About Me

Name:davecatbone
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Alas Ron Paul, we knew him all too well....

Lemming alert, hide the razor blades and latch the windows. Ron Paul is quitting the race. What WILL the Paulbots do? Go to Denver and protest in the street? Hot Air notes:
there’ll be some sort of formal concession of a race he never had the remotest chance of winning, no matter how many terrorist-themed “moneybombs” the Paulnuts managed to put together. He had his own cult before Obama did; he’s still the only candidate with his own blimp (and his own racialist newsletter, his own Nazi donor base, etc etc).
Cult is accurate. Mob of nutcased tinfoil hat wearing loonies is more accurate. Good riddance. But at least Ron Paul was one candidate who actually questioned the Constitutionality of the way our government runs. We need more of that.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (43) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Night Of The Living Dead

The Queen of the Damned has risen out of mist, like a nightmarish spectre floating across darkened fields and moonless skies. How can this be? The Train of Hope has relentlessly churned out mile after mile and had it's minions bury Hillary in a shallow grave. Answer: you must cut off the head. By not doing so, the Left has allowed talk radio and word of mouth to rouse the Righteous Right to crossover and resurrect Elvira Clinton. Do I know this for sure? I don't. But I do know I was contacted by people attempting to make this happen, and when I went to vote for the Ohio primary, I witnessed quite a few people requesting change of party forms. Hmmmmmmmm. Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham advocated the crossover, and Sean Hannity's show featured multiple callers intending to do so. The Left gave us McCain, and turnabout is fair play. The Democrats deserve Clinton. A mob with pitchforks and torches won't do the trick against the undead. The Clinton's got to the media this week:
the former first lady questioning his sincerity in opposing the North American Free Trade Agreement and darkly hinting he's not ready to be commander in chief in a crisis.

Polling place interviews with voters in both states suggested the criticism hit home, finding Clinton was winning the votes of late deciders in Ohio and Texas, as well as Vermont.

I'm not buying it. The Left and the Moderates will need a two by four upside the head to make them jump off the Obama Train. That hasn't happened. Yet.

UPDATE 7:18: from CNN
following a call by Rush Limbaugh for listeners to vote for Hillary Clinton. Early exit polling shows 10 percent of the voters in Ohio’s Democratic Primary identified themselves as Republican, along with 22 percent who said they were independents. It was the same story in Texas: 10 percent of the voters in the Democratic primary identified themselves as Republican, along with 25 percent who said they were independents.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (63) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama & Clinton bare their throats for McCain?

The foreign media may do the the work our Enemedia refuses to, or not, I'm not holding my breath. Yet, in an amazingly revealing series of moves, the Democratic contenders have allowed John McCain to show himself to be more able to understand international relations than the pompous, populist, preening pretenders they are.
"One of our greatest assets in Afghanistan are our Canadian friends. We need our Canadian friends, and we need their continued support in Afghanistan," McCain said.
Hillary couldn't run a lemonade stand, let alone a campaign, not to mention the most powerful nation in the world. And Obama is equally as unqualified. This must be coming apparent to not only our friends to the north, but to our neighbors to the south. Carlos M Gutierrez in the Wapo opines:
Quitting NAFTA would send economic shock waves throughout the world, and the damage would start here at home. Our economy and much of the U.S. business model is increasingly integrated with our neighbors to the north and south. Withdrawing from NAFTA would destroy economies in U.S. border communities, hurt U.S. farmers, rip apart North American supply chains and information systems, and devastate large and small exporters. In short, it would cause incredible damage to the overall American economy.
Maybe. I'm not evaluating NAFTA here though, I'm pointing out that once again, the incompetence of the Democratic party to do anything right may be it's own (once again) undoing. Their classic ability to attempt, in every facet of their theater of operations, to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. The Theater of the Absurd, because:
Most of this has nothing to do with Mexico or Canada. But politically that doesn't matter. Americans are not doing well. For many, NAFTA symbolizes everything that has gone wrong.
The Progressive Liberal Party of the Populist Demagogues. Perfect. Let's see if McCain can make hay with this, or instead focuses on attacking conservatives.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (37) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Happy Sadie Hawkins Day!

