I'll be gone for the weekend. Probably won't have access to a computer. But be sure and check back Tues. I may have a surprise.
Thursday, August 30, 2007
From Berimbau speak view hear (well, yeah, that's the blog's name)
"With reverse engineering, chinese manufacturers have come up with a replica of the iphone that is amazingly exact; and, it may actually be better that the original because it can run popular software, is open to any cellphone carrier network and it costs half as much!
This article in Popular Science talks about China's cloning industry. It's not just shoes, bags and jeans anymore. Now they can copy anything from an ipod to a Ford or Mercedes Benz, to a whole manufacturing plant off the original blueprints! Check out this gallery of a cloned Ford, Benz, PSP, Addidas, and see if you can tell them apart."
I don't get this. Wouldn't i-pod and Ford be a bit ticked off about this? Do we not sue companies in China?
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 11:05 PM
Gordon is legendary in his hometown as the tramp who can accurately predict the time even though he never wears a watch. A local college student paid homage to him on Facebook and now thousands round the world share photos and memories of him asking, "What's The Time, Gordon?" (Meridian News TV on YouTube) via Good news network
They say "tramp" over there instead of "homeless." It's strange, isn't it? I mean, we look at tramp as an insult. Anyway, It is interesting that he can tell the time without looking at a watch.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 10:08 PM
Spokesman Review does a "knock three times" parody. Pretty funny.
The Idaho Statesman has a roundup of late night jokes and more:
"Sen. Craig said he made a mistake by pleading guilty. And I was thinking, maybe that was your second mistake. ... The way I look at it, anyone who spends more than two minutes in an airport men's room is guilty of something."David Letterman"
"The police report says he tapped his foot, which means 'I want gay sex.' And also means I'll never wear my iPod to the bathroom again." Jimmy Kimmel"
via Slate Magazine
More from About.com:
"How about that poor Senator Craig from Idaho? ... So he gets arrested in a men's room there at the airport in Minneapolis. And here's the deal now. He's now in Stage One of a political sex scandal: defiance. Stage Two: stepping down to spend more time with his family. Stage Three: 'I'm gay and I'm proud!'" --David Letterman
"Don't kid yourself, this Craig is in a tough spot. When you're up for re-election, you don't want to be known as 'The Restroom Don Juan.'" --David Letterman
"The guy was arrested for lewd behavior in the men's room, and I'm thinking, 'Well, hell. I'm lucky if I can get a hand dryer to blow'" --David Letterman*
"Senator Larry Craig declared he won't quit and he's not gay. And then Craig said 'I'm sorry. I meant to say I won't quit being gay.'" --Conan O'Brien
"Now there's more trouble for Senator Craig. First he's accused of soliciting gay sex at an airport. Now he's accused of soliciting gay sex at a train station. Craig denied the charges and said if you'll excuse me, I have to get ready for a big night at the bus terminal." --Conan O'Brien
"Idaho Senator Larry Craig is now being called the hole from Idaho." --Jay Leno
"A lot of people are calling Senator Craig a hypocrite because he was a very vocal opponent of same-sex marriages. ... But to be fair, he has never come out publicly against anonymous gay bathroom sex." --Jay Leno"
This whole thing has to be very frustrating for the Republican Party. All these gay sex scandals and they still can't get any support from Hollywood." --Jay Leno
"Idaho Sen. Larry Craig, a married, very anti-guy conservative Republican, was arrested by a plainclothes police officer for lewd conduct in a Minneapolis airport men's room. Today the senator's office said it was all a big misunderstanding. Apparently what happened was when the senator went in to use the restroom, he accidentally grabbed the wrong penis." --Jay Leno*
"Larry Craig, the conservative senator and hardcore heterosexual from Idaho, insists that he is not gay. In fact, he's anti-gay marriage and anti-gays in the military. He's anti-gay everything but sex." --Jimmy Kimmel"
There's a very simple explanation for all of this. Larry Craig is gayer than a barrel of Andy Dicks." --Jimmy Kimmel
Slate magazine also has "Bathroom Sex FAQ" It's disturbing because it reads like a parody, but you realize that it isn't one.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 8:40 PM
From Real Clear Politics:
"Randy Enright, the national political director for Fred Thompson, just announced on a conference call with supporters that, "next Thursday on September 6 Senator Thompson will officially become a candidate for President of the United States.
