds-on favorite for the Democratic (and some experts say National) ticket although Obama isn't too far off for comfort [Edwards seems to be sinking slowly into oblivion, but don't count out Iowa in the Democratic process]. On the Republican side, it's basically a 3-way race according to where you ask. Guiliani is still the front-runner, with Romney and Fred getting the nod in localized polls. While Romney seems to be the most organized, Fred brings the 'grass-roots' to the table and both these candidates should be well positioned to remind voters of the short-falls of Rudy.
While the next few months promise to be exciting, they (more than likely) will be bitter and 'underhanded' as well. This seems the SOP for politics in this day and age.
May the best candidates win.
Great W-in-Iraq post over at Misha's; check it out (pictures)Labels: politics, Presidential campaign |
posted by Lord Nazh @ 06:30 | View blog reactions |
|
|
|
| Thursday, July 19, 2007 |
| Tears |
Shocking news today on the 'Libby lied, people cried' front:
Valerie Plame's lawsuit dismissed
AP Photo: In this Friday, March 16, 2007, file photo, former CIA analyst Valerie Plame listens... | By MATT APUZZO, Associated Press Writer 44 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - A federal judge dismissed former CIA operative Valerie Plame's lawsuit against members of the Bush administration Thursday, eliminating one of the last courtroom remnants of the leak scandal.
Plame, the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, had accused Vice President Dick Cheney and others of conspiring to leak her identity in 2003. Plame said that violated her privacy rights and was illegal retribution for her husband's criticism of the administration. |
U.S. District Judge John D. Bates dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds and said he would not express an opinion on the constitutional arguments. Bates dismissed the case against all defendants: Cheney, White House political adviser Karl Rove, former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby and former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage. (link)
I can't tell you how heart-broken I am for poor Val and Joseph. I can't tell you probably because there aren't words to allow me to make you believe any such thing. Kiss-and-tell Val will appeal I'm sure and this sordid affair will drag on longer than the current Presidential campaign.Labels: CIA, leak, politics |
posted by Lord Nazh @ 15:46 | View blog reactions |
|
|
|
| Friday, May 18, 2007 |
| THERE GOES SOCIAL SECURITY!!! or "Why I Might Be Voting For Myself in 2008" !! |
CAUTION: STREAM OF CONSCIOUSNESS RANT BELOW>>>
I HAVE HAD IT !!!
The Senate reached a "compromise" on illegal immigration yesterday.
Let me re-phrase that for you...
The Senate Republicans got rolled by Teddy Kennedy and agreed to a bill granting AMNESTY to lawbreakers !!!
Read about it here;
The plan, which was still being finalized, allows the estimated 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens in the United States to come forward and receive probationary status So...people who are waiting in their home countries for YEARS...playing by the rules get shafted so the Senators can be seen as "doing something" on illegal immigration??? Senators, the only thing worse than doing nothing is doing something so mind-numblingly stupid and crafting a bill that effectively rewards law-breaking.
This bill is so eerily similar to the 1986 bill that it is scary...
Take a look at what Ed Meese (Reagan's Attorney General) has to say about the 1986 Amnesty Bill here;
President Reagan set out to correct the loss of control at our borders. Border security and enforcement of immigration laws would be greatly strengthened—in particular, through sanctions against employers who hired illegal immigrants. If jobs were the attraction for illegal immigrants, then cutting off that option was crucial.
He also agreed with the legislation in adjusting the status of immigrants—even if they had entered illegally—who were law-abiding long-term residents, many of whom had children in the United States. Illegal immigrants who could establish that they had resided in America continuously for five years would be granted temporary resident status, which could be upgraded to permanent residency after 18 months and, after another five years, to citizenship. It wasn’t automatic. They had to pay application fees, learn to speak English, understand American civics, pass a medical exam and register for military selective service. Those with convictions for a felony or three misdemeanors were ineligible. So... how well did THAT turn out... I wonder ??? Anyone see any real ENFORCEMENT going on?? Anyone see the borders locked down and illegal immigrants numbers declining? Nope??!! Me either ...
