For those who buy into polls that show the inevitability of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani as the Republican standard bearer for president in 2008, the first quarter fund-raising numbers should put a lot of cold water on that.
The numbers show that former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney leads the pack with $23,000,000 raised, and all for the primary season. Coming in second is Rudy Giuliani with $15,000,000. Sen. John McCain has not, as of this, released his numbers. But, Mr. Romney is numero uno-number one!
So, this is from a candidate with some polls showing him in single-digits? Well, yes.
I think this shows that the Republican party, like the probability the Democrats will, have a first time candidate for president. The GOP will have possibly a Mormon at top of the ticket and the Dems may have a woman or black in the top spot.
It will be interesting indeed.
Monday, April 02, 2007
Romney Tops In Cash
For those who buy into polls that show the inevitability of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani as the Republican standard bearer for president in 2008, the first quarter fund-raising numbers should put a lot of cold water on that.
The numbers show that former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney leads the pack with $23,000,000 raised, and all for the primary season. Coming in second is Rudy Giuliani with $15,000,000. Sen. John McCain has not, as of this, released his numbers. But, Mr. Romney is numero uno-number one!
So, this is from a candidate with some polls showing him in single-digits? Well, yes.
I think this shows that the Republican party, like the probability the Democrats will, have a first time candidate for president. The GOP will have possibly a Mormon at top of the ticket and the Dems may have a woman or black in the top spot.
It will be interesting indeed.
The numbers show that former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney leads the pack with $23,000,000 raised, and all for the primary season. Coming in second is Rudy Giuliani with $15,000,000. Sen. John McCain has not, as of this, released his numbers. But, Mr. Romney is numero uno-number one!
So, this is from a candidate with some polls showing him in single-digits? Well, yes.
I think this shows that the Republican party, like the probability the Democrats will, have a first time candidate for president. The GOP will have possibly a Mormon at top of the ticket and the Dems may have a woman or black in the top spot.
It will be interesting indeed.
Saturday, March 31, 2007
The Best Time Of The Year
Ah, spring. The flowers are blooming, the weather is getting warmer, unless you are in Southern California as I am and it is already fire season, and it is time for...BASEBALL!
Yes, baseball, the American sport. Some call it a pastime, others, as myself, call it a passion.
I must confess. Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast does not get it. We will go to a couple a games during the long, glorious season, but I think she really goes for the food. But, no hot dogs, or Dodger Dogs for her. So un-American!
But, anyway, how can one not get excited about this time of year. I mean, the hockey playoffs begin soon, and every one of the 30 major league baseball teams think that they have a real shot at making and winning the World Series. In a month though, reality will set in and some teams will realize that it is but a dream. Some, like last years Detroit Tigers can ride it all the way to the big dance. But, then a team like the St. Louis Cardinals will peak at the right time and end the dream of a team like the Detroit Tigers. But, at this point, hope springs eternal for all.
If you do not know, I am a die-hard Los Angeles Dodger fan. Got that from my old man, who grew up in Brooklyn. When he passed on in 1986,we found out that he was born in...THE BRONX! Enemy country! Home of the hated this day and all days, the New York Yankees! EECCKK! Unfortunately, I can not pass that love and passion on to my stepson as he is not even a sports fan.
But, as I do every year, I really believe that this is the year that the Dodgers will get back to where they belong, in the World Series. I don't care who they play, but it would be nice to vanquish the hated Yankees. It would also be nice to have a Freeway Series with the Anaheim Angels that counts and is not played in the exhibition and regular season.
Oh, I know, everyone else says that the Angels are the, so hard to even type this, Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. But, I will NEVER refer to them as such. They left Los Angeles in 1966 and became the California Angels and later the Anaheim Angels. As such, they are always refered on this blog as the ANAHEIM Angels!
I also like the Angels as well, but there is just something about being a Dodger fan that is so different. Maybe it is because they are in the National League. After all, the National league is the original major league. Maybe it is because when they were in Brooklyn, they were always playing the Yankees in the World Series and until 1955, always losing. Maybe it is a lot of reasons, but the Dodgers are my number one team and the Angels second.
But you see, that is why it is the best time of the year. Now everyone starts off even and it is the beginning of six months of living and dying by what your favorite team or teams do.
This is the best time of the year!
Yes, baseball, the American sport. Some call it a pastime, others, as myself, call it a passion.
I must confess. Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast does not get it. We will go to a couple a games during the long, glorious season, but I think she really goes for the food. But, no hot dogs, or Dodger Dogs for her. So un-American!
But, anyway, how can one not get excited about this time of year. I mean, the hockey playoffs begin soon, and every one of the 30 major league baseball teams think that they have a real shot at making and winning the World Series. In a month though, reality will set in and some teams will realize that it is but a dream. Some, like last years Detroit Tigers can ride it all the way to the big dance. But, then a team like the St. Louis Cardinals will peak at the right time and end the dream of a team like the Detroit Tigers. But, at this point, hope springs eternal for all.
If you do not know, I am a die-hard Los Angeles Dodger fan. Got that from my old man, who grew up in Brooklyn. When he passed on in 1986,we found out that he was born in...THE BRONX! Enemy country! Home of the hated this day and all days, the New York Yankees! EECCKK! Unfortunately, I can not pass that love and passion on to my stepson as he is not even a sports fan.
