Sunday, June 29, 2008
***BREAKING NEWS***It's official! Laura will return to the radio airwaves on Monday, June 30. Buckle your seatbelts!
This is direct from her website http://lauraingraham.com. So, if I am wrong, do not blame this messenger!
We may find out some of the details as to why her syndicator, Talk Radio Network, had her off the air for almost a month. Or, we may not.
No matter what, it will be great to have her back on the airwaves and just in time for the sizzling summer of mindless political "news".
Also, I want to thank Monica Crowley http://monicamemo.com, who filled in for her most of her absence. Clearly, Miss Crowley was in a rather unusual situation and handled it with class. Same for Tammy Bruce http://tammybruce.com, who did a little fill-in duties.
Laura, I am glad you are back!
What the traditionalists have done is exactly what the modernists have done. Decided that they knew best and the current Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Rt. Rev. Dr. Rowan Williams has played his fiddle while the Communion burns.
The issues are much more than human sexuality. That is the thrust of it according to the Dinosaur, Drive-By, Mainstream Media. There is so much more.
For the Anglican in the United States, the Episcopal Church, the mindlessness in mind numbing.
Take something as basic as a Christian denomination that rejects it's very purpose? Well, the Episcopal Church does just that. The official party line, if you will, is that Jesus Christ is NOT the only way, the truth and the life. No, not at all. Since at the last general convention, a seemingly innocuous reaffirmation of what it means to be a Christian, the understanding of the basics of the faith was rejected. By a vote, of course. Sort of like the "Jesus Seminar." Picking and choosing what they like or don't like.
And there is the constant changing of the Book Of Common Prayer. The last major revision was in 1979. It was divisive because it brought in contemporary language. And some wanted to jettison the Elizabethan English that had been in place since the founding of the Church of England and the Protestant Episcopal Church. But, the compromise was to have both. That should have been sufficient. But, not to the modernists. Many want "inclusive" language. You know, no He or Him for God. Just God, God and God. And forget those pesky His and Hers. No differentiation of sexes. No, no, no. And to make the Lord's Prayer something of a gobly-gook that one could not say with a straight face.
To the Anglican, the Prayer Book is as important as the Holy Bible. Unfortunately, some see it the other way around. But the importance can not be brushed away. That is why the radical changes that the modernists would want would make the Episcopal Church unrecognizable in a generation or less.
It is just an overall trend among those of us who, for some inexplicable reason, stay in the Episcopal Church and thus by extension, the Anglican Communion.
But now, we may very well have two leaders. The Archbishop of Canterbury and the head of this new group that wants very much to stay in the Anglican Communion, but is tired of being lectured to by the so-called enlightened modernists.
The numbers, and regret ably that is one of the ways to monitor trends, are not good for the Episcopal Church. Many more traditionalists will leave to join a new province in North America. Some sitting on the fence may look closely at this new grouping. Churches and whole diocese's will leave. It is very possible that when all is said and done, the Episcopal Church may be left with fewer than one million members. Ditto for the Anglican Church in Canada. The Mother Church, The Church of England would be out of existence where it not for the monarchy and the Queen, Elizabeth II, being in charge.
The traditionalists have finally taken the shot across the bow. It is time to see whether Archbishop Williams will respond, or let the bow pierce his heart, and that of the Anglican Communion.
Friday, June 27, 2008
One of Sen. "F--- You" McCain's strengths is that he is seen as a reformer. And, he needs to pound that home day in and day out. And, as Mr. Fund points out, he needs to have a focused reform agenda.
A fasicinating point is about the two polls that came out.
One was a Newsweek poll that showed Sen. Messiah Barack ahead of Sen. "F--- You" McCain by 15% and the Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll showing Sen. Messiah Barack ahead by 12%.
Mr. Fund points out the over sampling of registered voters and padding the Democrat respondents.
And Mr. Fund points out that once people get really focused on the election, generally after Labor Day, the seemingly overwhelming numbers that one can have evaporate. As examples, there is 1976 in which it appeared that then President Ford was going to be drubbed by former Georgia governor, Jimmy Carter. Mr. Ford only lost by two percent.
The ominous is that the election seemed very close in 1980 between former California governor Ronald Reagan and incumbent President Carter. Mr. Reagan won in a landslide.
The Democrats have nominated one of the least experianced people to ever be a major party candidate for president in Sen. Messiah Barack. Two terms in the Illinois state senate and less than one term as a United States senator. While Sen. Messiah Barack is often compared to President John F. Kennedy, here is a fact. When Sen. Kennedy ran for president in 1960, he had been in congress for 12 years. So, Sen. Kennedy was much more versed in the ins and outs and knew how to frame issues. Sen. Messiah Barack is like dung. He is all over the place.
Even former President Carter had time in the Georgia state senate and was governor for a term.
The United States is a center-right nation. Sen. Messiah Barack is an unrepentant left-winger. While many conservatives have a lot of rightful doubts about Sen. McCain, he is much more reflective of the general mood of the United States. And, does not seem like a fringe candidate. Sen. Messiah Barack will be proven to be a fringe candidate.
As Mr. Fund points out, elections are won in the fall, not the summer. But, impressions are made during this time. So far, Sen. Messiah Barack has failed to impress. If the mood of the United States is that we are in a terribly wrong direction, Sen. Messiah Barack should be an easy 20% ahead of Sen. "F--- You" McCain. But, I think that a lot of what ails the United States populace is, and I write this with regret, President Bush.
And, that is why Sen. "F--- You" McCain needs to be his own man and distance himself, respectfully, from President Bush. He has done so on major issues. Not the ones that count and that is important to excite the conservative base.
