About Me

Name: flagwaver
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Why Am I Not Surprised?

I was planning on doing a full-on, one issue post this week...I really was. But then the Fort Hood shooting happened, the Democrats passed their health-care bill in the House, Andre Agassi caused some serious upset in the genteel world of tennis, and our dear President Obama decided that his decision on Afghanistan is...to not make a decision. So I figured I would just hit on each of those topics in brief (more or less), and maybe a few more if they come to me.
 
First, what world do liberals live in? For anyone to say that they find the murders at Fort Hood incomprehensible is incomprehensible to me! Here you have a man, Major Nidal Hasan, who has telegraphed his adherence to a jihadist interpretation of Islam go on a shooting rampage on base at Fort Hood, in a readiness center full of unarmed troops either going to war or coming home, and their families...and liberals say they don't understand it. Well, I for one do understand it. It was an act of terrorism by Major Hasan, one in which he probably hoped to be martyred to his bloodthirsty version of Allah, and to say it was anything else is a travishamockery! He is the worst type of coward, as are all terrorists, because he deliberately targeted those he knew could not defend themselves against his attack. May he die a traitor's death for murdering, and attempting to murder, his brothers in arms.
 
But nearly as bad as the actual act of terror was the tepid response of out government to it. We have President Obama using the occasion to take not too subtle shots at the country while praising the troops; we are a nation that is cynical, selfish, etc. And we have Gen. George Casey bemoaning the fact that we have to create and maintain a "diverse" military, so we presumably should not hold it against the murdering Muslim that he fits the same general profile as the vast majority of terrorists that we deal with. And our Legacy Media is bending over backwards to make excuses for Hasan, and to warn America not to allow a conservative backlash against Muslims. Well guess what: we aren't interested in "persecuting" Muslims, but we are interested in destroying the dark forces arrayed against us. If they happen to be Muslim, so what?
 
In the midst of all this, Madame Pelosi (one of my top ten ugliest chicks alive...or dead) managed to get her health-care proposal rammed through the House. While she was all smiles afterwards, does anyone really think this bill has a snowball's chance of ever becoming law? When you have an overwhelming majority on your side, and you still need a Republican to vote with you...so you can win by F-I-V-E votes, that doesn't bode well for future prospects. The Senate doesn't have enough votes to break Joe Lieberman's threatened filibuster, and the House can barely pass any meaningful legislation so....the health-care debacle is likely DOA. For now.
 
After assembling his national security team for yet another jawboning session about Afghanistan, Mr. Obama has decided to...punt. He doesn't like any of the proposals put before him to consider, and refuses to make a decision on Gen. McChrystal's request for added troops to win "the good war". But what is to be expected when all the people advising the Novice-in-Chief are political hacks...including his Secretary of Defense, and the aforementioned Gen. Diversity, um...CASEY. He's even getting advice from that noted political thinker, and political general Colin Powell. Mr. Powell inveighs that the President should "take his time" making this decision, warns him not to be pushed by the left or the right, because this has tremendous implications for the remainder of his term. And this clown used to be a general for crying out loud! No Mr. Powell, and no Mr. Obama, this is not a decision about the rest of your term. It is a decision about the lives of the men we have sent to fight a war in a godforsaken, backwoods, hell-hole, in an effort to deny a safe haven to the very groups that conspired to attack us on September 11, 2001. It is about making sure that the blood and treasure spent in that conflict are not sacrificed on the altar of the Obama Political Altar, so that Obama can win electoral favor with the left. If you lack the will to fight and to see the fight through to victory, then "bug out" as the military parlance goes. But do not pretend to care about corruption in the Afghani government (as if our government is corruption free; see Murtha, Jack and Jefferson, William) or the recalcitrance of Hamid Karzai in allowing you to order him around like he's a member of our lapdog Legacy Media. At least be man enough to admit that you lack the will and inclination to finish the fight that they started, and bring our brave men and women home. That should give them time to rest and recuperate before we have to go right back into that region again, because when we pull out the jihadists will be coming after our soft underbelly, and they will try to finish us off. I just hope that when that day comes, we have someone in charge that understands that in war victory is all that matters, and electoral politics be damned!
 
On a lighter note, I am sure many of you have seen the media coverage of Andre Agassi's revelations in his new book Open. He admits to having used meth as a young man, tells of his virtual hatred of the sport of tennis, a game forced upon him by his Iranian immigrant father, and of tanking matches because he didn't want to play. What has surprised me more than anything is that all the tennis people seem to be focused on is his meth use and his saying he hated tennis. Martina Navratilova went off because he lied when he got caught using meth, not because he used the meth...but because he lied when he got caught! Hello! Who in their right mind is going to tell the organization that he works for that his failed drug test is correct, and that he was using meth? No one, especially if the organization doing the testing will believe a story that someone spiked his Gatorade with meth, and that's why he was positive! Shouldn't Marty Martina be more upset that the ATP bought the excuse equivalent of "The dog ate my homework"? As for people saying that you can't be good at something you hate, that's poppycock...especially in sports. Just last year Elena Delle Donne, a highly sought after female basketball player quit the game because she didn't like it anymore, mainly because of the pressure her parents put on her to play the game. Heck, when I worked in textiles I didn't particularly like my job, but I was the best at it because it paid the bills!
 
