How Is This Compatible With The First Amendment?

Fox News posted an article today reporting some recent comments by Beto O’Rourke.

The article reports:

Democratic presidential hopeful Beto O’Rourke says he’d strip churches of tax-exempt status if they don’t support same-sex marriage.

When the former Texas congressman was asked if religious institutions — “colleges, churches, charities” — should be stripped of tax-exempt status Thursday night by CNN anchor Don Lemon during the LGBTQ town hall, he immediately responded, “Yes.”

The article continued:

“There can be no reward, no benefit, no tax break for anyone or any institution, any organization in America, that denies the full human rights and the full civil rights of every single one of us,” he said. “So as president, we’re going to make that a priority, and we are going to stop those who are infringing upon the human rights of our fellow Americans.”

First of all, the churches who hold a Biblical view of marriage are not restricting your human rights–they are simply saying that they do not support something that is against the teaching of the Bible. These are churches who believe in the Bible. The Bill of Rights gives them the right to those beliefs. You are perfectly free to get married in any church that has a different view of marriage, you are just not allowed to coerce a church to go against its basic tenets.

The article concludes:

And Hiram Sasser, general counsel for First Liberty Institute, told Fox News their faith-based organization has taken on the government before.

“When the Obama IRS came after pastors gathering together in conferences with Rick Perry support traditional marriage, we had to defend the pastors,” Sasser said. “We beat the IRS then and we would do it again if O’Rourke attacks churches with the IRS in the future.”

President Trump has championed religious liberty, largely winning the evangelical vote in 2016, and earlier this year, his administration launched a global effort to decriminalize homosexuality.

Be very careful here. Regardless of how you feel about this particular issue, please understand that this is an attempt to chip away at the rights guaranteed to Americans in the Bill of Rights.

Why American Energy Matters

On Thursday The Daily Signal posted a story about American coal imports to Ukraine. One of the problems in the attempted Russian takeover of Ukraine is the dependence of the country on Russian energy imports.

The article reports:

“In recent years, [Kyiv] and much of Eastern Europe have been reliant on and beholden to Russia to keep the heat on. That changes now,” U.S. Secretary of Energy Rick Perry said in July, announcing an $80 million deal to ship more U.S. coal to Ukraine.

“The United States can offer Ukraine an alternative,” Perry said.

…Since the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991, Russia has often leveraged its power over Ukraine through the energy economy. Particularly, by cutting off gas supplies in winter. Consequently, energy security remains a linchpin for Ukraine’s fight for sovereignty from Moscow.

“Energy for years has been and continues on a daily non-military basis to be the prime Russian instrument for corrupting and subverting Ukraine,” Stephen Blank, senior fellow for Russia at the American Foreign Policy Council, told The Daily Signal.

American energy independence (and the ability of America to export energy sources) can play an important part in determining world politics. As America becomes more energy independent, the hold that OPEC has had over the American economy lessens. As America becomes more energy independent, we are free to choose our friends and allies on the basis of their commitment to freedom and democracy rather than having to support dictators and tyrants because they supply the oil our economy needs. Green energy is not the solution to this problem–the technology is not yet developed enough to be practical and cost efficient. At this time, the world runs on fossil fuel, and we need to make sure that we can power our economy with our own resources.

Ruled By The Dollar

It seems as if any attempt at honesty in the energy field is met with lots of dollars being donated to oppose it. We know that the Saudis have funded a large portion of the anti-fracking movement in America because they don’t want to lose their monopoly on oil. Well, that is not the only place money is fighting science.

The Daily Caller posted an article yesterday about pushback from the wind industry’s lobbying arm.

The article reports:

Not long after Secretary of Energy Rick Perry announced a 60-day review of green energy policies’ impact on electric grid reliability, the wind industry’s lobbying arm devised a strategy to push back against the study, according to a leaked memo.

Perry’s April announcement worried the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) and others that the requested study could be used to bash subsidies and policies that allowed wind energy production to rapidly grow in recent years.

AWEA laid out a plan to engage with federal lawmakers, regulators and the media to push back against a study they saw as “supporting baseload sources such as coal and nuclear,” according to a leaked memo obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation.

In March 2011 I posted an article about Spain’s attempt to convert to green energy. The attempt was a total failure–green energy is not reliable–the wind does not blow consistently 24/7 and the sun does not shine every day. The blades of windmills and the pressure around the blades kills birds, and the air above a solar farm can literally fry birds flying by. The attempt to convert to green energy caused energy prices to skyrocket and almost tanked the Spanish economy.

The green energy lobby is already taking aim at the review of green energy policies:

Green energy supporters and environmentalists interpreted the department’s study as a lifeline to coal and nuclear power plants, many of which have been slated for closure in the coming years. The Trump administration may be more focused on promoting coal and nuclear, green energy advocates fear.

AWEA quickly circulated a memo with other green advocates to push back against Perry’s study. The group planned a media and advocacy blitz in preparation for a study critical of wind power.

AWEA personnel would discuss the study with “contacts” at the Energy Department and present their own research to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which regulates the electric grid, according to the memo sent out by AWEA CEO Tom Kiernan on April 17.

