Bryan Preston: The Politics of Planting

Bryan Preston, Hot Air, deconstructions, CNN(Clinton News Network) and Wolf Blitzer’s phony debate.    Note Barack Obama’s reply.

Time to pull the plug on CNN and send Wolf Blitzer to Peter Arnett land.

Hat Tip:  Memeorandum.

The figures are in:

DETROIT (AP) — In another blow to the Motor City’s tarnished image, Detroit pushed past St. Louis to become the nation’s most dangerous city, according to a private research group’s controversial analysis, released Sunday, of annual FBI crime statistics.

The study drew harsh criticism even before it came out. The American Society of Criminology launched a pre-emptive strike Friday, issuing a statement attacking it as “an irresponsible misuse” of crime data.

The 14th annual “City Crime Rankings: Crime in Metropolitan America” was published by CQ Press, a unit of Congressional Quarterly Inc. It is based on the FBI’s Sept. 24 crime statistics report.

The report looked at 378 cities with at least 75,000 people based on per-capita rates for homicide, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary and auto theft. Each crime category was considered separately and weighted based on its seriousness, CQ Press said.

Last year’s crime leader, St. Louis, fell to No. 2. Another Michigan city, Flint, ranked third, followed by Oakland Calif.; Camden, N.J.; Birmingham, Ala.; North Charleston, S.C.; Memphis, Tenn.; Richmond, Calif.; and Cleveland.

The study ranked Mission Viejo, Calif., as the safest U.S. city, followed by Clarkstown, N.Y.; Brick Township, N.J.; Amherst, N.Y.; and Sugar Land, Texas.

10 most dangerous cities, indeed.

Ah, yes, Detroit…. “De riot” spelled sideways, kinda. Otherwise known as the “Mistake on the Lake”. Anyone who has been to that place of late, as I have been, will not be surpised. As it happens, I’ve got family (on both sides) who live there. Even here in Rochester, we’re within earshot of a few Detroit News/Talk stations (760/WJR and 950/WWJ, to name two) around here, and so I have a better local perspective than perhaps most of the readership does… and I get the impression the crime problem gets underplayed, even on the local media. If the locals were to get the whole of it, they’d be shell shocked in short order, I suppose.

That Detroit should holler isn’t a shock… anyone ending up in such a position is going to claim the numbers don’t really mean what they say, and complain that the people doing the study are liars, etc. (Most criminals claim they were framed, after all) If the whole of their crime problem were to come up on the national stage, the place would be walled off.

But here again, we come down to it, as we have in the past when such studies come out… What is the makeup of the population, and what are the political leanings of the people in those cities? I suggest a little study on your part of the cities in question, along those lines.

Let’s exemplify this with two sets of data:

Amherst, NY for example.

As of the census² of 2000, there were 116,510 people, 45,076 households, and 29,885 families residing in the town. The population density was 844.8/km² (2,188.1/sq mi). There were 46,803 housing units at an average density of 339.4/km² (879.0/sq mi). The racial makeup of the town was 89.28% White, 3.90% African American, 0.13% Native American, 5.22% Asian, 0.02% Pacific Islander, 0.37% from other races, and 1.09% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 1.36% of the population.

There were 45,076 households out of which 29.7% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 55.6% were married couples living together, 8.3% had a female householder with no husband present, and 33.7% were non-families. 28.3% of all households were made up of individuals and 13.4% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.42 and the average family size was 3.01.

Then we come to Detroit:

As of 2000, the city of Detroit was 82.70% African American, 12.26% white, 0.33% Native American, 0.97% Asian 0.03% Pacific Islander, 2.54% from other races, and 2.32% from two or more races. 4.96% of the population was Hispanic or Latino of any race. The city’s foreign-born population stood at 4.8%.

Come to your own conclusions…. but here’s a hint; this is not an educational issue. This is not a lack of government funding. This is not an issue of race. What we have here is a cultural issue, and by extension, a political one.  Ask any of the occupants of the Detroit area how it has come to this, and you’ll hear about how it’s all the government’s fault for not doing enough. It’s all Whitey’s fault. Blame “The Man”. Ask those in the other cities that are doing well, about why they’re doing so well, and you’ll hear it’s because government stayed out of the way, except to punish crime, and ostricize the criminal instead of dealing with it like it was a social issue.