Being born on leap year is a crummy deal for a kid. Birthdays only once every four years? Sheesh, what a gyp! But as the decades roll by, it ever increasingly becomes a blessing. And now, I'm downright grateful for it. What's the deal with Leap Year?
In the United States, some people have referred to this date as Sadie Hawkins Day with women being given the right to run after unmarried men to propose.

Sadie Hawkins was a female character in the Al Capp cartoon strip Li'l Abner. Many communities prefer to celebrate Sadie Hawkins Day in November which is when Al Capp first mentioned Sadie Hawkins Day.

OR..

It is believed this tradition (of Leap Year) was started in 5th century Ireland when St. Bridget complained to St. Patrick about women having to wait for so long for a man to propose. According to legend, St. Patrick said the yearning females could propose on this one day in February during the leap year.

Of course, the Greeks do it backwards....

There is a Greek superstition that claims couples have bad luck if they marry during a leap year. Apparently one in five engaged couples in Greece will avoid planning their wedding during a leap year.

But who are the leap year haters? The Muslims!

In the Islamic calendar, leap months are not used. They are forbidden by the Qur'an, which says:

The number of months with Allah has been twelve months by Allah's ordinance since the day He created the heavens and the earth. Of these four are known as sacred; That is the straight usage, so do not wrong yourselves therein, and fight those who go astray. But know that Allah is with those who restrain themselves.
Verily the transposing (of a prohibited month) is an addition to Unbelief: The Unbelievers are led to wrong thereby: for they make it lawful one year, and forbidden another year, of months forbidden by Allah and make such forbidden ones lawful. The evil of their course seems pleasing to them. But Allah guideth not those who reject Faith. (Qur'an 9:36-37)

Why even have a Leap Year in the first place?

A leap year (or intercalary year) is a year containing one or more extra days (or, in case of lunisolar calendars, an extra month) in order to keep the calendar year synchronised with the astronomical or seasonal year. For example, February would have 29 days in a leap year instead of the usual 28. Seasons and astronomical events do not repeat at an exact number of full days, so a calendar which had the same number of days in each year would over time drift with respect to the event it was supposed to track. By occasionally inserting (or intercalating) an additional day or month into the year, the drift can be corrected. A year which is not a leap year is called a common year.
So to all my fellow Leap Year babies.....enjoy your birthday this year, have a glass of Single Malt for me!




Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (25) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Empty suit? There's a Red lining....

The mainstream criticism of Barack Hussein Obama is that he's an empty suit, all talk, no substance. To believe that is to ignore the peril of his actual policy beliefs. So what are they (even though the Enemedia won't talk about them)? An example is Hussein Obama's intent to sell out our sovereignty to the United Nations. You scoff? Ever heard of the Global Povery Bill? Pete Winn writes:
"For years, America has committed to improving the lives of the world's poorest people," Obama said in a statement.

"In 2000, the U.S. joined more than 180 countries at the United Nations Millennium Summit and vowed to reduce global poverty by 2015. We are halfway towards this deadline, and it is time the United States makes it a priority of our foreign policy to meet this goal and help those who are struggling day to day," he added.


the so-called "Monterey Consensus" could wind-up costing U.S. taxpayers a whopping $845 billion or more by 2015, if the U.S. is forced to up its aid to meet the 0.07 standard.

The only way to get the kind of money, 
(Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media, a conservative media watchdog)  theorizes, is through some kind of global tax - something that the U.N. has been trying to impose on nations for years.
Two unnamed Conservative US Senators have placed a hold on Obama's bill.
S. 2433 declares it to be U.S. policy to help reduce global poverty and eliminate extreme global poverty. It also commits the U.S. to achieving the United Nations' Millennium Development Goal of cutting extreme global poverty in half by 2015 and directs the president to create a strategy to help reduce global poverty.
So this is who we're beginning to see. Obama, great Socialist Globalist. Creating jobs for everyone by destroying our economy and making us the highest taxed nation in the world? Is this guy a genius, or Rasputin?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (48) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Racial Thing....

