Monday, November 19, 2007

Obama Leada In Iowa, Stunning CNN in The Process!

Yep. Here's the news from ABC : Barack Obama's ahead 30 percent, 26 percent for Clinton, and John Edwards at 22 percent. Wolf Blitzer can't seem to stand that Obama's ahead of Clinton. They didn't mention that, or the Des Moines Register Poll, or the latest poll reporting Obama's lead at 4 percent.

Instead, CNN's Blitzer's focusing too much on other matters like the CIA leak, and totally ignoring Senator Clinton's major gaffe on Pakistan.

The Clinton News Network can't stand the news that Obama can win the Iowa Caucus.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

ROBERT NOVAK *I'VE SEEN NO EVIDENCE OF DIRT ON OBAMA



In this video, Fox News interviews columnist Robert Novak, also called "The Prince of Darkness" who in this case spread darkness about Senator Barack Obama by stating that the Clinton campaign claimed to have news about a sex scandal about Obama. Novak -- in the video -- essentially that the source was not from the campaign but who was told by an agent of the campaign. In other words, his source has a source. It's called gossip and he's spreading it, but there's nothing there. Novak does compare Clinton to Nixon!
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , ,

Mike Gravel - "Hillary, Your Lips are Moving and You're Lying'



In this video, Former Senator and U.S. Presidential candidate Mike Gravel -- who was not invited to be in the Nevada debate -- held his own event where he responded to the answers given by the candidates, well, ok, Senator Clinton here. He says she's lying about Clinton's position on Iran, saying "Hillary, Your Lips are Moving and you're lying. She's ignorant. The law that was past right after 9-11, coupled with the resolution that (U.S. Senator Joe Libermann) put in, gave the President the power to go to war."

It's not right that he was excluded; he'd have made the event informative and unforgetable as well as providing a great check for Hillary Clinton.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Vick Sells Virginia House At Big Loss

Report courtesy of www.wsbtv.com in Atlanta, Georgia.

SURRY, Va. -- Michael Vick has sold the Virginia house that was the headquarters of his dog fighting operation.

The Daily Press reported Friday that Todd Builders Inc. of Carrollton, Va. bought the house for $450,000.

The new owner plans to put the house up for auction on December 15.

The $450,000 price was below the home's assessed $747,000 value.

But that doesn't take into account the property's notoriety, said Kyle Hause Jr., the real estate agent who handled the sale.

"Only one person can own the most famous house in America today," Hause said. "You can ask people from coast to coast which house has the most notoriety in the country today, and it's this house."

The house at 1915 Moonlight Rd. was the home of Vick's Bad Newz kennels.

Dog fights were held at the property. Authorities found dog fighting equipment and 66 dogs when they raided the house back in April.
Posted by at No comments:

3 Young Boys Arrested In Rape Case

This story is extremely disheartening and emotionally upsetting. It's unquenchable to believe that a crime of this magnitude could occur in any part of the country.


Report Courtesy of www.wsbtv.com in Atlanta, Georgia.

ACWORTH, Ga. -- Police say they've arrested three young boys on charges they kidnapped and raped an 11-year-old girl in the woods near an Acworth apartment complex.

Police say the boys -- who are 8 and 9 years old -- are in a Cobb County youth detention center but could face adult criminal charges.

"Reportedly two 9-year-old boys and one 8-year-old boy took the girl into the woods against her will where she was raped," said Capt. Wayne Bennard of the Acworth Police Department.

Police reports show the girl went to authorities Saturday for the alleged attack, which she says happened Thursday.

The victim told police they had been playing outside the West Ridge Apartments before the attack.

"The three boys have been charged with crimes ranging from rape, sexual assault, kidnapping and false imprisonment," said Bennard. "The reaction is dismay."

The suspects are being held at the Cobb County Youth Detention Center.

Prosecutors said they have yet to decide whether to try the suspects as adults.

"That decision hasn't been made," said Kathy Watkins, a spokeswoman for the Cobb County District Attorney's office.
Posted by at No comments:

Gore / Obama Supporter - Gore Endorse Obama?



