French Oil Giant TOTAL to Continue Operations in BurmaTotal SA is one of the biggest foreign investors in Burma. Per Pravda, "A spokeswoman for Total told Dow Jones Newswires that Total had no intention of leaving because a "forced retreat" would open the way for competitors to take its place." (The French retreat from everything except the advance of democracy.)
Wiki: Although Total claims to maintain a "socially responsible investment" program, there has been recent controversy over its corporate involvement in Burma, despite recent European Union sanctions on new investment in the country due to its poor human rights record. Democratic activists have accused Total of propping up that country's brutal military junta...Total is currently involved in a joint venture with the military regime developing an offshore gas field in the Andaman Sea. The Burmese government in exile also criticises Total for allegedly funding rape, murder and genocide in Burma, as a result of hiring members of the military to guard their pipeline.
Total has been taken to court by six Burmese people who claimed they were used as forced labour in the preparation of Total's pipeline in Burma. Total paid the villages to drop the case in 2005. In 2005 a 14 year old girl was allegedly gang raped by sixteen members of the Burmese army employed by Total to guard their pipeline. Many activists feel Total has not taken adequate steps to bring those responsible to account.
Seawitch says: The courageous people of Burma are mostly employing peaceful tactics to gain their freedom from the military junta. They are being met with clubs, bullets, clubs, batons, tear gas and now the junta has taken away the most potent weapon the Burmese people have: the internet. She urges readers to contact the Chinese embassy.
An Expert Weighs in on the Importance of Public Worship
Trivia question of the day: Who said this?:
"And when you pray, you shall not be like the hypocrites. For they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the corners of the streets, that they may be seen by men. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their reward. But you, when you pray, go into your room, and when you have shut your door, pray to your Father who is in the secret place; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you openly."
Evan Maloney: What Are College Administrators Afraid Of?Evan Coyne Maloney, film-maker extraordinaire, penned a good column for the John William Pope Center for Higher Education Policy. He, of course, nails the crux of the problem quite eloquently:
Unfortunately, academia is not only becoming less open, but also more political. A recent study of campaign contributions found that academics put more money toward political candidates than the oil and gas industry, electric utilities, computer and Internet businesses, and pharmaceuticals. Considering how rapidly the cost of a college education is rising, I'm surprised that someone in Congress hasn't denounced higher education’s "obscene price increases" and "heartless gouging of the consumer."
What we do know is that the political donations of academics leans heavily toward one side of the ideological spectrum -- more than three-quarters of it goes to one political party. Perhaps not coincidentally, that political party tends to support higher taxes and more money for the academic industry. In other words, taxpayer money is paying the salaries of academics who use some of their salaries to fund politicians who support sending even more taxpayer money to those very academics. That's a nice setup.
Some might call it a culture of corruption. A culture of buying influence. An imbalance of perspective and opinion. A monopoly of thought.
Indoctrination factories. Interesting how the Democrats, always whining about "fairness," see no problems or conflicts of interest with the ongoing self-perpetuating and incestuous political and financial relationships between themselves and academia.
Posted by: Good Lt. at
11:05 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 246 words, total size 2 kb.
Microsoft and Apple Pushing Hard to Pass Patent Overhaul Bill
It's a little bit outside of our regular subject matter, but those of you in tech businesses may be interested in knowing that the patent system we've had for 50 years may soon come to an end. Via Forbes:
Despite worries that lawmakers still don't have the depth of knowledge on this complex issue to understand its implications, the House of Representatives is expected to pass a controversial and complex bill on Friday that would set the stage for the broadest overhaul of the U.S. patent system in more than 50 years.
"We'd like to see more debate, more hearings, more negotiation," says Marc-Anthony Signorino, director of technology policy for the National Association of Manufacturers, one of the country's largest industry groups. "Even a brain surgeon needs to be trained for a while to understand how the brain works."
