About Me

Name: Gamecock
Email: mikedevinelaw@yahoo.com Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Some time . . . when the team is up against it

 


Some time . . . when the team is up against it, when things are wrong
and the breaks are beating the boys - tell them to go in there with all they've got
and win just one for the Gipper. I don't know where I'll be then,
but I'll know about it, and I'll be happy.


 Gamecock also writes at www.race42008.com

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Drawl and That's All: The Myth of the Moderate Southern Democrat in D.C.

  John Spratt has been successfully scaring old people, the disabled, black folks and the "poor" to keep his cushy job as a vote button pusher in Washington, D.C. for 24 consecutive years.

I was reminded of Spratt's and the Democrat Party's nearly three quarter century old playbook when I heard SC-5's Congressman's 2006 radio ad version of the elect me or those evil republicans will "take your check" lie as I was riding through the District that remains relatively as poor as it was 24 years ago. What progress has been made in the District since Reconstruction is due to the growth of the Charlotte, NC Metro area and Republican economic policies and not anything Spratt has done. But they still have Shaw AFB (as if without Spratt the US would not have to have an Air Force) and the checks still come in the mail (But hasn't it been the GOP that's been voting to fund the checks since 1994?)

But don't bother a Democrat with facts when he's drumming up fear and hate to motivate the permanent dependency victim class he and his party helped to create. A class they feed a steady diet of class envy, victimology, and demonization of republicans as heartless, racist bigots as a substitute for self reliance and responsibility. In order to get votes from those that are poor, one must make sure their are always a good supply of the poor.

And so, Spratt lies. He lies when he says that Republicans want to privatize Social security. He lies when he implies that doing nothing will not lead to a bankrupt system. He hardly ever not lies when he opens his mouth about anything. He's an elected Democrat.

A major reason I had to leave the party if I wished to be able to look myself in the mirror, was due to their lies that the GOP would take social security away from the old and disabled, starve children , or make the burning of Black churches a spectator sport.

The GOP had targeted this seat by heavily promoting a serious SC State Legislator challenger, Ralph Norman, who is well known and well respected in District 5. I have not seen evidence of an aggressive television campaign however.

Norman has fared well in the debates, and in the process has helped to debunk the Myth of the Moderate Democrat, or at least the myth that democrats elected to serve in Washington are distinguishable in any significant way from the Pelosis, Kerrys and Kennedys.

In one of their eight debates (yes, 8) one of the Democrats that the MSM never misses an opportunity to call "moderate", Norman effectively forced Spratt to admit he:

1 - favors federal funding of embryonic stem cell research when Spratt had tried to obfuscate the issue by only referring to the generic "stem cell" research (which includes adult and cord blood in addition to embryonic);

2 - favors abortion on demand under Roe, when Spratt had tried to pass himself off as a pro lifer due to his support for "regulation" of abortions; and

3 - believes man is responsible for global warming and favors taxing citizens and businesses to stop us from usurping the power of the Sun.

http://www.wsoctv.com/news/10208437/detail.html

Norman also showed that except for a few high profile late in election year votes, Spratt's (and most all Democrats in Congress, as rated by the ACU - see link below) voting record is hardly distinguishable from the Lib Dems and certainly far closer to them than to conservative Republicans from the South and West or even liberal and moderate Republicans from the Northeast. In fact, all the DC dems have liberal voting records, bar none. Look at the link below. You will search in vain for even ONE democrat that has a more conservative record than ANY Republican. Bar None!

http://www.acuratings.org/

Sample ratings from 2005 and 2004

Spratt-D-SC 12 20
Pelosi-D-CA 0 8
Harold Ford-D-TN 21 21
Tom DeLay-R-TX 88 100
Cynthia McKinney-D-GA 4 n/a
Peter King-R-NY 83 71
Mel Watt-D-NC 0 0

So, the Moderate SC, TN and NC reps vote conservative from 0-79% of the time, while San Francisco Lib and Marxist McKinney vote conservative 0-92% of the time. Whereas, Northeastern King votes conservative 71-83% and DeLay 88-100.

The Myth of the Moderate elected Democrat in DC. The only thing moderate about them is the speed and tone of their voices as they lie about their records and their intentions.

Moderate and conservative Democrats desperately need to cease being impressed with rhetoric from a hired employee whose job is not to please one's ear, but to vote in accordance with their values on laws passed in D.C. Their job is to represent them, not please them with TV performances. For that, one should seek out true professional oratory entertainers on Turner Classic Movies and the Baptist Church!

Amen!

See also my recent essays related to this subject:

Democrats Would Let Foley Take Minors to Georgia for Abortions
http://gamecock.townhall.com/g/8d0e3c24-19e0-4c98-8234-6cf28053b94b

Hate-Driven Dems Never Win: Mature GOP Voters vs. Hate-Motivated Dem Voters 2006
http://gamecock.townhall.com/g/531f46e9-c032-446e-9dd9-53acb1bbb669

I Proudly Registered to Vote as a Republican Today
http://gamecock.townhall.com/g/8b3b9321-f84d-4ab4-84e6-4e9716f50543

A civil/criminal trial lawyer for two decades in federal and state courts throughout the South and presently Vice-President of a multi-state real estate investment firm headquartered in Charlotte, N.C., Mike DeVine a/k/a Gamecock was a SC Democrat party activist, official and delegate for 20 years, until his June 2001 conservative epiphany that led him to leave the Jack Asses of the World's Oldest political party to embrace the Elephants' never forget Party of Lincoln and Ronaldus Magnus.

Originally posted at
Redstate.

Gamecock also writes at  www.race42008.com

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Sen. Graham Displays GOP Culpability for Tepid Public War Support in Radio Interview

During a probing Halloween interview about the Iraq War, staunch war supporter Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) repeatedly bemoaned weak support for the war by the American public as a threat to victory, while obviously oblivious to the fact that his own rhetoric, and that of many of his GOP war supporter colleagues, helps to justify such scepticism and pessimism.

What made the interview so revealing was the historically informed interviewer, Ralph Bristol, host of the radio talk show that bears his name on Greenville/Spartanburg's AM1330/950 WORD in Sen. Graham's home state of SC. See links:

http://www.newsradioword.com/
http://www.ralphbristol.com/

As I have argued for the past three years, the Iraq War is one of America's finest hours with respect to our accomplishments and even more so with respect to costs incurred when compared to past US wars and with congruent wars in world history.

Yet, Sen. Graham, like most elected officials, and even most unwavering war supporters, has bought into the Drive-by Media-driven conventional wisdom meme that the war has been "mishandled" and that because of same, Iraq is a "mess" requiring a new "plan" or "strategy." Of course, if one wishes not to face the raised eyebrows of Tim Russert and more importantly, to be re-invited as co-stars on Sunday TV shows, one must accept the meme and only then argue for victory.

Most conversations about the war between elected officials and the media are juvenile arguments over meaningless semantic phrases like whether we are "winning" (we won't know we were winning until we have won) and should "stay the course," but even that conversation may be had only after the obligatory re-hash of the WMD intell failures and star chamber-like inquisitions as to whether the poor soul would still vote for the war knowing what we know now. And of course, one must accept that we really know what we know now, ie that since we didn't find the volume of WMD that we expected, that surely they never were there. That we know. Uh huh...

See Amir Taheri on why if we saw the war through the enemy's eyes, public support would be high. There is no excuse for the GOP and their alternative media outlets not to communicate the truth about the war that deserves to be told to honor the troops and to respect the American people.

http://www.benadorassociates.com/article/20213

But Graham didn't get the luxury of an un-challenging canned cliche interview with Bristol. No sir. Bristol challenged Graham on his certainty that more troops at the outset and now would solve all Iraq's problems. Bristol refused to accept the CW that the war has gone badly and is going badly or that the US and not Iraq is responsible for security.

I was happy that Graham got to hear that view, because while I am all for the democratization project as a long-term draining of the swamp that produces terrorists, the main reason we are there is to prevent future 911s by eliminating a terror sponsor state (done) and preventing the establishment of a replacement for same.

The Iraq battle is part of a long war that we can't make shorter by making getting out of Iraq the main goal. If Iraqis need to have a Civil War to put down the Baathist deadenders and their al Qaida allies, then let them have at it. We are there to kill terrorists that are only too happy to come there for their 72 virgin-bound ticket/Big Sleep/Dirt Nap and to prevent the re-establishment of a terror sponsor safe haven state, with oil money for WMD fueled 911s.

As Bristol deconstructed all the beltway assumptions, Graham sounded like his eyes were in a deer meets headlights mode. He came away exhibiting America's post-WWII war ignorance and ignorance of what history teaches is necessary to stay free.

It also glaringly revealed Graham and his GOP colleagues' failures to properly inform the public about the war in historical context rather than the Media bushlied 20/20 hindsight context, and their culpability in producing the very sceptical American public they fear could succumb to cut and run Democrats' desire for another glorious Vietnam-like retreat (But please don't show us the millions killed by the falling dominoes. If its not on film it doesn't happen in Greenwich Village.).

