Reuters/Ipsos poll: Romney and Obama tied

This is no surprise, Romney is fresh off a Convention and Obama is about to go into one. What will be thing to watch for, is if Obama gets any sort of bounce after the Convention.

With the Democrats set to nominate Obama for a second term this week in Charlotte, North Carolina, the race to the presidential election on November 6 is tight with 45 percent for Obama and 45 percent for Romney among likely voters, the survey found.
The findings were from the seventh day of a rolling online poll conducted for Reuters by Ipsos to judge voters’ attitudes around the political conventions.
Obama campaigned in Boulder, Colorado, the state where he accepted the Democratic presidential nomination four years ago, while Romney was off the campaign trail in New Hampshire, about to begin preparations for three debates with Obama in October.
via Obama, Romney tied as Democrats go into convention | Reuters.

There are some saying that there will be no bump for Obama after the Convention. But other say that there will be. It will be interesting to watch. I do feel however, that because of the trappings on this Convention and because of the lousy economy; people are going to look at Obama and think, “you have got to be kidding.” It is no wonder that people are fleeing the Democratic Party for the party of fiscal sanity.

Mitt Romney pushes back against critics who say he is ignoring the war

This is another one of those stupid liberal and somewhat neoconservative attacks.

Via Fox News:

Mitt Romney continued to take flak from Democrats over the weekend for not mentioning war in his nomination acceptance speech.
But the Republican campaign was quick to point out what critics seemed to be ignoring – Romney spent the day before his convention speech visiting the American Legion conference in Indianapolis, where he talked exclusively about national security and America’s veterans. President Obama, by contrast, addressed that conference in the form of a three-minute video aired at the conference site.
“Now that was an invitation that President Obama declined,” Romney senior adviser Eric Fehrnstrom said in an interview Sunday. “Governor Romney thought it was a privilege to be speaking to people who had served so nobly.”
Though Romney did not mention the war in Afghanistan on Thursday night, he focused on that issue, as well as the veterans who are returning home, in his American Legion speech.

Hmmmmm… Perhaps it is the fact that Mitt Romney is mindful of stuff like this here?

Via Reuters:

(Reuters) – U.S. Forces in Afghanistan said on Sunday they have suspended training new recruits to the Afghan Local Police (ALP) amid a spike in the number of insider attacks which are damaging trust between Afghans and their allies.
The ALP is a militia, set up two years ago by U.S. Forces, in villages where the national police force — a separate body trained by NATO — is weak. The ALP has been beset by allegations of abuse and widespread corruption.
Rogue shootings have killed 45 NATO-led troops so far this year, 15 last month alone, despite the coalition taking steps to try prevent them, such as requiring foreign soldiers to carry loaded weapons at all times.
In a statement, U.S. Forces said they will temporarily suspend training of about 1,000 new ALP recruits while they re-vet members currently belonging to the 16,000-strong force.
“We believe this is a necessary step to validate our vetting process and ensure the quality indicative of Afghan Local Police,” it said.

Perhaps Mitt Romney is not wanting to be a President who continues to fight a war that simply cannot be won? Maybe Romney will call it a victory in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

We shall see on that, I hoping for the best on that subject. But I am preparing for the worst.

Follow up: On that story about Romney’s staffers

It seems maybe my concerns were a bit unfounded.

Looks more like slime attack. Go read. I haven’t always agreed with the author, in fact; I do not link to him often at all. However, when he is right, he is right.

I feel a bit better, but I still think we should vet our people a bit more. I also think Romney’s people should vet staffers a bit more too.

Irony of the Day

Oh the Irony here!

It seems that Jonathan S. Tobin, is not too happy that someone dared to tip a sacred now and actually write something critical of Ronald Wilson Reagan.

Check it out, the first paragraph:

There is a longstanding tradition on the political left to attack contemporary conservatives by comparing them to the right’s leaders in the past. That means that Republicans who were reviled by liberals during their lifetimes are sometimes treated kindly in retrospect because it serves the political purpose of diminishing the reputations of their successors. But in some precincts of the left, bashing Ronald Reagan never goes out of style.
via Smearing Reagan Never Goes Out of Style « Commentary Magazine.

Here is where the irony is at, this Magazine will go out of its way to defend Ronald Reagan; but has absolutely no problem smearing Ron Paul at all. However, considering whom this magazine caters to, this should not be a great surprise at all. However, the irony is not lost, not on this American Conservative. Again, let me clear; Ron Paul was not perfect and no saint, not in the least. However, when one posts complaints of smearing, when one’s publication smears a true-American patriot; one must be held accountable for those actions.

