• 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

November 04, 2008


Vote. Here's why.


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:16 AM | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

October 30, 2008

Snoozing in the Pews during the Obama Worship Hour

I watched Obama's half hour infomercial last night so you wouldn't have to. My take on it is over at Family Security Matters:

Slickly produced, the 30-minute spot, with its soft music, emotive images and tearjerker stories of hardworking Americans going through difficult times (hey, why wasnt I auditioned for this?), reminds one more of a movie on the Lifetime, Oxygen or Hallmark channels than a political ad. The kind of movie that makes you squirm uncomfortably in your seat in embarrassment, wondering when the commercial will come so you can run to the kitchen for a bracing jolt of caffeinated soda (or something stronger). But then you remember: the whole thing is a commercial!

(Cue shower music from Psycho)

It's all here.

UPDATE (October 31): Mark asks why no one is talking about the ratings for this dud. Here you go:

The combined overall household rating for Senator Barack Obamas Wednesday night infomercial, in the top 56 local television markets where Nielsen maintains electronic TV meters, was 21.7.


In comparison, the final debate between the two presidential candidates received a 38.3 household rating in the top 56 local TV markets. The candidates first debate on September 26 received a 34.7 household rating in the top 55 markets; their second debate, on October 7, received a 42.0 household rating in those markets.

And according to two top infomercial producers, Obama's expensive self-promotion...

was a flop.

"I don't see enough smiling. Doom and gloom totally," said Anthony Sullivan, one of the biggest names in infomercial history.

"I feel depressed right now," added Sullivan, an Englishman famous for his infomercials touting the Swivel Sweeper and Smart Chopper. The only thing saving Obama, Sullivan said, was when the candidate appeared live at the end speaking at a rally in Florida.

"I think it needed it. I was about to throw myself through a window because it was depressing," Sullivan said.

You know if it had been a ratings blowout, the MSM would have been all over it like Chris Matthews on Obama's leg.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:00 AM | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

October 27, 2008

Obama in 2001: How to Bring About Redistributive Change

Before there was Joe the Plumber there was this 2001 radio interview, where Barack Obama explains what he means by the redistribution of wealth and the courts role in bringing it about:

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:53 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

Obama Campaign 'Punishes' Television Station for Hard-Hitting Interview

On FSM today:

A particularly pointed interview of Joe Biden by Barbara West of Orlandos WFTV-Channel 9 last Thursday resulted in the Obama campaign canceling an interview of Bidens wife Jill. Why? The reason given by the campaign was an unprofessional interview [of Joe Biden]both combative and woefully uninformed about simple facts.

West touched upon a number of topics that have been deemed verboten by the rest of the mainstream media, including whether Obamas talk of spreading the wealth to Joe the Plumber was a crushing political blunder. Her follow up question to that was, How is Sen. Obama not being a Marxist if he intends to spread the wealth around? Bidens initial response was to ask if the question was a joke.

Er, no, Joe, it wasnt a joke. Americans really want to know.

Read it all here.

Show Comments

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

October 26, 2008

Obama's Anthem

(For those who don't recognize the tune, it's the old Soviet Union anthem.)

h/t: The Jawa Report

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:36 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

October 24, 2008

Obama: The Man Who Wants to Lead All Americans Doesn't Like a Majority of Them

This is the man who claims he will transcend the racial divide that he and the Democrats must keep alive if they want to stay in power?

No other comment is necessary. The video speaks for itself.

And if that's not enough, here he is again, in his own words:

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 03:40 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

October 11, 2008

Is Obama a Natural Citizen?

According to our Constitution, a candidate for POTUS must be:

35 years or older
14 year resident
A natural born citizen

There have been some questions about whether Barack Obama was born in the United States or not, which I used to think was a bunch of hooey. Now I'm not so sure. Watch this video and see what YOU think.

h/t: American Thinker on a tip from Timothy.

UPDATE: Rev. Right reminds us that FactCheck.org, which assures us the certificate Obama has on his website is legit, is owned by the Annenberg of Chicago...and Obama used to sit on its board. (This is mentioned in the video, but it doesn't hurt to reiterate the fact.) Conflict of interest? You be the judge.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:01 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

October 06, 2008

Sean Hannity on Obama's Radical Friends

See it before Obama's Truth Squad gets to YouTube:

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:46 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

McCain Finally Pounds Obama on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

Better late than never:

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 05:15 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

September 24, 2008

Behold: Barack Immortalized on Gold Coin

First there was Barack Obama's own version of the presidential seal.

Then there was his version of a Greek temple (designed by the guy who has designed the sets for many of Britney Spears' tours).

Now...a gold coin with his likeness. I kid you not. A company in England is hoping to rake in the cash after the election:

The coins already sold to the Democrats will be presented to the senators, congressmen, governors and other politicians they are being given to within the next two weeks.

There will also be a television advertising campaign launched in the US.

The company directors got the idea of producing the coins after seeing actress Meryl Streep talking about Barack Obama on a television programme.

When they got in touch with the Democrats the party jumped at the chance. And the coins have proved such a hit that locally produced versions have already been launched to compete with the UK originals.

The coins show Senator Obamas face, along with a picture of the White House and the legend President of the United States of America."

Now I realize Obama didn't commission these coins himself. It's funny, though, how he got angry when McCain mocked his worldwide rock star status. Will he ask the Birmingham firm to stop the sale of the coins before the election? As Bob from the discount furniture chain would say, "I doubt it!" (Those of you from the Northeast will be able to hear the distinctive whine in your head!)

And yes, I know that the big sports leagues commission two sets of merchandise for the winners of the Super Bowl, World Series, etc., and then destroy the merchandise bearing the logo of the losing team. But striking a coin with Obama's likeness before we've even had the election and publicizing the fact takes just a little more hubris than that, to borrow a phrase from Charlie Gibson.

It's also nice to know that the Brits are taking such an interest in an election they can't vote in.


In Barack we trust? Not really.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:31 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

August 21, 2008

Caroline Kennedy: Obama's Ambassador to Britain?

Obama is making ambassadorial appointments already? Did I sleep through November 4?

If Barack Obama makes it to the White House, Britain seems set to have its first Kennedy as American Ambassador to the Court of St James's since JFK's father, Joe.

Mandrake hears that it will be payback for Caroline Kennedy JFK's only surviving child and a power broker in the Democratic Party, for being such an enthusiastic cheerleader for Obama.

Will we ever get away from the Kennedys? A dynasty founded by a bootlegger and Nazi sympathizer? How their "royal" status was conferred, I will never know.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised at this rumor, though, seeing as we've learned that Team Obama is already preparing for the transition from campaign to Oval Office occupancy.

What's that I smell? Oh yes, the whiff of arrogance. Seems to be getting stronger every day.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:24 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

August 13, 2008

George Clooney: Number One on Obamas Speed Dial?

My latest at Family Security Matters:

Those of you who think theres nothing behind the celebrity charge the McCain campaign has been lobbing against Barack Obama may want to read this article from the UK Daily Mail. Obama might not be Sienna Millers BFF (best friend forever), but apparently he and George Clooney have hit it off and, according to the article, text each other regularly and speak by phone a couple of times a week.

Aside from sharing manscaping tips, what could a former community organizer/Messiah and a college dropout/former television doctor have in common? In addition to giving him advice on things such as presentation, public speaking and body language, Clooney is using his expert credentials to push Obama to be more balanced on issues such as U.S. relations with IsraelGeorge is pro-Palestinian. And he is also urging Barack to withdraw unconditionally from Iraq if he wins.

Read it all here.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:35 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

July 08, 2008

Change Means a Lot More than You Thought Where Obama Is Concerned

Barack Obama has been promising "change" all throughout his campaign. His followers believed it meant he would change the way things are done in Washington. But it seems as though the more things change, the more they stay the same, and Obama is no exception when it comes to ducking and weaving for poliitical expediency. Seems the Rev. Jeremiah Wright was right about something.

The RNC has picked up on one of his latest shifts (or flip flop, if you will) - this one regarding the situation in Iraq. Take a look:

In order to appeal to the far left base of the Democrat Party, Obama had to swear up and down that the minute he put his feet under the desk in the Oval Office, those troops would be scheduled to start coming home. But now that he has to appeal to moderates and righties, suddenly the surge that Obama was "not persuaded" would stop sectarian violence is causing his advisors to whitewash his prior statements.

Will this latest development turn off his base? Will it convince moderates and righties? We shall see.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 03:23 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

June 21, 2008




Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:12 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

June 17, 2008

More MoveOn.Org Scare Tactics: You Can't Have My Baby!

Check out the latest election ad from MoveOn.org (funded in part by "one worlder" George Soros). Is this the latest "daisy" ad?

"You can't have him." Well, lady, here's a hint: John McCain will not be president in 18 years, even if he wins this election. So unless a future president decides to institute the draft by then, you won't have to worry that little Alex will be torn away from his Feminist, Gender and Sexuality Studies Program at college. He'll also have plenty of time to go snowboarding, mountain biking, and do all of the other fun stuff that young men in his position in life get to enjoy during vacation while mommy and daddy foot the bills.

I certainly hope there will be no more need to send soldiers off to war by the time another 18 years roll around. But don't worry, lady. If that is the case, someone else's son will be there to do the heavy lifting, while little Alex attends anti-war protests for extra credit from his English Lit professor while sporting a Che t-shirt and goatee and eating soy nuts. Your precious Alex will enjoy all that and more, courtesy of the U.S. military that you so obviously despise.

John McCain "can't have" her baby. Frankly, if he turns out to be anything like she is, let's thank our lucky stars.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:39 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

June 04, 2008

Obama vs. McCain: How Did It Happen?


If the MSM did its job the way it's supposed to--watchdog for the public--neither of these men would be running for president. Obama probably wouldn't be a senator. Yet, one of them will be living in the White House next January. But how can that be, you ask?

ThirdWaveDave has the answer.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:58 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

June 02, 2008

Great Bumper Sticker


h/t: Moonbattery

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:51 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

May 20, 2008

Breaking: Obama 'Not Familiar' With Hanford Nuke Site???

He may not be familiar with it, but he's voted on it. (Who's losing his bearings?)

More of the hope, change and new politics we've been hearing about, no doubt.

Thirdwave Dave is breaking the story. Head over NOW for details.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:25 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

February 21, 2008

What's the Obamamania About?

That's the name of a post by my blogging pal ReverseVampyr...he wants to know why people are so excited about a candidate who uses a lot of words to say very little. Just head on over to see what he has to say about Barack "Smooth Operator" Obama.

UPDATE (Feb. 22 2:51 PM): Poor Newtown Mark...lately when he's tried to comment he receives a "nontrusted source" message from MuNu. Here's what he tried to say today:

There have always been good orators that have had little or no real experience -- some have failed miserably and we have long forgotten their names, some have gone on the become tyrants and dictators and are forever remembered as the group that turned hope into fear.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:42 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

February 04, 2008

An Endorsement that Matters: Walid Phares Endorses Mitt Romney

By 2012 the Jihadists may recruit one million suicide bombers and could align two nuclear powers. By 2016 they would deploy 10 million suicide bombers and seize five regimes equipped with the final weapon. In the next eight years, NATOs European membership and US interests worldwide could be battling urban intifadas. To avoid these prospects of apocalypse, the offices on Pennsylvania Avenue must catch up with lost opportunities before next winter.

