The New Conservatives

Defending Nikki Haley

2011-01-16T15:22:00.004-05:00

Governor Nikki Haley has been criticised by some in South Carolina for giving pay raises to members of her new staff. She is paying her Chief of Staff $125,000 a year. That is close to a 25% increase from the amount Governor Sanford paid his Chief of Staff. Trey Walker her 2nd in command will get a 40% increase and on it goes. Just looking at those numbers you would think Governor Haley had reneged on her promise to streamline government and was giving pay raises to everyone right? Wrong.

While Governor Haley is paying her staff more per person than Governors Sanford and Hodges she is actually spending $944,732 less on them overall. Governor Haley has hired less staff than the last two governors. So while they get raises they will have more responsibilities. This governor's staff will consist of only 16 people. Also while she is paying some of her staff more than Governor Sanford she is still paying them less than previous governors. Her Press Secretary Rob Godfrey is being paid $3,000 more than he was in Sanford's administration, but almost $3,000 less than Governors Beasley and Hodges paid their press secretaries. She also hired Sanford's top lawyer and is paying him $600 less a year than did Sanford.

It appears to me that critics of the Governor are grasping at straws to find fault where there is none. I used the example earlier today of a boss having two employees that each made $10 an hour. He fires one and gives the other guy a raise to $14 a hour the boss still cuts pay by 30% and this is what Governor Haley has done. She has hired less staff, but paid those staffers more while still cutting overall spending. If this is an indication of how she will govern I'd say we're off to a great start.
http://www.wltx.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=117656&catid=2
http://www2.wsav.com/news/2011/jan/14/haley-defends-her-staff-salary-increases-ar-1343760/

Passports Issued to Thousands of Registered Sex Offenders

2010-07-15T15:20:00.006-04:00

The Obama Administration has been issuing passports to people involved in sex tourism since the beginning of his presidency. The reason, they did not know that in December 2008 then President Bush signed a law to deny these people passports. Considering Obama was the President-elect you would think that he might what to pay attention to what laws were going into affect right before he took office, or at least have someone pay attention for him. The GAO (Government Accounting Office) says that it wasn't until this April that the state department was informed of this law.

This is dereliction of duty by the President and his Sec of State. To not be aware of a law that is supposed to keep children safe from sexual predators is abhorrent. Oh and it gets worse, "In one case study, the sex offender was issued a passport in his name while in prison, which is allowed under federal law, while another was issued a passport after becoming delinquent in child support, an offense for which State must deny passports. Based on interviews with local police departments, several of our cases showed that sex offenders left the country and moved to Mexico." Mexico is a country listed as a sex tourism destination by our State department. I guess these people are now having a good time having sex with children in Mexico.

Now you would think the State Department would just take responsibility say we'll make sure this doesn't ever happen again and be done with it. However their response was something quite different, The State Department also took issue with the title of the GAO report, "Passports Issued to Thousands of Registered Sex Offenders," calling it "misleading." We are concerned that it conveys more 'shock value' than factual accuracy," reads the response. The title also fails to convey that GAO found no evidence that the offenders used their passports to commit sex offenses abroad," the letter reads.

Well of course these people didn't use their passports to commit sex crimes abroad they just wanted to go to a country that the U.S. list has a sex tourism destination to get a tan. GIVE ME A BREAK! Now I'm not saying every person that goes to Mexico is involved in sex trafficking, but if your already involved in that industry I think it's a pretty good bet that's why your going there.

Surely that's all the bad news out of this report, unfortunately no.

Additionally, 30 of the sex offenders who are federal employees were identified through salary data provided by the Department of the Treasury, the U.S. Postal Service and the Defense Finance and Accounting Service.

"It also is disturbing that the GAO found examples prior to that new law where the State Department issued passports to convicted sex offenders who fled law enforcement, received government housing subsidies and work for the Post Office. This report raises a lot of serious questions about how effectively the government protects us from child predators," Grassley said.

WOW! Let me see if I have this right not only were they fleeing from law enforcement that were also give government housing and jobs. Not just any jobs, but jobs in the postal service which means they might be putting the mail in my box every day. If that doesn't scare you I guess nothing does. I think it should go without saying that sex offenders should not be allowed to have federal or state employment. I like to think we could find a better character of person to work in our government, but wait there's more.

According to GAO, about half of the 4,500 sex offenders who received passports lived in five states -- California, Texas, Florida, New York, and Michigan -- and at least 12 individuals were approved landlords in the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Section 8 housing program during the two years before the study's time frame.

So it's not bad enough that people have to live in government housing, but now they have a sex offender has their landlord. Would you want a sex offender coming to your door collecting rent once a month. I'm not saying they need Donald Trump to be the landlord but could we at least find someone who isn't a sex criminal.

Finally, "The GAO acknowledged that the number of sex offenders it found receiving passports might have been low, because the data compared passport database records to the National Sex Offender Registry, which could lack or contain invalid Social Security numbers."

So the GAO is saying that with all the bad news in this article the situation is probably worse than we know.

Now not all this happened on President Obama's watch, but President Bush signed a law aimed at dealing with this and President Obama basically didn't bother to find out about that law. How can you be President and not know about a law that was signed about one month before you took the Oath of office? It's not like it was signed 30 years ago and everyone had forgotten about it, or that it was an unimportant and seldom used statue that just appeared in a line of a bill. This was a law written to protect children and punish sex traffickers from other countries.

The GAO lays out some examples of what it is talking about on pages 11-13 of it's report. You can find the report at http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10643.pdf
However I should warn you that it is very disturbing.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/15/thousands-sex-offenders-issued-passports-travel-abroad/

Captialism defeats Socialism at the World Cup.

2010-06-23T14:02:00.003-04:00

Anyone watching the World Cup knows that the French embarrassed themselves while the Americans fought through adversity to win their group for the first time since the first world cup. I believe the reason for this can be found in comparing freedom to socialism.

The French team came to the World Cup by way of a handball goal against Ireland. Even the most novice soccer fans knows your not suppose to use your hands in soccer. Then after getting here they embarrassed themselves. Nicholas Anika was sent home after an argument with their head coach Domenech. This resulted in the French team boycotting practice the next day. Then of course Domench retaliates by keeping the French captain Partice Evra off the field for the final game which South Africa won 2-1. France still could have made the next round with a win. After the game Domenech refused to shake the hand of the South African coach. There's also a video of one of the French managers throwing a clipboard but I can't seem to locate that. You probably saw it on ESPN anyway. Let's compare this to the Americans

The United States ties heavily favored England to open play, Then goes down 2-0 in the first half to Slovenia and comes back to tie. Then has their game winner disallowed by a terrible call by a official. Today the U.S. again has a goal disallowed by a terrible call. They have to score in extra time to advance. Meanwhile there was no skipped practices no one was sent home for being mean to the coach and the captain Landon Donavan scored the winning goal.

So what was the difference in the two teams. The French team was more talented by most accounts. They didn't get anywhere near the amount of bad breaks the Americans did. I think the difference is the France felt entitled to be here. The French team believed everything should be handed to them, much like it is in France. When things started going poorly for them they looked for someone to blame instead of sucking it up and playing hard. The coach blamed the captain the team blamed the coach the manager just quit and has a result the French managed all of one goal in the world cup and even that came when they were behind by two.

Capitalism teaches us that we are responsible for ourselves no matter what the circumstances. In other words when the going gets tough the tough get going. Socialism teaches that when the going gets tough go look for someone to blame then tell them to give you their money. Of course were experiencing a little of that with this administration here in America but I'm praying that doesn't last past
2012. Capitalism will always defeat Socialism and this is just another example.

You Can't Clean Up Oil Wthout Fire Extinguishers and Life Vests?!?

2010-06-18T00:07:00.003-04:00

Today the oil clean-up was halted by bureaucracy. The Coast Guard stopped barges that were to be used in the oil clean-up because they could not confirm the boats had fire extinguishers and life vests. "We are all in this together. The enemy is the oil," said Coast Guard Lt. Cmdr. Dan Lauer. Unfortunately this appears not to be true the enemy of Louisiana and the rest of the Gulf Coast is bureaucracy. The barges have now sat for twenty four hours while thousands of barrels of oil have spilled into the gulf coast. Of course Governor Jindal tried to contact the White House without success. However Jindal is not the only governor that is having problems.

Governor Riley of Alabama is also experiencing difficulty trying to get anything done.

"The governor said the problem is there's still no single person giving a "yes" or "no." While the Gulf Coast governors have developed plans with the Coast Guard's command center in the Gulf, things begin to shift when other agencies start weighing in, like the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

"It's like this huge committee down there," Riley said, "and every decision that we try to implement, any one person on that committee has absolute veto power."

Hey President Obama put one person in charge of the decision making. If you want them to run it by you first by all means, but quit allowing bureaucracy to harm the country. You can't keep having different people giving different answers to every question. Put one person in charge. Oh wait you did, your in charge! At least you say you are. Take control of this situation before all of the beaches on the East Coast are covered with oil. Or at least ask someone else too. Maybe a President with a backbone who knows something about oil. Kinda like the last guy we had in there. I think I'm going to go out and by one of those President Bush miss me yet shirts.

Seriously, this is what happens when you allow someone with no experience running anything to run a country. You almost can't even blame Obama for this, He doesn't know what to do because he never learned. He had no experience running anything before he became President. I mean Heck he only served 153 days in the U.S. Senate before his campaign started. I'll admit he probably had no business running for President having no experience, but 53% of the country voted for him. I guess this really goes back to an old saying, "Be careful what you wish for you just might get it." I wonder if Obama is wishing he had left this President thing to someone who has a clue how to lead.

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/bp-oil-spill-gov-bobby-jindals-wishes-crude/story?id=10946379&page=1

It's Game 7!

2010-06-17T22:27:00.001-04:00

Hey guys I'm getting a post about the SC Democratic Party ready to post, but I think It will have to wait until tomorrow night. Game 7 Boston vs L.A.

Gather your Armies

2010-06-17T00:04:00.004-04:00

I just saw this ad on O'Reilly and I thought it was the best thing I have seen since McCain's Celebrity Ad. If you haven't seen it watch it now if you have seen it watch it again.

The Left is saying that the ad implies that we should overthrow the government by force. I guess they've never heard of a metaphor. The ad is obviously about overthrowing the bums in congress. It's amazing how soon the left forgets about free speech when their not the ones speaking.

Another one Bites the Bus?

2010-06-16T15:24:00.008-04:00

It appears has Ken Salazar will be the next member of Obama's inner circle to be thrown under a bus. Before we get to Mr Salazar let's review a list of the other members of the bus club. First we have Our President's own Grandma who he called a racist to gain favor in the African American community. Then we have his pastor whose church Obama attended for the same reason. Then he threw Rev Wright under the bus with his Grandma when he realized that "white America" wouldn't accept a pastor that cursed America from the pulpit. Remember Arlen Spector, Here's a man who switched parties and was promised not to be challenged in the Primary. Of course he was and when he was down and needed the Presidents help President Obama, you guessed it, threw him under the bus. Let's not forget the situation when Obama threw police under the bus when they responded to a call about a possible break in at Henry Louis Gates house. They get there some guy outside says he lives there but can't prove that he does. So Our President says they acted stupidly. He even threw Israel under the bus after their soldiers responded in self defense to an attack aboard a ship illegally in their waters.

Back to Mr. Salazar he was appointed to his position by President Obama. Has Interior Secretary it is his job to make sure these oil rigs don't explode. So he should be fired. The problem is this comes after a long line of Obama appointees were tax cheats or felons. Those that weren't were seen as partisan choices like Leon Panetta to run the CIA. I already written about this on march 3rd if you want to read about it http://thenewconservatives.blogspot.com/2009/03/obama-first-instict-is-usually-wrong.html

The situation with the oil may have worked out differently if Obama had accepted help from the Dutch and many others that was offered immediately after the spill happened. The Dutch offered skimmers that would pick the oil out of the water. According to the AJC (hardly a conservative paper) the skimmers could have removed 4.4. million gallons of oil by now. 5 million is total have entered the gulf. That means that 88% of the oil could have been already removed from the Gulf Coast. http://blogs.ajc.com/kyle-wingfield/2010/06/09/oil-spill-why-did-obama-refuse-to-go-dutch/

Instead the spill is now a crisis. I guess his instincts haven't gotten any better in a year. However first he must show he is not to blame for the on going crisis and the best way to do that is to say that someone else is. However since Bush and Cheney have been gone for over a year it's going to be hard to lay this at there feet. Not that he didn't try last night, "Over the last decade, this agency has become emblematic of a failed philosophy that views all regulation with hostility -- a philosophy that says corporations should be allowed to play by their own rules and police themselves. At this agency, industry insiders were put in charge of industry oversight. Oil companies showered regulators with gifts and favors, and were essentially allowed to conduct their own safety inspections and write their own regulations." http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-nation-bp-oil-spill

Seriously this man has got to quit blaming the last guy for everything that goes wrong during his administration. This is one of the reasons no one trust him anymore. That and he can't deliver on anything he promised in the campaign. Of course most of us at this site already knew that. So since no one with a brain will believe this is the fault of President Bush he will have to find another fall guy. Mr. Salazar get ready I hear the bus coming.

Mexico upsets America ON OUR BORDER!

2010-06-16T14:47:00.002-04:00

That's right America has just ceeded terrority to Mexico! The U.S. Fish and Wildlife service has closed part of a national park due to drug smuggling and other illegal activity on the border. “It’s literally out of control,” said Babeu. “We stood with Senator McCain and literally demanded support for 3,000 soldiers to be deployed to Arizona to get this under control and finally secure our border with Mexico.“

How are we going to keep Americans from going into this part of the park. More guards telling them to stay away perhaps, No! Instead we're using the time tested method of posting signs. I can see the press conference now. "President Obama two fourteen year old girls were killed on the border by Mexican drug lords today, what do you have to say about that?" President Obama: "Can't they read didn't they see those signs I had posted."

Of Course Sheriff Paul Babeu had much more to say on the subject. We need support from the federal government. It’s their job to secure the border and they haven’t done it,” said Babeu. “In fact, President Obama suspended the construction of the fence and it’s just simply outrageous.” Oh great no fence either. Let me see if I have this right President Obama wants no troops, no barriers, is it possible he wants no borders?

This just makes me angry. The situation on our border is becoming unbearable. This is why we have to secure our borders now! Let's send some troops down there and stop the crime that is occuring on our border and the illegal immigration. Then after we have secured a permanent solution to the problem we can perhaps talk about Immigration Reform. However just like the oil spill it's hard to accomplish anything until you stop the leak. I think the sheriff sums this up best, “We need action. It’s shameful that we, as the most powerful nation on Earth, … can’t even secure our own border and protect our own families.”

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/06/16/closes-park-land-mexico-border-americans/

Obama and Bush in a dead heat.

2009-12-09T14:54:00.005-05:00

A new poll as come out showing that when people are given a choice between Obama and Bush Obama only comes out with 50% of the vote. Bush actually gets 44%. I guess the other 6% were stoned. Now while this technically means Obama is still more popular than bush you have to remember that when President Bush left office his approval ratings were below 30%. I figure in about six more months Bush will be leading in this hypothetical matchup.
http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2009/12/obamas-december-standing.html
Obama has shown over and over again he is not a strong leader. From taken way too long on his decision on Afghanistan, to being all over the place on the public option and healthcare. If Obama wants to survive the midterms he is going to have to find his backbone if he ever had one to begin with.

Politically Correct Seasons Greetings:

2009-12-07T17:14:00.002-05:00

I just saw this and thought everyone would enjoy it. Merry Christmas!

Please accept with no obligation,
implied or implicit our best wishes for
an environmentally conscious,
socially responsible, low stress,
non-addictive, gender neutral,
celebration of the winter solstice
holiday, practiced within the most
enjoyable traditions of the religious
persuasion of your choice, or secular
practices of your choice, with respect
for the religious/secular persuasions
and/or traditions of others, or their
choice not to practice religious or
secular traditions at all ...

and a fiscally successful,
personally fulfilling, and medically
uncomplicated recognition of the onset
of the generally accepted calendar
year _______, but not without due respect
for the calendars of choice of other
cultures whose contributions to
society have helped make America great,
(not to imply that America is necessarily
greater than any other country or is
the only "AMERICA" in the western
hemisphere), and without regard to the
race, creed, color, age, physical ability,
religious faith, choice of computer platform,
or sexual preference of the wishee.

- DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTABILITY -

(By accepting this greeting,
you are accepting these terms.
This greeting is subject to
clarification or withdrawal. It is freely
transferable with no alteration to the
original greeting. It implies no
promise by the wisher to actually
implement any of the wishes for
her/himself or others, and is
void where prohibited by law, and is
revocable at the sole discretion of
the wisher. This wish is warranted
to perform as expected within the
usual application of good tidings
for a period of one year, or until the
issuance of a subsequent holiday greeting,
whichever comes first, and warranty is
limited to replacement of this wish
or issuance of a new wish at the
sole discretion of the wisher.)

I'm Engaged

2009-12-05T10:35:00.003-05:00

Just thought I'd let everyone know that on Thanksgiving Day I proposed to my girlfriend and for reasons defying explanation she said yes. We are planning on getting married in Feburary or thereabouts. I hope everyone is doing well. Merry Christmas!

P.S. Sorry I can't seem to get to this blog as much as I would like to. I don't have internet access at home. Hopefully this will change and I'll be back to blogging soon.

Thank you to our Veterans

2009-11-11T16:06:00.003-05:00

On the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month the war to end all wars also know as World War 1 came to an end. Of course we now know that World War 1 was not the war to end all wars it wasn't even the war to end all world wars. Still this day as been chosen to honor all veteran's living and dead. I just want to take a moment to thank our soldiers who are fighting and Iraq and Afghanistan and who are stationed in foreign lands across the world. Their sacrifices along with the families of these soldiers is what makes America the greatest country on earth. Thank You you to all the soldiers who volunteer to protect this great land and even more thanks to the ones that never made it home.

It is the VETERAN, not the preacher, who has given us freedom of religion.

It is the VETERAN, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press.

It is the VETERAN, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech.

It is the VETERAN, not the campus organizer, who has given us freedom to assemble.

It is the VETERAN, not the lawyer, who has given us the right to a fair trial.

It is the VETERAN, not the politician, Who has given us the right to vote.

It is the VETERAN who salutes the Flagand

It is the VETERAN who serves under the Flag

The Berlin Wall

2009-11-09T13:47:00.006-05:00

I was nine years old when the Berlin Wall fell, but I still remember the event. Back then the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. were seemingly always about a moment from destroying each other. We were long past the days of duck and cover. (Perhaps because someone pointed out the absurdity of hiding from a nuke under a small wooden desk.) However the threat was still very real until the moment the Berlin Wall came down.

Their is great history behind the Berlin Wall. The Wall was completed on August 13, 1961. This closed the border between the communist East Berlin and the democratic West Berlin. The Wall was more than 87 miles long. Many families were separated and would not be reunited until the Berlin Wall fell. On June 26, 1963 President John F. Kennedy went to West Berlin and uttered the now famous phase "Ich bin ein Berliner" (I am a Berliner). The phase was intended to be a shot at the Soviets as well as the encourage people in West Berlin. Another American President would deliver a similarly iconic speech on June 12, 1987 at the Brandenburg gate. "We welcome change and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace. There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace. General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization, come here to this gate. Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate. Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" Just a little over two years later the wall did come down.

The fall of the Berlin Wall was the first visible sign weakness from the Soviets. While it is now well known that many of their shows of might were just that shows in 1989 they were still viewed as the one of the World's two superpowers. When the people in East Berlin took their sledgehammers to the wall twenty years ago they did so under the threat or maybe in their minds the certainty of death. The people of East Germany and West Germany decided that they'd rather die than live one more day without freedom. Only because they were willing to die for freedom did they received freedom. Men can only have freedom if they are willing to die for it and can only keep it in the same way.

Here in America we must never forget as President Reagan so eloquently said, "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free." Here in America has long has we have brave men and women willing to go across the world to fight for freedom we will always be free.

The Revolution Has Started

2009-11-04T15:11:00.004-05:00

Last night we saw a glimpse of what could happen in 2010 if Republicans stick to their guns and continue fighting run away spending and irresponsible government that is coming out of the Obama Admission. With Republicans winning the top three spots in Virginia for the first time since 1997, and with Chris Christie upset victory in New Jersey it became a big night for the Republican Party. On the downside upstart Doug Hoffman was defeated in the NY 23rd, but I expect him to run again as a Republican and win that seat a year from now.
Regardless of the results from last night we simply cannot become complacent. We must continue to call out our own party when they are in the wrong. We must demand accountability from all Republicans. I expect RINO's will see several primary challenges in 2010 and 2012. If conservatives are to take back this country it will be one election at a time. Last night was a good start, but that is all it was a start.

What I've been doing

2009-04-21T08:17:00.002-04:00

Hello everyone,
Just wanted to take this time and let you know what I've been up to and why I'm not posting articles much lately. The first reason is that I'm now working third shift so I basically wakeup, go to work, eat, workout, sleep, eat, go to work. Not much time in the during the week for much of anything. The second reason is that when I'm not doing one of the above I'm working on getting a Young Republicans group started. I've attended a few meetings of my local republican groups and am making good progress on this front. I think it should be off the ground within two weeks. Thank You to all the people who still visit this blog. I'm hoping to have it up and running again soon.

Thanks
New Conservative

No You Don't Have to Go to College, seriously.

2009-03-25T18:37:00.008-04:00

After graduating from college in 2007. I was all set to explode on the scene. Instead two years later I just took a job for $7 an hour from Wal-Mart. I have to admit I'm lucky to get that job in this economy. However what happened to college degree's being the gateway to success. How come I just spent $30,000 and my degree is basically worthless. It's because now everyone goes to college even people who don't need to. It has basically become the new high school diploma.

I have a new idea. I think students should be set on individual paths after eighth grade. In my scenario students would could chose one of three options. Option one would be to go to college. Many jobs do involve a high level of math and foreign languages that you just can't get in high school. Someone who wants to be a CIA operative would probably what to learn Arabic and Chinese. Engineers need high levels of Algebra and even calculus to be successful. Also someone who wanted to teach should go to college and learn about what he or she would be instructing. Doctors and lawyers would also still need advanced degrees.

Now that we've discussed what people need to go to college for now let's talk about option two skill based education. Any kid who has decided they want to learn a skill such as locksmith, plumber, carpenter, or welder just to name a few should not bother with college. We should have a separate track for these young men. For instance I had to take four English classes to graduate high school. If you can explain to me how poetry helps someone become a better pipe fitter or work on an assembly line in a plant I'm all ears, but if you can't, and face it you can't, does it make any sense to force these young men to learn poetry. Instead wouldn't we be better off if they took classes that helped them in their chosen profession. In some cases Algebra would be needed in others Geometry. If you needed a 5/8 wrench (by the way I have no idea what that is or if it even exist) you would probably want to know how much 5/8 was. Therefore a faction based math class might be necessary for some professions. I went to college with kids who couldn't do fractions. I never had any problem with factions, but some people could use a course on them in high school.

This bring me to option three business based education. The American dream is to come from nothing and succeed. When someone achieves the American dream it is usually because they started their own business. Sam Walton, the founder of Wal-mart is a good example of this. As is Dave Thomas, founder of Wendy's and of course Bill Gates, Microsoft founder. What if we taught some high school students how to start a business? Admittedly many businesses fail, but is that a reason not to give someone a chance to go after the American dream if they want to.

The final thing I would change is this need to require more education than necessary for almost everything these days. With few exceptions such as speciality doctors, lawyers, and engineers. Most profession should only require a four year degree.
Now don't get me wrong some jobs obviously require not only college but Master's Degrees. Lawyers, Doctors, engineers, and scientist just to name a few. However many government jobs require Master's degree's and then offer salaries that you can barely live on.

Of course the problem with the track system is what if someone changes their mind. Well here's an idea we allow them to change tracks. Any class that overlaps curriculum, and many would, could count toward the new track. However the student would have to start from scratch with the other courses. Yes this means it may take longer for a student that switched curriculum to graduate than one who did not switch. What if someone gets tired of being a plumber and wants to go to college? Well we still have technical college where you can go for two years and then transfer. Who knows maybe some four year institutions would who took different tracks. Also no system would be perfect, but I believe this system is the best out of all possible options.

