Crush Liberalism

Liberalism: Why think when you can “feel”?

Obama’s unlikely defender

Rudy Giuliani defended Barack Obama’s decision to publicly discuss his past drug abuse problems.  From Carl Cameron’s FNC blog:

Rudy Giuliani declared that Americans should not expect a “pretense of perfection” from candidates running for office and says he respects Barack Obama’s “honesty” for discussing his previous drug use with a group of high schoolers today.

The Illinois Senator is receiving criticism from Mitt Romney, among others, for opening up and discussing past mistakes during a town hall at a Manchester, NH High School Tuesday.

“I made some bad decisions that I’ve written about, there were times when I got into drinking and experimented with drugs.. there was a whole stretch of time when i didn’t really apply myself a lot,” Obama told the group.

Giuliani said he believes Obama’s topic of conversation was completely appropriate.

“I respect his honesty in doing that. I think that one of the things we need from our people who are running for office is not this pretense of perfection,” Giuliani said. “The reality is all of us that run for public office, whether its governor, legislator, mayor, president–we are all human beings. If we haven’t made mistakes don’t vote for us cause we got some big ones that are gonna happen in the future and we wont know how to handle them.”

The former NYC mayor has been forthright about admitting his own mistakes during the campaign–most recently dogged by his connection to indicted former NYC Police Commissioner Bernie Kerik–even noting in two recent television ads that he is not perfect. 

Mitt Romney, however, apparently thinks Barry O should be disqualified from consideration of the electorate based on this incident alone:

But fellow Republican contender Mitt Romney feels differently, saying Obama committed a “huge error.”

“It’s just not a good idea for people running for presoident of the United States who potentially could be the role model for a lot of people to talk about their personal failings while they were kids because it opens the doorway to other kids thinking, ‘well I can do that too,’” Romney told an Iowa audience today. 

My take?  Obama is hugely unqualified to be president of the United States for a plethora of reasons, none of which are related to his past drug use.  If the man has been clean for this many years, that’s fine with me.  Obama’s left-wing quasi-Marxist ideology, his pitiful record in public office, and his “let’s go bomb Pakistan” foreign policy gaffes are more than enough reasons to not vote for that empty suit.

November 20, 2007 Posted by | drugs, Obama, Romney, Rudy | 5 Comments

Shocker: former ABC news anchor (current journalism prof) endorses Shrillary

Color me with the “not very surprised” crayon.  From the Boston Globe:

It was an unorthodox political endorsement, to be sure. And in throwing her support behind presidential candidate Hillary Clinton with an unprompted, heartfelt speech at a New Hampshire rally last month, Carole Simpson, the longtime ABC news anchor-turned-Emerson College journalism instructor, flung herself into the partisan fires.

While Clinton was quite taken by the unexpected backing, quickly issuing a press release touting it, others have taken offense. Over the past month, news of Simpson’s endorsement has barreled across the blogosphere, seized on by conservatives as proof of liberal media bias (you got THAT right! – Ed.). And Emerson students and faculty continue to debate the ethics of a journalism instructor and well-known former reporter making a public show of support for a political candidate.

Simpson, 65, said she immediately regretted her actions and offered her resignation the next day, which university officials refused to accept. Now Simpson is considering an offer from the Clinton campaign to stump for the candidate, namely before black audiences in the South. She and other university officials have agreed she will not teach political journalism courses if she campaigns for Clinton.

“I know I made a mistake. It was definitely the wrong venue for my first foray into free speech,” Simpson said. “But I’d really like to see her win. After being a reporter for so many years, where you wish you could do more than you can, it would be nice to make a difference.”

Simpson described Clinton, whom she covered extensively during President Bill Clinton’s administration, as the smartest woman she had ever met.

“I want to tell you tonight, because I happen to be here with my students, that I endorse you for president of the United States,” she said. “It’s very freeing now that I’m not a journalist and I can speak my mind, and I wanted you to know I think you are the woman, and I think this is the time.” 

Now that is a brilliant move, “Professor”: bring your journalism students to a campaign rally and show them that they can cast their professional obligations aside if they really, really like a particular candidate.  Then again, maybe she’s not teaching them anything different than any other journalism school is teaching.

But I’m sure she’s just an isolated example, and that her profound love for Billary never clouded her professional duties.  Yeah, right.

Supposedly, her former colleagues are perturbed:

Simpson said she immediately recognized her actions were unwise, and believes she has lost a measure of respect among her colleagues as a result.

“It used to be more collegial,” she said. “I get the sense the relationship has changed.”

They’re likely angry because their laughable claims that they are unbiased have been (once again) proven false, and by one of their own, no less!

In light of her public fawning over Her Highness, Prof. Simpson then tries this with a straight face:

Simpson said she regrets that the endorsement continues to be a flashpoint, and said her political opinions have never influenced her reporting or teaching.

“I anchored for 15 years, and I defy anyone to have determined my political feelings from that,” she said. “In no way would I ever let my own political feelings affect my teaching or my grades.”

Sniff!  Sniff!  Oh, is that a challenge I smell, Professor?  Well then…game on, be-yotch!

In 2001:

“What an exhilarating moment it must have been for [Hillary Clinton] – the first First Lady in history to be elected to public office. There, for all the nay-sayers to see, was the woman who had finally come into her own, free at last to be smart, outspoken, independent, and provocative, all qualities she had been forced as First Lady, to ‘hide under a bushel.’ Still she was voted one of America’s most admired women. Just wait. You ain’t seen nothin’ yet.” 

