Regrets, I've had a few;
But a few more, than I'd rather mention.
I did what I wanted to do
And saw it through without exemption.
I planned each charted course;
Each carefree step along the byway,
But more, much more than this,
I did it myyyyyyyy way!
Saturday, September 23, 2006
Posted by Dave in Texas at 11:06 PM
An Al Reuters photo, which had the caption "A masked Egyptian man holds up a poster that reads, 'All of as are ready to die for Prophet Mohammad' during a protest against Pope Benedict's remarks in Al-Azhar mosque in Cairo September 22, 2006."I just can't figure out why a KKKlansman is protesting the Pope in Arabic??
Maybe William has some answers.
Aljazeera story here
Crossposted at Blue Star Chronicles
Posted by Beth at 6:48 PM
There are rumors afloat that Osama Bin Laden is Dead ..... again.
WASHINGTON, Sept 23 (Reuters) - The U.S. government has no evidence to support a French newspaper report suggesting that al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden died of typhoid a month ago, an intelligence official said on Saturday.
"We don't have anything to support it," said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
"We've heard these things before and have no reason to think this is any different. There's just nothing we can point to, to say this report has any more credence than other reports we've seen in the past."
"These things seem to come and go every six months," he added.
The French regional daily L'Est Republicain reported that, according to a French secret service report, Saudi Arabia was convinced that bin Laden died of typhoid in Pakistan in late August. The French government has said it could not confirm the report and would investigate the intelligence leak.
Chirac is a bit taken aback that this information got leaked.
PARIS — President Jacques Chirac said Saturday that information contained in a leaked intelligence document raising the possibility that Osama bin Laden may have died of typhoid in Pakistan last month is "in no way whatsoever confirmed."
Chirac said he was "a bit surprised" at the leak and has asked Defense Minister Michele Alliot-Marie to probe how a document from a French foreign intelligence service was published in the French press.
I would hate to think he died a peaceful death of natural causes (however painful dying of typhoid might be, it would not be painful enough). Although, dying like that would not be the 'going down in a blaze of glory' that most jihadists seem to pray for. All the same, it would be nice for a GI to have the honor of putting an American bullet right between his eyes.
Frankly, I don't see what difference it makes at this point. Bin Laden is irrelevant to the whole war now. He was the master mind behind the 9/11 attacks and gained noteriety and honor among his people from that piece of evil. But he is no longer relevant to the War on Terror other than as a figure head. There are so many like him and so many willing to step up and take on the mantle of horrific murderer of us infidels.
Still, I wonder how many times this guy can die.
h/t: My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
Ace of Spades thinks it legit.
I liked the Median Sibs pic of where osama might be ...
All Things Beautiful says: 'This may be the best present to Israel today for Rosh Ha-Shanah....The Day Of Judgment....How appropriate... '
Dr. Sanity is taking it with a grain of salt.
Planck's Constant is saddened?
Blue Crab Boulevard is also taking it with a grain of salt.
Strata-Sphere is wondering about that large funeral last month that we were all up in arms about that we didn't bomb.
Captain's Qtrs reminds us we've done the 'Ding Dong, Osama's Dead' thing before.
Yeah, Right, Whatever wishes he might have met a more Special Forces type end too.
The Pirate's Cove evaluates how the leftists are blogging this over at DU - it made my blood boil how easily they dismiss our military. I could go off on a rant about THAT - but will save that for later.
No Pasaran says take it for what it's worth.
Mary Katherine Ham has on-going updates and analysis.
ScrappleFace thinks this might explain the sulfur smell Chavez was talking about at the U.N. the other day!
- Old War Dogs trackbacked with Again?
- Right Truth trackbacked with Whitney Houston divorces Bobby Brown, Osama gets sick and dies
Crossposted at Blue Star Chronicles
Posted by Beth at 12:46 PM
As you can see from Dave's post below I have some guest bloggers sitting in for me while I go out of town. Along with Dave in Texas, there is BigDog, and Beth from Blue Star Chronicles.
I am not responsible in ANY WAY for anything they say ( especially Dave).....;-)
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 7:35 AM
Friday, September 22, 2006
Goodness. WJC looks a little upset.
His hair looks great though.
Fox News Sunday. Chris Wallace said something to irritate him. Can't wait to see the whole thing.
UPDATE: He would make a GREAT Santa Claus.
