Folks, if you enjoy reading RWN, how about checking out a few of our advertisers? They're for the most part conservatives trying to get message out or capitalists trying to make their business work and they're worthy of your support. So worthy, that I'm sure you'd at least be willing to check out a few of these links below.
Now I know, some of you read these sort of appeals and go, "FAH on these websites! I will not click on them!!!" Well, that's certainly your choice **cough cough*** put down Chomsky's latest book and click on the link commie ***cough cough***, your prerogative as a consumer ***cough cough*** only a French "Deanie Baby" wouldn't click on every link ***cough cough***, your decision ***cough cough*** you empty-headed animal, food trough wiper. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries if don't visit these websites ***cough cough***...
So make sure to check out at least some of my advertisers. Since they supported a conservative website like RWN, shouldn't conservatives give them a little support back by taking a look at their websites?
Last month, RWN drew 187,338 daily uniques & 324,922 pageviews and now you can put your website in front of all those readers. Main page ads, text ads, and button ads are all available for March (you can see the details here) and RWN has some of cheapest advertising rates on the net. Why not give it a shot?
Car-Jackers Insists He Has Never Even Played 'Grand Theft Auto - Vice City' By Karl Ring
Los Angeles, CA - A local man, arrested Sunday on suspicion of a carjacking that started in the South Central section of Los Angeles and ended in Pasadena, claims that he has never even played "Grand Theft Auto: Vice City."
The suspect, 22-year-old Ruben Alejandro, allegedly pulled the owner from the vehicle at gunpoint before leading police on a high speed pursuit for more than three hours. Los Angeles District Attorney Dan Hill said that the evidence against both Alejandro and the video game are overwhelming and is considering pursuing action against the manufacturer of Sony Playstation and developer Rockstar Games.
"We've seen this game," Hill said. "We've done extensive investigation on this game and the weapons [Alejandro] used and the pedestrians he mercilessly ran over, clearly mirror those depicted in the video game."
Alejandro, however, asserts that his alleged crime was motivated purely by greed, desperation and a crippling addiction to crack cocaine.
"I was trying to get away, that's all," Alejandro said during his bail hearing. "I can't afford no gaudy Playstation. That's why I'm out robbing people. I even had to pawn my Commodore when my girl got pregnant."
Despite Alejandro's assertions of his innocence, a number of witnesses have come forward to support the charges. Edward Jackson of Watts was at a stoplight next to the car when he saw the carjacking and noticed Alejandro carrying several Grand Theft Auto-type weapons and blaring music similar to the ones from the game.
"For god's sake, he had a katana and a chainsaw. He just grabbed that poor lady and yanked her right out the car," Jackson said. "Then, when I heard the 80's music blaring from the stereo, that was the clincher."
Still, Alejandro maintains that the similarities between the crime and the game are purely coincidental. "I'm not interested in playing expensive video games. I'm interested in smoking crack. Finding crack, buying crack and smoking crack. Crashing into cars and killing cops is just an added bonus."
Added Alejandro, "I gotta admit, there's nothing like playing Tetris on crack. And that game don't cost no fifty bucks."
If you enjoyed this satire by Karl Ring, you can read more of his work at Bob From Accounting (some humor articles are offensive and use obscene language)
When I posted the results of the Right-Of-Center Bloggers Select The Dinner Guests From Hell poll, I neglected to post my own selections so I decided to do it now. You cannot imagine how much I'd dislike having to sit down and talk to any of these people for a few hours...
Rosanne Barr
Pat Buchanan
Robert Byrd
Noam Chomsky
Wesley Clark
Robert Fisk
Larry Flynt
Jane Fonda
Al Franken
Jesse Jackson
Michael Jackson
Terry McAuliffe
Nelson Mandela
Michael Moore
Mark Morford
Ingrid Newkirk
Ted Rall
Arundhati Roi
Barbra Streisand
Helen Thomas
It has been snowing here in Charlotte now for roughly 36 hours straight. Because of this lame blizzard....stop laughing you Northerners, it's like a blizzard to us...I had to put off going on vacation this week-end. On the other hand, even though the snow is almost up to Patton's chin, he has a blast when I take him outside...
Mush boy, mush!!!
For me, the snow is an inconvenience, but for you, it's lucky. I say that because I might as well put out the Rumsfeld quotes later tonight instead of on Tuesday. So assuming the power holds out and I make it back alive from getting videos to watch, you'll be getting the best of Rummy's quotes later tonight on RWN...
