Democrat Voters will not Decide who Their Nominee is
This is a topic that I heard as I was listening to talk radio yesterday, and that is that the Democrat voters will not be deciding who the Democrat nominee is. This is something that has been speculated on for quite a while now. But last week’s primary virtually ensured it. The math just doesn’t add up. Sure Hillary achieved a victory of sorts by winning Texas and Ohio, but she gained very little delegate wise, she did however gain enough delegates to make it virtually impossible for either candidate to have enough delegates to win the nomination before the convention.
Here is a quick look at the math, as I heard it described on Boston talk radio:
Obama needs about 77% of the remaining delegates to clinch the nomination, to be honest I forget the actual percentage but it was in the upper 70’s and I am pretty sure it was 77%, the actual number is fairly irrelevant you can call it 70% if you want, while Hillary Clinton needs 94% to clinch the nomination before the convention.
Considering the fact that the largest margin of victory a candidate is likely to have the rest of the way is by a 55%-45% margin there is no mathematical way either candidate can win the nomination before the convention. This means party insiders and higher-ups are going to decide the nominee, not the actual voters.
This has to have the party insiders up in arms even as we hear that there may be a do-over of the Florida and Michigan surely to try to take the decision out of the insider’s hands. Party insiders do not want to be on record as to their choice between two minority candidates running for the highest office in the land. They don’t have the guts to make a decision based on the issues and stick to it, they are more worried about perception.
The very fact that we may actually witness a brokered convention is very exciting to a political junkie like myself, but the prospect that a brokered convention may tear the Democrats apart, well simply put, that is erotic.
Chicago to Debate Banning Small Plastic Bags
Chicago’s city council is going to debate banning small plastic bags. Now when I first heard this I have to admit that I presumed this was going to help save the planet and stop global warming, but as you can read here, that is not why they want to ban plastic bags.
Tiny plastic bags used to sell small quantities of heroin, crack cocaine, marijuana and other drugs would be banned in Chicago, under a crackdown advanced Tuesday by a City Council committee.
Navarro referred to the plastic bags as “Marketing 101 for the drug dealers.” Many of them have symbols, allowing drug users to ask for “Superman” or “Blue Dolphin” instead of the drug itself, he said.
They want to ban these plastic bags because drug dealers use them for their drugs. WOW! Instead of, oh I don’t know, maybe ARRESTING THE DRUG DEALERS, they are going to go after the means by which these drug dealers package their product. This is misplaced logic at best. Do they think that by banning plastic bags that they are going to drive the dealers into extinction? This is absurd, there are already laws on the books about dealing illegal drugs, why don’t you try enforcing them? There are also laws on the books about buying illegal drugs, why don’t you try enforcing them?
Instead of going after the drug dealers for illegally selling drugs they are going to go after them for illegally possessing small plastic bags?
“We need to use every measure that we possibly can to stop it because it is destroying our kids,”
Under this mindset we are supposed to believe that drug dealers aren’t smart enough to find another way to package their product. How stupid is that? Drug dealers will simply fade away because plastic bags have been banned?
Aren’t the drugs that are being sold by dealers banned? Why hasn’t that caused them to go away? Now banning the bags that dealers are using to package their banned product will lead them down the road to extinction?
If police are unable to enforce the ban on drugs, how are they supposed to enforce the ban on plastic bags?
Does anybody else see the misguided logic here?
Scientist Says That Global Warming is not Man-Made
The science has been settled, scientists have consensus, global warming is real and it is man-made. How many times have you heard those statements? More times than you can count.
Al Gore and all of the other politicians who are looking for the ultimate money grab by guilting people into believing that the earth is warming and will be destroyed and it is man’s fault have been spouting this bullshit for years now. The fact is that the science is not settled. I keep finding these stories from scientists that say that global warming is not man-made, if it is even happening at all. Yet politicians keep finding scientists, who are desperate not to lose their government grants, to go out there and propagate this lie.
I have now found a scientist who also says the science is settled so I thought I would share it with you.
The science is settled in the sense that we have evidence that most of the climate change taking place today is caused by natural forces and not by human activity,” Singer said during his luncheon address at the conservative Heartland Institute.
