My oldest brings us two plus minutes of... well... just watch:...
4:56 PM |
1 comments
The House ethics committee found Rangel guilty of multiple house rules. CNN has a breaking news article on the topic but so far it doesn't contain any more information than...
12:19 PM |
16 comments
A picture is often indeed worth a thousand words, so no need to say much else. Hat tip: Hot Air....
12:10 PM |
5 comments
If you're Newsweek, you claim the job's too big... for any man:Can any single person fully meet the demands of the 21st-century presidency? Obama has looked to many models of...
6:31 AM |
41 comments
Unbelievable. Congressman Charlie Rangel (D-NY), accused of a stunning array of corruption charges, involving lots and lots of money gained through illicit means (tax evasion, unreported income, unjustified benefits, and...
6:00 AM |
44 comments
They had me at... How can Americans create private sector jobs? The solution to America's jobs problem lies not with budget-busting federally mandated "stimulus" programs. Ah, your smal-government lower-regulation...
8:27 PM |
7 comments
That's Obama's description of Tȟatȟáŋka Íyotake aka Chief Sitting Bull in a new book he's written for children called Of Thee I Sing: A Letter to My Daughters: President Obama's picture...
8:26 PM |
10 comments
Before the Sarah Palin fans out there get up in arms, hear me out. My main point is this. Sarah Palin would be much more effective supporting causes like fiscal...
5:00 PM |
35 comments
Over the weekend, my colleague Rick posted a piece about the latest strain of violence in Iraq -- the deliberate targeting of that nation's relatively few Christians. And that got...
4:00 PM |
10 comments
Well, it seems that everyone's upset about the new airport security measures -- either the body scanners that essentially strip you naked, or the "patdowns" that pretty much equates to...
2:00 PM |
39 comments
Comments (10)
It's my theory that their b... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Lee | February 7, 2007 12:09 AM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
It's my theory that their belief that Hillary is electable (a belief that I don't share either, at least - not today) is a symptom of their dismay, not the the source of it.
I think we're seeing a full-blown conservative "funk" over the realization that there is a liberal political renaissance which is occurring in this country, and the memory of the Clintons and Gores dancing the macarena on the night of their election scares the bejeebus out of them.
Heck, it scares the bejeebus out of me too, but for a different reasons.
Hillary's perceived star power is just a symptom of this malaise, not the source, imho.
1. Posted by Lee | February 7, 2007 12:09 AM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on February 7, 2007 00:09
2. Posted by Lorie Byrd | February 7, 2007 1:35 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I think you might be right about that, Lee. Except for the liberal renaissance stuff, of course. :-)
2. Posted by Lorie Byrd | February 7, 2007 1:35 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on February 7, 2007 01:35
3. Posted by Scrapiron | February 7, 2007 2:01 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Right now it's been 2 months of comedy, screw ups and slap downs for the dhimmi's. Two years is a long time to keep the dhimmi's hands out of the working people's pockets and their greed will get the best of them. Mark that on the caledar for July 08. Millions will be after the dhimmi's heads by then.
3. Posted by Scrapiron | February 7, 2007 2:01 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on February 7, 2007 02:01
4. Posted by Jim Addison | February 7, 2007 2:38 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Hillary Clinton is one of the most polarizing individuals in recent political history. In any normal cycle, she would have a good chance at the Democratic nomination, but poor odds of winning the general.
The disarray of the Republican Party after the midterm election defeat, though, puts this into question. If the GOP can't reconstitute itself around a set of policies, and choose a candidate with broad national appeal , her chances are drastically improved.
Several commentators have raised the issue, however, of the Democrats in a divided government being solidly ensconced in opposition for opposition's sake, suggesting that our only hope for pursuing the War on Terror is a Democratic President and Congress. That way, they would own the WOT; otherwise they will continue to seek to undermine it.
4. Posted by Jim Addison | February 7, 2007 2:38 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on February 7, 2007 02:38
5. Posted by Hugh | February 7, 2007 7:16 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
It's the war "stupid". The old Carvilleian slogan rises again. Without some tremendous turn around in Iraq the Republicans can't win on that issue. Bush's disaster in Iraq has taken the focus from the GWT and Iraq, so far, is an unmitigated disaster in the eyes of most of the voters. I don't think that can be turned around in the next 21 months.
Whether Hillary can prevail is another story. Personally, this democrat would like to see the Clinton/Gore/Kerry bunch retire to some nice warm tropical isle and live wonderful lives there anonymously. We need fresh air.
Funny that Addison cites that several commentators raising the issue of the dems portraying themselves as the only hope for the GWT. That's what Bush and company have done for 6 years. That and tax cuts and absolutely nothing else.
5. Posted by Hugh | February 7, 2007 7:16 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on February 7, 2007 07:16
6. Posted by cme | February 7, 2007 1:14 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I'm mostly worried that Hillary won't be the Dem nominee. Unless the GOP picks someone who is quite uncharismatic or polarizing, I don't think she is electable in a general election. I predict the GOP will lose more senate seats in 2008 (we have a lot more to defend in 2008), gain seats in the House (but not enough to take the House back), and retain the White House, especially if Hillary is the nominee. But I think Hillary is so polarizing and comes off as so insincere that the Democrats will pick someone else as their nominee.
6. Posted by cme | February 7, 2007 1:14 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on February 7, 2007 13:14
7. Posted by Jim Addison | February 8, 2007 5:27 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Hugh, you once again misread my comment. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough: it was, in fact, the conservative pundits who suggested only Democratic domination of Congress and the White House could lead them to engage the WOT.
Now, the GOP has run on the proposition that only they could do it, as you suggest. Nothing in the record yet contradicts that, though, does it?
I mean, with all the weaselly little critters on the left hoping for America to be humiliated and all . . .
7. Posted by Jim Addison | February 8, 2007 5:27 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on February 8, 2007 05:27
8. Posted by Hugh Grady | February 8, 2007 2:59 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I looked back Jim and I did misread your comment.
I know that this is off topic and probaly latr for this post but I have a question for you. Do you really believe that the left is hoping for America to be humiliated?
8. Posted by Hugh Grady | February 8, 2007 2:59 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on February 8, 2007 14:59
9. Posted by John S | February 8, 2007 7:55 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
On the brighter side, a President Hillary Rodham Clinton would be such a mitigated disaster that two generations too young to remember Jimmy Carter, a Democrat Congress, and 21% inflation would get a refresher course. And the Republicans would get Congress back in 2010.
9. Posted by John S | February 8, 2007 7:55 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on February 8, 2007 19:55
10. Posted by Charles_in_Texas | February 13, 2007 2:32 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
For Hugh Grady,
You must be blind and dumb. It is absolutely proven that all left-wing idiots hate America (and themselves). They are death-wish freaks.
Just read any left wing blog and listen to any Demoncrat.
10. Posted by Charles_in_Texas | February 13, 2007 2:32 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on February 13, 2007 14:32