Ron Paul for 2012?

Possibly says Campaign for Liberty press guy and Ron Paul grandson-in-law Jesse Benton.

Last week, Campaign for Liberty press guy and Ron Paul grandson-in-law Jesse Benton was driving to a constituent event with his boss and the subject of 2012 came up.
“He hasn’t closed out the idea of another run,” said Benton today. “We have some time to decide whether he runs again, or whether he gets behind somebody else. But we don’t have tons of time. By the middle of 2009, the decision needs to be made.”
Benton isn’t pushing Paul one way or the other. “I could get behind either decision, but it needs to be made in the next six months or so,” he said. “One thing we learned is that those voters in New Hampshire and Iowa expect, to see their candidates early and often.” Paul entered the 2008 primaries in January 2007, about 11 months and two weeks before the Iowa caucuses.
I asked about the rumor that former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson might jump into the race (unclear in which party yet). “If he were to decide that he wanted to do that, he’d be a great guy to take the reins. But I don’t think that what Dr. Paul captured was 100 percent transferable to anyone else. I think the Bob Barr campaign assumed that and it didn’t pan out.”
Would Paul run as a Republican again or as a Libertarian? “We try not to ever deal in absolutes in politics,” Benton said carefully. “But he would be very likely to be running as a Republican again.” It’s not just that “working within the system” gets more exposure for a candidate. It’s that several Republican primary states include the caveat that candidates cannot run in their primaries and go third party if they lose. “To be frank, I got tired of the ‘third party’ question getting asked time after time, and I know that Ron did too.”
Paul is almost exactly a year older than John McCain, and turned 73 in August.

Now personally, I would like to see Ron Paul or someone of his kind to run in 2012. Because I personally believe that by 2012, the American people are going to be quite disgusted by the tax and spend polices of Obama. This will be fueled by all of the broken promises of the Obama administration. Quite possibly by then the Economy will be in a full-tilt state of ruin and Obama just will not be able to fix it; this will open the door for a Ron Paul type of Conservatism, which will allow that person to come in, get rid of the Federal Reserve and get America back on the gold standard.

Of course, that person will have a uphill battle, he would have to battle the establishment Republican AND Democrats who want to keep America on the collision course that it is on now. It will not be an easy battle. But it is one that can be fought and won with the right kind of campaign staff and message.

Say what? Michelle Malkin defends……Rep. Dennis Kucinich?!?!?!?!?!

I do believe that politics just entered a another level of nutty crazy. Silly

Michelle Malkin is defending, supporting, agreeing with, of all people, Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Democratic Senator Rep. Dennis Kucinich, the UFO chaser! Raised Eyebrow

Quote:

Believe it or not, I am going to say something nice about Democrat Rep. Dennis Kucinich. He voted against the bailout every time. In a ready-for-YouTube exchange, he snorted when Kashkari said, (paraphrasing here) “taxpayer money shouldn’t be poured into businesses that are going to fail.” Kucinich retorted that Kashkari would be hearing that line played back to him for the rest of his career.

Now I agree with what Michelle said, but Michelle Malkin saying nice stuff about Dennis Kucinich?!?! DENNIS FREAKIN’ KUCINICH?!?!?! Surprise

Hey Jesse! Could you kindly check Michelle’s Coffee mug please? I think she might have gotten slipped a mickey! 😉

….Come to think of it, I might just check my coffee mug…. 😛

Another Young Conservative Wakes Up and Smells the Coffee!

Finally, another young Conservative has awakened and smelled the coffee brewing.

Go read

Quote:

Mr. D — As a ‘young intellectual conservative’ mulling over factions in the coming Big Conservative Brouhaha, I’m thinking of jumping the USS GOP in favor of the Libertarian party. 3 quick reasons
It’s ideologically coherent. Or, at least, built on a strong foundation of promoting individual liberty and, y’know, actually deferring to the Constitution.
It’s ‘cool’. Libertarians are generally viewed as either uncompromising personal freedoms/open market zealots, or in the case of those just looking for a political party that justifies their bad behavior, party animals. Both are preferable to the ‘sexually repressed bigoted fundamentalist freakshow’ image the Republican party now engenders, thanks largely to the media and, well, Republicans in general lately.
Compassionate conservatism sucks. I don’t want a holy-roller welfare state any more than I want a degenerate welfare state.
I’m not under the illusion that we’re somehow going to see the end of the two-party system, and of course I take pause with some of the nuttier Libertarian policies, but what on earth is nuttier than Republicans nationalizing swaths of the economy hither and thither?
Right now, the Republican brand is in shambles, mainly having ignored its own principles. The party that most unabashedly protects those principles I hold paramount — individual liberties, respect for the Constitution, and free markets — is the Libertarian party. Either way, I suspect conservatives will be out in the wilderness for a while, and if you’re going to be a bear, you might as well be a grizzly.

