Thursday, January 31, 2008

15,000 Viewed Blog on MySpace in Little Over a Month

I need to thank you all again for your support and your tantalizing comments. In just over a month since I broke the 10,000 viewed blog on my site, I was able to achieve another. As of today, I was able to record my 25,587 viewed blog. That is more than 15,000 viewed blogs in little over a month.

It is a gratifying satisfaction that you are enjoying or going stir crazy reading my blogs and I will continue to bring in more worthwhile information and candor thoughts in matters that mean a lot to each one of us.

Once again, I am in debt for your kind support.

Wednesday, January 30, 2008

Romney and McCain Will Not Appoint Conservative Judges

Not with standing a miracle by intervention, I highly doubt that a new comer will step forward and claim the prize as President of the United States. Today, we have seen GOP candidate Rudy Giuliani stepped down his bid and shown his endorsement to John McCain. On the other side of the political spectrum, John Edward had bowed out from the race so that Obama and Hillary “duke it out.” There have been rumors that Ron Paul will drop out from the race since his poor showing (8% support) in Florida.

It now boils down to Mitt Romney and John McCain with Huckabees suppressing the Romney vote. That is a very clear thought-provoking idea for the conspiracy junkie. McCain needs Huckabee to stay in the race to suppress votes going to Romney.

I have stress before my personal views in choosing the right candidate is all about national security and picking conservative judges to our courts. There is nothing else that is more important than those two fundamental points. If we cannot fundamentally protect our nation’s security here and abroad and promoting a strict constructionist to the courts, all other issues will have a negative effect.

Since Fred Thompson dropped out of the race (hopefully temporarily), my choice in the general presidential election is to pick the right person that will put true conservative judges on the bench. George Bush did it right and kept his promise. That will be a lasting legacy of his presidency. I want the next president to do the same. So far, I am having extremely difficulty in supporting either Romney or McCain.

I see problems with John McCain in defending his tainted record with the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law and manipulating the procedural proceedings in the Senate with the Gang of 14. Referencing to the McCain-Feingold legislation, McCain's proudest achievement, it was aimed to take the money out of politics, but many conservative judges find it unconstitutional based against the first Amendment. Also, how can we forget the Gang of 14? For those not in the loop, The Gang of 14 was led by John McCain and it was a bipartisan group of lawmakers who agreed to prevent either party from filibustering judicial nominees except in "extraordinary" circumstance. Even though John McCain boasted that it helps put conservative judges on the bench and help confirmation of Supreme Court Justices Roberts an Alito, it enraged many conservatives for being unnecessary and making the GOP looks weak.

I see McCain picking a consensus judge in the mode of David Souter, Anthony Kennedy or Sandra Day O'Connor; so that he may appease a Democratic Senate Majority. I will base my remark solely on a quote that McCain was caught saying, "I would be more inclined to nominate a Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts than to Justice Samuel Alito because Alito wears his conservatism on his sleeve." Even though McCain named several conservative judges he admires like Janice Rogers Brown, McCain has steered clear of the courts as a presidential campaign issue. It makes me wonder of McCain's intent. With John Paul Stevens, Anthony Kennedy, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg suggesting retirement from the bench, the next president has a chance in making or breaking the ideology of a conservative court. I am not sure if either McCain or Romney has the commitment to follow the conservative populist.

With Mitt Romney, it is more of the same. Not much has been said of his judicial record in Massachusetts. You wonder why? Romney hasn't been honest with us. Did you know that as governor he passed over many conservative lawyers for appointment to become judges? Base on the Boston Globe newspaper dated in 2005, of the 36 judges he elevated to higher positions, more than half were Democrats and Democrat leaning Independents. It baffles me toward Romney's response, "People on both sides of the aisle want to put the bad guys away . . . The criteria of lower court judges can be different than the higher court, who would be more of a strict constructionist."

Hmm, can anybody say Harriet Miers? What does that say about a man who uses personal opinion to garner the hope that future judges would be strict interpreting the law than to legislate from the bench? The answer is not much. I am not impressed by Romney record in choosing conservative judges.

On one hand we got John McCain will use the McCain-Feingold litmus test in picking "conservative" judges. On the other hand, we have Mitt Romney tendencies to swap principles when politically convenient will leave some judicial conservatives unreassured.

Oh yeah, we got some great choices to choose from. That is why we need Fred Thompson back!

Saturday, January 26, 2008

We May See Another 1920 Republican Convention Scenario

I am still in denial and will not accept that Fred Thompson is dead in the water. This GOP presidential race is a toss up. No one has shown any viable caliber to take on the mantle as the GOP nominee for the general election. It doesn’t matter who wins in Florida. The only determining outcome after the Florida primary is who will be left standing. I am betting another candidate will drop out of the race. I would call it survive of the fittest. By the time Super Tuesday comes alone, I am anticipating a wide open race with no frontrunner.

I will not fool myself to pick for second best. The only way for the Republican to win the general election is by getting all Conservatives, and not by certain groups, to coalesce and march towards a Republican victory. To do that, we need to find a true Conservative to represent the GOP; and by looking at the remaining candidates, it looks extremely dismal.

It brings to the main point of this blog. It was brought to my attention of a similar event in American History. It was a dark horse named Warren G. Harding that came as a victor from the 1920 Republican convention. Senator Warren Harding (R-OH) had an atrocious showing in all the primaries during that time and was considered an unknown, but emerged from a single deal struck in a smoke-filled room to get the nomination. Harding’s “make or break” state of Indiana, similar to Fred Thompson’s South Carolina, came in a dismal fourth place. This is so profoundly similar to Fred Thompson case. Even though Fred Thompson ended his bid for the presidency, I wouldn’t rule him out. I am praying for a historical event to occur in the Republican Convention that would favor a similar outcome like Warren Harding.

Don’t we Conservative deserve the best candidate to represent us? Haven’t we had enough pandering and distortions of their personal record? There have been problems with each GOP candidate that they are unable to rebuke.

We had 5 primaries and so far no hint of a leader. What does that tell you? McCain is unable to garner enough South Carolina votes to match his votes during 2000. I am hedging he will have problems in Florida since it is a closed primary, meaning Independents can't participate -- and McCain polls far worse in contests where only Republicans can vote. Besides, how can Conservatives trust a maverick, which sponsored the McCain-Feingold campaign finance legislation, supported the amnesty bill, and opposed to drilling in ANWR.

Then we have another candidate in Mike Huckabee, who thinks he can wage unity with the Evangelical establishment. The GOP establishment (ex. Rush Limbaugh, Human Events, and The National Review) are scared to death of a Huckabee win. His record is not stellar and much criticism has been recently disclosed. In recent polls in Florida, Huckabee is placed fourth in the race.

The same is true regarding Giuliani. His personal life, social liberalism, and New York background make it unlikely that he can win the GOP nomination any other way than through the primaries.