But, as I do every year, I really believe that this is the year that the Dodgers will get back to where they belong, in the World Series. I don't care who they play, but it would be nice to vanquish the hated Yankees. It would also be nice to have a Freeway Series with the Anaheim Angels that counts and is not played in the exhibition and regular season.
Oh, I know, everyone else says that the Angels are the, so hard to even type this, Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. But, I will NEVER refer to them as such. They left Los Angeles in 1966 and became the California Angels and later the Anaheim Angels. As such, they are always refered on this blog as the ANAHEIM Angels!
I also like the Angels as well, but there is just something about being a Dodger fan that is so different. Maybe it is because they are in the National League. After all, the National league is the original major league. Maybe it is because when they were in Brooklyn, they were always playing the Yankees in the World Series and until 1955, always losing. Maybe it is a lot of reasons, but the Dodgers are my number one team and the Angels second.
But you see, that is why it is the best time of the year. Now everyone starts off even and it is the beginning of six months of living and dying by what your favorite team or teams do.
This is the best time of the year!
Amatuer Theology
I want to start off by writing that I am NOT a theologian. I am just a Christian believer like so many of you. So, if you have any criticism of what you about to read, just remember to come back to this disclaimer.
I have wondered a lot lately about the way that many Christians and non-Christians get worked up over the story of our beginning in Genesis.
Some believe that all the miracles of our beginning God did in six, 24-hour days and rested on the seventh day. Some say that it could not have happened in any of the way that the Genesis story happened because of science disproving that and finding out about such things as dinosaurs and the like. Some use the story to say we are only 6,000 years old at most. Some go back to science to say that we are billions and billions of years old.
My question is simple. Is the time frame that important? I do not think so.
Here is my unqualified take on it.
It is not how long it took God to create the world but what is important is the way that he did it. That is what I believe is important about the first 31 verses of the first story of the Holy Bible. It is the story about how God took the emptiness that was the world and had a plan to make something beautiful. It is about the light and the dark. Water and land. Food and plants. Animals and those in his image, human beings.
So, why is it so important to worry about the time frame?
To some, particularly fundamentalist and some evangelical Christians, because the word day is used and every word is literal, then it must have been six, 24-hour days and the seventh day is for rest. To the very liberal, it is just a fable, not to even be taken but with even a grain of salt. So, that leaves where I am, right in the middle of this.
I do not feel it is important to worry about the exact time details. It is the how the world began by God. And that I can believe.
Some would ask what about the cavemen and dinosaurs and all of that. It is not important. It is important to understand this about God. He had a plan and always has a plan. The story of our creation is the explanation that God thinks we should know for now. When he wants to reveal more, he will.
So, all of this is meant to have another position between two very extreme points of view on the creation story. It is not meant to be a final word, just something to think about.
I have wondered a lot lately about the way that many Christians and non-Christians get worked up over the story of our beginning in Genesis.
Some believe that all the miracles of our beginning God did in six, 24-hour days and rested on the seventh day. Some say that it could not have happened in any of the way that the Genesis story happened because of science disproving that and finding out about such things as dinosaurs and the like. Some use the story to say we are only 6,000 years old at most. Some go back to science to say that we are billions and billions of years old.
My question is simple. Is the time frame that important? I do not think so.
Here is my unqualified take on it.
It is not how long it took God to create the world but what is important is the way that he did it. That is what I believe is important about the first 31 verses of the first story of the Holy Bible. It is the story about how God took the emptiness that was the world and had a plan to make something beautiful. It is about the light and the dark. Water and land. Food and plants. Animals and those in his image, human beings.
So, why is it so important to worry about the time frame?
To some, particularly fundamentalist and some evangelical Christians, because the word day is used and every word is literal, then it must have been six, 24-hour days and the seventh day is for rest. To the very liberal, it is just a fable, not to even be taken but with even a grain of salt. So, that leaves where I am, right in the middle of this.
I do not feel it is important to worry about the exact time details. It is the how the world began by God. And that I can believe.
Some would ask what about the cavemen and dinosaurs and all of that. It is not important. It is important to understand this about God. He had a plan and always has a plan. The story of our creation is the explanation that God thinks we should know for now. When he wants to reveal more, he will.
So, all of this is meant to have another position between two very extreme points of view on the creation story. It is not meant to be a final word, just something to think about.
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Iraq Is One Theatre In The War Against Terror
I rarely read anywhere that Iraq is not a singular war that the United States is fighting. But, Victor Davis Hanson hits it right on the head in his latest column http://nationalreview.com.
The DDBMSM for some reason does not get that, like World War II, there are many places where the enemy is. Iraq is but one nation. We know that al-Queda is operating out of Pakistan, but we need a stable government there, even if it is not doing all it can to root out the foreign fighters in its territory. The alternative is worse. Saudi Arabia is in the same situation. We can let the government go to hell, but what is the alternative?
Read this to get a better idea of what the overall War Against Terror is about. Nobody can get to the nub of it better than Mr. Hanson.
The DDBMSM for some reason does not get that, like World War II, there are many places where the enemy is. Iraq is but one nation. We know that al-Queda is operating out of Pakistan, but we need a stable government there, even if it is not doing all it can to root out the foreign fighters in its territory. The alternative is worse. Saudi Arabia is in the same situation. We can let the government go to hell, but what is the alternative?
Read this to get a better idea of what the overall War Against Terror is about. Nobody can get to the nub of it better than Mr. Hanson.
Democrat Congress Not Doing Much Better In Public's Eyes
We were promised by the Democrats that when they took back congress, things would be different.
