In Roswell, New Mexico...there appears to be plans for a UFO-themed amusement park.
Complete with an indoor roller coaster that "simulates" an alien abduction. It'll be so realistic, Jimmy Carter wouldn't come near the place!
I wonder if the park will pay homage to "Flight of the Navigator" as well as "The X Files"...
Saturday, May 26, 2007
Friday, May 25, 2007
Virgil Goode's Flag Issue
Apparently, Virgil Goode doesn't like Mexican flags being flown in protest of possible immigration crackdowns in the towns within his constituency.
I do agree that if citizens of a foreign country want citizenship here, it's pretty hypocritical (if not outright pointless) to protest your inability to get citizenship by flying the flags of the country you left instead of the one you want to be a part of.
However, I don't have a problem with someone flying a flag in respect to their roots and heritage. In fact, I used to want to get a paint job on the hood of my car with a huge American flag waving, with smaller Brazilian and Irish flags crossed in front of it...because I'm proud to be American, and I'm also proud of my heritage.
If I wasn't an American citizen, but I wanted to be one...I'd personally fly a very large Star-Spangled Banner. At least that way, people wouldn't mistake my intentions.
I do agree that if citizens of a foreign country want citizenship here, it's pretty hypocritical (if not outright pointless) to protest your inability to get citizenship by flying the flags of the country you left instead of the one you want to be a part of.
However, I don't have a problem with someone flying a flag in respect to their roots and heritage. In fact, I used to want to get a paint job on the hood of my car with a huge American flag waving, with smaller Brazilian and Irish flags crossed in front of it...because I'm proud to be American, and I'm also proud of my heritage.
If I wasn't an American citizen, but I wanted to be one...I'd personally fly a very large Star-Spangled Banner. At least that way, people wouldn't mistake my intentions.
Chris Graham Interviews both Emmett Hanger and Scott Sayre
You read it right.
Chris Graham has back-to-back interviews with both Emmett Hanger and Scott Sayre, candidates for the GOP nomination in the 24th State Senate District. The primaries are coming up soon, as this has been one of the most hotly contested races thus far in the 2007 election season.
Catch it at The New Dominion.
Chris Graham has back-to-back interviews with both Emmett Hanger and Scott Sayre, candidates for the GOP nomination in the 24th State Senate District. The primaries are coming up soon, as this has been one of the most hotly contested races thus far in the 2007 election season.
Catch it at The New Dominion.
Ready to Run!
Looks like Fred is ready for a fight.
However, what is probably the most important part of this article comes in the last paragraph.
"Talking to a likely Thompson staffer ahead of the speech, I said I hoped he'd get in the race and shake things up. The staffer said, coyly, 'I think you'll get your wish.' I didn't push for a date and time. But this guy's ready to go for it."
Take that for what it is...but to me, that sounds like an affirmation that Fred Thompson WILL run for the GOP presidential nomination.
h/t to my fellow "Fred Thompsonite" Paul Cave for linking me to this article from The Free Republic.
However, what is probably the most important part of this article comes in the last paragraph.
"Talking to a likely Thompson staffer ahead of the speech, I said I hoped he'd get in the race and shake things up. The staffer said, coyly, 'I think you'll get your wish.' I didn't push for a date and time. But this guy's ready to go for it."
Take that for what it is...but to me, that sounds like an affirmation that Fred Thompson WILL run for the GOP presidential nomination.
h/t to my fellow "Fred Thompsonite" Paul Cave for linking me to this article from The Free Republic.
Check Out The Peeps
The Week in Peeps, brought to you by HamNation!
Frameshot courtesy of The News Buckit.
Trabajo...Trabajo...Jihado.
Feeling "Gassed"
A lot of talk has gone around recently about how Americans are nowhere near the "tipping point" for changes in gasoline consumption habits. We're told we need to ride bikes, don't make unnecessary trips, walk, carpool, buy hybrids that are thousands of dollars more than the regular models.
If you feel bombarded by all of this, you're not alone.
What I've gathered from all of this is that most Americans had pretty much cut out the unecessary trips. We go to the store to get necessities. We drive our kids to their babysitters, their schools, their football and baseball practice. We drive to work and back.
My driving includes a 40-45 mile round trip to work, and once a week I drive an extra 30 miles round-trip to meet my parents, so they can watch my child overnight, and my wife meets them at the same place to pick him up...and her daily round-trip to work is similar to mine. I have nobody to carpool with. My only other ventures in my car usually involve going to the grocery store. Other than that, I pretty much go nowhere.
I think most people fit a similar description. They've cut out the Sunday drives, cut back on the visits to family that aren't nearby, and mostly drive out of necessity.
So, when 7 out of 10 Americans say that they won't skip their summer trip because of current gas prices...it's because they've been patient, and earned that break from the monotony caused by necessity-only driving, not because they're selfish and stubborn.
If you feel bombarded by all of this, you're not alone.
What I've gathered from all of this is that most Americans had pretty much cut out the unecessary trips. We go to the store to get necessities. We drive our kids to their babysitters, their schools, their football and baseball practice. We drive to work and back.
My driving includes a 40-45 mile round trip to work, and once a week I drive an extra 30 miles round-trip to meet my parents, so they can watch my child overnight, and my wife meets them at the same place to pick him up...and her daily round-trip to work is similar to mine. I have nobody to carpool with. My only other ventures in my car usually involve going to the grocery store. Other than that, I pretty much go nowhere.
I think most people fit a similar description. They've cut out the Sunday drives, cut back on the visits to family that aren't nearby, and mostly drive out of necessity.
So, when 7 out of 10 Americans say that they won't skip their summer trip because of current gas prices...it's because they've been patient, and earned that break from the monotony caused by necessity-only driving, not because they're selfish and stubborn.
Thursday, May 24, 2007
State Primary Predictions
I'm going to Pull a "Not Larry Sabato" and provide my predictions on some of the key primaries coming up in June. All races will decided June 12th unless otherwise noted.
This "**" denotes they are the favorite to win in my mind, not necessarily the candidate I would personally endorse.
Virginia House of Delegates
34th House District - Democratic Primary
Margaret Vanderhye** vs. Richard Sullivan
- This has been a fairly close race, both money and support wise. This is pretty much a toss-up, but from what I've read, Vanderhye has the smallest of edges in terms of vocal support, so I'll give her the nod.
