The plight of a Barbie Doll, I mean "trophy wife"...

Jeri Thompson had to know this was coming:

"It's hard not to be defensive," she told People magazine in her first solo interview. "To think back on how hard you've worked, and all anybody thinks about is that you're a trophy wife."

In a story for Monday's issue, Thompson said: "I almost think they had to fabricate that trophy-wife stuff because there's nothing interesting to say."

.... she tells People: "I was never an older-man-dater kind of girl before."

Uh huh. If you don't want to be the trophy wife, start by knocking down the level of highlights in your hair or something.

In all honesty, that's the label and you've got to combat it with something more than a reputation for being a catty bitch to your husband's campaign staff. Or take your own advice and say something interesting.

I find it hard to cock my head and say "oh poor thing, so rich and beautiful, she has it so rough, poor little trophy wife."

Oh woe is she.

Who doesn't love the Onion?

2 funny:
Cheney in Love
How Black is D. McNabb?

Now, if only I could my political commentary into sarcasm....

Rosie, tuck it back in

Is anyone actually going to read this disaster of a "book"?

Rosie's Memoir Lets It All Hang Out:

Reading Celebrity Detox is like having a patient on the couch without the necessary medical degree to sort through what's insightful and what's just nutty.

This is a train wreck of a book — part self-help psychobabble, part searing memoir — by a grown woman who lost her mother as a child. (Oh Boo hoo-we all have issues.)

Score one for Rosie: She's the rare star willing to reveal her own insecurities and hubris. She writes openly about her ambivalence toward fame and money. She says she felt like an outsider on The View ("I was hugely threatening"), which she left after an on-air spat with Elisabeth Hasselbeck.

Like her or not, O'Donnell in Detox provides a big blast of fresh air in an industry that enshrines shallowness.

I'm sorry but Rosie epitomizes shallow. This is no score for anyone but her and the publishers' bank accounts. Her children will suffer the consequences of her actions, believe you me. The woman is a nut job and it's disappointing that consumers will actually read this garbage when there is so much quality literature out there worth experiencing.

Hey, wait a minute, I'm loud and obnoxious- can I get a book deal?

WOO HOO

U.S. Military Casualties in Iraq Fall to Lowest Since July '06

It's about time they reported some good news for a change.

Children as political pawns

When you see a few dozen children holding signs and marching holding their teachers' hands outside the White House, you expect them to be on a fun-filled educational field trip to the great city of Washington, D.C.

You would not expect the Service Employees International Union to be using them as political pawns, filling their vocabulary with chants they don't understand but robotically repeat, and dumping petitions on the drive of the White House in symbolic statement for SCHIP, a program they likely have no idea about. I can only assume they expected a juice box and some cookies after their excursion.

This is by no means a cutesy story- and the images on Fox News tonight were sad. Kudos to Senator Kennedy for pointing out these children were not in school, when they should have been learning their ABCs and 123s- not "protesting" something they don't yet understood.

It is disgusting to see such young impressional minds under the wrong impression.

I don't get her pep-talk speak

Nice picture, Fraley, but I have to elaborate.

Katie Couric sounds like a whiney cheerleader to me -but for the losing team. She seems to think that US expressions of patriotism are just too jubilant:

Speaking at the National Press Club Tuesday evening, CBS "Evening News" anchor Katie Couric pulled back the curtain on her personal views of both the war in Iraq and former “Evening News” anchor Dan Rather.

“Everyone in this room would agree that people in this country were misled in terms of the rationale of this war,” said Couric, adding that it is “pretty much accepted” that the war in Iraq was a mistake."

Oh, it's pretty much accepted, is it?

Just wait, she goes on:

"The former “Today” show anchor traced her discomfort with the administration’s march to war back to the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks.

“The whole culture of wearing flags on our lapel and saying ‘we’ when referring to the United States and, even the ‘shock and awe’ of the initial stages, it was just too jubilant and just a little uncomfortable. And I remember feeling, when I was anchoring the ‘Today’ show, this inevitable march towards war and kind of feeling like, ‘Will anybody put the brakes on this?’ And is this really being properly challenged by the right people? And I think, at the time, anyone who questioned the administration was considered unpatriotic and it was a very difficult position to be in.”

