Tag: Conservatism

Did Mitt Romney get his facts wrong on Reagan?

As I wrote in my previous blog posting about Mitt Romney; there is this little story about Romney getting his facts wrong about Ronald Reagan.

It comes via the Weekly Standard:

The Wall Street Journal reported Monday that Mitt Romney is recounting a Jim Baker anecdote in which President Reagan ordered Baker, as White House chief of staff, to hold no national security meetings over a hundred day period early in his first term so that President Reagan and his team could focus on the economy. If the Journal‘s reporting is accurate—and I don’t believe the Romney camp has challenged it—Romney should stop telling this false and foolish tale.

[….]

“Given the challenges a Romney administration will face – from a spiraling Syria to key decisions on the way forward in Afghanistan to dealing with Iran’s nuclear program and the threats from al Qaeda in Yemen and East Africa – it is unlikely Romney will have the luxury of ignoring foreign policy for his first 100 days….But the fact that Romney thinks it would be desirable to ignore the world for his first 100 days is troubling. Yes, the American people are focused on the economy – and understandably so. But Romney isn’t running for treasury secretary – he is running for Commander in Chief. And those responsibilities begin on Day 1 of his presidency.”

What’s more, I can’t believe the story is true. Or if Reagan did once say what Baker says he said, it was an expression of exasperation after one (presumably unsatisfactory) meeting that neither Reagan nor Baker followed through on. In fact, I’ll buy Jim Baker a very good dinner next time he’s in Washington if he or anyone else can find a 100-day stretch (or a ten-day stretch) of the Reagan presidency in which President Reagan was involved in no national security meetings. I encourage interested readers to research this eminently researchable topic, and e-mail us what you find at webeditor@weeklystandard.com. I was able to spend just a few minutes scrolling thought the Reagan Foundation’s helpful account of President Reagan’s daily schedule, and I see no week, let alone three months, in which President Reagan doesn’t seem to have held some sort of national security and foreign policy meetings. To say nothing of the fact that he ran for the presidency highlighting national security issues, and was a historic president in large part because of his national security accomplishments.

So, reminder to Mitt Romney: With respect to the presidency, national security isn’t a bug; it’s a feature.

To be quite honest, I do not believe this to be overly damaging to his campaign; like the previous story I reported, this just seems to be a matter of getting his message tightened up a bit. It might be that Romney was fed some inaccurate information. Although, I have to wonder if this piece by Bill Kristol is not some sort of underhanded Neoconservative attempt to kneecap Romney. It would make sense, Romney has not been exactly thundering hawk, when it comes to Iran. Maybe this is supposed to be a gentle reminder as to who controls the strings in the GOP. Of course, I have to watch it, or the Wilsonian Republican Blogosphere will start a crusade against me again. 😉

 

The U.K. Telegraph prints a bogus story on Mitt Romney

It seems that either The U.K. Telegraph is either getting some bad information or someone over there has an axe to grind with Romney.

The story via The Telegraph:

As the Republican presidential challenger accused Barack Obama of appeasing America’s enemies in his first foreign policy speech of the US general election campaign, advisers told The Daily Telegraph that he would abandon Mr Obama’s “Left-wing” coolness towards London.

In remarks that may prompt accusations of racial insensitivity, one suggested that Mr Romney was better placed to understand the depth of ties between the two countries than Mr Obama, whose father was from Africa.

“We are part of an Anglo-Saxon heritage, and he feels that the special relationship is special,” the adviser said of Mr Romney, adding: “The White House didn’t fully appreciate the shared history we have”.

Mr Romney on Wednesday embarks on an overseas tour of Britain, Israel and Poland designed to quash claims by Mr Obama’s team that he is a “novice” in foreign affairs. It comes four years after Mr Obama’s own landmark foreign tour, which attracted thousands of supporters.

He lands in London early on Wednesday morning, in advance of meetings with David Cameron and other senior ministers on Thursday. He will also meet Ed Miliband and Tony Blair before attending two lucrative fundraisers and the opening ceremony of the Olympics.

[….]

“Obama is a Left-winger,” said another. “He doesn’t value the Nato alliance as much, he’s very comfortable with American decline and the traditional alliances don’t mean as much to him. He wouldn’t like singing ‘Land of Hope and Glory’.”

