Category Archives: Michele Bachmann

Bi Weekly Meditation: Causing small acts of positive energy

“They might be giants, and we might be pygmies; but we stand on the shoulders of giants, so we can see farther.” Attributed to Sir Isaac Newton

 

So by now you have probably figured out that for my meditations I prefer to list actions and habits to instill rather than just things to focus on during the typical quiet sitting type of meditation.  Now this is not to say that we don’t all need that 20-30 minutes of silent reflection every day (though we so seldom get it). But it is best when it is 20-30 minutes of keeping your mind as blank as possible. Focusing on certain things in your life or certain mantras can be wonderful things to do in preparation for the silence, but it is the moments of silence where you clear you mind of everything and listen to the universe is what is important.

 

But I like action.  Actions that help calm your life.  Actions that bring happiness into your life.

They bring a positive feeling that dispels worries and concerns that not only make your daily life easier…but actually also help with those moments of quiet meditation, because when you’ve dispelled the worries they don’t intrude on your trying to clear your mind of all things. If you’ve ever sat on the beach you probably know how you can close your eyes, empty your brain and then suddenly 20 minutes have gone by and you didn’t have a single thought…conversely after a bad day you can’t quiet your mind to save your life.  So it’s best to reinforce everything you do during the day with positive actions if you want to provide for the best setting for effective meditation.

 

So what I would recommend for the next two weeks is to make every place you go to better than you found it.  Hold a door for someone.  Compliment someone.  Pick up a piece of trash.  Leave a tip for the barista.  Help someone with their work.  Something, anything.  But no matter where you go make sure you did something that made it better than when you got there.  Now our knee jerk reaction to this is, why would that matter–so I do one thing, it’s not like anyone else is reading this blog, what will that matter.  But that is why I included that quote at the top.  It doesn’t matter how little your impact is, it doesn’t matter how small your actions are, even the pygmies who can see further can see further, and your action have made something better.

 

Just psychologically it will help dispel every single negative emotion because every single memory of the day will focus on the action you choose to take which made something better, wherever your mind roams you will see good…and that will lead to a much happier disposition.  From a New Age standpoint it gets better.  You will be spreading positive energy that will go every where, even if only in very small amounts.  But it will have a cascade effect.  Your aura will become positive energybrighter with every act and thus every place you go you will have more of an effect on those around you. If you could just get in 5 positive things in before you go to work every morning, (which I know is a lot given most of our morning routines involve avoiding people*) then you might by the time you get to work be very well immune to the usual low level negativity that surrounds the usual work place.

 

Just try it for two weeks.  Everywhere you go leave it better than when you found it.  Everywhere.  See if you don’t feel the change in your daily life and in your meditations.

 

 

*But if I may suggest…(1) compliment someone either in person if you live with someone or via whatever social media we all know we check first thing in the morning. (2) Share a blog, really it does make the author feel better (they like me they really really like me) (3) Leave a tip at Starbucks of at least a dollar and thank the person who gives you the drink, we often under estimate the power of a thank you (4) you will inevitably see a piece of trash somewhere between your residence and work, pick it up and throw it away (5) hold the door for someone on the way into work.  Just a suggested list but you get the idea. Small things.  Small things that pile up on each other.

Leave a comment

Filed under 7th Chakra, Faith, Free Will, God, Happiness, Meditation, Michele Bachmann, New Age, Prayer, Religion, Spirituality

The Cold Cynical Calculus of V.P. Selection

Who will be VP?

Wouldn’t it be great if we could get the nominee for our party no matter what year it was, to pick a Vice Presidential running mate based on only their conservative beliefs and their ability to take over. Now the Romney camp is saying that first and foremost they are looking for someone who can take over should the worst occur…and this makes sense. Romney is a businessman and CEO of a massively successful company and at that level you find most CEO’s think long-term and make sure that their senior VP is always being groomed to take over. Now for Romney that would mean that their conservative credentials are pristine …and maybe there would have to be the third factor that they do not have any major

If only we could choose VP's based solely on qualifications...

personality conflicts.And at the absolute outside you would consider who wants to run in 2020. We should have learned that one of W.’s biggest mistakes was leaving no heir apparent to run in 2008 and I would hope that Romney is not planning on repeating that.

But we also live in the real world and know that a VP is also in part (and sometimes in whole) picked because they’re meant to shore up some group that the candidate themselves has a problem with. (Do you really think Reagan put that bleeding heart Bush on the ticket because of his understanding of economics?) And I’m sorry there is a simple fact that a lot of American voters vote sometimes on the dumbest damn things…I’ve heard both men and women comment that they’re voting because of a candidate’s (or the candidate’s wife’s) appearance. This boggles my mind because I’d vote for a ticket of the Elephant Man and the Phantom of the Opera if they were preaching Chicago School Monetarist economics and I was convinced they would do what they said…but apparently, what I consider a truly disturbing amount of people think Presidential candidates or their spouses often get into trysts with random people like themselves….and even that comes off as intelligent compared to the people who vote because of race. Let’s not waste time and argue about how people SHOULD makes themselves informed of all the candidates positions and SHOULD vote only on positions, experience, and character. No here in reality the unfortunate problem of democracy is that people vote for some candidates for some very dumb reasons. And while in a perfect world this wouldn’t be an issue, the fact is that a candidate who doesn’t take this into account is probably pretty dumb as you have to get elected before you can lead (and leadership at a national level does include a little showmanship and convincing legislators and the public you are right, and someone who doesn’t understand the wackiness of human psychology and know how to play some of these odd roles isn’t effective as a leader). Or to look at another way, Rick Santorum’s ability to even make it to the ballot in two contests and has failed to file a full slate in a lot of other primary runs…in other words if you’re too incompetent to be executive of a campaign, you’re definitely too incompetent to run the nation.

So let’s go over some of the people whose names have appeared.

Starting with the: NOT A SNOWBALL’S CHANCE IN HELL category…otherwise known as I WOULDN’T VOTE FOR ROMNEY IF HE PICKED SOMEONE IN THIS CATEGORY

Never in a million years...

Sarah Palin-liberal demagogue who is only out for herself and would  do just about anything if you paid her enough. Yes I’m hard on Sarah. Probably because I’ve never heard her actually articulate a conservative position. She’s squawked some conservative sounding platitudes, but whenever she gets on a roll she starts talking about “government on the side of the people” and government doing things and helping people…and well that’s not the mind of a conservative. Luckily I don’t think anyone, but Sarah, thinks she has a chance.

Ron Paul, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry, Herman

The loser brigade

Cain…this collection of losers has done a fine job of convincing us why they shouldn’t ever be allowed near a public office.

I’ve heard the name Jeb Bush also thrown around. No. This dynasty must end.