And that potential hyperdrama hinges on the mind and the nerves of the next President of this country.

I am looking at the most terrifying item on any Presidential agenda: national security. Here is what Ive found so far.

Read it all here.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:31 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

January 15, 2008

The Bonfire of the Multicultural Vanities

I stole the title for this post from a line in this article by David Brooks in the New York Times today. Brooks' commentary adds to that of Rush Limbaugh yesterday:

All the rhetorical devices that have been a staple of identity politics are now being exploited by the Clinton and Obama campaigns against each other. They are competing to play the victim. They are both accusing each other of insensitivity. They are both deliberately misinterpreting each others comments in order to somehow imply that the other is morally retrograde.

All the habits of verbal thuggery that have long been used against critics of affirmative action, like Ward Churchill and Thomas Sowell, and critics of the radical feminism, like Christina Hoff Summers, are now being turned inward by the Democratic front-runners.

If Hillary Clinton loses, then it's a sexist slap in the face to feminism. If Barack Obama loses, then it's a racist slap in the face to blacks. And of course, who could forget the "angry and getting angrier" John Edwards? If he loses, it's a slap in the face to the poor and downtrodden, aka class warfare mongerers.

Basically, the whole Democrat primary is one big slapfest. But who has the biggest hand?

As the Hot Air headline reads, "Reap what you sow, Democrats." Or in other words, they've created a monster. Heh. This election season is going to be a lot more fun than I thought.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:06 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

January 14, 2008

Ron Paul: Vision vs. Reality

This article by Bruce Walker over at American Thinker is one of the better ones I've read about Ron Paul's presidential candidacy. While the congressman from Texas has a lot of excellent ideas about a return to federalism, smaller government, lower taxes and so on, there's that small matter of his wanting to crawl into a shell of isolationism.

But other parts of Paul's policies simply do not fit our age. The notion that we should disengage from the Middle East, for example, suggests that Israel is "just another nation," like, say, North Korea or Syria. The foundation of the Jewish state was based upon the undeniable facts of history continuing, dreadfully, through the Holocaust, that Jews are not "just another people," but are rather a persecuted people who were not welcome when escaping Nazified Europe. Ignoring that is ignoring salient history.

But don't take my word for it; read the whole thing for yourself.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 04:16 PM | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

January 12, 2008


Ouch, that's gonna leave a mark:

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:57 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

January 10, 2008

South Carolina Republican Debate: Winners, Losers

I just finished watching the debate on Fox, and I'm now watching the candidates natter with Sean Hannity and Alan Colmes. This is the first debate of the election season that I'm weighing in on here, and want to get my thoughts down before rigor mortis sets in:

WINNER: Fred Thompson!
Fred nailed it! Whether it was the economy, national security, electability or our borders, he was spot on. Yes, he tends to say "uh" a lot, and as a former radio person that gets on my nerves. But the "uhs" were sandwiched in between a lot of great stuff. He jumped all over Mike Huckabee, and I think that's because he thinks Huckabee represents the greatest threat to him in SC. He said Huckabee was part of the "blame America first" contingency. He came out swinging and kept on hitting home runs.

Fred invoked the first round of applause for the night when he interrupted within the first half hour to address the Reagan Revolution and the "battle for the heart and soul of the Republican Party." He also had some great one-liners, like the one about Iranians looking to meet "the virgins they're looking forward to seeing" when the discussion was about the recent Iranian gun boat incident.

He made an excellent point: if we force Musharref out of Pakistan, who will replace him? Pakistan is the only Muslim nation with nuclear weapons, and those cannot fall into the hands of the Islamofascists.

The Fox focus group led by Frank Luntz also thought Fred was the clear winner. Fred was awesome; let's hope this trend continues. Was it really too little too late? We shall see. The pundits have been wrong before...

LOSER: Ron Paul
My gosh, that man gets loopier all the time. As my friend Tim wrote me, "He looks and sounds like a high school nerd who bought his way in. His point of view about Israel was way out of line from the main stream."

I would add that he seemed petulant, whiny and yes, totally out of touch, like Tim said. For example, when all the other candidates said they, as president, would agree that the commanders in the field (or on the sea) have the training and the on-the-spot ability to make cruicial decisions like the Strait of Hormuz incident, Paul started ranting about an aggressive going to war mentality. It got to the point where Brit Hume asked him exactly what it was that he was responding to.

He also said we need to stop treating Israel like a stepchild who has no responsibility, and that we need to let Israel sort out her own affairs with her Arab neighbors. Huckabee let him have it over that, and rightly so.

People say Fred Thompson is kind of a sourpuss, but have you seen Ron Paul's face when he's being criticized?

Surprise, according to the text message poll conducted by Fox, Paul is the winner thus far (35%), but we know the Ronulans are capable of spiking polls. I wouldn't take that seriously at all.

The others, in order of best to worst:

Mitt Romney: He continued to look presidential and sound presidential, and his comments were consistent. There was a point when he didn't directly answer a question posed by one of the commentators (can't remember what it was now, but that doesn't look too good.)

Oh wait, I remember: he was asked if, as president, he would support including an abortion benefit in a national healthcare plan as he did with the Massachusetts plan. He balked by saying something about the courts forcing him into it, and then veered off to answer a question asked to someone else.

I must say, the camera shots of Romney looking at Paul with incredulity during Paul's diatribes were classic.

Rudy Giuliani: Again, he stayed on message, and to appease those who said he relied too much on his experience as NYC mayor, he also talked about his stint as Associate Attorney General under Ronald Reagan. But really, his experience is based in NY, why shouldn't he talk about it? But he's lost a lot of his early sparkle. He's strong on national defense and fiscal responsibility. I wouldn't have a problem supporting him in the general election.

John McCain: McCain stayed on his path, but his comments sounded canned...I heard many of them during the last debate ("I'm the sherrif in the senate," "I won't be voted Miss Congeniality"). He keeps saying he's learned his lesson about amnesty, but did he really? And he mentioned climate change being something we can actually control, which for me is a major turnoff. Sorry, Maverick.

Mike Huckabee: Fred Thompson said Huckabee is a liberal at heart and Huckabee denies it, but is he really conservative? When defending his record on tax and spend in Arkansas, he employed a typical liberal tactic: "it's for the children." Children who received healthcare, education, etc., because of his generosity with taxpayer money. Whenever you hear about "the children," hold on to your wallet.

I did like his comeback about the religion question (that religious questions were off-limits for everyone else but him), but there were points where he acted and sounded like an annoyed parent putting a fractious child in place whenever he was responding to a criticism by another candidate. Very annoying indeed.

Others checking in: Michelle Malkin, Hot Air, John Hawkins, Ed Morrissey

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:50 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

January 02, 2008

Paulnuts Find Blogmeister USA

I have a modest little blog that doesn't fly very high on the radar. So imagine my surprise upon receiving the following e-mail:

Dear UnAmerican Blogger,

Talk more about Ron Paul in your blogs, please. No one is interested in corrupt
Kleptocrats that will never win the nomination. Ron Paul will win, and you will be shunned if you keep talking about Kleptocrats.

I'm from Connecticut also.

Thank You,

Lew (last name deleted for privacy)

P.S. If you sincerely don't know about Ron Paul, my apologies. Please Google Ron Paul ASAP.

My reply:

Dear Lew,

I write about whom I please. I know who Ron Paul is, and while he has some good ideas about taxes and smaller government, I find his isolationist rants not only unrealistic, but scary in today's world. He may have raised a lot of money, but there's no way he'll win either the nomination or the general election, even if he runs on a third party ticket.

If my posts about "Kleptocrats" means that I'll be shunned by people belonging to the Ron Paul "cult," I'll be happy to continue down the same path. Trying to coerce me to write about your candidate with silly threats is ridiculous. Who's being un-American here?

Thanks for writing...it's been very illuminating!


I've seen how Ron Paul's supporters (more like followers) deluge comment sections at other blogs, and it makes me laugh to think that my writing about this guy could make him more than just a tiny blip on the nation's radar screen.


Yikes, the Paulnuts found me!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:04 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

December 13, 2007

Some Free Advice for Hillary Clinton's Campaign

As First Lady, Hillary! wasn't very popular. Compare opinion polls from the majority of her "first ladyship" with that of Laura Bush and you'll see what I mean.

But a funny thing happened: Monicagate.

Although he'd had numerous affairs before, the Monica Lewinsky scandal happened in the White House, and Hillary! was shamed by her husband enjoying the charms of a young 20-something. (At the time, Hillary was in her 50s.)

Suddenly, her poll numbers began to rise. People felt sorry for the poor, belaguered wife who had suffered so much at the hands of her philandering husband. Her meddling in federal affairs (i.e. Hillarycare) was forgotten, and Hillary! became everyone's favorite martyr. This trend carried into her Senate campaign: she trailed behind rival Rick Laszlo in the polls until he approached her podium during the debate and "menaced" her. Poor thing...another man treating her, the fragile flower, badly. That debate caused her to surge in the polls and the rest is history.

My free advice? Bill needs to get caught in flagrante delicto -- the younger the gal the better. I guarantee a bounce for the Clinton campaign.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 02:48 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

November 29, 2007

CNN's YouTube Republican Debate: The Shenanigans Continue

Good lord, will CNN never learn? There were 5,000 questions submitted for last night's debate and a *surprising* number of them were from committed Democrat candidate supporters.

Michelle Malkin and Hot Air have lots and lots of details.

I only caught the second hour of the debate and watched the first half hour of the discussion afterward. The alarm bells first started ringing when Bill Bennett (the only conservative commentator out of six in the after-debate mish mash) said he was getting e-mails saying one of the questioners (I think the guy who said, "What would Jesus do?" about capital punishment) was connected with the Hillary Clinton campaign. Anderson Cooper started hemming and hawing, saying that he didn't know anything about that, but CNN would look into it.

Seems to me they might have wanted to look into it BEFORE the debate. Or did they?

I also enjoyed watching the 12 "undecided Republicans" whose reactions were being monitored. One of them said after the debate that she was supporting John Edwards! Quite the interesting turn of events. Can you imagine a Democrat debate on CNN where an "undecided Democrat" announced he was supporting Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney? I can't either.

Despite the penchant for bias against them, Republicans go on these networks for debate...yet Democrats refuse to go on Fox. What is it they're afraid of? They'd likely be treated more fairly than the Republicans were last night...and for all that, the candidates did fairly well. (Some better than others, of course.)

And frankly, I'm still undecided.

UPDATE: Paul tried to post a comment in the comments section, but MuNu rejected it for "questionable content." No idea why, so I'm including it below:

Actually it was a retired general who asked about gaes in the military
being part of a Gay/Les/etc. group that has ties to HRC (thanks for the clarification Paul -- ed.). As I pointed out
in LLP post, I thought it was odd he was the only one allowed a follow up, live at that!

