• Right Place Photo Caption Contest Hall of Glory Top 25

    meister.jpeg About Me
    BlogmeisterUSA's Guidelines for Commenting
    My Blog at Newsbusters
    My Writings at Family Security Matters
    My Writings at The American Thinker
    I Also Blog at Lifelike Pundits
    National Summary Interviews Me
    Read "The Americans" by Gordon Sinclair
    PELOSI_DEMOCRAT_TREASON-1.jpg More About the Fighting 101st Keyboardists

January 31, 2007

NY Times Shows Video of Dying Soldier

From the Houston Chronicle (via Sweetness & Light, h/t learner):

WASHINGTON A photograph and videotape of a Texas soldier dying in Iraq published by the New York Times have triggered anger from his relatives and Army colleagues and revived a long-standing debate about which images of war are proper to show.

The journalists involved, Times reporter Damien Cave and Getty Images photographer Robert Nickelsberg, working for the Times, had their status as so-called embedded journalists suspended Tuesday by the Army corps in Baghdad, military officials said, because they violated a signed agreement not to publish photos or video of any wounded soldiers without official consent.


Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism in Washington, said the incident was typical of the dilemmas that face news organizations in war.

"The fact that a photograph upset people, even family members, is not always sufficient reason not to run it," Rosenstiel said. "Editors may decide that there is a compelling public interest in running a photograph precisely because it does upset an audience."

The agreement that journalists are asked to sign as a condition of embedding has 14 rules. Rule 11 covers military casualties: "Names, video, identifiable written/oral description or identifiable photographs of wounded service members will not be released without service member's prior written consent."

The ground rule goes on to say, "In respect for family members, names or images clearly identifying individuals 'killed in action' will not be released." The rule says names of soldiers killed can be released a day after family notification, but it does not address photographs or video images.

From what I gather, the video and photo that were released clearly identified the soldier, in violation of the ground rule.

As Steve from S&L notes,

If Sgt. Leija had been a POW, publishing photos of his dying would have violated the Geneva Conventions.

The legality of the photos/video can be decided by the powers that be. However, it's interesting to note who the media worries about offending, and who it doesn't.

The New York Times and many other news outlets would not post the Muhammed cartoons in order not to "offend" the sensibilities of Muslims. This, in spite of the fact that by the time the MSM had the opportunity to show them, they had become an important part of what was becoming a major international story, not just a gratuitous poke in the eye. The reason? Muslims are becoming a protected class Western society because of the fear of violent retribution they have managed to instill in the hearts and minds of many. (One Canadian town is taking a stand.) It's unlikely that Sgt. Leija's family will send a suicide bomber into the NYT's offices in order to get revenge for being offended.

In the aftermath of 9/11, news outlets stopped showing pictures of people jumping out of the windows of the Twin Towers because the images were "upsetting." Are the relatives of 9/11 victims more prone to being upset than by the relatives of slain soldiers?

Soldiers are not high on the list of respected people for leftwingers, and the MSM is highly populated with leftwingers. The MSM has been doing its level best to give us a negative picture of the war. To heighten that negative view, they chose to show Sgt. Leija's last tragic moments as a "lesson" in the brutalities of war and why we should pull out now: to avoid more such tragic ends to "children" whom are being "sent" into war. Therefore, his relatives are not worthy of the consideration due to the families of other people who meet a violent end.

Surely the memory of Sgt. Leija deserves better.

UPDATE (2/1/07, 3:05 pm): Here is Michelle Malkin's take on it.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 04:27 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | Double Standards

Tired at Work? Consider a Move to France!

Napping on the job would get most American workers a reprimand and, if the habit continues, a pink slip.

But in France, a study is being proposed to see what health benefits could be reaped by sleeping during work hours:

France launched plans this week to spend $9 million this year to improve public awareness about sleeping troubles. About one in three French people suffer from them, the ministry says.

Fifty-six percent of French complain that a poor night's sleep has affected their job performance, according to the ministry.

"Why not a nap at work? It can't be a taboo subject," Health Minister Xavier Bertrand said Monday. He called for further studies and said he would promote on-the-job naps if they prove useful.

The French have 35-hour workweeks. They also have five weeks of vacation...not because they earn them, but because the government dictates to businesses how much vacation time they must offer. France may be number five on this list of countries by GDP, but the US has a GDP more than five times that of France.

And their government is thinking of giving a green light to snoozing at work? George Costanza would give his eyeteeth to be Fwench!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:21 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Europe

Say Goodbye, Al!

Those who love Air America will not love this news: Al Franken has announced his last day, February 14.

I guess not even the underhanded accounting at Air America is enough to get Al a paycheck.

For those who will miss him, fear not! Franken is seriously considering a run for the Senate from his home state of Minnesota. Minnesotans saw fit to elect Keith Ellis, so Al may actually have a chance. Just what our Senate needs: another blame America first lib.

As for Air America, the loss of Franken is likely to be a big blow, as he was the most well-known personality on the network. Its final demise is probably only a matter of time.

And if Franken is elected senator, rest assured he will likely push for the Fairness Doctrine as a form of revenge.

Getting ready to turn off his microphone for good

h/t: Moonbattery

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:56 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Leftwing Lunacy

Dodd Practically Non-Existent in Polls

If Chris Dodd's campaign was a movie, it would be The Sixth Sense: talking to dead people.

Dodd is practically dead in the water in the polls.

When pollster John Zogby asked a group of 339 likely Democratic voters earlier this month whom they wanted for president in 2008, one or two mentioned Connecticut's senior senator.

One or 2 percent mentioned Christopher Dodd?

No. One or two people, Zogby said.


Dodd finished between 10th and 12th in the polls, behind non-candidates like retired Gen. Wesley Clark and the Rev. Al Sharpton, usually tied with Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich or former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack.

That list of non-candidates ahead of Dodd includes Joe Lieberman.

And both Jay Leno and Jon Stewart are using his stature as a campaign nonentity as joke fodder.

Back when Dodd announced his candidacy, Sean Hannity wondered if Dodd's wife had encouraged him to run. I'm beginning to wonder the same thing.


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:37 AM | Comments (48) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

January 30, 2007

On Our Violent History

James Lewis has written a must-read essay for The American Thinker today on why sugarcoating man's violent past is a mistake.

Acknowledging human violence is not the same as excusing it. Just the opposite --- precisely because we have the capacity to destroy, we must be taught to act morally. That is the basic view of Western Civilization going back to the Code of Hammurabi. Civilized armed forces like the United States insist on high levels of restraint in their warfighters, even in the face of direct personal danger. But the civilized world is constantly faced with aggressive enemies willing to kill and die for some bizarre cause, from the heavenly glory of the Emperor to some Mullah's weird obsession with hanging sixteen year old girls who fall in love. Not to mention yet another Marxist scam to create a perfectly egalitarian paradise on earth, as is underway in Venezuela today.

Be sure to read the whole thing.

Peace activists either don't realize or conveniently forget that there is always someone lurking in the shadows, waiting for an opportune time to use violence as a means to attain power. (Genghis Khan, Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, and Pol Pot all come to mind.) The history of man is a bloody one, and it's essential that we not only come to terms with the fact, but realize that the use of force to prevent such people from gaining too much power is a necessary downside of civilization.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:37 AM | Comments (74) | TrackBack (0) | History

Nancy Pelosi to Begin her Own Blog

Michelle Malkin reports that Nancy Pelosi will soon begin her own blog, citing the power of the nutroots, er, netroots.

I highly doubt Mrs. Pelosi will actually sit down at the keyboard to compose her own daily entries. It's likely a hired minion will be responsible for those, with Pelosi giving approval. Of course, I could be wrong.

I'm highly skeptical of the idea of Congressional members blogging. They already have their own (government sponsored) websites and the MSM at their beck and call. It's not as if they need another outlet for their palaver. And it's not as if they will actually fit into the blogosphere, seeing as most blogs (even those that focus on news and political commentary) have a bit of the author's personal touch. I guess the idea is for Pelosi and other Congressional bloggers to seem folksy...but in my opinion, it's a big stretch.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:19 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Democrats

Kofi Annan Wins Award

Via AP:

STOCKHOLM, Sweden -- Former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan and Darfur human rights activist Mossaad Mohamed Ali won the Olof Palme Prize on Tuesday for their work to protect human rights, peace and security.

The award will be presented at a ceremony in Stockholm in May, and the two winners will share the $75,000.

The Palme memorial fund board, which selects the winners, cited Annan's courage and involvement during his U.N. leadership, saying he had "given proof of the utmost integrity" while also defending U.N. principles and international law when those were challenged.

"His fight for human rights, and his way of stressing that development is a necessary part of the work for security, has left indelible traces in the world organization."

Proof of the utmost integrity? Was the Palme memorial fund board not paying attention to the whole Oil-for-Food mess?

I guess you could say Annan was upholding U.N. principles, which seem to be bureaucratic corruption and avoiding accountability.

What a joke.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:22 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | United Nations

January 29, 2007

Quote of the Day

"Tyrants agree: the easiest way to win a debate is to prevent the other side from debating." ~ Selwyn Duke

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:35 PM | Comments (13) | TrackBack (0) | Quote of the Day

The Most Ethical Congress in History (giggle)

It seems that Nancy Pelosi, Evan Bayh and Rahm Emanuel left some important information out of their personal finance reports, and they're now rushing to "rectify" the problem. Details here.

Draining the swamp? More like creating a swamp of their own.

They really meant to disclose everything...they just got busy with, you know, things!

h/t: GOP Bloggers

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:23 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Democrats

Cuba, the Recycling Paradise

It's so educational to see how journalists are able to make Cuba seem like such a quaint place to live. Take this article from the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, for example:

Just about everything in Cuba seems to be re-used. Coffee grounds from the morning brew become fertilizer in gardens. A plastic CD cover doubles as a picture frame. And the cardboard centers from toilet paper rolls serve as hair rollers for women.

Stop at a food stand, and the drinking glasses are cut down Havana Club rum bottles. Buy dessert at a bakery, and flan pudding comes in the base of a soda can. String beans at the farmers market are tied together with a scrap of cloth from old pants.

