Tag Archives: Democratic

Mark Sanford Has Won The South Carolina Special Election

Posted on by

Tonight the Washington Post is reporting that former South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford has been elected to the House of Representatives.

The article reports:

Mitt Romney won this district by 18 points last fall, but Sanford’s personal history made the seat competitive. Democrats poured money into the race while national Republicans abandoned their candidate, giving Colbert Busch a 5-to-1 advantage in outside spending.

If the American people can forgive Bill Clinton for his indiscretions, I guess they can forgive Mark Sanford for his. There are two things in this election that bode well for the Republicans in 2014–the amount of money poured into the coffers of Democrat Elizabeth Colbert Busch did not make a difference, and a seriously flawed candidate whose positions on issues are in line with the voters can win an election despite his flaws.

As the House of Representatives considers the immigration bill that the Senate will hand them in the near future, they would do well to keep this election in mind–issues won–money did not.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Indiana Voter Fraud

Posted on by

Fox News reported today that two Democratic political operatives were convicted last night of fraud in the 2008 Indiana primary that put President Obama and Hillary Clinton on the ballot.

The article reports:

Former longtime St. Joseph County Democratic party Chairman Butch Morgan Jr.  was found guilty of felony conspiracy counts to commit petition fraud and forgery, and former county Board of Elections worker Dustin Blythe was found guilty of felony forgery counts and falsely making a petition, after being accused of faking petitions that enabled Obama, then an Illinois Senator, to get on the presidential primary ballot for his first run for the White House.

I am glad that the people involved in the fraud have been convicted, but I think the important thing here is to learn from the experience. President Obama and Hillary Clinton could have easily gathered the necessary signatures to be placed on the ballot–there was no reason to cheat. Our election officials need to get into the habit of routinely randomly checking signatures on petitions. If one of two signatures on a page don’t match, further investigation is needed. If five random signatures on a petition match, things should be okay.

I wonder about the integrity of our election system when we have a party leader who casually cheats when he could get the same result honestly.

Enhanced by Zemanta

President Obama’s Goals For 2014

Posted on by

Next year we have Congressional elections again. We have somehow morphed into a country whose leadership tends to be more concerned about campaigning than leading. The goal of the Democrats right now is to regain control of the House of Representatives and retain control of the Senate; the goal of the Republicans is to retake the Senate and retain control of the House of Representatives. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), also known as Obamacare, was passed during the time the Democrats controlled the White House and both branches of Congress. The Republicans are trying to prevent Nancy Pelosi becoming Speaker of the House and crafting and passing equally left-wing legislation.

In the April 29, 2013, issue of the Weekly Standard, Fred Barnes posts an article about next year’s campaign. In many ways, the Republicans have acted as the ‘stupid party.’ They have squandered many opportunities to lead and to do the things they need to do to distinguish themselves from the Democrats. Right now they are sitting on a bill to repeal the medical device tax in Obamacare that has the support of both parties (H.R. 1295, H.R. 523, S.232). These bills have been stuck in committee because one Republican leader wants to pass a comprehensive tax reform bill rather than simply do something simple that will save jobs and improve the economy. Thus, the ‘stupid’ party.

The article at the Weekly Standard provides some insight into the strategy of President Obama in the 2014 election:

Obama has told the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee he’ll do eight fundraisers for them in 2013 and no telling how many next year. And Organizing for America—his reelection campaign now functioning as the president’s personal PAC—will try to create voter turnout next year that’s more like 2012 than 2010. The goal is to prevent Republicans from dominating the 2014 elections as they did in taking over the House in the 2010 midterms.

Meanwhile, the president has set a trap for Republicans. He’s agreed to reduce annual cost-of-living increases for Social Security as a (small) concession to justify a new round of negotiations for a grand bargain on taxes, spending, and the deficit. House and Senate Republicans have wisely rejected new talks, but this allows Obama to tar them as obstructionists who oppose serious deficit reduction to protect the rich from higher taxes.

That’s just the beginning. He’ll accuse them of obstructing gun control legislation, which died in the Senate last week with the defeat of expanded background checks of gun buyers. If immigration reform fails, Obama will blame Republicans for obstructing it, too.

The Republicans have a choice–they can begin to lead or they can remain the ‘stupid party.’ There are many people (including myself) who have stopped contributing to the Republican Party and have instead supported individual candidates. The split in the Republican Party between the ‘old guard’ leadership and the Tea Party will probably come to a head during the coming campaign. For the sake of our country, I hope the Tea Party wins.

