The press can say what they will, I find Obama to be an irritating character. He isn't very sharp, he prances around like he is someone that he clearly isn't, and the people he chooses to hang around with are very unpleasant for different reasons.
All in all, I really wonder if folks will pull the lever/poke the chad for him on November 4, 2008.
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Israel
Is a lost cause. Its trade of 5 terrorists for 2 corpses defies logic.
Bring on Netanyahu and rattle some real estate over there.
Bring on Netanyahu and rattle some real estate over there.
What a MESS!
The Netroots are mad at Obama and Conservatives can't stand the sight of McCain.
November is looking more and more like a bad joke.
The conventions might be entertaining.
November is looking more and more like a bad joke.
The conventions might be entertaining.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Losing the war at home
When John Murtha blathered (re: Haditha), "Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood." and the MSM picked it up as the truth about our war against the savages, a new low for Congress was reached. I realize that confidence in Congress has fallen since then, but it was noteworthy for me because of the fact that such a horrible, defeating statement was not only uttered by a member of Congress but also excitedly printed and recounted by the press as the Truth.
And now charges have been dropped against yet another Marine (the 7th).
But I haven't seen any apologies (to the troops or the American public) by the MSM. What a joke they are.
America is probably winning the war on the battlefield but over here they are losing it; in the courts and with the public, as exuberantly reported by the MSM. The insane popularity of a very inexperienced Congressman who has no notable legislative achievements or policy pronouncements and who is more liberal than anyone we have taken seriously before, certainly for President, is good reason to worry.
The usual approach for an election year would be to try and convince another person that the reason(s) supporting their position is(are) not defensible. But that won't work now; it is a waste of time to try to reason with a liberal. It won't work because they don't come to a decison by reason or analysis; they exclusively use an emotional yardstick (which conservatives are told they don't have [which we know is bull, we just consider it with other factors that are given more weight, especially in a time of war]). I heard one voter exclaim, when asked why he likes Obama, "he's just so COOL!"
When someone believes their position is best because of how they "feel"; give it up - you've lost.
Peace in the MidEast!
;)
And now charges have been dropped against yet another Marine (the 7th).
But I haven't seen any apologies (to the troops or the American public) by the MSM. What a joke they are.
America is probably winning the war on the battlefield but over here they are losing it; in the courts and with the public, as exuberantly reported by the MSM. The insane popularity of a very inexperienced Congressman who has no notable legislative achievements or policy pronouncements and who is more liberal than anyone we have taken seriously before, certainly for President, is good reason to worry.
The usual approach for an election year would be to try and convince another person that the reason(s) supporting their position is(are) not defensible. But that won't work now; it is a waste of time to try to reason with a liberal. It won't work because they don't come to a decison by reason or analysis; they exclusively use an emotional yardstick (which conservatives are told they don't have [which we know is bull, we just consider it with other factors that are given more weight, especially in a time of war]). I heard one voter exclaim, when asked why he likes Obama, "he's just so COOL!"
When someone believes their position is best because of how they "feel"; give it up - you've lost.
Peace in the MidEast!
;)
Monday, June 16, 2008
Obama for national talk show host
He is "cool", a great talker, looks great, and is believable (comments by voters).
Since he is does not have credible or worthwhile economic or political ideas and can't judge character, what do you say we just convince NBC, CBS, or ABC to give him his own talk show? Advertisers will crawl all over themselves to buy time on his show and the country will remain safe.
Obama on children: " . . . any fool can have a child” . . . “That doesn’t make you a father. It’s the courage to raise a child that makes you a father.”".
He's telling sperm donor - boys that it takes bravery to raise a child. We know they aren't brave, they need to somehow grow up and be mature men. And the girls they impregnate need to exhibit some character and grow a semblance of a brain before they will even approach having the tools necessary to raise a child.
I can only hope that such Dims and their offspring don't vote.
