More on Hillary: The MSM musn't help those mean Republicans...

Peter Beinart of The New Republic is whining in today's WaPo that those evil GOP operatives are preparing to unfairly attack the NY Senator's recent well-documented "shift" to the center. He argues that - as in the last three Presidential elections - Republicans will attack her character as a flip-flopper with no "moral core". But his main points are that 1) this is an unfair tactic and 2) the MSM - if not careful - will unwittingly do much of the opposition's dirty work for them by reporting it so much.

The "Hillary moves to the center" story line dovetails perfectly with this character attack. How far will Clinton "go to become president"? So far that she'll radically change what she believes. When Clinton recently said that religion played a central role in her life, New York Conservative Party leader Michael Long told the New York Times, "All of a sudden she is saying she has these deep convictions. . . . I don't believe that. It's clear to me that she is getting ready to launch her candidacy for presidency, and she will become whatever she has to become to appeal to centrist voters." Implicitly endorsing that view, the Times headline read, "As Clinton Shifts Themes, Debate Arises On Her Motives."

He then goes on to pathetically try and convince his readers that, yes, she really is a "moderate". It's just that the grand Rove-ian conspiracy is painting Clinton with stereotypes.

Republicans will exploit that stereotype in their effort to keep Clinton from the Oval Office. But before playing along, the press should first figure out whether it's actually true.

Implicit in this statement is that the press is rooting for her in the first place, which is a given at this point. But I don't know who Beinart thinks he's fooling. The fact is even most of Hillary's supporters don't believe she's a moderate and no one from the base of the party to the MoveOn.org moonbats want her to be. And here is the real crux of her problem that she and past Democrat Presidential candidates have had: to get the nomination she will have to convince the Left that she really is singing from their songbook. To get elected she has to pretend she really didn't mean it.

The voters are not stupid and they know a phony when they see one. And they may be willing to "look the other way" if the phony in question is charming enough. Clinton's husband was a scoundrel but also a brilliant politician with a gift for connecting with voters. Not so with Hillary. And her transparent political machinations are so blatantly obvious, no one needs the MSM to help them figure it out.

Posted by: Gary at 09:35 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 473 words, total size 3 kb.

Time Magazine: Hillary in 2008? No Way...

Joe Klein, author of the loosely-based Clinton campaign novel Primary Colors says Hillary shouldn't run and won't win and that her candidacy in 2008 "would be a disaster on many levels". Why?

She has a clenched, wary public presence, which won't work well in an electorate that prizes aw-shucks informality; she isn't a particularly warm or eloquent speaker, especially in front of large audiences. Any woman running for President will face a toughness conundrum: she will constantly have to prove her strength and be careful about showing her emotions. She won't have the luxury of, say, Bill Clinton's public sogginess. It will take a brilliant politician to create a credible feminine presidential style. So far, Senator Clinton hasn't shown the ease or creativity necessary to break the ultimate glass ceiling.

I definitely agree with him there, but his other major reason is that the electorate may already have Clinton-fatigue. And that another Clinton Presidency would be as unpalatable as another (Jeb) Bush Presidency. Of this I'm not as sure although he makes a compelling case:

"You mean she can't run just because her husband was President?" a Hillary supporter yelled at me. "That is the most incredibly sexist thing I've ever heard." Yes and no. My guess is that Hillary Clinton would roll into Iowa with an incredible, Howard Dean-like head of steam in January 2008, and then the folks—yes, even the Democratic base—would give her a very close look and conclude that a Hillary presidency would be slightly dodgy. The Clinton line in 1992 was, Buy one, get one free. We've already had that co-presidency—for its full, constitutional eight years. What's more, I suspect there would be innate and appropriate populist resistance to this slouch toward monarchial democracy. There is something fundamentally un-American—and very European—about the Clintons and the Bushes trading the office every eight years, with stale, familiar corps of retainers, supporters and enemies.

Posted by: Gary at 06:58 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 329 words, total size 2 kb.

You can wish in one hand and crap in the other...

and see which one gets filled first.

Sen. McCain "absolutely" wants to be President. And he probably thinks it can happen. Which is further proof that he actually buys into all the media hype he gets.

Look, personally I like John McCain. Hell, he's one of the reasons I first registered as a Republican. But something happened to him back in 2000. While he had a great showing in New Hampshire and gave the Bushies a good scare early on, the fact is he had no chance at the nomination once he started competing for delegates in the South and West (outside of Arizona). When Bush crushed him in South Carolina it had nothing to do with dirty politics or soft money. McCain's conservative credentials just didn't measure up to W's and that was that.