It's enough to make a Greenpeace member weep with joy.

Cuba's socialist government long has extolled the value of recycling. In 1961, Ernesto "Che" Guevara led a state company to recoup metals and other materials from waste. The objective: to save on imports, boost exports, expand industry and create jobs.

But recycling soared in the 1990s by necessity after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of Soviet subsidies. At the depth of the post-Soviet crisis, some Cubans made stew from the skins of plantains and "steaks" from grapefruit rinds. To this day, plastic bags are routinely washed and hung out to dry.

Quite literally, recycling on this Caribbean island has become an art.

Cuba's socialist government? France and Germany have socialist governments. Cuba has a Communist government and, unlike China, has yet to embrace any kind of capitalist reform. And doesn't Che Guevara sound like a great guy for having started Cuba's recycling program? It almost makes one forget his murderous legacy.

In the beginning of the Sun-Sentinel article linked above, you'll note that the U.S. embargo is blamed for Cuba's woes. What about the trading it does with other countries? Note to author: Communist dictator Fidel Castro's policies are the cause. But people in this country who yearn for the Communist ideal don't like that uncomfortable truth, so it's easier to blame the U.S. for this and many of the world's other problems, rather than take a close look at the real reason.

File this article under journalistic pap.

...but they have great healthcare, a high literacy rate, and a bang-up recycling program!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:15 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Leftwing Lunacy

Patrick Kennedy Endorses Dodd

Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-RI) has given Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) his endorsement in Dodd's run for the Democrat presidential nomination.

He cited Dodd's Senate record and service in the Peace Corps, adding that they

...are both graduates of Providence College.

"He is a fellow Friar," Kennedy told The Providence Journal. "Friars stick together."

Kennedy is best known for being Ted Kennedy's son, and for getting special treatment after crashing his car while being inebriated last year.

Now there's an endorsement worth having!

In other endorsement news, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) has announced that he is open to endorsing any candidate in the presidential run.

"I'm going to do what most independents and a lot of Democrats and Republicans in America do, which is to take a look at all the candidates and then in the end, regardless of party, decide who I think will be best for the future of our country," Lieberman said Sunday.

Dodd "made up" with Lieberman last fall after Lieberman won his Connecticut senate race against Ned Lamont, whom Dodd had publicly supported when Lamont won the Connecticut Democrat primary.

Looks like Dodd's candidacy is off to a roaring start!


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:46 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

January 28, 2007

Yesterday's Peace Rally: What You Won't Hear from the MSM

Tonight, Aaron of Lifelike Pundits will share what the MSM won't about yesterday's "peace" rally in Washington, D.C. Also, David Bellavia returns with his take on Kerry's "US is a pariah" comments, the antiwar rally, and the antiwar resolution coming up for vote
this week in the US Senate.

AM 580 WDBO - Orlando/Central Florida
Listen on the stream at WDBO
Join the listeners in the chat room by logging on at ASKshow

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:58 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | CPR

Wanna Make Lots of Money? Be a University President

Check this out:

January 28, 2007 -- COLUMBIA University President Lee Bollinger lives large. The educator, who pulls down an annual $685,930 in salary and benefits, had the largest expense account of any of the Ivy League school chiefs, racking up $93,743 for the 2004-2005 fiscal year, the student-run Columbia Spectator newspaper reports. The university declined to give Page Six a breakdown.

As Kitty says, "and they complain about CEOs." Where's the outrage? Aren't universities supposed to be above such petty things as (gasp) money? Aren't college-level educators worried about the wage gap between people who make as much as Bollinger and the rest of us? Ah, it's always different when you're the one making the big bucks, eh?

(BTW, Columbia is where the Minutemen were basically forced offstage by a bunch of student thugs. To my knowledge, Bollinger has yet to do something substantive about it.)

Think this guy will ever make the AFL-CIO's Executive Paywatch?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:40 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Double Standards

January 27, 2007

Say NO to Hillary: Reason 1

From Unlimited Access (copyright 1996) by Gary Aldrich, chapter six, page 87:

Early in the Clinton Administration, the media was full of stories about FOBs -- "Friends of Bill." But many of the appointees I investigated were really FOHs -- Friends of Hillary. Nowhere were her thumbprints more pronounced than on the Health Care Task Force -- the most important domestic project of President Clinton's first term.

The health care debate looked very different inside the White House than it did to the public. While the public was inundated with hard-luck stories of suffering poor people who had lost their insurance, the Clintons themselves were behaving like the most cutthroat corporate downsizers.

In an effort to make good on candidate Clinton's promise to cut the White House staff by 25 percent -- a target the administration never reached -- many longtime federal employees were fired. To staff the White House, the administration brought in a flood of interns and volunteers who worked not only without insurance, but also without pay (and frequently without professional standards of behavior).

Kept very quiet by the Clintons was the fact that many White House employees were hired as officially "part-time" staff to be paid at only thirty-nine hours a week or less, even though there was plenty of work for them to do and they wanted to work full time. But denying them that extra hour of work a week allowed the White House to deny them a variety of benefits, the chief of which was health insurance!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:42 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Say NO to Hillary!

Protest and Counter-Protest

As you know (according to the MSM), tens of thousands of anti-war protesters joined Hanoi Jane, Code Pink, and other likeminded "America Sucks First" people in Washington, D.C. today.

Tens of thousands?

Aaron of Lifelike Pundits was there, and according to an e-mail he sent me and some other friends, it was more like 5,000 people. He has a post-in-progress about attending a "rally for the troops" counter protest. Check it out, and be sure to keep going back for updates.

Andrea Shea-King also discusses the protest over at The Radio Patriots. I like her final analysis:

What will these instant gratification-addicted whiners do when we're battling the savages at the gate ten or twenty years from now? Poor pacifist babies. They're cranky. They've already reached their maximum endurance level. Give them a Binkie pacifier and tell them to go suck on it. The grown ups will take care of things while these spoiled brats nap in their clueless slumber. I swear, they need adult supervision...

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 05:08 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

Feminism and Politics

My article about this topic is up at American Thinker.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:11 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Politics

January 26, 2007

Dreaming of American Idol

Now anyone who knows me can tell you that I am not an American Idol fan. Last year and the year before I watched some of the auditions and that was it. I didn't, and don't, want to get sucked up into the hype. Give me an episode of Forensic Files on Court TV any day!

But tonight, my oldest daughter and I entertained ourselves by going to YouTube and watching many of the Idol reject auditions that can be found there. I saw the young man whom Simon Cowell likened to a "bush baby," and one young lady who admitted that she was a terrible singer, but that with the help of the American Idol judges, she could become the first Idol who was unable to sing a note when she first auditioned. Then there was the girl who sang one of guest judge Jewel's songs, trying to sound exactly like Jewel...and failing miserably. (Jewel herself looked thoroughly embarrassed.) And what about the gal who imitated the Cowardly Lion and sang the Lion's song from the Wizard of Oz?

Some people on Idol accept the judges' decision gracefully. Others argue. And still others use profanity to let us know what they think. Like that's going to win hearts and change minds...

Why do these people put themselves through this? More importantly, why do we? (My daughter and I squirmed uncomfortably during more than one performance.)

I didn't see any of the contestants so far this year who are any good, although I am sure they are out there. But so many people who have absolutely no talent whatsoever go on this show! And so many of them say that they had family, friends, or co-workers urge them to try out. Either their cheerleaders are as tone deaf as they are, or they are sadistic b*stards, laughing at the failures that are broadcast for all of America to see.

The dream to become a pop star in America is very tempting. If I thought I had even half a chance, I might consider it. However: one, I'm too old for AI's age bracket, and two, my singing is just not up to par. Perhaps with some professional instruction (that I have no time or money for), who knows? But I know my limits. And I'm sure Simon would cut me off within the first few bars of whatever song I chose to sing. Paula would shake her head sympathetically. And Randy would say, "No, dog, the vocals just aren't there."

Part of the appeal of Idol, at least in the early stages, is seeing people make absolute fools of themselves. It's part of human nature to laugh at the expense of others. Rosie O'Donnell (who makes a living by deriding others, by the way) can complain all she likes about Simon Cowell's insults, but that is what people tune in to see. And everyone who auditions realizes they are taking the risk of having some of those barbs thrown at them. The entertainment world is a dog eat dog one. If you can't take the heat, you have no business being in the kitchen.

One of the things we are told as children is that we can do absolutely anything we want to do if we just want it enough. It's a lovely sentiment, but it simply isn't true. There are many things that sound great to me, but I know that there is no way I could possibly carry them off: being a model (too short), joining the Army (not enough stamina for boot camp), being a pro tennis player (I suck at tennis)...this is just a partial list! Even the things I am good at do not guarantee fame, fortune or a fabulous career. It's just the way life is.

Dreams are all well and good, but a bit of realism is important in those dreams. Instead of being told that we can do absolutely anything, we should be encouraged to follow a path based on our strengths, whatever they may be. Like you, I imagine, I have a few dreams. And perhaps maybe one or two of them may come true! But in the meantime, I try to live a life that's based in reality. It makes for less heartache and less need for Tums.

Unfortunately for some, getting caught up in the dream means crashing down to earth when the castle in the sky is shattered by the blunt honesty of people like Simon Cowell.

But it makes for great television ratings.

They're not going to lie to you!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:12 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Commentary

Illegal Sues for Corvette Prize

Earlier this month, there was the Toys R Us sweepstakes controversy, in which the toy retailer refused to give a $25K savings bond to a baby born to an illegal immigrant Chinese couple (which it later reversed, most likely to avoid bad publicity and a costly lawsuit).

Now we have an illegal immigrant suing a Chicago radio station, 107.9 La Ley (a Spanish language station...surprise!), because it hasn't given her the Corvette she won in a contest in 2005.

In a written statement, La Ley said that it is legally required to get a valid Social Security number or tax identification number from anyone who wins prizes worth more than $500.

In other words, US citizens or legal residents only.

