Tag Archives: president barack Obama

The 2010 Midterm Elections Will Be Worse For Dems Than Expected

"Republican Party Elephant" logo


Bookmark and Share    This November is going to be quite a dramatic reversal of fortunes for Democrats and while some on the left are trying to claim that the Republican hopes for retaking the House are unwarranted and deny that we are in a wave election, there is actually no realistic basis for such claims. The surging force behind Republicans in 2010 is undeniable.   As indicated by Gallup, the Republican Party is polling incredibly well among voters on a number of factors including  party identification, voter preferences among independents, and even candidate preferences, and the G.O.P. has also retaken the lead on the generic ballot.

Furthermore; Republicans are now either comparable with, or surpassing Democrats on everything from voter enthusiasm and an increased online presence, to fundraising and a growing number of boots on the ground, grass root volunteers. For one of the first times in recent history, young Republican voters are expected to turn out in larger numbers than young Democrat voters. College Republicans have even jumped to a point in popularity and fundraising that is allowing them to go national with ads and target several key states on 2010.

When it comes to the large gap in internet presence and fundraising that existed between the left and right in 2008, in 2010 the trend has totally reversed. The first signs of this became evident 11 months ago when Scott Brown raised nearly $10 million online in all of 18 days. Now, we have seen other examples of internet success in such candidates as Sharron Angle and Christine O’Donnell who raised more than $1 million online in the 24 hours after their primary wins. All of this is a sign of two things. The G.O.P. has finally gained parity with the Democrats in the use of the internet and that the collective strength of the G.O.P.‘s grassroots is becoming increasingly more important than any strengths of particular candidates or their campaigns.

All of this points to a shifting of the political earththat is far greater than we saw in 1994.

Rarely has a political Party comeback as quickly as the Republican Party is poised to do this November. Normally, it takes much more than two years to bounce back from the type of  losses that they suffered first in 2006 and then again in 2008.

It is accurate to say though, that the climb back to power for the G.O.P. is based less on the voters goodwill towards Republicans and more on the ill will that they have come to feel towards Democrats. Which leads me to wonder about something.

 Between 2006 and 2010, neither Party seemed to be held in any great esteem, yet why was there not any great move to finally create that perennially promised, almighty, and perfect third Party that we always hear dissatisfied voters talk about?

Although there has so far been a strong ripple of anti-incumbent sentiment out there,  we did not see the rise of that much hoped for third Party alternative. We did however see a powerful anti-big government movement infiltrate the process and greatly influence the field of Republicans running in 2010.

I believe that this is all largely due to the efforts of the Democrat Party more than the Republican Party.

The Party in power has overreached the mandate they thought they had in 2008. They even misread their significant wins in 2008 and assumed that the nation was actually desirous of an aggressive big government agenda. But in fact, they weren’t. The reason for the 2008 victory, led by the top of Democrat ticket with Barack Obama, was a phenomenon similar to the one that is giving rise to the Republican resurgence of 2010. Voters were voting against the Party in power.

This is what happens when voters are dissatisfied. They seek change……..the very same theme that candidate Obama successfully banked on in ’08.

Another key to the Democrat victories of 2008 was the excitement over the novelty of the historic chance to elect the nation’s first partially black President.  And last but not least was the fact that the G.O.P. ran a weak nominee at the top ticket who failed to energize the base and failed to prove that republicanism under him, would be any different from the republicanism seen under G.W. Bush and the existing Republican leadership in Congress.

So change was born. But as we have come to see, the change that Democrats have run with, is not the change that Americans are satisfied with. As a result, the political pendulum is now swinging back in the opposite direction. But it is swinging with a vengeance. Between incredible Democrat overreach, and an explosion of exaggerated government growth, spending and deficit increases, Democrats have polarized the electorate far more than did the Republicans who after a few years in power, slowly but surely forgot their commitment to limited government and less spending.

But it is clear now that most Americans believe in the basic Republican ideology of less government, less taxes and less spending. That is why rather than seeing a surge for third Party candidacies, you have seen a rush towards cleaning out the Republican Party of those whom have drifted away from those principles and failed to stand up for them responsibly and consistently.

We are now seeing one of those rare occasions when a large majority of voters are actually pushing an ideology more than a candidate. That is what the TEA Party movement is all about. They are pushing a cause more than Party politics and as such they are helping to return the G.O.P. back to its true conservative roots by ridding it of so-called RINO’s.

But if the G.O.P. is to continue its rise back to power into 2012 and beyond, they will have to prove to the voters that some lessons have been learned. 

Given that President Obama will still be President on the morning after November 2, 2010, and that the Senate will likely still be in Democrat control, albeit with a new Majority Leader, the G.O.P. House will have to hold firm in rejecting any compromises that err on the side of increased spending, and increased government overreach.

This will prompt charges of being obstructionists and cries that attempt to describe Republicans as the “Party of no” by those on the left, but it is important to remember that those initiating such remarks are not likely to ever support Republicans anyway. But if the G.O.P. aggressively offers solid alternatives while rejecting the President’s, and the Senate’s big government, liberal agenda, people will maintain faith in the new face of the G.O.P. and that ‘Party of no” description will continue to fall on deaf ears.

When the G.O.P takes back the House, they will have to prove that they are actually ready to fight for the values that are providing them with the momentum that they currently have behind them. This will especially be the case in matters of spending and the budget, since the House, more so then the Senate controls the purse strings of the federal government.  If they flinch, and if they fail to keep their noses clean and deliver on their promised commitments, their will be little enthusiasm from the grassroots to maintain the level of support that they are currently placing behind the G.O.P..

Republicans will also have to remember a few things. First they must make sure that each issue is connected to government’s role in the everyday lives of Americans. They need to consistently demonstrate how big government is expanding its control over our personal lives but at the sake of properly dealing with its actual responsibilities such as providing a secure border and finally developing comprehensive immigration reform or balancing the federal  budget. And they must keep each of these messages simple. The same way Ronald Reagan did in both 1980 and 1984, as demonstrated in the following 1984 Reagan campaign campaign ad:


Keeping it simple brings it home and in 1984 Reagan brought it home with a sweep of 49 states to Mondale’s 1.

But before we get to presidential politics as it pertains to 2012, we have to establish the point from which the G.O.P. will start from after 2o10.  At the moment it looks like Republicans could far surpass the expectations of many in both the House and the Senate .

Based upon the circumstances that exist today and my own estimation of how things will play out in the individual landscapes of several hotly contested states, I see the senate tied at with 50 Republicans and the 48 Democrats plus the two left leaning Independents who caucus with the Democrats.  This includes Retaining seats in Alaska, Arizona, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Idaho,Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Utah while picking up seats in;

  • Arkansas   (John Boozman over Blanche Lincoln)
  • Colorado    (Ken Buck over Mike Bennet)
  • Illinois       (Mark Kirk over Alexi Giannoulias)
  • Indiana      (Dan Coats over Brad Ellsworth)
  • Nevada       (Susan Angle over Harry Reid)
  • North Dakota    (John Hoeven over Tracy Potter)
  • Pennsylvania     (Pat Toomey over Joe Sestak)
  • Washington     (Dino Rossi over Patty Murray)
  • Wisconsin      (Ron Johnson over Russ Feingold)

However; there are several possibilities which increase the likelihood of a Republican takeover of the Senate.

