From Their Own Mouths...

Natural Inclinations

2008-12-19T22:21:00.001-06:00

The brouhaha over President-Elect Obama's choice of Pastor Rick Warren of Saddleback Church in Forest Lake, CA, and author of The Purpose Driven Life, to give the invocation at his inauguration is mind-boggling to me. Because he supported Proposition 8, he in the minds of the homosexual community, is unfit to pray. Ok then. Same old, same old, yarn - because you don't support gay marriage you are a homophobe. You are a hate monger, etc., etc. Yawn.

In the midst of all of this Warren gives an interview with Ann Curry.

ANN CURRY: Your position [on gay marriage] has raised the spectre that you are homophobic.

Warren responds with a hearty laugh.

CURRY: You laugh, but that is why gay people are angry.

RICK WARREN: Well, I could give you a hundred –

CURRY: Are you homophobic?

WARREN: I don’t know any church in America that’s done more to help the gay community, particularly with AIDS, than Saddleback. But the hate speech against me is incendiary.

CURRY: If science finds that this is biological, that people are born gay, would you change your position?

WARREN: No, and the reason why is because we all have biological predispositions. I’m naturally inclined to have sex with every beautiful woman I see. But that doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do.

Transcript HT: Cassy Fiano

Watch a video of this exchange:

Video HT: Hot Air

I love Warren's vivid, but true example. Just because we have a natural predisposition toward a particular sin or vice does not mean we have license to engage in that behavior. It may seem natural to do so, but that doesn't make it right. So the natural inclination argument for homosexual behavior doesn't wash.

Originally posted at Caffeinated Thoughts.

Saltsman for RNC Chairman

2008-11-19T12:57:00.001-06:00

Some of you when you read the title your eyes will gloss over. That's ok. I'm a political junkie so I don't expect everybody to be as interested in this as I am. However, after the shellacking that the GOP took on November 4th it is going to be vital that they select the right person to take the reigns of the Republican National Committee.

We actually have two fine candidates running. Former Maryland Lt. Governor Michael Steele has thrown his hat in the ring. I like him. He definitely has a future in the party I think and is a solid conservative. If he won I believe he would do an excellent job.

The other candidate is Chip Saltsman who is lesser known, but he has an impressive resume as well. He is a solid conservative. He was successful in his role as the Tennessee GOP chair. He also was Mike Huckabee's campaign manager. It was in his role with Huckabee that leads me to believe he would be the best choice for heading the national party.

The Huckabee campaign utilized some of the best grassroots efforts and online activity than any other campaign on the GOP side. The Democrats showed that they are ahead in that department. I was impressed by how well the Huckabee campaign reached out to bloggers which is something I didn't see with the McCain campaign.

He shares his vision for the party's future here. I'd like to highlight a few things regarding his vision:

The first thing he mentions is the need to strengthen the state parties. Here in Iowa I can see that is vital if the GOP wants to win state, let alone, national elections. The Democrats grassroots efforts put the GOP's to shame which is one of the reasons (not the only reason) Iowa shifted from red to blue in four years. This is also the primary reason why Obama won North Carolina as well. State parties can't be ignored.
He wants to invest in new technologies to reinvigorate party efforts... he goes on to say:

"We need to rethink our online tactics and strategy. The past election cycle taught us a number of valuable lessons: the growing political significance of self organizing citizen activism; the speed at which viral information travels through the blogosphere and other digital media; the power of online fundraising; the extent to which younger voters rely on and demand online information and interactivity; and the peril of a strategy blind to these irreversible developments."

He wants to implement outreach programs to expand the party base. The GOP simply needs to reach out to new voters... young, hispanic, etc. In Iowa, the Democrats killed the GOP in new registrations. That can't continue if we expect to win elections.

Again you read his vision here. I urge you to contact your state's Republican National Committee Man and Committee Woman to ask them to consider voting for Chip Saltsman.

Originally posted at Caffeinated Thoughts.

Technorati Tags: Chip Saltsman,Michael Steele,Republican National Committee

Forced Abortions

2008-11-18T17:49:00.001-06:00

If pro-choice advocates support an organization that supports coercive abortion policies are they still pro-choice? China is notorious for having coercive abortion policies in order to enforce their populations control measures that they have in place. Another episode of this happening is making news:

Arzigul Tursun, who lives in China’s far northwest region, is more than six months pregnant and is being hounded by authorities who want her to have an abortion. Tursun already has two children with her husband.