Maribel Nava Alvarez is also whining that the station's lawyer threatened to report her to immigration authorities if she went forward with the suit. She has since left the Chicago area, fearing deportation. Too bad she wasn't able to drive away in that snazzy Corvette.

Who says these folks aren't assimilating?

Gotta be legal to drive one of these babies!

h/t: Moonbattery

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:18 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Illegal Immigration

George Soros Donates to Obama Election Fund

Hollywood has been falling all over itself to raise money for Barack Obama's presidential bid, but guess who else is putting money into the kitty?

Our friend George Soros, the gazillionaire who made it his business to crush George Bush's re-election bid in 2004 (and failed), is up to his old tricks. John Ruberry of Marathon Pundit has an excellent post about Soros and what he stands for (hint: quite radical). Check it out.

Do not underestimate this man's intentions.


Hillary Already Losing Major Hollywood $$$ Support

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:49 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

NCAA Wants To Ban Male Practice Players for Girls' Teams

Many elite female sports teams, like the UConn Lady Huskies basketball team, have been using male players during practice sessions. Why?

The addition of male practice players hasn't been the sole reason behind UConn's phenomenal rise to the top, but the parties involved believe that the men have played a vital role along the path to winning five of the last 12 national championships. The influx of testosterone has hardened the psyche of the players and allowed them to hone their skills daily against quicker, stronger and more athletic opponents.

Guys, in general, are bigger and stronger than gals. It's a fact. And if using men during practice helps the women to improve their game, then who would complain?

The NCAA, that's who.

The Committee on Women's Athletics issued a statement Dec. 13 intending to ban the use of male practice players in all women's sports. The CWA said in a statement that the use of such players "violates the spirit of gender equity and Title IX" and "any inclusion of male practice players results in diminished participation opportunities for female student-athletes." The only coach on record who has been in favor of the ban is Ohio State coach Jim Foster.

Please. If the women aren't complaining and feel the practice sessions are beneficial, then what's the big deal?

"I think it's a weak argument saying we are taking away opportunities from the bench players," said [Vin] Bruno, who is in his third year with the team. "Really, if you watch practice, these girls will be playing on the white team, or our team. There will be three guys out there and two others like Jacquie (Fernandes) and Cassie (Kerns) out there with us. The assistant coaches Tonya (Cardoza) and Jamelle really do a good job of rotating everyone in, both male and female players."

Said UConn sophomore Tahirah Williams: "I think practice players are a big role in women's basketball. Honestly, I don't think they're taking away (any opportunities). I think they're making us better."

The use of male players also helps team members to rest during practice, and the practices are structured so there is not a free-for-all atmosphere in which the men are allowed to overshadow the women.

But don't expect the folks who banned the use of American Indian names for college sports teams during postseason tournaments to give in easily. What's next, banning male coaches from women's teams?

And so, the PC stampede continues to ride roughshod over common sense...after all, don't committees know better than you do?

Show Comments

January 25, 2007

Duncan Hunter In

A long-anticipated hat tossing:

SPARTANBURG, S.C. (AP) -- Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter, best known for his advocacy on behalf of the military, launched a longshot bid for the presidency Thursday in this early voting state.

Frequently citing Ronald Reagan, Hunter told supporters he wants to pick up on the former president's legacy.

"I want to lead that policy of peace through strength," said Hunter, a strong supporter of the Iraq war.

The 14-term conservative from California, who has made no secret of his White House aspirations, set up a presidential exploratory committee earlier this month.

This paragraph made me chuckle:

He joins an increasingly crowded GOP field of declared and likely candidates, including Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Sam Brownback of Kansas, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

That makes five total so far. The Dems have John Edwards, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Chris Dodd and Bill Richardson officially in (with more to come). Is that a crowded field? No, it's a diverse one.

A conservative from California who can last that long in Congress, let alone being elected in the first place, is an anomaly. He's got his military advocacy and his stance on illegal immigration going for him.

Note: Hunter is a Vietnam veteran and his son did two tours in Iraq. Does that mean the Dems can't question his support of the war?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:28 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

Hillary Already Losing Major Hollywood $$$ Support

Some of Hollywood's leading leftist cash cows have promised their support to Barack Obama, rather than Hillary Clinton:

Movie moguls Steven Spielberg, David Geffen and Jeffrey Katzenberg want their Hollywood peers to join them at a Feb. 20 fundraiser the three are throwing for Obama.

For $2,300 a person and $4600 a couple, they can meet the candidate at a reception at the Beverly Hilton Hotel, from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m. Those who commit to raising $46,000 (10 couples/20 tickets) for the evening will be invited to a private dinner at Geffen's Malibu, Calif., home.


Since the invitation went out just this morning, it was not clear who had R.S.V.P.'d for the event. But it is likely that those celebrities who've expressed support for Obama's candidacy including George Clooney, Matt Damon, Ben Affleck, Oprah Winfrey, Oliver Stone and superagent Ari Emanuel will be at the Beverly Hilton on Feb. 20.

Tinseltown is noted for its flavor of the month mentality when it comes to actors...why not when it comes to politicians?


Unsubstantiated gossip: I heard on a local station this morning (96.5 TIC) (during a Hollywood gossip segment called Mike Evans at Large) that the people at the Oscars are trying to get Hillary and Obama to present an award together. Of course, there was no mention of whether or not any Republican presidential candidates were being wooed to appear at the Oscars...

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:23 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

Have You Signed the Pledge?

5823 people have signed The Pledge thus far. Will you?

"If the United States Senate passes a resolution, non-binding or otherwise, that criticizes the commitment of additional troops to Iraq that General Petraeus has asked for and that the president has pledged, and if the Senate does so after the testimony of General Petraeus on January 23 that such a resolution will be an encouragement to the enemy, I will not contribute to any Republican senator who voted for the resolution. Further, if any Republican senator who votes for such a resolution is a candidate for re-election in 2008, I will not contribute to the National Republican Senatorial Committee unless the Chairman of that Committee, Senator Ensign, commits in writing that none of the funds of the NRSC will go to support the re-election of any senator supporting the non-binding resolution."

Click here to add your name. And spread the word! Maybe our elected GOP senators will finally get the message.

Thanks to HNAV.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:36 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

Unspeakably Disgusting

Stories like this bring tears to my eyes:

PHNOM PENH, Cambodia (CNN) -- At an age when most children might be preparing for their first day of school, Srey, 6, already has undergone trauma that is almost unspeakable.

She was sold to a brothel by her parents when she was 5. It is not known how much her family got for Srey, but other girls talk of being sold for $100; one was sold for $10.

Before she was rescued, Srey endured months of abuse at the hands of pimps and sex tourists.

There is a woman trying to make a difference for children like Srey, but she's just one person. Read it, if you can bear it.

My take: anyone who has a hand in doing such things to a child ought to be shot on sight, no questions asked. And don't talk to me about their rights.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:18 AM | Comments (19) | TrackBack (0) | International

January 24, 2007

The Chattering Hillary Doll!

Are you looking for a gift for that hard-to-please birthday present for the liberal in your life? Or perhaps you'd like to give a unique Valentine's Day gift? Well look no further. The Chattering Hillary Doll is here, and is sure to please anyone on your gift list.

With four sayings unique to this high-profile presidential candidate (and her tradmark dour visage), Chattering Hillary will delight all who pull the string on her back. Get an earful of what Americans have to look forward to if Hillary becomes our Commander-in-Chief in 2008!

A bargain at any price, Chattering Hillary is sure to become a collector's item, so get yours today! (Unlike other unpatriotic businesses, we have no problem shipping to APOs!)

The Chattering Hillary Doll puts the Franklin Mint in the shade!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 04:46 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Humor

Kerry Will Not Run in '08

This just in:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, the Democrats' losing presidential candidate in 2004, does not intend to run again in 2008, a Democratic official said Wednesday.

This official said Kerry intends to seek a new six-year term in the Senate.

I didn't think Kerry would do "the right thing" for his party. But perhaps when even those who claim to like him (at least enough to attend his dinner parties) were silent when the subject of his running again came up, even his iron-clad ego must have dented a little.

Either that, or Teresa said she wouldn't bankroll another election bid.

UPDATE: Head on over to HillaryNeedsAVacation to see what HNAV thinks of Hillary's upcoming conversation.

UPDATE II: Ah, memories...

His dreams of being the next JFK in the Oval Office are officially over

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:28 PM | Comments (74) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

Fairness Doctrine vs. Truth in Media

Selwyn Duke, writing for The American Thinker, discusses. Check it out.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:11 PM | Comments (27) | TrackBack (0) | MSM

On the State of the Union Address

I'm not going to delve too deeply into last night's address. You can read the usual excellent commentary here, here and here.

I would like to say that I think Bush's comment about those who voted to enter Iraq back in 2002 didn't vote for failure was an excellent zinger. I also noticed that on his way out, Bush didn't shake Harry Reid's hand. (Deliberate? Not? I don't know, but it sure made me wonder.) And goodness me, how did Nancy Pelosi manage to keep that frozen "deer in the headlights" look on her face for the entire speech? (One morning radio host suggested Botox.)

UPDATE: Other mention -- who saw John McCain snoozing? Not very impressive for a candidate-to-be. And Hillary, who last year had a look on her face reminiscent of having eaten lemons before the speech, had a starry-eyed look that made me think she wasn't really listening to President Bush, but imagining herself up there in two years...heaven forbid!

UPDATE II: The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review explains in an editorial why the Democrats are against Bush's new healthcare cost initiative (h/t Right Wing Nation):

Democrats oppose President Bush's health care plan to increase the number of insured Americans; it's too private and encourages the exercise of freedom.

They want to soak the rich to pay for the Big Brother of all entitlements: universal health care. That must be resisted; refer to out-of-control Medicare and Medicaid costs.

Read it all.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:01 AM | Comments (92) | TrackBack (0) | Government

Say Goodbye to The Man

Yet another fine blogger is retiring. The Man at GOP and the City has decided to stop posting to his blog, but promises to continue on Blogs 4 Bauer and Urban Elephants.

