Microsoft to tally up caucus numbers

Drudge is promoting this one big time. Looks like Microsoft is helping out in Iowa.

Anyhow, here’s the story via the Hill:

Microsoft volunteered to provide the technology to help tally up the results of Iowa’s caucus, free of charge. Now it will be put to the test Monday night.
The contests in both parties are expected to go down to the wire. And the spotlight will be on precinct officials who have been trained on a new Microsoft app, which is meant to cut down on human error and speed up the reporting process.
Both the Republican and Democratic parties in Iowa have expressed strong confidence in Microsoft, dismissing late suspicion of corporate influence from the campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) early last week.
Party officials have said no errors have been spotted in caucus dry runs. But the Sanders campaign has created its own backup reporting system, as has the Hillary Clinton campaign.
“It will be interesting to see what happens if and when there are discrepancies between the Microsoft system and either Democratic or Republican campaign tabulations,” Iowa State University professor Mack Shelley said.

Some would say that this smacks of corporate influence in elections. But, I really don’t see that, I mean, it would be worse. It could be the Government involvement. We all know what a disaster Mitt Romney had with that software he used. So, this might be a plus.

The 2016 Presidential Race Begins: Iowa caucuses are today

The first step of the 2016 election starts today.

Video:

The Story via Fox News:

As Iowans prepare to cast the first votes in the presidential nominating process Monday, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders hoped to defy the polls and pull off upset victories in Monday night’s caucuses.
After months of campaigning and more than $150 million spent on advertising, the race for supremacy in Iowa is close in both parties.
Among Republicans, the latest polls show real estate billionaire Donald Trump holding a slim edge over Cruz. Cruz, who became the first major candidate from either party to enter the presidential race 315 days ago, has pinned his hopes to a sophisticated get-out-the-vote operation. Cruz has also modeled his campaign after past Iowa winners, visiting all of the state’s 99 counties and courting influential evangelical and conservative leaders.
“If you had told me 10 months ago that the day before the Iowa caucuses we’d be in a statistcal tie for first place I would have been thrilled and exhilarated,” Cruz told Fox News late Sunday.
The Republican caucus is also the first test of whether Trump can turn the legion of fans drawn to his plainspoken populism into voters. The scope of the billionaire’s organization in Iowa is a mystery, though Trump himself has intensified his campaign schedule during the final sprint, including a pair of rallies Monday.

I predict that Trump will come in first, with Cruz second and Rubio third on the Republican side. On the Democrat side, I think that one could be a surprise. Sanders has a good deal of support, while Hillary has the name and the money. So, that one is a toss. It will be interesting to see to say the least.

Audio: Obama talks about Iowa, Hillary, Sanders and 2016

The full audio:

The Story via Politico:

Barack Obama, that prematurely gray elder statesman, is laboring mightily to remain neutral during Hillary Clinton’s battle with Bernie Sanders in Iowa, the state that cemented his political legend and secured his path to the presidency.
But in a candid 40-minute interview for POLITICO’s Off Message podcast as the first flakes of the blizzard fell outside the Oval Office, he couldn’t hide his obvious affection for Clinton or his implicit feeling that she, not Sanders, best understands the unpalatable pragmatic demands of a presidency he likens to the world’s most challenging walk-and-chew-gum exercise.
“[The] one thing everybody understands is that this job right here, you don’t have the luxury of just focusing on one thing,” a relaxed and reflective Obama told me in his most expansive discussion of the 2016 race to date.
Iowa isn’t just a state on the map for Obama. It’s the birthplace of his hope-and-change phenomenon, “the most satisfying political period in my career,” he says — “what politics should be” — and a bittersweet reminder of how far from the garden he’s gotten after seven bruising years in the White House.
The caucuses have a fierce-urgency-of-now quality as Obama reckons with the end of his presidency — the kickoff of a process of choosing a Democratic successor he hopes can secure his as-yet unsecured legacy, to keep Donald Trump or Ted Cruz or somebody else from undoing much of what he has done. And he was convinced Clinton was that candidate, prior to the emergence of Sanders, friends and associates have told me over the past 18 months.
“Bernie came in with the luxury of being a complete long shot and just letting loose,” he said. “I think Hillary came in with the both privilege — and burden — of being perceived as the front-runner. … You’re always looking at the bright, shiny object that people haven’t seen before — that’s a disadvantage to her.”

