American Thinker has a treatment program for recovering liberals called LibAnon. There is only one requirement to joining LibAnon:

The only requirement for LibAnon membership is the desire to stop being a Liberal. This can occur as a Heisenbergesque quantum leap or a lengthy, drawn out process. If the morally-relativistic, anti-capitalist, all-expressions-of-thought-are-equally-valid-moral-and-ingenious, who-am-I-to-be-discerning liberal in your life is aghast at the idea a formal code of behavior may actually be required to live genuinely in this world (and make amends for his past), you can put your mind at ease – eventually, either in this life or the next, he will see the light.

There are 13 steps in beating liberalism in LibAnon. Like any bad habit, it will be tough, but worth it:

THE 13 PRESCRIPTIVE PRINCIPLES (“STEPS”)
OF LIBERALS ANONYMOUS

1. WE admit we are not powerless over liberalism, but nevertheless, that we have allowed it to make a mockery of our cities, our schools, our universities, our borders, our foreign policy, and our daily lives.

2. WE have finally, belatedly, and bearing well-deserved shame, come to understand and know that a Power incalculably greater than ourselves can restore us to spiritual and moral sanity.

3. WE made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as He is rather than as we would have Him be for our convenience and self-esteem.

4. WE made a searching and (hopefully) fearless spiritual, moral, cultural, fiscal, and political inventory of our liberal, progressive, and/or socialist, opinions, views, selves and associations.

5. WE admitted to ourselves, to another as-yet-unrepentant liberal, our parents, a pollster, and a voting booth the exact nature of our previous wrongs, as well as the lack of either factual bases or reality to have supported much less committed them.

6. WE are entirely ready to have all these defects of character removed. Permanently.

7. WE humbly pray for the removal of our shortcomings and “good intentions” before they result in America’s burial somewhere along the road to either a world-rendering nuclear “oops” or perdition.

8. WE made a list of all persons we had harmed with our kooky opinions, views, and acts by looking up everyone we ever knew in the telephone books for every city in which we ever resided and became willing to make amends to them all. Somehow.

9. WE made political and societal amends to Conservatives whenever and wherever possible, except when to do so would cause injury to anyone other than ourselves.

10. WE continued to take personal inventory of our liberal tendencies and when they are exposed promptly admit it, and symbolize that admission by making a generous contribution to the G.O.P. or a Conservative political action committee.

11. WE sought through hard work and dedication to improve our conscious contact with Conservative principles as reflected in Biblical teaching and Western Civilization, and prayed for the strength and ability to constructively carry them out.

12. Having experienced a political awakening of conscience, reality, and responsibility for this and future generations as the result of these Steps, WE evangelize the Conservative message to Liberals, progressives, academicians, and anti-American activists of every stripe wherever we can find them, and practice these principles in all our affairs.

13. Having experienced all of the above, WE vote only for true Conservative Republicans in every election, and plaster our automobiles with the biggest support stickers we can get as a visible outward sign of our inward moral regeneration.

The first step is admitting you’re a liberal.

So many pro-choice liberals have asked me what I would do if the pregnancy of my wife would cost her her life. Wouldn’t I abort the child? I reply that I hope that I am never in that position, and pray for those who are, but I would not ask my wife to kill our baby so she could live her life knowing what she had done. They never believe me.

I’ll bet they wouldn’t believe this couple either:

Lorraine Allard, 33, was diagnosed with terminal liver cancer when she was four months pregnant, the Telegraph reported Saturday.

Allard rejected the idea of an abortion and delayed her cancer treatment, giving birth to son Liam 15 weeks prematurely, the Telegraph reported.

“She knew all too well she didn’t have long to live. So she put little Liam’s life before her own,” said her husband, Martyn, an oil field technician from St. Olaves, near Great Yarmouth, Norfolk.

Allard had hoped to live long enough bring her son home from the hospital. Her chemotherapy, however, had little effect and she died Jan 18, the Telegraph said.

Liberals who advocate abortion can’t understand this sacrifice, or if they can, they are at best, hypocrites. To understand this attitude, you have to understand that there is a living human inside the mother’s body. Not a fetus, or a clump of cells. I have even seen liberals refer to the baby as a parasite, no better than a tumor.

In their world, this woman is an idiot. In mine, she is a hero and a role model for parents everywhere. Parents, your children come first. Always.

God bless you, Lorraine.

Remember this:

On Jan. 26, 1998, at a Roosevelt Room announcement of a new education initiative, nobody asked Clinton about Monica Lewinsky. Nobody put him on the spot. But he brought up the topic anyway: “I want to say one thing to the American people. I want you to listen to me. I’m going to say this again. I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time — never. These allegations are false.” It was a coldly calculated, finger-wagging lie.

