The Grace Commission

Ronald Reagan summoned a commission in 1982 to review and report the ineffeciencies of government. Many politicans on both sides of the aisle have promised to go "line by line" (Obama) through the budget and weed out ineffeciencies. As far as I know, only Reagan ever did this.

The results of the Grace Commission -as it would be called- were startling ... and ignored by the corrupt democrats of Congress. The report claimed:

One third of income tax revenue is lost because of the wastefulness of the government. The report claimed $90 billion dollars (not adjusted for inflation since 1982) went to program mismanagement and $160 billion went to outright waste. [1]

The commission recommended a series of changes that they claimed would save the government $424 billion dollars over three years. The democrats refused to pass the their recommendations.

As for our day, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has estimated that the funds from Obama's stimulus will come long after the recession is over (keep in mind the CBO is run by the democrats!). Brit Hume has reported it will spend 2.2 million dollars per job that it creates. Hume noted that the private sector can employ people for far less money.

I just don't understand why people want to rely on the government to create jobs.

Preamble Commentary

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The preamble to the US Constitution is not very detailed in its scope. It lays some of the groundwork for the spirit of the United States of America. It hasn't provided much guidance in the courts, which is symbolic of a larger problem really: the courts have often time pronounced their own laws which they have 'found' in the Constitution.

The emphasis on "the People" was probably intended to distinguish from having a monarch. It could also be distinguished from "We, the Government".

To this extent I find it meaningful that the people of the United States are the ones who form the Union. It is not the Union -or government- that makes people or gives them a meaningful existence.

The Constitution was written hundreds of years before people watched 24 hour cable and talked like buffoons about how rights from government were supposed to somehow give them a meaningful life.

The great founding fathers were given few rights from the British government, and yet they were able to do much with their lives before there was anything like a Bill of Rights. All this is to say the government exists for the people and the people do not exist for the government, whatever John F. Kennedy might have said about that.

The preamble clarifies to its readers five things the Union ought to provide to it's people, and they are:

1) Established Justice

This is not "social justice" or "redistributive justice" or assurances that the average minority or alternative lifestyle makes the same average salary of everyone else. Established Justice means when someone robs you, the government has a responsibility to intervene and return your property. We live in a day where the government is continually looked upon as a vehicle to redistribute property -making the government the robber instead of the provider of Justice.

2) Domestic Tranquility

Domestic tranquility is opposed to international tranquility. The founding fathers did not expect us to intervene in every place around the world that seemed instable. In my opinion Communism presented a direct freedom to American-style Liberty (aka the best liberty afforded by any nation). These days we are constantly wishing to intervene in nations around the world, and the UN is constantly requiring funds from us to throw at conflicts around the world.

3) Provisions for the Common Defense

The Constitution explicitly recognizes the need to spend government funds on military spending. The military has gone out of fashion with the media elites of our day. In some countries, such as Canada, the military is considered to be a minimal and unimportant branch of the government. In New York, the police force was kept minimal pre and post Guilliani and the corruption and crime of the city have shown the fruits of straying from the priority of supporting the Common Defense.

4) The General Welfare

The framers of the Constitution did not understand "General Welfare" to mean you get free money as soon as you retire. This meant that the government had to do things for "everyone" and not just the middle class (whom every Democrat since Bill Clinton has directed all their campaigning and legislation to assist).

5) Security of the Blessing of Liberty

The framers of the Constitution didn't want the United States of America to become a nanny-state. In our day the government is becoming oversized to the point where it is dictating how many miles per gallon a car must be able to travel. Minimum wage laws also come to mind. In some states, like Hawaii, it has tried to fix the price of gas. In other states certain kinds of fat are against the law! The government has also taken it upon itself to end smoking. Again and again people are stripped of their economic liberties when the founding fathers explicitly put clauses to prevent these very travesties.

In summary, the wise framers of our Constitution intended government provide a narrow limit of services. There is no right to privacy, no right to a "living wage", no right to prescription drugs for seniors, or medical services, or food, or the internet or any of the other bread and circuses that people today claim to be entitled to. The founders understood that for liberty to thrive people needed to live their own lives and not have the government do it for them.

Three Obama Quotes

Here are some quotes Obama has made that were all new to me:

"It's not just terrorists, it's not just Hezbollah, it's not just Hamas -- it's also cynicism." [1]

This is quite an equivocation. Cynicism is bad, certainly. Cynicism doesn't target civilian buildings to fly aircraft into. Muslim terrorists do that.

As for cynicism, we do see a lot of it in our country: particularly at the Daily Kos, MoveOn.org, the Drudge Retort, Netroots, Fark ... in other words the liberals are the main culprits of cynicism.

“All too often the United States starts by dictating” [2]

I still can't believe the president said this addressing a foreign nation! My translation is: 'You guys don't need to attack America. I'm capable enough on my own of tearing down my own countery.'

George W. Bush spent a long time talking with leaders in the United Nations about stopping Saddam Hussein. He didn't start by invading the country.

Hamas, Al Quaeda, Iran, and Hezbollah start by cutting off civilians heads, threatening nuclear war, etc, and president Obama wants the United State to become the world leader in surrendering.

“[It's] time to set politics aside" [3]

... In borrowing huge sums of money that our children and our achieving citizens will have to pay back? Doesn't that sound just a little political? Doesn't it seem political that he's telling us not to listen to Rush Limbaugh? Doesn't his order to allow public funding for overseas abortions seem a little political?

I wish Barack Obama wasn't a liberal ... but what is far, far worse is the way he postures himself as all things to all people -like he's above it all. I wish he would just say what his views are instead of pretending to be above it all.

(Also, along these lines, you might want to check out this excellent article by Fred Barnes about how Obama is his own worst enemy.)

John 'thinks the world' of Sarah

There have been rumors circulated by the Associalist Press that the McCain campaign had taken issue against Sarah Palin for her role in the 2008 campaign. Ben Smith too has implied that Meghan McCain is upset with Sarah Palin.

John McCain, when provoked by Larry King to take issue with Sarah Palin instead had this to say:



McCain has also mentioned he doesn't regret selecting her to be his running mate.

He has also suggested nominating John Kyl for 2012. I have been surprised to find that he seems somewhat conservative. Who knows? They both seem like possibilities.

Andy Rooney Too?