And finally we have Mitt Romney. This pseudo-Conservative is getting mix reviews by many establishments, but there is one group that he will have a hard time convincing. That would be the Evangelicals, who don’t trust him. It is unfair, but it seems Romney hasn’t done enough to convince this powerful group. Besides, the other GOP candidates can't stand him. It seems everybody is targeting Romney’s record as of late. My personal problem is that he will not do enough for immigration reform since he supports sanctuary cities as governor in his own state of Massachusetts.

I am anticipating that as the Republican convention comes near, we will be heading to a deadlocked race with no one near the numbers required for the nomination. It seems the current GOP candidates cancel each other out to a net zero. This is where Fred Thompson resurgence may come into play.

It is uncanny that there are similarities between Warren Harding and Fred Thompson. Both didn’t far well in accumulate enough votes in their respective primaries. Both were considered unknown during the presidential race. Both sounded and looked presidential and no one disliked them nor had any strong reason to oppose them.

Now, I know it is a long shot and it would be absurd to rule out a Fred Thompson nomination, but if history showed us that there is hope, I am willing to embrace it.

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Hillary Clinton With A Smile Will Raise Your Taxes. That Bitch!

It bothered me last night about the Democrat Debate in South Carolina and it just hit me. It was something that Hillary Clinton said and exposed the real truth of Democrats.

This is the smoking gun of Hillary's constant blunder, which she hoped nobody took notice. She said this:

“Many of you are well enough off that . . . the tax cuts may have helped you. We’re saying that for America to get back on track, we’re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”

This is exactly what she said. I had to check from several reliable sources to make sure that I wasn't dreaming this up. The audience didn't take notice because her forte on agreeing both sides of the argument is undistinguishable. It is incredible that she was able to say that with a straight face. It just shows the intent of the liberal left and there is no denying that Democrats will raises taxes. It is a socialist government that the Democrats want to encroach into our daily lives. Calling it Socialist, Fascist, or Communist, they are all the same. Each style of belief leans toward removing the rights and liberty of the American public. If you want everybody to be equal, there is no incentive for improvement and our dependence to a big government will be reprehensible. I will never understand the mind of a Democrat. There is no concrete answer that lends support for the party. It tends to be certain issues like being pro-choice that they hold dear, which then proclaims themselves as a Democrat. They don't see the whole picture. I guess Democrats enjoy taking someone rights away to justify for the common good. It is that logic I will never understand.

Beside the illegal aliens obtain drivers’ license, if Hillary gets the nomination, this will end her appeal to the American public in the general election. I cannot believe how some people could say the dumbest things. If the American people enjoy giving the fruit of their labor to the government in the form of taxes, let them and just leave me alone.

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

We May See A Subway Series Afterall Between Giuliani vs Clinton

Since Fred Thompson dropped out of the race, it is hard to believe in supporting anyone on the GOP nominees. We have candidates changing positions and pandering to garner the votes needed for the nomination. We have one who conveniently changed views to be pro-life, another who supported gun control trying to woo the NRA, another who cannot distinguish immigration reform and amnesty, and another who believes in the Fair Tax even though he increased taxes as governor in his own state.

In my last blog, we might as well settle for second best. There is not one true conservative on the list of the remaining candidates. I would describe them as moderate liberals or RINO's. I am saddened that our culture has changed so dramatically that we are stupid that we cannot pick a conservative from a pack of liberals. If this is a way to counter a Democrat liberal, then I would have to say it is a very risky calculated maneuver.

I remember years ago when the media is supporting a subway series of the New York titans - Giuliani vs. Clinton. I couldn't believe that such a match up can be transpired, but as events unfold, it seems that it can be a reality. The media has won. They will get that subway series after all. I have a funny feeling that Giuliani will ask Fred Thompson to be his running mate. For us Fred-heads, it would be a nice consolation to see Fred Thompson taking part in the election process. It all depends on Super Tuesday. Fred Thompson is out and soon Huckabee will do the same. The former governor of Arkansas is broke. They have opted out in Florida in hopes that they can recover in Super Tuesday, which I highly doubt. McCain will lose the stream as the days unfold. Since he cannot retain the votes he won back in 2000, I highly doubt he can maintain that surge in popularity. It will narrow down to Giuliani and Romney. Between those two candidates, Giuliani will be more likely winning the nomination.

Whoever wins the nomination, I will be so critical of that individual. That person will have to prove to me that their promises are true and genuine. I do have my doubts. The economy is the most important issue in the upcoming general elections. I do not hear any of these candidates express a committed solution how to prevent another recession. I truly believe it will take three main targets to prevent a recession or a down turn of the economy. We need to see the Bush's tax cuts made permanent. We need have the Fed cut interest rates (standard procedure during a recession). We need to start drilling in ANWR to show the world our intent that we will not be dependent on foreign oil. These three will immediately solve our economical woes. The problem I have is that no candidates ever discuss my point of views.

Hell, I should have thrown my hat into the ring. It would have been a major improvement in comparisons to these Republican wannabees. I am so discourage at this point that I may just sit out on this one. Either a Republican win or a Democrat win, we are going to head into turbulent times. It will either be an Administration of appeasements or a hostile take-over of the Liberal left. I rather see the latter because the shock of idiocy will make every American wanting another change. I guess feeling the pain for a change for those Americans who cannot distinguish what is right and what is obvious WRONG is the only way for them to see the light.

God save our souls. This is the only time I would ever admit that I wish I was wrong on this one.

Monday, January 21, 2008

Huckabee Is Taking Votes Away From Fred Thompson

It is insulting that the media won't give in to Fred Thompson. I understand that the writers strike is affecting Hollywood and that the only thing we see on television is reruns, but that doesn't mean that the mainstream media should pick up the mantle and create their own drama.

Mike Huckabee is a creation of the mainstream media. Of the three unelectable candidates (Duncan Hunter, Sam Brownback, and Mike Huckabee), the media choose Huckabee to be the spoiler. It bewilders me to believe that the American people heard of Mike Huckabee before the Iowa caucuses. Now after the sudden surge, Huckabee sees himself as a viable candidate and he tends to forget that his popularity was not because of his record, but the manipulation of the corporations that run our media.

This so called proclaimed "messiah" is a false impersonator. I would more likely to assess that he is a charlatan. It is so idiotic to see during the debates how the moderator would throw religious issue for Huckabee to answer. Morons! Huckabee is a Baptist minister and these questions are so trivial for him. (How about trying to throw some hard question at Huckabee for a change) His record is dismal at best. Since he cannot catapult his Evangelicals in South Carolina, Huckabee seems to be in trouble.

Now, Huckabee blames Fred Thompson in taking away the votes that should be intended for the former governor of Arkansas. In his concession speech in South Carolina, Huckabee said, "The two of us (McCain) who finished on top ran with a level of civility . . . I would rather be where I am and have done it with honor than to have won with the dishonor of getting there by attacking somebody else." That was a blatant attack referencing toward Romney in Iowa and the constant criticism from Thompson. It seems Huckabee forgets this is politics and "honor" will not get the nomination.

