Louisiana Republican

Every time Nazi Pelosi speaks, a kitten dies

2009-02-06T09:36:00.000-08:00

“Well, I believe that — I know that President Obama is a strong supporter of America's workers. I myself am a strong supporter of that legislation. We passed it with a strong vote in the House in the last Congress, and I continue to be supportive of it.
But in terms of what we have to do in the first 100 days, we must address the needs of this country. Five hundred million people will lose their jobs each month until we have an economic package.”
Yea, Nan. And every time you mention this pathetic stimulus package or say something stupid, a kitten dies. I’m really glad to see that the speaker of the house is aware of America’s population, around 500 million? Last I checked America’s population is around 300 million. Talk about an exaggeration.
All but 11 Democrats voted for the plan, and 177 Republicans voted against it. What defines the $819 billion “economic” plan? What plans do our lovely President and Congressional Democrats have to simulate our economy? “Las Vegas, which by some accounts already glitters, wants $2 million for neon signs. Boynton Beach, Fla., is looking for $4.5 million for an "eco park" featuring butterfly gardens and gopher tortoises.” This would create 50 jobs. “And Chula Vista, Calif., would like $500,000 to create a place for dogs to run off the leash.” This would create seven jobs! “These are among 18,750 projects listed in "Ready to Go," the U.S. Conference of Mayors' wish list for funding from the stimulus bill moving through Congress.” (wallstreetjournal.com)
And that’s not all. Austin, Texas is building a 36-hole disc golf course costing $886,000. It will create four jobs. In Virginia Beach, Va, they get to build a replacement tennis court that will cost $1.8 million and create 38 jobs. Louisiana is in the package also! Shreveport, La gets $150,000 to purchase eight police-equipped Harley-Davidson motorcycles. How many jobs will be created in Shreveport thanks to the heavenly stimulus? One job. One. (wallstreetjournal.com)
So what exactly have the House Democrats been doing? Retreating to a Spa, of course. USA Today reports: "We're very mindful" of perceptions, House Democratic Caucus Chairman John Larson told reporters Thursday camped outside of the sprawling Kingsmill Resort & Spa in Williamsburg, Va., where House Democrats spent about $100,000 on their three-day annual retreat. "It's serious and it's from morning till night. We've been dwelling, rightfully, on the economy," said Larson, D-Conn… Democrats spend taxpayer money on their retreat but do not permit lobbyists to accompany them. The public pays for a charter train from Washington to Williamsburg for many of the 200 members who attend, as well as conference rooms, security and catering.” Now we see where our money is really going.
Maybe some of President Obama’s cabinet nominees, Tom Daschle, Nancy Killefer, and Tim Geithner, should pay their taxes. Think that would stimulate some of the economy?

Eggo Blago

2009-01-30T09:44:00.000-08:00

“ ‘Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich passionately defended himself for the first time at his Illinois Senate impeachment trial Thursday, arguing repeatedly that he has “done absolutely nothing wrong’ and warning that ousting him would be ‘a dangerous precedent.’ He urged the senators to acquit him.” (Washingtontimes.com)
Between Caroline Kennedy’s attempt at Hilary Clinton’s Senate seat and Geithner’s tax fraud, the Democratic Party has screamed “corruption” for a while now. And good ole’ FORMER Gov. Blago has only confirmed the suspicions.
“…he broke the law when it came to hiring state workers, expanded a health care program without legislative approval and spent $2.6 million on flu vaccine that went to waste. The 118-member House twice voted to impeach him, both times with only one ‘no’ vote.” (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/illinois_governor_impeachment)
The corrupted former governor did attempt to defend himself in his closing statement, however. Too bad no one found it too convincing. He defended himself on the flu vaccines. He helped the children! He helped the elderly, the kittens, the bunnies, the gumdrops and the rainbows! The flu shot scandal came about after thousands of unused flu shots that Illinois agreed to buy expired, all of the 700,000 flu shots.Taxpayers money, $2.5 million to be exact was spent on illegal importation of illegal vaccines.“Sure, there was a bit of a risk involved, but the risk was that we spend some money, and the upside was, we protected seniors and children from dying,” said Blago. Someone shut him up. Read over his closing statement transcript. One could swear the only thing he did during his pathetic administration was get those vaccines. THOSE VACCINES.
Then there’s Rahm Emmanuel, Obama’s chief of staff. Emmanuel actually gave Blago the idea for the vaccines, and then tipped off the Feds. “Let’s demand that President Obama fire Rahm Emanuel, because Rahm Emanuel was the one who gave me this idea,” he said. It must be nice to have a friend that’s a Democrat. So trustworthy and forgiving.
On top of his impeachment, he cannot, ever, ever, hold a public office in Illinois again. He didn’t even wait around for the final vote. He took a plane out and was seen on major media television proclaiming his innocence. Aren’t they always innocent? Wait! The vaccines!
But he’s not innocent. There were tapes to prove his guilt involving hiring, contracting, buying board appointments and fundraising. He was recorded trying to sell Pres. Obama’s Senate Seat. Corruption?
Another Democrat bites the dust because of corruption. When will they learn? A song by Rihanna comes to mind in memory of the former governor.
“How ’bout a round of applause, a standing ovation…Don’t tell me you’re sorry cause you’re not, when I know you’re only sorry you got caught, But you put on quite a show, You really had me going, But now it’s time to go, Curtain’s finally closing, That was quite a show, Very entertaining, But it’s over now, Go on and take a bow.
Later Blago! Take the vaccines with you.

I am white and must embrace what is...right?

2009-01-23T09:30:00.001-08:00

A record number of people, one million to be exact, attended the inauguration of Pres. Obama. There were 12.6 people who watched the inauguration on TV. However, despite lovely TV ratings, the inauguration did not top “American Idol.” The TV show actually had 22.4 million viewers. I guess American’s really needed some hope.
Pres. Obama’s illegal alien aunt was able to make the inauguration. Phew. “One special guest who commanded attention at the party was Zeituni Onyango, 56, Obama's aunt from Kenya who has been in this country illegally and is getting help in her immigration fight from another ball guest, Cleveland attorney Margaret Wong.” She overstayed her Visa and took refuge in Cleveland but somehow made it to the inauguration. Ha, the Federal immigration officials couldn’t find her. How did the media outlets find her? (http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2009/01/ohio_democrats_party_complete.html)
Now there’s hope for illegal immigrants!
Between the constant chanting of “OBAMA” in the crowd and the humble White House website, (www.whitehouse.gov.) I’ve never felt so humble. I thought it wasn’t about him? During the inaugural address, my wallet couldn’t have felt emptier. With his proposed stimulus, you, your parents, your kids and your grandkids will still be feeling the $825 trillion ripple.
Obama stated “We will begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people and forge a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan.” How will we do this Barack? He continues, “We say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you. For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus — and non-believers.” Diversity? We will defeat terrorists with diversity? Nice.
And if all of that isn’t inspiring enough for you, hope you watched Rev. Lowery’s benediction. “We ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to give back, when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead, man, and when white will embrace what is right,” Lowery said. Is this from m Dr. Suess? Rev. Wright? I thought Pres. Obama was worshipped for his godly abilities to bring all races together and introduce hope and change? That doesn’t sound like change to me. I guess I should stop writing this column and embrace what is…right?
For the first time in 56 years a president did not show up at the “Salute to Heroes ball,” a ball to thank the veterans and Medal of Honor recipients just by attending. But have no fear, Pres. Obama did make it to the Youth Ball, where Kid Rock and Kanye West played.
Well, if all of this did not inspire you, how about buying a Pres. Obama thong or action figure? What about some Obama Ice Cream? Yes, Pecan. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/09/yes-pecan-ben-jerrys-anno_n_156674.html

Let poor smokers pay for health insurance!!

