Not Larry Sabato talks about how the GOP hold on the senate is looking stronger and stronger.
You know, Ben over at NLS and I do not agree on a lot of things politically, but at least he is able to make observations from a more objective point-of-view, and that is something I appreciate from him.
Good example of this is the Jeannemarie Devolites-Davis/Chap Petersen race, which more than a few Democratic bloggers believe will be a runaway victory for Chap Petersen, despite Davis' obvious ties and well-organized campaign machine. I agree with Ben that this race is a total toss-up and may be one of the most interesting ones in
Although, win-or-lose, Chap's Ox Road South blog is a great read and I do recommend it.
If Davis does win, I hope her PR advisor tells her and her husband, Tom Davis, NOT to ever take pictures in matching clothes again.
Saturday, May 12, 2007
Just Because I'm Fair...
An anonymous comment was left on my abortion post from Friday. I accidentally deleted it, but I felt it wouldn't be fair to just say "oh well" and let it be, even though the person did not agree with me. Unfortunately, I'm unable to retrieve the text.
They made a pretty good argument about the medical benefits of a partial-birth abortion. There were a few "you're ignorant to the subject" and "you're just spewing rhetoric" comments sprinkled in there, but about 60-70% of the comment was informative to varying degrees.
I do want to say to this anonymous poster that the procedure does not make me squeamish, it makes me sick, and I have a strong stomach for watching these things. I simply believe in a certain level of humanity when it comes to these types of procedures. I need not speak to a doctor about the procedure when I'm simply talking how the procedure is performed, and whether or not it is a humane act.
I particularly don't care if this act of partial-birth abortion were to cure cancer, AIDS, altzheimer's, Parkinson's, and contribute to world peace...there has to be a better and more humane way, and I believe better ways can be found through research.
Simply put, that's my moral belief. You're free to disagree, "anonymous", but I'm pretty well set on this one.
They made a pretty good argument about the medical benefits of a partial-birth abortion. There were a few "you're ignorant to the subject" and "you're just spewing rhetoric" comments sprinkled in there, but about 60-70% of the comment was informative to varying degrees.
I do want to say to this anonymous poster that the procedure does not make me squeamish, it makes me sick, and I have a strong stomach for watching these things. I simply believe in a certain level of humanity when it comes to these types of procedures. I need not speak to a doctor about the procedure when I'm simply talking how the procedure is performed, and whether or not it is a humane act.
I particularly don't care if this act of partial-birth abortion were to cure cancer, AIDS, altzheimer's, Parkinson's, and contribute to world peace...there has to be a better and more humane way, and I believe better ways can be found through research.
Simply put, that's my moral belief. You're free to disagree, "anonymous", but I'm pretty well set on this one.
Friday, May 11, 2007
What Goes Around...
I hope that many of the Democratic bloggers and pundits realize that their tone comes across a bit arrogant when they believe that liberals will control 2/3rds of the Government come January of 2009, and that somehow this reign of power will last 10-20 years at the bare minimum.
It was the same arrogance that helped to bring down the Republican party as they strove for a "permanent majority" in Congress, and later The White House. That ended last November...and a large part of the reason was a certain arrogance that came with the power that the Republicans gained between 1994 and 2000.
It was also that same arrogance from the Democrats that helped bring about the 1994 Republican Revolution in the first place.
Considering approval ratings of the Democratic-controlled Congress are only a few percentage points away from Bush's ratings right now, Democrats really have little to be joyous about. Listening to the bloggers and pundits from the left, who are ever the optimists about their own party...you'd think their approval ratings were easily in the 60's.
The Democrats must be careful. It was this same attitude that carried Bill Clinton to a win in 1992, and then cost them Congress in 1994. The party is coming across as fake, malevolent, single-minded, ineffective, and indifferent to many voters, who feel the party is not holding to their 2006 campaign promises as well as only focusing on bringing down the Bush administration instead of "reaching across the aisle"...and their hopes for gains in 2008 are only buoyed by Republican missteps.
There is a reason that, for the past 39 years, 27 of those years have seen a Republican as President...and out of the 12 years with a Democrat as President, 6 of those had a Republican majority in Congress.
And the 4 most miserable years for our country (Jimmy Carter's term) just happened to coincide with the last large Democratic majority in Congress...mere coincidence? I think not...
Democrats beware...your overconfidence may be part of your eventual pitfall.
It was the same arrogance that helped to bring down the Republican party as they strove for a "permanent majority" in Congress, and later The White House. That ended last November...and a large part of the reason was a certain arrogance that came with the power that the Republicans gained between 1994 and 2000.
