Updates from Carol Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Carol 7:37 PM on 03/22/2010 Permalink | Reply  

    The Rev. Al Sharpton Says the American People Overwhelmingly Voted for Socialism 

    According to the Rev. Al people knew what they were getting when they voted for Obama.  For once, I agree with him.

    Read the post.

     
  • Carol 4:51 PM on 03/21/2010 Permalink | Reply  

    I’ve got a roundup of reaction to the Stupak cave in here http://carolyntackettscloset.blogspot.com/2010/03/stupak-caves-babies-die.html

    An interesting tidbit at Instapundit (http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/):

    Watch the momentum on Stupak’s opponent’s facebook page. Dr. Dan Benishek is running against Stupak in Michigan. Check out the velocity of his growth since Stupak announced: Benishek for Congress

    His membership is currently growing at a rate of about 20 new members every 30-60 seconds and incoming comments are fast and furious. People are begging him to set up his donation site so that they can start a money bomb.

     
  • Carol 10:09 AM on 03/20/2010 Permalink | Reply  

    Arizona Kills SCHIP 

    Arizona is waiting to see if ObamaCare passes.  The state has acted to send a powerful message to the White House that if Obama is determined to bankrupt the nation he can leave Arizona out.  Megan McArdle:

    On the eve of the possible passage of a health care bill, Arizona has provided a glimpse of our possible future by shutting down its SCHIP program and booting a bunch of people out of Medicaid:

    The Arizona budget is a vivid reflection of how the fiscal crisis afflicting state governments is cutting deeply into health care. The state also will roll back Medicaid coverage for childless adults in a move that is expected to eventually drop 310,000 people from the rolls.

    The reason this is so troubling, of course, is that the new proposed health care plan gets about half of its coverage expansion through adding people to Medicaid. The state side of this expense doesn’t show up on the books as a government expenditure (neatly enabling the bill to get a lower CBO score), but someone in America has to be taxed to pay for it, and there is a big problem when tax revenues fall short of the required expenditure.
    There are two frightening possibilities, for people who support this bill (and the rest of us, as well . . . but we’ve been frightened for a while)
    1) States pull out, and coverage drops
    2) States don’t pull out, and they go bankrupt.
    The third, and to me the most likely scenario, is that the Federal government basically bails out the states, perhaps taking over Medicaid. But that’s its own problem, because taking over the Medicaid obligations is not going to come attached to any revenue stream to pay for it. Where are we going to get the money?
    Of course, that’s what I want to know about the whole thing. But this makes the problem much more vivid.
    As McArdle points out, the Dems in part got the CBO score they wanted because ObamaCare passes billions of dollars of the cost on to states.  The states can’t afford this. 
    My own state, Florida, is already in deep financial trouble.  ObamaCare will push states off a cliff.  Additionally, deeply hidden in the legislation is the fact that states will be forced to pay for health care for illegals.  States with large populations of illegals will get a double whammy under this legislation.
    If this thing passes the states are not helpless.  They can say no.  So far, thirty-eight states are prepared to do just that. 
    This is the fight of our lives but we are fighting the good fight.  I have faith that we will win.  Keep up the calls and emails and be prepared to keep up the pressure long after the vote is taken.
     
    • MarkJ 10:21 AM on 03/20/2010 Permalink | Reply

      In 1861, 11 states revolted against what they viewed as tyranny by Washington DC. This resulted in a civil war. Those states ultimately lost.

      Quite possibly 150 years later, there will be another titanic struggle. But this time it will involve all 50 states lined up against perceived tyranny by Washington elites. I suspect the probable outcome of such a struggle will be quite different from what transpired in 1865.

    • Quite Rightly 10:44 AM on 03/20/2010 Permalink | Reply

      I just came across McArdle’s article too. According to the Times article she references, Arizona just dropped 47,000 children from Medicaid. More medical care that hospitals and doctors will have to provide–out of their pockets, if they can afford to.

      • rubyslipperblog 10:57 AM on 03/20/2010 Permalink | Reply

        In Pennsylvania we went without a budget for a few months because there really was no way to reconcile it.