Part of the reason he's quitting is to work on a particular presidential campaign. I won't spoil the surprise. Go over there now to find out, and either give him a mushy goodbye note or pile vile invective upon him -- it's your choice.

What is it, something in the water?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:52 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Blogging

January 23, 2007

Cal Thomas on Hillary's Candidacy

Cal Thomas warns conservatives of the pitfalls that lurk in a campaign against Hillary.

Conservatives should be careful. The nonstop attacks on Bill Clinton did not keep him from winning in 1992, nor did his personal scandals prevent his re-election four years later. Using similar smear tactics on Hillary Clinton will only turn her into a victim and cause many not predisposed to vote for her to support her.

Men can't run against a woman the way they run against other men. Former Republican Congressman Rick Lazio learned the double standard voters apply to a female candidate when he challenged her in 2000 for the New York Senate seat she now holds. During a debate, Lazio left his lectern and invaded her personal space to make a point. Many voters saw a man trying to physically intimidate a woman and Lazio lost the debate and the election.

Read the rest here.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:51 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

Bill Clinton, First Man?

The thought of Bill Clinton as "First Man" is scarier than the memory of him as president. Here's what he had to say in the wake of Hillary's presidential bid announcement:

"I'll do whatever I'm asked to do," the ex-president said of the campaign launched by his senator wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.).

Of course he will...we all know who wears the pants in that family.

"I am very proud of my wife. So is her daughter. I wish her well," the former prez gushed. "I can only tell you that I know her better than anybody on Earth, and she's got the best combination of mind and heart, the ability to lead and learn, to stand fast . . . and to make honorable agreements with people who disagree with her, than anybody I've known."

Honorable agreements with people who disagree with her? That's kind of like agreeing to stay with a multiple philanderer because it suits her political needs.

A word of advice: lock the Lincoln Bedroom.

On a tip from Cookiewrangler.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:03 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

Rudy's Getting Closer

The NY Post reports that Rudy Giuliani is looking to sell the investment banking portion of his many-faceted business, which looks like a sign that he's serious about wanting to be the Republican candidate for president in 2008. While it's a moneymaker, apparently Giuliani Capital Advisors can get involved in politically-sensitive issues, which would obviously constitute a conflict of interest for Giuliani.

There's a lot to like about Rudy. While I am not so wild about some of his social policies (such as gun control, free-for-all abortion rights, etc.), he is a strong leader at a time when we need one. I'm not making any kind of commitment to any candidate yet...it's waaay too early for that! But as the field of Democrats gets larger, I'm very interested to see who the Republicans will have to offer (aside from John McCain). Would Rudy be willing to compromise in order to secure the nomination? Only time will tell.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:19 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

January 22, 2007

Dodd: Hard Sell

Chris Dodd, Connecticut's other senator, spent part of his weekend in New Hampshire, trying to drum up support for his bid to be the Democrats' presidential candidate in 2008. Here's what it all boiled down to:

"You're experienced, you're affable. You have everything going for you, except one thing. You're a Northeast liberal," said Gary Patton, Hampton Democratic chairman.

Emphasis mine. Dodd responded that he's proud to represent "progressive politics." Progressive in this instance means wanting to increase taxes in order to fund more social programs and putting less emphasis on national defense. (Dodd is in the "voted for the war but now regrets it" camp.) Dodd also wants to lift our embargo on Cuba, something I wrote about for American Thinker. He thought nothing making a recent trip to the Middle East with John Kerry to meet with leaders who included Syria's president, a move that likely undermined our current administration's credibility in the eyes of our enemies. (I wonder what Dodd would think of a senator doing the same thing to him if he were to be elected president?)

Even if many Dems like Chris Dodd -- what he stands for, what he promises to do -- image really is key. One woman put it this way: "I like Sen. Dodd very much, but he's too close to what we had last time."

Yep. And as a patriotic American and Connecticut resident, I shudder to think that he might be inflicted on the rest of the country at large.


Lieberman Not Endorsing Dodd for President...
Dodd is In
Dodd Plans Talk With Middle East Leaders
Dodd Continues Middle East Tour

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:11 AM | Comments (424) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

January 21, 2007

SNL Takes on Hardball and Hillary

Usually, SNL skits lean heavily to the left when politics are involved, but last night's opening skit was one I never thought SNL would air (h/t Newsbusters).

It features Chris Matthews of MSNBC's Hardball interviewing Hillary Clinton in the wake of her announcement that she's running for president. "Matthews" needs a bib to soak up the drool as he questions his idol, and "Hillary" is sufficiently uptight and snooty. The best bit is at the end, when "Hillary" freaks out at "Matthews" comment, "But, in fairness to Senator Obama, until today when you've been asked if you're running for president, you've always denied it."

Watch it for yourself. The audience laughs tentatively, as if they're not sure if it's okay to laugh at Hillary, a leftist icon. Is this a shot across the bow from Hillary's supporters, warning her if she doesn't toe the line she'll be distancing herself from her base?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 05:54 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Humor

So Many Choices!

Come 2008 we could have:

The first black president.

The first woman president.

The first Hispanic president.

But who would be the best president?

I wish the MSM would worry more about the last qualification, rather than concentrate on skin color or if a candidate stands or sits in the bathroom.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 03:36 PM | Comments (13) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

January 20, 2007

Hillary Clinton: In

In the most anti-climactic statement ever, Hillary Clinton finally decided to "officially" announce her intentions to run for president. Get ready for things to get ugly. (If Barack Obama thinks he's been roasted over the coals the last few days, he ain't seen nothin' yet.)

Is the country ready for a woman president? Yes. Is the country ready for Hillary? Gad, no.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:47 AM | Comments (16) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

January 19, 2007

Chinese Test Anti-Satellite Weapon

This news is huge:

U. S. intelligence agencies believe China performed a successful anti-satellite (asat) weapons test at more than 500 mi. altitude Jan. 11 destroying an aging Chinese weather satellite target with a kinetic kill vehicle launched on board a ballistic missile.

The Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency, NASA and other government organizations have a full court press underway to obtain data on the alleged test, Aviation Week & Space Technology will report in its Jan. 22 issue.

If the test is verified it will signify a major new Chinese military capability.

Neither the Office of the U. S. Secretary of Defense nor Air Force Space Command would comment on the attack, which followed by several months the alleged illumination of a U. S. military spacecraft by a Chinese ground based laser.

More at Aviation Week.

h/t: Jeanette

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:35 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | International

Anti-Americanism in Europe

The American Thinker includes my thoughts about it today.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:49 AM | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0) | Commentary

Why One Soldier Joined the Fight

Michelle Malkin tells us about the death of 23-year-old 2LT Mark Daily in Mosul. She also posts his MySpace entry as to why he joined the Army in order to join the fight in Iraq. A snippet:

I joined the fight because it occurred to me that many modern day "humanists" who claim to possess a genuine concern for human beings throughout the world are in fact quite content to allow their fellow "global citizens" to suffer under the most hideous state apparatuses and conditions.

Interesting and touching. Be sure to read it all.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:01 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

Hillary's Team Already Making Things Hot for Obama

From Insight Magazine:

An investigation of Mr. Obama by political opponents within the Democratic Party has discovered that Mr. Obama was raised as a Muslim by his stepfather in Indonesia. Sources close to the background check, which has not yet been released, said Mr. Obama, 45, spent at least four years in a so-called Madrassa, or Muslim seminary, in Indonesia.

"He was a Muslim, but he concealed it," the source said. "His opponents within the Democrats hope this will become a major issue in the campaign."

Hmmm...that's not a very progressive stance, now is it? Coming on the heels of a story that highlights his admission to using drugs in his memoir Dreams From My Father: A Story Of Race and Inheritance (which was published 11 years ago), it looks like this election cycle will be a very exciting one. What other skeletons will be dug out of closets and dusted off for all to see?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:55 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

January 18, 2007

Global Warming Skeptics Beware!

One of the scientists leading the charge in the man-made global warming phenomenon is Dr. Heidi Cullen of The Weather Channel (TWC). Cullen hosts a weekly show called The Climate Code, where she discusses the oncoming disaster.

On TWC's blog, Cullen made this suggestion:

If a meteorologist can't speak to the fundamental science of climate change, then maybe the AMS [American Meteorological Society] shouldn't give them a Seal of Approval. Clearly, the AMS doesn't agree that global warming can be blamed on cyclical weather patterns.

In essence, Cullen is saying that those who don't agree with the politically correct view on global warming should be kicked out of the club. She should have been around in Galileo's time. (Galileo, as you remember, was branded as a heretic and sentenced to life imprisonment in 1633 for publishing papers about our universe centering around the sun, not the Earth.) Isn't the very essence of science to constantly question and debate? Cullen's suggestion flies in the face of collegiality and the goals of the scientific community.

Commenter Jordan on Cullen's post says the idea of silencing the skeptics has been around for a while:

Since you seem to be enamored with Al Gore's take on the global warming issue, perhaps you will find this evidence of his bias 14 years ago as interesting. In 1992, Newsweek journalist Gregg Easterbrook reported in The New Republic ("Green Cassandras," July 6) that Albert Gore and biologist Paul Ehrlich, author of the thoroughly discredited book The Population Bomb, had "ventured into dangerous territory by suggesting that journalists quietly self-censor environmental evidence that is not alarming, because such reports, in Gore's words, undermine the effort to build a solid base of public support for the difficult actions we must soon take." Easterbrook wrote: "Skeptical debate is supposed to be one of the strengths of liberalism; it's eerie to hear liberal environmentalists asserting that views they disagree with ought not to be heard."

Marc Morano makes this salient point:

[I]f a climate skeptic receives any money from industry, the media immediately labels them and attempts to discredit their work. The same media completely ignore the money flow from the environmental lobby to climate alarmists like James Hansen and Michael Oppenheimer. (ie. Hansen received $250,000 from the Heinz Foundation and Oppenheimer is a paid partisan of Environmental Defense Fund)

The alarmists have all of these advantages, yet they still feel the need to resort to desperation tactics to silence the skeptics. Could it be that the alarmists realize that the American public is increasingly rejecting their proposition that the family SUV is destroying the earth and rejecting their shrill calls for "action" to combat their computer model predictions of a "climate emergency?"