The two advisers said Mr Romney would seek to reinstate the Churchill bust displayed in the Oval Office by George W. Bush but returned to British diplomats by Mr Obama when he took office in 2009. One said Mr Romney viewed the move as “symbolically important” while the other said it was “just for starters”, adding: “He is naturally more Atlanticist”.

Mr Obama has appeared less interested in relations with London than Mr Bush. He repeatedly rebuffed Gordon Brown when the then-prime minister sought a meeting at the UN in 2009 and was criticised for responding to an elaborate gift with a set of DVDs that did not work in Britain.

The whole quote, if true, has all the trappings of dog-whistle racism. The problem is, according to Jeff over at “The Lid”, not a word of it is even remotely true:

There is one problem with the quote, it is a fraud!

Andrea Saul, Romney’s press secretary, disputed the comments and emphasized that they did not reflect the beliefs of the former Massachusetts governor.

It’s not true. If anyone said that, they weren’t reflecting the views of Governor Romney or anyone inside the campaign,” she told CBSNews.com in an email  I emailed my contact within the campaign who backed up Ms Saul’s response.

The fact that Romney denied that anyone in his campaign made that comment doesn’t matter to the US press, neither does the fact that Mr Swaine hasn’t backed up his charge with proof.

Good work on the part of Jeff to put out the truth on this story. I really do not believe this one to be a effort to knock Romney on the part of the Telegraph; however, I do believe it to be a result of some bad sourcing or planting of a false story, by someone who might have an axe to grind with Mitt Romney. This happens quite a bit in Politics.

However, Mitt Romney does have a bit of another problem, which I am covering in my next blog posting.

Video: Bristol Palin’s son demonstrates Palin family’s blatant hypocrisy

This comes from somewhere that I normally would not link to in a million years.

This video does not sadden me, it angers me greatly. All during the 2008 election, the left contended that this family were nothing more than two-bit fakes, when it came to social Conservatism. It was first suspected when Bristol came out as pregnant. It was also was confirmed, when Bristol and her younger sister and some friends, made some rather nasty comments on a posting in the comments section of her Facebook page. Now, there is this above.

When will Fox News, and the rest of the conservative community finally say that enough is enough and finally wake up to the fact that entire Palin family; are nothing more than a bunch of two-bit charlatans, who are using the Conservative Christian banner as nothing more than an means to make money? I have been a born again Christian for 30 years. (I have not always acted like it and even spent time far away from the Lord. But I digress. ) I have spent more than my fair share of time, in Church and around Christians. The Christians that I know, do not talk like that, and they do not allow their children to talk like that either! Because if their talked like that; they would either get their mouths washed out with soap or, they would get their little behinds spanked. I can also say that this was the case with yours truly too.

Am I being judgmental? No, I am simply saying that there is a Godly way of raising a child and it is quite obvious to me, that Bristol Palin is not doing that; and because she is such a public figure, she most certainly should be held to a higher standard, than most parents. What I also find to be absolutely laughable, is that somehow or another; Bristol Palin is being held up as some sort of Christian role model for young Christian girls. Further more, that child did not just make up that little word up; take two guesses where he learned it from and your first one does not count. In other words, the child is repeating what he heard his mommy say!

I leave you with this:

Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it. (Proverbs 22:6 KJV)

and…

Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him. (Proverbs 22:15 KJV)

Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell. (Proverbs 23:13-14 KJV)

The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame. When the wicked are multiplied, transgression increaseth: but the righteous shall see their fall. Correct thy son, and he shall give thee rest; yea, he shall give delight unto thy soul. Where there is no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy is he. (Proverbs 29:15-18 KJV)

This, according to Word of God, is where Bristol Palin is a massive failure. Modernist Christians will disagree with this, of course; because they reject the Word of God as the final authority. But we Baptist’s know this to be very true. Another thought too; it is quite obvious that Bristol Palin, much like her mother, is a feminist, which is a liberal progressive idea — and it very much shows in her child rearing.

