RIGHTWINGSPARKLE

Theatre in Baseball

2009-07-15T11:17:00.004-05:00

I don't care about baseball. I don't care if Pres. Obama was cheered or booed at his first pitch at the baseball all-star game in St. Louis.

But it is amazing to me the lengths Obama will go to to stage craft every move he makes.

The Billboard Battle

2009-07-15T00:41:00.005-05:00

In case you haven't been keeping up, Claver of RagingElephants.org raised enough money on his site to put up a billboard at the MLK exit off 610 in Houston that read "Martin Luther King Jr. was a Republican!" Quanell X (who is Houston's own Al Sharpton) brought out opposition to the billboard, and local news channels ran the story. That evening the sign company gave in to opposition's demands and took the sign down. No refund for Claver either.

I suppose Quanell X thought he had won, but that isn't what happened. Drudge put the story up as a headline. CNN and Fox News aired the story and Fox News put it on it's front page. Radio stations across the country started calling Claver for interviews. Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, and Chicago called. Sean Hannity played some of the news clip on his TV show.

Donations have poured into RagingElephants.org (feel free to donate so Claver can continue to get the message out there!)

Claver had hoped the sign would touch the people of Houston. But now, because of the opposition, it's touched the nation. Claver had said that he wanted a conversation to start in the African American community.

I think he got that and quite a bit more.

Call it God, call it karma. It's all good.

Sarah Palin: Our Anti RINO Warrior!

2009-07-15T00:00:00.005-05:00

Patrick over at HotAir has the most wonderful theory of what Sarah Palin will do now, and the more I think about it, the more sure I am that he is right on the money.

It starts with this quote from Sarah when she resigned as Governor:

“I will go around the country on behalf of candidates who believe in the right things, regardless of their party label or affiliation,”

Now, I have no doubt she means that, and will probably speak for any Conservative Democrat who has the brass to ask her to, but we all know that her main focus will be with Conservative Republicans. And that is the delicious part.

I just never thought about it. But she will be unencumbered by not running for anything herself. She will be able to campaign and raise money for Conservative candidates. The kind of candidates that Conservatives like me truly want to be elected!

We all know she can bring in the crowds and the excitement AND the news coverage. She can also bring in the money for the candidates that need it.

As Patrick points out in the house in an midterm election she could make all the difference:

"There are lots of districts where she can help, especially in an off-election year, whose candidates, if they win, will be quite grateful for her assistance. Based on the 2008 election, I count at least 19 seats that went narrowly for Democrats and could go narrowly, or better, for Republicans with enough nudging and some good candidates"

It makes me smile just to think of it. Not only will Palin help us win, but she will show what kind of star power she really has to the GOP establishment, which could use a smart kick ass Conservative woman to show them how to remember their roots and stop betraying Conservatives.

She will be our ANTI-RINO warrior!

I just love it.

Interesting.....

2009-07-14T23:17:00.002-05:00

One of the protestors arrested yesterday at the Sotomayor hearings was none other than Jane Roe herself of Roe v. Wade. She is Norma McCorvey of course, and is now a pro-life Catholic activist.

A Message to Hispanics

2009-07-14T16:48:00.001-05:00

America, this is your future....

2009-07-14T16:04:00.001-05:00

The Tax Man Comes Through The Back Door

2009-07-14T10:11:00.005-05:00

The Obama administration is looking for every way possible to tax Americans without them noticing. I call it back door taxing. As long as you aren't taking the money directly out of the paycheck of the average worker, the administration hopes that the average worker won't pay enough attention to the talking heads on TV to understand that taxing the company you work for means you will not get that raise you need, or worse, you might lose your job.

Cap and Trade is about that. Tax the energy, not the person, and maybe they won't notice. What the Obama administration is looking at now affects your company directly. And you better be paying attention, because the tax man is coming through your back door at the absolute worst time possible.

What Obama wants to do is increase the taxes on the foreign earnings of American companies. The Economist reported on May 7th:

“On May 4th Mr Obama unveiled his plans to reform the rules on taxing the foreign earnings of American firms. They came with a fusillade of rhetoric about companies ‘shirking’ their responsibilities, and the iniquities of a ‘broken’ tax system that rewarded firms for creating jobs in Bangalore rather than Buffalo, New York.”

