About Me

Name: Always To The...
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

Enough Already

Why is Hon. John Conyers, Jr. (D) Michigan, 14th, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee coming to New York to visit the family of Sean Bell?  Why is the House Judiciary Committee going to start an investigation on this issue?  The Officers were found not guilty, now the Feds are going to see if civil rights were violated, and a civil suit has to go foward, also New York Police Dept. has administrative hearings, now Conyers wants hearings, why?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Perspective

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

WAKE UP JOHN

New DNC ad: McCain wants 100 years of war in Iraq

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Hey, John McCain: Have You Bothered Watching The Ad You Condemned Yet?; NYTimes Piles On

Michelle Malkin  •  April 26, 2008 06:02 AM

Did you know that John McCain lambasted the North Carolina GOP’s anti-Obama/Jeremiah Wright ad without having seen it?

Yes, this noxious little tidbit was tucked into an AP story three days ago when the controversy broke and has been little remarked upon since. When I mentioned this fact at the Pennsylvania Leadership Conference dinner last night, much of the audience gasped. Obviously, the word hasn’t gotten out there enough

Let me repeat that:

“I didn’t see it, and I hope that I don’t see it.”

He didn’t bother to watch the 41-second video before his campaign leaned on the NC GOP to withdraw it.

He doesn’t want to see it, lest he sully his delicate eyes.

Yet, he’s so indignantly sure “that there’s no place for that kind of campaigning.”

And then he has the gall to turn around and knock Obama’s elitism.

Congratulations, Sen. McCain: You’ve out-snobbed Snobama.

Yes, without having seen the ad or talked directly to the NC GOP officials, he’s absolutely convinced that he’s right about his knee-jerk assessment of their supposedly bigoted motives.

McCain Math is the same as MSM Math: Southern + Republican + video featuring radical leftists who happen to be black = RACISTRACISTRACISTRACISTDANGERWILLROBINSON!

Naturally, McCain’s New York Times editorial board endorsers at the NYTimes were happy to oblige and pile on with a Pavlovian editorial this morning calling the ad racist and divisive, “shameful and ugly.” Congratulations for giving your friends at the NYTimes the rope to hang North Carolina Republicans, Sen. McCain

How about you apologize first, Sen. McCain, for running to the liberal media to once again trash conservatives as racists for exposing hard truths about the hard Left?

“Calm down?”

Not bloody likely.

Following the cue of McCain and Howard Dean, there are now two TV stations who refuse to play the ad because it is “offensive.”

Always happy to show it here again (with a reminder that the NCGOP could use your financial support)

Meanwhile, McCain continues to give himself special dispensation to challengeBill Ayers. Obama’s relationship with Weather Underground radical

Because, you see, raising questions about a Radical of Color is “not appropriate and unhelpful,” but raising questions about a Radical of Pallor is McCain-tested and RNC-approved.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Gruesome 'Honor' Killing In Iraq


Iraqi girl falls in love with British soldier, meets predictable fate

Sgt Ali Jabbar of Basra police said: "Not much can be done when we have an 'honour killing'. You are in a Muslim society and women should live under religious laws."
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Read And Learn

Blogging the Qur’an: Sura 23, “The Believers”




“In Hell will they abide. The Fire will burn their faces, and they will therein grin, with their lips displaced.”

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Birds Gotta Fly, Fish Gotta Swim

Surprise: NYT pronounces NC GOP ad racist


. . . the logic here is the same as in that moronic LA Times op-ed declaring “elitist” to be the newest racial slur. Any personal attack on Obama from the right — and that includes Hillary Clinton, even though she’s but a hair’s breadth further towards the center than he is — will be spun by his apologists as motivated by racism. It’s a totally disingenuous, totally irresistible way to render damaging criticism of him illegitimate; in that sense, it goes hand in hand with his weaselly nonsense about everything that he doesn’t want to talk about constituting a “distraction.” Which, of course, is why conservatives are tearing their hair out over McCain’s squishiness about the ad: He’s ceding this point to the left, declaring any challenge to Obama’s basic judgment in his personal dealings to be some sort of ad hominem. Someone should ask him whether he
considers the ad racist. I’m almost afraid to know.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Someone Pass The Smelling Salts

LA Times praises the Straight Talk Express?


