Tag Archives: youtube

Santorum Ad Tells Us What the “DEAL” with Newt Gingrich is

Bookmark and Share Fresh off of his poor third place showing in Florida, Rick Santorum is trying to take advantage of Newt Gingrich’s big 15% second place loss to Mitt Romney in the Sunshine State by reclaiming the title of “conservative alternative” to Mitt Romney, the big winner in Tuesday’s primary contest [see the ad below this post].

The ad entitled “Deal”, is a very powerful condemnation of Gingrich which catches you off guard with opening arguments that would have you think the ad is comparing Santorum to his three Republican rivals, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, and Ron Paul. It claims that the three politicians in question support legislative policies which are conservative anathema; Cap-and-Trade, amnesty, and the government bailouts. It would be bad enough for Santorum’s Republican rivals to have to wear all three of those issues around their necks, but the surprise comes when it is revealed that three politicians in question are not Romney, Paul, and Gingrich but rather President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Newt Gingrich.

The surprise comparison is twice as debilitating for Gingrich because while you might expect Mitt Romney to be accused of being too liberal, this ad avoids Romney and shockingly puts Newt Gingrich in an entirely differently league, one that puts him directly in the room with iconic liberals Obama and Pelosi.

The ad happens to be one of the most effective of this campaign cycle to date. It is produced well and is quite creative. It also presents Santorum’s case against Newt in a way that avoids being overly outlandish and to the point of being too hard to believe.

Yet while the ad is quite good, it is also indicative of the unfortunate position that Rick Santorum finds himself in. This ad pits him against Newt Gingrich, not frontrunner Mitt Romney, and it signals the fact that Santorum knows he is still competing in a primary within the primary………. the conservative primary within the Republican primary. It demonstrates that Rick Santorum is in a desperate fight to just get in to the race against Mitt Romney.

The good news for Santorum is that it is quite possible that conservatives have not yet ensconced themselves in Newt’s camp and Rick could still possibly win over a majority of them. One most notable conservative to recently go to Santorum’s side is Michele Malkin, a talking head with a considerably large conservative following. But at the same time it is a little late in this race for Santorum to hope his horse places or shows when the only ticket he can cash in on is the one to win.

But hope springs eternal and this ad is has a spin on it that forces me to give Rick Santorum a lot of credit, even though I believe it will help Mitt Romney than it will help Santorum.

Advertisements

5 Comments

Filed under politics

Do Democrats and President Obama Get the Message Voters In New York Sent Them?

Bookmark and Share Last night’s win of Republican Bob Turner in the special election to replace disgraced Congressman Anthony Weiner was a truly loud message to President Obama and Democrats. And while it does not necessarily mean that President Obama is surely going to be defeated in 2012, the fact that a Republican won this traditionally Democrat district with a 3 to one Democrat to Republican registration ratio in the heart of liberal New York City does mean trouble for Democrats.

In the video below the newly elected Congressman explains why he believes he won.

 

Turner is correct.

Normally winning the Democrat nomination for anything in this district is tantamount to winning the election. The only reason that was not the case this time was because voters are angry and wanted to let President Obama know that. Most important here is that this is a district heavily populated by a large Jewish constituency. Traditionally, the Jewish vote has mainly gone to Democrats but in this particular election, many Jewish voters came out to make it clear to President Obama that they oppose his policies involving Israel.

This will be a problem for the President in 2012. There is little he can do between now and then to reclaim favor among a substantial portion of the Jewish vote. Unless the President does a total 180 degree turn on many of his Israel related positions, he will have a hard time reaching the 270 electoral votes needed to win reelection. The Jewish community will not easily forget President Obama’s disrespect of Prime Minister Netanyahu when he withdrew from a meeting to eat dinner and left the Prime Minister  waiting for the President to finish his meal. And more importantly than that, Jews will not simply ignore President Obama’s request for Israel to return to its 1967 borders which prohibit Israel from properly defending itself.

As demonstrated in NY-9, the general anti-Semitic impression that the President’s actions and policies has generated within the Jewish community may not affect him very much in states with low Jewish populations like Utah, but many of those states are not expected to vote for President Obama anyway. But in a state like Florida which has one of the largest Jewish populations in the nation, the Jewish vote can make all the difference to President Obama’s reelection chances. There, without the Jewish vote, President Obama is sure to lose and without Florida, there are few if any realistic mathematical combination of state electoral votes that he can piece together to arrive at 270 electoral votes.

Yet Democrats are doing their very best to try to put a happy face on the message that the voters of New York’s 9th congressional district sent them on Tuesday.

In interviews the morning after the special election in New York, Democrat National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, who happens to represent a Florida district that is also heavily Jewish, used an interview regarding their loss of this seat and trying to make the case that it wasn’t a harbinger of things to come. According to Wasserman-Schultz;;

“It’s a very difficult district for Democrats”.

“It’s a very difficult district for Democrats”? —— What? ……. Is she joking?

