Big man Rahm

Rahm Emanuel, former congressman from Chicago and current chief of staff for Barack Obama, has found himself in the middle of the “ Hot Rod” Blagojevich saga. There is speculation amongst the MSM that he is the Obama staffer that spoke with the governor's office regarding the appointment of a replacement for Obama's Senate seat.

In tapes that the FBI released earlier this week Blagojevich is heard angrily demanding that the Obama camp pay-to-play if they wanted Obama's friend to be appointed to the Senate. He claimed that the seat is a valuable thing and that if they wanted Valerie Jarrett to be the next senator from Illinois that they should either pay money to his campaign fund or give him a high-level appointment.

Emanuel was confronted at Chicago City Hall, where he was listening to his children perform with their school. Instead of answering the question like a good servant of the people should, he hid behind his children. As the Chicago Sun-Times put it regarding Emanuel's evasion:

Emanuel was uncharacteristically absent from Obama’s news conference this morning. He was spotted two hours later in the lobby of Chicago’s City Hall. He was there to listen to his two children performing in a concert with their school, Anshe Emet.

A Sun-Times reporter pressed him to comment about whether he was the emissary named in the criminal complaint.

“You’re wasting your time,” Emanuel said. “I’m not going to say a word to you. I’m going to do this with my children. Don't do that. I’m a father. I have two kids. I’m not going to do it.”

Asked, “Can’t you do both?” Emanuel replied, “I’m not as capable as you. I’m going to be a father. I’m allowed to be a father,” and he pushed the reporter’s digital recorder away.

You're a real big man there, Rahm.

Props go to Drudge for the heads up.

SOURCE: Chicago Sun-Times article

Obama the Centrist?

The Obama campaign ran on leftist principles, much to the delight of the moonbats in the Democrat Party. However, now that he is president-elect, he seems to be moving toward the Center. The so-called Progressives (read: Communists) in the Democrat Party are upset that the most liberal Senator in the country may govern from the center of the aisle.

This is not a problem unique to the Dems however. Republicans have had their problems with candidates that run as Conservatives but rule as Centrists. But this proves the axiom that says that the majority of the electorate are Center-right. The Daily Kos and the MoveOn crowd on the Left and the talk radio shows and Pat Buchanans on the Right, do not represent the majority of the American people. If a candidate could get past the primaries without having to pander to the extremes of either party, we might have a real revolution in politics.

This is the prime reason we need an independent candidate. The party system in this country has done nothing but harm it. As I've mentioned before in this blog, I used to call myself a Republican. But I could see that standing on the party line was not always where I wanted to be. I still hold to many of the planks in the Republican platform, but I know that there are some things—probably many things—on which we can compromise

Unfortunately, Obama has shown that not only was he running to the Left during the campaign, he also legislated from the Left when he was in the Senate. The idea that he will actually govern from the Center once he takes the oath of office stretches credulity, in spite of his choices for leadership positions in his administration.

But stranger things have happened.

SOURCE: Politico story

Pay to play

Unless you were hiding under a rock for the past twenty-four hours, you probably know that Illinois governor, Rod Blagojevich—a Democrat—was arrested yesterday. Among other things, he is accused of trying to sell President-elect Barack Obama's recently vacated Senate seat. Now this is classic Chicago politics. It's “ pay-to-play”.

Probably the most interesting things about the indictment are the tapes. The governor was being wire-tapped by the FBI from October through the election. The thing is, he knew that he was being taped. And yet he continued to act as if he were bullet-proof.

The lead investigator went to great lengths yesterday to point out that there was no evidence—at least in the tapes sited in the indictment—that Obama knew that Blagojevich was asking for favors from the transition team in return for appointing one of Obama's aides to the Senate seat.

However, some missteps from the Obama camp lead me to believe that there is more going on here than the FBI is willing to admit. For one thing David Axelrod, Obama's senior advisor said that the president-elect had been in contact with the governor about possible choices for the Senate appointment. But yesterday Obama said that he had not been contacted by the governor.

I think that it's clear that the squeaky clean exterior of Barack Obama is slowly, but surely, coming off.

SOURCE: Chicago Tribune Blagojevich story

SOURCE: Chicago Tribune Axelrod story

Global government

The Drudge Report had a link to an interesting article in the Financial Times today. It's about that old chestnut that doesn't seem to die in the hearts and minds of liberals everywhere: global government.

With a globalist like Obama on his way to the White House I can understand why there are people who think that this might happen soon. He is definitely someone that is going to need watching.

SOURCE: Financial Times article

Pearl Harbor Day: A date that will live in infamy

Remember.

Moonpie over Mobile

I have a local story that illustrates a national problem. In Mobile, Alabama, Councilman Fred Richardson--a Democrat no less--has decided that the city needs a large object to lower from the top of our largest building ala-New York's Times Square ball.

But this won't be made of Waterford crystal. Oh no. It will be a giant moonpie.

"A moonpie", you say. "What's that?"

Well gather round kiddies and I'll tell you. A moonpie is a confection that appears once a year (usually) around these parts for the annual Mardi Gras celebration. The banana and the vanilla varieties are pretty good, but personally the chocolate takes like something that the parade horses leave behind.