  • Carol 1:27 PM on 03/17/2010 Permalink | Reply  

    Ginny Thomas 

    Judging from the article Andrew Cohen wrote in The Atlantic, “Doubting the Thomases“,  it appears that Cohen prefers that the wives of political figures, particularly Supreme Court justices, confine themselves to sitting primly in the back row.  Cohen seems quite excised that Ginny Thomas, wife of Clarence Thomas, has, gasp, opinions and worse, she exercises her right to free speech. 

    Cohen leaves little doubt that he doesn’t hold Mrs. Thomas in high regard:

    I’ve got nothing against Ginny Thomas’ desire to hop on the “Tea Party” bandwagon now that it’s rolling toward the 2010 elections.

    Is he accusing her of being an opportunist or is he just being snide?

    Cohen goes on to pepper Thomas with the questions:

    What part of the Constitution does she believe no longer means anything? What role does she ascribe to the Supreme Court, and to her husband, in making this so? To what particular “place” would she like to bring the Constitution and who would she like to help her along the way? What part of our current constitutional structure does she believe is leading us toward “tyranny?” And just exactly how does she define that word, tyranny? The same way Thomas Jefferson did or the same way Justice Clarence Thomas now does? And who in official Establishment Washington really fears tyranny anyway?

    These are now legitimate questions for the justice’s better half, a government spouse who has just criticized her husband’s co-workers in front of the whole world. She should answer those questions fully not just because the nation now has a right to know her mind on topics so closely connected to her husband’s vital job. But because her answers will likely help us better understand the justice’s mind as well. Does he see himself the same way, waging a mighty struggle each day against tyranny? Heroically striving with each ruling to keep the Constitution from dissolving into meaninglessness? Wouldn’t you like to know these things about Justice Thomas?

    I would. The Constitution Ginny Thomas decries belongs much more to her husband than it does to you or me or 300 million other Americans…

    If I might be so bold to answer for Mrs. Thomas.  As citizens, the Constitution belongs to all of us to the exact same degree.  Further, each of us has an obligation to faithfully act in accordance with our Constitution and resist tyranny.  Justice Thomas’ ownership stake in the Constitution is no greater than any other citizen by virtue of his position, nor is Mrs. Thomas’ stake lessened by virtue of her being a mere “spouse”.

    This would not be an issue except that Mrs. Thomas is the conservative wife of a conservative judge.  Otherwise, her activism would be welcomed and any questioning would be considered sexist.  But once again, conservative women are “fair game”.

     
    • rubyslipperblog 7:36 PM on 03/17/2010 Permalink | Reply

      I would so love to be a fly on their wall to know what Clarence thinks about the tactics they are hoping to pull off to pass this health care sham. Because he can’t say anything, doesn’t mean she should have to play Edith Bunker and “stifle.” This is entirely about their being conservatives and perhaps the fact she is Mrs. Clarence Thomas, she is doubly a target.

  • Carol 3:23 PM on 03/16/2010 Permalink | Reply  

    Promises, Promises 

    From the Telegraph:

     Barack Obama threatens to withdraw support from wavering Democrats

     Barack Obama has said he will not campaign for any Democratic congressmen who fails to support health care reform.

     I’m confused.  In most cases wouldn’t  Obama threatening not to campaign encourage people to vote against the health care bill?

     
  • Carol 7:57 PM on 03/15/2010 Permalink | Reply  

    What About Those People Who “Can’t Afford” Health Care? 

    Let’s face it, emotion sells.  With that in mind, the Dems have been trotting out every sad sack, tear jerker story they can get their hands on to illustrate how people suffer in this country because they “can’t afford” health care.  Here’s the other side of the story.

     
  • Carol 6:28 PM on 03/14/2010 Permalink | Reply  

    Constitutional Rights and Public Dollars 

    Earlier on Fox today the conversation came around to ObamaCare and paying for abortion. Asked about Henry Waxman’s statement that he wanted abortion covered under the health are bill,   Fox guest Susan Estrich stated that she, too, supported using public money for abortions and went on to say that as a constitutional right, abortion should be paid for.  Well, my.  I have a constitutional right to bear arms.  Might I ask when the government will be purchasing a glock for me?

