Thursday, February 28, 2008

Just Like MY Church!

I just read this article at AmericanThinker.com and it reminded me of the church to which I belong, a United Church of Christ congregation. This idea of divestment regarding Israel is an example of the horrible thinking that is typical of the UCC and apparently the Methodists as well (the article suggests other Protestant denoms also). In our denom they call it "Christian Zionism". Though I'm sure there is such a thing, which is some extreme belief in tying Israel to the Israel of the OT and the desire to convert them all to Christianity in order to hasten the end times, the position of these churches toward Israel is every bit as extreme & even more wrongheaded by quite a ways.

I'm going to go way out on a limb here and say that this attitude is entirely leftist, as in liberal, as in progressive, as in the goofiness we see from the leftwing of American politics every day. It is so typically liberal in the sense that it demonstrates the lefty notion that standing up to the good guys is somehow noble, which it is not considering the bad guys facing the good guys and the rest of us. These goofballs accuse Israel of being Nazi-like, as if we haven't heard that about our own president. In the meantime, the Pallies are lobbing mortars and sending suicide murderers with regularity, Lebanon's Hezb'allah is constantly thinking of new ways to portray Israel as ruthless, Iran wants to eliminate them from the world atlas, and Muslims and white supremists just hate them as part of their membership rules. So these liberal Christians think they are doing the Lord's work by insisting that Israel no longer protect themselves, and by insisting that American companies no longer do business with them.

Well I'm going on record as insisting that these pudding-brained liberal Christians pucker up and kiss ass, because they side with the real evil in the world by taking the position that the problems in the Middle East are caused by Israel's defensive policies, just as the lion's share of libs view our own of similar nastiness. May God grant them true vision and spines.

Sunday, February 24, 2008

Nader To The Rescue!

According to AOL, Ralph Nader has launched his next doomed presidential campaign. The best thing about this is that he's far more likely to cut into the Democratic numbers than GOP. That's a good thing.

Friday, February 22, 2008

More Barry

This piece by Kyle-Ann Shiver adds even more to consider when weighing the worthiness of Obama for president. It gives a little more insight into how he likely thinks given the manner and level of influence to which he exposed/exposes himself. Any doubting his socialist bent is truly in a state of denial.

Also from today we have this here. Give them both a good read.

From NewsMax, there's this. Right leaning writers all, but the points are solid, unless there's some way to refute them.

Another good one. I keep reading these and adding them here because they tell the tale so well. I can't understand the left leaning visitors to this bog that find Obama the perfect antidote for what ails us. How sick we will be should he rise to the presidency. And somehow ER finds a better way in this buffoon.

Thursday, February 21, 2008

Get Ready For The Spin!

I just read this through an AmericanThinker article and just had to post it. Lamentations over the Nat'l Debt tend to leave me a bit, uh, bored, as I never thought that it was the problem per citizen that the left would like us to believe (as it continues its abuse of Bush). This little piece supports my assumption, such as it is. Let all those who fancy themselves economists have at it.

What Will The Neighbors Say?

The title of this post is a line that for many would be answered, "I don't care what the neighbors say." Everybody likes to think that they are unaffected by the opinions of others when that body has reasoned his position correct. They won't change their sartortial style or the style of their hair if they truly believe it looks hip. Offense is taken when parenting choices are questioned by others. In almost any arena, each of us likes to believe that we act on principle, conscience, or personal taste, and that's where it ends.

Now if we looked at this from a political perspective, which side takes this more to heart? Without having any research or studies to back me up, I'd have to say that liberals more proudly and loudly proclaim their total independence. They like to think they take the road less travelled. They like to think they have struck out on their own and will push on in the knowledge that they are unaffected by the warnings of old fogeys who find their uniqueness troubling. That's fine. Though much of their "independence" is juvenile and meaningless, kudos to them for standing on their own. (And good luck getting anywhere looking like that.)

But when it comes to world opinion, my goodness how the left worries so. They suffer from the vapors to think that Europe might look down their noses at decisions of our government. Of course, seeing as how the left is nothing if not contrarian towards anything that emanates from the current administration, they will naturally be inclinded to agree with ANYONE who craps on America at this time, and most others.

(The latest idiot to trash talk the country was Sharon Stone during an interview with some Arab periodical during the Dubai Film Festival. She has journeyed to Iraq to see for herself...and of course sees what she wants to see.)

