Will Wolf Blitzer interview Elizabeth and Mary Cheney?

January 25, 2007 by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: Are you kidding me?, Media 

Or has he been beaten up enough by Lynne and Dick? How could I have forgotten about Lynne Cheney’s own run-in with Wolfie from last October?

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWcymCbSKqc]

I think, perhaps, Mr. Blitzer has had enough of the Cheneys

Pull out the waterboards – answers needed in bomb grade uranium sale case

January 25, 2007 by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: Are you kidding me?, News 

WASHINGTON — It was one of the most serious cases of smuggling of nuclear material in recent years: A Russian man, authorities allege, tried to sell a small amount of nuclear-bomb grade uranium in a plastic bag in his jacket pocket.

The buy that took place last summer, it turned out, was a setup by Republic of Georgia authorities, with the help of the CIA. Their quiet sting operation — neither U.S. nor Georgian officials have publicized it — is an unsettling reminder about the possibility of terrorists acquiring nuclear bomb-making material on the black market.

No evidence suggests this particular case was terrorist-related.

Maybe I’m cynical or something, but I just get the feeling that anyone that’s trying to sell uranium on the down low would possibly be terrorist-related – or at the very least a terrorist supplier wannabe.

Authorities say they do not know how the man acquired the nuclear material or if his claims of access to much larger quantities were true. He and three Georgian accomplices are in Georgian custody and not cooperating with investigators.

Waterboards – baby…

Do you think VP Cheney's had enough of Wolf Blitzer?

January 25, 2007 by · 4 Comments
Filed under: Are you kidding me?, Media, Politics 

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdiUXbb54qU]

The full written transcript is here – below is an expanded version of the YouTube video.

BLITZER: Do you think Hillary Clinton would make a good president?
CHENEY: No, I don’t.
BLITZER: Why?
CHENEY: Because she’s a Democrat. I don’t agree with her philosophically and from a policy standpoint.
BLITZER: Do you think she will be president?
CHENEY: I don’t.
BLITZER: Who do you think will be?
CHENEY: I’m not going to speculate.
BLITZER: Will it be John McCain?
CHENEY: I’m not going to speculate.
BLITZER: He’s been very critical of you, John McCain.
CHENEY: Well, John’s a good man. He and I have known each other a long time and we
agree on many things and disagree on others.
BLITZER: He said, the other day — he said, “The president listens too much to the vice
president. Of course, the president bears the ultimate responsibility, but he’s been very badly served by both the vice president and, most of all, the secretary of Defense.” That was John McCain.
CHENEY: So?
BLITZER: No reaction?
CHENEY: I just disagree with him.
BLITZER: He said, about the former Defense secretary, “Rumsfeld will go down in history,
along with NcNamara, as one of the worst secretaries of Defense –”
CHENEY: I just fundamentally disagree. You heard my speech, when Don retired. I think
he’s done a superb job.
BLITZER: You know, we’re out of time, but a couple of issues I want to raise with you: your daughter, Mary. She’s pregnant. All of us are happy she’s going to have a baby. You’re going to have another grandchild. Some of the — some critics are suggesting — for example, a statement from someone representing Focus on the Family, “Mary Cheney’s pregnancy raises the question of what’s best for children. Just because it’s possible to conceive a child outside of the relationship of a married mother and father doesn’t mean that it’s best for the child.” Do you want to respond to that?
CHENEY: No.
BLITZER: She’s, obviously, a good daughter –
CHENEY: I’m delighted I’m about to have a sixth grandchild, Wolf. And obviously I think the world of both my daughters and all of my grandchildren. And I think, frankly, you’re out of line with that question.
BLITZER: I think all of us appreciate –
CHENEY: I think you’re out of line.
BLITZER: We like your daughters. Believe me, I’m very sympathetic to Liz and to Mary. I
like them both. That was a question that’s come up, and it’s a responsible, fair question.
CHENEY: I just fundamentally disagree with you.
BLITZER: I want to congratulate you on having another grandchild.
Let’s wind up with the soft stuff (ph)– Nancy Pelosi. What was it like sitting with her last
night as opposed to Dennis Hastert?
CHENEY: I prefer Dennis Hastert, obviously. I like having a fellow Republican in the
Speaker’s chair. Nancy’s now the speaker of the House. We had a very pleasant evening.
BLITZER: But it’s different to have a Democrat–
CHENEY: Sure, it’s different. They have — yeah, but it’s the way it’s been during most of my career in Congress. I didn’t find it all that surprising or startling.
BLITZER: How do you feel?
CHENEY: Good.
BLITZER: Mr. Vice President, thank you
END

This just in: Kerry will not run but the real question is…

January 24, 2007 by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: Democrats, Election, Politics 

Will we be graced with an inspiring video from him on YouTube? More as this story develops.

If you read from the bottom up, you see that the “botched joke” is to blame.

Kerry to bow out of ’08 presidential race

By Rick Klein, Globe Staff | January 24, 2007

WASHINGTON –Senator John F. Kerry plans to announce today that he is bowing out of the 2008 presidential race, and will instead remain in Congress and seek reelection to his Senate seat next year, according to senior Democratic officials.

Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat, plans to say he will remain in the Senate to recommit himself to efforts to extricate the United States from the war in Iraq. His decision to stay out of the presidential race reflects a realization that he would have had an uphill climb in capturing the Democratic nomination, given the other party heavyweights who are already in the race, according to the officials, who spoke to the Globe on condition of anonymity.

Kerry, the party’s 2004 presidential nominee, has been acting like a 2008 candidate virtually since he lost to President Bush — traveling the country, spreading money to other Democratic candidates, and keeping in place a campaign infrastructure that was ready for another presidential bid.

But according to Kerry associates, the senator’s plans changed dramatically in the fallout of his election-eve “botched joke” about the education levels of US troops. The harsh reaction to that incident — from many Democrats as well as Republicans — displayed to Kerry the extreme skepticism within his own party about whether he should mount another run.

More here

So basically, he decided to run before he decided not to run. <–Now that’s a botched joke.

update.png HotAir has pictures!

Nurse Debra Muhl's story – Deployed then Fired!

January 24, 2007 by · 2 Comments
Filed under: Are you kidding me?, Heroes 

Michelle Malkin has this story:

Debra Muhl, a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Air Force Reserve, is a military nurse who has served in combat zones for 30 years. She works for Sutter Health, a health care provider in the Bay Area, as administrative director of the joint cardiac program

Or rather, she used to work for Sutter Health.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, she was fired last June just two days after letting her supervisor know that she was being sent to Iraq. Now, she has filed a federal lawsuit and it promises to be a very interesting case.

Malkin refers to other similar stories too. Take a look.

Mike Nifong will be having a really bad day today

January 24, 2007 by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: News 

Anyone want to be Mike Nifong today?

State Bar Adds More Ethics Charges to Complaint Against Duke Prosecutor Nifong

RALEIGH, N.C. — The North Carolina State Bar has added additional ethics charges to a complaint filed against the prosecutor who brought sexual assault charges against three Duke lacrosse players, accusing him of withholding DNA evidence and making misleading statements to the court.

The added charges were made public Wednesday, about an hour before Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong was scheduled to appear at a conference to discuss details of the ethics case. The changes could lead to Nifong’s removal from the bar.

More here.

HotAir weighs in Nifong slapped with second, harsher ethics complaint

From Ann Coulter:

Stripper Lied … White Boys Fried and The Stripper has no Clothes

update.png The charges at The Smoking Gun

The Attack on Kids With Down Syndrome

January 24, 2007 by · 1 Comment
Filed under: Down syndrome, Health 

The theme of Monday’s 34th annual March for Life was, “Thou Shalt Protect the Equal Right to Life of Each Innocent Human in Existence at Fertilization – No Exception! No Compromise!” But a whole lot of people, more specifically 85% of those with a prenatal diagnosis, take exception and some will compromise their Judeo-Christian ideals to terminate a baby with Down syndrome.

Look for that 85% figure to rise. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists is now recommending that ALL pregnant women (regardless of age) receive prenatal genetic testing and counseling.

Yes, it’s going to lead to more termination, but it’s going to be fair to these women who are 24 who say, ‘How come I have to raise an infant with Down’s syndrome, whereas my cousin who was 35 didn’t have to?’” Dr. Andre Lalonde, the executive vice president of the SOGC, told the National Post.

To make it easier on everyone (but the baby), a non-invasive nuchal fold translucency test can be performed at 10 to 13 weeks of pregnancy, when a mom is barely showing, so no one has to know if she chooses to terminate.

Those whose results are most worrisome could then undergo a procedure called chorionic villus sampling (CVS) to confirm the diagnosis while still in the first trimester. Those whose results are less clear and are worried about the small risk of miscarriage posed by CVS can wait until the second trimester to undergo the quadruple test. If that is positive, they could then undergo amniocentesis, which also carries a small risk of miscarriage.

Women who would opt to terminate a pregnancy based on the results would be able to do so much earlier, when abortion is less risky and less traumatic, Malone said.

“By the time you’re 20 weeks pregnant, most women will be feeling fetal movement. We wouldn’t want to underestimate the psychological or emotional difficulty of undergoing pregnancy termination that late,” Malone said. “Also, at that point it’s easy to tell by looking at the woman if she is pregnant. This way she can make her decision in utmost privacy.”

Canada is recommending automatic amniocentesis for all women over 40:

The Canadian society of obstetricians and gynaecologists recommends that all women be “given” amniocentesis, and that women over 40 should “automatically be given” amniocentesis. One wonders what the word “automatically” means here. Is there a distinction between being given amniocentesis and being automatically given amniocentesis? If so, what is it? Whatever it is, you can be sure of the direction in which the eugenic screws are turning. (From Reflections on Faith and Culture Blog)

I may be reaching, but I truly believe that the push for earlier diagnosis and genetic prenatal testing for ALL women stems from John Edward’s attack on obstetricians using junk science exclaiming cerebral palsy is caused by malpractice during the birth process. Now lawyers are finding other conditions to blame on obstetricians and are filing wrongful life/birth suits on behalf of parents and children with issues like Down syndrome. Testing all women gives them the opportunity to remove less than perfect babies from their bodies and no reason to sue their ob/gyn.

