Election Day

1) It's Election Day here in the Garden State. The choices: i) The incumbent Governor, Jon Corzine, who near as I can tell has done nothing for four years other than instruct his limo driver to speed while he (Corzine) wasn't wearing a seatbelt. Oh, he also raised our already ridiculously high taxes. ii) Chris Christie, the Republican who despite being a strong candidate is in a tough battle because his campaign manager has run the electoral equivalent of a prevent defense since early in the second quarter. iii) Chris Daggett, the former Republican who is running as an independent but whose policies seems suspiciously similar to those of the incumbent. The polls are all over the place. Some have Corzine in the lead, some have Christie ahead, and Daggett is pulling in anywhere from (depending on which poll you choose to accept) 6% to 14% of the vote. In short, it's a classic case of "too close to call". I have a bad feeling that Governor Corzine will win re-election, as the Democratic vote-generating machine in Camden, Hackensack, Paterson, Jersey City, etc., is really pushing its organizers to get out the vote, and because Daggett will siphon off enough votes from Christie to make sure that we get four more years of even higher taxes and a "Do as I say, not as I do" Governor..........

2) I was on my blogging sabbatical when this anniversary came and went, but in early September, the world marked the 70th anniversary of the German invasion of Poland, signalling the informal start of World War II in Europe (I use the word informal because I personally think that the Spanish Civil War was the "real" start of the War). As a military history buff, I've always found it fascinating that the Poles, who were fighting with cavalry and outdated military equipment, lasted three weeks before succumbing to the Germans invading from the west and the Russians who invaded from the east. That's just about as long as the French (whose military equipment was technologically the equal of the Germans) lasted when the Wehrmacht roared across the Low Countries and into northern France in 1940. History is full of "would have, could have, should have" moments. What would have happened had the French stood their ground when the Germans re-militarized the Ruhr Valley? What would have happened had Neville Chamberlain not cravenly given up Czechoslovakia? What would have happened had France and Great Britain responded to the "back door" invitations for an alliance with the Soviet Union, instead of rebuffing them and allowing the Soviets to ally with Germany instead? How many millions of lives would have been saved had any of these events occurred?

3) I have to admit, I'm more than a little amused at the anger of the left over the supposedly harsh treatment received by President Obama on Fox News. The hypocrisy is stunning, given the vitriol directed at President Bush on CNN and MSNBC during his Administration (he's been out of office for nearly a year, and they STILL heap abuse on him). Keith Olbermann still goes in a virtual apoplectic rage at the mere mention of President Bush's name, but hey, that's okay, because he's a Republican, and Republicans are fundamentally evil, right? Sorry, but what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. While I am no fan of "anger politics", those on the left in this country shouldn't profess to be stunned when the anger and outright hostility they directed at Bush 43 for eight years now comes back at them and a Democratic President. And, don't give me the "It's racist!" argument. Bull. That's just a cheap and intellectually dishonest way of attempting to silence debate and legitimate criticism of the President's policies. Are there some opponents of President Obama who are racist? Of course, but to tar and feather all of those who are critical of him with that broad brush is both unfair and ignorant.

4) While we navel gaze here in the U.S. (and to the extent that we pay attention to events outside our borders, we're focused on Afghanistan), there are worrisome developments in Europe and Asia, and I don't mean in the Middle East or Iraq or North Korea (though things aren't good in any of those places either). I'm speaking of Turkey, which is steadily and increasingly rapidly pulling away from the West and aligning itself with the Islamist theocracies and autocracies of the Middle East. Lest we forget, Turkey is a NATO member, and up until the last few years, was a secular Muslim state with a very good relationship with Israel, a true anomaly in that region. Over the past few years, relations between Israel and Turkey have cooled dramatically, to the point where Turkey refused to allow Israeli participation in a recently-scheduled NATO air drill, a drill in which Israel had participated regularly over the last few years. As well, Turkey's relations with both Syria and Iran have warmed incredibly (then again, given President Obama's friendly gestures to both of those countries, should I be so surprised?). When you combine these signs with a growing Islamic influence in Turkish public life, people in the west should be more concerned than they are.