Why is this so bad?

John Castellani in The Richmond Times Dispatch from June 5th explains:

“The Obama administration now wants to change the international tax rules in a way that will give foreign competitors an unfair advantage over U.S. companies in the global marketplace, allowing the foreign companies to reinvest more, expand faster, and sell products at lower prices. The administration claims it is protecting Americans against companies that export jobs; in reality, the proposal would put the U.S. increasingly out of sync with the rest of the world.”

Today at NRO Veronique de Rugy reports that when Obama was in Ghana this weekend, the he encouraged African governments to embrace economic growth. He said, "No business wants to invest in a place where the government skims 20 percent off the top."

I think this is what we call "irony." As Rugy explains:

"However, he doesn't think that American businesses deserve the same treatment. The U.S. corporate tax rate is 35 percent (at the federal level). That's the second highest of all the OECD countries. It's higher than France and Sweden. If you add the state rate, that's an average of 40 percent. And yet, he wants to reform the system in a way that that would punish U.S. firms by closing the loopholes that allow them survive competition abroad.

In my Reason column this month, I look at president Obama's corporate tax reform proposal. It's not pretty.

President Barack Obama is very insistent on the need to “save American jobs.” The spending and the Buy American provisions of his massive stimulus package, approved by Congress in February, were meant to “create or save” millions of U.S. jobs. “Saving jobs” was also the stated goal of his recent pledge to eliminate tax advantages for companies that do business overseas. But instead of saving American jobs, Obama’s new corporate tax is apt to worsen what is already the highest unemployment since 1983 and make America’s companies even less competitive in the global marketplace."

What the tax code does now, and what Obama wants to change, is it prevents double taxation for American companies in foreign countries, and it allows American companies to compete on an equal footing with their foreign competitors. What Obama will do is give foreign competitors and unfair advantage over U.S. companies in the marketplace.

The spin that the Obama administration is trying to put out there is that these are jobs that have been sent overseas and why should you care about that? He hopes that this will force companies to keep the jobs here. Forcing is what this administration is all about.

But the truth is that a recent study showed that as U.S. companies grew overseas, jobs and work were created here. That is how business works. A growing corporation means more jobs.

Spinning about overseas jobs is just that...spin. Although many American companies do operate overseas, the base of their company is in the U.S. Of these companies with overseas operations, roughly 79% of their employees are here in the United States.

The problem is that most American workers will never read this column. They won't understand the exact reason their company isn't competing in the global market place, and has to let him go to save costs to pay more taxes.

This grand plan to generate more revenue for the government will stifle job creation at a time when it has never been needed more.

Punishing the successful never works. Punishing companies never works. In the end it is the American worker who pays the price. The tax man got him. And he never saw him coming because the tax man came through the back door.

"Obama Rewrites The Cold War"

2009-07-13T10:15:00.003-05:00

It seems Democrats in general keep wanting to re-write history. Liz Cheney sets our President straight on the truth:

There are two different versions of the story of the end of the Cold War: the Russian version, and the truth. President Barack Obama endorsed the Russian version in Moscow last week.

Speaking to a group of students, our president explained it this way: "The American and Soviet armies were still massed in Europe, trained and ready to fight. The ideological trenches of the last century were roughly in place. Competition in everything from astrophysics to athletics was treated as a zero-sum game. If one person won, then the other person had to lose. And then within a few short years, the world as it was ceased to be. Make no mistake: This change did not come from any one nation. The Cold War reached a conclusion because of the actions of many nations over many years, and because the people of Russia and Eastern Europe stood up and decided that its end would be peaceful."

The truth, of course, is that the Soviets ran a brutal, authoritarian regime. The KGB killed their opponents or dragged them off to the Gulag. There was no free press, no freedom of speech, no freedom of worship, no freedom of any kind. The basis of the Cold War was not "competition in astrophysics and athletics." It was a global battle between tyranny and freedom. The Soviet "sphere of influence" was delineated by walls and barbed wire and tanks and secret police to prevent people from escaping. America was an unmatched force for good in the world during the Cold War. The Soviets were not. The Cold War ended not because the Soviets decided it should but because they were no match for the forces of freedom and the commitment of free nations to defend liberty and defeat Communism.

