I am a Conservative Because...

Even though I believe the more evil of the two lessers won the election (please don’t flame the statement, its just a term of use. And no I don’t believe Obama is evil. Misguided yes), I am not depressed, remorseful, downhearted or dejected.  In fact, I am ecstatic over of the opportunity to remold the Republican party into a more conservative, focused and principled political machine. Its a once in a life time event, beside the creation of a new party, like the original founding of the Republican party. Call it a mulligan, or what ever is your fancy, but we have the chance to effect the future of this country for the better.

The comments from the left seem to say that the election shows republicans/conservatives stand for nothing, while the liberal elites bath in the glory of their progressive opinions. This is by far the truth. As a response to those that “stand” for what is liberal, here is what it means to be conservative.

• I am a Conservative because I believe American succeeds when we stand up for our country. WE created it, WE defend it, WE promote it, WE admonish it and WE ARE IT.  If you are not “it”, then there is a new homeland call that EU that is perfectly welcoming. 
  
• I am a Conservative because I believe in the inventive ingenuity of its people and their ability to form businesses for the purpose of selling products, making a profit and paying its employees. Neither bottom up (Communism) or Top Down (Authoritarianism) work. It is the people alone and their creativity that drive the economy
  
• I am a Conservative because I believe the government should get out of the people’s affairs. No where in the Constitution does it stipulate rights to universal health care, welfare, social security, prescription drugs, the Department of Education, Health and Human Services, or the EPA. The list goes on but you get the point. 
  
• I am a Conservative because I believe in common sense and the reality of the world. Judgement takes common sense and the reality of the world is harsh, filled with people intent on doing harm. You cannot solve problems pretending they don’t exist, you have to face them head on with a principled moral compass for guidance to your common sense solutions. 
  
• I am a Conservative because I am an unapologetic believer in the literal meaning of the Bill of Rights, as expressed in the writings of our Founding Fathers.  For example: "And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; …" Samuel Adams.
  
• I am a Conservative because I believe in the Rule of Law as founded in the inherent moral compass of our being.  Either placed by God or determined by the judgements of mankind through principles of Objectivism, our laws determine the actions of its citizen towards others and maintains the mandate of freedom for one’s person.
  
• I am a Conservative because I believe in the inherent notion that absolute power corrupts absolutely and government must maintain a rigorous set of checks and balances, so that no party or person or group ever has the power to dictate authority over the masses, without our expressed permission. 
  
• I am a Conservative because I believe in Free Market Capitalism. I believe in the ultimate power of the consumer and Lassie-Faire principles that dictates the responsibility of the consumer in the market system. Failure of the consumer to engage, along with governmental interventionism is the basis for nefarious business practices and market correcting collapses. We should take note....
  
• I am a Conservative because I believe in America. Its principle of right and wrong, its expression of Hope, the bastion of Freedom on the hill for all the world to see. An example of what is good, even in the face of adversity or disagreement, we stand alone if we must to give others in the world a reason to dream.
  
• I am a Conservative because I believe through strength there is peace. Strength alone is a force for evil, when in the hands of the few. But when in the hands of the many, it is a tool of freedom, of democracy and hope for those less fortunate. The representation of service and comfort to those oppresses by the same tool misused. 
  
• I am a Conservative because I believe in the freedom we have in our own person. We all have to live in our own shoes and have little right to judge others for how they live in theirs. We must respect the legality of each individual’s right to exist, but in so doing employ the moral consensus of society to right the wrongs one person may choose to exhibit on another, either directly or indirectly. There are no gray areas. 
  
• I am a Conservative because I believe “WE THE PEOPLE, have formed a more perfect Union, established Justice, insured domestic Tranquility, provided for the common defense, promoted the general Welfare, and secured the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, have ordained and established this Constitution for the United States of America”
  

In response to: I am a Liberal Because...

Send Barry!

Since no one else in the world is willing to go after the pirates in the Somalia waters, why don't we send Barry to go talk to them? You never know, maybe the family tree has a few branches that stretch over into that neck of the desert!