Overall everyone in this group only brings someone who would stab the campaign and administration in the back while undermining policy at every turn. Now if you wanted to make this lot ambassadors to Mongolia, Iran, North Korea, Antarctica and for Newt, the moon, I’m fine with that. Sending them to places where there are few, if any people, or to very hostile nations is an excellent place to put this lot.

Moving onto the category of really long shots I’ve heard mentioned.

Allen West. Now Allen says some stuff that I love, but he’s a bomb thrower. He’s great for making speeches and pushing policy which works in the legislative branch…but not in the executive branch.

Mitch Daniels. The Governor of Indiana has a good track record but he stated he didn’t want to run for president in May of 2011 due to the lack of privacy it would bring to him and his family. I doubt that’s changed. Also as he’s 63 he would make a poor choice in 2020.

John Kasich. The Governor of Ohio also has a decent conservative track record. He also has hours upon hours of footage from his show on FOXNews to look through and take things out of context. I think the odds he could pull Ohio are vastly outweighed by the negatives.

Condi Rice. She doesn’t want it…and frankly to call her positions conservative is a bit of a stretch.

Rudy Giuliani. Now I love Rudy, and if the contest right now were Romney v. Giuliani I would be firmly in the Giuliani camp. That said, he’s a little old for the number two spot and while every scandal has already been brought to the light of day and would just seem cliché at this point, I don’t think he brings anything election wise to the table. It will be a cold day in hell for New York to go red, and Romney’s foreign policy or executive experience creds (where Giuliani shines) aren’t exactly his weakness.

Slightly less of a long shot

Rand Paul. Rand is a Tea Party favorite and also could possibly pull his father’s fans in both the Republican and Democratic Party. However, given how much speculation there as been about a backroom deal between Romney and Paul this just has the appearance of politics as usual, and politics is sadly a place where perception is reality. Also as with Paul, I have serious doubts about his understanding of foreign affairs.

Bobby Jindal. The Governor of Louisiana is a rising star in the party, but given the fact that he didn’t endorse anyone after his endorsement of Rick Perry (which quite frankly puts Jindal’s competence in serious question), there is the cloud of possible backstabbing that hangs around all the other guys who were at one time candidates. Besides Louisiana, like most of the South, is a red state and a safe red state, from a purely cynical perspective Jindal brings little to the table.

Michele Bachman. As you will recall I supported Bachmann early in the primary contest, and while I support her understanding of the economy and foreign policy fully, I am not sure she makes a strong choice of VP selection from a pragmatic stand point. The media has ignored her strong stance on states rights and painted her as a Rick Santorum brand of social conservative who will try to impose her moral beliefs on the entire nation via law and fiat. It’s a lie, but it’s also the message that media did a superb job in repeating over and over until it seemed like the truth…and unfortunately this would play all too easily into Obama’s hands of trying to make this election about social issues.

The Short List

Gov. Susan Martinez of New Mexico. Who? Yeah, I know. Conservative-ish. She was a Democrat before 1995…My guess is she is making the media short lists as she is a Republican Hispanic female from a swing state. If you are just looking for what she can bring that might look good on paper, but the issue of having been a Democrat coupled with the persistent lies that Romney is a flip-flopper or economic moderate this has a deadly potential to kill any enthusiasm in the base.

Rob Portman. Another favorite among the pundits, but not necessarily the base. Senator from the swing state of Ohio, he also has White House experience as W.’s Trade Representative and then OBM director. He brings Ohio and some government experience, but also the name W. and doesn’t do much to compensate for Romney’s low key personality.

Chris Christie. We would all love to see Christie given a national forum to beat up on liberals. We would all relish the tongue lashing he would give Biden in the debate; probably ending up with Biden huddled in a fetal position in a corner rocking back and forth. But, two north east governors from bluest of the blue states makes for a terrible time energizing the base. And while Romney has unjustly been accused on not supporting the 2nd Amendment, Christie actually has a questionable record. And I’ll be blunt. We all remember how the Nixon/Kennedy debates turned out? With everyone listening on the radio thinking Nixon won, and everyone watching on TV seeing Nixon look like death warmed over thinking Kennedy won? Chris Christie offers some terrible optics. And you can already see all the jokes about being asked to tighten the belt of the budget from a man who can’t tighten his. That’s cruel and unjustified…but you know the left will go there with a vengeance.

Bob McDonnell. The conservative Governor of Virginia. Swing state Virginia. Very conservative very likable. But like Bachmann, with his recently signing an abortion law in Virginia (yeah, let me thank the Virginia legislature for playing right into Obama’s plan, jackasses) he creates an opportunity to weakness more than he brings any help.

Tim Pawlenty. Former Governor of swing state Minnesota (but calling it a swing state is a bit optimistic, it will likely be blue). Defender of education reform and budget cuts he could certainly take the office if he had to. He is the safest of safe choices. And while he might make a good executive and meet all the rational criteria he doesn’t bring anything else to the table.

Nikki Haley. Governor of swing state South Carolina. Tea Party Favorite. Strong on immigration and budgets. Pro-life but as far as I can tell the left hasn’t managed to unfairly pin her as Christian psycho the way they did to Bachmann…also kind of hard to as she was raised as a Sikh. Daughter of immigrants she seems to embody the American dream and Romney’s call to believe in America. But…she seems to gather scandals like no other politician. She’s been accused of two extra-marital affairs and the South Carolina legislature is trying right now to get her impeached on some trumped up corruption charges. I searched for a couple of hours today and all these accusations seem to be a bit on the lacking any evidence side…really lacking any evidence. But I worry that in a profession where the accusation is more damaging than the crime if she is too risky a choice.

Marco Rubio. We all know the case. Rising star. Tea Party. Good looking. Charismatic. Florida. Hispanic. …and says he doesn’t want the job. Add to that picking him almost looks like pandering to Latinos and that he has very little actual experience (not to mention that he was the genius who introduced SOPA, which he has apologized for after reading the bill)…it becomes an iffy proposition.

Paul Ryan. The Golden Boy at the time of writing. Ryan is charismatic and knows how to use media to his advantage. His conservative and Tea Party credentials are unquestionable. Wisconsin is an iffy proposition this year so a Wisconsin representative could swing things.