Ten years ago today, Bill Clinton lied to the American people about his affair with Monica. And today, he lies about Obama and that has caused a lot of Democrats to wonder if they want Bill back:

What resulted from the lie was a yearlong impeachment battle that would lastingly poison the American political system. It should make Americans wary of letting Bill Clinton anywhere near the White House ever again.

Clinton’s lies about Obama this week show that he has not changed one bit. Former Clinton aide Gregory Craig, who was at his side during most of the Lewinsky scandal, now is an adviser for Obama. This week, he put it best about the man he knows so well: “Events raise the question, if Hillary’s campaign can’t control Bill, whether Hillary’s White House could.”

It is a two-for-one deal. Do you want Slick Willie back in the White House?

Since when do the Clinton’s ever say they went too far? I can’t remember a time when they were ever at fault for anything. Maybe it’s all the backlash from the black community, or that they are being perceived as hateful. Either way, they are backtracking now:

“[Bill Clinton] said several times yesterday that maybe he got a little bit carried away,” Hillary Clinton said on CBS’ “Early Show.”

“So we’re all going to, on both sides I think, you know, try to bring this debate and this campaign back to the issues that are important,” said the New York senator, who would be the first woman U.S. president.

We talked about this tonight on A Newt One’s podcast, and I don’t know that Obama is her best choice for Veep. Bill Richardson is a good candidate, but the governor of Ohio, Ted Strickland, is a great choice. It comes down to what is going to bring her the most votes. What do you think?

It isn’t getting hotter anymore, so we better switch gears and go back to global cooling.

Russian and foreign research data confirm that global temperatures in 2007 were practically similar to those in 2006, and, in general, identical to 1998-2006 temperatures, which, basically, means that the Earth passed the peak of global warming in 1998-2005,” said Khabibullo Abdusamatov, head of a space research lab at the Pulkovo observatory in St. Petersburg.

According to the scientist, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere has risen more than 4% in the past decade, but global warming has practically stopped. It confirms the theory of “solar” impact on changes in the Earth’s climate, because the amount of solar energy reaching the planet has drastically decreased during the same period, the scientist said.
”
Had global temperatures directly responded to concentrations of “greenhouse” gases in the atmosphere, they would have risen by at least 0.1 Celsius in the past ten years, however, it never happened, he said.

“A year ago, many meteorologists predicted that higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would make the year 2007 the hottest in the last decade, but, fortunately, these predictions did not become reality,” Abdusamatov said.

He also said that in 2008, global temperatures would drop slightly, rather than rise, due to unprecedentedly low solar radiation in the past 30 years, and would continue decreasing even if industrial emissions of carbon dioxide reach record levels.

I don’t know about the whole Ice Age thing, but this is some good ammo against the global warming alarmists.

Live on BlogTalkRadio: Mon, Wed, & Fri Call in: (646) 716-8606 -- Our Apologies. Somewhere along the way we lost this audio. --

Political News

• Top Earmark-er Clinton Grants $303,000 to ‘Gay’ Lobby Group
• ‘I DON’T REMEMBER MEETING REZKO’
• Bill Gates new project: Farming
• Obama on Letterman – And He’s Funny

Continue reading →

Last night, Mike Huckabee made a great point concerning the rebates that Congress just “gave” us.

“We’ll probably end up borrowing this $150 billion from the Chinese, and when we get those rebate checks, most people are going to go out and buy stuff that’s been imported from China,” Huckabee said.

Now, Huckabee was upset that the money was going into the hands of Americans, instead of going towards things like roads and bridges. But then, Mike, the federal government was not supposed to repair roads and bridges. But, not too many people think that way anymore.

Anyone think that reducing the size of government might be a good idea too?

10. To keep the budget balanced, I’ll rent the situation room for sweet sixteens.

9. I will double your tax money at the craps table.

8. Appoint Mitt Romney secretary of lookin’ good.

7. If you bring a gator to the White House, I’ll wrassle it.

6. I’ll put Regis on the nickel.

5. I’ll rename the tenth month of the year “Barack-tober.”

4. I won’t let Apple release the new and improved iPod the day after you bought the previous model.

3. I’ll find money in the budget to buy Letterman a decent hairpiece.

2. Pronounce the word nuclear, nuclear.

1. Three words: Vice President Oprah.

After delivering the list, Letterman thanked Obama. But Obama had one last joke in him. Sen. Obama replied, “Thank you so much, David, but you can’t muss my hair,” referring to Letterman messing up John Edwards’ hair during his appearance earlier this week.

Source.

Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich is leaving the race:

Kucinich said he will not endorse another Democrat in the primary.

Kucinich is seeking a seventh term in Congress, but his long-shot bid for the White House has drawn four Democratic opponents.

In the interview, during which he was seeking the paper’s endorsement of his re-election bid, Kucinich said he is dropping out of the presidential race for practical reasons.

“When I didn’t get into that debate in Nevada, it really made it difficult,” he said.

But Kucinich said he’s proud of his performance in the earlier debates and believes he’s had a positive influence on the race.