In response to: Late Afternoon/Early Evening Open Thread

Kossacks' Tantrum over Lieberman Shows Democrats' Fundamental Weakness

The Kossacks have been writing furiously yesterday and today about the Senate Democratic leadership's handling of Senator Joe Lieberman. This anger-fest is particularly amusing because of yesterday's post by Jed L (author of the Jed Report) on the so-called Republican "circular firing squad". To borrow (a revised version of) Jed's opening line, "Ah, don't you love Democratic infighting?"

The coverage on DK began in earnest yesterday with posts by Kos himself. Kos clearly wanted Lieberman drawn and quartered for supporting McCain's Presidential campaign. He was delighted when Lieberman's allies turned on him, calling for "significant consequences" (namely, stripping him of powerful committee leadership appointments). Noting that there was nevertheless a movement afoot to minimize these "consequences", Kos wrote:

The American people voted overwhelmingly, in landslide numbers, for change. Lieberman is George Bush's most faithful ally on Iraq, and his continued chairmanship of the committee tasked with national security would be spitting in the face of the American electorate.

It's looking like maybe, just maybe, the caucus truly does realize it and plans to act accordingly.

In a subsequent Monday post, Kos complained that the Senate Democrats planned to vote on the Lieberman issue using a secret ballot process:

Now these senators may not care what their constituents think. But given the American people voted overwhelmingly for change, keeping George Bush's best friend on Iraq in his committee, removing him in favor of someone in tune with popular sentiment (and the incoming administration) should be a no-brainer. And if the Senate spits in the face of this desire for change, then at the very least they should have the balls to own up to it.

Interesting, isn't it, that what Senate Democratic leaders feel is best for American workers (namely, Card Check, which is an Obama priority), is not good enough for them? Unions should be able to harass workers publicly into joining a union, but Senate Democrats do not have to reveal to each other or their constituents whether they supported or opposed Lieberman.

Next, Kagro X argued that the District of Columbia should not be represented by Lieberman because Obama carried DC by a 93% margin. "Wait a minute," you say, "doesn't Lieberman represent Connecticut, not DC? DC doesn't have a Senator!" Here's how it works:

And as you're no doubt aware, the District's affairs are fairly closely overseen by Congress. It's not a state, and as a federal district, Congress has a pretty big say in how it gets run and who runs it.

So who handles that on the Senate side? That's right, the "Governmental Affairs" side of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. And that means Lieberman -- the guy who must think 93% of DC pals around with terrorists.

It's true. According to the committee's web site, Senate Rule XXV(k)(1) gives them jurisdiction over the "municipal affairs of the District of Columbia, except appropriations therefor." Which is why this afternoon, Joe Lieberman's committee will be holding confirmation hearings for two DC judicial nominees. Right. Not the Judiciary Committee -- that's for federal judicial appointments. DC municipal court nominations are in the hands of... Joe Lieberman.

Actually, Sarah Palin must think that 93% of DC pals around with terrorists. Having lived there for five years, I'd have to agree.

But, I digress. Yesterday afternoon, Roll Call reported that a deal was brokered in which Senator Lieberman would lose only a subcommittee chairmanship. This drove Kos into a curse-laden tizzy:

Um, what idiot would think that taking away a subcommittee from Lieberman would be seen as a "stinging rebuke"? In whose DC-Beltway-addled mind is that even remotely punishment?

Let Lieberman keep that subcommittee. No one gives a shit about it. The only thing that matters, the only thing that Lieberman wants, and the only thing we don't want him to have -- is the chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee.

If this is the "starting point", and given the Senate Democrats' history of capitulations, expect Lieberman to come out of that meeting as majority leader.