Any one of three races could keep Joe Biden from breaking any tie vote.  Delaware, West Virginia and/or California could very easily go Republican. 

With the surprise win by a rather large margin of Christine O’Donnell over heavily favored Mike Castle, it is not of the question to believe that under the existing anti-left atmosphere and prevailing momentum,  O’Donnell could pull off another surprise and take the seat away from the media annointed frontrunner Chris Coons.  But even more possible than a Republican upset in delaware are the possible ones that are in the making inCalifornia and surprisingly, West Virginia.

In West Virginia, popular Democrat incumbent Governor Joe Mancin was originally seen as a shoo-in. He is one of those truly rare relative moderate Democrats and as a long serving Governor of the state he has done well by its voters and bonded with them extensively. Especially after a string of mining disasters that hit this coal mining state pretty hard and very personally. But it would seem that winds of disenchantment with anything relating to Democrats are blowing so strongly against them that even Mancin’s personal relationship with voters is being severely curtailed when it comes to sending him to Washington, D.C.. For that reason, his Republican opponent John Raese went from nearly 33% at the end of July to 48% at the end of September while during that same time period, the popular Mancin went from 54% to 46% where he currently stands 2% behind underdog Raese.

The race is sure to be close and right now it can easily go either way but I believe the Republicans can pull this one off and at the moment I believe they will squeak it out.

In California, I can’t underestimate Barbara Boxer.

In her last race for the Senate, back in 2004, she beat her Republican opponent by 20% and became the holder of the record for the most popular votes in a statewide contested election in California. But this time around, things are not so easy and she wont be breaking any records with her popular vote this time around.

She currently has a disapproval rating higher than her approval rating, one of the largest newspapers in the state has refused to endorse because they believe that after 18 years in the Senate she has failed to distinguish herself in any meaningful way and that they see no reason to believe that she will do with another 6 years in office.

But this is California, a state that President Obama won by 24% or more than 3.2 million votes. But in addition to that, something else that could work in Boxer’s favor this time around is a statewide proposition to legalize marijuana. That ballot question could draw many Democrats who otherwise were not interested in voting this time around, to the polls and while there, they just might push the button for Boxer.

For her part though. Republican Carly Fiorina is holding her own, has all the money she needs to keep pushing her message and pulling out her vote and at the moment, while she is behind Boxer, by less than 6 percent, Boxer is still under the 50% mark, a place that no incumbent should be in this close to the election.

Anyone of these three seats could easily break for the Republican and give control of the Senate back to the G.O.P. and the possibility of this happening increases each day that we get closer to Election Day. But even if neither Delaware, California or West Virginia fail to Republicans, with a 50/50 split it is quite conceivable that any one of handful of Democrats could switch Parties or in the case of Independent Joe Lieberman, decide to causcus with the Republicans instead of the Democrats.

On the House side, Republican victories are even more lopsided than they are in the Senate.

In the House of Representatives Republicans could possibly end up with the largest number of seats they have held since 1946 when the GOP won 246 seats. Currently it looks like the G.O.P. can actually win at least 62 seats, thereby breaking the House down to 241 Republicans and 194 Democrats. This projection is much higher than most estimates being publicly announced which, for the most part range in the 40’s. But my projection still falls below that of Patrick Ruffini a reputable and leading G.O.P. strategist who has been in the trenches for quite some time now. Ruffiini believes that the figure will certainly be somewhere over 50 seats but believes a 70 seat gain is not out of the question.

No matter what, the results of the midterm elections will produce profound changes in the direction of policy and at the very least change the pace of the Obama agenda .

But there remains an aspect of the 2010 midterm elections which is being overshadowed by the anticipated turnover in Congress and it could have an more even more important long term effect on politics.

That is the 37 gubernatorial elections being held throughout the nation. Of them Republicans are expected to pick up at least 8 new statehouses bringing them from 23 where they are currently at, to 31, leaving Democrats with Governors in only 19 states.

That number is profoundly important because in 2011 the once every decade census data is poured over by the states and with they draw the new the state legislative a congressional districts lines from which Americans will elect their representatives for the decade to come. Having Governors in 31 states, will give the G.O.P. an advantage in drawing districts that it will be easier to elect Republicans in.

But in addition to that, Governors can play a crucial role in presidential elections.

There ability to coordinate their states for national candidates is invaluable and having that advantage over Democrats in almost a dozen states, will give whomever the Republican presidential nominee is a leg up over President Obama in 2012. Of course if 2010 proves to be as devastating for Democrats as it is looking, President Obama may not be the Democrat nominee. I feel that if Democrat losses are as profound as they are shaping up to be, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will resign her post and in time declare that she will offer a primary challenge to President Obama in order to save the Democratic Party and the nation from him.

Of course it only takes one world event to turn things around and in politics 5 weeks is an eternity. But if things continue going as they are right now, Democrats are going to descend into the political wilderness for years to come and President Obama is going to be a one term President who Republican can thank for bringing them back to power and whom Democrats will blame for squandering their opportunity to maintain control of Washington for years to come. 

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

Jobgate Grows: Did NY Governor Patterson Also Get A Bribe?

Bookmark and Share First Joe Sestak was offered a job by the Obama Administration if he didn’t run against the President’s preferred nominee for US Senate in Pennsylvania. Then came the recent revelation that the Administration also offered a job to Andrew Romanoff if he too did not run against the President’s preferred choice for the US Senate nomination in Colorado’s Democrat primary.

Criminologists call this a pattern. It is defined as a group of the same crimes committed over a relatively short period of time and has a common proximate cause, including (possibly) the same perpetrator.

Establishing a pattern is an important part of building a case against a suspect. It can also unveil other previously unrealized crimes.

Take, for example, New York where around the same time that Joe Sestak was offered a valuable job for dropping his challenge to Arlen Specter, another high profile incumbent Democrat was urged to not seek a Democrat nomination for Governor. It was New York’s incumbent Governor David Paterson.

Since taking office upon scandal plagued Governor Eliot Spitzer resignation, Paterson had anemic poll numbers and looked like easy pickings for Republicans. But it was common knowledge that Andrew Cuomo, the state’s Attorney General and son of New York’s former Governor Mario Cuomo, was preparing to challenge Paterson for the gubernatorial nomination.

In came President Obama.

In what became quite a public spectacle, President Obama approved the delivery of message for Paterson to step aside. The messenger was New York Congressman Gregory Meek’s.

Of the incident, The New York Times had written the following;

Mr. Paterson would not characterize what he was told by the White House, saying that he would not “discuss confidential conversations.”

They even quoted the Governor as saying “I’m not talking about any specific conversations”.

Well maybe it is time for someone to ask Governor Paterson for some specifics.

As the fall of 2009 got underway and the political playing field for the fall of 2010 started shaping up, it is clear that President Obama was trying to maximize his Party’s political chances. Everyone knew that Paterson was unlikely to recover from his anemic polling numbers, that is except accept for Patterson who at one point vowed that the only way he was leaving the Governor’s office was feet first or at the hands of the voters. So President Obama tried to clear the playing field for his preferred candidate….Andrew Cuomo.