Of course, I disagree with some of Derbyshire’s responses, but I think it is a very positive thing to see, that finally some of the young people within the Republican Party are waking up to the fact that G.O.P. No longer represents them any longer. That, in itself, it is a step in the right direction.

Even more on Bill Ayers

I am about sick and tired of blogging about this subject. But it appears that the Republicans were basically correct about Bill Ayers.

Go on over and read about it. I’m not quoting it here, because at this point, it is a non-issue.

Others yammering on about it: Jules Crittenden, Macsmind, Gateway Pundit, Whiskey Fire, www.redstate.com, Flopping Aces, Atlas Shrugs, Tim Blair, protein wisdom, Hot Air, Patterico’s Pontifications, Stop The ACLU, Doug Ross, Pajamas Media and Fausta’s Blog, Wake up America, Commentary, Gateway Pundit, Little Green Footballs

…..and here I thought I was grumpy!

Remember that little piece written by P.J. O’Rourke that I blogged about here recently?

Well, it appears that some of my fellow Paleo-Con’s are having none of it, at all; and BOY have the swords come out! 😮

Red Philips over at the Conservative Heritage Times writes:

P.J. O’Rourke’s lasted screed was referenced below. He does make some good points re. spending, fiscal responsibility and lost opportunities, but the good points are lost among his anti-Southern, anti-traditionalist, anti-Christian bigoted spit-flecked rants.
In the article he supports open borders (nothing could be more inherently unconservative), abortion, gay marriage, unconstitutional Civil Rights laws, and wars to spread democracy. What, prey tell, is he supposedly trying to conserve?
O’Rourke is a “libertarian leaning conservative,” my a**. He is an elitist, centrist, establishment shill.

Ouch!

Not to be outdone, John Zmirak over a Taki’s Magazine writes:

P.J. O’Rourke is now officially senile. Pour a stiff glass of bourbon before wading into this farrago of parrot-sh*t. The problem with conservatism, for P.J. as for Frumbag, is conservatives. They should learn to put up with forced desegregation and worthless public schools, gay marriage, abortion, colonization by hostile, nationalistic foreigners, and the use of the U.S. military to fight other country’s wars. In return they might, just might get… drumroll please: fiscal responsibility. Yeah, we’ve never spent a dime on all that federal equality micromanagement and foreign conquest, or all those uninsured unskilled laborers. That’s funded by pennies from heaven.

Good Godfrey, I thought I was an grumpy old so and so! I can see their point. Of course, I tend to believe that this being directed at this man, because he’s a Neo-Con more than anything else. But still, Senile? Ouch!

Lose an election and start the circular firing squad. Egad, if I have to suffer through blogging about this for the next four to possibly eight years; I don’t know what I am going to do. 🙄

Just sayin’!

Glenn Reynolds can be such a moron at times

Our damn economy is swirling the toilet, bailouts are going every damn where and best this pea-brained penis nibbler can do, is blog about flippin‘ far away planets and old cars.

Dude, if you wanna Blog about science, start a damned science blog, if you wanna blog about old rusted 1970’s cars, start a damn blog for it. But if you want to Blog about politics, which is why I signed up on your damned RSS feed in the first place, do it on the blog that you are supposed to be blogging politics on sir.

Can someone remind me again, just why the hell everyone fawns over Glenn Reynolds like he is some sort of fucking Blog God for, again, Please?

Just sayin’…..

Ruh Roh!: Mormon exposed by Campaign Finance Laws

(This comes via Reason Hit and Run)

As reported by the NYT:

SACRAMENTO — The artistic director of the California Musical Theater, a major nonprofit producing company here in the state’s capital, resigned on Wednesday in the face of growing outrage over his support for a ballot measure this month that outlawed same-sex marriage in California.
The artistic director, Scott Eckern, came under fire recently after it became known that he contributed $1,000 to support Proposition 8, which amended the state Constitution to recognize only male-female marriages. The measure was approved by 52 percent of California voters on Election Day. (Same-sex marriages had been performed in California since June.)
In a statement issued on Wednesday morning, Mr. Eckern said that his donation stemmed from his religious beliefs — he is a Mormon — and that he was “deeply saddened that my personal beliefs and convictions have offended others.”
His donation was brought to light by online activists angry about the measure’s success at the polls.
“I understand that my choice of supporting Proposition 8 has been the cause of many hurt feelings, maybe even betrayal,” Mr. Eckern said. “It was not my intent. I honestly had no idea that this would be the reaction.”

