Ending the year with good karma…

Go GOP in 2008!!! 

With a solid message, a great messenger, and a positive attitude we can keep the White House, take the House and hold things in the Senate.  It’s going to be tough, but I’d pick an elephant over a donkey in any fight!

Soon we’ll be divulging our picks for the Republican nomination, preferably before Iowa on Thursday.  I won’t be rooting for Huckabee or Ron Paul.  Maybe Thompson, Giuliani, Romney, etc.

My final post of 2007 concerns an article in the UK’s Independent article by Bruce Anderson, a man who apparently owns the same crystal ball I do (not that it’s a particularly good crystal ball, but it has been known to work on occasion). Anderson’s prediction, identical to mine, for the 2008 Presidential election is that Mitt Romney will defeat She Who Must Not Be Named. The sentiments of the reasoning underlying his prediction should be familiar to we American conservatives, but the money quote is one in a million:

[SWMNBN] is charmless. She was always cold, egotistical and ruthless, but her good qualities have receded with age, and with marriage. When a feminist is harnessed to a philanderer, we should not expect a well-tempered feminist. The end product is a stainless-steel Dresden dominatrix, a blend of ice and ambition, a woman whose hunger for office and power makes Gordon Brown seem like Cincinnatus.

Amen mate. The witch must lose. Happy New Year to all the conservatives who read this site, and I mean that this year more than ever.

AP photo

If you sneak a post in at 12:02 am, make it a good one this time! Happy New Year!

Another reason why I don’t like Huckabee: he plays the holy card, tries to seem above the fray by attacking those who point out his record to the public, calls a presser to say that he’s pulling an ad to remain above that fray, then shows it to the press! 

They laughed at this obvious and shallow attempt at statesmanship. 

I’m not as impressed by his political manuevers as are people in this New York Slimes piece, I find it to be part of the mounting load of evidence that Mike Huckabee is not above any fray, but as low brow as anyone else in this race.  

Another reason why I don’t like Huckabee: he plays the holy card, tries to seem above the fray by attacking those who point out his record to the public, calls a presser to say that he’s pulling an ad to remain above that fray, then shows it to the press! 

They laughed at this obvious and shallow attempt at statesmanship. 

I’m not as impressed by his political manuevers as are people in this New York Slimes piece, I find it to be part of the mounting load of evidence that Mike Huckabee is not above any fray, but as low brow as anyone else in this race.  

TIME.com has an alphabetical list of people in the public eye who have left us this past year.  I actually forgot how many celebrities/figures we lost this year– it was a pretty rough year. 

Here’s the edited list (I added two, which have links):

Historical Figures

• Benazir Bhutto (1953-2007) Pakistani socialist democrat (little “d”).
• Lady Bird Johnson (1912-2007) former first lady to LBJ.
• Paul Tibbets (1915-2007) led the mission over Hiroshima to drop the first atomic bomb.
• Boris Yeltsin (1931-2007) first Russian President ever, who was a swanky drunken dancer!

Historians

• David Halberstam (1934-2007) made his fame covering Vietnam and his work on America in the 1950s.
• Arthur Schlesinger (1917-2007) famed historian who crossed the line a few times going beyond simply reporting history, but seeking to influence it.

Sports

• Evel Knievel (1938-2007) dare-devil who cheated death more than once, who finally csuccumbed this year.
• Phil Rizzuto (1917-2007) former New York Yankee who played on 9 championship teams.
• Bill Walsh (1931-2007) famed San Francisco 49ers coach who won three titles in the 1980s.

Entertainers and Icons

• Liz Claibourne (1929-2007) influential and highly popular women’s wardrobe designer.
• Jerry Falwell (1933-2007) evangelical leader who catalyzed the Religious Right in the 1980s.
• Merv Griffin (1925-2007) talk show host and creator of Jeopardy and Wheel of Fortune.
• Marcel Marceau (1923-2007) everyone’s favorite mime.
• Tammy Faye Messner (1942-2007) formerly Tammy Faye Bakker, lover of all things make-up, whose husband fleeced millions from his televangelist program in the 1980s.
• Luciano Pavarotti (1935-2007) one of the great tenors of the age.
• Anna Nicole Smith (1967-2007) the train wreck finally happened.
• Kurt Vonnegut (1922-2007) influential author, whose Slaughter House Five was read by nearly all in school.