Posted by Dave in Texas at 11:15 PM
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 9:21 AM
Byron York says both sides did. (Republican sides, that is)
"Who won? Before the final deal came out, there had been speculation that the White House had “blinked” in the much-hyped confrontation. By the end, though, representatives of both sides professed satisfaction. “I think there is every reason for both sides to be happy,” the source says. “This was a situation where both the Congress and the administration shared a common objective,” Hadley told reporters afterward. “And what we did in a fairly creative way was come up with ways that we could all support to achieve that objective.”
UPDATE: Patrick Hynes at Anklebiting pundits has a bit to say on the subject and he is not happy with conservatives acting like Kossacks when it comes to McCain.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 7:36 AM
Thursday, September 21, 2006
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 3:12 PM
Nancy Pelosi defends Bush?
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - One of President George W. Bush's fiercest political opponents at home took his side on Thursday, calling Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez a "thug" for his remark that Bush is like the devil.
"Hugo Chavez fancies himself a modern day Simon Bolivar but all he is an everyday thug," House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said at a news conference, referring to Chavez' comments in a U.N. General Assembly speech on Wednesday.
"Hugo Chavez abused the privilege that he had, speaking at the United Nations," said Pelosi, a frequent Bush critic. "He demeaned himself and he demeaned Venezuela."
Maybe there is hope for the Democratic party yet.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 1:17 PM
I was trying to remember if I had ever boycotted anything before. I don't think so. Usually things that have caught my attention I never bought anyway (like French wine) but this might have an impact.
A pro-family group has launched a boycott of the Citgo oil company because it is run by the Venezuelan government, which is led by U.S.-bashing President Hugo Chavez.
"Sales of products at Citgo stations send money back to Chavez to help him in his vow to bring down our government," said American Family Association founder Don Wildmon in a statement.
According to Citgo's website, the company is "owned by PDV America Inc., an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A., the national oil company of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela."
On his website, Wildmon urges supporters to e-mail both Chavez and Citgo to announce their intention to boycott the company.
This isn't about Chavez calling Bush "the devil" at the U.N., although we should all be insulted as Americans by that. But this is a man who not only hates Bush, but hates America:
"AFA notes Chavez told a television audience recently: "Enough of imperialist aggression; we must tell the world: down with the U.S. empire. We have to bury imperialism this century."
So...don't buy gas from Citgo. Tell your friends. I would love to see this affect Chavez.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 1:03 PM
When George Allen said that he did not know about his family's Jewish history before last month, I found that hard to believe.
But it looks like it's true.
All this came up when a rude reporter/panelist asked Allen last month this question:
"You've been quoted as saying your mother's not Jewish, but it had been reported her father, your grandfather Felix, whom you were given your middle name for, was Jewish," Fox asked Allen. "Could you please tell us whether your forebearers include Jews, and if so, at which point Jewish identity might have ended?"
It's an interesting story to be sure, but why is it important?
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 7:11 AM
"35,000 people rallied across from the United Nations to protest Ahmadinejad’s presence at the world body"
Yes, you read that right...35,000. What? You didn't hear about it?
I guess that is what the Blogosphere is for. The stories the msm just ignores.
Why would they ignore this one?
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 7:06 AM
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
- At least that is what Hugo Chavez calls our President today. It's what many on the left call him. So let's see what old satan had to say:
"Some of the changes in the Middle East have been dramatic, and we see the results in this chamber. Five years ago, Afghanistan was ruled by the brutal Taliban regime, and its seat in this body was contested. Now this seat is held by the freely elected government of Afghanistan, which is represented today by President Karzai. Five years ago, Iraq's seat in this body was held by a dictator who killed his citizens, invaded his neighbors, and showed his contempt for the world by defying more than a dozen U.N. Security Council resolutions. Now Iraq's seat is held by a democratic government that embodies the aspirations of the Iraq people, who's represented today by President Talabani. With these changes, more than 50 million people have been given a voice in this chamber for the first time in decades."
Any of that not true? Any of that debatable? No. Facts. I want you to reread it. These are not slight changes, these are not unimportant things. These are world changing events. And who do we have to thank for the destruction of two brutal regimes, emerging as democracies in the Middle East, and the two seats now held at the U.N?