After my son was born, I needed to find others who had children with Down syndrome. Among the famous were columnist, George Will, and actor, John McGinley.

George Will has always been one of my favorite columnists. Following is an excerpt from his most recent column in Newsweek. Follow the link to read the entire column.

Golly, What Did Jon Do?
By George F. Will
Newsweek

Jan. 29, 2007 issue – What did Jon Will and the more than 350,000 American citizens like him do to tick off the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists? It seems to want to help eliminate from America almost all of a category of citizens, a category that includes Jon.

Born in 1972, Jon has Down syndrome. That is a congenital condition resulting from a chromosomal defect that causes varying degrees of mental retardation and some physical abnormalities, such as low muscle tone, small stature, a single crease across the center of the palms, flatness of the back of the head and an upward slant to the eyes (when Jon was born, Down syndrome people were still commonly called Mongoloids). There also is increased risk of congenital heart defects, childhood leukemia and Alzheimer’s disease. Down syndrome, although not common, is among the most common congenital anomalies—47.9 per 100,000 births (compared with 77.7 with cleft lips or palates, which also can be diagnosed in utero, and which sometimes result in abortions).

As women age, their risk of having a Down syndrome baby increases. It has become standard practice for women older than 35 years old to be offered genetic counseling and diagnostic testing. But because of the higher fertility rates of women under 35, such women have 80 percent of Down syndrome babies. So new ACOG guidelines recommend that all pregnant women, regardless of age, be offered such counseling and testing.The ACOG guidelines are formally neutral concerning what decisions parents should make on the basis of the information offered. But what is antiseptically called “screening” for Down syndrome is, much more often than not, a search-and-destroy mission: At least 85 percent of pregnancies in which Down syndrome is diagnosed are ended by abortions.

Medicine now has astonishing and multiplying abilities to treat problems of unborn children in utero, but it has no ability to do anything about Down syndrome (the result of an extra 21st chromosome). So diagnosing Down syndrome can have only the purpose of enabling—and, in a clinically neutral way, of encouraging—parents to choose to reject people like Jon as unworthy of life. And as more is learned about genetic components of other abnormalities, search-and-destroy missions will multiply.

Nothing—nothing—in the professional qualifications of obstetricians and gynecologists gives them standing to adopt policies that predictably will have, and seem intended to have, the effect of increasing abortions in the service of an especially repulsive manifestation of today’s entitlement mentality—every parent’s “right” to a perfect baby. Happily, that mentality is not yet universal: 214 American families are looking for Down syndrome children to adopt.

Read more here

I also urge you to read La Shawn Barber’s article, Baby Killing as a Civil Right. We come to the table of right to life with different, yet simlar, ideas:

Last October, Planned Parenthood joined the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, an organization founded at the dawn of the modern civil rights movement. This isn’t news per se, but I thought it was a timely tidbit for today, the 34th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that fashioned a Fourteenth Amendment “right to privacy” for women to kill their babies in utero.

Says conservative writer and friend Mychal Massie: “How can a civil rights group that claims to support underprivileged blacks embrace an organization created expressly to hasten the demise of black people? People of conscience should be appalled and outraged by this alignment.”

State of the Union Address Poll

January 24, 2007 by · 3 Comments
Filed under: News, Politics 

Allah Pundit is running a poll at HotAir.com “What did you think of the State of the Union Address last night?” As of 6:53 am ET, the poll numbers are running: 69% It was great; 21% it was OK; and 10% It was poor.

Add your vote to the poll.

SOTU discussions, videos and more here:

State of the Union: The biggest non-event of the year (HotAir.com)

and here:

Michelle Malkin

and here:

Church and State -State of the Union from the Left & Right

Mom in Chief? Mom of the House? The political mommy-track

January 23, 2007 by · 1 Comment
Filed under: Democrats, Election, Politics 

Betsy at Betsy’s page has a great post discussing the political mommy-track.

I guess there must be some people out there whose hearts melt at the thought of mothers running for public office and relate to women talking about what they learned from raising their children. I’m just not one of them. I think this is all code for saying that these women are more likely to want to spend government money for the children. That’s why Democratic mothers seem more notable than Republican mothers to the media.

And what does all this fuss say about men? That they don’t love and care about their children and grandchildren? George H.W. Bush, for example, is a man who clearly deeply loves his children and grandchildren. Was that a political plus for him? Who cared? We weren’t electing him as Dad-in-Chief. Would these same journalists who were so wowed by the sight of Nancy Pelosi’s grandchildren have felt the same way if Barbara Bush had run for office surrounded by her grandchildren? I doubt it.

Read more

Some equal time for Gov. Richardson – sort of

January 23, 2007 by · Leave a Comment
Filed under: Democrats, Election, Politics 

Governor Richardson announces his presidential exploratory committee on YouTube. The times – they are a changin’ (apologies to Bob Dylan) [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4p7KL87heVQ]

In Espanol

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YofibCbPcRE]

Why didn’t Hillary and Barack think of that?

« Previous PageNext Page »