President Bush's fault - Katrina

The left is on their respective soapboxes, blaming President Bush for Katrina. Because he does not support their "global warming" issues, it's all his fault.
It doesn't matter that there have been fewer Category 5 hurricanes in this decade than ever. What about the hurricanes during President Clinton's administration? Was that President Clinton's fault...or President Bush's?
And the gas prices...they'll gripe about that, too.
What about the liberal left blocking the construction of refineries and the drilling for oil in ANWR?
No, it's all President Bush's fault.
Keep talking, liberals. Your intelligence, or lacking of it, is revealing your true colors.
President Bush, it's time to build some refineries, drill in Alaska, and to heck with the left.
We love the environment, not MORE than they do, but BETTER than they do. We have the technology to build while protecting.
- CrippleCrab
.
.

Cindy Sheehan - is she sane?

Does Cindy Sheehan realize what she is saying when she accuses President Bush of "lying" about WMD's in Iraq? Does she realize that when she says that, she is also calling President Clinton, Congress, all of the intelligence agencies, and many heads of state...liars. They all were saying the same thing: Saddam was developing and storing Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Lady...take a load off...go lie down...you're not making ANY sense!
- CrippleCrab
.
.

Hilary for Pres?

Just had to pass this on:
Hillary Clinton went to a primary school in New York City to talk about the world. After her talk, she had a "question and answer" period.
One little boy raised his hand & the Senator asked him for his name.
"Kenneth."
"And what is your question, Kenneth?"
"I have 3 questions:
1st - Whatever happened to your medical health care plan?
2nd - Why would you run for President after your husband shamed the office?
3rd - Whatever happened to all those things you took when you left the White House?"
Just then the bell rang for recess. Hillary Clinton informed the children they would continue after recess.
When they resumed Hillary said, "Okay where were we? Oh, that's right, question time. Who has a question?"
A different little boy put up his hand. Hillary pointed to him and asked him for his name.
"Larry."
"And what is your question?"
"I have 5 questions:
1st - Whatever happened to your medical health care plan?
2nd - Why would you run for President after your husband shamed the office?
3rd - Whatever happened to all those things you took when you left the White House?
4th - Why did the recess bell go off 20 minutes early?
5th - What happened to Kenneth?"

- CrippleCrab
.
.

Karl Rove, next thoughts...

Since writing the previous post, it has been documented that Valerie Plame was NOT a covert agent with the CIA at the time of the alleged "outing". Nor was she a covert agent within the last five years of the alleged "outing".
Just because she is an employee of the CIA doesn't make anything said about her to BE an "outing". Her former boss told Sean Hannity today that this whole thing is a non-event and "ridiculous".
So, no matter how Karl Rove stated his words to any reporters, it would be no different if he had said "George Tenet". Tenet was a known overt employee of the CIA and wouldn't have been a big deal if he had been referred to. So it is with Plame. She, like Tenet, is a FORMER covert agent from years ago. NO ONE was "outed".
With all of these new facts, it is clear that no crime has been committed, no ethical situations were created. It is just as Plame's former boss said, a NON-EVENT.
The fact remains then that the Democrats are using this issue because they are so poverty-stricken on any other issues. So they are more or less CREATING an issue to embarrass the Bush administration. How pathetic and un-American.
Here we are with al-Quaida supposedly on our soil, seeking for opportunities to destroy us and our way of life...and the Democrats are playing politics. Get a life, Harry Reid and Chuckie Shumer.
- CrippleCrab
.
.

Karl Rove, Joe Wilson, outing...