Enhanced by Zemanta

You Can Depend On Politicians To Want More Taxes

Posted on by

In Massachusetts you can always depend on the leaders of the Commonwealth to want to raise taxes. This is loosely related to the fact that the majority of the leaders in the executive and legislative branches of government In Massachusetts are Democrats. Well, this year is no exception to the rule.

Holly Robichaud posted an article in the Boston Herald today about Governor Patrick’s latest tax plan and the political theater surrounding it.

The article in the Herald reminds us of a few basic facts:

To sell Speaker Robert DeLeo’s $500 million tax package, there is a whole lot of political theater being staged to fool low information voters into being grateful it’s not Gov. Deval Patrick’s $1.9 billion plan.

When initially announced last week, Patrick pounced by stating that no Democrats lost their seats because they voted for his sales tax increase in 2009. There are Deval’s statements and then there are the facts. In 2010, the GOP doubled their numbers in the House.

It might be a good idea for Democrats to remember the consequences of raising the sales tax as they prepare to vote on the present tax bill.

Ms. Robichaud also notes that Democratic Party Chairman John Walsh has publicly warned Democrats that they will face challenges in primary elections if they do not support higher taxes.

I have lived in Massachusetts since 1978. I have spent a certain amount of that time wondering what in the world was in the water that caused the residents to vote the way they do. We are responsible for the government we have–we elected it. Until the voters of this state wake up and decide to protect their income from the kind of fraud we see in the EBT program and the constant demand for more of our money from the statehouse and legislature, the political theater surrounding tax hikes will continue.

I will be leaving Massachusetts by the end of this year and resettling to a place that has more respect for the fact that I wish to keep the money I earn. I will continue to blog about the perils of big government and its endless appetite for taxpayers’ money, but I will be glad to be in a place where that appetite is slightly smaller. More to follow…

Enhanced by Zemanta

This Is What Your College Tuition Buys ?

Posted on by

BizPac Review posted a story yesterday about a professor at Florida Atlantic University who teaches an intercultural communications class at the school. The professor asked the students to write “Jesus” on a piece of paper, put the paper on the floor, and then stomp on the paper.

The article reports:

One student, a devout Mormon, was so so disturbed by the exercise that he complained to school officials, saying Poole had offended his religious convictions. The school responded by suspending the student from the class.

While the incident has made the news, the media has failed to report a key component of Poole’s resume: He is vice-chairman of the Palm Beach County Democratic Party. His recent actions add fire to an already-disturbing pattern of hate coming out of the local party.

Mark Siegel, the former chairman of the county Democratic Party, was forced to resign in September under a barrage of criticism over an anti-Christian tirade at the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, N.C.

Siegel, who is Jewish, told an interviewer at the convention that pro-Israel Christians want to see Jews “slaughtered.”

“Oh no, the Christians just want us to be there so we can all be slaughtered and converted and bring on the second coming of Jesus Christ,” he said at the time.

Does it strike anyone else as odd that the student was suspended after complaining and no action was taken against the professor? There was a time in this country when the professor would have been fired. I think it is unfortunate that we no longer stand up for the values that made this country great–America was founded as a Judeo-Christian nation. Our legal system is based on the Ten Commandments. Why are we letting professors like this pollute the minds of our young adults?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Sequester Cuts For Thee But Not For Me

Posted on by

Today’s Boston Herald is reporting that as Democrats in Congress scream that the sequester cuts are the end of the world, the Democrats in the Massachusetts congressional delegation spent nearly $200,000 in bonuses, pay hikes and new hires in a timeworn tradition of end-of-the-year handouts. Despite their concern about closing the federal deficit, the Massachusetts congressmen increased their payroll by $196,000 in the last three months of 2012.

The article reports:

Local Democrats tried to place the lion’s share of the blame on House Republicans for forcing the sequestration because they hold a majority in the House.

“Most of them come to Washington because they don’t like government, they don’t think government should play a role in our lives. Maybe they don’t know anybody who needs heating assistance,” Capuano said at a local anti-sequester rally in February.

Ian Prior, a spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee, said, “The fact that the delegation is bemoaning all the cuts and saying they are standing up for the working class while they are passing out bonuses and beefing up their staff is rank hypocrisy.”

Until America’s voters wake up to the fact that they are being taken to the cleaners by their so-called representatives, I think we can expect more of the same.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Avoiding Even The Obvious Budget Cuts

Posted on by

John Hinderaker at Power Line posted an article today about the proposed Democrat budget plan and its relationship to welfare spending. The Obama Administration has already cut the work requirement in order to collect welfare, now they refusing to support another very obvious cost-cutting measure.