Not to mention, it is quite funny to point out. 😆

Karl Rove is making friends as always

Yes, the title is sarcastic in nature. It seems that old “turd blossom” is causing Conservatives to lose their minds again.

Phyllis Schlafly and Mike Huckabee are not happy with him at all.

It seems that Rove made a very crass joke about Todd Akin, who did make a bit of an idiotic statement about rape. Anyhow, Schlafly is not happy at all, from her Eagle Forum blog:

Karl Rove has made himself toxic to Republicans by his incredibly offensive and dangerous statement suggesting the murder of Congressman Todd Akin of Missouri. Any candidate or network who hires Rove will now be tarnished with this most malicious remark ever made in Republican politics.
Just imagine if someone had made that statement about Barack Obama. The Secret Service would go on Red Alert and you can bet that the author of that remark would be in jail by now. As quoted by a Businessweek reporter and now on the internet, Rove in Tampa told some 70 big donors to his Super PAC, American Crossroads, that every attendee should apply pressure to “sink Todd Akin” and force him out of the Senate race for which Missourians had nominated him. Then Rove said that if Akin were “found mysteriously murdered, don’t look for my whereabouts.”
This stunning attack on Akin is now reported as a joke. Sorry, Karl, it isn’t funny to joke about murdering a Congressman.
Rove has disliked Akin ever since Akin was one of the principled members of the U.S. House who voted against George W. Bush’s extravagant expansion of Medicare when the vote was called at 5:53 am in November 2003. Akin is a man of principle who doesn’t cave in to political pressure, so he’s not Rove’s kind of politician.
Rove tried to excuse his obscene joke by saying he would not have said it if he had known a reporter was in the room. That makes his statement worse! Is murder the kind of secret political advice Rove gives to Republican donors and candidates who hire him?
A private phone call by Rove to Akin to sort of apologize does not erase the public offense. At the very least Rove should make a public apology. But even that can’t wipe out his gross political mistake.
Karl Rove is an embarrassment to the Republican Party. We don’t want any more of his advice in secret briefings or publicly on Fox News. Missourians don’t want politicians from other states telling us who to run for the Senate.

Ouch. Now before any dismisses her as some angry old bitty, Schlafly happens to be one the very “old school” Pre-Reagan-era Conservatives. She goes back to the Barry Goldwater era and she does carry some influence in the Republican Party.

Even Mike Huckabee was not to happy with it either, while not as harsh as Schlafly, he also spoke out against Rove’s remarks:

If making a foolish remark about rape is bad, then making a joke about a United States Congressman being murdered is as bad or worse since Akin didn’t wish anyone to be raped, just spoke awkwardly and incorrectly about the likelihood of pregnancy in the event of a rape. In light of the attempted assassination of Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, the remark was disturbing.
[…]
….Todd erred, apologized, and we need to help him win, not convince ourselves he can’t. Karl erred, apologized, and we need to treat him in the way we want Todd Akin to be treated. If Todd is continued to be alienated and Karl doesn’t suffer the same fate, then I will encourage all the activists I can to spend all their time, money, and effort in Missouri. If the party doesn’t want us, then I guess they don’t need us. Akin will. Janet and I are sending him the maximum we can under federal law.

To me, there is nothing more awesome, than watching the Conservative grassroots stand up to the Republican Party establishment. Especially, people like Karl Rove; who is the perfect example of what was wrong with the Republican Party between 2000 and 2008. The sad thing is, that there are indications that the Republican Party might be making the same mistakes again. I would hope that this would not be the case; but it does look that way.

I will say this, if the Republican Party and Mitt Romney do go the way of big Government Conservatism again; this blogger will be there, fighting them every step of the way. I will write about it here on this blog. I will not let them get away with it, you can count on that.

Video: Alex Jones on Ron Paul’s campaign manager

I happened to have found this on Facebook.

I know what I said earlier about Ron Paul.

Alex Jones’s delivery and acting aside; the information is interesting.

Watch it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18PgaZzJDzE

I had heard about this before, but didn’t realize the extent of it.

Interesting indeed.

Defending real Christianity from Daniel McCarthy’s smug papist idiocy

I have quite a number of sites in my RSS reader, one of which is the decidedly anti-Semitic — to the point of the publisher of the attending an occupy AIPAC demonstration —The American Conservative. In it today, I happen to see a blog posting by a one papist Daniel McCarthy, in which he basically accuses the Protestant Christian world of supposedly “loosing it’s mind.”