Boortz this morning:

The corrupt United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has issued a summary for action on climate change. This summary says that “warming of the climate system is unequivocal.” Quite odd, really, since the Earth has actually cooled somewhat during the last three years, and considering the fact that there has been no appreciable warming for ten years.

The summary also says that “human activity” is behind the problem, and that we’re facing “abrupt or irreversible changes” on Earth. Again .. a bit odd, considering that humans are only responsible for about three percent of the carbon dioxide in our atmosphere.

The assumption being made, of course, is that actual fact is what’s driving this nonsense. It’s not. And at that point, once that is understood, there’s only one answer for why the UN is still pusing this bilge. Of course it’s all a ‘crisis’ (Our world is dying, can we unite behind liberals to save it?) and we have to ‘give’ to help. Not the ‘developing world’, mind, just the western world.

Figure it out, America.

Ohh… Boortz also says:

Hillary is getting on board with the global warming scam. Here’s her idea of spending $150 billion over 10 years to combat the problem, $50 billion of which will be “taken” from the evil oil companies.

Now what did I say earlier this morning?

Glenda Brawley whose daughter was not raped twenty years ago, is petitioning New York State governor and attorney general, Eliot Spizter and Andrew Cuomo to “reopen” the case.

NEW YORK (AP) — Twenty years after her allegations of a racially charged rape became a national flash point, Tawana Brawley’s mother and stepfather want to reopen the case, a newspaper reported Sunday.

Glenda Brawley and Ralph King want to press New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer and state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo to re-examine the November 1987 incident, which a state grand jury ultimately concluded was a hoax, the Daily News reported.

Brawley claims,

“New York state owes my daughter.”

Aside, Ms. Brawley’s daughter does not appear to be party to the petition, and has changed her name.   Who can blame her?  I believe that Ms. Brawley’s daughter is not a relevant part of the story.

Ms. Brawley asserts that New York State, (that is, me) owes her.   So just what do I owe Ms. Brawley?    At one point New York owed Ms. Brawley an investigation.    Debt paid in full.   The grand jury heard, what, one hundred eighty  witnesses, of whom Ms. Brawley was not one.   Ms. Brawley fled her subpeona and still a fugitive.

Does Ms. Brawley contend that New York State, (again, me) somehow owes her money?   Even if the rape allegations had been true, which they were not, the state does not owe monetary compensation to victims of crimes.    There was never any debt to be paid.

I am not sure for what Ms. Brawley trolling, sympathy or money. but she’ll get none from me.

Calmer analsysis,  Betsy Newmark, Betsy’s Page;   Sister Toldjah.

(edit  -Bit)

McQ over at O&O made a trip to an oil platform, and relates his experiences here.

There’s a lot going on in that post, but I do want to point up something  that relates to a discussion we had the other day about domestic production:

I think one of the more relevant points I learned was the size of the investments oil companies like Chevron routinely make in search of product. Right now, not counting Blind Faith, it has 27 projects world wide each costing a billion dollars or more. Blind Faith is a billion dollar plus project – again, before the first barrel of oil is extracted.

Billion dollar (and multi-billion dollar) projects aren’t undertaken unless you make a profit and can put that profit back into research and development and building the platforms necessary to produce the product.

And the issue of not allowing exploration on something like 85% of the known oil fields we have in this country aside for the moment, this is the other major issue that we face in terms of getting domestic crude going… taxes.  All this investment takes a lot longer to pay off when people like Hillary Clinton come along and try to tax oil companies to death because they’re making a ‘profit’. Where does Hillary think such profits go? Instead, the left taxes the hell out of oil companies and then tries to kill off the business by claiming there’s no product left. … and pushing oil’s competition…  leaving us with paying the freight, which at the moment comes up $3.25 a gallon. Which of course affects the prices on everything else in our economy, since everything gets transported, by whatever means.

As I said elsewhere:

After 30 years of work against domestic petroleum refiners, by the enviro-wacko left, we now find ourselves in the situation where we have Insufficient drilling capacities at home, and insufficient refining capacities at home, to meet the demand. Of course, the hope (thought they would never admit it) was that tightening the supply of oil would increase the supply of other forms of energy, such as biofuels. This was supposed to be our energy panacea.

