Weekly Podium: "Same Song, Now They're Just the Majority"

I am assuming that W.R. Marshall's "Dull Ache" has received some Tylenol, courtesy of this year's election.

Now that the jubulation has died down amongst the Democrats, liberal media, and the numerous contributors to the Augusta Free Press whose political opinions only seem to pop up around election time(see you in two years, guys), it's time to take a look at some of the murmurs and quiet commotion that you're starting to hear in the background while the celebration of the "Death of the Evil GOP" enters it's twilight hours.

Let's start at the top of the Democratic food chain. It seemed so simple, the Dems would take the House and march in unison to the Capitol itself, carrying Nancy Pelosi on their shoulders as if she were Julius Caesar returning to Rome. Just as the Dems reached the steps of the Capitol, things ground to a halt as we've discovered some dissention in the ranks.

Minority Whip Steny Hoyer is competing with John "Let's Pull Out The Troops Because Diplomacy Always Works With Terrorists" Murtha for the position of House Majority Leader. Soon-to-be-Speaker Pelosi has endorsed her close ally Murtha in an attempt to eliminate her old rival Hoyer from Party leadership. Personally, couldn't the Dems find someone a little more non-partisan? I mean, we all know that John Murtha is one of the most disliked politicians in the eyes of conservatives, so it is thought that Murtha will not win over Hoyer, who helped campaign for many of the victorious Dems in the recent election.

Of course, this is the same Steny Hoyer who endorsed Ben Cardin over Kwesi Mfume in the Maryland Senate Primary because he didn't believe the Dems could win with Mfume opposing another black candidate, Michael Steele. The same Steny Hoyer who stated that the African-American Steele "slavishly" supported the Republican party.

It's people like Hoyer that are members of a party that claims to be "looking out for all the minorities"(read: we make sure we get the Gay/Black/Jewish/Feminist vote by catering to their special interest groups, and painting the GOP as racist old white men). Yet, seem to play the race card either implicitly or explicitly as often as possible without any reprimand from the media. Need proof? Why is it that Hoyer's "slavish" remarks were quickly and quietly shelved while 3rd-person hearsay about George Allen's use of racial epithets were covered by the media with a fervor equal to the second coming of Jesus Christ himself?

Moving on...

I'm really sick. No, I haven't fallen victim from Mother Nature's violent mood swing from Indian Summer(or should I say "Native-American Summer" for the PC people in the crowd?) to bone-chilling precipitation. I've grown sick of the endless statements that read "Americans overwhelmingly voted for change" and "Virginia was decidedly in favor of ridding Bush's lackey George Allen" and other statements, would someone show me an "overwhelming" victory for the Dems in any other key race besides the Pennsylvania senate seat held by Rick Santorum? I guess winning with a margin of less than 0.4% of the vote is a landslide in Democrat terms, which mean's JFK's win over Nixon in 1960 must've been a blowout of epic proportions.

Anyway, I challenge these contributors to keep up this intense fervor in their writing. After reading Erik Curren's "The bad guys lost" article(AFP, 11/13/2006), he seems to be contemplating retirement...well, until the Republicans come back in office, because then he'll have something to complain about. So here's to you and your favorite party, Erik, may we endure at least 2 years of Democratic cries for higher taxes, an emboldened ACLU, and a spineless, UN-appeasing foreign policy. And in return...Toyota enjoys higher sales of the ugly-as-sin Prius sedan. Huzzah!

All this talk about the "joys of democracy" only comes about when the Democrats win...otherwise, it's "we need to change the Constitution".

Interesting statistic from CNN's exit polls on the Allen-Webb Senate race. I noticed that Webb pulled the majority in the vote with people with either incomes below $30,000, or above $100,000. So the middle class(between $30,000 and $100,000) decided Allen was a better candidate. Interesting, considering the fact that the Democrats label Republicans as crooked politicians who only cater to the rich. Yet, the rich(well, higher-income groups at least) voted Democratic. As for the less-fortunate? Well, considering the amount of rhetoric targeted at the lower-income class of citizens about how awful the Republicans are towards them...it's no wonder they continually vote for the Democrats.

Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island had a 62% approval rating on Election Day, and still lost the election due to the (R) next to his name. How sad is the state of politics when people gave a man such great approval ratings, and still vote him out of office due to his party affiliation. Talk about hypocritical...but then again, Rhode Island is one of those lovely liberal states of New England, hypocrisy is a common practice among them.

Well, now that I've done some Donkey-bashing, let me do some Elephant-smacking also.