2009-01-16T09:17:00.000-08:00

“At a time of economic crisis, nothing could be more essential than ensuring that the children of hardworking families receive the quality care they deserve. With more than 2.6 million jobs lost last year alone, Americans are seeing the health care they and their children depend on disappear. By helping working families find affordable health care coverage, this bipartisan legislation will ensure that 11 million of America’s children grow up healthy, strong, and ready to learn,” said speaker Nancy Pelosi this month on that passage of the SCHIP bill.
This bill would extend healthcare coverage to four million more kids, on top of the 7 million already covered. However, there’s always a catch. The definition of a kid, according to the bill anyway, is 19 years old and younger. And wait! That’s not all. According to the bill, it extends coverage to “families with incomes that are above the State’s Medicaid eligibility standard” it also may increase “50 percentage points above the prior level used under the State’s Medicaid program.” In lesser terms, it expands the bill to families making up to $80,000 a year. Great, let’s expand the coverage to higher income families. One in 5.5 children living under 200 percent of the Federal Poverty Level don’t have health care coverage. These kids were eligible for the program before the expansion! Shouldn’t we work on covering them first? Go to www.house.gov and search SCHIP to read the entire bill.
So who’s going to pay for this SCHIP expansion? Smokers! According to the National taxpayers union “a study by Congress’s Joint Committee on Taxation found that 2/3 of federal tobacco taxes come from those earning less than $40,000 a year – and less than 1% is paid by those earning more than $100,000 a year. According to the Tax Foundation, the 15-cent federal tobacco tax hike legislated in 1997 left people making less than $15,000 a year with 34% of the tax burden. Poorer people are more likely to smoke.” http://www.ntu.org/main/press_issuebriefs.php?PressID=200&org_name=NTU
Hopefully Obama won’t have to quit smoking.
So what’s the Democrats taxpaying remedy? Tax the poor! And if that’s not enough, The Wall Street Journal reported “the bill is expected to lift a provision in place for more than a decade that bars legal immigrant children and pregnant women from federal health programs during their first five years in the U.S.” Eligibility requirements aren’t listed. I smell an illegal applicant.
According to The Department of Health and Human Services, “13 states spent more than 44 percent of their S-CHIP funds in 2008 on people who are neither children nor pregnant women.” (http://republicans.energycommerce.house.gov/News/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=6644)
However, there is good news. Rep. Boustany voted No. http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/roll016.xml
This is only the beginning of big, huge government.

New year, same ole' Dems.

2009-01-16T09:16:00.000-08:00

The year 2008 was a rough year for Republicans. Although an exciting election year, last year only proved that the Republican party needs to revive itself. I would have never thought in a million years that John McCain would have been on the top of the Republican ticket. However a respectable man McCain is, he was never the true definition of conservative. McCain knew he needed to excite the Republican base and by tagging Sarah Palin as his VP, he did.

Despite the media’s harsh portrayal of Palin, she managed to grab the number one conservative spot. She stood by her values. She preached less taxes. She fought a bloody mainstream media fight. “‘As a public official, I expect criticism and I expect to be held accountable for how I govern,’ Gov. Palin said. ‘But the personal, salacious nature of recent reporting, and often the refusal of the media to correct obvious mistakes, unfortunately discredits
too many in journalism today, making it difficult for many Americans to
believe what they see in the media.’” I am proud to see Sarah Palin as the
new face of the Republican party and the leader in the revival of the
conservative movement.

Louisiana has also made history with the election of Joseph Cao, the
first Vietnamese-American Congressman. He is also the first Republican in
more than a century to win the New Orleans seat. He beat the corrupt,
Democrat “Dollar Bill” William Jefferson. The people of the second district
have spoken!
Reigning in 2009, we have the lovely, book-editing, “You know, um,
I’ll answer that question if I’m selected, you know, um” Caroline Kennedy.
What makes her qualified for the Senate?
(http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/28/nyregion/28kennedytranscript) If she can qualify, than anyone can.

And lets not leave out Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich who was arrested
on federal corruption charges involving, among other things, scheming to sell
Barack Obama’s United States Senate seat.

This year is bound to be an interesting year. President George W.
Bush gets a “job well done.” He had to deal with 9/11, Katrina, and Rita
along with many other testing disasters. He held his own and I believe he did
the best he could with Democratic Congress. Remind me again who has power ofthe purse? Oh yeah, Congress.

We now pass the torch to Barack Obama. It’ll be interesting to see
where he gets the $800 billion from for the economic recovery plan. For
America’s sake, I hope he does a good job.

Buckle up fellow conservatives. It’s going to be a bumpy ride through
2009.