The HRC connection was noted afterwards, and A Cooper seemed angry about
it. I think it was a mistake, but the fact is, he works for HRC because
of his views; he didn't ask the question because HRC paid him off. I
think it's important to remember that he was expressing his own views,
although I agree CNN made a mistake in not having the connection beforehand
(which they've acknowledged).

UPDATE 2 (Nov. 30): Another rejected comment...what's up with that? (channeling Seinfeld)...this one from husband-dude:

The political preference wouldn't matter at all if it had been disclosed beforehand that the questioners were for the most part Democratic activists. They were not represented as such.

Democratic candidates flat out refused to have a debate on Fox because "the network was biased against their party."

Republicans went ahead and had the debate with CNN where the network was apparently VERY biased against their party - and did very well.


The Clinton News Network strikes again...

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:07 AM | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

October 26, 2007

Hillary and Rudy -- A Couple of Thoughts

Kitty sent out an e-mail with a bit from the NY Post's Page Six about an endorsement for Rudy by a couple of former drug kingpins from NY: Frank Lucas and Nicky Barnes (whose story is told in the movie "American Gangster" starring Denzel Washington and Cuba Gooding, Jr.). Obviously no one wants that kind of endorsement, but that's not the point of this post.

One of the things Frank Lucas says is, "I don't think they're [Americans] ready for an Italian president."

What is it with our constant emphasis on the skin color, ethinicity, and sex of a person? I get so tired of hearing that America isn't ready for this-or-that kind of president. Rudy may be of Italian extraction, but as he was born and raised here, he's American first and foremost. And isn't that what it's all about?

What America needs is a competent president -- sex, color and ethnic heritage notwithstanding. As long as I think someone can lead and has the experience and values I believe are important, then that's the person I'll vote for.

Speaking of voting for someone just because of who she is, why would I vote for Hillary Clinton "just because" she's a woman? She would be a disaster for our country. No stranger to scandal (and adept at stonewalling and trying to cover it up), she also has plans to further socialize this nation that has already had quite enough of that nonsense. If you'd like to know what kind of person she is, take a look at this site -- it has a slide show with plenty of quotes directly from the horse's mouth that show what an uncouth, ethically-challenged, out-and-out socialist she really is.

Then let me know if you still want to vote for her.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:05 AM | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

October 09, 2007

Today's Republican Debate in Dearborn

UPDATE (October 10): Right Wing News has a good roundup of rightwing reaction to the debate. Looks like the verdict on Fred is generally positive.

Yes, let's have a debate at 4 pm Eastern...everyone will be able to watch it! :-/

This is the first debate I have actually watched (other than highlights online the day after), and one of my complaints is the same as everyone else's: too many people, not enough time for substantial information.

The main reason I made a point to tune in was because Fred Thompson made his debate debut, and he didn't do too bad a job of it. His main problem is that his answers are so broad. He needs to be more specific.

And now, I'll turn to my friend Timothy B., who sent me his quick reflections on the debate, because they pretty much mirror mine:

Fred did okhe did get a dig in on Chris Mathews when Mathews said he should have stopped at the word no on a subject. Fred replied, "That's your opinion, Christopher."

Rudy and Mitt were the clear winners. It's a shame Rudy is pro-choice.

Brownback would be an outstanding VP.

Huckabee would also be a good VP.

Tancredo is like a little mouse running around squeaking -- although he does have some good ideas, no one takes him seriously.

Ron Paul has his head up his proverbial butt. Both he and Toncredo both said they weren't sure if they would support the GOP nominee. Who the hell are they going to support? Hillary!!

And I noticed that except for the little dig at Thompson (which was served right back), Matthews made an effort to control himself. Maybe his betters at NBC told him to shape up.

I'm not going to go into any more detail because one, I didn't take notes and two, I was trying to do some editing at the same time (and I received a phone call), so my full attention was not on the proceedings. But I'll be interested to see what others on the right say about this debate.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 06:31 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

September 20, 2007

Hillary Calls Cheney 'Darth Vader'

The maturity of Democrats knows no bounds:

"Vice President Cheney came up to see the Republicans yesterday," Clinton said at the fundraiser. "You can always tell when the Republicans are getting restless, because the Vice Presidents motorcade pulls into the Capitol, and Darth Vader emerges."

And you can tell when Democrats are getting restless, because Mrs. Clitnon's motorcade pulls into fundraisers and The Emperor emerges.


Mrs. Clinton: puppetmaster of the Democrat Party

On a tip from Jeanette!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:06 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

September 10, 2007

Panderers, One and All

The Democrat presidential candidates were on a debate hosted by the Spanish-language television station Univision last night. Here's a sample of the rhetoric being tossed about willy nilly:

Hillary Clinton, regarding an immigration bill passed in 2006:

She said the bill, which would have punished people who aid illegal immigrants, "would have criminalized the Good Samaritan. It would have criminalized Jesus Christ." Notice Hillary only brings religion in when it's convenient? I wonder if she worries about Jesus' view on abortion?

Bill Richardson on the wall:

"Congress only funded half of the wall," said Richardson, who also served as energy secretary and U.N. ambassador in the Clinton administration. "If you are going to build a 12-foot wall, you know what is going to happen? A lot of 13-foot ladders. This is a terrible symbol of America." What's a terrible symbol? That America recognizes her sovereignty and will defend her borders? Och, terrible, aye.

Barack Obama on Bush's "missed chance":

"They [American workers] feel that they are losing jobs. They feel like they are losing health care," the Illinois senator said. "They feel that they are falling behind, and their children won't have a better future. So a president has to speak out forcefully against anti-immigrant sentiment and racist sentiment, but also has to make sure that all workers are being tended to." It's not anti-immigrant sentiment, it's anti-ILLEGAL ALIEN sentiment. Get it right, Barack, you're running for the highest office in the land.

Chris Dodd on Cuba:

"We need to understand it and be part of the transition in that country, to make a difference as it is occurring," Dodd said. What transition? Raul is just as much a hardliner as Fidel. Dodd=useful idiot.

John Edwards (aka Silky Pony) on the war:

Former Sen. John Edwards, the party's 2004 vice presidential nominee, said he was concerned the report -- presented by Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and Ambassador Ryan Crocker -- would be "a sales job by the White House." Silky would know about sales jobs...he conned enough juries in his day.

Joe Biden was unavailable; he was likely preparing his remarks that General Petraeus is "dead flat wrong" on Iraq. Interesting, since Petraeus hasn't given his official report yet. Oh, but he did preface the above remark with, "I really respect him..." Um, yeah, Joe, I'm sure you really respect a man whose position you see fit to judge before you hear his official report.

Gee, which one should I support?

On a tip from Jeanette!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 06:59 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

August 24, 2007

Zzz...Chris Dodd to March in New Hampshire on Labor Day

Connecticut's Sen. Chris Dodd, who is campaigning for the Democrat presidential nomination (yes, still), will be spending Labor Day marching in a parade in New Hampshire and having a tasty BBQ afterward. Below is the text of an e-mail I received:


Dear Pam,

On Labor Day, September 3rd, we are going to New Hampshire to join Senator Chris Dodd in the Milford, NH Labor Day parade. This is going to be an important day to rally support for Chris Dodd in New Hampshire, and it will mean a great deal to the Senator to have enthusiastic, energetic, and committed volunteers from his home state showing their support and picthing in to help him win in New Hampshire.

After a great day of showing New Hampshire the energy and excitement behind Senator Dodd's campaign we will join the New Hampshire for Dodd staff for a BBQ before heading back to Connecticut. We will arrive back to Connecticut by 8:00pm.

We will be leaving North Haven from the commuter lot off route 40 Devine Street at 7:30am. Exit 10 off I-91 North. Take a left off the exit and the lot of on your left.

From Manchester we will be leaving from the Spencer Street commuter lot at 8:30am. From the I-84 East take the I-384 exit. Take exit 1 Spencer Street off I-384. Take a left off the exit. At the first light take a left and the lot is on the left.

You can also check this event out at:

Please RSVP to this event right away!

For more information or to reserve your spot ont he bus please call the office at 860-244-2008 or email us at mscully@chrisdodd.com.

Thank you.

Melissa Scully


You know what I'd like? I'd like for Chris Dodd to actually do the job he pledged to do the last time he ran for re-election as one of Connecticut's senators. I'm sick and tired of hearing about how he's running around the country, running for president when he hasn't a snowball's chance in Hades, instead of doing what he's paid for.

And another thing: how about campaigning for prez right here at home? He's not my choice, but it seems rather insulting that he ignores his own state. Yes I know that it's necessary to woo certain states prior to the first primaries, but geez! Throw us a teeny little bone, would ya?

It's not just Dodd. All those senators, etc., who continue to hold their office while running for president really cheese me off. "We the People" pay them to legislate, but they're too busy campaigning for higher office to do so. And we wonder why nothing of substance gets done in Congress!

I think a rule should be in place that stipulates the following: anyone holding public office who wants to run for a different office should have to resign the current office. This is especially true now, since it looks like these early presidential election cycles are here to stay.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:53 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

August 15, 2007

The "Invisible" Woman

God, I wish. Why can't Hillary Clinton just disappear? I mean, if she did, we wouldn't have to suffer comments like these:

"If you're a family that is struggling and you don't have health care, you are invisible to this president," the New York senator says in the ad. "If you're a single mom trying to find affordable child care so you can go to work, you're invisible too.

The ad also argued that U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan are "invisible" to Bush.

The first thought that came to mind when I heard this comment was repeated by a caller on Rush Limbaugh's show this afternoon: For eight years, Mrs. Clinton and her husband literally ignored the Marines at the foot of Air Force One and Marine One on an almost daily basis. And she is claiming that Bush is ignoring the troops? Who is going to swallow that tripe?

Not me, lady. Not me.

Wyatt Earp

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 04:45 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

August 10, 2007

Hail To The Chief (Idiot)

If you don't laugh after reading this, then you do not have a sense of humor:

President Hopeful Lanakila Washington has created the EXIT PLAN needed to bring the troops home from the Middle East!

The plan is called "Operation Exit Plan" and he will put it into action during his first day in office as your President.

Operation Exit Plan. To quote the Guinness guys: "BRILLIANT!" And people think Ron Paul is a yutz. (H/T - The Man)

Wyatt Earp

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 03:50 PM | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

August 07, 2007

John Edwards: Should He Win an Oscar?

John Edwards: man of the people or giant con artist? In this editorial by Brad Warthen, Edwards comes off less as the caring, compassionate guy he claims to be and more like a cynical player who will do anything to win the presidency.

Here's a snippet:

Isnt he [Howard Dean] a nice man? said our copy editor (the fan). I agreed. Then came the revelation: Unlike John Edwards, observed the administrative assistant. Whats that? It seems that when she alone had met then-Sen. Edwards at the reception desk, she had been struck by the way he utterly ignored the folks in our customer service department and others who had hoped for a handshake or a word from the Great Man. He had saved all his amiability, all his professionally entertaining energy and talent, for the folks upstairs who would have a say in the papers endorsement.

The old wisdom is that the man who sucks up to his superiors but treats the waiter like crap says a lot about his character. In this light, John Edwards ain't comin' off too good.

