Recently in Liberals Category
Yesterday I got an email from the NRCC blog:
If you're reading this blog, chances are you're not happy with Washington. A bipartisan poll conducted this month shows that 73% of Americans disapprove of the way Congress is doing its job. Americans are frustrated, and rightfully so.
Families today face challenges that yesterday's laws simply don't address. We need to fix government, and one solution is to update our laws so they provide America's families with more freedom in their jobs; greater healthcare and retirement security; safer communities; access to quality, affordable education; and the ability for future generations to compete in the global economy.
I read it to TB with the party identifiers removed, and she thought it came from a liberal. Apparently others see it that way, too, as the post has received close to 700 comments, nearly all of them negative.
When I first viewed the post there were only a handful of comments. The big boost seemed to occur after Michelle Malkin posted on it (No, I won't link - go find it yourself.).
One wonders if Tom Cole reads the comments to his posts. I further wonder if any of the comments will be taken seriously.
Somehow, I doubt it. And I hope they're not counting on donations from me.
Update (5:37 PM EST): Now nearing 1,000 comments. No change in mood.
At a speech in support of Dennis Kucinich:
Yeah, I know the left is going to have fun with this. Let them. Fact is, this fellow has no more right to disrupt speeches than the multitudes of liberals who have done it to conservative speakers in recent years. Sean Penn, like or not, was an invited speaker. Our young friend with the funny signs (especially the second one) should have been outside the hall to protest. Freedom of speech isn't a guarantee of a forum, and exercising one's rights becomes unjust if it takes away the same right from others.
As an aside, please do note that there were no objects thrown, no crowds rushing the stage, no shouting. In fact, the only threat of physical contact came from a Kucinich supporter/Sean Penn fan. Ann Coulter would love to have such restrained protests at her presentations. In spite of the fact that he was wrong, the young fellow showed far more class and restraint than any of the liberal protests we've seen lately.
H/T Huffington Post.
At the dishonest comment deletion tactics allegedly in use at the San Francisco Chronicle(H/T Glenn Reynolds) and Think Progress(H/T Charles Johnson). However, browser caches can be unruly beasts, so I'm not yet ready to call foul.
If true, it just follows a pattern on the left of squelching any speech that does not agree with their own. This is no different than shouting down a speaker giving a speech, and belching "freedom of speech!" in the attempt to deprive the speaker of his. What makes it particularly nasty is that the commenter at SFC or TP don't know they've been shouted down.
Of course, no one at SFC or TP is compelled to publish any comment they find objectionable for whatever reason. They also have the right to ban commenters at will for any reason they like. What's repugnant about this tactic (again, if true) is the dishonesty in allowing someone to believe they're being heard when they aren't.
I does occur to me that this would be fairly easy to implement, though, through multiple methods. Expect to see a lot of site administrators (and bloggers, too) try this now that the idea is floating around.
Update: Apparently very easy to implement - Charles duplicates the effect by altering 6 lines of code.
Yeah, I watched it. Here are my impressions:
The first 10-15 minutes were exciting due to the backbiting. After that, they settled down into the familiar Bush-bashing pattern.
Hillary was on-game. She needed to be aggressive without coming off as nasty and largely succeeded. She's still going to be the front runner for a while yet. The audience booed twice when Hillary was attacked. Playing the gender card is apparently effective.
Chris Dodd and Joe Biden gave some good answers - particularly Dodd when answering about security vs. human rights. Making sense is death to your campaign when running with this crowd, though. Biden got bonus points for giving a one-word answer.
Obama had a very bad night. It took Wolfe nearly 5 minutes to get an answer about the drivers license issue. He also slipped and referred to illegals as "illegal aliens". That'll piss off the open borders crowd.
Speaking of pissed, Kucinich was. And with good reason, too. He had to prompt Wolfe to let him have a chance to answer a question. No matter how loony he is, as long as he's on stage with Hillary and Obama, and deserves equal time and consideration. Of course, it won't happen, since Democrats really don't care about fairness.
Edwards loves pandering to the nutroots. I heard him repeat the word "neocon" a few times, that resonates with the delusional fringe. He also mentioned Cheney a few times, which gets the nutroots speaking in tongues. He'll be the winner with the Daily Kos crowd.
Richardson pandered as well. He even managed to invoke "Haliburton" in an answer that had nothing to do with it.
Hypocrite alerts - Hillary for saying she's not playing the gender card and following with something that sounded a lot like "vote for me because I'm a woman". Dodd for saying he has no litmus test for judges then saying he won't appoint a pro-lifer.