It is irresponsible for an American president to go to Moscow and tell a room full of young Russians less than the truth about how the Cold War ended. One wonders whether this was just an attempt to push "reset" -- or maybe to curry favor. Perhaps, most concerning of all, Mr. Obama believes what he said.

Read the whole thing.

No Surprises From The Left

2009-07-12T22:23:00.002-05:00

Claver's "Martin Luther King Jr. Was A Republican" billboard was vandalized and torn down last night. This comes as no surprise from the party of "free speech only if you agree with me" and the party of "tolerance only if you agree with me."

Stay tuned for a message from Claver.

Update: Claver has heard that the sign company may have taken the billboard down themselves because of demands from the opposition. He hasn't spoken to them yet though. If that is true. Then I apologize for accusing vandalism on anyone. But the opposition's denial of free speech remains.

I'll keep you updated

Update: My feeling on this is that if there is an argument on whether King was a Republican at the time (remember, most blacks WERE Republican at the time) then we should change the focus onto things in history that are not in question.

It was Democrats who passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. It was Democrats who started the KKK. It was Democrats who stood in the school house doors.

It was Republicans that pushed to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957. It was a Republican President that sent troops to desegregate schools. It was Republicans that founded historically black colleges and universities. It was Republicans who began the NAACP.

So, if our purpose is to make sure that we all remember the true history of civil rights, then lets focus on these things.

In the last 40 years as blacks started voting Democrat, we see the results. If you are a black adult I ask you these things. Is the black community in general better off? Or has the family unit broken down? Are your communities thriving? Or have gangs and drugs become a part of every day life? In the 1960's most black children were born into intact families. Today 70-85% of black children are born to unwed mothers. Are your children staying in school? Are the schools, good schools? Are more black men in prison than in the 60's? Do you feel that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's dream has been achieved?

Because of all that was achieved in the 60's, thanks to Republicans, many blacks moved into the middle class and beyond. Education and drive brought them to success. But sadly too many in the black community were left in communites that do not serve their needs. Democrats have convinced them that they serve their interests, but the proof is in the pudding. The proof is all around us.

Claver and I have a great desire to bring many from the black community into the Republican party. We believe that the vision and policies of the Republican party better serves the black community. But Republicans have done a lousy job in reaching out and explaining why that is. Claver and I want that to change and that is what this is all about.

2009-07-12T17:38:00.000-05:00

Martin Luther King, Jr.Was A Republican Documentary Film (56min) @ Yahoo!7 Video

I love how this video gives the reader's digest version of history for blacks.

"More for the fit, less for the unfit"

2009-07-12T09:58:00.006-05:00

A few posts down I caused a stir by quoting Justice Ginsburg on her thoughts regarding population control. In that light, I thought you might enjoy the following quotes from John Holdren, whom Barack Obama has recently appointed Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and Co-Chair of the President's Council of Ad visors on Science and Technology. Also known as the United States' Science Czar.

In 1977 Holdren co-authored a book called "Ecoscience." In it he describes extreme measures that he felt might be needed to control the population.

From Zombietime

Page 837: Compulsory abortions would be legal

"Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society."

Page 798: Single mothers should have their babies taken away by the government; or they could be forced to have abortions:

"One way to carry out this disapproval might be to insist that all illegitimate babies be put up for adoption-especially those born to minors who generally are not capable of caring properly for a child alone. If a single mother really wished to keep her baby, she might be obliged to go through adoption proceedings and demonstrate her ability to support and care for it. Adoption proceedings probably should remain more difficult for single people than for married couples, in recognition of the relative difficulty of raising children alone. It would even be possible to require pregnant single women to marry or have abortions, perhaps as an alternative to placement for adoption, depending on the society."

Page 787-8: Mass sterilization of humans through drugs in the water supply is OK as long as doesn't harm livestock:

"Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple food is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such a sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets or livestock."

Page 786-7: The government could control women's reproduction by either sterilizing them or implanting mandatory long-term birth control:

"Involuntary Fertility Control.....A program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men."
......

The development of a long term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births."

Page 838: The kind of people who cause "social deterioration" can be compelled to not have children

"If some individuals contribute to general social deterioration by overproducing children, and if the need is compelling, they can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility-just as they can be required to exercise responsibility in their resource consumption patters- providing the are not denied equal protection."