Kiernan also wanted AWEA to “pursue late April meeting with Secretary Perry and wind CEOs” and to lock down a meeting with Perry in Dallas, Texas.

The memo mentions teaming up with the Solar Energy Industries of America and the pro-green energy Advanced Energy Economy to issue a “joint response” to the study. Kiernan also suggested working with allies in Congress and the media, including The New York Times.

It’s really about the money–not the environment–the green energy industry is worried about losing its government subsidies. My feeling on that is if you can’t make green energy economically feasible without government money, then it isn’t really economically feasible and you need to go back to the drawing board and invent something better!

When Politics Becomes More Important Than Justice

On Wednesday, The National Review posted an article about the recent legal case against Texas Governor Rick Perry.

The article reports:

On Wednesday, Texas’s highest criminal court threw out the charges against Rick Perry, which came as no surprise. Lehmberg’s (Rosemary Lehmberg,Travis County prosecutor) predecessor, Ronnie Earle, pulled the same sort of stunts, with the same outcome, in his partisan campaigns against Kay Bailey Hutchison, a U.S. senator at the time, and Tom DeLay, who was the House majority leader. The point of such prosecutions isn’t to get convictions — Texas Democrats are a stupid lot, but they aren’t that stupid — but to ruin political careers, as DeLay’s was ruined, and to bankrupt and harass political opponents.

The lawsuit began when Governor Perry, following Lehmberg’s arrest for drunk driving and her subsequent inappropriate behavior, cut funding to her department unless she was removed.

The article further reports:

Governor Perry, being a reasonably responsible chief executive, judged this state of affairs to be intolerable. But Lehmberg is not a state employee subject to gubernatorial dismissal; she is an elected official of Travis County. Her office, however, is funded by the state government, and Governor Perry made it clear that he would veto that funding so long as the person in charge of the place was — let’s reiterate — an out-of-control criminal misusing her official prosecutorial powers in an attempt to suborn misconduct from law-enforcement personnel.

Governor Perry carried through on his promise, and Lehmberg retaliated by indicting him on felony charges, alleging that his use of the veto — an ordinary part of his prerogatives as governor — constituted an abuse of power. That Rosemary Lehmberg, of all people, was developing innovative theories about the abuse of official power is the source of some grim mirth. But politically motivated felony prosecution of governors and presidential candidates is no joke.

Texas is known for this kind of shenanigans. If I were to criticize Rick Perry for anything during his time as governor, it would be failing to deal with the legal system in Texas that allows the use of legal actions to destroy political careers. The population of Texas is increasing as people and corporations from states with higher taxes move there. Now is the time to fix a legal system that has too often been used for political purposes.

 

 

Something To Consider

As a conservative (and as an American), I am not yet ready to decide who I would like to see run for President as a Republican in 2016. There are a lot of good conservative young leaders in the Republican party who would run a good campaign and do a good job as President. To name a few (but not all)–Bobby Jindal, Scott Walker, and Rick Perry. You will notice that Rand Paul is not on my list. That is simply because I don’t know enough about him or his policies. The people on the list are state governors with experience in running a state that they could bring with them to being President. Rand Paul and Ben Carson are both extremely smart men who have run medical practices, but I don’t know enough about their administrative abilities or policies to be convinced–yet. However, that could change.

Last night I attended a fund raiser for Congressman Walter Jones where Rand Paul was the main speaker. There were a number of comments he made about our current state of affairs in America that impressed me.

Senator Paul spoke about the Boston Marathon bombing. As someone who was living in Massachusetts at that time, that event was earthshaking. He reminded us that the Russians had warned us about the brothers who set off the bombs. The brothers had recently traveled to a part of the world known for terrorism. Because of a variation of the spelling of their last name, Homeland Security was not tracking them. How hard would it be to create a computer program that would account for variations in spelling? Senator Paul also pointed out that the government has gotten so busy spying on Americans’ cell phones and emails that it cannot find the terrorist threats in the midst of such enormous amounts of data. He stated,”Sometimes we make the haystack so big we can’t find the needle.” That sounds like basic common sense to me!

Senator Paul also pointed out the need for a debate in Congress before we send American troops into war. The Constitution puts war powers in Congress–not with the President. We need to get back to the Constitution on deciding when and where to send our troops. He also reminded us that in every Middle Eastern country where we have toppled a secular dictator in the name of democracy we have brought instability and chaos. We also need to get back to political leaders who put the good of America ahead of their own political ambition.

Senator Paul also cited some egregious examples of government’s wasting of American taxpayer’s money.

I left the event wanting to know more about Senator Paul’s foreign policy and his specific plans to bring America back to the limited government our Founding Fathers envisioned. I hope to hear more about those things in the future so that I can make an educated choice in the 2016 Republican primary election.

Following The Money On The Rick Perry Indictment

Yesterday Newsbusters posted an article about the indictment of Texas Governor Rick Perry. It is not news to anyone that this indictment is politically motivated. According to NewmaxHarvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz told Newsmax TV’s “America’s Forum” that the governor’s indictment was driven by politics and is representative of “what happens in totalitarian societies.” What also needs to be reported is the money funding the group behind the indictment.

