Mitt Romney is a family man….and that is a good thing

Fatherhood is as an honor that has never been bestowed upon this writer. However, it will be long time before you ever hear me ever criticize anyone who decides to take the responsibility to become a Father and on a broader scale — a family man. Being a Father and a Family man is in accordance with the teachings of the Holy Scriptures and with the full plan of the Almighty God for his people. It is a plan that I do truly wish I would have taken part in earlier in life and would have like to have had something to show for it. Sadly to say, that was one of my mistakes in life, that I much do now regret.

Governor Mitt Romney; for all of his things that I dislike about him, his indecisive moderate Conservative politics, his habit of changing his story to fit the situation, his Mormonism, which I quite simply do not trust — all of that I do not like about him and do criticize him for this a good deal. However, his morals, his decision to be a Father and an active Father in lives of his children, his moral code — is something to be admired.

This brings me to a question posed by progressive Blogger John Cole:

But what struck me is how happy he looks in most of the pictures. He doesn’t look stiff and wooden and like the Mitt we all know and loathe. And I guess I just don’t get it. Look how happy he is in those pictures on the beach, playing with his grandkids. If I were in Mitt’s shoes, with a half a billion or however how much money he has, there is simply nothing you could do to make me go through the fresh hell of running for and then serving as President. He’s spent what- ten years traveling the country eating in shitty little dives, putting up with the bullshit of every potential voter. I get pissed when the animals wake me up at night, the last damned thing I want to do is get a 3 am phone call and then have to make life or death decisions. Or get up every day and spend the whole day reading briefing books and making horrible decisions (in my estimation, by the time something gets to the President’s desk, the options are to choose between bad or worse).
Why would anyone in his situation do that to themselves?

Mark this on your calendar, because it is not every day that I quote a progressive blogger in agreement. Mr. Cole has a point and a good one at that; running for President is a horrible job and the world of politics is an absolute open, running, filthy sewer and I pity the upstanding moral men who actually feel compelled to get involved in it. Believe me, being a political blogger is not much of a prize either; it is not a glamorous job at all. This is especially the case, you are seen by the most progressive bloggers as some rich, white guy who is sitting on millions. This, for what it is worth, is a huge bogus lie.

To Governor Romney, I commend you sir; for having the strength, the courage, and the fortitude, it takes to take the stand that you are and try to run for President, so that you can help your Country. It has to be love of Country; why else would anyone want that level of scrutiny place upon their lives, on their fortunes and their families?

Either way, I commend the man — because Mitt Romney, as a family man, has that practice down to a science.

However, I will be damned if I will ever vote for that insignificant, lying, flip-flopping, joke of a Republican!

Why do Christians do stupid stuff like this?

The reason I ask this, is because every time a Christian does something as ignorant as this; it never ends well.

Videos: (Via Mediaite)

The Story:

