Democrats

Posted on Liberals, Moonbats

save the children from the liberals!

while viewing the pictures from the various anti-war rallies, i was struck by the pictures of kids passing flyers out and promoting various fringe propaganda groups. i don’t blame them for this, because it probably wasn’t their own idea. at least they are not armed with bombs like the kids in palestine. it’s just shameful that kids are used as pawns in this increasingly abrasive war of ideologies in this country. the adults are bad enough in allowing the fringe special interest groups to be associated with their cause. it only destroys any shred of credibility they have left after cindy sheehan joined the party.

it’s even more wrong when kids are taught this junk in school as a part of “tolerance”, “diversity”, or any other trendy word for teaching kids to hate america and our military. the temptation is to compare this indoctrination process to former campaigns that have taken place throughout history. i’m not going to go there. i will say that special interest groups of all kinds are negatively influencing the education system and pushing their own agendas at the expense of basic knowledge.

i don’t claim to know what the solution is to fixing the system, outside of more accountability for teachers and school choice for parents. i do believe kids were better off before sex ed, before the involvement of planned parenthood and the aclu, and before God was taken out of school. the problem in the schools is not the pledge of allegiance. there are more obvious problems than kids saying the pledge. the most glaring of them is allowing all these special interest groups and the nea to control the system. because of this, needed reforms are virtually D.O.A. once upon a time, kids grew up to be productive, useful citizens without knowing all this new junk. who knew this was possible???

just stop using kids to promote this nonsense. that’s one thing they should have learned from world history. it was wrong then. it’s still wrong today.

Technorati : , ,

Posted on Democrats, George W. Bush, Hurricane Katrina, Republicans

the president’s speech and the needed revolution

there are those who saw the president’s speech as an air-kiss to the liberal solution of throwing money at problems to cure them. i don’t think this is entirely incorrect. i think that the president will be better off when he realizes that some groups of people are never going to like him. trying to appease the kanye wests, the al sharptons, and the farrikans of the world is misguided and a waste of time. african-americans died in new orleans not because of racism, but because of mismanagement on all levels of government. we saw a lot of video with african-americans as victims of katrina. why was that? it was because there were a disproportionate number of them in that area. racism in this case was a myth and the president should have called out the race-baiters last night. he missed that opportunity.

one opportunity the president and our elected leaders should not miss is the opportunity to explode the concept of the welfare state. its flaws are obvious and glaring in new orleans. we need to encourage people to take personal responsibility for their own future by allowing them to be part of creating something they can take pride in. just re-creating new orleans the way it was before doesn’t fix the problem. we don’t want to keep people struggling and on welfare. if my tax money is going toward this reconstruction, then i want some accountability on where it’s going. we should all demand this.

also, repealing the pork projects in existing bills should be done immediately. we should bring the pressure to bear on our elected officials to do this. this country belongs to us, and it’s about time washington acknowledged this and listened to us for once.

Technorati : , ,

Posted on Democrats

the deconstruction of john roberts (part I)

women’s rights groups, gay rights groups, and leftists of all special interest persuasions oppose this nomination. according to one article in the washington post, his involvement in romer vs. evans did little to convince gay rights groups that he would rule with their side on the supreme court. the general consensus is that his role was minimal.

also worthy of note in that article is a little blurb at the end mentioning groups in the african-american community who support this nomination. why is that important? it is important because some of his critics accuse roberts, among other scathing indictments, of being racist. those who oppose the nomination are convinced that he will return women’s rights (as defined by naral, people for the american way, human rights campaign, et al.) and civil rights to the dark ages. that’s a rather outrageous allegation. i strongly disagree with that view, based on what i’ve read about him.

here’s the truth of the matter. those opposed to the nomination want to scare the heck out of their supporters about him, so they make up these crazy allegations to mobilize their little armies of fanatics. they are fanatics not because they disagree with me, but because they disagree with the views of the majority of americans in this country. i can’t say i blame them for trying this. both sides use this tactic. republicans have used this tactic for years, and most of the time it works.

Technorati : ,

Posted on '08 Election, Democrats, Liberals

john kerry- potential hillary challenger in ’08?

if anyone thinks that john kerry is still electable, this past election should have proved otherwise. president bush was in a very vulnerable position, and yet kerry failed to capture the country on democratic core issues like jobs, healthcare, and the economy. my uneducated view of this is that kerry’s campaign staff totally butchered his campaign. it was a brutal thing to watch. i could have run kerry’s campaign better than his people did.

the riff about vietnam was a very distracting one. getting war cred is one thing. democrats have always had the burden of proof when discussing strength and conviction in the area of foreign policy. so it’s understandable that kerry would want to use his vietnam service as proof that he had related work experience. where his campaign fell off of the tracks was when john kerry allowed vietnam to define it. vietnam is some kind of ideological struggle for people that doesn’t translate into votes for its war veterans.

the main problem kerry had is that he was never going to win enough of the “average joe” vote. he couldn’t relate to us very well at all. at the end of the day, he reeked of champagne and caviar rather than hot dogs, hamburgers and beer. he tried so hard to be a regular guy and he failed miserably because we saw through the crafted image.

throughout the whole campaign, he couldn’t even inspire his own party, which had been hijacked by hard-leftists like howard dean, michael moore, and moveon.org. the democrats were reluctant to throw their support behind kerry. i doubt there has been anything kerry has done since the election that would convince them that he’s the guy in ’08. if your own party doesn’t support you, that’s a big challenge to overcome when running for president.

john kerry shouldn’t run again. it takes away from valuable vacation time. it forces him to try to be someone he’s not. more importantly for the democrats, they have a better shot at the white house with hillary.

coming up in organized chaos, more on hillary and the expanding number of oppressed minority groups in this country.