Finally, what was Oprah thinking the other day? I don't watch her show, but to have that lady who was mauled by the chimp show what was left of her face on national television was a bit much. But it did surprise me that Oprah didn't do her usual routine with her guests, where everything that has happened to them happened to her. I can just see Oprah saying, "I know how you feel Charla. My face is disfigured too because I was attacked by a squirrel wielding a gigantic ugly stick! He got me right in the face, and he made Michelle Obama look like James Brown! It was just horrible!"
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (12) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Quitting Sarah Palin

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t the last election held in this country over on November 4, 2008? After that election the next national elections are not slated until 2010, correct? So could someone please, please tell me why there is such a furor over the losing vice presidential candidate from the last election!?! The way many on both sides of the political spectrum act, you would think that Sarah Palin was responsible for Global Warming, bitter beer face, and I’m A Celebrity…Get Me Out of Here!

Somewhere along the campaign trail, people decided that Sarah Palin was the bane of the McCain campaign, the scourge if the Republican Party, and the least qualified vice presidential candidate ever…as if that mattered when she was on a ticket opposing the most radical, leftist, inexperienced presidential candidate EVER!!! Somehow the inexperience of Palin as veep overshadowed the inexperience of Obama, although one was running to remake the Republic in his image, while the other was trying to help a flawed warhorse ascend to the White House.

What was amazing was to hear the same attacks that the left launched, as was their place as the opposition, coming from people who ostensibly stood on the same side of the issues as Palin. The leadership of the GOP looked down on her with their studied patrician arrogance for many of the same reasons she was savaged from the left; she only went to a state school for college; she was from Alaska, for goodness sakes!; she had a veritable tribe of children; she was not polished enough for the national stage, and by God she could not best Katie Couric in an interview on CBS News! Take her to the guillotine and take off her political head, because she is finished as a political player in national politics for all time!

That was to be expected from the Republican leadership, which has always seen itself as an exclusive country club an only tolerates those not to the manor born out of the necessity of garnering their votes come election time. The country-clubbers have never had any real use for those conservatives not located along the Boston-DC-Manhattan corridor; they hated Nixon, they hated Reagan, and they only liked George Bush because he had the right bloodline to be a member in good standing. But what I never expected was to see the “rank and file” conservatives turn on Governor Palin the way she did, especially after she decided to resign as governor of Alaska.

When Palin stepped down, many in the rank and file exploded in anger. To them the move just seemed to confirm the bad things being said about the governor in the media; she was ‘erratic’, unpredictable, and just plain strange. Why, oh why, would she just quit on the people of Alaska? No reason that the governor cited was good enough to assuage their anger, even if they were not actually her constituents. Neither the frivolous ethics complaints, nor the massive FOIA requests, nor the vicious attacks on her family were reason enough for the governor to step down. No, it was somehow felt that she owed it to the state of Alaska, the people of America, the Republican Party, and the conservative movement to bear those slings and arrows, no matter how much they impeded her ability to govern, or how personally hurtful the attacks on her family were. And when Governor Palin decided that she had a responsibility to do right by her family first and foremost, and that meant stepping down as governor, she became persona non grata to many people who had supported her in the presidential campaign.

Then came the insistence that resigning as governor meant that Sarah Palin was doomed as a political entity for all time; why the anti-Palin commercials calling her a quitter were already being written. Yet for someone that is a political non-entity, there is certainly a great deal of attention paid to her. If she were so politically radioactive, why do there continue to be hit pieces written about her**cough**Kathleen Parker and Peggy Noonan**cough**? If she’s so over, why does anyone care what she has to say about the current healthcare debate? I mean, she is finished…right?

People constantly come back to one theme with Sarah Palin that I would like to take a little time to address. One of the things people both left and right ask about Governor Palin is, “Why do you like her?” According to many she is just…well…simple. She isn’t polished like most people in politics; she doesn’t come off like she knows everything, and she doesn’t seem like the usual professional office seeker. And those are just the qualities that draw so many people to her. She is a genuine person, not a prepackaged product that is sold to us at election time. She has faults that she doesn’t spend her whole life attempting to cover up; she makes mistakes; she gets knocked around and pulls herself together, and she stands by what she believes in no matter the political costs. People like that about her; heck, I like that about her. In a world where politicians are commodities to be sold to potential voters, Sarah Palin stands out as different type of politician; namely the kind that doesn’t need to be in the political spotlight to be happy. Nowadays that is truly a rarity, and many people appreciate that about her.

None of knows what the future holds for Sarah Palin as a political player, and I’m not going to speculate about it. But I wouldn’t write her political epitaph quite yet; you never know what Sarah from Wasilla has in store for the future!

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (18) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Conservatives of the World, Unite!

Liberals come in all shapes and sizes, from the anti-nuclear power protestors to the Code Pink crowd. They have many individual concerns that fire their political passions, but there is always an underlying philosophy that unites them, no matter their personal political projects. Because at heart, liberals all believe in the same thing; government should strive to meet al of the needs of the people from cradle to grave, no matter whether or not there is any actual authority for the government to do so. And when push comes to shove liberals recognize that they all need one another in order to achieve the big government goals they have set for the nation. It is rare to see liberals divided over matters of ideology and even rarer to see even the most contrarian liberals culled from the left wing flock.