But war ignorance is not the only problem. The other problem is that Graham and too many others see themselves as armchair Commanders-in-Chief whose duty is to never fail to let the President and the Public know their every thought about how the war should be fought. After all they, not the generals, have the greatest quality to direct war strategy: ie a majority of votes from their respective states for a cushy 6 year job saying my honorable friend to some of the sorriest people on Earth with co-starring roles on TV if they will only please, please criticize the man elected by a majority of all the states so the Libs can enjoy the fantasy that Bush is stupid and they are smart.

Graham and his colleagues voted for the war. When they did so, then as now, the Constitution vested the plenary power to WAGE war in one man, not 100 or 535, and for good reasons. He displays all the reasons why every time he opens his mouth to express support and a desire to win (and for that he is to be admired as are Lieberman and the GOP) but then can't resist reciting the litany of defeatism, lest anyone in Georgetown think him unenlightened. Having put troops in the field, they owe the troops all they can do and say to help them and tearing down their CINC 24/7 doesn't cut it.

Notice that I have not mentioned my usual complaints about the Democratic party's bushlied, defeatist contributions to weak public support for the war? And all redstaters know my utter contempt for my former party.

The reason I haven't is because the GOP could cure that problem if they had the spines to not care what the media thinks and call their Dem colleagues on the carpet for speech that emboldens the enemy and costing American lives. The GOP senators could shame the Dems into silence if only they could give up being CINC's in waiting themselves and the fawning faux admiration of the media.

They could start by censuring Senators Lurch and Thing from Massachusetts and famed Nazi Hunter Turban from Illinois.

But let's not get fixated on the freaks. Its not them that are the danger. Its the so-called moderates that can't think, much less say, the word victory and with whom that the enemy in Iraq, Saddam's lawyers and Kim Jung Il regularly shares talking points with.

Lindsey Graham was the first republican I voted to send to Washington, DC after my 20 years in the democrat party before my 6/2001 epiphany (see I loved tax cuts before the war) and when this talented lawyer is in your corner, he is the best advocate you can find. And he also states a great case for the war as well, in between preening negativism. But Lindsey is, like most Americans, weakened by affluence and the vacation from history we have had since Korea and WWII.

Thankfully George W. Bush gets it.

Ralph Bristol gets it too, and we can only hope that Graham's exposure to Bristol's wisdom helps him to grow and do his duty to present a united front to the enemy and stop calling dishonorable democrat senators his honorable friends.

Originally posted at Redstate.com

Gamecock also writes for www.race42008.com.

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (1) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

WaPo "Poll" Latest Salvo to Pass NYT in Lie-Fest "06

WaPo Still Trails Grey Lady in MSM Lie-Fest '06 Despite Cardin Ad-"Poll"

Given the Washington Post's front page Sunday wake-up poll showing Democrat Ben Cardin surging to a double digit lead in the Maryland U.S. Senate race against Republican nominee Michael Steele, despite Cardin's cancellation of a debate following on the heels of a shellacking at Steele's hands in a debate the night before, one can only conclude that all Cardin needs do to bury Steele would be for Cardin to run naked at Annapolis shouting anti-Naval epithets.

The MSM mass insult to the intelligence continues. A host of Red State all stars, citing poll internals skewed to Democrats and away from Independents, have deconstructed the poll's credibility quite nicely in comments to the below blog entry last night:

New Wash Post poll has Cardin beating Steele 54-43%

This morning, Hugh Hewitt rips the poll to shreds with some interesting additional evidence that the poll is little more than a desperate October surprise ad for Cardin, with the Post acting like what The American Spectator's Jed Babbin calls, the 527-Media.

Link to Babbin's August 2006 column when he first coined the "527 Media" phrase and suggested that the RNC treat the MSM as such in ads.

Hewitt, in his Town hall blog, cites pollster Charlie Cook as declaring the race a toss-up as late as Friday. WaPo didn't deem Cook's move "fit to print". Hugh suggests the Post may have crossed a line with Maryland's Black voters with this bending over backwards grotesque advocacy for Cardin who beat former NAACP hear Kweisi Mfume in a bitter Democrat Party primary for the right to face Steele, also Black, in the general election.

Read the whole Hugh Hewitt piece.

Thus continues the print MSM Prevaricating March to the Sea (read Chesapeake Bay) of eventual weekly legal organ status. Let's let the Doctor of Democracy review recent history as we close:

The media in this country lied about hurricane Katrina and the aftermath -- and they gave themselves Pulitzer Prizes for doing so. They lie constantly about the status of the Iraq war. They lied about Karl Rove in the Valerie Plame matter. They not only lied about Bush's National Guard records, they engaged in a conspiracy to create forged documents to further what they knew was a lie.

The Drive-By Media lies constantly about the economy. They lie about our judicial nominees. They lie about John Bolton. They lie about Donald Rumsfeld. They lie about Condoleezza Rice. They lie about Dick Cheney. They will lie about anybody who gets in their way. They lie about Halliburton. They lie about oil profits. They lie about tax cuts and how they are effective. They lie about practically everything. They carry the water for the Democrat Party. They carry the water for liberal elites, for anti-capitalists in the environmentalist movement and elsewhere. They carry the water for the appeasement crowd, the socialist elites in Western Europe. When someone stands up to them and questions them in their tactics, they try to intimidate and destroy.

Just think. Think about the last three days. There are literally hundreds of stories over the last three days about me. They're not focused on the phony science involving embryos. They're not focused on any aspect of the issue that the ad that Michael J. Fox produced attempts to persuade people about. They're not focusing on it. I wonder why? Because they know it's not a winning issue. The only way it's a winning issue is if nobody stands up to the ad. The only way it's a winning issue if nobody challenges the lie and the misrepresentation that they put forth in the ad. For three days, we've had news stories about me. No focus on the phony science involving the embryos." - Rush Limbaugh

This column was originally posted at Red State.

DeVine-Gamecock  is also a contributing writer for www.race42008.com.

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Michael J. Fox vs. Science Rush

 The American Thinker has published an invaluable piece by an expert physician on the subject of embryonic and adult stem cell research and results that deconstructs the substance of the claims made by Michael J. Fox's ads for Democrat candidates.

As revealed by the below scholarly scientific piece, the reason the MSM can't defend the substance of Fox's claims is because his claims, as pointed out by Rush Limbaugh, are not true and the real agenda issue in this imbroglio is abortion, not stem cell research per se, or the bogus lie that the Hearing-Challenged Limbaugh "made fun" of Fox's particular disability.

See more DeVine Gamecock commentary as well as expert witness supporting excerpts and link to full article below...

Dr. Mary L. Davenport in the American Thinker says:

"Mr. Fox and his ads’ sponsors are guilty of conflating embryonic stem cell research, which the GOP candidates and many Americans oppose for destroying a human life in the name of curing other people’s diseases, with stem cell research in general, which includes adult stem cell research and umbilical cord blood stem cell research."

As we have seen, the MSM, with few exceptions, has avoided any talk of the substance of the claims, choosing instead to demonize Rush Limbaugh for daring to question claims by a disabled person and question whether the disabled person is acting in accordance with his prior admitted conduct when in a persuasive role, i.e. to go off his medications, given that Fox does not usually show such severe effects of Parkinson's in his frequent public appearances and in his role on "Boston Legal".

But the other reason their is no MSM defense of the claims is that the real reason that the Left has made embryonic stem cells their cause celeb is because embryos are made available by abortions, and abortion is the issue that defines the Left.

Dr. Davenport continues

"The only limits in question are on federal funding of new embryonic stem cell lines, requiring the sacrifice of new embryos. Private and state-funded research (California voters are spending six billion dollars borrowing money to fund this) is ongoing. The implicit claim that research based on new embryos is “the most promising” is absurd, completely unsupported by the scientific literature, and an insult to voters, based as it is on the assumption that they are incapable of understanding the issue. Too stupid to tell the difference, is the elitist assumption underlying this campaign.

Flim-flam is a charitable description. Why would federally-funded research be more promising than state- and privately-funded research? And on what possible basis can the claim be made that embryonic stem cell research is more promising than adult stem cell research?

The plain fact is that embryonic stem cell research is proving to be a bust. There are currently 72 therapies showing human benefits using adult stem cells and zero using embryonic stem cells. Scientifically-minded readers can review this medical journal article on the status of adult stem cell research. Adult stem cell therapies are already being advertised and promoted while no such treatments are even remotely in prospect for embryonic stem cell research.

The fact is that adult stem cells have already produced remarkable cures, whereas embryonic stem cells have failed. This should come as no great surprise to anyone with a background in high school biology..."

Read the whole American Thinker piece.

The fact is that the Left is desperate to find a way to combat moral objections to abortion and they think that if they can make embryonic stem cells a political issue in the curing of diseases, they can defend abortion as producing life saving "products"!