Patti Davis has written in piece in Newsweek asking candidates to stop invoking her father’s name on the campaign trail. She is especially critical of Mitt Romney, at one point slamming him for delivering a speech about faith. According to Davis (thank God she chose not to invoke her father’s name), her father would never have given a speech about faith because such matters are personal. What Davis either doesn’t realize or chooses to ignore is that her father never gave a speech on faith because he was not hounded on a daily basis for being a Methodist. Romney’s situation is obviously different. Moreover, Davis is either unaware or chooses to ignore her father’s countless speeches invoking God.

Perhaps Davis should put down the pen, pick up a book, and read exactly what it was that her father supported while he was alive. The trouble is, she already knows what her father’s views were. She repeatedly tried to undermine those views while her father was President just as she is trying to do in this Newsweek piece. Fortunately, no one took her seriously in the 1980s and I don’t think anyone will take her seriously now. Sorry Patti, but if you’re looking for someone who is no Ronald Reagan, try looking in the mirror.

Here’s a random video for your viewing pleasure.

[youtube= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2-od4n5Xl0]

16-0

Until now it’s never been done in NFL regular season history, but it became a reality Saturday night as the New England Patriots defeated the New York Giants 38-35 in probably the most exciting “meaningless” game I’ve ever seen.  Both teams had their playoff seeds locked up, but they both played their starters for the whole game and gave it their all.  The Pats were down by 12 (16-28) in the second half, then scored 22 unanswered points (making it 38-28) to bury the Giants in dramatic, come-from-behind fashion.  The Giants scored a late touchdown, but lost the onside kick try.  The Pats knelt on the ball to run out the clock and run into NFL history:

• First 16-0 regular season ever; fourth undefeated season in NFL history
• Most TD passes for a quarterback in a single season (50 by Tom Brady)
• Most TD receptions for a wide receiver in a single season (23 by Randy Moss)
• Most points scored by a team in a single season (589 points)
• Most touchdowns scored in a single season (75)
• Most consecutive regular season wins (19 in a row from last season)

So what now?  A bye-week and potentially two home playoff games before a prospective Super Bowl.  Many believe that if they don’t win the whole thing, then the season isn’t complete or as awesome.  Maybe.  I feel that they must win their last three playoff games to make the 2007 Patriots a team for the ages.  Plus, all teams aim for winning the Super Bowl, even those that didn’t win all their games.  So, they’ve reached the first plateau, but the climb isn’t finished yet.  For now, however, I’m quite pleased (the Giants fans at work would have nagged me for years if the Pats lost!).

NFL promotion photo.

Every four years, Peggy Noonan implores the parties holding Presidential primaries to simply nominate a normal person.  Her quadrennial plea is often amusing, and usually close to right.  Like most normal informed Americans, Noonan prefers a Republican President, but she does have some kind words about some Democrats with whom she disagrees.

I don’t agree with all of Peggy’s opinions in this year’s plea, but I do appreciate her take on John Edwards and She Who Must Not Be Named.  It’s one thing to be wrong on the issues as all of this year’s Democrats are, but it is quite another to couple a misguided worldview with loathsome personal qualities.  On the Democrat side, those personal qualities might be an asset though.  We’ll know soon.

Every four years, Peggy Noonan implores the parties holding Presidential primaries to simply nominate a normal person.  Her quadrennial plea is often amusing, and usually close to right.  Like most normal informed Americans, Noonan prefers a Republican President, but she does have some kind words about some Democrats with whom she disagrees.

I don’t agree with all of Peggy’s opinions in this year’s plea, but I do appreciate her take on John Edwards and She Who Must Not Be Named.  It’s one thing to be wrong on the issues as all of this year’s Democrats are, but it is quite another to couple a misguided worldview with loathsome personal qualities.  On the Democrat side, those personal qualities might be an asset though.  We’ll know soon.