Newsbusters reports:

Sometimes it seems like there isn’t a single political issue that a Soros-funded group isn’t involved in. Texans for Public Justice, one of the groups behind Rick Perry’s indictment charges, is part of a “progressive” coalition that has received $500,000 from liberal billionaire George Soros

…According to KXAN, a local NBC affiliate in Austin, Texans for Public Justice filed a complaint against Perry in court last June

According to an Open Society Institute press release, OSI has given $500,000 to help form a coalition that “could change the way the progressive community engages public policy in Texas.” Besides Texans for Public Justice, this coalition includes Texans Together, the Sierra Club, Texas Legal Services, La Fe Policy Research and Education Center, Public Citizen, and the Center for Public Policy. 

Even some liberals have defended Rick Perry and dismissed the indictment charges as politically motivated. Obama senior aide David Axelrod defended Perry on Twitter, tweeting that “[u]nless he was demonstrably trying to scrap the ethics unit for other than his stated reason, Perry’s indictment seems pretty sketchy,” and MSNBC called the case against the Texas governor “weak” and “fishy.” ABC, CBS and NBC have completely ignored these liberal criticisms of the indictment. 

George Soros is not an asset to the American political system.

The Democrats Attempt To Destroy Another Contender

Unfortunately the Democrat party is very skilled at using the media to destroy Republican candidates who are a threat to Democrats in future elections.  Actually, it’s not much of a challenge, because the media tends to lean left anyway. In the past, Mitt Romney was painted as an uncaring, wealthy snob, although in Massachusetts he was known for his compassion and generous giving to those less fortunate. Sarah Palin never said, “I can see Russia from my back porch.” Tina Fey said that on Saturday Night Live, yet the quote was made to illustrate that Sarah Palin was an idiot, which she is not. The Republicans were accused on waging a ‘war on women,’ when more than one Democrat was accused of sexually harassing or groping his staff. Somehow that was overlooked. Anyway, the list goes on. The latest attempt to take out a Republican before he becomes dangerous is currently going forward in Texas. The tactic that was used to remove Tom DeLay from the political scene is now being used on Rick Perry.

Yesterday John Hinderaker at Power Line reported on the indictment of Rick Perry. He noted that the Travis County district attorney’s office was also the office that indicted Tom Delay. The article notes that it took Tom DeLay years to clear his name, and by that time, his political career was ruined. That is what the Travis County district attorney’s office is attempting to do to Rick Perry.

The article reports:

A grand jury in Travis County, Texas, indicted Governor Rick Perry today. Why? For exercising his constitutional prerogative by threatening to veto, and then vetoing, an appropriation to support the public corruption unit in Travis County’s district attorney’s office. This followed the arrest of the county’s district attorney, Democratic Party activist Rosemary Lehmberg, for drunk driving, after she was found “with an open bottle of vodka in the front passenger seat of her car in a church parking lot in Austin.” Ms. Lehmberg served 45 days in jail.

…Conservatives should respond to this indictment by rallying around Perry. The indictment is a bad joke, intended simply to generate negative publicity. As with the bogus DeLay indictment from the same source, years may go by before it is finally proved baseless. In the meantime, conservatives should stand behind Perry and denounce the politically-motivated machinations of Texas Democrats.

The politics of personal destruction has worked for Democrats in the past. It will continue to work until Republicans learn to recognize it and expose it for what it is. It’s up to conservatives to stop this attack on Rick Perry. It is quite possible that the country-club Republicans will not join us in exposing this as a political attack. Rick Perry has done and is doing a good job in Texas. He does not deserve this sort of nonsense.

Texas Isn’t Turning Blue

Breitbart.com posted an article today about the Democrats plan to turn Texas blue by bringing in a large number of Hispanic voters. It doesn’t seem to be going the way they planned.

The article points out:

“The popular thinking is that the change in the American population portends bad news for a Republican Party that’s still heavily dependent on support from those older, whiter voters,” Bump states. “Our thinking: What better place to track how that evolution might occur than Texas.”

The report compares the 2000 and 2012 presidential election results and compares them to Hispanic population density in Texas. It concludes that while there was a close link between the density of a county’s Hispanic population and its support for Democrat candidates, the voting pattern for that county did not change as the county became less white and more Hispanic.

Most voters are aware of their immediate surroundings. Texas has experienced fantastic economic growth under Governor Rick Perry. Hispanics living in Texas have shared in that growth. The Hispanic population has not embraced Democrat principles–they are acting as intelligent voters.

The article concludes:

The Post (Washington Post) article states “On average, support for the Democratic candidate dropped 10 percent by county between Gore and Kerry. It increased 5 percent between Bush and Obama, and then dropped another 13 percent between 2008 and 2012. Between 2000 and 2012, cities and the border areas voted consistently more Democratic. But the central, emptier part of the state got a lot more red.”