Tonight I caught tidbits of 60 Minutes.
One story I listened too briefly was quiet clearly attacking Israeli troops. I am so curious as to why we feel the need to worry about Israeli troops? Shouldn't the United States worry about the behavior of our own troops? Wouldn't we love it if Great Britain dropped us when one of our troops acted in a manner in which they didn't like? C'mon. Our relations is with a country and their leadership we need to look at it as a whole, just as we expect the same courtesy.
Enough on that story.

The real stinger of the show: Andy Rooney is on the Obama band wagon too. Listening to him made me sick. He was unwilling to truly 'zing' him. I had to listen to it a couple of times. I think he was on the fence on a couple of issues. What do you guys think?
I think he was afraid to say anything about him. Maybe that was his point, could I just be hoping? Probably.
Oh, well, I am sick of everyone deciding he is a good President only a few days into the job. Oh, my goodness. This is going to be a long four years and at this rate, if the media has their way it is going to be eight years. My goodness, one would think Obama is Perfect.



Watch CBS Videos Online

Diet Socialism

A concealed flavor and all the calories ...

Barack Obama has informed the Republicans about his victory, telling them, "I won". I'm not sure how much relevance that has if he was down by 10 points in the polls before the subprime mortgage industry tanked.

The Associalist Press has carried on their verbal love affair with the president, saying that he has avoided making any divisive moves except for allowing government revenues to pay for overseas abortions. As much as the press trys to portray this as a normal Democratic gesture, it is slimy, and millions of babies are being aborted overseas.

Which brings us to the statement Barack made last week, about how abortion is a private family matter. If it is a private family matter, why are public funds being contributed toward it? I don't want my money paying for a stranger's wedding or superbowl party, much less the institutionalized murdering of babies.

I have no regard for this administration, and I have no regret about the money I put toward the losing campaign. Barack, I hope you are swiftly replaced by a leader who takes up the cause of the silent and defenseless.

The deceit of it all is that he claims to be so bipartisan. Today he told Republicans to stop listening to Rush Limbaugh. See Rush's response here. To me it sounds like he's saying, 'Stop listening to the conservative and start listening to the liberal.' How is that not partisan? How is that not divisive? Are we supposed to think it is only partisan when people listen to Republicans and not Democrats?

Dick Morris has published an excellent Hill piece on the slippery socialist slope Obama has American on track to slide down. He walks a detailed path through his agenda to show how Obama's vision for American ends with America in the socialist chains of Europe. Definitely worth a read.

You learn from Failure

As a teacher it breaks my heart that we have raised a generation of kids that think they always deserve an A for just trying. We have a raised a generation of kids that live above their means.
These two beliefs are going to bring the country down.
I no longer can even wrap my mind around the astronomical numbers the government has spent and is proposing to spend to 'bail' everyone out.

Hello, it is time to fail. Start over. Figure out how to fix it, take the lumps while fixing it and climb back to the top. You learn from failure. You do not learn if mom & dad 'bail' you out and we will not learn if the government 'bails' us out. I am sorry, I know it sounds harsh but these companies need to go bankrupt. Americans need to work for a living.

Americans need to live within in their means.

I am saddened by what is happening and I don't believe it is going to get better, only worse. The younger generation cannot accept failure, responsibility or hard work. Wake up, because there is always another country ready to 'jump' in and take the top.

Americans need to look at history. All great Nations have fallen. When you refuse to accept your weakness and not learn from your mistakes, you are ripe for a fall from within.

To the younger generation, please stop your reckless behavior. Stop living pay check to pay check. Actually, stop living beyond your pay checks. Get your education or a training! Learn your trade. Start at the bottom. Quit insisting your are entitled to start at the top!
Don't be afraid to fail. Go out and try, fail and learn from your failure. Stop hiding behind mom & dad and the government.
I apologize for our overzealous parenting. It is time to toughen up. It is time to save this country ourselves!

Roe Vs. Wade Anniversary

It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish.
Mother Theresa.

In case you missed it, large crowds of people filled the national mall today to protest Roe Vs. Wade. The Associalist Press reported that there were "tens of thousands" of people there.

With the title 'Yes, the Democrats won' Ben Smith reports President Obama's statement:

Government should not intrude on our most private family matters.

Apparently Barack Obama considers murdering the innocent to be a private matter. Barack, the blood of the infants cries out against you. There is a lot of discussion about how the new president will address this -he has favored conservatives in a couple of his moves. It is still hard to see what he will do, but he didn't reverse the so-called 'gag-rule' preventing US funds from going to abortions outside the US -unlike president Clinton. This gives me a very small amount of hope. His presidency presents the pro-life movement with a dark question mark, but a question mark to some extent.

Wondering if Mitt is posturing for 2012, Ben Smith also reports Romney's comments:

To their great credit, the organizers of the March for Life never let this anniversary pass without speaking to the conscience of America , and calling our nation to uphold its highest ideals in the protection of human life.

Somehow I think Romney's concerns are higher than getting into the White House.

The best article I read today was on the Politico front page. The piece (which you can read here) details many of the myths about Roe vs. Wade. I actually learned a lot reading this one.

Apparently if you told people abortion would not automatically become illegal, Americans would be 40% more in favor of overturning it than keeping it. This was the biggest surprise I found:

The first misconception is that the right to abortion has constitutional roots. But Roe’s justification actually derives from an abstract interpretation of the 14th Amendment’s premise of liberty and the malleable concept of a right to privacy found not in the actual text of the Constitution but rather in its “penumbras” and emanations. These foundations are so dubious that even leading lights on the left have criticized Roe’s legal reasoning. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, for example, has called Roe “heavy-handed judicial intervention.”

Also, check out RedState.com's article on the abortion debate. I borrowed the above picture from there. Here's a snippet from their article:

The primary function of any just government is to prevent and punish the taking of innocent human life. To but state the proposition is to prove it. Nevertheless, 36 years ago today, in the tradition of Scott v. Sanford, the Supreme Court of the United States took it upon themselves to declare that a certain class of humans were not really humans at all.

Inauguration Poem

I can't get over this poem written and recited by Elizabeth Alexander. You can find the full text of it here.

Dr. Fred Sanders has a good summary of it among his general inauguration commentary:

A slow start, with language too everyday. But it picks up. “What if the mightiest word is love” is too abstract. “Praise song for walking forward into the light.”

Everything about this poem is abstract. You have to hear the poem to get the full effect. The poetry is recited in an almost monotone cadance, with every word supposed to stand on its own without the author.