In fact, today Lieberman lost "only . . . his spot on the Environment and Public Works Committee", according to Roll Call. Apparently at President-Elect Obama's direction, Senate Democrats did take Margaret Hoover's "bad advice", Jed L. Kos responded, "There isn't a more tone-deaf group of people anywhere in this country than inside the U.S. Senate." I guess the Senate Democrats aren't giving that "seat at the table" to the Daily Kos after all. In a subsequent post, Kos added, "the Senate Democratic caucus are a bunch of spineless asses utterly unwilling and unable to deliver the change the American people requested."

The reality of the Lieberman situation is that Senate Democrats believe that they need him to caucus (and, more importantly, to vote) with them. As the Democrats' very own "maverick" (who used to be a "DINO" before he went "independent"), he could have been a great thorn in their side if they had spanked him too hard. In exchange for the leniency, Lieberman promised to be a good boy:



More importantly, though: the Daily Kos' coverage of the Lieberman debacle is a preview of the tantrums that the left wing of the Democratic Party will throw whenever soon-to-be inaugurated President Obama appears to be straying from their radical political path. All moderates and other traitors must be thrown under the bus! For Kos, this includes the left-wing leaders themselves: "I'm done with Reid as Senate leader."

This internal divisiveness, which is coming to light even before Obama has been inaugurated, points to potentially serious problems in the Democrats' ability to govern, "given the Senate Democrats' history of capitulations." If Kos wants to go on thinking that having Joe Lieberman in the Senate is equivalent to having President Bush in the White House, that's OK with me. Here's the kind of dialogue that this mindset creates:

Jane Hamsher: With all due respect Governor Dean, we were just told to go screw ourselves, that our concerns for Barack Obama and our concern about the war and everything else that we fought so hard for within the Democratic party is meaningless and that Joe being happy and giving in to his threats--and he did threaten Democrats in his press conference--is more important than we are. And so I don't think it was a matter of reconciliation. I think we were told to go Cheney ourselves.

[Howard] Dean: I haven't seen the blogs about this because this just happened but I'm sure the sentiment online is one of outrage. But I would line up with Barack. I don't think you were told to go screw yourselves at all. I think he has got to now practice what he preaches during two years of campaigns if he wants to bring America together and as objectionable as Joe's behavior was, and frankly unprincipled, I don't think that this is the thing that should divide us. And I don't think it's about his votes for FISA or anything else. I think it's about what kind of a tone do we want to send. Do we want a purge as the first thing we do? I don't think so.

Meanwhile, many Republicans are attempting to return the GOP to classic conservative ideas, values and policy goals. Let's hope the Democrats keep on fighting amongst themselves while the GOP rebuilds and retools (pace BarbinMD). This is the stuff of which the Republican resurgence in 2010 will be made.

In Response To: Dean on Obama, Lieberman, and Us

Chambliss Stands up for Sugar Workers-Media Spins it Again....

Opponents of Saxby Chambliss, the United States Senator from Georgia have created a mythical tale surrounding a very tragic event. On February 7th, 2008, a silo at Imperial Sugar company exploded ultimately killing 14 and leaving near three dozen others severely injured. The OSHA findings have shown that the explosion was caused when a bucket broke, causing a spark which ignited the combustible sugar dust in the bottom of the Silo.

When the Senate held hearings in July of this year, Sen. Chambliss asked some very pointed questions to the man who was in charge of Safety for Imperial Sugar, Graham H. Graham. According to Graham's testimony, he had implemented many changes in recent months because he found the conditions to be dangerous. He also testified that after the explosion he was no longer invited to attend meetings concerning the investigation.

The Liberal local media and their buddies at the DailyKos, would have you believe that Graham was a whistle blower. Only problem is he Never actually blew the Whistle. He didn't go to the Press and demand the plant be shut down. Hell, he didn't even go to Imperial Sugar and demand it be shut down. He's not a Whistle blower, he's a guy that was in charge of the safety of hundreds of people, who didn't get the job done.

Chambliss was criticized by the local media and others for his tough questioning of Graham H. Graham. Some even falsely reported Chambliss had received $1000 from an Imperial Sugar Pac.

Chambliss comes to his own defense with an Op-ed in Savanna Morning News

I stand with employees and families of Imperial Sugar who have had a life-changing experience.