He also spoke of Bernie Sanders:

Obama didn’t utter an unkind word about Sanders, who has been respectfully critical of his administration’s reluctance to prosecute Wall Street executives and his decision to abandon a single-payer health care system as politically impractical. But he was kinder to Clinton. When I asked Obama whether he thought Sanders needed to expand his horizons, if the Vermont senator was too much a one-issue candidate too narrowly focused on income inequality, the presidente didn’t dispute the assertion.
Gesturing toward the Resolute Desk, with its spread-winged eagle seal, first brought into the Oval Office by John F. Kennedy, Obama said of Sanders: “Well, I don’t want to play political consultant, because obviously what he’s doing is working. I will say that the longer you go in the process, the more you’re going to have to pass a series of hurdles that the voters are going to put in front of you.”
Then he added: “As you’ll recall, I was sitting at my desk there just a little over a week ago … writing my State of the Union speech, and somebody walks in and says, ‘A couple of our sailors wandered into Iranian waters’” — and here he stopped to chuckle in disbelief — “that’s maybe a dramatic example, but not an unusual example of the job.”

As much as I hate to say it; President Obama is correct about that one. The office of the President of the United States is a very difficult job and it requires someone who can handle the job. While Bernie Sanders might be a respectable person and all; if I were voting in a Democratic Primary, there is no way that I would vote for Bernie Sanders, I would most likely vote for Hillary Clinton. Because she has already been there and she seems, for a Democrat, a bit more reasonable, than Bernie Sanders.

Needless to say, being an ideologue is great; if you are an activist or even maybe a Senator. However, when you are the commander and chief, that is a whole other ballgame and there is a certain amount of pragmatism is required in that office, if you actually want to succeed at the job. You have to remember, when you are President; you are President of the people of the United States of America, not just the President of the people who voted for you. You have to take into account everyone, not just those who voted for you. This is why I am not too keen on Ted Cruz; he is an extreme ideologue on the right, where Bernie Sander is an extreme ideologue on the left.

This is where I think Donald Trump might just be the more pragmatic candidate, who might just be able to get things done in DC and put aside some of this partisan rancor that has become so terrible under Bush and Obama. Now, if we could just work on his humility and get him to stop retweeting stuff like this here.

Other Bloggers: Vox, The Daily Beast, USA Today, Yahoo Politics, John Hawkins’ Right Wing News, Mother Jones, Talking Points Memo, Hot Air, The Daily Caller, Washington Post, ABC News, Shakesville, Slantpoint and The Week – Via Memeorandum

Oof: Trump retweets neo-Nazi’s insult of Jeb Bush

How not to win an election part 1:

Donald Trump on Friday retweeted a message from a Twitter user with the handle @WhiteGenocideTM.The tweet features a photoshopped picture of Jeb Bush holding a “vote for Trump” sign outside of Trump Tower.The user’s profile has a black banner photo with red lettering that says “Get the f— out of my country.” The name attached to the profile is Donald Trumpovitz and the location is “Jewmerica,” with a link to a page promoting a pro-Adolf Hitler documentary.The profile picture is the cover of the October 1961 issue “The National Police Gazette,” featuring a picture of George Lincoln Rockwell, the founder of the American Nazi Party, thumbing his nose, and the subhead “The Man who wants to be Hitler.”Trump’s campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment. – Source: Trump retweets neo-Nazi’s insult of Jeb Bush

Trump will pay for that one and I mean dearly. Conservative politics 101 says no Jewish hatred at all. I am not saying that Trump might just be finished. But, if he doesn’t take a huge nosedive in the polls and have to do some serious apologizing; he is going to have a big problem on his hands. Not to mention that the left and the neocon right are going to have a field day with this one.

