Archive for the ‘National News’ Category

Those Demented Homeschoolers

Tuesday, November 18th, 2008

*** Since this is a post on education, I should probably let it be known that I am an educator at a public school.  I am not a member of the teacher’s union.  I will probably never join a teacher’s union.  As a matter of fact, I would be more comfortable handling my own negotiations than letting them, though I am okay with what I am making because I am not in it for the money.  My ideas on federalism and constitutionalism are that a parent is ultimately responsible for a child’s education, so a parent should have an unquestionnable right to home school their children.  The 10th Amendment would also give the state some say on the matter, but I believe that is better for the state to only get involved in public schools (notice I did not say the federal government).  On the flip side, I believe that a sizable portion of children whom are homeschooled would be better off in a school, public or private.  I would do it (homeschool or private school) for my children if faced with certain issues.  Private school would probably be my choice between the two. ***

Apparently Joy Behar called homeschoolers “demented.”  Should we really be surprised by anything that Joy Behar says?

Behar does wear her affiliations on her sleeve.  This is just another way that she does not really have a mind of her own.  She simply is anti-religious, anti-Republican, and anti-common sense.  Isn’t it funny how liberals want to talk about rights, unless it has a strong union pulling the other way?

How Obama Won In a Right of Center Nation

Tuesday, November 18th, 2008

In a previous blog post, I discussed some ways that the GOP needs to evaluate itself.  Truth is, Obama won by a fairly large margin.  There are several ways that he did so.

The first reason, in my opinion, is that voters were tired of Republican rule.  I am a Republican.  I could never vote for a Democrat in a state or national election.  I may be narrow-minded for making such a statement, but a vote for a Democrat in any state or national election is more than a vote just for that candidate.  This will put forth an agenda that I, as a Conservative, could not endorse.  Those who voted for any of the “Naifeh Republicans” (if you are from outside Tennessee you may not understand unless you investigate) indirectly helped advance the liberal agenda.  However, many Americans, including me, were tired of what was passing as Conservatism.  The Republican rule has been far from Conservative both socially and fiscally.  Others had their own pet peeves about what has come from Republican rule.

The second reason is that Republicans have been acting more like Democrats.  The Republican Party used to be the party of small government.  One would be hard pressed to argue that the Bush White House was for smaller government.  The one smaller government idea that I can point to is lower taxes.  There were very little other gains.  I want to clarify that Republicans and Democrats are really not all that close in philosophy, but I do want to point out that the Republicans gained near absolute power in the only way you can in a republic.  That near absolute power corrupted nearly absolutely.  We were acting like those same corrupt Democrats that we despise.

The third reason is that Obama capitalized on a two-fold message.  HOPE and CHANGE.  Americans felt that things were getting bad because of debt and economic problems of our country.  They were right.  Americans felt that Republicans (especially President Bush) were to blame.  They were only partially right.  It was a bad time to be an incumbent or a Republican.  It was a doubly bad time to be both a Republican and an incumbent.  That message of HOPE and CHANGE was something that citizens (Conservative, Liberal, and Moderate) were willing to choose.

The fourth reason is that the mainstream media had a love affair with Obama.  The media loves someone who can talk a good game.  The media equally loves someone who is a Liberal.  Obama met both qualifications.  Even parody shows failed to go after Obama.  Was it that these people were scared of being called a racist or just in love with Obama?  I believe that it was more love, but nonetheless, a fear of being marked as racist had to be in their minds.

The fifth reason, the biggest reason, is that the American public does not have a clue what is going on.  A Zogby poll of Obama supporters showed that Obama supporters are… shall we say… lacking in “intellectual fortitude.”  Did I just call Obama supporters stupid?  I will say that Obama supporters either have a screwed up ideology that does not jive with what it means to live in a republic or to be American, or they ARE stupid lacking in “intellectual fortitude.” 

