Sunday, January 29, 2012

Why Does The Leftywhore Media Romanticize Criminals?

One thing about the Sunday Left Angeles Times is that it almost writes a post in and of itself on unbelievable Leftywhore media bias.
Today's case in point is this front-page story on former Black Panther Pete O'Neal.
Now If one just looks at the photos, we see this dread locked old dude that surrounds himself with orphaned children. Children that he has taken care of.
Now that is the nice picture the writer, Christopher Goffard, wants to present.
But let's get to the heart of the real story.
Mr. O'Neal is a criminal that has evaded American justice for nearly 40 years.
Mr. O'Neal was convicted transporting a shotgun across state lines and was sentenced to four years in prison. And while out on bail, keep in mind he was already convicted, Mr. O'Neal and his wife, Charlotte, decided to get out of Dodge. And that was by way of Sweden and Algeria and eventually to his current home in Tanzania.
The head line of the story implies something different:

Former Black Panther patches together purpose in Africa exile

I highlight exile because the implication is that the United States exiled Mr. O'Neal to Tanzania. Nothing could be further from the truth. Mr. O'Neal jumped bail and is on the run of his own doing. He has chosen to live in a self-imposed exile. That should have been the headline.
Now keep this in mind.
The Black Panthers were some seriously bad dudes and gals. They wanted to begin "Black Liberation". In other words, they hated Whitey and all that they believed that Whitey stood for. They wanted not desegregation and all people to be treated equally, with respect. Not based on skin color but character. Nope, they wanted to kill Whitey and set up a Black, socialist utopia.
And Mr. O'Neal, himself a troubled youth, was the perfect kind of bad dude these people wanted.
The article implies that Mr. O'Neal has mellowed over the years. I suppose he has.
The article points out that he is embarrassed at the radical and the rhetoric he once employed. Yet he is not sorry for what he was trying to do.
In the meantime, the socialist, Maoist, whatever left-wing doctrine they were trying to figure out seems to have in a sense left Mr. O'Neal.
Mr. O'Neal owns four-acres in this rugged part of Tanzania. He even has modern conveniences such as television and a computer.
Yet the nagging thing is why Mr. O'Neal simply does not come back to the United States now? He probably would not serve a day in jail. A 40-year conviction on transporting a shotgun across state lines is hardly the thing one flees the United States and stays away for 40 years.
I believe it is in this statement he makes in the article:

For his radicalism itself, however, he won't apologize, even if — as he suspects — it is the one thing that might gain him safe entry back into the States.

"They will never convince me in my life," he says, "that what I was doing wasn't right."

Well, I won't try to convince you. But I will not celebrate you either.
One way that Mr. O'Neal earns a buck, or a Tanzanian Schilling, is hosting American high school students and regaling in the tales of his Black Panther days. I kid you not. Look at this photo of awe-struck students.

These young minds full of mush are allowed to go by parents, fork out $30 to spend the night and hear a boatload of propaganda. And they are lapping it up.
I do not get it.
Why would sane parents let their kids travel around the world to meet a guy that has such hatred for their nation? That at one time believed the White man was so evil that they had to be killed? And that almost all the students are. . .White?
But that is the whole problem with this article.
The result is that most people would feel sorry for this dude.
I do not.
I think that he should have come back long ago, either fought the charges or take the punishment. Or hope that there would be a compromise of sorts.
But, Pete O'Neal is a true-believer to the end. And that is nothing to celebrate but to mourn. For what he believes is in a fairy-tale. Socialism is a fairy-tale.

Saturday, January 28, 2012

St. Louis Honors Iraq War Vets-New York Does Not

The city of St. Louis had a parade honoring those brave men and women that served in the Iraq theatre in the War Against Islamofacsist Terror today.
And they get a big, double thumbs up from Right View From The Left Coast.
However, New York City will not have a parade honoring those that served in the WAIT, Iraq theatre.

The St. Louis effort was basically a home-grown effort by one Craig Schneider who began laying the ground work for the effort this past December. Mr. Schneider was able to get donations from Anhauser-Busch and Mayflower movers to help defray the cost. And there were 100 entries expected.
But Mayor Buttinsky, er Bloomberg, said no such luck in the Big Apple.
No, the mayor that wants to tell you what to eat said that he spoke with big-shots in Washington, D. C. and was told that a parade is premature because there are still troops in harm's way.
News Flash!
There are always troops in harm's way.
But a part of the mission in the WAIT is done. Those soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines are now home. And yes, they damn well deserve an honor. And a parade.
This Mayor Buttinsky should shut his yap about such things.
What is needed in New York City is a similar effort by citizens. Citizens telling Mayor Buttinsky to back off and let the citizens decide if they want to show their small but heart left gratitude to the brave men and women on the front lines.
It is giving me a thought that we need such a parade here in Pasadena. I can think of no better day than Independence Day, 2012.
What say you? Ready to get the ball rolling on getting this town to honor our troops?
Let me know.

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

Remember How Newt Supported Doug Hoffman In The New York State 23rd Congressional Race In 2009?

No, I bet you don't.
Neither do I.
OOPS! My bad!
I plum forgot that the former Republican Speaker of the House backed not the Tea Party choice for the infamous New York state 23rd congressional race in 2009.
No, Newt Gingrich, the stalwart conservative let the whims of a few Republican county party chairs sway who to support.

So, it is important to give a brief as possible history lesson on the race in question.
In 2009, the Dear Leader, President Obama, appointed John McHugh, a New York state Republican congressman to become Navy Secretary.
So, a special election was called by then-Gov. David Patterson.
In New York state, unlike California, the Republican party depends on the county chairs to essentially appoint a candidate. In California, a first-round of voting occurs and if no one gets 50% plus one, then the top two go to the second round, the general election.
The county chairs chose a little-known state assemblyman, Dede Scozzafava to be the choice the maintain the seat. Mrs. Scozzafava was and is a liberal Republican. Think of our former-thank God-governor, Benedict Arnold Schwarzenegger.
In New York state, there are two small parties, the Conservative and the Liberal party.
Enter Doug Hoffman.
Mr. Hoffman supposedly "lost" to Mrs. Scozzafava among the 11 county chairs in the 23rd congressional district.
So, Mr. Hoffman ran an insurgent campaign on the Conservative party line.
This created huge problems for the Republican party everywhere. Especially in Washington, D. C.
You know who supported Mrs. Scozzafava?
Why none other than the current flavor-of-the-week conservative, Newton LeRoy Gingrich.
In fact, your humble blogger noticed that Mr. Gingrich had some undying loyalty to Mrs. Scozzafava. And he was one of the last Republicans to unendorse Mrs. Scozzafava.
And it was not just some conservative on the Left coast noticing this may have not been the wisest choice Mr. Gingrich made.
The Hill newspaper noticed that Mr. Gingrich stepped in it, big time here.
If you think that Mrs. Scozzafava was some moderate, consider that she supported the union-backed "card-check" legislation. Was more than just "pro-choice" on abortion. And she supported the so-called "stimulus" legislation in 2009.
Somehow, Mr. Gingrich thought that this was a principled conservative:

“Our best chance to put responsible and principled leaders in Washington starts here, with Dede Scozzafava.”

Sure, Newt. Sure was.
Oh, for the record, Mrs. Scozzafava dropped out of the race. Endorsed the Democrat and current congressman, Bill Owens. And now has a cushy state job she was appointed to by the. . .wait for it. . .Democrat governor, Andres Cuomo.
But remember, all of you who are saying Newt Gingrich is a true conservative fighter. When he had the chance to get on the right side of the Tea Party, he went right back to his Rockefeller Republican roots.
It is ironic that today, on the Gingrich for President website, he has to admit that it was a mistake to support Mrs. Scozzafava. Here is from the website:

Whether it was helping to build the Republican Party of Georgia back when Democrats controlled the entire state or leading the nationwide effort in 1994 to break 40 years of Democratic rule in the House, Newt has always tried to advance the cause of a truly conservative Republican party. This has always meant supporting the most conservative nominee possible as selected by Republican primary voters.

Therefore, Newt will almost always back the nominee of the Republican party and not back an independent candidate in a race against a Democratic candidate.

Newt still believes in this principle, however, he has admitted it was a mistake to back Dede Scozzafava, the Republican nominee in the 2009 NY-23 special election. Although she was the Republican nominee, the problem was that Republican primary voters did not pick her, the local party leaders did, otherwise her liberal views would have prevented her from becoming the nominee.

