January 29, 2006
And the strategy was laid out on a conference call to Lefty bloggers by Tailspin Teddy and John Francois Kerry.
But even the Uber-Liberal Boston Globe has conceded defeat, reporting that "the best Kerry and Kennedy can hope for is to persuade 25 or 30 Democrats to sign on." These folks would have made terrific Kamikaze pilots.
California Yankees comments on RedState: "[Harry] Reid said he would support Kerry's filibuster 'to at least send a message.' Sadly, the message is that the Democrats are obstructionist sore losers." But just for shits 'n giggles he's keeping a pretty detailed tally as the events unfold.
The cloture vote is scheduled for tomorrow at 5:30pm, after which the confirmation vote for Sam Alito will take place on Tuesday around 11:30am. I plan on checking in every once in a while to watch the circus, but unless anything particularly interesting happens following this moment to moment makes as much sense as watching a round of the PGA tour on TV. Zzzzzzzzz.
January 27, 2006
This was a coup.Umm. I don't remember the poll that said "most American voters disapprove of Alito". G.W. Bush ran for re-election (against the aforementioned Sen. Kerry) and he made it quite clear that he intended to appoint Justices in - "the mold of Justice Scalia or Justice Thomas". And guess what? He won!
Miers was removed and Alito was installed to replace the swing vote on the Court. The President gave no thought to what the American people really wanted--or needed. So it's up to us to think about what America really needs - that's part of the true meaning of "advice and consent."
And even if there WAS a poll that said differently, so what? I don't recall the provision in the Constitution that called for a poll result to determine who the President could nominate or one that stated that a "swing vote" on the Court had to be replace with another "swing vote". Elections have consequences and Bush can appoint anyone he sees fit. As long as that nominee is qualified, there is NO provision in the Constitution for the Senate withhold its "consent". And it looks like a majority of Senators - Democrat AND Republican - give their consent.
When Sen. Kerry says he cares about "what America really needs", what he means is what he thinks America really needs. Because as far as he's concerned, if the American voter is too stupid to vote for George Bush over him then they certainly don't know what's best for the Supreme Court. Like a true Liberal elitist douchebag, Kerry thinks he knows better than the knuckle-dragging plebians of the electorate. So he's determined to pursue obstuction as his interpretation of "advise and consent".
Guess what Frenchy-boy? You LOST in November and you're gonna LOSE now. Because the American people - whether you believe it or not - are smart enough to decide for themselves what they want.
Here's a clue: they DIDN'T want you as President but they DO want Sam Alito on the Court. So go back to your sugar-mommy and "borrow" some money to send to MoveOn.org because at this point they have more political influence than you do. Loser.
From MoveOn.org's e-mail: "Filibustering the Alito nomination isn't just the right policy for the country, it's good politics for progressives."
Nice, not only do they not have the balls to call themselves Liberals, but they're admitting flat out that this is nothing more than what they consider to be "good politics".
Fortunately, the people in charge understand that there are some things more important than "good politics" and a good man and prudent jurist will soon be seated on the highest court of the land.
Allow me to quote Willy Wonka on this one. "You get NOTHING! You LOSE! Good day, sir."
Try winning an election once in a while and maybe your party wouldn't be so impotent.
January 25, 2006
Has it really been fifteen? Already?
January 15, 2006
Now, when I see a book come out that has a premise that I deem ridiculous, I accept it for what it is. Crap. And then I move on. There are plenty of Left-wing screeds on the NY Times bestseller list that Liberals run right out and buy because they tell them what they want to hear. It's a free market, but if the book really is crap only the moonbats will buy it.
Well, the Left is so apoplectic about O'Beirne's book that they've hopped on over to Amazon.com in droves and driven down the "rating" to 1.5 stars. And they see this is as some kind of victory for their side. As if someone who actually reads the reviews wouldn't figure out from the psychotic blathering that these people would hate the book no matter what. Here's one Lefty site that's positively giddy over these tactics:
Nice to know we drew blood. Because, you see, it isn't about winning some sort of ultimate triumph, it's about making them fight for every inch.Drew blood? Really? Gee Whiz, how will Ms. O'Beirne ever recover? To look at this as some kind of guerrilla warfare that wounds Conservatism is pretty childish. And here I thought it was about competing ideas, not doing whatever you can to try and make sure opposing ideas never see the light of day.
I haven't read O'Beirne's book (but then I'm sure neither have any of these moonbats). But it seems to me that the book should speak for itself. If it's full of lies and distortions that fly in the face of reality, won't that come through? Ah, but for moonbats, the writings of Conservatives seem to have this magical ability to put a spell over the American "sheeple", as Liberals would call them. The idea that the average person has the ability to think critically and make up their own mind can't penetrate their elitist mindset.
And so, just as Nazis burned books that they deemed a threat to their ideology, Liberals use these kind of petty tactics that reek of the very kind of fascism that they like to ascribe to American Conservatives. If this is what they have to resort to, they're in sadder shape that I thought.
January 05, 2006
Political figures from both parties have long defended and profited from ties to the coal industry. Whether or not that was a factor in the Sago mine's history, the Bush administration's cramming of important posts in the Department of the Interior with biased operatives from the coal, oil and gas industry is not reassuring about general safety in the mines. Steven Griles, a mining lobbyist before being appointed deputy secretary of the interior, devoted four years to rolling back mine regulations and then went back to lobbying for the industry.
h/t: Michelle Malkin
UPDATE: Tom Bevan at RCP Blog rebuts (with facts)
January 02, 2006
124 queries taking 0.0951 seconds, 253 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.