Parents Told To Be Silent On Morality

In the UK, the government began handing out leaflets telling parents how to discuss sexual behavior with their children. They were told not to impose their morality onto their children.

Check out the article at thetimesonline.

Can you believe the government is telling parents not to introduce morality to their children? I say the parents should be telling the government to include morality in education.

Maybe that's why aggrevated assault is so much higher in England than here in the US. And maybe that's why that 13 year old boy became a father in Essex.

I don't think we're far from this here in the US. This is along the lines of the sex education reform that Obama voted for. We are headed down a slippery slope.

Twitter Informs

Today I was informed by Senator John McCain's Twitter account. Sounds a little amazing. Twitter, Facebook and Texting just to name a few seem to be all ways in which politicians are trying to reach Americans with information.

Americans have been screaming about the bailout under Bush, which I will be up front and say I had serious problems with but not because it was under Bush. I have problems with the GOVERNMENT taking control over our lives.
Oh, yes, we all know this happens when somebody gives you money. What happens when you borrow money from friends or family? Let's back up, isn't the advice always given not to take that step. Therefore, when you do borrow the money what tends to happen.? They get involved in your life. They make judgements about your spending and you can't wait to pay them back.

The first gigantic bailout, the Government started by attacking the executives of the companies they bailed out. The American people loved that, since Obama already has Americans against the rich.
Now, here comes Obama with his so-called Stimulus package. Another bailout for Americans with a nicer name. It sounds good to the people. Stimulus. Stimulating the economy. But who is checking the Government spending of the American people's money? This is OUR money. It is OUR Government. The people of AMERICA need to know how the GOVERNMENT BEING RUN BY DEMOCRATS LED BY OBAMA IS SPENDING OUR MONEY.
Please read below the Tweets I received all day. After reading I do want AMERICANS to ask themselves if they really believe all those projects will stimulate the economy or just maybe our politicians could have thought things through a little better on how to spend the money.
This blind trust in one politician is dangerous. Also, food for thought, the bailout under Bush was analyzed to death. The American were led to believe the money went to executives. Once again, really, look below is this where you want the money to go?

Let the Tweeting begin:

Top Ten Projects by Senator John McCain

#10. $1.7M "for a honey bee factory" in Weslaco, TX.

# 9. $475,000 to build a parking garage in Provo City, Utah

# 8. $200,000 "tattoo removal violence outreach program to help gang members or others shed visible signs of their past" Really?

# 7. $300,000 for the Montana World Trade Center, enough said

# 6. $1M for mormon cricket control in Utah - is that the species of cricket or a game played by the brits?

# 5. $650,000 for beaver management in North Carolina & Mississippi

# 4. $2.1M for the center for Grape Genetics in New York- quick peel me a grape.

# 3. $332,000 for the design of and construction of a school sidewalk in Franklin, Texas- not enough $ for schools in the stimulus.

# 2. $2M "for the promotion of astronomy" in Hawaii - because nothing says new jobs for average Americans like investing in astronomy

And the Number 1 Project is:

# 1. #1.7M for pig odor research in Iowa.

Now, I ask you has the Main Stream Media given you the breakdown or just the rhetoric?

Can you say too much Government involvement? Really pig odor research, grape research, paying for people to have tattoos removed? Is this how you want your tax dollars spent?

Obama for change! This is the change that will make America great?

Budget Outlook

The government-produced chart on the Drudge Report today:



Bill Clinton famously said, "The era of big government is over." John Boehner, commenting on Barack Obama's plan has said "The era of big government is back."

Piper With Brother

Licking his hair down at the GOP convention.