"Some have argued that the democratic changes we're seeing in the Middle East are destabilizing the region. This argument rests on a false assumption, that the Middle East was stable to begin with. The reality is that the stability we thought we saw in the Middle East was a mirage. For decades, millions of men and women in the region have been trapped in oppression and hopelessness. And these conditions left a generation disillusioned, and made this region a breeding ground for extremism."
A truer statement has never been uttered.
"My country desires peace. Extremists in your midst spread propaganda claiming that the West is engaged in a war against Islam. This propaganda is false, and its purpose is to confuse you and justify acts of terror. We respect Islam, but we will protect our people from those who pervert Islam to sow death and destruction. Our goal is to help you build a more tolerant and hopeful society that honors people of all faiths and promote the peace."
Wow. Who knew the devil could hope for peace and clearly define those who pervert a faith. Not blaming the faith, but the extremists. You would think satan would like the death and destruction guys.
"To the people of Iran: The United States respects you; we respect your country. We admire your rich history, your vibrant culture, and your many contributions to civilization. You deserve an opportunity to determine your own future, an economy that rewards your intelligence and your talents, and a society that allows you to fulfill your tremendous potential. The greatest obstacle to this future is that your rulers have chosen to deny you liberty and to use your nation's resources to fund terrorism, and fuel extremism, and pursue nuclear weapons. The United Nations has passed a clear resolution requiring that the regime in Tehran meet its international obligations. Iran must abandon its nuclear weapons ambitions. Despite what the regime tells you, we have no objection to Iran's pursuit of a truly peaceful nuclear power program. We're working toward a diplomatic solution to this crisis. And as we do, we look to the day when you can live in freedom -- and America and Iran can be good friends and close partners in the cause of peace. "
Again I am so surprised by the devil being so diplomatic and respectful to a country that shows neither to him.
"To the people of Darfur: You have suffered unspeakable violence, and my nation has called these atrocities what they are -- genocide. For the last two years, America joined with the international community to provide emergency food aid and support for an African Union peacekeeping force. Yet your suffering continues. The world must step forward to provide additional humanitarian aid -- and we must strengthen the African Union force that has done good work, but is not strong enough to protect you. The Security Council has approved a resolution that would transform the African Union force into a blue-helmeted force that is larger and more robust. To increase its strength and effectiveness, NATO nations should provide logistics and other support. The regime in Khartoum is stopping the deployment of this force. If the Sudanese government does not approve this peacekeeping force quickly, the United Nations must act. Your lives and the credibility of the United Nations is at stake. So today I'm announcing that I'm naming a Presidential Special Envoy -- former USAID Administrator Andrew Natsios -- to lead America's efforts to resolve the outstanding disputes and help bring peace to your land.
Who knew the devil had so much compassion. I thought he was into suffering. Guess not.
"The world must also stand up for peace in the Holy Land. I'm committed to two democratic states -- Israel and Palestine -- living side-by-side in peace and security. I'm committed to a Palestinian state that has territorial integrity and will live peacefully with the Jewish state of Israel."
Now something is fishy here. I know Satan would not want this.
"Together we must support the dreams of good and decent people who are working to transform a troubled region -- and by doing so, we will advance the high ideals on which this institution was founded."
Yeah, let's just focus on what some idiot says, who speaks like a high school gossip jealous of the class president. He calls names and makes jokes when there are serious considerations in the world. He smugly enjoys the limelight as the media plays his sound bites over and over.
He is the worst of us. Never let us be fooled by a fool. The left will not defend our President. They will laugh at Chavez's words, but this world and this time is no laughing matter.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 6:28 PM
but there is some good reading out there today. This just boggles the mind (emphasis mine)
From The New Editor:
"The unserious nature of seemingly large elements of the Democratic Party was once again on display last week in Palm Beach County, FL.
Palm Beach Post columnist George Bennett reported last Monday that the Palm Beach County Democratic Party had planned to sponsor a screening of the 9/11 conspiracy movie Loose Change, in what the Dems' county Chairman Wahid Mahmood said was part of "an educational process for all of us."
"The local party's Volunteer Outreach, Information, Coordination and Education (VOICE) Committee is sponsoring a screening of the 9/11 conspiracy pic Loose Change later this month (suggested donation: $5) with a special appearance by Space Coast Democratic congressional long shot Bob Bowman, a prominent doubter of the official 9/11 narrative.