     
  • Carol 11:27 AM on 03/09/2010 Permalink | Reply  

    Charlie Crist is Embarrassing Himself and Embarrassing Florida 

    Charlie Crist is acting like a teenage girl who found out that the captain of the football team just isn’t that in to him.  We expect little girls to act petulant when they don’t get their way, but is that really the image that Crist wants to project?

    Just because Crist is losing is no excuse for him to act like a loser.  At the risk of asking too much, Crist needs to man up and stop embarrassing himself and Florida.

     
    • rubyslipperblog 2:02 PM on 03/09/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Wow have you seen the latest PPP poll:

      Rubio now leads Crist 60-28, including a staggering 71-17 lead with conservatives. Crist has a 49-36 advantage with party moderates, but they account for just 31% of likely primary voters compared to 65% who describe themselves as conservative.

      Rubio is benefiting from a widely held sentiment among Florida GOP voters that Congressional Republicans are too liberal and that Crist would add to the problem. 41% of them think that the party leadership in Washington is too liberal, and with those folks Rubio holds an 83-10 lead. 50% think that Crist himself is too liberal and with those voters Rubio’s advantage expands even wider to 90-5.

  • Carol 9:26 AM on 03/09/2010 Permalink | Reply  

    “Obstructionist” is not Necessarily a Dirty Word 

    After making several valid points in the his commentary in the New York Times, Bob Herbert falls back on the typical blah, blah, blah:

    The Republican Party has nothing in the way of solutions to Americans’ economic plight. It is committed only to the demented policy of trying to ensure that President Obama and the Democrats fail.

    While the it is true that the Republican Party has nothing in the way of solutions that the Left likes, solutions have been forth coming.  Further, it is both rational and desirable to obstruct policies that, if allowed to be implemented, would cause the country to fail. 

    I would further remind Herbert that the Dems in Congress do not need the Republicans to pass anything.  If Obama has failed to shove his socialist agenda  down the throats of the American people he failed in no small part because of Democrats who refused to walk in lock step with their leadership.  Honestly, whether they’ve done it out of principal or self-preservation, I don’t care.

    Did Herbert ever encourage the Dems in Congress to obstruct the policies of President Bush?  Darn skippy.  Herbert needs to get over the idea that this is about Obama.  It is about his policies. 

    To the Republicans in Congress I say obstruct away.

     
    • backyardconservative 1:36 PM on 03/09/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Thank goodness for the Republicans–they got some spine this last year–partly because Obama and Pelosi froze them out early on.

      Now the Dems who have the numbers as you say, are having trouble finding the votes. Dick Morris described it last night, on Hannity I think, as hand to hand combat, referencing the Massa incident.

  • Carol 3:43 PM on 03/08/2010 Permalink | Reply  

    What Obama Should Have Said 

    Ed Rollins, former White House political director for Ronald Reagan writes at CNN.com:

    If President Obama had been forthright last week at the health care summit, he would have opened the meeting by stating: “If you have health coverage, under our reform bills you are going to pay more and get less. If you are one of the 45 million elderly or disabled people on Medicare, you are going to get less. There is no such thing as free medical care. Somebody has to pay! And in the end it is you.”

    Had Obama said that, would I suddenly approve of the health care bill?  Nope but I sure would feel better about my president.

    For months now the Democratic members of our government have been making claims that just don’t ring true.  On top of a bill that the majority of us simply don’t want, it feels like we are being lied to and treated like children.  When exactly did our relationship to our leaders get so out of whack?

    Read the rest of Rollins’ article.

     
    • backyardconservative 8:39 PM on 03/08/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Democrats always lie to get elected. But this is such a big lie it’s attracting the attention of the American people. Thank God.

