Guiliani Finally Comes Clean

Deciding that the recent heming-and-hawing and the rhetorical rumba he had been dancing on the topic of abortion was starting to wear thin, it appears that Rudy has now decided to come clean.

The problem is, for those hoping he would emerge as the party's standard-bearer next November, his recent statements make that significantly less likely. (My prediction: He will not be the GOP Nominee in 2008.)

At a meeting at Houston Baptist University (of all the places to affirm his pro-choice stance, he chooses a Baptist university), the Houston Chronicle reported the following about his remarks:

"Saying he believes abortion is "morally wrong," Republican presidential hopeful
Rudy Giuliani told an audience at Houston Baptist University this morning that
he respects a women's right to choose to have the procedure."

Notice the delicate and euphemistic language being used... it's not "her right to kill her baby", nor her "right to terminate her pregnancy", it's a "right" to have a "procedure".

Let's not get into the details of what that "procedure" would entail or what the result would be... that's just not polite. What people with this distorted view on abortion like Guiliani holds don't seem to do is take their comments to any rational conclusion. For example, if he really thinks abortion is "morally wrong", why is it morally wrong?

If the reason is because it kills a child, well, do you really think that people should be able to "choose" to "have a procedure" to kill their own child? And why else would it be "morally wrong"? Anyway... but I digress...

This was the kicker for me to finally post again to this blog that has gone ignored for so long...

"In a stump speech outlining his plans to battle terrorism and tackle
economic and social issues, Giuliani urged listeners to find common ground with
him even though they may disagree with him. Tolerating differences makes the
country what it is, he said."

"We understand how to respect each other's difference," he said. "It's in our DNA."

Really, Mr. Guiliani? It's in our DNA? Maybe it's in yours, but it's not in the genes of at least 40 million babies because they are dead -- because their moms chose to kill them. Oh, wait, I'm sorry... "to have a procedure."

Not a Bad Call!

There are very few who read this blog, and that's OK because it's really more as a vent for my own opinions more than anything else, but I do feel a need to point out that my take on the outcome of the TX governor's race was pretty darn close.

Towards the bottom of a post about the Houston Chronicle's attempt to perform CPR (Chris (Bell) Political Rescusitation) on the Chris Bell campaign, I wrote this:

"The problem is, this is not a "very basic" race. If it were, he wouldn't have polling numbers that show him less than 20%. Rick Perry is virtually guaranteed 35-40% just by virtue of the being the lone "R" on the ballot. Carole Keeton Rylander Strayhorn Jones is a lock in at least the 15-20% range. Kinky is good for perhaps 10-15%, and the Libertarian is probably good for 3-5%. That leaves 20-37% left for Bell. And do we really think he's going to land on the high side of those numbers when recent polling shows him at 18%? Yeah, I don't think so either."

The outcome? Rick Perry - 39.0%, Chris Bell - 29.8%, Carole Strayhorn - 18.0%, Kinky Friedman - 12.6%, James Werner (L) - 0.6%.

The only "missed call" in those numbers was the poor performance by the Libertarian candidate. Yeah, it's a fan club of one, but for an amateur political prognosticator, I say, "Good call, Ump!"

Every Once In a While, the GOP gets it Right

I think I just wet my pants: (via the Washington Times)

RNC asks Steele to replace Mehlman

Not only did they pick the right guy, but according to various sources, he's accepted the job!

I can't wait to see him head to head with the Deaniac himself!

Looking to the Future in a Rear-View Mirror?

So much for the Democrats claims of a "new direction"... particularly with regard to the war in Iraq. It seems everything old is new again...

[George] McGovern to Meet With Congress on War

If the Dems are looking to a politician whose peacenik policies were resoundingly rejected by the American people thirty-four years ago for answers on the future of Iraq, they're really starved for new ideas.

From Wikipedia: "In the 1972 election, McGovern ran on a platform that advocated unilateral withdrawal from the Vietnam War in exchange for the return of American prisoners of war [White p. 122] and amnesty for draft evaders who had left the country [White p. 360], an "anti-war" platform that was presaged, in 1970, by McGovern's sponsorship of the McGovern-Hatfield amendment, seeking to end U.S. participation in the war by Congressional action."

Too bad Harry Truman is dead...

It will be a "Merry Christmas" at Wal-Mart!

Well, this was a nice thing to read after all the disappointing political news...

Wal-Mart: We're not afraid to say Merry Christmas
No. 1 retailer has decided to abandon its generic 'Happy Holidays' greeting in favor of 'Merry Christmas.'

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Wal-Mart has told its employees that it's OK to once again greet shoppers by saying "Merry Christmas" this holiday season instead of the generic "Happy Holidays."

(snip)

"We, quite frankly, have learned a lesson from last year," Wal-Mart spokeswoman Linda Blakley told USA Today in a separate report. "We're not afraid to use the term 'Merry Christmas.' We'll use it early, and we'll use it often."

Here's hoping that other retailers will follow suit... but I'm not holding my breath.

An Exercise in Futility

You knew it was possible, and, as Michelle Malkin points out, some Dems are going to grab the reins of government toward what noble task? That's right: Impeachment!

The impeachment drumbeat begins

Apparently, some former Representative from Brooklyn is putting out a book that gives four possible issues by which Bush could be impeached:

1. Lying about weapons of mass destruction to justify invading Iraq (except that witnesses who will be called to testify that their belief at that time that Iraq had WMD's will include Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, Tony Blair, etc...)

2. Allowing the torture of prisoners (unless making people feel sad, uncomfortable, or frightened is torture, this approach is a non-starter)

3. Leaking classified information (on what? who? Is this a dig at the long-disposed of and discredited Valerie Plame incident? Either way, there's no "there" there, as it were. And I'm aware of no allegation that even suggests that GWB was himself behind any such real or imagined act.)

4. Botching the federal response to Hurricane Katrina (while I have no first hand knowledge of how well or how poorly the federal government "responded" to HK -- although it should be pointed out that there are some people who are still living in government-provided housing -- "botching" something is hardly a criminal act. If incompetence were a crime, Jimmy Carter would be serving a life sentence!)

It's number 4 in particular that makes me realize the person who put forward these suggestions is a particularly unserious individual and borderline kooky.

But, we knew it would happen... and even though it would be an exercise in futility, it can at least be said that exercise is good for you!

An Interesting Turn of Events

Nationally, there was a "cleaning of the House", one might say. Not anything out of the ordinary, however, as the number of seats changing hands was right in line with the average for a six-year mid-term election -- but the change is significant nonetheless. The Republicans broke their 1994 Contract with America and paid the price for their breach. A painful but necessary punishment.

Locally, in Katy and Fort Bend County, it was business as usual -- Republicans swept all but one FBC race (Dem County Comissioner Grady Prestage was reelected as expected), and the Katy ISD bond passed as expected. Despite some lackluster and/or questionable GOP condidates, the Dems couldn't manage to put anyone else on the ballot that was compelling or qualified enough to overcome the fact that Dems are still a minority party in FBC.

But there was an interesting contradiction that emerged nationally that I put out there for your thoughful and introspective consideration:

Overwhelmingly, voters (where such issues appeared on their ballots) affirmed the traditional view of marriage by an average vote in favor of 63.6%. Meanwhile, voters also chose to raise their state's minimum wage by an overwhelming majority average of 65.5%.

Here's the breakdown by state with the winning percentage in parentheses:

Affirming Marriage ___Raise Minimum Wage
AZ (rejected - 51%)_______AZ (66%)
CO (56%) _____________CO (53%)
ID (63%)______________MO (76%)
SC (78%)______________MT (73%)
SD (52%)______________NV (69%)
TN (80%) -Wow!_________OH (56%)
VA (57%)
WI (59%)

Now, it's no national referendum - and the fact that there is overlap in only two states makes it exceptionally unscientific, but it makes you wonder about the nature of the electorate that a traditionally liberal issue (raising the minimum wage) should pass just as easily (actually, with even a stronger margin of victory) as a traditionally conservative issue (affirming marriage).

And just a brief comment about Arizona: talk about a strange place... the same place that narrowly rejected a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage (51-49), approved an increase in their minimum wage (66-34), and overwhelmingly established English as their official language (74-26). No wonder this is the land of Senator John McCain!

Overall, a very interesting turn of events, indeed!

Help us, John Kerry!

You don't need the details from me... suffice it to say that John Kerry is an idiot.

If only John Kerry would listen to our "uneducated" troops...

Boy, who needs an "October Surprise" when you have good 'ole John Kerry!

The Houston Chronicle Performs "CPR" on the Bell Campaign

Not that there was much life in the Chris Bell for Governor campaign, but the Houston Chronicle is certainly doing all it can with this article to revitalize this flagging campaign that has never seen 25% support in the polls when all current candidates are factored in...

Bell's political revival harder than imagined

The secondary headline reads: "Donation and debate showing revitalize effort".

Let's do a little cut and paste commentary, shall we?

"Chris Bell's political career was in the dumps by Christmas 2004."

(And for the last two years, it hasn't gotten much better...)

"...the road has been steeper than Bell could have imagined. Democratic leaders and financial donors dodged his calls. The news media cast him as an underfunded also-ran."

(...isn't he still an underfunded also-ran? Except for John O'Quinn's taxpayer-funded tobacco money, of course... I mean, he is a major party candidate in one of the largest states in the nation.)

"...The July campaign finance reports showed Bell keeping up with independent Kinky Friedman. Polls had him running about even with Friedman and independent Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn, while incumbent Republican Gov. Rick Perry was vulnerable. Libertarian James Werner trailed badly."

(When the "psychological turn" in your campaign is that you are "keeping up" with a guy whose political slogan is "Why the Hell Not?"... a guy who has the backing of no major political party and no political experience ... how far down do you have to be that to look to Kinky is to look up?!?)

"...Then Bell made an impressive showing in the only gubernatorial debate of the fall, followed by a $1 million campaign donation from Houston trial lawyer John O'Quinn with a promise of more. Bell's campaign got a new burst of life with television advertising that moved beyond cable."

(An impressive (to whom?) showing in a gubernatorial debate that no one watched... and the polling showed that his performance only bumped him to the high teens. That might impress political prognosticators looking to pump up a flat campaign, but it certainly didn't impress the few political die-hard voters that were watching. ... And are you really sure that having to publicly and visibly have your campaign rely on taxpayer-funded tobacco money from a trial lawyer is a good thing?)

"(after mutliple paragraphs of bio background)...In the current race, Bell's campaign is counting on getting a very basic Democratic turnout. The Democrat who did the worst statewide in 2002 got 1.4 million votes, or 33 percent of the turnout. If Bell could match that, his campaign believes it would put him in the running to dislodge Perry in a five-way race."

(The problem is, this is not a "very basic" race. If it were, he wouldn't have polling numbers that show him less than 20%. Rick Perry is virtually guaranteed 35-40% just by virtue of the being the lone "R" on the ballot. Carole Keeton Rylander Strayhorn Jones is a lock in at least the 15-20% range. Kinky is good for perhaps 10-15%, and the Libertarian is probably good for 3-5%. That leaves 20-37% left for Bell. And do we really think he's going to land on the high side of those numbers when recent polling shows him at 18%? Yeah, I don't think so either.)

"...Steen said the fact the contest can be won through a plurality has kept everyone associated with the Bell campaign saying: "This is not impossible. That's been our war chant all along: This is not impossible.""

No, it's not impossible... but it's not likely or probable, either. Chris (Bell) Political Rescusitation efforts notwithstanding.