ST reader Mark Dunn (aka “Fat Tone”) has a post up about a new terrorist alliance in the Middle East – that of Al Qaeda and Hamas.
Of course this was all happening while more ‘important’ developments in the world were taking place, like Paris Hilton’s ‘finding God’ while in prison, and her subsequent release …
Channeling Hillary’s thoughts on “big business”: They’re bad when you’re trying to pander to the left, but good when you’re trying to pander to the right.
For some related, more interesting reading on Hillary, Larry Sabato has a good piece up today titled “The Hillary Dilemma” where he looks at some of Hillary’s negatives and positives, how she is polling, etc. Bottom line is that she’s consistently polled well in just about every poll but those related to the Iowa caucus. That’s not to say that things won’t change – Howard Dean soared in the summer of 2003 and maintained that high – until the Iowa caucus, where Iowa Democrats chose someone they felt would be ‘electable’ over someone they thought would perhaps be too polarizing. Other states soon followed, picking Senator Kerry over Dean, and the rest is history on that.
Conservatives I have talked to over the years have believed that there is no way Hillary could get the nomination, because of the same polarizing aspect that plagued Howard Dean. This time around, though, you’ve got a smarter, savvier candidate who is not only trying to woo big business, but win over the military as well as pro-lifers. She won’t leave any stone unturned in her quest to become the first female president.
Essentially, she’s introducing average Americans to a ‘kinder, softer yet strong’ version of the driven, hard-nosed, military-hating, staunchly pro-abortion woman we’ve gotten to know and dislike. The question is, though: Should she make it through the primaries, will Hillary’s makeover convince the average American voter who doesn’t follow politics 24-7 like we do?
As an aside, Hillary is doing really well these days with the “Indian-American” community. Find out why.
Semi-related: Prominent lefty columnist Richard Cohen says to not rule out a good year for the GOP in 2008. Make sure to read James Taranto’s response to some of Cohen’s commentary.
As I’m sure you know by now, the Senate voted today to invoke cloture on the hotly debated immigration bill (Captain Ed liveblogged the vote).
You know my thoughts on the bill. This thread is for you to vent/discuss it. However, as a note to newbies (regulars already know and they usually keep it civil and thoughtful, anyway) should the thread turn into one along the lines of what I routinely see in the comments sections of certain blogs (like what happened here in Hugh Hewitt’s post defending the ‘sellout’ ‘traitor’ Arizona Senator Jon Kyl) it will get shut down without warning.
Yeah, I know that’s probably the understatement of the year.
Take a look at this photo on Rosie’s website.
In case you’ve sworn of visiting the detestable woman’s site, here’s a description: It’s of her very young daughter, wearing a bullet belt.
Now we know Rosie’s against guns, thanks to her infamous anti-gun argument with Tom Selleck on her old afternoon show. So what is Rosie trying to tell us here, with both the picture and the headline: “a picture is worth a thousand posts”?
Could it be “we’re training our kids to grow up to be killers!!!!!!!! Like in Iraq!!!!!!”
Or possibly “One of these days, this could be YOUR child, chaining the exit doors at a college and killing an untold number of people!!!!!!!!!!”
Bob Owens wonders what it all means, too:
But what, precisely, is the message is she trying to send?
Based upon the reaction of her readers, it seems to be either “I’m willing to pimp my child for a cheap political stunt,” or, “I’m so nutty, even my own demented fans are disturbed over how I’d use my child.”
Whatever her point, few seem to understand it, and I wonder if that cluelessness extends to O’Donnell he[r]self.
Oh, I have no doubt that cluelessness extends to one of the most clueless women in the ‘entertainment’ industry.
Whatever her point may be, here’s the message *I* got from the photo: It’s a sick reminder of just how far some people will go to try and prove a point about guns and violence and war.
You know, every once in a while some Hollyweirdos go from being just stupid, uninformed blowhards to disturbed individuals. Rosie, I think, is one such case.
Thought I’d get this one started seeing as I’ll be out most of the afternoon – I’m in between a couple of appointments I have today, and wanted to check in and say hi. Be back later this afternoon/early evening
In the meantime, check out Memeorandum to find out what’s buzzing in the blogosphere. The big ‘story’? How the GOP supposedly wants to “oust” Dick Cheney.
Gosh, I wonder where they got their ‘information’ from?
WASHINGTON (CNN) — President Bush got a little more than he bargained for when he invited high school students from the Presidential Scholars Class of 2007 to the White House for an event promoting reauthorization of his signature No Child Left Behind education reform law.
CNN has learned that a couple of the high school students privately gave the president a handwritten letter before the official event, signed by 50 teenagers, urging the commander-in-chief to “do all in your power to stop violations of the human rights of detainees, to cease illegal renditions, and to apply the Geneva Convention to all detainees, including those designated enemy combatants.”
The letter began, “We have been told that we represent the best and brightest of our nation. Therefore, we believe we have a responsibility to voice our convictions. We do not want American to represent torture.”
Was it the liberal MSM? Liberally biased teachers like Jay Bennish? Moonbat websites? A combo of all three?