February 2008
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
« Jan   Mar »
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
2526272829  

Month February 2008

Entries 10 Total

The Danger of Barack Obama

Feb 26, 08 1:46 AM

I couldn’t help but notice that in the last three debates, Barack Obama has indeed played the aggressor in constantly reminding America the bad choice Hillary made by voting to go to war.  He asserts that the war has “diverted attention from Afghanistan” and is happy to remind Americans that it was; after all, Al-Queda that killed 3,000 on our soil. 

His views really are no different than Rosie O’Donnell’s or any other left-wing kook that seem to think that terrorism was born in the mountain-cracks of Afghanistan.  He doesn’t even acknowledge the 19+ years of attacks we endured from Muslim fanatics preceeding 9/11.  How do stop that problem?  Moreover; the last time I checked, Bush had rounded up most of Al-Queda’s top men.

Since McCain’s latest run-ins with the NY Times and the same Democrats in Congress he worked so hard to impress all those years with Bills like McCain-Feingold, some of you will be happy to know that I am warming up to him finally.  I just may support him if this keeps up – but my stipulation of a good V.P. still stands.

Still though, it’s important as Americans to watch all the debates – as I have been – even during this horrific tax season I am having.  And if you’re paying attention, you will see that 4 years of Obama will me fifty times worse than four years of Hillary.

Read more on Barack’s Glass House

Comments (9)

A Nuclear Conflict Of Interest

Feb 25, 08 6:03 PM

elbaradei.jpg 

This one has always been in the back of my mind. Nah.  It’s been at the front of my mind.  I don’t want to sound un-PC.  But I will. When you put someone named Mohammed ElBaradei in charge of the IAEA (International  Atomic Energy Agency) and charge them with investigating Iran’s nuclear activities – what do you expect?

Hurl your accusations of racism or nationalism or whatever at me, but not before you read this article from the Wall Street Journal that simply confirms what I have believed aboutMr. ElBaradei all along.  ElBaradei is a fraud who exhibits anti-Western and anti-Israeli tendencies. 

Mr. ElBaradei’s report culminates a career of freelancing and fecklessness which has crippled the reputation of the organization he directs. He has used his Nobel Prize to cultivate an image of a technocratic lawyer interested in peace and justice and above politics. In reality, he is a deeply political figure, animated by antipathy for the West and for Israel on what has increasingly become a single-minded crusade to rescue favored regimes from charges of proliferation.

Mr. ElBaradei assumed the directorship on Dec. 1, 1997. On his watch, but undetected by his agency, Iran constructed its covert enrichment facilities and, according to the 2007 U.S. National Intelligence Estimate, engaged in covert nuclear-weapons design. India and Pakistan detonated nuclear devices. A.Q. Khan, the Pakistani nuclear godfather, exported nuclear technology around the world.

Why trust this man?  He has shown no propensity to curb third-world nuclear proliferation anywhere on the globe, much less in Iran.  Yet someone hands him a Nobel prize and declares him a demi-god?  More likely that was done because of his opposition to the US and their attempts to keep maniacs like Ahmadinejad from achieving nuclear capabilities.  ElBaradei is a Muslim sympathizer.  His record speaks for itself.

The IAEA director seems intent on undercutting Security Council diplomacy. Just weeks after President George Bush toured the Middle East to build Arab support for pressure on Tehran, Mr. ElBaradei appeared on Egyptian television on Feb. 5 to urge Arabs in the opposite direction, insisting Iran was cooperating and should not be pressured. And as he grows more and more isolated from Western powers intent on disarming Iran, Mr. ElBaradei has found champions in the developing and Arab world. They cheer his self-imposed mission — to hamstring U.S. efforts to constrain Iran’s program, whether or not the regime is violating its non-proliferation obligations or pursuing nuclear weapons.