But, like every other wet dream these people have come up with, it’s turned into a nightmare. It has become clear that we are not going to be able to do that. As a result, we now have an energy starved nation, paying $3.00 a gallon and better for the ability to drive back and forth to work… and all the economic repercussions that invokes.

Isn’t it time we took the government wonks keeping us from our own oil, in hand?

Anyway, go read McQ’s article.

Surber is still playing “Name that Party”

I doubt AP would have downplayed a Republican losing over a racist remark.

As a member of the MSM for most of my adult life, I should resent charges of a pro-Democrat bias in the media. Really, I should.

But then Melinda Deslatte of the Associated Press and her editors in New York do something like this: Downplay the election loss of a white Democratic State Representative in Louisiana who had called a civil rights leader “Buckwheat.”

You know, when the place has been declared “Chocolate City”, you’d think the message would get through to Deslatte that she’s just being tolerated… barely. Surber has the full story posted.

 And the first line of the quote above, says it all.

In Washington,  if you can’t beat it, spin it.  Sherry Argov, New York Post,  apparently runs into the brick wall that voters refer to Mrs. Clinton as a bitch, because she is a bitch:

 November 18, 2007 — You know what we need in the White House? A bitch.

We need a bitch facing down terrorists, Iran and Congress. A bitch to order around the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Come to think of it, there’s a bitch right now trying to save Pakistan. Golda Meir, Queen Elizabeth, Margaret Thatcher – all great leaders. All bitches.

Sadly for Argov and the other Clinton hacks being a bitch is not synomous with being strong.    The nation needs a strong leader, not a bitchy one.    Lady Thatcher,  and Golda Meir were ladies of strong will,  not vile temperment

Strong female leaders do not their husband take the heat for them, and play politcal hatchet man.   They do not hide behing their skirts   There are strong women.   Mrs. Clinton is not among them.

Mike Huckabee another person too stupid to be allowed to be President.   Will Lester, Associated Press:

WASHINGTON – Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee rejects letting states decide whether to allow abortions, claiming the right to life is a moral issue not subject to multiple interpretations

“It’s the logic of the Civil War,” Huckabee said Sunday, comparing abortion rights to slavery. “If morality is the point here, and if it’s right or wrong, not just a political question, then you can’t have 50 different versions of what’s right and what’s wrong.”

Moron.   Slavery did not become a federal issue because it was a moral issue.   The Constitution is quite silent on the subject of morality.   The Constitution gives the federal government utterly no power to decide define public morality.

No stupid, slavery did not become a federal issue because it was a moral issue.  Rather slavery become a federal issue because the Constitution was amended.  Absent a constitutional amendment, abortion is properly a state issue, always has been.

Hat Tip:  Memeorandum.

Socialists, and leftards, do I repeat myself, chant that healthcare is a right.  Nonsense.  Healtcare is a commodity.  That it is product of human endeavor.   Healthcare only exists when some human endeavors to create it.

Humans who are required to involunarily produce commodities for others are not free men, but rather slaves.   No healthcare can given to one person unless is first created by another person.

Further, as heatlhcare is a commodity that must be produced, there is but a finite supply of healthcare.    Hence states which provide “free” healthcare always ration it.    

Simon Cable, Daily Mail(UK) 

A British woman planning to start a new life with her husband in New Zealand has been banned from entering the country – because she is too fat.

Rowan Trezise, 33, has been left behind in England while her husband Richie, 35, has already made the move down under leaving her desperately trying to lose weight.

When the couple first tried to gain entry to the country they were told that they were both overweight and were a potential burden on the health care system.

How much you happen to weigh, is none of the state’s business, unless of course the state is providing your healthcare.

Hat Tip:  Hot Air

Times are tough for the Republican Party and its candidates. Earlier this month, according to Gallup, more people strongly disapproved of George W. Bush than any previous president since the advent?of polling—and, really, how could things be any different? Bush can boast of an unwinnable quagmire in Iraq, a decimated housing market, economic instability and a collapsing dollar, a dysfunctional health-care system, a still-devastated Gulf Coast, a wealth gap of a scope unseen since the Great Depression and a pervasive and disturbing image of America as a hapless, blundering giant, rather than a beacon of freedom and morality in the world.