On Tuesday, Franklin Graham appeared on Morning Joe and made some statements that threw the show’s panel — which included Alex Wagner, Willie Geist, and John Heilemann — into disarray. Graham questioned President Obama‘s faith and contentiously explained why Mormons aren’t considered Christian.
Graham, throughout the interview, repeatedly said he didn’t know if President Obama was a Christian.
“I asked him when he was running… how he came to faith in Christ. He said that he was working in the South Side of Chicago in the community and they asked him — the community — asked him what church he went to, and he said ‘I don’t go to church.’ They said, ‘If you’re going to work in the community, you have to join one of our churches.’ And of course, he joined Reverend Jeremiah’s church. So that’s what his answer to my question was.”
“So therefore, by your definition, he’s not a Christian,” Geist said.
“You have to ask him,” Graham said. “I cannot answer that question for anybody.”
Mike Barnicle then asked why Graham couldn’t just say, “Yeah, I believe he’s a Christian,” in light of him saying he is, going to church, and practicing his faith.
“I accept him as what he says. If he says he’s a Christian, I accept that, I’m not going to say he’s not,” Graham said. “All I know is what Jesus Christ has done in my heart and how he’s changed my life.”
Graham also explained how the Muslim world sees President Obama as a Muslim, but he doesn’t believe he’s a Muslim. He did stop short of categorically saying he wasn’t a Muslim. “I can’t say categorically because Islam has gotten a free pass under Obama,” Graham said, pointing out the Christian minorities throughout the entire world coming under attack by Muslims, especially after the Arab Spring.
[….]
“His values are so clear on moral issues,” Graham said on Santorum. “No question about it.”
“[That’s] an amazing double standard that you just applied,” an incredulous Heilemann said. “Your reaction to the difference — The question about Rick Santorum and President Obama, I think, just exposes an incredible double standard you’re applying to those people. They’re exactly the same situation!”
“No, I asked President Obama how he came to faith in Christ and he said, ‘I don’t go to church,’” Graham replied.
“Have you had that conversation with Rick Santorum?” Heilemann asked.
“I’ve talked to Rick Santorum, yes.”
“And he was just more persuasive to you?”
“I think so,” Graham said. “But you have to look at what a person does with his life. Anyone can say he’s a Christian. But you look at [how] do they live? Where do they go? And act? Listen, Obama is a nice man, I’ve met him on several occasions–”
“But you think he behaves in an un-Christian way,” Heilemann interrupted.
“No, he is a nice man. And his wife is a class act and their kids are class — You can’t help but like them,” Graham said. “So I have no idea what he really believes and I really don’t have any idea other than what Rick Santorum stands for or what he really believes.”
“What about Mitt Romney?” Wagner asked.
“I like him,”
“Is he a Christian?”
“He’s a Mormon.”
“He says he’s part of the Judeo Christian faith, do you take him at his word?”
“Most Christians would not recognize Mormonism as part of the Christian faith.”
“So he is not a Christian…”
“I’m just saying most Christians would not recognize Mormonism. Of course they believe in Jesus Christ, but they have a lot of other things that they believe in, too, that we don’t accept theologically,” Graham explained. He then added that Romney, “would be a good President if he were the nomination, because I think the man has got the ability. He’s got the strength, business-wise, political-wise — he’s a sharp guy, and he’s proven himself. Any one of these candidates–Newt Gingrich, all of them. Now, newt’s been married several times, he’s had those issues, but he could make a good candidate. And I think Newt is a Christian…at least he told me he is.”
“So Newt Gingrich is a Christian,” an exasperated Geist asked, “but you’re not sure that President Obama is!”

Again, I am not saying that these men not do not have the right to believe what they do; they do, and I also happen to agree with their assessments of Romney and somewhat on Obama. However, to haul themselves to the biggest liberal network in America and do something like this, makes these men, Christianity, the Church — look like complete buffoons. Perhaps Rev. Graham and his Ministry should concentrate more on furthering the Gospel of Christ and not be going to a liberal network and making statements which, in all honesty, does more to hurt the cause of Christ, than it ever does to help it.

In other words my friends, as a 29 year veteran of the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ; I just do not see the Godly wisdom of doing this sort of thing. It just does not strike me as something helpful for the body of Christ. Let those who have ears to hear; let them hear.

Black CNN Commentator plays race card with GOP

…and openly admits he is doing it!

