Wednesday, April 30, 2008
|
|
Questions For Pastor Wright
|
|
Posted by:
Hugh Hewitt at
4:31 PM
|
The issues that remain concern Barack Obama's judgment and his credibility.
If Pastor Wright agrees to be interviewed by other than Bill Moyers, the questions should ask not for his opinions on various controversies, but for facts about his relationship with the senator.
For instance, did Pastor Wright discuss Louis Farrakhan with Obama before during or after they both attended the Million Man March? Were they together during that trip. Did Senator Obama indicated unease with or criticism of Farrakhan?
How often did you see Obama at Trinity on Sunday over the past twenty years? Any particular dates you can recall with certainty? Do you have your sermons from those days on which you are certain Obama was present?
Did you appear at non-church events together? Did you ever discuss William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn? Tony Rezko?
Wright can destroy Obama's general election chances with one serious interview, and the New York Post suggests the rebuked reverend may be in a mood to do so, especially after being slammed for his "rants" yesterday:
The Post has learned. "After 20 years of loving Barack like he was a member of his own family, for Jeremiah to see Barack saying over and over that he didn't know about Jeremiah's views during those years, that he wasn't familiar with what Jeremiah had said, that he may have missed church on this day or that and didn't hear what Jeremiah said, this is seen by Jeremiah as nonsense and betrayal," said the source, who has deep roots in Wright's Chicago community and is familiar with his thinking on the matter.
|
|
|
|
"Oh, you go to Jeremiah's church." That kind of negative imaging I said might be harmful to him in terms of what he was trying to do in building coalitions and getting other churches to do things, again, for the benefit of the people. That would never happen just because they're going to associate your name with mine. That could be detrimental, I told him back then. It holds just as true, even more so, now. In fact, I just shared with, I was trying to remember who it is, somebody in public life was asking me about Barack, and I said listen, Barack might be forced by the media and/or by supporters to be very absent from this church and to put distance between our church and himself.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/week1028/intervie w.html
Jeremiah Wright at least had good instincts on that issue. |
|
Q: I read that when he first came to your church that you actually warned him that it might not be a good idea for him to associate with your church. Can you talk about that?
A: Yeah, I am not popular. I'm really not known. People have perspectives about me. In fact, one article recently said that I was a maverick. I am not your typical garden-variety African-American clergy person, and because I'm not -- he was talking about organizing the churches in those early days. I said, man, you don't know who you're talking to. They don't like me.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/week1028/intervie w.html |
|
from a Hillary supporter could go along way towards getting Wright into that interview ...
|
|
I'm surprised so few understand what is going on. What was saw yesterday was Nixon firing H.R. Haldeman.
Like Haldeman, Wright knows the real secrets of Tricky Dick Obama. Remember folks, Wright has been having converations with T.D.Obama for going on 20 years. Wright knows the REAL Tricky Dick Obama, not the carefully constructed one of Alexrod invention.
Seriously, is there anybody on this planet past puberty who actually thinks Tricky Dick Obama never affirmed, not even once, some of the kookier things Wright represents? Does anybody actually believe they have never once had a conversation where Obama agreed with some of the more 'cutting-edge' black liberation baloney? In your heart, you know they have.
This potential for blackmail explains all of the odd events of the past weeks. It is the reason Obama wouldn't denounce him previously, why he called Wright 'brilliant', and said Wright was like 'family'. Obama was trying to signal to Wright that his Philadelphia speech was exactly what Wright has said it was- a political speech designed to minimize the political damage. But, hey, Jeremiah, you know I'm down with the struggle. Knowing these secrets, Wright can swagger all over television, saying whatever he wants assured that Obama would never really disown him. But yesterday, with Indiana and North Carolina threatened, Obama threw him under the bus. Like Nixon, he's willing to toss anybody aside once it threatens his precious hide. But Obama knows, like Nixon, there is a catastrophic risk in doing so.
As usual, the press is wrong. What we saw yesterday wasn't outrage, far from it. It was FEAR. Obama lives in fear every hour of the day knowing Haldeman Wright can topple him whenever he wants.
Yesterday, Obama fired Jeremiah Wright Haldeman and assured us all he is not a crook. I'm betting very soon we hear otherwise.
|
|
|
Have you been listening to Mark Levin? He calles him Barack Millhouse Obama. |
|
McCain has turned the GOP into a chronically sick animal. His candidacy is a joke.
|
|
|
Wright. Honestly, I am sick and tired of this story. Some coverage, of course, but the number of articles and blog entries about this is out of control. What about gas prices, the fed cutting interest rates again, McCain's VP picks, the surge, even the plum island issue -- please, cover some other issues here. |
|
a man's skin or the church, mosque, or synagogue he attends.
What I do care about is some ill-intentioned snake-oil salesman who seems to think he can use the US flag as toilet paper, lie about our WW2 veterans, and rake in millions of dollars for his Constitutionally-guaranteed free speech, all the while complaining about how he's so much worse off than honest people of other ethnicities who actually have to work for a living...
Jeremiah Wright's congregation ought to be ashamed of themselves...
May the Lord rebuke them all for facilitating his hate speech... |
|
Barack Millhouse Obama? That's too funny.
I hope I don't offend Hugh, but I prefer Trick Dick.
Seriously, watch Obama with the sound off. He isn't angry or mad or ticked off or disappointed or hurt or outraged. He is scared.
Of the other shoe dropping.
|
|
|
When will the "real" blacks start throwing Oreos at Obama? Michael Steele wants to know. |
|
Question:
What has changed about Jeremiah Wright, at least with regard to his messages from a year ago, 5 years ago, 10 years ago, 15 years ago---and what he has been saying over the past week which prompts strong denunciations from you about him?
Again, what has changed in his message today compared to all of the previous years you've been friends; compared to those years where he presided over your marriage, compared to those years he baptized your children? |
|
let's take bets on how long it will take Rev Al to remind folks that he was one of the "real" blacks who said, several months ago, that Obama was not authentic, had not paid his dues, and was not down with the struggle? lol. I say within the next 24 hours if he hasn't said it already.
Wow. The payoffs trading hands among Clinton, The Professional Race Baiters, Rev Wright, and Obama handlers will be fast and furious. Like theghost said the bidding starts at $100,000. |
|
Yes, indeed, what about those gas prices.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid took control of congress nearly two years ago.
WHAT HAVE THEY DONE, WHAT ARE THEY DOING, TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE?
Where's all of that change they were promising to bring. Were they actually inferring that they were going to see to it that commodities were going to rise such as what we are witnessing?
Is that what they meant?
Wheat has doubled in price just in the spa of time San Fran Nan has been in CONTROL.
Uranium has increased 10-fold in the past few years.
I could go on, however, the point is clear enough. |
|
It would be instructive to see some visibility from Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid in this area.
Anyone?
Anyone?
Anyone?
Ferris Bueller? |
|
|
That the Dem/libs will unveil anytime now. |
|
you considered the slightest mention of his religious life an act of bigotry.
Now your main mission is to define Obama solely through the prism of his relationship with his pastor.
You're a man of exceptionally low quality, Hugh. |
|
Claim that God is a respector of persons? Did he make fun of other races? Did he say nasty things about America? Really?
When will you know the difference? |
|
Now what did that boy do?
Hey, JohnCar, Hugh's an activist for hire, a carny barker, not a political analyst of any integrity. Gotta take him with a grain of salt.
Remember asian bird flu? Tick... tick... tick...
He did get that pool and two years of college for his daughter paid for, though, thanks to Deep Pockets Mitt.
