Terrell Owens Acting Up Again

Yesterday, in yet another display of his me-first attitude, the talented wide receiver went on a radio station and had the nerve to say that the team would be in a "better situation" if Brett Favre was its quarterback instead of Donovan McNabb.

From the Miami Herald.com:

PHILADELPHIA - Terrell Owens dropped a few bombshells during an interview shown on ESPN's "SportsCenter'' on Thursday night.

The Eagles' wide receiver, who does not talk to Philadelphia reporters, was interviewed by an ESPN.com contributor, who asked Owens about comments made by former Dallas Cowboys receiver Michael Irvin.

Irvin, an ESPN analyst, had said that the Eagles would be better off with Green Bay's Brett Favre at quarterback, and in some respects, Owens agreed.

"He's a guy, obviously, a number of commentators will say he's a warrior, he plays with injuries," Owens said of Favre. "I just feel like (with) him being knowledgeable about the quarterback position, I just feel like we'd probably be in a better situation."

As talented as Terrell Owens is, I'm surprised that the Eagles continue to put up with his antics. Granted, I've always been a fan of his infamous touchdown celebrations because frankly, they're entertaining and ingenuitive. But when it comes to thrashing your own teammates, especially midseason, Owens more than crosses the line.

He also makes himself look pretty stupid when you consider that Brett Favre hasn't been a Hall-of-Fame QB for years now (is Terrell aware of Green Bay's current W-L record?). Owens credibility would also be enhanced if he was a leader and if he had a Super Bowl ring. That's a "nah" on both. Winners can say whatever they want whenever they want, losers should stay low and keep their mouth shut.

Low Poll Numbers Mean Nothing To Bush

A new poll shows that Bush's approval ratings have dropped to a record low.

From CBSNews.com:

Bush's low job approval is far below that of some of his two-term predecessors at this point in their second terms. In November 1985, President Reagan had a 65 percent approval rating, and Bill Clinton's job approval in November 1997 was 57 percent. Bush's rating is higher than Richard Nixon's was at the same point in his administration.

Both Reagan and Clinton endured scandals during their second terms. In January 1998, when facing questions about his affair with Monica Lewinsky, President Clinton's job approval ratings actually rose, reaching the low 70s, and remained at least in the 60s throughout the rest of that year. President Reagan's job approval rating dropped by more than 20 points to 46 percent in November 1986, just after public disclosures about the Iran-Contra scandal. During 1987 Reagan's approval rating hovered around 50 percent, but began to rise again in 1988. President Richard Nixon's approval rating fell as the Watergate scandal became public in the first half of 1973, and was at about 25 percent during 1974.

I find it funny how much Democrats continue to put so much emphasis on idiot polls . . . using them to discredit the President and to feed their anti-Bush rhetoric. But what Democrats don't seem to realize is that these polls mean NOTHING, especially to an incumbent President. In other words, Bush won in 2000 and he won again in 2004 . . . GET OVER IT!!! Bush could have a zero approval rating and he'd still be President for the next 3 years.

Plus, does any Democrat worth mentioning really think that Bush and the rest of GOP are losing any sleep over the President's low ratings? I don't think so. And why should they? Republicans have far more important things to focus on: like furthering their agenda, expanding their base, cutting taxes while increasing spending and getting another conservative judge on the Supreme Court.

So instead of wasting energy on meaningless polls, Democrats would be wise to turn their attention away and be more concerned about the upcoming Congressional elections in 2006. Both the House and the Senate currently own a majority, if Democrats are really interested in hurting Bush, that's where their focus needs to geared towards

50 Cent: God makes hurricanes, NOT Bush

Rapper 50 Cent is showing some guts and not joining the choris of whining liberals who blame the President for the response to Hurricane Katrina.

NEW YORK Nov 2, 2005 — Rap feuds aren't usually about differing opinions on President Bush. However, that appears to be the case between 50 Cent and Kanye West. 50 says he disagrees with West's infamous statement that "George Bush doesn't care about black people," proclaimed during a September telethon for Hurricane Katrina victims.

"I think people responded to it the best way they can," 50 told ContactMusic.com. "What Kanye West was saying, I don't know where that came from." Instead, 50 said, "The New Orleans disaster was meant to happen. It was an act of God."

Amen!

Deranged liberals have continued to exploit the response to Hurricane Katrina as a vehicle to feed their hatred for President Bush. And sadly, many Blacks have bought the con, naively buying into Kanye West's now-infamous barb and even going so far as to buy into Louis Farrakhan's lunatic rant that somehow Hurricane Katrina and the ensuing flooding of New Orleans were all part of a plot to kill and disperse the Black population. Farrakhan would go on to suggest that the levees were intentionally blown up to murder poor Blacks in the region. So, if were to believe Farrakhan, the delay in getting to some of the evacuees had nothing to do with the failings of Black Mayor Ray Nagin or even Governor Kathleen Blanco, but instead to a federal government that was hell bent on genocide.

