Monday, June 30, 2008

Anti-Science Conservatives Must Be Stopped

by Joseph Romm - June 30th, 2008 -

Conservatives put on a spectacular display of scientific ignorance this month in the U.S. Senate. During the debate on the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act, which would regulate carbon dioxide by setting a cap on emissions and allowing emitters to trade carbon allowances, most Republican senators questioned the reality of human-caused climate change or ignored the climate threat entirely and repeated the talking point that the bill would raise gasoline and electricity prices.


None of their scientific or technological claims is true and most of the economic claims are a wild exaggeration based on studies funded by fossil fuel companies. This may be a defining moment for humanity according to the world's increasingly desperate climate scientists, but to many conservatives it's apparently just another moment to score political points at the expense of future generations.

This article from the liberal web site is typical of the dialog about global warming. All they do is smear those who disagree with them.

First, please note the reference to fossil fuel. It has long been known that the myth of oil coming from fossils has been disproved. Yet the man causes global warming supporters still call it fossil fuel. This, at the very least, questions their credibility on the issue.

Second, the two signed petitions from the opposite sides indicate that significantly more scientists disagree with the premise that man is causing global warming. The petition touted by the global warming is caused by man crowd had only only about 300 climate scientists among the 2500 total signers, most of whom were government bureaucrats and not real scientists. These who doubt man is causing global warming got 30,000 signatures on their petition, with over 8,000 from PhDs who have studied climate. It would appear that based on number of scientists and their expertise, the man is causing global warming group is not justified in their claims.

Third, the enviro-extremists still ignore the warming on Mars and Jupiter, as well as indications the Sun is the major cause of warming here on Earth. You cannot ignore evidence that the entire solar system is heating up and still credibly argue that it is proven that man is causing the warming.

The tone of this article is the real problem. You cannot start arguing that anyone who disagrees with you is anti-science and expect that an intelligent dialog will result.

What is true?

There has been global warming for the last century, here on Earth, as well as Jupiter and Mars. There is nothing but a hypothesis that carbon based fuels are causing the warming on earth. There is considerable evidence, such as the warming on the other planets, that warming is not related to carbon fuel use. It is not only NOT settled science, the science is on the side of the doubters. There is no credible argument that the reason differs for each planet. If burning carbon based fuels is not causing the warming here on Earth, everything the enviro-extremists propose is counter productive. You have to question the sincerity of the enviro-extremists when they dismiss everything well intentioned opponents have to say, and can only hurl insults.

Mankind will need lots of cheap energy to handle either global warming or, the newest fear, global cooling. If we have enough cheap energy neither warming or cooling will be a serious problem. When the enviro-extremists reject nuclear as a viable option, you know that they have an agenda not based on what is best for mankind. So the question is, what is their agenda? My belief? It is political power. For this there is strong evidence. They are all socialists and liberals who love government control anyway. This uniform political belief calls into question anything they say about the science of global warming.

Saturday, June 28, 2008

Delahunt’s Zinger

by "The Prowler" - June 27th, 2008 - The American Prowler

Democrats during the hearing never once inquired whether any of the interrogation techniques used against terrorists had produced important intelligence for use against the enemy.

"You have to understand, guys like Delahunt, really all of the Democrats here, don't care about winning the war against the terrorists, or keeping us safe. They might have cared after 9/11, but now they are ruled by the radical left. All they care about now is putting the Americans who put in place the policies that have kept us safe for seven years on trial. The terrorists just don't matter to this crowd," says a former Department of Justice lawyer.

And yet as noted in the article, not a single Republican criticized Delahunt for his suggestion that Al Qaeda harm an American official. We are at war. Democrats are more concerned about power than about America. They cheer our enemies and encourage them to kill Republicans. When are Republicans going to understand that this is war and the enemy is not just Al Qaeda, but by their own choice, the Democrats.

Democrats keep insisting that nobody better question their patriotism. Okay. How about if I simply say they are evil.

Thursday, June 26, 2008

Take Back Our State Rally
w/ Bob Dole, Michael Steele, Pat McCrory

The pink pig (which represents legislative corruption and waste) was sitting proudly outside the legislative building in Raleigh. It marked the site at which the Americans for Prosperity and Civitas Institute sponsored Rally to protest tax waste and individual corruption (which has become endemic to our state) was to be held. More than a century of one party rule by Democrats has left North Carolina with a worse reputation than Louisiana once had.

As I arrived, Matt Mittan's producer, Agnes Cheek (below right) was setting up the booth from which they were already broadcasting. Agnes flipped back and forth from controlling the microphones to placing the signs and did it all with ease.

Further down the row of booths, Bill Lumaye was interviewing one of the luminaries of the event, GOPAC Chairman Michale Steele (below second from left). I met Michael a couple of years back and covered one of his amazing speeches. Michael is one of the future stars of the Republican Party. While I was there, a group of people started chanting Vice President . . . Vice President . . . hoping that Michael would be considered by John McCain for that position. It got so noisy that Bill had to comment about what was happening so the radio audience could understand the interruption.

After Michael finished his interview, Dr. Ada Fisher (below right) newly elected GOP National Committee Woman came up to introduce herself. Both are strong conservatives, but considering the malicious attacks they endure in the black community, they still are supportive when a black conservative does well in our party.

Jim Miller (below left) National President of Americans for Prosperity was being interviewed by Curtis Wright (center below) of the Big Talker.

When I got back to the Matt Mittan booth, Mayor Pat McCrory (below right) was being interviewed.

Shortly, Senator Bob Dole (below left) came by. I got a chance to meet him for the first time and exchange a few words. I still feel he is the best man who ever ran for President except for Ronald Reagan. I don't know how many people remember but his leadership skills were legendary. He is the longest serving majority leader in the history of the U.S. Senate. He is also the longest serving minority leader in the history of the U.S. Senate. The combination of these two historical periods tells you just how long he held the respect of his colleagues in this group of egotistical people. He is one of America's greatest leaders ever.

