Itz News to Me

…or else they might be experiencing out-of-control gun violence there…

If only there were something in the Constitution that allowed law-abiding citizens to defend themselves against that sort of thing…

Popularity: 3%

In yet another “airbrushing the past” incident, the Obama campaign has magically wiped away the evidence of his past opposition to the surge, lack of faith in our military, and general piss-poor judgment…

Popularity: 3%

San Francisco, one of the famous “sanctuary cities,” has found itself the victim of computer sabotage by one of its own employees….but the Leftist Democrats running the city still can’t see the potential dangers of not securing our borders…What if it hadn’t been just a disgruntled employee?

Popularity: 3%

…so says David Lightman of McClatchy Newspapers….

Never mind that Obama is a neo-Marxist…

Never mind that Obama thinks that I’m a bitter, gun-loving, Jesus-nut too stupid to figure out things for myself…

Never mind that Obama wouldn’t even be a U.S. senator were it not for the fact that he was the last man standing after scandal eliminated a rival that would have easily dusted him in an actual election…

Never mind that he doesn’t have a single legislative accomplishment to show for his time in the U.S. Senate….

Never mind that he can’t bring himself to actually denounce the idea that the U.S. brought 9/11 on itself or that the government created AIDS to kill colored people…(He only denounced what he called “controversial statements.” He never specified which statements. His lawerly parsing wasn’t an accident.)

Never mind that he thinks I am gullible enough to believe he belonged to a church for twenty years and had no idea what they stood for…

Never mind that he thinks it’s OK to hold fundraisers at the home of an admitted domestic terrorist…

Never mind that he’s involved in corrupt land deals with enemy agents and political fixers….

Never mind that he thinks people who wear flag pins are false patriots…

Never mind that his wife is a bigot of the first order…

Never mind that his first instinct, when he got in political trouble, was to throw the grandmother who loved and raised him under the bus…

Never mind that he is unable to make the distinction between having a difference of opinion and planting a bomb…

Never mind that he is the favorite candidate of Hamas and the Iranian regime…

I haven’t even gotten to the color of his skin because I could care less. Unlike Obama and Lightman, I judge people on the content of their character. I have seen Obama’s character and found it sadly lacking.

I could go on for pages, but why should I? After all, according to both Obama and David Lightman, the only reason I wouldn’t vote for him is because I’m clinging to my fear and dislike for “people who don’t look like me.”

Too bad neither of them would ever have the courage to say it to my face.

Popularity: 9%

Just hours after getting caught with their hands in the cookie jar for planting questions and swearing they’d never do it again, Hillary Clinton’s campaign did it again.

This time they tried to claim it was just an innocent conversation between old acquaintences. Problem is, they weren’t. And it wasn’t. It was the same old sleazy underhanded Clinton tactics: they just figured that lightning couldn’t possibly strike twice. Who would think to even check so soon after such an embarrassing incident after all?

This brazen huckstering shows that for Hillary there is no such thing as spontaneity: if it’s not in her script, it doesn’t happen. And we thought Al Gore was stiff and robotic in 2000? He’s looking like a freewheeling firebrand by comparison to the rigidity of Hillary Clinton and her handlers. Not that I’m complaining, mind you…The more the American public sees of who and what she really is, the less likely we’ll have to hear from her after November 2008.

Popularity: 17%

In just the latest round of Democratic hypocrisy, the state of Maryland (my home sweet home) thinks that everyone deserves to get paid a “living wage,” unless of course that somebody happens to work for the state of Maryland.

For those of you not privileged to live in this fine state, it is literally infested with Democrats from the local level all the way up to our governor and congressional delegation. If you want to find Republicans here, you have to go west in the “skinny” part of the state: but the population of Baltimore and the DC suburbs is so much larger that it is practically inconsequential. In recent years, Maryland has become more and more nanny state-ish, and this is going to be the end result: the only ones who will be able to afford doing business in this state will be the government. By creating special rules for itself while over-regulating and taxing everybody else to death, the Democrats are creating a creeping de facto socialist state.

This is what a liberal future looks like: is this what you really want?

Popularity: 14%

Don’t question their patriotism! Isn’t that the mantra we hear over and over? It’s gone well beyond a question into a statement. Democratic leaders have no patriotism: just an appetite for raw power that extends to their willingness to lie about the soldiers who are fighting the war in Iraq.

Democrats are already pre-emptively attacking General Petraeus as some sort of Bush stooge claiming that he will lie in his upcoming report by saying the surge is working. The problem is that the surge is working and they know it. Every reporter or blogger who has actually been there in the last couple months has come back saying what a big change it has made, and it has Democrats running scared. They’ve spent the last four years distancing themselves from the war and counting on its failure, so much so that a successful outcome could literally cripple their future electoral chances for a generation. And they know it.