5) The Evil Empire (a/k/a the New York Yankees) leads the World Series three games to two as the Series heads back to the Big Apple for Game Six tomorrow night. I don't think that we'll see a Game Seven--the Yankees are extremely difficult to beat in their glorified Little League park, and as well as Pedro Martinez pitched in Game Two, I have a lot of doubt that he can do that two straight games against the Evil Empire's formidable lineup. The Phillies have already taken two more games than I thought that the would win, because I just couldn't (and still can't) see the Phillies' pitchers holding down the Yankees enough to allow Philadelphia's bats to get going, last night's 8-6 win notwithstanding. So, I would not be surprised at all to see the Yankees win World Series title #27, nauseating as it is to for me to contemplate.

6) The "Top Five" in College Football this week, with the record and last ranking in brackets:
i) Alabama Crimson Tide (8-0, #1): They haven't lost and don't deserve to drop.
ii) Texas Longhorns (8-0, #2): The Longhorns have a clear path to the B(C)S title game.
iii) Florida Gators (8-0, #3): Either Florida or Alabama will lose in the SEC title game. My money's on the Tide to get revenge for its defeat at the Gators' hands last year.
iv) Cincinnati Bearcats (8-0, #4): I still think that the Bearcats will get picked off somewhere along the way. I'm just not sure by who.
v) Iowa Hawkeys (9-0, #5): This team is the Harry Houdini of college football, with one magical escape after another. Yeah, they said the same thing about Ohio State in 2002, but that season ended with a national title for the Buckeyes. Could the same be true for Iowa in 2009?
Dropped out: No team.

7) The NFL "Top Five" and "Bottom Five" this week, with the record and last ranking in brackets:
Top Five
i) New Orleans Saints (7-0, #1): The Saints are marching over every team they play, even when Drew Brees is not his normal, lethal self. All eyes are on their meeting with the Patriots in two weeks.
ii) Indianapolis (7-0, #5): Hardly impressed against a mediocre San Francisco 49ers team, but how often does Peyton Manning go an entire game without a touchdown pass? That won't happen again this season.
iii) Minnesota Vikings (7-1, #3): I still keep waiting for Brett Favre to remember that he's 40 years old. So far, no dice.
iv) Denver Broncos (6-1, #2): Got smoked 30-6 in Baltimore this past weekend, but the Broncos were due for a loss and it was a must-win game for the Ravens. I'm willing to give Denver a pass on this one.
v) New England Patriots (5-2, no ranking): Tom Brady looks like he's rounding into form. If so, watch out, rest of the NFL..............
Dropped out: New York Giants (#4)
Bottom Five
i) Tampa Bay Buccaneers (0-7, #3): And this coming weekend, they break out their old "creamsicle" uniforms. I guess that they really want to reinforce that image that they stink.
ii) Detroit Lions (1-6, #5): They lost...........to the St. Louis Rams..............at home. 'Nuff said.
iii) Cleveland Browns (1-7, #4): Cleveland's starting QB is Derek Anderson, who was the 35th-rated starting QB in the NFL last I checked. Remember, there are 32 teams in the NFL.
iv) St. Louis Rams (1-7, #2): Hope that the Rams enjoyed that win in Motown. They may not win another game.
v) Oakland (2-6, #5): The Raiders have been outscored 201 to 78 so far this season. Brutal.......... Dropped out: Tennessee Titans (#1), Washington Redskins (#5

8) The "Top Five" and "Bottom Five" in the NHL this week, with the record and last ranking in Brackets:
Top Five
i) Pittsburgh Penguins (11-3, #1): Interestingly, the Penguins are a perfect 6-0 on the road and a rather pedestrian 5-3 at home.
ii) San Jose Sharks (10-4-1, #2): I hate it that Dan Heatley is on a great team.
iii) Colorado Avalanche (10-3-2, #3): Colorado is still playing well. The longer it does so, the more the young team will gain confidence.
iv) Buffalo Sabres (8-2-1, no ranking): Buffalo is fast and skilled.
v) Washington Capitals (8-2-4, #5): Any team with Alexander Ovechkin will always be dangerous.
Dropped out: New York Rangers (#4)
Bottom Five
i) Toronto Maple Leafs (1-7-4, #1): Toronto is playing slightly better of late, but it is still losing games.
ii) Carolina Hurricanes (2-8-3, no ranking): This is too good a team to be playing this badly. Or is it?
iii) Florida Panthers (4-7-1, no ranking): Playing more like tabby cats so far this season.
iv) Minnesota Wild (5-9, #2): Did Jacques Lemaire really mean that much to the team?
v) Anaheim Ducks (4-6-2, no ranking): Fowl so far this season (ha ha).
Dropped out: New York Islanders (#3), Montreal Canadiens (#4), Nashville Predators (#5)

