I was out with the family at the Mayfest Parade in Strasburg. About one-third of the way through the parade, a small group of people came through, holding up signs saying "Shenandoah County Democrats", as well as signs for Maxine Roles and Sam Rasoul. The parade was a loud affair with lots of cheering.
That was, until the Dems showed up, then there was silence until they passed. I kid you not, it was like a funeral procession was passing by. You could see a few of them were uncomfortable walking amongst the deafening silence.
A woman shouted "Vote Roles!" as she passed by, to which I responded "Sorry, I'm voting for Obenshain!" She shot me a dirty look, as if I had professed some sort of allegiance to Satan.
I came by their "stand" after the parade, which was a rickety little table with 3 chairs. The same woman from the parade was there, so I asked her why their stand was so small. She replied, "at least we're here, where are the Republicans today?"
I replied "You didn't see them? They were the ones lined up along King Street, watching the parade you were in."
She sat and burned, I smiled...and parted with the words "Fred Thompson for President" and walked away.
Thought I'd share that with you guys.
Saturday, May 19, 2007
Friday, May 18, 2007
More on Fred Thompson's Reaction to Immigration Bill
Read the transcript of Fred Thompson's thoughts on this debacle of an immigration bill here, courtesy of the National Review.
Some of Thompson's points that I would like to highlight and comment on.
"I’d tell you what was in the legislation, but 24 hours after the politicians agreed the bill looked good, the Senate lawyers were still writing what may turn out to be a one thousand page document. In fact, a final version of the bill most likely will not be made available to the public until after the legislation is passed. That may come five days from now. That’s like trying to digest an eight-course meal on a 15-minute lunch break."
- That's becoming a big focal point for those who are against this. The bill was agreed upon before it was even written!
"The fact is our border and immigration systems are still badly broken. We were reminded of this when Newsweek reported that the family of three of the men, arrested last week for allegedly plotting to kill American military personnel at Fort Dix, New Jersey, entered the U.S. illegally more than 20 years ago; filed for asylum back in 1989, but fell off the government’s radar screen when federal bureaucrats essentially lost track of the paperwork. Wonder how many times that’s been replicated?"
- This is why I like Thompson, he wants to reduce the size of government, and cut back the bureaucratic BS...it makes things simpler. His last question is also worth thinking about.
"...agreeing to policies before actually seeing what the policies are is a heck of a way to do business."
- Isn't it, though?
"We should scrap this “comprehensive” immigration bill and the whole debate until the government can show the American people that we have secured the borders — or at least made great headway. That would give proponents of the bill a chance to explain why putting illegals in a more favorable position than those who play by the rules is not really amnesty."
- I would like for someone in Congress to explain that to me...then they can explain it to my mother, along with my grandmother (God rest her soul) and my grandfather.
Some of Thompson's points that I would like to highlight and comment on.
"I’d tell you what was in the legislation, but 24 hours after the politicians agreed the bill looked good, the Senate lawyers were still writing what may turn out to be a one thousand page document. In fact, a final version of the bill most likely will not be made available to the public until after the legislation is passed. That may come five days from now. That’s like trying to digest an eight-course meal on a 15-minute lunch break."
- That's becoming a big focal point for those who are against this. The bill was agreed upon before it was even written!
"The fact is our border and immigration systems are still badly broken. We were reminded of this when Newsweek reported that the family of three of the men, arrested last week for allegedly plotting to kill American military personnel at Fort Dix, New Jersey, entered the U.S. illegally more than 20 years ago; filed for asylum back in 1989, but fell off the government’s radar screen when federal bureaucrats essentially lost track of the paperwork. Wonder how many times that’s been replicated?"
- This is why I like Thompson, he wants to reduce the size of government, and cut back the bureaucratic BS...it makes things simpler. His last question is also worth thinking about.
"...agreeing to policies before actually seeing what the policies are is a heck of a way to do business."
- Isn't it, though?
"We should scrap this “comprehensive” immigration bill and the whole debate until the government can show the American people that we have secured the borders — or at least made great headway. That would give proponents of the bill a chance to explain why putting illegals in a more favorable position than those who play by the rules is not really amnesty."
- I would like for someone in Congress to explain that to me...then they can explain it to my mother, along with my grandmother (God rest her soul) and my grandfather.
Global Warming Thought
I'm not going to sit here and take a side on the global warming issue. I have read enough information on both sides of the issue to believe that yes, global warming is taking place...but what is causing it can be debated.
However, I do want to pose this hypothetical question to the environmentalists out there...
IF the Al Gores of the world are wrong, and global warming is being caused due to cyclical changes in the climate or due to solar-related activity (as many attribute to the melting ice caps on Mars)...should we continue to pursue the "green"-ification of our society, even though it would be in an attempt to circumvent the natural processes of either the Earth itself or the Solar System?
Just something I've been mulling over in my head.
I know some environmentalists are going to jump on me for not recognizing the "overwhelming" evidence that supports their theories. However, it seems that there is "overwhelming" evidence to the contrary, and it tells me one thing...we really don't know exactly what is the major cause of global warming. Is it one thing, is it another thing, is it the combination of all these theories at once? That, and the degree to which global warming will affect us, are the current topics that should be debated.
I think that there will be an effect on us as a global society by global warming, as the U.N. report stated an increase of up to 17 inches in the world water level by 2100 (this report done by some of the best scientists of our time). However, I think we are a species of adaptation, and we can adapt to water levels rising 17 inches in 93 years.
