I have alot going on right now so I've decided to take a break from blogging until after Christmas possibly New Year's. There doesn't seem to be much news right now. If there are any big stories I will most likely put up a post. Outside of any big events I probably won't be blogging much between now and Jan 2nd. See you next year!
According to the Chicago Sun Times Barack Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel had direct talks with the Governor about appointing Valerie Jarrett to the Senate.
"Emanuel talked with the governor in the days following the Nov. 4 election and pressed early on for the appointment of Valerie Jarrett to the post, sources with knowledge of the conversations told the Sun-Times. There was no indication from sources that Emanuel brokered a deal, however."
"Sources with knowledge of the investigation said Blagojevich told his aides about the calls with Emanuel and sometimes gave them directions afterward. Sources said that early on, Emanuel pushed for the appointment of Jarrett to the governor and his staff and asked that it be done by a certain date."
"After Jarrett took herself out of the running in mid-November, Emanuel submitted a list of suitable names to the governor's camp that didn't include her name."
This accusation was met with a strong denial from the Obama camp. However we should know for sure soon enough, "At least some of the conversations between Emanuel and Blagojevich were likely caught on tape, sources said."
So why did Obama deny that anyone had spoken to the governor about this seat? Anyone with a brain knows that of course there would be some discussion between a Senator and the man who would appoint his replacement. Makes me wonder what is on those tapes.
From Conservatism Today http://www.conservatismtoday.com/my_weblog/
Mike Ganzeveld, one of the two main bloggers on the Iowa Liberal (http://iowaliberal.com) was mugged at an ATM in Fort Dodge, Iowa at the end of last month. He wound up with a broken hand, which is healing, but worse, some serious damage to one of his eyes. He has medical insurance which will cover most of the cost of the retinal reattachment surgery he's facing -- and he'll go blind in that eye if he doesn't have it -- but as a result of his injuries, he's out of work for the time being.
His blogging partner, Jeromy Brown, has put up the article The Fix-Mike’s-Retina Donation Post…Extravaganza! (http://iowaliberal.com/?p=2262) with a PayPal link in which readers can donate to help Mike with his expenses.
My friend Dana Pico of Common Sense Political Thought is asking bloggers and readers (on both the left and the right) to help if they are able and so inclined.
I have always encouraged private charity over government intervention. And I especially like to give in cases where someone needs help through no fault of their own. This is a great opportunity for conservatives who talk the talk on private charity to walk the walk, and show our generosity.
That being said, it is also an opportunity to withhold good from someone whose views you disagree with.
If you've been reading me much, I think you know what I'll be doing.
Banned conservative speakers, stolen votes, assaults on religious liberty, gay English classes, and forbidden Thanksgiving & Christmas celebrations
Political correctness ran amuck in our nation’s school system this past year, and Young America’s Foundation has once again compiled our “best of the worst” academic abuses for 2008. From “free speech zones” to transgendered speakers at military academies, the following list may make you both laugh and cry in the same breath. That probably isn’t too surprising, however, since we are talking about academia after all…
1. The free speech “zone.” A student at Yuba College in California was sent an ultimatum by the school’s president: discontinue handing out gospel booklets or face disciplinary action and possibly expulsion. That’s right—gospel booklets. Ryan Dozier, the 20-year-old student, had the audacity to distribute Christian literature without a school permit, which restricts free speech to an hour each Tuesday and Thursday. Yuba College even directs students to where on campus they are allowed to exhibit free speech. In this case, it’s the school theater. Campus police threatened to arrest Ryan if he didn’t comply with the “free speech zone,” oblivious to the fact that students don’t need permission to exercise the First Amendment’s free speech and religious clauses.