ForReal Rankings

Here are the current standings at forrealornot.com:

Rank	Name	Average	Votes
1	Calvin Coolidge	100	2
2	William Shakespeare	97.5	4
3	Elisabeth Hasselbeck	96.7	3
4	Soren Kierkegaard	96.7	6
5	Tony Dungy	96.7	3
6	Billy Graham	96.7	6
7	Bobby Jindal	96	5
8	George Washington	94.3	7
9	Mister Rogers	93.3	3
10	Abraham Lincoln	91.2	8
11	Rachel Ray	90	1
12	Mother Theresa	90	1
13	John Roberts	86.7	6
14	Ronald Reagan	86.7	15
15	Alton Brown	86.2	16
16	Winston Churchill	85	2
17	Ann Coulter	82.5	4
18	Clarence Thomas	81.4	7
19	George H.W. Bush	80	2
20	Henry Clay	80	4
21	Bill O'Reilley	80	4
22	Dwight Eisenhower	80	9
23	Samuel Alito	78.6	7
24	Michael Moore	77.5	4
25	Evan Bayh	77.5	4
26	Ben Smith	76.7	3
27	Harry Truman	75	4
28	Theodore Roosevelt	71.7	6
29	Ed Schultz	70	3
30	Ben Stein	70	2
31	Giada De Laurentiis	70	1
32	George W. Bush	70	3
33	Jimmy Carter	68.3	6
34	Vladimir Lenin	67.5	4
35	Harry Kisinger	66.7	6
36	Thomas Jefferson	65.6	9
37	Simon Cowell	65	4
38	Larry King	64.4	9
39	John McCain	64.3	7
40	Tony Blair	64	5
41	Sean Hannity	62	5
42	Oprah Winfrey	62	5
43	Hillary Clinton	61.1	9
44	Eminem	60	3
45	Mitt Romney	60	10
46	Franklin Delano Roosevelt	60	2
47	Saxby Chambliss	58	5
48	Rick Warren	58	5
49	Herbert Hoover	58	5
50	Benjamin Franklin	58	5
51	John C. Calhoun	57.5	4
52	Friedrich Nietzsche	56.7	3
53	C.S. Lewis	55	6
54	Karl Rove	55	10
55	Sigmund Freud	54	5
56	Christopher Columbus	54	5
57	Barack Obama	53.7	19
58	Charles Darwin	53.6	11
59	Deion Sanders	53.3	3
60	D James Kennedy	53.3	3
61	Margaret Thatcher	50	2
62	Matt Drudge	50	4
63	Richard Nixon	50	9
64	John F Kennedy	50	1
65	Adolf Hitler	50	7
66	Al Gore	46	5
67	Sarah Palin	44.7	17
68	Barbara Walters	44	5
69	Joseph Stalin	43.3	3
70	Rahm Emmanuel	43.3	6
71	Geraldo Rivera	41.4	14
72	Bill Hybels	41.4	7
73	Tom Cruise	41	10
74	Rush Limbaugh	40	2
75	Napoleon Bonaparte	40	6
76	Ruddy Giuliani	38	5
77	Charles De Gaul	37.5	4
78	Bill Richardson	36.7	3
79	Ariana Huffington	34	5
80	Brad Pitt	33.8	8
81	Bill Clinton	33.3	9
82	Anderson Cooper	32.5	4
83	Karl Marx	32.5	4
84	John Kerry	31.2	8
85	Rachel Maddow	30	1
86	Tony Campolo	30	2
87	Kanye West	30	5
88	Nancy Grace	25	4
89	Woodrow Wilson	25	2
90	Ed Kennedy	23.3	3
91	Rosie O'Donnell	20	3
92	Martha Stewart	17.5	4
93	Jonathan Edwards	13.3	3

That's 507 votes total.

Most of the voters on this are from an evangelical bible school or from this website, so take some of these with a grain of salt.

A couple surprises: Alton Brown seems to be much more known (and forreal) than most of these politicans.

Also, people seem to think Bobby Jindal is a LOT more for real than Sarah Palin. I have some concerns about that because people seem to be basing this on the abuse Sarah suffered from the drive by press. Bobby will not be immune to this. They could not care less that he is a Rhodes scholar.

BTW, as far as Bobby Jindal goes, he gave a great speech tonight. I liked his distinction between government-financed healthcare and government-run healthcare. The federal government is about to start deciding who lives and dies. Also his commentary on the success of Louisiana (as opposed to Illinois) against corruption and educational vouchers were great.

Is President Obama Paying the Media?

