Honoring the dead or Honoring the party: How Libs Bring Their Bias Everywhere.

While many people were paying their respects to Coretta Scott King in Atlanta, some people, namely Jimmy Carter and Reverend Lowery, decided to use this time to criticize President Bush, who was in attendance in Atlanta where the funeral was held. Lowery criticized President Bush's spending on the Iraq War by saying, "For war, billions more, but no more for the poor," while Jimmy Carter jabbed at President Bush's wire-tapping program by stating that the Kings were "victims of secret government wiretapping." Instead of paying their respects like many of the people at the funeral, Carter and Lowery used this event as a opportunity to heckle Bush. I can't believe that these men would do something to a President Republican or not. A funeral is defined as a ceremony or group of ceremonies held in connection with the burial or cremation of a dead person, not a ceremony held to heckle people. Carter, one of the worst Presidents in my opinion, was to soft when it came to handling terrorists unlike President Bush who is pre-emptive. Carter had to deal with terrorists once during his tenor as president. What end up happening was a year long hostage situation, where Carter did not attempt to rescue these American citizens. The release of the hostages came when Reagan took over and did not mess with the hostages. Lowery shouldn't talk about President Bush in that manner during a service. After all, he is a minister and I think he would know how to act during a Church service. The message that I have to Liberals is this: Please, leave your political views outside of a Church. God doesn't care what party your affiliated with, and critizing is not very Christian-like. George Bush did follow Jesus' teachings and turned the other cheek while these two men tarnished his name.

Hypocrisy in Action: Hillary and Her Big Mouth

Hillary Clinton should take a lesson from her husband. When you gain much attention for doing something stupid, you stay away from the spotlight for awhile but Hillary is not like that. First, she stated that Congress was being run like a "plantation." Now, she is criticizing George Bush for "playing the fear card on terrorism" and not capturing "the tallest man in Afghanistan" which was referring to Osama Bin Laden. Hillary once again is demonstrating the classic Liberal philosophy of forgetting the past and finding everything wrong with the GOP party.
Hillary is showing that she is such a hypocrite with these statements. When her husband was in power only 6 years ago, Bin Laden was offered by the Pakistani Government but he refused to capture him. Bill Clinton did not want him and let this madman run free and commit some of the worst terrorists acts on US soil and abroad. The bombing of the USS Cole and the bombing of a embassy were committed. What did Clinton do after these travesties? Nothing, he did not do anything. To say that George Bush is "playing the fear card" while her husband did nothing is such hypocrisy. George Bush actually sent troops to both Afghanistan and Iraq to catch these terrorists before they strike again. The Bush Administration has captured more terrorists then Clinton and furthermore prevented another 9-11 by being pre-emptive. In a recent article published, George Bush stated that the administration has foiled a total of 10 serious terrorist plots, including the destruction of the US Bank Tower. If Hillary Clinton is planning to make a serious run at the presidency in 2008, she better stop opening her big mouth or it will be another win for the GOP, and I have no problem with that.

State of the Union or State of New Orleans?

After President Bush's State of the Union Address on Tuesday night, many of the hosts of the prime time shows were mad that Bush only spoke about the situation in Katrina for a little bit. Why didn't he speak longer? Were the cries of the people in that devastated region. The reason why Bush did not spend much time on this topic is because the State of the Union has to do with the entire country and not just one region. The State of the Union address always has more pros then cons in it anyway. The Bush Administration has devoted hours upon hours of support to the Katrina Victims already. The administration already has pledged 85 billion dollars of support to the victims, so what more do they want? The disaster in New Orleans was tragic, there is no doubt about that, but since September there have been more hard pressing issues on the President's mind. The election of the nuclear crazy president in Iran, the election of Hamas in Palestein and the pursuit of a new judge to the Supreme Court just to name a few. If the Katrina Victims are so concerned that they are not receiving any attention from the government, they should be hard pressing against people like Mayor Ray Nagin and Katherine Blanco, who deserve much of the blame. Nagin is currently in Washington D.C. being investigated about the Katrina response. Nagin still blames FEMA for most of his faults. Nagin should have been better prepared and had food and water supplies ready at both the Superdome and Convention Center. I think the President did a great job on his State of the Union. He touched every pressing issue throughout the United States and told Americans what he plans to do to fix the problems of the world.