Now to be fair, it was ultimately the utterly foolish choices Mrs. Cleary made that destroyed her marriage, but one has to wonder what posesses a person to subject themselves to this. I'm almost hesitant in posting this, because it's so awful to watch, but here goes:
Part of me wonders if she wanted to get caught. To risk all that for $200,000, and blow it? I don't think she could hide her guilty conscience. OK, I'm feeling leery even talking about this any further.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
In Other News...
Ralph Nader has picked his running mate for his Presidential run.
No, I don't really care either.
Also, Mike Bloomberg has announced he's not running for President (thanks for the update, Mike!!), and has mentioned talking with Obama. Vice Presidential pick, perhaps?
No, I don't really care either.
Also, Mike Bloomberg has announced he's not running for President (thanks for the update, Mike!!), and has mentioned talking with Obama. Vice Presidential pick, perhaps?
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Really?
I'm planning on posting on the Obama-Farrakhan controversy, but I just wanted to say that this pro-Israel Democrat finds fears like this unfounded. Obama says he is pro-Israel, and at the end of the day, I believe him.
UPDATE: This from the Republican Jewish Coalition:
"People should be very skeptical of Barack Obama's shaky Middle East policies. When a long-time political activist like Ralph Nader, with a well-documented, anti-Israel bias, claims that Senator Obama shares this anti-Israel bias, that is alarming," said RJC Executive Director Matt Brooks. "If Senator Obama supports Ralph Nader's policies, which consistently condemn Israel's right to defend itself against terrorism, and if Sen. Obama has only reversed his positions to run for president, it once again raises serious questions about his grasp of the geo-political realities of the Middle East and puts into doubt his commitment to the safety and security of Israel. These are important questions we in the Jewish community will be asking."
So we're supposed to believe Obama is anti-Israel because Ralph Nader says so? Huh? The concerns about his choice of advisors is much more valid (particularly with regards to ZBig), but I still fail to see this as alarming as others. The questions will need to be asked, but let's look a little deeper than the ego-driven rantings of Ralph Nader, shall we?
UPDATE: This from the Republican Jewish Coalition:
"People should be very skeptical of Barack Obama's shaky Middle East policies. When a long-time political activist like Ralph Nader, with a well-documented, anti-Israel bias, claims that Senator Obama shares this anti-Israel bias, that is alarming," said RJC Executive Director Matt Brooks. "If Senator Obama supports Ralph Nader's policies, which consistently condemn Israel's right to defend itself against terrorism, and if Sen. Obama has only reversed his positions to run for president, it once again raises serious questions about his grasp of the geo-political realities of the Middle East and puts into doubt his commitment to the safety and security of Israel. These are important questions we in the Jewish community will be asking."
So we're supposed to believe Obama is anti-Israel because Ralph Nader says so? Huh? The concerns about his choice of advisors is much more valid (particularly with regards to ZBig), but I still fail to see this as alarming as others. The questions will need to be asked, but let's look a little deeper than the ego-driven rantings of Ralph Nader, shall we?
William F. Buckley, 1925-2008
Author and conservative icon William F. Buckley has died at the age of 82. Needless to say, I didn't end up on the same page politically as William F. Buckley, but he was a great mind from what I've read of his work and heard, and always seemed an honorable man. God rest his soul.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Sammenhold
First off, allow to clarify. I have no desire to offend Muslims. I mean that. The thing is, there is a persisent and pernicious effort afoot to stifle free speech, in the name of not offending Muslims, particularly in the case of five jihadists arrested for plotting to kill one of the Danish cartoonists. This is an outrage. The answer to offensive speech is more speech, not violence, and not moral cowardice that refuses to condemn such violence. The blog campaign is once again well underway, and I proudly hitch my wagon to the train.
Thanks to Pat for the holy hat tip.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Oops!!
The blog remains one-hundred percent opposed to hysteria, and I myself resist the tendency towards it as well, but this cannot be good.
HT: Tully at SF
HT: Tully at SF
Monday, February 11, 2008
Rep. Tom Lantos, 1928-2008
Rep. Tom Lantos (D-CA) has died, losing his battle to cancer. Lantos was a staunch defender of human rights, and by all accounts a decent man, so I'm sure, and it's amazing this even has to be said, that regardless of one's politics, all will respect his service, and send condolences to his family. RIP.
Thursday, February 07, 2008
The Archbishop of Canterbury Says Sharia Law Not So Bad
Yeah, it seems he's gone insane. Read on:
The Archbishop of Canterbury has today said that the adoption of Islamic Sharia law in the UK is "unavoidable" and that it would help maintain social cohesion.
Rowan Williams told BBC Radio 4's World At One that the UK has to "face up to the fact" that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal system.
He says that Muslims could choose to have marital disputes or financial matters dealt with in a Sharia court. He added Muslims should not have to choose between "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty"
.
Dr Williams said there was a place for finding a "constructive accommodation" in areas such as marriage - allowing Muslim women to avoid Western divorce proceedings.
Other religions enjoyed such tolerance of their own laws, he pointed out, but stressed that it could never be allowed to take precedence over an individual's rights as a citizen.
This is pure insanity. Sharia law is openly hostile to democratic society, so I fail to see how sharia can be made to fit in, and maintain social cohesion. This is a move that leads straightway to madness, and the legitimization of extremism. This is an outrage.
Fortunately, there are others who agree that this is bad:
But his views were condemned today by senior Tory MP Peter Luff, who said: "This is a very dangerous route which we should not go down. You can't be a little bit pregnant. You can't have a little bit of sharia law.