 
So where does that leave us. Well let’s take a look at where Romney stands. According to the latest McClatch-Marist Poll, Romney is doing better than you’d think (I’d like a poll of likely not registered voters, as likely voters are more often Republican this can actually help to highlight weakness a little more in lieu of campaign internal polls). In a head to head right now it’s Obama 46% Romney 44% with 9% undecided. One the face of it this is good as you give 1-2 points for the difference between registered and likely voters and undecideds historically split 2 to 1 for a challengers (so you would likely see an actual result more along the lines of Romney 50% Obama 48% on election day). But it gets better when you look at the actual details. The bulk of the undecideds come from the “Conservative” to “Very Conservative” category…translation Santorum supporters who don’t want to make Romney appear strong. A strong Southern governor should help win them over. Obama also seems to be doing exceedingly well with “Very Conservative” voters. Again I think it’s Santorum supporters who right now want to make Romney look weak but come November they’ll vote against Obama more than for anyone if nothing else. Income is as it almost always is the poor and rich favor Democrats, while the middle class like Republicans. No surprise Obama does better with the young crowd and Romney does better with older voters. White voters, Romney by 11 points, African-Americans, Obama by 85 points and Latinos…Romney by 11 points. Wait what? Latinos voters are favoring the Republican by double digits? (15% undecided and remember, undecided voters go for the challenger). Well there just went the stronger and more cynical points for Rubio. And keep in mind that Obama and his team and surrogates are completely pissing off and alienating the Hispanic community in Florida with their over politicizing of the Martin shooting…so the Hispanic vote should be fairly secure for Romney if he doesn’t blow it. (Also it’s not a sampling error because, Obama v. Santorum in the same poll is effectively neck and neck with Latinos).

Romney’s biggest loses are Moderates by 12, the Northeast by 18, less than $50,000 by 8, age bracket of 18-29 by 8 and women by 6. If a Massachusetts governor can’t win the northeast just give up (although I have this far-fetched fantasy of Romney and Scott Brown turning the commonwealth red this one time). The only chance you have of winning the under $50,000 crowd is convincing them that Romney is going to improve the economy (so that’s Romney’s job) or by putting up a VP who grew up as the parent of immigrants (point to Rubio and Haley, but let’s not get too much into the details of Haley’s early life, her parents were well off). 18 to 29 crowd, well besides realizing that the 26th Amendment may have gone too far, the younger the better (point to Rubio, Haley, and Ryan). And to get women, more accurately to kill this BS that subsidizing birth control is somehow a right, you need someone who can’t be easily painted as a psycho-Christian (point to most of them, but I think this is hardest in Haley’s case).

Let me say up front from a policy standpoint from what I know I like Pawlenty, Rubio, Ryan and Haley. But…

I'd bet it will be one of these three

Were it up to me, I like Haley. She energizes the base. She brings a swing state.  Unlike Rubio and Ryan (or most of the people on this list), she has real business experience.  She deflects the arguments of Romney as a psycho Christian who is hell bent on creating massive social conservative laws (which you know they’ll try the minute Ricky drops out—and the left’s never too subtle accusations of racism are kind of hard to justify when your VP’s full maiden name is Nimrata Randhawa. She doesn’t upset Romney’s lead with the Hispanic vote as they can emphasize with the daughter of immigrants (and for the most part her hard line on illegal immigration policy is only unpopular with most illegal immigrants, and they’re voting Democrat anyway…yes I said that, I dare you to bring me factual proof to that illegal’s don’t vote Democrat). And if any woman on this list has the most chance of swaying the vote among women I think it would be Haley. But as I said there are the scandals. So if Haley were the top choice the Romney campaign should probably do everything it can, quietly mind you, to push Haley into the limelight and make sure the scandals float to the surface to ensure that the lack of evidence becomes obvious long before the convention and that they not only come out as baseless but lose their effect in the general election as a scandal only has a very limited half-life in the media or ADHD mind of your average voter. Hype her name, float the trial ballon, and see if the scandals stick.

Now if for some reason, like the scandals stick, I think Ryan is the next best choice because A.) he seems to have a larger vision than Rubio (that SOPA thing was kind of dumb) and B.) Florida while all important is looking safer with every day and a candidate who can help turn a mid-West state or two might be a greater advantage.

And there’s a second factor to consider. The longer the press is chewing on all of these VP potentials the longer they keep the limelight focused on Romney, but not on his positions. If Romney is very bright he will string the VP selection process out for a very long time, letting the press simply treat him as the heir apparent, working to dig into Obama’s press time, and doing Romney’s job of vetting people for the VP slot for him.

One other thing on Haley, Being Indian-American it would be interesting to see her debate Joe Biden…you know the guy who made this racist remark…

14 Comments

Filed under Capitalism, Congress, Conservative, Election 2012, GOP, Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney, Obama, People Are Stupid, politics, Rudy Giuliani

Paul Ryan’s Budget

I love, LOVE!, the new Ryan plan…it attacks all of the problems, makes cuts to all the waste, brings in more revenue, shrinks the government and understands the purpose of government without going to far too fast (as a Ron Paul might try to do).

But don’t take my word for it…look over it and decide for yourself.  The Budget Committee Page…and…THE PLAN ITSELF.



The Full Version of the Conference Here

We should support any politician who supports this plan, and condemn, harass,  push to support, or push out any politician who opposes this, the only plan that will work.

1 Comment

Filed under Budget, Capitalism, Congress, Conservative, Constitution, Corporate Welfare, Debt, Economics, Election 2012, Evils of Liberalism, GOP, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Health Care, Laws the GOP should pass, liberal arrogance, Long Term Thinking, Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney, Natural Rights, Obama, Patriotism, People Are Stupid, politics, Problems with the GOP, Social Security, Taxes, Tea Party, Tyranny, Welfare

The Supreme Irony of this Primary

Okay, so before I begin this I have to make a disclaimer. When coming into this election season I originally and incorrectly relied on what I knew about Romney from the 2008 campaign. This was a problem because back in 2008 I was so busy with work and writing I didn’t have much time to do a lot of research on all the candidates. I had settled on Rudy in 2008 and when he dropped out I just got tired of the whole thing and didn’t do much research (mostly because it was clear that it was going to be liberal Obama v. liberal McCain, neither of whom I would vote for, so why bother) so I didn’t bother to do any research on McCain’s numerous and slanderous lies about Romney being a liberal. After four years those lies, unchallenged and hardened a little in my mind and it took a while for me to do the needed research to see that Romney is a conservative and is exactly what this country needs.
But I will say in my defense it is primarily because, as the Founding Fathers would be proud of, I have a knee jerk reaction to believe the worst of any politician until proven otherwise.

But as bad as my knee jerk hatred of politicians is…the supporters of other candidates is worse, by leagues…
Paul supporters are crazy fanatics…principled crazy fanatics, but fanatics all the same. I once heard Larry Elder describe the problem of the size of government as “Republicans want to take a pen knife to a problem that requires a machete.” That may be accurate…but Paul and his supporters want to forgo the machete and just graduate to a full strafing of napalm.
Santorum supporters are as sanctimonious and unprincipled as their candidate. They also think that hatin’ us some gays and bannin’ abortion and dem evil birth control pills are clearly the most important issues facing this nation right now.
Newt supporters are just knee jerk Republicans. Gee he was speaker of the house I should vote for him. Gosh.
And I will admit that Romney supporters are a pretentious lot, but it might have something to do with that whole actually have done research and looked into the actual voting records and past acts of all the candidates. You know that whole “I can read” thing does make one a bit pretentious.
Oh Democrats, before you even think of using this against us, may I remind you that to support your guy you not only have to ignore 4 years of miserable failures, criminal acts, and outright incompetence, but you also have to ignore economics, history, human psychology, philosophy, sociology, common sense, reason, facts, truth and a whole of other stuff. At their worst any Paul, Romney or Gingrich supporter is better than any Democrat.
Why do I bring this up…well because the anti-Romney people, besides all being on the lower half of the average mark on IQ scale, are just getting desperate and it’s pathetic. For instance I’ve seen this video making the rounds to show that Romney’s a liar.