WRONG!
According to Real Clear Politics http://realclearpolitics.com cumulative polling data on congress the public's positive/negative is 30.5% positive, 58.5% negative. The best rating that the Democrat congress got was a 43% in the ABC/Washington Post poll taken from January 16-19, 2007. In the latest poll from Fox News taken March 27-28, 2007, the best congress can do is a 30% positive, 58% negative. That is about the Real Clear Politics poll average.
So, what happened? How come congress' ratings are not through the roof now that they are taking on President Bush and the administration? I mean there is not a subpoena that congress will not throw out willy nilly! And the tone, well it is wonderful. I mean, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Cal) could only advise the president to "calm down" as he has threatened to veto the military appropriation bill that sets a time line for combat troops to leave the Iraq theatre in the War Against Terror.
I think the reason is clear why congress has such low ratings.
The public wanted congress to really do some work-not bash Mr Bush-and to work in a cooperative manner. I mean, President Bush has constantly put forth an olive branch only to have it snatched away by Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada).
This is what was warned during the mid-term election campaign season. Not that Republicans did such a wonderful job during the last congressional term. Because of that, they got their hats handed to them.
So, will all of this eventually lead to congress impeaching President Bush? I mean, isn't that something that the public wants? Everything we hear from the Democrats is that they are only trying to bring the troops home because that is what the American people voted for when they voted them to take control of congress? Are the Dems not looking for something they can get President Bush on?
I think if they want to go for negative positive/negative ratings, they should keep going. People may wish for the good old days when things got done when the Republicans ran congress!
WRONG!
According to Real Clear Politics http://realclearpolitics.com cumulative polling data on congress the public's positive/negative is 30.5% positive, 58.5% negative. The best rating that the Democrat congress got was a 43% in the ABC/Washington Post poll taken from January 16-19, 2007. In the latest poll from Fox News taken March 27-28, 2007, the best congress can do is a 30% positive, 58% negative. That is about the Real Clear Politics poll average.
So, what happened? How come congress' ratings are not through the roof now that they are taking on President Bush and the administration? I mean there is not a subpoena that congress will not throw out willy nilly! And the tone, well it is wonderful. I mean, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Cal) could only advise the president to "calm down" as he has threatened to veto the military appropriation bill that sets a time line for combat troops to leave the Iraq theatre in the War Against Terror.
I think the reason is clear why congress has such low ratings.
The public wanted congress to really do some work-not bash Mr Bush-and to work in a cooperative manner. I mean, President Bush has constantly put forth an olive branch only to have it snatched away by Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada).
This is what was warned during the mid-term election campaign season. Not that Republicans did such a wonderful job during the last congressional term. Because of that, they got their hats handed to them.
So, will all of this eventually lead to congress impeaching President Bush? I mean, isn't that something that the public wants? Everything we hear from the Democrats is that they are only trying to bring the troops home because that is what the American people voted for when they voted them to take control of congress? Are the Dems not looking for something they can get President Bush on?
I think if they want to go for negative positive/negative ratings, they should keep going. People may wish for the good old days when things got done when the Republicans ran congress!
Tony Dungy, Bigot
Tony Dungy, the coach of the Super Bowl winning Indianapolis Colts is a practicing and devout Christian. A wonderful thing, right? According to a Washington Post blogger, not when you support a Christian organization that opposes same-sex marriage.
Today on the Rush Limbaugh website http://rushlimbaugh.com he has the link to the Post blogger that says, point blank, that Mr. Dungy is a bigot for supporting an organization that opposes same-sex marriage. I do not believe that to be true. I think, like so many Christians, Mr. Dungy believes that the sexual actions of homosexuality is what is wrong, not the person.
For the blogger's information, this is an issue that has not only divided much of Christendom but whole denominations. The Post's blogger, Emil Steinner, may not realize that. Mr. Dungy represents what can be said to be the traditional view of sexual relations. That it should only be between and man and woman, married at that. To people like Mr. Steinner, that may be quaint and old-fashioned, but it is something that many Americans believe in, Christian or not.
It is an issue that threatens to tear apart my Christian denomination, the Episcopal Church.
So, maybe Mr Steinner should not shoot from the typewriter key and ask if what Mr. Dungy believes is not what the majority of Americans believe. If it is, it is up to people like Mr. Steinner to educate Americans as to why that is wrong, not character assassinate good, decent men like Tony Dungy.
I think it took a while for the DDBMSM to go after Mr. Dungy for being a Christian.
Today on the Rush Limbaugh website http://rushlimbaugh.com he has the link to the Post blogger that says, point blank, that Mr. Dungy is a bigot for supporting an organization that opposes same-sex marriage. I do not believe that to be true. I think, like so many Christians, Mr. Dungy believes that the sexual actions of homosexuality is what is wrong, not the person.
For the blogger's information, this is an issue that has not only divided much of Christendom but whole denominations. The Post's blogger, Emil Steinner, may not realize that. Mr. Dungy represents what can be said to be the traditional view of sexual relations. That it should only be between and man and woman, married at that. To people like Mr. Steinner, that may be quaint and old-fashioned, but it is something that many Americans believe in, Christian or not.
It is an issue that threatens to tear apart my Christian denomination, the Episcopal Church.
So, maybe Mr Steinner should not shoot from the typewriter key and ask if what Mr. Dungy believes is not what the majority of Americans believe. If it is, it is up to people like Mr. Steinner to educate Americans as to why that is wrong, not character assassinate good, decent men like Tony Dungy.