I turns out that there is a huge long-term cost to this AMNESTY bill. It will strain our social services as the people who come herei llegally will be marginally employable and will not be a net-positive taxpayer. In other words, they will use up more resources than they contirbute. Now this is bad enough when it is home-grown people, but immigration is about controlling the flow of immigrants through our borders so that we are stronger..not weaker.
So with this drain on our local, state and federal coffers what do you think they governments are gonna do?? Either raise taxes or lower benefits on such things as Social Security. Being that I'm 38 years old...I'm SCREWED !! At least in terms of being able to enjoy the same level of Soc. Security benefits that the generations before me enjoyed. And until that time, my taxes are going to go up to pay for the welfare benefits of people that SHOULD NOT BE HERE !!! It is bad enough that the government is robbing Peter to pay Paul. Its even worse when he robs Peter to pay Paul and Jose' and Jesus and Carmen and Abdullah, etc...
Think I'm crazy? Then you outta take a look at the testimony of Robert Rector (Heritage Foundation) before the House Judiciary Committee;
Here is some of what he had to say;
The National Academy of Sciences in a very comprehensive study of the fiscal impact of immigration said that each high school dropout immigrant coming into the United States costs the taxpayers of the United States about $100,000 over the course of his lifetime. That would mean if you took that figure, and that's net of the taxes that he puts in, if you took that figure and applies it to the current illegal population it would indeed result in something like a net cost of a half a trillion dollars over the course of lifetime.
Now, with respect to the costs of the Senate bill, the Senate bill one of its key features is to give amnesty to around 10 million current illegal immigrants. That means that they will probably pay more in taxes, but it also means that they're eligible for a much wider variety of welfare programs. And as a result of that increased welfare eligibility, I calculate that the amnesty alone would have a direct cost of around $16 billion a year. He goes on to explain other unexpected costs and his main zinger was this one;
We have a very expensive, very large welfare system in the United States. We simply cannot make it unconditionally available to huge numbers of people from less developed nations You can read the other people's testimony as well and you'll find yourself asking the same question... who is gonna pay for all of this??
Especially when the bill allows so many "set asides" by any Administration so that even the $5000 fine can be waived. And you know it WILL be waived when Reid and Pelosi complain that making someone who makes $3/hour pay a $5000 fine is "heartless" and "cruel" and something only "despicable Republicans do". and then "poof" - there goes the fine.
Check out some blog reactions here;
Hotair hates it...
As does Michelle Malkin;
Redstate also pans it ;
Powerline doesn't like it;
Hugh Hewitt absolutely hates it like I do;
In short - we have another Harriet Myers situation here. It takes everyone calling their Representatives and Senators and letting them know that if they vote for this deal they are going to lose their next primary or general election. I have contacted Sen. Jon Kyl here: Contact
Sen. Kyl is the point man for those who want to keep this Amnesty from proceeding to the President's desk.
I told Sen Kyl that I would not support the Senate's Campaign Committee any longer if any GOP senator voted for that bill. Additionally, my money and support would instead go to the primary challenger of those Senators. I may not be one of their constituents and they may think they don't have to listen to me as I cannot vote for or against them. But I CAN help BANKROLL their opponent. Thats the beautiful thing about campaign contributions and the internet.
My next email is to my Senior Senator of Virginia John Warner-R. He is going to get the same message (along with the counterparts in the House).
I had been warming up to McCain due to his stance on the war and finishing the job, etc... Many others were too. He's finished now... you heard it here first. He will NOT get the Republican nomination for President in 2008.
I'm serious...I feel like Ronald Reagan did when he said that he didn't leave the Democrat Party - it left him (yes Reagan was an FDR Democrat at one time).
If the GOP keeps this charade (of acting like Democrats) up...on what basis do they have a right to come looking for our votes in 2008??
If they keep acting like de facto Democrats and letting Teddy roll them then I have no qualms with letting them lose big in 2008.