As expected, the patent overhaul passed the House and now moves to consideration by the Senate. This overhaul is happening largely thanks to heavy lobbying by Microsoft, Apple and Dell, which see light at the end of the patent tunnel:
"This issue has been considered in three different Congresses," says Steve Elmendorf, spokesman for the pro-reform coalition that counts Microsoft (nasdaq: MSFT - news - people ), Dell (nasdaq: DELL - news - people ) and Apple (nasdaq: AAPL - news - people ) among its members. He notes that there have been numerous hearings and stakeholder meetings on the subject. Regarding lawmakers' grasp of the subject, he says, "That's a lot of what Congress does. They deal with complicated issues every day."
And that, folks, is the amazing thing about Congress. They often deal with complicated issues on fast-track time tables, and they sometimes get it partly right. Amazing...
Posted by: Ragnar at
02:57 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 295 words, total size 2 kb.
Video : Mitt Romney on Campaign Finance
Campaign finance limits are unpopular these days, and Mitt's all over the question with the currently-popular answer:
Of course, as with a lot of issues, Mitt was FOR IT before he was AGAINST IT. Back when campaign finance limits were popular, Mitt had this to say:
What is it with these Massachusetts guys?
Posted by: Ragnar at
09:53 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 60 words, total size 1 kb.
Both Romney and Huckabee received a minor bounce in the polls for a few days [after the Iowa Straw Poll]. But, two weeks later, the national polls show that the Iowa event had virtually no impact. Romney remains mired in third place barely ahead of John McCain. Huckabee's support continues to be measured in the mid-single digits....
eporters have picked up on a story line that Fred Thompson's delay in entering the race has been a mistake. However, the polls show Thompson remains more of a threat to Giuliani's lead that Romney. His support is down a bit from its peak, but he's still showing a lot of potential.Which brings us to our Fred Thompson Frank fact of the day:
Fred Thompson can know both the exact position and momentum of a particle. Furthermore, he knows Schroedinger's cat is dead because he personally strangled it.
Posted by: Ragnar at
08:07 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 161 words, total size 1 kb.
Michelle : Larry Craig = "Lying Crapweasel"
Michelle weighs in:
He’s not just a weasel.
He’s a lying crapweasel.
Should he resign? Well, yeah. If he cared about the dignity of his office, he would. But he obviously doesn’t, does he?
OK, I'm not sure "crapweasel" is really a word, but it sounds like an appropriate moniker for a good chunk of our national politicians on both sides of the aisle.
With 1,034 votes cast so far in Michelle's poll asking "Should Larry Craig resign?," the emphatic "Hell Yes" has garnered 56%, followed by "They're all crapweasels" at 21% and the simple yet timeless "Yes" at 20%.
The stalwart "11th Commandment" contingent weighs in at a small but respectable 3%. Bless their hearts...
Posted by: Ragnar at
07:31 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 121 words, total size 1 kb.
Rudy on the Right to Bear Arms
Sorry, folks, I just don't see the guy who said this getting the GOP nomination:
"My position for many years has been that just as a motorist must have a license, a gun owner should be required to have one as well. Anyone wanting to own a gun should have to pass a written exam that shows that they know how to use a gun, that they’re intelligent enough and responsible enough to handle a gun. Should both handgun and rifle owners be licensed...we’re talking about all dangerous weapons."
E-Voting Decertified in California
(Sacramento) Apparently, electronic voting machines have been challenged by experts and lost.
California Secretary of State Debra Bowen, bowing to fears of computer fraud, Friday decertified Los Angeles County's electronic voting system and sharply curtailed the use of two other machines that California counties had hoped to use to conduct the February 2008 presidential primary.
She said she would allow unlimited use of one system, Hart InterCivic, as long as security and auditing safeguards are implemented.
But in the case of two major companies -- Diebold Election Systems and Sequoia Voting Systems -- Bowen said she would allow just one machine per polling place, apparently to provide an accessible option for disabled voters.