I think it took a while for the DDBMSM to go after Mr. Dungy for being a Christian.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Rising GOP Star
Yesterday in the senate, South Dakota Sen. John Thune showed why he is a rising star in the Republican party in support to strike the defeatist language the senate passed.
Sen. Thune said one cogent thing. That if we follow the Democrat logic, when they say that we should really be fighting more in Afghanistan, because there is where Osama bin Laden is, in reality if we really want to take the fight to those who attacked us on 9/11, we should go to war with Saudi Arabia for the majority of the hijackers where from there, not Afghanistan or Iraq. Oh, and bin Laden is from, you guessed it, Saudi Arabia.
There was more, but the thrust is that what the Democrats want is this to be in all ways to their advantage. But, while Americans may be rightfully frustrated with the lack of success in quelling the violence in Iraq, we do not want to leave in sure defeat.
If we follow the Democrat line to its final analysis, there is no real War Against Terror and we should come home and solve the "problems" we have here in the United States.
That is not a real solution. But it appears that the Democrats do not have a real solution except to oppose President Bush at every turn and especially in the War Against Terror.
But, as long as there are strong senators like John Thune, they will not be able to get away with it.
Sen. Thune said one cogent thing. That if we follow the Democrat logic, when they say that we should really be fighting more in Afghanistan, because there is where Osama bin Laden is, in reality if we really want to take the fight to those who attacked us on 9/11, we should go to war with Saudi Arabia for the majority of the hijackers where from there, not Afghanistan or Iraq. Oh, and bin Laden is from, you guessed it, Saudi Arabia.
There was more, but the thrust is that what the Democrats want is this to be in all ways to their advantage. But, while Americans may be rightfully frustrated with the lack of success in quelling the violence in Iraq, we do not want to leave in sure defeat.
If we follow the Democrat line to its final analysis, there is no real War Against Terror and we should come home and solve the "problems" we have here in the United States.
That is not a real solution. But it appears that the Democrats do not have a real solution except to oppose President Bush at every turn and especially in the War Against Terror.
But, as long as there are strong senators like John Thune, they will not be able to get away with it.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
Moral Clarity On Iraq
There is not many issues that I would agree with Sen. Joe Lieberman (ID-Conn), but his strong support for the Iraq surge can not be more clear than what he said today on the senate floor. http://corner.nationalreview.com has the synopses.
Sen. Lieberman is a man of conscience. He has been that way since the United States entered into the Iraq theatre on the War Against Terror. He has not changed his basic position. Unlike Sen. Hilary Clinton, who I believe is on the 12th position on the troop surge, what to do with the troops and when they will "come home." For whatever reason other than his belief that the United States would be committing an immoral act leaving before the job is done, Sen. Lieberman nearly lost his seat in last year's mid term election.
The tragedy is that there are not more senators like Mr. Lieberman who can stand on principle. We need more Sen. Liebermans and less Sen. Clintons.
Sen. Lieberman is a man of conscience. He has been that way since the United States entered into the Iraq theatre on the War Against Terror. He has not changed his basic position. Unlike Sen. Hilary Clinton, who I believe is on the 12th position on the troop surge, what to do with the troops and when they will "come home." For whatever reason other than his belief that the United States would be committing an immoral act leaving before the job is done, Sen. Lieberman nearly lost his seat in last year's mid term election.
The tragedy is that there are not more senators like Mr. Lieberman who can stand on principle. We need more Sen. Liebermans and less Sen. Clintons.
For All Those Who Believe In Euthanasia
This piece in the Los Angeles Daily News http://dailynews.com/bridgetjohnson/ci_5527027 is required reading for those who favor euthanasia as is practiced in The Netherlands and here in Oregon.
The radicals in the California legislature would like to extend this "right" here in California.
Obviously, I do not favor so-called "right to die" type legislation.
The problem is not the dignity that one would want in a terminal illness but how one may not want to take that way out. In The Netherlands, you need little if any reason to off oneself. And worse, you can be 13 years old to say you can end it all.
Dying with dignity, in my estimation, is not wanting to be given extraordinary measures to save one's life. In other words, one has six months to live. They have been following the doctor's orders and what to do, it is the six month and the condition is worsening. One falls into a coma, the person says do nothing to bring me out of it. The person dies peacefully and with dignity.
I don't think using extraordinary means to end one's life counts as dignity. It lowers us to an animal being taken to the vet and given the shot of death. We are not animals. We know the difference between making one's wishes known and one taking a shot of death.
I hope that Gov. Arnold does not sign this legislation if it ever reaches his desk.
The radicals in the California legislature would like to extend this "right" here in California.
Obviously, I do not favor so-called "right to die" type legislation.
The problem is not the dignity that one would want in a terminal illness but how one may not want to take that way out. In The Netherlands, you need little if any reason to off oneself. And worse, you can be 13 years old to say you can end it all.
Dying with dignity, in my estimation, is not wanting to be given extraordinary measures to save one's life. In other words, one has six months to live. They have been following the doctor's orders and what to do, it is the six month and the condition is worsening. One falls into a coma, the person says do nothing to bring me out of it. The person dies peacefully and with dignity.
I don't think using extraordinary means to end one's life counts as dignity. It lowers us to an animal being taken to the vet and given the shot of death. We are not animals. We know the difference between making one's wishes known and one taking a shot of death.
I hope that Gov. Arnold does not sign this legislation if it ever reaches his desk.