The results of the Zogby poll were startling.  I teach a computer class.  My students have tests that they take.  Some of them refuse to take the tests seriously and they take a 100 question multiple choice test with four possible answers, and they make a 25 on average.  If they make a 30, I know that they probably guessed on most, but they knew an answer or two.  If they make below a 20, it almost seems as if they sabotaged their answers.  In this Zogby poll, Obama fans showed they had no clue what was going on.  With a 50-50 shot, more than 57 percent did not know that the Democrats control Congress.  That question must have been below their pay-grade.  When asked about which of the four Presidential or Vice-Presidential candidates quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (that is a 25 percent chance for all of you Obama supporters), over 80 percent missed the question.  Furthermore, when asked which of the four candidates said he or she would bankrupt the coal industry and cause prices to skyrocket  (still a 25 percent chance for you Obama supporters… ahh heck with it, can they even read this?), more than 88 percent did not know that this was Obama.

But by golly (re-read that in a Palinesque accent), they knew all of the dirt on the Republicans.  More than 86 percent knew that Palin was the one that had $150,000 spent on her wardrobe by the GOP.  Nearly 94 percent knew that Palin had a pregnant teenage daughter.  Oh, and 87 percent “knew” that Palin stated that she could see Russia from her house (which by the way was not Palin, but Tina Fey). 

Sadly, McCain was chosen by Republicans that had about the same amount of “intellectual fortitude.”  Well, maybe not quite that bad, but there were definitely better choices. 

*** The above is simply a piece saying that Obama supporters and even those who chose McCain as the Republican nominee as a whole did not have a grasp on issues.  Obama supporters simply wanted “change” whatever that means (and which we may soon find out).  McCain supporters simply wanted someone enough like the Democrats that he could win.  I guess that backfired didn’t it? ***

Here are some other reads on the subject and the fallout:

http://www.howobamagotelected.com/

http://libertarianrepublican.blogspot.com/2008/11/some-conservatives-actually-helped-to.html

http://www.creativeminorityreport.com/2008/11/republican-party-or-donner-party.html

Chambliss Poised to Get Libertarian Votes in Georgia Senate Race

Monday, November 17th, 2008

Saxby Chambliss, the Georgia Republican Senator, was unsuccessful in obtaining the fifty-percent threshold needed to retain his Senate seat.  Georgia is a state that requires a candidate to meet the fifty-percentage points to win an election.  He will be facing off against the Democratic nominee in a December run-off election.  It seems that Chambliss is gaining support from libertarians due to his support for the Fair Tax

The Libertarian nominee Allen Buckley pulled in 3.4 percent of the vote.  Buckley has not endorsed, but Neal Boortz, a Libertarian talk show host, has.  He is supporting Chambliss. 

The Libertarian’s, especiall Boortz, support the Fair Tax.  Chambliss’s opponent ran ads against Chambliss for his support of the Fair Tax. 

This election will probably be decided by each candidate’s Get Out the Vote efforts.  Democrats may have an edge with this as Obama is a great fundraiser.  The only question is can the Democrats get energized about this as much as Republicans.  The Democrats are hoping to get 60 votes in the Senate, while Republicans are hoping to stop this.  We shall see which shall prevail.

Keyes Believes Obama to be Illegitimate

Sunday, November 16th, 2008

Philip J. Berg believed that Obama was not born in the United States, or at least that he did not meet the “natural born” citizen clause.  His case was tossed out due to a lack of standing.  In other words, the judge said Berg had no reason to bring the lawsuit. 

I just got home and turned on computer to see what has happened while I have been out today.  Terry Frank has a story and link to a story that says that another citizen, and one with standing, has brought this lawsuit back.  Alan Keyes, AIP Presidential Candidate, has brought a lawsuit saying that he was unable to run in a fair campaign because Obama ran unconstitutionally. 

There are many interesting tidbits in the complaint:

“If he was born in Hawaii, there are four (4) other obstacles to Senator Obama’s eligibility. In and about 1967, Senator Obama moved to Indonesia, took the last name of his stepfather, Soetoro, and went by the name Barry Soetoro. In original legal action filed by Mr. Berg, he presented Senator Obama’s school registration, showing him registered as Barry Soetoro, Citizenship - Indonesian, Religion - Islam, signed by L. Soetoro. From 1945, Indonesia has not allowed dual citizenship and, therefore, Ms. Dunham-Obama-Soetoro, Senator Obama’s mother, had to relinquish her son’s U.S. citizenship in order to obtain Indonesian citizenship for him, which would make him ineligible to become a United States President. Additionally, the United States could not allow dual citizenship with Indonesia at that time, as Indonesia did not allow dual citizenship, and it was prohibited by the Hague Convention of 1930, as interfering with the internal affairs of another sovereign Country.