The only way New York’s 9th CD would be difficult for a Democrat to win is if the name of the Democrat on the ballot was Adolf Hitler or Osama bin Laden. Wasserman-Schultz’ claim that this is a hard distrcit for Democrats to win in is so ridiculous that she should be fined for being too stupid to talk.

The fact is, that if President Obama been able to give voters, including Democrat voters, a reason to believe in him, they will. But now that the recession we are in is the longest in our history, and everything from job numbers to retail sales continue to be down, Americans are growing impatient. They now want a change from the “change” that candidate Obama promised in 2008. And to make matters worse, President Obama’s latest attempt to save face and the economy with his speech to a joint session of Congress and his American Jobs Act, has done little more than reinforce voters negative impressions of him. General consensus is that his new plan is anything but new and in truth,  just a regurgitation of the policies and plans that have gotten us to where we are today.

This is why the special election in NY-9 was so “difficult for Democrats”.

It is why Democrats lost control of the House of Representatives in a historic wave election that elected more Republicans to Congress than we have seen since the 40’s. And it is why Democrats are headed to a very rough 2012 election cycle.

Fortunately for Republicans, Democrats like President Obama and DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz don’t want to hear the message that people of New York’s Brooklyn and Queens sent them on Tuesday. But like President Obama himself said, the election is not for 14 months and we can’t afford to wait 14 months to get this economy going. Well Mr. President, the voters also can’t wait 14 months for you to get their message. You should have gotten that message in November of 2010, but clearly you didn’t and so now, there is little expectation for you to get it now.

Mr. President, it’s time to stop shouting “pass this bill”. It’s time to shut your mouth, open your ears, and hear the voice of the voters who are telling you to change direction.

Bookmark and Share

1 Comment

Filed under politics

DNC Ad Attacks GOP With CPAC

Bookmark and Share  In what can only be viewed as a sign of things to come, the Democratic National Committee is returning to their attempts at demonizing Republicans by trying to paint their conservative base as heartless fiends and maniacal evil scientists who would dare to experiment with such things as the ability for the free market to improve quality and life in America. In a video put out this week by the DNC, clips from CPAC, the American Conservative Union’s annual Conservative Political Action Conference.

The video uses clips of cheering CPAC audiences as speakers talk of replacing the E.P.A, abolishing the Board of Education and allowing people to opt out of Social Security. After the evil Republicans have their say, Steny Hoyer and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz are spliced in as they discuss how Democrats are making sure that America is competitive enough to insure is a stronger economic future. The video then goes to a clip of President Obama from his State of the Union Address in which he discusses the entrepreneurial spirit of Americans and how as a nation “we do big things.”

What the ad does not tell you is that for Democrats, those big things are big government and big government programs which replace the American entrepreneurial spirit with bureaucratic mandates and regulations that have a return on the dollar that is less than the cost required to implement.

Another interesting thing to point out is that, the way I see it, the DNC seems to also be banking on President Obama’s supposed great oratory skills as means to appeal to the hearts and minds of the American voter. Not that there is anything wrong with that. A President should be able to do so, but one must be able to tap into American sentiments if they wish to be successful at such attempts. One must be Reaganesque if they wish to do that. The problem is we knew Ronald Reagan and Barack Obama is no Ronald Reagan. Nice try though.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

Midterm Election Has Massachusetts Doing The Barney Shuffle

Barney Frank is Not Happy

With the purchase of a cheap suit and tie from J.C. Penny’s,  a green painted mask, and a twitter message calling for a local dancer who “can do contemporary moves and 1970s disco moves,” the campaign of Massachusetts congressional  candidate Sean Bielat took an obnoxious, irresponsible career politician and turned him into a video sensation that is sure to try drive a point home to voters. 

In what is undoubtedly one of the most amusing, yet truthful ads of the 2010 midterm election, Republican Sean Bielat and his team have taken the words of  Barney “Big Fannie & Freddie Mac”  Frank, and put them to music in a diddy called” The Barney Funk”   Then after a few applicants demonstrated their moves, the Bielat team, picked one agile dancer to don a suit, tie, and green painted mask as they danced to a lyrical versions of some of Rep. Frank’s most memorable to phrases. 

The result was the “Barney Shuffle” and driving home of the message that despite more than thirty years in offfice and his role in the congressional regulating scandal that was responsible for the housing market collapse which ushered in a worldwide economic crisis, Barney Frank simply dances around the issues, never addressing the real problems or his hand in adding to those problems.

According to the Bielat campaign:

” Nobody dances around the issues quite like Barney Frank.

Frank has tap danced around his support for bank bailouts, a failed stimulus, and job-killing tax increases. He has strutted back and forth on the issue of homeownership, despite a clear record of promoting it for unqualified buyers which lead to the housing collapse.  
 
Frank has twisted the facts about giving his friend’s bank a $200 million taxpayer-funded bailout, and waltzed away from his vote to nationalize healthcare.  Most recently, he attempted to side-step a controversy surrounding a luxurious Virgin Islands vacation with a billionaire hedge fund manager.
 