Why States Rights Don't Currently Matter When It Comes To Gay Marriage
One thing you'll often hear from advocates of gay marriage and even utopian conservatives is that we should let the states make the decision about gay marriages, not the Federal government. I'm not surprised to hear some conservatives make that argument, but it is a rather extraordinary argument to hear from lefties who over the years have consistently pushed to override states rights and who have even mocked the concept as racist. But in any case, states rights are largely irrelevant at the present time when it comes to this issue. I say that because there's a dirty little secret that most gay marriage advocates don't want you to know about.
You see today, there is not a single state in the union where gay marriage can win at the ballot box. Even in states like Massachusetts and California, the voters do not approve of gay marriage.
So how can gay marriage become the law of the land? Well historically, how has the left proceeded to implement its agenda when the voters don't want it? That's right, with activist judges. That's what's happening in Massachusetts and it's why Gavin Newsome can hand out documents no more legal than monopoly money and call them marriage certificates without being censured by the courts.
But what's probably going to happen sometime within the next couple of years in Massachusetts, California, or in some other state, is that activist judges are going to overrule the legislature, overrule the voters, and make gay marriage legal in that state. Then someone in a state that has signed on to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is going to demand that their state allow gay marriage because of the full faith and credit clause in the Constitution. Then that request is going to be denied because of DOMA.
At that point, a court case, or more likely, multiple court cases, are going to start working their way up the food chain. Then one of them is going to get all the way to the Supreme Court which up to this point has not ruled on DOMA. Then I think it's highly like that DOMA is going to be ruled unconstitutional because it contradicts the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution. Then once the SCOTUS rules against DOMA, gay marriages will be allowed in every state even though the voters of every state disapprove.
This is not some fanciful scenario, it is in all likelihood what's going to happen. That's why we need a Constitutional Amendment and cannot just leave this issue to the states.
Because I believe that protecting marriage is so absolutely essential to the continued success of our country, I support a Constitutional Amendment that defines marriage as being between a man and a woman. But if that can't get through Congress, and Constitutional Amendments are difficult to get approved under the best of circumstances, I would support a fall back Amendment.
That would be an Amendment to the full faith and credit clause to insure that the legislators of each state, not the courts, would make the decision on gay marriage and that their rulings would not impact other states. I think that kind of Amendment would have a much better chance of being passed because it would expose anyone who opposed it as zealots who want activist judges to impose their agenda on the rest of the nation.
But whatever we do, everyone should understand as it stands now, either the Federal Government or the SCOTUS is going to end up being the final arbiter of this issue, not the states.
"FASHION CAN BE DEADLY: According to Reuters this week, over 12,000 people were taken to hospital in 2002 after slipping over on 'fashionable wood floors', four times as many as in 1998. (No figures are available for the number of people injured by unfashionable wood floors). It is clear that terrorist operatives have infiltrated fashionable flooring suppliers and are engineering the floors as weapons of minor destruction. The risk thus posed to vulnerable yuppies who are innocently renovating their homes is enormous. The government swiftly announced a new public education campaign, warning of the risk replacing nasty carpet with trendy floorboards." -- Check out the Pyxis Review for more
Near the end of his latest column (which I'd highly recommend that you read), Larry Kudlow notes the following,
"Modern Democrats love jobs but can't stand the businesses that create them. They also claim to want prosperity, but don't want anyone to get rich should prosperity come about."
That brings a pertinent question to mind. Aside from ladling out pork to local businesses, what policies do the Democrats support that actually help the economy or create jobs?
Strangling businesses with red tape and higher taxes unquestionably increases expenses for businesses, harms the economy, and costs jobs. Protectionism saves jobs in some industries, but almost inevitably leads to larger job loss in other fields. Unions makes businesses much less competitive on the global market. Environmental extremists & out of control trial lawyers, both backed to the hilt by Democrats, have caused large increases in the cost of doing businesses. Also, you have to consider that the Democrats obsession with punishing successful people via the tax code has led to a decrease in investment and has decreased the motivation of some of America's highest achievers.
So again I have to ask; what policies do the Democrats support that actually help the economy or create jobs?
A 10 Year Olds Second Hand Insult Is Sexual Harassment?
In Sacramento, it's apparently never too early for the political correctness fanatics to start indoctrinating the kids...
"The parents of a 10-year-old boy suspended from a public school for sexual harassment are shocked and angry that a playground outburst by their son has been given such a distressing and politically charged label.