The vague trends led the Post to conclude, “All we can do is look at how the state evolves over time. Over the past 10 years, the population shift was subtle and the voting change barely noticeable. In 2000, Al Gore won 24 of the state’s counties. In 2012, Obama did better. He won 25.”

The Obama-encouraged wave of Hispanic immigrants may not create a Democrat party majority for the foreseeable future. The people coming here may have other ideas.

This Is How It Is Done

Yesterday Breitbart.com reported that the Australian Queensland Government has opened a North American Trade and Investment Office in Houston.

The article reports:

Speaking of Texas business, Gov. Perry said, “Today, our economy continues to win raves from the business community, including Chief Executive Magazine‘s “Top State for Business” for nine straight years. We’re also a major factor in international trade, leading the United States in exports for 12 years in a row, with more than $279 billion of goods flowing through our state in 2013. That’s an average of more than $1 billion of exports per business day, a total that’s larger than the entire GDP of countries like Chile, Nigeria, the Philippines and Portugal.”

Rick Perry understands that part of his job as Governor of Texas is the grow the economy of the state by bringing new business to the state. This is a lesson that needs to be learned by our federal government.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Pro-Abortion Movement Gives New Meaning To The Term Grassroots

The picture below is from an article by Ed Morrissey posted at Hot Air. The ad appeared in Craigslist in Austin, Texas.

craigslist-prochoice-texas

Mr. Morrissey stated in his article that he posted the picture in case the website took it down. The bottom line is simple–you can make money be being an advocate for abortion. Somehow that just doesn’t seem to belong in the concept of ‘grassroots.’

The article at Hot Air states:

The special session got announced by Gov. Rick Perry on the 26th; this ad went up three days later, and just two days before a swarm of “volunteers” arrived at the capitol building today.  Pro-choice Texas employees get paid roughly minimum wage to “stand,” I mean start, assuming that the $1300 per month is for full-time work.  The position ranges to nearly $12.70 for standing around and yelling slogans like, “Hey hey, ho ho, fully-formed human life’s got to go,” and so on.

The article reminds us that 62 percent of Texans support the bill that the special session will be taking up. I guess that is why the organizations that oppose the bill are having to pay people to show up to protest the bill.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Rick Perry Comes To New York

Texas Governor Rick Perry has been making the rounds lately–visiting states with high taxes that might cause businesses to take a look at Texas. Fred Barnes posted an article at the Weekly Standard about Governor Perry’s recent visit to Manhattan.

The article reports:

After his freshman year at Texas A&M in 1969, Perry sold Bible-related books one summer in rural Missouri. “It took weeks before I sold my first books,” he says, but he learned salesmanship. “I look at myself just like a businessman trying to sell a product,” he says. Perry told Trump he’s selling the “opportunity” for business owners to flee the “high tax, high regulation, high litigation” environment of states like New York and thrive in a free market state that lets them keep more of the money they earn. Texas has no state income tax.

Perry is never bashful. When touting Texas as a safe haven for American business, he’s doing what no governor has done before. And he’s doing it with as much fanfare and buzz as possible. Some governors send letters, urging companies to pick up stakes and move. When Perry spent a day in Connecticut last week, he bumped into Dennis Daugaard, the Republican governor of South Dakota. Both were on economic missions. The Connecticut media latched on to Perry and ignored Daugaard.

This is an example of how the United States is supposed to work. The states were set up to be independent laboratories for policies–then Congress would enact the programs that worked in the successful states and not enact the programs in the states with economic or social problems that were not being solved. Unfortunately, Congress has often chosen to do the opposite.

The advertising campaign in New York was noteworthy:

The killer line: “If you’re tired of the same old recipe of over-taxation, over-regulation, and frivolous litigation, get out before you go broke.” Perry delivered the closer. “Texas is calling,” he said. “Your opportunity awaits.” The ads made a splash.

Governor Perry’s trips and advertising campaign are paid for by a group called Texas One, a foundation that touts the state’s economy.

The article reports the goals of Governor Perry’s trip to New York:

Perry had three goals for his trip. He succeeded, partially anyway, on two. In time, he may on the third. The first was to attract businesses to Texas. Perry insists it takes nine months from his pitch to a company’s decision to move. So we’ll have to wait on that. But Perry says he expects to hear this summer that an untold number of California companies are Texas-bound.

The second goal was to stir a national debate on “blue state versus red states policies.” Perry thinks he’s set this in motion and he may have. It should shine a favorable light on the Texas model of low taxes, light regulation, and less litigation—small government that works.

Perry didn’t acknowledge the third goal. It was a test of his skill as a potential presidential candidate after his disastrous performance in last year’s race for the Republican nomination. He says he “parachuted” into that campaign both too late and unprepared. He knows better now.

I guess the primary season for the 2016 Presidential election has begun.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Why We Should All Move To Texas

Rick Perry has done it again. Politico reported on Thursday that Rick Perry has signed a bill passed by the Texas legislature that makes it legal to say “Merry Christmas.”