It’s time to end the Washington Hustle. On November 2, the show’s over.”
 
 A  picture may certainly be worth a thousand words but this video is priceless and certainly worth your time.  So sit back, relax and allow and as Election Day approaches, allow the visions of Barney to dance in your head  just like children children with visions of sugar plums dancing in their heads as the holidays approach.
 
 
  
   

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

Call Me Don “VETO”

Bookmark and Share    The following is a political  ad and campaign statement for use in an online, virtual presidential campaign that takes place at U4Prez.com

The ad and subsequent speech that support the ad’s message may be part of a game of fantasy politics, but they also reflect the opinions of its creator, ….me,……..Kempite.

If you have not yet become a part of U4Prez.com, do so now.  Beyond the gaming aspect of finessing your own campaign for President, U4Prez provides a platform for interesting and often intense debate ith an array of fellow Americans who are willing to go to their graves in defense of their political opinions and beliefs.

The following is just one example of the many creative angles that can be used to advance your opinions and candidacy on U4Prez.  This particular ad and statement was prompted by a video advertisement contest currently being sponsored by members of the site.

We need a President who will use the power of the veto.

America needs a President who will say no even to good legislation if it brings with it dozens of bad legislative amendments and billions of dollars of pork.

The power of the veto is not something to be taken lightly. It is not something that should be used in any willy-nilly manner. A President must have good reason to overrule the majority vote of the people’s house and require a supermajority to undo such objection. This power is great and, more often than not, the votes required to override presidential vetoes are not often achieved.

Since the time of George Washington to the time of George W. Bush, American presidents have cast a total of 2,562 vetoes. And of that total number, only 110 have been successfully overturned. That is little more than 4% of all the vetoes cast throughout our history.

So clearly, with an almost 96% success rate, President’s have the advantage.

It is that advantage which must not be carelessly abused, but responsibly used.

Zachary Taylor and Millard Fillmore were the last Presidents we ever had that never used their veto. Most recently, President George W. Bush had gone 1,889 days without issuing a single veto. It was more than 5 years before he saw fit to object to any legislation.

During that span of time, President Bush did however approve of and sign in to law 1,091 bills.

I tend to believe that if it were my signature required to turn that many proposals into the laws of the land, I would probably not want to put my John Hancock on all of those 1,091 pieces of legislation. I have a feeling that not all of the bills put before the President were perfect and that some of them contained either concepts or spending that I would have found objectionable. But it wasn’t until George W. Bush’s last few years in office, specifically the two years that Democrats controlled the House of Representatives, that George W. Bush finally objected to something that came across his desk. In the end, he vetoed a grand total of twelve bills and of those twelve, four were overridden.

By contrast, Franklin Roosevelt had much to object to.

Although his numbers are skewed because of his longest in history service as President, he still objected to much that Congress sent him. He vetoed 635 pieces of legislation. And of those, only 9 were successfully overridden.

Somewhere between George W. Bush and FDR probably lies the happy median regarding a President’s use of their veto power.

But I fear that a happy median is probably out of the question for any President who really feels that the games, tricks and abuses of the legislative process have gone too far and are no longer acceptable.

As President, such is the opinion I myself would hold.

With billions of dollars that get past any legitimate scrutiny or debate and the addition of amendments that are not germane and in fact totally irrelevant to the thrust of many proposed bills, the people of United States of America are being shortchanged. When healthcare reform legislation can include a clause that is buried amid a few thousand pages and dedicates hundreds of millions of dollars to a certain state for issues that are entirely unrelated to healthcare, that is bad enough. But when such conduct becomes not the rarity but the norm, then it is time for someone to say enough is enough!

That is why, as President, I will initiate the Kempite Doctrine.

It will be a doctrine that demands all bills contain items, sections, clauses, and amendments that are relevant to main concern that each bill is aimed at addressing. In addition to the existing reforms of the process that I have proposed , I declare here and now that every aspect of every piece of legislation better consist of clauses that are germane to the main thrust of any bill at hand. As President I will not be able to approve measures such as an infrastructure bill that has spending on something so off topic, such as funding for the study of the effects of insomnia on circus animals.

Nor will I pass a defense budgets that includes something like changes in civil law for such things as hate crimes.

Under my Administration, if there is any spending that must be paid for or a law that needs to be written or changed, they will have to be individually approved on the basis of the merit of each individual issue or proposal.

I have no problem with omnibus legislation which contains related initiatives but we can no longer tolerate the shady deals that assemble votes on one issue by including amendments that have nothing to do with the original issue. If something is good enough to be included in any piece of legislation that comes before this American government, than it should be good enough to stand alone and after standing up to healthy scrutiny and debate, be passed on its own merit, not the merit of another bill.

