A Better Way Forward

Earlier today while you were busy at work or taking care of yourself or your family at home, a sea change occurred in Washington, D.C. that will affect your life in a very positive way for years to come. Today, the Republican Party took control of the U.S. House of Representatives officially, and the new Speaker of the House, John Boehner, was elected.

Not only will Boehner's self-effacing, emotional, heart-on-his-sleeves style be in stark contrast to the blathering and blustering that American has suffered through over the past four years with Nancy Pelosi in the Speaker's post, but the concrete results that the country will begin to see over time will  be even more profound.

Back in November, the American voting public sent a clear message to lawmakers that the controlling Democratic Party led by Pelosi and President Barack Obama had grossly overstepped their bounds in beginning to lead the country down a path towards Socialism. No longer would irresponsible bailouts to big business, massive increases in government control of our daily lives, and repressive taxation be permitted to continue.

In taking the gavel of Congressional power today, Boehner promised to return government to the people with a renewed focus on the Constitution and the principles of transparency, honesty and accountability. Of course in actuality it was we, the people, who had returned government to ourselves
by putting Boehner into power with the landslide electoral victories of November 2010.

Speaker of the House Boehner recognized the fact of the people's expressed will when he stated in today's speech "The people voted to end business as usual, and today we begin to carry out their instructions." Those instructions include making the Bush-era tax cuts permanent for every American, rolling back the socialist Obama health-care behemoth, ending the practice of "earmarks" in legislation initiatives, and returning America to it's Constitutional roots.

The Republican Party itself has not been a very good steward of these values when it has had the opportunity in the past. In fact, there is really only one major difference in today's Democratic and Republican Party. That difference is the people who make up the two parties out here in the homeland. The majority of Republicans at the grass-roots levels want a national government that keeps taxes low, keeps spending low, promotes personal and familial responsibility, that keeps us safe here at home, and that never inhibits the faith that is at the very foundation of our nation.

Democrats, on the other hand, generally want a government that lets anyone do what they want, when they want, except when it bothers them specifically as an individual, in which case they want the government to step in with regulation and control and penalties. They want an ever-expanding nanny state that takes care of them from the cradle to the grave, and want those who have been historically hard-working, the job creators, the builders, to pay for it all.

Oh, and they want to have sex without fear of any parental consequences, and so they push for the murder of babies under the guise of a "choice" for women. Never mind that the poor little baby gets no such choice in the matter at all. Hey, mommy couldn't keep her legs closed. Hey, daddy couldn't keep it in his pants. So sorry kid, but you gotta go. (insert sucking vacuum sound here)

John Boehner and the Republicans who took office today know one thing for certain, that they are being watched. No, I'm not talking about being watched by and Dem politician or liberal media outlet. I'm not talking about being watched by some hack comedian or some self-righteous television talk show host. I'm talking about being watched by us, the very same people who elected them in November.

The elections of November 2010 are only the beginning. There are more congressional offices to take, more Senatorial offices to flip. More state houses to make a move on in the future. And then, of course, there is the big one in 2012, when it will be time to topple the faux Messiah himself.

A better way forward has been forged, not by politicians, but by the people of the Republican Party. The politicians who took office today, particularly the new Speaker of the House John Boehner because of the importance of his public position and the power that he now wields, are only our instruments. We will be listening closely to the tunes they play in the coming months and years.

Tea Party Should Not Be A 'Third' Party

There has been a great deal of angst among the Lefty Lib community regarding the emergence over the past year or so of what has become known as the 'Tea Party' movement. The liberals who now control the Democratic Party should be concerned, because they and their political leaders led by President Barrack Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid have awoken a sleeping giant.

That sleeping giant is the true Conservative movement that the majority of Americans feel a natural affinity towards. The people who make up real main-stream America. Hard-working, family-rearing, tax-paying, God-fearing, America-loving, law-abiding folks who want government out of their lives. Who recognize that low taxation, modest regulation, secure borders, and the teaching of and support for American exceptionalism are the true path to lasting recovery, not the socialist style policies of the Obama administration.

That sleeping giant has been embodied by the Tea Partiers. The term, based on the 'Boston Tea Party' protesters of Revolutionary War days, evolved from those people at the grass roots levels of the Conservative movement who held and/or attended town hall meetings that sprang up across the nation during 2009 in response to the various government takeovers, bail outs, and spending programs enacted and proposed by Obama and the liberal Democrats.

Since those numerous and emotional town hall events, the Tea Partiers have taken to the internet, the radio waves, and the blogosphere to continue to push a return to basic, traditional American values and away from the government entitlements, social programs, and massive spending undertaken by the Dems.

But a problem has cropped up among some within the Tea Party movement itself. They have become so disenchanted, rightly in many cases, with some recent and current Republican politicians that they have floated the possibility of becoming their own 'third party' in American politics. This new formal 'Tea Party' would be wholly conservative in every way.

There is one major flaw to such an idea. It is a loser.

The only people who would actually benefit from a third 'Tea Party' made up of conservatives would be the Democratic Party and all of it's ultra-liberal politicians, consituencies and benefactors. Such a party would basically amount to a splitting up of the Republican Party, leaving the Dems to dominate organized politics for the forseeable future, and dooming America to their socialist tendencies, the very programs and ideals that the Tea Partiers stand against.

The 'Tea Party', such as it is, should remain exactly what it is - a movement. It should never try to become a third political party, thus damning itself to the destruction of the very causes for which it was established. What it should do, however, is hold Republican politicians at every level - particularly at the state and national levels - to traditional American and Conservative standards and values.

Remaining organized, active, and vocal will ensure that no longer will the Republican Party nominate a Progressive candidate as it's standard bearer, as it has in recent years with both George W. Bush and John McCain. Instead the Republican Party will have as it's out-front leaders those who support less governmental spending and intervention in our lives, lower taxes, a strong military, secure borders, a judiciary that interprets rather than creates laws, and programs and policies aimed at keeping America strong and independent.

