About Me

Name:beltway girl
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Toy Soldiers: John McCain, America, and My Grandfather

Posted by beltway girl on Saturday, March 29, 2008 3:40:02 AM
The little toy-dog is covered with dust
But sturdy, and staunch he stands:
And the little toy-soldier is red with rust
And his musket moulds in his hands;
Time was when this little toy-dog was new,
And the soldier was passing fair;
And that was the time when our Little Boy Blue
Kissed them and put them there.
 
                                            -Eugene Field, Little Boy Blue
 
John McCain gave a speech this week in Arlington, Virginia, and he talked about when he was a little boy standing outside his house one day.  And a car pulled up outside, and a man called out to his father that day.  The Japanese had just bombed Pearl Harbor.
 
John McCain's father was a soldier.  So John McCain's father went away, and this little boy grew, and one day, after his battles were through, this little boy's father came home.  So did this little boy's grandfather, for he'd been fighting the same battles.  And he was so tired, he died the next day.
 
When the little boy grew into a man, he, too, was called away, this time into the hot, wet rice fields of Vietnam.  And then, one day, when his battles were through, this little boy, now a man, he came home, too.
 
And in his speech, a weathered and tested, and unbeaten and unbroken man, talked about a nation standing on a threshold.  Will we be a young nation or an old nation?  Will we forge ahead comfortably in our strength, or withdraw into a hardened shell of isolationism, which provides a brief period of false security, but little else?  Will we live in a future or a past?
 
The soldier sees the world as it is; it is a dangerous place, filled with violent rhetoric backed up by horrendously violent action.  That is one front.  There is also ruthless competition from powers, who, having imported our markets but not our ideology, or our love of individuality, would be happy to take our place as a superpower at the global table. 
 
What will they do with the power?
 
The soldier's speech traced America's history through Harry Truman and JFK, much as the soldier's life has.  He reminded us that we did not win the Cold War by ourselves.  Indirectly, he reminded us also that we did not lose Vietnam alone.  Vietnam lost, too, as ethnic cleansing and genocide wrote its nation's last chapter before the ultimate embrace of the free markets of the West, but not of its ideology.  And this is a return to a theme he raises powerfully, most notably with China. 
 
America has sins, as all nations do.  Once you accept your sins as your signature, you have no future.  You are like Britain, a nation of past greatness and all apologies.  You are a nation of isolationism.  You are an old nation, with crumbling power.
 
America has a choice ahead of her, and the soldier sees it quite clearly.  Will you be young again, not to fight, but to be forceful enough to make fighting a daunting choice for your enemy?  Will you recognize that America has enemies outside of her own borders?
 
Will she become an old nation, lamenting her choices within her own borders and swimming in her own guilt?  Or will she rise above it, accept her own responsibility to make it right with all her children, and keep her place as a shining city on a hill?
 
We will go one way, or we will go the other.  We will be young, or we will be old.  We will shine and thrive in the future, or we will grow accustomed to the darkness and wither in the past.
 
My grandfather was a man with a wide face and a bright mind and a bright smile and soft eyes and a sharp wit and a quick joke.  My grandfather's hands were no strangers to a gun.  My grandfather, too, was a soldier.
 
Too many Americans are used to toy soldiers.  Blood runs through the stripes of our country's flag, the suffering of all of its children.  America must decide now what she wants for herself: Will she be a shining sign of hope for the world, or a bleak and broken apology that cannot face itself or its neighbors around the globe?
 
We decided a long time ago that we would not end up like the British Empire.  America is again at a threshold, deciding her own fate with the same question.
 
John McCain is a soldier, and America, of late, has been to quick to run from her soldiers.  McCain does not celebrate either war or his status as a war hero.  This is because good soldiers know better than you, or me, what war costs.  Not in a budget.  Not in a funding request.  But in real, human life.  America's best hope would be realized in bringing the real soldier home to make peace, and leaving the toy soldiers on the shelf of her past. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (5) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Satan Endorses

Posted by beltway girl on Friday, March 28, 2008 1:35:58 AM
(thanks to Rob Long, National Review, for his columns along this same vein)
 
The Situation Room transcript, 3/29/08
 
WOLF BLITZER: And now, as promised, we have Satan for an exclusive interview.  Welcome, Satan, to The Situation Room.
 
SATAN: Thank you, Wolf.
 
WOLF BLITZER: So, Satan, everyone has been wondering who's going to receive your endorsement in the upcoming general election.
 
SATAN: Right, well, I think it's good strategy to build suspense.  It keeps people off their guards and has the potential to cause more suffering, and perhaps even widespread panic, despair, and destruction.
 
BLITZER: Were you impressed by Hagee's endorsement of McCain?
 
SATAN: Yes, definitely.  But that's nothing compared to the Jeremiah Wright controversy, or to Hillary's campaign manager likening Bill Richardson to Judas.
 
BLITZER: That impressed you?
 
