There will be no driving privileges for illegal aliens in the Empire State any time soon:
A humbled Gov. Eliot Spitzer — facing an insurrection from New York Democrats — is ditching his controversial plan to grant driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants that provoked a massive national backlash.
Spitzer will announce he’s “scrapping the plan” after a meeting of the state’s congressional delegation on Capitol Hill this morning, according to his spokeswoman, Christine Anderson.
Spitzer’s epiphany won’t be enough to save his political bacon though, as NY state voters are ready to scrap him when 2010 comes around.
Technorati Tags: eliot spitzer, illegal, immigrant, new york“Play my game or else,” more or less.
If he thinks he’s hurting GWB with such petty threats, he’s sorely mistaken.
That SOB needs to go. To quote a comment from the article link:
Technorati Tags: defeatism, harry reid, treasonReid is like the streaker caught on film - exposed. He still, even today, wants only to lose the war because “it is Bush’s war.” He can no longer claim the Administration’s strategy has failed, or that withdrawal will reduce violence or reduce the number of jihadists, or that he supports the troops - because it is obvious he just wants to lose, period. He is exposed, naked, and it isn’t pretty.
When the S-CHIPs are down, the moonbats in Congress go wild:
The outburst from Rep. Pete Stark as the House debated a children’s health bill drew immediate condemnation from Republicans who demanded he retract it.
Instead Stark, known for his liberal views and volatile temperament, issued a statement saying Republicans should apologize for voting against an expansion of children’s health care.
By a vote of 273-156 the House failed Thursday to override President Bush’s veto of legislation to expand the popular State Children’s Health Insurance Program.
Stark, who’s in his 18th term representing the liberal East Bay near San Francisco, took to the floor to accuse Republicans of funding the Iraq war but not children’s health.
“You don’t have money to fund the war or children,” Stark declared. “But you’re going to spend it to blow up innocent people if we can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the President’s amusement.”
A White House spokesperson was not immediately available Thursday afternoon to respond to Stark’s comment.
S-CHIP was vetoed because the Democrats wanted to expand the program to cover middle-class kids whose parents can afford health insurance for them. The program was started to help provide health insurance coverage to poor and needy children. Period. Expansion of S-CHIP would send the nation down the slippery slope towards socialist medical care.
Of course, Democrats like Pete Stark prefer to whine and throw temper tantrums when they don’t get their way — just like little children.
Technorati Tags: health care, iraq, pete stark, schipThe Morgan State debate is in two days. Still, Thompson, Romney, Giuliani, and McCain still won’t change their minds to appear. In short, to quote J.C. Watts, it is “a stupid decision” on their part.
“I think the best that comes out of stupid decisions like this,” said former Oklahoma Rep. J.C. Watts, is “that African-Americans might say, ‘Was it because of my skin color?’ Now, maybe it wasn’t, but African-Americans do say, ‘It crossed my mind.’”
All four GOP presidential front-runners — former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson — have said they will not attend a PBS debate at a historically black college in Baltimore hosted by Tavis Smiley. […]
Watts pointed out that some of the candidates with more liberal histories on issues such as guns and abortion have reached out to conservative groups that don’t share their views.
It’s not just black conservatives complaining. White conservatives are shaking their heads in disappointment. Commentary from Redstate:
The fact that our major Republican candidates have decided to skip out on a debate hosted by NPR’s Tavis Smiley at an historically Black university is a travesty. I’ve never been so disappointed in this Republican field as a group as I am about this issue. Even the CEO of Wal-Mart has appeared on the Tavis Smiley show to talk about his company, address concerns and objections, answer tough questions, and present himself and his company to Smiley’s audience and let them make up their own minds. It’s a real pity so many of our prospective Presidents aren’t willing to do the same. Don’t tell me the CEO of Wal-Mart isn’t as busy as any of these guys.
We have scolded the African-American community for its lock-step support for Democrats. However, as the avoidance of this debate demonstrates, Republicans haven’t exactly beaten down doors in an attempt to engage these voters, either. Given that these invitations went out in March, the campaigns had plenty of time to schedule one debate to address one of the largest voting blocs in the country, and one whose loyalties could help the GOP turn national elections. […]
Because Republicans don’t engage, we allow the Jacksons and Sharptons and Wests to define the GOP rather than define ourselves. We have to get aggressive in engaging black voters so that we don’t leave a vacuum. And if we ever want to gain their votes, we have to answer the barbs tossed at Republicans and get past the self-appointed gatekeepers with our answers.