So in one video he says it’s an executive’s job to get funds where they can find them. In another he says that as executive he will get funds where he can find them. Yes, truly those two contradict each other. Huh? Granted in the debates he chides the three guy in Congress for offering the funds in the first place, but I believe the colloquial phrase is “don’t hate the player, hate the game.” Rick, Newt and Ron along with the rest of Congress helped set the rules…but we’re going to blame Mitt for playing by those rules? Huh? How does that make Romney look like the bad guy? It’s kind of pathetic really.

Here’s the problem there is no reason to vote for Santorum or Newt. If I still believed Romney was just a Massachusetts liberal, I’d be sitting things out like I did last time. Newt and Santorum have done twice the liberal things that even the worst lies about Romney claim (yeah, thank right and left wing media for pointing that out). But the saddest part of all is what’s going to happen after this primary is over.

The vast majority of the GOP voters are going to line up behind Romney and he is going to win the middle and in November win the White House.

And here’s the funny thing that is going to happen. While I will defend Romney right now as the most conservative of the remaining candidates (which he is) I will judge him as President not by the fact that I voted for him but by his actual actions. When he is conservative I will praise him and when he is liberal I will be a sieve of vitriol and venom. But the funny thing is that those same Santorum and Gingrich (and even a few Paul) supporters , being the Republican sheeple that they are will defend President Romney as if to question him is to question the scripture. Why? Because he’s a Republican. Need proof of this hypocrisy? Just look at how those same supporters are defending Rush Limbaugh right now. Rush went too far, he could have attacked Fluke on the medical facts she distorted, on the fact that she is a leftist shill, that it was her choice to go to a Jesuit university and she can live with that choice, that her whole argument is for an expansion of government power into the private sector that would be unprecedented in any free nation (not so much in fascist nations)…but no, he chose to sink to the liberal level and attack her sex life (even he admitted Monday that he was wrong to do so). He let the liberal agenda that this is about sex become the item of discussion, and by doing so betrayed conservative principles. But those Santorum and Gingrich supporter march lockstep with what they believe to be conservative commentator as much as liberals march lockstep to CNN, MSNBC and media matters. (And democrats remember Santorum and Gingrich supporters are the minority in our party, sheeple are the majority in yours).

How else do I know? Because these people didn’t demand Bush’s head for his Medicare drug socialist expansion. They didn’t demand his impeachment after the bailout (I did, but I was not blogging at that point otherwise I’d have link here). Now I will admit that I was slow to condemn Bush on Afghanistan and Iraq, because the intent was right, to free the oppressed, and it’s hard to see whether an occupation is going well at first (if it was going well and going poorly would look much the same at the beginning) but I think we can all admit at this point that while the military side was executed without flaw, the diplomatic after we win the military engagement side was handled by idiots. But you don’t hear the valid condemnation of Bush for his lack of a plan in Iraq or Afghanistan, or for his socialist policies from the right even those the bleeding heart deserves it. So I know they’ll march lockstep to President Romney even when he is wrong (and even if he is the second coming of Reagan he will at times be wrong).

Which is kind of ironic don’t you think.

2 Comments

Filed under Conservative, Election 2012, GOP, Government is corrupt, Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney, Obama, People Are Stupid, politics, Rick Santorum

Five in a row…Mitt looks to Super Tuesday…

I prefer the written word…but I understand how video and audio can do so much more….so here are some of this week’s highlights for Team Romney.

My first choice Michelle Bachmann says some great things about my current choice Mitt Romney…

O’Reilly and Romney…notice what Romney does for charity…

Ann Coulter and O’Reilly on Romney

http://videos.mediaite.com/embed/player/?content=TF84G52WW23NJB97&layout=&content_type=content_item&playlist_cid=&media_type=video&read_more=1&widget_type_cid=svp
Ann and Mitt Romney after winning Michigan and Arizona

…In other news Rick Santorum, Rush Limbaugh,and Barrack Obama duke it out for the idiot of the year award…this is going to be a photo finish.

Leave a comment

Filed under Ann Coulter, Election 2012, Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney, Obama, politics

Taking a very brief break from politics

Campaign season is burning me out just a little.  So I’m going to try (emphasis on the try part) to take a short break on politics for a few days (maybe a week)…

 

But let this suffice until after the Arizona/Michigan votes as all encompassing commentary that will probably fit any day for the next month.

 

Mitt Romney said some very conservative things today.  He was largely ignored.  The left wing media pulled some clips out of context and made him seem heartless.  The right wing media also pulled some clips out of context, ignored his entire record, and called him a liberal.

 

Rick Santorum said some crazy ass things today.  That or he announced that he actually works for The Onion  and they wanted to see how long people would believe an actor trying to parody the villains from a Dan Brown novel could keep it up before someone called him on it.  Oh and I’m sure the devil had something to do with it.  Oh most of the left wing media will continue to ignore all of his insanity, and the right wing media will continue to ignore his life-long act that seems hell bent on restoring the Soviet Union here in America…but you know with an added theocracy flavor.

 

Newt blew the good will he built up in the last debate by opening his mouth today.  Yes we all agree he comes up with wonderful quips during a debate but then he opens his mouth outside of a debate and you remember what a sleazy piece of crap he is.

 

Ron Paul said something very brilliant about economics today…and then totally blew it by talking about foreign policy.

 

Eric Holder did something illegal today as he does every day that ends in “y.”

 

Barrack Obama did something dumb today.  And he wasted millions of dollars in tax money today.

 

Marco Rubio, Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan, Rand Paul, Allen West, and Michelle Bachmann all said something brilliant, conservative and true today.  They were promptly ignored by everyone.

 

Bill O’Reilly, nice guy, said something today that shows he did not take enough classes in economics.

 

Joss Whedon wrote something Shakespearianly brilliant today.  This has nothing to do with politics, but it is a fact.

 

China, Syria, Iran, Pakistan and N. Korea did something unspeakably evil today.  Obama became their best friend.

 

Israel again ran the odds of waiting until next January when they have support or just getting it over with now.

 

Hollywood greenlit a crappy movie that should be burned even before it is filmed.  Again nothing to do with politics, just a daily fact of life.

 

Both sides in the Syrian conflict once again showed that they’re both evil.

 

Paul Krugman said something astoundingly stupid today.