He admits that global warming exists although he actually has the balls to say that it is due to natural causes. I guess he doesn’t need his grant any more.
Skeptism appears to be growing.
On average, there are anywhere from two to four new scientists per week in the English-speaking world who are publicly announcing their skepticism about claims that human activity is primarily responsible for climate change
We can only hope that this momentum continues to grow before this year’s election. All three candidates have bought into this global warming hoax and all are willing to throw millions if not billions of our hard earned money at a problem that is contrived.
We cannot afford, literally, to sit idly by and watch politicians take our money away from us under the guise that it is better for the planet if we are taxed on the environment.
Read more here.
Nancy Pelosi is sponsoring a bill that would allow HIV-positive patients who do not have AIDS to qualify for Medicaid. This bill has support on both sides of the aisle and it sounds fair enough, doesn’t it? At least it does if you think the government should be in the health-care business, but that will be a discussion for another day after November’s election when we have national health-care again in the spotlight. Anyway, it sounds fair, but there is a small problem with Nancy Pelosi sponsoring this bill. Her husband owns $250,000 worth of stocks in a company that stands to benefit from this legislation.
That is not the only problem however. Her campaign was given $20,000 by Amgen in July, one week later Pelosi introduced a bill that had been previously been stopped, the bill I mentioned above. This bill would benefit Amgen as they make the AIDS drug that would now be covered under Medicaid, this would also benefit Pelosi’s husband as this is the company he owns all these stocks in.
An ethical issue pops up as a result of her investment in Johnson & Johnson,” Fitton told Cybercast News Service. “Obviously she should explain whether or not her contributions from Amgen and its executives are influencing her position on the HIV bill in an inappropriate way.”
Being a Democrat has it’s privileges though and so she will never be held accountable for this. But this isn’t the only money she has received from Amgen.
In addition to the 28 separate contributions Pelosi received last July from Amgen, seven other contributions were made by executives in the months of July and August, for a total of $30,050 to Pelosi’s re-election campaign. Also, AmgenPAC (political action committee) gave Pelosi’s campaign a total of $10,000 last year.
She needs to answer these questions. This is one of the issues that the Democrats ran on in 2006, the culture of corruption, and it is now possible that Nancy Pelosi has been caught up in it.
“It’s not three or four steps removed,” Fitton said. “The drug presumably would be covered under the bill. So will any Democrat or Republican ask for an investigation of this, whether she violated the rules? On the face of it, she seems to be bringing discredit on the House as a result of this apparent conflict of interest.”
It will be interesting to see if anything becomes of this but I think we all no where this is headed. Nowhere.
Read my source material here.
Freedoms will be Lost Through Global Warming Legislation
One of the issues I have been writing about is the fact that global warming is nothing but a tool to help restrict personal freedoms of the American people. I have written time and time again about how all of the so-called solutions to global warming involve Americans paying more taxes and the government expanding. Unfortunately too many tree-hugging, do-gooders believe everything that the government spoon feeds them and they are convinced that humans are actually destroying the planet. They are willing to pay more taxes and have more restrictions put into their lives because they don’t bother to question the absurdity of Al Gore. Anytime a politician is the leading voice for a cause Americans first instinct should be to hold on to their wallets.
So while many Americans are too lazy or uninterested in actually debating global warming, and just assume it is fact, (and even if they don’t think it is a fact it still makes them feel good because they care so much about the environment), the president of another country sees this for what it truly is.
Centralized planners with “megalomaniac ambitions” are now working to restrain democratic development and economic activity under the guise of environmentalism, said Vaclav Klaus, president of the Czech Republic. He spoke Tuesday morning at conference in New York City.
He wasn’t done there:
Advocates of man-made global warming theories in Europe and the U.S. are pushing cynical political schemes that will erode individual liberty, curtail the standard living and stymie economic growth, Klaus warned audience members. Unfortunately, these individuals are not sufficiently challenged in the field of climate science or in the social sciences, he argued
When civil liberties are eroded and the standard of living is reduced and economic growth is stymied what do we have? We have the need for bigger government and we have more people dependent on government. That is the real goal of the global warming agenda. It is time to stop this hoax before it is too late. The fact that politicians and not scientists are the leading advocates for the global warming hoax should tell everybody everything that they need to know.
