Pastdate post

dfd

Obama's Friends (Part 8): Barack Obama and James Cone

Alright. Full Disclosure. I have no evidence that Barack Obama ever met James Cone. But I do know that James Cone is the source of Jeremiah Wright's theology. Wright himself credits Cone for his belief structure. And we all know that Jeremiah Wright is Obama's Spiritual guide. We also know that Obama's church's bookstore is full of James Cone's books. So let's see what he has to say:

Watch: Reverend Wright Affirms James Cone's Influence Video.

Some Quotes from Cone's Book:
"Black Theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy" (James Cone; Black Theology & Black Power)

"Whiteness, as revealed in the history of America, is the expression of what is wrong with man. It is a symbol of man's depravity. God cannot be white, even though white churches have portrayed him as white. When we look at what whiteness has done to the minds of men in this country, we can see clearly what the New Testament meant when it spoke of the principalities and powers."
- James H. Cone; Black Theology & Black Power; 150

Read the American Thinker Article on James Cone

Obama's Friends (Part 7): Barack Obama and Jesse Jackson Jr.

This is from the Co-Chairman of Obama's Campaign with regard to Hillary Clinton...

"The natural reminder here is O.J. [Simpson] -- how does an African American candidate attack a white woman?" (Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr. (D. ILL)
Read Jesse L. Jackson Jr.'s Comment

No denunciation from Obama for the remark...
No attention from the media for the remark...

Imagine if Hillary's campaign made a comment about lynchings or slavery, she'd be finished. Yet somehome Obama is immune from any kind of real scrutiny.

Obama's Friends (Part 6): Barack Obama and Wife Michelle Obama

Does this woman represent you and your country?

"For the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country"
-Michelle Obama

Michelle Obama Comment Video

Obama Won't Wear Flag Pin, Won't Sing National Anthem, and Flies Communist Flag

And why do people want him to be president??

Watch These Short Clips:
Obama Won't Wear Flag Pin
Obama Won't Sing National Anthem or Place Hand Over Heart
Official Obama Campaign Office Flies Communist Flag

All of Obama's Friends...Very Scary

The last 5 posts have outlined Obama's friends. It has been said you can learn a lot about a person by the company that he keeps. So what does this list say about Obama? In each and every case he has had to devise clever excuses to get past the obvious conclusions:

1) He Agrees with them. (and/or)
2) He Simply has poor judgement.

In either or both case(s), is this who we want to be in charge of our country?

Let's Recap Obama's Friend List:
1) Tony Rezko
2) Pastor Jeremiah Wright
3) Father Pfleger and Louis Farrakhan (not directly friends...)
4) William Ayers
5) Bernardine Dohrn

This video is phenomenal and gives a clear picture of who Obama really is...

Obama Video

Obama's Friends (Part 5): Barack Obama and Bernardine Dohrn

I was going to combine Bernardine Dohrn with William Ayers since they have a similar and connected association with Barack Obama but to be fair they are separate people. Here's a Brief Sketch:

1) Once on the FBIs 10 most wanted list.
2) J. Edgar Hoover called her "The Most Dangerous Woman in America."
3) Member of the Weather Underground.
4) Dorhn is Married to William Ayers.

More:
Video (watch the whole thing, it is admitedly biased yet truthful...)

Obama's Friends (Part 4): Barack Obama and William Ayers

This is one of the scariest of all associations. When Barack Obama was coming up in the political world in the South Side of Chicago he chose to associate himself with William Ayers:
1)Obama was at Ayers home to launch his State Senate Candidacy.
2)He sat on a Non-Profit Board with Ayers (even after Ayers admitted bombings).
3)Obama even credits his "community organizing" philosophy and training to Ayers.

So who is William Ayers you ask?

1) Ayers is a home grown terrorist akin to Timothy McVeigh.
2) Ayers was the Weather Underground bomber of the Pentagon.
3) Ayers Quote: "I DON'T regret setting bombs; I feel we didn't do enough." (NY Times, Sept. 11, 2001)

Learn More About Ayers:
Video: Obama and Ayers
Ayers and Obama Article

Obama's Friends (Part 3): Barack Obama, Father Pfleger, and Fa

I did not separate Father Pfleger and Louis Farrakhan into 2 posts for 1 main reason. I can't find a personal connection between them and Obama. I am convinced that they have had interactions personally with Obama, but I can't readily find those connections. In both cases, however, both of these men are "friends" of Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ where Obama attended and gave money to for the last 20 years. Farrakhan was awarded the Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award by the church. Pfleger is clearly anti-American among other things. Both of these men endorsed Obama and in both cases Obama half-heartedly rejected those endorsements. It should be noted that he did not "denounce" the men...

See For Yourselves:
Louis Farrakhan and Obama

Father Pfleger and Obama

Obama's Friends (Part 2): Barack Obama and Pastor Jeremiah Wright

Well, how much more can we say about the 20 year Pastor, Mentor, and Friend of Obama. Jeremiah Wright married the Obamas, baptized their children, and came up with the title for Barack Obama's book. In case you have been asleep for the last few months, here are some of Jeremiah Wright's views:

1) The US Government created Aids to kill black people.
2) The US Government involved in/caused 911.
3) He is racist against whites...(I will not elaborate, see for yourself....)
4) He follows Black Liberation Theology as outlined by Jim Cone (James Hal Cone) who is Jeremiah Wright's mentor and who wrote: "If God is not for us and AGAINST WHITE PEOPLE, then he is a MURDERER and we had better kill him..." (This is a paraphrase, from Jim Cone's book please see the links below)

For Confirmational Purposes See and Read below:
The Best of Jeremiah Wright: God Dxxn America, Aids, White People, Black Jesus..
More On Jim Cone and His View on God
Racist Confirmation?

Obama's Friends (Part 1): Barack Obama and Tony Rezko (not Resco or Rezco)

This post will begin a series of posts to outline who Obama's friends were as he was an up and coming politician in Chicago and who he kept in touch with up until this point.

First on the List is Tony Rezko (falsely spelled Resco or Rezco).

When it came up in a debate with Hillary Clinton about Obama's relationship with "slumlord" Tony Rezco, Obama stated that he did about 5 hours of work for Mr. Rezko at the law firm where he worked when he was a junior attorney. Those 5 hours were allegedly out of hundreds of hours that the law firm represented Tony Rezko.

