Scholarly Indeed

I meant to post about this story earlier this week but never got to it. One of the coolest things that I've seen come out of high school students in a LONG time.

I would have loved to see the president's face when he was handed this letter:

As members of the presidential scholars class of 2007, we have been told that we represent the best and the brightest of our nation. Therefore, we believe that we have a responsibility to voice our convictions.

We do not want America to represent torture. We urge you to do all in your power to stop violations of the human rights of detainees, to cease illegal renditions, and to apply the Geneva Conventions to all detainees, including those designated enemy combatants.

*ZING!*

Wow. How do you recover from that?

Have a photo-op with the students and speak about the re-authorization of the No Child Left Behind Act.

Duh.

------
Photo: J. Scott Applewhite/AP

Read More

Deja Vu

Ugh. Haven't I seen/heard this before?

I'm serious here kids: the Democrats need to hop to it and get this DONE. Gee-Dub is going to veto just about anything that crosses his desk - so they need to break out the big guns.

With people like Dick Lugar and George Voinovich voicing their dissent from the Bush administration's Iraq policy, the jobs of the Democratic leaders in congress may get easier.

But Defense Secretary Robert Gates noted legislation from Congress called for progress reports on Iraq in July and September and suggested those should determine any decisions.

... and I do somewhat agree with that. HOWEVER, I worry that when the official reporting comes in July and September - one of two things will happen: 1) Bush will say, "Oh sure, things are going badly, but we need to give it another six months." OR 2) the president will simply lie to the American people and say that "things are going swimmingly with the Surge, but we need to keep all of our troops in Iraq to continue the work." Or, he may come up with some unholy incarnation of both options.

Even though I'm not a political strategist, or a military strategist, I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest what needs to happen to end the war in Iraq.

The United States Congress needs to, SOMEHOW, take war powers away from the executive branch. If that means reneging on the Congressional War Authorization - so be it. If that means holding a vote of no-confidence in the president's execution and leadership in this war - write it up.

You can threaten to take away funding all you want - but that's not going to work. Your opponents will always say that you "aren't supporting our troops" or that you are "aiding the enemy".

Thoughts?

------
Photo: Molly Riley/REUTERS

Read More

Naughty, Naughty Pajama Pundit

I found out that my blog is the equivalent of a soft-core porn-flick.



Apparently, because the words "abortion", "gay", "hell", "dick" and "sex" appear throughout my blog numerous times each, if my blog were a movie it would get an NC-17 rating.

Very interesting. You can check out the site here.

Read More

Drop It Like It's Hot

The Bush administration - and the Department of Justice - must be on fire.

Yet another staffer in the DOJ announced her resignation yesterday. She gave no reason for leaving. But, I'm guessing that having Alberto Gee running around making everyone recite the talking points just in case they are called before the Senate Judiciary committee is a pretty good reason to float that resume around in the corporate world.

Good luck Ms. Brand. Good luck.

Read More

The Tone Of Campaigning

The Wife is out of town for the weekend - which leaves me here alone with the kids. SO, I've decided that when they are sleeping (napping or at night), I will make use of the "alone time" and blog it up.

First I'm going to talk some smack on Barack.

Don't get me wrong - I like the guy. Out of all of the candidates that I've seen speak (which I think is all of the them), he seems to be the most genuine. The real deal, so to speak.

But now I read this. Wait for it....

You're joking, right? F**kin' ringtones? Really? Yes?

C'MON!

SO, apparently the Obama campaign wants to reach out to the younger, cell-phone-obsessed generation of voters. You know the type: sitting behind me in the movie theater, clearly having a quasi-juvenile conversation on the phone, talking louder and louder so they can hear their own voice over the argument on the big screen (I went to see The Break Up with my wife a while ago, and this really happened). I mean, do you really want to be in a corporate staff meeting and hear a "vote for Obama" ringtone, while watching some younger staffer scramble to silence their phone before the Boss fires their ass? No. Me either. Although that would be funny...

BUT, I will concede to the Obama camp that they are definitely thinking outside of the proverbial box. Ringtones would not have been at the top of my list - but upon further inspection, I found that when you sign up for a free campaign ringtone, you are automatically signed up to receive campaign updates and announcements via text messaging. Not a bad idea.

However, we all know what happens with the younger demographics during election season: they talk, and talk about voting and being politically active - and then only 30% (or so) show up on election day.

Eh. I'm too tired/hungover/lazy/busy/uninformed/stupid to go and vote today. I'll vote in the next election.

Oh well, at least they will have something cool to go on their iPhone...

Read More

Corpus Courtin'

YAY habeas corpus! ... well, hopefully.

Now, a clear message to the President:

The closure of the detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay would represent a positive first step toward restoring our international reputation as the leader of democracy and individual rights.

SCORE!

Read More

Impeaching Dick

Wow. Support is gaining quickly.

Watch out Dick. They're coming for you...

------
Photo: Ron Edmunds/AP

Read More

I've Got Issues

I can't believe that it has taken this long for the Church to come out and say something about Rudy's pro-choice stance. It seems like they were all too quick to pile on John Kerry back in the '04 elections.

That said, here's what peeves me about the whole abortion debate: in my opinion, it's a non-issue in politics right now.

If you were to gather 100 people in a room and ask them what the biggest issue in the 2008 presidential race is, I would bet my ass that 100 people would respond, "the war in Iraq" (or possibly "the war on terror"). Next in line would be the economy. The probably the environment. Maybe our dependence on foreign oil with no alternative fuel ideas. Then immigration. Then possibly foreign policy issues (like how the rest of the world thinks that we - Americans - are total dicks).

My guess is that you would have a small minority - maybe 15-20% of the group - who feel that abortion would even be in the top TEN important issues facing the presidential candidates.

You see, this is why I got interested in the Unity08 Campaign. On the issues:

Unity08 divides issues facing the country into two categories: Crucial Issues — on which America’s future safety and welfare depend; and Important Issues — which, while vital to some, will not, in our judgment, determine the fate or future of the United States.

