About Me

Name: Always To The...
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Don't Give Them Any Ammunition

Posted by Always To The Right on Wednesday, January 21, 2009 2:09:23 PM
Experts: Obama should re-take the oath

Several constitutional lawyers said President Obama should, just to be safe, retake the oath of office that was flubbed by Chief Justice John Roberts.

The courts would probably never hear a challenge, and some might argue that Obama automatically took office at noon because that's when President Bush left the office. But because the procedure is so explicitly prescribed in the Constitution, Beermann said if he were Obama's lawyer, he would recommend retaking it, just as two previous presidents, Calvin Coolidge and Chester Arthur, did under similar circumstances.

"He should probably go ahead and take the oath again," Turley said. "If he doesn't, there are going to be people who for the next four years are going to argue that he didn't meet the constitutional standard. I don't think it's necessary, and it's not a constitutional crisis. This is the chief justice's version of a wardrobe malfunction."
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Canada To Bill Ayers: Go Back Where You Came From!

Posted by Always To The Right on Tuesday, January 20, 2009 11:26:41 PM
He was supposed to speak at an education seminar in Toronto, but Canadian border guards said not so fast!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Back To Enflamed, Anti-American Hatred In Iran!

Posted by Always To The Right on Tuesday, January 20, 2009 6:46:33 PM
Michelle Malkin  •  January 20, 2009 02:38 PM

Guess that whole moving-forward-with-the-Arab-world thing President Obama talked about today hasn’t reached the streets of Tehran yet:

Pro-Gazan Iranian demonstrators carrying a British flag, burn a photo of US President-elect Barack Obama, during an anti-Israeli, anti-US and anti-British protest in front of the former US Embassy in Tehran, Iran, Tuesday, Jan. 20, 2009.
(AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Nuance

Posted by Always To The Right on Tuesday, January 20, 2009 5:11:21 PM

Inaugural benediction: Pray that “white will embrace what is right”

Didn’t whites just do that by electing Jesus Christ president?

Welcome to the post-racial age. Exit question: Hey, that Rick Warren’s pretty controversial, huh?

Buzz up!


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Number One Of Five

Posted by Always To The Right on Tuesday, January 20, 2009 2:53:05 PM
Aw: Politico rates McCain the Republican most likely to back Obama
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Gore Losing The War: 59% Don't Believe Man Is Warming The Planet

Posted by Always To The Right on Monday, January 19, 2009 9:46:46 PM
Heart-ache: Only 41% believe in man-made global warming

Talk about your inconvenient truths!

This has got to be bad news for a man that has bet his reputation as well as his very fortune on people buying into his junk science. As reported by Rasmussen Reports Monday:

Forty-four percent (44%) of U.S. voters now say long-term planetary trends are the cause of global warming, compared to 41% who blame it on human activity.

Seven percent (7%) attribute global warming to some other reason, and nine percent (9%) are unsure in a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. [...]


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Bush And The Bush-Haters

Posted by Always To The Right on Monday, January 19, 2009 8:55:21 PM
American Thinker: Bush and the Bush-Haters

There is one thing certain to go through Barack Obama's mind during the inauguration: at one point or another, while glancing at George W. Bush, he will consider the treatment that Bush got as president and hope to God he suffers nothing even vaguely similar.

It can be stated without fear of serious argument that no previous president has been treated as brutally, viciously, and unfairly as George W. Bush.
Bush 43 endured a deliberate and planned assault on everything he stood for, everything he was involved in, everything he tried to accomplish. Those who worked with him suffered nearly as much (and some even more -- at least one, Scooter Libby, was convicted on utterly specious charges in what amounts to a show trial).
His detractors were willing to risk the country's safety, its economic health, and the very balance of the democratic system of government in order to get at him. They were out to bring him down at all costs, or at the very least destroy his personal and presidential reputation. At this they have been half successful, at a high price for the country and its government.