Democrats+Senate Vote On Iraq=Defeat
Today, the senate by a vote of 50-48 passed a date certain pull out of all United States troops from Iraq. Of course, Sen. Joe Lieberman (ID-Conn.) voted with the Republicans as did Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.). The GOP lost Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) and Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.). In a sense no surprises. But, the GOP also lost Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) and that is the difference.
It is a disgrace. We are showing that the surge is working in Iraq as overall violence is decreasing. Also, there appear to be serious rifts withing the Sunni forces and they are turning against the Al-Queda in Iraq. That is good for the United States and its allies and the Iraqi government.
But, no matter to the Dems, who want to get out so they will not have to deal with this next year during an election year. Why, none other than Sen. Hilary Clinton (D-New York) said that she resents President Bush for the possibility of this being on her if she should become the next president. Hmm, as noted in an earlier posting, maybe President Bush should resent former President Clinton's inaction that precipitated 9/11 in the first place.
War is a tough business, especially when it is both a hot and cold war. The bad thing about this is that one party, the Democrats, want it all to go away, no matter what. The other party, the Republicans, realize that there is a war and the need to fight it.
Votes like we had today show that to be true, and if the Dems should win the White House next year and there is another 9/11 scale attack, they will have no one to blame but themselves for the lack of will to fight and win.
It is a disgrace. We are showing that the surge is working in Iraq as overall violence is decreasing. Also, there appear to be serious rifts withing the Sunni forces and they are turning against the Al-Queda in Iraq. That is good for the United States and its allies and the Iraqi government.
But, no matter to the Dems, who want to get out so they will not have to deal with this next year during an election year. Why, none other than Sen. Hilary Clinton (D-New York) said that she resents President Bush for the possibility of this being on her if she should become the next president. Hmm, as noted in an earlier posting, maybe President Bush should resent former President Clinton's inaction that precipitated 9/11 in the first place.
War is a tough business, especially when it is both a hot and cold war. The bad thing about this is that one party, the Democrats, want it all to go away, no matter what. The other party, the Republicans, realize that there is a war and the need to fight it.
Votes like we had today show that to be true, and if the Dems should win the White House next year and there is another 9/11 scale attack, they will have no one to blame but themselves for the lack of will to fight and win.
Pray For Tony Snow
White House press spokesman Tony Snow found out today that his colon cancer has reoccurred and spread to his liver. Mr. Snow is looking into all the options and that will include chemotherapy. We all wish him Godspeed and that he will recover. He, as does Elizabeth Edwards, the right and positive attitude. This is where our partisan politics ends and where we hope all will be well for both.
Saturday, March 24, 2007
More On The "Death Of Conservatism"
There is an excellent article in the Weekly Standard http://weeklystandard.com by Noemie Emery on the latest Time magazine folly into describing the so-called death of conservatism.
Remember that cover with former President Reagan on the cover, tear streaming down his right cheek? The caption reads, "How The Right Went Wrong."
Many of those who may read this may be too young to remember, but Mr. Reagan was pilloried day after day, night after night on the big three network news programs. Oh, that is when people watched them. It was no better on CNN, then the only cable news network. Trashing went on in the pages of Time, Newsweek and to a lesser extent, US News and World Report. There was no big talk radio to speak of. No alternative media like there is today.
The reality is that the DBDMSM is trying to kill conservatism every chance they get. And more people are tuning out. So, what you may get in polling data is answers from people who may still depend on one of the old media sources for their information. Hence, that maybe why Rudy Giuliani is leading in many polls. But, back to the DBDMSM attack.
Emery points out article upon article describing all that is wrong with Mr. Reagan and the administration. Note, not one will be a conservative or even close.
Read Miss Emery's piece and I believe that it is something that should buck every conservative up and get us going to find the best candidate in '08
Remember that cover with former President Reagan on the cover, tear streaming down his right cheek? The caption reads, "How The Right Went Wrong."
Many of those who may read this may be too young to remember, but Mr. Reagan was pilloried day after day, night after night on the big three network news programs. Oh, that is when people watched them. It was no better on CNN, then the only cable news network. Trashing went on in the pages of Time, Newsweek and to a lesser extent, US News and World Report. There was no big talk radio to speak of. No alternative media like there is today.
The reality is that the DBDMSM is trying to kill conservatism every chance they get. And more people are tuning out. So, what you may get in polling data is answers from people who may still depend on one of the old media sources for their information. Hence, that maybe why Rudy Giuliani is leading in many polls. But, back to the DBDMSM attack.
Emery points out article upon article describing all that is wrong with Mr. Reagan and the administration. Note, not one will be a conservative or even close.
Read Miss Emery's piece and I believe that it is something that should buck every conservative up and get us going to find the best candidate in '08
Friday, March 23, 2007
The Death Of Conservatism-Again!
According to a recent Pew Research poll, more Americans identify themselves as Democrats than Republicans and that some of the issues that Republicans have ran on are now favoring the Democrats and the left. I am not overly surprised that, at this point more Americans lean towards the Democrats. Since there is no strong, take no prisoner offensive touting conservatism, the socialists see an opening. But, we have been led down this road before only to have conservatism and the Republicans ride into some power.