The media love affair is becoming annoying. They truly are crossing lines.
I guess as I listen to the lines being crossed I just ask, "Who is paying them to throw their ethics of journalism out the window?" The reporters no longer report the news. They commentate only. It is inappropriate. They should be fired.
A commentator tonight said to Katie Couric that ALL American people are behind President Obama and he does not have to worry about their support. He just needs to convince Congress. Katie Couric said, "Is this the first time in history that has happened? Is the the first time in history that the President will really be speaking to Congress and not the American people?
Again she says, "Since, he does not need to worry about their support then the President just needs to work on Congress." Wow, way to question your commentator Katie. Way to ask your commentator how he knows ALL the American people are behind the President. Way to ask the commentator why the stock market continues to drop and investors aren't investing, aren't they considered Americans? Oh, that's right, Katie isn't about to ask hard questions about President Obama. Her job is to keep saying over and over he is making history. Everything is a first for Obama. Maybe her question should be "When will the American people be able to see Obama walk on water.?"
President Obama has an entire Media at his side just waiting to tout anything he needs to sell.
I have no idea what America our Media is reporting about but the people I speak to are scared. They are not so sure about his economic recovery. I'm not saying they are against him but they are not all gung- ho like the media portrays.
And the stock market says a lot in this country. Investors are not investing in the bailout. They are not trusting our politicians.
Therefore, I ask, has President Obama paid the media to spin a pretty picture? Claiming Americans need to hear hope . And the media went, "Whatever we can do to help you make history!!! "

Oh, and here is the tag line for the next eight years (let's face it the media will see to it that he sticks around) President Obama is making history.....


I don't know about some of you but I am ready to throw up.

They even excuse his mistakes. Obama was suppose to wait to be announced by the Speaker and he didn't. Bush would have been called stupid. They would have said he should have known protocol.
Katie said, "It is his first time and he just not familiar with all the protocol." And then she giggled. Hey, Katie, he should have been briefed by his staff on protocol. But, I know, it's Obama. MAKING HISTORY!!!

You know what else is making history, the ending of journalism. We need some muckrakers again. But, the mainstream media would have them squelched for sure.
I apologize for such a passionate post.

Based On Fear?

I don't understand this modern way of saying some emotions are 'good' and some are 'bad', but the Democrats have been insisting that the Republicans have been campaigning based on "fear", which is an emotion that is apparently bad in itself.

Barack Obama claimed that if his stimulus bill was not passed the United States would enter a recession it would never be able to get out of again. I'm not sure what 'fear-mongering' is, but apparently we are supposed to believe this is not it.



Also: Obama is planning massive tax hikes on the rich while pushing his new socialization of medicine. Further details here and in President Obama's State of the Union speech on Monday.

NY Muslim Beheads His Own Wife

A New York muslim remains in jail on accusations of beheading his wife.

The regular news media is doing everything they can to avoid talking about this one.

The unbelievable part to me is that this Muslim started a television channel after September 11th in order to show the world who the Muslims really are. I find his behavior very telling.

My friend at work keeps telling me how peaceful and wonderful Muslims are. He says to me, 'Well, the Christians are just as bad because the priests have been abusing the children.'

This is the equivocation: getting abused or getting your head cut off!

The template of the news media is to always be as cultural as possible, and this involves concealing stories that would undermine religions that are not Christianity.

A New Kind of Leader

I recently finished the latest Sarah Palin book.

I wouldn't recommend it. Much of the writing is repetitive and there's far too much self-analysis. On the other hand, the author, Joe Hilley, noted some tidbits about Sarah I hadn't known before:

[When running for lieutenant governor:]
While attending a candidate's forum in Fairbanks, a moderator asked her how she would handle commissioners who failed to effectively prioritize state budgeting demands. Without hesitating, Sarah replied, "I would encourage firing the guys who can't prioritize." p.58

During the summer she turned twelve she was baptized ... p. 64

Wasilla Bible Church [where the Palins attend] offers the most conservative worship style. Adele Morgan, a minister of music at the church, explains, "A lot of churches are about music and media and having a big profile. We are against that." p. 66

On one occasion she broke her hand while waiting to offload their catch to a tender boat. She had her hand tended to and returned the next day to continue working. p. 72

She said, "A good friend told me that in politics either you eat well or you sleep well... I wasn't sleeping well." [Before Sarah resigned from the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, exposing a major scandal] p. 74