7th district congressional debate, Louisiana

2008-10-26T21:58:00.000-07:00

Between the yelling and finger pointing coming from Peter Vidrine and Don Cravins Jr.’s conservative claims, I couldn’t stop laughing. If I learned anything from the Congressional debate Wednesday night, it’s Dr. Boustany is the only person running for Congress with respect, dignity, and honesty and the only person I want representing the seventh district.
Cravins claims to be conservative. Yet, he supports Obama? Obama is pro-choice. McCain is pro-life. Cravins Jr. claims to also be pro-life. Obama wants more taxes. McCain wants to cut taxes. Cravins Jr. claims he also wants to cut taxes. Obama wants more gun control. McCain wants no gun control. Cravins Jr. claims he also wants no gun control. What is going on here? I mean, I know when I vote for a candidate it’s usually because I believe in the same things he or she does. I’m not going to vote for McCain because I’m pro-choice. Maybe it’s just me, but usually I vote for someone I have the same views as. Should I start voting for candidates that have the opposite views as me? According to Cravins, I guess it’s the right thing to do. He also criticized Boustany for voting with Bush majority of the time. I wonder if Cravins Jr. knows how congress works. A congressman is supposed to vote according to constituents and since the majority of Louisiana voted for Bush in 2000 and 2004, doesn’t that mean the majority of Boustany’s votes should be with Bush?
I also really enjoyed Cravins’ NRA card. Nice touch. I wish I would have been close enough to him to read the name on it. I wonder if he is aware that if Obama is elected his little NRA card will mean nothing and his non-existent rifle will be confiscated.
The congressional debate must’ve also been the night for Vidrine to express his anger. Instead of introducing himself and letting us know what he represents, he decided to vent. From watching the debate, all I know about Vidrine is that he is angry at AP and angry at Dr. Boustany. He’s just really angry. I wonder what AP thinks about him now.
On top of that, Vidrine and Cravins decided they should pounce on Dr. Boustany about his vote for the $700 billion bailout. Did they know that Dr. Boustany voted against the bailout first? I’m sure he only voted for it because there was no other way. Let’s say a child just caught a curtain on fire. Are we going to scold the child over and over again while the curtain, and then the whole house, is burning? No. You’ll put out the fire and then scold the child. I would really have liked to see Cravins and Vidrine in the hot seat. It’s a whole different ball game when you have that voters card.
Between the vomiting of personal attacks on Dr. Boustany and the ignorant yells behind me in the crowd Wed. night, all I could do was shake my head. I’ll give the seventh district Congressional debate one thing, however. It was definitely more entertaining than the Presidential debates.

Louisiana Congressional Race: Charles Boustany is the man!

2008-09-19T22:54:00.000-07:00

Let’s face it. Louisiana has been known for corrupt, greedy, untrustworthy politicians. From racketeering to freezing money, Louisiana grew a dirty reputation that our current political leaders are having to mop up. Charles Boustany Jr., M.D., has been doing just that. And he wants to continue to clean and prop up Louisiana.
While Congressional Democrats went home for their recess, many Republicans decided not to take a vacation. Instead, the Republicans fought to pass an energy bill and were ignored by Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Charles Boustany, our congressman, was one of those Republicans.
He declared an “audacity of action” for an energy plan. “Members of Congress are ready to follow the American people’s call for lower gas prices through an ‘all of the above’ strategy, but Speaker Pelosi of California and other extreme environmentalists are blocking any and all action,” said Boustany. “Let’s work together to lower the price at the pump, decrease our dependence on foreign sources of oil and keep good paying American jobs here at home,” said Boustany. (http://boustany.house.gov/LatestNews.asp?ARTICLE3149=9246)
Do you know who influences Boustany’s votes on the House Floor? People from the 7th Congressinal district. While most Congressmen or Congresswomen vote with their party, Boustany votes to keep the people of his district satisfied. (I know, rare, right?)
In July 2008, The Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008 became law when both the House and Senate voted overwhelmingly to override Bush's veto. Boustany was one of the 383 congressmen to listen to the voice of the people. This vote allowed Medicare patients in need of mental health services to pay lower insurance payments and prescription drugs. (http://www.theind.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2833&Itemid=97)Boustany has proven that southwest Louisiana is his district, he’s proud of it, and he will continue to push for it.
Boustany has worked to remove unnecessary farm taxes and has continued to support Louisiana agriculture. He supports the WRDA bill and makes sure that it includes incentives for Southwest Louisiana.(The WRDA bill authorizes over $1.9 billion in funding for a number of coastal restoration and hurricane protection projects in the Louisiana Coastal Area (LCA), making it the largest coastal restoration project in American history.) (boustany.house.gov). He supports the No Child Left Behind Act, Headstart reauthorization and expanding educational choices. (For more information on Rep. Boustany and the bills he’s voted for or against, visit Boustany.house.gov)Rep. Boustany has shown the 7th Congressional district that he is a fighter, defending Louisianans, their agriculture, healthcare, jobs and education. When it comes to politicians, Louisiana doesn’t get lucky. We usually get punished or laughed at. We have finally found an honest, whole-hearted, for-the-people Congressman here in the 7th district. Let’s not let him slip through our fingers.

What is there NOT to like about VP Sarah Palin?

2008-09-03T21:28:00.001-07:00

When McCain announced Gov. Sarah Palin as his VP pick, I couldn’t have been more ecstatic. I had personally chosen her back in May as the perfect Republican VP candidate. I wrote my conservative column on her, endorsed her on the “Draft Palin for VP” website, and blogged about her. In my eyes, she is the perfect running mate for McCain. She is helping to deliver McCain back to the conservatives who were unsure about him. And after hearing her speak at the Republican National Convention, she did just that.
She brought America back to a level of realness.
Palin reminded me that Republicans set their standards high in order to reach their goals. She reminded me that every Republican family, no matter how high their standards are set, will have obstacles and failures. We are not perfect, but we can sure as hell strive to be, because this is America, and we learn from our mistakes. We have the opportunities to try and try again.
I knew about Gov. Palin long before she was even considered a VP pick. I just always liked the Governor. I followed the corruption she exposed, the big oil companies she fought, the taxes she cut and the surplus she created in Alaska. Everyday I learned something new about the governor and everyday I thought “Wow, I wish she would be considered as VP.” I knew she would draw women to the Republicans, pick up the Clinton supporters and offer a little “pick me up” to the conservative base, which I had lost hope in.
It’s exciting for the Republican party to have their first woman on the Presidential ticket. The McCain camp made an intelligent pick with Gov. Palin, the maverick. It was exciting and rejuvenating.
During Obama’s campaign, the word change kept getting thrown around. Obama wants to change things. What did Obama change by selecting Biden as his running mate? Obama, you change things by selecting the same ole’ white man VP? What party is changing things now? We have an NRA member, hunter, mother-of-five, mayor, governor, reformer, God-fearing, troop supporting WOMAN as our VP pick.
And in response to that, the media jumped all over her, finding any piece of dirt they could on her. They won’t find much because Sarah Palin has no dirt. Everything there is to know about the Governor is known. So stop with “no experience.” She has more experience then the Obama, who spent most of his term in Senate campaigning for president. I think it’s pathetic that the Obama camp has to pick on the Vice Presidential candidate. Aren’t you running for President and not Vice President, Obama? Why does the Obama camp feel the need to attack a VP candidate? I guess they feel threatened.
Gov. Palin’s 17-year-old daughter is pregnant and of course the left retaliates with “What kind of Conservative is she?” What gives Liberals the idea that Conservatives are perfect? We aren’t perfect, and like I said before, we just set our standards higher. At least she didn’t have her daughter do what you Liberals like to do: abort it. The media tried to play the “how will she have time for her kids if she’s the VP?” card, but that’s not working. When did the media ever say that about a MAN??
McCain was wise in picking Sarah Palin as his VP. With energy I am seeing in Conservatives and Liberals alike, America is excited with this pick.
“The American presidency is not a journey to self discovery” -Sarah Palin, Sept. 3

Who loves Sarah Palin? I do! Conservatives do! We all do!

