October 29, 2005

Is That All There Is?

John Podhoretz is his column today about the Fitzgerald investigation:

That's all, folks. The grand jury in the most hotly watched Washington political-legal investigation since Whitewater concluded its business yesterday by returning charges against one man and one man alone — who, the grand jury alleges, didn't tell the truth about when and how he discovered a piece of classified information.

Scooter Libby was not charged with the misuse of that information, or with the unlawful exposure of an undercover agent, or with involvement in a conspiracy to reveal her identity. He is, it is worth repeating, charged only with lying about his knowledge of it.

But that didn't stop the folks at MoonBat.org from trying to make chicken salad out of chicken... Well, you know. They fired out an email literally within minutes of the conclusion of Fitzgerald's press conference:
"This is one of the biggest scandals to rock the White House in America's 229-year history."
Really? Well, that's their story and they're sticking to it. And they want their members to write letters with their talking-points: "Our tool makes it easy to write to your local paper". Their tool of course is a form that allows you to fill in your name and address and cut and paste "talking points" about the grand "Bush Lied" conspiracy theory of Iraq into the body. Then it emails your "letter" to the publication of your choice. I fully expect to see one next week in my local paper (just one of course, as the editors are smart enough not to publish "repeat" material).

It didn't matter what the result of this investigation was, the Moonbat's knee-jerk response was always going to be the same: "The American people must know this important truth: Today's indictment is about a cover-up of the lies that led our nation to war in Iraq." Yadda, yadda, yadda. Whatever guys.

Posted by: Gary at 08:23 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 320 words, total size 2 kb.

October 24, 2005

Poll Games

Why is it that whenever some outfit - like USAToday, A/P, CBS/NYTimes or Pew - does a poll that asks "adults" (which means basically whomever picked up the phone regardless of whether or not they're even a U.S. citizen) if they have a positive or negative view of the President and the results look bad for Bush, you see it as the lead story everywhere? Even Drudge (when he's not monitoring hurricanes) usually has it as his top story.

And then, when you get a poll that actually uses a legitimate methodology and samples "likely voters" (i.e. people who are paying attention to the news and taking the time to not only register to vote, but to actually got out and vote) like this one and it shows Bush's approval rating higher than the others, you have to go to a Canadian website to find it? Anyone else see this today?

As I've said before, it doesn't really matter what Bush's approval rating is. He's not running for President anymore. Or anything for the matter...ever. But it's ridiculous the "pack" mentality that the MSM has on this subject. Basically, if it's good news, ignore it. But if it's bad news - regardless of the quality of the poll - run with it. What a bunch of shit. I know the bias is there, but it never ceases to amaze me just how blatant it is, like they're not even trying to hide it.

Posted by: Gary at 10:40 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 247 words, total size 1 kb.

October 11, 2005

All We Are Saying...Is Give Peace A Chance

Rick Moran of Right-Wing Nuthouse puts the Miers debate in the context of prior Republican in-fighting in his contribution to The American Thinker today. And he takes a cold, hard look at the potential long-term damage that could result.

For the conservative “true believers” however, this is the crisis of the Bush presidency. No amount of stroking by Bush aides is going to assuage their disappointment. In this respect, it remains to be seen if these disappointed activists will fall on their swords once again in a futile gesture of defiance by staying home on Election Day, 2006. If they do so, and if they hand the election to the Democrats, there could be a real bloodletting among conservatives that could split Republicans for a generation and perhaps even give impetus to the creation of a third party.

Any way you look at it, the President has his work cut out for him. And if Harriet Miers falters or comes up short in any way, the coalition that has elected 3 out of the last 4 Presidents could finally collapse in flurry of recrimination and anger.

Can you hear the newscast teaser from four years from now? "Coming up, President Hillary Rodham Clinton met with members of the Democrat-controlled Senate today to discuss the potential replacement of retiring Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy..."

Ugh.

Posted by: Gary at 07:16 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 237 words, total size 2 kb.

October 07, 2005

The Fallacy Of The Two-Party System

Here in the U.S., we scratch our heads at the multi-party systems of European governments (and even Canada's), seeing them as so different from our own. It seems to us that a two-party system makes things so cut and dried, either one party is in power or the other - two opposing sides.

In Parliamentary systems, the winning party often does not constitute a majority and must rely on "coalitions" with other parties to make up a majority. It's a concept that at first glance seems so foreign to Americans. The assumption, however, that voters identify themselves as only Republicans or Democrats or consistently vote for one or the other if they are not affiliated is inaccurate.

In the two-party system, coalitions are very much alive and well. Remember that fully one-third (or more) of the electorate does not belong to a specific political party. The reality of party organization and funding - not to mention the Electoral College - makes it near impossible to form a successful third party. But that does not mean one could not attract enough support to alter an election's outcome. There are many examples in American history: Ross Perot's Reform Party, George Wallace's American Independent Party, Teddy Roosevelt's Bull Moose Party, to name a few. more...

Posted by: Gary at 09:35 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 818 words, total size 5 kb.

<< Page 1 of 1 >>
22kb generated in CPU 0.06, elapsed 0.1273 seconds.
117 queries taking 0.1023 seconds, 231 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.