The Drudge headline is currently touting an ARG poll which shows She Who Must Not Be Named leading Barack Obama by 15 points. As someone who still thinks the Democrat primary will be nothing but the witch’s coronation, I can say that we should not believe this for one second. Call the last few weeks of CNN reporting bad news for SWMNBN a cover in their attempt to appear objective.  Call it shopping around. Call it whatever you want, but it is now obvious that the Cl-nt-n News Network is coming home.

CNN’s M.O. for years has been to trumpet misleading polls to create a false sense of inevitability for their favorite family. In 1996, the network routinely cited polls showing the 42nd President leading Bob Dole by 15 to 20 points. The impeached one won that race by 8.  As they did then, CNN is now citing inflated poll numbers for their favorite candidate in order to create a self-fulfilling prophecy.  They are predictably falling into line.

SWMNBN will probably win Iowa. She will most likely be coronated as the nominee. But she is not currently leading Iowa by 15 points. No way in Chappaqua.

AP photo

UPDATE: The Real Clear Politics average, which for some reason includes this bogus survey, is probably a more accurate snapshot of where they are.

The Union Leader has an interesting piece on why Mitt Romney has been losing ground to John McCain in New Hampshire. According to the UL, Romney “lacks something John McCain has in spades: conviction.”  I think that’s only half right.

If voters were to judge the candidates solely by what they’ve said during the campaign, Romney would probably be light years ahead.  He has mastered the correct language on taxes, immigration, and abortion.  On the abortion issue, Romney even realizes that stem cells are part of the debate.  The trouble is, Romney’s past statements, especially on immigration and abortion, do not match his current positions.  That is half of Romney’s problem, which the UL noticed.

The half of the story the UL misses is that liberals can vote in the New Hampshire Republican primary.  Under NH law, Republicans and independents are allowed to vote in the GOP primary.  Left-leaning independents, who have no problem with opposing the Bush tax cuts, supporting the Gang of 14, and opposing the First Amendment  are also a factor in the NH primary.

Still not a bad article though.

Great Barrington, Massachusetts, was recently the target of Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly because of the town’s decision to turn off the Christmas lights at 10pm to cut global warming emissions.  Every year the battle resumes: making Christmas a Christian holiday rather than a secular one.  One can’t blame Christians for this reaction: it is their holiday, 8 of 10 Americans are Christian, and culturally it’s been celebrated in Western Civilization for millennia.  Even some people from in Great Barrington have a problem with the secularization of Christmas (you know the whole semantic ”holiday” versus “Christmas” thing), not seeing why this whole issue is even a big deal.

But I applaud O’Reilly and others who take the extremists to task.  A few hundred LEDs are not going to destroy the ozone layer, poison dolphins or suffocate mankind, and I completely agree that this kind of lunacy, perpetrated by public officials, should be brought to the general public’s attention.  Alarmism plus Christmas should equal media attention. 

Pic from All Posters.com. 

I was waiting until the Patriots actually achieved the 16-0 regular season record before writing a post on this season’s achievements (knock on wood, the 14-0 Pats still have to beat the 1-13 Dolphins and the 9-5 Giants).  Since the infamous “Spygate” incident in Week 1, all but a few reporters and Jets fans have seemed to have let that go for now since history has been creeping since the November 4 win against the Colts.  Living in Jets country, I hear it all the time!

Actually, according to this report the Patriot’s attempt at achieving the perfect regular season, which hasn’t been done since 1972s 14-0 Miami Dolphins, is drawing record crowds, including the most-watched cable program ever (the close call in Baltimore), the highest rated Sunday Night Football Game ever (the other close call against Philadelphia) and the highest rated Sunday afternoon game since 1987 (that incredible November game against the Indianapolis Colts). 

The NFL is loving the Patriots right now, fans all over the league are tuning in at record numbers to see possible history being made every week, and this Pats fan loves all the ESPN, CBS, and FOX coverage, along with the national interest in the team. 