Conservatives like to look on liberals and say that they are disjointed, or just a loose amalgam of different pressure groups seeking political power in order to serve their specific ends. That is very true of the Democratic Party in general, as well as the GOP, but what we often miss is the fact that liberals almost always unite when the need arises. Look at the current healthcare debate as a prime example; nearly any plan that is passed will eventually have negative impacts on union members and their healthcare plans. Yet the unions have set aside, for the most part, their individual concerns to push for President Obama’s plan in a show of liberal unity. And it is this type of unity that allows the liberals to carry the day on so many important political and policy fights in the country; they will stick together through thick and thin.

On the conservative side, however, that unity does not seem to exist. When people look at the conservative side of the aisle, they do not see a movement made up of people pulling together to reach a single destination. What they see instead is a much fractured group that can hardly stop bickering long enough to even make a show of opposing the left wing agenda being promulgated by the current presidential administration. “National defense conservatives” are at odds with “paleoconservatives” over national defense strategy, while “border security conservatives” clash with “free market conservatives” over whether we need secure borders or a steady stream of sla…uh…cheap labor. And it seems that every other conservative faction seems to have a bone to pick with the “religious conservatives”, who by the way, seem to always bear the blame for the electoral failures of the GOP. The ultimate unity of purpose that is found on the liberal side of the spectrum just seems to be missing from the conservative side.

What I have noticed among conservatives is that whenever conservatives start adding qualifiers to their ideological leanings, there is going to be some internecine battles about to be fought. It seems that many people that want to identify as conservatives also want to claim the mantle of “true conservatives” and wrap themselves in it, while diminishing their fellow conservatives. Case in point: After the 2006 midterm elections when the GOP lost control of the Congress, what was the loudest complaint from many conservatives? The complaint, which as echoed in some quarters after McCain was beaten by Obama, was that the “religious conservatives” or “social conservatives” had cost the GOP the elections, and that they should be jettisoned from the movement. Little time was spent on figuring out what conservatives could do to win back public trust, while finger pointing inside the conservative movement ran rampant. Many conservatives were more concerned with attacking other conservatives that they did not agree with than opposing the massive government intrusions into the financial life of the country.

What conservatives of every stripe should be doing is what the liberals always do when it counts: Focus on the unifying characteristics of their ideology instead of picking fights within the group. There are certain characteristics that should be part of the political DNA of every conservative: smaller government, fiscal restraint, strong defense, secure borders, judges who actually respect the Constitution, and a fair chance for everyone to succeed or fail on his own merits. Whether your particular passion is national defense or fiscal policy, all of the other conservative characteristics are there in you as well. If we can learn to put aside our petty fights and differences when big issues are on the table, we can stall the list to port of our ship of state, and maybe even bring her back to starboard. But we have to be unified to do it, because we are facing an adversary that is relentless, aggressive, and above all else, unified. Only with a similar unity from conservatives can the slide towards socialism be arrested; to continue on a fractured path is to condemn the country to the continued ravages of the left and its ideas.

So to borrow a phrase from the left: Conservatives of the world unite! Because as one of the Founders so succinctly phrased it, “Either we all hang together, or we will all hang separately.”

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (17) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Governor Goes Home

 On July 3rd Sarah Palin stepped in front of a microphone in front of the press at a hastily assembled press conference and made an announcement that shocked the political world. She was tendering her resignation as governor of the state of Alaska, effective July 26th, and handing the reins of the government over to her lieutenant governor, whom she professed to hold in great esteem and favor. She cited a slew of ethical complaints lodged against her that were dominating her time and relentless attacks against her family as reasons for her shocking announcement.

The responses from the press and the political pundits were immediate and very predictable. Her media enemies, from Maureen Dowd to Kathleen Parker, all pronounced her to be “erratic”, a “quitter”, and her actions confirmed to them that she was not ready for the political spotlight. Why, if she cannot stay the course for the last sixteen to eighteen months as governor, how can she run for president? If she cannot take the media heat while safely ensconced in the ultimate flyover state in Alaska, then she will never be able to handle another national campaign. Why, there had to be some other deep, dark secret reason for her to resign; an affair or an FBI investigation being the most likely reasons. But whatever the reasons, Palin was officially dead as a national political figure. There is no way that she could mount a presidential campaign in 2012, and her “bizarre” behavior would likely preclude her from even attempting a run in 2016. The pundits could already see the anti-Palin campaign commercials, “If she could not be trusted to stick with her constituents in Alaska, how can she trusted to stick with the presidency?”

The thing that has struck me about all of the blathering about Palin’s future is how much of it centers on politics and completely discounts the idea that Gov. Palin was being honest about her reasons for stepping down. The reactions by the media and punditry are exactly what one would expect from people who are totally wrapped up in the Washington-Manhattan elite bubble; people who are unable to view any event apart from the usual political considerations. And we the people sit and listen to them, take their ideas to heart, and view things from a purely political prism. The problem is that we have all become political cynics, expecting everyone that holds a political position to be a professional politician.