Enright said the announcement will come via webcast on Thompson's site and will be immediately followed by a two-part grassroots tour that will begin in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and eventually get to Florida before winding up on September 15 with a "welcome home" rally in Thompson's home town of Lawrenceburg, Tennessee.
Now things will get more interesting.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 7:21 PM
He remembers fondly.
Carlson said that in high school he was accosted by a man in the bathroom. He went and got a friend and they went back and he slammed the guy's head against the stall and then waited for the police, who arrested the man. Dan Abrams and Joe Scarborough yuk it up while he tells the story.
GLAAD is having none of it. And neither are many leftwing and gay blogs.
Carlson responded with this e-mail:
"Let me be clear about an incident I referred to on MSNBC last night: In the mid-1980s, while I was a high school student, a man physically grabbed me in a men's room in Washington, DC. I yelled, pulled away from him and ran out of the room. Twenty-five minutes later, a friend of mine and I returned to the men's room. The man was still there, presumably waiting to do to someone else what he had done to me. My friend and I seized the man and held him until a security guard arrived.
Several bloggers have characterized this is a sort of gay bashing. That's absurd, and an insult to anybody who has fought back against an unsolicited sexual attack. I wasn't angry with the man because he was gay. I was angry because he assaulted me."
These people who attacking Carlson should consider that they are not defending a guy who is gay and got assaulted, but a predator. It's an insult to gay people who are upstanding citizens to call this gay bashing. This is PREDATOR bashing, which I am all for. This didn't happen last year. He was a high school kid and it was an adult male.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 8:00 AM
Women Do Not Search For Sex On Craigslist
Some lonely fellow answered 100 Craiglist Casual Encounters ads, presumably posted by women. Of the 81 responses he got:
"-4 seems to be legitmate (or person at least): 1 successful online
conversation / 3 email conversation (2 dudes)
-58 immediat (within 2 hours) automatic fake responses (porn sites)
-19 delayed responses: the fake sites are getiing smarter, they are sending
out reply after a day
-19 non-reply (i even got rejected from porn sites!)
So yeah: Of the 4% of straight ads sampled that turned out to be real people, half of them are guys pretending to be women. Have fun out there!
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 7:21 AM
"For the last 15 years, California authorities have been trying to figure out what happened to a businessman named Norman Hsu, who pleaded no contest to grand theft, agreed to serve up to three years in prison and then seemed to vanish."
But he's been around the whole time raising big cash for Democrats, especially Hillary:
"Since 2004, one Norman Hsu has been carving out a prominent place of honor among Democratic fundraisers. He has funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions into party coffers, much of it earmarked for presidential hopeful Sen. Hillary
Rodham Clinton of New York."
I know this seems just juicy as it can be, but the truth is the public does not care about things like this. I don't know the legal aspect of this from a campaigning point of view, but I don't think Americans think a candidate should be responsible for the background of a donor, unless it is obvious from the beginning.
via WSJ and Redstate
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 6:55 AM
"Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards told a labor group he would ask Americans to make a big sacrifice: their sport utility vehicles.
The former North Carolina senator told a forum by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers in Lake Buena Vista, Florida, yesterday he thinks Americans are willing to sacrifice.
Edwards says Americans should be asked to drive more fuel efficient vehicles. He says he would ask them to give up SUVs."
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 6:53 AM
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
The Air Force next month will deploy a new generation of pilotless airplane with the bombing power of an F-16 to help stop the stubborn Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan.The Reaper is an upgraded version of the Predator, which has become one of the military’s most sought-after planes since it first appeared in Afghanistan in 2001. The Reaper can fly three times as fast as a Predator and carry eight times more weaponry, such as Hellfire missiles
via Stop the ACLU and PW.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 7:19 PM
Look, I know Elizabeth and John Edwards are the worst of the leftwing elite. But you have got to love Elizabeth's passion and the fact that she isn't taking any crap from anyone. Including a smug self serving delusional leftwing feminist.