If we adopted this model for education I believe we the dropout rates would drop tremendously because the kids wouldn't be bored out of their minds in school. They would wake up in the morning wanting to attend school instead of dreading attending school. Crime would drop because the kids that used to join gangs would now have a trade or be opening up their own business. Maybe I'm just being an optimist, but I think if you teach kids how to make money legally that won't go sell drugs and risk being thrown in prison. Of course we don't live in a utopia. No matter what the system some people will try to cheat, steal and even kill their way through life. However I believe if more of these kids could learn a skill or how to open their own business we would all benefit.

Time to make some changes

2009-03-23T20:33:00.002-04:00

When I started this blog I intended to make it different from other blogs, but I found that to be difficult especially in an election year. I ended up posting about what I saw on other blogs and searching the internet for interesting news articles. I gave my opinions on these articles, but now I want to do what I intended in the first place.
The New Conservatives was meant to attract new people to conservatism and changing the minds of some conservatives on issues like the Environment. Don't get me wrong I haven't become a global warming fanatic. I meant looking after the environment the way hunters would like us too. In my mind hunters are environmentalist. On Energy I believe the all of the above approach we have the right message, but on Education and the Environment I think we could use a little work on our message. Tomorrow I'm going to write an article about overhauling our education system. I hope you will stop by and read my article.

U.N. to U.S.: Quit Demonizing the Devil

2009-03-18T01:51:00.002-04:00

Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann, The President of the U.N. Security Council, said that the U.S. has been demonizing Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. When asked about Ahmadinejad's comments about wiping Israel off the map Brockman said "if he said that, it's lamentable," but he quickly added that "words as such don't kill" and it's the actions that have to be watched. If he said it, well just in case you have has bad a memory as the President of the Security Council here's an article referring the quote. http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/10/26/ahmadinejad/ I look for a clip but apparently there either isn't one or I just can't find it.

Brockman continued the defend the Iranian President, "I don't think anyone can doubt that in our part of the world ... (President Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad has been demonized," he said. "The United States has been in the business of the demonization of people forever and the canonization of the worst of dictators."

He also criticized the International criminal court for issuing a warrant for Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir for war crimes and crimes against humanity. "It helps to deepen the perception that international justice is racist because this is the third time that you have something from the ICC, and for the third time it has to do with Africa," d'Escoto said. Bashir is responsible for the genocide occurring in Darfur.

The spokesman for the U.S. Mark Kornblau, was almost speechless when asked about the situation, "It's hard to make sense of Mr. D'Escoto's increasingly bizarre statements."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,509596,00.html

Obama to Charge Troops For Injuries.

2009-03-16T23:14:00.004-04:00

Obama is planning on forcing Private insurance carriers to pay for wounded soldiers that were hurt while fighting for our country. This news came after Obama met with Commander David K. Rehbein of The American Legion. Rehbein said after the meeting that he is deeply disappointed and concerned." Rehbein described his conversation with the President Obama, "It became apparent during our discussion today that the President intends to move forward with this unreasonable plan," said Commander David K. Rehbein of The American Legion. "He says he is looking to generate $540-million by this method, but refused to hear arguments about the moral and government-avowed obligations that would be compromised by it."

Let me see if I get this straight we have money 3.6 trillion dollars to spend in the 2010 fiscal year, but not enough money to take care of our soldiers when they come home. Wasn't it Obama that said McCain didn't care about the troops? Looks like we know the truth now. Too bad it's about three months too late.

The commander wasn't happy with the results of the meeting and let that be known. "This reimbursement plan would be inconsistent with the mandate ' to care for him who shall have borne the battle' given that the United States government sent members of the armed forces into harm's way, and not private insurance companies. I say again that The American Legion does not and will not support any plan that seeks to bill a veteran for treatment of a service connected disability at the very agency that was created to treat the unique need of America's veterans!"

He had previously written a letter to the Administration letting his views be known. The letter read in part, "There is simply no logical explanation for billing a veteran's personal insurance for care that the VA has a responsibility to provide. While we understand the fiscal difficulties this country faces right now, placing the burden of those fiscal problems on the men and women who have already sacrificed a great deal for this country is unconscionable."

Outside of the fact that Obama is turning his back on the men and women that defends out country there are other problems that these troops will face if this becomes government policy. "The Legion argues that, depending on the severity of the medical conditions involved, maximum insurance coverage limits could be reached through treatment of the veteran's condition alone. That would leave the rest of the family without health care benefits. The Legion also points out that many health insurance companies require deductibles to be paid before any benefits are covered. Additionally, the Legion is concerned that private insurance premiums would be elevated to cover service-connected disabled veterans and their families, especially if the veterans are self-employed or employed in small businesses unable to negotiate more favorable across-the-board insurance policy pricing. The American Legion also believes that some employers, especially small businesses, would be reluctant to hire veterans with service-connected disabilities due to the negative impact their employment might have on obtaining and financing company health care benefits."

However none of this seemed to matter to President Obama. "I got the distinct impression that the only hope of this plan not being enacted," said Commander Rehbein, "is for an alternative plan to be developed that would generate the desired $540-million in revenue."

Apparently for Obama this is all about saving money. However how comes the first time he has trying to save money it involves taking a shot (for a lack of a better word) at our men and women fighting overseas. Why could he not save money by trimming his own budget requests, or vetoing that spending bill that had over 7 billion dollars in earmarks. It's simple those earmarks were more important to him than our soldiers. I hope President Obama comes to his senses and recommits to our brave soldiers that protect this country. However if he's insisted on trying to make them pay for the wounds they incur while fighting overseas, I hope he fails. http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20090316/pl_usnw/the_american_legion_strongly_opposed_to_president_s_plan_to_charge_wounded_heroes_for_treatment

Obama to Negotiate with Terrorist

2009-03-10T00:56:00.002-04:00

Obama told the New York Times over the weekend that he consider working with the Taliban. This comes of course after he's already reached out to Iran, Syria, and Russia. Pretty soon Obama's going to extend his hand in friendship and come back with a nub. I've posted the article below

Only seven weeks into his presidency, President Obama has already made fresh overtures to countries like Syria, Iran and Russia, fulfilling a campaign pledge to reach out to America's adversaries in hopes of settling tensions and shoring up U.S. interests around the globe.

But ... working with the Taliban?

In an interview with the New York Times over the weekend, the president pointed to the success the U.S. military had in persuading Sunni insurgents in Iraq to turn away from Al Qaeda, and he suggested that the U.S. would consider working with moderate Taliban elements in Afghanistan to do the same.

"There may be some comparable opportunities in Afghanistan and in the Pakistani region," Obama said.

But some foreign affairs analysts cringed at the suggestion.

David Rittgers, a legal policy analyst with the Cato Institute who served three tours with the U.S. Army's Special Forces in Afghanistan, said the statement would mark the most extreme attempt so far to engage an adversary.

He said negotiating with moderates at the local level, some of whom might fall under the multifaceted umbrella of the Taliban, could be possible and worthwhile. But he said any attempt to divide and conquer the Taliban would probably fail, and he said Obama had given the Taliban leadership "propaganda strength" in publicly suggesting that outreach is possible."They really are negotiating from a position of strength. What are we going to offer them?" Rittgers said. "I don't know where we're going to find the common ground, with the exception of leaving their drug money alone."

He said the Taliban does not offer the same opportunities as the Sunnis in Iraq, because whereas the Sunnis could be economically motivated, many in the Taliban control drug money and are economically independent.

Shortly after the Obama interview was published, a Taliban spokesman told Britain's Guardian newspaper that the overture was a sign that Americans are "tired and worried."

He challenged Obama to find so-called moderates in the Taliban: "They will not be able to find such people because we are united around the aim of fighting for freedom and bringing an Islamic system to Afghanistan."

Some analysts have also questioned whether the moderates are plentiful or influential enough to make a difference.

"The notion of moderates ... I'm not sure they exist," said Simon Henderson, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. But he said it is "worth trying" to reach out to persuadable elements of the Taliban.

"This is a distraction which (Obama) wants to settle down and also to contain," Henderson said. "It's a cancerous growth which he would like to cut off completely but in fact can't."

Obama told the Times he understands that dealing with the complex nature of the Taliban is challenging. And some argue that the need for discussions with these groups is a political reality.

Afghanistan expert Barnett Rubin co-authored an article in Foreign Affairs in December urging the U.S. to distinguish political opponents of the U.S. from global terrorists like Al Qaeda -- suggesting members of the Taliban could be swayed. Rubin envisioned an agreement that would prohibit the Taliban from allowing Afghanistan to be used for launching international terrorism, in exchange for an agreement from the U.S. and NATO to end military action.

"Any agreement in which the Taliban or other insurgents disavowed Al Qaeda would constitute a strategic defeat for Al Qaeda," the article said.

Obama has won both praise and criticism for his efforts to mend troubled relations with other U.S. adversaries.

Last week, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signaled a major shift when she said the U.S. would send two envoys to Syria to begin "preliminary conversations." It would mark the highest-level U.S. administration visit in more than four years to Syria, which has been called a state sponsor of terrorism. The Bush administration withdrew the U.S. ambassador to Syria in early 2005 to protest the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. (Syria officials have been investigated in the killing, though Damascus denies involvement.)

State Department spokesman Robert Wood said Monday that Syrian behavior is still of "great concern" to the Obama administration.

"We want to work with Syria, but it does take, you know, two to tango here. And up until now, Syria hasn't played that positive role that we've wanted to see in a number of areas, with regard to foreign fighters in Iraq, with regards to interference in Lebanese affairs," he said.

Further, Congress is poised to pass a spending bill that includes provisions to ease restrictions on travel and trade with Cuba.

Wayne Smith, with the Center for International Policy, said Obama should go even further than that in order to send a friendly signal to Latin America ahead of the upcoming Summit of the Americas, a meeting of North, South and Central American countries. He said Obama could move to lift restrictions on academic travel, for instance.

"All this can be done with the stroke of a pen," Smith said. He said normalizing relations with Cuba might actually prove less challenging than some of Obama's other diplomatic aims.

"This is much easier than talking with the Taliban," he said.

The Obama administration is also reportedly planning to invite Iran to an international conference on Afghanistan in late March.

And the administration has escalated outreach to Russia in recent weeks, with Obama writing a letter to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. Though Obama denied it, some officials suggested the letter floated the possibility that the U.S. could junk its plans for a missile defense shield Moscow opposes in exchange for Russia's help in stopping Iran from building nuclear weapons.

Clinton also met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov last week, saying the talks marked a "fresh start" in resetting relations with Russia.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/09/talk-taliban-outreach-obama-makes-court-press/

Obama Thinks We're Retarded.

2009-03-04T21:50:00.005-05:00

Obama is trying to say he's saving money by not spending money on the War in Iraq. While at first blush this seems to be true when you take a look at the amount and the length of time he projects the war would've lasted had he not stepped in it's obvious either he's retarded or he thinks the American people are.

Obama's budget presumes that we would spend over $100 billion ever year until 2019.
Of course we know that every troop will be out of Iraq by December 31th 2011 due to an agreement signed by former President Bush. John Boehner said "This budget is a lesson in fuzzy math,"

The high for spending in the Iraq war was $188 billion a year, but Obama's budget has the U.S. still spending 183.5 billion in 2019. Either Obama is planning on starting a third Iraq war, or he's not being honest. Of course their is still the option he's retarded.

"It's like a family trying to claim savings of $10,000 by assuming a family vacation and not taking it," said Brian Riedl, a senior federal budget analyst with the conservative Heritage Foundation. "Riedl said the estimate is unrealistic and allows Obama to claim massive cuts to spending that was never going to take place anyway." Obama is using these stats to say that he is heading off a $9 trillion deficit 10 years from now. Yep he thinks we're retarded.

Obama making up fake deficits and then erasing them is not change, wait yes it is, it's change for the worse. I guess since no one bothered to ask what you meant by change your still keeping your promises. It's going to be a long, long four years. I hope everyone has started hording their non-perishables.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/02/republicans-expected-war-savings-obama-budget-suggest-fuzzy-math/

WSJ: The Obama Economy

2009-03-04T03:30:00.002-05:00

As 2009 opened, three weeks before Barack Obama took office, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at 9034 on January 2, its highest level since the autumn panic. Yesterday the Dow fell another 4.24% to 6763, for an overall decline of 25% in two months and to its lowest level since 1997. The dismaying message here is that President Obama's policies have become part of the economy's problem.

Americans have welcomed the Obama era in the same spirit of hope the President campaigned on. But after five weeks in office, it's become clear that Mr. Obama's policies are slowing, if not stopping, what would otherwise be the normal process of economic recovery. From punishing business to squandering scarce national public resources, Team Obama is creating more uncertainty and less confidence -- and thus a longer period of recession or subpar growth.

The Democrats who now run Washington don't want to hear this, because they benefit from blaming all bad economic news on President Bush. And Mr. Obama has inherited an unusual recession deepened by credit problems, both of which will take time to climb out of. But it's also true that the economy has fallen far enough, and long enough, that much of the excess that led to recession is being worked off. Already 15 months old, the current recession will soon match the average length -- and average job loss -- of the last three postwar downturns. What goes down will come up -- unless destructive policies interfere with the sources of potential recovery.

And those sources have been forming for some time. The price of oil and other commodities have fallen by two-thirds since their 2008 summer peak, which has the effect of a major tax cut. The world is awash in liquidity, thanks to monetary ease by the Federal Reserve and other central banks. Monetary policy operates with a lag, but last year's easing will eventually stir economic activity.

Housing prices have fallen 27% from their Case-Shiller peak, or some two-thirds of the way back to their historical trend. While still high, credit spreads are far from their peaks during the panic, and corporate borrowers are again able to tap the credit markets. As equities were signaling with their late 2008 rally and January top, growth should under normal circumstances begin to appear in the second half of this year.

So what has happened in the last two months? The economy has received no great new outside shock. Exchange rates and other prices have been stable, and there are no security crises of note. The reality of a sharp recession has been known and built into stock prices since last year's fourth quarter.

What is new is the unveiling of Mr. Obama's agenda and his approach to governance. Every new President has a finite stock of capital -- financial and political -- to deploy, and amid recession Mr. Obama has more than most. But one negative revelation has been the way he has chosen to spend his scarce resources on income transfers rather than growth promotion. Most of his "stimulus" spending was devoted to social programs, rather than public works, and nearly all of the tax cuts were devoted to income maintenance rather than to improving incentives to work or invest.

His Treasury has been making a similar mistake with its financial bailout plans. The banking system needs to work through its losses, and one necessary use of public capital is to assist in burning down those bad assets as fast as possible. Yet most of Team Obama's ministrations so far have gone toward triage and life support, rather than repair and recovery.

AIG yesterday received its fourth "rescue," including $70 billion in Troubled Asset Relief Program cash, without any clear business direction. (See here.) Citigroup's restructuring last week added not a dollar of new capital, and also no clear direction. Perhaps the imminent Treasury "stress tests" will clear the decks, but until they do the banks are all living in fear of becoming the next AIG. All of this squanders public money that could better go toward burning down bank debt.

The market has notably plunged since Mr. Obama introduced his budget last week, and that should be no surprise. The document was a declaration of hostility toward capitalists across the economy. Health-care stocks have dived on fears of new government mandates and price controls. Private lenders to students have been told they're no longer wanted. Anyone who uses carbon energy has been warned to expect a huge tax increase from cap and trade. And every risk-taker and investor now knows that another tax increase will slam the economy in 2011, unless Mr. Obama lets Speaker Nancy Pelosi impose one even earlier.

Meanwhile, Congress demands more bank lending even as it assails lenders and threatens to let judges rewrite mortgage contracts. The powers in Congress -- unrebuked by Mr. Obama -- are ridiculing and punishing the very capitalists who are essential to a sustainable recovery. The result has been a capital strike, and the return of the fear from last year that we could face a far deeper downturn. This is no way to nurture a wounded economy back to health.

Listening to Mr. Obama and his chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, on the weekend, we couldn't help but wonder if they appreciate any of this. They seem preoccupied with going to the barricades against Republicans who wield little power, or picking a fight with Rush Limbaugh, as if this is the kind of economic leadership Americans want.

Perhaps they're reading the polls and figure they have two or three years before voters stop blaming Republicans and Mr. Bush for the economy. Even if that's right in the long run, in the meantime their assault on business and investors is delaying a recovery and ensuring that the expansion will be weaker than it should be when it finally does arrive.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123604419092515347.html#

Obama First Instict is usually wrong.

2009-03-03T15:10:00.007-05:00

It seems to me that usually Obama's first choice is wrong. This goes back to the campaign Obama said in a a democratic primary debate he would meet with leaders from terrorist sponsoring countries without Pre-conditions. He later changed his answer. In the Presidential compaign Obama first blamed Georgia for being invaded by Russia. It took Obama three attempts to figure out that the bigger county was bullying the smaller country. I think a first grader would've understood what was going on faster than Obama did. Apparently this hasn't changed with Obama's cabinet picks.

Ron Kirk- Obama's choice for trade representative owes $100,00 in back taxes. This is now the fourth nominee with tax problems. It appears he will be confirmed

Tom Daschel- failed to disclose $300,000 in past income. withdrew

Timothy Geithner- failed to pay $40,000 in payroll taxes. He is now our Treasury Secretary

Nancy Killfer- Obama's pick for Chief Performance officer had tax problems. withdrew

So it appears Obama will get half of his tax cheating cabinet picks confirmed. I think I've figured out why this administration is so set on raising taxes. It's because no one in the cabinet is going to pay them anyway.

If we combine those choices with a couple of Obama's other picks such as Bill Richardson and Judd Gregg I think a pattern starts to emerge. Richarson withdrew after it was discovered he was under federal investigation into how his political donors got a transportation contract. Gregg also withdrew after he realized Obama had no intention of listening to any of his ideas and just wanted to appear bipartisan.

It should be clear to anyone that our new President's instincts are not good. He has chosen four tax cheats and a man under federal investigation to serve in his cabinet so far. This doesn't even include other very partisan choices he has made to serve in his cabinet such as Kathleen Seblius to serve as Health and Human Services secretary and Leon Panetta to head up the CIA. These are not choices that bring the country together these are choices that tear it apart.

The New Look GOP

2009-02-24T15:21:00.010-05:00

The GOP has finally figured out what I've known for the last ten years. It has to become more racially diverse, it must reach out to woman and it must get younger. The truth is the GOP always has been the party of diversity, but now some of this diversity is finally being put out front for everyone to see. Bobby Jindal, the Governor of Louisiana, is giving the GOP response to Obama's speech to congress tonight. Jindal is 37. He is also the first Asian governor ever elected in the Continental U.S. We have also selected Michael Steele the first African African ever to hold a statewide office in the state of Maryland. He was also the first Republican elected to that office. Steele is now the Chairman of the GOP. Of Course the difference between these Republicans and Barack Obama is simple Jindal and Steele are qualified to hold their positions Obama is not qualified to be President of this country. A fact I believe will become painfully obvious in the next four years.

As far as getting younger goes the GOP's new House minority whip is showing great leadership. Eric Cantor got every Republican in the House to vote against Obama's wasteful spending bill, also know as the stimulus package. Cantor was also a finalist in the Veep stakes in 2008. Cantor is also the only Jewish Republican in Congress.

The National Young Republicans want to have 40% of challengers for congress to be under the age of 40 by 2012. This is a way to bring youth back into the Republican Party. The Republican Party is perceived has the party of old white guys because we are. Don't believe me go to the next Republican County meeting and tell me what you see. I do think a shift is starting to occur. Hopefully our Young guns in congress along with our youthful governors and new RNC chair can keep the momentum going in the "right" direction.
Governor of Louisiana

GOP National Chairman

2008 VP Candidate and Governor of Alaska

U.S. House Minority Whip

Super Bowl Pick

2009-02-01T02:55:00.002-05:00

My pick to win the Super Bowl is the Arizona Cardinals. My reason Kurt Warner is the man! Plus we all know he has Jesus in his corner so that can't hurt. Besides the Steelers have enough trophies. GO Cards!

Michael Steele's Blueprint for Tomorrow.

2009-02-01T02:42:00.002-05:00

Michael Steele is the GOP's new Chairman. He was my first choice with Katon Dawson being my second choice. The truth is those were really the only two picks tha would've made any sense at all in my opinion. Steele defeated Dawson head to head on the final ballot. I have enjoyed watching Steele on various news programs. I think he has the determination and the ideas to lead us out of the wilderness and back to the promise land. This is his platform.

Blueprint Chapter1

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Politics & Governmen michael steele Republican Party

It's Offical our Treasury Secretary is a Tax Cheat

2009-01-26T23:23:00.002-05:00

Timothy Geithner was confirmed by the U.S. Senate by 60-34 vote today. This despite the fact that the man couldn't manage to pay his taxes. Obama said there had been a "devastating loss in trust and confidence" in the U.S. economy. And installing tax cheat as the top finacinal man in the country is going to fix that how?

I'm going to take a look at Obama's whole cabinet pretty soon. Stay tuned that will be one interesting article.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/26/senate-confirms-geithner-treasury-secretary/100days/

Pelosi: Close GITMO but don't put those terrorist in my district.

2009-01-26T00:03:00.006-05:00

When I heard that Rep Bill Young suggested that we should reopen the Rock and put the GITMO detainees there I thought it sounded like a great idea. I mean if were going to close GITMO lets and bring those detainees to America (an idea I think is idiotic) AT LEAST we should put them in the most secure facility possible. Alcatraz seems like it would be the place. Even if they escape they would still have to get through shark infested waters. So why not The Rock? Well It turns out The Rock is located in Speaker Pelosi's district. So? Doesn't Pelosi want them bought to America? She should be willing to put them in her district, right? Why that might make sense to the rest of was Pelosi says NO! When asked if the idea was a serious one Pelosi said, "It is -- no." She has the NIMBY syndrome. NIMBY stands for not in my backyard. Amazingly while she is in favor of bringing terrorist here and giving them rights. She is against terrorist being anywhere near San Francisco. (I guess she wants them in the South where all the uneducated, gun toting, bible clinging, conservatives live.) Pelosi what's the deal? I thought these guys were all wrongly imprisoned and were just turned in for ransom, at least that's what you've been telling the country for the last three years.

Despite the fact that Pelosi has no idea where we could put these terrorist, she still said, "What the president put forth was very wise. He said he's going to close Guantanamo, take the time to do it. You can't just go down there today and say, 'Everybody out,' and lock the door. They're going to review the cases, narrow it down and then go from there. ... It's brilliant," she said on ABC's "This Week."

Brilliant, Closing GITMO and having nowhere to send the detainees is brilliant. You can't really believe that. I know your trying to suck up to the new President, but you really believe this is brilliant. Maybe it's time for someone to give you a reality check and since we all know the press won't do it allow me Speaker Pelosi.

Closing GITMO and bringing the terrorist to America (while keeping them far away from your district) puts this country in danger. For example the terrorist will now have lawyers. What happens when some "lawyer" turns out to be relaying messages for Al Qaeda." It happens with the Mafia why wouldn't it be the same with terrorist. Two, what if we know their guilty, but can't prosecute them because we can't reveal how we got the information without revealing national security secrets? In that case the terrorist would walk right out the door of an American courtroom a free man. This could happened with several detainees. Not to mention what if one of those liberal Judges you love so much overturns a rightful conviction on appeal. The Supreme Court probably won't review every case some nutball liberal overturns by making up new constitutional rights.

Just incase you thought there couldn't possibly be anyone else who thought like Pelosi let me introduce you to our Vice President. Joe Biden said of GITMO, "There's no question it has to be closed. And we don't think it's inconsistent to deal with our national security and our Constitution. ... That's why we have the White House counsel -- Mr. Craig is now going through this meticulously, deciding what we're going to do with each and every prisoner,"

Biden also tries to ensure Americans by telling them even if some are released they won't stay here. "They have no legal status to stay here, I don't anticipate that happening. What I anticipate happening is that those people who are in a situation where it is either the evidence is in question or it's going to be hard to make a case, we will most likely be rendering them back to their countries of origin or another country,"

Alright lets take the Vice President at his word. So the terrorist will be handed over to countries like Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Iran, Syria, along with many others that would allow them to go right back to killing Americans on the Battlefield in Iraq and Afghanistan. We already know many GITMO detainees that have been released have been recaptured on the battlefield. One recently popped up as an Al-Qaeda commander in Yemen. He had been released to Saudi Arabia for rehabilitation.