That is the thing that has flummoxed the Left, and some on the Right, from the start about Sarah Palin, and it is why her explanations for her resignation have been roundly been dismissed by all the political ‘experts’ out there. Sarah Palin is something we all claim to want from our political leaders, yet when we get it we rebel against it; she is a citizen who is involved in politics, not a person who is consumed by political ambition. Look at her reasoning and the facts behind them; Palin has faced over 18 ethical complaints since 2008, the vast majority of them after her selection as John McCain’s running mate in the 2008 presidential election. Of the 18 complaints, 1 has been settled with a reimbursement to the state for the travel expenses of the Palin children when the governor traveled, two are still pending, and 15 have been dismissed. (See the full list at http://www.adn.com/palin/story/838912.html) These complaints have cost the state $300,000 dollars and have cost the Palin family $500,000; not to mention the time and expense involved in the time state workers have to put in to answer the charges. And since the end of the 2008 presidential campaign there have been 150 Freedom of Information Act requests; according to a Wall Street Journal article by John Fund (see it at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124700261179807839.html). And do not forget that every one of the FOIA requests, by law, must be answered by a date certain. And who can forget the crass ‘joke’ by David Letterman about her teenaged daughter Willow…which he claimed was meant for her other teenaged daughter Bristol? Or the jokes made at the expense of her youngest son Trig, who was born with Down’s syndrome? Is it so hard to believe that such pressures would not make leaving the governor’s office behind a viable option for someone who is not totally invested in political success?

The reason that we are so unwilling to believe that Palin is lying about her reasons for leaving, or that she is somehow betraying the GOP is that we have become, as I stated earlier, political cynics. We have become accustomed to a political class in this country that eats, sleeps, and breathes only for the chance to gather political power into their hands. We are accustomed to a political class that goes to all the right schools (Harvard, Yale, Brown, Wellesley), takes all the right classes (political science and law), and trains to work the levers of the federal bureaucracy. Not only have we grown accustomed to it, we have embraced it and reject nearly anyone who is different from the accepted norms of political behavior.

We claim to want elected officials that aspire to serve the public good, but we continue to vote for officials that only care about their next election. We claim to want officials who can look honestly at their service and will step away when they are doing more harm than good, but we elect people who can only have their hands taken off the levers of power if you chop their fingers off! We keep sending people to Congress, the state house, or the governor’s mansion that cannot imagine a time when they were not in elected office, and would damned near die if they lost an election. They have become a political oligarchy that we willingly prop up, while tearing down anyone that goes against that grain.

You see, the real story of the Palin resignation is not found in her reasoning, her timing, or her political future. The real story is how we all reacted to a person that decided that political office was not what was best for her and her family and actually made a decision that was in their best interests and not one that was made with an eye towards the next political goal to be reached. She explained why she did what she did, yet we were unable to accept it at face value. The story was never Palin, it was always us and how we have succumbed to the prevailing political cynicism.

Maybe Sarah Palin had it right when she decided to resign, but we have it wrong in reacting to it as purely a political event. Our reaction to her decision says more about us than the original decision says about Mrs. Palin.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (38) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A Few Quick Thoughts

What is the deal with the idea that the GOP is finished in 2012 because Sen. John Ensign and Gov. Mark Sanford were caught having extramarital affairs? What has surprised me the most is the number of commentators and pundits of all stripes who are looking at the failures of these two men as the fall of the GOP and the end of GOP opposition to Obama in 2012? The truth is that as much as people may have admired the stances the two men took on a variety of issues, such as illegal immigration and financial responsibility; neither man was much of a serious contender for the GOP nomination process that takes place…in three years! Ensign was not particularly well known on the national political scene, notwithstanding his position as a US Senator, and until the dustup Sanford had over attempting to refuse federal stimulus money for South Carolina not many people outside the state and his region had heard of him. Yet as soon as the two men were caught in their sex scandals, they suddenly became the two GOP frontrunners for the next presidential cycle. Is that because they actually were, or is it because they fell down and can be used to dump on the GOP and their future electoral chances?

I was watching the news today and saw the giddiness of people at the sentence of 150 years for convicted swindler Bernie Madoff, and had to wonder what is wrong with people. Yeah, Madoff deserved some serious jail time for his Ponzi scheme, but 150 years for stealing money seems extreme to me. We give mass murderers less time than this for killing people, yet we go to the mat to slam a thief! My problem here is two-fold: I don’t like judges using a defendant’s sentence to “send a message” to others, and I think that this slamming of Madoff lets his “victims” off the hook for their roles in his scheme. First, I thought a judge was supposed to look at each case before him individually, weigh the merits of that case, and hand down an appropriate sentence. Instead, this judge has done what so many others have done in the past; he has decided that it is his job to make an example of one man in order to scare potential miscreants. Now, if Madoff deserved 150 years in prison…cool; give him 150 years. However, do not sentence him out of anger or public outrage, because that is not justice. Second, most of the “victims” of Madoff’s schemes were willing participants in the scheme. These people saw a deal that was offering too good to be true returns on their investments, and they ignored the ages old warnings about things that are too good to be true and caved into their greed. They gave him their money to play with hoping that they would get a better return than other investors would and instead were burned for being greedy. They, in most cases, bear the burden of their losses since they willingly signed up with a swindler.

I also saw today that the SCOTUS has struck down Judge Sonya Sotomayor’s ruling in the Ricci case. Good for them! The 5-4 majority has decided that discrimination based on race, even if you’re white, is not going to stand in America. Well, I say it is about damned time that the courts recognized that if we are to live in a society that is not based on race then we cannot discriminate against any race for any reason. We would not stand by and allow it if a woman, and Asian, Latino, or black was denied an earned promotion for no real reason, so we cannot let it stand against white men either. Moreover, if the GOP has any sense (which is debatable) they will ignore Patrick Leahy’s statements about this not being an issue and put it right out there for all to see. Being repudiated by the SCOTUS in such a public manner on such a highly charged case is very relevant, and must be stressed in the upcoming confirmation debate.