The ice caps are shrinking, but they are also thickening. Some regions of the world are suffering through temperature increases, some are suffering through temperature decreases. There is a hole in the ozone, but recent studies show that this hole has been closing for at least a few years, now.
See how the data goes back...and forth...and back...and forth.
However, I do want to pose this hypothetical question to the environmentalists out there...
IF the Al Gores of the world are wrong, and global warming is being caused due to cyclical changes in the climate or due to solar-related activity (as many attribute to the melting ice caps on Mars)...should we continue to pursue the "green"-ification of our society, even though it would be in an attempt to circumvent the natural processes of either the Earth itself or the Solar System?
Just something I've been mulling over in my head.
I know some environmentalists are going to jump on me for not recognizing the "overwhelming" evidence that supports their theories. However, it seems that there is "overwhelming" evidence to the contrary, and it tells me one thing...we really don't know exactly what is the major cause of global warming. Is it one thing, is it another thing, is it the combination of all these theories at once? That, and the degree to which global warming will affect us, are the current topics that should be debated.
I think that there will be an effect on us as a global society by global warming, as the U.N. report stated an increase of up to 17 inches in the world water level by 2100 (this report done by some of the best scientists of our time). However, I think we are a species of adaptation, and we can adapt to water levels rising 17 inches in 93 years.
The ice caps are shrinking, but they are also thickening. Some regions of the world are suffering through temperature increases, some are suffering through temperature decreases. There is a hole in the ozone, but recent studies show that this hole has been closing for at least a few years, now.
See how the data goes back...and forth...and back...and forth.
Fred Thompson on Possible Immigration Compromise
Yesterday, potential presidential candidate, and Podium favorite, Fred Thompson posted a reponse to the pending immigration bill I blogged about yesterday. Here's what he had to say...
“With this bill, the American people are going to think they are being sold the same bill of goods as before on border security. We should scrap this bill and the whole debate until we can convince the American people that we have secured the borders or at least have made great headway.”
I couldn't have said it any better, myself. In fact, yesterday I stated that we need to secure the borders before we do anything in regards to legalizing or deporting illegal immigrants in a widespread manner.
I'm happy to see that the man I want to be President thinks the same way. Thompson's rapid responses to various issues, along with his usage of the internet to spread his thoughts, are very impressive and show that he knows how to communicate with modern America.
h/t to National Review Online, as well as my fellow Fred Thompson supporter Paul Cave, for the quote.
“With this bill, the American people are going to think they are being sold the same bill of goods as before on border security. We should scrap this bill and the whole debate until we can convince the American people that we have secured the borders or at least have made great headway.”
I couldn't have said it any better, myself. In fact, yesterday I stated that we need to secure the borders before we do anything in regards to legalizing or deporting illegal immigrants in a widespread manner.
I'm happy to see that the man I want to be President thinks the same way. Thompson's rapid responses to various issues, along with his usage of the internet to spread his thoughts, are very impressive and show that he knows how to communicate with modern America.
h/t to National Review Online, as well as my fellow Fred Thompson supporter Paul Cave, for the quote.
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Caught In The Act
The latest "Vent" with Michelle Malkin reveals an employee of Planned Parenthood going beyond their limits and encourages an underage teen to lie about her age to get an abortion.
I'm not a fan of abortion, but I do recognize that it is currently part of our society. However, what occurred in that video clip is wrong, and there should be serious repercussions. I think that even the most ardent pro-abortion supporter would agree that to attempt to persuade a teenager into lying about their age to get an abortion is wrong.
I'm not a fan of abortion, but I do recognize that it is currently part of our society. However, what occurred in that video clip is wrong, and there should be serious repercussions. I think that even the most ardent pro-abortion supporter would agree that to attempt to persuade a teenager into lying about their age to get an abortion is wrong.
What are Senate Republicans Thinking?
So a tentative compromise has been reached in the Senate regarding new legislation regarding illegal immigrants. Apparently, legal status will be granted to the 12-20 million illegal immigrants in this country. In return, border security is going to be strengthened, and a "temporary worker" program will begin soon after that...with upwards of 400,000 of these "temporary workers" each year.
On the good side, mandatory documentation for all workers and if a temporary worker is told to leave the country, they cannot apply for greencards and permanent residency.
Lets talk about a key aspect of this...we're talking about legislation that will cost our country an extra $2.5 trillion dollars in social security and health care benefits to these newly-legalized immigrants when they reach retirement age.
Oh yeah, and that extra $2.5 trillion...it comes out of your wallet and mine.
Today, Rep. Brian Bilbray(R-Ca) pretty much summed up the feelings of many people when he stated, “The ‘compromise’ announced today by Senator Kennedy will reward 12 million illegal immigrants with a path to citizenship – what part of illegal does the Senate not understand? Any plan that rewards illegal behavior is amnesty. You would think that the Senate would have learned their lesson after the 1986 amnesty debacle, but it looks like their idea of a ‘compromise’ is to repeat the failed policies of the past.”
I'm not happy with this bill, despite the fact that a large number of Republicans and pretty much all of the Democrats (not to mention George W. Bush) are ready to push this bill through the Senate and right to Bush's desk. Bush wants to have this done and signed into fruition by the end of the summer.
This didn't work in 1986, and it sure as hell isn't going to work now. Strengthen border security FIRST, then we can talk about possible amnesty for those who haven't committed any other crimes since they came into this country illegally. It completely angers me that 12-20 million people come into this country illegally, and they simply get a free pass...while people like my mother and my grandparents did everything the proper and legal way. This kind of legislation spits in the eye of my family's legacy of dignity and respect for the United States of America.