I'd rather get stabbed (with the proverbial knife) in my chest by the Dems than in the back by the Repubs. Filed: democrats, republicans, illegal immigration, Fatah, amnesty, BlogPower, ThaiphoonLabels: amnesty, democrats, illegal immigration, politics, republicans, thaiphoon |
posted by Thaiphoon @ 17:34 | View blog reactions |
|
|
|
| Tuesday, March 20, 2007 |
| The Sun Rises in the East and other things you never knew |
This just in ... The Supreme Court is the highest court in the land !!! This just in ... The Congress (both houses) craft legislation. This just in ... The President of the US (POTUS) has the ability to fire US attorneys !!! < OH NO !!! RUN FOR THE BORDERS FOLKS - THIS IS CLEARLY A SIGN OF THE APOCALYPSE!!!> Ok - I'll now remove tongue from cheek.
Just watched Pres. Bush's press conference earlier today (regarding allowing his advisors testifying before Congress) and wanted to say something I've not said to him in awhile...
"BRAVO MR. PRESIDENT !!!!"
Pres. Bush basically told the Democrats in Congress to go pound sand. AND ITS ABOUT TIME!!! Stand up and fight Mr. President. Stop letting people like us carry your water for you.
Lets face it my friends. This attorney firing scandal is anything BUT a scandal.
Lets get some facts out of the way;
1.) The US attorneys are not inherently vested with the power to prosecute citizens by the Constitution. That prerogative is vested in the Executive Branch.
2.) The Executive Branch consists of exactly ONE person. That would be the President. The Legislative consists of the Congress. The Judicial consists of the Supreme Court. The Executive begins and ends with the President as far as the Constitution is concerned.
3.) Since the Executive (POTUS) cannot be everywhere at once, he basically delegates his authority to prosecute to the various US attorneys nationwide.
4.) These attorneys follow the direction the POTUS lays down. So if one year, the POTUS decides there will be a focus on prosecuting money laundering over other crimes, it will be expected that the US attorneys will be aggressive in investigating and prosecuting such cases.
5.) These US attorneys owe their positions to Executive patronage. Which means that each US attorney serves at the pleasure of the POTUS.
6.) US attorneys serve 4 year terms at which time they are either let go or reappointed.
7.) The position as US attorney is therefore a POLITICAL position.
Therefore the POTUS can fire these attorneys ANYTIME HE WANTS TO AND FOR ANY REASON !!
In past presidencies it is natural that the POTUS would want "his people" in to make sure that his direction is followed. Past Presidents kind of eased out US attorneys as they went with one, HUGE, notable exception.
Bill Clinton
In 1993, Clinton fired 93 US attorneys (pretty much all of them)in order to put "his people" in place.
Noone batted an eye. No cries for an investigating from the Press or from Democrats who controlled Congress. In fact, we were told that these were political jobs and that Presidents always put their people in place. Which is not necessarily the case. Billie replaced all of the holdovers from previous GOP administrations without worrying about whether they were actually any good at their jobs. One of the attorneys he fired was investigating the Whitewater deal (anyone remember that?)
Fast forward 13 years and now a Republican president (after 6 years in office) fires a grand total of 8 US attorneys. Now I didn't learn any of the "New Math" but that would be... by my count... exactly 85 less than Bill Clinton fired in his first year in office. Even more important is the fact that while these US attorneys are mostly Clinton appointees they were RE-APPOINTED by Bush. So essentially he's just firing people he appointed.
Democrats in Congress (after winning the House and Senate on a themes of corruption) are naturally trying to play this up as another example of corruption.
I say let them come. Let them try to play this up and then SMACK them down with their own hypocrisy. Let the record show that Sens. Fienstein, Leahy, et al are guilty of playing politics and wasting the People's Time on matters that are not subject to their purview.
Let the sun shine in and let the public find out that the President has absolute authority to fire and appoint US attorneys and that the Congress should BUTT OUT !!
About the only thing I'm pissed about is AG Gonzales' performance to-date regarding this so-called "controversy". He seems to be shooting himself in the foot and if the Dems weren't howling for his scalp I'd be recommending he get fired. But since the Dems are trying to get him to resign as proxy to weaken Bush I'm standing by him.