Sure, every politician has a bit of actor in him. It's part and parcel of the gig. But if you can't even bring yourself to be cordial to the people you want to lead, then you have a really big problem. And no matter how much you comb your hair, it's what's inside that really counts. I get the feeling there isn't much behind that Gorgeous George facade.

Check out which bit Aaron found most amusing!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:15 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

Obama, Clinton on Outs

Newt Gingrich made the prediction that there would be some combination of an Obama/Clinton presidential ticket in 2008. Could he have been wrong?

The tension between the two Democratic presidential hopefuls, which has spilled into public view in the last three weeks, has been intensifying since January. It is clear that the genteel decorum of the Senate has given way to the go-for-the-jugular instinct of the campaign trail.

As the Senate held late sessions of back-to-back votes before its summer break, the two rivals kept a careful eye on each other as they moved across the Senate floor. For more than two hours one night, often while standing only a few feet apart, Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama never approached each other or exchanged so much as a pleasantry.

The scene repeated itself the next evening, a departure from the clubby confines of the Senate, where even the fiercest adversaries are apt to engage in the legislative equivalent of cocktail party chitchat.

When the cameras are on them, they can make a point of showing good sportsmanship. At a Democratic forum Saturday in Chicago, Mrs. Clinton smiled and moved her hands as though she was conducting a choir when an audience of liberal bloggers sang Happy Birthday to Mr. Obama, who was turning 46.

By the end of the event, Mr. Obama had called her Hillary in a sharp tone, criticizing her for accepting contributions from lobbyists.

Darn...and I've already ordered the monogrammed cocktail napkins!

So while we might have our first woman or black presidential candidate, we likely won't have our first minority dream team candidacy...unless cooler heads prevail "for the good of the party." Not for the good of the country, but for the good of the party. You know how it is! ;-)

On a tip from Cookiewrangler!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:07 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

August 03, 2007

Dodd Makes Fool of Himself on O'Reilly

Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) was supposed to appear on "The O'Reilly Factor" Wednesday night, but the entire show was pre-empted due to the bridge that collapsed in Minneapolis.

However, he appeared last night (in a pre-taped segment) to "discuss" Daily Kos and his pending appearance at their convention this weekend. I first wrote about it here. Well, I saw the segment last night and I have to tell you, Dodd came off looking like the stiff I know him to be. He also came off looking like a complete tool. Hot Air has the video of what ended up being a shout fest between him and O'Reilly. Hot Air also shows Dennis Miller's reaction to the segment, which needless to say didn't do Dodd any favors.

It comes down to this: Dodd has probably never seen Daily Kos, and he likely doesn't watch O'Reilly's show. As Bernard Goldberg pointed out in one of the show's later segments, Dodd's presidential polling number is an asterisk, and that he would use this appearance on the otherwise verboten Fox News in order to add funds to his tiny campaign coffers. (He was right, of course; check out Dodd's campaign website.)

Dodd kept yammering about how the only reason O'Reilly was picking on DailyKos was because of its ideology. He kept calling it a "community" of people -- as though that excuses some of the vile rhetoric the site is responsible for. In fact, he barely acknowledged the photo of Rove, Bush and Joe Lieberman in flagrante delicto that appears on DailyKos, except to say something like, "Of course it's unacceptable, but that's not the point..." Um, yes, Mr. Dodd, that is the point.

In the end, he may end up getting a few extra donations, but that's all this appearance will do for Dodd. O'Reilly's regular viewers aren't likely to vote for him anyway, and he showed his obvious disdain for them by going on not to civilly discuss the issue, but to behave like the proverbial bull in a china shop.

Fortunately for Dodd, he'll have his cushy seat in the Senate to keep him busy when his presidential aspirations go the way of the dodo. Connecticut's libs are more than happy to keep re-electing him.

UPDATE: John Hawkins discusses the legacy of Daily Kos on his column at Town Hall today.


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:01 AM | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

August 01, 2007

Chris Dodd to Appear on O'Reilly Tonight


So I get my usual e-mail from the Dodd campaign (or is that non-campaign?):

Dear Pam,

This Saturday, Senator Dodd will join other Democratic primary candidates at the Yearly Kos Presidential Forum -- an event being broadcast on CNN and DTV. [DTV stands for Dodd TV -- ed.]

A Presidential forum put together wholly by grassroots activists; you would think that is an encouraging sign for our Party, and our democracy.

It is, of course, unless you work at Fox News and your name is Bill O'Reilly.

O'Reilly has gone on a tirade against the netroots for the past two weeks, essentially declaring war on Yearly Kos, its sponsors, and participants ... and that includes Senator Dodd.

He tried to get our campaign to distance itself from the event -- we pushed back. I don't think he expected that.

He invited us on the show -- we accepted. I don't think he expected that either.

Will you stand with Senator Dodd as he faces Bill O'Reilly tonight on "The O'Reilly Factor" at 8 P.M. Eastern?

Bill O'Reilly's weapon of choice in this battle is to pick a handful of the millions of comments posted on DailyKos and attempt to pass them off as representative of the community.

This is not a new trick for him, and we called him out on it.

Will you stand with Senator Dodd tonight as he goes face to face with Bill O'Reilly?

Bill O'Reilly is not used to people standing up to him and his unfair attacks.

Will you stand with Senator Dodd as he faces Bill O'Reilly tonight on "The O'Reilly Factor" at 8 P.M. Eastern?

You won't want to miss this,

Tim Tagaris
Internet Director, Chris Dodd for President

First of all, I don't think Bill O'Reilly is too worried about getting smacked down by Chris Dodd. And as for the assertion that he's "not used to people standing up to him and his unfair attacks," that in and of itself is a joke. If you've ever watched his show, you know he thrives on controversy and opposition. I'm sure he's going to enjoy having Dodd on his program to argue with.

Now, I've seen some of Bill O'Reilly's taking down of Daily Kos, and while I agree with him that the site spews quite a bit of hateful rhetoric, I think he's going about it the wrong way, as Michelle Malkin has said on some of her guest appearances.

Read More "Chris Dodd to Appear on O'Reilly Tonight"

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:08 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

July 17, 2007

Obama Outraises Dodd in Dodd's Home State

Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) might well consider throwing in the towel as far as his presidential run is concerned, and go back to actually representing the state. In the last quarter, he was trumped in fundraising by golden boy Barack Obama, with Obama raking in $941,486 compared to Dodd's paltry $857,263.

Maybe if Dodd actually campaigned in his home state, Democrats here might consider backing him.

He's not discouraged yet, however:

"We have 73 Democratic Town Committees already endorsing us, with more coming all the time, the endorsements of all statewide Democrats and legislative leaders, and importantly, thousands of loyal Dodd supporters who are behind this campaign. Support for Senator Dodd's bid for the White House is growing every day, and we're proud of that," [campaign spokeswoman Colleen Flanagan] said.

It's all well and good to have town committees and other political players behind you -- not to mention "yesterday's news" celebrities like Paul Simon. But if you don't have the popular support of your own constituents, that's a bad sign. Remember, Al Gore didn't win his own state of Tennessee when he ran for president in 2000.

But don't worry. Dodd will stick it out to the bitter end, going back to his comfy Senate seat when all is said and done.


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:16 AM | Comments (65) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

July 13, 2007

Clinton, Edwards: Let's Limit Debate

Huge egos don't enjoy sharing the spotlight. Politicians in general usually have larger egos than the average bloke, but Hillary Clinton and John Edwards leave others in the shade. Apparently they were heard talking amongst themselves about having smaller debates so that they'll get more microphone time.

Edwards says, "We should try to have a more serious and a smaller group."

Clinton agrees, saying, "We've got to cut the number" and "they're not serious." She also says that she thought their campaigns had already tried to limit the debates and say, "We've gotta get back to it."

Fox News microphones caught the surreptitious chat at an NAACP-sponsored forum in Detroit yesterday. Another reason to hate that dastardly channel!

Cookiewrangler, who gave me the tip, wonders if Edwards isn't buttering up Clinton so she might tap him as her VP nominee -- he doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hades, after all. I certainly wouldn't put it past him...

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:41 AM | Comments (177) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

July 09, 2007

Sheehan vs. Pelosi

In this corner we have the long-time Congresswoman from California, current House Speaker, and lifetime shill for leftwing causes...Nancy Pelosi!

And in this corner we have the founder of Gold Star Moms for Peace, "peace" activist, and starving publicity hound...Cindy Sheehan!

That's right, Cindy Sheehan is planning to put up her dukes and battle it out for Nancy Pelosi's House seat in the election next year if Pelosi doesn't make a move to impeach President Bush within the next two weeks.

Sheehan, who announced in late May that she was departing the peace movement, said she decided to run against Pelosi unless the congresswoman moves to oust Bush in the next two weeks.

"I think all politicians should be held accountable," Sheehan told The Associated Press on Sunday. "Democrats and Americans feel betrayed by the Democratic leadership. We hired them to bring an end to the war."

I agree with Sheehan on the point that our elected officials should be held accountable...that's why we hold regular elections, after all. But while I am not impressed with Pelosi by any means, replacing her with Sheehan would not exactly be a step forward for democracy. Other than being a one-trick pony with the whole anti-war thing, what does Sheehan have going for her besides haircuts as public as John Edwards' and her love for Hugo Chavez?

Somehow, I doubt Pelosi is worried by the competition. By all means, though, I hope Sheehan does run for Pelosi's seat. It'll make for some much-needed entertainment in the election year to come.

"I don't want to be your friend anymore, Nancy!"

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:53 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

June 22, 2007

Dodd Campaign Enlists Musical Backup

When a presidential candidate receives 1% (or less) in various polls, he needs to do something -- anything -- to get voters to notice him. And so Chris Dodd has enlisted the aid of Paul Simon to help entertain voters when he heads to Iowa in early July.

Why Paul Simon, famous for his '60s music-making with Art Garfunkle (Bridge Over Troubled Water) and later solo works (Kodachrome and You Can Call Me Al)?

"Paul is a long time friend," [Dodd] said, "and one of the most important voices in American music, and he has been tireless in his service to the greater good of people throughout our country and the world."

I doubt even Simon's musical talents will breathe new life into this sinking campaign, but you can't blame Dodd for trying just about anything. Any port in a storm, as the saying goes. And if voters find Dodd a bit dull, at least they can enjoy the music.

He's hoping Paul Simon will excite the voters...
best of luck!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:44 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

June 14, 2007

Bill Clinton's Blabbing Lines Family Pockets with Big Bucks

Via Breitbart:

WASHINGTON (AP) - Former President Clinton made more than $10 million in paid speeches last year, according to new filings that show he and his presidential- candidate wife have at least $10 million in the bank, and may have closer to $50 million.

According to financial disclosure forms made public Thursday, Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton hold two accounts, each valued at somewhere between $5 and $25 million. One is an old-fashioned bank account; the other is a blind trust.

The reports indicate that when it comes to family wealth, Clinton is the wealthiest of the members of Congress running for president. Of all the presidential candidates, only Mitt Romney, whose assets are between $190 million and $250 million, may lay claim to being more affluent.

More details about the other top candidates can be found in the article.

