The Guild 12-28-2003 It's about life. Make a donation

Continued prayers for your Daddy.

And I'd say your new rig is truely a "Masculine" type vehicle. Will it fit in your garage? Years ago we had a neighbor purchase a new Van to haul all 9 of his kids around,,, it was too tall to fit in his garage. Had to hire a carpenter to 'raise the roof' and add a taller door.

Down here we use garages for our "stuff",
not for our vehicles, sadly.

Here in the midwest, we store our 'stuff' in our basements. We need the garages to shelter the vehicles from the elements.

Peter Pan sounds like the movie to see! Alas, I have no teenyboppers to take so I'll wait to see it on the pay channel. Thanks for the review!

I watched some of a Hardball rerun (geez, is my life exciting or what?!) with Clark. I caught another lie, unfortunately there's no way to call him on this one.

Matthews: You know, you said something interesting about what happened after we were hit on 9/11, 2001, about how you got the word somewhere in the Pentagon or elsewhere that there were people already pushing for war with Iraq. Tell us about that, first, because it tells us, I think, about the mind-set of this administration going into 9/11.

CLARK: Well, I went through the halls of the Pentagon. I’d only-it must have been within a couple of weeks after 9/11. And I had been on CNN almost every day. I had been down in Atlanta and so forth. And I still felt like a military guy. You know, still looked at my sleeve, I wanted that big black stripe for general officer on there. And it felt funny, because the people-everybody that was going to be engaged in it, of course, I’d worked with them all.

So I went through the Pentagon and just kind of wanted to check in and make sure the stuff I was saying was about right in terms of what they could tell me about the intel and about their perceptions and so forth. I didn’t want to divulge any classified information, but just to sort of calibrate.

And so I went in to see Secretary Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz was there. And I went downstairs, and a guy said, sir, come in here. And I said, I don’t want to take up your time. He says, no, you need to hear this. He said, have you heard the joke? I said no, I haven’t. What joke? He said “9/11, Saddam Hussein, if he didn’t do it, too bad, he should have. Because we’re going to get him anyway.”

Of course, it wasn’t a joke. It wasn’t funny. And he didn’t tell it to me to make me laugh.

MATTHEWS: Right.

CLARK: He was telling me that there was something seriously amiss in the way the administration was approaching the problem of dealing with terrorism. Link

How does this creep get away with this crap?!

Help me with remembering all Clark's lies, I know there were five but can only remember four.

Lie #1 - Bush Administration called him on 9/11 and told him to blame it on Saddam.

Lie #2 - Karl Rove wouldn't return his calls so he switched parties.

Lie #3 - Can't remember!

Lie #4 - Dean asked him to be VP candidate.

Lie #5 - Pentagon "joke".

Help me with lie #3. I want to keep a record of them all.

Britney Spears married Jason Alexander last night in Vegas.

Ok, it was a different Jason Alexander, but she did get married.

Why do you I get the feeling that Dean dances like Elaine and Sienfeld?

That ain't dancin', Sally!

I still felt like a military guy. You know, still looked at my sleeve, I wanted that big black stripe for general officer on there

In other words, poor ol' Wesley couldn't stand being irrelevant, so he decided to run for president. If all he needs to make him go away is a stripe, I'd be happy to sew them on all his suit jackets.

Oops, she did it?

Pop tart Britney Spears got hitched early yesterday morning in a quickie Las Vegas wedding, making good on a joke that went a little too far, People magazine reported on its Web site early this morning.

The saucy Southern belle strolled down the aisle - in jeans and a baseball cap - with a man named Jason Allen Alexander, who, like Spears, hails from Kentwood, La., the mag reported.

The 22-year-old pop princess was escorted to the altar by a hotel bellman, with no family or friends on hand for the magic moment at the Little White Wedding Chapel on the Strip. Reps at the chapel wouldn't comment.