This as got to be my favorite. One free speech zone twice a week for an hour a day. This is honestly just scary. Ryan Doizer is the Vice President of Christian in Action at the college. I guess the university thinks it's O.K. to have a group named Christians in Action as long as they don't actually take any action. This is their club webpage http://www.yccd.edu/yuba/campuslife/viewclub.php?id=4
2. Transgendered activists in, pro-life speakers out. Liberal administrators at the University of St. Thomas, a Catholic institution in Minnesota, censored the appearance of prominent pro-life speaker Star Parker because campus officials felt “uncomfortable” and “disturbed” by previous conservative speakers at the school. The University’s mission statement claims it values “the pursuit of truth,” “diversity,” and “meaningful dialogue.” Except, not really—or better yet, as long as the said “pursuit” doesn’t offend leftist predilections. Meanwhile, within the past year, the same school hosted Al Franken, the bombastic liberal comedian, and Debra Davis, a transgendered activist who believes God is a black lesbian. Realizing they had a public relations disaster on their hands, the head honchos at St. Thomas eventually reversed the ban on Star Parker.
"Uncomfortable and disturbed?" The only thing that disturbs me is our nation's universities limiting points of view on campuses because the other side to them is disturbing. I think their side is disturbing but I've never tried to keep someone from giving their opinion. I have no problem with debating however apparently liberals do.
3. A new meaning of Duty, Honor, Country. Cadets at West Point, the nation’s foremost military academy, must maintain disciplined, selfless behavior—a precursor to the standards graduates are expected to uphold and reinforce once commissioned as military officers. So how does leftist instructor Judy Rosenstein of the Department of Behavioral Sciences and Leadership encourage cadets to appreciate the military’s code of conduct? By hosting a transgendered speaker in class, of course! “Allyson” Robinson, a West Point grad him-, er, herself, switched genders after leaving the Army. Upon returning to West Point as a guest speaker, “Mrs.” Robinson found it “worrisome” that the student composition seemed more socially conservative than when “she” was a student. Perhaps West Point’s leadership should confine speaker invitations to those whose behavior, if emulated, would not get cadets booted from the academy, much less the Army.
This was just a stupid move. West Point should sue itself.
4. 2008’s stolen election? Columbia University recently polled students on whether or not they would support the return of the Navy’s Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) to campus after a 40-year absence. Columbia claimed the referendum lost by 39 votes. However, the University inexplicably closed the online poll at different times for different students and discarded more than 1,900 votes out of the 4,905 cast. To boot, the university showcased its “anti-fraud” measures, revealing they caught one person who purportedly voted 276 times! So much for secure, front-end identification control. In the end, 1,502 “valid” NAYs trumped the 1,463 AYEs. Does anyone else smell some anti-military electioneering rats?
When it comes to stealing elections looks like Minnesota wasn't the only place liberals were trying it in 2008. Columbia University, the school who gave us Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmendijad as a guest speaker, disqualified more than 1900 votes in a student pool on letting the ROTC back on campus. The ROTC lost by 39 votes. How about holding another election of course we would need to have election monitors present since you screwed up the last one so bad. Or the administration could do the right thing and give it's students to choice of whether or not to take the course by letting our military onto it's campus.
5. When English class turns gay. Heads turned when Deerfield High School in Deerfield, Illinois required this book as part of an Advanced Placement English literature course: Angels in America: A Gay Fantasia on National Themes. The book is laced with graphic sexual content, much of it too inflammatory to print here—although there are “milder” exchanges fit to report, such as one character pleading with his sexual partner to “infect” and “make [him] bleed.” Supporters of Angels in America say the book is useful because it depicts “forgiveness, kindness, and compassion,” as if HIV-positive sodomy is the best way to promote empathy to minors.
Never read it never will.
6. You can’t pray here! The First Amendment, is it a bestowed right given from above and protected by our government or a meaningless, antiquated concept to be disposed of? If you’re the folks at the College of Alameda in California, you’d pick the latter. How else do you explain their threatening to expel a student who prayed on campus? It all started when a student, Kandy Kyriacou, visited her professor to give her a Christmas gift. But when Kandy saw that her teacher was ill, she offered to pray for her. The professor agreed. That’s when Derek Piazza, another professor, walked in and freaked out that a prayer—gasp, a prayer—was occurring on college premises. “You can’t be doing that in here,” Piazza purportedly barked. Kandy received a retroactive “intent to suspend” letter from the administration, claiming that she was guilty of “disruptive or insulting behavior” and “persistent abuse of” college employees. Further infractions would result in expulsion, the letter read.
