Mike Gallagher's Blog

 

  • Democratic scandal? Nah....

    October 27, 2006

    In reading about Virginia Democratic Senate candidate Jim Webb and his sordid, vile writings as a fiction writer in the 90's, I keep thinking about the difference between the overall philosophy of the Republican Party versus the Democrats.   Consider the Mark Foley scandal.  A GOP congressman is discovered to have written inappropriate things to teenage boys, and he's out.  Finished.   No Republican supported him, he's universally denounced.  But Jim Webb, in a neck-and-neck race for Virginia Senate against incumbent George Allen, wrote some of the most disgusting things imaginable.  This "fiction" included a story about a man having sex with his naked son, strippers performing physical acts with their anatomy, and more.  So where's the scandal?   How about Democrats demanding that Webb immediately step down from the race?   I'd take ANY Democrat stepping up and saying that it's pretty disgusting for a man who wants to be a U.S. Senator being capable of fantasizing about a man and his naked little boy having sex.

    This double standard helps define the difference between the Democrats and the Republicans.  The Dems are all about the politics.  Never mind right or wrong. 

    Shame on them.

     

  • The Prez talks to Stephanopoulos????

    October 19, 2006

    I've been getting a lot of flak lately for my visit to the Oval Office last month to spend some time with President Bush.   Five of us radio hosts were invited there for an "off-the-record" conversation with the Commander-in-Chief (well, six were actually invited, but Rush declined).

    It was obviously an incredible opportunity for five of us radio blowhards to ask the President some tough questions, have him describe a lot of what goes into his decision-making process, and learn a thing or two about things like the war, taxes, terrorism, and even how he copes with the pressure of that fishbowl of a life.

    My close friend Sean Hannity, who sat across from me on the other Oval Office couch, was so right when afterwards he said that if every American could have that experience we did, President Bush would have about an 80% approval rating. 

    And yet when the New York Times called the other day to ask about the meeting, I knew the ensuing article would stir up the proverbial hornet's nest.  Sure enough, after the article about the visit ran in the Times, complete with a White House photo of the five of us in the Oval Office meeting, some of the rabid lefties went bonkers.  Keith Obermann on MSNBC referred to us hosts as the "legion of doom"; a radio host from the bankrupt Air America network actually compared us to prostitutes (something to do with the Jeff Gannon scandal).

    And yet none of the critics seem to mind when President Bush sits down with former Clinton right-hand man George Stephanopolous on ABC and admits that it's understandable to be able to compare Iraq to Vietnam.

    Every time I see Stephanopolous on TV, I cringe.  Some objective "journalist", eh?  At least those of us who are paid to express opinions on radio or TV wear our biases on our sleeves -- Georgie boy pretends to be objective.  

    So when the President gives ammo to the left by agreeing that Iraq feels like the Vietnam Tet offensive, where are the cries of Bush wasting his time on a meaningless interview?   Why don't liberals seem to mind if the President visits with loyal Democrats on-air?

    Boy, I don't know what's going to happen on November 7th.  But I sure can't wait for November 8th.

  • ABC caves?

    September 08, 2006

    So Bill Clinton throws a hissy fit about an upcoming ABC mini-series, "The Path to 9/11" before he even sees it, eh?   How noble.   Seems he's got his joe boxers in a wad because he was "told" that the ABC series portrays him as being distracted by the impeachment debacle and let Osama bin Laden slip through his fingers when he had the chance to nab him.  Well, let's just ponder something for a moment:  do you think a U.S. president, facing impeachment over his official lies, might just be a bit distracted from the business of the day?  Isn't it true that the United States knew all about Osama during Clinton's presidency?   So ABC dared to connect the dots and suggest that perhaps the president, who seemed mighty busy doing things like chasing interns around the Oval Office desk with a cigar, might have been a bit preoccupied.  Big deal.

    Now comes the reaction from ABC:  Don't panic, no one has seen the final product yet and we're still in the editing process.  Oh brother.   You know what that means, right?  A team of editors, sweating profusely, are working 24/7 to snip out all the offensive scenes detailed in Clinton's stupid 5 page letter to ABC honcho Bob Iger.  In fact, I can picture the editing team sitting at their editing bays with copies of the Clinton lawyer letter scotch-taped above their machines so that they can check off, one by one, all the scenes that the Clintonistas are objecting to.  After all, ABC can't possibly afford to tick off the Hollywood crowd that treats Billary like a pair of rock stars, right?

    Prediction:  the scenes will be deleted, ABC will claim they were never there in the first place, and once more, the blowhard liberals win.

    In the end, I suppose that's okay.  The people who stained the integrity of the presidency still have themselves to look at in the mirror, no matter what an ABC mini-series does or doesn't portray.

« Previous12…1213141516171819202122Next »