On Feb. 7 of this year, our coastal community experienced a great tragedy when an explosion occurred at the Imperial Sugar refinery in Port Wentworth. Thirteen lives were lost, dozens more were injured and families were changed forever.

Following the explosion, I visited with the families and employees and toured the exterior of the facility. It was indeed an emotional visit.

These types of accidents must be prevented, and that is why I have continued to seek answers on behalf of the families who were shaken by this terrible situation. It is why Sen. Johnny Isakson and I urged the U.S. Secretary of Labor and the interim executive of the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board to fully investigate the accident and, if appropriate, assess penalties to any party determined to have violated The Occupational Safety and Health (OSHA) Act.

OSHA is the only federal agency with the statutory authority to penalize the company for violations of workplace safety law.

The results of the OSHA investigation, recently released, determined that Imperial Sugar "egregiously and willfully" violated safety and health standards and a total of $8,777,000 in fines was issued to Imperial Sugar, making it the third largest fine to one company in the history of OSHA.

However, this is not the end of the story, and it is for this reason I asked tough questions during a hearing on Capitol Hill this past week examining the role of combustible dust, which is believed to have played a role in the accident.

During the hearing, an official of Imperial Sugar testified about conditions at the plant, and I asked him some tough and direct questions. This is an emotional and tragic issue, so it is baffling to me that my intense questioning created quite a stir in the media, with some making accusations that this newspaper has since had to correct for being false.

In fact, I did not receive a political contribution from Imperial Sugar in June 2008 as the paper reported.

Let me be clear, I was elected by the people of Georgia to stick up for them, and when injuries occur and lives are lost in a tragedy like the one that occurred in Port Wentworth, you bet I am going to ask harsh questions. The media needs to do the same. It infuriates me that this incident occurred and it cannot happen again.

During the hearing, I believed it was necessary to ask the witness, who held himself out to be in charge of safety at the plant and had described the conditions as "shocking, dirty, dangerous, and combustible," why he didn't recommend the plant be shut down and cleaned up. The company had adhered to every one of his recommendations to that point, so I wanted to know why he had not proposed to management to shut down the facility and make it safe.

Because of that question, some accused me of taking a "cheap shot," but the unfortunate reality here is people were seriously hurt and lives were lost when this situation clearly could have been prevented.

It is disappointing that members of the media chose to come down on the side of political cynicism. That is not what Georgians want, but unfortunately in this case, that is what they got.

I will continue to ask the tough questions and stand with the employees and the families who have had a life changing experience, and I will do everything I can to ensure a tragedy like this does not happen again.

So while Saxby Chambliss is trying to find out what really happened and how it could be prevented from happening again, the Liberal Media spins an Election Year tale that they hope will deliver their "happy ending".

God Has a Sense of Humor

Funny thing happened on the way to the Global Climate Change (Warming) meeting, it snowed. And not just once, but over and over again. It seems Al Gore and his Climate Priests of the Apocalypse cannot show up anywhere without an abnormal cold front and bad weather abruptly interfering with their meeting.  Siting here in the Nation's Capital, where the High temperature today will not break the average cold temperature, you see the stage God has set for this comedy tour. More than once, Al Gore and team have shown up to discuss the climate change emergency, only to have the meeting cancelled by Snow.



But it does not matter where he goes or which of his political allies conduct the meeting, the outcome is the same. What’s unfortunately not funny for the participants of these climate protests, is the lesson they sometimes have to learn when they try to make a point. But still they are not deterred, and God calls them up on stage to be the Patsy. In most cases the parade of jesters marching to announce our imminent demise, gives us the opportunity to laugh at their Ministry of Silly Walks.

What’s not funny is the universal zeal the believers have in concocting “solutions”. Schemes that undoubtedly will result in higher taxes, higher priced products and controls on the everyday events of our lives for which government with have a final say. Remember the last time we had the government interfere with the production of products along environmentally conservative guidelines? We got the AMC Gremlin, the Pacer and the Ford Pinto. 