And is there really an author behind "song"? If we are to praise song are we praising an idea or what or who exactly?

What if the mightiest word is love...

As long as love remains a word, it is empty, dead, and dying. You really can't have poetry without a poet, but it's as though Elizabeth Alexander is really trying to remove herself entirely, trying to give us a "perspectiveless" perspective -something which she has to say although it is not 'her own'.

The coldness of the newspapers with their language is in here too. The reporters are always claiming they are withholding 'their opinion' and just giving us 'the facts', but their empty and robotic claims about morality and justice are opinions that refuse to be opinions and opinions none the less.

Hope ... change ... accountability ...

Talk is cheap. Words are cheap. A person who does not waste his or her own breath is a find. I wish we could hear from more poets, politicans, and reporters who openly said what they believe instead of disguising it in shame.

Barack Obama, I hope you are ready and willing to set aside the popular view -the mob mentality and all its illusions- to lead candidly and from your heart. That may not be change, but I can believe in it.

The American Way

I'd like to start today's post by saying that I am proud to be an American. I truly am! What a great country we live in that we have so many freedoms. We can practice any religion we choose. We have the freedom to live where we want, do what we want, and make choices.

I have the freedom to have this blog in which I can write and express myself in anyway I see fit. If I don't like something my government has done, I have the right to express that! You know in some countries that's a death sentence?

Today was another great day in the United States. I'm sure some of you may be shocked to hear my say that. But see today we saw the democratic process that makes this country great put into action. We swore into office our 44th President. And, although I didn't vote for him, I am proud that we all had a chance to vote for who we believed in.

We have a new Commander in Chief who I will stand behind because he is our leader. I may disagree with some of his ideas; but I believe in this great country and the checks and balance system that we have in place. I also believe that I am not the only citizen of this country and, though I may not always agree, our voting allows for what is good for the majority to prevail.

I am as proud to be an American today as any other day. I do pray that God watches over our country, keeps her safe from harm, and gives us no more than our country (and those who serve her) more than they can handle.

What I'm not proud of is how other's are defining this day. This isn't, as many would have you believe, a day to celebrate a "black man" in office. No, a man who was allowed the same opportunities as you and me; a man who has proven himself worthy in many people's eyes; a man who has served this great country as a representative, was sworn into office.

He is no different that those who didn't win the Presidential election. When people declare that this is a great step for the country and focus on the color of his skin...that is racist.

Do you mean to tell me that had he not been black that he would be any less qualified for this position he is in?

It's not about the color of his skin. Everyone who thinks and expresses this needs to take a deeper look. This has NOTHING to do with race. It has everything to do with the ability of a person.

You are cheapening his Presidency if you make it about anything other than that.

I pray for him, his family, and this country because I am an American. It doesn't matter to me what his ancestry is. What matters to me is the ability for this Commander in Chief to lead this country.

Is he the best person for the job? In my opinion, no. But then again, I don't think anyone who ran in the end was the best person for the job. In the end, he was the person that the majority of the country chose...and that's American enough for me.

MLK Jr. Remembered

I've always had a high opinion of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., or at least since I was a boy. He did many good things, but he was far from the spotless icon he has become in our time.

To his credit his strategy was peaceful. Historically speaking, violent racial movements are more common than peaceful racial movements. To some extent I believe this was influenced by his background with the Bible.

Dr. King should be honored, I agree, but let's not pretend everything about him was perfect. It is worth noting wikipedia has scrubbed all the unseemly aspects of his story. Let's not try to hide his faults, because he did have them.

To put it bluntly, I have a problem with his promiscuity during his marriage[1]. We are all human, and I understand that. To some extent, though, I wonder if a black person who was more faithful to his wife would make a more wholesome example for children.

He was also a believer in socialism. He thought the government could wipe out poverty just like medicine had wiped out small pox or polio.

If he had further allowed his preaching to guide his civil rights work, he would have considered Christ's promise to the poor, that they would always have the generosity and charity of the Church. Instead, Dr. King saw the poor as a strain on humanity that needed to be moved along into higher, snobbier income brackets.

Dr. King was a bright beacon in contrast to the buffoons and shadowy figures that ended up succeeding him. I doubt Dr. King was out to find "a civil rights career" I think he was just looking out for the folks in his congregation. I can't say the same thing about people like Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson.

Many of the subsequent civil rights leaders carry around the title, "The Reverened..." almost as though it is a way of tricking people into respecting them. I don't think this was the style of Dr. King at all.

Another shortcoming of his work was his hesitance to identify the difference between obeying government laws and actually caring about one's neighbor. In my day black children and white children were allowed to go to school together, and that is as much of a political achievement as ever. But do people really care for those who are black any more than they would have as a result of the legislation? I am inclined to think they do not.

Much of Dr. King's work remains to be done. In Hawaii, for example, there are schools where you must be of Hawaiian ancestry or you are not allowed to attend. Just because Hawaiians are a minority and many of them are poor, it doesn't give them a pass to be racists.

Along with Dr. King, it should be remembered that Lyndon Johnson helped enact a large amount of legislation to reverse public discrination against minorities. The Republicans and conservatives of that time were instrumental in helping push this legislation through against the will of the Democrats.

In summary, Dr. King helped end much of the overt racial oppression of African Americans. His personal life, however, had many shortcomings, and it is ultimately the personal sphere were the fight of racism must take place. If people hate individuals of other ethnicities, everything else that can be ensured by the government is for naught.

Looking For Our Leader

Who will be the next leader of the Republican party?

What's your opinion?

Sarah Rising

Sarah Palin has apparently risen 4 points in the polls to 49%, according to an opinion poll by Fox News. According to Red State her favorability was at 54% after the Republican convention and slipped to 45% after two months of campaigning.

58% of people said she was treated unfairly by the media. Among Republicans she has an 85% approval rating. Check out this excellent Fox News clip on YouTube:



Also, 73% of Americans think George W. Bush is a good person. As the title of this blog entones, it is difficult to quibble with earnesty. 53% of Americans think Historians will be unkind to him.

I'm a little concerned about the possibility of Huckabee winning the nomination. He criticised McCain for belonging to "the mushy middle", but that is exactly how I would describe Huckabee. He has consistently dogged all the Republican contenders, viciously attacking Romney (he tried to play down the book he wrote recently with many broadsides against the former Massachusetts governor), yet he is about as high as Sarah Palin right now. Some polls have shown him ahead.