The second half was interesting - CNN wanted the Dems to look good, as they lined up victims one by one. One said he was a victim of racial profiling caused by the Patriot Act, no one called him on it. Update (11:28 PM): One of the CNN's "victims" is a war protester. And that's CNN's idea of an "undecided voter"? And why isn't Dan Riehl on my blogroll? Fixed.
Also, what idiot let the question about jewelry get asked?
If I had to pick, I'd say Biden won - at least in debate terms. Since he doesn't have a chance, though, that matters little. What does matter is who lost - Obama. Most folks have open minds, if he had taken a decisive stance on the illegal alien question and attempted to explain why he felt that way, folks would have respected it. Instead, he wasted everyone's time trying to avoid being pinned down to an answer on a question that wasn't difficult. It made him look especially bad after attacking Hillary on the exact same thing for the past 2 weeks.
Since Obama's loss is likely to be Hillary's gain, she'll emerge as the apparent overall winner through default - even though she didn't win through her answers.
It's kinda like watching the game when you don't like either team.
From a press release today from the esteemed ufologist:
WASHINGTON, Nov. 13 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- "Made in China" has become a health and safety warning label for American consumers following the recalls of tens of millions of Chinese-made toys, but the "real warning label should say 'Made in Washington, D.C. by corporate lobbyists' because the life-threatening hazards of these products were either ignored or brushed off by members of the Congress seven yeas ago," Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich said today.
So Congress was supposed to know the Aqua Dots were toxic 6 years before they were introduced? Ridiculous. But Congress isn't the target of his ire over failure to properly read the tea leaves - it's Silky Pony:
"Senator Edwards knew seven years ago that people would be hurt, so why did he vote for China trade?" Kucinich asked. "How credible is his newfound consumer protectionism and his campaign advocacy for trade reform to save American jobs?"
Well, channeling the dead in court should indicate additional extra-sensory abilities, I suppose. But even though Edwards' crystal ball was limited to the recently deceased, apparently Dennis did know, else he wouldn't have the moral authority to attack those who were prognostication-challenged. But how? I think I've figured out what he's up to with the outstretched-arm thing:
That's right - he's positioning himself for better reception from the mothership.
Someone remind me to invite Jason to my next cocktail party. I'd love to hear his views on tolerance, diversity, and civil discourse.
We do wonder why, though, has he felt compelled to repeat his dislike for Republicans so many times? Are his righty neighbors continually trying to befriend him? Does he get a lot of fan mail from conservatives?
This post, oddly enough, was not blocked by Blogrolling. A rare event!
Posted on Delaware Watch is the below video on Diego Garcia. I'm not studied on the primary subject of British policy in Diego Garcia, but the second minute of the piece paints the US military as baby killers. Sadly, this kind of disgusting totally untrue smear of the troops happens far too frequently in leftist circles. It is beyond dispute that no military in history has worked harder than ours to avoid civilian casualties.
The piece does show what appears to be horrible treatment of the indigenous population of Diego Garcia. However, its view of the U.S. military is so dishonestly wrong that the rest of the piece is highly suspect.
There's a lesson here. Journalists who really care about exposing injustices should check any ideology at the door else risk discrediting any good they might accomplish. Same goes for those who spread it.
Update: If the atrocities outlined in the film are real, then notable are the dates - the key years for the United States' involvement are between 1961 and 1968 - all during Democrat administrations.
I'm sure that makes it all OK, right? Since it was for the "common good", after all...
This post was blocked by Blogrolling.
Pulling no punches, Karl Rove serves up a critique of the most unpopular Congress in history. From their fear and loathing of the military to their childish antics to please their MoveOn.Org masters, he scores on each shot:
"The list of Congress's failures grows each month. No energy bill. No action on health care. No action on the mortgage crisis. No immigration reform. No progress on renewing No Child Left Behind. Precious little action on judges and not enough on reducing trade barriers. Congress has not done its work. And these failures will have consequences."
Actually, I think "No immigration reform" is a good thing, but it's a small quibble. Please go read the whole article. I'm bookmarking this one.
"But they're going to do it anyway...."
It's the argument they used in Maine to give potentially harmful prescription drugs to girls who could benefit only if they were raped.
It's the argument used by the advocates of drug legalization, the pro-choice movement, the folks who give out condoms and oral sex lessons to junior-high schoolers.
It's been used countless times in the past 4 or 5 decades and each time the effect has always been the same - the continued downward definition of moral standards.
The "they're going to do it anyway" crowd is hallmarked by laziness, selfishness, or both. They are either unwilling to do the hard work necessary to address a problem, or actively seek the normalization of behaviors that they themselves desire to participate in.
LONDON (Reuters) - A Roman Catholic bishop in the southern English port city of Portsmouth is backing a campaign to legalize brothels without in any way condoning them.The Right Reverend Crispian Hollis supported the local branch of the Women's Institute which wants to license brothels.