He then goes to blather on about how much more vastly superior the liturgical version of Christianity and the Roman Catholic Church is to the knuckle-dragging Bible Believing Protestant Christians. Which, in this writer’s opinion, says a bit, about this man and the condition of his heart. Furthermore, it does reenforce my belief that Roman Catholics are not Christians at all. I know that might bother some, but I have Bible scripture to back that up, as I am sure you know.

My direct response to Mr. McCarthy is: I suppose Priests, which are forbidden in the Bible —defending the abusers of children, as being victims, is the sign of how much more superior your papist doctrine and supposed “Christianity” is to ours? Furthermore, I suppose that the Roman Catholic Church Inquisition towards various people, including my Baptist forefathers was a sign of the vastly superior papist doctrine and so-called “christianity” to ours? Also, I suppose that the systematic sexual abuse of young children, and coverup and justification by the Roman Catholic Church and its so-called “priests” is proof positive of the vastly superior papist doctrine and so-called “christianity” of the Roman Catholic Church? I really would love to see Mr. papist McCarthy answer these questions.

You see this, is why I have such an issue with so-called Christian bloggers, especially ones who are papists. The Bible has a word for it, it is Highmindedness. (It is defined here.) It is the very silly idea that somehow, his Church, which, by the way, is riddled with false doctrine; is somehow vastly superior than anyone else. This is why I steadfastly refuse to ever own or write at a “Christian Blog.” For the record, this blog is not a Christian Blog at all. It is a Conservative political blog, that happens to be owned by a Christian. This is because I will be the first to tell you, that we Independent Fundamentalist Baptists are far from perfect, as recent events have proven. Although, I will be the first to say, that there were many of we Fundamental Baptists, including myself, who saw that recent coming from a mile away.

In closing: While the title of this blog posting might suggest otherwise; this should not be taken as an ad hominem attack against Mr. McCarthy. But rather a defense of Protestant Christianity and Fundamentalist Christianity from those who have an agenda against it. A perfect example of that agenda is in the writings of Mr. McCarthy. Mr. McCarthy and those of his ilk have tried to discredit protestant Christianity for years and this is proof of that. Well, someone has to stand up for those who choose not to submit to the utterly Satanic and without Christ Roman Catholic Church and it may as well be me.

The folly of the liberal left

Please take time and drink in the stupidity that is Kevin Drum and his idiotic liberalism:

I don’t write about national security and civil liberties issues as much as I should. Partly this is because I find much of it too grim to bear. But it’s also because it seems so hopeless: there’s really no significant difference between the two major parties on most of these issues, and therefore no real chance of any of them being changed. There are differences at the margin — Obama banned torture and Eric Holder at least tried to institute civilian trials for terrorist suspects — and during campaign season even modest differences become magnified. But really, there’s a pretty broad bipartisan consensus on all the big stuff: drones and assassinations and secrecy and military intervention and the ever increasing role of surveillance in our society, just to name a few items.
via It’s Official: No One Will Ever Be Prosecuted for Bush-Era Torture | Mother Jones.

Maybe it is because no one really actually did anything illegal and if legal boundaries were pushed, it was because there were actually people wanting to protect this Country from terrorist attacks. However, Liberals cannot be bothered with that; because they are too defending those who want to kill us. Yes, Abu-ghraib prison was horrible thing and quite the isolated incident, in which the people who committed those crimes were tried, convicted and served their time. Now, of course, those people are going to say, “Oh yes! I was told to do what I did!” Do you really think those idiots are going to say, “Yes, I was a treasonous a–hole and I admit that.” — honestly? One would think the smart answer to that would be no. But then again, we are talking about Liberal Democrats here.

Which brings me to my real point of this posting: This is precisely why I stopped voting for the Democratic Party. Because of the acute anti-Military attitude exhibited by them. This piece quoted above is nothing more than a nice way of saying that our own military are nothing more than “battlefield terrorists.” Something that has been expressed by the liberal left before. This attitude is also found in the some of the libertarian and strict Paleoconservative circles too; which is why I am not too friendly with them.

When it comes to foreign policy, I tend to follow the Reagan line. Military only as a last resort — peace through strength, not domination of the World by military might and not irresponsibility by foreign policy disengagement. I believe that Wilsonian foreign policy is wrong-minded and has caused more harm, that it has ever caused good. The outcome simply is not worth forcing western style of Government and Politics on those who do not want it. Both Iraq wars proved it, Vietnam proved it, Korean War proved it, World War I, which eventually caused World War 2 — proved it.