40th House District - Democratic Primary
Morris Meyer vs. Rex Simmons
- Another tight race, in fact, this one is too close to call. I've combed through blogs, newspaper articles...I'm just having an impossible time getting a handle on a favorite. We'll call this a "toss-up". However, it's most likely that whoever wins will pretty much lose to Tim Hugo come November.
51st House District - Republican Nominating Convention (June 2nd)
Faisal Gill** vs. Julie Lucas
- Ah, this race is one of the most talked-about primary races this year. Gill is being blasted by opponents for numerous reasons (both working for George W. Bush and having links to known terrorists, including Al Qaeda). Lucas, on the other hand, hasn't helped her cause as many feel she has attempted to find ways to bring down Gill when there really wasn't anything there (the "website scandal" with Gill and PWC GOP Chair Tom Kopko). Gill has more delegates attending the June 2nd convention, and in the end...that may be all that matters. Gill gets the nod here.
79th House District - Democratic Primary
Johnny Joannou vs. Henry Light **
- Joannou is the incumbent. Light has aligned himself as a "Warner/Kaine" Democrat. Light also has an almost 3-1 money advantage over the incumbent Joannou. Light has a lot of endorsements on his side, and I think that will be enough to give him the edge.
Virginia State Senate
9th Senate District - Democratic Primary
Benny Lambert vs. Donald McEachin**
- Lambert, the incumbent, will get his on June 12th, as his support for George Allen in last fall's Senate race will very well come back to bite him, as many Dems have thrown their support behind McEachin. Lambert has the money advantage, but much of that was in loan funding. McEachin should come out of this one as the Democratic candidate.
24th Senate District - Republican Primary
Emmett Hanger vs. Scott Sayre**
- The race that has all of the Shenandoah Valley talking! Well, maybe just the Valley blogosphere. As I stated before, I believe this primary is Sayre's to lose.
27th Senate District - Republican Primary
Jill Holtzman Vogel** vs. Mark Tate
- While Tate NARROWLY lost to Russ Potts in 2003, he's in trouble now. He's currently been indicted on 2 counts of election fraud and 9 counts of perjury, but he's still running. Vogel has been pretty consistent in her campaigning, and seems to have had the support necessary to win...even before the Tate scandal.
39th Senate District - Democratic Primary
George Barker vs. Greg Galligan**
- This was a pretty sleepy primary race that has gotten more attention since Barker supporters have been accused of "swiftboating" Galligan. From what I understand, Barker has not encouraged this, nor has he discouraged it. Either way, Galligan's got the money and the stronger campaign staff. Barker has had staffing problems, including losing his campaign manager to Christopher Dodd's presidential campaign. Galligan should get this one.
Any races I missed? Disagree with me? Want to add something? Put it in a comment below.
UPDATE - Requested Predictions
Requested by VB Dems
83rd House District - Republican Primary
Chris Stolle** vs. Carolyn Weems
- If this had been the three-way primary involving incumbent Leo Wardrup, I'd say this was a toss-up, being that loyalties to Wardrup and the Stolle family would be split amongst GOPers, and Weems would be running on name recognition. However, Wardrup decided to retire. That being said, Weems now has Leo Wardrup's machine behind her, plus her name recognition...while Stolle has his own family political machine and a few key endorsements. Should be a close, interesting race. However, this district is full of moderate Republicans, and I think Stolle may appeal to the "closer-to-center" GOP voters than Weems. I can't believe I forgot to include this race in my earlier predictions.
This "**" denotes they are the favorite to win in my mind, not necessarily the candidate I would personally endorse.
Virginia House of Delegates
34th House District - Democratic Primary
Margaret Vanderhye** vs. Richard Sullivan
- This has been a fairly close race, both money and support wise. This is pretty much a toss-up, but from what I've read, Vanderhye has the smallest of edges in terms of vocal support, so I'll give her the nod.
40th House District - Democratic Primary
Morris Meyer vs. Rex Simmons
- Another tight race, in fact, this one is too close to call. I've combed through blogs, newspaper articles...I'm just having an impossible time getting a handle on a favorite. We'll call this a "toss-up". However, it's most likely that whoever wins will pretty much lose to Tim Hugo come November.
51st House District - Republican Nominating Convention (June 2nd)
Faisal Gill** vs. Julie Lucas
- Ah, this race is one of the most talked-about primary races this year. Gill is being blasted by opponents for numerous reasons (both working for George W. Bush and having links to known terrorists, including Al Qaeda). Lucas, on the other hand, hasn't helped her cause as many feel she has attempted to find ways to bring down Gill when there really wasn't anything there (the "website scandal" with Gill and PWC GOP Chair Tom Kopko). Gill has more delegates attending the June 2nd convention, and in the end...that may be all that matters. Gill gets the nod here.
79th House District - Democratic Primary
Johnny Joannou vs. Henry Light **
- Joannou is the incumbent. Light has aligned himself as a "Warner/Kaine" Democrat. Light also has an almost 3-1 money advantage over the incumbent Joannou. Light has a lot of endorsements on his side, and I think that will be enough to give him the edge.
Virginia State Senate
9th Senate District - Democratic Primary
Benny Lambert vs. Donald McEachin**
- Lambert, the incumbent, will get his on June 12th, as his support for George Allen in last fall's Senate race will very well come back to bite him, as many Dems have thrown their support behind McEachin. Lambert has the money advantage, but much of that was in loan funding. McEachin should come out of this one as the Democratic candidate.
24th Senate District - Republican Primary
Emmett Hanger vs. Scott Sayre**
- The race that has all of the Shenandoah Valley talking! Well, maybe just the Valley blogosphere. As I stated before, I believe this primary is Sayre's to lose.
27th Senate District - Republican Primary
Jill Holtzman Vogel** vs. Mark Tate
- While Tate NARROWLY lost to Russ Potts in 2003, he's in trouble now. He's currently been indicted on 2 counts of election fraud and 9 counts of perjury, but he's still running. Vogel has been pretty consistent in her campaigning, and seems to have had the support necessary to win...even before the Tate scandal.