It was also that same arrogance from the Democrats that helped bring about the 1994 Republican Revolution in the first place.
Considering approval ratings of the Democratic-controlled Congress are only a few percentage points away from Bush's ratings right now, Democrats really have little to be joyous about. Listening to the bloggers and pundits from the left, who are ever the optimists about their own party...you'd think their approval ratings were easily in the 60's.
The Democrats must be careful. It was this same attitude that carried Bill Clinton to a win in 1992, and then cost them Congress in 1994. The party is coming across as fake, malevolent, single-minded, ineffective, and indifferent to many voters, who feel the party is not holding to their 2006 campaign promises as well as only focusing on bringing down the Bush administration instead of "reaching across the aisle"...and their hopes for gains in 2008 are only buoyed by Republican missteps.
There is a reason that, for the past 39 years, 27 of those years have seen a Republican as President...and out of the 12 years with a Democrat as President, 6 of those had a Republican majority in Congress.
And the 4 most miserable years for our country (Jimmy Carter's term) just happened to coincide with the last large Democratic majority in Congress...mere coincidence? I think not...
Democrats beware...your overconfidence may be part of your eventual pitfall.
A Thought on Partial-Birth Abortion
Many libs and feminists are mad that the ban on partial-birth abortions has been upheld as constitutional. Some subscribe to the theory that upholding this ban injects "rigid Catholicism" into the Constitution. Of course, that's pretty typical...if you take a moral stand against something, liberals turn it into a religious stand. There is a difference between having a moral base and a religious base.
This atrocious procedure is supported by people who believe that torturing terrorists for interrogation purposes is inhumane, but killing a partially-born infant is not. Even Democratic politicians have considered the procedure to be "close to infanticide"...but still support it as a political position.
Abortion is really not a "hot button" issue for me, although it is an issue for other conservatives. However, I believe that there is a place where a line has to be drawn, a place where the practices of abortion go to far. Partial-birth abortion is part of that line.
A woman has a right to choose...but I personally believe that there are so many options out there, abortion should be the exception and not the rule. There are other options, like giving the baby up for adoption, morning-after pills, giving the baby up for adoption, early-term abortions, giving the baby up for adoption...you see what I'm getting at?
Did I mention that they could give the baby up for adoption?
Of course, that would mean a complete overhaul of social services, but that's a subject all it's own...
Click here to see a video about celebrating a life that a partial-birth abortion would've taken away. This clip hits close-to-home with me, especially because I have a toddler at home, and he is the greatest thing I've ever done with my life.
h/t to Mason Conservative for the clip.
This atrocious procedure is supported by people who believe that torturing terrorists for interrogation purposes is inhumane, but killing a partially-born infant is not. Even Democratic politicians have considered the procedure to be "close to infanticide"...but still support it as a political position.
Abortion is really not a "hot button" issue for me, although it is an issue for other conservatives. However, I believe that there is a place where a line has to be drawn, a place where the practices of abortion go to far. Partial-birth abortion is part of that line.
A woman has a right to choose...but I personally believe that there are so many options out there, abortion should be the exception and not the rule. There are other options, like giving the baby up for adoption, morning-after pills, giving the baby up for adoption, early-term abortions, giving the baby up for adoption...you see what I'm getting at?
Did I mention that they could give the baby up for adoption?
Of course, that would mean a complete overhaul of social services, but that's a subject all it's own...
Click here to see a video about celebrating a life that a partial-birth abortion would've taken away. This clip hits close-to-home with me, especially because I have a toddler at home, and he is the greatest thing I've ever done with my life.
h/t to Mason Conservative for the clip.
Wednesday, May 9, 2007
Thoughts on Barack Obama
You know, I used to drink the Barack Obama kool-aid. When he gave that magnificent speech at the 2004 DNC, I was among the millions who swooned at the idea of someone who wanted to focus on reunited our sharply-divided nation. His speech became the point of no return for Obama himself, as he had not solidified himself as the "future" of the Democratic Party.
At first, this gave me hope for the party of John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, and Harry Reid. I thought that maybe he would usher in an era of younger, more centrist Democrats who would break away from the party lockstep and force the stalwart Dems to change their tune.
Almost 3 years since that magnificent, rallying speech...and nothing. Obama has become part of the party machine instead of changing the machine. He pretty much votes liberal-down-the-line. He's an eloquent speaker, and seems cool under pressure...but he speaks in broad tones and loves to talk about "hope" and "promise", without defining what he will do to deliver "hope" and "promise". In fact, he's barely defined his idea of "hope" and "promise".