If I were a solider I'd have a hard time not feeling like my country was betraying me. We're going to end up releasing terrorist that U.S. soldiers died capturing.
The people that say they want to close GITMO don't want the terrorist anywhere near their cities, and what's the Speaker of the U.S. House say about all this. "It's Brilliant."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/25/pelosi-shrugs-alcatraz-possible-terror-detention-facility/

http://www.citizen-times.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009901240323

Sunday Funnies

2009-01-25T01:31:00.001-05:00

I Just saw some amazing Political cartoons. Check them out.
http://brettpassmore.com/2009/01/political-funnies/

Obama Better Organizine the White House Better Than He Did the Inauguration

2009-01-23T00:13:00.003-05:00

"Optimistic chants of "change" and "O-bam-A" morphed into angered shouts of "Let us in!" outside the security gates to the inauguration. These folks had tickets, and they wanted in." Yet many didn't get in too see the event because of bad organization. "There was a "chaos of people, no line and no bullhorns with directions," said Haverkate. We were so disappointed that we missed the historical moment we'd be waiting for for months," he said. Another person who came all the way from California had this to say, "The entire experience was extremely disappointing, and I am utterly disgusted and appalled at the organization and preparation of this event," Well at least you didn't come from Michigan in your Wheelchair. After a bus ride from Detroit to D.C. Denise Robinson was twenty feet from the gate when it closed. Mayor John Bull from Coxsackie, New York who was also denied entry said this, "It's heartbreaking to think how far she came and how hard is was for her and her husband to fight through the crowds and push her wheelchair just to be shunned in the end."
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/22/inauguration.problems.irpt/index.html?iref=24hours

First of all I feel bad for all those people who had tickets that were unable to get in to the inauguration. I know when I buy a ticket for an event I expect to be able to attend the event. However apparently that isn't the case if it's an event Obama is a part of. Obama if this is a preview of how you plan to run the country I'd say it's going to be a long four years.

Fidel is alive and has a "very good Perception"of Obama.

2009-01-22T04:27:00.004-05:00

The title alone should scare the crap out of every American. When bad people be it Fidel, Hamas, Ahmadinejad, have positive things to say about you I don't consider that to be a good thing. If it was one bad person I'd say not to worry about it but it seems like every bad person has something nice to say about "The One."

In a meeting with Argentina President Fernandez Castro. Castro called Obama, "a man who seems absolutely sincere," who believes strongly in his ideas "and who hopefully can carry them out." He also said, "I personally did not have the slightest doubt about the honesty of Obama, the 11th president since Jan. 1, 1959, when he expresses his ideas." Well if a mass murder trust him and wants him to succeed that's good enough for me. I guess I was wrong about Obama.
Or maybe it's possible Castro wants Obama to succeed because he and Obama share the same vision of government.

Raul Castro also had nice things to say about Obama. "Earlier Wednesday, Raul Castro said Obama "seemed like a good man" and wished him luck." Obama has offered to negotiate with Raul Castro and to ease restrictions on Cuba. I guess we'll just be negotitating how much we will ease restrictions. I'm sure telling Castro you planned to ease them anyway won't give him the upper hand in those negotiations.

Is there an evil dicator anywhere in the world that Obama won't negotiate with. Maybe Obama can offer Florida in exchange for them not killing or imprisoning anyone that disagrees with them.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,481407,00.html

Obama is no Abe Lincoln Here's the Proof

2009-01-20T21:38:00.012-05:00

So apparently somehow Obama got the idea he is the next Abraham Lincoln. Maybe it's all the media coverage saying how great he is even though he hasn't accomplished anything yet. Or it could be that he's just an overconfident self-absorbed egomaniac.
This quote from June 29th 2005 tells us everything we need to know. "This week comes the previously careful Sen. Barack Obama, flapping his wings in Time magazine and explaining that he's a lot like Abraham Lincoln, only sort of better. "In Lincoln's rise from poverty, his ultimate mastery of language and law, his capacity to overcome personal loss and remain determined in the face of repeated defeat--in all this he reminded me not just of my own struggles." "Mr. Obama said he keeps a photographic portrait of Lincoln on the wall of his office, and that "it asks me questions."

"I'm sure it does. I'm sure it says, "Barack, why are you such an egomaniac?" Or perhaps, "Is it no longer possible in American politics to speak of another's greatness without suggesting your own?"
http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110006884

Obama was sworn in on the Lincoln bible a feat no other President, probably because of modesty, had ever attempted. His Inauguration dinner is a tribute to Lincoln's favorite foods. If you want to see the menu you can go here. After that he took the same route that Lincoln had traveled in the inaugural parade. He also is took the same train route Lincoln took to D.C.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/4229770/Barack-Obama-to-turn-inauguration-into-Abraham-Lincoln-memorial.html
http://inaugural.senate.gov/luncheon/

Lincoln owned his own business and was a Captain in a state militia. He learned leadership in these areas. Show me one place Obama learned leadership. Being a senator for 143 days before he started running for office doesn't even come close. Even if you take the liberal number of 304 days that's still less than a year of experience. Plus Obama now has exactly 12.5 hours of executive experience. Something Lincoln learned has a business owner and a Captain.
http://www.gopusa.com/theloft/?p=707
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/832119/is_is_true_that_barack_obama_only_has.html?cat=75

President Lincoln did what he had to do to keep this country united. Including suspending Habeus Corpus rights. Obama can't handle the fact that we use enhanced interrogation techniques on people that want to kill us all. They even want to kill the liberals. Of course from talking to liberals I know they'd rather we sacrifice ourselves for our ideals. What good are ideals if their is no one alive to defend them? I'm all for standing up for what I believe in. I do it all the time. That's what being a conservative is, but when I believe in something that's contrary to what liberals believe in they say I'm a coward because I won't die for their ideals.

Lincoln made hard decisions in possibly the most difficult time in American history. I think the fact we still exist as a union 143 years after the civil war proves he made the right decisions.

Hearing Obama compared to Lincoln is absurd. How absurd? Let's Compare these two men.

President Obama:
The First African American President

44th President of the U.S.

3 terms in Illinois State Legislature

4 years as U.S. Senator

Called for withdrawal from Iraq in 2006

Backed off his promise to take
public financing in General Election

President Lincoln:
The First Republican President

16th President of the U.S.

4 terms in the Illinois State Legislature

1 term has U.S. Congressman.

Spoke out against slavery said it was
"founded on both injustice and bad policy."

Made Thanksgiving a national holiday

Captain of Illinois Militia company

Known has honest Abe

Ran a small business

Worked to pass the 13th Amendment of the
Constitution ending slavery

suspended Habeus Corpus during Civil War

Won the Civil War

Obama may have a similar biography as Lincoln, but that is where the similarities end. He has neither the courage nor the conviction to be anywhere near the man Lincoln was much less the President. I wish Obama well as President I hope he does a good job however the first thing he needs to do is realize there is only one Abraham Lincoln.

Happy MLK Day.

2009-01-20T00:03:00.002-05:00

Even though it's no longer MLK day I thought I'd wish everyone a happy one anyway. MLK was a man that stood up for his principles and was willing to die for them. I feel sure he knew that standing up for what he believed in would not be popular and may get him killed (which it did.) He did it anyway because he understood that his actions could affect generations of people that would come after him. Partly because of his courage we elected our first black President this year. However Obama is no Martin Luther King Jr. He's also not Abraham Lincoln even though his belief that he is will be the subject of a later post. Perhaps Tomorrow. Actually make that later today.

Back to a post a day on Monday

2009-01-17T00:58:00.002-05:00

To anyone who is still reading my blog. I will go back to putting up at least one post a day on Monday. Sorry I haven't been doing a very good job of staying updated lately. I'll probably also start cross-posting with Conservatism Today and Patriot Room. To try and drive up my traffic again. Anyone got a clue when RealClearPolitics is going to start accepting Reader Articles again?

History Will Prove Bush Was Right.

2009-01-14T23:54:00.002-05:00

I came across this article while surfing the web today. Finally someone has the courage to tell the truth about this administrations actions. Too bad this article was published in England.

By Andrew Roberts

The American lady who called to see if I would appear on her radio programme was specific. "We're setting up a debate," she said sweetly, "and we want to know from your perspective as a historian whether George W Bush was the worst president of the 20th century, or might he be the worst president in American history?" "I think he's a good president," I told her, which seemed to dumbfound her, and wreck my chances of appearing on her show.

In the avalanche of abuse and ridicule that we are witnessing in the media assessments of President Bush's legacy, there are factors that need to be borne in mind if we are to come to a judgment that is not warped by the kind of partisan hysteria that has characterised this issue on both sides of the Atlantic.

The first is that history, by looking at the key facts rather than being distracted by the loud ambient noise of the
24-hour news cycle, will probably hand down a far more positive judgment on Mr Bush's presidency than the immediate, knee-jerk loathing of the American and European elites.

At the time of 9/11, which will forever rightly be regarded as the defining moment of the presidency, history will look in vain for anyone predicting that the Americans murdered that day would be the very last ones to die at the hands of Islamic fundamentalist terrorists in the US from that day to this.

The decisions taken by Mr Bush in the immediate aftermath of that ghastly moment will be pored over by historians for the rest of our lifetimes. One thing they will doubtless conclude is that the measures he took to lock down America's borders, scrutinise travellers to and from the United States, eavesdrop upon terrorist suspects, work closely with international intelligence agencies and take the war to the enemy has foiled dozens, perhaps scores of would-be murderous attacks on America. There are Americans alive today who would not be if it had not been for the passing of the Patriot Act. There are 3,000 people who would have died in the August 2005 airline conspiracy if it had not been for the superb inter-agency co-operation demanded by Bush
after 9/11.

The next factor that will be seen in its proper historical context in years to come will be the true reasons for invading Afghanistan in October 2001 and Iraq in April 2003. The conspiracy theories believed by many (generally, but not always) stupid people – that it was "all about oil", or the securing of contracts for the US-based Halliburton corporation, etc – will slip into the obscurity from which they should never have emerged had it not been for comedian-filmmakers such as Michael Moore.

Instead, the obvious fact that there was a good case for invading Iraq based on 14 spurned UN resolutions, massive human rights abuses and unfinished business following the interrupted invasion of 1991 will be recalled.

Similarly, the cold light of history will absolve Bush of the worst conspiracy-theory accusation: that he knew there were no WMDs in Iraq. History will show that, in common with the rest of his administration, the British Government, Saddam's own generals, the French, Chinese, Israeli and Russian intelligence agencies, and of course SIS and the CIA, everyone assumed that a murderous dictator does not voluntarily destroy the WMD arsenal he has used against his own people. And if he does, he does not then expel the UN weapons inspectorate looking for proof of it, as he did in 1998 and again in 2001.

Mr Bush assumed that the Coalition forces would find mass graves, torture chambers, evidence for the gross abuse of the UN's food-for-oil programme, but also WMDs. He was right about each but the last, and history will place him in the mainstream of Western, Eastern and Arab thinking on the matter.

History will probably, assuming it is researched and written objectively, congratulate Mr Bush on the fact that whereas in 2000 Libya was an active and vicious member of what he was accurately to describe as an "axis of evil" of rogue states willing to employ terrorism to gain its ends, four years later Colonel Gaddafi's WMD programme was sitting behind glass in a museum in Oakridge, Tennessee.

With his characteristic openness and at times almost self-defeating honesty, Mr Bush has been the first to acknowledge his mistakes – for example, tardiness over Hurricane Katrina – but there are some he made not because he was a ranting Right-winger, but because he was too keen to win bipartisan support. The invasion of Iraq should probably have taken place months earlier, but was held up by the attempt to find support from UN security council members, such as Jacques Chirac's France, that had ties to Iraq and hostility towards the Anglo-Americans.

History will also take Mr Bush's verbal fumbling into account, reminding us that Ronald Reagan also mis-spoke regularly, but was still a fine president. The first
MBA president, who had a higher grade-point average at Yale than John Kerry, Mr Bush's supposed lack of intellect will be seen to be a myth once the papers in his Presidential Library in the Southern Methodist University in Dallas are available.

Films such as Oliver North's W, which portray him as a spitting, oafish frat boy who eats with his mouth open and is rude to servants, will be revealed by the diaries and correspondence of those around him to be absurd travesties, of this charming, interesting, beautifully mannered history buff who, were he not the most powerful man in the world, would be a fine person to have as a pal.

Instead of Al Franken, history will listen to Bob Geldof praising Mr Bush's efforts over Aids and malaria in Africa; or to Manmohan Singh, the prime minister of India, who told him last week: "The people of India deeply love you." And certainly to the women of Afghanistan thanking him for saving them from Taliban abuse, degradation and tyranny.

When Abu Ghraib is mentioned, history will remind us that it was the Bush Administration that imprisoned those responsible for the horrors. When water-boarding is brought up, we will see that it was only used on three suspects, one of whom was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, al-Qaeda's chief of operational planning, who divulged vast amounts of information that saved hundreds of innocent lives. When extraordinary renditions are queried, historians will ask how else the world's most dangerous terrorists should have been transported. On scheduled flights?

The credit crunch, brought on by the Democrats in Congress insisting upon home ownership for credit-unworthy people, will initially be blamed on Bush, but the perspective of time will show that the problems at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac started with the deregulation of the Clinton era. Instead Bush's very
un-ideological but vast rescue package of $700 billion (£480 billion) might well be seen as lessening the impact of the squeeze, and putting America in position to be the first country out of recession, helped along by his huge tax-cut packages since 2000.

Sneered at for being "simplistic" in his reaction to 9/11, Bush's visceral responses to the attacks of a fascistic, totalitarian death cult will be seen as having been substantially the right ones.

Mistakes are made in every war, but when virtually the entire military, diplomatic and political establishment in the West opposed it, Bush insisted on the surge in Iraq that has been seen to have brought the war around, and set Iraq on the right path. Today its GDP is 30 per cent higher than under Saddam, and it is free of a brutal dictator and his rapist sons.

The number of American troops killed during the eight years of the War against Terror has been fewer than those slain capturing two islands in the Second World War, and in Britain we have lost fewer soldiers than on a normal weekend on the Western Front. As for civilians, there have been fewer Iraqis killed since the invasion than in 20 conflicts since the Second World War.

Iraq has been a victory for the US-led coalition, a fact that the Bush-haters will have to deal with when perspective finally – perhaps years from now – lends objectivity to this fine man's record.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/4241865/History-will-show-that-George-W-Bush-was-right.html

Obama Trying to Make Everyone Happy.

2009-01-12T21:55:00.005-05:00

Trying to make everyone love you is the best way to be sure that no one does. This is a lesson I learned a long time ago and yet one our President elect still needs to learn. I just saw this article on foxnews.com saying that Obama has asked the first openly gay bishop to say a prayer during one of the inaugration events. He's also asked Rick Warren who supported the gay marriage ban in California to give the invocation. What's more likely the people that support Warren will be happy and the people Robinson will be happy, or that no one will be happy. I'd say the latter is more likely. On the one hand you have an openly gay bishop, something many Christians believe is a contradiction in terms, leading a prayer. On the other hand you have an anti-gay pastor (their words not mine) giving the invocation.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/12/gay-bishop-say-prayer-inaugural-event/

Let's see can I find other examples of Obama trying to make everyone happy in the past? Yes I can. In fact we can start with his kindergarten teacher who said "Obama is always trying to make everybody happy." So basically this is a lifelong problem he's had.

Obama also tried to make everyone happy during the campaign by saying he was for gun bans then praising the Supreme Court ruling that struck down the D.C. gun ban. Here's the video.

Another example Obama voted for the 2005 Energy bill, but spent the campaign railing against it. The bill passed the senate with a 74-26 vote. However when it came time to campaign Obama railed against the now unpopular Bush-Cheney Energy Bill. So when it was popular Obama was for it, but when it was unpopular Obama rails against the bill.

Remember when Obama promised to filibuster the Telecom commuications bill during the primaries. "To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies." However when the bill came to a vote after he had won the nomination he did nothing. He actually voted for the bill.

So let me get this straight Obama your plan is to make everyone in the country hate you? I know that's not the plan, but that will be the end result if Barack Obama keeps trying to make everyone happy. Of course he will keep trying this tact because this is what liberals do. They try to make everyone happy. Elect me and I'll give you everything for free. However what most of us know is everything comes with a price. Sometimes you pay for it then and other times you pay for it later. The question isn't if Obama's presidency will cost this country something it's when will we have to pay and how much?

The National Champions in The New Conservatives poll

2009-01-09T22:28:00.003-05:00

Without a doubt the Utah Utes deserve to be National Champions. They completely manhandled an Alabama team that led Florida late in the second half of the SEC title game. They defeated TCU which defeated previously Undefeated Boise State and whose only other loss was to Oklahoma. TCU finished 7th. Another conference foe BYU finished the year 25th. Utah also beat a Oregon State team that defeated USC. Oregon State finished 18th. Not to mention they finished the year as the only undefeated team in major college football. Utah had everything you could ever want in a National Champion that's why I'm naming them the 2008-09 New Conservative blog National Champions.

Obama's Choice to Head CIA Realizes my Greatest Fear

2009-01-06T22:47:00.003-05:00

Early on in this process posiably even back during my primaries a liberal friend of mine asked me what my greatest fear about Obama was. My reply "I'm worried he's going to get us all killed." Now with the possible appointment of Leon Panetta to be CIA chief it appears Obama will in fact get us all killed. Hey Obama how about appointing someone who knows something about the intellience process instead of a political hack.

Panetta would be fine for a position in the Obama administration just not one that my life my depend on. The man has no experience in the intelligence field. Obama try not to get us all killed.

Isreal Invades Gaza.

2009-01-03T22:30:00.002-05:00

Isreal has sent Ground troops into Gaza and doesn't plan on leaving under Hamas is unable to fire rockets into their country. This is a Statement from Ehud Barak, Minister of Defense.

"A few hours ago, Israeli ground forces entered the Gaza Strip as part of operation Cast Lead against the Hamas terrorists and their affiliates and infrastructure in Gaza."
"So far, the Israeli Defense Forces have dealt an unprecedented heavy blow to Hamas. In order to complete their mission we now launched the ground operation."
"I have said all along that our military activities will widen and deepen as much as needed. Our aim is to force Hamas to stop its hostile activities against Israel and Israelis from Gaza, and to bring about a significant change in the situation in Southern part of Israel."
"We have carefully weighed all our options. We are not war hungry but we shall not, I repeat - we shall not allow a situation where our towns, villages and civilians are constantly targeted by Hamas. It will not be easy or short, but we are determined."
"We are well aware of the humanitarian aspect and are doing and will continue to do everything possible to provide all humanitarian needs to Gaza."
"While we are fighting in Gaza, we keep an open eye on the sensitive situation in our northern border. We have no aggressive intentions there. We hope the situation there will remain calm; nevertheless we are ready and alert to face any unwarranted development in that area."
"We are peace seekers. We have restrained ourselves for a long time but now is the time to do what needs to be done. We are determined to afford our citizens what any citizen anywhere in the world is entitled to - peace, tranquility and freedom from threats."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,475628,00.html

Some notes from the fighting:

Isreal killed senior Hamas commander Abu Zakaria al-Jamal. "On Thursday an Israeli warplane dropped a 2,000-pound bomb on the home of one of Hamas' top five decision-makers, instantly killing him and 18 others. The airstrike on Nizar Rayan was the first that succeeded in killing a member of Hamas' highest echelon since Israel began its offensive."

Israeli warplanes and gunboats blasted more than two dozen Hamas targets Saturday, including weapons storage facilities, training centers and leaders' homes as Israel's offensive against Gaza's Islamic militant rulers entered a second week.

"Israeli missiles hit 25 Hamas "outposts, training camps and rocket launching sites" Saturday morning, an IDF statement said."

"The United Nations estimated Friday that around 100 civilians have been killed in Gaza in the past week, around 25 percent of the 400 estimated killed in the bombing campaign."

Most if not all of the civilans killed are killed because Hamas fires rockets from civilan locations. They also have many of their ministries inside of civilan populations. Hamas intentionaly uses civilans has shields. "In many ways, they are victims like us. Both the civilian population of southern Israel and the civilian population of the Gaza Strip have been victims of this terrible, extremist Hamas regime," Regev said.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,475525,00.html
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/01/03/israel.gaza/index.html

I have no idea how long Isreal will be in Gaza, but I have no doubt they are pissed and they have no plans of waiting for the U.N. the negoiciate another meaningless one sided ceasefire. Has of right now it looks like the U.S. will continue to back Israel during the invasion.

"We are working toward a cease-fire that would not allow a re-establishment of the status quo ante, where Hamas can continue to launch rockets out of Gaza and to condemn the people of Gaza to a life of misery," U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said in a written statement issued Saturday evening.

McCormack added that a cease-fire should come "as soon as possible," but it should be "durable, sustainable and not time-limited." In other words no more six month ceasefire that serve no other purpose except to allow Hamas to regroup and rearm after a Isreali invasion. Any ceasefire agreement needs to be strictly enforced by both parties. Meaning if that Israel should not hesitate to attack if Rockets start flying into their cities after the ceasefire is reached. Also if Israel is the agressor Hamas would be within their rights to fire back. However my opinion is just let them go. These two will never peacefully co-exist. One of them must be completely inalinated.

The son of Hamas leader now living in exile in the United States agrees with me. Talking about a lasting peace between Israel and Hamas. "There is no chance. Is there any chance for fire to co-exist with the water?" said Mosab Hassan Yousef, the son of one of the group's founding members.
Yousef added: "It's not about Israel, it's not about Hamas: it's about both ideologies."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,475226,00.html

Hamas has promised to battle to the last breath "We will not abandon the battlefield, and we will stay on the thorny course, and we will fight until the last breath," Hamas chief spokesman Ismail Radwan said in a statement on Palestinian network Al-Aqsa.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/01/03/israel.gaza/index.html

I'm sure Israel wouldn't have it any other way.

Aren't you glad 2008 is over? I am.

2009-01-01T00:02:00.003-05:00

2008 was a bad year for Conservatives. Even the Republican Party was a big disappointment. From bailouts to out of control spending Republicans did not do what they were voted in to do so they got the boot. It didn't help that McCain couldn't stop bashing his own party long enough to let them vote for him. He was way to worried about people getting offended. He should've been worried about firing up his base. He only won South Carolina by nine points and he lost North Carolina for crying out loud. Bush won South Carolina by twice what McCain did in 2004 and he carried North Carolina by 13 points. North Carolina hadn't gone Democrat since 1976. How did that go? I guess some people can't learn from history. Don't worry for those who either don't remember or we're to lazy to do the research. You will be living through a repeat of the Carter years very soon. That may be fine with you, but did you have to force me to live through them.

Blago appoints new Senator, Israel invades Gaza, Franken still trying to Steal Minnesota Senate Seat

2008-12-31T16:51:00.003-05:00

Hey everyone believe it or not I just got my computer set up in my new place today. This moving thing is annoying. I'll probably be moving again in a few months. I'm not looking forward to that. Well let me catch up on a few stories I've missed in the last couple of weeks.

Minnesota Recount: It looks like Franken may have had some votes counted twice. Coleman attorney Fritz Knaak issued a statement saying, “The Franken campaign wants to simply accept the double counts; however, once those ballots are put in the pile, as the Franken campaign wants, they are part of the count. To protect the right of every voter in Minnesota, we are asking the Supreme Court to straighten out the problem of including both duplicate ballots and original ballots in the final recount number.”

There are around 200 ballots that have been counted twice according to the Coleman camp. "Talking about instances when a ballot couldn't be run through a voting machine, requiring a duplicate to be made, the Coleman campaign said the ballot should be counted only if an original could be matched with its copy." Right now it looks like Franken will win this election by less than 100 votes. Coleman is planning a suit to get the double counted ballots tossed out.