Late on Sunday, Tursun fled the hospital that she was staying at while awaiting her abortion. But she was tracked down by police Monday afternoon at a relative’s house and was again taken to the hospital for an abortion, according to Radio Free Asia.

“The police found my wife,” Nurmemet Tohtasin, the woman’s husband, said in a telephone interview from the Women and Children’s Welfare Hospital, to RFA. “My wife’s father was already at the hospital. They will probably do the abortion today.”

The village chief and party secretary had forced her husband to find Tursun after she escaped from the hospital on Sunday. Nurmemet took officials to two of Tursun’s relatives’ homes and to her parents’ home.

“They said if we don’t find Arzigul, they would take our house and our farmland,” he said.

Source: Christian Post

The last eight years the Bush Administration has withheld money from the U.N. Population Fund because of its support of these practices. It is predicted that President-Elect Barack Obama will reverse that presidential order.

There is the general issue here of why taxpayer money is being used for this purpose at all. I believe it is entirely unethical to use taxpayer funds to support a practice that most people believe is wrong. Don't mistake some people not wanting to outlaw abortion as being a supporters of the practice and feeling like it should be funded with taxes. This is really should be a bipartisan issue.

More specifically, why would a pro-choice president want to support financially an organization that enables taking a woman's choice away? This doesn't seem pro-choice to me. As far as I'm concerned this practice is anti-woman, and I don't believe is representative of the type of change that Americans voted for.

Originally posted at Caffeinated Thoughts.

How Obama Got Elected

2008-11-18T15:07:00.002-06:00

Yikes.

Only One Group Showed Hate Here

2008-11-11T20:38:00.003-06:00

Video footage of a Prop 8 protest in Palm Springs shows homosexual activists and protesters surrounding a cross-bearing elderly lady trying to answer questions from a reporter and verbally accosting her, physically harassing her and the reporter, swatting her cross and sign out of her hands, and trampling the cross.

Keep watching 'till the end. Their actions speak louder than their words. Disgusting. It reminds me of this post on "tolerance" from waaaay back. People never become more tolerant. They simply shift who they are intolerant of to a different demographic. I'm becoming more convinced of this every day.

Mandate

2008-11-04T23:04:00.001-06:00

Harry Reid mentioned "mandate" too many times tonight. God help us.

Election Night Live Blog

2008-11-04T14:01:00.001-06:00

As the results come in join me discuss the results. The live blog will start at 7:00pm. Feel free to join late or leave early as you need.

Click Here for a live blog popout window

Update: Classy

2008-11-03T13:04:00.003-06:00

He supposedly did the same thing to Hillary Clinton near the end of the primary.

Update: Here is the first time he did this...this time to Hillary:

Obama on Wealth Redistribution

2008-10-28T15:26:00.001-05:00

These are Obama's own words defining himself as a Socialist (without using the term):

Yikes - Warning: Crass Language

2008-10-28T15:08:00.004-05:00

This guy makes me uncomfortable...but I couldn't stop watching either. Very interesting. I wonder if the IRS will be coming down on him November 5.

Post Script: Not sure how he thinks Obama is going to take away Christmas. This guy is super crazy, angry, and hateful but makes some good points in the midst of his wackiness. I found it entertaining and disconcerting at the same time. Tell me what you think. I think it started out good and got insane.

I'm also very tired of black people using the n-word. Irritates the crap out of me.

Now's The Time To Help A Candidate

2008-10-22T12:55:00.002-05:00

If you have never sent money to a candidate before, now is the time. I normally don't publicly endorse candidates - even on blogs - but this is too important. Check out www.johnsonforiowahouse.com and donate. This is a critical election and Jamie is an extremely solid guy.

Obama: Babies Are Punishment

2008-10-21T08:16:00.003-05:00

Here is Obama side-stepping the life question and John McCain's response when asked the same question:

Warning: Disturbing Story About Obama

2008-10-19T13:11:00.001-05:00

I have struggled to remotely care about John McCain. I just don't like him. But what I struggle with even more are Christ-followers who support Barack Obama. If you can watch this video (or hundreds like it) and support Obama, I have concerns about your moral compass...if not your soul.