Michelle Obama has released her Princeton thesis to the Politico after much clamoring. What's in it that's so interesting? Not too much really, other than the angst of a Black woman over feeling like she doesn't fit into White society, who has now become a potential First Lady, depending on whether or not White America votes for her husband. Get it? Jeffrey Ressner, about the thesis:
"My experiences at Princeton have made me far more aware of my 'blackness' than ever before," the future Mrs. Obama wrote in her thesis introduction. "I have found that at Princeton, no matter how liberal and open-minded some of my white professors and classmates try to be toward me, I sometimes feel like a visitor on campus; as if I really don't belong. Regardless of the circumstances underwhich I interact with whites at Princeton, it often seems as if, to them, I will always be black first and a student second."
A complaint about always being seen as Black first. Not a member of the collective America. Okay. But to murk up my mind, Michelle as part of her thesis sent out a survey to the 400 blacks at Princeton asking:
to choose whether they were more in line with a "separationist and/or pluralist" viewpoint or an "integrationist and/or assimilationist" ideology.
The responses she got disappointed her:
I hoped that these findings would help me conclude that despite the high degree of identification with whites as a result of the educational and occupational path that black Princeton alumni follow, the alumni would still maintain a certain level of identification with the black community. However, these findings do not support this possibility."
Michelle Obama was disappointed that her fellow Black students wanted to assimilate into American culture, yet chafed at being seen as Black first. And has always been ashamed of her country. A portrait of mixed feelings. But to some degree, aren't we all? But the issue of her (and perhaps her husband's) feelings about our country bring forth more questions. Good ones being voiced by Peggy Noonan:

Are the Obamas, at bottom, snobs? Do they understand America? Are they of it? Did anyone at their Ivy League universities school them in why one should love America? Do they confuse patriotism with nationalism, or nativism? Are they more inspired by abstractions like "international justice" than by old visions of America as the city on a hill, which is how John Winthrop saw it, and Ronald Reagan and JFK spoke of it?

Have they been, throughout their adulthood, so pampered and praised--so raised in the liberal cocoon--that they are essentially unaware of what and how normal Americans think? And are they, in this, like those cosseted yuppies, the Clintons?

These need to be asked and discussed. Because the Obama Hope Train is carrying the improbable load of White Liberal America towards election day, because they feel, as Peggy Noonan says:
In a country that has throughout most of our lifetimes been tormented by, buffeted by, the question of race, a country that has endured real pain and paid in blood and treasure to work its way through and out of the mess, that for all that struggle we yielded this: a brilliant and accomplished young black man with a consensus temperament, a thoughtful and peaceful person who wishes to lead. That is his draw: "We made that." "It ended well."
Thats why White Liberal America feels so good about the Obamas. Will they still after finding out who they really are?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (116) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Can McCain Win Without Conservatives?

There's a mass of voters in the middle of America's demographics, who call themselves independent moderates. These are the hope of John McCain. They are the people who voted in Republican primaries and tilted the scale for McCain. But many more of them are listening to Barack Obama's message of hope and change and thinking, "hmmm, hope & change are good!" And the Enemedia is letting him, for the most part, get away with it without revealing who he is.

It won't last. Obama's past will return to haunt him. Just as the New York Times has now embarked on a smear campaign against McCain, Obama will have to face the facts of his true positions. Karl Rove says:

The truth is that Mr. Obama is unwilling to challenge special interests if they represent the financial and political muscle of the Democratic left. He says yes to the lobbyists of the AFL-CIO when they demand card-check legislation to take away the right of workers to have a secret ballot in unionization efforts, or when they oppose trade deals. He won't break with trial lawyers, even when they demand the ability to sue telecom companies that make it possible for intelligence agencies to intercept communications between terrorists abroad. And he is now going out of his way to proclaim fidelity to the educational unions. This is a disappointment since he'd earlier indicated an openness to education reform. Mr. Obama backs their agenda down the line, even calling for an end to testing, which is the only way parents can know with confidence whether their children are learning and their schools working.

These stands represent not just policy vulnerabilities, but also a real danger to Mr. Obama's credibility and authenticity. He cannot proclaim his goal is the end of influence for lobbies if the only influences he seeks to end are lobbies of the center and the right.

So, the question is, will the dumbed down moderate middle of America wake up, stop watching Dancing With The Stars long enough to question the empty suited, radically connected, non voting Liberal who's voice soothes them into feeling good, about who he really would be as our president? That's up to the McCain campaign. And the only way he can win the election at this point, because he's using his disaffection with conservatives as a badge of independence that he holds up to the moderates to say, "see, I'm with you guys".
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (63) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Kosovo: An Islamically correct war?

