Friday, February 29, 2008
The column in the Chronicle is hilarious because it is what the left really thinks about those who oppose the policies and positions of St. Barack http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/morford/.
One Mark Morford starts by dismissing those who like to say St. Barack's full name, Barack Hussein Obama. I guess it is because us evil, conservative Republicans want to link the clearly Islamic name to the possibility that St. Barack is not a saint, but Islamic. Too bad that all the controversy was started by supporters of the Sen. Hillary Clinton campaign.
Then Mr. Morford goes on a rant about Sen. John "F--- You" McCain, WalMart, trailer parks and bunkers filled with Ding-Dongs and Coors beer. And that is all in the third paragraph!
The crux of Mr. Morford's sick rant is that to oppose the positions means one opposes the candidate because is is a white and black man. Oh, Mr. Morford does not include the fact that St. Barack is bi-racial. Mr. Morford chooses to emphasize St. Barack's blackness. Who is the real racist here?
Mr. Morford asks with venomous sarcasm how the Republicans will attack St. Barack. How nefarious, racist and draconian will these Republicans get.
Mr. Morford dismisses real issues because he must be caught up in the St. Barack rapture.
Oh, Mr. Morford readily admits that St. Barack does not have much about his as compared to Sen. Clinton. But, Sen. Clinton has a lot of "baggage" like her gender (which we evil, conservative Republicans hate!), her husband (no comment), everything she represents (almost everything) from the Bill Clinton era. And of course she is smart, you know!
So as this Mr. Morford goes on, he cites the areas us Republicans can not get on St. Barack. Such as past drug use. Why bother? Bill Clinton lowered that bar in an unconvincing manner. Or the lack of military experience. Mr. Morford seems to get back to the evil leaders, President Bush and Vice-President Cheney because of their limited or non-military service. And what about the major policy errors? St. Barack has none! Somehow, this Mr. Morford character does not get that the policy, or lack thereof, is the serious issue St. Barack faces.
Somehow, Mr. Morford thinks that the Republicans are just going to get to St. Barack because of his race.
Most amazing is that I think that this is how most people in San Francisco think about much of the rest of the United States.
I think Mr. Morford needs to get out of the 45-square mile area of insanity and see the very people that he seems to have more contempt for than anyone may possibly have against St. Barack.
When one travels this amazing land, one sees that most people can care less that anyone running for president maybe a woman and or a bi-racial candidate. Most Americans care about what these people would do on real issues such as the increasing role of government in our lives. About the crushing burden of taxation at multiple levels like a cheap Ponzi scheme. About the coarsening of our culture and a culture that seems to celebrate death and not life. Most important, how the next president will prosecute the War Against Islamofacsist Terror.
I know none of this is important to Mr. Morford. What is important to he and his kind is to paint anyone who opposes St. Barack and his quest for the Holy Grail of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue as some knuckle-dragging know-nothing.
What Mr. Morford has done instead is exposed himself and the St. Barack defenders for the shallowness that they represent. For beyond change and hope are real issues. And that is where we will rightfully and vigorously contrast St. Barack with Sen. "F--- You" McCain.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
That he is possibly not a "natural born" United States citizen.
In 1936, the year Sen. "F--- You" McCain was born, the Panama Canal Zone was a territory of the United States.
The Times http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/us/politics/28mccain.html? has an extensive article in today's editions about the possibility of the erstwhile Arizona senator not being born, assumed, in one of the 48 American states at the time.
This non-issue is based on Article II, section I of the constitution and reads as follows:
No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall and Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States. http://heritage.org.
Now, I have expressed extensively my many problems with Sen. "F--- You" McCain, but the constitution is clear and Sen. "F--- You" McCain meets all of the requirements.
The so-called article does not and could not merit the space The Times gave it.
All it is showing is that maybe every week from here on to election day in November, The Times may continue to assault Sen. "F--- You" McCain with pointless "stories" until maybe, just maybe, one sticks.
All it does is give the Democrats a talking point in changing the requirement so essentially anyone could run for president.
After all, we have a governor here in California from Austria and Michigan has a governor from Canada. Why should they be denied the right to run for the highest office in the land? The constitution says that they can not. Period.
John McCain was born in what was then United States territory, given away by former President Jimmy Carter, and his parents were American citizens and John McCain was born in a naval hospital. I do not think you can get any more American than that!
I think that The New York Times needs to find other, factual and real, stories about Sen. John "F--- You" McCain.
Like why Sen. "F--- You" McCain apologized for his warm-up act, radio talker Bill Cunningham, referring to Sen. Barack Obama by his full name. Now, that is a REAL story!
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Who ever has been or has become a conservative got there by reading the writings of Mr. Buckley starting with his tome, "God And Man At Yale", the journal of conservative thought, National Review and watching the debates on "Firing Line" which was on PBS of all networks!
No doubt that Mr. Buckley was not only a friend of Ronald Reagan but one of his mentors. And both men did more than most of us ever could hope to do to make modern conservatism the mainstream of politics in the United States.
I for one am glad that Mr. Buckley's writings, telelvision appearances and National Review live on, a living teaching tool for those who are confused by today's events.
Thank God for William F. Buckley and all that he accomplished in His name here on Earth.
Monday, February 25, 2008
That is being an Obamacan-a Republican for the Democrat senator Barack Obama.
According to the Los Angeles Times http://latimes.com, there are quite a few all over the United States, especially in Ohio.
The Times really focuses in on Josh Pedaline. The Times cites that Mr. Pedaline is a lifelong Republican, who reveres Ronald Reagan and voted twice for the current President Bush. Oh, and he is all of 28 years old. Mr. Pedaline says that he is sick and tired of all the partisanship. That his big issue is Social Security. Mr. Pedaline wants a candidate who is not an ideologue, of course he means a conservative ideologue, and one who is willing to compromise and seek solutions.
That is the appeal to Susan Eisenhower, the granddaughter of President Dwight D. Eisenhower. Also why Colin Powell may give his support. And that paragon of Republican virtue, former Senator Lincoln Chafee from Rhode Island. He is so full of guts that once he was voted out of office, Mr. Chafee became an independent.
There is a trend of all these Obamacans. These are not people who are really very comfortable being Republicans in the first place.
In the case of Mr. Pedaline, if he so reveres Ronald Reagan and voted for President Bush twice, does he in fact blame the two for the "partisanship" in Washington? If he is for Sen. Obama, one has to say yes. And that means that he does not really understand the party he claims to have been a member of to begin with.
And Ms. Eisenhower? Who even knows of her in Republican circles? I mean, I did not realize of her import to Republicans until this article. I would say that it is her name and the assumption that she is a tried and true Republican.
Colin Powell is more of an Arnold Schwarzenegger Republican. No ideology. No serious policy. But, he is a black and Republican. His support would be one that could be taken seriously. But, more on the margins and in solidifying Sen. Obama's increasing support in the black community.
Then there is Lincoln Chafee. Mr. Chafee was not exactly in the conservative Republican mainstream. His American Conservative Union lifetime rating was a 34%. Why Democrat Ben Nelson of Nebraska has a 55% rating, much higher than Mr. Chafee. He is not what one would call a Republican of consequence. And, his being an independent means it is not support of an actual Republican. Thus, it is not a real "Republican" endorsement of support.
There is no question that some Republicans are taking a look at Sen. Obama. Some are even conservative Republicans who may not like the fact that Sen. John "F--- You" McCain is the nominee presumptive.
For that matter, there are Democrats who support Sen. "F--- You" McCain, thought they not be as many at this point.
But, when at this point in the campaign season major DDBMSM sources are trying to make it like there will be these mass defections of Republicans to the most liberal senator in the United States http://nationaljournal.com is spin if I ever read it.
