TIME Longs for the Dark Ages.

December 2, 2009

I was browsing this article Time.com (which I was directed to via Ace of Spades HQ) and I was so surprised by what I had read that I had to go back and read it 2 or 3 times before I was certain the article said what I thought it did.

Advertisements

Creating a Story to Fit the Narrative.

November 9, 2009

Hey! Did you know that Republicans hate Women, Blacks, Jews, Hispanics, (insert group of non-old white men here) ?!? What? You didn’t?! Just look at all the evidence!

For those of you who read conservative blogs, you know that accusations of bigotry of all forms is not uncommon for the Repulican party, or conservatives in general.  However, I found this article uniquely offensive and angering and for someone who’s a conservative in a heavily liberal area, that’s hard to do.

But the growing schism between the Republican Party’s ascendant right wing and its shrinking moderate core has clear gender undertones — and Scozzafava’s departure raises fresh questions about the GOP’s ability to recruit, elect and even tolerate the sort of moderate women who used to be part of its ruling mainstream.

Ah yes, gotta love those “undertones” and “raises questions” lines.  Democrats and liberals use these lines when they want to make accusations but don’t have the balls to actually stand behind what they are accusing people of (usually because they know it’s untrue).  Sounds a lot like those racist undertones conservatives had during Obama’s campaign, and throughout the ongoing fight against universal healthcare.  Why, we (conservatives) are only opposing the President because (gasp) he’s black!  Now, we’re only voting against candidates like Scozzafava because (gasp) she’s a woman!  It takes almost the entire first page before we find out that there’s even any possibility of another reason conservatives would oppose her nomination.

Scozzafava’s conservative critics — including former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh — chalked up their opposition to her liberal positions on abortion and gay rights.

It’s not so much that they invoked Palin and Limbaugh as critics (who by far weren’t the only ones) of Scozzafava, but the authors of this pile of crap article only chose to mentin two specific issues; abortion, and gay rights. 

Did you also know that Scozzafava was pro-card-check?  She also supported the porkulus bill that every single GOP House Representative voted against.  She also voted for tax hikes and a $180 million dollar state bank bailout.  However, those couldn’t possibly be reasons for conservative opposition, it MUST be because we’re all RAAAC- er…I mean…SEEEEEEEXXXXIST!!!!

But it doesn’t stop there.  In the very next paragraph, the authors of this crapfest double-down on stupid.

Read the rest of this entry »


Andrew Breitbart on How to Combat Pop Culture Liberalism

March 16, 2009

This past Friday, Andrew Breitbart, a leader in online conservative media, appeared on “Real Time with Bill Maher”.  As anyone who has watched 5 minutes of the show knows, it’s not exactly a welcome place for conservatives.  I watched the first 3 or 4 minutes on YouTube and had to turn it off in disgust from how Maher and his liberal guest were treating Mr. Breitbart (not that I was shocked or suprised by that).

Many people questioned Mr. Breitbart on why he would willingly appear on a show that has a unblemished track record of being hostile to conservatives and advised him to decline the invitation.  Today in the Washington Times, Mr. Breitbart explains why he didn’t heed the advice he recieved. 

Since the salad days of ABC’s “Politically Incorrect,” which minted countless right-wing pundits and best-selling authors, conservatives have rightly assessed the HBO version of the Maher show as R-rated and shockingly hostile to their worldview. So most opt out.

I totally see why. But I think that’s exactly the wrong strategy.

The problem with the withdrawal approach is that it cedes the popular culture debate to the other side. We figure talk radio, a certain cable news network and some independent Internet venues will allow for us to get our ideas out to the masses. Well, those few outlets are greatly outnumbered. They are also isolated and targeted for destruction by the activist left. The sitting president (using taxpayer money) is now leading the charge.

In my neighborhood at least, this strategy of avoiding engagement with the other side isn’t working out so well.