Sen. Messiah Barack is going to have a hard time convincing those Sen. Hillary Clinton voters back in the Democrat fold. Many supported Sen. Clinton because she had some experiance and did not seem as radical as Sen. Messiah Barack. But, her sin to many a Democrat was that she voted to authorize President Bush to use force to topple the Iraqi dictator, Saddam Husein. And the anti-war crowd did not like that and she could not explain it away. DO NOT let the "kiss" today between those two (YUCK!) fool you. She has no interest in seeing a Sen. Messiah Barack win.
So, the bottom line is this. Sen. "F--- You" McCain is more than still in this race. He needs to get a reform agenda on track. And this shapes up to be another nail biter. Do not take my word for it. Take John Fund's!
two who slugged it out to the end in this frightening photo? And the
phoniness of it all!
But, there it is. Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Messiah Barack Hussien
Obama and the most painful kiss since, well that hideous photo of
then first lady Clinton and then President Bill Clinton frolicking on a
Caribbean beach. BUUUUUURRRRR!
The photo is the Lie Of The Day!
Mark this posting that Sen. Clinton will be doing all behind the scenes
to make sure that Sen. Messiah Barack never sees the front door of
the White House. Except to meet President-elect McCain on the way to the inauguration on January 20, 2009!
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Looking at this chart of swing states, it becomes clear who John McCain's choice for VP should be. McCain should select Mitt Romney as his running mate. This move would put Nevada in the Republican category and, at the very least, make Michigan a "toss up" if not "leans Republican." To the extent Romney supporters are willing to travel to nearby Colorado and New Mexico, it could also ensure that McCain has a much needed, fairly active get out the vote effort in the southwest.
I never liked Romney. It wasn't the Mormon thing—every Mormon I've ever met has been an upstanding citizen. It also wasn't the slick way he managed to slam McCain for positions he had taken in the months before announcing his candidacy. My problem with Romney was that he embodied the ever-increasing banality of politicians, which I feel duty-bound to resist.
So I am rallying around him why? Not least because John McCain's election will postpone the death of personality for four to eight years. After all, McCain, as a boy, used to hold his breath until he got his way. There is every indication he would sucker punch a recalcitrant congressman once in the Oval Office. For his own part, Romney might even be willing to cut a big check, because McCain's selection will secure Romney the Republican nomination in the future.
The only downside? If McCain/Romney pull this off, National Review's post-election cruise will be short one VIP.
Save for the humor about the National Review post-election cruise, this is a spot-on analysis.
And, I will make this prediction.
If Sen. "F--- You" McCain has the good sense to put Mr. Romney in the number two spot, Mr. Romney should be spending a lot of time in California.
After all, it was then-Gov. Romney who had the misfortune to be the sitting governor when the Massachusetts supreme court found a "right" to same-sex marriage. And, as noted here many times, then-Gov. Romney tried to get the issue on the ballot to have a state constitutional amendment to recognize marriage as between one man and one woman. Because of the convoluted process, then-Gov. Romney was unsuccessful. His successor, Democrat Gov. Deval Patrick let it die in the General Court (legislature), dominated by Democrats.
Here would be a chance to show those power-grabbing courts that the will of the people does account for something.
If advocates of same-sex marriage want to convince people of their position, they need to and should in the court of public opinion. Depending on courts to divine rights sets back the cause.
Before I trail into another post, the case for Mitt is now being made in The Weekly Standard. And I could not agree more.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Here is a Saudi Arabian talking about proper behavior in courtin' the gal to be one of the man's wives.
Oh, yes, you read that right. You can have a marriage contract even with a one-year old girl.
Oh, but it gets really better as he explains the one to follow is the pedophile himself, the prophet Mohammad.
It was Mohammad who took Aisha when she was six years old. But, Mohammad had the decency to wait until she was nine years old to have relations.
Go to http://www.hotair.com and look for "Saudi Marriage Advice" to see the whole, disgusting video.
Remember, these are the people that Sen. Messiah Barack thinks we can sit down and have heart-to-heart talks with. Hmm, I think not!
If you want to show your concern, follow this link http://www.mrcaction.org/512/petition.asp?PID=17077071&NID=1 and sign the petition.
Remember, all of you who think that four years of a President Messiah Barack will be OK, this is the kind of legislation that the left will use to silence conservative voices. Once they take down conservative talk radio, this medium will be next. Do not think that this will be hyperbole.
This election maybe the last gasp of the hard left for a long time if we conservatives are smart. We can not vote for a third party candidate with no chance. We can not vote for Sen. Messiah Barack. And, we can not stay home because Sen. John "F--- You" McCain is not the perfect conservative choice. On this issue, Sen. "F--- You" McCain has been on our side. He has consistently opposed any attempts at silencing the conservative side, even when we have rightfully called him on the carpet for his grievous derelictions.
Here is a chance for conservatives, and fair-minded liberals and all who favor true free speech to let congress know that any attempts in Orwellian fashion to silence conservative voices will not just happen.
It's All Relative at the L.A. Times
A while back, I did a spit take when I read when the L.A. Times was reporting that voters "narrowly" opposed gay marriage when the survey they were citing indicated voters opposed it by a whopping 19 percent margin.
So yesterday, the L.A. Times reports that an L.A. Times/Bloomberg poll has Obama up 12 percent over McCain. (I haven't looked at the methodology myself, but based on other polls that seems like a significant outlier.)
Anyway, care to take a guess at what word the L.A. Times used to describe that margin? Yep, "sizable."
You see, when it is about the proposition regarding same-sex marriage that will be on the November ballot in California, somehow 54%-35% is narrow. Then if one splits the 11% undecided right down the middle, it becomes 60%-40%. Similar to the margin that Proposition 22 won by in 2000.
But, when it comes to Sen. Messiah Barack a 12% advantage becomes sizable. Oh, and the polling was of registered, not likely, voters. It is known that when polling is done with registered voters versus likely voters, the registered voters sample is tilted to favoring a Democrat because there are more registered Democrats over Republicans. But, likely voters tends to be a more representative sample. Republicans tend to be more in the likely voters catagory. Independents are always the hard group to figure out in polling.