39th Senate District - Democratic Primary
George Barker vs. Greg Galligan**
- This was a pretty sleepy primary race that has gotten more attention since Barker supporters have been accused of "swiftboating" Galligan. From what I understand, Barker has not encouraged this, nor has he discouraged it. Either way, Galligan's got the money and the stronger campaign staff. Barker has had staffing problems, including losing his campaign manager to Christopher Dodd's presidential campaign. Galligan should get this one.
Any races I missed? Disagree with me? Want to add something? Put it in a comment below.
UPDATE - Requested Predictions
Requested by VB Dems
83rd House District - Republican Primary
Chris Stolle** vs. Carolyn Weems
- If this had been the three-way primary involving incumbent Leo Wardrup, I'd say this was a toss-up, being that loyalties to Wardrup and the Stolle family would be split amongst GOPers, and Weems would be running on name recognition. However, Wardrup decided to retire. That being said, Weems now has Leo Wardrup's machine behind her, plus her name recognition...while Stolle has his own family political machine and a few key endorsements. Should be a close, interesting race. However, this district is full of moderate Republicans, and I think Stolle may appeal to the "closer-to-center" GOP voters than Weems. I can't believe I forgot to include this race in my earlier predictions.
Snakes On A Plane!!!
cross-posted at Daily Whackjob.
Literally.
The man was attempting to smuggle 700 live snakes onto a plane in Egypt, 2 of which were poisonous cobras in their own separate cloth sacks. He claims he was going to try to sell them in Saudi Arabia.
Either way, I can't imagine the panic if those snakes had gotten loose. Some people will do anything for the possibility of money.
Literally.
The man was attempting to smuggle 700 live snakes onto a plane in Egypt, 2 of which were poisonous cobras in their own separate cloth sacks. He claims he was going to try to sell them in Saudi Arabia.
Either way, I can't imagine the panic if those snakes had gotten loose. Some people will do anything for the possibility of money.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Excellent Debate
Head on over to Republitarian for an excellent debate between James Atticus Bowden and The Port Republic Farmer over the Warner tax increase of 04, Jim Gilmore's No Car Tax, and it's effects on the local economy down around Harrisonburg and Rockingham County. Although, it seems that they're arguing two different points at times...but there is some good discussion going on down there.
Hopefully this continues for a little while. It's really good stuff and I highly recommend giving it a read.
UPDATE
The debate has been continued at this link. There are a few others getting into the mix, so enjoy.
Hopefully this continues for a little while. It's really good stuff and I highly recommend giving it a read.
UPDATE
The debate has been continued at this link. There are a few others getting into the mix, so enjoy.
Elizabeth Hasselbeck > Rosie O'Donnell
Just watched the clip from today's episode of "The View", and for once it was not a clip of Rosie saying something ignorant...this time it was Elizabeth Hasselbeck saying something smart, and Rosie was unable to find any kind of rhetoric to save herself...and got stuck in some sort of mental la-la land with nothing to say.
Hasselbeck took Rosie to task over Rosie's twisting of Hasselbeck's words about the Iraq War, and who the enemy really is. While Hasselbeck puts together a string of good points, what is Rosie's best response? Simply put, she gets whiny and attempts to call out Hasselbeck for "not being a good friend."
The backbreaker line from Hasselbeck was when she said, "Asking a rhetorical question that you never answer yourself: That is cowardly."
See the video at The News Buckit. Who also noticed that it was indeed Rosie who went ad hominem first.
More commentary on this video clip at Hot Air.
Hasselbeck took Rosie to task over Rosie's twisting of Hasselbeck's words about the Iraq War, and who the enemy really is. While Hasselbeck puts together a string of good points, what is Rosie's best response? Simply put, she gets whiny and attempts to call out Hasselbeck for "not being a good friend."
The backbreaker line from Hasselbeck was when she said, "Asking a rhetorical question that you never answer yourself: That is cowardly."
See the video at The News Buckit. Who also noticed that it was indeed Rosie who went ad hominem first.
More commentary on this video clip at Hot Air.
Ring The Alarm, Ignore Fact!
h/t The News Buckit.
On May 18, Dr. Timothy Husky gave a pre-commencement speech for Saint Louis University's newly created Center for Environmental Sciences. In his speech, he went "over-the-top" alarmist in his speech.
Some of the statements he made...
- The frog and reptile species are threatened (but then he admits he's not sure why)
- The "100 year floods" will soon happen every 5-10 years in Missouri. So far, it's been 14 years and counting since the last of the "100 year floods" in Missouri.
- Soon, the Gulf of Mexico will border southern Missouri
- He admits that current projections show a sea-levels "accelerating" to levels 3-4 feet higher than they are currently in 100 years (the U.N. report stated 17-23 inches, and that's the high-end estimate)...then he states that "some climate models" (the Al Gore variety) show tens or hundreds of feet water-level increases "within a lifetime".
- He mentions the damage caused by tsunamis during this diatribe, but fails to realize that global warming does not cause tsunamis...seismic activity does. DOLT!
Erik Curren's "Doomsday Scenario" wasn't even this bad. At least Curren stuck to his guns when he made his predictions.
And environmentalists wonder why many people don't heed their calls.
On May 18, Dr. Timothy Husky gave a pre-commencement speech for Saint Louis University's newly created Center for Environmental Sciences. In his speech, he went "over-the-top" alarmist in his speech.
Some of the statements he made...
- The frog and reptile species are threatened (but then he admits he's not sure why)
- The "100 year floods" will soon happen every 5-10 years in Missouri. So far, it's been 14 years and counting since the last of the "100 year floods" in Missouri.
- Soon, the Gulf of Mexico will border southern Missouri
- He admits that current projections show a sea-levels "accelerating" to levels 3-4 feet higher than they are currently in 100 years (the U.N. report stated 17-23 inches, and that's the high-end estimate)...then he states that "some climate models" (the Al Gore variety) show tens or hundreds of feet water-level increases "within a lifetime".
- He mentions the damage caused by tsunamis during this diatribe, but fails to realize that global warming does not cause tsunamis...seismic activity does. DOLT!
Erik Curren's "Doomsday Scenario" wasn't even this bad. At least Curren stuck to his guns when he made his predictions.
And environmentalists wonder why many people don't heed their calls.
