The A.D.H.D. of the Conservative blogsphere

I cannot believe I am using that title, seeing I have A.D.H.D. and take meds for it daily.

I hate to always be the wolf to break away from the pack. But sometimes common sense has to start somewhere…. Many of my fellow right wing Bloggers are howling about this one:

In a reflection of a legislative strategy that has left no stone unturned, President Barack Obama on Monday called on like-minded bloggers to help his administration keep the heat on lawmakers to pass health care reform.

“It is important just to keep the pressure on members of Congress because what happens is there is a default position of inertia here in Washington,” the president said during an invitation-only conference call. “And pushing against that, making sure that people feel that the desperation that ordinary families are feeling all across the country, every single day, when they are worrying about whether they can pay their premiums or not… People have to feel that in a visceral way. And you guys can help deliver that better than just about anybody.

via HuffPo: Obama Calls On Bloggers To Keep Health Care Pressure On Congress (AUDIO).

Some of the Republican/Conservative Bloggers have some seriously short memories or something.  Because Bush did the same thing, when he was in office. See here, here, here, and here. So, while it might be cool to attack Obama for his policies, it just seems mighty silly to attack Obama for something that the Bush Administration did themselves.

Nice try guys, but this one is a bit silly IMHO.


David Brooks writes a whopper

No, I am not talking about Burger King. :giggle:

I am referring to his Op-Ed in the New York Times Today:

It was interesting to watch the Republican Party lose touch with America. You had a party led by conservative Southerners who neither understood nor sympathized with moderates or representatives from swing districts.

They brought in pollsters to their party conferences to persuade their members that the country was fervently behind them. They were supported by their interest groups and cheered on by their activists and the partisan press. They spent federal money in an effort to buy support but ended up disgusting the country instead.

It’s not that interesting to watch the Democrats lose touch with America. That’s because the plotline is exactly the same. The party is led by insular liberals from big cities and the coasts, who neither understand nor sympathize with moderates. They have their own cherry-picking pollsters, their own media and activist cocoon, their own plans to lavishly spend borrowed money to buy votes.

This ideological overreach won’t be any more successful than the last one. A Washington Post-ABC News poll released Monday confirms what other polls have found. Most Americans love Barack Obama personally, but support for Democratic policies is already sliding fast.

It is truly an interesting article to read and I ask that you click on the link and go read it for yourself. I also notice that many Conservatives are taking issue with it as well.

Dr. Melissa Clouthier, whom I gently ribbed once this week already; writes something rather intelligent this time around:

So, President Bush talked God with a cowboy dialect but his actions were all moderation. Hello? AIDs spending in Africa? School reform with Teddy Kennedy? Amnesty? And all these things made the federal government bigger (or would have), more powerful and invasive. The Bush presidency wasn’t about restraint and limiting government power–traits I associate with conservatism.

David Brooks and the Beltway elites are delusional. If President Bush governed conservatively, then David Brooks would put nearly every conservative person I know into the Right Wing Extreme camp. No wonder Barack Obama sounded good to him. Obama moderate? Is he insane?

Good point!  Bush was about as Conservative, as I am a damned Communist. Especially when it came to Foreign Policy; The man was a Wilsonian to the core. (That, is what Liberals call a Neo-Con) Iraq proved that. Bush could have cared less about the WMD’s. He just wanted to take out Saddam and finish the job his daddy started, that is what that war was all about. (Some Conservatives and or Republicans deny this, but it is the damned truth…..) The problem was, that he had that serial fuck up; Donald Rumsfield running the damn Defense Department! The Liberals are on a witch hunt to put persons related to the Iraq War in Jail. Well, they can start with Rumsfield. He’s the fucking tool that caused the problems in Iraq.  It took Rumsfield being ousted and Robert Gates being put in; for that little situation to be fixed properly. Too bad it took 4000+ of our finest men to finally get someone’s attention in the beltway, that Rumsfield had to go. The damned idiots. :pissedoff: :reallypissed:

As for Obama being a moderate. Yeah, and I am a Russian Communist. 🙄 I suppose Brooks considers Taxing us into a damned hole that we might never get out off; Moderate. Like hell Obama is. I suppose that David Brooks would consider me a “Right Wing Extremist”.