Kosovo declares independence. Throngs in the streets. Serbia, Russia, Cyprus, Romania, Slovakia, Spain and Greece all protest and sabre rattling starts. Why should Americans care? As pointed out by Allahpundit:
Kosovo is majority Muslim; we might be seeing the birth of a new Islamic and Islamist state in Europe.
What will be interesting is to see if the elites in Hollywood and Entertainment, as well as the Progressive Liberals all jump on the "intervention" band wagon. You know, Bosnia was Bill Clinton's war, Madeline Albright thinks it's okay to use our military there. George Clooney and Bruce Springsteen are probably on the phone right now figuring out how they can "help". CNN, MSNBC and Katie Couric are developing, I'm sure, storylines to tell us why we should care about sending those evil thug killers in the United States Marine Corps over to Kosovo.

And the Iraqi people would be watching it all unfold with great interest and a sense of irony.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (17) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why Oppose McCain in November?

There are many McCain supporters in the GOP and right here at Townhall who are adamant about the need to elect John McCain. I am not one of those. Why aren't I afraid of a Clinton or Obama presidency? I cannot express the reasons better than Newt Gingrich:

The conservative movement cannot be a subsidiary of the Republican Party. The conservative movement is a long-term permanent commitment to fundamental philosophy....We can put the Democrats on record every day from here on out. We can use the House and Senate as opportunities to have the country focused on what's the right change and what's the wrong change.

There are two ways to go in the next election. Vote party and watch the GOP drag the nation Leftwards, or demand conservative candidates, and vote only for conservative candidates, and drag the country Rightwards. The latter takes courage and principles, the former takes no effort at all.

UPDATE:
Michelle Malkin reports: John McCain endorses Hillary’s “good character, honesty, integrity”  this is just too rich folks....
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (86) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Bush To Give Mexico Over a Billion $?

The Merida Initiative. You've heard about it at Michelle Malkin's and Rush Limbaugh's, right? 1.4 billion dollars to the Mexican government? From the Council on Foreign Relations site:

It’s always been reported that the Mexican police are very corrupt and that because of the drug rings everywhere in Mexico, there is corruption throughout. Will this money really help or just go down the drain?

This is a big question. The exact amounts and where they are going haven’t been released yet. But it looks like 50 percent is going to equipment. There will be new helicopters, boats, surveillance equipment, x-ray machinery for the border, that sort of thing. Another 25 percent is going to training to use this equipment and then only about 25 percent to the strengthening of police forces and judicial systems. In the short term, Mexico needs this equipment. The drug cartels are very well armed and they are very sophisticated so to fight them the government needs similar materials. In the long term what needs to be done is strengthening the institutions of the police, the military, and the judicial system. There is some money for that but it’s not a lot.

Is there any doubt what will happen with this money going down the drain? How much fence and how many border agents could 1.4 billiion dollars fund? Where's the gd fence? Oh, right, McCain will secure the borders. Anyways, the WOT trumps all, isn't that right independent moderates?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (22) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Problem With Today's Youth Vote

In an opinion piece published in the Cincinnati Enquirer 2/10/08, the voice of Today's Youth is represented in "Imagine the outcome if everyone who's eligible voted". A nice sentiment with the best intentions, but containing the following:
And if you have the right to vote, a right for which so many men and women have fought and died, a right upon which this country is based,...
Too many of the young people of today are plainly uneducated about the terms of their citizenship in the United States of America. Cami Ross of Amberley Village is a plain example. Voting is not a right in America in spite of the Populist myth perpetuated on the Left. Voting was defined by the founders as a privilege, not to be given to everyone. The founders, for "the common good", set up a representative Republic, that used Representatives to govern us, to avoid, among other things, mob rule.  Just as "we live in a Democracy", another common fallacy perpetuated by the Left and government schools, "Everyone should have the Right to Vote" is also false. Felons, Children, Illegal Aliens, and Anyone Who Fails to Register cannot and should not be allowed to vote.

Funny though, when it comes to the military vote, the Left can't disenfranchise our citizens fast enough.