"We should not start introducing new different legal systems alongside ours."
True dat.
Read the rest.
HT: Simon
UPDATE: Christopher Hitchens goes even deeper in explaining why this is bad:
Picture the life of a young Urdu-speaking woman brought to Yorkshire from Pakistan to marry a man—quite possibly a close cousin—whom she has never met. He takes her dowry, beats her, and abuses the children he forces her to bear. She is not allowed to leave the house unless in the company of a male relative and unless she is submissively covered from head to toe. Suppose that she is able to contact one of the few support groups that now exist for the many women in Britain who share her plight. What she ought to be able to say is, "I need the police, and I need the law to be enforced." But what she will often be told is, "Your problem is better handled within the community." And those words, almost a death sentence, have now been endorsed and underwritten—and even advocated—by the country's official spiritual authority.
It's real bad, folks.
The Archbishop of Canterbury has today said that the adoption of Islamic Sharia law in the UK is "unavoidable" and that it would help maintain social cohesion.
Rowan Williams told BBC Radio 4's World At One that the UK has to "face up to the fact" that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal system.
He says that Muslims could choose to have marital disputes or financial matters dealt with in a Sharia court. He added Muslims should not have to choose between "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty"
.
Dr Williams said there was a place for finding a "constructive accommodation" in areas such as marriage - allowing Muslim women to avoid Western divorce proceedings.
Other religions enjoyed such tolerance of their own laws, he pointed out, but stressed that it could never be allowed to take precedence over an individual's rights as a citizen.
This is pure insanity. Sharia law is openly hostile to democratic society, so I fail to see how sharia can be made to fit in, and maintain social cohesion. This is a move that leads straightway to madness, and the legitimization of extremism. This is an outrage.
Fortunately, there are others who agree that this is bad:
But his views were condemned today by senior Tory MP Peter Luff, who said: "This is a very dangerous route which we should not go down. You can't be a little bit pregnant. You can't have a little bit of sharia law.
"We should not start introducing new different legal systems alongside ours."
True dat.
Read the rest.
HT: Simon
UPDATE: Christopher Hitchens goes even deeper in explaining why this is bad:
Picture the life of a young Urdu-speaking woman brought to Yorkshire from Pakistan to marry a man—quite possibly a close cousin—whom she has never met. He takes her dowry, beats her, and abuses the children he forces her to bear. She is not allowed to leave the house unless in the company of a male relative and unless she is submissively covered from head to toe. Suppose that she is able to contact one of the few support groups that now exist for the many women in Britain who share her plight. What she ought to be able to say is, "I need the police, and I need the law to be enforced." But what she will often be told is, "Your problem is better handled within the community." And those words, almost a death sentence, have now been endorsed and underwritten—and even advocated—by the country's official spiritual authority.
It's real bad, folks.
Romney is Out, and McCain is the Man for the GOP
Mitt Romney has officially quit the race, and basically conceded the GOP nomination to McCain. He announced it during a red-meat speech at CPAC. Laura Ingraham introduces him, but not before she basically rips into McCain. Romney basically said that he would've pressed on to the convention (a la Reagan in 1976), but he wants the GOP united against the Democrats. (He actually said it a bit differently than that, but you get the idea).
The word on the street is that he's going to pull a Reagan circa 1976, and try and set himself up for 2012, as the "true conservative." Maybe this is why he has said he's "suspending" his campaign, as opposed to ending it outright. Who knows.
The word on the street is that he's going to pull a Reagan circa 1976, and try and set himself up for 2012, as the "true conservative." Maybe this is why he has said he's "suspending" his campaign, as opposed to ending it outright. Who knows.
Wednesday, February 06, 2008
Nope, She's Not Joking
The heated battle between McCain and Romney over the support of the right-wing base of the GOP is well-known. Many hardcore conservatives do not like McCain, and some really loathe him. I'm talking loathing here. One of those who hate McCain with a passion is acid-tongued righty firebrand Ann Coulter, who has said she'd back Hillary Clinton if McCain wins.
Apparently, she's not joking:
I didn't think it was possible to hate somebody that much. I'm not stumping for McCain, but for Heaven's sake, the charges she lays on him are ridiculous. McCain called for the surge two years before anybody, and has supported it unwaveringly since its implementation. He was right to oppose the failed Rumsfeld strategy, and right to stand against torture. I just felt the need to clear that up.
I'm a moderate liberal Democrat, so my perspective is obviously different, but Hillary more conservative than McCain? Really!? I wonder what Hillary thinks of that statement.
And Pat Buchanan's in on it as well...
HT: Classical Values
UPDATE: Via Glenn Reynolds, a somewhat different take here. Problematic for many obvious reasons, but interesting.
Apparently, she's not joking:
I didn't think it was possible to hate somebody that much. I'm not stumping for McCain, but for Heaven's sake, the charges she lays on him are ridiculous. McCain called for the surge two years before anybody, and has supported it unwaveringly since its implementation. He was right to oppose the failed Rumsfeld strategy, and right to stand against torture. I just felt the need to clear that up.
I'm a moderate liberal Democrat, so my perspective is obviously different, but Hillary more conservative than McCain? Really!? I wonder what Hillary thinks of that statement.
And Pat Buchanan's in on it as well...
HT: Classical Values
UPDATE: Via Glenn Reynolds, a somewhat different take here. Problematic for many obvious reasons, but interesting.
Friday, February 01, 2008
"Am I the only one who can realistically picture myself voting for Clinton, Obama, Romney, or McCain?"
Well, if you take Romney out of that question, then the answer is no, you're not the only one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)