One last point on man or nature's ability to effect the environment.  It seems that on December 25-26 (the birthday of Christ) of 2006, there was a snow storm.  Obviously, an event like this happens all the time in Winter.  Except for one thing.  This happened in Australia, in the Southern Hemisphere, in Summer.  Sometimes our egotism gets the best of us and in the end we are the fool.  

In Response to: The [Climate Policy] Change We Need

Jeers and More Jeers: Chris Dodd is a Crook!

Listen to the interview that the Democrats don't want you to hear. Chris Dodd gets it handed to him by radio talk show host Tom Scott.

http://www.newhavenindependent.org/archives/upload/2008/11/102808_edited_Dodd.mp3

In response to: Cheers and Jeers: Tuesday

GA-Sen: Jim Martin? Are you kidding me?

In response to: GA-Sen: "What's A Recession?"

Obama Detailed Wasteful Spending Before the Election

Via the Washington Post:

Obama Spelled Out Goals in Letters to Federal Employees Pre-Election Missives
Addressed Staff At Seven Agencies, Provided Specifics
By Carol D. Leonnig
Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, November 17, 2008; A01
In wooing federal employee votes on the eve of the election, Barack Obama wrote a series of letters to workers that offer detailed descriptions of how he intends to add muscle to specific government programs, give new power to bureaucrats and roll back some Bush administration policies.
The letters, sent to employees at seven agencies, describe Obama's intention to scale back on contracts to private firms doing government work, to remove censorship from scientific research, and to champion tougher industry regulation to protect workers and the environment.
He made it clear that the Department of Housing and Urban Development would have an enhanced role in restoring public confidence in the housing market, shaken because of the ongoing mortgage crisis.
Using more specifics than he did on the campaign trail, Obama said he would add staff to erase the backlog of Social Security disability claims. He said he would help Transportation Security Administration officers obtain the same bargaining rights and workplace protections as other federal workers. He even expressed a desire to protect the Environmental Protection Agency's library system, which the Bush administration tried to eliminate.

So let's scale back on contracts that cost the taxpayer less than what we'd pay lazy public employees. The Department of Housing and Urban Development will have a larger role in government? Wow, big surprise from a Community Organizer. Let's see, isn't Cabrini-Green in Chicago? That's a good fix for the mortgage crisis, war-zone public housing solutions.

Wow, so we need more Social Security staff? Really? 62,000 people cannot get it done? 2.5 million people file disability claims and there is a backlog of 762k people waiting. Ok, 62k employees who work 200 days a year. With 12 people in backlog per employee, hmmm, seems to me that in two weeks (one extra claim per day per person) they should be able to clear it up. Think about this, according to the 2008 Social Security Trustees report, there are 50.4 million people receiving social security (9M of which are "disabled") That is 813 people per government employee. That means that for every person on social security, there is 20 minutes of worker time per year. Think about your parents (or grandparents) did they use their 20 minutes this year? So, we need more?

WOW! He WANTS TSA officers to be as unproductive as OTHER government employees? Normally the CEO would rather be closer to the worker than have a union in the way. I guess that is why he supporters workers losing their rights with Card Check.

In Response To: Obama Detailed Goals on Election Eve

DAK's Abbreviated Pundit Round-up

Bloomberg's Kevin Hassett

The U.S. has always distinguished itself relative to its major trading partners by having a higher faith in free markets and a greater respect for the limits of big government. Sure, the U.S. passed a stimulus package now and then, but it also let failure run its course and refused to resort to excessive big-government intrusions into the private sector.

The risk is that we will forget this lesson. First we bailed out the financial companies; now President-elect Barack Obama is asking for $50 billion to bail out the auto companies, an effort backed by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. Next we will see a tax credit for people who buy General Motors Corp. cars at stores of bankrupt retailer Circuit City, provided they use the car to go to a Detroit Lions game.

A look at economic history suggests that the crazy policy intrusions have to stop. Failure can be a good thing, and recessions force economic stragglers to make tough decisions. Those tough decisions set the stage for the recovery.