The Cult of Obama

2008-09-30T19:51:00.001-05:00

I feel bad for these kids. What are they going to do when he disappoints? Because he will if elected, as will Senator McCain if he's elected. Why? They are fallible human beings. Will they turn to despair?

For the record I would concerned if this were a McCain video. We should find hope in Jesus not a politician. Obama is being elevated to the point that he is becoming an object of worship which is truly, truly scary and truly sad.

HT: Matt Reisetter

Originally posted at Caffeinated Thoughts.

Socialism Creeping In

2008-09-24T14:54:00.001-05:00

There is much that has me concerned with Federal plan to help fix the credit mess that we find ourselves in. The $700,000,000,000 price tag for this made my eyes pop. Then, as George Will expressed, there is a concern about proper oversight - should one person have this much control over this much money - elected or not?

Lawrence Kudlow said in his op/ed on Real Clear Politics that a clean bill requested by Treasury Secretary Paulson along with the oversight board that Senator McCain has called for should help fix this credit problem we have.

Unfortunately it doesn't look like Paulson is going to get that clean bill, Kudlow writes:

But after Tuesday's Senate hearing I'm very concerned. The bells and whistles that would be attached to Paulson's plan by our Democratic friends are anti-capitalist and anti-opportunity.

Capping compensation for both the selling and purchasing institutions? What? Salaries and bonuses are no business of the government. People go to work for profits. For opportunities. It's at the heart of our free-market capitalist system.

Now, I can understand companies like AIG, Fannie, and Freddie, which effectively have been nationalized. That's different. I don't care if they all make $75,000 a year, just like the regulators. But to stretch this to the banks that are selling or buying the assets goes beyond the pale. It's France. But it's France heading toward the old Soviet Union, or at least Tsar Putin's Russia.

And then there's the ownership question. Some Democrats want Uncle Sam to take an ownership position in all the selling and purchasing banks. This is nuts. In America, this is nothing but property confiscation. It also will sharply curb buyers of the distressed assets.

You think Henry Kravis or Steve Schwarzman are gonna take a salary cap and lose an ownership share of the private-equity funds they themselves created and built? They shouldn't and they won't. And these funds are crucial to the new process. The only banks that will sell in this over-regulatory environment are the absolute, near-bankruptcy turkeys.

Meanwhile, Sen. McCain apparently has proposed that the buying and selling banks have comp-levels no higher than the top paycheck in the U.S. government, which I guess is the president's at around $400,000 a year. Hey, I've got an idea. Let's raise the chief executive's pay to $50 million. He probably earns it anyway.

There is a word for what they are suggesting. It is socialism. What business does the government have in establishing what compensation levels should be for anybody but government employees? None. Does the government have any business in having an ownership position in selling and purchasing banks? Now way!

Not only does Kudlow not like it, neither does the stock market as it took a dive when the details of the behemoth bailout were shared. Not a good move. Some regulation is needed in this time these proposals are an overreaction and will make this proposal ineffective essentially wasting taxpayer money. Let's keep the marketplace free and not allow socialism to creep in.

Originally posted at Caffeinated Thoughts.

Palin Interview Edits

2008-09-14T00:08:00.001-05:00

I thought when I watched ABC's Charles Gibson interview Alaska Governor and GOP Vice Presidential Nominee Sarah Palin this week that it seemed choppy in places. Now I now why. Below are excerpts from that interview. The text that is bold are parts of the interview that were edited out. This is pretty disturbing. When Bill O'Reilly interviewed Senator Barack Obama he was given a 1/2 hour. How much of the interview did he show? 100% of it.

GIBSON: Governor, let me start by asking you a question that I asked John McCain about you, and it is really the central question. Can you look the country in the eye and say “I have the experience and I have the ability to be not just vice president, but perhaps president of the United States of America?”

PALIN: I do, Charlie, and on January 20, when John McCain and I are sworn in, if we are so privileged to be elected to serve this country, will be ready. I’m ready.