Richard M. Nixon probably stands as the most hated president prior to Bush.

With Reagan, the coterie was even smaller and more isolated.

Bush is alone at being attacked and denied support from all quarters -- even from many members of his own party. No single media source, excepting talk radio, was ever in his corner. Struggling actors and comics revived their careers though attacks on Bush. A disturbed woman perhaps a half step above the status of a bag lady parked outside his Crawford home to throw curses at him and was not only not sent on her way but joined by hundreds of others with plenty of spare time on their hands, an event covered in minute-by-minute detail by major media.
While FDR was accused of having engineered Pearl Harbor (as if even an attempted attack on the US would not have been enough to get the country into WW II in real style), no president before Bush was ever subjected to the machinations of an entire conspiracy industry. The 9/11 Truthers, a mix of seriously disturbed individuals and hustlers out to pull a profitable con, accused Bush and his administration of crimes that put the allegations against Roosevelt in the shade, and with far less rational basis. These hallucinations were picked up the mass media, playing the role of transmission belt, and various fringe political figures along the lines of Cynthia McKinney.
But even this pales in light of the actions of the New York Times, which on its downhill road to becoming a weekly shopper giveaway for the Upper West Side, seriously jeopardized national security in the process of satisfying its anti-Bush compulsion. Telecommunications intercepts, interrogation techniques, transport of terrorist captives, tracking of terrorist finances... scarcely a single security program aimed at Jihadi activity went unrevealed by the Times and -- not to limit the blame -- was then broadcast worldwide by the legacy media. At one point, Times
reporters published a detailed analysis of government methods of searching out rogue atomic weapons, a story that was no doubt read with interest at points north of Lahore, and one that we may all end up paying for years down the line. The fact that Bush was able to curtail any further attacks while the media as a whole was working to undermine his efforts is little less than miraculous.

As for his own party, no small number of Republicans (not all of them of the RINO fraternity) made a practice of ducking out on their party leader.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

BDS Always For Them

Posted by Always To The Right on Monday, January 19, 2009 5:14:36 PM
Liberals Demand: Arrest Bush Now!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Assault Carries Consequences For Journalists In Iraq

Posted by Always To The Right on Monday, January 19, 2009 4:45:59 PM

Irony alert: Heroic shoe-thrower applies for asylum to Switzerland

Hey, I thought that the media had anointed Muntazer al-Zaidi the representative of the Iraqis in terms of their feelings towards George Bush and the American liberation of Iraq from Saddam Hussein.  After Zaidi tossed his shoes at the outgoing American president, the mainstream media made him into a hero and used the shoe-tossing assault as an ongoing motif in cartooning and in Bush retrospectives.  In Iraq, though, Zaidi has discovered that it constitutes assault on a foreign dignitary — and they’re enthusiastic about prosecuting him for it (via Michelle)

Why does he need asylum?  The biggest problem, outside of the potential 15-year sentence, is that Zaidi can’t get work as a journalist since his attack on Bush.  Imagine that!  Why would an unprovoked assault on a foreign leader suddenly mean that a journalist can’t be trusted to report on events?

For more irony, consider the options asylum would bring Zaidi:

Once settled in Geneva, the bachelor without children could “very well work as a journalist at the United Nations” which has its European headquarters here, Poggia said.

Of course he could!  Why, shoe-throwers are what make the UN the credible multinational organization it is.  I can’t think of a more appropriate correspondent for the UN’s Geneva base.  Someone brings up Oil for Food?  Throw a shoe.  Anyone talking about how UN peacekeepers routinely sexually exploit women and children in exchange for aid?  Throw a shoe.  Hugo Chavez talks about smelling sulphur after following Bush to the dais?  Hand Chavez a shoe for him to throw.

Zaidi committed an assault on a foreign dignitary for his own political purposes.  He’s not being persecuted, he’s being prosecuted for a crime that not only got captured on video, it got seen by hundreds of millions of people around the world.  Now Zaidi wants to take the cowardly way out of the consequences of his actions.  What a hero!