He and Deval Patrick (Democratic governor of Massachusetts) have used the same playbook, so far. It worked for Patrick in the 2006 campaign, but his lack of political experience has come through, and Patrick's once soaring approval ratings are now tanking. Patrick has seen his approval ratings slump to well below 50% in one of the most Democratic states in the nation. His job approval rating in an April showed that 45% polled thought he was doing a Below-Average/Poor job as Governor, compared to only 31% saying he was doing an "Above-Average/Excellent" job. This is mainly because Patrick, who had lots of Obama's style and eloquence, lacked political experience and substance beyond the style.
Obama, whose political experience equals 3 terms in the Illinois State Senate and 4 years in the U.S. Senate (he hasn't finished his first term), needs to show people that he has solid political stances on individual issues, and deliver that in his speeches and statements. His relative lack of experience at the federal level is his achilles heel right now, and he needs to overcome that with policy initiatives that are sensible and appealing to both sides of the aisle.
Now, as a person, I have no problem with Obama. In fact, I would love to sit down at a poker table with him, Fred Thompson, and Glenn Beck, and just talk politics and society while playing cards, smoking cigars and drinking a good brand of scotch or gin. Obama is a likeable guy, from what I've gathered from listening to him and watching his demeanors. He seems like someone who you could talk to and debate with, and not have to deal with agitation of feelings or opinions.
I'm not going to be like some of my fellow conservatives and use Obama's full name (Barack Hussein Obama) as some sort of subliminal or satirical ploy to denigrate Obama, as I feel that he really hasn't done anything to deserve denigration...except for that "10,000 died" comment last night...that was outright ludicrious. Other than that, I really can't complain about outrageous or ignorant comments coming from the man's mouth.
However, given what I've read through his voting record, and his relative lack of political experience, and the needs of our country right now...I just don't think Obama (or any of the Democratic candidates, for that matter) is the right choice. However, I do think that in comparison to Hillary Clinton and John Edwards (the other two front-runners), I prefer Obama.
At first, this gave me hope for the party of John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, and Harry Reid. I thought that maybe he would usher in an era of younger, more centrist Democrats who would break away from the party lockstep and force the stalwart Dems to change their tune.
Almost 3 years since that magnificent, rallying speech...and nothing. Obama has become part of the party machine instead of changing the machine. He pretty much votes liberal-down-the-line. He's an eloquent speaker, and seems cool under pressure...but he speaks in broad tones and loves to talk about "hope" and "promise", without defining what he will do to deliver "hope" and "promise". In fact, he's barely defined his idea of "hope" and "promise".
He and Deval Patrick (Democratic governor of Massachusetts) have used the same playbook, so far. It worked for Patrick in the 2006 campaign, but his lack of political experience has come through, and Patrick's once soaring approval ratings are now tanking. Patrick has seen his approval ratings slump to well below 50% in one of the most Democratic states in the nation. His job approval rating in an April showed that 45% polled thought he was doing a Below-Average/Poor job as Governor, compared to only 31% saying he was doing an "Above-Average/Excellent" job. This is mainly because Patrick, who had lots of Obama's style and eloquence, lacked political experience and substance beyond the style.
Obama, whose political experience equals 3 terms in the Illinois State Senate and 4 years in the U.S. Senate (he hasn't finished his first term), needs to show people that he has solid political stances on individual issues, and deliver that in his speeches and statements. His relative lack of experience at the federal level is his achilles heel right now, and he needs to overcome that with policy initiatives that are sensible and appealing to both sides of the aisle.
Now, as a person, I have no problem with Obama. In fact, I would love to sit down at a poker table with him, Fred Thompson, and Glenn Beck, and just talk politics and society while playing cards, smoking cigars and drinking a good brand of scotch or gin. Obama is a likeable guy, from what I've gathered from listening to him and watching his demeanors. He seems like someone who you could talk to and debate with, and not have to deal with agitation of feelings or opinions.
I'm not going to be like some of my fellow conservatives and use Obama's full name (Barack Hussein Obama) as some sort of subliminal or satirical ploy to denigrate Obama, as I feel that he really hasn't done anything to deserve denigration...except for that "10,000 died" comment last night...that was outright ludicrious. Other than that, I really can't complain about outrageous or ignorant comments coming from the man's mouth.
However, given what I've read through his voting record, and his relative lack of political experience, and the needs of our country right now...I just don't think Obama (or any of the Democratic candidates, for that matter) is the right choice. However, I do think that in comparison to Hillary Clinton and John Edwards (the other two front-runners), I prefer Obama.