Even though there are many conservatives, myself included, who have reservations about Sen. "F--- You" McCain, when up against Sen. Obama and his vapid, cult of personality campaign will be laid out by a man who has wanted to be president longer than Sen. Obama has been alive. And that will rally most of us conservatives and others in the Republican coalition to Sen. "F--- You" McCain.
For most Republicans, the overwhelming majority of Republicans do not want to see an Obama or Hillary Clinton administration, who will lose the War Against Islamofacsist Terror. Who will possibly appoint as many as three new supreme court justices. Who will certainly pursue with abandon socialized medicine. I think that is more of a frightening thought than a moderately conservative McCain administration.
Even if there are some "lifelong" Republicans backing Sen. Barack Obama today.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
On the other hand, every prophet has a secondary leader, and that is where Michelle Obama, or Pope Michelle comes in.
At a recent rally at UCLA, Pope Michelle implored the crowd this:
Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. That you put down your divisions. That you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones. That you push yourselves to be better. And that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed.
On so many levels, this really sounds more like a Nazi or Communist or Fascist talking point than anything else. But, peel back and realize that because St. Barack is now a messianic figure for the Democrat party, this really is a sermon, sort of a Sermon On The Mount, St. Barack style.
Let's take it line by line.
Barack Obama will require you to work.
I am not quite sure what to make of that line. Is he going to create one of those make-work government projects to hire thousands of, union members of course, workers? Or is he going to make all American companies have to meet certain hiring quotas set by the government? Or does he mean that YOU will work for him, the new prophet? Hmm.
He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism.
Sorry Pope Michelle but I thrive on being cynical. I mean, cynicism is a way of getting to common sense. It is also healthy. Not being cynical means that you become a sheeple, part of a flock of followers following something that you do not quite know what it is about. And, maybe Pope Michelle wants it that way. It is a precept of a cult, and the followers of St. Barack are beginning to show signs that they are following a cult leader.
That you put down your divisions.
Oh dear, she is preaching unity! Have no thoughts of your own! I, for one, like divisions. It makes clear that there is a choice in everything. And, many times that is between two competing parties and ideas on getting, usually, to the same place. There are many places in the world that practice unity. Some include Red China, North Korea, Cuba in the secular realm. For the religious, all Islamic, there is Saudi Arabia, Iran and there was those lovable fellows that ruled Afghanistan, the Taliban. I'm sorry but I am your first heretic in the Church of St. Barack for I just will not put down my divisiveness!
That you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones.
What if I like being isolated, not being bothered by anyone? For is that not an All-American right?! And comfort zones? Well, maybe I can go one out of two. I can move out of my comfort zone, but do not ask me to change my allegiances to my sports teams dagnabit!
That you push yourselves to be better.
All kidding aside, this is actually the best and most correct line of this diatribe. I think that a political leader is not able to solve all problems, and should not. That is where the people, you and I come in. We could all be a little better and sometimes, the right leader can set an example of being better. But, not messianic.
And that you engage.
Engage in what, pray tel? Does that mean when the government is not following the will of the people that the people have the right of redress? I mean, when the so-called "comprehensive immigration reform" bill-scam came up for a vote, was it not the people getting engaged writing, calling and e-mailing their senators to vote against it? Is that being engaged enough? I think that Pope Michelle means something different.
Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed.
Now, that is the creepiest line of the whole diatribe. Who gives St. Barack the power to change your life? Is it up to the president of the United States to get you involved, informed? NO! HELL NO! It is up to you and I to be involved and informed.
But, what this all raises up is that fact that St. Barack and his Pope, Michelle, are nothing but ol' fashioned left-wingers. These two are not liberal. They are socialists. This kind of talk is the kind of talk that St. Barack must have used when he was a "community organizer". And what about Pope Michelle? She believes in all that she said. And that is frightening.
Somehow, I worry more about the travelling revival known as St. Barack Obama and Mrs. Michelle Obama more than whether or not Sen. John "F--- You" McCain maybe had an "inappropriate" relationship with a lobbyist many a moon ago.
Monday, February 18, 2008
But, Mr. Bush said a curious thing that adds to the "bash Reagan to make McCain look good" narrative of this part of the campaign.
Mr. Bush said that former President Ronald Reagan faced attacks from some to the right of him. Mr. Bush cited a magazine Conservative Digest and it publisher, Richard Vigurie http://reuters.com/.
For the record, Conservative Digest has not been around for many years and Mr. Vigurie is a very outlier figure of the conservative movement.
But, it is another attempt to marginalize the Great Man by saying that people on the fringe right, which Mr. Vigurie represented, were going after the Great Man the same way that reasonable, mainstream conservatives are trying to point out some uncomfortable truths about Sen. "F--- You" McCain.
It should be noted that in 1982, a very right wing candidate for congress tried to take on the Great Man during a meeting of Republican candidates in the White House. An exasperated Mr. Reagan tried to reason with the candidate, but he would not listen. Mr. Reagan ended up having to tell this fringe Republican to shut up. In those words. As it turned out, the candidate was a card-carrying member of the John Birch Society. Not exactly Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham or Rush Limbaugh.
And also, Mr. Bush would not be considered a great heir to the Great Man's legacy.
As we all know, many conservatives had even more doubt about Mr. Bush. Eventually, at the Republican convention, Mr. Bush said the fateful words that would haunt his presidency, "Read my lips. No new taxes." And in 1990, those words went right out the window as he did raise taxes and thereby ensured his defeat at the hands of Ross Perot and the Great Whoremonger, Democrat William Jefferson Blythe Clinton.
So, Mr. Bush would have been well enough to not comment about the rightful and mainstream criticizms of Sen. "F--- You" McCain.
Both of Mr. Bush's son's, former Florida governor Jeb Bush and the current President George W. Bush have proven more conservative records than the old man.
And, I will just end by writing that Mr. Bush is a decent man, always wanting to do the right thing and a great American patriot and a true war hero as a fighter pilot in World War II.
But, a conservative in the order of the Great Man, Ronald Reagan, Mr. Bush is not.
St. Barack likes to pontificate in genralities, but Guy Benson http://townhall.com lays out the goods on the meteoric rise of this "community organizer" from the mean streets of Chicago.
How do you think that St. Barack ended up in the Illinois state senate?
According to Mr. Benson, it is because he double crossed a sitting state senator, Alice Palmer, who ran for the congressional seat of pervert Democrat Mel Reynolds in 1995 because, unlike the Great Whoremonger, William Jefferson Blythe Clinton, Mr. Reynolds had the decency to resign. For the record, why Mr. Reynolds is a pervert is because it is accused that he had sexual relations with an underage girl. How quaint. Back to Alice Palmer. Ms. Palmer lost the primary and wanted to run for reelction. But, St. Barack, being the hand-picked successor did not get the memo that if Ms. Palmer lost, she would want to run for the current job. St. Barack basically did it the old fashioned way. With a team of lawyers to keep Ms. Palmer and anyone else off the ballot, thus ensuring St. Barack the first victory.
In 2004, St. Barack spoke at the Democrat national convention, and like almost anything else, said little and somehow galvanized the audience and liberal, left America. But, St. Barack also was running for the United States senate seat of retiring Sen. Peter Fitzgerald. In the Democrat primary, he was far behind the establishment candidate, millionaire Blair Hull. But, lo and behold, a scandal broke out for Mr. Hull. Somehow, his sealed divorce papers became unsealed and there was good reason they were sealed. It shoed that Mr. Hull was alleged to have physically and verbally abused his ex-wife. Well, Mr. Hull went down with the ship and St. Barack was nominated as the Democrat nominee.