This will most assuredly put me at odds with Congress on many occasions. It will also force me to foster a truly bipartisan presidency. For if it is my Party that holds the majority and if it is my Party presenting a bill that is stuffed with pork and the pet projects of the donors that a lawmaker is trying to slip quietly into a major piece of legislation as a favor, I will be forced to work with the minority party or the opposing Party. I will be forced to maintain a coalition of support that will make it impossible for my veto to be overridden.

I may at times be criticized and attacked for not signing truly good and valuable legislation. But let it be known that I would rather oppose good legislation that is filled with bad amendments, and riders and costly pork than pass bad amendments and riders and wasteful spending that is attached to good legislation.

And for those in Congress who want to challenge me, be forewarned that I will not be intimidated easily. I will use the power of the bully pulpit ,otherwise known as this presidency, to call each and every sponsor of pork or unwarranted amendments out by name. If you try to pollute necessary and productive legislation with political junk, I will veto it. And then I will visit your legislative district and personally tell your voters what you tried to sneak through Congress. I will let them know that you are the roadblock to the passage of that meaningful bill that America clearly needs or those spending reforms crucial to job creation in our nation. If you are a polluter of the process, I will make you famous, or to be more accurate, I will make you infamous.

The games are over.

The political class must begin to recapture the virtues of integrity and honesty. Our American government deserves nothing less than to be viewed as virtuous as opposed to the image of corruption and dishonesty that tarnishes it now more than ever. And if you can not force yourself to act with virtue and integrity, I will force you to. For I will not sign into law any measure that I can not be proud of and that Americans can no longer afford.

Call me Don “Veto” because as of today I will become the Godfather of the presidential veto and if forced, I will use it.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

Keith Olbermann Tried To Make Fun of My Mom

Bookmark and Share  The apple really doesn’t fall far from the tree and in my case I fell right next to the trunk of my parental tree.

When it comes to myself, I have a perfect mixture of both my parents in me.  I have developed a love for books that my father who literally owns a library of well over 6,000 books has. I have developed a talent for writing that both my olbermann_lgparents possess. Granted, my talent is not quite as good as theirs and I have not yet written any books or historical theses that have shaped events as they have, but I still have some time to catch up.

In other areas, when calm and collected, I demonstrate my father’s sense of analytical depth and when angered I demonstrate my mother’s fire, determination and flight off the handle.

 
Both my parents are quite civic minded. That is another thing I have inherited. But now my father has reached a point in his life where he wants to be left alone and not bothered by the craziness of a world that he has long ago tried to change so that his son could grow up in a world better than the one he grew up in. My mother on the other hand took part in the same struggles as he and also wants to be left alone by the world but with a government that refuses to listen, her temper flares and that anger inspires a stubbornness that forces her to still continue to try and change the world. Her temper and stubbornness are other traits that I inherit from her.

In my inherited stubbornness I still struggle to eek by in the world of politics, constantly at odds with the Leadership of the Republican Party that I have an ideological adherence to, but little ideological faith in anymore. In her stubbornness however, she has no political party loyalties. My mother can’t stand nor tolerate any politician or paerty and if she had the financial wealth of a George Soros, she would pull a Ross Perot on all their asses and create a party of her own. It would probably be a party with a very patriotic but angry sounding name. Something like the American Freedom Fighters Union. As it is, her email address is GiveMeLiberty.  Mine is LiberalsRlosers.  As I said….the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.

Recently her stubbornness has forced her to become a Tea Party Patriot. Between the outrageous antics of New Jersey state government and the audacity of dope we have in the White House, she has been driven to a point of total impatience. And so she has picked up arms in the form of a cyber trigger that she pulls constantly as she organizes a New Jersey Tea Party group. She has been attending and coordinating protests against Governor Jon Corzine and trying to wake people up to the fact that the citizens of freedom’s greatest nation are losing there freedoms.

 
In the midst of all this, one day while setting her DVR to record the television programs that she did not want to miss, she noticed something funny about the way The Glenn Beck Show appeared written out on the screens programming schedule. Now I am not a fan of Glenn Beck. I have nothing against him but for as dramatic as I can often be, I find him overly dramatic. Still I find that there is little that he states which can be disputed from a constitutional perspective, the only perspective that a federal government should have and my mother is an admirer of Glenn Beck.   She appreciates the level of anger that the points he brings up elevate her temper to.
 

So while my mother was setting up the DVR, she took a closer look at the screen and there it was, as clear as crystal….. GlenIf”ck.

While all other programs appeared with their proper names and spelling, this one conservative oriented program was turned into a curse word. After a moment of taking this in, she became offended and then angered by this abnormality that was unique to only this show.

As time progressed so did her anger. What was this all about? Whose idea of joke was this? All these thoughts crossed her mind and as each one passed her anger was raised.

She contacted CableVisiont, her cable provider. They had no explanation. She contacted the FCC. No answer was provided as to the reason or cause for the curse word identifying the Glenn Beck Show. So she pulled out her digital camera and recorded this event so as to prove that she was not seeing things.