In reality, the problem is that the Left, er LOS Angeles Times is not a serious newspaper. If it were, it would try harder to appeal beyond the left wing reader. It would try to have more serious news, not polls designed as news.
If this continues, readership will continue to hemorrage and maybe then, polling and reporting will be done seriously.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Where is Sen. Messiah Barack on this issue?
I ask because Sen. Messiah Barack is the first black candidate for president of the United States. The horrific situation is happening in Africa. Sen. Messiah Barack talks about his black, therefore, African roots and heritage. Does our possible future president have no thoughts on the thug dictator, so-called President Robert Mugabe driving the rightful president, Morgan Tsvangirai, into the embassy of the Netherlands?
Not that the Republican nominee for president, Sen. John "F--- You" McCain nor the Bush administration get off the hook on this abomination.
But, because this should be a perfect situation for Sen. Messiah Barack to point out, for instance, that black-majority rule that was fought for does not mean dictatorial rule. That is exactly what has happened in Zimbabwe since 1980 when President Mugabe was elected. Since then, he has taken a prosperous nation, the breadbasket of Southern Africa and destroyed it based on a cult of personality, and fear. Fear that the evil white people will somehow regain power. Too bad most white Zimbabweans have fled the nation.
I should think that Sen. Messiah Barack should point out that President Mugabe has long worn out his welcome. Yes, he was what could be called the father of the movement that gained blacks their God-given rights. But, in a democracy, and that is what Zimbabwe claims to be, sometimes you lose elections. And when one loses, they hand the reigns of power to the winner graciously. They do not use fear and intimidation and outright murder.
If Sen. Messiah Barack should take a position, he can use southern neighbor South Africa as the example to follow.
Yes, the African National Congress party is the dominant party in South Africa. But, there are opposition parties. And said parties, for the most part, are not forced into submission or intimidated. Sometimes, the ANC will lose elections and parties change hands. That is how a democracy works.
As a sidebar, the old National Party, the party of the white, Afrikaner majority that instituted apartheid, fell on hard times. Eventually, it ceased to exist. But, and this is a key, many members of the National Party became members of the ANC and serve in government. It is amazing that the force that fought against apartheid ended up bringing descendants of those who implemented apartheid into their fold.
I just do not understand why nobody in a position to say so has not taken a more aggressive approach to the crisis, and it is a crisis, in Zimbabwe?
I noted in a earlier posting when things looked like President Mugabe would hand over the presidency to Mr. Tsvangirai that a chaotic situation is what Islamofacsist terrorists look for to sweep in and claim to be a stabilizing force for good. Ask the people of Lebanon about Hezbollah and what they have done to that once beautiful nation.
Zimabwe is not a hotbed of radical Islam, or much of Islam, but it would be fascinating to see if the situation went spiralling out of control is radical terrorists could indeed take advantage of the situation. It is what the old Soviet Union did after all.
I would be very curious to see whether or not Sen. Messiah Barack will ever comment on the situation in Zimbabwe and what he would or would not do if he were president. On this, he would actually be one to have a serious potential to do some good.
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Although there is no question that the slow down may affect charitable giving this year, it does show that as a people, we really do care about each other. If we did not, we would not be so giving.
When those that rail about how terrible the United States is, quote this article and remind those that are the critics that it is not how much the government does, but what people do for each other.
For those of you who are still hungover at the fact Sen. John "F--- You" McCain is the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, this is going to be the first in occasional posts about those conservative Republicans running for offices down ticket.
Today, I want to introduce you to California state senator, Tom McClintock http://tommcclintock.com/ who is the Republican nominee for congress in the fourth district.
Mr. McClintock is one of those first elected to the California state assembly in 1982, during the Reagan Revolution era.
Mr. McClintock has always fought for small government, lower taxes and for tax reform.
And, this is Mr. McClintock's first run at Washington office.
On the issues, he is spot on.
Take illegal immigration. Mr. McClintock favors completing the border fence and enforcing the laws that we already have on the books. In other words, we do not need so-called "comprehensive immigration reform" so much as we need to keep our borders secure and then plan a strategy that may include guest workers. Call his position the Laura Ingraham position http://lauraingraham.com.
On defense issues, the McClintock position is the Ronald Reagan position, Peace Through Strength. One of the fundamental reasons I believe that the United States has not been attacked again on American soil by the Islamofacsist radicals is because they know that even a poll-weakened President Bush will fight back and hard. And, if the United States military is feared, that is one way to keep the Islamofacsists on the run.
An issue that is near and dear to my heart is education. I am so tired of the federal government taking more and more decisions about education away from the local parents and school boards, which the people elect. Mr. McClintock is a strong advocate of local control of education. It is local control and knowledge that can lead to some serious education reforms that would be in the best interests of parents and students, not the teacher's unions.
The bottom line is that Mr. McClintock is a true conservative. He is a product of and an unashamed supporter of the conservative ideas that Ronald Reagan espoused throughout his political life. He will be a leader of conservatives in congress.
That is why I am supporting Tom McClintock for the California fourth congressional district. And, you can too by going over to his website and make a donation. He will need all the money he can get because the Democrats are gunning for this district.
Let's win one for the Gipper here with Tom McClintock!
The thrust of the hit piece http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-hensley22-2008jun22,0,1163725.story?page=1 is that because Mrs. McCain is the chairman of Hensley & Co, a large beer wholesaler, it may cloud the judgement of a President "F--- You" McCain on matters relating to the federal government's role in alcohol control.
So, what is wrong with Mrs. McCain being the chairwoman of a major corporation in Arizona?
Well, firstly it is about the lobbying that the company does to other senators and congressmen and local elected representatives in the Arizona legislature.
You know, to the left there is something evil about corporations lobbying to have the government legislate, or not, in their favor. If the size of government was not so Amazonian to begin with, there would be little need for lobbyists to begin with. That is another issue to post about at a latter date.