Insisting that the first-year principal at Theodore Judah Elementary School overreacted and used poor judgment, they say they are appealing the suspension and want the "ridiculous" punishment stricken from the boy's record.
They also believe the Sacramento City Unified School District should revamp a sexual harassment policy that treats children as young as 9 the same as 12th-graders.
"I'm just very upset about the whole thing," said Romola Wilcox, 42, the boy's mother. "I know he said something that was wrong, but the category they put it into, 'sexual harassment,' is extreme."
According to the "notice of suspension" signed by Principal Marilee Bellotti, the fifth-grader made a crude remark about a girl's chest Feb. 5. The boy was required to stay home the following day. The suspension document does not describe the girl's reaction to the comment or how it came to the attention of the principal.
....Bellotti called sexual harassment at the K-6 school in east Sacramento an "occasional occurrence," though the punishment of the boy was the first such suspension she has issued.
..."It's unbelievable that you have this policy out there for sexual harassment for kids who don't even understand what sex is," said Dave Blagsvedt, 41, the child's father. "So what do I have to do, include sexual harassment in my birds-and-the-bees talk? It's come this far, from Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill into the workplace and now it's made it down to the schoolyard."
...Here's the account according to the boy's parents: The 10-year-old made the remark to a male friend on school grounds. The friend then ran over and repeated it to the girl. The incident occurred four days after the controversial Super Bowl halftime performance during which pop singer Janet Jackson exposed her breast. It was also a week after the boy attended a sex education class.
....For now, the boy is apparently coping with the punishment and wants to move on, according to his mother, though that may not be so easy. He turns 11 today, and one friend has already said he is no longer allowed to attend the birthday party."
Here's a conversation that should be happening right now in Sacramento...
Superintendent X: So I understand you suspended a 10 year kid for sexual harassment after he made "crude remark" to a friend about a classmate's chest.
Principal Marilee Bellotti: Absolutely!
Superintendent X: Well, I have a question for you...
Principal Marilee Bellotti: Sure, what is it?
Superintendent X: Are you some sort of moron? What's wrong with you?
Principal Marilee Bellotti: Huh?
Superintendent X: 10 year olds make insensitive comments about each other all the time. They always have and they always will. You don't just arbitrarily call it "sexual harassment" and kick the kid out of school...
Principal Marilee Bellotti: But I thought...
Superintendent X: No, you didn't think, that's how you got into this situation. And obviously we weren't thinking when we gave you this job either or we would have never put an ideologue who apparently understands so little about children in charge of an elementary school.
Principal Marilee Bellotti: You can't talk that way to me, I'm a principal!
Superintendent X: You were a principal...YOU'RE FIRED...well, actually suspended with pay for a couple of years while we fight with teacher's union about you and that teacher who started coming to class drunk every day after he got tenure.
All I can add to that is "bring on the school vouchers"! The sooner the average parent has a real choice about which school is going to be educating their kids, the sooner this sort of nonsense will start to become a thing of the past.
Canada always seemed to be too inconsequential to be an enemy, but I sent my crack research staff to find out what they can about Canada to see for sure if our neighbor to the north can be trusted.
FUN FACTS ABOUT CANADA
* Canada was originally populated by peoples loyal to Britain and dumb people who just got lost.
* Canada is still technically owned by England and has to dance for them when commanded.
* That happens usually three times a year.
* The border between U.S. and Canada is the longest unprotected border in the world. There are plans to mine it, set up video cameras all along it, and not tell Canada for a new Fox special called When Americans Are B@stards.
* It is rumored Canada has its own military. Their most powerful weapon is the telephone with which they can call America and say, "Help! We're being invaded, eh!"
* Canadians are almost as genetically similar to humans as the chimpanzee.
* Was originally called Cana, but, since everyone there said, "I live in Cana, duuuuh," the name Canada eventually stuck.
* For the same reasons, it will eventually be known as Canadada.
* Their national symbol is the most evil of leafs, the Maple Leaf, a.k.a. Satan's Palm.
* In a fight between Aquaman and a maple leaf... actually, a maple leaf is even too lame for Aquaman. Our national symbol, the bald eagle, would whup Aquaman's @ss, though.
* Canadians pretend to be peaceful, but more Canadians are murdered in Canada every year than any other country.
* Canada modeled their currency after ours just to annoy us when we accidentally get useless Canadian trinkets in change instead of hard American currency.