These people have no shame. They will lie to sufferers of diseases and exploit them with false hope. They will lie about anyone that dares to contest the content of claims made by their carefully chosen victims supposedly immune from criticism. They will lie about the substance of issues. basically the Left Lies. That's what they do. And they expect that they will not be challenged given the many decades of media monopoly they enjoyed. The key word being "enjoyed" with the "ed".

They no longer enjoy that monopoly and with courageous conservatives like Rush Limbaugh and his 20 million dittohead army, they cannot count on not having their lies challenged even when they exploit the disabled to spout the lies.

We won't be holding our breath for the MSM to come to the rescue of Limbaugh even though he is deaf. You see Limbaugh opposes abortion, i.e. the sacrament of the Left's secular religion.

Over at Redstate a poster asked why their isn't more emphasis on Cord Blood research. I advised that  Cord Blood Stem cell research requires birth not abortion. The politicization of embryonic stem cell research is a cover for the advancement of the abortion agenda. The Left desperately wants to legitimize abortion as life saving rather than life taking. Abortions provide the "work product" for embryonic research. Birth's provide umbilical cords which are to the abortion lobby what a cross is to Dracula.

Rush commented on recent MSM history to put the MJ Fox incident in context:

"Let's review some obvious recent history. The media in this country lied about hurricane Katrina and the aftermath -- and they gave themselves Pulitzer Prizes for doing so. They lie constantly about the status of the Iraq war. They lied about Karl Rove in the Valerie Plame matter. They not only lied about Bush's National Guard records, they engaged in a conspiracy to create forged documents to further what they knew was a lie.

The Drive-By Media lies constantly about the economy. They lie about our judicial nominees. They lie about John Bolton. They lie about Donald Rumsfeld. They lie about Condoleezza Rice. They lie about Dick Cheney. They will lie about anybody who gets in their way. They lie about Halliburton. They lie about oil profits. They lie about tax cuts and how they are effective. They lie about practically everything. They carry the water for the Democrat Party. They carry the water for liberal elites, for anti-capitalists in the environmentalist movement and elsewhere. They carry the water for the appeasement crowd, the socialist elites in Western Europe. When someone stands up to them and questions them in their tactics, they try to intimidate and destroy.

Just think. Think about the last three days. There are literally hundreds of stories over the last three days about me. They're not focused on the phony science involving embryos. They're not focused on any aspect of the issue that the ad that Michael J. Fox produced attempts to persuade people about. They're not focusing on it. I wonder why? Because they know it's not a winning issue. The only way it's a winning issue is if nobody stands up to the ad. The only way it's a winning issue if nobody challenges the lie and the misrepresentation that they put forth in the ad. For three days, we've had news stories about me. No focus on the phony science involving the embryos." - Rush Limbaugh

Originally posted at Red State.

Read DeVine-Gamecock at
www.race42008.com as well.

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Waging War Against War Ignorance and Unpatriotic Speech, Acts and Omissions

 CNN crossed another line this week when it aired a propaganda tape, allegedly depicting a sniper siting and firing upon American forces, that was allegedly "delivered" to it from an agent of the Baathist-Al Qaida enemy that we, the United States, and the Democratic government of Iraq are fighting.

Now lets make Hay in waging this war, which is really a battle in the larger Civil War the left has been waging against America for decades that has reached new lows since the invasion of Iraq. Many have commented on this war. For an example see Prager.

One of the major points that Prager makes is citing the alienation of the left in the MSM, academia and the Dem party that is behind much of the blame America first world view that serves as the "moral" justification for the Left's actions that many Americans consider unpatriotic, if not rising to the legal definition treason.

But I want to explore this issue a little deeper and focus not so much on CNN, but rather on the general population and look not only at the results of the Left's 40 year indoctrination on a large percentage of the American people in varying degrees, but also other influences that define the divide on the war that includes people that would not be considered part of the larger civil war in the culture..

And then I want to look at how we can wage and win this civil war at least as regards unity against foreign enemies.

Let me say this at the outset. I believe that we will unite to win the war against Islamo-Facism. The only question is if we will do so based on logical persuasion based on a historical perspective or based on massive casualties on American soil as a result of future 911's.

A second preliminary remark concerns the warning of a future civil war in America between Muslim-America citizens and the sharia-hating rest of us. I think it is essential that we unite on the present foreign struggle, if not the culture, before that occurs.

Now to the matter at hand raised by haystack.

Gamecock and most Americans alive on September 10, 2001 were gratefully ignorant of all things war, especially, the place war holds in the history of mankind and the brief history of of western civilization especially since 1776.

This ignorance born of long periods of prosperity is not a new phenomenon. Many if not most great civilizations fall due to internal rot from within that aggressive enemies exploit to bring them down.

In many ways this war ignorance is a major reason that the Left was able to increase in power in the 60s and thru today. Security, or assumed security from foreign invasion or attack is a prerequisite for leftist, secularists to grow.

The conflicts we have engaged in since 1960 have added to the ignorance and made it worse, because the added elements are what I think helps produce a lot of otherwise conservative citizens, not part of the left in any major way, but which are passive as regards what patriotism means, ignorant of the crucial need to win wars to total victory and tolerant, if not outright supportive, of media behavior like that of CNN.

I speak now of the effect of such phrases as "limited war", and "proportional escalation", but even more so the "exit strategy" mantra and the insidious self limiting "Powell Doctrine."

The First America Civil War and WWII were great victories precisely because they were total victories for the victors and total defeats for the vanquished. Less than two generations after Appomattox, Southerners enlisted in greater numbers than any other region in the "Union" army to defend the United States that had utterly devastated their CSA gone with the wind.

Japan loves baseball and Germany is pacifist.

Limited war in Vietnam prolonged the Cold War and resulted in mass slaughter that the Left still refuses to apologize for. It also signalled to would be future enemies of the United States that we could be defeated by enlisting the American Left's media in their cause.

The Powell Doctrine's insistence that war only be fought if it could be won quickly with massive force, little loss of life and have a clear "exit strategy" signalled to the world that would be enemies could defeat us even more easily than in Vietnam and that we wouldn't even fight unless Syria agreed to come along as the lowest common denominator. And even then the "victory" would leave the aggressor in power.

I think the psychological effect of the above continues even after 911 among too many citizens that never speak of victory in Iraq, but only "how to get out," as if we didn't go there for a purpose that was important enough to "get in" in the first place.

Now to my prescription for how to wage a non-violent civil war against the Left, their MSM and their useful idiots even among conservatives.

These thoughts are triggered not only by Haystack's Declaration but also by some comments made to me about the CNN video being the "truth" and Bush's so-called "propaganda".

I think the key to unity is educating the near left on war and patriotism. But it will be hard. Why? Well, prior to now,

I have suggested that the only way to turn the tide on the media and the left is for elected GOP members (but not the president) to call out their Democrat colleagues on live TV for statements and actions that embolden the enemy. To be blunt in their face. This would signal to the public that its OK to call out unpatriotic behavior and give it a definition. I am pleased to note that Duncan Hunter (R-CA) has moved to take action against CNN and that for the first time since WWII the US government has changed an American with treason.

But I now think this matter goes so deep that not even a much stepped-up calling out of the unpatriotic elected officials and media by patriotic elected officials will suffice, and that it may have to be fought at dinner tables family by family and person to person. It may well be necessary that we risk losing friends to win our Civil War, just as the First Civil War divided families and friends, so that we can win the war abroad and be strong to face the internal cultural divisions and a possible future Civil War against whatever enemies we may have developing within. We will have to be more blunt and stand our ground.

The CNN matter tells me that we must take off the gloves. Too many Americans are numb due to TV and the moral equivalence it sets up in its crossfire type shows, where everybody are pals and all views are taken equally seriously. Commercial break. See you tomorrow on Hannity & Colmes. Well, all views are not equal. Our enemies don't quote all views. They quote the views that fit with their goal, ie that we cut and run and give them the victory they have sought since they started streaming into Iraq after Saddam fell to join their Fedayeen Saddam fundamentalist religious brethren and Sunni Baathist brethren to re-establish a new safe haven and terror sponsoring state to replace the ones they lost under the Taliban and Saddam. Thanks to our military and increasingly the new unified free Iraqi security forces, the enemy's new "training ground" is neither "safe" nor a "haven." Cutting and running would make it both, with unfettered oil-rich nation-state funding to boot with access to the Persian Gulf shipping lanes.

Many Americans are totally blind to the line CNN crossed. People, we are surrounded by severely disabled citizens when it comes to war and patriotism. Major surgery is required to correct the disability. many on the left argue that we need to see such "snuff" videos so that understand what war is about, as if we don't know and that if we did we would see that war is never the answer. Yet those on the left don't want us to see the 911 videos that are the reason we went to war in the first place.

