Tag: Republicans

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

Oh Wonderful….: The Economy is screwed to hell, worse than originally thought!

Hope and Change……and Unemployed:

The recent unemployment numbers have undermined confidence that we might be nearing the bottom of the recession. What we can see on the surface is disconcerting enough, but the inside numbers are just as bad.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics preliminary estimate for job losses for June is 467,000, which means 7.2 million people have lost their jobs since the start of the recession. The cumulative job losses over the last six months have been greater than for any other half year period since World War II, including the military demobilization after the war. The job losses are also now equal to the net job gains over the previous nine years, making this the only recession since the Great Depression to wipe out all job growth from the previous expansion.

Here are 10 reasons we are in even more trouble than the 9.5% unemployment rate indicates:

  • – June’s total assumed 185,000 people at work who probably were not. The government could not identify them; it made an assumption about trends. But many of the mythical jobs are in industries that have absolutely no job creation, e.g., finance. When the official numbers are adjusted over the next several months, June will look worse.
  • – More companies are asking employees to take unpaid leave. These people don’t count on the unemployment roll.
  • – No fewer than 1.4 million people wanted or were available for work in the last 12 months but were not counted. Why? Because they hadn’t searched for work in the four weeks preceding the survey.
  • – The number of workers taking part-time jobs due to the slack economy, a kind of stealth underemployment, has doubled in this recession to about nine million, or 5.8% of the work force. Add those whose hours have been cut to those who cannot find a full-time job and the total unemployed rises to 16.5%, putting the number of involuntarily idle in the range of 25 million.
  • – The average work week for rank-and-file employees in the private sector, roughly 80% of the work force, slipped to 33 hours. That’s 48 minutes a week less than before the recession began, the lowest level since the government began tracking such data 45 years ago. Full-time workers are being downgraded to part time as businesses slash labor costs to remain above water, and factories are operating at only 65% of capacity. If Americans were still clocking those extra 48 minutes a week now, the same aggregate amount of work would get done with 3.3 million fewer employees, which means that if it were not for the shorter work week the jobless rate would be 11.7%, not 9.5% (which far exceeds the 8% rate projected by the Obama administration).
  • – The average length of official unemployment increased to 24.5 weeks, the longest since government began tracking this data in 1948. The number of long-term unemployed (i.e., for 27 weeks or more) has now jumped to 4.4 million, an all-time high.
  • – The average worker saw no wage gains in June, with average compensation running flat at $18.53 an hour.
  • – The goods producing sector is losing the most jobs — 223,000 in the last report alone.
  • – The prospects for job creation are equally distressing. The likelihood is that when economic activity picks up, employers will first choose to increase hours for existing workers and bring part-time workers back to full time. Many unemployed workers looking for jobs once the recovery begins will discover that jobs as good as the ones they lost are almost impossible to find because many layoffs have been permanent. Instead of shrinking operations, companies have shut down whole business units or made sweeping structural changes in the way they conduct business. General Motors and Chrysler, closed hundreds of dealerships and reduced brands. Citigroup and Bank of America cut tens of thousands of positions and exited many parts of the world of finance.

Job losses may last well into 2010 to hit an unemployment peak close to 11%. That unemployment rate may be sustained for an extended period.

via Average length of unemployment highest since 1948. – WSJ.com.

So much for “The One” fixing the economy. Oh, right; he misread it. Looks like this Blogging gig get might be my only job for a long time to come.  The Left is now spinning saying it will never recover.

Here’s ol’ Floppy ears talking about it:

Others: Hot Air, Pajamas Media, QandO, The Strata-Sphere, Stop The ACLU and Balloon Juice

An Aunt's Grief

(H/T MRC)


Watch CBS Videos Online

I wonder, what would Lew Rockwell say now?

Pssst! Hey Liberals! Sarah Palin knows what she's talking about!

As I am sure you all know Sarah Palin wrote in the Washington Post, an Op-Ed about the purposed Cap and Trade legislation.

Government Palin Writes:

There is no shortage of threats to our economy. America’s unemployment rate recently hit its highest mark in more than 25 years and is expected to continue climbing. Worries are widespread that even when the economy finally rebounds, the recovery won’t bring jobs. Our nation’s debt is unsustainable, and the federal government’s reach into the private sector is unprecedented.

Unfortunately, many in the national media would rather focus on the personality-driven political gossip of the day than on the gravity of these challenges. So, at risk of disappointing the chattering class, let me make clear what is foremost on my mind and where my focus will be:

I am deeply concerned about President Obama’s cap-and-trade energy plan, and I believe it is an enormous threat to our economy. It would undermine our recovery over the short term and would inflict permanent damage.

American prosperity has always been driven by the steady supply of abundant, affordable energy. Particularly in Alaska, we understand the inherent link between energy and prosperity, energy and opportunity, and energy and security. Consequently, many of us in this huge, energy-rich state recognize that the president’s cap-and-trade energy tax would adversely affect every aspect of the U.S. economy.

There is no denying that as the world becomes more industrialized, we need to reform our energy policy and become less dependent on foreign energy sources. But the answer doesn’t lie in making energy scarcer and more expensive! Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America’s economy.