Knowing that about nine out of 10 black voters have cast their ballots for the Democratic presidential candidate over the past two decades, the candidates can have little doubt that the audience at the All-American Forum is not likely to be receptive to Republican candidates or Republican policies.
But how can Republican supporters, many of whom labeled Democrats “cowards” for refusing to debate on the Fox News Channel, remain silent while their candidates run and hide from Tavis Smiley, one of the most congenial black talk show hosts on TV today?
It’s not too late. There are still two more days until the debate.
Yes, two more days. I already voiced my opinion on the subject, and it still stands.
It’s time for the frontrunners to step up or step off.
Related: Jim Geraghty offers up “reasons” why the Fearful Four won’t debate this Thursday. Frankly, I’m not buying their excuses.
Related #2: Shorter Bob Herbert: “Go away! I’m race baitin’!” (via Sister Toldjah)
Technorati Tags: debate, Giuliani, McCain, Morgan State, Romney, Tavis Smiley, ThompsonPlease pay a visit to Michael D. Cobb Bowen’s blog. He has an open letter for you regarding the Morgan State debate.
Rather than quote it, I think you (as well as other interested individuals) ought to read it in its entirety.
Technorati Tags: debate, Fred Thompson, Morgan StateThe top four Republican presidential candidates are in hot water with black and Hispanic voters (well, at least with the people who claim to speak for all of them; myself included):
The decision by four top Republican presidential candidates to skip a long-planned forum next week on African-American issues has renewed a debate over whether some GOP contenders are writing off many black voters, with some analysts suggesting the move could hurt the party’s chances in the 2008 general election.
The four candidates leading in most national polls - Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, Mitt Romney, and Fred Thompson - have said they have fund-raising or other scheduling conflicts and will not attend the nationally televised forum in Baltimore on Sept. 27. But even some leading Republicans questioned whether the candidates are interested in addressing issues of special concern to African-Americans.
I’m sure they are, but not on the terms defined by Tavis Smiley — where all the debate panelists are on the left, and most of the questioning will be based on “The Covenant With Black America”, a statement defined by its backers to be “a national plan of action to address the primary concerns of African Americans today — from health to housing, from crime to criminal justice, from education to economic parity.”
I’ve read the CWBA when it was announced last year, and most of it consists of proposals and goals based on leftist, collectivist thought. Most of the answers that would be forthcoming from GOP candidates (attendees and no-shows alike) would run counter to what CWBA is demanding, as conservative solutions are mostly rooted in individualism, and not collectivism.
However, I agree with Newt Gingrich, Michael Steele, and others who expressed grave disappointment at the top tier candidates declining to attend. Whether they had legitimate scheduling conflicts or just simply felt that participating in a heavily biased, agenda-driven forum would be a waste of their time is already being discussed, debated, or maligned by pundits everywhere.
Just as I took black Republican no-shows to the 2006 State of the Black Union (another CWBA themed event) to task, I’m doing the same for the Top 4 — especially Fred Thompson, whom I support for the presidential nomination: Show up anyway.
Yes, you’re damned if you do (and of course damned if you don’t), but you’ll earn a lot more respect from those who may not necessarily agree with you. Some may even open their minds and consider your plans and proposals for the future. And just maybe some of those who consider your arguments may come over to your side, lend you their support, and even cast a vote for you.
Well, at least such sincere efforts convinced me a few years ago.
I exhort the Top 4 (especially Thompson) with the following from last year: Hold your head high, present your case, and take the high road. If you’re drowned out by ad hominem attacks and epithets masquerading as “civil dialogue”, then shame on Tavis (and double-shame on the “open-minded”, “tolerant”, and “peace-loving” left-wing intellectuals). Don’t back down — and don’t get intimidated by the haters.
For the sake of political diversity among blacks, browns, and for all Americans who make up our republic, step up and represent.
Update: There’s a lively debate going on regarding the issue over at Booker Rising. Welcome Bookeristas!
Update #2: Cobb posts an open letter to FDT.
Update #3: The conversation continues at RedState.
Will someone kindly tell Jesse Jackson that his time has come — and gone?
Not even a spoonful of sugar will help her latest stab at socialized medicine go down.