And what is the lobbying about?
One is fighting the proposal to disclose alcohol content in adult beverages* of all kinds. This is being pushed by Mothers Against Drunk Driving or MADD.
I for one do not have a dog in that fight. I do not see the harm in disclosure but I do see the government butting into a private business decision not to and that is something I am naturally against. The best way to get disclosure done is by people at the grass roots taking action. Not the government and or the courts.
The juicy part about the hit piece is that fact that Mrs. McCain is involved in an alcohol wholesaler to begin with. The reason? All those pesky religious voters who do not consume adult beverages*. Note these four paragraphs, roughly in the middle of the hit piece:
Indeed, apart from its potential to create a conflict of interest, the mere ownership of the beer distributor could turn off some social conservatives and those who object to alcohol use.
About a third of Americans abstain from alcohol, and half either abstain or consume less than a drink a month, according to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.
For some, abstinence -- and a disdain for the industry -- is religion-based. Leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention, which has more than 16 million members, expressed "total opposition to the manufacturing, advertising, distributing and consuming of alcoholic beverages" in the church's most recent resolution on the matter.
"I am sure for some individual Southern Baptists, [the McCain family's involvement in the beer business] would be a concern," said Roger S. Oldham, vice president of Southern Baptist Convention relations.
I guess that there are going to be some voters that will not vote for the senator on this information, but that is going to be far and few in between. And, of course it is the obligatory blame those damn Southern Baptists theme! Those killjoys!
For the record, I do not consume adult beverages* and have not in 16 years. But, I am not Carrie Nation about it either to those that do consume adult beverages*. The fact that Mrs. McCain does head an alcohol wholesale company does not make any difference as to whether or not I will vote for Sen. "F--- You" McCain for president.
So, after showing Mrs. McCain in a bitter death match with MADD and irritating those Southern Baptists, it is not until about two-thirds into the hit piece that we are treated to the relevance of Mrs. McCain's leadership of a private company and the potential conflict of interest with Sen. "F--- You" McCain.
It is not until that part of the article that one realizes, hmm, what does Sen. "F--- You" McCain do when these issues come up? Well, he smartly recuses himself and thus avoids any conflict between his role as a senator and Mrs. McCain's as chairwoman of Hensley & Co.
But, what about if Sen. "F--- You" McCain does become president?
The obvious is at the very end of the hit piece.
That Mrs. McCain put her stake in the company, about 68% in a blind trust until a President McCain is out of office.
So, what is the point of this "article"?
I think it is clear. That Hensley & Co. engages in lobbying-bad. That Hensley & Co. is against alcohol content disclosure in beer-bad. That Hensley & Co. fights all the typical left-wing "consumer" groups-bad. And that no matter what, as senator or president, John "F--- You" McCain is screwed.
But, he is not and the real story should be how Mrs. McCain is indeed a successful businesswoman. But, she is a Republican and that does not fit into the liberal-left world of the DDBMSM.
I am afraid that we can look forward to these hit pieces on Cindy McCain. She will not be off limits to the DDBMSM like Sen. Messiah Barack has ordered the DDBMSM to "lay off" his wife, Michelle Obama.
Can you say "double standard"?
Saturday, June 21, 2008
No, it is an unfortunately cutsie way for Sen. Messiah Barack, I suppose, to add a little gravitas to his campaign.
Why, he even has discovered a little Latin, for panache I suppose.
Oh come on, we should all know the Latin that we learned in school. Oh, I'm sorry, we do not learn Latin in government schools.
Anyway, vero possumus is, are you ready? YES WE CAN!
As an aside, the last time I heard such a trite campaign slogan was not in a campaign, but in sports.
In 1979, it was the then California Angels rallying cry on their way to their first division title. I remember it like yesterday.
YES WE CAN! YES WE CAN! YES WE CAN!
At least as a sports rally cry, it makes sense.
But, as a political slogan it is moronic. Every candidate can use that and, like so much Sen. Messiah Barack says, it means not one thing.
Can what? Can wake up in the morning? Can use a restroom? Can drink a cup of coffee? Can drive our SUVs? Keep our air conditioners at 72 degrees? Can eat what we want?
Well, when it comes to the last three items, according to Sen. Messiah Barack, it is NO WE CAN'T!
Really, the seal is too much. But it is so typical of a campaign that is all symbolism and no substance. Whenever the substance gets out, like Sen. Messiah Barack lecturing us on SUV usage, how we adjust our temperatures and if we can eat what we want, people scratch their collective heads and mumble, "Huh?!" "What the hell does he mean?!"
So, it means he has to stay away from any real positions. They, and his professional relationships are what keeps getting our secular Messiah in trouble in the first place.
I think that Sen. Messiah Barack needs to have the asterisk around vero possumus*-except when it comes to SUVs, personal climate control and how we eat.
Since I went to government schools, please give me the Latin for "NO WE CAN'T".
Last week, in a referendum that Ireland would have been forced to accept a European president and foreign minister and a usurpation of national sovereignty http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/14/eu.ireland1.
By a 54%-46% vote, the Irish people rejected what has been rejected in the Netherlands, France and Denmark. These people are waking up.
There is no way other than by brute force that Europe can unite behind a superstate. Judging by what most Euroburrecrats and their socialist allies believe in how to radical Islamics, the people of the European nations have come to realize that each said nation must be able to deal with their problems on their own, not under some phony-baloney banner of unity. BTW, does that "unity" theme sound familiar?
Ireland rightfully rejected the so-called Lisbon treaty. In the cited article, the most glaring quote was from Hugo Brady:
"You don't say yes to something you don't understand," said Hugo Brady, a analyst at the Centre for European Reform think tank.
And that is the problem when the left tries to take on such issues.
By usurping rightful national identity and local custom in favor of some economic scheme that supposedly will make all the citizens of said nations financially better off is no way to sell a flawed plan.