* Canada has a picture of a queen on their money to show their contempt for democracy.
* A large minority of Canadians speak French, and they boss around the rest of the Canadians. Bossed around by French-speaking people - that's so pathetic I can't even imagine it.
* Canadians think they are superior to Americans. The rational basis for this is unknown.
* Canada holds up a sham democracy to try and be accepted by the civilized world, but in fact all real decisions are made by their moose overlord.
* It's a myth that the normal way a Canadian says "about" is so that it rhymes with "boot". It just happens that a lot of Canadians are retarded.
* The northern area of Canada is technically God-forsaken. If anyone there has a prayer, he or she first has to mail it to an American priest for God to hear it.
* Most of the prayers involve hockey and are promptly ignored.
* If a Canadian ever tries to express an opinion about America, hit him on the head with a rolled up newspaper while shouting, "No!" You have to catch them in the act or they'll never learn.
* Canada has gone its entire history without doing anything of note, something almost unheard of for a country its size.
* Canada has become an entry point for terrorist which has caused Canada's boring index to decrease slightly.
* Canada has no known industry. It's believed all their income comes from sales of syrup and hockey tickets.
* Canadians have universal healthcare. The way they afford it is making people wait so long that most die before seeing a doctor.
* Canadians are completely harmless, but don't assume someone who is wearing a hockey mask is Canadian. The people at Crystal Lake made that mistake and, well, it was messy.
* Canadians don't have any nuclear missiles because we decided they are not mature enough for them. Maybe when they’re older.
* Canadians have national gun registration. While solving no crime, the excessive amount of money the initiative has taken has foiled Canada's evil schemes to make mutant snow monkeys.
* If ever attacked by a Canadian... well... beat the crap out of him. What? You can't take a Canadian? What kind of pansy are you?
* This list would be classified as a hate crime in Canada.
* Actually, most Canadians who read this list would just say, "Eh?"
If you enjoyed this satire from Frank J., you can read more of his work at IMAO.
"Whether it is in the United States or in mainland Europe, written constitutions have one great weakness. That is that they contain the potential to have judges take decisions which should properly be made by Democratically elected politicians."
Today, that "great weakness" is being exploited by gay advocates and judicial activists who are attempting to radically alter the definition of marriage. Just as Justice Scalia predicted in his dissenting opinion in Lawrence v. Texas, courts in Massachusetts and a mayor in San Francisco with the tacit approval of liberal judges, are defying the will of the voters and imposing gay marriage by fiat.
One could make the case that per the First Amendment, the government has absolutely no right to fundamentally alter the definition of a religious ceremony to begin with. But since that argument has little chance of succeeding in an age where the government outstripping the powers given to it by the Constitution is the rule, not the exception, I think it's worth pointing out that state legislatures & voters, not imperious judges or a mayor acting like the head of a banana republic, should be the ones to make this sort of momentous decision. (Cont)
For The Left, Your Skin Color Determines Your Politics
Since I touched on how the left treats minorities who dare to stray from the liberal line in my last post, I thought it might be a good time to show you this cartoon that I ran across a while back at the The Black Commentator...
See Condi USED to be black. But the moment she became identified with conservatism, she became white in their eyes. That's because when it comes to minorities in general and blacks in particular, the left acts as if political views are transmitted genetically. If Condi Rice (who is pro-Affirmative Action despite what the cartoon implies) sounded like Ted Kennedy, reflexively opposed everything Republicans support, and referred to Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton as her "leader," her blackness would never be in question. But since she's going her own way and not following the Democratic Party line, she's an "oreo," a "race traitor," and someone who deserves to be racially vilified.
Condi, Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, Armstrong Williams, Larry Elder, Jesse Lee Peterson, Walter Williams, Alan Keyes, Deroy Murdock, J.C. Watts and other black conservatives are a threat to the left. That's because they became popular and well liked in the conservative movement based on merit, not based on race. Their success is a continuing threat to the left, because it exposes the smears that liberals regularly hurl at conservatives on race for the lies that they are. That's why the left is willing to go to such lengths to try to discredit people like Condi & Colin Powell. Because the example that they provide is dangerous to the liberal stranglehold on the black vote and therefore to the left's political agenda....
"U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown verbally attacked a top Bush administration official during a briefing on the Haiti crisis Wednesday, calling the President's policy on the beleaguered nation "racist" and his representatives "a bunch of white men."