Read the source material for this post here.
New Hampshire State Government Ranked Last in the Nation
I have been bitching about the state of New Hampshire politics here for just over a year now, and it seems as though the country is now beginning to see how far New Hampshire has fallen. New Hampshire is ranked last in the nation when it comes to the way state government is run. New Hampshire’s government is considered the least efficient. Needless to say liberal, irresponsible, tax and spend Governor John Lynch (Democrat) takes offense to this study.
“We’re the most livable state. We’re the most business friendly state, and I think we’re the envy of other states. We are for a reason, and part of that is the way state government operates,” said Democratic Gov. John Lynch.
“I’m offended that some out-of-state group would criticize our system of government,” he said.
Well Governor Lynch, I am offended at the way you have spent us into bankruptcy and the way you have passed nanny state regulations that treat adults like children. I am offended by the way you have stripped away the rights of the parents to raise their children. Now not only are residents of the state noticing, but so is the rest of the country. You have turned New Hampshire into a laughingstock, I hope you are happy.
the Granite State earned a C-minus for how it handles money, D for managing and retaining qualified employees, and D-plus for both its long-range planning and infrastructure improvement, and for program accountability.
A C-minus for how we handle money seems very generous considering John Lynch turned a budget surplus into a projected $150 million deficit in two years. As far as accountability goes, since when does a liberal believe that anybody should be held accountable for anything?
Governor John Lynch and his liberal cronies need to be removed before it is too late. I have always been proud of my state, and I hate to lose the New Hampshire way of life and that is why it is so important for Republicans to find a strong opponent in November. This study is embarrassingly true in my opinion. I have written before that I think it is alright for me to attack the way New Hampshire is being run because I live here, but that I would defend my state from out-of-staters who decide to bash New Hampshire, and I was going to use some of this post to do just that. But I can’t. I am disgusted by the turn New Hampshire has taken and I am glad that it is being recognised by national groups. If this doesn’t start to wake up New Hampshire residents than nothing will.
Tonight I hang my head in shame at the embarrassment that New Hampshire has become, but I still hope that come November New Hampshire voters will shake up the political landscape and rid ourselves of this “Blue Plague” that has reeked so much havoc on the state in so short of a period of time.
This Has Been a Fun Week to be a Conservative
This has been a fun week to be a conservative. I suppose fun is a relative word in this case. I have long since given in to the fact that John McCain is going to be the Republican nominee, and even his impending and likely clinching of the nomination tonight cannot take away from the joy I have been getting this week watching the Democrats.
I have already resigned myself to the fact that a Democrat is going to be the next president, I have also resigned myself to the fact that even if John McCain pulls off a miracle and becomes president he will be no better than either Obama or Clinton, and I will not give him the privilege of my vote. That being said, I think the Democrats are sowing the seeds for their undoing, and I am enjoying it. I do think that this year belongs to the Democrats, there is too much anti-Bush feeling out there to expect that Republicans have any shot. So yes, the Democrats may becoming unraveled but I don’t think it will affect this year’s election, I think it could have long and irrevocable consequences that could cause the Democrats to slit apart before our eyes. It is already beginning to happen.
Let’s look at what has happened this week that I find so enjoyable. First we had Obama make campaign promises to Ohio voters about NAFTA even as his campaign workers met with Canada and promised them that Barack Obama was lying to Ohio voters about NAFTA in order to get elected. Obama denied this meeting ever took place. We then found out that Obama was lying because this meeting did in fact take place. Obama’s campaign then said that there must have been a misunderstanding about what was said in this meeting between Obama’s campaign and the Canadian government. Obama is a liar. The word is out there now that a written memo exists that in fact shows that Obama’s campaign did write to Canada to assure them that Obama was lying to Ohio voters.
All of that pales in comparison to all of the racial overtones that are prevalent now in the Democrat primary. It is this racial tension that could tear the Democrat party apart.