Not long after that, he did the same thing for his preferred candidates in Pennsylvania and Colorado.

We know now for sure that there is a pattern here, but is it a series too?

As the smoke thickens around job gate, sooner or later we will have to ask where is the fire that the smoke is coming from? And how many fires have to put out?

Since Joe Sestak won his primary a few weeks ago and repeated his claim that the Obama Administration offered him a job for dropping out of the race he won, I have been calling for a special prosecutor and since then the list of witnesses that would be called in front of such an investigator has grown in size.

It went from Joe Sestak, to Rahm Emanuel who contacted former President Clinton and asked him to appeal to Sestak with a White House job offer. Then the witness list expanded to Andrew Romanoff and the man who made him a White House job offer for dropping out of a primary, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Jim Messina. And of course the list also includes President Obama who must be asked if he he actually ordered and approved these job offers that were intended to effect several different federal elections in direct defiance of the law.

Now, based on both the pattern and series we see here, New York Governor David Paterson and Congressman Gregory Meeks would have to be questioned about the White House inspired conversation aimed at getting David Paterson out of New York’s Democrat gubernatorial primary.

So far, all that can be really said is….the plot thickens.

Some may say that there is no plot. They may claim that is politics as usual and that it is commonplace for a President to use patronage for many different purposes, including the outcome of a Party nomination process.

To a degree this is true. But the truth is that there is a perfectly legal way to do this.

I once dedicated a few years to getting a Republican elected to the State Senate from Brooklyn, a county in New York that elected no Republicans to any office. Eventually it happened, and I became that Senators Chief of Staff.

Soon after that, the same Senator ran for Chairman of the Kings County Republican Committee and we won that too.

Soon after that, it was decided that in order to avoid any conflicts of interest, the state senate and county Party operations must be kept entirely separate. As a result of that
Decision, I left the position of chief of staff to run his political operations as the Executive Director of the Kings County Republican Committee.

It was in this position that I handled all official political and electoral politics.

It was in this position that I and the senator I served, avoided the type of conflict of interest that President Obama is now facing.

Had President Obama not used a member of his White House staff to initiate discussions that would effect the nomination process of several candidates, he would be less vulnerable to the current accusations. Had the right people from the Democratic National Committee approached Sestak, Romanoff and even possibly Patterson and had they not been specific about their offer, the President could have been in the clear.

But he didn’t.

Instead, he used federal government employees to manipulate the process and make inappropriate offers of patronage. He did not go through the party apparatus and he did not use language that would have avoided any serious conflict. Such language would include phrases such as;

“The President would look quite favorably upon you if you forego a run for the nomination”


“The President has other things in mind for you if you forego a run for the nomination”

Or maybe even;

“President Obama will owe you one if you forego a run for the nomination”

If any of these statements were made by an official of the Democratic National Committee, would have made the President and his Administration immune form the charges that now exist. But he didn’t. Instead he used White House staff to make inappropriate job offers in order to effect a political election.

There is no denying that there is a “pattern” of misconduct here. That has been established with Sestak and Romanoff. It could have been avoided but it wasn’t And now, the more resistance that the President has regarding an investigation by an independent federal prosecutor , the more doubt that will be raised.

Such is the case now with New York Governor David Patterson.

Bookmark and Share

1 Comment

Filed under politics

Thumbs Up, Thumbs Down. This Week’s Winners & Losers 11/16/09-11/22/09

Politics 24/7 Winners and Losers 

Bookmark and Share

Week of 11/16/09  through 11/22/09


Politics 24/7 Thumbs Down

Recovery.gov & Vice President Biden  PhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucket

In his State of the Union address, President Obama claimed that a spending package as big as his historic stimulus package, we had to make sure we spend it right. He added “Here in Washington, we’ve all seen how quickly good intentions can turn into broken promises and wasteful spending,”. He then proceeded to give the job of insuring that it was spent right and that every dime was accounted for to Vice Presdinet Bonehead….I mean Biden.  The President said “I’ve asked Vice President Biden to lead a tough, unprecedented oversight effort — because nobody messes with Joe.”  Really? If that’s true——-WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED THAN?

10 or so months since the deficit busting measure was enacted, with its main purpose being “job creation”, here we are and with the highest unemployment in over a quarter of a century and more people out work since he took office than were out of work before he took office,  3.8 million more in fact  The President insists his great stimulus package is greasing the engine that creates jobs.


It would seem that it is greasing more palms than job creating cogs and thanks to Recovery.gov and Vice President Biden we have no idea of what has really been spent, who has really gotten the money and what jobs, if any have really been created. Joe’s great oversight had Recovery.org recording that a whole host of jobs were being created in one state’s fifteenth Congressional District. Problem is the state in question only has 8 Congressional Districts. In Oklahoma, a  joint effort that received six military contracts counted the same 10 jobs six times. According to Recovery.org and the Vice President, a shoe-store owner claimed he created nine jobs on an $889.60 contract. In fact, he supplied nine pairs of shoes to the Army Corps of Engineers. In Washington state, The Mid-Willamette Valley Community Action Agency reported 205  jobs created or saved with $397,761. The money was actually used for pay raises.

There were literally hundreds of false reports such as this discovered so far——-so far!.

What this essentially means is that President Obama was full of crap when he promised the most transparent and ethical Administration ever. It means that the American people are being lied to and that the job figures coming out of the Whitehouse are wrong and not to be taken seriously. It also means that although nobody may “mess with Joe”, Joe is actually more messed up than any of us thought when we told, then Senator Obama,  that Joe Biden was a dimwitted dunce with a mouth so big he could fit both his and the President’s set of feet in it.

Recovery.Org and the man in charge of accounting for the so called stimulus money, are the biggest losers of the week. Unfortunately and more importantly, all of us are also losers because right now billions of our tax dollars are being wasted on we don’t what.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid PhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucket

I call him Pimp Daddy Reid and this week he is the biggest loser because he literally broke the bank on trying to get his healthcare bill over a procedural hurdle. He didn’t get the bill passed, he simply help avoid a filibuster thereby giving his government takeover of health care the chance to see another day of light.  But just to pass this simple procedural hurdle, he pimped out at least a fourth of his fellow Democrat Senators. None more than Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu, the Magnolia Madame. This political prostitute held out for $100 million dollars that was artfully written into the healthcare reform bill and designated to go to her state for Medicaid subsidies.

Now she can go back to Louisianans and tell them that she got them a hundred million bucks. But what she wont tell them is that she may have cost them about 650 million with a bill, that if passed, will tax the life out of the health of her state’s people.

In the meantime, Reid conducted the entire bill drafting and deal making process behind closed doors. He never once tried to work with Republicans or let them work with him and is clearly going for the nuclear option on passage of the bill. And while all this scheming is going on, lord knows how much all his deal making is costing us. He promised $100 million to Landrieu, to sit back, shut and do what he says but how much will he be paying to the other liberal whores out that there that face a tough reelection bid in 2010? How much will Max Baucus get? What will Lieberman be offered?