Oh forgive us, Katie, for the waving stripes have hypnotized our nation into believe we are united as a "we." We're so sorry to have made you feel unconfortable.

"Couric referenced comments made by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday’s “The Charlie Rose Show,” and said she actually agreed with Ahmadinejad on one point. “Oftentimes Westerners don’t really understand fully the values of this particular culture,” said Couric. “And I think the jury is still out as to whether democracy can really thrive in Iraq.”"

Someone forgot to hand Katie her pompoms and "IRAN ROCKS" t-shirt.

Healthy Wisconsin has a Sick Senate

Senate Majority Leader Judy Robson told the conference committee Friday morning Dems are dropping Healthy Wisconsin "in the interest of moving the budget process forward."

Uh huh. What's the catch?

In its place, Dems offered a DHFS package that includes the cigarette tax increase, the hospital assessment and the BadgerCare expansion Gov. Jim Doyle had proposed.

Still sick.

Sunday Morning

Today on Sunday Morning, Newt Gingrich addressed Ms. Clinton's health care plan.

I value his idea that at this stage, we should be examining the candidates' plans for America- taking the time to analyze, point out the good parts, and question the bad.

We could use an independent group picking apart the various proposals from both sides of the aisle before we make ill-advised decisions on what is best for America.

Say what?

Giuliani answers his cell phone at the NRA meeting he addressed. Say what?

Where is this proper etiquette? Where is it even cute or likeable? I am quite disenchanted by this political ploy. If it wasn't planned, that means a number of things.
1. It's happened before- don't you think he should have learned from the first time and put the cell phone away?
2. The candidate is addressing a crowd-giving a formal speech. He shoud not have a cell phone on him. DUH, I say to his advisors.
3. It is rude to answer a cell phone during any kind of meeting or speech. Who do you value more? Are you a crackberry? It appears you are. Utter lack of manners.

If this was planned- it means a number of other things.
1. The advisors seem to believe Giuliani will appear cute and a family man- taking a call from his wife, considering her more important than anything he is doing at the time. While believed to be "cutesy" and "adorable," it actually is quite the opposite.
2. The advisors seem to think ANSWERING the cell phone is OK while the candidate is speaking. As does Giuliani himself. WHO SAID ANSWERING THE CELL PHONE DURING A SPEECH IS OK?

He should have silenced it, ignored it, or better yet- left it in the car.

Giuliani is simply unimpressive to me lately. He needs some new advisors. I don't think he impressed the NRA group much either.

Giuliani too Posh for me

Rudy Giuliani has recently rubbed me the wrong way -

1. His latest comment: "I'm probably one of the four or five best known Americans in the world." Talk about snooty. Fit for the British.

"Giuliani told reporters he has made 91 trips to 35 countries in five years and many governments seek him out for advice on security. He was given an honorary knighthood in 2002 by Queen Elizabeth II for his leadership after the Sept. 11 terror attacks."

Well, aren't we just the cat's meow.

and 2. He runs 2 hours late to an event because of passport paperwork issues...

and he still gets praised for turning the toilet that was NYC into a... non toilet?

Seems a little too prissy for me lately.

Back to the race card

Once again, it is the black leaders that play the race card.

I have no sympathy. You are not persecuted because you are an African American quarterback. You face the same Monday-morning criticism that the whities do. It's all in your head. You are doing just fine.

More propoganda for the left!

In a disturbing commentary by Ryan Yeomans of Central Connecticut State University- yes Ivy League indeed- I see the left stoop to a new low. Unsure of whether this will get him a coveted seat on the Clinton or Obama campaign, Yeomans drops below the left-wing, Anti-Americans in Congress even and attempts to push President Bush over Bin Laden on the level of "scariness" each poses to our freedom.

"Bush or bin Laden: Who is More Evil?" he asks, and continues, trying to equate cell-phone bill scrutiny with the Trade Towers crumbling like legos. Mr. Yeomans, you are severely off here.