As luck would have it for St. Barack, the Republican nominee was Jack Ryan, also a millionaire businessman. But, Mr. Ryan was also divorced and, as luck would have it, his divorce records were also sealed. The Chicago Tribune, patrons of St. Barack pressured a court to unseal the divorce records that both Mr. Ryan and ex-wife, actress Jeri Ryan (of late the show Shark on CBS) did not want released. And, with good reason. It appears that among some of Mr. Ryan's purient tastes included forcing the former Mrs. Ryan to visit sex clubs. And, once again St. Barack came out on top because the Illinois Republican party makes the Massachusetts GOP look like Utah. There is none to speak of. The Illinois GOP was desperate and asked the ol' stemwinder himself, Alan Keyes, to fill in. And, Mr. Keyes got a whopping 23% against a relative neophyte.
Why is any of this important?
Because it shows that St. Barack is no different from Sen. Hillary in raw ambition. It shows that St. Barack stands back and lets his boosters do the dirty work. And, it maybe a warning for presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Sen. John "F--- You" McCain.
It is thought that Sen. "F--- You" McCain had a midlife crisis when he divorced his first wife and took up with current wife, Cindy McCain. I for one do not know any of the details and whether or not those divorce records are sealed. But, other than the fact the current Mrs. McCain is about 25 year younger than Sen. "F--- You" McCain, there is nothing to indicate that the senator did anything than divorce wife number one for the hot, young wife number two.
But, if there is anything, and St. Barack is the Democrat nominee, look for his minions to find anything, and I mean anything, on Sen. "F--- You" McCain, especially his divorce records.
How ironic that while Sen. "F--- You" McCain saves his venom for fellow conservative, Republicans, he may end up wishing a certain St. Barack a "F--- You"!
Friday, February 15, 2008
This presidential election year has brought into focus something that one would think was explained and practiced not too long ago.
That is conservatism.
But, we have found out that there is a three-legged stool and, I will add a forth.
There are social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, foreign policy and defense conservatives and here is the forth, judicial conservatives.
But, here is the thing. I am not a boxed-conservative. I am a conservative period.
So, what is it being a conservative?
It is a total world view. Not just on a certain set of issues. It is how I live my life. It is how I look at any multitude of issues. It is, quite simply, life experience.
But, while Mitt Romney ran for the Republican nomination for president he said he was a "full spectrum" conservative. And the Rev. Mike Huckabee is a social conservative. Sen. John "F--- You" McCain says he is a conservative, but does not know much about economics and doesn't do "social issues."
So, why were many people looking for the next Ronald Reagan, the Godfather of modern conservativsm?
Because the Great Man was a conservative period.
He easily explained it on many levels because he believed it and lived it. He was able to cobble together the so-called three legs of the modern Republican stool. In the Great Man's view, there were not just fiscal conservatives, or social conservatives, or foreign policy/defense conservatives and yes, judicial conservatives. For the Great Man, it was all inclusive.
Since Mr. Reagan passed from the political scene, there have been some hick-ups of inclusive conservatives. Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich came close but was self-destructive and was not able to close the deal as speaker, so to speak. Many thought that President Bush could be the man. But, he chose to refer to himself as a "compassionate conservative" and that had a bad meaning. It meant that some conservatives were mean-spirited and he would be the white horse that would make conservatism a better sell. And how can we forget that President Bush 41 said that under his leadership, the United States would be a "kinder, gentler nation."
Now, we who are in the Republican party are faced with another leader who has a hard time with the conservative thing. That is Sen. John "F--- You" McCain.
We conservatives have seemingly broken apart. The social conservatives had their guy in the Rev. Mike and are ready to go all the way with him. And, they seem to be "flexible" on the rest of conservatism.
The fiscal conservatives had their guy in Mitt Romney, but he just could not close the deal and by the time he was able to freely go for the conservative message, it was the speech before CPAC and it was his swan song. And, they too seem to be flexible on the other aspects of conservatism.
The foreign/defense conservatives have their guy in Sen. John "F--- You" McCain. They feel he will beat back the Islamofacsists. They look at the War Against Islamofacsist Terror as the over riding issue to the point of throwing the social and fiscal conservatives under the bus.
The question is why?
The message of conservatism is that it is not a sectional, ghettoization of groups. But, without someone to clearly articulate and make all feel a part of, each so-called sub-group feels marginalized and thus looks for leaders of their sub-group.
When one has a conservative view of the world, there is an understanding of what that means. Thus, I do not worry about social conservatives because I am one. I am with them because they are right in the defense of the unborn, maintaining marriage between one man and one woman, that children are in the best growth environment with a mom and dad, and that the culture is totally debased.
I do not worry about the fiscal conservative because I am one. I believe that all forms of government should live within it means and that it should not interfere with the free market. Government works best from the bottom up, not the other way around. Taxes should never be used to pit groups against groups but to provide for basic services.
I do not worry about the foreign and defense conservatives because I am one. I believe that we should always follow our foreign policy on the interests of the United States, not international groups and or organizations. In other words, the United States may have to fight the War Against Islamofacsist Terror on our own, not depending on so-called allies and alliances. And we should support our allies and defeat out enemies. Our armed forces should always be the strongest and best equipted at all times. When there is a "peace dividend" it should never be squandered at the expense of our armed forces being the best in the world.
And, I do not worry about judicial conservatives. They are the ones that realize there is a tyranny of unelected judges that make law up as they go along, not respecting the disticntly American separation of powers. And of lawyers clogging our judicial system at all levels to the detriment of the citizenry as a whole. Judicial conservatives know all too well that we need judges that adjudicate, not legislate. We will only get the kind of judges that respect law and order if we all come to understand the importance of it.
In a few short paragraphs, I think I have tried to explain conservatism.
A conservative does not have to emphasize one over the other because the building blocks of conservatism is all inclusive.
What conservatism needs is some people to articulate what that is with the ease of a Ronald Reagan. We need someone who believes in the whole package, not just what suits their fancy. I know that leadership is out there and we have to encourage them to speak out and loudly.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
There is the infamous Juan Hernandez, an open borders advocate who has dual citizenship and served as an advisor to former Mexican president, Vicente Fox.
Senor Hernandez one has to assume did a lousy job giving Senor Fox advice. Appearantly, his advice was to allow and or dump as many fellow Mexicans on the United States' doorstep as possible. Senor Hernandez is one of those who believes that where Mexicans are, that is Mexico.
If Sen. "F--- You" McCain gets that the American people want to secure the borders, he needs to disavow Senor Hernandez and dismiss his support.
The next who should be dumped is adman Mark McKinnon.
He would not feel comfortable in going after Sen. Barack Obama, aka St. Barack, in a head-to-head matchup.
The question is, why? It is only OK for you to go after Republicans? Or what about Sen. John F. Kerry? That was OK?
It is such a weak-kneed kind of advisor that would be fearful against going mano-a-mano against the first black candidate for the highest office in the land that makes people wonder about Sen. "F--- You" McCain and his own lack of judgement in the first place.
If Sen. "F--- You" McCain is serious about allaying the fears of conservatives, he needs to dismiss the support of Senor Hernandez and save Mr. McKinnon the trouble and fire him now.
Conservatives do not need to grovel at Sen. "F--- You" McCain in asking him to rid his campaign of these charlatans. Their comments and actionsspeak for themselves.
Sen. "F--- You" McCain does not need this trouble now. As he is finally getting needed support from the conservative base, he needs to know that he will not be able to defeat either Sens. Clinton or Obama without their money and volunteer work. Moderates do not like to get dirty doing the nuts and bolts work of getting voters to the polls and ginned up in the first place.
