I just don't like her.

Michelle Obama waved away criticism of her husband's lack of experience. In the Democratic primaries, the freshman senator will face off against more experienced politicians, such as Sens. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and Joe Biden, D-Del., and former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C.

"He has great experience," she said. "He's been in the state legislature; he's been a community organizer. He's been a civil rights attorney. ... Need I go on?"

Ummm, yes please.
I want a commander-in-chief, an EXPERIENCED commander, to lead us during a time of war. Your husband fails on that count, so please, DO go on. He was a community organizer. BFD. I was a Girl Scout leader, that does not qualify me or him as POTUS.

"This [is a] rare opportunity where spirit, vision, hope, uniqueness, experience combine in this one individual at this point in time," she continued. "It's his time."

No, it is not. He is NOT entitled to this position.

"I'm going to have to make a range of changes in my life. I've reduced my work hours at work. I will probably have to take a leave at some point. I will probably not be able to maintain my commitments,"

Ya think?!?! Your husband is running for President and it might, JUST MIGHT, have an impact on your life? You want to be First Lady and you might have to make a change in your life?

"He's going to do what's right for ... the country. He's going to speak out. And he's going to, you know, implement his views as he sees fit. ... I see no conflict in that."

He's going to SPEAK OUT?!?!?!?!?!?! WTF?!?!?!?!?!?! No, you moron, a President LEADS, he represents the country, exactly WHO is he speaking out against? He is going to implement HIS views? And what about ours? That is not a conflict.

You are an idiot. 2008 cannot come soon enough.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA

It's confirmed. Brian Williams is a jerk.

pour leur dire qu'ils peuvent compter sur notre amitié.

But what was revealing was the spontaneous applause and cheering that broke out among the crowd when he uttered the words "to say to them that they can count on our friendship": "pour leur dire qu'ils peuvent compter sur notre amitié."

Thank you France. Thank you Sarkozy!

Europe (finally!) gets the War on Terror

Emphasis mine throughout.

It looks like the Dems have backed the WRONG ideological horse for 2008. Read the whole article, I am calling out a few choice paragraphs.

If Europe is swinging more pro-America, then the Dems whole schtick of "anti-Bush, the war is lost, America is a pariah" goes the way of the baby buggy and spittoon. And they will end up looking the fools for it.

If France elects Nicolas Sarkozy, watch for the tide to turn our way. Germany already tossed out Schroeder.

One signal of new realism in Europe is a public call by the German news magazine Der Spiegel to tone down the over-the-top anti-American cat-calling that has obsessed the German press in recent years. That was followed by two major puff-pieces for Chancellor Merkel's effort to reconnect with America.

In France, Nicolas Sarkozy has started what he hopes to be his final sprint to the Presidency by criticizing the "1968 generation," which includes all the recent leaders of the EuroLeft. "1968" refers to the year of student rebellion that brought people like Schroeder and Joschka Fischer to power, just as in the United States the Sixties Left launched Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Both Merkel and Sarkozy are "welfare-state conservatives" rather than ideologically pure socialists. They can see clearly the suicidal limits of the multiculti Left, particularly its support for uncontrollable millions of anti-Western migrants, fresh dependent voters for the welfare state. They also see the looming fiscal limits of the social welfare state, as the Euro Boomer generation retires while a host of poorer nations are joining the European Union. Those nations cannot get the massive handouts that were routinely channeled to France. The money isn't there. The word "cynical" and "immoral" were used by Sarkozy recently to describe the Boomer Left. Europe's vacation from reality is reaching its natural limits, and public opinion is sobering up fast.

That does not mean that present US policy is going to work without course adjustments. The Iraq War may turn out to be much like the Korean War, a test of American resolve, and also of the limits of American commitment to an important but remote war. At the end of the Korean War, American forces withdrew from North Korea but not from the South. Because of that American willingness to hold firm, South Korea grew into a formidable bulwark against Asian Communist expansion, as it remains to this day. China's new prosperity can be attributed to the democratic capitalist successes of South Korea, Japan, Singapore and Taiwan, all of them dependent upon American support. We cannot predict the outcome in Iraq, but somewhere in the Middle East a defensible line will emerge against jihadist Iran, and perhaps against newer threats.

Europe imports far too much oil from the Gulf to evade the obvious: A vital need for a renewed alliance with the United States against totalitarian aggressors with strategic weapons.

Call it Cold War Two --- if we are lucky and keep our wits. But we must expect continental Europe to play a more active and constructive role for its own defense than it did in the last sixty years.

Thank you gay activists

Time's attention, like the BBC's, has been caught by the legal battles underway to decriminalize incest between consenting adults. An article last month by Time reporter Michael Lindenberger titled "Should Incest Be Legal?" highlights the case of Paul Lowe, an Ohio man convicted of incest for having sex with his 22-year-old stepdaughter. Lowe has appealed his conviction to the Supreme Court, making Lawrence the basis of his argument. In Lawrence, the court had ruled that people "are entitled to respect for their private lives" and that under the 14th Amendment, "the state cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime." If that was true for the adult homosexual behavior in Lawrence, why not for the adult incestuous behavior in the Ohio case?

And then continues

...it is worth remembering, the Supreme Court didn't just invalidate all state laws making homosexual sodomy a crime. It also overruled its own decision just 17 years earlier (Bowers v. Hardwick, 1986) upholding such laws. If the court meant what it said in Lawrence -- that states are barred from "making . . . private sexual conduct a crime" -- it will not take that long for laws criminalizing incest to go by the board as well. Impossible? That's what they used to say about normalizing homosexuality and legalizing same-sex marriage.

In Germany, the Green Party is openly supporting the Stubings in their bid to decriminalize incest. According to the BBC, incest is no longer a criminal offense in Belgium, Holland, and France. Sweden already permits half-siblings to marry.

Now, more than ever, I am against gay marriage. And then there is this:

McGreevey to Enter Episcopal Seminary

And you treated your wife and family just so well, now didn't you? Is this Brokeback Mountain redux? Mistreat and disrespect women and children, that's ok, but reward "man love" as a holy thing? Isn't this the same scenario as the plot of that insipid movie?