The bill states:

“a school district may educate students about the history of traditional winter celebrations, and allow students and district staff to offer traditional greetings regarding the celebrations, including ‘Merry Christmas,’ ‘Happy Hanukkah,’ and ‘happy holidays…“a school district may display on school property scenes or symbols associated with traditional winter celebrations, including a menorah or a Christmas tree, if the display includes a scene or symbol of more than one religion or one religion and at least one secular scene or symbol.”

It is sad that we need a bill like this to protect the religious rights of all students, but we do. Thank you, Governor Perry, for signing this bill.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Why All Patriotic Americans Should Immediately Move To Texas

Common sense has long since departed from our political discussions, but every now and then it shows up. Lately it seems as if it shows up a lot in Texas. Today’s Houston Chronicle is reporting that the Texas Department of Transportation will take over the funding for the thirteen small air traffic control towers that the federal government has stopped funding.

The article reports:

The decision must be approved by the Texas Transportation Commission, which is scheduled to meet Thursday in an emergency session.

TxDOT will get the money from existing state aviation funds, said spokesman Mark Cross.

The estimated cost of paying the air traffic controllers is $7 million a year, Cross said.

The initiative for the funding came from Gov. Rick Perry‘s office, he said.

The sequester cuts are all for show. The government will still spend more money this year and next year than it did the year before. The idea that we are being harmed by the sequester is political garbage (that’s not the world I really wanted to use, but this blog is rated “G”).

Thank you, Governor Perry, for exposing the sequester spending cuts sham for what it is.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Cost Of Taking The Politically Incorrect Stand

 

 

Big Government posted an article yesterday about a program in Texas to aid low-income women that has been defunded by the Obama Administration. Remember that this is happening at a time when the Republicans are accused of waging a ‘war on women.’ Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), stated Friday that a Texas health program for low-income women will no longer receive federal funding because Planned Parenthood has been banned from the program.

The article reports:

Two weeks ago, Texas state officials announced plans to prevent Planned Parenthood from participating in the Medicaid Women’s Health Program, which provides health screenings and contraceptive services. The state has made the decision to exclude clinics from the program that are affiliated with abortion providers, even though the clinics themselves do not provide abortions.

Ms. Sebelius said that the federal government, which has covered about 90% of the cost of the program, will gradually end the program over the next few months. “The waiver will not be extended,” she said. “We’ve put them on notice.”

Federal requirements stipulate that the state is not permitted to exclude qualified providers from the women’s program, and Texas has not received a waiver from those regulations.

Texas Governor Rick Perry has made the appropriate response, “We’re going to fund this program. Listen, we’ll find the money. The state is committed to this program…This program is not going away.”

Governor Perry has directed his state’s secretary of the Health and Human Services Commission to work with the Texas legislature to locate funding for the program. Approximately 130,000 women are enrolled in the program.

Planned Parenthood is a major source of funding for Democrat Party campaigns. Much of the money they make on Medicaid patients eventually finds its way into Democrat campaign coffers. That is one of the things that makes the battle about Planned Parenthood and anything that threatens their income so intense–you are not only taking on Planned Parenthood–you are taking on the funding of the Democrat Party.

The article concludes:

Yet, speaking of her warning to the state that their law would end funding for the program, the secretary said, “”They knew … they are not allowed to deny women the right to choose.”

First, when did something being “illegal” ever stop this administration before?

Second, is Kathleen Sebelius really hoping we haven’t noticed that, while she is telling us “it is illegal to spend any federal money on abortion,” the Obama administration is also forcing the Catholic Church and other religious groups to provide abortion-inducing drugs to their employees, free of charge?

It is illegal for federal funds to be used to pay for abortions directly, but the millions of dollars the federal government gives to Planned Parenthood provide the infrastructure so that abortion is a profitable business for Planned Parenthood. Thank you, Rick Perry, for taking a stand against this.

Enhanced by Zemanta

America’s Political Sage Sums Up The Debate

Late last night, Michael Barone posted an article at the Washington Examiner analyzing the night’s debate in New Hampshire. Michael Barone is the main author of The Almanac of American Politics, which is published every two years. He a very knowledgeable political observer and very accurate predictor of future political events.

Mr. Barone states in the article:

At about 10:28pm tonight, as Mitt Romney pivoted from a question on tax loopholes and started in with, “the real issue is vision,” I had recorded this thought in my notes, “He just clinched the nomination.”

Romney said, as he often has, that Barack Obama has put America on the road to decline and is trying to make America more like Europe. He made reference to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, as he often has—which helps to explain why he polls about as well with supporters of the tea party movement, who revered and often reference the Founding documents, as with non-supporters—and proclaimed that the question in this election was whether America was going to remain “a unique nation”and whether it would “return to the principles on which it was founded.” To which Newt Gingrich then meekly concurred, adding some caveats.

The article goes on to detail the performance of each of the candidates in the debate. According to Mr. Barone, Mitt Romney moved forward in the debate, and Rick Perry positioned himself for the race in South Carolina. The other candidates pretty much stayed where they were before the debate.