+ + + |
|
|
I have been watching the self destruction and aided destruction of Sen Obama with much interest, and can surmise that quite possibly the "African-American Leadership" might not desire Senator Obama to win or even be the choice of the Democrat Party. With the franchise at stake (that is the discriminated against minority) it behooves Rev Wright, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton to maintain the status quo to protect their personal money machines. These men have built fortunes on keeping African-Americans as second class citizens, in their self proclaimed position of leadership. If Senator Obama became President then it would prove to those who buy into their rhetoric that we as a nation have long past slavery and Jim Crow. If Senator Obama wins the nomination and loses the election yell prejudice, if he loses to Senator Clinton then cry out prejudice, either way the Reverend, Jesse, and Al will have plenty to crow or should I say "Jim Crow" about. |
|
Obama's church is religious?
When I see clips of Trinity United, all I see is a bunch of neo-Marxist, Afro-centric race baiters using the Bible as a pretext to attack America and the people anybody who doesn't hold to ...what do they call it...the "black value system".
Am I allowed to talk about the "white value system"?
Tell me any, ANY, mainstream religious leader in America who is allowed to talk about the "white value system"? Yea, I thought so...
It's Barry's embrace of the racial double standard that will cost him any chance of the presidency.
|
|
It's funny how everything centering on Obama's relationship has LITTLE to do with religiosity:
1.) US of KKK A.
2.) US government inventing AIDS to eradicate the black race
3.) The USA being no different from terrorist organization group Al Qaeda.
4.) The US government distributing drugs within black neighborhoods to young black males.
5.) Chickens coming home to roost in explaining just desserts to the victims of World Trade Center bombings.
Now that does not sound to me like Obama's "religiosity".
But, perhaps you can 'splain it all to us.
We'll be over here patiently awaiting your excusing of this hatred for America on political grounds vis a vis religious. |
|
Thank you very much. "Mitt's church" is studiosly apolitical: the complete antithesis of "Barack's church," which is steeped in politics, and liberation theology at that.
John Car: If you haven't figure that out by now, turn in your voter registration card.
|
|
You've done an excellent job of sharply separating Wright's crazy political views from his religious duties.
Just as Obama has quite credibly done. This bipartisan side of your nature is very disarming--you should give free reign to it more often. |
|
|
rev wright's chickenssss have come home to roost. |
|
|
Plum Island issue? Tell me more. That's a new one for me. Is that the Plum Island off of Salisbury, MA? What happened? |
|
I can imagine if tables were turned and it was a conservative who had this 22 year relationship with a, "crazy" (as you refer to him") Wright, yours would be that all too typical narrative on separation of church and state. It would surely be woven into your chatter.
Nonetheless, this issue is about judgement; Obama's. His poor judgement in maintaining relationship with someone who has parroted this, hate-America spew long before you and I became aware of it.
Question for you, JohnCar:
If this is no big deal for you Liberals, Leftists, Progressives, Victicrats, socialists, communists, then it must concern you that Obama is just now repudiating this man. It should matter not a whit what Hugh Hewitt, nor any conservative thinks about Obama's longstanding relationship with a "wacky" Wright. It should only matter what his "followers" think, those like you.
You are fine with the Obama/Wright relationship. That should be enough for him to leave it status quo. I mean, Obama should not deounce the guy for conservatives.
You are fine with his relationship with Bill Ayers as well. Fine. Conservatives should not impact Obama's organizing additional parties at the Ayer's household, as he's done in the past.
Obama, however has just turned from Wright. That's odd. He has your support. he has the unwavering support of the vast majority of blacks. He has unfettered support of Leftists. Why should he change direction this week? He should maintain his loyalty to Wright as he's done for 22 years. It does seem odd that he is changing his tune. His peeps are fine with him and that should be good enough for him.
Just another pandering politician?
|
|
Dear McCain haters (Part I),
I'm sort of stunned by the continuing vitriol directed against John McCain. I voted for him, and I'd debate anyone, anytime, as to his conservatism. Whatever anybody's gripes about him may be, he won the nomination in a fair contest.
Had he not, I would not have been thrilled with Romney, Huckabee, or Ron Paul. Still, if any of these men had won the most primaries, he'd have had not only my vote, but my unhesitating financial support.
I would not, in other words, have picked up my ball and gone home just because my preferred candidate lost. I would not have threatened to sit on my hands in November.
Yet that is what I am hearing from so many in your comments section: McCain's a liberal, McCain's really a Democrat, he's this, he's that, on and on. Well, to them I say this: McCain is a longtime fiscal hawk, more so than guys like Tom DeLay or George Bush have ever been. He's the main man on the Hill behind the surge. He is right on taxes and the 2nd Amendment. He not only supports wholeheartedly the GWOT, he can explain to Americans why they should do so also. On health care, abortion, judges, and most other things we care about, McCain is conservative. Yes, campaign finance reform was a misstep, as was McCain's support for President Bush's immigration bill. But the former is hardly a deal-breaker (really, do you feel your freedom of speech so stifled? How so exactly?), and McCain has acknowledged his error in how he handled the latter. So I ask you, if Mitt Romney can change his position on abortion, and is accepted at his word that his new position is, in fact, genuine, why cannot John McCain be granted the same benefit of the doubt when he not only changes his position, but frankly admits his error, on illegal immigration?
... |
|
|
Pelosi and Reid are a JOKE! Pasadena Phil, Plum Island, it's the infectious desease lab, and in a typical attempt to save $$ in the short term, they are planning to move it, where, of course, right near the cattle herds. If there is ever an outbreak, we will be in the same position as they were in the UK, and have to destroy the herds. It is insane! |
|
(continued from above)
As for the torture issue, maybe I'm in the minority in my own party, but I oppose it. For one, Israel doesn't torture terror suspects, and they're under constant threat. For two, the Army opposes torture, for obvious reasons. Three, I feel comfortable deferring to John McCain on this issue, and not only because he withstood torture for 5-1/2 years and didn't give up anything, but because he's right: the City on the Hill cannot have a torture chamber and remain the City on the Hill. If you don't agree with me, fine -- I won't go Sullivan on you and call you an evil nut -- but please don't tell me McCain's stance on torture is a deal-breaker.
As for GITMO, face it: it's been a PR disaster. We need to shut it down and set up a new facility in the Middle East somewhere. Let the Afghans run it, too -- our guys can swing by to ask the questions. Let's see the press and bleeding hearts head out to Kandahar to bust chops because the soup isn't hot or the veggies aren't fresh enough. Something tells me they won't.
A few final words. The blog "Big Lizards" has a couple of posts regarding John McCain, titled "Gee, he really is a conservative". I highly recommend them. If any of you out there, having read them, and having really investigated John McCain's conservatism, and found the latter so unacceptable per your own standards, please consider: the choice in November is going to be either John McCain, or Hillary or Obama. The Democrats control both houses of congress and probably will hold on to both houses for at least the next couple of election cycles.
That is the reality. And whether our defeat in 2006 was mostly-earned, or mostly a result of the press' war on the GOP, doesn't matter. We are where we are and we must deal with it realistically.
... |
|
Right now, the Democrats are salivating at the prospect of enough Republicans staying home to give them the Presidency. Groups like ACORN are going to be out in force, registering as many dead people, pets, and illegal aliens as they can. MoveOn and George Soros are going to pour millions into smearing Republicans up and down the ticket. Meanwhile, you can gripe about McCain, and whip up as many conservatives as you can to not vote for him, and, when November 4th comes, you can pull the lever for Bob Barr, and you can call it acting on principle. That is your right. And maybe you can do this, and McCain will still win, without your help. But maybe he won't -- and then, like it or not, you will be on the side of the scales that gives us a President Obama or Clinton, and all the Justice Ginsbergs and Secretary Bergers that come along with them.
