31
May
This picture is making the rounds on the internet right now:
After careful scrutiny, and a lot of laughing, I have come to the conclusion it is most likely Photoshopped. 
You however, can believe what you want.
29
May
Nah, this isn’t going to be your typical illegal alien rant. This is much more important:
The Don attributed their rude behavior to protest of US immigration policies. However, that doesn’t condone them attacking an innocent person, and they know that. So, it was just plain rude and totally inappropriate. I think an apology from whoever it is that is the Mexican presidente would be greatly appreciated by those of us IN the United States propping up his economy by employing those workers who apparently can’t get a job there. If he wishes for us to continue doing so, he better start giving us reasons to LIKE Mexico and a few less reasons to NOT like Mexico. The reason the immigration policy is so popular here and so unpopular there is it keeps the thugs, drugs, and criminals THERE and not HERE. That’s not Rachel Smith’s fault, it’s theirs.
File this one under jerks of the day as well.
Other opinions:
27
May
Was reading this story on Fox. It’s about Bill cheating on Hillary to the point where he decided to divorce Hillary and she talked him out of it. Nothing that really surprised me. However, what I got at the very end was shocking tho:
As a result, Clinton’s chief-of-staff Betsey Wright took him to see a therapist.
You scroll and scroll and there is NOTHING. Not one single word. No story, nothing.
Hillary MUST have gotten ahold of Fox, but apparently just a little too late to prevent the copy that’s there from making it. I’ll bet the rest is gone before too long as well, but I linked it anyway.
It’s a vast left-wing conspiracy I tell ya!
The National Association of Broadcasters has enlisted the recently re-minted lobbying firm of Bluewater Strategies in its quest to combat the proposed merger of XM Satellite Radio and Sirius Satellite Radio.In a Wednesday filing at the Senate Office of Public Records, lobbyists Tim Kurth, Andrew Lundquist and George Nethercutt, former Republican representative from Washington, said they would represent the NAB on the merger and other issues.
I think this is a waste of time and money. I am completely ambivalent about this merger. XM radio, the service, is a niche thing. Not everyone wants XM radio, no one HAS to have it. And, with the advent of Wimax looming, I doubt anyone will even want it in five to ten years.
Here in Kentucky, we had to endure a rather ugly political fight for about a year ( it felt like a LOT longer ). Attorney General Greg Stumbo indicted Governor Ernie Fletcher and just about everyone that worked for Fletcher in any shape or capacity. As soon as the indictments were released, every media outlet in Kentucky proclaimed Fletcher’s political death. People fled the Governor’s office in droves. Then Fletcher did the unthinkable and pardoned everyone involced in Stumbo’s indictment except himself. The media proclaimed Fletcher officially 100% politically dead. Fletcher claimed at the time it was all politically motivated by Stumbo, who was toying with the idea of running for governor himself. Then, a rather odd thing happened on the way to the courthouse. Stumbo dropped the indictment. It seems there’s a rather vague little law in Kentucky that basically says a candidate can not bring suit against an elected official if they plan on running for that position. Not too long after dropping the lawsuit ( in political terms ), Stumbo announced he was teaming up with Greg Lunsford to run for the governor’s office as Lieutenant Governor. That’s a position in Kentucky that basically does nothing except wait to run for office as governor as soon as the person you teamed up with is out of the picture. Well, a funny thing happened today:
In the Republican primary:
| Fletcher/Rudolph | 100,291 | 50.2 |
| Northup/Hoover | 73,507 | 36.8 |
| Harper/Wilson | 25,898 | 13.0 |
In the Democrat primary:
| Candidate | Votes | % Votes |
| Lunsford/Stumbo | 73,108 | 21.4 |
| Richards/Brown | 44,440 | 13.0 |
| Beshear/Mongiardo | 140,574 | 41.1 |
| Galbraith/Wireman | 20,410 | 6.0 |
| Henry/True | 59,793 | 17.5 |
| Hensley/Robbins | 3,801 | 1.1 |
The politically dead Fletcher got 100,291+ votes while Stumbo’s ticket got 73,108 votes. In non-mathematical terms, Fletcher’s still alive and Stumbo’s not.