But, not everyone likes the Patriots.  After Spygate and the Pats’ subsequent success, the Pats have become the new team many love to hate.  I understand this feeling: I hated the Dallas Cowboys of the 1990s– no one could beat them AND they were cocky about it!  The Pat’s head coach Bill Belichick won’t let the team get cocky, and I’ll be the first to admit that the team seemed to peak in November– not a good time to peak. 

In fact, if the Pats don’t win the whole darn thing this year, it’ll seem like all the hype was for naught, the team wasn’t really that great, the close games this season become lucky, and Spygate should have resulted in a forfeited game.  That’s a lot of pressure for any one player or individual to have to handle.  Plus, the last team to beat the Pats in the regular season was the Miami Dolphins! 

AP photo.

Global warming is taking place.  It’s slow, unsteady, and unpredictable, but it is measurable. 

However, what impact have humans have on this warming? 

That’s the zillion dollar question.  A recent US Senate Report sponsored by the GOP lists and references 400 scientists that tell of a story that is quite different than the Leftist “consensus” that industrial nations, SUVs, and “deniers” are destroying the planet.

Algore’s people responded to this ground-shaking development by picking on a few of the cited scientist’s connection to oil companies. 

Wow.  Is that all they got?  Seems pretty weak if all they can do is attack a few of the 400 scientists on the same panel Algore views as a monolithic endorsement of his ideology.  What about the substance of the information put forth?  This is science: hypothesize, study, measure, and report.  

Hat tip: Drudge.

Adding more fuel to the fire this week is this from Michelle Malkin’s blog as well as Annie C’s new column regarding the political missteps that Mike Huckabee has made in the last week.  Even Condi handed Huckabee a scathing retort on one of Huckabee’s recent misinformed, liberal-sounding foreign policy pieces.

My advice to Huckabee: start acting like a frontrunner for the Republican Party! 

In the last few weeks you’ve become a phenomenon in the press because they need a front-tier candidate to trash in the primaries instead of She Who Must Not Be Named and you give the MSM ample fodder, especially if you start winning states.  But, while you hold true to your support of the Ten Commandments, you have sufficiently violated Ronald Reagan’s Eleventh Commandment:  thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican.  The Mormon remark and the hit on Limbaugh from his people are just two recent examples: the attack wasn’t on substance, rather it was personal and inappropriate.  It is also kind of strange for a candidate who swelled into the lead to attack his opponents in such a way.

Before anyone knew who Huckabee was, he seemed like a very amiable, conservative Republican.  Over the last few weeks, however, he’s burned the bridges with Romney and Giuliani, alienated the not-as-churchy conservative base with his liberal tax policies, ostensibly alienated Rush Limbaugh (and many of his millions of conservative listeners) from his big tent, attacked Bush’s foreign policy which offends the party people, being so out of step with conservatives on illegal alien college tuition, etc. 

Yet, he’s still polling well.  I’m just baffled at Huckabee’s behavior and statements recently, especially since his recent fronterunner status materialized.

AP photo.

Reading George Will’s latest column, which actually discusses the details concerning She Who Must Not Be Named’s limited experience, makes it obvious that candidate has not learned anything from her past mistakes. The real issue next year (or in a couple of weeks), whether we’re discussing SWMNBN’s experience in selecting a competent Attorney General or her experience in attempting to nationalize health care, is whether the American people have learned anything from her experience. Judging from her performance over the last couple of weeks, I think we have.

AP photo

Representative Tom Tancredo, realizing that he can’t win, has bowed out of the race for the Republican Presidential nomination and has thrown his support to Mitt Romney.  Tancredo was, unfortunately, a one-trick pony: illegal immigration was his mantra and basic Republican ideals were squeezed in to deal with every other issue.  Though he will be gone, his presence will still be felt in the Republican Party, being the only party that wants to get real with illegal aliens.  Tancredo was that standard-bearer.

AP photo.