So Democrats are trying to steal the election. Is it just me or do Democrats accuse Republicans of doing things there never did only to turn around and do the thing they accused Republicans of doing? Stealing elections for example. This isn't rocket science if you there is a proceedure for what happens when a ballot can't be run though a voting machine. They are supposed to be marked. The fact that none of the ballots were marked and you know that around 200 (I believe 192 is the exact number) couldn't be run through the voting machine means that there must be duplicate ballots. It appears that number is 192. If you can't match the original ballot with it's copy then the vote shouldn't count because it is most likely a duplicate. Just don't try to explain that to a liberal or their head might explode.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/12/15/1715571.aspx
http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/36372934.html

Blago makes Senate apointment:
The soon to be impeached Democrat governor of Illinois appointed former State Attorney General Roland Burris. Burris if the Senate agrees to seat him something Harry Reid as said he will not do, would be the only African American member of the Senate. So in essence Blago has played the race card on his own party. He has forced Harry Reid to either seat Burris or to refuse to seat what would be the only minority member of the U.S. Senate. "The choice of Burris to be Obama's replacement is being backed my the African American community. U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush forcefully backed Blagojevich's decision on the basis of race, warning the public not to "lynch" Blagojevich's Senate pick, who is black." "This is a matter of national importance," Rush said. "There are no African-Americans in the Senate, and I don't think that anyone, any U.S. senator who's sitting in the Senate right now wants to go on record to deny one African-American for being seated in the U.S. Senate. ... And so I intend to take that argument to the Congressional Black Caucus."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/12/30/rep-rush-invokes-race-defending-blagojevich-senate-appointment/

Israel Invades Gaza:
I'm days behind on this story if you want however Patriot Room has kept up with it since the begining.
http://patriotroom.com/article/israel-starts-offensive--operation--cast-lead-
go there for great coverage of this story. So far they have 165 Updates on this story.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year

2008-12-19T10:21:00.002-05:00

I have alot going on right now so I've decided to take a break from blogging until after Christmas possibly New Year's. There doesn't seem to be much news right now. If there are any big stories I will most likely put up a post. Outside of any big events I probably won't be blogging much between now and Jan 2nd. See you next year!

Obama Lied, Emanuel Discuss Senate Seat With Blagojevich

2008-12-19T04:30:00.004-05:00

According to the Chicago Sun Times Barack Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel had direct talks with the Governor about appointing Valerie Jarrett to the Senate.

"Emanuel talked with the governor in the days following the Nov. 4 election and pressed early on for the appointment of Valerie Jarrett to the post, sources with knowledge of the conversations told the Sun-Times. There was no indication from sources that Emanuel brokered a deal, however."

"Sources with knowledge of the investigation said Blagojevich told his aides about the calls with Emanuel and sometimes gave them directions afterward. Sources said that early on, Emanuel pushed for the appointment of Jarrett to the governor and his staff and asked that it be done by a certain date."

"After Jarrett took herself out of the running in mid-November, Emanuel submitted a list of suitable names to the governor's camp that didn't include her name."

This accusation was met with a strong denial from the Obama camp. However we should know for sure soon enough, "At least some of the conversations between Emanuel and Blagojevich were likely caught on tape, sources said."

So why did Obama deny that anyone had spoken to the governor about this seat? Anyone with a brain knows that of course there would be some discussion between a Senator and the man who would appoint his replacement. Makes me wonder what is on those tapes.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/blagojevich/1337789,CST-NWS-rahm18good.article

Action Notice: Liberal Blogger Mugged

2008-12-16T20:20:00.000-05:00

From Conservatism Today
http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/

Mike Ganzeveld, one of the two main bloggers on the Iowa Liberal (http://iowaliberal.com) was mugged at an ATM in Fort Dodge, Iowa at the end of last month. He wound up with a broken hand, which is healing, but worse, some serious damage to one of his eyes. He has medical insurance which will cover most of the cost of the retinal reattachment surgery he's facing -- and he'll go blind in that eye if he doesn't have it -- but as a result of his injuries, he's out of work for the time being.

His blogging partner, Jeromy Brown, has put up the article The Fix-Mike’s-Retina Donation Post…Extravaganza! (http://iowaliberal.com/?p=2262) with a PayPal link in which readers can donate to help Mike with his expenses.

My friend Dana Pico of Common Sense Political Thought is asking bloggers and readers (on both the left and the right) to help if they are able and so inclined.

I have always encouraged private charity over government intervention. And I especially like to give in cases where someone needs help through no fault of their own. This is a great opportunity for conservatives who talk the talk on private charity to walk the walk, and show our generosity.

That being said, it is also an opportunity to withhold good from someone whose views you disagree with.

If you've been reading me much, I think you know what I'll be doing.

Young America's Foundation releases top ten abuses on campus

2008-12-16T02:44:00.007-05:00

Banned conservative speakers, stolen votes, assaults on religious liberty, gay English classes, and forbidden Thanksgiving & Christmas celebrations

Political correctness ran amuck in our nation’s school system this past year, and Young America’s Foundation has once again compiled our “best of the worst” academic abuses for 2008. From “free speech zones” to transgendered speakers at military academies, the following list may make you both laugh and cry in the same breath. That probably isn’t too surprising, however, since we are talking about academia after all…

1. The free speech “zone.” A student at Yuba College in California was sent an ultimatum by the school’s president: discontinue handing out gospel booklets or face disciplinary action and possibly expulsion. That’s right—gospel booklets. Ryan Dozier, the 20-year-old student, had the audacity to distribute Christian literature without a school permit, which restricts free speech to an hour each Tuesday and Thursday. Yuba College even directs students to where on campus they are allowed to exhibit free speech. In this case, it’s the school theater. Campus police threatened to arrest Ryan if he didn’t comply with the “free speech zone,” oblivious to the fact that students don’t need permission to exercise the First Amendment’s free speech and religious clauses.

This as got to be my favorite. One free speech zone twice a week for an hour a day. This is honestly just scary. Ryan Doizer is the Vice President of Christian in Action at the college. I guess the university thinks it's O.K. to have a group named Christians in Action as long as they don't actually take any action. This is their club webpage http://www.yccd.edu/yuba/campuslife/viewclub.php?id=4

2. Transgendered activists in, pro-life speakers out. Liberal administrators at the University of St. Thomas, a Catholic institution in Minnesota, censored the appearance of prominent pro-life speaker Star Parker because campus officials felt “uncomfortable” and “disturbed” by previous conservative speakers at the school. The University’s mission statement claims it values “the pursuit of truth,” “diversity,” and “meaningful dialogue.” Except, not really—or better yet, as long as the said “pursuit” doesn’t offend leftist predilections. Meanwhile, within the past year, the same school hosted Al Franken, the bombastic liberal comedian, and Debra Davis, a transgendered activist who believes God is a black lesbian. Realizing they had a public relations disaster on their hands, the head honchos at St. Thomas eventually reversed the ban on Star Parker.

"Uncomfortable and disturbed?" The only thing that disturbs me is our nation's universities limiting points of view on campuses because the other side to them is disturbing. I think their side is disturbing but I've never tried to keep someone from giving their opinion. I have no problem with debating however apparently liberals do.

3. A new meaning of Duty, Honor, Country. Cadets at West Point, the nation’s foremost military academy, must maintain disciplined, selfless behavior—a precursor to the standards graduates are expected to uphold and reinforce once commissioned as military officers. So how does leftist instructor Judy Rosenstein of the Department of Behavioral Sciences and Leadership encourage cadets to appreciate the military’s code of conduct? By hosting a transgendered speaker in class, of course! “Allyson” Robinson, a West Point grad him-, er, herself, switched genders after leaving the Army. Upon returning to West Point as a guest speaker, “Mrs.” Robinson found it “worrisome” that the student composition seemed more socially conservative than when “she” was a student. Perhaps West Point’s leadership should confine speaker invitations to those whose behavior, if emulated, would not get cadets booted from the academy, much less the Army.

This was just a stupid move. West Point should sue itself.

4. 2008’s stolen election? Columbia University recently polled students on whether or not they would support the return of the Navy’s Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) to campus after a 40-year absence. Columbia claimed the referendum lost by 39 votes. However, the University inexplicably closed the online poll at different times for different students and discarded more than 1,900 votes out of the 4,905 cast. To boot, the university showcased its “anti-fraud” measures, revealing they caught one person who purportedly voted 276 times! So much for secure, front-end identification control. In the end, 1,502 “valid” NAYs trumped the 1,463 AYEs. Does anyone else smell some anti-military electioneering rats?

When it comes to stealing elections looks like Minnesota wasn't the only place liberals were trying it in 2008. Columbia University, the school who gave us Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmendijad as a guest speaker, disqualified more than 1900 votes in a student pool on letting the ROTC back on campus. The ROTC lost by 39 votes. How about holding another election of course we would need to have election monitors present since you screwed up the last one so bad. Or the administration could do the right thing and give it's students to choice of whether or not to take the course by letting our military onto it's campus.

5. When English class turns gay. Heads turned when Deerfield High School in Deerfield, Illinois required this book as part of an Advanced Placement English literature course: Angels in America: A Gay Fantasia on National Themes. The book is laced with graphic sexual content, much of it too inflammatory to print here—although there are “milder” exchanges fit to report, such as one character pleading with his sexual partner to “infect” and “make [him] bleed.” Supporters of Angels in America say the book is useful because it depicts “forgiveness, kindness, and compassion,” as if HIV-positive sodomy is the best way to promote empathy to minors.

Never read it never will.

6. You can’t pray here! The First Amendment, is it a bestowed right given from above and protected by our government or a meaningless, antiquated concept to be disposed of? If you’re the folks at the College of Alameda in California, you’d pick the latter. How else do you explain their threatening to expel a student who prayed on campus? It all started when a student, Kandy Kyriacou, visited her professor to give her a Christmas gift. But when Kandy saw that her teacher was ill, she offered to pray for her. The professor agreed. That’s when Derek Piazza, another professor, walked in and freaked out that a prayer—gasp, a prayer—was occurring on college premises. “You can’t be doing that in here,” Piazza purportedly barked. Kandy received a retroactive “intent to suspend” letter from the administration, claiming that she was guilty of “disruptive or insulting behavior” and “persistent abuse of” college employees. Further infractions would result in expulsion, the letter read.

"disruptive or insulting behavior" Persistent abuse of college employees" Apparently praying for someone is the same as telling a professor to go F themselves. Don't pray for me I might lose my job and you'll be expelled! This is without a doubt religious bigotry. You know the kind the left is always accusing us of.

7. Hey, that feather cap is racist. For decades, kindergarten classes in the Claremont district of California have celebrated Thanksgiving by dressing up as Pilgrims and Indians and sharing a feast. Harmless, eh? Apparently not. In a letter to her daughter’s elementary school teacher, Michelle Raheja, an English professor at University of California-Riverside, fumed that such activities are “dehumanizing” and serve as a “racist stereotype.” In fact, Ms. Raheja whined that the Thanksgiving costume party is comparable to parading children around as “slaves” and “Jews.” The school district capitulated, and now the toddlers are prohibited from wearing “their hand-made bonnets, headdresses and fringed vests.”

Beat you too this one America's Foundation. Read My post The War on Thanksgiving for more information on this one. http://thenewconservatives.blogspot.com/2008/11/war-on-thanksgiving.html

8. Ho, ho, forgetaboutit! Who’s offended by Christmas decorations? All the white liberals who celebrate Kwanza? Must be. Florida Gulf Coast University’s president, Wilson Bradshaw, sent holiday festivities packing because he didn’t know “how best to observe the season in ways that honor and respect all traditions.” Holiday décor wasn’t the only thing to go, under Mr. Bradshaw. The school’s greeting card contest got tossed as well. Cheer up, says, the President—Christmas merriment was replaced with an “ugly sweater competition.” Mr. Bradshaw ultimately had a change of heart, after his embarrassing attempt at censorship became public.

Yep bullies will back down if you get in their face.

9. Leftist factions compete on who is more multicultural. When eco-fanatics at UC-Berkeley illegally saddled themselves in trees on campus and hurled urine and feces to block the construction of a multi-million dollar athletic facility, probably the last thing they expected was to be called racists. Yet the school’s chancellor, Robert Birgeneau, labeled them just that, saying the environmental radicals were impeding the completion of a new athletic facility designed to attract “minority student athletes.” Puzzled that the chancellor played the race card on them, the tree dwellers argued that “three of the final four” protesters were “Latinos” and the very first hijacker was a “Native American.” One of the Berkeley zealots, who goes by the name “Running Wolf,” said that Mr. Birgenaeau attempted “to pit colored against colored.”

It's always about race with these people. Why is the athletic facility only attracting minority student athletes, don't white people pay sports anymore. This of course left the protesters using the always successful, we're not racist we had protesters that were minorities. Kinda like the I have a black friend argument.

10. Who knew? Universal health care is actually a non partisan issue. Administrators at the College of St. Catherine in St. Paul, Minnesota—the nation’s largest Catholic women’s college—unexpectedly blocked young conservatives on campus from hosting Bay Buchanan, a popular conservative commentator and U.S. Treasurer under President Reagan. College officials deemed Ms. Buchanan’s remarks on “Feminism and the 2008 Election” too politically charged, citing concerns about the school’s tax status. Those same “concerns,” mind you, didn’t prohibit the school from sponsoring programs that push for universal healthcare and minimum wage increases or hosting Frank Kroncke, an anti-war radical who is reliving the Vietnam days. But Bay Buchanan? Well, she’s partisan, according to St. Catherine’s administration.

All conservatives are partisan all liberals are mainstream. This is the way liberals think. They never consider themselves partisan because they never talk to anyone who disagrees with them. Everytime I talk to a liberal they always say I don't anyone whose conservative. The truth is they probably know several closet conservatives. I've found many conservatives are scared to speak their values openly because the left will paint them as a racist, a bigot, a sexist, or a bigoted racist sexist.

My two Cents added @11:21pm 12/16/08

Arsonist burns Wasilla Bible Church

2008-12-14T21:13:00.005-05:00

It appears the fire at Wasilla Bible Church where Sara Palin attends was arson. Palin apologized to one of the pastors if her run as VP in any way caused the arson. The church has over 1,000 members.

Despite the fire there will still be a Church service this Sunday 11:15am. The service will be held at Wasilla middle school. The Pastor tried to put things in perspective. "I've had a lot worst calls at night," Pastor Larry Kroon said. "When one of your parishioners dies or loses a child, it's a whole different thing than the building's on fire." The pastor then reminded the reporter that a buliding doesn't make up a church the people do. "Chose faith, live with hope and keep caring about people," he said. "That's what we'll do."

http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=9516339

I don't know who set fire to Palin's Church, but if it's not a democrat I'll eat my shoes. I guess this is the liberal defination of tolerance. You agree with us or we set fire to your church. I'm glad these nutcases don't know where I go to church.

McCain says Republicans being too hard on Obama.

2008-12-14T19:29:00.006-05:00

When asked about statements made by Mike Duncan, the Republican National Committee chair, criticizing the way Obama has dealt with the Rod Blogojevich scandal McCain said, "I think that the Obama campaign should and will give all information necessary. You know, in all due respect to the Republican National Committee and anybody — right now, I think we should try to be working constructively together, not only on an issue such as this, but on the economy stimulus package, reforms that are necessary. And so, I don't know all the details of the relationship between President-elect Obama's campaign or his people and the governor of Illinois, but I have some confidence that all the information will come out. It always does, it seems to me." Obama should and will give all information necessary. Since when? McCain just lost a Presidential race to Obama in part because Obama did not explain details of his relationships with some of his associates. So now I'm supposed to believe that Obama will explain the details of this relationship, I don't think so. The video below was just released this morning. I believe these were the type of actions McCain was speaking of.

The truth is I always thought conservatives that were against McCain were a little off the wall. I mean I knew he wasn't a perfect Republican, but who is? Even Reagan made mistakes. However after reading this quote I now understand why conservatives had a hard time swallowing his nomination. He just threw his own party under the bus for no reason. Why? Because he wants to be able to get along with the democrats in the senate and help them pass legislation. In theory that sounds great, but in practice it's going to be a disaster. McCain will most likely be pushing much of the democrats agenda which will include universal healthcare, bailouts of industries, and raising taxes on the wealthy. All these things in theory work perfectly, however in practice they'll be a disaster.

Universal healthcare will cause major strain on the government. No one will pay for healthcare if they can get it for free so the cost of this program will be enormous. However it will be quoted as being much less because the Dems won't take into account the number of people that have health insurance that will drop it to take advantage of the government program. I have talked to people who say they would drop their health insurance and take the free government healthcare. Why should they have to pay for healthcare if no one else does?

Bailing out industries in trouble sounds great too. You give the industry money to stay in business thus saving millions of jobs right? Wrong! They tried this with the auto industry in Britian in the 60's it didn't work then, and it won't work now. http://patriotroom.com/britain-bailed-out-its-automakers-once-they-no-longer-exist/ These industries are in trouble because they either are not producing a good product or they have union contact and they cannot live up to those contracts without going out of business. So if you give them money they'll be back it may be six months, a year, or maybe even five years, but they'll be back asking for more money. After these industries take all the money the government is willing to give them they will go out of business. Seems to me we could save alot of tax dollars by just letting them die.

Finally raising taxes on the wealthy. Most people thinks this is a good idea because they don't understand what it means. They think it will only affect those people that makes millions of dollars a year. What it actually means is taxing anyone who owns their own business. So if you own a business and someone raises your taxes you have to find a way to cut costs. The biggest expense for a business is labor. So first the employer starts cutting hours to try and save money. Eventually the employer is forced to lay people off. This not only means more people in the line at the unemployment office it means the same amount of work as to be done in less time with less people. Therefore you end up with an inferior product that people don't want to buy. When people don't buy the product you end up with less money coming in to your business, so your forced to lay off more people. Eventually the employer goes out of business.

Right now the Republican Party does not have a leader. As much as she might try Palin can't lead the party from Alaska. It's now obvious that McCain will not be the leader of this Party. I know people like Newt Gingrich, but I don't think he's the right guy to lead the party although he definatly should be an advisor to the leaders. There's a list of possible future leaders of the Republican Party here.
http://thenewconservatives.blogspot.com/2008/11/future-of-republican-party.html
If you want to add your own in the comments section feel free.

digg it:
http://digg.com/political_opinion/McCain_Stabs_Republicans_in_the_Back

Leadership: Academic Elitism vs Principled Wisdom

2008-12-14T03:26:00.000-05:00

From: http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/

President-elect Barack Obama swiftly revealed the direction his team would take, as the Washington Post noted last Sunday:

All told, of Obama's top 35 appointments so far, 22 have degrees from an Ivy League school, MIT, Stanford, the University of Chicago or one of the top British universities...

While Obama's picks have been lauded for their ethnic and ideological mix, they lack diversity in one regard: They are almost exclusively products of the nation's elite institutions and generally share a more intellectual outlook than is often the norm in government. Their erudition has already begun to set a new tone in the capital, cheering Obama's supporters and serving as a clarion call to other academics. Yale law professor Dan Kahan said several of his colleagues are for the first time considering leaving their perches for Washington...

Absent-Minded Professors

Just what America needs, huh? A bunch of pointy-headed theorists who have never accomplished anything outside of Planet Academia, rushing to Washington to tell inhabitants of the real world how we can solve all our problems.

We tried this "best and brightest" approach under Kennedy. As the article notes, that's how we got mired in Vietnam. We had our own President Egghead with Jimmy Carter. He was always the smartest man in the room, and usually the least able to decide what course of action would be best to take.

High intelligence and even higher education is not a prerequisite for leadership - it is a warning signal. More often than not, these types suffer from Absent-minded Professor Syndrome - great genius in the laboratory or the classroom, but an inability to locate their car keys and an empty place where their common sense should be.

Dangerous Geniuses

Occasionally you find a highly-intelligent, highly-educated person who is not totally incapable of completing normal tasks successfully. Someone who can shoot hoops and smoke a cigarette at the same time. Someone like Barack Obama. Their education tells them that they have all the answers. Their high intelligence tells them that they are the only person who can save America from itself.

This is dangerous. Once this conclusion is reached (and I believe it already has been) it's all over. These people might have good intentions. They might make the trains run on time for awhile. But soon no policy, no law, no relationship becomes as important as maintaining power. Mistakes will be made, laws will be broken and ignored, preachers and grandmothers will get thrown under the bus.

This doesn't just go for liberals, either. One of my favorite theoreticians ever is Newt Gingrich, and he suffered from the same problem. For a short period of time, he accomplished great things. But his belief in his own greatness caused him to make mistakes, break rules of ethics and throw people under the bus. Until the bus made a detour and ran him over. Since he's gone back to working as a theoretician, he's been doing great things again. But he should never be President.

Wise, Principled Leadership - The Reagan Legacy

If extreme intelligence and high educational achievement are not positive character traits in leaders, what is? Wisdom, based on timeless principles of individual liberty. Reasonable intelligence mixed with common sense and love for that which is good. A high sense of personal morality.

The article notes that my political hero, Ronald Reagan, graduated from tiny Eureka College. Certainly he was an intelligent man; you don't save multiple lives as a teenage lifeguard, become a top sports announcer, become a household name as an actor, become President of an actors union, become governor of the largest state in the nation, and then become President of the United States without intelligence. Being one of the best in the world at whatever you choose to be doing at any given time takes some smarts. But his intelligence and education were not uncommon.

As President, he would nod off during meetings when advisors talked about missile throw-weights. The minutia didn't interest him. Pointy-headed academics didn't interest him. He was interested in the big picture.

He believed that insuring personal freedom was the greatest goal of government. He knew that socialist utopianism doesn't solve problems, that government planners don't solve problems, they exacerbate them. And he knew these things because he knew all about the existence of evil.

And because he knew about evil, he knew what Soviet communism was. He learned this as President of the Screen Actors Guild, when he had to carry a gun with him to cross picket lines and when he had to battle Soviet infiltrators in the film industry. And because he knew evil, he knew that the Soviet Union would someday crumble from within. He knew that if America ever applied the right types of pressure, it would crumble sooner.

The academics laughed at the "ignorant cowboy" when he said the following in June of 1982 to the British Parliament. None of the great minds with their fancy degrees knew what Reagan knew: That the Soviet Union was doomed because it was evil, if free men and women would just shine their light upon it.

We're approaching the end of a bloody century plagued by a terrible political invention -- totalitarianism. Optimism comes less easily today, not because democracy is less vigorous, but because democracy's enemies have refined their instruments of repression. Yet optimism is in order, because day by day democracy is proving itself to be a not-at-all-fragile flower. From Stettin on the Baltic to Varna on the Black Sea, the regimes planted by totalitarianism have had more than 30 years to establish their legitimacy. But none -- not one regime -- has yet been able to risk free elections. Regimes planted by bayonets do not take root....

(t)he gift of vision, the willingness to see the future based on the experience of the past. It is this sense of history, this understanding of the past that I want to talk with you about today, for it is in remembering what we share of the past that our two nations can make common cause for the future...

History teaches the dangers of government that overreaches -- political control taking precedence over free economic growth, secret police, mindless bureaucracy, all combining to stifle individual excellence and personal freedom.

President Reagan then predicts the future:

Historians looking back at our time will note the consistent restraint and peaceful intentions of the West. They will note that it was the democracies who refused to use the threat of their nuclear monopoly in the forties and early fifties for territorial or imperial gain. Had that nuclear monopoly been in the hands of the Communist world, the map of Europe -- indeed, the world -- would look very different today... At the same time we see totalitarian forces in the world who seek subversion and conflict around the globe to further their barbarous assault on the human spirit. What, then, is our course? Must civilization perish in a hail of fiery atoms? Must freedom wither in a quiet, deadening accommodation with totalitarian evil?In an ironic sense Karl Marx was right. We are witnessing today a great revolutionary crisis, a crisis where the demands of the economic order are conflicting directly with those of the political order. But the crisis is happening not in the free, non-Marxist West, but in the home of Marxist-Leninism, the Soviet Union.

It is the Soviet Union that runs against the tide of history by denying human freedom and human dignity to its citizens. It also is in deep economic difficulty. The rate of growth in the national product has been steadily declining since the fifties and is less than half of what it was then. The dimensions of this failure are astounding: A country which employs one-fifth of its population in agriculture is unable to feed its own people...

