Wednesday, April 25, 2007

MOYERS vs. O'REILLY!

Bill O'reilly has the goods on Bill Moyers. He caught Moyers saying something disparaging about O'reilly and Fox News, and then denying he said it. He showed the denial first, of course. I have been a Moyers critic for quite some time, so I enjoyed seeing this report. Still, it almost smacked of a petty stunt, but I wasn't the target of Moyers' words, either. I think O'reilly should stick to investigating Moyers' connections with PBS, and his financial ties to George Soros, which he mentioned in the Factor segment.

However, there is no doubt that Moyers' credibility is shot. I have two previous posts on him, which illustrate my thoughts about him:

LIKE IT IS: MOYERS' HYPOCRISY

"HE DOTH PROTEST TOO MUCH": IS BILL MOYERS BEING PERSECUTED?

For the record, I have two posts that differ with O'Reilly, as well:

LEAVWORLD SLAMS O'REILLY: A FIRST!

MAC JOHNSON VS. O'REILLY ON GAS PRICES!

Can Moyers continue to go around "characterizing" (slandering) O'Reilly as being bought by the Bush administration? How justified is O'Reilly for hitting back, and "catching" him lying? To add insult to injury, O'Reilly commented that, at 72, Moyers may not remember saying those things, when he was interviewed in "gotcha" style by a "Factor" producer.

I'm glad to see Moyers get the spotlight treatment; he's due for some of his own medecine. More to come on this, for sure. While researching this post, I found this story on Fox News.com:

MOYERS RETURNS TO PBS WITH WEEKLY SHOW

Here it comes.

Saturday, April 21, 2007

Cindy Adams on Bradley, Dean, and Obama: The New York Magazine Curse!

A tidbit from Cindy Adams:

ELECTIONS ago, New York magazine crowned Bill Bradley as the new hot candidate. He must be in the Witness Protection system because nobody's heard from him since. A while back New York magazine crowned Howard Dean as the new hot candidate. He never got out of the starting gate. New York magazine just crowned Barack Obama as the new hot candidate. Poor Barack Obama.

(Note to Sen. Bradley: Send Cindy a signed copy of your book, "The New American Story," and remind her that you are still around.)

Cindy Adams is a legendary gossip columnist, known for her "talking to you" NY slang style of writing (which I detested, until I adopted it, on occasasion). She is far from political, but she knows politics. Her take on this is not to be taken lightly, though it will be, by most "political observers" and "commentators."

The political truth is that Obama doesn't have a chance, just as Dean and Bradley didn't. It's not "the curse of New York magazine" that's haunting Obama. It's the political machine, which gave Gore and Kerry the past two nominations. Hillary is the "machine" candidate, period, and will get the nomination.

When that happens, I'll adapt one of Cindy's classic lines: "Leavitt told you so, kiddies." If it doesn't, I'll be wrong, but I'll still bet that Cindy is right, and Obama's not the nominee. Of course, everyone is still in play, and it's early. If Obama becomes the Dem nominee, I'll be as happy as if Dean had been nominated in '04. I just see him as a long shot, however "new" and "hot" he is, right now.

A final note: Cindy knows that Obama raised more funds than Hillary in the last quarter, after the final numbers were broken down. That's why she used the phrase "poor Barack Obama." She's being sarcastic, in typical NY style.

What do you think about the "New York" magazine curse? Is Obama another popular, but destined for failure "alternative" presidential candidate? Will Bill Bradley endorse him? (Dean can't, as head of the DNC, of course.) Is there really a "machine" behind Hillary? I'd especially like to hear Sen. Bradley's take on this post, if he would be so kind.

This was originally written for, and posted on Gather.com. Bill Bradley is a VIP at Gather (or more precisely, on the board of directors), and has a group there, promoting his new book.

Friday, April 13, 2007

Mother Nature's Thumb In Al Gore's Eye, AGAIN!

I caught the ending of "The Day After Tomorrow" on TV tonight, and I remembered that Al Gore used the release date of that movie as a PR opportunity (Gore Warns of 'Climate Emergency' While Promoting Disaster Film ...), about a year before he put out his own oscar-winning "documentary" movie, An Inconvenient Truth.

The day that Gore made his speech, the temperature in NYC was at a record cold, in over the last half-century. It fit in with the preposterous scenario of the movie, which was "global warming's effect will be global cooling, at least over the USA." Perhaps that is why he wasn't more widely ridiculed at the time.

Gore's newest effort to radicalize the left wing troops in defense of the climate is getting stiffer factual resistance than one cold day in NYC. It looks as if April is coming in with winter's vengance, and making up for the warm winter weather we (in NYC) got in January. Snow from Texas to NY, and temperatures to match.

I wouldn't be surprised if "global" temperatures were actually decreasing, depending on which areas one uses to guesstimate the "global" temperature.

I can say this much: it was a rare thing, but my mother said that it snowed in NYC on Apr. 21st, 1962 (the day before Easter, that year); the day I was born. Here we are, almost 45 years later, and it's still cold enough for snow, which was falling, but not sticking, on Easter 2007 (Apr. 8th).