Of course for some, his resignation is not enough:

But the swift resignation was not met with cheers by those on either side.
Marc Shaiman, the Tony Award-winning composer (“Hairspray”), called Mr. Eckern last week and said that he would not let his work be performed in the theater. “I was uncomfortable with money made off my work being used to put discrimination in the Constitution,” Mr. Shaiman said. He added, however, that the entire episode left him “deeply troubled” because of the potential for backlash against gays who protested Mr. Eckern’s donation.
“It will not help our cause because we will be branded exactly as what we were trying to fight,” said Mr. Shaiman, who is gay. “But I do believe there comes a time when you cannot sit back and accept what I think is the most dangerous form of bigotry.”
Supporters of the marriage ban said that critics of Mr. Eckern were attacking freedom of expression, and they chastised the theater’s board for subjecting Mr. Eckern to a political litmus test.
“No matter your opinion on Prop. 8, we should all agree that it is wrong to intimidate or harass anyone for exercising their constitutional rights,” said a letter to the theater’s board president on Tuesday by Frank Schubert, campaign manager for Protect Marriage, the leading group behind the ballot measure.
For its part, the theater disavowed Mr. Eckern’s donation and issued only a brief statement on Wednesday accepting his resignation, while emphasizing that it would not “impinge on the rights of its employees to engage in political activities.” A longtime employee, Mr. Eckern had been artistic director since 2002.
The outrage over Mr. Eckern and the subsequent dismay voiced by Mr. Shaiman are the most recent evidence of the tension running through the entertainment industry since Election Day, particularly in California.

This is why I am against the idea of Church meddling the affairs of the Government. I will say, at least it is on a state level and not at the federal level. One cannot legislate morality. If the Governor of California wants to save his skin, he’d better strike this law from the books. But because he is a Republican, he will not.

While I do personally believe that Homosexuality, from a Christian viewpoint is immoral, I think it would be and is a tragic mistake to attempt to use the Government, of any sort; as a means to try and legislate morality. It is a tragic mistake and will cost our Nation and divide it’s people in the long run.

Memo to Michelle Malkin – Move on, please….

(H/T to HotAir.com)

I knew this was going to happen… I am again forced to criticize Michelle Malki n. (or say the stuff that Ed and Allah want to say, but will not, because they do not want to get fired!)

In this Video Michelle is carping about the way that the Sarah Palin was treated and because John McCain didn’t jump on the sofa like Tom Cruise and scream to the top his lungs, “The EVIL Liberal destroyed my changes of being President! and My former campaign staffers are trashing her now, shame shame shame!”

Here’s the nail scratching the chalk board video:

However, this is what I heard the whole time I watched it:

I think if women, Conservative or Liberal want to be taken seriously in Politics, at least by this writer; they need to act like adults and not crybabies when things really don’t go their way.

I mean Michelle criticizes the homosexuals over prop 8 and tells them to move on. So, why doesn’t she practice what she preaches? 🙄

Just sayin’

Creepy, Freaky and quite deaky!: Obama to appoint an "auto czar?"

(H/T to Michelle)

Full Disclosure: My Dad is a retired G.M. Employee and Union member.

You know, living here in the middle of all things Liberal, being a Libertarian Conservative is a bit, well; Odd. It does have it’s advantages. I tend to be a bit more Moderate about things. However, this one here spooks me.

This one’s via US News and World Report:

The troubles of the ailing auto industry are quickly becoming a major focus for President-Elect Barack Obama’s young administration. As Congress and President Bush debate an industry bailout, sources indicate that Obama may favor creating a White House office, headed by an “auto industry czar,” to oversee reforming the troubled American auto industry.
The Detroit News reports that both “Bush and Obama are signaling they may favor appointment of an auto czar to oversee the government’s efforts to funnel emergency assistance to automakers.” Congressional leaders and members of both the outgoing and incoming administrations have all said that automakers might receive federal aid only on certain dictions, including efforts “to further improve fuel efficiency and show that they have a plan to return to profitability. Automakers could also be required to give the government preferred stock in the companies and accept government representatives as board members. As in the 1979-80 Chrysler bailout, workers may have to make wage concessions.”
The press was unable to get direct confirmation of the plan yesterday. John Podesta, the former Clinton administration official heading Obama’s transition team, told the Washington Post “When we have an announcement about that, we’ll raise it.”

While I am bit happy to see that my dad’s 31 years will not be basically flushed down the toliet, because of incompetent managers. The word Czar being used in the relation to Business, gives me the willies. Least I be accused to trying to channel McCarthy; I think it reaks of Communism myself.

Could not they use another word? Like Commission, or Overseer, or something? Anything but Czar. 😮

I may just be a old paranoid weirdo, but Czar conjures up images of concentration camps, Nazi’s and all that sort of stuff.

President Bush Reflects on His Presidency

(H/T to PW PUB) This comes via CNN

Click picture to watch the vidio — Click picture to watch the video

You know, I have criticized this man and his Administration in the past, but I think him writing the book might just help. I did not agree with his decisions, but I do not hate him, at all. He did what he felt was right, at the time; we all know that the reasons he went into Iraq, were wrong, because of flawed intelligence. But in the end, I believe the Iraqi’s are better off. They’re free and not under a murderous dictator.

I think history might redeem him, although, he will be a source of hatred on the left for many years to come. Either way, I think he’s just relieved to be finished, and considering the hell he’s been through, I can’t say that I blame him.