On the campaign front, this will KILL John McCain's attempt at the GOP Presidential nomination, as conservatives are not going to support him after this...and you'll see Mitt, Rudy, and Fred Thompson all separate themselves from McCain at the top of the leaderboard, as all 3 will undoubtedly come out against this bill. The unfortunate thing is, none of them reside in the Senate or the White House at this time.
Conservatives/Republicans...take action, called 202-225-3121 and ask for the offices of Mitch McConnell, Trent Lott, or John Kyl. Those are the 3 leaders of the Senate GOP. Tell them this is not the way to go.
On the good side, mandatory documentation for all workers and if a temporary worker is told to leave the country, they cannot apply for greencards and permanent residency.
Lets talk about a key aspect of this...we're talking about legislation that will cost our country an extra $2.5 trillion dollars in social security and health care benefits to these newly-legalized immigrants when they reach retirement age.
Oh yeah, and that extra $2.5 trillion...it comes out of your wallet and mine.
Today, Rep. Brian Bilbray(R-Ca) pretty much summed up the feelings of many people when he stated, “The ‘compromise’ announced today by Senator Kennedy will reward 12 million illegal immigrants with a path to citizenship – what part of illegal does the Senate not understand? Any plan that rewards illegal behavior is amnesty. You would think that the Senate would have learned their lesson after the 1986 amnesty debacle, but it looks like their idea of a ‘compromise’ is to repeat the failed policies of the past.”
I'm not happy with this bill, despite the fact that a large number of Republicans and pretty much all of the Democrats (not to mention George W. Bush) are ready to push this bill through the Senate and right to Bush's desk. Bush wants to have this done and signed into fruition by the end of the summer.
This didn't work in 1986, and it sure as hell isn't going to work now. Strengthen border security FIRST, then we can talk about possible amnesty for those who haven't committed any other crimes since they came into this country illegally. It completely angers me that 12-20 million people come into this country illegally, and they simply get a free pass...while people like my mother and my grandparents did everything the proper and legal way. This kind of legislation spits in the eye of my family's legacy of dignity and respect for the United States of America.
On the campaign front, this will KILL John McCain's attempt at the GOP Presidential nomination, as conservatives are not going to support him after this...and you'll see Mitt, Rudy, and Fred Thompson all separate themselves from McCain at the top of the leaderboard, as all 3 will undoubtedly come out against this bill. The unfortunate thing is, none of them reside in the Senate or the White House at this time.
Conservatives/Republicans...take action, called 202-225-3121 and ask for the offices of Mitch McConnell, Trent Lott, or John Kyl. Those are the 3 leaders of the Senate GOP. Tell them this is not the way to go.
Sayre and Hanger Have a New Problem
As Chris Graham reported over at The New Dominion, the Democrats announced that they do have a candidate for the 24th District seat currently held by Emmett Hanger. This candidate will be revealed on May 24th.
It appears that the Democratic strategy has been to let Hanger and primary challenger Scott Sayre soften each other up and drain each other's campaign funds, and quietly building up their own campaign around this currently-unknown candidate. This also hurts Arin Sime's chances of upsetting the GOP candidate in November.
It appears that the Democratic strategy has been to let Hanger and primary challenger Scott Sayre soften each other up and drain each other's campaign funds, and quietly building up their own campaign around this currently-unknown candidate. This also hurts Arin Sime's chances of upsetting the GOP candidate in November.
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Score One For the House Minority
As Michelle Malkin reports, Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats in the House of Representatives revealed that they were going to attempt to rewrite House rules that has stood for 185 years (I believe Thomas Jefferson co-authored these rules).
These rule changes would have effectively shut down the minority (i.e. Republican) party's right to the Motion to Recommit or the test of germaneness on the motion to recommit. Also, it would have allowed for tax increases without votes.
This came after 11 straight successful motions to recommit by the Republicans.
So, the Democrats want to both eliminate accountability for tax increases...and shut down the Republican party's ability to challenge bills on the House floor.
Compare these actions with the words of the Speaker of the House and the House Majority Leader...
“[W]e promised the American people that we would have the most honest and most open government and we will.” - Nancy Pelosi, December 6, 2006.
So Pelosi's idea of "honest and open" includes shutting down opposition and raising taxes without a vote.
“We intend to have a Rules Committee ... that gives opposition voices and alternative proposals the ability to be heard and considered on the floor of the House.” - Steny Hoyer, December 5, 2006.
Will someone explain to me how shutting down a minority party's ability to challenge and debate a bill "gives opposition voice and alternative proposals the ability to be heard"?
Good to see some solidarity and unity amongst the GOP.
These rule changes would have effectively shut down the minority (i.e. Republican) party's right to the Motion to Recommit or the test of germaneness on the motion to recommit. Also, it would have allowed for tax increases without votes.
This came after 11 straight successful motions to recommit by the Republicans.
So, the Democrats want to both eliminate accountability for tax increases...and shut down the Republican party's ability to challenge bills on the House floor.
Compare these actions with the words of the Speaker of the House and the House Majority Leader...
“[W]e promised the American people that we would have the most honest and most open government and we will.” - Nancy Pelosi, December 6, 2006.
So Pelosi's idea of "honest and open" includes shutting down opposition and raising taxes without a vote.
“We intend to have a Rules Committee ... that gives opposition voices and alternative proposals the ability to be heard and considered on the floor of the House.” - Steny Hoyer, December 5, 2006.
Will someone explain to me how shutting down a minority party's ability to challenge and debate a bill "gives opposition voice and alternative proposals the ability to be heard"?
Good to see some solidarity and unity amongst the GOP.