GIBSON: And you didn’t say to yourself, “Am I experienced enough? Am I ready? Do I know enough about international affairs? Do I — will I feel comfortable enough on the national stage to do this?”

PALIN: I didn’t hesitate, no.

GIBSON: Didn’t that take some hubris?

PALIN: I — I answered him yes because I have the confidence in that readiness and knowing that you can’t blink, you have to be wired in a way of being so committed to the mission, the mission that we’re on, reform of this country and victory in the war, you can’t blink.

So I didn’t blink then even when asked to run as his running mate.

GIBSON: But this is not just reforming a government. This is also running a government on the huge international stage in a very dangerous world. When I asked John McCain about your national security credentials, he cited the fact that you have commanded the Alaskan National Guard and that Alaska is close to Russia. Are those sufficient credentials?

PALIN: But it is about reform of government and it’s about putting government back on the side of the people, and that has much to do with foreign policy and national security issues Let me speak specifically about a credential that I do bring to this table, Charlie, and that’s with the energy independence that I’ve been working on for these years as the governor of this state that produces nearly 20 percent of the U.S. domestic supply of energy, that I worked on as chairman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, overseeing the oil and gas development in our state to produce more for the United States.

GIBSON: I know. I’m just saying that national security is a whole lot more than energy.

PALIN: It is, but I want you to not lose sight of the fact that energy is a foundation of national security. It’s that important. It’s that significant.

GIBSON: Did you ever travel outside the country prior to your trip to Kuwait and Germany last year?

PALIN: Canada, Mexico, and then, yes, that trip, that was the trip of a lifetime to visit our troops in Kuwait and stop and visit our injured soldiers in Germany. That was the trip of a lifetime and it changed my life.

GIBSON: Have you ever met a foreign head of state?

PALIN: There in the state of Alaska, our international trade activities bring in many leaders of other countries.

GIBSON: And all governors deal with trade delegations.

PALIN: Right.

GIBSON: Who act at the behest of their governments.

PALIN: Right, right.

GIBSON: I’m talking about somebody who’s a head of state, who can negotiate for that country. Ever met one?

PALIN: I have not and I think if you go back in history and if you ask that question of many vice presidents, they may have the same answer that I just gave you. But, Charlie, again, we’ve got to remember what the desire is in this nation at this time. It is for no more politics as usual and somebody’s big, fat resume maybe that shows decades and decades in that Washington establishment, where, yes, they’ve had opportunities to meet heads of state … these last couple of weeks … it has been overwhelming to me that confirmation of the message that Americans are getting sick and tired of that self-dealing and kind of that closed door, good old boy network that has been the Washington elite.

GIBSON: Let me ask you about some specific national security situations.

PALIN: Sure.

GIBSON: Let’s start, because we are near Russia, let’s start with Russia and Georgia.

The administration has said we’ve got to maintain the territorial integrity of Georgia. Do you believe the United States should try to restore Georgian sovereignty over South Ossetia and Abkhazia?

PALIN: First off, we’re going to continue good relations with Saakashvili there. I was able to speak with him the other day and giving him my commitment, as John McCain’s running mate, that we will be committed to Georgia. And we’ve got to keep an eye on Russia. For Russia to have exerted such pressure in terms of invading a smaller democratic country, unprovoked, is unacceptable and we have to keep…

GIBSON: You believe unprovoked.

PALIN: I do believe unprovoked and we have got to keep our eyes on Russia, under the leadership there. I think it was unfortunate. That manifestation that we saw with that invasion of Georgia shows us some steps backwards that Russia has recently taken away from the race toward a more democratic nation with democratic ideals. That’s why we have to keep an eye on Russia.

And, Charlie, you’re in Alaska. We have that very narrow maritime border between the United States, and the 49th state, Alaska, and Russia. They are our next door neighbors.We need to have a good relationship with them. They’re very, very important to us and they are our next door neighbor.

GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?

PALIN: They’re our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.

GIBSON: What insight does that give you into what they’re doing in Georgia?

PALIN: Well, I’m giving you that perspective of how small our world is and how important it is that we work with our allies to keep good relation with all of these countries, especially Russia. We will not repeat a Cold War. We must have good relationship with our allies, pressuring, also, helping us to remind Russia that it’s in their benefit, also, a mutually beneficial relationship for us all to be getting along.

