Senate Dems Tonight Seem to Me to Be Much In a State of Flux & Uncertainty.

You have them rejecting an anti-abortion-funding amendment to the senate bill, which some "blue dog" dems have insisted is a prerequisite to their vote (thereby very much threatening the dems' ability to pass anything here), and then on the same night you have this feeble little mouse known as Harry Reid scurrying out and proclaiming from on high that "We have a deal on the public option, but you can't see it yet, nor can I describe anything about it, but trust me, it's a good thing, and we have a deal!" What a PATHETIC group of individuals these congressional dems are, rivaled only by the congressional repubs. Not to mention, at least one prominent Senate dem is disputing that there's really any "deal" on the public option issue. But I digress. My bottom line observation on all this: Dems look confused, weak and chicken$hit, even more so than they typically do just in the normal course of things. Which also makes them extremely dangerous. We thought the danger of a "nuclear option," or some insane anti-democratic procedural maneuver being used, was past us? I'd say, think again. Because I think that may be the only way these crazy individuals will be able to get anything passed. God help us. Literally.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5B807720091209?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true

Good to See the Dems Reverting Back to Their True Pathetic Colors.

All Summer Long (The Summer of Discontent, as it has become known to us Independents) these far left freaks were going around making all kinds of wild statements right and left about how ANYONE who disagreed with them on ANYTHING was, inter alia, a Nazi, a Mobster, a Racist, etc., etc., etc. Well, I do have to say, the radical leftist freaks have VERY much toned down their rhetoric in recent months -- almost like they all got together and resolved to do so. But just how long can a rat go without sniveling on some rotten cheese? Answer: Only so long. And so it was today that we see our Much Esteemed Senate Majority Leader from the State of Nevada, Harry Reid, comparing ANYONE who disagrees with Obama & The Dems' health care plan to Slave-Holders and Male Chauvinistic Pigs! Good to know that the country of freedom, independence, and debate is exhibiting so much tolerance for opposing viewpoints so as to make such a wonderful example for the world community! Put another way, Reid's a slime, just like so many other dems and members of the far left who react with third-grade insults and attack mode towards ANYONE who has the unmitigated gall to disagree with them on anything. And republicans, you can go F*** yourselves too.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/07/reid-compares-health-care-reform-foes-slavery-supporters/

Hubba, Hubba!

The Dignitaries are rollin' in and linin' up right and left in Denmark for this Copenhagen climate summit starting tomorrow (first link below). Following up on Saturday's blog post, I wonder how many of them are there for their freebie (second link below)?!? Hey, I'm not casting any stones (really though)! I just hope Bill Clinton is nowhere near this mess! Talk about something rotten in Denmark -- that would be IT!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6736517/Copenhagen-climate-summit-1200-limos-140-private-planes-and-caviar-wedges.html

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jR91DgH-8QLeQeoRLk4qoGzDBF8Q

Forget ClimateGate. I Want to Head to Copenhagen for my Freebie.

"Copenhagen Prostitutes Offer Free Climate Summit Sex" (link below).

I've heard of doing your part to help the environment, but this is ridiculous.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,665182,00.html

I'm Glad I'm Not Tiger Woods Tonight.

As discussed last night in the sidebar: Normally, as a high-profile sports figure, Woods would only have to worry about the likes of ESPN or FoxSports or occasionally one of the hapless news networks covering his dirt. But now he's got TMZ all over his ass (link below). (Update: Just watched TMZ's daily program, and they are really all over his ass.) That is NOT a place I would ever want to be. If you want to roll in the celebrity world as defined by TMZ, then you get to deal with TMZ. Woods existed outside that world previously because he wasn't exactly a Hollywood player, but one weird car accident and a couple of revelations of extramarital affairs, from the one of the most recognized sports figures in the world, and TMZ is on the case. And let me be clear on TMZ: I don't really like what they do, chasing around celebrities and making fun of them at the same time they make a living from them, BUT TMZ is the best I've seen in that world. And they are VERY well-sourced and connected in that domain. As discussed previously in this space, when they were the first to report Jacko's death as fact, which no other media outlet could do until over 45 minutes later (in the Internet Age for crying out loud!), TMZ impressed the hell out of me. And as also expressed previously, I just wish TMZ would get out of the solely celebrity focus and branch out into hard news: They'd likely set the journalistic world on fire, which would be a very good thing these days.