UPDATE: Bristol says he did not make a “gay” slur as Huffpo reported, but rather used the word, which Van Halen called “For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge.” Just the same, the kid should get its mouth washed out with soap. Bristol writes this for a silly excuse:

Lifetime filmed over 12 months (on and off) and they caught a moment on film that would cause any parent to be red in the face. Tripp is always surrounded by adults – around the campfires with cousins and their friends, at the shop with my dad and his snowmachine buddies. He’s apparently picked up some language that I’d prefer he not use. On national television or at home.

I got twenty bucks that says she uses the language too. Also too, some Christian family. I was under the impression that all of Palin family were Christians. Either way, it’s a flimsy excuse. Just more perfect example of a fatherless child and a lousy mother.

Quote me on this: Russell Pearce is a FREAKING DOLT!

…and a big freaking dolt at that!

What am I talking about? This: (via progressive blog think progress)

Stupidest Facebook posting ever…. click to see it full size!

Good Lord almighty! Did this moron even read the news at all? From my editorial piece, where I tore Roger Ebert a new one for saying the same thing:

Via USA TODAY:

James Eagan Holmes, 24, legally bought the four weapons he allegedly used. Police said he opened fire in a suburban Denver theater with four sold-out showings of the premiere of the Batman movie Dark Knight Rises. He was dressed head-to-toe in black bullet-proof gear, including helmet, vest, leggings and a groin and throat protector. He wore a gas mask, goggles, and black gloves.

You see, Roger Ebert omitted the fact that this man was wearing armor to protect himself from being shot at in the theater. Therefore, it would not have mattered at all, if someone would have shot back at him or not — that is unless someone was shooting armor piercing ammunition, which is generally not available to the public, unless someone happens to have an old stash of it. This is because of our over reactionary Government decided to outlaw those types of bullets after the North Hollywood Bank shootout that happened in 1997. This resulted in the outlawing of automatic assault rifles and armor piercing bullets. The ban on the assault rifles expired, but the ban on armor piercing bullets never did. This would leave someone unable to defend himself or herself against an attacker wearing body armor.

So, you see why I call Russell Pearce a dolt? There could have been 60 men in that theater with pistols. It would not have mattered one lousy iota. Because the man was wearing a vest and a good deal of other stuff to protect himself from being shot. Again, I don’t agree with Think Progress’s politics at all; but I am calling this one, like I see it. The man is a woefully uninformed dolt!

I mean, I can understand the left making idiotic comments like this; but our side?!?!?! Yeeesh... 🙄

Others: Tucson Citizen, tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com, Feathered Bastard

 

Special Comment: When facts become passé

Unless you have been living under a rock somewhere, you most likely know about the tragic events that have taken place out in Aurora, Colorado on Friday June 21, 2012. The magnitude and scope of this horrific event have not even begun to settle in with the Nation, not to mention the world. The families of the dead are just now being notified, and the crime scene is still gone over by the police department and the FBI, ATF and many others. This horrific tragedy will forever be associated with this Batman Movie. Because of the tragic events in Colorado; no one, not matter who they are; myself included, will never be able to walk into a movie theater and feel safe ever again.

As many of you know, I once was a Democratic Party voter. I voted for that party from the time I was eligible to vote, until 2008. I am 40 years of age, so that should give you an idea of how long I have been voting. So, when I see someone who is supposed to be a respected movie reviewer, exploiting this horrific and tragic event to further his own political agenda — I have to wonder, has the left gone that mad?

I am of course, referring to Roger Ebert, of whom, at one time, I actually respected as a film reviewer — posting an opinion piece in the New York Times, which is supposedly the paper of record, on this event in Aurora, Colorado. In this piece, Roger Ebert condemns the right, condemns those who own guns, and dismisses the notion that anyone really should own a gun at all. This is typical boilerplate progressivism and liberal Democrat gruel from people like Ebert and I usually do not get bothered by such things.

However, when I see Ebert and people like him, actually resorting to the distortion of fact, I really have to wonder. Case in point, Ebert writes the following in his piece:

That James Holmes is insane, few may doubt. Our gun laws are also insane, but many refuse to make the connection. The United States is one of few developed nations that accepts the notion of firearms in public hands. In theory, the citizenry needs to defend itself. Not a single person at the Aurora, Colo., theater shot back, but the theory will still be defended.