But McCain's psyche look a licking that spring and when he finally realized that it was over for him, he couldn't believe it. The MSM adored him and built him up to be more popular than he really was. It's no coincidence that McCain was able to win in States that we now think of as "Blue States" or in states with open primaries that Democrats and Independents could vote in.

Frankly, McCain was bitter...and still is to this day. It's one of the reasons that he cast aside any duty to the First Amendment by pushing his Campaign Finance Reform bill. To him, it was personal. The whole drive behind the legislation was getting "payback" against all the big-money donors who spent money to defeat his attempt at the GOP nomination.

Many in the party view McCain as hardly a Republican at all. Sure he came out for Bush in NYC last August but that was bowing to political reality. He was being a loyal soldier to a general he didn't really care for.

McCain, who was defeated by George W. Bush in the 2000 GOP presidential primary, explained that he continues to want to be president "because I think I'm qualified to help make the world a better place; I'm qualified for the job."

He also declared that the right wing of the GOP has become "more accepting of me than they used to be - not accepting but more accepting - because of the fact that I worked hard for Bush's re-election."

Qualified? Sure, but no more so than any of the other prospective GOP candidates. However, the base of the party is not stupid. McCain can talk the talk, but his actions and questionable allegiances have soured most Republicans on him at this point.

McCain's major character flaw is that it is so important to him to be liked - by the opposition and the media more than by his party. He does have a natural appeal to moderates and even some less-than-hardcore Liberals and, admittedly, it is difficult to win a Presidential election without them. But it's pretty damn impossible for a Republican to win without the conservative base. And you don't get their vote by thumbing your nose at the issues that mobilize them at the grass-roots level.

He can live with the fantasy for a couple more years but come 2008 reality is going to be a bitch.

Hat Tip to Jayson at Polipundit for the link.

Posted by: Gary at 04:40 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 571 words, total size 3 kb.

A Mother's Love...

An article in the Washington Times highlights a recent study on the special bond between mother and child. While many in academia and the social sciences try to make the case that the differences in child-rearing between mothers and fathers in negligible, the data in this study suggest otherwise. Sampling 2,000 mothers, 93 percent said the care of their children is "so unique" that no one else can replace it. The study was done by nonpartisan marriage and family advocacy think tank, the Institute for American Values (IAV).

While I'm sure the reality is that the IAV isn't completely "nonpartisan", the results of their study are telling. Psychologist Brenda Hunter, a representative of IAV says the mothers questioned came from a broad range of demographic groups.

What was revealing about the study, she said, is that the women almost unanimously rejected the notion that motherhood is too demanding.

"Sacrifice is not a dirty word," Mrs. Hunter said, noting that 94 percent of mothers agree that they had "gladly" made sacrifices for their children and only 3 percent say they were dissatisfied with their "life as a mother." And 81 percent describe mothering as "the most important thing" they do.

The idea that mothers are unique in the lives of children is time-honored, said Janice Shaw Crouse, senior fellow at Concerned Women for America's Beverly LaHaye Institute.

"It's one of the givens," she said. "A child who is hurt cries for mom. The child waking up in the middle of the night wants its mother... Men dying in foxholes will call for mom. Moms just hold a very special place in everybody's heart."

I know first hand the strength of this attachment simply from knowing my wife. We have three sons and I know exactly where ol' Dad is in the pecking order. To her credit, all three boys come first in her heart. And that's as it should be.

There are some cases where the mother-child relationship follows a most dysfunctional course, but by and large the love of a mother for her children is something powerfully unique. On this special day, we should all appreciate the fact that when life hands you lemons, mom is always there to make you lemonade. Happy Mother's Day.

Posted by: Gary at 04:01 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 381 words, total size 2 kb.

Frist's Finger on the trigger?

Yes, we've been hearing over and over that the Senate is going forward with kill judicial filibusters with a Senate rules change but if the sources quoted by The Hill are to be believed the moment is fast approaching.

Conservative lobbyists and business-community representatives who attended a closed-door meeting with Frists staff are justifiably growing impatient.

The leader of a broad coalition of conservative groups fighting to end the Democratic filibuster of judicial nominees, Manuel Miranda, chairman of the National Coalition to End the Judicial Filibuster, said: "We all believe that it will be next week."

