She was miered

Here's an article I found on Drudge discussing the difference between getting "borked" or "miered"

I agree that Bush is too concerned with concensus. Not in a lot of areas that are important (Iraq, etc.), but in many others. I'm a reasonable person and would normally say that trying to work with your opposition is a good thing. But when you give an inch and they refuse to give even a milimeter back, these people just aren't worth trying to compromise with --on ANYTHING. We're on English units, they're on metrics. They're just refusing to make anything work. He should stick with the base that got him elected and flip the libs a big ol' Texas bird.

Harriet Miers withdraws

Happy Thursday, everyone.

Just read on Conservative Underground that Harriet Miers has withdrawn herself from consideration for the Supreme Court.

Super. The libs must be having parties right now. Can't say I blame her, though. I mean after what Roberts went through who would WANT to go through that?

I'll post more as I find it.

Link: MSNBC has a story up...so does FoxNews.

Anne Rice - Christian Author?

Um...call me a cynic, but when I read this article, the only thought in my mind was, "She must have been following the HUGE success of The DaVinci Code and wanted a piece of it". But in a way, it's a good thing. Haven't we been saying for a long time that Hollywood needs to look at the success of family-friendly movies and pay attention? I firmly believe that this country is demanding more movies they can take their kids to and less that they themselves have problems viewing.

So in a way I'm happy about this, and will probably buy the book (I happen to love Anne Rice), but in another way I'm leery of being suckered. The article mentions some "liberties" with the story of Jesus as a 7-year old...which made me think "Ah. DaVinci Code. She's going for controversy."

There's a chance she's genuine, but I'm not buying it. Not that I have any room to judge anyone - after all I'm not the one that "sees men's (and women's) hearts".

The case against Bush

Well. Here you go. 6 reasons why some conservatives are turning on Dubya these days. I gotta be honest, I didn't think that the libs would win - and I don't think they WILL...not in the long run anyway. But it seems that between the libs and the media they've still managed to convince some Americans that Dubya is doing a bad job as President.

What happened to the better-informed electorate? How is it that we've allowed ourselves to sign on to the Bush Botched Katrina Karl Rove is a Criminal Harriet Miers is a Bad Choice How Dare Bush Nominate Her Fry DeLay bandwagon?

Just feeling discouraged this morning.

Talk amongst yourselves.

(oh. Link thanks to Lucianne)

No Pressure...

The big game is ON this Saturday, 3:30 p.m.

And you'll see from this article there's not much pressure on Weiss and the team......

(yes, I'm being sarcastic) They are comparing this to every big ND game that ended up leading to a championship in the last 50 years... But if anyone can do it, it's the team with Touchdown Jesus on their side...

Go Irish!!!

Hang them

Why does anyone still report things Algore says? Why do other countries still want to hear this guy speak? I don't understand. Well, here's a quote on what would be different for our country if (God help us) Gore had been our prez:

"We would not have invaded a country that didn't attack us," he said, referring to Iraq. "We would not have taken money from the working families and given it to the most wealthy families."

"We would not be trying to control and intimidate the news media. We would not be routinely torturing people," Gore said. "We would be a different country."

Oh, so we're "routinely" "torturing" people, eh? Yeah, OK. Not even going to dignify that one with a comment.

And we're "controlling the news media?" Yeah, Karl Rove's influence is clearly evident each time I peruse the NY Times or flip on CNN.

Let's forget the fact that these liberals are doing nothing but spouting talking points for their constituents who are either a.) Blind Bush-haters who crave this stuff or b.) complete imbeciles. (sometimes a and b go hand in hand...)

They obviously cannot grasp the war on terror concept or how Iraq is a part of it. Apparently, they also can't grasp that harping on how it was wrong for us to invade Iraq will do nothing to help us win the struggle we're facing there now. And even liberals from Massachusetts admit we can't just pull out now that we're there. That would be an utter disaster. See, getting more allies on our side would help us win this war. Bashing the U.S. lecture tours through old europe talking about how wrong our actions are will not help us win. Get it?

