Archive for July, 2007

Defending the White Male

Posted by: Jason | July 30th, 2007 · 4:47 PM

(image: usconstitution.com)

I admittedly find it embarrassing to mention the name of James Carville directly under a picture of the founding fathers. As an amateur historian, one longs for the cordial days of men such as Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton, where politics was a constant stimulation filled with intellectual elites who talked of real issues.

In regard to the white male however, I find myself committed to their defense this Sunday afternoon after being exposed to one of Carville’s many tasteless comments. It seems as though, according to Carville this morning on Meet The Press, that the partially announced Republican candidate Fred Thompson is the “great white hope” of his party, and that “their hope only comes in one color”.

A clear attack on the current field of all-white presidential candidates, Carville eludes to some inferiority he sees with a lack of diversity on the GOP stage. Forgetting the obvious criticism that a conservative might bring up at this point, in that we don’t pick candidates based on race or gender, I have to take this further and ask, what’s wrong with the white male?

More >>>

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

The Alien Contheorist Question

Posted by: Ion | July 28th, 2007 · 4:25 PM

Fruitloop voter asks a penetrating question for the Democrat CNN/YouTube debate:

(via Who Sucks)

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

Jessica Andrews, FTW

Posted by: Ion | July 27th, 2007 · 8:18 PM

(The Hill)

Ah, the Hill’s 2007 50 Most Beautiful People on Capitol Hill list is out. As is usual, the top ten is chock full of cough inducing abominations (witness Nancy Pelosi at #4). But down the line, there are some lookers.

My vote is easy: Jessica Andrews. Air Force Reserve officer, Redskinette and public relations manager for the Fleet Reserve association. See above for the rest. Wowzers.

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

Great Moments In Political Marketing: The Citizen Advisers

Posted by: Jason | · 2:10 PM

During the long stretches of the beloved 2000 campaign, Gore V Bush (and gosh those were the days weren’t they?), it was becoming increasingly evident that Governor Bush, despite a growing economy and peaceful world atmosphere, could possibly take the White House.

Desperate for a gimmick, in an attempt to win press, Bob Shrum, Vice President Al Gore’s campaign guru and best thing to ever happen to the Republican Party since Reagan, thought of an incredible plan. A plan so bold, that it would win the hearts and minds of the American people upon first witness.

They would use their knack as Democrats for dividing people up, not as individuals, but as specific targeted political segments, and build a team of average guys and gals to follow Gore around and advise him on policy (cue laughter).

Their name… the Citizen Advisers. You had the black guy, the single pregnant young woman, the slightly NASCAR-esque white southern dad, the liberal polo wearing guy, the 17 year old, the mom, and the Hispanic chick. Collect all 7!

More >>>

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

Ronald Reagan on What’s My Line? (1953)

Posted by: Ion | · 12:32 AM

Great fun.

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

Kostic’s Millions

Posted by: Ion | July 26th, 2007 · 7:31 PM

Here’s one of the most unusual political donations I’ve ever heard of. Deceased businessman Zoran Kostic, willed a sizable fortune of about $102 million to the British Conservative party before he died. That’s a substantial windfall for the still beleaguered Tories.

Alas, Kostic’s disowned son is disputing the award in court, on grounds that his father was a raving lunatic and therefore unfit to will anything. Admittedly, Kostic’s reasons for the donation are more than a bit crazy:

Both sides accept that Branislav Kostic, Zoran Kostic’s father, had been “delusionary insane” since 1985 when he divorced, broke off relations with his son and sister and claimed there was an international conspiracy of more than 100 people masterminded by sexually perverted pharmaceutical company executives to destroy “freedom, democracy and human purity”.
(The Guardian)

My own feeling is that being crazy does not entitle anyone to rob you. Believing in Satanic conspiracies, should not prevent you from buying a $1 candy bar in a 7-11. So why should the right to spend your money as you please, be revoked only after death? Presumably only because you’re no longer around to defend yourself and millions are at stake. That’s pretty rotten IMO.

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

The Thompson Tease

Posted by: Jason | · 5:06 PM

(image: nbc)

So Fred Thompson just teased the #*%& out of me. I get this email 2 minutes ago. Feel the excitement until about paragraph 4…

In the past few months, I’ve traveled the country talking and listening to folks. I’ve been discussing where I see America going, about what we need to do to keep our nation secure, what we must do to keep this remarkable economy growing, and the challenges we must address together for the next generation of Americans.

I believe the United States is at a crossroads, and what I’m hearing on the road is that a lot of people agree with me. They’re ready to move forward together to meet our challenges here at home and abroad. They aren’t buying into the defeatist talk about our security, our economy, and our future.

During this “testing the waters” effort we’ve undertaken, I’ve been saying the political waters feel pretty warm. It’s allowed us to start laying the foundation of a good team across the country and to keep up this national conversation we’ve been having. Now we’re going to take that conversation to a different level.

On Tuesday, August 7th, we’re inaugurating a new weekly “I’m With Fred” email, complete with news, updates, and photos from the road. We’re also working on the ImWithFred website 2.0, in order to keep in touch on a daily basis and to give you more opportunities to join us at events, help us organize, and spread the word about our efforts.

The real news here is that Thompson will be undoubtedly holding off until the month of September to make his formal announcement. But at least we’ll be getting something new in August. Sigh…

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

Barack Obama… The Cowboy?

Posted by: Jason | · 4:36 PM

(image: photobucket)

Stop the press! Stop the press! In a stunning development, just uncovered by Lee, we have found pictures of Barack Obama wearing a cowboy hat, I repeat… a cowboy hat… And he looks damn good in it.

This development places the entire nomination process in jeopardy for the Democrats, as it is uncertain whether or not Madame Hillary looks good in a cowboy hat herself yet. This means folks… yes… that Obama may eventually overtake Clinton in becoming the next nominee for the Democrats.

The historical significance of the cowboy hat is a time honored tradition among Democrats as well, as it has propelled LBJ, Carter, and Clinton, all to the White House (all cataloged in my original Cowboy Test explanation).

Developing…

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

Passing the Cowboy Hat Test

Posted by: Jason | · 4:04 PM

(image: DrudgeReport)

We’ve written extensively at PP about an important test that all presidential candidates must pass. Sure… positions on particular issues have to line up, they need experience, a great presence, and speaking skills are a must. But no other litmus test is more important than our famous “Cowboy Hat Test”. It can make or break a candidate’s potential with just one click of a camera (we remember George Allen).

We haven’t known whether or not Fred Thompson was a pass or a fail in this department. Until now…

Notice the picture above from a recent campaign appearance. Good form… He wears the hat well, and a big one at that. He’s tall, manly, and looks damn good in it. Rudy or Romney couldn’t wear one, and we’ve seen McCain in a hat.

Fred Thompson passes the Cowboy Hat Test, and is thus predicted now officially, to be the next Republican nominee for president.

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati

Do or Don’t: Further Costs in the Search for Hypocrisy in Political Debate

Posted by: Ion | July 25th, 2007 · 5:17 PM

A blog called Sciatica linked to one of my old posts about Tangerine Dream the other day. I was pleased at first to see another fan, but unfortunately ideology is deep over there. Sciatica was swiftly reduced to the following profane missive:

The guys who run it look young enough to go fight for our freedom. I wonder why they aren’t. They are probably part of “Generation Chickenhawk“. F*ckers.
(Sciatica)

The implication I presume, is that because Jason and I are advocates of an aggressive security policy in the War on Terrorism, we are hypocrites (last vice of the Left), because we’re not currently patrolling Sadr City with rifles.

Now we’re in our early thirties, so the charge of eligibility might be correct. He scores either way though, because I’m far too proud to admit I probably wouldn’t pass a military physical examination, after decades of sedentary computer gazing. But the trouble with this complaint is not that, but its incompleteness.

You see, we’re much worse f*ckers in this respect, than Sciatta even imagines. Here’s a few other things we might qualify for, yet haven’t done and still argue passionately in favor of:

1. Police officer
2. Fire fighter
3. Teacher
4. Physician
5. Electrical engineer

To that list I might add thousands of careers which we are generally in favor of, yet are non-participatory as providers.

Were Sciata’s complaint sensible, we would also be incorrigible hypocrites for arguing that our localities require law enforcement, a fire department, education, a physician or two and electricity. For Sciatica, since we are not presently sustaining the risks and responsibilities of those professions, we have no business arguing their merits. Given his or her rationale that one must practice what one supports politically.

However, the obvious corollary is that since it’s unlikely that Sciatica himself has ever been any of those five things either (and certainly not all five), he must be either indifferent or opposed to them, as with our military policy.

Perhaps in that context Sciatica might recognize how exceedingly silly it is, to try to disqualify advocacy on grounds of practice, in a democratic society.

Add us: Digg | Del.icio.us | Technorati