9) The Initial "Top Five" and "Bottom Five" in the NBA this season:
Top Five
i) Boston Celtics (4-0): Already own a win in Cleveland to start the season.
ii) Los Angeles Lakers (2-1): I see the Lakers back in the Finals, but against who?
iii) Denver Nuggets (3-0): Improved considerably without Allen Iverson.
iv) Orlando Magic (3-0): Dwight Howard is already a monster, and he's still getting better.
v) San Antonio Spurs (2-1): I can't write off any team with Tim Duncan, Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili.
Bottom Five
i) New Jersey Nets (0-4): They should rename this team the Bricklayers.
ii) Los Angeles Clippers (1-4): And #1 overall pick Blake Griffin is out until January at least.
iii) New York Knicks (1-4): It'll take years to clean up Isiah Thomas' mess.
iv) Minnesota Timberwolves (1-3): It's a good thing that the Vikings are doing so well, because it allows Twin Cities residents to ignore the Wild and T-Wolves.
v) Memphis Grizzlies (1-3): Will this team EVER be good?

President Obama

It is official; Barack Obama was sworn in as the 44th President of the United States a few minutes after noon today. The Bush Administration is no more. I thought that President Obama's Inauguration Speech was masterful. To use a baseball cliche, he "hit a home run". Now, we will see if his actions match up with his soaring rhetoric.

I may dismay or anger some of my fellow conservatives, but I'm going to give him a chance, a chance that the left in this country NEVER gave President George W. Bush. Even now, now that President Bush is an "ex-President", the left's hatred for him endures, and if anything, is intensifying. I'm on Facebook and have about 260 "Facebook friends". A fair number of those people are on the left politically, and as I scroll through their status updates, I can't help but be struck by how mean-spirited and even vicious their comments are. Certainly, they are entitled to be gleeful that their candidate won the Presidency, but can't they exhibit SOME graciousness?

I know, I know, this is something that the left never showed during the eight years of the Bush 43 Administration--hey, for all you morons who kept screaming that "Bush is a fascist", blah, blah, blah, how do you explain that your candidate is now the President? And to those who loudly and insistently proclaim that President George W. Bush is "the worst President ever", I would only remind you that one James Earl Carter held the Presidency from 1977-1981. The angry comments about President Bush show historical ignorance that is simply unforgivable. As far left as my late mother was politically, she was a Nazi refugee, and she would have told the left in this country what REAL fascism was like.

In any event, and to come full circle, I truly do wish President Obama success. It's what would be best for all of us, like it or not. Time will tell over the next four years what kind of President he will be..................

MLK Day, 2009

Some random brain droppings on a holiday Monday (for some, not me, unfortunately)........

1) This is kind of a double-witching hour day. First of all, today is Martin Luther King Day, so I wish the best to those who are off today and have ability to observe the holiday. And, 24 hours from now, the nation will witness the inauguration of the first African-American (or biracial, if you prefer) President. Regardless of whether you voted for the man or not, it is an historic occasion. I've said it before, but it bears repeating. I didn't voted for Obama. I don't like his proposed policies. I think that he will be the most anti-Israel President this country has seen since Eisenhower in the 1950s (yes, even more than Bush 41). That said, it is in ALL of our best interests' if he succeeds and is a good President. I hope that he does well and that my worst expectations of him are not met.