"disruptive or insulting behavior" Persistent abuse of college employees" Apparently praying for someone is the same as telling a professor to go F themselves. Don't pray for me I might lose my job and you'll be expelled! This is without a doubt religious bigotry. You know the kind the left is always accusing us of.
7. Hey, that feather cap is racist. For decades, kindergarten classes in the Claremont district of California have celebrated Thanksgiving by dressing up as Pilgrims and Indians and sharing a feast. Harmless, eh? Apparently not. In a letter to her daughter’s elementary school teacher, Michelle Raheja, an English professor at University of California-Riverside, fumed that such activities are “dehumanizing” and serve as a “racist stereotype.” In fact, Ms. Raheja whined that the Thanksgiving costume party is comparable to parading children around as “slaves” and “Jews.” The school district capitulated, and now the toddlers are prohibited from wearing “their hand-made bonnets, headdresses and fringed vests.”
Beat you too this one America's Foundation. Read My post The War on Thanksgiving for more information on this one. http://thenewconservatives.blogspot.com/2008/11/war-on-thanksgiving.html
8. Ho, ho, forgetaboutit! Who’s offended by Christmas decorations? All the white liberals who celebrate Kwanza? Must be. Florida Gulf Coast University’s president, Wilson Bradshaw, sent holiday festivities packing because he didn’t know “how best to observe the season in ways that honor and respect all traditions.” Holiday décor wasn’t the only thing to go, under Mr. Bradshaw. The school’s greeting card contest got tossed as well. Cheer up, says, the President—Christmas merriment was replaced with an “ugly sweater competition.” Mr. Bradshaw ultimately had a change of heart, after his embarrassing attempt at censorship became public.
Yep bullies will back down if you get in their face.
9. Leftist factions compete on who is more multicultural. When eco-fanatics at UC-Berkeley illegally saddled themselves in trees on campus and hurled urine and feces to block the construction of a multi-million dollar athletic facility, probably the last thing they expected was to be called racists. Yet the school’s chancellor, Robert Birgeneau, labeled them just that, saying the environmental radicals were impeding the completion of a new athletic facility designed to attract “minority student athletes.” Puzzled that the chancellor played the race card on them, the tree dwellers argued that “three of the final four” protesters were “Latinos” and the very first hijacker was a “Native American.” One of the Berkeley zealots, who goes by the name “Running Wolf,” said that Mr. Birgenaeau attempted “to pit colored against colored.”
It's always about race with these people. Why is the athletic facility only attracting minority student athletes, don't white people pay sports anymore. This of course left the protesters using the always successful, we're not racist we had protesters that were minorities. Kinda like the I have a black friend argument.
10. Who knew? Universal health care is actually a non partisan issue. Administrators at the College of St. Catherine in St. Paul, Minnesota—the nation’s largest Catholic women’s college—unexpectedly blocked young conservatives on campus from hosting Bay Buchanan, a popular conservative commentator and U.S. Treasurer under President Reagan. College officials deemed Ms. Buchanan’s remarks on “Feminism and the 2008 Election” too politically charged, citing concerns about the school’s tax status. Those same “concerns,” mind you, didn’t prohibit the school from sponsoring programs that push for universal healthcare and minimum wage increases or hosting Frank Kroncke, an anti-war radical who is reliving the Vietnam days. But Bay Buchanan? Well, she’s partisan, according to St. Catherine’s administration.
All conservatives are partisan all liberals are mainstream. This is the way liberals think. They never consider themselves partisan because they never talk to anyone who disagrees with them. Everytime I talk to a liberal they always say I don't anyone whose conservative. The truth is they probably know several closet conservatives. I've found many conservatives are scared to speak their values openly because the left will paint them as a racist, a bigot, a sexist, or a bigoted racist sexist.