In our opinion, Crucial Issues include: Global terrorism, our national debt, our dependence on foreign oil, the emergence of India and China as strategic competitors and/or allies, nuclear proliferation, global climate change, the corruption of Washington’s lobbying system, the education of our young, the health care of all, and the disappearance of the American Dream for so many of our people.

By contrast, we consider gun control, abortion and gay marriage important issues, worthy of debate and discussion in a free society, but not issues that should dominate or even crowd our national agenda.

Damn right.

The problem is that the "issues" have been hijacked by the uber-conservative religious right wing of the Republican party. Instead of having open discussions and debates about things that directly affect "America's future safety and welfare", presidential candidates - in BOTH parties - are forced to talk about friggin' evolution, abortion, gay rights, gun control, Scooter Libby, etc.

Now, don't get me wrong - I'm a HUGE believer in debating the social issues (gay rights, abortion, stem cell research, gun control, etc.). They are very important to discuss on the national level. I'm just arguing that... well... WE ARE STUCK IN A WAR RIGHT NOW (actually THREE wars). Nobody seems to be doing shit about that. I'd love to be able to fix all of the "big picture" items like terrorism and global climate change. Then we could talk about gay rights and stem cell research until the cows come home.

But here's a news flash: Stem cells and drag-queens are not going to shoot at my buddy Cliff - who is in an Apache attack helicopter somewhere near Tikrit right now.

Research the "crucial" issues. Make an informed decision when electing leaders - based not on your religious beliefs, but based on who you believe will be the best person to lead.

Read More

Missed It

Missed the Democratic debate last night. Dammit.

Oh well. At least there will be plenty more opportunities for me to see them pander.

------
Photo: Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP

Read More

More On Ann (Or Is It 'Moron Ann'?)

She appears to be losing it:

(I totally TiVo'd this interview!)

And then there's David Kuo's take (and take 2) on Coulter. Whether you are Christian or not, he makes sense.

Finally, the Rude Pundit weighs in (note: not for the faint-hearted).

Read More

Why Ann Coulter Should Be Skull-F**ked

Okay, okay.... I know that title may appear to be a little harsh.

Just last night, the Wife and I were talking about the negatives of the use of explicative language in my blog. I do like to keep some kind of civilized discourse in my quasi-sensical rants. However, when a true douchebag like Ann Coulter comes along - all bets are off.

The money shot:

I don't know where to start. First, if you haven't seen this, then you must be living under a rock - or are not nearly as obsessed with political mumbo-jumbo as I am. Which is not necessarily a bad thing.

You have to understand that Ann Coulter is a media-whore, plain and simple. In fact, I would argue that she is THE Media-Whore-In-Chief. Am I the only one that notices that her repugnance seems to increase just as she is releasing a new book? Seriously, she's a calculated PR stunt - with blonde hair and bony legs.

But I digress...

"Coultergeist" (as my homie K.O. calls her) is known for spewing this bile - aiming it at "liberals" - and usually hides behind the thin veil of "humor" as an excuse. This sickens me - as I like to consider myself somewhat of a humorist.

Look I'm all for free speech and everything, but there comes a point - usually when you are saying that a 9/11 widow is enjoying her husband's death - that you have to put on the brakes and use some common sense:

These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzies. I have never seen people enjoying their husbands’ death so much. - Ann Coulter, Godless: The Church Of Liberalism

Unbelievable. Seriously, unbelievable.

So now she has been revving up the hate-machine once again as a pre-requisite for her book Godless coming out in paperback. She goes on Hardball with Chris Matthews and "debates" Elizabeth Edwards - not on policy or issues, but on the role of personal attacks on candidates in intelligent political debate.

Here's where it gets simply sad. As Elizabeth Edwards is making her point about the dumbing-down of political dialog due to personal attacks, Coulter continually changes the subject. First she tries to distract by pointing out that the Edwards campaign has been using Coulter's venomous diatribe as a fund raising ploy. Then, as Mrs. Edwards is describing the column in which Coulter suggests that John Edwards used his son's tragic death as a campaign stunt, Coulter again tries to change the subject and asks why Elizabeth is making the call instead of John.

Just sad. If she weren't such a massive ________, I might almost feel bad for her. (you fill in the blank - it's an interactive blog)

So, where does this leave us? Here are my thoughts - in random fashion.

1:: Stupid personal attacks should not see the light of day in true political dialog. Sure, one person may COMPLETELY disagree with another's political ideology or viewpoint, but this should not result in name-calling or ya-mama jokes. Ridiculous.

2:: Those few imbeciles who DO resort to Bill O'Reilly-like personal attacks, don't deserve a seat at the collective table of discussion. When these folks ARE allowed a place-setting, they distort the conversation and cloud the discussion of serious topics.

3:: If you want to have intelligent debate on the war in Iraq, health care, education, immigration or foreign policy - I'm in. But what good does it do to begin attacking a political or ideological rival based on something so trite. I'll give you an example - again from Coulter: for some strange reason, Ann Coulter finds it irresistible to refer to Barack Obama as "B. Hussein Obama". Now, granted, his middle name is indeed Hussein - but what good does it do to HIGHLIGHT that as his middle name? Unreal. It's his FRIGGIN' NAME... he can't do anything about that - even if he wanted to!

Bottom line: If you are out to sell a book, or just cause havoc in the media, do us all a favor and shut the hell up. I regularly watch The Daily Show and other book-plugging programs (FYI, the reason I'm reading Al Gore's The Assault On Reason is because I saw his interview with Jon Stewart and my interest was piqued), and I know that you don't have to act like a __________ to sell books.

So go ahead and skull-f**k Ann Coulter.



NOTE:: I know that I've resorted to name-calling in reference to those who disagree with my political and ideological views - that irony is not lost on me. HOWEVER, I would never stoop to this level with someone who is able to have a real political discussion. I cite Joe Scarborough as my example in this case: the guy is conservative, moreso than I, and yet he does not call people names and use personal attacks to further his ideology.