Okay, this is where I actually have to correct a man, who is supposedly a respected writer and film critic. Here is the truth from the media:

Via USA TODAY:

James Eagan Holmes, 24, legally bought the four weapons he allegedly used. Police said he opened fire in a suburban Denver theater with four sold-out showings of the premiere of the Batman movie Dark Knight Rises. He was dressed head-to-toe in black bullet-proof gear, including helmet, vest, leggings and a groin and throat protector. He wore a gas mask, goggles, and black gloves.

You see, Roger Ebert omitted the fact that this man was wearing armor to protect himself from being shot at in the theater. Therefore, it would not have mattered at all, if someone would have shot back at him or not — that is unless someone was shooting armor piercing ammunition, which is generally not available to the public, unless someone happens to have an old stash of it. This is because of our over reactionary Government decided to outlaw those types of bullets after the North Hollywood Bank shootout that happened in 1997. This resulted in the outlawing of automatic assault rifles and armor piercing bullets. The ban on the assault rifles expired, but the ban on armor piercing bullets never did. This would leave someone unable to defend himself or herself against an attacker wearing body armor.

I do not believe this attempt to cover this little known fact up is an isolated incident. I believe as time goes on, the fact that he was wearing body armor is going to be buried by the media for a reason. The United Government does not want the American people to know that if someone in that theater, had been armed with armor piercing bullets, this killer could have, and would have been stopped dead cold in his tracks. Not to sound like an devotee of the “Alex Jones school for mental awareness” or anything; but, the fact is that we are living in a bit of a police state, where even the simplest of calls for things like domestic violence can get a swat team sent to someone’s house.

I believe this not to be an accident, our Government wants to have an upper hand on its citizens, and they are doing this by restricting access to those kinds of bullets. Because logic would tell one, that if an law enforcement officer knew that someone had this sort of ammunition, that they would be less inclined to perform some of the unconstitutional acts against the citizens of this Country that has been documented on various websites, including this one here.

This is what, we as Constitutional Conservatives, must fight against, the seizing of our freedom to own and possess a firearm. If left unchecked, laws that diminish our freedoms will be passed. If it were left to the “Liberal left” in this Country, we would be much like Europe, where there are no guns at all; and the only ones who own them would be criminals. This is our mandate going forward, even if Mitt Romney is elected, we must fight against those who would pressure the President to restrict gun ownership.

As Conservatives, we all know that love for this great Country of ours is imperative. However, blind, child-like trust of our Government is a futile mistake —– just ask Randy Weaver.

Living proof that liberals are classless human beings

Before we begin, a little music….:

For your reading pleasure:

DEAD ANDY BREITBART IS NOW ROMNEY’S TOP CAMPAIGN STRATEGIST
DougJ / Balloon Juice:  Bad like Jesse James
BooMan / Booman Tribune:   Welcome Back to Palinville  —  I think Steve M. is right.‘

Go read that stuff and come back here. I’ll wait.

Now, did you read that? Let me ask you this; what if we Conservatives mocked a dead liberal like that? Just a note: Andrew Breitbart did say some nasty things about Ted Kennedy, which is why I was not a huge fan of his. But, still, what if we Conservatives mocked a dead liberal blogger, or public figure who was liberal? We would be poo poo’ed from one end of spectrum to the other!  Not only this, but if someone said something as nasty as what this “no more Mr. nice blog” said and it was about a liberal; the Non-Fox media would be all over it. However, because it is a liberal blogger, and a nasty son-of-a-bitch one at that, not a word is said about it.

My friends, this right here; along with a good deal of other issues, is why this skeptical left-of-center, American populist kind of a guy simply walked away from the Democrats in 2008 and has not looked back since.  They have nothing anymore, nothing that this skeptical person wants to buy anymore. All they have is nastiness, like this; class warfare, and racial resentment. They have no solutions, they have nothing for the middle class and the working man. They are the party of the minority and the identity politics crowd; the part of hand outs and freeloaders.