Her outburst was directed at Assistant Secretary of State Roger Noriega during a closed-door meeting on Capitol Hill. Noriega, a Mexican-American, is the State Department's top official for Latin America.
"I think it was an emotional response of her frustration with the administration," said David Simon, a spokesman for the Jacksonville Democrat. He noted that Brown, who is black, is "very passionate about Haiti."
Brown sat directly across the table from Noriega and yelled into a microphone. Her comments sent a hush over the hourlong meeting, which was attended by about 30 people, including several members of Congress and Bush administration officials.
Noriega later told Brown: "As a Mexican-American, I deeply resent being called a racist and branded a white man," according to three participants.
Brown then told him "you all look alike to me," the participants said.
During the meeting, Brown criticized the administration's response to the escalating violence in Haiti, where rebels opposing President Jean-Bertrand Aristide's government have seized control of large parts of the country.
After her comments about white men, Noriega said he would "relay that to (Secretary of State) Colin Powell and (national security adviser) Condoleezza Rice the next time I run into them," participants said. Powell and Rice are black."
Isn't it fascinating that minorities who don't tow the left-wing line often seem to end up on the end of nasty, race based attacks these days? Don't look for a lot of left-wingers to condemn Brown for her moronic comments because quite frankly, most liberals are not terribly bothered by racist attacks on conservative minorities.
Of course, they'll deny that, but everybody reading this page, liberal or conservative, knows that if the situation were reversed and a Republican told a "Mexican-American" that "you all look alike to me," he'd catch holy hell not only from the left, but from the right. On the other hand, in cases like this one, left-wingers are willing to write off this sort of attack as merely an "emotional response" that we should just shrug our shoulders and forget about.
This isn't the first time this has happened, not by a long shot, nor will it be the last. As long as there are minorities out there who have the courage to espouse conservative beliefs instead of whatever the standard line that the Democratic party demands that minorities adhere to based on the color of their skin, these sort of contemptuous smears will continue.
Gary Trudeau & The Redundant National Guard Witness
The latest Democrat to try to beat the flayed, desiccated, husk of the horse that was the AWOL charges against George Bush is Gary Trudeau of Doonesbury fame.
Trudeau notes a dental exam that Bush had in Jan of 1973 at Dannelly Air National and says,
"So don't let the smear artists define the president. If you personally witnessed George W. Bush reporting for drills at Dannelly Air National Guard Base between the months of May and November of 1972 we want to hear about it. Help Mr. Bush put this partisan assault on his character behind him, so he can focus on more serious issues like jobs, the deficit and the coming civil war in Iraq. Just contact us below with the salient details. If we think you're a possible winner, we'll get back to you pronto. Good luck to all contestants!"
When I first heard about this, I assumed that this had to be old because there's no way Trudeau could be ignorant enough of the facts to post this today. But no, it's still up on his website.
This puzzles me not only because the Bush administration has already released documents proving that he met his service requirements in 1972, but because John Calhoun has already publicly come forward and said that he served with Bush in Alabama. Will Trudeau pay out if Calhoun contacts him or would he weasel out of it?
If the mainstream media wasn't so biased against conservatives they would have treated this story like the joke it was from day 1. After all, the military never declared Bush to be a deserter or AWOL. But instead, we've been treated to constantly moving goal posts. Originally when this story broke big at the Boston Globe back in 2000, the claim was that Bush didn't serve for 17 months. Then the New York Times revealed that Bush actually served in 9 of those 17 months that the Globe missed. Fast forward to 2004 and the issue comes up again. First the media demanded more details and evidence that Bush served and it was provided. Then they demanded Bush release his records and provide witnesses. Boom, they got it. Now the left is STILL desperately trying to find some way to keep this story alive. Give it up already...
M*A*S*H* Fans Eager For New Korean War By Bob From Accounting
Seoul, South Korea - While the Bush Administration continues to condemn North Korea for reactivating its nuclear reactors, expelling U.N. inspectors, and pulling out of a 1994 global non-proliferation treaty, a large contingent of American television viewers are excited about the possibility of a new Korean conflict —and perhaps a MASH spinoff.
Fans of MASH, the Emmy Award-winning TV show set at the 4077th Mobile Army Surgical Hospital during an 11 year run ending in 1983, are glued to the television --and not just at 10:30 weeknights on TV Land. They watch CNN, hoping Pyongyang's nuclear ambitions and continued tensions with the U.S. and South Korea will possibly bring Hawkeye Pierce, BJ Hunnicutt, Hot Lips Hoolihan and the rest of the gang together for a warm, but relevant jaunt back to the front lines of the war-battered Korean peninsula.