So rather than get on the right side of history and admit they were wrong, they go to the backroom and devise a new party line: the soldiers are liars! they’re tools of President Bush! General Petraeus isn’t going to tell us the truth! Blah, blah, blah. It’s one thing to be on the other side of an issue, but it’s quite another to intentionally slander our troops. I have no patience left for these lying traitors, and I can only hope that the American public punishes them in the 2008 elections for trying to perpetrate this fraud on us and on our soldiers.

Popularity: 14%

For all the current talk about problems within Republican ranks, the truth is that when it comes to outright fraud and corruption, nobody does it like Democrats. From mafia-controlled unions to backroom politics, the biggest local “machines” such as the infamous Tammany Hall which controlled New York politics have always been Democratic. But that was the past you say. Lots of people and organizations have unsavory pasts that they’ve moved beyond. True. It’s just the Democrats aren’t one of them.

Witness New Jersey. In what at first blush seems just another local politician gone bad story, the money quote is literally the last sentence in the article:

More than 100 public officials in the state have been convicted on federal corruption charges in the last five years.

How many? More than 100. Convicted. Not charged, convicted.

If there had been more than 100 Republicans convicted across the country in the last five years, the media would be pounding on them day and night. But there hasn’t been a peep about New Jersey. Why? Because they’re Democrats. And the silence is deafening. Where are 60 Minutes, Dateline NBC, 20/20, the New York Times, or the Washington Post on this story? An entire state subverted by corrupt party politics at every level right down to the school boards, and no one thinks that’s national news?

Media defenders always conveniently ignore how many stories don’t get run because of media bias. There’s no bias? Really. Then defend this….

Popularity: 16%

The New York Times has had enough 9/11. Today’s edition contains an article with complaint after complaint from locals who just wish the whole thing would go away. How fitting…and how politically convenient…

First, let’s dispense with the basic point: that six years is far too long to commemorate 9/11. Hey guys, ever heard of Pearl Harbor Day? It’s closing on 70 years later and it’s still on the calendar. So where’s the article about Pearl Harbor Day fatigue? Answer: you’ll never see one. Ever. Why? Because Democratic victories in upcoming elections don’t depend on people forgetting Pearl Harbor Day.

It’s a measure of just how far the NYT is willing to sink that they are resorting to this sort of propaganda. For that’s what this article is: an attempt to neutralize the Democratic weakness on national security issues by trying to erase 9/11 from the public consciousness. Nothing more and nothing less. Move along. There’s nothing to see here. So what if Democrats have a long history of weak-kneed appeasement of threats to this country, dictators and thugs both at home and abroad. There are no threats on the horizon to worry about, right? Right? 9/11? What 9/11?

Just another reminder of who’s side they’re really on….It’s not yours or mine or even this country’s. It’s all about naked political power. They want it, and they’re willing to do anything to achieve it. I don’t question their patriotism, because there’s no question that they have none.

UPDATE: Over at Classical Values, Eric has found an even more embarrassing divide between what the NY Times is and isn’t willing to commemorate: Princess Diana’s death. Hey guys: she wasn’t American, she wasn’t even in line for the British throne….She was just a foreign celebrity, but the NYT goes wall-to-wall for the anniversary of her death while the more recent deaths of nearly 3,000 of their neighbors is just “annoying.”

Popularity: 16%

I said this a long time ago, and I’ll repeat it again: History will judge President Bush kindly.

For those of us old enough to remember Reagan’s time in office remember that many of the same criticisms being leveled at the Bush administration are simply retreads of the exact same criticisms - from many of the exact same people and institutions - that were made toward then President Reagan: arrogance, tyranny, insensitivity, stupidity, yada yada yada.

The reality is that many of those criticisms are not aimed at Bush’s ineffectiveness, but the fear that his policies actually are effective. I’m not going to waste my time arguing on behalf of his PR machine which has been woefully inadequate since Karen Hughes’ departure. The Medicare drug benefit for seniors which Democrats wanted to block rather than have seniors believe that the Republicans were anything but willing to euthanize the elderly, implementation of testing in schools over the objections of the teachers union which is offended by the prospect of actually forcing teachers to do their jobs rather than run social experiments on our children, and the prosecution of militant Islamists rather than continue the Democratic appeasement policies of Carter and Clinton will all be what is long remembered while the critics of those policies will be resigned to the “dustbin of history.”

Even now the Democrats are running scared of any perceived success of the surge in Iraq by attempting to continually move the goalposts away from success on the ground to avoid any hint of a victory against tyranny and Islamism in the Middle East because the truth of the matter is that Bush said one of the rationales for the war is a “draining of the swamp.” And it truly is doing that despite the protestations of war critics. Democrats want to either: a) run away from Iraq before it truly takes hold, or b) get into office themselves so they can take credit for the heavy lifting being done today.

History will tell a different story than today’s New York Times just as it does of the Reagan administration: and just like today, they’ll all “remember” how they supported those policies too…

Popularity: 17%