The Truth:
1) Barack Obama has had real estate dealings that involved Tony Rezko that many have called "shady" since 2006. At the time of these dealings, Rezko was under investigation and indictment.
2) Barack Obama did do legal work for Tony Rezko (as he stated).
3) Tony Rezko was one of Obama's biggest supporters and fundraisers from the beginning of Obama's campaign until just recently.
4) Tony Rezko was just found guilty of 16 separate counts to include bribery, fraud, and money laundering to name a few.

Hmmm...seems like Barack Obama has had a little bit of a closer relationship with Tony RezKo than he originally lead on.

More for your reading pleasure:
Antoin Rezko Found Guilty
Obama on Rezko Real Estate Deal

The Federal Budget, The Cost of War, Healthcare, and Other Thoughts

What follows here is an email that I sent to a friend the other day.
-------------------------
Hey Buddy,

In the spirit of friendly debate, I researched some things you and I spoke about regarding the Federal Government and the Budget.

In our discussion regarding Universal Health Care I had stated that the Government can't sufficiently run any fiscal enterprise to which you responded "what about Medicare, what about the Post Office." Let's look at those things.
(See Website links at the bottom of this email.)

The Federal Government's Record on Running Fiscal Things:
1) The Latest Estimates have Medicare Bankrupt by 2019.
2) The Latest Estimates have Social Security Bankrupt by 2041.
3) In 2007 the Post Office had a $5.4B deficit!
4) 2008 Post Office projections- $600Million deficit.

The Federal Government has proven time and again that it can't run things as good as the Free Market.

Federal Budget Breakdown
Also, I said that 1/2 of the Federal Budget goes to entitlement programs to which you disagreed. Lets Take a look:
1) Social Security- 20% of Federal Budget
2) Medicare- 13.6% of Federal Budget
3) Medicaid- 9.5% of Federal Budget

So you were right, it isn't 50%, it’s closer to 44%.

4) Of course if you add in Unemployment/Welfare- 12.7% of Federal Budget, then you have 57% of Federal Budget going to Social Needs. - not infrastructure, defense, law enforcement....

The question that begs to be asked is why are social needs are part of the Federal Budgets?? Why aren't states taking care of their citizens?

I repeatedly hear that the war in Iraq is "Bankrupting our Country", I'm not sure if you used those words but you definitely shared the sentiment. Now to be sure, I don't like war, but lets look at the #s:

The War on Iraq as Compared to other Federal Expenditures
The war in Iraq has cost the U.S. about $500 billion TOTAL. That is less than $100 Billion per year. Let's compare that with other U.S. Government expenditures:

War in Iraq/year- $100 Billion/year
Social Security- $586 Billion/year (5 times as much as War each year)
Medicare- $396 Billion (4 times as much as War each year)
Unemployment/Welfare-$294 Billion (3 times as much as War each year)

War/Defense vs. Education
As for the other argument that people use against the War and about Defense spending in general is that we spend much more on these things than on education. This is a False Argument. Yes at the Federal level we do spend more. But if you add all the State Budgets together, this Nation spends far more on education than on the military. Florida alone spent $23 Billion dollars on education.


Universal Healthcare:
Adding Universal Healthcare to the list of government subsidies will be another program that the government cannot sufficiently run. I agree something needs to be done, but the Fed. Government stepping in is not the answer. If people want this so bad why aren't they going to their State governments as did the people of Mass. where they actually have Universal Healthcare through private solutions?

State Governments:
If people understood how our country worked they would get more of what they want. Everyone wants the Federal Gov’t to step in and tell the states what to do...until they step into their own state of course.... If people used their state governments properly, they'd improve education, they wouldn't need welfare, they'd have booming economies.... The Federal Government is there to Protect us and to enable interstate processes....not tell states how to do things...

Well, if you made it this far, I'd love to hear your thoughts...


References and Links:

Medicare Bankrupt / SS Bankrupt
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/medicare-social-security-outlooks-show/story.aspx?guid={940319E6-C595-4BB4-B3B5-D9C96053FAA6}

http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/beat_the_press_archive?month=07&year=2007&base_name=michael_gupta_says_medicare_is

Post Office deficit
http://federaltimes.com/index.php?S=3065789

Federal Entitlement Spending
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10609044/

Federal Budget
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget%2C_2007

Cost of War in Iraq
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_cost_of_the_Iraq_War

http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home

Jeremiah Wright Says We are "Attack"ing the "Black Church"

For Obama's Pastor to say that the criticism against his comments and Obama for sitting in his church is an attack on the "Black Church" is ridiculous on multiple fronts.

First, we never said we were attacking the "black" community (church or otherwise), we are bringing to light WRIGHT's comments. Why can't he take the heat for what HE said? Instead he wants to bring ALL African American with him as if they all share HIS views.

Why wouldn't I give all African Americans the same benefit that I give all Americans which is that they don't all agree with Wright? But Jeremiah Wright would have us believe that he is the norm... Really Mr. Wright..... And this is supposed to help racism in this country...

But to me the more pressing issue is his use of the word "Church." I understand that African Americans have their own heritage and tradition. We all do. But using it with the word "Church" as in "Attacking The Black Church" shows how little understanding this man has of Christianity. For in Christianity "there is no Jew or Gentile" meaning no separation of people. There is ONE Church and that is the Church of Jesus Christ. And by him saying "The Black Church" it is just another step Wright is taking to ensure that prejudice and racism is perpetuated not only in economic or politics, but in religion also.

To Watch The Video of his remarks: "Attack on the Black Church"

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/04/28/sot.wright.attack.on.church.cnn?iref=videosearch

Jimmy Carter Makes Me Sick, Actually He Should Be Charged With Treason

Alright, I can't stay quiet about Jimmy Carter much longer. I stayed quiet when good-ole Jimbo called Bush the "worst president in this countries history," a title he himself has held for the last 30 or so years. Which was laughable since a lot of what we are dealing with in the Middle East today can directly be related to Carter's ineptitude as President. Let's remember that it was during Carter's term that Iran ceased to be our ally.

But Carter's latest bout of narcissism is tantamount to Treason itself. Carter has taken it upon himself to be an envoy to the Middle East. That in itself isn't the problem. The issue is that Jimmy is doing it in such a way as to spit in the U.S.'s face. He honored Arafat's grave. He has met with Hamas. Incidentally, even Obama and Clinton have gone on record as saying they would not meet with Hamas.

