Monday, March 26, 2007

Pay No Attention To The Man Behind The Curtain!

From, via the Drudge Report...

Clinton Opens Up About Attorney Firings

"Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton on Monday dismissed any comparison between the firing last fall of eight U.S. attorneys with the replacement of 93 U.S. attorneys when her husband became president in 1993."

Yeah, I'll bet she did.

The major difference is that Alberto Gonzales fired eight U.S. attorneys for failing to do their jobs properly, and Janet Reno, under the incoming Clinton Administration, fired EVERY SINGLE U.S. attorney for working for a Republican Administration.

What seems to you to be more disruptive to the investigation and prosecution of crimes and corruption?... The firing of eight (out of ninety-three) specific U.S. attorneys for various reasons, whatever they may be, or the summary dismissal of EVERY SINGLE U.S. Attorney, all at once, no matter what they were working on at the time?

"That's a traditional prerogative of an incoming president," Clinton said in an interview with The Associated Press."

What? To fire everyone who worked for his predecessor? I sure wish President Bush had known that when he took office, or that he had at least taken advantage of that perogative when he took office...

I think that he would have had a whole lot less trouble throughout his Presidency if he had...

"She conceded that should she win the presidency in 2008, she likely would replace all of the U.S. attorneys appointed by President Bush. She said that's merely following traditions in which presidents appoint prosecutors of their own party."

Okay... Then she has absolutely no right to comment on this subject at all. She has said that she would do the same thing. If it is bad, then she would be just as bad. If it isn't bad, then why is this a big deal?

"Clinton argued that the Bush administration's firing of the eight federal prosecutors has caused an uproar because it is seen as a conservative push to shift the balance of power in favor of the executive branch."

Cannot the uproar that is being drummed up by the Democrats and the Media over this issue be interpreted as an attack against the power of the Executive Branch?

Do you think that if Hillary is elected President that she will not try to shift the balance of power in favor of the Executive Branch at every opportunity?

This is Hypocrisy.

"On another topic, Clinton said the Senate is struggling to find a way to deal with an Iraq funding measure. A House-passed measure includes a timetable for pulling troops out of Iraq, but Clinton said there's no consensus in the Senate. "

Timetables in House Bills are a usurpation of Presidential Power. The President is the Commander In Chief, and he alone is to decide how Wars are to be prosecuted.

The House has the Constitutional Power to de-fund Wars, but not to Micro-Manage them. If the House has a problem with the war in Iraq, they need to put up, or shut up.

The Senate has no role in War whatsoever. They just need to shut up.

Hillary included.

After all, she voted to authorize this War, and has never backed down from that position.

The truth is that Hillary Clinton never opens her mouth without giving the American People (the ones who THINK, anyway) another reason why she should NEVER be taken seriously as a Presidential Candidate.

This article is simply another in a long series of examples of her hypocrisy and elitism.

She is absolutely unfit for service in that office, because she seeks to manipulate the (percieved, by her,) stupidity of the American People.

And if We The People screw up and allow her to be elected to that office, then we deserve what we get.

I really hope she gets the Democrat Nomination... She is the most defeatable of the current Democrat field...

Wednesday, March 21, 2007

Do As I Say, Not As I Do!

From the website of the U.S Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works, via The Drudge Report...


WASHINGTON, DC – Former Vice President Al Gore refused to take a “Personal Energy Ethics Pledge” today to consume no more energy than the average American household. The pledge was presented to Gore by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, during today’s global warming hearing.

Senator Inhofe showed Gore a film frame from “An Inconvenient Truth” where it asks viewers: “Are you ready to change the way you live?”

(Click Here for link to chart.)

Gore has been criticized for excessive home energy usage at his residence in Tennessee. His electricity usage is reportedly 20 times higher than the average American household.

Here is the "Personal Energy Ethics Pledge"...

As a believer:
· that human-caused global warming is a moral, ethical, and spiritual issue affecting our survival;

· that home energy use is a key component of overall energy use;

· that reducing my fossil fuel-based home energy usage will lead to lower greenhouse gas emissions; and

· that leaders on moral issues should lead by example;

I pledge to consume no more energy for use in my residence than the average American household by March 21, 2008.”

The last sentence from the article...

Gore refused to take the pledge.

And why SHOULD he?