But I digress. The point of this little missive is that in a time of recession and economic uncertainty, terrorist attacks and a liberal majority in Congress and Obama in the White House, this is just what we need. Major cities, several states, the auto industry and every Tom, Dick and Harry around is traveling to Washington, D.C. with their hand out to get bailout money. Yeah, we really need to spend good money on a giant googaw that will only be used once a year. Then it will probably sit there like a giant diaphragm so that all the visitors to our area can say that they saw the world's largest contraceptive.

The unnecessary spending is bad enough. Now the entire city will look like a trailer park at Christmas.

Well, Laissez Les Bon Temps Roulez. And let's hope that the bloody thing doesn't fall on someone (unless it's the city council, of course).

The wolf stalks you

The federal government is a ravening wolf. It seeks out the producers in our country and seizes them by the jugular. If you don't pay due deference to it the wolf will rip out your throat. and there are people in the government--politicians, bureaucrats and functionaries—and those outside it, who stoke the blood lust of the beast.

The government has no remorse. When it attacks a person or business it doesn't care that they were trying to do the right thing, but simply misplaced a decimal or failed to file on time. Once it smells blood and fear it comes for its prey and no one can do anything to stop it. Some of its prey choose to end their own lives rather than let the wolf devour them alive.

We live in a time in our republic where the wants and desires of those people that the wolf's keepers determine are “needs”, overrule the needs, wants and desires of those that earned their wealth. Class and wealth envy are the sticks that the keepers use to stir up the wolf's pups. When the pups start whining and baying at the moon, Momma Wolf leaps in to “save” them.

It doesn't matter to these people how much of the country's gross domestic product that wolf consumes. It matters to them only that the “pups” are taken care of, whether they need it or not. But it's not only about caring for the pups. It's about controlling the pack.

With tax policy the keepers wave sticks and carrots at the prey to entice them into the trap. If you make too much they will tax you by a larger percentage of your income than someone that doesn't make as much. Then they will turn around and use your money to dangle as a carrot in front of those that don't make as much.

The keepers only want the wolf to grow up big and strong. They don't care whether they take the pay of honest workers for frivolous, and even unconstitutional things. So long as they stay in control and the wolf stays happy.

Capitol visitor boondoggle

The U.S. Capitol Visitor Center has finally been completed. The original estimate was for $265 million. The final tally was $621 million. That's $356 million over budget. Now don't you just love government. Fifty-two percent of you must; you voted for Obama and the Democrats.

SOURCE: CNN.com article

$53,000,000,000,000

$53,000,000,000,000. That's the current estimated amount of the U.S. Government's unfunded liability. That's Social Security, Medicare, etc. That's a lot of zeros my friends.

That's a lot of money.

The celebration of Advent

This past Sunday was the first Sunday of Advent. Advent, for those of you that don't know celebrates the coming of the Messiah and his eventual return.

Advent has always been one of my favorite aspects of the Christmas season. When I was a member of the United Methodist church our congregations would have an Advent wreath that would be lit by the acolyte. There were four candles for the Sundays leading up to Christmas, and one larger candle in the center representing Christ.

We also had a Chrismon tree—a concept originally created by Frances Kipps Spencer, a Lutheran, in 1957—that had Christ-oriented ornaments. Chrismon are ancient symbols of Christianity, like the Pisces and crosses, as well as others. The tree, like most Christmas trees, is an evergreen. It represents eternal life through Christ.

My family created our own Chrismon and an Advent wreath. We've somehow misplaced the wreath, but our tree always has a Chrismon or two on it.

I don't know how many other denominations beside United Methodist and Lutheran use the Chrismon but I always enjoyed it. I'm sure pagans will say that we stole the idea from them, but since God created the tree, it doesn't really matter what either of us think.

Despite what this time of year meant in the past, it has come to be the accepted time for celebrating the birth of Jesus the Christ. However, over the last several years more groups are coming out against public expressions of Christmas, even when the property in question isn't owned by the government.

The interesting thing about all the hubbub is that the majority of the people who protest the most about Christmas celebrations are people of no faith—atheists. Jews, Muslims, Hindus, none of them argue about it. And some even get in on the fun, whether they believe in the spiritual side of it or not. But atheists for some reason have a chip on their shoulder about Christians. I hardly ever hear of some atheist complaining about Eid al-Adha or Hanukkah decorations or celebrations. Admittedly there aren't as many overt displays of Jewish or Muslim celebrations.

However, I think it goes deeper than that. They are more terrified of Christianity than any other religion. It's not the Crusades or the Salem witch hunts. Those were crimes against people of faith and they happened centuries ago. And we have repented of those atrocities, whether anyone accepts that or not. But just as there are, and were, evil people who used the cover of Christianity to commit crimes that Christ abhors, there have been more than enough atheists that have committed crimes against humanity (read: Mao Zedong, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, etc.). There have also been plenty of pagans that have killed on genocidal scales. For Christians this is simply proof of the fallen nature of man. For the atheist there's always the question: “What drove them to do that?”.