BAM!

Read More

I'm Weather-ly Challenged

Storms in the northeast yesterday. Knocked out power - and Internet service. Just got it back this morning (THANK GOD!). You don't realize just how "plugged-in" you are until you are forcibly unplugged. I suppose that is the 21st Century's version of "you don't know what you've got until it's gone". Sad really.

I'm back. I love the response that I've gotten from my "I'm A Bad Dad" column. Keep the comments coming Liz and "anonymous"!

Shout-out to Ron - you don't know how happy I am that I'm part of your daily read.

Nice.

So let's see... what's in the news? Ann Coulter is a douchebag (though I suppose that is not really news). Veep Cheney is completely insane, and becoming more and more scary with each new report. The White House is being issued subpoenas from Congress. High-profile and well respected Republicans are running away from the administrations Iraq War policy. And finally, Gee-Dub is facing a crisis in his own party over his support for the immigration bill that is currently going through congress.

So... much... to... say...

Read More

I'm A Bad Dad

What happened? I am out for a week and suddenly we are thrust back into the heady days of the Cleaver family?

What.
The.
Hell.

Apparently, because I do not provide for my family (that is to say that my wife goes to work and I stay home with the kids... and blog some too), I am not doing my fatherly duty. Observe the source of my ranting:

God intended a father to perform two primary functions in his responsibilities for his family: provision and protection.
...
God also designed that same physical strength in a man for the purpose of protecting one's family. In more crude times such protection was very physical and the threats were very real. Beastly predators both man and animal caused the father to take on the necessary skepticism, awareness, and wisdom that would serve as a bulwark, literally shielding his family from the horrors that awaited. With today's technology protecting one's family is easier, but no less important. Fathers can and should take all precaution necessary to know who their children are spending time with - online and in person, what curriculum the local school board is planning on teaching, and even as a general rule of thumb - something as simple as being the one to answer the door at night when an unannounced guests rings the bell.

Now, I can definitely get down with the protection part - as I would absolutely destroy anyone or anything that would cause harm to any member of my family. BUT, I would also argue that my wife would do the same - which contradicts the idea that only men are strong enough protect the family. Have you ever heard of adrenaline? Yeah. It gives the ability to kick ass to anyone - regardless of gender or position in the family.

But, my biggest beef with this column is the idea that men and women serve completely different purposes in the family. Granted, if a man is the breadwinner and the woman is the homemaker, these roles naturally complement each other. The same would be said of the converse. HOWEVER, I do not believe that these "roles" are preordained by God. If they are, then I am surely going to burn in hellfire for eternity.

Well, in all fairness, I may burn for other things too. But I digress...

What is so wrong with the idea that the woman could be the breadwinner and the man the homemaker? It occurs to me that Mr. McCullough thinks that anyone who has not "commit[ted] himself to being the breadwinning provider" for the family is a "slacker".

It is a moral and right thing for a man in his truest essence to commit himself to being the breadwinning provider for his home. Any man who seeks the hand of a woman in marriage who is not prepared for this responsibility should not be granted that honor. Because he is not yet truly a man. And women do themselves a tremendous disservice when they are willing to tie themselves down to such a slacker.

But what is even more disturbing to me is the idea that by tying the the person who is NOT the breadwinner (the homemaker) to the term "slacker" - i.e. I am a dad who stays at home, does not have a nine-to-five job, therefore I must be a "slacker" - insinuates that if a woman does not have a nine-to-five job, she too must be a "slacker".

You see, the major flaw in his "logic" is that his conclusions are drawn from his faith in God.

But there is another reason modern feminists reject a strong father today. It is rebellion against God - the ultimate father.

Feminists wish to subvert God's plan, order, and instruction in order to create a world that they see as the ultimate reality. A reality that is made in their own image. Scripture refers to that as idolatry.

Thusly feminists have gone to great lengths to show fathers as bumbling idiot boobs in pop culture. Some have gone to great lengths to insist that fathers are completely unnecessary to the future of this world. Some scientists have gone so far as to now attempt to eliminate the need for men all together.

Okay, first of all, I'd LOVE to see some proof of the feminist plot to transform the world into "a reality that is made in their own image." What does that mean anyway? Secondly, he is assuming that we are all Christians out here in the blogosphere. EHHH! Wrong. What does being a Christian - or a religious person in general - have to do with good parenting? Nada. Thirdly, could I see some examples of how "feminists have gone to great lengths to show fathers as bumbling idiot boobs in pop culture"? And for that matter, what is a "bumbling idiot boob"?

I would argue that this medical breakthrough that has Mr. McCullough's panties in a bunch is something in which lesbian couples (heaven forbid) might be interested. It is not to create a world without men. Someone needs to tell Ole' Kev that in the cable news business, they will use lines like that to grab your attention. This way, you will stay tuned throughout the commercial break to see what the story is. I'm guessing that after he slumped down in his chair and started opining about how men are great and the world would not be able to function without us, he did indeed stay tuned to see the story. It works.

Having made the joint decision with my wife some 19 months ago to assume the role of homemaker (although I've upgraded my title to "Director of Operations for the Pajama Household"), I feel that I'm completely qualified to tell you all that no slacker is fit to do this job. While my wife goes out into the workforce everyday (and I love her for it), I stay home and I cook meals, clean the house (as best I can) and most importantly - I chase two kids around all day. The only time that I get a break is during the p.m. naptime (which I then use to vent about things here).

I love what I do - and I would not hesitate to smack that smug jackass over at Townhall who claims that I'm a slacker.

Conclusions? The aforementioned jackass is simply that; a jackass. He is clearly afraid of progress, both in sex and in gender roles. If his faith and religion guide his life in the manner with which he speaks - I have no problem with that. However, it is ridonkulous rants like this that are widening the political polarization of America. For every quasi-intellectual moderate thinker like myself who reads McCullough's drivel, there are likely 10 right-wingers lined up to drink his brand of Kool-Aid. Scary indeed.