This week, even though Pimp Daddy Reid won a strictly party line that prevented a filibuster, he is a loser. He promised so much pork barrel spending just to make sure that his conference agreed to debate the bill that healthcare reform is already proving to be too costly. Lord knows how much more of our money he will pimp out other Democrats for to actually get them to pass the bill.

President Obama PhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucket

President Obama promised to have a health care reform bill that Americans could be confident in. He promised that the entire process creating the bill would be carried on C-Span and he promised America that his entire presidency would be the most ethical and transparent ever.

Well guess what Mr. President?  As Joe Wilson would say————YOU LIED!!!!!

The entire health care reform process was conducted behind closed doors and among Democrats only. The President’s party is preparing to go nuclear on the issue and his legislative leaders have turned the House into a brothel, chock filled with  political prostitutes.

And at the same time, President Obama has failed to even once step in and offer leadership on the issue…… Real leadership.   He has offered lip service and rhetoric but nothing more. He has not once been man enough to have his chief of staff, Rahm “Rahmbo” Emanuel, sit down and draft any aspect of this bill with the President and tell Congress, “this is something we should work with”.  In 1993, when Hillary care flopped, part of the problem was the her husband B.J. Clinton had his wife write the entire bill. Congress had nothing to do with it. In the end, they still had nothing to do with it. They simply rejected it. Now in President Obama’s case, he hasn’t written a thing. Instead he just threw this piece of raw meat on the floor of Congress and allowed for a free for all that has so far written almost 5,000 pages of healthcare legislation that pays for everything from Mary Landrieu’s reelection effort to loans to veterinarians….that’s veterinarians, not veterans.

Essentially what we have here is a mess that only promises to get messier, especially if this mess becomes law.

President Obama is truly a loser this week and I believe that this week will produce a significant dip in his poll numbers because I also believe that many other people are seeing what Politics 24/7 is seeing.

RedWhiteBlue.gif picture by kempite


POLITICS 24/7 Thumbs Up

Pat Toomey  PhotobucketPhotobucket

The Pennsylvania conservative who still believes that the Republican Party could again someday stand for the principles that once made it great, is a winner this week. He did nothing special to earn the win, but he didn’t do anything to detract from it. In the meantime, whoever is going to oppose him has really deepened themselves into a primary that will be bloody and costly.

Liberal Democrat Congressman Joe Sestak has kicked up his campaign for the Democrat nomination while Liberal Republican turned Liberal Democrat, incumbent,  Arlen “How Many Years Have I Been Here” Specter, also dug his heels in. Specter became a Democrat because he could not beatToomey in a promised Republican primary and now it is not certain if he can win a Democrat primary. And if he doesn’t win, Joe Sestak will have exhausted a lot of his own  financial resources to remain standing for the general election.

A few weeks ago Toomey was considered the underdog in the general election, but now, as his opponents start slicing eachother up, Pat Toomey is now even in polls that have Toomey in hypothetical match ups with either Sestak or Specter. Between that and the growing dissatisfaction that voters, nationwide, have with incumbents right now, the environment is continuously becoming more and more favorable for a Toomey victory in 2010. So this week, he’s a winner

Scott Fenstermaker PhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucket

Fenstermaker is the defense attorney for one of the 9/11 Five enemy combatants currently in the Guantanamo Bay prison. On Sunday, Fenstermaker came out and warned officials that they really need to reconsider having these murderers tried in a civilian court rather than in the military tribunal that they are suppose to be tried in.

After visiting with his client in Guantanamo, Fenstermaker warned that a long trial is going to create some severe national security risks due to both the testimony that will have to come out and the retaliatory acts of terror that the public trial will inspire. He also confirmed that all five will be pleading not guilty and they will use the platform given to them, to spread their anti-American messages and articulate their opinion of American foreign policy.

This is coming from the man defending one of these five terrorists. Now if the defense attorney can see this, how come the Attorney General of the United states can’t see it? The fact that Scott Fenstermakercame forward to provide this insider opinion of the dangerous situation, makes him a winner.

Ed Mangano PhotobucketPhotobucket

Who the heck is Ed Mangano? Well he just may be the next County Executive of New York’s Nassau County on Long Island. Even though Nassau County has been a fairly strong Republican county, Managano was given little chance of defeating popular incumbent Tom Souzzi. Democrats have seen their voter registrations increase and they not only took the back the county executive office but they had also taken control of the county legislature. So it was looking like Nassau County was trending towards a blue future.

However; in the November 3rd election, Republicans regained control of the county legislature and Tom Souzzi, well he was denied the opportunity to make a victory speech. Onnelection night Tommy Boy found himself with a lead that was too close to call.

Now weeks later, with 8,000 paper ballots needed to be counted, Ed Managano is leading Tom Souzzi by more than 350 votes. This is a pretty harsh blow to a man who after once winning a relatively good Republican in New York saw himself as a candidate with so much wide appeal, that he immediately decided to run for Governor. He challenged, then Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, for the Democrat nomination. Souzzi ended up with less than 29% of the vote. As it turned out, with the scandalous conduct of Spitzer that forced him out of the Governor’s office, Suozzi might have been the better choice. New Yorker’s would have had the Governor they elected and Suozzi would still have a job.

The importance of Managano’s race is not based so much on him.   It is based more on the fact that Nassau  is a crucial downstate County in statewide elections.  Without a good Republican operation and groundswell of Republican support in Nassau County that can compensate for the heavy Democrat vote that comes out of neighboring New York City, the chances for any Republican to win any statewide election are slim.   So Mangano’s come from behind signifies some important  momentum in 2010.

As it stands now, Suozzi may be out of his job and the underdog, Ed Mangano, seems to be on his way to an unanticipated election victory. There are still many ballots to be counted and Mangano could lose his lead but even if that does happen and Suozzi gets sworn in again, the fact that Mangano has gotten this far makes him a winner and a shoe in next time around. But it looks like he will not have to wait. I think he will ultimately widen his lead and be declared the winner this time around.

So long Tommy.

Stars01.gif picture by kempite

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

Attorney For 9/11 Conspirator Warns Against A Civilian Trial

Bookmark and Share    Scott Fenstermaker is the attorney for one of the 9/11 Five…….the five enemy combatants who admitted to playing a roll in the attacks of September 11th in 2001.

Under the direction of attorney General Eric Holder, the Obama Administration decided that these mass murders, who are responsible for the most devastating attack on America in our history, are to be tried in a civilian court that is only blocks away from Ground Zero in New York City.

Today, Scott Fenstermaker, the man who will be representing one of the five men facing trial. has urged that we get these guys through the system quickly.

Even their own defense attorney believes that the these five terrorists should be tried in a military tribunal instead of a civilian court.

Fenstermaker visited his clients in their Guantanamo Bay prison last week and today he reports that all five 9/11 conspirators will not deny the specific roles they played in the tragedy but they will also use the stage they are given to deliver their radical messages. According to Fenstermaker each one is preparing to give their assessment of foreign policy and how it caused them to kill 3,000 Americans. They will also make clear why they believe more must die.

Is this justice? Is this what the United States Department of Justice considers a good way to deliver justice to those who made America stand still for a time? These are of course rhetorical questions. No sane person can conclude that any good can come from allowing those who were responsible for 9/11 to deliver their political views and promote their radical Islamic message. This is not justice, it is simply a reward. A reward that allows them to try to repeat the statement they tried to make on 9/11.