In 1999:

Most infamously, in a 1999 interview with President Bill Clinton at an Arkansas tomato processing plant, Simpson made the story all about herself and her glory: “I have to bask in this moment, for a moment, because I am here talking to the most powerful man on the planet, who was a poor boy from Arkansas….I am an African-American woman, grew up working class on the south side of Chicago, and this is a pretty special moment for me to be here talking to you. How does it feel talking to me? That I made it, too, when people said I wouldn’t be able to?” Clinton: “It’s a great country.”

That wasn’t too hard to debunk, Professor.  So can we please cut the crap about how you were never able to freely express your views as a journalist?  You did so uninhibitedly and repeatedly.

November 20, 2007 Posted by | Hillary, media bias | Leave a Comment

CIA: Terrorist mole / criminal alien agent no big whoop

Whether the next president be Democrat (God help us) or Republican, could we please do a bit of housecleaning in the CIA?  From NY Daily News:

In the wake of Nada Nadim Prouty’s guilty plea to lying her way into U.S. citizenship and sensitive FBI and CIA jobs, operatives of both agencies disagree whether she breached the government’s trust, or just showed poor judgment.

For many in the buttoned-down FBI, a fellow special agent tarnished the bureau’s image and betrayed them by living the lie that she was a law-abiding naturalized citizen from Lebanon.

“That can’t be glossed over,” said John Sennett, a retired agent and former president of the FBI Agents Association. “To get into the FBI under false pretenses is inexcusable. This isn’t like lying about your age to join the Navy in December 1941.”

But to CIA veterans, where Prouty was recruited as a covert operations officer in 2003, a talented spy merely fudged the truth to win her citizenship.

Prouty, 37, admitted in court that she became a U.S. citizen by hiring an American to marry her. She then joined the FBI in 1999.

“That’s not uncommon – people do it all the time,” said a dismissive CIA source. The source strongly praised her undercover work in Iraq fighting insurgents, and said at worst she used bad judgment before joining the CIA. 

Really?  This kind of stuff is “not uncommon” and “people do it all the time”?  Seriously, we routinely have illegal aliens getting high security clearance jobs that handle sensitive issues of national security AND have ties to terrorist organizations, all under false pretense?

Here’s the real jawdropper:

Several other CIA officers also shrugged off her pleading guilty to rifling FBI files for information on family members and a Hezbollah counterterror case in Detroit.

“As far as I can tell, she was just looking out for her family,” another senior official said. 

Um…yeah.  Her brother-in-law is a Hezbollah fundraiser!  We damned sure do not need anyone in the CIfreakin’A “looking out for her family” if her family is composed of terrorists or terrorist abetters!

November 20, 2007 Posted by | illegal immigration, intelligence, religion of peace | 2 Comments

MSM says Schiavo was “brain dead”

Un-friggin’-believable.  From Life News:

Terri Schiavo’s family is upset with the media for again erroneously depicting the disabled woman as “brain dead” when she was able to interact with them before her former husband took her life. This time, the Schindler family says ABC News and the New York Times wrongly reported on her condition.

Yesterday on ABC’s “This Week” program, George Stephanopoulos, in an interview with Senator Fred Thompson, commented that Terri Schiavo’s autopsy proved she was “brain dead.”

The New York Times reported on the television interview, and repeated the erroneous claim.

Terri’s brother Bobby Schindler told LifeNews.com on Monday that the “brain dead” assessment is patently false. He said Terri’s family is requesting that the media immediately stop using this “offensive and inaccurate expression” to describe her condition.

Brain death is an authentic diagnosis, not some catch phrase that should be loosely used based upon a ’summary of widespread response’ or opinions that have been written about my sister,’ Schindler said.

“We are requesting that the media take a few minutes to research the facts regarding Terri’s case and, more importantly, her condition,” he added. In doing so they would learn that not one doctor ever diagnosed Terri as being ‘brain-dead.’”

Of course the autopsy showed she was brain dead!  They don’t do autopsies on live people, do they?  I don’t care how you feel about the Schiavo situation, but is it unreasonable to ask that the proper medical terms be used?

Nope…no liberal media bias!

November 20, 2007 Posted by | media bias, shameful | 5 Comments

al-Reuters “news” article: Rudy is “scary”

The “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter” network thinks that Rudy is “scary”.  Their proof?  A bunch of liberals have said so (which, for me, is good enough reason to vote for the guy).  From the New Editor:

Ellen Wulfhorst pens this latest “news” piece from Reuters:

Republican Rudy Giuliani vows to be tough on terror, chooses advisers who want to bomb Iran and doesn’t think pretending to drown prisoners is torture.

Add to those views a reputation for being combative, and Giuliani often evokes the word “scary” from opponents who find the tough-guy image that served him so well after the September 11 attacks now a cause for concern as he seeks the U.S. presidency.

Type the word “scary” and names of Republican candidates for president into a leading database of articles. The name of the former New York mayor will get the most hits.

“He is a scary guy,” said Jerome Hauer, who ran the city’s Office of Emergency Management for Giuliani. “He was probably one of the more divisive mayors the city has ever seen.

“People in this country should be very frightened of Rudy because he is not going to bring the country together,” Hauer added. “Who knows who he’d pick wars with?”

In addition to not identifying which “leading database of articles” she conducted her search in, Reuter’s Ms. Wolfhurst must have forgotten to let her readers know that Jerome Hauer has contributed over $9,000 to Democratic candidates since 2000.

See a record of Hauer’s political contributions here and here.

But why get into the details when it might spoil a good story?

Reporter Wolfhurst also quotes Michael Tomasky, the editor of the Guardian Online, and a ‘progressive’ blogger whom she uses as an example of the view of Giuliani from the “online community,” as illustrations of people who find Giuliani ‘scary.’

No political motivation in this story here … move along, nothing to see — except for the ‘scary’ guy. 

Nope…no liberal media bias!

November 20, 2007 Posted by | media bias, Rudy | 3 Comments

   

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 25 other followers