After all, he is a Go-Zillionaire, and he has only the best interests of the Great-Unwashed at heart, right?

I mean, hasn't Gore EARNED his own right to pollute twenty times more than you by all of the good he has done, or intends to do for Humanity?

I mean, haven't he and his allies worked tirelessly to raise the Minimum Wage to a level that will support a family of four, while simultaneously attempting to limit the access of a family of four to a vehicle which will carry four people? (For the good of the Earth, don'tchaknow?)

I'm telling you all, right now.

BEWARE the Politician who claims to want to solve your problems, ESPECIALLY when that same Politician is pointing those very problems out to you.

BEWARE the Politician who refers to YOU as "Workers", or to you and your families as "Working Families", ESPECIALLY if neither that Politician nor her Husband has ever held a job on which they actually "Worked."

BEWARE the rulers who are unwilling to live under the same conditions as their "Subjects."

If you want anything done, DO IT YOURSELF.

Conserve, Reduce, Recycle. By all means. Live Responsibly. Think Locally, Act Globally.

Have at it. After all, it IS the responsible way to live.

But do it YOURSELF.

Whatever you DO, don't allow AlGore and HillBillary to mandate it through the power of Government.

Because if you do, you will have surrendered your personal freedom to live your life in the same way that AlGore believes that he is entitled to live his, in exchange for an empty promise to solve a problem which may not even exist.

UPDATE: This chart bears notice...


You are being LIED TO! (And not by me!)

Monday, March 12, 2007

The Wisdom Of Zell Miller...

From The Raw Story...

"Zell Miller: Abortion has shrunk our military, hurt social security, caused illegal immigration"

"Zell Miller, the former Democratic Senator from Georgia who backed President George W. Bush in 2004 and spoke at the Republican National Convention, recently told an anti-abortion gathering that the "killing" of unborn babies was the cause of many of America's woes, including its military, social security, and immigration problems.

"How could this great land of plenty produce too few people in the last 30 years?" Miller asked.

"Here is the brutal truth that no one dares to mention: We’re too few because too many of our babies have been killed."

Miller claimed that 45 million babies have been 'killed' since the Supreme Court decision on Roe v. Wade in 1973.

"If those 45 million children had lived, today they would be defending our country, they would be filling our jobs, they would be paying into Social Security," he asserted."

( I love that the article puts the word "killed" in quotations...)

This is the point that I made over a year ago which first got me called a Nazi on my comments page. (Except that I said that Abortion doesn't bother me because I recognize the fact that Liberals are aborting their Voter Base, and that I thought that Conservatives should get out of the way and let them do it until they are gone.)

You see, this is one of the most inflamatory things that you can ever say to a Neo-Lib.

"This is all YOUR fault!"

And while Neo-Libs are more than happy to share the blame with the collective, (i.e. "We are destroying the Environment" etc...) they know beyond a shadow of doubt that they alone own this particular issue, and they own it out loud and in your face.

So, in their world view, Abortion can never be hinted at as the cause of any problem whatsoever, but must always be held up as a solution to horrible and otherwise unsolvable problems. ("Just look at all the unwanted and unloved children who would starve and be abused to death in Orphanages and in the homes of single parents working seven jobs and collecting welfare just to squeak by in abject Poverty if it weren't for Abortion! Are YOOOUUUU going to adopt ten or twenty of them and look after them Mr. and Mrs. Conservative, Mr. and Mrs. Hypocrite, HUHHMMMMMNNNN?!?")

(The next time a Lib hits you with that one, extend their own logic and suggest that we should instead round up the children who are living in those conditions now and kill them since they would be better off dead anyway, and see what they call you...)

Zell Miller is exactly right.

But he stopped too soon...

He should have gone on to point out that many of those aborted children would have been of voting age in 2000, and that most of these voters would have been raised their whole lives by people who obviously support a woman's right to choose, i.e. Democrats.

How many more votes would it have taken in 2000 to defeat George W. Bush with a clear and unquestionable margin?

Not all that many.

So now do you see that without Abortion, there would probably never have been a President George W. Bush?

Now do you see how Liberalism is ultimately it's own punishment?

Wednesday, March 07, 2007

Pardon Me?

Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution gives the president "Power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment." A reprieve reduces the severity of a punishment without removing the guilt of the person reprieved. A pardon removes both punishment and guilt.