2008-09-03T21:26:00.000-07:00

I'm an inhabitant of Planet Pelosi

2008-08-21T13:43:00.000-07:00

When I left Washington D.C. this summer to return home, I expected Congress to do the same. I expected the Congressional members to take a flight to spend time with their families and enjoy a non-political atmosphere, for a little while, anyway. Because let’s face it, we all need a break at some point.
Energy, being the most debated topic among members this summer, also kept the Republicans on the House floor. The republicans are concerned with lowering gas prices. In order for that to happen, a plan must be compiled and both the Democrats and the Republicans have to agree on it. The plan is domestic oil; drilling on our own land and depending on ourselves. Even the mere threat of domestic drilling lingering over the heads of big oil companies persuaded a 10 cent drop in gas prices.
But, wait America. Have no fear!! Nancy Pelosi is here! And she is going to save the planet from the evil Republican bullies who want to drill.
“’I’m trying to save the planet; I’m trying to save the planet,’ she says impatiently when questioned. ‘I will not have this debate trivialized by their excuse for their failed policy.’” (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/12122.html)
Really Nancy? What are you going to do to save the earth? I’m really excited that you can do it alone, too. Besides, when it comes to saving the planet, I hope you don’t feel the need to ask any other countries what their plans are to save the planet. Who needs to get China or Russia involved in saving the planet? All this world needs is good ole’ Pelosi.
That’s really comforting. And stupid.
What about me, Mrs. Pelosi? Can I be part of the planet? Can you save me from your repetitive ignorance?
Are the Congressional Republicans the only people in the world taking this energy crisis seriously? While they sit in Congress and think energy, Pelosi prepares for her very own book tour! I wonder if she will use trees to make the pages of her book. I hope not, because that wouldn’t look good for someone who is trying to save the earth. Think about all those dead trees.
“In protest of you and your Democrat majority not allowing an up or down vote on producing more American energy, we and our House Republican colleagues were prepared to take to the floor on Friday, August 1, 2008, and speak to the nation. Rather than allowing that to happen you and your Democrat majority adjourned the House, turned off the television cameras, shut off the microphones and turned out the lights. Nearly 50 House Republicans remained on the floor of the House in defiance speaking to those citizens gathered in the galleries and to the media.
Signed by: John Boehner, Republican Leader; Roy Blunt, Republican Whip; Adam Putnam, Republican Conference Chairman; Eric Cantor, Chief Deputy Whip; and Members of the House Conference”
(http://gop.gov/web/guest/press_releases/documents?p_p_id=56_INSTANCE_M2Tk&p_p_action=0&p_p_state=normal&p_p_col_id=column-2&p_p_col_pos=0&p_p_col_count=3&_56_INSTANCE_M2Tk_groupId=1&_56_INSTANCE_M2Tk_articleId=1888&_56_INSTANCE_M2Tk_version=1.0)
Have a great first week of school on PLANET PELOSI!!

Obama small towns

2008-08-04T11:15:00.001-07:00

“You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. So it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”- Barack Obama April 11, 2008.
Us Republicans can thank Barack Obama for this statement, for he has pissed off most of Pennsylvania and handed Sen. Clinton his head. People in Pennsylvania are walking around with “We’re not bitter!” pins and throwing their support to Clinton or McCain. You’re just what the Democratic party needed Obama.
People own guns and embrace religion out of frustration? That's a fact? So, what, when he's President, the government will take care or them, so they won't need guns.... or religion? Karl Marx would be proud of him.
Do Americans understand how ignorant someone has to be to even think that middle class America is clinging to “guns or religion” because they are bitter over losing jobs? Does Obama really think people are waiting around 5, 10, 15, or 25 years for jobs to come back? If "the people" who live in small towns have no "economic opportunity" like Barack pointed out, then "the people" would move away to where there is "economic opportunity" and their towns would disappear as has happened time and time again in America over the last 200 years.
Hey Obama, we’re big kids now. We're grown-up Americans and we can travel to where we want to be, wherever a good life is possible. Just because a large percentage of Americans live in small towns doesn't mean they're forced to live there!! They live there because it's where they want to be. It may not be the life you choose to live, Obama, but it's our choice to make and not yours.
Sen. Obama could never understand the importance of religion to the majority of Americans. I tell you what though, I doubt that all of these “religious” people are going to church praying because they can’t find a job.
Obviously, Barack Obama can’t understand that the majority of Americans, not just small town Americans, feel passionately about issues like: guns, religion, anti-immigration. Is he really that out of touch with the American people?
So, someone needs to clarify Obama for me, because I’m quite confused. The man never gets a hard time from the media!
A person can’t say Obama's middle name (which is Hussein) because someone gets offended.
A person can't repeat what Obama says -- nor try to explain it or put it into context, because if we do, we’re just trying to bash him.
We can't mention Obama's decades-long relationships with racist pastors, real-estate tycoons, or radicals, because that‘s not important. Right?
We are all supposed to ignore any and all statements and actions Obama has shown with respect to American flag lapel pins, pledging allegiance, or standing attention when the national anthem is played. (Because we’ve all seen that picture of him refusing to place his hand over his heart.) And he wants to be the president.
Obama’s experience is not supposed to be relevant; only his "charisma" and “rhetoric” and the fact that he's a smooth talker (when on-script, that is, because lately off the script, he’s been screwing up.)
Us Americans are supposed to believe him when he says talking with terrorists is good for the country. Really Obama? How many terrorists have you tried talking to? Exactly.
And, last but not least, whenever Obama or his wife say something that is racist, anti-American, or socialist -- we're to look away and pretend that we didn’t hear anything, until we can turn it into a Republican plot or pin it on President Bush.
And if the previous quote from Obama is not enough…
“"The point I was making was not that my grandmother harbors any racial animosity, but that she is a typical white person. If she sees somebody on the street that she doesn't know there's a reaction in her that doesn't go away and it comes out in the wrong way."
Nice, Obama. I’m a typical white person. Great.
I would personally recommend Barack H-word Obama to just keep his mouth closed or go back to Chicago. He needs to leave the rest of us "American's" that are so 'miserable' with our religion, guns and U.S. Constitution, alone.

Obama on abortion

2008-08-04T11:13:00.001-07:00

“Look, I got two daughters, 9 years old and 6 years old. I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby. I don’t want them punished with an STD at age 16, so it doesn’t make sense to not give them information.”