Finally, this has been a long weekend for the entertainment community. It started with the death of Ed McMahon and ended with the sudden death of ubiquitous television pitchman Billy Mays. But of course, the two biggest names were Farrah Fawcett and Michael Jackson. For men of a certain age, Farrah Fawcett was the “It girl”, and her 1970s poster was one that helped many a young boy move to young manhood. She was a talented actress, and frankly one of the best-looking women we have ever seen in the entertainment industry. Her battle with cancer was in all respects courageous, and it was sad to hear that she ultimately was unable to beat the disease. The death of Michael Jackson was a total shock to the system, and in my household, a few tears were shed at the news of his death. Heck, even I had a lump in my throat when I heard the news. For me, Michael Jackson’s music and videos were a huge part of the soundtrack of my life, and the idea of speaking of Jackson in the past tense still takes an effort. What is even sadder is that it seems that he died in some respects a broken man, allegedly hooked on prescription pain medications, and in increasingly poor health. Nevertheless, I prefer to remember him as the man who wowed me with the “Smooth Criminal” and “Remember the Time” videos; made me smile with songs like “The Way You Make Me Feel” and “Don’t Stop Till You Get Enough”; and touched me with songs like “You Are Not Alone” and “We Are the World”. RIP to Michael Jackson, Farrah Fawcett, Ed McMahon, and Billy Mays. My prayers go out to all their families, and they will all be missed.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (26) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Mr. Daley Goes to Washington

When Bill and Hillary Clinton were in the White House bringing the office of President into disrepute with their myriad scandals and illegalities, I am pretty sure that we all thought it would be a long time before we saw the likes of that again in the Oval Office. Bimbo eruptions, getting blown on federal time, semen stained dresses, purloined FBI files, and perjury were just the lowlights of the Clinton administration, and it was a relief when George W. Bush took over as POTUS because an adult had finally returned to the White House. And for eight years the only scandals emanating from the Bush administration were basically created by the media, who became sworn enemies of Bush and company when the Goracle managed to blow the election by not even managing to win his home state of Tennessee. And the scandals the media attempted to blow up were all minor league issues that involved no scandal at all; the ‘outing’ of Valerie Plame, the firing of the USA’s, and the constant mantra of “no-bid Halliburton contracts” were all media stories that led nowhere…except in the trumped up perjury charges against Lewis Libby.

So we come to the 2008 presidential campaign and we are treated to Barack Obama assailing the Bush administration and GOP led Congress on their alleged culture of corruption, and his claims that he was going to restore ethics to the executive branch. Gone would be the days of former lobbyists holding high positions in the administration, and gone too would be the days of ethical lapses emanating from the White House. Indeed, Obama promised to deliver on Bill Clinton’s pledge to run the “most ethical administration in history.” Yes, these were to be heady days indeed, if you are a fan of highly ethical government and were wishing to see government cleaned up and straightened out.

But the reality is far different from the rhetoric; instead of an ethical paradise the Obama administration seems more like Chicago-on-the-Potomac. In just the first six months of the Obama reign we have seen a plethora of unethical and/or illegal conduct. Here’s just a quick rundown of the stench emanating from the Hope & Change Express:

·         Instead of locking out all lobbyists the Obama White House began carving out exceptions to the very rules they instituted. While there is nothing wrong with former lobbyists working in the government to begin with, the Obama Bunch promised that any lobbyists hired would not work in areas that they had lobbied in recent months. Yet we have an assistant secretary at the Defense Department whose last job was…wait for it…lobbying for a defense contractor! That’s not the change we had hoped for!

·         The Obama Bunch has openly ignored the established rules of bankruptcy in the cases of General Motors and Daimler-Chrysler in order to reward its political patrons. The Obama Bunch (and the federal courts) allowed the secured creditors of the two companies to be paid pennies on the dollar for their interests in the companies, while the UAW was paid up to twice as much as the secured creditors. And all the while, the Obama Bunch was also threatening the secured creditors with serious repercussions, including setting the White House press corps on them to destroy their reputations, for having the temerity to oppose the hosing they were about to get.

·         The Obama Bunch also continued the illegal policy of the Bush administration in giving money from the TARP to the auto industry in blatant violation of the statute that created the program. The money was specifically appropriated for the purpose of bailing out troubled financial institutions in order to keep the entire system from crashing, yet both the Bush administration and the Obama Bunch misused those funds to prop up failing auto companies. Neither group attempted to even hide their illegal actions, no one from Congress stood up to oppose it, and the media cheered the move (probably the second time they cheered any Bush era move). So Obama took the ball and ran with, dumping even more money down the GM/Chrysler rat holes until he could successfully nationalize the companies.

·         The Obama Bunch has also caused severe tensions between the US and UK after bribing the Bermudans to take some of the Uighur terrorists (yes, they’re terrorists…why else would they have been caught in an al-Qaeda camp?) off our hands. The problem with that little action is that Bermuda, as a British protectorate, has no ability to make those types of foreign policy decisions; all of Bermuda’s foreign policy is supposed to run through No. 10 Downing Street in London. The Obama Bunch had to know this, yet they willingly circumvented the system in order to score some cheap political points by relocating some of the “harmless” terrorist suspects still housed at Gitmo. This may not be illegal, but is sure as hell is hot an unethical move…and they damned well had to know it was unethical. And they did it anyway. That should tell you a lot about the people we have in charge for the next three-plus years.