SATAN: More so Wright.  Wright has almost certainly ruined Obama's chances for winning the general election.  This will cause pandemonium for the Democrats and make a lot of them extremely unhappy.  Heads are already rolling, and it's keeping Hillary's campaign alive.
 
BLITZER: It sounds a little bit like you're a fan of Hillary.
 
SATAN: Well, the Judas reference was completely out of line.  I know Judas personally.  He is a transcendant figure on the spiritual scene.  He has paid his dues to get where he is today.  Richardson just isn't in Judas's league.
 
BLITZER: So it sounds like you're leaning more towards Senator Clinton right now?
 
SATAN: Well, I've actually made donations to the Clinton campaign, but I had to launder the money through MoveOn.org. 
 
BLITZER: So is it safe to assume that you're against the war in Iraq?
 
SATAN: Absolutely. 
 
BLITZER: Would you ever consider endorsing John McCain?
 
SATAN: Absolutely not.  McCain would move the country in the wrong direction.  Any of the Republicans would.
 
BLITZER: What about Senator Obama?
 
SATAN: I don't think he has enough foreign policy experience.
 
BLITZER: So it sounds like you're going with Hillary?
 
SATAN: If I had to pick someone right now, well, yes, I'd go with Hillary.  Her strict adherence to the Democratic Party principles makes her a good choice, and I, more than anyone, support choice.  And her campaign's tactics in pursuing the nomination have been admirable.  I can't understand why no one believes her sniper-fire story. 
 
BLITZER: So are you endorsing Senator Clinton?
 
SATAN: I'm holding off on an actual endorsement for now.
 
BLITZER: Okay, okay.  Well, I won't try to force you.
 
SATAN: Good idea.
 
BLITZER: Any comment on the Rush Limbaugh voter fraud controversy?
 
SATAN: That Limbaugh is a terrible influence on the American people, and the Democratic Party will have him thrown in prison!
 
BLITZER: Well, as always, we appreciate your having taken the time to speak with us today.
 
SATAN: Always a pleasure.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (5) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Well, voting Democrat ought to be a felony...

Posted by beltway girl on Thursday, March 27, 2008 11:57:58 PM
and it's good to see that the Democrats know it, too!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Monster Mash

Posted by beltway girl on Thursday, March 27, 2008 12:59:29 AM
Samantha Power called Hillary Clinton a "monster."
 
This was a mistake.  The Hill/Bill, that strange and amazing, two-headed campaign creation, is the correct way to discuss this phenomenon.
 
Then, there was Reverend Wright. 
 
Reverend Wright is not a monster.
 
Quite right.  Reverend Wright thinks AIDS was caused by the federal government to engage in a race-based genocide.  He's not a monster.  He's a raving luncatic.
 
Okay, then we have the sniper fire in Bosnia. 
 
Then, we have the Camp Clinton field trip to NAFTA, and in the brochure, first it's a good place.  Then, it's a bad place.  Wait, wait, it was a good place again.
 
Kayo.
 
So then, we have Jumpin Judas Richardson, the governor who Dared to Endorse, and who now looks forward to a trip to the nether regions via a newly created Potter's Field in New Mexico.  In the unlikely event Hillary were elected, it would be moved to the White House lawn, so we could all enjoy it.  How do you say "Field of Blood" in Spanish?
 
Lesson from Camp Clinton: No fair calling opponents "monster."  "Judas," however, is acceptable.
 
Then, we have Bill, going prematurely senile, rambling on about Jesse Jackson and then patriotism, implying that Obama is perhaps not of the same patriotic stuff as the Hill and McCain.
 
As a reward for his insights, he is now not only the Lady Macbeth of this campaign.  Now, he's Joe McCarthy.  Lady Macbeth McCarthy.  It sounds uncomfortably like Heather Mills McCartney. 
 
Then there is Michelle Obama, talking about how, as an adult, she's never really been proud of her country until now.
 
A first time for everything!
 
Geraldine Ferraro.  That Obama's just as much of an affirmative action candidate as I was, although you might have noticed that I didn't mention this when I was runnning.
 
And now, we're suing that Rush Limbaugh via an extremely creative (almost revolutionary!) interpretation of what truly constitutes "vote fraud."
 
Okay, so is that it?
 
These are not the Donner Party Democrats.  No human being could possibly digest this and survive.  The only ones who get out alive are the Hill/Bill, that strange hybrid, and Jumpin Judas Richardon, who is evidently enlivened by demonic forces. 
 
It's going to be a long summer.
 
I'm not hungry. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Feminism on the Set of the Bill and Hillary Show

Posted by beltway girl on Monday, March 24, 2008 6:43:59 PM
Hillary says she and Bill are equal partners.
 
Maybe in their marriage.  But they are definitely not equals when it comes to their respective candidacies.
 
Although you might be able to claim equality in terms of foreign policy inexperience.  Bill, who'd been the governor of Arkansas for twelve years of so in total, was decidedly light in foreign policy.  And Hillary, running at a time of war, has sought to make something-out-of-nothing with her vast "foreign policy," First Lady experience.  Even were it something, she was married to it.
 