Time to be the "Straight Canning Express" and get rid of Senor Hernandez and Mr. McKinnon.
The greatest line from Mr. Romney was this:
With their rhetoric, our Democratic opponents are very skilled at striking heroic poses. But with our Republican candidate we're going to offer America the real thing.
Of course a lot of the talking heads, so called pundits and the like are saying that there was some tense moments and that they were not buddy-buddy. And, of course Sen. McCain will not ask Mr. Romney to be his vice-president.
Firstly, what were they supposed to do, hold each other in an embrace and give each other a kiss? Look, Mr. Romney got beat and already withdrew. It was a matter of time before he would endorse Sen. McCain. And, release his delagates. I think that was enough and his praise of Sen. McCain was equalled with praise from Sen. McCain. I do not need to read body language and all that psychobabble. These two would make a great ticket.
I also think that Sen. McCain was correct in realizing that Mr. Romney made him a better candidate, being aggressive with Mr. Romney, of course a little too much, but nonetheless, a better candidate. The fact is that Mr. Romney was the only Republican to take on Sen. McCain by name and on issues and the senator had to defend them. That is what candidates are suppose to do.
The reality is that Mr. Romney knew when to fold 'em and did it was class and grace. And did the same in fully endorsing Sen. McCain.
Too bad the Rev. Mike has not got the memo yet.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Some are even in conservative talk radio itself.
But my question is do these people even get conservative talk radio?
I mean, do they think that conservative talk radio hosts get their talking points from the Republican National Committee? Or that they cabal at the beginning of the day to talk about the issues of the day? Or that every host talks about the same thing?
In order, no, no and definatly no.
Each host has a different perspective on the news, current events, cultural trends and life in general.
Yes, there has been some harsh comments about Sen. "F--- You" McCain by some hosts, but if one is willing to look at the points that some hosts make, they have a strong, valid points.
My complaint is that too many decided at the last minute to realize that former candidate Mitt Romney was a solid conservative and say they would vote for him. Since it was too late, well you know the rest of the story.
But, why all of the sudden should these hosts just clam up because Sen. "F--- You" McCain is the presumptive Republican presidential nominee?
Because some of these people must believe that conservative talk radio needs to be in bed with Sen. "F--- You" McCain. Many believe that there is only one issue and that is the War Against Islamofacsist Terror. They are willing to overlook some serious conservative and Republican heresies. And that is tragic.
When we sell our souls as conservatives, we get what we deserve. Thus, we were led to believe that George W. Bush was a solid conservative. And, instinctivly he is. But, because he is not a thinker of conservative ideology, he all to willing to cut deals. So, to buy off senior citizens, he bought into the prescription drug benefit. Same with No Child Left Behind. What President Bush should have been advocating was abolishing the Education department and restoring education issues back to the states. But, he cut a deal with Sen. Teddy Kennedy. Same on spending by Republican congresses. He should have been advocating cuts, but instead bought into the fact that Republicans had congressional control, they have to do what it takes to keep control. Then came September 11, 2001. The terror attacks changed everything. Even critizism of President Bush by same hosts accused of disloyalty now were muted because of the war.
So, once again many are putting aside conservative principles and supporting a one time conservative in Sen. John "F--- You" McCain.
And some people, many in conservative talk radio, do not want to make the same mistake twice.
So, the constant critisism of Rush Limbaugh http://rushlimbaugh.com/, Laura Ingraham http://lauraingraham.com/, Sean Hannity http://hannity.com/ and to a lesser extent Hugh Hewitt http://hughhewitt.com/ and Dennis Prager http://pragerradio.com/ is nessecary to insure that Sen. "F--- You" McCain remembers that he was once a conservative and should return to those roots if he wants to have half a chance at victory in November.
That is where I fall in.
I want Sen. "F--- You" McCain to use the venom he usually shares with fellow Republicans against the Democrats. I want Sen. "F--- You" McCain to give a big middle-finger to those that want to do us harm and hit them as hard as possible.
If conservative talk radio does not hold up Sen. "F--- You" McCain to the conservative principles that he expressed in his speech last week at CPAC, then no one will.
Talk radio is not a monolith nor on the RNC payroll. There are even hosts who support Sen. "F--- You" McCain such as Michael Medved http://michaelmedved.com/ and Bill Bennett http://bennettmornings.com/.
And that is what is the beauty of conservative talk radio. These are thinking people, not sychophants. And that is the kind of oversight that these hosts provide for a public that is constantly hungering for the kind of political leadership that a man named Ronald Reagan once provided.
Monday, February 11, 2008
Saturday, February 09, 2008
And that shows two things.
Firstly, conservative Republicans, any Republicans for that matter, who bother to vote in the upcoming primaries and caucuses are desperate to send a message to Sen. John "F--- You" McCain. Even if that means pulling the lever for the Rev. Mike.
Secondly, Sen. "F--- You" McCain has a lllooonnnggg way to go to unify the Republican party.
Although I have spent months decrying the potential of a McCain nomination, it is more of less upon us Republicans. And, I do not like it. I more do not like a showboat like the Rev. Mike becoming a caricuture of himself and running himself, thankfully, out of the vice-presidential sweepstakes.
What the Rev. Mike has become is the one candidate who can let conservatives vent.
But, it also means that Sen. "F--- You" McCain has to actually campaign and raise money to compete in primaries. That time is needed for Sen. "F--- You" McCain reach out, personally, and mend fences with those conservative Republicans that hate the thought of supporting and voting for him. I do not speak for myself, I will vote for Sen. "F--- You" McCain. I can not see the Clintons and or St. Barack becoming president and leading the United States down the road of socialism.
We conservatives had our chance to rally around one candidate, which I believe should have been Mitt Romney, but we did not. To have someone stay in with no chance to stop the "Straight Talk Express" is not good for conservatism and or the Republican party.
If Sen. "F--- You" McCain is the presumptive nominee, then we need to force our place at the table and hold him accountable to the efforts that began this past Thursday in his speech at CPAC. Otherwise, the Rev. Mike's strategy of going all the way will look not too bad. And that is not good since the Rev. Mike is not all that much of a conservative. And that makes the protest voting all the more baffling.
There is a time and a place for the protest vote.
I confess that I voted for Pat Buchanan in the 1992 California Republican primary. But, that was long after it was clear that then Preisdent George H. W. Bush was the Republican nominee for reelection. And, that may have weakend President H. W. Bush's relection. Now, that we can look back, seeing the end result of the Bill Clinton years, did that do any good? No.
So, I ask the Rev. Mike Huckabee to say that he has made his point and that he is suspending his candidacy and taking the high road so that Sen. "F--- You" McCain can continue to come to conservative Republicans to make amends and seek support. All this does is delay the inevitable and make conservatives look like they do not care. I do. As much as I think that Sen. "F--- You" McCain is going to give conservatives heartburn and a lot more, I would rather have the Sen. give the terrorists the "F--- You". I would rather have the Sen. give the Democrats the "F--- You". I want the Sen. to give an "F--- You" to those that want to lead the United States down the road to socialism.
John McCain can not do that if a not so well known former governor from Arkansas, the Rev. Mike Huckabee keeps flying around like tha gnat that one can not swat down.
I must write this first.
He showed me why I became a supporter early on. The speech at CPAC was a stemwinder and the reasons that he became a candidate in the first place. I think that in that speech, which should have been made a lot sooner, he summed up why he is a legitimate conservative and that there are many issues that will be the focus of the presidential campaign. But, in talking about the War Against Islamofacsist Terror, he summed up the reason to leave now and eventually support Sen. John "F--- You" McCain.