An excellent question, one which I'm sure Cullen and her ilk are not ready to answer. They're too busy trying to shut their critics up.

These meteorologists didn't believe in An Inconvenient Truth.

Thanks to V the K (via Moonbattery).

The Great Warming: Same Old Schlock
Global Warming Not Welcome Here!
Kyoto: It's Not About the Environment...
Al Gore: A Knight in Shining Armor...
Latest Kyoto Snafu

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:45 AM | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0) | Global Warming Hype

January 17, 2007

Jimmy Carter: Interceded on Behalf of Nazi SS Guard

Jimmy Carter has been in the news so often, I'm beginning to think I need a special category for him in my sidebar. The man is just an embarrassment to our country.

It's been revealed by former U.S. Justice Department official Neil Sher that Jimmy Carter interceded on the behalf of a former Nazi SS guard, who was deported from the U.S. in 1987.

[Martin] Bartesch, who had immigrated to the U.S. and lived in Chicago, admitted to Shers office and the court that he had voluntarily joined the Waffen SS and had served in the notorious SS Deaths Head Division at the Mauthausen concentration camp where, at the hands of Bartesch and his cohorts, many thousands of prisoners were gassed, shot, starved and worked to death. He also confessed to having concealed his service at the infamous camp from U.S. immigration officials.

His adult children and church began lobbying as many officials as they could in order to procure special treatment for him, using as excuse that he had "only" been 17 or 18 at the time he joined the SS. Only Carter took the bait, but by the time he sent in his plea, Bartesch was already gone (as if it would have made a difference). Carter's note said that in cases like this, he wanted "special consideration for the family for humanitarian reasons."

Humanitarian reasons? Those adult kids could go to visit Dad wherever he ended up anytime they wanted to. Unlike the Jews that Bartesch had a direct hand in ruthlessly exterminating, they were living their lives in peace and freedom. Bartesch himself obviously didn't consider Jews worthy of humanitarian consideration, yet Jimmy Carter didn't think he deserved to be deported because his poor family was being left behind. Unbelievable.

Why tell the story now?

Now, following Carters book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, Sher has decided to go public with the hope that a public made aware of Carters support and defense of a Nazi SS man will help illustrate why the arbiter of the Camp David Accords came out with a book defending the Palestinians after the landslide election of the Islamist Hamas terror group.

It always bothered me, but I didnt go public with it until recently, when he wrote this book and let it spill out where his sentiments really lie, Sher said. Here was Jimmy Carter jumping in on behalf of someone who did not deserve in any way, shape or form special consideration. And the things he has now said about the Jewish lobby really exposes where his heart really lies.

Jimmy Carter: Defender of the undeserving.

On a tip from Cookiewrangler.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 04:34 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Just Plain Stupid

Michelle Malkin is Back from Iraq

Check out what she has to report here. Lots of good information and pictures to illustrate, with a promise of much more to come in the next few days.

Stand-out quote: "The troops I met ask only three things of their fellow Americans back home: time, patience, and understanding of the enormous complexities on the ground." She also suggests loudmouths Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews make the same trip she did. Don't expect them to take her up on it...they prefer their comfy anchor chairs to the rigors of a war zone.

Sorry, Malkin-haters; she made it home safely in spite of your wishes to the contrary.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:03 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

The Duke Rape Case and Common Sense

John Podhoretz has written a great piece in the NY Post on the judicial folly that is now known as the Duke rape case. Here's the pivotal point:

The reason the so-called "Duke rape case" has attracted such intense attention over the past year is that at every turn, simple common sense was overcome and discarded due to an intoxicating cocktail of raw political calculation, shameful butt-covering and self-righteous political correctness that was ingested by nearly every authority figure and political actor in this homely city of 272,000.

Read it all.

Duke Invites Two Lacrosse Players Back

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:25 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Judges & Law

January 16, 2007

Global Warming Evidence! Really!

There's new scientific evidence in favor of the global warming hypothesis. Mr. Right has all the details.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 03:22 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Humor

You Too Can Become an Illegal

Are you tired of the bureaucratic red tape involved with taxes and healthcare? Have you ever wondered how you can save yourself a little grief (and possibly big bucks)? This letter, posted over at ControlCongress.com, explains how:

The Honorable Paul S. Sarbanes
Senate Office Building Bu
309 Hart
Washington DC , 20510

Dear Senator Sarbanes,

As a native Marylander and excellent customer of the
Internal Revenue Service, I am writing to ask for your
assistance. I have contacted the Department of
Homeland Security in an effort to determine the
process for becoming an illegal alien and they
referred me to you.

My primary reason for wishing to change my status from
U.S. Citizen to illegal alien stem from the bill which
was recently passed by the Senate and for which you
voted. If my understanding of this bills provisions
is accurate, as an illegal alien who has been in the
United States for five years, all I need to do to
become a citizen is to pay a $2,000 fine and income
taxes for three of the last five years. I know a good
deal when I see one and I am anxious to get the
process started before everyone figures it out! Simply
put, those of us who have been here legally have had
to pay taxes every year so Im excited about the
prospect of avoiding two years of taxes in return for
paying a $2,000 fine. Is there any way that I can
apply to be illegal retroactively? This would yield an
excellent result for me and my family because we paid
heavy taxes in 2004 and 2005.

Additionally, as an illegal alien I could begin using
the local emergency room as my primary health care
provider. Once I have stopped paying premiums for
medical insurance, my accountant figures I could save
almost $10,000 a year.

Another benefit in gaining illegal status would be
that my daughter would receive preferential treatment
relative to her law school applications, as well as
in-state tuition rates for many colleges throughout
the United States for my son.

Lastly, I understand that illegal status would
relieve me of the burden of renewing my drivers license and
making those burdensome car insurance premiums. This
is very important to me given that I still have
college age children driving my car.

If you would provide me with an outline of the process
to become illegal (retroactively if possible) and
copies of the necessary forms, I would be most
appreciative. Thank you for your assistance.

Your Loyal Constituent,

Pete McGlaughlin

This is an excellent way for citizens like you and me, overburdened by tax and healthcare expenses, to enjoy the fruits of The Great Society. Worried that illegals can't vote? Not a problem! Many states have no way of checking if you're a legal citizen. So head on over to the polls without a care.

And you thought illegal immigration was a problem?

On a tip from learner.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 03:11 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Illegal Immigration

Obama's In

No surprises here:

Democratic Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois jumped into the 2008 White House race on Tuesday, promising to bring Americans together and "change our politics" with a campaign that could make him the first black president in U.S. history.

The Reuters article goes on to discuss whether or not America is ready for a black president, and Obama's "unusual personal history," as in having a white mother from Kansas and a black father from Kenya, yada yada yada. (I have NEVER heard of such a thing, have you?)

I am so sick of people wondering whether or not America is ready for a black president. We have blacks in Congress. We have blacks in the highest places of our government. Blacks can do anything they want to if they work hard enough, just like whites. Why isn't anyone wondering if Britain is ready for a black prime minister? We claim to be beyond these things, and then the so-called progressive press has to pop it into the debate.

Obama should be judged on his merits, not his skin color. I have plenty of issue with his qualifications, but color is not one of them. Please, let's stick to the issues and leave the race card at home.

It will be interesting to see if this official announcement prompts Hillary Clinton into finally admitting she's planning a run for office. And when she does, be prepared for the "is America ready for a woman in the White House?" question. As I said above with Obama, candidates should be judged solely on qualifications. Again, I have plenty of problems with Hillary. But let's leave that sex card at home with the race card, hmmm?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:38 PM | Comments (51) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

Long-Lost Brothers?

There's a spooky resemblance between politician-turned-environmental expert/celebrity Al Gore and celebrity-turned-environmental/foreign policy expert Alec Baldwin.

Despite being ten years apart in age (Gore was born in 1948 and Baldwin was born in 1958), there are a lot of similarities. Neither one of them goes by their given first name (Gore's first name is Albert and Baldwin was christened Alexander). Both men married blondes (although Baldwin's wife, actress Kim Basinger, left him while Gore's marriage to Tipper is still going strong). Both were upset when George W. Bush won the election in 2000. And both consider themselves to be experts on our environment; specifically, global warming.

But in case you need any more proof, look at the photos below:

Read More "Long-Lost Brothers?"

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:56 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Humor

January 15, 2007

Okay, One More...

Just one more for tonight: Nik Kershaw and the title track to his 1984 album The Riddle. Full disclosure: this is the kind of guy I thought was totally hot back then! (I still prefer the hair to today's version of the '70s mop top.) I also had a major thing for Tom Bailey of The Thompson Twins.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:14 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Just for Fun

Matt Bianco on YouTube!

I haven't posted any YouTube nostalgia lately...and here's a song I hadn't heard in a while. Last week, when I filled in for the '80s new wave show at our local college station, I made sure I played it. It's called Don't Blame It On That Girl, from the 1988 album Indigo. (BTW, Matt Bianco is the name of the group, not one guy.) Enjoy!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:50 PM | Comments (21) | TrackBack (0)

Chirac to Run Again?

Even though he has been expected to retire after his current term, there is speculation that French president Jacques Chirac will run for a third term this year (h/t Marathon Pundit), although even his wife doesn't know for sure.

At 74, one would think that Chirac would prefer to give up the daily strain of being the leader of one of the world's superpowers (cough, cough) and spend the rest of his days drinking wine and enjoying cheese and crackers in the beautiful French countryside.

However, there is that little matter of graft while he was mayor of Paris that Chirac may be worried about. As president, he is immune from prosecution, but once he's out, all bets are off. From The Australian (September 2006):

With only the slenderest hope of re-election next year, Mr Chirac faces prosecution in connection with a series of scandals dating from his time as the mayor of Paris, between 1977 and 1995. Three have resulted in court cases.