Other Blogs reporting: Little Green Footballs, ThinkProgress, ABC News, Yahoo Politics and RedState

Sarah Palin uses her Iraq War vet son as a campaign bumper sticker

Can someone tell me again why Donald Trump brought this woman on as an endorsement?

Via USAToday:

Sarah Palin appeared to suggest Wednesday that her son’s arrest this week on domestic violence charges stemmed from the effects of PTSD as a soldier and blamed President Obama for not providing adequate care for veterans.
Track Palin, a 26-year-old Iraq veteran, was arraigned Tuesday on charges of domestic violence assault, interfering with a report of domestic violence crime and possession of a firearm while intoxicated.
Track was handcuffed and arrested Monday night following a dispute with his girlfriend at the Wasilla home he shares with his parents, according to police documents.
The charges were filed on the same day the 2008 Republican vice-presidential nominee made her first public appearance on behalf of GOP presidential hopefulDonald Trump in Iowa. Palin alluded to her son’s legal troubles at a rally in Oklahoma on Wednesday after she failed to show up at a morning event.
“I guess it’s kind of the elephant in the room because my own family going through what we’re going through today with my son, a combat vet … like so many others, they come back a bit different, they come back hardened,” Palin said. “They come back wondering if there is that respect for what their fellow soldiers and airmen and every other member of the military so sacrificially have given to the country.”

I am thinking that Donald Trump just made a huge mistake. I most likely will vote for him, when the primary makes it to Michigan. I just hope like heck that Trump does not put her on the VP ticket. Cabinet position, maybe. But, not VP. Heck, even Glenn Beck, of all people, is going to come out against it. You watch and see.

This is going to be an interesting election season, needless to say. 😮

Bernie Sanders and DNC reach “an accord”

Well, that was quick. I guess the lawsuit and big dust up were avoided.

Washington Post reports:

The presidential campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont filed a lawsuit against the Democratic National Committee on Friday, arguing that the party had unfairly suspended the campaign’s access to key voter information. After several tense hours, both sides announced a deal had been reached.
The suit came shortly after campaign manager Jeff Weaver acknowledged at a Washington news conference that Sanders staffers had improperly reviewed information gathered by rival Hillary Clinton earlier in the week. But he accused the DNC of overreacting to the breach by suspending the Sanders campaign’s ability to access the computer system containing information about Democratic-leaning voters, including data the campaign has gathered about its own supporters.
After midnight, Sanders and the DNC put out statements that both indicated the impasse had been resolved but that put remarkably different spins on the outcome. Sanders’s campaign said the DNC had “capitulated” and that Sanders would soon regain access to the data. The DNC said what happened was “completely unacceptable” and that it would continue to investigate the circumstances even as Sanders regained access to the valuable information.

I have two theories about why the DNC decided to settle. One is that the DNC is about broke and going to war with Sanders, who is obviously no pauper; would have bankrupted the Party. Two, is that if Sanders had been shut out; He would have ran as an independent, which would have resulted in chaos and would have ruined the Democrats ability to even win the election – thereby ruining Hillary’s chances. You have to realize, Bernie Sanders is getting the support of the disillusioned Obama supporters who feel that Obama and Democrats sold them up the river.

Believe me when I tell you this; I know all about that feeling of being sold up the river. I have mentioned this before; but, my Father is a retired G.M. worker and a member of the local UAW chapter here in Detroit. Back in the 1990’s when NAFTA was signed into law, by Bill Clinton; there were many people around these parts, who felt that the Democrats and Clinton, had sold them up the river. I and my family were one of those people.

So, I totally understand how they feel. I also know that this feeling was one of the motivations for me giving up on the Democratic Party. I mean, I honestly felt sold up the river; as a white guy, of southern heritage being called a “slope-headed racist,” It just made me think that my family and myself were sold up the river at the cost of getting Obama elected. Which is pretty ironic, considering the fact that Obama has basically sold most of the people, that elected him, up the river – in the name of global trade.

