It’s going to be a long, long wait for the election to be over in November.  RT and I’ve been watching CNN and their coverage of the South Caroline Democratic Primary.  Lord help us!  They’re bringing in every Tom, Dick, Harry and Soledad to give their opinions and analysis of what’s going on. 

They’re giving us information/opinions on:

How the black vote might go.

How the white vote might go.

How the female vote might go.

How the Hispanic vote might go.

How the lower income vote might go.

How the affluent vote might go.

What the racial break down might be.

Whether a particular candidate might “over-perform” or “under-perform.”

They explain what they mean by “exit polls.”  It’s such a difficult concept, you know.

They have a countdown clock for when the polls will close and they will start getting numbers to put on the boards.

They tell us about each of the candidates - about their goals, their dreams, their tactics, their biographies.

The worst folks to give opinions couched in “reporting” are Roland Martin, Gloria Borger, Candy Crowley, Donna Brazile and Jeffrey Toobin. 

Jeffrey Toobin had the ultimate patronizing and inane comment:  ”Let’s not forget that John Edwards is a human being with a distinct story. . .  This IS his life - to be a presidential candidate.”  What an idiot!

I laugh at the paranoia of people who truly believe that George Bush STOLE the presidency in the 2000 election.  Do people really believe that silliness?  Whenever I surf left-wing blogs, I see countdowns to the end of the Bush presidency.  Widgets are available to install on one’s website to track the time until the “stolen” presidency is over.  They write about it on their blogs and in comments.  Are they serious?   There was nothing shady about the election.  If Bush and Gore swapped places and Gore was the one in office and people on the right were crying that he had stolen the presidency, the left would be laughing at the absurdity of the claim.

Apparently, left wingers seem to enjoy wallowing in their role as the eternal victim.  Most importantly, these silly claims help them get people who are incapable of thinking for themselves into thinking that there is a conspiracy against them.   That line of non-thought should be good for some votes for whoever the Democratic candidate might be.  I really don’t understand why the Democrats want to make people dependent on the government - except to move us even closer to socialism.  If a Democrat is elected, that’s exactly where we’re headed.

I spent my afternoon at a meeting.  The person who was facilitating the discussion was a man (an elementary school principal) who had THE worst toupee I’ve ever seen.  The toupee in the phototo on the left is similar to what he had.  Obvious, miss-matched, should be embarrassing, hilarious.  It actually was almost uncomfortable because you feel so sorry for someone who doesn’t appear to have a clue that he looks so ridiculous.  He just kept talking abou thow wonderful his school is how he is such a wonderful principal.  Really, I’ve rarely seen such a undeservedly confident person.

Unfortunately, we were sitting around a large conference table, and the toupee’ed school principal was sitting next to me.  He was very talkative and, as I said,  quite proud of what a wonderful speaker he is.  In fact, he’s the kind of person who completely monopolizes meetings. So, out of courtesy,  I watched him a good part of the 3 hours that the meeting lasted.   I wonder if he realized that I was studying his horrible toupee most of the time I was looking in his direction.   My thought was that I couldn’t wait to get home so I could write about his bad toupee.  The color was a fairly good match, but it was obvious that his own hair was straight, and the toupee was curly.  In the back, the toupee stuck out away from his shirt collar - making it even more obvious.  At his temples, you could see his real sideburns underneath the toupee.  And the toupee is not new.  He has apparently been wearing the same toupee for years. 

Since I sat close to him, I was able to see the toupee close-up, and I could see how awful it really was.  I guess educators don’t make much money but SURELY he could save enough money to buy a decent toupee.  Many years ago a friend loaned me a wig, and I wore it a couple times - just for the fun of it.  It was hot and felt miserable.  Yet this man wears a toupee every single day.  I can just imagine how uncomfortable that is.

The president of Pakistan blames Bhutto for her own death. 

“I think she is to blame alone.  Nobody else. Responsibility is hers.”

And THAT wraps up in a nutshell what is wrong with the world today.  The victim is blamed for her own murder because her murderer was a radical Muslim.  Radical Islam is given a free rein because, of course, it’s radical Islam.  So they’re not responsible for their own actions. If Bhutto had been a man, there would likely be a different perspective in the radical Muslim world.  Radical Islam has the world by the short hairs.  The United Nations can criticize any other religion - but they can’t say anything negative about Islam.  When will we recognize radical Islam for what it is - a mean hate-filled bully that must be stopped. 

Musharraf Blames Bhutto for Her Death

By Randall Mikkelsen,

Reuters

WASHINGTON (Jan. 5) - Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf conceded that a gunman may have shot Benazir Bhutto but said the opposition leader exposed herself to danger and bore responsibility for her death, CBS News said on Saturday.

Musharraf was also quoted as telling the CBS “60 Minutes” program to be broadcast on Sunday that his government did everything it could to provide security for Bhutto, who was killed last week in a gun and suicide-bomb attack after a political rally.

 ”For standing up outside the car, I think it was she to blame alone. Nobody else. Responsibility is hers,” Musharraf said in the interview taped on Saturday morning.

Pakistan’s government has said Bhutto died when she struck her head on a handle on her vehicle’s sunroof — a contention widely derided in Pakistan where many people suspect Musharraf’s government of complicity. The government has also blamed al Qaeda for the attack.

Musharraf was asked by CBS, which provided excerpts of the interview, whether a gunshot could have caused Bhutto’s head injury. He replied, “Yes, yes.”

The questioner asked, “So she may have been shot?” and Musharraf said, “Yes, absolutely, yes. Possibility.”

Bhutto’s widower called on Saturday for a U.N. investigation of the killing.

In an opinion article in the Washington Post, Asif Ali Zardari urged that a caretaker government be named to oversee national elections that were postponed until next month and he outlined other standards for assessing their legitimacy.

“Democracy in Pakistan can be saved, and extremism and fanaticism contained, only if the elections, when they are held, are free, fair and credible,” he wrote.

Zardari is the new co-chairman of Bhutto’s Pakistan People’s Party, alongside their son Bilawal.

Musharraf, a U.S. ally in its battle against terrorism, postponed the general election from January 8 to February 18, and the PPP is expected to benefit from a wave of sympathy for Bhutto.
Musharraf, whose re-election as president in October is still disputed by the opposition, will need support in the next parliament and looks likely to have to renew efforts to reach an understanding with the Bhutto’s party, analysts say.

CARETAKER GOVERNMENT

Zardari has said the PPP would take part in the vote. But the elections, he said in the Post, must be conducted under a “new, neutral caretaker government, free of cronies from Musharraf’s party.”

He also called for an independent election commission, monitoring by trained international observers with access polling stations and an ability to conduct exit polls, press freedom and an independent judiciary.

He urged that the United States and Britain join the push for a U.N. probe. Britain has sent a team from Scotland Yard to help the government of nuclear-armed Pakistan investigate the killing, and Washington has endorsed the step.

However, Zardari said, “an investigation conducted by the government of Pakistan will have no credibility, in my country or anywhere else.”

Bhutto had complained to an acquaintance shortly before she died that the Pakistani government was not meeting her security pleas.

CBS asked Musharraf whether he believed the government did everything possible for her security. “Absolutely,” he said. “She was given more security than any other person.”

I feel sorry for the 6-year old girl whose mother helped her lie her way to winning tickets to a Hannah Montana/Miley Cyrus concert.   The mother has deliberately taught her daughter to lie and cheat in order to get something she wants.  What a morally corrupt woman!   The mother was on TV this morning defending her actions by claiming that she was simply writing an essay.  She declared that she’d written essays in school.  This was just another essay.  Since when is an essay defined as a lie?

According to this story the girl (or the mother) wrote an essay in which she claimed that her father had died in Iraq this past April in a roadside bomb attack. 

 The girl won a makeover that included a blonde Hannah Montana wig, as well as the grand prize: airfare for four to Albany, N.Y., and four tickets to the sold-out Hannah Montana concert on Jan. 9.

The opening line in the essay was: “My daddy died this year in Iraq.”

The girl’s mother had told Club Libby Lu officials that the girl’s father died April 17 in a roadside bombing in Iraq, company spokeswoman Robyn Caulfield said. But the mother, Priscilla Ceballos, admitted later Friday that the essay and the military information she provided about her daughter’s father were untrue.

Here is part of the mother’s explanation:

“We did the essay and that’s what we did to win. We did whatever we could do to win,” Ceballos said in an interview Friday with KDFW-TV of Dallas. “But when (Caulfield) asked me if this essay is true, I said `No, this essay is not true.’”

This parent has taught her child all the wrong lessons in life.  She failed miserably in her role as a parent.  Hopefully, by seeing the resuls of the deception, the little girl will have learned a valuable lesson about the importance of truth and trust, and she will decide to not follow in her mother’s footsteps.

Others writing on this topic: TMZ,  Snafu-ed….Situation Normal

This morning I read Blue Star Chronicles (as I do every day) and found an amazing story.  A psycho anti-military Chicago lawyer, Jay Grodner, saw a car with military stickers and decided to key it - causing $2400 in damages.  When the Marine Sgt Mike McNulty saw Grodner keying his car, he confronted him.  Grodner immediately took on the victim role by claiming he was being picked on because he’s Jewish.  You know,  McNulty wouldn’t mind if a Christian, atheist, Buddhist, Muslim or agnostic keyed his car, but since it was a Jew who did it . . .  I’m wondering if Grodner is really going to get away with this offense. 

Black Five originated the story and has updates.  Click over to BSC or Black Five to read the entire story.  Baldilocks makes a prediction. Moonbattery tells us what Grodner will see in the mirror.   Conservative Belle asks “What do you get when a bad lawyer . . . .?” Fausta says it’s a hate crime. Volokh Conspiracy wants answers about the legal issues in the case. Planck’s Constant  says Grodner is an idiot and he has the photos to prove it.

As a Tennessean, I’m embarrassed for Tennessee.  The pompous windbag, Al Gore, has been named the 2007 Tennessean of the year.  Today’s newspaper had pages about him.  I tried to read most of it, but he is so insufferably and unwarrantedly self-righteous, it was difficult.  He and his disciples see him akin to Jesus - saving the world.  My gag reflex worked overtime getting through all the praises for this silly man.  His only claim to fame is that he lost the 2000 election and he and his supporters have spent the past eight years trying to prove that he isn’t really the loser he is. 

I was just watching a show on E! called “Chelsea Lately.”   Along with Chelsea Handler there are three other people around the table discussing various people and issues.   I have no idea who the three people are - one white guy, one black chick and one white chick.  Oh yes, there’s a hispanic little guy, too.  At one point in the show, the black chick declared - when a television show was mentioned - ”I don’t like that show.  There’s too many white people for me.”  She thought she was funny - and Chelsea and the others all laughed on cue.  All the white folks on the show just laughed it off.  I wonder if the black chick would have laughed it off if Chelsea had said she didn’t care for a show because “There’s too many black people” on it?  Chelsea could very well be looking for another job by now.

There is a huge double standard in our culture.  If something is wrong for one racial group to say or do - then it’s wrong for other racial groups.  We fought for and won equal rights for everyone.  Equal rights - not special rights for privileged groups.

Unfortunately, I kept watching the show.  The black chick was full of “racial humor.”  Maybe that’s her thing.  She wasn’t funny.  I wonder if she is actually successful as a comedian using the type humor she showed on the show.   As part of this particular Chelsea Lately show, she went to a Spice Girls concert and interviewed people.  She selected a black guy and gave him a hard time for attending a Spice Girl concert: “What the HELL are you doing here?  Martin Luther King is rolling in his grave right now!”  Then she asked him how many times he’d voted for Mel B in “Dancing With the Stars.”  When he replied that he’d voted for Mel B twice, her comment was “Another brother that don’t vote!”  You notice she didn’t ask if he’d voted for any of the white dancers.  The question assumed that since he was black, he should have supported the black finalist on “Dancing With The Stars.” 

Racism is racism.  Just because it’s black against white racism shouldn’t make it any more acceptable.

I didn’t particularly enjoy Clash of the Choirs as a whole, although there were parts that I enjoyed a lot.  Mostly, though, it was a dud of a show. I watched the first night and the last night - and bits and pieces of the other night.  I’ve never been a Nick Lachey fan, but as I watched the show, Nick came through as one of the more humble musicians.  His choir sang songs that were believable.  I really disliked Patti LaBelle’s rendition of “Somewhere Over the Rainbow.”  She shrieked through the song from the beginning - and it seemed so staged and fake.  When Nick’s choir sang “What a Wonderful World” it was melodic and well performed.  It was also a win for the choir - not for the celebrity.

However, I didn’t really have much hope that Nick’s choir would win.  Everyone had carried on so much about how wonderful Patti was - how “Somewhere Over the Rainbow” had been so outstanding.  I didn’t see it - If they hadn’t announced that the song they were singing was “Somewhere Over the Rainbow” I sure wouldn’t have known it by listening to Patti sing.  The actual tune of the song was lost in all the yelling, facial contortions, shoe-throwing and theatrics.

I was pleased when Nick Lachey’s choir was announced the winner.  They deserved it.  They were the consistently best choir there. 

Then I read about Patti LaBelle’s remarks when she realized she hadn’t won.  Here’s the story:

In comments published on Philly.com, the Philadelphia Inquirer’s Web site, LaBelle did not appear overly gracious about her loss.

“It was a ripoff — somebody stole it from me,” she said before backing off a bit. “I’m still a winner, you know what I mean? I’m not taking anything away from Nick Lachey … I’m 63, he’s about 2. … It’s called Clash of the Choirs, not Clash of the Popularity.”

She’s not taking anything away from Nick Lachey? Well, yes she is. She’s saying he’s too young to win and that the only reason he won is because he is popular and not because his choir was the best. She insulted him and she insulted the people in his choir. Yes, it was called Clash of the Choirs, and that’s why Nick’s choir won. Patti’s choir was all about Patti. Even though Patti’s choir contained people who weren’t African American, she selected an African American charity. What a slap in the face for her non-African American choir members. It seems to me that she was interested in Patti and Patti’s interests - and not in her choir. No wonder Nick’s choir beat her so soundly. People like Patti LaBelle who lose a competition and, instead of congratulating the winners and being gracious, criticize the winners and claim that “somebody stole” the competition from them, just illustrate their own shallow, mean-spirited and self-involved personalities.

I listened to a conversation today.  It was between two fellow teachers - both of whom belong to a Church of Christ.  Wonderful, active, educated and vibrant women who have been working fulltime for many years - earning a paycheck that goes directly to their families:

First teacher:  “Ken gave me $150 to spend on the twins’ Christmas gifts.”

Second teacher nodded - no incredulity or shock - just a “that’s-how-it-is” nod. 

The conversation continued as they chatted about Christmas shopping.  I was still in shock.  Ken is her husband.  The twins are their children.  She works full time and earns a paycheck, and her husband “gave” her the money to buy their children Christmas gifts.  Amazing.