Carter has hailed himself as an advocate of Democracy all over the world. So what is he thinking by meeting with Hamas? They are not a democratically elected government. They are a known terrorist organization who refuses to recognize Israel's right to be a nation.

How is this not treason? He is outwardly defying our President and our Government and working against our best interests all the while spitting in the face of Israel, our ally. Even Democrats in Congress are upset with this latest stunt by former President, Carter.

And you know what this shows? It shows that Jimmy Carter simply doesn't care about the United States' best interest but rather he is more concerned with his own warped view of his supposed legacy.

Furthermore, what kind of message does this send to the world? They don't know we think Jimmy Carter's a joke. All they know is that he was a President at one time.

Admittedly I don't know the law in this regard, but I wish that someone who had the power to would bring him up on charges of Treason. Even if they don't stand, at least it will send a message to all of these people in our country that simply will not stand with us and will not act in the best interests of our nation's security.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080418/ap_on_re_mi_ea/carter_palestinians

Add To Technorati

Technorati Profile

Babies are a Punishment: More Obama Nonsense on Abortion

Obama says that babies are a punishment....funny, I thought they were a joy, a blessing, something to love....

Of course an "unwanted" pregnancy can be scary and I won't pretend to know what going through that must be like. But for Obama to say about his daughters "But if they made a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby" shows just how far to the left he really is. So even Obama's daughters don't have to take responsibility for their own actions. And here is the irony. It also shows where Obama's heart is. Is he suggesting that he and his wife would not help his daughters? We aren't talking about a poor family that can't make ends meet and feed another mouth. Why would it be a punishment? The whole family should step up and help out.

Consequences are a part of life. Is it punishment if you get a ticket for speeding, break your leg while skydiving, or get lung cancer while smoking? I guess you can call them punishment, but they are all consequences and a part of what it means to be a human. In the adult world we call the results of our actions "consequences" that are caused by us and not "punishments" that happen to us.

On another note, an "unwanted" pregnancy, does not automatically equate to an "unwanted" baby. There are many unwanted pregnancies that lead to well loved babies. But in Barak Obama's world an unwanted pregnancy leads to punishment. That is how he refers to millions of U.S. citizens today born to single mothers- as punishments.

I'm not sure what kind of Christian Church Obama goes to or what "brand" of Christianity he prescribes to but my Bible tells us that we were formed by God in our mother's womb (Psalm 139). My Bible tells me to take up my cross each day. (Luke 9:23)

Check out an article for the reference and video at this page:
http://christiannewswire.com/news/311726126.html

Hillary Clinton: Liar or Delusional about Bosnia Trip and "sniper fire"

Well Hillary is at it again. In an attempt to show how much she had to do with her husbands administration she told a tale of how she endured sniper fire as she got off the plane while on a trip to Bosnia in 1996. It's funny, but from this picture of her and a little girl on the runway you wouldn't know that she was in any danger.

Now she's saying she mispoke! Really....that's what we call lying now... How do you mispeak about something so clearly wrong? Look at the picture and tell me how you could forget this scene and replace it with one of violence...
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/25/campaign.wrap/index.html#cnnSTCText

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/03/hillarys_balkan_adventures_par.html

http://www.slate.com/id/2187780/

Obama Shows Clear Lack of Judgment (again) and is not Fit to Be President

My previous post focused on why Obama's is different from other Christian pastors and also described Obama's connection to him. The question I left unanswered is twofold:

1) Why this matters?
2) Should Obama be held accountable for his Pastor's remarks?

My answers:
It does indeed matter that for almost 20 years Obama has sat under this man's guidance (see below post for details). It clearly shows a lack of judgment on Obama's part. If he believes his pastor, he certainly isn't fit to be president as he has no concept of reality. If he doesn't believe his pastor, then his Christianity, beliefs, and values are all a ruse since he stayed in a church that he doesn't agree with. In either case he does not have the judgment necessary to be president and he certainly doesn't represent me.

Now, what about people who say that he didn't know about these comments? My answer is: are you serious? If he was in church he knew about them. If he wasn't in church enough to hear about them then he has lied to us about his faith. Anyone who goes to church knows that each pastor has certain themes. These themes are consistently intertwined in their messages. Watching Wrights remarks and the emotion with which he presents them makes it clear this is no passing matter. It is at the heart of who he is and it is something he consistently preaches.

The bottom line is this. Obama most certainly knew about them and that raises serious concerns about his judgment.

On a separate but related note....
I have heard all kinds of commentators saying that whites don't understand the black church in America and that we are taking comments like "Gxx Damn America" and "911 was an inside job" and "Bill Clinton....was riding dirty...over blacks.... out of context. Boy do they have that right. There is no such thing as a church that claims to be Christian and separate itself as a "black church." There is only one Christian Church and it is the "Church of Christ." There is only one Gospel and it is the "Gospel of Christ."

For a church to make a distinction of itself as separate yet still in Christ they have just showed how far off from the purpose of church and the message of Christ they really are....

Barak Obama and Pastor Jeremiah Wright: It should concern us

Recently Barak Obama has mildly spoken out against his Pastor Jeremiah Wright. This is supposed to appease his supporters and quell his detractors. Really? Why would we believe this isn't simply a ploy to save his political career, or at the very least his presidential bid?

Are we to believe that Obama, a member of Wrights church for almost 20 years, didn't know about Wright's views on America, 911, and whites, just to name a few?

Are we to believe that Obama, who Wright married and baptized his children and called a personal friend, truly shares the same view of Christianity of the average church going American?

That is the issue.

Yes, people are saying that we hold the McCain's relationship to his pastor, Rod Parsely, to the same standard. Ok, lets do that. Parsely hasn't spoken out about America. Parsely hasn't said that 911 is an inside job. Parsely hasn't caused division among the races. Parsely hasn't used inappropriate sexual references and gestures in his church. Parsely hasn't taken the Lord's name in church.

Yes, Parsely speaks out against social sin as defined by the Bible. It is no secret that the Bible speaks against sexual immorality. It is no secret that the Bible speaks about judgment to sinners. This is not earth shattering. These are well known positions.