Those on the leading edges of the various groups that make up the most vocal sections of the Conservative movement in America must keep the heat on the politicians and the Republican Party as a whole, while at the same time tempering and better channeling the emotions of those who would sabotage the Party and imperil it's future from within. Only by sticking together and remaining strong will we be able to overcome the Liberals, the Progressives, and the Democrats, elect conservative Republican majorities, and begin to roll back the Obama policies, dismantle the Obama programs, and return America to common sense.

Media Matters Makes Connection Between Fox News and Threats to Pelosi

Progressive commentators should be more aggressive at making the connection between the venom from Fox and the increase in Domestic terror threats.

Elections Have Consequences

For the past year it has become the public mantra of Democratic Party politicians: "Elections have consequences." Whether they were talking about bailing out large corporations or taking over the banking, auto, and health care industries, that simple phrase has been their fallback position.

To some extent, that is true. When the nation elects a leader such as Barack Obama, the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate, it has definitely sent a message. A majority of the citizens of the United States spoke up in November of 2008 and sent the message that the direction the country was headed during the Bush years was not one that they wanted to continue following.

The American electorate sent a clear message for 'change' to Washington politicians at that point. The problem, however, and it is a big one for the Dems, is that the voters quite obviously wanted 'change' with a small 'c', not the "Change" that marked the Obama campaign's signature slogan.

What Obama was trumpeting was "fundamental change", a message that he banged home time and time again. The mass electorate heard those words and decided that he meant a simple change in direction, something they wanted indeed. What he actually meant was to change the very nature of what it meant to be America as a nation.

After winning election, Obama got his house in order, got his Democratic Party leadership organized, and then set out down the path towards that fundamental change from a democratic, capitalist society to a full-blown European-inspired socialist one. The American 'system' that had made us the envy of the world for generations had somehow "failed" in is words and needed to be almost completely trashed.

Problem was, the American public didn't go along for the ride. As the depth and scope of Obama's vision of change came into view and practice, as Dem national leaders like Nancy Pelosi in Congress and Harry Reid in the Senate began to push the legislative agenda, it became crystal-clear to Americans that socialism was the order of the day.

The Democrats were making a fundamental political mistake, one that the Republicans had made a couple of times in the last couple of decades. They assumed that their election to power now gave them a mandate for major changes to America, and they began to institute those major changes.

Quickly, the American public began to voice their concerns. In every major public opinion poll, the public shouted at the top of it's lungs for the Dem leadership to slow things down. Some changes were needed to the system, yes. But almost no one wanted socialist restrictions and control to replace democratic capitalism's freedom and liberty.

Socialism has failed everywhere that it has every been tried on earth. The reasons are quite simple. Taking away incentives from individuals to work harder, to dream bigger, to achieve more results in less production. Citizens come to rely on their government to provide for them. Eventually, the government can no longer do so, because it simply lacks the resources.

You cannot possibly tax individuals and businesses enough to sustain government control. And let's face it, that is the only place that government gets it's money. Government is, in fact, you and I. We pay into the system to keep it functional. We elect people to run things as our representatives. In a socialist system, those representatives just keep raising and raising our taxes to take on more and more control over our everyday lives.

Eventually a system such as the Obama administration is attempting to install will collapse on itself because it is economically unsustainable. But before it does, society will degenerate into a mess of ennui and disillusionment, or worse. If those who have control in a socialist system see that control slipping away, their response has often been to use force to remain in power. They change the laws and keep themselves in the life boats to protect their own interests as the ship sinks around them.

Many Americans did understand that this would be the direction that Obama and the leading Dems would take once in power. Those are the tens of millions who voted against them. They are now being joined by the millions 'in the middle', those Americans who wanted the small 'c' of 'change', not the capital 'C' of Obama's socialism.

Yes, Democrats, elections have consequences. However, what you are failing to remember is the lessons of politicians and Parties past. That there is always another election coming. This November, Americans will again go to the polls. All signs point to the Dems losing control of Congress, which will seriously cripple Obama's ability to continue his agenda.

Obama and Pelosi and Reid have led America down this path of 'Change' at full speed, recklessly disregarding the public's wishes time and time again. Reid and many of his Dem leadership co-horts will undoubtedly pay the price in the Fall of 2010. They will pay that price because, despite their election victories in 2006 and 2008, they are now ignoring the American electorate in 2010.

Now is a time of opportunity for the Republican Party to reassert itself, but it must be willing to return to basic American principles of democracy, capitalism, and traditional exceptionalism in order to take full advantage. The Republicans must reflect core American values, pledge a change in direction to fiscal sanity and responsibility, and to fully and effectively preserving and defending our nation and it's founding principles.

In the fall of 2010, the Democrats will be reminded that elections do indeed have consequences. When they lose their control over Congress, their control over the purse strings and the power and the direction, then they will cry and wail and moan. They will blame one another, point fingers, and become disgruntled. And they will have no one to blame but themselves, because elections do indeed have consequences, the next one as strongly as the last one.

American Political Revolution

It might be a bit too premature and over dramatic to use such terms, but it is not very difficult to make the case that what happened yesterday in Massachusetts is not some isolated election anomaly, but part of a burgeoning nationwide American political revolution.

Since Republican Henry Cabot Lodge was defeated by a young, upstart politician named John F. Kennedy in November of 1952 and left office in January of '53, at least one of Massachusetts' two U.S. Senators has been a Democrat. Two years after JFK was elected to the Presidency in 1960, his brother Ted Kennedy assumed the seat and owned it until his death last year.

The other Massachusetts Senatorial spot was won by Paul Tsongas for the Democrats in 1979. He was succeeded in 1985 by ultra-liberal John Kerry, and so the Democrats have had solid control of both U.S. Senatorial seats from Massachusetts for a generation. In what has to be a stunning, bitter, ironic defeat for the Dems, the seat virtually owned by the Kennedy's and controlled by liberal interests for over a half century was lost yesterday.

In the special election held yesterday to replace the deceased 'Lion of the Senate', 50-year old Scott Brown was chosen by the previously reliable voters of Massachusetts to become the first Republican U.S. Senator to represent the commonwealth in three decades.

It is that very idea of previously 'reliable' voters rising up and throwing out the candidates presented by their political party, particularly the Democratic Party at this time, that leads to the notion that there is something more brewing here than simple dissatisfaction in local politics.