Which is precisely why I am at the political stance that I am now. I am conservative on social issues: Abortion is murder, homosexuality is morally wrong. You have to realize, that back, as recent as 30 years ago; these positions were pretty much mainstream Democratic Party positions; needless to say, that has changed, quite a bit in the last 30 years. The question is: What changed? It was not me, that is for sure. What changed: They did. The Democrats changed, not me. They are the ones who moved further to the left; not me.

I also, since filing for bankruptcy in 2004; have become a bit of a fiscal conservative too. Losing one’s livelihood will do that to a guy.

Either way, I am glad they settled; I would like to see Hillary fight for her quest to become the DNC’s nominee. To see it just handed to her, is against what that party supposedly stands for.

Others: Associated Press, TalkLeft and Power Line (via Memeorandum)

The DNC figures out a way to kneecap Bernie Sanders

I figured this was coming, I just didn’t know how they were going to do it.

Washington Post reports:

Video:

Story:

Officials with the Democratic National Committee have accused the presidential campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders of improperly accessing confidential voter information gathered by the rival campaign of Hillary Clinton, according to several party officials.
Jeff Weaver, the Vermont senator’s campaign manager, acknowledged that a staffer had viewed the information but blamed a software vendor hired by the DNC for a glitch that allowed access. Weaver said one Sanders staffer was fired over the incident.
The discovery sparked alarm at the DNC, which promptly shut off the Sanders campaign’s access to the strategically crucial list of likely Democratic voters.
The DNC maintains the master list and rents it to national and state campaigns, which then add their own, proprietary information gathered by field workers and volunteers. Firewalls are supposed to prevent campaigns from viewing data gathered by their rivals.
NGP VAN, the vendor that handles the master file, said the incident occurred Wednesday while a patch was being applied to the software. The process briefly opened a window into proprietary information from other campaigns, said the company’s chief, Stu Trevelyan. He said a full audit will be conducted.
The DNC has told the Sanders campaign that it will not be allowed access to the data again until it provides an explanation as well as assurances that all Clinton data has been destroyed.

Having his campaign cut off from the national party’s voter data is a strategic setback for Sanders — and could be a devastating blow if it lasts. The episode also raises questions about the DNC’s ability to provide strategic resources to campaigns and state parties.

It looks like the DNC is bound and determined to have Hillary Clinton be the nominee for President of the United States for the Democrats and they will stop at nothing to get her elected; including have a vendor purposely allow the Sanders campaign access a database, then penalize him for it.

It is a passive way to getting the old man to just leave the race, without resorting to being rude or worse, being labelled an anti-Semite. However, don’t you think that the Jewish media isn’t watching this; because they are, very much so. Needless to say, this should be very, very, interesting to watch play out in the media.

Something tells me however, that Sanders won’t reach for the Semite card at all. This is not to say that some of his surrogates will not. As you see the video above, lawsuits are already being threatened. As they say in lawyer speak, discovery is a bitch.

Others: Talking Points Memo, ABC News, blog.ngpvan.com, Bloomberg Business,Guardian, Engadget, addictinginfo.org, Hot Air, Politico, New York Times, Common Dreams,Syracuse Post-Standard, CNN, The Daily Caller, Raw Story, Jewish Telegraphic Agency,NBC News, Shakesville, Althouse, abc13.com, Business Insider and U.S. Uncut (Via Memeorandum)

Saudi Arabia announces effort to combat the groups that they fund

I saw this last night and because I was a bit tired, I did not write about it. So, I am doing it now. I have to admit; I laughed about this one. The very people who are funding ISIS and Al-Qaeda are now going to try and form “an alliance” against these very groups. That, my friends, is funny.