"This is way more exciting then when Rhoda and Mary were reported hanging out again on the CBS lot," said 28-year-old accounts payable supervisor Lance Lisanti. "It would be so cool if all those doctors and Radar and everyone got to go back there and do all that funny stuff again, like having a liquor still in their tent. That killed me."
35-year-old fan Dawn Brenner couldn't agree more, admitting she has wished for years she could see whatever became of all those funny surgeons and staff of the 4077th.
"My first question of course would be if they actually remained friends all these years-- even though Hawkeye lives in Crabapple Cove, while BJ lives way out West in California," Brenner said. "Plus I wonder if maybe a more mature Hawkeye would ever let his true feelings be known for Margaret. Maybe in the new show Hawkeye's about to propose but then he takes some shrapnel to the chest and it looks like he's going to die. Then Major Winchester proposes to her instead! That would be awesome!"
While Pyongyang accuses the Bush Administration of acts of aggression, including labeling North Korea as part of the infamous "Axis of Evil," South Korea and the United States are actively searching for a diplomatic solution to the standoff.
Meanwhile MASH fan club president Harvey Yang is spearheading an effort to send thousands of letters to the show's creators, begging them to go back overseas and show everyone all the horrors of war in a completely new TV show -- but with all the regulars.
"Maybe they could have a dream sequence show where Hawkeye asks Colonel Blake for advice even though he's dead and Frank Burns is awarded the Nobel Peace Prize or something weird like that, and then they wake up all freaked out and Sidney Freedman comes for a visit," Yang said. "Dr. Freedman rocks."
Yang continued, "and maybe have Klinger 's son by his marriage to Soon-Lee join the North Korean Army and she doesn't know what to do so Klinger has a talk with him and then is forced to shoot him even though Father Mulcahy accidentally gets shot when he tries to intervene. "This new show would be so great!"
President Bush has said repeatedly he plans to keeps all his options open, but still believes the standoff between the two nations can be resolved diplomatically.
Although he too would like to see Hawkeye and Hot Lips get together.
If you enjoyed this satire by Bob From Accounting, you can read more of their work here (some humor articles are offensive and use obscene language)
I am adamantly opposed to gay marriage and I'll be going into detail about my position on the subject in an editorial that'll be released on Thursday. But today, I want to talk about the politics of the Gay Marriage Amendment that Bush is now publicly supporting.
There are more than a few earnest, knowledgable, rightward leaning bloggers, who'll tell you that the President is making a political mistake to back a Constitutional Amendment that preserves the sanctity of marriage. They usually base that contention on polls that show the country is roughly divided on the topic of a Constitutional Amendment, anecdotal evidence that comes from left leaning/Libertarian blogs & emails, and posts from the relatively small number of prominent conservatives who oppose an Amendment (for the moment at least).
However, as I said back in July of 2003, this is a good issue for W. to take on. But, how can it be if the polls are split on the issue? Well, the polls ARE NOT split on gay marriage. The voters are against it by a wide margin. In most polls I've seen on the subject lately, Americans come down against gay marriage almost 2 to 1. Furthermore, not only do the voters who are against gay marriage tend to be older and more likely to vote, I feel confident that on the whole, they are much more passionate about the issue than those who favor gay marriage. That's why even in perhaps the most liberal state in the nation, California, "61% of (the) voters...supported Proposition 22, a ballot initiative in 2000 that said the state would recognize marriage only between a man and a woman as valid." I can tell you with confidence that I don't believe that there is a single state where Bush will be hurt more than he is helped by strongly coming out against gay marriage.
Furthermore, now that we have two clear examples, in Massachusetts and San Francisco, of radical gay activists &/or liberal judges running roughshod over the will of the voters, I think the case for a Constitutional Amendment just got much, much stronger. And if the choice is between having gay marriage imposed on states by activist judges or having the Federal govt block it via Constitutional Amendment, and it is, then the latter is a better option and much more in line with what the American people want.
Last but not least, this issue is going to energize the GOP base while weakening Kerry.
The overwhelming majority of Republicans oppose gay marriage and social conservatives and Evangelicals in particular find this to be a hot button issue. So if Bush needed a way to help fire up the base without alienating a significant number of moderates, this is it.