I guess Stumbo didn’t fool as many people as he thought. As noted on other blogs and media, Stumbo’s the big loser tonight. He would have easily kept his position as attorney general if he had not let his ego get in the way. And, in my opinion, the result is proper.
I’m not gonna go so far as to say Fletcher will win this fall. However, he’s been ruled dead so many times it gets kinda tiresome. And every time someone says he is, he wins. So, this fall should be a fun one to watch. Now, Steve Beshears, the Democrat candidate-elect, has been in the same boat as Fletcher, but never seemed to win anything. They both ran clean, good campaigns. This should be a fun race this fall. One that all Kentuckians can be proud of.
18
May
Nah, not the blog again. We are. As in the family is. We’ve been building a house for over a year and now it’s somewhat sortof ready. So, blogging will be light for a few days or so.
Wish us luck!
17
May
I wasn’t going to say anything about Falwell’s passing, but feel remiss for not. So, I’m gonna tackle it as best I can.
I have never been a fan of Falwell’s. Ever. When I was a small kid and he was on television, I either laughed at how inane he was, or just turned it before anyone could see it was even on long enough for me to figure what it was and flip the channel. Televangelists just annoy me.
However, if you go back to 1979, the country was in a state of flux. We had possibly the worst president of all time, definitely in my lifetime. We were still reeling from Vietnam. The Supreme Court was passing repeated very liberal opinions. The US was being held hostage by Iranians. The economy was in shambles. Gas was scarce and expensive. Things were basically just a huge mess. And, they were the result of very liberal and weak leadership. Although Jimmy Carter was a very religious man, his policies were perceived as being very liberal. The Republican Party was disorganized and completely lacking direction. The prospects going into 1980 were pretty bleak on both sides. Ronald Reagan had lost his primary in 1976 to Gerald Ford in a very tight primary that split the party even moreso than it had been already. Ted Kennedy was giving Jimmy Carter a fight for his political life when the hostage situation bailed Carter out. The events that caused the country to rally behind the flag would lead to complete and utter frustration. Things were bad and no one was stepping up to lead us in a new direction. Reagan was very upbeat and positive, but was relying on his economic philosophies to excite his voter base. And, it wasn’t working. Then, leading into the North Carolina primary, things changed. Senator Jesse Helms came out very firmly behind Reagan and brought all his organization and grass roots support with him. What that led to was Jerry Falwell organizing a new element in politics, televangelist driven voter drives. The ranks of Republican voters had steadily declined throughout the 60′s and 70′s. With this new social initiative, they suddenly swelled. With Reagan’s acting skills and speech making prowess, the Republican Primary of 1976 turned unexpectedly exciting with an obvious new element arising in the party. The Democrat Party was contentious and traditional. Although Reagan lost in 1976, by the time Jimmy Carter was sworn in, the whole country knew who our next president would be. It was just a matter of time. During that time Falwell continued to motivate young, conservative professionals to register Republican en masse. Millions of them joined the Republican Party. Whereas the Democrat Party had staked its future on the hippy generation, the Republicans were being reborn as the religious conservatives. And, these weren’t your typical conservatives. They were aggressive and outspoken. Just like their mentors. When Reagan won in 1980, Falwell was given a lot of credit. When Reagan was re-elected in 1984, Falwell was there with him. The Neo-conservatives had risen from nothing to national prominence in basically eight years. Thanks for the most part by the leadership of Falwell. Those who dared attack Falwell, as McCain did in 1984, lost. The Republicans were back in control, and would eventually regain the House and Senate briefly. Falwell and his followers were right there with them the whole way. When Clinton won in 1992, neither candidate really associated themselves with the Religious right. However, Falwell and the Religious Right went after Congress and the Senate. With that grassroots conservatism, the Republicans won both the House and Senate. In 2000, they’d get the White House as well. With the riches came the in-fighting that goes along with it. The Religious Right basically imploded and Falwell faded from the limelight amid a series of very intolerant quotes.
As I started with, I didn’t like Jerry Falwell. I don’t like what the Neos have done to my party. But, I do acknowledge that if they hadn’t, there wouldn’t be much left of that party. Reagan and the neophyte Neocons returned the United States to a strong two-party system, regardless of what I think. Maybe not for the right reason for me. But, the alternative was even worse.