The Video:

The Story via NBCNews.com:

Saudi Arabia said Tuesday that 34 nations have agreed to form a new “Islamic military alliance” to fight terrorism.
The announcement published by the state-run Saudi Press Agency said the coalition is being established because terrorism “should be fought by all means and collaboration should be made to eliminate it.” …
The new counterterrorism coalition includes nations with large and established armies such as Pakistan, Turkey and Egypt as well as war-torn countries with embattled militaries such as Libya and Yemen. African nations that have suffered militant attacks such as Mali, Chad, Somalia and Nigeria are also members.
Saudi Arabia’s regional rival, Shiite Iran, is not part of the coalition. Saudi Arabia and Iran support opposite sides of in the wars raging in Syria and Yemen. Saudi Arabia is currently leading a military intervention in Yemen against Shiite Houthi rebels and is part of the U.S.-led coalition bombing the Sunni extremist ISIS in Iraq and Syria.

Here’s a real kicker:

Iraq and Syria, whose forces are battling to regain territory taken by ISIS and whose governments are allied with Iran, are not in the coalition.

Ed Morrissey observes the following:

Seeing Iran and Saudi Arabia on the opposite sides of a regional conflict is obviously nothing new. However, ISIS is a Sunni phenomenon, not a Shi’a group. They attack Shi’ite mosques within their reach, which is one reason among several that Iran has provided resources and military personnel to fight ISIS in Iraq’s Sunni-held areas. Iraq may be a client state of Iran more than in the past, but it needs to find ways to get the Sunni tribes allied with Baghdad to some extent if Iraq is to defeat ISIS in its own territory. The obvious partner for that would be Saudi Arabia, and for Saudi Arabia, the government in Baghdad is essential to that counter-terrorism fight too … if that’s what the priority truly is. Clearly, the new alliance has other priorities.
The Saudis aren’t the only entity nominally in the anti-ISIS fight with a curious set of priorities, either. Russia has escalated its diplomatic and military clash with Turkey (also in the Saudis’ new alliance) by bombing targets near Turkey’s borders to target anti-Assad forces there.
[…]
The Russians have other priorities, too. Their first priority is to prop up Assad. Turkey’s first priority is to depose Assad. Iran wants to prop up Assad too, but they’re more interested in expanding the grip of Shi’a Islam in the region. The Saudis and their new alliance have as their first priority to boot Iran out of Yemen and roll back both Shi’a and Iranian influence in the region.The only players that actually have ISIS as its first priority are the Kurds and the US, the latter of which has withdrawn from leadership in the fight and the former of which are the only effective force in the field against ISIS. And the latter won’t directly support the former with arms and material, but insists on working through Iran-based Baghdad instead.

Chuck Baldwin, in one of his most recent columns observes the following at Newswithviews.com:

ISIS is composed of mostly radicalized Saudi Arabian Sunni Muslims. The goal is to dispose of President Assad’s government in Syria as a stepping stone to conquering both Syria and Iran, thus turning those Shia Muslim nations into Sunni Muslim nations. The result of which means Saudi Arabia’s King Salman will become the de facto king of the entire Middle East. It would also mean that King Salman (already the richest man in the world) would single-handedly control the oil of the entire Middle East. And as everyone should already know, King Salman is in the harlot’s bed with virtually the entire western banking and petroleum worlds.
[….]
Neocons and globalists in Washington, D.C., are using the Shia Muslim people as the proverbial straw man to topple the governments in Iran and Syria, because those Shia Muslim nations care absolutely nothing about getting in bed with the international traders who want to further enrich themselves from the profits that can be made in those countries. The only one who is seriously making war against ISIS is Russia’s Vladimir Putin. And his efforts against the Sunni terrorists began but just weeks ago.
The refugee crisis is a tool of globalists to destabilize the West and help usher in a global Police State. Again, the goal is a global economic system. The Federal Reserve has taken the U.S. and European economies to the brink of collapse. The only thing that globalists can do to circumvent this inevitable collapse is create global panic, global war, and a global Police State. A Europe and America invaded with angry Muslims is just the antidote.
Please understand that the vast majority of refugees are NOT terrorists. They are persecuted Muslims and Christians (and others) who are literally fleeing for their lives. But there is no question that CIA-backed Sunni terrorists have infiltrated these refugees.
Ask yourself, why would refugees seeking safety and protection in other countries want to murder hundreds of citizens within those countries? They know this would completely alienate the country against them and only serve to further endanger the lives of their families. The attacks in Paris were NOT committed by refugees; they were committed by CIA-backed, Saudi-backed, Mossad-backed, Turkey-backed, MI6-backed ISIS terrorists.
Even though the majority of refugees are doubtless harmless people who did not want to leave their homes and did so only for their very survival–and with the knowledge that western operatives have created a radical Muslim Frankenstein–and given the fact that our federal government is making no attempt to vet these refugees, it is foolish for states to accept them. Governors are right to refuse. (If the U.S. government was truly behaving in the interests of peace and was not an active participant in creating war and instability in the Middle East–and thus creating the refugee crisis to begin with–it would be a different story.)
In addition, how did those terrorists successfully pull off these coordinated attacks? How did they get fully-automatic rifles and bombs into Paris? These sand people are NOT that sophisticated. They do NOT have those kinds of connections. Do you think you could successfully get a group of people together and smuggle dozens of automatic weapons and explosives into a European country–and then successfully coordinate a large-scale attack in a high-security major downtown city? The only people capable of such a thing are Special Ops military personnel. In other words, ISIS had help, folks–a LOT of help.