Understanding Speech In Context
Last night, I was watching "Sanford and Son" on TV Land. There wasn't anything else really on at that time, so I decided to watch an old favorite. I've always thought that Redd Foxx was a comedic genius.
Anyway, in this particular episode, Redd's character was going on and on about the Puerto Rican guy who operates a junkyard next door. In a series of rhetorical questions, Redd asks "why is he smuggling wetbacks over the border!?" This was part of a long line of jokes about Hispanics.
Now, had I been some sort of bleeding-heart, ACLU activist-type...I would've been on the phone complaining to TV Land/Nick-At-Nite within 2.7 seconds flat. I would be acting so indignant on this blog about this "outrageous lack of responsibility by TV Land not to pre-screen these shows for insensitive remarks!"
Instead, I laughed. I laughed pretty hard, actually (it was really funny). I then looked at my wife, and I said, "See, that would never fly today, too many people don't understand the concept of 'context' when someone makes a joke like that."
When a statement like that is made on TV, it's not intended to reflect what the actors, directors, and producers believe...it's to reflect a character. In this case, it's an older, working-class guy who has certain values and stereotypes. Nowadays, there are people who believe we should hide from the fact that there were/are people who had these stereotypes in their minds.
I am glad, though, that the majority of people give shows like that, along with "All in the Family" and others, a free pass on this kind of speech. If we were to start censoring the past...those shows would lose their cultural importance.
I'm not advocating the consistent use of terms like "wetback" TV, but when terms like that are used on TV shows, I hope that people can understand the context the phrase is used and where the phrase is coming from...rather than just focus on the words alone.
Anyway, in this particular episode, Redd's character was going on and on about the Puerto Rican guy who operates a junkyard next door. In a series of rhetorical questions, Redd asks "why is he smuggling wetbacks over the border!?" This was part of a long line of jokes about Hispanics.
Now, had I been some sort of bleeding-heart, ACLU activist-type...I would've been on the phone complaining to TV Land/Nick-At-Nite within 2.7 seconds flat. I would be acting so indignant on this blog about this "outrageous lack of responsibility by TV Land not to pre-screen these shows for insensitive remarks!"
Instead, I laughed. I laughed pretty hard, actually (it was really funny). I then looked at my wife, and I said, "See, that would never fly today, too many people don't understand the concept of 'context' when someone makes a joke like that."
When a statement like that is made on TV, it's not intended to reflect what the actors, directors, and producers believe...it's to reflect a character. In this case, it's an older, working-class guy who has certain values and stereotypes. Nowadays, there are people who believe we should hide from the fact that there were/are people who had these stereotypes in their minds.
I am glad, though, that the majority of people give shows like that, along with "All in the Family" and others, a free pass on this kind of speech. If we were to start censoring the past...those shows would lose their cultural importance.
I'm not advocating the consistent use of terms like "wetback" TV, but when terms like that are used on TV shows, I hope that people can understand the context the phrase is used and where the phrase is coming from...rather than just focus on the words alone.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Chris Graham and I Agree on Scott Sayre
When Chris Graham and I agree on something, you know it's gotta be rock solid stuff, because we disagree quite often.
Chris gives his opinion that this race is Sayre's to lose.
I especially agree with his last few paragraphs. Primaries are mostly about turnout, and Sayre's campaign and platform are generated towards generating higher turnout, which will definitely favor the challenger in this primary. Graham also states that, even though the Dems have a better shot at upsetting Sayre than Hanger due to Sayre's lack of political experience, he believes Sayre would be the favorite heading into November's general elections.
I do have to pose this scenario for discussion. You currently have Will Hvorat to be the Democratic candidate, and Arin Sime running as a Libertarian candidate. Let's say Sayre wins the primary (which I actually expect he will do). You have an interesting situation unfolding.
Arin Sime is running on a similar "anti-tax" platform as Sayre, but has kept quiet since he has no primary to compete in. Sime could eat into Sayre's base a little bit. At the same time, Sime's socially-moderate stances could very well eat into Hvorat's base of moderate Democrats.
So, Hvorat will get a lot of solid-left support. Sayre will get the solid-right support, and what's left in the middle will Sime's...but Sime will be able to pull even by grabbing a few Democrat and a few Republican voters.
That's what will make this race so interesting.
So while I'm not endorsing Sayre, I do believe that this primary is his to lose. And frankly, given that there are some things I don't like about Emmett Hanger...I'm not broken up about that at all.
Chris gives his opinion that this race is Sayre's to lose.
I especially agree with his last few paragraphs. Primaries are mostly about turnout, and Sayre's campaign and platform are generated towards generating higher turnout, which will definitely favor the challenger in this primary. Graham also states that, even though the Dems have a better shot at upsetting Sayre than Hanger due to Sayre's lack of political experience, he believes Sayre would be the favorite heading into November's general elections.
I do have to pose this scenario for discussion. You currently have Will Hvorat to be the Democratic candidate, and Arin Sime running as a Libertarian candidate. Let's say Sayre wins the primary (which I actually expect he will do). You have an interesting situation unfolding.
Arin Sime is running on a similar "anti-tax" platform as Sayre, but has kept quiet since he has no primary to compete in. Sime could eat into Sayre's base a little bit. At the same time, Sime's socially-moderate stances could very well eat into Hvorat's base of moderate Democrats.
So, Hvorat will get a lot of solid-left support. Sayre will get the solid-right support, and what's left in the middle will Sime's...but Sime will be able to pull even by grabbing a few Democrat and a few Republican voters.
That's what will make this race so interesting.
So while I'm not endorsing Sayre, I do believe that this primary is his to lose. And frankly, given that there are some things I don't like about Emmett Hanger...I'm not broken up about that at all.
Good News, and More Good News
The new Iraq spending bill will NOT include a timetable for withdrawl. Nor will it be weighed down with a lot of other pieces of legislation, either. The one key piece of legislation that will be added to the Iraq spending bill will be the minimum-wage increase.
Two birds with one stone, and those are two birds I wanted to get!
Adding to my moment of joy with Congress is the news that this Immigration "compromise" may end up being defeated due to the enormous amount of amendments combined with the rising opposition to this bill.
So all-in-all, not a bad day for me.