      • fuzislippers 9:29 PM on 03/08/2010 Permalink | Reply

        A fair few republicans lie to get elected, too. What BO did is unforgivable: he hid his true nature (granted with the fawning approval and cover of the press) and pretended to be something he clearly is not. Now the mask is off and it’s all loony leftist ideology all the time. Nothing he said was real or true, except those rare “candid” moments as with Joe the Plumber and on some of the shows when he tried to talk to about his commie leftie nonsense. I guess, to be fair, he did want to be honest about it, at least at first, but he had no trouble at all hiding his true agenda when it became clear to him that America wouldn’t elect him as the far left radical that he is. And now he’s just going to do whatever the heck he pleases; he won, right? He’s got a “mandate” in his mind . . . even though he ran as something else entirely. (well almost entirely, I wasn’t fooled by him, but millions were)

  • Carol 7:41 PM on 03/06/2010 Permalink | Reply  

    Jill, re your post on Steyn. He certainly doesn’t pull his punches, does he? His comments on Scotland fit right in with my post Moral Imperatives and Freedom, http://carolyntackettscloset.blogspot.com/2010/03/moral-imperatives-and-freedom.html
    I doubt the Scots understood the implications when the traded their freedom for what at the time they thought was a guarantee of security. In the end, they have neither freedom nor any real measure of security. Beware of governments promising to take of citizens for their own good.

     
  • Carol 2:34 PM on 03/05/2010 Permalink | Reply  

    Here We Go Again 

    What do Charlie Sheen,  Daniel Sunjata, Martin Sheen,  Mark Ruffalo, Mark Stepnoski, Willie Nelson, and Rosie O’Donnell have in common with John Patrick Bedell?  They are all 9/11 “Truthers” also known as “Right Wing Extremists“.  Christian Science Monitor:

    John Patrick Bedell: Did right-wing extremism lead to shooting?

    Details of Mr. Bedell’s case are still emerging. But writings by someone with his same name and birth date, posted on the Internet, express ill will toward the government and the armed forces and question whether Washington itself might have been behind the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

    Bedell most certainly sounds like an extremist-but right wing?  As a right winger myself, I can testify that we have no animus against “government” per se, we simply ask that our government stay within their Constitutionally mandated boundaries.   Further, most on my side of the ideological spectrum have a deep, abiding respect for the men and women of the armed forces.  And though it gives me a bit of a giggle to call Rosie O’Donnell and Martin Sheen “right wing”, the truth is “trutherism” is almost exclusively the privy of Left wing Bush bashers.  You know the type, like Joseph Stark, the man who flew his plane in to the IRS building.  Or James Von Brunn, the hate filled nutcase who opened fire at the Holocaust Museum.

    Personally, I am getting a little sick of the MSM’s fabrications.  I am perfectly happy to condemn right wing violence, when it occurs, and would ask that those on the Left and their MSM lapdogs do the same.  Bedell was not a right winger and he was not a “teabag***”.  The Left needs to get its narrative straight.

     
    • fuzislippers 2:58 PM on 03/05/2010 Permalink | Reply

      It’s so bizarre to me that the left paints us as violent loons. As you point out, we aren’t the ones who are truthers or who become violent during protests; it’s the left.

      Any opposition to expanding government has to be painted as “anti-government” so that they can demonize us. But we aren’t “anti-government,” we just want our government to remain within the confines of the Constitution and not slide into totalitarianism. What is hard to understand about that? Nothing. So they can’t argue the point and simply make things up. I don’t think it’s working anymore, though, people are waking up and deciding they really don’t care if a bunch of loony lefties call them names (oooh!).

      • Carol 3:21 PM on 03/05/2010 Permalink | Reply

        The thing is, during the Bush years it was considered to be a badge of honor to be “anti-government”. In fact, the more hateful the rhetoric, the better. Now these same people equate the once noble “speaking truth to power” with racism. Generally speaking, I think that they are sincere in this belief. They live very cloistered lives where everyone they know thinks and feels alike. They simply can’t conceive of anyone feeling differently from themselves and therefore, rather than accepting differing opinions they assign evil motives to them. Overall, I’ve come to believe that people on the Left aren’t very nice.

    • The Kid 10:52 PM on 03/05/2010 Permalink | Reply

      When ‘you’ are incompetent screw-ups, your only tactic is to point and squeal at all around you in order to misdirect and take the attention off of your own sub-level performance. Of course, in this case, we’re talking non-performance.

      Man, the truthers arguments are so lame it hurts. For example, “a kerosene (jet fuel) fire can’t melt steel”

      The jet fuel was only part of what was burning in the building. How about desks, and everything else you’d find in an office building. MORE Importantly, this was on the 103rd? floor of one and 90th? of tower two. High enough up that you’d have quite a breeze up there. In fact the smoke trail streaming out of the damaged floors of the building indicate quite a breeze.