My mother began forwarding the details of this mysterious but ominous situation to media outlets. Some newspapers started making calls and reporting back that neither FCC or Cablevision had an answer. In fact officials at CableVision went on record as saying “no comment”.

One New Jersey radio station picked up on this suspicious circumstance and discussed it. Others continued to try to get details about it.

Then on Friday night, the looniest of liberal loons, the master of liberal propaganda and talentless hack who couldn’t make it as sportscaster, Keith Olbermann, picked up the story. He ended his pitiful display of liberal lies and devastatingly low rated excuse for a television show with the video my mother made which showed how the Glenn Beck Show appears on her television.

In it, you will see that Dopermann tries to belittle her suspicion that this suspicious anomaly is more than just a glitch. Now while Olbermann tries to belittle her desire to get to the bottom of this by trying to paint her and conservatives as wacky conspiracy theorists, I would like to point a few things out.

First, the fact that the Glenn Beck Show is the only program that shows up this way is not a theory or even considered a conspiratorial effort by liberals. The plausible assumption here is that someone is demonstrating their own liberal biases and tampering with the programs name and the reasonable request here is to have such shenanigans stopped.

Second, if anyone wants to point fingers at extremists who exaggerate claims, Keith Dopermann should take at look at the party he pledges allegiance to and ask Hillary Clinton about that vast rightwing conspiracy that she blamed on the nation while her husband was lying to the world.

Thirdly and probably most importantly. Don’t make fun of a mans mother.

As I already stated, I have inherited my mother’s temper and Keith “Low Rated” Olbermann has already gotten on my bad side once before. Last time he offended me, I took him on and was invited to discuss him on a Los Angeles radio show.

This time , it’s personal.

So I offer this to Keith;

I don’t make fun of your mother, so do not make fun of mine. Your mother may have raised a spineless, fool with more mouth than brains but mine didn’t.

And may I also suggest that while your program ,which borders on being cancelled, continues to lose traction because of the gibberish that you air, stop for a minute and take a look at yourself and the ideology you promote. Look at your ratings and the few dredges of the earth who program their televisions to see your pathetic program. Check out the Van Jonses and Nancy Pelosis, Barney Franks, Rod Blagojeviches, Dennis Kuciniches and William Jeffersons of your ideology and tell me how serious that party can be taken.

Then I want you to please name for me any of the Democrat Party’s greatest achievements in the last forty years. I’ll be waiting for your script writers to try and dig up any significant accomplishments. The answer to that question would leave lots of dead air on your show if you had to answer that question live, on television.

In the meantime remember this, don’t make fun of people’s mothers. Especially the mothers of Italian sons from Brooklyn who have tempers.

Oh yeah. One more thing Mr. Olbermann………..

Photobucket Check out the Olbermann clip and the radio program that adressed this incident in the video below

Bookmark and Share

1 Comment

Filed under politics

Because “Hope” and “Change” Is Easier Said Than Done

linusa

Bookmark and Share     Like Charles Schultz’s famous Peanuts character, Linus van Pelt, who literally carries around a blanket as a source of security, President Obama carries a teleprompter around with him everywhere he goes.

A teleprompter is the source of what is suppose to be the first quality that impresses us with our new President. We are suppose to be impressed by his purported speaking ability and his incredibly articulate manner. For the left it is a particular source of pride. They claim President Obama’s command of the language is a terrific counter to the seemingly less articulate dialogue of former President George W. Bush.

Although President Bush did have his moments, he didn’t follow snoopy around with a blanket in hand. He didn’t require a teleprompter to know what he felt or what he knew, in his mind, we needed to do.

Unlike President Bush, President Obama uses a teleprompter to deliver all his speeches. There is nothing wrong or unusual with using, occassionally. But President Obama uses a teleprompter with unusual regularity and consistency. Far more than any of his predecessors. He drags it around like Linus with his security blanket.

President Bush, used a teleprompter only for major speeches, like the State of the Union. He never needed one for occasions like the traditional pardoning of the turkey for Thanksgiving Day events. But not Barack. He uses it for everything from announcing nominees to cabinet positions, to welcoming the Irish Prime Minister on St. Patrick’s Day.

The teleprompter, or as some have come to call it “TOTUS“, is everywhere POTUS goes.

It has gotten to the point where those covering the President are finding it difficult to do without being hindered by the teleprompter. Photographers have a tough time taking a picture of the President without a teleprompter covering his face from one angle or another.

It makes one wonder how confident our President is on any of the issues he addresses. It makes one wonder if Barack really is the great communicator and profoundly articulate individual that his adoring fans make him out to be.

Does he really feel what he says? Does he believe what he says? Are his words coming from the heart? Or are his words merely coming from a teleprompter in a carefully scripted charade.

I do not know the real answers to those questions but I am inclined to have my doubts.

For another opinion on the matter, here is a video for your viewing pleasure.