Hey Paris Hilton, Just Go To Jail Already
You're on your third conviction. One was a DUI lowered to reckless driving. Two more for driving without a license. Your excuses so far have been inconsistent..."I didn't know", "my assistants didn't tell me", and lately "I don't read".
Well, I can believe the last excuse.
However, you can hear. You hear so well that you even said "fine, take my license, I'm still going to drive". This is the total lack of responsibility we've come to expect from you, among other irresponsible and whiny celebrities.
You're only going to jail for less than half of the "cruel and unusual" punishment of 45 days. Do the right thing, Paris, and serve your 3 whole weeks of jail time. Governor Schwarzenegger will not pardon you, he's pretty much implied that. C'mon now, he's got to choose between you and your mommy and daddy...or the rest of the state of California (and the country, for that matter). I think you lose in that decision.
Plus, you're not that attractive...I'd take America Ferrera over your vapid, skeletal frame any day of the week.
Well, I can believe the last excuse.
However, you can hear. You hear so well that you even said "fine, take my license, I'm still going to drive". This is the total lack of responsibility we've come to expect from you, among other irresponsible and whiny celebrities.
You're only going to jail for less than half of the "cruel and unusual" punishment of 45 days. Do the right thing, Paris, and serve your 3 whole weeks of jail time. Governor Schwarzenegger will not pardon you, he's pretty much implied that. C'mon now, he's got to choose between you and your mommy and daddy...or the rest of the state of California (and the country, for that matter). I think you lose in that decision.
Plus, you're not that attractive...I'd take America Ferrera over your vapid, skeletal frame any day of the week.
The Opie and Anthony Saga Continues...
Opie and Anthony...two guys with targets on their back.
As many friends of mine know, I am a fan of "The Opie and Anthony Show". I don't have XM radio, so I only get the tape-delayed broadcast of their terrestrial radio show on WJFK out of Washington D.C. Most of the time, they'll recap some of the happenings on the XM show, because satellite radio is much less regulated in terms of language and content matter due to lack of FCC regulation on satellite radio. However, I do like the fact that their show is generally unbiased, and stupidity and/or ridiculousness gets mocked, no matter who it is that acts stupid. Their show is pretty entertaining, and is a staple of "shock jock" radio.
Anyway, this whole incident started when Opie and Anthony did a bit with a character known as "Homeless Charlie". The bit included a rant where Homeless Charlie fantasized about rough, violent sex with Laura Bush, Condi Rice, and Queen Elizabeth II. This was not a bit done in good taste, and they apologized for the bit 2 days later.
Then, they asked for some solidarity amongst the hosts of similar radio programs, citing the firings of Don Imus and JV and Elvis. The nail in the coffin came when Opie and Anthony stated that, while the FCC couldn't regulate their show, they still had to follow XM's "dumb rules".
For calling XM's rules "dumb", they were both suspended 30 days. Thankfully for the millions of fans of the show, they'll at least have the 3 hours on terrestrial radio via CBS Radio (which, ironically, is the company that fired Don Imus).
Many believe this is XM's attempt to pacify lawmakers in order to have a proposed merger between XM and Sirius approved.
Democrats are using these incidents to push for a new version of the "Fairness Doctrine", which means that lefty shows get equal radio time in the one media outlet that has a conservative majority, and that majority is there because it is what the audience wants (hey libs, it's the ratings, stupid...nobody wants to listen to Air America).
Holy crap, people...it's the DEMOCRATS that want to control the airwaves!!! And yet, it was the liberals that screamed about censorship after Janet Jackson's "Breastgate" incident. Hypocrisy, thy name is liberal on this issue.
As many friends of mine know, I am a fan of "The Opie and Anthony Show". I don't have XM radio, so I only get the tape-delayed broadcast of their terrestrial radio show on WJFK out of Washington D.C. Most of the time, they'll recap some of the happenings on the XM show, because satellite radio is much less regulated in terms of language and content matter due to lack of FCC regulation on satellite radio. However, I do like the fact that their show is generally unbiased, and stupidity and/or ridiculousness gets mocked, no matter who it is that acts stupid. Their show is pretty entertaining, and is a staple of "shock jock" radio.
Anyway, this whole incident started when Opie and Anthony did a bit with a character known as "Homeless Charlie". The bit included a rant where Homeless Charlie fantasized about rough, violent sex with Laura Bush, Condi Rice, and Queen Elizabeth II. This was not a bit done in good taste, and they apologized for the bit 2 days later.
Then, they asked for some solidarity amongst the hosts of similar radio programs, citing the firings of Don Imus and JV and Elvis. The nail in the coffin came when Opie and Anthony stated that, while the FCC couldn't regulate their show, they still had to follow XM's "dumb rules".
For calling XM's rules "dumb", they were both suspended 30 days. Thankfully for the millions of fans of the show, they'll at least have the 3 hours on terrestrial radio via CBS Radio (which, ironically, is the company that fired Don Imus).
Many believe this is XM's attempt to pacify lawmakers in order to have a proposed merger between XM and Sirius approved.
Democrats are using these incidents to push for a new version of the "Fairness Doctrine", which means that lefty shows get equal radio time in the one media outlet that has a conservative majority, and that majority is there because it is what the audience wants (hey libs, it's the ratings, stupid...nobody wants to listen to Air America).
Holy crap, people...it's the DEMOCRATS that want to control the airwaves!!! And yet, it was the liberals that screamed about censorship after Janet Jackson's "Breastgate" incident. Hypocrisy, thy name is liberal on this issue.