So, now, the Saudis are going to try and stop the group that they help start and now fund? Can you say kabuki theater? Ed Morrissey say this is what happens when America leads from behind; however, I have a different take. This is what happens when America invades a country based on outright false information propagated by a corrupt President and Vice-President. This is also what happens when a status of force agreement is broken by Iraqi President and when a President tries to placate his left-wing of his own party and pulls out of a Country too fast.

However, the fact remains, and the neocons, like Morrissey will not accept is that if we had just kept our noses out of Iraq, we would never even be here. But, now, we are and we’re stuck with this mess. Thanks Neocons, ya jerks. 🙄

On Donald Trump’s Statement on Muslim Immigration

Here’s the statement in its entirety:

(New York, NY) December 7th, 2015, — Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on. According to Pew Research, among others, there is great hatred towards Americans by large segments of the Muslim population. Most recently, a poll from the Center for Security Policy released data showing “25% of those polled agreed that violence against Americans here in the United States is justified as a part of the global jihad” and 51% of those polled, “agreed that Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to Shariah.” Shariah authorizes such atrocities as murder against non-believers who won’t convert, beheadings and more unthinkable acts that pose great harm to Americans, especially women.
Mr. Trump stated, “Without looking at the various polling data, it is obvious to anybody the hatred is beyond comprehension. Where this hatred comes from and why we will have to determine. Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in Jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life. If I win the election for President, we are going to Make America Great Again.” – Donald J. Trump

Here is the problem with this idea. It is, in fact, a total violation of our First Amendment. Not to mention it is straight up discrimination.

If trump was elected and he tried to do this, the ACLU would have a field day with it and lawsuits would fly like crazy. The reason I say that it is a First Amendment, is because if the Federal Government gets in the business of telling which religions can enter the Country, we put the First Amendment in jeopardy. There is also this thought from the Southern Baptist leader Russell Moore:

The United States government should fight, and fight hard, against radical Islamic jihadism. The government should close the borders to anyone suspected of even a passing involvement with any radical cell or terrorist network. But the government should not penalize law-abiding people, especially those who are American citizens, for holding their religious convictions.
Muslims are an unpopular group these days. And I would argue that non-violent Muslim leaders have a responsibility to call out terror and violence and jihad. At the same time, those of us who are Christians ought to stand up for religious liberty not just when our rights are violated but on behalf of others too.
Make no mistake. A government that can shut down mosques simply because they are mosques can shut down Bible studies because they are Bible studies. A government that can close the borders to all Muslims simply on the basis of their religious belief can do the same thing for evangelical Christians. A government that issues ID badges for Muslims simply because they are Muslims can, in the fullness of time, demand the same for Christians because we are Christians.