Here is some of what Jeremiah Wright has said (I will be paraphrasing. You can see watch video after video of his comments on Youtube or in any of a number of articles.

Wright has said that: "Bill Clinton did the Black people like he did Monica Lewinsky" That he was "Riding Dirty (add hip thrusts and grinds)" while in church. That "911 was an Inside Job." "Gxx Damn America." and a whole host of other Anti-American, Anti-White comments.

So what is the point of all of this?? Should Obama be held accountable for his pastor's positions.

You'll have to read the next/newer post to find out why I think this matters.

Conservatives are More Generous- FACT!

I love it! I'm so sick of hearing about "heartless Republicans" from liberals around this country. It really is mind boggling how so many people vote Democrat for social justice issues yet studies have shown time and again that the most generous states are the "Red" states. It is typical Democratic ideology: "I want the government to do it so that I don't have to."

Besides the "Red" states giving more money to charity, which is well documented, last year a study showed that 10 out of the top 25 non-profit organizations were run by religious organizations. (I will admit that I can't find the link to that article anymore, if anyone comes across it please let me know and I'll add it here.)

For all the details about giving, be sure to check out the book, titled "Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism". It's sure to continue to ruffle feathers. And in case you think this is Conservative propaganda know that it is written by Arthur Brooks who was raised a Liberal but is now registered as Independant.

The disparity is even more shocking when you consider that Liberal Billionaires like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are actually very generous. Imagine how much lower the money from Liberal donors would be without Gates' and Buffet's contributions there to bolster #s for the other "bleeding hearts" who don't give squat.

And oh yeah, in 2000 Mr. Bleeding Heart himself, Al Gore, gave a pithy .2% of his income to charity. That's right you read it correctly....not 2%, .2%....Why even give anything Al? In case you are further wondering .2% is one seventh of the National Average for giving...I guess VPs have a hard time making ends meet.....

Read more:
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/204/story_20419_1.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html

California Courts' Home Schooling Decision Infringes on Parental Rights

I am truly disgusted by this latest decision by a California Court. I must admit I am not up on the exact details of this specific case but I am aware that it sets the precedent that all Home Schooled Children must be taught by State Certified Teachers. This means that a parent must become certified before they can teach their own child. Being a Certified Math and Physics Teacher in the State of Florida, I know what a joke this is. The fact is that most home schooled kids are in the younger grades. The thought that a parent isn't qualified to teach their own child Elementary and Middle School material is ridiculous.

But that really isn't the point. The point is this: does a parent have a right to raise their child how they see fit? Apparantly in California they don't think so. Of course parents need to act in the child's best interest and if they don't the state can step in. So, some would argue that it is in the child's best interest to be in school. Really?? Well those people and the judge from this case obviously failed to look at these statistics that show Homeschooled children on average score 30 points higher than students in public schools. And most of them are taught by non-certified parents. Thats right. Students in the public schools score on average in the 50%ile. Home schooled students score in the 80%ile on those same tests.

Maybe it's just that the State of California is embarrassed that home schooled students destroy their public school counterparts academically...

For more on this topic read this LA Times article.

I'll Miss You Mike Huckabee!

Mike Huckabee conceded to John McCain last night amidst the obvious defeat. This speech shows why I have the utmost respect for the man.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/03/04/sot.huckabee.i.did.my.best.cnn
For anyone who can't understand why he stayed in the race this long or if you think he was just wasting money (as if you can waste what people give you to spend with full knowledge you're a long shot...) here is a previous blog post that I wrote on the matter.

http://patrioticpolitics.blogspot.com/2008/02/why-huckabee-staying-in-race-helps-john.html

Washington Politics as Usual: Obama, Canada, and NAFTA

I thought Obama was above all of this Washington Politics stuff. I thought he wasn't going to conduct business as usual. I thought he represented change. Actually I didn't....but since so many Americans do I thought I'd bring up this little tidbit.

In the weeks leading up to the Ohio primary Obama has made it his focus to attack NAFTA since Ohio has suffered due to its policies. The fact that he has no plan to fix it isn't the point of this post but it does show that he is a typical politician more interested in insighting public uproars than in fixing a problem.

Amidst all of this rhetoric we now find out that Obama's top economic advisors told Canada that Obama's stance on NAFTA is political and not to worry. Hmm...so who is Obama lying to- us or Canada? It just shows that Obama is no different than the people he criticises.... Here is one article on it:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20080301/cm_thenation/1293120

International Conference on Climate Change

Did you know that right now in NYC there is an event that has attracted over 400 of the worlds leading scientists, economists, and experts on climatology? You didn't? Well, don't try to google it, because you won't find any news articles on the topic. You see, the press isn't interested when a group that is actually qualified to discuss the matter gathers to debate its merit. They are more concerned about what rock stars and washed up politicians have to say about the subject of Global Warming.

It really is shocking. Global Warming has been the hot issue of late. We are ready as a country and a world to change all kinds of policy and spend trillions of dollars on this issue. You'd think we'd like to hear from people who actually study this. But since this group disagrees with the premise that CO2 emissions and Green House gases are causing Global Warming, we won't hear anything about it.

I did find this conference listed on a few websites- but not news stories on it. The only reason I even heard about this event is from Glen Beck last night when he interviewed many of the participants and leading experts featured at the conference.

http://www.heartland.org/NewYork08/newyork08.cfm

http://www.globalwarming.org/

http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/glenn.beck/

Gloria Steinam Attacks McCain

This is simply despicable. In the latest of attacks on John McCain, Gloria Steinem actually thinks it makes sense to attack McCain's POW status. She actually questions whether him being a POW is relevant experience. Isn't this the same party that applauded John Kerry for throwing his military medals away? So let's see the reasoning here: throwing away U.S. honor and patriotism- makes you good....surviving as a POW for over 5 years makes you bad...hmmm.... Here is one of the many articles on this story:

http://www.observer.com/2008/stumping-clinton-steinem-says-mccains-p-o-w-cred-overrated

I guess what ticks me off the most is that while John McCain was having both arms pulled out of the sockets, Steinem was off getting high somewhere. While John McCain was off being a Patriot, Steinem was busy being a Hippie.... I have news for Gloria Steinem. Yes, McCain has earned the right to run for President. Yes, his POW status is significant- not only because he was a POW, but how he acted while he was a POW. He actually refused being released after about a year since he knew he was getting special treatment over the other POWs.

On a final note:
Unlike Gloria Steinem, John McCain actually does stand for the rights of women. Ms. Steinem of course only stands for women's rights if that right doesn't include the right to be a stay at home mom which she has routinely over the course of the last 40 years berated women for doing.

Gloria Steinem, you make me sick.

Hagee Supports McCain- Big Deal

A lot has been made of John McCain's latest endorsement. McCain is being attacked for accepting John Hagee's endorsement due to John Hagee's anti-Catholic remarks.
Hagee’s views on Catholicism is muddled. This is because it is not a normal theme for him. I once heard Hagee commend Pope John Paul II for his efforts to reach out to the Jewish Community. Yes Hagee does at times speak against Catholic history, the crusades, and the Catholic Church. He is a Protestant minister. By definition, Protestants (Protest) don't agree with Catholics. All of this has nothing to do with McCain. For someone not to vote for McCain because of what someone else (Hagee) thinks is ridiculous. Look at McCain’s record...what has he done that is Anti-Catholic?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080303/ap_on_el_pr/mccain_catholics_7

Hillary & Obama on NAFTA

Both Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama have resorted to muddled rhetoric rather than actual change. They have spent the last week arguing over NAFTA. Both apparently hate NAFTA and are pandering to the people in states like Ohio who have been negatively impacted by NAFTA. The truth is that both have previously supported NAFTA. Now they are both saying they will renegotiate NAFTA. Ironically, Obama has says that he supports Free Trade. I guess he likes to have everything both ways...

Obama Flip-Flops on NAFTA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OA8Bu9c-XA4
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080225/pl_nm/usa_politics_obama_trade_dc_1

Hillary Flip-Flops on NAFTA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJ0swdRvYgw

See their stances i n the Ohio (latest) Debate:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jO05Dd0Hd0

Questioning McCain's Legitimacy to Run for President is Ridiculous

Why did this even come up? So McCain was born in a U.S. Territory and not the U.S. itself. Who cares? McCain is a 4th Generation U.S. Military man who has dedicated his life to the country. He was born to American Citizens serving in the military and stationed in another country as ordered by the United States. I guess since the Republican nomination is all but wrapped up, it seems the news just needs something to talk about on the GOP side of things...

Here is the article if anyone is interested:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/us/politics/28mccain.html?_r=1&sq=mccain%20not%20born%20in%20united%20states&st=nyt&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&scp=1&adxnnlx=1204218414-cOKyXBWdjXdURqeUAvQzxQ

McCain's Most Inspirational Comment

(Thanks Mike for pointing this article out to me!)

"On the night of the Potomac primaries, McCain demonstrated an appropriate humility on the road to the White House at a time of war:

“I do not seek the presidency on the presumption that I am blessed with such personal greatness that history has anointed me to save my country in its hour of need. I seek the presidency with the humility of a man who cannot forget that my country saved me. I am running to serve America, and to champion the ideas I believe will help us do what every American generation has managed to do: to make in our time, and from our challenges, a stronger country and a better world.”

I have reservations about McCain, but he is a responsible steward of U.S. national security and appreciates the gravity of the office of commander-in-chief. He understands that talking about “hope” and “change” isn’t the same thing as leadership; it’s a gimmick. And we’ve already expended too much blood and treasure — in a war that was not of our choosing — to put our trust in gimmicks. "

This Excerpt is from Kathryn Jean Lopez article in the NationalReviewOnline.com:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MmQ0YzdkMWJmZmQ0YmI5OGRhOTllZjc4YmM4YTg4N2M=

The True Obama

Yes, Obama is exciting. I have even found myself getting caught up in his speaches and promises that "I Can" make a difference. This article admits that. But it goes further to explain who Obama truly is. Here is an excerpt. Click the link for the whole article.

"With Obama you get a naïveté about foreign policy. You get a radical on abortion who has opposed the most reasonable pullbacks on the Supreme Court’s inappropriate lawmaking, at a time when a chunk of Americans are for restrictions on the issue. You get someone who will pull troops out of Iraq “immediately,” with no heed to the consequences to our allies in the region and our own security."

This Excerpt is from Kathryn Jean Lopez article in the NationalReviewOnline.com: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MmQ0YzdkMWJmZmQ0YmI5OGRhOTllZjc4YmM4YTg4N2M=

McCain Makes the Conservative Choice

Almost on cue, McCain is beginning to show his support for the Conservative Causes that will help unite the party. Here is an excerpt from an article on his latest vote.

"McCain voted against the bill, which would restrict the CIA to using only the 19 interrogation techniques listed in the Army field manual.
His vote was controversial because the manual prohibits waterboarding - a simulated drowning technique that McCain also opposes - yet McCain doesn't want the CIA bound by the manual and its prohibitions."

To Read the full article:

http://apnews.myway.com//article/20080220/D8UUAQV80.html

Separation of Church and State is a False Argument

In response to critics who say that Churches should be taxed because they are nothing more than a business and often use their pulpits as a way to endorse political candidates:

Why would you tax them and not the United Way, The Red Cross, The Boy Scouts, Planned Parenthood, The ACLU, or any other Non-profit. They are a non-profit. They have soup kitchens, missions out of the country, relief for hard hit areas, and counseling for those in their communities.

Try to tax them. Then they will change their distinction from being a Religious Organization to a standard Association like the above groups and then the pastors will make CEO and Director's salaries the way other nonprofits do.

Separation of Church & State is a False Argument and found no where in the Constitution. It was something that Jefferson said one day and the full context of his statement was to protect the church from the government and not the other way around.

What the Constitution does say as part of the 1st Amendment:
1) The Establishment Clause- The FEDERAL Government will not adopt a National Religion so as not to discriminate against other religions. It is interesting to note that State governments could have State Religions.

2) Free Exercise Clause- Religions won't be denied any rights because they are a religion. (Yet they routinely are denied access to hold events in public facilities and always receive threats such as losing tax exempt status. )

Both are there to protect Religious Freedom and not the Government. Based on #2 you can't legally take away a Religious Organization's Tax Exempt status w/o doing it to any other Non-Profits....

February 21: Democratic Debate Thoughts

Eh.... Nothing new. Obama and Hillary have rehashed this same discussion for the last month.