2) The Israeli offensive in Gaza seems to be winding down, and let's see if Israel met its goals:
i) Goal #1: Stopping the rocket and missile attacks. Goal NOT met. Rockets are still falling on Israel, and Israel's unilateral decision to just stop its offensive. Hamas can claim that Israel accomplished nothing except to "kill civilians" (more about that below).
ii) Goal #2: Recover Gilad Shalit. He's still a prisoner. Goal NOT met.
iii) Win the PR War: Israel is being accused by such "unbiased" observers as Human Rights Watch of using phosphorous weapons on human targets (a charge refuted by the International Red Cross, hardly a friend of Israel). Israel has once again been accused of using "Disproportionate Force" (a bogus charge, but one that resonates with the left, which feels that Israel should not be permitted to defend itself anyway). Goal NOT met.
iv) Eliminate Hamas' leadership: Goal PARTIALLY met. Even the most partisan supporter of Hamas has to admit that Hamas took a punishing blow. But, even the most ardent supporter of Israel has to admit that it was anything but a fatal blow. Ismail Haniyeh still lives. Khlaled al Meshaal still lives. While Israel took out several of Hamas' leaders, the main ones are still around.
v) Avoid "Civilian Casualties": The MSM is full of reports of dead children, dead civilians, but let's look at this realistically. The death toll on the Palestinian side after the three week offensive by Israel is between (by most counts) 1000 and 1500, of who many are Hamas terrorists, and this despite the overwhelming military superiority of the IDF and Hamas' clear strategy of launching missiles, rockets and mortars from civilian areas such as schools, hospitals, and houses. What was Israel to do, not respond (lefties out there, don't bother to respond. I already know what your answer is)? So, surprisingly, I'm going to say: Goal MET.
vi) Restore Israel's deterrence factor. In order to this, Israel needed to make Hamas understand that the price to be paid for launching rockets at Israel was too high. It didn't come remotely close to doing that. Goal NOT met.
vii) Be able to declare "victory" and avoid a repeat of the Lebanon War in 2006: As indicated above, missiles were still being launched at Israel at least as of yesterday, and Hamas will certainly keep working on missiles that will eventually be able to reach Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. Israel needed to be able to achieve its goals, and I might give it credit on this had Israel just once actually told the world what those goals were. It didn't, and in a quirky war in which Hamas can declare victory merely by not losing, the public's read on what happened is going to be that Israel did not win. Goal NOT met.
So, the long and the short of this war is that while Israel fought differently than it did against Hezbollah in 2006, the end result is exactly the same, in my opinion. Israel did not restore the deterrence effect it lost back in the 1990s, and now the world sees a weakened and leaderless country which is ripe for the plucking. The way this war is ending, with Israel just doing the military equivalent of taking its ball and going home, can lead to no other impression (at least on my part).

3) The collective moaning in my area over yesterday's 32-25 loss by the Philadelphia Eagles in Arizona to the Cardinals (the Cardinals are going to the Super Bowl?????) is just beginning. After watching the game, it is pretty clear to me that the Cardinals were the better team yesterday. They were better prepared, especially in the first half, when the Cardinals raced out to a 24-6 halftime lead. The team showed some character in coming back to take a 25-24 lead, but when the chips were down and the defense needed to make a stop, it didn't. It gave up an 80-yard drive that took up half the fourth quarter. It had already blown a timeout earlier in the half (more of those same idiotic clock management issues that have plagued this team for years). So, with the team down by seven points, with a little less than three minutes left in the game, two timeouts (plus the two-minute warning) left, the ball was placed in the hands of the franchise quarterback, Donovan McNabb. He came up small--his passes were erratic and while the team got a couple of first downs, the drive stalled at midfield and the game was lost. Philadelphia has now played in five of the last eight NFC title games, and it has lost four of those games, with only the loss to the Rams in 2001 coming to a team that was arguably better than it.

4) In the AFC, the Pittsburgh Steelers showed the world how to get a job done. Their defense was fearsome and fearless, and they were deserving winners, 23-14, over the up-and-coming Baltimore Ravens. I don't think that the Pittsburgh can be stopped at this point, and in two weeks, the Steelers will collect their record sixth Super Bowl title. I don't even think that the game will be close. I can see a final score of 27-6, or something like that. As good as he is, Larry Fitzgerald will not get open against the Steelers' secondary the way he did yesterday against that of the Eagles. Kurt Warner will get snowed under by the Pittsburgh defensive line. The game has the potential to get ugly early, and the only chance I give Arizona is if it manages to generate some turnovers on defense.