Dan Riehl Says:

This is all great. But if Brooks is so smart, where the hell was he during the campaign when the rubes knew what to expect?

Dan, David Brooks was too busy giving Obama a Blowjob in he back of his limo slobbering all over himself at the fact that a black man was going to actually be President. Barack Obama was seen as a novelty item, by the Conservative establishment in the beltway. Not to mention the media. However, as we have all seen, that novelty is quickly wearing off and many people; from the Right to the far left are beginning to see this man for what he really is. Just another lying politician.

Others: The Moderate Voice, Wake up America, , Althouse, Riehl World View, Le·gal In·sur·rec· tion, The TrogloPundit, Right Wing News, Macsmind,

Quote of the Day

That is diversity, is it not?

And who is the least represented minority in America on the U.S.  Supreme Court? Not Catholics, who have two-thirds of the seats. Not   Jewish-Americans, who though 2 percent of the population, have 22 percent of the seats. Not African-Americans, who at 13 percent of  the population have 11 percent of the seats. And not Hispanics, who at 15 percent of the population will have 11 percent of the seats.

No, the most underrepresented group of Americans — nay, the most unrepresented minority, the largest group of our fellow citizens   never to have had one of its own sit on the U.S. Supreme Court in the modern era is — Evangelical Christians.

They are more numerous than Catholics, who at 24 percent of the population have 67 percent of the seats on the court. And, for Republicans, they are a far more reliable voting bloc than Catholics — not to mention Hispanics, Jews and African-Americans, all of whom voted somewhere between two to one and 20 to one for Obama.

Bush II tried to close the Evangelical gap with Harriet Miers, but conservatives opposed her as unqualified.

Republicans should now be searching for highly qualified Evangelical Christian judges and constitutional scholars, women as well as men — and, when falsely accused of being “anti-Hispanic” or “anti-woman,” ought to reply: “What do you liberals have against white Christians, man or woman, not to have named one in 45 years?”

Everybody can play the diversity game

Sad News: Radio Host, Author, Writer, and Christian; Alan Stang dies at 80

Some sad news to report:

Author and radio host Alan Stang, a longstanding champion for conservativism and outspoken opponent of communism in the U.S., died yesterday. He was 80 years old.

Stang began his career in communications as an editor for Prentice-Hall before moving on to radio at NBC in New York City. The award-winning journalist also worked as one of Mike Wallace’s first writers before Wallace became a fixture of “60 Minutes” and went toe-to-toe in the ratings against Larry King, when the two hosted competing radio shows in Los Angeles. Stang boasted that despite broadcasting on a station of significantly less power, his program drew twice as many listeners as King’s.

Most recently, Stang hosted “The Sting of Stang” show on the Republic Broadcasting Network.

“My dad spent his whole life fighting for this country,” Stang’s son Jay told WND. “He saw something to fight for, just like every one of us. He never gave up, even when he had to fight for his own life instead. His treasure was truly in heaven. He loved Jesus Christ with all his heart, and he loved his family. He was able to hold his first two grandchildren in his arms and look them in the eye. He is happy now and has no more pain or sorrow. He is with his savior.”

via Author, radio host Alan Stang dies at 80 – WorldNetDaily

I will admit it, I did not always agree with this man. In fact, there were times, when I would read his stuff and I would cringe at some of the things he said. But, then I’d smile and think to myself; he reminds me; of myself. Stang’s writings were a mixture of Conservatism, Conspiracy Theory and Christianity. Some of it, I enjoyed, and some; I just read.

May Brother Allan rest in the Peace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the Lord Jesus be with his fine family.

Rest in Peace Allen; Me, Chuck Baldwin, Freedom’s Phoenix and everyone who stands for Freedom….. We will take it from here.

You can read Mr. Stang’s writings here.