From ABC News via HotAir:
Blogger "Rebecca" wrote a fiery tirade on the site Monday morning attacking Mrs. Edwards choice to bring her two small children, Jack and Emma Claire, on the campaign trail with her while her husband, John Edwards runs for president. (The blog is called Silicon Valley Moms Blog)
"…. you are being a terrible mother, forcing your young children, who should be in SCHOOL, to ride in buses and talk to the press when they obviously don't want to. This election is NOT ABOUT THEM, " blogger Rebecca writes.
The rant continues:
Mrs. Edwards comments about Hillary Clinton in a recent Salon.com interview were also criticized on the blog, "What resonated in my mind was the way that she (Elizabeth Edwards) dissed Hillary Clinton, decrying the "choices" that Hillary has made. The implication, of course, was that Hillary chose to work rather than spend time with her child. But it took all of my self control not to ask her, ‘Was it Hillary's work for the Children's Defense Fund, where she saved millions of lives of poor children, that you thought was a poor choice? Or was it when she went to China and announced, possibly for the first time ever, that women's rights are human rights? Or perhaps was it the way that insisted on being taken seriously, since she too was an accomplished attorney like her husband?’"
No, the poor choice is that you only have a few years with your child when he or she is young. It may not even be the child who loses the most when her mom is always off to work, It is the mom who loses the precious short time she has with her small child. Precious time that Elizabeth Edwards understands all too well. Since she may well have little of it left to spend with her children. How dare this woman judge Elizabeth for wanting to be with her kids. Good grief.
But I don't need to defend Elizabeth, she does very well all by herself:
Posting in the comments section of the website, Elizabeth Edwards responded with an equally fiery post, "…what I said about Hillary's choices is that I had made the same choices she had made as a parent, and when I changed my choices I was happier. Just like you don't get to decide what makes me happier, I don't get to decide what makes Hillary happier."
And the mother-of-three wrote at length about her choices as a mother, electing to bring along her children on the campaign trail, "….you have no idea what the quality or amount of the time I spend with my children is….You don't get to say I am a terrible mother because you think you wouldn't make my choices in my situation…You don't get to judge me because you think you know exactly what you would do if you had my disease. I want to be really clear: you don't know. And if the sun always shines on you -- and I pray it does -- you will never know."
Take that you Naomi Wolf wanna be.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 10:52 AM
Too bad. That would have been lovely.
Guess that will quiet the lefties who saw this as a way to bump up approval ratings before the elections.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 9:25 AM
Yes, it's opinion programs sway to the right, but that's not why I love it. The hard news is as "fair and balanced" as it gets no matter what lefties tell you. But more importantly, as this excellent article from Brent Bozell points out, the mainstream news outlets (ABC, NBC, CBS, who still garner 9 times the viewing audience of cable!) overwhelming favor Democrats in their news coverage: (emphasis mine)
Rich Noyes of the Media Research Center assessed all morning-show coverage on the Big Three from Jan. 1 through July 31. In those 517 campaign segments, the networks offered nearly twice as many segments to Democrats as Republicans, a margin of 284 to 152. (Another 66 stories focused on both parties.) When the sample is narrowed down just to interviews with the candidates or their spouses and staffers, the morning shows gave out nearly three times as much free airtime to Democrats (4 hours, 35 minutes) as they gave to Republicans (1 hour and 44 minutes).
ABC's "Good Morning America" was the worst, with 119 segments on the Democrats to just 51 for the Republicans. And try this for impartiality, ABC-style: The network offered sprawling, positive "town hall" segments to only two presidential candidates so far this year: 38 minutes for John Edwards and 26 minutes for Hillary Clinton.
All three Democratic frontrunners received more individual attention than any of the top Republican candidates, with Hillary unsurprisingly receiving the most coverage of anyone, at 61 adoring minutes. The leading Republican was former liberal media darling John McCain, who attracted 31 minutes of coverage, much of it assessing how his campaign was falling apart.
Oh, it's a "love Hillary" fest on the main networks, and this is only the beginning.
Rudy Giuliani drew only 26 minutes, and Mitt Romney attracted even less, 19 minutes. Worse still, the Republican segments highlighted problems and controversies, like Romney's Mormonism and Giuliani's messy, fractious private life.