Two birds with one stone, and those are two birds I wanted to get!
Adding to my moment of joy with Congress is the news that this Immigration "compromise" may end up being defeated due to the enormous amount of amendments combined with the rising opposition to this bill.
So all-in-all, not a bad day for me.
Podium Gets A Mention!
By Duncan Hunter's campaign, click here to see.
I still say Hunter is shooting for a VP slot, but the man has been good on my key issues, so far.
I wouldn't mind a Thompson/Hunter or Guiliani/Hunter ticket come November '08.
I still say Hunter is shooting for a VP slot, but the man has been good on my key issues, so far.
I wouldn't mind a Thompson/Hunter or Guiliani/Hunter ticket come November '08.
Mark Tate Indicted
Moving on to actual news...looks like VCAP was right after all, and Tate was being subjected to a criminal investigation. This also means a few Tate supporters and a handful of liberals over at NLS are going to eat some crow this.
Read the story at the Washington Post.
I think this all but seals the deal for Jill Holtzman Vogel. I figured she already had the Warrenton and Winchester areas already sewn up. Given she is from Warrenton, and has great name recognition from Winchester south to the border of Frederick, Warren, and Shenandoah County (due to the prominence of Holtzman Oil).
Now, I guess the focus shifts to the general election in November.
(h/t Too Conservative, even though I read the blog after I read the WaPo story)
Read the story at the Washington Post.
I think this all but seals the deal for Jill Holtzman Vogel. I figured she already had the Warrenton and Winchester areas already sewn up. Given she is from Warrenton, and has great name recognition from Winchester south to the border of Frederick, Warren, and Shenandoah County (due to the prominence of Holtzman Oil).
Now, I guess the focus shifts to the general election in November.
(h/t Too Conservative, even though I read the blog after I read the WaPo story)
Bury The Hatchet
You know what, I'm a bigger man than all of this.
In fact, I'm willing to let bygones be bygones with Spank That Donkey. I really am.
I'm willing to shake hands, and continue my neutral stance on all this SWAC/Whackjob/Sayre/Hanger business. Why? Simply because I'm trying to end the in-fighting amongst conservatives.
Especially when there are much larger goals to achieve as an ideological group, especially since those representing the ideology need to unify, instead of bicker amongst themselves.
So, STD, do you agree that you and I both should get back to promoting conservatism? If so, just post your comment and lets officially bury this hatchet.
In fact, I'm willing to let bygones be bygones with Spank That Donkey. I really am.
I'm willing to shake hands, and continue my neutral stance on all this SWAC/Whackjob/Sayre/Hanger business. Why? Simply because I'm trying to end the in-fighting amongst conservatives.
Especially when there are much larger goals to achieve as an ideological group, especially since those representing the ideology need to unify, instead of bicker amongst themselves.
So, STD, do you agree that you and I both should get back to promoting conservatism? If so, just post your comment and lets officially bury this hatchet.
Spank That Donkey Called Me a Democrat?????
The SWAC vs. Whackjob feud continues, and I posted some more thoughts on SWAC over there. I'm managing to keep a pretty even keel on this, since I do have ideological similarities to some of the SWACers.
But Spank That Donkey called me a friggin' Democrat! I'm insulted! I'm feeling downright indignant about this!!!
Actually, I'm a bit amused, if not slightly aggravated.
Ok, he didn't necessarily call ME a Democrat, he called everyone who posted at Whackjob a Democrat. What he didn't realize (or intentionally forgot), is that out of 6 contributors at DWJ, 3 of them are conservatives (2 Republicans and 1 Independent, which is me).
What I think STD fails to realize is that conservatives/Republicans don't all fall into the apparent definition of "conservative" that STD has laid out.
STD states that the CASTLE bloggers are fighting for the heart and soul of the Republican Party. I'm beginning to think that if these people are going to label ME as a Democrat, simply because I don't agree with their tactics...maybe I should become a Republican, and make the party move to me...instead of moving to the party.
Spank That Donkey, you really should watch what you say...calling me a Democrat is like calling Mike Gravel quiet and soft-spoken. We're supposed to be on the same side of the ideological divide, so why do you (among others) want to ostracize good conservatives?
But Spank That Donkey called me a friggin' Democrat! I'm insulted! I'm feeling downright indignant about this!!!
Actually, I'm a bit amused, if not slightly aggravated.
Ok, he didn't necessarily call ME a Democrat, he called everyone who posted at Whackjob a Democrat. What he didn't realize (or intentionally forgot), is that out of 6 contributors at DWJ, 3 of them are conservatives (2 Republicans and 1 Independent, which is me).
What I think STD fails to realize is that conservatives/Republicans don't all fall into the apparent definition of "conservative" that STD has laid out.
STD states that the CASTLE bloggers are fighting for the heart and soul of the Republican Party. I'm beginning to think that if these people are going to label ME as a Democrat, simply because I don't agree with their tactics...maybe I should become a Republican, and make the party move to me...instead of moving to the party.
Spank That Donkey, you really should watch what you say...calling me a Democrat is like calling Mike Gravel quiet and soft-spoken. We're supposed to be on the same side of the ideological divide, so why do you (among others) want to ostracize good conservatives?
Monday, May 21, 2007
The Immigration Capitulation...Read It!
The "Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Reform Act of 2007", as released last night and spread across the internet this morning.
Read the reader comments on the side to see some of the astute criticism of this act. I'd go through it in detail, but it would take me forever to do so, simply because there is so much information to process, and lot that needs to be said. Needless to say, this whole bill needs to be scrapped, and we need to secure our borders first...then talk about what we're going to do with illegal immigrants, migrant workers/guest workers, and those who want to come to America to live.
The PDF file is 326 pages long, and this isn't the complete, final version. In recognition of his efforts, I want to extend a very gracious h/t to Truth Laid Bear for this wonderful slice of information, and all of the work put into making this large piece of doomed-to-fail legislature easier to for the eyes and the brain to digest.
UPDATE
To quote our "esteemed" Secretary of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff:
"You know, Wolf, first, I understand there's some people who expect anything other than capital punishment is an amnesty. The reality is the proposal here requires people who came in illegally who want to stay to pay a penalty. Like a fine. That's a punishment. That's not an amnesty."
See the video here.
THIS is the kind of statement that keep conservatives like me from becoming a member of the Republican Party. Chertoff is an idiot, and a complete failure at his job if he thinks this immigration bill is going to do anything for homeland security.
Someone comes to this country illegally, hops the border, and the best you can do is FINE them??? For the love of Christ on a bike, you can't be serious, can you?!?!?!? Why bother having Border Patrol and I.C.E.??? Just have them pay their one-time fee as they come across!!!
This is probably a good thing, statements like this will KILL any public support out there for this bill.
Read the reader comments on the side to see some of the astute criticism of this act. I'd go through it in detail, but it would take me forever to do so, simply because there is so much information to process, and lot that needs to be said. Needless to say, this whole bill needs to be scrapped, and we need to secure our borders first...then talk about what we're going to do with illegal immigrants, migrant workers/guest workers, and those who want to come to America to live.
The PDF file is 326 pages long, and this isn't the complete, final version. In recognition of his efforts, I want to extend a very gracious h/t to Truth Laid Bear for this wonderful slice of information, and all of the work put into making this large piece of doomed-to-fail legislature easier to for the eyes and the brain to digest.
UPDATE
To quote our "esteemed" Secretary of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff:
"You know, Wolf, first, I understand there's some people who expect anything other than capital punishment is an amnesty. The reality is the proposal here requires people who came in illegally who want to stay to pay a penalty. Like a fine. That's a punishment. That's not an amnesty."
See the video here.
THIS is the kind of statement that keep conservatives like me from becoming a member of the Republican Party. Chertoff is an idiot, and a complete failure at his job if he thinks this immigration bill is going to do anything for homeland security.
Someone comes to this country illegally, hops the border, and the best you can do is FINE them??? For the love of Christ on a bike, you can't be serious, can you?!?!?!? Why bother having Border Patrol and I.C.E.??? Just have them pay their one-time fee as they come across!!!
This is probably a good thing, statements like this will KILL any public support out there for this bill.
Bionic Limbs - A Reality?
Apparently, the same man who invented the Segway has now invented a bionic arm.
Remember the hype around the Segway, where it was supposed to be something that revolutionized our lives, and it was codenamed "it"? Then, when people found out what "it" was, there was quite a letdown.
This invention, should it prove feasible for mass production, is "it", an invention that will revolutionize the medical world. Let's just hope that this thing really works.
(h/t The News Buckit)
Remember the hype around the Segway, where it was supposed to be something that revolutionized our lives, and it was codenamed "it"? Then, when people found out what "it" was, there was quite a letdown.
This invention, should it prove feasible for mass production, is "it", an invention that will revolutionize the medical world. Let's just hope that this thing really works.
(h/t The News Buckit)
Weekly Podium: "The Sayre Supporters: A Third Party Perspective
Cross-posted at The New Dominion
The race for the GOP nomination in the 24th Senate District is hotter than the Shenandoah Valley in early August. Emmett Hanger, the incumbent, is facing a challenge from what appears to be a viable contender in businessman Scott Sayre. This race is receiving a lot of attention from the local media, and has stirred a lot of controversy amongst the political blogs of Virginia.
Now, as many people know, I don’t really have a horse in this race. While all the state elections will have an some sort of an effect on me, I don’t live in the 24th District. However, given the intensity of the race, the district’s geographical proximity to me, and the fact that my editor at The New Dominion, Chris Graham, has been accused of having a “pro-Hanger” agenda…I have no choice but to succumb to the temptation to make observations and give my two cents.
Sayre has the support of a large majority of the local party chairs in the district. He also has a group of bloggers that have subsequently called themselves “Bloggers4Sayre”. Coincidentally (or maybe not), most of the members of Bloggers4Sayres are also part of a larger conglomerate known as “CASTLE” (which stands for Conservatives Against Short-sighted Truth-challenged Liberal Elites, in case you didn’t know). This group is very much a right-wing bunch. Pro-military, small government, low taxes, and so on. There is nothing wrong with this, and in a “policy position” sense, I can agree with them on quite a few issues.
The Bloggers4Sayre have made it their mission to get Scott Sayre nominated over 12-year incumbent Emmett Hanger. They have built their case against Hanger on three main points, as well as few peripheral issues.
Their first point is built upon the fact that Hanger voted for Mark Warner’s tax increase in 2004, even though the state had a budget surplus. Sayre, in opposing fashion, is one of many nominees in the state of Virginia who have signed a “No-Tax Pledge”, which states that if they do get elected to office, they will never raise taxes. Hanger’s tax increase vote has allowed these pro-Sayre bloggers to give him the not-so-flattering label of a “RINO” (Republican In Name Only).
The second key issue in the case against Emmett Hanger surrounds the amount of out-of-district funding he is receiving. The latest campaign finance reports (for the quarter ending on 03/31) showed that Hanger was receiving the vast majority of his campaign donations from outside of the district (most of which came from a special interest group in Northern Virginia), where Sayre was receiving almost all of his money from within the district. Sayre supporters believe that this is an indicator that Sayre is gaining traction within the district amongst voters.
The third main issue the pro-Sayre bloggers have brought up is Hanger’s remarks about how grassroots workers are “insignificant“. Naturally, the local GOP chairs, the campaign “street teams”, and the Republican bloggers have taken offense to being considered not important enough to worry about…and basically considered to be not influential in the outcome of an election. I read Sen. Hanger’s remarks, and it seems he has both praised and criticized the grassroots. Personally, I would think that a man who has been in office as long as Hanger has should know not to say anything bad about those who bust their backsides, only to receive little or nothing in return (other than their candidate‘s possible victory).
Hanger’s statements that the Sayre supporters were a fringe group of “anti-tax” and “anti-government extremists” did not sit well with this group. I can’t believe it has sat well with many conservatives, who I would think would want taxes lowered or eliminated if necessary.
The pro-Sayre bloggers do have some valid points, and they have done a fantastic job of getting their nominee-of-preference some name recognition amongst the general Virginia blogosphere, which is normally focused on the Northern Virginia, Richmond, and Tidewater Regions when it comes to which campaigns to focus on.
However, I have noticed some things that are a bit, well, odd to say the least.