Oh, and he should stop referring to "feminists" in such a negative way. Feminism isn't about some outlandish plot to enslave men and take over the world - it's about the freedom to choose how to live your life.

Read More

Don't Call It A Comeback

Back from my vacation to the Jersey shore. T'was extremely relaxing for both the Wife and myself. Say what you will about New Jersey, but I love Ocean City. Great for families - or just couples. We were fortunate enough to "unload" our two kids for a week of R&R. However, I guess it's time to get back to work... while I watched a bit of cable news each morning (during coffee time, before our daily bike rides), I still have a TON of reading on which I must catch-up. If I don't post anymore today, it's because I'm still reading.

Good to be back - but I'd still love to be there:

Oh, and the white book on the corner of our beach blanket is The Assault On Reason by Al Gore. I'm still working on it (it reads like he speaks... dry and windy), but I must admit that so far Gore is raising some good points. I'll discuss further in a future post.

Read More

Beach Bound

I'm leaving tomorrow for a (much needed) vacation with the Wife. I won't be back until June 26th and I will not have any access to a computer or the web - so please forgive my extended absence.

I'll be sure to take lots of pictures of the Jersey shore for you all.

Read More

The Love Doctor

My love affair with Ron Paul continues.

Libertarianism. Word.

Read More

Pardon Me?

Now, I'm no candidate running for president of the United States. BUT, if I was, I would be UBER-pissed if one of my campaign legal advisers went public with a personal statement.

What the hell was this guy thinking? Let me see if I get this: Robert Bauer, Barack Obama's (D-IL) general counsel, wrote an article for the Huffington Post saying that he felt Lewis "Scooter" Libby should be pardoned? Yikes. Obama needs to distance himself from this - and quickly.

Or just fire him.

------
Photo: Charlie Neibergall/AP

Read More

Mitt Vs. Fact

The gloves are now officially off.

*DING DING*

Read More

Sick-O

Michael Moore summed up. I couldn't say it any better:

Deconstructing Michael Moore is difficult because his heart is usually in the right place, but his judgment and journalistic ethics are off on some other planet. Documentaries are journalism, not audio-visual polemics, and he has erased the line between them.

------
Photo: Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP

Read More

Scandalbeat: Libby

Nah nah naaah nah
Nah nah naaah nah
Hey hey heeey
Goood-bye

Conservatives have pressured President George W. Bush to pardon Libby before he serves any time in prison and Thursday's decision could increase that pressure. But a White House spokesman said the president is not going to intervene for now.

I don't think Gee-Dub will pardon Libby now.

------
Photo: Larry Downing/REUTERS

Read More

Scandalbeat: Gonzales

It looks like things are not getting any better for the attorney general.

I just share senator Patrick Leahy's (D-VT) hope that things will proceed with full-disclosure:

The last time an internal investigation at the Department of Justice got too close for comfort the White House shut it down.

Read More

Reid It And Weep

Look kids, I'm NO FAN of this war - I think that I've made that pretty clear. I think that it's also quite obvious that I've got no love for George W. Bush.

However, I think that when senator Harry Reid (D-NV) makes remarks that attack the leadership of the military - it's simply crossing the line. You don't have to agree with the George W. Bush to be a top commander in the miltiary - you just have to follow orders . I think that's exactly what General Petraeus has been doing. Calling him "incompetent" doesn't solve anything, it just pisses people off.

Harry, if you want to get some shit done - lobby your stick-in-the-mud colleagues who want to keep our troops in Iraq until the Second Coming. Do something.

Geez.

Read More

Dr. No... YES!

Great column about Ron Paul.

It is indeed a shame that Ron Paul's message is falling (for the most part) on deaf ears. There are so many in the conservative movement who don't want what Paul is selling: Peace. A non-interventionist view on foreign policy.

Wouldn't it be nice to bring our troops home and worry about America for a while? It's not that I want to isolate our great nation from the rest of the world - far from it. It's just that there are so many domestic issues that our country faces - it would be nice to be able to focus on education, health care, or one of the myriad of other issues with which so many Americans struggle.

------
Photo: AP

Read More

A Lot To Digest

A TWELVE-point-program? C'mon Rudy...

I'll admit that I'm no savvy political consultant, but logic tells me that if you are going to run for public office - especially POTUS - you should probably whittle your lengthy-bullet-pointed-plan down to three or four major ideas. Maybe five. Definitely not twelve.

Hell, in the press conference announcing his Big Plan, Rudy forgot one of his own priority points. You know that there is a problem when you can't even remember the twelve points in your twelve-point-program. The irony here is that the one that Rudy forgot (#4), is the point that discusses tax cuts and tax reform.

Yikes.


------
Photo: Josh Reynolds/AP

Read More

Archives

Overview

Welcome to ThePajamaPundit.com! Are you looking for something in particular? This is the place to start.

You can browse through the monthly archives, take a look through the various label categories or simply search the whole blog to find the posts which pique your interest.. If you have questions you can hit up the contact page and the Pajama Pundit will respond in short order.

---

Monthly Archive

2009: January | February March | April May | June July | August September | October November | December

2008: January | February March | April May | June July | August September | October November | December

2007: May | June July | August September | October November | December

---

Label Archive

Afghanistan
Al Qaeda
Alberto Gonzales
Barack Obama
Bill Clinton
Bill Richardson
Blog/Blogging
Cartoon
Congress
Debate
Democrat
Dick Cheney
Economy
Election 2008
Entertainment
Environment
Fox News
Funny Of The Week
Furious
Gasoline
George W. Bush
Happiness Is
Hillary Clinton
Homeland Security
Iran
Iraq
Joe Biden
Joe Scarborough
John Edwards
John McCain
Jon Stewart
Keith Olbermann

Mail Bag
Media
Mike Huckabee
Mitt Romney
Movies
Osama bin Laden
Personal
Political Advertising
Poll Smoking
Primary 2008
Quote
Race
Racism
Religion
Republican
Right Wingers
Ron Paul
Rudy Giuliani
Rush Limbaugh
Sarah Palin
Saturday Morning Cartoon
Scandal
Sexuality
SNL
Terrorism
The Daily Show
The Pajama Wife
Torture
Troop Support
Veepstakes
YouTube

---

Search further

Read More

Mier-ed In Scandal

Former White House counsel Harriet Miers and former White House political director Sara Taylor have been issued subpoenas to testify before congress.