I asked the person in my video about Al Gore endorsing Barack Obama and had a hard time getting a straight answer out of her, but I did learn a lot about the Gore / Obama effort -- it seems that, as she said, it's there idea and a dream. But for me, it's really more than that as they have signs and shirts and a website.

They're really activists. The bottom line is that I can't remember an election where there were so many fringe groups formed around "dream tickets" -- can you?
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Ron Paul Kicks Fox News Chris Wallace Into Abyss - Video

In this cool video that places Congressman and Presidential Candidate Ron Paul in the role of a Spartan as in the movie "300", Paul kicks Fox News Chris Wallace into an abyss. You've got to see it.

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,

Tim Russert, LA Times Fixing Obama News - Media Makes Errors and Ommissions Regarding Barack Obama News

If you've wondered about those negative stories about Barack Obama and whether they were "fixed" here's your answer: yes they were. If you've ever wanted one place to see all of those errors and ommissions with regard to Senator Obama's presidential run, you've come to the right place.

It's all here. From the LA times excluding Senator Obama's specific statements on human rights and national security, to Time Russert's famous "fixed" Meet the Press questions that sounded as if they were written by the Clinton campaign, to CNN's misrepresentations of Senator Obama's statements about Hillary Clinton.

They're all here for you. Share this with a friend and tell them how the mainstream media's unfairly fixing news against Barack Obama. They can't laugh at you; it's all here!

Check it out.

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Sunday, November 18, 2007

Raiders Daute Culpepper Misses Wide Open Wide Receiver Johnnie Lee Higgins (15) At End OF Vikings Game

You know, I've always believed that teams have their quarterback's just throw up the ball and hope someone comes down with it on their side at the end of a tight game. But I think it's become habit and so much so that quarterbacks miss wide open receivers on the way to the end zone.

The Oakland Raiders Daute Culpepper missed a wide open Wide Receiver Johnnie Lee Higgins (15) while dropping back to throw the hail mary pass.

I just watched a replay of the final play and the obvious was in full view: #15 was 10 yards in front of the next closest Vikings defender. He makes a catch; Raiders win.

But Dante never saw him.

Just another small reason the Raiders have two wins this year.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,

Saturday, November 17, 2007

In WSJ Peggy Noonan Calls Hillary Clinton A Jerk For Playing Gender Card



Never one to mince words, Peggy Noonan, the former speechwriter for Ronald Regan and a contributing columnist at The Wall Street Journal, wrote this classic column comparing Senator Clinton and former Prime Minister Margret Thacther. In it she wrote..

"It's all kind of wonderful, isn't it? Someone indulged in special pleading and America didn't buy it. It's as if the country this week made it official: We now formally declare that the woman who uses the fact of her sex to manipulate circumstances is a jerk."

Noonan also is a fan of Barack Obama.

PEGGY NOONAN - WALL STREET JOURNAL

Things Are Tough All Over
But Mrs. Clinton is no Iron Lady.

Friday, November 9, 2007 12:01 a.m. EST

The story as I was told it is that in the early years of her prime ministership, Margaret Thatcher held a meeting with her aides and staff, all of whom were dominated by her, even awed. When it was over she invited her cabinet chiefs to join her at dinner in a nearby restaurant. They went, arrayed themselves around the table, jockeyed for her attention. A young waiter came and asked if they'd like to hear the specials. Mrs. Thatcher said, "I will have beef."

Yes, said the waiter. "And the vegetables?"

"They will have beef too."

Too good to check, as they say. It is certainly apocryphal, but I don't want it to be. It captured her singular leadership style, which might be characterized as "unafraid."

She was a leader.

Margaret Thatcher would no more have identified herself as a woman, or claimed special pleading that she was a mere frail girl, or asked you to sympathize with her because of her sex, than she would have called up the Kremlin and asked how quickly she could surrender.

She represented a movement. She was its head. She was great figure, a person in history, and she was a woman. She was in it for serious reasons, not to advance the claims of a gender but to reclaim for England its economic freedom, and return its political culture to common sense. Her rise wasn't symbolic but actual.