·         Finally, the Hope & Change Express decided to fire Inspector General Gerald Walpin for having the gall to actually do his job. He discovered that Sacramento mayor Kevin Johnson had misused federal money allocated as a grant to his St. HOPE charity, including using the money for attempting to influence the outcome of the local school board election. When Walpin blew the whistle on the whole mess the Obama administration went Chicago style politics on him; they demanded that he either quit or be fired. To his credit Mr. Walpin took the honorable way out and forced Obama to fire him, and fired he was…in violation of a law cosponsored by then Senator Obama that mandated a 30 day notice before termination, and for having a cause for the termination. When challenged, the Obama Bunch opted not to really defend their illegal action; instead they tried to paint Walpin as on the verge of senility by releasing a report that claimed he was “confused” and “disoriented” during one of the meetings he conducted. The first act was blatantly illegal, while the subsequent actions all smack of the “politics of personal destruction” that liberals always scream about…while being the main practitioners of said tactic.

Instead of the super-ethical administration we were promised, we are seeing some of the dirtiest politics we have run across in a long time. I mean, even the Clinton’s made it longer than six months before they were caught up this many scandals! Yet Obama continues to act like he’s as pure as the wind driven snow and that his crap doesn’t stink. But if we are lucky, the people are watching and the new media will be able to keep a running account of what is going on leading up to next year’s congressional races. Maybe by then the GOP leadership will pull their heads out of their collective bung-holes (that means you Mike Steele!) and can use this to make some hay on election day. Because not even the most fervent followers of the O-bomination thought they were signing up for an administration that looks to put even the Clintons to shame when it comes to ethical obtuseness.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (14) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Father & Son: Special Edition

This Spade posting is going to be a bit different from the norm, because this one is going to be written by someone else. I usually don’t give space up here to other writers, unless they have something to say that I think is very powerful, cogent, and may be missed by my usual readers. I have given up space to a writer from the American Spectator, a local columnist in my area, reprinted an interview with Justice Clarence Thomas, and most recently reprinted excerpts from Ronald Reagan’s 1975 speech at the CPAC conference. And for the most part, that has been it. So it should tell you something that I am giving up space to someone else to actually write a post on my little blog.

The person that I am going to turn the Spade over to this time is my 13 year old son. He listens to me talk politics…ok rant…all the time and he has started forming his own political identity. You see, my wife is a Democrat, as are his grandparents whom he loves very much, respects, and listens to. Yet he has compared and contrasted their political views with mine, and he has come down on my side of the ideological fence. His reasoning as stated to me on many occasions basically boils down to this: When his mom and grandparents talk about politics it all boils down to feelings and emotions. Whenever he asks why they support a certain position they lead off with emotions and seem to end with the standard “Democrats are for Black people” sentiments that so many people have come to believe. When he talks to me, even when I am in my most worked up state of mind, I am able to explain to him WHY: WHY a policy won’t work, WHY a decision is faulty, WHY I hold the views I hold. And it never devolves into an emotional response or an attack on the other Party. So he has decided that conservatism simply makes more sense, is more logical, and can be expressed and defended much better than liberalism.

Last night he and I stayed up late shooting the political bull, and I began to ask him questions about the current president and why he thinks so lowly of him. You see, since the campaign season and definitely since the election, my son has expressed many times that Obama actually scares him. So I started to probe him last night on just what it is that scares him so much about Obama, what it is that he dislikes in the Dear Leader, and what he wants to see happen in this country. See, we adults are always saying that we are worried about the future of the Republic and that we are worried about the future that our progeny face…but we often don’t ask them about the future they would like to see. So I asked him about his feelings for Obama, his thoughts on the Obama foreign policy, what he wants to see in a leader, and where he wants this country to go…because it is, after all, his country too.

So while many of these thoughts and opinions are going to be familiar to you, please take the time to read and ponder them closely. This is the next generation of our nation and of our movement speaking to you. This is the voice of the people we work so hard every day to nurture, to protect, and whose futures we are striving to safeguard. So without further ado, and with a tremendous amount of pride, I yield the Spade to my son, Christian.

FOREIGN POLICY

President Obama is a coward when it comes to world affairs. He will not come out and say what he means or thinks because he does not want to be offensive. NEWSFLASH! Some people won’t like us no matter what; some people love to be offended because they love to be in the spotlight. DO NOT sugarcoat things because Iran, China, North Korea, etc. won’t sugarcoat their feelings about us! As president, Obama can’t show any weakness or our enemies will move to exploit them.

MEDIA ADULATION

The press loves our president and everyone knows it. For example, on June 17 during an interview he swatted a fly and John Harwood {the interviewer} was so excited that he killed a fly(!) he nearly jumped out of his chair! My father has killed flies, spiders, and other insects…but that wasn’t on the news for two days straight! The media talks about Obama all the time, and it is never anything negative. Fox News is the only place you can get straight news without the anchor offering an opinion, while NBC News pats Barrack Obama on the back so much it’s a wonder his back doesn’t get raw!

DUMB DECISIONS

Take GITMO as an example: GITMO is going to close, so you send these terrorists in training to Bermuda?! Heck, I know law abiding citizens that would LOVE to go to Bermuda, but they can’t go…but the government pays for the Uyghur’s to relocate there. Hey, why not just send a serial killer to Hawai’i? This is one of the dumbest things ever! And speaking of dumb decisions, I don’t think the founders wanted the president to take over private companies like Obama has done with GM and Chrysler.