No one expects us to agree on everything. But we are expected to govern with integrity, goodwill, clear conviction, and a servant's heart. [quote from Sarah] p. 79

Keeping it simple is my philosophy ... My desire is to see small, efficient government that's going to provide the basic services for Alaska, that's shared by the majority of Alaskans. And in keeping it simple, we know that Alaskans, we crave and we deserve leaders who are not going to approach all of our issues with just merely a partisan approach. [quote from Sarah] p. 91

In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers. And then there are those ... who use their careers to promote change. [quote from Sarah] p. 95

Of those women who are found to carry a child with Down syndrome, almost 90 percent choose to have an abortion rather than carrying the child to term. ... For Sarah there was never any doubt. She was going to have the baby. p. 130

I'm not going to Washington to seek their good opinion- I'm going to Washington to serve the people of this country. [quote from Sarah] p. 147

I have no more confidence in polls than I had before the election... I never did have any confidence in polls, and I haven't got any confidence now. I make my decisions on whether it's right or wrong from my point of view, and after I have all the information and all the facts I can get to go on. Polls have no effect on me whatever. [quote from Sarah] p. 149

As governor, Sarah Palin garnered a 90 percent approval rating, an astounding feat in politics. p. 156

Sarah Palin didn't set out to become popular. She set out to be the best leader she could be. Popularity followed. p. 157

While I was at it, I got rid of a few things in the governor's office that I didn't believe our citizens should have to pay for. That luxury jet was over the top. I put it on eBay. [quote from Sarah] p. 159

Because power corrupts, society's demands for moral authority and character increase as the importance of the position increases. [quote from John Adams] p. 160

I guess a small-town mayou is sort of like a "community organizer," except that you have actual responsibilities. I might add that in small towns, we don't quite know what to make of a candidate who lavishes praise on working people when they are listening, and then talks about how bitterly they cling to their religion and guns when those people aren't listening. [quote from Sarah] p. 174

For Real Or Not?

Sometimes when I hear a politician, actor, or reporter make a statement I say to myself, "Wow, that guy is definitely a phony. I wish I could warn people about them." Sometimes I saw, "Wow, they are totally for real. I'd like to come out in favor of them."

Do you look at public figures that way too?

You should check the latest activity at conservativeearnest.com: ForRealOrNot.

If you think someone is fake rate them a zero (click the buttons on the left side). If you think someone is 'for real' click the buttons on the right side. If you don't know, click the 'I don't know' button.

Try not to base your opinions on how much you like them or how conservative they are. For example, I thought Vladamir Lenin was a little more 'for real' than Joseph Stalin, so I rated Lenin a little higher.

If you see someone you don't recognize, you might want to google them. There's much to be learned!

The Obama Recession

This is what the DOW has been doing since Obama was elected:




It's dropped 2000 points since election day. It was down 200 points after the first vote on Obama's bailout, and minutes after Geithner announced the next banking bailout it dropped another 50 points.



It's dropped 2000 points over the entire course of the Bush administration (remember September 11th is in there and the housing crisis in September which handed the election to Obama is that big drop).

Charts from http://finance.yahoo.com/.

Any Bias Here?

Breaking from our normal debates, Tim and I have agreed that the media -while pretending to be unbiased and objective- works very hard to impose its opinion on us. Presuming to be judge, jury, and executioner, it often targets the upright of people with it's slander. When the allegations are proven false, they print the story on page six.

Also -if you haven't heard about this- Judith Warner, who is a columnist at the New York Times wrote a blog post in the New York Times about how she had dreams about Barack Obama discovering her in the shower. Other female journalists are writing their fanatasies with President Obama as well.


Last night on Hannity's America, Bernard Goldberg -an ex-CBS anchor- declared journalism to be dead while debuting his new book: A Slobbering Love Affair. I haven't read his latest one yet, but his other book, 110 People Who Are Screwing Up America, is excellent.

Welfare Illustration

Big government is not the solution for this ... big government caused this!

This is a liberal cartoonist who is thinking about becoming a conservative over this lady's poor judgement.

The only solution liberalism can offer is to regulate how many children this woman has (while it incentivises her to have more!).