"I believe it's concrete," Miranda said. "It must happen next week. It would be considered intolerable to delay any further than next week." He added, "Were it to be delayed beyond the next week, the Senate GOP should expect tens of thousands of angry phone calls and faxes to tie up their lines."

Next Monday is four years from the day when President Bush first introduced his slate of appellate-court nominees, several of whom Democrats blocked.

There is speculation that all the back and forth and lack of certainty as to when the move will be made may very well be intentional:

The lobbyist added that Frist's staff has been cautious about revealing the timing because "they know that eventually the word gets out there and they don't want to give the other side an absolute heads up."

Patience is running out, however. Tick Tock, Senator...We're waiting.

Posted by: Gary at 09:12 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 252 words, total size 2 kb.

UK Election Fallout...

Joe Gandelman brings together a quick round-up of the results and the reaction. Hat Tip to: Winds of Change.

Posted by: Gary at 07:35 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 25 words, total size 1 kb.

Absolutely Heartbreaking...

This photo of an distraught American soldier (a 35-year old father) holding in his arms a small Iraqi girl killed by a car bomb says so much about what we're fighting against.

Michelle Malkin attaches the story behind it.

Posted by: Gary at 07:20 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 43 words, total size 1 kb.

Howard Dean's fundraising...pathetic.

Robert Novak reports:

Democratic National Committee (DNC) fund raising under the chairmanship of Howard Dean shows a disappointing $16.7 million raised in the first quarter of 2005, compared with $34 million reported by the Republicans.

That tends to confirm dire predictions by old-line Democratic fund-raisers of a fall-off in money if Dean became chairman. He had promised to bring in heavy individual contributions, as he did in his 2004 campaign for president. But the DNC in the first quarter received only $13 million from individuals, compared to $31 million for the Republican National Committee (RNC).

He's just WOWING them down South, ain't he?

UPDATE: 5/8/05 07:37am:
John Hinderaker at Powerline weighs in:

Whether this relates to Dean's frequent missteps, I don't know. The Dems may also be seeing the effects of last year's Presidential race, when independent organizations like MoveOn and ACT largely replaced the party's fundraising apparatus. It may be that left-wing Democrats are continuing to support those far-left organizations rather than the party. I'd be curious to know whether our readers have seen any data on fundraising by those organizations; I haven't. McCain-Feingold has been a disaster pretty much across the board, but I don't think there is any doubt that the biggest loser has been the Democratic Party.

Posted by: Gary at 11:25 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 217 words, total size 2 kb.

Euphoria and Angst from a Star Wars junkie...

Harry Knowles at Ain't It Cool News has seen Revenge of the Sith and has a lot to say. This is not your typical review. This is a re-examination of the saga from a life-long fan who now has the perspective of seeing it all come together, and the mixed emotions that some of us will feel when we finally see it ourselves.

The most shocking or surprising emotion I felt during this film experience is thatÂ… I donÂ’t want Anakin to become Darth Vader. I justÂ… Despite 27 years to the contrary, as I sat in that theater watching the last act of a good Jedi that turned evilÂ… I just found myself wanting to scream at him to stop.

This is a must read for any thirty-something geek who's been waiting for this moment for so long. Not a lot of spoilers, but lots of naughty words.

Posted by: Gary at 10:37 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 165 words, total size 1 kb.

Brian C. Anderson Interview...

"South Park Conservatives" author goes in depth over at Ankle-Biting Pundits on the future of the Conservative movement in an interview by BullDogPundit. Good Stuff! Go check it out here.

Posted by: Gary at 07:30 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 38 words, total size 1 kb.

(Double) Diane Lane Photo(s) of the Week...

Posted by: Gary at 07:04 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 33 words, total size 1 kb.

Yes, I know. No postings = boring...

Posted by: Gary at 11:01 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 54 words, total size 1 kb.

New "Featured Timeswaster"....

the "Kitten Canon". Sick...but oh so fun.

Posted by: Gary at 10:11 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 13 words, total size 1 kb.

Looks Like I'm Fixed!!!

Check back for more updates.

Posted by: Gary at 07:57 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 13 words, total size 1 kb.

Possible blackout this weekend...

I'm having PC issues at home that I am hopeful will be resolved tonight. However, it is possible that I will not be able to post anything all weekend. I REALLY hope this is not the case.

