Tag Archives: campaigns

The atheists obsession with Christians

[I]t’s odd that they [atheists] will condemn politicians like Bachmann for bringing God into a political discussion, yet they throw their support behind leaders like President Barack Obama, a Christian who says that he is opposed to gay marriage because “God is in the mix”. (A weak attempt at making his Christianity sound cool).

Hmm, Michele Bachmann is crazy for thinking that there is a God who backs her political agenda but President Obama is just fine even though he’s against letting consenting adults who love each other marry because the same God says no?

Why is it that so many atheists who feel that anyone who believes in God is delusional and should seek help support leaders like President Obama? If believing in God is a sign of mental illness, would you really want a man who is suffering from this delusion to have a nuclear arsenal at his disposal?

One reason is that, like many Republicans, they don’t really believe that Obama is a Christian. Not surprising, considering that this is the man who said that guns and God were something for bitter, small town Americans to fall back on when he said that “they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them.” – Daniel James Hayden IV


The Donald at CPAC

Straight talk from Donald Trump at CPAC. You won’t ever hear any other candidate or elected official tell it like this. Just like Sarah Palin, this is another strong, no nonsense person. He doesn’t mince words or candy coat anything. He tells you what you want and need to hear. I have to wonder why Obama was so stupid to appoint Jeffery Immelt to his economic advisors when he could have gotten Trump – a man who REALLY does know about free markets and fair trade.

One of the best parts is when he talks about Obama and his unknown, secret past.

It’s less than 15 minutes long so I hope you listen.


Why it might get harder to find good people to run for office or your future is really your past.

I read two interesting columns today in the WSJ that on the surface have nothing in common until you start to think about it.

Peggy Noonan wrote that “all candidates must assume now that they are being taped, wherever they are, including private conversations. Sharron Angle was taped in a private meeting with a potential supporter, who leaked it to the press, to her embarrassment. The taper/leaker was a sleaze and a weasel—a sleazel—but candidates can no longer ever assume they are speaking in confidence; they have to assume even aides and supporters are wired. (Go reread “Game Change” and wonder if some of the conversations reported there were taped.) The zone of privacy just got smaller, and the possibility of blackmail, a perennial unseen force in politics, wider. Prediction: This fact will, at some point in 2012, cause an uproar.”

And the next step from recording is filming and posting on YouTube.

“Annoy the wrong person, behave in a way some blogger disdains, and you will soon find yourself locked in the digital pillory, exposed to snark and ridicule. These are supposed to be salubrious incentives to civil public behavior, but I haven’t seen much evidence that a Web-armed society is a polite one,” according to Eric Felton.

He goes on to say that “The most odious aspect of these online humiliations is that they don’t go away. As law professor Daniel J. Solove notes in his book “The Future of Reputation,” the Internet saddles us with permanent digital baggage: “Internet shaming creates an indelible blemish on a person’s identity. Being shamed in cyberspace is akin to being marked for life.”

It made me think that in this day and age, how do we find politicians with absolutely spotless pasts? And on the internet, thanks in great part to the anonymous character of it, you don’t need proof to make accusations.

Let’s look at some partially exaggerated scenarios. Are we going to have candidates whose college frat pranks, whether true or not and then maybe posted on a social network site, can come back years later and haunt them during a campaign? Do we expect an 18 or 20 year old to know, that their “dabbling in witchcraft on a date” and maybe some classmate filmed it on a cell phone, will sink their political aspirations in 20 years when it’s posted to YouTube? How many 18 or 24 year olds know they will be running for political office in 20 years? How many of us knew at 22 that we would be where we are now? And how many of us did what qualifies as basically stupid things in high school and college?

It makes me wonder how many otherwise qualified and exceptional people will shy away from running for office because of these kinds of pitfalls. Or how many otherwise fine lives will be ruined. This is a new age that we are just growing into. Most of us have not had the world wide web at our fingertips for too much more than a decade. And many of us have no idea on whose hard drives our past is residing: whether it’s a completely true past or partially manipulated one by someone who would wish us ill.

It’s something to ponder, I think.

 

 

 

 


Pre-election day musings

Have you noticed that, during this election, every time a Republican candidate appears on Fox, his Democrat opposition “can’t be reached” or “declined to appear”? The cable news channel with, hands down, the largest viewership in every single time slot, and the opposition refuses to be seen on it. Charlie Crist is a the most recent notable example of a non-Republican candidate who actually did appear (on Greta last week.) And there have been debates on Chris Wallace’s show where both candidates appeared. But for the most part, the Democrats stay clear of Fox. I guess they don’t care about the likely voters they might connect with or the donors that they are snubbing. Nothing has become more apparent than the fact that every single election, whether it’s in New Jersey or Oregon, have national implications and money from all over the nation come into those campaigns.

~~ooOoo~~

A few weeks ago I signed a petition at Americans for Prosperity and when doing so, I signed up to volunteer making phone calls. I didn’t do that on purpose and in fact, had no idea I had done it until I got a phone call last week asking me “how I was doing on my phone calls.”

“Oh,” I said, I’ll be getting on that tonight.” Great save, I thought.

Ah geeze. I had no idea I had volunteered to do this but then I thought about what Levin had said about doing the least this election while others, in Afghanistan, were giving their all for our freedom. So I went online and read the stuff and tried to make the calls but numbers wouldn’t show up on my screen. After a half dozen attempts, I finally realized that – duh, you have to be plugged into a phone line. So, I dug out a phone cable and plugged myself in. Okay, all set to call folks and tell them to vote for the Republicans in Arizona this election day.

But still no numbers appeared on my screen. Then I realized that I had basically shut off our lan phone. I can receive calls in but can make no calls out (except for 911) and only kept the line for the internet.  We don’t even have a phone plugged in at our house because we use strictly our cell phones. You can find my phone number in the phone book but no one will ever answer it.

So my almost good, although accidental intentions were for naught. But I’ve decided that by ’12, I will have my home phone up and running to do my part.

Make no mistake about it, the 2012 campaign will begin this week, on November 3rd. It’s going to be an eternity. But as s nation we can’t survive another 4 years of this guy.

~~ooOoo~~

I think the most despicable part of this whole election cycle is the ballots that will not arrive in time for our soldiers overseas to vote. Nothing expresses the incompetence of our elected officials better than this. They knew over a year ago that the second day in November was election day (like that never changes, you dumbasses) and still they could not have the ballots ready and mailed in time. Elections should be held up until every single soldier who wants to vote, is able to.

This is nothing short of shameful and a transparent suppression of voters who will likely not vote in the Democrats favor!

~~ooOoo~~

I don’t know about anyone else, but I welcome gridlock in Washington. I’m proud to be the party of NO. I remember the story Levin tells about what Senator Laxalt told him years ago: “Every day that Congress convenes, is another day of lost liberty for Americans.”  (or words to that affect, I’m paraphrasing here.) The less those people can do, the better for all of us. I hope they tie up things and gum up the works. There have been enough damage done in the bills and presidential appointments that have already been passed.

 

 

 

 


An idea that could catch on!

from The Patriot Post - a real obit.