By comparison, the babble about Democrats was, and continues to be, embarrassingly giddy. Take ABC's Claire Shipman describing Hillary and Barack as both "white hot," a diversity-enhanced clash of the titans. Hillary was an "unparalleled star," with a "hot factor" boosted by "her ever-popular husband." But wait, Obama, "with his fairy-tale family, has personal charisma to spare!" Someone needed to urge Shipman to come down off her puffy cloud of hype.
Bozell points out that in all the coverage of the Democratic Presidential hopefuls, the word "liberal" was never used. The only time it was uttered was to describe....Rudy Giuliani.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 7:21 AM
From Let Freedom Ring via The Gateway Pundit:
"According to this article the Thomas More Law Center has agreed to represent Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani in a civil suit against Rep. John Murtha if/when the charges against him are dropped."
Murtha may get what he deserves.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 6:42 AM
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
The international man of mystery.
NY Magazine has a interesting detailed piece on Matt, although they didn't get to interview him because he is obsessive about his privacy. I find him fascinating because he opened up this whole new world of blogging and blending the news with everyday man's opinion. But you don't have to read the long article. I did that for you. Here are the good parts:
"The Drudge Report is an institution, the seventh-most-visited news Website, ahead of the New York Times, Fox News, and the Washington Post. Getting linked on Drudge can unleash a tsunami of public mentions and e-mails, and journalists cater to Drudge to gain those links, alerting him when their stories have nasty anecdotes."
And of course the big green eyed monster raises it's ugly head:
“He is the center of personality-obsessed, attack-based politics. That is the content Drudge looks for,” Glenn Greenwald says. “He’s a right-wing hack.” Greenwald is a leader among the phalanx of left-wing Internet groups and voices, from Salon to Media Matters to Talking Points Memo"
But Drudge seems to believe that Hillary will be our next President:
“That House is going pink,” says Drudge."
What is Drudge like personally? Ohh... the mystery. But usually if your enemy has something nice to say about you, that is, at least, a bit of who you are:
"Donna Brazile describes her first meeting with the Webmaster: “What I remember is the graciousness of a Southern gentleman in him."
The author of the article paints a picture of a sad troubled childhood filled with parental rejection. I'm not talking just a nasty divorce. There was mental illness of a creative powerful woman, a father who was more interested in his new family than a strange son, and then being sent away. Then the turning point:
"After high school, the boy tried New York and Europe, then drifted to his father’s hometown, Los Angeles, where he worked for years in the gift shop at CBS studios. Worried about his son’s aimlessness, Bob Drudge insisted on buying him a Packard-Bell computer in 1994. The Drudge Report began as an e-mail sent out to a few friends."
Then came the moment of fame:
"Drudge filed a breathless report claiming that Newsweek had, that week, held a story reporting that Bill Clinton had had a sexual affair with a 23-year-old White House intern."
Could Drudge have seen how the Clintons would change his life? Even today it seems the Clintons will continue bankroll Drudge's life:
"Drudge said, “I need Hillary Clinton. You don’t get it. I need to be part of her world. That’s my bank. Like Leo DiCaprio has the environment and Al Gore has the environment and Jimmy Carter has anti-Americanism … I have Hillary.”
But what good NY Magazine article on anyone with even the whiff of rightwing about them, be without an outing?:
"Sheff’s metaphor touches on the left’s assertion that Drudge is gay and closeted. In high school, Drudge was already in a gay scene, dating men, Jeannette Walls reported in Dish. And in his memoir, Blinded by the Right, conservative-turned-liberal David Brock, who is gay, described Drudge coming on to him sexually in 1997, including e-mailing Brock the suggestion that they be “f*ck buddies.” Michaelangelo Signorile, a journalist who has broken down many a closet door, calls Drudge “a nasty faggot.”
Isn't that sweet? You have to love the loyalty and decency of "friends" like Brock, don't you? My question is, why does it matter? Why is Drudge's sexuality even an issue or even interesting? He isn't a politican. And no matter what they say, he links negative rightwing stuff as often as he does leftwing. He isn't registered with any party and he doesn't even vote.