A year ago today, Barack Obama was sworn-in as the 44th President of the United States. The first minority to hold the office, Obama was elected after a campaign that promised to "fundamentally change America" in his very own words.

It has become abundantly clear in the ensuing year that what Obama and his ultra-liberal congressional leaders, U.S. Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi from California and U.S. Senator Harry Reid from Nevada, consider 'Change' is very different from what the vast majority of those who elected him expected.

The majority of voters are generally 'centrists' who do not adhere to any political idealogy on a stringent basis in their daily lives. They may be generally conservative in nature, such as myself and most Republicans, or generally liberal, as most Democrats, but they begin to get very turned off when the far-end of either party begins to attempt to assert control over their lives.

The voters should have understood what Obama meant by his 'Change' because he was really no secret. By every measure he was the most far-left of the liberal Democratic U.S. Senators. His personal, educational, social, and political associations were all at least bordering on socialist and communist. He is certainly the single most politically progressive individual to ever hold the highest office in the land.

But the fact is that the majority of voters just didn't get it. They were wooed by Obama's dynamic public speaking ability and by a liberal-dominated mass media into buying into the notion that he would simply be a compassionate, intellectual alternative to lead a younger generation of Americans forward in a changing world.

Instead, what Obama did was almost immediately undertake a radical policy to have the federal government take over large swaths of American private industry. He and his political allies who are currently in control of Congress and the Senate have taken what was already huge public debt and driven it to irresponsible levels. This will undoubtedly lead to massive tax increases in the coming months and years.

Many people now believe this is an intentional attempt to collapse the American financial system and lead to complete government control of most or all sectors of public life including the financial, labor, health, educational, and media systems.

None of these actions are in compliance with the stated intent or the spirit of the U.S. Constitution or the traditional American precepts of self-reliance and independence. As the year has worn on, Americans finally began to sit up, take notice, and then stand up to be heard.

At what became known as 'Tea Parties' and at town hall meetings across the country, Americans let their elected officials and representatives of the Obama administration know that they were not happy with the direction in which the country was heading. Rather than pay heed to the obvious discontent fomenting among the people, the arrogant politicians plowed on with their plans, often publicly stating that they didn't care what the people want.

Then came the fall, and election season. In New Jersey, uber-rich, ultra-liberal incumbent Democratic Governor Jon Corzine was defeated by Republican Chris Christie. In Virginia, Republican Bob McDonnell ousted liberal Tim Kaine from the Governor's seat held by the Dems for eight years. The issues and personalities were indeed local, but in both instances reflected national opinions and trends.

For months now, almost every single reliable poll taken across the country has shown great dissatisfaction among the electorate with the programs and the policies undertaken by Obama and being plowed through congress by his lock-step Democratic Party cohorts. The polls are showing that the gubernatorial elections in Virginia and New Jersey were akin to tremors preceding an earthquake. What happened yesterday in the Massachusetts Senatorial election is the strongest in what is now a continuing series of these tremors.

What seems crystal clear at this point is that traditional American values are under attack, and Americans have had enough of both parties. Going forward, at least in the short term, it appears that no incumbent who ignores their electorate is safe. Americans don't want party politics as usual, they want people who will speak the truth to them, and who will respond to them. Either that, or the people will resort to the old political axiom of 'throw the bums out'.

This coming fall Americans will go to the polls all across the nation in what will be pivotal times for the future of the country. Will the United States continue to slide closer and closer to full-blown socialism by keeping the current liberals running the Democratic Party in control? Or will the American political revolution begun at the 2009 tea parties and town halls, carried into Virginia, New Jersey, and now Massachusetts, lead to a reclaiming of traditional America?

Join the 912 Project

The picture accompanying this story might look like a scene out of some late 1960's, Gump-esque, anti-Vietnam War rally with counter-culture hippies, radicals, and others disenchanted with the actions and policies of their government protesting those actions and policies.

However, the picture, one that many of you likely have never seen because the former mainstream media does not want you to know about these events and thus fails to cover them or underpublicizes them, is not from the 'Summer of Love' but rather it is from the end of this very past summer. September 12th, 2009 to be exact.

The Americans in this counter-culture demonstration, the new generation of 'radicals', gathered in the National Mall between the Lincoln Memorial and the Washington Monument and all over Washington, D.C. to demand fundamental change.

You might have heard that before somewhere, the "Change" idea? The one word slogan was deftly used in last year's U.S. presidential campaign by Barrack Hussein Obama. It was meant to galvanize those sitting on the fence in the election to support a change from the policies of the George W. Bush administration which had governed for the previous eight years.

But while Obama and his people sold that idea as a change from Bush policies to what they described as some new, more enlightened and peaceful era, what they were actually selling was a bill of goods. Their real motive was a change in the very fabric, culture, and traditional values of America.

During their first year with full control of the American political process since 1994 the Democratic Party has shown that it's transformation from a centrist, populist party fighting for the middle class to one that is completely dominated by it's fringe left and bent on massive social change is now complete.

Just since coming to power in January, Obama and his lock-step congress led by California congresswoman Nancy Pelosi and Nevada senator Harry Reid have driven America further into debt than the combination of every political generation before them. And while risking financial catastrophe they have begun to risk our very safety and security with their weak foreign policy approach.

All the while, they and their supporters in the puppet media have begun to tear away at the very fabric of American spiritual and institutional culture, lurching it ever closer to collapse and their ultimate goal of a communist/socialist, totalitarian, government-run life for all.

Tens of millions of American did not vote for Obama or for much of any change in the last election, albeit as the lesser of two evils. Millions sat it out because they were not happy with the choices, even when they believed Obama was bad for America. And now millions more who did vote for that 'Change' have begun to realize that they were hoodwinked by these elitists masquerading as commoners.

In response to these mounting attacks on the American traditional way of life and value system, Americans from all walks of life, all races and social standings, began to mobilize at the grass-roots level, forming the beginnings of what has now grown into "The 912 Project" movement.