It is blatant and juvenile for Huckabee to degrade the campaign and integrity of Fred Thompson. What a ludicrous statement! It should have been that Huckabee is taken away the votes that should belong to Fred Thompson. Just compare the records of Huckabee and Thompson and one will see significant discrepancies. From taxes to immigration, Fred Thompson is far superior. To hear that Fred Thompson is John McCain's lapdog, which is hurting the Huckabee vote, justifies my initial assessment of Huckabee. He is a child reckless to say anything to get what he wants. Why are we blinded to see that Huckabees only chance winning this election is to get the Conservative Evangelicals that got George W. Bush in office in 2000 and 2004? It seems that the Evangelicals didn't support 100% toward Huckabee. It’s funny to note that Huckabee is still struggling to appeal beyond the Evangelicals, which wasn’t a problem with George W. Bush. Time is running short and the upcoming states are getting bigger, which means more money to run a campaign. This will put strain on Huckabee to pick up funds. Forget the endorsements. It takes money to continue a campaign.

This whole race will be determined on Super Tuesday in a couple weeks and the decision to nominate the Republican candidate will occur during convention. I will not buy this sudden upswing of McCain. The challenge will soon to be revealed. The Iowa and Nevada caucus, and New Hampshire, Michigan, and South Carolina primaries are small in comparison when 25 states will be casting their votes in their respective primaries on Super Tuesday. There is no clear cut candidate and we can then further assess after those 25 states cast their vote.

This will be an occasion unlike no other. We are witnessing a historical moment in choosing the Republican nomination. Every candidate all shares the same "so-called" Republican Conservative Reagan value, but many of the candidate’s records contradict the ideology of the GOP. Here is a hint. Do not expect what they say during the campaign trail to reflect what they would do in the White House. Just look at their past to justify their character and foreshadow their intent as the leader of the free world. The only candidate I can trust, without a shadow of a doubt, is Fred Thompson.

I refuse to settle for second best. Look at those who settle for convenience in marriage, deciding on a car, a house, job, or buying furniture. That sick feeling and doubt will always be there gnawing at you. We all know the feeling of second guessing. It sucks.

I blame all this on Huckabee. His is the spoiler of the Republican presidential race. I just wish Huckabee drops out because his votes are taken away from a candidate who should be the presidential nomination- FRED THOMPSON.

Saturday, January 19, 2008

Military Success In Iraq Will Deliver Full Iraqi Control By December 2008

Here is something you will NEVER expect to hear from the mainstream media. From Washington, D.C., Leaders received word from Lt. Gen Ray Odierno, No. 2 commander of the US forces in Iraq, that the Iraq army and police could be ready to take over full security in all 18 provinces by the end December 2008.

Because of the surge, we are seeing a dramatic reversal of roles in the improvement of a country that was once thought of being lost to al Qaeda. It is indeed great news to hear. Too bad we don't hear more of this. Presently, the Iraqi security forces now control nine provinces. We have seen major accomplishments in Basra, a central oil hub in southern Iraq, that gave full control to the Iraqi force in December 2007, and it is expected full control in the Anbar province, a former stronghold of insurgent mercenaries, by March 2008.

Since building up the US troop levels to 155,000, the levels of violence have dropped considerably. It brings to reasons why the President sent them there in the first place and that is to quell sectarian violence and provide uninterrupted dedication to train the Iraqi army. Currently, all military operations are a joint effort led by Iraqi troops and supported by the US military. Currently the number of Iraqi security forces numbered to 500,000 and it is expected to exceed 580,000 troops by the end of the year.

This combined success in delivering a complete transitional Iraqi authority will allow planned withdraw of 20,000 US troops by summer of 2008 to go as planned. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said, "All the evidence available to me now suggests we will be able to complete the drawdown and it remains my hope that the pace of the drawdowns in the second half of the year will be what it was in the first half of the year."

With the presidential election setting worries about Iraq is unnecessary. These candidates have no decisions in the overall direction in the war in Iraq. The President’s role is to delegate that authority to a trust general to make sure that the objective is carried out. It will be obvious by the general elections that another issue beside Iraq will be on the table for debate.

Less I hear about Iraq in the news, I gain comfort and confidence that we will succeed with honor and victory.

Department Homeland Security Enacting New Border Rules

While everybody is focusing on the primaries, The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has done something that the mainstream media won't report. The DHS has taken the proactive approach in tightening our borders. It is good to see that the DHS will be tighten the movement of people across the Mexican/American border. By February 1, 2008, new rules will be implemented to stop illegal aliens from gaining unacceptable entry into American soil. The "oral declaration" will end and that proper acceptable forms of identification (State Drivers License, Birth Certificate, or US Passport) will be on the only route to gain passage into the United States. "Oral Declaration" is a term when someone just walks up to the border and say, "I am an American" without providing proof of citizenship.

Believe it or not, this form of idiocy has been the norm for decades, but as of Feb 1, 2008, this will all stop. All I can say, "It's about time!"

Stopping "oral declaration" and providing proof of citizenship is two pieces of regulations of a larger package called the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative. This policy was recommended by the 9/11 Commission recommendation, but was stalled to be implemented til June 2009. Democrats led by Rep. Louis Slaughter (D-NY), chairman of the House Rules Committee, blocked this bill to be enacted til 2009. As you can see, another promise by the Democrats broken in the name of politics. The rule of commonsense has push to the wayside in order for Democrats to allow political ambition to supercede the safety of Americans that they are suppose to protect. No wonder their approval rating has tanked since they took power. It is a do nothing Congress. They do not represent the American people. This is why I believe in term limits. It is not a political career to serve as Senator or Congressman. They are there to represent the people who elect them.

I am glad the Director of Homeland Security Chertoff has decided to take a couple regulations from the bill and enact them himself. It serves for the better interest of the American people. Chertoff already stated that the border fence (physical and virtual) is going as plan and should be completed by the end of the year. Presently, there are few snags and it is currently tied up in the court system, but these are minor and The Department of Homeland Security is confident that the motion will go to their favor. No matter what, the border fence will be completed before President Bush leaves office.

These two simple rules being enforced will dramatically cut down illegal alien crossing our border. I'm glad to see someone keeping to their promise. Democrats should learn that self-serving ambitions will not get them reelected. Hmm, probably that would be best for America.

Friday, January 18, 2008

Mike Huckabee Insults South Carolina

Mike Huckabee is a typical politician hiding behind a minister garb. I don't care if he voted to pledge against amnesty. I don't care if he is a staunch Fair Tax advocate. This man will say anything to get voted. On amnesty, he has not demonstrated anything that supported the notion he was against it. If he was weak on immigration as governor, how much effective would Mike Huckabee be as commander in chief. Do you know why he supports the Fair Tax? It is because his weak record in raising tax in Arkansas needed a smoke screen and deflection. That is why he is supportive of the Fair Tax. Mike Huckabee is a tax whore. If he was a supporter of the Fair Tax, he could have incorporated a similar idea in his home state of Arkansas.

In an effort to pander to potential voters, the former Governor of Arkansas made an astounding idiotic statement on MSNBC television. The mainstream media is ignoring the fact that Mike Huckabee on national television said something bigoted, stereotyped, and racist.

The worst thing of it is that I have no idea if he was serious or clowning around. He said, "South Carolina's a great place for me. I mean, I know how to eat grits and speaks the language . . . We even know how to talk about eating fried squirrel and stuff like that, so we're on the same wavelength."

Whether he was kidding or not, Mike Huckabee just insulted and made fun of South Carolinians. Is that the type of leader you want to represent the country? A very disrespectful President is not in the best interest of the American people. We do not want a clown to sit behind in the oval office. This is a serious position that should not be taken lightly.

Thursday, January 17, 2008

Gut Feeling- Fred Thompson Wins South Carolina

Latest poll in South Carolina shows Fred Thompson surging just days of the South Carolina primary. This is the position that I have yearned to see in this viable candidate. This is the hype that I was anticipating for almost a year. The only true overall conservative in the field and Fred Thompson is banking on winning in South Carolina and I think he will get it.

Fred Thompson record would be the envy of every GOP presidential wannabe. In his eight years in the Senate, Fred Thompson voting record was sterling. He often stood alone for the principle of federalism and state's rights. He had a 100 percent pro-life record. He stood tall against wasteful spending and high taxes. He pushed hard for high ethical standards and for efficient government reform. Fred Thompson instills the Reagan policy of strong defense and conservative foreign policy. Most important, he is the only candidate that I can trust in putting conservatives to the Supreme Court as demonstrated with Chief Justice Roberts. Many conservatives think tanks praised Fred Thompson solid conservative stances on saving Social Security, tax cuts, strengthening the military, and curbing spending.

My belief that Fred Thompson may win in this state is base on strategy I see coming from the Romney and Giuliani camp. Romney has pulled out from South Carolina to concentrate Michigan, which he won. Giuliani is banking on winning in Florida just before the Super Tuesday primaries. Both men haven't concentrated their efforts in South Carolina and them both would like to see Fred overtake McCain, who South Carolina loathes, and Mike Huckabee, who is starting to be a one state wonder. Romney and Giuliani would like to see a train derailment on the campaign front of McCain and Huckabee. By having Fred win in South Carolina may give some life for Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani. That would mean each candidate, assuming Fred wins’ South Carolina and Giuliani win Florida, win one state apiece just before Super Tuesday. My guess would be a dead even heat at the end and the nomination would be decided at convention.

Fred Thompson’s stand on South Carolina is symbolic in nature. He knows that since 1980 no presidential candidate won the presidency without winning in South Carolina. Granted, South Carolina was forced to choose from a field already narrowed by the two smaller, front running states, but this time around South Carolina could do something that they haven't done. That is to choose its own candidate. And if that candidate would go onto win the presidency, that winner would go on air to say, "South Carolina, I wouldn't be here without you. Thank you!"

The South Carolina voters are not novices. They know their candidate and they want someone who is conservative. South Carolinians want to tell the world that the Reagan coalition is alive and has relevance. A win for Fred Thompson will tell the nation that consistency of conservative issues still carries weight at the voting booth. South Carolinians know those candidates who are fake and who are genuine. It's a no-brainer that Mike Huckabee cannot maintain the Evangelical, conservative Christian base because he is losing his appeal and many respectable conservative leaders warned that a Huckabee win would be disaster. This is why Thompson is so appealing to South Carolina. Fred Thompson represents everything that South Carolina believes: Pro-Life, Pro-Second Amendment, Pro-National Security/Military.

South Carolinians will be taking their sweet old time in deciding. This has frustrated pollsters because they cannot get an accurate survey and it is the best interest for them to get it right to maintain public support. One thing about South Carolinians is that they are serious about their politics and they don't take things for granted. If you asked any potential voter in South Carolina why you pick this candidate over the other, you would get substances as an answer and not the rhetoric "I believe he can take this country to the right direction or I believe in him."

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

I Don't Trust John McCain Rhetoric

Yesterday, I went on to discuss Huckabees liberal record. Today, I want to discuss the rhetoric and distrust of John McCain. While Senator McCain’s has an impressive economic record promoting a number of pro-growth positions, such as his opposition to wasteful government spending, his overall record is tainted by a marked antipathy toward the 2001 and 2003 Bush's tax cuts, supporting increase government regulation, increase Social Security tax, and his McCain-Feigold bill.

The only quote that I can find on McCain's reason of opposing the 2001 and 2003-tax cut was this:

"I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us at the expense of middle-class Americans who need tax relief."

John McCain joins the like of Ted Kennedy in supporting the standard rhetoric of tax cuts will benefit the wealthy rich. To see McCain align himself with Liberals send chills down my spine. It bothers me that he would accept the gross inaccuracies of class-warfare demagoguery. I just call it simply stupid and ignorant. I still haven't heard McCain saying he was wrong in voting against the tax cuts or explain why he aligned with Liberal Democrats in offering counter amendments designed to undermine the Bush's tax cuts.

One of the most common rhetoric coming from John McCain is that he didn't vote for a tax increase, but that is a bold face lie. If you look throughly in John McCain voting records, it shows a totally different picture. For example in 1998, he sponsored and voted for a huge tax increase in cigarettes (more than 200%). He even tried to dance around it by saying it that such increases were a fee and not a tax increase. Nice try McCain, but we aren't buying it. John McCain has opposed to most pro-growth tax cuts during his two decades as Senator and that would be worrisome to many if he gained access to the oval office.

Beside his impressive anti-pork and decrease spending initiatives, I do have a problem with his Social Security policy. He pledged to implement personal retirement accounts and to raise Social Security taxes as part of a package. Several years ago on Meet the Press with Tim Russert, the question was posed to John McCain if the solution to Social Security's solvency problem is to lift the cap so that one would pay payroll tax, Social Security tax, not just on the first $90,000 of one income, but perhaps even higher. John McCain's answer was "YES, I could and I would."

Club for Growth summarized John McCain record as follows:

While John McCain can easily point to a handful of pro-growth votes over his twenty-four years in Congress, a deeper look at Senator McCain's record and rhetoric, especially in recent years, ought to give American taxpayers a long and hard pause.

To give credit where it's due, John McCain's record on spending, school choice, and free trade is extremely positive. His go-it-alone moralism sometimes results in pro-growth policies, as is the case in his anti-pork crusades. However, this moralism often manifests itself in the form of more government, less freedom, and a distrust of the individual and the free market system. This is dramatically the case in his opposition to the Bush tax cuts, his class-warfare rhetoric, his occasional support for large-scale increased government regulation, his willingness to raise Social Security taxes, and of course, his abysmal record on political free speech.

Senator McCain's outspoken pursuit of anti-growth and anti-free-market policies in the realms of taxes, regulation, and campaign finance reveals a philosophical ambivalence, if not hostility, about limited government and personal freedom. This ambivalence, combined with a rebellious nature, often leaves taxpayers the victims of his latest cause célèbre. Despite his positive votes-and there are several-his negative positions have tainted, perhaps beyond repair, the positive ones over his twenty-four years in Congress. The evidence of his record and the virulence of his rhetoric suggest that American taxpayers cannot expect consistently strong economic policies from a McCain administration.

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Mike Huckabee Cannot Distort His Liberal Record

It is a ridiculous and incredulous statement from Mike Huckabee blaming Fred Thompson stubbornness to stay in the race in South Carolina in order to pull votes from Huckabee and bring them over to help John McCain. That is very bold from a former Baptist minister turn politician. Give credit where credit is due. Fred Thompson is a strong candidate down south and should not be taken for granted. There have been five televised debates that Thompson was in and I think that is enough to qualify his positions to the American public. If another American says he is too late to get into the game, I would have to say, "what other clever rhetoric can you say from the drive-by media."

Isn't politics and choosing a candidate base on the policies and their voting record? If it was a popularity contest, might as well put Brad Pitt into the mix. I can candidly say that most Americans have no idea about the candidate they support. I bet any money that most would say that their candidate can direct this country into the right direction. Platitudes and generalizations are the typical answers. Many would say they support of one particular issue, but neglect the rest. Those I call ignorant and narrow minded. But whatever the case, votes cast to a candidate would mainly be base on raw emotions. It's so sad, but it is politics.

There is already commotion stirring up in South Carolina and the trouble maker is coming out of the Huckabee camp. It is bad enough that an unbiased economic watchdog organization, Club for Growth, has rated poorly on Huckabees record as Governor of Arkansas, but to blame that those records are skewed due to bribes from the other side is laughable. There is no proof of bribes, but Huckabee is trying to hide the facts that he led a liberal platform in a state that he governed. The facts are facts and there is no way to deny what Huckabee did as governor in the state of Arkansas. Just asked the citizens of that state. The record cannot lie.

Here is a summary from the Club for Growth website on Mike Huckabee:

Over the past ten months, it has become abundantly clear which path Governor Huckabee has chosen, and it looks more like the path of John Edwards than it does a limited-government, economic conservative. Huckabee himself admits that he is a "different kind of Republican," a code word for more government involvement, less personal freedom, and greater dependence on government bureaucrats. Huckabee is proud of his tax hikes, his spending increases, and his regulatory expansions as governor, and he has not indicated that he would govern any differently as President. Nominating Mike Huckabee for president or vice-president, would constitute an abject rejection of the free-market, limited-government, economic conservatism that has been the unifying theme of the Republican Party for decades.

In regards of tax hikes Huckabee tried vehemently to deny, Club for Growth stated the following:

Governor Huckabee has taken to pronouncing his 1994 tax cuts on the campaign trail as "proof" of his economic conservatism and of the Club for Growth's "dishonesty." While Governor Huckabee deserves credit for his modest tax cuts at the beginning of his tenure, several Arkansas papers have documented the fallacy of Huckabee's "1994 tax cuts" line. The Arkansas Morning News called it "another bloated pronouncement encompassing every penny-ante tax break the Legislature passed during his time." These "1994 tax cuts" include such minor tweaks as exempting residential lawn care from the sales tax, reducing taxes on bets made at Southland Greyhound Park, and exempting Arkansas Symphony Orchestra purchases from the sales tax.

Overall, Huckabee's substantial tax hikes far surpassed his modest tax cuts, with the average tax burden increasing by a whopping 47% over his tenure. Huckabee will argue that he did not sign all of the tax hikes, and while true, this fact does not absolve him of responsibility. In the case of a 1996 constitutional amendment to raise the sales tax for the state's conservation agencies, Huckabee campaigned vigorously for the tax hike, even taking a fishing trip down the Arkansas River to promote it. The amendment passed by just 8,284 votes out of 802,148 votes cast.

While Huckabee repeatedly claims that 80% of Arkansas voters approved the gas and diesel fuel tax increases that he backed, the frequency of his repetition of this claim does not make it true. In fact, the claim is false. The Arkansas Legislature passed two bills in March of 1999 to pay for transportation projects, a gas and fuel tax hike, not subject to voter approval, and a bond issue that was contingent on voter approval. Huckabee signed the gas and diesel fuel tax increases into law on April 1, 1999; the tax hikes began taking effect that day. Voters approved the bond issue, but this referendum did not include the gas and fuel tax increases and did not take place until June 15, 1999. Importantly, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette made this clear when it wrote, "the tax increases [signed by Huckabee] will stay whether voters approve the bond issue or not."

Finally, Huckabee argues that the 2003 historically high sales tax hike was mandated by the state Supreme Court and that he refused to sign the final product. This is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts. The Arkansas Supreme Court did not mandate a tax hike. It simply mandated that the state spend more money on education and distribute that money equitably. Reducing state spending in other areas in order to increase education funding would have been a perfectly acceptable remedy for the court ruling, but it is one that Governor Huckabee did not embrace. Instead of cutting spending, the Legislature opted to raise taxes by historical levels. While Huckabee allowed the bill to become law without his signature, his opposition was not due to any philosophical opposition to tax hikes; rather, he opposed it because the Legislature refused to adopt his school consolidation plan, telling the Associated Press through his spokesperson that "He doesn't want to obstruct the wishes of the Legislature but still believes we should have obtained a more-significant level of reform for this size tax increase." While Huckabee did not sign this tax hike, as he did many others, his refusal to fight for lower spending and his ambivalence in the face of the largest tax hike in Arkansas history is certainly reason for concern.

It is also true that since our initial white paper in January, Huckabee has signed Americans for Tax Reform's anti-tax pledge and embraced a Fair Tax proposal on the campaign trail.

These are positive steps in a vacuum, but they lack credibility given his tax-hiking record and the vigor with which he defends those tax hikes. It is hard to take Huckabee seriously when he says he will not raise taxes as president when he continues to vigorously defend the tax hikes he initiated and supported as governor.

Let me interject one piece of information about the Fair Tax. Huckabee is so in favor of the Fair tax because he is trying to shield his liberal tax and spend ideology that he was as governor. It is a real cop out. Throughout his rant of supporting the Fair Tax, he did not state how he will implement it and how he will manage to abolish the 16th Amendment. What would happen is that the 16th Amendment will stay and so will the Fair Tax. That would mean a double whammy in taxes. That is a very fair assessment and a realistic approach Mike Huckabee would follow as a Liberal Republican.

Monday, January 14, 2008

Like Huckabee, John McCain Is A Liberal Republican

To my relatives who support McCain, I am very truly sorry to break rank. I show no disrespect to your political affiliations, but I cannot bear the thought of holding it in anymore. It kills me how the media is putting liberals as the front runners of the GOP. It was Giuliani and Romney in the very begging of the campaign. Huckabee and McCain were considered dead in the water and not to be of any significance to the Republican Presidential race, but they are currently the darlings of the drive-by media.

Besides Duncan Hunter, who has no political clout, only Fred Thompson is the only true Conservative among the GOP candidates. It would be a disservice to those of political intellect to not see that Fred Thompson should be representing the Republican nomination. I would blame each of those Americans who are stupid enough not following commonsense, but to allow frivolous emotions to decide their candidate of choice. The choice is not who is electable, but rather select a candidate with less baggage.

To prove my point, look at the Democrat Presidential race. It has gone to a nasty campaign using the race and gender card. I'm waiting for the trifecta when they start using the class warfare in the mix. You have Hillary using her acting skills of crying and whining to the American public for her support, and when the heat is on, she enjoys running behind her husband and pout that the big boys are bashing on the little girl. You have the Hillary camp using her minions to attack Obama's drug use as a child and using racial innuendo against Obama being a Muslim. On the other side, Obama is using the racial card against Hillary to get the black votes. Both Hillary and Obama’s method are dirty tactics, but none-the-less, it is extremely effective. When the final vote comes in to nominate the Republican candidate, just watch how these same methods will be used in the general election.

Fred Thompson has a distinguished record that can withstand the Clinton Machine or the Obama/Oprah team. If by chance Fred doesn't get the nomination, I am confident Giuliani and Romney should be able to hold off the Democrat nominee’s attack. What I am scared of is McCain and Huckabee. I have for the past two weeks writing blogs on Huckabee and I hope I have made my point across that this man is a Jimmy Carter without the abortion. Now, its John McCains turn to be on the spotlight.

I have read and listen to many people about John McCain and I am very concerned about his record. If many conservatives in Congress and pundits in the media and radio have reservation about the man, then I have to assume that there may be a problem. I will give McCain the benefit of the doubt in the McCain/Feingold bill (campaign finances), McCain/Kennedy Bill (amnesty program or immigration reform) and opposing the Bush 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. Each of these is worth debating, but there are things in the realm of commonsense that is considered wrong and inexcusable.

One major issue is The Gang of 14, which was led by John McCain. This particular 3rd party prevented the Republican leadership in the Senate from mounting a rule change that would have ended the abusive use, whether actual or threatened, of the filibuster to prevent majority approval of judicial nominees. Please keep in mind that this rule does not abolish the use of the filibuster. It was only intended for use during nominating judicial nominees by the President of the United States. During the Clinton Administration, majority of all nominees presented by Congress got majority approval by a Republican Congress without use of a filibuster.

Another problem I have is that McCain is adamant in the immediate closing of Guantanamo Bay and bringing the combatants into our own prison and gain legal access to our court system. Fred Thompson made mention of this during the South Carolina GOP debates. Imagine the burden of our over populated prison system and the fiasco in managing such a dangerous population.

Beside closing Guantanamo, I do have a problem when the ACLU supports any candidate. There have been praises by the ACLU as they supported a bill by John McCain titled The Anti-Torture Amendment. This is an unprecedented bill granting due-process rights to unlawful enemy terrorists caught by us. McCain's proposal uses only the Army field manual on interrogations as the legal standards for interrogation policies. I'm extremely surprise John McCain supported this idea since he was once a prisoner of war during Vietnam and they tortured him against the Geneva convention. I guess McCain got soft in his old age when his bill came during the time of the Abu Ghraib scandal. Let keep in mind that no prisoner died in Abu Ghraib, but rather, embarrassed and humiliated. Did anybody have a problem with that?

One last thing, in the South Carolina debates, McCain bluntly bragged that he was the only one to take credit by forcing the President to adopt General David Petraeus's strategy. Can anybody show evidence to support such a claim? I can't.

It is a sad mistake to see people are jumping on the Huckabee bandwagon. Don’t make the same mistake with McCain. The only true Conservative is Fred Thompson. He is the only candidate that has less baggage compared to the other candidates and his voting record is impeccable.

Sunday, January 13, 2008

The Clintons DON’T Favor the Afro-American. They are Racist

The only race issue in the Democrat Presidential race is Hilary Clinton stupid remarks about Martin Luther King. It is bad timing since next week is Martin Luther King’s birthday. It would be easy to say I'm sorry and move on, but she just enjoys digging herself into a hole. It would be in the best interest for the GOP and the conservative movement that Hillary wins the Democrat nomination. I do not support her, nor like her. It would be a blood-fest of her inconsistencies and the GOP would enjoy exposing her hypocrisy as First Lady and a Senator. I consider it an investment to stop her in any further run as president. A good example is Senator Joe Biden and his many bids for the presidency. He became insignificant as a contender many years ago, but no one has ever told him that he was wasting his time.

Let's get back to Hillary and her miscue as she degraded the role of Martin Luther King in the civil rights movement. Hillary was quoted to say Dr. King's "I Had a Dream" speech was realized only when President Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. She was comparing herself as LBJ and Obama as MLK. That is the most insulting comparison and doesn't do justice to the memories of LBJ and MLK. It didn't help any when her husband, former President Bill Clinton, went on to comment about Obama's voting record on the Iraq war as a "fairy tale story" or was it? Personally, Bill Clinton choice of words has some subliminal connotation to reference Obama rises to stardom as a fairy tale story. I'm not the only one who interpreted that assumption because there are many who felt the exact same thing.

I'm not surprise of Bill Clinton clumsy statements, but Hillary definitely shot herself on the foot with her comment. Now, she is stating that Obama is taking her comment out of context. If Hillary never removes the shoe from her mouth, this wouldn't be an issue. Her defensive behavior and blame the other guy show her cowardliness and lack of integrity. She is following in the same footsteps as her husband. I'm not surprised.

If this wasn't an issue, I wonder why the Clinton camp is scrambling to deflect the whole incident by bringing up the teenage drug use of Obama. That is the most mature thing that Hillary can conjure up. Let’s throw a smoke screen so any disparaging remarks can be swept under the rug. It seems that she needs more smoke screens to divert her idiocy. Just recently she spent time with lower income families’ Las Vegas. A man shouted that his wife is illegal. Hillary in her wise wisdom said that no female is illegal. This is a perfect example of pandering the American public. Tell them what they want to get the votes. That is the Democrats’ policy and it is a specialty that they have perfected.

No matter if Hillary cries, whines, or make empty promises to get the vote, these are few reasons why we need her to win the nomination so that the GOP can destroy her in the general elections.

So my advice to Hillary is to shut up and save it for the Presidential debate in the fall. By that time, she can completely implode and self-destruct just as she did in Philadelphia.

Friday, January 11, 2008

Fred Thompson Is The True Conservative Among The GOP Candidates

It has been a fabulous 24 hours for Fred Thompson. He dominated the South Carolina debate on Fox last night--I hope you had a chance to see it. It is apparent to see that Fred Thompson finally separated himself from the pack. The media is starting to take notice and it's giving the Liberals angst.

From day one, the media knew that Fred Thompson would be trouble. To keep the status quo and maintain more of a liberal pornographic society, any of the other liberal or moderate Conservative would be okay to run the country except for Fred Thompson, who is the true Conservative. It was nice in the beginning to get the buzz that Fred Thompson is "testing the waters" as a potential contender for the presidency. That got ratings. Now, after putting his bid in the ring, every newspaper and media outlets are casting doubts in the minds of the American people about Fred Thompson. Rumors and speculations were thrown in to thaw his campaign. Just recently, an article stated that Fred Thompson will end his bid and support John McCain. Another article stated that Fred Thompson is really interested in the vice-president role. It is obvious that the media and the Liberal organizations do not want Thompson to win the nomination because his conservative values will set back the Liberal agenda for many years.

The New Hampshire debate and the South Carolina debate brought clarity and focus on Fred Thompson. He got his game face on and has established as a vile threat to the other GOP candidates. Not even the drive-by media poster boy Mike Huckabee can take voters away from Fred Thompson. The ad current circulating around America and on the internet showing Mike Huckabees poor judgement in allowing a rapist free to continue his trade in another state will be Huckabees demise. That alone will bring those supporters of Huckabee back to Fred Thompson corner.

After the South Carolina debate, pollster Frank Luntz's Fox focus group declared Fred Thompson the clear winner. And virtually all the pundits agree. Watch the video here.

In the past week since the New Hampshire debate, Fred Thompson has been getting more air time on prime-time. More conservative pundits are taking a second look at the former senator from Tennessee. The Heritage Foundation, a conservative "Think-Tank," gave two thumbs up for Fred Thompson. Even the top conservative talk show personalities, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, are talking highly about him without giving their endorsement. But there is more great news: Today Fred Thompson was endorsed by the highly influential Human Events, the weekly conservative periodical. Human Events has advocated the conservative cause for years.

Here's a key line from their endorsement: "We conclude that Thompson is a solid conservative whose judgment is grounded in our principles." Read the endorsement here.

This is such a good news to a well deserving man. Fred Thompson will win the hearts of America. Open your eyes America. Your candidate is right there within sight. You wanted a Conservative President to follow the Reagan legacy; Vote for Fred Thompson!

Wednesday, January 9, 2008

Huckabee Is A Hypocrite On Birthright Citizenship

I have received many email and comment on my blogs asking why I enjoy bashing former governor Mike Huckabee. The question I would like to pose is "why not?" I refuse to be duped by a creation by the mainstream media. There is no way a surge to prominent notoriety within months of the start of the primaries can occur. There has to be a sense of suspicion when a man comes out of obscurity to lead the GOP presidential race.

I really don't care if such a candidate takes a sudden charge, but I would like to see the "RIGHT" candidate to lead the way. I do not want the American people to be duped and jumped on the bandwagon on Mike Huckabee. This man has no credentials to lead this country. He is no conservative. To be a minister of the faith does not constitute as a conservative. If that is so, we can group Huckabee, Sharpton, and Jessie Jackson as conservatives. Huckabee acts more like a moderate Republican or a RINO (Republican In Name Only). I do not trust him to run the country as a core conservative. If he couldn't keep his promise to Arkansas, how much would he do if he took the reign on the whole country?

This week Huckabee flip-flop on birthright citizenship. Washington Times reported that the former governor would amend the 14th Amendment and prevent children born on US soil by illegal parents to become US citizens. Huckabee promised Minuteman Project founder James Gilchrist that he would challenge the courts and to encourage Congress to pass a 28th Amendment to clarify the 14th Amendment.

Then the Huckabee campaign issued this following statement:

"I do not support an amendment to the constitution that would prevent children born in the U.S. to illegal aliens from automatically becoming American citizens. I have no intention of supporting a constitutional amendment to deny birthright citizenship."

Huckabee must be using his compassionate Conservative ideology that helped him win the Iowa caucus. The 14th Amendment reads: "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." Like every law of the land, there is an implied interpretation that must be proven valid in order that the claim to be true. The 14th Amendment would not apply to a child born by illegal aliens who came to the country illegally. The parent’s entrance on our soil became voided of all benefits that a citizen of the United States would experience. Therefore, any product that an illegal alien produce is considered null and void because their action is against the law.

By giving instate tuition to illegal aliens is another problem Huckabee has on his immigration policy. With immigration as the big issue in the general election, Huckabee would have a hard time defending his past and at the same time trying not to implode in front of the America people.

Tuesday, January 8, 2008

Huckabee's Political Antics Are Childish

My last blog written back on Sunday, January 6, 2007, I made mention about Huckabees sly conniving stunt he pulled with the Mitt Romney ad. Well, on Monday, Jan 7, 2007, the Associated press had a piece exposing Huckabees offbeat antics while he was governor of Arkansas.

I would call it very childish for a grown man who is representing the state of Arkansas to stoop to a new low. I have always said that his campaigns are all one liner and based on "bumper sticker" style mentality. These cliches will only go so far.

This is a man who made it known that he and his wife lived in a triple-wide trailer while the governors’ mansion was being renovated to show the public that they are normal ordinary folks. This is the same man who renewed his wedding vows with this wife in front of a huge crowd at a sports complex to show to the public the support of a marriage law he just signed. This is a man who worked as a cashier trainee at the Division of Motor Vehicle (DMV) while as governor to show the public his intention to streamline the agency.

Publicity stunts or not, Huckabee holds a high-ranking public office in a state where people are not stupid. These stunts are childish, and at times, insulting toward ones intelligence. Probably working on the lighthearted approach to serious public policy is all the attention he needs to get the votes. Well, Huckabee may be able to dupe the citizen of Arkansas, but that will not fly for the other 49 states.

I probably understand why he does this. Have you ever listened to Huckabee speak? He may speak with good diction, but the answers to the question raised are either generalized or stupid. For example, in New Hampshire this past week, he told to an audience of 180 people what is it like to get that surge in popularity. Huckabees answer, "Being president is a serious job. Running this country is a serious business. The issues we face are serious. The reason I have fun is because I love America." WHAT?? That doesn't make any sense.

I cannot trust a man who runs his campaign and enforces his policies using gimmicks. Another example, Huckabee traveled the Arkansas River by a river boat to get support for a one-eighth of 1 percent sales tax for conservation efforts.

A Republican governor being man handled by a Democratic state legislator. Huckabee would chide with them for trying to increase taxes to offset the state budget deficit. Huckabee eventually lost the battle and therefore saw an increase of taxes. If Huckabee wants to become president under a Democratic Majority of both chambers of Congress, what makes you think he can do a better job if he couldn't do the same in his own state.

Huckabee needs to change his childish antics and grow up. I'm embarrassed to know that a public figure assumes that the American people are idiots and using gimmicks to get his point across. I can imagine him giving the state of the union speech as president. He probably would be using picture flash cards and a short film strip to get his point across.

Sunday, January 6, 2008

Huckabee Says He Feels Like SeaBiscuit. I Say More Like a Jackass

An article written recently stated that Mike Huckabee feels like Seabiscuit, a famous Triple Crown champion thoroughbred race horse. I would rather modify the definition to state Mike Huckabee feels more like a jackass. To define this make-believe notoriety from obscurity to rock star status is conjured by the liberal biased main stream media. I will refuse to be bought by his 30 second anecdotes and one-liners to win me over. Mike Huckabee is a horse of sorts. A jackass.

The latest stupidity from the Huckabee camp is the ad against Mitt Romney that Huckabee strongly urged his camp to pull it from circulation. In the news conference, Huckabee being a generous, compassionate Christian pulled a hypocritical liberal stunt. In front of reporters, who produced loud snickering due to the scent of hypocrisy, the former governor of Arkansas explained that the ad was pulled off from being viewed on tv, but he went on to show the reporters what the ad contains. Within minutes, reporters posted it on national television and all over the blogs without costing Huckabee any money. It was free advertising. That is a sly cheap trick coming from a former Baptist minister. I guess Huckabee doesn't follow what he preaches.

This was done before the Iowa caucus and I felt it helped give him the win. I cannot trust a minister who preaches the word of God and does something so conniving. It was Huckabee's latest gimmick in an unconventional campaign that has captured the fancy of Iowa voters, especially Christian conservatives, with a mix of offbeat humor, anti-business populism and aw-shucks Southern charm.

Well, this Christian will not bow to any Southern Christian charm. I am a NEO-Conservative, a Neo-Con, to the core and damn proud of it. I vote base on the candidate realistic promises and policies that they offer.

Huckabee says, "I believe in things like a strong national defense, less government, lower taxes. I believe in the integrity of small business, knowing that's where 80 percent of our jobs come from...I'm also pro-life, I'm pro-Second Amendment; I believe in the 10th Amendment -- let there be more power in the states, less in the centralized federal government." Well, this is not his own philosophy, but the core value of the Conservative movement. It is not only Huckabees policy, but all the Republican candidates share the same exact policy too.

I can see the false facade of Mike Huckabee and many top conservative radio talk show hosts see the same thing too. They will not pander to Huckabees cute one-lines and his platitude of answers. If Huckabee, who is a moderate Republican (RINO), ran as a Democrat, he would have easily beat Clinton, Obama, and Edwards. Huckabee says he will not be basing on the votes of the Christian Conservatives, but it is very obvious that he doing that. In order for Huckabee win the nomination, he has to "kiss-up" to the leaders of Conservative talk radio especially Rush Limbaugh. Huckabee says he would love to speak to Rush, but is unable to do so. The audacity of Huckabee saying that Rush should call him is outrageous. Why should Rush call Huckabee? It is Huckabee who should be begging for Rush's support.

If Huckabee could conjure up that free ad stunt, I would think getting a direct line to Rush wouldn't be a problem at all.

Thursday, January 3, 2008

Republican Party Improves Building The Conservative Base

The Iowa caucus is over and the winner is not the individual, but the Democrat and Republican party. It seems a historical number of caucus-goers turned out on a very cold, bitter night. Iowa Democratic Party reported some 218,000 caucus attendees, compared to 124,000 in 2004. On the flip side, Iowa Republican party reported 115,000 caucus attendees, compared to 87,666 in 2000. Therefore, it is indicative that the 2008 election will be a very dynamic and interesting.

It's worth noting that the Liberals felt that the Republican machine is dead, but that is not true. With the Iowa GOP supporters coming out of the shadows to participate in the caucus, it's show that the conservative base does care who will represent the American people in the oval office.

Not only the conservative base rallied, but the GOP has taken the lead over the Democrat party in fund raising for 2007. The Republican National Committee raised $83 million in 2007, compared to the $50.5 million raised by the Democrat National Committee. The RNC has $17.5 million cash on hand, compared to the $2.8 million from the DNC. This significant difference will give the Republicans a big edge in the general presidential election.

It is important to state that the Republicans have a better system in targeting their base. The Democrat party has a system in place, but they are 10 years behind the technology of the Republican party. In the 2008 election in November, one should keep a keen eye on those districts that went blue in 2006 go back to red. For December 2007, the number of Americans who consider themselves as Republicans jump to 34.2%. That is the largest jump in nearly two years. At the same time Democrats fell 36.3%. That is down by a percentage point compared to a month ago.

The gap between the parties is closer compared to a year ago. Democrats have the edge of 2.1 percentage points over the Republicans. This narrowing gap coincides with increased public confidence in the War on Terror and the low approval rating of the Democrat Majority in Congress.

While the GOP presidential candidates are working hard to win the nomination, the RNC is working behind the scene to build enough funds to defeat the Democrat presidential nominee.

Tuesday, January 1, 2008

MSNBC Hopefully Cancel Keith Olbermann

I really believe that the rating for MSNBC will continue to tank in 2008 just like 2007. There is one person who is so over the top that is bringing the network down. Keith Olbermann, who is the host of "MSNBC Countdown," has probably put his foot in his mouth too many times to count.

I was giving the benefit of the doubt that his shock tv liberal idiocy is a gimmick. After painfully watching his show to understand the liberal left, I conclude that he is truly an idiot.

I have capture many quotes that he made throughout 2007. Keep in mind that I don't watch his show all the time, but the times I do watch it, he always has to say something totally stupid. Olbermann's hatred for President Bush is very obvious. I'm surprise that Olbermann hasn't blown an aneurysm.

Here are some of his idiotic quotes in 2007:

"The presidency of George W. Bush has now devolved into a criminal conspiracy to cover the ass of George W. Bush" - December 21, 2007 "Special Comment"

"We cannot and will not turn this country into a police state" - December 21, 2007 MSNBC Countdown

"Mr. Bush, you do not own this country" - December 28, 2007 MSNBC Countdown

"Our policy in Iraq has been criticized for being indescribable, for being inscrutable, for being ineffable. But it is all too easily understood now. First, we sent Americans to their deaths for your lie, Mr. Bush. Now we are sending them to their deaths for your ego" - January 2, 2007 "On Sacrifice"

"Your presidency has been about the tilted playing field, about no rules for your party, in terms of character assassination, and changing the fabric of our nation, and no right for your opponents or critics to as much as respond. That, sir, is not only un-American, it is dictatorial" - September 20, 2007 "A Petulant President"

"Which party held the presidency on September 11, 2001, Mr. Giuliani? Which party held the mayoralty of New York on that day, Mr. Giuliani? Which party assured New Yorkers that the air was safe, and the remains of the dead were covered and not being used to fill potholes, Mr. Giuliani?" - April 25, 2007 "Republicans Equal Life, Democrats Equal Death?"

At the time I am writing this blog, executives in MSNBC are evaluating their mission statement and they finding ways to improve their sinking poll numbers. There are rumors that Keith Olbermann reign as a host in several MSNBC programs may be terminated. That would be a nice thing to do in changing a new leaf for 2008.