Michelle Malkin  •  January 19, 2009 11:40 AM

Iraqi journalist Muntazer al-Zaidi, the international moonbat who threw his shoes at President Bush, wants refuge in Switzerland

I hear he has also filed for asylum in Hollywood. Third choice: the NY Times newsroom.




Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What's The Carbon Footprint Of Obama-Palooza?

Posted by Always To The Right on Monday, January 19, 2009 4:12:39 PM
From ABC News on the stars and wealthy arriving in D.C. for the inauguration tomorrow: For CEOs and stars arriving by private jet, local airports have . . . Go
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

“It Was Almost A Movement That Had To Be Ordained, I Think.”

Posted by Always To The Right on Monday, January 19, 2009 2:10:21 PM

Spike Lee: Tomorrow’s the most important day in American history

Insight from a man who once believed, and maybe still does, that AIDS was a conspiracy to kill blacks. He saved this newest revelation for the right network, too: Here’s Obama supporter James Poniewozik, writing at Time about MSNBC’s absurdly breathless Obamapalooza ads.

The difference between 2001 and now: Unlike Bush, Obama is an avatar heaven-sent to save America, a point made before by Lee and reaffirmed here with his theory of whose invisible hand was pushing the economy off a cliff in September. Exit question: Is anyone not watching MSNBC’s coverage of the inauguration tomorrow, just to see how obsequious they’ll be? I expect nothing less than tears from Matthews and an intimation from Olby that we’re seeing providence unspool before our very eyes. Click the image to watch.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Poll On Gays In The Military Perturbs Palm Cente

Posted by Always To The Right on Sunday, January 18, 2009 10:11:58 PM
On Wednesday, incoming White House spokesman Robert Gibb responded to a question by affirming that the Obama administration fully intends to repeal the 1993 law . . . Go

As I wrote in this article for NRO, the recently released annual Military Times poll found that 58% of active-duty respondents were opposed to repealing the law.  The 2008 survey further found that if Congress repeals the 1993 law, 10% of respondents said they would not re-enlist, and an additional 14% said they would consider ending their careers.  This is a poll, not a crystal ball, but indicators such as this should give pause to the new president and commander-in-chief, Barack Obama.  Personnel losses anywhere near these numbers would devastate the volunteer force.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama Hosting Pricey Party In A Dicey Economy

Posted by Always To The Right on Sunday, January 18, 2009 8:16:24 PM
AP suddenly notices that Obama inauguration is ridiculously expensive
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (6) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

McCain Is The Reason McCain Lost

Posted by Always To The Right on Saturday, January 17, 2009 10:49:55 PM
From the web;

Have you thought back to the 2008 election?  Have you asked yourself who was responsible for that loss?  Have you asked yourself who really should shoulder the blame and the burden for the defeat of Senator McCain?  A lot of people have been speculating this, a lot of postmortems on the election.  Let's go to the BBC.  BBC World Service, host Stephen Sackur spoke with former McCain campaign manager Rick Davis and asked Rick Davis on whose shoulders rests the burden of the McCain defeat.

DAVIS:  We didn't successfully reach out to them.  I mean, but you look at the leadership John McCain gave which is counter to the direction that the party was headed, when you have the Rush Limbaughs of the world who, you know, literally almost feed the nativist attitude toward immigration reform, what do you think the Hispanic voter, the Latino voter is gonna remember?  They're gonna remember the attacks, not the efforts by people like John McCain to try and reform.

The Democrats in the Senate right now are happy. They have 58 or 59 seats. Depending on what happens in the finals of the Stuart Smalley/Norm Coleman race, they can have 58 or 59 seats.  Everybody says, "Well, whew! Whew! Boy, that means they don't have their 60 votes."  Au contraire.  You know who's going to get the 60 votes for Obama in the Senate? Do you know who's going to get the 60 votes for Harry Reid? 