And this is our new"Science Czar" under Obama. Unsettling to say the least. Remember the quote from Ginsburg? That there was a "concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of." These quotes from our new Science Czar re-emphasizes that point. To find a way to keep people from producing children that "contribute to general social deterioration." Who decides who that is? Why, they do! Of course.

This is how these elite liberals think.

They keep telling us who they are. Why aren't we listening?

Remember "Catholics For Kerry?"

2009-07-11T13:57:00.002-05:00

The founder of "Catholics For Kerry" was also head of Catholic Outreach for the Clinton campaign last year. A joke to begin with since both Kerry and Clinton go against everything Catholicism stands for, but now the guy is not just a joke, but a criminal:

Eric McFadden, founder of Catholics for Kerry in 2004, a Democrat political operative, former director of Democrat Ohio Governor Ted Strickland’s Faith-Based and Community initiative and head of the Catholic outreach of the Clinton campaign last year, pleaded guilty on Thursday in a plea bargain to two felony counts of pimping for prostitution a 17 year old girl on the internet. Sentencing will occur on August 20.

Claver Fights the Good Fight

2009-07-10T19:09:00.003-05:00

My buddy Claver T. has put up the "MLK was a Republican" billboard in Houston. He is catching flak from it.

This billboard is really about reaching out to the black community from Republicans. We want you in our party. We are not going to ignore you any more. We are going to respond to your needs. What we understand is that voting Democrat has not done much good for the black community. We open our arms and invite all to the party who doesn't judge you by the color of your skin, but the content of your character. We are the party of life. We are the party of family values. We are the party that believes in smaller government and personal responsibility. Come join us!

Update: Here a clip from Channel 2.

The Reality of Iran

2009-07-10T10:37:00.003-05:00

While we here in the United States were waiting breathlessly for the funeral of Michael Jackson, 34 people were hanged in Iran. 22 in one day. The mainstream media may be more focused on Jackson, but the people of Iran are continuing to fight against all odds and against extreme violence. Many have twittered and asked if we have forgotten them in light of a pop star's death.

Have we forgotten them?

Yesterday thousands of demonstrators ignored government warnings at Tehran University and marched to commemorate the anniversary of bloody student unrest in 1999. They chanted "Death to the dictator!"

They were tear gassed, some arrested, and police seized license plates of vehicles in order to identify them later.

Iran has detained people from the French, British, and Canadian embassies and jailed around 40 journalists and media workers in the post-election crackdown. Thousands of hardline militiamen have been deployed across the city of Tehran to deal with protesters.

What began as a protest against the election results has turned into much more. It has turned into a people seeking the freedom of a true democracy. Meanwhile the Iranian government blames the United States for the unrest. Iran’s intelligence minister Gholam-Hossein Mohseni Ejei told Iranian IRIB television that “Americans and Zionists” were responsible for spreading rumors among Iranians that the election had been rigged.

It's clear that our President will do no more than claim he is "deeply troubled" and finally "outraged" by the events in Iran. Even at the G8 summit the focus was on Iran's uranium enrichment activities, and not on the people of Iran who are so desperately fighting for freedom.

The focus on uranium enrichment is well founded and needed, but let's not forget the brave people of Iran. They fight the very same regime that threatens the world with a future nuclear threat. This threat cannot be ignored like the people of Iran have been ignored by the international community.

Nation's leaders with the G8's joint declaration warned Tehran to comply with UN resolutions calling for a freeze on its uranium enrichment activities. French President Sarkozy threatened further sanctions against Iran if it did not respond to US overtures for talks on its nuclear activities. President Obama said the international community would not wait "indefinitely" for Iran to comply. The leaders warned Iran that they would "take stock" to see if Iran had complied with demands for a freeze on its nuclear activities at the G20 meeting in Pittsburgh in the US in September.

Somehow I don't think that mattered much to President Ahmadinejad. I would think the reaction would be similar to when Pres. Obama expressed outrage regarding the violence on protesters. Pres. Ahmadinejad scolded Obama:

"Mr. Obama made a mistake to say those things ... our question is why he fell into this trap and said things that previously [former President George W.] Bush used to say," the semi-official Fars News Agency quoted Mr. Ahmadinejad as saying.