Before I disect your mess of rhetoric, I am appalled that you encourage others to read the transcript of Osama bin Laden's video hate-message to America. This is the fundamental difference between the right and left. The left simply wants America to lose, to placate ourselves in the fact that other people hate us only because of who is in the White House right now. Need I remind you, they have hated us long before Bush was in the White House and will hate us no matter who follows him- Democrat or Republican. The reason they support the democrats in Congress for their words is because they are pro-terrorist in so many ways. A Clinton or an Obama in the Oval Office will only make it less threatening to come onto our soil and attack us once again. I will NOT apologize that my President desires to protect American lives and the wellbeing of our nation. I will NOT apologize that our troops are on the front lines, killing terrorists who despise us.

"The Bush administration was quick to respond to bin Laden’s first video appearance in three years by stating that he is useless, “aside from his ability to hide in caves and spread anti-American propaganda.” White House aide Frances Fragos Townsend went on to say that “This is a man on the run, from a cave, who’s virtually impotent other than these tapes.”

This statement causes me to seriously question the integrity of the White House’s reports. How can it be that a man with more wealth and power than most Americans and the ability to evade our searches for six years is really just hanging out in a cave all day? It seems to me that what bin Laden wants us to believe is exactly what the Bush administration thinks to be true."

Listen pal, you know a lot less than you think you do, and a lot less than our intelligence agencies and the leaders of our government. Drop it.

For some reason your idiocy continues.

"By claiming bin Laden to be “impotent,” they are using this video to mislead Americans into a false sense of security, even though the imminent danger of terrorism exists now more than ever because of Bush’s actions."

Yes, because of President Bush, we are more in danger. HARDLY. Because of President Bush we have not seen another attack on US soil. The response of the President only makes the terrorists angry because a)they can not win without being hunted, b) they live on the run in caves, hiding, cowardly, and c)they know that US resolve is greater than any minor scheme they can pull from their turbans.

Here, you have gone too far:

"As of late, if you were to bring up the president in a discussion you would find that many Americans disapprove of the decisions he has made. At the same time, Osama bin Laden presents many good arguments against the president and many of his reasons for disapproving of Bush are similar to those of anti-Bush Americans. Would it be wrong to assume that there is some kind of connection between feelings of the American people and those of Osama bin Laden? As I would love to make this connection, I ultimately cannot because of the actions of our president. If I were to say I agree with bin Laden, that would mean that I agree with a terrorist; under the Patriot Act, I could be labeled a potential terrorist and my phone could be tapped, and every move I make could be watched and analyzed.

In finding myself in this predicament, I questioned myself as to who the lesser evil actually is. I ask, “Who has done more damage to the lives of the American people?” Personally, I worry more about the next bad decision Bush is going to make than I worry about a potential Osama bin Laden organized terrorist attack."

It does sure seem you agree with the terrorists. Perhaps we should buy you a ticket instead to the next training camp with the likes Daniel Maldonado and John Walker Lindh -other Americans-turned-Terrorists.

Advocating that we abstain from pursuing terrorists on our homeland because it might threaten their rights (oh boo hoo their phone gets tapped!) and believing that Bush's decisions are worse than terrorist attacks at home is utterly irresponsible. You should be very afraid of the next Osama bin Laden organized attack. More importantly, you should be very afraid of what the government could do to you for defending a terrorist over our own President and Commander in Chief.

Those of you who take the opportunity of FREEDOM to bitch and moan about how the Patriot Act infringes on your rights, step back and be grateful you are allowed to criticize the government. Others around the world know nothing of that right. You are also allowed a voice and a vote for your elected leaders. Quit running your mouths and use your vote.

Does the left seems to believe that rhetoric like "the war is lost" and "I'm more afraid of Bush than Osama," will help us with the Global War on Terror? Do they want to win? No, Democrats would rather score political points while harming our national security. I am in awe of the amount of free speech and RIGHTS we DO have, amidst a war on terror in which the homefront should be nothing but bound together positively- instead we have Cindy Sheehans of the world, wasting time during which they could be bettering society and the Harry Reids who want nothing more than to see the demise of a single man who only wants what is best for our nation.

I will pray for you, Mr. Yeomans- that you may open your eyes and see the damage you and your little question of who is more evil are doing to American morale.