In fact, she wasn't so much a woman as a lady. I remember a gentleman who worked with her speaking of her allure, how she'd relax after a late-night meeting and you'd walk by and catch just the faintest whiff of perfume, smoke and scotch. She worked hard and was tough. One always imagined her lightly smacking some incompetent on the head with her purse, for she carried a purse, as a lady would. She is still tough. A Reagan aide told me that after she was incapacitated by a stroke she flew to Reagan's funeral in Washington, went through the ceremony, flew with Mrs. Reagan to California for the burial, and never once on the plane removed her heels. That is tough.

The point is the big ones, the real ones, the Thatchers and Indira Gandhis and Golda Meirs and Angela Merkels, never play the boo-hoo game. They are what they are, but they don't use what they are. They don't hold up their sex as a feint: Why, he's not criticizing me, he's criticizing all women! Let us rise and fight the sexist cur.

When Hillary Clinton suggested that debate criticism of her came under the heading of men bullying a defenseless lass, an interesting thing happened. First Kate Michelman, the former head of NARAL and an Edwards supporter, hit her hard. "When unchallenged, in a comfortable, controlled situation, Sen. Clinton embraces her elevation into the 'boys club.' " But when "legitimate questions" are asked, "she is quick to raise the white flag and look for a change in the rules."

Then Mrs. Clinton changed tack a little and told a group of women in West Burlington, Iowa, that they were going to clean up Washington together: "Bring your vacuum cleaners, bring your brushes, bring your brooms, bring your mops." It was all so incongruous--can anyone imagine the 20th century New Class professional Hillary Clinton picking up a vacuum cleaner? Isn't that what downtrodden pink collar workers abused by the patriarchy are for?

But even better, and more startling, people began to giggle. At Mrs. Clinton, a woman who has never inspired much mirth. Suddenly they were remembering the different accents she has spoken with when in different parts of the country, and the weird laugh she has used on talk shows. A few days ago new poll numbers came out--neck and neck with Barack Obama in Iowa, her lead slipping in New Hampshire. There is a sense that Sen. Obama is rising, a sense for the first time in this election cycle that Mrs. Clinton just may be in a fight, a real one, one she could actually lose.

It's all kind of wonderful, isn't it? Someone indulged in special pleading and America didn't buy it. It's as if the country this week made it official: We now formally declare that the woman who uses the fact of her sex to manipulate circumstances is a jerk.

This is a victory for true feminism, in its old-fashioned sense of a simple assertion of the equality of men and women. We might not have so resoundingly reached this moment without Mrs. Clinton's actions and statements. Thank you, Mrs. Clinton.

A word on toughness. Mrs. Clinton is certainly tough, to the point of hard. But toughness should have a purpose. In Mrs. Thatcher's case, its purpose was to push through a program she thought would make life better in her country. Mrs. Clinton's toughness seems to have no purpose beyond the personal accrual of power. What will she do with the power? Still unclear. It happens to be unclear in the case of several candidates, but with Mrs. Clinton there is a unique chasm between the ferocity and the purpose of the ferocity. There is something deeply unattractive in this, and it would be equally so if she were a man.





I wonder if Sen. Obama, as he makes his climb, understands the kind of quiet cheering he is beginning to garner from some Republicans, and from those not affiliated with either party. They see him as a Democrat who could cure the Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton sickness.
I call it that because it seems to me now less like a dynastic tug of war than a symptom of deterioration, a lazy, unserious and faintly corrupt turn to be taken by the oldest and greatest democracy in the history of man. And I say sickness because on some level I think it is driven by a delusion: "We will be safe with these ruling families, whom we know so well." But we won't. They have no special magic. Dynasticism brings with it a sense of deterioration. It is dispiriting.

I am not sure of the salience of Mr. Obama's new-generational approach. Mrs. Clinton's generation, he suggests, is caught in the 1960s, fighting old battles, clinging to old divisions, frozen in time, and the way to get past it is to get past her. Maybe this will resonate. But I don't think Mrs. Clinton is the exemplar of a generation, she is the exemplar of a quadrant within a generation, and it is the quadrant the rest of us of that generation do not like. They came from comfort and stability, visited poverty as part of a college program, fashionably disliked their country, and cultivated a bitterness that was wholly unearned. They went on to become investment bankers and politicians and enjoy wealth, power or both.

Mr. Obama should go after them, not a generation but a type, the smug and entitled. No one really likes them. They showed it this week.