I may have disagreements with the SBC on many things, mostly because they’re evangelical and I happen to be an old Fundamentalist Baptist. However, on this issue here, he is right. We simply do NOT want the United States Government getting involved in religion at all.

What should happen is this: There should be a 10 year moratorium on ALL immigration in this Country or at least until this Country figures out a way to screen every last person coming into this Country and figures out a way to share information with other Countries as to the background of all persons coming into this Country. Furthermore, the United States of America should be going after the Muslims that are suspected of having ties to extremists, who are living here already.

Furthermore, we should be stepping up to the fullest extent possible, the surveillance of Mosques here in America that are suspected of preaching radical jihad; and the Imams who are preaching this sort of thing, should be arrested, tried and deported out of the Country, never again allowed to return to America. If they are from the United States, they should be tried with promoting hate speech. Also, their connections and money trails should be fully investigated as well. If the Imams are found to be taking money from radicals, they should tried for that as well.

The point is this: We already have the means and the ability to track these things and put a stop to them. The problem is that political correctness stopped it and now, we are paying the price. The blood of all those killed in London, San Bernardino and everywhere else, so far; is on the hands of the political correct and civil rights people. Protection of the Republic of the United States, and its people come first. This President has failed horrible on this issue, because he wishes to placate the liberal wing of his Party. Because of this, people have been killed and if President Obama is not real careful, that will end up being his legacy.

Others: Talking Points Memo, New York Times, BuzzFeed, USA Today, Salon,FiveThirtyEight, Breitbart, NBC News, CNN, Washington Post, MSNBC, Vox, Press Enterprise, RH Reality Check, The Hinterland Gazette, Power Line, Slate, The Week,Bloomberg Business, The Gateway Pundit, Political Wire, Gothamist, Taylor Marsh,Hot Air, Guns.com, Scared Monkeys, SaintPetersBlog, Political Insider blog, BizPac Review, Mashable, Towleroad, ImmigrationProf Blog, Daily Kos, The Hill, KRQE-TV, Mother Jones, TalkLeft, Fox News Insider, The American Conservative, Center for Security Policy, The Moderate Voice, Independent Journal,Le·gal In·sur·rec· tion, PoliticusUSA, Althouse, No More Mister Nice Blog and Politico (Via Memeorandum)

Mark your calendars: I actually agree with something in the New York Times

It is not everyday that I agree with something from that Marxist rag. But, I suppose a broken clock is right once a day, at least.

Frank Bruni writing over at the New York Times about the events of the two days and the political idiocy that has followed says:

Can’t we wait until we’ve resolved the body count? Until the identities of all of the victims have been determined and their families informed? Until the sirens stop wailing? Until the blood is dry?
Or must we instantly bootstrap obliquely related agendas and utterly unconnected grievances to the carnage in Paris, responding to it with an unsavory opportunism instead of a respectful grief?

This has been my thoughts too. It happens every damned time one of these tragic events happens. Both sides start carping about the politics of it. I mean, just for damned once, can we please stop making a tragic event about politics? Yes, I know, the shooters were Muslim.

However, what the neocon/conservative/Republican bloggers and media talking heads — fail to acknowledge is, that if George W. Bush had not invaded Iraq, based upon faulty intelligence or Bush’s lust for war — pick one; those 129 people in France would still be alive and the 352 people would not be in the hospital fighting for their lives.

It is much too bad that the douche canoes like Power Line, Instapundit and Diary of a Mad Voter (Roger L. Simon) do not understand that concept. I mean, at least give the damned bodies a chance to be buried and give the damn French a chance to grieve, before making political statements or opinions. I know, I am just as guilty as anyone. 🙁

It is not just the right, the damned left does it too. As Mr. Bruni points out, terrorism due to climate change? Oh brother. Between that and the idiotic nonsense that I wrote about here; I am sure that the progressive movement has lost its ever-loving mind.

As Patrick J. Buchanan has pointed out, we have two political parties in this Country; The Stupid Party and The War Party. Allow me to change that one, if I may. We have two political parties: The Stupid Party (left) and the Stupid War Party (right). This above is proof of that.