McCrory and Daughtridge Hold Waterfront Party On Harkers Island

Come Enjoy a Waterfront Party This Saturday, August 2, 2008 with . . .

Mayor Pat McCrory
Candidate for Governor of North Carolina



and

Representative Bill Daughtridge
Candidate for North Carolina Treasurer




Hosted by the
Maxwell Family

Great Music by
Steve Hardy‛s “Original” Beach Party

Fantastic Food by
White Swan BBQ

Saturday, August 2, 2008
6 -8 p.m.
at Harkers Point

Beach and Boating Attire

Boat Dockage Available

Contact information:
events@billdaughtridge.com
(919) 612-0865

The '60s Won't Go Away

by Victor Davis Hanson - July 28th, 2008 - FrontPage Magazine

Barack Obama, a child during the '60s, is imbued nonetheless with that decade's "hope and change" messianic sermonizing. Now he wants a new mammoth government-funded "civilian national security force," one "that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded" as the Pentagon.

What does Obama think the Secret Service, FBI, ATF, DEA, Military Reserves, National Guards, Hiway Patrols, Sheriffs and Police are? They are our domestic security force and it is a good thing that they report to different levels of power. It is good they are not consolidated. Obama wants a Presidential controlled force for what purpose? To declare a national emergency and take over our nation? All you have to do is see how willing to be a fascist power these types of troops are by remembering Elián González and the willingness of these goons to carry out Janet Reno's orders. Control of domestice polic power is after all the basic theory behind Marxism, the political philosophy that he clearly embraces. Does he think that Americans don't read?

It is also obvious that such a force could not be used to fight battles overseas. Therefore he disdains the whole concept of war being "fought over there so it does not have to be fought over here." It is clear he is totally ready to fight the battles with Islamo-fascism in the streets of America. For what purpose I cannot imagine. Oh yeah. One comes to mind. To make total surrender easier.

Deconstructing Obama

by Kyle-Anne Shiver - July 28th, 2008 - The American Thinker

The academics' pet theory of the past 30 years has touched numerous facets of our society. These thorny deconstructionists have managed to convince many an American college student to sacrifice his God-given common sense and Judeo/Christian values on the altar of presumed white male privilege, from which these students are admonished they now must actively disengage. After all, say the deconstructionists and their postmodernist, post-colonialist allies, every single good in Western civilization has been irrevocably tainted by the despicable, ill-gotten-gain methods of those nasty, imperialist, white, male, chauvinist-pig founders, warriors, inventors, builders, landowners, writers, jurists et al. How dare we, as modern day white Westerners, reap the ill-gotten benefits of such a despicable, greedy, imperialistic lot.

I have attempted to understand the complex arguments of the liberal deconstuctionists on several occasions over the last 20 years. In every case I have ultimately given up trying to understand their arguments since I cannot get them to adhere to logical thought. I am impressed with Ms. Shriver's apparent fluency with their proclaimed logic and her careful dismantling of its tenets. However I had to read the article three times and do some research on her points before I felt comfortable with my understanding and agreement with her premise.

It reminds me of my criticism of many in the Democrat Party here in Eastern North Carolina when I returned a few years back. They simply ignore the discussion about the claimed differences between liberal, socialist, marxist, progressive and communist. The subtle arguments on the differences, brought up by liberal (or whatever they call themselves at any point) leaders, are almost impossible to follow. Like the illogical arguments of deconstructionists, they do not adhere to any rules of logic. When I complain to Democrat Party followers in this area they are backing candidates that oppose everything the person claims to believe, they simply get mad. At some point they accepted that Republicans are evil and Democrats are moral. After that they tune out any other discussion and anger is the reaction to any attempt to have them revisit their decision.

That is where we are with many in the populace today. It is impossible to have an intellectual discussion of the issues. Decisions on any candidate are based on superficial issues. When I call someone a Marxist, it appears they simply tune out anything that follows. I don't see how we can ignore the appropriate use of labels and yet most in the populace have no clue what the labels mean. And no willingness to even try. How else can you explain the fact that nearly 20% of the people in North Carolina who are objectively described as conservatives vote consistently for local and state officials who are by any measure aggressively opposed to the conservative values of the very people voting for them.

I cannot give up. I believe it is important to continue to have the intellectual discussion even when so many reject the attempt. We will have to win them over one at a time. However when I read articles like Ms. Shivers I am reminded how hard this can be. I suspect that many times what I write is as hard to follow for others as her article was for me. I finally got her point, but I almost gave up. This is going to be a really long hard battle. I just hope that one by one we can occasionally win the battle and change some minds. Not just winning a liberal-marxist over to conservatism. But winning a conservative over from Democrat to Republican.

To save our nation, we have to.

Global Warming – Shell Game

by Dean Stephens

The claim man is causing global warming is based on a myth, a scam and a truth being ignored . . . and the solution the adherents propose is a shell game where you lose.

The myth: "Petroleum is in short supply and we are running out."

This myth is perpetuated by the phrase "fossil fuel". Science proved nearly 60 years ago that petroleum’s origin is in fact not from fossils although some still believe wrongly to this day that it is. Certainly anyone who has studied the global warming issue at all must have come across the scientific explanation that is today recognized as correct. Oil comes from two abundant components of the earth's crust, iron oxides and calcium carbonates. Under intense pressure and heat approximately 60 miles below the surface, these two elements combine to form oil. Because the earth's crust is constantly moving and experiencing upheaval due to the tectonic plates, this creation process is ongoing. The oil created is driven upward through cracks and crevices due to the centrifugal force of the earth's motion and pools in gaps in the earth's crust which are called oil fields. Oil is in fact a renewable resource and we have sufficient supplies for thousands of years. Anyone who uses the term "fossil fuels" or who claims we are running out of oil is clearly too ignorant of the truth to claim credibility in this debate.

The scam: "CO2, carbon dioxide, is a pollutant causing global warming."

Actually carbon dioxide is an absolutely critical trace element in our atmosphere, needed for the photosynthesis process which sustains life on our planet. The relationship between carbon dioxide and temperatures has been verified through studies of thousands of years of ice age and global warming periods to show that carbon dioxide always increases AFTER temperatures increase. Since we are coming out of the little ice age, carbon dioxide is continuing that known process and increasing as a result.

The normal delay of this natural phenomenon is around 3 to 4 centuries and sure enough, the little ice age started to end around 3 to 4 centuries ago. The carbon dioxide increase in the last century had nothing to do with causing temperature change. Global warming fanatics used a computer simulation scam to dupe the public into believing this myth. The program which created the "hockey stick" projection, on which the demand for government action is based, has proven to be fraudulent.

First a group of skeptics fed data into the program to test it. They fed random data from a telephone book into the program and yet the graph produced projected the same hockey stick temperature increase. If you feed decreasing temperatures into the program the graph still projects the hockey stick temperature increase anyway. In other words, the program is a scam and predicts temperature increases no matter what data is fed in. Man burning carbon based fuels is NOT increasing temperatures. Anyone who claims that carbon dioxide causes temperature increases is basing this on a known misinformation giving them no credibility in this debate.

The truth being ignored: "The earth's temperatures go up and down."

During the last century, the sun had the highest activity levels of the last 11,400 years. As a result, Jupiter, Mars and the Earth all experienced global warming. Man did not cause it. The last time the earth was warmer than it is today was the medieval warming period that led to the renaissance. Man was able to live much better than he had before because the longer growing season provided societies with the basics of life in abundance. Iceland and Greenland prove the point. An illustration often used to bolster the argument of "green fanatics" is the ice regression of Iceland and Greenland. The truth is that regression merely proves the little ice age has ended and they are once again warming up. Many regions that once flourished could no longer produce food competitively during the little ice age but are once again able to do so. What is known is life was good during the renaissance as a direct result of global warming. Anyone who claims that global warming will be a disaster is ignoring history and has little credibility in this debate.

The Shell Game: "Only government forcing people to stop burning oil will save the planet."