The Irish vote has probably killed, for now, this latest attempt at creating a fallacy on its own petard. The European superstate.
And this is good for the international community.
Sovereign nations are better to deal with than a so-called community of nations that agree on very little.
Just ask the United Nations.
Ireland voters gave a boost to correct nationalism and sovereignty. Let us see now how the Eurocrats try to steam roll the people and nations.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Clearly, there is a divide between the respective presidential candidates. Sen. Messiah Barack, the Democrat, is trotting the environmentalist lines and one that is a favorite. "You can not drill your way out of this". Hmm, actually, we can but it is no thanks to such friends as the California governor, Benedict Arnold, et al that there is a notion that we can not explore offshore and in ANWR.
Sen. John "F--- You" McCain, the Republican, has a least come to realize that the American people want some real action. So, he is doubling down the middle. Sen. "F--- You" McCain is saying yes to offshore drilling, but no to exploration in the arctic desert known as ANWR.
Had then President Clinton signed congressional authorization to explore in ANWR in 1995, we may not be importing more oil now. We could have been energy independent and exporting oil.
A statistic to keep in mind. During the Clinton years, United States oil production declined 1,349,000 barrels a day and foreign imports increased 3,574,000 barrels a day.
So, what is going to make prices come down any significant amount?
Sadly, nothing short term.
But, in the long term, more drilling is one solution. What the United States has done is taken the NIMBY-not in my back yard-approach to energy. No, we do not want the nuke plant anywhere near any city-or any "pristine" area. No, don't want to see any oil derricks on the beach. No, the windmills at sea block the "pristine" view of those who can afford to live on the coast.
As a nation, we need to get over some of these NIMBY attitudes and understand that drilling today is not like it was a while a go. It is much more environmentally friendly. We need the nuke plants that Sen. "F--- You" McCain has talked about. Even a nation like France understands that and over 80% of French electricity is nuclear powered. As far as the offshore drilling, it is really offshore, about 100 miles offshore.
The Democrat solution is pure posturing. The windfall profits tax is just a slam against "big oil". When are they going to have a windfall profits tax on some of their friends, labor unions. Or maybe the Hollywood elites? Back to the Democrat "solutions". No new refineries. No new nuke plants. But, research endlessly "alternative" energy sources. No one is against researching "alternative" energy sources. But, without a long term comprehensive approach, trust me, gas will look very cheap today. Oh, and let us not forget New York Democrat congressman Maurice Finchey's solution. Nationalize the refineries! Unbelievable!
Here it is.
Drill, more refineries, more nuke plants, and yes, more research into "alternative" energy sources. It is a comprehensive plan and needed right now.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Even if you should be an opponent to the war effort in the Iraq theatre, at least you can make a difference in trying to let some youths have fun with the sport they so love.
HT: Laura Ingraham
Sen. "F--- You" McCain is a master at these forums. And with about 22 years of senate experience against Sen. Messiah Barack, I suspect that he will try to do the most minimum of debate, and or townhall style meetings as possible.
If one thinks that he is all that, Sen. Messiah Barack told ABC News Jake Taper that he would, essentially, end the War Against Islamofacsist Terror unilaterally and return to the President Clinton approach of the 1990s. You know, treat terrorism as a purely law-enforcement matter. I would suggest reading Andy McCarthy's book, "Willful Blindness: A Memoir Of The Jihad", about his time as a federal prosecutor that did send away the so-called Blind Sheik, Omar Abdel Rahmen, to prison.
So I say to the secular Messiah, please continue to get off that teleprompter. Give us the details of your plans to raise our energy costs further. And more about what you would do as far as total surrender in the War Against Islamofacsist Terror. More details, please, about how we can not drill our way out of the high cost of oil and gas, but we can tax our way to prosperity. And of course, more of that change talk, but off prompter, please.
John Podorhetz is correct. Sen. Messiah Barack is really bad off the teleprompter. And it is time for Sen. "F--- You" McCain to take advantage of that fact.
In 1992, when President George H. W. Bush was running for reelection, I was a frustrated true believer that felt betrayed by the president and his capitulation to the Democrat-controlled congress in then the largest tax hike in American history.
Pat Buchanan was running against President Bush for the Republican presidential nomination. Although President Bush was already assured the Republican nomination, when the California primary came in June, I cast my protest vote for Mr. Buchanan. I have grown to regret that vote more and more every day. I fear it diluted the party, much worse than the reaction to Sen. John "F--- You" McCain. And it led to the four years of William Jefferson Blythe Clinton.
Now, Mr. Buchanan has written a book, "Churchill, Hitler And The Unnecessary War: How Britain Lost Its Empire And The West Lost The World." and one of the central assertions is that the United States not only should not have been involved in World War II, but among other assertions one being that sanctions against Fascist Italy drove it to ally with the German ruler, Adolf Hitler. I believe that was the argument the Fidel Castro by his apologists. That the United States pressured the British to drop its alliance with Japan before World War II. The most odious is that Mr. Buchanan saves all his venom against British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. Because it was Mr. Churchill who warned that then Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain's concessions to Hitler regarding the Sudetenland was a precursor to the beginning of World War II. Oh, but really, Mr. Buchanan does not like the fact that Mr. Churchill had no problem in seeing the creation of the State of Israel.
Now I have suspected that Mr. Buchanan has a very strong anti-Jewish attitude about him. It is not just his knee-jerk anti-Israel positions. One can be opposed to Israeli government policies and not be anti-Jewish. But after all it was Mr. Buchanan who had blistering comments about so-called neoconservatives, code for Jewish conservatives, and their "Amen corner" in regards to the American Israel Political Action Committee, AIPAC.
This book, while it may have some nuggets of fact, is his attempt to smear Jews, pure and simple.
