Tag Archives: Conservative

The Call of the RINO in Virginia and Mississippi

Stop feeding RINOsIt would be a lot easier for conservatives to tolerate the sanctimony of Republicans In Name Only (RINOs) if they weren’t so hypocritical — or in the case of Mississippi RINOs — despicably hypocritical.

‘Moderate’ Republicans never tire of telling us conservative extremists how they are inclusive and ready to reach across the aisle to get things done. While we are exclusive and alienate and people that disagree with us.

Well the Sen. Thad Cochran campaign got things done in Mississippi all right and in the process of building their ‘big tent’ party the RINOs turned race–baiting 180 degrees.

Formerly in Mississippi and other states where Jim Crow was president of the chamber of commerce, unscrupulous white bigots used the threat of black voting, lawlessness, sexual potency, you–name–it to frighten other bigots into voting against the opposition. Typically this was another Democrat that only had one parent in the Klan, as opposed to the baiter who had two.

The lurid overt and covert campaigns wielded scurrilous attacks in the primary because in the South at that time the general election didn’t count. Republicans were as scarce as black members of the Sons of the Confederacy.

This year in a new low for even bottom feeders, the RINOs in the Cochran campaign used race–baiting to scare blacks into voting against Cochran’s conservative white opponent. In the process smearing State Sen. Chris McDaniel with all the mainstream media and leftist TEA Party slanders.

None of it was true, but accuracy was beside the point when crony capitalists, lobbyists and an entitled Senate staff were working to keep their access to the government trough.

The sleazy campaign hired sleazy consultants and then denied involvement with the product. The Cochran group — lead by lobbyist Haley Barbour and his nephew Henry Barbour —denied knowing anything about the content of the robo–calls or radio ads. The nephew told The Daily Caller, “She (a discredited black consultant forced to resign from the mayor of Atlanta’s staff for filing false financial reports) and I talked message for calls, but I never heard them.”

As lies go this isn’t even as good as an Obama lie.

I’ve worked in campaigns for over 30 years and I assure you that when a campaign pays for a product, they approve it before it goes on the air. Heck, campaigns argue about yard signs for days, so you can imagine the discussion around radio advertising.

So at least Barbour knew, but I’m not so sure Cochran did. Coordination between an ‘independent’ expenditure and the campaign is illegal and even if it wasn’t, Thad occasionally has difficulty distinguishing between the days of the week.

The ads specifically warned black voters that McDaniel had a “racist agenda” and that blacks “could lose food stamps, housing assistance, early breakfast, free lunch” and all the other handout programs. The ads concluded with the ominous, “We’ve come this far, we can’t go back now!”

Say to the time when Mississippi was run by white bigots who were Democrats.

This combination of pandering and lying is actually worse than the old–fashioned race baiting, because then, after the election, the race–baiting winner was going to vote the way the bigots wanted. In fact the loser in the primary probably would have voted the way the bigots wanted.

Which lent the practice an air of twisted integrity. But the herd of RINOs, Barbour & Barbour, backing the longtime and frequently out­–of–touch incumbent Cochran will do no such thing. If the primary result stands, Cochran will go back to voting the same way that earned him a zero civil rights rating from the ACLU.

Giving ‘credit’ where ‘credit’ is due, the Cochran victory was remarkable. Typically when a long–time incumbent is forced into a runoff, he loses. Cochran trailed in the first vote by 2,000 votes and then won the runoff by 7,000 votes. The difference being the McDaniel campaign spent the runoff turning out it’s base and the Cochran campaign spent its time turning out Obama’s base.

But there is no guarantee the Cochran ‘victory’ will stand.

Mississippi law says anyone can vote in the Republican runoff as long as they did not vote in the earlier Democrat primary. If they did, those votes are illegal. McDaniel campaign representatives have already begun checking names and claim that thousands of Cochran votes came from voters that had already voted in the Democrat primary.

Meanwhile back in Virginia, those inclusive RINOs in the Cantor organization are busy making sure the Dave Brat campaign won’t have the use of the hundreds of thousands of dollars that until last week were sitting in the 7th District Republican Committee.

Eric Cantor — either ambitious or too–big–for–his–britches, take your choice — had turned the committee into an influence–peddling machine. He raised almost $400,000 for the committee so he could contribute campaign funds to other Virginia candidates and build up a bank of political chits he could call in later.

This money was in addition to any leadership PACs and his own federal campaign account that he used to buy influence with his fellow members of Congress. Of course a funny thing happened to Cantor on the way to being Speaker of the House or governor of Virginia.

He lost a primary to Dave Brat. So instead of healing the wounds and uniting for victory in November, Cantor had his lackeys on the committee give the money away in a breath–taking display of spite and poor losership.

Brat’s plan initially was to use a bit over half of the money for a grassroots get–out–the–vote effort with a dozen staffers who would supervise telephone call centers and a direct mail campaign.

Instead the RINOs charged in and gave $150,000 to the Republican National Committee, $150,000 to the National Republican Congressional Committee, $5,000 to Ed Gillespie’s campaign for US Senate, $25,000 to a GOP state senate candidate and $13,000 to the VA GOP. And oh yes, they left a $10 gift card to Ace Hardware in the deposit box so Brat could buy a bucket to soak his head.

Once the deed was done, the lying could begin.

Cantor’s consultant assured the media the best way to insure the money will come back to the 7th district is to send it off to Washington, as opposed to leaving the money in the local bank account where is already was. Possibly he thought the money would gain momentum as it traveled through the banking system and return to Virginia with the impact of an asteroid.

But I’ll tell you what will happen. Most of the money will go anywhere but Virginia. These committees are run by 24–year–old masters of the universe that let polling do their thinking. Brat’s seat is a safe seat, so he won’t get a dime. The money will go to other House races in other states.

If Gillespie polls well, he could get some of the 150K back, minus a few miscellaneous handling fees, but that’s a big if. What is not in doubt is that Dave Brat won’t have a GOTV operation unless he raises the money for it himself.

So who are the fanatics now? The TEA party–backed candidates who worked hard and turned out conservatives or the RINOs who use sleaze and spite to get their way?

Eh! Who Cares About the Rules?

conyers

Have we as a nation – and more precisely, we are Conservatives, Constitutionalists, Libertarians and Republicans – completely given up on playing by the rules? That would seem to be the case, at least in the instance of election law in the State of Michigan.

The Michigan Secretary of State, Ruth Johnson, a Republican, has abdicated her responsibility to enforce election law for the most basic of issues: how someone qualifies for being included on an election ballot.

The Hill reports:

“Michigan won’t appeal a federal judge’s ruling that placed Rep. John Conyers (P-MI) on the Democrat ballot, ending the threat that he would have to run a write-in campaign.

“The office of Michigan Secretary of State Ruth Johnson, a Republican, announced the decision on Friday to let the judge’s ruling stand.

“Conyers had originally been ruled ineligible to appear on the ballot for the August primary because local officials found he didn’t submit enough valid petition signatures.

“A US district court judge last week, though, overturned that decision, finding it unconstitutional, and issued an order directing the local election commission to place the longtime lawmaker’s name back on the ballot.”

Let’s overlook, for the moment, that fundamental election law is supposed to be – supposed to be – reserved for the States. While the US Constitution prescribes basic qualifications of an individual to participate in a federal election, State legislatures regulate the eligibility of an individual for voting and to regulate the qualifications for a candidate appearing on a ballot paper. Ergo, the federal judiciary has unconstitutionally overstepped its authority in intervening in this case.

If the Secretary of State – a position directly elected by the voters of any given State – is charged with the responsibility to faithfully execute election law, in the case of Ms. Johnson, the option to abdicate responsibility to follow the letter of the law does not exist. By not executing an appeal of the federal judge’s unconstitutional ruling she both violates her oath of office to faithfully execute her duties as Secretary of State, but she also betrays the constitutional rights of her State’s citizenry by surrendering the State mandated rights of Michiganians.

A citizen versed in the threat of Progressivism would point out that one of the primary goals of the Progressive movement is to centralize government at the federal level, moving the authority of government away from elected representation and toward an ever-expanding federal bureaucracy. Ms. Johnson, by skirting her responsibility to defend her State’s authority to render election law, has aided the Progressive cause in Mr. Conyers’ inclusion on the Michigan ballot when he had not satisfied the requirements to be included.

As the mainstream media continues to manifest a false narrative about a “rift” within the Republican Party, the fact of the matter is this. Those who call themselves Conservatives, Constitutionalists and TEA Partiers (and by the way, TEA is capitalized because it is an acronym for Taxed Enough Already) are standing against those “go along to get along” Republicans who consistently betray the core tenets of the Republican Party, chief among them the common understanding that the United States of America – as so eloquently stated by John Adams – is “a nation of laws, not men.” To wit, there is no “rift.” True Republicans are trying to purge Progressives from their ranks, especially in positions of leadership.

This understood, hasn’t Ms. Johnson proved herself a Progressive in the Republican Ranks? One has to ask, what gives Ms. Johnson the authority to pick and choose what laws she follows and what laws she doesn’t? An action such as this is something the Obama Administration engages in…and that, constitutionally speaking and in a land of laws and not men, is both unAmerican and illegal.

The Danger of Granting Lerner Immunity

The House Oversight & Government Reform Committee has voted to advance a Contempt of Congress charge against Lois Lerner, the former Director of the IRS Exempt Organizations Division. The vote was 21 to 12, brought about by Ms. Lerner’s refusal to provide information about the IRS’s targeting of Conservative advocacy groups vying for 501c3 tax-exempt status, especially during the period before the 2012 General Election.

To say that this very legitimate issue has been politicized would be an under-statement. Both Republicans and Democrats – not to mention Progressives – see political capital to be gained from this issue. Democrats and Progressives will continue to advance the canard that any action against a member of the Obama Administration is based on racism and hate, while Republicans, Conservatives and TEA Partiers will continue to point out that crimes have been committed against the American people; crimes directly affecting rights guaranteed in the United States Constitution.

While committee chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), stated, “This is not an action I take lightly… [lawmakers] need Ms. Lerner’s testimony to complete our oversight work and bring truth to the American people,” Rep. Carolyn Maloney (P-NY), rebutted, “Guilty or innocent, Ms. Lerner has a constitutional right to remain silent on this issue,” and Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-MA), said smugly that the case would be “laughed out of court.”

To the latter points, yes, Ms. Lerner has the right not to incriminate herself under the Fifth Amendment rights afforded her in the US Constitution, but I seriously doubt that the political targeting of American citizens’ First Amendment rights to redress government would be “laughed out of court.” As to the hypocrisy of Ms. Lerner seeking protection from the US Constitution, even as she disregarded the protections the US Constitution affords her fellow Americans, that she should be rewarded with a pension and/or benefits stemming from her 32 years of federal employment – including service with the Justice Department and the Federal Election Commission, two positions that prove she knew better than to do what she is accused of doing – is a scandal in and of itself.

There are those who are willing to allow Ms. Lerner to “get away” with her politically-based ideological attacks on her fellow Americans by granting her immunity to testify, perhaps in an effort to spotlight others who may have been involved in the crimes committed. Many suggest that she is shielding US Attorney’s General Eric Holder, who himself has been held in Contempt of Congress for his unyielding obstruction of several investigations led by the House of Representatives: “the people’s house”; the direct voice of the people in federal government. Others suggest that Ms. Lerner’s direction originated in the White House, possibly by super-secret special adviser, confidant and political handler Valerie Jarrett. Of these two accusations we cannot be sure, purely for the fact that Ms. Lerner and her complicit underlings refuse to answer questions about their actions, their direction and their motives.

Those in favor of granting Ms. Lerner immunity, with the caveat that she gets to keep her pension and benefits if she provides information, say just such a move will facilitate the information necessary to determine where the order to violate the citizenry’s constitutional rights, in deference to political advantage, originated. But there is a huge flaw in that thinking…and perhaps two.

Should Ms. Lerner be granted immunity to provide information related to this crime against the American people, there would be no guarantee she would tell the truth. She has already proven that she cannot be trusted to do right by the American people on two levels. First, the very fact that she would oversee the usurpation of the citizenry’s First Amendment rights proves, in enough measure, that she is willing to deceive to achieve; she is willing to break the law to achieve a political outcome. And second, she has proven, through her refusal to cooperate with a congressional investigation, but, in defiance, cooperate with a rigged investigation by the US Department of Justice (and please, the Holder DoJ has proven time and time again that they are politically and ideologically motivated), that she will seek the safe haven of the corrupt over admitting to wrong-doing and serving the best interests of the people of the United States.

Additionally, should congressional negotiators be naïve enough to offer immunity to Ms. Lerner, should she perjure herself in the immunized testimony, she will most likely claim immunity to prosecution if found out. This very point almost entices the corrupt and the politically and ideologically motivated to “re-write” the history of the events in question, if not to save their sorry hides, to affect the very political and ideological “change” that was the goal in the first place. And, if you even have a cursory understanding of the Progressive Movement, you know they are prone to re-writing the facts and history to facilitate their narratives.

(As an aside, a good example of Progressives re-writing history to suit their immediate needs comes in President Obama’s lionization of LBJ as a great and insightful leader; the one who burned political to achieve Civil Rights legislation. The truth of the matter is that President Eisenhower, a Republican, first floated Civil Rights legislation only to have it derailed by three Democrat Senators; Sens. Strom Thurmond, D-SC, John F. Kennedy, D-MA, and Lyndon B. Johnson, D-TX. Further, the only reason LBJ was able to steal credit for Civil Rights legislation was due to overwhelming Republican support. Democrats stood in opposition to the bill. Yet today, Mr. Obama re-writes history to extol the greatness of LBJ, the man who ensconced us in Vietnam.)

The intentional and systematic usurpation of our citizenry’s constitutional rights is, to put it mildly, unacceptable. Ms. Lerner – and all involved – should be made to pay an incredibly high price for their misdeeds. But depending on the Eric Holder-led US Justice Department to affect justice in this case is just as much a fantasy as Obamacare being a beneficial legislation for the total of the American people.

Perhaps – just perhaps – Mr. Issa and his crew can do some outside the box thinking on this matter; crafting an effective course of action to affect truth and justice in this case. Perhaps they can figure out a way to empower this investigation to extend beyond the 2016 General Elections, when an Attorney’s General might be seated who would actually care enough about the law to pursue a legitimate investigation into, and subsequent legitimate prosecutions of, the violation of the citizenry’s constitutional rights.

Of course, that would mean that Republicans – and many establishment Republicans at that, would have to dispense with ego to better serve the people…and we don’t see a lot of that these days, from either party.

When Disappointment Comes from The Right

As Republicans stand on the precipice of taking back the majority in the United States Senate – that is if (and that’s a mighty big “if”) they can achieve the remarkable feat of not snatching defeat from the jaws of victory – it is becoming painfully obvious that our rhetorical standard-bearers of the punditry have not only been absorbed into the beltway mentality, but have ingested so much of the elitist Kool-Aid that they are, themselves, becoming the poison that moves the foundation of the Republican Party – and, therefore, Conservatism – incrementally to the Left.

It was with great chagrin that I listened to Ann Coulter, appearing on FOX News Channel’s Hannity, depict those who are calling out “establishment Republicans” shysters (or scheisters, if you will). Ms. Coulter, a usually stalwart scion of the Conservative Movement (but for her affection for New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who hasn’t a clue about the serious threat our country faces from Islamofascism), while seemingly lauding the TEA Party, in the same breath took them to task for identifying Progressives who exist on the Right side of the aisle.

In part, Ms. Coulter opined:

“There are two ways of looking at it. The people out in America who call themselves TEA Partiers are fantastic. They’re the heart of America and I think they have made a huge difference; they did in the 2010 elections, which in the House, anyway, Republicans picked-up more seats than they did in the famous 1994 election…[U]nfortunately, as with any grassroots movement, I think there are a lot of con men and scammers coming in a tricking good Americans into sending them money claiming ‘we are fighting for you,’ and they aren’t fighting for you.”

Ms. Coulter later opined:

“Basically, anyone who claims to be going after ‘establishment Republicans,’ the key word here is ‘Republican’…if we don’t elect Republicans – I don’t care which Republican – we will not repeal Obamacare…The only way to repeal Obamacare is to elect Republicans. It is not to be fighting against Republicans.”

Evidently, and due to the fact that we live in a time when the electorate is about as evenly split as it ever has been; a five to ten percent of the population deciding elections, by Ms. Coulter standards, it is never a time to take a stand against the encroachment of Progressivism in the Republican Party.

Each and every one of those so-called “Conservative” pundits (including Ms. Coulter, I am quite sad to say) who attack the TEA Party – which is just as much a part of the Republican Party as Progressive-Leftists are a part of the Democrat Party – should forever refrain from singing the praises of President Ronald Reagan for their complete abandonment of Reagan’s 11th Commandment, originally declared by Gaylord Parkinson, “Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican.”

The demonization of those who the TEA Party grassroots elected to office – be it on the local, county, state or federal level – is inexcusable, as is their defense of those who have made being federally-elected a career, instead of a duty. By defending the status quo in the “establishment GOP,” Ms. Coulter and her fellow “top level” pundits, either inadvertently or knowingly, facilitate the incremental political slide to the Left from which our country currently suffers. They do so by their support for those in elected leadership who abdicate the founding principles of the Republican Party for retention of power.

As I stated back in a 2009 article titled, The Path to the Future Requires a Return to the Roots:

“In summary – and to paraphrase – the platform stood for protecting the rights of individuals as outlined in the Charters of Freedom, the right to unfettered government recourse and due process in the event those rights were challenged. Further, it embraced only specific and limited measures that would provide opportunity for individual achievement and advancement. And lastly, it set forth a welcome mat for men of all ideas and affiliations who ‘believe in the spirit of our institution as well as the Constitution of our country.’

“In other words, the original platform of the Republican Party was one of protecting the rights of individuals so that they could advance their individual beliefs and causes in society. What it did not establish was a platform of positions on special interest issues and litmus tests for those who would be put into nomination to lead the party, both in government and organization.

“Today’s Republican Party has abandoned these founding platform commitments. Instead, today’s GOP finds itself naively acquiescing to false challenges put forth by our political opponent parties; taking concrete positions on special interest issues that divide the electorate into two camps. The Republican leadership of today has fallen prey to a political tactic that forces declared positions on special interest issues. Because of this the party has become a haven for special interest groups instead of being a pure political organization that protects the fundamental rights of all Americans, including special interest groups.”

Each time our modern day national GOP leadership engages into “compromise” with the Progressive leadership of today’s Democrat Party; each time they break-off into “gangs” of eight, twelve or sixteen; each time they make excuses not to hold to the promises they made to the electorate during campaigns or try to explain why they voted directly against the founding principles of the party they lead, they prove to care more about retaining power than doing the work they were elected to do: representing their constituents and executing their charge with fidelity to the platforms they ran on.

Even a cursory understanding of the tactics used by the Progressive-Left sheds light on the fact – the fact – that they use the word “compromise” in situations where they already have the advantage, so as to “begin” “negotiations” from a position left of true political and ideological center. In using this tactic, they are assured that any perceived “compromise” will always – always – move the issue’s end point further to the ideological Left. A perfect example of this is “hate crime” and “hate speech” legislation.

As addressed in a recent article, who is the arbiter of the definition of “hate”? Hitler, Stalin and Guevara all had their own definitions of “hate” and those definitions resulted in the mass murders of millions of people. But Progressives manipulate the electorate – and their political opponents – by tapping into “feelings,” therefore, a fickle national GOP; a federally-elected Republican Party leadership more concerned with how they are perceived than the principles they were sent to Washington, DC, to defend, will always lose – always, and do so incrementally.

Today we have a federal Republican leadership team – or, an “establishment Republican” leadership team (a moniker at which Ms. Coulter grimaces), that:

▪ …has promised tax reform for decades but has never delivered said reforms, almost always tapping the excuse that it would never fly in an election year, even though Democrats promise the same;

▪ …has promised a decrease in the size and scope of government but has, instead, presided over a grotesque expansion of government, including the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (just for snicks-and-giggles, look-up the literal translation of Gestapo or “Geheime Staats-Polizei,”);

▪ …has consistently, since the enactment of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), openly and overtly pledged to do “everything possible” to de-rail, de-fund and repeal the law, yet refused to use the full power of the purse allocated to the US House of Representatives by the Constitution to do so;

▪ …has abandoned the law – the law – that says the southern US border is to be secured physically; instead entering into another round of immigration reform “compromise” that will – again – see the Progressive-Left achieving a mass amnesty for those who violated our laws to exist in our country.

I could go on and on and on but I will simply address one more:

▪ …has abandoned and abdicated their constitutional mandate to provide for the common defense. They have so egregiously abdicated this responsibility that we exist at the point where we cannot, by all accounts formulated by military leadership, wage and win two major conflicts simultaneously. Would the same level of ineptitude have existed in 1941, we would have lost World War II to either the Nazis or the Imperial Japanese…maybe both.

Yet, Ms. Coulter and her “establishment Republican” pundit brethren, and it gives me no pleasure to say this, continue to support the status quo incremental slide to the Left by facilitating the mentality of the career elitist Republican politician; the Progressive who has infiltrated the GOP; those who seek to legislate by “gang” and oligarchic elitism. It is for this reason that this statement of Ms. Coulter’s is so very misguided and, in fact, dangerous, and it bears repeating:

“…the key word here is ‘Republican’…if we don’t elect Republicans – I don’t care which Republican

Ms. Coulter, I certain do care about which Republicans are elected. Consider this: a Senate full of Lindsay Grahams and John McCains…It should send shivers down your spine.

Conservative Evangelical Agenda ‘Asks Too Little’ of Christians

proud_conservative

WINSTON SALEM, N.C., Oct. 23, 2013 /Christian Newswire/ — Today in America, many Christians feel disillusioned as they watch the faith they hold dear being used to further a worldly political agenda. It is as if our religion has been taken hostage: forcibly wedded to a particular political ideology or economic system, or stripped down to a couple of hot-button issues, like abortion and same-sex marriage, as though to oppose these were the sum of our faith. Ironically, in our efforts to “take back America,” we have ourselves been taken captive by the prevailing culture and politics of imperialism, partisanship, greed, racism, and xenophobia that surround us. And so the struggle for the soul of a nation has also become a struggle for the soul of the church. How can we regain a political voice that is neither power-hungry nor passive, neither conservative nor liberal, but simply Christlike in its concern for justice and the poor?

In “Christ Held Hostage: The Hijacking of American Christianity,” evangelical pastor and author S.J. Munson explores these issues from the perspective of both the Bible and history. “There is an ever-growing frustration within American Christianity over the marriage of religion and politics,” says the author. “Many of us feel the so-called culture wars of the past forty years, have failed us. In the popular mind, the church, which Christ intended for the uplifting of humanity, has instead become a kind of pathetic old curmudgeon, leading the charge on the downward slope of regressive politics. Whereas Christ stood with the poor and powerless, too often we have become attack dogs for the rich and powerful.”

How has this happened? Throughout its history, Munson maintains, the church has frequently been accused of being a guardian of the status quo. This occurs whenever the church allies itself with power, empire, a certain economic system, or even a particular political party.

The solution, he believes, begins with reading the Bible with new eyes, to rediscover God’s deep concern for the poor and weak. “We are, first and foremost, followers of Christ. That means bringing his agenda to the table. And that agenda is a whole lot broader than any conservative or liberal platform.” For Munson, Christ’s agenda goes beyond abortion, same-sex marriage, and prayer in schools. “Limiting our agenda to such hot-button issues conveniently enables us to externalize sin, to say ‘those people’ out there are the problem. Yet when we read the Bible, we find the number-one social issue on God’s heart is concern for the poor and weak. If you start digging, you find that poverty and injustice are issues in which we are all deeply involved and implicated.”

Munson believes our agenda is too narrow and needs to be “expanded” to become a more consistently biblical one. “If we want to be biblically consistent, then we cannot cherry-pick sins,” he says. “These hot-button issues are important, but when it comes right down to it, they cost us very little.”

The Rev. S.J. Munson has been an evangelical pastor and writer for the past 25 years. The author of plays, theological articles, and fiction (“The Treasure of Israel,” 2011), he is an outspoken activist with a deep concern for issues of poverty and injustice. He resides in Winston Salem, NC.

“Christ Held Hostage: The Hijacking of American Christianity” by S.J. Munson is available in paperback or Kindle ebook via Amazon.com.

Liberal vs. Conservative: Racist

racist

Via Joe For America:

Fear. Hate. Divisive. Tool.
The first 3 words above are pretty self explanatory, but “Tool”, I think needs to be explained.
In this day and age, with logic in short supply, with the media telling you what and how to think, and politicians and political parties always looking for an edge and more power the word “racism” has become a tool.
These “examples” below are designed to shut you up, hence a “Tool”:
I want the government to do its job and secure the border. Somehow, someway I’m a racist for making that statement. If you feel the same way, you are also a racist.
I have criticized Barack Obama’s policies, somehow in the eyes of some media and congressmen, that makes me a racist. If you have done this you are a racist too.
If you belong to the wrong political party (per the media) you are probably a racist.
Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Charles Rangel use RACISM as a tool to stay in power, no matter how much it hurts the very people they say they represent.

Consultants Who Think They Are Kingmakers

Boyd Marcus (the Karl Rove lookalike on the right) when he still consorted with Republicans.
Boyd Marcus (the Karl Rove lookalike on the right) when he still consorted with Republicans.

Boyd Marcus (the Karl Rove lookalike on the right) when he still consorted with Republicans.

A Virginia consultant no voter ever heard of endorses a candidate for governor nobody really likes and somehow it’s on the front page of the Washington Post’s Metro section. It reminds me of what Democrats formerly called the ‘Shrum Primary.’  That was the jockeying Democrat presidential candidates went through to try and persuade Bob Shrum to join their campaign as lead media consultant and strategist.

It wasn’t quite like a barefoot Emperor Henry IV standing in the snow begging the forgiveness of Pope Gregory VII, but it was close. The Shrum spectacle went on for a number of presidential elections until someone noticed (keep in mind Democrats are often blind to the obvious) that Shrum candidates were never called Mr. President after the election.

There is a larger question regarding both of these instances — who cares and how large does your ego have to be to think someone does?

This week’s ‘newsmaker’ is Boyd Marcus, described by the Posties as “a veteran Republican political consultant.” Marcus is famous as the architect of George Allen’s U.S. Senate victory over incumbent senator Tim Kaine last November. At a time when madcap TEA Party candidates were discussing women’s private parts or God’s plan for rape, ‘mainstream’ George Allen was cruising to victory.

Wait, my mistake. That’s what Marcus assured us was going to happen after ‘electable’ Allen (he can raise money, you know) got the nomination. So when November came around, Marcus and the rest of the Allen brain trust were perched inside the Mitt Romney Momentum Express bus waiting for the acceleration to kick in. They are still waiting.

It’s completely in character for Marcus to move from Republican Allen’s rerun Senate candidacy to a revenge endorsement of Democrat Terry McAuliffe in this year’s Virginia governor’s race. Marcus, who formerly only worked in Republican campaigns, says he is proud to endorse McAuliffe because Terry is the only candidate for governor willing to cut him a check.

Whoops, another mistake on my part.

For public consumption Marcus said, “I was looking at the candidates, and I saw Terry McAuliffe as the guy who will work with everybody to get things done.” Then McAuliffe wrote him the check. And what a deal! If only endorsements for the Democrat money–man were all a simple financial transaction! McAuliffe wouldn’t have to waste time shaking hands and pretending to be interested in what some Virginia hillbilly thinks about the deficit.

The McAuliffe campaign also issued its own bizarre Marcus quote, “I’ve never before supported any Democrat, but this election Terry is the clear choice for mainstream conservatives.” Translation: McAuliffe is the clear choice for self–involved turncoats whose support is for sale.

The real reason Marcus decided to monetize his political sympathies was his candidate for governor in Virginia — Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling — dropped out of the race when Ken Cuccinelli supporters in the Republican Party changed the nomination format from a primary to a convention. This completely upset the Bolling applecart consultants and all.

In spite of the fact Bolling had been light governor for eight years he and Marcus somehow overlooked the importance of building an organization during his two terms. No real connection with the grassroots means no delegates at the convention. So TEA Party fave Cuccinelli walked away with the nomination.

That meant Marcus lacked a meal ticket this fall. Cuccinelli certainly wasn’t going to hire him and there were no wealthy Virginia RINOs running for other statewide offices available to aid his cash flow.

An operative with even a shred of integrity would simply sit this one out. What one doesn’t do is what Marcus did — sign on with a candidate that is the antithesis of everything for which the Virginia, and for that matter national, Republican Party stands. This is what the average American hates about politics: The mercenaries and their candidates who ‘grow’ in office and have infinitely malleable principles.

How many pro–life bills does Marcus think uber–Democrat McAuliffe is going to sign? How many taxes will McAuliffe be willing to cut? How much government intrusion into the free market is McAuliffe going to prevent? And how often will McAuliffe oppose public employee union attempts to put one over on the taxpayer? Will McAuliffe fight Obamacare and the Medicaid expansion? Will McAuliffe be a voice against pressure from the left to legalize illegals?

In a nutshell, none, none, none, never, no and no. The things McAuliffe will get “done” involve abortion, alternate lifestyles, amnesty and helping Hillary gear up for 2016.

The vast majority of Virginia Republicans really believe in the party’s platform. They don’t change their positions like Marcus changes his socks. Marcus’ politics of petulance is one of the many problems with GOP ‘leadership’ today.

I know a little about changing political parties. Up until about 2000 I was a Democrat, but as I experienced more of reality and the Democrat party decided to embrace unreality, we drifted apart. I made the change official in the 2002 election and I stopped working for Democrat candidates and limited myself to Republicans.

Switch–hitting in baseball is fine (and leftists would have you believe it makes for an exciting marriage) but in politics it only indicates opportunism and a lack of core beliefs.

It will say a great deal about Marcus if he tries to work for Republicans in the future. And it will say even more about any Republican who hires him. Conservatives beware.

Getting Hammered with Steve Hamilton and Stevie J. West

IMG_7337

When: Friday, July 19, 2013

Where: The Studios at Casa de Hammy

Tonight: Hammy is out of town and Stevie has taken over The broadcasting studios of Casa de Hammy. We’re talking about the #Zimmerman verdict (becuase no one else is), the huge right to life victory in Texas, and the absolute cluster of disaster the Left has wreaked upon the once great city of Detroit. Join me! (And pester @e2pilot to call into the show for awhile)

 

The libertarian Chick Speaks – Why Not?

gadsden flag

I’ve been taking a break from social media for the last few days. I won’t lie and say that I didn’t expect it to be difficult. I did. I live and breathe social media, especially my political circles. Funny thing, though… it HASN’T been difficult. It took me until this morning to figure out why I haven’t really missed being on Twitter and Facebook that much.

Before I get to my epiphany, I want to explain why I finally (abruptly) decided to take a break from social media. part of the reason is this:

ggtweets.
And that is pretty much consecutively. There hasn’t been a 48 hour stretch since the day that I joined Twitter ( as @GaltsGirl) that I have not tweeted… about politics. My tweet count will more than bear out that statement as fact.
Another reason, and one that has weighed on my mind for awhile, was that I was losing a sense of accomplishment. I continue to grow my follower count. I continue to engage people from across the political spectrum. I continue to get positive feedback about the way I choose to engage.

You see, I am generally a “happy warrior.” (Yes, that is a h/t to Andrew Breitbart) But, despite all of those things, I am seeing a replay of post-primary 2012 sentiment on social media.. and it is getting worse. It is very frustrating to concretely define your reason for being on social media as being one of bringing people to the same table, only to see them all stand at the outer edge and never take a seat and TALK. Or worse, to see those who have a seat, never stop talking long enough to listen to anyone new. Twitter has become ( at least in #tcot and #tlot circles) the high school cafeteria, and very few want to move over and grant someone new a seat at the “cool table”.

I took the week off to decide if I needed to approach my presence differently… or if I should bother to continue at all. I have been more and more tempted to just shut down my twitter and political Facebook account and go back to participating in politics locally only. It would be much easier on me, and far less time consuming, than trying to be active locally and inspire others to do the same online. It REALLY, REALLY would, and I was very much leaning in that direction.

This morning I had three conversations and stumbled onto something my ten year old daughter drew that changed my mind. The first two of the conversations were praise for my BTR show from people I have never talked to on Twitter and had never interacted with on Facebook. One was a guy who joined Facebook last Sunday after being told to listen to my show by a friend. The other was a guy who had been fighting his family and friends on Facebook over is political beliefs and felt like he was alienating them because he didn’t know how to communicate his thoughts in a way that wasn’t offensive to them. He credited listening to my show as inspiration to keep trying to convince them. The third conversation was with a long-time friend, and it wasn’t nearly as flattering. I was reminded of something I said to him in 2009 when he was flabbergasted by the local support he heard for Obamacare: I told him to quit complaining, get educated, get off the couch and DO SOMETHING. I can be blunt when the situation calls for it. Apparently, he has learned well.

Finally, while walking outside this morning, and trying to finally make a decision, I ran across a chalk drawing my daughter did:
WhyNot

I should probably explain that, in her view while drawing, was a Gadsen Flag. And I grinned. Huge.

I have asked myself if I am doing anything good. I have asked myself if anyone is listening ( No one listens to the libertarian chick™ is a common tweet of mine). Both of those questions were answered, to my satisfaction, by the conversations I had this morning.

I have asked if I am even qualified to be spreading my political opinion all over the place. What I probably should have been asking was “Why not?

Self-doubt plagues us all. Activist fatigue is unavoidable. It *is* okay to take breaks… and it’s good to know that others are just as passionate as I am, when I need one.

I’ll be back. In a few more days. “Why Not?” has become “What Now?“.

whoquote

What Is It About ‘Stereotype’ that the Tea Party Doesn’t Understand?

runaways-tpcToo bad Tea party types are such ingrates. Now that the mainstream media (MSM) is finally starting to cover the IRS political scandal, you’d think the Tea party would go out of its way to reward the media for emerging from its Obama–induced coma.

Consider what would have happened if there had been four deaths in connection with the IRS attacks, as happened in Benghazi. Result: It happened a long time ago and what difference does it make?

Repaying the MSM would not have been difficult. For example, at the recent Tea Party–dominated Republican convention in Virginia, conservatives could’ve done something simple like book a minstrel show for entertainment, sing ‘Dixie’ before the National Anthem or burn a cross for illumination. Stereotypes would have been confirmed and MSM self–satisfaction could continue unchallenged.

But no, out of seven candidates running for Lt. Governor the overwhelmingly white, middle–aged Tea Party Republicans had to go and pick the only black guy in the bunch! Even worse. E. W. Jackson had raised the least money of any of the candidates and instead had to base his hope for victory on an impassioned speech before the assembled delegates.

A black guy that can make a speech and impress Republicans? Who’d a thunk it?

In fact the WaPost complained, “it’s almost inconceivable that (Jackson) could have won an open party primary.” Which is true, since a primary would have been dominated by something WaPost leftists claim to hate even more than conservative blacks and that’s money in politics.

Bottom line? Media leftists prefer capitalist money influencing elections to blacks escaping the Democrat plantation. (But on the plus side, Rev. Jackson is one candidate you can legitimately ask about the content of his prayers.)

Instead Jackson, who in addition to being a minister is a graduate of Harvard Law School and a Marine veteran, won through personal contact and the force of his personality. And what a personality it is! No mottled shades of gray here.

Media leftists consider conservative minority politicians to be deeply embarrassing and something a decent person would want to keep private and within the family; like a son who wanted to marry a man. Besides being guilty of thought crimes, a black Republican that opposes the Democrat platform of amnesty, abortion and alternative lifestyle is called an Uncle Tom.

This is another example of leftist revisionism. Back when Democrats were leaning on the Supreme Court for legitimacy and dominated politics and culture while being on the wrong side of slavery; a black who supported ‘massa and claimed to be happy with his lot, was called an Uncle Tom for kneeling before power. Frederick Douglass was a hero for fighting against injustice and going against prevailing legal and cultural norms. (Dang, wasn’t Douglass a Republican, too?)

Today Democrats again lean on the Supreme Court for legitimacy, dominate politics along with culture and are on the wrong side of abortion. The legal system is cluttered with “hate crime” legislation, homosexuals qualify for special rights, Christians are to be kept in the closet and any attempt to regulate abortion is called a “war on women.” Yet a black that supports conservatives is instantly branded an Uncle Tom, when the reverse is actually true. This means Utah’s Mia Love is Fredericka Douglass on a courageous crusade for truth and Susan Rice is Aunt Jemima.

And make no mistake the WaPost is in a snit regarding Jackson. Columnist Robert McCartney did everything but call him “macca” in a column this week. McCartney says that Jackson on the ticket will reflect poorly on gubernatorial nominee Ken Cuccinelli. This is because fiery black ministers only cause problems when they are linked for a few months to a white candidate, while sitting in the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s church for 20 years is just a coincidence for Barack Obama.

McCartney quotes Jackson as saying gays have “perverted” minds and are “very sick people psychologically and mentally and emotionally.” And he adds Jackson has described President Obama as “an evil presence” and liberal abortion policy as “infanticide.”

So I think VA Republicans are just going to have to resign themselves to losing Megan McCain’s vote this year.

Another red flag for McCartney came when Jackson said Planned Parenthood has been more lethal to blacks than the Ku Klux Klan. I will admit the only politician with the moral stature necessary to make modern–day slavery comparisons is Joe Biden. But that being said, Jackson does have the facts on his side — as if that makes any difference to the left.

The number of blacks killed by lynching in the US between 1864 and 1968 was 4,946. You can add to that beatings and intimidation by both the Klan and freelance bigots who didn’t want to be bogged down with a formal commitment to an organization.

Compare that with 18,778,000 black babies killed by an abortionist between only 1973 and 2013. Nathan Bedford Forest doesn’t begin to compare with your local Planned Parenthood facility manager when it comes to eliminating young blacks.

The WaPost was also appalled at VA Republicans for having a convention in the first place. In their view being committed enough to give up your Saturday and attend a largely boring convention disqualifies one for participation in the decision–making process.

The mandarins at the Post complain that the 8,000 delegates attending the Richmond convention were less than one percent of the people who claim to be Republicans in Virginia. Yet I don’t recall them complaining when only 5,556 delegates to the Democrat National Convention in 2012 approved a far left platform way out of the mainstream of American thought. (I hope the WaPost has not reverted to the practice of only counting 3/5ths of a Republican for apportionment purposes as Democrats did during slavery.)

Virginia conservatives have provided voters with a clear choice in November: A Republican ticket composed of social and government conservatives versus whatever opportunists the Democrats have handy.

The media will just have to cope with the fact that Jackson’s nomination has ruined what was to be the favorite headline this fall: VA Republicans – Whiter Than White; Righter Than Right.

Moore Love – Oklahoma Rallies After Deadly Tornado

line2
Moore, OK tornado

May 20, 2013 tornado that struck Moore, Oklahoma

For the second day in a row, Central Oklahoma was hit with severe weather and deadly tornadoes. Moore, Oklahoma is no stranger to the danger of tornadoes. On May 3, 1999, the city of Moore, which is just South of Oklahoma City, was devastated by an EF5 tornado that killed 46 people. The tornado today, which followed a strikingly similar path, has already been estimated at least an EF4, and reportedly already has a higher death toll. It may be days before we have an official number of fatalities.

As rescue efforts continue, and families wait to be reunited, the residents of Oklahoma City and surrounding areas have rallied to provide for the victims of this devastating storm. Several area locations have set up donation centers, and the response from the community has been overwhelming. Local news channel 9 ( KWTV) set up a donation center a their station and, at the time of this writing, volunteers were still unloading donated water, shovels, nonperishable food, clothing and more from the generous residents in their viewing area.

To assist: Text: STORM to 80888 for Salvation Army. Text REDCROSS to 90999 for Redcross. Text FOOD to 32333 for Reg. Food Bank.

America’s thoughts and prayers are with the people of Moore tonight, and the images below should serve to remind that kindness and compassion abound. ‘Merica.

line1

Line to donate at Channel 9 News collection center

line2

edit4edit3

edit2mary1

In Deep with Michelle Ray

UL

When:Thursday May 16th, 10pm Eastern/7pm Pacific

Where: In Deep with Michelle Ray on Blog Talk Radio

What: Join Social Media Director of ConservativeDailyNews.com, Michelle Ray (@GaltsGirl) as she discusses the issues that impact America.

Tonight: Jason Pye of United Liberty joins me to discuss the points of contention between libertarians and conservatives

Listen to internet radio with CDNews Radio on BlogTalkRadio

Acting Commissioner of IRS Resigns Over Scandal

IRS

millerHoping to get ahead of the breaking scandal involving the IRS targeting Conservative organizations seeking tax-exempt status, President Obama said he told Treasury Secretary Jack Lew to seek the resignation of acting IRS Commissioner, Steven Miller.

At a press conference this evening, the President announced that Miller had resigned and vowed to work with Congress and Lew to put safeguards in place to keep such targeting from happening again. Obama stated that he was angry, and that this type of behavior would not be tolerated in any department, but in particular from the IRS, given the influence and reach that they have.

Miller issued a statement regarding his resignation, saying that there was a “strong and immediate need” to restore public trust in the nation’s tax agency. According to reports, Miller has known for some time that there were reports of applications taking longer than they should, and had identified “rogue employees” as those responsible for targeting Conservative and Tea Party groups.

The Justice Department has begun and investigation into the IRS, and The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee will hold a hearing on May 22, according to an aide for Rep. Darrell Issa, the Committee’s chairman. No successor to Miller has been named at this time.

Getting Hammered With Steve Hamilton and Stevie J. West

photo

 

When: Friday, May 10 at 10Eastern/7Pacific

Where: Getting Hammered with Steve Hamilton and Stevie J West

Tonight: While the rest of the world is a BlogCon this weekend, the “Poors” (Stevie and Steve)are still holding down the bar at Casa de Hammy and getting ready for a GREAT show with SO much news to cover this week.

Jimmie Bise, Jr. (@jimmiebjr) joins us to discuss Benghazi, where did that whole “Just a Response to a Fake Movie” story come from, the hearings this week, and why it all REALLY does matter.

We’re also talking about the Cleveland, OH kidnapping ,other news stories, and of course, We’ll Mock the Week.  The phone lines will be open and we want to hear from you.  So come hang out with us tonight, the bar is open and we’re Getting Hammered!


« Older Entries