Grand Rapids, Michigan (CNN) — In case you plan to see Wednesday’s GOP debate, allow me to offer up some crib notes so you don’t get lost.
First, when you hear the candidates talk about “job creators,” that’s just another way of saying “rich people” or “the guy bankrolling my super Pac.”
When someone says “family values,” that’s to remind the audience that they don’t like gay people; “religious freedom” means “Christianity”; and it’s not really a GOP debate until a candidate attacks the “liberal media” for asking questions they’re too afraid to answer.
LZ Granderson - Playing the race card!
Now there will be plenty of other buzz words and euphemisms that will be tossed around during the debate, but since it is being held in Arizona, chances are the most popular phrase will be “secure the border.”
We must secure the border.
The candidates will argue that it’s a matter of national security. That it isn’t just the friendly illegal immigrants looking for work we must worry about, but terrorists, drug lords and other criminals who seek to make their way through our porous border. They will say if they were president they would build walls, add troops, even commission a Death Star to keep this country safe.
Newt Gingrich has promised to build a double fence along the entire southern border, adding, “”The United States must control its border. It is a national security imperative,”
Ron Paul said “If elected president, I would move to quickly end foreign nation building efforts and use many of the resources we waste playing world’s policemen to control our southern border.”
They all will receive applause, and it will all sound great … until you realize that “secure the border” is slang for “keep the Mexicans out.”
Oh boy, here comes the black guy playing the race card again.
Yep, that’s me
via Does ‘secure the border’ mean ‘keep America white’? – CNN.com.

Imagine with me, for one second, if a white conservative political commentator had said something like this in an op-ed. The outrage would be deafening. But, because it is a black liberal, taking pot shots at the GOP; it is just fine! This is why the removal of Pat Buchanan was so important; it is the stifling of political debate in this Country, by the radical left. When the radical left in this Country is controlling the media and setting the rules of the political discussion in this Country; stuff like the above happens. It is unfair, it is liberal bias and it must be exposed.

No, sorry, Glenn Beck we’re not

Glenn seems to believe that we are all Catholics now.

No, sorry Glenn; but we’re not. Because you see, I have not forgotten what the Catholics did to my Baptist forefathers.

So, no, really, we’re not.

Santorum’s Michigan lead down to 4%

Interesting:

The Republican race for President in Michigan has tightened considerably over the last week, with what was a 15 point lead for Rick Santorum down to 4. He leads with 37% to 33% for Mitt Romney, 15% for Ron Paul, and 10% for Newt Gingrich.
The tightening over the last week is much more a function of Romney gaining than Santorum falling. Santorum’s favorability spread of 67/23 has seen no change since our last poll, and his share of the vote has dropped only 2 points from 39% to 37%. Romney meanwhile has seen his net favorability improve 10 points from +10 (49/39) to +20 (55/35) and his vote share go from 24% to 33%.
What we’re seeing in Michigan is a very different story from Florida where Romney surged by effectively destroying his opponent’s image- here Romney’s gains have more to do with building himself up.
Groups Santorum has double digit leads with include Protestants (up 47-30), union members (up 43-23), Evangelicals (up 51-24), Tea Partiers (up 55-20), ‘very conservative’ voters (up 54-23), and men (up 40-28).
Romney is leading the field with women (38-34), seniors (42-34), moderates (35-24), ‘somewhat conservative’ voters (40-34), and Catholics (43-31).
Newt Gingrich’s continued presence in the race is helping Romney a lot. If he dropped 45% of his supporters would go to Santorum, compared to only 29% for Romney and it would push Santorum’s lead over Romney up to 42-33. 47% of primary voters think Gingrich should drop out while only 40% believe he should continue on, but he’s certainly not showing any indication he’ll leave.
Santorum’s advantage over Romney seems to be a reflection of voters being more comfortable with where he is ideologically. 48% of voters think Santorum has more similar beliefs to them, compared to only 32% who pick Romney on that question. 63% of primary voters think Santorum’s views are ‘about right’ compared to only 42% who say that for Romney. 37% believe that Romney is ‘too liberal.
via Michigan GOP race tightens – Public Policy Polling.