Pat McCrory was still on the air when Agnes started setting Bob up, but Pat seemed more interested in meeting Bob than continuing his interview.

I was standing by the speakers that monitored the show so I got to listen to a lot of what they said. Pat and Bob are both impressive representatives of Republican leadership for which the party is noted.

Away from the radio booths, the Craig Woolard Band (below) kept up a constant stream of beach rock and roll for which they are famous. After a while the organizers brought out the free Bar-B-Que and fried chicken which had been advertised.

The crowd looked to be quite close to the 1,000 people the organizers claim had signed up. It was definitely a large group.

As they started getting ready for the evening speeches, I ran in to Chuck Stires (below left), one of the Republican candidates for the NC House, in conversation with Mayor Pat McCrory.

It was, all in all, a great Rally! Civitas and Americans for Prosperity can be proud.

Take Back Our State Legislative Visits

Since the end of day Rally was going to be held at the Hallifax Mall right behind the Legislative Building, it was decided to kill time between the luncheon and the Rally by allowing all the busloads of people to see our legislature in action. As has been noted before, laws are like sausage. No one who loves the result should ever see how they are made. Watching for even a few minutes left me (as usual) disgusted with how our elected officials go about their jobs.

The outside of the Legislative Building (above) is quite beautiful.

After walking up a very long staircase, you reach the lobby (above) which allows access to the visitor's galleries above the Senate and House chambers.

This is the House in session (above).

And this is the Senate in session (above).

Take Back Our State Luncheon

The second luncheon this day was for planned attendees of the "Take Back our State" Rally. Held at at different hotel, everyone had to rush from one event to the other, since there was no break. The second luncheon started an hour after the first. Pat Tarbell (below left) and Cathy Heath (below right) were there registering the attendees to the second luncheon and making everyone feel at home.

This is not a regular event so attendance comparison is not possible, but it was a very good crowd.

As I wandered around, I got a chance to meet people from all over the State of North Carolina. These folks (below) are from two different counties at the the west end of the state.

Jeff Mixon (below) of Civitas repeated his role as master of ceremonies.

Bob Pruett (below right) a Marine Veteran from Carteret County, was asked to lead us in the pledge of allegiance.

Dallas Woodhouse
(below) of Americans for Prosperity - North Carolina - welcomed people to the luncheon and talked about the Rally that was going to happen later in the day.

Jim Miller (below) National President of Americans for Prosperity welcomed people to the event they were hosting and talked about a recent rally held in California.

The crowd was treated to a review of the Civitas Poll results by Francis DeLuca (below) President of Civitas Institute

Two local talk radio hosts, Curtis Wright (left below) of "The Big Talker" and Matt Mittan (below right) of "The Matt Cave" provided analysis and commentary on the poll results.

Civitas Decision Maker Poll Luncheon

The first event of a very long day was the Noon Luncheon by the Civitas Institute they call their Decision Maker Poll Luncheon. It is a monthly event that allows for state leaders to hear the results of the Civitas non-partisan poll on key events of interest to the people of our North Carolina. Courtney Johnson (below left) and Jason Bennett (below right) were there to register attendees, pass out credentials and generally make sure that everyone felt welcome and knew what was happening.

Before the luncheon got started I got a chance to chat with Chris Hayes (left below) and Francis DeLuca (right below) about the coming day's events.

Jeff Mixon (below) of Civitas was the master of ceremonies for the event.

Dallas Woodhouse (below) of Americans for Prosperity greeted everyone and talked about all the events that were coming up that day.

It was a large crowd, more than 30% above the normal crowd for these events, which is a good sign for those who believe we must get more conservatives active in the problems of our state.

Jim Miller (below), National Director of Americans for Prosperity, greeted the crowd, and talked about the event planned for later that day at the Hallifax Mall behind the Legislative Building. It is called Take Back Our State and is dedicated to the premise that we must stop the constantly increasing tax load and legislative corruption that has marked the one party Democrat rule for the last century.

Francis DeLuca
(below), President of Civitas, reviewed the results of the monthly Decision Maker Poll. (Bill Daughtridge, republican candidate for NC Treasurer is in foreground).

Bill Lumaye
(seated below left) of WPTF talk radio and Chris Hayes (seated below right) of Civitas also provided comments and analysis of the results of the poll.

The results that I found curious are consistent with the results of poll after poll taken month after month. People are not happy with the direction of the state and yet are prefectly willing to endorse the party in power for the last 100 years that is responsible for the direction being taken. They are not happy with the economy but feel Democrats are better able to handle the economy. They are not happy with taxes but feel Democrats are better to decide how much we should be taxed. They are unhappy with the corruption but are not willing to replace the corrupt Democrats with Republicans.

The reality is that polls give little guidance as to why the people continue down the electoral path they have always taken, but they seem to always take it.

Wednesday, June 25, 2008

Know Them By Their Endorsements

Editorial - June 24th, 2008 - Investor's Business Daily

Unlike Obama, whose endorsers include Oprah Winfrey, Hulk Hogan, Michael Moore and Jane Fonda, McCain got one from a different sort — the icy commissar who ran the Hanoi Hilton during the Vietnam War.

The BBC tracked down Tran Trong Duyet, a communist who held McCain and other U.S. servicemen in the notoriously inhuman conditions. There, American servicemen were starved, tortured, beaten, kept in solitary confinement and forced into communist propaganda stunts, all in violation of the Geneva Conventions.

"McCain is my friend," the former jailer told the BBC. "If I was American, I would vote for him."

Kim Jong Il, Moammar Gadhafi, Daniel Ortega and Fidel Castro, along with most of the leaders of the various components of the Islamofascist movement dedicated to our destruction, are a few of the anti-American leaders who have endorsed Barack Obama. They universally praise him in code speak for being a good marxist, not for being a man who impressed even his enemies with his character and courage.

As noted in this editorial:
John McCain is winning grudging respect by forgiving his enemies and projecting strength of character. Barack Obama, on the other hand, attracts dictators because he projects a weakness that seems to serve their interests. Based on these endorsements, who would be a better president?