In the late 1970's, we were told that George H. W. Bush, a center right Republican would be the savior of the GOP. Ronald Reagan was not even on the radar of many of the pundit class. They figured he got beat in 1976 and would just continue doing radio commentaries. Hmm, some one very Republican and conservative is also doing radio commentaries... I believe that would be former Sen. Fred Thompson (R-Tenn). Then, Mr. Reagan announced he would run and he not only won the Republican nomination but trounced one President Jimmy Carter. Mr. Carter has just gotten more bitter since then.
When Gov. Bill Clinton won the presidency in 1992. we were told by the pundit class that it surely was the end of conservatism. But, two years later under the discipline of a message and a messenger in Newt Gingrich, conservatives and the GOP did something not seen in many of our lifetimes. They took control of both houses of Congress. Of course we were told that it was only temporary. It took 12 years and a growingly unpopular war in Iraq to bring to Dems back by the slimmest of majorities.
So, what does all this have to do with the Pew poll?
It means that Pew is definitely skewing the questions to produce the results that it wants. We have to look at the fact the Democrats have only controlled congress since January and, with today's slim vote to defeat in the House, there has been no real time to gauge how the Dems are really doing. One fact also remains. In poll after poll, when GOPer's Rudy Guiliani and John McCain are matched against Hilary Clinton and or Barack Obama, Messers Guiliani & McCain are ahead consistently. If the United States is taking a decided left turn, then Clinton and Obama and any other Democrat should be far ahead at this point.
I think that what we are seeing is Bush fatigue. A lot of independent voters are tired of the war in the Iraq theatre, maybe even the War Against Terror itself. These voters see anything Bush and just don't feel all that wonderful.
But, that does not mean that there is this rush to the left.
Can one person, the GOP presidential standard bearer change that? Yes.
That is why this poll is pointless. We should be taking these polls six months from now and see if we get the same results. I have a feeling we won't.
What we need is someone not afraid to talk straight to the American people about a conservative vision for America.
There is a certain radio commentator who seems to be leading that way. We shall see.
In the late 1970's, we were told that George H. W. Bush, a center right Republican would be the savior of the GOP. Ronald Reagan was not even on the radar of many of the pundit class. They figured he got beat in 1976 and would just continue doing radio commentaries. Hmm, some one very Republican and conservative is also doing radio commentaries... I believe that would be former Sen. Fred Thompson (R-Tenn). Then, Mr. Reagan announced he would run and he not only won the Republican nomination but trounced one President Jimmy Carter. Mr. Carter has just gotten more bitter since then.
When Gov. Bill Clinton won the presidency in 1992. we were told by the pundit class that it surely was the end of conservatism. But, two years later under the discipline of a message and a messenger in Newt Gingrich, conservatives and the GOP did something not seen in many of our lifetimes. They took control of both houses of Congress. Of course we were told that it was only temporary. It took 12 years and a growingly unpopular war in Iraq to bring to Dems back by the slimmest of majorities.
So, what does all this have to do with the Pew poll?
It means that Pew is definitely skewing the questions to produce the results that it wants. We have to look at the fact the Democrats have only controlled congress since January and, with today's slim vote to defeat in the House, there has been no real time to gauge how the Dems are really doing. One fact also remains. In poll after poll, when GOPer's Rudy Guiliani and John McCain are matched against Hilary Clinton and or Barack Obama, Messers Guiliani & McCain are ahead consistently. If the United States is taking a decided left turn, then Clinton and Obama and any other Democrat should be far ahead at this point.
I think that what we are seeing is Bush fatigue. A lot of independent voters are tired of the war in the Iraq theatre, maybe even the War Against Terror itself. These voters see anything Bush and just don't feel all that wonderful.
But, that does not mean that there is this rush to the left.
Can one person, the GOP presidential standard bearer change that? Yes.
That is why this poll is pointless. We should be taking these polls six months from now and see if we get the same results. I have a feeling we won't.
What we need is someone not afraid to talk straight to the American people about a conservative vision for America.
There is a certain radio commentator who seems to be leading that way. We shall see.
Two Republicans That Need To Be Defeated In 2008
Walter Jones and Wayne Gilcrest. Remember those two names.
They are the two Republican congressman who joined the 218 majority of otherwise Democrats to vote for defeat in Iraq by setting a date certain withdrawal and setting knowingly ridiculous benchmarks.
No matter as President Bush vowed to veto the bill and judging by the bare majority, there will be no override.
At least 14 Democrats voted against the bill and they are brave in comparison the two above mentioned weasels.
Walter Jones is in North Carolina and Wayne Gilcrest is in Maryland. They need strong primary challengers to defeat them and win for victory in Iraq. See if there is any action in that regard at Victory Caucus http://victorycaucus.com. Give some ideas of strong, Iraq veteran potential candidates.
It is one thing to have been against the war from the beginning, but going against it when our troops need it the most, that is reprehensible.
Two weasels who need to lose next year-Walter Jones and Wayne Gilcrest-remember those names!
They are the two Republican congressman who joined the 218 majority of otherwise Democrats to vote for defeat in Iraq by setting a date certain withdrawal and setting knowingly ridiculous benchmarks.
No matter as President Bush vowed to veto the bill and judging by the bare majority, there will be no override.
At least 14 Democrats voted against the bill and they are brave in comparison the two above mentioned weasels.
Walter Jones is in North Carolina and Wayne Gilcrest is in Maryland. They need strong primary challengers to defeat them and win for victory in Iraq. See if there is any action in that regard at Victory Caucus http://victorycaucus.com. Give some ideas of strong, Iraq veteran potential candidates.
It is one thing to have been against the war from the beginning, but going against it when our troops need it the most, that is reprehensible.