I highlight the most important part because it was the process that was wrong. As a so-called reformer, he should have been demanding that the secretive process be opened to party rank-and-file voters, not corrupt county party chairs greasing the wheels for one of their own.
Newt was wrong then and while he admits that mistake, it cost the Republican party a congressional seat and dealt the Tea Party movement an unnecessary setback.
Leadership means sometimes throwing out the playbook. On this Mr. Gingrich did not and I think there are a whole lot of other issues that he has been on the wrong side of.
This is a glaring one.

Saturday, January 21, 2012

The Cruise Industry Is Better Than One Lousy Italian Captain

When I first heard about the accident that caused the capsizing of the luxury liner Costa Concordia, my first thought was this is bad and going to be really bad for a lot of people.
The good news is that fortunately, less than 50 out of over 4,000 passengers and crew died or are missing. And believe me, I am not dismissing any death, injury or distress for all those people.
There is a lot of conflicting information still to this day. That the captain, Francesco Schettino, steered the ship close to an island off of an Italian island for a crew member. That Mr. Schettino went in a life boat to escape before ascertaining the whole situation. That Mr. Schettino claims to have tripped and fallen into the said life boat. And that some of the panic once the situation was ascertained was that the ship had not had the lifeboat drill before leaving port.
And of course this is leading many to want to investigate the cruise industry in general.
So, as one who has been on several cruises, let me say here and now that most are wonderful adventures and rather uneventful affairs.
The first cruise Mrs. RVFTLC and I went on was our honeymoon cruise nearly 12 years ago.
It was on this ship, The Carnival Elation

Now it is a 13-year old ship. But it was new at the time. Our itinerary was Mexico. The West Coast. Puerto Vallarta, Mazlatan, and Cabo San Lucas. And a couple of full days out at sea.
It was the first time either of us were on a cruise. It was a gift from my mother in law.
A funny aside.
As part of it, there was a video that featured Kathy Lee Gifford signing and talking about the ship. There was corny throughout. "Its an Elation vacation!" It made us laugh silly. But once we stopped laughing, it was rather informative.
Once we got on the ship, we were amazed.
Everyone was pleasant. The crew. The people. It was amazing to realize that we were on a ship of roughly 4,000 people.
Most cruises are great affairs to rememeber.
Subsequent cruises were an Alaksan cruise and two more to Mexico.
But the only time one hears of cruises in the Leftywhore or any media, it is when disaster strikes. Or about how the crew is paid. And how terrible their working conditions are.
In other words, the negative.
Yet this once reserved for the rich way to travel has come to the middle income people. The industry has exploded. And in fact, there is a cruise line dedicated to family travel in Disney Cruise Line.
But to bash a whole industry because one captain was an idiot and a coward is not fair.
Cruising is safer than auto travel. Probably safer than air travel as well.
But you would not know the positives when there is this ship half-sunk off of the Italian coast.
That is too bad.

Newt Wins South Carolina

As seemingly expected, former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, has won the Republican primary in South Carolina and rather handily tonight.
With 99% of precincts reporting, Mr. Gingrich had 40% of the vote to Mitt Romney's distant second at 28%. Rick Santorum came in a solid third with 17% and Ron Paul came in last of the four still running at 13%.
It is a solid win for Mr. Gingrich. No doubt about that.
But I wonder how much of it is a "sympathy" vote after the ABC interview with the former Mrs. Gingrich number two, Marianne? And the subsequent dressing down Mr. Gingrich gave to CNN's John King for even bringing it up?
I think that John Pitney, Jr. over at The Corner at National Review sums it up best in this posting. And the list that will now more than ever be spotlighted is given a brief overview:

Expect renewed attention to troublesome aspects of his public record: his past support for a value-added tax, his overdrafts at the House Bank and his other ethics problems, his denunciation of deficit hawks as “the perfectionist caucus,” his past skepticism about the Founders, and many others.

How will Mr. Gingrich handle legitimate questions on those and other issues. The phrase "I should not have said FILL IN THE BLANK." can only be used so much before people get a little annoyed. And those are the supporters. Imagine a whole nation of voters in a general election?
Its time for Mr. Gingrich to celebrate this win because they are going to get harder and much costlier to come by.
And now, on to Florida.

See South Carolina Election Results Here

This is a link to the Charleston Post and Courier election results.
It will be something to see in real time.

Why Do Some Conservatives Ignore Gingrich Transgressions Yet Salivated At Clinton Ones?

If there is one thing that this blogger seeks is truth. And sometimes it means that some people that I like and respect need to answer an obvious question.
The question in this case is simple.
Why are some conservatives ignoring or dismissive of numerous personal and policy transgressions on the part of Newt Gingrich? Yet when one William Jefferson Blythe Clinton was president, same said conservatives were salivating at every one of Mr. Clinton's transgressions?
A point here is I sure was one that saw Mr. Clinton as a threat to the Republic. Politically, of course.
It was well known that the lug was a womanizer with the best of them. Many of the same people said that automatically disqualified him to become president in 1992.
While a lot happened in the Clinton era, the dreaded impeachment of the president in a strange sense was a turning point.
I still believe that it was correct to impeach the president because he lied in a deposition on a civil matter. While president of the United States. If he will easily lie about a matter that he should have settled, what would he really lie about?
Ahh, but the Leftywhore media and the Democrat party made it an issue about sex and the president's private life. Most conservatives would have none of that. Remember when we mocked Mr. Clinton every Sunday as we saw him either walking into or from church? With Holy Bible tucked under his arm?
Fast forward to 2012.
One of the leaders of the impeachment of Mr. Clinton was Newt Gingrich.
To show how reckless and dangerous Mr. Gingrich was, the media successfully made sex the issue. And yet Mr. Gingrich was cavorting with the current Mrs. Gingrich, Calista. While still married to Mrs. Gingrich number two, Marianne.
And let us not forget that Mrs. Gingrich number two became that in the same manner.
Now, one can ask each of these women why they would have thought Mr. Gingrich would be any different with them.
But that is for the head-shrinkers.
For me, to listen to conservatives today, you would have think we are in another world.
When a Democrat is full of transgressions, we rail against them.
When a Republican is full of transgressions, we suddenly sound like, well Democrats.
Ah, its his personal life. That happened years ago. He realizes that he was bad and has sought forgiveness.
Yet in 1998, that was not enough for most of us.
Keep in mind, once the Leftywhore media changed the narrative, it was harder and harder to keep the basis of impeachment front and center.
It was not about an affair but alleged sexual harassment. And the president lied about it. And lied when a pattern of reckless behavior became evident. Again, that was what it was all about.
Again, I get why many like the fighter Newt Gingrich.
But he can not be the Republican standard-bearer in 2012.
The affairs are just one reason.
The policy transgressions, the attacks on people for making money, the seemingly lack of discipline, that along with past faults make Mr. Gingrich be suspect in the long haul.
But we cannot have a double standard.
Bill Clinton was and is bad.
Newt Gingrich was bad, but he is our guy so he is cool.
I want to win this election, but I am with Rick Santorum.
Here is what he said in the CNN GOP debate this past Thursday:

I mean, Newt's -- Newt's a friend. I love him. But at times, you've just got, you know, sort of that, you know, worrisome moment that something's going to pop. And we can't afford that in a nominee.

We need someone -- I'm not the most flamboyant, and I don't get the biggest applause lines here. But I'm steady. I'm solid. I'm not going to go out and do things that you're going to worry about. I'm going to be out there. I'm going to make Barack Obama the issue in this campaign.

Think about that fellow conservatives.
Mr. Santorum is right.
Most important, we need to admit that we have set a double standard if Mr. Gingrich is the GOP nominee. And it may be no turning back on that one.

Friday, January 20, 2012

My Prediction For South Carolina

Tomorrow, well actually almost today as I write this, the good voters of South Carolina will go to the polls and decide who they like in the Republican primary for president.
So, of course I will offer my fearless prediction.
It is as follows:

Mitt Romney: 30%
Newt Gingrich: 29%
Rick Santorum: 23%
Ron Paul: 15%
Other: 3%

This does take into account the fact that Newt Gingrich is really surging in So Carolina. And I think that this is not a place for the Ron Paul breakthrough.
If Mr. Gingrich does not win this one, how can he seriously keep it up through the remaining contests? I do not get how a fourth place finish in Iowa, a fifth place finish in New Hampshire and a possible loss in So Carolina and yet Mr. Gingrich can say he will be the nominee.
At some point, Florida becomes the place where either Rick Santorum or Newt Gingrich becomes the so-called conservative alternative to Mitt Romney.
It will be interesting to see who Gov. Rick Scott in Florida endorses. By all accounts, as a former businessman himself, he tacitly will endorse Mr. Romney. And at some point may formally do so.
Despite a lot of nervous nellies in the Republican party, So Carolina does not end the primary season. It is just warming up. And now it is to see if Mr. Romney will be facing a rejuvenated Mr. Gingrich or Mr. Santorum in future races.