 

 

There, I promise you that this will cover everything for at least the next week (if not month)

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Arizona, Capitalism, Conservative, Election 2012, Government is corrupt, Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney, Obama, politics, Rick Santorum

An open letter to those who oppose Romney

Dear Romney Opponents,
I get it. I really do.
In 2008 I was splitting my time between an 80 hour a week job and trying to write a book…I’ll bet you have a personal life and job and didn’t have a lot of free time on your hands also…who did, the economy was collapsing and we were all working our hardest to make sure that if cuts came wherever we were working we would be the last man standing and our lazy coworkers would not. So while we all knew we hated McCain we just got into the habit of buying his statements that Romney was a liberal, a flip-flopper, or whatever else we hate him for.

And this election cycle came around and we just fell into the pre-worn habit of disliking the man. I understand. I wanted Rudy. And when he didn’t run, I wanted Michele Bachmann. And because of this I just fell back on my preconceived notions of Romney without doing any research.

But after Iowa I had a choice to make. I knew I couldn’t support Paul, I love his statements on economics, but the man is psychotic. So who was left? And then I started doing some research.

I really began learning that I really hated Newt and Santorum. But I’m not going to go into why I dislike them. I’m the kind of person who if I don’t like candidates I don’t vote or I do write-ins. I don’t vote for the lesser of two evils, I only vote for people I support.

So I begrudgingly started looking into Mitt Romney fully expecting all my worst suspicions to be confirmed. That he was Obama-lite, that he was a flip-flopper on every issue, that he was not a conservative in any way.

But as I started doing research. I started with the all videos that show the things I knew I would dislike about him. His support of liberal policies and big government.

And strangely I found that this wasn’t the case. I found that Romneycare was a much more conservative alternative to what the liberal legislature in Massachusetts wanted to do with the state, which was basically put the whole thing under government control and just eliminate the private sector. I found that the worst aspects of it were done over his objection and veto or put in after he left office.

I found that the “flip flops” were all quotes taken out of context and when I went back to find the full speech or full statement his ideas were always consistent and logical, it was simply taking sound bites out of context with a man who has an inability to talk in sound bites (and is that really a bad thing? A man whose thought can’t be reduced to a little quip?)

I found every action, every choice, every move and every decision was a conservative one. I found that a man of character and experience who doesn’t come off with oodles of charisma because he’s got a secure hold of his personal psyche that he doesn’t need to seek self-aggrandizement. I found a man of achievement who can get things done that is simultaneously pragmatic in the long term and conservative.

And here I am going to challenge you. Do real research yourself. Go back and find the actual articles printed at the time of his governorship, find the whole speeches, discover what really happened. I promise you if you do, even with the compromises he made with liberals you will see that no conservative in history could have gotten a better deal given the circumstances.

I get it. I bought the McCain BS too out of lack of time and habit. But I promise you, take a day, one whole day of real research and reading, and you won’t find yourself settling for Romney, or holding your nose and voting for him because we need to get rid of Obama. If you do the research and really look over what this man has done, you will vote FOR him, not just against someone else.

I could include a lot of links in this post, but I don’t want you going to, what some will claim are, my cherry picked sources. I want you to do the research yourself. Don’t go to blogs, or opinion articles, or new articles written in the last few months. Really do some research, go and find the real information on Bain, on the Olympics, on his time in Massachusetts. Find the full speeches and read the full text. Pull up all the Paul/Newt/Santorum attack ads and look for the information they’re hitting Romney on. I promise you every single time you leave liking Romney more and hating the others as cheap mudslingers.

Romney is a conservative. Romney is what this country needs.

15 Comments

Filed under Conservative, Election 2012, Evils of Liberalism, Government is useless, Long Term Thinking, Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney, politics

What does Santorum think of women?…he hates them.

This kind of speaks for itself…

“I think that could be a very compromising situation, where people naturally may do things that may not be in the interest of the mission because of other types of emotions that are involved. It already happens, of course, with the camaraderie of men in combat, but I think it would be even more unique if women were in combat,” Santorum added. “And I think that’s not in the best interests of men, women or the mission.”

Want to read more blatantly misogynist statements from Santorum…try his book where he says women can only be happy by staying home.

Or think back to all the times he was dismissive of Michele Bachmann.

This man apparently believes that women should be weak, stupid, barefoot and pregnant. That’ not hyperbole, that’s not slander, that’s not even a mild exaggeration. This man is throw back to a time and place when women were chattel and kept out of sight.

1 Comment

Filed under Election 2012, GOP, Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney, politics, Problems with the GOP, Rick Santorum

Reflections on Iowa

I’ll be honest I wasn’t foolish to think Bachmann would win, but I thought she would do better than she did.

As my friend the Snark Who Hunts back said “Some might disagree, but the fact that Bachmann is 6th, below Gingrich and Perry just shows misogynism is a bigger problem than racism.” In my opinion those who disagree are in denial.

But here is the real problem you had two options (in reality you only ever have two options) Pragmatism and Principle and most of our choices are a balance between these two (principle is important, but only a fool fights the good fight over everything).  And then there is the Republican Party which somehow manages to never go with pragmatism or principle and consistently manages to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory…time…and time…and time…and time again.

Let’s look at Iowa.

Pragmatism says Romney and maybe Gingrich.  Perry is a stuttering fool, Santorum will scare the moderates to death, Romney will also scare the conservatives into seriously asking ‘is Obama really that bad?’ Huntsman who?  Now I love Bachmann, and I think she could beat Obama in a head to head, but if you’re going for the safe bet I’ll admit she would not be it.  So really Romney is the pragmatic bet, with Gingrich as certainly safer than anyone but Romney.

As for principle. There is Bachmann.  Santorum is only a social conservative who would eagerly regulate every aspect of the economy and your personal life if he had the chance (he is the boogeyman liberals fear Republicans are…and people voted for him?!), Perry wants to tell you what medical care you should have and is willing to unconstitutionally use executive orders to do it, Romney is a Massachusetts conservative (possibly read liberal…unless what he is saying about doing the best he could with the liberal legislature is true, your call, I believe him), Gingrich has said very liberal things and done very conservative things (and vice versa, so it’s a toss-up).  And not only is Ron Paul evil incarnate when it comes to foreign policy (the wet dream of genocidal lunatics the world over) he is beginning to sound so small government that he wants to not just go back to the gold standard, but would rather go back to the Articles of the Confederation.  And then there is Bachmann who is a take charge small government capitalist who wants to defend liberty in the world and whose only flaw is that she is a little too socially conservative.  And who’s Huntsman?

Let me say up front to the roughly half of the state of Iowa that voted for Gingrich (not my preference but you can at least pass the no brainer test), Romney, or Bachmann, I did not mean to insult you, you at least have reasons for your votes…but honestly over half your state voted for Obama and now this.  How do you stand it being surrounded by so many dumb people?