The solution is to stop giving away free money so people recognize their individual duty to raise their children and stop carelessly handing responsibility over to the government (which is incapable of raising or loving children

Comic is from Pat Oliphant here.

Fascism, Socialism, Welfare, Capitalism what word doesn't belong?

Typically, we assume that when we use words that everyone agrees on the definition. In politics this assumption should not take place. It is amazing to see how the definitions change. I'm not sure they change, I think people get a little confused with all the pundits. Even the politicians themselves have a tendency to use the words, oh, let's just say, in a manner that comes across in a better light if that is what they need at the moment. Therefore, I am going to warn you. I am starting this post with a definition of terms. This way you know exactly how I am using the terms. Here it goes.

Capitalism: is an economic system in which wealth and the means of producing wealth, are privately owned and controlled rather than community, publicly, or state-owned and controlled.

Centralization: the concentration of administrative power in the nation's capital, allowing little or no local autonomy.

Conservatism: political mood or movement aimed at preserving older or traditional values, economic systems and laws.

Federation: political system in which component territories enjoy a high degree of autonomy or home rule.

Nationalization: governmental takeover of private industry.

Privatization: The selling of state-owned enterprises to private business.

Socialism: political movement at greater equality by means of welfare measures and/or nationalization of industry.

Totalitarian: a dictatorial regime that attempts to impose total ideological, economic, and political control over society.

Welfare: redistributive measures that provide health care, food, housing and insurance to poorer classes.

Oh, my goodness, that was a lot.

Well, as I continue to watch our politicians and our President ( I mean really you cannot help but see Obama the man is everywhere, it is a little creepy) go on and on about how the government needs to save us one can easily see that capitalism is dying in America. I would argue that America has not been a true capitalist society for a while but what was left of our capitalism is truly dying.

What seems to be happening right before our eyes is the nationalization of our industries. What will be next? Will we cease to be a federation? If you ask me the United States his heading towards the centralization of government.

The government is growing. This stimulus package. Unbelievable. I mean when you start talking about trillions of dollars, I cannot even wrap my mind around those figures. Worse, does it make any sense to anyone that they are lowering taxes and increasing spending and bailing out industries. Do the math? This cannot work.

In addition, if you notice now the President is turning Americans against business owners. He has insinuated it is their fault. I think it is high time everyone takes responsibility for their actions. Also, let the business fail if it is not making it. You learn from failure, not from the government taking over and giving you a strong talking to. What I find interesting is the fact that all the workers want their jobs saved but they want the people at the top canned. Um, not how it goes. If a company fails, it goes out of business and everyone loses their jobs, including the executives. That is how it should work. Therefore, if the government saves a company shouldn't everyone be saved. No, the President is making sure he is setting up a fall guy and making himself look like a hero to the little guy.

I am a confused American. I'm not sure if we are leaning towards socialism, fascism, totalitarian or Obama Welfare State. Go back to the top and look at the definitions. O.K. see why I'm wondering. Now, fascism, yeah, that one is over the top. I mean it is probably extreme to compare him to Mussolini but hmmm let's see. Mussolini favored big businesses, allowing the small ones to fail. I do believe the bailouts are for big businesses. Mussolini called it the Agency for Industrial Reconstruction, we just call it a bailout or stimulus package. The early supporters of Mussolini were students and white - collar workers who found jobs in the expanding party and government. Yikes, sounds a lot like Obama supporters. Mussolini created bureaucracies and public works to create jobs and lift spirits. Sound familiar? Just a little piece information Mussolini came to power legally in 1922, it took a few years for him to create a dictatorship. He promised the people prosperity at a time when they were down and out. It is easy for us to judge and say, "how does a society let that happen?"
Well, look at us. Americans seem to worship Obama. He is everywhere. He does commercials to get the American people to side with his political ideas now. He is on Twitter, Facebook, all over the web. He was interviewed five straight mornings on the Today show. Obama was on ABC, not sure if CBS had him on too. All the makings of, dare I say it, a dictator. I mean, you cannot say anything bad about him or people get nasty. Responses are unreal. You get called racist. You are told, "how dare you speak of this President, it is history in the making." What? O.K. Obama won the election but since when do we stop critiquing our President? This is America! It was what use to be great about our country. We always had a smooth transition but we just didn't say, "hey, let the new guy do what he wants."