A significant number of California counties have invested mucho dinero for their machines and now they won't be able to use them. I imagine they're pretty puckered. California's registrars will likely try to fight the decision.
Posted by: Mike Pechar at
07:30 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 151 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: Ortzinator at July 04, 2007 04:51 PM (lXwyd)
2
When a user tries to access a blocked site they should get a warning banner from whatever content filter the company is using. The "Websense" filter for example presents the user with a page that says "Access to this site has been blocked by Websense, blah blah blah".
Most of these content filters work in the same fashion in that they get a master list of hostile or undesirable sites from the parent server. However, this list is editable by the local administrator, if the admin wants to add Google.com to the blacklist it only takes a few minutes to make it happen. It can also be done by group or by specific user. Got a user spending too much time on Myspace? Block em.
The best thing to do is make find out the content filtering software the company is using and then email the manufacturer and see if your (reportedly blocked) site is on the master list. If it isn't, the local admin is adding it to the blacklist manually.
BTW: These content filters are just proxies that an organization will pipe all of their HTTP traffic through for filtering. The traffic is basically "Users Web Client -> Proxy Filter -> Gateway/Internet".
Posted by: blackflag at July 05, 2007 08:39 AM (Mq5jS)
John McCain : Riding an Express Elevator to Electoral Hell
Being a "maverick" Republican and flipping off the conservative base over and over again is an effective way to get good press from the New York Times. It's surprisingly ineffective at endearing you to the conservative base:
WASHINGTON - John McCain's campaign, trailing top Republican rivals in money and polls, is undergoing a significant reorganization with staff cuts in every department, officials with knowledge of the shake-up said Monday.
Some 50 staffers or more are being let go, and senior aides will be subject to pay cuts as the Arizona senator's campaign bows to the reality of six months of subpar fundraising, these officials said.
1
McCain is just above Ron Paul in the polls, but without the online surge.
I think this improves on the snark.
Posted by: JabbaTheTutt at July 02, 2007 06:38 PM (5TiXr)
2
Ha ha. I got a nice fund raising letter from McCain a couple of weeks ago. I wrote in big letters across the letter that "It will be a cold day in hell before he gets a nickel from me you open border jackass" and mailed it back in his postage paid envelope. Sounds like he got a bunch of those.
Posted by: Randman at July 02, 2007 07:41 PM (Sal3J)
3
I told you guys McCain was history 6 months ago.
Posted by: Greyrooster at July 02, 2007 08:14 PM (ttUYt)
4
Mcpain was history when Mcpain -Feingold passed, or was it the Keating five scandal?
Elephants never forget.
Posted by: Paul Moore at July 02, 2007 08:41 PM (JROsA)
Is the Conservative Grassroots Just a Paper Tiger?
Allah thinks so:
[Arlen Specter] is why I scoff at threats that we’re going to bounce those who voted for amnesty with primary challenges. If we had any power to get rid of incumbents, don’t you think we would have sent this tool packing decades ago?
I think Allah raises a decent point, but I also think an awful lot of folks in this country are just now waking up to how much the elite machinery protects its own. George W. Bush was able to give the Snarlin' Spectre a nice boost to fend off a primary challenge by Pat Toomey just a few years back. Any chance that Bush could swoop into Pennsylvania and give Spectre a big boost today? Not much.
It's not just Bush. The rank-and-file Republicans are a lot less likely today to trust the party leadership in general. I believe that collapse of trust is going to make a difference next year. How much of a difference remains to be seen.
If we can't pry the worst RINOs out in the primaries, then I may be more receptive to Ace's position on what to do about these guys in the general.
1
Spector is from Pennsilvania a shacky blue state that will bite a Rhino but conservativism is not going to have great sway. Compationate Conservative crap sells in places like that which are the oxymoron of Limited Liberal Socialism but somehow with enough conservative part to not break the bank, like I said oxymoron.