On the other hand, as per usual, Kerry is stuck trying to play to both sides of the issue. He says he's against gay marriage and believes "marriage is between a man and a woman," but he doesn't back a Constitutional Amendment and is criticizing Bush for going that way. That's going to be a tough position to maintain long-term because the overwhelming majority of people who are militantly pro-gay marriage are on the left and Ralph Nader, who Kerry has to worry about siphoning off his voters, supports gay marriage. Yet Kerry doesn't want to alienate the majority of voters who are opposed to gay marriage. So Kerry will need to rabidly attack the people who are fighting against gay marriage to please his base even as he portrays himself as against gay marriage to the general populace. Trying to thread that needle is going to be very difficult for Kerry and I suspect he is going to end up looking very conflicted, evasive, and hypocritical, as he attempts to pull it off.
In any case, I applaud President Bush for doing the right thing and I certainly hope and expect for him to reap the political benefits of doing so.
I received an email from RWN reader "HezbollahNext" that clued me into something interesting about the 2000 elections that somehow escaped my notice...
"Buchanan cost Bush Wisconsin New Mexico Oregon and Iowa cause his vote totals in those states where higher then the win margin for Gore in those states. Everyone talks about Nader and Florida and New Hampshire, but never what Buchanan cost Bush."
Of course, I went back and verified the numbers and here's what I found...
Bush lost by 5708 votes in Wisconsin (11) and Buchanan received 11,471 votes.
Bush lost by 366 votes in New Mexico (5) and Buchanan received 1,392 votes.
Bush lost by 6765 votes in Oregon (7) and Buchanan received 7,063 votes.
Bush lost by 4144 votes in Iowa (7) and Buchanan received 5,731 votes.
So if Buchanan wouldn't have run in 2000, it's at least POSSIBLE that Bush would have reeled in another 30 electoral votes. Even if you decide that Oregon is too close to call, that's still 23 electoral votes.
Here's another little interesting fact about those states -- normally, they have leaned HEAVILY towards the Democrats -- i.e., they're states that most people would take for granted that the Democrats are going to win. In fact, if you look at each Presidential election from 1988 on, those states went Democratic 15 times out of 16.
But...and didn't you just know there had to be a "but"...don't get too excited. Nader pulled in a lot more votes than Buchanan in all those states and I don't expect him to be anywhere near as strong this time. But still...if Kerry were to actually write off the South and try to go with a "win the Gore states + 1 or 2 strategy," even the loss of a couple of those states could be quite significant. It may be nothing, but it's worth keeping an eye on...
Bush Backs Traditional Marriage -- AndrewSullivan.com Hardest Hit By Scott Ott
President George Bush today announced his support for a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a monogamous heterosexual relationship, and experts predict that Andrewsullivan.com will be hardest hit.
Visitor traffic on the weblog, which is written by an openly-Republican homosexual and professing Roman Catholic, has already spiked to more than 10,000 visitors per hour.
"Not only will AndrewSullivan.com be hard hit," said an unnamed expert in constitutional PR, "But Mr. Sullivan's PayPal donation link will take a beating as liberals and homosexuals race to combat the amendment by funding Andrew's promotional efforts."
Mr. Sullivan could not be reached for comment since he is appearing on several dozen news and talk shows.
If you enjoyed this satire by Scott Ott, you can read more of his work at Scrappleface.
I am working on putting together a list of the best quotes from Donald Rumsfeld. If you have any quotes or even exchanges between Rummy and reporters that you'd like to see included, please add them in the comments section of this thread. If you happen to have a URL that goes along with the quote, that would be helpful as well since I verify all quotes before they're posted. Thanks in advance for your suggestions.
Right-Of-Center Bloggers Select The Dinner Guests From Hell
Right Wing News emailed more than a 160 right-of-center bloggers and asked them to send us a list of who they considered to be the "Dinner Guests From Hell" and representatives from 53 blogs responded.
All bloggers were allowed to make anywhere from 1-20 selections. Rank was determined simply by the number of votes received. The bloggers were also told that their selections had to be currently living people from anywhere in the world that they'd really dislike having to sit down with for a long 1 on 1 conversation over dinner. Furthermore, no dictators, terrorists, serial killers, or mass murderers could be selected.
A coalition of advocacy groups called yesterday for the (New York) city Department of Education to set up a vast translation network for the non-English-speaking parents of city schoolchildren.
The groups, led by the New York Immigration Coalition and Advocates for Children, also released the findings of a survey indicating that many immigrant parents are often kept in the dark about messages and school meetings critical to their children's future.