      They melted all sorts of metal in the Time Before Christ by using a bellows pointed at the fire in order to supply it with a constant stream of oxygen, and the bellows put fresh air into the fire at about 15 mph. The smoke pouring out of the WTC buildings was obviously going more than 15 mph. More like 40, but that could all be easily measured. There would be no problem melting steel in that environment.
      One of many 3rd grade level absurd arguments that the truthers rely on.

  • Carol 5:14 PM on 03/04/2010 Permalink | Reply  

    Crist Doesn’t Want to Go Negative, But… 

    Help!  Charlie Crist is making my head spin.  The other day Crist said that he did not want to see the ObamaCare bill scrapped.  Today, in an interview with Robert Costa at the National Review Crist said:

    “It is awful how [Democrats] have this compulsion to ram this thing through, even though the American people don’t support it,” Crist says. “They don’t realize that even if they pass their bill [with reconciliation], the American people will still detest it. We need to take a free-market approach.” Crist also says that Obama is “moving too quickly” in trying to address health-care reform. “Bipartisanship is necessary here,” he says. “We need true bipartisanship, which is a two-way street, with both sides having the opportunity not only to be heard, but the chance to forward their ideas, sit at the table, and help to craft the final product.”

    Scrap the bill.  Don’t scrap the bill.  Move forward.  Slow down.  Oy, will the real Charlie Crist please stand up?

    Well, I guess I should be careful what I ask for.  The real Charlie stood up and told Costa, “I won’t go negative in this race, that’s not my nature…” and then he launched in to a negative tirade against Marco Rubio, his opponent in the Republican race for the US Senate.

    Is Crist resorting to personal attacks because he knows that he loses hands down on the issues?  It certainly seems to be the case.

     
  • Carol 2:04 PM on 03/04/2010 Permalink | Reply  

    Emily’s List Gives Lincoln the Heave Ho 

    Arkansas Senator Blanche Lincoln can’t catch a break these days.  Seems that in the spirit of bipartisanship Lincoln has made enemies on both sides of the political spectrum.  The latest blow comes from Emily’s List:

    In 1998, EMILY’s List helped elect Lincoln to the U.S. Senate. We believed her when she told us that that, if and when the Senate took up right-wing Senator Rick Santorum’s bill to ban what he called “partial birth” abortion, she would insist on a health exception that protects women.

    Our members gave generously to her campaign, believing that she would steadfastly stand by the pledge she made to us to protect women’s reproductive freedom.

    She took our members’ hard-earned money to get elected. Unfortunately, when the Santorum bill came up for a vote, Lincoln voted for it even though it provided no exception to protect women’s health.

    Groucho Marx famously said, “I don’t care to belong to a club that accepts people like me as members.”  Emily’s List would have done well to have reflected upon Marx’s words prior to offering Lincoln membership.  Even the vast majority of those holding a pro-abortion view find partial birth abortion abhorrent.  That Emily’s List made support of the practice a condition of membership, and that Lincoln at least initially agreed, speaks volumes of both parties. 

    While I am by all means grateful that Lincoln did not uphold her end of the bargain, I can’t imagine any pro-life person cutting her slack now.  In the end I wonder if Emily’s List initial support was worth the price that Lincoln has had to pay for it.

     
    • rubyslipperblog 4:52 PM on 03/04/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Blanche is as far to the left as the rest of the supposed moderates on the Democratic side of the aisle. Anyone who is truly pro-life would never cut these faux moderates who claim to support life any slack. I did wonder why Emily’s List is cutting her loose now but I see they haven’t contributed to her re-election since she voted for the partial birth abortion ban. This incident does say a lot about Lincoln though, agreeing to support partial birth abortion as a condition to gaining endorsement for election is the definition of selling your soul to the devil, imo.

      • backyardconservative 5:25 PM on 03/04/2010 Permalink | Reply

        I remember Democrat Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan calling the practice akin to infanticide. But then he was just about the last Democrat I respected.