What Drudge does is take what is interesting and show it to us. The stuff that the media wouldn't even look at. The $400 haircut of Edwards, the swift boat veterans attack on Kerry, and of course what was obviously boring and should have been of no concern to us, Newsweek's blocked story of a young woman named Monica and the President of the United States.
His magic is knowing what we want to know.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 6:56 PM
Regarding Sen. Larry Craig and his lewd conduct:
"Once again, we've found people in Washington have not lived up to the level of respect and dignity that we would expect for somebody that gets elected to a position of high influence. Very disappointing. He's no longer associated with my campaign, as you can imagine... I'm sorry to see that he has fallen short."
And Romney also included this jab at Bill Clinton as he continued to talk about Craig: "I think it reminds us of Mark Foley and Bill Clinton. I think it reminds us of the fact that people who are elected to public office continue to disappoint, and they somehow think that if they vote the right way on issues of significance or they can speak a good game, that we'll just forgive and forget. And the truth of the matter is, the most important thing we expect from elected--an elected official is a level of dignity and character that we can point to for our kids and our grandkids, and say, `Hey, someday I hope you grow up and you're someone like that person.' And we've seen disappointment in the White House, we've seen it in the Senate, we've seen it in Congress. And frankly, it's disgusting."
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 3:08 PM
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 10:01 AM
I caught this through the media blog at NRO. They seem to think that this video montage by the NY Times makes Edwards seem weak, but I disagree. I think it makes him seem like a parent.
We make fun of Edwards for his prettiness, but I think he would have this nomination if it weren't for the Hillary Machine. I think Edwards could take on Obama pretty easily but he's so busy trying to figure out how to take down Hillary without seeming mean, that he can't do it.
I disagree with everything he stands for, but like Obama, there is something very likable about him. I think the video gives us a glimpse of how hard it is to be a Presidential candidate. Especially when you are trying to keep your kids with you. It's very hard.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 7:05 AM
You have probably heard by now about Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) being arrested for lewd conduct in a men's public restroom at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport.
I will never understand this kind of depraved behavior. Having sex with strangers in a public bathroom is simply depraved. And you cannot blame it on his having to hide his homosexuality. I mean, look at George Michael the singer. He did this sort of thing and he is in an industry that could not care less if one is gay or not. Both of these men could have "relationships" easily without having to resort to this disgusting behavior.
But no, there is something that drives them more than sex. It's some kind of sick thrill I suppose. But that is not my point anyway.
Perhaps Craig and others like him, do not want to admit to their desires because they think it is wrong. But it is much more wrong to lie to all those who love you. It is much more wrong to portray yourself as something you are not. Craig betrayed his family, his friends, and his party. Democrats may not care or look the other way with this kind of thing, but clearly the Republicans do not.
Craig will have to come to terms with who he is and how he wants to live his life. I wish him the best, but just not in the Republican party.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 6:34 AM
John at Powerline got to meet with Fred Thompson last night:
"My own impression of Thompson was similar to the image I already had of him. He's good; he has a nice, folksy manner, some good lines, a sincere, fatherly demeanor, and comes across as a solid conservative of the border-state variety.
Yet I still think there is something missing. Thompson gives long answers to questions, and a point often comes where his folksiness gives way to ennui. He rarely shows much--any--intensity."
That has been my concern with Fred too, I wonder if he has the "fire in the belly" to run for President. Plus I worry about the rumors about his health. But I am rooting for him.
There are things I like about all the top tier candidates (except Rudy) so I"m hoping for the best for all of them.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 6:29 AM
Monday, August 27, 2007
That's nice. I hope it's true. I know all the skeptics out there are rolling their eyes on that one. But sometimes these "jailhouse conversions" are real. The problem is that if Vick's conversion is real, you won't be hearing much about it from the MSM. They only have scorn and derision for born again athletes.
Just recently Michael Irvin was inducted into the Hall of Fame. He had recently "found Jesus" as well. His speech was one of the most moving speeches I have ever heard come from an athlete. Here is final bit:
"You know the Bible speaks of a healing place. It’s called a threshing floor. The threshing floor is where you take your greatest fear and you pray for help from your great God. I want to share something with you today. I have two sons. Michael, he’s 10, and Elijah, he’s 8. Michael and Elijah, could you guys stand up for me. That’s my heart right there. That’s my heart. When I am on that threshing floor, I pray. I say, God, I have my struggles and I made some bad decisions, but whatever you do, whatever you do, don’t let me mess this up.