The environmental extremists have made this a game of three shells:
Shell 1 - Business as usual (massive money transfers)
Shell 2 - Carbon credit trading scheme (government control)
Shell 3 - Drill for oil (cheap energy and a strong economy)

Shell 1 - We will continue to send $800 billion (6 % of our annual earnings as a county) dollars a year to other countries who supply the oil. This makes us more economically and security dependant on foreign governments. As costs and amounts increase for foreign oil, we will eventually have foreigners owning most of our valuable assets as a nation.

Shell 2 - Pretending we face a crisis that justifies extraordinary government control of our lives will reverse the long term increase in individual liberty and economic wealth that western society has provided. Those who support the proclaimed need for government controls are using "man causes global warming" as an excuse for their desire (which predates this crisis) to increase government controls. Global warming is simply a convenient scare tactic of the left to goad us into their real objective - a socialized America.

Shell 3 - Keeps us in the game until wind, solar, natural gas, tidal, nuclear, hyrdogen and all the other remaining sources of energy become cost effective replacements. Be assured, some of them will given time and research. We have the time since oil is not running out. Only by drilling for oil locally can we send the message that we are going to remain independent and strong while competition determines the right answer for the long term future.

In truth no one knows if global warming will continue or if we are going into a global cooling period (which some scientific evidence suggests may be happening). One early recognition of this is that the global warming fanatics appear to be suddenly hedging their bets, at least linguistically, now referring to global warming as global "climate change". This linguistic change is just part of the shell game.

We know there is no rational argument man is causing whatever happens. We also know that man's comfortable existence on earth is critically dependent on cheap energy. Whether we see an ice age or global warming we need more energy. The cheapest energy currently available is petroleum and it will remain so for some time.

The proponents of government control have spun the facts around and thrown in so many irrelevant details about their proclaimed environmental crisis because they want America to pick the wrong shell, just like the scam artists who run the real shell games on the streets of our cities.

We have to keep our eye on what is important.

We must drill . . . and drill now. That is the only choice where America wins.


Update: August 4th, 2008

The following article has some great supporting information on this same theme of understanding the science that refutes man caused global warming.

In Science, Ignorance is not Bliss - by Walter Cunningham [Sorry, but you now have to register to read the article.]

Obama Camp Pins Scrubbed Troop Visit on Pentagon

by Sunlen Miller and Luis Martinez - July 25th, 2008 - ABC News

In the air flying from Berlin to Paris, Obama senior advisor Robert Gibbs spent 45 minutes speaking to the press over the course of three media availabilities in an attempt to clarify what appeared to be dueling reasons for cancelling the trip.

German magazine Der Spiegel published an article Thursday saying Obama's planned trip to visit troops stations in Germany, including injured troops from Iraq, had been cancelled.

Note the title of the article. It is of course the usual liberal spin that Obama is right and the Pentagon is wrong. What is really true is that Obama does not see the military as something that represents his America. As john Edwards frequently claims, there are two Americas, and Obama (along with Democrats like Edwards) is never in line with patriotic America. Democrats don't even feel comfortable visiting.

This failure to visit the hospital is an insult to our troops. The waffling excuses Obama is making to explain away his failure just add more insult to the original injury.

The freedom we all enjoy is complements of those who fight for our freedom. Barack Obama has never considered being one of those. He has little understanding of the entire idea of freedom and the role of our troops in assuring that freedom.

Obama believes that people in America who are poor are poor because someone else did it to them. In reality, anyone in America who is poor is poor because of their own actions, or inactions.

Two Americas. The America of Barack Obama and the America of John McCain. I'll take McCain's.

How Can A 'Fellow Black American' Oppose Obama?

by Larry Elder - July 26th, 2008 - World Net Daily

Speaking of helping the "underprivileged," I'd suggest you read a book called "Who Really Cares," by Arthur C. Brooks. A non-Republican professor raised by Democrats, he examined the charitable spending habits of Democrats and Republicans. The results surprised him. Brooks found that Republicans give far more of their money and time for charitable purposes than do Democrats. And the giving is not confined to their churches or other houses of worship. This, by the way, has nothing to do with income. Poor Republicans give more than poor Democrats.

In this article Larry Elder has compiled a compelling list of the reasons that blacks should come back to the Republican Party. On almost every critical issue of the day, blacks have more in common, and more reason to agree with Republicans than with Democrats. It is sad that so many black leaders have persuaded black voters that continuing their dependence on Democrats is a necessity to survive. It really is all about black leaders getting rich, as so many of them have, delivering the black vote to a party that never actually helps them.

Iowa Protest Aimed At Karl Rove Leads To Arrests

by Kay Henderson - July 25th, 2008 - Reuters

"It should be Karl Rove in that van. War Criminal!" one of a dozen protestors shouted as the four were put into a police van outside a Des Moines country club where Rove spoke at a private state Republican party fundraiser

We have reached the bizarre situation where Democrats reject the validity of Republicans winning an election. They define anything that Republicans do after winning as a crime. In truth, what the Republicans do after winning is what Democrats do after winning. They exercise the power of their positions. However Democrats are so convinced of their infallibility that they see anything Republicans do as criminal. Losing the election is just the starting point of Democrats trying to subvert the results of their loss.

I dislike Karl Rove. I believe that he has violated Republican principals and moved the nation, and my party, closer to acceptance of socialism. However he is at the least, still putting America first in the world. We are at war and Karl Rove and George W. Bush have fought the war. I will leave to later the final resolution of whether that war was fought well. However fighting it was not a crime as these protesters claim.

I don't understand how so many Democrats can blithely pretend that these people are not acting in their name. They disavow their actions even as they align themselves with these people at election time. That, to me, is duplicity.

The Far Left's War On Direct Democracy

by John Fund - July 26, 2008 - The Wall Street Journal

Last year, Mr. Jacob was charged with conspiracy to defraud the state of Oklahoma in a bizarre prosecution that claimed he brought in out-of-state signature gatherers in violation of the state's residency requirement. Yet local public sector unions opposed to Mr. Jacob hired out-of-state outfits such as the Voter Education Project, an AFL-CIO offshoot that specializes in harassing signature drives.

It was implied but not stated that this is an incredible double standard. The unions can violate the law. Those who oppose the liberal violation of our equal right laws are harassed.

The issue is affirmative action. It is clear that our courts will not do anything about the abuses of equal protection that this concept has produced. 360,000 white men and women died to end slavery in America. Their descendants are denied the equality they died to provide to the former slaves. Liberal government employees practice extreme hypocrisy in trying to assure the special privilege of affirmative action laws is not ended. That is justice in America today.

One World? Obama's On A Different Planet

by John R. Bolton - July 26th, 2008 - Los Angeles Times

Having earlier proclaimed himself "a fellow citizen of the world" with his German hosts, Obama explained that the fall of the Berlin Wall and the reunification of Europe proved "that there is no challenge too great for a world that stands as one."

Perhaps Obama needs a remedial course in Cold War history, but the Berlin Wall most certainly did not come down because "the world stood as one." The wall fell because of a decades-long, existential struggle against one of the greatest totalitarian ideologies mankind has ever faced. It was a struggle in which strong and determined U.S. leadership was constantly questioned, both in Europe and by substantial segments of the senator's own Democratic Party. In Germany in the later years of the Cold War, Ostpolitik -- "eastern politics," a policy of rapprochement rather than resistance -- continuously risked a split in the Western alliance and might have allowed communism to survive. The U.S. president who made the final successful assault on communism, Ronald Reagan, was derided by many in Europe as not very bright, too unilateralist and too provocative.

The speech in Berlin actually proves two things about Obama. He is a global socialist, as many have proclaimed, ready to squander our national wealth in fighting poverty, not just in America, but throughout the world. And like Jimmy Carter he lives in the clouds, never allowing reality to get in the way of his soaring visions of world unity, assuring that our enemies do not have to win victories so much as wait for him to grant them at no cost.

As a President, he will be a disaster.

Mixed Metaphors And Soggy Logic

by David Frum - July 25th, 2008 - National Post (Canada)

Obama’s vague language is the product of an unrealistic mind. He denies the reality of conflict — and flinches from the obligations of self-defense. Obama has risen to power by using a soothing cloud of meaningless words to conceal displeasing truths and avoid difficult choices. His more worldly supporters will quietly whisper that Obama thinks more incisively than his speeches suggest. Let’s hope so. Yet the speech in Berlin should cause us all to wonder: Maybe Obama’s mind really is as foggy as his language.

