Ann Coulter has written yet another fabulous column, this one about the dilemma presented to conservatives by the seeming popularity of Mike Huckabee. Personally, I've never been a fan of Huckabee - it's been quite obvious to me that there are other candidates on the Republican side who are both more qualified and more conservative. As Huckabee continues to stick his foot in his mouth, however, it amazes me that his popularity has yet to wane.
Huckabee has run largely on his image as a Christian conservative...but that's all it is: image. He may be a Christian; I'm not going to judge his religion (though it is worth pointing out that seemingly every time Huckabee opens his mouth on religious issues he promptly sticks his foot in it). However, conservative he definitely is not. Huckabee has come down on the side of liberalism on everything from taxes to big government to the Supreme Court's decision that sodomy is a Constitutionally protected right...and when it comes to illegal immigration, Huckabee is every Democrat's dream.
Personally, I'd rather vote for Hillary than Huckabee - at least Hillary is open and transparent about her desire to turn the US into a socialist state, and her feeble attempts at religiosity on the campaign trail fall flat enough to merit a chuckle or two...but if the election comes down to Hillary vs. Huckabee, I'm definitely going third-party.
Huckabee is not what the Republican party needs, and he definitely is not a conservative candidate. The Republicans need to get a clue: Giuliani is failing in Iowa for a reason: he isn't conservative enough. Huckabee has remained strong in the polls for a reason: the media is his friend (go figure: the lib media will befriend a lib Republican).
As the primary season edges ever closer, it is important for voters to stop listening to what the media is feeding them and start looking into what the candidates actually stand for. Huckabee is a liberal who is trying to use his religious views to mask himself as a conservative. Anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear should be able to see through Huckabee quite easily: he's the wrong choice for conservatives, the wrong choice for Republicans, and the wrong choice for America.
Monday, December 31, 2007
RIAA: Recording Industry Taking It Too Far
The RIAA has been aggressively trying to curtail the illegal downloading of music for some time now, and with the success of paid-download services such as iTunes, it seems that they have at least met with some measure of success in their pursuit. Personally, I see nothing wrong with that: there is such a thing as intellectual property, and recording artists should be paid for their work (even though the vast majority of today's music is produced by talentless "musicians" and isn't really worth all that much).
Now, however, the RIAA has taken it too far. The industry has filed suit against a Scotsdale, AZ man for transferring music from his CDs onto his computer. Personally, I think this is hogwash: the industry won their suits against people downloading music illegally, and now they're trying to double their money: get people to buy their CDs, and then force people to pay to download mp3s to use on their iPods or mp3 players.
Once I've paid for a CD, it is my property. I should be able to transfer it however I wish, be it to computer, tape, or even vinyl if I so desire. By taking this step, the RIAA has lost any modicum of support I may have given them in their pursuit to curtail illegal downloading, because now their true purpose has come through: it's all about greed.
I'm not all that familiar with copyright laws, but personally, I don't think the RIAA has a legal leg to stand on in this case...and if, by some bizarre chance of luck the RIAA wins its suit, I think a little civil disobedience is in order, and we should bring back the days of illegal file-sharing networks.
Now, however, the RIAA has taken it too far. The industry has filed suit against a Scotsdale, AZ man for transferring music from his CDs onto his computer. Personally, I think this is hogwash: the industry won their suits against people downloading music illegally, and now they're trying to double their money: get people to buy their CDs, and then force people to pay to download mp3s to use on their iPods or mp3 players.
Once I've paid for a CD, it is my property. I should be able to transfer it however I wish, be it to computer, tape, or even vinyl if I so desire. By taking this step, the RIAA has lost any modicum of support I may have given them in their pursuit to curtail illegal downloading, because now their true purpose has come through: it's all about greed.
I'm not all that familiar with copyright laws, but personally, I don't think the RIAA has a legal leg to stand on in this case...and if, by some bizarre chance of luck the RIAA wins its suit, I think a little civil disobedience is in order, and we should bring back the days of illegal file-sharing networks.