WSJ's Michael E. Levine

Federal law provides a way out of the web: reorganization under Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code. If GM were told that no assistance would be available without a bankruptcy filing, all options would be put on the table. The web could be cut wherever it needed to be. State protection for dealers would disappear. Labor contracts could be renegotiated. Pension plans could be terminated, with existing pensions turned over to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. (PBGC). Health benefits could be renegotiated. Mortgaged assets could be abandoned, so plants could be closed without being supported as idle hindrances on GM's viability. GM could be rebuilt as a company that had a chance to make vehicles people want and support itself on revenue. It wouldn't be easy but, unlike trying to bail out GM as it is, it wouldn't be impossible.

USA Today's Ken Dilanian

Even among Democrats, there has been a lack of full-throated support. Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri, home to three American-owned auto plants, said in a statement Friday, "We are going to have to do more to protect tax dollars for me to vote for this."

NYT's Louis Uchitelle

But many industry experts say the big foreign makers are established enough to take control of the industry and its vast supplier network more quickly than is widely understood.

“You would have an auto industry in the United States more like that of Mexico and Canada: foreign-owned,” said Sean McAlinden, chief economist at the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Mich., which describes itself as a nonprofit organization that has “strong relationships with industry, government agencies, universities, research institutes, labor organizations” and other groups with an interest in the auto business.

In response to: Your Abbreviated Pundit Round-up

Fundy's Weekly Scripture Reading - 11/15/08

With militant homosexuals taking their protests to the front doors of churches in California, I thought it fitting to look at what happened when some sodomites showed up at Lot's front door.
Gen 19:1-25 KJV
(1) And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;
(2) And he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant's house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early, and go on your ways. And they said, Nay; but we will abide in the street all night.
(3) And he pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in unto him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat.
(4) But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:
(5) And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.
(6) And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him,
(7) And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly.
(8) Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.
(9) And they said, Stand back. And they said again, This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and came near to break the door.
(10) But the men put forth their hand, and pulled Lot into the house to them, and shut to the door.
(11) And they smote the men that were at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great: so that they wearied themselves to find the door.
(12) And the men said unto Lot, Hast thou here any besides? son in law, and thy sons, and thy daughters, and whatsoever thou hast in the city, bring them out of this place:
(13) For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of the LORD; and the LORD hath sent us to destroy it.
(14) And Lot went out, and spake unto his sons in law, which married his daughters, and said, Up, get you out of this place; for the LORD will destroy this city. But he seemed as one that mocked unto his sons in law.
(15) And when the morning arose, then the angels hastened Lot, saying, Arise, take thy wife, and thy two daughters, which are here; lest thou be consumed in the iniquity of the city.
(16) And while he lingered, the men laid hold upon his hand, and upon the hand of his wife, and upon the hand of his two daughters; the LORD being merciful unto him: and they brought him forth, and set him without the city.
(17) And it came to pass, when they had brought them forth abroad, that he said, Escape for thy life; look not behind thee, neither stay thou in all the plain; escape to the mountain, lest thou be consumed.
(18) And Lot said unto them, Oh, not so, my Lord:
(19) Behold now, thy servant hath found grace in thy sight, and thou hast magnified thy mercy, which thou hast shewed unto me in saving my life; and I cannot escape to the mountain, lest some evil take me, and I die:
(20) Behold now, this city is near to flee unto, and it is a little one: Oh, let me escape thither, (is it not a little one?) and my soul shall live.
(21) And he said unto him, See, I have accepted thee concerning this thing also, that I will not overthrow this city, for the which thou hast spoken.
(22) Haste thee, escape thither; for I cannot do any thing till thou be come thither. Therefore the name of the city was called Zoar.
(23) The sun was risen upon the earth when Lot entered into Zoar.
(24) Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;
(25) And he overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground.

See ya in church!