So I Only Watched the First Hour of the Debate...
...but, I do have some thoughts on what I did see.
- Jim Gilmore got called out for his Rudy McRomney statement and other attacks on "The Big 3". The best he could do was talk about his blog (obvious shill for page hits), and stumble his way through "the pronoun game" until the moderator made him name who he was referring to in each instance. Gilmore, despite all of his attempts to align himself with solid, Reagan-like conservatism...he constantly breaks that "11th commandment" of Reagan's. Gilmore solidifies himself as OUT.
- Tom Tancredo did come across more composed and prepared...but the man is too hesistant on his answers. I can literally see him search his brain for each sentence he's about to say. The only times I have seen Tancredo answer a question without several long pauses is when he's either talking about immigration or the Duane "Dog" Chapman issue...both of which I do agree with him on. He does has slim hopes for a VP nod, because a lot of GOPers like him...just not for President. Tancredo is now barely gunning for VP.
- Tommy Thompson should rename himself Tommy Veto...all he talks about is how many vetos are on his record as governor, and at least "Tommy Veto" sounds like a cool name for an Italian mob boss. However, Tommy Thompson is too ugly to look at...he makes James Carville look like GQ cover material. Double-T is OUT.
- For every point Ron Paul made that I agreed with, he'd make another one that turned me off to him. His idea that it was our "interventionalist" policies that caused 9/11 completely kills any GOP support he may have had. I'm glad Rudy Guiliani shut him up last night. Paul is waaay OUT.
- Sam Brownback is a little too Christian conservative for my tastes, and probably for most of America's tastes. He has some charisma and spark in his voice, but I think he reminds too many people of the reasons why people voted Republicans out of power in Congress. Brownback is gunning for VP, because he could give a more moderate candidate some hard-right support.
- Mike Huckabee made me laugh with the "John Edwards in a beauty shop" statement. Lots of cheers for that one. Huckabee made it a point to stick to his good points, managed to both praise and be critical of Rudy Guiliani in the same 30 second spot, and while I think he'll eventually become a top choice for VP, Huckabee is still in the running as the Dark Horse.
- Duncan Hunter, the other favorite among GOP bloggers (besides my man Fred Thompson) made his points clear, and nailed himself down as a solid conservative...which most of us already knew. Hunter should join Huckabee as a top VP candidate, and could very well deliver the state of California to the GOP in November of 2008. Hunter, though, is on the fence. He doesn't stand out to the average voter.
- John McCain came across a bit forced. His fire and intensity from the previous debate appeared very contrived and forced, and he appeared uncomfortable. The more conservative Republicans really went after McCain's "reaching across the aisle". I think Romney did an excellent job of pointing out some of the weakness of McCain's positions, and McCain held his own, as well. McCain is still in, but fading. He hits his points, but something is missing when he's debating, and I can't put my finger on it.
- Mitt Romney wasn't as impressive stylistically-speaking as he was in the first debate, but he made sure to reiterate his points, explained his position changes over the years pretty thoroughly, but he got blindsided by John McCain for changing his position on such a wide variety of issues. Still, he has that "presidential feel" that will appeal to the more shallow voters. Romney needs to regroup and solidify some of his positions, but he is still definitely in.
- Rudy Guiliani definitely shone a spotlight on himself that he needed to emphasize, and that was his tough stance on terrorism. His standing up to Ron Paul's statement about American provoking 9/11 won him lots of applause and showed that he wasn't about to let the loud and boisterous Paul get away with such a statement. Guiliani solidified his beliefs on abortion, but has also helped his cause with more conservative Republicans. Rudy is also definitely in. However, would someone tell Rudy that, due to his lisp caused by his false teeth, he should never utter the name "Fort Dix".
However, I think Fred Thompson won over a lot of people with his reply to Michael Moore's debate challenge...which makes this race for the nomination that much more interesting.
- Jim Gilmore got called out for his Rudy McRomney statement and other attacks on "The Big 3". The best he could do was talk about his blog (obvious shill for page hits), and stumble his way through "the pronoun game" until the moderator made him name who he was referring to in each instance. Gilmore, despite all of his attempts to align himself with solid, Reagan-like conservatism...he constantly breaks that "11th commandment" of Reagan's. Gilmore solidifies himself as OUT.
- Tom Tancredo did come across more composed and prepared...but the man is too hesistant on his answers. I can literally see him search his brain for each sentence he's about to say. The only times I have seen Tancredo answer a question without several long pauses is when he's either talking about immigration or the Duane "Dog" Chapman issue...both of which I do agree with him on. He does has slim hopes for a VP nod, because a lot of GOPers like him...just not for President. Tancredo is now barely gunning for VP.
- Tommy Thompson should rename himself Tommy Veto...all he talks about is how many vetos are on his record as governor, and at least "Tommy Veto" sounds like a cool name for an Italian mob boss. However, Tommy Thompson is too ugly to look at...he makes James Carville look like GQ cover material. Double-T is OUT.
- For every point Ron Paul made that I agreed with, he'd make another one that turned me off to him. His idea that it was our "interventionalist" policies that caused 9/11 completely kills any GOP support he may have had. I'm glad Rudy Guiliani shut him up last night. Paul is waaay OUT.
- Sam Brownback is a little too Christian conservative for my tastes, and probably for most of America's tastes. He has some charisma and spark in his voice, but I think he reminds too many people of the reasons why people voted Republicans out of power in Congress. Brownback is gunning for VP, because he could give a more moderate candidate some hard-right support.
- Mike Huckabee made me laugh with the "John Edwards in a beauty shop" statement. Lots of cheers for that one. Huckabee made it a point to stick to his good points, managed to both praise and be critical of Rudy Guiliani in the same 30 second spot, and while I think he'll eventually become a top choice for VP, Huckabee is still in the running as the Dark Horse.
- Duncan Hunter, the other favorite among GOP bloggers (besides my man Fred Thompson) made his points clear, and nailed himself down as a solid conservative...which most of us already knew. Hunter should join Huckabee as a top VP candidate, and could very well deliver the state of California to the GOP in November of 2008. Hunter, though, is on the fence. He doesn't stand out to the average voter.
- John McCain came across a bit forced. His fire and intensity from the previous debate appeared very contrived and forced, and he appeared uncomfortable. The more conservative Republicans really went after McCain's "reaching across the aisle". I think Romney did an excellent job of pointing out some of the weakness of McCain's positions, and McCain held his own, as well. McCain is still in, but fading. He hits his points, but something is missing when he's debating, and I can't put my finger on it.
- Mitt Romney wasn't as impressive stylistically-speaking as he was in the first debate, but he made sure to reiterate his points, explained his position changes over the years pretty thoroughly, but he got blindsided by John McCain for changing his position on such a wide variety of issues. Still, he has that "presidential feel" that will appeal to the more shallow voters. Romney needs to regroup and solidify some of his positions, but he is still definitely in.
- Rudy Guiliani definitely shone a spotlight on himself that he needed to emphasize, and that was his tough stance on terrorism. His standing up to Ron Paul's statement about American provoking 9/11 won him lots of applause and showed that he wasn't about to let the loud and boisterous Paul get away with such a statement. Guiliani solidified his beliefs on abortion, but has also helped his cause with more conservative Republicans. Rudy is also definitely in. However, would someone tell Rudy that, due to his lisp caused by his false teeth, he should never utter the name "Fort Dix".
However, I think Fred Thompson won over a lot of people with his reply to Michael Moore's debate challenge...which makes this race for the nomination that much more interesting.
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Some Liberals Express Hate for Falwell...
...that is, despite the best efforts of several prominent liberal blogs (Huffington Post, Crooks and Liars) to try and keep a certain level of respect and decency about the comments, so kudos to them. In fact, some of the comments at the Huffington Post were so bad that they blocked all comments.
News Buckit has a report on all the crazed comments here.
I understand Falwell was a polarizing political and social figure, and I personally believe that the man is part of the reason why conservatives catch so much flak from the left for their political ties to the "religious right".
I have never been one to agree with any person who believes that "if you're not a born-again Christian, you're a failure as a human being" (his words, not mine). However, I have found many of the comments that I've seen as equally repulsive as some of the things Falwell has said in his lifetime.
I have to commend all of the Virginia blogs that I have read so far, they have managed to keep a conciliatory and respectful tone about Falwell's death, no matter if they were conservative or liberal. Kudos to them.
News Buckit has a report on all the crazed comments here.
I understand Falwell was a polarizing political and social figure, and I personally believe that the man is part of the reason why conservatives catch so much flak from the left for their political ties to the "religious right".
I have never been one to agree with any person who believes that "if you're not a born-again Christian, you're a failure as a human being" (his words, not mine). However, I have found many of the comments that I've seen as equally repulsive as some of the things Falwell has said in his lifetime.
I have to commend all of the Virginia blogs that I have read so far, they have managed to keep a conciliatory and respectful tone about Falwell's death, no matter if they were conservative or liberal. Kudos to them.
Democrats do the Limbo Under Bush's Poll Numbers...
See for yourself in the latest Gallup Poll. Bush holds steady at 33%, Congress is down to a 29% approval rating. From what I gather from reading this, I guess people on both sides of the party divide are already frustrated with the shenanigans of Pelosi and Reid.
Maybe it has something to do with the lack of progress made during the "First 100 Days" and the "stop and shift" manuver of the Democratic leadership from working on various legislations they promised (which is probably the biggest reason why they got elected) to becoming single-issue oriented and bogging themselves down with headhunting the Bush administration.
Bush's numbers are nothing for conservatives to get excited about, either, but Democrats should be worried about this.
Maybe it has something to do with the lack of progress made during the "First 100 Days" and the "stop and shift" manuver of the Democratic leadership from working on various legislations they promised (which is probably the biggest reason why they got elected) to becoming single-issue oriented and bogging themselves down with headhunting the Bush administration.
Bush's numbers are nothing for conservatives to get excited about, either, but Democrats should be worried about this.
Fred Thompson KO's Michael Moore...
Moore sent Thompson a letter today that challenged Thompson to a debate. Read it at The Drudge Report. Notice, though, how Moore only wants to talk about the issues he can pick out to debate.
Thompson, with his ever-present cigar, responded with this video, courtesy of Breitbart.tv, where Thompson responds beautifully to Moore's challenge. I'll let the video speak for itself.
Gotta love the internet, as Thompson received Moore's letter, and already has made a response via video in the same day. This is another reason why I like Fred Thompson...he knows how to handle himself when faced with idiots like Moore.
Thompson, with his ever-present cigar, responded with this video, courtesy of Breitbart.tv, where Thompson responds beautifully to Moore's challenge. I'll let the video speak for itself.
Gotta love the internet, as Thompson received Moore's letter, and already has made a response via video in the same day. This is another reason why I like Fred Thompson...he knows how to handle himself when faced with idiots like Moore.
Monday, May 14, 2007
Town Steps Up Against Illegal Immigration
h/t to Conservative Viewpoints for the story.
The town of Farmers Branch, Texas is fed up with illegal immigration, and they've decided to take measures to fight it. The citizens of this Dallas suburb voted to enact an ordinance which makes renting homes to illegal immigrants against the law. In fact, the vote passed with a resounding 68% of the vote.
There are those who are vocal opponents of the measure, and will attempt to fight the ordinance in court. However, no matter the outcome, it's nice to see individual cities and towns step up and take action when they feel it is necessary.
That, my friends, is democracy in action.
The town of Farmers Branch, Texas is fed up with illegal immigration, and they've decided to take measures to fight it. The citizens of this Dallas suburb voted to enact an ordinance which makes renting homes to illegal immigrants against the law. In fact, the vote passed with a resounding 68% of the vote.
There are those who are vocal opponents of the measure, and will attempt to fight the ordinance in court. However, no matter the outcome, it's nice to see individual cities and towns step up and take action when they feel it is necessary.
That, my friends, is democracy in action.
It's Official, I'm Now a Total Whackjob
What in the hell was Greg thinking? I don't know...but now you can find more posts from me over at The Daily Whackjob.
I get to be the token Hispanic, yay!
In all seriousness, though, Whackjob is an interesting mix of serious discussion and total goofing on society. Check it out...although, half of you probably found me through Daily Whackjob, anyway.
I get to be the token Hispanic, yay!
In all seriousness, though, Whackjob is an interesting mix of serious discussion and total goofing on society. Check it out...although, half of you probably found me through Daily Whackjob, anyway.
Weekly Podium - "The New Rural Society"
Early Saturday morning, I found myself in the small dot on the map known as Conicville, Virginia. I was going to deliver some barbecued chicken to the soccer fields in Strasburg for the Shenandoah County Soccer League; it was a favor for my father who is on the SCSL Board. When I arrived in Conicville, where the chicken was being made, I was a bit surprised to find that the chicken was not ready...and it would be another 1 1/2 hours before I was back on the road again.
Standing around with my father, we watched a group of guys and a few girls (all related) slave over this barbecue pit, with the sweet smell of 500 chickens barbecuing floating in the air. Every few minutes, the elder of the bunch would call for the chicken to be "sauced", and cries of "SAUCE THE HELL OUTTA 'EM" would ring out as they would use large brushes and barbecue sauce in buckets and generously cover the chicken in sauce, over and over again. Eventually, my father and I got to helping out, filling buckets of barbecue sauce and slathering it across the plethora of chickens before us.
These guys and girls were very typical residents of the Shenandoah Valley. Long-standing family roots, country-boy/country-girl types, blue collar workers...most of them work jobs doing masonry and other types of arduous construction work. A day off is precious rest for these guys, and here they were cooking chicken at 8 AM for the soccer league as a favor for one of their family members. Their family, due to marriage, had black and biracial members. However, there was no ostracizing, everyone joked around, chipped in, and had a good time while working over the hot and smoky pit.
To many residents of the Shenandoah Valley, this is nothing new. However, to those who are not familiar with the Valley (or rural areas in general), this may come as something new. It's the New Rural Society.
For the longest time, areas of a rural nature (like the Shenandoah Valley) have long been associated with stereotypes of ignorance, racism, blind religious faith, homophobia, and cultural backwardness. Now, I am one who gets and enjoys a good joke, but when you read something like "An Open Letter to a Red Stater", you tend to see that many people still have these types of stereotypes in their head.
Now, it is true that the "letter" in the link I provided in the last paragraph was obviously written by a liberal. However, this is not a "liberal" or "conservative" issue. It's not really a "Republican" or "Democrat" issue, despite the overwhelming majority of Republican voters in more rural areas. This is an issue of debunking myths and stereotypes of the "ignorant redneck" image that many people of both sides of the ideological divide seem to have about "country folk".
Now, I am not making widespread accusations of anti-rural bigotry...I'm simply out to show the real side of the rural populous to those who don’t know it. I am city-born and somewhat city-raised, and I'll admit that when I moved to Shenandoah County almost 10 years ago, I had some of these same stereotypes swirling about in my then-teenage head. However, through getting to know people and learning about life in the Valley, I slowly realized that these stereotypes don't apply to most people in the area.
Sure, many of these rural residents did not attend college. It is also true that there are a handful of people out there that still hold onto certain racist or bigoted stereotypes, but the same could be said about any area...whether it is rural, urban, or suburban.
Most of them wake up at the crack of dawn, and perform hard work that benefits the lives of most Americans in some way or another. They're mechanics, farmers, and workers of various trades. Many are also volunteer fire-fighters, helping to keep other citizens safe. They volunteer for community activities. They support the local high school football team, and take pride in their country roots. They shop at both Wal-Mart and the locally-owned, Mom-And-Pop stores.
Hunting has always been part of the culture, and they teach future generations to respect their weapons of choice for hunting, as well. Many see the suggestion of regulation and restriction on their 2nd Amendment rights as encroachment upon part of their culture.
These are not the type of people to be taken for granted, nor should their opinions and thoughts be discounted because of where and how they live. They don't care for most of the details and general BS that surrounds politics...most have a long-standing distrust of Washington politics. Some are for the Iraq War, some are against it, but most (if not all) believe that America is a great place that represents all the good aspects of freedom and liberty.
It is this “love-thy-nation” attitude and blue collar lifestyle that attracts some of the criticism and lampooning that many like to spout about rural areas. What they don’t realize is that around here, a person’s character is important. I know that in the Valley, they don’t trust fast-talkers and shady characters. Honesty, integrity, and a little faith in a higher power will go a long way with Valley citizens, as it does in most rural areas.