If the traditional Saturday "Diane Lane photo of the week" does not make it up tomorrow, then it will be my first item of business when all this works itself out. I know how much Steve over at The Llama Butchers looks forward to that.

Posted by: Gary at 04:05 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 90 words, total size 1 kb.

Not The First Time This Has Ever Happened...

And probably not the last, either: Oral Sex Causes Car Smash.

Posted by: Gary at 01:58 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 27 words, total size 1 kb.

Liberals Open Hostility to Religion...

The Northeast Dilemma over at New England Republican reviews the history of the Left's campaign against Judeo-Christian values and the culture war.

As a conservative who does value the separation of church and state, I ask Republican leaders to start questioning the origin of liberal philosophy. The GOP has to expose the roots of modern day liberalism for what it is - a cult formed in the post-War, post- Civil Rights period designed to remove everything remotely religious from the public sphere.

True conservatives seek to give the states the right to choose what religion they want to follow - a humanistic counter-culture that was founded on moral relativism or the Judeo-Christian values this country was founded on. I am willing to let the people decide. Are liberals?

Posted by: Gary at 01:41 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 138 words, total size 1 kb.

School Forced To Pull The Plug On Sex-Ed Class...

In a major win for the parents of Montgomery County students in Maryland, the public school system yanked a controversial sex-ed curriculum that was to have begun today. A U.S. District judge ruled in favor of a lawsuit filed against the school district. The lawsuit charges that the course is unconstitutional and promotes homosexuality.

A few days ago, I highlighted the controversy. School officials banned the right of parents to sit in on the course to find out what their kids were being taught on the weak rationale that their presence would "hamper" the educational process. This, despite the fact that school policy encourages parents to visit all other classes.

Judge Williams agreed with the two groups that filed the lawsuit -- Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum (CRC) and Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX) -- who argued that the curriculum is biased toward homosexuality and dismisses religious perspectives on the subject.

Montgomery County Public Schools "open up the classroom to the subject of homosexuality, and specifically, the moral rightness of the homosexual lifestyle," the judge wrote in his decision.

"However, the Revised Curriculum presents only one view on the subject -- that homosexuality is a natural and morally correct lifestyle -- to the exclusion of other perspectives.

"The public interest is served by preventing [school officials] from promoting particular religious beliefs in the public schools and preventing [the officials] from disseminating one-sided information on a controversial topic," Judge Williams wrote.

This judge will no doubt be branded a bigot and a homophobe by gay activists. And we'll get the standard arguments from the Left that gays are being discriminated against in this case. The problem with that argument is that this is actually a case of religious discrimination because it does not respect the rights of those who have certain religious beliefs about homosexuality.

Judge Williams, a Clinton appointee, makes the specific objection to:

[A] portion of the curriculum that "discriminates between religious sects in that it prefers those sects that are friendly to the homosexual lifestyle."

And that's the true irony of this case. If the school curriculum was being transformed to teach creationism to the exclusion of evolution, the ACLU would be up in arms and Liberals all over the country would be expressing outrage over the fact that the rights of atheist were being trampled on. It would be front page news in the NY Times and Washington Post.

But once again, Liberals have their double standard. Presenting one point of view or pushing a certain agenda is only unacceptable to them when they disagree with it.

Posted by: Gary at 09:46 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 446 words, total size 3 kb.

Bittersweet Victory For Blair...

Well, it seems the Brits have spoken. There definitely was some Iraq backlash against Tony Blair. Despite his historic election to a third term, his party took a hit on the size of its majority.

Such an outcome, if confirmed by the actual vote count, could set the stage for Blair to be replaced in midterm by a party rival such as Gordon Brown. As Treasury chief, Brown was widely credited for the strong economy that appears to have clinched Labour's victory, outweighing the bitterness many voters said they felt over Iraq.

While this was due to be Blair's last term anyway, it looks increasingly likely that within a year or two he may very well be replaced as Prime Minister by the ranks of his party.

I'll troll for analysis of the election's impact on the future of Britain and the effect it will likely have on relations with the U.S. At least the PM received a vote of confidence, albeit a measured one.

Posted by: Gary at 08:59 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 172 words, total size 1 kb.

I Could Use One Of These...

Cool. I hear it has a button that, when pressed, says "Dead or alive, your coming with me."

Link via Eric the Viking

Posted by: Gary at 04:55 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 35 words, total size 1 kb.