The VOICE Committee's Rick Neuhoff handed out Exposing the Myth of 9/11 fliers at Thursday's Democratic Executive Committee powwow. Neuhoff says he's convinced that President Bush had "foreknowledge" of the attacks and that the World Trade Center "didn't come down because of the planes."
The local Democratic Party isn't endorsing any 9/11 theory, Chairman Wahid Mahmood says, just trying to present "an educational process for all of us."
It was only after the "educational process" was made public did the Palm Beach County Dems cancel their plans to show the video, as the Post reported in this editorial.
While it's obvious that the original decision to highlight this movie at an official party gathering is not the mark of a serious local political party, sadly, this kind of conspiracy mongering has been echoed in the past by current and former national party leaders as well.
In 2004 then-presidential candidate and current National Party Chairman Howard Dean seemed to endorse conspiracy theories on National Public Radio when he said there was "an interesting theory" that the President was told about the Sept. 11 attacks in advance by the Saudi Arabian government.
Also in 2004, then National Democratic Party Chairman Terry MacAuliffe echoed 9/11 conspiracy theories when, after viewing Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11, he was he asked by National Review Online if he believed Moore's assertion that the war in Afghanistan was fought -- not in an effort to eliminate the Taliban and al Qaeda -- but to assure that the Unocal Corporation could build a natural gas pipeline across Afghanistan for the financial benefit of Vice President Dick Cheney. McAuliffe answered, "I believe it after seeing that."
This week, Newsweek reports that Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair Rahm Emanuel (IL) has been using his brother Ari Emanuel, Michael Moore's agent for Fahrenheit 9/11, as a key cog in the Dems' fundraising apparatus in Hollywood.
Why are the Dems' leaders associating themselves with 9/11 conspiracy theories, and those who peddle them? Are these decisions the mark of a political party that is serious on the issue of national security?
It doesn't seem so.
via Blogs for Bush
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 11:43 AM
....than this. Lileks is on fire. Large excerpt:
"An angry man on the radio yesterday insisted that talk radio was part of the “fascist control” of the media. He was, of course, a barking lunatic, as nuts as the people who were certain Clinton would use Y2K to appoint himself Bubba the First and suspend the Constitution. But if you dial down the rhetoric a little, you find the same overheated sentiments in more mainstream quarters. It reminded me of Keith Olbermann, who, by his own words, is the first person to criticize the current Administration, all other voices of dissent having willingly stifled themselves in accordance with Archie Bunker Act of 2002. The other day he birthed this rich observation:
. . .That flash of lightning freezes at the distant horizon, and we can just make out a world in which authority can actually suggest it has become unacceptable to think. Thus the lightning flash reveals not merely a President we have already seen, the one who believes he has a monopoly on current truth. It now shows us a President who has decided that of all our commanders-in-chief, ever, he alone has had the knowledge necessary to alter and re-shape our inalienable rights.
Yes, indeed. Well, having just read what actual altering and reshaping rights looks like, I am disinclined to panic over the thing made out in the distant horizon via lightning, even if it reveals “a world” – presumably Manhattan, below 150th street – in which “authority” – presumably Drinky W. Flyboy, the Resident-in-Chief – actually suggests that thinking is unacceptable, and we must hereby rely on our autonomous nervous system.
Hear ye: if ever I announce that the lightning is sending me messages about how the government seeks to control what I think, please have me commited for paranoid schizophrenia.
Then again, it’s no ordinary lightning flash. It simultaneously “reveals not merely a President we have already seen,” but one who is preparing to revoke Keith Olbermann’s right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of a job on a network a lot of people actually watch. Fine; it’s good red meat, and there’s always a market for that. (Insert obligatory Ann Coulter denunciation!) Mr. O has his furrow, and he will spend the next two years shoving the blade in the dirt. He will have fans and nice write-ups and profiles and the rest of the perks that follow when you stake out a particular niche. Just like Art Bell. And just like Art Bell, he will instantly become a footnote the moment something horrible and significant happens, and his nonsense is swamped by things that actually happen, instead of things he believes are actually suggested.
One of the constant rhetorical ticks in my email concerns my incontinence when it comes to “terrorism.” Apparently people of my ilk are constantly pissing or piddling ourselves when the government plays the ol’ booga-booga card. We drop our Big Gulps and shout “oh, protect me from the scary Mooselmen, Great Father!” I think it was Woocott who first dribbled this particular riposte, and it’s caught on. A day doesn’t go by in which someone doesn’t point out a direct connection between ginned-up scare-news and the retentive abilities of my urethra.