So who does Iowa pick?  The Devil and the Socialist Puritan.  WTF!  They are neither the principled choice nor the pragmatic one.  Does corn make you stupid?  I now see why The Music Man is placed in Iowa, it’s the kind of place where people would actually think “Trouble with a capital T and that rhymes with P and that stands for Pool” is a legitimate argument.  Is the smartest thing anyone ever did in that state was plow under their corn field and build a baseball stadium…oh wait that was also fiction, I guess no one in that state was even bright enough for that.

I’m sorry but there is absolutely no excuse for this.  Cain, Gingrich, Romney, Bachmann at least theoretically have (or in Cain’s case had) ideas.  Romney, Gingrich, Cain (for a while) seemed electable.  But no let’s have half the state vote for the dimwit twins.

If you voted for either of these not so affable dunces, you should know that you are a terrible, terrible, person because you have no excuse.  But to the people who voted for Paul especially I have a simple message.  I want to thank you m!@#$%f!@#ers for giving the Democrats ammunition.  For the next decade when Democrats unjustly claim that the GOP which tries for rules that will give everyone equal opportunity are racists (ignoring that their policies almost seemed designed to deny minorities opportunities in life) every non-racist in the GOP is now going to have to deal with the fact that apparently 20% of the GOP (in Iowa) felt Ron Paul was a viable option.  And quite frankly when the Democrats point that little tidbit out, there’s not a lot we can do, because, sadly it’s a valid point.  Thank you Iowa voters for giving Democrats ammunition against us.

To the rest of the country, let’s show the truth that we are not racists and it’s only the Iowa-GOP that’s suffering serious mental issues and make sure that Ron Paul does not crack single digits again.  If you have to verbally berate Ron Paul supporters until they are huddled in fetal position in a corner rocking back and forth, know that you are doing it not just for your party but your country and I am with you in spirit (if you can convince them by reason, but they’re supporting Ron Paul, they’re a bit beyond reason at this point).

You know, Ron Paul used to be fun, when he was harmless.  He was our Dennis Kucinich.  The crazy kook, the wacky drunken uncle of our political family, who we kept around for the humor of it.  How in the name of the dear lord almighty did you get 20%!

Ford, Bush, Dole, Bush, McCain and now this.  What is wrong with our party?  Why can we not even choose a pragmatic or principled candidate?  Why must we always nominate losers who are the worst of all possible worlds?

Please, the rest of nation, prove Michael Barone right that “As Iowa goes, so goes Iowa.” 

Leave a comment

Filed under Anti-Semitism, Capitalism, Congress, Conservative, Economics, Election 2012, Evils of Liberalism, Fear, GOP, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Michele Bachmann, People Are Stupid, politics, Problems with the GOP, Tyranny

Thoughts on the eve of an election

Thoughts on the Eve of an Election— Podcast version

It looks like Romney is going to win in Iowa  with it more a question of who will take second: Paul or Santorum?

Neither option is great.  Paul would let the world burn and evil expand so long as he can have peace in his time (and why is it that no one but me compares him to Neville Chamberlain, it’s an all too obvious comparison?).  And Santorum is everything I hate about the Republican party, faith over reason, faith over Constitution, faith over law and ethics and state rights and free economies and everything that is actually supposed to define a conservative.

 

Does anyone remember we are Conservatives?  We believe in small governments.  We believe that few laws are better.  That we know how to run our lives better than the government and that if we don’t harm anyone we should be allowed to do whatever we want with our lives and our money.  We believe in state’s rights and local government more than federal government.  We believe that America is the city on the hill that is not just supposed to provide an example to the world,    but to put down the worst examples of evil in it.

 

And of course, I know I’m odd but I like to go through the raw data of polls…does it bother anyone that of all the GOP nominees, Ron Paul does the best in terms of favorability among people who identify themselves as liberal and very liberal…and shaves the most votes from those two categories off of Obama.  It’s like Ron Paul’s message of isolationism, letting Islamofacists evil expand without check, letting Israel burn in a new Holocaust, and implicit racism does very well with the people who like to tack the nebulous “Civil Rights Violation” onto every crime, require quotas for minorities (because they believe that minorities couldn’t make it on their own), and like to oppose any kind of reform that might actually help inner-cities.  And you wonder why I call the Democrats the party of racists (well that and their long standing affliction with the KKK).

 

Only real Conservative in the bunch.

The best case scenario is Bachmann winning as she is the only real fiscal and foreign policy conservative in the bunch.  Does she have some crazy religious beliefs?  Yes.  And she has also said she considers those state’s rights issues and she will not intrude on state’s rights issues (unlike Santorum).

 

2nd best would be for Paul to win.  As I said this will guarantee the electorate falls in behind Romney and at least we have the most electable candidate as our nominee.  Further this prevents Paul from mounting a serious third party challenge as he will spend so much time trying to win the GOP nomination that he will have no chance to re-gear his campaign for a 3rd Party challenge.

 

3rd best would actually be for Romney to win and Santorum to come in 2nd place as Santorum would be easier to challenge on fiscal issues than Ron Paul (given that Santorum doesn’t actually believe in fiscal conservatism…only in legislating what we do with our genitals and with whom).

You don't even need to mock up a photo with this guy...nothing looks less presidential than that sweater vest...yeah he got his ass kicked every day on the playground

 

 

Oh and a word on the fact that none of the candidates who have dropped out have endorsed anyone.  Gutless cowards the lot of you!  And an especially vicious “damn you to hell” goes from the bottom of my heart to Sarah Palin.  Not only is this idiotic liberal dressed in Republican clothes (bridge to nowhere, taking state money for her TV show, saying the only thing we need to do is spend more money to fix education, among many other bleeding heart stances) a coward for not endorsing any candidate until it appears she can safely endorse the winner, she continues to show she has no principles whatsoever.  Just look at 2010 where she endorsed only two categories of people (1) any woman who claimed to be conservative (even if they weren’t, i.e., Whitman, Fiorina) and (2) uber-liberal and opponent to every right listed in the Constitution, John McCain.  At least with point 1 you would have assumed that she would have endorsed Bachmann, right?  Nope, of course not, a Bachmann win might steal Sarah’s thunder.  Because to Sarah it’s all about Sarah, and nothing (the sake of the nation, beating Obama, unity within the party, the Constitution) should even come before Sarah and her checkbook.  No issues cannot be flip-flopped on, no professed principle cannot be shoved under the rug.  No conservative can be thrown under the bus fast enough to gratify Sarah’s ego.  She’s like the GOP version of Obama.

 

So here’s to praying for a Bachmann win in November and just hoping for an easy Romney win in November.  Clearly the Senate races are not only going to be important but crucial as we need to get Tea Party, small government (not just Republican) blood in there too if we’re going to drive Romney to always veer toward liberty.