Think it over, please.
|
|
Right now, the Democrats are salivating at the prospect of enough Republicans staying home to give them the Presidency. Groups like ACORN are going to be out in force, registering as many dead people, pets, and illegal aliens as they can. MoveOn and George Soros are going to pour millions into smearing Republicans up and down the ticket. Meanwhile, you can gripe about McCain, and whip up as many conservatives as you can to not vote for him, and, when November 4th comes, you can pull the lever for Bob Barr, and you can call it acting on principle. That is your right. And maybe you can do this, and McCain will still win, without your help. But maybe he won't -- and then, like it or not, you will be on the side of the scales that gives us a President Obama or Clinton, and all the Justice Ginsbergs and Secretary Bergers that come along with them.
Think it over, please.
|
|
|
What will the questions be for the Hildabeast? Will there be something in her past, in her positions, that will actually nail this lying incompetent. Will Rush do Chaos on her which will actually be meaningful? After all, we do know she has so many tricky money raising thugs behind her. The Tries and Huangs. But, will there be anything else that can actually challenge her votes, her bills that Americans will realize are just another name for socialism? The McCain effort seems a bit weak on challenging her or even the wounded Obama. He cannot just have Talk Radio do it. He must actually challenge these two socialists. |
|
Now he's going to CHANGE his relationship with Wright.
Wright confirmed at the Press Club what many have suspected from the clips, he's a radical. Ayers is a radical. People are starting to think Obama is a radical. So Obama will CHANGE his relationship with Wright. |
|
It's really up to Sen. McCain. If he wants our votes, he has to earn them.
He said he heard us after the last amnesty fight. He heard two things right. We want the border secured and we don't trust them. There apparently was alot he didn't hear.
He hired Juan Hernandez, who represents foreign nationals illegally in our country as his hispanic outreach, instead of reaching out to someone from "You Don't Speak For Me" a group of citizens of hispanic descent who oppose illegal aliens.
He said a couple of weeks ago he would sign McCain/Kennedy if it were put on his desk.
If he wants my vote, there are a couple of things he could do.
1. Publicly dismiss and disavow Juan Hernandez and the Reconquista for which he stands.
2. Apologize for conspiring in secret with La Raza and Ted Kennedy and trying to jam amnesty down our throats.
3. Pledge to veto ANY amnesty bill.
4. Pledge to enforce the laws, including deportation, which is the penalty for illegal aliens.
It's up to Sen. McCain, he can represent the interests of American citizens and uphold the rule of law or he can continue to court the favor of liberals and illegal aliens.
I will not vote for the latter.
|
|
He hasn't really changed his position on illegal aliens, he still wants amnesty, or Comprehensive Immigration Reform, as he and Teddy like to call it.
http://townhall.com/columnists/AmandaCarpenter/2008/03/28/b loggers_press_mccain_adviser_on_immigration
“John McCain’s position on immigration is very clear and this a question that gets asked at townhall appearances everyday in media appearances and has answered the question at least a thousand times before the New Hampshire primary,” Schmidt said.
He explained, “Any person who supports John McCain’s campaigns is a subscriber to John McCain’s views"
A vote for McCain is a vote for surrender of your country. They will use your vote for McCain as proof that you want amnesty.
Many of us see another amnesty as the end of the Republic, the stampede it will set off will be overwhelming. If we don't stop the inundation none of the rest matters. We'll be a banana republic before the jihadis can get us. There will never be another GOP president or Congressional majority. Importing voters for the socialists is as stupid as it gets.
McCain keeps saying "Secure the border first". We know that he means amnesty next. The plan is to get the border state Gov's to declare the border secure. Conveniently, they are all on board the cheap labor express. Then his good friend Ted Kennedy will bring back McCain/Kennedy and McCain can provide his good friends across the aisle with their new permanent majority.
I will not vote for amnesty.
|
|
Okay -- here's where I think you're right, and where I think you're wrong.
For a long time, I was wildly incensed about illegal immigration -- and I mean incensed. Angry as hell, arguing about it all over the place. Not so much anymore. Not because the issue's changed -- it hasn't. It is still one of the most important issues we are facing as a nation. If we keep on the road we're on, we will wind up having imported a foreign revolution -- which is what the hard-left wants. We will bankrupt ourselves trying to care for all these people, and we will dilute our own votes, and all the rest -- you know it so I won't say it.
That said, there are right ways and wrong ways as to how we go about a solution. |
|
Which is to say that, like it or not, we got ourselves to our current crisis. Reagan did, Bush I did, and W did -- it is on them as much as it is on the Democrats. And like it or not, the people who are here illegally have set up communities in the United States. They have friends, families, etc. The question is, what do we do about them?
William Kristol wrote, correctly in my view, that, should we take the "ship 'em all out" attitude towards illegal aliens, we will lose Hispanic voters for a generation. We will lose them to the Democrats, even though Hispanics are more culturally aligned with conservative values and the GOP. |
|
|
Simple challenge I have posed to all the Pince Nez RINOs who defend McCain as a conservative and vow to hold their noses and vote for him. Just provide JUST ONE accomplishment in his 25 years in Congress where he wasn't delivering landmark liberal legislation for liberal Democrats. In the months I've been asking that, NO ONE has come up with anything. And don't bother citing his conservative rating. That is why I call him Shoeless John, after Shoeless Joe Jackson who famously hit .359 for the 1919 Chicago Black Sox while throwing the series. Just like McCain always crashes and burns when the game is on the line for his own team. There is no point in "reaching across the aisle" if all you are doing is surrendering your friends to your enemies. What difference does it make if Hillary or Obama wins? I'd rather get stabbed in the back by my enemy than in the chest by a "friend". At least with an enemy, you expect and have a chance. |
|
The latter, however, brings us to the "good" part of the problem: we are not Europe, and, bottom line, if we are going to have immigration coming from the third world, the Hispanic countries are the way to go. In that sense, it must be acknowledged that our problem could be much, much worse.
Yet we still have a problem. So what should we do? |
|
|
I live in the belly of the beast and you can take my word for it, if the immigration laws are enforced, the LEGAL Mexican immigrants will be grateful. It is the LEGAL immigrants who are hurt the most by illegals. Nothing good happens when people who are following the rules while working out of poverty are forced into deeper poverty by being forced to compete with those who are cheating. You have either been asleep for the past two years or are too lazy to look into this issue. I have found that most of the people here defending illegal immigration are liberal white people who live in mostly white suburbs. Here's a quick assignment. Google Jamiel Shaw. |
|
We cannot conduct mass-deportations. For one, logistically it would be all but impossible. Secondly, it would be a spectacle the likes of which you have never seen, and it would make us look like Nazis -- and I do not use that term lightly. It would be a wild forced exodus, and it would be horrifying to see.
So what is the answer?
As I see it, the solution is multi-faceted, and one of the facets is border control, and John McCain has promised he will secure the border. Now, you may call me crazy, but I think he will keep his word. And not only because I think he'll lose the GOP base in the mid-terms, but because he is a man who values his word. |
|
It wasn't legislation, but the Gang of 14 was a very good thing to have done -- it was a very good *conservative* move that saved us the filibuster for judicial nominations for when we have a Dem president and we are a minority in congress.
Aside from that, I am not a historian as to legislation -- but I would not claim victory in your wager quite yet. McCain has a huge legislative record, and no doubt a lot of it is bi-partisan -- but I sincerely doubt that it is as you say. |
|
|
The question we must all ask ourselves now, as we head towards November, is who is more likely to do the most to address the problem of illegal immigration? McCain or the Democratic nominee? To paraphrase Reagan, better to have 50%, 25%, or even 10% of what you want, than to have 100% of what you don't want. |
|
We need Comprehensive Immigration Enforcement, not reform. We need to restore respect for the law and the faith of the American people that their government is not selling them out. Amnesty for the illegal aliens is also amnesty for the corrupt companies who have been employing them. Money trumps everything, including love of country. Multi-nationals have no loyalty to country by definition, they see us as a market, not a nation. They see people as workers, documented or undocumented, no difference. If they can't send the work to where the labor is cheaper, then they want to bring the cheap labor here. If citizenship becomes meaningless, this is no longer The United States of America.