Do Obama's supporters here, the one's who get to vote, not pay any attention to the implications of the open and enthusiastic support for their candidate of those around the world who hate us?

Tuesday, June 24, 2008

Hydrogen Cars And Hot Air

by Joseph Romm - June 23rd, 2008 - The Guardian (London)

Would you buy a car that costs 10 times as much as a hybrid gasoline-electric one, like the Toyota Prius? What if I told you it had half the range of the hybrid? What if I told you most cities didn't have a single hydrogen fuelling station? Not interested yet? This should be the deal closer: what if I told you it wouldn't have lower greenhouse-gas emissions than the hybrid?

You don't think that the entire man is causing global warming religion is based on pure illusion? Biofuels and hydrogen are perfect examples of the hype.

Biofuels were based on a calculation that "assumed" there would be no cost in carbon footprint to grow the feedstock of the manufacturing process. However that ignored the reality that world food production was already increasing and that the prime target for new crop lands were rain forests. Take a huge chunk of the world's food production and divert it in to biofuels, and immediately, large swaths of our remaining rain forests were diverted into land to produce food to make up for the biofuel diversion.

Unintended consequences of this miscalculation? Starvation in some countries. An immediate CO2 surge for cutting down the rain forest and burning the residue. An ongoing reduction in CO2 consumption for the rain forest acres no longer covered by trees. A minor advantage in carbon footprint for the biofuels, so minor that it would take 100 years to show a positive result for the earth. However the immediate effect is a huge increase in CO2 in the short run. This is environmentally responsible?

So here we go again as the environmental religion starts its new propaganda war. Having fomented a stupid and disastrous biofuel idiocy on the world, environmentalists have found a new program that once again is meaningless posturing. Hydrogen cars have no advantage in carbon footprint and cost a fortune. As this article notes, they may never get down to $100,000 per car. Yet governments and politicians are touting them as the answer based on nothing but delusions about how great they will be for the economy. This new enthusiasm is primarily based on not being held accountable for their last disaster . . . biofuels. Sound like bait and switch?

How many times do these environmentalists get to prove they don't have a clue how to solve a problem they don't even understand before we stop listening to their lies and hype?

For Obama, Chicago Days Honed Tactics

By Jonathan Kaufman - April 21st, 2008 - Wall Street Journal

In his first run for public office in 1996, Barack Obama faced an unexpected obstacle. A liberal black incumbent had encouraged him to run for the Illinois state senate seat she intended to vacate. Then she changed her mind, deciding to run again.

Mr. Obama hired a fellow Harvard Law School graduate, challenged the validity of signatures on her nominating petitions, and got her thrown off the ballot. He eventually ran unopposed, launching the career that has made him the front-runner for the Democratic nomination for president.

Barack Obama is not a man you can trust.

He is a Marxist who insists he is a moderate. He is pro Abortion with a 100% voting record in favor of abortion on demand but claims that making vague statements about wanting to see abortions reduced makes up for this voting record. He has aligned himself with Alinsky and Ayers but insists he must not be found guilty by association, even though he sees nothing wrong with their anti-American positions. Their hatred for America "saddens" Obama, but you can't hold him responsible for the fact they support him. In fact you can't hold him responsible for the fact that every Marxist you can find is passionately supporting the Obama candidacy. He is in favor of a "united" Jerusalem but not so united that Arabs can't rule half of it.

It is getting so you can't find a single issue that Barack Obama has not straddled and taken every side on "verbally". The problem is that he has a voting record that denies almost every moderate statement he has ever made. Couple that with the reality, Obama spent the first 18 years of his life outside the continental United States, much of it in Indonesia. He then went to Harvard, not known as a bastion of middle class American values. Finally he became a politician in the most corrupt political environment in America, Chicago. How any American middle class worker or small businessman can think he shares any of our values is simply amazing.

As I said at the beginning. He is a Marxist. America better wake up to that or we are going to find ourselves with a President committed to destroying or way of life.

Ice Core Reveals How Quickly Climate Can Change

by David Biello - JUne 23rd, 2008 - Scientific American

Roughly 14,700 years ago the weather patterns that bring snow to Greenland shifted from one year to the next—a pattern of abrupt change that was repeated 12,900 years ago and 11,700 years ago when the earth’s climate became the one enjoyed today—according to records preserved in an ice core taken from the northern island. These speedy changes—transitions from warming to cooling and back again—in the absence of changes in greenhouse gas could presage abrupt, catastrophic climate change in our future.


Sediment cores from the ocean show that forests of spruce and even fern grew on Greenland just 125,000 years ago.

However the fact that all of these abrupt changes, totally unaffected by "fossil fuel" use (in quotes because petroleum does not come from fossils . . . most politicians and reporters still use the term because they don't understand the issue) and inconsistent with CO2 gas levels, has not changed the mind of the global warming is caused by man brigade.

Oh no. This does not prove that we need to prepare for climate change by having cheap fuels like petroleum, coal and nuclear. It means we must work even harder to assure that we can control climate change that we are completely in the dark about but ONLY in a politically correct manner. Massive change could be coming so lets do something not likely to help even if we don't have a clue what to do and whether it will help.

Monday, June 23, 2008

Planned Parenthood:
A Wolf In Sheep’s Clothing?

by Bishop Harry R. Jackson - June 23rd, 2008 -

Because of the group’s gross disregard for the law and the dignity of its youngest clients, I believe that Planned Parenthood should be de-funded by the Federal government.

This billion dollar a year federation presents the pristine appearance of an empowering, civil rights organization. As I have already stated, looks can be very deceiving.

That number is correct. Planned Parenthood is a billion dollar per year organization. What is even worse, 336 million dollars is taxpayer funded support for this organization which is continuing its duplicitous plans to eliminate blacks from the earth. The founder espoused black genocide when she was alive and the practice of the organization clearly indicates it still practices black genocide with its efforts. Their clinics are placed into black communities in hugely disproportionate numbers.