Wow, Mr. Obama. Are you really comparing a child to an STD? Why would your daughters be ‘punished’ if one of them conceived a child? Don’t you think, Sen. Obama, that if one of your girls decided to have sex, she should be willing and ready to face the consequences of that decision instead of choosing abortion? But that’s the liberal way, right? Everything has got to be easy or free. Abortion is just another scapegoat. Face your decisions. I can see where a liberal like Obama would want to make it seem like those challenged with unwanted pregnancy are victims, because again, it’s the liberal way. Nobody is ever responsible for their own actions. People don’t act, they are acted upon. That’s the liberal way.
Sure, Mr. Obama. It’s not fair to bring an unwanted child into the world. But, it also isn’t fair to stick surgical scissors in a baby’s skull, suck the baby’s brains out with a vacuum, and then dismember the child and throw him or her away in a garbage can. That’s not fair.
And since when does an individual’s right to live depend on someone else wanting them?
I don’t know if the left knows anything about children, or babies for that matter, but they are not punishment. Human life is sacred. I know you pro-choicers have trouble understanding the concept of human life, but it is protected by the Constitution. The main purpose of our Constitution and Bill of Rights is to secure “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” for every American, no matter how old or young. It protects an individual’s right to life, especially those who cannot speak for themselves at the earliest stages of development.
And do not even try throwing the “it’s not a baby yet” card at me. It is a biological fact that life begins at conception. From the very moment of conception, the fetus contains all the genetic information that the baby will have for the remainder of his or her lifetime. This is not religious or philosophical. It’s scientific.
Did any of you know that the Latin word “fetus” means “little child” or “young one?”
I refuse to protect a woman’s right to choose abortion. I refuse to support murder.
“The care of human life and happiness and not their destruction is the first and only legitimate object of good government.” (Thomas Jefferson, March 31, 1809)

Separatoin of Church and state

2008-08-04T11:10:00.000-07:00

The liberal left has repeated the words “separation of church and state” so many times, that one could swear those very words were actually in our constitution. But they aren’t. In fact, “separation of church and state“ does not appear in our Bill of Rights or Declaration of Independence either.
This is the actual statement:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging freedom of speech or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
So where does the phrase “separation of church and state” come from? The phrase appeared in a private letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote on Jan. 1, 1802. (11 years after the first amendment was ratified) The letter is called the Danbury Letter. Jefferson wrote this letter to the association of Danbury Baptists. He used the term “a wall of separation between church and state to assure the baptists that the federal government would not make a federally recognized state religion. Jefferson viewed religion as a personal matter that government had no business getting involved in (http://www.usconstitution.net/jeffwall.html)
The constitution does not mandate a separation of church and state; but ensures the freedom of religion. It does not, however, ensure freedom FROM religion. The first amendment was written with the intent of preventing the U.S. from making a national religion. The U.S. did not want Americans to fear being forced to show devotion to any national religion, in which the founding fathers fled from.
The declararation of independence, the constitution and many of the founders’ speeches and U.S. public government buildings refer to God. For 185 years, prayer was allowed in public schools. In 1961 prayer was removed from schools in a Supreme Court case called Engel v Vitale. This has had negative social consequences. Since then, teenage pregnancy and out-of-wedlock pregnancy has increased. Sexually transmitted diseases has increased, violent crime has increased, adolescent homocides have increased and test scores have plummeted. About 25 percent of the U.S. capitol’s statutory incorporates a religious message. A stained glass window showing George Washington seeking guidance from God is in the congressional chapel and a line from Psalm 16:1 is etched into the stained glass. Moses is depicted in the House of Representatives. “In God we trust” is engraved on our currency. There are many more religious statues, quotes, and engravings that our historical to America. So, if our founding fathers meant for their to be a separation of church and state like the liberals claim, then why did they allow, or create, so many so many religious symbols in the U.S.’s most sacred places?
When the government prevents a child who believes in God from expressing his or her beliefs so as not to offend the atheists, the child who believes in God is offended.
If schools can discuss sex in the class room, then discussions about God should have the same privilege, especially because of its historical relevance in America for almost 200 years in public education.

What Conservative media?

2008-08-04T11:02:00.000-07:00

For the past half-century, the major news source for the majority of Americans has been the mainstream media (CBS, ABC, NBC) and metropolitan newspapers (The New York Times, The Washington Post)
Technological inventions have allowed Americans to express their opinions and beliefs in many ways, such as blogging. While most Americans are quick to recognize the conservative media, like Fox News, and conservative radio hosts such Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh, few point out the Liberal bias among other news channels and journalists.
The late ABC news anchor Peter Jennings said it best when he said “Historically in the media, it has been more of a liberal persuasion for years. It has taken us a long time, too long in my view, to have vigorous conservative voices heard as widely in the media as they now are.” (Dissecting Liberal Media bias, p. 24)
The effort to hire more minorities and women has had the effect of making the media more liberal. Both these groups already tend to be liberal.
There are six firms that dominate all mass media: Time Warner, Disney, Viacom, News Corp, General Electric and Bertelsmann. “Aren’t the owners of these corporations conservatives?”, would be the liberal argument. But, even corporate executives can be liberal. Ted Turner, the owner and former boss of CNN, and a billionaire, is about as liberal as they come. Bill Gates, part owner of MSNBC, is Liberal as well.
Didn’t Dan Rather have bosses at CBS that let him get away with a left-leaning agenda for years? Big corporations, which may own the media, do not write the news. Journalists do.
“In May 2004, the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press released a survey of 547 journalists and news media executives, including 247 who worked for national news organizations. Pew found that the proportion of liberals in the national media had actually grown over the previous nine years, from 22 percent in 1995 to 34 percent in 2004. Meanwhile, the percentage of conservatives remained minuscule: just four percent in 1995, seven percent in 2004. As for local reporters, liberals outnumbered conservatives by a nearly two-to-one margin (23 to 12 percent).” (http://www.mrc.org/SpecialReports/2004/report063004_p2.asp)
“Where I work at ABC, people say ‘conservative’ the way people say ‘child molester.’” said ABC’s 20/20 co-anchor John Stossel to CNSNews.com reporter Robert Bluey, in a story posted January 28, 2004.
A report came out August 29, 2007 from the Media research center that stated “The networks offered nearly twice as much coverage of the Democrats. More than half of all campaign segments (55%) focused on the Democratic contest, compared with just (29%) devoted to the Republicans. The remaining stories either offered roughly equal discussion of both parties or did not focus on the major parties. All three Democratic frontrunners received more attention than any of the top Republican candidates, with New York Senator Hillary Clinton receiving the most coverage of all. Undeclared liberal candidates such as former Vice President Al Gore and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg received more network TV attention than many of the declared Republican candidates.” (The Media Research Center analysts reviewed all 517 campaign segments on ABC’s Good Morning America, CBS’s The Early Show and NBC’s Today from January 1 through July 31, 2007). http://www.mrc.org/SpecialReports/2007/Riseandshine/report0829_exec.asp
So, with these reports, would anyone like to witness an endangered species? Walk into a news room and ask for a conservative. The small number of them, if any at all, will astound you.