I live in Massachusetts. I lived here when Mitt Romney was Governor. He did a good job considering the legislature he had to work with. I think Romneycare would have been a lot worse without Romney as Governor. I could easily vote for him in the 2012 election, although frankly he is not my first choice. I think his success in running against Barack Obama will largely depend on his choice of a running mate. There are a lot of very good options for him out there.

Enhanced by Zemanta

An Interesting Turn Of Events

 

 

Big Government is reporting today on an interesting twist of events that has resulted in Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry being excluded from the Virginia Republican primary ballot. It seems that in the Presidential primaries of 2000, 2004, and 2008, 10,000 signatures were required, but those signatures were not checked.

The article reports:

The only reason the Virginia Republican Party checked the signatures for validity for the current primary is that in October 2011, an independent candidate for the legislature, Michael Osborne, sued the Virginia Republican Party because it did not check petitions for its own members, when they submitted primary petitions. Osborne had no trouble getting the needed 125 valid signatures for his own independent candidacy, but he charged that his Republican opponent’s primary petition had never been checked, and that if it had been, that opponent would not have qualified. The lawsuit, Osborne v Boyles, cl 11-520-00, was filed in Bristol County Circuit Court. It was filed too late to be heard before the election, but is still pending. The effect of the lawsuit was to persuade the Republican Party to start checking petitions. If the Republican Party had not changed that policy, Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry would be on the 2012 ballot.

As much as I would like to see both Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry in the Virginia primary, I support the idea of checking signatures (I also support voter ID laws). I think we need to make sure that our elections truly do represent the idea of ‘one man, one vote.’

Enhanced by Zemanta

A New Political Low

U.S. Department of Homeland Security Official ...

Image via Wikipedia

I understand that presidential primaries can be nasty, but sometimes things get totally out of hand. Recent events in Texas show how our political system can be manipulated to the detriment of our national security.

CBN News is reporting today that Mohammed Elibiary, an advisor to the Department of Homeland Security, was given access to sensitive government documents. Mr. Elibiary then leaked some of those documents to the media. Supposedly, his goal was to defeat the presidential campaign of Texas Governor Rick Perry by accusing him of “Islamophobia.”

The article reports:

Out of 26 members on the Department of Homeland Security’s Advisory Council, only Elibiary was granted access to a nationwide database that includes terror watch lists and sensitive FBI reports. 

Mr. Elibiary is not an obvious candidate to be working with the Department of Homeland Security. The article reports:

In 2004, he spoke at a Texas conference honoring Iran’s notorious Ayatollah Khomeini as a “great Islamic visionary.”

He’s written in praise of one of the most influential Islamic radicals of the modern era: former Muslim Brotherhood leader Sayyid Qutb.

And he has spoken out against the prosecution of Hamas fundraisers in the U.S.

In a disturbing 2006 email exchange with a Dallas Morning News editor, Elibiary wrote: “Treat people as inferiors and you can expect someone to put a banana in your exhaust pipe or something.”

This really does not fit my definition of a ‘moderate’ Muslim. The good news here is that Mr. Elibiary’s access to the database of the Department of Homeland Security has reportedly been revoked.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Just Wondering …

The Daily Caller reported today that Herman Cain told reporters today that he would not answer questions about the alleged charges against him while he was speaking to the group Docs4PatientCare at the group’s annual meeting in Alexandria, Virginia. I have no problem with that–the whole story is ridiculous. The Women’s Liberation movement has made sexual harassment charges a joke–anything you decide makes you uncomfortable can be classified as sexual harassment. The standard is so low that opening a door for a woman can be considered harassment.

Anyway. I am wondering where these charges came from. I have no doubt that someone who claimed harassment was paid a severance and let go. I just want to know who she approached with her information. My actual guess is that the attack came from the Republican establishment. If they are really good, they will blame Rick Perry for the attack–that would eliminate two non-Republican-establishment candidates at once. I realize that I am in the tall weeds here, but I do wonder who gave the story to Politico. I don’t think Herman Cain has handled the charges well, but he is so inexperienced and understaffed that he can easily be caught off guard.

I do wonder who dug up the dirt and I am prepared not to believe anything I hear about the source until well after the 2012 election. The truth may or may not ever come out!

Enhanced by Zemanta

Between A Rock And A Hard Place

There is an old joke (I’m a grandmother—all I know are old jokes) about a man walking back and forth under a streetlight. A friend comes by and asks him what he is doing. The man who is walking explains that he dropped his keys when he got out of his car, so he is looking for them. The second man asks why, since the car is parked across the street, the first man is looking on the other side of the street. The first man replies, “Because the light is better here.” That is my commentary on the current state of the mainstream media.

Big Journalism posted an article yesterday contrasting the media’s charges of racism against Rick Perry because of a rock on a property he did not own and the way President Obama’s more recent association with the New Black Panthers has been covered. This dust-up has nothing to do with Rick Perry–it has to do with the political left’s belief that Mitt Romney will be an easier candidate for Barack Obama to defeat. If Mitt Romney is the nominee, the left will attack him on Romneycare and his Mormonism. They have no other weapons.

