ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF WORD MANIPULATION ON THE LEFT

James Tananto in his Best of the Web Today - 1/16/2006 - crituques Mark Shields on PBS and his changing of a straight forward quotation to fit the lefts bias.

• "We got a chuckle during PBS's "NewsHour" Friday when Mark Shields, asked about Sam Alito's prospects for confirmation, invoked a famous politician (now in prison for racketeering) to say it was a sure thing: "Gov. Edwin Edwards of Louisiana once said he wouldn't lose an election unless he got caught with a live boy or a dead woman in a compromising position."
  Actually, that's a bit of a misquote. What Edwards actually said, while running for re-election in 1983, was: "The only thing that would keep me from winning the election is to be caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
  We guess we can understand why Shields would change "in bed" to "in a compromising position." After all, PBS's viewers tend to be old and stodgy and may not cotton to Edwards's sexually explicit talk.
  But why did he change "girl" to "woman"? This is an obvious sop to politically correct feminism, which abominates the word girl and insists that all female human beings must be called "women," or, if they're underage, "pre-women." (Unborn baby girls, however, are not "pre-pre-women," they are just clumps of tissue.)
  OK, so why then did Shields say "boy" rather than change it to "man"? Because he didn't want to offend the gays by suggesting that there's something wrong with being caught with a live man.
  Maybe Shields should have just said, ". . . unless he got caught with a live person or a dead person in a compromising position." (my emphasis)

Just be aware this goes on all day, every day with every left MSM organization in the hopes of changing the society. Accuracy - and often Truth - do not count any longer!

Hugh Hewitt explains the PANIC on the left

And it is not Roe v. Wade!

I believe he is absolutely right. We are seeing the tip of an ICEBERG that is bringing originalism and theism back into our society - not to dominate, but to offer what was for almost 200 years a very successful system.

We will see.

Jack Abramoff spread his money around!

If you want to know who got Abramoff's money look here!

It appears to me he spread money around pretty evenly given that the Republicans are in power at this time. This is how our government works and I'm not sure what should be done about it. You have to allow the public (Abramoff) to lobby our government or it will cause a greater problem.

How about electing some representatives who will not take the money? Unique idea, isn't it!

SO YOU THINK ABRAMOFF WILL BE THE END OF THE GOP? THINK AGAIN!

I quote Captain Ed of Captain's Quarters:

"When we're talking about systemic corruption, we have to remember that it rarely, if ever, happens on a partisan basis. The idea that one party has a "culture of corruption" is ludicrous. Power corrupts, and regardless of current status, both parties wield power in Washington. The corruption will have followed both in proportion to their power. Expect to see enough takedowns to thoroughly embarrass everyone."

The effect on the 2006 election will be nil - and hopefully many of the corrupt politicians on both sides of the aisle will be taken down - as they should be!

FOR ALL MY TEACHING FRIENDS: DO YOU REALLY SUPPORT THIS?

"Teachers Pets" in the WSJ today explains where the NEA's donations go based on new data they are required to supply to the Department of Education. I am not surprised that they are a supporter of nearly all left causes, and spread vast amounts of money to thwart options that I believe many teachers would support!

Teachers: speak up and let your voices be heard! Note the salaries of the 600 employees of the NEA and decide who they are trying to support, you or themselves!