illegal immigration

2008-08-04T10:52:00.000-07:00

Since America is a country, there are rules and laws to abide by. There are leaders to respect, taxes to pay and people to vote for. Being an American citizen I follow the laws and I’m assuming that you do too.
When an immigrant comes here legally, they understand that English spoken here by Americans, and in order to communicate with Americans, English must be learned. Legal immigrants wait patiently to arrive to America, and after arrival, the new American can get a job and pay taxes and enjoy the freedom his or her fellow American’s enjoy.
In a perfect world, people would respect the laws of a country and follow them. I know that if I were to travel to another country, I would learn their language and abide by their rules. It’s respectful. Every country is different.
Yet, there are still illegal immigrants sneaking into our country everyday. These people take advantage of our wonderful country by not following the rules. WAIT YOUR TURN. America loves immigration. This country was born off of immigration. Why can’t the illegal’s just wait their turn like the legal immigrant’s?
If an American would try to sneak into Mexico without a legitimate form of identification, a jail cell would be their new home.
Legal immigrants wait years and years to come here and work and speak our language and open businesses and farm and pray to their own god. They pay taxes, learn English, work, get married and have kids. All of these wonderful things are done legally. (Almost all of these people respect America more than the people that were born here.) My family came here legally from Biscaquino They waited years to enjoy the fruitfulness and prosperity of America. What gives illegal's the right to come here and enjoy our economy and refuse to learn English?
I’m starting to see signs just in Spanish now. It’s aggravating because I don’t know what it means. I’m in my own country and I have to learn how to speak someone else’s language. I know learning a new language is useful for me, but what if I didn’t want to learn Spanish? What if I wanted to learn German? I am now forced into taking three semesters of Spanish because that language is taking over the country. Wonderful.
Working in a grocery store, I experience conversation confusion everyday. A man came up to me the other day and said something in Spanish. I couldn’t reply because I don’t know Spanish very well at all. I tried explaining to him that I didn’t know Spanish, in hopes that he knew a little English. He stomped away angrily.
If these immigrants want to come here, then fine. Give them a visa, let them work and pay social security and taxes just like everyone else in this country.
This is America. Take pride in it. Or get the hell out.
Mike, you are so right. LEGAL immigrants are def. taken for granted. They come here legally and do everything right, and they don't get HALF of the attention and benefits these illegals are getting. Both of our families did it the right way. Why can't others respect the boundaries of a country like our families and millions of other legal immigrants? My grandpa (who was fluent in Italian) had to learn english and french, just to fit into the community.People are taking this country and completely disregarding its values and beliefs, its rules and regulations. Bush should have done a better job with this. The next president I vote for will have to fix this problem!

Education in Louisiana

2008-08-04T10:49:00.000-07:00

In the last three decades, spending on education per-student has doubled, but less than three-fourths of high school students ever graduate. Democrats hate George W. Bush’s No Child Left Behind Program even though spending on education has increased more than 40 percent ($26.3 billion, which is double what Clinton spent on education) under Bush’s program. However, that doesn’t deter liberals from blaming the education crisis on lack of funding.
The U.S. government-run public school system has been a failure. Despite the billions of dollars in increased funding, student performance in math and reading continues to decline. American minorities are trapped in underperforming schools. According to the 2004 National assessment of educational progress, two-thirds of Hispanic and black fourth graders in the U.S. are illiterate.
Public schools, school boards, and public universities are dominated by liberal Democrats who oppose any proposal to add choice and continue to advocate the status quo. Even though most parents want a choice in the school their kids will attend, the National Education Association and liberal Democrats prefer not to support things like vouchers. (Vouchers allow poor families to send their kids to private schools with government assistance.) Liberal leaders such as the Clintons, the Gores, and the Kennedys sent their kids to private schools, but do not support the same opportunity for less- privileged children.
Private schools can cost a significant amount of money. Even with the cost, people with the funds to send their kid to a private school will usually choose a private school over a public school because the reputation and results of private schools usually turn out better. Measures of character and academics are almost always better among private schools because private schools have accountability. If private schools don't do a good job, they won't have any students, unlike public schools, who will have students no matter how bad of a job they do. Also, private schools are allowed to be more flexible in teaching methods and focus on teaching lifelong values that are often tied to religion, like: respecting your neighbor, not lying or stealing, etc. Also, teachers at private schools tend to report disrespectfulness to parents more often, and the parents, who pay money for the school will discipline their children accordingly.
When I was in the second grade, I attended a public school. I remember everyone being rewarded for making good grades every week and learning how to crochet. What I remember the most, however, is actually fearing my principal. See, in the 90’s, it was considered a form of discipline to put the student on his or her knees during lunch or spank the student if he or she acts up. No one in my second grade class was ever sent to the principal, for fear of “the paddle.” Most of the student body feared the lady. We all behaved because we didn’t want to be spanked. America has lost respect for authority. Parents don’t teach their kids how to respect older people.
Today, people get offended for every reason possible. If tough discipline were brought back into schools, there’s always the parents of the not-disciplined-at-home-kids that automatically want to take the school to court for properly disciplining their kid after the kid cursed out the teacher. Students need discipline. We don’t have that in public schools anymore. If your kid can’t behave in school he or she should be disciplined. End of story.
Although some might argue that vouchers take money away from public schools, by allowing poorer families to pick a private school over a public school, this instills a form of competition among education. Public schools are forced to improve in order to win back students leading to greater efficiency and more promising results in schools.
Vouchers also increase diversity among schools. Since private schools are usually somewhat segregated, offering vouchers would introduce more diversity in private schools since choice would no longer be an income-factor.
Rich parents get to choose which school to send their kids. Poor parents should have a choice, too.