Power From Offshore - Either Way, It's A Good Thing
A recent WaPo article spoke of "Windmill Farms" being built offshore in Delaware, and possibly Maryland and Virginia. The ideas that have been proposed are fairly interesting. Large groups of wind-powered turbines built anywhere between 6 and 11 miles off the Atlantic coast. If this kind of power source can create a sufficient amount of power, I can see the sense in this option to provide power to Americans.
However, I would like to know what kind of damage these turbines can sustain during a hurricane, as they would be in a good place for those hurricanes that tend to hang along the coast and wreak all kinds of havoc. If these turbines can be built to withstand at least a category 4 hurricane, then I can see this as a very feasible option.
However, I do believe that since we are an oil/petroleum-based society energy-wise, until we can find a sufficient, cost-effective, reasonable way to ween ourselves off of oil...off-shore oil drilling is a viable option. Simply put, we have to reduce our dependence on foreign oil first, then we can reduce our dependence on oil in general.
However, these offshore "Windmill Farms" are an interesting idea.
However, I would like to know what kind of damage these turbines can sustain during a hurricane, as they would be in a good place for those hurricanes that tend to hang along the coast and wreak all kinds of havoc. If these turbines can be built to withstand at least a category 4 hurricane, then I can see this as a very feasible option.
However, I do believe that since we are an oil/petroleum-based society energy-wise, until we can find a sufficient, cost-effective, reasonable way to ween ourselves off of oil...off-shore oil drilling is a viable option. Simply put, we have to reduce our dependence on foreign oil first, then we can reduce our dependence on oil in general.
However, these offshore "Windmill Farms" are an interesting idea.
When Democrats Stretch The Truth...
...they stretch it BIG TIME!
As Barack Obama said in Richmond yesterday...
"In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died - an entire town destroyed."
Now, first of all, 12 people died...and the town's entire population was 1,600. So nothing in the statistical analysis of this town could approach the number "10,000". So, it's not like he meant to say "10,000 homes destroyed", or "10,000 people injured", or even "10,000 civilians displaced from their homes".
He simply came up with that number. Wonder what the liberal spin will be on this quote.
I did notice that Vivian J. Paige didn't bother to mention this tidbit of information, either, in her report on the event. Whether or not she noticed his gaffe and chose to ignore it, or was simply caught up in "Obama Fever" and didn't catch that he said this, I don't know...but I did notice it's lack of mention.
As Barack Obama said in Richmond yesterday...
"In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died - an entire town destroyed."
Now, first of all, 12 people died...and the town's entire population was 1,600. So nothing in the statistical analysis of this town could approach the number "10,000". So, it's not like he meant to say "10,000 homes destroyed", or "10,000 people injured", or even "10,000 civilians displaced from their homes".
He simply came up with that number. Wonder what the liberal spin will be on this quote.
I did notice that Vivian J. Paige didn't bother to mention this tidbit of information, either, in her report on the event. Whether or not she noticed his gaffe and chose to ignore it, or was simply caught up in "Obama Fever" and didn't catch that he said this, I don't know...but I did notice it's lack of mention.
Tuesday, May 8, 2007
Blogosphere Battle Royal
Man-oh-man, has it been a whirlwind week in the Virginia blogosphere.
---> Nate de la Piedra and Greg at Daily Whackjob got into it over Nate's view of apparent racist comments (Greg jokingly calls me a beaner, Nate didn't like that, even though I have no problem with it because I know Greg's intentions when he says it). This, in return, ended up with Greg questioning the validity of de la Piedra's "New Generation Democrats" PAC. Then, NLS got into the fray, reporting Greg's findings. Things eventually settled down when Greg allowed Nate to clear things up on Daily Whackjob. However, I still wish Nate
---> Raising Kaine and NLS have taken issue with BlogNetNews's ranking system, stating that it is completely unfair. Ben over at NLS also didn't like BNN's using the first paragraph or so of his blog's articles in the BNN feed...even though Dave Mastio (who runs BNN Virginia) states that this is well within copyright laws to quote something that is public.
This, as well as some other issues NLS has with Dave Mastio, has caused NLS to remove his RSS feed completely in protest. Even though in the latest rankings, Raising Kaine was number 1, and NLS was number 4. This has led to a few other Liberal blogs to leave BNN (VBDems, GOTV, others). While I respect their decision, a lot of the cries of "unfair" have come because of the rise of the CASTLE bloggers...many of which happen to be part of the much larger (and and much more influential) ODBA...this is a fact that many have failed to notice. However, it should be noted that the CASTLE blogs do tend to link to each other and contribute to each other's "influence index" on BNN.
Now that NLS and RK have decided to pick up their ball and go home because the right-wing blogs are growing in popularity, now the lefties and the CASTLE blogs are going at each other a bit. Personally, I agree with the anonymous post at NLS that stated that NLS is "cutting off the nose to spite the face".