Leave a comment

Filed under Capitalism, Economics, Election 2012, Evils of Liberalism, Free Will, GOP, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Long Term Thinking, Michele Bachmann, Patriotism, People Are Stupid, Podcasts, Problems with the GOP, Tyranny

A word from Paul Ryan on what this election means…

I love Paul Ryan …

He doesn’t go over all of these issues but this is what we need to make this election, and every election at every level about:

Here is your choice

The Individual or the group?

Low Taxes or the government saying it knows more about spending money than you do?

Small Government or a welfare state?

Opportunity with the possibility of failure or stagnation and equality in misery?

Economic Liberalism/Economic Freedom/Capitalism (which always works) or Keynesianism/Krugman/Marx (which has never worked)?

Rules or loopholes?

Inequality of joys or equality of suffering?

Do you have the right to do with your body and your life what you want so long as it harms no one or does the government get to say what you can say, do and think?

The right to live your life or being merely safe at a subsistence level?

The right to fail and learn or to be taken care of like a child?

The personal responsibility to help yourself and others or the letting someone else do it for you?

Is the Constitution the highest law of the land or just more of guidelines?

The national responsibility to defend the weak from tyranny or letting others fall and say it’s not our problem?

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness or existence, control, and the guarantee of subsistence?

I’m not saying that one or any of the current GOP candidates fits this bill perfectly, although some come closers than others (*cough*Bachmann*cough*…that will sound better on the podcast)…but these are principles of America vs. those of the what now passes for Europe (although the UK might just pull out and join us in principle, God bless David Cameron).  Every time, every election, every level.  We are at a cross roads and we cannot afford to choose anything but America.

Leave a comment

Filed under American Exceptionalism, Capitalism, Congress, Conservative, Constitution, Economics, Evils of Liberalism, Founding, Government is corrupt, Government is useless, Happiness, Health Care, Individualism, Long Term Thinking, Michele Bachmann, Natural Rights, Obama, Taxes

Bachmann shows class and character again…

LINK TO THE PODCAST

Bachmann Shows Class and Character

So gay rights activist didn’t do themselves any favors today. Hot on the heels of a great video that made the rounds on Facebook last week showing that gay people can raise children just as well as straight people…

…there is a new video that destroys all the good the last one did and shows that gay people are as human as everyone else, and can be absolutely terrible parents just as straight people can be terrible parents.

Take a look.

Now it may be hard to hear but the kid says “My mom is gay and she doesn’t need fixing.”
Sadly, the kid is very, very wrong.
Does his mom need fixing because she’s gay. Good lord no. But she does need fixing.
She needs fixing because instead of having the guts to challenge Bachmann on her own, to go and face Bachmann woman to woman, she uses the coward’s way out and uses a child as a body shield.
Clearly this child has been coached to say this. So this mother chooses rather than to take a stand and actually get into an argument with someone (and hell it’s an argument where almost* ALL the facts are on her side, it would have been far more embarrassing to Bachmann to have her challenged with a real opponent) she chooses to have her child speak for her because she is too afraid to justify her own life on her own. Such rank cowardice is sickening, and that she would use her child is worse.  And it’s quite frankly an insult to gay rights as it makes it appear it is a concept that can only be defended when you use cheap tricks.
I’m sorry, children should not be used as puppets in political and social debates. (But then again the left and it’s Occupy Wall Street kin are known for using children as human shield)

While children should be brought to political events and shown how a good citizen is involved (although given the massive amounts of crime and violence anyone who brings a child to an Occupy Wall Street event is clearly guilty of endangering a child), they should not be used as the mouth pieces for your political statements. Grow a spine and make your own comments.

But again thank you for showing that gay parents are just like straight parents—they can be complete asses or they can be great.

And kudos to Michele Bachmann for having the class and intelligence to realize that this child is just being used as a pawn. She gives the mother a dirty look (likely for being such a piss poor parent that would exploit their child for a political end…and bring a video recorder along for the ride, real classy, clearly the best interest of the child is always at the forefront of this parent’s mind) but for also saying goodbye to the child with a smile showing him that she bares him no animosity.
Also I love how this shows they don’t know who their enemy is. Bachmann has stated she’s not going to get in the way of states that choose to allow gay marriage. In fact how many times in the last year has Bachmann brought this issues up, as far as I know it’s only brought up by other people and she responds…as far as I can tell it’s not an issues that is important to her policy agenda one way or the other. A Bachmann presidency would likely see an expansion of states who allow it (if for no other reason than she would be a great lighting rod for the movement to use and encourage people to vote gay marraige or civil unions in, meanwhile she would allow state laws to be implemented…unlike say another President who feels that any state that doesn’t agree with him should be sued out of existence in complete violation of the Constitution) . Why not try going after Perry and Santorum who don’t understand states rights?  Or how about Obama’s miserable track record for gay rights?

*Those gay pride parades are a disgrace and really the gay community needs to drop that insanity and just go with the “we’re human and just like everyone else” line.


Oh, and before anyone misunderstands what offensive statement I’m making here, let me be clear, the fact that this woman in a terrible parent has absolutely nothing to do with her being gay…it has to do with her being liberal.

Leave a comment

Filed under Evils of Liberalism, Gay Marriage, Gay Rights, Government is useless, Michele Bachmann, Obama, Occupy Wall Street, politics

Which is worse breaking the 11th commandment or being insane?

For Ron Paul you don’t have to make a choice.

(Full disclosure, as my regular readers know I’m supporting Bachmann right now).

Certainly most of these charges are valid and damning.  And it would make a good argument against against Newt Gingrich…until you see the part where it says “Ron Paul 2012.”

At that point you’re looking at it and saying…”hmmm.  on the one hand Newt appears to be a hypocrite, a pragmatic one that will say whatever will gain him power at the time, but a hypocrite nonetheless.  Versus Ron Paul, a man who doesn’t see anything wrong with letting Iran having a nuke. ” Iran, a country led by the Ayatollah and Ahmadinejad, two Holocaust deniers who are religious zealots and certifiably insane…because I can’t possibly see anything wrong with that.  Any person with half of a functioning brain (clearly not Ron Paul) knows that the people in charge of Iran are so insane they will use a nuclear weapon against the Israel and the U.S. the consequences be damned, because they don’t think there will be consequences, because they think Allah is on their side, and thus they won’t be harmed for carrying out his will.  When Paul mentions the Chinese and the Russians as having more nukes, he seems to fail to realize there is difference between just being evil and being evil AND batshit insane!  Ron Paul makes Neville Chamberlain look like a genius of foreign policy who plans for the long term outcome of events.

Keep in mind that this is also a man who has interesting book releases. While other candidates release autobiographies or books on policy…no not Ron Paul, Ron has a cookbook.  It’s a cookbook.  IT’S A COOKBOOK!  (sorry couldn’t resist).

Yes this indeed is the man who I want running the country.  A man who doesn’t feel he can tell evil lunatics whether or not they can have a weapon of genocide…but he can tell you how to eat.