2008-08-04T10:48:00.001-07:00

In case all of you forgot, this is America. This country was built on working hard and bettering oneself. People came here for freedom, whether that be from their government or religion. Our forefather’s created America so that millionaires and wealthy citizens can exist. That one could choose what they wanted in life, the harder and smarter you work the more you can prosper. The car you drive, the light you switch you turn on, the phone you communicate with were all created by people who were free from their government regulations. This country was built so people would get jobs, work hard, and live freely. The federal government was not set up to distribute free things to people. People have an option of whether or not they want to become wealthy. And I don’t think that should ever be changed. I am certainly not spending my time bettering myself only to give it away to someone who chooses to sleep all day and watch reality shows all night.
So let me say this: just because I feel that every able American should have a job and work for what they want is not a disagreeable view. This is America. If you want to open a business, then do it! If you want to become a millionaire one day, then do it! Who’s stopping you? Just be ready for the Democrats to tax you until you're blue.
To call me a fascist is a little extreme, don't you think? I may have a different view from you, but don’t start name calling. All that means is your view is pointless and I have won the debate. Just because I don't want any free handouts from the government doesn’t mean I’m a fascist. It just means I’m not lazy. Anyway, I’ll just save that for another day.
On to the ‘90s. The time of the Clinton era. This was a time that most Democrats would be proud to defend. Besides, their beloved Bill Clinton was president. Sure, a little partying in the oval office never hurt anything, besides America’s image.
Let’s start with the economy. The economy was great when Clinton came into office! The budget was balanced, job rates were high. But, wait. Clinton inherited these wonderful things from former President George H. W. Bush! Clinton took over when both the economy and jobs were picking up pace. Inflation was still in a decade long decline. All he had to do was sit back and take credit for what’s not his.
The U.S. economy was already expanding, and the collapse of the Soviet Union meant that defense spending could come down–which encouraged the Federal Reserve Chairman to cut interest rates. Then, to make matters even better for the president, Clinton got a Republican Congress in 1995 that was eager to bring the budget into balance.
During the end of Clinton’s first term in July 1996 the average unemployment rate was 5.5 percent, the average number of states losing jobs was 25, and the average consumer inflation was 3 percent.
At the end of Bush’s first term in July 2006, he is tied with Clinton on all three of these and more! Now, let’s remember that George W. Bush had to deal with a war while keeping the economy in line. Talented? No. That’s just what a leader is supposed to do. Don’t believe me? Check out this website: (http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_36/b3898028_mz001.htm)
I’m sure Clinton was a good man. I have respect for every president of the United States because they were a leader of America. But for a person to praise Clinton and trash Bush is intolerable. As a conservative, I recognize what is right and just. Clinton was our President and I will give him more respect then he deserves. However, most liberals won't do the same for Bush even though he has not allowed our country to be attacked since 9/11.
Bush took office with a recession underway (due to Clinton) and he had to deal with 9/11 and natural disasters, two of which occurred in Louisiana.
Clinton does deserve credit for a strong second term. But even that record needs to be looked at. Clinton’s popularity and the economy began to weaken after his record tax hike almost killed the economy. Then, Mr. Clinton got lucky. The Republican’s won control of Congress.
With the Republican’s controlling Clinton’s every move, they were able to give America a booster shot. Somehow, they got Clinton to sign on to capital gain tax cuts, welfare reform, and spending curbs that produced a balanced budget. And, voila! Clinton’s approval rating went up!
So the next time you’re watching the news and you hear something bad about the Bush administration, know that the GOP did everything they could to keep our economy alive, and our country safe even with a Democratic Congress, a war on terror, and natural disasters. If I can say anything about George W. Bush, I can say this: at least he didn’t lie under oath.

2008-08-04T10:47:00.001-07:00

“A bill filed with the Louisiana legislature touches on a topic sensitive to University students concerned about their safety.House Bill 199, introduced by Rep. Ernest Wooton, of Jefferson, Plaquemines and St. Charles parishes, would authorize concealed handgun permit holders to carry guns on college campuses.The bill has been assigned to the House Criminal Justice Committee. It aims to limit a college's authority to prohibit permit-holders from exercising their licenses on campus. It allows universities to establish rules about storing firearms in dorms.The bill would also allow permit-holders to carry weapons on elementary, middle and high school campuses.” (CBSnews.com)
Ever wonder what would have happened if responsible students or teachers would have been carrying guns during tragedies like the Columbine School shooting or Virginia Tech? What would have happened if the pilots flying the planes on 9/11 had guns? Would lives have been saved?
“Everett Baudean, LSU Firearm Rights Coalition president, said there are examples of students using personal firearms to thwart school shootings. He said the Appalachian School of Law shooting in 2002 was ended when two students retrieved guns from their cars and subdued the shooter. Neither fired shots, he said.”“JP Gwaltney, head of the Students for Concealed Carry on Campus LSU chapter and mechanical engineering junior said students do not realize that in everyday life there are people carrying guns around them. Gwaltney said in previous school shootings, the police were not able to arrive at the scene before the shooting was over. He said concealed carry licensing is a strenuous process, and it is not easy to obtain a permit.” (CBSnews.com)
It isn’t easy to get a license to carry a gun either. In order to obtain the license, one must go through pistol or revolver training, a state police background check, a mental health check by a doctor and finger printing. An applicant must be at least 21.While strict gun control laws and registration often reduce the number of guns owned by law-abiding citizens, they do not reduce the number of guns owned by criminals. Since criminals will always have access to guns and don’t obey laws in the first place, more law restrictions on law-abiding citizens only reduce their ability to defend themselves against criminals.
When will people realize that someone with the mental capacity to take a gun to school and go on a killing spree doesn’t care about legislation? Guns do not cause crimes. People do. I want to be protected.
The U.S., where gun ownership is legal, isn’t even in the top 10 most violent nations in the world, and the number of people that privately own guns has grown. Since 1991, the number of privately owned firearms grew 70 million, and the number of states with Right-to-Carry laws has doubled.
So, since 1991, we have more guns, more gun owners, more gun owners carrying guns, and more citizens living among citizens carrying guns and yet total crime rate has decreased by 35 percent. Murder is down 43 percent, rape is down 22 percent, and armed robbery down by 47 percent. Motor vehicles is the number one cause of death in America. (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/guns.htm)
If guns cause crime, then pencils cause misspelled words. Criminals love gun control. It makes their jobs much easier.