If we love our Constitution and our representative Republic and we intend to keep it we must not surrender our sovereignty or abandon the rule of law. Profits must not supercede security. We should not create a new path to citizenship. We have a path to citizenship, more generous than any other country, illegal aliens have ignored it and bad choices do have consequences.
|
|
Actively, consistently, continuously enforcing existing laws will send the message that we are serious about our laws. Changing them to accomodate people breaking them sends the opposite message. And not just to those already here. Millions are waiting to see which tack we take. Amnesty will set off a stampede like we have not seen before. Enforcement will start the flow in the other direction as the jobs and benefits dry up. Those pushing for amnesty are for surrendering to the demands of the illegal aliens and their employers, abandoning the rule of law and surrendering our sovereignty. We should not change the laws to suit those breaking them.
|
|
|
So, if one grants that the answer to that question is that McCain, while probably not perfect, is (a) a pretty straight-shooter and a man of his word and (b) much, MUCH more likely to address the problem of illegal immigration than either Obama or Clinton, then the choice is clear. Bush was a disaster on illegal immigration before the 2004 election -- I remember, I was going nuts over how bad he was -- and yet, I'll be a lot of the people fuming over what McCain did in helping push the President's immigration bill never hesitated for a second about turning out for Bush. In point of fact, honestly appraised, of the two, Bush or McCain, I think you can expect far better from McCain in the future vis-a-vis illegal immigration. |
|
|
Dogman you make a very compelling argument for McCain however as a conservative and someone who loves this country and wants to maintain it's sovereignty I'm hard pressed to back McCain. He talks about border security but is constantly dodging the amnesty,and then there is Juan Hernandez.McCain has to realize that illegal immigration is a deal breaker to real conservatives. |
|
Attrition is the way to go. But if we have seen anything, perhaps the best means to handle that is not to hand over responsibility to the federal government, but leave it to the states.
Seriously -- think about it: state by state, it would be much easier to enforce the laws that are already on the books, than to try to strong-arm it through the federal government, which, as a matter of course, is weak-willed when it comes to state matters. |
|
Gang of 14 was a good thing? Both Alito and Roberts would have been seated without it. What it actually accomplished was to sacrifice the entire judicial appointment process behind the fig leaf of avoiding a knock-out, drag-out fight over the "nuclear option". That was a major liberal victory. That is why their hasn't been a single federal judge appointed to fill the very many open positions since. That is well over a year. A few senators defy tradition to form a private club overrule the ruling party (Republicans). It was one of the many actions by Shoeless John that paved the way for the November 2006 GOP catastrophe. It was a disgraceful sellout by all senators who joined in.
Care to try again? McCain-Feingold maybe? |
|
Yes, it is tough. I know that. Like I said, I was flipping out about the issue. But then I realized, the federal government isn't the best way to handle the situation -- and not only because they won't, but because they tend to screw up almost every long-distance job they undertake vis-a-vis the states.
Consider what happened with Katrina: Mississipi came through like a champion, whereas Louisiana floundered on the deck. Why? Bush's emergency guy was terrible, we can all admit it -- but at the end of the day, it came down to who was at the helm at the state level. |
|
I stand by my view of the Gang of 14. Like it or not, many if not most of our party are pretty spineless when it comes to standing up to the dems on judicial appointees. The Gang of 14 got Alito through, and cleared the way for many others in the lower courts. It wasn't the best solution, but nobody came up with a better one, and you can't put it all on McCain. The GOP senate voted in Justice Ginsberg almost unanimously. We don't pull the crap that dems do. Maybe we should but we don't. And when it came to fighting, most of the senate repubs never stepped up.
I'm happy as hell we didn't give away our filibuster -- not like any of our guys would ever have the guts to actually use it, but still... |
|
|
On all of the illegals here, yes attrition is the way to go. But before anything happens, you have to close the gate and re-establish the rule of law. Most of us who are battling illegal immigration know many illegals and have much empathy for them. But if the system isn't fixed, they are doomed to be indentured servants while the carrot of a "pathway to citizenship" is dangled in front of them for 13 years by unscrupulous employers while the government overlooks the abuses but deports any worker who violates the least rule. We don't need illegals and we don't need indentured servants (guest worker program). Cheap labor is the enemy of innovation. Black slaves were also doing "the work Americans would not do". There already is a path to citizenship. It is called LEGAL immigration. Let's work on that. If the laws are flawed, change them. |
|
|
|
... is a frickin' nutjob - and so is that peanut gallery is the background.
This just gets worse and worse for Obama.
geez! |
|
I say this: in many ways, we've become sort of spineless as a party. We demand our president do this, that, and the other thing, forgetting how much can be done at the state level. Most things are most efficiently accomplished via local, hands-on control. States, one by one, can enforce their own employment laws, and fix the illegal immigration problem -- but that takes activism at the local level. We need to quit looking to Washington to fix everything -- in essence, to quit looking to them as Democrats do, happily, only with regard to our own issues.
The above being said, on most of the big issues, McCain is a proven conservative -- in terms of fiscal responsibility, it's not even a contest b/t him and Bush -- and on this one issue, illegal immigration, he has told us he screwed up, and that he realizes he must secure the border first. Now we have a choice: we can stick with our old prejudices, we can say "Ah, that damned McCain! He was pushing for Bush's amnesty bill! He'll never secure the border!" or we can give him the benefit of the doubt. We can say, OK, he's our nominee, and in a million ways he's better than either of the democrats (let alone either of them with both houses of congress to do their bidding), and will, without question, be better than them on this issue.
At very least, McCain cannot be worse than Bush on this issue. |
|
|
Frankly, I don't know why we are arguing. We seem to be generally frustrated by the same things. We can over-analyze this until we both go daffy. The point is that the GOP has screwed up so bad that Republicans are abandoning the party in droves. There weren't even enough Republicans to prevent Democrats from nominating McCain. As conservatives, we have nothing to gain by rallying around that Trojan horse. It's all about Congress this year and denying the liberal president a mandate. It is the only way 2010 will present an opportunity for a second Contract with America like 1994. That would not have happened had Bush 41 not first been booted out without handing Clinton (43%) a mandate. We did that in 1992 and 1994 and we were nowhere near as angry as we are now. Why is it so hard this time? Have conservatives gone soft? |
|
according to Pasadena Phil.
But given the choice of Barack Obama who is very liberal and John McCain who is social moderate and a fiscal conservative, this is an easy choice. Especially given McCain's past service and bravery.
There is too much at stake, Supreme Court justices (as well as the lower courts), having a party split between executive and legislative branches, completing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and working towards destroying al Qaeda.
Obama primary focuses are on expanding entitlements like health care, increading taxes to combat a recession, and getting out of Iraq as quickly as possible.
But hey--I am not into starting a third party like Pasadena Phil is. Ask him who his dream candidate would be. Duncan Hunter? Mitt Romney? Ron Barr? I am not sure who this mythical third party candidate would be. |
|
|
I am surprised you are promoting Mexifornia again. When Victor Davis Hanson threw his support to McCain you promised to bring your copy to the firing range as a target. |
|
Actually, I've read a lot of VDH, and I've seen him speak a number of times. I agree with you -- but I still think the solution will come from the states. And generally speaking, at least as far as it's seemed to me, taking the extreme poles of any view never make for success -- what they do make for, instead, is the delaying of reasonable action: you wait until you have perfection, of course it never comes, and the situation worsens and you're still shouting for a solution that no one will take up.