Then, she talked up the non-experience into opportunities for real experience.  Again, she couldn't have done this had she not been Mrs. Bill.  Since Mr. Bill had no spouse who'd formerly occupied the White House when he first ran in 1992, you still have to be thinking that this is all looking very unequal. 
 
Then, when you look at the domestic situation, Bill had been the governor of Arkansas.  Many presidents are former governors.  Mrs. Bill, on the other hand, once again is First Lady, in this case, of Arkansas.  Then, she's First Lady of the US, trying unsuccessfully to push through her health care reforms. 
 
Trying desperately to ride on her significant other's coattails, she starts to look like a Hollywood Mom.  It would be amusing except for the fact that she is trying to become head executive and Commander-in-Chief of a nation embroiled in an expensive, dangerous, and strategically important war overseas, and a United States that is in a recession to boot.
 
Then there's electability.  Bill's negatives never looked like hers until he started campaigning for her.  Moreover, when Mr. Bill ran, he promised potentially big returns in the South.  An actual Hillary nomination carries with it big losses in the South, thanks to Camp Clinton's alienation of the Obama bloc.
 
So we have much that is unequal here.  But Bill and Hillary do seem to be equally unashamed when it comes to spewing forth very, very large fabrications, such as he didn't sleep with that woman, and Hillary didn't support NAFTA.  In terms of that last item, the release of the First Lady's organizer shows her attending several NAFTA pep rallies.
 
So we see that they are equally committed to historic revisionism.
 
Where does this rather unflattering comparison of Mr. Bill's and Mrs. Bill's political portfolios end for feminism?
 
Well, look back.  Look way, way back to the days of actual royalty.  We now have an heiress apparent to Bill's un-Democratically vacated throne.  George Bush is the equivalent of a peasant revolution, temporarily interrupting the proper line of succession.  (They'd probably enthusiastically agree with that last point.)
 
God Save the Hillary!  The feminists had to go overseas to make it all happen for the sisterhood on this one. 
 
And what are the Queen-to-Be's actual achievements?  So far, her biggest achievement seems to be have been marrying a man who became president and parlaying her First Lady Days into a position as senator from the powerful state of New York.  And, of course, prompting feminists to revert back to the days of monarchy.
 
Feminists are scampering all over the set of what National Review has referred to as the Bill and Hillary Show, but the current plot for B&H looks more like a cross between the history of the English Royal Family and "Desperate Housewives."
 
The Dems have few real ties to actual principle any longer, and the sceptre of Queen Hillary's fake foreign policy experience illustrates this very clearly.  The Democrats are pure only in their agenda-driven politics.  And now that the plug has been pulled on the coronation, one has to wonder what the Bill and Hillary Show will have done to feminism in America.
 
We may have to stretch and look way, way back over our shoulders to figure that one out. 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Operation Chaos: The Donner Party Democrats

Posted by beltway girl on Monday, March 24, 2008 3:05:03 PM

Limbaugh is discussing the article by Egan now (Donner Party Democrats), which was interesting (think it was NYT).  Made the analogy that they're now eating their own. 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Operation Chaos Update: Bill sings: Grandma Got Run Over...

Posted by beltway girl on Monday, March 24, 2008 2:35:35 PM
by Obama
after Rev. Wright was asked to leave
you might think he'd love the one who raised him
but there she is in pieces in the street
 
Limbaugh's Operation Chaos, www.rushlimbaugh.com
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Democrats' Romance with Precedent

Posted by beltway girl on Monday, March 24, 2008 12:01:15 AM
Precedent.
 
Accepted.  Settled law.
 
And Roe has become accepted law, and abortion on demand is the liberals' baby.  Many of them accepted it as settled before the Supreme Court did, and before an overwhelming majority of Americans did.  Today, we hear many of the same disco ball revolutionaries sounding the alarm in terms of safety and security of their baby.
 
The Republicans will put more bad men on the Supreme Court.  And those bad men will kill our baby!
 
They didn't say it like this.  They wrapped their baby up in precedent.
 
This is settled.  And that's it.  And that is why we are for this.  Because it's a done deal. 
 
You see, liberals aren't really about change; they're about the status quo.
 
Remember when owning slaves as a right was precedent?
 
Remember when women and Native Americans not being allowed to vote was precedent?
 
Remember when segregated schools were precedent?
 
Remember when the overwhelming majority of women becoming housewives or librarians...  was accepted?
 
Remember when African Americans couldn't play in professional sports, and that was accepted?
 
Remember when black people sat in the back of the bus, and that found social precedent?
 
Remember how the liberals fought against all of these things because they were settled?  They were done deals?
 
Let's all keep these things in mind now, while the liberals wrap their baby up in the Democratic (Party) American flag of precedence.  And let's all commend these people on this clever satire of making us all open our eyes to the fact that there really is no Democratic candidate in this election.  There couldn't be.  Precedent ruled them out long ago, and the Democrats hold precedent as sacrosanct.
 