        • rubyslipperblog 9:49 PM on 03/04/2010 Permalink | Reply

          The procedure itself is so gruesome. I have yet to hear any credible scenario where a child near birth already would need to be delivered dead in order to save the life of the mother. If they can deliver a dead child safely how could delivering a live child possibly do anything to save the mother? Liberals constantly trot out the life of the mother argument as a means to keep the door open to do the procedure at will regardless.

  • Carol 12:29 PM on 03/02/2010 Permalink | Reply  

    backyardconservative, remember moving out of your parent’s house? The scary giddiness of finally being able to call your own shots? In those first days some of the decisions were good and some were not so good but when we screwed up we dealt with it and kept going. The nanny state wants to turn back the clock and revert us all back to dependents again. I can’t do it. I can’t trade freedom for security. I can’t imagine saying “I can’t take care of myself”. To me, that would be like being stuck in one really bad, never ending marriage..

     
  • Carol 8:12 AM on 03/01/2010 Permalink | Reply  

    Thomas Friedman sings the praises of Lindsey Graham 

    Thomas Friedman is using words like “courageous” to describe Republican Senator Lindsey Graham.  Somehow, it gives me a very, very uneasy feeling.

    Graham is on the receiving end of Friedman’s admiration because, like Friedman, he believes (or at least purports to believe) that the end of the world is nigh and that the only thing standing between humanity and floods, famine and presumably plagues of locusts is taxing energy and killing employment.  Given the recent and ongoing revelations about Global Warming Climate Change, my question to Graham is, “What’s in your portfolio, Senator?”.

    However, a disbelief in Global Warming is not indicative of a disbelief in the importance of energy independence.  Yesterday I posted Rubio talks common sense on energy and questioned whether as a country we are ready to take an “all of the above” approach to energy independence.  We can, and should, take every measure to wean ourselves off our dependency on foreign oil. 

    Taxing energy does nothing to accomplish this goal but does much to further erode our economy.  Graham would do well to get his priorities straight, start serving his constituents and stop parroting the likes of Thomas Friedman.

     
    • pjMom 9:00 AM on 03/01/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Ah, the media anoint the new McCain–who will be touted as the savior of the party, etc etc etc.

    • richard mcenroe 3:33 PM on 03/01/2010 Permalink | Reply

      If Friedman’ fer ‘im, I’m agin ‘im.

  • Carol 2:54 PM on 02/28/2010 Permalink | Reply  

    Quick thoughts:

    Pat, going forward I will never look at Nancy Pelosi without remembering a bit Glenn Beck did during the Bold Fresh tour. It went something like this-“blink, ouch! blink, ouch!” Hysterical!

    Poor Nancy, her lack of accomplishment has driven her to delusion. I fear it was a very short trip.

    Obi’s Sister, my heart and prayers go out to the people of Chile as well. Fortunately for them, unlike the people of Haiti, they have an infrastructure in place which will make recovery much more easy. Still, they have a tough road ahead and will need our support.

    On a different note, today is Sunday and for our brothers in the Conservative blogosphere that often means “Rule 5”. Deep sigh accompanied by an eye roll. Well, boys will be boys but I’ve posted something for the ladies at http://carolyntackettscloset.blogspot.com/2010/02/well-ladies-it-is-rule-5-sunday-which.html. Let me know what you think.

     
    • fuzislippers 3:24 PM on 02/28/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Nancy has always been painful to watch and listen to, but it’s getting way worse of late.

      And I am an official fan (girly) of conservative men rule “Rule 5” Sunday.

  • Carol 2:54 PM on 02/27/2010 Permalink | Reply  

    Selective Abortion and Female Genocide 

    My daughter, my first child, was born in Turkey.  I was thousands of miles from home and scared to death.  I felt like I had no one to talk to about all the conflicting feelings.  For the older women on base pregnancy was old hat.  Honestly, I was so ignorant about pregnancy and motherhood that I felt silly talking to other women.  And when I did the conversation always came back to labor which resulted in the other women engaging in one upping each other with stories of how long their labor had been, how painful it had been, etc.  Despite all that, I found myself breathlessly, completely in love with the child that grew inside me.