I do not know if Mr. Buchanan, a practicing Roman Catholic, has been hanging around actor Mel Gibson or not. Mr. Gibson is the one while being arrested for drunk driving in Malibu, California went into a drunken, anti-Jewish tirade. But the book is a cleverer way of addressing the "Jewish problem" from an intellectual standpoint. After all, that is the thrust of the book. Somehow, only Pat Buchanan can find a way to make Adolf Hitler, and Benito Mussolini and the Imperial Japanese seem to be victims rather than antagonists. History shows that the Axis powers were antagonists. They would have split the world in three parts if they did not split each other up first. That is just a fact.
I will concede that both Mr. Churchill and President Franklin Roosevelt were way too accommodating to the brutal Soviet dictator, Josef Stalin. By splitting Europe, I think that the infamous speech in which Mr. Churchill referred to Eastern Europe as the other side of an Iron Curtain was as much a concession as a reality. Sometimes, wars do lead to bad alliances and different outcomes than the planners would have imagined.
But, in rewriting history to, once again in Buchananland, blame the Jews for World War II, and probably World War I, Mr. Buchanan has finally gone over the shark. He is not too far from being a holocaust denier. Harsh, but accurate words at this point.
Sunday, June 15, 2008
The reason I urge this is to channel the conservative energies down the ticket this year. Those who either have problems with and or will not vote for the Republican presidential nominee, Sen. John "F--- You" McCain, need to find ways to help those that will carry out the conservative message with or without a President McCain.
The Free And Strong American PAC http://www.FreeStrongAmerica.com has a list of candidates they are supporting in the upcoming November election. For the McCain haters, go past that one to the list of the up and comers in Republican and conservative circles.
As a Mitt Romney supporter, I am giving some cash to get this off the ground. Remember, when the Great Man, Ronald Reagan lost to President Ford for the Republican nomination and thus President Ford reelection, he founded the Citizens For The Republic, one of the first PACs.
It is a way that Mr. Romney will be able to affect an agenda and promote the conservative policies and values that we support and fight for everyday.
So, if you are so inclined, throw a bit o' cash to the Free And Strong America PAC and get involved in supporting conservative, Republican candidates for office. I know I will.
The secular Messiah's attempt to blunt the unproven rumors of a Michelle Obama video in which the wannabe first lady, or co-president, refers to some of us as "whiteys" was to blame Rush for starting it, of course.
I believe that it was a Sen Hillary Clinton supporter who started the rumor in the first place.
And, since it is a rumor, I would advise the secular Messiah's campaign to not feed into the rumor mill.
Amazing. These people can not even get a rebuttal straight!
Thank you, Sun-Times for some good journalism.
HT: Kathryn Jean Lopez @corner.nationalreview.com
Saturday, June 14, 2008
This is the Mother church of the Anglican communion. This is the linage where the Episcopal Church comes from. It is once again the direct flaunting of what the Church teaches and breaking tradition that these modernists do not agree with.
The modernists do not like the traditionalist view that marriage, Christian marriage, is between one man and one woman. Since they do not like it, they just feel that they are so enlightened, so "prophetic" that they know better than the rest and just make up their rules as they go along.
In the case of the Episcopal Church here in the United States, the modernists suddenly finds rules important when traditionalist churches, fed up with the modernists shoving down the average parishioner's throats their agenda, leave the Church. They don't like losing the property and are really insulted when said traditionalists have bishops from other Anglican Communion churches become their bishops. See, when the modernists see a threat from the traditionalists, they like to talk about polity and that these bishops are usurping their authority, yada, yada, yada. And when that does not scare the bejesus out of the traditionalists, the army of lawyers the Episcopal Church has under their wing then begin legal proceedings to get "their" property back.
The fact that two obviously gay priests believe their relationship is the equivalent to Christian marriage between one man and one woman shows that they do not care nor read the said Holy Bible that they are ordained to teach the layman and laywomen about. The Holy Bible clearly says that the mystery of marriage is the joining of man and woman as one. Two opposites. That relationship is part of the mystery of the relationship between Jesus Christ and his church. All other relationships are not equal to this. It does not mean that all relationships are not important, but that God himself revealed that the perfect one is between man and woman.
Now, as far as civil law is concerned, the reason that the civil union concept is appropriate because the same-sex relationship is granted importance and protective of couples in areas in which in the past they were denied such things as power of attorney, property going to a partner when one goes with God and clearly appropriate in terms of civil authorities recognizing, like it or not, that these couples do have some rights and protections.
But, and this is important. When a church deems such relationships the same as the Christian understanding of marriage between one man and one woman, it demeans what marriage is. Thus, at some point, one can make the argument that polygamy as practiced in Old Testament times is A-OK and that the church should recognize that as equal. Or other absolutely bad relationships. Hey, what would be wrong for a brother and sister to marry? How about a father who loses his wife and has a daughter, what is wrong with that?
It is not trying to make same-sex relationships sound deviant. It is just pointing out a reality that the proponents do not want to grapple with. It is something that proponents need to explain to the rest of us.
Clearly, this is a shot across the bow and now, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Rev. Dr. Rowan Williams needs to address this and now.
Friday, June 13, 2008
Mr. Russert died where he probably would have wanted to. In the NBC Washington news bureau preparing for this Sunday's "Meet The Press".
Yes, I know that he was a Democrat and worked for Mario Cuomo. But he started working in politics for the late Sen. Patrick Moynahan (D-NY). And, most important is that Mr. Russert never forgot where he came from. And that was a working-class neighborhood in South Buffalo, New York.
Another aspect as the moderator and as I noted, grand inquisitor, on "Meet The Press" was that he was well researched and very fair. He gave both his fellow Dems a tough time as well as Republicans. Few, if any, in political journalism today could do it like Mr. Russert.
The measure of the man is his love for God, as a faithful Roman Catholic, family as his book on the ol' man, Big Russ, evidenced and his own wife, Maureen, and son, Luke. And, that politics never got in the way of that.