Technorati : , , ,

Posted on '08 Election, Democrats, Liberals

more ’08 candidates I would like to see

it’s obvious that the media has already decided for us which republicans are going to oppose hillary in ’08. how nice of them to do this. we certainly wouldn’t want the responsibility of picking someone ourselves. however, they are assuming hillary won’t face any serious challenges. that’s a big if, especially if the far-left is still running the party 3 years from now. if they are, i can think of several far-left candidates the democrats should consider for maximum ideological fanaticism and entertainment value. on an “unrelated note”, i really do miss ross perot.

here’s my first ticket and reasons for/against them.

rachel maddow/kent jones
(slogan — we’ll save air america!)

why rachel?

  • she is very smart and argues the liberal side with conviction
  • she ties conservatives in knots with her arguments
  • doesn’t attract special interest money from rich corporations
  • she works with kent jones
  • she opposes the new york yankees, as any good american should

why not?

see above. ms. maddow belongs on the radio as an intelligent liberal counterpoint to the rest of the country.

why kent jones?

  • having a comedian as VP might be fun
  • imagine the press conferences!

why not?

  • both rachel and kent shouldn’t take valuable time from TRMS to run for office where they would actually do less damage.

also receiving votes — the jerry springer/ al franken ticket. think that springer wouldn’t come up with a few reasons to tune in to his media blitz? the testimonials alone would be priceless. i mean, look how many people he’s lifted out of the gutter. you could get a few ads out of that for sure.

Technorati : , ,

Posted on Conservatives, Democrats, Liberals, Republicans

wanted: republican rock stars?

the republicans have an image problem. they are perceived as intolerant and shockingly enough, even uncool. we are trying to achieve coolness by hanging around the popular kids (loosely applied term) Giuliani and Governor Arnold. as we all know from our high school days, this hardly ever works. this is almost as ridiculous (but not quite) as Snoop Dogg and Iacocca playing golf together in that Chrysler commercial. should we as republicans reach out to everybody? to a certain extent, yes. but when a party ends up losing their core values by following the crowd, its soul is lost.

i think that republicans (with very few exceptions) care too much about public opinion to stand up for what they believe, especially those running for office. at least the democrats with their wild-eyed maniacal screamer-in-chief howard dean, say what they think and don’t apologize for it. if something is worth fighting for, fight for it. why are we as republicans ashamed of who we are and what we believe? our values are shared by quite a few people in this country. who cares if the Hollywood left or the mainstream media agree with us? why should Barbra Streisand be taken seriously on politics when she knows next to nothing about it? (more on this in a future post)

so to the republican leadership, i suggest this: quit trying to be cool. this isn’t high school. it’s a battle for the hearts and minds of the american electorate. we will win not because of our friendship with rock stars or Hollywood glitterati but because we have ideas that work for the people of this country. we might not end up at the prom with a cheerleader or a football player, but we will still be better off in the long run.

Technorati : , ,

Posted on Liberals

air america’s bumper sticker contest and the naral ad against john roberts

i support air america’s right to exist. the marketplace of ideas should be open to every point of view, whether you agree with it or not. but air america has the inconvenient problem of promoting generally unpopular ideas on their radio network. this doesn’t help ad sales or ratings very much. if you don’t have either of these, like hannity and rush do, it’s hard to make a profit in radio. if a liberal radio network can be financially self-supporting like the conservatives mentioned above, we should welcome them to the debate. now serious questions have been raised about air america’s finances and these should be investigated just like any other company would be.

for those of us who disagree ideologically with air america, here’s a blog with some rather interesting proposals for air america’s bumper sticker contest.

Here’s my favorite.

ok. that’s rather cruel. i’m sure they are more popular than that tagline would suggest. i admit to listening to the rachel maddow show via podcast. but they need more listeners than they have, obviously.

on to another topic of the day somewhat related to my previous point about air america. should we, as conservatives, apply pressure to the networks not to show the naral ad against supreme court nominee john roberts? it accuses judge roberts of supporting abortion clinic bombers and excusing their behavior. it is totally inaccurate, based on his comments regarding that case. it is a dishonest ad. it reeks of poor taste and desperation by naral and other bush opponents.

even keeping that in mind, i still say let the people decide. let them see the ad. conservatives can put up their ads, liberals can put up theirs, and we’ll have the brawl everybody expected. the american people are smart enough to see through the lies once they have all the facts. you don’t legitimately win an argument by gagging the opposition, no matter who it is. until we have a “good taste” clause in network ad contracts, there’s no legitimate way to block this ad.

Technorati : , ,