It just blows my mind that the Democrats are so DESPERATE to find something that they can do to damage the Bush administration that they will take a non-event and turn it into a major scandal. Anyone with a half-baked education can see through their efforts to politicize the supposed "outing" of Joe Wilson's wife, a former undercover CIA agent.
Notice that it is JUST Democrats who were calling for Karl Rove's indictment...then his firing...now his security clearance removal. They couldn't get one, so then they demand the next; couldn't get that, so they demand the next. It just shows the insincerity of their efforts. If they felt as strongly as they do about what they think Rove did, why back down off of the indictment?
Why? Because they know he really didn't do anything wrong. So then, when it was determined that he did nothing criminal, they asked for his firing. When they realized that the President wasn't going to fire him, they sought the next possible damage that they could get: security clearance removal. ANYTHING to embarrass Rove. Vengeance! So childish.
You kids in the Democratic party leadership, DO SOMETHING CONSTRUCTIVE, please. You are either in the posture of DESTRUCTION or OBSTRUCTION.
Is there ANYONE in the Democratic party with enough gonads to be a bonefide leader and realize that the far left faction is DESTROYING you? Can you not see what you look like to the American population? Yes, you may have your small following who believes everything that the elite media tells them from your talking points. However, the true MAINSTREAM America thinks that your politics STINK.
We want you to quit playing in D.C. and get to work!
You need to FIX Social Security!
You need to SECURE THE BORDERS!
You need to enhance intelligence bureaus!
Get to work and quit your dad-gum playing around with all this idiotic partisan politics.
Enough.
You will find yourselves back in your hometown drawing a regular salary if this stuff continues.
- CrippleCrab
.
.

A SECOND Supreme Court nominee...?

With the rumors abounding that Supreme Court justice William Rehnquist may retire before the end of this week, comes the realization that President Bush will have two simultaneous nominations to submit, replacing Rehnquist and O'Connor.

There have been voices of dissatisfaction from the conservative base over the prospect of the nomination of Alberto Gonzales, since he is not pro-life.

I've heard talk show hosts like Michael Medved express to his audience that Supreme Court justices should neither be pro-life or pro-choice, but rather to be open to measuring issues to the standard of the U.S. Constitution.

I don't see how this is relevent. Regardless of how a nominee's philosophy is on abortion, the PEOPLE will know the candidate's past judicial rulings. The PEOPLE will contact their Senators and give their voice for or against the nominee. It is up to the Senator to give the nominee an up or down vote...or obstruct through filibuster.
Whether the nominee is pro-life or pro-choice will be determined by PEOPLE gauging their past rulings or historical statements.
It will be obvious how the nominee treats and interprets the Constitution by their own history.
President Bush has promised to nominate justices who are "originalists". I trust that he will do just that. The nominees must hold the sanctity of life dear. NOTHING is more important. Not the economy, not foreign relations, not the Patriot Act, not Social Security. Neither is education, joblessness, the price of oil, or national security. If a person can't get the fundamental issue of life right, I can't TRUST them with the economy or national security. I can't trust their judgment with ANYTHING if their stance on life is distorted.
President Bush knows that this is an opportunity that cannot be wasted. His nominees MUST be of the caliber that respects the issue of life BEFORE they interpret the Constitution.
Pundits have said that the Constitution does not address the issue of abortion.
Oh, but it does...in the very first phrase, "We the People of the United States..."
Until a relatively recent time, a preborn child was considered a person. Only when the abortion debate began did the redefinition process begin, the child evolving into terms such as "fetus" or "tissue".
The pro-death proponents have re-defined traditional terms in order to justify their willingness to kill an unborn child...in order to remove the consequence of bad behavior, namely pre-marital or extra-marital sex.
The judicial nominees must have a clear definition of LIFE...if we are to expect the blessings of the Creator of life on this nation.
- CrippleCrab
.
.

Supreme Court nominee...

With the just-announced retirement of Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, we are set to see an all-out war between the right and the left...the liberals and the conservatives...the Democrats and Republicans...over the next nominees to fill that position.
It can be predicted, based upon the President's previous judicial nominees, that he will nominate a conservative judge.
While the left may beat around the bush (no pun intended), and may not use the actual word, the whole war will be centered around the abortion debate.
They may frame it in other words, such as "a woman's right to choose", "reproductive rights", or "mainstream thought", however, it all boils down to one word: abortion.
The left are bug-eye fearful that they are going to lose their hold on the Roe v. Wade decision with ANY nominations made by President Bush.
This is their sacred cow. They will stoop to any depths to undermine the President's nominee, degrading them, slandering them, seeking any tidbit of dirt that can be found and in their past to be emphasized and amplified to mountainous heights.
This is going to be a hard, dirty political war. Much worse than the midterm elections. Much worse than the last Presidential elections. Much is at stake with this nomination...and they know it.
Just remember, liberals, we know it, too.
Christians, conservatives, pray for your President and your country.
- CrippleCrab
.
.