I have discussed on other occasions, including my address on May 9th, the elements of Western policies toward the Soviet Union to safeguard our interests and protect the peace. What I am describing now is a plan and a hope for the long term -- the march of freedom and democracy which will leave Marxism-Leninism on the ash-heap of history as it has left other tyrannies which stifle the freedom and muzzle the self-expression of the people.

He went further in his Evil Empire speech in 1983.

So, in your discussions of the nuclear freeze proposals, I urge you to beware the temptation of pride -- the temptation of blithely declaring yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at fault, to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a giant misunderstanding and thereby remove yourself from the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil...

Whittaker Chambers, the man whose own religious conversion made him a witness to one of the terrible traumas of our time, the Hiss-Chambers case, wrote that the crisis of the Western World exists to the degree in which the West is indifferent to God, the degree to which it collaborates in communism's attempt to make man stand alone without God. And then he said, for Marxism-Leninism is actually the second oldest faith, first proclaimed in the Garden of Eden with the words of temptation, "Ye shall be as gods."

The Western world can answer this challenge, he wrote, "but only provided that its faith in God and the freedom He enjoins is as great as communism's faith in Man."

I believe we shall rise to the challenge. I believe that communism is another sad, bizarre chapter in human history whose last pages even now are being written. I believe this because the source of our strength in the quest for human freedom is not material, but spiritual. And because it knows no limitation, it must terrify and ultimately triumph over those who would enslave their fellow man.

We forget what leadership based on the wisdom of conservative, small government principles looks like, because we haven't seen it on a national scale since Reagan left office. We'll need to see it again following four years of Barack Obama and his fellow academic elites.

IT'S MY BIRTHDAY!

2008-12-11T00:00:00.002-05:00

If you feel like leaving birthday wishes use the comments section. If you want to give me a present click the yellow Donate Button at the top right of the screen.

Blago just Wanted the Same Treatment for his wife as Obama got for Michelle?

2008-12-10T22:57:00.000-05:00

From http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/

In light of allegations that the governor of Illinois was ready to auction off Barack Obama's Senate seat to the highest bidder, does any major media organization feel like they examined the political culture that Obama came from sufficiently? Do the New York Times, theWashington Post, the major networks, the newsweeklies, the cable networks, etc. — do they feel that they really gave their readers and viewers a good sense of how Chicago politics works, and how that place shaped Obama?

Don't Stanley Kurtz and David Freddoso, among others, deserve an apology from their critics?

I never heard word one about Chicago politics leading up to this election. That's kind of how I knew the media fix was in. But that's a stupid question, of course they wouldn't report on the political culture of Chicago. They were too busy vetting whether or not Trig was really Sarah Palin's son.

America made a mistake in electing someone from the Chicago political culture to the highest office in the country. Was it a grave mistake? Is there any other kind? America can't handle the truth.

Hat tip to Jack Nicholson and Tom Cruise.

L.A. Times: The Democrat Culture of Corruption

2008-12-10T22:54:00.000-05:00

From http://patriotroom.com/

Sorry Barry, your big win last month turned Washington into a one Party town. Now, it’s all about the Democrats. And the Libs at the L.A.Times are beginning to eat their own.

The arrest of Illinois Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich on Tuesday marked the latest in a series of scandals involving Democratic politicians — an ironic turn for a party that won control of Congress in 2006 in part by saying it would end a “culture of corruption” under Republican leadership. . . .

The corruption charges against Blagojevich come as one of the most powerful Democrats in Congress, Rep. Charles B. Rangel of New York, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, is under investigation by a House ethics panel. . . .

Democratic Rep. William J. Jefferson of Louisiana is awaiting trial on charges of bribery, money laundering and misusing his congressional office. He has pleaded not guilty. On Saturday, Jefferson was ousted from his House seat in a runoff election.

Earlier this year, Democratic Gov. Eliot Spitzer of New York resigned after revelations that he was a regular customer of an elite call-girl ring.

And Democrats were . . . wait for it . . . shocked about this whole Blagojevich Yard Sale of the Senate Seat.

The allegations against Blagojevich — including that he solicited favors to influence his decision about who should replace Obama in the Senate — were shocking to Democrats.

“It straightened my hair,” said Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.).

And the Times breaks the bad news - the Republicans could actually win back some seats in 2010 as a result of scandals like these. But the Democrats are confident, because they have made ethics reform a top priority. Hmmmm. Ethics reform for whom?

The political risk for Democrats is that voters will be as repulsed by the ethics problems as they were by the scandals that contributed to the defeat of former GOP Reps. Tom DeLay of Texas, Bob Ney of Ohio, Mark Foley of Florida and others.

Democrats won those and other House seats in districts that had been reliably Republican, and the party made ethics an issue in the 2006 elections that delivered control of Congress to Democrats.

But Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), chairman of the committee responsible for helping elect Democrats to the House, said he thought the political damage would be limited to those engaged in wrongdoing because the party leadership had made ethics reform a priority.

So the GOP ads for 2010 show Blago, Rangel, Jefferson, and Spitzer all doing the perp walk with the word Corruption slamming down on top. Then show Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Reid, Pelosi, and Obama recklessly throwing taxpayer money at the Big 3 automakers, the unions, and every other poorly managed business with political connections to Washington.

Works for me.

Lullabys for Terrorist

2008-12-10T02:28:00.003-05:00

Military interrogators have often blasted music at detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay. According to the British law group Reprieve, these are among the songs they have used most frequently:

• "Enter Sandman," Metallica.

• "Bodies," Drowning Pool.

• "Shoot to Thrill," AC/DC.

• "Hell's Bells," AC/DC.

• "I Love You," from the "Barney and Friends" children's TV show.

• "Born in the USA," Bruce Springsteen.

• "Babylon," David Gray.

• "White America," Eminem.

• "Sesame Street," theme song from the children's TV show.

Other bands and artists whose music has been frequently played at U.S. detention sites: Aerosmith, Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, Don McLean, Lil' Kim, Limp Bizkit, Meat Loaf, Rage Against the Machine, Red Hot Chili Peppers and Tupac Shakur.

You know I've been saying we weren't torturing this guys since GITMO opened, but now knowing their forced to listen to the Barney I'm convinced. No wonder these guys are committing suicide. On the other hand, I say we send the purple dinosaur to GITMO and have him do some interrogations. We'd have Osama, his deputy, and the rest of Al-Qaeda rolled up in a week. God bless America!

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,464685,00.html

Wurzelbacher appalled by McCain, says Palin is the "real deal."

2008-12-10T01:30:00.004-05:00

Joe the Plumber told Glenn Beck that he felt "dirty" after spending time with McCain on the campaign trail. The thing that really upset Wurzelbacher was the $700 million bailout. Speaking about McCain Wurzelbacher said, "I asked him some pretty direct questions. Some of the answers you guys are gonna receive — they appalled me, absolutely. I was angry. In fact, I wanted to get off the bus after I talked to him."
The reason he stuck with McCain is the reason alot of conservatives stuck with McCain, "honestly, because the thought of Barack Obama as president scares me even more."

However when asked about Palin he said, "Sarah Palin is absolutely the real deal."

This as come has no surprise to many conservatives who had a hard time swallowing the McCain nomination. Many only jumped on board after he chose Palin as his VP. However even after that McCain made a fatal mistake. He kept talking! The more he said the more liberal he sounded. Many conservatives did not trust him on issues such as Abortion, Immigration, or Marriage. All staples of the Republican platmore. Add on to that he continuly discussed the threat of global warming, something many conservatives beleive to be a hoax. He even made the mistake of calling himself a liberal Republican in the video below. You pile an economic meltdown on top of that and you end up with the thumping McCain got on Election Day.

Selling the Senate Seat Not Even the Worst Thing Blagojevich did.

2008-12-09T22:03:00.004-05:00

Everyone in the country knows this moron tried to sell Obama's Senate seat so I won't go into detail about that. However did you know that's probably not the worst thing he's done. It appears these "pay to play" schemes have been going on since the Governor took office.

He tried to force the owners of the Chicago tribune to fire it's editorial board by threatening to withhold $100 million in state funds for the sale of Wrigely Field. My personal favorite is when he threatened to withhold eight million dollars in funding for a children's hospital if he did not get a donation from their executives. The hospital released a statement saying, "Children's Memorial is very disappointed that the $8 million in Illinois funding that the pediatric providers of Illinois believed would enable them to care for Illinois' neediest children has been tied to an alleged pay-to-play scheme," the statement reads. "Neither Children's Memorial nor any of its personnel participated in such a scheme. If such allegations are true, Children's Memorial, pediatric physicians and the children of Illinois have been victimized."

This guy is a first class jerk. He tried to extort money from a Children's Hospital! How low can you go? I hope they put him in with the general populations he's just a thug in a suit.

Bob Hope: Democrats = Zombies

2008-12-08T18:13:00.002-05:00

Found this on a website called the Jungle Hut.
http://jungle-hut.blogspot.com/2008/12/saturday-morning-cartoon.html

Washington Post: Now that gas prices are low let's triple the Gas Tax.

2008-12-08T14:48:00.004-05:00

From the Washington Post

"Congress should enact a steep, inflation-indexed hike in gas taxes, one big enough to alter consumer incentives and habits permanently. This would take back some of the de facto economic stimulus consumers have received from the recent drop in gas prices, and it would be a hard sell politically. But surely voters can understand that, even if Congress were to triple the tax to 55.2 cents, gas would still be cheaper, in real terms, than it was in 2005. The increase could be rebated through the income tax system."

What a great idea! Tripling the gas tax in a recession. Come on guys we don't need food or heat this winter. What we need is to pay higher taxes to stop global warming. If a few people in the Northeast freeze to death because they can't afford heat, so what? We're saving the planet here?

"This would take back some of the de facto economic stimulus consumers have received from the recent drop in gas prices, and it would be a hard sell politically."

De facto economic stimulus? So because gas prices have gone down and consumers have benefited they should be punished? So basically what your saying is, "These consumers aren't suffering as much as they should be. Let's raise taxes to show them they aren't entitled to relief from high prices."

However they are entitled to welfare, healthcare, and unemployment benefits. Is anyone else confused by this line of thinking.

The article refers to lower gas prices as a "Golden Opportunity." O.K. genius what happens when the prices start to go back up? Somehow I doubt the liberals first suggestion will be to cut the gas tax. Even if we did cut the gas tax it wouldn't be even close to being back to it's current level. Of course I'm sure that would be fine with liberals since their "saving the planet."

Planned Parenthood in action

2008-12-06T01:32:00.003-05:00

This is an undercover video where a college students posing as a 13 year old girl goes for an abortion. She tells the "nurse" that her boyfriend is 31. Under State Law the "nurse" is required to report this to the police. Instead she tells the girl how to cover up the crime and directs her to an out of state facility.

If this was just one nurse in one Planned Parenthood it would still be bad. However it's more than that I've heard and seen stories about this for years now. If a 13 year old girl is pregnant by a 31 year old man there is a good chance it's a teacher or a relative. By not reporting these crimes to the police Planned Parenthood allows this person to continue raping children. I'm sure the nurse thinks she's doing the right thing and has probably been trained to do this. Which makes it even more disturbing. I wonder how many rapist take their victims to Planned Parenthood for an abortion or the morning after pill every day? Scary thought isn't it?

Millions of Drunken Obama Kool-Aid Drinkers Expected to Invade Washington D.C. for Inauguration Week. Here's an idea... Let's Extend Bar-Time to 5am

2008-12-06T00:23:00.003-05:00

From Conservatism Today
http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/

Take millions of people, already hopped-up on hallucinatory visions of hope and change. Add in lots of booze, and leave the bars open all week long, with alcohol prohibited for just two hours per day.

What could go wrong?

Hoping to tap in to an inaugural bonanza, the D.C. Council Tuesday night voted in favor of extending last call to 5 a.m. and allow bars and restaurants to serve food around the clock during inauguration week.

Millions of visitors are expected to descend on the city to celebrate Barack Obama's presidential swearing-in on Jan. 20. The council hopes to accommodate the throng by allowing licensed restaurants and taverns to serve drinks later and to keep their doors open 24 hours a day for the whole week.

Sounds perfectly reasonable.

Council member Jim Graham, Ward 1 Democrat, who introduced the bill, said the measure will allow the city's entertainment industry to "engage fully" in inauguration week, which includes Martin Luther King Jr. Day on Jan. 19.

Mr. Graham said the measure also will encourage celebrations that are safely indoors. He pointed to the boisterous revelers on election night as an example for the city to try to avoid.

"On election night there were just throngs of people who were pouring into the street, and I think people may be safer celebrating inside than be wandering the streets," he said.

Yes, I can see how this would allow people to "engage fully" in the festivities. Has anyone studied the effects of combining Obama Kool-Aid with other mind-altering drugs? No need, D.C. will soon become one big laboratory.

The Democrat council member makes a good point. People would be much safer inside than they would be wandering the streets. One question: How exactly does he intend to keep these people inside? They have to leave eventually, no?

Now, I am against the legislation of closing times for bars to begin with. I believe it is highly discriminatory against people with odd working hours and/or sleeping habits. That being said, if ever there were a time when you want to cling to existing laws, I think this might be one of them. There must be some other reason all these Dems are behind this...

Council Chairman Vincent C. Gray, a Democrat, said at a press conference on Monday that the bill would allow the city to cash in on a lot of extra revenue.

Mr. Graham agreed.

"It's not a principal factor behind the legislation, but given these economic times it is a factor," he said. "There are certainly concerns regarding city revenue, and with the inauguration there's definitely a lot to be had," he said.

Ah, yes. Money. Show a Democrat a way to gouge taxpayers to the fullest, and they'll implement it. Public safety be damned.

I suppose I could think of worse things than the idea of gathering a couple million of the biggest leftists in the country in one spot for a week, letting the booze flow like a faucet, and sitting back and watching it all play out. Of course, conservatives will end up saving the day when the National Guard gets called in.

Plaxico Burress on gun safety

2008-12-06T00:13:00.003-05:00

Just saw this video over at Little Green Footballs. I'm still laughing.

$1 gas?

2008-12-05T23:43:00.003-05:00

Found this at foxnews.com.

Oil prices hit four-year lows Friday as employers cut the highest number of jobs in 34 years. The continuing decline in prices is so dramatic and so sudden that it is raising the prospect that gas prices could soon fall below $1 a gallon.

The worst jobs data in 34 years on Friday just added more fuel to the deepening global recession as U.S. employers slashed a far worse-than-expected 533,000 jobs in November and the unemployment rate rose to a 15-year high of 6.7 percent.

A gallon of gasoline can be had for 50 cents less than it cost just last month, and people are starting to talk about $1 gas.

Granted, gas prices are a long way off from that magic number last seen in March 1999when prices were at 97 cents a gallon, according to motor club AAA. Prices at the pump fell 1.6 cents overnight to $1.773 nationally, according to AAA, the Oil Price Information Service and Wright Express.

But consider what has happened since July 11 when a barrel of oil hit a record $147.27 and a gallon of gas was $4.117 on July 17. In less than five months, oil has fallen 72 percent.

Just this week, in which the National Bureau of Economic Research determined that the U.S. is in recession, oil has fallen 25 percent.

On Friday, light, sweet crude for January delivery settled at $40.81 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange, down by nearly $3 per barrel. Prices fell as low at $40.50, levels last seen in December 2004.

Gasoline futures for January delivery tumbled to 90 cents.

For gas prices to get close to a $1, oil prices probably would need to fall another $10 a barrel — something that would have been impossible to fathom during the first part of this year as oil prices soared near $150 per barrel.

"Just seeing that '1' up there is just hard to imagine," said Kevin Keating, 65, an attorney as he filled up his Volvo S60 at a station in Phoenix that advertised prices at $1.67. "Wasn't that long ago that we worried about the '4' being up there."

Prices in New York City are well above the national averages, but still well off their highs of nearly $5 this summer.

"When gas prices are OK, we make a little profit," said Mamady Kourouma, 36, a cab driver from Guinea who paid $2.41 a gallon at a station in Chelsea.

With wages stagnant, home prices plummeting and foreclosure rated soaring, dollar-a-gallon gas may help mom fill up in the family minivan and cab drivers in New York City, but prices that low also would truly speak to how rotten the economy has become.

"The economy at that point worldwide would be in a serious, serious deterioration," said Geoff Sundstrom, spokesman for AAA.

Tom Kloza, publisher and chief oil analyst at Oil Price Information Service, said Thursday on his blog that retail prices could fetch $1.25 a gallon soon in parts of the Midwest, including Ohio, Indiana, Illinois and Missouri.

Already, some parts of the country are seeing prices around that level. The Web site gasbuddy.com, where motorists can post local gas prices, motorists can fill up for $1.29 in Neelyville, Mo., a village of about 500 people near the Arkansas state line.

The jobs number suggests that demand for gasoline, which has been running well below year-ago levels even with the cheaper prices in the last several weeks, will fall even more in early 2009 as work-related driving plummets, said Kloza.

"I believe that January 2009 will represent the most 'challenging' and ugly economic month of my lifetime, and my first memory is of Sputnik," Kloza said.

There is plenty of reason to suspect Kloza is right.

Since the start of the recession, the economy has lost 1.9 million jobs, the number of unemployed people has increased by 2.7 million and the jobless rate is up 1.7 percentage points. The meltdown in financial markets has crushed lending, the Detroit 3 are on the brink of bankruptcy without a big government bailout.

Friday's report was much deeper than the 320,000 job cuts economists were forecasting. If there is a plus side it is that the unemployment rate did not climb to the 6.8 percent level economists were expecting.

Kloza does not believe prices will make it to a $1. Gas prices neared a dollar last time on Dec. 18, 2001, three months after the terrorist attacks and the country in its last recession, when prices hit $1.08 a gallon.

Though the weak gasoline prices point how bad the economy is, they also could help it turnaround.

Kloza figures the U.S. gasoline bill at $1.75 per gallon average will be about $20.5 billion this month, down about $16 billion a year ago. Five years ago, the bill was $17.2 billion.

"That could be one important spur to some kind of economic recovery," Sundstrom said.

In other Nymex trading, gasoline futures tumbled 6.83 cents to settle at 90 cents. Heating oil slid 8.26 cents to $1.4265 a gallon while natural gas for January delivery shed 24.7 cents to sell at $5.77 per 1,000 cubic feet.

In London, January Brent crude slipped by $2.42 cents to $39.86 on the ICE Futures exchange.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,462905,00.html

O.J. Guilty

2008-12-05T22:28:00.005-05:00

O.J. Simpson will spend at least the next nine years of his life behind bars for his role in a robbery in a hotel room in Vegas. Simpson tried to explain and apologize for his actions in the same breath saying, "I didn't mean to steal anything from anybody ... I'm sorry. I'm sorry for all of it."

However it looks like O.J. drew the wrong judge for leniency. Judge Glass is described has "a no-nonsense judge known for tough sentences." Simpson could face has many has 33 years in prison. Which would effectively be the rest of his life. However he's up for parole in nine. As for parole don't count on it. "The prosecutor also said that because the crimes were considered violent felonies, Simpson and Stewart will not be eligible for good-behavior credits to lessen their sentences. He did not expect them to be immediately released when they do seek parole.

So why was this prosecutor able to convict the NFL legend. To put it simply he had it on tape. "Jurors who heard 13 days of testimony said after the verdict that they were convinced of Simpson's guilt because of audio recordings that were secretly made of the robbery at the Palace Station casino hotel."

"District Attorney David Roger revealed that Simpson and Stewart had both been offered plea agreements during the trial that would have resulted in lesser sentences. He would not provide details." I remember Simpson's attorney saying something to the affect of "Mr. Simpson has great faith in the jury system."

While O.J. may now have less faith in that system it helped Ron Goldman's family
the man O.J. was acquitted of murdering in 94 along with his Nicole Brown Simpson) regain some of theirs. "We are thrilled, and it's a bittersweet moment,"Fred Goldman said. "It was satisfying seeing him in shackles like he belongs. After sentencing was over, the Goldmans left the courtroom and Kim threw her arms around her father and wept." The Goldman's even took some credit for Simpson's plight stating that their "relentless pursuit" of his assets "pushed him over the edge."

Nicole Brown Simpson's sister, Denise Brown, released a statement from her family referring to the date her sister and Ron Goldman were killed, "Allowing wealth, power and control to consume himself, he made a horrific choice on June 12, 1994, which has spiraled into where he is today," the statement said.

This seems like a fitting end to the saga that has been O.J. Simpson. Since the murder trail in 1994 in which many people believe he got away with two murders. He has been in trouble several times. Mostly Domestic disputes and I believe at least one case of road rage. However it appears that the O.J. Simpson saga has finally come to an end with this conviction.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=3747669

Recount over, Coleman still leads

2008-12-05T20:36:00.009-05:00

The Recount in Minnesota is over, at least the recounting part any is anyway. Coleman is up by 192 votes. However there are still 133 missing ballots from Minneapolis. Coleman started the recount with a 215 vote lead. So even with all of Franken's deceit he only made up 23 votes. However there are 6657 challenged ballots. Coleman challenged 3,376 ballots and Franken challenged 3,281. However from my experience has a poll watcher this election I seriously doubt this election will be swung by challenged ballots. Anyone can make a challenge for any reason including no reason. I feel sure most of these challenges fall under the category of for no reason.

With what I am now calling a Republican victory in Minnesota and Saxby's big win in Georgia. The Republicans will have 42 seats in the U.S. Senate. This should help us keep the Democrats in check since we will be able to sustain a filibuster if it's necessary. Also remember that the out of power party usually picks up seats in the Presidents first midterm. Also I believe 2012 is supposed to be a good year for Republicans in the Senate meaning were challenging for more seats than were defending. So it's possible that we could take the senate back in 2012. I figure we'll also pick up seats in the House in 2010. Whether or not we pick up more in 2012 will depend on how Obama does as President.

2012 Conservatism Strikes Back

http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/35607614.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUX

The Case for Boise State

2008-12-05T20:18:00.004-05:00

Sorry guys I have to go off-topic every once in a while to talk about my other passion college football. In this case America's underdogs may be screwed out of a chance to play in a BCS game. I'm not saying Boise should be playing for the national title. Although if there was a eight team playoff they should be in that.

The Boise State Broncos are 12-0. Their competition for the final BCS birth is 10-2 Ohio State. Boise plays in a weak conference, but they did go to Oregon (14) and win 37-32. That was the only game this year Boise did not win by double digits. eight times they held their opponents to 10 points or less. They average 39.4 points a game. Lets not forget Oregon blasted Oregon State 65-38 last Saturday. Oregon State would have gone to the Rose bowl with a win. Instead Oregon State finishes third in the Pac 10 behind Oregon and USC.

Ohio State had two chances to make a BCS bowl this year. The third game of the year against USC in which they were dominated 35-3. The score doesn't show how badly they were beaten. They changed quarterbacks after the game. Later in the season they were given another shot to make a BCS game against Penn State. A win there would've given them the Big ten title and a trip to the Rose Bowl. They lost 13-6 at home. This time with their new quarterback Terrell Pryor. It seems obvious to me that Ohio State's offense can't handle top notch defenses no matter who the quarterback is. However Ohio State has beaten two teams in the top 25 this season, Michigan State (21) and Northwestern (22).

It seems to me that a school that has already failed twice to earn a trip to a BCS game shouldn't be allowed to have a third bite at the apple. Everyone outside of Ohio knows Ohio State will be dominated by any of their potential challengers. As far as I'm concerned Boise State will give Texas or Oklahoma a much better game and it will certainly be more interesting than watching Ohio State go run, run, pass, punt for sixty minutes.

I know that Boise State hasn't played anyone outside of Oregon all year, but that's because no one has the guts to put them on the schedule. Even if they did it would be a one shot deal. None of these big schools are going to risk their season on taking a trip to Boise to play on the blue turf. The truth is Ohio State has two quality wins to Boise's one. However Boise has no losses and Ohio State has two. Plus Boise Dominated the teams they played this year. The Oregon game was the only game they played that was really competitive. However I have watched the Broncos on a few occasions this season I have seen that they never take a play off no matter what the score is. Boise is capable of beating any team that makes the mistake of lining up in front of them. I hope the BCS selection committee gives them the chance to prove me right by placing them in a BCS game Sunday at 8pm on FOX.