Trashing Sarah Palin, part 2,398,050,572,375

The MSM is nothing if not relentless, so I guess that the latest attack on Sarah Palin shouldn't be a surprise. Now, it's going after her foreign policy experience, screeching that she has only negotiated with one country, Canada: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081001/ap_on_el_pr/palin_foreign_policy. Well, first of all, given that Canada is by far the largest trading partner for the United States, that's kind of a big deal. Second, I don't recall seeing similar attacks on Bill Clinton when he ran for the Presidency, and I am fairly certain that President Peanut Farmer's credentials weren't scrutinized this way in 1976. Third, she's NOT at the top of her party's Presidential ticket; John McCain is. Fourth, what is Barack Obama's experience in this area? Other than his "world tour" this past summer, it's not too impressive.

Nope, no bias at all, just keep moving along, nothing to see here................

Actions speak louder than words

Barack Obama claims to support Israel, but very simply, I don't trust him. Look at his foreign policy team, which originally included Samantha Power and Robert Malley, two prominent anti-Israel academics. They were forced to resign when their presence on the Obama team became a source of embarrassment to the Democratic Presidential candidate. Now, we have Zbigniew Brzezinski, a steady critic of Israel (and the former Secretary of State under President Peanut Farmer) who has recently spoken out in defense of the Walt & Mearsheimer screed claiming that those nefarious Jews were manipulating American foreign policy for their own ends: http://www.nysun.com/national/dershowitz-obama-should-repudiate-brzezinski/62439/. Funny how Brzezinski , who asserted that the Israeli military was engaging in actions that amounted to "killing hostages" in the Second Lebanon War in 2006, seems to have absolutely problem with the Saudis or other Arab states lobbying the U.S. government.

In any event, Senator Obama seems to have this unfortunate tendency of associating himself with people who don't like Israel too much (does the name Jeremiah Wright ring a bell to anyone?), so I really have to wonder how any supporter of Israel can at the same time support him?

Very well said

Somebody by the name of Joseph Epstein has a fascinating piece on what it is like to the that most incongruous of people, a Jewish Republican: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122143719228934301.html?mod=djemEditorialPage. He's right, too. Other than perhaps African Americans, no group is identified more with the Democratic Party than Jews, going back to the days of Franking Delano Roosevelt.

The thing is, that Democratic Party is not today's party, which has taken a fairly sharp turn to the left and which is now home to many people who don't hold what I would call "Traditional Jewish Interests". For example, Jews are high achievers, by and large, yet the Democrats stridently support quotas which have the effect, albeit unintended, of keeping them out of certain positions. Jews support Israel by an overwhelming majority, yet the Democratic Party is home to the President Peanut Farmer ("Israel is an apartheid state!") and the denizens of the Daily Kos and Moveon.org, who regularly and loudly villify Israel in the most vile language.

Those are but two examples, and I don't know that anyone will agree with either Mr. Epstein or myself, but it's interesting nonetheless.

Let the wackos unite!

Nothing brings people together like a national crisis...........or a conspiracy about a national crisis. When you factor in the Arab mentality, which blames everything and anything for problems it causes, you get nutcase theories like these: http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=Announcement8208. 9/11 was President Bush's fault (the Angry Left in this country would go along with that one, wouldn't it?). 9/11 was Israel's fault (always a popular position in the Muslim/Arab world). 9/11 was orchestrated by the CIA, etc., etc., etc.

Funny how Arabs see eeryone as being responsible for 9/11 except for those who actually caused and took "credit" for it.

Like he has a clue

Ron Reagan, Jr., has opined that his father, the late President, would not have backed a ticket on which Alaska Governor Sarah Palin was a candidate: http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=74558. Of course, there is no way to know that for sure, but something tells me that Junior has no clue what his father would have done. After all, Ron Reagan, Jr., is unquestionably a Democrat, and his view of things is slightly skewed, to say the least.

Seeing clearly

John Bolton, the one-time U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, is as astute an analyst of the world situation as there is. So, when he castigates the United States for its foreign policy pratfalls over the last two years or so, it is worth noting: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122066094200605825.html?mod=djemEditorialPage. He points to all of the locations where the United States has failed of late; North Korea, Georgia, Iran, Israel and the list goes on (and on and on.............).

The Bush 43 Administration's refusal to fight for him as the U.N. Ambassador to the United Nations is a mark of shame on this administration.

Point of interest: Who was the Senator who was most instrumental in keeping Mr. Bolton from being appointed as the permanent Ambassador? One Joseph Biden of Delaware.

Can't he ever shut up?