I am genuinely afraid for this country's future -- I can see it getting to be like Venezuela, with a massive underclass that is ready at any moment to explode to the hard-left. If that happens, God help us. Nevertheless, I know a lot of Hispanics -- I live in New York -- and they are conservative socially, and they can be brought into the American fold. In fact, that is another part, I think, of a long-term solution: not just shouting about the borders, not just talking about enforcement, but, in the meanwhile, doing our best not to alienate this group that is up for grabs, politically speaking. As conservatives at the local level, even as we push for employment law enforcement, an end to sanctuary city policies, and the like, we can also push for an end to bilingual education in our schools -- if they're here, we can insist on blitzing them with English, we can insist on them taking American civics (first we'd have to bring civics back, of course), etc. In short, we have a choice: we can act locally, fight, and we can also be positive about what is good about the situation: socially-conservative, Christian people who value hard work and *can* be educated to be patriotic Americans -- or can be abandoned to the hard left. |
|
Conservatives are soft, unfortnately. But I still do not think railing against McCain is the answer.
Frankly, I look at Obama and I feel like I'm on another planet -- who could ever imagine such a man standing for president, who seems to care so little for the country he seeks to lead? |
|
|
It's an excellent book but I have lost much of my respect for Hanson. He's an academic in a remote college so I'm guessing he likes the attention of actually making a controversial endorsement. Either that or he is lackes intellectual integrity. I may yet take the book to the range but I read it. |
|
|
You are over-intellectualizing the problem. Because these candidates are so similar, they are being presented with competing stories to tug at us on a personal and emotional level. They are just masks. Don't even look or listen. It's like having Satan locked in your closet. Ignore whatever you hear and DON'T OPEN THE DOOR! Keep it simple. The only way to change a one-party system is to vote against it. Don't be afraid to vote against it. We've had worse presidents than either Hillary or Obama and McCain is hardly an improvement. We'll be fine if we kill the mandate. A powerless president having to work with a conservative Congress is the best we can do this year. But if we don't do even that, there is nothing to look forward to until at least 2016. |
|
|
I also called you a "Pince Nez RINO". |
|
The truth is, we're not arguing -- we're discussing. I do hope to win you over, though. I voted for McCain -- I like him, and I think he'll pull in the Reagan Dems. And with his fiscal policies, health care plans, etc., I think we stand a really good chance to get back our good names as reliable stewards of the economy.
There is, also, something else I like about McCain -- I mean really like: his utter openness with the press. He is who he is, and he is a fighter. People say that he'll never get our judges through congress -- well, I say wait and see. He does have a temper -- fire in the belly, as they say -- and he can talk. I think he'll see blocking of his judges as a personal affront, and launch a counterattack the likes of which Bush never could have. McCain says he'll make porkbarrel spenders "famous" -- well, I see him speaking to America a lot in general: I see him saying "Today, yet again, congress blocked my nominees..." Say what you will about him, the man can speak extemporaneously -- he doesn't need a script, and he can reach people in a way that is unique. |
|
Phil,
How do you expect to accomplish that? We don't have congress, and by all estimates, we're not getting it back anytime soon. |
|
"taking the extreme poles of any view never make for success"
What extreme pole am I taking? Enforcing our borders? Arguing for voting "third" party to restore the two-party system? There is nothing conservative about Shoeless John. If we are going to elect a liberal Democrat in November, let's make sure that liberal Democrat is not a Republican. |
|
|
A conservative congress? How? I don't follow. |
|
|
I said a "conservative" Congress, not Republican Congress. Republicans controlled EVERYTHING until November 2006 and all they did was engineer the biggest government expansion in the history of the planet. That has been tempered greatly since many of them lost their seats to conservative Blue Dog Democrats. Congressmen run for election every two years so they are the most likely politicians to be true to their campaign promises and the dominant themes this year are again conservative. The 1980s were known as the conservative decade yet the Democrats controlled everything except the White House. The Reagan coalition is still holding together but no longer looking to the GOP for leadership. If you listen to stump speeches, Hillary is always appealing to the need win back the Reagan Democrats (while Shoeless John visits the 1960s shrines of ancient liberal battles). You have to forget about Republican vs Democrat and focus on conservatives vs liberals. Remember, 33% of voters describe themselves as conservative with another 25% as moderate leaning conservative. Less than 20% of voters describe themselves as liberal. Yet we are forced to pick among three very liberal candidates. Voters are swinging right while the parties are drifting left. Vote third party. It is the only choice that will get the attention of the national parties. |
|
I meant like mass deportation, or even trying to get politicians at the federal level to address such a hot button issue as illegal immigration. It's horrible, but most GOP senators will not stand up for tough illegal immigration laws -- they just won't. I don't think this is a matter of opinion. On the other hand, where we do see spine is in the House, because these people are running in districts: smaller areas in which the views tend to be more uniform. Oklahoma has now some of the strictest laws re hiring illegals in the country -- the usual suspects are fighting it in the courts, but I don't think they'll win in the long run.
In short, getting the federal government to do anything on such a hot-button issue has been like pulling teeth for a reason: they really, really don't want to do it. They weigh the risk vs. the potential reward, and they wimp out. States, on the other hand, are another story -- you can accomplish things at the state level that you never could at the federal. Consider the wide gamut of views in the different states -- it's like that for a reason. |
|
... I think I'm going to sign off. Incidentally, I've never posted at a blog before -- it's amazing, having access to such a forum.
Have a good one.
dogman |
|
Tomarrow is the National Day of Prayer. I hope many of you will take the opportunity to go to a gathering in the open to pray for our nation and our leaders. In 90+ countries Christians are persecuted and not allowed to openly practice their faith. We have the priviledge so I hope many will participate in asking for God's guidance and help in troubled times.
http://www.persecution.org |
|
No one is advocating mass deportation. That is the straw man argument the shrill open-borders advocates rail against because they don't want to address the actual arguments and solutions being presented to them. "I CAN'T do my homework Mom! Every time I try to study, 100 million people die in Africa!!"
Defending the border is one of the three primary responsibilities of the federal government. When they refuse to do it, local authorities have been choosing to exploit that instead of fighting it. Arresting, fining and imprisoning employers who hire illegals is extremely effective. Turn off the magnets and most will simply go away and fewer will come. It's all very logical. It's all blowing up here in LA where we are getting closer and closer to becoming another Tijuana where the drug cartels control the police. We are at a tipping point and the federal government absolutely must control the borders and stop funding sanctuary cities. I don't know if you googled Jamiel Shaw like I suggested but he was a star black high school football star and top student who was assassinated by an illegal alien gang banger who had just been released from prison and not deported. His mother was notified of her sons murder while serving in the army in Iraq. She has since returned to finish her tour of duty.
This wasn't a drive by or accidental killing. Shaw was especially selected because he was such an inspiring young man. He was not even in the wrong place at the wrong time but killed 3 houses down from where he lived in broad daylight. He had a chance of making the NFL and was headed to Stanford on football scholarship. The police did nothing. When the Shaw family appeared before the LA City Council to protest, those hacks not only refused to offer them the standard sympathies but accused them of participating in a political stunt!!! We are at a tipping point here and not far from open warfare. The outrage among the black AND Mexican communities is real. |
|
|
Glad to have you join us. See you again soon. |
|
That hurts. Well I hear wearing pince nez glasses hurt. I never wore them. Teddy Roosevelt did. I liked Teddy. I especially enjoy drinking whiskey on the porch of his bunk house in Yellowstone in the early evening. I highly recommend it to you all.
As for being a RINO, all the alleged sins of "Shoeless John" could be laid at the feet of Ronald Reagan. No difference between McCain and Obama? Eight years in the Hanoi Hilton is something. Not expanding entitlements is something. Being right on defense and fiscal issues is something. You are being just like the Birchers William F. Buckley Jr. fought against. I have nothing against John Birchers, other than they are completely uncompromising to the point that they will throw elections so they can feel "pure" while they complain how bad the Democrats are.