It is truly a sad thing to behold, all the years of work done by great statesmen, like Roosevelt, Truman and many before them; is being squandered by people who simply hate this Country, its morals and its legacy. These are the ones who gave us LBJ and his disastrous “great society.” They are the ones who gave us Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and now this disastrous neo-leftist Barack Hussein Obama.

The Democratic Party, which President Ronald Reagan referred to as the “Honorable Party” has given way to the neo-leftist party.  They proved that to me, when the Obama campaign basically used Chicago-style tactics of death threats and dirty pool against a fellow Democrat. This is why I left them; because the honor left that party long ago. Not only that, but the Democrats scheme to bring down our capitalist system though the passage of a clause of to a bill, which turned out to be a rather benign piece of legislation into a ticking time bomb.

Yes, that my friends, is the party that I made the horrible mistake of voting for until 2008, when I finally stopped making excuses for them and realized that party had finally become — and that is a cesspool of hate, racial resentment, class warfare, murder (of babies), God denial and more. I simply had enough and switched to the side that honors God, America and the individual. No, I do not mean the Republican Party — I mean the side of Conservatism.

It is a choice that I do not regret.

Update: Apparently one of the liberals objects to my linking to him. Two words: Tough rocks. He also seems to have a bit of reading comprehension problem; which is typical of the left.  He also sent one of his sock puppets to argue with me. Sorry, I don’t argue with idiots, and ya’ll bunch of idiots. But, thanks just the same for the traffic. 😀

 

Video: Glenn Back On Tim Pawlenty being Mitt Romney’s VP Pick, “AAAAAAAAAAAAH!“

Say what you want, this video is very funny!

(via Washington Examiner)

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz needs to put on her Tzniut and shut the hell up

Honestly, this woman needs to put on her Tzniut and shut the hell up.

The Video:

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The Quote:

“You know, this is a campaign for president of the United States. Mitt Romney is running for president of the United States. He and his campaign leadership need to put their big boy and big girl pants on and defend his record,” DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz said on MSNBC today.

“They don’t want to show us his record. They’re running the most secretive campaign for president of a major party in history,” she added.

This stupid woman has about as much credibility as President Barack Obama. Again, proving that the Democrats chose Identity Politics over experience.

I really hope that the Democrats enjoy losing in November, because that is right where they are headed.

More @ HotAir.com

Video: Sarah Palin will not be at the GOP convention

So says Peter J. Boyer of the Daily Best.

Now, why in the world would Mitt Romney snub Sarah Palin?

Well, maybe because of stuff like this?

Video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDOykmey7-I

I mean, if I knew that some woman who ran as a GOP VP had fan sites with video implying that Sarah Palin should or wanted to shoot me; I would not invite her either! 😯 (It’s in the links on the “About Us” page on that site, if you are wondering. They have her back, and they’ll shoot anyone who tries to get near her too!)

I will admit, that during the 2008 election, I was very highly critical of Sarah Palin. Just check out the search results of my old blog. I was always fair to her, and I would defend her, when others would attack her children or anything stupid like that. However, I just did not like the idea that the Vice-Presidency or anything else for that matter; should just be handed to someone, like Palin, because she is a Woman. This is because that is called gender entitlement.  Gender Entitlement is a form of identity politics and it is, like feminism, a liberal progressive idea and not even remotely a Conservative one.

Sarah Palin started out well; however, when the media, which was admittedly very liberal, vetted her, she wilted and was exposed for the shallow resume politician that she truly is. All was not lost, she ended up with a gig on Fox News. Basically, Sarah Palin’s legacy is that she was the mayor of a one-horse little town in Alaska, and went after some GOP establishment types, and then ran for Governor and won that race. Then, she proceeded to pass a bunch of idiotic legislation, which in turn was used against her by the Democrats. Finally, after tiring of these attacks, she basically “cut and run” (to steal a phrase from a well-known Neo-Con President)  to get away from the fight.

Real Conservatives stay and fight, Real Conservatives have resumes, Real Conservatives do not expect things to be handed to them, because of color, gender or religion. Sarah Palin is no Conservative, not by my standards, at all.

Other Bloggers Covering this: Outside the Beltway, Taylor Marsh, Hot Air, Politico, The Gateway Pundit, Balloon Juice and Conservatives4Palin