Each day since the Obama Administration refused to let the enemy combatants to be tried as such, more and more evidence has been produced that proves the decision to try these terrorists in a civilian court is nothing but wrong. The recent remarks of the man who is suppose to be on these guys side in court confirm that. And even he disagrees with the venue for clients trial.

Is the Obama Administration so mentally incapacitated that they do not understand this? Does the President not realize that the heightened tension that the specter of a circus-like civilian trial will create increased national security risks and gamble with the lives of civilians? This is a decision that will haunt President Obama right up until his last day office.  In the mean time, the men behind 9/11 appreciate the paltform the President is giving them to denounce America from.

Some one is going to inevitably pay a price for this decision.  I just pray that it won’t be us, the American people who have already been the victim of one of the most massive terrorits attacks ever.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

Van Jones Resignation Is A Blow to Radical Liberalism

Bookmark and Share   President Obama’s Czar for green jobs was forced to resign on Sunday amid growing disatisfaction with his extremist views.  The resignation is a blow to the radical left as they continue to be denied tenure in what is one of the most radically liberal presidential administrations in our nations’ history.
Now former White House Green Jobs Czar Van Jones

Now former White House Green Jobs Czar Van Jones

Van Jones extremists views had no place in a civilized American administration in the first place. But evidently the radicalism of Jones did not discourage the extremist sensibilities of President Barack Obama who loves the Czarist mentality of old world Russia and made Jones an environmental czar of sorts.

After publicly calling Republicans “assholes” back in February (see video below), it was discovered that Van Jones had signed a petition attesting to his belief that the U.S. government and the Bush administration were behind the events of 9/11.  Jones now denies it, but his signature indicates differently.

It took four days but President Obama finally realized that Jones’ extreme leftwing views can’t be so openly conveyed by those he appoints to serve him.

For Jones’ part he claims that people on both sides of the aisle have urged him to stay on fight. To that I must ask….Names please? Because those people need a serious beating down come election time.

In his resignation Van Jones wrote “On the eve of historic fights for health care and clean energy, opponents of reform have mounted a vicious smear campaign against me”. He added “They are using lies and distortions to distract and divide.”

Hmmm….so people who disagree with the President on taxing the air that we breathe in the name of clean energy and who oppose socialist medicine are distracting and dividing. Yet his standing before hundreds of people and calling Republicans “assholes” is what…….a focus on unity?

The point here is that after seeing how inept the administration was at vetting those he appointed to cabinet level positions, God only knows how horrible half of the people are that he appointed to non-elected positions of power and influence that Congress had no say in at all.

Van Jones is just one such horrible example.

In regards to this incident, one leftwing propaganda site, Liberland.com, which is run by Allan Colmes of Hannity & Colnmes fame, wrote isn’t “Van Jones saying what most Republicans are thinking about liberals?”

To that I must admit he is right. Quite right. The problem is that most Republicans are not a part of the current administration. Most Republicans are not sent out to speak for the President’s administration and advising him on issues such as green jobs. They do not have the same responsibilities to the administration that Van Jones did and most of all, while Republicans officials may be thinking that liberals are “assholes” none of them are irresponsible enough and reckless enough to use such language at a time when we should be building bridges between the political divide, not burning them.

Despite Van Jones’ claims that people want him to stay on, it is clear that he is too irresponsible a man to serve in an administration and it is clear that he is not the type of man who can build bridges of understanding and harmony that will allow Americans to get over partisan differences. It is clear that Jones has to go. It is also quite evident that President Obama is a poor judge of talent and quality because Van Jones never should have been appointed to his position in the first place.

As for Van Jones himself……Good riddance asshole!  Don’t let the White House doors hit “ya where the good Lord split ‘ya.

I can say that because I am not a part of the administration and I don’t ever intend to be.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

Town Hall Meeting Shows That Americans Do Not Believe That Obama Is Sincere

Bookmark and Share    Today I listened to Senator John McCain’s town hall meeting on healthcare reform in Sun City, Arizona. He brought up many valid points and pretty much adhered to the widely held Republican ideas regarding what they believe should Americans have little faith left in President Obama, already!be the first steps for effective reforms. But aside from all the minutia and valid arguments presented at the event, one thing stood out to me.

As Senator McCain was wrapping up his remarks, he said, “I believe President Obama is being sincere on the issue“. He was about to continue by saying “but we don’t agree on the approach that we should take“, but the large crowd in attendance interrupted the Senator with jeers and boos before he could finish his statement.

The demonstrated disapproval from the audience was not directed at the Senator as much as it was a response to how sincere they believe the President is on the issue.

Senator McCain calmly encouraged the crowd not to think the President is insincere but it did not really change any minds in the audience. The incident shed light on an important part of President Obama’s problem not only on healthcare but in general. There is a significant segment of the population who do not trust the President. They do not necessarily believe in him or the much touted mantra of “change” that he asked us to believe in when he was running for election to the presidency.

Without actual accurate polling to refer to, I will not claim that the segment of society that feels this way is a clear majority of the population, but it is a significant enough number of Americans to make it hard for the President to ram through his entire legislative agenda in a mere eight months and there is nothing to make them think otherwise.

For example, as the nonpartisan C.B.O. (Congressional Budget Office) released a report indicating that the recession we are in is much deeper than opinions have estimated, they also pointed out that the President’s current spending spree will lead to a deficit of $9 trillion over 10 years. That is $2 trillion more than was forecasted earlier this year.

Other factors indicated that while there may be ever so slight recovery signals in the economy, an inordinate number of Americans will continue to be jobless for much longer than expected and well in to next year.

These nonpartisan assessments do not help make Americans believe in President Obama’s economic supervision or his proposed stimulus packages which White House talking point memo’s has urged Democrats to refer to not as a stimulus package but rather a recovery plan.

The move even led liberal loon Congressman Elmer Fudd , I mean Barney Frank, of Massachusetts to state “I’m not supposed to call it stimulus. The messaging experts in Washington have told us we’re supposed to call it the ‘recovery plan’ because that works out better with focus groups. I was puzzled by that because I have found that most people would rather be stimulated than recover.”

Smart remarks from asinine legislators aside, much of the American people are not confident in what President Obama is doing.

The best interpretation of the condition of the economy that the public has heard coming from economic officials in the White House was that things aren’t as bad as they could be. That is not a glowing assessment and does little to build confidence.

Now, as presented by the C.B.O., more dire news is released.

All of this is helping to cause Americans to distrust the President. After almost eight months in office, a sizeable portion of Americans have become more doubtful about the President than assured by him.

This lack of confidence, this lack of belief in him, makes it all the more difficult for him to gain support for another expensive, deficit exploding, questionably effective, spending plan that would create government run healthcare in America.

Couple this with an obvious lack of bipartisanship on the part of the President and as indicated by those in attendance at John McCain’s town hall, a lack of confidence in him has begun to fester and turn into a perceived lack of sincerity.

That is a dangerous sentiment for people to have of their leader and left unchecked things will only get worse. If this sense sets in, the Democrat ship will sink fast and not only will its captain, the President, go down with the ship, so will many of the Democrat hands on deck.