Now, on to why he is not where Sen. "F--- You" McCain is today.
If it could be all summed up in one word, it would be Massachusetts.
Regretably, for many Republicans, nothing good comes out of Massachusetts. And, most of the time that would be correct. After all, Sen. John F. Kerry was the Democrat nominee for president in 2004 and look at how well that turned out. In 1980, Democrats almost made the mistake of throwing then President Jimmy Carter over the bridge with the winner of the 1969 Massachusetts Safe Driver Of The Year, Sen. Edward "Teddy" Kennedy, from ta da da da! Massachusetts. And, maybe more than the fact Mr. Romney is a Mormon, he was from Massachusetts, which might as well be a foreign nation to most Southerners. It is also true that most people from Massachusetts think that the South is still the Confederate States of America.
So, I think that they never got the real Romney record as governor and it was a conservative one. I think that many thought he legalized same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, not a state supreme court in which he had no nominations. Or that he was in favor of state funding of embriotic stem cell research. Mr. Romney vetoed that bill, but it was overidden. And while it is true that he did raise fees, which had not been raised in years, he did not raise taxes and did cut taxes. So, Mr. Romney did have a conservative record. Much of what seemed unconservative was when he ran against said Sen. Kennedy in 1994. For whatever reason, he thought that he would win trying to blur differences. It did not work and he lost in an otherwise Republican years as we all know.
Another reason is that a large enough minority just could not vote for a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, the Mormons.
I still believe that it was a small minority. But, even in the rightviewfromtheleftcoast household, there was spirited discussions between Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast and myself. In the end, I did persuade her that if Mr. Romney was the nominee, she would vote for him.
And some of the most strident opposition I encountered came from liberal, Democrats and Christians. Several people at my church and I had spirited disscussions. It was amazing to see how judgmental these liberals are in reality. And, these people would not even be partiicipants in the California Republican primary.
Bottom line is that it was there and can not be denied. And, it did not help that the Rev. Mike Huckabee, former governor of Arkansas fuled the anti-Mormon sentiments in a now infamous interview with the New York Times Sunday Magazine.
I think the worst thing was that he was not able to communicate the same message in every place that Sen. "F--- You" McCain and the Rev. Mike were. It seemed to change depending on where he was campaigning in earnest. I think that is due to the fact this was the first time on the national stage and the grueling death march of a primary season. But, it is not an excuse, just an explanation. Mr. Romney needed to hammer home his stand on the War Against Islamofacsist Terror and how he would handle big government and the economy at home. Muddled messages meant that voters bought the analysis that he was nothing but a flip-flopper. And, he was not, but that was only noticable to political junkies like myself.
Because so many Republicans and conservatives bought the DDBMSM narrative on Mr. Romney, they realized that it was all false when it was too late. And, that in part is the fault of Mr. Romney and his advisers.
But, by graciously bowing out this past Thursday in a speech at the CPAC conference, I think that many really belived that he was a solid conservative, which I knew he was all along. And that will make others take a second look. And one maybe the Republican nominee for president, Sen. John "F--- You" McCain.
Thursday, February 07, 2008
But, here are some thoughts.
Firstly, all of us need to take a real deep breath and realize something. This is the primary season and when we support a candidate and he or she does not get the prize, it is how they leave that shows what kind of person they are made of. And, when the appearant winner shows rightful humility, that shows what kind of person they are made of.
So, my guy is out. But, he went out with a message to conservatives. I am one of you and I am not going away. And we better believe it and not think this is the last we will see of Mitt Romney. He showed a lot of grace in his speech before CPAC today. He showed the passion that was missing in his campaign. The themes that he hit upon show that he is a Reagan Republican. And, he was not always but has seen the light and we should be welcoming him into the fold. It is what the Great Man would do.
Now, onto Sen. McCain.
He did show humility and I hope reconnection with conservative Republicans. After all, he did start out as one. In many ways he still is one. For me, although I have and still will refer to him as Sen. "F--- You" McCain, it is not personal. It is that I have not liked the fact that he has stuck it to us conservatives on many occasions and we take it. We expect that from liberal Democrats, not one of our own. But, maybe this is how he should have started his campaign for president last year when he did not attend the CPAC conference. I think that he has confused conservative support for President Bush with something against him personally because he did not get the nomination in 2000. No, it just was not his time.
But, it is important that while I will vote for Sen. "F--- You" McCain, it will be with a more critical eye.
We were desperate to gain the White House in 2000 and we rallied around then Gov. George W. Bush. Most of us knew that he was not a conservative in the Reagan mold but he was definatly more of a conservative than George H. W. Bush. And, eight years later we have paid a high price for not being more critical.
Hence, I have been around long enough to know that Sen. "F--- You" McCain has been a conservative. He needs to remember that. He needs to realize that a Reagan Republican would not knee-jerk accept globaloney warming. Also, a Reagan Republican would not sound like he cares more about international opinion and how we obtain information from terrorist suspects. Also, while I share the same concern about money and politics, his signature legislation was not a good one. And, his solution for illegal immigration looked more like what it was. Written by Democrats for Democrats.
Sometimes, even among friends, we will not always agree. It is how we treat each other that makes the difference.
And, that is why there has been hostility to Sen. "F--- You" McCain. When we offer criticism, it is not to be critical, it is to find a different way. And, I will hold the good senator that he must secure the borders before trailing down amnesty road.
Back to today.
I think that we may have begun to bring Sen. "F--- You" McCain back to the fold of conservatism. The kind of conservatism that Ronald Reagan fought for and believed in.
That is what Mitt Romney talked about today. And John McCain.
So, some advice for the presumptive Republican presidential nominee.
Do not make this election just about the war in the Iraq theatre and the federal judiciary. They are good for the base, us conservatives, but when we are dealing with these left-wing Democrats, we have to do better.
Take them on on their issues. Talk about how screwed up our tax system is, and how you will reform it. Not just lowering taxes, but the kind of reform that the Great Man fought for.
Talk about how government interference is part of the problem with health care delivery. Mitt Romney can help you on that score.
If we just run on those two issues, it will not inspire the base.
I want to draw clear, distinct lines between the Democrats and Republicans. I like partisanship. If I wanted bipartisanship, I would move to Red China, Cuba or maybe North Korea.
Mitt Romney will be able to help John McCain and so too can the Rev. Mike Huckabee. We may not have one leader to articulate the Reagan conservative Republican message, but we can and need these three leaders.
And, there is my olive branch.
Wednesday, February 06, 2008
Read on and do not think that I have left the planet.
The Huckabee people should get one thing through their heads. Sen. "F--- You" McCain is not going to nominate the Rev. Mike as his running mate. Once he serves his purpose in dividing the conservative base, Sen. "F--- You" McCain will dispose him to the side.
So, the Romney people, myself included, need to realize that once the divide and conquer strategy of the McCain braintrust is complete, the good senator will stray back to the Sen. "F--- You" McCain of the immigration debate yore.
We need each other.
It is obvious that the Rev. Mike has a following and does have a way of connecting with people. I think that there is a genuiness to him that I do not see in Sen. "F--- You" McCain. If I hear "My friends" one more time I will scream. Back to the Rev. Mike. Also, he is the only candidate who has talked about a real tax reform plan. But, he needs to learn more about private-sector economics and that class envy is unbecoming of a conservative Republican. And, he needs to learn not to be afraid of Mormons.
Mr. Romney needs to learn more about evangelicals and how important to really reach out to people. He needs to let people know that his coming around on the critical social issues is something on his heart. Kind of like President Bush in dealing with his alchohol addiction.
They both need to surround themsleves with serious, bright conservative and not-so-conservative thinkers on national security and foreign affairs.