I say, Please, help me raise them for some young lady so that they can be a better husband than I. Help me raise them for their kids so that they could be a better father than I. And I tell you guys to always do the right thing so you can be a better role model than dad. I sat right here where you are last year and I watched the Class of 2006: Troy Aikman, Warren Moon, Harry Carson, Rayfield Wright, John Madden, and the late great Reggie White represented by his wife Sara White. And I said, Wow, that’s what a Hall of Famer is.
Certainly I am not that. I doubted I would ever have the chance to stand before you today. So when I returned home, I spoke with Michael and Elijah . I said, That’s how you do it, son. You do it like they did it. Michael asked, he said, Dad, do you ever think we will be there? And I didn’t know how to answer that. And it returned me to that threshing floor. This time I was voiceless, but my heart cried out. God, why must I go through so many peaks and valleys?
I wanted to stand in front of my boys and say, Do it like your dad, like any proud dad would want to. Why must I go through so much?
At that moment a voice came over me and said, Look up, get up, and don’t ever give up. You tell everyone or anyone that has ever doubted, thought they did not measure up or wanted to quit, you tell them to look up, get up and don’t ever give up.
Thank you and may God bless you."
There was no doubt in my mind that he was sincere. It was quite beautiful. When I was living in Dallas in the 90's and the Cowboys were superbowl superstars, I never liked Irvin. He was a pompous self absorbed criminal in my mind. When I happened upon his speech on ESPN, I didn't even know he had become a Christian. The media loved reporting his criminal exploits, but they didn't give quite the same coverage to his redemption.
Irvin did some terrible things. Just as Vick has. Is Vick sincere as Irvin seems to be? Time will tell. Time will tell.
I'm always ready to forgive. Because, you know, that is how we are forgiven. And who among us is perfect?
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 12:40 PM
Fascinating as always.
"People at home want to know what our Soldiers and Marines are doing in Iraq, and the only way to tell their story is to follow them. So deep inside the culvert, crawling on all fours, using my camera as a walking chalk (it’s pretty tough), I crawled behind SSG Lee who was using his rifle as a walking chalk. The day was hot. The body armor made it hotter.
I said, “I only met you for the first time like 20 minutes ago. What’s your name Staff Sergeant?”“Staff Sergeant Lee, Sir,” he answered while crawling forward.“United States Marine Corps,” I said.“Semper Fi,” he answered, and kept clearing the tunnel."
God bless our troops.
*Click on the "Support The Next Dispatch" at Michael's site. He can always use the donations.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 10:39 AM
His speech was completely non political. It was about public service and his family. Unlike my buddies on the right (there is a list of links at HotAir) I think that Gonzales is an upstanding intelligent loyal public servant. Out of the thousands and thousands of documents the Democrats have requested and countless witnesses, (see witch hunt) there has not been one shred of evidence that proves any wrongdoing.
So why has the right abandoned him? First and foremost, imo, is illegal immigration. If Gonzales had been a champion of eliminating illegal immigration, then you would be seeing very different headlines on the blogs from the right.
I understand the emotions here. I don't disagree with my friends on the right on illegal immigration. But I am not going to let Democrats smear an honest man because I disagree with him.
Shame on the right for doing so.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 9:52 AM
Sunday, August 26, 2007
So says TIME Magazine’s editor-at-large and senior political analyst Mark Halperin. This is from an interview David Brody recently filmed with Halperin. (emphasis mine)
"Take what happen the other day as a perfect example. Michelle Obama said, "Our view is that if you can't run your own house, you certainly can't run the White House".(some say it was a swipe at Hillary Clinton) Well, the story didn't get much play until Drudge featured it on his website. Watch Halperin's take above:
"Once Matt Drudge decided, for whatever reason, he wanted to highlight those remarks, they dominated cable news, they dominated talk radio. They produced a whole new round of interest. That's the power Matt Drudge had four years ago, clearly the power he will have in 2008. The campaign that figures out how to deal with Matt Drudge from both an offensive and a defensive point of view will probably elect the next President of the United States."