But in this Bush has done just what libs claim they support, doing what he believes is right and doing so in spite of public or world opinion. For Bush, this position is prohibited. He is to do only what the left believes is right so that our foreign friends don't think badly of us. Nonsense. This is one of Bush's best characteristics. And frankly, I couldn't agree more. I don't care what the world thinks of us if we are engaged in doing right, which we have been. Our Democratic nominees hope to have the chance to raise up our image in the eyes of the world and to that I have to wonder just what will be given up, what will be compromised, how closely will we have to be like them in order to succeed in this endeavor? I shudder to think.

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

This Is Perfect

This is the perfect response to the Michelle Obama attitude. (She wasn't proud. Did she despise?) Libs should keep Kennedy's words in mind with every thought toward more entitlements, more welfare, more money for whatever it is they think our hard earned money should support.

Saturday, February 16, 2008

The Guy's Got a Point

I just read this at AmericanThinker.com. It's hard to disagree. The conservatives in this race have long left us wanting, in large part due to the push for those less than conservative by the media, some talk radio folk, and the voting public's unwillingness to pay attention and research the candidates. Now we're left with McCain, who despite the wailing of Michael Medved, is indeed more liberal than any self-respecting conservative can stomach. The writer is echoing the sentiments of Ann Coulter who believes that it is better for a lib to make stupid lib mistakes and take the heat, should libs actually blame one of their own for failures (they rarely do), rather than have conservatives take the hit.

Since McCain/Feingold, I had decided that I couldn't vote for McCain. It's true what Medved says, that McC/F has done little to truly take money out of politics, but the failure of a stupid move does not legitimize ignoring the person who made it. The intentions of the person take precedence in deciding how to proceed.

Then of course came other bills with his name on it, the most insufferable is the McCain/Lieberman bill regarding the mythical man-made global warming. Now, with Johnny-boy way, way, way in the lead with over 900 delegates to the Huckster's 200+, the preacher's gonna need a miracle to turn things his way. But he's only a slight step up. And the plan for many at this point is to hold the nose and vote for McCain over whichever buffoonish socialist the Dem voters foist upon us. Talk about rocks and hard places.

So now, I'm once again leaning away from backing the party, since the party has lost it's way so badly, and let the Dems have it all. It's difficult to imagine that we'd have to suffer for more than four years.

But there's one final possibility and that is if McCain can give us an indication of not only who'll be his VP choice, but who he has in mind for the Supreme Court, and that he'll back off on some of his goofier notions, such as closing Gitmo and housing those scumbags here where they'd be more likely to be treated like common criminals rather than the uncommon evil that they are.

Tricky times, my friends. Tricky times.

Friday, February 15, 2008

Thank You Libs So Very Much

With every tragic shooting, such as what happened at NIU yesterday, I have to give it up to the lib mindset that determined it is good for the law-abiding citizen to be defenseless against lunatics with malicious intent. Illinois is quite possibly the worst state for those who believe they have the right to not be shot to death. As a bastion for the looney left, in the state that gave us complete idiots such as Dick Durbin and Barak Obama, it is felt that gun control legislation actually means something to scumbags. Some years ago we had a crazy bitch walk into an elementary school and open fire on small children. How is it that criminals and lunatics are the only people able to aquire weapons and the good people of the state cannot? In Chicago and other towns, it's illegal to own a handgun, never mind carrying one. A couple of years ago, a man in a NorthShore town was in trouble with the law for shooting a burglar who was trying to rob his home a second time. That town preferred he get robbed than to own a weapon to defend his property.

The Supreme Court is currently, or very soon to be, debating the understanding of the 2nd Amendment. Somewhere in my personal archives, what my wife calls "that junk in the garage", I have a gun magazine that ran an article about the 2nd and detailing the mindset of the founders and the top people in each colony as they worked to decide what should be considered a right in our Constitution. Self defense was paramount and to question that the 2nd means I can carry a weapon for self defense is akin to arguing whether or not water is wet. The left has long suffered from an inability to understand the obvious, and people die as a result. The decision to disarm the general public, an example of the fascism of which they accuse the right, parallels the attitude of the left toward the war in Iraq, a major front in the war on terror. They will leave the citizens to the mercy of the despots and lunatics and somehow claim a superior position of compassion. Thank you so very much looney liberal left. May God have mercy on the souls of the victims of liberal philosophy.

Thursday, February 14, 2008

No Agenda? Right!

I just couldn't pass up the opportunity to re-open this festering wound, so for your perusal, check this out. It concisely covers a lot of bases perfectly.