We get it already. Hillary's Universal Health Care plan mandates coverage for everyone and Obama's doesn't.

Their stance on the border fence was ridiculous. Hillary actually doesn't think there should be a fence on the border so that family members can cross the border to see other family members. Is she serious?? That is exactly why we need a fence...

Obama thinks its unfair to charge illegal aliens for court costs, legal fees, and fines because they can't afford them..... the last I checked immigrants need to prove they had a way to live and contribute to this country before they could be a citizen. I guess this doesn't apply to the illegal ones...

I really don't believe these 2....

Obama Denys Basic Logic and Reason

This is article calls into question Obama's ability to draw rational and logical conclusions based on already established criteria and arguments. Here is the gist of it:

1) We know that if a baby is born premature that the baby is considered a Human Being and has all of the associated rights that go along with that distinction.

2) We know that if a mother is prematurely induced into labor for her own safety that the baby that is born is considered a Human Being and has all of the associated rights that go along with that distinction.

3) It therefore stands to reason that if a baby survives an induced labor abortion it should also be considered a Human Being and have all of the associated rights that go along with that distinction.

Well, Obama doesn't think so...and hasn't on several occasions....

Obama Votes Against The Born Alive Infants Bill (click to read)

Defending McCain: Why the Newest Allegations are False

The newest allegations about John McCain are flat out wrong. They are filled with innuendo and anonymous sources. This story is from the 2000 election. Why is it being rehashed now??

Here is a short list of why it is wrong:

1) Allegation about Affair: There is no substantiation to this claim. The worst that can be said is that McCain's advisors asked the lady to stay away from McCain to avoid the appearance of impropriety. That is hardly a silver bullet and it to is unsubstantiated.

2) Accepting Campaign Contributions: There was nothing illegal here. This happened in 1999 when it was a common practice in Congress and before any Campaign Finance Reform laws were in place.

3) Flying On Private Aiplanes: This was also an accepted practice at the time and every member of the Congress/Senate took part in this. The rules have since changed.

4) Letter to the FCC on Behalf of Lobbyist's Client: Isn't it interesting that the letter was left out of the articles? The fact is that the letter was on behalf of both sides of the argument on an issue that the FCC had sat on for over 2 years. McCain simply asked that the FCC bring the issue to a vote and made it a point to say that he is not urging a decision one way or another. He just said that the issue warranted a decision.

Learn more about the defense against these allegations by watching these short videos.

McCain's Comments at Today's Press Conference (Click Here)

Understand Why The Newest Allegations About John McCain are Wrong (Click here)

Democrats Continue to Play Identity Politics

Isn't it funny how the Democratic Party is held up to be the party of the people and the foremost champion of civil rights in this country yet no organization does more to divide this country among racial and gender lines than they do?

They just can't help themselves. In every primary and caucus since this race for the presidency began we can't help but hear who the "blacks" or "whites" or "Hispanics" or "women" will be voting for on the Democratic side of things. It really heated up down there in SC when Bill Clinton's involvement further polarized blacks and whites in this campaign. The truth is that the Clintons have caused more race controversy in this election than this nation has seen in years. That, too, is ironic since he has been hailed the first "Black President."

You just don't hear this sort of thing on the Republican side of things. In the various GOP races the that stats that are reported are with regard to how people with certain beliefs voted. For instance, we hear about the "Evangelical" vote or the "Conservative Vote." The reason this is more helpful and less incendiary is that these are ideologies that people prescribe to and not identities given them by God. You see, someone's ideology is based on beliefs which is at the core of voting.

The Democrats would rather pigeon hole groups, not based on their beliefs but rather based on stereotypes about the various groups. The result of this is astounding as they place their own insecurities on the rest of us. For instance, it has been widely mentioned by the liberal media that white males won't vote for Obama because he is black or Hillary because she is a woman. I find it insulting that they think that I (being a white male) can't examine the issues and come to the rightful conclusion that regardless of gender or race that these candidates simply don't line up with me ideologically.

Here is another interesting point: Most major civil rights advancements in this country came under Republican Administrations- Abraham Lincoln being the most notable. Furthermore, It was under the last 2 Republican Presidents that these groups (African Americans and Woman ) got their first real shot at the glass ceiling. I am of course speaking about Colin Powell and Condoleza Rice. Isn't it amazing that you never hear the Democrats have a complimentary thing to say about either of them. Someone should have told Colin and Condi that they were supposed to be Democrat....

The truth is, it is the Republican Ideology that has fostered the type of environment for people of all types to succeed and get ahead. We simply don't look at things like color, gender, or religion. We look at who can do the job. We look at who works the hardest. We look at who has the strongest values. We look at who is most qualified. It sounds pretty American to me.

McCain & Hillary Pin Obama Down on Lack of Substance

Both John McCain and Hillary Clinton have attacked Obama for being a great orator who lacks in substance. It seems these charges have succeeded in forcing Obama to speak about his policies. This will prove to be the greatest asset to John McCain in the general election. For all of Obama's rhetoric about uniting this country he has just taken the first steps that will do exactly the opposite.

After Obama's latest wins on Tuesday night he gave a 45 minute victory speech discussing the policies he wishes to enact. On all accounts he is offering big government solutions and socially liberal ideology as his platform of change. The programs he listed would cost upwards of $800 billion with no way to pay for them. On all accounts he is living up to the charge that he is on the far left in the Senate.

As McCain and Obama will likely battle it out for the Independent vote, Obama is most certainly heading in the least likely direction to get it. He will either stand by these newly revealed policies which will bolster his liberal image or he will back away from them which will earn him the right to hear his opponent call him a "flip-flopper." Both will serve to distance Independent voters away from Obama.

This was the same tactic that the Bush Administration used in 04 when running against Kerry. Just when the Dems were hailing the election as a forgone conclusion the Flip-Flop charges surfaced with a vengeance. It forced Kerry to come out strong about his policies. This enabled Bush to point out Kerry's extreme left tendencies and it cost Kerry the election. Simply put, the people in this country are just not that liberal.

I'm looking forward to a repeat....

Why Huckabee Staying in the Race Helps John McCain

Ever since Mitt Romney dropped out of the race "for the good of the party," people have been calling for Mike Huckabee to do the same. Many have held that he is distracting McCain from running a campaign targeted toward the general election and specifically against Hillary or Obama. Some have even suggested that Huckabee must be delusional to think he could win. None of this is true.