So says Kos, who sounds rather like a gradeschooler, complaining “But Teacher, it’s MY turn on the slide!!!” If this is the kind of mindless sludge we have to look forward to from him at Newsweek, I’d say Rove is going to have a rather easy time with him, assuming they do a point/counterpoint format… which they don’t seem to be doing this week.. Not to steal Rove’s fire, here, but I’m going to demonstrate how easy it is to backhand this clown, Kos:

Kos, ol’ buddy, Im sure that’s the picture you’d like to paint… and in this you’ve had MSM help. But here’s the facts:

• Far from being unwinnable, we ARE in fact winning both the war, and the peace in Iraq.. a point even the leftist MSM is starting to admit.
• The housing market is cyclical, and is not collapsing, though the looming tax increases being offered by Democrats isn’t helping the housing market, either.
• What Economic problems there are come down to two things: Energy and the Democrats refusal to allow us to build our own Energy infrastructure (IE, drill our own oil) all supposedly to to ‘save the environment’. It is the Democrats who have forced us into getting oil from foreign countries, because we can’t drill any of what we have available within our own borders.
• The Gulf coast is only devastated where the state government is too incompetent to deal with the situation. Note that while Louisiana still has many problems in terms of recovery from Katrina, equally hard hit Mississippi has problems that are not nearly on the same scale. The difference?  The state government in Louisiana is run by incompetent Democrats, who have had a lock on the state for generations, whereas Mississippi is run by more competent people of both parties, who recognize that it’s the state government, not the federal, which is responsible for such things. And since, in Louisiana, the monies the Federal government provide for recovery efforts largely remain undistributed by the Democrat run state government there, I think we have a fair enough idea where the blame ought to be going.

The fact was, is and will be that running against Bush on his record will be fruitless for the Democrats since your brining all this up will only serve to remind the voter that he’s done his job, whereas the Democrats have not yet figured out what the job is, exactly, other than beating up on President Bush. It’s a lesson you’ve also, apparently, yet to learn.

Aside from the fact, of course, that Bush isn’t RUNNING.

If that’s the best you’ve got, Kos, you poor old sod , you’re going to be in for a very long year of writing toothless op-eds for Newsweek.

Discussion, Memeorandum

(Edit:1515, Bit )

Nothing to see here. Just Move On, Citizens.

(Washington Post) – Federal prosecutors on Friday accused Rep. William J. Jefferson (D-La.) of soliciting bribes in two alleged schemes that had not been previously disclosed.

The allegations, detailed in a seven-page document filed in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, will not result in new charges, prosecutors said, but they plan to present them during Jefferson’s federal bribery trial as evidence of a pattern of intentional wrongdoing.

In 2002, the government alleges, Jefferson asked a lobbyist of a U.S. oil service company for $10,000 a month for a family member in exchange for Jefferson’s assisting the company in promoting business in Africa. The lobbyist turned down Jefferson’s request, the document said.

Three years later, according to the filing, Jefferson allegedly agreed to urge NASA in a letter to consider doing business with a U.S. rocket technology and rocket launch services company. In exchange, the company allegedly agreed to pay Jefferson’s family business and a relative.

Ho hum. More Democrat corruption. Nothing to see here.

Mind you, Jefferson isn’t the only bit of Corruption… merely the one that’s been caught. Where are the cries from the left to remove this guy from office? Maybe they got tired after Tom Delay, huh?

Memeorandum has more reax, as you might expect.

Little Green Footballs gives us the latest example of the Democrats in action… I’m telling you folks, the Democrat party split is already here. It doesn’t break out well, so it’s best if you go RTWT.
In this case, God help me, but Kos is right… though doubtless for the wrong reasons.

LOL…. This is going to go over huge in Orange County… especially this first para, from the Orange County Register, we see Mark Steyn, this morning…

I don’t believe the U.S. Constitution includes a right to abortion or gay marriage or a zillion other things the Left claims to detect emanating from the penumbra, but I find it sweetly touching that in America even political radicalism has to be framed as an appeal to constitutional tradition from the powdered-wig era.

In Europe, by contrast, one reason why there’s no politically significant pro-life movement is because, in a world where constitutions have the life expectancy of an Oldsmobile, great questions are just seen as part of the general tide, the way things are going, no sense trying to fight it. And, by the time you realize you have to, the tide’s usually up to your neck.

So Americans should be thankful they have one of the last functioning nation-states. Europeans, because they’ve been so inept at exercising it, no longer believe in national sovereignty, whereas it would never occur to Americans not to. This profoundly different attitude to the nation-state underpins, in turn, Euro-American attitudes to transnational institutions such as the United Nations.