    At the same time I came to know a Turkish taxi driver whose wife was also pregnant with her first child.  The man was over the moon with joy over his wife’s pregnancy.  I never met her but through him we shared our experiences during those months.  Just days before I would give birth he picked me up again.  During the ride he told me that his wife had given birth and that the child had died.  I was devastated for him and his wife and started crying as I told him how very sorry I was.  He pulled the cab over and turned around in the seat to talk to me.  I will never forget him trying to comfort me with these words, “It is okay.  It was a girl.”

    Read the post

     
    • backyardconservative 6:35 PM on 02/27/2010 Permalink | Reply

      It’s so horrific. Your personal story really underscores the point.

      I remember years ago, when my kids were little, I put a bumper sticker on my minivan–She’s not a choice, she’s a child.

      I live in an upscale suburb–and it was scratched and scored off in the parking lot of the community recreation center–that’s the only time that ever happened to me, and not since all these years later.

      I got mad for a while, I thought—why should I care that these “feminists” are killing their children? But as we know, we have to keep speaking up about this–for those innocents who have no voice.

  • Carol 9:03 PM on 02/26/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags:   

    Al Gore gets a public smackdown 

    Have you ever sat through a shareholder’s meeting?  Trust me, having your wisdom teeth removed is less painful.  There is always that one person who refuses to dispense with reading of the last meeting’s minutes.  Cold. Hard. Miserable. Misery.  And that’s before they start going over the financial statements.

    And then it happened.  Smack!

     
    • rubyslipperblog 10:39 PM on 02/26/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Oh, I was just going to post that. Wasn’t that hilarious, couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.

    • Quite Rightly 11:36 PM on 02/26/2010 Permalink | Reply

      That is the best! Count down. $100,000,000 green fraud dollars, $99,999,999 green fraud dollars, $99,999,998 green fraud dollars . . . . The great sucking noise has started. What was Gore ever doing on Apple’s board anyway?

  • Carol 7:29 AM on 02/26/2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , ,   

    The British are confused 

    They thought Barack Obama was their friend.

     
    • backyardconservative 9:34 AM on 02/26/2010 Permalink | Reply

      The Brits should remind themselves our President Barack Obama threw the bust of Churchill back in their faces. It had been a gift to the White House.

      Supposedly Obama’s forbears were treated badly by the British. But how mature is this? Who could object to a bust of Winston Churchill? Should we not have fought against the Nazis?

      You are right Carol, he is a knee-jerk leftist ideologue.

    • richard mcenroe 11:26 AM on 02/26/2010 Permalink | Reply

      The British are so confused their new Tea Party movement has been throwing the tea back onto the ship….

    • fuzislippers 1:35 PM on 02/26/2010 Permalink | Reply

      Why on earth would the British think that BO is their friend? One of his first “diplomatic” acts as president was to return the bust of Winston Churchill that had been in the Oval Office, he was rude to Prime Minister Brown (and defended that by saying that the UK is just like all the other nations in the world and should expect to be treated as such–Hillary Clinton smoothed that over, thank God), and he’s not in the close contact with British officials that President Bush was.

      BO is doing everything he can to destroy the special relationship the U. S. has with the UK. Here’s a good post on it from the Telegraph blog section: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/4884219/Barack-Obama-must-preserve-the-special-relationship.html And here’s a quote from someone in the administration: “The facts are, Obama hates the Brits,” said one person close to the administration. “Something to do with his grandfather in Kenya. A colonial hangover. And there is nothing you can do about it” (source: http://bit.ly/brevbd)

      This is one of the main reasons that he has to be sent packing in 2012. The British are our greatest allies, and he treats them like the enemy while cozying up with Chavez and trying to be bestest buds with Ahmadinejad.

      • pjMom 1:42 PM on 02/26/2010 Permalink | Reply

        I’m speechless after the last link, Fuzislippers.

        • fuzislippers 1:43 PM on 02/26/2010 Permalink | Reply

          For some reason the link isn’t working on my end, but I wrote a post about it all a while back: BO Myths Busted and America Rising: http://bit.ly/c0mDMP

        • fuzislippers 1:44 PM on 02/26/2010 Permalink | Reply

          And yes, he’s a real threat to our relationship with the British, and that offends me as an American.

c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel