Seems like a nice topic for a Friday afternoon.

Over the last 8 years, the lefties (in AND out of the press) succeeded immensely in painting caricatures of the key members of the Bush administration. They did this often by associating certain characteristics (true or not!) with each person and ALWAYS including these characteristics whenever they discussed these folks.

For example, President Bush was rarely mentioned without some synonym of the word ‘stupid’ (dunce, village idiot, clueless, etc) and VP Cheney was rarely mentioned without a synonym of ‘dangerous’. This has been a liberal tactic for decades.

Conservatives have, I guess, been more reluctant to get involved in this type of name calling, preferring instead to focus on issues. But this is a very effective tactic. It helps to shape the opinions of those who don’t follow politics closely. Only the strength of conservative principles has been able to occasionally trump this word association trick. I am proposing that we, as conservatives and members of the RS Army, start using this tactic. For example, we could make sure that every time Barack Obama is discussed, that he is associated with the word ‘arrogant’. This is not truly name calling if you choose descriptive and accurate terms rather than inflammatory names.

So consider this an open thread for you to suggest words to associate with different members of the Obamadministration. Here’s just a couple ideas to start with:

Barack Obama: arrogant
Joe Biden: flibbertigibbet, or our foot-in-mouth VP
Rahm Emanuel: partisan, or master manipulator, something like that
Robert Gibbs: bumbling
Nancy Pelosi: geez, can’t think of anything non-inflammatory here

anyway, you get the idea.

P.S. Rush and Hannity already have some terms that they repeat often, like ‘Dingey’ Harry Reid, Rahm ‘Dead Fish’ Emmanuel, etc. We can continue to use those terms or make up some more. The idea is to be consistent as possible in associating these terms with their ‘owners’.

[This is a re-print of a Commentary I had published in the Virginia Tech Collegiate Times on December 3, 1993. It is a spoof of Hillarycare, which was being thrust on us at the time. Now, over 15 years later, we're about to get something similar shoved down our throats, through Reconciliation, by the Obama administration. To update the column, I have changed the word Clinton to Obama. Enjoy.]

If Grocery Shopping Were Just Like Health Care

Before we all get caught up in the feel-good ‘big-government-savior’ rhetoric being sold to us by the Obama administration regarding health care reform, we must realize the absurdity of this plan. Solving the problems in the existing health care system by creating a sweeping new bureaucracy is inefficient overkill.

To illustrate the absurdity of this solution, let’s draw an analogy: consider the problem of hunger in this country.

Clearly, the best way to solve the hunger problem is to help those who are not able to obtain the means to do so.

But using the Obama health care reform as a blueprint, here is how one would envision their solution to hunger. Everything in this plan is taken directly from the current health care debate.

The problem: Americans are spending more and more of their hard-earned money on food. Millions of Americans are hungry due to a lack of food. Americans who lose their jobs may be unable to afford to buy food.

The current food distribution is unequal; some have plenty to eat, some have too little. Many grocery stores turn people away who cannot afford to buy food. This is a crisis. We cannot be competitive for the 21st century unless all Americans are secure in their food!

The premise: Food is a right. Everyone needs food to survive, therefore we must see that it is provided to all Americans. We should not be denied food because we cannot afford it. We should not lose our food because we change jobs or lose our jobs.

The Food Security Plan: Each state will form Regional Food Alliances. These alliances will select a limited number of grocery stores from which food may be obtained.
Every American must choose which grocery store plan they wish to join in their alliance. They may only shop at the store for that plan.

States may also elect a Single Payer Food system. This would mean that all residents of that state could only buy their food at the state food store.

The Regional Food Alliances will place limits on the amount a farmer or food company may charge a Grocery Plan for a particular type of food.

It will be illegal for Americans to go outside the Food Security Plan and use ‘bribes or gratuities to influence the delivery’ of food service.

All employers will be required to provide 80 percent of their employees’ Grocery Plan premiums. The individuals will be responsible for the remaining 20 percent.

Your premiums will be based on a regionally averaged food premium. Thus, people who need less food will pay the same as people who need more food.

Employers who decide to save money by administering their own Employee Food Plans will be taxed 50 percent on the amount of money they save by not joining the Regional Alliance.

Unemployed persons or persons below the poverty level will have their Food Plan premiums supplemented by the federal government.

This plan will not cost any additional government money. It will be financed entirely by savings in other government food programs, such as school lunches, and by a 75 cent per bar tax on candy bars.

The Cost: President Obama’s Task Force on Food has spent literally months researching the food industry and estimating costs. Only 25 percent of Americans will pay more for their food under the Obama Plan – wait, actually 40 percent. No, we mean 15 percent – wait, it’s really 40 percent. But let’s stop this nonsense about who pays more and who pays less! People who pay more will also be buying Food Security, and that’s something money can’t buy!

Sound absurd? Watch out, I wouldn’t put this past the Obamabots. If you don’t believe me, let me ask you this. Have you ever gone two months without going to the doctor? You have. Have you ever gone two months without food?

So which is more important…which should be a fundamental right?

I had an epiphany today…OK, maybe it’s just end-of-the-semester sleep deprivation. Who knows? But I thought I’d share it for what it’s worth on a Friday night when there are fewer folks posting diaries.

I teach engineering at a small campus of a rather unusual university. Our student body, and faculty for that matter, are significantly less liberal than most institutions of higher learning. About 20 percent of our student body are ROTC, and virtually all our students are interested in getting into the aerospace and aviation industry. In the last three POTUS elections, I have run a mock election in all my classes. In 2000, George W. Bush got the votes of about 90% of the students. Algore actually ran in third place behind Nader! In 2004, the result was very similar, though Kerry did manage to capture second place with around 10 percent of the vote. However, in the 2008 version, McCain got only one more vote than Obama out of the roughly 100 votes cast in my three classes. I seriously don’t think that our student body has changed that much since 2000 or 2004, it just reflects the general appeal that Obama had to the younger voters. But it was a significant shift.

We at Redstate have engaged in a number of post-election debates about the challenge to Conservatism. Should we moderate our message? Should we go back to first principles, a la Reagan? Should Sarah Palin be our spokesperson? Is she what her fans (full disclosure: myself included) think she is? Should it be Jindal, Sanford, Gingrich, etc? Should we support gay marriage? Should we kick out the “squishy” moderates or open the tent more?

I love these debates. I have my definite opinions, and I love hearing the opinions of all of you at RedState. But something happened today in a couple of classes that actually caused me to have a ‘aha’ moment in regards to the challenges we face as Conservatives.

Read More →

A recent diary about Kay Bailey Hutchison dissing Sarah Palin in an advertisement brought out a number of negative comments regarding Gov. Rick Perry (R-Tx). I stayed quiet through these as most were from Texas conservatives, who I figured knew Perry better than I. I’m predisposed to liking Gov. Perry as I am a Scoutmaster in the Boy Scouts whose son is nearing the Eagle rank, and Gov. Perry recently published On My Honor, a book about Eagle Scouts (of which Perry is one).

Now, it appears that Gov. Perry, for whatever he may have done in the past that upset TX conservatives, is on the right side of things. From the featured story on Drudge:

WAKE UP CALL: TEXAS GOV. BACK RESOLUTION AFFIRMING SOVEREIGNTY
Tue Apr 14 2009 08:44:54 ET

AUSTIN – Gov. Rick Perry joined state Rep. Brandon Creighton and sponsors of House Concurrent Resolution (HCR) 50 in support of states’ rights under the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

“I believe that our federal government has become oppressive in its size, its intrusion into the lives of our citizens, and its interference with the affairs of our state,” Gov. Perry said. “That is why I am here today to express my unwavering support for efforts all across our country to reaffirm the states’ rights affirmed by the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I believe that returning to the letter and spirit of the U.S. Constitution and its essential 10th Amendment will free our state from undue regulations, and ultimately strengthen our Union.”

Perry continued: “Millions of Texans are tired of Washington, DC trying to come down here to tell us how to run Texas.”

A number of recent federal proposals are not within the scope of the federal government’s constitutionally designated powers and impede the states’ right to govern themselves. HCR 50 affirms that Texas claims sovereignty under the 10th Amendment over all powers not otherwise granted to the federal government.

It also designates that all compulsory federal legislation that requires states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties, or that requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding, be prohibited or repealed.

Developing…

Now, I don’t know if this will pass or not and what effect it will have in practice, but as a symbolic act it is certainly a nice start. I look forward to hearing responses from you TX folks as to how significant this story may or may not be.
And a message to The One: “The Eyes of Texas are Upon You!!”

P.S. And a message to Texas and Gov. Perry from one in Arizona: “I Second That Emotion”!

Jeez, just heard this on Rush. Here’s a part of the transcript from last night’s (4/2) Larry King Live. Guests were Penn Jillette, James Carville, Terry Holt, and Stephanie Miller.

KING: If [Obama's] programs, Penn, brought about health insurance that pleased all, taxes that pleased most, a better way of life for a lot of people, then that’s the kind of success you would think you’d like.

JILLETTE: I would think that if you please everybody on anything, you’re doing something wrong. But, luckily, there’s no chance of that. I just think that individuals are more important than a whole kind of group thing and that individuals can do more than a top down kind of thinking. I don’t think the government can solve all of our problems or should try.

HOLT: Amen

KING: OK. But, Terry, we do have 300 million people, Terry.

CARVILLE: Right. Yes.

HOLT: Well, and…

KING: And you can be individuals as much as you like.

HOLT: We do…

KING: Somebody has got to think for the masses.

(Emphasis added)
Wow, that about sums up the liberal thought process, doesn’t it. Terry Holt (Bush-Cheney 2004 spokesman) then responded nicely to King, but watch what King says after!

HOLT: We do. But we — but the government shouldn’t be in the business of picking winners and losers. Penn’s right. We should all be in a system of liberty where people can succeed and fail and where merit plays a certain role. If you’re going to help everybody, then what about the guy that worked hard enough — I mean, in some cases, in this — in this budget that Barack Obama is promoting, the small businessman who succeeds, grows the business, hires people, is going to get slapped with the highest tax in the country.

MILLER: No…

HOLT: In other words, because he succeeded, he’s going to be punished. And there’s something wrong with that kind of policy.

KING: Well, you might have that wrong.

(Again, emphasis added.)

Next time some idiot like Larry King says these kinds of stupid things, I wish someone would say:

American slaves pre-Civil War had:

• Free housing
• Free food
• Guaranteed jobs for life
• No need to save for retirement
• Zero taxes
• A “leader” to think for them

Sounds like a statist’s utopia, doesn’t it? (end sarcasm)
Wish just once, someone would throw that up in Larry King’s face!

(Ok, if this is not really a diary-worthy topic, I apologize in advance.  But it made an impact on me, and if it helps even one of you feel the way I did, it will be worth getting scolded for posting as a diary! ).

If you’re like me, and I know a lot of you are, you’ve been feeling pretty down lately about the direction that the socialists in the White House and Congress are bent on taking this country.  Every day, it seems that the news gets worse and worse.  Our new president is clearly not up to tackling the real problems the country faces, and seems intent on doing nothing but trying to cement his own (& his party’s) power.  It seems sometimes like there are SO many people who just don’t want to see what’s going on.

I’ve been encouraged a little recently by things like Glenn Beck’s 912 project and the tea parties, but it still feels like we’re pulling against the tide.

Tonight, I was up late doing some laundry.  The wife and kids are in bed, it was midnight, and I had several loads of clothes to fold.  So I decided to turn on the tube for some background while I folded.  Nothing good was on the regular movie channels, but I saw an interesting-looking 2004 TV movie on the Disney Channel called ‘Tiger Cruise’.  It starred Bill Pullman as the XO on an aircraft carrier which was taking a bunch of family members (including a bunch of kids) on a short cruise to show them what happens onboard.  Hayden Panatierre played Pullman’s daughter, who went along hoping to convince Pullman’s character to retire so he would be home more.

To make a long story short (and not to be too much of a spoiler), 9/11 happens while they are at sea.  The movie isn’t Academy-award material, and it’s a bit unrealistic in its portrayal of the freedom that the kids seem to have to roam about the ship at will.  However, the message that is brought home is one of duty, honor, and country.  The performances by both Pullman and Panatierre, and several other cast members, are moving and authentic.  It really brought back to me the feeling of 9/12 that Glenn Beck is trying to promote with the 912 project.  Not only did it move me to remember the feelings of patriotism and unity that we ALL felt that fateful week, but it also recharged my spirits to work even harder to fight what is happening now.

Our families, children (mine are 17, 10 and 8), and grandchildren are too important for us to sit back and watch Harry Obamelosi destroy everything that this country was founded on and has stood for for 230+ years.  We must stand up and work to protect the values and principles for which those long-ago patriots, and millions of men and women in and out of uniform since, fought.  Never give up!

If you need a recharge like I did, consider getting your family together and renting or watching ‘Tiger Cruise’.  If it’s on TV, record it and pass it to your friends.  If you find it on DVD, buy or rent it.  You’ll be glad you did.

I just started reading Russell Kirk’s “Rights and Duties”. Very early in the book (pages 6-7!), Kirk quotes a letter that Lord Thomas Babington Macaulay sent to Henry S. Randall in 1857. Randall was an American biographer of Thomas Jefferson. Macaulay was warning that Jeffersonianism would destroy the U.S. The passage from Macaulay’s letter says:

It is quite plain that your government will never be able to restrain a distressed and discontented majority. For with you the majority is the government, and has the rich, who are always a minority, absolutely at its mercy. The day will come when, in the State of New York, a multitude of people, none of whom has had more than half a breakfast, or expects to have more than half a dinner, will choose a Legislature. Is it possible to doubt what sort of a Legislature will be chosen?

To this point, Macaulay’s argument sounds like a typically elitist view against citizen participation in republican government. But his point is somewhat deeper than that superficial analysis would indicate.

Read More →

According to Hannity’s count, Obama used the words “crisis” or “catastrophe” no less than 24 times during his mortgage crisis speech today here in Arizona. And we’ve all heard “the worst economy since the Great Depression” enough times to go “postal” if we hear it one more time! (My apologies to you faithful postal workers here!).
Thanks to www.miseryindex.us, it takes only a few seconds to easily refute Obama’s fearmongering. A simple look at a plot of the Misery Index (unemployment + inflation) for 1948 through the end of 2008 makes it clear that this is all folly (click on plot to access image file):

The current Misery Index is substantially lower than it was during the recessions of the 70′s and early 80′s.
Now, if you argue that the Misery Index doesn’t tell the full story due to the currently low inflation rates, you can also look at the historical unemployment trends:

You can see the recent spike in unemployment. But it is clear that this is not a unique event, and that we are still lower than the peaks of the 70′s and 80′s. Also, notice that there is an unemployment spike, almost like clockwork, every 4-6 years. The only exceptions to this are in the late 60′s (Vietnam), the mid-80′s (Reagan’s tax cuts), and the mid-90′s (tech boom).
I haven’t put the plot together, but one could easily do the same thing with GDP growth and show the same conclusion.
I am an engineer, not an economist. But an engineer’s view of this data clearly indicates NOTHING remarkable about the current situation. Certainly nothing worthy of being called a “crisis”. All of this is based on government data that is easily obtained and reported in the MSM regularly. Any reporter without an agenda could easily look at this data and look at Obama’s rhetoric more skeptically. So clearly, not that it’s any surprise to anyone here at Redstate, the media agenda is overriding any essence of truth.

Lord President Obama just landed in Phoenix a couple hours ago and will be speaking at a school tomorrow.  KFYI radio personalities Bruce Jacobs and (former Congressman) J.D. Hayworth have organized a mock demonstration against the stimulus porkulus package in conjunction with Obama’s appearance.  If you live in the Phoenix area, you may want to attend.  Find details here.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) says Obama’s plan will hurt the economy in the long haul (like we didn’t already know that!).

President Obama’s economic recovery package will actually hurt the economy more in the long run than if he were to do nothing, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday.

CBO, the official scorekeepers for legislation, said the House and Senate bills will help in the short term but result in so much government debt that within a few years they would crowd out private investment, actually leading to a lower Gross Domestic Product over the next 10 years than if the government had done nothing.

CBO estimates that by 2019 the Senate legislation would reduce GDP by 0.1 percent to 0.3 percent on net.

So where is this story in the mainstream media?? This ought to be the big news of the day along with the jobs report. If there were a lick of integrity in the Democratic party or their willing accomplices in the ‘slobbering’ media, this would result in an immediate halt on the progress of the bill and a rework. But Obama’s continuing rush to push this bill through indicates VERY clearly that it is NOT about helping the economy, rather it is about helping the Democratic Party by aiding their worn-out liberal causes.

Where are you when we need you? Your TRUE Hope and Optimism and Conservative message live on!

HAVE YOU SEEN THIS MAN?

Name: Rahm Emmanuel
Born: 11/29/59
Date last seen: Approximately 12/20/08
Occupation: Named The One’s Chief of Staff, report to duty 1/20/09
Former occupations:
Congressman, Illinois 5th District
Senior Advisor, President Bill Clinton
Ballerina

If anyone has seen or knows of his whereabouts, please post links below. Can include links to cell-phone video. Casey Anthony’s parents can be dispatched to check into any potential sightings.

It has been posted previously that Gov. Janet Napolitano will be resigning once she is confirmed as The One’s Secretary of Homeland Security, and that Republican Sec. of State Jan Brewer will take over as Governor.

Soon-to-be Gov. Brewer has chosen former State Sen. Ken Bennett of Prescott to succeed her as SoS. Bennett was the former GOP President of the AZ Senate, and was mentioned as a possible Congressional candidate and as a potential opponent for Napolitano last time around. He was term limited out of office. This puts him in a statewide position for which he will likely run for (re-)election in 2010. Depending on how long Brewer wants to stay in office, Bennett would then have statewide name recognition and be a viable candidate to succeed her as Governor.

It’s even within the realm of possibility that he could oppose McCain in the 2010 primary, but I don’t see that as likely. McCain’s a tough guy to beat in the AZ GOP; it would take a serious suck-up to the Obama administration for McCain to tick off the GOP enough to be vulnerable. However, he seems to be trying to go that way so far. Hmmm….

I really got tired of Campbell Brown’s incessant attempts to smear Sarah Palin that started August 29 and didn’t end until after November 4.  “No bias…no bull” seemed a moniker for a show that was full of both bias AND bull.

But her latest commentary takes Barack Obama to task on his response to the Blagojevich story. I almost fell out of my chair when I read it!

If this is a sign of things to come from the previously KoolAid-intoxicated Obamamedia, then this could really be an interesting 4 years.

If Obama should serve two terms, I think it’s highly unlikely Joe Biden will see all 8 years as Veep. It could be his health (yes, it’s been a long time since his brain aneurism, but there was surprisingly no brain scan in his released medical records) or his propensity for gaffes, or just a strategic move. He could even be finished after one term. All this is just a hunch, but I’d give it 50-50 odds.

With Janet Napolitano’s apparent selection as Sec. of Homeland Security, it puts her in a high-profile cabinet spot. If Biden were to leave at some point, watch Obama put Janet in as veep. Why would he do that, you ask? First, despite being a twice-elected, fairly popular governor in a red-leaning state, she is not an exciting personality or public speaker. She has also long been the subject (maybe unfairly?) of a whisper campaign about her sexual orientation (remind you of another Janet in a Dem cabinet position?). She would probably never be put on an elective ticket at the national level. But if she were APPOINTED as Vice-President, that could circumvent her electoral weaknesses and leave her running for President in 2016 as a sitting VP.

This would also accomplish several pluses for Obama. It would add to the historic nature of his presidency by capturing the first black AND first woman mantles. It would also essentially freeze out a move by Hillary in 2012 or 2016. And though it would not take the shine off of Sarah Palin as far as we conservatives go, it would definitely take away from the novelty of a possible Palin presidential run that might help appeal to moderate and independent women.

Arizona has some mighty funny congressional districts and the 1st is no exception. The district contains 5 complete counties (Apache, Gila, Graham, Greenlee, and Yavapai) and parts of 3 others (Coconino, Navajo, and Pinal). That’s 8 out of Arizona’s 15 counties! Not only that, but the 2nd district contains a portion of the 1st district’s territory in a way that can only be explained by referring you to the map . (The hashed areas on the map are Indian reservations.)

Our representative for the last several terms has been Republic Rick Renzi, who has been indicted on a number of fraud charges for a land deal (imagine that happening in Arizona . He did not run again, and the national Democrat congressional committee pumped millions of dollars to this district to run negative ads agains Republican Sydney Hay, who ended up losing handily to Ann Kirkpatrick, a liberal Democrat state lawmaker who masqueraded as a conservative to win in a generally Republican district (55.8%-39.6%)

Read More →

So, some creative bloggers with a sense of humor made MSNBC look like fools (not really that hard to do!):
MSNBC duped by Palin Africa story

This really got me thinking. During the campaign, there was a daily drumbeat of negative stories re: Sarah Palin (Campbell Brown on CNN was a one-woman anti-Palin machine, cranking out often multiple stories per day trying to trash Palin’s reputation).

I wonder if someone looked into the sources for all these negative stories? (that was a rhetorical question, btw). I’ll bet many of them, if one dug deep enough, can be traced to folks who were pulling similar stunts to the folks in the story linked at the beginning of this diary entry. And it would not be the least bit surprising if most of those didn’t connect back eventually (though well-concealed I’m sure) to David Axelrod. “Astroturfing” is his specialty, and this reaks of that kind of tactic. As I recall, there was an anti-Palin video that went viral that one blog site was able to tie back to a company hired by Axelrod.

How many more were there, and what effect did that have on the election. Maybe we’ll never know. Or maybe some of you are “sleuthy” enough to find out…

The 10/29 update of the “reputable” daily tracker averages is available at:
Totally Clear Politics

On the SNL spook of the VP debate, I got a kick out of Tina Fey’s reference to a drinking game purportedly played by viewers who took a swig every time Sarah said the word “maverick”.

Even though I don’t drink, I’ve taken to playing a similar game over the last several weeks. At least several times a day, I click to CNN.com and, if there is a negative story about Sarah Palin on the list of story links, I eat a small candy bar (ok, so I’ve gained a few pounds during the campaign!).

You can turn this into a drinking game (shouldn’t probably do it at work, though!) or whatever other ritual you prefer. The other option is to make a bet with a co-worker that there will be a bash-Palin story there, and maybe you can get a free lunch out of the deal! You could probably pull this on several co-workers and get numerous free lunches before they catch on.

You could also appear extremely prescient and bet your friends that, not only will there be a negative Palin story, but that it will also have a Campbell Brown byline.

Try it, and send me a mini candy bar if it works for you!

Are you, like me, tired of trying to watch the RCP average and glean the truth from it? I got tired of the RCP average being skewed by the non-daily tracking polls, like Pew, Newsweek, NBC/WSJ, ABC/WaPo, CBS/NYT, etc. which are only released weekly or less (except recently ABC). Plus, most of these polls use outrageously high Dem weighting to skew the numbers for Obama.

I just created a blog where I will publish daily a chart that averages the “reliable” daily trackers (Rasmussen, Gallup-traditional and expanded, IBD/TIPP, GWU/Battleground, Zogby, Diageo/Hotline, and Research 2000). OK, I know that R2K is the DailyK#@’s poll, but it has at least been consistent even if it does skew a few points towards Obama.

You can see this chart at:
totally clear politics

There has been a definite tightening over the last 4 days, though we’ll have to watch over the next few days to see if this is sustained.