The article reports:

Jeff Sessions offered an amendment that addressed the Obama administration’s outrageous policy of advertising the easy availability of food stamps in foreign countries. This is how Sessions described the amendment:

Contrary to sound policy, the United States is spending money advertising food stamp benefits in foreign consulates. This amendment would prohibit any funds from being spent on this controversial promotion campaign.

Federal law has long prohibited immigration to the U.S. by anyone who is likely to become a public charge. Instead of enforcing this law, the Obama administration has willfully violated it by encouraging immigration to the U.S. by Mexicans and others, precisely because they will become public charges and thereby contribute to the expansion of the welfare system. The administration’s promotion of the food stamp program to foreign nationals is part of this effort.

Why in the world are we advertising American food stamp programs in foreign countries? It seems to me that if we wanted to control immigration (legal or illegal) offering free food or money would not be the way to do it. America needs immigrants, but we need legal immigrants who will contribute to society rather than expect to be supported by hard-working taxpayers.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Forbes Magazine Gets It Right

Posted on by

Yesterday Forbes.com posted an article that totally explains the lack of representation that the average American receives in Washington. The article talks about the “country class” of Republicans–identifiable by their opposition to ever-bigger government financed by ever-higher taxes as opposed to those Republicans who side with the “ruling class“–those Democrats who support higher taxes and bigger government. Because of those Republicans who are now aligned with the “ruling class,” the ideas of many Americans are not represented in Congress.

The article states:

Thus public opinion polls confirm that some two thirds of Americans feel that government is “them” not “us,” that government has been taking the country in the wrong direction, and that such sentiments largely parallel partisan identification: While a majority of Democrats feel that officials who bear that label represent them well, only about a fourth of Republican voters and an even smaller proportion of independents trust Republican officials to be on their side. Again: While the ruling class is well represented by the Democratic Party, the country class is not represented politically – by the Republican Party or by any other. Well or badly, its demand for representation will be met.

The author of the article seems to believe that the current crop of Republican and Democrat leaders will result in the formation of a new political party. As much as I don’t like that idea (it takes a long time for a third party to actually get people elected), I can see the roots of that in the Tea Party. America is well along the road to bankruptcy. We have Washington screaming about sequestration, when upon close examination you find out that sequestration does not cut spending–it only slows the rate of growth. Upon close examination, you also learn that all you would have to do to limit the potential damage that might be caused by sequestration is to give various government agencies control of where they cut the rate of growth. Why hasn’t either the President of Congress suggested that? This is a political issue–not a practical issue. If it ever gets out that sequestration is not a spending cut and that the panic we are hearing is totally unnecessary, Congress might not be able to raise our taxes. Make no mistake–even though we are being told that we need to raise taxes on the ‘evil rich,’ the eventual goal is to raise taxes on the middle class. Be forewarned. We are being played by some very smart politicians who reside in Washington.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article at Forbes. It is fascinating.

Enhanced by Zemanta

This Really Does Not Sound Like Co-operation

Posted on by

Yesterday’s Washington Examiner posted an article stating that the Democrat Senate intends to pass a budget this year. Sounds like good news, but wait a minute.

The article reports:

But now a prominent Democratic lawmaker says his party will finally pass a budget — for the express purpose of raising taxes.  “We Democrats have always intended to do a budget this year,” Sen. Charles Schumer said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”  “It’s a great opportunity to get us some more revenues.”

“You’re going to need more revenues as well as more cuts to get the deficit down,” Schumer said.  “And I’ve talked to Leader Reid. I’ve talked to Budget Chair Murray. We’re going to do a budget this year. And it’s going to have revenues in it. And our Republican colleagues better get used to that fact.”

Great. More taxes. The article also explains why the Democrats have not passed a budget since 2009:

The Democrats’ strategy has long been clear.  The last time Majority Leader Harry Reid allowed a budget through the Senate was in April 2009, when huge Democratic majorities in Congress passed steep increases in spending.  Since then, Democrats have funded the government through a series of continuing resolutions — essentially locking in the 2009 budget as the new baseline for spending.

The article concludes:

Schumer, with 55 Democrats in the Senate, is now saying: Think again.  We’re going to raise taxes, and you can’t stop us.  The battle between the two sides will likely consume the Senate for the next two years.

The question is simple. Are there enough grown-ups who vote in America who realize that we cannot continue to spend money we don’t have? Raising taxes does not necessarily increase revenue. (Please see the Laffer Curve.) Raising taxes also slows the economy, increases unemployment, and ultimately causes the cost of government to increase while slowing growth in the private sector.