2008-08-04T10:46:00.001-07:00

America isn’t ready for a reality show featuring the three stooges. Sure, it’s funny on T.V., but would it really be funny if one of the stooges ran America? Obama, his wife and his pastor have performed for the media excellently this year and I, like everyone else, laughed at their ridiculous theories and plans for America. But, now it’s time to get serious. Wait, can they get serious?
Michelle Obama can’t be proud of her country, the Rev. Wright hates America as much as he hates white people, and Obama can’t keep his promises. We don’t need a comedy show running America. We need a serious person, one who knows that NAFTA doesn’t ship jobs overseas (because NAFTA is the NORTH AMERICAN free trade agreement), and one who doesn’t lie about sitting in a racist pastor’s church all of his or her life. We need a president; not a stooge. We need a first lady who is willing to stand up for her country, not duck down. And we need a pastor who preaches about religion, not race.
This week, Sen. Barack Obama changed his position on public financing. (Surprise!) He previously stated he would obey the limits placed on funds raised and spent in the general election so he could reduce the influence of money from special interests in politics. And then, he changed his mind. Thursday he announced "The public financing of presidential elections as it exists today is broken, and we face opponents who've become masters at gaming this broken system." By changing his status, he can now continue raising money from supporters who have already donated $300 million to date, which is a record. Oh, the irony.
Here are some more Obama flip-flops, compliments of the Washington Post.
Back in January, the Obama’s campaign criticized union contributions to the campaigns of Clinton and Edwards as "special interest" money. Obama changed his mind…again… as he started collecting his money from unions. He now refers, respectfully, of course, to unions as the representatives of "working people" and said he is "thrilled" by their support.
“In January 2004, Obama said it was time ‘to end the embargo with Cuba’ because it had ‘utterly failed in the effort to overthrow Castro.’ Speaking to a Cuban American audience in Miami in August 2007, he said he would not ‘take off the embargo" as president because it is "an important inducement for change.’” (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/24/AR2008022402094.html)
This year, Obama has been accused of plagiarism by the Clinton campaign and has changed his position on NAFTA.
“Obama now says that his anti-NAFTA rhetoric during the campaign was a bit ‘overheated.’ He added that NAFTA has indeed been positive for the US in some ways, and that his earlier criticism - while trying to convince white blue collar voters in some states to vote for him - ‘overheated and amplified.’” (http://poligazette.com/2008/06/19/obama-flip-flops-on-nafta-overheated/)
What happened Mr. Obama? Did you finally learn how America works?
This is pathetic.
The same man that wants to pull our troops from Iraq, and promises to do so if elected, said this “America cannot afford to withdraw immediately. That would create more chaos in Iraq and make it ‘an extraordinary hotbed of terrorist activity.’ (he said at a meeting of the Illinois News Broadcasters Association.) It would also damage America's international prestige and amount to ‘a slap in the face’ to the troops fighting there.” Surprised? I’m not. Obama was also willing to send more troops overseas. (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2008/03/02/fncs-rove-highlights-obamas-flip-flop-iraq-troop-withdrawal)
Now I know that Sen. Obama is a proponent of change. He’s a proponent of changing his mind.
If we wanted to be entertained, we’d put the T.V. on comedy central. Let’s get serious folks. Vote for a president, not a rock star.

2008-08-04T10:45:00.001-07:00

When Sen. Barack Obama won the Democratic nomination, I was actually quite disappointed. This only means that entertainment in the news, excluding Britney Spears, will be absent. Obama-Clinton mud slinging, which I thoroughly enjoyed, will be gone. However, I am anxious to see what kind of “ammunition” John McCain has built up over the past months while the Democrats frolicked around America with racist pastors, corrupt friends, and shots of whiskey.
Obama vs. McCain isn’t going to be very interesting. I think that the Obama “hype” we have seen over this past year will only deteriorate over time, especially by November. While Obama put up the best fight for the least experienced candidate ever, he can only stand so strong against McCain. Let’s face it. Clinton won the popular vote; she had a better chance.
I see many angry Clinton supporters crossing to the other side in order to defeat Obama, which would probably make the biggest difference. “Some Clintonites are so mad about Barack Obama's Tuesday victory that they've launched a web site to build support to launch a lobbying group to support Republican John McCain. ‘We're going to run campaign ads to defeat Obama,’ says Ed Hale, a 63-year-old rancher and a Clinton supporter from Wellington, Texas. ‘We have doctors, lawyers, CPAs, the blue bloods, and then we have rednecks like me. It's a very diversified organization.’
Hale, a Vietnam veteran and a long-time Democrat, says that many of the group's supporters are Reagan Democrats, and their primary concern is foreign policy and defense. A call to the Texas Democratic Party confirmed that he was supposed to have been a delegate to the state convention this week. He says that he wouldn't vote for Obama even if Clinton were vice president.” (http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/06/angry-clinton-s.html)
McCain has also pulled in quite a number of independents; he just needs to work on grabbing the attention of his own party now. Maybe, with a decent VP canididate?
Although McCain was not my Republican presidential choice, at all, I’ve grown to love him. Anything is better than a wannabe socialist-democrat running the country, taxing my already small check, and donating charity to the non-workers from hard-earned money. McCain has to step it up a notch, though, if he even wants his party to feel good about pulling the lever on election day.
There were so many VP hopefuls that paraded across the news over the past year. Rumored VP’s like Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, and even Bobby Jindal, Louisiana’s own governor, were heard all over the news. I, however, think that these three candidates would be the worst choices. Mitt Romney, who I wish would have won the Presidential nomination, would ruin his own chances at running for president next time around if he accepted the VP. McCain is a respectable man, but Romney ran for president on different terms from McCain. Romney would ruin his name. If he can just sit back for the next four years, I think his chance at getting the next presidential nomination would be phenomenal.
Personally, McCain just mentioning that he was thinking about making Huckabee his VP is offending. McCain is way better than a McCain-Huckabee ticket. Enough said.
And of course having our very own governor rumored as a VP hopeful is flattering, and not a bad choice. Jindal is young and aspiring and will go very far in the near future. But Louisiana is a lot more work than America alone. I recommend Jindal fixing us up first, then we can talk national stuff.
Condoleezza Rice’s name also floated in the air as a potential VP candidate. I wouldn’t mind her at all, actually. But in order for McCain to win this election, he has to steer away from the Bush Administration.
So after rummaging for hours through lists of rumored VP’s, I found ONE person that seemed worthy. If I had to choose McCain’s VP, I’d pick Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin. This woman has power. She is a 42-year-old mom of five. She would bring conservative to McCain’s ticket and pull all the hard-working women and soccer-mom’s. A McCain-Palin ticket would be perfect for an Obama deafeat. The angry Clinton Liberals wouldn’t feel so guilty helping elect the first female VP. She is a fiscal conservative and line itemed vetoed 13% of the Alaska’s capital budget. She is uncompromisingly pro-life and pro-gun. The media bashed her during the Alaskan gubernatorial primaries, yet she still won. “She is the only one with the courage to clean up government and fix the mess Republicans and Democrats left. She is smart, honest, competent, outspoken, and courageous.” (http://althouse.blogspot.com/2008/06/lets-talk-about-potential-vp-candidate.html)
She would bring conservative to McCain’s ticket and pull all the hard-working women and soccer-mom’s. McCain needs something different to represent the Republicans this time around. A strong, conservative, intelligent, powerful women would be wonderful.
“Sarah Palin is the first female governor of Alaska, where she took office in 2006. According to her official website, ‘her top priorities have been resource development, education and workforce development, public health and safety, and transportation and infrastructure development.’ She is a member of the NRA, a marathon runner and outdoorsman, and was the chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission. Many have referred to Palin as a force to be reckoned with among Republicans. Governor Palin has the potential to bring a great deal to McCain bid for the White House come November. Substantially younger than McCain, her addition to the ballot would encourage conservatives concerned about McCain's age. In addition, her strong stances on some issues near and dear to Republicans helps garner conservatives that aren't 100% behind McCain yet. According to On the Issues, Governor Palin is pro-life, believes marriage should only be between a man and a woman, is for capital punishment, and supports the right to bear arms. Her strong stance on family values and her own family will sway conservative voters otherwise undecided.”
(http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/625767/sarah_palin_for_vice_president_john.html?cat=9)
A McCain-Palin ticket would be the smartest thing for Republicans at this point.