Motion To Impeach Cheney Heads To Debate

From The Hill:

House Republicans on Tuesday prevented Democratic leaders from blocking a resolution to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney.

The vote to table the privileged resolution, offered by Ohio Democrat Dennis Kucinch, began as a largely party-line vote to kill the measure, but Republicans developed a strategy to force Democrats to debate the resolution by supporting Kucinich. GOP leaders felt as though it was in their interest to debate the measure because it would make Democrats look bad.

After more than an hour of waiting for the vote to close, the motion to table the resolution failed by a vote of 162-251 after Democratic leaders failed to convince a group of liberal caucus members to side with them.

I can't wait to hear how the Democrats handle this one.

Michelle Malkin has a lot more.

Giving Licenses To Illegals Would Be Very Unpopular

Red State:

A new poll finds voters oppose drivers' licenses for illegal aliens by a nearly five-to-one margin:

Seventy-seven percent (77%) of American adults are opposed to making drivers licenses available to people who are in the country illegally.

This is set to be one of the major issues next November. Americans oppose giving licenses to illegal aliens. 88% of Republicans, 68% of Democrats, and 75% of independents all agree this should not happen.

Fred's Newest Ad

H/T: Ace of Spades

Red And Green Lights Are Too Religious In Colorado

From World Net Daily:

A special task force in a Colorado city has recommended banning red and green lights at the Christmas holiday because they fall among the items that are too religious for the city to sponsor.

"Some symbols, even though the Supreme Court has declared that in many contexts they are secular symbols, often still send a message to some members of the community that they and their traditions are not valued and not wanted. We don't want to send that message," Seth Anthony, a spokesman for the committee, told the Fort Collins, Colo., Coloradoan.

He said the recommended language does not specifically address Christmas trees by name, but the consensus was that they would not fall within acceptable decorations.

What will be allowed are white lights and "secular" symbols not associated "with any particular holiday" such as icicles, unadorned greenery and snowflakes, the task force said.

The group was made up of members of the city's business and religious communities as well as representatives from some community groups. Members met for months to review the existing holiday display policy, which allowed white as well as multi-colored lights and wreaths and garlands.

Read the rest at the link.

I am speechless.

Is It Wrong To Joke Around Now?

This may be the most asinine thing used yet to attack Fred with:

Even Fred Thompson doesn't think he will become president. Chatting off-air
to a television reporter, a stunningly candid off-the-cuff quip from the Hollywood actor cemented the impression that his heart is not in the 2008 race.

Trying to encourage his studio to hurry up so an interview could start, Carl Cameron of Fox News said into his microphone: "The next president of the United States has a schedule to keep." Standing beside him, a deadpan Mr Thompson interjected: "And so do I."

As some Thompson aides looked bemused and others cringed, a taken-aback Mr Cameron, Fox's chief political correspondent, exclaimed: "You can't do that kind of stuff!"

The self-deprecating quip said much about the former Tennessee Senator's candidacy.

Read on if you want to, but come on people.

It was a clearly joke. Of course it will become fodder for all the naysayers.

As far as Fred being lazy, go here.

It is true when Fred was in the Senate he was not seen everyday. Read the link above and you will see, he was busy doing his job.

Hate Crime At George Washington Univ. Was Faked

From Hot Air:

A freshman painted swastikas on her own dorm door.

After evaluating evidence from a hidden camera positioned in response to the swastika postings in Mitchell Hall, University Police have linked the student who filed the complaints to several of the incidents.

Following a final interview with investigators today, the student admitted responsibility for those incidents…

Using footage from a hidden video camera, the University Police Department linked freshman Sarah Marshak with the vandalism. She will now appear
before Student Judicial Services and could face federal and District charges, a spokesperson announced Monday afternoon.

In an interview with The Hatchet Monday afternoon, Marshak, who had been a reporter for this newspaper, categorically denied drawing the swastikas on her residence hall door.

Marshak saw six swastikas on her residence hall door, where she lived alone.

What is this world coming to? Evidently she was just looking for attention. I'd say she'll get more than she bargained for now.

What Did She Say?

I haven't been able to say a whole lot of good things about John Edwards, but this is good:

If You Do Not Know The Candidates, Just Stay Home

From Burt Prelutsky of Townhall:

For as long as I can remember, people have been cajoled, harangued and even bullied, into voting. They’ve been reminded incessantly that their ancestors fought and died so that they would have the right to choose their leaders. It’s been pointed out to them that even today there are hundreds of millions of people to whom universal suffrage is nothing more than a fantasy.

All of which is true, but so what?

The beauty of our system isn’t that we have the right to vote. After all, Russians got to vote for Joseph Stalin and Iraqis got to vote for Saddam Hussein. No, the nice thing is that people who are too dumb or lazy or uninformed to bother casting a ballot aren’t compelled to vote. And no apologies are required. In fact, in my opinion, thanks are in order. Far too many people are voting, as it is.

...

So why on earth would you urge citizens who have done their level best to avoid thinking about the issues or the candidates to suddenly roll off the couch on election day and do their civic duty?

Before the last election, some busybody suggested that, as an incentive to stir up the electorate, there should be a special lottery open to anyone who bothered to vote. I have no problem with the idea of a lottery, but, frankly, I think it should be limited to those people who, by remaining steadfast in the face of relentless peer and media pressure, did the honorable thing…and stayed home!

I wholeheartedly agree. Too many people vote just because. That is all you here for months before elections. Get out and vote. BS! If you don't know where each candidate stands on the issues, stay home.

I have talked with many people who don't know what each party stands for. A few months ago I was talking with a guy that actually said "If the damn republicans would quit raising taxes...". On another occasion, a girl I know told me that "Bush needs to let the democrats build the fence down on our border ...". While it is true that Bush does not want a fence, he is not stopping the democrats.

Don't worry, I asked each of them if they vote. They both told me they did not vote. I could have urged them to vote, or at least pay closer attention. What I did was say "good", and left it at that.

So I have to say this. If you do not somewhat keep up with the presidential race keep your butt at home.

Fred And The Issue Of Abortion

Federalism:

Sen. Fred Thompson appeared on Meet the Press today and, Clintons take note, had to answer some tough questions asked by host Tim Russert. He discussed the crisis in Pakistan, his support for concealed carry laws on university campuses, and other issues. A little over midway through the interview, Russert queried Thompson on the Human Life Amendment and whether he supports it or not. He doesn’t. He favors letting states set abortion law. Around that nugget, though, Thompson touted his 100% pro-life voting record and ends this clip with his opinion on when life begins.

I find it hard to argue with his point on this issue. I am against abortion. I do not want it to be legal. But I also want this country to be guided by the Constitution, which gives the power to determine issues like this to the states.

Glenn Reynolds (Instapundit) agrees.

Win, Fred, Win

Hillbilly White Trash Has It Right

Thoughts on Clinton and immigration from HWT:

I'll say. At least 40% of why Republicans lost the legislature last year was due to the president's and key Republican Senate leaders' support for amnesty and open borders.

The writer of the WaPo article, who is a partisan Democrat, attempts to whistle past the graveyard by claiming that most Americans really support amnesty but then can't offer a coherent explanation of why that isn't a winning issue for Democrats.

The truth is that the Clinton machine, which is entirely poll driven, knows with absolute certainty that immigration is a losing issue for Democrats. This is why Hillary melted down when asked to answer a simple yes or no question about an issue which is a no-brainer to around three quarters of the American people.

Does anybody out there still think that Hillary is unbeatable? Is there anybody left now who thinks that the only way Republicans can defeat her is by selling our souls and embracing human sacrifice?

Read the rest, you know where.

All Of A Sudden Bush Likes To Veto Stuff

This should have started a long time ago:

An increasingly confrontational President Bush on Friday vetoed a bill authorizing hundreds of popular water projects even though lawmakers can count enough votes to override him.

Bush brushed aside significant objections from Capitol Hill, even from Republicans, in vetoing legislation that provides $23 billion for projects like repairing hurricane damage, restoring wetlands and preventing flooding in communities across the nation.

It appears certain Bush will have his veto overridden for the first time in his presidency. The bill passed in both chambers of Congress by well more than the two-thirds majority needed to override Bush's decision and make the measure law.

"When we override this irresponsible veto, perhaps the president will finally recognize that Congress is an equal branch of government and reconsider his many other reckless veto threats," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

It will be overridden, but it will also be brought to the public's attention. That is why it is important to do this. Too many bills slide right through without any opposition because they can be overridden. He should veto them all and let it be know that he opposes them.

Nice Answer Fred

This question came during an interview with Jed Babbin:

JB: I take it you think you’re the best guy to beat Hillary. Can you, will you, be tough enough to go at her like maybe Tim Russert did?

The answer:

FT: Of course the answer to that is yes. Now I’m not fixated on Hillary. Now that may be against the gospel for a lot of Republicans. But we’d better keep our eye on the ball. Our issue is our relationship with the American people. Our fortunes do not rise and fall based on the personality of one person over on the Democratic side. We need to worry about sticking to our principles. And I would invite the American people to do this. Of course a Hillary Clinton Administration would be bad for America.

But they also need to think about this: when our worst enemy is sittin’ down at the table trying to figure out if our leadership is tough, if our leadership is serious or our leadership is credible when they tell them what they are going to do, when they are trying to figure out how much they can get away with in terms of endangering our country for their own purposes. Who do Americans want sitting on the other side of the table? Now that’s the question, that’s the grownup question that Republicans and Democrats alike need to ask themselves. And that’s the one that I want them to think about. You know we’ll deal with Hillary when the times comes, if that’s what fate has in store. But let’s keep our eye on the ball.

Once again Fred is right on. The issue is the American people.

Read the whole interview.

Win, Fred, Win

More Democratic Nonsense

Michael B. Mukasey was supposed to be just the man for the job of attorney general.

Looks like things have changed:

The WaPo reports this morning:

Democratic support for attorney general nominee Michael B. Mukasey dwindled further yesterday over his refusal to comment on the legality of a harsh CIA interrogation technique, setting the stage for an unexpectedly close vote next week by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (Ill.) and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.) announced that they will join Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (Del.) in voting against Mukasey on the Judiciary panel, after the nominee said in a four-page letter to Senate Democrats that he does not know whether a type of simulated drowning called waterboarding constitutes illegal torture under U.S. law.

Other Democrats on the Judiciary panel have pointedly refused to disclose how they will vote during a special meeting to consider Mukasey’s nomination, which has been scheduled for Tuesday. Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) also declined to say whether he will allow the nomination go to the full Senate with a negative recommendation, which occurred with some past nominations.

White House officials said yesterday that they remain confident Mukasey will be confirmed, and Republicans again accused the Democrats of attempting to hold the nomination hostage to score political points. “No one is ready to declare it DOA,” White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said.

The nomination has become a particularly thorny problem for Mukasey’s original Senate patron, Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.). He had suggested Mukasey as a consensus nominee to the White House and declared two weeks ago that he should be confirmed, but he was noncommittal yesterday.

“I’m reading the letter, I’m going over it,” Schumer told reporters. “That’s all I’m going to say.”

This prompted a reaction from Bush, here.

Why can't the Republicans learn that the Democrats are not going to agree with them on any subject? They act as if they are surprised when this kind of thing happens. I, on the other hand, would probably fall over with a heart attack if there wasn't a battle over this.

Hey Republicans, the Democrats are out to get you. They will use all means necessary. If they must invent things to use, they will. If they have to lie, they will. All bets are off.

Fred On Hillary's "Drivers Licenses for Illegal Aliens" Debate Answer

Fred08:

While Hillary Clinton was speaking out both sides of her mouth at last night’s debate over the issue of drivers licenses for illegal immigrants, what went unsaid is that this is a recipe for increased voter fraud. Under the federal “Motor Voter” law (the National Voter Registration Act of 1993), states must provide applicants for drivers licenses with the opportunity to register to vote.

Giving legal drivers licenses to illegal immigrants is wrong and would provide them the opportunity to register to vote in our country. People who are not citizens of the United States should not be encouraged by pandering politicians to further break our laws and risk the health of our political system.

Read Fred's statement in San Jose at the link above.

This could be just what the doctor ordered for Fred. It is amazing how out of touch with the American people most politicians are on this issue. Mitt, John, and Rudy are all damaged on this issues. Fred needs to keep pushing this issue.

Win, Fred, Win

Why Is Rudy Winning Over The Pro-Life Crowd

This is an excellent post by Hillbilly White Trash:

Yesterday I was listening to Sean Hannity's show when Bill Bennett came on as a guest. Both Hannity and Bennett are Roman Catholics who have made their opposition to abortion very clear in the past. However the likely prospect of ardently pro-choice Rudolph Giuliani gaining the Republican nomination had them
both backpeddling as fast as they could.

The two hypocrites vied with one another to see who could blow off the issue the fastest.

This is not an isolated phenomena on the right either. On his blog Michael Medved posted an entry called Abortion's shades of gray where he said this:

Please read the rest of his post at the link above.

I cannot understand why so many "conservatives" are lining up behind a man that holds such different views as they do. I don't want to see Hillary in the White House a bit more than any Republican does. I just don't think we have to stray that far away from our core beliefs to keep her out.