This effort by Bishop Jackson is totally justified. Tax payer funding of Planned Parenthood must be ended.

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

The Problem With Obama's Father's Day Speech

by Bruce Walker - June 18th, 2008 - The American Thinker

When young women have casual, indiscriminate sexual relations with a number of young men -- in many cases not even knowing these men beyond their first names -- then the catastrophe which follows is at least as much the fault of the mother as of the father. If young women stopped having sex before marriage, then the problem of fatherless children would vanish.

It is much easier, however, to pummel young men, than for Obama to lay blame for fatherless children where it also belongs: on the reckless actions of those mothers who count upon taxpayers to step in the place of fathers.

The politically correct Obama would not dare make this point in his speech. In the liberal lexicon of today women are never to be criticized. Only men are acceptable targets for criticism. When our society abandons its current hatred for men, then and only then will we have a reasonable chance to address some of the problems of family, love and equal opportunity for our next generation.

First Americans, First Ecologists?

by Michael Medved - June 18th, 2008 -

The cherished notion of Indians as ecologically enlightened protectors of the natural order actually carries no more authenticity than Chief Seattle’s ruminations on rotting buffalo [a fraud] or the purportedly Cherokee identity of the Sicilian-American “Iron Eyes Cody.”


The truth is that native peoples, like all other aboriginal societies on the planet, did anything and everything to their surroundings that might help them to survive. "There is now a very considerable body of research," Robert Whelan writes, "which demonstrates conclusively that the Indians made a massive impact on their environment before the arrival of the white man, and that much of this impact was damaging and showed no conception of a conservation ethic."

This truth will not be popular with our liberal teachers or anyone in the "hate America first" socialist brigade. Stewart Udall may have popularized this politically correct attitude, "First Americans, First Ecologists", but it is no more true than many other lies promoted by liberals and socialists.

The American people are once again under assault by the legions of greed, i.e. socialists, who use lies to promote their claim that redistribution of wealth is fair and reasonable. Environmentalism is the new excuse to create a socialist utopia. It will fail and become a tyranny of bureaucrats just like all other socialist states have become. That does not stop the people who want to dream about utopia though. Dreaming about utopia is just so much more satisfying than living in the real world.

Airport Tyranny

by Walter E. Williams - June 18th, 2008 -

. . . people can be arrested if they act in a way that "might distract or inhibit a [TSA] screener from effectively performing his or her duties … A screener encountering such a situation must turn away from his or her normal duties to deal with the disruptive individual, which may affect the screening of other individuals." That means it is a federal offense, and a fine of up to $1,500, for any alleged "nonphysical interference" that makes a TSA screener "turn away" from whatever he was doing.

What's nonphysical interference is solely up to the discretion of a TSA screener since it isn't defined in the regulations. TSA agents can levy fines for a passenger disagreeing with the behavior or arrogance of a screener. The TSA has made little effort to control screener behavior. Bovard reports that in March 2004, airline passengers filed almost 3,000 formal complaints with the federal government over the conduct of TSA screeners. Hundreds have complained about the rudeness of TSA screeners. And yet, none of these passenger complaints resulted in disciplinary measures.


Do you want to know what socialism is? It is a nation where people have become such sheep that this useless and abusive agency is tolerated. The idea that safety officials CAN'T profile and thus must treat everyone like a criminal, is just dandy for building a huge union protected bureaucracy that can criminalize citizen's behavior just for despising the tyrannical scum who work in the agency.

That is what we have today. The TSA has accomplished some good things. The question is whether the costs are worth it. Training Americans to be sheep, tolerant of bureaucratic abuse, seems to have been the major accomplishment. I wonder whether long term the "safety" they have provided will not prove to have simply replaced the tyranny of Islamo-fascism with the tyranny of socialism. The bureaucrats have certainly made a significant start in suppressing our freedom.

Tuesday, June 17, 2008

Conservatives Must Act

by James Lewis - June 17th, 2008 - The American Thinker

"These are the times that try men's souls," wrote Thomas Paine on December 23, 1776.


If you like John McCain, help him win just as hard as you can. If you don't like him, don't jump off a cliff. What about all the other . . . true conservatives who are running? They need money, volunteers, and constant pressure on the media to give them a fair shake.

This is a rational assessment of the need for conservatives (and libertarian-conservatives) to stop whining and get back in the battle. We must not do counter productive things like continuing to rail at George Bush for betraying us. We need to do productive things, like the recommendations in this article. Get in the fight and find a candidate at some level who will make things better. That is how we give back to our society usefully.

Freedom And Natural Rights

We are at a crossroads in the majestic history of our great nation. At a time when all countries were ruled by Kings, America was formed by a group of freedom loving intellectuals who were the most successful individuals in a land that was raw and rough. Life was not easy, but for those who loved freedom, America was an amazing place.

Our first President, George Washington, was the man who presided over the Constitutional convention that gave us a most intriguing document. The Constitution was designed to assure that government was limited and restricted so that Americans were free to pursue their happiness with as much vigor as they had, free of interference. This did not make life in America easy. It made it free. When some wanted to make Washington King, he rejected that. His example of valuing freedom more than power affected the way our nation was governed for more that 100 years.

Over the last two and one half centuries, various people have struggled to erode the "natural" rights on which our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution are based. These natural rights come from the belief that there is a God and he granted us free will. From this God-granted free will flows the right to freedom and the right to pursue happiness that our founders threaded into our culture. This view of free will is shared by believers in the God of the Jews and those who believe in the son of that God. The interesting thing is that these believers in free will did not set up a nation with a religion based on their own beliefs, but granted the free will that comes from natural law to all in our nation, assuring us of religious freedom as well. They granted free will to all, believers or non believers. This took great courage, to assure that those with whom they did not agree had the same freedom as those who agreed. This is an important element in the foundation of our nation that we must not lose.

The last hundred years we have been losing the battle for freedom. There are two related forces that have opposed our form of government from its inception, those who deny God and those who seek government power over our lives. They appeal to the greed of those who fail under freedom and those who wish to compel you to accept certain duties subservient to government for reasons of power. In recent years these two forces are on the ascendancy.