Ms. Noonan is a contributing editor of The Wall Street Journal and author of "John Paul the Great: Remembering a Spiritual Father" (Penguin, 2005), which you can order from the OpinionJournal bookstore. Her column appears Fridays on OpinionJournal.com.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

John Edwards Joins WGA Writers Stike For Cameras

Walking with Hollywood writers is no way to show you're a populist Presidential candidate. To me, this is a mistake.

From ABC News....

Edwards Joins Writer's Strike

ABC News' Raelyn Johnson Reports: Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., will leave the campaign trail briefly Friday to join striking writers on the picket lines in Burbank, California.

"I’ll be there to walk with them because this is an example why when a product is being produced and that product is creating a significant amount of revenue then we have to be fair to the workers and the creative forces that are producing," Edwards told ABC News before leaving Las Vegas to fly to California.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: ,

Friday, November 16, 2007

Barry Bonds and Steriods | Why The Perjury Case Against Barry Bonds Is Flawed

As I stated in my last post, I've read the 10-page indictment against Barry Bonds and hold that the Federal Government's charge of perjury is flimsy at best. Here's why; let's start with the definition of "Perjury":

Perjury is the act of lying or making verifiably false statements on a material matter under oath or affirmation in a court of law or in any of various sworn statements in writing. Perjury is a crime because the witness has sworn to tell the truth and, for the credibility of the court, witness testimony must be relied on as being truthful. Perjury is considered a serious offense as it can be used to usurp the power of the courts, resulting in miscarriages of justice. In the United States, for example, the general perjury statute under Federal law provides for a prison sentence of up to five years, and is found at 18 U.S.C. § 1621. See also 28 U.S.C. § 1746.

The problem is this, which comes from the indictment itself:

"having taken an oath to testify truthfully in a proceeding before a Grand Jury sitting in the Northern District of California, unlawfully, willfully, knowingly, and contrary to such oath, did make false material declarations,"

The problem rests in the use of the words "willfully" and "knowingly". The government's evidence must prove that Barry Bonds did indeed know that what he was being given was a steriod and willfully lied about it. He has testified -- and the information is in the indictment -- that he did not know what he was being given.

Plus, the other problem is that not every steriod was banned at the time. In other words, Bonds could have been given a legal steriod. If the Government's case does not make that distinction, it' fails. I must also add that one main problem with the work of San Francisco Chronicle writers Lance Williams and Mark Fairnu-Wada is that they fail to note the difference between "legal" and "illegal" steriods.

Bodybuilders use many legal steriods to "get big" and without fear of prosecution or arrest. Anabolic steroids, which build muscle, are controlled substances, whereas "Andro" which is what Mark McQuire and other baseball players have supposedly taken, is a hybrid substance and was under scrutiny for prohibtion by the FDA in 2004.

Which brings up another point: the time of focus of Bond's actions is between 2000 and 2003, not on or after 2004.

The other issue not adressed by the indictment is the matter of what was a legal drug at the time. If the Government and the FDA were not banning or prohibiting the use of many of the drugs listed in the indictment at the time Barry supposedly was given them, then it's even more possible he didn't know that what he was being given at the time was a now banned steriod, or for that matter a steriod. Victor Conte, the former head of BALCO, which distributed drugs to athletes, has said he never gave a banned steriod to Barry Bonds.

The Government may have errred here, as well. They can't switch between asking Bonds whether he lied about taking a banned substance or a legal substance. Then, there case not only looks bad, it begins to take on the appearance of an obvious witch hunt. In that instance, a jury in Northern California, where the suit was filed, would almost certainly consist of Bonds sympathizers, and the case would fail.

My bet is the Government's lawyers forgot to consider just what was a banned steriod and what was not at the time. Remember, much of this case calls for rebuilding what happened in the past. And even if the steriods were legal, again, Barry had even less reason to fear that what he took was not appropriate or that he actually knew that he was being given something illegal and of massive concern.

What the Government needs is more than just circumstantial evidence, as the Chronicle writers provide. It needs a document with Bonds handwriting on it that proves he visited and approved of the use of steriods. Without real, hard core evidence of that type -- and there's no sign it's there -- the Government could lose this case, big time.

I think they will.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)