I can't WAIT to hear their testimony... hopefully it tracks a little better than what Alberto Gonzales had to say.

Read More

Status Kuo

With Bush's idea of "compassionate conservatism" proven to be irrevocably destroyed, David Kuo makes a good point:

So what is next for the party of Lincoln? Perhaps "conscience conservatism"? "Compassion" is too squishy and amorphous a term. It doesn't actually mean very much - especially in these days where compassion can mean so many different things. "Conscience" may be the way to go...especially for conservatives. Conscience conservatism could provide a unifying conservative ethos - helping the poor, investing in Africa, fixing our schools (radically where needed), these aren't matters of compassion; they are matters of conscience.

Indeed.

Read More

Tier-ing Up

Most candidates inflate their standing when running for office. But in the case of Bill Richardson (D-NM), he really does appear to be gaining in the polls.

I love rooting for an underdog.


------
Photo: Jake Schoellkopf/ AP

Read More

Walk THIS Way

Talk this way.

In an interview in the New York Observer, Daryl McDaniels (DMC of Run-DMC, pictured on the right) says that he likes Hillary Clinton because "it's gangsta". More:

And did Mr. McDaniels have anything to say about Mrs. Clinton’s ongoing, highly public search for a campaign theme song?

“For Hillary Clinton,” he said, thinking aloud. “What’s a good campaign song?”

Raising Hell?

“No.”

Walk This Way?

“Uh-uh.”

Dude (Looks Like a Lady)?

“No. I got something. No. ‘King of Rock.’”

That’s the suggestion?

“Yes, sir. The reason why is because 'She cracks through walls, come through floors, cuts through ceilings and knocks down doors'. It’s time for change.”

Read More

Call Me Al

I smell a run for the presidency.



Or not.

------
Photo: Getty Images

Read More

A Lott Of Questions

Yesterday, during debate on the "no-confidence" vote on the floor of the Senate, Trent Lott (R-MS) said:

This is not the British Parliament, and I hope it never will become the British Parliament. Are we going to bring the president in here and have a question period like the prime minister has in Great Britain?

As David Schraub points out, this might not be a bad idea.

Granted, the thought of President Bush stepping foot outside of the Oval Office for more than a photo-op is pretty much a pipe dream. BUT, wouldn't it be nice if he sat down at a table in front of a Congressional panel and bared his soul to the American people?

A fella can dream, can't he?

Read More

Why I'll Never Vote For Hillary

Some call her calculated, some call her cold, and some - like my uber-conservative father - even call her a criminal.

I simply call her a Clinton.

I'll never vote for Hillary Clinton. Oh sure, if somebody amended the Constitution of the United States to allow Gee-Dub to run for a third-term as president - I might consider voting for Hillary (if she was the Democratic nominee). BUT, that ain't gonna happen.

I'm tired of the dynastic political climate that this country is experiencing. What do I mean? Observe:

In 1980, Ronald Wilson Reagan won the presidency with George H.W. Bush as his veep. The Reagan/Bush administration served for eight years. Then in 1988, George H.W. Bush set out to win the White House as the ticket headliner. And he did. He served a lackluster four-year term (does anyone remember "Read my lips... no new taxes"?) until he was defeated by William Jefferson Clinton in 1992. Bill Clinton served eight roller-coaster years as president until 2000, when George H.W. Bush's son, Geoge W. Bush, decided to "take up the torch" and run as the "compassionate conservative". Rrrright. I think we all know how that is working out.

Now that Gee-Dub is winding down his second term as president (thank GOD), there is a familiar family name in the Democratic field of presidential candidates. Hillary Clinton is, after all, a Clinton.

So, understand that for nearly thirty years, there has been a Bush or a Clinton in the White House. If Hillary were to win in 2008, that would make 20 years that a Bush or a Clinton was PRESIDENT (not to mention if she were to win a second term). Ugh.

Who is next, Jenna and Barbara Bush on a dual ticket? Yikes.

"Vote for us - weeeeeee!!!"

What is frightening to me is the idea that the presidency of our country, arguably the most powerful job in the world, is being passed back-and-forth between families like so many well-packed joints (of which BOTH families should be quite familiar with - even if they "didn't inhale"). We're talking about a distribution of power that is not... well... distributed very well. Combine that idea with the fact that George W. Bush has given the Executive Branch unprecedented power in our government (see: wiretaps, habeas corpus, etc.).

Scary times indeed.

That is the foremost reason that (if she wins the Democratic primary) Hillary will not get my vote.

Thoughts?


------
Photo: Mannie Garcia/Getty Images
Photo: AP file

Read More

Republican, Reschmublican

I'm shocked that they haven't already "bolted".

Rudy is a Democrat in a Republican's suit. The only "conservative" quality he possesses is his stance on defense.

Period.




------
Photo: Phelan M. Ebenhack/AP

Read More

Tappa, Tappa, Tappa...

I'm so glad that there is finally some action taking place regarding the NSA wiretapping ordeal.

I can't believe that Americans aren't more upset over the flagrant violation of civil liberties here.

Ugh.

Read More

No Cigar

So close...

... yet so far away.

Read More

Scoot To Jail

Clink!

Unless they can get an appeals court to hear the case real soon, it looks like Libby is off to trade in that expensive suit for a cheaper, orange one.


------
Photo: Larry Downing/Reuters

Read More

True Americans & Immigration

The Daily Read has paid off for me. Got a great laugh.

