Is anyone surprised at the NYT hit piece on McCain?

I'll begin with this.  After the Clinton presidency, who are Democrats, liberals and progressives to comment on a politicians extramarital affairs whether real or fabricated?

 

Now, with that out of the way let me talk about the New York Times' hit piece on John McCain.  In case you did not read the article, the supposed affair that John McCain is having with a lobbyist was never substantiated.  But whether or not McCain had an affair is not the issue.  The New York Times' reporting is.

 

You see, the New York Times had this story in December and they told McCain about it in December.  So why was this potentially damaging story held until now?  It sure was not benefit John McCain.  The New York Times wants a Democrat in the White House, plain and simple.  This story is evidence that the media is left leaning and attempting to manipulate the outcome of an election.

 

The New York Times could have published that story in December, but why not?  If the story was published then and had its desired effect then McCain would not be the Republican nominee.  Now, McCain is going to be the nominee, and now the media will strike.

 

I am not any more upset with the media than I normally am.  A snake is a snake and the NYT is the NYT.

 

A note to John McCain: you've stepped on the conservatives and gotten colzy with the Libs.  And where has it gotten you?  Did you honestly think that your Lib buddies wouldn't forsake you for Hillary or Obama?  Lesson learned.  I hope.

Bush proposes tax rebate. Dems spin.

President Bush is working on a proposal to address economic worries. Within this plan he is proposing a "rebate" on income taxes. This is similar to the rebate we received in 2002. Singles are said to receive $600 and married couples receive $1,800.

Of course the media and libs are out there spinning this. Several stories have surfaced in the media where people are dragged out who will say that they don't feel like this will help the economy.

Let me ask, weeks ago when Hillary, Barack and Edwards were touting their "free" give aways wasn't this going to undoubted help the economy? Isn't that how it was touted in the media? So what's the difference between the Dem "giveaways" and Bush's "rebate?"

To begin, rebate is not the proper word. Refund is. Bush proposes taking money directly out of the government coffers (our money) and giving it back. Hillary's supposed free, universal healthcare or "baby bonds" redistribution of wealth. Under Democrats taxes will raise to pay for the program. Bush on the other hand recognizes that we have a tax surplus and is not going to spend it, but give it back.

This is only a half-solution. The real solution, make the tax cuts permanent.

Iranian navy provocation brings out the crazies.

As you may or may not know, last week the Iranian navy sent fast attack boats out to confront a US Navy destroyer group. I have no doubt that the Iranians knew they would not be able to successfully attack the destroyer group and that their harassment was intended to provoke a response by the destroyers.



One thing that you can always count when something like happens is the kooks will come out in droves calling shenanigans. Just ask, the sinking of the Lusitania? Faked/the US did it. Pearl Harbor? FDR knew about it. USSR invasion of Afghanistan? the USSR was "lured" in by the CIA. 9/11? Bush did it.



What is the common theme here? The US is the bad guy. The US is to blame. No other nation, ever, ever, ever does anything against the US. The US is just so hell bent on war that we fake provocation to acheive that goal.

Ridiculous.

The kook spin on this will be that the Iranians would not dare attacking the US Navy as they know they would be destroyed. This will come from the same people that say we cannot win a war in Iraq or Afghanistan and have stated that the US military cannot fight terrorism.

Russians reliving the space race...

I ran across this headline, "Russia says it is ahead in race to put man on Mars"

The Russians say that they are winning the space race. Really? There's a race for that? Imagine that the Russians are racing for the red planet.

Here's a guarantee. Based on the USSR's previous performance they may well put a man on Mars first. Whether that man is still breathing when he gets there is another question.

Comments on the NH Primary

After last night's primary it looks like Clinton is still in the game. Good. I truly hope that she gets the nomination because she will be easier to beat in the general election.

Here's my question. Obama was polling at double-digits ahead of Clinton leading up to the New Hampshire primary, where are all the lefties crying voter fraud? I mean come on, in 2004 it had to be voter fraud because polls said Kerry was ahead, right?

Speaking of voter fraud, how does that work in Democratic primaries? Does one candidate get all the "dead voter" support and one get the "I vote once... in each county" support?