Regardless, Advent is a time of celebration and reflection for Christians just as Hanukkah and Eid al-Adha are for Jews and Muslims, respectively. We should all live with each other, if only for a month or so. There are so many real problems in the world that we don't need to be squashing the holiday season simply because we don't worship the same god, or any god. Take a deep breath and listen to some Christmas songs, light a menorah or watch the sun from Stonehenge on the Solstice.

God bless.

How to revive the Republican Party by Dan Calabrese

There is an insightful article on how to revive the Republican Party by Dan Calabrese at North Star Writers Group. It offers a very strong case for conservative principles rather than centrist moderation.

SOURCE: North Star Writer’s Group article

Economy vs. defense

Events over the last few days have shown that the worst of the financial crisis has already occurred: fifty-two percent of Americans elected Barack Obama president. It is a cliché that in tough economic times people vote for Democrats, but it is what it is. The opposite cliché is that when the issue is national security, the people usually vote for Republicans. In this year’s election, people only saw the economic trouble and not the threat from Islamic terrorists and rogue nations. After all, 9/11 was seven years ago. That kind of thing can’t happen again, right? Wrong.

As I am writing this, the Indian people are picking up the pieces from a major coordinated attack in the city of Mumbai. There are hostages and over one hundred people are dead and hundreds are injured. Of course, Islamic terrorists have claimed responsibility. Witnesses claim that some of the terrorists were demanding American and British tourists.

Closer to home intelligence officials claim that they have credible evidence that terrorists are targeting New York City subways for Thanksgiving. The believed goal is to close down Amtrak’s Northeast corridor. This would shut down holiday traffic, as well as Black Friday traffic between Boston and Washington, D.C.

As I said earlier the problem is that the Americans’ that voted for Obama were only concerned with the economy. They apparently forgot the harm that September 11 caused to our economy. And there are worse threats than airplanes slamming into buildings.

Many on the Left have argued that they are just as strong on national defense as Republicans. Yet Barney Frank (D-Mass.), the chairperson of the House Financial Services Committee wants to downsize the military. In addition, Vice President-elect Joe Biden told backers during the campaign that he believed that there would be a major terrorist attack within six months of Obama’s inauguration, “to test” the new president. He added that then-candidate Obama might do some things in response to such an attack that people might not understand. However, he pleaded with people to be patient with him. This statement has always raised the hackles on my neck. It’s not because I feel it confirms what Republicans said about Obama’s lack of experience. It’s because it sounds much more Orwellian than I care for.

We are about eight weeks from the inauguration of a man who has only three years of service on the national level. He did not sponsor any meaningful legislation during that time and mostly voted “present” during legislation. Somehow, he has become the “Chosen One” that will lead this country out of the wilderness that the Left have claimed for the last eight years that we have been wandering in. The Left claim that he has the practical understanding to appoint experienced people that can make up for any lack of experience in any given area. But in the end it will be Barack Obama that has to make the final decision. If the American people have any sense whatsoever they will remember that in 2012. Assuming that is, of course if some group hasn’t irradiated a major city or infected large numbers of people with some horrible plague. If this has happened then the only people that can be held ultimately responsible for such a tragedy will be Barack Obama and the people that voted for him.

A Reason for hope?

I just finished reading an article at reason.com (and also at Townhall.com), by Steve Chapman that gave me a little bit of hope for the Republican party. Go read it and see what you think. I was unaware of some of the information I found in it.

SOURCE: Reason Magazine article
SOURCE: Townhall.com article

Hold on to your money and your gas

In January, you can probably wave goodbye to the lower gas prices that we have experienced over the past several weeks. When the Democrats take a bigger slice of Congress and Barack Obama moves into the Oval Office the promises of domestic oil exploration will evaporate like so many gas fumes. The Dems are already talking about reinstating the offshore oil drilling ban. But why is it, you may think, that gas prices have dropped by almost half throughout most of the country? It was the furor that the American people raised at paying $4.00 a gallon over the summer. They demanded that domestic oil reserves be tapped regardless of where they were located. The oil speculators and the OPEC nations were scared that their only source of income would completely dry up. Now that the election is won and the prices have dropped so low, you will see all of the platitudes that the Liberals in Congress made disappear and your gas prices go up. And this time they will say that higher gas prices are good because it will force America to find "more sustainable" energy.

How ignorant are Barack Obama's fans?

There is a new documentary out that questions the wisdom of Barack Obama's supporters (fans) as well as the complicity of the mainstream news media. The film, How Obama Got Elected, looks at twelve people who voted for Obama on November 4th. The answers that these twelve individuals gave to various political questions are telling about the intelligence of the American people, specifically those identifying themselves as Democrats, and the voracity of the information disseminated to the public by the news media.

Though I have not seen the doc I have seen comparison-contrast clips on Hannity and Colmes. One of the questions was “Which party is in control of Congress?”. Inevitably, they either claimed not to know or that the Republicans were in charge. Those that claimed not to know “guessed” that the Republicans were in the majority. This despite the fact that Democrats have controlled both houses of the Congress for the past two years.