This week started with the now infamous “3:00 am” commercial that I wrote about here. I have actually had a person, who is an Obama supporter and thereby a liberal, comment on my blog that this commercial has racial overtones because it implies that Obama wouldn’t be home to answer the phone at 3:00 in the morning. This is, according to the person who commented on my blog, racist because it plays into a stereotype about black men not being around to take care of their children.
The “3:00 am” commercial is then analyzed as being racist by more liberals for another reason. One of the children is wearing pajamas that say “good night” on them. Evidently if you look real, real hard you will notice that the only letters you can see on the pajamas are “NIG”. These are liberals that noticed this supposed subliminal message about Barack Obama’s race.
Today the DailyKoz, probably the most liberal organization in the country, accused Hillary Clinton’s campaign of using a “blacker than normal” picture of Barack Obama in her campaign ads just to remind everybody that he is a minority. Here is the picture in question:
This is incredibly absurd to me. The far left organizations are all endorsing Barack Obama because Hillary isn’t far enough left for them. If I had to guess I would say that this is all being generated by the far left organizations and not by the Clinton campaign. But the truth is it doesn’t matter who is responsible for these attacks. It doesn’t matter if it is coming from Obama supporters or from the Clinton campaign, the fact is that it is coming from the left. The fact is that it is coming from the party that is supposed to be colorblind. Suddenly it is the left that is dividing itself by race and gender. It is the left that is splitting apart because of racial tension. It is the left that has over-sensitised Americans over the years and now it is coming back to haunt them.
That is why I have had so much fun watching the Democrats this week even though I will not be voting for a president this year. I have been amused and uplifted by the fact that while a Democrat is probably going to win the presidency this year that it may come with a heavy price to pay in the long run. The party that claims to be the only party that can improve race relations, the party that may actually introduce legislation in the senate to apologize for slavery is the same party that is tearing itself apart over the fact that a black man may beat a white woman and become president.
You would think that this would be a win-win situation for liberals but it is turning out to divide them. The funny part is that it is dividing the party along the same lines that the Democrat party has been trying to split the country. The Democrat party has been trying to divide minorities from Republicans for many, many years, and now they are dividing themselves within their own party.
Finally Democrats are being held to the same standards as Republicans.
That is why it has been fun to be a conservative this week.
Does Hillary Clinton Believe Barack Obama is a Muslim?
When Hillary Clinton was asked on “60 Minutes” if she believed that Barack Obama was a Muslim this was her reply:
“Well of course not, there is no basis for that. I take him on the basis of what he says, and you know, there isn’t any reason to doubt that.”
That was not exactly a staunch denial that she believes he is a Muslim. She basically said that if he says he is not a Muslim than she will take him at his word. She did not come right out and say that she believes he is not a Muslim. This answer was apperently not good enough so the reporter pressed her on her answer. He asked her again if she believed that Obama was a Muslim, she replied:
“No, no, why would I — there’s nothing to base that on — as far as I know,”
Again she leaves the door open. As far as I know he isn’t a Muslim, but you never know is what she appears to be saying. She refuses to come right out and say no. Just look at that qualifier, “as far as I know”. This answer was worse than he first. She probably doesn’t believe he is a Muslim but she wants to leave that little lingering doubt in the back of the minds of voters.
I find this so amusing I can’t even put it into words. The best part of this whole debate about Barack’s religion is the fact that Democrats are the ones being asked whether they believe Obama or not. Democrats are supposed to be so caring, and supportive of all beliefs and cultures, yet they are the ones being torn apart by this choice. If the Democrats, like Hillary, truly were all-caring they would just come out and say, “who cares what religion Obama is, we need to judge him on the issues”
The Clinton’s are the ones who first played the race card in this election, now Hillary is unclear about whether she feels Obama is a Muslim. Hillary is showing America exactly the kind of person that she is. She is willing to throw a black man under the bus to gain power, she is willing to throw a religion under the bus to gain power. Why doesn’t she just come out and say that there is nothing wrong with Muslims and that it would be okay even if Obama was a Muslim? Why does she hide behind words that hint that Obama could be a Muslim? She hides behind these words because she feels that if she can leave a little doubt in the voter’s minds that maybe Obama is of the same religion as those that attacked us it could translate into votes for her. How sick is that? The fact that she is leaving doubt about Obama’s truthfulness reeks of racism.