We have never allowed the showing of such close angle videos or pictures of killing by either side in war. And the showing of an enemy propaganda video would most certainly have gotten the broadcaster charged with treason and probably hanged under WWII or any other war rules prior to Vietnam. Even in Vietnam we censored enemy videos of the killing of Americans for several reasons, first of which is that it could cause sensitive civilians to lose morale at home and that it it is disrespectful to the dead and their families.

But as regards enemy provided propaganda films, the dangers are even greater that the video contains a message to their allies, provides a basis fore them to boost morale and instructs those they can't otherwise communicate with to keep up the fight.

Tony Snow also objected to the video partly because it depicts US soldiers as "sitting ducks."

Let's get the bottom of this quackery about sitting ducks.

First, I think Tony should not have dignified the sitting duck argument with a response. To do so implies that if one's soldiers are sitting ducks that the war should not be fought. If that were the rule, then we would still be a colony of the British. I really have a hard time even understanding the argument. Some falls back on the WWII example as if tank led armies on a plain is the only war our soldiers "deserve" to fight and as if no soldier was ever shot down by a sniper's rifle fire in 1776, 1917 or 1941. Its silly, nonsensical and unworthy of a response.

Secondly, lets look at why CNN shows an enemy propaganda video of an American soldier being targeted BUT NOT 911 videos of Americans burning to death, jumping from skyscrapers and hitting the pavement. If ever there were sitting ducks, it was the inhabitants of the WTC, the pentagon and the airplanes. The video of the deaths of civilians at he hands of the enemy can't be shown somehow.

But we can see the enemy aiming fire at our soldiers?

You see the connection? The soldiers are being fired at because of 911. the soldiers are in harms way voluntarily to prevent future 911s. But CNN can't let Americans see that connection. Oh no. They would rather us see the "insurgents", ie butchers that worked for Saddam or al qaeda as akin to our colonist founders, ie Minutemen, fighting for "their" country, all the time ignoring that 80%+ Iraqis are fighting with us against the insurgents for their country and to deny victory to those that would perpetrate more 911s. The enemy has diverted their most of their resources from attacking us on US soil to a desperate attempt to prevent the establishment of a stable free nation in the Middle East that is our ally against their Islamo-Facist vision and slavery.

So we cant see the deaths of America civilians but we must see our soldiers in sniper sites that the enemy hopes will cause us to cut and run, as does CNN.

The war against the MSM must be waged by not letting actions that aid and abet the enemy go undenounced in blunt terms to their faces with NO ambiguity that we respect them even if they disagree.

Those that embolden the enemy thru unpatriotic statements, actions, omissions and endorsements, explicit or tacit, are not honorable. Now, many don't realize they are acting unpatriotically. They are ignorant. They must be educated on the matter. A patriotic spanking appears in order to GC. We must become like that nation in 1777, 1917 and 1944 that were united on what patriotism is and what actions and statements are unpatriotic and on the absolute necessity to achieve total victory no matter the cost.

Give me Liberty or give me Death!

originally submitted to compliment my
Red State brother, Haystack who properly and eloquently declared war on the MSM.

D-G also blogs at
www.race42008.com.

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

MSM Apes Old Southern Media in Insulting Voters' Intelligence

 In the late 70s and thru the 80s and 90s, when the GOP was growing into the dominant party in SC and eventually making SC nearly the one-party state it is today after having been a one-party DEM state from the Civil War thru the 60s, local media dominated by liberals, ALWAYS highlighted stories that focused on problems and how the DEMS cared and that the GOP hadn't solved or didn't care to.

They ALWAYS emphasized how the GOP could lose and the DEMS could win, just like the MSM does and has since the 80s and Reagan forward and increasingly so after the advent of the NEW MEDIA.

What is pathetic is to have our beltway conservatives fall for it, first in 1992 and now in 2006. For Fred Barnes and Cal Thomas to say that they are sure we will lose the House and/or that it could do some good? Boggles the mind. Who cares what they think will happen. The game will be played.

Most Americans in a recent poll that has not changed except in our direction for decades is that over 60% of Americans describe themselves as conservative or very conservative!!

These people are not going to vote for Democrats.

Get out the vote? Well duh. Yes, chatterers, the Election will be decided by ACTUAL VOTES ON ONE DAY, ie ELECTION DAY, November 7, 2006.

What is so funny, is that the whole "get out the vote" mantra was always mainly seen as a democrat mantra, because, at least since the 80s, as a Democrat Party official, I knew that GOP voters were self-motivated. It was my former party that had to harass and cajole and herd ginned up victim voters like cattle.

When people become republicans that is the evidence of their motivation. They GET OUT THE VOTE like breathing. They become republicans TO VOTE!

They understand that really ALL that matters is to vote. Congressmen are voting machines to exert our will. That's all they are. All that matters is if our side outnumbers their side so that our policy preferences can prevail. That's all that matters, and its bad liberal policies that causes people to BE republicans in the first place.

Yes, there are some that can be discourage from voting, and that can be a danger, which, again, makes the "smart" conservative beltway boys all the more wrong to join in a chorus of conventional wisdom that is but sound and fury signifying nothing. Nothing anyone says can prevent a voting machine from tallying a vote made by a GOP voter at their polling place on November 7th.

The fact is that NO MATTER WHAT THE MSM POLLS AND TALKING HEADS SAY, our people can freely go to the polls and vote our GOP reps into office in a landslide. The talk cannot effect that unless we let it, and the only way any significant number let it happen is if they take Barnes and Co to heart and give up.

The election has not begun. The Election begins at 12:01 AM on Election Day, November 7, 2006 at Dixville Notch, NH and ends at 8 PM in Hawaii.

The GOP doesn't have to "come back" from "being behind."

We are tied now and will be until the first chap at Dixville Notch comes out of the booth and outs us ahead by one vote.

Courage.

A civil/criminal trial lawyer for two decades in federal and state courts throughout the South and presently Vice-President of a multi-state real estate investment firm headquartered in Charlotte, N.C., Mike "Gamecock" DeVine was a long-time SC Democrat party official until his June 2001 conservative epiphany.

DeVine regularly writes about legal issues; economic issues given his phi beta kappa econ major education; political issues given his past experiences as an official in the South Carolina faction of the world's oldest political party; and about the virtues of conservative political thought, policies and values given his June 2001 epiphany that led him to leave the Jack Asses to advance a n elephantine we never forget, Reaganite, conservative agenda to save an anti-Borkian America "Slouching towards Gomorrah."

Moreover, as Legal Editor and conservative voice of The (Decatur, GA) Champion newspaper, (legal organ for DeKalb County in Metro-Atlanta Atlanta), he was the one of first columnists in the nation, soon after September 11, 2001, to comment on the likelihood that captured terrorists in Afghanistan would be deemed to be illegal enemy combatants not entitled to Prisoner of War status under the laws of war. He also wrote four dueling editorial debate columns against then Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney after her disgraceful statements after 911 and before her firs ever electoral defeat in 2002.

This Rooster knows from whereof he crows!!!

originally posted at RedState.com

Gamecock also blogs for
www.race42008.com

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Romney Takes Bold Stand for Marriage Amendment

Romney’s Advocacy of Marriage Amendment Threatens Viability of Giuliani’s Candidacy

Below are remarks by Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney yesterday in which he declares his unequivocal support for a Federal Constitutional Amendment defining marriage as exclusively restricted to the union of one man and one woman as the only way to effectively protect the institution.

While some conservatives favor a state’s rights approach to the issue coupled with appointment of non-activist judges to the U.S. Supreme Court that would uphold the Defense of marriage Act, such approaches would not prevent states from allowing gays to marry.

For most conservatives, that is unacceptable. The only way to absolutely protect the institution of marriage is a constitutional amendment. Their has been much speculation that Rudy Giuliani, who personally favors gay rights, will pledge to appoint justices like John Roberts and Samuel Alito. But it is beyond belief that he would move so far too the right as to favor the amendment Romney is advocating.

Romney is making this issue one of the defining issues of his candidacy. This has a powerful appeal to the base and could make it impossible for Giuliani to get off the ground before he even starts.

http://www.mass.gov/Agov2/docs/20061015_liberty_sunday.doc

Liberty Sunday: Defending Our First Freedom
October 15, 2006

“Welcome to this historic city. The authors of liberty recognized a Divine Creator who bequeathed to us certain inalienable rights. They affirmed freedom of religion and proscribed the establishment of any one religion. Today, there are some people would like to establish a single religion for America . . . the religion of secularism. They not only reject traditional religious values, but also the values of the founders. And they set aside the wisdom of the ages. Their allies are activist judges. Here in Massachusetts, activist judges struck a blow to the foundation of civilization, the family. They ruled that our constitution requires same sex marriage. I believe their error occurred because they focused on adult rights. If adult heterosexual couples can marry, they reasoned, then to have equal rights, adult homosexual couples must also be able to marry.
 