I am not sure how foggy his mind is. However it has long been true that Marxists are blinded by their desire for the world to be ruled by a mankind of good wishes that has never existed. It is the reason that socialism has failed wherever it has been tried. Obama is clearly infected with this mindset. The only evil he has room for in his world is the evil of free enterprise. Why worry about the evil of a foreign power when there is someone living on the next street who is rich. He is the evil in the world to Obama. Even if he is poorer than Obama and would only be called middle class by any objective criteria.

Their Fair Share

Editorial - July 21st, 2008 - The Wall Street Journal

Washington is teeing up "the rich" for a big tax hike next year, as a way to make them "pay their fair share." Well, the latest IRS data have arrived on who paid what share of income taxes in 2006, and it's going to be hard for the rich to pay any more than they already do. The data show that the 2003 Bush tax cuts caused what may be the biggest increase in tax payments by the rich in American history.

Significant data in this article?

The richest 1% earned 21% of income in 2005 but paid 39% of taxes, the highest rate in more than a generation, and double the amount of taxes paid under Clinton. So much for the illusion that Bush has protected the rich.

The turnover among the rich is indicated by the truth that the rich during the Clinton years have since then suffered the largest decline in income of any group.

America is still the nation of opportunity. There is no entrenched wealthy. That is the situation under socialist regimes. Like the regime that Barack Obama wants to institute. The other thing this data proves is the long known reality, lower tax rates on the rich increases tax collections from the rich. Why is this reality something that Democrats just cannot seem to understand?

Judiciary Releases Witness List For Kucinich "Impeachment" Hearing

by John Bresnahan - July 24th, 2008 - Politico

The House Judiciary Committee has released its witness list for Friday's hearing on Rep. Dennis Kucinich's (D-Ohio) impeachment resolution. One big surprise — a House Republican will testify.

And who else would that sole Republican be but North Carolina's own Walter Jones. Democrat lover. Actually a Democrat who registered as a Republican to get elected but who never ever really stopped being a Democrat. Though he constantly poses as a Christian, Jones proves by this act that he has no Christian charity or forgiveness in his heart. He is filled with rage at George Bush and Dick Cheney. Nothing would give him greater satisfaction than to exact retribution on them for perceived flaws by seeing this impeachment effort actually succeed. Nothing will be accomplished by this impeachement effort as neither Bush nor Cheney will ever stand for public office again. They are only months away from leaving office and are increasingly viewed as lame ducks. Yet Jones cannot focus on the future. He can only focus on his desire for vengeance. Walter Jones is an evil man.

Obama's Berlin Transfiguration Speech

by Lee Cary - July 25th, 2008 - The American Thinker

I'm the presumptive POTUS who will lead the world. This is my time.

"People of Berlin - people of the world - this is our moment. This is our time."

(snip [in the original article] )

"People of Berlin - and people of the world - the scale of our challenge is great."

Obama has three themes that are becoming clear. Arrogance that someone with so little experience is the ordained leader of our nation. Marxist belief that our wealth belongs to the world and he can lead America in sharing it. Indifference to the real risk of Islamo-fascism and the movement it represents. He vaguely points the way to his desires with flowery and deceitful language. There is no doubt, he is a great speaker.

Complete text of Obama's Berline Speech as reported in the New York Times.

Citizen of the World?

Editorial - July 25th, 2008 - The New York Sun

So Barack Obama, whose father is from Kenya and who attended school in Indonesia, now appears before a crowd of 200,000 cheering Germans in Berlin to proclaim himself a "citizen of the world." It makes you wonder whether he's running for president of America or secretary general of the United Nations . . .

[snip]

It's amazing how far away Mr. Obama will travel to avoid Senator McCain's invitation to participate in a series of joint town hall meetings. As the Democratic primary season wore on, the more voters got to see of Mr. Obama the less they seemed to like him. Maybe Mr. Obama's campaign aides are hoping that if they can just keep him out of America for the rest of the campaign he might be able to eke out a victory in November.

The speech Obama gave was filled with Marxist pledges to give America's wealth away to the poor of other nations. It was also filled with inaccurate statements, even mis-stating his father's reason for coming to America among a litany of falsehoods (listed here).

The arrogance of Obama even doing this foreign trip was echoed when we find out that Barack Obama has established a transition team already. This is usually done when the candidate is confident of victory.

Of course it is obvious, he thinks he has already won.

What is also obvious to Americans, he is not one of us.

Out Of Bounds!

Obama falsely claims to be Banking Committee member

by Steven Thomma - July 23rd, 2008 - McClatchy Washington Bureau

What happened: Obama on Wednesday was speaking to reporters in Israel when he tried to boast about what he'd done to protect Israel.

"Just this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee — which is my committee — a bill to call for divestment from Iran as a way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they don't obtain a nuclear weapon," Obama said.

Why that's wrong: Obama is not a member of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee.

The problem is becoming clear. Obama is so out of touch with reality that he thinks anything he says will be believed. All of the major anchors believe everything he says. Why wouldn't everybody? Therefore: he can say anything whether it matches reality or not.

What Part Of 'Drill Now' Do They Not Understand?

by A.W.R. Hawkins - July 24th, 2008 - Human Events

In Colorado and Wyoming alone we have oil deposits sufficient to rival those of Saudi Arabia. Those, plus the use of ocean rigs, would easily result in over a hundred years of fuel for our nation. Yet Reid and Pelosi will not even consider removing the Congressional ban on offshore drilling. Rather, they spend their time talking about the current “energy crisis.” But with oil supplies such as those in Colorado, Wyoming, and the ocean untapped, this doesn’t really seem like an energy crisis as much as it seems like a concerted effort on the part of Reid and Pelosi to keep America from enjoying her independence.

The rational need to drill for oil is being supported by more and more people who are tired of the lie that carbon dixoide is a pollutant and causes temperature increases. More and more people know the truth. The "hockey stick" computer program is a lie. NOTHING indicates burning oil, or drillling for oil, if done in an environmentally safe way, harms the environment. As noted in this article, the caribou are thriving and their numbers are increasing BECAUSE of the Alaska Pipleline.

It has gotten to the point where the old joke is actually true. How can you tell if an environmentalist extremist is lying? Because you can see their lips move.

I am an environmentalist. Most conservatives are. Rejecting the extremist message does not mean we are not responsible stewards of our world. It simply means we reject the anti-human messasge of PETA and similar adherents to extremist orthodoxy.

The Man Who Could Topple Jack Murtha

by Michelle Malkin - July 23rd, 2008 Townhall.com

The 18-term congressman's challenger, staunch conservative Republican newcomer William Russell, raised nearly $670,000 in the second fundraising quarter. Earmark king Murtha scraped together a measly $119,000. Russell's underdog campaign bested Murtha without the perks of incumbency, national name recognition, big PAC donations or mainstream media support.

Even more amazing: The 45-year-old Russell, a Desert Storm veteran, former Army lieutenant colonel and Army reservist who survived the Sept. 11 terrorist attack on the Pentagon, was not even publicly campaigning during the quarter. He is on active duty with the Army until after Aug. 1 and is barred from actively campaigning until then.

Everything that I have heard about William Russell says he is like the impressive Will Breazeale here in North Carolina, another veteran who is running for congress. We are at war. We are at war with the most complex enemy we have ever faced, since it is not a nation, it is a movement. Most people do not understand war against a movement since it is something we have never faced before. There are a large number of veterans of this war who will be coming home and getting involved in helping America understand what is at stake. The most impressive talent they bring to this battle is courage to do and say the right thing, along with a pride in the willingness of some citizens to risk their lives for our freedom. Their involvement will change everything.

Remember those names; William Russell and Will Breazeale. You will be hearing from them a lot in the future.

Republican Party Principles

by Carl Mumpower

I'm a Republican Because -

I BELIEVE the strength of our nation lies with the individual and that each person's dignity, freedom, ability and responsibility must be honored.