See, why I am leaning towards fascism? My goodness!

I truly think Obama is following closely in the footsteps of FDR. What FDR did to combat the depression changed the role of government in American life, setting a pattern unchallenged until Ronald Reagan. The government grew under Roosevelt and it was because of Roosevelt continually winning elections that the amendment was created to limit the term on the presidency. It was believed that Americans, yes Americans could actually allow a strong leader to be in power too long.
Anyways, FDR's handling of the depression has been hotly debated. Conservatives think its basic mistake was to attempt, vainly, to change the normal operations of a free market-economy. Spending more money than the government had collected. Roosevelt began the system of federal budget deficits that have become so enormous today. Obama is now skyrocketing it! At the end of the 1930's , Roosevelt admitted, one-third of Americans remained "ill housed, ill fed, ill clad." Oh, didn't work out too well and the government was digging itself a hole. Glad we learned from FDR.

Lastly, confusion seems to surround the term 'socialism'. Many call the welfare states of Scandinavia 'socialist' because freely elected social Democratic governments have gradually introduced elaborate medical, unemployment, educational, housing and other schemes designed to lift up the lower rungs of society: 'cradle-to-grave welfare'. The aim of these parties is to wipe out poverty without resorting to coercion or state control. And here's where Scandinavian 'welfarism' differs from Communist style socialism. The Scandinavian lands have little nationalized industry and they pay very high taxes. What was nationalized was done for non-ideological reasons. The bulk of the economy is privatized. Bottom line, first came capitalism, then welfarism or socialism if that is what you want to call it but they still maintain a society that is highly privatized with high taxes. It is the high taxes that pay for their welfare programs because they want those welfare programs.

Americans, well, as usual we want it all. Low taxes. Welfare. That is going to lead to Socialism with nationalized industry. We all know how well that worked. U.S.S.R.

Us Conservatives have to continue to speak up. We must remind Americans that the United States is a federation that believes in an individuals rights. Individuals don't need the State to control their lives. Our industry should be run by individuals. Capitalism works. If Americans want welfare then they should pay for it. Our taxes should be for our welfare. Our taxes should not be for huge government spending and buying industries thus giving all the control over to the STATE . We need a resurgence of conservatism and we need it fast!


My sources for this post are from:

Twentieth Century World, Findley/Rothney 1998

and

Countries and Concepts (An Introduction to Comparative Politics)/ Roskin,Michael G. 1998

Definitions from: Countries and Concepts (An Introduction to Comparative Politics)

The Government Creeps In

I found this one from a college of mine, Mark Duling, covering some of the government's health reforms in the stimulus package.

You can read the details here.

Apparently Daschle (originally heading the Health and Human Services position) had claimed the health care reform "will not be pain free".

Bloomberg explains:

Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).

The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle’s book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.

In 2006, a U.K. health board decreed that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get a costly new drug to save the other eye. It took almost three years of public protests before the board reversed its decision.

Also disturbing is the attacks by the news media against that woman in Los Angeles who recently had eight babies at once. The "news" has decided this is too many babies, and that the government should stop people from having too many babies.

Do they want us to become like China? Where the government murders unborn babies when the parents already have a child? Where high volumes of people convicted of capital crimes have their organs sold in America? [1]

This reminds me of the New Zealand story about the man whose wife was refused citizenship because she was overweight and would be a burden on their health services. Should the government decide who we can marry too?

Why should the government tell people how much money they can make? Or how many kids they can have? Why should news papers be telling people how to vote or how many kids to have?

Totalitarian Trojan Horse In "Stimulus" Bill

No wonder the Democrats wanted this Socialist Trojan Horse to rush through the House and Senate. We are now learning that Socialized health care has been included in this monstrosity. The amount of control the Obama Administration will have over our lives by the end of the year is truly frightening.

Independents?

John McCain was supposed to have high standing among a group of people labeled by the Main Stream Media as independents.