Liberals, now in danger of having their baby-in-the-abstract aborted, are in hysterics.  In the meantime, there's an actual cost in real human lives, not abstract ones, being sacrificed at the altar of liberal hypocrisy.  So their abstract baby can continue to be swaddled in an "evolving" and "living" federal constitution.
 
Their precedent. 
 
Their baby.
 
Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.  If that's not a direct quote, it's very close.  The speaker?  President William Jefferson Clinton.  He said those words many moons ago. 
 
Just words.
 
And guess what?  In this case, that's all they were.
 
What did this person actually do to make abortions more rare?  If you look at his record, he made efforts to make them more available, not more rare.  And now we have the nuts (and bolts) Mrs. Bill Clinton.  So where are the nuts and bolts for these words?  Where are the nuts and bolts for "rare" abortions in the US?  Where is the LBJ of "rare" abortion?
 
Obviously, we all know the Democrats couldn't be this hypocritical.  Maybe they were just words in this case, but that's because it's all about precedent.  It's the precedent, stupid!
 
And they mean it.
 
Okay, we all get the point.  So let's end the satire now.  Get off the stage with Barack, Mrs. Clinton.
 
Because precedent would require that. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Adventures of Obama

Posted by beltway girl on Friday, March 21, 2008 2:09:45 AM
So the speech was brilliant.  Brilliant writing and content, brilliant delivery. 
 
It rang true.  And incidentally, race and politics in Chicago arguably transcend religion.
 
But at the end of the day, all the inconsistencies-- taken as a whole-- were simply being further compartmentalized.  And one has to wonder whether many viewers weren't still sitting there, scratching their heads, and wondering...
 
Why did you keep coming back for more of this?
 
What exactly did you hear and not hear?
 
What do you consider "controversial"?
 
What do you consider "anti-American"?
 
What do you think "racism" is?
 
Obama is a sweeping candidate.  He talks often in generalities about universal truths.  He is poetic and moving.
 
But the Wright mess requires more nuts and bolts, more particulars.  Obama had to get down into the boiler room to make this problem go away, and he refused. 
 
And it won't go away.  The Wright controversy is not dangerous solely because of Wright; it is potentially fatal because Wright carries with him-- in his colorful rhetorical baggage-- an unacceptably close association to Louis Farrakhan.  This "lifetime achievement award," the pseudo-endorsement by Farrakhan of Obama, this is not the stuff to be remedied with the most erudite and groundbreakingly honest discussion of race in the US today.
 
Inflammatory racist rhetoric was only a part of Wright's problem.  The more insidious problem is Farrakhan and a presidential contender's friendship with a pastor who travelled to Libya with him. 
 
If Obama's political resume were-- in significant ways-- to diverge from the Farrakhan and Wright menu, people might breathe easier.  But everything Obama says is in perfect harmony with it.
 
Of course, the actual menu is the same menu of the DNC.  So the menu itself is not the bombshell.  No, it is the menu and the Farrakhan association.  Democrats cannot have this; it becomes too alarmingly clear just how far left their party has gone when Farrakhan arrives on the scene. 
 
Obama's chances of shaking the Wright factor will be reduced with each passing day.  And then, one day, after many of these days, the chance will be completely gone.
 
Mort Kondracke discussed Obama's speech in a recent column, and his assessment on this is more brilliant than Obama's speech.  Yes, Obama's speech was brilliant.  But talking about a little old white lady afraid of black men was not exactly a head-on broaching of the Farrakhan issue.  Nor did this speech address exactly how Obama's hunger for change squares with his pastor's hunger for change. 
 
The outcome will be that many will fear it's the same hunger.  And that the politician cannot state it so forthrightly and hope to win the election.
 
In the meantime, we have Hillary's nasty NAFTA snafu posed to take center stage when the Uncle Jeremiah story becomes tired.
 
The Democrats are in trouble.  And the problem is not one cadidate with too close an association with Wright and Farrakhan.  It's having an agenda that that both of them can way too easily embrace.
 
Tolerance.
 
Let's all remember our gramdmothers while we contemplate the idea that you really can have too much of a good thing.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (6) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Politics of Religion

Posted by beltway girl on Tuesday, March 18, 2008 12:28:33 AM
And change we're now embroiled in.
 
Okay, first there were just murmurings about Jeremiah Wright and a possible "pastor problem."  They were balanced with Obama's glowing praise about his Audacity of Hope sermon, and it was like a breath of fresh air to see a young presidential candidate actually embracing his spirituality so enthusiastically, rather than running a sprint from it.
 
But it doesn't look so refreshing any longer.  And many are wondering why he wasn't running the sprint.
 
"Goddamn America"
 
This is not exactly the stuff good political campaigns are made of. 
 
It looks...  really bad.  And here's a prediction: It may be looking worse in the weeks to come.
 
Not too many things could have made the Bill and Hillary Show a viable viewing choice, but the Uncle Jeremiah Hour has actually done the trick.
 