To no ones surprise Democratic Rep. and noted Dick Cheney hater Charlie Rangel joined in the racial outcry following Hurricane Katrina, accusing President Bush of being “our Bull Connor,” in reference to the Birmingham, Alabama police commissioner who resisted the Civil Rights Movement (and happened to be a Democrat).

Meanwhile, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and other such opportunists/race baiters focused on the great injustice of the word “refugees” being applied (sympathetically) to displaced New Orleans residents by the media. Indeed, no accusation became too absurd in their attempts to get the most out of the disaster spotlight.

But here's what Farrakhan and the Left WON'T tell you about the response to Katrina: according to Jack Kelly, of the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, the federal response to Hurricane Katrina was actually faster than years past.

In the article, Kelly points out that:

- more than 32,000 people were rescued, many plucked from rooftops by Coast Guard helicopters.
- The Army Corps of Engineers has all but repaired the breaches and begun pumping water out of New Orleans.
- shelter, food and medical care have been provided to more than 180,000 refugees.

Florida Army National Guardsman, Jason van Steenwyk, said: "The federal government pretty much met its standard time lines, but the volume of support provided during the 72-96 hour was unprecedented. The federal response here was faster than Hugo, faster than Andrew, faster than Iniki, faster than Francine and Jeanne."

A former Air Force Logistics officer said: "We do not yet have teleporter or replicator technology like you saw on 'Star Trek' in college between hookah hits and waiting to pick up your worthless communications degree while the grown-ups actually engaged in the recovery effort were studying engineering."

Let's not forget that it was Mayor Nagin who originally went on TV and claimed on all the major news networks that the possible deaths in New Orleans could reach 10,000 -- yet the Left had little reaction to the 1200+ who ended up losing their lives.

I'm not a big fan of 50 Cent or any of his self-made controversies, but in this case he should garner plenty of kudos for speaking the truth.

Good News For Tom DeLay

Senator DeLay gets MoveOn. judge removed:

From the LA Times:

WASHINGTON -- Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay won the first skirmish in his conspiracy and money laundering case today when a Texas judge was removed from presiding over the trial after DeLay's attorneys showed he has been a significant financial contributor to Democratic causes.District Judge Robert Perkins of Travis County, Texas, was removed at the close of a hearing in the state capital in Austin when a separate Texas district judge, brought out of retirement, ruled that Perkins' history of making 34 donations in the last five years to Democratic candidates and organizations suggested he would not be impartial in hearing the trial of the Republican member of Congress.

The visiting judge, C.W. Duncan, made the ruling without explanation. It now sets up the appointment of a new judge to preside over the trial. Under court rules, neither DeLay's lawyers nor state prosecutors can make recommendations on the selection of Perkins' replacement.Travis County Dist. Atty. Ronnie Earle, himself a Democrat who brought a series of grand jury indictments against DeLay and several of his Republican associates, had sought to keep Perkins on the case.

Earle viewed Perkins as fair, and not one to allow his political leanings to dictate his handling of the upcoming high-profile trial.Borrowing a line from Shakespeare, he said DeLay's complaint that Perkins would side against him was "much ado about nothing."Earle's assistant, prosecutor Rick Reed, argued at the hearing that there was no apparent "reasonable doubt that the judge is impartial."But Dick DeGuerin, DeLay's chief attorney, said in a telephone interview from Texas after the ruling that even in a state where judges are elected and may make political contributions, it just seemed improper for a judge who gave so much money — $5,585 — to federal and state Democratic candidates and causes to hear the case.

"There's no question he's very partisan," DeGuerin said. "In most cases, that wouldn't matter. But when partisan politics is what this case is all about, it doesn't look right for the judge to be on the opposite side of the person who is accused. That's as plain as the nose on your face." Perkins had sought to hang on to the job overseeing the trial. But legal papers filed last month by DeGuerin showed the judge consistently sent money to Democratic coffers, including contributions to the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee, John Kerry, and the Democratic advocacy group, MoveOn.org.

Despite the fact that Tom DeLay is clearly getting railroaded by Texas Dems still upset by DeLay's help in getting George W. Bush four more years, the fact that DeLay's fate might've rested in the hands of a judge who contributed money to that insane, Leftist-propaganda machine known as MoveOn, added clear insult to injury.

The decision by Judge Duncan was the right one because it makes sure that Tom DeLay gets a fair trial and no matter which side of the political fence you stand on, if you truly believe in democracy, you'd want DeLay to at least have that.