John McCain was heartily endorsed by independent and centrist Republicans like David Brooks. He enjoyed a large turnout by the "independents" in the 2008 New Hampshire primary. They seemed to be driving up his polling numbers on RealClearPolitics.com, in fact McCain was the only person who was out polling both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Barack Obama -the Senator with the most liberal record in the US Senate and Illinois state senate- wasn't supposed to be able to win over these 'independents' because his record was too partisan. McCain looked like he was going to win Republicans and the centrists.

But there were skeptics.

Rush Limbaugh refused to endorse McCain at any point in the primaries. In fact, he ended up endorsing Mitt Romney (who McCain had savagely attacked). Rush insisted that we had nominated a candidate who favored the "independent" voters, and that this would cost us the election or it would be the death of our party even if he did win.

Eventually Rush claimed McCain's pick of Sarah Palin was brilliant, but he insisted the election would be a turnout election. In a turnout election, the 'centrists' or 'undecideds' do not determine the outcome. The party with the most voters determines the election.

When McCain won the party's endorsement for president in 2008 everything suddenly changed. The New York Times, which had recommended McCain claimed (the very next day) that McCain was having a scandalous relationship with one of his staffers, a lobbyist. Of course, the New York Times is a big joke, so it didn't hurt McCain too much.

But bit by bit, the newspapers and pundits who had spoke so highly of McCain during the primaries began to turn on him and endorse Barack Obama. Anchors described Barack Obama -a hyperpartisan- as sending shivers up their legs. Andrea Mitchel accused McCain of resorting to unfair tactics -even as McCain refused to put Obama's crazy pastor in his campaign videos.

John McCain had been made by the "independent" and "truly objective" news anchors. Yet he was also destroyed by them at the last moment. Voters decided they'd rather have a president who stands for something (even something villainous like Obama) than a president who would fall for anything (and McCain's erratic stance-changing -an artifact of trying to please diverse groups- proved him to be exactly that).

From what I've been reading, Republican voters are shifting to the right. They have seen the damage that a candidate who tries to be 'all things to all people' can do to the party in John McCain.

Sarah's Effect On 2008

I recently read an excellent article at realclearpolitics.com.

Here's an excerpt:

In the end, Palin had a modest impact on the race. About 60 percent of those interviewed in the exit polls said McCain’s choice of Palin had been a factor in their vote. Of these, 56 percent voted for McCain while only 43 percent voted for Obama. In other words, she appears to have helped McCain more than she hurt him, but not by much, which is as it should be; we were voting for a President, after all. In the face of unprecedented attack, Palin succeeded where almost no vice-presidential candidate ever has before in winning sustained support for the ticket.

They debate themselves and lose

It's a sad fine line that pro-choicers have drawn: It's only a baby when it's wanted. Here's the proof.

A doctor in Florida is being investigated because he was late to an abortion. A result of him being late to the procedure, the 23 week baby was born alive...she took air into her lungs before she was put into a plastic bio hazard bag by the woman who gave birth to her.

A horribly sad and criminal offense; would you agree?

The people involved in throwing out a life (literally throwing out a living, breathing human baby) are being investigated. There's even talk of bringing on murder charges.

"Even those who support abortion rights are concerned about the allegations."

I'm sorry, but you support abortion rights, why are you concerned? What happened different here than usual? The result was the same as if the doctor had been on time!

If the doctor hadn't been late, the only difference would have been that there would have been no air taken into the lungs.

Cases like this prove that those who support abortion do know that a baby in the womb is still a life! It's legalized murder of the most innocent and defenseless beings. Where else would this ever be allowed?

It disgusts me and makes me physically ill. All because "She concluded she didn't have the resources or maturity to raise a child". How absolutely selfish! She didn't think that maybe someone else had the resources or maturity to raise that child? No, she would rather kill her baby then let someone else love and raise her; she would rather dump her in the garbage than give her a chance at life.

And they had the audacity to allow her to name that baby. Rest in Peace, Shanice, held in the loving arms of The Father who protects you eternally from the pain you knew in your short time here on Earth.

Bailout Losing Support

Josh Painter has an excellent post on RedState.com revealing the declining support for the bailout among voters:

Only 37% of those polled now favor the Democrat’s idea of stimulus, while 43% oppose it and 20% cannot make up their minds. Just two weeks ago, 45% supported the plan. Last week, 42% favored it.