http://www.tmz.com/2009/12/03/tiger-woods-uses-childhood-friend-as-cover/

MAN-GONE-O

Breaking news tonight: Mark Mangino forced out as head football coach of the University of Kansas. They call it a "settlement," meaning the Fatman is receiving something in the way of payment, but obviously he's be forced to hit the bricks due to the combination of 7 straight losses, including to bitter rival Missouri, to end the season, plus all of the recent allegations of physical and extreme verbal abuse of many of his players. As a Missouri fan who only wishes the worst for KU, it's hard to know how to feel about this. On one hand, Mangino has been better and more successful head coach than KU football has had in a long time, and he had a decent measure of success against MU (going 4-4). But maybe KU brings in a better coach than Mangino, which is the obvious potential downside of the current situation. To follow up on a comment I recently made in this space, I think I'll start a campaign for KU to hire one or more of the Bowden clan to run their program. That's definitely the way they should go, in my humble opinion.

http://www.kansascity.com/news/breaking_news/story/1609250.html

These Two Goofs Have Actually Given Me an Idea.

Yeah, I think I may have to take one out of the playbook of Michaele & Tareq Salahis. I think I'm going to try to crash one of these Tea Parties as one of the few non-conservatives attending. And if any liberals or progressives show up as protesters, then I'll heckle them too. I roll like that.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,578998,00.html

Let the Firings Begin.

It's that time of the year. Bobby Bowden is about to "resign" at Florida State. Charlie Weis gets the axe at Notre Dame. Already the speculation begins as to where Weis will land next, e.g., would the Kansas City Chiefs be interested in him as an O-coordinator for next year (and would he be interested)? And how much longer will Mark Mangino last at Kansas? I don't see any way he sticks around. When there's substantial internet chatter about who will replace you (as there has been regarding Mangino), that sort of bodes poorly for your chances of keeping your job. And on that front, who will replace Mangino in the probable event that KU fires him pretty soon? Bowden's two boys are available. Heck, I guess technically even Bobby is about to be available. And the revolving door just keeps turning...

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hIkyCcDP1b7gzOxkqq0f18KaWCngD9CAK4880

So Apparently Obama Is (Finally) Set to Make an Afghanistan Decision & Speech This Week.

It's good to see that Obama has been able to actually block out some time to address Afghanistan after 10 months in office and 3 months after General McChrystal's request for substantial troop increases. I just want to be clear on my position before such speech takes place this week: Obama needs to either provide something substantially close to what the commanders in the field are requesting, or he needs to get us the hell out of that hellhole. There is no other option. I suspect, however, that we're going to get some inadvisable middle ground that maintains our involvement there but which comes woefully short of providing the commanders with what they think is necessary to turn the situation around over there. The same would be extremely disingenuous on the part of Obama, who ran a presidential campaign criticizing Bush (and rightfully so) for paying scant attention to Afghanistan and focusing too much on that stupid war in Iraq in which we should have never been involved in the first place. But we'll see -- I'm reserving judgment until I hear what Obama has to say. Maybe he'll surprise me for once.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/11/29/senators-give-obama-advice-on-afghanistan-strategy-speech/

Stick a Fork in 'Em. They're Done.

It was supposed to be a magical, historic season -- the best ever -- for the University of Kansas Jayhawk football team. Instead, it ends at 5-7, no bowl game, and a last second defeat at the hands of bitter, hated rival Missouri. And for all his efforts, KU Head Coach Mark Mangino is about to be ridden outta' Lawrence, Kansas on a rail (if they have one sturdy enough over there to carry him). It's a Beautiful Day.

http://www.kansascity.com/385/story/1598432.html

She's Been Recently Described as, "The Hottest & Most Dangerous Woman In America"! Check Her Out -- This is Tionna Smalls, Reality Star!

http://gawker.com/335454/lots-of-people-always-say-stuff-that-they-will-never-do-until-the-fire-is-under-their-ass

Another Spectacular Day for The Great American Media! Pat Yourselves on the Back!!!

I swear, American media, when you aren't incessantly slanting towards one political ideology or the other, you can't even get your facts correct. Fresh off the heels of the entire American media (both the left-slanting and right-slanting) prematurely reporting the death of the Ft. Hood (alleged) killer who then miraculously turned up alive, this afternoon we get widespread media reports about how Tiger Woods is in "serious condition" (i.e. potentially life-threatening injuries) following an early morning car accident. Turns out, he had some facial lacerations, nothing serious at all, and was released from the hospital this evening. Of course, all the talk going forward nationwide is going to be what the hell happened -- why was he out at driving at 2:30 a.m. -- and why was he driving over fire hydrants and trees. But that's not my focus nor my point tonight. Shame on you, Amercan media, yet again. I repeat: Not only do you have an utter inability to cover the news with any pretense of objectivity (which is what every REAL journalist constantly strives to accomplish) -- you idiots can't even get your most basic facts straight! VERY PATHETIC STUFF.

http://sports.espn.go.com/golf/news/story?id=4693657

From One Turkey to a Couple of Others...