The Socialist Weekly Address Online

In case you missed Obama's address today:



In response to: The Democratic Weekly Address Online

DAK's Abbreviated Pundit Round-up

Michael Barone

Obama's presidential campaign was an entrepreneurial enterprise whose success owed much to harnessing individual initiative through an innovative management structure and creatively using emerging technology. The campaign, as well as the candidate, helped inspire under-30 voters, who preferred Obama by an unprecedented 66 percent to 32 percent margin -- as opposed to his 50 percent to 49 percent margin in those 30 and over. But keeping the Detroit Three in their present form, with their extravagant health care benefits and the union's 5,000 pages of work rules, is an exercise in preserving in amber the America of the past.

Fred Barnes

The top priority for Obama is the economic downturn. We know his solution because he's been talking about it for two years. It's to revive the economy from the bottom up, cutting taxes for the middle class, sending checks to the poor, and paying for new spending by raising taxes on the well-off. That includes increasing the tax rate on capital gains and dividends.

Does anyone think this will work? It was tried by the president whom Obama seems to regard as his model, Franklin D. Roosevelt. Rather than jolt the country out of the Depression, FDR prolonged the economic slump right up to World War II. He advanced the interests of organized labor over those of business. Obama would do roughly the same through card check, a minimum wage increase, and protectionism.

Camille Paglia

How dare Palin not embrace abortion as the ultimate civilized ideal of modern culture? How tacky that she speaks in a vivacious regional accent indistinguishable from that of Western Canada! How risible that she graduated from the University of Idaho and not one of those plush, pampered commodes of received opinion whose graduates, in their rush to believe the worst about her, have demonstrated that, when it comes to sifting evidence, they don't know their asses from their elbows.

Liberal Democrats are going to wake up from their sadomasochistic, anti-Palin orgy with a very big hangover. The evil genie released during this sorry episode will not so easily go back into its bottle. A shocking level of irrational emotionalism and at times infantile rage was exposed at the heart of current Democratic ideology -- contradicting Democratic core principles of compassion, tolerance and independent thought. One would have to look back to the Eisenhower 1950s for parallels to this grotesque lock-step parade of bourgeois provincialism, shallow groupthink and blind
prejudice.

In response to: Your Abbreviated Pundit Round-up

Cheers and Jeers: Diet Coke FRIDAY!

Let's think about the following blurb taken straight from the KOS:

"JEERS to what George Bush hath wrought. When it's all said and done, every American family will end up paying $46,000 to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Aren't ya glad you got that $300 refund check back in '01?"

So I paid a combined $46k for the past eight years worth of the war on terror? Now it's not easy to find an accurate number on the number of Taliban, Al Qaeda, and Insurgents we've killed during this same time period, but I think we can conservatively estimate the number around 500,000. That's less then $0.10 per terrorist!

Yes!

Where do I sign up for the next $50k?

In response to: Cheers and Jeers: Rum and Coke FRIDAY!

Diagnosing the Left's ailment

The one and only, Mr. KOS, states the following in response to Tim Pawlenty's assessment of where the GOP currently is:

"Big question -- what can they do about it? Really, not much. The GOP is out of step with a public that is increasingly libertarian on social matters, yet their religious wing won't let them shift on those issues." KOS

I'll give you one data point to prove that Mr. KOS is full of it when he says the public is increasingly libertarian on social matters:

CA Prop 8 (Los Angeles County) Yes 50.3% No 49.7%

Think about it. Los Angeles County supported the ban on gay marriage. If Black and Hispanic Americans ever decide to put social issues above economic issues, the Dems are in big trouble. Obama was elected because he promised handouts, not because his social and moral beliefs are in line with the majority of America. The only one "out of step" is the Daily Kos. Once Obama's pyramid scheme crumbles, so will the Left's dominance over the minorities in this country.

In response to: Diagnosing the GOP's ailment

When the Democrats act Surprised, Don't be Surprised!

What a surprise! The democrats are trying to blame someone else for their bailout catastrophe!

Any guess on who they are blaming?

President Bush..! Yes, yes! President Bush of course. I know, that one was easy.


