Christopher Buckley writes that his father, William F. Buckley Jr., who died in February of 2008, may have voted for Barack Obama had he lived long enough to vote in the election.
Some are calling ridiculous the notion that William F. Buckley would have thought about voting for Obama, but some serious considerations are in order before mocking the idea. For example, given ACORN’s proclivities, we can’t discount the possibility that William F. Buckley did vote for Obama.
During a speech to Duke UniversityÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s graduating class, Oprah talked about the secrets and joys of success. Among them: owning a mansion and a jet.
Ã¢â‚¬Å“ItÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s great to have a nice home. ItÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s great to have nice homes! ItÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s great to have a nice home that just escaped the fire in Santa Barbara,Ã¢â‚¬Â she told the students. Ã¢â‚¬Å“ItÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s great to have a private jet. Anyone that tells you that having your own private jet isnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t great is lying to you.Ã¢â‚¬Â
It’s refreshing to see a celebrity not hiding from their success behind a pile of hypocritical B.S. and apologetic rhetoric.
But… It’s too bad that Oprah cancels out this kind of message by endorsing Barack Obama, in whose America a graduating class won’t look at Oprah as an example of what they too can achieve if they get an education and work hard, but instead look upon her as someone who really needs to be made to share her stuff with the rest of us.
That’s the annoying thing about Oprah. That and f*$#@*g “pajama parties” — seriously, what the hell?
Today’s column, as many do, spun off from something posted here on the blog a couple of days ago.
Wanda Sykes was the headliner at Saturday’s White House Correspondents Dinner, and did a number on Republicans — even going as far as to joke about Rush Limbaugh being the 20th hijacker — but she left a lot of material on the table. Specifically anything funny about the person who is often the butt of the jokes at these functions: The President.
So I thought I’d help out and offer the jokes that should have been told on Saturday night, but weren’t. Give a read to “The joke’s not on Obama” for the whole story.
You can help spread the word by giving it a “Digg” here.
Update: Lots of email about this column, but a few people were upset because somebody dared blaspheme The One. An example of the disenchanted came from Calethia H.:
I donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t need to hear those jokes. I hear enough negative crap about the President when the new recaps Rush and Cheney. So keep them in your study and laugh at them in Ã¢â‚¬Å“yourÃ¢â‚¬Â free time.
Scott Levenson, spokesman for the vote fraud group ACORN, was on the Glenn Beck show yesterday and things got a little heated. The guy came dangerously close to going full-blown Nathan Thurm. During a commercial break, Levenson called Beck a racist — the default accusation of any liberal losing an argument — and left the studio:
If you’re not familiar with Martin Short’s character, Attorney Nathan Thurm, here he is at his ACORN-ish best:
Charles Grodin appeared on Sean Hannity’s Fox News program last week and asked Hannity if he’d agree to be waterboarded (since Sean’s not against the practice as a CIA interrogation technique). Hannity said, half-jokingly I imagine, that he’d do it for charity.
I’d like to up the torture ante now and offer Hannity $1,250 for every second he can stand to watch Keith Olbermann’s show — a practice so horrific that it has been banned at Gitmo. I’m guessing Hannity chooses the waterboard.
To be fair, a similar offer goes to Olbermann for every second he can go without blaming Bush for everything and foaming at the mouth like he just rear-ended a Burma Shave truck.
As a brief closing observation, at what point did it become conventional wisdom, in the media at least, that if you support certain interrogation techniques, you should be willing to undergo them yourself? Nobody uses the Ã¢â‚¬Å“donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t back it until youÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ve tried itÃ¢â‚¬Â so-called Ã¢â‚¬Å“logicÃ¢â‚¬Â for any other issue. In other words, I’ve yet to hear Keith Olbermann offer a pro-choicer $1,000 for every second he subjects himself to getting aborted.
The Miss America pageant is all about diversity, charity, and tolerance for the views of others. Just kidding — it’s about being a cookie-cutter liberal who parrots the prevailing views of the nuts and fruits who run the competition. Miss California just found that out.
When asked by judge Perez Hilton, an openly gay gossip blogger, whether she believed in gay marriage, Miss California, Carrie Prejean, said “We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite. And you know what, I think in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that’s how I was raised.”
What’s funny is that Prejean was the runner-up in the competition, so those who direct the pageant know that the sort of honesty that leads to voicing opinions that the diverse and super-tolerant judges don’t want to hear needs to be put down quickly before it spreads. Enter Keith Lewis:
Keith Lewis, who runs the Miss California competition, tells FOXNews.com that he was “saddened” by Prejean’s statement.
“As co-director of the Miss California USA, I am personally saddened and hurt that Miss California believes marriage rights belong only to a man and a woman,” said Lewis in a statement. “I believe all religions should be able to ordain what unions they see fit. I do not believe our government should be able to discriminate against anyone and religious beliefs have no politics in the Miss California family.”
Then why was the question allowed to be asked?
Here’s a video of Miss California’s answer and Perez Hilton getting all snitty while the audience applaudes. The only thing Prejean did wrong was to say “no offense to anybody” after her opinion. Screw ’em… nobody on the other side ever apologizes for offending people. Otherwise, well done, Miss Cal:
Today’s column at WorldNetDaily is on the media “coverage” of the tea parties last Wednesday.
You’ve no doubt heard the insults and ad hominem slurs fly — “teabaggers” is a big one that seems to give the left a chuckle. What explains this behavior? Give a read to “Tea isn’t their bag” for the whole story.
Also, over the weekend, senior White House advisor and man with the perfect 70’s porn-star name, David Axelrod, said this: “I think any time you have severe economic conditions there is always an element of disaffection that can mutate into something that’s unhealthy.”
That’s a fairly generic and polite, albeit completely false, representation of tea-partiers. Most of the people who attended have jobs. This wasn’t a large group of disgruntled, unemployed, desperate people begging the government for help. You’ll find those people at Democrat rallies, Mr. Axelrod.
The media and many politicians simply can’t comprehend “protesters” whose main demand is to be left alone and for future generations to not be leveraged and born owing money.
Tea parties are those rare events where the people in attendance want nothing — it’s what they don’t want that is the issue. And if politicians and their handlers fear that this could “mutate into something that’s unhealthy” — then, according to Thomas Jefferson, that’s healthy.