At least Spears is in good company. The midnight matrimonial hall claims Bruce Willis and Demi Moore, the Dixie Chicks' Natalie Maines and Stone Cold Steve Austin among its famous clients.

But don't count on this being one of the chapel's longer-lasting unions. Spears was reportedly already set to annul the spontaneous nuptials.

The wedding whopper follows a doozie of a New Year's Eve party at the hip Ghostbar in the Palms Hotel.

People Magazine reported that Spears and Alexander hatched the plot Friday night in another bout of partying at Ghostbar, and got bouncers to fetch a lime-green limo to take them to the chapel.

Once there, they were told they had to go get a marriage license, which they did. The Associated Press obtained a photo of the signed document.
http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/151743p-133660c.html

Why do I have the feeling that things will not end all that well for Britney?

By Jonathan Alter
Newsweek
Jan. 12 issue -
It's almost a party tradition. Democrats gouge each other's eyeballs out in the winter and spring of election years, then spend summer and fall performing reconstructive surgery. Only once—in 1968—did these recriminations cost them the presidency. That year the party was deeply divided on ideological grounds in ways that it isn't in 2004. The divided Democrats didn't unite behind Hubert Humphrey until October and nearly beat Richard Nixon anyway. Some analysts cite 1980 as another example, when President Jimmy Carter had to fend off a challenge in the primaries from Ted Kennedy, who then snubbed the president on the podium at the Democratic convention. That didn't help, but Carter was crushed in the fall by Ronald Reagan for other reasons. All in all, the bruising iceballs of January almost always melt by July.

For evidence that the eventual winners often look weak within their own parties, I like to look way back. In January 1932, Gov. Franklin D. Roosevelt was widely depicted in the press as an unprincipled lightweight, and the Democratic National Committee, breaking any pretense of neutrality, fought FDR's nomination every step of the way. In January 1960, the smart money was betting against the playboy senator from Massachusetts, who was considered unelectable because he was a Roman Catholic. The party matriarch, Eleanor Roosevelt, believed that John F. Kennedy should show "a little less profile and a little more courage," and his rival Lyndon Johnson spread rumors that Kennedy was dying of Addison's disease right up until the moment JFK put LBJ on the ticket for vice president.

Want more? In 1976, the prospect of nominating Governor Carter was so distasteful to many rank-and-file Democrats that they gathered around "Governor Moonbeam" (Jerry Brown), who won late primaries. In early 1992, Sen. Bob Kerrey charged that the Vietnam draft controversy enveloping Bill Clinton would destroy Clinton's chances in the South, where Republicans would "split him open like a warm peanut." As late as June, just weeks before he was nominated, Clinton was so disliked and distrusted that he was running a weak third in the polls behind the incumbent President George H.W. Bush and Ross Perot.

The point is, voters don't mind fight-night primaries as long as everyone in the party ultimately kisses and makes up. But will they? Of the Democratic candidates trying to gang-tackle Howard Dean, it's Joe Lieberman who seems most likely to stay mad and cause problems, as he did when he broke ranks and ripped Clinton in the impeachment wars. Joltin' Joe may continue to depict Dean as out of the mainstream, even though the facts don't support the charge. If Dean wanted to pull out of Iraq and cut the defense budget, their differences would be deep. But he doesn't and they aren't. [Considering his many flip-flops, I wouldn't be surprised if that isn't exactly what Dean has suggested]

Neither Lieberman nor Dick Gephardt nor John Kerry are likely to be the beneficiaries of their attacks on Dean. But President Bush won't profit much from their barbs either. [Alter says hopefully] If Republicans run ads attacking Dean with the words of Democrats, these former rivals will inevitably cry foul—then claim (out of party loyalty enforced by other Democrats) that the situation has changed, they've seen a new Dean, whatever. Eating their words would prove embarrassing to Democrats, but not fatally so. Most voters will understand that these things were said many political turns of the wheel earlier and discount them. That's why there is almost no history of one party's using the opposition's primary struggles in general-election TV advertising. They usually have better weapons at hand.