"Do you want to speak with this tone? If that is your stance then what is left to talk about ... I hope you avoid interfering in Iran's affairs and express your regret in a way that the Iranian nation is informed of it."

I'm not sure if you caught that, but Pres. Ahmadinejad just told our President that he needed to apologize to Iran. Somehow I don't think that is going to happen (at least I HOPE NOT). Do any of us doubt that Pres. Ahmadinejad will have a similar tone in September regarding Iran's nuclear capabilities.

It's clear that Iran does not fear the United States or the international community. It will continue abusing it's people and it will continue it's forward march to a nuclear weapon. In May The Telegraph reported "Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, has said that Iran could be just a year away from developing a nuclear weapon."

The United States and Pres. Obama may be able to turn our face away from the human right abuses in Iran, but Obama cannot continue to ignore this nuclear threat. Sooner or later, President Obama will have to face the fact that he will have to give up his fantasy of being able to sit and have tea with the President of Iran. You cannot reason with those who are not capable of it.

Meanwhile, we pray for the brave Iranian people. It's the only thing we can do.

2009-07-10T00:02:00.001-05:00

2009-07-09T18:04:00.001-05:00

Stolen from Ace. Pretty funny. Just goes to show that men will be men, even heads of state.

Sometimes Liberals Tell Us Who They Really Are

2009-07-09T11:44:00.006-05:00

Every once and awhile liberals give us a peek into the real reasons behind so many of their policies. In an interview in the New York Times Justice Ginsburg discusses what she thought Roe v. Wade would do:

Q: If you were a lawyer again, what would you want to accomplish as a future feminist legal agenda?

JUSTICE GINSBURG: Reproductive choice has to be straightened out. There will never be a woman of means without choice anymore. That just seems to me so obvious. The states that had changed their abortion laws before Roe [to make abortion legal] are not going to change back. So we have a policy that affects only poor women, and it can never be otherwise, and I don’t know why this hasn’t been said more often.

Q: Are you talking about the distances women have to travel because in parts of the country, abortion is essentially unavailable, because there are so few doctors and clinics that do the procedure? And also, the lack of Medicaid for abortions for poor women?

JUSTICE GINSBURG: Yes, the ruling about that surprised me. [Harris v. McRae — in 1980 the court upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.] Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion. Which some people felt would risk coercing women into having abortions when they didn’t really want them. But when the court decided McRae, the case came out the other way. And then I realized that my perception of it had been altogether wrong.

Can you even believe that?! Admitting what we Conservatives knew all along, that liberals believe there are certain "people" that we shouldn't "have to many of." Considering that abortion clinics were built in inner city and poorer areas, we have a pretty good idea of what "populations" she was referring to.

This is truly chilling and comes as no surprise to me.

At least she does admit that her perception was wrong. But that was after years and years of believing it.

I might add that this was exactly what Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, had in mind. When it came to reproduction she believed "More for the fit and less for the unfit."

Who were the unfit? Well, I'll let her tell you.

In 1939 a researcher for Planned Parenthood wrote a memorandum titled "The Negro Project." It was a project to get charasmatic black preachers to preach birth control among their congregations.

Sanger wrote to Gamble; "We do not want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten that idea out if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members."

Right. Not "exterminate," just reduce those we don't want "too many of."

via HotAir

One Final Thought On Michael Jackson

2009-07-09T01:21:00.003-05:00

I know that the last thing you want to hear about right now is Michael Jackson, but now that the Michael Jackson funeral circus is over, I think it's important that we cut through the celebrity cult crap and look at some hard cold reality.

If I hear one more time that Jackson "broke color barriers," I may scream. The only color barrier Michael Jackson broke was in his own skin going from black to white.

Many kept repeating that Jackson was the first artist on MTV, and how groundbreaking that was. As if MTV would never have played black artist's videos if not for Michael. Please. MTV sees only one color, and that color is green. They would and will play artists that make them money. Skin color was never an issue. And by the way, was Michael the first black artist on MTV? I seem to remember Prince with his "1999", Tina Turner, and Donna Summer before Michael.