President Obama’s economic plans have been a total failure. The only way that he can win re-election is to destroy any candidates who could defeat him and make sure his opposition is vulnerable enough to be defeated. Republicans need to be very careful not to let the mainstream media choose their candidates.

Please follow the link to the Big Journalism article to see the contrast in the reporting of ‘racism’ regarding Rick Perry and President Obama. We need to be very careful not to let the mainstream media determine who the Republican presidential candidate will be.

Enhanced by Zemanta

What 2010 Election ?

Tea Party Patriots

Image by Gage Skidmore via Flickr

The 2010 midterm elections were not good news for the Democrat Party. The issues were runaway spending, Obamacare, and the economy in general. The Democrats lost six seats in the Senate, 63 seats in the House of Representatives, and six governorships. The Tea Party played a part in the Republican victories. The Tea Party (and the Republicans) made some mistakes, but overall, the election was a statement by the American people that they wanted less government, less spending, and repeal of Obamacare. Unfortunately, the current administration (and Democrat leadership and much of the Republican leadership) did not get the message.

Reuters is reporting today that the Democrat members of the debt super committee are insisting that the negotiations begin with raising taxes.

The article reports:

During the super committee’s initial closed-door meetings, “Republicans wanted to just talk about spending cuts and Democrats said, ‘No,'” the aide said.

Republicans strongly oppose tax hikes, arguing they will hurt an anemic economic recovery. But they have not ruled out closing some tax loopholes as part of tax reform. Democrats, including President Barack Obama, insist revenue increases must be part of any deficit reduction deal.

Democrats’ calls for increasing taxes on the rich may have been bolstered by a new Congressional Research Service analysis. The September 23 report obtained by Reuters concluded that letting decade-old tax cuts for the wealthy expire at the end of next year as scheduled “could help reduce budget deficits in the short term without stifling the economic recovery.”

On Thursday, The Hill reported why the Senate has not taken up President Obama’s bill to balance the budget:

“The oil-producing-state senators don’t like eliminating or reducing the subsidy for oil companies,” (Dick) Durbin said. “There are some senators who are up for election who say ‘I’m never gonna vote for a tax increase while I’m up for election, even on the wealthiest people.’ So, we’re not gonna have 100 percent of Democratic senators. That’s why it needs to be bipartisan and I hope we can find some Republicans who will join us to make it happen.”

If the future of America were not at stake, this would be comical.  I agree with Rick Perry’s statement, “I’ll work to try to make DC as inconsequential in your life as I can.” That’s the attitude we need in Washington.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Why Are We Making All This Noise About Straw Polls A Year Before The Election ?

Dewey Defeats Truman

Image by scriptingnews via Flickr

Many of us are not thriving in President Obama’s economy. I understand that. I also understand that there is something in human nature that wants bad things to end. However, we have somehow descended into a political system that is in campaign mode all the time. The presidential campaign starts the day after a new president is elected. We need to stop that. I realize it gives us more time to size up the candidates, but other than the political junkies, no one will be paying attention until next June anyway. What has happened to our political system?

There was a Republican straw poll in Florida yesterday (the day after the Republican debate). Yesterday’s Washington Times reported that Herman Cain received 37 percent of the more than 2,600 votes cast.

Another Washington Times story posted the numbers for all the candidates:

Herman Cain, 37.1%
Rick Perry, 15.4%
Mitt Romney, 14.0%
Rick Santorum, 10.9%
Ron Paul, 10.4%
Newt Gingrich, 8.4%
Jon Huntsman, 2.3%
Michele Bachmann, 1.5%

William Kristol at the Weekly Standard posted an article partially explaining the results. He points out that even though Rick Perry did not do well in the debate, the disappointed voters did not move their support to Mitt Romney. Mr. Kristol also points out that the debate and straw poll will result in Rick Santorum and Herman Cain both getting more serious consideration by the voters. Mr. Kristol also suggests that a lot of people will be carefully watching Chris Christie’s Reagan Library speech on Tuesday.

The bottom line here is that the debates are not necessarily constructive at this time. They are something of a ‘gotcha’ game where the Democrat party can do opposition research. I really question the wisdom of starting the debate process this early.

 

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Be Careful Who You Believe When You Look For Fact-Checkers

"The Honorable Rick Perry (front right), ...

Image via Wikipedia

Yesterday John Hinderaker at Power Line posted an article about Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post, a liberal reporter who now claims to be The Fact-Checker, and his fact checking of a recent Rick Perry speech. When asked whether there should be a Palestinian state, Rick Perry called for Palestine to denounce terrorism and to require that any Palestinian state be required to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist. Sounds pretty basic to me.

The Fact-Checker replied:

As part of the 1993 Oslo accords, in an exchange of letters between then Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat and Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, the Palestine Liberation Organization met all of these conditions nearly 20 years ago. The letters are posted on the Web site of the Israeli Foreign Ministry.

Really? Is Mr. Kessler familiar with the term ‘Intifada?’ Mr. Hinderaker points out that Palestinian children are taught that Jews have no right to be in Palestine and the maps shown to these children show Palestine as including all of present-day Israel.