So ... CONGRATULATIONS PRESIDENT BUSH !!! I'm glad to see you get your cajones back. You could see how pissed Sen. Schumer was when telling the press that because accounts would differ that it was important to get it under-oath and transcribed. They were hoping this would be like another Scooter Libby set-up and were hoping to nail Karl Rove
So go right ahead Pres. Bush.
Tell them to "pound sand".
Tell them - "no testimony under-oath".
And just to show them who is boss concerning whose prerogative it is to fire and appoint US attorneys...
tomorrow...
Fire another 8 US attorneys !!!Labels: Authority, politics, thaiphoon |
posted by Thaiphoon @ 20:58 | View blog reactions |
|
|
|
| Monday, March 12, 2007 |
| Dirt |
James Higham over at Nourishing Obscurity has the dirt in the Fwench Presidential Elections:
Monday, March 12, 2007 It's been a long time since this blog got into muck-raking, gutter-press, sensationalist journalism so here goes. First, the dirt on Sarko:
Nicolas Sarkozy urged the colonialist Arno Klarsfeld to think of colonization.
Doesn't move you? All right, how about this:
The satirical French newspaper Canard Enchaine is running a story which claims that in 1997, Sarkozy was sold an apartment in Neuilly for 300,000 euros (nearly $400,000) below the market rate. The catch: the same company that sold him the apartment had been granted city contracts, which was then being governed by Sarkozy.
Trouble is, he got out of that one. OK, the gloves are off now:
Read the rest and comment if you have a horse (or care) in that race.
Labels: France, politics |
posted by Lord Nazh @ 18:31 | View blog reactions |
|
|
|
| Friday, March 9, 2007 |
| Newspaper on the WarPath |
In a bizarre story out of St. Augustine we find that the local newspaper is on a manhunt to find out who an anonymous blogger is who .... (wait for it) ... dared to blog the TRUTH on his webiste. Newspaper Asks Public to Identify Local Blogger A Florida newspaper appears to have hit an all-time low in the relationship between bloggers and the media. The St. Augustine Record is asking the public to help expose the identity of a local blogger who recently started a site critical of county politicians. This evening, the paper's home page has a grainy surveillance photo of a man accompanied by this text: Who is this man? Believed to be connected to a politically charged but anonymously-run Web site targeting the character of members of the St. Johns County Commission. Help us determine his identity. Start by watching these four movies featuring footage from surveillance cameras. The Record published video taken inside and outside its offices March 1 that show a man dropping something off at the front desk. There's no explanation of what he's doing, making it look like some kind of threat was delivered, but I found the details on the paper's message board. He was at the newspaper buying an ad. (link)
Go read the whole thing and make sure to read the comments. MYCROFT sounds like a real winner on this one (/sarc) __________ Reason to wonder Filed: Rodgers Cadenhead, Florida, man hunt, truth, LordNazhLabels: News, politics |
posted by Lord Nazh @ 01:41 | View blog reactions |
|
|
|
| Sunday, March 4, 2007 |
| Outrage |
I was going to make a nice long post about the outrage caused by Ann calling the Silky PonyTM a faggot, but for some reason it didn't save and I lost it.
It was a great post, but not one I'd care to try to do again. Needless to say, most of the right and left blogosphere are still crying in their oatmeal because pretty boy Edwards was called a mean name.
------- A case for getting ahead of the 'evil' media:
Mar. 4, 2007 13:20 | Updated Mar. 4, 2007 14:41 Marciano: Punish me if you see fit By JPOST.COM STAFF
Talkbacks for this article: 2 MK Yoram Marciano (Labor) submitted a complaint to the Knesset Ethics Committee on Sunday - against himself. Following his involvement in a bar brawl in Herzliya on Wednesday night, in which he allegedly attacked security guards and received several blows in return, Marciano expressed regret for his actions and apologized before the Knesset for damaging the honor of the institution. 'Witnesses contradict Marciano' He also called on the Knesset to take disciplinary action against him, if they found it fitting. He emphasized, however, that he had acted innocently and that most of the media reports on his behavior were false. On Wednesday, Marciano attended a party at the Rio nightclub in Herzliya celebrating the birthday of a Knesset official. There were varying reports of what actually happened during the confrontation between Marciano and the security guards at the club. According to a police complaint filed by Marciano, the incident occurred when he was trying to leave the club through a back door, which was no longer used as an exit, and was apprehended by security guards. According to a conflicting report filed by one of the security guards, Marciano himself struck out at the guards and shouted at them that they were mistreating a public official. (link)
Weird to see a politician turn himself in. Yes it is in Israel and not here, but would be nice if some of the 'responsibility' rubbed off on certain members of our congress.