His death, his funeral, and the entire coverage of it seemed to gloss over the fact that he had been accused of sexually molesting little boys. With the best lawyers money could buy, he was acquitted of these charges. But I find it hard to believe that anyone who followed the trial, the testimonies of the boys who claimed to have been molested by Jackson over the years, and the documentary entitled "Living with Michael Jackson" by British journalist Martin Bashir, could conceivably doubt Jackson's guilt.

Many believe he is innocent. I get that. But what it clear is that Michael Jackson was a drug addict who couldn't even sleep at night with out a drug so powerful that is used to put patients asleep for surgery. Do you wonder why he found it so hard to sleep? Guilt is a difficult thing to live with.

He spent hundreds of millions of dollars on himself. He blew through his vast wealth until he was in debt. He butchered his nose through plastic surgery until he hardly had one. In the end he looked like a mime artist, with his white face and painted features.

He was talented, no doubt. But he was a sad broken man in a hundred different ways. He in no way deserved some "House resolution" as proposed by Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee to honor Jackson as "an American legend."

My heart goes out to his children and to his family, but that shouldn't keep us from facing the reality that was his life. Pretending that he was some great humanitarian dishonors those who really do live a life of unselfishness and caring for others.

I'm sure to those who loved him, he was a sweet man. But there was a darkness there. Everyone could see that.

I'm sick of this celebrity cult in our society. Nothing defined that more than Jackson's funeral. Holding him up as some historical figure of greatness was ridiculous and embarassing.

After all that we were practically forced to watch with wall to wall coverage, I just felt that this, as harsh as it seems to be, needed to be said.

Honduras

2009-07-08T15:08:00.004-05:00

Most of us are just not getting what is going on in Honduras. We know the President was ousted and that Pres. Obama has supported the ousted President and is refusing to recognize the new President.

When you read the whole story and understand what really happened, it is mind boggling that our President is supporting this man right along with Chavez and Castro.

It wasn't a "coup." It was a President trying to defy his country's law to become a dictator. Is it any wonder that Chavez and Castro support that? Honduras replaced him because he was defying law.

Now our country is threatening to withhold aid to this country if they don't take this despot back????

Read the whole thing and read this inside look and weep for the ignorance of the President of our country.

Confessions of a Former McCain Supporter

2009-07-08T11:47:00.003-05:00

Anyone who has read my blogs these past 3 years know that I was a BIG McCain supporter long before the primaries. This July 2006 entry at the Houston Chronicle illustrates my early belief in McCain. All through the primaries I blogged and blogged on the man. I attended two fundraisers at River Oaks in Houston and met him and had my picture made with him. I argued and argued with my fellow Conservatives. I was convinced he was the one who could win.

Oh boy, was I wrong.

I was like the teenager who is just convinced she is the smartest person in the room, and we all know there is no reasoning with that.

I wasn't just wrong about McCain being able to beat Obama. Although, I don't think anyone could have beaten Obama with all his money and the media on his side. It was train that no one could have stopped. But I was wrong about McCain in general.

McCain never believed in Republican values enough to stand strong for them. He could have made a grand statement by not voting for the first stimulus bill, but he didn't. He could have exposed Obama for the socialist policies he advocated, but he didn't. There are a thousand things he didn't do. The only smart thing he did during the campaign is pick Sarah Palin as his V.P. She brought the crowds and the excitement with her. But he used her ineffectively. He didn't defend her from scurrilous attacks. His staff was pathetic and inept. I hope that all Republican politicians understand that, and NEVER hire any of McCain's staff EVER.

And then there is Meghan McCain. A younger female version of McCain. His daughter has chosen to step in the public spotlight, and it has been nothing but embarrassing. Like her father, she is critical of many things that Conservatives hold dear. She has this notion that the party should change for her, to bring in a younger, more hip crowd. You know, that younger, more hip crowd that doesn't understand the issues, but can make a mean appletini. They vote on emotion. They voted for Obama because he was "cool." I'm sure in the next few years as they graduate from college and there are no jobs to be had, they will start to understand that "cool" doesn't get the economy going or produce jobs. They will mature and understand that more government is never the answer, and that with Obama they were sold a bill of goods. They will learn to vote Republican after experiencing the real grownup world. The Republican party need not change for them. They will change for us. I have no doubt. No jobs, a crumbling economy, and threats from rogue nations that go unanswered making us look weak, will make them understand how silly and foolish their vote for Obama really was.