The first oddity is that there seems to be a bit of a divide between Sayre and the bloggers that support him. Sayre runs on his anti-tax platform, he shows up at various events, and he takes a very measured approach to how he goes about campaigning. He talks about what he stands for, and focuses on his platforms in a fairly positive sense.
Meanwhile, it seems that the bloggers that support him take a bit more of a maverick approach to obtaining their goal of getting Sayre nominated. Their general objective is to “reveal the true Emmett Hanger”. While Sayre tells us why we should vote for him, the bloggers are supposedly telling us why we shouldn’t vote for Hanger.
To use such a two-sided approach isn’t necessarily a bad way to go about running a campaign. However, there are some questions about the nature in which the pro-Sayre bloggers have gone about making their claims about Hanger.
While the claims of Hanger receiving a large percentage of his campaign money from outside the district, there are those who find it hypocritical that they bring up this topic. The reason behind this is because approximately half of the Sayre bloggers reside outside of the district as well. While it is hard to compare outside money to outside verbal support…there is enough relation between the two that the pro-Sayre bloggers should not be surprised when they come under fire for this.
Another reason these Sayre supporters have come under fire is due to a misperception of influence that they have in the Virginia political spectrum. To their credit, these bloggers have done an excellent job of creating a lot of commotion for their cause. They’ve created a sizeable enough network of bloggers to bounce back-and-forth between each other’s sites and comment on each other’s posts.
What this does is increase the amount of internet traffic they generate. Aggregators like “BlogNetNews” use various methods to track this information in an attempt to gauge the amount of influence each blog has in the state of Virginia, as related to other blogs. By moving themselves higher up in the influence category, they also attract new readers to their various blogs, thus spreading their messages of support for Scott Sayre to a lot of people.
Some bloggers, however, have taken some offense to this…as they feel it creates an unfair representation of the true influence these Sayre supporters have in the digital world of Virginia politics. The fact that the Sayre bloggers are unabashedly proud of their influence rankings does add fuel to the animosity held against them.
Personally, I can’t blame them for doing what they‘ve done in that regard. If you’ve got a group of people who are all supporting a cause, you do as much as you can to spread your message. While it may not be the most honest representation of their true influence…you have to give these bloggers credit for figuring out “the system” and making the most of their opportunity.
However, once again, they should be so surprised and defensive when they come under fire for what others feel is a misrepresentation of their influence (or importance). Nor should they be so quick to throw out accusations of “having a pro-Hanger agenda” when someone questions their actions.
I'm not here to make judgments on the actions of either the Hanger campaign or the Sayre campaign. What I am doing is passing along observations of what I've seen over the past couple of months.
In short, I’ve found this whole campaign to be an interesting study in internet politics. You’ve got a group of people dedicated to a cause, and are doing everything in their power to promote that cause. At the same time, they need to realize that with the spotlight will come criticism. If that criticism isn’t handled correctly, it could very well cause serious damage to the cause they support.
The race for the GOP nomination in the 24th Senate District is hotter than the Shenandoah Valley in early August. Emmett Hanger, the incumbent, is facing a challenge from what appears to be a viable contender in businessman Scott Sayre. This race is receiving a lot of attention from the local media, and has stirred a lot of controversy amongst the political blogs of Virginia.
Now, as many people know, I don’t really have a horse in this race. While all the state elections will have an some sort of an effect on me, I don’t live in the 24th District. However, given the intensity of the race, the district’s geographical proximity to me, and the fact that my editor at The New Dominion, Chris Graham, has been accused of having a “pro-Hanger” agenda…I have no choice but to succumb to the temptation to make observations and give my two cents.
Sayre has the support of a large majority of the local party chairs in the district. He also has a group of bloggers that have subsequently called themselves “Bloggers4Sayre”. Coincidentally (or maybe not), most of the members of Bloggers4Sayres are also part of a larger conglomerate known as “CASTLE” (which stands for Conservatives Against Short-sighted Truth-challenged Liberal Elites, in case you didn’t know). This group is very much a right-wing bunch. Pro-military, small government, low taxes, and so on. There is nothing wrong with this, and in a “policy position” sense, I can agree with them on quite a few issues.
The Bloggers4Sayre have made it their mission to get Scott Sayre nominated over 12-year incumbent Emmett Hanger. They have built their case against Hanger on three main points, as well as few peripheral issues.
Their first point is built upon the fact that Hanger voted for Mark Warner’s tax increase in 2004, even though the state had a budget surplus. Sayre, in opposing fashion, is one of many nominees in the state of Virginia who have signed a “No-Tax Pledge”, which states that if they do get elected to office, they will never raise taxes. Hanger’s tax increase vote has allowed these pro-Sayre bloggers to give him the not-so-flattering label of a “RINO” (Republican In Name Only).
The second key issue in the case against Emmett Hanger surrounds the amount of out-of-district funding he is receiving. The latest campaign finance reports (for the quarter ending on 03/31) showed that Hanger was receiving the vast majority of his campaign donations from outside of the district (most of which came from a special interest group in Northern Virginia), where Sayre was receiving almost all of his money from within the district. Sayre supporters believe that this is an indicator that Sayre is gaining traction within the district amongst voters.
The third main issue the pro-Sayre bloggers have brought up is Hanger’s remarks about how grassroots workers are “insignificant“. Naturally, the local GOP chairs, the campaign “street teams”, and the Republican bloggers have taken offense to being considered not important enough to worry about…and basically considered to be not influential in the outcome of an election. I read Sen. Hanger’s remarks, and it seems he has both praised and criticized the grassroots. Personally, I would think that a man who has been in office as long as Hanger has should know not to say anything bad about those who bust their backsides, only to receive little or nothing in return (other than their candidate‘s possible victory).
Hanger’s statements that the Sayre supporters were a fringe group of “anti-tax” and “anti-government extremists” did not sit well with this group. I can’t believe it has sat well with many conservatives, who I would think would want taxes lowered or eliminated if necessary.
The pro-Sayre bloggers do have some valid points, and they have done a fantastic job of getting their nominee-of-preference some name recognition amongst the general Virginia blogosphere, which is normally focused on the Northern Virginia, Richmond, and Tidewater Regions when it comes to which campaigns to focus on.