It’s an interesting thought I’ll pour myself a second cuppa, take a few minutes to explore with you.

My first thought is Billy Beck and I could bounce the implications of that around for hours, and I suspect come to no real conclusion.

From my own POV; It is inarguable that the nation state is ripe for abuse. And boy, has it’s power been abused. No argument whatsoever on that score. Many of the bloggers you read daily have made a name for themselves blogging such abuses. Such abuses are demonstrated daily.

At the same time, however, it is also inarguable that for all of the abuses of government, our government as originally designed, is the best hope for freedom this world has yet seen. This is a point that is also demonstrated daily.

The irony here is that while some, like Billy, scream at volume ten about the abuses of the government and it’s infringements on individual liberty..(And he does so properly, I think) who else but a relatively powerful American government has the ability to defend and enforce those freedoms from powers elsewhere in the world who would, given the chance, eliminate those freedoms… and often as not, eliminating the people demanding them, as well?

One more irony; Many like Billy rankle that the government isn’t small and isolationist enough to suit them.  And certainly, when this country was founded, an isolationist approach, such as one encouraged by Washington, back in the day, was an acceptable and workable answer. Thereby, a weaker, more powerless government was all that was needed to deal out such policy.  The kind of aggressions against us as a people, and against our freedoms from foreign sources, were not enough of a worry to need much of a defense.  That’s the ideal.

Thing is, that ideal no longer exists. For one thing, back in that day world-wide travel was hardly the trivial matter it is today.  We didn’t have to worry, in the late 1700’s, about planes flying into populated buildings, or trucks loaded with explosives, and so on. We didn’t have to be concerned about Foreign invaders showing up from places halfway around the world in a matter of hours, to engage in battle with us on our our soil.

These are not situations which are responded to reliably by rugged individualist Joe Sixpack and his trusty Double Barrel Shotgun. Certainly, Joe can usually be of some help…. (If the government will but allow Joe to be armed…. and yes, that’s another abuse of government) … but the fact is, he’s not up to the task of defending the whole country, and the freedoms its people hold dear, even when joined by millions of his fellows.

The point I am making, here, no other entity is large enough to deal with such threats, but the nation-state.  Steyn makes it too, by way of comparison:

Aside from Britain and France, the Europeans cannot project power in any meaningful way anywhere. When they sign on to an enterprise they claim to believe in – shoring up Afghanistan’s fledgling post-Taliban democracy – most of them send token forces under constrained rules of engagement that prevent them doing anything more than manning the photocopier back at the base.

If America were to follow the Europeans and maintain only shriveled attenuated residual military capacity, the world would very quickly be nastier and bloodier, and far more unstable. It’s not just Americans and Iraqis and Afghans who owe a debt of thanks to the U.S. soldier but all the Europeans grown plump and prosperous in a globalized economy guaranteed by the most benign hegemon in history.

Now, whoa… slow down a minute… Before you think I’m leaning left and arguing purely on the idea of a big intrusive government, think again…, take a deep breath and read.

You see, first of all, defense is a constitutionally mandated function of government. Secondly, equally important to size, is what that government is based on… and what it is defending.

Look again what Steyn says on that point:

In Europe, by contrast, one reason why there’s no politically significant pro-life movement is because, in a world where constitutions have the life expectancy of an Oldsmobile, great questions are just seen as part of the general tide, the way things are going, no sense trying to fight it. And, by the time you realize you have to, the tide’s usually up to your neck.

The cause of that is what the government(s) is (are) founded in, and in turn, what the Europeans see as the purpose of government.  They’ve not being driven by the principles of freedom, they’re being driven by the whim of the moment.  They have nothing to anchor them.  Such a sand foundation is why they’ve fallen variously into Fascism, and socialism, and their offshoots, several times over the last 100 years, and we have not, as a nation.

No question, that we have also been driven both right and left over the years, but that anchor, the constitution and the principles that guided it’s authoring, have held us steadier than cousins in Europe.