The other favorite Democrat theme that's been going on since the 1930s is this class warfare talk. Enough already! When are they going to accept that we live in a capitalist country? We are not socialists or Marxists or Commis and we don't want to become them! Our Constitution says we are guaranteed the rights to life, liberty, and the PURSUIT of happiness. No one on earth is guaranteed money or riches. You have to work for those. Most Americans know this. Sure, it's really easy for a hard-working person to drive by a big mansion and say "that bastard. Why does he deserve that house? I bet he doesn't work as hard as I do." Well, maybe, maybe not. But someone having more than you is no reason to inspire hatred. And punishing those who achieve in this country is no way to encourage achievement.

At the end of the day, there should be a limit to free speech by public figures. We are at war. A serious war on terror. In fact, it's been waging for about 20 years, but no one has wanted to acknowledge it. Many liberals still can't acknowledge it. In this volatile state of war, lying to the world, claiming we "routinely torture" people, and bashing our capitalist system of government is detrimental to our war effort.

So I propose we bring back good old fashioned American justice. Let's hang the traitors! I know this might sound extreme, but people have wanted to kill Bush for far less. Who's with me! I think a good high-profile hanging or two might discourage American politicians and movie stars from spreading treasonous rhetoric around the world. At the very least, we could rid ourselves of Algore! Let's start the campaign! Hang the traitors!

5th Anniversary of the USS Cole bombing

Just thought I'd take a moment to remember the USS Cole, and share with you Michelle Malkin's take on it all, along with other links and commentary.

Time traveler or just a robber with style?

Now here's something you don't hear about every day...

For your consideration

Okay, back to your regularly scheduled blogging. I posted this comment on Conservative Underground and thought I'd share it with ya'll for your consideration. If you have time, read the whole thread - it's pretty interesting.

It all started with one of the members posing a question in regards to liberal hypocrisy - one which this poster asked some of the liberal members of the site to comment on. Here are my thoughts:

I've given up trying to understand their hypocrisy. Know how they screech and caterwaul for gay rights and have their "pride" marches and whatnot? Yet when a reporter has the nerve to not criticize the White House, instead - gasp! - agrees with the President, they dig around and find out that this particular reporter is GAY! GAY, I tell you. He's an awful person - he's GAY! I scratched my head about that one for a long, long few minutes. Remember how it was a big deal that Dick Cheney's daughter was a lesbian? If it was Chelsea Clinton that was a lesbian I'd bet my salary that there would be parades in her honor for being "courageous" and an "icon".

It's celebrated and trendy to be a Kabbalahist (or whatever they're called) or a Yogi or an atheist or a Christian Scientist. But heaven forbid if you're a Christian. They celebrate pagan religions and fight like hell to get these religions "accepted" and keep followers of these religions from being "offended" by our nativity scenes and displays of the Ten Commandments, but when Christians are discriminated against and laughed at? We're expected to just grin and bear it. Christians are murdered all over the globe and nobody cares. But they'll wear t-shirts celebrating Communist dictators.

It's a crime to kill a baby in utero - unless we call it "abortion". Scott Peterson was convicted of TWO counts of murder. Shouldn't that make someone stop and think about that? A boy beats his pregnant girlfriend's belly with a bat (at her request) and induces a miscarriage. He was convicted of murder. If that same baby at the same gestational age had been sucked out by a vacuum and dismembered under a "doctor's" supervision it would have been not only LEGAL but considered her "choice". I've been waiting a long time for an explanation on THAT topic...

Don't get me started on the Democrat politicians who have been impeached and yet are still celebrated. The Democrat politicians who are murderers yet nobody holds them responsible. Ex-Klan members who are given credibility by a party that calls themselves "tolerant" - and yet we're the racists? We have a Republican president who has appointed more minorities to high-profile positions than any other, yet he and his appointees are ridiculed, not commended. If a Democrat president did the same, he/she would be celebrated and worshipped.

How about all the women who have been freed from abuse and oppresion in Afghanistan? All the Iraqi women who are free from fear of being murdered, raped and tortured? Are the liberal feminist groups applauding Dubya for this? Nope.

It's schitzophrenic and I've given up trying to understand it all.

What do you think?
Link to the thread here.

SportsBlog!!

