Sound familiar? It’s all the left can do in whatever country they inhabit. They cannot win elections on the merit of the issues because they have no vision. They cannot persuade people because they have no ideas. So, they resort, as the always have, to the politics of personal destruction and demonization.
The American left have been implementing here and continue to do so. And now the French see what a vapid, visionless socialist campaign led by a woman must do–she cannot elevate herself, so she strives to pull her opponent down.
Socialism is a disease that destroys countries by sucking the very life out of the people. Let’s hope the French reject this sickness.
The demonisation of Sarkozy
Ségolène Royal intensified a desperate final effort yesterday to tar Nicolas Sarkozy, her presidential opponent, as a dangerous tyrant whose election would threaten the peace of France.
Ms Royal, the left-wing candidate who is about four points behind the conservative Mr Sarkozy in polls, denounced her opponent for the “great violence†and “brutality†of a campaign that she maintained was frightening away voters.
She will use a critical television debate with her opponent tomorrow to contrast her “France at peace with itself†with Mr Sarkozy’s “France of the hard Rightâ€.
Ms Royal’s line of attack, five days before the country goes to the polls, was amplified yesterday by aides and supporters. In the latest torrent of anti-Sarko vitriol, 100 stars of the arts and sciences declared that “Sarkozy embodies a hard radicalised Right . . . with all its fears and hates. Entrusting the presidency to a demagogue like this means real danger.†[...]
A CSA poll on Sunday found that 65 per cent of French people think Mr Sarkozy “solid†compared with only 24 per cent for the Socialist. Yet only 29 per cent find him likeable, compared with a 57 per cent rating for Ms Royal.
The Socialists set out to demonise Mr Sarkozy months ago, according to Eric Besson, a senior campaign official who defected after falling out with Ms Royal. “Since we had a weak candidate, it was the best path to take,†he said.
Just a little projection there on behalf of the left. Non?
I found a kitten-pusher and have arranged a meeting to check them out. My plan is this: I will sit down in the middle of the floor and see which kitten runs up to me, meows, purrs, and wraps her little kitten arms around me. We’ll then talk about our favorite movies, which martinis we prefer, and whether or not dogs really mean well.
I’ll probably be able to tell who’s sincere, and who is not. While I prefer no games, I realize that kittens do play games, and pretend to not be interested in you. Yes, I’ve seen that before. It’s never happened to me, of course. I’ve only observed the behavior from afar. On occasion, I would make a request of Sadie, she would take a note and get back to me. But she always usually did get back to me. Eventually.
The kittens I am visiting include two orange kittens, a white kitten with block spot on his head, and a calico girl. The calico is described as slightly ‘wild.’ She already has the edge. I will report when I return, and will most likely have photographs. Wish me luck.
UPDATE:
Schmmitty and Spot
Well, last night was a success. I saw three kittens, one of whom is a calico girl. I will get a picture of her today because she is in the top two and I want you to see her. Above are another two cutie-pies, both were great. I’ll be honest and at first wasn’t necessarily interested in Spot, (the white kitty with the spot on his head), but he was the only one who purred when I held him. He also made a beeline for my earlobe. And I thought a girl had to ply someone with a martini to get that!
So, I arrived and immediately saw the calico, who was still afraid. She had been caught by the rescue people just that day. Not so wild, but afraid and shy. The orange cats were cute but it didn’t seem like we connected. Then Spot did his ear/purr thing and I was hooked. Then I held the calico. She was very sweet, and when I scratched her cheek she went to sleep on me. Since it was her first day I didn’t want to judge her on the purr test. The rescuer and I, we were the first humans she has known.
So, I’m going to give them another couple of days to settle and then re-visit. It’s between the calico and Spot. As soon as I have the other kitty pic I’ll get it to you. I had forgotten how nice a purr can be 
UPDATE:
Here’s the calico. I think you can see why I’m havng trouble deciding between her and Spot.
Despite the apparent argument by some fluffy lesbians that scientists are mistaking “muscular” for obese, researchers are sticking to a finding that says lesbians are twice as likely as straight women to be fat. I tend to believe them. Last time I checked, of all the gay women in the United States (and yes, I know them all except for one or two), there was one Jackie Warner, plus one million lesbians who were not fat only because we’re constantly fighting the battle of the bulge (but determined to get that six-pack. Okay, a two-pack), and then seven million other lesbians who are, well, fluffy and muscular in the Garfield way. Not in the Jackie Warner way.
Now, just to make sure things are clear:
Jackie Warner=Fit and Muscular. And, uh, appealing.
Rosie O’Donnell=Unfit and Fat. And, uh, unappealing.
Yes, I am the Queen of the Understatement. This should clear up any confusion about the difference between the two.
Lesbians twice as likely to be obese
Lesbians are twice as likely as heterosexual women to be overweight or obese, which puts them at greater risk for obesity-related health problems and death, US researchers said. The report, published in the American Journal of Public Health, is one of the first large studies to look at obesity among lesbians.
“Our findings indicate that lesbian sexual identity is linked to a greater prevalence of overweight and obesity,†the authors wrote in the study, released this week.
They reviewed smaller studies that have suggested a higher prevalence of obesity among lesbians and the possible reasons why…
But the authors said they placed little confidence in the idea that lesbians were more muscular than straight women, and thus were more likely to have a high body mass index, or BMI, while having little body fat.
LOLROTFLMAO!
We live in a world where extreme, coma-inducing cute is all too rare. Unless, of course, we’re dealing with Choco-Cat, but even then the cuteness is tempered by, well, fakeness.
Knut, on the other hand, is real, growing up and moving from porridge in a bowl to meat on the bone.
Less Cute, more Bruiser Knut
Knut Steadily Getting Less Cute
It’s a tragic fact of life. Celebrity polar bear cub Knut, now almost five months old, is gradually mutating from a fluffy porridge-lapping cub into a heavy bruiser with a penchant for meat off the bone. But the visitors are still flocking to see him.
Knut’s days of extreme cuteness are numbered now that he has acquired a markedly longer snout and weighs a chubby 17 kilograms (37 pounds), twice as much as when he first appeared before an adoring public five weeks ago.
“His teeth are sharper and he’s stronger, he still gets porridge but we now feed him beef on the bone occasionally,” the zoo’s bear expert Heiner Klös told SPIEGEL ONLINE. “He’s calmed down a bit, he doesn’t potter around as much as he used to and he’s happy to sit on his own more often. But he still wanders back to his keeper to tank up on security.”
I give you Princess Beatrice of England, the daughter of Sarah Ferguson and Prince Andrew. 18 years old and smashed. I think the eye and the ear have it.
They would have gotten “meetings” like this instead of war. Jews would have also been exterminated and the world would be speaking German and walking in goose-step. But who am I to judge the Bush/Rice/Baker foreign policy of cowardice, indecision and group therapy?
US, Iranians to meet over Iraq stability
Iran and the United States are set for the first cabinet-level meeting since the end of 2004.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she would not rule out the possibility of conferring directly with Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki at a regional conference on Iraq. But she did not foresee any discussions on one of the most divisive issues between the two, Iran’s nuclear program.
“This is not a meeting about the United States and Iran,” she said on the ABC News program This Week on Sunday. “This is a meeting about Iraq and about what Iraq’s neighbours and interested parties can do to help stabilise the situation in Iraq.”
She then ticked off a list of actions Washington would seek from Tehran in a repetition of the accusations that have helped sour relations, including providing Shiite militias with weaponry to use in roadside bombs, known as improvised explosive devices.
Oh, I see. It’s not a meeting between us and Iran; it’s a meeting between Condi and Barney the Dinosaur. Because she says so. And instead of setting up a war strategy against the country that is providing the weapons and training that is killing our troops, we’re setting up a coffee-klatch.
Yep, if those Nazis weren’t dead and buried they’d be kicking themselves right now. Oh wait, they’re not dead and buried, they’re just calling themselves “Islamists”.
HI everyone. First, sorry for the seriously light blogging this weekend (I do see, however that Maynard was up late and working I has just incredibly jammed.
Just the regular reminder that I will be on Fox this morning at about 10:20am ET (7:20am PT). It looks like the topic will be Carl Bernstein’s new book about Hillary Clinton. Interestingly, Bernstein is a liberal (i.e. leftist) Democrat who was and is against the war in Iraq, and his book is being touted as exposing how HIllary has misrepresented both her political and personal past. I have a hard time believing, however, that this is the crux of the book. Even in discussing her lack of character, I am convinced his endpoint is to declare, even with all their faults, the Clintons (both of them) are best for the White House.
Watergate reporter demolishes Hillary’s career story
Drawing on a trove of private papers from Hillary Clinton’s best friend, the legendary Watergate journalist Carl Bernstein is to publish a hard-hitting and intimate portrait of the 2008 presidential candidate, which will reveal a number of “discrepancies” in her official story.
Bernstein, who was played by Dustin Hoffman in the film All the President’s Men, has spent eight years researching the unauthorised [Yeah, right, yet has access to her closest friends and confidants. And started at the beginning of the Bush administration and the start of her senate career. Gee, I wonder why?--ed.] 640-page biography, A Woman in Charge: The Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton.