Saturday, December 29, 2007
Noonan Sizes Up The Campaign
Peggy Noonan has written an excellent column this week sizing up the presidential primary this far, and offering some great insight into each candidate. Noonan's slogan should ring true for each and every American who believes in their nation: Reasonable Person for President.
According to Noonan, the candidates who are both reasonable and experienced are: Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, Mitt Romney, John McCain, Duncan Hunter, Fred Thompson, and Bill Richardson. Noonan classifies Barack Obama as a reasonable candidate, but lacking in the experience needed to be a good president - too much potential for the young politician to treat the presidency as a stage for political theater.
Hillary Clinton won the distinction of being classified as unreasonable, and personally, I agree with her assessment. During his presidency, Bill Clinton showed himself to be a political opportunist, triangulating on issues, playing on opinion polls to do whatever would make him most popular at time. Hillary, during her time as First Lady, Senator from New York, and her current presidential campaign, has shown quite clearly that she is willing to do the same, playing both sides against whatever will be most advantageous for her quest for political power.
The positive side to this is that as the campaign drags on, more and more Americans can see her opportunism for what it is.
The drawback is that this seems to draw Democrats to Obama, whose youthful charisma makes him look like a very good choice.
As I see it, the problem with this campaign is twofold: it has drawn on way too long, to the point that many people are just sick and tired of it, and the campaign has largely become media-driven, with the news media choosing who will be the frontrunners and who will remain obsolete. This still does not prevent any given candidate from surging in the polls or from shoving a foot down their throat, but giving the media this kind of power in a presidential campaign is inherently dangerous, especially considering how polarized the media is - even the supposedly conservative Fox News Channel has been found to be left-of-center, and the media's leftist bias definitely effects which candidates get reported on more often.
Of all of the candidates that are out there, Duncan Hunter and Fred Thompson still look like the best choices to me...and while conservative candidates don't seem to do very well in the polls, I'm still holding out hope that the voters will know better than to continue America's march to the left. Many Republicans have grown tired of seeing their party become more and more liberal - the problem is that a conservative party has not yet risen far enough to effectively oppose the Democrats. All is not lost, though: I have faith that the American people will not give in to the appeal of leftist bribery politics that feed the power-hungry but do little to advance our nation.
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Religion and Politics: A Disgusting Combination
As Christmas approaches, the presidential campaign has taken a rather repulsive turn: each candidate is trying to out-Christian the others.
Huckabee, the former Baptist minister, has the appearance of a Christian, but his behavior during the campaign has (in my opinion) shown him to be divisive and judgmental, trying to make grandiose statements about who may or may not be Christian enough to be president. Romney seems the most sincere about his faith - most Mormons I've known are very good people, even the bad Mormons. In my opinion, this is a huge point in Romney's favor, even if I don't agree with all of his policies.
Obama and Hilary have joined the fray, as well, with Obama producing a commercial geared solely toward portraying him as a strong family man (which he may be - as a conservative, I haven't payed much attention to his campaign). Hilary's new Christmas campaign commercial accentuates her willingness to bribe Americans for their votes via welfare & government-provided health care, but she has made a point to give speeches in churches...as if giving a speech in a church could somehow prove how Christian she is.
Fred Thompson looks like a very good candidate to me - I've been very impressed by him every time I've heard him interviewed...but unfortunately his campaign has been pretty stagnant.
Two things disgust me about this current campaign: politicians playing the religion game, putting on a veneer of spirituality in order to woo voters, and campaigns playing the minority game in order to win sympathy from the minority voting bloc.
Educated voters should not be impressed when candidates wear their religiosity on their sleeves, because most of the time it's nothing but a hoodwink: politicians playing the field to coerce ignorant people into voting for them. The minority game is the same scam: elect Hilary because she's a woman, elect Obama because he's black...but who cares about the fact that their policies would effectively ruin the nation's economy and send us spiraling into a liberal fascist state, with enforced equality: all citizens equally poor and oppressed.