Two weasels who need to lose next year-Walter Jones and Wayne Gilcrest-remember those names!
CORRECTION
Oops! I got the first name of the Texas United States attorney wrong. It is JOHNNY, not EDDIE Sutton. Sometimes in my zeal to get the information out, I get a little ahead of myself. Thanks to the person who left a comment on "They Forgot to Fire An Attorney" However, when you do leave a comment, please keep it clean. I am as frustrated as that person, but we should not lower ourselves to the level of those on the left. But, thank you for reading and leaving a comment!
Thursday, March 22, 2007
They Forgot To Fire One U.S. Attorney
In the hubbub over the Bush administration firing of the eight United States attorneys, one name was missing. The over zealous Eddie Sutton from Texas.
While he is apparently following the policy of waiting for an illegal alien to have a sixth strike before prosecuting, he has no problem going after United States Border Control agents doing their job.
You don't know who Mr. Sutton is? He is the United States attorney who prosecuted to the absolute fullest extent of the law border agents Jose Compean and Ignacio Ramos. They were trying to capture an fleeing illegal alien drug smuggler when they shot him in the buttocks. Some say that the suspect was already in Mexico when when the shots hit him.
Well, Mr Sutton, while really busy looking to prosecute those six-strikers, found that these agents did not follow procedures fully to the letter of the law. What they did was so heinous that he gave the suspect FULL immunity and used him to testify against the two agents, who are Hispanic Americans. The suspect gets off to smuggle drugs over the border while the two agents are found guilty and sent to prison almost as fast as in an episode of Law and Order. While in prison, appealing his case, Mr. Ramos was put in the general population and beaten severely by, no doubt, illegal alien prisoners that you and I, the American taxpayer, are paying to house rather than ship back to Mexico or where ever they are from.
Mr. Sutton also used this prosucatiorial tactic on a Texas border sheriff deputy.
There are a lot of unanswered questions on the case of agents Compean and Ramos that the trial transcript could answer, but there is no question that something is wrong with the United States attorney's office here and I call for Attorney General Gonzales to fire Eddie Sutton.
Oh, but that might get Mr. Gonzales in trouble with congress, the media, et al.
While he is apparently following the policy of waiting for an illegal alien to have a sixth strike before prosecuting, he has no problem going after United States Border Control agents doing their job.
You don't know who Mr. Sutton is? He is the United States attorney who prosecuted to the absolute fullest extent of the law border agents Jose Compean and Ignacio Ramos. They were trying to capture an fleeing illegal alien drug smuggler when they shot him in the buttocks. Some say that the suspect was already in Mexico when when the shots hit him.
Well, Mr Sutton, while really busy looking to prosecute those six-strikers, found that these agents did not follow procedures fully to the letter of the law. What they did was so heinous that he gave the suspect FULL immunity and used him to testify against the two agents, who are Hispanic Americans. The suspect gets off to smuggle drugs over the border while the two agents are found guilty and sent to prison almost as fast as in an episode of Law and Order. While in prison, appealing his case, Mr. Ramos was put in the general population and beaten severely by, no doubt, illegal alien prisoners that you and I, the American taxpayer, are paying to house rather than ship back to Mexico or where ever they are from.
Mr. Sutton also used this prosucatiorial tactic on a Texas border sheriff deputy.
There are a lot of unanswered questions on the case of agents Compean and Ramos that the trial transcript could answer, but there is no question that something is wrong with the United States attorney's office here and I call for Attorney General Gonzales to fire Eddie Sutton.
Oh, but that might get Mr. Gonzales in trouble with congress, the media, et al.
One Smart European
Looking at the Drudge Report, I stumbled on this story from the London Daily Telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk that is stunning in its honesty about the political correctness that threatens Europe as here in the United States.
Jose Manuel Barroso, the European Commission president from Portugal said the following:
"We should be aware of people who, sometimes for good reasons, try to establish what I call private moral codes, for this or that, be it climate change, religious behavior or any kind of social behavior."
While I could take issue with the example of religious behavior, the point is this man is not some right winger from under a rock. Mr. Barroso was a Maoist student leader leading the overthrow of the Portuguese dictatorship. Only when he grew up and Portugal became a democracy did he realize the folly of left wing political correctness.
Too bad that the organization he is president of is leading Europe down the path of destruction from within.
Jose Manuel Barroso, the European Commission president from Portugal said the following:
"We should be aware of people who, sometimes for good reasons, try to establish what I call private moral codes, for this or that, be it climate change, religious behavior or any kind of social behavior."
While I could take issue with the example of religious behavior, the point is this man is not some right winger from under a rock. Mr. Barroso was a Maoist student leader leading the overthrow of the Portuguese dictatorship. Only when he grew up and Portugal became a democracy did he realize the folly of left wing political correctness.
Too bad that the organization he is president of is leading Europe down the path of destruction from within.
Can The Dems Govern?
I am perplexed. I thought that when the Democrats took control of congress, they were going to do things differently. I guess I missed the memo on that by different, they meant weaselly ways to end the war in the Iraq theatre of the War Against Terror, passing legislation that they know President Bush will finally veto, and throwing out subpoenas faster than I take out the trash at home.
Lets take the latter first.