It's incredible.  One has to strain to figure out which one is actually running for office.  Will the real politician please stand up?
 
Will he please stand up and walk out of the building where these rants are occurring?
 
But he didn't.  While the Wright Rants can arguably be set aside as Wright's own interpretation of today's events in a religious context (the UCC has come out in his defense), the political half of this duo is likely to be doomed.
 
Why?  Because this is a radical interpretation.  Very radical.  Extremely radical.  Unacceptably radical. 
 
Explosively radical. 
 
Not going to happen radical.  God Bless Louis Farrakhan and Goddamn America radical.  One of these sentiments alone, one alone, might have permitted survival.  But as a pairing, they are almost certainly lethal. 
 
Moreover, the condemnation of African-Americans of the Republican persuasion is especially telling and troubling in terms of Reverend Wright's worldview.
 
Again, is this politics or religion?  To be respected and black, in Mr. Wright's view, is to be an African-American Democrat.  And it appears there are no other options. 
 
This is not a joke anymore.  This really is the Church of the DNC.  And any religion or church that effectively becomes an arm of a political party is straddling a frightening line.  Moreover, we're seeing eye-for-an-eye politics/religion at work with this hybrid, and this becomes clear if you see some of Wright's more dynamic performances, now playing in the mainstream media. 
 
This is tragic, and we can all thank the Democratic Party of today for it.  Outrageous statements are something the Democratic Party has never been a stranger to, and Reverend Wright now is being called to media judgment.  Had such outrageous statements been discouraged by the Democrats, would Wright be in the position he is in today? 
 
When his defenders note his achievements, they are right to do so.  Reverend Wright has done some wonderful things in his ministries, and these things shouldn't be dismissed by anyone.  Success matters for individuals, especially those who have been dealt a bad hand by society.  The world matters to individuals.  Lifting people up matters.  And Wright has done this for many, and for this, he should be applauded. 
 
Unfortunately, words-- one of Obama's great strengths-- are not a strength for Wright.  And the Reverend Wright has not shied away from dealing his own bad hands-- in words-- to individuals like Condoleezza Rice and Clarence Thomas.  Thomas, who has given many in the pro-life movement hope, and who is revered based on the content of his message and character, not the color of his skin.
 
Stepping all over other human beings is never right.  It's not right when they're white or black.  There's little possiblity of actual racial healing in such an atmosphere.  If possible, this can only make things worse.  Racism is not an acceptable practice for any individual of any color.
 
Rice and Thomas are not slaves to Reverend Wright's political preferences.  White human beings should not be subject to Reverend Wright's angry social gospel, nor should they become secular martyrs to this nation's racially scarred and deeply flawed racial past.
 
Barack Obama, so charismatic in his own right, offers change we can believe in.  And he says he's never seen any of Wright's more inflammatory rhetoric, but the Kessler story is still circulating, and even if the date is in error, the overall message of the piece is still in tact. 
 
No campaign can survive this.  Huckabee's loaves and fishes are Howdy Doody in comparison.  Can Obama really pick up these pieces?  Trying to paint this relationship as a type of Oscar and Felix from The Odd Couple?  He has tolerated Reverend Wright's darker side and grabbed onto the good?
 
Obama's speech tomorrow could very well end up looking like the climactic final speech from Capra's Meet John Doe.  But life is a funny place.  This is the candidate of hope.  And anything is possible in politics.  Obama doesn't just need change we can believe in tomorrow.  He needs a speech that can be believed.  
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Where Could Wright Have Come From?

Posted by beltway girl on Sunday, March 16, 2008 3:19:58 AM
"General Betray Us" -MoveOn.Org
 
"I just want to say something.  655,000 Iraqi civilians are dead.  Who are the terrorists?" -Rosie O'Donnell on Iraq
 
"Abortion, it's beautiful, it's beautiful abortion is legal." -Chris Rock
 
"I love Hillary." -Jenna Jameson, porn star
 
"I did not have sex with that woman." -President William Jefferson Clinton
 
"We have to agree it's not unpatriotic to hold our leaders accountable and speak out." -George Clooney on Iraq
 
"Hugo Chavez is not a dictator...  And he is not anti-American..." -Cindy Sheehan
 
"White people, burning, he was there.  Black people drowning, he don't care..." Chris Rock on George Bush
 
"Bush doesn't care about black people." -Kanye West
 
"It's a question in the back of everybody's head, you know.  Some people, it's further back than others, collecting cobwebs.  But are African-Americans ever going to get reparation for slavery?" -Will from the CNN/YouTube debate
 
"I don't care about motivation.  I care about credibility." -Eliot Spitzer
 
"These were not men who had been tortured.  These were not men who had been starved.  These were not men who had been brainwashed....  Pilots were saying it was the policy of the Vietnamese and that it was systematic.  I believe that's a lie." -Jane Fonda on Vietnam War returning POWs
 
"Ohhh, War! huh... good God, y'all, What is it good for?  Absolutely nothing, say it again--"  -Edwin Starr and Bruce Springsteen, "War"
 