I will say this very loud and very clear so you people can hear me. George Allen dug his own grave. The man could've easily won this election. Jim Webb was running a mediocre-at-best campaign with little national funding, and the election was to be a chip-shot for Allen. However, his continual self-destruction during the campaign leads me to believe that maybe this was a good thing, as now the Republicans can have a candidate to challenge Jim Webb in 6 years that won't crack under pressure. To use an equation for sports fans out there, George Allen = Mike Vanderjagt.

George W. Bush is doing the right thing at this moment, he's open to new ideas for Iraq and is reaching out to the new Democratic leaders. However, I think we all know that firing Donald Rumsfeld was an act that should have taken place pre-election(and don't tell me Rumsfeld "resigned", we all know what that really means). Normally, I would agree that Bush had the right idea with promoting a sense of continuity and solidarity among his party...but Bush's low approval ratings are, to some degree, Rumsfeld's fault. He had the President's ear when it came to Iraq, and he made sure that his voice was heard above all. The man fell upon the GOP like a wet blanket, and his departure should make way for some progress.

All-in-all, what this election did is eliminate Republican dead weight(Mark DeWine, Bill Frist, Mark Foley, and others) and kick the party where it needs to be...just far enough right of the proverbial fence to give them an indentity, but much more moderate than they had been pointing in the past. The Democrats, despite all the mosaics they paint, are too far left to do this country any good in the long run. That will show over the next several years, as Republicans and moderate Democrats will become key players and elected officials over the next several years.

Finally, I hope that Jim Webb's supposedly "conservative Democrat" stance holds true, and he can become a voice of reason in a fairly unreasonable party. However, after watching him win an election due to an uninspiring campaign and a massive political meltdown by his opponent, I'm more inclined to believe that while Jim Webb might've been a solid military man for the Navy, he'll become a solid political robot for the Democrats.

As I close this tirade, many of you have come to a couple of conclusions. One may be that I'm a Republican(nay, I am a registered Independent, and I lean Libertarian), and the other may be that I am some sort of antagonist. Well, you are free to believe as you wish, but I will tell you that I am of the belief that in order to challenge a position, you have to challenge those who promote the position, as well. Hence why you'll hear me call out the names of columnists. Whether it be Erik Curren or W.R. Marshall at the Augusta Free Press, or the Paul Krugman's and Al Franken's of the world, I will challenge the thinking of these writers just as they challenge the thinking of those who oppose them, or the politicians they don't like.

I will not shy away from those who disagree with me, either. I'm free and open to debate with you, the reader, as well. Not only am I a contributor to the AFP, but I am also an avid reader. I know that I will receive positive and negative letters about my words. I'm not just expecting them, I'm encouraging them. My goal is not only to spew forth my opinion(whether you like it or not), but my goal is to provoke thought that counters much of the same-song drivel that you, the reader, may be taking in on a daily basis.

Weekly Podium: "Getting Beyond Rhetoric"

I hope the political pundits within the state of Virginia is happy. I hope the angry voters are happy. I hope the women of Virginia are happy.

They got what they supposedly wanted, someone other than George Allen. Someone other than a man who has done no harm to the state, and has represented Virginia well as a Senator. I know there are absentee ballots to be counted, but barring something short of an elephant-sized miracle, Jim Webb is our new junior Senator.

All "macaca" aside, there was nothing wrong with George Allen as far as whether or not he was a detriment to the state. He stood for lower taxes, smaller government, 2nd amendment rights, and other items. However, it was liberal rhetoric, skewed media, and the hoodwinking of voters that has led to this race being as close as it is.

The biggest piece of rhetoric was "George Allen marches in lock-step with George W. Bush!"

Now, as Jim Webb has not solidified himself on any particular stance, lets watch as our Senator-elect starts to march in lock-step with Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi(aka Hillary Clinton, Jr.), Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, and become part of an immediate future filled with congressional gridlock and inaction...all of which will be blamed on the Republicans, as blame-shifting tends to be the liberal strategy as of late...well, I apologize for that. It has been their strategy for quite a while, now.

Speaking of the walking slab of New England concrete known as Senator Kerry, during his congratulation of Deval Patrick becoming Governor of Massachusetts, he spent over half of his speech talking about how great Ted Kennedy is, the other half talking about how "America spoke today", and only mentioned Patrick at the end...when he introduced him as the new Governor. Anyone else reading into Patrick's placement as more of a figurehead for supposed liberal "racial equality"? Obviously, John Kerry didn't think enough of his fellow party-mate to speak about his victory, other than announce him the winner.

Now, the liberals have the House and a strong minority in the Senate. Expect more Chicken Little-esque "the sky is falling" pro-environmental rants from the Left. By listening to these people, I've come to the conclusion that a few too many people took the unrealistic aspects of the movie "The Day After Tomorrow" a little too seriously. Erik Curren, I hope you reading this.