Right now, in the only two races for governor up this year, Republicans have wide leads over their Democrat opponents. In Nevada Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid lags behind his likely Republican opponent by double digits. None of this is an indication of people believing in change that they were asked to believe in.

I believe that the time has come for President Obama to change gears. I think he must begin to work with his opponents instead of chastising them and calling them “mobs” or placing them on watch lists and asking Americans to report those who offer dissenting opinions to the government.

On healthcare, I have repeatedly pointed out that the only way to achieve any reforms will be through a sincere bipartisan effort. I have pointed out that the lack of bipartisan commitment was the downfall of other attempts at reform dating as far back as the 1930’s under FRDR and as recently as the early 90’s under Bill Clinton. Why President Obama, a supposedly brilliant and skilled leader, has chosen to take the same partisan approach that has consistently failed throughout history is beyond me. Yet just a week ago reports confirmed that the White House considered reconciliation, the nuclear, go-it-alone, option that would push health reforms through with only Democrat support.

Thinking like that helps to make people believe that President Obama is insincere. It makes the President look less a leader than a partisan hack.

None of this instills faith in him.

After seeing the Democrats try to ram through such measures as the crap-and-tax bill which would tax the air that we breathe and amount to the greatest transfer of wealth in history and after seeing the President try to demand that healthcare reforms got passed before the August recess Americans have become skeptical. They have been give reason to wonder if insincere motives are leading the ruling regime to get pass bills before people have the chance to read them.

If President Obama does not quickly change gears, I think it is safe to say that the wheels rolling the change he wants us to believe will come unhinged and none of what he hoped to achieve will be realized. Perhaps his all-or-nothing approach to government should be explored again. After all, it is that same approach which President Obama and others criticized former President Bush for. They chastised him for not trying to build consensus in foreign policy. They berated him when in regards to terrorism he told the world “you’re either with us or against us.”

Well that is the same path that President Obama and his liberal cohorts in Congress are taking. Will they continue to prove me right in pointing out that Democrats have become a hypocritical based party? Or will they begin to act responsibility and convince Americans of their sincerity on the issues?

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics



Bookmark and Share    President Obama delivered a powerful speech that focused on bipartisanship and counted on the hope that the poor performance of the private sector over the past two years has forced people to have more faith in government and want more government action.

Undeniably well received, the speech was also undeniably expected.

President Obama believes that government is the answer to all our problems and although he made a point of stating that he does not believe in bigger government, he never backed away from more government control . In fact three extraordinary government based goals were punctuated in President Obama’s speech. One was for a government run universal health care project that is akin to LBJ’s expansion of social economic welfare in the 60’s.

Another lofty target laid out was the President’s cap and trade regulations on carbon. That well intended environmental goal will revolutionize our economy and produce some economic winners and many losers and, at best negligible, environmental results.

The final foray into change offered by President Obama was his initiatives which would put education in the domain of government and under its control from the elementary level through the college level.

However, in the Republican response to the President, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal reminded us that the strength in America’s future lays not in government but our people.

Acknowledging the fact that Washington must lead, Jindal made it clear that more money and power in the hands of Washington is not leadership.

Despite the trappings of Washington power and the deserved traditional pomp and circumstances of the Presidency, Governor Jindal presented his case under less impressive circumstances than the President, but his message was as resounding as the Presidents.

Governor Jindal addressed the need to stabilize housing markets, increase energy efficiency and the use of alternative energy sources, and the need to grow our economy. But his approach to those efforts did not rely on the government bureaucracy which has proven itself unable to effectively deliver services, monitor itself or act with speed and efficiency.

Having to follow President Obama in a response, Bobby Jindal faced a daunting task. He needed to deliver a response that could appropriately counter the President and although the grandiosity of his oration may not have met the emotional height of President Obama’s, the content did.

One speech relied on the collective will, determination and stamina of the people. The other relied on government replacing individual will, determination and stamina with a bureaucracy.

Jindal’s response was not made an easier by the fact that President Obama is undeniably one of our greatest contemporary political orators Any message that the President delivers is likely to strike a chord in the hearts and minds of citizens. Much the same way that Ronald Reagan did when he ruled the bully pulpit.

Both Obama and Reagan used the bully pulpit quite effectively. The difference between the two though, existed in content.

President Obama uses the bully pulpit to promote government as the key to the success of our people.

President Reagan used the bully pulpit to promote our people as the key to the success of our government.

President Obama sees government as the tool which people are empowered by while President Reagan saw people are the source to any power that the government is given.

It is a point noted when we look at the content of President Obama’s speech.

In it , government is the source of our success. Through incremental moves to socializing medicine, education and industry, under the leadership of President Obama, things will improve. In his speech, the source to a sustainable success is the bureaucracy which has proven itself to be slow, cumbersome, unruly, ineffective and inefficient. We are to believe that a government which can’t control itself or monitor itself is suppose to be the source of our wealth.

This is the same government that operates a postal service that is in the red, and has to increase rates while cutting services.

Yet, according to President Obama, government is the answer.

Bobby Jindal’s response to President Obama stated the opposite and although he lacked the suspense and emotion of the President, the content of his speech spoke to the fact that government bureaucracy holds no candle to the power of a free people. He spoke to the principles that our nation was founded on. The principles that we will have to someday struggle to recapture as we slowly move away from a people driven government to a government driven people.

In his address, governor Jindal stated that where Republicans agree with the President, we “must be his most ardent supporters.” With that I agree. However; I fear that that the President’s incremental adoption of the socialist policies that America has long fought against will provide little opportunity to demonstrate any ardent support.

Bookmark and Share


Governor Bobby Jindal’s Republican response to President Obama




What did Soviet Socialists use before they had candles?
Answer: electricity.




Leave a comment

Filed under politics


antspreadwealthBookmark and Share   With wide spread electoral support for “spreading the wealth” through big government, President Obama and liberal leaders Pelosi and Reid , are well on the way to advancing their socialist conversion of our democracy.
It needs to be mentioned that Republicans have also helped in this effort.
Of course only three Republican federal office holders supported the current American economic socialization package but the sudden unwillingness of many Republicans to allow what they have allowed in the past is to little too late.
In the past a healthy block of Republicans in the house and senate have opposed fascist economic policies but not enough to help save the party from defeat in the past two election cycles. An abandonment of our antiestablishment mentality, the acceptance of political largess and a lack of adherence to conservative policy has helped to undermine the G.O.P.’s purpose and our nations economic and social health.
The fact that only three Republicans jumped on board to the recent multi hundred billion dollar stimulus package is encouraging. It shows that the G.O.P. may have learned a lesson and is getting back on track and back on message.

That is yet to be seen though.

If it is in fact true, it still remains to be seen if they are willing to maintain their rediscovered principles if and when they get back control of government.

But what is heartening to know is that there definitely are leaders outside of congress who are willing to keep their conservative beliefs and principles intact.

Several Republican Governors have indicated that they would rather do the hard work it takes to build a strong, sustainable economy that is based on the principles of our free society and free markets as opposed to selling their political souls for federal dollars that will do little more than place a band aid on an economic gash that requires stitches.