Huckabee's presence in the race is proving to be a remarkable asset to John McCain. Brilliantly, it is having the exact opposite effect that the pundits said it would. As this race lumbers on, so does John McCain's free press. He never would have made a speech after his Wisconsin win on Tuesday if there was no race in Wisconsin. His speech was sharply aimed at Obama and it was even reported to rival Obama's 45 minute victory speech on the same night by networks such as CNN and Fox News.

The truth is that McCain hasn't wasted 10 minutes talking about Huckabee since Super Tuesday. He didn't even campaign in the days leading up to the Potomac Primaries (DC, Virginia, and Maryland) and he won them all. During his latest win, he made one comment about Huckabee and spent the remainder of his speech attacking Obama. If Huckabee had bowed out, he never would have been given the press time on all the major networks. I'm not saying this is Huckabee's intended reason for staying in the race but it sure is a great side effect.

As for the delusional comment, Huck doesn't think he can win at all. He is staying in this race "to keep focus on the issues" as he has said in interviews. He wants to keep the issues that are important to him, such as a Federal Life Amendment and a revamped tax system, in the forefront and this is his platform to do it. You know what I say? More power to him. Anyone who donates to him at this point knows that he doesn't have a chance, yet they do it anyway. He therefore has a right to continue in this race and you don't see McCain complaining about the free press he has been getting as a result.

Romney's Incentives for Supporting McCain

In my opinion, this is a completely political move by Mitt and has nothing to do with "his" country.

He didn't get out of the race for his party. He got out of it for his pocket. It cost him $1.6 million per delegate that he received as opposed to Huck's $50,000 for each delegate. If that isn't trying to buy the election, I don't know what is. If he really cared about the country and thought he was best, he would have stayed in which certainly would have prevented McCain from getting 1191 (assuming Huck also stayed in). He got out because he wasn't willing to blow his whole fortune and commit political suiced at the same time (can't say I blame him).

So he had to spin it and said he was doing it "for the party."

If he really was a Patriot he would have dropped out and given Huck all of his delegates on the spot which would have afforded Huckabee even more momentum after Super Tuesday. Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney, after all, have very similar views. And oh yeah, Huck is a Governor and a Washington Outsider- both of which Romney said were what this country needed. Conversely, both are the exact opposite of what McCain is, stands for, and what Romney hates.

Romney supporting McCain is nothing more than a political ploy to garner support from the vast # of McCain supporters for 2 reasons:
1) If McCain wins, Romney wants a Cabinet or even VP role (or even head of the GOP).
2) If McCain loses, Romney is instantly thrust into front runner position for the 2012 Republican Nomination.

Further Analysis of Mitt (if you are interested):
Mitt is a bored business man who made all the money he ever needed. I've met people like him in my time in industry- 50 year old millionaires who are looking for the next challenge. So he figured in the 1990s that he wanted to be President and ran for the U.S. Senate. When that didn't pan out, he was placed in charge of the most prestigious worldwide event (the Olympics). What is left for him? He wants to be President. So he ran for Governor in time to rack up some experience before the next presidential race. This 1 term Governor throughout the election has maintained that Senators don't have the experience needed to lead the country. Hmmm, funny it seems like he wanted to be a Senator before he wanted to be a Governor. One couldn't help but wonder what his message would have been if he had won the Senate. How would he spin the "Washington Outsider" message? I'm sure he would have said something.

Mitt's whole focus in life for the last 14 years has been to be President. He is willing to say or do whatever it takes. His support of McCain is purely for his own reasons and not for the benefit of the Republican Party.

McCain is already entirely focused on the General Election. He didn't campaign for the Potomac Primaries one bit and he won them all (Virginia, DC, Maryland). McCain didn't need Romney's support.

This also shows the staunch Conservatives out there (Beck, Limbaugh, Coulter- all of which say it would be better for a Dem to be Pres for 4 years then to compromise their values anymore) that what I've been saying all along is true. Mitt is not a "true Conservative." How could he be if he is supporting the one one candidate that those same conservatives don't want?

Mitt has once again done what is best for Mitt. Personally I don't care, because it does help McCain. I had gained a little respect for Mitt when he bowed out. Well, now its gone again....

GOP Candidate's Cost Per Delegate

Ok, I heard this on the news last night and I don't have the reference to back it up. But up to this point Romney has spent $1.6 million for each delegate that he has. Compare that to Huckabee's $50,000 per delegate. Hmmm. Isn't Romney supposed to be a good businessman? Why is it costing him 32 times more to win votes than it is Huckabee? Seems like a waste of money to me...

Why Dobson is Wrong

I love James Dobson, but his recent stance about not supporting John McCain in the general election is flat out wrong. If he did this to help garner support for Mike Huckabee (now that Romney is out of the picture and the Conservative vote is consolidated) then I think it was a good tactical play. But when all is said and done and McCain is the GOP nominee, Dobson needs to support McCain. McCain has always voted on the side of "Life" which is, after all, one of the main issues among evangelicals. McCain is also the strongest candidate on National Security- also a hallmark conservative position. But the most important thing that Dobson needs to ask himself is who would he rather have appoint the next Supreme Court Justices as 6 of them are 70 or older?

Here is a fantastic article that examines these points thoroughly.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120251515611255127.html?mod=opinion_main_review_and_outlooks

Who's Stealing Whose Votes

I'm sick of hearing Mitt Romney tell Huckabee that he should drop out because he is stealing votes from him.

Lets see who is stealing votes from who....

Romney has only won states where he lived (Michigan, Mass,Utah) or places where no one else campaigned (Nevada, Wyoming). He has won no notable Primary and has had no close 2nd place.

Huck on the other hand has had very close 2nd places- South Caroline and Missouri- so much to the extent that had he won SC it could have tipped the balance in his favor and reignited his efforts going into FL and Super Tuesday.

It seems to me that Romney has stolen votes from Huckabee. Or maybe bought is a better term. See the next post for details on that...

Romney Flips on Immigration

After repeatedly being hostile to John McCain about his Immigration Bill with Ted Kennedy we find out that he actually thought it was reasonable at first.....