"I would compare those two.  Yes, definitely."  -Charlize Theron on lack of freedoms in Cuba and United States
 
"My own country, the United States, is principally responsible for obstructing progress in Bali." -Al Gore on global warming
 
"I love the English lifestyle.  It's not as capitalistic as America.  People don't talk about work and money, they talk about interesting things at dinner."  -Gwyneth Paltrow
 
"I won't be happy till I'm as famous as God." -Madonna
 
"Americans are possibly the dumbest people on the planet... in thrall to conniving, thievery, smug pricks.  We Americans suffer from an enforced ignorance.  We don't know about anything that's happening outside our country.  Our stupidity is embarrassing." -Michael Moore
 
Right.  So where did this Wright guy come from?
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Heaven On Earth: Brought to You by the DNC

Posted by beltway girl on Saturday, March 15, 2008 2:49:07 AM
Mankind censure injustice fearing that they may be the victims of it, and not because they shrink from committing it.  -Plato, The Republic
 
If one had no idea who Barack Obama was, or who Jeremiah Wright was, and one were to see them both speaking, without knowing who they were speaking to, or where, who would you think was the preacher, and who would you think was the politician?
 
Wouldn't the mild-mannered, gentle, and kindly Obama look more like the cleric?  And wouldn't the rabble-rousing Mr. Wright look more like the candidate, out there trying to fan the flames and move some votes?
 
And this, in a nutshell, is what has gone wrong for the Democratic Party as a whole. 
 
The Dems can't tell the difference between voting and going to religious services any longer.  Indeed, voting Democratic is a religious experience in itself, and a Democratic ballot is a cure-all for every evil at work in the world.  The Democratic agenda is supposedly all about social justice in action, and it is a handmaid of whatever lord you may have in mind.
 
The mutilated women of the pre-abortion-on-demand days have supposedly found friends on the Democratic ticket.  A group of committed combat feminists, anxious to extract justice for these victims, form a part of the secularized sainthood.
 
But do these women, whose lives were destroyed, really find justice with this ticket?  Is their lot improved, is their suffering undone, or are their deaths in any way nullified-- or rectified-- with over a million abortions a year now?
 
Have victimized women found champions in Bill and Hillary Clinton?  Bill, who walked away from the Lewinsky scandal virtually unscathed, and Monica, who was arguably destroyed?
 
Women's rights?  "Social justice"?
 
And now Hillary attempts to ascend to the presidency on Bill's coattails.  Had she not been Mrs. Bill Clinton-- Mrs. Bill to Mr. Bill, who talked women's rights in the abstract but walked his own in the concrete-- had Mrs. Bill Clinton been Mrs. Anyone Else, would she be in the position she is in today? 
 
Is this more "social justice"?  Marrying your resume and ignoring your own husband's inability to convert his grandiose rhetoric about women's rights into reality?
 
The Democratic Party talks the talk on a diverse menu of social issues.  There will be women's rights.  There will be happy, married, family-oriented homosexuality.  There will be a new world for minorities, filled with scholarships and nice jobs and computer terminals.  There will be equal opportunity for all!  There will be universal health care.  There will be no unwanted children.  There will be no war.  There will be no more unnecessary build-up in greenhouse gases.  There will be "Cocoon"-like aging.  There are going to be good jobs with good wages, illegal immigrants will all be wrapped up in an American flag, it won't really cost anything, we'll stamp out domestic violence, and...
 
It's going to be heaven on earth!
 
And that's why there can't be any mention of God in all of this, either.
 
He'd steal our votes.  Because, as you can tell from our agenda, we are God!  We work miracles.  When everyone converts to our religion, whoops, party, we work miracles.
 
And this is what has happened to the Democrats.  Their political agenda is God.  It is heaven on earth.  And you cannot tell the difference, in many cases, between the man of God and the politician.  There is a fusion going on, and a strange hybrid is emerging. 
 
The politician has come out ahead.
 
What did you expect?
 
So please, let's not blame Jeremiah Wright or Barack Obama for the circus going on now.  Because what has taken center stage in the media with the Wright mess is not even Wright's fault.
 
It is your Democratic Party at work.  And this is the new frontier.
 
Welcome to the Church of the DNC!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Wright's Lewinsky Comments Not All Wrong, But It's Still Not All Right

Posted by beltway girl on Friday, March 14, 2008 2:19:30 AM
You know, Bill Clinton is a president who enjoys a legacy.  A respected man.  A man of honor, cherished by the left almost as much as their cherished right to have an abortion.
 
Monica Lewinsky, on the other hand, is the butt of jokes.  She is a mockery, and has been disgraced.  And she will probably never have a normal life.
 
Double standard?  Does that term, "double standard" come to mind for anyone on the left?
 
Evidently not.  Double standard, that cherished term, is reserved for a different type of girl.
 