A Lakota Indian delegation, part of the Greater Sioux Nation of Indians, has formally withdrawn from all 33 of its treaties with the United States Government and wants to speak with the embassies of Bolivia, Venezuela, Chile and South Africa.  They are citing the US Constitution as justification for their actions based on a 1980 treaty Congress approved (there’s the specter of the Carter Administration coming back to haunt us again!) at the Vienna Convention giving special recognition to indigenous peoples.  If honored, Lakota territory would comprise of parts of South Dakota, North Dakota, Nebraska, Wyoming, and Montana.

This is significant and a very difficult situation.  Devolution of nation-states has been happening since World War II when the empires of old came apart due to a lack of will from the mother country and indigenous pressures winning out:  most of Africa since 1948, Tibet should probably be its own country, Scotland has pushed for and achieved more autonomy in the last fifteen years, some in Quebec keep hopes alive for an independent country one day, just to name a few. 

What do you do if an Amerindian tribe wants to push its autonomy like the Lakota?  Let them have it, since they’ve been punished enough by our government throughout history?  Let the five states in question vote on the proposition?  Flat out tell them no and risk a potential military conflict? 

This could end up being a great day for the Lakota, or another instance where an Amerindian tribe takes on the US government with tragic consequences.  We’ll just have to wait and see how this whole thing plays out.  I’d like to hear where Congress and the President stand on this, but I have a feeling this will be kicked down to the next President and the next Congress to handle.

Pic from USGS.

Vladimir Putin.  Tsar Commissar General Secretary Vladimir Putin the Great/Terrible, Man of the Year.  Seems to work for this power-hungry new version of an old Russian habit: autocratic rule through violence, intimidation, political assassinations, and saber-rattling.  I’m disappointed.  I honestly thought that Time would have chosen Algore for his global warming farce and anti-American rants at international conferences.  No, just a real autocrat, not an aspiring global one.

Time likes to choose it’s “Person/People of the Year” the following way:

“TIME’s Person of the Year is not and never has been an honor. It is not an endorsement. It is not a popularity contest. At its best, it is a clear-eyed recognition of the world as it is and of the most powerful individuals and forces shaping that world—for better or for worse. It is ultimately about leadership—bold, earth-changing leadership.”

Not an honor (I guess not, they gave it to Bush in 2004).  But it sure is an effective way to sell papers and peddle the influence of the people selected, inadvertently giving cultural legitimacy to them through the press and buzz. 

My choice would have been to pick General David Petraeus for the amazing and positive change he helped inaugurate in Iraq since August.  However, that may put Iraq in a more positive light and Time doesn’t want to give Republicans any help by giving press to a man who has done great things regarding an issue the Dems have been wrong about all year.  Give Time some credit though: Petraeus was a runner-up, along with Communist Hu Jintao, author JK Rowling, and their true favorite, Algore.  Credit, but not props.

Time Picture.

Vladimir Putin.  Tsar Commissar General Secretary Vladimir Putin the Great/Terrible, Man of the Year.  Seems to work for this power-hungry new version of an old Russian habit: autocratic rule through violence, intimidation, political assassinations, and saber-rattling.  I’m disappointed.  I honestly thought that Time would have chosen Algore for his global warming farce and anti-American rants at international conferences.  No, just a real autocrat, not an aspiring global one.

Time likes to choose it’s “Person/People of the Year” the following way:

“TIME’s Person of the Year is not and never has been an honor. It is not an endorsement. It is not a popularity contest. At its best, it is a clear-eyed recognition of the world as it is and of the most powerful individuals and forces shaping that world—for better or for worse. It is ultimately about leadership—bold, earth-changing leadership.”

Not an honor (I guess not, they gave it to Bush in 2004).  But it sure is an effective way to sell papers and peddle the influence of the people selected, inadvertently giving cultural legitimacy to them through the press and buzz. 

My choice would have been to pick General David Petraeus for the amazing and positive change he helped inaugurate in Iraq since August.  However, that may put Iraq in a more positive light and Time doesn’t want to give Republicans any help by giving press to a man who has done great things regarding an issue the Dems have been wrong about all year.  Give Time some credit though: Petraeus was a runner-up, along with Communist Hu Jintao, author JK Rowling, and their true favorite, Algore.  Credit, but not props.