Another question was, “Which candidate claimed that they had visited 57 states during the campaign?”. Most answered “Sarah Palin”. The correct answer is of course, Barack Obama, the man they voted for. In fact, this was one of the gaffes that Republicans tried to use against Obama to show his naiveté and inexperience. The MSM repeatedly defend Obama regarding this gaffe by saying that anyone that had been campaigning as long and hard as Senator Obama would make similar mistakes. However, when Sarah Palin had similar problems with Africa being a continent and not a nation, the mainstreamers jump on it like ravenous wolves. Even though Palin was the vice-presidential choice, rather than on top of the ticket.

Now much of this ignorance is of course the result of that Democrat darling, government education. For nearly a hundred years the Liberals in the U.S. have pushed the compulsory government education agenda, as well as forcing liberal dogma down the throats of children. And when the results are inevitably horrid they simply claim that all they need is more money for programs, more teachers for the schools and more money to pay the teachers. The teachers unions, just like every other union in this country has the Democrat party tied around their little fingers. They're the only ones that benefit from this tax and throw down a deep dark pit strategy. The students are simply warehoused for eight hours a day for around fourteen years of their lives. And, of course, Liberals continue to try and make compulsory education the law for younger children every year. But the horrendous education system is not the only culprit in the debacle of this year's election.

The Mainstream Media's job is ostensibly educating the American people about the candidates and the option that they have as voters. Unfortunately, during previous elections the MSM has consistently augured for the Democrat. And this election was the most blatant attempt to mold the electorate as the media elites saw fit. Even the Washington Post admitted that they had unfairly given positive coverage to Barack Obama, when compared to John McCain. But why not admit it now; their guy won.

And of course let us not forget that Liberals love to claim that Conservatives are the stupid ones. But after hearing the people who supported Obama I believe that there is more than enough proof that the Dems aim at the lowest common denominator when seeking votes. For the past eight years Republicans have had to listen to the derisive jokes aimed at George W. Bush by those afflicted with Bush Derangement Syndrome. I guess they spent so much time hating W. and lamenting the past that they forgot to learn about their own candidates and the current election.

It should really be no surprise in a nation that gets its “news” mostly from The Daily Show with John Stewart and The Colbert Report, as well as Entertainment Tonight and Extra that people are politically ignorant.

What's in a name?

Fascist, communist and socialist. These are all familiar epithets that are used in political discourse. This has been especially true in this country over the past two decades, with the Right calling members of the Left communists or socialists and the Left calling Conservatives, fascist. And every now and then you'll hear the dreaded “n” word: Nazi. The fact of the matter is that these are all slightly different flavors of the same philosophies. The core of all of these political systems is the supremacy of the State.

During the early part of the 20th century governments and philosophers began to break away from the monarchies and empires of the past. They felt that royalty and oligarchs always put the people, the proletariat on the bottom of the totem pole. Socialists and others felt that the way to end this was to put the control of the government into the hands of the people. Something similar had been tried before with republican forms of government, first with the Greeks, and more recently with the United States of America and the French Republic.

However, the political philosophers saw what they felt was a flaw in the republican model. They knew that some would achieve more than others. Some would be richer, smarter, wiser. The socialists believed—and still believe—that all men are equal, not just in the basic rights of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, but also in every way. They believed that no one should have more than another. That regardless of whether a person works hard they should be given room, board and food, that everyone should drive a similar model of car or live in a similar house. Socialists believed that it was the duty of the State to provide an equalizer for all citizens. This is antithetical to what it means to live in a free society.

However, what Liberals don't tell you is that Nazism started in the same way. Nazi stood for the “National Socialist Workers Party” in Germany. The like all fascists believed in government control of private business. Now this differs slightly from socialism as it was envisioned by Marx, Engels and other founders of socialism in that they believed that the government should not only control businesses but that they should also own all businesses. But with modern socialism this has been modified more in keeping with fascist principles of private ownership, with heavy government regulation. Perhaps the fall of communism throughout the world has led to this modification of core principles. One need look no further than China, which has a communist government with much of the businesses being owned by private individuals. Both fascism and socialism believe that utilities and transportation, as well other services, should be owned and operated by the government.

In the final analysis, the names and terms that people use for the various political groups in this country are more similar than politicians and pundits—particularly Liberals—would have you believe. Instead of being an accurate description of the opposing side, they are simply different names than the standard “Republican” and “Democrat”. The Left uses “fascist” and “Nazi” against those on the Right, even though those terms have very little difference in meaning from Left-oriented “socialist”. While the Right uses the “socialist” tag for the Left even though there are elements to the neo-conservative movement that are firmly entrenched in socialist beliefs.

So, what is in a name?

No reform here

Barack Obama was packaged and sold as a reformer, a harbinger of change. But as Republicans have said throughout this campaign, he is nothing more than a savvy politician with cunning handlers. He has stocked his cabinet and his Oval Office with former Clinton hacks. He is rumored to be considering Hillary Clinton for Secretary of State. Bill will probably the chief molester and of course let us not forget that there is most likely a place for Al "Moonbeam" Gore. Maybe he could create a new cabinet position for Secretary of Ego.