"The New York City school system has systematically failed to provide translation and interpretation services to parents who require these services," the report reads. "Despite numerous federal, state and local laws mandating translation and interpretation for parents with limited English proficiency, the New York City Department of Education has yet to adopt policies and procedures to address these issues."
At a news conference in Manhattan, several parents, speaking through translators, described their ordeals.
Ana Cartagena, a mother of eight from Puerto Rico who lives in Bushwick, Brooklyn, said she was once told by a principal that if she wanted to know what was going on in her children's school, she should learn to speak English."
Oh the horrors of John Ashcroft's Amerikkka! A woman who lives in America is being told to learn to speak English. Can the concentration camps be far behind? But, I digress, let's go back to this tragic tale of people who are too lazy/incompetent to learn the native language of the nation they call their home...
"Paul Rose, a spokesman for the Department of Education, said that many parent coordinators were bilingual and that language skills were taken into account when they were selected.
He said that parents who call the mayor's 311 hotline with school-related questions can get answers in other languages and that messages sent to parents from the chancellor are translated into eight languages: Spanish, Chinese, Russian, Korean, Urdu, Arabic, Haitian Creole and Bengali."
Bengali? Urdu? Hey, I've got a crazy suggestion...so crazy that it just might work! I suggest that we send all the papers home in English and we let the parents learn the language. If it's too tough for them to figure out, then maybe they can go out and meet some people who actually speak English and have them translate it for them. It'll be fun and as an added bonus, it'll help them to assimilate. And trust me, if you're moving here from almost anywhere they speak Arabic or Haitian Creole, the faster you shake off the backwards habits you learned in your home country and start getting Americanized, the better. Sure that's harsh, but it's also true.
In all seriousness, an article like this should raise all kinds of obvious questions. Like, why are there large groups of people living in the United States who don't have even a basic command of the English language? Why in the world should we allow anyone to stay in the US or worse yet, become a US citizen if they can't even speak English?
Now I know some of you think that's "mean" to say, but have you really thought about the implications of this? What kind of job can you get in America if you only speak Russian or Spanish? You're going to be picking lettuce, washing dishes, or doing some other kind of manual labor. It doesn't matter if you were a doctor or a rocket scientist in your native country, if you can't speak English, your options are limited here.
Furthermore, how can you assimilate into our culture if you can't speak English? Do we really want a nation filled with "Russiatowns" and "Little Haitis" where all these immigrants go so they can hang out with other people from the "mother country"? Do you really think that's good for America? We need immigrants who want to come here, assimilate, and live the American Dream. To do that, you need to learn the language and the last thing we should be doing as a society is making it easier on people who haven't even bothered to learn English.
Democratic Underground Post Of The Day: Nader ='s Stalin?
Question: How can you tell that the Democrats are really, really angry at Ralph Nader for running again?
Answer: You find a poll at the Democratic Underground that reads "Does Nader=Stalin" and here are the results....
Do you know what would REALLY make the Dems mad? Since Nader is running as an Independent, that means that the Green party could run someone like Cynthia McKinney =D. Imagine both of them splitting off lefty votes =D
...Ok, that's enough imagining because I don't want to get anybody's hopes up. I don't expect Nader to have nearly as much of an impact thistime not only because people now clearly understand that he cost Gore the election, but because he probably won't even make it on the ballots of every state. But, as long as Nader and the Green Party candidate offset the wasted votes that are going to go the Libertarian party and Reform Party, I'm happy.
I'm sure that some people would tell you that this bumper sticker I found on Free Republic isn't fair to John Kerry....
I disagree. George Bush understands that we're fighting a war on terrorism, is willing to go after terrorist groups of global reach and the nations that support them, and is Reaganesque in his determination to build up our military.
On the other hand, John Kerry thinks fighting terrorism is a law enforcement matter, is apparently not willing to go after terrorist groups of global reach and the nations that support them unless the whole world is on board with us (which isn't going to happen), and has frequently tried to weaken our military and intelligence services throughout his tenure in the Senate.
In short, George W. Bush is dead serious about fighting the war on terrorism and John F. Kerry is not. When the price of taking terrorism lightly could be another 9/11 or much, much, worse, which candidate would you rather have in office?
I got together last night with Mike LaSalle from Men's News Daily, Jon Henke from QandO, and James Joyner from Outside the Beltway to discuss the 2004 election. You can read the edited transcript of our chat by clicking here.