It comes from the real horses mouth. The teleprompter.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

REJECTED SUPERBOWL AD REALLY MAKES YOU THINK TWICE

antabortionBookmark and Share    There are many topics I would like to discuss today.

Republicans have a new political leader.

Our government has increased our debt and used the cover of economic crisis to rob us blind by allocating hundreds of billions of dollars to things that will do anything but stimulate and improve the economy.

Somalia continues to become a stronghold of and safe haven for terrorism and with little experience President Barack Obama faces many dire challenges for our nation.

Yet today I choose to discuss something a little less complicated.

Life.

Yeah, if only life was was less complicated, but as we know, it is not.

Neither is the question of when life begins.

Personally, as a man, I know one thing.  I will never be in the position that a woman will be in. My body will never be the shelter for a life. That is a fact that has constantly made me leery of staking a position on abortion.

I am not God and I do not for a moment think that I have all the answers so I will not tell you that life begins at conception. I will not tell a woman what she can do to her own body, yet I am still uncertain about whether it is right to abort a life at any stage.

I do know that I am glad that I shall not have the responsibility to make that decision on my own.

I can’t help but feel that if I were a woman and I had an abortion, I might always carry a sense of guilt around with me. I can’t help but wonder if I would be wracked by the guilt of thinking that I possibly snuffed out a human life.

I don’t know. I just don’t know.

What I do know is, that when in doubt, I personally feel I would rather err on the side of life than death.  One is more final than the other and one offers more hope and promise than the other.

I have always felt that way and I often think about it. I often wonder if I were a legislator, and I had the responsibility to place a vote on the issue, what would I do?

Would I go with my conscience and err on the side of life by prohibiting abortion?

Would I pull an Obama and vote “not present” or maybe, as a representative, I would just vote the will of the majority of the people that I was representing.

I wish I were confident to say which way I would vote, but as of now, I am not sure.

However I recently came across this commercial.

NBC refuses to air it during the Superbowl, which the organization behind the ad tried to buy time for.

NBC calls the advertisement too political. 

Right or wrong, the ad is powerful and their refusal to air it will probablty give it more attention than they wanted.

I ask you to take a look at it.

If you have any sense of compassion, like me, than you might just be brought closer to a decision……like me.

Photobucket

punchline-politics

 

The word politics is actually a Latin derivative.

It comes from two words……..

Poly meaning many…….

…..and Ticks meaning blood sucking insects.

Bookmark and Share

1 Comment

Filed under politics

We Get The Government That We Deserve

If Barack Obama wins this election, it will be deserved.
 
He will have successfully orchestrated a campaign that effectively persuaded enough votes to establish a plurality of enough states to garner the 270 or more electoral votes needed to win.

The United States will also be getting what it deserves.

If there are a majority of people in this country whom are willing to adopt a system approaching socialism and that burdens the taxpayer with government programs and redistribution of wealth, than we deserve it.

If that is what the people think they want, than they need to suffer it’s consequences. They need to learn their lesson. They need to realize what excessive taxation does and what the government can’t effectively do and shouldn’t do.

It will be a much deserved consequence for my party too.

The Republican party became complacent. After a dozen years in control of the house and senate they lost their maverick, conservative thinking, their antigovernment thinking. The type of thinking that opposed heavy governmental influence over the daily lives of people. It was a school of thought which challenged a ruling bureaucratic mentality and opposed political hypocrisy, and a ruling arrogance that put those in government above the law.

After a dozen years in power, Republicans lost that thinking and began to suffer from the repercussions of letting power go to their heads. They began to enjoy their own power more than the opportunity to empower those they represented.

So in losing sight, they lost power.

My party also deserves to lose this election because we have failed to properly articulate our purpose. We failed to convey the fact that the GOP believes, first and foremost, in the power of freedom. That belief includes the defense of freedom at home, as well as abroad.

We failed to convey the fact that as Republicans we are proponents of the greatest social welfare program known to man. A program called opportunity. It is the one program that helps more people in more ways than any other government program created by FDR and LBJ combined.

Opportunity opens all doors for all those who are willing to walk through them and, as republicans, our mission is to create opportunities for all and make it available to all.

We failed to explain that opportunity is not achieved by bringing down some to better a few, but by lifting government burdens and lowering taxes on all. It is achieved by lowering costs on businesses so that they can hire more people and provide more opportunity to people. It is achieved by lowering the cost of running a burdensome government so that taxes on the people can be lowered and allow them the opportunity to spend more, as well save more and invest more in more opportunities.

Not a single Republican stepped up and stated that instead of the government offering citizens hundreds of dollars in a rebate to stimulate the economy, maybe we should be taking less from them in the first place.

The money we gave back to the people to spark our economic engine was originally taken from the people. Yet has one Republican been bold enough to question the premature talks of Obama, Pelosi and Reid to offer another stimulus package if Obama is elected? Has one of them asked why if giving the citizens back their money stimulates the economy, than why is lowering taxes and letting them keep the money that we are giving back to them not a stimulus for the economy in the first place?”