President Peanut Farmer has dispensed his unique form of wisdom once again, this time proclaiming that John McCain is "milking" his experience as a former prisoner of war: http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/28/former-president-carter-mccain-milking-pow-experience/. Well, gee, maybe it's because he actually has a past worth discussing, unlike YOU, Mr. ex-President.

Honestly, is there a more bitter politician out there? If you're a Democrat, you have to cringe every time he opens his mouth, because you KNOW with certainty that what he is saying is going to be either mean-spirited or offensive, or very likely both.

How can we miss you if you won't go away?

Jean Chretien, the disgraced, corrupt former Primer Minister of Canada, seems intent on traveling down the same road as President Peanut Farmer. Just as there WAS a tradition in the U.S. for ex-Presidents not to criticize the actions of sitting Presidents, until President Peanut Farmer breached that tradition, there was a similar policy in Canada for retired Prime Ministers to keep a low profile after they left office. So much for that policy. Chretien has trashed sitting Prime Minister Stephen Harper for the latter's refusal to attend the opening ceremonies of the Beijing Olympic Games, as well as for Canada's refusal to repatriate terrorist wannabe Omar Khadr: http://www.nationalpost.com/sports/beijing-games/story.html?id=732142#email. I guess that I shouldn't be surprised. Chretien has never met a communist he didn't like, and he has always been very sympathetic to the actions of terrorists.

Disgusted

The U.S. State Department has denied an Israeli request to purchase military hardware which would have allowed Israel to attack Iran's nuclear facilities: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1010938.html. A friend of mine e-mailed the article to me, and this set me off this morning, leading to my diatribe in the e-mail:

Is it official yet? Can we formally declare that the odious, Arabist U.S. State Department is now running all aspects of American foreign policy? I have been talking about this for several years now; about how the United States has been steadily distancing itself from Israel ("coincidentaly", that distancing began when Condoleeza Rice, a disciple of James "F--- the Jews" Baker, took over as Secretary of State). And this is what we're getting with a REPUBLICAN in the White House?!?! Can you imagine what it will be like if/when Obama takes over?

Here's what Bush 43 will have "accomplished" in terms of foreign policy in the last two or so years:

1) In connivance with the criminal Ehud Olmert, his government will have caused Israel to (for the first time in its history) lose a war--or at least appear to have lost a war, against Hezbollah;
2) Allowed Iran to make irreversible progress towards obtaining nuclear weapons;
3) Refused to do ANYTHING about Pakistan's not-so-subtle support of al Qaeda and the Taliban;
4) Exposed the U.S. as the most fragile of paper tigers during the Russian rape of Georgia;
5) Played footsy with North Korea as one of the world's most evil regimes spreads weapons and nuclear technology around the world to all of our enemies;
6) Demanded that Israel allow terrorists into the country, individuals that we won't even allow into the U.S.!
7) We've become the biggest funder of the corrupt terrorist entity known as the Palestinian Authority;
8) Encouraged the "Cedar Revolution" in Lebanon and then turned its back as Iranian/Syrian proxy Hezbollah took over the country.

Want some domestic failures? Sure, here's a whole bunch:

1) It took this so-called fiscal conservative SIX YEARS to veto his first bill. During that time, spending has ballooned to levels that would make even the most liberal of New Deal supporters blush;
2) He has allowed the U.S. Dollar, FORMERLY the pre-eminent international currency, to sink to unthinkable levels against virtually every other currency in the world, making it more expensive for Americans to buy everything. Thinki about this: The cost of oil began to spike six years ago, in 2002. When did the U.S. Dollar begin its freefall? I'll give you one guess as to the answer to that question;
3) He has absolutely refused to do ANYTHING about border security. If you're in bed with Ted "Open Borders" Kennedy, as Bush 43 is on the issue of illegal immigration, you KNOW that you're on the wrong side of the debate;
4) It took him until June of this year to finally propose lifting the ban on offshore drilling. Hmm. You have a far left figure in Nancy Pelosi running the show in the House. You COULD have proposed this in 2002, 2003, 2004, 200 or 2006, when there was a Republican majority in the House and as oil prices began their climb, but no, as usual you were reactive, not proactive. Good luck to you there, Dubya!
5) I'll come full circule here. Anyone checked out that national debt? It's kind of, well, HUGE. It's getting bigger, too. Again, I will remind one and all that he is SUPPOSED to be a fiscal conservative! Instead, he has been so profligate on spending that he has actually put the Democrats in a position where they can run to the right of the Republicans (!!) on the fiscal responsibility issue!