I wonder how much Hillary is willing to have taken away from her for the common good?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 02:32 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

June 11, 2007

Impeached Judge is Co-Chair of Hillary's Campaign

Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) has been named as co-chair of the Clinton presidential campaign. To refresh your memory, Hastings is a former federal judge who was impeached on corruption and perjury, and removed from office in 1989.

Nancy Pelosi, drainer of corrupt swamps, was all set to name Hastings as chair of the House Intelligence Committee earlier this year, but it turns out people remembered she had been among those voting for Hastings' impeachment. Oops!

How fitting that Hastings should be such a large player in Mrs. Bill Clinton's campaign! Let's take a trip down memory lane to see what another Clinton presidency could be like:

- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance

- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates

- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation

- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify

- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly

- First president sued for sexual harassment.

- First president accused of rape.

- First first lady to come under criminal investigation

- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case

- First president to establish a legal defense fund.

- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions

- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad

Remember, the Clinton years of the '90s were a two-for-one special! Anyone for a second helping?

h/t: Moonbattery

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:50 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

Late GOP Entries Could Change the Race

Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney and John McCain are the current GOP frontrunners in the race for the White House. But a couple of possible late entries could change everything. (If you follow politics even part of the time, you'll know what I'm talking about.) My pal Jonathan Strong, aka The Strong Conservative, writes about these possibilities for the Sarasota HeraldTribune today.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:40 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

June 08, 2007

Chris Dodd Shows He Knows Diddly

Chris Dodd, (sadly) one of my elected representatives in the Senate, is running for president. If you didn't know, it's because he's near the bottom of the heap of Democrat Oval Office wannabes. "Dodd who?" is a common refrain among nationwide voters.

Dodd, who has a barely-used law degree because he's been in either the House or Senate for the last 30 plus years, has declared that the Constitutional rights of terrorist detainees have been violated. And he wants you to care! Here's the e-mail I received from his campaign yesterday...it made me want to vomit. (Apparently his views are over at HuffPo as well):

America doesn't start wars - we end them.

We don't turn away from the world - we lead it.

And we don't commit torture - we condemn it.

All of this was true until the current administration, and we shouldn't wait until we elect a new President before we stand up to the mistakes made by this one.

There is no doubt that we live in dangerous times and that America has real enemies, but the actions of this Administration have made us more vulnerable as nation, not less.

That is why I intend to do everything within my power to bring a bill I introduced earlier this year, the "Restoring the Constitution Act," to a vote in the United States Senate.

But today I need your help. Watch my video discussing the bill and upload your own explaining why you believe America is most secure when we draw strength from our highest ideals, not our worst fears.


During last weekend's debate, I was asked what a top priority for the Dodd Administration would be during my first 100 days in office. My answer was clear, "I would try to restore the Constitutional rights in this country" and I wouldn't need one hundred days to do it.

Indeed, we must restore habeas corpus, but to regain our moral standing in the world requires more than that alone.

That is why the "Restoring the Constitution Act" would also prevent the use of evidence in court gained through the unreliable and immoral practices of torture and coercion, limit the authority of the President to interpret the meaning and application of the Geneva Conventions and make that authority subject to congressional and judicial oversight, and narrow the definition of unlawful enemy combatant to individuals who directly participate in a zone of active combat against the United States, and individuals who participated in attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001.

Watch the video explaining the "Restoring the Constitution Act," upload your own, and sign on as a citizen co-sponsor.


In removing habeas corpus protections, the Military Commissions Act affirmed vengeance as a tool in fighting terrorism discarding sixty years of precedent and respect for the rule of law.

The subjugation of habeas and the use of torture make us weaker as a nation, not stronger. It's time we stand up and say once and for all that the choice between vengeance and security is a false choice that American leadership ought to draw strength from not our worst fears but our highest ideals.

Please take a moment to learn about the "Restoring the Constitution Act" and get involved in its passage.


Justice Jackson said of the Nuremberg Trials, "To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well."

If we fail to rise to this moment, I fear we will be drinking from that chalice for many years to come. In the end, by restoring our fundamental principles we serve not only the interest of justice, but also the long term interests of the United States.

Now I'm not a lawyer, but even I could see that this man is blowing more smoke out of his rear end than a Mack truck. But my pals Aaron and Charles over at Lifelike Pundits have given this nonsense the smackdown it deserves. Aaron is not a lawyer, but Charles is...he was just admitted to the Illinois bar earlier this year and, unlike Dodd, plans to use his law degree. Please click here to see why Chris Dodd is so full of hot air that if he were a conservative, the Goracle would try to have him condemned for single-handedly turning our planet into a sauna.


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:53 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

June 07, 2007

Frank Luntz on McCain and Thompson

Frank Luntz was on Sean Hannity's radio show yesterday afternoon (I caught part of that), and he was also on Hannity and Colmes last night. Luntz is a political analyst who uses focus groups to see where a candidate is standing and from what he says, John McCain's prospects are sinking fast, while Fred Thompson's are rising just as quickly.

The biggest problem for McCain is his support of the amnesty bill. They can call it comprehensive immigration reform, but what it boils down to is amnesty, conditional though it may be. The problem with too many politicians is that they forget that the voters have eyes, ears, and minds with which to process what they see and hear. And the voters are angry. As for Thompson, it's not just star appeal. There's a lot more to his attraction than that.

Hot Air has a portion of Luntz's appearance on H&C last night. Take a look...it's highly informative. Meanwhile, Ace points out why these citizens-in-waiting will not "more than pay for themselves" with the taxes collected on their earnings.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:43 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

June 06, 2007

Official Fred Thompson Site Up

The official Fred Thompson campaign site is up. Called I'm With Fred, there currently isn't much to see on it, but there is a "donate" button, along with a place to sign up to be a "friend of Fred."

Check it out!

h/t: Draft Fred Thompson

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:50 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

June 01, 2007

Mitt Slaps Hillary's Socialism

On the campaign trail yesterday, Republican nominee contender Mitt Romney called Mrs. Bill Clinton's plans for bigger government and more social programs a "European caricature."

"Her view is the old, classic, European caricature that we describe of big government, big taxation, welfare state...She gave a speech a couple of days ago and laid out her vision for America. And as I listened to her I figured her platform wouldn't even get her elected in France."

I laughed when I read that, and apparently the jibe received real laughs in Sioux City, Iowa, where he made the speech.

Romney's right, of course. Just last month, France rejected socialism when they elected Nicolas Sarkozy, a conservative who wants to lessen the intrusion of government into industry and create a freer market that would in turn create more jobs in a country with double digit unemployment, highest among young adults.

Romney also brought up the successful statewide health plan he implemented when he was governor of Massachusetts. I don't know enough about it to comment, but I know I wouldn't be bragging about that to people in the Midwest, who tend to be more mistrustful of big government planning than the Socialist Commonwealth of Massachusetts, home of Teddy Kennedy and John Kerry, both of whom never met a socialist program they didn't like.

Check out this paragraph from the AP story:

In recent French elections, conservative Nicolas Sarkozy captured the presidency, defeating Segolene Royal in her bid to become France's first female president.

Notice that Sarkozy is labeled as a conservative (true), but Royal's status as a socialist is left out? Reading between the lines, one might think Royal was defeated because she was a woman, not because she wanted to keep France's failing socialism intact. You can bet that if Mrs. Bill Clinton is either not nominated or is nominated and loses the election that the press will be playing the sexist card, not admitting that her policies could possibly have anything to do with her defeat.

I like Romney and although he's not my first choice, we could certainly do worse for a president. I'm not worried so much about his good looks as his policies, unlike out-of-work actor Ben Affleck, whose complaints about Romney on Real Time with Bill Maher last week included his being "all clean cut and he looks like a Ken doll." But then that ends up being a compliment, even Romney's being a Mormon, as Affleck went on to say Rudy Giuliani is "crazy" and John McCain is "completely insane."

This is how the great political minds in Hollywood think. Thank goodness "actor/activists" like Affleck aren't really running anything but their mouths.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:28 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

May 31, 2007

Fred Thompson Quits "Law & Order"

Further indication of his desire to run.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

May 30, 2007

Fred! '08

Last week, I passed on a tidbit from the OpinionJournal's Political Diary that Fred! Thompson was thinking about announcing on or around July 4th. The Politico is now saying that it's more than just a possibility:

Fred Dalton Thompson is planning to enter the presidential race over the Fourth of July holiday, announcing that week that he has already raised several million dollars and is being backed by insiders from the past three Republican administrations, Thompson advisers told The Politico.


A member of Thompson's inner circle, who insisted on anonymity, said the former senator will offer himself as a consistent conservative who can unite all elements of the Republican Party. "The public is increasingly cynical and disenchanted with government," this adviser said. "Competence is at the heart of what people want from government, and they need to have a sense that government can do the things they care the most about. They want a reason to continue Republican governance. Thompson can be seen as the adult with a firm hand on the tiller."

This is the most exciting news I've heard in months! He has my vote and my donation. But let me be clear: if he doesn't win the nomination, there will be no picking of sour grapes here...I will be voting for whomever gets nominated. A so-so Republican is a better choice than any of the current crop of Democrats.

And lest you forget, this is the kind of straight talk we can expect from Fred! Thompson. I look forward to his campaign!

h/t: Cookiewrangler

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:46 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

Hillary Accepts $4,000 Donation from High School Student

Gee, if I had had $4,000 lying around when I was in high school, I would have found better ways to spend it. But was it really from a football-playing private high school student? From Reverse Spin:

Most high schoolers dont have $4,000 lying around to give away and those who do are not going to give it to a U.S. Senator from another state.

Unless, of course, his mother or other relative is an employee for a company whose top officials have given Hillary more than $150,000 over the last several years and one that could strongly benefit from a Clinton presidency. Valerie Ramsdell has been a top official for Buffalo Grove-based International Profit Associates, a business consulting firm in the cross hairs of state and federal governments for alleged fraud and blatant company wide sexual harassment. Her $4,000 donation to Hillary two weeks prior to Camerons listed the same 1200 Valley Road address.

Mrs. Bill Clinton taking money from tainted sources? Say it ain't so!

On a tip from Marathon Pundit.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:01 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

May 23, 2007

Fred Thompson May Announce July 4th

According to the OpinionJournal's Political Diary from today (subscription required, so I can't provide a link), Fred! Thompson is planning to officially announce his candidacy for president some time around the Fourth of July weekend:

It looks as if Fred Thompson will be announcing his presidential candidacy around the Fourth of July weekend. He already has hired Tom Collamore, a former Commerce Department official, as his campaign manager and former Federal Elections Commission chairman Michael Toner as his campaign lawyer.

The announcement has been delayed while Mr. Thompson builds up a credible staff to enable him to hit the campaign trail in an organized fashion. He also had to clear up loose ends on his calendar by fulfilling speaking engagements and allowing original episodes of NBC's "Law and Order," on which he has a regular role, to air before federal equal-time rules kick in that would prevent NBC from airing them.

GOP rivals are carping that Thompson's campaign will fizzle out early admidst the task of fundraising and building grassroots support in key states. Yet that might not be a problem, according to Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN), who says, "Fred has the most spontaneous support I've seen of anyone in the last 40 years."