Governors such as South Carolina’s Mark Sanford and Louisiana’s Bobby Jindahl have not exactly signed the mortgage papers for their states with the federal government. Joining them are also Alaska’s Governor Palin, Mississippi’s Haley Barbour and Idaho’s Butch Otter.

These Governors have not entirely looked the gift horse in the mouth. They have indicated a willingness to accept some of the money trickling down from the federal bureaucracy. But the monies they are willing to accept for their states are those which do not come along with strings that are attached to regressive policies that are damaging to their states in the long run.

One example cited is additional funds for unemployment. According to the pork riddled, economic wealth socialization boondoggle, states accepting supplemental federal unemployment funds must extend their state unemployment eligibility to part-time workers.antmoney-strings1

The move would force states to engage in an expansion of a governmental safety net that is meant to help full time employees stay afloat until they can be gainfully reemployed. It is not meant as a benefit to be exploited by teenagers who lose their part-time jobs because of the start of school or due to juvenile, irresponsible, insubordinate behavior and job performance.

The measure would in fact turn the unemployment insurance program into a system that would produce a long term need to drastically increase unemployment withholding taxes and still not be able to sustain the level of unemployment insurance benefits needed to effectively aid those who do find themselves unemployed.

The expansion of unemployment to include part-time workers is just one of many strings attached to the dangerous precedence created by the so-called recovery package.

Yet while liberals in congress attached strings that would expand the size of government and it’s socio-economic reach, they refused to exercise a scintilla of fiscally conservative policy.

They refuse to accept withholding stimulus money from businesses that did not participate in the -E-Verification system that would help insure that these businesses do not hire illegal immigrants and spend American economic dollars on illegal residents instead of American citizens.

Rather than withhold federal stimulus dollars from states that maintained sanctuary city policies, liberals insured that the spreading of the Americans taxpayers wealth was divvied up among illegal immigrants and invading hordes.

Governor’s were not a part of the Capitol Hill fight over the economic socialization bill that liberals passed with the help of three liberal Republican senators. But now that the bill has passed and been signed into law by the President, Governors are on the frontline of the fight.

They will be the ones either buying into the decline of our democratic republic or they will reject many of the federal bribes aimed at reforming our state governments from states where the opportunity to create wealth is endless or to ones where the government is the source of a wealth that they use to spread as they wish.

Bookmark and Share



“The United States have developed a new weapon that destroys people but it leaves buildings standing. It’s called the stock market.” —Jay Leno

Leave a comment

Filed under politics


Bookmark and Share     In 2006 Maryland and Virginia elected rising stars in the Democratic party to govern them.

Virginia Governor Tim kaine

Virginia Governor Tim kaine

Tim Kaine took control of Virginia and Martin O’Malley took over Maryland. The two of them are quite alike. They are Catholics with experience as mayors and they both promised to “move” their states “forward”.

They promised to alleviate the congestion problems in their Washington, D.C.suburbs and to improve the quality of life in general. They also ran during elections cycles that were quite good for Democrats.

Now,  two years later, both of these gentlemen are facing a change in plans.

Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley

Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley

The economic downturn has severely altered their plans for alleviating congestion and improving the quality of life. That is largely because all of their plans were based on more spending and now, states do not have enough money to increase spending.

Of course both of these states could do what New Jersey does. They could raise taxes, tolls and tariffs on everything from gardening to joining a gym. But that might not be the best way for Tim Kaine to win an election in Virginia and this year he is running for reelection.

New Jersey Governor jon Corzine

New Jersey Governor jon Corzine

The truth of the matter is that this year, Tim Kaine shares a lot in common, not only with Maryland’s O’Malley but with New Jersey’s Jon Corzine.

New Jersey and Virginia are the only two states in the nation electing Governor’s and Corzine., like Kaine, faces a derailment of his intended path, paths that were based on increased spending.  Now they both face out of control budgets that rely on help from the federal government.

They are not the only states with such troubles but they are the only two who are governing states that will become electoral battlegrounds.

With the focus on Virginia and New Jersey, every consultant, election lawyer and celebrity will be traveling to New Jersey and Virginia to help pull their respective side across the finish line and into first place.

For Democrats the election could be a reaffirmation of their majority status and their total control in Washington. At this point in time it will not necessarily be a referendum on President Barack Obama or the Democratic party but during the course of the next 7 months, it could easily become one .

President Obama is the titular head of the Democratic party and Tim Kaine is now the Chairman of the party. That means that anything Democrats do nationally could easily be echoed in Virginia and New Jersey voters could easily also use their vote as a form of protest.

We are intertwined and people react to events, regardless of where they happen or who is in question.

Former Denator Bill Bradley

Former Senator Bill Bradley

In 1990 New Jersey’s Bill Bradley was running for reelection to the United States Senate. Republicans nominated a little known county Freeholder named Christie Whitman. Bradley should not have had any problems winning reelection but with a bit more than 1.9 million votes cast, he barely won.

Former NJ Governor & EPA Director Christie whitman

Former NJ Governor & EPA Director Christie whitman


Well fellow Democrat, New Jersey Governor Jim Florio, had raised state taxes by $2.8 billion. Voters were madder than ever and even though Florio was not on the ballot, they took their anger out on Bradley. Out known and outspent by Bradley, Whitman came within 56,000 votes of unseating Bradley and catapulted herself into the Governor’s mansion when it came time to run against Jim Florio.

The same type of backlash could happen in Virginia and again in New Jersey in this election cycle if Democrats take their tax and spend policies too far.

In New Jersey, Governor Jon Corzine has already gone too far and he simply promises to go even further. His first budget, almost three years ago, raised taxes by nearly $2 billion dollars and like Florio, he invented a few new taxes. And like Tim Kaine, all of Jon Corzine’s promises relied on increased spending.

Former NJ Governor Jim Florio

Former NJ Governor Jim Florio

So Democrats in Virginia and New Jersey are going to have a tough go at it. Corzine more than Kaine, but as the new Chairman of the Democrat National Committee, Tim Kaine could find himself on par with Corzine by the time elections roll around in November.

As for Republicans, their races will not be easy.

At the moment, Democrats have the upper hand in fundraising and organization. They also have a President with a clean slate and if the President maintains his current popularity he could be an asset to them and he will surely be one of those “celebrities” shuttling back and forth between D.C, Virginia and New Jersey.

But Republicans have the most at stake.


RNC Chairman Mike Steele

The RNC’s new national Chairman, Mike Steele promises to make New Jersey and Virginia priorities in the coming months and losing in these two states will only deepen the rut we are in.

Victories in these two states will go along way in proving that the G.O.P. may be down but they are not out and it could set the stage for their resurgence.

Perhaps the best way to boost their fortunes will be by highlighting the common bond that exists not only between Virginia’s Tim Kaine and Maryland’s O’Malley or Tim Kaine and New Jersey’s Jon Corzine …..Spending.

All of these people promised to spend our way into happiness and they promised to do so with taxpayers money. But now that we do not have any money to spare, their promises are broken and the only way they can try to stay on their promised courses is by taxing us even more.

Republicans need to point out that Democrat leadership , from Obama to Kaine, Corzine, O’Malley and every liberal in between, is based on taxing and spending and after all their government spending is said and done, all they have left to show for it is the need to raise taxes and spend some more.