Flexing their new-found political muscle, Native Americans - the only “true” Americans - have now weighed in on the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill, lobbying Congress to provide for the immediate deportation of all Mayflower descendants.

Speaking for the National Council of American Indians, Chief “Running Tab at Foxwoods” asserted that the Mayflower settlers “not only entered this country illegally, without visas or work permits, but behaved very badly-spreading disease, raping our women, despoiling the land, and worst of all, stealing our very identity for their sports teams.

Satirical Political

Read More

Pretty Boy

Mitt Romney is experiencing a "pretty-boy" label in his campaign.

He is a good lookin' guy... I don't know if I'd say "hot, hot" though.

Read More

Gonzo Stays... For Now

He safe for now. I think it's only a matter of time...

Read More

Take That Neo-Cons

Yay Constitution!

Read More

Kuci-Niche

I think that this message could work.

This makes a strong statement - and one that I think with which most Americans will identify. Mr. Kucinich simply needs to make his name more recognizable. Oh, and he should always travel with Mike Gravel in tow. Gravel makes Kucinich appear to be more mainstream and less "fringy".

Read More

As Washington Turns

It really is like a soap-opera.

In a bit of political theater, Democrats have set a procedural vote as a prelude to considering a resolution expressing Senate dissatisfaction with the attorney general for a variety of actions, including the firing of federal prosecutors and the handling of national security matters.
But Republicans believe they will be able to deny Democrats the 60 votes necessary to overcome the procedural hurdle, though they are pointedly saying that position should not be read as an endorsement of the attorney general’s performance.

I'm waiting for some congressman to show up with an eye-patch and a gun and exclaim that "I'm the father of that baby!"

Read More

Another Pro-Choice Republican?

It appears that Rudy is not the only pro-choice conservative with eyes on the presidency:

Read More

Newt Kid On The Block

I don't think that he'll run. If he does, he's going to have a lot of questions to answer...

Read More

Democrat, Schmemocrat

Seriously. Somebody check his papers. Are we absolutely sure that Joe Lieberman is in fact a member of the Democratic Party? It doesn't sound like it to me...

I think we’ve got to be prepared to take aggressive military action against the Iranians to stop them from killing Americans in Iraq... and to me, that would include a strike … over the border into Iran, where we have good evidence that they have a base at which they are training these people coming back into Iraq to kill our soldiers.

Yikes.

Read More

A Long Weekend

T'was a long weekend. I've missed a bunch. Get ready to digest.

Read More

Comment Policy

By posting comments submitting e-mail to ThePajamaPundit.com you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general commenting and e-mail policy:

[1] All e-mail received from readers by The Pajama Pundit is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer.

[2] The Pajama Pundit reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.

[3] The comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post’s topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. A couple of sentences to make your point is fine -- then simply link to your source material.

[4] Comments that are abusive, offensive, or contain racist material will be subject to removal and the author(s) banned from future comments at the discretion of The Pajama Pundit. Comments such as these are contrary to the initial intent of this site: to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who likely share differing viewpoints.

[5] All points of view are welcome on The Pajama Pundit, with the following exceptions:

(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.

(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.

[6] Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Pajama Pundit will NOT be tolerated and will result in the potential deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter’s ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given another chance. This is all at the discretion of The Pajama Pundit.

[7] Anonymous commenters should identify themselves with the same moniker, so readers know their comments are coming from a single individual. If they don’t, it becomes increasingly difficult to have a coherent discussion -- particularly in threads that are lengthy.

[8] The Pajama Pundit is a blog. It is not the Government. It is NOT aligned with any political party. It is not a public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors’ varying points of views. Writers on this weblog WILL take positions.

Disclaimer:

– Reading and posting comments at ThePajamaPundit.com constitutes acknowledgment of and agreement to the terms outlined in this comment policy. This comment policy may be revised in part or in full at any time.

– All comments must comport with applicable state and federal laws. The Pajama Pundit has no obigation to monitor, edit, censor, or take responsibility for comments. ThePajamaPundit.com may or may not act upon a violation of its comment policy once a suspected violation has been brought to its attention. Therefore, commenters are solely responsible for the content of their comments and should ensure that that their comments are lawful and fall within the stated guidelines of both ThePajamaPundit.com.

– The Pajama Pundit is not be responsible for injury or liability to any reader or commenter resulting from its own communications or those of commenters, that may be offensive, misleading, inaccurate, illegal, or otherwise unsuitable in the view of the reader. Readers and commenters further agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Pajama Pundit from claims resulting from the use of any material appearing on ThePajamaPundit.com which damages the reader, commenter or any other party.

– The Pajama Pundit is not responsible for and might disagree with material posted in the comments section. While we strive for accuracy in our posts and attempt to correct errors, material posted by The Pajama Pundit in its posts -— or those left by others in the comments section -— may or may not be accurate.

Above all else, read and Post at your own risk. Thanks for visiting!

Read More

Coal? Really?

Geez. The Democrats can't even agree on things like clean energy?

Specifically, they (House Democrats) attacked the bill for pushing development of coal as a transportation fuel, despite concerns that doing so would raise greenhouse gas emissions, and for not increasing fuel mileage standards for cars and trucks aggressively enough.

Read More

Bueller, Bueller.... Bueller

Helena Andrews calls it like she sees it:

Sen. John F. Kerry is smart. He went to Yale, but all too often he slips into a Ben Stein-esque monotone that can lose even the most energized would-be environmentalists.

Read More

Stem Cell Goodness Redux

YAY!

We're finally making some progress here.

Read More

Gravel Vs. A Captive Audience

No joke. They really were captive. No, not like "Gitmo" captive, but Mike Gravel certainly got the time to speak that he felt was lacking at the other Democratic candidate debates.