Keeping fingers crossed!

h/t: Cookiewrangler

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 02:04 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

DC Madame for Hillary!

You know, for someone who seems somewhat frigid, Mrs. Bill Clinton sure has some hot women backing her bid for the presidency. First it was "adult film star" Jenna Jameson vocally lending her support, and now it's Deborah Jeane Palfrey, who is also known as the DC Madame.

Palfrey thinks Mrs. Clinton is "great," and that "she's bright and articulate." (Wait a minute, I thought Barack Obama had the articulate bit sewn up. We can't have more than two articulate candidates!) I guess Palfrey hasn't seen this video of Hillary giving a recent commencement speech.

Palfrey also despises President Bush, saying he got where he is because of his father. And Mrs. Bill Clinton got where she is all by herself? Interesting!

Make sure you read the comments section at the first link above...there are some real gems.

I know I wouldn't be thrilled to have these two, er, ladies publicly advocating my candidacy. But then, as long as they're willing to help fill the campaign coffers, why would Hillary complain? Show me the money, baby!

h/t: Cookiewrangler

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:54 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

May 18, 2007

Help Hillary Clinton Nail Down a Campaign Song!

Via The Man, here is an e-mail sent out by the Hillary for President campaign:

Dear Friend,

Hillary needs your help. We've been working on an important issue -- the kind that can make or break a campaign. And your input is absolutely critical to ensuring that we make the right decision.

That's right -- we're picking our campaign song.

We've got a great selection up in an interactive poll on our website, with artists like Shania Twain, U2, KT Tunstall, the Dixie Chicks, and more. Visit the site, listen to the songs, and make your choice. Or you can suggest one of your own.


Thanks for participating. And don't miss Hillary's announcement of the song contest on YouTube -- you won't want to miss it. Trust me.

Patti Solis Doyle
Campaign Manager
Hillary for President

That's right folks. It's not her socialist, nanny-state ideology or her likely inability to lead a great nation that should concern you, but which song will be chosen to represent her campaign and lull you into a false sense of security. These are important times, people!

With that said, here are my duly noted submissions:

Witchy Woman by the Eagles
Summer in Hell by Fred Schneider and the Shake Society
Girls Just Want to Have Fun by Cyndi Lauper
Owner of a Lonely Heart by Yes
Sympathy for the Devil by the Rolling Stones
Like a Virgin by Madonna

Add your ideas to the comments section!

La la la LA la la la....

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:57 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

May 15, 2007

Bloomberg Sets Aside $1 Billion for Possible Run

New York City mayor (and RINO) Mike Bloomberg is still making noises about a possible independent run for president in 2008, and he has $1 billion of his personal fortune of $5.5 billion to do it. (Bloomberg is the founder of Bloomberg L.P., a financial data, research and news company.)

Another possible independent candidate is Sen. Chuck Hagel (RINO-NE).

With that kind of money, Mike Bloomberg could wreak quite a bit of havoc, but I doubt he could win for a couple of reasons: Except for New Yorkers and people in the immediate surrounding communities, Mike Bloomberg is hardly a household name. I realize that with that kind of money people will soon know who he is (remember Ross Perot?), but his money couldn't buy him the presidency either.

Independent candidates hardly have a great track record for winning really big elections. Yes, Joe Lieberman won his senate race in Connecticut last year, but he was an official Democrat before that, and had both name recognition and a viable track record. As much as people whine and moan about there only being two real political parties in this country, it's doubtful the prominence of the Republicans and Democrats will face any real challenge soon. Plus, the problem with three or more parties is that a large field could make for a small fraction of the population deciding who becomes president.

Independent candidates tend not to win, but to take votes away from the Republican and Democrat candidates.

The question would be, who would Bloomberg suck votes away from? He's a fiscal conservative, but a social liberal...much like Rudy Giuliani. The difference between them, in my opinion, is that Rudy has been battle-tested. He's the one who cleaned up New York and stood firm in the days after 9/11. Mike Bloomberg has simply had to keep up the policies Rudy installed before him to keep New York running smoothly. Plus, Rudy's position on Iraq and the GWOT is crystal clear. Bloomberg hasn't had much to say on those topics, but that would certainly change if he throws his hat into the ring.

Now, where's Fred?

Previous: Bloomberg in 2008?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:59 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

May 09, 2007

Obama Exaggerates Kanasas Twister Deaths

In his zeal to find a way to place blame on President Bush for the relief efforts following the tornado that hit in Greensburg, Kansas last week, Barack Obama said the following at a campaign stop:

"In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people diedan entire town destroyed...

"Turns out that the National Guard in Kansas only had 40 percent of its equipment and they are having to slow down the recovery process in Kansas."

Ten thousand people? Try ten. [correction -- 12 -- ed.]

(Please don't get me wrong -- any death related to such a natural disaster is a tragedy, and our prayers go out to the families affected not only by the deaths, but those whose homes and livelihoods have fallen victim to the whims of nature. I do not mean to belittle their situation.)

Obama said his error was due to being tired from his constant traveling on the campaign trail, and that he meant to say ten. But there's more to this story than just a misstatement. Obama is using this opportunity to bolster his anti-war stance, because that mean old Bush has taken away National Guard equipment for a hurricane that he must have known would hit at some point. The shortage was one of the first things out of Governor Kathleen Sebelius' mouth, and Obama is only one of many to take up the "blame Bush" banner and wave it proudly.

For just as Katrina could be laid at Bush's feet, so must the Greensburg tornado.

Confederate Yankee says of Sebelius,

Despite the reduction of certain kinds of National Guard equipment in state armories, I suspect that the personnel and equipment that remain at Gov. Sebelius' disposal is more than sufficient to handle the effort at hand. On some level, she seems to agree. Of thousands of National Guardsmen available, she has apparently deployed just 110.

It seems that her anti-war pronouncements and appointments have as much to do with her claims as does any actually [sic] shortfall of equipment, and I suspect her words have as much to do with Sebelius' political hopes as it does the reality of Greenburg's [sic] battered ground.

It's funny how state and local government officials who are Democrats find a way to blame President Bush for the natural disasters that happen on their doorsteps. And it's funny how quickly the media follows suit.

I repeat my question from the other day: where are all the Hollywood celebrities and their offers of help and support?

UPDATE: This Kansan doesn't seem to think a lot of Sebelius' opportunistic whining.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:01 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

May 08, 2007

Chuck Hagel Considers 2008 Run as Independent

Caution: Raging RINO ahead!

Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) is hinting that he may run for president in 2008 as an independent. I guess an independent run is the closest Hagel can come to admit he's not really a Republican without totally ticking off those Nebraskan Republicans who foolishly voted for him.

He'll likely use his support of a timeline for pulling out of Iraq as part of his campaign strategy.

Fortunately, while Hagel is well known in Washington, I don't think he's well known enough on a national scale for him to make much of a showing. Connecticut's Chris Dodd (D) has the same problem.

h/t: Ankle Biting Pundits (who predicted this scenario back in 2005).

Do you recognize this man?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:42 PM | Comments (25) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

May 04, 2007

GOP Debate Roundup

I couldn't tune in to the debate last night because I had play rehearsal. However, Michelle Malkin, John Hawkins and Sister Toldjah are among those who did. Check out what they have to say. And Hot Air has the video highlights.

The consensus from what I've read around the blogosphere is that this was a so-so debate. But with questions from the MSNBC moderators like, "Would it be good for Bill Clinton to be back in the White House?" and "What do you say to Roman Catholic leaders who would deny communion to those who support abortion rights?", what can we expect? (Romney's answer to that last one was great: "I don't have anything to say to them. They can do whatever the heck they want!")

Please, let the next debate be on FOXNews. At least the candidates will get more meaningful questions.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:40 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

Another Hillary Fabrication?

She told us she was named for Sir Edmund Hillary, and it turned out to be a load of hooey. Now another anecdote of Mrs. Bill Clinton has been put under the microscope, and it has to do with her having grown up surrounded by farms and babysitting for the children of migrant laborers. Marathon Pundit has the scoop.

Another little white lie?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:38 AM | Comments (39) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

April 30, 2007

Latest GOP Bloggers Straw Poll Up

Click here to cast your vote.

*As of this writing, Fred Thompson is in the lead as first choice, with 54.7% of the vote. Rudi Giuliani has 15.5%, coming in at a distant second.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:22 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

John Edwards Considers Taxing Wealthy


Democratic presidential contender John Edwards said Sunday he would consider raising taxes on corporations and the wealthy to fund programs such as universal health care.

Edwards has long said he wants to repeal the tax cuts on upper-income earners enacted during the Bush presidency, but Sunday he seemed to go further, by saying he was open to raising them higher than they were before George W. Bush took office. He also said he would consider taxes on "excess profits," including those made by oil companies.

Edwards said it was more important to level with voters than to worry about the political consequences of advocating higher taxes.

"It's just the truth," Edwards said during a news conference following his speech to the California Democratic Party convention. "It's the only way to fund the things that need to be done."

Excess profits? Since when is the likes of Edwards, who made his fortune off of suing the pants off of doctors, the arbiter of what constitutes excess profits? If that's the case, I'd like to suggest that trial lawyers who make more than $200K per year be subject to an "excess profit" tax. Please make checks payable to me, as it would level my playing field quite nicely.

This is typical leftwing schtick. People who work hard and profit handsomely from their labor have an unfair advantage over everyone else, so they must be punished by higher taxes, which means that they have less money to invest in capital ventures that could end up benefiting many other people by creating more employment, etc. Edwards and other Democrats enjoy their roles as modern-day Robin Hoods -- except that the people they are stealing from didn't get their money by extorting the poor, but from hard work and smart investments. The ones who are being disproportionately taxed these days are the rich.

This is class warfare, pure and simple. I find it highly amusing, however, that instead of actual poor people leading the charge, we have obscenely wealthy politicians like Edwards, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi and others who feel they are entitled somehow to tell the rest of us, rich, poor, or otherwise, how much is too much.

And the idea of universal healthcare should definitely scare everyone off. If you'd like to know more about how successful "free" government-run healthcare is, click here to see what's happening up in Canada. It seems "free" healthcare is great, as long as you don't come down with anything more serious than the flu.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:08 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

April 28, 2007

Hillary is Multilingual

Yes folks, Mrs. Bill Clinton is multilingual because she sometimes puts on a lousy Southern accent -- not because she can speak more than one actual language. Boy, that woman can put a spin on everything. And you know whut Ah'm talkin' about!

Funny, though, how that accent tends to come out only in front of black audiences, even if those audiences are up North.

Just think of all the money schools could save if they stopped teaching languages and just coached kids in different "multilingual" accents. Then all that money could go toward more important things, like civics, which seem to be disappearing in our schools. Then maybe kids could grow up to recognize a political panderer when they see one.

To sleep, perchance to dream...

Mrs. Bill Clinton displays her "multilingual" skills in Selma

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:03 AM | Comments (295) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

April 26, 2007

Dems to Giuliani: Don't Go There

UPDATE: Newsbusters has more on this story...apparently the MSM is trying to do a hit job on Giuliani by attributing words to him he didn't say. Click here for details.

Democrat candidates for president are taking Rudy Giuliani to task for, er, suggesting that they aren't strong on defense and don't take the terrorist threat seriously. Giuliani isn't backing down.