Can't Be Said Enough

Read this Townhall.com article, one of many to explain just why Obama is NOT presidential material. Try to calm yourselves if reading from a conservative source makes you anxious. It's just that they are the only places, besides searching governmental voting records of representatives, where one can find the details about the man who would take the country in the wrong direction, and likely do it faster than either Hillary or John McCain.

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

Maybe We Should Just Wear Targets On Our Backs!!!

I just heard today that the Senate has enacted some legal prohibition against the CIA using waterboarding in interrogations of suspected terrorists. Mumble-mouth Ted Kennedy thinks we should just go by some military handbook of interrogation techniques. Why not just send the list of those "approved" techniques right to the scumbags who didn't need anymore reasons why we should not be feared? Better yet, let's just not waste anymore time and nuke ourselves. Who votes for these idiots? Wait, I know. The same people who are backing Obama and Clinton. Pathetic.

I Wonder What His Supporters Think

I thought I had heard something like this in the last couple of days. Another peek into the man who would be king can be found here.

Of course it may be simply the people who man the office, but then one must wonder why do such people support Obama? What do commies see in him that bring them out to back him? The same could be said for others of questionable character and desires, such as Planned Parenthood, GLBT types and who knows who else? If such people were attracted in a way that brought forth their repentance or positive change, that would be one thing. But I suspect they see in Barry Obama something to which they can relate. I wonder which candidates Mahmoud likes?

Saturday, February 02, 2008

Clinton Or Obama?

Is American ready for a woman for president? Is America ready for a black man for president? Hillary's a woman, Barak's a black man, but they are identical twins for all the difference in their politics. It's as if they're both going to smash our skulls with a baseball bat, but one uses aluminum, and the other a Louisville Slugger. Either way, it's Headache City.

So the question isn't whether or not America is ready for a woman or a black man in the White House. In fact, that's an altogether stupid question, as stupid as the statement that now is the time for either. It's pretty clear that America isn't ready for this woman or this black man. It's really pretty sad that such a question even gets the time of day in America. Of course it's the character of the person along with their record and plans for the job that matters.

What matters even more, of course, is us. Are we paying attention? Are we staying abreast of the political scene at least in some substantive manner? More clearly, and more sadly, it is not the case with far too many voters based on the money being raised for these two clowns. I think it was Thursday's Hannity & Colmes where I caught a guy interviewing primary voters who backed these two. Most of them backed Obama (I can't decide if that's good or bad), with one guy saying it's because Obama has the guts to say what needs to be said. In this case it was that Obama wants to raise taxes. The interviewer asked for a show hands (there was about twenty or so lunatics) of those for whom raising taxes was important. Most of them raised their hands. It's amazing that they think that's a good thing.

Other comments, before I changed the channel, included the usual meaningless crap about change and unity. Unity. As Dennis Prager stated in a recent Townhall column, "unity" means buying into his crap, otherwise you're "devisive".

These two clowns musn't win the election. I don't think our country or our culture can sustain four or more years of people like these.

Friday, February 01, 2008

What If It's McCain?

This Townhall piece should be read by conservatives still reeling from the departures of Thompson and Hunter from the GOP primary race.

Like many, I'm not completely thrilled with our selections for the Republican nominee. Through a combination of factors---media influence, poor campaigning, poor fundraising, etc.---the best conservatives have fallen by the wayside. We are left with men who are less than ideal regarding conservatism, though each is still likely to be a decent president, and certainly better than either of the two remaining clowns on the Dem side.

The John Hawkins piece is focussed on McCain, and why we should vote for him if he wins the nomination. I have problems with McCain, as do many on the right, and I believe I once determined that I'd never vote for him. But what of the alternatives? How can I, in good conscience, NOT vote for the opponent of Obama/Clinton? That would just be too nasty a thing to do to the nation. How about some third party candidate? Yeah, right.

There's been a lot of talk about McCain being a RINO, "more liberal than Hillary", etc. I don't buy it. He's not liberal, he's just not the most conservative guy that ran. Medved, a big McCain backer, laments the aforementioned knocks on McCain, but I read a response to his defense recently. Medved likes to talk about the rating given McCain by the American Conservative Union (ACU), which is around 83. Turns out, that's not so hot overall. Senator Kyl, also from Arizona, scored around 97. Half the people sent to Congress from Arizona score around 94. Here is where you can read more about his ACU ratings.

So of course, the only reasonable thing that I can do, should McCain be the party nominee, is to cast my vote for him. I encourage all who lean right, stand in the middle, or are just barely left, to vote for whomever wins the GOP nomination. As the Hawkins article points out, we can't let a million kids per year die just because McCain, or any other GOP hopeful, is less than the perfect conservative.