Happy Thanksgiving to everyone!

We Need a New War Tax! How Otherwise Are We Going To Pay for This War, Dems Ask!

Well, let's see, they might start by putting the kibosh on all of these ultra-liberal, massive expansions of the federal government such as the public option health care bill, and the Cap'n Trade, and the proposed 2nd Stimulus. And they might also have thought about making the first stimulus a serious stimulus, rather than one mostly laiden with pork and having no connection whatsoever to stimulating the economy. They might just start in those places. Is THIS the reason why Obama has waited 3 months to reach a decision on the military's plea for more troops in Afghanistan, i.e. has he been waiting until he gets some leftist dems to call for more new taxes right before he announces that he will send more troops there? Sorry, folks, but the level of insanity I see from this dem party, without one ounce of leadership or common sense, very much reminds me of the W Years. As I've often said, hardly change we can believe in, just more of the same.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29851.html

What's All This Then with the Silly Commotion Over Adam Lambert at the AMAs?

How many of these awards shows have I seen where a couple of ladies are grinding or kissing or doing all sort of sexually provocative things. Hardly an eyelash is batted. But when this Adam Lambert does the same thing with a bunch of male performers and kisses one of them, STOP EVERYTHING! CAN'T HAVE THAT! Please. Grow up, America. If you're going to rant and rave about this, then rant and rave every time the ladies engage in this kind of stuff on TV. Otherwise, you have no credibility with me. My own view: I'm not offended by any of it. I don't think any of this sort of stuff should be viewed by young kids, but as an adult, I have no problem with any of it. But if you do, I can respect that, but only if you're calling it out every time it happens, regardless of the sex of the folks involved.

Two Postscript Notes: (1) Look at the above pic. Lambert has some real blemishes. Teenage acne? (2) Love how ABCNews, which bends over backward to Obama and the far left whenever it can, makes a homophobic jackass of itself by banning Lambert from Good Morning America. Hey ABCNews: You're just doctrinaire and slanted. I'm much more open-minded than you, homophobic network.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091124/D9C64U9O0.html

I'm With Joe.

(Link regarding Lieberman's opposition to the Senate's Reid health care bill is set forth below). Like Lieberman, I would also like to see a health care reform bill, and I've even tried to tell my liberal and progressive friends that I'd even be open to a new federal government entitlement to help those who can't afford health insurance obtain it. But I draw a line in the sand (like Lieberman) at a public option, which I'm convinced is intended and will probably ultimately result in almost virtual control of the health insurance industry by the federal government (i.e., a single payer system or something very, very close to the same). I do not want that. I do not want to see the federal government in the health insurance business. The radical progressives very much want it, which says a lot right there. Am I open to a federal government entitlement that helps pay for health care coverage for those who can't afford it? Yes, as already stated above. But I cannot accept the federal government starting its own health insurance agency. Just can't do it. Even if I'm wrong about a public option eventually resulting in a virtual single payer system, I have other concerns: I trust our federal government to run something like a health insurance agency about as much I trust my ability to heave Mark Mangino for a world-record shot-put toss. Boot the public option, and a lot of my opposition evaporates. I hope Lieberman sticks to his guns in the same way.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125900412679261049.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTTopStories

I light my torch & wave it for the New Moon...

...on Monday. It's a $140.7 million opening weekend in the U.S. for "The Twilight Saga: New Moon." People sure do love their vampires these days.

http://www.kansascity.com/stargazing/story/1586102.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMi8gnhQZzc

OK, So If I Needed to Ram an Important Procedural Vote Through a Legislative Body on the Road Towards Passage...

...of a massive monstrosity of an ultra-liberal bill that no one's read or digested, and containing a public option unpopular in the country and intended to ultimately arrive at a single payer system, and without any bipartisan support whatsoever, what might I do? Well, I might make sure that such vote occurs well into the evening hours of a Saturday night, when the media is largely asleep and most of the nation is focused upon the college football games. I might do that. But then again, that would make me a chickenshit, now wouldn't it? Or a democrat. Same difference, in my estimation.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091122/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_overhaul

Talk About Three Faces That Only a Liberal or a Conservative Could Hate.