"They do not seem to get the fact that there are people, terrorists in this world, really dangerous people that want to come here and kill us," Giuliani said on "The Sean Hannity Show," according to a transcript distributed by his campaign. "They want to take us back to not being as alert which to me will just extend this war much, much longer."

He was defending his remark Tuesday in New Hampshire, where he echoed sentiments expressed by other Republicans in election time. The former mayor said if a Democrat is elected, "it sounds to me like we're going on defense. We're going to wave the white flag there."

But, he said, if a Republican wins, "we will remain on offense" trying to anticipate what the terrorists are going to do and "trying to stop them before they do it."

But isn't it true? Harry Reid tells us we've lost in Iraq. Nancy Pelosi jet sets to Syria to talk to their president, something that's not in her job description, and something that was calculated to embarrass President Bush. A Democratically-controlled Congress has okayed an Iraq spending bill that has a definite "expiration date" for Iraq.

It seems the Dem candidates would rather forget about the dangers we face. Barack Obama says Giuliani is taking "politics of fear to a new low." John Edwards whines that Giuliani shouldn't suggest there is a "superior Republican way to fight terror." Oh? Well at least Republicans know what to call it. They're not the ones who decided that the term "global war on terror (GWT)" is now verboten.

Mrs. Bill Clinton is, of course, had the most vague rebuttal, seeing as she never knows when she'll have to shift position. "It should be a solemn responsibility that all of us pledge to fulfill regardless of what party we're in." (Does anyone know if she used a bad Southern accent to make this remark?)

Democrats are the party of cut and run. They can run from that description, but they can't hide. We have their number. They can huff and puff all they want, but Rudy Giuliani is right. And to talk about it now isn't just politics, it's good sense. It's the defining issue of our time, and to ignore it in the name of poll numbers at home is just the latest in Democrat game-playing. Only the Oval Office is not the only thing at stake here -- it's the safety and security of American citizens.

You go, Rudy!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:16 AM | Comments (278) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

April 24, 2007

Fred Thompson on Federalism

Want to know how conservative Fred Thompson is? Read his essay at Town Hall on federalism and what it means to him.

Run Fred, run!

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:11 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

April 16, 2007

The Flip-Flopper's Ultimate Flip-Flop?

If you thing you've seen the last of John Kerry on a national scale, think again:

DENVER - Sen. John Kerry (D-Massachusetts) reopened the door to a possible 2008 presidential campaign during a book signing in Denver and then again, in an interview with 9NEWS.

The 2004 Democratic nominee told a crowd of more than 250 at the Tattered Cover bookstore in lower downtown Denver that he had no desire to endorse any candidate for the office right now, choosing to wait to see how they addressed the issue of global warming.

Kerry and his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, are finishing up a nationwide tour to promote their book, "This Moment on Earth," which highlights successful efforts at the local level to better the environment.

Jet-setting John Kerry and his rich wife Ter-ayza are the new advocates for global warming? Which one of their five luxury homes will they be giving up? Sorry, but replacing all of your lightbulbs with "enviro-friendly" ones and buying carbon credits so you can still fly around in your private jet really doesn't cut it.

And even though he said earlier this year that he wouldn't run, that could change.

When asked whether he expected that decision to change in time for the 2008 race, Kerry said, "If suddenly the field changed or the dynamics of the nation shifted, who knows? You might look at it differently, but I don't see that. I don't foresee that. That's not where I am today and that's not what I'm doing."

Reminds me of Mrs. Bill Clinton and how she kept saying things like, "I haven't made any decision about it" back in September.

Politicians rarely say exactly what they mean. They are masters at word games, so that they can always have a way to wriggle out of a particular situation. Just look at how Kerry said he wouldn't run:

"But I've concluded that this isn't the time for me to mount a presidential campaign. It is the time to put my energy to work as part of the majority in the Senate, to do all I can to end this war and strengthen our security."

Who knows? Maybe Kerry's time will come later this year. Chris Dodd would certainly benefit, as it would mean that he would no longer have the honor of being in last place among serious candidates.

Others blogging: Sister Toldjah, Red State, Betsy's Page

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:04 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

April 13, 2007

Hillary Clinton: Mother of All Exploiters

What is Mrs. Bill Clinton if not a champion of exploiting a situation for her political gain? She's off to Rutgers next Monday, where she will meet with the women's basketball team to commiserate with them over Imus' tacky remarks -- for which he has not only been fired from MSNBC, but from CBS as well. (The visit follows her show of support on her website, where she invited people to send a message of support to the team, with a picture of them plastered at the top of the site.)

The official reason for the visit, of course, is the 50th anniversary of the Eagleton Institute of Politics and the 35th anniversary of Eagletons Center for American Women and Politics (CAWP). But don't expect that to get in the way of good old-fashioned political pandering.

The implication seems to be that, if elected president, she will magically erase all bigotry, racism, and hurtful remarks of any kind. Except her own, of course.

Mrs. Bill Clinton...the great white hope.

h/t: Cookiewrangler and HNAV

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 07:45 AM | Comments (23) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

April 12, 2007

MoveOn.org Poll Puts Obama on Top

From the Hartford Courant:

Illinois Sen. Barack Obama eked out a victory Thursday as the top choice of anti-war activists, as he won the MoveOn Town Hall vote with 27.87 percent of the total.

MoveOn, an activist group closely aligned with the Democratic party, hosted more than 1,000 events all over the nation, including several in Connecticut, Tuesday night. Candidates prerecorded short speeches detailing their positions on the Iraq war, and people were then invited to vote on the question, "Which candidate do you believe would be best able to lead the country out of Iraq?" Anyone who was a MoveOn member as of 7 p.m. Tuesday could vote.

An activist group closely aligned with the Democratic party? What an understatement, considering what MoveOn said about the Democrat Party after the 2004 election:

"We bought it, we own it, we're going to take it back."

Obama came out on top of the poll with 27.87% of the votes. According to the MoveOn site, it has 3.3 million members. How many of those members voted? Even if they all did, it's less than 2% of all registered voters (using 2004 numbers).

In other words...big deal.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:57 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

April 11, 2007

John Edwards Works Shift At Nursing Home

Well isn't this special:

MAMARONECK, N.Y. (AP) - Democrat John Edwards got a taste of low-wage life Wednesday, rising before dawn to help to dress, shave and deliver breakfast to elderly residents of a nursing home outside New York City.

His visit was part of the "Work a Day in My Shoes" program sponsored by the influential Service Employees International Union, where presidential candidates spend time with health care workers to understand the challenges of their jobs. Edwards was paired with certified nursing assistant Elaine Ellis, an 18-year employee of the Sarah Neuman Nursing Home who escorted him on her early morning rounds.

Ellis, a divorced mother who raised four children on her nursing assistant's salary, called Edwards "a very personable person" and praised his willingness to spend time on the job with her.

I'd be a bit more convinced of his sincerity if he had done a couple of things:

*Given a resident a spongebath or cleaned a bedpan
*Agreed to try to live on a nursing assistant's salary for at least a month

Otherwise, this is just another PR stunt.

h/t: Cookiewrangler

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 04:00 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

March 30, 2007

How Fiscally Responsible is Rudy Giuliani?

Pat over at Brainster has a lengthy piece about Rudy Giuliani's fiscal record as New York's mayor. From what Pat has discovered, Rudy has some explaining to do as far as his views on taxes and responsible spending.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 12:40 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

March 26, 2007

Bloomberg in 2008?

Rumor has it that New York City mayor Mike Bloomberg is considering entering the race for the presidency in 2008 as an independent. (Bloomberg was a Democrat, then turned Republican when it was clear that he had a better shot at getting elected mayor as a Republican at the time.)

Bloomberg, 65, has told confidants that he will not decide until early next year, when it has become clear whom Democrats and Republicans will nominate.

If he runs for president as a self-financed independent, New York could find itself home to a trio of presidential candidates, an oddity for a state and city often portrayed as far outside the mainstream of American political and social life.

While Bloomberg is a good mayor with respect to fiscal responsibility and keeping New York clean and crime-free, he's also a major lib when it comes to social issues: for example, he wants strict gun control laws, he was behind the strict smoking laws in New York, and he was on board with the banning of trans-fats in restaurants.

Could he win as an independent? It's hard to tell. He's a billionaire, and so can afford to finance his own campaign (as he did during his two runs for mayor). But as much as people whine about wanting more choices, they pretty much stick with the two major parties.

The question would be, then, would Bloomberg be draining votes from the Republican or Democrat candidate?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:00 AM | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

March 12, 2007

Fred Thompson in 2008?

As many of you might have heard, actor Fred Thompson may enter the race for the Repbublican 2008 nomination. He's a lawyer who was involved in the Watergate investigation, and he was to the Senate in 1994 to fill Al Gore's unexpired seat. Here's where he stands on some of today's major issues:

*Is "pro-life," and believes federal judges should overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade abortion rights decision as "bad law and bad medical science."

*Opposes gay marriage, but would let states decide whether to allow civil unions. "Marriage is between a man and a woman, and judges shouldn't be allowed to change that."

*Opposes gun control, and praised last week's 2-1 federal appeals decision overturning a long-standing handgun ban. "The court basically said the Constitution means what it says."

*Supports President Bush's decision to increase troops in Iraq. "Wars are full of mistakes. You rectify them. I think we are doing that now," he said. "We've got to give it a chance to work."

*Would pardon former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby's conviction for perjury and obstruction of justice now, rather than waiting until all his appeals are exhausted.

Libby is "bearing the political brunt of something that should've never come about," Thompson said, noting that "practically every witness at trial had inconsistent statements."

I have no problem with any of that, just as I have no problem with an actor turning politician. I appreciate an actor who will put his money where his mouth is, rather than just spout off from the sidelines.

Thompson is waiting until summer to make up his mind. I'm looking forward to his potential candidacy!

He's got presidential potential

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 08:46 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

March 08, 2007

Rudy in 2008? Why One Conservative Says "No"

Regular readers will know that I am an early supporter of Rudy Giuliani as the Republican nominee for 2008, but my endorsement is not official, as it's much too early to be making such decisions. Much can happen between now and the primaries.

I admire Rudy's strength, commitment to national security and fiscal responsibility, and his willingness to get the job done. However...

John G. sent me this piece, which explains the thoughts of one conservative about Rudy. The writer finds much to admire, but there are strong reservations, and those have to do with tradition. Here's his main point:

[...] Rudy Giuliani has a philosophy in his personal life that is antithetical to the American tradition. Giuliani has secular-elite morality . . . more libertine than conservative. Can traditionalists trust his basic impulses?

What do I mean? Nobody can anticipate the challenges a President will face . . . remember 9/11 and George Bush. Gay marriage was not the issue it became in 2000. How will a man react to new challenges? His personal life philosophy is a good measure.

Rudy Giulianis personal life indicates that in any new challenge his deepest predispositions will be hostile to traditionalists.

When he does not need our votes, he will forget us utterly. He has no friends in our camp or memories that can stir him to sympathy with our point of view.