Huckabee, the former Baptist minister, has the appearance of a Christian, but his behavior during the campaign has (in my opinion) shown him to be divisive and judgmental, trying to make grandiose statements about who may or may not be Christian enough to be president. Romney seems the most sincere about his faith - most Mormons I've known are very good people, even the bad Mormons. In my opinion, this is a huge point in Romney's favor, even if I don't agree with all of his policies.
Obama and Hilary have joined the fray, as well, with Obama producing a commercial geared solely toward portraying him as a strong family man (which he may be - as a conservative, I haven't payed much attention to his campaign). Hilary's new Christmas campaign commercial accentuates her willingness to bribe Americans for their votes via welfare & government-provided health care, but she has made a point to give speeches in churches...as if giving a speech in a church could somehow prove how Christian she is.
Fred Thompson looks like a very good candidate to me - I've been very impressed by him every time I've heard him interviewed...but unfortunately his campaign has been pretty stagnant.
Two things disgust me about this current campaign: politicians playing the religion game, putting on a veneer of spirituality in order to woo voters, and campaigns playing the minority game in order to win sympathy from the minority voting bloc.
Educated voters should not be impressed when candidates wear their religiosity on their sleeves, because most of the time it's nothing but a hoodwink: politicians playing the field to coerce ignorant people into voting for them. The minority game is the same scam: elect Hilary because she's a woman, elect Obama because he's black...but who cares about the fact that their policies would effectively ruin the nation's economy and send us spiraling into a liberal fascist state, with enforced equality: all citizens equally poor and oppressed.
Saturday, December 22, 2007
Reid's Flip-Flop
Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader and liberal wacko extraordinaire has now officially reversed his position on the Iraq troop surge (now let's count the days until he changes positions yet again).
Earlier this year, in April, to be exact, Reid denounced the surge, saying that it would never work. Reid also publicly stated that the surge was a failure...before all of the troops had even been able to reach Iraq.
Now Reid has reversed his position...because maybe the troop surge wasn't such a bad idea, after all.
From News Hour with Jim Lehrer:
The truth is that the troop surge has been a great success. The situation in Iraq has never been perfect - not even close...but since the surge, troop deaths are down, civilian deaths are down, and real progress is being made - so much progress that even Harry Reid has to admit that the surge has been a good thing.
Earlier this year, in April, to be exact, Reid denounced the surge, saying that it would never work. Reid also publicly stated that the surge was a failure...before all of the troops had even been able to reach Iraq.
Now Reid has reversed his position...because maybe the troop surge wasn't such a bad idea, after all.
From News Hour with Jim Lehrer:
The president said, "Let's send some more troops over there, and that will give the Iraqis the time to take care of themselves." We sent other troops over there, and there are a lot of reasons the surge certainly hasn't hurt. It's helped. I recognize that.Ever the partisan, Reid's admission was colored with denunciations of President Bush and proselytizing for liberal spending programs...but for someone as partisan as Harry Reid, even a partial reversal is extremely significant.
The truth is that the troop surge has been a great success. The situation in Iraq has never been perfect - not even close...but since the surge, troop deaths are down, civilian deaths are down, and real progress is being made - so much progress that even Harry Reid has to admit that the surge has been a good thing.
Saturday, December 01, 2007
Maybe Liberalism Really Is A Mental Disorder...
A recent Gallup poll shows that, across the board, Republicans report much better mental health than independents or Democrats.
The survey, conducted over the last four years, shows that no matter the demographic break-down, Republicans report that their mental health is "excellent" or "good" in higher numbers than the Dems. Maybe this explains all of the whining and crying whenever a Republican wins an election or a conservative bill is passed by legislators...it also reminds me of a story after the 2004 Presidential election about large numbers of liberals seeking counseling for post-election depression. After the '06 election, there was no mention of conservatives running to their shrinks because the Republicans lost their congressional majority...so this, combined with the Gallup poll, leaves only one logical conclusion: Republicans are just more sane than Democrats.