The Conservababes will now be exclusively dedicated to sports. Red Wings, Lions and Pistons, oh MY! Count on the Sage for her exhaustive coverage of all things Red Wings and the Patriotette for all things Pistons.

Just kidding.

However, I think the C'babes are pretty darn sick and tired of politics and liberal stupidity in general, so to get us through the gray, dull days of October and November we'll be periodically posting about our favorite teams. Feel free to jump in and talk some trash - we welcome sports fans of all persuasions. Except Pacers fans. (And Yankees fans.) They're almost as bad as liberals.

What happened to Old Time Hockey, eh?

The NHL regular season kicked off this week and the citizens of Hockeytown couldn't be happier. Especially after seeing how great our Wings looked in their first two games against St. Louis.

The season starts off with several new rules. The two line pass rule is cool --it makes for faster paced games and helps well skating teams like the Wings. The new goalie rule I'm still up in the air about. The OT shootout also makes for more excitement, which apparently we need.

That seems to be the big complaint from all the idiots out there --"Hockey's not exciting. I can't see the puck!" whine, whine, whine. Personally, I'd rather have them not watch hockey, but I understand we need to build revenue. Maybe one day Bettman will wake up and realize people actually like watching fights! (Imagine that? It's not only part of the game, but usually what excites fans most. And even the idiots who can't see the puck can figure out what's going on when two players are fighting. And Bettman thinks he needs to change the rules to build the excitement...)

So we've got rule changes and more special teams play than good old 5 on 5. I can handle this.

What I cannot abide is the new scheduling rules! How can an entire NHL season pass us by without Detroit playing Toronto ONCE? Or Montreal? Or Boston? We're talking the original six here! Do you think we want to watch Detroit play crappy teams like St. Louis a dozen times or more? (Oh, it will build rivalries --no, idiots! Teams build rivalries, not league schedulers!!)

It's bad enough I have to put up with Florida having two teams and teams in frickin' Arizona. Personally, I think hockey should be contained to north of the mason-dixon and east of the mississippi (canada exclued). Then we wouldn't have to change all the rules to try to entice people to watch the game. But enough is enough! Stop the madness.

Bring back Old Time Hockey! Eddie Shore, eh?

Harriet Miers?

Update III (on top because I think this answers the questions posed below): David Limbaugh weighs in with his usual thoughtfulness and honesty. I think I get it now. :)


Can someone help me out with something? All over the blogs, conservatives are a bit miffed with Dubya's pick of Ms. Miers. She's not "conservative enough". She's "only adequate". President Bush has "squandered" an opportunity.

Let's see. Didn't the liberals squawk and caterwaul about Roberts being *too* conservative? Didn't we jump on them with all fours reminding them that the role of a Supreme Court justice was to interpret the Constitution and not legislate from the bench? Dubya has said that Ms. Miers will interpret the constitution and not legislate. According to the President, she is more than qualified for the position.

So can anyone explain to me why we're upset with the President for his choice? Why is it that it matters to us conservatives how conservative she is, but when the liberals complain about how a nominee is TOO conservative we stuff our foot down their throats and remind them that justices aren't partisan - that they are to interpret the Constitution and nothing more?

I'm sure I'm missing something. Maybe someone out there can set me straight.

Update: Time Magazine wonders what her philosophy regarding Gay rights is...and again I ask, "Who CARES?" It's not like she's going to waltz into the court and make her own laws. At least she SHOULDN'T. The President said she WOULDN'T. It's called "legislating from the bench" and it's a no-no for Supreme Court Justices.

Again, am I missing something here??


Update II: Interesting point of view by The Therapist. (I love his style!) Worth the read, anyway. I think I'm closing in on the "what I'm missing" part...

Judges, on the other hand answer to no one, except for God, and they’ve done a good job of overturning Him anyway. That kind of autonomy is not only rare, it does not deserve to go to the ideologically androgynous. It deserves to go to someone with an established record, liberal or conservative.

that time of year...

revised rankings

Notre Dame moves back up to #12! They take on two time champs USC in two weeks. Personally, I think it's about darn time USC lost a game...

Go Irish!

(And can someone tell me HOW Tennessee is ranked #8? Have you seen them play??? Sloppy)