In 2004, Alain Juppe, his closest associate and former prime minister, was given a 14-month suspended prison sentence and barred from office for a year for his role in a 1980s racket to award fake jobs to Gaullist Party members.

Last year, Michel Roussin, formerly the head of Mr Chirac's private cabinet, was given a four-year suspended sentence and a E50,000 fine in connection with a system of kickbacks over contracts to repair schools in the Paris region.

And this year, Georges Perol, another Chirac associate, was given a two-year suspended sentence and a E20,000 fine over corruption involving public housing contracts in Paris.

Mr Chirac is alleged to have known about - and benefited from - all three affairs.

He is also suspected of involvement in a fourth scandal relating to the manipulation of electoral lists in Paris, which will come to trial this month.

Could it be Chirac is hoping to put off the inevitable? With 81% of those polled saying he should not seek re-election, it's a slim hope indeed.

Instead of a relaxing retirement, Chirac
faces possible prosecution.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 04:28 PM | Comments (27) | TrackBack (0) | International

Tournament Named in Saddam's Honor

The older and more cynical I get, I feel that nothing can surprise me anymore. But today, I discovered that yes, I am still capable of surprise.

Can you imagine entering your children in the following sports leauges/tournaments?

*The Pol Pot Tennis Open
*Little Hitlers Football League
*Stalin's Soccer All-Stars

Well, hold on to your keester, because a Palestinian soccer tournament for children has been named after Saddam Hussein.

This in and of itself is not unusual among the Palestinians:

The PA routinely names youth sporting events after terrorists, including a soccer tournament the PA named for the Passover eve suicide terrorist who killed 31 Israelis, and summer camps for girls were named after Wafa Idris, the first woman suicide terrorist, and Ayaat al Akhras a 17 year old, the youngest girl suicide terrorist. [Al Hayat Al Jadida, Jan. 21, 2003; Al-Ayyam, July 18, 2003; Al Quds, Aug. 14, 2003]

I suppose we shouldn't be surprised. After all, we know that Saddam used to reward the families of Palestinian suicide bombers with $25,000 checks. And it's also well known that Palestinian children are taught early on to glorify jihad (especially against the Jews) and martyrdom.

Despite this knowledge, I still find it disturbing to know that a soccer tournament, where children are supposed to be learning about good sportsmanship and fitness while having fun, is to be named after a murderous despot who killed thousands of his own citizens. A man who was not martyred, but found guilty of terrible crimes against his own people and sentenced accordingly.

Is nothing sacred to these people? To answer my own question, apparently not.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 04:06 PM | Comments (350) | TrackBack (0) | Just Plain Stupid

Lieberman Not Endorsing Dodd for President..

at least, not yet. On Meet the Press yesterday:

WASHINGTON Sen. Joe Lieberman passed up an opportunity Sunday to endorse fellow Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd's bid for the Democratic nomination for president.

Lieberman, I-Conn., won a fourth term in November as an independent candidate after losing the Democratic nomination to Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont. Dodd backed Lieberman in the primary, but supported Lamont in the general election, even appearing with the Democratic nominee in TV ads.

Asked on "Meet the Press" whether he endorses his Senate colleague's presidential campaign, Lieberman said he's avoiding presidential politics, at least for the time being.

"I've worked closely with Chris Dodd for 18 years," he said. "His experience, his ability makes him a very credible candidate for president. I wish him well. I've had a lot of politics over the last two years. I'm staying out of any presidential campaign for a while."

Dodd appeared with Lieberman on the program and laughed as his colleague began to answer the question. "Oh, don't put Joe in that position," he told moderator Tim Russert.

Who can blame Lieberman, after Dodd threw him to the wolves during his campaign last year?

Lieberman may end up endorsing Dodd in the end. He may endorse someone else. He may endorse no one. But I like the idea of him making Dodd sweat.


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 02:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

Trump to Condi: You're "Fired"

You know, Donald Trump is a brilliant businessman, and many of us find his public feud with Rosie O'Donnell to be amusing. But now he's passing judgment on Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and that's just ridiculous.

Donald Trump says in an interview set to air tonight that Rice seems like a nice person, but when it comes to her role as the nation's chief negotiator, he'd like to use his trademark line on her: "You're fired."

Americans "want someone that knows how to negotiate, that knows the art of the deal," he said in an interview on FOX News Channel's "Hannity's America."

"In all fairness, I see Condoleezza Rice - she goes on a plane, she gets off a plane, she waves, she goes there to meet some dictator. ... They talk, she leaves, she waves, the plane takes off. Nothing happens, it's a joke, nothing ever happens. I think she's a very nice woman, but I don't want a nice woman. I want someone that's not necessarily nice."

In all fairness, The Donald is not in on the meetings with Dr. Rice, so how does he know what's going on? And I dare say negotiating with "dictators" is different than negotiating with fellow businessmen.

Unless he's looking to fill the position himself, Trump should stick to baiting other loudmouthed celebrities.

On a tip from Cookiewrangler.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:47 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Celebrity

Two More Hangings in Iraq

In what might be called an anticlimax, two of Saddam Hussein's top aides were hanged early this morning.

Saddam's half-brother, Barzan Ibrahim, was Iraq's intelligence chief and Awad Hamed al-Bandar was the head of the Revolutionary Court. They were found guilty along with Saddam of killing 148 Shi'ites in 1982.

Perhaps in an effort to stem the criticisms that erupted after Saddam's execution two weeks ago, the video was shown to reporters, but there are no plans as of yet to let anyone else see it.

The usual suspects begged Iraq not to hang the men, including the UN.

According to reports, Barzan's head was severed during the hanging, which has prompted accusations of mutilating the body after death.

What I find interesting is that while many are demanding that Iraq's new government take responsibility for itself, those same voices are complaining when that same government does something they don't like. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Two more place settings, please!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:47 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Iraq

January 14, 2007

I Talk About Chris Dodd and Cuba...

over at The American Thinker today.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:33 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

January 13, 2007

Who Cares About Nebraska?

I don't get to listen to Rush, CPR or Sean Hannity at work anymore because the internet firewalls at my company don't allow for online streaming, and I can't get AM radio reception. So I miss my daily dose of live conservative commentary.

I wish I had been listening to Rush yesterday, but fortunately he posts a lot of good things that happen on his show on his website. A woman called yesterday from Nebraska to talk about how Nebraskans are dealing with the aftermath of back-to-back icestorms in late December, which she said had been likened to a class 5 hurricane. Here's part of the call transcript:

CALLER:...I realize that they are very serious ranching problems in Colorado but the fact that they are covering shoveling in Colorado and didn't mention that there were thousands of people in central Nebraska who were without power, just kind of floored me. But I do know why it wasn't coveted by the national media, and I kind of want to thank them, because we here are very independent, very self-sufficient, and extremely caring people. We are America's heartland.

RUSH: Flyover country.

CALLER: Mm-hmm. But --

RUSH: Well, that's what the liberals call it.

CALLER: Oh, flyover, that's right.

RUSH: You're just something they fly over on their way to their sophisticated hangouts on both coasts.

CALLER: That's true. But, you know, we're not newsworthy because our governor wasn't on television complaining that FEMA wasn't here at our door. What was going on here is what should happen in the midst of national disasters. People were looking out for everybody else. Everybody who had something was looking for how they could share it with their neighbor. People were looking out for old people who were without power. People were looking out for people with small children who were without power. People were driving out into the country to get people who were stranded in their homes. I know an electrician of mine who was hooking up generators for free. They had brought in power workers from all over the country, and I just want to say, "Thank you, thank you, thank you," to all the people who worked on this and were working 15 to 18 hour days in the cold and in the snow, working to get us back on our feet, and everybody here, there was no whining. There was no complaining. There was power that was out for weeks!

RUSH: Great, and there was no FEMA --

CALLER: Yeah, there was no FEMA.

RUSH: -- and there was no FEMA in Denver, and there was no media anywhere blaming Bush for causing the national disaster.

CALLER: Exactly.

RUSH: There was no media demanding that FEMA show up.

CALLER: Mmm-hmm.

RUSH: And you know why? Because nobody in the media cares about you.

CALLER: Well, because we're not whiners and complainers. We're not exactly what make big news.

RUSH: Yeah, but it's not that.

CALLER: We're not busy cursing the darkness. We're too busy lighting our candle. We are trying to find our own way out of what is befalling us. I can tell you I am so grateful to live among the people that I live with, and I just cannot say enough how proud I am.

RUSH: Well, let me tell you something.

CALLER: Mmm-hmm?

RUSH: People would be tempted -- in listening to you, Ann, people would be tempted -- to think that your description of events is what's unique in this country. Sadly, that's not the case. Your description of how neighborhoods and states band together and help themselves in times of trouble like this is quite common in this country, because the people of this country are good people. What's unique and unfortunate is the kind of reaction we got after Hurricane Katrina. It's not all that unique, but there are people who have been raised to sit around and wait for the government to do whatever it is that they need done. They know nothing else. So you go to these very liberal enclaves and those attitudes exist. I've always found it fascinating that, in that big snowstorm, the ice storms that you're describing, there was more coverage of the cattle that were stranded than of the 44 people that they had to dig out of cars and so forth who had died.

That got reported, but all this media was showing helicopters dropping hay and other kind of things for wildlife that was stranded out there to eat. It's not hard to understand why that was not sexy to the media. For one thing, the skin color was wrong. It would be hard to make victims out of people like that. But New Orleans was made to order. New Orleans fits a template of American liberalism -- or the aftermath of Katrina, I should say, fits a template -- and that is, we still have a two-class society in this country: "Poor black people, and they are not cared for. "They are not liked. They are ignored, and if we could, we'd just find a way to be done with them," and that's what the media thinks a lot of people in this country have as a racist attitude. So here came this hurricane, and here came all this destruction, and here comes the government totally ill-equipped to deal with something this large. No bureaucracy anywhere could have, and you throw in the hatred of George W. Bush and the desire to do anything possible to ruin his administration, and it's like the Duke rape case.