Were Conservatives could really hold sway and control elections would be in the red states the west and especially the south. Concentration their would bring some victories and over time backed by deeds that base could be expanded.
I still believe thou the answer is forming a Conservative Alliance that you could donate to rather than the RNC this Alliance then from within the Republican party make donations to push over like minded Conservatives in the Primaries (were Conservative sway will be the strongest). A little money in the primary will go alot further than a general election. A bonus would be that if the Conservative Alliance group was picky in who they allowed to pimp thier membership bonofieds then like in 06' when the Rhinos went on a spend and graft spree along with some kiddy f*ckin to boot the Alliance members could step out of that umbrella and maybe all those Blue Dogs would have been Conservative Alliance members who took out the incumbents in the primaries and rode in the general as not a Republican but a Republican Conservative.
Posted by: C-Low at June 29, 2007 10:49 AM (aXMim)
2
I think Allah is wrong because I personally have gotten 5 different friends more involved in this AMNESTY debacle then they have ever been politically and if I got 5 friends and someone else got 5 friends and so on and so on we actually have a new movement and NumbersUSA is proof of that. So lets not stop at this win after the Senators July holiday lets start harassing them to secure the borders under current law and lets go after the businesses that hire illegals. To let this opportunity go would be sad.
Posted by: Jaded at June 29, 2007 11:38 AM (ElLn4)
3
I have friends that wrote our Senators for the first time ever. We should either force a change at the primaries, or we should use the tools we have with the internet, and start a thrid party in ernest! Call it the 'Conservative' party, maybe. Call it the 'Common Sense' party, possibly. Come up with a name, and organize. And take this last thought seriously .... .... If we don't have a candidate of our own, we can still choose which candidate from the BigTwo, represents our values in each election. and if we choose, we can endorse them as a block! As a third party, we can let the BigTwo spend money building up possible candidates, and we can withold our endorsement as a block, or bestow it. .... There is more than one way to skin a cat (no offense cat lovers) Make these dingalings recognize us.
USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at June 29, 2007 02:25 PM (2OHpj)
4
I'm with Jaded. Time for enforcemnent of the laws on the books.
Posted by: Greyrooster at June 29, 2007 03:00 PM (BT9oD)
And all the cities with the most strict gun laws has the highist crime rate and scince guns were banned in ENGLAND and AUSTRALIA their crime rate is much more worse then ours
Posted by: sandpiper at June 24, 2007 10:36 AM (h6CK1)
Are You a FredHead?
Do you have recurring dreams of Fred Thompson taking the Presidential oath of office in January, 2009?
Are your three children (including both your daughters) named "Fred Dalton Thompson"?
Have you lobbied Congress to change the law so you can donate even more money to the Friends of Fred Thompson Exploratory Committee?
Do you stay up late at night thinking up ingenious (and mostly legal) new ways to support Fred Thompson?
If any of the above describes you, you are experiencing "Thompson Elative Compulsion Syndrome." By all accounts, this condition is highly contagious and spreading like a wildfire across the United States. Other known side effects are insomnia and an elevated heart rate.
Fortunately, there is no known cure, but there is now a support group.
We are the "FredHeads," a support group/political movement for all FredHeads everywhere.
As you've no doubt experienced, FredHeads are very big on talking about Fred Dalton Thompson. We love to talk about Fred.
That said, we think it's time for a little less talk and a little more action.
If you agree, just click here, and let's get moving:
1
Does getting a woody every time I see a pic of Fred's wife count?
I like Fred a lot, But his wife is Hot!!!
Posted by: 1sttofight at June 11, 2007 01:38 PM (51r8a)
2
If Fred looks like he has a chance of winning, I predict he will die in a mysterious plane crash, because the corruptarian establishment will never let an honest man sit in the Oval Office again.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at June 11, 2007 02:51 PM (jQsc/)
3
As long as he doesn't go third party I'm all in. There is no way I want a third party candidate while a Clinton is running for office again.