Like Hillary.  We're hearing all about double standards now, with the press corps "in the tank" for Obama, and discussion of a woman candidate's wrinkles and appearance. 
 
But not a word for the unfortunate Lewinsky.  She got to go and live in the shadows, probably hoping for a driver's license and universal health care that will cover her psychiatric bills.
 
So when Jeremiah Wright raises the spectre of Lewinsky, do I care?
 
No.
 
When he paints her as a victim, do I care?
 
No, because she was one.  Well, let's put it this way.  She is no more or less a victim than President Clinton.  And she has as much claim on exoneration or condemnation as President Clinton.
 
Bill, the looney left will argue, was a great president.  He has earned his forgiveness at the Temple of the Left.  Lewinsky, on the other hand, was no Hillary.  No, she was not, and could never have been, a great president. 
 
So she's not forgiven.
 
See, the double standard isn't because she's a woman; she's just not an important enough woman, and she's up against a man the lefty feminists like.  That is what you need to have a "forgiven" tryst with Bill.
 
Interesting.
 
So I think Wright's comments on Lewinsky are actually valid, and they expose the twisted logic that left Bill walking away into the sunshine while Lewinsky ended up with her name becoming synonymous with various unconventional sexual acts.
 
Wright's style in terms of delivery is up for criticism.  A lot of people don't want to see their pastor getting down with his bad self.  But that has nothing to do with his raising the issue, and the issue is being raised in a climate where there's zero tolerance in terms of brining up Bill's sexual baggage or attacking his legacy.
 
The baggage is a part of that legacy, whether a hypnotized and hypocritical strain of feminism acknowledges it or not.
 
On the other hand, Wright's attacks on Zionsm and "white" America, as well as his remarks about 9/11 and his admiration and appreciation of Louis Farrakhan, are not so right.  They create an aura so inflammatory, and so filled with anger and malice, that, unfortunately, the Tony Rezko story is going to end up buried deep in Section B, while Wright ascends to the headlines on page one.
 
Jeremiah Wright's relationship with Barack Obama is a ticking time bomb, and the fuse is just starting to catch fire and sputter.  If Obama does not dig in hard and act aggressively to diffuse this-- and soon-- this will not end up another Rezko.  The entire election will end up in the hands of the emboldened pro-Clinton-- and shaken pro-Obama-- superdelegates. 
 
This is not going to go away like the Farrakhan "endorsement."  The relationship between Wright and Obama is too pronounced, and Obama has dismissed it too lightly.
 
There are currently about eight million more Democratic voters than Republican in this country.  That ratio works out to 5 to 3, nearly double.  The nation, according to The Wall Street Journal, is in a recession.  Bush's approval ratings haven't significantly improved.  The Democrats should be expecting to sail into the White House on a veritable summer breeze right now.
 
But Hillary hangs in there, with her astronomically high negatives, and Obama sits there, brushing off Wright while he really needs a wind machine in Wright's direction.
 
Up until the Wright moment, it looked like 2008 was going to be Barack Obama's year.  His chances now jeopardized, things could very well turn-- and quickly-- in McCain's favor.  If the Wright connection ignites on Obama, the election will become a blazing hot potato in the laps of the superdelegates, and the result will be a Hillary nomination and a McCain inauguation.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Brave New World

Posted by beltway girl on Wednesday, March 12, 2008 3:06:17 AM
Obama's widespread appeal terrifies the establishment Democrats.
 
This is a party that nominated Walter Mondale.  This is a party that nominated Michael Dukakis.  This is a party that nominated John Kerry.  This is a party that loves to lose.  That war-mongerer Patton may have said that America loves a winner; but he didn't know the DNC of today. 
 
Democrats don't really want to win.  "Winners" are not good people.  Winners don't know pain and suffering.  Winners don't accept reality.
 
The Democrats-- for several deacades-- equate loss at the polls with victories in virtue.  They won't say it.  No, they know the "little people" out there, punching the ballots, wouldn't like it.  These are the delusional Democrats, who think their votes should count.  Who don't think we're in a parliament in Europe running a perpetual opposition party.  Who think that, okay, this is a political race.  The party bigwigs are trying to win this. 
 
Nothing brings home the bacon to voters better than a win, and that includes pork.  There's nothing like winning, and the little people, who actually watch sports and American Idol and Top Chef instead of Tim Russert, know this.
 
The establishment, unfortunately, doesn't share this respect for a winner.  In fact, they have a thriving and completely unwholesome disrespect for one. 
 
Why?
 
Well, "winners" might have their name punched by someone with the mentality of someone...  in a red state.  Someone who actually thinks abortion is wrong!  And not just personally repugnant, but wrong when carried out on a grand (and virtually unchecked) scale.  Worse yet, they might actually be in a red state!
 
It might not be abortion. It could be any of the various social solutions proposed by the left for the plethora of problems that exist in America today.  The solutions that amount to a band-aid on top of a brain hemorrhage. 
 
It might have gotten to the point where it's bad enough where America might be ready, willing, and able to reject the DNC's radical social agenda very soon.  And they know this.  And it scares them.
 
Returning a moment to this theory of the DNC's love affair with losing elections, one has to wonder, then, how Bill Clinton ascended to his throne. 
 
The marriage.
 
It was the marriage, and the Southern charm.  One was just as important as the other.
 
No, no, not Bill's marriage to Hillary.  It was the marriage of the left's radical social agenda to liberal spending policies. This is in place in many of their losing elections, too, but minus Clinton's charm and crucially important regional Southern appeal.
 
Bill didn't break up the marriage.  It would have been to his detriment to do so.  His Southern charm would not have given him the electoral bankroll to dissolve it, even had he wanted to do so.
 
But that doesn't mean it will be unthreatened forever, and who is this Obama, anyway?  And this is where the fear enters in.
 
He's getting big turnouts in these traditionally red states, and in swing states.  What if he turns these states?  Will he feel some affinity towards these voters, should he win?  Will he feel some obligation to them?  Do we of the establishment feel like we can trust him to ignore these voters?
 
Why are they voting for him, and what do they expect in return?  Why does he talk about Reagan like he was actually human?  And what's all this crap about working together to get things done?
 
That's McCain's job!
 
Yes, and it scares them to think it might start to become their job, too.
 
And this is why the party establishment, so in love with losing, is scared to death.  Isn't it better to lose the presidency, but keep that marriage together?
 
Maybe the voters will finally get to answer that question, especially now, when the brave new world isn't looking so brave after all.  The marriage may not fall apart, but the fear of its doing just that will continue to be an overwhelming dynamic in Democratic elections.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Eliot Spitzer in an Imperfect World

Posted by beltway girl on Tuesday, March 11, 2008 12:11:57 AM
Last year, there were 1.3 million abortions in the United States.  Since Roe, there have been 40+ million abortions in the U.S.
 
There are 800+ Planned Parenthood facilities across the country, peddling contraceptives and promoting and performing abortions.
 
Tens of millions people in this country use contraceptives every year. 
 
Last year, the pornography industry was worth about $13.3 billion in the U.S. alone.  And Democrats should remember that buying Hustler never fed a hungry child.
 
But much of what we encounter in everyday life-- both in the media and walking down the street-- has become quasi-pornographic.  Indeed, many porno queens are being embraced in avenues of the mainstream culture, and we can see the results of this walking around amongst us in men, women, and their attitudes.
 
There are more strip clubs in this nation than anywhere else in the world.
 
Prostitution is legal in many counties in Nevada. 
 
There are 3.6 divorces per 1,000 total population.  That's the divorce rate.
 
When I was in my all-girls Catholic high school, there was always a car out in the parking lot with a bumper sticker that said, "Virginity Is Curable."
 
Larry Craig was caught doing his thing in an airport bathroom stall.  Everyone in the media was outraged.  One had to wonder if maybe they thought Larry should be forced to make an honest man of the potential stallmate, had he been anything other than an undercover police officer.  Maybe Larry should have proposed, or at least have dates with flowers, candy, and phone calls.  Pajamagrams.  Would this have been acceptable?
 
Then, we had the Bill and Monica romance way back when.
 
And we of course couldn't have some religious zealot nutcase like Mike Huckabee (who was governor of Arkansas for about ten years) in our highest political office.
 
And now, we have the media gasping in disbelief over the unfortunate Spitzer. 
 
"How could such a thing happen?"
 
Okay.  Okay, what do you guys think?  Do you think maybe the abortion-on-demand, strip-club-frequenting, condom-carrying, Playboy-subscribing, Victoria's Secret-shopping, contraceptive-patch-wearing mentality might be slightly involved here?
 
I know you're all shocked out there in the media.  I know you just cannot understand how the governor of New York could start engaging in the same dysfunctional behavior as many of his constituents.  You'll excuse me for saying so, but this is outrageous behavior in some circles, in some areas.  They're called "deep red states."  And you make a racket out of laughting at just this same audience, those raving lunatic "evangelicals," (otherwise known as "religious people" or "enemies of the people," depending on where you are) out there, actually acting like their votes count!
 
We don't want to legislate morality.  Arguably, they can't even legislate morally.  Now, they're actually engaging in immoral acts.
 
What a completely unexpected outcome.  Keep snickering at those wacky evangelicals because this is where it goes. 
 
Spitzer's hypocrisy is nothing compared to the hypocrisy of the media when it comes to issues like this.
You know, because everyone is judged by his or her own individual standards in the media's view, I think Spitzer should now have to prosecute both himself and the prostitute. 
 
It's preferable to having them condemned by the drive-bys, who will sit there, talk about the imperfect world, and stoke the fervor towards making it even more imperfect, if that's possible.  Let's all be realistic.  Spitzer isn't perfect.  As the media will remind us, when it coincides with their own agenda, this is an imperfect world.  And the media isn't perfect, either.  What a shame they can't see parallels between Spitzer's case of moral schizophrenia and their own.   
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous123Next »