Since he is does not have credible or worthwhile economic or political ideas and can't judge character, what do you say we just convince NBC, CBS, or ABC to give him his own talk show? Advertisers will crawl all over themselves to buy time on his show and the country will remain safe.
Obama on children: " . . . any fool can have a child” . . . “That doesn’t make you a father. It’s the courage to raise a child that makes you a father.”".
He's telling sperm donor - boys that it takes bravery to raise a child. We know they aren't brave, they need to somehow grow up and be mature men. And the girls they impregnate need to exhibit some character and grow a semblance of a brain before they will even approach having the tools necessary to raise a child.
I can only hope that such Dims and their offspring don't vote.
Friday, June 13, 2008
SCOTUS rules on political question in ultimate political grab by 5 justices
In Boumediene, the majority found the constitutionally guaranteed privilege of habeas corpus review to apply to persons held in Guantanamo, including enemy combatants. WHAT?!
The Supreme Court has not historically heard "political questions" out of respect for the legislative and executive branches of government. When the doctrine has been construed narrowly by more liberal jurists, it has been invoked only when the issue presented to the Court is one that "has been textually committed to another branch of government." When considered more broadly by conservative jurists, the political question doctrine has been used when there is a lack of judicially manageable standards to decide the case on the merits, when judicial intervention might show insufficient respect for other branches of government, or when a judicial decision might threaten the integrity of the judicial branch.
So much for SCOTUS' integrity (Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito excepted). It hasn't been threatened by the Boumediene decision, it has been eviscerated. The Court is now a threat to the very country that it serves.
Aso, an Amicus Curiae brief submitted by the American Bar Assn. on behalf of the petitioners (enemy combatants in a time of war) shows the ABA to be the disgraceful organization that it is.
So, "people" who want to blow us up and cut our heads off have the same rights under the U.S. Constitution as school teachers and you do. And we all get to pay for this. What is going on and where will it end? This is a nightmare.
There should be a new rule of engagement - immediate adjudication on the battlefield.
The Supreme Court has not historically heard "political questions" out of respect for the legislative and executive branches of government. When the doctrine has been construed narrowly by more liberal jurists, it has been invoked only when the issue presented to the Court is one that "has been textually committed to another branch of government." When considered more broadly by conservative jurists, the political question doctrine has been used when there is a lack of judicially manageable standards to decide the case on the merits, when judicial intervention might show insufficient respect for other branches of government, or when a judicial decision might threaten the integrity of the judicial branch.
So much for SCOTUS' integrity (Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito excepted). It hasn't been threatened by the Boumediene decision, it has been eviscerated. The Court is now a threat to the very country that it serves.
Aso, an Amicus Curiae brief submitted by the American Bar Assn. on behalf of the petitioners (enemy combatants in a time of war) shows the ABA to be the disgraceful organization that it is.
So, "people" who want to blow us up and cut our heads off have the same rights under the U.S. Constitution as school teachers and you do. And we all get to pay for this. What is going on and where will it end? This is a nightmare.
There should be a new rule of engagement - immediate adjudication on the battlefield.
Federalist Paper No. 69 and the Boumediene decision
Boumediene vastly expands the wartime power of the federal courts and contracts the power of the elected branches of government to provide for the common defense.
With respect to the executive branch, Alexander Hamilton's comments in Federalist Paper #69 are important: "Of all the cares or concerns of government, the direction of war most peculiarly demands those qualities which distinguish the exercise of power by a single hand. The direction of war implies the direction of the common strength; and the power of directing and employing the common strength, forms a usual and essential part in the definition of the executive authority."
Boumedienne will be a blemish on the Court for decades.
With respect to the executive branch, Alexander Hamilton's comments in Federalist Paper #69 are important: "Of all the cares or concerns of government, the direction of war most peculiarly demands those qualities which distinguish the exercise of power by a single hand. The direction of war implies the direction of the common strength; and the power of directing and employing the common strength, forms a usual and essential part in the definition of the executive authority."
Boumedienne will be a blemish on the Court for decades.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