After following the recommendations of the generals in the field, and consulting with policy wonks and partisan politicians at home, President Bush is “changing course” in Iraq — with progress and success being the guiding principles:
Our troops in Iraq are performing brilliantly. Along with Iraqi forces, they have captured or killed an average of more than 1,500 enemy fighters per month since January. Yet ultimately, the way forward depends on the ability of Iraqis to maintain security gains. According to General Petraeus and a panel chaired by retired General Jim Jones, the Iraqi army is becoming more capable, although there is still a great deal of work to be done to improve the National Police. Iraqi forces are receiving increased cooperation from local populations. And this is improving their ability to hold areas that have been cleared.
Because of this success, General Petraeus believes we have now reached the point where we can maintain our security gains with fewer American forces. He has recommended that we not replace about 2,200 Marines scheduled to leave Anbar Province later this month. In addition, he says it will soon be possible to bring home an Army combat brigade, for a total force reduction of 5,700 troops by Christmas.And he expects that by July, we will be able to reduce our troop levels in Iraq from 20 combat brigades to 15.
General Petraeus also recommends that in December, we begin transitioning to the next phase of our strategy in Iraq. As terrorists are defeated, civil society takes root, and the Iraqis assume more control over their own security, our mission in Iraq will evolve. Over time, our troops will shift from leading operations, to partnering with Iraqi forces, and eventually to overwatching those forces. As this transition in our mission takes place, our troops will focus on a more limited set of tasks, including counterterrorism operations and training, equipping, and supporting Iraqi forces.
I have consulted with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, other members of my national security team, Iraqi officials, and leaders of both parties in Congress. I have benefited from their advice, and I have accepted General Petraeus’s recommendations. I have directed General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker to update their joint campaign plan for Iraq, so we can adjust our military and civilian resources accordingly. I have also directed them to deliver another report to Congress in March. At that time, they will provide a fresh assessment of the situation in Iraq and of the troop levels and resources we need to meet our national security objectives.
The principle guiding my decisions on troop levels in Iraq is “return on success.” The more successful we are, the more American troops can return home. And in all we do, I will ensure that our commanders on the ground have the troops and flexibility they need to defeat the enemy.
Americans want our country to be safe and our troops to begin coming home from Iraq. Yet those of us who believe success in Iraq is essential to our security, and those who believe we should bring our troops home, have been at odds. Now, because of the measure of success we are seeing in Iraq, we can begin seeing troops come home.
Despite the good report and the beginning to draw down the troops, anti-war Democrats are still whining that anything short of immediate surrender and full retreat isn’t good enough for the American people the MorOns, the Code Pinkos, and the Ku Kos Klan.
But cooler heads knew that already…
The moonbat organization (no linky love for them) ran a full-page ad in the NYT attacking Gen. David Petraeus:
Let’s be clear: MoveOn.org is suggesting that General Petraeus has ‘betrayed’ his country. This is disgusting. To attack as a traitor an American general commanding forces in war because his ‘on the ground’ experience does not align with MoveOn.org’s political objectives is utterly shameful. It shows contempt for America’s military leadership, as well as for the troops who have confidence in him, as our fellow soldiers in Iraq certainly do.
General Petraeus has served this country for over 35 years with honor, distinction, and integrity. And this is not just about General Petraeus. After all, if General Petraeus is “cooking the books,” then the entire military chain of command in Baghdad, and all the staff, military and civilian, who have been working with General Petraeus are complicit, since Petraeus did not write his report in isolation. They are all, apparently, ‘betray[ing] us.’
MoveOn.org has been working closely with the Democratic congressional leadership –as an article in today’s Sunday New York Times Magazine makes clear. And consider this comment by a Democratic senator from Friday’s Politico: “‘No one wants to call [Petraeus] a liar on national TV,’ noted one Democratic senator, who spoke on the condition on anonymity. ‘The expectation is that the outside groups will do this for us.’
Hmmm, I wonder if said Democratic senator coward happens to be from the small town of Searchlight?
Fortunately, not everyone in Congress is drinking the Kool-Aid on this latest outburst from the crazed left. Senator Joe Lieberman brings the smackdown:
“The personal attack on Gen. David Petraeus launched today by Moveon.org is an outrageous and despicable act of slander that every member of the Congress — Democrat and Republican — has a solemn responsibility to condemn.
“General Petraeus has served his country honorably and selflessly for over thirty-five years. He has risked his life in combat and accepted lengthy deployments away from his family to defend our nation and its citizens from its enemies. For this, he deserves the respect, admiration, and gratitude of every American — not the disgraceful slander of Moveon.org.