But if Dean isn't being teed up for Bush, he might find himself being softened up for Wesley Clark. I was in Arizona last week, where the important Feb. 3 primary is, as a nurse in Tuba City put it, beginning to feel like a "two-man race." Dean is still the favorite because he is phenomenally well organized; in the Democratic town of Bisbee, for instance, he has an astonishing 50 volunteers lined up while the others have only a handful at most. And yet doubts are surfacing. Between bites of pancakes at an IHOP in Glendale, a pair of senior citizens see Dean as a fast-talking "know-it-all" and Clark as a candidate who has "been there" on foreign policy. Beyond Iowa and New Hampshire, most voters are barely paying attention, and none of the TV ads is original or funny enough to break through. So in Arizona and elsewhere, Clark's first name—"General"—is a distinct advantage.

The issue for Dean is not the other candidates but himself. He conceded to me last month that he would need to fine-tune his message for the general election. But he wouldn't accept my premise that his political bedside manner left something to be desired. It's very difficult for a cranky, shoot-from-the-hip candidate to win a presidential race. (Dean's model, Harry Truman, became president on FDR's death and only barely won in 1948.) History shows that would-be presidents, like doctors, need to measure their words, stay positive and smile—from January right through the year. link

In other words, poor ol' Wesley couldn't stand being irrelevant

My thought exactly. Wesley still can't stand being irrelevant hence the continual lying.

He reminds me of that creepy kid in school who had to make up stories so that the other kids would think he's cool. It was the only way to for the poor soul to get a friend.

I believe this is why Shelton and Franks have a bad taste in their mouths about Wesley. They've seen Wesley's behavior over many years and have probably been on the receiving end of some of his lies. Clark is completely devoid of morals.

Clearly, Britney has joined the league of those who NEED KEEPERS. Unfortunately, it is nearly impossible to save people from themselves.

Hey stranger, nice truck.

Glad to hear your dad's on the mend!

The Dean Dilemma - ALL THE RAGE: His blunt talk's propelled him to the top, but some Democrats worry that Dean's shoot-from-the-hip style and shifting views might doom him in November. The doctor's ills—and how his foes plan to exploit them. (Howard Fineman article for Jan. 12 Newsweek). Excerpt:

More serious, Dean's foes say, is his penchant for adjusting his positions on issues, especially since he's hawking himself as a nonpolitical Yankee with a backbone as thick as the trunk of a Vermont maple. Indeed, on the war in Iraq, he was opposed from the start and has wavered very little. On other issues, though, there's been more swaying in the breeze. Years ago he was a supporter of Jimmy Carter's against the insurgency of Sen. Ted Kennedy and was, therefore, on the pro-business side of the party; now Dean rails against Carter's political descendants in the Democratic Leadership Council. Dean was for NAFTA and GATT, but now opposes any further free-trade agreements unless they have higher labor and environmental standards. He once thought it might be wise to raise the retirement age to protect Social Security; now he rules that out. Dean once thought Medicare was a miserable, poorly administered program; now he wants to save and expand it.

In Dean's NEWSWEEK interview, motion seemed evident in his attitude toward Osama bin Laden. In late December, Dean said he believed the "old-fashioned notion" that, if captured, the master terrorist should be bound over for a jury trial. A few hours later he issued a statement saying that bin Laden should, in fact, be dealt with by the same kind of military-run tribunal Saddam Hussein is expected to face. Last week he told NEWSWEEK that, if the American military has bin Laden in its sights, soldiers should kill him. "Of course we ought to off Osama," he said. "I was asked a hypothetical question about what would happen if Osama was captured. If we can get Osama, we ought to get Osama, however we can get Osama."

Joltin' Joe may continue to depict Dean as out of the mainstream, even though the facts don't support the charge.

Bwahahahaha!

Official Bird of Deanieacs

but some Democrats worry that Dean's shoot-from-the-hip style and shifting views might doom him in November.