Back in Business

2008-12-05T19:41:00.003-05:00

Wow has it really been over a week since my last post. Sorry about that. Like I said I was on vacation for awhile. I'm going to put up at least two new post today (not counting this one.) I've already started on one of them. Well I better get back to work.

10 reasons for Conservatives to be thankful

2008-11-27T20:16:00.002-05:00

From Pajamas Media:
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/ten-reasons-for-conservatives-to-be-thankful/2/

Thanksgiving brings time for reflection and appreciation. We all have many reasons to be grateful for the blessings in our personal lives. But in a year in which so little has gone right politically for conservatives it is good to recall ten things which should engender gratitude — and indeed rejoicing — from conservatives.

First, President-elect Barack Obama won by assuring voters he would pursue tax cuts, victory in Afghanistan, prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, and go “line by line” through the federal budget to eliminate waste and unneeded programs. We can doubt his sincerity or ability to achieve these ends, but he won by recognizing and espousing center-right principles. If he pursues some or all of them, the country will be the better for it. If he doesn’t, he is unlikely to succeed or maintain the broad-based popularity needed to keep Democrats in power.

Second, Hillary Clinton, James L. Jones, and Robert Gates are on tap to fill key national security roles. This is not the crew to bug out of Iraq before the job is done, repeal FISA, rush off to meet with Ahmadinejad, or support a 25% cut in defense spending. On national security, the president-elect in essence has conceded that the Left’s vision is impractical and dangerous. To echo Ronald Reagan on the Cold War, conservatives can rightly crow to the Left in the Democratic Party: “We win, you lose.”

Third, Congressional Republicans have not been a source of pride for the GOP, but the elevation of Eric Cantor to minority whip and Mike Pence to the Republican conference slot puts two of the more articulate and attractive Republicans in the spotlight. They won’t win very many votes, but they can paint stark differences and begin to restore intellectual vigor to Republicans inside the Beltway.

Fourth, Mitch McConnell. If your numbers are down, your morale is low, and you are facing a savvy Democratic president, there is no one better situated to prevent the worst and eke out small victories. And given his toughly contested Senate race, we can look forward to an equally vigorous race against Harry Reid in 2010.

Fifth, Republican governors make up a diverse, attractive, and effective group of leaders. From the ranks of Bobby Jindal, Sarah Palin, Jon Huntsman, Mitch Daniels, Haley Barbour, Tim Pawlenty, and Mark Sanford will come conservative ideas, articulate spokesmen, and a raft of contenders for 2012. If President Obama fails to bring about economic recovery with a reenactment of the New Deal, this group stands ready to present alternative plans for reviving the economy.

Sixth, the MSM has never been in lower repute. Reporters and editors from their own ranks concede their bias. The stock of major media companies is plummeting. They are in bigger trouble than the Big Three auto companies. And they show even less inclination to reform. That means the opportunity exists for conservative and new media to cultivate large audiences. If alternative media outlets continue to offer hard-nosed reporting and balance the fawning analysis of the MSM, they can become the media of choice for more and more Americans.

Seventh, there is a rich — and sometimes contentious — intellectual community on the Right in think tanks, new media, and grassroots organizations which did not exist in other moments of crisis for conservatives (e.g., post-Watergate). Yes, they sometimes devolve into acrimonious bickering. But they also provide the potential for intellectual and political rebirth. There is no shortage of ideas or voices on the Right.

Eighth, we complete seven years without a terrorist attack on American soil. Despite the many criticisms of the Bush presidency, he achieved what few thought possible — a perfect record in foiling terrorist plots which would have struck our homeland and killed more Americans. If the president-elect follows the advice of Attorney General Mukasey, a good deal of the homeland security architecture erected during this administration will remain in place and will continue to afford protection for Americans. (For example, just as he did in his final vote on extending FISA, President-elect Obama’s assessment of the Guantanamo detainee cases may lead him to the same conclusion which the Bush administration reached on an important aspect of security — we need an appropriate non-civilian legal system and a secure location for dealing with very dangerous people in an unconventional war of undetermined length.)

Ninth, President George W. Bush and General David Petraeus persevered against tremendous odds and have placed us on the verge of one of the great military turnarounds in our history. We can disagree about the wisdom of the decision to go to war in Iraq, but a victory with a stable Iraq allied with the U.S. and a humiliated al-Qaeda is now within our grasp. By avoiding defeat and empowering an Arab nation to take up arms and defeat Islamic terrorists, Bush and Petraeus furthered the security of the U.S., the region, and our allies around the world.

Tenth, Republicans in Washington and around the country will no longer have George W. Bush tied around their necks. For example, Virginia Attorney General Robert McDonnell can run for governor on his own merits — likely against Clinton operative Terry McAuliffe — without need to defend an incumbent president as did Virginia Republicans in two losing Senate races and one failing governor’s race during the Bush years. That will be duplicated in races around the country as Republicans, freed from a horribly unpopular president, can run on their own ideas and contrast themselves with their Democratic opponents. A huge weight has been lifted.

All of this may seem small comfort to conservatives who finish the year on a losing streak. But Republicans were counted out in 1964, 1976, and 1992. Their resources are greater and their ranks are larger now than at any of those times. They can be thankful as well for the truism that nothing in politics is permanent. So for all these things — as well as the many blessings in their own lives — conservatives should indeed be grateful.

It's Second Amendment Weekend in South Carolina

2008-11-26T19:39:00.003-05:00

Welcome to South Carolina where the Second Amendment is still seen as being just as important as the First.

The people of South Carolina will not have to pay taxes on guns this holiday weekend. The State legisature added this measure onto a bill that would also include energy efficent items on the Tax-Holliday. "We are a gun-owning-tradition state, a hunting-tradition state," said Republican state Rep. Mike Pitts, a retired police officer who introduced the proposal and has promoted other pro-gun legislation."

South Carolina is the only state offering any kind of tax break to shoppers over Thanksgiving weekend, said Joe Henchman, counsel for the Washington-based Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan tax research group. Henchman is against tax hollidays.

If you think Pitts is using this tax holliday to make some sort of political point you would be right. "Pitts said he wanted to make a political statement as the U.S. Supreme Court considered the right to have guns for self-defense in the home. The justices' decision to strike down the District of Columbia's 32-year ban on handguns came in late June, one day after the South Carolina legislators overrode Sanford's veto."

"The National Rifle Association said no other states are considering a tax-free holiday on gun sales, though the group believes they should."

"Everyone is faced with tough times, and we believe, in addition to helping hunters and shooting sports enthusiasts, this will also help the local economy and merchants," said NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam. "This shows South Carolina cares about America's hunting heritage, cares about law-abiding gun owners, and other states should follow suit."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,458225,00.html

The War on Thanksgiving!?!

2008-11-26T16:28:00.008-05:00

We all know about the liberals war against Christmas. Now they are trying to stop Thanksgiving as well. A college English professor has taken it upon herself to end a decades long tradition at Claremont Elementry School.

"Kindergartners at Condit and Mountain View elementary schools take annual turns dressing up and visiting the other school for a Thanksgiving feast. This year, the Mountain View children would have dressed as Native Americans and walked to Condit, whose students would have dressed as Pilgrims." Now these children will not be allowed to wear the costumes that many of their parents wore when they attended the school decades ago. Apparently this custom has gone from a friendly and harmless event to beginning compared to what the Nazi's did to the Jews overnight. "It's demeaning," Michelle Raheja, the mother of a kindergartner at Condit Elementary School, wrote to her daughter's teacher. "I'm sure you can appreciate the inappropriateness of asking children to dress up like slaves (and kind slave masters), or Jews (and friendly Nazis), or members of any other racial minority group who has struggled in our nation's history."

This isn't demeaning it's fun. I'm not sure if this story is completely true, partially true, or absolutely false. However the story of Thanksgiving teaches us all a great lesson about putting our differences aside, loving our neighbors, and giving thanks to God for the blessings in our lives. I don't see how the Nazi's play into this.

Apparently several of the parents of the children agree with me. "She's not going to tell us what we can and cannot wear," said Dena Murphy, whose 5-year-old son attends Mountain View. "We're tired of [district officials] cowing down to people. It's not right." Another parent seemed to echo those remarks, Raheja is "using those children as a political platform for herself and her ideas," Constance Garabedian said as her 5-year-old Mountain View kindergartner happily practiced a song about Native Americans in the background. "I'm not a professor and I'm not a historian, but I can put the dots together."

So can I Ms. Garabedian. Professor Raheja is trying to see how far she can push her agenda. I guarantee you since the school caved into her here she will back again.

Liberals are like terrorist their never satisfied with partial concessions and will always come back asking for more once you've shown your willing to comprise your principals. The only way to defeat either is to stand up to them and fight for what you believe.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-thanksgiving25-2008nov25,0,1458033.story

If you like this story go to www.realclearpolitics.com check out the readers articles with more than ten votes and vote for this story. The more votes a story gets the longer it stays on the site and the more people that get to read the article.

On Vacation

2008-11-25T05:49:00.003-05:00

Just wanted to let everyone know I'm going to out of town and will be without my computer for about two weeks. I may have limited access to a computer while I'm out of town visiting family. Just wanted you to know if I don't get another post up for awhile that is the reason.

Looks like you only need 1 marine for every ten terrorist in Afghanistan

2008-11-25T05:47:00.001-05:00

From Patriot Room
http://patriotroom.com/

Looks like 250 terrorists picked the wrong day to screw with 30 U.S. Marines in Afghanistan. Frankly, is there ever a good day to screw with the Marines?

In the city of Shewan, approximately 250 insurgents ambushed 30 Marines and paid a heavy price for it. . . .

“The day started out with a 10-kilometer patrol with elements mounted and dismounted, so by the time we got to Shewan, we were pretty beat,” said a designated marksman who requested to remain unidentified. “Our vehicles came under a barrage of enemy RPGs (rocket propelled grenades) and machine gun fire. One of our ‘humvees’ was disabled from RPG fire, and the Marines inside dismounted and laid down suppression fire so they could evacuate a Marine who was knocked unconscious from the blast.”

The vicious attack that left the humvee destroyed and several of the Marines pinned down in the kill zone sparked an intense eight-hour battle as the platoon desperately fought to recover their comrades. After recovering the Marines trapped in the kill zone, another platoon sergeant personally led numerous attacks on enemy fortified positions while the platoon fought house to house and trench to trench in order to clear through the enemy ambush site.

“The biggest thing to take from that day is what Marines can accomplish when they’re given the opportunity to fight,” the sniper said. “A small group of Marines met a numerically superior force and embarrassed them in their own backyard. The insurgents told the townspeople that they were stronger than the Americans, and that day we showed them they were wrong.”

And of all mistakes the terrorists made that day, the worst one was picking the patrol with this guy in it.

During the battle, the designated marksman single handedly thwarted a company-sized enemy RPG and machinegun ambush by reportedly killing 20 enemy fighters with his devastatingly accurate precision fire. He selflessly exposed himself time and again to intense enemy fire during a critical point in the eight-hour battle for Shewan in order to kill any enemy combatants who attempted to engage or maneuver on the Marines in the kill zone. What made his actions even more impressive was the fact that he didn’t miss any shots, despite the enemies’ rounds impacting within a foot of his fighting position.

“I was in my own little world,” the young corporal said. “I wasn’t even aware of a lot of the rounds impacting near my position, because I was concentrating so hard on making sure my rounds were on target.”

The most amazing thing about the battle: Not a single Marine was seriously hurt.

Hoo-rah!

Shouldn't Obama Have to Accomplish Something Before We Start Naming Things After Him, I Guess Not

2008-11-22T01:16:00.008-05:00

At the behest of its students, an elementary school near New York City has been renamed after President-elect Barack Obama.

The six and seven year olds made us do it!

The Hempstead Union Free School District board voted unanimously Thursday night to rename Ludlum Elementary School as Barack Obama Elementary School. The change went into effect immediately, school officials said Friday.

So basically no one on that school board had the guts to be politically incorrect and say "Barack Obama isn't even President yet, don't we normally wait until someone dies or at least does something significant before we start naming things after him." Also couldn't we have at least waited, I don't know, until he actually became President.

Officials for the Long Island district say they think the school is the country's first to be named after the first black president-elect, although similar efforts to rename schools, parks and streets are under way elsewhere.

So it was a race was it? Are they going to change the name back if Obama Presidency turns out to be a disaster? Seriously if we the economy goes into a depression and there are several terrorist attacks on his watch do you think they'll change it back?

The Clear Stream Avenue School in Valley Stream, N.Y., also on Long Island, will consider a renaming resolution in December. Students at the Clark K-8 At Binnsmead school in Portland, Ore., are seeking to rename it after Obama. And the prime minister of the Caribbean nation of Antigua and Barbuda has said he wants its Boggy Peak renamed Mount Obama.

All right that's it! Shouldn't the man have to sign at least one piece of legislation before he gets a mountain named after him. By the way why are other countries naming their mountains after Obama anyway.

Most of the 466 Hempstead pupils are black or Hispanic, and Obama's election was a big source of pride, principal Jean Bligen said Friday.

Some of the children read essays about Obama and the election at the school board meeting on Thursday night. "That really was effective," Bligen said.

Translation: Some of these kids parents wrote essays for their children and made them go to the board meeting and read them.

The change will be formalized at a ceremony in December. School officials hope Gov. David Paterson, the state's first black governor and Hempstead High School graduate, will attend.

I'm sure Patterson will attend. If for no other reason than to ask why the school wasn't named after him. Since uhh you know he's actually served the citizens of New York.

Built in the 1920s, the Ludlum Elementary School was named after Dr. Charles Ludlum, a local physician who served on the school board for about 40 years.

Dr Ludlum served his community for forty years, Obama has never lived near this community and yet Dr. Ludlum's name has been replaced why exactly? Oh that's right because the six and seven year olds wanted it to be. I can't be the only one who thinks this is crazy.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,456348,00.html

Next thing you know some they'll expect to have his face on Mount Rushmore. You probably have already seen this, but it still gets the point across.

Obama's Payoff Complete, Hillary Clinton Sells Soul for Secretary of State Job

2008-11-22T00:35:00.002-05:00

From Scott Martin
Conservatism Today
http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/

In Hillary Clinton's lust to be remembered as something other than the most cheated on First Lady ever, she has made a deal with the Devil, an odd sale of her soul where she doesn't even get to be President. I guess you have to take whatever you can get for your soul nowadays, what with the post-Obama market collapse we're going through. And what she could get was a job as Secretary of State, a job that would seem perfect for the woman who guaranteed that if the phone should ever ring at 3 in the morning, she would be there to answer it.

Meanwhile, Barack Obama has answered the call the same way he always seems to. He has thrown his rhetoric of "change" under the bus, where it lies trampled next to campaign finance, his grandmother, Reverend Wright and anything else that has stood between him and his laser-like focus on gaining power.

Barack Obama can't change the way Washington DC does business by bringing back all of the Clinton's old friends. He certainly can't do so by naming a Clinton his Secretary of State. This is not change. This is buying the next eight years. Barack Obama has ensured that he will face no Democrat opposition by buying out the only people who were a danger to him. Now he just needs to avoid becoming Jimmy Carter and he's got his eight years.

If this is the change America wanted, change back to 1992, why not just vote for Clinton instead of Obama. Oh, wait. It did.

Oh, the story:

Mrs. Clinton came to her decision after additional discussion with President-elect Barack Obama about the nature of her role and his plans for foreign policy, said one of the confidants, who insisted on anonymity to discuss the situation. Mr. Obama’s office told reporters Thursday that the nomination is “on track” but Clinton associates only confirmed Friday afternoon that she has decided.

“She’s ready,” said the confidant. Mrs. Clinton was reassured after talking again with Mr. Obama because their first meeting in Chicago last week “was so general,” the confidant said. The purpose of the follow-up talk, he added, was not to extract particular concessions but “just getting comfortable” with the idea of working together.

Yeah, I could see how that could be difficult. How do you get comfortable with the thought of working for the unaccomplished, smooth talking, male, affirmative action recipient who just stole the job you've been working for your whole life? I guess a life's worth of practice makes it a little bit easier every time.

Just when I had begun to respect her. No more.

So do you think Obama will make any of his own decisions as President? It looks like Bill and Hillary picked his entire cabinet for him. We all know that Obama and Hillary have major differences on Foreign Policy. So either he was lying to get the nomination during the primary, or he's planning on throwing Hillary under that bus first chance he gets.

Hitler's back!

2008-11-20T17:03:00.002-05:00

Same video new take
Hat Tip: Conservative Today
http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/

al-Zawahri, Osama's #2, calls Obama a House Negro

2008-11-19T16:37:00.003-05:00

So much for the terrorist not being mad at us anymore. Seems like they aren't particularly impressed with President-Elect Obama. "America has put on a new face, but its heart full of hate, mind drowning in greed, and spirit which spreads evil, murder, repression and despotism continue to be the same as always," the deputy of al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden said.

Zawahri goes on to call Obama a house negro. Ayman al-Zawahri said in the message, which appeared on militant Web sites, that Obama is "the direct opposite of honorable black Americans" like Malcolm X, the 1960s African-American rights leader.

In al-Qaida's first response to Obama's victory, al-Zawahri also called the president-elect — along with secretaries of state Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice —"house Negroes."

Well at least Zawahri was being bi-partisan

Zawahri did not threaten specific attacks, but warned Obama that he was "facing a Jihadi (holy war) awakening and renaissance which is shaking the pillars of the entire Islamic world; and this is the fact which you and your government and country refuse to recognize and pretend not to see."

I have to agree with Zawahri here. It does seem like most people here have forgotten we are fighting a war.

He said Obama's victory showed Americans acknowledged that President George W. Bush's policies were a failure and that the result was an "admission of defeat in Iraq."

Seems to me some of us were saying that electing Obama would inspire the terrorist.

However Obama's actions will have much more to do with what happens in Iraq than any statement some guy makes from a cave. Right now it looks like we'll be there until 2011, due to the status of forces agreement which President Bush and the Iraqi government just agreed on. Then we will withdrawal and let the Iraqi's defend their own country. If Obama tries to leave earlier we may have major a problem on our hands. However I don't see any reason Obama would try to leave earlier 2011 is before 2012 so he can tell everyone he kept his promise to get troops out of Iraq during his re-election campaign. The fact he had absolutely nothing to do with it won't even be mentioned most likely.

Obama has promised a surge into Afganistan during his first term as President. Al-Qaida says they will be waiting.

"Be aware that the dogs of Afghanistan have found the flesh of your soldiers to be delicious, so send thousands after thousands to them," al-Zawahri said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081119/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_al_qaida_obama

Wanna say the pledge of Alligence, Get out of the classroom!

2008-11-19T04:49:00.003-05:00

That is the message in the Socialist state of Vermont. Now before you say that I can't call Vermont socialist remember they have elected a socialist, Bernie Sanders to represent them in the Senate.

The school has said the children who wish to say the pledge must leave their classroom and go to the gymnasium on the second floor. A sixth grader is designated to go around to the classrooms and ask them if they want to say the pledge. The sixth grader then leads the student in the pledge.

"We don’t want to isolate children every day in their own classroom, or make them feel they’re different,” Principal Michaela Martin said. About half the students chose to participate, Martin said.

So it's OK to make the half of kids that want to say the pledge feel different. I mean their obviously freaks for wanting to recite the pledge of allegiance.

Friday, the routine changed again.

Just before 8 a.m., Martin herded all the school’s students — and several adults — into a cramped foyer that adjoins the first-floor classrooms and told sixth-grader Nathan Gilbert, 12, to lead them in the Pledge.

Most recited it; some didn’t.

I'm sure that went well.

Afterward, 10 adults streamed down the steps and outside, forming a circle around Dunlap for a heated discussion in which they pressed for an explanation of why it couldn’t be said in the classrooms.

The format is up to teachers, not administrators or parents, Dunlap said.

So it's the teachers idea to take all of their students out of their classrooms into a cramped foyer instead of staying in their classrooms. Remember some of these kids are six and seven years old. So these teaches either have some sort of mental disorder or Dunlap is full of crap. I'm going with the latter.

Tedesco a retired marine had a different take on it. “Saying the Pledge in the classroom is legal, convenient and traditional,” Tedesco said. “Asking kindergarten- through sixth-graders who want to say the Pledge to leave their classrooms to do so is neither convenient nor traditional. There’s no way a heckler’s veto should abridge the constitutional rights of the majority,”

Amen Tedesco.

http://burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20081115/NEWS/81114036

Man who defended Clinton during Impeachment named Obama's White House Council

2008-11-19T04:25:00.006-05:00

President-Elect Barack Obama has chosen Gregory Craig has his White House Council. Craig is most known for defending President Clinton on the House Floor during impeachment hearings. However he has had more than a few controversial clients. I found this list over at Blogs for Victory:

Elian Gonzalez’s father - Craig represented the father who demanded the return of his son after his estranged wife died trying to take Elian to freedom. Most people saw this as a thinly-veiled publicity stunt from Fidel Castro, attempting to embarrass the US. The dispute got resolved when Janet Reno ordered an armed assault on the house where Elian’s family in the US provided him a home.

John Hinckley, Jr - Craig presented and won the insanity defense that allows Ronald Reagan’s would-be assassin to spend weekends with his family now.

Kofi Annan - The former Secretary-General of the UN hired Craig to defend his interests in the Volcker Commission probe of the Oil-for-Food scandal, which put billions of dollars into Saddam Hussein’s pockets while providing cash for Annan’s son, his deputies, and some allege Annan himself.

Pedro Gonzalez Pinzon - A Panamanian legislator wanted for murdering an American soldier in 1992. The Dallas Morning News demanded that Obama force Craig to drop the case during the campaign, but no report of whether he did is easily available.

So Craig defended a guy who shot a Republican President then stood in defense of a Democratic President who committed perjury. This must be Obama's definition of bi-partisanship. Of course he did defend Clinton during Impeachment so maybe Obama is just getting ready for future events.

All joking aside Barack Obama should have thought more about his White House council. I don't think choosing the guy that defended the man who shot Ronald Reagan is the best way to show bi-partisanship.

How Obama got elected.

2008-11-18T05:47:00.005-05:00

When you put this video together with the Howard Stern video from before the election. (shown below) You can't deny that the media did was completely bias in it's coverage.

This is a poll taken of Obama voters. The only thing they seemed to know was that Sarah Palin had a pregant kid and she wore expensive clothes. They also had a hard time separating Palin from Tina Fey.

Zogby Poll

512 Obama Voters 11/13/08-11/15/08 MOE +/- 4.4 points

97.1% High School Graduate or higher, 55% College Graduates

Results to 12 simple Multiple Choice Questions

57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing)

81.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing)

82.6% could NOT correctly say that Barack Obama won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing)

88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing)

56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance by guessing).

And yet.....

Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their party spent $150,000 in clothes

Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage daughter

And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her "house," even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!

Only 2.4% got at least 11 correct.

Only .5% got all of them correct. (And we "gave" one answer that was technically not Palin, but actually Tina Fey)

Here's the deal it's everyone's right to vote. However if you don't know what party is in control of Congress, or who is the Senate Majority Leader or who's Speaker of the House just stay home. If you don't care enought to know what's going on before Election Day, don't decide to care on Election Day. We really don't need people that don't understand the issues, or that don't even know what the issues are deciding the election. Maybe in 2012 we will actually have voters that know something about what's going on before they vote.

Obama to make McCain Sec of Defense.

2008-11-18T04:54:00.002-05:00

From Bill Dupray at http://patriotroom.com/

UPDATE: Actually, a correction. Under Arizona law, if McCain were to vacate his Senate seat, the Governor would have to appoint a replacement from the same party. The replacement would serve out the remaining two years of McCain’s term.

Thanks to Freeper Conservative From Georgia for the heads-up.

ORIGINAL POST:

Not sure what to make of this, but No Quarter has a source in Chicago that says that Obama and McCain will meet tomorrow to discuss the Secretary of Defense job.

A source in Chicago informed me earlier today that John McCain will be meeting with Obama and his handlers tomorrow in Chicago in order to discuss the possibility of a Secretary of Defense appointment. That McCain will be in Chicago tomorrow is corroborated by an article London Times published one hour ago. The Times, however, claims McCain will most probably not be appointed to a Cabinet position. But he will be consulted on topics on which he and Obama have “common ground.” This certainly does not preclude the possibility of an appointment of McCain to Secretary of Defense.