The democrats are starting up the finger pointing machine, aimed at Bush.

They are now acting like Bush tricked them into the bailout legislation, by scaring them.


Yep, that means they want us all to believe the Obama bailout legislation was a big Bush trick.

Funny thing is, Candidate Obama fought for that bill!

And Candidate Obama had a big part in determining what the bill should be!

Can anyone remember that the democrats are the ones who started scaring us about the whole "Crisis" in the first place????!

Right before the November 2008 election as a matter of fact.

(Hmmmmmmm coincidence??? HA, HA HA! Right.)

But yeah, the democrats were the ones telling us we had to solve this problem in 2 days or we would all face a horrible fate.

Now, after the dust has settled, the Citizens of the USA are looking around and see 850 Billion in debt added onto their growing tab, and the stock market is plummeting.


This awareness by the people has triggered the democrat default response to anything they get caught doing wrong. They act Surprised!


Surprise, Surprise! See the democrats act surprised and start pointing those fingers! With the help of their minions in the press.

But that shouldn't be surprising to us. The democrats and their helpers never take credit for their mess. They always blame someone else.

In this latest mess, we can see the democrats want to avoid taking blame for two things :

1) Causing the financial crisis in the first place. Democrats brought us the faulty loan policy that caused the problems in the market in the first place. Policy that, after $850 Billion in "emergency" legislation, still hasn't been repealed.

History tells us the credit problem was caused by our government. Jimmy Carter signed the law that started it all. Left wing organizations, including ACORN forced these loans on banks with lawsuits. (By the way, President elect Obama donated $800,000 to Acorn this election, and Worked with Acorn and was a lawyer for Acorn.) The democrats, who were in charge of overseeing this policy, defended this loan policy even though it was pointed out over and over how dangerous the policy is. Here is a video of when the left defended the loan policy when it was questioned in 2004. Here is another video describing the evolution of the problem and mapping out how it was covered up and defended by the left .

2) The Bailout. Democrats hold the purse strings now. THEY wrote the Bailout legislation. THEY fought for it when it didn't get passed, THEY added bribes to it so it would pass, then THEY brought it to the floor again and THEY got it passed.

The bill is a democrat creation. We can all look honestly at this bill and know that there isn't one thing in that bill the democrats didn't want! Guaranteed! They had full control.

America is getting exactly what the democrats wanted. It isn't good. It isn't right. But this is how THEY run things.

The democrats wanted things this way!

This is all about taking power, prosperity, freedom and rights away from the people, and getting to their promised land. Socialism.

The democrats are doing what it takes!

NewsFlash: The super powers that were granted to the Treasury Secretary, to do whatever he damn well pleases to our economy, was not on accident! The bill was written that way, by the democrats, on purpose!

So we can take for granted that it is no surprise to the democrats that the superpowers of the treasury are being used to buy into private banks that have been devalued by the poor loan policies of our government. George Soros, who owns nearly all of the democrat party and finances practically every left wing group in the World, is dictating this policy to them. Soros told them to buy out banks. And they are doing it!

Democrat benefactor George Soros is dictating the socialist solution to a problem caused by the interference in our capitalist system by our government. The democrats KNOW that Soros wanted this, and all this is happening because Soros said to do it .

Face it! The bank buyouts are NO surprise to the democrats! They are following orders from their boss!

The democrats are working for their one constituent, George Soros, to hell with the rest of us!

So there you have it democrats! Your democrat party is causing this mess.
It is your democrats who are representing the elites, and not the people of the USA!

It is your democrat party that is trying to cover up for all of it by acting surprised!

And it is your democrat party that wants this all to happen....

Democrats may pretend to be surprised, but they are not surprised!!!!!

Start pointing fingers in the direction they belong!

Stop buying into the democrat's act! Stop blaming others!



We will all be better off if you start doing this.

Now and in the long run.



This Opinion is in response to Daily Anti-Kos Diary Our Congress is "Surprised". Surprised??? by Granny Doc