“Bernstein reaches conclusions that stand in opposition to what Senator Clinton has said in the past and has written in the past,” said Paul Bogaards, a spokesman for Knopf, which publishes the book on June 19.
Bernstein is known as a liberal Democrat who fiercely opposes the war in Iraq and is likely to be critical of Clinton’s Senate vote to authorise the war. His marriage to Nora Ephron, the screen-writer, broke up when he had an affair with Baroness Jay, the daughter of former prime minister James Callaghan. [Another indication that he's a Hillary supporter...If only his wife had been more like her and not left her man.-ed.]
For years Bernstein suffered from writer’s block, but Knopf is promoting his biography as a triumphant return to form. Publisher Sonny Mehta said his portrait would “show us, for the first time, the true trajectory of Hillary Clinton’s life and career”. It will be published simultaneously in Britain by Hutchinson.
According to the publishers, it will cover everything from Clinton’s “complex relationship with her disciplinarian father” to “her courtship with Bill Clinton and the amazing dynamic of their marriage, during the most trying of circumstances”.
Keep in mind, Hillary cooperated with this book from the beginning, and probably needed a way for her to be in control of negative information. Bernstein gives her that avenue.
Couching this book as a hit piece on Hillary is the only way for it to get attention. The announcement of a love letter written by and published by supporters isn’t exactly news, is it?
A post by Maynard
These 007-type gadgets catch my eye. Here we see an electrified woman’s jacket (that is to say, an electrified jacket for women, not a jacket for electrified women). If an unfriendly gentleman gets too friendly, the lady surreptitiously presses a button and zaps the ill-mannered lout with a million volts.
It all sounds a bit questionable to me, but the idea is an interesting one. The jacket doesn’t appear to be in production yet, but the designer’s website is at www.no-contact.com.
I wonder if they’re working on a matching pair of pants.
A post by Maynard
It’s worth noting that Adolf Hitler married Eva Braun on April 29, 1945 in his bunker in Berlin. Hitler had previously avoided marital commitment because, so he said, his bachelor status made him more appealing to female voters. Of course, it had been a few years since the fuehrer had felt any need to worry about elections.
As it turned out, the marriage was to be short-lived. The nuptial couple committed suicide together the very next day, as the Russians took Berlin.
The following week marked the end of Hitler’s “Thousand Year Reich”. Germany surrendered unconditionally on May 7/8, 1945, ending the war in Europe. The Pacific war dragged on for a few more months.
With the destruction of the Axis powers, after perhaps 60,000,000 people had been killed (of which about a two thirds were civilians), the world was at relative peace for a little while.
A post by Maynard
I am repeating here a note that Tammy made on her radio show today. This was a weird little incident that illustrates how dumb some of the politicians and mainstream media people think we are.
Hillary was raised in Illinois. She attended college at Wellesley (Massachusetts), and later went to Yale (Connecticut), where she met Bill. The heavy Southern accent which nowadays springs to her lips (here’s a YouTube sample) when she speaks to a Black audience is a new and obviously artificial affectation.
Okay, she’s a politician, and she panders. That’s to be expected. But when challenged on this point, her spin is a ridiculous even by political standards. As reported by the Associated Press:
“I think America is ready for a multilingual president,” Clinton said during a campaign stop at a charter school in Greenville, S.C.
For the record, “multilingual” means “speaking several languages”. If speaking with a funny accent makes one multilingual, I would have done much better in my high school language class.
Then, the AP article goes on to objectively report:
Clinton is a linguistic polyglot — a Chicago native turned New York resident who works in Washington and spent two decades living in Arkansas when her husband, Bill Clinton, was governor.
For the record, a “polyglot” is someone who is “competent in many languages”. It’s a stronger word than “multilingual”.
A newswire seems like such an objective source, doesn’t it? It’s just a wire, unaffected by human bias. That’s why “everyone” agrees there’s no need to apply a “fairness doctrine” to the news — except of course to FoxNEWS, which “everyone” knows to be tainted. (Remember Bill Clinton in his 9/22/06 interview with Chris Wallace? “So you did Fox’s bidding on this show. You did your nice little conservative hit job on me.” Bill has just handed his foot soldiers an official permission slip to hate Fox.)
I appreciate talk radio hosts for being up-front with their biases and agendas. We know who we’re dealing with and what they’re selling. I’d like to see the mainstream media aspire to this level of honesty. Or, failing that, at least to make their lies slightly less insulting to our intelligence.
What? They Didn’t Know This Was Going to Happen?
by Tammy on April 27, 2007 · 2 comments
Miss Cleo
I knew I was going to write this. And I know that you knew that I knew. Yeah.
Who knew? An old law shuts psychics
No, actually the first sign of that will be the Clintons moving back into the White House.
{ 2 comments }