Gee Mr. Fineman, that pretty much describes every single candidate on the dem side.

I especially like to hear dems like Kerry say that if Dean is elected he'll leave our national security up to the UN. So when Kerry accuses GWB of being unilateral and not bowing down to the UN he must mean something else? Ha.

Oh my gosh! It seems we've all misread Dean!

To see today's Democratic squabble in proper context, it helps to take a longer view. On domestic policy, Clinton's presidency consisted of two years on offense followed by six years on defense. The meltdown of his health-care plan in 1994 cost Democrats control of Congress and ended the affirmative phase of Clinton's presidency.

Clinton's great achievement on defense was to move the country from large budget deficits (which put Democratic domestic ambitions in a straitjacket) to unprecedented budget surpluses. As 2000 drew near, it was clear that Clinton's surreal odyssey of survival would be vindicated only if he were succeeded by a president who would use the surpluses he was bequeathing to pursue the unfinished progressive agenda he never had a second chance to pursue himself.

But Al Gore did not become president. And now, in record time, President Bush has dissipated the surpluses.
This guy has his head buried up to his shoulders.
More:

Dean argued that Democrats should again raise their sights. But this isn't abandoning Clinton's legacy - it's precisely the opportunity that Clinton's defeat of the Newt Gingrich "revolution" and his surplus-generating survival was intended to create.

What "radical" goals would Dean urge the party to pursue, in what he now calls a "New Social Contract for Working Families"? Affordable health care for the 44 million uninsured. Affordable child care. Universal preschool for millions of poorer kids who don't have it. A new commitment to make college more affordable. A modest increase in the minimum wage. New efforts to encourage savings for average citizens.

These goals aren't radical; they're common sense.

Nah, not radical, just pie in the sky. Kinda like saying that NAFTA and GATT will be just fine if an international minimum wage is instituted. LOL!

A Washington Post writer laments that the black community is leaving the dim party.

There has been a measurable rightward shift in the black electorate. In 2002 the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, a liberal think tank, asked black respondents in its national survey to identify themselves as either Democrats, independents or Republicans. Although 63 percent claimed to be Democrats, the number was down from 74 percent in 2000. The decrease occurred in nearly every age group, including among respondents 65 and older (where the drop was from 82 percent to 75 percent). There was a significant increase in those calling themselves independents, especially between the ages of 26 and 35. Respondents identifying themselves as Republicans also increased: Between ages 26 and 35, the share tripled, going from 5 percent in 2000 to 15 percent in 2002.

None of this is coincidental. More African Americans now have college degrees, ushering them into the middle class, shifting their values and priorities while prompting them to abandon the "blacks-as-victims" theology. Many low-income blacks have gained an appreciation for the opportunities provided by the free enterprise system and are rejecting the notion of government as savior. Meanwhile, there has been an emergence of a new generation of African Americans that exists in a multiracial, crossover world.

There is one more reason for the changes in affiliations: Some African Americans have accused the Democratic Party of practicing "plantation politics." They say that although blacks repeatedly are depended on to keep the party in elected office, African Americans often are overlooked for key leadership posts. Link

Dims just can't admit the truth. They call fact, accusations and accusations, fact.

It's not an accusation that dims have been practicing plantation politics, it's a fact. Or is the writer saying that those who have gotten fed up with being played for a sucker are just stupid and have gotten the dim policy wrong? Perhaps the writer thought dims wouldn't keep reading if she put this nugget of truth in the story, so she saves it for the last paragraph.

If Democrats want to avoid an erosion of their African American base, they can start by opening the door for more and younger blacks to assume leadership posts, and by abandoning the outdated left-wing politics they seem intent on playing. Most important, they can stop navel-gazing and do what Republicans are doing: Pay attention to the evolving African American electorate.

Thanks SL - I'll be going to check on things in north Texas later this week.

I've never seen as much crappy junk mail and solicitations as my father receives..we'll be putting an end to much of that garbage.