Rush Limbaugh is not News

Rush Limbaugh is not news. What is news is the loss of common sense and dignity in Congress.

Congress, the current Democratic Congress, has the lowest approval rating of any Congress in the history of the United States. They are rivaling the kind of demagoguery and outright partisanship for their own selfish ambitions that led to the Civil War. This Congress can be compared to the Pre-Civil War Congress where they were so morally weak and indecisive that they allowed the "Great Compromise" - that some states should be slave states and some should be free. I fear that we could be on the edge of another civil war with such incompetent and self serving leadership.

On both sides, we have clear and open evidence of pettiness, viciousness, corruption, bribery and sexual perversion. When the top leaders of our country act like animals, selfish children and whiny brats – attempting to screw strangers in public bathroom stalls, hiding money in freezers, using native Americans for their own corrupt political purposes, sleeping and drooling and ranting on public TV the American public knows its time for a change. (I’ll let you guess who they are. They are from both sides of the House and Senate and they have one thing in common – they love themselves and money more than they love the American they are hired to serve and defend.)

Most in Congress on both sides have an attitude of extreme treachery toward the very military THEY desperately need to keep their "candy asses" from being blown sky high on the way to work. The Carpetbagger from New York is using her senatorial office for no other reason than to run for president (and yes, she'll probably win - I believe the American people are overall just that stupid). Under this current Congress, which has put off any meaningful debate about illegal aliens and protection of our homeland, murderous illegal aliens can get more health and government benefits than a Hardworking US citizen who has paid their dues all their life, it is possible that freedom is not just being eroded, but is being destroyed.

In our country, we have laws - Don't murder. Don't steal. Don't lie.. The list goes on. But then we have our Congress and our political leaders decrying the "Two Americas", where, in reality, "if you are rich and famous you can break all the laws you want, maybe write a book, and get a ton of cash for it. But woe to you if you are a poor person of color! One false step and you are going down for 20 years because you felt sorry for yourself one day and just had to steal a bike.

According to God's Word, the true sign of the end times is that people would be evil, and this is how we would know what evil is - very simply: people would be lovers of themselves, and call what is evil good and what is good evil. I believe our Congress is in that camp and that they should all resign. Every last one of them. When people who represent our freedoms sacrifice them for their own power lust and personal ambition, are we really safe?

Dems Debate on Raising Taxes for Healthcare

Tonight on the AARP debate, Democratic candidates were touting their fabulous comprehensive and universal health care plans.....all paid for by raising Taxes on the "Rich" and by raising Capital Gains Tax from 15% to 27%.

I don't think Edwards, Richardson,Clinton, Biden and Dodd really have a background in economics. What they propose may satisfy the itching ears of the "poor" who are bitter and have a grudge against those who are blessed with the ability to accumulate wealth, but in reality it is those who have a little extra capital who can start businesses without borrowing and who can create jobs which increases the revenue base from which people pay more taxes. They don't realize that "Bush's Tax Cuts" - they speak that like a derogatory word - are what have fueled the strong economy we have now.

In their lofty and even pompous proclamations about health care, they fail to address the one great unmentionable in Democratic politics - Illegal aliens are sucking the health care system dry and not contributing via taxes. If that issue were dealt with, along with tort reform and a purging of corruption form the Medicare system that still pays our $12 for a tylenol, it would go a long way toward solving some of our health care issues.

John must be at the parlor.....

Elizabeth is doing all the talking for him again. Ever know someone whose wife did all the important talking for him....? The Royal Edwards family is case in point.








I'm just wondering when John-boy will decide to call it quits......or will his wife make that decision for him too?

Edwards Trotting Towards Defeat

So now John Edward's national security plan is based on a 10,000 member "civillian peace corp" which he thinks will stop terrorism before it starts.

I'm so sorry to breck, oops, break it to you, Mr. Edwards. Terrorism has already started, even if you don't believe it exists.

Here is part of the article from the "New York Sun"

The plan Mr. Edwards presented yesterday — which he dubbed "A Strategy to Shut Down Terrorists and Stop Terrorism Before It Starts" — calls for a 10,000-person "Marshall Corps" to deal with issues ranging from worldwide poverty and economic development to clean drinking water and micro-lending. He said investing in those areas would shore up weak nations and help ensure that terrorism does not take root there. That, he said, would allow the country to stop potential terrorists before they even join the ranks.

I do believe the United States has been doing that kind of work for YEARS now. This is nothing new and it didn't help.

The problem with the rise in terrorism is that we have failed to address the source of the terrorism. We are dealing with a group of people who are being trained from the womb that it is honorable and glorious to kill and be killed for the sake of a totalitarian religion that suppresses and oppresses its members. Yes, I am talking about radical Islam. We have been so enamored with "multi-culturalism" and accepting all cultures as equal (even though common sense tells us that some cultures are just made to survive and thrive and treat people better than others) that we tolerated human rights abberations by certain cultures. We thought if we just left them alone, they would leave us alone. Bad move, for their culture hates the very civilization we know and love.

And Edwards wants to win them with a big flashy smile, perfect hair, and a little money and clean water??? Ain't gonna happen!!!

And you want to be President???? That ain't gonna happen either.

Poverty Politics

This is ironic. John Edwards goes to the University of California at Davis to give a speech at this state funded school. His topic is "Poverty, the Great Moral issue Facing America." His negotiated fee for this speech amounts to $31 per person - about $55,000 for the speech. And this university is going to raise tuition rates for the next school year by about seven percent.

This would not be so obscene except that Edwards proposed that 'every financial barrier' be removed from American students who want to go to college. This has been one of his campaign pledges.

Since Poverty was Edwards' topic, shouldn't he have done the speech for free, and help to relieve the financial burden of the students? That additional $55K could have been used to provide additional scholarships for deserving students so they, too, can climb out of poverty. Who knows? Maybe one of the deserving students will become a personal injury trial lawyer and become rich by winning lawsuits that place additional burdens on the rest of society just like Edwards did.

Priceless!

Mike Huckabee!

We know which side he is on!

Well, Mr. "Two Americas", why don't you come and live on our side for a while?

$400 is exorbitant for any hair treatment, let alone a simple haircut. Iowa Barbers Agree!
I'm sorry, Mr. Edwards - with your personal hypocrisy and your far left political stance, don't count on my vote in 2008 or any time.

When Democrats run as Republicans and Republicans run as Democrats

What would really be political news?

Something most are trying to ignore. Democrats are running on Republican issues to gain votes, and Republicans are running on Democrat issues to gain votes. This causes fusion of the moderates of both political parties, and not a little confusion.

Take the election last November. The Democrats who were successful in taking Republican seats ran on predominately conservative issues - cut taxes, strong on defense, pro-business, and one or two were actually anti-abortion. While Republicans were running on conventional democratic issues - socialized medicine, pro-government entitlements, the raising of the minimum wage and anti-war positions.

Here are two articles from the midterm election season before the election that discuss this:

In Key House Races, Democrats Run to the Right

Republicans Running As Democrats

Who did this benefit? Well, the Democrats, for sure! And it says a lot about Americans in general. Average Americans are neither far right or far left in their political views. They usually vote for someone who is similar to them and who makes them feel safe. They want someone in elected office who is fair and reasonable and able to meet their personal needs.

Now, who in this presidential race is leaning in which direction? Let's look at the major contenders for the 2008 Presidential race:

On the Republican Side: John McCain, Mitt Romney, Rudy Guiliani

On the Democrat Side: Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, John Edwards, Bill Richardson

The rest, discounting the possibility of a dark horse candidate, are small potatoes and will probably be eliminated in the primaries - not because they are bad candidates, but simply because they don't have the money or the political organization behind them.

Let's examine the candidate list more closely based on prior political history.

John McCain, who tags himself as a conservative, is, in fact, politically a Democrat. So much so that John Kerry DID ask him to be his vice-presidential running mate during Kerry's failed bid for the presidency. The likely reason McCain turned Kerry down was not that he was not interested, but that he wanted to run for the presidency himself. His pro-tax and spend attitude, and deliberate votes against the Bush tax cuts (while flip-floppingly voting to extend them) speak for themselves.

Mitt Romney was pro-abortion before he was anti-abortion. What is more confusing is his stance for or against gay marriage. This has him at odds with conservative groups all across the country. How else would a Republican be elected as Governor of Massachusetts! Goodness!!!!
Note, the art of flip-flopping has been honed to perfection in that state!

Rudy Guiliani never saw a tax he didn't like, but we should forgive him since he is from New York and can't help it . He is openly pro-choice and very liberal. Despite his left leaning views, he will probably become the Republican nominee and will probably be elected because we like to choose a president to keep us safe, and Guilani has proven himself as a leader in post-9/11 New York. The man is gifted and articulate in speech craft and is a likable human being. (unlike a nameless former presidential candidate that had a "plan" but no answers!)

Now it's time to skewer the Democratic hopefuls.

Hillary Clinton leaned conservatively in several issues but recently has been leaning more to the left to appease the radical elements of her party. She carefully researched and voted for the Iraq war before she decided to change her mind to please the Cindy Sheehan branch of her party. In the early days of her Senate career, she voted very conservatively on immigration.
If she wants the conservative vote, she is going to have to become even more centrist. (Or start praying in a Baptist Church - no, she just has to be seen praying in a Baptist church.)


Barak Obama - Well, what's to say about him? He's good looking and well spoken. If you are a Democrat, you really should vote for this guy. Not only does he totally toe the social-democrat line, but if he gets in office he will change the United States into a leftist socialist utopia that Hugo Chavez would stand up and salute.

John Edwards is the pretty boy in the bunch. Nice teeth, too. Why is he even running? He could not even carry his own state (then again, neither could Gore). And his repetitive "Two Americas" stump campaign is true - His American ,which is super wealthy,......and the rest of us wage slaves. His only advantage is that he holds the keys of the "plan" of the nameless failed presidential candidate!

Then there's Bill Richardson. He is the only Democratic governor that actually cut taxes. He did this for the people of New Mexico before he decided to run for President because he knew it would be best for his state. He was right. Economically, New Mexico is a pro business and pro growth state, and jobs abound here. He's been pro education, the roads are superior, he has used justice and common sense in the Immigration situation, and would have been a tremendous asset if Bush had not been so stubborn concerning a reliable and compassionate guest worker program. Although he will allow abortion to continue as the established law of the land, there is an aggressive pro abstinence program in New Mexico, and funding so women who choose to keep their babies can have reasonable options.

Richardson is very eloquent, and I believe he would decimate Hillary Clinton in open debate based on his personal integrity, experience and character alone. He is the true moderate of all the candidates, and is more conservative than the top Republican contenders for the office of president. He only lacks the money and the political machinery to have a fair contest against Hilary Clinton. This is a David and Goliath story - the Clinton machine being the Goliath. Richardson can win if he can get his message out. Good thing he has name recognition. Many Christian Conservatives, given a choice between left leaning Republicans Guiliani or Romney vs. right leaning Democrat Richardson, would discover, with chagrin, themselves voting Democrat.

We look forward to the upcoming political contest. What we want is a good man or woman to be President, and the American people would like (not that we are going to get) someone that is honest and effective as a leader.


Here is a Blog that will tell you more about this man. Better than I can tell you, any day.

Americans for Richardson

People should take a careful look at Bill Richardson as the next President of the United States because he is the very best Democrat running as a stealth Republican that we have ever seen.

Christian Bashing and Polarization

An interesting article in today's Opinion Journal - Curse of the Christian Bashers - exposes an underlying problem of the political left, and particularly the Democratic party. The most vocal supporters of the Democratic party are squeaky wheels of the far left. Unfortunately, these people are hardly diplomatic in expressing their opinions about those with whom they disagree - particularly those who carry even the faintest whiff of conservatism, "orthodox" Christian faith, support for the War and/or the President (if only out of respect). The brashness of this part of the Democratic party supporters, as well as their failure to see the benefits of working with those of differing viewpoints to at least find points of agreement has contributed to the polarization of the American political scene.

The current crop of Presidential hopefuls has turned to the blogosphere to get their message out and to hopefully gain support in next year's primary elections. John Edwards made a couple of unfortunate choices in hiring Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwan because he did not vet their earlier comments for politically explosive material. In a different article, Bonnie Erbe, writing as a guest columnist for the Seattle Post Intelligencer, addresses the problem as well. Here is part of her article:

"After the Edwards campaign fired and then rehired the bloggers last week, each of the two resigned this week. The whole episode made the campaign look bad. Perhaps worse, it devoured an opportunity to give serious, meaningful consideration to several crucial issues about which the women were writing.

First, let me state for the record the bloggers were woefully out of line to single out Catholics and Christians for attack. Extremists exist in the hierarchy of just about every large scale, organized religious group. Some even claim the right to dictate to followers how to live their lives. It is religious extremists who abuse this power whose behavior should be examined, not the broad swath of all adherents to one particular faith.

But the bloggers allowed themselves to be sidetracked by hurling invectives at all believers, which was unfair not only to those who believe and do not impose their beliefs on others, but also to some of the causes the bloggers espoused."

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/303892_erbe16.html

I hope members of all political parties are are paying attention to this drama, for when we lean to the extremist end of our ideology for support, we lose the middle ground.

Mary Eberstadt is succinct in her analysis in the Opinion Journal:

For what the blogger tempest really illuminates is a fact that could come to haunt the Democrats as they vie for national office: namely, that their past few wilderness years have also been boom years for the church-loathing liberal/left punditry. As a result, anti-Christian invective now graces (or disgraces) many of the books, magazines, Web sites and blogs to which liberals, including the Democratic elite, habitually look for ideas. One motto of this cottage industry is that the most serious threat to the American republic can be found in, no, not those religious fundamentalists, the ones that first leap to mind after 9/11; but, incredibly, certain other believers--our nation's Christians.

Is anybody listening? I hope John Edwards is now. And the other political candidates......?