My mind is definitely staying open. Every candidate has baggage. The question is, how will that baggage affect his ability to govern?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 11:00 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

March 06, 2007

Edwards: America Selfish, Jesus Would Be "Appalled"

John Edwards invokes the old "What would Jesus do?" question popular among the left:

Edwards, in an interview with the Web site Beliefnet.com, said Jesus would be most upset with the selfishness of Americans and the country's willingness to go to war "when it's not necessary."

"I think that Jesus would be disappointed in our ignoring the plight of those around us who are suffering and our focus on our own selfish short-term needs," Edwards told the site. "I think he would be appalled, actually."

Edwards also said he was against teacher-led prayers in public schools, but he added that "allowing time for children to pray for themselves, to themselves, I think is not only OK, I think it's a good thing."

(Note to AP editors: When referring to Jesus, it's customary to capitalize the pronoun "He." But then, that might violate the "no respect" clause for Christianity in the AP Style Guide.)

Is John Edwards trying to suck up to the very people he offended during the short-lived careers of his anti-Christian campaign bloggers? Look, Edwards may consider himself to be a religious man, and that's fine by me. But his party's politics generally run against what conservative Christians believe in, and Edwards has proven himself to be a party line kind of guy (and I'm not talking about the conga line). On abortion issues alone, see how Edwards voted while he was a senator for North Carolina:

*Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime. (Mar 2004)
*Voted NO on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)
*Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions. (Oct 1999)
*Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. (Dec 2003)
*Expand embryonic stem cell research. (Jun 2004)

Abortion is a huge issue with the conservative Christian community. Saying that kids should be allowed private time during the school day to pray or meditate silently isn't likely to white out that voting record.

And sure, Edwards can go around talking about how selfish Americans are, but from where I sit, he seems to be a bit more selfish than most. This 2004 CNN report says Edwards and his wife gave 8.6% of their income between 1994 and 2004, or about $3.3 million. Now $3.3 million is certainly nothing to sneeze at. I wish I could afford to give that much! But in just one year, Dick Cheney and his wife gave away nearly $7 million to various charities. (Of course, the media jumped all over the fact that he got a refund that year, but what else to expect?) Yet who is considered to be the greedy one and who's the righteous one in the media?

By the way, how's the house coming along, John?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:48 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

March 01, 2007

Early Support for Rudy in NJ

In a poll taken in New Jersey by Quinnipiac University, Rudy Giuliani is enjoying a wave of early support from voters overall:

Giuliani, a Republican, would defeat Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., 50 percent to 41 percent, based on a survey of New Jersey voters by the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

In January, the poll gave Giuliani a 48-41 edge over the wife of former President Bill Clinton. She is the top choice of New Jersey Democrats.

Giuliani, the top choice among New Jersey Republicans, also would defeat Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, the second-ranking Democrat, 50-39.

Giuliani also extended his advantage over other GOP hopefuls. The poll found he had a 58-15 lead in New Jersey against Sen. John McCain of Arizona, his nearest contender, compared to a 39-21 edge in January.

This early in the race, we can't say this poll is definitive, but as New Jersey usually leans Democrat, this is interesting news indeed. Note the increase in percentage points between him and Hillary!

At the moment Rudy is my top choice. However, I am well away from actually deciding who to vote for in the primaries. There's a long way to go yet!

Garden State voters like Rudy

On a tip from Jeanette.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 10:01 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

February 26, 2007

Hillary's Campaign Scandal: Will No One Call Her On It?

From New Media Journal:

A brief was filed on January 11, 2007, in a civil fraud case which alleges Sen. Hillary Clinton engaged in criminal misconduct, citing a violation of federal code that carries a possible five-year prison sentence.

Businessman mogul Peter Paul alleges the New York Democrat solicited and accepted his illegal contribution of more than $1 million and falsified statements to the Federal Election Commission.

Read more here. It's amazing, isn't it, that this isn't being discussed in the MSM? They dutifully reported it back when the story was hot, then dropped it as soon as they could. This should be front-page news.

But what else to expect from the Democrats' biggest cheerleading section?

h/t: learner

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:34 AM | Comments (18) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

February 23, 2007

First Democrat Presidential Casualty

Tom Vilsack is out of the running.


Vilsack was Iowa's governor, but left office in January to pursue the presidency. Due to the tremendous money-raising abilities of front runners like Hillary and Obama, he's throwing in the towel, saying "money and only money" is the reason.

Frankly, I'm surprised his hard luck past didn't propel his candidacy, since it's right out of the Democrat victim status handbook:

His parents were well-to-do and sent him to a private preparatory school, but his mother was an alcoholic who beat him and his father suffered trying financial reversals.

The catch here is that Vilsack's a white male, and so he's not media fawn-worthy.

It'll be fun to see who drops out next. My money's on Chris Dodd.

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 03:20 PM | Comments (176) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

February 22, 2007

The Buzzards are Circling

Hillary's in trouble, and we're still a year out from the primaries. Not only does Hollywood seem to be abandoning her for Barack Obama (I guess all those overnight stays in the Lincoln Bedroom have been forgotten), but ex-Senator and former Democrat Senate leader Tom Daschle has given his formal endorsement to Obama the Boy Wonder.

Daschle said Obama has a "great capacity to unify our country and inspire a new generation of young Americans, just as I was inspired by the Kennedys and Martin Luther King when I was young."

Frankly, I hardly call Obama inspiring as a leader. He has a pleasant voice and knows how to work a crowd, but so does a carnival barker. But today's media seems to prefer style over substance. Otherwise, why would they be giving credence to a man who has not really proven his leadership and gives us feel-good platitudes instead of firm policy plans?

Hillary has chosen to take the low road with Hollywood's abandonment. Her campaign has started what the NY Post calls a "mud fight" over the fact that movie gazillionaire David Geffen not only donated to Obama's campaign, but said some singularly unflattering things about Hillary. My favorite:

"Everybody in politics lies, but they [the Clintons] do it with such ease, it's troubling," he was quoted as saying.

It's too bad that it took Geffen so long to figure it out, but perhaps he's proof that not all those who were blinded by the Clintons in the '90s are beyond redemption. Now if they'd just vote Republican...

Well, it's probably too much to hope for a miracle of that magnitude.


Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:01 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

February 21, 2007

The Old Clinton Chutzpah Continues

From the NY Post's Page Six (h/t Kitty):

February 21, 2007 -- NOT everyone was psyched for last night's highly anticipated fund-raiser for Barack Obama, held by DreamWorks founders David Geffen, Steven Spielberg and Jeffrey Katzenberg. A source with close knowledge of the event said Obama's fellow front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, Sen. Hillary Clinton, was furious at the three, who she thought were her friends, for supporting her rival. According to our source, an angry call was made to Geffen by someone in Clinton's office. "They were very angry [the movie moguls] were holding this event," our source said. "They calmed down after an assurance was made that there would still be support and money left over for [Clinton]." A rep for Clinton said, "No one spoke to [Geffen]." Clinton is having her own funder on March 24 and Spielberg has agreed to host another for her. Obama's event was so popular that it had to be moved from a restaurant that could hold 400 people to the Beverly Hilton, which can hold 600. Jennifer Aniston, Eddie Murphy, Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington shelled out $2,300 each to attend.

So instead of this temper tantrum ticking the money men off, they seek to mollify Hillary's camp with the assurance that she'll get the same star treatment. Have these people no spines? Once again, Hillary gets away with something most three-year-olds would get swatted for (or at the very least, a stern time out).

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:38 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

February 20, 2007

Dodd's Poll Numbers Dismal in Home State

Via AP:

U.S. Sen. Chris Dodd may be the home state presidential candidate in 2008, but a new statewide poll released Monday shows he's far from the top choice among voters in Connecticut.

Results: Hillary Clinton 33%, Barack Obama 21%, Al Gore (who claims he's not running) 9%, Dodd 8%. The bright news for Dodd is that he places before John Edwards, who has 5% of potential Connecticut voters at this point. I guess the Breck Girl is still trying to rebound from his terrible choice of official campaign bloggers.

"If Senator Christopher Dodd can't even come close to winning a Democratic primary in his home state, that's obviously a bad sign for his presidential campaign," said Poll Director Douglas Schwartz.

Connecticut's AG Richard Blumenthal, who is Dodd's campaign chairman, said that the poll shows that people "love" having Dodd as senator and are "just beginning to focus on the possibility" of Dodd becoming president. I don't love having Dodd as senator...I wish the pollsters had contacted me! And I certainly don't relish the idea of his brand of socialism (and Castro support) being foisted upon the rest of the country either.

Schwartz (quoted above) was also quoted as saying Dodd is a "long shot." I think that's an understatement.

UPDATE (10:20 a.m.): Apparently Dodd compared the vote on a non-binding resolution against a troop surge to "asparagus." He said that he would have preferred something "real and accountable." Not quite sure where he makes the connection between the vote and asparagus, unless he means that the Senate gets mushy when overcooked... (h/t MM)



Dodd Counting on Sense of Humor
Dodd Receives Some Celebrity Support
Dodd Practically Nonexistent in Polls
Patrick Kennedy Endorses Dodd
Dodd: Hard Sell
Lieberman Not Endorsing Dodd for President...
Dodd Is In

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:32 AM | Comments (34) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

February 19, 2007

Dodd Counting on Sense of Humor

According to this Hartford Courant article, Chris Dodd (Connecticut's other senator) is counting on his sense of humor to help get him through the Democrat primary process.

He cracked jokes about President Taft. He cracked jokes about being 62 and the father of two young girls. He also compared his confidence level to that of Ronald Reagan's.

Comparing himself to a highly successful Republican president? Now that is funny!



Dodd Receives Some Celebrity Support
Dodd Practically Nonexistent in Polls
Patrick Kennedy Endorses Dodd
Dodd: Hard Sell
Lieberman Not Endorsing Dodd for President...
Dodd Is In

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 09:26 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

February 13, 2007

Obama Apologizes for "Wasted" Remark

The man seems to be channeling John Kerry:

During his first campaign trip this weekend, the Illinois senator told a crowd in Iowa: "We now have spent $400 billion and have seen over 3,000 lives of the bravest young Americans wasted."

He immediately apologized on Sunday, saying the remark was "a slip of the tongue."

During an appearance Monday in Nashua, N.H., he apologized again, telling reporters he meant to criticize the civilian leadership of the war, not those serving in the military.

"Even as I said it, I realized I had misspoken," Obama said. "It is not at all what I intended to say, and I would absolutely apologize if any (military families) felt that in some ways it had diminished the enormous courage and sacrifice that they'd shown."

Just like Kerry was talking about the Bush administration with his "botched" joke.

This is eerie...

UPDATE: Here is Michelle Malkin's opinion. You know, if someone knows "right away" that he's misspoken, doesn't it make sense to set the record straight immediately, rather than wait a day or two to gauge public reaction? What a load.

Reliving 2004?

Show Comments

Posted by Pam Meister at 01:29 PM | Comments (34) | TrackBack (0) | 2008

February 09, 2007

Rudy: More Conservative Than You May Think

Mona Charen tells us why. One reason she cites may just be proof enough: Rudy declined to meet with race hustler Al Sharpton during his days as mayor of New York.

Show Comments