How - wholesome.
When the Catholic Church starts using the same argument that leftists and some libertarians have made over the years to redefine behavioral standards down, we should all take notice - and be a little embarrassed at what we're becoming.
Lamentably, I killed your cat while trying just to sting it. It was crouched, as usual, under one of our bird feeders & I fired from some distance with bird shot.
Had the Iranians been hanging around under his bird feeder in 1979, we might not have a terrorist threat today.
Well, his antics over the last few days helped his image with someone:
WASHINGTON, Nov. 7 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- In the first real test of grassroots support for the eight Democratic Presidential candidates, Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich scored a stunning first place finish nationally and topped every other candidate in 41 of 50 states, according to results released late last night by Democracy for America (DFA).Of the 150,000-plus ballots cast, Kucinich received more votes than former Senator John Edwards and Senator Barack Obama combined. Kucinich tallied 49,364 (31.97%), compared with Edwards' 24,078 (15.6%), Obama's 21,403 (13.86%), and Senator Hillary Clinton's 6,504 (4.21%).
Of course, it's a self-parodying poll:
Undeclared write-in candidate and former Vice President Al Gore scored second nationally with 24.77% of the vote, and he "won" six states: New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, West Virginia, Tennessee, and Florida.
Hmmm. Unscientific web poll with numbers dramatically at odds with any respected national poll, over-the-top fanaticism for wildly non-mainstream views.... Wonder how much bleed-over from the fans of Ron Paul? Come to think of it, has anyone ever seen Ron Paul's supporters in the same place and time as Kucinich's supporters? Hmmm?
Have been watching C-SPAN and the drama unfolding with Dennis Kucinich's impeachment resolution. Steny Hoyer tried to table the resolution, but the Republicans all switched votes to keep the resolution alive. This was to embarrass the Democrats who are already under fire for the endless and fruitless investigations.
Currently, there's a motion to send it committee, where it could be kept low-key (and unembarrassing to house Dems). Looks like that motion will pass.
Had the Republican's gambit worked, the house would have debated for an hour followed by a vote. Republicans would have had a field day shaming the ludicrous assertions in the resolution, such as "Keeping all options on the table" meaning that Cheney was conspiring to wage war with Iran.
Back later with more...
Update from Yahoo/AP:
Debate on Cheney impeachment avertedWASHINGTON - House Democrats on Tuesday narrowly managed to avert a bruising debate on a proposal to impeach Dick Cheney after Republicans, in a surprise maneuver, voted in favor of taking up the measure.
Bruising indeed. It would have been fun to watch, too. Statement from the White House in the same article:
The White House, in a statement, said Democrats were shirking responsibilities on issues such as childrens' health insurance "and yet they find time to waste an afternoon on an impeachment vote against the vice president. ... This is why Americans shake their head in wonder about the priorities of this Congress."
And I managed to make it all the way through the post without exploiting the extraterrestrial angle!
It's kind of a girl fight story with a little moonbatty BDS thrown in to stroke the base:
"Senator Clinton is voting like a hawk in Washington, while talking like a dove in Iowa and New Hampshire," Edwards said, referring to two crucial early-voting states.
"She's giving the administration exactly what it wants again."
Edwards also warned in a speech in Iowa City, that the Bush administration was trying to use attacks on US forces in Iraq, to justify a war with Iran.
"George Bush, Dick Cheney and the neocon warmongers used 9/11 to start a war with Iraq, now they're trying to use Iraq to start a war with Iran," he said.
This stuff from Edwards and the others is going to be pure gold for the Republicans next year. We've already seen Hillary play the "victim girl" card, so expect it to be played after she wins the nomination and the Republican candidate points out any inconsistency, no matter how accurate, in her positions. Having Democrats make the point instead will be so much easier.
Do you think these folks are going to rally around Hillary after she gets the nod? Count on it. And even the least amount of critical review from the press will prompt the best tap-dancin' you've ever seen. All the latest dust-ups between Hillary and the other candidates also serve to illustrate that they know how dishonest their positions are - it just takes a heated primary to get 'em to admit it.
Oops.
I tried to call, but couldn't get through at all. Of course he'll say that the "interested citizens" are all supports of his impeachment effort. My guess is that folks on the right tipped 'em over the edge. Yay, team. Or perhaps he couldn't establish an up-link with the mother ship:
Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich is planning to re-schedule a nationwide conference call to discuss Articles of Impeachment against Vice President Richard B. Cheney after tonight's planned event encountered technicalproblems stemming largely from the overwhelming volume of calls from interested citizens.