Corrupt Medicine

Ninety percent of women who undergo ultrasound during pregnancy and learn their child has down syndrome decide to abort their baby.*

When I went to go see our doctor before my wife gave birth, our doctor recommended having an ultrasound first because in her words, 'Only the far-out religious people would keep a deformed baby.'

What if that baby were a little older?

What if, perhaps, the baby went off to school, then highschool, then medical school, advised patients about pregnancies, and then due to some trauma became mentally retarded?

Would only a far-out religious person want them?

When I was a boy, my cousin was born with a cleft palate. The roof of his mouth was missing, making it difficult for him to breathe at first. The deformity could have been corrected through surgery without much complication.

The doctor left my cousin in a corner of the hospital to wait for him to die.

A God-fearing nurse observed what the doctor was doing and resuscitated the child, my cousin.

Many times the educated, the 'knowledgable ones' think they know life better than the rest of us. They think a life is only as good as its circumstances -and some of them even (half) hold themselves to that standard.

They think that if they are good-looking enough, or have a good-enough job (like practicing medicine) their life will mean something. If not, they're better off dead.

But maybe it's the people who make these assessments who are already dead.

The government assures us it will contain abortion so that only the fetus will die. It claims accountability will give us that assurance. If enough people are breathing down each other's necks, they won't do evil.

Or so they tell us.

But it is exactly the people who work to win the approval of others who care little about their own values or concern themselves with what God approves.

Sarah Palin gave birth to her child knowing full well the difficulties her child would face. My mother resuscitated my cousin knowing he would need several surgeries. My Father in heaven loves me in spite of my deformities.

But many politicans have cold, cold hearts, and the government loves no one.

Barrack Obama has said he doesn't want his daughters "punished with a baby". He has also voted in favor of allowing doctors to murder infants who were delivered alive in failed abortions.

May God have mercy on us. We are a crooked, crooked people.

*New York Times. "Prenatal Test Puts Down Syndrome in Hard Focus". May 9, 2007.

Transitioning into Scandal

There is a lot of excitement right now about the incoming inauguration, or perhaps the better word is 'hype'. The MSM is backtracking on how many people will show up -they're blaming the recession.

Even though the press attacked the Republicans for spending $40 million dollars during the 2004 inauguration, they are now saying $46 million is not lavish enough for the Obama inauguration. This is a must read expose on it.

I'm interested in seeing Obama get in there soon so he can start taking credit for this recession (which had a lot to do with investors suspecting he would get elected and selling their shares).

One thing that isn't getting talked about much in the transition by the news are the major, major scandals happening in Obama's cabinet. Rahm Emmanuel is in hot water for the Blagojevich incident, but he's probably in the cleanest of the scandals.

Bill Richardson is getting accused of pay-to-play tactics during his tenure as governor. Let's get this straight: he is accused of handing government contracts to the companies that would fund his campaign the most (hmm, sounds like Chris Dodd, Barnie Frank, and Obama with Fannie and Freddie), which is basically the same as the crimes of Blagojevich himself.

The latest scandal concerns Geithner, Obama's Treasury pick. We are told his personal tax finances were an 'honest mistake'. He made a lot of money and he forgot to put the income on his taxes returns. How do you forget something like that? When Joe the plumber did this (with far less money) the press screamed 'murder'! And yet when the head of the treasury does it, it's called an honest mistake. How can the IRS be run by someone who doesn't understand he has to list his income in his tax returns?

Speaking of the new president, Rush has noted (and the press hasn't) that one of the US Congressmen (a democrat) is trying to repeal the 22nd ammendment. The 22nd ammendment stipulates that the president cannot administer his office over more than two terms. In other words, the Democrats are passing legislation in their favor so that once Bush is out, Obama can have the chance to run for three (or more) terms.

Remember, Nancy Pelosi, who has told voters that having more democrats would ensure the Congress would be governed from 'the center'. After the election, she has passed legislation preventing the Republicans from proposing legislation (even though the press continues to maintain that the Republicans shut the Democrats out of Congress).

'Above It All'

This is a clip from Reagan's historic Evil Empire speech.



A snippet from the speech:

In your discussions of the nuclear freeze proposals, I urge you to beware the temptation of pride, the temptation of blithely declaring yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at fault, to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a giant misunderstanding and thereby remove yourself from the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil.

I can't count the number of times people in the political (and spiritual) arenas claim to be above two sides in conflict so they can feel superior about themselves while they give into evil.

The Israel and Georgian conflicts come readily to mind. Every time a conflict breaks out the United Nations issues a statement condemning the 'violence' on both sides even when one side is fighting for its very national existence (when was the last time the UN had to fight for its existence?). The foolish press has also attacked George W. Bush for labeling Iran, Iraq, and North Korea as an Axis of Evil.

It was Reagan's view of foreign policy that ultimately led many doves and liberals in his day to his conservative side, one of which was the provost at Stanford, Condoleezza Rice.

We would do well to remember that old Greek sage, Solon who demanded that in times of conflict every individual citizen take a side instead of pretending to be above it all. In the spiritual realm also, it was Kierkegaard who said in his book The Sickness Unto Death that to not choose is really a choice. As Wormwood and Screwtape would be eager to note (and declare victory) to ignore Satan's work is really to stand with him.

Relocating

Michael R. Blood, a writer for The Associated Press, recently published an article about how people are leaving California in large numbers. A net total of 144,000 have left California between July 2007 and July 2008. He offered the following explanation.

Among other things: California's unemployment rate hit 8.4 percent in November, the third-highest in the nation, and it is expected to get worse. A record 236,000 foreclosures are projected for 2008, more than the prior nine years combined, according to research firm MDA DataQuick. Personal income was about flat last year.

In this case we see an example of a democrat-controlled state with high taxes, high unemployment, and a bad economy with many people leaving. It turns out California is not alone.

Bruce Kimball has published on behalf of ElectionDataServices data showing that people are leaving states that usually vote for democrats.


Consider the above chart of the ElectionDataServices results on wikipedia where the red states voted for McCain and the blue states voted for Obama. The red states are on track to gain 7 seats and the blue states are on track to lose 7 seats. Keep in mind that McCain won fewer states than most Republican candidates. Can this be a coincidence?

Or does this indicate a larger problem? Is it the case that the democrats put such constraints upon the economy through their taxes that people decide to pack up and leave? Could it be that their loosening of ethics and morality laws decreases the desirability of people to remain in their states?