The reality is that between them, they have the majority of conservatives in the Republican party. They just do not realize it because they think that if they keep going, they will be able to have some influence riding into the convention is St. Paul, Minnesota.
Not going to happen.
The signs are very ominous for a blowout in November.
Sen. "F--- You" McCain can not really say that he is the choice of the majority of Republican voters and caucus attendees. The best state he has won so far is New Jersey with 55% of the vote. It is a state that if he is the nominee, he will never go back to in the general election campaign. Sen. "F--- You" McCain is averaging about 40% of the votes in primaries and caucuses.
Since vanity will prevail instead of logic, both the Rev. Mike and Mr. Romney will be just given a night, maybe, to speak at the convention. That is all.
But, together they can be the face of the Republican future.
Both are reliable conservatives. They have shown their passion and it is not to pass a liberal agenda. Yes, they have made mistakes, but they do not show contempt for the base and the larger Republican party.
As noted many times here, Ronald Reagan did compromise and yes, made mistakes as president. Even as governor of California. But, it was never from the liberal side of things. He would be rolling his eyes that anyone would believe, hook, line and sinker in globaloney warming. He would have never, ever signed "campaign finance reform" into law. He proved that congress was so wrong in not funding the Nicaruagan rebels that he made a deal to sell arms to Iran, a sworn enemy, because a greater enemy, communism, was making a beachead in Central America. Waterboarding? I think that if it saved American lives and prevented a terrorist attack, he would do the waterboarding himself.
Because the Great Man was a unique politician. A man of ideas and convictions. He never wavered on the big stuff.
We do not have that now. We could be stuck with Sen. John McCain Nixon as our nominee. He all but destroyed the Republican party and had the kind of temprement and dark side that I see in Sen. "F--- You" McCain.
But, there are two new national voices for conservatism, a proven and winning ideology, and they are Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee.
They need to work together because the issues are larger than their personalities.
Tuesday, February 05, 2008
Firstly, despite all of our efforts on the Republican side Sen. John "F--- You" McCain will more than likely be the presidential nominee. But, neither Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee will be his vice-presidential nominee. And, this is the worst aspect of tonight for the Republicans is that this division will hand the White House to the Democrats and more than likely that Democrat is going to be Sen. Barack Obama.
On the Democrat side, this was a better night for Sen. Hillary Clinton than expected. But, Barack Obama won more states in general and he is going on to the Democrat nomination. And, he will win the White House.
Yes, I know that a lot can happen in the nine months until election day, but if one takes a look at all the states that have voted up to and including today, the momentum and enthusiasm is on the other side. We Republicans are so divided that the only possiblity for unity, dare I write this, is for Sen. "F--- You" McCain to go back to the Reagan Library, dig up the Great Man and take him high and low to convince conservatives he is one of us. When a party is this divided this late in the primary election season and it is a three-way division, it just gives time for the other side to unify and whip up the enthusiasm.
Here are some really bad trends for the Republicans.
Sen. "F--- You" McCain did not even carry his home state with 50% of the vote or more. But, Mr. Romney only got 51% in his home state of Massachusetts. The Rev. Mike carried his home state with 62% of the vote. That was the largest win for the the Rev. Mike in the South. However, he is proving to be a strong regional candidate in general. Mr. Romney does best in the mountain and Plains states, not large ones.
Since no one is getting out on the Republican side, the train wreck continues.
Good news for the Democrats.
Sen. Clinton got 57% of the vote in her "home" state of New York. But, Sen. Obama won his real home state, Illinois, with 70% of the vote.
As noted, the Dems are just more excited and ready to storm the White House.
I guess at the end of the day, the Republican party is so divided, and it is a three-way division. Sen. "F--- You" McCain used the Mayor Rudy strategy, win in the big states. The Rev. Mike won in the South, and West Virginia. Mr. Romney won everywhere else.
There is a way that possibly, and this is a long shot, that Mr. Romney and the Rev. Mike team up to stop Sen. "F--- You" McCain. Because even if one looks at it that Sen. "F--- You" McCain and the Rev. Mike are tag-teaming against Mr. Romney, since the Rev. Mike actually did win more states than expected thus denying a clear-cut win for Sen. "F--- You" McCain, he may have won himself out of the vice-presidency.
Here is another thought and this is really painful, the Republicans will lose in November. Depending on how bad and if Mr. Romney can mend fences and work with the party the next four years, he may have an inside shot at the nomination in 2012.
Also, this shows that while Vice-President Cheney has been a great vice-president, this showed that it really is important to pick a vice-president that can not only succeed you, but possibly win as George H. W. Bush did in 1988 and unify the party very quickly.
It is going to be a long nine months and a really long four years with President Obama.
Monday, February 04, 2008
A side note.
Even a probable strong showing by Mitt Romney will be downplayed by the DDBMSM. They are already trying to downplay the importance of California, the largest state in the nation and the top prize for both the Romney campaign and that of Democrat Barack Obama. But, we will know if the momentum is going Romney's way.
And, that is the point of this post.
DO NOT LET THE DINOSAUR, DRIVE-BY, MAINSTREAM MEDIA TELL YOU REPUBLICANS HOW TO VOTE!
Do not let the early results from New York, Connecticut or New Jersey get you down. They are strong McCain states that gained strength from the departure of Rudy Giuliani.
There are a lot more states in play.
There is Georgia, Missouri, Minnesota, and the big kahuna, California.
I urge all of you in any Super Duper Tuesday state to get out and vote. And take someone with you. It is time for those of us who believe in conservatism, the way that the Great Man, Ronald Wilson Reagan, showed us how it is done. Because of persuasion and not platitudes, a candidate has realized that the Great Man was right about a lot of things.
That man is Mitt Romney.
Yes, he could have run as a liberal Republican. But he is not. While he was moderate in many ways, as governor of Massachusetts, he governed as conservative as one could in one of the most Democrat-dominated states in the United States.
When confronted with two very critical social issues, the "legalization" of same-sex marriage and the push for state-funding of stem-cell research, Mr. Romney came out against both. He fought the Massachusetts legislature to let the voters decide the fate of same-sex "marriage" and although unsuccessful, he made it a top priority. He vetoed the funding of stem-cell research.
And, he came around to become pro-life. And that is not pandering because as noted here many times, it is tougher to come on our side than to cave in and become pro-abortion.
And, he did not raise taxes and balanced the budget four years in a row and left office with a "rainy day" fund.
Unlike another governor running, the Rev. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas, he worked with that same Democrat-dominated Massachusetts legislature to have every citizen in Massachusetts access to health insurance. It may not be perfect, but he is the only candidate on either side to say that he did that.
It is very easy for a sitting senator to say he is pro-life and to vote on it, it is another to have to make a decision on it, with regards to stem-cell research.
It is very easy to tout the success of the surge in American troops in the Iraq theatre in the War Against Islamofacsist Terror. But, he was not in charge of any aspect of implementing the policy. And, it is easy to trash a former defense secretary as said sitting senator has done.
Mitt Romney is a man of action and he is a conservative, Republican. He will fight for traditional, American values as president. And he will lead to multiple reforms here at home. And, he will lead the fight against the Islamofacsists with every thing in the American arsenal. He will not accede to international concerns.
I urge all Republicans to NOT PAY ATTENTION TO THE DDBMSM AND VOTE On Super Duper Tuesday for the next president of the United States, MITT ROMNEY.
In the push to make Sen. John "F--- You" McCain the Republican presidential nominee, I notice a disturbing trend among "conservative" supporters of the senator from Arizona, the one who won Barry Goldwater's seat.
The trashing of Ronald Reagan as a "compromiser."