The movement began to organize with responses at a series of town hall meetings held by the Obama government meant to sell their socialist health-care program. Regular everyday people showed up and began to speak out against these policies. Then the 'Tea Party' movement was born, taking its name from the famous 'Boston Tea Party' protest action during the run-up to the Revolutionary War. This all culminated with the massive rally on September 12th, 2009 in Washington, D.C. Popular radio and television commentator Glenn Beck, among others, devotes a great deal of time and effort to spreading the message.

The term '912' or '9/12 mindset' comes from the idea that in the immediate aftermath of the attacks against our nation by islamofascist terrorists on September 11th, 2001 (9/11) the entirety of the population was together. We all were wounded, outraged, mourned, grieved. We all demanded and sought retribution and we all clearly saw the enemy and the dangers which they posed beginning on 9/12, the day after the attacks.

Since the first months after the attacks, however, the continued passing of time has seen many Americans drift away into a state of passiveness and apparent forgetfulness. They seem to lack the knowledge that the enemies who attacked us then continue to look for further opportunities to attack us now, and on a grander scale.

There also are some Americans who have intentionally moved past that post-attack period and are happy that many others have forgotten. These are actual Americans who believe that we simply got what we had coming to us on that fateful day in September 2001. They want a version of what the terrorists want, a complete change in American ideals and culture.

Only these Americans want the opposite direction of change. Whereas the islamofascists want America to become an islamic theocracy with the Koran as the basis of its laws and the ruling clerics as the interpreters of social and cultural doctrine, these liberals want an open, anything goes society. They want to force their version of equality and collective group-think, based on what the government believes is best for everyone. Both ways directly attack the very ideals that America was founded upon.

The organizers of 'The 912 Project' tapped into that feeling from the day after the 9/11 attacks, that remembrance that we are all one nation, that our freedom is unique and vital, and that the ideals which the Founding Fathers of our nation established are worth both fighting and dying for.

The project bases it's organization on 9 principles and 12 values upon which it hopes to begin the process of refounding traditional America. The 12 values are: honesty, reverence, hope, thrift, humility, charity, sincerity, moderation, hard work, courage, personal responsibility, and gratitude. Pretty radical stuff, huh?

The 9 principles are even more radical, depending on whether you share the Obama-led view that government is the boss, knows best, has all the answers, is unaccountable, and that you should just shut up if you disagree. These 9 principles are:

1) America is good
2) I believe in God and He is the center of my life
3) I must always try to be a more honest person than I was yesterday
4) The family is sacred. My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government.
5) If you break the law you pay the penalty. Justice is blind and no one is above it.
6) I have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but there is no guarantee of equal results.
7) I work hard for what I have and I will share it with who I want to. Government cannot force me to be charitable.
8) It is not un-American for me to disagree with authority or to share my personal opinion
9) The government works for me. I do not answer to them, they answer to me.

While admitting that I agree with the vast majority of these principles and values, I have not always lived up to some of them. That is going to change. I am looking forward to dedicating myself completely to these basic foundational ideals in my life, and a fight to return them to their rightful place at the center of American culture, society, and law.

If you share the belief that America is the land of the free and the home of the brave, that God has blessed America, and that we are supposed to be a nation of the people, for the people, and by the people then you need to look into 'The 912 Project' more deeply and consider dedication yourself in some way.

NOTE: As always, the title of this entry is a link to further information on the subject, in this instance taking you directly to 'The 912 Project' website.

You Lie!

Congressman Joe Wilson had enough of the lies, and could no longer contain himself. The Republican from South Carolina had sat patiently in his chair while trying to endure 45 minutes of President Barack Obama droning on about extending his Socialist vision of America into the health care industry.

But then Obama told one lie too many for Wilson during last night's nationally televised attempt at indoctrination and bullying. The President let slip that his proposed government option would not cover illegal aliens. It was the proverbial straw that broke the camels back for the Congressman.

"You Lie!" shouted Wilson.

If you were watching on television, you heard it plain as day. The uproar in response was immediate and boisterous as various members of Congress either gasped in astonishment, hollered their disapproval, or mildly cheered the outburst. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, seated immediately over Obama's left shoulder, shot an icy stare in Wilson's direction.

Obama was also stunned by the outburst and momentarily glanced away from his teleprompter, causing him to stumble and mumble a weak "That's not true" as a response. Unfortunately for Obama, Pelosi and the Democrats, particularly the ultra-liberals on the far left who are pushing the President further and further towards that Socialist disaster, Joe Wilson was the only one actually speaking truth.

On the issue that caused Wilson's outburst, Obama has repeatedly rebuffed calls for individuals to provide proof of citizenship in order to receive health care under the proposed government option. This will undoubtedly result in illegals receiving such care, and increased numbers of them as Mexicans and others stream across our southern borders to receive better medical care here at no cost.

Well, it's at no cost to the illegal aliens. It will, however, cost every single taxpaying American as money is sucked from our paychecks in order to provide health care for people who are not even citizens of our country.

The funding for this project is another of it's controversial elements, and was addressed last night with another of Obama's lies. He spoke of increasing costs by $900 billion over the next decade, and compared that amount to the same amount to fund the Bush tax cuts and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. His point was that it is affordable if we choose to take care of uninsured sick Americans instead of giving tax cuts to the wealthy or going to war.

As usual, Obama was lying. The $900 billion dollars over the next decade figure comes from adding up to 18 million more Americans to the Medicaid rolls. But that is just the rock bottom basic cost. Everyone involved knows that costs will rise and that the plan would end up costing at least hundreds of billions of more dollars. And then there is the fact that the plan doesn't go away after a decade.

Harsh to say that Obama is lying? Not at all. I am going to give Barack Obama credit where liberals were unwilling to give George W. Bush credit by saying that Obama is smart. Fact is, so was Bush, but you'll never convince most libs of that notion. But they would definitely agree with me that Obama is both intelligent and informed.

To even contemplate that Obama does not know all of the facts involving his health plan would be ludicrous. So when he tells you that it will be affordable, that there will be no increase in the federal deficit, that illegal aliens won't be covered, and that abortions won't be covered he is quite simply not telling the truth as he knows it to be. The word we all use for such a person is 'liar' in other instances, and it applies here as well, whether you like the sound of Obama being called one or not.