The GOP missed the opportunity to unite Americans around the fact that the expansion of opportunity is not achieved by expanding government. It is achieved by lifting government ’s burdens and restrictions on thing likes education where we need to expand school choice through vouchers. Issues like that were gift wrapped and handed to us by Barack Obama.

Obama called for more government and more taxes for more government . He is calling for more government restrictions and fewer opportunities for personal choices such as those that would be made available through school vouchers.

While Obama based his campaign on more government and dividing Americans with class warfare, John McCain could have united us by promoting less government and more freedom and opportunity. Opportunity is what can unite us. Obama’s class warfare is what divides us.

These are just some of the points not effectively made by Republicans in this election. McCain touched upon such notes but barely. It was not a message that was developed and conveyed enough. Part of the reason for that may very well be the fact that we nominated John McCain.

In John McCain we selected a nominee who has never been closely associated with the conservative philosophy. It was part of his problem from the beginning and it required him to waste valuable time trying to define himself as a conservative in order to inspire the party he represented. He had to do so at a time when the conservative label was not regarded highly by the general populous. Had McCain not needed to solidify his conservative credentials, with the party base, he could have used that time to solidify his well deserved maverick image. An image that is highly regarded by Americans.

Instead, the McCain campaign, forged ahead with a mottled message. It was a message that inspired few, connected with even fewer and never struck a cohesive chord that attracted enough people to rally around.

Under these circumstances, Barack Obama was able to capitalize on the anti-republican sentiments that have come about because of another individual who lost the ability to convey the right message, our inarticulate, incumbent, republican president.

Truthfully, Obama’s campaign was nothing great either. His success is merely rooted the failure of poorly run, republican campaign.

The originality of Barack Obama’s campaign slogan, “Change” was less than creative, effective for the time, but not creative. And his ability to change any minds was minimal. His campaign did inspire the choir that he was preaching to but it did not convert the nonbelievers. Unlike Ronald Reagan and Reagan Democrats, the term Obama Republicans is not something that we will be referring to as a political sea of change over the course of a generation. There are few, if any, who are republicans today, that will be calling themselves democrats tomorrow, even if they vote for Obama on Tuesday.

If there is a significant number of republicans voting for Obama, they are doing so not because they believe in the liberal ideology that he espouses, but because they do not like the messenger that we have in John McCain. Some republicans may even vote for Obama as a form of protest urging the GOP to get back to it’s more conservative, antigovernment economic roots. Others may not go so far as to vote for Obama’s socialism. Instead they may just provide the margin of victory for Obama by not voting at all and denying McCain support that another republican candidate would have gotten from them.

Either way, if Barack Obama is elected president, it will be due more to McCain losing than Obama winning. Obama’s campaign was nothing great. He offered us nothing new. He simply offered more of the failed policies that republicans had to save us from in the 80’s. Obama may win because he shaped himself up to be a governmental messiah that intends to make government the source of our greatness. It is an approach that rejects the fundamental thinking that allows one to understand that the source of our greatness is not government but our people, our free people, endowed by our creator not by a bureaucracy.

If he wins it will be a mistake that we can learn from and we certainly will learn from it.

On the other hand, if John McCain gets elected, it will not be because his campaign was a model of successful strategy. It will be because most Americans do understand that the change Barack Obama is offering us is too closely aligned with the socialism that America has fought against. And if that is the case, unlike Michelle Obama, it won’t be the first time that I am proud of my country. It will just be another reason for my continued pride in my country.

If not, I will continue to be proud of my relatively young nation and chalk the next four years off to the same type of experimentation and learning experiences that all youth must go through. My only fears deal with the existing threats that we face. The type of threats that all vulnerable youngsters need protection from during dangerous times.

If electing Barack Obama is needed to provide us with a learning experience in socialism, what learning experience will it take to teach us how to properly defend ourselves? That is a lesson we should have already learned by now, but I guess 9/11 was either not dramatic enough or too long ago for people to remember very well.

Photobucket

Photobucket

Campaign Promises and More Promises

It was election time, again. So, a politician decided to go out to the local reservation to gather support from the Native Americans. They were all assembled in the Council Hall to hear the speech. 

 

The politician had worked up to his finale, and the crowd was getting more and more excited. “I promise better education opportunities for Native Americans!”

 

The crowd went wild, shouting “Hoya! Hoya!” 

 

The politician was a bit puzzled by the native word, but was encouraged by their enthusiasm. “I promise gambling reforms to allow a Casino on the Reservation!”

 

“Hoya! Hoya!” cried the crowd, stomping their feet.

 

“I promise more social reforms and job opportunities for Native Americans!” 

 

The crowd reached a frenzied pitch shouting “Hoya! Hoya! Hoya!”

 

After the speech, the politician was touring the Reservation, and saw a tremendous herd of cattle. Since he was raised on a ranch, and knew a bit about cattle, he asked the Chief if he could get closer to take a look at the cattle.