The Kucinich campaign apologized for the snafu, explaining that staff had significantly underestimated the number of call-ins, and public interest in the issue exceeded technological capacity. The call will be re-scheduled within the next few days.
Kucinich, author and prime sponsor of the impeachment measure against Cheney, will be introducing a privileged resolution to the House tomorrow (Tuesday) to force a vote on the matter of impeachment.
I'll let you know if/when they reschedule.
Update (11/6/07 7:45AM): "Stay tuned for the day-long circus."
Update (11/6/07 9:48AM): Welcome Michelle Malkin readers! Thanks for the link, Michelle!
Oh, and if you didn't make it here through Michelle's post, head over there - she has the full text of the UFO-fueled resolution to impeach Cheney in all it's lunatic glory!
Three guesses who she blames, and the first two don't count:
"For too long, President Musharraf failed to confront effectively his growing unpopularity. The Bush Administration enabled Musharraf's delusion by ignoring his undemocratic acts and lack of internal support in exchange for his assistance in efforts against terrorism."Pakistan will only be a reliable and capable ally against terrorism when its government is not seen as an enemy by its own people. The interests of the United States are best advanced by policies that do not promote one goal at the expense of the other."
It's always Bush's fault with these people, isn't it? However, there's more than a little irony in Nancy taking a jab at Musharraf failing to address his unpopularity as she leads a House with the lowest approval rating in history. Instead of taking cheap BDS-driven shots at the administration, maybe she should address her own "growing unpopularity".
Update (11/6/07 7:08AM): Patrick Leahy blames Bush, too.
Dennis Kucinich is hosting a nation-wide call-in straight from the mothership tonight @ 7:30 p.m. ET to discuss his loony impeachment resolution. This has the potential to be entertaining yet nauseating at the same time. If you want to listen to a bunch of crazed alien-sighting-addled rantings complete with barking moonbats cheering him on:If he opens up the call for questions (unlikely, but who knows?) I might ask him what his position is on aliens performing medical experiments on humans, and if he thinks Cheney is responsible.
- The call-in number is (641) 715-3300.
- When the operator asks for an access code, key in 324341#.
- The call is open to all interested citizens.
Update: Thanks for the link, Hot Air! And welcome Hot Air readers! We're just getting going again after a very, very long break, so not many recent posts yet - but feel free to look around!
Only in the extraterrestrially-addled brain of Dennis Kucinich could the phrase " ... if we fail in Iraq, it will advantage Iran" be transmogrified into "From the Oval Office on down, this Administration has been targeting Iran as the next domino it wants to topple..."
Shame and embarrassment over being associated with an obvious loony like Kucinich is surely going to cause a drop in the numbers for the next national poll about UFO sightings and abductions.
This online film from Nickelodeon has to be seen to be believed. I can't understand the mental process that drove them to feature children being utilized as unwitting tools by the anti-American World Can't Wait (WCW).
While it's to be expected from WCW (they've targeted young impressionable minds before), for Nickelodeon to glorify this kind of disgusting propagandizing of children is beyond reprehensible.
Goodbye, Nickelodeon. You're no longer welcome in our home.
BTW, I don't place all the blame on Nickelodeon. Simple decency prevents me from expressing my feelings about this child's parents - he surely didn't sink into the WCW cesspool on his own.
h/t Michelle Malkin and ArmyWifeToddlerMom
I'm sure you've all heard the revelations about the University of Delaware's diversity training from Hot Air, Michelle Malkin, and others. Today the story merits front page above-the fold treatment at the Wilmington News Journal, our local daily paper. From the story by Beth Miller, a quote from one of the students who had to attend the training (emphasis added):
Brooke Aldrich considers herself open-minded and accepting of all kinds of people.But the University of Delaware freshman said statements made in a recent diversity training session on her floor of Russell Hall tried to make her believe she was a racist.
"I personally have no problem with anyone of any background, race, sexual identity, or any religion," said the 18-year-old Hockessin resident, who is majoring in animal science. "I accept people for who they are as people. But coming out of the group sessions makes you feel as if I was in some way a racist, just by the color of my skin. It was like, 'Because you've never been oppressed, you're part of the problem.' "
Here's another from later in the article:
Aldrich said other exercises made many students feel uncomfortable. In one, she said, students were asked if they approved of such things as affirmative action or gay marriage. If they did, they would join students on one side of the room. If they didn't, they would join students on the other side of the room. They were not permitted to explain their reasons or to answer "I don't know," she said.
While this is now getting some attention and will likely be changed as a result, keep in mind that the program ran for four years before anyone heard about it. My question is how many more schools are doing this that we haven't yet heard about?
Update (11/1/2007 8:51 PM) As predicted, UD has discarded their indoctrination program. Good. Here's the post at FIRE's website.