So now I can admit it. I was wrong about McCain. As Republicans we need to never again make the mistake of nominating someone who is not completely dedicated to Conservative ideals. No more giving the nomination to "the next in line." We need STRONG Conservatives who passionately believe in our message of liberty, freedom, smaller government, greater personal responsibility, the sanctity of life, and lower taxes.

Let's never forget that ever again.

My girl, Sarah

2009-07-07T19:43:00.001-05:00

Maybe you just can't bear to slog through the hundreds of Palin articles and blog posts. You don't have to.

Here is the best one.

Obama Media

2009-07-07T11:07:00.003-05:00

Everyone agrees that Obama used the new media brilliantly throughout his campaign. The genius of having on the home page of his website a place where one could type in their zip code and be given the location of where they were supposed to vote (ads to click on this page to find your location were everywhere on the net). Of course you were required to type in your e-mail address as well. You were then on a mass e-mailing list, which even today his staff uses to inform. Money talks as well. Obama had a 3-to-2 advantage over Mr. McCain on network TV buys. Obama outspent McCain in every state in media buys.

Of course it didn't hurt that the old media was and is in his back pocket either. Looking back at the big picture of the campaign, it's no surprise that he won. The surprise is that McCain received almost 60 million votes. But we all know a certain "spark" in McCain's campaign brought so many to the voting booth for him (hint: everyone still underestimates her).

Trying to manipulate the media is nothing new, but Obama having the media slobber along like a love starved puppy was new.

But the Obama administration knew that in all love stories there are spats, anger, and sometimes breakups. Which brings me to what the administration is doing now to make sure a positive spin is put on, well.....everything they do. And guess what? You and I are paying for it.

From to Accuracy in Media:

Barack Obama's White House is spending more than $80,000 a week to staff its old and new media offices. Add the price of speechwriters and the White House communications tab reaches nearly $100,000 a week, or nearly $5 million a year-and that is for salaries alone.

Based on the coverage the President has garnered so far, it is money well spent.

Accuracy In Media gathered the data from the White House's annual salary report to Congress, which was released last week. AIM identified a total of 66 staffers with some connection to Obama's messaging machine-press secretaries and assistants, communications directors, new media specialists, speechwriters, and the staff of the new Office of Public Engagement.

The latter group, which employs 13 people at a cost of $1,090,200 a year, organizes events like last week's online healthcare forum in Virginia to take the White House's message directly to the public. Valerie Jarrett, who earns the top White House rate of $172,200 a year as assistant to the president for public engagement, hosted the event.

Add to this the carefully staged ABC primetime healthcare special that aired from the White House, and how CNN, CBS, and MSNBC cater to Obama, you have positive Obama coverage all day, all the time, except for one lone Fox News.

But that is not enough for Obama:

But it's obvious from the way the White House has been controlling reporters at press conferences, producing its own pool reports and orchestrating faux town halls that Obama wants even more unfiltered control over both his message and his public image than past presidents.

He is willing to pay millions of taxpayer dollars to achieve that goal.

It's disturbing to me that so much of our own taxpayer dollars are being used against us. Used to sell rosy pictures of programs that will eventually bankrupt our country. Without Fox News and talk radio we would never hear the other side or understand the critics concerns.

But as long as the Obama administration can control most of the media, they control the message. Our voices, here on the Internet, are nothing but distant whispers in the vast media of today.

Remember this as things get progressively worse here in this country. When you start to wonder why. When you wonder why you keep hearing blame put on anyone but the Obama administration. When reality is ignored on the news. Remember that millions of dollars are being spent to make sure you don't get the reality of why.

We Have the Government We Deserve

2009-07-06T22:25:00.002-05:00

Posted by BigDog

Bill Whittle gets fired up in this vid.

When Politicians Go Bad:
From DC to New York & California The Government We Don't Deserve

H/T Pajamas TV

Texas Magazine!

2009-07-06T16:31:00.002-05:00

If you are in Texas, run out and buy this month's Texas Magazine! My profile on Michael Williams in in there!

Ouch!

2009-07-06T15:41:00.001-05:00

Russian President Medvedev doesn't seem too impressed with Obama.

Seems a good pic for a caption contest. Go for it.