This non-issue about the firing of the eight United States attorneys by the justice department is trying as hard as they can to make a mountain out of a molehill. Here it is in a nutshell. The president has the right to hire and fire the 93 attorneys. They serve at the pleasure of the president. Period. They can be doing whatever and the president can say thank you for your service, and goodbye. If the Democrats want to go down this road, they better hope that they do not win the presidency while the Republicans are in control of congress for it will be a tit for tat if they keep pursuing this. It may seem that the timing was bad, but this is one of those presidential prerogatives that the Democrats will just have to live with. But, alas, they will not and this attempt to embarrass the Bush administration will go on.
Secondly, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) went six-for-six in passing legislation in the first "100" hours that the majority will never make it out of the senate. The only one that has a chance, the increase in the minimum wage, will only make it after Republican senators put in tax breaks for small businesses to offset the forcible wage hike. There is really no compromise on the Democrat's part so that they can bring some Republicans along and put some pressure on President Bush. But, they do have time to host a pointless hearing featuring former Vice-President Al Gore ranting about the earth having a fever.
Most grievously, the Dems are trying to have it all ways on the Iraq theatre in the War Against Terror. They ran on ending the war in Iraq and can by simply cutting off funding. But, because they don't want to be seen as being against the troops, they will simply adopt what has been the slow-bleed strategy of setting up phony benchmarks that will be impossible to keep. At least those who have been against the war in Iraq from the beginning have some moral high ground to stand on. Those who voted for it and then turned against it are weasels, pure and simple.
The Democrats are going to have a short run in control of congress for if there are no accomplishments to take to the voters in 2008, then the results of 2006 will be seen as what they were. Public frustration with the way the Republicans were doing things and the war in Iraq dragging on.
Lets take the latter first.
This non-issue about the firing of the eight United States attorneys by the justice department is trying as hard as they can to make a mountain out of a molehill. Here it is in a nutshell. The president has the right to hire and fire the 93 attorneys. They serve at the pleasure of the president. Period. They can be doing whatever and the president can say thank you for your service, and goodbye. If the Democrats want to go down this road, they better hope that they do not win the presidency while the Republicans are in control of congress for it will be a tit for tat if they keep pursuing this. It may seem that the timing was bad, but this is one of those presidential prerogatives that the Democrats will just have to live with. But, alas, they will not and this attempt to embarrass the Bush administration will go on.
Secondly, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) went six-for-six in passing legislation in the first "100" hours that the majority will never make it out of the senate. The only one that has a chance, the increase in the minimum wage, will only make it after Republican senators put in tax breaks for small businesses to offset the forcible wage hike. There is really no compromise on the Democrat's part so that they can bring some Republicans along and put some pressure on President Bush. But, they do have time to host a pointless hearing featuring former Vice-President Al Gore ranting about the earth having a fever.
Most grievously, the Dems are trying to have it all ways on the Iraq theatre in the War Against Terror. They ran on ending the war in Iraq and can by simply cutting off funding. But, because they don't want to be seen as being against the troops, they will simply adopt what has been the slow-bleed strategy of setting up phony benchmarks that will be impossible to keep. At least those who have been against the war in Iraq from the beginning have some moral high ground to stand on. Those who voted for it and then turned against it are weasels, pure and simple.
The Democrats are going to have a short run in control of congress for if there are no accomplishments to take to the voters in 2008, then the results of 2006 will be seen as what they were. Public frustration with the way the Republicans were doing things and the war in Iraq dragging on.
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Misleading The Flock
It seems that the Left Angeles Times, for those not familiar, the Los Angeles Times, thinks that the Episcopal Church is united in rejecting the requests of the worldwide Anglican Communion, which it is part of, to stop blessing same sex unions, ordaining openly gay and lesbian clergy who are not celibate and other measures.
In an article in today's fish wrap latimes.com, it seems to leave out the fact that at least 10 conservative bishops do not favor the prevailing wind among the dominant liberal House of Bishops and in fact it is their pleas to the Archbishop of Canterbury precipitating this crisis. They will lead the schism of the Episcopal Church and it will not stop there.
Also, there are many in parishes that do NOT agree with their rectors and or bishops on the above issues and many others.
Here is the problem in a nutshell.
Today's "leadership" is only interested in a social gospel. That means concern for the poor and marginalized in society. It also in today's lexicon means socialism. The clergy seems to forget about having a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and building up the spiritual body of each member. Without that, it is nothing more than socialists wearing collars.
So, while the "leadership" lead by the so-called presiding bishop, Katherine Jefferts-Schori, fiddles as Rome burns, it would behoove the Left Angeles Fish wrap to report all sides, not the side it favors in the titanic struggle for the heart and soul of the Episcopal Church.
In an article in today's fish wrap latimes.com, it seems to leave out the fact that at least 10 conservative bishops do not favor the prevailing wind among the dominant liberal House of Bishops and in fact it is their pleas to the Archbishop of Canterbury precipitating this crisis. They will lead the schism of the Episcopal Church and it will not stop there.
Also, there are many in parishes that do NOT agree with their rectors and or bishops on the above issues and many others.
Here is the problem in a nutshell.
Today's "leadership" is only interested in a social gospel. That means concern for the poor and marginalized in society. It also in today's lexicon means socialism. The clergy seems to forget about having a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and building up the spiritual body of each member. Without that, it is nothing more than socialists wearing collars.
So, while the "leadership" lead by the so-called presiding bishop, Katherine Jefferts-Schori, fiddles as Rome burns, it would behoove the Left Angeles Fish wrap to report all sides, not the side it favors in the titanic struggle for the heart and soul of the Episcopal Church.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)