Pointing out the wrongness of liberal policy alone is not enough though.

New Jersey and Virginia Republicans will need to nominate conservative oriented candidates for governor. They can not put forward nominees that are wishy-washy and afraid to go out on a limb and stand against initiatives designed at “spreading the wealth”.

And then they must offer solutions. Solutions that do not require government spending or loony tune government mandates like the low income housing mandates initiated by New Jersey’s Council On Affordable Housing.

If Republicans in New Jersey and Virginia can recapture their inherent conservative oriented ideology, they just might be able to reclaim some territory that is currently controlled by vulnerable liberals.

Either way, brace yourself. Whether you live in these battleground states or not, the 2009 election cycle will be intense.

Bookmark and Share
A young man’s parents were trying to figure out what their son’s future career would be so they decided to give him a test.

They took a twenty dollar bill, a Bible, and a bottle of whiskey, and put them on the front hall table. Then they hid, hoping he would think they weren’t at home. The father told the mother, “If he takes the money he will be a businessman, if he takes the Bible he will be a clergyman but if he takes the bottle of whiskey, I’m afraid our son will be a drunkard.”

So the parents took their place in the nearby closet and waited nervously. Peeping through the keyhole they saw their son arrive home. He saw the note they had left, saying they’d be home later. Then, he took the twenty dollar bill, looked at it against the light, and slid it in his pocket. After that, he took the Bible, flicked through it, and took it also. Finally, he grabbed the bottle, opened it, and took a whiff to be assured of the quality. Then he left for his room, carrying all the three items.

The father slapped his forehead and said, “Darn, it’s even worse than I could ever have imagined…”

“What do you mean?” his wife asked.

“Our son is going to be a politician!” replied the very unhappy father.

Leave a comment

Filed under politics


Bookmark and Share     When Tom Daschle served as the Democrats senate leader he was not very cooperative when it came to presidential appointments. In fact in 2004 Daschle prevented up-and-down votes on ten of President Bush’s nominees to federal courts of appeals.


Back then Tom Daschle believed that there were issues and factors that surpassed the judgment of the President and that President’s constitutionally guaranteed right to appoint individuals to positions that they saw fit.

Little more than four years later Tom Daschle now believes that the President has the right to appoint him to a position despite ethical breaches.

Tom Daschle is,was, and will always be a liberal and as such he always possesses a level of hypocrisy that is astounding.

In 2004 he felt that because the Presidents judicial appointments were conservative, the President should be denied them. Daschle simply disagreed with the President. Those ten judges did not conduct any moral, ethical or legal breaches of conduct or activity. They just weren’t liberal. So for that Daschle, held up the courts and denied the President his judicial appointments.

Now in 2009 Tom Daschle wants us to ignore his own unethical conduct and allow him to be appointed Secretary of Health and Human Services simply because the President wants him.

For his part President Obama wants us to accept his appointment of Tom Daschle to the HHS position because he believes that Tom Daschle is the best person for the job.

Never mind that President Obama made a big deal about constructing the most open, honest and ethical administration in history. Never mind the fact that President Obama stated that he wants his administration to be above reproach.

None of that is suppose to matter when it comes to giving President Obama a stamp of approval. Regardless of his supposedly pristine approach to government we should overlook the ethical breaches of those who he wants to work with.

Despite the fact that Tom Daschle collected over two hundred thousand dollars from the very health care industry that he wants to reform, we should simply approve of the move and give Tom Daschle a thumbs up.

We should approve of President Obama’s choice of Tom Dascle for HHS Secretary despite the fact that he is a tax cheat who claims that he simply saw the year or more of the use of a car and chauffer as an ordinary gift from a friend.

We are to believe that a one hundred and forty thousand dollar gift from a political patron was normal and that it really has no bearing on anything.

Well you know what?. I don’t buy it.

I do not believe that a man who has been given two hundred thousand dollars by an industry can effectively reform and police that industry for the American people.

I do not believe that a man who neglects to pay taxes on services amounting to one hundred and forty thousand dollars demonstrates the ethical sincerity that we need in government.

Tell me, do you think the taxes on that “gift” would have ever been paid had Tom Daschle not been thrust back into the spotlight?

No. He promises to pay the taxes due on those services because he was going to get caught.

As for President Obama, well I have been giving him the benefit of the doubt. He is my President and he has one heck of job to do. He has only been in office for a matter of weeks and he deserves to at least get his footing before anyone tries to knock him off balance. So I have shied away from any harsh criticism, but the inherent hypocrisy of liberal thinking is building to a crescendo and I can not sit idly by and say, sure go ahead, do what you want, ethics do not matter.

The Obama administration is not off to a good start.

The most ethical administration in history didn’t even take office before one cabinet member-designate , New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, had to withdraw his nomination as Commerce Secretary because he is being investigated for selling legislative favors in turn for substantial campaign donations.

Right there it became obvious that the Obama vetting process was faulty.

But then, during confirmation hearings, it became clear that Obama’s choice for Secretary of the Treasury was a tax cheat. That appointment claimed that he didn’t understand the tax code.

Now that’s encouraging, isn’t it. The man in charge of our treasury doesn’t even understand the tax codes he will rule over. Yet despite his lack of familiarity with his job and his ethical breaches, the senate overlooked it all because President Obama felt he was the best man for the job.

Now this.

Tom Daschle takes money from the industry he will monitor and neglects to pay his taxes.

Is this anyway to gain our confidence in this administration or its sincerity?

Is this anyway for the most ethical administration in history to begin?

I for one do not accept the ethical breaches and illegal conduct of these individuals. I believe that the Obama administration better start saying what it means. Either they are above reproach or they are not.

Right now they are not.

Right now they are making so many exceptions to their own rules of conduct that they cannot be believed.

The only thing that would anger me more than what the Obama administration is doing to ethics would be for any Republican to vote in the affirmative when it comes to confirming Tom Daschle’s nomination.

Any Republican that can approve of Daschle is simply playing the game and voting for Tom Daschle because he is a former member of their exclusive club….the senate.

Republicans need to be the loyal opposition here. They need to keep President Obama to his word and realize that Tom Daschle is far from meeting the standards set by the President.

And if that isn’t enough I have ten other reasons for denying President Obama his first choice for Secretary of Health and Human Services. Those ten reasons are the ten judges, whose appointments to the bench, Tom Daschle denied, simply because he didn’t like them.

Bookmark and Share

NASA was celebrating, they had just made the scientific breakthrough of a lifetime.

As they were uncorking a bottle of champagne, the head scientist at NASA, asked everyone to be quiet as he had received a congratulatory phone call from the President of the United States.

He picked up a special red phone, and spoke into it.

Mr. President,” he said, grinning broadly, “after fifteen years of hard research costing billions of dollars, we have finally found intelligent life on Mars.”

He listened for a second, and his smile gradually disappeared, replaced by a frown.

He said, “But that’s impossible … we could never do it. … yes Mr. President,” and hung up the phone. He addressed the crowd of scientists staring at him curiously.

“I have some bad news,” he said, “the President said that now that we’ve found intelligent life on Mars … he wants us to try to find it in Congress.”

Leave a comment

Filed under politics