This may have been a good thing for the Republican cause, as several of the losers in their respective races are politicians who have bright futures ahead of them. Rick Santorum, Michael Steele, Bob Ehrlich, Jim Talent, and Mike McGavick all have time and potential on their side to pursue equal or higher offices in future years, and these are the gentlemen who will lead the Republican rebound from yesterday's loss. Most of those men would have won their targeted office, but just happened to get swept away in a tide of an admittedly well-crafted Democratic national campaign of rhetoric and slander, centered around turning the name "Bush" into a 4-letter word, and applying it to every conservative candidate out there.

With all of this rhetoric, no wonder there is a general malaise about the general public towards the government.

Oh, and could someone tell CNN that George Allen did not win the male vote in Virginia based on who his father was. Tell them it was because the majority of males in Virginia liked his policies over Webb's. Is it that hard to believe that Allen could be a better candidate than Webb? 49% of the population didn't think so...

Weekly Podium: "Smokers Having Their Rights Snuffed Out"

Since my last classes at Lord Fairfax Community College, I used to make the occasional visit to my former post-secondary institution of education. I had a few friends that were finishing up their degree programs, or simply taking a course or two for a certificate they were attempting to obtain.

Many of these former fellow students and friends of mine had long congregated in a sheltered area outside a set of double doors in an area dubbed "The Smoker's Pit". It was sheltered on 3 sides with a roof, and allowed for some reprieve from the usually miserable elements of mother nature that tend to plague the Northern Shenandoah Valley during the late fall and winter months. It also allowed for reprieve from the stress of exams, labs, and the other strains of college education by giving people a sheltered area in which to relax and have a cigarette or two between classes. Lots of political, social, and pop-culture related banter took place in "The Pit".

During my final year at LFCC, The Student Council not only allowed, but sponsored advertising for "National Smoke-Out Day", posting anti-smoking ads across the hallways of the college. Normally, I would have brushed this off as more liberal drivel and ignored it...except they faced one of these posters through the window towards those smoking in "The Pit". This was alright with the Student Union...but my marker-written replies on the back of the poster(facing inside the school) about Jim Fixx and other "pro-healthy living" people of the past and present(and their early demises) was considered "unacceptable" and "not promoting the health of LFCC students". I wasn't punished at all, but I was chastized for only

This anti-smoking campaign was created, of course, because 18-25 year olds in recent and present generations don't know that smoking can cause cancer and other diseases...that hasn't been drilled in our heads since the early 80's, right?

Upon my return visits to this institution, they have now forced all smokers to smoke in designated gazebos...with maximum exposure to the elements. Need a smoke when the wind chill is 5 degrees outside? Well, too bad...you don't even get a wall to protect you from the bitter cold wind.

Fast-forward to present day. Our esteemed Governor(and Mark Warner coat-tail rider)Tim Kaine has banned smoking in-and-around most government facilities, which is fine. However, now he's exploring the possibility of having smoking in restaurants/bars/etc...banned in the state of Virginia. What Mr Kaine does not realize is that tobacco usage is a staple of this state. To eliminate tobacco use would only drive out Richmond's stalwart corporations due to resentment towards Mr. Kaine's policies, but eliminate a right to smoke that liberals are attempting to eliminate throughout the country.

Smokers have long conceded various aspects of their rights to pacify the aggressive non-smoking advocates. Most restaurants have designated smoking areas to around the bar area, or reserved over two-thirds of dining area to non-smoking tables, forcing smokers at some restaurants to endure longer waits for tables on busier nights than non-smokers. Fast-food establishments, for the most part, banned smoking in their facilities long ago, although a few exceptions remain. Even my present employer forces employees not only to their cars...but have forced employees to drive off the property in order to smoke on their breaks.

Such is the price to burn one and relax for 10 minutes.

With all these concessions made, why the continued left-wing persecution of people for making a "lifestyle choice". If someone choses to be gay, be anti-American, or have a child out of wedlock, the liberals run to their defense as it is a "lifestyle choice". However, if someone wants to light up a cigarette because they enjoy it, down comes the proverbial hammer upon those who smoke because it's "unhealthy" and even "morally wrong", as smoking supports "those evil tobacco companies", as they are labeled by the anti-smoking advocates. Here's some breaking news to the liberal world, smokers know it is unhealthy, and to treat them as though they don't is condescending and demeaning.

I quit smoking for good several months ago as a personal choice, and as a favor to my wife(who requested I do so, as she was allergic to the smell of the smoke)...however, I refuse to quietly allow good people to have their rights denied because a handful of "activists" decided(as usual) to loudly voice their problems with smoking.

And even though I quit smoking, those truth.com commercials give me more of an itch to light up again than any Joe Camel ad ever did in my youth.