Power and greed are the enemies of freedom and the enemies of the God granted free will on which our nation is based. It is that struggle which we must address right now because we are at war with three powerful movements dedicated to the destruction of our freedom.

For reasons of communication we need to label those forces who are seeking power and encouraging greed in opposition to American freedom and free will. At a broad level, they are global socialists, Islamo-fascists and Aztlantists, each actively seeking our destruction. Co-mingled among them are those who simply seek a better life for themselves and their descendants. These individuals give cover to the organized movements and allow the movements to denounce anyone in America who opposes them. These complex sets of forces are overwhelming America's defenses since each has its adherence among our own citizens who enable them and subvert our freedoms. Their motivations are based on visions of greater power for themselves and their individual wealth, gained by changing our nation from a nation that assures freedom to a nation that picks winners and losers. They want to be elected the winners.

All of these enemies seek a nation, not of freedom, but of government power. It is God who grants us free will. Those of us who believe in natural law and God granted free will must stand up and resist, or we will shortly be subservient to government power in all things of importance.

Do you believe in freedom and free will? Are you willing to fight for your freedom? Are you willing to accept that with freedom comes hard work? Freedom is slipping away. The time to act is now.

One force that has always fought for freedom is called conservatism. However there are many who are concerned with the conservative movement. Two recent articles that discuss the belief that conservatism is weakening include The long goodbye: conservatism's perpetual decline and Conservatives, fear not. Both address the concerns I have but focused solely on the issues of this political movement.

I see the problem from a broader perspective since conservatism is only indirectly about freedom and free will. Conservatism has been taken over by populists like Newt Gingrich, John McCain and George Bush and remolded to their perspectives. Many of these populist goals conflict with free will. It has allowed them to advocate positions that would never be endorsed by those who believe government must only protect us from others and that government must be limited. Government must not dominate our lives and protect us from ourselves and our own weakness. A government powerful enough to tell us we must have a particular drug program must first be powerful enough to take our money to fund the program. This removes the free will of individuals to decide for themselves how much effort they wish to expend in this regard.

The problem with this view is that the American people do not seem willing to focus on freedom as the most important aspect of government any longer. There is a clear preference in the current mood of our populace for redistribution of wealth as long as that redistribution is from others to them. It is couched in the logic of help for the needy. It is justification for government programs that take from our neighbors and ease the existence of those who are not willing to pay for programs that they want but which have a lower priority in their personal budget. Thus you have people who will not themselves pay for health insurance arguing that they should have free health care paid for by the state . . . i.e. anyone but them.

Conservatism, or at least a major element of the people who call themselves conservative, has thus broken with its roots and become a force for evil rather than a force defending God granted free will. Neither party seems concerned with liberty and freedom. They are even fighting over the idea of whether our enemies are truly our enemies or whether we must focus on internal fights between each other. Freedom comes from the free will of each of God's children accepting the costs that come with that freedom. It also means we must allow others to have free will in their own lives if we are going to demand our own free will.

George Washington understood that. Americans have strayed from that belief. We must go back to a love of freedom for others if we want our own freedom respected. Is that possible any longer?

Sunday, June 15, 2008

American Marxists Back Obama

Judge James Burge's wall is covered by Fidel Castro, Che Guevara and Barack Obama posters.

This same Marxist judge (who admires Guevara, one of the most ruthless and evil butchers who ever lived) recently ruled the death penalty statute "cruel and unusual". Typical of thinking by Marxists who support Barack Obama.

The press constantly claims that noting the relationship between supporters of Guevara and Obama is not fair, yet a huge number of Marxists are Obama supporters. It is also true that more than one
Obama headquarters is decorated with Guevara posters.

How likely is it that the obsessive love for Barack Obama by Marxists is not an indication of Obama's true beliefs?

The Tragedy Of America's Disappearing Fathers

By Juan Williams - June 14th, 2008 - The Wall Street Journal

As we celebrate Father's Day tomorrow, we should reflect upon a sad fact: It is now common to meet young people in our big city schools, foster-care homes and juvenile centers who do not know their dads. Most of those children have come face-to-face with their father at some point; but most have little regular contact with the man, or have any faith that he loves or cares about them.

I am not alone in observing that being a man is under attack. It comes under a great range of subterfuges with one common goal. Denigrate our cultural history and the belief that courage, sacrifice, integrity and honor are attributes of the leaders of a great society. There have always been dead beat fathers. Today, our laws assume that all fathers are dead beats.

On cable all the heroes are now women. Feminism has successfully created the image that men are all stupid and mysoginist. With the expectation that all men are evil, women no longer love anyone but the bad guy. Decent men, honorable men, are considered a joke. Where is the John Wayne of the current generation? Today Evan Gahr describes our heroes as "angst-ridden and self-absorbed" comic book illusions. Such men are never going to be admired by their kids, or the women who don't marry them.

Women constantly criticize the man who leaves them with a child and will not support them. However these same women will not date a "nice guy". Only the "bad boy" who treats them as sexual objects ever gets their attention.

Tupac Shakur and Michael Vick are typical of today's male heroes to women, even as they are condemned. Being a real man is impossible in such a world. Who can men look up to? Who can boys look up to?

Our culture is imploding with each passing decade . . . and few seem to care.

Saturday, June 14, 2008

America's Other Minority?

by Jerome E. Dobson - June 14th, 2008 - The Washington Times

. . . in this supposedly enlightened age, there is one minority that still can be routinely portrayed on TV as dim-witted and cruel...slandered with the foulest of stereotypes...called by ethnic epithets...reviled by people who do not regard themselves as prejudiced and who are not regarded by others as being that is clearly disadvantaged but receives no minority benefits and exempt somehow from America´s passion for diversity.

The answer, of course, is rural people (hicks, bumpkins, yokels) and among them Southern whites (rednecks, bubbas, crackers, white trash). . .