Now, I will be the first to note that he did have to compromise. After all, the House of Representatives was decidedly Democrat controlled his whole presidency. The closest Republicans got was 192 seats in the landslide 1980 election which elevated Mr. Reagan to the presidency. By the time Mr. Reagan left office it was down to 177 Republicans.The senate was a much better place as Republicans had control for the first six years of the Reagan presidency with a high-water mark of 54 down to 45 by the time he left office.
If one wants a good understanding of how Mr. Reagan was able to achive all he was able to, read Mark Levin's piece in National Review http://corner.nationalreview.com/.
The fact is that while Mr. Reagan did do some not so conservative things like raise taxes, he was able to achieve tax reform and by the time he left office in 1989, there were only two tax brackets.
In other words, when he did compromise, he did so from the conservative position. He did not accept the view of the other side, the liberal Democrats. He did not accept their positions and work to acheive them. Otherwise, he would have stayed a Democrat.
And, since the term flip-flopper has been used by all Republicans in this campaign, I would remind every single one who uses the term to remember this. The greatest flip-flopper of all was. . .Ronald Reagan!
He was a Democrat up to at least 1960. Yes, he was a leader in Democrats for Nixon, but he did not change party identification until it became clear that as he put it in his manifesto, "Where Is The Rest Of Me" that he did not leave the Democrat party, it left him.
Yet he has become the greatest Republican of the last half of the 20th century.
I accept his "flip-flopping" because he became a conservative, understood what it meant to be a conservative and a Republican. And, many old-line, blue-blood, Rockefeller-type Republicans have hated it ever since.
And the most important thing for those trashing Mr. Reagan to make Sen. "F--- You" McCain look good need to remember.
President Reagan never had to remind conservative Republicans he was one of us. Even when we were mad at him for making compromises, he would come right back and throw some kind of zinger that irritated the liberal Democrats. And, we forgot that he may have made such a mistake in the first place.
Why I, in defense of Mitt Romney, defend his "flip-flops" is because it is coming to the conservative side. He is not apologizing for being a conservative. Believe me, in this political climate it is difficult to defend a lot of what conservatism has become. But, like Ronald Reagan, I believe it is with sincerity that Mr. Romney has embraced more conservative positions. I think that if when all is said and done if Sen. "F--- You" McCain should be the GOP nominee and does lose the presidency, Mr. Romney will be able to prove his chops for the next four years and will emerge as the leader of the conservative wing of the Republican party.
Sen. "F--- You" McCain, for all of his alleged "straight talk" has let his surrogates trash the reputation of the Great Man, Ronald Reagan, to make him look good. And that is bad because Ronald Reagan has left a legacy. Sen. "F--- You" McCain is just leaving carnage in his waste.
Sunday, February 03, 2008
Improbably, the Giants beat the undefeated, 18-0 Patriots, 17-14 literally in the last minute.
Giants quaterback Eli Manning, brother of Indianapolis Colts QB Peyton Manning and son of former New Orleans Saints QB Archie Manning threw a 13-yard touchdown to Plaxico Buress with 35 seconds left in regulation.
The Patriots, led by scumbag quaterback Tom Brady,* tried to desperatly get into field position to try for a field goal attempt to tie the game and send it into overtime. But, it did not happen. And the Giants were giant killers being 12 point underdogs to the undefeated Patriots.
It is truly amazing. the ramifications will be written about in our lifetimes and beyond. It tops the New York Jets defeating the then Baltimore Colts in Super Bowl 3. I can not think of anything that tops this in the history of the NFL.
It was wonderful and I a glad that I changed my mind and did watch the game.
For it was one for the ages.
For instance, my home state of California is numero uno, thats number one in case you do not know a little Espanol! The "analysis" seems OK until the last sentence:
Historically, California's Republican voters tend to be more moderate than those in other Western states.
They have got to be kidding! I mean, from the state that produced two United States presidents, Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, by way of Illinois. Who began the property tax reform movement in the late 1970s. Of course maybe because many Republicans were hoodwinked into voting for Gov. Arnold not once but twice. But, downticket in 2006, all the candidates for the other offices were solid conservatives.
In Arizona, where Sen. John "F--- You" McCain should be polling in landslide numbers, he is not http://realclearpolitics.com. The average of numerous state polls show Sen. "F--- You" McCain with only 41.3%, Mitt Romney at 25%, the Rev. Mike Huckabee at 8.3% and Ron Paul at 4%. That leaves still a little over 21% undecided. Not real great numbers. But don't worry, the Times gives it's "analysis" on this.
Mr. McCain leads comfortably in his home state; other candidates have not campaigned much here.
Keep in mind, Sen. "F--- You" McCain has an average 16.3% lead over Mr. Romney in his home state.
Move to Mr. Romney's home state, Massachusetts.
According to Real Clear Politics, Mr. Romney has a 54% average and Sen. "F--- You" McCain has an average of 28.7. The Rev Mike has an average of 6.3% and Ron Paul comes in at 3%. And an average of only 8% undecided. The spread is 25.3%.
But, here is how the Times, the old grey lady, "analizes" this:
Mr. Romney, the state's former governor leads his rivals by a wide margin. But the Boston Globe (A subsidiary of the New York Times) reported on Thursday that some analyists see the McCain momentum "spilling over into Massachusetts." Mr. McCain won the state's Republican primary in 2000.
By the way, the parenthisis is my point about the Boston Globe being a New York Time's owned newspaper.
Sen. "F--- You" McCain has a lesser lead and more undecided voters in his home state, a caucus state, and he is leading comfortably. While Mr. Romney is leading in his home state by a larger margin and less undecided voters and somehow the "McCain momentum" may change the outcome of that race.
It is part and parcel of the DDBMSM trying to influence the outcome, especially in the Republican races. There is little if any positive or straight news on Mr. Romney, but fawning news on Sen. "F--- You" McCain.
Do not believe the spin folks. Look at all the polling data at Real Clear Politics. It show that there is Romney momentum in many of these races. Tomorrow many radio talk show hosts will be on the air and probably promoting their recent endorsment for Mr. Romney. And, Rush will be live and I am sure on fire.
As I noted in an earlier post that these pollsters need to get out of the way and let us, the citizens, vote. No spin until we vote.
If you are undecided and in a Super Duper Tuesday primary or caucus state, don't let the "news" and "polls" decide how you are going to vote.
Dennis Prager http://dennispragerradio.com said it best on this past Friday's show. Vote for the person that you think will make the best president. If that happens to be Sen. "F--- You" McCain, that is OK. But if it is not and there is one other, vote for that person. It is really down to a two-man race. McCain and Romney.
A lot of people have had their reservations about Mr. Romney, but if you are one of those, look at his overall record. It is not without blemishes or even blotches. But, he was a Republican governor in Massachusetts. He did not take a pass when the state supreme court divined a "right" to same-sex marriage. He fought tooth and nail to let the voters decide the issue. But that did not happen. He vetoed a bill that would have expanded state funding into stem-cell research. He did not raise taxes. Bob Novak wrote that he was the most conservative of four Republican governors that succeeded former Democrat governor Michael Dukakis.
The record is out there on Sen. "F--- You" McCain.
All I can ask is that you do not let so-called "analysis" affect your vote. Tell the DDBMSM that you will vote who you really think will be the best president from the Republican side. And same for Democrats because they are trying to affect that race as well.
See what they will spin on Wednesday.
Saturday, February 02, 2008
Yesterday I got a call from the Mitt Man himself. Today I got a call from former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum and the ray of sunshine himself, Sen. John "F--- You" McCain.