Quote of the Day

As the confirmation hearings of Supreme Court Justice nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, proceeded last week, one man could not understand why not one of the seven Republican senators on the Senate Judiciary Committee would question Sotomayor about her criminal activities. It’s understandable no Democrat would ask Sotomayor to explain herself since each and every Democrat in the U.S. Senate is so ethically bankrupt, they would seat Satan on the high court if it would further their agenda. Their only concern for a justice on the highest court in the land is gender and ethnicity; these pusillanimous hucksters go for future votes. The law and truth be damned.

But, the silence by Sessions, Graham, Coburn and the others is beyond perplexing. Bill O’Reilly remarked last week at the end of the hearings that the Republicans will vote to confirm Sotomayor possibly to “garner favor” with Latino voters for the next election. Sounds like a good excuse as any for their cowardice in not taking Sotomayor to the box on Dr. Cordero’s evidence.

I first became aware of Dr. Richard Cordero’s documentation a week ago. As with any other investigation, one has to spend a great deal of time studying all the evidence and Dr. Cordero has it. It took about nine hours of reading to get through his evidence, i.e., this 236 pages laying out the fraud. This humble man is like so many other Americans who believe in the rule of law, only to find out that some are above the law due to their political clout. In my email exchanges with Dr. Cordero, and when he was a guest on my radio show last week, I could detect no political bias, only a desire to stop the confirmation of Sonia Sotomayor.

From the Dept. of "Why am I not surprised?"

Shocking, but not surprising…:

Chalk this up as Stupid Palin Meme of the Week:

In a July 12th hit piece published on the front page of the New York Times, reporters Jim Rutenberg and Serge Kovaleski (assisted by Kim Severson and William Yardley in Alaska) made the following claim:

Friends worried that she appeared anxious and underweight. Her hair had thinned to the point where she needed emergency help from her hairdresser and close friend, Jessica Steele.

“Honestly, I think all of it just broke her heart,” Ms. Steele said in an interview at her beauty parlor in Wasilla, the Beehive.

This tidbit was seized upon and has bounced through the Internet and blogosphere — a Google search for “Palin hair thinned” now returns nearly 400,000 hits. Lefties such as Eleanor Clift seized on it as some kind of meme that Palin can’t handle stress.
Well, Jessica Steele, proprietor of The Beehive and the Palin friend and hairdresser quoted by the NYT, is outraged at the claim and making it known through a forum immediately available – her Twitter feed

via Conservatives4Palin.com: Palin Hairdresser: NYT Was Lying About “Hair Thinning” Claim.

Of course the New York Times is going to lie about Sarah Palin. They lie about everyone that they fear. They did it to George W. Bush, They did it John McCain and now they are doing to Sarah Palin.

But I do ask one question; does not Sarah Palin have this coming? After all, it was Sarah Palin and John McCain who allowed themselves to be interviewed by every liberal news network out there; but refused to come onto Fox News Channel, at all.  Was it not Sarah Palin and John McCain who came on to Saturday Night Live and allowed themselves to be openly mocked by the liberals?

The way I see it, if you run with the wolves; you should not complain or protest, when they decide to devour you.

Now the Palin-bots are going to try attack me for saying she deserves this; because she is a woman; which is so typical of these so-called “Feminist Conservatives”. But that is NOT what I am saying at all. I am saying that when you play the liberal game; or as some would call it, if you “Jump through their hoops”, you pay the price.

Sarah Palin should have never agreed to any of the “Liberal hoop jumping” during the election, this is why they are attacking her now.

Others: Don Surber, Gateway Pundit and 24Ahead

Oh Please!

Now the Neo-Conservative Republicans are saying that people like me, who voted for Bob Barr have no morals.

Q&O lays it out in his typical well-done manner:

Bob Barr pulled all of 511,324 votes. Statistically that’s 0% of the electorate. Had every Bob Barr voter voted for John McCain, he’d have ended up with 58,854,995 votes instead of 58,343,671 to Obama’s 66,882,230.

Apparently Clouthier believes that libertarians are a wholly owned subsidiary of the GOP and due a righteous lecture for their lack of support.

It may be time for a little reality check for the good doctor.

A) Obviously if every vote Barr got had gone to McCain, it wouldn’t have increased McCain’s final count by even a percentage point. So the attempt to blame your abysmally poor GOP candidate’s abysmally poor showing on Barr voters is technically a non-starter.

B) The reason the GOP sucked so badly in the last election has absolutely nothing to do with Bob Barr and/or libertarians.  It had to do with how poorly your party governed.  Like most libertarians I haven’t voted for a Republican since Reagan. And frankly what happened to the size of government under Reagan is one reason why. Bush compounded the problem (Medicare Part D? “No Child Left Behind”?) and the eternally squishy McCain promised more of the same.

C) The only reason libertarians even somewhat identify with your party is because it sometimes pretends to be concerned about less spending and smaller government. Unfortunately, as I imply above, the GOP mostly just talks the talk and rarely walks the walk.

D) The GOP picked John McCain, not libertarians. John McCain was the worst of all worlds and your party gave him the nod. He was a candidate who had once been considered as a VP pick for John Kerry for heaven sake! He proved he was an enemy of the 1st Amendment with his campaign finance bill. His definition of “compromise” was to give the Democrats what they want.

E) Libertarians don’t owe the GOP a damned thing. You want libertarian support?  Then quit whining and lecturing and earn it! Put up candidates that actually do what you claim to want to do in terms of spending and the size of government. Yeah, that’s right – cut spending drastically and reduce the size of government radically and then you can start asking why libertarians aren’t supporting the GOP. Then you’ll have grounds to do so. But until then – we owe you nothing.

Barack Obama sits in the White House not because of Bob Barr or the libertarian vote. He sits there because the GOP has completely and totally failed to live up to its claimed philosophy and its word for decades. John McCain’s nomination told libertarians all they needed to know about the lack of seriousness within the GOP to remedy that situation.

If the GOP wants libertarian votes, then it had better mend its ways. We don’t do “tents” and we don’t do “plantations” and we don’t belong to the GOP. You want us, you’d better do what it takes to get us – and you’re not even close right now

[….]

Fixing the GOP is your job, not ours – you need to quit trying to outsource it. Libertarians have no desire to be a part of the GOP per se because there is enough not to like to keep us away. But libertarians will support a GOP that commits itself to the principles of less spending, smaller government and less government intrusion. But only when the GOP actually does something about them – find and run a candidate who actually believes in those principles and elect Republicans to Congress who will help he or she act on those principles.

Until then libertarians aren’t going to support the GOP. You can call it “flopping around the edges” or whatever you wish, but that won’t change the fact that until the GOP actually does the hard work of recreating itself in alignment with its stated principles it can’t expect support from libertarians just because the GOP thinks the Democrat’s candidate is worse than theirs.

Well put. This is why I just do not believe that women have any place in politics whatsoever. I really wish the Doctor would do something lady-like and very Conservative; like go have a baby or something, and leave the politics to the men folk and more importantly; the adults.

Further more, when the Republican Party starts acting like it’s name, instead of the Socialist-lite, that it has been since George W. Bush took office, then I might be inclined to vote for them. Otherwise, I will continue to vote Libertrian on a National Level and Republican on the State level.

Others: The Moderate Voice, Riehl World View, Ace of Spades HQ, AmSpecBlog and The Other McCain

Please note: this posting is a replacement for one that I pulled, because I posted when I was angry. Something I should not do. Apologies to those who might have seen it. My feelings about Dr. Melissa Clouthier being a clueless oaf, remain unchanged.

Video: The Southern Avenger: Ron Paul and Jim DeMint Take on the Fed

Synopsis: Texas Congressman Ron Paul and Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina are gaining bipartisan support by going the extra mile in their efforts to audit the Federal Reserve.

Sounds like a good idea……But!

The Founder of the Largely Neo-Conservative Owned Free Republic, writes the following, While I think it is great. I have some problems with it myself. I will quote an underline the problem areas:

Here is our recourse as declared by our Founding Fathers:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

It cannot be denied that the central government has become destructive of our unalienable rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness and our rights to live free. The government is no longer responsive to we the People. They have stretched and shredded the constitution to the point that they have illegally seized for themselves virtually unlimited powers over the citizens and act as if we have no rights and no powers of our own. They are acting without our consent.

Our Founders established that when our government becomes destructive of our rights then it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

We have reached the point where the government’s long train of abuses and usurpations has achieved absolute Despotism, therefore it is our right, it is our duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for our future security.

Therefore, We the People of America choose to exercise our right to throw off and alter the abusive government by peacefully recalling and removing from office the President of the United States, the Vice President of the United States and all U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives effective immediately.

Okay first off; why does it have to peacefully? We did not separate from Great Britain peacefully. It took a war, and people were; gulp, killed. So, why are all of the sudden the Conservatives becoming peace-nicks? Just a thought, I am not advocating violence; just trying to make a point here.

The next wonderful little issue that I have with this article is this:

Our first unalienable right is the right to life. Protecting Life and Liberty shall be of paramount importance to our central government. Roe v Wade and all congressional acts, regulations, court opinions allowing legalized abortion or the taking of innocent human life are hereby rescinded, overruled, repealed, nullified and voided. Life is fully protected by the U.S. Government.

Now this is where I am going to get into trouble with the Pro-life, Right to life, Nazi Republicans.  I just do not believe that the Federal Government has the right to tell a woman what she can and cannot do with her body. What these so-called “Pro life” Zealots call the protection of the unborn life. I call the unconstitutional exertion of Federal Governmental power. Abortion is and always should be a State Governmental issue; it never,ever should be a Federal Government issue. One cannot have it both ways. Either you believe in limited Government or you do not. Either you believe that the Federal Government has NO RIGHT to controls one’s movements, life or property; or you believe it has the right to control ALL of your life, movements and property. These Republicans who speak out of both sides of their mouths are speaking a language that borders of a bi-polar disorder. The reason ROE v WADE was decided like it was; was because it was determined that the Federal Outlawing of the practice of Abortion was unconstitutional. I am afraid, as a federalist, that I agree with that decision. Not in the grounds that I support abortion; because I do not support such ungodly practice, but rather on the grounds of Constitutionality and because of my personal convictions towards a centralized Government. When the Government supposedly protects, it is exerting powers over the people. That is centralized Government and I oppose it in ALL of its forms. If people do not want to have an Abortion, they should be able to CHOOSE NOT to have an Abortion. It simply boils down to this. When the United States Government has to “Protect”, it automatically assumes that “We the People” are not smart enough to choose the right thing. That my friends flies in the face of the founding principles of what this Nation was founded upon.

The rest of this article is border bellicose and simply aspirational in nature. But it is interesting reading.

The Liberals, of course, are going to have fit about it. Because they believe in a socialistic form of Government, which is basically a Communist-lite form of a Government. Keith Olbermann will most likely feature it in his “Head-exploding” Worst person in the World segment.

Others: Little Green Footballs, Right Wing Nut House, and Macsmind

ACU Offers support for a price, Democrats rejoice; But! Democrats do the same thing….

Well, Maybe a little worse. But anyhow…Here’s the quote:

The American Conservative Union asked FedEx for a check for $2 million to $3 million in return for the group’s support in a bitter legislative dispute, then the group’s chairman flipped and sided with UPS after FedEx refused to pay.

For the $2 million plus, ACU offered a range of services that included: “Producing op-eds and articles written by ACU’s Chairman David Keene and/or other members of the ACU’s board of directors. (Note that Mr. Keene writes a weekly column that appears in The Hill.)”

The conservative group’s remarkable demand — black-and-white proof of the longtime Washington practice known as “pay for play” — was contained in a private letter to FedEx , which was provided to POLITICO.

The letter exposes the practice by some political interest groups of taking stands not for reasons of pure principle, as their members and supporters might assume, but also in part because a sponsor is paying big money.

In the three-page letter asking for money on June 30, the conservative group backed FedEx. After FedEx says it rejected the offer, Keene signed onto a two-page July 15 letter backing UPS. Keene did not return a message left on his cell phone.

via Exclusive: Conservative group offers support for $2M – Mike Allen – POLITICO.com.

Video via Politico:

Without missing a beat, the Democrat/Liberal bloggers all jumped up at once and said, “Ho Ho! See??!?! The Conservative are in the bed with BIG BUSINESS!”

….and the Democratic Party is without fault and never commits acts of dishonesty, right? Well, Not so much. As the Politico’s Glenn Thrush points out: (H/T to HotAir.com)

Three House Democratic leaders who were whipping members on the climate change bill gave tens of thousands in campaign cash to party moderates around the time of the 219-212 vote on June 26, according to Federal Election Commission records.

It’s impossible to tell if that torrent of cash was an attempt to schmear wavering Democrats — or just part of the usual cash dump made by leaders on the eve of the June 30 quarterly fundraising deadline.

Majority Whip Jim Clyburn (D-SC) doled out $28,000 to reps who eventually voted yes on June 24, two days before the big vote — on a day when House leaders were doing some heavy-duty arm-twisting.

Clyburn recipients who voted for the bill included a who’s-who of battleground district Dems: Steve Driehaus, D-OH ($2,000); Martin Heinrich, D-NM ($2,000); Suzanne Kosmas, D-Fla. ($4,000); Betsy Markey, D-Colo. ($2,000); Carol Shea-Porter, D-NH ($2,000), Baron Hill, D-Ind. ($2,000); Alan Grayson, D-Fla. ($2,000); Leonard Boswell, D-Iowa ($2,000); Jim Himes, D-Conn. ($2,000);  Mary Jo Kilroy, D-OH ($2,000); Kurt Schrader, D-Ore. ($2,000); Jerry McNerney, D-Calif. ($2,000) and Tom Perriello, D-Va. ($2,000).

On the other hand, Clyburn also gave at least $14,000 to Democrats who voted no despite his pressure: Mike Arcuri, D-NY ($2,000); Marion Berry, D-Ark. ($2,000); Bobby Bright, D-Ala. ($2,000); Chris Carney, D-Penn. ($2,000); Chet Edwards (D-Tx.), Travis Childers , D-Miss. ($2,000); Parker Griffith, D-Ala. ($2,000) and Harry Mitchell, D-NM ($2,000).

The same pattern held true for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who gave $4,000 to yes-voting Ohio Democrat Zack Space and the same amount to no-voting Chris Carney.

House Energy and Commerce Henry Waxman gave at least $16,000 to yes-voters on June, 25, FEC records show.

A Waxman campaign spokesman said the payouts were part of the usual “end-of-quarter activity.”

Ken Spain, communications director of the National Republican Congressional Committee emails this response:

“If this was a concerted effort by the Democratic leadership to purchase votes for Nancy Pelosi’s national energy tax at the eleventh hour, then it is unconscionable at best and corrupt at worst. The sad fact for those Democrats who were seemingly bought and paid for, is that it will take a lot more money than they received to defend such an atrocious vote.”

Of course, the Democrats right away sent Glenn a list of Republicans; who supposedly have done the same thing. Mostly vulnerable Republicans who may lose their seats in the 2010 election. (But of course!)

The point of this is, both of these parties are inherently corrupt and both need a good cleaning out and need new faces and new leadership; preferably ones that cannot be bought.

Others, on both sides of the fence: The Huffington Post, Michelle Malkin, Outside The Beltway, Right Wing News, Think Progress, Zandar Versus The Stupid, Firedoglake, Hot Air, The Note, Gawker, The Volokh Conspiracy, MoJo Blog Posts, Balloon Juice, Weekly Standard, Riehl World View, Washington Monthly, Democracy in America, Salon, Reason, The Corner, Newshoggers.com, The Atlantic Business Channel, Vox Popoli, Michael Calderone’s Blog, Say Anything, Eschaton, Conservatives4Palin.com and The Washington Independent