It appears the fire at Wasilla Bible Church where Sara Palin attends was arson. Palin apologized to one of the pastors if her run as VP in any way caused the arson. The church has over 1,000 members.
Despite the fire there will still be a Church service this Sunday 11:15am. The service will be held at Wasilla middle school. The Pastor tried to put things in perspective. "I've had a lot worst calls at night," Pastor Larry Kroon said. "When one of your parishioners dies or loses a child, it's a whole different thing than the building's on fire." The pastor then reminded the reporter that a buliding doesn't make up a church the people do. "Chose faith, live with hope and keep caring about people," he said. "That's what we'll do."
I don't know who set fire to Palin's Church, but if it's not a democrat I'll eat my shoes. I guess this is the liberal defination of tolerance. You agree with us or we set fire to your church. I'm glad these nutcases don't know where I go to church.
When asked about statements made by Mike Duncan, the Republican National Committee chair, criticizing the way Obama has dealt with the Rod Blogojevich scandal McCain said, "I think that the Obama campaign should and will give all information necessary. You know, in all due respect to the Republican National Committee and anybody — right now, I think we should try to be working constructively together, not only on an issue such as this, but on the economy stimulus package, reforms that are necessary. And so, I don't know all the details of the relationship between President-elect Obama's campaign or his people and the governor of Illinois, but I have some confidence that all the information will come out. It always does, it seems to me." Obama should and will give all information necessary.Since when? McCain just lost a Presidential race to Obama in part because Obama did not explain details of his relationships with some of his associates. So now I'm supposed to believe that Obama will explain the details of this relationship, I don't think so. The video below was just released this morning. I believe these were the type of actions McCain was speaking of.
The truth is I always thought conservatives that were against McCain were a little off the wall. I mean I knew he wasn't a perfect Republican, but who is? Even Reagan made mistakes. However after reading this quote I now understand why conservatives had a hard time swallowing his nomination. He just threw his own party under the bus for no reason. Why? Because he wants to be able to get along with the democrats in the senate and help them pass legislation. In theory that sounds great, but in practice it's going to be a disaster. McCain will most likely be pushing much of the democrats agenda which will include universal healthcare, bailouts of industries, and raising taxes on the wealthy. All these things in theory work perfectly, however in practice they'll be a disaster.
Universal healthcare will cause major strain on the government. No one will pay for healthcare if they can get it for free so the cost of this program will be enormous. However it will be quoted as being much less because the Dems won't take into account the number of people that have health insurance that will drop it to take advantage of the government program. I have talked to people who say they would drop their health insurance and take the free government healthcare. Why should they have to pay for healthcare if no one else does?
Bailing out industries in trouble sounds great too. You give the industry money to stay in business thus saving millions of jobs right? Wrong! They tried this with the auto industry in Britian in the 60's it didn't work then, and it won't work now. http://patriotroom.com/britain-bailed-out-its-automakers-once-they-no-longer-exist/ These industries are in trouble because they either are not producing a good product or they have union contact and they cannot live up to those contracts without going out of business. So if you give them money they'll be back it may be six months, a year, or maybe even five years, but they'll be back asking for more money. After these industries take all the money the government is willing to give them they will go out of business. Seems to me we could save alot of tax dollars by just letting them die.
Finally raising taxes on the wealthy. Most people thinks this is a good idea because they don't understand what it means. They think it will only affect those people that makes millions of dollars a year. What it actually means is taxing anyone who owns their own business. So if you own a business and someone raises your taxes you have to find a way to cut costs. The biggest expense for a business is labor. So first the employer starts cutting hours to try and save money. Eventually the employer is forced to lay people off. This not only means more people in the line at the unemployment office it means the same amount of work as to be done in less time with less people. Therefore you end up with an inferior product that people don't want to buy. When people don't buy the product you end up with less money coming in to your business, so your forced to lay off more people. Eventually the employer goes out of business.
