October 29, 2005
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 Â— who, the grand jury alleges, didn't tell the truth about when and how he discovered a piece of classified information.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:
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.
"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.
October 24, 2005
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.
October 11, 2005
For the conservative Â“true believersÂ” 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.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..."
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.
October 07, 2005
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...
111 queries taking 0.0703 seconds, 232 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.