Free Republic

Harriet Miers? The argument was not that she was not conservative, it was that she was not qualified!

Personally, I don't want someone that is conservative, I want someone that is principled! Are they willing to allow bad law to stand if it is constitutional and kill good law if it is not. I want someone that rules on points of law, not votes on policy issues. Basically, I'll take another Thomas or Scalia. O'connor was great on property issues only because she was a western rancher's daughter. In other words, she voted for property rights because that was personal ox she had seen gored before. She also voted on social issue. She lacked the proper temperament to rule on the points of law.

Simon in CA and Jindal in LA were OK candidates. Jindal ran a decent campaign, but the large the large African American vote (which is dependably democrat) and some anti Hindu bigotry probably led to his defeat. In CA, Simon ran a poor campaign, but his problem was the Republican party in CA. Everyone from the top down, all the RINOs not only did not help, but actually hurt Simon. Same happened in NJ with Shundler. Whitman should have been fired from the EPA the day after Shundler won the primary and she wasn't in NJ doing backflips. How come everytime a Liberal Republican runs, conservatives are expected to line up in suppport, but everytime a conservative runs, the liberals piss and moan. Oh yeah, they're liberals.

There are 2 major problems facing steel manufacturers. First is a world wide overcapacity on the order of 16%. The second are legacy benefits given to employees in the place of pay. Just like social security and every other ponzi scheme as less and less people are available to pay for more and more beneficiaries, the scheme colapses.

BTW, I'm personally in favor of forgeiners dumping steel, but would prefer they just give it to us for free instead of at a 10% discount. They might as well send us TVs, DVDs, computers and other consumer electronics. In fact, why don't they just trade their stuff for gold and ship us gold bars. What a bunch of dummies they are!

The president added: "You know, I did feel the presence of God amongst my friends on Air Force One." But some Republican strategists expressed concern privately that the incident might strike secular-minded voters as a blurring of the line between church and state.

I still don't get why people would be all upset over a voluntary service on a government airplane. This stupidiy run wild.

Like I said before, who cares about WMDs? It was worth it for the MESSAGE factor and Iran seems to be getting the message!

I'm going with the Limbaugh posture here. Let the wackos rant and rave, it only makes them look like the stupid boobs that they are!

I used to read Krugman (a little) because economics is a hobby of mine (Austrian school). But even when he discusses economics, his Bush hatred gets in the way such that he can't string a coherent thought together.

He favors progessive taxation.

So do I, a flat tax percentage rate. A single rate would be both progessive (the more you make the more you pay) and fair. Eliminate all deductions. No taxes on capital gains, dividends or interest! Charge up that economy. Also, everyone pays. We need to get everyone on the rolls so that they will vote against tax increases and vote for limited government.

I was surprised to here he gambled.

The guy I think that is in trouble is the insider in the casino. This guy just cost his casino millions of dollars since Bennett is giving it up.

BTW, I'm watching Joe Cannason whine about him being discredited and he should go crawl under a rock. This is the biggest Non-Scandal to be reported as a scandal in history. He is blamed for not being hypacritcal and not being secretive! I don't know his net worth, but it seems he can afford gambling as entertainment. The most he is guilty of being politically stupid.

This reminds me of liberals talking about how far to the right the republicans have moved. We only look like we are far to the right because the left has moved so far to the left they are about to lap pluto!

At least Rendell is keeping his word for now.

Oh, he'll keep his word alright. Put a death grip on your wallet and your guns!

Jeffords jumped because he finally figured out that the Republican party was no longer the party of snotty rich liberals as opposed to the Democratic party which is the party of snotty middle class and poor liberals. He apparently missed the whole "A Choice, Not an Echo", Goldwater era and the Reagan Revolution.

I'm wondering with all the talk of her positioning herself to run in 2004, might she be afraid of loosing her sentate seat in 2006? I thought Chuckie might be vulnerable, but maybe Clinton is as well. That would kill a 2008 presidential run. I think this is why John Edwards jumped into the presidential race. Most think he might loose his senate seat this year! This sounds fun considering the Novak reported that the DEMS calculate a 4 seat loss in 2004. Could be 2 - 7 in my analysis, especially if someone in Alaska can oust Murkowsky in the Republican primary.

I happened to tune into a local Cincy Talker and he was going over a "Professional Panhandlers" website. They have a message board where you can post conditions for panhandling in different cities. This is not the poor, this is the lazy.

But he knows too well that his multi-million dollar salary would go out the door quicker than you can say Noam Chomsky if commies actually took over the U.S.A. But it sure is great for those brown people in the banana republics and elsewhere. He's just another stinking liberal hypocrite.

So true! I recall those UN poverty summits where all the rich, lilly white, college kids go on about how wonderful it is that the 3rd world uses cart and oxen instead of tractors. Of course they never actually live in these places. They just jet home and live off the fruits of other people's labor.

"People just explode sometimes. Natural causes."

I've been waiting for Hitlery to spontaneously combust for years. You know that devil is just dying to burst into flames and expose her horns.

We had a guy in our local paper ranting about "Big Sugar" and comparing them to the dreaded "Big Tobacco". He was whining about people eating too much sugar and how advertising by "Big Sugar" is making people fat. What he didn't indicate is that the U.S. Government, in colusion with "Big Sugar" already is doing the best thing to supress sugar eating: They artificially inflate the price of sugar. We pay 2 times the price because of current policy. This is how Landruie got reelected in LA. She warned that the Bush administration was going to cut the price supports for LA sugar producers and allow more Mexican sugar into the states.

This is one issue where not having the mainstream media is killing us. This issue should be getting lots of play and it should be all bad for the democrats. The NY Times actually ran an editorial where they pontificated that Jeffery Sutton should not be seated not because he is unqualified or rendered bad opinions, but because he successfully argued two cases before the Supremes which the Times did not like!

This issue will galvanize the base in the elections for sure. But the Republicans better figure out a win on this or forget about them. Here is my order of preference:

1. Force a real fillibuster where the media would have to give it attention. The problem with this is all the things Bush want passed would be held up. I think it is worth it!

2. Use the Barnett solution where Bush recess appoints really rupugnant (to dems) that would not be voted in under any circumstances. How much fun would it be to see Bork returned to the DC court. It is not like the Dems can argue he isn't qualified because that he already sat there. I would seat Bork as a single and if that didn't work, I would do thin enmasse filling every open seat at one time!

3. Recess appoint the actual nominees.

What I am wondering is why we can't make the Supremes rule on this issue. Can a Senator or other party petition the court to determine if the senate rule requiring 60 votes actually violates the constitution. This at least would focus media attention on it, though I don't think the Supremes would be thrilled fussing in the business of another branch.

Then, Kennedy said: “If we had left those [standards] in place, we would not have imported one drop of Gulf oil after 1986. We would not have had a Gulf War. Think of the possibilities. Think of the World Trade Center still standing!”

In response to this startling charge, Brown posed a really tough (and nasal) question. He asked, no kidding: “Are you encouraged by the way people see environmental issues, even if they’re not quite ready to act on them, or are you discouraged these days.”

Gosh, shouldn't CNN give Brown a raise for this masterful interview technique. He will elicit just the information that the public should know about Kennedy's claim.

NATO is not going to be split.

I don't know the rules for NATO, but I think that if France and Germany push an EU Military alliance, NATO should vote them out! Make the choice stark for all the other nations. Who are they going to choose, the U.S. or France as the protector of their liberties.