I could go on and on, but I'm too disgusted right now. Bah f---ing humbug...................

They won't give up, will they?

BDS sufferers are nothing if not remarkably persistent. Even though we are just 99 days away from the November election, they are STILL determined to impeach President Bush: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jul/26/committee-hears-about-trying-bush/. What in the world do they hope to accomplish with this? What could it possibly achieve? All that is being done is that even more government resources than normal are being wasted on a fool's errand, which is saying something.

Obama and President Peanut Farmer

Barack Obama and President Peanut Farmer are alike in more ways than just a left wing domestic view. As this Op-Ed from the Wall Street Journal shows, they also share a similar--if not identical--lack of experience with respect to foreign policy: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121685849692379323.html?mod=djemEditorialPage. The analsysis is more than a little stunning. Richard Allen, who wrote the piece, goes all the way back to Nixon and shows how every President, with the exception of Obama and Peanut Farmer, had at least some experience overseas. All of Obama's is coming from a couple of trips to Iraq and a whirlwind tour of the Middle East and Eurrope, which the MSM is attempting to turn into a triumphant wourld tour. Keep this in mind when you're pulling that lever in November.........

Tunneling through to the other side of the world

President Peanut Farmer hasn't hit the bottom yet. He just keeps digging. Meeting with Hamas wasn't enough. Now he's going to meet with Hezbollah: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/148198.

This vile, odious man is a disgrace. He was the worst President of our lifetime, and now despite his earnest and commendable work for Habitat for Humanity, he's going to make sure that he's known as the worst ex-President as well.............

Conspirary theorists of the world, unite!

Libya's Moammar Khaddafy is back in the news again, explaining that Barack Obama's words of support for Israel at the recent AIPAC conference stem from a fear on Obama's part that the Mossad will assassinate him...........just like it took out JFK: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/991948.html.

I wonder if he knows that JFK was very pro-Israel?

We better hope not

Time Magazine has a piece on the similarities between President Peanut Farmer and President-wannabe Barack Obama: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1810056,00.html. I still classify President Peanut Farmer as the worst President of our lifetime (and he's pretty much locked up the title "worst ex-President" forever), and if Obama is walking down the same road as a him, that's a very bad thing indeed...........

LBJ, friend of Israel

Call me historically ignorant, but I had no idea that former President Lyndon Baines Johnson was a friend of Israel: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/05/28/africa/ME-GEN-Israel-LBJ-Tapes.php. Judging by his comments, he was a better friend to the Jewish state than an of his successors in the White House (though his immediate predecessor, John F. Kennedy, reportedly also harboured strong positive sentiments towards Israel).

One the theme, LBJ was also personally involved in the saving of Jews during the Holocaust: http://lennybendavid.com/2008/05/lyndon-johnsons-historical-connection.html. I am sure that among the thousands of people protesting the Vietnam war there were many Jewish people, and I wonder if among those who chanted "Hey, hey, LBJ, how many babies did you kill today?", any of them knew about this?

President Peanut Farmer goes after Israel........AGAIN

The man's loathing for Israel really knows no end, does it? Apparently, his "Peace, not Apartheid" book wasn't enough. Now, he's breached the longstanding Presidential ban on discussing Israel's nuclear status by proclaiming that Israel has 150 nuclear weapons: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/987703.html,

The ramifications of this pronouncement are enormous. Undoubtedly, Iran will use this information to justify its pursuit of nuclear weapons. So, what President Peanut Farmer has done (perhaps intentionally, perhaps not) is to give the Iranian nuclear program a big boost.

I didn't think that it was possible that he could prove to be worse as an ex-President than he was as a President, but he is rapidly proving me wrong.

A defensive President Peanut Farmer.....

.........writes in the New York Times (where else?) about why he chose to speak with Hamas terrorists: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/28/opinion/28carter.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin. It's a stunning read, if for no other reason than he admits that the "promises" he obtained from Hamas' leadership are essentially valueless, and yet he believes them (or professes to believe them) nonetheless.

There is no depth to which this man will not sink.