Rove lays out strategy for Repub win in '08

He laid it all out in an interview with Charlie Rose, and it is so false that I think the American people will surely buy it.
The Democrats who were in Congress in 2002 are responsible for all the problems in Iraq today because their vote authorizing the use of force pushed Bush to war before he was ready. They were gung ho, and Bush wanted to take his time and let diplomacy have a chance to address the issues we had with Saddaam.
I'm not joking. This isn't The Onion.

checked out some of the Dem debate

I still prefer Biden or Edwards to the rest of the field. I think Hillary or Obama would get trounced in the general election. Neither one of the them is ready for a big-time, full out campaign against the evil empire (Republicans).

Chris Dodd said some very heartfelt sounding stuff about the mudslinging against Hillary. He said words to the effect that the American people aren't interested in this negative stuff and that they really want to hear differences on policy. I think he is completely wrong. Americans are bored shitless by policy debate. They need the mudslinging to make it interesting for their small minds.

Edwards' take on the Hillary bashing is astute. He noted that this is very gentle stuff compared to the storm of lies and nastiness that ANY Democrat faces when they run against the Republican Party for the presidency.

What do liberals, conservatives and moderates put into their brains?

http://www.learcenter.org/html/projects/?cm=zogby

This is interesting stuff. The poll was run for the purpose of aiding the advertising campaigns interpret the results in a political way. I'm one of those interpreters. I take this as further proof that people who swing to the political left are more open-minded than those on the right. This is natural, because liberalism = open-minded.

Is Obama checking out Hillary's ass?

Obama slings mud at Hillary

From Newsweek.
"Q. How would you describe her response on the question of her First Lady papers?
A. Her response was certainly inadequate. When she suggested somehow she didn't have control over whether or not these papers were being released—what we're talking about here is her husband's presidential library. And when she is making a suggestion that part of the experience that she brings to this office is her experience as First Lady, people have a right to ask some tough questions. She can release these papers.
Q. So is she being honest?
A. I think she was being disingenuous.
Q. What's the difference between disingenuous and dishonest?
A. You'll have to ask her.
Q. Is she entitled to any credit for her years as First Lady as she argues her case to be president?
A. On those areas where there is a record of her having done work, she certainly deserves credit for it. What she can't do is have it both ways. She can't embrace every success of Bill Clinton's presidency and distance herself from every failure of Bill Clinton's presidency."

This is just not cool. I'm liking Obama less. Slinging poop at Hillary for this Presidential paper thing is stupid and wrong. Mostly because this just in not important, but also because the accusation is cheap and should be beneath any Democratic candidate for the nomination.

W at The Heritage Foundation

Our President made another horrifyingly evil partisan speech this week. There's so much material in this turd, that I barely know where to begin. But I'll try:
"Together with a great President named Ronald Reagan, you championed a policy of rolling back communism oppression and bringing freedom to nations enslaved by communist tyranny. And by taking the side of dissidents, who [sic] helped millions across the world throw off the shackles of communism, you helped build the free and peaceful societies that are the true sources of stability and peace in the world.
And now we're at the start of a new century, and the same debate is once again unfolding -- this time regarding my policy in the Middle East. Once again, voices in Washington are arguing that the watchword of the policy should be "stability." And once again they're wrong. In Kabul, in Baghdad, in Beirut, and other cities across the broader Middle East, brave men and women are risking their lives every day for the same freedoms we enjoy. And like the citizens of Prague and Warsaw and Budapest in the century gone by, they are looking to the United States to stand up for them, speak out for them, and champion their cause. And we are doing just that. (Applause.) "

Here we have the wise analysis of the head of our government that we have elected twice to run the most powerful nation in the world. I can see where this message would be attractive the the fundamentalist audience at Heritage, which is pretty much the opposite of my world view. The problem is that the analysis is completely wrong. Radical Islam is NOTHING LIKE COMMUNISM!!!!! Nothing at all. Not even close.
Please vote these knuckleheads out of office. This just is not good for any of us.