 

“Sure,” the Chief said, “but be careful not to step in the hoya.”

Photobucket

Check Out The Hot New Hit!

SPREAD THE WEALTH AROUND!!!!

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

THE MESSIAH MODE AND BARACK OBAMA’S POLITICAL MADRASAS

In the Islamic faith a madrasa is a school for the study of the Koran and Islamic thought,. Many madrasas are wrongfully used to teach extremist Islamic views and indoctrinate the young into jihad against what they call, the great Satan, the United States.

When used as a training ground for terrorism, madrasas are dangerous. They perpetuate a corrupted interpretation of a religion and breed violence and hatred all in the name of Allah.

Such schools of propaganda are frowned upon and not only discouraged but fought against. Yet here in the United States a growing number of political madrasas are cropping up in the gymnasiums and classrooms of our own public schools. They have grown in number from California to New York and were inspired by followers of liberal messiah Barack Obama.

Liberals have been blinded by hatred for Republicans and motivated by their jealousy of Republican electoral victories.  That same hatred and jealousy has inspired them to spread their message through the basic educational institutions within the nation’s school systems.

Just a few weeks ago a college level teacher forced students to complete an assignment that ripped apart Sarah Palin’s speech at the Republican National Convention. A contrary approach that would have supported her speech by a student, who agreed with what she said, was unacceptable and did not fulfill the requirements of the assignment.

Shortly after that, low grade elementary school children were gathered together for days of rehearsal as they prepared for a choir performance that sang the virtues of Barack Obama.

Now in Missouri, another teacher was reprimanded for gathering students together for pro-Obama military like drills that shout out adoring chants for Barack. As you can see in the video, it is an eerie display of Nazi like military celebrations for Hitler.

In fact all of these public school activities and the training of children into liberal ideologies before thay have developed sense of personal independent thought are frightening. The biased indoctrination of youth by public school educators is appalling. The single digit aged kids singing in choirs for Obama is reminiscent of communist Chinese school auditoriums paying homage to Mao Tse Tung.

What I find most intriguing is the fact that the educators who are sponsoring these events are the very same people who refuse school prayer or the pledge of allegiance to be conducted in the public domain. They have thrown the ROTC off of campuses and refused to allow it as an option for children.  Yet they are more than happy to train school children to believe that Barack Obama is our savior and that he is the one person we must have faith in.

It is another example of liberal hypocrisy and a prime example of the same type of madrasa-like atmosphere that extremists use to brainwash children and draft them into jihad.

The problem, for me, is that this is still America. The Islamic jihad has not yet converted our population to their cause and the tactics that they use should not be adopted by American schools and educators. It is bad enough that many institutions of higher learning are dominated by liberal radicals like domestic terrorist and Obama buddy Bill Ayers who is now a Chicago professor. But the line must be drawn in our elementary institutions.

Liberals preach the virtues of tolerance and acceptance. They accuse all others who are not liberal of being

Class In Session At An Extremist Madrasa

Class In Session At An Extremist Madrasa

intolerant and prejudiced yet they have no qualms about brainwashing innocent children into promoting their own biases and intolerances. Just like the extremist madrasas promoting their sheep-like flock of terrorists.

All of this is a result of the very real messiah image that Obama has created for himself. An image that he, himself, believes and that his mindless, desperate, bitter, hateful followers agree with. For them Obama can do no wrong even though he has done nothing in his entire political career. For them winning is all that matters and for them no one is immune from their tactics to win, not even innocent children. It is dangerously similar to the bombing tactics of William Ayers or Hezbollah and it is unacceptable in a democracy, especially our American democracy.

It is time for Barack Obama to denounce such tactics and help to stem the prostituting of our youth in an attempt to promote a political agenda. Does he adore and endorse endorses these tactics the same way that Kruschev did when children from all over the former Soviet Union were collected and gathered in Red Square to sing his praises behind a backdrop of the latest military hardware? Or does Barack rejects such spectacles and tactics as an illegitimate and inappropriate parasitizing of children for political purposes? Having the messianic complex that he has of himself I think I know the answer to that question.

 

Here is a free puppy

Barack Obama is running down the street one day, and he sees a little girl who is giving away puppies that her dog just had.

He goes up to the girl and says, “Little girl, I think that it’s wonderful that you’re doing such a good thing.”

The little girl says, “Thank you, Senator Obama. Would you like a puppy? They’re Democrats.”

Barack declines and jogs onward. The next day Barrack jogs past the same girl and decides to talk to her again. “You know what, little girl? I think I’ll take one of those puppies after all, seeing as how they’re Democrats.”

The girl says, “I’m sorry Senator Obama, but they’re not Democrats any more. They’re Republican now.”

Barack says, “They are? How do you know? As a matter of fact, how did you know that they were Democrats at first to begin with?” 

She says, “Well, just after they were born they were Democrats, but now their eyes are open.”
Photobucket

 

2 Comments

Filed under politics