Romney actually says on 11/30/05 that McCain's proposal (and he outlines it) is a reasonable proposal. Click this link, then scroll down and listen to the first soundbyte:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/03/16/romneys_words_grow_hard_on_immigration/
Here is another interview where Romney describes these policies and doesn't have a problem with them:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rr6-CcOJPw

On Point Article About John McCain

Another good article about John McCain's Conservatism.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/014/651mibdg.asp

I'm Disappointed in McCain

Well I'm saddened to say, the "straight-talk" express has taken a left turn...

With all of the Conservative Support welling up around McCain (Charlie Christ, Mel Martinez, being the latest), why did he resort to this attack on Mitt Romney? If you don't know what I am referring to it is that McCain has said that Romney advocated for timetables and a withdrawal date in Iraq. This is from a quote that can be found here (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3003765&page=1) .

An honest look at the quote would show that Romney was merely talking about having Timetables for Goals and Milestones- something commonplace in business.

It is obvious that I am not a fan of Mitts, but I believe that McCain has twisted his position. The question is why did he do it? I guess he wanted to get the focus back on Iraq and away from the Economy. But did he really need to?

It is tight in FL but people are coming out in droves to show support for McCain and he is winning. I wish he had remained true to the values that I have come to appreciate in the man....

Examine Mitt Romney's Record

Dear Family and Friends,

I normally don't send these kinds of emails out. I feel very strongly about this Presidential Race and it truly disturbs me to watch Mitt Romney's campaign over the last 3 months. He is trying to buy the presidency, he has twisted his opponents positions, and he tells people what they want to hear. If you are thinking of supporting Mitt Romney in this election, please give this email a few minutes of consideration and at the very least view this quote and link:

"I will preserve & protect a woman's right to choose & I am devoted and dedicated to honoring my word in that regard." -Mitt Romney
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4&feature=related

Now, if that view doesn't bother you consider that he has now changed it. If it does bother you, how can you trust (why would you trust?) his complete opposite view on this same subject right now? If you are still interested, view this video which further shows the contrast in the 2 positions:

Flip-Flop on Abortion
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFMdK0TWtks&feature=related
That is just a sample of how Mitt Romney changes his views to win elections. The only reason he is now Pro-life is because early in this race Republican's were displeased with Guiliani's Pro-Choice stance, so Romney changed his position and established himself as a contender.

Romney Denounces Regan and Conservatism
Next: This is uncanny, Here Romney is questioned by Ted Kennedy about supporting Reagan and Bush (1), Romney says that he was an Independant and tries to distance himself from Reagan's economic policies (middle of this video).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9IJUkYUbvI&feature=related

Interview about Changing views
This interview a year ago asks Romney a number of questions about how he has changed positions over the years:
http://www.abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/Politics/Story?id=2885156&page=1

Pandering
This article describes how Romney goes State to State telling voters what they want to hear. In Michigan- The Federal Government will bail out the Automotive Industry... In South Carolina- The Federal Government will bail out the Textile Industry...Does this guy want more or less Fed. Government involvement??
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080116/ap_po/on_deadline_michigan

Thanks for your time and if this email bothered you I apologize. It is just that I feel strongly about this. I would also ask you to consider John McCain in this election. If you have any concerns about McCain, this article may shed some light on them: 6 Lies About John McCain:

http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/MichaelMedved/2008/01/23/six_big_lies_about_john_mccain

McCain vrs. Romney

(This post is in response to an email that I received commenting on Romney's wealth as an indicator of leadership.)

Dear (Anonymous),

Are you serious? So your argument is that you'd rather have someone who makes money vs. someone who keeps the country safe for President? First of all who said the amount of money someone has defines their character as good? Second, do you really believe that someone who spent 30 months as Missionary and as many years in school as Romney did, had no money?

Romney's Father was a politician and almost president himself- do you think they had no money? How did they pay for his colleges? Do you not think that he was given opportunity just not based on who he was?? Whether or not McCain even has money is a non-issue because he isn't flaunting it and he isn't campaigning on it.

But.. while Romney was living off of Daddy's fame and $$, McCain was busy getting shot down in Vietnam and being held as POW. When they tried to release him he refused on the principle that others were there longer.

How many jobs has McCain created you asked? How about how many jobs has Romney eliminated? During his time as head of Bain Capital Romney made the majority of his money through Leveraged Buyouts. Look up and see how those work....

How may businesses has McCain saved you ask. ... Innumerable due to the policies he created and voted for. But how about how much money McCain has saved Taxpayers. Billions. And a lot of that was his own doing.

Florida January Republican Debate Thoughts

Weak debate. No one had to defend their positions or records. It was almost as if this was a debate for people who knew nothing about the candidates.

Since Huckabee is sagging in the Polls and it is going to be a Romney/McCain race in FL, I'm getting on the McCain train (you already knew I liked him). Still like the Huckster, but it is too important for me that Romney not win FL.

I think Romney came across really good.

Coming across good doesn't mean anything though. No one knows what he will do because he has changed on so many issues. He tells us to judge him on his record in MA. But then when you say- OK, in MA you mandated Health Insurance and fined people who don't get it, when asked if he would do that for the U.S. he says no. So how can we use his MA record to determine Presidential actions?? He says that in MA that he was Pro-life at all times, pretty easy position to take since the governor has no say in that...And he campaigned as Pro-choice.

McCain Misconceptions Please Read

A lot of emphasis has been placed on John McCain's positions not being conservative enough. I disagree and this article articulates it perfectly:

Read "6 Big lies about John" to learn why.


http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/MichaelMedved/2008/01/23/six_big_lies_about_john_mccain

Romney Panders State To State

( From an email....)
Dear (Anonymous)
Here is another instance of using your definition of Liberal and applying it to Romney. He campaigned in Michigan saying "Washington will make it its responsibility to help out the automobile industry."

The question is- Why? Why is that a Federal Government responsibility? What about the textile industry? What about the agricultural industry? Where is the state government's responsibility in all of this. Why isn't it the Michigan Governor's responsibility to provide re-education and pro-industry policies to rejuvenate the Michigan economy?

Romney goes state to state and says what the state wants to hear. If he is the Republican Nominee he will have 50 promises to 50 different states in addition to National Issues. How will he keep those promises? He either won't which makes him a liar, or he will need to overstep the bounds of the Federal Government which is exactly the opposite of the Conservative position.