TRULY SCARY

Face it, Obama is a big boob! He has no plans, and whenever he does he can’t explain it. He has no experience and it scares me that we have three more years or more with him as our president. He has a hissy fit anytime someone disagrees with him, and the person disagreeing is quickly labeled as a racist. He doesn’t understand that the government of Iran doesn’t like us; the leaders there still call us “The Great Satan”, yet Obama wants to sit down and talk with these people. And he refuses to realize that Islam is not a ‘religion of peace’ as he claims it is. Islam is divided into the House of Islam and the House of War; basically that means that if you are not a Muslim you and infidel who must convert…or die. We cannot find peace with people that think that way.

WHAT A PRESIDENT IS SUPPOSED TO BE

I believe that the Founding Fathers knew what they were doing and I believe that Americans should be free. I think the president should be strong in foreign affairs and in domestic affairs. I want a president who isn’t going to beat around the bush about issues, but can be blunt without being bellicose. Lastly, a president should be honest, straightforward, and not buckle under the least bit of pressure. In other words, the president shouldn’t be a thin-skinned ego hound who constantly needs his ego stroked!

So there you have it, the thoughts, fears, and ideals of the next generation of conservatism. So don’t believe the libs when they say that we are losing the nest generation, they just haven’t looked hard enough to find them. As long as we teach our kids that America is great, was great, and it is up to them to maintain that greatness, conservatism will continue to thrive!

Eric and Christian

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (9) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Time Is Now

By this point everyone and his brother is talking about the Specter switch and what it means to the GOP and the future of the Party. The media has gone to the usual suspects, Snowe, Collins, and Graham to tell them what they want to hear about the demise of the GOP. They are saying that the GOP is not 'big-tent' enough; that it is being dominated by conservatives; that 'moderates' are being forced out, and that ideological purity is a hinderance to electoral success.
 
But a couple of things strike me when listenening to the whiners out there braying about the direction of the GOP, and giving their prescriptions on how to change the Party going forward. First, what GOP have they been a member of since 1989? When Ronlad Reagan left office, the 'moderates' in the Party officially took control of the apparatus again, and have held power ever since! Look at the people who have served as President or had the GOP nomination since Reagan left the scene: George H.W. Bush, Robert Dole, George W. Bush, and John McCain. Not a conservative among them, including the alleged 'compassionate conservative' himself, G.W. Bush. So where is this group of conservative bully-boys the 'moderates' are so afraid of? Look at the leaders we have had to deal with in the Congress, and point out the conservative to me....I'll wait, and if you can find me one strong conservative voice that the GOP congressional power brokers didn't try to silence, please add the name in the comments section.
 
Second, why is striving for a consistent ideology such a bad thing? To be totally honest, I respect the Democrats at this point a whole hell of a lot more than I do the GOP because if there is one thing the Democrats do well it is enforce the Party ideology among its members. Very rarely are you going to see a prominent Democrat doing the types of things that John McCain spent 8 years doing to his Party and his president and not pay a serious price for it. Joe Lieberman, Independent from Connecticut is exhibit one on this issue; when Lieberman decided that he was going to buck the Party and side with President Bush on the Iraq War, the Democrats summarily drummed his butt right out of the Party, and were threatening to strip him of his place on the committees he served on. Now I am not saying that such draconian practices are the way to go, but at least the Democrats let it be known that there are times when Party unity is a must, and if you break that unity you will be dealt with. The GOP NEVER does things like that, which is why McCain can go all 'maverick' because he got his tender feelings hurt in 2000, Graham can be McCain's loyal lapdog, and Snow/Collins can basically caucus with the Democrats on every issue...and never hear a discouraging word about it!
 
In all honesty, the Specter defection now gives the GOP the chance to redefine the Party and its goals, and to marginalize the members who spend all their time voting as Democrats and running as Republicans. If that means that Snowe and Collins feel the need to switch parties, then fine...I'll even fly to DC to hold the door open as they leave, if they want me to. But this should be the time for us to actually move the Party back to the right and fulfill the talk of a right-wing takeover of the Party. And now is a time for conservative Party leadership to emerge and let it be known that disloyalty and disunity are no longer going to be accepted practices within the GOP; either stand together or stand alone. Finally, it is time for conservative voters to let their representatives know that we the people are no longer willing to tolerate the usual practice of rewarding the people who turn their backs on us after garnering our votes by returning them to office.
 
And one last thing: I know that many have been uninspired by Michael Steele, but I personally loved his response to the news that Specter had officially changed parties. He immediately called it for what it was, simple personal political preservation and dispelled the notion that Specter was trying to create of it being some noble decision, driven by personal conviction. Specter showed himself for what he truly was yetserday, and Harry Reid revealed what a turncoat he has been for the last three years, and Mr. Steele called him on it publicly. For that he gets a big HURRAH!!! from me! 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (26) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Democratic Diplomacy

 

There are many reasons to distrust the Democratic Party, among them their penchant for tax increases, governmental interference and growth, and their tendency to support social engineering as good policy. But the issue that gives people the most pause with the Democrats is their seeming fundamental fumbling with foreign policy. The last two Democratic administrations have presided over the loss of Iran to Islamic extremists, the loss of valuable secrets to the Communist PRC, and the complete boondoggle of building nuclear reactors in North Korea in exchange for their “abandoning” their pursuit of nuclear weapons.

