Blogs For Victory

Via NRO’s The Corner:

…Senator Obama says he’s going to change Washington, but his solution is to simply make government bigger, and raise your taxes to pay for it. We’ve been doing that for years, and it hasn’t worked. In the few years he’s been in the Senate, he has requested nearly a billion dollars in pork barrel spending. That’s nearly a million dollars for every day he’s been in office.

I’ve never asked for a single pork barrel project for my state of Arizona, and as President, I will veto every bill that wastes your money, and make the authors famous. I will order a top to bottom review of every government program before I give them one additional dollar of funding. Those programs that are doing important work for the American people have nothing to fear from me. Those that can be modernized and made more effective will find me a willing partner. And those that have outlived their usefulness to you, and waste your money on things you neither want nor need, are going out of business whether they like it or not.

Senator Obama says he will only raise taxes on the rich. But in the Senate, he voted for tax hikes that would have impacted those making just $32,000 per year. He has proposed tax increases on income taxes, capital gains taxes, dividend taxes, Social Security taxes – pretty much anything that you can tax, he wants to tax more. Raising taxes in a bad economy is about the worst thing you could do because they would kill more jobs in an economy that‘s already losing too many. I‘m going to keep current tax rates low, and cut others, not because I want to make the rich richer, but because it keeps jobs in America and creates new ones, and gets our economy moving again by making sure you have more money to spend and save as you see fit.

Senator Obama says he wants energy independence, but he is opposed to new drilling at home; he is opposed to nuclear power; he is opposed to encouraging the invention of an affordable electric car that can run a hundred miles or more before it needs to be re-charged. He has even criticized wind and hydropower. He has said the high cost of gasoline doesn’t bother him, only that it rose too quickly. He believes every domestic energy source has a problem. I believe every energy source needs to be part of the solution. We need to develop new advanced alternative energies like wind, solar, tide and biofuels, but we also need to develop more existing energies like nuclear power and clean coal. And we need to stop sending $700 billion a year to countries that don‘t like us very much or care that Americans are suffering, start drilling and producing more oil at home, and bring down the cost of gasoline that is killing our economy.

On Iraq, Barack Obama says he wants peace, but even today he opposes the strategy of the surge that succeeded in Iraq and will succeed in Afghanistan. No rational person could see the progress we’ve made in the last year and a half, and not recognize that the surge, and the brave Americans who made it work, rescued us from a terribly dangerous defeat and put us on the road to victory. I don’t question his patriotism. This country has been as good to Senator Obama as it has been to me, and I’m sure he loves it. He just doesn’t understand how our defeat in Iraq would have left al Qaeda with a base to prepare attacks against us; increased Iranian power in the region; and threatened to draw other countries in the Middle East into a wider war that would have demanded even greater sacrifices from us. He didn’t see the danger in his policy, and so he thinks Iraq was just another issue to play politics with. Just like he doesn’t see that his policy of unconditional withdrawal before we are certain Iraqis can protect the gains we have achieved at the cost of American blood and treasure could result in in renewed violence and a third Iraq war. I hate war, and I know its costs better than many. When I bring our troops home, I intend to keep them home, leaving Iraq secured, and a democratic ally in the Arab heartland.

The bottom line is that Senator Obama’s words, for all their eloquence and passion, don’t mean all that much. And that’s the problem with Washington. It is not just the Bush Administration, and it’s not just the Democratic Congress. It’s that everyone in Washington says whatever it takes get elected or to score the political point of the day. If Senator Obama doesn’t have the strength to speak openly and directly about how he will address the serious challenges confronting America? How will he be strong enough to really change Washington? We don’t need another politician in Washington who puts self-interest and political expediency ahead of problem solving. We need to start putting the country’s interests first, and come together to keep American families safe and help them realize their dreams for a better life.