However, I have noticed some things that are a bit, well, odd to say the least.
The first oddity is that there seems to be a bit of a divide between Sayre and the bloggers that support him. Sayre runs on his anti-tax platform, he shows up at various events, and he takes a very measured approach to how he goes about campaigning. He talks about what he stands for, and focuses on his platforms in a fairly positive sense.
Meanwhile, it seems that the bloggers that support him take a bit more of a maverick approach to obtaining their goal of getting Sayre nominated. Their general objective is to “reveal the true Emmett Hanger”. While Sayre tells us why we should vote for him, the bloggers are supposedly telling us why we shouldn’t vote for Hanger.
To use such a two-sided approach isn’t necessarily a bad way to go about running a campaign. However, there are some questions about the nature in which the pro-Sayre bloggers have gone about making their claims about Hanger.
While the claims of Hanger receiving a large percentage of his campaign money from outside the district, there are those who find it hypocritical that they bring up this topic. The reason behind this is because approximately half of the Sayre bloggers reside outside of the district as well. While it is hard to compare outside money to outside verbal support…there is enough relation between the two that the pro-Sayre bloggers should not be surprised when they come under fire for this.
Another reason these Sayre supporters have come under fire is due to a misperception of influence that they have in the Virginia political spectrum. To their credit, these bloggers have done an excellent job of creating a lot of commotion for their cause. They’ve created a sizeable enough network of bloggers to bounce back-and-forth between each other’s sites and comment on each other’s posts.
What this does is increase the amount of internet traffic they generate. Aggregators like “BlogNetNews” use various methods to track this information in an attempt to gauge the amount of influence each blog has in the state of Virginia, as related to other blogs. By moving themselves higher up in the influence category, they also attract new readers to their various blogs, thus spreading their messages of support for Scott Sayre to a lot of people.
Some bloggers, however, have taken some offense to this…as they feel it creates an unfair representation of the true influence these Sayre supporters have in the digital world of Virginia politics. The fact that the Sayre bloggers are unabashedly proud of their influence rankings does add fuel to the animosity held against them.
Personally, I can’t blame them for doing what they‘ve done in that regard. If you’ve got a group of people who are all supporting a cause, you do as much as you can to spread your message. While it may not be the most honest representation of their true influence…you have to give these bloggers credit for figuring out “the system” and making the most of their opportunity.
However, once again, they should be so surprised and defensive when they come under fire for what others feel is a misrepresentation of their influence (or importance). Nor should they be so quick to throw out accusations of “having a pro-Hanger agenda” when someone questions their actions.
I'm not here to make judgments on the actions of either the Hanger campaign or the Sayre campaign. What I am doing is passing along observations of what I've seen over the past couple of months.
In short, I’ve found this whole campaign to be an interesting study in internet politics. You’ve got a group of people dedicated to a cause, and are doing everything in their power to promote that cause. At the same time, they need to realize that with the spotlight will come criticism. If that criticism isn’t handled correctly, it could very well cause serious damage to the cause they support.
Sunday, May 20, 2007
Jimmy Carter, "increasingly irrelevant"
As reported in the Washington Post today, a White House spokesman stated that Jimmy Carter's continued criticism of Bush (which he has been doing since 2002) is making him "increasingly irrelevant" in the global spectrum.
Increasingly irrelevant? The only relevance Carter holds in my eyes is that he was the last Democratic presidential candidate my father ever voted for (back in 1976, and I still give my father grief over that).
The former peanut farmer from Georgia has attempted to take some of the tarnish off of his miserable failure of a presidency by becoming a face for global humanitarianism. What Carter should know that his tenure as a president produced one long-lasting positive effect (The Camp David Accords), and but several missteps/bad policies/failures, a few notable issues that had a negative effect on America during Carter's tenure include...
- Signing away the Panama Canal
- Cancelling the B-1 bomber project (resurrected by Reagan)
- Prime rate hit as high as 21.5% (it was 8.25% as of May 2, 2007)
- Double-digit inflation, partially due to Carter's economic policies
- Mismanagement of the Iran Hostage Crisis
- Raised taxes, including a large increase in the Social Security Tax
By 1980, the country dumped him out of office and replaced him with a man who became, in my eyes, the greatest president we've ever had. I think you all know who I'm referring to.
A lot of younger Democrats love to state that our country has never been in such bad shape as it has been under George W. Bush. However, none of them know what things were like under Jimmy Carter (nor do they care to look it up, either), they only know Carter for his post-presidency trips to foreign nations and his 2002 Nobel Peace Prize. People may complain about how interest rates may have risen a little bit in the past 6 years...but when I think about a prime rate of 21.5%, it makes me shudder.
Jimmy Carter isn't totally irrelevant...he's more of a bad nightmare that we vaguely remember.
Increasingly irrelevant? The only relevance Carter holds in my eyes is that he was the last Democratic presidential candidate my father ever voted for (back in 1976, and I still give my father grief over that).
The former peanut farmer from Georgia has attempted to take some of the tarnish off of his miserable failure of a presidency by becoming a face for global humanitarianism. What Carter should know that his tenure as a president produced one long-lasting positive effect (The Camp David Accords), and but several missteps/bad policies/failures, a few notable issues that had a negative effect on America during Carter's tenure include...
- Signing away the Panama Canal
- Cancelling the B-1 bomber project (resurrected by Reagan)
- Prime rate hit as high as 21.5% (it was 8.25% as of May 2, 2007)
- Double-digit inflation, partially due to Carter's economic policies
- Mismanagement of the Iran Hostage Crisis
- Raised taxes, including a large increase in the Social Security Tax
By 1980, the country dumped him out of office and replaced him with a man who became, in my eyes, the greatest president we've ever had. I think you all know who I'm referring to.
A lot of younger Democrats love to state that our country has never been in such bad shape as it has been under George W. Bush. However, none of them know what things were like under Jimmy Carter (nor do they care to look it up, either), they only know Carter for his post-presidency trips to foreign nations and his 2002 Nobel Peace Prize. People may complain about how interest rates may have risen a little bit in the past 6 years...but when I think about a prime rate of 21.5%, it makes me shudder.
Jimmy Carter isn't totally irrelevant...he's more of a bad nightmare that we vaguely remember.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