No, there is no reform here. Simply the tired old mule of liberalism coughing out another idiotic administration; an administration that the American people will wind up paying for in the decades to come. Fifty-two percent of them deserve what they get.

Gimme, gimme

Come and get it. The trough is open. First, it was the banks and insurance giant AIG. Then it was individual citizens. Now the Big 3 automakers are coming to Congress with their hands out and it appears that municipalities throughout the country will be next. Everybody wants a piece of the bailout pie and you and I are footing the bill.

The problem of course is that we are already spending at a deficit. Between two ongoing wars, the spendthrift nature of recent congresses and the dwindling revenue due to the financial crisis itself there's no way that the government can make up that gap. This is why the government uses credit from foreign nations to prop up its budget. But other nation's are feeling the credit pinch as well. And that brings us to an even more troubling situation.

The United States may lose its 'AAA' rating which will make it more difficult to get loans to pay all of the deficit spending that we are doing. And in the unlikely event that some nation calls in its loans, it will make the Great Depression look like a mild correction. I say that it is unlikely because the debt could not be paid off and trying to seize the assets of the U.S. would cause a catastrophic crisis around the world including the nation or nations that call in that debt. But we live in a world filled with suicide bombers and socialist dictators that would love nothing better than to destroy capitalist nations, especially America. The suicide bombers would have nothing to lose because the believe they answer to a “higher power” than Wall Street. The tin-pot dictators who believe they are the second-coming of Marx aren't bright enough to realize that socialism is no replacement for the free market. Case in point: Hugo Chavez. Since he nationalized most of the Venezuelan economy and put price controls on food, rationing of essentials and economic collapse has been the result. And let's not even get into Cuba.

So there are worries involved in any economic crisis, especially this one. But that's all the more reason to take a measured, judicious approach to the treatment of these crises. Republicans warned that the socialist bailout plan that Congress passed a few months ago would result in more problems than it would solve. Now that the nation knows that its so-called leaders can be cajoled to give handouts, everyone wants a piece of the action.

Props go to Drudge for the article on the 'AAA' threat.

SOURCE: CNBC article

Thanks but so long

The Dems are on a hunt for the heads of moderate and conservative members of their party. They have every intention of swinging far to the Left and I say that we Conservatives should let them. Sooner or later it will come back to bite them in the posterior and that's when we can retake control of the Congress.

The Libs in the Democrat party are trying to push Joe Lieberman and John Dingell out of their positions in the Senate and House respectively. Lieberman is on the chopping block because of his support of John McCain during the election. In 2006 he was kicked off the Democrat ballet in Connecticut because of his support for the Iraq War. He ran as an Independent and the people of his state voted the veteran senator back into office. Even after the betrayal of his party he continued to caucus with them on most issues. In fact he was one of the reasons that the Dems had a majority in the Senate for the past two years. But now that the Dems have won more seats his vote is no longer needed to maintain their majority so they're saying sayonara.

Representative John Dingell, of Michigan, is in a similar predicament because of his moderate views on climate and energy policy. With the extreme Left running the Democrat party only the “greenest” members are safe. Henry Waxman the ultra-liberal congressman from California, stated the day after the election that he would seek to replace Dingell on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Dems like Waxman refuse to accept terms like “reasonable”, “realistic”, “achievable” and “cost containment”. They want to pass a law that would force industries to cut emissions to 80% below 1990 standards by the year 2050. The thing is that Dingell passed a bill out of his committee that would more reasonably required emissions reductions to 80% below 2005 levels. As the Wall Street Journal puts it, this type draconian law would affect blue-collar Americans more than Waxman's Beverly Hills constituents.

The WSJ also points out that all of this is a warning to “Blue Dog” and rural-state Dems that they are on thin ice with the Obama-Pelosi-Reid triumvirate. If the Republicans' charges that the Democrat party is being controlled by the Moveon Left weren't enough to convince the rest of America, then this should do it. Unfortunately, it's too late. For the next two to four years we're stuck with the job-destroying, tree-worshiping liberals. I hope you're happy America.

SOURCE: Wall Street Journal story

The 11th hour...

On the 11th hour, of the 11th day, of the 11th month, in 1918, the armistice that ended World War I went into effect. It was, up to that point, the bloodiest conflict in modern history. It was the first war to use weapons of mass destruction, including tanks, machine guns, chemical weapons and the full fury of the Industrial Age.

First proclaimed in November of 1919 and finally made an official holiday on May 13, 1939, it was meant to remember the men that fought and died in World War I. In 1953, a Kansas shoe store owner named Al King began a movement to have Armistice Day honor ALL veterans, regardless of whether they served in war or peace. President Eisenhower signed it into law in May of 1954 and in November of that year Congress amended the law to change the name from Armistice Day to Veterans Day.

So today if you see a vet, whether currently serving or not, say thank you. Whether they served in war or peace they gave a portion of their lives so that ours could be free.

God bless America.