It will be John McCain.  John McCain does not want his legacy to be that he lost the presidential race.  He wants his legacy to be that he's a deal-maker. He wants his legacy to be that he walked across the aisle, that he's bipartisan, that he's bigger than life, blah, blah, blah. So I guarantee you, McCain will be the guy that shepherds wayward, liberal, Northeastern Republicans to vote with Democrats on some issues, some bills, in order to give the Democrats their filibuster-proof majority of 60 or more votes.  Now, that's in the cards. I don't think there's any question about it. It's exactly who McCain is, and that's why he lost! Most Republicans perceived McCain as a Democrat. When you get right down to it, that's how he was viewed.

That's what happened to the Republican Party. They became Democrat Party Light.  McCain gave nobody any substantive reason to vote for him.  Essentially, he ran a Democrat campaign when it came to illegal immigration, global warming, campaign finance, interfering in the private sector.  And this is why McCain is far more comfortable working with congressional Democrats than Republicans, and McCain will be the guy that gets Harry Reid his 60 votes in the Senate whenever Reid needs them. Mark. My. Words.  Now, this immigration issue, sure. Minor little things like the rule of law, economic conditions in border states.  There's an exodus of people from California for a whole host of reasons, but among them, it's simply too expensive to do business and live there. 

You're going to have to learn something very fast: Republican voters that you need to win elections think the mainstream media is as much the enemy as any Democrat candidate is going to be.  And sidling up and trying to get the approval of a bunch of incompetent boobs who have sided with Democrats for the last 50 years is not the way to engender support, ongoing support and get a mandate.  This campaign never had a prayer and everybody knew it from the get-go.  It never had a prayer.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Will Holder Be Obama's Richardson?

Posted by Always To The Right on Saturday, January 17, 2009 5:58:32 PM
Liberals may be overjoyed to hear Attorney General nominee Eric Holder unequivocally declare waterboarding to be torture. But will he refuse to let his president prevent terrorism?

Read Full Article

Protesters present in the hearing room were delighted when Holder answered the very first question panel chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., put to him with the statement that "water-boarding is torture."

When Leahy then went on to ask if he believed that "painful stress positions, threatening with dogs, forced nudity and mock executions" were also torture, Holder initially said he was "not as familiar with those techniques," but proceeded to conclude that "I believe they do" constitute torture.

What shall we add to the list? A chilly jail cell? A too-hard mattress? No dessert after the evening meal?

It may sound very principled and upstanding to take this supposed high road while claiming that as head of the Justice Department you will also "use every available tactic to defeat our adversaries," as Holder assures us.

It can be summed up as follows: Will we get as tough as possible with terrorist detainees who have information that will foil plots and save hundreds of lives — even to the extent of taking them to foreign locations and doing unsavory things to them? Or will we act always as if an ACLU lawyer is looking over our shoulder — and thus risk the consummation of a terrorist operation against the homeland?

The CIA inflicted enhanced interrogation techniques on at least three detainees, including the mastermind of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. The 9/11 Commission report cited his interrogations some 60 times as the basis for key facts revealed regarding al-Qaida.

The CIA and other U.S. government personnel involved in this nasty business, along with the officials of foreign governments who acted as hosts, are heroes, not lawbreakers. As brutally terrifying as repeatedly being subjected to a drowning sensation is, it is not in the same league as what our POWs underwent in locales like imperial Japan and Communist Vietnam, and it should not be classified as torture.

Any 21st century definition of torture should, however, include another horrifying sensation: the pain of living without a father or daughter for the rest of your life because they were blown to smithereens in a preventable terrorist act.

Holder also made it clear to the Judiciary Committee that Guantanamo Bay prison would be shut and due process rights extended to some of the enemy combatants held there. The president-elect may end up being very sorry indeed that he appointed an attorney general more focused on securing terrorist rights than averting terrorist wrongs.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous12…212223242526272829…3435Next »