I BELIEVE in equal rights, equal justice and equal opportunity for all, regardless of race, creed, sex, age or disability.

I BELIEVE free enterprise and encouraging individual initiative have brought this nation opportunity, economic growth and prosperity.

I BELIEVE government must practice fiscal responsibility and allow individuals to keep more of the money they earn.

I BELIEVE the proper role of government is to provide for the people only those critical functions that cannot be performed by individuals or private organizations, and that the best government is that which governs least.

I BELIEVE the most effective, responsible and responsive government is government closest to the people.

I BELIEVE Americans must retain the principles that have made us strong while developing new and innovative ideas to meet the challenges of changing times.

I BELIEVE Americans value and should preserve our national strength and pride while working to extend peace, freedom and human rights throughout the world.

FINALLY, I believe the Republican Party is the best vehicle for translating these ideals into positive and successful principles of government.

"I will always place principle before party, power, or popularity - and take the heat that comes with that position." Carl Mumpower - 11th District Republican Congressional Candidate

Carl has produced a great set of principals. How ironic that our national party leaders during the last 8 years were constant violators of these principals. I agree with Carl. We need to reaffirm these beliefs and actually govern by them . . . the next time Republicans are in power.

'Time' Publishes Definitive Obama Puff Piece

Satire - July 18, 2008 - The Onion

"No news publication has dared to barely scratch the surface like this before," columnist and campaign reporter Michael King wrote in The Washington Post Tuesday. "This profile sets a benchmark for mindless filler by which all other features about Sen. Obama will now be judged. Just impressive puff-journalism all around."

ROTFL

I especially loved the quote, "Time managing editor Rich Stengel said he was proud of the Obama puff piece, and that he hoped it would help to redefine the boundaries of journalistic drivel."

The Onion has showed the New Yorker how satire is done.

It is worth reading no matter what your political persuasion. Funny.

Obama Wraps Up The Bush Status Quo In Pompous Clichés

by Robert Tracinski - July 20th, 2008 - Real Clear Politics

Here's a tip. When Obama begins a sentence with "As I have said many times," this means that he is about to announce a totally new position that contradicts everything he has said before. For a little reminder of what Obama has actually said about the surge "many times," check out this video clip helpfully posted to YouTube by the Republican National Committee.

The rest of [his comment] shows a total, willful ignorance about what the surge actually consisted of and what it has done. He says that we "talked directly to Sunni tribes that used to be hostile to America." Well, we did a little more than talk. We backed up the Sunni "Awakening" movement with some serious military action--which is precisely what the extra "surge" troops were needed for.

But the most ridiculous line is that "Shiite militias have generally respected a cease-fire." This Spring saw pitched fighting between Iraqi troops and the Iranian-backed Mahdi Army militia--fighting that ended because the Mahdi Army lost. Does Obama not even watch the news?

Day by day this campaign gets funnier and funnier. Read the New Yorker article and it is clear, Obama's total efforts to date have been vicious hard core partisan politics. Yet Obama poses as "post partisan". His comments and history prove he is most comfortable around racist bigots. Yet Obama poses as a "racial healer". He has surrounded himself with Marxists and extreme leftists. Yet some compare him to Ronald Reagan who was the Marxists avowed opposite. He has done nothing of significance; accomplishing little as a community organizer, tried only 10 meaningless cases as a lawyer, did nothing as a State Senator, and spent less than one year as a U.S. Senator before he sought the highest office in our land . . . and the most powerful position in the world. He flips and flops on his positions with vague rhetoric, consistent with his only talent, public speaking. His supporters ooh and ahh and call him the messiah.

My summation of his record? The only talent he has we can point to is public speaking. This is a great talent for someone who conducts seminars or becomes a preacher. It is not a talent that will lead to success as a President. In every other way he is a second rate charlatan who has accomplished nothing of signficance.

Does It Have To Take A Decade To Bring New Crude To Market?

by Monica Showalter - July 18th, 2008 - Investor's Business Daily

. . . streamlining the [two to three year] environmental impact process and tightening the four to six year schedule for bidding [on government acreage] would make a big difference.

[Government] bureacracy's not the only problem.

"The chilling effect is the lawsuits at every single step of the way," said [Marilyn Crockett, executive director of the Alaska Oil and Gas Association].

The bottom line answer to the title of the article?

No.

In 1 to 2 years oil can be flowing, if the American people want it. It takes 10 years only if you leave it to the Democrats who oppose oil to satisfy the enviro extremists desire to kill our economy.

Why McCain Must Win

by Bruce Walker - July 19th, 2008 - Canda Free Press

Although some of us have heard the story so often that we are sick of it, McCain in war showed more physical and moral courage than most of us could even muster. Yes, he was a POW and not a hero. Yes, McCain has milked it for all that it is worth. None of that changes the facts: He could have gone home, ended his torture sessions, and no sane person would have held it against him.

This old fact of this old politician’s life will always be in the back of the minds of our fighting forces. Many of them may dislike McCain, but none of them can doubt that he truly knows the horrors that they face in war and that he will not put them in harm’s way without cause. This makes McCain, whether we like it or not, a good wartime president.

Morale in military conflict is more important than equipment or tactics or numbers. Morale is the key to victory. There seems little doubt that McCain will provide the right equipment and sufficient numbers of troops. He seems to understand military tactics and operations well. But most importantly, McCain can lead our forces in a way that few Americans could. That means McCain can win this war for us. That is why McCain must win this November.

We are at war. It is a war that we did not start. Though some on the left just do not get it, this war is with a movement that assuredly did include Saddam Hussein. Some of us do get it. We must destroy the forces that are driving this maniacal movement, Islamo-fascism. It can destroy us and we must win for the future of individual freedom on this planet. It is reality that if they ever get nuclear bombs we will see the holocaust that we avoided with the Soviet Union. Losing is simply not conceivable to anyone who thinks freedom is worth fighting for. This makes John McCain an exciting candidate. On this issue, there is no one his equal.

Obama, Democrats, and the Surge

They were against it before it worked.

by Peter Wehner - July 28th, 2008 - The Weekly Standard

Rarely has a political party been so uniformly wrong, in such an obvious way, on such an important matter. And when Americans cast their vote on November 4, they should carefully consider how Barack Obama and the entire Democratic party fought ferociously and relentlessly to undermine a policy that has worked extraordinarily well and may yet prove to be among the most successful military plans in modern times.

Obama has repeatedly avowed that it is not about experience, it is about judgement. Yet he also repeatedly proves that he has worse judgment than almost any politician in America. He panders to the anti-war global socialist extreme in the Democrat Party aligning himself with Marxists and racists totally out of touch with America. This is judgement?

Obama's Paid Staff Dwarfing McCain's

by Brian C. Mooney - July 20th, 2008 - The Boston GLobe

Reports filed with the Federal Election Commission show that in May the [Obama] campaign had a payroll of about 900, not counting nearly 500 part-time workers who were paid stipends. As of May 31, the Obama campaign staff was well over twice the size of the Bush reelection campaign staff in 2004 and nearly three times the size of McCain's current staff, and has expanded significantly since.

If anyone has any doubt that Obama will run up federal emplyment in the same way, let me just suggest they are deluding themselves.

The End Of White Flight

For the First Time in Decades, Cities' Black Populations Lose Ground, Stirring Clashes Over Class, Culture and Even Ice Cream

by Conor Dougherty - July 19th, 2008 - The Wall Street Journal

In Washington, a historically black church is trying to attract white members to survive. Atlanta's next mayoral race is expected to feature the first competitive white candidate since the 1980s. San Francisco has lost so many African-Americans that Mayor Gavin Newsom created an "African-American Out-Migration Task Force and Advisory Committee" to help retain black residents.

Since the early 1970s black communities and black leaders have been demanding specific black rights and black power. They have used affirmative action and the voting rights bill to set up legal segregation and encouraged hostility between the races. This has been a driving factor in the white flight cities have experienced.