Posted by: scaulen at June 11, 2007 03:39 PM (OZn2O)
4
Fred's ole lady gets my vote. Been waiting for someone to bring her up. 40 years old and tight. With her I'm not sure Fred will last another 5 yrs. I wouldn't and Fred and I are the same age.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 11, 2007 04:58 PM (ijNsC)
5
I say Frd for Prez and Joe L for VP or Vice Versa. Preferably Fred as the Head.
Posted by: SeeMonk at June 11, 2007 09:04 PM (yKwZ2)
Charges Dropped in Police Dog Gurning Incident
A drunken woman makes faces at a police dog and gets arrested! Luckily, a prosecutor steps in and drops the charge:
CHELSEA, Vt. (AP) - A prosecutor has dropped charges against a woman who was arrested for staring at and making faces at a police dog.
"Prosecuting a woman for `staring' at a police dog is absurd," said her lawyer. "People are allowed to make faces at police dogs and officers to express their disapproval. It's constitutional expression," said public defender Kelly Green, who represented Jayna Hutchinson.
Disorderly conduct, public intoxication? Sure. Animal cruelty for allegedly upsetting a dog by making faces at it? C'mon.
1
The woman is a bitch (no pun intended) but she obviously did not deserve to be arrested.
Posted by: George Ramos at June 07, 2007 12:54 PM (TmLg9)
2
They want to charge a woman for making faces at a dog and yet Paris Hilton gets to go home because she was cold in her cell and didn't like to food and death row inmates get reprieves because the lethal injection might hurt.
Justice at it's finest.
Posted by: George Ramos at June 07, 2007 01:01 PM (TmLg9)
Posted by: George Ramos at June 07, 2007 01:02 PM (TmLg9)
4
Of course, its Liberal Vermont, dog rights are above human rights, didn't you know that. What have they got going for them, well they've got maple syrup and card carrying communists in their legislature. Go Vermont! Solidarity, Comrades!
Posted by: DrTheopolis at June 07, 2007 01:12 PM (9ZqGe)
5
Those syrup-sucking stump jumpers don't produce nearly as much maple syrup as New York State! Posers.
6
I had never heard of the word gurning before. Forgive me for being slow.
Posted by: George Ramos at June 07, 2007 03:52 PM (TmLg9)
7
Free Paris Hilton. Anything Al Sharpton is against I'm for. She's rich, she's thin, she looks good. Hate the rich, bla, bla, bla. If the punk John Edwards wasn't running for office he would be running after her. Screw people who can't afford a good lawyer. Go to work and get one. A friggin muslim can move here and get rich. Friggin lefturds crybabies. I wish Paris would invite me and my son to the party at her house tonight. Bet it's a good one.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 07, 2007 04:14 PM (StMuN)
8
Paris is hot but South Park is right. She's a spoiled rich whore.
Posted by: John Smith at June 07, 2007 05:20 PM (TmLg9)
9
I like spoiled rich whores. Particularly if they look good. Screwing under silk sheets is the best.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 07, 2007 06:53 PM (BPAVt)
10
That poor dog, It will have to deal with that "stress syndrome" now for the rest of its life. poor attack dog,
g
Posted by: gerald at June 07, 2007 09:28 PM (foV9j)
1
Ragnar, I think you have a winner! USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at June 07, 2007 05:27 AM (2OHpj)
2
What Thompson strikes me as is a "grown ass man." Someone who has their crap together and is willing to take responsibility for themselves. It seems such a contrast to Bush at this point, who seems to have given up on so much (I'll give him credit for holding the line on Iraq, though). It's a shame because he had the potential to be a great President and he let it slip through his fingers.
Posted by: David Marcoe at June 07, 2007 05:33 AM (dJ/b4)
3Thompson gets about 15% in most Republican polls because of his ideology, they see him as being the most conservative.