The poll source is Rasmussen.

My hope is the Republicans will realize this is an albatross they can tie around the democrats. It certainly reeks, and the voters will remember it.

Government Starts Fixing Pay

Obama has decreed that the federal government will now limit the salary of workers employed by companies receiving bailout funds. The WSJ has a detailed overview here.

The president had this explanation for this new and unprecedented law:

This is America. We don't disparage wealth. We don't begrudge anybody for achieving success. And we believe success should be rewarded. But what gets people upset -- and rightfully so -- are executives being rewarded for failure, especially when those rewards are subsidized by U.S. taxpayers.

Why does Obama bother mentioning what country he is the president of? Why does he claim that his country doesn't disparage wealth?

Because he's acting like the president of Cuba, and he sure looks like he disparages wealth. The very fact that he opens with a denial indicates he is hiding something, and it is exactly the thing he denies.

Some conservatives are suggesting some unintentional positive effects may result from this change. Companies will be less inclined to accept federal compensation. With less of an incentive for the best workers, these companies are also likely to shrink in their profitability (and many of them need to fail).

Also worth noting: Barney Frank came out today saying that the American people hated bankers. I couldn't disagree more. I think people are more angry at Barney Frank (among them is Bill O'Reiley who chewing out Frank on his show).

The bottom line is the government has started setting limits on the amount of money private companies can offer to their workers. The government wants everyone to be paid the same amount. This is the slippery slope among the many "opportunities" Rahm Emmanuel saw in the current recession.

Obama has said Americans don't hate the successful. Barney Frank has insisted they do. What no one has done is explain how CEO's earning large salaries has contributed (in any way) to the current recession. No one has explained how limiting their pay will help solve the recession. There is not even a claim that it will achieve anything.

In other words, paychecks are being limited by the government simply out of a Communist ideology and class envy.

This agenda of limiting the amount people can succeed (Rush calls it a war on American prosperity) will remove incentives to achieve. People will lose confidence that their hard work will be rewarded and the economy will suffer. The government will try more interventions which will kill motivation in individuals further.

It's time for the government to stop intervening in business. This was not the way America became prosperous, and it will never lead to prosperity in the future. The best thing government can do is to get out of the way.

TIME Magazine Covers

This is how the TIME Magazine covers look to me.

Click on the images to see them in their full size.

McCain's Petition

I got an email from John McCain today (perhaps because I was kind enough to give $50 to his running mate during his campaign). He asked me to sign his petition against the Obama stimulus.

If you think Obama's stimulus is a big giveaway of our money to people that haven't earned it, click here to sign John McCain's petition.

Ending "Torture"?

After the Left has been accusing the Bush administration of violating the Geneva Conventions and American ideals, it's looking like Obama is going to keep the "secret prisons" and enhanced interogation techniques. Moe Lane has a detailed summary:

Under executive orders issued by Obama recently, the CIA still has authority to carry out what are known as renditions, secret abductions and transfers of prisoners to countries that cooperate with the United States.

Current and former U.S. intelligence officials said that the rendition program might be poised to play an expanded role going forward because it was the main remaining mechanism — aside from Predator missile strikes — for taking suspected terrorists off the street.

More Corruption

Red state has some good articles on the number of tax issues [1] [2] [3] and corruption issues within the Obama cabinet (Geithner, Daschle, Franken, among others). Ben Smith has written about the depth of these violations and how they are even worse than they appear.

One commentor wrote:

At least, we can understand why the democrats are so eager to raise taxes. They don't pay them.

Here is another comment:

What is Obama DOING? I voted for him. Every single friggin day there is another scandal, and I cannot believe that he truly believes NO ONE else in this country can do the jobs these criminals are getting. Can you imagine what would happen to us if we did these things? Richardson withdrew, what about the others. What is wrong with Obama? Why did I believe?

Is A Refinery Strike A Gift To President Obama?

As a refinery operator and a member of a union(for the moment, I am getting out because of this) the possibility of a refinery strike is not good for anyone. My main concern is that it could used by President Obama to justify even further control over our lives. More of my thought are posted here.