Our source maintains that McCain will visit Chicago tomorrow in order to discuss the Secretary of Defense appointment.

This would be the right move for the sake of the country. It would be a clever political move by Obie because it would allow the Democrat Governor of Arizona, Janet Napolitano, to choose a Democrat replacement for McCain’s Senate seat.

The real fun will be watching the The Great Moonbat Mutiny of 2008 when they realize that the architect of the evil surge will be in charge of ending the war, no doubt on McCain’s, not Obama’s timetable. It gives Obama cover if the draw-down goes badly, as he can blame McCain and retake the controls at any point.

I seriously doubt this would happen. If Obama were to name McCain Sec of Defense he would basically be telling all those people who voted for him, haha fooled you suckers. Not that anyone who really paid attention would be surprised that Obama was going back on a campaign promise he made. However most of the people that voted for him weren't paying attention.

I think it would be a good move for the country if McCain was named Secretary of Defense. It would also show Obama wants to be a centrist and unite the country. McCain wouldn't have to worry about a Democrat taking over his seat because a person from the same party has to be named to fill the seat according to Arizona law.

Of course this works for Obama too if something goes wrong he has a scapegoat to point the finger at. If this story is true and Obama offers McCain the job McCain needs to decide if he is willing to be thrown under the bus. Obama will throw McCain under the bus if something goes wrong. Believe it or not there's still more room under that bus.

Huckabee Kicks Off 2012 Primary Battle.

2008-11-18T02:05:00.003-05:00

As I was waiting for some pizza I ordered I walked into a nearby business where I saw they had Red white and blue hats with the Republican elephant on them. The hats were $2.50 before the election she said, "but now that it's over their only 99 cents." I looked at her and I said, "Oh, it's never over." And so the 2012 Republican Primary has begun with the release of Mike Huckabee's new book: Do the Right Thing: Inside the Movement That's Bringing Common Sense Back to America.

"Mitt Romney, Huckabee's principal rival in Iowa, receives the roughest treatment. Huckabee writes that the former Massachusetts governor's record was "anything but conservative until he changed the light bulbs in his chandelier in time to run for president." He notes that Romney declined to make a congratulatory phone call after Huckabee beat the odds to win the Iowa caucuses, "which we took as a sign of total disrespect." He mocks Romney for suggesting, during one debate, more investment in high-yield stocks as a solution to economic woes. "Let them eat stocks!" Huckabee jokes."

Of course Romney's camp responded. "Eric Fehrnstrom, a spokesman for Mr. Romney, fired back today in a statement: “This type of pettiness is beneath Mike Huckabee. If we’re going to move the party forward, we need to offer more than personal recriminations. Unfortunately, in this book, Mike Huckabee is consumed with presumed slights, and he seems more interested in settling scores than in bringing people together.”

Huckabee and Romney if they don't hate each other are about as close as two Christians can come to hating each other.

Huckabee also takes on Fred Thompson although he is nowhere near as tough on him as he was Romney. Perhaps because he knows Fred doesn't have another run in him. Some would say he didn't even have the first run in him. "Fred Thompson never did grasp the dynamics of the race or the country, and his amazingly lackluster campaign reflected just how disconnected he was with the people, despite the anticipation and expectation that greeted his candidacy," Huckabee wrote.

However Mike Huckabee did not stop at his political opponents he also took on the Club for Growth. The organization perhaps most responsible for stopping his meteoric rise. In his chapter Faux-Cons: Worse than Liberalism," Huckabee identifies what he calls the "real threat" to the Republican Party: "libertarianism masked as conservatism. "Faux-Cons aren't interested in spirited or thoughtful debate, because such an endeavor requires accountability for the logical conclusion of their argument." Among his targets is the Club for Growth, a group that tarred Huckabee as insufficiently conservative in the primaries and ran television ads with funding from one of Huckabee's longtime Arkansas political foes, Jackson T. Stephens Jr."

But for all the sharp words Huckabee has for his fellow Republicans, score-settling is not the major thrust of the book, Huckabee's sixth. Rather, Huckabee, who now hosts a weekend show on Fox News, spends most of the pages celebrating the grass-roots success of his surprisingly successful campaign and laying out, again, his vision for the future of the Republican Party, which includes instituting a national sales tax to replace the income tax and renewed focus on health-care prevention and education. He mentions McCain only in passing, and with praise, calling him a "true statesman and a man of honor."

Good to know this book isn't just a hit job. I would've been very disappointed in Governor Huckabee if it had been.

I see four people who should be running for the nomination in 2012. Gingrich, Huckabee, Palin, and Romney. Honestly I would love if it was just Huckabee and Romney so those two could have the fight to the death they were denied by Fred Thompson allowing McCain to win the SC Primary. Thus McCain became our nominee and we all saw how that turned out. Of course I'm sure Jindal will want to jump in too. Crist might jump in, but I don't see him getting the nod. Then again Cantor and Pence might want to take a shot. All right eight, but that's it. I guess Ron Paul will probably run again so that would make nine. PLEASE MAKE IT STOP! We have even inaugurated the new President yet and the campaign for 2012 has begun.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1859539,00.html?xid=rss-topstories

Have we won in Iraq?

2008-11-15T03:09:00.009-05:00

This is a picture of Children playing at an Al-Anbar school. One of the many the United States military as built. This project was completed on Oct 15th 2008.

Hat tip: Common Cents

"THE WAR IS OVER AND WE WON:" Michael Yon just phoned from Baghdad, and reports that things are much better than he had expected, and he had expected things to be good. "There's nothing going on. I'm with the 10th Mountain Division, and about half of the guys I'm with haven't fired their weapons on this tour and they've been here eight months. And the place we're at, South Baghdad, used to be one of the worst places in Iraq. And now there's nothing going on. I've been walking my feet off and haven't seen anything. I've been asking Iraqis, 'do you think the violence will kick up again,' but even the Iraqi journalists are sounding optimistic now and they're usually dour." There's a little bit of violence here and there, but nothing that's a threat to the general situation. Plus, not only the Iraqi Army, but even the National Police are well thought of by the populace. Training from U.S. troops has paid off, he says, in building a rapport.

He says the big problem everybody is talking about now is corruption. But hey, we have that here, too. He'll be heading to Afghanistan next week. "Afghanistan is a bad situation, but on Iraq I can't believe things have turned out so well."

He thinks that Obama will be able to pull troops out, and send some to Afghanistan, without creating problems in Iraq. Michael will be reporting from Afghanistan soon, and sending back video, so stay tuned. Things aren't going swimmingly there.

It's ironic that we will be able to pull out some troops out of Iraq precisely due to the fact that we did not follow the democrats advice and retreat in the face of adversity. American forces have already started to pull out of many Iraqi cities and let the Iraqi millitary and police handle most of the problems. None of this is possible without the surge that Senator McCain began calling for long before anyone else even knew it was necessary. I suspect we will leave Iraq by the end of Obama's first term. Not because it is his policy but because the Iraqi's will be trained and ready to defend their country from all enemies foreign and domestic. It might not go down that way in the history books, but I will tell the next generation this is the way it was.

Things You Can't Do!

2008-11-13T03:49:00.001-05:00

http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/

You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot help small men by tearing down big men.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot lift the wage-earner by pulling down the wage-payer.
You cannot help the poor man by destroying the rich.
You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot establish security on borrowed money.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away men's initiative
and independence.
You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could
and should do for themselves.

William Boetcker, 1873 - 1962

It's all so simple and obvious that you would think that there would be a thriving movement centered around these ideas. Oh wait. There was. Unfortunately it appears a whole new generation will have to learn these truths the hard way.

Schummer compares talk radio to pornography

2008-11-13T03:12:00.004-05:00

Hat Tip: My aisling
http://myaisling.blogspot.com/

Schummer on Fox News here is being asked about the Fairness doctrine. He calls Conservative Talk Radio Pornography. I thought maybe I was overstating it so I listened again just to be sure. In Schummer's eyes Rush Limbaugh and Jenna Jameson are one and the same.

2008-11-13T03:06:00.001-05:00

Democrats want government to own Auto companies.

2008-11-13T02:34:00.003-05:00

Congressional Democrats are pushing legislation to send $25 billion in emergency loans to the beleaguered auto industry in exchange for a government ownership stake in the Big Three car companies.

There's a word for this, soviet, no that's not it. Socialism! That's the word I was trying to think of.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., hope for quick passage of the auto bailout during a postelection session that begins Monday.

Looks like Bush will have to pull that veto pen out one more time before he leaves office.

Legislation being drafted by Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, and Sen. Carl M. Levin, D-Mich., would dip into the $700 billion Wall Street rescue money, approved by Congress last month, for the auto aid.

Why use it for what it was meant for when we can use it to buy votes um I mean help the auto industry in Michigan?

Any effort to throw the companies a lifeline could run into GOP roadblocks that could derail it in the Senate. In that chamber, Republicans, including some who believe their votes for the Wall Street bailout hurt, and in some cases doomed, their re-election bids, are loath to agree to any new money.

Glad to see these guys finally got the message. Too bad it didn't happen until after they had their tails handed to them in two consecutive elections for the first time since the Great Depression.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said Wednesday the auto sector was "critical," but that the financial industry rescue was not designed for car companies.

"Any solution has got to be leading to long-term viability" for auto companies, Paulson said.

He also suggested Congress could try to use the loan program already in place to help the companies.

Wait their is a program already in place to help and the dems want to start another loan programs why?

Democrats say those loans were designed to help automakers adapt to new fuel standards, not to stave off the financial disaster the companies now say is imminent.

You know I'm all for higher fuel efficiency vehicles, but if it's between that and saving the company I say we delay the focus on fuel efficiency until we get the industry back on it's feet.

Not to mention it's not like this happened overnight has White House Spokesperson Dana Perino pointed out. "Look at the history of these companies, decisions they've made over time that got them to where we are today."

I got it the industry should ask the UAW for some concessions so that they can stay in business. You know if the companies go out of business no one has a job right UAW? However Why would the UAW accept those terms if the government is just going to give the industry money anytime it's in trouble?

Auto executives, labor leaders and other industry proponents are mounting an intense lobbying effort for a bailout. They want an immediate $25 billion loan to keep the companies operating and a separate $25 billion to help cover future health care obligations for retirees and their dependents.

I'm all for taking care of your employees, but if the companies hadn't agreed to ridiculous contacts with the unions that they couldn't possibly afford we may not be in this situation.

Pelosi on Tuesday urged "immediate action" for the industry. Her request came less than a week after GM and Ford posted bleak third-quarter earnings reports. GM, the nation's largest automaker, posted a $2.5 billion quarterly loss Friday and warned that it may run out of money by the end of the year without government aid.

Democratic leaders will need to win over some skeptical lawmakers who question whether a bailout would cause changes in the auto industry or simply lead to more handout requests from other industries.

Hey I stupidly supported the first bailout thinking that it had to be done. Fool me once shame on you fool me twice shame on me. I say the Republicans left in congress should do everything they can to stop this bailout. Or who knows who will come knocking next?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081112/ap_on_go_co/auto_bailout

Karl Rove says Conservatism can strike back in 2010.

2008-11-13T00:20:00.002-05:00

I'd say Mr. Rove must have been reading my blog.

Political races are about candidates and issues. But election results, in the end, are about numbers. So now that the dust is settling on the 2008 presidential race, what do the numbers tell us?

First, the predicted huge turnout surge didn't happen. The final tally is likely to show that fewer than 128.5 million people voted. That's up marginally from 122 million in 2004. But 17 million more people voted in 2004 than in 2000 (three times the change from 2004 to 2008).

I bet the press continues the myth about the turnout in this elections even now that the facts are here for them to read.

Second, a substantial victory was won by modest improvement in the Democratic share of the vote. Barack Obama received 2.1 points more in the popular vote than President Bush received in 2004, 3.1 points more than Vice President Al Gore in 2000and 4.6 points more than John Kerry in 2004. In raw numbers, the latest tally shows that Mr. Obama received 66.1 million votes, about 7.1 million more than Mr. Kerry.
Four out of five of these additional votes came from minorities. Mr. Obama got nearly 3.3 million more votes from African-Americans than did Mr. Kerry; 2.9 million of them were from younger blacks aged 18-29. A quarter of Mr. Obama's improvement among blacks -- 811,000 votes -- came from African-Americans who voted Republican in 2004. Mr. Obama also received 2.5 million more Hispanic votes than Mr. Kerry. Over a third of these votes -- 719,000 -- cast ballots for Republicans in 2004.

One of the most important shifts was Hispanic support for Democrats. John McCain got the votes of 32% of Hispanic voters. That's down from the 44% Mr. Bush won four years ago. If this trend continues, the GOP will find it difficult to regain the majority.

Hispanics are the swing vote in 2010 and 2012 for the Republican Party. Republicans need to carry 40% of the Hispanic vote to become the majority party once again.

Mr. Obama won 4.6 million more votes in the West and 1.4 million more in the Midwest than Mr. Kerry. Mr. McCain, on the other hand, got more than 2.6 million fewer votes in the Midwest than Mr. Bush. In Ohio, for example, Mr. Obama received 32,000 fewer votes than Mr. Kerry in 2004 -- but Mr. McCain got 360,000 fewer votes than Mr. Bush. That turned a 119,000 vote GOP victory in 2004 into a 206,000 vote Democratic win this year.

Then there were those who didn't show up. There were 4.1 million fewer Republicans voting this year than in 2004. Some missing Republicans had turned independent or Democratic for this election. But most simply stayed home. Ironically for a campaign that featured probably the last Vietnam veteran to run for president, 2.7 million fewer veterans voted. There were also 4.1 million fewer voters who attend religious services more than once a week. Americans aren't suddenly going to church less; something was missing from the campaign to draw out the more religiously observant.

I don't know why Veterans would not get out and vote for McCain. I'm thinking they had been convinced by the polls the election had already been decided. As far as those Republicans that just didn't think McCain was conservative enough shame on you. I admit the man wasn't the perfect candidate, but candidates like Reagan are once in a generation. Now we will suffer through four years of higher taxes and increased spending under an Obama administration. Even looking ahead to 2012 I'm not sure I see the "perfect" candidate for our party out there. If there is really such a thing.

In a sign Mr. Obama's victory may have been more personal than partisan or philosophical, Democrats picked up just 10 state senate seats (out of 1,971) and 94 state house seats (out of 5,411). By comparison, when Ronald Reagan beat Jimmy Carter in 1980, Republicans picked up 112 state senate seats (out of 1,981) and 190 state house seats (out of 5,501).

I was greatly relieved to see Obama had no trickle down effect. Especially since I was a campaign manager on one of those State House races. It looks like alot of people that voted for Obama just wanted to vote for the star and forgot he might need a cast. I'm guessing alot of the youth and first time vote that went to Obama made that mistake.

In the states this year, five chambers shifted from Republican to Democrats, while four shifted from either tied or Democratic control to Republican control. In the South, Mr. Obama had "reverse coattails." Republicans gained legislative seats across the region. In Tennessee both the house and senate now have GOP majorities for the first time since the Civil War.

This matters because the 2010 Census could allocate as many as four additional congressional districts to Texas, two each to Arizona and Florida, and one district to each of a number of (mostly) red-leaning states, while subtracting seats from (mostly) blue-leaning states like Michigan, New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania and, for the first time, California. Redistricting and reapportionment could help tilt the playing field back to the GOP in Congress and the race for the White House by moving seven House seats (and electoral votes) from mostly blue to mostly red states.

History will favor Republicans in 2010. Since World War II, the out-party has gained an average of 23 seats in the U.S. House and two in the U.S. Senate in a new president's first midterm election. Other than FDR and George W. Bush, no president has gained seats in his first midterm election in both chambers.

FDR and George W. Bush were both Presidents during a major crisis. If there's a major crisis on Obama's watch it won't help him because he will have caused it.

Since 1966, the incumbent party has lost an average of 63 state senate and 262 state house seats, and six governorships, in a president's first midterm election. That 2010 is likely to see Republicans begin rebounding just before redistricting is one silver lining in an otherwise dismal year for the GOP.

In politics, good years follow bad years. Republicans and Democrats have experienced both during the past 15 years. A GOP comeback, while certainly possible, won't be self-executing and automatic. It will require Republicans to be skillful at both defense (opposing Mr. Obama on some issues) and offense (creating a compelling agenda that resonates with voters). And it will require leaders to emerge who give the right public face to the GOP. None of this will be easy. All of this will be necessary.

2010 conservatism strikes back!

Mr. Rove is a former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush.

Newt says he'll take the job if the RNC wants him.

2008-11-12T15:04:00.006-05:00

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Newt Gingrich has let it be known that, if Republicans want him, the former U.S House speaker is willing to serve as chairman of the national party and lead it out of the wilderness it’s blundered into.

Can you think of anyone better?

The question is whether the 168-member Republican National Committee is open to the match.

If they aren't they'll be committing suicide.

“If a majority of the RNC thought he was needed, he would accept that appointment,” said Randy Evans’ Gingrich’s close friend and legal counsel. “He fully appreciates the urgency of the moment.”

What might strike some as coyness is in fact caution. The odds are stacked against the former Georgia congressman, for several reasons.

For one thing, six days after the election of Barack Obama and substantial gains by Democrats in the House and Senate, Republicans have yet to decide whether a serious overhaul of the party is required.

Really? We've lost 20 house seats in two consecutive elections for the first time since the great depression and you don't know a serious overhaul is required.

If a revolution is in order, then there’s the small matter of which side is issued the pitchforks, and whose castle is to be stormed. Is this a fight to purge moderates, or a battle to expand the tent?

Look moderates should be in the party, but they should never control the party. We just ran a moderate for President and we got killed. We have to reach out with conservative ideas for the country.

“The RNC has to do some soul-searching and decide what level of change is necessary,” Evans said. “If that answer is bold, energetic change led by someone who has done it before, then Newt would be a good choice.”

If the party is eying a shift toward the middle, Evans added, “that isn’t Newt.”

If the Republican party moves toward the middle it will cause a third party to be born and the two parties will steal votes from each other for years to come.

Though he retains his reputation as a polarizing figure, Gingrich served as a sideline strategist for the GOP during the presidential season. He pointed McCain to the issue of offshore drilling. But Gingrich also helped generate skepticism over the Wall Street bailout — which McCain and other Senate Republicans supported.

We need a polarizing figure has head of our party. The Dems had Howard Dean and he kicked our butts. Newt has clear ideas for where he wants this country to go. You can't try to please everyone because then you end up pleasing no one.

A Gingrich chairmanship might get loud support from the GOP’s talk-radio contingent. The former House speaker has close ties to the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Neal Boortz.

But the RNC is a different, often parochial animal, made up of the top three members of the GOP establishment in every state and U.S. territory, plus the District of Columbia.

The RNC is scheduled to make its decision in January, shortly after Obama’s historic inauguration. Had John McCain made it to the White House, committee members would have deferred to his choice.

But without White House clout, past elections have shown that the RNC prefers — though is not required — to choose from within its ranks. And the 65-year-old Gingrich is not an RNC member.

Whoever the RNC chooses it must be someone already nationally known. We don't have time to let people get to know the new Chairman we have to start attacking the day our new chairman is selected.

Moreover, while President Bush still searches out new lows in popularity, the RNC is peopled with those who helped him win two elections — and many remain loyal. Yet Gingrich, seeing Bush squander the fruits of his ’94 revolution, has been ruthless in his criticism of the out-going president.

A sifting of the ashes will begin in Miami with a Wednesday meeting of the Republican Governors Association. Gingrich and other candidates will be there to buttonhole party leaders in small, private conversations.

Those interested in the job include Saul Anuzis, chairman of the Michigan GOP, and Katon Dawson, the South Carolina chairman. The current RNC chairman, Mike Duncan, also seeks another term.

Duncan seeks another term. You just presided over the worst four years for the GOP since the great depression. How dare you run for another term. Don't you care about this party at all?

“There were too many deals cut with the Democrats. We have no rudder,” Herren said. On the other hand, she said, if Gingrich really wants the GOP chairmanship, a front-porch strategy won’t cut it. She’s already been lobbied by a half-dozen candidates.

“Newt - if he wants to do it, he’ll have to start pedaling now,” Herren said.

Newt Gingrich is the Leader the RNC Needs to Take Back Congress

2008-11-12T15:01:00.001-05:00

Scott Martin
Conservatism Today
http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/

The talk of former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich heading up the Republican National Committee is the best potential news I've heard in ages. He has said he would take the post if asked. I can just see the Clinton supporters now. The Democrat Party may look pretty flush right now, but I'll take Newt's leadership in a heartbeat over Howard Dean's at the DNC.

Newt Gingrich has let it be known that, if Republicans want him, the former U.S House speaker is willing to serve as chairman of the national party and lead it out of the wilderness it’s blundered into.

The question is whether the 168-member Republican National Committee is open to the match.

“If a majority of the RNC thought he was needed, he would accept that appointment,” said Randy Evans’ Gingrich’s close friend and legal counsel. “He fully appreciates the urgency of the moment.”

Although, if we're being totally honest, I'd take Newt as head of the RNC over any living, breathing American politician. For those who don't recall, Newt Gingrich single-handedly took back Congress for the Republican Party in 1994 with his highly successful Contract With America. He then proceeded to run into problems with his abrasive attitude toward those who disagreed with him and his condescending attitude toward those who weren't as smart as him (ie, everyone). So he lost his power and left Congress. He was the most hated enemy of the left.

Since then, the smartest man in the world has rehabilitated his image. Clinton supporters will remember a man who worked together with Bill Clinton to achieve numerous reforms that improved the role of government in the country, that balanced the budget and eliminated our nation's debt. His work with American Solutions, where he reached across the aisle to anyone who had a decent idea for limiting government bureacracy and improving the way government works, has been impressive. He is the most forward-thinking conservative I know of. And he is always working on new proposals like his Contract With America, agendas composed of center-right issues that have overwhelming public approval. Ed Morrissey notes:

Some wanted Gingrich to run for President in 2008, but this role would suit him much better. Gingrich has operated best as a philosopher for the conservative movement, someone who can both capture the essence of conservatism and put it into action. Gingrich has the skill to communicate to a national audience and an emeritus status that will have people paying attention when he speaks. As RNC chair, his political baggage becomes irrelevant, allowing him to focus on party- and agenda-building instead of running for office.

Most importantly, Gingrich understands the technological tools that escaped the GOP in 2008. American Solutions has established a very impressive grassroots structure for policy, which could easily be adopted and adapted to the RNC. As Patrick Ruffini has been arguing at Rebuild the Party, the RNC needs to close the technology gap with the DNC in a hurry. Gingrich could get the GOP to a terrific start in doing just that.

Please let this happen. If so, we will be repopulating Congress with boatloads of true conservatives by 2010.

Al Franken trying to steal Minnesota Senate Seat?

2008-11-08T23:24:00.001-05:00

From Scott Martin
http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/

Former SNL cast member and current chronic liar and tax cheat Al Franken is trying his hand at election theft. It seems his campaign just keeps on finding bundles of new ballots from highly Democrat-leaning precincts. From Powerline comes a statement from Ron Coleman's campaign manager:

"Not content to allow the recount process to move forward as prescribed by law, the Franken Campaign and its supporters are attempting a campaign of undue influence. The increasing questions about unexplained and improbable shifts in vote counts, coupled with Franken Campaign antics over the past 24 hours, compelled us to seek legal action to protect the rights of Minnesota voters. We had an election. Senator Coleman won. And we now must have a legal and transparent process conducted in the light of day - and that is our goal and intent.

"Late last night, after another unexplained shift in votes occurred when the Secretary of State's Office closed, new ballots have suddenly appeared from a heavily Democratic precinct. These ballots have been unsecure since the election, yet the Franken Campaign is demanding they be stuffed into the ballot box, attempting to change a vote count that was already finished. Minnesota election laws provide specific rules for reviewing and counting ballots. Today's legal proceeding is an effort to ensure that a transparent and orderly process be in place. The Franken Campaign should be joining us in this action, not seeking to push the process outside the bounds of the law."