But marriage is not primarily about adults. Marriage is primarily about the nurturing and development of children. A child’s development is enhanced by the nurturing of both genders. Every child deserves a mother and a father. Of course, the principal burden of the Court’s ruling doesn’t fall on adults. It falls on children. We are asked to change the state birth certificate. To prevent “heterocentricity,” mother and father would become parent A and parent B. An elementary school teacher reads to her 2nd graders from a book titled “The King and King” about a prince who marries a prince. And a 2nd grader’s father is denied the right to have his child removed from class while that book is being read. Our state’s most difficult-to-place adoptive children may no longer be placed by Catholic charities because they favor homes where there’s a mother and a father.
 
The price of same sex marriage is paid by children. Our fight for marriage, then, should focus on the needs of children, not the rights of adults. In fact, as Americans, I believe that we should show an outpouring of respect and tolerance for all people, regardless of their differences or their different choices. We must vigorously reject discrimination and bigotry. We are all God’s children. He abhors none of us.
 
Massachusetts is the front line on marriage, but unless we adopt a federal amendment to protect marriage, what is happening here will unquestionably enter every other state. The spreading religion of secularism and its substitute values cannot be allowed to weaken the foundation of family or the faith of our fathers who more than life their freedom loved.”

www.race42008.com

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (5) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Hate-Driven Dems Never Win

Mature GOP Voters vs. Hate-Motivated Dem Voters 2006

 I have a lot of experience as a witness to the musings and machinations of Democrat activists and voters. And a lot of memories watching GOP activists worry in lead ups to election days based on MSM TV coverage and polls, knowing all the time that they would beat my party like a drum.

I don't have as much experience as a witness to the same in GOP voters mainly because most GOP voters don't muse and machinate as much. (We in the chattering class are an exception to this rule!) They just show up on Election Day and vote. GOP voters have been battle-hardened by the struggle that achieved their rise to majority status and they are not about to abandon the field with the job of renewing America not yet done.

Dem voter turnout has always been largely driven by passion, emotion if you will. The problem with that is that emotion can be its own reward, especially the emotion of hate. The Dems have won on rare occasions of late, and even then with pluralities, not majorities, when their better natures were appealed to. Bill Clinton was an optimist, and while he always engaged in some class envy and is on the stump this season demonizing Christian conservatives, he won the presidency by appealing to our better natures.

Their better natures are not being appealed to in 2006. The Dem party today bears no resemblance to the Bill Clinton of the 90s.

When consumed by hate, they suffer landslide defeats.

I would remind you that Mondale, Dukakis and Kerry led in the polls that don't choose the wielders of power.

One of the paradoxes with hate driven voting is that one risks losing the object of their emotion rush if they remove the hated object form the TV show called news and the flip side of that major paradox for the Dem's Bush hatred this year is that no matter what they do, they can't vote against Bush.

How is one's hate to be satisfied?

In short, many Dem voters behave like children. I used to herd these children to the polls losing only a few to pubs and ice cream shops along the way.

I can't tell you how many times during my 20 years in the Dem Party that I was working the grassroots for the party and listening to probable Dem voters and hearing not one word about an issue, but rather having to endure demonization of Republicans on a personal level and the kind of emotion justifications for voting that can easily fade away if one has to choose between missing one's favorite sitcom or standing in line to vote when one's self absorbed life will change not a whit the next day no matter what.

Except that if they miss the sitcom they won't have a witty retort at the water cooler on Wednesday.

The average GOP voter on the other hand is a much more serious person. Many are converts, and so are especially zealous to defeat the known evil that is their former party. But the main things about the GOP is that it has a coherent world view that is important to its voters in a serious way. Moreover, GOP voters are reliable to exercise their right and are much more cognizant of the policy consequences of who holds power.

For so long the Dems have spread fear that old folks and children would be starved to death if the GOP got power. But what they see since 1994 is increasing obesity in the 'hood and at the social security check day mailbox discussions.

GOP voters don't vote on emotion, primarily. They vote values, and they have 2 years more worth of then 16 and 17 year olds than they did in 2004. The Dems have two more years worth of aborted potential voters and more 60s hippies dead from hard livin'.

I noticed that this was all true when I was a Democrat. I watched the GOP grow into the dominant party, and saw it even at the time as a naturally occurring phenomenon that simply could not be stopped.

The reliability of GOP voter turnout since 1994, but especially since 2002 and 2004, is quite impressive. GOP voters will turn out no matter what the MSM does. They like low taxes. They love America and want it defended. And they want to finish fixing the courts. They will turn out.

They are not fickle, passion of the moment actors.

A high percentage of Democrats are.

One reason they are is actually quite rational. While they may hate what the GOP stands for in a vague sense, at least the demonic version their "leaders" define, they fear the incompetence of their own people more based on experience in the 70s and 90s as compared to Reagan, and so many just stay home.

This is a fact. I know these people. They can't look each other in the eye when they get two sentences into a discussion about what Dems stand for. They know its an empty suit or a ruined suit.

Now comes 2006. After decades of being told that the GOP would usher in a return to Hoovervilles and Jim Crow, and after 5 years of relentless Bushlied and Bush is the cause of all that is wrong in the world, and I mean ALL, they still get their checks in the mail.

Oh well, its late. Look at all those cars. The line must be long and Bush ain't on the ballot anyway. Let's get a pizza and watch TV.

Pizza beats hate when the line is more than two persons deep and the carb addiction kicks in.

A civil/criminal trial lawyer for two decades in federal and state courts throughout the South and presently Vice-President of a multi-state real estate investment firm headquartered in Charlotte, N.C., DeVine-Gamecock, aka Mike DeVine, was a long-time SC Democrat Party official until his June 2001 conservative epiphany.

originally posted at redstate.com

DeVine-Gamecock also blogs at race 4 2008 as Gamecock

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (5) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

WWJFKD?

 What Would JFK Do?

Today may be turning point in World History, IF, and a big IF, this was an actual nuclear test, and not a fake. But, if it was a real nuke test, either the United States draws a line in the sand NOW, or we resign ourselves and our children and their children to a new, much Colder War with many much more hot battles than the one Reagan won after 45 years of Dark Ages for half the world.

Iran is watching, and, unlike 1993 when we were unaware UBL was watching Black Hawk Down, we know it. All of the great work President George W. Bush has done the past 5 years to restore a credible deterrent against evil regimes could be lost in the next 72 hours or thirteen days.


see coming up crows


JFK faced a similar situation and took bold action. He  blockaded Cuba.

Pray for President Bush. God knows he has shown admirable courage since 911, especially when faced with a Democrat Party that emboldens our enemies 24/7. But now he needs more courage than any President since JFK. And when faced with the deployment of missiles in Europe, President Reagan put missiles in Europe to oppose them.

Words cannot be our only response.

The US must at least move force into the area. I think anything less than a blockade of the country to prevent export of a nuclear device that could be transported to our or our allies' shores would show aggression inviting weakness to our enemies. Of course, we should move to increase SDI funding.

I would favor ANY use of force the President deems necessary.

Today is possibly as important a day as 911.

I pray we meet the challenge NOW.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (6) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Social Conservatives are Libertarians Defending Free Speech Rights and Liberty

 This is an analysis of the supposed conflict between social conservatives and libertarian principles, social conservatives and other conservatives in the GOP coalition, especially as concerns the reason social conservatives became politically active in the first place, ie Supreme Court usurpation of the right of the people to make law.

originally posted at Redstate.com

Liberty, with a capital "L', is the right of people to govern themselves thru consent of the governed, ie the right of the majority to make law in their communities subject to safeguards for the minority as set out in Constitutions. Free speech is the key to informed choices. Secular minded minorities no more have the right to exclude religious speech from the public square than vice-versa. People speak. Then Vote.

Purple Heart caught my attention.

SteveLA followed up some back and forth with this thoughtful post.

Then the rooster crowed at length:

An Activist "conservative" judge would OUTLAW abortions, not simply reverse Roe. The scare quotes represent my belief that activist conservative is an oxymoron.

To favor a judge that would reverse Dred Scott, Plessy or Roe is not to be an activist. A judge's job is to apply the constitution, as written, not to come to the document with an "open" mind to do what he thinks is right. That is WE THE PEOPLE'S LIBERTY that blood was shed for. It was not shed to let judges rule us like the King before.

The constitution is written. Its words have meanings, most of which are quite plain. The constitution is a contract between the states and the federal government, and like any other contract the only honest way to interpret its words is by determining what they meant when they were ratified.

There is one issue that is a major but not necessarily fatal problem in interpretation, and that is the incorporation doctrine that activist judges have used since the 14th amendment was passed after the Civil War, which clearly did not implicate the first amendment at all.

In 1789 and until the mid-1830s, up to 9 states had established STATE religions. In fact, Thomas Jefferson's famous wall of separation letter, that has been taken wholly out of context by liberals beginning with Justice Black, was a letter that told the Danbury, CT Baptists that he, as president of the FEDERAL government, could not intervene on their behalf against the state's official Congregationalist Church.