I just cannot believe that the other Democratic candidates (Clinton, Obama Richardson and Dodd) simply didn't show up for the debate at Johns Hopkins. This was to be a debate specifically dedicated to the war in Iraq - and more specifically, how to get out. I mean, c'mon folks! Gravel made it. Kucinich and Biden were late (because of voting taking place in the House and Senate respectively), but at least they got there.

I guess if there is not corporate sponsorship and a nationally televised audience, then candidates aren't interested in debating (arguably) the most important topic for the 2008 election: Iraq.

Shout out to Lionus.

------
Photo: AP

Read More

Washington

A friend sent this to me. I thought it was worth passing on...

Read More

F. Thompson: No Reagan

David Kuo makes a good point.

...this isn't about him (Thompson). This is about a GOP field so weak, so without evident soul, that Fred Thompson appears to be the savior. Maybe he will be. Maybe he is the next Ronald Reagan - the movie star (broadly defined) who rescues the Republicans and helps save the world from doom. Somehow, however, I doubt that is true.

A weak field indeed.

Read More

Stem Cell Goodness

Nice. Hopefully the prez will come to the realization that this makes sense... and put down the veto pen.

These stem cells are going to be frozen indefinitely - or destroyed. So, if humanity can benefit from these stem cells - through research - then I say "rock on".

For many, stem cell research is the most promising source of potential treatments and cures. Unfortunately, because of the stubbornness of one man, President Bush, these people continue to suffer and wait. - Diana DeGette (D-Co)

Ugh. I hope he won't be stubborn this time...

Read More

God Vs. Rudy

For anyone who may have missed the beauty... here's Rudy trying to talk about his stance on abortion - when a Higher Power decides to shut him up.

Priceless.

Read More

PA Politics

This makes me proud to be from Pennsylvania.

... but it doesn't make Rudy look so good, eh?

Asked about Mr. Asher’s involvement, a spokeswoman for the Giuliani campaign, Maria Comella, said last night, “We have not made any announcement at this point in time” regarding leadership in Pennsylvania.

Oops.

Read More

Too Hot For D.C.

An interesting question - to say the least.

One thing is for certain: Mrs. Thompson would definitely be the most attractive first lady that we've seen in a long time...

Read More

2009 Can't Get Here Fast Enough

Unbelievable.

I know that Bush is an Evangelical. I know that he wants to infect the ENTIRE United State government with loyal "Bushies" who practice his twisted brand of politics. But c'mon - the f**king surgeon general?

This guy could possibly be the top doctor in all of the land - and he's homophobic? What next, a head of the Department of Education that is illiterate?

Ugh.

------
Photo: Patti Longmire/AP

Read More

The Return Of Habeas Corpus

Yes.

Habeas Corpus is IMPORTANT and has been grossly overlooked since the Military Commissions Act of 2006 was passed last fall.

My state senator, Arlen Specter (R-Pa), is a co-sponsor of this bill (YAY!) along with Patrick Leahy (D-Vt), but it needs a bunch of support. Leahy recommends this letter to your state senators:

Dear [state senator],

Last fall, Congress eliminated the fundamental right of habeas corpus when it passed the Military Commissions Act. I urge you to reverse this assault on our American legacy of liberty by supporting the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2007 (S.185).

The elimination of basic legal rights undermines, not strengthens, our ability to defeat terrorists. It is from strength that America should defend our values and our way of life. It is from the strength of our freedoms, our Constitution, and the rule of law that we can prevail. We can ensure our security without giving up our liberty. We must restore the checks and balances that are fundamental to preserving the values that define us as a great Nation.

It is urgent that we restore our legal traditions and ensure there is a fair and independent check on the ability of any president to lock someone up illegally. I urge you to sign on as a co-sponsor of the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act today.

Signed,

[your name]
[your address]

Read More

Off The Cheney

I can't say that I'm surprised. But still, it annoys the FISA out of me that Cheney really doesn't care about citizens rights. If he wants these illegal NSA wiretaps, there's no way that he's in favor of the Constitution, right?

Vice President Cheney told Justice Department officials that he disagreed with their objections to a secret surveillance program during a high-level White House meeting in March 2004, a former senior Justice official told senators yesterday.

The meeting came one day before White House officials tried to get approval for the same program from then-Attorney General John D. Ashcroft, who lay recovering from surgery in a hospital, according to former deputy attorney general James B. Comey.

SO, the question is; Did the veep knowingly send (then-White House Counsel) Alberto Gonzales and Andrew Card (Bush's chief of staff) to John Ashcroft's bedside to circumvent James Comey's decision to not re-authorize the wiretap program?

I bet he did.

Read More

The Dodd Squad

Fantastic idea! Now I know where to look to see what the breakdown of time is in each debate.

Read More

He's Got Two First Names

Man, that last post was LOOOOONG. Sorry about that.

Here is a great column about the White House press corps standing up and regaining their collective spine.

I think Gregory does a fine job - even if he is labeled "pompous" by others in the press corps.

Read More

Master-Debaters: GOP Edition, Part II

The third Republican presidential debate.



Where do I begin?

Winners? Losers? I see not winners and losers (although some of these guys are REAL losers), I see differing opinions and ideologies on a variety of subjects.

I've been reading around the 'Internets' and have found that various pundits have declared various winners. Some say that McCain, despite having an unpopular view on immigration, really set himself apart from the rest of the GOP pack. Others thought that Rudy Giuliani was the winner - never mind that there were signs from the Almighty that his pro-choice stance wasn't right for the Grand Ole Party. At least this made for interesting television...

Break it down yo:

Sam Brownback::: Basically, he was a waste of space. The only interesting highlight for me was when Wolf Blitzer asked Senator Brownback to expand on the idea that he rejects evolution as scientific fact. His response:

...I believe that we are created in the image of God for a particular purpose. And I believe that with all my heart. And I’m somebody — I’ve had cancer in the past. I’ve had a season to really look at this and study it and think about the end of life. And I am fully convinced there’s a God of the universe that loves us very much and was involved in the process. How he did it, I don’t know.