I believe it is.

Liberalism is depriving this nation of the thing that has set America apart. Immigrants are jumping fenses, rafting channels, and hiding in cars to live here. Like the more conservative states people are moving to, we need to embrace smaller government and higher ideals if we are to continue to be the place people want to live.

Liberalism's Coming War On Christianity

I am thankful and yet filled with a growing sense of concern that others are reaching similar conclusions as I am about the future of America. The issue of homosexuality is not going to go away but become one of the main fronts in the coming war against Christianity. Abortion is going to be the other front. And now with our "Progressive" youth wanting to be enlisted into Obama's civilian army we have even more to be worried about.

Nearly a Century ago J. Greshem Machen brilliantly argued that Liberalism is a false religion that stands in antithesis to Christianity. The fight over the very soul of what it means to be a Christian and how Christianity is defined continues to this day. The only difference now is that instead of the attacks coming from Liberals they prefer to be called Progressives.

In the above link to Robert Gognan's article about the coming war against Christianity, he raises some serious questions:

How can Christians, as well as other persons who share similar values, vote for a candidate who wants to persecute them for their views and to compel them, against their consciences and subject to civil penalties, to be indoctrinated and participate in the affirmation of immoral practices? In short, how can Christians vote for someone who will insure society’s regard for them as bigots?

Sadly, many Christians did vote for Barack Obama. What these Christians failed to understand is exactly what Machen tried to warn us about. That is the incompatability between Christianity and Liberalism. These are two religious world views and Liberalism will not tolerate the existence of Christianity since it poses such a great threat to it's vision. A vision that requires power to impose it upon the rest of us.

The emergence of these newly empowered Liberal Pharisees cannot tolerate their truth to be questioned or not obeyed. The recent rise and influence of President-elect Obama spells trouble for Christians who hold to the truth of God's Word, who hold to the truth of the exclusivity of the saving work of Jesus on the cross, and who hold to the truth that Jesus is the one and only Lord that ought to be served. Christians need to get ready for the persecution that is going to come.

2008: What Happened?

In September the GOP was just about to retake the White House. All of the sudden the polls flipped and Barrak Obama was elected president. What happened?

1) The sub-prime mortgage industry bottomed out.

While the democrats were pretending like they didn't know what was happening (actually Nancy Pelosi blamed capitalism), Chris Dodd and Barrak Obama were receiving money hand over fist from Freddie and Fannie. Barney Frank defied the Bush administration's repeated pleas to police the government-chartered mortgage companies, but the democrats resisted at every point and somehow McCain got blamed for the economic collapse. See Todd Nelson's blog here.

2) John McCain suspended his campaign to SUPPORT the bailout.

The vast majority of Americans were against the bailout: red-states and blue-states were against it. If McCain had been against it, Obama would have had to have opposed it or he would have been totally crushed. Dennis Miller has claimed this was McCain's biggest campaign mistake and that it cost him the election. I'd say Miller is not far off if not dead on. A true conservative (like Michelle Malkin, Rush Limbaugh, etc.) would have opposed it from the beginning.

3) The mainstream media was absolutely devoted to Obama (as long as he stayed good-looking for the democrats).

John Zogby almost completely proved the people who voted for Obama had absolutely no idea what his record was like. They knew more about Saturday Night Live than they did what was actually happening in the real world. The media totally hid the fact that Obama came out against the US Constitution (for getting in the way of redistribution), that he promised to bankrupt the coal industry, that he claimed to be against the bitter religious folks and the gun "clingers", that his mentor was an extreme racist who totally hates America and blames it for creating the AIDS virus. Meanwhile (instead of doing their job), they character assassinated Sarah Palin (calling her a 'shopaholic' while she bought her clothes from thrift stores and making up lies about her daughter). This is exactly while newspapers are declaring bankruptcy and the NYTimes is taking out another mortgage and laying off it's workers: their lies are becoming obious to all.

4) John McCain is a phony Republican.

I had huge misgivings about voting for him after the primaries. He ran vicious and false attacks against Romney in a way that gave him no possible chance to respond. His answers in the Republican debates were full of lies. No conservatives were happy about having him win the election. John McCain was so far to the center that he talked with the Democrats about joining their party.

He was supposed to get a broad range of votes because he was from the center, but the winner, Barrak Obama, was an extreme liberal. David Brooks (another phony republican), the token republican at the New York Times gave him lipservice in the paper until he won the nomination. Then the press said, 'We created you, and we can destroy you' (Barrak Obama's whole career is also an artifact of the mainstream media).

I don't blame the voters on this one. We had the choice between a phony Republican and a true villian. I can see how a true villain would be preferable. I technically voted for McCain, but it was really a vote for Sarah. McCain had some strong points: he was strong on the topic of abortion and foreign policy and national defense, but his moderation and support of the socialist bailout ultimately killed his campaign.

If half the voters feel the same way for McCain that I do, it's a good indication that 2012 will be very favorable for whoever the Republican turns out to be. Rush Limbaugh has predicted that Barrak's infrastructure plan (in which he asked the Democrats if they had a better plan) will be Jimmy Carter times a thousand. If this new administration goes twice as well as likely, it will be a good year for Republicans.

Why we need LESS social programing

Last night on the way home from work, I stopped by the grocery store to pick up a few items; it was just enough to get us through to our next paycheck. We are both preschool teachers and live off a very small budget (well worth it to both of our points of view). However, we live off a budget and live paycheck to paycheck.

We don't rely on federal or state funding to get our needs met. This is partly because we make about $100 more a year than we should in order to qualify. But even if we made $100 less, we still wouldn't. We take responsibility for our actions and don't think that the hard working citizen should have to put food on our table just because we want an xbox 360.

While standing in line, there was a girl/woman/female in front of me with some chips, dip, and some other junk food. She was also holding a food stamp EBT card. This is a new system for handling food stamp money in which a person gets an ATM-like card to make their purchases. She then told the cashier that she wanted a bottle of some high priced alcohol. The cashier reminded her that the card would not pay for it; the girl said, "I know, I have cash for that."

She then proceeded to take out a wad of $20's from her purse. Seriously! She could have paid for my groceries, her junk food, AND her alcohol with that cash. Okay, let's give her the benefit of the doubt; maybe that money was to pay for her bills. However, I cannot overlook the fact that the alcohol she bought cost more than the junk food we tax payers paid for.