“It has been widely reported that Moveon.org has worked closely over the past months with many members of the Democratic Party in coordinating their efforts to derail the strategy that General Petraeus has been leading in Iraq.
“I do not know whether the Democratic leadership was consulted in any way or informed by Moveon about this personal, political attack on General Petraeus. That is not the point. The point is that when partisan political attacks which have already divided and weakened our nation in many ways are directed at a non-partisan, non-political commander like General Petraeus, everyone has a responsibility to shout, “Stop. Enough.”
“As a member of the Senate Democratic caucus, I therefore call on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to denounce Moveon.org in no uncertain terms for its vile attack on Gen. Petraeus. General Petraeus deserves no less.
They Dastardly Duo won’t denounce the hand that props them up though, being the seditious cowards they are.
In the meantime, let’s hear what the Gen. Petraeus has to say — and hope that his opponents in Congress will call off their attack dogs and heed his recommendations.
Before Gen. David Petraeus can even have the opportunity to present his report on the war effort in Iraq, the Dems are already dissing it.
Congressional Democrats are trying to undermine U.S. Army Gen. David H. Petraeus’ credibility before he delivers a report on the Iraq war next week, saying the general is a mouthpiece for President Bush and his findings can’t be trusted.
“The Bush report?” Senate Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin said when asked about the upcoming report from Gen. Petraeus, U.S. commander in Iraq. “We know what is going to be in it. It’s clear. I think the president’s trip over to Iraq makes it very obvious,” the Illinois Democrat said. “I expect the Bush report to say, ‘The surge is working. Let’s have more of the same.’ ” […]
“Are these leaders asking the American people to believe that the testimony of a commanding four-star general in the U.S. Army should be discarded before it’s even delivered?” said Brian Kennedy, spokesman for House Minority Leader John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican.
“If so, these statements completely ignore what’s truly at stake in this war and suggest that neither the commander in chief nor our chief commander on the ground have any regard for the lives of the men and women fighting for this country,” he said. “It’s appallng, and I think the American people — rightfully — will continue to stick by the decisions of our commanders and troops on the ground when it comes to what is best for their safety and security.”
Unfortunately, the Congressional Dhimmicrats are too busy kowtowing to the Kos Kids and kissing enemy posterior to give a damn what the American people think. And don’t get me started on that touched-in-the-head moonbat down in Searchlight.
P.S.: For a good laugh, check out the ‘lolterizt’ postings over at IMAO.
Another Democrat performs random acts of treason:
US Democratic presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich, on a Mideast visit that included a stop in Syria, said the country lambasted by the Bush administration deserves credit for taking in more than a million Iraqi refugees.
Kucinich, a strong anti-war opponent who trails far in the US presidential polls, also said he won’t visit Iraq on his trip to the region because he considers the US military deployment there illegal.
“I feel the United States is engaging in an illegal occupation … I don’t want to bless that occupation with my presence,” he said in an interview in Lebanon, after visiting Syria. “I will not do it.”
But he had no scruples about “blessing” Bashar Assad with aid and comfort.
Sadly, no one will demand his immediate resignation from Congress and a public apology, as socialist Democrats nowadays are given blanket immunity from criticism or controversy.
(link via Wizbang)
Update (9/7): LGF has jaw-dropping video footage.
Earlier, select blogs were chosen to field questions for the Thompson campaign; the best 5 questions from each blog will be forwarded on to Fred for answers.
One of the questions is regarding the FairTax. Hopefully it’ll be selected, and hopefully there’ll be a straight answer on the subject once and for all (although I’m not getting my hopes up. Other than that, Go Fred!).
Why wait for the future when the ugliness comes straight from the candidate’s mouth?
“[Social Security] is the most successful domestic program in the history of the United States,” [Hillary] Clinton said to applause from seniors gathered in Washington to push their policy agenda. “When I’m president, privatization is off the table because it’s not the answer to anything.”
Socialist Security is on the verge of financial collapse, yet Girl Marx thinks it’s the worker bee’s knees.
And of course, in Billary’s World, privatization is evil. How dare individuals make their own choices?
Related: Lest he be upstaged, John Edwards give Americans a taste of his own authoritative medicine.
I’ve already concluded that the man is an embarrassment to Nevada. This week, he didn’t fail in becoming more like his party’s mascot.
Meanwhile, Dennis Miller speaks for this Nevadan concerning “Pinky” (or is it “Pinko”?).