As to the controversial abortion topic, for instance, the President claims that the language of his health bill is 'neutral' on the issue. Fair enough, but fact is that most Americans have already spoken their minds that they do not want a publicly funded abortion option as part of any taxpayer funded plan. So Republicans tried to insert amendments that would specifically prohibit the plan from covering abortions. The amendments were voted down by the Democrats. So much for the President' bill being 'neutral' on abortion. What is to keep it from covering the procedure, Mr. President?

Mr. President, it might make Nance Pelosi cringe, your fellow Democrats bellow, and even moderate Republicans feign public indignance, but the facts are the facts and the American public deserves more than you and your administration are giving us on issue after issue. A 'Change' to Socialism was not what they voted for last November. I can't blame Joe Wilson for his outburst because frankly, Mr. President, he simply was telling the frustrating truth when he shouted "You Lie!"

Why Nancy Pelosi Should Step Down

The case against Nancy Pelosi remaining Speaker of the House is as simple as it is devastating:

The person who is No. 2 in line to be commander in chief can't have contempt for the men and women who protect our nation. America can't afford it.

To test how much damage Speaker Pelosi has done to the defense of our nation, ask yourself this: If you were a young man or woman just starting out today, would you put on a uniform or become an intelligence officer to defend America, knowing that tomorrow a politician like Nancy Pelosi could decide you were a criminal?

Would you?

This Isn't About Politics. It's About National Security

The controversy swirling around Speaker Pelosi isn't political - she may think it is, other liberal Democrats may think it is, and the media may want it to appear that way.

But this isn't about politics. It's about national security.

At issue is whether Speaker Pelosi was informed, at a briefing by intelligence officers on September 4, 2002 when she was the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, that the CIA had used and was using enhanced interrogation techniques - specifically waterboarding - on captured al Qaeda terrorists.

From a Question of Memory to a Question of Criminality

Prior to her now infamous press conference last week, Speaker Pelosi insisted that the CIA had not told her in 2002 that waterboarding and other enhanced techniques were being used. At last week's press conference she went beyond this position to assert that "the only mention of waterboarding at [the September 2002] briefing was that it was not being employed."

In contrast, Leon Panetta, the current CIA director, wrote a memo last Friday to CIA employees in which he stated that "our contemporaneous records from September 2002 indicate that CIA officers briefed truthfully on the interrogation of [Al Qaeda terrorist] Abu Zubaydah, describing 'the enhanced techniques that had been employed.'"

And so the question, prior to her rambling press conference, was one of memory: Did Speaker Pelosi remember correctly the briefing she received in 2002?

If she had confined the controversy to her memory versus the CIA's, Speaker Pelosi may have saved herself. She would be guilty of irresponsibility and incompetence perhaps, but that would basically be it. Not good, but not disqualifying.
Pelosi on the CIA: "They Mislead Us All The Time"

But Speaker Pelosi did not confine the question to the reliability of memory. Instead, she made the allegation last week that the CIA intentionally misled her - misled Congress - and not just once, but routinely.

"They mislead us all the time," she said.

She charged that the CIA, deliberately and as a matter of policy, violated the law by lying to Congress.

And with that allegation, Speaker Pelosi disqualified herself from the office she holds.

Why Did Pelosi Escalate the Controversy into a Full Scale War With the CIA?

And the question that remains is why? Why would Speaker Pelosi escalate the small skirmish she found herself in over the 2002 briefing into a full-scale war with the CIA?

Perhaps it's because if America knew that Speaker Pelosi consented, fully informed and without complaint, to waterboarding back in 2002, it would reveal the current liberal bloodlust over interrogations for what it is: The Left's attempt to hunt down and purge its political opponents.

Remember what America was like in September, 2002, less than a year after 9/11.

America was terrified. As I said on ABC Radio last week, our entire defense, intelligence and justice establishment expected that there would be additional al Qaeda attacks, we just didn't know where and we didn't know when.

If Pelosi Consented to Waterboarding in 2002, the Bush Policy Is Vindicated
If Nancy Pelosi believed that waterboarding was justified in 2002 - just like Porter Goss, President Bush, Vice President Cheney and CIA Director Tenet - then a policy of selectively using enhanced interrogation techniques in carefully circumscribed ways in order to prevent future attacks - in other words, the Bush Administration policy - is vindicated.

But rather than admit that President Bush, when faced with an array of difficult choices, made the hard choice that kept the nation safe, Nancy Pelosi has instead retreated into the cheap sanctity of ignorance. She didn't know, so she claims. That's why she didn't do anything about it.

But President Bush did know. It was his job to know, and he made the tough choices needed to save American lives.

It was Nancy Pelosi's job to know too. But to avoid culpability for the choices she supported, she's now telling us she didn't know. And she's calling the intelligence officials who say otherwise liars and criminals.

Shame on her.
Speaker Pelosi Has Made America Less Safe
Speaker Pelosi has damaged America's safety.

She's made America less secure by sending a signal to the men and women defending our country that they can't count on their leaders to defend them.

And every day they spend worrying about being politically persecuted is a day we are made more vulnerable to a nuclear attack on one of our cities, a biological attack on one of our subways, or a bomb going off in one of our malls.

America is losing ground because of Nancy Pelosi's contempt for those who defend her.

Democrats owe it to their country and our national security to replace Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House.

WRITTEN by Newt Gingrich in his newsletter Volume 4, No. 20 dated May 20th, 2009

God Has His Ways of Getting a Nation's Attention

When Old Testament Israel strayed from following God, Yahweh had unique and painful ways of getting the Hebrews’ attention. His first line of attack was to send in His prophets—who were not the shiny, happy-clappy, cliché-spewing, aphorism-addicted mega church pastors who are more interested in hawking their books than bearding the priests of Baal.

No, the prophets were wrecking cranes to wayward Israel’s facades. They were imperfect, difficult dudes who called a spade a shovel for a perfect God. They didn’t give a crap who you were, who your mommy was, if you were the King or Pastor Whoop-Dee-Frickin’-Do. They were fiercely devoted to God and His ways. Janet Napolitano would call these truth-tellers “terror threats” because they loathed godless governments and butt-kissing priests and had no problem whatsoever letting those entities have it verbally.