See, we need to make choices in our life. Sometimes these choices suck. I can eat or I can drink alcohol, I have to choose. Hey, I can either pay for gas in my car to get to work and make money or I can spend that money on the DVD for series 4 of House. Would I like to have that DVD? Of course! It would bring me much more happiness that trekking off to work everyday. But I have to live within our means in order to not be a burden on society.

In my program, we do home visits. I go into people's homes of children who are receiving free child care (free to them, tax payers pay the price). We also provide free food to these children and families.

There are some families that I feel really good about helping. I've had a widowed 23 year old mom with 2 kids whose husband was killed in an car accident on his way home from work. She was a SAHM and was going to home school her boys. He wasn't old enough to have but that much into SSI to hel his family out.

There are some other families that have just been dealt bad times and really appreciate the help and are trying hard at getting back on their feet.

Unfortunately, this is the minority.

There are many other homes that I drive up to and the house is falling apart. Literally, screen doors falling off hinges, roofs need to be replaced, lawns dead and not taken care of, broken windows, etc... The children are playing outside with no shoes; not because they don't want to wear them, but because the parents "can't afford" them. These children come to our program and eat three meals a day with us and scarf it down because it's their only meal in a day.

I walk into the homes and am greeted by several adults sitting around watching a big screen tv (many times too big for the room and unimaginable how they even got it in there) where the newest xbox game is being played.

The attitude is (and I've had several people tell me this to my face), "Hey, the government will pay for (this or that) why should I? I can spend my money on other things."

I do think that there needs to be some social programs available for some people; but I know from experience that our tax money is being wasted on things that it shouldn't be. No, we didn't pay for that big screen tv; what we payed for was the food or clothes so that the families didn't have to spend their money on needs so that they could get what the want.

Suicide Rates

Suicide rates are higher in countries with larger governments.

Look at this map from wikipedia. Generally the red countries with the higher suicide rates are the ones with larger governments and/or histories assocaited with Communism.

France, Germany, Cuba, Japan, China, Russia.

The suicide rate gets higher the further into Scandanavia and easter Europe you go.

Ireland has lower taxes and their rate is a bit lower than ours. Georgia -which has embraced heavy capitalist reforms- has a lower suicide rate than the US or Ireland.

There are a couple exceptions: Venezuala being one of them. The statistics for Venezuala are fairly old (2002). I think it predates a lot of the effects from Chavez' regime.

One thing that concerns me is that governments around the world are only getting larger, and the suicide rates keep going up. I've heard this also applies to the world in general.

Sarah Responds ...

"She is the real deal."

Apparently some folks are putting together a documentary on the 2008 presidential campaigns, and Sarah Palin granted them an interview. The clip affirmed many of my suspicions -particularly how vicious the press was treating her while she was turning the other cheek.



I was also drawn to the observations made by the reporter who is admittedly a Sarah Palin fan already.

One of the things you quickly learn when you visit the Palins is that the legend created around who they are and how they live is no myth. It appears to be absolutely real and everything about them seems 100% sincere. From the stuffed hunting trophies on the wall, to Track’s military photo by the TV set, to Piper’s crayon school projects on the refrigerator door - everything is exactly as you imagined ...

As a former TV sportscaster and radio talk show host I’ve interviewed a lot big-time “celebrities,” and can honestly say that even though you could argue Sarah Palin was the most prominent, she is also by far the nicest, most sincere and seemingly honest subject I’ve ever questioned...

I also know, with moral certitude, that the media assassination of her, her character and family, was one of the greatest public injustices of our time and that I’m totally justified in devoting my life to correcting the historical record in my forthcoming film.

One of the things that came across in the interview to me is how focused the liberals are on 'getting a good laugh'. I don't think they understand the value and the depth of being earnest and serious about anything. I think it's all a big show done for people to see.

You can read a response from the Politico here.

Also in the news, Newsweek called Sarah Palin a "shopaholic" with an ego 'bigger than Alaska'. I'm fine with people publishing these awful opinions, but the magazine should definitely be renamed 'editorialweek' or 'drivelweek'. Here are some responses: [1] [2] and [3].

My Son Saw the Light!

Today, my son listened to the President to be talk. My son said, "Oh, I wish I would not have voted for him." I said, " I tried to tell you to look farther back than just his campaigning days to see the 'real' Obama.

My son said, " He wants to nationalize everything. Right? Isn't that just what you heard mom?" I said, " If you would have listened closely you would have realized that all along dear." I then said, " You are forgiven, you got caught up in all the frenzy and it was your first election. In addition the media was slanted. Learn and move on." He said, "I am so disappointed and he hasn't even started. I don't want everything nationalized." Then, as every child does ( he is in college but still young) turned to his mother for some reassurance and asked, "It will be hard for him to get that past Congress, right?" Now, my son is counting on Congress to hold Obama off. I turned and said, "Let's hope." I then said, "It does sound an awful lot like socialism, wouldn't you say?" My son said, "Yeah, it is scary." I proceeded to say, "You know FDR tried to do something like this and we got nowhere with it. I certainly hope someone, anyone is remembering their history lesson and they won't go down that road again." My son said, "I don't think this is going to work." (still a little stunned after listening to the broadcast) You could see and hear my son's disappointment today.

Well, it is kind of funny how a young college student can so quickly hear the words on television now and comprehend the consequences but during the campaign got all caught up in the frenzy. The media helped keep the wool over their eyes and it seemed no one could uncover Obama's true colors. No hiding it now! Too late America. Here we go!!!

Change Here Please

My thanks to Jerry Holbert for the comic.

A Rising Star?

President George H.W. Bush recently suggested his son Jeb Bush would make a great presidential candidate. The Associated Press described Jeb's governorship this way:

Bush won bipartisan praise for leading the state through eight hurricanes in two years. He used standardized testing to overhaul the education system, was credited with making government more efficient and lowered taxes.

I find it peculiar the Associated Press would portray Jeb Bush this way. Perhaps they are trying to say something interesting to sell more papers ... or they could be afraid of Sarah Palin. In any case he seemed confident and capable in the clip.

Must Like Obama

An NBC executive recently forbid Ann Coulter from appearing on any NBC shows. This includes CNBC, MSNBC, and regular NBC. He explained his decision as follows:

We just don't want anybody who doesn't like Obama. We don't want a critic of Obama. This is not the time for it. This is not what the audience wants.