Some thoughts about race

I was sitting at work trying to be at peace with the nation's choice of president and I came up with some interesting thoughts about race. It is something that our nation will always have to deal with but this particular election brings into the clear light of day, I think for the first time.

I never had any intention of voting against Obama because his skin was darker than mine. It really never entered my mind. And yet many black Americans did vote for Obama because he is a black man. One commentator said that the number of whites that voted against Obama because of color offsets the number of black people that supported him for the same reasons. I find this logic spurious at best.

Colin Powell is a prime example of a black man that voted for Obama simply because he is the same color. Powell had been a long time Republican—albeit a moderate one. Like John McCain he had served in Vietnam and he was well aware of the the Arizona senator's qualifications for the presidency. Despite his assertions to the contrary he endorsed Obama for no other reason than his race.

I don't have a problem with black people supporting Barack because he's black. They should be proud of the accomplishment of the first term senator from Illinois, the “Great Emancipator”, Abraham Lincoln's state. What I don't like is when a person tells a bald-faced lie about their reasons for making this very important decision.

It brings up a question that I feel has to be asked: why is it that people think they have to lie about it? If this were forty years ago I could understand the reticence of black Americans to state their reasons for voting based on race. Of course forty years ago a black man would never had made it. The point is that times have changed. And Colin Powell is one of the reasons that they have changed so positively. He served with distinction and became Chairman of the Joint Chiefs under George H. W. Bush. He led the successful campaign against Saddam Husein in the first Gulf War. He was the first black Secretary of State. He has no reason to be ashamed about the fact that he voted for Obama simply because he is also black. Powell has paid his dues.

One of the reasons may simply be that he feels that he was slighted by the current Bush administration because of his reticence to use military force against Iraq. He made the case to the world at the UN for war and the evidence was faulty. It made him look bad. He also may feel that he is partially to blame for the deaths of over 4,000 men and women of the American armed forces. I guess I feel that maybe I am too since I supported the war. But the fact remains that we were operating on the intelligence that we had at the time. And though I'm just a lowly civilian I supported the war because I thought it was the right thing to do. I made some mean statements about the people who were against the war and I am sorry. However, neither Colin Powell nor anyone else that supported the war should blame ourselves for that tragedy since we used the same info to come to our conclusions. So if a feeling of responsibility for what happened is one of the reasons that he lied about his reasons for voting for Obama, it is misplaced. A lot of good people were duped.

I don't think that Colin Powell is afraid of what people think about him. I don't think that that is why he lied about his reasons. But if that's not the reason then the only remain reason for lying is the worst reason. He was actively trying to mislead the American people. Remember he didn't have to publicly support Obama. He could have simply done what the rest of America did on November 5^th; he could have silently voted. But he went out of his way to make a statement of his support on all of the Sunday chit-chat shows. And while doing so he lied about his reasons.

I think that I have lost a little respect for Mr. Powell.

An open letter to Republicans

Dear Republicans,

Well here we are at the beginning of our long exile from power. We have two groups to blame for our ouster: the leadership in the Republican party and the selfish American people (see my previous post). Because I have already addressed the issue of the selfishness of the American people, and I have already given fair warning to the Democrats about the next two to four years, it's your turn my brothers and sisters.

I originally was going to do a bullet list of the problems facing the Republicans at this time. However, I felt that maybe it would be better to go in depth with the problems and some possible solutions. I mean we have to be optimistic and have a “Yes we can” attitude.

First of all the leaders of the party must be held accountable for their lackluster performance. We have already shed some like Denny Hastert, but it will take a scorched-earth policy to cleanse us of the scourge of neo-conservatism. We should be die-hard conservatives, pure and simple.

The next thing we must rid ourselves of is the label “compassionate conservative”. The very term should make us cringe. It's as if we're admitting the old liberal chestnut that conservatives are crotchety old Scrooges that want to take the home away from the old widow lady. If we truly believe in the merits of our conservative principles, then it is not necessary for us to say that we are “compassionate” conservatives.

We must not put all of our eggs in one basket. While most of the members of our party are God-fearing people who believe in social conservatism, we can't rely on that one side of our nature to win over the moderates and independents. Abortion is murder, pure and simple, but we have no hope of eliminating that horror if we are still in exile or we don't have a super-majority in the Congress. Gay marriage is slowly being decided on a state-by-state basis, and remember we believe in states' rights, right?

Keeping with the topic of diversification we must also not rely too heavily on security and defense as a crutch. We know we are strong on defense and the American people know we are strong on defense. We don't need to keep reminding people, especially in the current economic climate. Obviously the American people are more concerned at this point with getting something-for-nothing, and robbing those that earned it to give to those that didn't to be concerned at this time with little things like national defense (even though we are still fighting a war of terror).

Next we as a party must become a part of the information age. We cannot sit idly by while people like Moveon.org and Daily Kos corner the market on the high tech sector of campaigning. There are some good sites out there, like RedState.com and PajamasMedia.org, but we have to do more. We have to hit iPods, iPhones, YouTube, Blackberries and new emerging venues. We need to add tools to our arsenal, like Flash animation and Conservative web programming. Again we have a start with sites like Stop-him-now.com (which has apparently ceased to exist) which used Flash animation to poke jabs at Obama and the Dems as a whole. But it never achieved the regularity of liberal forums like MarkFiore.com, only producing sporadic animation. In fact, the site started as Stop-her-now.com, and was directed at Hillary Clinton during the primaries. So it never achieved the coherency of purpose that it needed.