---> A smaller subsection of the CASTLE blogs, "Bloggers4Sayre", now have a bit of a problem with The New Dominion, an online publication with some facets of a blog, but more of a news/op-ed site. Now, I get to be privy to this little back-and-forth, as this whole "Now At The Podium" blog formed out of my weekly "Now At The Podium" columns over at The New Dominion, so I have some interest in this little spat.
Bloggers4Sayre have been pro-active in attempting to get Scott Sayre nominated for the 24th Senate District over incumbent Emmett Hanger. They've raised some excellent points about Hanger getting a lot of outside-the-district contributions, and that Hanger has made some questionable statements about the grassroots and the Sayre supports. Chris Graham at The New Dominion has brought up that half of the Bloggers4Sayre do not live within the district either. Chris Green (Spank That Donkey) went on The New Dominion's podcast, and from that podcast grew an article where Graham questioned the "non-nastiness" of some of the photoshopped images that have become popular amongst the Bloggers4Sayre.
So now, it seems that there will be a few interesting commentaries on both sides that should follow. Probably nothing of a vicious nature, but some entertainment and hopefully some informative blogging should be in the works...as well as a few little verbal jabs, just for some spice.
Nonetheless, it seems like the cauldron that is the Virginia Blogosphere has begun to really bubble and froth with these types of incidents. While this is typical "Nature of the Blog", it's interesting, and slightly amusing, that all of this came about within the same 5-day timeframe.
---> Nate de la Piedra and Greg at Daily Whackjob got into it over Nate's view of apparent racist comments (Greg jokingly calls me a beaner, Nate didn't like that, even though I have no problem with it because I know Greg's intentions when he says it). This, in return, ended up with Greg questioning the validity of de la Piedra's "New Generation Democrats" PAC. Then, NLS got into the fray, reporting Greg's findings. Things eventually settled down when Greg allowed Nate to clear things up on Daily Whackjob. However, I still wish Nate
---> Raising Kaine and NLS have taken issue with BlogNetNews's ranking system, stating that it is completely unfair. Ben over at NLS also didn't like BNN's using the first paragraph or so of his blog's articles in the BNN feed...even though Dave Mastio (who runs BNN Virginia) states that this is well within copyright laws to quote something that is public.
This, as well as some other issues NLS has with Dave Mastio, has caused NLS to remove his RSS feed completely in protest. Even though in the latest rankings, Raising Kaine was number 1, and NLS was number 4. This has led to a few other Liberal blogs to leave BNN (VBDems, GOTV, others). While I respect their decision, a lot of the cries of "unfair" have come because of the rise of the CASTLE bloggers...many of which happen to be part of the much larger (and and much more influential) ODBA...this is a fact that many have failed to notice. However, it should be noted that the CASTLE blogs do tend to link to each other and contribute to each other's "influence index" on BNN.
Now that NLS and RK have decided to pick up their ball and go home because the right-wing blogs are growing in popularity, now the lefties and the CASTLE blogs are going at each other a bit. Personally, I agree with the anonymous post at NLS that stated that NLS is "cutting off the nose to spite the face".
---> A smaller subsection of the CASTLE blogs, "Bloggers4Sayre", now have a bit of a problem with The New Dominion, an online publication with some facets of a blog, but more of a news/op-ed site. Now, I get to be privy to this little back-and-forth, as this whole "Now At The Podium" blog formed out of my weekly "Now At The Podium" columns over at The New Dominion, so I have some interest in this little spat.
Bloggers4Sayre have been pro-active in attempting to get Scott Sayre nominated for the 24th Senate District over incumbent Emmett Hanger. They've raised some excellent points about Hanger getting a lot of outside-the-district contributions, and that Hanger has made some questionable statements about the grassroots and the Sayre supports. Chris Graham at The New Dominion has brought up that half of the Bloggers4Sayre do not live within the district either. Chris Green (Spank That Donkey) went on The New Dominion's podcast, and from that podcast grew an article where Graham questioned the "non-nastiness" of some of the photoshopped images that have become popular amongst the Bloggers4Sayre.
So now, it seems that there will be a few interesting commentaries on both sides that should follow. Probably nothing of a vicious nature, but some entertainment and hopefully some informative blogging should be in the works...as well as a few little verbal jabs, just for some spice.
Nonetheless, it seems like the cauldron that is the Virginia Blogosphere has begun to really bubble and froth with these types of incidents. While this is typical "Nature of the Blog", it's interesting, and slightly amusing, that all of this came about within the same 5-day timeframe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