Labels: outrage, politics |
posted by Lord Nazh @ 06:49 | View blog reactions |
|
|
|
| Tuesday, February 6, 2007 |
| Fillibusters |
A lot of people have been covering the unique phenomena that is the MSM coverage of politics. The assumption by the press to say that a Republican fillibuster is a debate-killer and a Democrat(ic) one is a debate-enhancer.
With the 'stalemate' in the Senate raging on, Pelosi decides that if the Democrats in the Senate can't do their job correctly, the House will have to show them how: House Schedules Vote on Iraq Resolution
Feb 06 3:12 PM US/Eastern
| | By DAVID ESPO AP Special Correspondent
|
|
| | WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Democratic-controlled House will vote next week on a nonbinding measure opposing President Bush's decision to dispatch additional troops to Iraq, officials said Tuesday, hastening a postelection clash between Congress and commander in chief. The precise nature of the measure remains to be determined, the officials said, although Brendan Daly, a spokeswoman for Speaker Nancy Pelosi, said, it will be "our opposition to the surge" in troops. The Pentagon is in the midst of implementing Bush's order to raise troop levels by 21,500, part of a plan to help quell sectarian violence in Baghdad. Bush's revised strategy has sparked strong opposition among Democrats, and officials said that Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., had both pledged to their rank-and-file that next week's vote would merely be the first attempt to pressure the president to shift course in the war. Other legislation will be binding, they said. Under House rules, Democratic leaders have the authority to advance a measure to the floor for three days of debate and a vote. That stands in contrast to the Senate, where Republicans have so far blocked an attempt by Democrats to hold a full-fledged debate on a war that has claimed the lives of more than 3,000 U.S. troops. House Democratic leaders charted their course as Defense Secretary Robert Gates told a Senate committee that U.S. forces might be able to start leaving Iraq before the end of the year _ if daunting conditions including subdued violence and political reconciliation are met. (link)
Notice the bolded paragraph. The AP is actually claiming that the Republicans are thwarting debate by fillibust'ing the vote on a senate bill. Before the current congress was installed, any fillibuster by Democrats was called opening up debate (as it is truthfully), so what gives? I'll leave that question to you, if you don't know the answer, you probably don't like what I write anyway. __________ Reason to go hmmm Filed: Congress, Democrats, Senate, MSM, liberal, LordNazhLabels: congress, MSM, politics |
posted by Lord Nazh @ 14:58 | View blog reactions |
|
|
|
| Thursday, January 25, 2007 |
| The Pledge |
Victory trumps party!
6684 people have signed The Pledge thus far. Will you?
If the United States Senate passes a resolution, non-binding or otherwise, that criticizes the commitment of additional troops to Iraq that General Petraeus has asked for and that the president has pledged, and if the Senate does so after the testimony of General Petraeus on January 23 that such a resolution will be an encouragement to the enemy, I will not contribute to any Republican senator who voted for the resolution. Further, if any Republican senator who votes for such a resolution is a candidate for re-election in 2008, I will not contribute to the National Republican Senatorial Committee unless the Chairman of that Committee, Senator Ensign, commits in writing that none of the funds of the NRSC will go to support the re-election of any senator supporting the non-binding resolution. (link)
I signed the pledge and I hope everyone will. __________ Reason
Labels: politics, TWoT |
posted by Lord Nazh @ 09:42 | View blog reactions |
|
|
|
| Wednesday, January 24, 2007 |
|
| I watched the SoTU addr | | |
Make sure to read the rest of his post (and especially the comments).
Ron may run on a 3rd party ticket and that is just where he deserves to run.