Which brings me to our next point. We cannot continue to target Billary—or now Obama—solely. We must take a broad approach to the entire Democrat party. We can target those that lean too far to the Left, but we also have to target the Dems that are considered moderate of conservative. If we are to gain the necessary seats in the Senate we have to go after all comers.

We must be judicious in our use of the filibuster. We don't want to give the Democrats a reason to use the so-called “nuclear” option. We also can use that refusal to use the filibuster as a way to not go on the record without voting the dreaded “present”. This way it will be easier to put the complete responsibility of Democrat failures solely on their own heads. They won't be able to claim that the reason that things are bad is because of Republican obstructionism.

Finally, any Republican candidate that promises to take only public funding should be immediately disqualified for mental incompetence. We need to target smaller donors, like Obama did in this election. It is the only way we can compete.

We have a long road to hoe brothers and sisters and the days will be long and the winds cold but we can reclaim the Congress and the White House if we are persistent and if we stick to our principles.

Love,

The America Report

An open letter to Democrats

Dear Democrats,

I just thought that you should know that in 2006 you did not win back control of congress. I know that it may seem that way at times, especially since you have a good chance at winning the trifecta this year, but you are wrong. It was the Republicans that lost.

You may ask yourself, “What's the difference?”. The difference is that you win by having better ideas than the other guys and by capturing the hearts and minds of the electorate. That is not what happened in 2006 and it is not what is happening this year.

The thing that you don't seem to comprehend is that the majority of Americans are still center-right in their political leanings. They know that you are controlled by far left-wing groups and individuals like Moveon.org, Daily Kos and George Soros, as well as ninety-nine percent of Hollywood. But they were angry at the Republicans for what they had failed to do, which was shrink the size of government and cut spending. They were also angry that not only did the Republicans not decrease the size of the imperial federal government, they doubled it's size and its spending.

Now if this was the election after the 9/11 attacks, you wouldn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of getting elected. This is because another flaw of the Democrat party is that you have a great disdain for the military. You believe that all conflict resolution should be handled by the UN. You call terrorists “freedom fighters” and give them cushy, tenured positions in your liberal colleges. And most of all most of the current Democrat party is truly anti-American. This might play well in San Fransisco or Hollywood, but not in the rest of the country.

Unfortunately, the American people are scared about their financial freedom this election. They see the damage caused by unscrupulous mortgage lenders—some of which were protected by Democrats in congress—that gave loans to people who really could not afford them and had bad credit. Unfortunately for the Republicans, they are seen as the party of the business sector and this is largely true. Also to the Republicans' detriment is the fact that the current president is a Republican and people usually blame the party of the sitting president. President bush has very low approval ratings but congress' approval ratings are much lower than his, and congress has been in your hands for the past two years. This helps to prove the case for saying that you didn't win, the Republicans lost. If the president, who is a Republican, has higher approval ratings than the Democrat controlled congress, then the only reason for your success in 2006 and your predicted success this year is that the country is really punishing the Republicans.

I say all of this to give a warning. You will not be able to get away with your extreme liberal agenda, at least not for very long. You may achieve total supremacy in both house of the legislature along with the White House and you may attempt some of your goals but in two years the entire House and a third of the Senate come up for reelection. If you overreach the American people will slap you down. In addition, the majority of the electorate are people of faith, so your secular/atheistic agenda won't fly either. Even if you win the big prize this year you may not be able to follow through on your machinations because your desire to be reelected is stronger than your agenda.

But we know you too well. You can't resist a power grab. After all for the past twelve years you have screamed that you're going to take America back, as if it were your own personal plaything. The American people own this country not one party. So watch your back. You can try redrawing electoral maps and stacking the states' AG offices and the judiciary with liberals, but Americans won't tolerate that for too long. Yours is the party of dependence on government, of welfare and redistribution of wealth, of abortion and disdain for religion and faith, and of socialism and the supremacy of the State. We don't want rationed health care or to be taxed by the UN and the rest of the world. We don't want to save the environment at the expense of our standard of living or our jobs. Sooner or later no matter what you do to try to stop the inevitable backlash, the American people will slap you back down.

Love,
The America Report

The True American People

For decades the world has claimed that Americans are selfish and boorish. In the past it was easy for those of us firmly seated on the Right to put that down as nothing more than envy and jealousy for the standard of living and freedom that we enjoy in this country. However, as is usually the case in times of hardship the true character of a people comes out, and it certainly has reared itself here in America.

For nearly twelve years the American people put their morals ahead of selfishness. This "moral center" dictated their political choices and ushered in the Republican revolution and helped to put George W. Bush in office for two terms. But by 2006, the American people had become disillusioned by the Republicans refusal or inability to reduce the size of government and spending in general. They had also been stung by scandals that had attacked Republican politicians. The final straw (and one that the MSM gave far too much weight to) was the war in Iraq. So in November of '06 Republicans lost control of both houses of congress and the Democrat takeover began.