Therefore, under the 1st amendment ONLY CONGRESS was barred from establishing a NATIONAL Church on par with the Church of England they fled. All states dis-established their state churches voluntarily due to competition for settlers, etc.

Clearly then States that can have a state church, can do LESS than have a state church, even if the incorporation doctrine was not adhered to.

But, even applying the First Amendment to the states, the display of the Greek God Zeus, still life paintings of a flower pot, or the Magna Carta or 10 commandments is not the establishment of a church.

This is a matter of free speech and states rights. But the point is that we have examples of what state churches were. And Roy Moore's monument was not one.

As to prayer, as long as its voluntary, there is no violation. A community has the right to have its values reflected in its institutions, esp its schools.

The idea at the founding was that happiness pursuits could be maximized by like-minded people governing themselves in their communities. The un-likeminded could move or stay. In any event there is no coercion.

To HEAR religious speech is not to be denied one's right to free exercise nor to have an established church erected.

Free exercise means one can attend one's own church and believe what one wishes without being punished by fines or imprisonment.

To HEAR words spoken that the majority wishes to have spoken in the collective exercise of their LIBERTY to governance by the consent of the governed and majority rule, does not violate the constitutional rights of the HEARER.

The matter is one of free speech. Secular and religious speech is protected.

I recall no evangelism in grammar school when we had prayers. And many of the kids were heathens! haha But the fact that we answered to God was great way to civilize children and remains so.

There is to be no neutrality when it comes to what the constitution says and means anymore than GMC can reinterpret my contract with them to make me pay more for the truck.

And to ban prayer in favor of a value-less secularism that is no less a "faith" being foisted on the children is simply to deny the people their free speech rights. SOMEONE's values will be inculcated in children at school. To BAN the name of Jesus but allow the study of anything else is to teach that Jesus is somehow less proper. It sends a message of ridicule and shame in one's family's values. Parents have the right to have their values taught by majority vote.

I have often moved precisely to make sure that I approve of my children's schools. I didn't sue and claim that I had a right to make the majority comply with some supposed "neutral" curriculum.

One of the things that really blows my mind about liberals is their apparent blindness to the legitimate power they DO have under the US Constitution to make laws they prefer in their communities and states vs their tar baby-like clinging to the illegitimate imposition of their agenda on the whole nation thru courts.

First of all, I have no doubt that no state would allow prosletyzing in public schools if local schools tried to do that. No state maintained an established state church after the 1830s or 1840s. So even if the establishment clause had not been applied to the states thru the 14th, Americans would not approve of an established church under state law.

Second, liberals, jews, secular humanists, atheists, gays and any other group, have the power to congregate in a community and fashion their local schools in accordance with their values. I moved my family away from a school district precisely because I did not wish for my child to be taught from the book about Two Mommies. The majority in that community favored the teaching of the book. I had and still have many friends in that community, but disagree with them on the issue. So I moved into a community of like minded people on the issue.

Third, to me, the objection to the display of an inanimate object in courthouse rising to the level of violation of an individual's supposed right not to see it is quite insane. I disagree with much of what is hung on the walls of government buildings. But, the people elect their reps to run the government and reflect their values, even in decoration. This is a proper exercise of collective Liberty. Alan Keyes is quite eloquent on this aspect of state's rights.

Sandra Day O'Connor is primarily responsible for the mess in this area of the law, and unless J. Kennedy changes his prior positions, the new justices will tear down the silly 17 point-wall tests about intent behind a display.

We can SEE the thing. And in any event, what business is it of the federal government much less a federal judge as to what pictures hang on a wall?

www.race42008.com
"Within the covers of the Bible are the answers for all the problems men face." - Ronald Reagan

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (6) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

I Proudly Registered to Vote as a Republican Today

I found that as a Republican, I could say what I really knew to be true and be proud and not have to think before I spoke. I was liberated by truth, sound doctrine and ideals.

(originally posted on www.redstate.com at http://www.redstate.com/blogs/gamecock/2006/oct/06/i_proudly_registered_to_vote_as_a_republican_today)

As the Redstate family knows, I experienced a conservative "epiphany" in June of 2001 after 20 years of activism in the Democrat Party. During those years, I was a party man. I disagreed with the notion of voting "for the man" in nearly all races, especially those for service in Washington, because my involvement in politics was to see policies I deemed best for the country to be enacted into law, and it's parties that run on platforms they deign to advance.

And now that I am a Republican (and even more officially so given my registration in a State that requires registration by party for the first time), I am a party man, and proudly so, despite the imperfections of the party.

I am not involved in politics and debate for the sport of it, although it can be invigoratingly sporting, or for vanity, though I be a vain recovering elitist chatterer (read geek) seeking affirmation and converts (Gamecock is honest about his need for prayer on the deadly sin of Pride).

But all this would be but sound and fury signifying nothing, if our efforts were not directed to the ultimate goal of correct policy and laws for the good of America and, by extension, mankind. (I'm also a Christian called to love all men and Go ye with the message, and history proves to me that God's providence was involved in the founding of this land and the miracle aberration of freedom for so many since our founding. I truly believe that our creative nation best approximates a sliver of what God intended in Eden and what he intends for his elect in eternity, but I digress. Boy did I digress!! sorry)

Let me tell you just how complete was my epiphany and how deep is my love and respect for the Republican Party. Yes, I was always a hawk on defense and being an econ major, Milton Friedman free marketer and Laffer Curve supply-sider. I go with what works. I was always furious that Democrats weren't for tax cuts. But I was a judicial elitist and a moralist that favored the democrat party to make myself feel morally superior by being for government giveaways to the "disadvantaged."

But I was also a rabid anti-racist and in the 70s, most racists I knew were republicans and most people I knew that reached out to Blacks were Democrats.

During the 90s I saw fellow democrats start to exhibit racist attitudes and saw republicans treat Blacks like I always wanted them to be treated, ie as equals that can compete and that can adhere to the same moral standards. I saw liberals grow callous about the lack of freedom in communist countries. I saw them cling to obviously failing policies. I looked in the mirror and saw a man that was living a lie and participating in a fraud. Being a cover for kooks. I began to notice that every time a democrat opened his mouth, and especially Bill Clinton, that they were saying things to justify policies that we all knew to be lies. Politically correct lies.

I arrived in Atlanta after 35 years in SC, to a politically correct nightmare world run amok. Surrounded by liberals with eyes glazed over. With their souls blackened. With people that either were hostile to people of faith or apologetic about their own. With black race hustlers and racist whites that used blacks for dependency victims to be the objects of their work and livelihood.

I read Robert Bork's Slouching Towards Gomorrah and The Tempting of America and saw the light on my legal profession. I saw all that Rush Limbaugh had been saying through my radio for 15 years all co0me tiogether. i saw the media as a TV show that was not to be trusted.

Maybe even more importantly, I saw the beauty of conservative thought and its consistency with faith and the judeo-christian vales I believed in.

I gained a newfound respect for people that had been conservatives since the 50s and since the 60s and since the 70s and since Reagan. I really saw how I had been fooled by the media and in denial about who really was in my party.

I found that as a Republican, I could say what I really knew to be true and be proud and not have to think before I spoke. I was liberated by truth, sound doctrine and ideals.

I converted ideologically and as one that knows oh so well, the decadence that is my former party. I loathe the Democrat Party like a reformed drug addict loathes his pusher.

And so, maybe more than even Kowalski and haystack, I hate to see Republicans that have the truth and proven successful principles on their side back off from aggressively, unapologetically advancing them. It is the principles of conservatism that animate me. Knowing they work. I must admit, that I have had moments of despair like haystack and "Ski" where I declared myself a Conservative with no party.... for about 5 seconds, during which time I heard noise from a Democrat contrasted with President Bush.

I am about this country getting the conservative spanking it needs!! On all fronts. That can only happen via the Republican Party. And we have in Reagan's example and in most election DAYS (remember that word, "DAYS") the key to victory. Aggressive, unapologetic conservatism works every time its tried.

It gets tried every election DAY, and the few weeks leading up when citizens transmogrify from inattentive life-livers to attentive voters. They pick conservatives, or those that articulate it, even if its Carter or Clinton fraud.

If our elected congressmen would just remember those DAYS and that another such DAY will come when they can count on adherence to conservative principles to be affirmed and rewarded with re-election, we can fix this country.

There is no other way this side of eternity but thru the GOP. The Grand Old Party that was formed to rid the world of slavery and which now wishes to rid the world of the latest fascist threat and restore America to the values that made us the Shining City ion the Hill.

God bless the GOP. Its great. Its just not perfect. For that, see Jesus Christ My Lord and put all this in perspective.


www.race42008.com

"Within the covers of the Bible are the answers for all the problems men face." - Ronald Reagan

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (8) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (1) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Only the Historically Ignorant Say the Iraq War is not a Success

  Only the Historically Ignorant Say the Iraq War is not a Success

NOTHING enrages me more than to see conservatives, especially elected Republicans, acquiesce in the MSM conventional wisdom KNOWN FACT that the Iraq War, INCLUDIUNG the post war portion thereof, is "not going well" or not "going as expected" or to describe the whole effort as "mistakes were made."