However, I do believe that defending the Republic is very important. I also happen to believe, that if we are going to fight wars, that we should actually declare a war, and do it according to the Constitution. This is something that I actually agree with Ron Paul on. However, the problem with the Ron Paul and his followers, and also with strict paleoconservative crowd is that they conflate or at least confuse the terms “defending the Republic” and “defending empire.” There is a fine line between the two and Ronald Reagan walked it very well. Ron Paul and the strict paleoconservatives, not so much. To be fair, Bush blew it too.

Not to mention that a good many of the Paleoconservatives have an issue with the idea of a Jewish state, not to mention some of them just outright hate Jews with a passion. While I might have an issue with some of the actions of some of the American Jews and their supporters. I have no issue at all with the Jewish State at all. This is one of my big issues with the paleoconservative right, and it is why I tend to distance myself from most of them. It is okay to be against Wilsonian foreign policy; but to use nuanced Anti-Semitic rhetoric to denounce it does nothing for that cause.

Now the difference between Kevin Drum and the strict paleoconservative is this; Kevin Drum believes that big Government is just fine, while the Paleoconservatives find big centralized Government to be terrible. Which is why Paleoconservatives will never be in the mainstream of Conservative politics; between the hatred of Jews and their state — and the unrealistic foreign policy — it is just something that is not ready for prime time.

The only reason, however, that the liberal left and their policies even remain mainstream, is because of the lip service and handouts that they give to the minorities in this Country. Otherwise, the Democratic Party would have been marginalized long ago. Housing meltdown and failed economics be damned; there people who will always support the Democrats and the left, because of what they can get them.

It is a truly a sad thing; but very true.

For the Record: Ron Paul will never be satisfied

This is why Ron Paul is not the GOP’s candidate for President of the United States:

Rep. Ron Paul said GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney’s convention speech left him “very skeptical” that the country’s economic policies will change.
“The speech is what I would expect,” the Texas Republican said Friday on Bloomberg Television’s “In the Loop.” “I remain very, very skeptical of hearing anything that will change the course of history. We have a debt problem. We have a spending problem, but how many things did he list to cut?”
Not enough, he said. The former GOP presidential candidate said the “most disturbing” part of America’s fiscal problems is the Federal Reserve, which Romney did not focus on during his speech.
“There was no talk of the Federal Reserve,” said Paul, advocating the elimination of both the Fed and fixed interest rates. “As long as we have the concept,” he later added, “we will linger a long time because debt is a problem and no one is willing to face up to it and I certainly didn’t hear that last night.
via Mitt Romney speech leaves Ron Paul ‘skeptical’ – Kevin Cirilli – POLITICO.com.

Ron Paul; for all the good things about him, this is one of his many flaws — besides his unrealistic foreign policy —- is that he is just too ideologically rigid. The only way that Ron Paul and his many legion of fans would be happy, is if the Federal Reserve were closed, the military were dismantled and America went back to gold standard. Of course, all of those things are just unrealistic at best.

He followed up those remarks with this bit idiotic nonsense:

So what’s his take on the Republican Party?
“Well, it is not my party. I do not like politics at all,” Paul said. “I think both parties are Keynesian economists and support positions that I do not like. So, the party, in many ways is irrelevant.”

Which is precisely why Ron Paul will never be President of the United States of America or thankfully anything else in the Republican Party ever again. I mean, if the man cannot tell the difference between an Marxist and an Republican; then he needs to get the heck out politics for good. because it is quite obvious that he is not fit to serve in any sort of capacity.

The Bottom line is:

**Vote for and support Mitt Romney — He might not be perfect, but he is much smarter than Ron Paul!**

Videos: Mitt Romney’s convention speech video and speech video

I have to admit, I liked both the convention pre-speech video and the speech itself.

The intro video was quite moving. One of the moments that stands out, is the moment when Romney talk about love. He sighs deeply and says, “You know, I just do not understand love.” This hit home with me, greatly. Only difference with me is, the young Lady that I fell in love with just was not in the cards for me to marry or God’s will, if you want to put a religious shine on it. So, I let her go and let it go. But I know that feeling of being in love with someone. It is a deep emotion and I’ve experienced it in my day.

Here’s the intro video: (via HotAir.com)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_cGyPwt5UI&hd=1

The convention speech was great, even Reagan-like. Of course, there are some who are serial gripers and complainers; who did not like it. But for me, as an Christian, as a Conservative American; it hit right at home.

Here it is:

I believe that if this speech and the talks about Romney’s willingness to help others does not convince voters, that he is the real deal and not a rich stiff — then nothing will — and quite frankly, I really do not give a remote flip if we get their votes or not. Anyone that is stupid enough to buy the lies of the liberal left and vote for a Marxist President after this one’s horrible failures; they get the Government that they deserve.

In closing:

Tag: Opinion