We need a lot more Tim Russerts today, and he will be sorely missed.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
JUST IN...LAURA TO HOST NEW SHOW ON FOX Tune in Monday at 5 pm to "Just In with Laura Ingraham." Let the games begin! You can catch her on the Ingraham Angle segment on the O'Reilly Factor Thursday, June 12. She will also be hosting the O'Reilly Factor Friday, June 13th and Friday June 20th at 8pm and 11pm ET. Be sure to tune in!
While we still miss her on the radio, this gives her more exposure that we conservatives badly need in the new messianic age o' Obama we are in.
Don't forget, you can e-mail the boneheads at Talk Radio Network http://www.talkradionetwork.com/corporatecontacts or call at 541-474-2297 to get Laura back on the radio airwaves.
Who wrote the decision for the majority? The Reagan administration's third-string supreme court nominee to pass senate muster, Anthony Kennedy. Mr. Kennedy was nominated after Robert Bork was defeated and District of Columbia appeals court justice Douglas Ginsburg could not try the "I did not inhale" defense in his use of marijuana in college.
Two things. When an administration gets bogged down and has to get a third-stringer in a position like this, then there should be no wonder when they stray off the reservation, so to speak. And, it is imperitive that if it is a President McCain, that he get it right the first time and nominates a conservative that can not be denied by a potentially more Democrat senate
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
As noted by Sen. Hutchison, with blunt honesty, conservatives have been on defense on many an issue, but on energy the conservative Republicans are with the American people.
There are some good nuggets in here that you can share with your friends who are frightened by the prospect of man-made globaloney warming.
Take this about the last time our liberal Democrat friends thought that a "windfall profits" tax was a good idea:
In 1980, Congress passed a "windfall profits tax" and the consequences were devastating. In the six years following that levy, domestic oil production dropped by 1.26 billion barrels and imports of foreign oil rose 13%. The "windfall profits tax" was an unmitigated disaster, which is precisely why it was repealed. We shouldn't make that same mistake again
Clearly, once domestic production dropped, our dependence on the oil from the unsavory regimes of the Middle East increased. Only logic a liberal, left-wing Democrat could love!
Sen. Hutchison also points out the obvious. Obvious to many if not most Americans:
So many people in Washington have grown accustomed to the idea that we must either import oil from the Middle East or make an expensive transition toward homegrown fuels like corn-based ethanol. This is a false choice. One of the best kept secrets in politics today is that our country is one of the richest energy nations in the world, and is extremely capable of achieving energy independence - but only if we have the willpower to do it.
The reason that there is a real food crisis in the developing world is because farmers are growing food, like corn, for fuel instead of feeding people. There is absolutely no balance in that approach. But, once again for a liberal, left-wing Democrat, it makes perfect sense. Slam the oil companies for not being able to drill in the United States thanks to overbearing regulations and now globaloney warming hysteria. And when that is not enough, encourage farmers to produce crops that should be for people instead going into some of our automobiles. Sheesh!
But, this amazing statistic is enough to make an American cry:
Current federal law prevents oil and gas production in the deep waters off the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts. These laws, which were first passed in 1981 when the price of oil was $35 per barrel, were a luxury at the time, but today, given America's growing energy needs, they are indefensible. The fact is, these areas, along with another energy-rich section of the Gulf of Mexico, could contain as much as 115 billion barrels of oil - which is greater than Venezuela's current reserves - and 565 trillion cubic feet of natural gas - which is greater than the combined reserves of Iraq, China, Yemen, Oman, Nigeria, and Venezuela. Federal laws also prevent us from exploiting one trillion barrels of shale oil in Colorado, Wyoming, and Utah - an amazing amount that is three times what Saudi Arabia has on reserve. Our bill, The American Energy Production Act of 2008, would allow us to tap these resources with environmental safeguards
Can you believe that? We have enough within our reach to not only become energy independent, but possibly an exporter of oil. If this were in place today, do you really think that we would be paying $4 a gallon-now $4.50c and speedily rising here in California? Of course not! Gas could be at the price level in the 1980s. Instead, we are well on our way to becoming like much of Europe, which by the way, is paying close to $10 a gallon. That is because they have to pay for the free lunch that is socialized medicine and the rest of the intricate welfare state that they have developed in much of the continent.
Would you like to know what the Democrat nominee for president, Sen. Messiah Barack, thinks about all of this?
In shorthand, of course he wants to bring back the "windfall profits" tax with a vengeance. And as far as the $4 to $4.50c a gallon gas prices? No problem but that it came about to quickly.
And, it does not help that the Republican presidential candidate, Sen. John "F--- You" McCain buying in so much into the globaloney warming theory that he has hemmed himself in. With his ridiculous comparison to the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, ANWR, to the Grand Canyon, and his overall confusion about what to do about the here and now, it is hard to tell much of a difference between the two on the oil/gas "crisis".
What it means is that the Republican rank-and-file, and conservatives, once again have to educate the Republican presidential candidate. We have to force a vote on the Sen. Hutchison legislation. We have to explain it to John that we have the ability to do both drilling that can be regulated and with responsible safeguards put in place. A win-win.
Call the senate and your senator and tell them that you want a vote on the Sen. Hutchison legislation. You can go to the website http://www.senate.gov or call the senate switchboard at 202-224-3121 and they will connect you with your state senator.
It is time for the majority to call out the alarmists and a real vote for real energy independence will go a long way towards a logical solution to the oil/gas "crisis".
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
The following is a note that has been on the Laura Ingraham website
NOTE TO LAURA LISTENERS Due to contractual obligations, for the present time I am unable to reveal why I am not currently hosting The Laura Ingraham Show. Rest assured, this absence is not of my choosing, nor is it health or family related. I am ready, willing and eager to continue the conversation we started seven years ago about politics and the culture. (Heck, if cancer couldn't keep me off the airwaves for long, nothing will.) Keep checking the site for a schedule of my appearances on the Fox News Channel. All queries regarding my on-air status should be directed to Talk Radio Network's management at 541 474 2297 or send an email http://www.talkradionetwork.com/corporatecontacts. Thanks for sticking with me, and...Power to the People!