One of the problems we have with our society today is that we put faith and science at odds with each other. They aren’t at odds with each other. If they are, check your faith or check your science. And we should have a discussion.

Um, what? How does that answer the question? Duh.

Jim Gilmore::: As Lionus put it, "Who?" Exactly. Okay Jim, we get it. You are a "consistent conservative". You've said that at every debate so far...

Rudy Giuliani::: Rudy, Rudy, Rudy. You actually think that Saddam was a direct threat to the United States? Really? You also are advocating the use of tactical nuclear weapons against Iran? Yikes. You are now officially on my scary motherf**ker list.

I think that James Fallows has the best take on Rudy here.

Mike Huckabee::: Again, on the evolution denunciation bandwagon, here is Huckabee's take:

...you’ve raised the question, so let me answer it. “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth.” To me it’s pretty simple, a person either believes that God created this process or believes that it was an accident and that it just happened all on its own.

...if anybody wants to believe that they are the descendants of a primate, they are certainly welcome to do it. I don’t know how far they will march that back. But I believe that all of us in this room are the unique creations of a God who knows us and loves us and who created us for his own purpose.

Rrrrright Mike - and there is no chance that someone can believe that there is a grey area somewhere in between those two? Nice try. You're really scared of Fred Thompson's Baptist background, aren't you? Yeah, court that religious vote Mike. Court it hard.

Duncan Hunter::: Same as Gilmore. Duncan who? Face it Hunter, Tom Tancredo has the "immigration-is-my-main-issue" crowd is his pocket. We get it - you BUILT the fence with your own two hands. Move on.

John McCain::: J-Mac! Where you been man? Oh really? In the shadow of Giuliani you say? That SUCKS. I thought that McCain actually held his own pretty well during this debate. I don't agree with all of his positions - but it was PAINFULLY clear that McCain's colleagues on stage did not agree with his immigration bill that is currently before Congress.

Rudy's thoughts:

The problem with this immigration plan is it has no real unifying purpose. It’s a typical Washington mess. It’s — everybody compromises, four or five compromises, and the compromises leave you with the following conclusion. The litmus test you should have for legislation is, is it going to make things better? And when you look at these compromise, it is quite possible it will make things worse.

Romney's thoughts:

...this bill, unfortunately, has at least one provision that’s a real problem. It’s the Z visa. And what it allows is people who’ve come here illegally to stay here for the rest of their lives. Not necessarily as citizens; they have to wait 13 years to become citizens.

As you can see, the two "moderate" candidates aren't big fans of McCain's plan (which Georgey W. Bush has backed). Poor Johnny.

I think that McCain's high point was a very moving monologue directed to a member of the audience who lost her younger brother to the war in Iraq. McCain stood up (while the other candidates were seated) and walked to the edge of the stage and said:

It’s not, and I want to tell you, thank you for your brother’s service and sacrifice to our country. We are proud of you and your endurance, and we’re proud of your sacrifice.

This war — I’m going to give you a little straight talk. This war was very badly mismanaged for a long time, and Americans have made great sacrifices, some of which were unnecessary because of this management of the — mismanagement of this conflict.

I believe we have a fine general. I believe we have a strategy which can succeed, so that the sacrifice of your brother would not be in vain; that a whole 20 or 30 million people would have a chance to live a free life in an open society and practice their religion no matter what those differences are.

And I believe if we fail, it will become a center of terrorism, and we will ask more young Americans to sacrifice, as your brother did.

This is long and hard and tough, but I think we can succeed. And God bless you.

Now, I don't necessarily agree with McCain on all points - but I was impressed with his handling of this question.

Ron Paul::: This was by far the best performance by Ron Paul out of the three debates. He was convincing, he was earnest in his responses and I felt that he may have really helped his campaign with this exposure. Because the war in Iraq is becoming so grossly unpopular, I think that Dr. Paul's appeal is getting stronger. On the money:

...we’ve had four years to do this and it hasn’t worked. The biggest incentive for them to take upon themselves the responsibility is just for us to leave. We don’t need to lose 100 men and women every month, more than 1,000 per year. And so you want it done. You want them to take over. You’ve got to give them an incentive.

So I think we should immediately stop patrolling the streets. That’s a policeman’s job. It’s not the work of the Army. We’re not fighting a military battle. We’re in a different type of warfare right now. So the sooner we recognize that, the sooner we can make sure that no more Americans will die.

We have a lot of goodness in this country and we should promote it, but never through the barrel of a gun. We should do it by setting good standards, motivating people, and have them want to emulate us. But you can’t enforce our goodness like the neocons preach with an armed force. It doesn’t work.

Hell yeah.

Mitt Romney::: Mitt - you look so pretty. Why can't your politics match your oh-so-dreamy looks? Flip-flop Mitt, as some have been calling him, is just that - a flip-flopper. Like a fish out of water kids.

Tom Tancredo::: For my money, Tancredo had the best dig of the night. When Wolf Blitzer asked how Mr. Tancredo would utilize the talents of his predecessor George W. Bush, Tancredo responded:

Some time ago, 2003 I think it was, I got a call from Karl Rove who told me that because of my criticism of the president, I should never darken the doorstep of the White House. I have been so disappointed in the president in so many ways since his — actually for the last several years, not just the immigration issue, but several other things, including the No Child Left Behind and the massive increase in government that we call prescription drug — Medicare prescription drug, that I’m afraid I would have to tell the president of the United States — I mean as president, I would have to tell George Bush exactly the same thing Karl Rove told me.

ZING!

Other than that, Tom Tancredo is a whack-job who believes that the United States should halt all types of immigration, both illegal as well as LEGAL. Duh.

...and finally...

Tommy Thompson::: I lump him into the group with Hunter and Gilmore. If Thompson wants votes, he needs to distinguish himself as someone other than "the candidate, not the actor".
==================================================

WHEW! Long post.

Comment at will... or don't. It's not like there is anyone actually reading my prose. :)

------
Photo: CNN

Read More