As I wrote earlier, I don’t think Hillary believes Obama is a Muslim, but I do believe that she thinks that if she can keep this doubt in the voter’s minds it may turn voters away from him. She is playing on racist and bigoted lines and hoping it will pay off for her.
I just find it funny that she is relying on the bigoted hatred of the left to carry her to victory. The left has made this an election based on race and religion. And they call Republicans racist.
Video: John McCain Calls Himself a Conservative Liberal
Below is a video where John McCain says that he is a conservative liberal. Was this just a slip of the tongue? Or was it a Freudian slip? I think it was just a slip of the tongue, he was thinking one line ahead of what he was saying. At his age, that can be dangerous. I still think the video is pretty funny though, it does kind of reaffirm conservative’s fears about John McCain.
But there is another part of this video that I find even more interesting than whether John McCain truly considers himself a conservative liberal or not. The part I find more interesting is the last part of the video. Watch the video and I will discuss my take on what he said after he called himself a liberal below.
Did you catch what I am referring to? I find it funny that John McCain complains about the 527 groups that run negative ads. He says they are distorting the political process and they should be outlawed. One of the big issues that conservatives have with John McCain, besides immigration and judges and GITMO, is his campaign finance reform bill that he sponsored with Russ Fiengold. This bill was nothing short of a restriction of the freedom of speech. John McCain sponsored this bill which restricts criticism of an incumbent politician in the last 60 before an election. The time when free speech is the most important is right before an election. In the unintended consequences department comes those 527’s that McCain now opposes. The 527’s found a loophole in the law and now campaign finance reform, which was supposed to take the money and special interests out of politics, is responsible for pumping more money than ever into campaigns.
John McCain is responsible for the creation of the 527’s that he now says should be outlawed. This, along with his comment about giving the president credit at the very beginning of the video, is nothing more than an attempt to ease the minds of Republicans who are still disgusted by the nomination of John McCain as the party’s presidential candidate. We are supposed to forget he is responsible for creating the groups that he now wants outlaw.
The groups aren’t all bad however. They are probably single handidly responsible for ending John Kerry’s presidential aspirations with the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth.
I suppose John McCain does deserve some credit for that.
Hillary Clinton Embraces the “Politics of Fear”
Cross posted on Grizzly Groundswell
Democrats have for years accused Republicans of using the politics of fear. Whenever a Republican brings up the issue of national defense and keeping the country safe you can rest assured that a Democrat will accuse him of using scare tactics. It doesn’t matter to them if this is a real issue or not.
The Democrat race is about “hope” and “change” and who Democrats feel can best provide both. That is until now. Now that Hillary is in trouble and people evidently feel as though Obama is the best candidate to provide “change” and “hope” Hillary has decided to use the “politics of fear” that I thought she was opposed to.
Her new add being run in Texas shows two children sleeping at night peacefully while the narrator states the following:
“It’s 3 a.m., and your children are safe and asleep. But there’s a phone in the White House, and it’s ringing. Something’s happening in the world. Your vote will decide who answers that call. Whether it’s someone who already knows the world’s leaders, knows the military—someone tested and ready to lead in a dangerous world.” At this point, we see our first adult, a concerned mother, opening the door and peering into her children’s bedroom. “It’s 3 a.m. and your children are safe and asleep,” the narrator repeats. “Who do you want answering the phone?”
The answer to that question is Hillary according to the ad. So much for the Democrats being above the politics of fear. There is no more dangerous Clinton than a wounded, frightened, and cornered Clinton. It is now time for the Clinton’s to pull out all the stops and suddenly the “politics of fear” are acceptable and palatable to them.
Hillary Clinton has abandoned her message of change and is now embracing politics as usual. This is hardly the change that Democrat voters are looking for. Or is it? Is the change that Democrat voters are looking for merely a change in parties in the white house? That seems to be the question that the Clinton campaign must be asking themselves. Once they win the nomination they would be able to switch back to the message of change. Until she wins the nomination however, politics as usual, and the politics of fear are perfectly acceptable to her.