The repeated flaps about use of the n-word are an example of black attitudes of today. They feel they have a right to be exempt from the rules everyone else must live by. Whoopi Goldberg bragged not only is there a double-standard in society but it is perfectly fine that it be so. She flaunted this power on the view by repeatedly using the n-word and then threatening Barbara Walters if she dared say it too.

This in your face hostility is indicative of a much greater problem. It is typical of the former self righteous attitudes of Ku Klux Klan members back in the day when prejudice loaded laws gave preference to whites. Today affirmative action law, and almost every law we pass, gives preference to blacks over whites. Black leaders are in that way the new Ku Klux Klan racists. Even when the laws do not give legal preference, discussions by black leaders are colored by the insistence that the black community has to be considered and treated with special courtesy. Racial preferences are demanded as their right.

This is getting old. There was never a moral justification for Jim Crow laws that gave whites special preference and that segregated the races. It was a violation of the basic concept of individual liberty and freedom on which America was based. Affirmative action is just as immoral. It is time to stop the arrogance of people like Whoopi Goldberg by ending this preference for blacks. It is the underlying rationalization that permits such insane excuses. When the multi millionaire Whoopi Goldberg defends getting special treatment and having special rules because she is black and it makes her feel "discriminated" against, as if somehow that overcomes her millions of dollars and her limousine lifestyle, we have exceeded the usefulness for laws that grant preference.

The only concern I have is whether the backlash against black preference will lead us to re-institute laws of preference for the whites that have been damaged over the last two generations by special rights for blacks . When a super rich millionairess thinks she can put on the mantle of "black" and brag about the justice of a double standard clearly in her favor, there is justification for poor whites getting revenge. Let's not simply start another round of discrimination.

Myth of Consensus Explodes: APS Opens Global Warming Debate

by Michael Asher - July 18th, 2008 - Daily Tech

In an email to DailyTech, Monckton says, "I was dismayed to discover that the IPCC's 2001 and 2007 reports did not devote chapters to the central 'climate sensitivity' question, and did not explain in proper, systematic detail the methods by which they evaluated it. When I began to investigate, it seemed that the IPCC was deliberately concealing and obscuring its method."

According to Monckton, there is substantial support for his results, "in the peer-reviewed literature, most articles on climate sensitivity conclude, as I have done, that climate sensitivity must be harmlessly low."

Monckton, who was the science advisor to Britain's Thatcher administration, says natural variability is the cause of most of the Earth's recent warming. "In the past 70 years the Sun was more active than at almost any other time in the past 11,400 years ... Mars, Jupiter, Neptune’s largest moon, and Pluto warmed at the same time as Earth."

As I have noted in most of my postings for a couple of years, the AGW crowd is not just getting one thing wrong. They are wrong about CO2 being a pollutant and causing Anthropogenic Global Warming (i.e. man is causing global warming). They are also wrong about where petroleum comes from. They still insist on calling it "fossil fuels" even though all science is persuasive that petroleum never came from fossils. It is a natural byproduct of the constantly moving earth's crust. Iron oxides and calcium carbonates, two abundant components of earth's crust, under pressure and heat deep in the crust, combine to make petrolem and other carbon based fuels. They are still doing so to this day. That makes petroleum a renewable fuel.

It is hard for me to believe that anyone who cares about science can be this wrong about two different issues of relevance to the AGW debate, especially when they are the two most important issues in the debate. Being wrong on both makes it clear, they are not likely wrong so much as being intentonally deceitful. Al Gore is a liar.

The Gathering Threat to Freedom

by Ken Blackwell - July 17th, 2008 - Townhall.com

The First Amendment freedom of conscience naturally divides into two parts. The clauses on free speech, a free press, freedom to assemble, and freedom to petition the government to allow us to express ourselves personally or through the press to speak about any issue. The clauses on the establishment of religion and free religious exercise protect our right to believe according to the dictates of our own conscience. These are the twin pillars of a society where hearts and heads are free.

So true. And yet the Republican Party has nominated a man who, no matter how patriotic, does not understand freedom at all. John McCain is only marginally better than Barack Obama with regard to the reason patriotism in America is stronger than most other nations. Individual freedom starts with the two freedoms defended by Ken Blackwell, and yet few (even Republicans) seem to understand what that means.

Rev. Jackson, The Fat Lady Is Singing

by Larry Elder - July 17th, 2008 - Townhall.com

Jackson, and his race-card-waving cohorts, derive stature, power, significance and self-enrichment by claiming that racism remains a serious problem in America. After complaining about the lack of minority beer distributorships, for example, Jackson's sons ended up with a lucrative Anheuser-Busch distributorship in Chicago. Author Kenneth Timmerman, in his book "Shakedown," describes the Jackson modus operandi -- playing the race card for self-enrichment, as well as that of friends and family.

Rather than display pleasure at America's obvious progress, or pride in his role in getting us there, the anachronistic Jackson now morphs into a shrinking, petulant, self-pitying "leader" -- with little left to lead.

That only leaves the question, where does Jackson, or for that matter Barack Obama, have to lead America?

Slavery was an evil institution that was opposed by many who founded this nation. However in a compromise that our nation paid a huge price to overcome, it was tolerated in a portion of the states that fought the revolution to win our freedom and create this new form of government based on individual liberty.

One price? To end slavery and preserve the nation, 360,00 Union troops died in the civil war that resulted. Twelve times that many suffered injury, like most war injuries causing lifetime debilitation. The vast majority of these millions of injured and dead were young white men who were dedicated to the cause of ending slavery. At one period of the war, an amazing 30,000 in one month had their enlistments expire. They could have gone home. However they were so dedicated to the cause of ending slavery that like the soldiers in Iraq they re-enlisted in droves, thereby preserving the union. Yet today many of the descendants of the slaves that were freed by their sacrifice and death demand reparations from the descendants of the men who freed them. This is the insanity of race relations today.

The institutional discrimination that was practiced against the freed slaves by some of those governments in the states where slavery formerly existed was ultimately ended in the middle of the last century. It was primarily ended by the efforts of the same party that argued to try and end slavery a century before by politics. It then fought the actual war to end slavery when the slave states seceded. Richard Nixon, a Republican, even invented something called Affirmative Action as a "temporary" way to accelerate equal opportunity after the years of legal discrimination by Democrats. The party of freedom is the Republican Party. That is also the party that American blacks almost universally revile today because it does not embrace institutional preferences on behalf of blacks which are nearly as evil and pernicious against individual white males as the Jim Crow legal discrimination once inflicted on the former slaves.

Jesse Jackson does not tolerate anyone, whether Bill Cosby or Barack Obama, daring to imply all the problems of blacks are not caused by honkies, whitey, those evil bogeymen that Jackson has used to extort riches for himself and his family. For Obama daring to suggest that these honkies (a word Jackson regularly uses in private conversation) are not the sole cause of black problems, Jackson ripped into Obama privately with the following:

"Barack, he's talking down to black people . . . " said Jackson. "I want to cut his nuts off . . . telling ni##ers how to behave."

[snip]

Jackson accused Obama of "acting like he's white."

Jackson has called New York City "Hymietown", a racist comment against Jews indicative of his general hostility against anyone but blacks.

The reality is that blacks in America are jealous of their legal superiority and sneer at any who are outraged . . . or even critical.

A clear reason that many are imputing to Barack Obama the ability to heal race relations is that many are tired of this 13% minority in America being the constant focus of attention by our government. We are tired of everything being about race. Everyone has challenges. Everyone, even whites, face discrimination and hardships growing up. Blacks get special laws that protect them even when they are rich. The son of a rich black man gets legal advantages over the son of a poor white man. Blacks who have voluntarily come to this country in the last 20 years as immigrants get special rights superior to whites who are born here as citizens. And Jesse Jackson defends this outrage.

Because he is a Marxist I believe the election of Barack Obama is going to be bad for America. However it will without question cause one good outcome. The legal discrimination of affirmative action will be ended almost immediately. If a member of this 13% minority can be elected President, there can be no Justice in continuing the hate inducing legal preference which affirmative action grants to blacks. We can tell the race baiters like Jesse Jackson to shut up and end their extortion racket against whites. I welcome that.