I happen to agree 100% with Mr. Breitbart’s analysis here.  Currently in this country, the default political worldview is that of liberals.  Conservatives and conservative-leaning media sources (FoxNews, talk radio, etc.) are labeled as racist, bigoted, homophobic, facist, and so on and so forth.  If you’ve ever talked to someone about Rush Limbaugh who’s never tuned in to his show, you know what I’m talking about.

My fiance was one of these people.  Not that she was a big left-wing liberal (she wasn’t very politically aware, period), but she had always had this image of Rush of being angry, racist, and hostile to any callers who disagreed with his opinions.  Don’t ask me how I did it, because I don’t remember, but I was able to get her to start listening to some of Rush’s show, and she was literally shocked.  She said to me “he is not at all what I thought”.  She now enjoys Rush’s show, his humor, and his overall personality and demeanor.  She says “he’s got this really pleasant tone and voice, and once you understand his sense of humor, his show is really entertaining”.

I think a lot of people who go out and vote are “default Democrats”.  They are the people who will always claim “I don’t really like politics”, yet are compelled to vote (and rightfully so) out of a sense of duty…and because Matt Damon, MTV, E!, P. Diddy, or whoever is telling them they should.  They don’t follow the issues, heck, as John Ziegler and countless polls have pointed out, most people don’t even know something as simple as which party is in the majority in the House or Senate.  The pop culture in this country is decidedly liberal, and if conservativism is to make a comeback in government, part of the resurgance is going to have to start by combatting this.  But how to go about it?

Read the rest of this entry »


Blagojevich Impeached

January 9, 2009

Well, in a nearly unanimous vote of 114-1 (and one “present” vote), the Illinois House has voted to impeach Gov. Rod “my hair is as rock-solid as my ethics” Blagojevich.  The Illinois Senate now holds the trial which is scheduled to begin Jan 26th.

Here’s a little something that I thought I would share with you all.  The new Illinois state liscense plates!!!

 

il-guv-license-plate

"Where Our Governors Make Our Liscense Plates!"

 

By the way, here’s a little tidbit on the Representatives who voted “against” (Milton Patterson) and “present” (Elga Jefferies), surprisingly both are Chicago Democrats, whoda thunk?!.

The one lawmaker voting against impeachment was Rep. Milton Patterson, a Chicago Demorcrat who represents the South Side. Rep Elga Jefferies, also a Chicago Democrat, voted present.

Patterson said he wasn’t defending anyone, but that he read the impeachment committee’s report and wasn’t comfortable voting against the governor. “I have no firsthand knowledge of any of the evidence,” he said.

“I went by my own gut feeling, it’s as simple as that,” he said. “I read the report. If the government is going to indict him, let them go ahead and do that. That’s their job and I’m doing my job.

Apparently Rep. Patterson feels that evidence that he was not directly involved in, shouldn’t be considered when making up his mind on which way to vote.  Unless Patterson was a part of those phone calls looking for favors in exchange for a Senate seat, he feels it’s inadmissable as evidence.  Oh, and even if it was included in the evidence, logic and reason have no part in his decision-making process.  He just votes according to “his own gut feeling”.  Hey, I didn’t make this stuff up folks, and you people on the South Side voted for this idiot.  Congradulations, you’ve got a complete buffoon representing you.

Oh, and here marks the end of my Christmas/New Years/Election hangover.


BREAKING: Blagojevich taken into custody by FBI

December 9, 2008

This morning, according to the Chicago Tribune, Gov. Rod Blagojevich has been taken into custody by the FBI agents on federal corruption charges.

I guess I should have posted an article I was working on last night afterall. I’ll try and make up for it by keeping on top of this as best I can.

UPDATE

Gov. Blagojevich and his chief of staff, John Harris, were arrested by the FBI on federal corruption charges.  Here are some of the accusations

Blagojevich and Harris conspired to demand the firing of Chicago Tribune editorial board members responsible for editorials critical of Blagojevich in exchange for state help with the sale of Wrigley Field, the Chicago Cubs baseball stadium owned by Tribune Co.

Blagojevich and Harris, along with others, obtained and sought to gain financial benefits for the governor, members of his family and his campaign fund in exchange for appointments to state boards and commissions, state jobs and state contracts.


Moving forward…

November 5, 2008

Well, it was inevitable that half of us were going to be dissappointed after yesterday.  I just was hoping that I wouldn’t be part of that half  (ok, ok, it was 62.9M to 55.7M, not really half but close enough).

The real question that conservatives are faced with today, is how we move forward?  I’ve heard many suggestions, but the truth of the matter is, regardless of how people think we need to win this country back, none of it is going to happen without remaking the party into a true conservative movement.  We need younger people getting more involved in their local elections, we need to support current conservatives like Sarah Palin, Bobby Jindal, Paul Ryan, and a handful of other young politicians.

Furthermore, we need to establish how we are going to carry ourselves and react to the Obama administration.  Despite what you may hear some people say, I honestly believe we cannot react in the same way the left did to President Bush.  That doesn’t mean I’m going to “support” Obama and his decisions, but I will treat his position with the respect and courtesy that it deserves.  Something that the left never did with Bush.

For all of you out there reading this, I highly suggest you read Steve Den Beste’s piece today.  While I may disagree with a few of his predictions on what’s going to happen, I do think he’s got a good handle on how conservatives need to move forward.

The President of the United States is the most powerful political figure in the world, but as national executives go his powers are actually quite restricted. Obama will become President, but he won’t be dictator or king, let alone deity. He still has to work with the House and the Senate, and he still has to live within Constitutional restrictions, and with a judiciary that he mostly didn’t appoint.

The main reason this will be a “coming of age” moment is that now Obama and the Democrats have to put up or shut up. Obama got elected by making himself a blank slate, with vapid promises about “hope” and “change” — but now he actually has to do something. Now he has to reveal his true agenda. And with the Democrats also having a majority in both chambers of Congress, now the Democrats really have to lead. And they’re not going to do a very good job of it. It’s going to be amusing to watch.

And the people who fell for the demagoguery will learn an invaluable lesson.


Wow…just…wow

October 9, 2008

In this election, I honestly like to listen to both side’s arguments.  I don’t just dismiss Obama’s views simply because he’s a Democrat.  I don’t wholeheartedly embrace McCain’s views simply because he’s a Republican.  I think it’s my responsibility to listen to both sides, and make a decision.  It just so happens I strongly disagree with a lot of the core ideas/themes of the Democratic party.

Now, there’s been many arguments saying that if Obama doesn’t win, it’s simply because Americans are still racist.  We’re not going to vote for Obama because he’s “got a funny name” or “he doesn’t look like the Presidents on the currency”.  I say this is utterly ridiculous, and I’ve often said in political conversations that Obama is probably getting a BOOST because he is black.  On November 4th, I’m confident we will see African-Americans come out to vote in record numbers.  Most polls I’ve seen show the 95% of the African-American population voting for Obama.  Obviously, this suggests that Obama actually has an advantage in the election due to his race, not the opposite.

Are African-Americans simply voting for Obama because he is black? Personally, I think a lot of voters don’t really listen to the issues, don’t do their due dilligence in researching the candidates positions, and simply accept any tidbit of news they hear about the candidates as fact.

Of all people, I never expected Howard Stern to be the one to provide evidence in support of my theory.

Apparently Stern had a man out on the streets in Harlem, asking people who they were voting for.  He then asked them why they were voting the way they were.  As expected, all the people featured in the audio clip on Stern’s show were voting for Obama.  However, when the interviewer asked them what stances of Obama’s they supported, he used McCain’s positions instead of Obama, even asking voters “If Obama wins, would you be ok with Sarah Palin as the Vice President?”.

Shock-jock delivers something…not entirely shocking.

(Credit to neveryetmelted.com)