Say, That Newt Gingrich Fellow Kind Of Reminds Me Of Someone Named Nixon

It has been a long thought for me to write this overall assessment of one Newton LeRoy Gingrich. That in fact he is not necessarily the strong conservative that he makes himself out to be.
There was another American president that tried that shtick.
His name.
Richard Milhous Nixon.
Any regular reader of this blog knows that I believe that while he destroyed his own presidency, he almost single-handily destroyed the Republican party as well. Of course we all know that it took one Ronald Reagan to reform and renew the party.
But what Mr. Nixon did was talk a conservative game. Yet it was Mr. Nixon that believed in socialist medicine. Oh, he would argue that it was not, but in the end it would have created the bureaucracy that all of Europe sees.
Mr. Nixon never actually did anything to scale back the so-called Great Society of his predecessor, Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson. In fact, to fight inflation, Mr. Nixon not once but twice imposed wage and price controls.
In other words, Mr. Nixon essentially conceded domestic policy to the other team.
And Mr. Nixon was always a brooding figure. Seemingly not all that much of a happy man. Yet, he always had a fighter's view of politics.
And that is Mr. Gingrich.
A fighter. In last night's CNN Republican debate, Mr. Gingrich got conservatives excited because he slammed CNN's moderator, John King, for bringing up ABC's interview with the former Mrs. Gingrich number two, Marianne.
Well, sorry but this is relevant.
This is Mr. Gingrich's third marriage. And he left his previous two wives while cavorting with the future wife. Wife number three, Calista, was who he wanted to share with wife number two.
Get all of that?
And Mr. Gingrich was carrying on that affair while pushing to impeach then President Bill Clinton.
An aside.
The impeachment was not about sex.
It was about the president of the United States lying under oath in a civil case. And he was caught. The fact that the lie was about a short-term affair is not what is important. What he lied about on that was in regards to a sexual-harassment suit brought against him by Paula Jones.
But knowing that Mr. Gingrich was shtooping Calista at the same time, what did that do the proceedings?
And if that does not bother you, how about this devastating piece in The American Spectator by Quin Hillyer? And Rick Santorum pointed out the grandiosity of Mr. Gingrich that Mr. Hillyer does in the piece. But this is the critical line of the piece:

Gingrich was great at rabble rousing. He was awful at actually managing things

I would alter it this way:

Gingrich is great at rabble rousing. He is awful at actually managing things.

And he has the Nixonian view of any disagreement as being an enemy.
We lived that before and it was a traumatic era in the United States.
This is the most critical election in my life. And to blow it because we like when Mr. Gingrich goes gonzo on the Leftywhore media. Or when he slams Mitt Romney for. . .making money. For once being a strong believer in Globaloney Warming to weaseling worse than anyone on stage. For once backing the individual mandate in national health care and now weaseling on that.
And yet Mitt Romney is called a flip-flopper.
And while it is not something that is good, optics and attitude matter.
A thrice-married, kind of short, a little chubby, white-haired White guy next to the youngish, handsome mixed-race success story with a very nice family. The first mentioned guy pretty mercurial a lot of the time. The latter guy with a smile.
Like it or not, people vote for someone who exudes a positive quality. Look at Mr. Reagan, both Mr. Bush's, Mr. Clinton.
At the end of the day, a vote for Newt Gingrich is a vote for Richard Nixon from the grave. And that is not a good vote for the United States.

Thursday, January 19, 2012

Just A Reminder, Rick Santorum WON The Iowa Caucus Outright

From the In Case You Missed It file, former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum did win the Iowa caucus by 34 votes.
According to the latest count, Mr. Santorum has 29,839 and Mitt Romney, the presumptive winner, has 29,805.
And if that is not maddening enough the Iowa Republican party is not going to formally certify the results.
Because eight precincts did not follow the rules and thus they do not count in the final tally.
So, Team Romney is going to call it a tie. Team Santorum, rightly, calls it a victory.
Oh yeah, and this does not put a black mark on the whole Iowa process, doesn't it?
If they want to maintain the first-in-the-nation voting in the presidential race, they can not claim one thing on election night and two weeks later say never mind.
Team Santorum needs to emphasize the fact they won the Iowa caucus. It should be a huge boost in South Carolina on Saturday.

Perry Out; South Carolina, Vote FOR SANTORUM!

To many, this did not come soon enough.
That the Texas governor, Rick Perry finally dropped out of the race for the Republican nomination for president.
But he did go out with a sort of bang by endorsing former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich in his bid for the GOP nod.
This is for anyone in South Carolina reading this.
So Carolina, do not vote for Newt Gingrich. If you want to keep the race going with an authentic conservative alternative, you must vote FOR Rick Santorum.
But Mr. RVFTLC, Newt will take the Dear Leader, President Obama, out in the debates!
But we will be lucky to see one debate let alone multiple debates no matter who the Republican nominee is.
But Mr. RVFTLC, Newt is full of ideas.
Yes, Mr. Gingrich is always full of ideas. And he says a lot without giving much thought. Take the assault on Bain Capitol. It was straight out of the Saul Alinsky handbook. And yet Mr. Gingrich does not seem to get why many of us would defend the good work of Bain Capitol. Mr. Gingrich, even the government at many levels (not the federal one) have had to shed jobs. That is what happens in the real world.
But Mr. RVFTLC, he is angry and that is what we need. A real fighter.
Yes, I do agree. But, and this is important, one that can thread the needle. Call it the Happy Warrior if you will. Like it or not, voters do not like angry people. And sometimes, Mr. Gingrich comes off as too much on the anger and not enough on the smile.
But Mr. RVFTLC, what about three marriages?
Ahh, there is a rub. And it maybe the rub that does him in.
Ronald Reagan was the first divorced man to be elected president. His divorce from first wife Jane Wyman was not because Mr. Reagan was shtooping the secretary. It was because Miss Wyman felt his political activities were cramping their life. It was irreconcilable differences but not scandal. And by the time Mr. Reagan ran for California governor, he was happily married for 14 years to the former Nancy Davis.
But Mr. Gingrich has not had the same situation.
Now on his third marriage, Mr. Gingrich has had another woman ruin the other two.
The latest former Mrs. Gingrich. Marianne Gingrich in an interview with ABC News seems to say that Mr. Gingrich wanted an "open marriage". Where he can have Marianne and his then paramour, Calista.
Oh yeah. Forgot this nugget. Too bad the second former Mrs. Gingrich was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis nine months before divorce proceedings began.
Look, I think people forgive one failed marriage. Two, and the circumstances make a lot of people turned off. And that, like it or not Gingrichnistas, is all you would hear from Team Obama.
So, if you are in South Carolina, it comes down to Mitt Romney or Rick Santorum.
And I ask you to vote FOR Mr. Santorum.
In almost every way he is the opposite of Mr. Gingrich.
A solid guy married to his wife, Karen, for 21 years. Have six children. A very blue-collar background. From a large swing-state, Pennsylvania. And has won races where he was written off almost every single time.
I want to keep the debate within the Republican party going. But to do so it must be between two men that are serious and do not flail all over the place.
If Mr. Romney is the eventual nominee, what better than to be sparring with some one like Mr. Santorum? Both are offering a different and positive vision for the United States. Both are disciplined. And it will be much easier for the party to unite no matter who wins.
But I just think that while a long shot falls in Rick Perry, he backs another long shot in Newt Gingrich. And in the end it all helps Mitt Romney.

Tuesday, January 17, 2012

Perry Going For The Anti-Catholic Vote?

