corky's blog
Posted at 2:07pm on Nov. 8, 2006 Lieberman for Secretary of Defense
By corky
This would give Lieberman a chance of not going back on his word of caucusing with the Democrats; bipartisanize the war; and give control of the Senate to the GOP.
Kinda funny that we don't know anything about his qualifications for the job but that quite a few people are entertaining the notion.
Comments (1) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 12:30pm on Mar. 25, 2006 Christian Peacemakers Teams Hostage Response
By corky
"I do not believe that a lasting peace is achieved by armed force, but I pay tribute to their courage and thank those who played a part in my release," he said in a prepared statement shortly after arrival.
Read the rest: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060325/ts_nm/iraq_britain_hostage_dc
I believe the group those 3 represent is anti-American and Marxist, but I think its important to, at least, show the actual quotes from the people that were actually there as opposed to only what their organization had to say.
I've heard a lot, some on this site but mostly on talk-radio, about how ungrateful they were. Seems at least one actually was...
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (3) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 12:29pm on Sep. 17, 2005 Supreme Court Nomination - Part II
By corky
Okay, so Roberts is the man. However, in the grander scheme of things, was nominating him first a mistake?
Perhaps 'unfortunate' is better than 'a mistake', considering the passing away of Judge Rehnquist was something unforeseen (unless you wear a tin-foil hat and considering his demise a Roviavellian plot) and Roberts was nominated beforehand.
Still, look @ the ammunition the Democrats have without even knowing who the next nominee is:
- we're replacing a female SCJ which will doubtlessly make the LMSM focus on the female and minority candidates and the prospective nominee's lack of victimhood/diversity credentials should it be a fat white male named 'Chuck'
- Roberts/Rehnquist is a wash; replacing O'Connor gives Bush the ability to actually change the balance of the court should
- the Donks can seem reasonable by giving Bush his first nominee then going all out opposing the next one; I can almost hear the first Democratic Senator accolade of Judge Roberts, during the second hearing, and the subsequent denoucing of the candidate for not being more like Judge Roberts.
Hindsight is 20/20, but I can't help fantasizing about a scenerio where, Judge E. Jones is nominated first, breezes through the confirmation process, because she's female and only replacing another strict constructionist, then Bush dropping the Roberts bomb on the Donks; he would have been considered the smartest man alive.
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (5) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 2:05am on Sep. 9, 2005 Irish Times re: Katrina
By corky
Puts a lot into perspective:
http://www.sluggerotoole.com/archives/2005/09/ill_wind_may_no.php
Hat Tip - Instapundit
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (4) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 4:11pm on Jun. 22, 2005 I, Chickenhawk (?)
By corky
I just got finished reading:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/6/20/141953/595
I'm troubled. Almost every part of me thinks that the WoT includes Iraq. America will be safer when the people of the Middle East are freed (more free) because democracies don't war with one another.
So, we have a necessary war and a shortage of manpower and I haven't signed up. If someone were to ask why I'm not over there if I think its so necessary, I wouldn't have an answer. Despite the 6 surgeries I've had on my left leg for broken bones and knee problems, probably disqualifying me for army infantry, I haven't even attempted to enlist.
Am I bothered only because I've fallen for some kind of logical fallacy? Is it 'ok' to support a war I haven't signed up to fight?
Am I a coward??
My only consolation is that the people who support the war and support this president are the ones who are disproportionately fighting it so I feel less hypocritical than the Kosians who, most likely, are underrepresented in the military.
I seethe with anger every time I read the posts on that site, but this time its a different kind of anger. It's anger @ myself for not knowing whether I'm doing the right thing.
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (68) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 4:31pm on Apr. 8, 2005 Terri Part 2??
By corky
http://thrownback.blogspot.com/2005_04_03_thrownback_archive.html#111289773
119911491
I don't know enough about this case, but it seems a lot less clear cut than the Schiavo one.
Anyone have any more information on this?
If that link contains the facts, I really hope everyone isn't too "Schiavo'd out" to do something about it...
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (42) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 4:56pm on Apr. 1, 2005 Does this bother anyone else?
By corky
I was raised Roman Catholic, but I'm pretty much an atheist ATM. Have said that, does anyone else find this post disturbing?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/3/22/20925/3049
Maybe its my reactionary anti-liberal bias, but I find this somewhat intolerant...
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (22) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 1:27am on Feb. 28, 2005 Pro-choice but Anti-Roe
By corky
Is that a loser position on both sides or would it be treated as pro-life?
Just curious cuz I think that's me. Only reason I "think" this is because I don't feel strongly about the issue.
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (4) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 1:18am on Feb. 3, 2005 Were we this nutty during the Clinton years?
By corky
I'm 27 years old and never really got into politics until the 2000 Republican Primaries. I had just graduated college as a flaming liberal and quickly turned libertarian after listening to talk radio for a week :)
Were we the same way from '92-'00? Were Republicans as confrontational in Congress? Did we all think Bill and Hillary were (are) anti-Christ's?
Just trying to get some perspective. Perhaps if our side were just as crazy back then I can consider the Democrats' current behaviors "just a phase" and our counter-balance to excessive Republicanism can go back to being sane.
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (24) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 1:00pm on Nov. 17, 2004 What to do about DeLay?
By corky
So indictments are a-comin'--already hittin' some senior staffers of his. Republicans, in the house, are trying to reverse a 10-year decision of theirs to make members, in positions of leadership, step down if put in such a situation.
Few questions come to mind:
- Flip-flop?
- Is DeLay a good guy to have in such a high position of power?
- Do you think Republicans of principle, who think the 10 y/o rule is a good idea, will get "hammered" for saying as such?
My own opinions:
- Yes. The rule should stand.
- Its better than him being on the other side; however, redistricting was absolutely horrendous for republican government (not Republican) and, from what I've read of his dealings within the house, he's not a very "nice guy" when you're opposed. Maybe that's what a "whip" is for.
- Yes. I think that there are too many Republicans scared of DeLay and would never stand for their principles, in this particular case, for fear of retribution.
Outcome? Republicans rescind the rule, DeLay gets indicted and convicted, and we look like really big a-holes.
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (8) / Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 12:41am on Nov. 5, 2004 So what about my wing of the GOP?
By corky
Ever since I've graduated from college, I'm been a supporter of the Republican Party; a right-wing talk show listener, who converted from the stereotypical lefty liberal of my undergrad days. Now, I'm a staunch fiscal conservative, yet I still lean left when it comes to social matters.
I never thought the social policy of the redstaters would affect me. I'm pro-choice, but believe Roe v. Wade should be overturned and the abortion decision left to the states. I'm against the War on Drugs™ but, since I don't do drugs, whether others can or cannot does not affect me. No matter what John Ascroft has tried (or wanted) to do, I still have my Porn-on-Demand via the WWW. Hence I could always, with good conscience, support any Republican for any office.
So, now that they guy I voted for is in, what do I and my peeps get? Bush was the lesser of two evils when it came to fiscal policy, yet he's still a very big spender (and isn't because of the war on terror). Is fiscal conservatism dead? Are my choices now between who has the better social policy?
Although I think the "evangelical-christian-mandate" is somewhat overblown by the media, I'm starting to think that there may be changes coming which I may start caring about. Hence, the small disparity between the parties' government spending may start to get outweighed by the "moral values" presidency ahead of us.
Would someone like to allay my fears?
Posted in User Blogs — Comments (17) / Email this page » / Read More »