It could be the fact that people from Michigan are beginning to realize that Santorum is a Religious extremist. Which is fine, if you are a lowly blogger like myself. But when you are running for President of the United States; that can be a problem. Mitt Romney is more a moderate; but his Religion sucks. My issue with both of these guys is this; their religion, because you have one guy who is a part of what the Bible calls, “The Great Whore of Babylon” and then you have a guy who’s a part of the biggest false Christian cult since the Roman Catholic Church. But as an protestant Christian, as a Fundamentalist Baptist, of this stripe here; both of these religions are a problem, and a big one at that! The question both of these candidates need to answer is this; of where do these two gentleman’s allegiances lie? Are they with the Roman Catholic Church or in Romney’s case, are they with the Mormon Church?

Is Romney’s plan for America one to uphold the Constitution and restore America’s greatness…. or is it to fulfill the Mormon agenda? Which can be read here and here.

Is Santorum’s plan to fulfill the Roman Catholic’s plan for America? Which can be read about here.

For all of Ron Paul’s issues; at least he is a protestant Christian; and I believe I could actually trust him in the White House. I might just for him in the primary here.

Mitt Romney pimps out Donald Trump

How Ironic:

ABC News’ Michael Falcone reports:
With just over a week to go before Michigan voters head to the polls, Mitt Romney is enlisting the help of one of his highest-wattage surrogates: Donald Trump.
The real estate mogul is preparing to spread his pro-Romney, anti-Rick Santorum message in a series of radio interviews this week on local stations from Traverse City to Detroit.
Trump’s effort begins Monday morning with an interview on the “Art Lewis Show,” on WSGW news radio in the Flint-Saginaw media market.
On Tuesday he will call into the “Ron Jolly Show” on WTCM in Traverse City. On Wednesday it’s the “Paul Smith Show” on WJR in Detroit. And on Thursday, Trump will talk to Michael Patrick Shiels, host of a drive-time radio program on WJIM in Lansing
via Donald Trump Hitting The Michigan Airwaves For Mitt Romney – ABC News.

A Wishy-Washy independent stumping for an indecisive Moderate, how quaint. An old saying, “Money looks out for money.” This is perfect example of that. I do not think that it will much help or hurt. Either Romney will bag the primary here or he will not; I seriously doubt that “The Donald” will influence that at all.

I have touched on this, in this blog posting here; But to repeat, Michigan’s largest voting bloc is the Independent voter and I am not entirely convinced that these voters are overly impressed with either Mitt Romney or Rick Santorum; at least not among the working class folk, or as they’re called “The 60k or less a year crowd.” I know that, as someone who is a working stuff, (Present Employment situation notwithstanding) I am not overly impressed with either of them really. Although, I could be very well wrong. Something just tells me, that Santorum and Mitt are going to be barking up the wrong tree around here. Especially with Santorum’s dog-whistle comments about Obama.

It remains to be seen; but I have feeling both of these guys are going to be highly disappointed.

Memo to Rick Santorum: This is not helping your cause

This is not a smart move, Mr. Santorum.

Via the Detroit News:

Washington — Rick Santorum on Sunday condemned what he called President Barack Obama’s world view that “elevates the Earth above man” and requires insurers to pay for prenatal tests that will encourage more abortions.
A day after telling an Ohio audience that Obama’s agenda is based on “some phony theology, not a theology based on the Bible,” the GOP presidential candidate said he wasn’t criticizing the president’s Christianity.
“I’ve repeatedly said I don’t question the president’s faith. I’ve repeatedly said that I believe the president’s Christian,” Santorum said in a broadcast interview. “I am talking about his world view, and the way he approaches problems in this country. I think they’re different than how most people do in America.”
The former Pennsylvania senator said Obama’s environmental policies promote ideas of “radical environmentalists,” who, Santorum argues, oppose greater use of the country’s natural resources because they believe “man is here to serve the Earth.” He said that was the reference he was making Saturday in his Ohio campaign appearance when he denounced a “phony theology.”
“I think that is a phony ideal. I don’t believe that is what we’re here to do,” Santorum said. “We’re not here to serve the Earth. The Earth is not the objective. Man is the objective.”
Obama’s campaign said Santorum’s remarks were another attack on the president’s faith by Republican rivals in a nominating contest that has grown increasingly bitter and negative.
“It’s just time to get rid of this mindset in our politics that, if we disagree, we have to question character and faith,” said Robert Gibbs, Obama’s former press secretary. “Those days have long passed in our politics. Our problems and our challenges are far too great.