The article at Power Line concludes:

One last thing: Kessler thinks that Israel has nothing to fear because of a twenty-year-old letter from a dead terrorist. What is the PA’s real intention, as of today? Look no farther than this: as Scott reported earlier today, “Palestine” is represented in the United Nations by the heroine Latifa Abu Hmeid. What is her claim to fame? She is the mother of no fewer than four terrorist murderers, who together are serving a total of 18 life sentences. Is Rick Perry’s concern about whether the Palestinians and their leaders are really reconciled to the existence of Israel unfounded? Let’s be blunt: Glenn Kessler either is woefully ignorant of Middle Eastern history, or he is deliberately misleading his readers.

Palestine does not want a two-state solution–they want a one-state solution with Palestine as the state. Creating a Palestinian state at this time under the current Palestinian culture would be a recipe for war–not peace. Until the schools stop teaching hate and the state stops honoring terrorists and terrorism, we need to make sure Israel is armed to the teeth. That is the path to peace in the Middle East. A weak Israel is an easy target.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Some Random Thoughts On The Debate Tonight

I’m good at random–it’s how my mind works!

Mitt Romney or Rick Perry will be the nominee. My husband tells me it will be Mitt Romney. I would be happy with either one (although I would be happier with Rick Perry).

Mitt Romney knows how to create jobs as a member of the private sector. Rick Perry knows how to create an environment that promotes jobs in the private sector.

I tend to think Mitt Romney will be more ‘politically correct’ than Rick Perry. That’s something I like about Rick Perry.

There is probably very little difference in the ideas and policies of Mitt Romney and Rick Perry. Either man would be good for the country at this time.

I just wish we could see a Republican debate moderated by Republicans. I would like to see Bill Bennett, Hugh Hewitt, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly moderate a Republican debate.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Watching The Foxes Moderate The Townhall Meeting They Held With The Chickens To Discuss Security In The Chicken Coop

"The Honorable Rick Perry (front right), ...

Image via Wikipedia

Sorry, I couldn’t resist that. The fact remains that in order to get airtime on stations that cater to the left side of the political spectrum, Republicans are having to engage in some debates moderated by people who do not want them to win or to communicate their ideas to the American people. You are welcome to disagree, but that is the view from where I sit.

Byron York at the Washington Examiner posted his take on the debate early this morning. He felt that Rick Perry did well, but walked into two minefields that could be a problem for his campaign–in the past Governor Perry has called Social Security a Ponzi scheme (it is, but it’s not polite to call it that), and Governor Perry sees more value in boots on the ground at the border than a fence (true, but not always popular). Byron York sees the race as between Rick Perry and Mitt Romney. I think that is generally the conventional wisdom.

During the debate, Governor Perry and Governor Romney discussed who had created the most jobs as governor. Guess what–nobody cares. We just want to know what you will do with the current unemployment situation.

Andrew Malcolm at the Los Angeles Times simply broke the debate into award categories. He listed both Rick Perry and Mitt Romney as winners. He also gave Newt Gingrich the award for most eloquent–noting that the loudest applause came when Newt chastised the moderators for asking questions to divide the candidates rather than contrast their views with the President’s.

To me, the debate illustrated the political and cultural divide we currently have in this country. When Brian Williams seemed concerned that the audience applauded the use of the death penalty in Texas, Rick Perry had to explain to him that they were applauding the concept of justice. There is a portion of our society that has lost the concept of justice and confused it with not being compassionate. I support compassion, but believe that without justice compassion is useless. I regret that a murderer is being executed, but I believe the family of his victim is entitled to justice. I don’t want to see a murderer back on the street in ten years. That almost guarantees future victims and is not compassionate.

All in all, I think the debate went well. I look forward to a debate in the future with a less biased moderator.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Governor Romney’s Economic Plan

Governor Romney has released his plan for turning around the economy. Yesterday John HInderaker at Power Line released his initial evaluation of the plan. The article at Power Line posted a graph comparing the Obama ‘recovery’ to recoveries from past recessions. This is the chart:

That chart makes it pretty clear that we have a problem.

The article also includes a chart on the number of new of government regulations:

The uncertainty caused by the increase in government regulations is one reason companies are reluctant to hire new employees at this time. One of the tenets of Governor Romney’s economic plan is to undo the excessive regulations put into place by the Obama administration.

At this point I would like to insert a few thoughts about the Republican Primary race. I live in Massachusetts, and I feel that Governor Romney did a good job as governor of the state. Those who criticize the Governor for passing healthcare in this state do not understand the political composition of the state. Massachusetts is a one-party state that occasionally elects a Republican governor. The Democrats hold overwhelming majorities in the state legislature and pretty much do what they want (to the point where the last few leaders of the legislature have been sent to jail). Governor Romney could not have stopped healthcare in Massachusetts–he could only attempt to make it less awful, which he did. That said, I will be voting for Governor Perry in the Republican Primary. I like Mitt Romney, but I like Governor Perry better. Either one will be a very good candidate to run against Barack Obama.

Enhanced by Zemanta