Yup. They can say what they want about Thompson; that he hasn't accomplished anything, that he's not a hard worker, that he's an empty suit, blah blah blah. Yet he's the most conservative. nuff said as far as I'm concerned.
1
Well Fred used Greyroosters' favorite phase. Use Common sense. I also like the part where he considers it a badge of honor to be attacked by bozos. Me to. Love his stand of pre-emptive strike on Iran. We cannot let those bozos attain nuclear capability. Iran self destruct? Don't know if I agree or not. Muslims are muslims and will act the part. Which is religion before anything else. Even eating.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 07, 2007 06:36 PM (gG0UF)
1
I'm with Fred to run along with Giuliani as vice president. The Clinton bitch is about to run into her being old news. McCain also. Barrack HUSSEIN Jomama may soon be the leading democratic candidate. 99.9% of blacks will vote for him merely because he is black. Blacks would vote for a child molester if he ran against a white man. I don't believe Jomama is a christian and fully expect him to pull a Cassius Clay/Fidel Castro. All muslims will vote for him in the hope he is what I suspect. We must be careful. Giuliani/Thompson will be a winning ticket.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 06, 2007 04:35 PM (30TNB)
3
It's funny how the leading dem candidates can measure their experience in federal government in months rather than years. Remember what happened last time we elected someone without enough DC experience? We got BOOOOSH!
Posted by: wooga at June 06, 2007 08:31 PM (t9sT5)
4
The widget screws up my sidebar, and since all the code is remote, there's little I can do about it. I'm hoping they'll put up a contact addy for the webmaster so I can email him about it.
Posted by: rightwingprof at June 07, 2007 08:58 AM (H1WLJ)
Fred Thompson is Now Taking Contributions!!!
First, a message from Fred:
We’re entering a new phase of this process, and if I do take on this challenge, we’re not going to do things the same old way. The so-called ‘experts’ say we’re getting in too late. Well, I don’t buy it, and you don’t, either.
We’re going to plow some new ground and make a real difference for our nation.
Your support is going to help us bring to our fellow American the message of change and a call to return to the principles of our founding heritage. It’s critical that we address our nation’s challenges through the core ideals of self-governance, free markets, and the rule of law.
I believe there is a real sense across our country that we’re tired of the same old petty politics. Our fellow Americans want to see some real change. They want it in Washington, and they want it closer to home. They want a better future for themselves and for their families.
1
Still a Giuliani man. Just can't come up with anything Fred has accomplished. We'll see. Certainly not again the man. Like the way he talks. He's diffenately a good candidate. Will be make a good leader in the tough times ahead?
Posted by: greyrooster at June 06, 2007 12:13 PM (1h1Tb)
2
I'm with you, greyrooster. Just don't understand why so many "conservatives" find Thompson so appealing, other than talk. I have nothing against him, but as a term-and-a-half senator who has spent most of his adult life as either an actor or a lobbyist, I honestly don't see how he's much less a "lightweight" than Obama.
Posted by: geobandy at June 06, 2007 02:15 PM (rRNqo)
3
Of course you can say he's not guilty of association with lifelong politicians.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 06, 2007 04:44 PM (30TNB)
For President Bush, loyalty is apparently a one-way street; decency is something he's for as long as he doesn't have to take any risks in its behalf;and courage--well, that's nowhere to be seen. Many of us used to respect President Bush. Can one respect him still?
1
George Bush is toast! Besides chewing food with his mouth open, besides his support of AG Gonzales, besides his inability to realize the internal hatred among the Iraqi peoples, besides his blindness to our open borders, he just has never gotten over his Father's tall persona. We should have known when he uttered "Compassionate Conservatism" that we were being conned. Our fault. Thank god we've got that drug entitlement for old citizens, god knows we'll all be on some in future years after we realize who is paying for this idiot's misdirections--our children!
We should be ashamed for what we've allowed to happen.