I for one have no idea why Miss Ingraham is off the air but we who are conservatives and also believe that Miss Ingraham is entertaining and engaging need to do what she would want us to do and have a real Power To The People moment.
We must call Talk Radio Network and e-mail that we want Laura Ingraham back on the air and right now! Not only that, we want to know why this situation has occurred. The TRN owes it to us, the Laura Ingraham audience. We have made her the number one conservative talk show hosted by a woman.
Also, we should remember that it was Miss Ingraham who led us to call those pesky senators and kill the so-called "comprehensive immigration reform" bill-scam. It was Miss Ingraham's leadership that got a lot of us off our rear ends to take our United States back.
And now we are faced with a real Power To The People moment.
Can we do it? We did it before and will do it again and I believe that Miss Ingraham may be back in time to give us a Soundbite Of The Week.
HT: Laura Ingraham, Renew America @ www.renewamerica.us and David Frum @ National Review.
Friday, June 06, 2008
Now Marc Ambinder is usually a pretty level-headed guy. Sharp as a tack. But on this, it is insane on trying to use the 2000 model as what will happen in this election in 2008.
It will not be the blowout that many think. But, the winner will have both the majority of the popular and electoral college votes.
While the hard core of the state that went for Democrats Al Gore and Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass) will be about the same, it is a bit of a different map and the candidates are quite different this time around.
The McCain people are going to make some kind of play for California. Although it would seem to be the bluest of blue states, it does not top 55% in either 2000 or 2004. Sen. McCain's maverick image fit for a lot of California voters. There are many a disgruntled Hillary Clinton supporters here who may think seriously about voting for Maverick McCain. Many people overlook California at their own peril. Obama, the new secular messiah, did not pull it off in California and while he does start at a good average among Hispanic voters, though it is painful to admit, McCain can make some headway with traditionalists. And, the issue of same-sex marriage is on the California ballot. A Mitt Romney in the VP slot would be a boost to those opposed to the California state supreme court's recent decision divining a "right" for same-sex couples to marry.
Obama will make a play for Colorado. It is a states trending Democrat. In 2006, they elected a Democrat to the senate, governor and the state legislature went from Republican to Democrat. If that trend continues, look for Obama to spend time and effort there.
Those two examples alone should make any observer see that the current Red-Blue standings may be obsolete and that these two are going to areas that neither party has been in a long time. And, it is not just states but the interest groups.
Obama is going to go after religious voters. After the "Rev." Wright fiasco, it may be harder, but he will try.
McCain is going to make a real push for Hispanic voters as well as independents and yes, Democrats.
So, if Obama does lose, and I believe he will, it is not going to be in some conspiracy. It will be because voters will look at the two candidates and determine for better or worse, McCain is the better of the two.
So Marc Ambinder, do not look for some weirdness to explain a potential Obama loss. Let the voters vote and decide.
I am reading transcripts from Barack Obama's Virginia rally last night with Senator "Born Fightin'!" Jim Webb. Obama's description of Webb as an "unlikely German" strikes me oddly.
OBAMA: Now, speaking of -- speaking of folks having your back, when I announced that was running for the presidency, this unlikely German, there were a number of people who said it's too soon. He's too young. He hasn't been in Washington long enough. We weren't getting the big name endorsements. A lot of people took a wait-and-see attitude. But there was one person who about three days after I announced was willing to stand with me in the seat of the old confederacy right here in Virginia and say that the time for change has come.What does that mean? Because Webb is German it's unlikely he would have supported Obama from the gate? The whole passage is weird to me. If I'm missing some kind of reference or am not "getting" it for some reason, let me know in the comments because this sounds like some kind of racial/heritage thing.
Now, if Sen. Messiah Barack knew the first thing about Sen. Webb that he is known for the book "Born Fighting" which is about the Scots-Irish and their warrior impact on the United States. Sen. Webb is. . .SCOTS-IRISH! What a shock! I mean, the new leader, Sen. Messiah Barack now has a real American hero, Sen. Webb as a German?!
Maybe what Sen. Messiah Barack was really trying to say is that because he was in the military, why he must have been German. You know, like all those crazy Germans back in the old country oh say back in the mid 1930s to around, hmm, maybe about 1945. Is that what our new secular messiah meant?
Why did the man who says his whole campaign is to transcend race feel the need to bring up, incorrectly, the national heritage of an out-of-the-box supporter?
Maybe he thinks only Germans are members of the armed forces. And if it not someone who is German, say a black man or woman, then they must have a Germanic surname. You know, from all the German slaveholders.
Once again, our new flavor of the moment, Sen. Messiah Barack opens mouth, inserts foot. Yet, because he is who he is, it is OK. You know, he just might be tired. As if being president would not be tiring enough.
I think it is going to be a very funny summer every time Sen. Messiah Barack goes off the teleprompter!
HT: Amanda Carpenter @ Townhall.com
Thursday, June 05, 2008
Oh, it must be where the other apologies are. In the ether.
In reality, Mr. Murtha has never apologized for his reckless accusation that the marine corps covered up a mass killing by marines and army soldiers in Haditha. Mr. Murtha made the scurrilous accusations in justifying his then new-found opposition to the war in the Iraq theatre in the War Against Islamofacsist Terror.
And when a left-winger needs to make a point, the truth can not and will not get in the way.
As the linked article points out there are two more that now have to go through the motions, but like First Lt. Grayson, they will be exonerated. And the foul-mouthed Mr. Murtha will probably win another term in the House of Representative. The people of Pennsylvania do deserve better.