Job losses are so certain under this new cap-and-tax plan that it includes a provision accommodating newly unemployed workers from the resulting dried-up energy sector, to the tune of $4.2 billion over eight years. So much for creating jobs.

In addition to immediately increasing unemployment in the energy sector, even more American jobs will be threatened by the rising cost of doing business under the cap-and-tax plan. For example, the cost of farming will certainly increase, driving down farm incomes while driving up grocery prices. The costs of manufacturing, warehousing and transportation will also increase.

Of course, as if right on cue, every liberal in America is laughing at her and is saying that she is an idiot; and that she is trying to stay in the spotlight and so forth. Well, guess what? Not too long ago; on March 5, 2009. My own home paper, The Detroit News, wrote a similarly written editorial, basically saying the SAME THING. The Article itself is now offline, and you have to pay to get it. But luckily for me; I blogged about it.  The Article says and I quote:

President Barack Obama’s proposed cap-and-trade system on greenhouse gas emissions is a giant economic dagger aimed at the nation’s heartland — particularly Michigan. It is a multibillion-dollar tax hike on everything that Michigan does, including making things, driving cars and burning coal.

The president is asking for a system of government limits on carbon emissions. The right to emit carbon would be auctioned off to generate revenue for more government spending programs.

The president’s budget projects receipts totaling $646 billion through 2019 from the sale of these greenhouse gas permits.

The goal, according to the president’s budget outline, is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions such as carbon dioxide to 14 percent below 2005 levels by 2020.

Doing so will drive up the cost of nearly everything and will amount to a major tax increase for American consumers.

Such a tax will hit the Midwest particularly hard, which is why House Minority Leader John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, told the New York Times, “let’s just be honest and call it a carbon tax that will increase taxes on all Americans who drive a car, who have a job, who turn on a light switch, pure and simple.”

The carbon tax will be paid by energy companies, manufacturers and public utilities, who will pass the cost on to their consumers. Michigan will be especially targeted. It gets 60 percent of its electric power from coal plants, and the state’s economy is still reliant on heavy manufacturing such as car and truck assembly and auto parts production.

Michigan will lose as carbon tax money is shifted to states with a greater presence of high-tech and service businesses.

The proposed tax would take effect in 2012 and has the very real potential to throw the nation back into recession, if indeed the expected recovery has arrived by then. It’s impossible to raise costs for such basics as manufacturing and energy production by more than half a trillion dollars over a decade and not have the effects felt across the economy.

The nation’s gross domestic product contracted at an annualized rate of 3.8 percent in last year’s fourth quarter — the worst economic record in nearly three decades. Is this really a good time to be talking about a carbon tax? How will such talk impact investment decisions?

Obama promises to use some of the revenues for tax relief for certain workers and some of the rest for subsidies for alternative energy. But that won’t make up for the damage this huge new tax will do to the economy, especially in Michigan.

So, maybe, perhaps maybe, Sarah Palin is not as stupid as these liberals want to make her out to be. At least, she right on point about this Cap and Trade Legislation. It would raise taxes and be a job killer for Michigan and yes, for the rest of the Country.

Others, Yes, Including idiot liberals who are mocking her: The Fix, The Atlantic Business Channel, The New Republic, The Huffington Post, Washington Wire, The Daily Dish, The Hill’s Blog Briefing Room, Ezra Klein, Boston Globe, Hot Air, Right Wing News, PERRspectives, PoliGazette, The Strata-Sphere, Wake up America, Moe Lane, The Note, The Daley Gator, Democratic Strategist, Zandar Versus The Stupid, NY Daily News, The Politico, The Swamp, NewsBusters.org, No More Mister Nice Blog, Gawker, Gathering of Eagles: NY, Sister Toldjah, YID With LID, Macsmind, Classical Values, GOP 12, Stop The ACLU, TBogg, American Power, Real Clear Politics, Green Inc., Gateway Pundit, Cold Fury, PoliBlog, Balloon Juice, Latest Open Salon Blog and Left in the West

Liz Cheney open to run for office in the future

This comes via Washington Times:

[podcast]http://media.washingtontimes.com/media//audio/2009/07/13/LIZCHENEY.mp3[/podcast]

It happens towards the end of the interview. But it Liz Cheney has left the the door open for a run for office; now as to which office, she did not really get into that part. I think she would make a great President, myself. Palin would make a great vice President. Palin would have, by then, honed herself well enough to get to know the beltway.

As for the rest of the interview, I, for the most part have to agree with Liz here. The Democrats are committing Political Suicide by even thinking about going after Bush Administration officials. Because there are top Democrats that knew about this program, don’t let anyone fool you. They knew; and if Holder does this, there will be a political blood bath.

Quote:

The daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney said Monday that running for political office is on her horizon.

“It’s something I very well may do,” said Elizabeth “Liz” Cheney, a lawyer and State Department appointee who has worked on two Republican presidential campaigns.

Ms. Cheney, 44, has emerged as one of the strongest defenders of the effectiveness and legality of Bush-Cheney policies on enhanced interrogation methods. More recently, she and her father have become two of the most outspoken critics of President Obama’s position on terrorism and other national security issues, which has led Republicans to consider her a strong candidate for national political office.

Between her and Sarah Palin; I believe Democrats would not have a prayer in hell.