That fits a template, a societal template that the left has. Look at the way the University administration there reacted! The minute the charges were made, the lacrosse team is shut down, the coach is fired and the kids are kicked out of school. One shred of evidence has not ever been produced to say these kids did it, and yet the faculty and everybody was demanding that they be run out of Durham, run out of town forever, because it fits a template that liberals and the media in this country have. What happened to you doesn't fit a template. It's ignored. It's not interesting to them -- and the success stories are not what they're about. They're not going to run around and do stories on how well you all banded together and people sacrificed and the electrician you're talking about was donating generators. That's not sexy. That's not news. They want victims. They want destruction. They want death and they want mayhem that they can show, so that they can then point fingers of blame at it! Plus, it'd be very hard for them to get there. It was an ice storm and it was snow. They'll stand out in the middle of the street in the cities where they live to report that it's snowing, but to actually go into that mess themselves -- and some of the airports were closed, it was a convenient excuse not to get there, just take local footage from the helicopters that were flying around shooting things. It's a great story. I'm glad you called, Ann. Thanks much.

Nebraskans going through hardships in the aftermath of a tremendous storm, and the media barely mentions it. But with Katrina and New Orleans, you had round the clock coverage for weeks. And they're still harping on it.

And the libs want to put fetters on programs like Rush's by reinstating the Fairness Doctrine because they don't like for their hypocrisy to be highlighted. This is why now, more than ever, we need these alternative voices to the pap being spoonfed to the American public by the MSM.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 02:42 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Double Standards

January 12, 2007

All Emergencies Must Wait Until After Teatime

Just when you thought healthcare horror stories in Britain couldn't get any worse, they do. On December 31, 2006, a 76-year-old man was forced to wait 20 minutes for an ambulance after his heart attack -- even though one was only five minutes away -- because the paramedics (or whatever they call them there) were on their EU-mandated break.

The same thing happened ten days prior, when a 21-year-old man was forced to wait, and died of a drug overdose. (Some may say he was asking for it by dabbling in drugs, but that is beside the point.)

This latest case emerged as controversial new guidance was issued to managers saying paramedics working at the same station should be given breaks simultaneously, despite the potential delays.

One ambulance worker, who asked not to be named, said: "It has caused nothing but problems since it was introduced. Staff deserve a break but we have not got enough crews to make sure we maintain cover and get to calls.

While medical staff on call should not be expected to work straight through their shifts without a lunch or dinner break, having everyone go on break at the same time is foolhardy at best, deadly at worst.

There is always the chance that neither of these men would have lived even if the ambulance had arrived within minutes of being called. But we'll never know, will we?

And to think there are people here at home who admire the "free" healthcare provided in Britain (and also in Canada). As the families of these two men can attest to, nothing is ever free.

If you want a better idea as to what the healthcare system in Britain is like, check out this posting board: NHS Sucks.

Ambulance crew on lunch break. Will return at 1:30 p.m.

Idea for this post stolen shamelessly from Moonbattery.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 02:11 PM | Comments (71) | TrackBack (0) | International

Barbara Boxer: Childless Rice Makes No Sacrifice

Will the chutzpah never end? Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) told Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that she has nothing to lose in Iraq because she has no "immediate family" serving. Rice, as always, kept her cool despite having to once again endure the type of personal insult that liberal Democrats seem to love slinging about. (Never mind the fact that we will all lose something if the situation in the Middle East is not resolved. Al Qaeda is playing for keeps. We need to do the same.)

As today's NY Post editorial page notes:

The junior senator from California ap parently believes that an accom plished, seasoned diplomat, a renowned scholar and an adviser to two presidents like Condoleezza Rice is not fully qualified to make policy at the highest levels of the American government because she is a single, childless woman.


The vapidity - the sheer mindlessness - of Sen. Boxer's assertion makes it clear that the next two years are going to be a time of bitterness and rancor, marked by pettiness of spirit and political self-indulgence of a sort not seen in America for a very long time.

As a long-time supporter of "women's rights," which one would logically think includes the right to choose a demanding career instead of marrying and having children, Boxer's hypocrisy is stunning. But coming off Nancy Pelosi's focus on "the children" at last week's swearing-in ceremonies, I suppose we shouldn't be surprised. The Democrats are going to milk "the children" for all they can. (This new political tool is somewhat amusing, considering their stance on children in utero.)

Boxer's assertion also slams our military professionals: adults, not children, who make the decision to join the armed forces fully aware of what the stakes are. (And fully aware that they swear to defend and protect ingrates like Boxer.) Yes, all soldiers are someone's children. But so are those who join police and fire departments. Would Boxer suggest that they not be sent out on patrol or out to fight fires because, if they die in the line of duty, their parents would be sacrificing them? The whole notion is ridiculous.

Somehow, when Americans voted for "change" last November, I don't think the change they were looking for was a sharp drop in civility and common sense. But as the NY Post noted, we're in for a heaping helping of nastiness from a party that, even in victory, can't play nice.

Crowned Queen of Chutzpah and Hypocrisy

On a tip from Cookiewrangler

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:34 AM | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0) | Democrats

Minimum Wage Hike Excludes American Samoa

On Wednesday, the House passed the minimum wage increase bill that, if passed by the Senate and not vetoed by President Bush, means that the minimum wage in the US and its territories (Puerto Rico, etc.) will rise from $5.15/hr to $7.25/hr. Its lack of economic sense aside (Thomas Sowell tells us why), you may be interested to know that American Samoa has been exempted from this bill.

American Samoa? How many people even know where American Samoa is? (See the map below.) And why would this tiny island be exempt from a potential law that is supposed to, according to Democrats, benefit the poor, oppressed workers from the evil businessmen who exploit them?

It turns out that Star Kist Tuna is the biggest employer on the island. Star Kist is owned by Del Monte. And guess where Del Monte's headquarters is located? San Francisco...home of violent thugs (who don't like the Star Spangled Banner) and...Nancy Pelosi.

Coincidence? Sorry Charlie, but something's fishy here.

Pelosi playing favorites with this island paradise?

On a tip from V the K via Moonbattery.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:02 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Economy

Slim Majority Prompts Same Old Tricks

New Congress, same story:

WASHINGTON -- The Senate's new Democratic leaders, the fragility of their thin majority on display for the first time, were set back Thursday when nine Democrats joined with Republicans in support of stricter House-passed rules on lawmakers' pet projects

Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., was forced to delay a final vote on a measure he opposes after losing 51-46 a parliamentary attempt to kill it.

The measure, an amendment to an ethics and lobbying bill, would have adopted a wider definition of "earmarks," specific projects inserted in bills, to include Corps of Engineer water projects, Pentagon weapon systems and items from other federal entities.

The language favored by Reid would require disclosure of only targeted funds directed to nonfederal entities such as city parks, state universities and private contractors. Reid crafted the ethics bill with Republican leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., but McConnell supported DeMint on the earmarks issue.

Here's the good part (emphasis mine):

After the move to kill the DeMint language failed, Democrats refused to allow the amendment to be approved by voice, a normal procedure, and an hour later Reid called the entire Senate to the floor to beseech them to reconsider. He did not set a time for a final vote.

It reminds me of all the filibustering we had to sit back and watch last year.

Looks like the "new direction" isn't garnering the approval ratings...they're still dismal.

Reid's creed: If you can't lick 'em, stall 'em!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:45 AM | Comments (27) | TrackBack (0) | Democrats

January 11, 2007


of the comments I've received regarding my article today at The American Thinker (all spelling original):

regarding ms. pelosis's swearing in:

you are aware of the difficulties in getting the bush family together for such a foto, dont u?
making arrangements with probation officers, drug counslelors and the like?

go f*** urselves, u whinning pissants!!!!

ed grimley

Thanks Ed...I didn't know you were still around. How's the wedgie going? (Spokane...what a surprise!)

"Apparently only Democrats are allowed to use children as public relations tools."

Perhaps you didn't notice that on the day in question, Nancy Pelosi was not the only one to "use" children. Even Republicans (gasp) were allowed to bring their families to the floor on that opening day, as is tradition. Get your facts straight. Having children present during a heated debate as a ploy for the topic at hand is not the same thing.

Lisa Ehrhardt

Perhaps I didn't notice because so much of the attention that day was on Pelosi...and the media gushfest before and after didn't exactly help. As for the child Santorum wanted to have on the floor during the abortion debate, he claimed she wanted to be there, and I would assume her mother would have had to give permission. Do I approve of Santorum's idea? Not necessarily. However, I stand by the point I made. Thanks, though, for not using profanity (and props for not using a fake name).

There have been favorable comments as well (thanks Andrea, Kitty, and "learner"), but you just can't beat the unfavorable ones for entertainment value!

Gee, I'm beginning to get a feel for what people like John Hawkins and Michelle Malkin have to deal with (on a much smaller scale, of course!).

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 02:34 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Blogging

Dodd is In

Yes, folks, it's true...the news you've been waiting for: Connecticut's other senator, Chris Dodd (D), will be filing the necessary paperwork today to become a candidate for the 2008 Democratic presidential nominee. He said problems at home and abroad encouraged him to "get out of the bleachers and onto the arena floor." (Plus, I hear the reclining desk chair in the Oval Office is really comfy.)

Dodd has forged strong ties with labor unions, advocated fiscal accountability for corporations and championed education and other children's issues. This month, he became chairman of the influential Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee and is a senior member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Let's not forget Dodd's recent trip to the Middle East (one not sanctioned by the administration, who sets foreign policy), and his call on Syria's president, who is persona non grata at the Bush White House.

For those of you unfamiliar with Dodd, a Washington regular for over 30 years, here's his voting record. He's a real liberal's liberal, voting heavily in accordance with NARAL's wishes and, as cited above, he has major union ties.

Oh, and did you know that he served in the Army Reserves during Vietnam? I wonder how that will be handled by the press, which was so eager to bash President Bush for only having served in the Texas Air National Guard.

Dodd is up for re-election to his Senate seat in 2010, which means that if he doesn't end up in the Oval Office, Connecticut voters will likely return him to Washington. As a political lifer, Dodd is risking little in this bid for the presidency.