And for that, Jerry Falwell does need to be recognized.
Gallup came out with their most recent polls on the candidates, and non-candidates who are polling. Here’s the dirt:
Democrat:
- Hillary Clinton, 35
- Barack Obama, 26
- Al Gore,16
- John Edwards, 12
- Bill Richardson, 2
- Joe Biden, 2
- Al Sharpton, 1
- Christopher Dodd, 1
- Wesley Clark, 1
- Dennis Kucinich, <1
- Mike Gravel, 0
- Other, 1
- None, <1
- All/any, 0
- No opinion, 4
And the Republicans
- Rudy Giuliani 29
- John McCain 23
- Fred Thompson 12
- Mitt Romney 8
- Newt Gingrich 6
- Sam Brownback 2
- Tommy Thompson 1
- Mike Huckabee 1
- Tom Tancredo 1
- George Pataki 1
- Duncan Hunter <1
- Jim Gilmore <1
- Chuck Hagel <1
- Ron Paul 0
- Other 2
- None 5
- All/any 0
- No opinion 8
As it stands now, 65% of Democrats will be dissatisfied with their nominee, and 71% of Republicans dissatisfied with theirs. Now, the long term problem this presents to me is X number of people will cross over after the primaries to support their party’s nominee, but X number will do so grudgingly. And, even worse, X number won’t at all. They may vote for their nominee, but they won’t necessarily support them. When hard decisions have to be made or something bad happens, those people are the first to jump. IMO, that’s what we’re seeing now in spades. Neither candidate really excited their party during the last election, with the main thrust of the public and media being which one was less capable of leading the country. When things got tough, those un-excited non-supporters jumped ship. It doesn’t take much for that to happen either. The result? 65% negativity ratings regardless of how good or bad things might be going. The second result is media constantly whining about the polarization of the US without having a clue how it got that way.
Nancy Pelosi condemned the Republicans as a culture of corruption in her efforts to take over Congress. And, people bought it apparently. Since then we’ve had Barbara Boxer very quietly slip out of the spotlight after giving her husband billions of taxpayer money. We had William Jefferson, under investigation for taking bribes put on Homeland Security. Now, we’ve got another pillar of Democrat morals busted for giving her husband $25 million of taxpayer money in earmarks. Who might be that unscrupulous icon of Democrat corruption be?
Would you believe Nancy Pelosi?
Now, where this gets fun is under Nancy’s direction, legislation was passed requiring members requesting earmarks to sign a form stating they would not personally benefit from the earmark itself.
No sooner than it passed, she gave her husband $25 million. I hear CNN and MSNBC’s Hardball are all over this story.
Before going any farther, I learned a long time ago not to trust rhetoric purely because someone says it happened. So, I looked up John Edwards’ website. Sure enough, here it is:
As citizens, we honor and support our troops for their service and sacrifice.As Americans, we are blessed by that sacrifice and support, which keeps us safe and keeps us strong.
I tend to agree with Morin on this one. Using a day to honor to people who have died defending our country is the worst possible day to politicize someone’s own personal beliefs. It’s a day for them, not for John Edwards. I doubt Edwards had much support from military voters in the first place, if this word gets spread around much, he’ll probably have none.
However, the bigger issue I see for John is that he is apparently making the War in Iraq his central theme by focusing on it on his website, and starting a website specifically to protest the War, http://www.supportthetroopsendthewar.com/ Now, as I noted strongly earlier, this rigid anti-war rhetoric hasn’t done Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats any good at all. Her ratings have fallen precipitously since she went hard-line on the issue. That’s something Nancy can work her way out of over time, she’s not gonna get voted out any time soon. Not so with Edwards. The primaries are right around the corner and the places he’s leading, such as Iowa, are strong conservative areas where he’s perceived as the least liberal of the Dems running. He can’t afford to slip in those areas. He won’t win in New York or Illinois, or probably California. He HAS to win in the bread-basket. And, by alienating the military, he won’t.
The American Legion is huge across the US. Count Edwards out IMO.