Tell me Phil, who is the candidate you support. What person will lead this third party effort. You must have someone in mind. Duncan Hunter? Mitt Romney? Bob Barr? Perhaps Pat Buchanan? Who is it? |
|
I agree with Phil that border (and port) security is critical, combined with work place enforcement. I suspect in time most illegals will leave if those two things occur. That could happen now. I would allow a mechanism for some to stay, provided they meet certain criteria (such as no crimes, having a job, long term presence, paying a fine, etc.). I do not believe that is amnesty. That is common sense.
I would also increase legal immigration greatly to this country, with an emphasis on skills we need. |
|
To the monomaniacs on immigration. What part in the decline of native birth rates from over 4 to just below 2 are you responsible for? You can't not grow your native population and expect not to either (a) massively implode economically or (b) have to import lots and lots of the young people that your generation didn't bother to beget.
Lo siento, chicos, but the wages of sexual caprice are dispossession.
You don't have five Catholics on the Supreme Court just because they have good natural law background (although that helps, given the intellectual as well as demographic collapse of the Protestant mainline).
+ + + |
|
At least our illegals are for the most part Christians from a European civilization. You'd rather be Europe, where "Mohammed" is the most popular name in maternity wards in large cities across the continent?
Count your blessings, Estados Unidos.
Smile and thank a Mexican today for serving your burger or pruning your hedges (hi, Mitt!) or cleaning your bathrooms.
Give him a copy of the Constitution or the Declaraion of Independence (many organizations offer these for free distribution).
Then go and talk with your daughters and grand-daughters and neices about how God's very first commandment -- before Moses, before David, before Jesus -- was "be fruitful and multiply and subdue the Earth".
+ + + |
|
|
for your service. Of course, you realize we are not against Mexicans who are here legally, right? And we don't want this country to turn into Mexico. Great, as long as we're in agreement. Why not we all go to Mexico and change that country? That would be terrific. |
|
|
A lot of pavlovians keep saying something about "important to get judges on court" or something like that. It seldom gets done so I don't pay them any mind anymore. But what was it that McCain did about judges? Something like "Alito too conservative" and Gang of 15 or 12 or something. Anyway I think he and his buddies apparently blocked the path for cons to get judges appointed. Now I understand McCain is the Repubs' only hope TO GET JUDGES WE WANT. Boy oh boy I am confused. |
|
Yes you are confused, but don't worry I am here to help.
Please, not the Alito slander again. McCain helped get Alito on the court and championed him through the Senate. Same with Roberts. Now you can disagree with the Gang of 14, but in light of Republicans being the minority party now in House and Senate, it is not so bad a deal (given Republicans got virtually all the Judges they were seeking to get confirmed). McCain did not block the path, he opened it up. Almost all of Bush's judges got confirmed. The ones that did not get confirmed (a small handful) would have faced opposition from the Dems anyway and likely would not have gotten confirmed.
Now maybe McCain would not pick judges and justices you would. But McCain is being advised on this by Ted Olson. Who is advising Barack Obama? Lawrence Tribe? Heck, Obama might even pick Tribe for the Court.
If you are going to ring that bell, at least give us a beer to make it worthwhile.
|
|
This nativist argument about jobs and how immgrants will destroy America has been going on since the first waves of Irish and German immigration. Back then they just came.
I want to end the quasi illegal gray labor market that is currently going on from Latin America. As for recruiting engineers, physicians, and other technicians from India, China, Korea, Eastern Europe, etc.--why not? We are not taking numbers that will seriously drive down wages and discourage native born children from pursuing those careers. The fact is bringing skilled people in helps invigorate our economy making us all wealthier and better off.
As for those Mexicans and Latin Americans, many need to leave but some would make fine citizens and should be put on the path of becoming citizens. Guess what, most Latinos who do that assimilate. We are not facing the demographic poison that Europe is (with Muslim immigrants who remain outside society and refuse to assimilate).
As for birthrates, well grab your gal and get to it Jorge. I did my part with the Missus. |
|
|
Warren Rudman who gave us David Souter is also advising McCain. |
|
Souter was picked in after he was recommended to George H.W. Bush by John H. Sununu. Yeah Warren Rudman was in on that too. The Harriet Mier who got through. But to suggest McCain is going to give Warren Rudman the choice of Supreme Court picks is pretty weak.
Ted Olson is the guy advising McCain on that.
|
|
|
I trust John McCain on judges as much as I trust him on illegal aliens, ask Juan Hernandez how much that is. |
|
Not to offend you but you are doing what Dem/libs do: they cause a problem and then claim they are the ones to fix it. McCain frickin' helped to CAUSE the Stupid Party to be in the minority! I know you know that. So, what you're saying is, "Good thing McCain planned ahead for when he pushed us into the minority with the Gang of 14 heist." It's all about McCain baby.
And as usual, sooner or later, the cons will have to clean up the mess.
How can you, with a straight face, tell us that McCain will risk the wrath of PieFace Kennedy and Smug Schumer and Dull Leahey with a suitable con choice for justice? Even Reagan only got us whatshername. |
|
|
I realize a lot of readers are sick of hearing me say this but so long as you ADD-stricken Pince-Nez RINOs insist on lying about my position, I will repeat it yet again. There is only one way to beat a one-party system and that is to VOTE AGAINST IT!!! I don't have a horse in the race so I will be voting for any third-party candidate for president so that whatever liberal wins WILL NOT HAVE A MANDATE. Is this too complicated for you? Stop pinching your nose! It's cutting off the blood flow to your brain! |
|
Scarlet Pimpernel wrote;
-----------
"How can you, with a straight face, tell us that McCain will risk the wrath of PieFace Kennedy and Smug Schumer and Dull Leahey with a suitable con choice for justice? Even Reagan only got us whatshername."
-----------
I trust that McCain will nominate constructionists to the Supreme Court.
Ted Olson wouldn't waste his time on McCain as his judiciary advisor if he didn't believe McCain was serious about it.
Besides, McCain has voted "YES" to confirm all of the constructionist judges whom conservatives love---even in the face of opposition from Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer, and Pat Leahy.
But it sounds like you're suggesting that since we cannot predict with absolute certainty what kind of judges a President McCain will nominate, we should just go ahead and surrender the fight and allow the radical left winger Barack Obama to make the nominations.
After all, that is what will happen if we don't vote for McCain.
And with Obama, we know for sure what kind of judges (radical left wingers) he would nominate.
As far as Reagan goes, Sandra Day O'Connor wasn't as bad as Anthony Kennedy is.
But Reagan also elevated Rehnquist to Chief, and got Scalia on the Court. |
|
You are still voting out of fear. How did Clinton do with Lani Guinear? And Ruth Ginsberg was a mouthpiece for the ACLU. Fear not, we will not fall that fast. But claiming that justices and judges will be a big reason to vote McCain just does not wash out historically speaking.
And since Hillary and Obama will not quit the war there is no good reason to vote for McCain.
btw- even Kennedy and them won't allow a radical justice after the debacle that is about to happen to the Dem party after the Convention. |
|
MR. RUSSERT: Senator McCain, a serious question: Do you think the lady to your right would make a good president?
SEN. CLINTON: Oh, we can't hear you, Tim. We can't hear you.
SEN. McCAIN: Yeah, you're breaking up. I am sure that Senator Clinton would make a good president. I happen to be a Republican and would support, obviously, a Republican nominee, but I have no doubt that Senator Clinton would make a good president.
|
|
Please, Read Karl Rove's article in the Wall Street Journal Dated April 30th. GETTING TO KNOW JOHN MCCAIN
He Heard deeply moving things, wanted American to know about Senator McCain, who is one of the most private individuals to run for presidency, from Col.Bud Day.