Yep, if you were out of sorts with God because of practicing whacked stuff or preaching Oprah instead of Obadiah, you were about to be publically roasted via the prophets’ sizzling invectives.

Need a mental image? Imagine Rush, Beck, Coulter, Miller or O’Reilly on steroids.

This skewering, to be sure, was about as fun for the rebel recipients as watching Nancy Pelosi do an interpretive dance of “Riders on the Storm” (the extended version) would be for Simon Cowell.

A humiliating open rebuke, however, was a mere love tap when compared to an eternity of misery and the coming decades-long national butt kicking Israel was in line to receive should they remain contumacious.

The prophets’ messages were never complicated. These gruff and holy critters offered God’s people two choices: turn or . . . burn. If Israel obeyed, they’d be blessed. If they disobeyed, well . . . let’s just say things didn’t go that well for the next four decades.

You see, if Israel turned from their profane BS (belief systems) and back to God, Yahweh would chill and relent from the attention-grabbing calamities He was heatin’ up on heaven’s back burner. The prophet, unfortunately, was officially out of a job if the Hebrews went the repentant route. Yep, Amos had to go back to fig picking.

However, when Israel blew the prophets off by condemning the messenger, categorizing the message as hate speech, jailing the prophet(s) or, as in some cases, killing the prophetic salvo, God would in turn switch to plan B to get His insubordinate group’s good ear.

God, not the one to run out of advanced repentance techniques, would allow Israel’s economy to go to hell, plagues to ravage their land, nature to convulse, and enemies the ability to pulverize them.

Yep, unless I’m reading the Bible upside down, it seems that when the nation went astray from God’s law and wouldn’t listen to the prophets’ calls to repentance and instead vilified the saving voices, God allowed one (or more) of the four aforementioned hammers to pound them until Israel became all ears.

This is, at least to me, a plain prophetic pattern within the Scripture. The $64,000 question you gotta ask yourself is this: If there is a God, and if the Bible isn’t a bunch of fairy tales written by a stack of whack jobs, then does God still roll today like He did with Old Testament Israel as He interfaces with 21st century nations that spurn His values to His face?

I’m guessin’ God hasn’t had an extreme makeover and that He is the same yesterday, today and forever, which could mean in our current culture—where evil is good and good is evil—that we might be in line for grave negative sanctions because, apparently, America’s new favorite pastime is whizzing on that which is holy, just and good.

WRITTEN by Doug Giles for TownHall.com and published there on May 10th, 2009

Obama-Dem Mistake #3

President Barack Obama and his Democratic Party cohorts in Congress have done it again. In fact, they've done it a couple of times, and so both today and tomorrow we will take a look at these two most recent Obama-Dem mistakes. I am starting out today by playing catch-up with a mistake made a couple of weeks ago, that being the behemoth $3.6 trillion dollar Obama spending fiasco that he calls a 'stimulus' budget plan. This ridiculous-on-its-face plan to get out of our current financial crisis by taxing and regulating businesses both small and large while at the same time increasing spending at outrageous levels is a complete over-reach by the liberal wing that is now dominant among the Dems. I like to compare it to the famous episode of the television comedy Seinfeld in which Jerry and Elaine decide they need to have sex in order to save their friendship. Ludicrous on its face and a disaster waiting to happen, which indeed it does, which anyone with half a brain could see coming a mile away. The exact wrong solution for a difficult problem they were experiencing. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Alan Chanrey, the director of USA Action, one of many ultra-liberal groups pushing Obama strongly and speedily towards the socializing of the American governmental system, stated "This budget is real change, the change Americans voted for last November." He is right in one regard, that 53% of Americans did indeed vote for a party change last November. But he and the rest of the Democratic Party, and Obama as the President, have been making one major error after another because they do not understand what kind of change the majority of these Americans voted to see happen. Americans wanted a philosophical change away from a war footing and a perceived antagonistic face in world affairs. They did not vote for Socialism. The financial budget and programs that Obama and the Dems are instituting will result in more layoffs, higher taxes, more business closings. Obama and his supporters will argue that it should create jobs. But these are jobs that will depend on the Federal government either directly as employees or through Federally funded programs and grants. They will argue that it creates an opportunity for all Americans to receive health care coverage, but they never, ever speak about the cost involved. The cost in financial terms of not only creating such a program, but then maintaining it and likely expanding it over time will simply be the largest expenditure ever incurred by our government. Part of their plan involves $650 billion dollars over a decade in a 'cap-and-trade' plan that is nothing more than a tax on businesses. Another is increased limitations on both mortgage interest and charitable tax deductions that will effect millions of Americans at tax time, as well as payment cuts to Medicare insurers, in order to fund their new medical coverage plan. Obama and the Dems are planning on allowing tax cuts instituted by the Bush administration to expire in a couple of years, thus raising the taxes of millions more American families. Further outlays in the massive budget plan include billions involving so-called 'green' plans to combat a controversial global-warming situation that may in the end be nothing more than a natural phenomenon. There are so many other huge spending programs in this plan that it is almost a joke. One of the leading conservatives on the Republican side, Newt Gingrich, actually says that he agrees with much of Obama's rhetoric on the financial issues. But Gingrich sees a "gap between the words and reality" in a plan that actually promotes "higher-tax, weaker-economy, fewer-jobs" in its practical applications. How can the government possibly expand like this when everyone else is contracting? The simple answer is that they cannot. The Wall Street stock market is reacting to the obviousness of this folly with its weekly free-fall. The administration of President Barack Obama surely inherited a difficult financial situation, and this situation required tough decisions. But it also required smart decisions, and the obviously dumb ones of the past few weeks are only turning the economy for the worse in both the short and long term outlooks. It is similar to Obama walking into a situation where there was a fire growing. He had the opportunity to begin to pour water over the fire and extinguish the flames. Instead he and his Democratic Party cohorts led by Nancy Pelosi in Congress have chosen to pour gasoline over them. Their logic is that by making the fire bigger and bigger, we whose property is actually going up in smoke will become more and more dependent on their government to eventually put it out. But the fact is that day will never come. What will actually happen is that their power will grow as our fire grows, until eventually one of two things happens. Either we vote them out of office quickly, or they burn our American house down to the ground. The gigantic, enormous, humongous behemoth of a budget that is misrepresented as 'stimulus' is the Obama-Dem Mistake #3. Tomorrow we will cover the most recent mistake number four. NOTE: All of the items in the Obama-Dem Mistake series can be found by visiting that below label.