Yeah.  Sorry.  Muslim sympathizer.  He is an apologist for Islamist regimes like Iran and a protector of any other tin-pot dictatorship that antagonizes the US and the West with threats of nuclear weapons.  I want to know who the hell put this guy in charge of the IAEA in the first place.  He is biased, has a political agenda and does not serve his office or the international community well.  It’s time to “can” ElBaradei before it’s too late.

Comments (2)

Olbermann Declares “End is Near” for Ann Coulter

Feb 25, 08 2:24 AM

Keeping with the issues as well as they always do, liberals and Olbermann are fixated on Ann Coulter’s visit to a supermarket last week where her credit card was rejected (reason never reported).

This of course is the billionth time Olbermann has made Coulter the “Worst Person/Best Person in the World.”

Signs that Coulter’s end is near: her credit card was rejected and a liberal Newspaper characterized her in a negative manner.  (Gee that’s never happened before!)

Signs that Olbermann’s career is already over: Making Ann Coulter the “Worst/Best Person in the World” more times than the number of viewers your show gets.

Comments (10)

What’s Good for the Goose is Bad for the Moderate

Feb 25, 08 12:05 AM

mccainfeingold.jpg 

After a couple of spirited chats on finance reform here at gayconservative.org, I am happy to report that McCain gets first-hand experience of what happens when you “moderately” work with far-left nuts like Feingold.

In an article released tonight titled Democrats Seek FEC Probe of McCain, we see what happens years later after pandering to the left:

The national Democratic party wants campaign finance regulators to investigate whether Sen. John McCain would violate money-in-politics laws by withdrawing from the primary election’s public finance system.

McCain, who had been entitled to $5.8 million in federal funds for the primary, has decided to bypass the system so he can avoid spending limits between now and the GOP‘s national convention in September.

“John McCain poses as a reformer but seems to think reforms apply to everyone but him,” Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said Sunday

If McCain were prohibited from withdrawing from public financing, he would be severely limited in his campaign spending for the next six months. Under campaign finance rules, he would be allowed to spend only $54 million; as of the end of January, his campaign had already spent nearly $50 million.

I’m still waiting to see the good side of “moderate.”

The bright side?  At least McCain will have time to ponder this now before selecting his VP.

Comments (11)

I Donated!

Feb 22, 08 6:33 PM

I donated today. 

Nah.  Not blood.  I’m a gay male, remember?

I donated a few bucks to John McCain today.  And you know why? 

I donated because this “hit piece” in the New York Times was the shoddiest, slimiest piece of so-called reporting I’ve seen in a while.  This garbage actually didn’t even deserve the title of “journalism” even though the bar for journalism has been lowered substantially in the last couple of decades.

Go read the piece.  I won’t even to bother to recount it here except to say that the NYT threw out innuendos about McCain having an affair with a female lobbyist a decade ago without the slightest bit of proof.  They didn’t even claim that McCain had an affair.  They just threw out some buzzwords about a lobbyist that would lead one to assume that “something might have happened.”  It’s disgusting yet predictable.

When you have the likes of Rush Limbaugh actually excoriating this rubbish, you know something is wrong.  I love Rush, but I know it hurt him to defend McCain.  Of course, he also admonished John for getting too close with the MSM.  I can’t disagree there.

It doesn’t matter who would have claimed the GOP mantle.  You can count on the NYT to be there to attempt to sink them.  For those of you who have doubts, be assured – the NYT and their ilk are out to destroy the GOP.  John McCain was naive to assume otherwise.  Maybe he has learned his lesson now.

In the meantime, this BS from the Times has enraged a lot of conservatives and made many of them sympathetic to McCain.  If the point of this crap-of-an-article was to turn public sentiment against the Senator, then they have failed miserably.  Wonder why newspaper readership is declining? 

I don’t.