I have written many times that I do not get the Rick Perry candidacy for the Republican presidential nod.
I mean, he has been a great governor of Texas. Policies that he has enacted has led to the state being one of the few to add jobs in this Endless Recession.
But now I am finding out that I kind of sort of loathe Gov. Perry.
And if this from Brian Bolduc over at National Review is right, it appears that a desperate Rick Perry is denigrating former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum.
Oh, it is not a new one.
But and oldie yet moldie.
It appears that Gov. Perry not once but twice in a speech emphasized that Mr. Santorum was one of them there Cathyliks.
And I write that as a staunch Protestant Christian.
When I was baptised, it was in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. No allegiance to the Pope or the church of Rome. Sure, I do the sign of the cross. But as a Christian, affirming the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. And in reciting the Nicene Creed, I will not say one pesky little word.
So, here is that part of the Creed:

We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.

Nope, won't say it. I just skip over it. And before you explain to me it is not in reference to the Roman Catholic Church, does not matter.
So, I am here to denounce Gov. Perry and his clear slander about Mr. Santorum and his being a faithful Christian. A Roman Catholic Christian.
Although I still try to be a good Episcopalian, some days by the skin of my teeth, in many ways am much more inclined to accept Catholic teaching on abortion, same-sex marriage and being freely able to practice one's faith. That does not mean I am thinking of switching Christian denominations. It is just my reality.
But what makes me like Mr. Santorum is that he freely speaks of the meaning of his faith in his life. And does not denigrate others as Gov. Perry seemingly, in code, has done.
I guess Gov. Perry figures "Hey, I'm gonna lose anyway! Why not go out in a blaze of glory?! Huyuck, yuck, yuck!!!"
Is this what the GOP nomination contest has lowered itself to? Worrying about whether another candidate is a Roman Catholic or not? Bashing Mormons?
I should hope not.
Right now, if I had to vote in South Carolina, I would vote for Mr. Santorum. I think that he is the real deal. But hey, I could change that. I don't need some hayseed Texas governor not wanting to deal with issues, but throwing out the code word.
C a t h o l i c.
Really? In 2012 America.
Let's hope that South Carolina proves Gov. Perry wrong and gives a big boost to the Santorum campaign by voting for him on Saturday. Not against the others.
And hopefully, vote for Mr. Santorum because you agree with him on the issues.
Oh and for Gov. Perry, I have one for you.
You know who else in the race is one of them there Cathyliks?
His first name starts with an N and ends with a T.
Are you gonna remind voters that he is a good Catholic too as you misrepresent his record.
Just askin!

Monday, January 16, 2012

Yes, There Is The 8,319,012 Republican Debate Now

No, I won't spend time now writing about it.
But if you wish to comment, please feel free.
Look at this as an open thread.
All I know is that one candidate needs to show up and win this debate.
That is Rick Santorum.

Sunday, January 15, 2012

FINALLY! Huntsman, Jr. To Drop Out Of GOP Presidential Race

As if New Hampshire did not tell him enough, maybe the fact that there is no way former Utah governor Jon Huntsman, Jr. could muster any votes anywhere makes this decision easy.
He is finally dropping out of the Republican nomination for president.
GOOD! It is about time.
After literally living in New Hampshire since he resigned as The Dear Leader, President Obama's ambassador to Red China, all he managed was about 15% of the vote and a very weak third place.
But for some reason, maybe he was delusional, Mr. Huntsman, Jr. saw that as a sign. That maybe, maybe those that voted for Sen. John "F--- You" McCain, excited about the recycled "Country First" slogan were gonna come out and push him to the top.
But, as the combined polling over at Real Clear Politics shows, uh, not so much. When you are fighting with the Texas governor, Rick Perry, for fourth place, that must have been the sign. The sign that South Carolina is not going to say "Country First".
For some inexplicable reason.
Stop right there.
There is an explanation.
The reason that Mr. Huntsman, Jr. never caught on with the Republican grass roots is because his brain trust, led by the worst campaign "strategist" in either party, John Weasel, er Weaver told him to ignore them. Appeal to the moderates and independents. That is the ticket. Oh, and totally ignore Iowa.
Here is a clue.
If you already write off states to maybe win the nomination, they might as well be written off in the general election as well.
So, why did Mr. Huntsman, Jr. allow his brain trust to do that to him? After all, this guy is really pretty conservative. I mean, sure he believes in Globaloney Warming. And yeah he is a little squishy about same-sex marriage. And he did serve as The Dear Leader, President Obama's ambassador to Red China.
But I do think that he could have overcome those obstacles had he made a serious effort to attract the conservative base.
Mr. Huntsman, Jr. did not make any serious effort with the Republican base. In fact, when one looks deep at the New Hampshire primary results, it appears much of Mr. Huntsman, Jr's. support came from Democrats and people that do not like the Tea Party as Ed Morrisey points out over at HotAir.
The lesson that people like Mr. Weasel, er Weaver and his bunch do not get and seemingly never will is this. A candidate, running for the Republican presidential nomination, needs to appeal to Republicans first and formost. And to really have a chance, he or she should appeal to the the majority of the party, which is now a conservative one. Like it or not.
It is almost kind of sad that his campaign is coming to an end. Because had he done things right, he might well have been the Republican front runner and not Mitt Romney.
Well, I wonder if Mr. Huntsman, Jr. will be gracious in bowing out or mad that we just did not see his political hotness? We shall see about 8 am Pacific Standard Time tomorrow.

Children Are NOT Animals

I usually stay away from the these type of stories but what is amazing that the perpetrator of the following behavior is an M. D.
The background is this.
Mom has unruly child. Just learned to walk and is walking, no, running away from parents.
Mom's wonderful solution.
Put said child on a leash.
Yup, that is the startling confession of Claire McCarthy, M. frickin D.Unbelievable.
The essential confession of Dr. McCarthy is that she could not handle her daughter, Elsa, because she had two other children. And the poor doc was often left alone on weekends while the hubby worked.
Boo! Hoo!
Here is a thought.
If you know that this is going to be a problem, and you are a doctor and I think could fork out a little cash, would it not have been better to have Elsa stay home with a babysitter? Or the older children?
See, the leash on children is a lazy solution to a real problem. One that would take some extra time and patience.
But no, it appears that Doc. McCarthy had neither.
In a previous life, while going through college I worked at a department store no longer in existence. It was The Broadway and it eventually got bought out by Macy's. There were more than several occasions that I would see parents with children on a leash. Sometimes, I would not quietly utter to my fellow workers that I thought it was disgusting. The it dehumanizes the children. And also more than several times, it was whole families and all the kiddies were on a leash.
What really amazes me is that today, 2012, we talk about having off-leash parks for dogs. Yet this doctor justifies and asks for no judgement for putting a supposed unruly child on a leash.
No matter how one justifies it, it is wrong to put a child on a leash and parade said child around in public. As I wrote, it dehumanizes the child. It is something that we once did to fellow humans and it was called slavery. What makes this any more humane and or right?
Doc McCarthy thinks that it is wrong for me to judge her. No ma'am, it is not wrong. I read your article multiple times. And I still believe that it is always wrong to put a child on a leash. From what I get, it turned out to be a convenience for you. Not the child. Kind of like a pacifier. I get that. Though I do not like them either. It is not a form of dehumanization to put something in a child's mouth that may make them feel better. Often times, the child is crying due to teething.
Let me go back to the slavery analogy.
Why did the sellers put the slaves on leashes and worse, chains? Well for one, so that they would not get away. After all, they were someone's potential property.
What makes Doc McCarthy different from the slave owners?
I do not think all that much.
A more humane and loving solution would have been not to take her daughter in situations until she addressed the actual problem. Which is not so much a problem. It is natural for many children to explore. It is how parents deal with it that makes the difference.
And I think that Dr. McCarthy dealt with it totally wrong. And that it is immoral.
A leash on a child represents bad parenting and should be scorned. And one point Dr. McCarthy made is that many of those who would have been horrified to see a leashed child said nothing to her. I do not disagree. But what would have wanted them to say? "Hey, what the hell are you doing having this kid on a leash?" Or things much worse.
As a doctor, I think that she should know better. But this shows that for all the book learning, some people are not all that smart when it comes to showing a little common sense.
The point is do not treat children as animals. Do not put a leash on a child no matter what. It will be better for the child in the short run and you as a parent in the long run.

Saturday, January 14, 2012

Will The Tebow Haters Celebrate Tonight?

