About Me

Name:Roxanna M.
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Do These Stripes Make Me Look Fat?

 
It's being reported that Congressman Charles Rangel (D-NY) failed to report more than $75,000 in income over the last 20 years on some investment/vacation property he owns in a resort in the Dominican Republic.  Apparently, his "little house facing a big ocean" can rent for as much as $1,100 a night in high season.
 
Mr. Rangel has served on the Ways & Means Committee  -  the committee that writes the tax code  -  since 1975 and is currently its chairman.  According to Mr. Rangel's attorney  -  former Clinton attorney Lanny Davis  -  Mr. Rangel "did not realize" that he had to declare the money as income and was "unaware" of the semiannual payments from the resort because his wife handled the family finances and conferred with their accountant on tax matters.  Way to go Charlie, blame your wife. 
 
By the way, which is it?  He can either be unaware of the payments or aware of the payments but unaware that he had to declare them as income.  It's one or the other because it cannot be both?  Which excuse are you buying? 
 
From Ted Kennedy to Gary Hart to Bill Clinton to John Edwards and now Charles Rangel, we see how democrat men treat women.  Should we be at all surprised that Harry Reid referred to Sarah Palin as shrill or that Barack Obama prefers to refer to her as the Mayor of Wasilla rather than the Governor of Alaska. 
 
And another thing, it seems that Good Time Charlie was also wrongfully using rent-controlled apartments in New York City.  And just one more thing, it seems that letters on his congressional stationery were somehow sent out that shouldn't have been sent out, something about demanding money for the shrine he's planning on building to himself, probably going to call it the Charles B. Rangel Monument to Ethical Behavior While in Congress.
 
Since he's a democrat, however, don't be surprised if nothing happens to him.
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A Culture of Blood

 
You can argue with the choices Sarah Palin has made in her life.  You can argue that John McCain should not have chosen her.  You can argue that she doesn't have enough experience, or the right kind of experience.  The one thing you can't argue with, however, is that she is an American success story. 
 
She started out in a small town.  She married her high school sweetheart and started a family.  Not happy with how things were going, she got involved.  She started out with the PTA.  She moved on to the City Council, then onward and upward to Mayor (10 years) and then to Governor (2 years).  Now, she's a nominee for Vice President of the United States, being only the second woman in 232 years who can lay claim to that honor. 
 
And, she did it the old-fashioned way.  She didn't rely on family connections or money.  She married for love, not ruthlessly hitching her wagon to a man she thought was going somewhere and expecting him to return the favor at a later date.  She did it on her own, without ever sacrificing all the good things in life for a political goal.  Coming across as warm, friendly, and open, we are discovering that Sarah Palin may very well be an iron fist in a velvet glove.
 
So, why isn't the feminist movement welcoming this woman of achievement with open arms?  Because she's pro-life, and that is not acceptable.  Sarah Palin refused to abort a child with Down's syndrome and refuses to march her 17-year old daughter off to an abortionist.  Regardless of what a woman accomplishes in her life, if she's not pro-abortion, she's out of the hat. 
 
Don't let the misnomer pro-choice fool you.  The feminist movement is pro-abortion.  Saying that you're pro-abortion, however, might turn some people off, hence the more palatable pro-choice.  If the movement was really pro-choice, would it be excoriating Sarah Palin for the "choice" she made, for the "choice" her daughter is making?  Absolutely not. 
 
The mask is off, and the movement is revealed for what it really is:  bitter, angry women who think there is no higher glory than killing a baby just because you can.    Some of the very same women who say that soldiers shouldn't die in wars and convicted murderers should not be executed, gladly and gleefully sign death warrants for the most innocent among us and demand that all women march in lockstep with that concept.
 
Make no mistake about it, these women are not going to be happy if Sarah Palin breaks through that glass ceiling they're always talking about.   She chose life, and that makes her a traitor.
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

And Another Thing

 
It isn't just Sarah Palin's youth and "inexperience" that has the democrats so tweaked, it's her sex.   In their view, John McCain had absolutely no right to put a woman on the ticket because it stole their thunder.  They wanted to be the party of history.  Look at us, we put a black man at the top of the ticket.  Call me a racist if you will, but there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that if Obama was a white, first-term senator from Illinois, he wouldn't be strutting around thinking he's going to be the next President of the United States.  We saw what the democrat voters did to white senators, even those with decades more experience than Obama. 

If the democrats win, there will be no end of patting themselves on the back for their "accomplishment".  If the Republicans win, thereby making history first, there will be no end of the vituperation from the Left.  In fact, it's already begun.  While flipping between news channels over the weekend, I listed to the pathetic Campbell Brown drone on about what a bad mother Sarah Palin is for "putting her daughter through this."  Never directly, of course, but by (not so) sly innuendo. 

Well, first of all, Sarah Palin doesn't owe it to her daughter to pass on the opportunity of a lifetime.  Secondly, Bristol Palin did what she did.  The ripe old age of 17 is as good a time as any to learn that there are consequences to one's actions.
  

And thirdly, the press doesn't have to talk about the situation.  They don't have to hound the Palin family about it.  They could just leave them alone to deal with this situation privately. 

So, who's really putting Bristol Palin through anything? 




 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

One Less Thing to Wonder About

 
Republican VP pick Sarah Palin recently gave birth to a baby with Down's syndrome, which is a chromosomal disorder caused by the presence of all or part of an extra 21st chromosome.
 
On his blog Liberaland, Alan Colmes first posted and then removed a post entitled "Did Palin Take Proper PreNatal Care", as though Mrs. Palin somehow caused this by not taking care of herself.
 
I have often wondered if Alan Colmes is as stupid as he appears on TV.  Apparently, he is.
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Reading Between the Lines

 
Almost without exception, the democrat response to McCain's pick of Sarah Palin has been:  she has no experience.  Despite the fact that this is laughable coming from a party that just nominated such an unqualified man for President, what are they really trying to say without having to say it?
 
They think that McCain is going to die.  Since the job of Vice-President is to break ties in the Senate and go to state funerals, why else are they so concerned about Palin's alleged lack of experience?  They can't say that out loud, however, for fear of alienating seniors, the most reliable voting bloc in the country. 
 
Both parties should just drop this line of complaint and move on.
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Entangling Pursestrings

 

It is being reported that John Edwards is not only emerging from seclusion, but has raised his speaking fee to $65,000.  Sounds like Elizabeth put herself in charge of the family's finances and cut his allowance.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Scared Witless

 
Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin is John McCain's pick for a running mate.  If you think that democrats aren't scared, or at least worried, think again. 
 
The first two comments I heard from democrats, one from Charles Schumer (D-NY), shows that they're engaging their mouths before their brains.   Both comments dealt with the fact that McCain had put someone with no foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency.  Didn't the democrats just put a man with no foreign policy experience at the top of their ticket?
 
Another comment said that women won't like her because she's pro-life.  As though every woman in America shares the pro-abortion stance of democrats. 
 
Look for more howlers in the days to come.
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Who Cares?

 
Last night Fox News showed some of the Hollywood celebrities that were in attendance at the democrat convention.  Most wouldn't deign to speak to the reporter, but we all know how they feel about Bush, Cheney, and Republicans in general. 

To which I say, Who Cares? 

Any person who will vote or not vote for someone because of what Spike Lee or Madonna or Chevy Chase says is someone I don't want voting in the first place.  This country would be better served if such people would just stay home!
 
 
 
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Bromide Bill

 
Last night I gritted my teeth, held onto my armchair, and listened to Bill Clinton.  When I say listened, that's exactly what I mean.  During the eight years that I was forced to endure him, I discovered that the only way to tolerate him was by only listening when he spoke, not actually watching him speak.  I believe that that is the only thing that saved my TVs from the junk heap. 
 
If you were to take away the hall, if you were to take away the hoopla, if you were to take away the hype, what would you have?  A speech that was nothing more than an endless recitation of democrat talking points, devoid of truth and in no way whatsoever connected to Barack Obama.  Generic, boilerplate.
 
Democrats don't like George Bush.  They don't like his policies.  They don't like what they think he has done to the country.  Bill Clinton could have said everything he said and at the end of it all could have said, that's why we need to elect _______________________ as the next President of the United States. 
 
Nobody should be fooled into thinking that he's actually happy about Barack Obama being the nominee instead of his wife.  But for the first time in a long time, maybe ever, he and his wife were forced to put the interests of the party that has been so good to them ahead of their own.  And don't for one second think that it's not going to cost that party dearly. 
 
His speech was about electing a democrat, any democrat, and nothing more.
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Psst . . .

 
She didn't mean it.  Hillary Clinton doesn't want Obama to be President any more than I do. 

Unlike me, however, she has to play the game in order to mollify the people she'll need for her next run, which won't be until 2016 if Obama wins in November.  By then, her age will be against her, as will Biden's.

Kinda sad, isn't it, to spend your whole life chasing something that may never be yours.
 
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Conventional Wisdom

 
Conventional wisdom seems to be saying that Obama was wrong not to choose Hillary as his running mate.  I would respectfully disagree. 

Why would Obama want a running mate whose husband was a former President?

I remember back in 1992 when we all heard two for the price of one, elect one get one free, or some other variation thereof.  We all know that Hillary could not keep her hands off her husband's presidency.  And, it has now been pretty well determined that she was usually behind every bad decision ever made.  I remember George Will calling her a "disaster". 

Firstly, while they might not like each other very much, they're very much a team.  How many times would "That's now how we did it" ring through the halls?  How many times would Obama have to remind them that he was President and not them.  It seems to me that this would place him at a constant disadvantage. 

Secondly, does anyone really want the Clinton dog-and-and pony show back in the White House?  Haven't we had enough of their scandals?  Doesn't Mr. Change want to go forward and not back?

At this point in time, I want a President focused on America and her best interests, not in the latest scene his veep and her husband might be playing out.





Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why I'm A Republican

 
The first night of the democrat convention featured a tribute to Ted Kennedy, who had secretly flown in for the event.  This man drove his first wife to the bottle and desperation.  And, of course, he drove Mary Jo Kopechne to her death.  Of course, the Kennedy men have always treated women as negligible, so it's not surprising that Mr. Kennedy has never shown any remorse for his behavior.

The man is more deserving of a prison cell than a tribute.  




Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Some Thoughts

 
Back in 2004, did anyone in the MSM ask professional gigolo John Kerry how many houses he and his wife owned? 
 
Anyone who thinks the Clintons are going to go quietly into that good night haven't been paying attention.  They may make a good show of it for the public, but don't think for one minute that they're not doing things behind the scenes to sabotage Obama and lay the foundation for her run in 2012.
 
What does Joe Biden add to the democrat ticket?
 
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Bottom Line

 
Obama's support for abortion and what he did or didn't do while in the Illinois Legislature is Topic #1 these days.  It's impossible to watch any news show without hearing loud and overlapping voices as to what did or didn't happen.  Let's cut through all that and look at what's important. 

Obama says that he voted against the bill(s) because he thought it (they) would interfere with Roe v. Wade.  Therefore, by his own admission, it was more important to him to preserve a woman's "right" to abortion than it was to mandate medical treatment for living, breathing human beings who had just survived a traumatic event.  

Makes me real worried about his plans to "fix" healthcare here in America.
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Media Bias

 
 
 
Obama 7   McCain 2
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous123456789102930Next »