I thought this was a great pic, as it now sits atop Politico.com's main page. John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman. Conservatives hate these guys because they are not conservative. Liberals hate these guys because they are not liberal. Such is the way that conservatives and liberals roll. I generally like all three of these guys for consistently exhibiting an independence of thought that often eschews doctrinaire thinking and the desire to have one's viewpoints neatly and mindlessly align on a vertical totem pole of conservative or liberal ideology. For the record, I did think McCain was too old and tired to be running for president in 2008, and I did not vote him (nor Obama). At any rate, the linked story below explains an interesting rift that's developing between the three of them as McCain strongly criticizes the efforts of Graham and Lieberman in working on a cap and trade bill that might garner a measure of GOP support and make it through the Senate. By the way, since the Senate is set to vote on the Harry Reid health care monstrosity at 8 p.m. Saturday night, maybe the Senate dems could try to ram through the ole cap and trade at 9 p.m.? You know, sort of kill two pieces of America with one stone? Heck, maybe a little second stimulus at 10 p.m.? The trifecta!

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29747.html

Another Saturday Vote on a 2000-Page Monstrosity (This Time The Reid Senate Monster).

Meantime, no one (inside the beltway or otherwise) has had any chance to meaningfully digest anything close to the totality of this massive bill. Sorry, folks, as much as I distrust the repubs and the conservatives, the dems in control in Washington are truly a pathetic, scary bunch. I fear very much the havoc that their massive ultra-liberal, progressive, huge government ram-rodded pieces of legislation are going to perpetrate upon our economy, our future, not to mention the America that so many of us have grown to know and love during the course of our lives. Never before in my life, until gazing upon the radical progressive strain that now controls our federal government like an Iron Curtain, have I ever felt so hopeless as an American. It's getting to the point where neither your voice nor mine means much of anything. Regardless of popular dissent towards these massive pieces of non-sensical crap legislation, the dems really just don't care. They don't care that they are about to pass one of the most radical, sweeping pieces of legislation in American history without so much as any opposite party support (save one or two stragglers, possibly). The wisest of politicians I've noted during my lifetime (on both sides of the aisle) have always said that you don't pass radical, groundbreaking legislation like this without even so much as a significant minority of opposing party votes in your favor. The phrase I've coined in this space before: Scary Days. And unfortunately, they just get even scarier come Saturday night, I suspect. And for all of my radical progressive and garden variety liberal readers of this space who blissfully go about their lives without ever questioning their government now that the dems are in office: You frankly make me sick. Not one ounce of free thought in your mind -- You might as well just start wearing a T-Shirt in public proclaiming that "I am a Left-Wing Dittohead, I thinks not for myself." Scary Days.

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20091119-717535.html

Dems Are Losing A Lot of Independents, But Do They Really Care?

The linked Politico.com report is entitled, "Dems alarmed as independents bolt," but if you read the story, many of the dems quoted are downplaying the trend and trying to spin it as not that big of a deal. But I wonder if that's what they really think behind the scenes? What I've consistently seen from dem powerbrokers in Washington is a desire to ram through massive pieces of legislation irregardless of popular support for the same, and so maybe dems as a whole truly don't give a rat's behind what the independents think or do. But at the end of the day, I think these trends are concerning to dems, even if they are hesitant to admit it publicly. After all, the Independents decide elections, and you would have to be a political fool to turn a complete blind's eye towards them.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29646.html

The Fat Man's In One Big Fat Pickle, And I'm Not Referring to Cheeseburgers or Fatback Over Here.

University of Kansas head football coach Mark Mangino faces allegations of improper verbal and physical abuse of current and former players (first link below). As I commented elsewhere (second link below), I just really hope there was no flatulence involved.

http://www.kansascity.com/666/story/1575397.html
http://www.tigerboard.com/boards/missouri-tigers.php?message=7082449

Hillary & Sarah on an Independent Ticket in 2012? The thought occurred to me tonight out of the blue. Don't even know what to make of it.

