8.20.2005

LaHood drops out, Oberweis attacks Kjellander

Mostly bad news here. I thought LaHood was looking strong. The article explains the Oberweis bit, which I really don't have anything to say about, other than that the act was quite tasteless and helps to authenticate a negative feeling I had about Oberweis. O'Malley, Bill Brady, and Birkett need to drop out now, they are going nowhere. The GOP needs to fill out a ticket for other offices than governor, and Brady, Rauschenberger, and Birkett can fill those roles. Judy Baar Topinka needs to get her butt in gear and stop acting like she has the whole thing nailed down, because she needs to have money to fend off Oberweis and Gidwitz. Jim Edgar needs to make a decision soon. Baar Topinka has said she would drop out if Edgar entered the race. I can't see Oberweis overtaking Edgar in a primary, but you never know. So in conclusion (from polls numbers, current campaigning, and fundraising numbers), I have belatedly come to the same conclusion Karl Rove did months ago: A Edgar-Baar Topinka ticket is our best hope. Judy would face a very uphill battle against Blagojevich, but with Edgar the odds are much better. I've become quite sure that Oberweis would fall flat on his face if he won the primary.

Climate change sceptics bet $10,000 on cooler world

We need more of this gambling and Ansari X-Prize type stuff in the science world. It certainly would stop all the crazy, unproven studies out there if they had to put money on whether their conclusion was true. I bet the Russians win!

I love it: John Roberts hates Michael Jackson as much as I do!

Since the Washington Post doesn't have anything else to do, and since they are desperate to get some dirt on Supreme Court nominee John Roberts, they have published an article about 3 of his memos while working for the Reagan administration that condemn the presidential act of giving an award to Michael Jackson for his work against drunk driving. I love this part in particular:
"If one wants the youth of America and the world sashaying around in garish sequined costumes, hair dripping with pomade, body shot full of female hormones to prevent voice change, mono-gloved, well, then, I suppose 'Michael,' as he is affectionately known in the trade, is in fact a good example. Quite apart from the problem of appearing to endorse Jackson's androgynous life style, a Presidential award would be perceived as a shallow effort by the President to share in the constant publicity surrounding Jackson. . . . The whole episode would, in my view, be demeaning to the President."

8.19.2005

Rasmussen gets really bored

Rasmussen has done a poll on Cindy Sheehan. She is found to have a favoribility rating of 35% (much lower than even, *gasp*, President Bush!). It would be even lower if the MSM ever bothered to report what Drudge does.

8.18.2005

Cindy goes totally insane!

The Drudge Report has brought to my attention some very outrageous statements made by that wacko anti-war protester Cindy Sheehan. Cindy's son was killed in Iraq, and she got to meet with president Bush. Though she said then that she was against the war, she made clear at the time that her opinion of the President was very high, and that she was pleased with his sentiments during the meeting. A while ago, she did a total 180, making absurd insults at the President, then began an anti-war protest outside his Crawford, TX ranch. Her family has practically disowned her for her actions, and her husband has filed divorce papers over the matter. Cindy disgusts me in the usual way of vulgar, irrational leftists, but also because of the dishonor and downright exploitation of invoking her son's death. Her comments today and in the past are so crazy that I really have no comment, because if you can't understand what is wrong with them, then you are beyond help:
"We are not waging a war on terror in this country. We’re waging a war of terror. The biggest terrorist in the world is George W. Bush!"

So declared Cindy Sheehan earlier this year during a rally at San Francisco State University.

Sheehan, who is demanding a second meeting with Bush, stated: "We are waging a nuclear war in Iraq right now. That country is contaminated. It will be contaminated for practically eternity now."

Sheehan unleashed a foul-mouth tirade on April 27, 2005:

"They’re a bunch of fucking hypocrites! And we need to, we just need to rise up..." Sheehan said of the Bush administration.

"If George Bush believes his rhetoric and his bullshit, that this is a war for freedom and democracy, that he is spreading freedom and democracy, does he think every person he kills makes Iraq more free?"

"The whole world is damaged. Our humanity is damaged. If he thinks that it’s so important for Iraq to have a U.S.-imposed sense of freedom and democracy, then he needs to sign up his two little party-animal girls. They need to go to this war."

"We want our country back and, if we have to impeach everybody from George Bush down to the person who picks up dog shit in Washington, we will impeach all those people."

8.15.2005

Ahhhh! The glories of Reaganomics!

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office is predictly a sharply lower deficit for the current fiscal year. The Bush economic policy is similar to Reaganomics: Increase spending by making tax cuts. The increased deficit forces Congress to cut spending. Final result: the deficit comes down, the economy goes up, and the size of government becomes smaller.
I for one am not quite ready to buy the line of all those who say that Bush is an out of control spender. Sure that transportation bill was filled with pork, but if Bush hadn't threatened to veto it, it would have been even more expensive. I think I've come to the conclusion that the nature of Congress is to spend, spend, spend, no matter which party is in control. It is the duty of the president and the small group of true small govenment conservatives in Congress to stop it. Reaganomics basically was a way around the roadblocks of a porking, spend-happy Democratic controlled Congress. Unfortunately Bush has had to do the same to the Republican controlled Congress.

The Howard Dean Quote-A-Thon

The next round up here got a short mention by the Washington Times. Since it is relatively brief, I will just post the whole thing here.
"Dean's latest
Howard Dean, the Democratic National Committee chairman who was the hero of his party's anti-war wing before his gaffe-prone 2004 presidential candidacy crashed and burned in Iowa, still doesn't think the Iraqis are better off with dictator Saddam Hussein out of power and in prison.
Appearing on CBS' "Face the Nation" yesterday, the fiery former Vermont governor said, "It looks like today, and this could change, as of today it looks like women will be worse off in Iraq than they were when Saddam Hussein was president of Iraq."
Mr. Dean was the guy who said right after Saddam was found hiding in a "spider hole" that his capture by U.S. troops "has not made America safer," a statement ridiculed and condemned by most of his Democratic rivals at the time.
In a brief statement yesterday, the Republican National Committee said, "Dean's wild assertion that Iraqi women would be better off living under Saddam Hussein than democracy is not only counterproductive to meaningful debate, it demeans the hard work of American servicemen and women serving in Iraq."


TheDrudge Report also picked up on this.

8.14.2005

The most fun I've ever had at College Confidential

I feel like a dweeb posting a link to a thread on a discussion forum, but I'm very proud of my work there. I'm not proud of highjacking the poor person's thread, but these six pages basically sum up the argument over affirmative action. This illustrates the principles of liberal indoctrination I just read in the newest D'Souza book. The people on the forum defending AA didn't counteract anything I said. As D'Souza siad: If you ask a liberal professor about the Communist contras in Nicaragua, they wouldn't tell you that the contras weren't Communist. They wouldn't argue with you. They just stare at you as if to say "Are you from Iowa?". If you persist, they might call you an uneducated racist and then ignore you. No matter what, the result is that they don't even have to defend their position, but eventually you are conditioned not to question their liberal authority. Matt 1, liberal elite 0.