The Democrats have another reason to worry about California. Not only does the Los Angeles Times editorial board go out of their way to praise John McCain’s political courage, they scold both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for their shameless pandering. I know it’s snowing in Minnesota today, but did Hell freeze over as well?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (5) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Best Regulator Of Economic Activity And Source Of Knowledge Is Free Competition

"Mortgage Crisis," shouts The New York Times. The Times has used the term "subprime crisis" at least 11 times. Not in opinion columns -- in news stories.

Sure, some lenders are skittish while things play out. Some investment banks and brokerage houses are sitting on shaky, mortgage-backed securities. But why call that a "crisis"?

There's been a loss of jobs in the last two months, but that comes after years of strong job creation -- 25 million net jobs in the last 15 years. At 5.1 percent, unemployment is low by historical standards.

And are we really experiencing a mortgage-default "crisis"? No. The Mortgage Bankers Association's 2007 fourth-quarter survey reports that foreclosures came to 2.04 percent of all mortgages. Many of those were speculators seeking flip profits rather than homeowners losing a dream house.

During the quarter, only 0.83 percent of homes entered the foreclosure process. It may get worse -- in March, "foreclosure filings, default notices, auction sale notices and bank repossessions rose 5 percent," Reuters reports. But let's keep things in perspective: Ninety-eight percent of borrowers are not in foreclosure. Only a small percentage of them are even late in payments.

Politicians love a "crisis." McCain, Clinton and Barack Obama think that the government should bail out homeowners who can't pay their mortgages. When they say the government should do this, they mean the taxpayers, including those who are paying their mortgages. They also think the government should regulate the lending and investment industries further.

Because "crisis" justifies making big government bigger.

It's why we now have a global warming "crisis" and in previous years we had "crises" over avian flu, the Y2K threat to computers, imaginary cancer spikes caused by pesticides, killer bees flying up from Mexico and uncontrolled population growth leading to a "Population Bomb" that will bring "riots and mass starvation" by the year 2000.



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Lost In Translation

Caving to Muslim pressure groups, the Bush administration has banned the term "jihadist" to define the enemy. Islamic terrorists will now be known as "violent extremists."

Our war on radical Islam has been hamstrung by political correctness from the start. First, we couldn't call the campaign to strike back at al-Qaida a "crusade" because Muslims found it historically offensive.

Then we couldn't define the enemy as "Islamic terrorists" because it insulted Islam — even though it accurately described the Muslims committing murder and mayhem in the name of Islam.

To appease critics, we narrowed the terminology, confining it to the jihadist element within Islam. And so officials in recent years have frequently referred to "jihad" or "jihadists" in public.

Only now they can't describe terrorists as "jihadists," either, because Muslim leaders complain that it, too, gives Islam a bad name. But jihad, or holy war, is a central tenet of the faith. In fact, jihad is often referred to as the "sixth pillar of Islam."

Even "mujahedeen," or Islamic freedom fighter, is a no-no in the new watered-down Washington lexicon. And "Islamofascism" is definitely out.

The Homeland Security report, titled "Terminology to Define the Terrorists: Recommendations from American Muslims," does not say which Muslims made the recommendations.



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A Green Revolution

Today's headlines are filled with Americans expressing their fears of food shortages and frustration with spiraling grocery prices. As part of the solution, it's time to give genetically modified crops a try.

There's much resistance to overcome, however. In the fall of 2006, Friends of the Earth publicly asked governments in the hungry African countries of Ghana and Sierra Leone to recall American food aid that contained genetically modified rice.

Four years earlier, when southern Africa was tormented by famine, the U.S. offered 540,000 tons of genetically modified grain.

Though the World Health Organization estimated that nearly 14 million Africans, including 2.3 million children under 5, were at risk of starvation, leaders in the region rejected the food.

One, Zambian President Levy Mwanawasa, called it "poison."

In this nation, according to the Biotechnology Industry Organization, corn production increased by 33% from 1996, the first year a biotech variety was commercially planted, to 2007; soybean yields increased during that same time by 16%.

Americans daily eat 1 billion servings of food containing genetically modified ingredients. About 60% of food found in grocery stores is made from engineered crops. The number of acres sown with biotech plants has passed 280 million in 23 countries by 12 million farmers — 90% of whom are resource-poor farmers in developing nations, says the Biotechnology Industry Organization.

Yet not a single death or sickness can be blamed on biotech foods.




Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous123456789101920Next »