Thursday, September 21, 2006

What's wrong with Hugo?

So Hugo Chavez goes out blasting the president at the UN. Like most pompous dictators he got a standing ovation from the rest of the world oppressors. What does this say about him? Well he obviously can't accept that a country like America is free to elect someone he doesn't like, unlike his country where he seized power in a vastly fraudulent election.

But the topper to the story is this...Charles Rangel came out blasting Chavez for his comments...Sort of. He spent 2 minutes kissing Hugo's rear end and about 2 seconds criticizing him. The only thing I find more odd is the silence on the behalf of the Republican party. But In all fairness, criticizing Bush is one of Charles biggest pass times so it is no wonder he didn't want to sound like a maniacal crazy dictator.

Thursday, September 14, 2006

Thought of the Day

Radical Rosie O'Donnelism is as much a threat as Radical Islam.

That is all

Thursday, September 07, 2006

The party is over

I have been thinking about ej's comments and while I am sure he wont visit me again, I do know this...He accuses me of acting like a democrat and then tells me that because I am not backing the endorsed candidate and defying the endorsed candidate by campaigning against him, I cannot possibly be anything but a democrat. It amazes me at the hipocracy of this statement. The party that claims the other is anything but and the resort to attacks and name calling simply isn't befitting of a true conservative. Because I don't agree with ej he simply tells me that I am a democrat. If he was true to his party, he wouldn't be assaulting me because I differ in view with him but would engage me in honest and open debate. The fact that he has not return indicates quite clearly to me that he is neither honest nor open to new ideas, and when that happens you elect people like Tim Pawlenty who are not honest, and are not open. The slide to the left progresses and then people wonder what happened to the good ole days when we had a capitalistic society and low taxes.

ej, this is a calling to you...If you believe that Sue Jeffers isn't the right candidate respond and tell me why in an honest, no name calling, debate of facts and issues. If you can't do this, if you won't do this, then you are no better than the democrat you claimed me to be.

Wednesday, September 06, 2006

The D stands for Defeat

I often wonder how long the democrats want to string out our security in the name of "Freedom". Then the president comes out and says that he is going to grant geneva rights to the terrorists. So here I am thinking that the world is going to go well and boom, the president smacks me in the forehead saying we are going to try the terrorists with all rights and privileges there in...

So my question today is when do we begin to clean up our dead? You know that some judge is going to let one of these bastards out and boom, literally. Seeing as the military papers are telling pro-troop groups to get the hell out, it seems only logical one is going let a terrorist out. When the terrorists realize that they will live in comfy cozy quarters for the rest of their life because they are given geneva rights they will reign down on us a fury that has never been seen. It is not a question of if, but now when.

Tuesday, September 05, 2006

It wasn't us, really! had some posters to their forums posting in very hateful speach against jews and joe lieberman. Now to many people it would seem quite logical that the group that is so anti-war would dislike Joe with a passion would resort to their kind of hate filled speech. But the kicker of course, the absolute great line of the story, was this:

He added that most of the comments were not made by MoveOn members and suggested it could be an effort by conservatives to "target" the group, and said any effort to tie the rants to MoveOn was "wrong."
Yes, because we all know how much conservatives hate the Jews, especially Joe Lieberman

Sunday, September 03, 2006

Libertarian, what, who?

Normally someone like like ej's comments I would have deleted simply because he cannot seem to put together a good coherent thought without resulting to personal attacks and anger as a resolve. Sue will win the primary. But I wanted to address some core concerns of his that moved me. He claimed that Minnesota politics will become more divided than ever, The problem is that they are already divided. Most of the people voting for Sue WILL NOT be voting for pawlenty. It is not my fault he could not keep conservative values.

But I really love the attack that this is a state where conservatives get voted out. Norm Coleman ran on a conservative ticket and won. Tim Pawlenty ran on a conservative ticket and won. 1/2 of the House and Senate ran on a conservative ticket and won. Mark Kennedy is running on a conservative ticket and will win. Conservatism wins every time it is run and when you are forced to decide between a liberal like Hatch or a liberal like pawlenty, you are then relegated to a moot vote. Voting for hatch or voting for pawlenty is pretty much one in the same.

Let me make this clear, I have no plans of voting for hatch, but after the slew of very personal insults that pawlenty threw at me at the state fair last year, and his policies of tax and spend, I will not vote for him either.

Oh, and to EJ who couldn't figure out the very simply comment system, you post your comments AFTER the post you are commenting on, not before it.

To Promote?

As usualy my life is a triumph of politics 24 hours a day and this week has been no difference. However one thing sticks out in my mind that I want to expand on. I had a discussion with my parents regarding Sue Jeffers. The discussion had many points but there is one that I wanted to touch on briefly. They made the statement that Sue needed to make herself aware to non-politically aware people. Now my parents do not share much of my core conservative and intellectual prowess so this didn't strike me as too odd, however the fact that they wanted to be told that there was an alternative did strike me. Now, I am of the camp that voting is not a privilage that should be shared with the populace. People who come in an vote because one candidate "looks better" or because they are male/female/AFCIO/white/black/whatever is just plain retarded. I have never voted solely on party lines and neither should anyone else. I remember the first election I ever went to was a school board election. I went in with no clue who anyone was and I voted but felt very stupid afterwards. I had never heard of anyone and voted fairly randomly. It was then that I realized I need to study who is on the ballot beforehand. The next election had a couple dozen judges of which I knew each one and who I wanted to vote for. There was no confusion as to who was good or who was bad. I knew because I had to study. Now there is the side point here that Minnesota prevents judges from running a true political election campaign or get endorsements so this is different but the same remains that I knew who every person was on that ballot and where they stood.

So the question is, should a political candidate be forced to shove themselves in front of voters? This particular laziness is not the candidates problem and by ignoring choices when they are available and actually doing some homework you negate your vote and encourage incumbancy. Aside from this it ensures that only the super rich, those who can get large contributions, throw huge fund raisers, and get endorsements are the only ones who will get into office. The problem with this is the stupid people, the ones who don't want to have to do anything other than show up, get incredible power to act like idiots. They are allowed to vote for someone of which they know nothing about. They could be voting for someone who has pledged to exterminate all the jews and yet they have not done the due diligence to figure out the stance of the person they are voting for.

Now the standard response is that we need spending limits and money removed from politics. Hogwash. First, the ability to spend money to buy ad's and campaign materials is fundamental to obtaining political office. If you limit the ability of a campaign to spend money how they see fit, you eliminate a lot of things like yard signs, bumper stickers, and many other little freebies that people get in order to promote a candidate. Second and more importantly, the ability to buy ad time or buy public functions to speak is a fundamental right...Congress shall make no law...

Now for the solution. A small, easy test before you can vote. Every candidate on the ballot is listed, you must correctly identify their party and what office they are running for. To appease the liberals and the lazy (usually one in the same) everyone will still be allowed to vote, however only those who score 90% or better on the test get their votes circular filed.

Saturday, September 02, 2006

Sue Sue Sue!

Today I realized that tim pawlenty is hated by democrats as much as Bush... I am now rallying democrats to vote in the republican primary to oust pawlenty by voting for Sue! The revolution has begun!

Friday, September 01, 2006

MPR Blogs

Well I was selected as a "centrist" voter by MPR and asked to make contributions to their blog so starting in about 2 weeks I will be on MPR's blog found here:

I will still post here but be noted I will probably link my posts there from here.
Weblog Commenting and Trackback by