OK, everyone who hates Denver Bronco' quarterback Tim Tebow, now you can celebrate that he lost this playoff game to the New England Patriots, 45-10.
Is that what they should be doing?
Well, if you actually like the Pats and think that they are the better team, sure you should be happy and celebrate the victory.
But, if you are on the Pat bandwagon just to rub it in to Mr. Tebow and to mock his genuine faith, then there is something fundamentally wrong with you.
I can just hear that hate-filled Bill Maher make some kind of crass comment. You know that he has already as I noted here.And some players will mock Mr. Tebow for showing his thanks to God in the end zone after the Broncos score touchdowns. Yup! Damn that Tebowing.
No question in the quarterback battle.
The Patriots' Tom Brady had a better game. Tim Tebow did not have a good game. The box score is always the best indicator of the stats. And in this case, the stats don't lie.
But let me be clear.
Football is a team sport. Yes, the quarterback is the offensive leader. He is the one that makes the plays. But without a good supporting cast, no quarterback no matter how good he is, can do it all himself.
I hope that those that hate Mr. Tebow if nothing because of his honest Christian faith will look at themselves. Why would you hate someone like Mr. Tebow because of his faith? Does that not say something about you?
Tebow Haters, think about that.
Now, I can write that once again, the Pack is back and the Green Bay Packers will win the Super Bowl. After all, it is one of my predictions for this year!

The Duke On Liberals

Whilst going around the internets, I found this over at The Other McCain.
It is comments made by the late, great John Wayne.
We do not know when this was done, but it is worth the under five minutes of your time.
The Duke speaks plainly about what liberalism hath wrought on the United States.
It is defiantly not politically correct.
The Duke refers to Native Americans as, Indians.
The language is blunt, if not colorful.
The frightening aspect about this is that not much has changed. It may be that it has only gotten worse. And yet, if one speaks openly about this, one can now be rightfully worried about being tarred as anti-fill-in-the-blank lefty cause.
We need more plain speakers like John Wayne, not less. Enjoy watching the link.

HT: The Other McCain

Thursday, January 12, 2012

This Is A Great Reason Conservatives (And Myself) Can Support Santorum

A lot of us have decided to be undecided for the Republican presidential nominating process.
Last time around, I was all in for Mitt Romney. I was very disappointed that he did not fight all the way to the Twin Cities and fight to the bitter end against the eventual nominee, Sen. John "F--- You" McCain.
But that was then.
Now, the fight is for what kind of Republican party we will be moving on to this election and the next several election cycles.
So, I have predicted several surges that occurred before votes were cast. One was the Gingrich Buzz. One non-surge was the Perry Fizzle.
But always in the back of my mind there was Rick Santorum.
I always though that he is one of the most forceful, articulate conservatives out there. One not afraid of taking to the left and the Democrats.
So, I ran across this piece by Lisa Schiffren at National Review Online's The Corner.
It articulates what I believe is what I like about Mr. Santorum.
That at his core, he says what he believes and will fight for them. That he understands the stakes and will be plain with us, and our enemies.
Born of immigrants, Mr. Santorum went through public schools. Went to Penn State University. And probably better than any of the other Republican presidential candidates understands what it may be like to balance that checkbook at the end of the month. To really get the aspirations of millions of Americans. That is what separates Mr. Santorum from someone like Mitt Romney.
Like Mrs. Schriffren, if Mr. Romney is the eventual Republican presidential nominee, I will walk through fire to vote for him.
But what bothers me is that I worry that Mr. Romney does not have the same fighter instinct that Mr. Santorum does. That maybe being governor in very liberal and very Democrat Massachusetts can make even the most conservative person feel drained.
Here is Mr. Santorum's plea from his successful 1994 senate run:

“Vote Santorum. Join the fight.”

Fight. It is always a fight with the left and the Democrats. And while like any other politician, he worked with the other side when he could, when he could not he went on offense. And sometimes, what he had to say was not popular. Even among Republicans and yes, some conservatives.
And Mrs. Schiffren makes this very important point about the last two Republican presidents, Bush and Bush:

On top of this key insight (the traditional nuclear family), which the last two GOP presidents chose to ignore because it sounds emotional, religious, and down-market.
In other words, don't let that aspect of the Culture Wars get in our way. We WASPys don't want to be bothered by such things.
But what made me sit up and say, Mr. Santorum is spot on is one of the recent Republican debates.
He gently scolded Mr. Romney for using the term "Middle class". What Mr. Santorum said, and I do not remember word for word, is that there are no classes in America. That there are people that are middle income. Lower income. Higher income. But no classes.
It is going to be important for the Republican nominee to articulate that salient point. Because Team Obama is going to hammer the theme "Middle class" until election day. Not like they have not the past three, mind-numbing years.
And in reality, like it or not, the Dear Leader, President Obama, is hardly the poor, Black kid that went all the way to the White House.
The Dear Leader, President Obama, has essentially never spent a day in public schools. He went from Indonesia to Hawai'i where he went the the most prestigious private prep school on the islands. Then to private Occidental College. Then to private Columbia University. Then to private Harvard Law School.
There is nothing wrong with that. But to imply that one is something that they are not, well that was the Big Lie of the 2008 presidential campaign.
Hopefully, the voters in South Carolina will give Mr. Santorum the ability to fight another day. To go to Florida and beyond.
And Mrs. Schiffren makes a great point.
Win or lose, Mr. Santorum would now have to be under serious consideration for the number two spot on the Republican ticket.
And that would be a great team. Romney/Santorum. The ultimate good cop/bad cop.
I like Rick Santorum and hope that he will continue in the GOP race because the last thing we need now is any kind of coronation of any candidate.
What we need is a fighter. And Mr. Santorum is a fighter!

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

So What About Those New Hampshire Primary Results?

Well, the people of the Granite State, New Hampshire have spoken and for the Republicans, it was a good win for Mitt Romney.
As the results show, Mr. Romney won almost every county in the state. OK, there are only 10 counties. But winning nine out of 10 counties is rather amazing. And considering Mr. Romney did so only winning 39% of the statewide vote. The only county to fall out of the Romney victory is the northern county of Coos county which looks like it is going to go with, gulp, Crazy Uncle Ron Paul.
So what is behind the numbers?
Mr. Romney seems to have swept all the major categories. And that does bode well as he begins to take the campaign to the next state, South Carolina.
Crazy Uncle Ron Paul may have peaked by getting about 23% of the votes in this open primary. As the primary season continues, many of the states are closed but to Republicans. Thus, all the independents and Democrats that voted for Crazy Uncle Ron will find it harder to pump up his numbers.
Jon Huntsman, Jr. What is to say about this guy? He lives in this state for the election season, eschewing the Iowa caucus and comes up with. . .17% of the vote?! I mean, with the Boston Globe endorsement, doncha think he could have at least gotten, oh I don't know, at least 20% of the vote?!
So there is a battle for fourth place and that is between Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum.
At this writing, both are coming in at about nine percent each. Mr. Gingrich is in fourth in five of the ten counties as is Mr. Santorum.
Now they are tied, but I think that Mr. Santorum is helped much more than Mr. Gingrich. If you look at the chart at the link, Mr. Santorum went from being on life support to almost 10% of the vote. Mr. Gingrich went from being second and seemingly a real threat to Mr. Romney to crashing trying to win double-digit numbers.
Rick Perry? Yup, he chose to make his stand in South Carolina and skipped New Hampshire.
Here is a clue.
Whenever a candidate does not make at least a token effort everywhere, that campaign is on life support. And Mr. Perry and Mr. Gingrich are there. On life support.
So, what should happen from here?
If he were smart, and I don't think he is, Mr. Perry would drop out and support Mr. Santorum.
Mr. Gingrich needs to look at the landscape and wonder, where can he make a stand. And it does not look good for him as South Carolina looks bleak and so does the next state, Florida. He may have to make a decision soon as well. And maybe before next week's primary in South Carolina.
Mr. Huntsman, Jr. should let his ego go and leave the race. Again, he will not because he thinks he is just, well so above it all. So cool.
That leaves Mr. Santorum.
And for me, this is where I believe the race comes down to.
Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum.
The above mentioned are already also-rans.
Mr. Santorum must do a strong second place finish in South Carolina. And he will be up against Gov. Nikki Haley and possibly Sen. Jim DeMint. Sen. DeMint supported Mr. Romney in 2008. And while he is not formally endorsing anyone, I do not doubt that he does pretty much support Mr. Romney. But Mr. Santorum is tough, smart and gets that Mr. Romney is not the enemy.
If he remains competitive to the end, Mr. Romney could look to Mr. Santorum as his running mate. And I would love to see Mr. Santorum debate Vice-President Plugs, er Biden.
And this race for the Republican nomination may have gone into the race for second place, literally, in a quick couple of weeks.
That is what will be important about the New Hampshire Republican primary results for 2012.