Perhaps it’s so; perhaps there’s a reason I sit in the dark at night making cold calls to Pakistan, hoping the government taps my phone and maybe, just maybe, finds a terrorist on the other end.
But there’s a certain dark jot of damp trouser-front to Olbermann’s rhetoric as well, no?
Today two important speeches were made at the UN: one was a sack of lies dumped out by a religious simpleton bent on heralding the apocalypse, and the other was by the President of Iran. At least that’s how a Fark headline might put it, depending on the IQ level of the submitter. There were various desultory FARK threads on the speeches. My favorite concluded thus: there was the usual debate about whether Ahmadinejad had actually called for the destruction of Israel. (It’s a matter of faith among some that Bush personally blamed Saddam for 9/11, but a matter of debate as to the Mullah’s true feelings about the Jews.) "
And I have to give you his ending just in case you are so stubborn as to not go read the whole thing. The first line is a quote from the Pres of Iran in yesterday's speech.
"Make us among his followers. This would be akin to President Bush concluding his speech with an appeal for everyone to follow Jesus. The commentariat would fall off their chairs en masse: he’s outPoped the Pope! But Ahmadinejad, I suspect, will get a pass. Not because his kumbaya blather and deliciously naughty anti-empire rhetoric chubbed up the lads at AP and Reuters, but because he’s seen as a vaguely absurd figure. He says the most colorful things. Nice smile, too! Always good for a quote, that one.
There’s something else behind the indifferent reaction, though. Everyone has already accepted the idea of Iranian nukes. I think it’s been factored into our subconscious calculations, where they lie as great red glowing things whose threat is somehow still abstract. They won’t use them. They just want them. The way we all want a big-screen TV, and would keep it in the box once we bought it.
I frequently hear people remark that Iran would not be stupid enough to use a nuke, since they know it would bring about retaliation. But MAD only works if the other guy’s SANE. If the Administration regularly made remarks like Ahmadinejad and the other top-tier leaders, critics in the West would have long ago been dissolved in a puddle of corrosive urine. Imagine the President of the United States addressing a group of supporters and leading them in a chant of “Death to Iran.” Imagine what that might mean.
If it helps clarify things, imagine a flash of lightning.
via Dean Barnett
Update: Hugh Hewitt chronicles the mainstream media's view of the Iranian President's speech. As you can imagine, it's pathetic.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 8:37 AM
Mackubin Thomas Owens at NRO has it:
"I continue to be guardedly optimistic about the U.S. enterprise in Iraq. Although violence continues, there are a number of factors that favor the Iraqi government. The principal one is that, arguably, we have broken the back of the Sunni insurgency, the main threat to the Iraqi government."
Read the whole thing. It's not all good news, but he goes through operation after operation explaining what we have accomplished and explains what Zarqawi tried and failed to do. Fascinating really.
via Blogs For Bush
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 8:15 AM
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
McCain himself writes about the recent interrogation controversy:
"It often seems to me and many Americans that international public support for the United States is always strongest when we are the victims of terrorism and weakest when we forcefully defend ourselves from it. We must persevere confident in the necessity and justice of our cause even though we can expect that much of the world, even our allies, will often find fault with us as we seek to defeat the enemies who threaten us and them.
History will vindicate us, even though many of us will no longer be around to read it. And when history records our victory may it also celebrate the fact that we fought an enemy who believed our values made us weak and discovered in the end that our faithfulness to our values was as important to their defeat as was the strength and courage of our armed forces.
Fighting for our security alone makes this fight just. Fighting for the security of other nations as well makes it generous. Fighting for the ascendancy in the world of our values makes it noble. That is the burden and the honor history has offered us. So let us take care, just as we take care to minimize civilian casualties while our enemies deliberately kill the innocent, not to provide our critics with an excuse to doubt how seriously we take our obligations to abide by our values even in times of war, no matter how cruel, difficult or unusual that war."
Who can disagree with that?
This is what McCain says Bush worries about:
"Under U.S. law, a grave breach of Article Three can be prosecuted as a war crime. The Bush administration worries that Geneva’s prohibition of cruel and degrading treatment is ill defined and could be misapplied by a judge with the result that an American interrogator who acted in accord with U.S. law might be prosecuted unfairly. The administration would prefer that Congress pass legislation defining cruel and degrading treatment prohibited in Article Three as it was defined in legislation I sponsored and Congress passed last year as treatment prohibited by the 5th, 8th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution."