The article goes on to explain that among this group there is the highest identification with being American along with pride in America. There is little pride in America by any of the hyphenated-American groups who mostly criticize America and popularize this prejudice. So the most reviled minority in America is Americans. Is that bizarre?

Friday, June 13, 2008

Are Americans Pro-Slavery?

by Walter E. Williams - June 11th, 2008 -

During slavery, visitors to the South often observed "a great many loose negroes about." Officials in Savannah, Mobile and Charleston and other cities complained about "nominal slaves," "virtually free negroes," and "quasi free negroes" who were seemingly oblivious to any law or regulation. Frederick Douglass, a slave, explained this phenomenon when he was employed as a Baltimore ship's caulker: "I was to be allowed all my time; to make bargains for work; to find my own employment, and to collect my own wages; and in return for this liberty, I was … to pay him (Douglass' master) three dollars at the end of each week, and to board and clothe myself, and buy my own caulking tools."

I frequently have people object to my use of the term slavery to describe the socialism advocated by Democrats. This article is a great explanation of why my view of the term is correct. Socialism is slavery. My thanks to Mr. Williams for his great article explaining the validity of that view.

Gay Rights vs. Religious Liberty

Media Ignore Impending Collision

by Brian Fitzpatrick - June 10th, 2008 -

The homosexual rights movement is not really an effort to win civil rights for a supposedly oppressed minority. It’s a war against Western civilization’s Judeo-Christian moral order, joined now by many non-homosexuals who support rewriting society’s moral code. The goals are to win social acceptance of alternative sexual “lifestyles,” especially homosexuality, and to make room for a revolutionary new sexual code that glorifies self-indulgence and embraces promiscuity.

Hedonism and homosexuality cannot be legitimized without displacing the Bible’s restrictions on sex and God’s design for the family. The revolutionaries are going about it the obvious way, in our litigious society—through the courts. By redefining traditional sexual morality as bigotry, the sexual revolutionaries are using the law to assail the rights of speech, association and religion of anyone who disagrees with them.

It is sad that this war was started by those who wanted to criminalize sin on behalf of religion. This new effort is a backlash to that effort. However it is just as wrong to turn it around and criminalize society's view of morality as to criminalize sin. What is the old playground saying? Something like two wrongs do not make it right?

This war is being waged in democracies all over the world as liberal groups support one of their favored minorities through use of the courts to take away the rights of society in defense of these constituencies. Religion is losing this battle. When freedom of religion and freedom of speech no longer exist, political domination will not be far behind.

Thursday, June 12, 2008

Warming Up To Obama's Message Of Hope And Change

by Larry Elder - June 12th, 2008 -

Obama rejects the Bush my-way-or-the-highway "cowboy" foreign policy. Obama repeatedly said he wishes to meet with enemy/thug leaders without preconditions. But wait!

He now says only if he decides to meet in the first place. And if he decides -- to which he may not -- he'll do so without preconditions. And if he decides not to, his decision will have been made without preconditions, unless, of course, he decides to meet after all -- but only without preconditions. And if he decides not to meet, he'll make that decision without any preconditions, just as he would make the decision to meet without the precondition of no preconditions. But if he decides to meet, without preconditions, he'll do so solely when, where and if he decides to -- without preconditions.

That's change.

I have a friend who knows Larry Elder, so I got a chance to meet him a couple of times while I lived in Los Angeles. What I liked about him was his cheery optimistic outlook on life. He is also a funny guy.

This article had me grinning. It reminded me of what a great guy he is. Wish I could have gotten to know him. Great article and worth the read.

Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Who Is Obama? Where Is The Press?

by Tony Blankley - June 11th, 2008 -

A much more recent example of the media not even going through the motions of being responsible is their almost complete avoidance of a recent statement Obama made:

"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK. That's not leadership. That's not going to happen." Is there absolutely no curiosity at The Washington Post, The Associated Press or even The New York Times about the assertion by the man who is considered likely to be president of the United States come noon Jan. 20, 2009, that letting Americans eat as much as they want is "not going to happen"? Doesn't that shockingly dictatorial assertion deserve comment and inquiry? Yes, it is true that Obama was saying explicitly that what wasn't going to happen was "other countries (saying) OK" to Americans eating as much as we want. But a fair reading of the whole passage suggests that Obama agrees with those other countries.

You know, a thought has started to form in my mind. It was only about 150 years ago that two attitudes about a single idea led to civil war. The issue then was slavery and there were people in favor of slavery (for others of course, not themselves) and people opposed, abolitionists. However there seems to be little concern on the part of many on the left that most people who love freedom consider socialism to be a form of slavery not significantly less evil than the form we ended back then with the emancipation proclamation. If we do slide into the slavery called socialism, what chance is there we will not see another civil war, with once again the Democrats being on the side of slavery and Republicans as usual, dying to end slavery?

Voters Say ‘Drill’

by Larry Kudlow - June 10th, 2008 - National Review (Online)

Recent polling data from Gallup show the percentage of voters blaming oil companies for skyrocketing gasoline prices has dropped from 34 percent to 20 percent over the past year. At the same time, support for more drilling in U.S. coastal and wilderness areas has increased to 57 percent from 41 percent.

And the candidates remain blind to these shifts.

Obama continues to lambaste oil companies while congressional Democrats push for cap-and-trade. They’re missing the point, big time. The public wants more energy and more fuel to cut high prices and spur economic growth. But the costly cap-and-trade plan would produce less fuel and less growth. It would only raise gas pump prices while mounting a Gosplan-type taxing, spending, and regulating program that would be the moral equivalent of Hillarycare on nationalized medicine.

Sen. McCain has an opening here. Yet he, like Obama, would have voted for cap-and-trade, which went down to defeat in last week’s Senate vote. And while Mr. McCain favors some off-shore production and has been strong on nuclear development, he is against drilling in ANWR Alaska.

Then there’s the oil nobody is talking about. The Bakken fields beneath North Dakota, Montana, and Canada hold an estimated 400 billion barrels of oil. In comparison, Saudi Arabia’s biggest field, Gahawar, has an estimated 55 billion barrels, while ANWR has an estimated 10.4 billion barrels.