See below, after my commentary, a Life magazine article by libs that described post-war Germany as a failure.

My intellectual respect for a large percentage of supposed educated friends and "leaders" in Washington has plummeted since 911, and especially since 6 weeks after same and especially since 48 hours after we invaded Iraq.

Do our people not understand the sacrifices made since 1776 that makes all this obese colossal ignorance possible? Do they not know of the seven years, including valley forge and the high percentage of the population that died to establish a bulwark of liberty where men could govern themselves to secure their God-given inalienable rights rather than bow to a King? Or the greater percentage that died to preserve this would-be arsenal of democracy in the Civil War 86 years later? Or the hundreds of thousands that died to avenge the deaths of less than 3000, rid the world of a threat to plunge the world back to its normal state of tyranny? Or the tens of thousands that died in the hot parts of the Cold War that Reagan finally was finally given the power to win after 50 years, and the multiplied billions we spent to do so and free half the world?

In Iraq, have so many (50 million plus) been freed from tyranny at so low a cost in history? An terror organization that killed for over a decade with impunity has been decimated. A man that initiated wars that killed millions and funded suicide bombers, trained terrorists and killed hundreds of thousands with WMD in his own country stands trial while 90% of his country fights 10% and al qaida for freedom side by side with us!! Anti-jihadist Arabs, called Iraqis and Afghans fight with America against the barbarians. Its not Europeans fighting and dying in great numbers. Its our new allies that braved bombs at polling places!!!

Some wise guy said no Americans were killed by snipers in POST war Germany as a snark to belittle our efforts in Iraq. How many Americans were killed in Post-war America in the Civil War? 500,000. How many in the war to defeat Germany? over 150,00. How many in the Iraq War in total? less than 3000.

We were in Germany until...WE'RE STILL THERE!!!!!!!!!!

It is a disgrace that our brave freedom fighters are denied their glory EVEN BY GOP ELECTED OFFICIALS. STOP MIMING THE MEME!!! Learn war and history and give our troops and our country the glory. Don;t be Bill Clinton and let the TV be reality. Its not!!!! Clinton said he didn't do more after the 1998 Embassy bombings due to "wag the dog". The fact is that the GOP leadership praised his retaliatory bombings. But Clinton based his inaction on TV commentary.

Thank God FDR and HST didn't let Life Mag determine their actions. And that President Bush doesn't!!

HONOR THE TROOPS AND THE FACTS. And quit embarrassing yourselves and talking down to Americans. You insult our intelligence.

The Iraq War cannot be judged in an MSM anti-Bush post Vietnam TV vacuum. War is the history of mankind, and most of that history is weak people being conquered by evil tyrants. American history is an aberration I would like to see continue. The only way it can is if we stay string and NEVER give up. NEVER!!!!!!! And stay technologically superior and have the WILLLLLL to use our power and use it.

LIFE Magazine: Americans Are Losing the Victory in Europe

January 7, 1946

We are in a cabin deep down below decks on a Navy ship jam-packed with troops that’s pitching and creaking its way across the Atlantic in a winter gale. There is a man in every bunk. There’s a man wedged into every corner. There’s a man in every chair. The air is dense with cigarette smoke and with the staleness of packed troops and sour wool.

“Don’t think I’m sticking up for the Germans,” puts in the lanky young captain in the upper berth, “but…”

“To he*l with the Germans,” says the broad-shouldered dark lieutenant. “It’s what our boys have been doing that worries me.”

The lieutenant has been talking about the traffic in Army property, the leaking of gasoline into the black market in France and Belgium even while the fighting was going on, the way the Army kicks the civilians around, the looting.

“Lust, liquor and loot are the soldier’s pay,” interrupts a red-faced major.

The lieutenant comes out with his conclusion: “Two wrongs don’t make a right.” You hear these two phrases again and again in about every bull session on the shop. “Two wrongs don’t make a right” and “Don’t think I’m sticking up for the Germans, but….”

The troops returning home are worried. “We’ve lost the peace,” men tell you. “We can’t make it stick.”

A tour of the beaten-up cities of Europe six months after victory is a mighty sobering experience for anyone. Europeans. Friend and foe alike, look you accusingly in the face and tell you how bitterly they are disappointed in you as an American. They cite the evolution of the word “liberation.” Before the Normandy landings it meant to be freed from the tyranny of the Nazis. Now it stands in the minds of the civilians for one thing, looting.

You try to explain to these Europeans that they expected too much. They answer that they had a right to, that after the last war America was the hope of the world. They talk about the Hoover relief, the work of the Quakers, the speeches of Woodrow Wilson. They don’t blame us for the fading of that hope. But they blame us now.

Never has American prestige in Europe been lower. People never tire of telling you of the ignorance and rowdy-ism of American troops, of out misunderstanding of European conditions. They say that the theft and sale of Army supplies by our troops is the basis of their black market. They blame us for the corruption and disorganization of UNRRA. They blame us for the fumbling timidity of our negotiations with the Soviet Union. They tell us that our mechanical de-nazification policy in Germany is producing results opposite to those we planned. “Have you no statesmen in America?” they ask.

The Skeptical French Press

Yet whenever we show a trace of positive leadership I found Europeans quite willing to follow our lead. The evening before Robert Jackson’s opening of the case for the prosecution in the Nurnberg trial, I talked to some correspondents from the French newspapers. They were polite but skeptical. They were willing enough to take part in a highly publicized act of vengeance against the enemy, but when you talked about the usefulness of writing a prohibition of aggressive war into the law of nations they laughed in your face. The night after Jackson’s nobly delivered and nobly worded speech I saw then all again. They were very much impressed. Their manner had even changed toward me personally as an American. Their sudden enthusiasm seemed to me typical of the almost neurotic craving for leadership of the European people struggling wearily for existence in the wintry ruins of their world.

The ruin this war has left in Europe can hardly be exaggerated. I can remember the years after the last war. Then, as soon as you got away from the military, all the little strands and pulleys that form the fabric of a society were still knitted together. Farmers took their crops to market. Money was a valid medium of exchange. Now the entire fabric of a million little routines has broken down. No on can think beyond food for today. Money is worthless. Cigarettes are used as a kind of lunatic travesty on a currency. If a man goes out to work he shops around to find the business that serves the best hot meal. The final pay-off is the situation reported from the Ruhr where the miners are fed at the pits so that they will not be able to take the food home to their families.

“Well, the Germans are to blame. Let them pay for it. It’s their fault,” you say. The trouble is that starving the Germans and throwing them out of their homes is only producing more areas of famine and collapse.

One section of the population of Europe looked to us for salvation and another looked to the Soviet Union. Wherever the people have endured either the American armies or the Russian armies both hopes have been bitterly disappointed. The British have won a slightly better reputation. The state of mind in Vienna is interesting because there the part of the population that was not actively Nazi was about equally divided. The wealthier classes looked to America, the workers to the Soviet Union.

The Russians came first. The Viennese tell you of the savagery of the Russian armies. They came like the ancient Mongol hordes out of the steppes, with the flimsiest supply. The people in the working-class districts had felt that when the Russians came that they at least would be spared. But not at all. In the working-class districts the tropes were allowed to rape and murder and loot at will. When victims complained, the Russians answered, “You are too well off to be workers. You are bourgeoisie.”

When Americans looted they took cameras and valuables but when the Russians looted they took everything. And they raped and killed. From the eastern frontiers a tide of refugees is seeping across Europe bringing a nightmare tale of helpless populations trampled underfoot. When the British and American came the Viennese felt that at last they were in the hands of civilized people. But instead of coming in with a bold plan of relief and reconstruction we came in full of evasions and apologies.

U.S. Administration a Poor Third

We know now the tragic results of the ineptitudes of the Peace of Versailles. The European system it set up was Utopia compared to the present tangle of snarling misery. The Russians at least are carrying out a logical plan for extending their system of control at whatever cost. The British show signs of recovering their good sense and their innate human decency. All we have brought to Europe so far is confusion backed up by a drumhead regime of military courts. We have swept away Hitlerism, but a great many Europeans feel that the cure has been worse than the disease.

The taste of victory had gone sour in the mouth of every thoughtful American I met. Thoughtful men can’t help remembering that this is a period in history when every political crime and every frivolous mistake in statesmanship has been paid for by the death of innocent people. The Germans built the Stalags; the Nazis are behind barbed wire now, but who will be next? Whenever you sit eating a good meal in the midst of a starving city in a handsome house requisitioned from some German, you find yourself wondering how it would feel to have a conqueror drinking out of your glasses. When you hear the tales of the brutalizing of women from the eastern frontier you think with a shudder of of those you love and cherish at home.