Part of our current economic problems is the relationship between government spending levels and the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Traditionally spending has been about 18 percent of GDP and tax revenue has been about 18 percent of GDP.  Unfortunately since 2009 (when the Democrats took control of the House of Representatives), spending has been approaching 25 percent of GDP. Unless the government takes almost all of the money that Americans earn away from them, there will never be enough tax revenue to fund that spending.

The chart below (from The Big Picture) shows where we are:

The American voters will determine in 2014 whether or not America survives economically.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Trying To Win The Media War Instead Of Governing

Posted on by

The basis of the American republic is the U. S. Constitution. It serves as a guide to governing the nation.. We ask the President and Congress to swear an oath to support and defend the Constitution when they take office. It is a little disconcerting when our elected officials seem to forget or ignore this oath.

Yesterday John Hinderaker at Power Line posted an article which illustrates an apparent lack of knowledge of the Constitution by some of the leaders of the Democrat party. Senators Harry Reid, Dick Durbin, Patty Murray and Chuck Schumer have written a letter to President Obama asking him to take all “lawful steps” to increase the debt ceiling–with or without the Republicans. They are fully entitled to write that letter, and they are fully entitled to their opinion, but do they have any idea what the U. S. Constitution says?

This is the letter (from the website Scribd):

This letter is political theater. Either the Senators who wrote it have not read the U. S. Constitution or they don’t understand it.

John Hinderaker at Power Line takes a closer look at the letter. Some of his comments:

Why are they talking about default? Default is constitutionally prohibited by the 14th Amendment. The federal government’s cash flow is more than ample to pay all interest on the national debt and to retire bonds as they mature. Other spending would have to be cut, to be sure; but default will not, and cannot, happen.

The senators telegraph here what they are really afraid of: the House may pass legislation that extends the debt limit along with spending cuts–cuts that will no doubt seem reasonable, not “unreasonable” or “unbalanced,” to voters. I believed that the Republicans wouldn’t be able to get much in exchange for increasing the debt limit because the threat not to do so lacks credibility, but this letter suggests that the Democrats are more worried than I thought.

…What “lawful steps” could Obama take “without Congressional approval” that would permit racking up more debt? Article I of the Constitution gives Congress the exclusive “Power…To borrow Money on the credit of the United States.” Obama has no such authority. Are the senators urging Obama to violate the Constitution? Or perhaps to pursue the trillion-dollar platinum coin gambit? It is impossible to say.

Sure. They want it for nothing, just like Obama wanted tax increases for nothing. The Dems say they are willing to negotiate, they just don’t want the GOP to have any bargaining power.

But wait! Didn’t Obama just get higher income and investment taxes on everyone earning over $250,000, precisely the higher taxes on the “rich” he has always said he wanted? The Democrats’ greed is never satisfied.

It would be a wonderful thing if the entire budget were on the table, but that isn’t what the Democrats have in mind. Still, the Democrats’ evident concern about the debt limit, manifested not just by this letter but by the trillion-dollar coin and other half-baked ideas that are being taken seriously by Democrats, suggests that more of the budget might be on the table than we once thought possible.

Does anyone remember what President Obama said about the national debt? RedState reminds us:

On July 3, 2008, Presidential candidate Obama said that adding $4 trillion in debt was “irresponsible” and “unpatriotic.” Obama was referring to the $3.764 trillion that had been added to the national debt during the seven and one-half years Bush had been president. Obama of course got his facts wrong when he falsely claimed President Bush increased the national debt by $4 trillion “by his lonesome.” When Speaker Pelosi took over Congress on January 3, 2007, the national debt was $8.7 trillion. So the Democrats must get some of the credit for one of the four trillion dollars candidate Obama tried to blame on Bush.

I guess debt is only good when the Democrats are in the White House.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Representative Nancy Pelosi And Reality

Posted on by

When reality does not picture the truth as she sees it, Representative Pelosi obviously has no problem changing the truth. Yesterday the Washington Post posted a story about a recent picture of all of the women in the House Democratic Caucus. Sounds fine, right? Well, not so fast. Some of the women in the Caucus missed the photo shoot, so they were photo-shopped in.

The article reports Representative Pelosi’s response when asked about the picture:

“It’s an accurate historical record of who the Democratic women of Congress are. It also is an accurate record that it was freezing cold and our members had been waiting a long time for everyone to arrive and that they had to get back into the building to greet constituents, family members, to get ready to go to the floor,” she said.

It’s a photo-shopped picture. A photo-shopped picture is not an accurate record–it’s an altered record. Does this woman not know the difference between reality and fantasy? Was it also okay when Hezbollah photo-shopped pictures of damage done to Lebanon by the Israeli Defense forces? Was it also okay when Iran photo-shopped pictures of test firing missiles? Photo-shopping is a propaganda tool, why is it being used by a Congresswomen to create something that did not happen?

Enhanced by Zemanta

An Interesting Twist On The Massachusetts Senate Election

Posted on by

Today’s Weekly Standard posted an article (and a video) stating that union members who showed up to support Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren during the Wednesday night debate in Springfield, Massachusetts, were told that they would be fined if they were not there.

This is the video:

The article states:

This isn’t the first instance in a Massachusetts Senate race where unions have been accused of generating fake grassroots support for the Democrat.

In 2010, before Brown‘s victory in the special election, a union member wearing a shirt supporting the Democratic candidate, Martha Coakley, told a local blogger on camera that he had been paid $50 to wear the shirt but that he was actually voting for Brown.

Don’t believe that all the union support for Ms. Warren is real.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Quote Of The Week

Posted on by

DaTechGuy is the host of a Worcester political talk show (830 AM WCRN Saturday 10am to noon) and a dedicated reporter on the political scene. His blog, DaTechGuyBlog.com, reports on both national and state politics. Recently he interviewed Senator Scott Brown.

The quote of the week comes from the Senator in that interview. When the Senator was questioned about his appeal to voters, he replied:

“Last time I got votes from the Democratic party the independent party the republican party and quite frankly people who just like to party.”

Enhanced by Zemanta

This Is What Happens When People Not Familiar With The Military Try To Honor Our Military

Posted on by

Yesterday’s Navy Times posted a story about the tribute to veterans that took place at the Democratic National Convention. It seems that the patriotic display of military power taking place on the screen behind retired Adm. John Nathman, a former commander of Fleet Forces Command, as he spoke was of Russian ships. Oops.

The article reports:

“I was kind of in shock,” said Rob Barker, 38, a former electronics warfare technician who left the Navy in 2006. Having learned to visually identify foreign ships by their radars, Barker recognized the closest ship as the Kara-class cruiser Kerch.

“An immediate apology [from the committee] would be very nice,” Barker said. “Maybe acknowledge the fact that yes, they screwed up.”

The background — featured in the carefully choreographed hour leading up to the president’s Sept. 6 speech accepting the Democratic Party’s nomination — showed four ships with radar designs not used in the U.S. fleet.

A follow up article in the Navy Times today reports:

Democratic officials apologized Wednesday for mistakenly displaying an image of the Russian Navy during a tribute to America’s veterans at last week’s Democratic National Convention.

This is the text of the DNC statement:

“Due to vendor error, incorrect images appeared briefly on screen behind fifty-one veterans during the convention and the DNCC apologizes for this mistake,” the statement said. “This error should not distract from the words of Admiral Nathman and others who spoke to President Obama’s strong record on issues that impact those who have served our nation. We’re proud of the service and sacrifice of our veterans and military families, and while they were an important and active part our of convention, Mitt Romney failed to even mention them in his speech in Tampa.”

Notice that it was ‘ “vendor error.” They are not taking responsibility for the mistake. That is just too typical.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Massachusetts Fourth Congressional District

Posted on by

Today’s Attleboro Sun Chronicle reported the results of the Massachusetts Fourth Congressional District primary.

These are the numbers as reported by the Sun Chronicle:

U.S. House – District 4 – Dem Primary
September 07, 2012 – 09:41AM ET
Massachusetts – 215 of 220 Precincts Reporting – 98%

Name                         Party       Votes       Vote %
Kennedy , Joe            Dem      35,318        90%
Brown , Rachel          Dem        2,411          6%
Robinson , Herb         Dem        1,314          3%

U.S. House – District 4 – GOP Primary
September 07, 2012 – 01:38AM ET
Massachusetts – 207 of 220 Precincts Reporting – 94%

Name                        Party        Votes       Vote %
Bielat , Sean              GOP      13,844        73%
Childs , Elizabeth      GOP       2,594        14%
Steinhof , David         GOP       2,530        13%

There are a few things we can learn from these numbers. About 39,000 people voted in the Democrat primary, about 19,000 people voted in the Republican primary. That alone means that Sean Bielat has a difficult job ahead of him in order to win the election. It can be done, but it will be difficult. Also, notice that the Democrats opposing Joe Kennedy got a total of 9% of the votes; the Republicans opposing Sean Bielat got almost 30% of the vote. Evidently the Kennedy name still has value in an election despite all the scandals connected to it.

I don’t know how many independent voters there are in the Massachusetts Fourth Congressional District. I suspect that Sean Bielat is hoping that there are a lot of them. In order for Sean Bielat to win, he needs the independent voters and the voters who are tired of the status quo represented by Joe Kennedy. Admittedly Joe Kennedy is a fresh candidate, but his ideas represent the Democrat establishment. If the voters look around and decide that the Democrat establishment (and the Republican establishment) does not work, Sean Bielat can win.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Contrast Is Obvious

Posted on by

I haven’t watched a lot of the Democratic convention–I have been tied up with more important family things, but I have seen the highlights. As you can assume from the name of this blog, I am a conservative, and I am not a young voter. I have watched a number of conventions over the years, and I am somewhat amazed at the direction of this year’s Democratic convention.

The opening video proclaimed, “The government is the only thing we all belong to.” I am more in line with Mitt Romney‘s tweet in response to that statement, “We don’t belong to the government, the government belongs to us.”

Think about that for a minute. If we belong to the government, the government is responsible for us–our successes, our failures, our prosperity, our poverty, our children’s behavior, etc. If the government belongs to us, we are responsible for the government and for ourselves. It seems to me that we have a choice to make here–are we going to grow up as a country and take responsibility for who we are (and what we need to do to make ourselves better) or are we going to sit back and wait for the government to do everything for us.

I have one more simple observation on the convention. There has been an awful lot of emphasis on the so-called ‘Republican war on women,’ and the Democrats seem to be trying to prove that their ideas are much better for women. Well, wait a minute. The convention has already honored Ted Kennedy, and Bill Clinton is the major speaker. How did these women treat the women in their lives? The Democrats seem to think that the essence of treating women well is defined as paying for them to kill their children and giving them free birth control (regardless of whether of not that is against their religion). There is more to woman than birth control. The women speaking at the Democratic convention are demanding things from the government–the women who spoke at the Republican convention were women of power. They had achieved success in their own lives–they were not taking from government–they were giving. Which image is more flattering to women?

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Hazards Of Being A Diplomat During The American Politcal Season

Posted on by

Breitbart.com reported today that Israeli Ambassador to America, Michael Oren, has stated that Democratic National Chairman Debbie Wasserman Schultz was not telling the truth when she stated that he had told her that the Republican approach to Israel was dangerous to the State of Israel.

The article reports:

“I categorically deny that I ever characterized Republican policies as harmful to Israel. Bipartisan support is a paramount national interest for Israel, and we have great friends on both sides of the aisle,” Oren said, according to Alana Goodman of Commentary.

Meanwhile, the growing alienation of the Israeli government and the Obama administration is leading to fears of a further decline in relations if Obama wins re-election in November.

There really are no words to describe the lunacy of Ms. Wasserman Schultz’s statement. The Obama Administration has not treated Israel well, and it has not supported Israel as Israel has been continually threatened by Iran. Meanwhile, it has supported the overthrow of governments that although not friendly to Israel, were at least not hostile to Israel.

The article further reports:

An Israeli security official believes the distance Obama is placing between the U.S. and Israel is indicative of at least one thing — plans to punish Netanyahu if Obama is able to win a second term.

The unnamed official believes Obama took umbrage at a dinner Netanyahu held in Gov. Mitt Romney‘s honor, and is now positioning himself to “make Netanyahu pay for his behavior.”

President Obama has not visited Israel since he became President. It is no secret that the President and Benjamin Netanyahu are not great friends. If the Jewish vote in America goes for Obama, it will be because the American Jewish population simply is not paying attention.

Enhanced by Zemanta

An Interesting Double Standard

Posted on by

The Daily Caller posted a story today about the LGBT people who are protesting the fact that New York Cardinal-Archbishop Timothy Dolan will deliver the closing prayer at the Democratic National Convention.

The article relates the objection:

“While Cardinal Dolan has a respected track record in the ministry, his work to undercut the dignity of LGBT people cannot be overlooked. There are many faith leaders who would be an ideal fitto close out the Democratic National Convention — but Cardinal Timothy Dolan is not that leader,” said Michael Cole-Schwartz of the Human Rights Campaign.

It is interesting to me that the LGBT people are not protesting the two hour Muslim prayer meeting that is going on at the beginning of the convention. Has it occurred to them what their human rights would be under Sharia Law?

The article concludes:

While LGBT groups are indignant at the inclusion of Cardinal Dolan, there’s been no quarrel from them on the invitation extended to individuals that share sympathies with hardline Islamist groups. Radical Islamists have a far, far more intolerant attitude toward homosexuals than any Catholic clergyman, to the point that they have recently been stoned and burnedalive in some countries. Why doesn’t the LGBT lobby get as fired up about the organizers of the Jumah as it does about Cardinal Dolan? Partly, adherents to the Judeo-Christian tradition are familiar targets for the LGBT lobby. But this situation is also the product of the unqualified embrace of pluralism that characterizes the left. When moral judgments are subordinated to the mantra of “diversity,” then the truly odious views aren’t diminished. The result is that the LGBT lobby has become another group on the left that fails to see the danger that radical Islam poses to all of us.

The double standard here is amazing.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Rats Deserting A Sinking Ship

Posted on by

As the Republicans hold their convention in Tampa, the Democrat convention to be held next week is taking shape. Mostly it seems as if major Democrats are choosing not to attend.

The Daily Caller reported yesterday that although Bill Clinton will be speaking at the Democrat convention, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will be out of the country. She will be visiting the Cook Islands, Vladivostok, Russia, and Manchuria, China.

The article reports:

U.S. unemployment, debts and deficits are at record heights, while wages and investment are in decline.

Clinton’s departure prevents Obama from using her popularity to boost his outreach to swing-voting unmarried and married women.

Instead, Obama has awarded a speaking slot to her husband, former President Bill Clinton. That could be risky, because relations between the two presidents have been frosty, and the former president may subtly undercut the current president.

Clinton’s high-profile exit from the country and from party politics forcefully underlines her effort to distance herself from Obama’s waning political fortunes.

But it also protects her fortunes, just in case she decides to run in 2016.

On July 18, Hot Air quoted Representative Nancy Pelosi:

House minority leader Nancy Pelosi says that Democratic members should stay home and campaign in their districts rather than go to the party’s national convention in North Carolina.

“I’m not encouraging anyone to go to the convention, having nothing to do with anything except I think they should stay home, campaign in their districts, use their financial and political resources to help them win their election,” Pelosi said in an exclusive interview for POLITICO Live’s On Congress, a new weekly show to be streamed live on POLITICO’s website and broadcast on NewsChannel 8 on Wednesdays. …

“We nominated a president last time. We have an incumbent President of the United States. We’re very proud of him. There certainly will be enough people there to express that pride, but I’m not encouraging members to go to the convention no matter what the situation was, because they can be home. It’s campaign time. It’s the first week in September,” she said.

That really doesn’t sound like a comment made by a winning team. At this rate, I wonder how many average Americans will be able to get into the Democrat convention just to fill the seats!

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

How You Answer When You Are Caught With Your Hand In The Cookie Jar

Posted on by

The Washington Free Beacon posted an article today which featured my nominee for the Quote of the Week.

Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz was being interviewed on Fox News Sunday. She was asked about the Obama ad accusing Mitt Romney causing the death of Joe Soptic’s wife. Ms. Wasserman Schultz  pointed out that the ad was produced by Priorities USA, an Obama-affiliated super PAC run by a former Obama White House staffer. She then stated, “I have no idea the political affiliation of the folks who are associated with that super PAC.” Wow. Did she think it was a pro-Romney ad?

When you listen to the entire interview, you begin to wonder if the Democrat‘s main objection to Mitt Romney is that he was successful as a businessman. I wonder how many people in America think that America needs a successful businessman to put the economy of America in order.

Please follow the link to the Washington Free Beacon to watch the video. This is how you avoid answering a question when you are caught with your hand in the cookie jar!

Enhanced by Zemanta

One Of Many Reasons I Support Paul Ryan For Vice President

Posted on by

There are many reasons I support Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney‘s choice for Vice-President. This YouTube video is one of them:

Paul Ryan is like the nerd who sat behind you in Physics class in high school, understood everything the teacher said, and could explain it in less than 25 words. He is a humble, but strong, man who understands how numbers work and how the Washington numbers game is played. I seriously doubt anyone in Congress would even try to double talk him on any budget issue.

This is a great choice that will inflame the liberals in the Democrat party. I can’t wait for the debate between Paul Ryan and Joe Biden!

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Only Way To End This Type Of Campaign Ad Is To Vote For The Person Being Attacked

Posted on by

The Blaze reported yesterday on a video campaign ad put up by the American Sunrise PAC.

The article reports:

The American Sunrise PAC is responsible for the video.  The group was incidentally founded by the father of Congressman West’s general election opponent, Democrat Patrick Murphy, who has funneled $250,000 into the PAC. 

UPDATE: The group responsible for the West advertisement has disabled all comments and ratings on their video page.  The immense distaste for the ad may have pressured this move.  As Blaze reporter Jason Howerton noted: The video on YouTube currently has more than 12,000 views, with 252 “dislikes” and just 16 “likes.”  The move is ironic since the group responsible for the ad claims to work for “thoughtful”, “more open”, “brighter future” in politics.

What is the problem with the ad? It shows a caricature of Allen West wearing boxing gloves punching an old woman, a young lady and seemingly a family with children. He is then shown taking money from the family and laughing like a gremlin.

The only way to stop this sort of foolishness is to render it ineffective. If you live in Florida, please vote for Allen West.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

So Much For The Voice Of The People

Posted on by

The Tennessean reported yesterday that the Tennessee Democratic Party has said that it will not support Mark Clayton, who won the Tennessee primary to run on the Democrat ticket against Republican Senator Bob Corker. Mr. Clayton received nearly twice as many votes as his closest challenger in Thursday’s seven-candidate primary, The reason the Democrats refuse to support him–they are accusing him of belonging to a ‘known hate group.’

Mr. Clayton is an unpaid vice-president for the group Public Advocate of the United States and occasionally writes for them. The group is pro-life and pro-marriage. I need to say something here. I oppose gay marriage. I think it totally creates confusion in terms of the First Amendment rights of the clergy not to perform the marriages and simply complicates something that does not need to be complicated. I support civil unions. I think a committed gay couple should have all the rights of a married couple. I just don’t want to see a Bible-believing pastor forced to perform a wedding that goes against Biblical teaching. I don’t hate gays. I have no reason to hate gays. Frankly, it isn’t important to me whether or not a person is gay. I am perfectly willing to share my world with any person regardless of what they do in their spare time. Opposing gay marriage is not hate speech, and groups that oppose gay marriage are not hate groups–they simply have an opinion different than the mainstream media and much of the Democrat party. We live in a country where differences of opinion are allowed. Stop calling it hate–it isn’t hate, it’s a belief in something different than what you believe.

Meanwhile, back to the story.

The article reports:

Sean Braisted, a Democratic Party spokesman, left the door open for a possible legal maneuver to try to get Clayton’s name off the Democratic line of the November ballot.

“The only option we are taking off the table in this situation,” he said, “is supporting Mark Clayton.”

The people voted. The Democrat Party did not like the results, so they are looking for a way to undo the vote. That really doesn’t sound like the wishes of the people who voted for Mark Clayton were important to the Democrat Party.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Attacking The Donors

Posted on by

Under the guise of transparency, some Democrats have asked that Political Action Committees list major donors. Although that sounds like a reasonable request, some recent activities by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) make me wonder about their motives.

Normally, a political campaign attacks the opposing candidate. Unfortunately, the people currently running the Democrat campaigns have not felt the necessity of being limited by such restrictive rules. I have recently posted articles about the attacks on Frank Vandersloot, a major donor to Restore Our Future, (rightwinggranny.com), attacks on New Hampshire businessman Jack Gilchrist (rightwinggranny.com), who had the nerve to appear in a Romney ad. The Democrats have also gone after billionaire casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, charging that he was tied to the Chinese mob and a prostitution ring.

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air reports:

The attack on Adelson falls into the same category as the demonization of the Koch brothers for their funding of conservative activism.  It’s designed to intimidate them — and others who might want to get involved in politics — out of the public sphere.  (That’s not an impulse limited to the Left, either; the Right has George Soros as its bête noir, for example.)

Why did the DCCC, of all Democratic organizations, start throwing mud at Adelson?  They wanted to attack John Boehner and House Republicans for supposedly taking prostitution money, but that’s a very big reach even if they had some evidence on Adelson — which they don’t, and never did. 

The good news here is that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee issued a public apology Thursday afternoon to Mr. Adelson.

The article at Hot Air quotes the statement:

“In press statements issued on June 29 and July 2, 2012, the DCCC made unsubstantiated allegations that attacked Sheldon Adelson, a supporter of the opposing party. This was wrong. The statements were untrue and unfair and we retract them,” the DCCC wrote. “The DCCC extends its sincere apology to Mr. Adelson and his family for any injury we have caused.”

Any person who runs for office in the current political climate can expect to be smeared, lied about, and threatened by the Chicago thugs that have taken over the Democrat party (I say that sadly–I used to be a Democrat). However, it is truly a shame that those who make political donations are now also vulnerable to this sort of thuggish behavior.

Enhanced by Zemanta