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 6:55 PM
William Kristol has an excellent article on the real history lesson of Vietnam. The lesson Bush was referring to in his speech before the VFW. All this braying of the left on how Iraq is like Vietnam, just not in the way Bush meant it, is hogwash.
"Like a pig in muck, the left loves to wallow in Vietnam. But only in their "Vietnam." Not in the real Vietnam war.
Not in the Vietnam war of 1963-68, the disastrous years where policy was shaped by the best and brightest of American liberalism. Not in the Vietnam war of 1969-73, when Richard Nixon and General Creighton Abrams managed to adjust our strategy, defeat the enemy, and draw down American troops all at once--an achievement affirmed and rewarded by the American electorate in November 1972. Not in the Vietnam of early 1975, when the Democratic Congress insisted on cutting off assistance to our allies in South Vietnam and Cambodia, thereby inviting the armies of the North and the Khmer Rouge to attack."
But what really brings home our biggest mistake to me in Vietnam is this letter that Kristol reprints from Phnom Penh former Cambodian prime minister Sirik Matak that he wrote to John Gunther Dean, the American ambassador, turning down his offer of evacuation: (emphasis mine)
"Dear Excellency and Friend:
I thank you very sincerely for your letter and for your offer to transport me towards freedom. I cannot, alas, leave in such a cowardly fashion. As for you, and in particular for your great country, I never believed for a moment that you would have this sentiment of abandoning a people which has chosen liberty. You have refused us your protection, and we can do nothing about it. You leave, and my wish is that you and your country will find happiness under this sky. But, mark it well, that if I shall die here on the spot and in my country that I love, it is no matter, because we all are born and must die. I have only committed this mistake of believing in you [the Americans].
Please accept, Excellency and dear friend, my faithful and friendly sentiments.
As Kristol writes, Matak was executed by Khmer Rouge soon after, shot in the stomach and left to die. It took three days for him to do so. He was one of between 1 and 2 million Cambodians slaughtered and one of thousands of Vietnamese. His final words to us break my heart.
The old saying that if we do not learn from the mistakes of our history, then we are bound to repeat them, certainly rings true here.
Many could make the legitimate argument that our mistake of ever going into Vietnam in the first place is the mistake that we are repeating. But the time for that argument is past. We are in Iraq. And now we can choose to abandon them as we did Vietnam.
I promise you, the result will not be any prettier.
Related and must read from TimesOnline: "Why Democrats dread hearing the V-word
Vietnam: a lesson in fouling up the endgame
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 4:26 PM
...how Michelle and Obama handled this little "If you can't run your own house, you certainly can't run the White House" bit. Of course they denied that she meant Hillary. So the story keeps being "Michelle Obama denies that she meant Hillary couldn't take care of her own man, how can she can take of our country?"
It's the insult that keeps on giving, even when Michelle says she didn't give it.
Maybe it's my complete and utter fear of another Clinton Presidency, but I am liking the Obama campaign. I really am rooting for him for the Democratic nomination.
via The Kevin and Patrick Blog
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 1:29 PM
Well, if you live in Oregon, you are about to find out. Know Thy Neighbor is an activist gay group that "plans to add Oregon to the list of states in which it's taking action. The group says it will publish names of those signing petitions to overturn gay rights bills passed in the state earlier this year, according to the Statesman Journal:
"A coalition of conservative Christians is circulating petitions to put the two measures before voters in the November 2008 election. That would enable Oregon voters to decide whether to grant marriage-style rights to same-sex couples via domestic partnerships, and whether to ban discrimination against gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered people. Know Thy Neighbor pledged to launch a new Web site that will list the petition signers' names and addresses."
Gay activists do love outing people, don't they? I don't really see the harm here. I mean, if I sign a petition for something that I believe in, then I don't care who knows about it. But I wonder how the activists would feel if say....someone posted the names and addresses of people in their organization that are...I don't know... members of NAMBLA, or the names of the gay porn sites they frequent?
I'm just saying that if you don't respect one's privacy, then don't expect your privacy to be respected either.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 12:33 PM