Barack Obama's Super Marketing Machine

by Mike Madden - July 16th, 2008 - Salon.com

The 5 million people on Obama's e-mail list are just the start of what political strategists say is one of the most sophisticated voter databases ever built. Using a combination of the information that supporters are volunteering, data the campaign is digging up on its own and powerful market research tools first developed for corporations, Obama's staff has combined new online organizing with old-school methods of voter outreach to assemble a central database for hitting people with messages tailored as closely as possible to what they're likely to want to hear. It's an ambitious melding of corporate marketing and grassroots organizing that the Obama campaign sees as a key to winning this fall.

I am somewhat surprised at the lack of understanding by Republicans of the consequences of this growing marketing of the Presidency. Howard Dean's campaign failed when he ran for President, but he then won Chairmanship of the Democrat Party against the preferences of the Party power brokers. His efforts then focused on ORGANIZING the Democrat Party down to the grassroots level, using technology and modern techniques to get this done in every precinct across the nation.

The young, who are historically liberal, are the most comfortable with the new technologies that are employed for this purpose. The famous saying, "if you are not a liberal when you are 20 you have no heart, if you are not a conservative when you are 40 you have no brain," still applies to this day. The new techniques cannot work unless a political party uses them, and it cannot use them if there is a major element of the party which will not use the technology. Democrats are clearly more comfortable with requiring their supporters keep in touch by online techniques because they are younger. That requires a computer and an Internet connection. Their supporters almost universally already have these because of this age advantage. A great number of Republicans do not use the Internet. In fact, I have experienced that a great number of Republican activists are hostile to the idea that they will use a computer.

My concern is the weakening of the Republican party as a result, indicated by the growing control of Presidential campaigns over the databases that are used for this marketing. Bush and Rove drove computerization efforts of Republicans and with Bush no longer running, the focus of this information is not passing to the party in a useful form.

Control is the problem, since the instant the campaign is over, the data starts to degrade in usefulness. People change emails regularly. An email for one Presidential campaign is unlikely to be valid the next time around. The relevancy for the political party of this data is also of concern. Since everyone votes for President, a database can use national marketing databases to tie voter information together. At the national level for a national office that is great. However for a House candidate, the information costs the same and yet has 1/435 the relevancy. The value is not there. It is even less relevant for State legislative offices. The effort to tie old-school methods of voter outreach to the computer data are key.

To date attempts to relate campaign information to ongoing party activities by Republicans has simply been ineffectual . Republicans do not even relate their party official lists to the voter lists at the precinct level and keep data accurate and useful. Mailing lists, telephone lists and email lists of party officials, registered voters, marketing information from businesses and advertisers, online databases about issues, specialty organization databases (magazines, conservative organizations, web sites) . . . all exist and need to be correlated with a data purification and currency effort. However these are all controlled by individual campaigns, few of which do an effective job. The party must get more involved in this and efforts must be correlated. That involves planning how to do this. It will not just happen.

Party officials however never care about the value to effectively correlating this information. Party officials are usually passionate about some part of the party platform, but their participation in party activities is about personal ego and control. They have no interest in working for an acquisition of useful information for others. When efforts to utilize the new computer technologies are addressed they rapidly become focused on low level goals of control, not marketing and reaching voters. Thus the efforts never extend to efforts that benefit the party goals, much less the nation's goals. Those always are handled by campaigns and are then lost to the party.

This dichotomy between party goals and campaign goals is a major source of the information chaos.

The difference is that the Democrats are the party of government. Their focus is power. As such they have been much more successful in getting cooperation between the candidate efforts and the party efforts to retain useful information and share it for long term party goals. Unless Republicans start to understand this, and worry about this, and work on this, a huge advantage will accrue to the party which is hostile to free enterprise.

Mumpower Puts Congressional Campaign On Hold

Press Release - July 14th, 2008

In a Saturday open letter to 11th District GOP officials, Congressional candidate Carl Mumpower has taken the unusual step of putting his campaign on hold, calling a "Principles First" campaign to be Job One. Stepping away from his fight against Shuler in the interest of the betterment of the Republican Party is courageous, considering that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has called this contest "a frontline race".

This is a principled effort to get the Republican Party to cease its current embracing of practices which are a violation of our stated principals. When we campaign on the concept of no pork and then allow George Bush and Dennis Hastert to increase pork by 285%, which in total means nearly 4 times as much, it is an insult to our constituents and our party's supporters.

Are Facts Obsolete?

by Thomas Sowell - July 15th, 2008 - Townhall.com

As the hypnotic mantra of "change" is repeated endlessly, few people even raise the question of whether what few specifics we hear represent any real change, much less a change for the better.

Raising taxes, increasing government spending and demonizing business? That is straight out of the New Deal of the 1930s.

In a society where our teachers have done an incompetent job of teaching our history, the old cliche becomes a serious predictor of the consequence, "Those who do not understand history are condemned to repeat it."

Barack Obama is about to lead our nation down the road to Marxism, just like FDR did in his time. Just as many economists believe that FDR prolonged the great depression, maybe even was the cause of a recession becoming a depression, Obama is advocating popular but misguided solutions for problems that will be exacerbated by what he is recommending.

Barack Obama cautioned James Dobson not to disagree with him on his understanding of the bible, implying he was better able to interpret the bible than a man who has been a lifelong pastor. He has also cautioned economists to not disagree with him on his understanding of economic policy. He blithely dismisses the idea that raising tax rates will reduce tax receipts, something that he considers irrelevant to improving the "fairness" of the tax system.

This is the candidate who started running for President one year after he was elected to the U.S. Senate at a time when he had never accomplished anything of consequence. He still has nothing but rhetoric as an accomplishment. Yet he is being compared favorably to a man who endured five years of torture and stayed faithful to his pledge to his fellow soldiers. Ego versus courage. Those are the real differences between thse two candidates.

Thomas Sowell is right to ask, "Are facts obsolete?" What fact can possibly justify this political charlatan Obama being seriously considered for President?

Oil Is NOT A Fossil Fuel And AGW Is Non-science

by Peter J. Morgan - July 14th, 2008 - Canada Free Press

. . . scientists and engineers found that oil is not a ‘fossil fuel’ but is a natural product of planet earth – the high-temperature, high-pressure continuous reaction between calcium carbonate and iron oxide – two of the most abundant compounds making up the earth’s crust. This continuous reaction occurs at a depth of approximately 100 km at a pressure of approximately 50,000 atmospheres (5 GPa) and a temperature of approximately 1500°C, and will continue more or less until the ‘death’ of planet earth in millions of years’ time. The high pressure, as well as centrifugal acceleration from the earth’s rotation, causes oil to continuously seep up along fissures in the earth’s crust into subterranean caverns, which we call oil fields.

This truth has been known for many years. It is likely that at some point we will cease being able to find enough to satisfy man's need for energy, even as more oil/coal is being produced. Partly that is because we will by then have such a large need for each person's requirements, and such a large population, that only nuclear energy will satisfy our insatiable demand. By then, nuclear will be common and oil will become like whale oil, an historical anomaly.

This article probes some of the more interesting issues about why this truth is not better known. Everyone who is involved in geology and oil exploration knows that planet earth is producing more oil each and every day. Why is it that our politicians and news reporters are so ignorant? Do they not ever talk with anyone who knows what the truth is? If they don't, why not?

Ego-Bama, Swallow Some Of That Pride

by Jonah Goldberg - July 13th, 2008 - New York Post

Last July, Obama explained to reporters that he would eventually overtake Hillary Rodham Clinton in the polls because "to know me is to love me." Some months later, according to The Associated Press' Ron Fournier, he proclaimed, "Every place is Barack Obama country once Barack Obama's been there."

What could possibly be the motivation of a man who less than 1 year after ascending to the position of Senator, considered himself to be qualified to be President of the United States and the most powerful man in the world? Our current young generation has been defined as the me-me-me generation. Barack Obama is certainly the obvious incarnation of the self absorbed who have little regard for the costs of success. They demand success without effort as their right.

A Clash Of Generations In Black Community

by Joseph Williams - July 13th, 2008 - The Boston Globe

Though black voters turned out for Obama in record numbers during the marathon Democratic primaries, any erosion of that support could mean the difference in battleground states like Georgia and North Carolina.