I have been unclear as to the ACTUAL reasons behind the shift in loyalties, vacillating back and forth between believing it was due to honest outrage and that it was simply "anybody but the Republicans". In fact I do believe that the Dems did not WIN in '06, the Republicans LOST.

But now I have a firmer grasp on what led to the ouster of the Republicans. People in this country are selfish. This was not so clear two years ago but the success of a neophyte candidate like Barack Obama has shown me that selfishness is the true dominating factor in this whole mess. We have the choice in this country between a man who served his country and nearly died TWICE doing so, or a man who spent the better part of his life disdaining America and attending a church that spewed anti-American vitriol on a regular basis. If we were living in the better times of the late '90's or early '00's I do not think that Obama would be anywhere near as popular as he is now. But we don't.

So what is it about Obama, and the Dems in general, that is convincing the majority of Americans to sweep them into unprecedented power? The Dems are promising "to spread the wealth". Somewhere along the way, probably in government schools among other places, Americans have been taught that it is the job of the imperial federal government to spread the wealth from the people who earn it to the people who didn't.

And now the Dems are couching it in terms like "fairness" and "patriotism". When you hear any politician tell you that it is your patriotic duty to share your wealth at the point of a gun with people who didn't earn it in the interest of fairness, you've walked into the land of socialism. "From each according to his means, to each according to his needs". That was Karl Marx the father of modern socialism and communism. We spent the better part of the twentieth century fighting communism and socialism around the world. But now times are tough and because the liberal politicians in this country promise people that they are going to give them something for nothing they are willing to throw away their freedoms in the hopes of a quick buck and a pacifier to suck on at night.

Oh yeah that's fair.

Rocky Rhodes

Those of you who have better things to do than listen to politics all of the time or listen to liberal talk radio may not have ever heard of Randi Rhodes. So you can be forgiven for scratching your heads when I mention this vile woman's name. However, it may be time for you to listen up.

Rhodes has been a liberal talk radio host since the heady days of Air America. In fact she was sacked from that job because she called Hillary Clinton and Geraldine Ferraro ____ing whores (use your imagination). Her current place of employment id "progressive" talk network Nova M Radio. Well over the last week or so she has shown that her intelligence hasn't grown any.

First she claimed that Senator John McCain was treated well by his captors while a POW in Vietnam. This must explain why he walks with a limp and can't raise his arms above his shoulders. The latest bit of wisdom to ooze from her lips is about Sarah Palin. She claims that Govenor Palin is like a molester of teenage boys. Maybe Rhodes just hates women in general.

Last year this sterling example of liberal character tripped on the sidewalk near her home and claimed that she had been the victim of a hate crime. The culprit: right-wing muggers. As you can see this woman is just a lovely individual that needs compassion and maybe a little Thorazine.

New Political Animation

I have released the first of my new weekly (hopefully) political animations. This one is entitled "Obama's Head". I was going for a direct assault on Mark Fiore's monopoly on animated political cartoons. Like many things dealing with the latest technology it seems that the Left has the upper hand on the Right when it comes to animated political punditry. Tell me what you think.

Can atheists be trusted?

An atheist is suing the U.S. Army because he was allegedly harassed by other soldiers for his beliefs (or lack thereof). Now if this did happen I would say that it was wrong and that something needs to be done about it.

However, I always question the voracity of allegations such as this when made by atheists and agnostics. For the the last century or so nonbelievers have made it their mission in life to generally be a thorn in the side of believers and do everything in their power to tear down Christianity.

Notice I didn't say religion since it seems that they really only attack Christians. They claim to believe in religious freedom or freedom from religion but they don't practice what they preach, no pun intended. For people who claim not to believe in any higher power they sure do protest a lot. If there is no God and we all cease to exist when we die then it seems to me that they are wasting an awful lot of time fighting a "nonexistent" foe.

And why do they seem to direct most if not all of their animus toward Christians. Not Jews, Muslims, Buddhists or Scientologists. Just Christians. Something to think about.

The Pennsylvania Debate

A lot of criticism has been placed on ABC News for their handling of the debate Wednesday. Now I normally don't like the mainstream media. But the main critism seems to be that ABC's Charles Gibson and George Stephanopolus asked "frivolous" questions for the first forty-five minutes of the debate.

Let's look at the subjects discussed during that time. Most of the "frivolous" questions were aimed at Barack Obama and certain issues of race (his nut job pastor), patriotism (his refusal to wear the American flag lapel pin after 9/11) and elitism (because those of us in middle-America cling to our guns and God). The remainder were aimed at Hillary Clinton and her dodging sniper fire.

Now these candidates would love for you to forget their faux pas but the fact of the matter is that Obama is a racist, unpatriotic, elitist and Hillary couldn't tell the truth to save her life. Neither one of these leftist wingnuts deserve to be president.

Blog by Email

I have added this entry by email just to see if it makes it easier to
keep up to date.