I really hate to be the one to bring this out; nothing bothers me more than to have to point out the obvious. However, because I am a Lincoln Conservative, a libertarian-minded Conservative and because I happen to believe that all forms of bigotry are simply immoral, I must address this issue.

Mr. Santorum, your dog whistle racism needs to stop. This idiotic notion that President Barack Obama is not a Christian because he happens to disagree with your political stance is asinine at best. Mr. Santorum your use of the word “worldview” is troubling. Because I happen to believe that what you are actually saying is that because President Barack Obama is a man of color, because he is a black man; that somehow or another he views American differently than say yourself or even me.

My simple question to you sir is this; would you make the same statement of that nature to a Democratic Party Presidential candidate who was of the White race? I happen to believe that the answer to that very important question would be a resounding no. Because sir, it is a fact that your Party and the Conservatives that happen to reside in have been fanning the flames of an belief that because President Barack Obama is a black man and has ancestral ties to the African nation of Kenya; that somehow or another he is a communist. Further that he somehow or another loves the Nation of Kenya more than he loves the United States of America.

Mr. Santorum because I grew up on the southwest side of the City of Detroit, in the state of Michigan here, I find all of this to very mightily offensive. Furthermore, sir, I have a solemn warning to you and your campaign, and to the Republican National committee. If you do not drop this idiotic and utterly contemptible pursuit of dog whistle racism in your pursuit of the White House, you sir will lose and the Democrats will win the election in 2012.

Because there is something that you, your campaign and the Republican National Committee need to know, Michigan is a very diverse state; racially, politically and economically. Good portions of the residents of this wonderful state of ours are neither Republicans nor Democrats; many of them, like me, indentify ourselves as political independents, who usually vote for other third parties, if the candidates in the two major parties do not meet to what we feel meet our needs as citizens of this great Country of ours.

Mr. Santorum, if you continue this practice of “dog whistle” racism during this primary, you might actually succeed in defeating Mitt Romney in the primary here in Michigan. You might just also successfully be able to win the nomination of your own party. However, I assure you that you will lose the general election, not only here in Michigan, but nationally as well; because the America know when nuanced racist language is used against a black man. We knew in 1964, when the southern Democrats wanted to keep blacks in the south from being truly free and we know it now. We knew it during World War 2, when people from your own party objected to rescuing Jews from the insanity of Hitler. Sadly, some of your people in your party are still bigots of that sort.

So, please sir; stop this madness while you still can maintain control of your own message.

This is the way that politics used to be

I think that this is a great story.

Via NYT:

LAKE JACKSON, Tex. — Once there was a challenge of a softball game from the Ron Paul clan to the Mitt Romney clan. “They didn’t show up,” Mr. Paul says. “We didn’t schedule it. We really razz them about that, ‘You guys chickened out!’ ”
This is the way that politics should be today!
In a Republican presidential contest known for its angry rivalries, the Romney-Paul relationship stands out for its behind-the-scenes civility. It is a friendship that, by Mr. Paul’s telling, Mr. Romney has worked to cultivate. The question is whether it is also one that could pay dividends for Mr. Romney as he faces yet more setbacks in his struggle to capture the 1,144 delegates needed to win the nomination.
Ideological similarities among supporters of Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich suggest that if Mr. Gingrich dropped out, many of his backers would coalesce behind Mr. Santorum. But as Mr. Paul steadily collects delegates, one thing that remains to be seen is whether his affinity — at least on a personal level — for Mr. Romney could help the former Massachusetts governor as the fight drags on.
Mr. Paul, a 76-year-old congressman from Texas, sees his three Republican rivals as more or less the same politically. He can be tough on Mr. Romney, whom he describes as a flip-flopper with a dubious political core.
“He’s been all over the place on some of this stuff,” Mr. Paul said in a recent interview near his Texas home. But he seems to segregate those views from his personal feelings for Mr. Romney, whom he sees as a steady, dignified personality whose devotion to wife and family reflect his own values.

I would recommend that you head on over and read the rest of that; it is a truly great story of how two men who disagree on much and still are friendly to one another. This is the way that it was back in the days of Ronald Reagan, him and Tip O’Neil would fight like dogs during business hours and then after business hours, Tip and Ron would have a drink at the White House and discuss the days events.

Again, at the risk of sounding like a nostalgic old fogie, this is the way things were done in the olden days. When leaders were statesmen, and not the idiots we have today. We could learn much from these people of old, it is tragic that people like Ron Paul are not more followed in the way they do things. Not that I support all of Ron Paul’s policy positions, but his statesmanship is something to be admired.

By the way, yes, I did give Althouse a little grief on her blog; she is a two-bit phony, in my humble opinion. She gives Ron Paul and Mitt Romney grief for their kindness toward each other. I think Ann Althouse could learn a little about what true Conservatism is from Rep. Paul. Because it is surely not what she pawns off as Conservative; that is for sure. Sorry, but voting for a liberal socialist Democrat is not conservative, not even close.

UPDATED: Pat Buchanan is right and wrong

I will give him credit, Mr. Buchanan makes a very good point:

Is it now hate speech to restate traditional Catholic beliefs?
Documented in the 488 pages and 1,500 footnotes of “Suicide of a Superpower” is my thesis that America is Balkanizing, breaking down along the lines of religion, race, ethnicity, culture and ideology, and that Western peoples are facing demographic death by century’s end.
Are such subjects taboo? Are they unfit for national debate?
So it would seem. MSNBC President Phil Griffin told reporters, “I don’t think the ideas that (Buchanan) put forth (in his book) are appropriate for the national dialogue, much less on MSNBC.”
In the 10 years I have been at MSNBC, the network has taken heat for what I have written, and faithfully honored our contract.
Yet my four-months’ absence from MSNBC and now my departure represent an undeniable victory for the blacklisters.
The modus operandi of these thought police at Color of Change and ADL is to brand as racists and anti-Semites any writer who dares to venture outside the narrow corral in which they seek to confine debate.
All the while prattling about their love of dissent and devotion to the First Amendment, they seek systematically to silence and censor dissent.
Without a hearing, they smear and stigmatize as racist, homophobic or anti-Semitic any who contradict what George Orwell once called their “smelly little orthodoxies.” They then demand that the heretic recant, grovel, apologize, and pledge to go forth and sin no more.
Defy them, and they will go after the network where you work, the newspapers that carry your column, the conventions that invite you to speak. If all else fails, they go after the advertisers.
I know these blacklisters. They operate behind closed doors, with phone calls, mailed threats and off-the-record meetings. They work in the dark because, as Al Smith said, nothing un-American can live in the sunlight.
via The New Blacklist by Pat Buchanan.

At the risk of sounding like a snarky old coot, I will simply say this; When Barack Obama was elected President of the United States, Mr. Buchanan should have seen that the writing was on the wall and left MSNBC. Actually, the hard swerve to the hard life and its intolerance for Conservative thought, of any sort; started after Tim Russert passed away. It went into hyper-overdrive, when it was clear that Obama was going to win the election in 2008. The only person to blame for Pat Buchanan’s troubles is Pat Buchanan; the man stayed on much long after the political winds had shifted around him.

For all of the political traits that liberals and Paleoconservatives share, there happen to be some traits that they do not. Paleoconservatives and liberals share the disdain of war and Wilsonian foreign policy. Paleoconservatives and Liberals however do not share the same ideas on freedom of speech, or the sharing of ideas outside of what they, the liberals, consider mainstream. While President George W. Bush was in office, Pat Buchanan’s outside of the Conservative mainstream ideas were perfect for the progressive, anti-Bush tone that the network was taking at the time.