McCain says that seem fair but...
"Such an impression would complicate our efforts to win the ideological war that will be a critical element in our victory over Islamic extremists. It could cause other nations to refuse to extradite terrorists they’ve arrested to the United States for interrogation and prosecution. It would provide a handy excuse for regimes with less concern for human rights to re-interpret the conventions according to their standards and possibly put Americans at greater risk in future conflicts."
"Sens. John Warner, Lindsey Graham and I have proposed a way to bring clarity in the law so that the CIA can continue to interrogate high value al-Qaida detainees, and subsequently prosecute them to the fullest extent without being exposed unfairly to criminal and civil liability. Rather than redefine the Geneva Conventions, we would spell out in U.S. law and in clear terms what constitutes a “grave breach” of Article Three so that no judge could decide, for instance, that a female interrogating a Muslim male is a war crime. Only truly grave offenses would rise to that level, and as long as the program stayed within the bounds of the legislation passed last year, no American could be sued or prosecuted for doing his or her duty.
This, we believe, meets both our and the President’s desire for actionable intelligence from captured terrorists and upholds for the world standards of basic human decency that the United States, more than any other country, has sacrificed so much to defend."
You have to admit. He makes his point.
Update: Richard Cohen agrees.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 6:20 PM
Rush and Molloy deliver this item in today's column:
The transition from Star Jones to Rosie O'Donnell hasn't been easy at "The View," especially not for Elisabeth Hasselbeck.
"She is crying every day," an insider tells us. "No one can control Rosie, and Elisabeth can't contain her feelings. She gets so upset all the time."
Some on-set sources think that Rosie's outwardly liberal views have been upsetting the show's conservative voice.
Via National Ledger
Rosie O'Donnell has proven herself to be an anti- Christian bigot. One can only imagine how she is treating her conservative co-host. Elisabeth does a good job of standing up for herself, but she is young and doesn't have the "star power" that Rosie does.
I think we should show our support for Elisabeth. Send her an e-mail of encouragement against such hostility. She needs to know that we are on her side.
Go here and click on "email Elisabeth" under "email your view" on the left.
I think this is important. Not because the show is important, because it isn't. But we have so very few voices on daytime TV and we need to stick up for the ones who choose to go into the lion's den.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 4:01 PM
It was excellent. Intelligent, compassionate, and firm. I love how he spoke directly to the Iranian and Syrian people. It was one of his best speeches.
Read it here.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 3:11 PM
Many of you have probably seen the clip of George Allen, during a debate with his opponent Jim Webb responding to a question by one of the panelists, a woman named Peggy Fox. She asked Allen, "It has been reported your grandfather Felix, whom you were given your middle name for, was Jewish. Could you please tell us whether your forebears include Jews and, if so, at which point Jewish identity might have ended?"
Dean Barnett at Townhall seems to think the panelist was trying to "tar" Allen with being Jewish in a southern state. If there is any truth to that, I am more than sickened and disgusted with these stereotypes of the left that believe that southerners wouldn't vote for someone who is Jewish or black. It's so ridiculous! Throughout the south there are officeholders on every level of many different religious and ethnic backgrounds.
It seems to me that the woman was trying to make some sort of a point that Allen is ashamed of his heritage as well.
I don't know George Allen. I don't really know what kind of man he really is, but it is obvious to me that the panelist, Peggy Fox personifies all the things she probably claims to hate like stereotyping based on race or religion and using such to make a political point.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 10:10 AM
This picture of liberal bloggers meeting with Clinton got a lot of attention last week for the women surrounding Clinton. Ann Atlhouse and Feministing got into it regarding feminists using their looks. But that wasn't the only controversy surrounding this meeting. I hadn't realized that the meeting took place in Harlem. I also hadn't known that Peter Daou, who put the meeting together, is the creator of the Daou Report, and blog advisor to Sen. Hillary Clinton.
La Shawn Barber wants to know where are the black bloggers? I wondered that myself.
Lisa Sabater, another black blogger (but liberal) wasn't happy:
"I am just shocked at the glee with which Peter Daou has shown his disrespect for Pam Spaulding, Steve Gilliard, Louis Pagan, Chris Rabb, Earl Dunovant and me when he decided to not invite neither of us, or for that matter, any other black or latino bloggers."
"What does it mean though that there are 20 bloggers invited to this lunch and not one is black or latino? What does it mean for this group of bloggers to be patting themselves on the backs for being with Clinton when they are all in Harlem and not one of them is a person of color? What does it mean for these people to be there and have not one of them raise this issue in their blogs?"
Peter Daou says that black and latino bloggers were invited and just couldn't come. Let me get this straight. They have a luncheon and meeting with President Bill Clinton in Harlem and no black bloggers are able to attend??? Sorry. I just don't buy that one.
I know I will stir some feathers here, but this doesn't surprise me. When it comes to the Democratic leadership it has always been about "what they can do" for the black community, not what the black community can do for them.
It's about the benevolent helping hand the Democrats hold out to the black community. It's never about the equal sharing of power.
The Democrats demand loyalty of the black community, but never seem to give much respect.
This may have shocked Lisa. but it sure didn't shock me.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 8:09 AM
Monday, September 18, 2006
We are used to protests in the United States. We see anti-war, pro-choice, pro-life, pro-immigrant, anti-immigrant protests all the time. So why do these protest pictures in Europe bother me so much? Well, not only because they call for the death of the Pope, but these same minded people firebomb Churches and kill innocent nuns.
I've been reading this morning about several Democrats who say Bush uses fear as a political tool. Just the other day Hillary says that Bush uses "fear factor" as a strategic approach. It's an old line they have been using for a while, but as I look at these protest pictures I actually do feel a trickle of fear. Not for me. Not here. Not yet. But for others, like that nun.
I don't understand what the Democrats don't understand about this threat. A little over a month ago "a plot to blow up planes in flight from the UK to the US and commit "mass murder on an unimaginable scale" has been disrupted, Scotland Yard has said."
Did. We. Get. That? Do the Democrats get that?
Yes, to Hillary and the rest...maybe we should be a bit afraid. The planning and almost carrying out of mass murder tends to make me jumpy. But what we see from the Democrats are not ways of keeping us safe, but continued fighting with Pres. Bush on every measure which he sees as keeping us safe, from NSA surveillance to interrogation methods. Why they don't see the danger, I'll never understand.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 1:55 PM
From John Derbyshire:
"Let's Not Forget that Islam is a Catholic heresy. So argued Hilaire Belloc in his 1938 book The Great Heresies. The book has a long chapter titled "The Heresy of Mohammed." Sample:"
"Mohammedanism was a heresy: that is the essential point to grasp before going any further. It began as a hersey, not as a new religion. It was not a pagan contrast with the Church; it was not an alien enemy. It was a perversion of Christian doctrine. Its vitality and endurance soon gave it the appearance of a new religion, but those who were contemprary with its rise saw it for what it was—not a denial, but an adaptation and a misuse, of the Christian thing. It differed from most (not from all) heresies in this, that it did not arise within the bounds of the Christian Church. The chief heresiarch, Mohammed himself, was not, like most hersiarchs, a man of Catholic birth and doctrine to begin with. He sprang from pagans. But that which he taught was in the main Catholic doctrine, oversimplified. It was the great Catholic world—on the frontiers of which he lived, whose influence was all around him and whose territories he had known by travel—which inspired his convictions. He came of, and mixed with, the degraded idolaters of the Arabian wilderness, the conquest of which had never seemed worth the Romans' while... "
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 1:52 PM
The Captain is angry. He is a bit angry at the Pope too for apologizing.
Confronting the left. Smash gives us a transcript and audio. Excellent. via Wizbang
Screenwriter for "The Path to 9-11" discusses the left's McCarthyism. Hot Air shows the last 2 minutes of the film which prove beyond a doubt that this was not written by any Bush apologist.
The New York Times chastises the Pope. (But can't bring itself to do the same to violent Muslims. Ugh)
Article 3 of the Geneva Convention explained. via RCP
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 6:56 AM
Sunday, September 17, 2006
Michelle is encouraging us to send e-mails of support to the Pope:
"You can send your words of support to: benedictxvi-at-vatican.va"
For some reason that struck me as amusing that the Pope has an e-mail address.
You might try e-mailing God here... God@heaven.com
But then again, prayer is easier.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 4:48 PM