A Correction

In my previous post on predicting the outcome of the New Hampshire Republican primary, I listed the out come this way:

Mitt Romney: 45%
Rick Santorum: 24%
Jon Huntsman, Jr: 15%
Newt Gingrich: 9%
Rick Perry: 5%
The Rest: 2%

I did not realize that I meant to write another name at the five percent number.
So, it should read this way:

Mitt Romney: 45%
Rick Santorum: 24%
Jon Huntsman, Jr: 15%
Newt Gingrich: 9%
Ron Paul: 5%
The Rest: 2%

That is what I get for my strong displeasure at Ron Paul and my still wondering why Rick Perry is in the race at all!

Monday, January 09, 2012

Why Jon Huntsman, Jr. Is Nothing But A Tool

You know that I loathe the former ambassador to Red China under the Dear Leader, President Obama, and current Republican presidential candidate Jon Huntsman, Jr.
Mitt Romney made the case about the fundamental problem with Mr. Huntsman on Saturday night in the so-called debate on ABC.
Mr. Romney made the point that while he was working to elect Republicans to blunt the ill-effects of the Dear Leader, President Obama, and his Democrats that controlled congress, Mr. Huntsman, Jr. was working for, well the Dear Leader, President Obama. Mr. Huntsman, Jr. had a weak response that he was putting his country first. He even used his two sons service in the navy to somehow justify his, well stupidity.
First, lets make something clear.
There is a difference when someone joins the armed forces of the United States. They are doing so to protect the United States. From all enemies, foreign and domestic. They are not political appointees.
Mr. Huntsman, Jr. was appointed by the Dear Leader, President Obama to be the ambassador to Red China. He had to be approved by the senate and was.
So there is a huge difference.
But here is something so, so John "F--- You" McCainish.
That Mr. Huntsman, Jr. is so much running against the Republican party that he is recycling the ever so-winning McCain slogan from the 2008 presidential campaign.
"Country First".

This is the best Team Huntsman can do?
Remember, a slew of McCainistas joined his campaign led by chief tool and dim bulb John Weaver. Mr. Weaver has tried to do two things. Help Democrats and his patron, Sen. "F--- You" McCain. Period.
Again, explain to us on the Republican side how this excites the base and gets people to vote for you? If there is not much difference between someone like Mr. Huntsman, Jr. and the Dear Leader, President Obama, will Republicans come out in masse to vote for a Jon Huntsman, Jr.?
I think not.
And it is true that Mr. Huntsman, Jr. is but one that can not be trusted.
Please, do not test our intelligence, Mr. Huntsman, Jr.
You claim to put "country first" and work for the Dear Leader, President Obama. Then suddenly, you resign and claim it had nothing to do with the worst kept secret. That you were going to run for president.
As noted in this post from Jim Geraghty at National Review's Campaign Spot, Mr. Huntsman, Jr's. official resignation took place on April 30, 2011. On May 3, 2011 Mr. Huntsman, Jr created a political action committee. The first step in declaring his candidacy for president.
What it reeks is that it shows a total lack of loyalty to the Dear Leader, President Obama. When has a presidential appointee from the other political party taken a job in an administration and in roughly two years resigned and decided to run for president?
Why should anyone be loyal to a, gulp, President Huntsman, Jr.?
See the fundamental problem.
I think that tomorrow night at this time, Mr. Huntsman, Jr. will have a disappointment. That will be the voters of New Hampshire saying thanks, but no thanks, to Jon Huntsman, Jr.
It will be great to see this tool slither off in the sunset!

So, Who Will Come In Second In New Hampshire?

OK, I will make the bold prediction that Mitt Romney will win the New Hampshire Republican primary.
So the real question is two-fold.
First, how many votes will Mr. Romney get.
Second is who will finish second and will it be close or not.
Lets take what I believe will be the percentage of votes Mr. Romney gets. I think that Mr. Romney will get 45% of the vote.
The disappointment for Team Romney will be two-fold.
First, that they will not break 50%. It would mean that there would be a run away for Mr. Romney and no one would really be able to stop him.
Second it will boost whoever finishes second and the distance between those votes.
So, here is my fearless prediction on how the percentage of votes will breakdown tomorrow night.

Mitt Romney: 45%
Rick Santorum: 24%
Jon Huntsman, Jr: 15%
Newt Gingrich: 9%
Rick Perry: 5%
The Rest: 2%

Ah, see who finishes second?
OK, maybe if you look at the results from Dixville Notch, you might think that I am off on second place.
But hang with me on this.
Sure, Rick Santorum is taking the beating now that he had his strong finish in Iowa. It will not be enough to win in Mr. Romney's neighborhood. But it makes him one to beginning to be taken seriously.
And judging by the crowds Mr. Santorum has been drawing, it is safe to say that he will be in the top three no matter what.
The huge loser, as he has been this campaign is Jon Huntsman, Jr.
Sure, I believe that he will end up third, but all the time and effort that he put into New Hampshire will make him this political season's Rudy Giuliani. All the rage of the Washington Beltway and the elites but no traction in the mind of the electorate.
And Newt Gingrich will not fare well here either. But he was not supposed to either. My guess is that he is making his stand along with Rick Perry in South Carolina.
If Mr. Santorum does indeed finish second, and Mr. Romney does not break 50%, then by default he will be the one that conservative Republicans will begin to look to as the primary-no pun intended-opponent to Mr. Romney.
It should be a very interesting night tomorrow in New Hampshire.
And the race will continue no matter what.

Thursday, January 05, 2012

Rick Santorum And Their Family New Fodder For Obamawhore Media

Keep this in mind folks. That the same media that ignored then Sen. Messiah Barack and his sitting in the pews of an Afro-centered, racist church, seem to have problem attacking Rick Santorum and his family for the way they dealt with a family tragedy.
In 1996, Karen Santorum was pregnant and in the 20th week of pregnancy developed an infection. According to the link, it was a life-threatening infection to Mrs. Santorum. Already with name in mind, Mrs. Santorum had little Gabriel Santorum. But he only lived two hours out of the womb.
It was without a doubt a horrible tragedy for the family to endure.
But, it is their strong Roman Catholic faith that helped them endure. And it was doing something to remember that Gabriel was a human being, albeit but a brief moment in time. Rick and Karen did not just take Gabriel to the funeral home. They stayed with the lifeless baby all night and the next day they took the now lifeless body home so that their children would know that indeed, for a moment in time, they did have a brother. Here is an account that was published in The New York Times Magazine from a 2005 interview with then Sen. Santorum:

"Rick and Karen Santorum would not let the morgue take the corpse of their newborn; they slept that night in the hospital with their lifeless baby between them. The next day, they took him home. 'Your siblings could not have been more excited about you!' Karen writes in the book, which takes the form of letters to Gabriel, mostly while he is in utero. 'Elizabeth and Johnny held you with so much love and tenderness. Elizabeth proudly announced to everyone as she cuddled you, "This is my baby brother, Gabriel; he is an angel."

For me I am moved to tears at the way that this family dealt with such a tragedy. That in fact and indeed, both Karen and Gabriel could have died. Yet it was the baby that died.
And this is noted in the book written by Mrs. Santorum Letters To Gabriel about her pregnancy and her maternal bond that should never be broken.
But, alas, in the scorched-earth policy of the fever swamps of the Obamawhore media, this is fair game.
In fact, to Alan Colmes, it is weird. Because they "took the baby home and played with it". Um, I do not think that any account says that mom, dad or the children "played" with the baby at all. They did bond with Gabriel and know in their minds and hearts that he was alive on this earth for a short time. But that he was a part of the family. It is worth watching both clips at the link to see the smugness and arrogance that Mr. Colmes shows in discussing the matter. And to see Mr. Santorum explain why they did what they did with Gabriel. Mr. Colmes had to later apologize to Mr. Santorum. As he should have done. He should have never brought this up as somehow a disqualifier to be president.
But I'll be damned if this is not getting further review from Obama Worshipping tool Eugene Robinson over at The Washington Post.
Mr. Robinson wades into the matter to discuss how "weird" it was for the Santorum's to deal with their loss the way that they did. Yet in the link to HotAir, Allahpundit gives us this advice from the American Pregnancy Association:

After the tests are completed, you will usually have the choice to spend time alone with your baby. You can find comfort in looking at, touching, and talking to your baby. Most parents find it helpful to make memories of this precious time that will last a lifetime…

With the loss of your baby, your family members will also grieve. Your baby is someone’s granddaughter, brother, cousin, nephew or sister. It is important for your family members to spend time with the baby. This will help them come to terms with their loss. If you have other children, it is very important to be honest with them about what has happened by using simple and honest explanations. It is your decision whether you would like the children to see the baby. Ask for a Child Life Specialist at the hospital; these are trained professionals who can help you prepare your children for the heartbreaking news, and prepare them to see the baby if you wish.