When the Vietnamese captor broke Col. Days arm (to make him cripple) Mr. McCain put him on the cell floor collected bamboo pieced in the prison courtyard used as splint. Mr. Day went on to fly again. Mr. McCain, help administer religious sermon sevices to the prisoners. Mr. Day still vivdly recalls McCains' sermons "The episcopal lituragies".
Mr. Day says " He wasn't corruptible then, and he is not today".
The stories told by Day involves more than wartime valor.
Then, in 1991, Cindy McCain visiting Mother Teresa's orphanage in Bangladesh, when a dying infant thrust in her hands, that need medical care, she brought the child to America, after years of surgery and rehabilitation, now that child is their teenage daughter.
Maybe the Arizona senator can't run on biography. Neither should it be ignored.
We conservatives can not trust our security and war on terror to the Democrats.
Our Supreme Court Judges appointment is a lifetime position, and there is no way we can trust that to Liberals.
On these two issues, we have to work with a Republican candidate.
It is not fear, it is common sense.
Dealing with war on terror, if you recall Clinton years, and their foreign policy, world-wide response to Al-Qaeda and terrorism. Love of America, will not permit to trust the future of this country to the Democtrats. |
|
no doubt McCain did his duty honorably. He is a terrible senator. For the Repubs I mean. I'm not scared of another Carter/Clinton. They won't get much passed anyway. How did the popular Bill Clinton do?
All we have to do to get back control is stop putting Lindsay McCains in Congress. |
|
What do you think of (Alaska, Gov.) Sarah Palin, as McCain's VP?
She is a stalwart conservative.
Attractive and articulate.
She will be my first choice.
|
|
Are you not aware, somehow, that the Dems have majorities in both houses now and are expected to have bigger ones after the election. How would a Dem Prez have any trouble getting his/her way. Your head, my friend, is wiggling its ears in that hole in the ground. WAR(Retreat & Defeat as promised..), Lib-Living Document Supremes, Socialist Medicine...Leaving the Mid-East to Dark Age Butchers and almost cetainly more 9-11s at home.(Yes, because Retreat over there will embolden our enemies to strike against our nation led by cowards--If Dems..)
What, in God's name, do you guys mean,"It won't matter,"??? |
|
Oooooooppppssssss...I had a Guy Slip.
What I meant to say was...Sarah is very impressive and appears to be a fine choice for Veep. |
|
Jeez, Marystella,
suddenly you sound like a political operative, rather than a Middle-easterner (or, more likely, a TZ) living in West Cleveland. TZ, Alaskans don't bring in votes. What, is she pretty?
(Neo, pay attention here). |
|
She is awesome
I sincerely hope McCain, will pick her as VP. Yes, She is Super Delicious.!!
Delightful to be standing next to McCain, she will be doing all the talking and all John McCain has to do is show up!
Isn't that sexist? in reverse? Ha..Ha..
Or he has to Pick Romney,
Someone Good looking, and articulate too!
Mark Sanford, will be Ok? He is for less government too. He is handsome too! |
|
You want me to vote for the guy who assisted greatly in demoralizing the GOP base? The guy who stopped a controlled takeover of the Congress? One of the leaders who rushed us downhill? He has no killer instinct except to bite his own. Who's crazy?
Don't be afraid. |
|
How many delegates does it have, 2? lol I'm just stating what the average voter is thinking.
Palin seems fantastic. Maybe in 2012 with Duncan or another con. Jindal would be better. That's a winner right there. Fresh faces. Conservative. Team Players. Aggressive. Not trying to make friends with our domestic enemies. Pretty much everything McCain's not. |
|
We are not voting for the man, honestly, I do not like him.
He was not even my last choice.
I am voting for the War, for our troops. Their Mission, McCain will see they finish their job honorably.
War on Terror is serious, I do come from that part of the world.
They understand only force and respect power and strenght.
Jihadism is real. |
|
I know what you mean and I understand your concerns. Here's what will happen if McCain doesn't win (which I think he will btw)
Obama or Hillary will wait about a month or 5 and then tell everyone that W made such a mess that we have to stay blah blah blah. They will also immediately tell everyone how important it is to win before they do that.
The media will jump in and talk up the bravery of the Dem/libs and, oh yeah, the troops. They will tell us of the brilliant strategy that O or H imparted to the generals. It is not fair but the Stupid Party is mostly to blame for letting the scumbag Dem/libs steal the credit. Ronald Reagan didn't let the media get him down.
As for the judges: if O or H wins, more cons will get voted in. Radical judge appointments may be stopped if the Repubs stick together. We hold out til 2012 and run real cons and win in a landslide. |
|
Scarlet, I think McCain, will win any way!
That is why, I really want his Veep to be young, articulate, handsome!
Seriously, Middle East, is a big mess, the Democrats do not have the brains to secure peace, Carter took over peace time, left a legacy of terror.
We are now at WAR. |
|
Thanks, for the compliment!
Yesterday we met in a dream,
sleep had fled
dream is over
in the twilight of memory,
half awaking,
we part,
shall speak
no more
all vanished
in the twilight
mist,
at the dusk.
Do you hear
the great Trumpeting
of an Angel?
braking silent night
People standing still
To
The trumpeting
of the great War!
Rest for a little while
before the start
of the Great War!
|
|
You're doing wishful thinking where Hillary & Bazama are concerned. AND, banking on that wishful construct. It's a stick-house, Lad.
I'm completely with MaryStella on this. |
|
I fear, the whole mess in the Middle East started with Carter in Iran, will eventually end with Iran. I just hate to think about the role Russia is going to play in this mess.
(I pray people inside Iran rise up against their own government). |
|
|
It will play out just like I said unless the Repubs grow a pair. |
|
Scarlet,
In other words, you're making a moral equivalency between a potential President McCain and a potential President Obama.
Incidentally, you sometimes do a good job of debating the lefties on the Townhall boards about the issue of fighting Islamic Jihad.
Ironically, you just don't think fighting Jihad is important enough to elect a President (McCain) who will actually fight them.
Just out of curiosity, do you fear a President McCain more than you fear a President Obama ? |
|
This next election may well bring in the last act on the stage of human history....and there may need to be a "dim" to let the man of lawlessness get control of the world econoies,trade and commerce. It will not happen because of me & mine, however.
I will not intentionally vote so that baby killers can freely have their way. John McCain is pro-life and God holds that postion as His own. |
|
Explain to me dear Brother, how the poetic and brillant mind of MaryStella can bring out the poisonous venom of a big "Dud" snake in the grass???
Or how the kind and giving moi' can bring spewing vomit out of the giant cavern that is "the mouth",the blovie boy and the perennial 8th grade school monitor???
She and I are just sitting here,reading,typing, sipping our hot tea and offering the world a little bit of knowledge and wisdom;-D !!! |
|
|
is out of gas when they have to come on this board, thread after thread, trying to equate Pastor Hagee with the very unreverand Wright, Kimba, now frantic, with the knowledge that the one she pinned all her hopes on, "the wimp", is dead in the water, NO CHANCE, to ever become POTUS, all she has is to lie, to distract from the death spiral that Hussein finds himself in, this i'm sure works in liberalville, it don't work here though, Kimba, we'll forgive your inane equivocations, after all you must be quite dizzy, your in that death spiral with "the wimp". |
|
It's all that sipping good tea!
[psalm 25:8-9] Good and upright is the Lord,/thus he shows sinners the way./He guides the humble to justice,/ he teaches the humble his way.
I just pray, that God Bless this wonderful country, and keep it safe.