In war and peace, I have been an imperfect servant of my country. But I have been her servant first, last and always. Whenever I faced an important choice between my country’s interests or my own interests, party politics or any special interest, I chose my country. Nothing has ever mattered more to me than the honor of serving America, and nothing ever will. If you elect me President, I will always put our country first. I will put its greatness; its prosperity and peace; and the hopes and concerns of the people who make it great before any personal or partisan interest. We are going to start making this government work for you and not for the ambitions of the powerful. And I will keep that promise every hour of every day I am in office, so help me God.

This is the unanswerable argument and if Senator McCain can just hammer this message home again and again and again from now until Election Day, then he’ll win. This is what the campaign has to be about in order for McCain to short-circuit Obama’s bogus change and make the race about who really wants to work for a great America.

McCain, as President, will alternately infuriate and delight us on the right – but whether we fighting for him or fussing with him, we can be certain that what he’s doing is what he honestly believes is best for America. With Obama, on the other hand, the clear indication is that the beneficiaries of an Obama Administration would be the same corrupt unions, corrupt lobbyists, large corporations and varied leftwing special interest groups who have profited off Democratic power for the past 60 years. It is, indeed, time for a change – but not a change backwards to Carter and LBJ; we need a change which will turn our government back over to we, the people. A change which will end the asinine liberal idea that Washington can spend our money better than we can. A change which will end the arrogant, condescending idea that we poor, little folk down here can’t make it unless someone like Obama comes along to organize us and show us how its done. A change to an America where government protects us where necessary and leaves us alone as we live our lawful lives respectful of our fellow citizens.

As for me, I want to live in John McCain’s America where I’m free to strive as I see fit, not in Obama’s America where I’ll get to cue up for government doled-out welfare and health care.

Some have said that life issues won’t be important in Campaign ’08 – that all we care about is how audaciously hopeful Obama makes us. Don’t count on it:

Colorado for Equal Rights, an organization backing a measure on the Colorado ballot that would define a person in the state’s Constitution as “any human being from the moment of fertilization,” has released a list of over 70 physicians and pharmacists from around the United States who agree that a person includes any human from the moment of conception.

“We are honored to have received these endorsements from such respected physicians,” stated Kristi Burton, head of Colorado for Equal Rights. “Science clearly proves that life begins at the time of fertilization. We are secure in the fact that we have science and reason on our side, and we are pleased to have the medical community supporting our efforts.”

“As support for Amendment 48 accumulates, we are very encouraged as we get closer to November’s election,” Burton said. “Every human life should be protected, and the endorsements we continue to receive prove that our easy to understand amendment is one that all Coloradans can support.”

The group needed to collect 76,000 signatures to put the amendment on the ballot in November and succeeded in doing so on May 31 with 103,000 signatures.

The defense of human life from the moment of conception to the natural end of life – that is what pro-life is all about; we’re all human beings here, good people, and if we can’t respect those who are entirely at our mercy, how are we then to really respect anyone, including our selves?

I know all the pro-choice arguments – some of my closets friends adhere to them, including some of my fellow Catholics (we’re working on that). But all of them ring hollow because, in the end, an abortion is the permanent disposition of a temporary condition. Pregnancy lasts for 9 months, while the agony of abortion – for the mother – lasts a lifetime. It is a false promise – a work of Hell, if there ever was one – to say that an abortion solves anything. To think that killing an unborn child is equal or even superior to giving birth to a child is anti-human in the extreme. It is a point of view which I might have understood at one time, but only because I was too ignorant to understand how monstrous a crime abortion is – these days, I just can’t fathom the pro-choice position…this bizarre idea that killing is a solution. It might have been a Final Solution, once upon a time, but one hopes we pass by such barbarities and move forward.

The credit for this one goes to Nevada Pundit – it has to be seen to believed.

So says Obama:

Sen. Barack Obama, speaking to a gathering of minority journalists yesterday, stopped short of endorsing an official U.S. apology to American Indians but said the country should acknowledge its history of poor treatment of certain ethnic groups.

“There’s no doubt that when it comes to our treatment of Native Americans as well as other persons of color in this country, we’ve got some very sad and difficult things to account for,” Obama told hundreds of attendees of UNITY ’08, a convention of four minority journalism associations.

The Hawaii-born senator, who has told local reporters that he supports the federal recognition bill for native Hawaiians drafted by U.S. Sen. Daniel Akaka, noted other ethnic groups but did not mention native Hawaiians when answering a question about his thoughts on a formal U.S. apology to American Indians.

“I personally would want to see our tragic history, or the tragic elements of our history, acknowledged,” the Democratic presidential hopeful said.

“I consistently believe that when it comes to whether it’s Native Americans or African-American issues or reparations, the most important thing for the U.S. government to do is not just offer words, but offer deeds.”

That, by the way, comes pretty close to Obama endorsing the monunentally unjust idea of reparations for slavery. Outside of that, I’d like to find a day over the past 30 years when we weren’t noting the tragic elements of our past…and counter that its time we started concentrating on the glorious aspects of our past. To be forever digging up the ghosts of slavery, Jim Crow and Wounded Knee does no one any good – it doesn’t help those who were treated unjustly (they are all dead), it doesn’t harm those who carried out the injustices (they are, also, all dead) and it makes it harder for us to reconcile in the modern world and, like the Seneca at Appomattox, say “we are all Americans here.”

‘The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.’
-Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America

The Tenth Amendment, which is supposed to hold weight equal to the First, Second and every other Amendment to the United States Constitution, has in the last 80 years been regarded as “a nice idea” but optional. This has resulted in usurpation of powers from the States in everything from health care to education (and everything in between).

Far from being taken seriously, the Tenth Amendment has become the red-headed stepchild of the Constitution, and has been ignored with impunity by the Federal government.

There is a movement afoot in Oklahoma, however, to rectify the situation:

Oklahomans are trying to recover some of their lost state sovereignty by House Joint Resolution 1089, introduced by State Rep. Charles Key.

The resolution’s language, in part, reads: “Whereas, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows: ‘The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.’; and Whereas, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more; and whereas, the scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states; and Whereas, today, in 2008, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government. … Now, therefore, be it resolved by the House of Representatives and the Senate of the 2nd session of the 51st Oklahoma Legislature: that the State of Oklahoma hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States. That this serve as Notice and Demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.”

The measure passed overwhelmingly in the Oklahoma State House of Representatives, but was hung up in the State Senate (sound familiar?) However, Representative Charles Kay plans to re-introduce the measure when the Oklahoma State House reconvenes next year.

What would upholding the Tenth Amendment entail? Walter E. Williams writes,

Federal usurpation goes beyond anything the Constitution’s framers would have imagined. James Madison, explaining the constitution, in Federalist Paper 45, said, “The powers delegated … to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, [such] as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce. … The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people.” Thomas Jefferson emphasized that the states are not “subordinate” to the national government, but rather the two are “coordinate departments of one simple and integral whole. … The one is the domestic, the other the foreign branch of the same government.”

Of course, the eye of the needle through which the camel squeezed its head was the Fourteenth Amendment, which gave the Federal government the authority to regulate interstate commerce. All well and good; however, meaning of the term “commerce” has been twisted and manipulated to not only cover business transactions between residents of different states, but everything else under the sun:

These scholars interpret interstate commerce to mean “substantial interstate human relations” and find this consistent with the meaning of commerce at the time of the writing of the Constitution. They also argue that this expansive interpretation makes more sense for the foreign and Indian commerce clauses as one would expect Congress to be given authority to regulate non-economic relations with other nations and with Indian tribes.

This ‘liberal translation’ of the term, ‘commerce,’ of course, flies in the face of Jefferson’s writings; which is SOP for liberals, who true to their moniker often take great liberty in using the words of the Constitution as so much silly puddy to bend and shape their meaning to fit their cause d’jour. This led to the creation of FDR’s “New Deal,” which led to the notion that the government pretty much had the right to step in to any situation, for any reason, if there was any indication of interstate commerce whatsoever. While minor shifts toward state’s rights have occurred in between, the Federal Government still maintains overwhelming authority over areas of our lives in which they Constitutionally have no business to regulate.

This could be the start of a groundswell of opportunity to defeat Federal usurpation of power, and to once and for all defeat the federal imposition of liberalism and its even uglier cousin, socialism. I look forward to a Republican legislator from my home state of Minnesota to take up this mantle (I know it won’t be a democrat).

Have at it boys and girls, just didn’t have time to write a good post for the AM shift.

UPDATE, by Matt Margolis: Looks like John Kerry was partying late this weekend…

According to Real Clear Politics show the race varying from an 8 point Obama lead, to a 4 point McCain lead. What does this mean?

That no one really has a clue what is going on out there.

I look at it like this – there are just too many variables out there. Will the youth vote show up? Will blue collar Democrats vote for Obama or McCain? Will movement conservatives show up for McCain? Will President Bush’s unpopularity drag down GOP participation? Will the Democrat Congress’ unpopularity drag down Democratic participation? Will victory in Iraq help/harm McCain/Obama? Will oil/gasoline prices help/harm Obama/McCain? Will liberal women show up for Obama? Will hispanics keep on track for the Democrats, or will McCain have appeal to them due to his immigration stance? The only thing we can say with any certainty is that African Americans will turn out in high numbers and will give a super-overwhelming majority of their votes to Obama (if McCain cracks 5% of the black vote it’ll be a bit of a shocker). With so many variables out there I’m not surprised that a respected pollster like Ramussen comes up with a three point Obama lead while respected pollster USA Today/Gallup comes up with a four point McCain lead. I really don’t suspect any bias in the pollsters (except any Newsweek poll – they are universally and amazingly biased in favor of the Democrats – I’ll trust a Carville poll before I’ll trust a Newsweek poll) – they just don’t know and are doing the best they can.

Its also July and while this election seems to have been going on forever, it really doesn’t kick into gear until after Labor Day…and the high test doesn’t come until after the World Series is over. Between now and then, there is just so much which can and will happen, that all I can do at this point is rate the election a complete toss up and thoroughly enjoy the most interesting political year I’ve ever seen.

Demonstrating that its really all about keeping abortion legal, everything else be damned:

Steven Mosher, president of the Population Research Institute (PRI), has charged that American feminists are refusing to address the problem of sex-selective abortions, a phenomenon in which unborn children of an unwanted sex are aborted. Mosher claims that over 100 million girls are missing, primarily due to parents who use ultrasound examinations to choose whether or not to abort the unborn child.

Speaking in PRI’s latest YouTube video, Mosher says the disparity is particularly noticeable in East and South Asia, but also in American groups of Asian descent.

In China, India, and other Asian countries, there is a strong preference for boys,” Mosher says. “This combination of a preference for boys and modern technology—the ultrasound machine—has proven deadly for millions upon millions of baby girls.”

The PRI video cites a recent study published by the National Academy of Sciences.

“Where are the feminists when you need them?” Mosher asks…

The lesson here is that if you want justice, liberty, etc you can only get it if you apply it to everyone – exclude the unborn or the sick elderly, and the injustice you allow will just breed more. Abortion, in and of itself, is unjust – sex selection abortion just doubles down on it…and the feminists – except for a relative few with wisdom over at Feminists for Life – stay silent about this destruction of the next generation of women.

Do you want to live? Then you have to defend everyone’s right to life. Do you want to have a fair shot in life? Then everyone who comes into life must also have a fair shot. Do you want to be respected as an individual? Then you have to respect all individuals. Can’t have it both ways – you are for Life, or you are for Death…and most feminists are for Death.