And in reading the actual website, it appears that this is a mainstream organization.
But I suppose not to Messrs Colmes and Robinson. No, lets see Mr. Robinson's words them self:

“That I think some Republicans are going to be off-put. Not everybody is going to be down, for example, with the story of how he and his wife handled the stillborn child whose body they took home to kind of sleep with and introduce to the rest of the family. It’s a very weird story.”

First, Mr. Robinson gets his facts wrong. But no matter. It is to tell a narrative. That Family Santorum is a bit out there. You know, because they actually loved their child so much that they were willing to have the baby, even at all the risks it carried with it.
And really Mr. Robinson, do you not realize that Republicans would be at the very least sympathetic to the Santorum family? I guess you just do not know real Republicans outside the Salons of Georgetown.
So what do I think?
Well, I have to say that grief is a matter that is different to people. It all depends on the situation.
I reacted differently to my parents death.
In 1985 my father was diagnosed with lung cancer. Two-pack a day smoker of Chesterfield, unfiltered, cigarettes. Literally within six months to the day of diagnosis, my father died. My mother decided to have the body embalmed as it was decided that it would be an open-casket wake and funeral. Through my tears several times I touched my father's lifeless body. I spoke with him. He looked peaceful. So much better than in the hospital room less than two days before his death. It was a comfort.
On the other hand, when my mother died seven years later, it was rather a shock. She had heart bypass surgery and was recuperating at my brother's home near San Diego. Two weeks later she died. The last time that I saw her, her whole body was bruised and battered from the surgery. regrettably that is the last time I saw her. I did not want to see her in the funeral home. I just did not want to deal with the way she would look. We decided not to have any open casket and thus did not embalm her body.
But, by the time my mother died, I had become a Christian. And I had more of an understanding what death of this life meant.
But a baby, no matter how old it is, to die is the hardest thing. I do not know that I would not think the same as the Santorums. To let the other children know that the baby was alive. That they should see it. Touch it.
This is from one Tommy Christopher. It is overall a balanced piece and takes Messrs Colmes and Robinson to task for the way that they take advantage of a family tragedy and try to somehow make it a political issue.
The Obamawhore media sycophants are not going to leave anything unturned that might hurt their guy, the Dear Leader, President Obama. Anyone that maybe a threat will get unbelievable scrutiny. Yet their guy seems to skate on almost anything. And they will even take a tragedy and make it an issue. What disgusting people they are. But they are exposing themselves. And that is something in and of itself.

Would Meghan McCain Slash Her Wrists If I Endorsed Rick Santorum?!

Oh Lordie, Lordie! The brain surgeon better known as the daughter of Sen. John "F--- You" McCain, Meghan McCain, came up with this gem while discussing her daddie's endorsement of Mitt Romney for the Republican presidential nomination.
She said that if her daddy would have endorsed the former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum, she would have slashed her wrists had he done that. If daddy would have endorsed "the moron", Mr. Santorum.
So, Meghan, if I endorse Rick Santorum, would you slash your wrists? Not on the table with Larry O'Donnell but anywhere, anytime?
See, too many people actually believe that Miss McCain represents Republicanism. And some even think that Miss McCain is a. . .wait for it. . .a a a. . .conservative.
Please stop laughing and read on.
Look, Sen. "F--- You" McCain was endorsed by Mr. Romney literally the minute that he dropped out of the 2008 presidential race. So to me it is no surprise that Sen. "F--- You" McCain is endorsing Mr. Romney.
But really, does anyone give a flying fig what this dilettante really thinks about anything?
Yet for some reason, I guess because her last name is McCain, the good folks at MSNBC think that she must be the best kind of a Republican.
That would be a loser.
Just like the old man.
But watch the link. See how Mr. O'Donnell is goading Miss McCain to taking the cheap shot that she did against Mr. Santorum.
Calling him a moron? Really? Is that the best that you can do Miss McCain?
So yeah, I will make the endorsement of Mr. Santorum if you slash your wrists.
And also, please shut your grill. Leave serious analysis to people that actually pay attention to politics.

Wednesday, January 04, 2012

Michele Bachmann Quitting GOP Prez Race

According to this from CNN, Congressman Michele Bachmann is "suspending" her quest for the Republican presidential nomination.
As I pointed out here last night, she needs to focus on reelection to congress now that Iowa has spoken.
Congressman Bachmann has presented herself as a leading conservative and now she needs to get back in congress and continue that leadership.
More on this later.

Tuesday, January 03, 2012

Romney Wins Iowa Caucus By EIGHT Votes!

In an amazing night in Iowa, it turns out that Mitt Romney DID defeat the former Pennsylvania senator, Rick Santorum by a total of E I G H T votes.
According to The Des Moines Register, Mr. Romney did pull off the victory in the end.
But it is a Pyrrhic victory and does show serious signs that Mr. Romney needs to do a lot better if he is not only to win the Republican nomination but defeat the Dear Leader, President Obama.
If one looks at this Iowa map, Mr. Romney won in Des Moines and surrounding areas. In the Western part of Iowa, another larger city win was in Woodbury county, home of Sioux City, Mr. Romney won there as well. Basically, Mr. Romney won in the larger cities and Mr. Santorum everywhere else.
While Mr. Romney did win, he can not and should not ignore Mr. Santorum. A couple of weeks ago, Mr. Santorum was wallowing in single-digits in most polls. It showed that his hard work, tenacity and retail politics ended up connecting well with many Iowa Republicans.
Now that votes have actually took place, it appears that Republicans are narrowing the field down. And not what many expected. No doubt that this report about Texas Gov. Rick Perry heading back to the home state to "reassess" his campaign. Re: its over. And while Congressman Michele Bachmann is putting on the game face and moving on, she has to decided whether or not she wants to return to congress or continue a quixotic campaign. Newt Gingrich may be able to get to South Carolina. But unless he shows decent in New Hampshire, it is hard to see where he is able to break through.
While Mr. Romney may have won a very razor-thin victory in Iowa, Mr. Santorum truly won by his second place finish. And Mr. Santorum may now be the one to keep Mr. Romney from a coronation for the Republican presidential nomination.

And The Santorum Surge Is A Tidal Wave!

OK, who has told you folks not to count out Rick Santorum out of Iowa caucuses?
Well, one has been The Other McCain, but the other has been your humble blogger at this spot.
And it appears that Mr. Santorum, former senator and congressman is about to pull off the upset and win the Iowa Republican caucus.
At this writing with 97% of the precincts counted, Mr. Santorum is ahead of the former Massachusetts governor, Mitt Romney by 44 votes.
But what this has done is throw the Republican race in a whole other direction.
So many people pinned their hopes on another governor from Texas, one Rick Perry, to be the one. Yet Gov. Perry is mired in fifth place with 10% of the caucus vote.
Others tried to pump up Herman Cain. But he fizzled and ended up dropping out.
And still others jumped on the Newt Gingrich train. But it kind of veers off the track and Mr. Gingrich is mired in fourth place at 13% of the caucus vote.
No one, but no one seemed to grasp that Mr. Santorum is a serious man and has serious ideas for the future of this nation.
Oh, the serious people kept bringing up that Mr. Santorum lost his senate reelection bid in 2006 by 16 points. And same serious people leave out that it was the year that the Democrats took back congress and made then Sen. Santorum enemy number one.
But what they fail to point out is that the guy has won statewide in Pennsylvania and in very Democrat leaning congressional districts.
No, Mr. Santorum trudges away unnoticed. Except by the people that count. The voters of Iowa.
And before one says that they really are not representative of the nation as a whole, sure they do.
And they have spoken. They have decided that Rick Santorum should live to fight another day.
And now on to New Hampshire!