"We don't need Jesse Jackson to be divisive," said Jerome Jenkins, 44, sipping a glass of wine at a downtown Washington cigar bar. "It's Barack's time. If the man's going to be president, let him be president."

By making the debate public, Jenkins said, Jackson feeds white-held stereotypes: "They'll say, 'Look at the blacks - they still can't get together,' " he said.

This is an amazing quote. What Barack Obama's candidacy is challenging is black-held stereotypes, not white-held stereotypes. One of those stereotypes is the belief that blacks must "get together" to succeed. Here in Eastern North Carolina that results in vicious denunciation of any black who strays from the Democrat Plantation. Any black who believes anything but their Marxist prescription of welfare and dependency will be publicly reviled as an "Uncle Tom". Blacks "getting together" is not the expectation of conservatives. It is the expectation of liberal Democrats. Liberals demand that the black community be monolithic in its support of the Democrat Party line.

To accomplish this, the standard technique is lies. I will never forget the incredible argument that I had with one of the most racist blacks here in Bertie County. I was told that a statement I made saying a larger percentage of Republicans voted for the 1964 Civil Rights bill than Democrats was a "(pejorative deleted) lie". He insisted that 90% of Republicans voted against the Civil Rights Bill. [Actually 82% of Republicans voted FOR the bill.] He demanded I "stop insulting" him by saying things "nobody would believe." He said to me, "You are a racist." "90% of Republicans are racists" was his final summation.

This article addresses the reality that most black leadership is concerned any honest discussion of the issues will fragment the black community and allow the very large part of the community that is conservative to stop voting Democrat. They fear the ability to keep affirmative action and welfare for blacks a part of the law of the land is dependent on continuing the belief that racism among whites is a serious problem and black leadership can deliver the black vote to Democrats.

Jesse Jackson's blackmail of large corporations is dependent on delivering this monolithic view. It is the reason that so much of black leadership reviled Bill Cosby for talking about accountability of those being helped to deserve that help. Black leadership insists that any discussion of the need for blacks to accept accountability for their own success will end their power and "harm blacks".

The real problem is the illusion that black individuals cannot excel in American society except on the issue of black grievance. However it is becoming clear that individual blacks can be honored by America, without it requiring they base their success on black grievance. "You can't succeed without us," the line of Jesse Jackson and black liberal leaders is disproved by the success of black geniuses like Thomas Sowell, Larry Elder, Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice, Juan Williams, Bill Cosby, Bishop Harry Jackson, Allen Keyes, and on and on.

America is still based on individual freedom and individual effort, not group entitlement.

Obama Calls ‘Access Hollywood’ Interview A Mistake

by Mike Celizic - July 9th, 2008 - MSNBC

“I think that we got carried away in the moment,” the Illinois senator and presumptive Democratic presidential nominee told TODAY’s Matt Lauer Wednesday.

[snip]

“We wouldn’t do it again, and we won’t be doing it again,” the candidate said flatly.

In case you had forgotten this is the candidate who swore he wanted to keep his family life private. When it is convenient though he is perfectly happy using his family to advance his candidacy. Just don't ask him to do it again, unless he wants to do it again, in which case he will do it with no preconditions!

ROTFL

This arrogant candidate is absolutely unbelievable. My thanks to blogger AirForceCane on lucianne.com for the following list.
FISA
Jim Johnson
Gun Control and Second Amendment Rights
Access Hollywood
Reverend Wright and Reverend Pfleger
Jerusalem
Taxes
Effectiveness of Surge
Abortion Rights
Debating at town halls
Public Financing
Meeting with Ahmedinijad and Chavez
Negotiating NAFTA
Free Trade

He brags about his judgment and yet this is just a short list of all the issues where candidate Barack Obama has not only not shown good judgment. He has displayed a greater level of incompetence, ignorance and willingness to flip-flop than any candidate in recent history. He does not have a clue what he believes and is willing to take every side of every issue as a result, or else he is convinced that the American people are too stupid to follow his logic.

And still he leads in the polls for President. I am starting to believe that the goal of his candidacy is to convince the world that no population is smart enough for Democracy to succeed. It certainly appears Americans are not able to recognize this charlatan for what he is. Not yet anyway.

A Deal On Climate Change - But Then The Backlash

US signs up to 50% target but emerging economies demand more

by Patrick Wintour and Larry Elliott - July 8th, 2008 - The Guardian (London)

But while the five-page communique is the first time Bush has committed his country to a long-term target, the deal agreed at the G8 summit in northern Japan was quickly dismissed by the big five emerging economies, which want the world's biggest polluters to go much further in cutting emissions.

Five countries who are exempt from cutting emissions are adamant that their biggest competitor nations, especially the U.S., must destroy their economies or they will not go along. However that makes little sense because these nations do not have to do anything of consequence anyway.

If nothing else will convince all of the liberal idiots here in America that this whole global warming issue is fraudulent, perhaps the attitude of these five nations, Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa, will finally get through. They will do nothing to reduce their growing reliance on carbon based fuels. They will do nothing to reduce their increased pollution. They will do nothing to limit their growth. However they demand the U.S. must do more than cut its CO2(which is not even a pollution) by 50%. They demand we reduce it more than 80% and destroy our economy in the process. There is no rational excuse for the entire effort to reduce greenhouse gases be shouldered by the west alone if the problem is real.

Growing evidence exists that the entire greenhouse gas issue is a con job by global socialists to change the balance of power in the world. Will Americans wake up before we destroy our nation?

Conservatives for Obama?

by Thomas Sowell - July 7th, 2008 - Townhall.com

What is becoming ever more painfully apparent is that too many people this year-- whether conservative, liberals or whatever-- are all too willing to judge Barack Obama on the basis of his election-year rhetoric, rather than on the record of what he has advocated and done during the past two decades.

Many are for him for no more serious reasons than his mouth and his complexion. The man has become a Rorschach test for the feelings and hopes, not only of those on the left, but also for some on the right as well.

Here is a man who has consistently aided and abetted people who have openly expressed their contempt for this country, both in words and in such deeds as planting bombs to advance their left-wing agenda.

Despite the spin that judging Obama by what was said or done by such people would be "guilt by association," he has not just associated with such people. He has in some cases donated some serious money of his own and even more of the taxpayers' money, as both a state senator in Illinois and a member of the Senate of the United States.

As usual Thomas Sowell has explained the fears of many with his common sense summation of the issue. Barack Obama is the greatest risk this nation has ever taken. His election may well be the final leap into a world of socialism and tyranny. Yet even many Republicans, already seduced by the "compassionate conservative" socialism of George Bush, seem ready to take the plunge.

No Permanent GOP Minority

by Robert D. Novak - July 7th, 2008 - Townhall.com

House GOP leaders were triumphant June 27 as Congress recessed for a week. They had passed war funding and telephone surveillance bills with solid Republican backing and minority Democratic support. Chairman David Obey had just shut down the Appropriations Committee process so that Democrats would not be forced to vote on Republican oil-drilling proposals. The Republican leaders congratulated themselves that they were winning the debate over whether boosting production or curbing speculation is the proper response to runaway gasoline prices.

Unfortunately, say Republican reformers, it looked like the operation was a great success but the patient died. Popular though expanded drilling may be, Republicans are blamed for four-dollar gasoline. Away from the party leadership table, members blame a negative Republican image created by leaders.

Republicans cannot "wash their hands" of accountability for the current gas crisis. Though it is true the majority of Republicans, including George Bush and Dennis Hastert, supported drilling during the six years of Republican rule, it was never a priority. The current crisis is the responsibility of Republican leadership and Republicans (mostly moderate Republicans who have no principals but to get elected). What amazes me is the idea that worrying about whether we are a majority or minority is exactly what got us into this mess to start with. It is Karl Rove mentality. Yet Karl Rove is still a powerful force in our party because so few see what a disaster he has been.