I can imagine Al's response: "Global fluctuations in temperature are a sign of instability caused by our production of greenhouse gasses." I have news for him, and his disciples: global fluctuations in temperature are normal. Steady temperatures over any number of years are abnormal. Man's influence on temperatures are marginal, as far as they can be determined.

Mother Nature is saying this. The question is whether we choose to hear it. AlGore clearly doesn't, preferring to serve his "greenie" (or is it "greedy?") masters.

Parents Can Stop ACLU Lawsuit Against Wilson Co. Schools

Crosssposted from the fine people at STOP THE ACLU, written by lobo in OK.

April 11, 2007 10:08 PM
NewsChannel5.com


A federal judge has granted permission to a group of parents to try to stop a lawsuit filed by the ACLU.

The suit claims Wilson County schools violated constitutional separation of church and state.
It alleges Lakeview Elementary school in Mt. Juliet and the Wilson County school board endorsed and promoted religious activities on campus that led to constitutional violations.


Very short article, lacking much information, but here is an Oct.2006 piece from Alain's Newsletter that gives a bit more detail.

Old Hickory, TN –
U.S. Senate candidate Bob Corker today said the Tennessee chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is woefully wrong to have filed what he called a "frivolous liberal lawsuit" against the Wilson County School District alleging a morning prayer endorsed by Lakeview Elementary School officials is a constitutional violation of church-state separation.

"When the President declared September 14, 2001 — just two days after the attacks of 9-11 — a National Day of Prayer, no one sued him for crossing some arbitrary line between church and state," said Corker. "We just bowed our heads and prayed. When a school in Wilson County or anywhere in our country allows children to do the same on the National Day of Prayer, or at a gathering at the flagpole, the courts ought to stay out of the way."

Corker said he supports the efforts of Mt. Juliet Commissioner Glen Linthicum, who said it was time for the community to take a stand against the ACLU lawsuit recently filed against the Wilson County School District. Linthicum co-sponsored a resolution unanimously approved last Monday night by the Mt. Juliet City Commission that encourages the elementary school and the Wilson School District to fight for their rights to religious expression.

"Like many parents across our state, I pray for my family everyday," Corker stated. "We should never force anyone to believe a certain faith or pray a certain way," Corker continued, "but if a school decides to set aside some time to allow children who wish to pray to do so, we ought to support that school and community. That is precisely what it means to protect our freedom of religious expression — and I will fight to do just that in the U.S. Senate if elected."


It appears that the ACLU has set it's sights on this school district...The ACLU Targets Christians


This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay at Jay@stoptheaclu.com or Gribbit at GribbitR@gmail.com. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 240 blogs already on-board.

Saturday, April 07, 2007

Speaker Pelosi as "Diplomat?"

Speaker Pelosi says that Syria is "willing to talk" to Israel. Didn't she also say that Israel was "ready to talk" to Syria, when she was there? What the hell is she talking about? She mentioned nothing about the "preconditions" to these talks: Israel will not consider any "right of return" for Palestinians, and Syria will not accept Israel "occupying" Palestinian land, including East Jerusalem.

These "stumbling blocks" to the "peace process," as well as many others, are well known. Did she ask President Asad to crack down on anti-semitism, or allow entry to "common" people who have traveled to Israel first? No average traveller or tourist could follow her path, because Syria won't let anyone who's been to Israel into their country, unless they have "diplomatic" priveleges, which Speaker Pelosi enjoys. There is also the question of how so many Al Queda operatives move through Syria, with either fake, or no documentation.

I haven't heard her speak of these, or any specific points from her meeting with Asad. It looks like a bad political ploy, meeting with a man who is enabling the slaughter of US and Iraqi troops, and civillians. She tried to cover her ass by going to Israel first, and then meeting with the son of the late Lebanese PM Rafik Hariri. I wonder if he had a message for her to deliver to President Asad, who is being investigated as a suspect in Hariri's bombing murder. Something like "You'll get yours, just as Saddam did, MF."

Of course, I wouldn't expect Pelosi to deliver that message. She's probably hoping that she will get credit for helping the British hostages get released, and she will get credit, from the far left. These would be the same people who believed Rosie O'Donnel's proclamation that the British Marines' kidnapping was set up by the US, to lead us into a "Gulf of Tonkin"-type resolution, declaring war on Iran.

What purpose did she serve on this trip? She was an easy target for the NY Post, and people like me. She was also a beacon for the Iraq surrender group (ISG) followers. If anything, she showed the futility of talking with the Syrian government. She may be trying to claim some role in any success that the current military "surge" may yield, as well.

It's too late for me to have faith in the Speaker's "good intentions." What she is doing is exactly what the left accuses Bush of, which is "cowboy diplomacy." The only difference is that this heffer's "off the ranch," so to speak. Someone needs to reign her in, before she stirs up more trouble. Then again, I might have to watch her self-destruct, hoping she won't destroy the nation at the same time.