As the Republican party moves farther and farther to the Left, though, I wonder just how long this trend will last......
The survey, conducted over the last four years, shows that no matter the demographic break-down, Republicans report that their mental health is "excellent" or "good" in higher numbers than the Dems. Maybe this explains all of the whining and crying whenever a Republican wins an election or a conservative bill is passed by legislators...it also reminds me of a story after the 2004 Presidential election about large numbers of liberals seeking counseling for post-election depression. After the '06 election, there was no mention of conservatives running to their shrinks because the Republicans lost their congressional majority...so this, combined with the Gallup poll, leaves only one logical conclusion: Republicans are just more sane than Democrats.
As the Republican party moves farther and farther to the Left, though, I wonder just how long this trend will last......
This Is The Peaceful Religion
This story has been developing over the last few days, but it has now taken a most bizarre (yet predictable) turn:
A British teacher who was working in the Sudan was arrested not long ago on charges of insulting Islam. Her crime: she allowed the students working in her classroom to name a teddy bear, and the name they chose was "Mohammed." As it turns out, one of the students in her class was named Mohammed, and the class decided to name the bear after him. Unfortunately for Gillian Gibbons, however, this fact makes no difference to the Islamofascists in the Sudan.
Gibbons has been sentenced to 15 days in jail and subsequent deportation, but that is not enough for the radicals, who took to the streets in protest, saying that Gibbons should be killed. This is the true nature of Islam: complete intolerance. Why the liberals defend this religion is beyond me. First it was riots over cartoons, now it's mobs protesting over an elementary school class naming a teddy bear. Gibbons has been moved to a secret location by the Sudanese government in order to protect her from the mob.
Oh, and for all of the liberal wackos out there who say that Christianity is just as dangerous as radical Islam, try going to Vatican City or any evangelical Protestant church with a teddy bear named "Jesus," and see if you get the same results as Gibbons (who, as it turns out, may have just been the victim of a "vindictive school secretary").
My guess is, we won't see any uprising of moderate Muslims in Europe and the U.S. denouncing the actions of their fascist brethren. CAIR and similar organizations are all too willing to defend the actions of Imams acting like terrorists on a US airliner, but they don't really want to improve "American-Islamic relations." They want the kind of Islamic law that is practiced in the Sudan to come here. Anyone with any modicum of common sense should be able to see that Islam is dangerous...Muslims in the Middle East are always providing us with new examples.
A British teacher who was working in the Sudan was arrested not long ago on charges of insulting Islam. Her crime: she allowed the students working in her classroom to name a teddy bear, and the name they chose was "Mohammed." As it turns out, one of the students in her class was named Mohammed, and the class decided to name the bear after him. Unfortunately for Gillian Gibbons, however, this fact makes no difference to the Islamofascists in the Sudan.
Gibbons has been sentenced to 15 days in jail and subsequent deportation, but that is not enough for the radicals, who took to the streets in protest, saying that Gibbons should be killed. This is the true nature of Islam: complete intolerance. Why the liberals defend this religion is beyond me. First it was riots over cartoons, now it's mobs protesting over an elementary school class naming a teddy bear. Gibbons has been moved to a secret location by the Sudanese government in order to protect her from the mob.
Oh, and for all of the liberal wackos out there who say that Christianity is just as dangerous as radical Islam, try going to Vatican City or any evangelical Protestant church with a teddy bear named "Jesus," and see if you get the same results as Gibbons (who, as it turns out, may have just been the victim of a "vindictive school secretary").
My guess is, we won't see any uprising of moderate Muslims in Europe and the U.S. denouncing the actions of their fascist brethren. CAIR and similar organizations are all too willing to defend the actions of Imams acting like terrorists on a US airliner, but they don't really want to improve "American-Islamic relations." They want the kind of Islamic law that is practiced in the Sudan to come here. Anyone with any modicum of common sense should be able to see that Islam is dangerous...Muslims in the Middle East are always providing us with new examples.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)