However, as President Bush began to fade from the relevant political discussion and when the Democrats saw that, they had someone that could actually challenge the Republican’s candidate, things changed around MSNBC and not for the good either. Without getting into rehashing of a good deal of history, I will just simply say that pretty much after 2008, Pat Buchanan began to stick out like a sore thumb and should be seen that and left for better climates; like Tucker Carlson did around the same time.

As for Mr. Buchanan’s assessment of homosexuality and the decline of the white Anglo-Saxon protestant class of people, I have one thing to say — I concur. The fact that MSNBC fired Mr. Buchanan over his positions on these two subjects is living proof that the far-leftists have overtaken the political discourse in the Democratic Party and in the progressive movement as a whole. Furthermore, the imbecilic notion that Mr. Buchanan’s assessment of the current state of the Anglo-Saxon protestant class of Americans is somehow an indication of hostility on Mr. Buchanan’s part towards Blacks, Jews or any other class of persons is moronic at best.

As for Mr. Buchanan’s Roman Catholic beliefs, which are Christian in origin, I also concur. The Holy Bible, which contains the Holy Scriptures given to us by the Almighty God Himself; is clear, in both testaments — old and new —- that the practice of homosexuality is a forbidden thing. It is the sodomite lifestyle, it is repugnant in the eyes of a Holy and Righteous God, and Christians are forbidden to partake in it, and are commanded by God Himself not to have associations with those who do. Yes, there is a good deal of Holy Scripture to back those statements up and I will provide them to anyone who doubts what I have written.

Lastly, I feel that as a libertarian-minded Conservative it is important to point out to Mr. Buchanan the following: No privately owned network is obligated to allow you to appear on their network. Free speech in this case, is not applicable. MSNBC is a privately owned network, which is backed by advertisements from private companies. Contract or not contract, MSNBC, does reserve the right to remove someone, if said companies who buy advertisements are not comfortable being associated with said person. While it might seem a bit rude for MSNBC to just drop Mr. Buchanan and void his contract, MSNBC does have the right to act in its best interests. Now, if the Government moved to silence him, I would say, sound the alarms. However, MSNBC is not the Government; they are a private media outlet. Therefore, the howling of “repression of freedom of speech” is a bit much to be honest. One thing to remember, the only place that you can be truly free to express your opinions, regardless of the content, is a site that you personally own. Nobody else is ever obligated to cater to you whims. Some people forget that, and shout, “Freedom of speech!” When, in fact, that argument is not even a valid one.

Update: This is now a Memeorandum Thread.

Update #2: Buchanan is defended by Jazz Shaw, Tim Stanley, and Andrew Sullivan?!?!?!

Video: Rep. Allen West “Government handouts world’s ‘most insidious form of slavery'”

Here is Rep. Allen West literally throwing read meat out for the Republican messes! …and making Democrats want to scream. 😛

Video:

The Story via Fox News:

Republican Rep. Allen West decried government “handouts” as the worst form of modern “slavery” during an impassioned floor speech Wednesday evening.
The freshman Florida congressman, who is black, made the remarks in commemoration of Black History Month. He used his floor speech to detail the Republican Party‘s role throughout American history in promoting equal rights and freedom for black Americans.
He said that commitment did not end after Abraham Lincoln, a Republican, signed the Emancipation Proclamation.
“Republicans have been on the frontlines of the fight for equal rights and individual manifest destiny since our party’s founding under Lincoln,” he said.
In modern times, West said, this has meant fighting to prevent black Americans “from being trapped in a permanent underclass through dependence on government handouts.” He said that fight continues despite the welfare reform of the 1990s.

He goes on to say a whole bunch of other stuff; very good speech. I recommend you watch it.