Can you believe this? "We don't want a critic of Obama?" As Rush points out, the book she had been scheduled to discuss isn't about Obama. It's about bias in the news coverage!

Ann Coulter was replaced by Rachel Maddow, who wasted no time in tearing apart our current president, George W. Bush. Apparently we don't want a critic of Obama, we want a critic of George W. Bush.

Sean Hannity pointed out that NBC had no problem hosting an interview of Bill Ayers who publicly stated he wished his terrorist organization that blew up government buildings had done more. Is NBC suggesting that's the kind of criticism we need to have made?

Unleash Israel

As Reuters recently noted, the Palestinians broke their truce and fired rockets into Israel, provoking the current crisis they now find themselves in. Ben Smith is about as neutral a reporter as I can find, and he claims both Democrats and Republicans are basically okay with the way Israel has handled this conflict.

Rush Limbaugh re-posted one of his editorials from 2001 saying the best solution for the Middle East is to unleash Israel. He compares his suggestion to the way Harry Truman demanded unconditional surrender from American's enemies:

So there can be no possible misunderstanding, both Germany and Japan can be certain, beyond any shadow of doubt, that America will continue the fight for freedom until no vestige of resistance remains. We are deeply conscious of the fact that much hard fighting is still ahead of us. Having to pay such a heavy price to make complete victory certain, America will never become a party to any plan for partial victory. To settle for merely another temporary respite would surely jeopardize the future security of the world. Our demand has been, and it remains, unconditional surrender.

Why would it be acceptable to allow the United States to make these claims during WWII and yet unacceptable to allow Israel to do the same thing?

Our friendly liberal opponent, Tim, has written up on his blog and in the comments on this blog about the blood Israel has on its hands. As far as I can tell, Palestine will never be satisfied with anything Israel gives them. If this provoked this conflict by ending the truce, they are liable for just about anything that happens in retaliation. They should have all their weapons confiscated and their freedoms checked -at least the Palestinians living in Gaza. I think there might be hope for the Palestinian authority in the West Bank. We will see.

The Press Attacks Palin Again

Redstate.com had an article on how CNN was about to publish a list of the 'politicians who fell from grace in 2008'. According to Todd Houston at NewsBusters.org, everyone on the list has been: "convicted of criminal actions, ... indicted for corruption, lost their positions, been drummed out of their party, or are soon to face jail time.” With the only exception being Sarah Palin. Greta Van Susteren and conservative blogs raised such a big deal about it that CNN took Sarah off the list.

What a bunch of crooks. They take it upon themselves to gloss over or ignore real scandals like Bill Richardson's resignation from the Obama cabinet so they can focus their attacks on people who earnestly want what is best for America. As one commentor put it at Redstate.com, it is probably because they see wholesome, capable leaders as a threat to their agenda.



CNN Conservative Rating: 0%
CNN Earnest Rating: 0%

Picture posted from here.

Coolidge's Views On Taxes

"[This] country needs every ounce of its energy to restore itself. The costs of government are all assessed upon the people."

"Taxes take from everyone a part of his earnings and force everyone to work for a certain part of his time for the government."

"I want to cut down public expense. I want the people of America to be able to work less for the government and more for themselves."

Some excellent observations from one of our finest presidents, Calvin Coolidge.

The New Racism

In America, the word racist was once used to define persons with an unreasonable hatred toward persons of color. Racists blamed every ill of America on black people, Hispanics, Native Americans and Jews. This hatred was institutionalized and used to keep these minority peoples in their place while giving unmerited favor to the majority white race. America has changed and this kind of racism only exists in small pockets of people but racism in America is far from dead.

There is a new face of racism in the USA today. Racism has become a very powerful manipulative tool for those who desire political power. These manipulators have become very deft in their playing of the race card. The key to the successful manipulation of others through racism, is to play it in accordance to old guilt and the ardent desire of most good people to not be found as racist. When properly played, on the feelings of shame associated with guilt, the race card has the power to completely invalidate and completely silence the voice of opposition. This form of racism has been given the nod by the politically correct who follow a relative morality upon which good and evil is decided by the most common human opinion on any given matter. It looks to no higher power and the rule of law is completely irrelevant according to this morality of expedience. Like the old racism, it is becoming institutionalized and it is being used to put the old majority in its place as it gives unmerited favor to those who adhere to the politically correct view of the world.

This is no more evident than in the demonstrations against Israel and the world's response to them. These hate filled demonstrations that call for the annihilation of Israel are not only tolerated but supported. Anyone who dares to voice an opinion as to the lack of morality in persons calling for the annihilation of a people, who use their own children as shields and weapons against those that they hate, is deemed a racist. Even though it was not long ago that over 2,000 innocent Americans were murdered by such persons on September 11, 2000, it is deemed racist to recognize such persons as enemies as they march in protest against Israel and the US, marching even in the streets below that vile, bloody, and cowardly attack.

This new racism has no power over me because I am no racist and I have no guilt in that regard. I do not decide upon a matter based upon any one's skin color, nationality, or religion. I decide the stance that I take in any situation by morality. I decide according to the specific morality of the Bible and that morality makes it clear to me that a vile people has stood up and declared enmity against me and my people. I see these people to be motivated by death and destruction as they celebrate it through the sacrifice of their own innocent children as human shields and human bombs. I see them celebrate it through their own martyrdom in support of a system that keeps them subservient through oppression.

I am no champion of Genocide, infanticide, and oppression. Therefore, I cannot give support to Hamas or the Muslims that place themselves on its side. This is a moral decision based upon the love for all peoples that God has placed within my heart. It is a moral decision that is a clear depiction of good and evil in every season and not one that is relative to this day and time and situation only. The right moral decision is seldom the politically correct decision.

I have made my decision to stand with Israel in the face of this new racism that threatens me as a consequence. I have made this decision in the face of the political correctness that threatens us all. Political Correctness threatens to drown us all in a sea confusion formed by a relative morality that cannot recognize what is good from what is evil. The leaders of the world seem set to lead us all down to drown in this sea of confusion that is of their own making. I am one woman who has purposed in my heart to stand against this tide of evil even if it should cost me my life; not because I am anything special but simply because it is the right thing to do. Being labeled a racist is a small price to pay for a clear conscience; and I would rather die than live with a muddied conscience. I have chosen my conscience over the praise and acceptance of the politically correct. I hope and pray that there will be many others who do the same and may the power of conscientious moral choice take away the power of this new racism, that is, in reality, the same old monster with a new face. I pray that as a people, we rise up in moral indignation before it is too late and our enemies consume us.