Posted by: RJ at June 06, 2007 08:12 AM (yyxO/)
2
Well said RJ. I cannot believe how a little "aw shucks" and envoking God a few times in every speech can keep the 28% or so who support him happy. The guy is a complete huckster - a fake cowboy, living on a fake ranch, and a fake Christian.
But thats too simple. What would of been the alternative. Much more of what we didn't want. Shitty policy times 2 is no more palatable when you didn't vote for the person spoon feeding you shit. This should be the lesson for Repubs thinking about not voting in the next election.
Posted by: Randman at June 06, 2007 11:08 AM (Sal3J)
It is vital to emphasize repeatedly that the havoc wreaked on this country by George W. Bush is, first and foremost, the work of America's so-called "conservative" movement, which venerated Bush to a degree unseen in the modern presidential era. Here was not a mere President, but "our" Commander-in-Chief during a Time of War, and to criticize him was to criticize America. There were multiple culprits-in-arms along the way -- principally the news media -- but the right-wing movement now seeking to re-invent itself as dissatisfied victims of the Bush presidency in search of a "Real Conservative" to lead it are the ones who bear full responsibility for the devastation this presidency has wreaked on the country.
[...]
There was a time when I, at least, expected far more conservatives to object meaningfully to the endless series of decisions which so plainly contravened the storied, theoretical "conservative principles," yet it never happened -- until Bush's popularity collapsed and his presidency widely viewed as a failure of historic proportions.
One cannot say -- and I never have said -- that there are no conservatives who dissented from the Bush worldview, but their numbers are so tiny as to be irrelevant. That is because this movement's belief in its ostensible political principles is plainly illusory, just a crass political prop. And they simply do not believe in the basic constitutional values which have defined the country since its inception, nor do they believe in the rule of law (hence the virtual consensus that convicted felon Lewis Libby should be pardoned). What else do they need to embrace in order to eliminate all doubts about that?
[..]
It is worth recalling how common it is -- especially in recent times -- for a political movement to mount primary challenges to sitting Presidents when that movement believes the President has strayed from the movement's defining ideology. Liberals were dissatisfied with Jimmy Carter, believing he did not embody liberal principles, and thus backed Ted Kennedy's 1980 primary challenge. Many conservatives did the same in 1976 by backing Ronald Reagan over Gerald Ford, and again in 1992 by backing Pat Buchanan against George H.W. Bush.
But the idea of mounting a primary challenge to George W. Bush in 2004 never crossed the mind of any prominent conservatives, at least not publicly. The consensus among them was that he was one of them, a True Conservative, someone to be hailed and revered and built up -- and that consensus remained undisturbed until now, when political considerations compel them to pretend that they have been dissatisfied with Bush because he is something other than a "conservative." And with that behavior, this movement reveals itself to be as dishonest and free of principles as they are destructive.
Posted by: Bo at June 06, 2007 02:27 PM (euN4c)
6
Overall, the main reason that Bush has gotten so much support from anyone, is likely due to the left's tireless and very often irrational hatred for him. That, and as has been basically said before, why order the double platter of something bad, when you can get the diet portion? And Americans want to win in Iraq BELIEVE IT OR NOT! Bush ALSO wants to win in Iraq, and so many people supported him on that issue alone. As I have said before, I voted for Bush, because he was less bad than his opposition. I was only given two choices in our two party system, so I took the slowly bleeding cut, instead of the malignant brain tumor. I figure the tumor is a miserable certain death, but maybe, maybe I CAN stop the bleeding so at least there I have a chance! If we had a third party, that would be nice ... BUT WE DON'T!!! So we are stuck with BAD, and REALLY BAD! This time it might be different, IF Fred gets his hat in the ring. USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at June 07, 2007 01:51 AM (2OHpj)
7
Before you ask .... NO! I didn't expect the cut to develop an infection on top of everything else. Makes life more complicated though. USA, all the way!
Posted by: Michael Weaver at June 07, 2007 01:53 AM (2OHpj)