And now we have this, also from Powerline. 100 ballots found, all for Al Franken:

As improbable and statistically dubious chunks of votes appear and disappear, overwhelmingly benefiting Al Franken, the Coleman for Senate campaign today filed a data practices request with county auditors and the Secretary of State requesting data related to Election Night results, records related to ballot security and information relating to all revisions made to the results since being reported on Election Night.

"Minnesota has a history of fair and clean elections, and we are committed to ensuring that this election is no different. That is why it is so troubling to us that instead of the normal slight changes in vote totals one would expect during this process, we are now seeing huge chunks of votes appearing and disappearing - statistically dubious and improbable shifts that are overwhelmingly accruing to the benefit of Al Franken. And, as many of these unexplained and improbably vote swings are taking place on the Iron Range, we're asking that local and state election officials provide us with the necessary data to reassure the public that the canvassing process has not been tainted," said Cullen Sheehan, campaign manager.

It has been reported that during the night, 100 new ballots were reported to the Secretary of State's office from the Mountain Iron area. These previously unreported ballots contained 100 votes for President-elect Barack Obama and DFL candidate Al Franken.

I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me. And if not, we'll just fill out ballots for them saying that they do.

Boycott Utah Because California Banned Gay Marriage. What!?!

2008-11-08T00:46:00.004-05:00

That's right the tolerant left is now calling Utah a "hate state" after the Mormon church pumped millions of dollars in to get Prop 8 passed in California. "The main focus is going to be going after the Utah brand," he said. "At this point, honestly, we're going to destroy the Utah brand. It is a hate state." OK so does that make California. "At this point, the Californians are the victims and the Mormons are the persecutors," he said. "We had won this until they swept in ... We need to send a message to Utah that they need to stop trying to inflict their way of life on every other state." Really? Did he really just say that? It seems to me that it must be the other way around otherwise wouldn't Prop 8 have failed. I wonder if commercials like this one run by those opposed to prop 8 actually helped to pass the legislation.

Now if gay marriage proponents wanted to boycott California because they banned gay marriage that would make sense. People in California went to the polls and voted to pass this amendment to the State Constitution. So why not boycott California? I can think of several reasons. One much better weather than Utah, come on why would anyone deprive themselves of the California sun when they can just blame the Mormons. Two, I bet none of these people have ever even been to Utah. So basically they're not suffering at all from boycotting the State. Three, most likely the people behind this hated religion before this vote. Finally four, California is a blue state and for the most part gay marriage proponents support what goes on there. Despite the fact they just rejected gay marriage. Utah is a Red State and therefore inherently evil in their minds.

So how are these hateful Mormons responding. Church spokeswoman Kim Farah said in a statement about the temple protests Friday that it is "disturbing" that the church is being singled out for exercising its right to speak up in a free election.
"While those who disagree with our position on Proposition 8 have the right to make their feelings known, it is wrong to target the Church and its sacred places of worship for being part of the democratic process," Farah said.

The church had said in a statement after Tuesday's vote that "no one on any side of the question should be vilified, intimidated, harassed or subject to erroneous information."

Let's punish those Mormons in Utah because people in California voted to ban gay marriage. Maybe I'm confused but who are the bigots again?

Who should take over has RNC chairman?

2008-11-07T19:16:00.006-05:00

It obvious were going to need new leadership at the top of the Republican Party. The question is who? Let's take a look at some possibilities.

Newt Gingrich: The man who led the Republican Revolution in 1994 and became the first Republican speaker of the house in forty years comes back to lead another one has RNC chairman in 2010. Sounds good to me.

Mike Huckabee: If he doesn't want to run for President again this would be a great spot for him. He's "sunny side up" conservatism could help put a new face on a party that badly needs it.

Michael Steele: What better to show Americans that we are the party of opportunity for all than by making Steele the RNC Chair. He's obviously qualified. He's already chairman of GOPAC.

Chip Saltsman: Former Huckabee campaign manager also headed the Tennessee GOP before he took on that job. He came within a eyelash (three percentage points in SC to be exact) of pulling the most stunning upset in political history. Or at least since Truman beat Dewey.

Katon Dawson: The high profile chairman of the South Carolina Republican Party, organized a meeting in Myrtle Beach later this month designed to bring together Republican leaders to discuss the future of the party. Strength: Dawson is extremely aggressive, well liked by conservatives and a regular presence on national cable programs already."

Dawson's biggest downfall is he's not a nationally known figure which I think the RNC is going to need if they expect to strike back in 2010.

Go here to read more about the RNC Chairmanship fight.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/11/the_rnc_chair_fight_begins.html

The Future of the Republican Party

2008-11-07T18:25:00.005-05:00

I was about to write about the GOP young guns but then I saw that Free Republic had already done it for me. However I may haved added some things I felt they missed about the candidates. I'm also putting the most interesting candidates on top. I added Huckabee myself.

Sarah Palin (44) - Alaska's Governor has made it though the initiation phase of national politics thanks to having been named John McCain's running mate. Though her star doesn't shine quite so brightly now that the campaign is over (her once stellar 80%+ approval rating in Alaska is now in the mid-60s, still very positive), she made history by being the first woman to have been nominated as the Republican Party's vice presidential nominee. She has proven herself to be tough enough, taking all the abuse the Democrats, the drive-by media, the pundits and even some of her running mate's staffers could dish out and still remain standing. In fact, Palin has done little complaining about the attacks, showing that she can weather them with remarkable grace, charm and good humor (except for the inexcusable attacks on her children, which understandably angered her). She also endured two ethics investigations in her home state, both politically motivated, and still managed to emerge from the ordeal looking good. Palin was a success on the campaign trail, drawing large, enthusiastic crowds which far surpassed those seen at Joe Biden's events or even John McCain's. She has returned to Alaska to deal with the affairs of that energy-producing state. Palin will build her resume by completing the gas pipeline deal, and she will study up on foreign affairs and other issues she will need to be able to expound upon if she wants to make a run for the GOP presidential nomination in 2012. She also needs to build her own networks, including perhaps a PAC and a campaign organization that must be ready to hit the ground running. Palin has been invited to speak at CPAC 2009.

Bobby Jindal (37) - The chief executive of Louisiana has made some history of his own as the youngest sitting governor of the United States. He won the job after serving three years in the U.S. House of Representatives, where he was a member of the conservative RSC caucus. Jindal also served in the Bush administration as the principal policy advisor to the Secretary of Health and Human Services. An Indian-American Catholic, Jindal took his name out of contention for consideration as a potential GOP vice presidential nominee for the 2008 election, choosing to build his own resume instead. He will also be a speaker at CPAC in February. (Lifetime ACU rating: 93.33)

Michael Steele (50) - This former lieutenant governor of Maryland is also a history-maker. He was not only the first Republican to serve as lieutenant governor of his state, but also the first African American to do so. A Catholic, Steele studied for the priesthood before getting a law degree from Georgetown. He has experience as a corporate securities associate at Cleary's offices in Washington, D.C., Tokyo and London. After working for Cleary, he established Steele Group, a business and legal consulting firm. Steele has served as chairman of the Prince George's County Republican Central Committee, as chairman of the Maryland Republican Party and chair of GOPAC, his current job. He delivered memorable speeches at the 2004 and 2008 GOP conventions, at the latter coining the phrase, "Drill baby, drill" - a reference to the need for offshore drilling which became a familiar chant at McCain and Palin campaign rallies.

Eric Cantor (45) - A three-term U.S. congressman from Virginia, Cantor served nine years in that state's House of Delegates before winning national office. He is currently the House's chief deputy minority whip, but is currently making a run for the position of house minority whip, which Rep. Roy Blunt has announced that he intends to vacate. During his first term in office, Cantor served as Chairman of the Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare and has also served on the House Financial Services Committee, the International Relations Committee and the Ways and Means Committee. Cantor has a law degree and an advanced degree in real estate. He is the only Jewish Republican currently serving in the House. Cantor was on Sen. John McCain's list of potential vice presidential nominees before Sarah Palin was selected. Cantor was the author of the Republican alternative to the first version of the $700 billion economic bailout bill, and he was outspoken in his criticism of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for her "tone of partisanship" during negotiations on the final version of the measure. (Lifetime ACU rating: 96.86)

Mike Pence (47) - A four-term member of the U.S. House from Indiana, Pence serves on two powerful House committees, Foreign Affairs and Judiciary. A former chair of the conservative RSC House caucus, Pence has earned a reputation as a tax-cutter and an opponent of earmark spending. He's also a social conservative who opposed late-term abortion and federal subsidies for embryonic stem cell research. Pence has described himself as "a Christian, a conservative and a Republican, in that order." (Lifetime ACU rating: 99.43)

Mike Huckabee (52)
Former Governor Huckabee spent 10 years as Governor of Arkansas. He came out of nowhere to finish second in the GOP primary race. I watch him on Fox every chance I get, he was my pick in the primaries. He was against the bailout saying that "The CEO's were like little children if you give them what they want when they kick and scream they'll kick and scream more." Maybe that's not an exact quote but that was the jist. At the time I thought it was a necessary evil. Looks like I should've listen to Huck.

Duncan D. Hunter (31) - Sharing his father's name, young Hunter now has his recently retired dad's U.S. House seat for the 52nd District of California as well. Duncan worked his way to a business degree from San Diego State by creating websites and programming databases and e-commerce systems for high tech companies. The day after the 9/11 terrorist attacks of 2001, Hunter enlisted in the U.S. Marines. After graduating from the Corps' officer candidate school, the newly-commissioned lieutenant served the first of two tours of duty in Iraq. After his return, he was honorably discharged and was promoted to the rank of Captain while in the reserves. Soon after filing to run for Congress, Hunter was recalled to active duty in the Marines and was sent to Afghanistan. He returned to campaigning after his return home and was rewarded with a victory in the 2008 elections.

Paul Ryan (38) - Now serving his fifth term representing the 1st congressional district of Wisconsin in the U.S. House, Ryan is the ranking minority member of the House Budget Committee and a senior member on the House Ways and Means Committee. He has a degree in economics and political science and has worked in the private sector as an economic analyst and as president of his own consulting firm. A former legislative director for Sen. Sam Brownback, Ryan also wrote speeches for William Bennett and Jack Kemp. Ryan just won his bid for re-election and will serve a sixth House term. (Lifetime ACU rating: 92.89)

Jeff Flake (46) - Flake has served in the U.S. House since 2001. Prior to that, he served as Executive Director of the Foundation for Democracy in Namibia and as the Executive Director of the Goldwater Institute. Known as one of the more libertarian House Republicans, he is a member of the Liberty Caucus. Flake has earned a reputation as one of the most vocal critics of pork and earmark federal spending. He was designated a "taxpayer superhero" by Citizens Against Government Waste and was named by that group as the least extravagant spender in Congress. A Mormon, Flake is Flake is staunchly pro-life. (Lifetime ACU rating: 95.43)

Michelle Bachmann (52) - Bachmann just won a second term in the U.S. House from Minnesota. She is a member of the Financial Services Committee. Backman is a former attorney for the U.S. Treasury Department, and she served two terms in the Minnesota State Senate. A favorite target of Democrats and liberal interest groups for being what they call a "Christian fundamentalist," Bachmann has been active in the pro-life movement. (Lifetime ACU rating: 100)

Thad McCotter (43) - McCotter is a U.S. congressman from Michigan. After practicing law, he won a seat as a Wayne County Commissioner in 1992. McCotter was elected to the Michigan State Senate in 1998 and to the U.S. House of Representatives in 2002, where he has served three terms. He's a member of the House Financial Services Committee and serves as chairman of the Republican House Policy Committee. McCotter was the first GOP House member to oppose the Paulson bailout plan in September, labeling it "American socialism." A Catholic, the most notorious McCotter quote, according to liberals, is "No Good Government Denies God's Presence." He is also a strong supporter of the Iraq War. (Lifetime ACU rating: 87)

Jeb Hensarling (51) - having served in the U.S. House as a representative from Texas, Hensarling has an economics degree from Texas A&M ands a law degree from the University of Texas. He has worked for former Texas Sen. Phil Gramm and as executive director of the Republican Senatorial Committee. An entrepreneur and owner of two small businesses, Hensarling sits on the House Budget and Financial Services Committees. With a reputation as a spending hawk and a proponent of low taxes, Hensarling supports a one-year moratorium on all Congressional earmarks. He is a co-author of the Taxpayer Choice Act and introduced the Taxpayer Bill of Rights in the House. Hensarling has been mentioned as a possible successor to Eric Cantor as House Deputy Minority Whip. (Lifetime ACU rating: 98.33)

Adam Putnam (34) - Putnam was the youngest member of Congress when he was sworn in at the age of 26 in 2001. Now with three terms of House service on his resume, the Florida Representative has held minority leadership positions, chairing the House Republican Policy Committee and the House Republican Conference. He also has a seat on the House Financial Services Committee. Putnam acquired the nickname "The Elder Statesman" because of his rapid rise in the House Republican leadership despite his relatively tender years. (Lifetime ACU rating: 92.29)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2127431/posts

Just so know one starts streaming at me. Mitt Romney is sixty years old. Therefore He really can't qualify as a young gun. However I expect him to be a major factor in the 2012 primaries. However anyone who says they know whose the frontrunner is right now is either a liar or a prophet. Don't be surprised if you check back here in four years and find the Republican nominee didn't even make the list.

Teacher tells student her Daddy will be in Iraq for 100 years if McCain wins

2008-11-06T23:20:00.003-05:00

Diantha Harris, a teacher at a Asheville NC, grade school browbeats McCain supporting student, Kathy. The child becomes distressed over the teacher’s line of questioning. It looks like she's about to burst into tears when the video ends.

Isn't it great that the party of tolerance is now in power.

Dow down 443

2008-11-06T18:46:00.004-05:00

What could be causing these massive losses in the Dow the last two days. Was there some sort of contest on Tuesday that has made businesses here in America nervous? Do they think that the new President is going to make the economy worse and cost them millions of dollars in profits. Are they worried about having to fire more workers thereby raising the unemployment rate? Could it be that they're worried
the government is going to increase spending thereby causing inflation.

YES THEY ARE!

Update: 10:13pm

I just saw this is the biggest two days drop in history. "The massive back-to-back waves of selling carved more than 900 points from the Dow, its worst two-day point decline in history." I'm sure the election had nothing to do with it.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/cisco-toyota-weigh-futures/

A Moderate Republican Party Cannot Win Elections

2008-11-06T16:34:00.004-05:00

Scott Martin: Conservatism Today
http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/

John Hawkins of Right Wing News http://rightwingnews.com/#post13372 gives 7 reasons why this is so:

1) What constitutes a "moderate" changes from person to person. That's how people like Joe Lieberman and Chuck Hagel, neither of whom would agree on just about anything, can both be considered "moderates" in their parties.

Put another way: a socially conservative, anti-abortion voter who believes in big government policies could be fairly called a moderate. On the other hand, a socially liberal, pro-abortion voter who doesn't want any new government programs could also be fairly called a moderate.

So, since what constitutes being a "moderate" changes from person to person, it's not possible to build a party around appealing to "moderates."

2) Because moderates tend to be much less ideological, less knowledgeable about politics, and less informed than liberals and conservatives, it's entirely possible that even if our candidate's views are closer to their views, they won't be capable of figuring it out (That's exactly how it worked with McCain and Obama, for example).

Go to the link for the rest. Does anyone disagree with this? Nearly all of our lost seats in Congress were moderates. Our candidate for president was a moderate. I'm convinced that voters need to be given a real choice, and that the past few decades show that most will choose a real conservative when given the option.

Karl Rove on the 2008 election

2008-11-06T15:55:00.003-05:00

Intense and gripping, the 2008 election was also historic. The son of a Kenyan immigrant and an American mother has risen to the presidency of history's most powerful nation. Who was not moved by the sight of Jesse Jackson standing silently among strangers with tears streaming down his face as he thought of a long journey towards equality and acceptance?

So how did Barack Obama win? Some of it was fortune: He was a fresh, gifted, charismatic leader who emerged at just the moment that people yearned for something entirely new.
Some of it was circumstance: The October Surprise arrived a month early and framed the election in the best possible way for Mr. Obama (and the worst possible way for John McCain).

Some of it was thoughtful positioning: His themes of bipartisanship and a readiness to tackle the country's pressing challenges were enormously attractive, especially when delivered with hope and optimism.

And some of it was planning and execution: The Obama campaign, led by the two Davids -- Plouffe, the manager, and Axelrod, the strategist -- carefully built a powerful army of persuasion aimed at accomplishing two tasks.

A candidate can improve his party's performance by getting additional people out to vote and persuading people inclined to support the other party to cross over. The first yields an additional vote; the second is worth two, the one a candidate gets and the one he takes away from his opponent.

So the two Davids registered millions of voters in states the Obama campaign picked as battlegrounds, especially where there were many heretofore-disinterested African Americans and younger Democrats. Messrs. Plouffe and Axelrod understood that over the last 28 years only 11 of 20 eligible Americans on average cast a presidential ballot. They focused on registering and motivating the other nine who don't usually vote. This decision, perhaps more than any other, allowed Mr. Obama to win such previously red states as Virginia, Indiana, Colorado and Nevada. It forced Mr. McCain to spend most of the fall on defense, unable to take once-reliably Republican states for granted.

Second, Messrs. Plouffe and Axelrod pried away from the GOP ranks small but decisive slices of the Republican presidential coalition. We can't be precise, because for the third election in a row the exit polls were trash. The raw numbers forecast an 18-point Obama win, news organizations who underwrote the poll arbitrarily dialed it down to a 10-point Obama edge, and the actual margin was six.

But we do know President-elect Obama ran better among frequent churchgoers (perhaps getting 10 points more than John Kerry did), independents (perhaps five points more than Kerry and eight points more than Al Gore), Hispanics and white men. He even made special appeals to gun owners and sent his wife to cultivate military families. This allowed him to carry previously red states like Florida, New Mexico and Iowa.

This combination helped Senator Obama run four points better nationally than John Kerry did in 2004 and 2.5 points better than Al Gore did in 2000. These small changes on the margin meant all the difference between winning and losing.

It is a tribute to his skills that Mr. Obama, the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate, won in a country that remains center-right. Most pre-election polls and the wiggly exits indicate America remains ideologically stable, with 34% of voters saying they are conservative -- unchanged from 2004. Moderates went to 44% from 45% of the electorate, while liberals went to 22% from 21%.

Mr. Obama understood this. He downplayed calls for retreat from Iraq, instead emphasizing toughness on Afghanistan, even threatening an ally, Pakistan, if it didn't help more to exterminate al Qaeda. Mr. Obama campaigned on "a tax cut for 95% of Americans," while attacking "government-run health care" as "extreme" and his opponent's proposals as hidden tax increases.

What Mr. Obama and his team achieved was impressive. But in 75 days comes the hard part. We saw a glimpse of the challenge Tuesday night. The president-elect's speech, while graceful and at times uplifting, was light when it comes to an agenda. That may have been appropriate, but it also continued a pattern.

Many Americans were drawn to Mr. Obama because they saw in him what they wanted to see. He became a large vessel into which voters placed their hopes. This can lead to disappointment and regret. What of the woman who, in the closing days of the campaign, rejoiced that Mr. Obama would pay for her gas and take care of her mortgage, tasks that no president can shoulder?

The country voted for change Tuesday. But the precise direction of that change remains unclear. Mr. Obama's victory was personal rather than philosophical. The soaring hopes and vague incantations of "change" that have characterized the last 21 months were the poetry phase; a prosaic phase is about to begin.

This should be an interesting few years. Let every American hope for the success of the new president and the country we all love.

Mr. Rove is a former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122593304225103509.html#printMode

My Day has a Republican Poll Watcher

2008-11-06T14:12:00.006-05:00

I was planning on sleeping in on Election Day after having finished my work has a Campaign Manager on Nov 3rd. I had asked about poll watchers, but was told not to worry about it. Turns out I should've worried about it. At 9:30am my candidate gives me a call (I was still sleeping) and tells me to go to a polling place because there are reports they're not checking I.D.'s. So I get up shave, wet my hair down, throw some clothes on, and run out the door.

When I get there I find out that it's an erroneous report. However while I'm there the Democratic Party stops by to accuse me of voter intimidation tactics. At this point I had not even challenged a single vote. As a matter of fact I only challenged one vote all day, and it turned out I was wrong on that count. The elections were very well run where I was. I watched the poll workers for awhile then the polling place starts to get very slow so I decide to go vote. When I get to the place the line is out the door. I waited an hour and a half to vote for John McCain. However I should've known we were in trouble then because there were a ton of young people in line.

After I go vote my boss gives me a call and tells me his challenger is standing outside a polling place asking people to vote for him so he wants me to go there and tell people to vote for him. We can only stand there if no one makes a complaint. I always thought it was completely against the law apparently it's not until someone complains about it. While we were there someone complained and the poll worker asked us to leave. So the candidate, a democrat obviously, starts screaming about how I had one of my people go in there and make the complaint. For the record I have no people I'm the only staffer on the whole campaign. At this point were both supposed to leave, but he refuses to leave. I call my boss and my boss tells me if he's not leaving your not leaving. So I get out of my car and go tell the guy the law is he must leave. Still refuses so I grab a police officer and try to get him to ask him to leave. The officer basically said he wasn't getting involved. Now the nut job, trust me he was a nut job, starts calling his lawyer and trying to file formal complaints against me. So of course I start calling all the people I know and asking them to get someone down there. Eventually my boss got there and after talking with his opponent for a while just asked me to go to another polling place. Once I finally got in touch with someone from the Republican Party I found out there was actually nothing that guy could do.

Well I went to another polling place after that and waited for them to print out the results and called them in to the Republican Party and my candidate. Then I went home to watch what can now be fairly called our complete annihilation on the NEWS. After that was over I went to Waffle House for some comfort food and because I wanted to stay up and find out what happened in my race. At around 2am I get a phone call, WE WON! All my work paid off. Turns out it wasn't even close. Apparently a lot of people must have known our opponent was crazy. Too bad not enough realized that about Obama.

2010 Conservatism Strikes Back!

Go here to vote on the article at RCP: http://readerarticles.realclearpolitics.com/

This really helps me out with getting new vistiors

After taking a little time to think about it

2008-11-06T01:51:00.003-05:00

You know after taking a little time to think about it, and after seeing Palin on TV as she returned home to Alaska. It occurs to be I may have been hasty in writing her off so quickly. First of all I'm assuming what is being said is true, which is usually a mistake when it comes to the media. Second of all no one has put their name to their quotes about Palin so they could be making it up or maybe they never said it at all. 2012 is a long way away and anything can happen between now and then. I'm not writing anyone off this far out. We will see how everything transpires from now until then. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a new face on the right for 2012. Remember everyone 2010 Conservatism strikes back.

Looks like I was wrong about Palin.

2008-11-06T01:01:00.004-05:00

Wow, while I still think she was the right pick. McCain had to do something to take the spotlight off Obama. His poll numbers rose after the pick, but Palin obvisouly wasn't ready for the spotlight. Just watch the report by Carl Cameron.

I don't think she will be able to come back and run in 2012 in 2016 or 2020 who knows?

Palin appears finished

2008-11-05T23:51:00.004-05:00

The McCain campaign is telling stories about Palin on the campaign trial that will end any chance she ever had at becoming President. It appears Palin is done with National Politics in the immediate future. Although I could still see her as a Senator or House Member from Alaska given her overwhelming popularity there. In eight or twelve years she may be back but 2012 no chance.

Hat Tip: Conservatism Today
http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/

Thank you to all my new readers

2008-11-05T20:14:00.004-05:00

On Nov. 3rd this site set a new record with 996 hits in a day. My hits have gone up every month since August. Last month I had 3,822 hits. This month in five days I have over 2,500. I would ask who to get involved as much as you can with this site by leaving comments. I hope I can keep your attention now that the election is over. We have a long fight ahead of us and in 2010 conservatism strikes back.

"Stand up and fight. America is worth fighting for. Nothing is inevitable here we never give up, we never quit, we make history we don't hide from history."
John McCain

If McCain had won

2008-11-05T17:05:00.002-05:00

This is the video I was hoping to put up last night. Obvisously I had my fun making the Obama video a nuclear bomb going off. He's what I would've put up had McCain won.

I wish had the chance to play that last night. I'll might keep it on file for 2010 and 2012. It took me forever to find it. I looked at many vidoes before I settled on this one.