81. In addition, upon return to the United States in and around 1971-1972, Senator Obama would have been required to go to the then current immigration procedures to regain his U.S. citizenship. There is no record of him ever doing that. Even if he had done so, he would be considered a naturalized citizen and not a “natural born” citizen.

82. Additionally, assuming Senator Obama was born in what is now Kenya, at the time of Senator Obama’s birth in 1961,(now) Kenya was the British Protectorate of Zanzibar and Senator Obama was automatically accorded a form of British citizenship under Section 32(1) of the British Nationality Act of 1948, effective date January 28, 1949, based on his father’s citizenship.

83. Finally, in 1981, Senator Obama traveled to Pakistan, when there was a ban for U.S. citizens to travel to Pakistan. The only logical possibility for him to do so was by using one of his other passports: Indonesian, Kenyan, or British.

84. Based on all of the above, it is the duty of the SOS to obtain proper documentation of Senator Obama’s citizenship to confirm his eligibility for the office of the President of the United States.”

Another story seems to indicate that Obama was born in Mombasa.

Red Hat Rob’s “Reapportionment & Redistricting 101”

Friday, November 14th, 2008

Red Hat Rob has a blog entry explaining the reapportionment of congressional seats following the census and the redistricting that can and will take place following the census.  Gerrymandering will more than likely take the Tennessee delegation from being in the Republican minority in the US House to a majority. 

He also explains why Tennessee, a red state, has a Democratic majority.  Read more here.

Gay Rage in Michigan

Thursday, November 13th, 2008

So if someone attacks homosexuals, even verbally, you can be charged with a hate crime.  If homosexuals attack a religious organization, no charges are made?  I am not sure that I understand this one.  Maybe someone will create a new reality show – When  Gays, Lesbians, and Transgendered Persons Attack…  Maybe not…

Outside there was a peaceful protest.  Okay.  If it was, people have the right to peacefully protest.  Apparently, however, the police decided not to pursue the fiasco that occurred inside.  I have waited on this story to hit a local newspaper so I could see what really happened.  Here is the link to that.  There have been other reports that lewd acts and even face to face confrontations started by the bunch of worthless trash that went wacko in the church. 

It is truly a sad day when the police will not protect innocent people that went to church to worship God.  This just backs up what I have said for years.  We, the people, should not depend on government to even protect out rights.  The first amendment gives us (and the peaceful protestors outside) the right to worship and freedom of speech.  The second amendment gives us the means and the right to protect our freedoms.  Luckily for the attackers, no one in the church decided to exercise their second amendment rights.

Newt Now Backing Steele

Wednesday, November 12th, 2008

Word on the blogs is that Newt Gingrich is now backing Steele for the RNC post.  Fred Thompson has also been mentioned, but he is not the one to lead the Republican Party back.  I like Fred.  I even considered voting for him in the Republican Primary, but he does not have any charisma to lead the RNC.  We should probably now look toward Steele.

Newt Ready, Willing, and Able

Monday, November 10th, 2008

Newt Gingrich has stated that he is ready, willing, and able to take over as RNC Chairman.  Hopefully the RNC will look to him to try to make the gains he helped gain in 1994.  He also wants to move (gasp)… the party back to the right. 

I urge everyone to contact the RNC and urge them to look to Newt to take back the soul of the Republican Party.

Mailing Address:
Republican National Committee
310 First Street, SE
Washington, DC 20003

Phone Numbers:
Comment Line & General Information: 202.863.8790
Phone: 202.863.8500
Fax: 202.863.8820

Email Addresses:
General Information: info@gop.com Technical Contact: ecampaign@gop.com

GOP Self Exam

Sunday, November 9th, 2008

Now that the election is over, it is time for the GOP to examine itself.  The GOP needs to evaluate what has gone wrong the last 8 years, and then we need to create a plan of where we will go from here.  I have some pointers on what the GOP can do nationally and at the state level. 