Monday, January 02, 2012

The Rose Parade 2012 And The "Occupy" Vermin

I made my annual trek to the Tournament of Roses Parade in my fair burg of Pasadena, California as usual this morning.
As usual, it was a great parade full of floats, marching bands and equestrian units.
Many photos were taken and I will share some later this week.
It is what makes my hometown a special place.
Sure, the Rose Parade, as it is known to all, started off as a scam. A good one, but to be blunt it was a way to showcase Pasadena as a place to come to live and set up business.
Started in 1890 by the elite Valley Hunt Club, as this link shows it was to showcase the fledgling city.
Nothing wrong with that.
In fact, it has been doing the same thing for over 123 years. And thousands if not millions come here between Christmas and New Years to share in the biggest camp out and party in the world.
So, why was it held today instead of New Years?
Can't do in on a Sunday. To be correct, the rule is "Never On A Sunday". The essential reason is that when the parade began, it was down Colorado Blvd and that is where most of the churches in town were. And that is sort of the case. But I think it is one of the quirks and traditions that make the Rose Parade a wondrous event.
But some people mightily tried to ruin it today.
Leave it to the Occupy Wall Street vermin movement.
Like the rats they are, they put such a fright into the leadership of the city and the Tournament of Roses board of directors that they were allowed to participate. And the very end of the parade. Behind the police and tow trucks that bring up the rear of the parade.
Judging by the coverage of two major local television outlets here and here, they did not have much of an impact.
But let me share my experience with some "Occupy" vermin I had at the parade today.
First, my quibble with the ABC report is that the "occupy" vermin claimed that they did not want to disrupt the parade.
Tell that to the revolutionary Chica gal, complete in black beret, trying to get the crowd into a chant. While the parade was still going on. And she did have a wireless microphone. So, don't cover-up the reality that the vermin, like the rats that they are, just scattered among the crowd.
At my location, they set up two long folding tables-a no-no that was overlooked by law enforcement. After the revolutionary chicha couldn't get the parade viewers riled up, the parade ended. And that is when it got interesting.
On the tables were copies of their four-page "Occupy" newspaper. And they were handling them out to those of us leaving out fun time. A seemingly nice enough older woman handed me a copy of the newspaper. I proceeded to tear it in pieces in her face. Then her response was "Please don't litter! I'll take it back!" And I did hand it back to her. I also said. "Good, you should throw away this trash!" and I went on my merry way.
Let me explain why this movement is at its core bad.
It is because it looks at the United States as so flawed that they can not make change within the system. They look at elections as zero-sum affairs. The reason that they refer to themselves as occupiers is that they are assaulting the very "establishment" that they hate.
Thus what is more establishment that to assault the Rose Parade? Sure they marched in the route after the actual parade. But they had a full contingent of fifth-columnists tucked in the crowd. Harassing people that just wanted to see a parade and have a good time.
Thus it is a big lie. The "occupy" movement is bent on fundamentally changing the United States further than any garden-variety liberal's dream.
But judging from the crowd I was with, while most did not take the action I did, most were non plussed by the "occupy" vermin.
And that is how it should be at an event that brings so much joy and happiness to millions of people in Pasadena and around the world. The Tournament of Roses Parade needs to be clear of politics and should have never given these "occupy" vermin any platform to air their grievances.

Sunday, January 01, 2012

Yeah, It Is Countdown Time

And no, it is not about Keith Overbite and his show on what is it again? Current TV?!
It is about the new widget on the sidebar.
It is the Obama Countdown Clock.
It will be there until 12:00 noon, January 20, 2013 when there will be the peaceful transfer of power. From the Dear Leader, President Obama to the Republican victor. Who ever he or she may be.
For you that love and worship the Dear Leader, President Obama, read it and weep.
For those of us that do not like his policies and want to see a real change, keep you eye on that. For that is what we are in this for. To end the Obamanation and restore representative republican democracy.
Enjoy the Countdown!

Is The Rose Parade And Rose Bowl Worth It? You Becha!

Every New Years Eve and New Year's Day, those of us that live in Pasadena, California get to ask the same question.
Is it worth all the hassles having the Tournament of Roses Parade and the Rose Bowl football game?
I say it sure is worth it.
It causes a divide in the RVFTLC abode.
Mrs. RVFTLC gets very frustrated very easy for the day after Christmas, motor homes start coming from out of nowhere to park on the streets north and south of Colorado Blvd, Pasadena's main drag and the route of the parade. And trust me, many are elaborate homes on wheels. Hell, many have satellite dishes that seemingly pop out of nowhere. If the apocalypse does come, I should think if we are lucky enough to survive, I will want one of those that someone no longer needs.
I digressed.
Back to the point.
The traffic in and around the area known as Old Pasadena is essentially a nightmare for a week.
And it also depends on who is in the Rose Bowl football game. It is the Granddaddy of them all and a reason we will probably never see a true playoff in NCAA Division I football.
This year it is the Wisconsin Badgers and the Oregon Ducks. Go Badgers! Sorry, but Oregon has the ugliest uniforms ever to grace a team evah! And well, why should I care since UCLA is nowhere near this game.
Now today it is rather unusual.
Sure it is New Year's Day.
But there was no parade. No Rose Bowl game. What gives?
Well, it is an age-old aspect of the New Year's festivities in this fair burg.
Never On A Sunday.
It traces back to when all the churches in town were on Colorado Blvd. They did not and do not budge that church takes precedent over bacchanalia. And good for them. And good for the TOR for not caving to the whims of convention and letting the parade and football game take place today.
So, the campers and the like had to wait a day.
Yep, people come on New Year's Eve from all over and have the biggest, longest and just plain camp out and party. For while you may see in the rest of the world the nice people in the stands at the beginning of the parade, keep in mind the route is over five miles long. And there are not temporary grandstands all the way down Colorado Blvd. In fact, most parade watchers come and enjoy for free. And part of that is staking a claim to prime real estate, really a part of the sidewalk. And it must be after 12noon the day before.
Well, let me tell you that is not really enforced and it usually starts early in the AM that day before the parade.
Amazing but there and a lot of laws, rules and regulations as to how this all works every year for the past 123.
According to this article, this event brings in more than $180,000,000 dollars to the local economy.
So on that alone, I will say yes it is worth it.
What it is all about is a mix of Americana, a football game and a great party that people participate in. Usually with little if any problems.
And trust me, there are few problems.
The combined forces of the Pasadena police department, Los Angeles county sheriff deputies and California Highway Patrol make the event go off with little if any trouble.
So yeah, I will put up with the extra traffic for a week. And eventually, Mrs. RVFTLC succumbs and realizes it is a good thing for our city. Because seeing the parade live and the game near my abode is something that makes a mark on a town that for the rest of the year is pretty non-descript in the grand scheme of things.

Is George Will Kidding?

You know that someone has been inside the Washington beltway too long when you get a column like this from George Will.Really?
We conservative Republicans should just aim for control of congress?
And yeah, so what that the United States is an exporter of petroleum?
Whiskey! Tango! Foxtrot!
The problem with Mr. Will is that if one party does control the executive and legislative branches, then similar policies will be voted on and implemented.
In this piece, Mr. Will essentially makes the case for divided government.
Yet some examples that Mr. Will does not point out is an under reported one.
The federal judiciary.
If we have, God forbid, another four years of the Dear Leader, President Obama and a Republican congress, will he suddenly appoint conservative Republicans to the benches? Not on your life, buddy. The Dear Leader, President Obama, will still appoint liberal judges. And they will demonize a Republican senate for either not voting for them or using time-honored senate procedures to block said nominations.
Really, we are talking the moderately, and I do mean moderately, conservative supreme court. Imagine that in divided government, Mr. Will. And to refresh your memory, it is a divided government that gave us, ta da! Anthony Kennedy.
And what about the slew of Executive Orders that this president would do to circumvent a Republican congress? And don't kid yourself. The Dear Leader, President Obama, is hellbent and determined to get his agenda through no matter what. And he will do anything to get there. So, divided government=Executive Orders.
Mr. Will ends his tome with some snark about the election not bringing some kind of apocalypse.
No, it won't usher in the apocalypse, but if we conservative Republicans do not win both the legislative and executive branches, policies will still emanate from the White House either way. And they can be good, conservative ones. Or bad, liberal ones.
But to dismiss a potential reelection by the Dear Leader, President Obama by a conservative no less shows that this one, George Will, has no idea about what is going on outside the Washington Beltway. After all, even though I got the link from The Boston Herald, he does write his column for the Washington Post.


Here is the FPOTNEW-First post of the new year!
All I have to say is HAPPY NEW YEAR!
Here is to a great year for you and all. May you keep your resolutions. May you remember to be thankful for what you have. May you help those that are not as fortunate as you are.
And I need to remember the I in that as well!
So here is to great 2012!