Hopefully the next president will have the wisdom, to guide through very tough times.
|
|
Just a quick reply between VIGFMs...Whew! Sooo much GOOD to be done...
Reading your posts on this thread just puts a Happy Evil Neocon Smile on my kisser. Thank you!!
'Hawk...Pluperfect description of the 2-brain dead dogs. Poster kids for Invested In American Defeat. Paaatttooooey. Ain't worth a real man or woman's spit. |
|
Praise the Lord, Praise Him in His place!
It will all work out in the end, dear friend!Until then pray for John McCain....I think he needs it(and I don't mean that in a mean way either) |
|
You keep putting your words to what I write. From now on I'll just relax and find it amusing.
I said History. Please, name all of the Dems who have quit a war.
So what you're saying is that a Dem/lib Prez will be thrilled that the body count goes up? I believe they will fight hard not out of our concerns but for their own vanity and records.
And I ALWAYS do a good job against Dem/libs.
I fear no president. I don't live my life based around what politicians do.
Here's a question for you: Why do you want to reward bad behavior? Would you embrace a man who mugged you? |
|
If you're a Christian, and I believe you are, then you know a few things:
We don't know when the hour will come. Jesus did not even know that.
God puts rulers up and brings them down. The mystery of faith - Bill Clinton?
You guys need to relax. The Great Exasperator will win anyway because many feel the same as you guys. |
|
Marystella, marystella,
are you a gal, or are you a fella?
the great war you anticipate
is one you'll have to wait
for |
|
You are an artful debater. Always with great skill, and reason. I think you follow the conservative, libertarian view. And do a marvelous job.
For years, McCain's Maverick political policies has been quite disheartening.
For now, things have changed so much, and the alternative is so, dangerous, especially, the candidate, on the left, has been endorsed and bankrolled by left-wing radical billionaire, Soros.
The alternative will wreak extreem havoc. |
|
question before, it's NOT a valid query. What, pray tell, does ANY previous Democrat President have to do with now? Jimmah Cawtah did massive damage without a war. Think Iran, Sandinistas, Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan and gutting our military. Clinton...Think closing dozens of bases and--again--GUTTING our military. Not to mention Billy Bubba's skirt chasing coma whilst our enemies of the Islamist Radical kind, revved up for Jihad and thousands of dead Americans on a September morning. That's quite a legacy.
Your wishful thinking about these defeatist cowards is touching, Scarlet. I'll stick with 'Hawk & MaryS. |
|
Just for a chuckle!
You should hear Iranians how they curse Jimmy, for bringing this havoc of the mullahs. I heard yesterday they had demonstrations, again, were blooding men and women, equally, their prisons are full! (very sad). |
|
in Chicago and gets back to Tehran every 2 or 3 years says very much the same. Kathy tells me that the regular folks admire and like our Evil President Boooosh and quietly toast his successes.
She says that, generally speaking, they detest the Mullahs. Maybe a revolution one of these days, MaryS??
|
|
Iranian women are just gorgeous....I hope they will be in democratic freedom someday soon.
Good job of listing the pitifulness of Clinton and Carter as cowards.
Hillary's trying to come off as one tough mama. I don't believe her. |
|
I do not believe Comrade Hillary, either, but she sounds, great!
Ohbama, cannot top that!
|
|
Scarlet Pimpernel wrote;
------------
"You keep putting your words to what I write. From now on I'll just relax and find it amusing."
------------
I didn't put ANY words in your mouth.
I was clearly s-u-m-m-a-r-i-z-i-n-g your position about McCain VS Obama.
Here's what I wrote;
"In other words, you're making a moral equivalency between a potential President McCain and a potential President Obama."
Scarlet, you've made it perfectly clear that you don't believe that a McCain Administration would be better for the nation than an Obama Administration.
On the other hand, I believe an Obama Administration would be a disaster for the country both in foreign policy, and domestic affairs.
Scarlet also wrote;
------------
"So what you're saying is that a Dem/lib Prez will be thrilled that the body count goes up?"
------------
I don't even know where you got that from.
Maybe you were reading somebody else's post.
Nonetheless, I will comment on it; Barack Obama says he intends to withdraw from Iraq if he becomes President, and I take him at his word.
On the other hand, John McCain intends to fight Islamic Jihad as Commander-in-Chief.
I support fighting Islamic Jihad, thus, I support John McCain. |
|
Poster Girl, Hillary, after demonstrating for 30+ years that she'll put up, as a routine matter of course, with compulsive serial philandering on the part of her Narcissist Hubby...THAT Hillary will, by Gawd, scare those Male Mullahs and other Male Tyrants of the region and the planet into docile submission. Uh-Huh. The same First Lady of Arkansas who would let his smarmy hairless body into bed after a spirited day of downing bimbos in the Guv's Mansion. The SAME First Lady of America who would welcome him under the presidential sheets of the family quarters after a fun & frolicksome day of underage girly pages in the Oval Office. Baby Kim of North Korea is gonna respect that Mamma! And, Bashar Assad in Damascus...and the REAL BIG Boys in Peking...Uh-Huh.
Wonder what Missus CoDependency-Hang-Onto-Power- No-Matter-What was doing while lover boy raped Juanita B.
Yep, just what our country needs right now(or EVER!)is a shrill, brittle, power consumed, clueless, needy, CoDependency Queen as our--pause for a laugh--Leader! |
|
I understand your concerns. We could all just "stay the course cause it's hard hard work" but I'm not going to this time. One of the high quality traits of cons that separate us from lower life forms like Dem/libs is our ability to change habits. I don't want to be a yellow-dog Repub anymore. Helping the country slouch closer to Eurabia is not something I wish to participate in.
As for the troops - if O or H win then the troops will either be safe at home or they will receive whatever they need to win as the Dem/lib Prez takes full credit for the glory.
McCain will choose a mod judge at best and still get hammered by the Dems. O or H will pick a mod judge and get hammered by the Dems.
McCain just proposed billions in new spending. He wants open borders. He wants to curb free speech. As Prez he will bash Repubs just out of habit. He loves himself. He loves the adulation of the press. He has spent at least 8 years if not longer honing this image of his and it has worked. Why do you think he'd change?
To my way of thinking NOW is the perfect time to shake things up. I think it will be to late in about 10 more years of this kind of stewardship. Break the cycle, friends. |
|
I agree, McCain is a liberal too far. BTW, he has also taken money from Soros, so all the candidates are tainted in that regard. They all want the illegal alien inundation to continue, think citizenship is meaningless, and don't care that American citizens want our borders and laws enforced.
I will not vote for that. |
|
|
Glad you two weren't around in the Depression & WW2 times. |
|
easy with the thought that Dems will bring our warriors home where 'they're safe'. (*I know, Scarlet, that's IF they do what they've promised.*)
'Hawk, I think I'm safe in stating from both of us that position is lunacy in vast time of war. |
|
|
As with leaving Iraq in 91' before the job was done, it has cost 200 fold in lives and who knows how much in money...it will be much,much worse the next time we go back;-( |
|
marystella, mister or missus,
you are like the snake that hisses;
warning all who stand before
that there will be a great war,
even as you blow them kisses. |
|
No higher calling, no greater good for the little Demorats. Country? Nope. Honor? Nope. Victory for our Warriors? Nada. Staying ever on the Offense against the Dark Age Butchers? Nyet. Homosexual Marriage? Oh, yeaaaah, Bay-Beeeee. Criminal Trials for Gitmo Lodgers? Uh-Huhhhhhh. Listening in on al Qaeda phone calls? NO Waaaaayyyy!
God luv'um. I never will. |
|
It has come to light that, while counselling 2-parishners, you seduced the wife of the couple. Which brings us now to the question of your spiritual sessions with the Obamas in the privacy of your office...
Never mind. |
|
|
|