Comments (16)

A Perspective from the “Rightest” of the “Far Right”

Feb 21, 08 1:52 AM

Pro-lifers like to ask, “How many Einsteins have we lost to abortion?” I ask: How many Reagans have we lost to campaign-finance reform?Ann Coulter – 02/20/2008

Ironically she released her weekly column tonight after I wrote my last post.  She thoroughly explains Reagan’s process of getting elected and proves that with McCain-Feingold, Ronald Reagan would have never been elected.

Forward it on so people can be informed – you will never hear this from the mainstream media. 

Take the information and fact-check it if you wish before using it but we need to be informed to make change necessary for 2012.  We need to start now. 

Leave a Comment

The Year the NY Times Re-Defined Conservatism

Feb 20, 08 6:55 PM

It boggles me; really, why some continue to perceive John McCain as a viable choice to run this country.  Aside from being a ripe 71 years old who is not changing anytime soon, the man has as much ability to tick off the far-left as Teddy Kennedy. 

He teamed up with Teddy Kennedy to create a Bill that would give amnesty to 20 million illegal aliens.  He seemed to not be too far apart from Kennedy’s positions that day.

He teamed up with Russ Feingold to create a Bill that reformed campaign finance.  Basically this rule wiped out anyone who was not a Hollywood star, a raging liberal, someone endorsed by Oprah, a Republican that liberals liked, or someone with instant name recognition like Hillary Clinton.  His positions weren’t that far off from Feingold’s that day.  (Come to think of it, perhaps we all know now why he supported Campaign Finance Reform in the first place!)

He teams up with congressional members of the far left to cry about dropping water down the noses of terrorists.

He teams up with members of the far left to denounce and demand that we shut down Guantanamo.

The NY Times loves him because he supports these crazy positions.

But one thing they love more is watching alleged Republicans call someone “far right” simply because we aren’t allowing the media to select our candidate for us.

McCain IS NOT G.O.P.  No matter his outcome, we lose the White House anyway because our principles will not be going with him.

All of the above positions that McCain has sold us out on are NOT positions that are important to the “far right!”  They are positions important to “Americans!”

Just get used to President Barack….

  • Much like McCain, he was funded by George Soros
  • Much like McCain, he opposes water-boarding
  • Much like McCain, he wants illegals to have amnesty
  • Much like McCain, he criticizes the war
  • Much like McCain, he wants to shut down Guantanamo
  • Much like McCain, he is loved by the NY Times

But unlike McCain, he was endorsed by Oprah.

That’s our future, people.

When Democrats don’t show as much fear of our Presidential candidate as we do with theirs – then we really may as not have a candidate to begin with.  We really have four bad years ahead of us.

Amazingly though, the same voters who supported Ronald Reagan and his positions 25 years ago are now members of the “far right.”

A category I will gladly rest in if that’s what it takes.

The NY Times can make that claim and anybody else can. 

I am a Republican and McCain is not my candidate.

Comments (18)

Escaping From My Escape?

Feb 20, 08 6:29 PM

Any of you who have been readers of this blog or my past blog at RedStateGay know that I have two major passions in life – politics and sports.  Everyday when I arrive home from work I spend a couple or a few hours online reading everything I can about politics and quite a bit about sports as well.  Sports (particularly college sports) has always been my escape.  Sometimes, after a bad day at work, I don’t want to read all about the negative things going in the world or the bloodsport known as politics.  So, I often lose myself in the pages of ESPN.com, SportsIllustrated.com, SportingNews.com, etc.

Sports had always been an innocent diversion for me.  I always love to keep up with my Oklahoma Sooners, my high school alma mater, Midland Lee, some pro sports, most college sports.  My thirst for knowledge extended beyond politics to a place where men and women competed in the realm of athletics in order to attain excellence.  The competition and personalities that come with the world of sports is almost equal to that of politics. When I didn’t want to read about the latest suicide bombing in the Middle East or the latest filibuster in the Senate – I could always check the scores from last night’s basketball games.

Unfortunately, I think my favorite escape has gone the way of politics and current events.  For every interesting or uplifting story I read on ESPN.com, there are plenty more to bring me down.  I’m left to wonder what the world is coming to when our sports heros become as tainted as third-world dictators or scandalous politicians.

Consider today’s headlines at ESPN.com.  I checked into sports first today after I got home from work.  If you go onto ESPN.com’s page, there will be the main page with headlines from various sports.  Across the top of the page, there is a link that you can click on that will take you to another “main page” for each major sport.  As I clicked on each one, I became despondent and disheartened.  I might as well have read the obituaries or police reports in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.  Here is a sampling of the headlines:

A-Rod Expects Drug Questions

Formula One’s Alonso Rejects Spain Racism Claims

LSU QB Perrilloux Suspended For Rules Violation

DUI Arrest Costs Vol Punter 5 Games, Scholarship

Gamecocks WR Lecorn Arrested On Drug Charges

Ex-Texas RB Taylor Sent To Jail For 5 Months

FSU Puts Itself on 2 Years Probation After Scandal

Discipline Considered For Beavers In Confrontation

Charges Dropped vs. Memphis’ Taggart, Robinson

Junior’s Nationwide crew Chief Suspended 6 Races

Stewart, K. Busch Placed On Probation

Chelsea Boss Grant Receives Death Threats

Are you depressed yet?  I sure was.  Something as innocent and entertaining as athletic competition has suddenly become a reminder of the worries, scandals, crimes and drama that plague so many aspects of our everyday lives.  Nothing can be more relaxing and exciting as a day at the ballpark or watching football on the big screen with your buddies at home.  But now, sports has become a drama that reflects so many of the negative realities in everyday life.

I’ll readily admit that part of the problem is news coverage in the realm of sports. History is full of athletes and sports teams tainted by scandal.  The new age of the media and the papparazi have placed the spotlight on athletes. We know more today about these celebrities than people ever knew of Babe Ruth or Wilt Chamberlain in their wild heydays.

But I also see more of these issues pouring into college and high school sports where the young men and women were supposed to be insulated from the excesses of money and fame.  I gave up on most pro sports long ago because I was disenfranchised by the commercialism and drama that was so rampant among the professionals.  But now I see these young people tainted by adults and the images of celebrities.  I see college stars being arrested or booted off teams.  I see schools being investigated for cheating or paying players.

It makes me want to give up on society at times.  I’m not sure what to think. My heros are not the overpaid pros who have big houses and rich, belligerent agents.  My heros are the kids who get a scholarship to a great college or university.  The young men and women who play sports, not for pay, but for the love of the game.  Now – even that is disappearing in a haze of greed awash with dollars.  Coaches and schools who are supposed to be instilling a sense of worth in these students are allowing them to run rampant and get themselves into legal trouble. And some of these coaches are criminal as well.

I’m all about personal responsibility, but our institutions of higher learning are supposed to be dedicated to education and arming their students with the tools they need to be productive adults.  In the area of athletics, that is not happening.  Slowly, the line is being blurred between pro and college and high school athletics  More of these athletes are ending up in rehab, on the streets, or in jail.  Sports at this level was supposed to build character, promote friendly competition and teach life lessons.  Reading those headlines makes me think otherwise.

And that makes me sad.

Leave a Comment

An Update On The Pups

Feb 17, 08 7:07 PM

squirt_patrick_021408.jpg

An update on my baby pups.  They are entering week 6 now.  We have a few takers, but I’m not letting them go for another couple of weeks.  The picture above is my hubby, Patrick, and my favorite baby.  We’re calling him Squirt for now.  He is staying with us.  I love runts, and this was the runt of the litter.

I’m looking for a unique name for my boy.  It has to end in -ee (not the letters, but the sound).  Mom is Chloe, dad is Loki, and my other dog is Lottie.  If you have a name idea for my baby boy, give it up.  I’m looking for something different.