Sarah Palin on Russia:

We cannot repeat the Cold War. We are thankful that, under Reagan, we won the Cold War, without a shot fired, also. We’ve learned lessons from that in our relationship with Russia, previously the Soviet Union.

We will not repeat a Cold War. We must have good relationship with our allies, pressuring, also, helping us to remind Russia that it’s in their benefit, also, a mutually beneficial relationship for us all to be getting along.

GIBSON: Would you favor putting Georgia and Ukraine in NATO?

PALIN: Ukraine, definitely, yes. Yes, and Georgia.

GIBSON: Because Putin has said he would not tolerate NATO incursion into the Caucasus.

PALIN: Well, you know, the Rose Revolution, the Orange Revolution, those actions have showed us that those democratic nations, I believe, deserve to be in NATO.

Putin thinks otherwise. Obviously, he thinks otherwise, but…

GIBSON: And under the NATO treaty, wouldn’t we then have to go to war if Russia went into Georgia?

PALIN: Perhaps so. I mean, that is the agreement when you are a NATO ally, is if another country is attacked, you’re going to be expected to be called upon and help.

But NATO, I think, should include Ukraine, definitely, at this point and I think that we need to — especially with new leadership coming in on January 20, being sworn on, on either ticket, we have got to make sure that we strengthen our allies, our ties with each one of those NATO members.

We have got to make sure that that is the group that can be counted upon to defend one another in a very dangerous world today.

GIBSON: And you think it would be worth it to the United States, Georgia is worth it to the United States to go to war if Russia were to invade.

PALIN: What I think is that smaller democratic countries that are invaded by a larger power is something for us to be vigilant against. We have got to be cognizant of what the consequences are if a larger power is able to take over smaller democratic countries.

And we have got to be vigilant. We have got to show the support, in this case, for Georgia. The support that we can show is economic sanctions perhaps against Russia, if this is what it leads to.

It doesn’t have to lead to war and it doesn’t have to lead, as I said, to a Cold War, but economic sanctions, diplomatic pressure, again, counting on our allies to help us do that in this mission of keeping our eye on Russia and Putin and some of his desire to control and to control much more than smaller democratic countries.

His mission, if it is to control energy supplies, also, coming from and through Russia, that’s a dangerous position for our world to be in, if we were to allow that to happen.

Sarah Palin on Iran and Israel:

GIBSON: Let me turn to Iran. Do you consider a nuclear Iran to be an existential threat to Israel?

PALIN: I believe that under the leadership of Ahmadinejad, nuclear weapons in the hands of his government are extremely dangerous to everyone on this globe, yes.

GIBSON: So what should we do about a nuclear Iran? John McCain said the only thing worse than a war with Iran would be a nuclear Iran. John Abizaid said we may have to live with a nuclear Iran. Who’s right?

PALIN: No, no. I agree with John McCain that nuclear weapons in the hands of those who would seek to destroy our allies, in this case, we’re talking about Israel, we’re talking about Ahmadinejad’s comment about Israel being the “stinking corpse, should be wiped off the face of the earth,” that’s atrocious. That’s unacceptable.

GIBSON: So what do you do about a nuclear Iran?

PALIN: We have got to make sure that these weapons of mass destruction, that nuclear weapons are not given to those hands of Ahmadinejad, not that he would use them, but that he would allow terrorists to be able to use them. So we have got to put the pressure on Iran and we have got to count on our allies to help us, diplomatic pressure.

GIBSON: But, Governor, we’ve threatened greater sanctions against Iran for a long time. It hasn’t done any good. It hasn’t stemmed their nuclear program.

PALIN: We need to pursue those and we need to implement those. We cannot back off. We cannot just concede that, oh, gee, maybe they’re going to have nuclear weapons, what can we do about it. No way, not Americans. We do not have to stand for that.

GIBSON: What if Israel decided it felt threatened and needed to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities?

PALIN: Well, first, we are friends with Israel and I don’t think that we should second guess the measures that Israel has to take to defend themselves and for their security.

GIBSON: So if we wouldn’t second guess it and they decided they needed to do it because Iran was an existential threat, we would cooperative or agree with that.

PALIN: I don’t think we can second guess what Israel has to do to secure its nation.

GIBSON: So if it felt necessary, if it felt the need to defend itself by taking out Iranian nuclear facilities, that would be all right.

PALIN: We cannot second guess the steps that Israel has to take to defend itself.

GIBSON: We talk on the anniversary of 9/11. Why do you think those hijackers attacked? Why did they want to hurt us?

PALIN: You know, there is a very small percentage of Islamic believers who are extreme and they are violent and they do not believe in American ideals, and they attacked us and now we are at a point here seven years later, on the anniversary, in this post-9/11 world, where we’re able to commit to never again. They see that the only option for them is to become a suicide bomber, to get caught up in this evil, in this terror. They need to be provided the hope that all Americans have instilled in us, because we’re a democratic, we are a free, and we are a free-thinking society.

GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?

PALIN: In what respect, Charlie?

GIBSON: The Bush — well, what do you — what do you interpret it to be?

PALIN: His world view.

GIBSON: No, the Bush doctrine, enunciated September 2002, before the Iraq war.

PALIN: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell bent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made. And with new leadership, and that’s the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better.

GIBSON: The Bush doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a preemptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us. Do you agree with that?

PALIN: I agree that a president’s job, when they swear in their oath to uphold our Constitution, their top priority is to defend the United States of America.

I know that John McCain will do that and I, as his vice president, families we are blessed with that vote of the American people and are elected to serve and are sworn in on January 20, that will be our top priority is to defend the American people.

GIBSON: Do we have a right to anticipatory self-defense? Do we have a right to make a preemptive strike again another country if we feel that country might strike us?

PALIN: Charlie, if there is legitimate and enough intelligence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people, we have every right to defend our country. In fact, the president has the obligation, the duty to defend.

GIBSON: Do we have the right to be making cross-border attacks into Pakistan from Afghanistan, with or without the approval of the Pakistani government?

PALIN: Now, as for our right to invade, we’re going to work with these countries, building new relationships, working with existing allies, but forging new, also, in order to, Charlie, get to a point in this world where war is not going to be a first option. In fact, war has got to be, a military strike, a last option.

GIBSON: But, Governor, I’m asking you: We have the right, in your mind, to go across the border with or without the approval of the Pakistani government.

PALIN: In order to stop Islamic extremists, those terrorists who would seek to destroy America and our allies, we must do whatever it takes and we must not blink, Charlie, in making those tough decisions of where we go and even who we target.

GIBSON: And let me finish with this. I got lost in a blizzard of words there. Is that a yes? That you think we have the right to go across the border with or without the approval of the Pakistani government, to go after terrorists who are in the Waziristan area?

PALIN: I believe that America has to exercise all options in order to stop the terrorists who are hell bent on destroying America and our allies. We have got to have all options out there on the table.

Sarah Palin on God:

GIBSON: You said recently, in your old church, “Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God.” Are we fighting a holy war?

PALIN: You know, I don’t know if that was my exact quote.

GIBSON: Exact words.

PALIN: But the reference there is a repeat of Abraham Lincoln’s words when he said — first, he suggested never presume to know what God’s will is, and I would never presume to know God’s will or to speak God’s words.

But what Abraham Lincoln had said, and that’s a repeat in my comments, was let us not pray that God is on our side in a war or any other time, but let us pray that we are on God’s side.

That’s what that comment was all about, Charlie. And I do believe, though, that this war against extreme Islamic terrorists is the right thing. It’s an unfortunate thing, because war is hell and I hate war, and, Charlie, today is the day that I send my first born, my son, my teenage son overseas with his Stryker brigade, 4,000 other wonderful American men and women, to fight for our country, for democracy, for our freedoms.

Charlie, those are freedoms that too many of us just take for granted. I hate war and I want to see war ended. We end war when we see victory, and we do see victory in sight in Iraq.

GIBSON: I take your point about Lincoln’s words, but you went on and said, “There is a plan and it is God’s plan.”

PALIN: I believe that there is a plan for this world and that plan for this world is for good. I believe that there is great hope and great potential for every country to be able to live and be protected with inalienable rights that I believe are God-given, Charlie, and I believe that those are the rights to life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

That, in my world view, is a grand — the grand plan.

GIBSON: But then are you sending your son on a task that is from God?

PALIN: I don’t know if the task is from God, Charlie. What I know is that my son has made a decision. I am so proud of his independent and strong decision he has made, what he decided to do and serving for the right reasons and serving something greater than himself and not choosing a real easy path where he could be more comfortable and certainly safer.

HT: Mark Levin via Hugh Hewitt

Cross-posted at Caffeinated Thoughts

Al Franken Is A Scumbag

2008-09-12T18:18:00.000-05:00

Raise Taxes Because They Can Afford It

2008-09-09T21:57:00.001-05:00

In a recent interview with Fox News' Bill O'Reilly; Senator Barack Obama talks the economy and taxes. It is hard to fathom, but he actually advocates income redistribution. Incredible.

Technorati Tags: Barack Obama,Bill O'Reilly,taxes,economy,income redistribution,socialism

Gov. Palin RNC Speech Highlights

2008-09-07T16:08:00.002-05:00

Obama and Biden Planning To Criminally Charge Bush

2008-09-03T22:50:00.001-05:00

From the British Paper "The Guardian:"

"If there has been a basis upon which you can pursue someone for a criminal violation, they will be pursued," Biden said during a campaign event in Deerfield Beach, Florida, according to ABC.

"[N]ot out of vengeance, not out of retribution," he added, "out of the need to preserve the notion that no one, no attorney general, no president -- no one is above the law."

Obama sounded a similar note in April, vowing that if elected, he would ask his attorney general to initiate a prompt review of Bush-era actions to distinguish between possible "genuine crimes" and "really bad policies".

"[I]f crimes have been committed, they should be investigated," Obama told the Philadelphia Daily News..."

The Candidate With Class

2008-09-02T18:56:00.001-05:00

Congress Solves Energy Crisis

2008-08-22T11:21:00.000-05:00

Intellectually Bankrupt

2008-08-20T12:21:00.006-05:00

The following quote comes from Democrat lobbyist Michael Tobman writing in "The School Choice Advocate:"

"I'm a Democrat close to many Republicans and a generally savvy fellow. But even I have a difficult time seeing how a party that depends on the National Rifle Association to turn out in November is perceived as being the exclusive champion of, for example, tax credits designed to get children into private and religious schools and off streets plagued by handgun violence."

To claim to be close to Republicans and arrogantly proclaim yourself as "generally savvy" and follow up with the dumbest correlation possible is embarrasing for Tobman at best.

Although I appreciate his defense of School Choice in general, to blame the NRA for youth gun violence is asinine. If liberals would take off their traditional blinders and look at the rise in gun crime in countries with extensive gun control legislation (see Australia and Great Britain for prime examples), they would see how ignorant and blindly stubborn they look making statements like this. There will always be small arms. So to claim criminals (who by definition don't obey the law) are going to be disarmed by gun laws is not only dishonest but blatantly ignores the historical truth staring them in the face.

Obama Quells the Russians

2008-08-16T19:10:00.001-05:00

I can't believe I missed this gem. I must have been focused too on the Olympics.

According to Virginia Governor Tim Kaine (who is being discussed as a potential VP candidate for Obama), Obama quelled the Russians. You heard that right! Because of his request for a cease fire, the Bear lays down its arms and agrees to pull out of Georgia... well, sort of.

It was a bad crisis for the world. It required tough words but also a smart approach to call on the international community to step in. And I’m very, very happy that the Senator’s request for a ceasefire has been complied with by President Medvedev.

HT: Hot Air

No, it wasn't President Bush, Secretary Rice, or even Senator John McCain. It was the request put forth by the silvery tongued former Illinois State Senator. I guess if he can navigate Chicago politics he can accomplish anything!

Technorati Tags: Barack Obama,Tim Kaine,Russia-Georgia conflict

Clinton's Name To Be On DNC Ballot

2008-08-15T01:28:00.001-05:00

Interesting... wonder if the DNC's going to have a little mutiny on their hands?

HT: Say Anything Blog

Technorati Tags: Hillary Clinton,Democratic National Convention