I'll be watching his candidacy closely over the next couple of years.

UPDATE (10:14 a.m.): I forgot to mention...Dodd, a major critic of the war in Iraq, originally voted "yes," now saying his vote was a "mistake." Just something to keep in mind.

You'll be seeing a lot more of this over the next
couple of years

Dodd Plans Talks With Middle East Leaders
Dodd Continues Middle East Tour

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:12 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

Once Again...

Thomas Lifson, editor at The American Thinker, has graciously posted a piece by me. This one's about Nancy Pelosi. Head on over to check it out, along with the other excellent writings by authors discussing what matters today.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:10 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Blogging

January 10, 2007

Less than 1%

That's the (approximate) percentage of homeless people we have in our country.

WASHINGTON (AP) - There were 744,000 homeless people in the United States in 2005, according to the first national estimate in a decade. A little more than half were living in shelters, and nearly a quarter were chronically homeless, according to the report Wednesday by the National Alliance to End Homelessness, an advocacy group.

That's right. In a country that topped 300,000,000 people last year, less than 1% are without homes (0.248% to be exact). That's lower than the jobless average (which last checked in at 4.5%).

While the reasons for this can vary widely from individual to individual, I find it very reassuring that so comparatively few people here are living in the streets. To hear activists talk, I would have expected the number to be much higher. (But if you'll read the article linked above, you won't find any mention of percentages.)

Aaron at Lifelike Pundits adds his two cents.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 06:46 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Economy

Quote of the Day

"It's tempting to think of higher minimum wages as an anti-poverty weapon, but such an idea doesn't even pass the smell test. After all, if higher minimum wages could cure poverty, we could easily end worldwide poverty simply by telling poor nations to legislate higher minimum wages." ~ Walter Williams

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:09 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Quote of the Day

Dick Durbin Enlists Kos Kidz

That's right; Dickie Durbin, the Democratic whip in the Senate, has asked the folks who post and comment at Daily Kos to help shape the Democrats' agenda for the next couple of years. John Hawkins has done the dirty work so you won't have to.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:54 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Democrats

Another Blogger Bows Out

One of my favorite bloggers (and fellow Connecticut resident) Gary at Ex-Donkey has made the decision to retire his blog in a few weeks. Click here to see why, and be sure wish him all the best!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:07 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Blogging

Thank God for Alec Baldwin

The man has morphed from actor to foreign policy expert to environmental guru -- all in less than a decade. It's pretty impressive.

Newsbusters brings our attention to a screed he wrote at HuffPo:

All around us are signs of global climate change. And this administration's response is to send in more troops. If you don't think there is a link between the weather and Iraq, you are wrong.

You heard him, folks. The warm weather in the Northeast is all due to our being in Iraq. As soon as we pull troops out, we can bring out our heavy coats and snow shovels. Pass the guacamole...

A Manhattan Project-esque assault on US energy policy is what is required now. Our country must lead the way in global energy strategies that will, somehow, convince countries like China not to spend decades to come burning trillions of tons of fossil fuels to grow their economies in the way we did. It is the most important work we can do now, on par with "fighting terrorism."

Somehow, somehow, we have to get China to listen to us. Of course, people like Alec usually criticize America when it tries to exert its influence elsewhere on the globe, but because Alec says it's okay in this case, we can rest more easily. Perhaps he's looking for an ambassadorial assignment? How soon can he pack his bags? I hear China is nice this time of year.

But this crowd will do nothing to begin that process. All they will do is ignore the meaning of the mid-term election and sprint in the direction of prolonging this war. Their goal, obviously, to pass this mess on to their unfortunate successors in '08.

Like the Democrats ignored the meanings of all the other elections before this last one?

Kennedy has it all right. Time is up. And this is not a loss for Americans and their brave fighting men and women. This is Rumsfeld's War. And like McNamara before him, he will carry that burden on his shoulders long into our country's history.

But Rumsfeld is out. Now it's Gates' war. I guess Alec missed the press release on that one. (But perhaps he can give Rumsfeld a bit of advice about carrying a burden, what with his his bomb of a movie The Marrying Man that will forever rest on his own shoulders.)

A lot of talk about what the Dems should do now that they are at the wheel. Two people this Congress should not let up on. Cheney, obviously. Can't let the opportunity slip away to prosecute Pinochet-ney for all of his crimes. The other is Lieberman. This party needs to send a strong signal, and that is that loyalty matters in partisan politics. (Did Lieberman really think that his colleagues would chuck the entire Connecticut state apparatus just to soothe his ego?) Lieberman needs to go to the shed. For a very long time. Gotta get his mind, right. And when he comes out, ask him, "Are you a Democrat, Joe? Or aren't you?"

Unlike many politicians from both parties, Joe Lieberman votes his conscience. And besides, I thought the Democrats were going to chuck partisanship out the window in this new era of Congress? Oh that's right, they reneged on that promise.

Thank God for Teddy.

Yes, thank goodness for Teddy "The Swimmer" Kennedy, who always manages to keep his head above water. Thank goodness for Teddy Kennedy, whose concern about the environment and alternative fuels doesn't extend to his own backyard. After all, if you can afford to live in Cape Cod, you don't want to have those unsightly windmills marring the view. Climate control efforts are obviously for the little people.

And thank goodness for people like Alec Baldwin, who proves once again the greatness of this country by his ability to spew his ridiculous rants without fear of reprisal. (That's without fear of reprisal, not without fear of criticism. Just thought I'd make that bit clear.)

On a tip from HNAV

UPDATE (10:45 a.m.): joe-six-pack has a few words to say about Teddy Kennedy's recent proclamations.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:02 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Global Warming Hype

January 09, 2007

Quote of the Day

Actually, there are two today...both from Thomas Sowell (I had difficulty picking):

Civil rights used to be about treating everyone the same. But today some people are so used to special treatment that equal treatment is considered to be discrimination.

If people had been as mealy-mouthed in centuries past as they are today, Ivan the Terrible would have been called Ivan the Inappropriate.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:03 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Quote of the Day

Pelosi Peril

Must-read editorial in today's NY Post (h/t: HNAV):

Is history to repeat on the Democrats' watch? And how typical of the party to threaten to cut the legs out from under the U.S. military effort.

It's what it did in Vietnam more than 30 years ago:

* First, the Democratic-controlled Congress voted to end all U.S. military activities there by a set deadline.

* Then it cut off all military funding to South Vietnam.

Emboldened by these moves, North Vietnam invaded the South; President Gerald Ford pleaded for an emergency infusion of military and humanitarian aid, but Democrats voted it down.

Weeks later, Saigon fell, the agony of the Boat People began - and Cambodia's Pol Pot, waiting in the wings, made his move.

Now Pelosi & Co. are flirting with a repeat of that kind of disaster.

They maintain that the only avenue open to the United States in Iraq is a political solution - once that's reached, they claim, internal security will follow.

In fact, the truth is just the opposite.

As Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) notes on the opposite page, "security is the precondition for political progress and economic development."

Will that guarantee peace? No. But as Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.) added: "Our troops believe they can win, and that's important."

The Democrats are so busy running away from a war they initially approved that they're willing - even eager, perhaps - to facilitate an American defeat.

Read it all.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:10 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Democrats

Blogging About Work: Don't Do It!

I received an e-mail from a blogging friend who sometimes writes about funny things that happen at work. Not long ago, something he wrote about leaked out among his co-workers. He didn't violate any rules at work for having written about it, and he was simply asked by his superiors to be more careful next time. That should have been the end of the story.

Unfortunately, his immediate supervisor and some of his other co-workers are still in a snit. Despite the fact that he never uses names (and blogs under a pseudonym), they are certain that now everyone and his mother knows who they are, and they have been making his life a misery. I really feel for him, and encouraged him to continue writing about the other things that make his blog enjoyable to read.

That is why I never blog about work. My last job was with a high-profile company, and my current job is with another high-profile company. (My job isn't high-profile, though, so don't think I'm getting too big for my britches.) In fact, I don't even write about anything that has to do with the industry I work in! The last thing I need is for some company bigwig to stumble across my blog, figure out who I am, get mad, and hand me my pink slip. Contrary to popular belief, I may be a Republican, but I am not rich. I need my job if I want to keep food in my kids' mouths and a roof over their head. (I also keep the existence of my blog fairly quiet at work...only one person knows about it, and I don't think he reads it. Not to mention, being a conservative in a blue state can be fairly unpopular in the workplace.)

A couple of years ago, a former beauty editor lost a job offer (after she had given notice at her previous job) because her blog was about the beauty industry, and the higher ups got mad. As it turns out, she got a book deal and is now a media consultant. Still, not everyone manages to land on his feet in the same fortunate manner!

So please...unless you own the company, don't blog about work. If you do, I hope you blog under a pseudonym. I don't want to hear any more distressing stories from my pals in the blogosphere!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:40 AM | Comments (15) | TrackBack (0) | Blogging

January 08, 2007

Should Be Required Viewing...

for anyone who believes that abortion should be used for convenient birth control in non-emergency situations:

In the Womb: Multiples

Non-viable tissue mass?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 04:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | Health/Science

Quote of the Day

On Nancy Pelosi and the Dems controlling Congress:

[W]e're getting ready for a 600 gallon enema of socialism. ~ Reverse_vampyr

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 03:54 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Quote of the Day

Diversity Not All It's Cracked Up to Be

It's not a popular position to say that throwing people with different ethnic or cultural backgrounds together, without giving those people a common cause, is due to backfire. But one person did say so, after a great deal of research. What's even more surprising is that this person did not enjoy the fruits of his research: Harvard professor Robert D. Putnam, who is a former Carter administration official.

[Putnam] confessed to Financial Times columnist John Lloyd that his latest research discoverythat ethnic diversity decreases trust and co-operation in communitieswas so explosive that for the last half decade he hadnt dared announce it until he could develop proposals to compensate for the negative effects of diversity, saying it would have been irresponsible to publish without that.

In a column headlined Harvard stu