This morning on Fox & Friends we were treated to another shining example of the obtuseness of Democrats in the field of foreign policy. Gov. Bill Richardson (D-NM) was being asked by host Steve Doocy about the recent Iranian missile tests and the prospects of actually sitting down and negotiating with Iranian President Ahmadenijad. In answer to the inquiries, Gov. Richardson goes into this speech about how we should negotiate with Iran, but not with their President; according to Richardson, we should be talking to the “moderate” clerics in Iran, and besides Ahmadenijad is not looking too strong in the next Iranian presidential elections!

To which I say, WTF!?! This is just the type of foolishness you can expect from Democrats in the realm of foreign affairs, and it would be funny if it weren’t so serious. In what world does Mr. Richardson live, where the presidential politics of Iran even matter? Does he not understand how things work in Iranian politics? And who are these “moderate” clerical plenipotentiaries that he expects to negotiate with?

In case Gov. Richardson doesn’t understand, there are no free elections in Iran, so their presidential elections do not matter. The President does not run anything in Iran, the Guardian’s Council does, and no one is even going to be on the ballot unless the Council allows it. And you can bet that anyone serving as President of Iran is but a mouthpiece for the Council; that person is no more independent of the Council than Quisling was independent of the Nazi Party. So worrying about upcoming Iranian presidential elections is a waste of time and energy, because whoever occupies that office is still the puppet of the Council.

As for the idea that there are “moderate” clerics for us to talk to, that is laughable. There may be some moderate clerics in Iran; as a matter of fact I am pretty sure there are some. The only thing is, they don’t sit on the Guardian’s Council, and they damned sure are not the highest cleric in the land! You can talk to a million moderate clerics, but that will not do you any good so long as the Guardian’s Council exists. They are the only group of clerics in Iran whose voices matter, and they are committed to the Islamic Revolution launched by Ayatollah Khomeini and have actively worked to export their revolution all over the region. And these are the people we are supposed to be negotiating with?

This is what makes the Democrats so dangerous in foreign policy; they see everything as analogous to our political system. You see it when they urge endless jawboning when action is urgently necessary, and you see it when a person who should know better puts his faith in a change of the President in a country ruled by a council of twelve clerics! They fail to realize that these foreign governments don’t work like ours, and mostly are not interested in working with us! Iran is not interested in negotiating with us; they are interested in our ultimate destruction and in their ascendance to the position of primary power in the Middle East. Nothing else really matters to them, and the quicker the Democrats figure that out the better off they will be. Then they can have a say in the foreign policy of the United States that makes sense, and is not diametrically opposed to our national interests.

God help us if these people get their hands back on the foreign policy apparatus of the United States, because they are a disaster waiting to happen.

 

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (6) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Politics of Fear

Every now and then the Democrats and liberals get it right, and in a way they have pegged the GOP pefectly. When they describe the GOP as practicing the politics of fear, they are correct to a certain point. They are wrong when they accuse the GOP of trying to use the threat of terrorism as part of the politics of fear, because after decades of terrorist attacks on American interests ( Khobar Towers, USS Cole, embassy bombings) and the attacks on 9/11 we have finally had to wake up to the very real threat of terror attacks in our lives. But they are right (or would be) to describe the political tactics of the GOP in election season as fear based, if they had the right line on where the fear is directed.
 
The GOP's politics of fear is not based around terror threats, but on trying to scare their voters into voting against Democratic candidates. The national GOP has basically abandoned trying to convince people to vote for them and has turned their attention to crying wolf about what a Dmocrat would do if elected. This is a foolish endeavor, and a disastrous strategy, but the GOP has decided to wed itself to just such a strategy.
 
They started it in the 2006 midterm elections by trying to scare the base to convince them of how bad it would be for America if Nancy Pelosi were to become Speaker of the House, and Harry Reid became Senate Majority Leader. According to GOP leadership a Democrat dominated Senate would block all of the President's judicial nominees, would raise taxes, would defund the Iraq War, would set artificial timetables for withdrawal from Iraq, and would waste valuable time and resources attempting to impeach the President. But guess what? The strategy didn't work, because the GOP never gave us a reason to support them! Voters want to know what you are about, not just a litany of what is wrong with the other guy.
 
Besides, we are nearly two years removed from those 2006 midterms and what has happened? I'll tell you what, not a whole heck of a lot. Reid and Pelosi have proven to be the ineffective hacks we all knew they were, they have abandoned their stated Iraq defunding and withdrawal talk, and they have kept threatening to impeach Bush, but have not been able to gain any traction for the effort. In other words, all of the GOP's dark nightmares about what the left would do when in power have proven to be just that, nightmares and not reality.
 
Now many in the GOP have trotted out that same line of "reasoning" to scare us first about Hillary Clinton, and now about Barack Obama. To hear them tell it, if we don't vote for John McCain then the Republic will fall as soon as Obama takes the oath of office, the Constitution will no longer carry any weight, and political correctness will rule the land. But honestly, how much different would it be if we elected McCain? He already has a record of disregarding the Constitution when it suits him (McCain-Feingold), he is already trying to enforce PC on us (Republicans are not to say "Hussein" in reference to Obama!), and he is already acting like he is running for Kingship and not President! So what's the difference?
 
Until the GOP figures out that its voters want to vote for something instead of against something else and starts running candidates that can inspire support from the members of the Party and not just the Party bigwigs, they are going to continue to be losers...even f they win the occasional election. They are building the Party on sand instead of rock, and sooner or later (probably sooner) that foundation is going to fail. And then where will they be?
 
Lost in the wilderness again.
Tags: GOP   Elections  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (11) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »