You can't soar with eagles if you flock with turkeys.
Think of me as existing in the realm of thought, intangible yet visible in the wings of your mind.
LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla. - Taking a swipe at a potential GOP presidential rival, Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton on Saturday criticized Fred Thompson for suggesting illegal Cuban immigrants pose a terrorist threat.
"I was appalled when one of the people running for or about to run for the Republican nomination talked about Cuban refugees as potential terrorists," Clinton told Hispanic elected officials. "Apparently he doesn't have a lot of experience in Florida or anywhere else, and doesn't know a lot of Cuban-Americans."
Thompson posted Thursday on his campaign blog saying he had been referring to Cuban spies, not immigrants. "Our national security is too important an issue to let folks twist words around for a one-day headline," Thompson said in his post. "Cuban-Americans are among the staunchest opponents of illegal immigration, and especially so when it's sponsored by the Castro regime."
………………
This is a typical Hillary demagoguery.She went to a city where Cubans abound and spoke in the true fashion of a charlatan. I did not hear or see the video but I am pretty sure she spoke withthe affectation of a tin can orator atop a soapbox. Notice that Hillary is issuing blanket statements, like she is speaking of gospel truths.This is characteristic of demagogues and rabble rousers talking specifically to a selected audience, telling them what is pleasing to their ears, with utter disregard of truth and nuances of truth.
I find this attitude and mindset of a person running for the White House very disturbing. It is too self-serving, and translated on global scope on which the White House is anchored,Hillary will be looking at the world thru the eyes of a frog in a well looking at the sky. Fred Thomson summed it up succinctly:folks twisting words around for a one day headline.
The Senate majority hasn’t shaken off its euphoria from the last elections. First they act like generals and try to micromanage the war in Iraq and now they try to micromanage the functions of the White House by disrupting the Justice Department.
The minority Republicans are wise to dig in their heels against the whims and fancies of the wannabe generals and Commander-in-Chiefs. The democrats are unwittingly chipping away at the bastion of the executive branch and trying to usurp its functions. White House spokesman is right in asserting the fact that the Justice Secretary works at the pleasure of the president, not the senate. The Justice Secretary has done no wrong, regardless of how much the Senate try to unearth any anomalies in the department.
The sponsor of the resolution for a vote of no confidence, Charles Schumer, is acting like a snake oil salesman trying to grab the limelight, and the Senate did the wise thing when the GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote.
By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Senate Democrats blistered Attorney General Alberto Gonzales Monday with debate on a "no-confidence" resolution, butPresident Bush and fellow Republicans shrugged it all off as a waste of time.
No one predicted that the resolution would survive its test vote late in the day. But neither did Republicans or Democrats rush to defend Bush's longtime friend after he alienated even the White House's staunchest allies on a host of controversies — from the bungled firings of eight federal prosecutors to the handling of wiretapping authority under the USA Patriot Act.
Many Republican votes against the symbolic resolution apparently sprang from a fear of political retribution, not support of Gonzales.
"There is no confidence in the attorney general on this side of the aisle," said Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record) of Pennsylvania, the senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, announcing he would vote for the no-confidence resolution.
The debate itself shook loose another Republican call for new attorney general.
"I have lost confidence in the ability of Attorney General Gonzales to lead the
Department of Justice effectively," Sen. Susan Collins (news, bio, voting record), R-Maine, said in a statement. "I think his continued tenure does not benefit the department or our country."
Other Republicans complained that the Democratic resolution was an effort to pressure Bush into firing Gonzales — an unlikely prospect in light of Bush's strong continued support.
"They can have their votes of no confidence, but it's not going to make the determination about who serves in my government," Bush said in Sofia, Bulgaria, the last stop on a weeklong visit to Europe.
"This process has been drug out a long time," Bush added. "It's political."
The attorney general said he was paying no attention to the rhetoric on Capitol Hill.
"I am not focusing on what the Senate is doing," Gonzales said at a nuclear terrorism conference in Miami. "I am going to be focusing on what the American people expect of the attorney general of the United States and this great Department of Justice."
Democrats said it was only fair that senators give Gonzales an official up-or-down vote, especially after five GOP senators had called for the attorney general's resignation and many more had publicly criticized him.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif., one of the resolution's sponsors, said any attorney general should uphold the law rather than the president's political priorities.
"The attorney general has not lived up to this standard, and he has lost our confidence," Feinstein said on the Senate floor.
So-called "no-confidence" votes on members of the executive branch are rare, in part because the Constitution mandates the separation of powers. The only way Congress can remove a presidential appointee is through impeachment.
Majority Democrats toned down the language in the one-sentence resolution to attract more support from Republicans.
"It is the sense of the Senate that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales no longer holds the confidence of the Senate and of the American people," read the measure, sponsored by Sens. Chuck Schumer of New York and Feinstein.
Sixty votes were required Monday to bring the resolution to a formal debate.
Republicans protested the measure on constitutional grounds. There was scarcely any defense of Gonzales himself.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (news, bio, voting record) called the debate a waste of time.
"It will have no impact on the tenure of the attorney general," McConnell, R-Ky., told reporters on a conference call.
Sen. Orrin Hatch (news, bio, voting record), R-Utah, did not defend Gonzales. He said the resolution failed constitutional and procedural tests and he took issue even with the notion that it accurately represented both houses of Congress or public sentiment.
"This joint resolution amounts to sound and fury, it signifies nothing," Hatch said on the Senate floor.
A broad immigration bill to legalize millions of people in the U.S. unlawfully suffered a stunning setback in the Senate Thursday, costing President Bush perhaps his best opportunity to win a top domestic priority. The bipartisan compromise championed by the president failed a crucial test when it could not attract even a simple majority for an effort to speed its passage.
Supporters could muster only 45 votes to limit debate and speed the bill to final passage, 15 short of what was needed on the procedural maneuver. Fifty senators voted against cutting off debate.
Most Republicans voted to block Democrats' efforts to advance the measure.
Click on link for more details…
Congress is spinning its wheels on this legislation. By all accounts, this bill is bipartisan and to top is all, is Dubya’s pet project. Despite Sen. Kennedy spearheading the passage of the bill, it did not make the grade. One would think that the Democrats are in the minority.
Proponents of the bill assert that we are a nation of immigrants. It is true, but the logic does not apply to the legislation in question. The more than 12 million undocumented residents are not immigrants, period
I have a surefire way to make congress stop spinning their wheels. ENFORCE the current laws of the land, and everything will fall into their right places.
A new biography’s unflattering portrayal of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton as someone who “camouflages” her real self for political gain is starting to attract attention — and not for the salacious stories most books recount about the Clintons.
“A Woman in Charge,” by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Carl Bernstein, gives scant attention to the tense days the former First Lady spent in the White House when Bill Clinton was sneaking around with his intern, Monica Lewinsky. Instead, the former Washington Post reporter, who helped blow the lid off Watergate, attempts to portray Hillary Clinton as someone who is willing to rewrite her own history to advance the political career she put on hold when she moved to Arkansas with her college sweetheart who would later become president.
“This is a woman who led a camouflaged life and continues to,” Bernstein told TODAY host Matt Lauer on Friday in an exclusive interview. “This book takes away that camouflage.” The book, which he called the first “real biography” of Hillary Clinton, will be available on June 5.
To tell the story of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s journey from a humble childhood marked by abuse at home to the White House, and later the U.S. Senate, Bernstein talked to about 200 close friends and advisers to the Clintons. Bernstein said he learned a lot about Hillary Clinton, including steps she took to try to silence the various women linked to her husband throughout his political career.
Click on link for more details …
+++++++++++
I have long harbored this gut feeling that there is something phony about Hillary R. Clinton in the way she talks to her audience. It appears that she takes on the stance of an actor, tailoring her rhetoric to what is pleasing to the specific audience, making her sound like a tin can orator – irritatingly loud and without substance. I could not quite articulate an adequate description of this Hillary character, until now that Carl Bernstein said so in his book, i.e. - inauthentic. She is patently artificial in her ideas and corresponding words, so much so that she appears flip-flopping on important issues. Naturally when there is no solid foundation for ideas, the substance expressed in words keep changing like the colors of a chameleon. I would not entrust the onus of the White House to this unstable character.
The main reason why this nation is great is because it is built on the selfless sacrifices of heroes unmindful of the cost of preserving freedom. This nation is great because it went through the crucible of war and the discipline that emanated therefrom was forgedfrom the blood and spirit of heroes who did not plunge blindly into the valleys of death but rather with dogged resolve to keep the conflict away from succeeding generations of their children.. I honestly believethat this remembrance of today should be in spirit of nationhoodtotally untarnished by mundane pursuit of personal ambition, otherwise called politics. I am in total agreement with Paul Morin …
Here is a surprise: I am not going to defend the Iraq war. I won't even explain the importance of the war on terrorism. Veterans Affairs budget? Not today. That's because this column is about Memorial Day, a hallowed day that should be about honoring the more than 1 million men and women who died in the service of this nation in wars and conflicts dating back to 1775. It should be above politics. Period.
Yet Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards is calling on Americans to use Memorial Day weekend as a time to "bring an end to this war." Mr. Edwards is hardly the first politician from either political party to exploit this day, a holiday that was consecrated with the blood of American heroes. As national commander of the American Legion, I implore all candidates to refrain from politicking on Memorial Day.
The families of those killed in war should not be led to believe that their loved ones died for a less-than-worthy cause. They died because they took an oath to defend this nation and its Constitution. The sacrifice is the same whether it's for a "popular war" or an unpopular one. Memorial Day should be an occasion to bring Americans together to honor these heroes.
It brings to mind the words of Army Sergeant 1st Class Jack Robison, who recently wrote from Iraq, "Sometimes I think God must be creating an elite unit in heaven, because He only seems to select the very best soldiers to bring home early."
If you want to honor these heroes, visit a veterans' cemetery on Memorial Day. Attend a parade without the divisive political signs. Make cards for the comrades of the fallen who are recuperating in military and VA hospitals. Lay a wreath at the headstone of a departed hero.
Americans need to remember why Memorial Day is special. It's not about picnics or trips to the beach. It's not about making pro- or anti-war statements. It's not about supporting political candidates. It's about honor, duty, and the ultimate sacrifice. It's about people who have decided that the United States is worth dying for.
• Paul Morin is national commander of the American Legion, the nation's largest wartime veterans organization.
The Iraq war is a polarizing event such that even ex-presidents do not run short of acrimoniouspontifications. It was not like we marched to Iraq like a knight in shining armor to deliver the Iraqis from Saddam. The images of Iraqis dancing in the streets while the Twin Towers were burning will never be blurred from memory but that is beside the point.911 was not an accident in history – it was a well planned adventure in terrorism that served as a wakeup call for Americans, hitherto smug in the thought that the oceans are buffer zones for safety. 240 dead american servicemen in Lebanon and 17 dead sailors aboard USS Cole failed to shake us from stupor.The burning World Towers were jolting shocks in succession and only a zombie will not react to such pain.
Liberals and Conservatives were unanimous in declaring that retribution is imperative.The terrorist were confronted in their own game and terrirories. But soon the Liberals wavered in their resolve – after body bags started bringing casualties back to the homeland. The Liberals think that fighting terrorist is a game, and according to Harry Reid, one more casualty is one too many. The euphoria of winning the last elections made the Democrats think thatthey have the mandate to act like wannabe Napoleons and thus attempt to micromanage the Iraq war like it were the little house on the prairie.
Of course there is price to pay for defending the country from terrorism. The soldiers never wavered in their resolveby enlisting in a volunteer service and some even refused lucrative sports contracts .There is no honor more edifying and reward more gratifying than giving one’s life in service to the country. So while wimps and detractors are calumniating George dubya Bush to mask the shaking in their boots, a California family grieves dead soldier.
By JEREMIAH MARQUEZ, Associated Press WriterThu May 24, 12:20 PM ET
The front steps of Pfc. Joseph Anzack Jr.'s old high school became a makeshift shrine of flowers, flags and balloons, marked with a sign reading: "You're our HERO."
The 20-year-old soldier's Web page was also flooded with condolences on Thursday, a day after word came that his body had been found in the Euphrates River following an ambush in Iraq.
At South High School, Arnack was self-assured, knowing early that he wanted to join the military.
"I just remember, as a sophomore or a junior in high school, he was set on it," said Kyle Flynn, the soldier's friend and football teammate. "'I'm ready to go,'" Flynn recalled Anzack saying.
Students went to the school to leave flowers and light candles. The sign on the school steps read, "We love & miss you Joe Anzack. You're our HERO."
Anzack was one of three soldiers who vanished after their combat team was ambushed May 12 about 20 miles outside Baghdad. Five others, including an Iraqi, were killed in the ambush, subsequently claimed by al-Qaida.
This image provided by the US Navy shows the USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74), USS Nimitz (CVN 68), and USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD 6) strike groups steaming through the Gulf of Oman Tuesday May 22, 2007. The U.S. Navy staged its latest show of military force off the Iranian coastline sending the three strike groups through the narrow Strait of Hormus on Wednesday. Aircraft aboard the three carriers and the Bonhomme Richard were to conduct air training while the ships ran submarine, mine and other exercises. (AP Photo/US Navy - Denny Cantrell)
George W. Bush has been called lots of names but nevera name for lack of courage. The US can not afford to become appeaser to international rogues and terrorists who are banking on America’s ‘weakness’ of giving values to each and every human life. Iran rants mayjust be bluff and bluster, but threats to wipe Israel off the map is no joke, not even for dubya. The Democrats would rather consult the UN and other countries before they make a move in the Persian gulf, simply because they do not have the courage of dubya … without realizing that it might be too late for consultations.
In the face of Iran’s intransigence and defiance of UN sanctions, I think the US opted to send diplomats - Nine U.S. warships enter Gulf for training– to convey the message that time is up.
By Mohammed Abbas
Nine U.S. military ships entered the Gulf on Wednesday for a rare daylight assembly off Iran's coast in what naval officials said was the largest such move since the 2003 Iraq war.
U.S. Navy officials said Iran had not been notified of plans to sail the vessels, which include two aircraft carriers, through the Straits of Hormuz, a narrow channel in international waters off Iran's coast and a major artery for global oil shipments.
Most U.S. ships pass through the straits at night so as not to attract attention, and rarely move in such large numbers.
Navy officials said the decision to send a second aircraft carrier was made at the last minute, without giving a reason.