This is interesting. The long term issues that are facing America are the economic devastation that cap and trade will impose on our nation and the impact to our future if the middle east is controlled by the Islamo-fascists. The American people have figured out the right answer . . .DRILL NOW. Neither of the candidates for President are supportive of what the American people want.

This article asks the right question. Considering how much more malleable Obama is than McCain, will he adjust his campaign rhetoric first and steal this issue from the slow witted and inflexible McCain?

Mr. Right?

by Bruce Bartlett - June 11th, 2008 - The New Republic

A broad swath of the [conservative] movement has been in open revolt against George W. Bush -- and the Republican Party establishment -- for some time. They don't much care for the Iraq war or the federal government's vast expansion over the last seven-and-a-half years. And, in the eyes of these discontents, the nomination of John McCain only confirmed the continuation of the worst of the Bush-era deviations from first principles.


In nearly every quarter of the movement, you can find conservatives irate over the Iraq war--a war they believe transgresses core principles. And it's this frustration with the war--and McCain's pronouncements about victory at any cost--that has led many conservatives into Obama's arms. Francis Fukuyama, the neoconservative theorist, recently told an Australian journalist that he would reluctantly vote for Obama to hold the Republican Party accountable "for a big policy failure" in Iraq.

I see Obama as Marxist and anti-free enterprise, totally committed to redistribution of wealth, elitist and surrounded by radicals whose anti-America extremism will dominate his administration.

I am appalled that there are people who profess to be libertarians or conservatives who think the rhetorical flourishes of his speeches will make up for the core convictions of his most ardent followers. The very fact that people who profess to believe in libertarian commitment to individual liberty can embrace Obama, is proof to me that our nation has lost its collective will to remain free.

The Next Great Conservative Movement

by Maggie Gallagher - June 11th, 2008 -

How low can the GOP brand go? What will the next great conservative movement look like?

Former House Republican leader Tom Delay told the editors of The Washington Times a hard truth: "The conservatives refuse to accept that the left is cleaning their clock, and until you hit some bottom, whatever that is, to where it says, 'Well, maybe we ought to do something different,' little or nothing's going to change."

There are several great implied questions in this article. First, what is the difference between what it means to be conservative versus Republican? Second, what is the role of Judeo-Christian values in a nation that promises freedom of religion? Next, how does a nation retain individual freedom when unions control our government? Next, how can free enterprise compete with government funded liberalism which pours money into the anti-free enterprise party? Finally, how can a society survive when it allows teachers to subvert its basic principals?

These questions about individual freedom and our future are not trivial, and yet each of nearly a half dozen political groups in the GOP are arguing about a dozen other issues of minor importance, while the issue of individual freedom remains secondary.

I am astonished that our party remains so complacent. However a great example of our diversion into trivia happened at the North Carolina Republican Convention. Kim Cotten, Chairman of the North Carolina Young Republicans tried to make a point that we need to fund our candidates and our party if we wish to be successful. The reaction of the party leadership, and the reaction of one of the posters on my blog yesterday, was not to the goals of what she was trying to accomplish. A minor process of who to send one of the two checks was attacked.

Anyone but an idiot who understood the technical issues could have easily suggested the simple change to fix Kim's proposal. However attacking her for the mis-statement of process became vastly more important to these people than addressing the reality that Republicans have stopped contributing funds to fight for our future in a meaningful way.

Are we raving lunatics?

Several articles and editorials this morning are starting to focus on the reality that Barack Obama is probably going to be our next President. That is of great concern to anyone who cares about individual freedom. Yet another poster on my blog from yesterday was talking about Ron Paul's right to create a furor at the national Republican Convention over the idea that the IRS is not legal. Forget the reality that absolutely no chance exists to change this. It is an internal issue of our nation about the structure of taxation leading to an internal issue of our party about how to select delegates. At the same time we have external wars that require our attention that are fundamental to our existence in the world. We are at war with Islamo-fascism, global socialism and Aztlantism. Could anyone really think the internal issues should be the focus of our discussions at this point in time?

We are never going to change the direction of this nation with the Republican Party fighting over anything but the issues directly related to individual freedom. Unfortunately I do not see that happening yet. I am concerned that it will not happen in time.

We are underfunded and Republicans do not care. In such an environment, disaster in November looms at every level of our ticket.

Tuesday, June 10, 2008

LBJ’s List And The Conservative Challenge

by Jeffrey Lord - June 10th, 2008 - The American Spectator

"Because if we are willing to work for it, and fight for it, and believe in it, then I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal..."

Excuse me? You mean all those LBJ Great Society programs didn't provide care for the sick, secure good jobs for the jobless and take care of the environment? On the off-chance the Internet has a space limitation, let's settle for a partial listing of LBJ's efforts for the sick, the jobless, the environment and more as reflected in the list of legislation he proudly compiled and boasted of in his presidential memoir . . .

"Change you can believe in." That is Barack Obama's constant mantra. Yet the "Change you can believe in" is nothing more than Barack Obama's inability to recognize his Marxist program has already been tried and failed. It has been tried in the Soviet Union and failed abysmally. It has been tried in all of Eastern Europe and these nations threw it off and adopted free enterprise when they finally got the chance. It has been tried in Cuba and North Korea and is rapidly being dismantled in China because it FAILS wherever it has been tried. And between Johnston and Carter, it has even been tried here in America with trillions of dollars poured into programs that have not alleviated the problems. Indeed it has made them worse.

Though Reagan reduced the socialist disaster, many of these programs are still devastating people here in America. As noted in this article:
The reason that Democrats complain of poverty, bad schools and lousy jobs is that -- in places where liberalism rules -- this is exactly what one does find. Take a trip to Detroit and check in on the public school system. Hop on down to New Orleans and see what was going on there before -- not after -- Katrina hit. The failure of LBJ-style liberalism is writ large, for all the world to see. And the answer of Senator Obama is -- more! More! More! MORE!