Right now the Republican Party does not have a leader. As much as she might try Palin can't lead the party from Alaska. It's now obvious that McCain will not be the leader of this Party. I know people like Newt Gingrich, but I don't think he's the right guy to lead the party although he definatly should be an advisor to the leaders. There's a list of possible future leaders of the Republican Party here. http://thenewconservatives.blogspot.com/2008/11/future-of-republican-party.html If you want to add your own in the comments section feel free.
President-elect Barack Obama swiftly revealed the direction his team would take, as the Washington Post noted last Sunday:
All told, of Obama's top 35 appointments so far, 22 have degrees from an Ivy League school, MIT, Stanford, the University of Chicago or one of the top British universities...
While Obama's picks have been lauded for their ethnic and ideological mix, they lack diversity in one regard: They are almost exclusively products of the nation's elite institutions and generally share a more intellectual outlook than is often the norm in government. Their erudition has already begun to set a new tone in the capital, cheering Obama's supporters and serving as a clarion call to other academics. Yale law professor Dan Kahan said several of his colleagues are for the first time considering leaving their perches for Washington...
Just what America needs, huh? A bunch of pointy-headed theorists who have never accomplished anything outside of Planet Academia, rushing to Washington to tell inhabitants of the real world how we can solve all our problems.
We tried this "best and brightest" approach under Kennedy. As the article notes, that's how we got mired in Vietnam. We had our own President Egghead with Jimmy Carter. He was always the smartest man in the room, and usually the least able to decide what course of action would be best to take.
High intelligence and even higher education is not a prerequisite for leadership - it is a warning signal. More often than not, these types suffer from Absent-minded Professor Syndrome - great genius in the laboratory or the classroom, but an inability to locate their car keys and an empty place where their common sense should be.
Occasionally you find a highly-intelligent, highly-educated person who is not totally incapable of completing normal tasks successfully. Someone who can shoot hoops and smoke a cigarette at the same time. Someone like Barack Obama. Their education tells them that they have all the answers. Their high intelligence tells them that they are the only person who can save America from itself.
This is dangerous. Once this conclusion is reached (and I believe it already has been) it's all over. These people might have good intentions. They might make the trains run on time for awhile. But soon no policy, no law, no relationship becomes as important as maintaining power. Mistakes will be made, laws will be broken and ignored, preachers and grandmothers will get thrown under the bus.
This doesn't just go for liberals, either. One of my favorite theoreticians ever is Newt Gingrich, and he suffered from the same problem. For a short period of time, he accomplished great things. But his belief in his own greatness caused him to make mistakes, break rules of ethics and throw people under the bus. Until the bus made a detour and ran him over. Since he's gone back to working as a theoretician, he's been doing great things again. But he should never be President.
Wise, Principled Leadership - The Reagan Legacy
If extreme intelligence and high educational achievement are not positive character traits in leaders, what is? Wisdom, based on timeless principles of individual liberty. Reasonable intelligence mixed with common sense and love for that which is good. A high sense of personal morality.
The article notes that my political hero, Ronald Reagan, graduated from tiny Eureka College. Certainly he was an intelligent man; you don't save multiple lives as a teenage lifeguard, become a top sports announcer, become a household name as an actor, become President of an actors union, become governor of the largest state in the nation, and then become President of the United States without intelligence. Being one of the best in the world at whatever you choose to be doing at any given time takes some smarts. But his intelligence and education were not uncommon.
As President, he would nod off during meetings when advisors talked about missile throw-weights. The minutia didn't interest him. Pointy-headed academics didn't interest him. He was interested in the big picture.
He believed that insuring personal freedom was the greatest goal of government. He knew that socialist utopianism doesn't solve problems, that government planners don't solve problems, they exacerbate them. And he knew these things because he knew all about the existence of evil.
And because he knew about evil, he knew what Soviet communism was. He learned this as President of the Screen Actors Guild, when he had to carry a gun with him to cross picket lines and when he had to battle Soviet infiltrators in the film industry. And because he knew evil, he knew that the Soviet Union would someday crumble from within. He knew that if America ever applied the right types of pressure, it would crumble sooner.