Time Picture.

The Clinton’s are so obnoxious it stops being funny on occasion.  While campaigning for She Who Must Not Be Named, BJ recently said:

“Well, the first thing she intends to do, because you can do this without passing a bill, the first thing she intends to do is to send me and former President Bush and a number of other people around the world to tell them that America is open for business and cooperation again.”

So, even Bush 41 believes his son’s policies have ruined America?  Not according to Bush 41’s spokesperson today:

“Former President Bush wholeheartedly supports the president of the United States, including his foreign policy. He has never discussed an ‘around -the-world mission’ with either former President Bill Clinton or [She Who Must Not Be Named], nor does he think such a mission is warranted since he is proud of the role America continues to play around the world as the beacon of home for freedom and democracy.”

Doesn’t quite sound like Bill’s version. 

So, Bill and SWMNBN have resorted to just making things up!  Their accomplices in the MSM bought the lie hook, line, and sinker, which was to be expected since they did it every day for eight years.  It’s looking more and more desperate out there for her campaign.  I still think she’ll win the primaries, but her future Republican opponent would be an idiot not to use things from this period to get the best stuff on her next year.

If a candidate has to use valuable campaign time to convince people that they are “likable,” then they have a real problem.  She Who Must Not Be Named has sent her husband (I use the term loosely) and others to campaign, not on the issues and the campaign’s message, but rather that she is a likable person who has helped people.  They are even dragging out a story of a six-year-old constituent who was victim of an incurable brain disease who SWMNBN comforted at one point six years ago.  Is she running for Jesus, I’m not sure?

The problem with SWMNBN is that she is not likable and it’s pretty obvious.  All you have to do is watch her give a speech:  she seems to be trying too hard, kind of like smiling isn’t a natural thing for her.  Also, like Dubya, she is a very divisive figure.  You love her or hate her, there’s no middle ground.  Mitt, Fred, O’Bama, and Huckabee have no problem with likability: they are all nice guys, even if you disagree with their policy decisions. 

“Likability” is important in politics because we want to trust our leaders and make some kind of connection with them.  Since we’re going to see our President on TV every night for four years in a position of power, we want to be sure that that person is one that we personally like in addition to their policies.  SWMNBN is not such a person.  The idea that she’s having a tough job selling her likability to the people of Iowa, who have seen her more closely than any other primary or caucus group, should be a signal that something’s fundamentally wrong. 

AP photo.

If a candidate has to use valuable campaign time to convince people that they are “likable,” then they have a real problem.  She Who Must Not Be Named has sent her husband (I use the term loosely) and others to campaign, not on the issues and the campaign’s message, but rather that she is a likable person who has helped people.  They are even dragging out a story of a six-year-old constituent who was victim of an incurable brain disease who SWMNBN comforted at one point six years ago.  Is she running for Jesus, I’m not sure?

The problem with SWMNBN is that she is not likable and it’s pretty obvious.  All you have to do is watch her give a speech:  she seems to be trying too hard, kind of like smiling isn’t a natural thing for her.  Also, like Dubya, she is a very divisive figure.  You love her or hate her, there’s no middle ground.  Mitt, Fred, O’Bama, and Huckabee have no problem with likability: they are all nice guys, even if you disagree with their policy decisions. 

“Likability” is important in politics because we want to trust our leaders and make some kind of connection with them.  Since we’re going to see our President on TV every night for four years in a position of power, we want to be sure that that person is one that we personally like in addition to their policies.  SWMNBN is not such a person.  The idea that she’s having a tough job selling her likability to the people of Iowa, who have seen her more closely than any other primary or caucus group, should be a signal that something’s fundamentally wrong. 

AP photo.

Elizabeth Edwards, the picture of charm itself, has admitted that she’s actually afraid of Republicans.   This really isn’t surprising when you remember that she’s also afraid of being decent to her neighbors, backing up asinine statements with something that at least resembles a fact, Holy Water, and letting her husband fight his own battles.

This latest tantrum gives new meaning to the politics of fear, an amusing meaning, but a new one all the same.