Obama did not grow up in America. Obama is so out of touch with our nation that he can make statements like the one he made last May, "In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died — an entire town destroyed.” The actual death toll: 12. This statement is indicative of his total ignorance of our nation. That Obama can think that 10,000 people died and it would not have dominated the news proves how utterly out of touch he truly is with who we are. His excuse? He misread a report. However what this really proves is how unfit to serve as President he truly is. 3,000 people died on 9/11 and it was overwhelmingly in the news. How could Obama not realize that the press reaction to the Kansas story guaranteed no real American would have believed 10,000 people died. It just would not play for anyone who is truly American. Obama did not have a clue.

Why? Because Barack Obama is not really American. He is a global socialist who has been backed by two huge anti-American forces, other global socialists like him among our rich elitists, and bitter African Americans who are disappointed in the failure of the welfare state that their leaders have totally adopted and sold to them. The welfare state policies of victimization have devastated their community. Planned parenthood has nearly reached its goal of black genocide by driving abortion rates in the black community to unheard of levels. Sanger set that as her goal. Democrats have backed it. And blacks still make common cause with this group which is quietly continuing a practice aimed at eliminating them from the earth.

Does that make sense?

I don't think it makes any more sense than the idiocy of Barack Obama trying to claim that he is going to START welfare programs that have been tried for 40 years and which have FAILED despite trillions of dollars. He calls this change you can believe in. It actually constitutes, as Tomas Sowell has noted, "cocky ignorance" on a monumental scale.

Sunday, June 08, 2008

Republican Convention Showcases Great Leaders

The North Carolina Republican Convention showcased both of the interesting stories about the party at this time. Due to the Rove-Bush-Hastert years there is uncertainty about what it means to be a Republican. Rove-Bush-Hastert fostered an attitude that we can support pork and socialist programs and still be conservatives. A great amount of time is being spent trying to get back some degree of party unity among those who rejected this premise and those who accepted it.

At the same time, our party still has some of the really great leaders of our nation who are dedicated to forging a great future based on freedom and opposition to failed liberal policies. The other party is advocating socialism as "change you can believe it"? Since when is that something new?

I believe this uncertainty of who we are as a party is the reason attendance to this year's convention was lighter than normal. However the enthusiasm and excitement among those who came was driven by the clear leadership qualities of the candidates who have been selected to represent our North Carolina party this year. They were there to spread the word and lead us back.

The Master of Ceremonies for the 2008 convention was the excellent Bill Miller (shown below). Bill is a great MC, funny, quick and totally in command. Bill definitely counts as one of those great leaders we have in abundance.

A highlight of the convention was the arrival of Senator Fred Smith (shown in center below), one of our recent gubernatorial candidates. Though he did not secure the support of the greatest number of voters during the primary, among party regulars (like the people who were at the convention) Fred was the overwhelming choice. He is greatly loved and people flocked to him as he walked through the convention hall.

The Saturday sessions of the convention made the excellence and character of our candidates unalterably clear as one after another, the great leaders who are running for the North Carolina Council of State positions were introduced to the crowd . . . and they explained their plans for the future.

These leaders include our incumbents, Steve Troxler - Agriculture Commissioner, Cherie Berry - Labor Commissioner, and Les Merrit - Auditor (who was represented in the afternoon by his wife as he had a prior commitment and had to leave). It also includes newly chosen candidates; Senator Robert Pittenger for Lt Governor, Bill Daughtridge for State Treasurer, Bob Crumley for Attorney General, Jack Sawyer for Secretary of State, and John Odom for Commissioner of Insurance. These are impressive people and their speeches indicated their serious respect for the offices and the importance to our future it represents.

The culmination of these great speeches was when our impressive Senator Richard Burr (shown above) introduced presentations by both our incumbent Senator Elizabeth Dole, and our Gubernatorial candidate, Mayor Pat McCrory. These two are the headliners in our campaign for North Carolina's government of the future.

Senator Dole (shown above) as usual gave a professional and inspired presentation. The reason she won decisively in her last campaign was clear.

She is a hard act to follow, but Mayor Pat McCrory was the hit of the convention with his rousing and emotional appeal for a commitment to the future of our nation and the future of our party. He hit all the right notes with the issues he addressed and had people repeatedly standing up to cheer.

The most surprising aspect of his speech was the enthusiasm he displayed. He was on fire! I haven't seen a Republican with this much fire in quite a while.

Immediately after his speech (during which Pat asked Fred Smith to stand up and be recognized) Chairman Linda Davies invited Senator Fred Smith up to the podium to really be recognized. It appeared to be spontaneous and the idea of Mayor McCrory. Whoever had the idea, it was well received.

Fred talked about his total commitment to help Pat win in November, and even joked about his loss to Pat. Fred said that Pat had taught him one lesson in the primary. That lesson? There were a lot of people who lived in Mecklenberg County (and they all voted for Pat!). The crowd roared.

Along with the usual litany of votes on electors and various other issues related to this Presidential campaign year, the election of our two National Republican Committee Members (who serve along with our Party Chairman at the national level) probably generated the most excitement.

The grassroot favorites who won the two contested elections for National Committee (one defeated the party leadership nominated candidate and the other defeated the Ron Paul contingent's candidate) were
Dr. Ada Fisher (shown above on left) and Representative David Lewis (shown above on right).

For me, one of the ironies of the convention was when the Chairman of the Young Republicans, Kim Cotten (shown above), rose to ask the convention to do something about lagging Republican contributions. Kim offered her checks to both the party and our candidate for Governor Pat McCrory. Incredibly her motion to ask convention attendees to match her was ruled out of order. How can it be out of order to ask party members to fund our party and its candidates? I don't think I was alone in appreciating what Kim tried to do. Thanks Kim. Good job.

My question to the party? When are you going to address the reality that Republicans are being out spent by Democrats by nearly 4 to 1? As the convention proved, we have a great slate of candidates. We do not currently have a great party backing them.