Obamanation!

Barack Obama was sworn in this afternoon as the 44th President of the United States of America. He thus becomes the first black President, the first minority of any type, ending the monopoly held by white males on the highest office in the land for over two centuries. In some ways this very fact is a good thing. No longer will America's detractors, both within and outside of our country, be able to speak of glass ceilings and inequality with any credibility. Anyone can rise to the highest office in the land. America is willing to accept a person of color, as proven by President Obama's new position. America is willing to accept a woman in the position as well. The support for both Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin from their respective party's as they ran last year prove that statement as well. So this is now officially an Obama Nation. He and his supporters are in charge now. The celebrations will continue with a number of parties tonight known as Presidential Ball's, but when everyone wakes up in the morning the real business of governance will begin. President Obama began his tenure by stumbling over his swearing-in ceremony as he was incorrectly led in taking the oath of office by SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts. Roberts inserted the word 'faithfully' at the wrong point, causing Obama, who had likely prepared for this and practiced the oath a number of times, to halt. The two then did a verbal dance until Obama simply said it in the manner that Roberts led him. We can write that off to nervousness on both men's parts, and the awesome reality setting in that this event was actually finally happening. Everyone is not perfect all the time, not even Barack Obama and John Roberts. However, can you imagine the field day that the media and celebrities would be having were it George W. Bush being involved in such a blunder in front of the whole world? This was a real shame for such a truly historic moment. But human gaffes aside, its the meat and potatoes of the acceptance speech that really matter. President Obama started well by properly thanking President Bush for both his service to the nation and his cooperation in the transition. But he then spoke of how the economy has been weakened by, among other things, a "collective failure to make hard choices." Obama himself and his Democratic Senate colleagues have been front and center in failing to make hard choices and consistently cow-towing to liberal special interests and pork barrel spending programs. It will be interesting to see how the new President leads us into the more fiscally responsible era that he seems to be calling for. He said that jobs have been shed and businesses shuttered. I wonder if he plans on following or supporting the path of Nancy Pelosi and her Democrat House colleagues in allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire, and in raising taxes that will only result in even more businesses closing and more jobs lost. He spoke of our health care being too costly. Now is not the time for details, but when they eventually come out will they involve a socialized medical coverage plan that will lower costs for some in initially, but lower care as well while creating frustrating and interminable bueracracies such as those that have emerged with Canada's national health care system? And the costs that will rise from that bueracracy? They will be borne by 'We the People' in increased taxes for all. We will all pay in the end. It's just that now you will be paying that bigger Uncle Sam rather than some medical provider. He said that "our schools fail too many", but is that really appropriate, or do too many students fail themselves because they are unwilling and undisciplined. Is the problem really mostly in the schools, or is it in the home? He said that "we use our energy to strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet" and yet consistently voted against programs that would have led to greater energy independence for America. The new President also incredibly stated that there was a "sapping of confidence across our land - a nagging fear that America's decline is inevitable." I don't know who President Obama has been speaking with...oh wait, yes I do. He has been speaking with and is speaking of his fellow Democrat politicians and their followers. Republicans and American traditionalists of all stripes have never had any such thoughts. We are always confident in our belief in the strength, power, faith, and resilience of America. We always see both the spirit and the actuality of America's greatness extending well into the future. We are always positive. It has only been the Dems and their supporters who have felt this "sapping" and "nagging" about our nation, its world role, its direction. He later went on to call those who do not believe in his programs "cynics" who "fail to understand that the ground has shifted beneath them", and claimed that "stale political arguments...no longer apply." Trust me, we conservatives are well aware of the political shift. And we also realize that political differences remain and the arguments will continue. We will regroup, re-engage, and come back again even stronger in the future. The President said that the problems of government are not whether it is too big or small, but whether it works. The fact is that whether it's working or not is defined differently by many different sources. However, it is also factual that if government is too big, that in itself is a huge problem. Government is already too big and President Obama and his followers plan to grow it to an incredible size. That will create a true "problem of government." The President made a telling statement in addressing world leaders when he said that "America is a friend of every nation, and every man, woman, and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity." What he failed to say was anything about how he would deal with those nations whose vision of peace and dignity is not possible without the destruction of Israel as a nation and the erasing of America from its position as a world power. He began to draw to his closing, and one of his comments referred to the goodness of "a parent's willingness to nurture a child." It will be interesting to see how his Supreme Court nominees stand up to that measure of goodness in their willingness to protect those children as God's most precious gift of human life. Despite my skepticism of his plans, Barack Obama is now my President. Unlike the destructive path that the Dems took with President Bush, myself and most Republicans will pray for and support President Obama as our own, our leader, our Commander-in-Chief. But we are indeed the 'loyal opposition', and our loyalty only extends so far. We will continue to fight against him and the liberal Democrats as hard as we can to maintain traditional American values, keep government out of our individual and familial business as much as possible, and maintain our safety and security. We will not allow this new Obama Nation to become an abomination. God bless President Barack Obama, but more importantly, God bless America.
NOTE: This article has been amended from its original form, which alluded to problems with the swearing-in ceremony being caused by Obama's nervousness. He may have been nervous, but it was Justice Roberts' gaffe that started the problems. Thanks to a commenter for pointing out this error. Comments can be viewed by clicking on to that below label on every entry.