Bill Clinton pardoned 140 Criminals on his final day in office. Over the course of his Presidency, he issued 395 Presidential Pardons.

It is the Constitutional Right of the President of the United States to pardon anyone he wants, at any point during his Presidency, for any crime for which they might be convicted.


Yesterday, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the former Chief of Staff for the Vice President, was found guilty of being a Victim of a Gross Miscarriage of Justice.

On the Jury that convicted him was a person who has written a book entitled "Spying: A Secret History Of History." This Juror has stated that he took "copious notes", and plans to write a new book about the experience of being one of the Jurors on the Libby case.

Another Juror is quoted on the Drudge Report tonight calling for the President to Pardon Libby.


I'm not saying that President Bush should Pardon "Scooter" Libby. That's up to him. If he wants to do it, then he should do it. If not, then don't.

What I AM saying is that if he wants to Pardon Libby, then that is his right, as President of the United States, granted to him by the U.S. Constitution, and bestowed upon him by the Majority of Voters in the 2004 Presidential Election, and that neither Harry Reid (How DARE he open his mouth over this!!), nor Katie Couric, nor Cindy Sheehan, nor Tim Russert, nor George Soros, nor Ariana Huffington and all of her readers and commentors, nor the whole of the crowd ALL OVER AMERICA have any right to tell him not to, nor should they have any input whatsoever in his decision one way or another.

It's up to him. He is the decider.

If Clinton had the right, on his last day in office, to sell pardons to anyone who promised to donate to his Library/Massage Parlor, then Bush has the right to pardon people who may be covering up his own criminal activity. (If indeed there is any of that.)

Personally, If I were President, I would Pardon Libby today.

Then I would fire Fitzgerald.

Then I would form a Special Council to look into Harry Ried's land deals. And William Jefferson's freezer. And Ted Kennedy's sanity. And John Kerry's Military Record. And Barak Obama's race. And Al Gore's Carbon Footprint. And Barbara Boxer's "Big Oil" investments.

And Hillary Clinton's own memory lapses during her grand Jury Testimony.

I would find out how many of THEM could stand up to the type of investigation that has been directed at the Bush Administration for years and years...

Monday, March 05, 2007

Hillary Clinton... The Gift That Keeps On Giving...

"Ah don' fee-yull naw-wayze tarrred... Aah commed too faaaaar frum wherr Aaaah-aah staaarted frum!...

"No-budddy tol' mee dat dah road wudd be eeeaz-eee!...

"Aaaah don' b'leeeeve He brought me this faaaar to leee-uhve me!..." - Said Senator Clinton.

Or, to put it more succinctly... "YEEAAAAAAHHRRR!!"

How stupid is Hillary Clinton?

Are any of you buying her act? Don't you all see what she is attempting to do? (And badly at that?)

Is this offensive to no one besides me?

And I am not even Black!!

This wouldn't have been any worse if she had given away free bar-b-qued ribs, fried chicken, and basketballs!

Who does she think she is?!?

Can you imagine the Media outcry if Newt Gingrich had done this?

Rush Limbaugh?

Ann Coulter?...

Oh, yeah, that's right...

Coulter is the decoy to which the Media hopes to direct your attention in case you start to almost notice the fact that Mrs. Clinton is mocking Black People.

Don't fall for it.

Ann Coulter has as much right to call John Edwards a "Faggot" as Howard Stern has to call George W. Bush a "Retard."

It should draw just as much attention.

And no more.

Both have happened recently, and neither are worthy of any attention beyond an initial chuckle.

Hillary Clinton thinks that by mocking Black People's speech patterns, she can convince them to forget that she is a rich white woman who thinks that they are all stupid, and that they will vote for her over a man of their own race.

Which they might. I don't know.

That's up to them.

But remember this...

If Hillary Clinton REALLY believed in Racial Diversity...

If she REALLY believed in the concept of promoting achievement among African-Americans... (whoever THEY are...)

If she REALLY, REALLY believed in Racial Equality and the ability of African-Americans to succeed at the highest levels of Society...


But I don't think she will have to.

If she makes just one more speech as ridiculous as this one, she's had it politically.

And that is as it should be.

But I personally LOVED her speech in Selma!

Keep 'em comin' Hillary!

You GO Gurl!!

You dah BOMB!!