I was watching Hillary blathering on today about she'd like to sit down with Palin (whom she's never personally met) for coffee. Couple that with the generally complimentary things that Palin has always had to say about Clinton. How could such a marriage of strange bedfellows every possibly happen, you ask? Well, first of all, it probably never would. But say Hillary saw an opportunity in 2012 to take on a low popularity Obama, running on a theme of being an alternative to the unpopular and radical "progressive" far left strain that has basically taken over the dem party. Not that I think Hillary has too huge of a problem with the "progressives," but make no mistake that she is not one of them (NOR is she what one would describe as a "moderate"), and she is a consummate politician, and I could conceivably see her going Independent against the radical far left IF conditions completely aligned for such an event. And I'm telling you folks, a lot of strange political winds are blowing throughout the country, unseen at any point in my life, so I would never say that Hillary going Independent is an impossibility (although I acknowledge that it's an improbability). To reiterate, Hillary is no progressive, but she's no centrist either -- she's basically a garden variety liberal, although those folks scare me much, much less than the "progressives".

So how does Palin fit into this equation? Different dynamic there entirely. Palin would never become an "alternative" to the repubs' far right conservative base because that's what she is, a far right conservative. BUT I could see her running as an Independent against the republican party given that there is a huge old-money-style as well as elitist component to the far right that really dislikes Palin because she wasn't educated in the Ivy League, and she dares to be a former mayor of a town of 9,000 (the radical "progressives" hate that about her too, by the way). I could conceivably see her finally getting so fed up with the traditional repub powerbrokers that she would turn and run as an Independent.

So, then, how would Hillary and Sarah, two 1000-miles apart politicians, ever possibly link up? Only one possible way: Both of their insatiable desires to WIN higher elected office, that's how. About 40% of this country is now Independent, and if you give those folks (my people) the option of such a completely unprecedented ticket as that which Hillary-Sarah would offer, you would probably get most of their votes plus a ton of non-liberal dems and non-conservative repubs at the same time. In other words, an Independent ticket could actually win the presidency. An obvious conundrum: Who would be at the top of the ticket? Well, they would have to hash that out, but frankly I'd assume Hillary since she was ever so close to winning the dem nomination last year over Obama, but came up just short. In contrast, Palin has obviously never run for pres before.

So am I really advocating such a ticket? I'm not so sure. It was more just a very strange thought that occurred to me tonight. In this strange political climate, nothing would surprise me, and I bet we will be seeing all kinds of weird things like this in the months and years to come. But as for me: Hillary has always been too far left for me to consider voting for, and Palin likewise too far right. But the two of them together on one ticket? Seems intriguing, fascinating, and at least something that I would consider.

The Mainstreaming of Palin? This Has Gotta Be Chappin' the Far Left's Behind!

And for that, I have to laugh tonight. She coming out with a book, she's on Oprah, she's doing photo ops with Barbara Walters, she has Hillary Clinton saying that she'd love to meet Palin. The Radical Progressives must be a stewin' tonight (!) and pondering their next hateful false rumor to concoct and spread about Palin.

For the record, my views on Palin have been made very clear in this space over time. She's a devout right-winger, I'm not, and I doubt that I could ever vote her, especially given my additional viewpoint that she's not exactly what I view to be presidential material -- sorry, but she's a little loopy (just a personal observation completely divorced from her viewpoints and ideology). And I've always contended that these characteristics make her virtually unelectable. But, I will say this about her: She seems to be a politician who has very much made a career of people underestimating her, and I'd be the first to admit that I could be underestimating her too.

Further, I'm don't mean to be all doom & gloom when it comes to Palin. Just because she may not be quite my cup of tea doesn't mean that I personally dislike her, because I don't. I respect a lot that she's originally from a ton of 9000, as I am, and I still recall how that fact played a huge role in me having a "moment of clarity" in 2008 concerning precisely what it was that Obama and his people were all about (the day McCain selected Palin, the first words in response from the Obama campaign were that McCain "has seen fit to choose a former mayor of a town of 9000 as his vice presidential running mate" -- that's Classic Liberal Elitism, and it only set in concrete for me the true colors of an Obama who was trying to convince us all that he was some kind of "moderate" -- But I digress).

The far left HATES Sarah Palin, mostly I believe because she does not act like she's supposed to act in the far left's eyes. She's an attractive, self-made woman, and so she's not supposed to be anything other than a liberal, at least in the slanted estimation of the far left. It's sort of Clarence Thomas-syndrome at work in my view. But to tie this off, Palin continues to be a fascinating political figure (even if I still ultimately think she's not a serious contender to ever be president), and despite my disagreement and misgivings with a lot of her ideology and rhetoric, I will still continue to defend the smalltown gal every time the radical left fabricates another one of their slimey rumors or false reports about Palin, because that kind of crap always rub me the wrong way. And in the meantime, we'll just keep watching the intriguing and ongoing political saga of one Sarah Palin.