Comments (6)

Another Wayward Organization

Feb 11, 08 7:21 PM

I have always felt, and I think most conservatives would agree – that the United Nations is a pointless organization, a waste of US taxpayer dollars and a waste of some decent real estate in New York City.  Let them move the UN to Caracas or Moscow or Tehran – somewhere where the host nation is more supportive of their leftist, anti-US agenda.  But, growing up a Reagan baby and watching the final confrontation of the Soviet empire, I never dreamed that I might one day say the same thing about NATO.  Unfortunately, the day has come.

I don’t know a damned thing about Los Angeles Times columnist, Andrew Bacevich.  So I don’t know where he’s coming from here.  I just know that he makes a valid point in his latest article.

Once the Soviet threat disappeared, the European nations making up the core of the alliance wasted no time claiming their peace dividend. They cut defense budgets and shed military capacity. For example, the German army, which had 12 divisions in 1989, today maintains the equivalent of three.

Meanwhile, back at NATO headquarters, the iron law of bureaucratic self-preservation kicked in. Justifying the alliance’s continued existence became a cottage industry. Even as armies shrunk, new missions proliferated.

One of the new missions was to expand. Today, NATO consists of 26 members, with Albania, Croatia and Macedonia lined up to join next. Still more candidates — Serbia, Montenegro, even Georgia and Ukraine — are knocking at the door. Adding members provided a mechanism for incorporating what had been Eastern Europe and even parts of the former Soviet Union into Europe proper. But enlargement diluted NATO’s actual ability to defend itself. Rather than a collective security organization, the alliance became something more akin to a political club, far more adept at convening conferences than at organizing itself for war.

You have to wonder.  I’m not saying that NATO is inherently useless.  It has the potential to be a significant organization – especially in the light of Russia’s desire to reassert its bellicose, military dominance on the world stage.  And I am not against including Eastern European nations in the organization.  Just the fact that NATO expansionism pisses Putin off is enough to make me smile a little bit.

What I am against is the fact that NATO membership just seems to be a status symbol for new European democracies aspiring to membership in the European Union.  Most of these guys have no intentions of honoring NATO’s goals or participating in the miltary aspects of the organization.  I can think of a few exceptions such as Poland.

The more saddening aspect of this is that older members such as Germany, France and Spain have sought to scale back their roles while simultaneously desiring to retain membership.  They want to be members; they just want the United States to do all the hard work.

The ongoing Afghan war against Al Qaeda and the Taliban is now providing a second and more demanding test case. This test demonstrates just how much the alliance’s capabilities and solidarity have withered.

In Afghanistan, NATO is failing. Nominally, all 26 alliance members are contributing to the war effort, with some 43,000 total troops deployed. In reality, stripping away the forces provided by the United States, Britain and Canada, the alliance has fielded barely 20,000 soldiers — this to pacify a country that is 50% larger than Iraq. Many national contingents, Germany’s being the most prominent, operate under restrictions that make them unusable except in areas where relative security exists.

U.S. officials call for the allies to do more — more troops with fewer strings attached. But Europe lacks trained soldiers, lacks adequate stores of equipment and above all lacks political will. European publics have an exceedingly limited appetite for sending their fellow citizens to chase insurgents in other parts of the world. European governments, with Germany again providing a good illustration, reflect the will of their people.

I think Afghanistan is an excellent illustration of NATO’s ineffectiveness.  Europe isn’t the same.  The US and Ronald Reagan took care of the Soviets.  So the member states don’t feel like there is much reason to keep up the effort.  Add to the equation the fact that their citizens are increasingly liberal, pacifistic and anti-American – you are left to wonder about the point of it all.

I don’t want to be a reactionary, but as I eye some budget cuts – I look to NATO.  Our “partners” were pathetic in Kosovo and are balking in Afghanistan.  Now I’m left to be a little cynical in asking – who needs them?  They certainly need us more than we need them.  Maybe it’s time to show a little tough love. 

Of course, I’m just an arrogant American.  My opinion probably doesn’t mean much to them.

Comments (5)
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 172 other followers