Here’s the thing about Dennis. He seems like a really nice guy. I mean that. He seems like someone who would be a really good friend. But his politics are far left, and I have no use for that.

I admit I was disappointed with Fred Thompson dropping out of the race. But there still isn’t a clear leader in the race for the Republicans, so, is there still hope for a Fred Thompson candidacy?

If McCain loses in Florida, the Republicans may well be headed to a deadlocked race and convention. And history teaches us that the likeliest candidate to emerge in that scenario is someone like Warren G. Harding: the prototypical, less-than-stellar candidate to which conventions turn when the going gets rough.

This year’s Harding? Believe it or not (are you sitting down?), despite the fact that he’s withdrawn from the race, is Fred Thompson.

This is a great look at the history of the nomination process, and makes an interesting case for a Thompson nomination:

That, in fact, is the key to winning a race that deadlocks. And, this year, it is Thompson’s ace in the hole.

Think about it: the GOP establishment is scared to death of Huckabee, the outsider who has the allegiance of the evangelicals. The only way he’s going to get nominated is if he can win a majority of delegates in the primaries. Ditto for Giuliani: his personal life, social liberalism, and New York background make it unlikely that he can win the GOP nomination any other way than through the primaries (which, unless he can win Florida, is a long shot).

McCain? The GOP establishment and mainstream Republican voters have never really trusted this maverick, either, given his sponsorship of the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance legislation, his friendship with Democrats such as John Kerry, and his current stance on immigration. McCain can win over a few stray delegates committed elsewhere. But unless he’s close to a majority as the convention approaches, he’s unlikely to be the acceptable second choice of most delegates.

Romney? Parts of the GOP establishment (i.e., the National Review crowd and Rush Limbaugh) like him, but he has the highest negatives of any candidate in the race. Evangelicals don’t trust him, perhaps unfairly. And the other candidates can’t stand him, which, if a deadlock should occur, will hardly leave him the likely beneficiary of any efforts they might make on someone else’s behalf.

That leaves Fred.

It’s very unlikely that this will be the actual case, but with the uncertainty of this campaign, just about anything can happen. I don’t know that I would be surprised with this at all. I know I would be happy with it. He is still the best person, in my opinion, for advancing libertarian ideas. And it’s not just me saying that. Reason Magazine agrees.

That headline ought to raise the hackles on the back of some necks. Now take a look at who said it:

During a Democratic presidential debate on Monday, [Barack] Obama was asked about Morrison’s famous description of the former president.

“I have to say that, you know, I would have to, you know, investigate more of Bill [Clinton's] dancing abilities. You know, and some of this other stuff before I accurately judge whether he was in fact a brother,” Obama said.

NAACP President Lonnie Randolph nailed it when he said: “Wow. Stereotype.”

That’s the kind of comment that kills Republicans. But Obama can say it, I guess, because he’s black. And a Democrat. That’s a double whammy.

Stereotype or not, don’t look for any backlash, said Clemson University political scientist Bruce Ransom.

“I think he gets a pass on it,” said Ransom, who is black. “This is one of the situations in which it came from an African American and it probably is a double standard.”

Probably? No. Definitely.

Maybe they should both go on Ellen and have a dance off.

One of the more conservative candidates in the 2008 campaign, Duncan Hunter raised more than a few eyebrows when he put his support behind Mike Huckabee for president:

“I got to know Governor Huckabee well on the campaign trail,” Hunter said in a statement. “Of the remaining candidates I feel that he is strongly committed to strengthening national defense, constructing the border fence and meeting the challenge of China’s emergence as a military superpower that is taking large portions of America’s industrial base.

“Along with these issues of national security, border enforcement and protecting the U.S. industrial base, I see another quality of Mike Huckabee’s candidacy that compels my endorsement,” he added. “Mike Huckabee is a man of outstanding character and integrity.

I am one of many who shake my head in disbelief. For the life of me, I can’t understand how Congressman Hunter can support this guy.

UPDATE:

Duncan explains why on the Roger Hedgecock show:

I added an extensive list of global warming heretics to our blogroll tonight. If you know of any sites that I missed, add them to the comments or e-mail me and I will add them.

I’m glad to see this many people out there speaking out against this myth. There is a lot of good information in those links.

Global warming reducing hurricanes in U.S., report says

Intensifying one of the hottest debates in science, a new report concludes that global warming is diminishing the number of hurricanes that strike Florida and the rest of the United States.

The study found that the planet’s oceans have been warming for more than a century. No surprise there, but this may be: Those warmer oceans are producing stronger crosswinds that tend to suppress the development and growth of hurricanes, the scientists said. [source]

A couple of years ago global warming was going to increase the number of hurricanes in the United States. If there had been more hurricanes, do you think there would have been a report blaming global warming for the increase?

It’s almost as if The Church of Global Warming™ is making this up as they go along.