While racism has not been completely eliminated, it is nothing like what many people believe it is. I’ve learned that, for most southerners, the Confederate flag really does mean “heritage, not hate”. As generations have passed since the civil rights movement of the 60’s, times have changed. Interracial relationships of all kinds are no longer frowned upon. There are a small minority of people that, due to a resistance to change, may hold on to these old beliefs. However, do not let the actions and viewpoints of a very small group of people deter you from seeing the rural society for what it is today.
The “New Rural Society” is, in a way, a lot like the old one. Traditional values of honesty, hard work, and respect for your heritage are now mixed with the beliefs of newer generations, such as racial and social inclusiveness. It is this mixture of social progress and traditional values that helps to make areas like the Shenandoah Valley a beautiful place to live and raise a family.
I know that for many who read this, I’m simply preaching to the choir. However, if I can change at least one person’s perception of “the country” to a more positive view, then I’ve done my job today.
Standing around with my father, we watched a group of guys and a few girls (all related) slave over this barbecue pit, with the sweet smell of 500 chickens barbecuing floating in the air. Every few minutes, the elder of the bunch would call for the chicken to be "sauced", and cries of "SAUCE THE HELL OUTTA 'EM" would ring out as they would use large brushes and barbecue sauce in buckets and generously cover the chicken in sauce, over and over again. Eventually, my father and I got to helping out, filling buckets of barbecue sauce and slathering it across the plethora of chickens before us.
These guys and girls were very typical residents of the Shenandoah Valley. Long-standing family roots, country-boy/country-girl types, blue collar workers...most of them work jobs doing masonry and other types of arduous construction work. A day off is precious rest for these guys, and here they were cooking chicken at 8 AM for the soccer league as a favor for one of their family members. Their family, due to marriage, had black and biracial members. However, there was no ostracizing, everyone joked around, chipped in, and had a good time while working over the hot and smoky pit.
To many residents of the Shenandoah Valley, this is nothing new. However, to those who are not familiar with the Valley (or rural areas in general), this may come as something new. It's the New Rural Society.
For the longest time, areas of a rural nature (like the Shenandoah Valley) have long been associated with stereotypes of ignorance, racism, blind religious faith, homophobia, and cultural backwardness. Now, I am one who gets and enjoys a good joke, but when you read something like "An Open Letter to a Red Stater", you tend to see that many people still have these types of stereotypes in their head.
Now, it is true that the "letter" in the link I provided in the last paragraph was obviously written by a liberal. However, this is not a "liberal" or "conservative" issue. It's not really a "Republican" or "Democrat" issue, despite the overwhelming majority of Republican voters in more rural areas. This is an issue of debunking myths and stereotypes of the "ignorant redneck" image that many people of both sides of the ideological divide seem to have about "country folk".
Now, I am not making widespread accusations of anti-rural bigotry...I'm simply out to show the real side of the rural populous to those who don’t know it. I am city-born and somewhat city-raised, and I'll admit that when I moved to Shenandoah County almost 10 years ago, I had some of these same stereotypes swirling about in my then-teenage head. However, through getting to know people and learning about life in the Valley, I slowly realized that these stereotypes don't apply to most people in the area.
Sure, many of these rural residents did not attend college. It is also true that there are a handful of people out there that still hold onto certain racist or bigoted stereotypes, but the same could be said about any area...whether it is rural, urban, or suburban.
Most of them wake up at the crack of dawn, and perform hard work that benefits the lives of most Americans in some way or another. They're mechanics, farmers, and workers of various trades. Many are also volunteer fire-fighters, helping to keep other citizens safe. They volunteer for community activities. They support the local high school football team, and take pride in their country roots. They shop at both Wal-Mart and the locally-owned, Mom-And-Pop stores.
Hunting has always been part of the culture, and they teach future generations to respect their weapons of choice for hunting, as well. Many see the suggestion of regulation and restriction on their 2nd Amendment rights as encroachment upon part of their culture.
These are not the type of people to be taken for granted, nor should their opinions and thoughts be discounted because of where and how they live. They don't care for most of the details and general BS that surrounds politics...most have a long-standing distrust of Washington politics. Some are for the Iraq War, some are against it, but most (if not all) believe that America is a great place that represents all the good aspects of freedom and liberty.
It is this “love-thy-nation” attitude and blue collar lifestyle that attracts some of the criticism and lampooning that many like to spout about rural areas. What they don’t realize is that around here, a person’s character is important. I know that in the Valley, they don’t trust fast-talkers and shady characters. Honesty, integrity, and a little faith in a higher power will go a long way with Valley citizens, as it does in most rural areas.
While racism has not been completely eliminated, it is nothing like what many people believe it is. I’ve learned that, for most southerners, the Confederate flag really does mean “heritage, not hate”. As generations have passed since the civil rights movement of the 60’s, times have changed. Interracial relationships of all kinds are no longer frowned upon. There are a small minority of people that, due to a resistance to change, may hold on to these old beliefs. However, do not let the actions and viewpoints of a very small group of people deter you from seeing the rural society for what it is today.
The “New Rural Society” is, in a way, a lot like the old one. Traditional values of honesty, hard work, and respect for your heritage are now mixed with the beliefs of newer generations, such as racial and social inclusiveness. It is this mixture of social progress and traditional values that helps to make areas like the Shenandoah Valley a beautiful place to live and raise a family.
I know that for many who read this, I’m simply preaching to the choir. However, if I can change at least one person’s perception of “the country” to a more positive view, then I’ve done my job today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