The academics laughed at the "ignorant cowboy" when he said the following in June of 1982 to the British Parliament. None of the great minds with their fancy degrees knew what Reagan knew: That the Soviet Union was doomed because it was evil, if free men and women would just shine their light upon it.
We're approaching the end of a bloody century plagued by a terrible political invention -- totalitarianism. Optimism comes less easily today, not because democracy is less vigorous, but because democracy's enemies have refined their instruments of repression. Yet optimism is in order, because day by day democracy is proving itself to be a not-at-all-fragile flower. From Stettin on the Baltic to Varna on the Black Sea, the regimes planted by totalitarianism have had more than 30 years to establish their legitimacy. But none -- not one regime -- has yet been able to risk free elections. Regimes planted by bayonets do not take root....
(t)he gift of vision, the willingness to see the future based on the experience of the past. It is this sense of history, this understanding of the past that I want to talk with you about today, for it is in remembering what we share of the past that our two nations can make common cause for the future...
History teaches the dangers of government that overreaches -- political control taking precedence over free economic growth, secret police, mindless bureaucracy, all combining to stifle individual excellence and personal freedom.
President Reagan then predicts the future:
Historians looking back at our time will note the consistent restraint and peaceful intentions of the West. They will note that it was the democracies who refused to use the threat of their nuclear monopoly in the forties and early fifties for territorial or imperial gain. Had that nuclear monopoly been in the hands of the Communist world, the map of Europe -- indeed, the world -- would look very different today... At the same time we see totalitarian forces in the world who seek subversion and conflict around the globe to further their barbarous assault on the human spirit. What, then, is our course? Must civilization perish in a hail of fiery atoms? Must freedom wither in a quiet, deadening accommodation with totalitarian evil?In an ironic sense Karl Marx was right. We are witnessing today a great revolutionary crisis, a crisis where the demands of the economic order are conflicting directly with those of the political order. But the crisis is happening not in the free, non-Marxist West, but in the home of Marxist-Leninism, the Soviet Union.
It is the Soviet Union that runs against the tide of history by denying human freedom and human dignity to its citizens. It also is in deep economic difficulty. The rate of growth in the national product has been steadily declining since the fifties and is less than half of what it was then. The dimensions of this failure are astounding: A country which employs one-fifth of its population in agriculture is unable to feed its own people...
I have discussed on other occasions, including my address on May 9th, the elements of Western policies toward the Soviet Union to safeguard our interests and protect the peace. What I am describing now is a plan and a hope for the long term -- the march of freedom and democracy which will leave Marxism-Leninism on the ash-heap of history as it has left other tyrannies which stifle the freedom and muzzle the self-expression of the people.
He went further in his Evil Empire speech in 1983.
So, in your discussions of the nuclear freeze proposals, I urge you to beware the temptation of pride -- the temptation of blithely declaring yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at fault, to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a giant misunderstanding and thereby remove yourself from the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil...
Whittaker Chambers, the man whose own religious conversion made him a witness to one of the terrible traumas of our time, the Hiss-Chambers case, wrote that the crisis of the Western World exists to the degree in which the West is indifferent to God, the degree to which it collaborates in communism's attempt to make man stand alone without God. And then he said, for Marxism-Leninism is actually the second oldest faith, first proclaimed in the Garden of Eden with the words of temptation, "Ye shall be as gods."
The Western world can answer this challenge, he wrote, "but only provided that its faith in God and the freedom He enjoins is as great as communism's faith in Man."
I believe we shall rise to the challenge. I believe that communism is another sad, bizarre chapter in human history whose last pages even now are being written. I believe this because the source of our strength in the quest for human freedom is not material, but spiritual. And because it knows no limitation, it must terrify and ultimately triumph over those who would enslave their fellow man.
We forget what leadership based on the wisdom of conservative, small government principles looks like, because we haven't seen it on a national scale since Reagan left office. We'll need to see it again following four years of Barack Obama and his fellow academic elites.
A college graduate with a BA in History and a minor in politics from Coastal Carolina University. Has a student at Coastal Carolina I led the College Republicans for two years. I also volunteered for Mike Huckabee's Presidential campaign.