Ms. Ross's example shows the decline in civics education in America, and her teachers should be ashamed. The very survival of our Republic depends on the electorate to vote because of their willingness to clearly understand what each candidate stands for, not how they make you feel. They should understand the ramifications of the policies each would support and why, and be able to clearly state so. Unfortunately, this is not the case in a large percentage of the voting population, and stands as a peril to our nation.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (18) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Youth Vote

We've watched, during past elections, rock stars and celebrities entertain and cajole the young masses of America with concerts and rallies, trying to pump up the voting base with every scheme imaginable. And every year on voting day, the kids go, "duh" and go back to sleep. During this primary year, however, the numbers are a stark contrast.
The youth vote already has played a key role in earlier primaries. In South Carolina, 18- to 29-year-olds accounted for 14% of voters, up from 9% in 2004. And in Iowa, young voter turnout rose 135% from the previous presidential primary.

Obama won both states.
The Republican voters are deciding whether or not to hold their noses. Not exactly an explosion of enthusiasm. The young 18 to 29 year old Democratic voters are outnumbering the GOP's in the primaries by 3 to 4 percent. As Mort Kondracke noticed:

In all the primaries held so far, just the three top Democratic contestants -- Clinton, Obama and former Sen. John Edwards (N.C.) -- amassed 25 million votes, compared with 12.5 million for six Republican candidates.

All the nose holding in the world from an uninspired electorate cannot defeat an energized, motivated opponent. Are we facing the dark years?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (8) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Kamakaze Conservatives

This election has always been about pragmatism vs. core values. The ascendancy of John McCain has given birth to the Kamakaze conservative.

Still, McCain has so radicalized key conservatives that some have vowed to turn themselves into suicide voters next November by pulling the lever for Hillary Rodham Clinton over him.

This last-minute blitz against McCain by Limbaugh and others, however, comes far too late.

But if those conservatives sit out the general election, they will help Democrats make history by electing either the first black president or the first female president next November.

The conundrum of our time. It's not enough some would just stay home. They will actively vote for the opposition to ensure a McCain defeat. The CPAC meeting Thursday will be very instructive. Will McCain leave with egg on his face. Or tomato?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (17) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

McCain objective: Destroy the GOP?

From the most prominent conservative voice in America:
"I think McCain has an animus toward the Republican Party. I think ever since South Carolina 2000 he's had it in for the Republican Party, and one of his objectives is to destroy it and change it."
This is not so far fetched an observation. I happen to agree with Rush Limbaugh. John McCain is NO conservative, in fact he despises conservatives.
“He stabbed his own president in the back on legislation, a number of times. He doesn’t support his party or his president when the chips are down. He called people who want to protect the border racists, nativists, protectionists, and worse. And what kind of character is it that tries to slide all that through under cover of darkness, in a back room.”
Nuff said.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (10) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The New Republican Party

John McCain, favorite for the GOP presidential nomination, quoted about the subprime lending problem:
"greedy people on Wall Street who need to go to jail."
Glen Reynolds replies most thoughtfully:
(it's) a story of people who "used their houses like ATMs," taking out home equity loan after home equity loan when they started with a subprime mortgage, only to wind up owing far more than their houses were worth and unable to make the payments. Boo hoo. Shouldn't there be a price for being an idiot?
This is the GOP, the populist compassionate moderate independent party. But as Michelle Malkin puts it:

I certainly have sympathy for borrowers who may have been misled. But for every “predatory lender” out there, you can find a predatory borrower. For every fraud-minded loan officer or mortgage broker, you can find a homeowner who secured financing and bought a home he knew he couldn’t afford with little money down and bogus or no income verification
. Washington is silent about this reckless behavior, which it is encouraging both tacitly and explicitly.

And both parties will fall all over themselves to pander to this generation of idiots. How much will "the people" expect from their government? At the Nation, Max Fraser calls for us:

to take a lesson from groups like the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition and ACORN, which are calling for a moratorium on foreclosures of a year or longer and for the creation of a massive government loan agency on the scale of the Reconstruction Finance Corporation of the 1930s. "We need some serious federal government intervention to restructure loans, not repossess homes," says the Rev. Jesse Jackson.

Where do you think bi partisan hero John McCain will come out on this?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (20) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive