Can you believe this, Huckabee actually appologizes for Bhutto's murder...

http://fredthompsonnews.blogspot.com/2007/12/huckster-apologizes-for-bhotto.html 

There are many running on the GOP ticket for POTUS that I refuse to vote for, but this forum topic (above link) explains why Huckabee is the most dangerous candidate. He seems to think that we are somehow responsible for Bhutto's bloody assasination. This kind of thinking is usually set aside for far-left whackos, so please think very hard if this guy happens to be your choice in the upcoming primary.

For strong Conservative leadership, I'm voting for Fred. 

Have you run up your credit card on a shopping spree, now feeling the squeeze because you can’t pay the minimum balance? It’s all the economy’s fault, according to the December 26 “NBC Nightly News.”

NBC senior investigative correspondent Lisa Myers reported on mounting credit card debt, but presented borrowers as victims of credit card companies and a struggling economy.

In their year in review issue (dated December 31/January 7), Newsweek sums up its year in the snarky "Conventional Wisdom Watch" box. The box is utterly conventional in its liberal bias, slashing the Republicans in general at year's end:

George W. Bush (DOWN): Manages to stymie Dem Congress. But still has nothing to show for his seven years except no 9/11 sequel. Sad.

Dick Cheney (DOWN): Secretive, trigger-happy fossil-fuel lover is like banker Mr. Potter in "It’s a Wonderful Life." But without the happy ending.

Condi Rice (SIDEWAYS): Condi ‘08! On second thought, there’s a think tank somewhere with a corner office for you and a piano.

Karl Rove (DOWN): Bush’s brain goes from running the world to writing an occasional piece for NEWSWEEK. Now he can leak to himself!

Scooter Libby (DOWN): Cheney’s man convicted of perjury but scoots out of jail thanks to Bush. Let him do community service at Walter Reed.

Even the up arrows came with attacks on conservatives:

The Pakistan People’s Party, under the leadership of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, used a news release yesterday to announce it had turned to the Internet to raise funds for the party’s efforts to win parliamentary elections in January 2008. In a message to supporters who visit the PPP web site, Mrs. Bhutto said:

“Pakistan is at a crossroads. We citizens are faced with a decisive choice this January 8th, election day. We can turn our backs on the years of dictatorship, fundamentalism, and economic decline. The Pakistan People’s Party is ready to lead our beloved country into a brighter future of prosperity, peace, and security. For you and for our country’s future, I am ready to lead.

In the wake of the Benazir Bhutto assassination, consider this: I was puzzled in my car yesterday listening to the XM satellite music service, and its reggae channel "The Joint." Rapper/singer Wyclef Jean was doing a little promotional ditty for XM and singing he was running for president, with "Clef for President" going up against Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, and then noting he would be "elected on Friday, assassinated on Saturday, buried on Sunday, back to work on Monday."

This is apparently a shortened version of Wyclef's song "If I Were President" from the Dave Chappelle show on Comedy Central. The little song on XM also had some of these cockeyed liberal lyrics:

An old man told me
Instead of spending
Billions on the war
We can use some of that money
In the ghetto
I know some so poor
When it rains that’s when they shower
Screaming fight the power
That’s when the vulture devours

Congressional "Pay-As-You-Go" budgeting translates to perpetually bigger government

Originally published on December 21^st by Human Events. 

The New Seal of the Federal Government

Want to ensure the growth of government?  Forever?

The media does, and they have with Liberals devised the perfect way to do it.  It is the "pay-as-you-go" Congressional budgeting rule -- Pay-Go.  It requires every move that Congress makes be "budget neutral"; every new spending initiative must be paid for - no more deficit spending.

How could anyone, Conservatives especially, not be enraptured with such a concept?

For general comment and discussion...

A leading nonpartisan media watchdog, the Center for Media and Public Affairs, says so. The "About" page for CMPA is here.

Imagine that (HT The Cable Game):

The Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA) at George Mason University ..... found that Fox News Channel's evening news show provided more balanced coverage than its counterparts on the broadcast networks.

A look at the press release (small PDF) reveals the extent of the balance at Fox, and the imbalance elsewhere:

Fox News Channel’s coverage was more balanced toward both parties than the broadcast networks were. On FOX, evaluations of all Democratic candidates combined were split almost evenly – 51% positive vs. 49% negative, as were all evaluations of GOP candidates – 49% positive vs. 51% negative, producing a perfectly balanced 50-50 split for all candidates of both parties.

On the three broadcast networks, opinion on Democratic candidates split 47% positive vs. 53% negative, while evaluations of Republicans were more negative – 40% positive vs. 60% negative. For both parties combined, network evaluations were almost 3 to 2 negative in tone, i.e. 41% positive vs. 59% negative.

See Update at foot: "I wasn't teasing: don't get in my way."

If at the end of a hunt and while still in the field a politician disfavored by the MSM had joked about shooting his opponent, do you think it would have made big news? But how much coverage have you seen of just such a statement Mike Huckabee made during his recent Iowa pheasant photo-op hunt?

You've probably seen footage of Huckabee joking about shooting people who won't vote for him. Morning Joe played the clip in its opening segment today. Huckabee points to three dead birds on the ground.

View video here.

Welcome to the 2007 Top Ten Lowlights of The New York Times. As usual, the year brought a cornucopia of biased behavior by the nation's paper of record, from sliming innocent Duke lacrosse players to defending illegal immigration to yet another liberal rant from a high-level Times executive (this year it was Executive Editor Bill Keller who did the honors). Times Watch has whittled down the absolute worst from another liberally slanted year from the New York Times. For the full report, visit Times Watch. Here are the headlines for a taste:

10. Bill Keller Unleashed in London -- "War Going Very Badly in Iraq"

9. The Haditha "Massacre"

8. Doubting the Fort Dix Six Terror Plot

7. France's Fearsome Nicolas Sarkozy

6. Gee, Why Is Dick Cheney So Secretive?

5. Reporter Chastised for Saying "Surge" Worth a Shot...

4. Blaming the Victims in the Duke "Rape" Hoax

3. Loving the (Illegal) Alien

2. Deep Discount for MoveOn.org's "Petraeus-Betray Us" Ad

1. Grossly Biased Giuliani Coverage

Here is the sort of ridiculousness that makes people distrust the media. The Minneapolis Star Tribune published a story that breathlessly proclaims that "More people say there should be less of a Christian emphasis placed on the holidays" making it appear that a Christian Christmas is falling into disfavor with the American people. Wow, how dire for Christianity! Yet when you look closer at the story, it turns out that only 27% of those responding to a poll are saying such a thing. It happens that 64% say there should be more focus on the birth of Jesus during Christmas. So, with such an overwhelming percentage in favor of the religious content of Christmas why is the headline focused on the anti-Christian sentiment? As a result of that negative focus, should someone simply read the headline, a false impression that contradicts the facts is quickly fostered.

Reuters injected bias into this December 24 article about 40 missing Cuban “migrants” who never arrived in America after being smuggled out of Cuba. The article minimized Castro's oppression and faulted the US for the Cubans' flight.

The wire service began by deliberately mischaracterizing the Cubans as “migrants” instead of calling them “refugees” or even “passengers.” Labeling them “migrants” ignores Cuba's political and economic straitjacket, and more importantly links Cuban refugees to the issue of illegal immigration.

The media are beginning to call everyone who comes to America with the intent to stay, “migrants,” whether here legally or not, which erases any distinctions. People who are anti-illegal immigration often support Cuban refugees remaining in the US, and linking the two issues can reduce opposition to illegal immigration.

While explaining why the Cubans risked their lives coming to the US, Reuters ignored Castro's totalitarian regime (bold mine throughout):