Tammy Bruce interviews Sarah Palin

Here is a link to the podcast:

Special Podcast: The Sarah Palin Interview

An informal interview over the phone, it's just under 15 minutes long.
     

Endorsments of McCain shift some opinions

When John McCain became the front runner for Republicans on Super Tuesday, radio commentator and author Tammy Bruce claimed that he was just "Hillery in drag", and has been vehemently against his nomination. But cracks are showing in her rigid stance on that position:

My Hero John Bolton Endorses McCain

[...] I respect Bolton, in fact, more than anyone else on the public/political scene. I do not question his judgment. At all. I also, as I think all of us do, think very highly of Ted Olson. I was thrilled when he threw his support to Giuliani, then was extremely disappointed when he endorsed McCain. I decided it exposed a side of Olson that was not to be trusted. Now, with the Bolton endorsement I feel compelled to rethink my assessment of Olson.

I am not the only one who needs to ratchet up my self-reflection on the McCain issue. You Fredheads have no doubt been dealing with your guy's endorsement of McCain as well. Perhaps most of you would prefer to not be exposed to my wrestling with our issue, but I think it's only fair to let you know where I'm at in this process. I know I'm not the only one struggling.

Perhaps my process will help some of you who are as frustrated as I am by the whole situation. We also must remember this is only February. We also must see what McCain does with his Veep choice.

As I reflect on what to do, I do realize that someone like Ted Olson is more likely to be nominated by McCain for the Supreme Court, than by Hillary. But we also saw what a hostile congress can do to any nomination, the Bolton UN nom being the prime example. It's choices like that which do make a difference.

I also trust John Bolton. This is a guy who we can trust to make statements and recommendations based on what he truly thinks is best for our country, especially in dealing with the international tyrants the Bush admin has allowed to prosper. Bolton is not a man who endorses someone out of 'compromise.' He doesn't have to.

I know the comments here and ensuing discussions help me get a sense of what independent conservatives think on this issue. Please chime in here and let me, and everyone else, know what you think of all these developments. And remember--you don't have to decide today, or even next week, or next month for that matter. This is indeed only February. What ultimately matters is what you do in November. [...]

This is a big deal for her, as she has spoken out vociferously against McCain in the past. I'm glad she's at least willing to reconsider the whole situation. She correctly points out that November is a long way off, and we have time to consider and talk about it (as folks are in her comments thread) If you follow the link to her post, she has a video clip of John Bolton giving his endorsement, and talks about an email she got from Debra Burlingame. Lots of food for thought.


Related Links:

Larry Kudlow: The Case for McCain

Bennett on McCain
     

Tammy Bruce on the push to purge talk radio

Former President of the Los Angeles Chapter of NOW, Tammy Bruce appears on Bill O'Reilly's show to talk about the assorted methods the left is using to try to silence it's critics. She maintains there is a struggle in the Democratic party right now between the far left and classical liberal Democrats like herself, with the former trying to purge the later. The video is just over 5 minutes long.

On her blog, she posted about her upcomming appearance on the show. An excerpt:

[...] I'll be on alone with O'Reilly to discuss how the Imus firing is really the beginning of what the left hopes will be an ideological purging (silencing) of talk radio.

Keep in mind, Imus is not a 'conservative,' but he is also not a leftist. I see this attack on Imus very much like the attempt by Establishment Left to purge Lieberman (and what he represents) from the Democratic Party--there is indeed an ideological war going on, and even before the leftist gestapos out there feel they can turn to silencing conservatives, they have to purge their own house of liberals who don't pledge allegiance to the leftist worldview. It's why I get attacked by the left for not being a "real" Democrat and why Imus was one of the first on their Hit List to go.

It's very Maoist, and very dangerous unless we all speak up. I think we're a nation which can handle being occasionally offended, and can have that discussion socially. Yet, under the guise of protecting the apparently freakishly vulnerable and sensitive ears of minorities, we're being asked to punish and destroy only those who dare to question and decry leftism, issue dissent and cause a politically incorrect ruckus (the two usually go together). All of us would prefer a world where certain phrases aren't even considered as part of the social debate, but what this is really about is how far you are willing to be manipulated, in the name of 'decency', to allow and accept Stalinistic control over what can and cannot be heard.

For those who think this is about decency across the board, when Jesse "Hymie Town" Jackson and Al "Tawana Brawley" Sharpton call for the firing of Rosie "Ching-Chong" O'Donnell, then you'll have a point. But you won't because she's a loyal moonbat and has 'protection' to say whatever the hell she wants. Ching-chong to you, too.

In the meantime, it's safe to say this has nothing to do with "decency" and everything to do with ideology and the leftist politics of purging those who are unafraid and cannot be controlled. [...]

(bold emphasis mine) Having been a Leftist activist for many years, and as such used the MSM extensively, Tammy knows well of what she speaks. Tammy is the author of three books (the most recent: "The New American Revolution"). She currently hosts her own Talk Radio show in the Los Angeles area.
     

The Battle Continues for 2nd Amendment

Maynard at the Tammy Bruce Blog posted this a while back:

How the Left Plans to Take Your Guns

While dining out, he overhears a foghorn leftist justifying to her friend the confiscation of all guns from citizens. Among other things this woman claimed that collective rights usurp our individual rights. It has a kind of logic, yet Maynard points out how it's not even consistently applied:

[...] It's also worth noting the irony of how Leftists will interpret the Constitution very loosely when they want to invent a new "right", but they turn into super-strict constructionists when trying to control people they dislike. For example, where exactly do you find your Constitutional right to unrestricted access to abortions? Even those who favor a woman's right to choose (as I do) must acknowledge that the Constitutional argument is marginal. It's said to derive from the right to privacy, which also isn't enumerated, but is a generous interpretation of protection from unreasonable search and seizure (the Fourth Amendment). I heard Gloria Allred expalin that abortion rights were a product of the "Constitutional penumbra". I won't necessarily argue with that, but can't we have a little consistency here? Someone who finds meaning in the Constitution's penumbra ought to also respect the actual words. [...]

This is a popular tactic with the left, and the views Maynard overheard are worth noting since they are actively being used against all gun owning citizens to dilute the meaning and authority of the 2nd Amendment. It's worth reading the whole thing.


More recently, Maynard posted this:

The Second Amendment: Saved?

[...] In a 2-1 decision, a U.S. Appeals Court for the District of Columbia has overturned the DC gun ban. The court ruled that the right to bear arms is "not limited to militia service, nor is an individual's enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued intermittent enrollment in the militia."

In other words, in the opinion of this Court, the Second Amendment acknowledges YOUR right to be armed. You may think this is obvious and that any other opinion would have been a gross offence against common sense and decency. But, legally speaking, the question had been undecided.

This ruling does NOT end the issue. This is a regional court ruling. Only a Supreme Court ruling would settle the legal argument for the nation. [...]

Saved? No. It's a step in the right direction, but a future Supreme Court decision against gun owners could still be disastrous.





Related Links:

www.saveourguns.com

Second Amendment victory in D.C.

Crime Emergency in "Gun Free" Washington, DC