The effort of the Lincoln Club, described in this article, does nothing to alter the reality of our problem. Hastert is gone, but Republicans chose him as a leader and he was corrupt. Whether personally corrupt as now appears likely, or merely systemically corrupt as the father of the 285% increase in waste (just to be clear that much increase means the total amount of pork was nearly 4 times as much) makes no difference. Our representatives backed him overwhelmingly. Where was the Lincoln Club then?

Bush will be gone in a few months, but there is still a huge fondness for his "compassionate conservative" philosophy that has unleashed rampant socialism in our nation. Bush has made both parties advocates of huge government. When do we get our party to acknowledge the evil that we have advanced in the name of this con game?

America is at war with movements promoting Islamo-fascism, illegal immigration and global socialism. I don't see the Lincoln Club leading the way to tackle any of these problems or countering these movements. They are leading the way to tear down our current leadership. I agree our leadership is wrong, but I want to know what the Lincoln Club proposes to replace it with. In the meantime Barack Obama and the global socialists are well on their way to victory in the coming election.

President Bush Exonerated

. . . of 'misleading statements' leading to Iraq war.

by Vincent Gioia - July 6th, 2008 - The American Thinker

Those who harped on the Bush administration and its members for both the "leak" and for going to war in Iraq despite a supposed lack of evidence of a nuclear program by Iraq's monstrous dictator and his sons should by all rights be made to suffer the same indignities visited upon President Bush, Vice President Cheney, their aides and especially, Lewis Libby.

Today we know that Iraq did possess 550 metric tons of "yellowcake" -- the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment. The effort to topple Hussein and cause regime change was indeed necessary to prevent the development of nuclear weapons. We know this because it has been revealed, albeit without the fanfare of the earlier "scandal", that this huge stockpile of concentrated uranium, a remnant of Hussein's nuclear program, was removed from Iraq and shipped to a buyer in Canada. It should be a great relief to the world to know that Hussein was not given enough time to further develop his nuclear program because President Bush defied his critics and took action to abort this threat.

When Democrats start ranting in public about Republicans it is difficult for any semblance of truth to emerge. On issue after issue the truth is ignored. Lies that support a Democrat agenda are allowed to become accepted as truth. Democrats claim the lies are on both sides yet I have never seen a single situation where a Republican is allowed to rant and rant about an obvious lie that is so critical to the safety of our nation. Scooter Libby is knowingly convicted of covering up Dick Cheney leaking a story that Richard Armitage, someone on the opposite political side, actually leaked.

Want to talk about some truth that has come out in the press? Saddam Hussein was funding a large number of nuclear scientists who were working with Khan, the Pakistani nuclear genius, developing nuclear bomb technology within the Libyan nuclear program. Qaddafi was rattled by the invasion of Iraq and surrendered his nuclear program. If we had not invaded Iraq in the course of this war against Islamo-fascism, Libya, Syria and Iraq would have long since had the technology allowing them to build a nuclear bomb. Iraq had the yellow cake, topic of this story, which would have allowed them to BUILD many bombs, once they had the technology and expertise learned in the Libyan program. Saddam was secretly preparing to build these bombs.

Democrat truth? Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction. Actual truth? Saddam was well on his way to building a nuclear bomb. He would have assuredly provided these bombs to the Islamo-fascists and they would have been used in America. Democrats do not care if we are at war, or how many Americans die, as long as they are in power. The democrat lies will continue. I guarantee you will never see this truth in the MSM.

What is frightening is where this leaves patriots in the coming election. The Democrat leadership have successfully convinced 80% of Democrats, 70% of Independents and even 40% of Republicans that we went to war in Iraq uselessly. However as we started to win on that front these people have become more and more convinced that we need to pull out. They do not see that we are still in the same situation we were when we went in to Iraq. The war is against Islamo-fascism, it is an asymmetrical war, the Muslim fanatics have not given up and are still recruiting suicide bombers who like the Kamikaze bombers at the end of WWII see martyrdom as a glorious way to die . . . and any real victory against these Islamo-fascists will be a generation or more in coming. Nuclear bombs will turn this movement into the most destructive force our nation has ever faced.

George Bush has made a lot of good moves in fighting the war. However he has failed to keep America behind the war. That will leave him the most reviled President in history when those nuclear bombs start to drop, since it is becoming more and more obvious that he has merely delayed the inevitable. I am not sure that is exoneration.

Vermont Is For Lovers, Liberal Judges, Pedophiles And Stupid Parents

by Doug Giles - July 5th, 2008 - Townhall.com

Sadly, a freshly dead or severely wounded pervert was not the story we all got crammed into our faces this week but rather another 85lb cute little girl, namely Brooke Bennett of Vermont, who was found in a shallow grave with the alleged culprits being her way-too-creepy uncle (who happened to have a kidnapping and rape prior) and her satanic ex-stepdad who was part of a local sex ring.

This is one of those articles that cause me anguish about who to be mad at. Certainly it is an article that makes me want to rage at the recent Supreme Court refusal to allow the death penalty for child rapists. How these arrogant robed tyrants can rationalize their defense of these perverts is simply beyond my understanding. I also want to scream at mothers who forgive their relatives for sexual perversion and allow them to hang around their children.

I wonder what relationship there was between the mother having a brother who had previously raped someone and her marrying a man who was a member of a satanic sex ring?

Well of course the Supreme Court has the solution to this. Let's just slap them on the wrist and let them out again. Typical of the revolving door criminal justice system the the Supreme Perverts have run for years.

How Jesse Helms Made A Difference

by John Fund - July 5th, 2008 - The Wall Street Journal

The issue of race will always cast a shadow on Helms's legacy. He could never understand why he was viewed by many as a bigot, having run one of the most integrated TV stations in the South and often hiring blacks on his staff [and treating them with dignity as equals]. His criticisms of affirmative action and forced busing were on the mark.

[snip]

Indeed, the mainstream media rarely put Helms's career in context the way they did, for example, with Sam Ervin, a Democrat who served with Helms in the Senate from North Carolina before retiring in 1975. Ervin was the leading legal strategist against Civil Rights legislation, and he largely crafted the Southern Manifesto against Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court case that ruled school segregation unconstitutional. But Ervin was the man who chaired the Watergate hearings that helped bring down Richard Nixon, and his views on civil rights were almost never mentioned. Both Helms and Ervin were courtly, principled conservatives. Only one became a cartoon media villain.

The differing treatment of these two men shows beyond dispute the bigotry of the MSM and the Democrat Party. It is not about racism. It is about Marxism. Black leadership in America is overwhelmingly Marxist, and they forgive anyone who embraces the Marxist program of the Democrat Party. They denounce as "racist" anyone who defends free enterprise and religion, the prevailing premise of the Republicans who most incite the bigoted rage of black democrats. The only prevalent racism today is the racism of black leadership. Helms could never overcome that flaw, a flaw not of Helms, but of his enemies.

Michael Monsoor - Winner - Congressional Medal Of Honor

by Elizabeth Downey - July 4th, 2008 - Fox News

A Fitting Tribute to a Slain Navy SEAL Gains Attention

. . as Monsoor's coffin was taken from the hearse to the gravesite, Navy SEALs lined up in two columns. As the coffin passed, video shows each SEAL slapping down the gold Trident from his uniform and deeply embedding it in Monsoor's wooden coffin.

The slaps were reportedly heard across the cemetery.

The echoes of these slaps are being heard across our nation as patriots give honor to this fallen hero. God bless Michael Monsoor. God bless his family and friends. God bless the Navy SEALs. God bless all the troops who guard our freedom. God bless America.

"Greater love has no man than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends"
- John 15:13

Declaration Of Independence

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate, that governments long established, should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his assent to laws the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature; a right inestimable to them, and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing, with manly firmness, his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining, in the mean time, exposed to all the dangers of invasions from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers, to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies, without the consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the military independent of, and superior to the civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us; For protecting them by a mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states;

For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world;

For imposing taxes on us without our consent;

For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury;

For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offences;

For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighbouring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries, so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these colonies;

For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments;

For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection, and waging war against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy, scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow citizens, taken captive on the high seas, to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every state of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms. Our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have we been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them, from time to time, of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace, friends.

We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance, to the British crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved; and that, as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.