Offended

I am a Christian woman and my God teaches me to be slow to take offense but today, I must confess, I am thoroughly offended.

I am offended by a people who claim their religion is a peaceful religion but when they speak, all that comes from their mouths are insults, threats, and death and in their hearts is only murder for all who would disagree with them and their religion. I am offended by a people who use their own children as weapons to fulfill their hateful threats against others as suicide bombers and human shields. I am offended by a people who allow their religious leaders to oppress them in ignorance and fear and then seek to spread that oppression to the rest of the world in the name of, Allah. I am offended by this people who seem to be themselves in a constant state of being offended by small slights aimed at the icons of their faith and by larger wrongs that are met with the same solution of death to those who do not believe as they do. I am offended by this people who, by their actions, seem to celebrate only death and never life. I am offended by this people who continually call for the death of all Jews and who's unifying desire is to wipe Israel from the map along with the USA, whom they also view as Jews simply because we are the ally of Israel.

I am weary of the label, Jihad being used to describe no holy war as it is touted, but what in reality, is a war fueled only by evil hatred toward all that are labeled as infidel.

Though I dislike lumping a people together under one banner of evil, I can no longer ignore the tsunami of antisemitic evil that is spreading across this globe and is quite strong in Europe, through people of the Muslim faith. I abhor their burning of effigies, their riots, hate filled demonstrations, and the dark cloud of fear that they have place all of us under. I can no longer deny the simularities between their hatred and that hatred that nearly consumed Europe during World War II, through Hitler. They are of the same spirit. I am disgusted by the terrorist actions of those that Islam holds to be heroes who are only cowards that attack and slaughter the innocent. I recognize these people for who they are, enemies of Israel, America, western civilization, and of all people who desire to be free.

I am even more offended by the politically correct amoral code that allows this hatred to flourish and even sides with it and protects it. I am revolted by the political and medial elites and the antisemitic hatred that they try to hide behind intellectual masks. I am tired of these amoral and decadent snobs who put evil for good and use their money and power to force feed it to the common man.

I will not remain silent on this matter any longer. If there are moderate Muslim voices, then let them speak up, now! Let them show us their bravery instead of the vile cowardice that has been continually displayed since 9-11, by standing up against the evil tide that has taken their own people. Let me hear anger against those who slaughter the innocent. Let me hear them cry for peace in Palestine by demanding that the Palestinians stop firing rockets and terrorizing Israel. If moderate Muslim voices remain silent, then I will assume there is no moderation allowed within the Muslim faith and those who claim to be moderate, I also will mark as part of the enemy. I will stand with Israel and defend, in whatever way that I am able, her right to exist and her right to defend herself. Even if the whole world be taken up in an antisemitic tide of evil, by the power of God, I will stand with Israel.

The bad economy is good for something...

Illegal aliens are self-deporting because of the bad economy. With the economy getting worse, people are getting laid off, and there less job opportunities.

Less money bouncing around in our economy means that there is less money going towards the illegal immigrants.

More legal citizens are asking for aide in funded programs which leave less money for the illegals. Since there are more people applying for services, agencies are being much more proficient in looking at an individuals need and qualifications.

They aren't getting the aid, they aren't getting jobs, they are going back to their homes.

Will everyone leave? Probably not. We still need to get on deporting them. But this is helping make the job a bit easier.

Communism Quotes II

Communism to me is one-third practice and two-thirds explanation.
Will Rogers

Communism is the death of the soul. It is the organization of total conformity - in short, of tyranny - and it is committed to making tyranny universal.
Adlai E. Stevenson

I think the best president - because he changed the whole mood of the country, the whole economy of the country, and stood up to Communism... that was continuing its causes around the world, and backed them off and caused them to collapse - and that was Ronald Reagan.
Pat Boone

Communism is inequality, but not as property is. Property is exploitation of the weak by the strong. Communism is exploitation of the strong by the weak.
Pierre-Joseph Proudhon

Communism, which claims to be a solution of the crisis, is itself a symptom and an irritant of the crisis.
Whittaker Chambers

In Communism, inequality comes from placing mediocrity on a level with excellence.
Pierre-Joseph Proudhon

For us in Russia communism is a dead dog. For many people in the West, it is still a living lion.
Alexander Solzehnitsyn

Communism has never come to power in a country that was not disrupted by war or corruption, or both.
John F. Kennedy

Communism possesses a language which every people can understand - its elements are hunger, envy, and death.
Heinrich Heine

Communism is a hateful thing, and a menace to peace and organized government.
Grover Cleveland

Let's not talk about Communism. Communism was just an idea, just pie in the sky.
Boris Yeltsin

With his trademark courage and conviction, President Reagan led us out of the Cold War, spreading his vision of freedom, resulting in the release of millions of people from the yoke of communism.
John Doolittle

Communism is the corruption of a dream of justice.
Adlai E. Stevenson

Communism is not love. Communism is a hammer which we use to crush the enemy.
Mao Tse-Tung

For Europe, the fall of Communism has to be taken into account, and the fact that in the fight against Communism the recovery of Europe's Christian roots was the driving force.
Rocco Buttiglione

For more quotes see here.

More Palin-Kennedy Comparisons

Andrew Sullivan -who totally loathes Sarah Palin and committed himself to attacking her after the election was over- has admitted in the New York Times that Sarah Palin is far more qualified to be Vice President than Caroline Kennedy is qualified to be a United States senator. [1]. The strange thing, of course, is that the media has been fawning over Caroline while demonizing Sarah.

Also, Kathleen Parker has written in the Washington Post that there is no comparison between the two ladies because Caroline Kennedy has mature, politically correct opinions and Sarah Palin should be opposed "for good reasons". Kathleen Parker opposes Sarah Palin because of her pro-life positions and her "increasingly divisive" style.[2] In other words, we can forgive Caroline's thin resume because she's a liberal, and we can ignore Sarah's 90% approval rating and her elected position by the people because she's a conservative.

Andrew Sullivan
Conservative: 0%
Earnest: 80%

Kathleen Parker
Conservative: 0%
Earnest: 0%

Thanks to Ben Smith for finding these articles.

UPDATE: Caroline might be in trouble. See here.