Trying to Find a Silver Lining

I have always been a pretty positive person. It's hard to get me down for long, and I've learned in the course of a life that is now well into it's 5th decade that most of the things that we worry over are somewhat insignificant. For instance, my hometown Philadelphia Eagles lost a heart-breaking NFC Championship game yesterday to the Arizona Cardinals. The defeat means that the team falls just short of reaching football's ultimate goal - the Super Bowl. It was very disappointing and somewhat frustrating as the final seconds ticked away and we came to realize that our team was not going to make it. What is even more ludicrous to me is what will happen over the next week or so, as all of the 'Monday Morning Quarterbacks' come out of the woodwork to criticize every poor play and missed opportunity. I will most definitely be avoiding all sports talk radio stations for the next couple of weeks. As for me, I try to find the silver lining. With the Eagles it will be in the way they played for the last six weeks of their season, when they had to win nearly every week to keep their season alive. They won most of those games, and it was a fun time to be a fan. To me, Donovan McNabb and Andy Reid showed that they are still among the best quarterbacks and head coaches in the league, and some strong young players leave me believing that next season will be a strong one for the team. So football is over for 2009 here in Philadelphia. Only the Arizona-Pittsburgh meeting in the Super Bowl remains for the NFL. Tomorrow will be an even bigger challenge for me in trying to find a silver lining. Today marks the final day of the Presidential administration of George W. Bush. One of the most liberal politicians to ever become the President of the United States, Democrat Barack Obama, will take the oath of office on Tuesday. He will have a mostly supportive Congress and Senate behind him, as the Democratic Party is back in charge of both Houses. And the big television networks and former mainstream media newspapers are all on board with this liberal Democratic government monopoly. The fact is that for conservative Republicans such as myself, the next few years are likely going to see one disaster after another play out against the country that we love. We are likely to see taxes raised for all Americans as the Dems both repeal the outstanding Bush tax cuts and raise them further with their own legislation. We are likely to become far less safe as the Dems slowly dismantle the security programs put in place by the Bush administration after 9/11. The budget deficits of today will balloon with pork-barrel spending that goes far beyond any savings found by repealing the tax cuts and bringing home some troops. And at least in the first year there will be partisan calls for investigations into members of the Bush administration for nothing more than political vindictiveness. It is going to be a very, very ugly time in America. But that is what Democrats do best. They complain, they whine, they distract, they get divisive and vindictive, and they bury America under taxation and regulation while playing Russian roulette with our national security. This is what is likely to happen over the next four years. We can only hope that the liberal Dems don't do too much damage before the Republicans can get our acts back together and reclaim power. In the mean time the positive attitude person inside me will be searching for a silver lining for America. For one, black Americans should have to finally set aside any thoughts that they have any barriers. The United States of America has proven that race and sex are no barrier in advancing to the highest offices in the land. That is a good thing. But which minority is the one that takes office and commands power, that has always been the real issue. A black or female President, or any other minority, is not the problem. A liberal Democrat President of any stripe is the problem. Here's to hoping that the Democrats finally find a way to get more things right than wrong for once. I pray for the success of Barack Obama in keeping America safe, in leading a fix of the financial problems our country faces, in maintaining traditional American values, and in building political bridges rather than allowing the country to remain distracted by the partisan politics of people like Nancy Pelosi. I will sincerely pray for those things. But knowing the nature of the Party to which he belongs, and that of the vast majority of its members in political power seats, I don't have much hope. But I will keep praying for America, and will keep looking for the silver lining.

It's the 'Hard' That Makes It Great

This past weekend, presumptive Democratic Presidential nominee Barrack Obama announced that Senator Joe Biden of Delaware would be his running mate. One of the things being touted about Biden is that he is Irish-Catholic. I don't know if this is a harking back to the good ol' JFK days for Dems, or if it is an attempt to paint the Obama-Biden ticket as more mainstream. But in any event, as most real Catholics know, there is a big difference between calling yourself something and actually being that which you label yourself. In recent decades the concept of the 'cafeteria catholic' has emerged. This means that you do some things, like attend Mass, take Communion, send your kids to Catholic schools, and so on, but that you don't follow Church teachings on certain issues. Those certain issues are different for each person, each gets to select whatever part of the faith they want, and discard whatever part of the faith that they do not want. Thus the idea of it being like a cafeteria, you get to pick and choose from available items, ideas, positions, rulings. Problem is, we as the faithful flock do not get to make or interpret Church doctrine or spiritual matters. In most instances, the Church Fathers, especially the Pope, rule on and interpret matters of the faith, and pass along how we should approach these situations. One of the strongest positions that the Church holds is that of being pro-life. For politicians who call themselves Catholic but who want to present themselves as politically liberal, this often means breaking from the Church on this issue, and publicly announcing that they are pro-choice, meaning that they support a woman's decision to pursue an abortion if she so wishes. This is, of course, the wrong position to take. All Catholic politicians should be taking positions such as that taken by Senator Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, who is liberal on most all issues, but who is pro-life in that area. Casey recognizes that this is not only a political litmus test, it is a true moral one as well, and one that he will not sacrifice on the political altar. Nor has he needed to, as he defeated a popular and seasoned opponent in Republican Rick Santorum to win election to the U.S. Senate last year despite being one of the few Democrats with the courage to take a pro-life position. Now the leading Dems are coming under fire from Church leaders for their public positions. The Archbishop of Washington D.C. has come out against Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, who stated that the history of the Church does not show that it is always against abortion. Archbishop Donald Wuerl responds that the Church teaching has not changed in 2,000 years and that Pelosi is simply incorrect. The Dems then named Biden as their Veep nominee, a man who calls himself Catholic but who supports abortion and claims similarly that the Church position has changed over the millenia. Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput, in whose city the Dems are hosting their nominating convention this week, in response stated: “I presume that his integrity will lead him to refrain from presenting himself for communion, if he supports a false ‘right’ to abortion.” The fact is that if you are going to call yourself Catholic, then you should try to follow the teachings of the Church as much as possible. You should certainly never bend your morals for political considerations, in effect selling out your soul for your elected position. If you don't want to obey the rules, then leave the Church. There is always some church out there that has similarly bent their morality to that which you are seeking. Being a Catholic isn't always easy. As Tom Hanks said in the film 'A League of Their Own' regarding baseball: "It's not supposed to be easy. If it was easy, everyone would do it. It's the 'hard' that makes it great."