Happy Anniversary

I'm sure Teddy happily marked this day on his calendar - just like he does the Happy Hour schedule at the local pub - Abu Ghraib one year later.

Ted Kennedy's comments look to be just another attempt to push his agenda using the few bad members of our brave U.S. military.

But if Senator Kennedy's so interested in marking anniversaries, then why didn't he give celebratory remarks one year after the toppling of Saddam Hussein's statue in Baghdad?

On April 9, 2003 the world saw one of the most endearing images of freedom - EVER - thanks to the bravery of the same military men and women that Kennedy uses so deplorably today.

But on April 9, 2004 and 2005 Kennedy was silent. I suppose his mama taught him well ... if you have nothing good to say, don't say anything at all.

It's a disgrace though that a United States Senator can't muster some positive remarks about those who protect his liberties ... and on a day like today you couldn't drag him off the stage.

We should all be ashamed that he's in the United States Senate.

British media goes too far

The BBC admitted today that they provided hecklers with microphones and sent them to a political rally for Conservative Party leader Michael Howard.

The BBC claimed that the exercise was part of a "completely legitimate programme about the history and art of political heckling" and said that other parties' meetings were being "observed".
However, The Telegraph established that none of Tony Blair's meetings were infiltrated or disrupted in a any way.

A Conservative Party spokesperson, in a letter to the BBC, accused the news organization of staging the event "to generate a false news story and dramatise coverage. . . intended to embarrass or ridicule the leader of the Conservative Party".

It's clear that the BBC brass wanted a news story of Howard being heckled, so they manufactured the episode. Those on the Right have long-believed that the BBC is not a vaild news organization, unable to remove its deep political bias from its news coverage.

This complete disregard for journalistic integrity proves the point.

Gee, why didn't we think of that...?

Hillary Clinton has once again succeeded in positioning herself to the Right of most Republicans on a key issue - border security.

Clinton announced plans to push for legislation creating a Border Security Czar for the northern border who would be appointed by the Dept. for Homeland Security.

Clinton is pushing this idea while fighting against a Homeland Security proposal (backed by the Bush Administration) to require American's to show their passports when crossing our border shared with Canada.

The Czar idea is politically smart, of course, and probably has left many a Republican wondering why they didn't think of it themselves.

But on a lighter note, Hillary can forget about the 18-21 year-old vote living in Michigan, Ohio, and Upstate New York. I remember those days ... just shy of legal drinking age in the U.S. we'd often hop over the border for a pint - or two - where in Canada the drinking age is 18. Most kids that age either don't have - or at least don't have easy access - to their passports.

Just as well for Hillary that they never vote anyway!

Newt for President?

Newt Gingrich took his book tour for the recently published Winning the Future: A 21st Century Contract with America through New Hampshire yesterday - site for the second head-to-head battle for each Parties nomination for President; the first being in Iowa.

When asked if he'll run in 2008 Gingrich responded, "I'll think about it in the summer of 2007.

I'm in New Hampshire, and I'll be in Iowa, and I'll be back in New Hampshire and I'll be back in Iowa. If you want to set the terms of the 2008 debate, these are the two best states [in which] to set it."

Sounds like a candidate for President to me... but could he win the nomination? And then beat Hillary?

Bolton Nomination

Senator George V. Voinovich of Ohio surprised everyone today when he decided he needed more time before casting a vote on the nomination of John Bolton as ambassador to the United Nations.

Voinovich explained that his "conscience got" to him... surprising even his colleagues in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Three Republican Senators have expressed concern over the nomination of John Bolton... in addition to Voinovich, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island were glad to see more time given to review the nomination.

Their phone numbers are:

Voinovich - (202) 224-3353

Hagel - (202) 224-4224

Chafee - (202) 224-2921

Either call to congratulate them or tell them to get in line ... your choice.

RNC Raises $32 Million

The Republican National Committee raised a record $32 million in the first three months of 2005.

The DNC has not yet released its figures.

Take a closer look at the money trail at Opensecrets.org

Hillary - genius or imbecile?

Is Hillary Clinton the brilliant politician we all assume she is?

Most believe YES, but in today's Opinion Journal, Jay Cost tries to prove otherwise ... and makes a pretty good case.

But sorry Jay, I'm not buying it ... the Clinton's haven't lost an election in 25 years and while its always been Bill at the forefront, Hillary's been taking notes.

She'll be tough to beat in 2008.

Dean doesn't know his audience

DNC Chair Howard Dean was in Los Angeles this weekend at the California Democratic Convention... a fun-for-all Arnold Bash that had the three declared candidates for Governor whining and snipping at each other as much as beating up Schwarzenegger.

For those keeping score the three Democrats who have jumped into the ring are Attorney General Bill Lockyer, State Controller Steve Westly and Treasurer Phil Angelides.

Combined, these three candidates have as much personality as a damp towel.

In last night's speech to the Democrat faithful Howard Dean focused on changing the rhetoric used when talking about abortion:

"I think we need to talk about abortion differently," Dean said. "Republicans have painted us into a corner where they have forced us to defend abortion. I don't know anybody who's for abortion."

"We can make common ground with folks," he continued. "The issue we need to debate is not whether abortion is a good thing. The issue we need to debate is whether a woman gets to make up her own mind about her health care or whether Tom DeLay gets to make up her mind."

This may be a sound strategy, but Dean can forget about bringing the Democrat Faithful along with him...

"That's not the Democratic Party anymore," one Lefty activist said. "That's the party of the far right and that's the direction we're moving in when everybody starts talking about abandoning choice for women in the Democratic Party."

Being staunch pro-choice is what makes the Democrat party faithful tick - and it's these types that show up to state conventions in the middle of an off election year. Dean's right that if Democrats are going to be successful they need to tone down the abortion rhetoric, but his message will - and did this weekend - fall on deaf ears.

All he accomplished this weekend in LA was demoralizing a base that he will desperately need to work hard for him next year.

Mr. Prime Minister

Earlier this year I wrote about "the second most important politician in America," U.K. Prime Minister, Tony Blair.

The articulate case he made for war with Iraq, free elections and the overall power of democracy helped President Bush in more ways that I think even he is willing to admit.

So today's London polls showing Blair victorious in the May 5 parliamentary elections should come as welcome news to Bush and the eventual Republican nominee for President, whoever that may be.

The irony of course is that Blair is the Labour candidate - the liberal. The Conservative Party (or Torry) leader Michael Howard today announced - in the heat of campaign rhetoric - a 1.7 billion Pound tax cut to save the U.K.'s pension plan... sounds like Bush.

This would give Blair his third - and according to him - his last term as PM of Great Britain.

PREDICTION: McCain Will Not Be President

John McCain's fate in the 2008 Republican primary will be sealed with his No vote on the judicial nomination issue (see today's earlier post)... but just in case there is still doubt about his future McCain's immigration reform could finish him for good.

We're talking pure politics here... whether a guest worker program is a good or bad plan is beside the point; whether creating a system in which illegal immigrants in this country can move toward legal status is a good or bad idea is also beside the point... both are great questions and great issues, but for this post they're not relevant.

The point here is that both of these issues will destroy a Republican candidate's hopes of capturing the nomination.

McCain has teamed with Senator Ted Kennedy on the plan, which Roll Call recently said will include the two controversial proposals mentioned above.

If the McCain/Kennedy plan allows for illegal immigrants to gain legal status, he'll be done as a Republican candidate for President... he might as well switch parties. And while bipartisanship is important to Independents and moderates, conservative Republicans will also look at McCain's partnership with Kennedy as a sign that he is not a true Republican, as many have believed all along.

Republicans have votes to end filibuster

Robert Novak writes today for Townhall.com that Republicans have the votes needed to end the Democrat filibusters on confirmation of judicial nominations.

The minority Democrats have thus far successfully blocked a full vote of the Senate on many of President Bush's nominees for the federal bench.

Three Republican Senators - Olympia Snowe of Maine, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island and John McCain of Arizona - are expected to vote against the move but Republicans will still have the 50 votes necessary.

debate08 believes that in siding with the Democrats on this pivotal issue John McCain will essentially end any chance he has at the Republican nomination for President in 2008.

Where does it all go?

As you scramble today to file those taxes (or extensions) why not check out where all that hard-earned money you make goes ...

Citizens Against Government Waste

WARNING: You may need a stiff drink after visiting this site.

Happy Tax Day!

No Gay Marriage in Oregon

Folks on the Right have recently had to endure a run of extremely poor decisions (at least in their estimation) by "liberal" judges - the Schivao case and the fact that jurors in Denver can't look at a Bible when considering a death penalty case to name two.

So today's ruling by the Oregon Supreme Court to ban the almost 3,000 marriages between homosexuals that took place in one county must have come as a shock to both those on the Left and the Right.

In fact, it was such a shock to the Mayor of Portland, Tom Potter, that he uttered such a bizarre remark as to warrant the question of the week...

Potter said that today was "a sad day" and continued that, "I am especially saddened for my daughter, Katie. As a Portland police officer, she has put her life on the line to protect our community. Katie and her partner, Pam, married last March, with their two little girls watching. Now, I wonder, who will protect Katie and her family?"

Question: What in the world is he talking about? Now I know politicians like to run their families out onto the stage and use them as political propaganda every once in a while ... but doesn't this instance strike you as slightly strained? I mean honestly, what is he talking about? What possible relevance does her employment as a cop have to do with gay marriage?

Pataki in trouble; what about Hillary?

The New York Post today reports on two new polls (one by Marist College the other by Siena College) that both show New York Governor George Pataki getting beat badly by Attorney General Eliot Spitzer in his bid for a fourth term.

Marist College poll:
60% Spitzer
33% Pataki

Siena College poll:
48% Spitzer
34% Pataki

Both polls also showed that former Mayor Rudy Giuliani would beat Spitzer.

As for the former first lady, Hillary may need to tend to her own fence before launching her national assault for the White House.

In a repeat of the early-2000 election, Giuliani v. Hillary, the Marist survey found Giuliani the winner, 49% to 47%; the Siena poll found Clinton ahead, 52% 41%

What does all this mean? Not much. The only thing these polls may do is hurt Pataki's fund raising efforts... other than that, they're meaningless.

Too dumb to vote?

John Kerry told an audience yesterday that intimidation and trickery caused many not to vote last November.

''Leaflets are handed out saying Democrats vote on Wednesday, Republicans vote on Tuesday. People are told in telephone calls that if you've ever had a parking ticket, you're not allowed to vote,'' Kerry said.

Here's my question: If people are stupid enough to fall for these lines, do we really want them involved in the election of the leader of the free world?

Hillary in the Raw

An internal fight is brewing in the halls of Penguine publishing house about a new book, Hillary in the Raw, set for a September release, that apparently has "revelations in it [that] should sink her candidacy," according to a source close to the author, Ed Klein.

Penguine's no stranger to politically charged literature... its editors published Kerry's official campaign book last year... but will they publish a book that could sink their Democratic Savior?

Drudge has the story.

Rudy '08

By stating last week that he will not run for the New York Senate seat or Governor's mansion next year, many believe Rudy Giuliani essentially announced his run for President in 2008.

But the New York Daily News asks today if Republicans are capable of nominating a man who has been married three times, supports gun control, gay rights and a woman's right to an abortion ... it's a good question.

debate08 believes the answer is No, Republicans are not capable of such a thing ... even if it means handing the White House to Hillary Clinton.

Republicans - at least the one's who work in and help shape the primary campaigns - would rather go home at night knowing they voted their moral principles and lost, than compromise those principles and win.

Hillary Meter ...

Updated - 8:15 PM

Of course, Hillary still has trouble leaving her liberal views totally behind ... "two U.S. senators, Democrats Hillary Clinton of New York and Patty Murray of Washington, vowed Thursday to block President Bush's nominee to head the Federal Drug Administration until the agency rules on whether the morning-after pill could be sold over the counter." [Full story here.]

--------------------------------------------
Moderate Makeover Working for Hillary!

43% of Americans believe Hillary Clinton is liberal ... down from 51%, according to pollster Scott Rasmussen.

63% of Americans believe she'll be the Democrat nominee in 2008.

See complete numbers here.

How about you ... is she liberal or not?

Bush and Clinton Sitting In A Tree ...

Bush and Clinton are getting awfully chummy these days ... much to the chagrin, I would imagine, of many on the Right.

President Bush solicited foreign policy advice from former President Bill Clinton at CIA briefings this week and even told Mr. Clinton that he liked his approach to reforming Social Security ... Read on here.

Pope John Paul II (1920 -2005)

As Catholics across the globe mourn the death - and celebrate the wonderful life - of Pope John Paul II the guessing game has already begun on who will be his successor.

And thanks to The Teaching Company (and to Hugh Hewitt for spreading the word on this) you can learn all about the fascinating history and process of papal elections. Click here for the free downloads.

Matthew 25:21
His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant.

God Bless, John Paul.

Running on the backs of the poor?

John Edwards - former Senator from North Carolina and Democratic Veep nominee - says he's not running for President in 2008 ... at least not yet.

But instead he's "pouring [his] heart and soul into" poverty and has started a new poverty center in his home state.

Of course he said this while on the radio in Iowa - the site of the first presidential caucus in '08 and where the chosen few candidates will rise to the top while the rest begin their short decent into oblivion.

Kerry won in Iowa - Edwards second and Dean third - and that win began Kerry's steamroll of the D-primaries; just like it would have started Edwards' or Dean's if they had won.

That's why Iowan's are getting so much attention these days ... and it's fun to watch the politicians go out of their way to say they're not running. They make the pilgrimage to Iowa and once there stress - at least publicly -how it's too early to start talking about 2008.

Of course Edwards met with key Iowa Dem. party officials and backers of his 2004 campaign ... but I'm sure all they talked about was poverty.

Here's my question: Since when did poverty become a national issue on which to launch a presidential campaign? What does Edwards know that we don't? And please don't respond by saying he's doing this ONLY becomes he cares about the poor - I'm sure he does care if they're poor, unless they ask him to defend them in court. But let's be honest, shall we? He's running for President - just like the rest of them. So why poverty?

Click here to see results and info on the 2004 Iowa Caucus.