 

First, let’s examine the McCain loss.  They say hindsight is 20/20, but many Conservatives saw this coming.  Many of us simply hoped that if McCain were to win, he would continue to pretend to be a Conservative.  The Palin pick energized the base, but that seemed to be just a ploy to make Conservatives believe that McCain was one of us. 

 

McCain says that he puts country first.  He did put country first as he fought valiantly for our country, but Obama-mania literally scared many Republicans into thinking that this has been more than a catchphrase since he has been in the Senate.  If McCain had a ‘D’ next to his name, I dare say that most Conservatives and/or Republicans would have a far different take and spin on his “country first” slogan.

 

He has been a champion of some of the most detrimental legislation and confirmation votes that we have ever seen.  These votes certainly did not put country first.  These votes gave liberty a backseat.  If we were to look at the courts, we can see two judges that should never be in a courtroom except as defendants in Breyer and Ginsburg.  Both of these justices were confirmed by John McCain.  Neither of the justices put country first as evidenced in their usage of international law in deciding “constitutional law.”

 

Another anti-liberty measure that McCain not only supported, but that McCain also developed is the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2000.  Most of us know it as McCain-Feingold.  If you are not sure what it is, basically it is legislation that attempts to limit freedom of speech by limiting what type of ads can be run within a certain timeframe of an election.  It also limits ones ability to donate money to political causes.

 

McCain has several other positions that show that he is not one to be trusted with our rights and liberty.  McCain was self-serving as he considered changing parties and even considered (and possibly even lobbied for) the Democratic nomination as VP for John Kerry.  McCain also flip-flopped on tax cuts when it became politically suicidal for him to be against the “Bush tax cuts.”  McCain has also not been a friend to gun owners.  (Note: McCain did get the NRA endorsement, but it was more of an anti-Obama endorsement.)  Let’s also not forget that McCain pushed hard for perhaps the most anti-American legislation that we have seen in the last decade.  In a time when America has been under attack, McCain fought hard to allow the US to be vulnerable to future attacks when he pushed for McCain-Kennedy which would have given amnesty and citizenship to illegal immigrants.

 

I would argue that McCain has caused severe harm to our liberties as Americans, and I would argue that McCain has caused great harm to the Republican name.

 

Next, I would like to focus on the sitting President.  I want to say that I think President Bush is a good man.  I also feel that history will be better to him than we see now.  However, we see that President Bush is not the Conservative that he tried to portray himself as in 2000.  A few of the instances are the immigration fiasco, out of control spending, the bailout plan, and his nomination of Harriet Miers as a Supreme Court Justice.  All of this bumbling, combined with the division that the Iraq War created hurt the Republican brand.

 

The third, and perhaps the one with the most blame, is the Republican controlled chambers of the Bush presidency.  Republicans in the House and Senate had trouble telling President Bush, “NO!”  Divided government is good when there is a lack of principle.  The Democratic Party has been the one with a lack of principle.  They have stood for bigger government.  The Republican Party has been the party of principle with an ideology for smaller government.  We Conservatives learned that this principle was skin deep as the Republicans expanded government at a very alarming pace. 

 

Conservatism was not rejected on Tuesday.  The moderation and liberalism of the Republican Party was what was rejected.  I will go on record as saying that the American people were either blinded by Obama’s message of “Change,” or the American people were duped.  I won’t blatantly say that Americans were stupid for electing Obama.  I won’t blatantly say that Republicans were stupid for choosing McCain.  This election was not just about the lesser of two evils.  Obama is extremely anti-American.  I won’t say that he hates America as it is, but there is no doubt that he despises what the Founders created.  Look at his quotes on the Constitution and the Founders.  It seems that he believes that the Founders made a mistake in their ideas.  However, McCain was a far greater evil than most Republicans were willing to recognize.  McCain should have never even come close to the Presidency.  While McCain was the lesser of two evils, he nevertheless was too much of an evil to have in the Oval Office.  America would have been worse than it is today as a result of a McCain presidency.  Sadly, the United States is much worse off with an Obama presidency.  The GOP needs to focus on republicanism and small government.  The GOP needs to get serious about its Conservatism.  The Tennessee GOP has done this fairly well.  The National GOP needs to take notice and return to its Conservative roots.