That we are one world is unfortunately a brutal truth. Punishing the German people indiscriminately for the sins of their leader may be justice, but it is not helping to restore the rule of civilization. The terrible lesson of the events of this year of victory is that what is happening to the bulk of Europe today can happen to American tomorrow.

In America we are still rich, we are still free to move from place to place and to talk to our friends without fear of the secret police. The time has come, for our own future security, to give the best we have to the world instead of the worst. So far as Europe is concerned, American leadership up to now has been obsessed with a fear of our own virtues. Winston Churchill expressed this state of mind brilliantly in a speech to his own people which applies even more accurately to the people of the U.S. “You must be prepared,” he warned them, “for further efforts of mind and body and further sacrifices to great causes, if you are not to fall back into the rut if inertia, the confusion of aim and the craven fear of being great.”

Getting Déjà Vu yet? Here's more from this issue of LIFE...

The first winter of peace holds Europe in a deathly grip of cold, hunger and hopelessness. In the words of the London Sunday Observer: “Europe is threatened by a catastrophe this winter which has no precedent since the Black Death of 1348.”

These are still more than 25,000,000 homeless people milling about Europe. In Warsaw nearly 1,000,000 live in holes in the ground. Six million building were destroyed in Russia. Rumania has her worst drought of 50 years, and in Greece fuel supplies are terribly low because the Nazis, during their occupation, decimated the forests. In Italy the wheat harvest, which was a meager 3,450,000 tons in 1944, fell to an unendurable 1,304,000 tons in 1945. In France, food consumption per day averages 1,800 calories as compared with 3,000 calories in the U.S.

Germany is sinking even below the level of the countries she victimized. The German people are still better clothed than most of Europe because during the war they took the best of Europe’s clothing. But their food supply is below subsistence level. In the American zone they beg for the privilege of scraping U.S. army garbage cans. Infant mortality is already so high that a Berlin Quaker, quoted in the British press, predicted. “No child born in Germany in 1945 will survive. Only half the children aged less than 3 years will survive.”

On Germany, which plunged the Continent into its misery, falls the blame for its own plight and the plight of all Europe. But if this winter proves worse even than the war years, blame will fall on the victor nations. Some Europeans blame Russia for callousness to misery in eastern Europe. But some also blame America because they expected so much more from her. On the following pages the distinguished novelist John Dos Passos, who has been abroad as LIFE correspondent, reports on Europe’s suffering and what it means for America.

originally posted at

http://www.redstate.com/blogs/gamecock/2006/oct/03/only_the_historically_ignorant_say_the_iraq_war_is_not_a_success#new


http://devine-gamecock.townhall.com

www.race42008.com
"Within the covers of the Bible are the answers for all the problems men face." - Ronald Reagan

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Democrats Would Let Foley Take Minors to Georgia for Abortions

Democrats Would Let Foley Take Minors to Georgia for Abortions 

originally posted at Redstate.com (link below)


Lost in the news even before the ABC October Foley IMs surprise, was the Senate vote to invoke cloture to end a Democrat filibuster and move to a vote on the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act. The Act would make it a federal crime to transport a minor across state lines for an abortion without parental consent.

The vote took place the same day that the Senate passed the law authorizing military tribunals to try terrorists for war crimes. The Democrats did not filibuster that bill although much less than 50% of them voted for passage.

But on the issue of parental notification before one takes a child to another state to have an abortion, they so opposed it that they wouldn't even allow it to be voted on on the merits. It should also be noted that four republicans also refused to invoke cloture as well, and if they had, the filibuster would have been killed.

From the Catholic Fire:

Of the 14 Democrats who initially voted in favor of S. 403 on July 25, yesterday eight flipped and voted to kill the parental notification requirement: Ken Salazar (Co.), Tom Carper (De.), Bill Nelson (Fl.), Daniel Inouye (Hi.), Evan Bayh (In.), Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan (both ND), and Herb Kohl (Wi).
The six Democrats who voted in favor of the bill on both occasions were Mark Pryor (Ar.), Ben Nelson (Ne.), Mary Landrieu (La.), Harry Reid (Nv.), Tim Johnson (SD), and Robert Byrd (WV). The four Republicans who opposed the bill were Lincoln Chafee (RI), Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe (both Maine), and Arlen Specter (Pa.).

"It is remarkable that only six out of 45 Senate Democrats voted to require a parent to be notified before an abortion is performed on a young daughter in some other state," commented NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson, who noted that the bill had exceptions for cases involving abuse, medical emergency, and judicial waiver of notification. "We commend Majority Leader Bill Frist for fighting to the end to free this legislation from the grip of a Senate minority, a minority that has preserved the ability of profiteering abortionists to keep parents in the dark."

read the whole story

http://catholicfire.blogspot.com/2006/09/eight-senate-democrats-flip-kil...

Democrat message: Congressman Foley, feel free to take my child from Tallahassee to Atlanta for an abortion, but don't send her any suggestive e-mails.

http://www.redstate.com/blogs/gamecock/2006/oct/02/democrats_would_let_foley_take_minors_to_georgia_for_abortions

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Star-Spangled Purple-Fingered Bond the Left Can't Sever

I do not believe that the left (MSM, Academia and Democrat Party) will be successful in forcing us to abandon our new allies in Iraq and Afghanistan. And make no mistake about it, they would also pull us out of Afghanistan as well, despite all the Captain Ahab desired search for Usama Moby Dik bin Laden. Europe is in the process of cutting and running now.

Originally posted on Redstate.com

http://www.redstate.com/blogs/gamecock/2006/sep/30/the_star_spangled_purple_fingered_bond_the_left_cant_sever

Haystack's brilliant, as usual, just recently posted blog entry on "The Peskiness of Truth in the Body Politic"

http://www.redstate.com/blogs/haystack/2006/sep/30/the_peskiness_of_trut...

and its stark reminder of the uphill battle we face against a ubiquitous doom and gloom anti-conservative useful idiot to the enemies of freedom media on all policy fronts and his reference to our shared experience of JFK's assassination as one of our earliest experiences, reminded me of an issue I have wanted to address that I think should give us hope that a majority of Americans can overcome the obstacles and have learned major lessons form the retreat from Vietnam and 911.

I do not believe that the left (MSM, Academia and Democrat Party) will be successful in forcing us to abandon our new allies in Iraq and Afghanistan. And make no mistake about it, they would also pull us out of Afghanistan as well, despite all the Captain Ahab desired search for Usama Moby Dik bin Laden. Europe is in the process of cutting and running now.

I don't even think the Left remotely understands the bond that has been forged between President Bush, the US Military and freedom loving Americans with the millions of purple fingered freedom fighters, both civilian and military, in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The words seem to pass over the Media and Democrats heads when spoken by the president at news conferences and troops in the field. The president seems to resort to the word I am thinking of almost as a last resort of incredulity that doesn't let him accept that the Left simply has no honor or even wisdom about the matter, and that matter is:

Honor.

Its loyalty. Its the common cause for freedom. Its those that returned to polling stations after bombs with the smoke still clearing. its the memory of the Democrat Party's abandonment on the South Vietnamese while they were winning in 1975 and the millions slaughtered as a consequence. Its the millions that Stalin and Mao killed and that languished under Gorbachev's slavery until Reagan said "we win, they lose. Its the Contras. Its the Iraqis that were slaughtered and those that were left to slavery when Bush41 abandoned them.

Honor.

The American people will not abandon our allies for freedom to the enemies of freedom.

But the left will never understand why.

I think the bonds between our people and the Iraqi and Afghan people are as string as any I have seen in my lifetime and probably approach or exceed any bonds from the past. The Philippines bond come s to mind as approaching same. maybe Britain. maybe Poland and eastern Europe.

But I think the shared space and arms is the difference. the Iraqis seeing our sacrifices for them. And us, despite not seeing all we should, having seen the women vote at peril.

We will not abandon them, even if President Bush has to do an Iran-Contra writ large or an Andrew Jackson. Even if only Laura and barney are left? Mr. President, you will always have many more than that even if our GOP reps in Congress are too timid to speak.

Honor precludes it. Enough Americans remember Vietnam and UBL's paper tiger label that we will not see our nation;'s honor disgraced by Democrats again.

We will find a way.

My first memory of my life is the horse drawn caisson with JFK's body. I was a democrat that loved America and hated tyranny, especially communist tyranny, and it was the den=Democrats that didn't share these vales in the 80s that started gamecock on the path to the epiphany. What matters in this world if our support for free people doesn't? Birkenstocks?

Today, JFK Democrats are called Republicans. we are the only party left that will defend this country. We must prevail not only over the foreign threat, but also their useful idiots here at home. In fact the only way we can lose is if the 5th column prevails.

They won't.

Bear any burden. Even the burden of losing friends here in America that are morally blind and intellectually lobotomized.

Honor. Loyalty. Freedom.

Oppose ANY foe...even the the MSM and the Democrat Party.

D-G also writes for www.race42008.com

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive