Price of gas is going up partly due to the price of the dollar (oil is traded in dollars worldwide) and partly due to the leftist policies that prevent us from increasing the supply of oil and from building new refineries.
Currency devalues when too much of it is created. Banks create money when they lend, thanks to the magic of fractional-reserve banking. The US government borrowed **trillions** of dollars under Bush, mostly to finance balooning liberal spending programs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:U.S._Federal_Spending_-_ FY_2006.png
The unemployment rate isn't all that remarkable. It goes up and down, and it ain't anywhere near Jimmy Carter levels.
If the majority of nations were always right about foreign policy issues, our national reputation would actually matter.
On foreign policy...The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are succeeding. The insurgencies are being eviscerated. Salman Pak is out of commission. (1) The al-Tuwaitha nuclear program will not resurrect (unless we surrender). (2) Our government pursues a mostly-free-trade policy. Bush isn't giving North Korea any more light water nuclear reactors as Clinton did. Germany and France have shifted toward the right
On the down side, we are not urging Mexico toward the (conservative) economic reforms necessary to become a thriving economy, whaich would liberate Mexican nationals and subsequently ease the illegal immigration problem. (Canada is a libertarian paradise compared to Mexico.) Bush, like Clinton, the un-conservative policy that Israel must bargain with its terrorist enemies instead of defeat them. We didn't appease David Koresh, and he was small potatoes compared to Hamas.
The failure I see is stemming from leftist ideas.
(1) http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/salman_pak.ht m
(2) http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/tuwaitha.htm |
|
The point is that the Boomer conservatism of the sort Hugh and Duane represents is collapsing. Price of gas is skyrocketing. Dollar is sliding. Unemployment jumped. National reputation eroding. Failed policies overseas. And all these two clowns can talk about are Church Bulletins and Rev. Wright. They are babbling fools. I understand there are serious people on the right, but as we stand at the moment of the discrediting of Boomer conservatives, some of them will lose their marbles.
Have fun redefining conservatism. It needs to be done, and it shall be done. Don't expect any help from these simpering louts, though. The loss of clout and influence can drive a man nuts. And we have a generation of conservatives who have known nothing but clout and influence. |
|
|
was better than, say, Mariah Carey's effort in Japan. We'll give him that. And you only get one--so in that sense, Duane came through. But if you are at the plate, you just love seeing that big old beach ball lollipopping its way towards you. Yeah, Duane, give me one I can drive.. |
|
|
Wow, thanks Hugh. This is really inflammatory stuff. If I can take this bulletin at face value, it would seem to prove this is a Christian Church. Could there be anything more damning? You really nailed 'em this time. |
|
'cause I'm not seeing it.
Next up, people dig through Wright's trash looking for unrecycled glass bottles. |
|
Spot on. Spot on.
Duane, can you convince the Phillies to let you pitch again? You threw a decent one and everyone loved it. |
|
context of the Church, release them all at once to a website, and link to that.
Releasing them like this, one-by-one in a nearly unreadable format, is the equivalent of releasing pages from the phone book.
Analyze them all, post them all to a website, and then tell us which ones have anything interesting.
My bet is that Wright kept his racism to the spoken word and kept his bulletins and written word banal and mainstream, albeit leftist.
It is the style and format of the releases I object to. I think it is bad blogging. It is like some defense attorney showing the nice letters the defendant wrote from camp as a boy: irrelevant but still used to humanize the defendant.
Wright does not our help to be distracted from his self-proven hard core lefty racism.
|
|
What is the purpose of posting this series of pastoral letters? Somebody please answer the question!
For the record, I am no fan of Jeremiah Wright or **anyone** who espouses the theology of James Cone, which is summarized in this passage:
"Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community ... Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love."
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/JC18Aa01.html |
|
Let's go back in time to the election of 1860 and imagine what HH might have asked rhetorically of Lincoln:
"Can you explain, Abraham Lincoln, why you spent 4 years sharing the bed of another man, Joshua Speed, long after you could have afforded your own?"
"Abe Lincoln, just what was the nature of your relationship with the handsome and dashing young Elmer Ellsworth, so that you cried so much when he died, though you'd known him only a couple years?" (I know, literary license--Ellsworth died in 1861)
"And finally Abe Lincoln, you have severe bouts of depression, how can we expect you to stand up to Jeff Davis and R.E.Lee?"
Uh, President Stephen Douglas, anyone?
|
|
Kimberly writes: Saturday, June, 07, 2008 1:03 AM
Stick a fork in it, HH
It's over. Or, didn't you get the talking points memo yet
Arch says:
Kimberly. Why are you so upset about postings of Jerry Wright's church bulletins? Let those read who want to read and those who don't, ignore. You are a strange little person trying to micromanage the readers of this forum Kimberly! |
|
If there is nothing to it then,
Why bother? Why is this so upsetting if there is not much to it.
Mabybe, there is a need for shaping a certain timeline?
I personally, am not interested, and care less what Pastor Wright wrote on every little fine print but,
I certainly know, was a close friend of Farrakhan, went together to Libya visited Khaddafi.
I know Rev. Wright helped organize Farrakhan's million man March.
On the cover of Trumpet 2/12/06, Wright, Obama, and Farrakhan, all three faces are on the cover together.
Relationships are important, timelines are important. |
|
I'm thinking that Hugh is posting the bulletins so you can get an overall picture of what's going on in the church, good and bad. He's not trying to inflame passions, he's just trying to give all the information so readers can make up their own minds.
That said, the juxtaposition of these compassionate sounding bulletins with his sermon videos is very bizarre. He has judged who is worthy of his compassion, and my guess is that I am not. Not because of my deeds, but because of what I look like. |
|
Hey, don't group me with McTex. He was an anti Mormon bigot. That is not at all where I am coming from.
As you know I am a McCain supporter. I have no idea where this Duane post is going. Seriously, Jeremiah Wright is a nut job (go watch him on YouTube). Why dilute it with this pablum? |
|
|
Look at all the fools criticizing Hugh's postings! You would think that if there were nothing to worry about concerning Obammy's pastor, Jerry Wright, They would just ignore the whole thread but no , they have to throw outrages childish fits and attempt to explain away the embarrassing fact that their candidate is a phony lying leftist deceiver with suggestions of racist hatred of white people by association for twenty years with the delinquent pastor Wright. Post them all Hugh and let the interested read every word of Obammy's racist pastor and friend of twenty years to spite the Obammy apologists bidding you to stop. |
|
Hi guys!
Just wanted to let you know ... about the whole printing-the-church-bulletins thing?
It makes you look like crazy people. Like the guy I see in the parking lot of my grocery store sometimes, muttering to himself about how his landlord is bugging his phone.
So far, there's nothing in these church bulletins that I don't see at my mainline Protestant church every Sunday.
I hate to be the one to tell you, but stuff like this is not going to make people gravitate toward the conservative message any more than my seeing the crazy guy at the grocery store makes me want to start muttering to myself and smelling bad.
Is this the best you've got?
William F. Buckley is shedding a tear in heaven right now, wondering how and why the stupid people hijacked his perfectly good conservative movement. |
|
it's unconscionable that you put these papers up on here with the phone number of one of the parishioners. Especially considering the racist nuts who might view this.
If this is the kind of lame ammunition you're going to come up with to try to smear Obama with, you haven't got a shot in hell. Worse stuff than this didn't work.
You are making your desperation patently obvious. |
|
Andrew Sullivan wrote this today:
"Has Hewitt Finally Lost It?
06 Jun 2008 09:14 pm
Maybe I'm missing something, but Hugh Hewitt keeps posting images from TUCC's church bulletin as if they contained something scary or shocking or revelatory. I can't find anything in them even faintly remarkable. Donating a kidney to another member of the congregation? Instructions on how to get an EITC tax credit? Help for Katrina victims? Is Hewitt now muttering aimlessly in a dark room somewhere?
But there was this classic:
Even voters hostile to Israel ougth [sic] to wonder about Obama's naivete about the issue.
Wha?"
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/0 6/has-hewitt-fina.html
Frankly I have strained my eyes, assuming that these bullitins contain something offensive and outrageous (given Wright's and Pfleger's past comments) only to find stuff that is rather banal. It is not my cup of tea and obviously very liberal oriented, but I have to shrug my sholders and say "so what." Duane can you explain what the relevance of all of this is?
|
|
The trick, dear CriticalBill, is to recite Mr. Hewitt's “Decision 2008” mantra* over and over and over. Again, it goes:
“Ayers. Dohrn. Pfleger. Rezko. Wright. …Ayers. Dohrn. Pfleger. Rezko. Wright. …Ayers. Dohrn. Pfleger. Rezko. Wright. ...”
As Chancellor Hugh has taken great pains to explain, those five proper nouns are the key to understanding what an Obama presidency would be all about, nor is there much else the electorate really needs to know about the candidate.
Trust us, fellow townhallers, just keep chanting Hugh’s “thin slice” and suddenly everything (including his seemingly cryptic posts) will start to make sense.
Hope that helps. (Btw, someone might want to pass that tip on to that ever-hapless Mr. Sullivan.**)
///
* http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/blog/g/fcf5f165-a939-46a9-a faa-e26aaec507ec
** http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/ 06/has-hewitt-fina.html
|
|
Yes, this is outrageous. I am outraged.
Now, why would you post someone's home phone number on your site? That, I'm afraid, is really, actually outrageous. |
|
This is reminiscent of the recent Fox program where the anchor and known loony Michelle Malkin made a big deal about the horrible plagiarism that Obama showed in parroting the words of a democrat from years ago (I forget who it was). The problem was that the clips they showed of the two speeches had absolutely nothing in common. Michelle and the Fox guy nattered on about how bankrupt the Obama message was, that he had nothing new to say and so was just repeating what someone had said years earlier. Obviously neither of them had actually seen or heard the two clips, they were just jerking their knees.
That appears to be what Hewitt is doing here. |
|
that some lackey put up the wrong page.
Unless I'm missing something, and if I am, it's not real obvious. |
|
|
... what in any case was a poor excuse for a mind. What on earth is this supposed to demonstrate? A member of his congregation needs a new kidney and information about taxes should be passed on to Katrina victims? Que? No comprendo... ah, perhaps, both the unlucky chap with renal failure and the Katrina victims were black, therefore meaning that this church spews nothing but black racism? Jeez Hewitt, do your ever-dwindling fan base a favour and book yourself into rehab. |
|
|
|