Darn! He did not refer to himself by that name, you know "F--- You" McCain. Oh, thats right. He saves that for his Republican friends!
I figure before this is over I will get several more of these taped calls.
Do they make a difference?
For me, no.
But, for some who are undecided and there are many all over the United States, it may help.
So far, it is the Mitt Man two, Sen. "F--- You" McCain one.
I am waiting with bated breath for the Rev. Mike to call. And I am sure it will be tomorrow, Sunday. I hope that he will use a quotation from the Holy Bible, King James Version of course, to get my vote.
With a little sarcasm, I think that these calls do matter as noted to an undecided voter. And it is a good way for a decided voter to know which candidate is targeting which voters.
Oh, a confession.
Mrs. rightviewfromtheleftcoast is a registered independent here in California.
Thus, earlier this week we got a live person calling on behalf of Sen. Barack Obama. Fortunatly, I was not home. I fear she would have not liked me to answer her call! Nor would the McCain people. And especially the Clinton people!
It is the way to get to the most voters in a state like California and they must work or candidates would not use them.
If Gov. Arnold calls, oh boy he better get ready for an earful!
Why, Maine of course. And it was a Republican caucus.
Once again, Mitt Romney one another caucus. In this one Sen. John "F--- You" McCain is trailing The Rev. Mike Huckabee AND Congressman Ron Paul. http://drudgereport.com.
It is not a winner take all and yes, it is not exactly New York or New Jersey or the big prize, California. But, a win is a win.
It would be wise for the Romney team to build this up. They can point that not everyone everywhere is going to be put under a spell to vote for Sen. "F--- You" McCain. And, though a small state win, it can be played up that Mr. Romney is paying attention everywhere because he has the cash to do so. We all know that Sen. "F--- You" McCain does not. He raised a rip-roaring $7 million in January. Democrat Sen. Barack Obama raised $32 million in January http://hughhewitt.com.
Republicans need to think long and hard as to who we want to run against a Sen. Obama or a Sen. Hilary Clinton.
A 72 year old navy veteran who looks it and does not have support of his party's base. Or, a fresh newcomer who can get the base, unify all factions of the GOP and a higher ability to raise cash.
We get to decide that on Tuesday. Hopefully, we will make the right choice.
But, sometimes when she speaks, she reminds me of that other blight on conservatism, Sen John "F--- You" McCain.
Take her latest comments.
She said that if Sen. "F--- You" McCain is the Republican presidential nominee that she will campaign and vote for DEMOCRAT Hilary Clinton.
Now, this blog has given extensive example time and again that Sen. "F--- You" McCain is not a strong conservative and that he goes out of his way to be a "maverick." But to openly say that you would rather have the other candidate is just, well kind of McCain-like.
It is why the left love her. They can not wait to hear what she will say next.
I am certain that it was only to get a rise out of people but the fact is that too many will actually believe her. And, that is a problem for someone who is a brilliant as Miss Coulter is.
So, my unasked and unqualified advice is that Ann Coulter should not comment on the presidential election campaign until it is over. We already have Sen. "F--- You" McCain, we do not need another!
So, here are some of mine.
I will write this aspect as a sort of disclaimer.
I am an information junkie.
One of the reasons that I do blog is to share some of the information that I find, mostly on the internet. Sometimes, I blog about a subject and the next day conservative talk radio picks it up and voila! We get some conversation going.
And on some, not all issues, we get something going.
The most recent example is the so-called "comprehensive immigration reform" bill-scam. Once the public heard the ramifications of the proposed law, it started right here in the blogosphere, went on to talk radio and the rest is history. Why do you think that Sen. John "F--- You" McCain does not want to talk about the bass ackwards of the bill in the first place? Had he talked serious border enforcement first and then the pathway to citizenship, he would have won over a lot more people.
On one issue, the people were heard thanks to conservative and alternative media.
But, most radio talk show hosts are not influence peddlers. They are like you and me. Just people interested in the world around them. In fact, Rush Limbaugh is sort of like Sen. "F--- You" McCain in the sense that he emphasizes that fact that he is not doing what he does to be an inside-the-beltway influence peddler. He like most are independent thinkers.
Michael Medved in supporting Sen. "F--- You" McCain I am afraid does not get the memo. He has said that talk radio will lose influence because they are not backing Sen. "F--- You" McCain.
On the other hand Laura Ingraham said that a lot of those that are backing Sen. "F--- You" McCain are doing so because they are afraid of losing contacts and influence.
Conservative media is not going to lose any influence whether or not Sen. "F--- You" McCain is the Republican presidential nominee or not. Or if the nominee, eventual president. And, Miss Ingraham is right on the nose about some people who are more worried about losing their coveted places at the table rather than what they really think and or believe.
And that is the beauty of this media that we are all a part of. We get to say, write and talk about what we really believe.
At some level, it does influence people. Maybe it will not be to the point of determining the outcome of a presidential campaign. OOPS! I am wrong. Almost forgot about the folks over at Powerline who exposed the fraudulent documents that sunk the career of Red Dan Rather at CBS news. Hell, he decided that if you can not beat the new media, join them. He is at a little-known outfit called HD news.
Clearly, we all are a different breed. We who write, talk, comment, are activists are different from the vast majority of Americans. But, because we are who we are we do have an ability to change people's minds. If not that give people something to talk about.
I really do not think I will change the outcome of history. All I can do is find interesting stories and share them with you. I comment on them and give my perspective. If it can change a mind, that is great. But, I do not see myself as one who WANTS to be like those we watch on TV and have a stake in the outcome.
So, as many of us are about to vote in Super Duper Tuesday, think about what I have shared with you here about politics. Don't change your mind just because I have a position. Change it if you do because you have given thought to it. That is what would make what I do a happy outcome.
Friday, February 01, 2008
Mr. Romney got quite a few outside-the-beltway endorsements today. Former Sen. Rick Santorum, Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin have all jumped on the bandwagon. The Denver Post, the largest newspaper and in the Rocky Mountain West has endorsed him.
So, how does the Sen. "F--- You" McCain camp react? Why they rush out a press release that the Los Angeles Times is endorsing him. UGH! How much more are we conservatives going to beat ourselves up looking for the perfect candidate?
I mean, when a "conservative" trots out an endorsement from another left-wing branch of the DDBMSM, we are in trouble.
And, that is why real people are on the Romney Express.
Yes, Sen. "F--- You" McCain is racking up real inspireing endorsements from Governor Arnold, the most Democrat Republican governor in the United States. And Mayor Rudy, which should be no surprise. And the DDBMSM is orgasmic over Sen. "F--- You" McCain.
But, mulling over the Rudy endorsement. One of his leading supporters was California congressman David Dreier. He had a chance yesterday to endorse Sen. "F--- You" McCain, but did not. Hmm, maybe he will jump on that Romney Express.
I also would suggest listening to this interview Mark Levin had with the former Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert http://www.2.nationalreview.com/dest/2008/02/01/levinhastert0201081.mp3. Listen how well Sen. "F--- You" McCain has worked with House Republicans.
We have a chance folks. I know that I will be at my voting booth first thing on Tuesday morning voting for Mitt Romney. Any one in a Super Duper Tuesday state needs to make up their mind real quick. A vote for Romney is a vote for keeping the all conservatives together. And someone that can go at either the Clinton machine or the St. Barack surge.
I think a lot more people are coming to realize that Mitt Romney is the one standing in the way of Sen. John "F--- You" McCain becoming the Republican nominee. Remember, the erstwhile senators greatest hits that I posted on yesterday. If you want to let McCain get it without a fight, you have no one to blame but yourselves. If we fight him, we move him back on the reservation at least. If not, he gets a pass and we get beat like a drum in November.