(One can also point to the problems in Europe to include the cultural degradation that the governments there have allowed for in the name of ‘openness’ and that’s a key to all this, as well… for one thing, the freedoms which we defend are cultural values in nature, as I have said several times previously, here. But we’ll get back to that at some future time)

Argue against the abuses of government if you will, my friends, argue against how we need protection from abuses against our freedoms from within… from government… and I’ll support you.  But arguing for Anarchy, arguing for the destruction of the nation state is, ironically, and in reality an argument against freedom, because without that nation-state, there’s nothing to protect that freedom. And as we have seen of late, it does need that protection from without.

And without that, we’d have none of the other blessings which Steyn describes:

But on this Thanksgiving the rest of the world ought to give thanks to American national sovereignty, too. When something terrible and destructive happens – a tsunami hits Indonesia, an earthquake devastates Pakistan – the United States can project itself anywhere on the planet within hours and start saving lives, setting up hospitals and restoring the water supply.

And we have many freinds around the world thereby, which in turn makes America safer from attack. Nothing like a few friends in a bar fight to keep things in hand.  ( Which would seem to includ Europe… once the wolf starts howling at the door… Or more correctly, the Russian Bear as we saw with Sarkozy, the other day.)

I wonder how all this will play out in Orange. Or Olympia.

WOMAN SHOT FOR NOT HELPING TALIBAN

Posted: 14 Nov 2007 03:54 PM CST

WOMAN SHOT FOR NOT HELPING TALIBAN

UPDATE: COALITION FORCES POSITIVELY IDENTIFY TERRORIST KILLED IN RECENT RAID

Posted: 14 Nov 2007 12:31 PM CST

UPDATE: COALITION FORCES POSITIVELY IDENTIFY TERRORIST KILLED IN RECENT RAID

COALITION FORCES DETAIN 26 SUSPECTS TARGETING AL-QAEDA NETWORKS

Posted: 14 Nov 2007 12:15 PM CST

COALITION FORCES DETAIN 26 SUSPECTS TARGETING AL-QAEDA NETWORKS

COALITION FORCES DISRUPT AL-QAEDA NETWORKS; ONE KILLED, 14 DETAINED

Posted: 14 Nov 2007 12:04 PM CST

COALITION FORCES DISRUPT AL-QAEDA NETWORKS; ONE KILLED, 14 DETAINED

DESPITE WOUNDS ANA, ANP FIGHT BRAVELY TO SECURE ORUZGAN PROVINCE

Posted: 14 Nov 2007 12:02 PM CST

DESPITE WOUNDS ANA, ANP FIGHT BRAVELY TO SECURE ORUZGAN PROVINCE

CHERTOFF PARTICIPATES IN THE LARGEST NATURALIZATION CEREMONY EVER IN IRAQ

Posted: 14 Nov 2007 11:59 AM CST

CHERTOFF PARTICIPATES IN THE LARGEST NATURALIZATION CEREMONY EVER IN IRAQ

IRAQI SCHOOLGIRL KILLED BY EXTREMIST ATTACK

Posted: 14 Nov 2007 11:57 AM CST

IRAQI SCHOOLGIRL KILLED BY EXTREMIST ATTACK

KIRKUK AIRSPACE RETURNED to IRAQI CONTROL

Posted: 15 Nov 2007 12:46 PM CST

KIRKUK AIRSPACE RETURNED to IRAQI CONTROL

COALITION FORCES TARGET AL-QAEDA NETWORKS; TWO TERRORISTS KILLED, 12 DETAINED

Posted: 16 Nov 2007 10:07 AM CST

COALITION FORCES TARGET AL-QAEDA NETWORKS; TWO TERRORISTS KILLED, 12 DETAINED

John Hawkins of Right Wing News, posts a question at Town Hall:

Does Marrying Bill Clinton Qualify Someone To Be President?

If a CEO of a fortune 500 company were to retire, would anyone seriously consider his wife to be an adequate replacement simply because she was married to him when he ran the company? What about a Super Bowl winning football team? What do you think the reaction of their fans would be if their coach’s wife was being seriously discussed as his replacement?

It sounds ridiculous, doesn’t it? Yet, Hillary Clinton has practically been anointed by the press and the punditocracy as our next President, despite the fact that her run at the presidency is almost entirely based on being Bill Clinton’s wife.

Heh… it occurs to me that such a position might present more of a challenge that it sounds. But Bimbo erruptions aside, John’s right….what has the woman done to rate ANY high office, much less the highest?

Discussion: Memeorandum