I recently had the pleasure of interviewing S.E. Cupp and Brett Joshpe, authors of Why You’re Wrong About The Right: Behind The Myths – The Surprising Truth About Conservatives, which debunks 20 negative stereotypes about Republicans and conservatives.I have posted the interview below:

MATT MARGOLIS: Did your experiences growing up and living in the liberal northeast inspire you to write this book? Was there any particular incident that made writing book feel more like a necessity to you?

S.E. CUPP: Although I grew up in the liberal northeast, I didn’t necessarily grow up in a particularly political household. My parents were patriotic, hardworking and compassionate, so that was my largest immediate influence — not politics. It wasn’t until college really that I understood how conservative I was, and until I realized that the Republican Party best addresses my political interests. This book is a direct result of our circumstance, being conservative fish-out-of-water in liberal Manhattan, and finding ourselves inexplicably at the business end of a verbal firing squad on a near-daily basis.

BRETT JOSHPE: Yes, for sure.  My experiences in college and law school probably contributed to my desire to write this book more than anything.  It is very frustrating being lectured to by left-wing professors and having relatively little recourse.  It made me want to respond in other ways, hence the book.  Also, I witnessed a great deal of anti-Americanism given the post 9/11 world we live in, which was also frustrating and inspired me to want to work on this project.

MATT: How did you choose which stereotypes to address in your book?

S.E.: It wasn’t hard to come up with a list of 20 stereotypes that are regularly and inaccuarately used to sum up conservatives in catchy sound bytes and clever bon mots. I think anyone with a pulse and a television could come up with 20 stereotypes about Republicans.

MATT: How can Republicans overcome these stereotypes?

BRETT: Well, it certainly won’t happen lying down.  It’s important for conservatives to disprove these stereotypes by not only showing people that they do not embody the myths, but by educating themselves on the facts so that these accusations can be refuted.  Our book is a good place to start, and there are also some other new books filled with facts that show why some of these stereotypes are grossly inaccurate.  Peter Schweizer’s new book, “Makers and Takers” is one such example.

MATT: Have any of your liberal friends read your book? Were they convinced by it?

S.E.: Many of our liberal friends have read the book, which is a feat in itself. And while they’ve all said how much they enjoyed it, how funny it was, and how informative it was, few have actually changed their own political ideologies. But I think a number have realized that conservatives and Republicans are far more intellectually diverse than they thought. I think they appreciate how nuanced our positions on race, reproduction, poverty, foreign policy, faith, gun control, and the rest are, and I think many will think twice now before using the same, hackneyed rhetoric to describe conservative points of view.

BRETT: Yes, many liberal friends have read it and enjoyed it.  One such friend said that although it didn’t push him over the edge from liberal to conservative, it provided about a 20% swing towards conservatism.  Not bad.  If we could get a 20% swing in everyone, we would have no trouble in November.  In general, I think most people, liberals and conservatives, who have read the book have enjoyed it and definitely have a more complete view of our movement now. Continue reading →

Obama is back home and he got a bounce from is campaign to be President of the World – but will it really help him in the long run? Or is this yet another Obama flash in the pan doomed to fizzle out as soon as the pizzaz fades away and people, once again, realise that Obama is just a very junior Senator with no life experience which indicates an ability to be President?

Oil prices fell sharply last week, and have been followed by lower gasoline prices – are we about to see the oil bubble pop, or are we just catching our breath before another rise in oil prices?

President Bush touted the turn-around in AIDS treatment in Africa over the past five years or so – just how did Chimpy McSmirk BusHilter manage to be this great a humanitarian for Africa? Shouldn’t he be evil to them, too? Or, is it that the EEEVIL!!! Bush meme is a bit overdrawn?

Team McCain welcomes Obama’s flip flop on surrender in Iraq – congratulating the Senator on finally seeing that a withdrawal from Iraq must be based on conditions, not rigid timetables. Will this flip harm Obama with his kook left base? Help Obama with non-kook voters?

Discuss these and any other issues you wish.