You'll have to excuse the light posting. I had a new PC built and just picked it up - been busy configuring that and re-configuring the home network. Imagine that, a blogger bought a new PC and didn't have a blog bleg. LOL I thought about it, I just hate doing them.
Anyway, pretty cool new machine with some of the latest in tech, component-wise - also a tuner so I can watch the tube and surf/blog at the same time. Life is good!
As for the headline ... I'm just not going to get into some of the ugliness I see floating around on the Left right now regarding Palin. And as far as conservatism's Twisted Step-Sister Andrew Sullivan - I'll leave it to Ace.


Strong,powerful,intelligent and attractive. What's not to love? She looks a little like an older, slightly heavier "Xena, Warrior Princess" so she is apt to attract some Liz Beans to her side. Can't have too many Lizzies at a party as far as I'm concerned. Unfortunately the gain may be offset by bible thumpers who think wimmens should be barefoot and in a motel with an evangelist. The soccer moms should love her and her five kids, of course the pro-abortion crowd will hate her because of kid #5......Which I find completely strange among the people who claim that a woman should have a right and blah, blah......Yeah, all told she's got a lot going for her. Sorry folks, the single women are going for the pretty brotha.
Then there are those pesky people who look at meaningles things such as voting records and other 'experience'........
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 07:49 AM
They won't hate her because of the number of children she has, but rather for her stance on Roe v. Wade.
I'll give you powerful, strong, attractive and intelligent...but it also sounds a bit like she's power hungry and vindictive given some of her personnel decisions.
Sarah Palin=Harriet Meirs
Posted by: Spartan112 | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 08:26 AM
And just what is "her stance on Roe v. Wade" ?
What could she or any president do about it?
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 08:51 AM
Please remind me of all the articles in 2004 from liberal papers calling John Edwards an unqualified VP pick? Yeah, I thought so. And Jean Fraude Ketchup had the nerve to call the Governor of the largest state (area wise) in the Union, unqualified. He's a pathological liar.
Posted by: eaglewingz08 | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 09:18 AM
Wahoo Willie:
"And just what is 'her stance on Roe v. Wade' ?
What could she or any president do about it?"
You're absolutely correct. I saw Chris Matthews ranting hysterically that Palin wants to "outlaw abortion." Libs need to read the U.S. Constitution. What president, Senator, or member of the House is going to propose a bill to overturn Roe and have enough votes to succeed? The only way Roe gets reversed in is the courts.
Yes, McCain-Palin might get a couple of conservative justices appointed, but overturning Roe is still a crap shoot. It's a 35-year-old decision. Stare decisis is a very significant hurdle to overturning any decision. Of course, the Court could be moved that it's terribly bad policy (40 million abortions?) and overturn it a la Plessy v. Ferguson overturned by Brown vs. Topeka Board of Education. On the other hand, who knows with the current court and any new appointees? Do you think Bush I wants that Souter appointment back?
But seriously, anymore the entire issue is really all at the margins of reasonable restrictions. Dems and libs clearly have the losing arguments there.
Even if Roe is overturned in, say, six years (time for two appointments and a new test case), what then? It's not outlawed. It's then back in the hands of individual states to allow or outlaw.
Ultimately, the pathetic thing is what is this issue is all about: The right to be an irresponsible skank. I think Obama calls it "punished with a baby." I'm happy to acknowledge rape, incest, and health-of-the-mother exceptions. Women are entitled to equal treatment with respect to men, but the fact of the matter remains that they come with a different design--and it's up to them to take responsibility for themselves. They should exercise the right to choose before getting used and dumped by Mr. Wrong.
Posted by: SAM | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 10:02 AM
"I think Obama calls it "punished with a baby."
Yeah SAM, that quote from Obie ranks right up there with the most hatefilled rhetoric. I did take the time to find out that Palin thinks RvW should be returned to the states.....but again, as badly as the left wants a dictatorship we dont have one...yet, and no single president, VP or congress person can change the law. So you can kill all the babies you want to rather than behaving responsibly.
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 10:15 AM
What is she going to do about it? Simple, the balance of the SCOTUS will likely be controlled by the next administration or two. Does that spell it out clearly enough for you?
Posted by: Spartan112 | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 10:44 AM
{"Does that spell it out clearly enough for you?"
Oh my. Of course this assumes many things line up. Killing babies means a lot to you, huh?
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 10:51 AM
Posted by: Spartan112 | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 10:44 AM
"What is she going to do about it? Simple, the balance of the SCOTUS will likely be controlled by the next administration or two. Does that spell it out clearly enough for you?"
Is the sky falling too? For purposes of too many future Supreme Court decisions, I want those appointments in hands other than those of Obama. And Biden, for crying out loud, recall what a jackass he was to Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas. The world will not end with some conservative appointments--and even those are always crap shoots--see Souter and even Kennedy. Go join hands with the rest of the Chicken Little Brigade.
Posted by: SAM | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 11:15 AM
Now that the bat-ass crazy baby theory is busy being put back in the sewer alongside the libs themselves, I'm sure we can look forward to brand new conspiracies from the leftist fever swamps. The baby thing was just a test-shot.
Posted by: Children of the Arugula | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 11:18 AM
"The baby thing was just a test-shot."
CA; Are you forgetting that these same people still think Cheney's Ninjas flew planes into the WTC, blew up the levees and blame FEMA for a mayor's and governor's lack of action after Katrina?
The baby will be Cheney's before this is put to rest.
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 11:28 AM
I Lurves Her.
Posted by: Jane | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 11:31 AM
Let's handle this on two levels:
First, the women: The Bible's restriction on females having leadership extends to (a) Family and (b) Church.
God ordained three basic institutions which actually derive from the "bottom up":
1. Family - the immediate family in particular, and ideally including extended family.
2. Church - any collection of true, obedient, and Christ-loving people.
3. State - any collection of families/tribes with a common identity that form a nation with common interests (food, common defense & security, trade)
The first two exist according to God's written and revealed will, with defined roles and leadership for Christians:
1. Family. God is the head of all; Christ is the head of all families; the father/husband of a family is the head of that family; the wife and children follow the husband's authority in obedience to, and love for, *Christ*, and then also out of love for one another *in* Christ.
2. Church. Father God is the head of Christ, Christ is the head of His Church (also called "the Bride of Christ"), and New Testament pastors - temperate men of spiritual gravitas married to one wife - are selected and ordained to shepherd (spiritually lead) local churches through the power of the Holy Spirit.
The precedent for New Testament pastors - rendered in the King James as "bishops" from the Greek "episkopos", meaning "overseer" or "pastor" is here:
"-----
1 This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.
2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;
5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)
-----"
(1 Timothy 3:1-5, KJV)
For most situations, a congregation with (adult) men present in it, and families where the father was present, it is best to follow Christ's pattern: The Father (God) is the head of Christ, the Son; Christ is the Head of the Church (His believers, not a building or a denomination) Pastors are the leaders of their local churches, and fathers/husbands are the heads of their families.
There are reasons why God frowns upon females in (spiritual) authority over men, particularly in the matter of Church and family: it conflicts against the natural order God has ordained, and creates friction and strife - the woman's role in the family is as a mother to her children and a helpmeet to her husband. For a woman to have spiritual direction over other families (and the husbands/fathers who are supposed to be leading them) it creates bitterness and dissension where the husband's authority is undermined.
And as goes the undermined family, so goes the church, the local community, and ultimately the nation.
There is no specific Biblical prohibition on females in government (although, given the society and near-chattel status of women in Hebrew, Greek, and most Middle- and Near- Eastern civilisations in the 4,000 span of Biblical history, female roles in government were unlikely).
And exceptional women - like Governor Palin - do arise from time to time. If God, in his permissive will, sees fit to turn peoples' hearts to elect her and McCain to office in November, I believe that it may very well be a blessing.
A blessing, because it would certainly be a better thing than the curse that comes with 8 years of Obama and Biden driving this nation into the ash-heap of history.
Posted by: seekeronos | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 11:34 AM
Like I said, just a test shot.
Soon KOS will be publishing "proof" (consisting of a Burger King receipt and an "anonymous source) that Palin was actually a surrogate mother for her daughter's baby, and that the baby's father is Karl Rove.
I wish that idiot 'Fighting Democrat' would show up again, he of the "OH YEAH PALIN'S TOAST WHEN BABY GATE HITS THE MSM!" hysteria.
Palin is the hottest thing, in every sense of the word, to hit the big political scene in a long time and the dems know it. There will a human wave ground assault leveled against her, you can bank on that.
Posted by: Children of the Arugula | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 11:38 AM
Seek my friend, as usual you attempt to use what the Bible ACTUALLY says (maybe you want to do a lil deeper look into the home)and it is meaningless to the average bible thumper who does not differ between spiritual leadership from "tribal" leadership. You're a scholar who maybe has never met these people who believe in revelations, healing and general religious hokus pokus. Scary people who are just short of their own honor killings......those are the types I refer to.
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 11:45 AM
And for the second issue:
Abortion, AKA "Nationally Enshrined Infanticide" is not going away. Not likely in a long lifetime for that matter.
There are simply too many hurdles to jump, too many legal barriers to overcome, even to restore the decision to the states (as opposed to outright federal prohibition).
Let's review (once again) for those liberals too stupid or ignorant to figure this out:
1) We have a deadlocked Senate and a thin-margin Democratic majority House, and a lame-duck GOP president, and a largely centrist (by way of dilution and Justice "Swingman" Kennedy) SCOTUS.
2) After 2008, barring a major miracle, we will have a Democratic *supermajority* in both houses of Congress. Same centrist SCOTUS, and even IF McCain-Palin win, the BEST we can hope for are "mavericky" appointments of nominally conservative, functionally centre-left justices like Souter and Kennedy.
The reason we got Souters and Kennedys is because of the near 50-year domination of Congress by Democrats, and in all likelihood, this isn't going to change... and it will likely grow worse if Obama gets elected.
Posted by: seekeronos | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 11:49 AM
"Soon KOS will be publishing "proof" (consisting of a Burger King receipt and an "anonymous source) that Palin was actually a surrogate mother for her daughter's baby,"
You mean like the link fightin dem rats gave us to the "christian" web site that had a picture of the "pregnant" daughter? Yeah, the one that idiots could not tell had been enhanced. Karl Rove da baby daddy? You know Bob Dole was doing those viagra commercials..............
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 11:54 AM
"I wish that idiot 'Fighting Democrat' would show up again,"
Eh, that one is like picking on a fat kid and totally incapable of debate. Hell at least DaBoob is funny, Harpie can make a point and of course my Pookie is usually quite capable as an adversary. I bet her green haired head is just spinning where ever she is..........Missing you Pookie
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 12:01 PM
I'm not sure if the daughter-photo was enhanced or not, but it doesn't matter, it was taken in 2006 and the baby was born in 2008. KOS is up to it's usual stupidity.
BTW, KOS is now claiming that Palin supports Alaska seceding from the union. No kiddin'.
These people are morons.
Posted by: Children of the Arugula | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 12:11 PM
There are only these avenues for overturning Roe v. Wade:
1) a "stare indecisis" review that finds that a national law enshrining infanticide violates the Constitution in that there is no Constitutional right reserved to the federal government on abortion (i.e. state's rights vs. federal interest, where any rights not specifically forbidden to the many states or specifically reserved to the federal gov't. in the Constitution are held by the many states) ... OR ... where infanticide (abortion) is ruled to be a violation of the baby's Fourth Amendment Rights:
"---- The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. ----"
To wit, Baby has a constitutional right to be secure in her person and her house (her mother's womb) against unreasonable seizure (extracting Baby forcibly from her mother's womb) ... and being such a person that otherwise cannot commit a crime (of course, other than her father's DNA having met her mother's egg, and then having the temerity as a blastocyst to parasitically attach to the wall of her mother's uterus)... a future SCOTUS *could* rule that an abortion for the sake of simple birth control could violate Baby's constitutional rights.
2) The SCOTUS grants a certiorari and hears a new case that otherwise overrules much of Roe v. Wade, with a result of returning sovereignty to the many states.
3) A new amendment is passed and ratified by the required supermajority of states protecting unborn babies
4) The Congress removes jurisdiction from the SCOTUS on abortion IAW Article III Section 2 of the Constitution.
None of these is likely to happen; we have had a number of years of a (nominally) conservative GOP controlled Congress and White House where something could have been done, but we did nothing.
The train has left the station, the ship has sailed, Elvis has left the building, the horse is out and it is too late to close the barn door.
Add whatever cliché you deem apropos.
Overturning Roe v. Wade is not going to happen for any time in the foreseeable future, and not likely in my remaining lifetime: it is at best a wedge issue to grab the "low information voters" and to rally the religious right.
Posted by: seekeronos | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 12:17 PM
"KOS is now claiming that Palin supports Alaska seceding from the union. No kiddin'."
IF THEY DO, I'M MOVING THERE.
Seriously, we tried that and the northern cabal did not take it very well.....Still paying for it. Bad, bad idea.
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 12:18 PM
Well this is interesting. It seems that Bristol Palin is actually pregnant right now. It's strange how things happen, though I'm sure the hysterical liberals will find some new way to smear her.
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN2944356420080901?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=10112
Posted by: Richard Peter Wiener III | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 12:25 PM
"--- You're a scholar ... ---"
I just examine the scriptures prayerfully to learn God's will and be transformed by the renewing of my mind according to His will, as all Christians *should* do. I fall short more often than I'd like to.
"--- who maybe has never met these people who believe in revelations, healing and general religious hokus pokus. ---"
I've met my share of some of the more "charismatic believers" who major on the minors, forget about the majors, and fall into much error thereby. This is not to say that God doesn't give revelation to His believers, but one must exercise much caution to insure that that revelation is in line with God's word. In fact, I tend to discount much of what people say in regard to "divine revelation", as the revealed word of God (in English, the King James Bible) contains the fullness of God's revealed will for us.
If someone sees a vision or a prophetic revelation, it is best to rigorously vet it against God's word, letting His word be the judge rather than bending His word to fit their visions. At best, such a vision or dream is best kept to themselves unless it *clearly* is in line with Biblical truth.
The reason for this is that people are generally gullible, and particularly so in matters concerning the spiritual realm. It is all to easy for devils and demons (who by the way, have a fairly thorough knowledge of God's word, and confuse and twist it to their own evil purposes) to deceive people with visions, dreams and false prophecy.
"--- Scary people who are just short of their own honor killings......those are the types I refer to. ---"
I won't deny that there is no shortage of strange cultists like the Branch Davidians or the white nationalist/racialist "churches" like "Christian Identity" or the like... but these are very much more rare and marginalised.
The greater danger is from so-called "mainstream" churches and "evangelical" churches who claim to be obedient to God's word, and yet lack either obedience to God, or love to Him as well as their neighbour. It is from these that the "Great Apostasy" - the Falling Away - whose love is and has gone cold, that we have much to be wary of.
Posted by: seekeronos | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 12:38 PM
"who major on the minors"
Absolutely love that statement
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 12:41 PM
I wuv Sarah Palin. I hate Keith Olbermann. Who would you rather sit next to on a plane?
McCain's mother went coach on a plane to the convention. Lieberman and his wife hadash were on the same place in first class, of course.
Posted by: joeb | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 12:43 PM
"Children are the most precious and promising ingredient in this mixed-up world you live in down there on Earth. Trig is no different, except he has one extra chromosome," --Governor Palin, writing to her family about her new son.
“Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby." -- Senator Obama, speaking without a teleprompter.
Posted by: w3 | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 01:00 PM
Obie say:
"--- I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby. ---"
If either of those daughters are "punished with a baby", it seems that Obama will have failued to have taught them about values or morals.
For it is written:
"----- Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it. -----"
(Proverbs 22:6, KJV)
Posted by: seekeronos | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 01:32 PM
So big sister is preggers after all...wonderful. What an example for my grand daughter. Here almost six month in, she's going to marry the boy (eventually) so I guess that makes it ok.
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 01:40 PM
Well it sounds like the VP's 17 yr old really is preg.
If this was a liberal, woman VP's kid we would be talking about her choice to abort.
Welcome to adulthood. Time to make a lifelong (and lifegiving) decision coming up!
Thank god this young woman was raised by parents that don't teach from birth to just kill those "punishing" little globs of tissue.
I pray everyday that more young women would choose life over death. I can't imagine the dinner table talk where these heartless, godless parents teach it's okay to destroy 40 million Americans lives since Row v Wade and just treat it like throwing out the garbage
Posted by: SacTownMan | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 01:43 PM
" I am going to teach them first about values and morals".....Maybe if you add 'responsibility' to this formula they wont make a "mistake" (I love that cute little, it's ok to make mistakes outlet) and they wont be "punished" with a baby..........or the guilt of killing one.
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 01:45 PM
Everyone makes mistakes, it if want to call it that, so whomever decides its time to judge young Bristol, I suggest you think back to when you were seventeen.
Posted by: Richard Peter Wiener III | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 01:55 PM
I'm kinda curious if McCain knew about the pregnant daughter or not. Also, I'm not sure if putting your 17 year daughter under the glare of a potential national media frenzy is a good idea or not.
Posted by: Worst President Ever | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 02:14 PM
Oh Rich, I'm not judging Bristol but I am judging a society that excuses poor decision making as a "mistake". That teaches us that we can throw it out both pants legs without a care in the world. Tis a whole lot different world than way back in the day I was 17 and a whole lot easier to make a "mistake". We had excuses that kids today dont have, like finding clever ways to get the most rudimentary birth control. I had to get condoms from a .25 cent machine at a truck stop (no quality risk there)........Now they hand them out at school and girls can get anything they want without the parents knowing. At least the kids are facing responsibilty after the fact and I applaud them for it. They could've gotten it "taken care of" without parental consent afterall.
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 02:17 PM
"I'm kinda curious if McCain knew about the pregnant daughter or not. Also, I'm not sure if putting your 17 year daughter under the glare of a potential national media frenzy is a good idea or not. "
McCain's staff says he did know (which is just odd) and I agree with your last sentence.
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 02:18 PM
McCain claims he knew about the daughter and the Palin's were smart to announce the pregnancy of their daughter before the KOS types decided to hang her for it (though they seem to be trying to do it anyway-oh well).
Now the ball is in the media's and Obama's court, they can decide to attack and demolish their own desire that family be kept inviolate, or move on in and roll the dice with the electorate.
Keep in mind that Barack Hussein Obama II was conceived out of wedlock.
Posted by: Richard Peter Wiener III | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 02:22 PM
I wasn't directing my comment at you, Wahoo, merely as a general comment to anyone who might read it.
When someone errs like this, it is a mistake and there is no other way to say it. I'm not excusing it but in a bad world such as ours people end up in situations they may not have desired and must take responsibility, which is what Bristol is doing. It's called being human. Bristol now has a child and will have to learn quickly, someone who commits a crime will have to do their time.
Posted by: Richard Peter Wiener III | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 02:27 PM
Obama's not going to attack Palin over this - that would be incredibly stupid. At most, he'll question McSame's judgement and leave it to voters to make the connections.
It's certainly going to be more of a distraction for McSame's campaign when he doesn't need one. This week should have been all McSame, all the time. Instead he first got pre-empted by Gustav. Now he has to share what's left of the media attention he needs to get his message out with stories about Miss Palin's pregnancy.
As for the "wimmin's loves Palin" - probably not so much. http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/08/focusedthe_sequel.html
Posted by: Worst President Ever | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 02:37 PM
Rich I wasn't taking it personally nor meaning that you are personally excusing poor decisions. LOL I dont take the statement "someone who commits a crime will have to do their time." literally toward Bristol & Levi either.
Yeah and I guess it's good for him that Obie's grandparents didn't mind being "punished" with their daughter's baby.
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 02:38 PM
Here's what Obama says:
"I have said before and I will repeat again: People's families are off limits," Obama said. "And people's children are especially off limits. This shouldn't be part of politics. It has no relevance to Gov. Palin's performance as a governor and or her potential perfromance as a vice president. So I would strongly urge people to back off these kinds of stories. You know my mother had me when she was 18, and how a family deals with issues and teenage children, that shouldn’t be a topic of our politics."
On charges that his campaign has stoked the story via liberal blogs:
"I am offended by that statement. There is no evidence at all that any of this involved us," he said. "Our people were not involved in any way in this, and they will not be. And if I thought there was somebody in my campaign who was involved in something like, they that would be fired."
Posted by: Worst President Ever | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 02:44 PM
Wow the geezers at AARP dont like Mac's choice. He'd have had a better chance of finding someone right leaning at an ACLU convention.
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 02:44 PM
"--- What an example for my grand daughter. Here almost six month in, she's going to marry the boy (eventually) so I guess that makes it ok. ---"
I wouldn't say it is "ok" as in something that should be aspired to, but it is a very much better than the alternative for that young, unborn baby.
And as for Levi, good on him for being man enough to marry Bristol and share in the parenting of their new child.
Posted by: seekeronos | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 02:46 PM
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that getting pregnant was a crime, that was a poor extrapolation by me of my own thoughts.
I meant that criminals often try to get a break by claiming their offense was a mistake, but we have a justice system to persuade them otherwise. Bristol made a mistake, in that she probably didn't want to get pregnant, and now she will have to create her own "system" to deal with it.
Posted by: Richard Peter Wiener III | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 02:47 PM
"You know my mother had me when she was 18"
I think Obie is sincere on this point.........pity some of his devotees don't see it his way.
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 02:52 PM
Good on Obama for saying that, now let's see if the minions heed the advice.
Posted by: Richard Peter Wiener III | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 02:52 PM
So Hanna is now a hurricane and appears aimed at Savannah for now. Crappie weekend, crappier week ahead. Damn you Cheney.
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 02:55 PM
"--- Damn you Cheney. ---"
Blame it on Putin's see-krit weather weapons.
Gotta milk this Russian thing a wee bit more, ya know.
Posted by: seekeronos | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 03:07 PM
Now Cheney will have to sneak back in and remove the satchel charges from the levees.
Posted by: Riff | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 03:14 PM
"Blame it on Putin's see-krit weather weapons."
Where is Alex Jones when you need him!? I'll compromise and say it's Putin's KGB because Cheney's Ninjas were too busy trying to blow up NOLA again.
Posted by: WAHOO WILLIE | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 03:15 PM
Looks to me like Palin has a 50/50 chance of turning into a major train wreck for McSame. His campaign claims they knew about her daughter's pregnancy before nominating her. They're either lying or incompetent.
It's also a bit of the blood in the water effect - reporters are now going to be digging around looking for other stuff.
McSame's campaign got it exactly bass-ackwards - they're now sending lawyers to vet Palin.
http://thepage.time.com/2008/09/01/asked-and-not-answered/
Posted by: Worst President Ever | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 08:44 PM
Greetings supporters of troops and bastard children everywhere!! It saddens me to return from such a great week but what news I return to!! To think that a town councilWOMAN from NW Canada was chosen to prop up an 80 year old man! Her defiance in the face of medical evidence is inspiring! To do otherwise and the terrurists would win! I look forward to seeing how many kids she can have in years to come!
Thank you all for your service!!! God BLESS you all!!
Posted by: BobInStamford | Monday, September 01, 2008 at 09:02 PM