 

But here is the thing, as hypocritical as Newt is, he’s still better than Obama. Ron Paul and his eagerness to hurtle us toward WWIII through appeasing all of the world’s villains…I’m not quite sure that his foreign policy wouldn’t be worse for America than Obama’s economic policy.

 

 

 

1 Comment

Filed under Election 2012, Foreign Policy, Michele Bachmann, politics

Democrats are just as crazy as their leader…

I usually don’t talk about  the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) (primarily because my mother taught me it was wrong to make fun of people with a severe mental handicap)…but I couldn’t resist this one.

Today, on CNN she made the following statement…

“These are a field of Republican candidates so obsessed with one job, Barack Obama’s, rather than American jobs, that they even refused to acknowledge that it’s President Obama who planned and executed the attack on al Qaeda that killed Osama Bin Laden.”

Damn Right! He didn’t just sign a piece of paper giving approval, this man personally planned the approach and how the members of SEAL Team 6 would hit the compound, then he personally, personally I tell you, got on a chopper, went with the SEALs, calling every single shot, and fired the kill shot himself. “planned and executed the attack”

And he didn’t sign a piece of paper with a plan already pre-made by the generals and experts which it would have political suicide to not sign…no this is the man who told the CIA to start tracking this terrorist, because before him they were doing nothing, this is the man  who trained the seals, who executed the surveillance, who led the brave soldiers into battle and who rid the world of evil.   “it’s President Obama who planned and executed the attack on al Qaeda that killed Osama Bin Laden.”

And how dare those goddamned Republicans not give him credit.  The way they’re acting you’d think all he did was make a no brainer political call that anyone in his position (okay, maybe not Ron Paul or Jimmy Carter) would have done and then just sat and watched it on the big screen TV with only slightly more interest than he paid to Game Seven of the World Series.  How dare you!

“PLANNED AND EXECUTED THE ATTACK!”

How dare you treat this man as anything short of Jesus Christ, George Washington, Superman and Jack Bauer rolled into one.  Shame on you Republicans.

It’s kind of telling that the point she goes to as his shinning achievement which he should be given credit for is one that must have taken immense character and courage to make such a unpopular choice.

Oh, and what is it with liberals and blinking (go on, click the link above and watch the video)…When we used to always go to Pelosi she would blink only when she would be making bad calls on the stock market (it’s amazing how well that woman can pick stocks…it’s like she had insider information or something)…but now we have this dingbat who blinks about 30 times a second.

2 Comments

Filed under Congress, GOP, Humor, Michele Bachmann, politics, War on Terrorism

Why I support Bachmann

So the other day a friend of mine posted the following insightful comment on facebook:

Why is everyone so upset about candidates trying to do away with the Department of Education?

It was an intelligent comment as it is a worthless federal department. But it strangely got this response:

maybe because that’s what Bachmann supports and so the perfectly reasonable [sic] people in this country know immediately it’s a bad idea…

Now I’ll grant that this second comment came from someone who has always struck me as having the I.Q. of turnip, but it does seem that this a widely held belief that Bachmann is a moron. But what is this based on? (Besides the fact that there is misogynistic hatred of women in this country which I have already talked about at length.)

Well we have two odd pop culture gaffes. The kind of flubs we all make where we reach for one name and our brain pulls out another, or where we associate one place with something entirely unrelated. These flubs had nothing to do with policy and in fact any person who talks all day without a script probably makes a dozen of these a day (or if you’re Obama you just stand there going uh, uh, uh, until someone brings the teleprompter out).

Then there is her religion. Yes she went to a religious school for her J.D. and passed the bar…oh and then she got another Masters Degree from William and Mary…you try getting into William and Mary see how easy it is (all this while raising children).

But she’s religious! Yeah, so are a lot of people. Is she wrong in her opinion on the nature of homosexuality? Of course she is. But you’ll notice that unlike lunatics like Perry or Santorum she doesn’t feel the need to legislate it. In fact she said:

In New York State, they have passed the law at the legislative level, and, under the 10th Amendment, the states have the right to set the laws that they want to set. […]
That is up to the people of New York. I think that it’s best to allow the people to decide this issue. I think it’s best if there is an amendment on the ballot, where the people can weigh in.

Yes, she has said that there should be a Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage…but you’ll notice that she only mentions that when she’s directly questioned, all she wants to talk about, given the choice, is the economy and national defense…and really do you think she’s so stupid as to think that such an amendment has a snowball’s chance in hell of passing? I doubt it. Listen to what she says, it’s a throw away line to keep the base happy, she doesn’t seem to put major energy into promoting it…not like the amount of energy the media puts into keeping this issue alive.  And keep in mind I have very little reason to support a highly religious candidate (being a Pagan and all), so if I’m not worried about her religious beliefs, you shouldn’t be either.

And yes her husband is nuts. But we’re electing a President not their spouse…if we judged presidents by their spouses…uh…well that might not be best the policy…and don’t just think of first ladies for the last century…think of the spouses of some of the people who lost. If we choose presidents by how likeable and honorable their spouses were, we’d have President John Edwards right now. I want you to think about that.

But let’s see here what has she said that’s made sense:

Well there was:

“I believe absolutely every American benefits by this magnificent country. Absolutely every American should pay something, even if it’s a dollar.”

Yes, not caring about “fair share” but actual justice, what a concept.

“I also want to completely abolish the tax code. I want to flatten the tax for all of Americans, simplify that tax for all of Americans. And that creates job growth, which is exactly what we need to have.”

“Because to be able to fuel the fire for this economy, again, it is the tax code, but it doesn’t end with the tax code. It’s the regulatory burden that costs us $1.8 trillion every year, but it’s more than that cost. It’s jobs that are lost. “

“ So we need to repeal “Obama-care,” repeal the jobs and housing destruction act known as Dodd-Frank. President Obama’s plan has been a plan for destruction of this economy and failure. “

Clear understanding of classical liberal economic policies…much better than any of the other candidates with maybe the exception of Newt.

“I will build it on the entire border, and I’ll tell you why. Every year, it costs this country $113 billion in the costs that we put out to pay for illegal aliens. It costs the state and local government of that amount $82 billion. For every household of an American citizen, it costs us $1,000 a year. We are robbing the household of Americans who can’t afford that.

“ I will build the fence. I will enforce English as the official language of the United States government. “
“And every — every person who comes into this country will have to agree that they will not receive taxpayer-subsidized benefits of any American citizen…

No tap dancing and a clear understanding what it needed to fix the problem.

She is also the only candidate who seems to understand the difference between what the President does and what Congress does. Other candidates make claims about what Congress will pass, they give specifics on legislation they will have no control over, this leads to some of her statements being a little vague, but only because unlike the rest of these losers she seems to understand the President is not a law unto himself (or herself). And she seems to understand what the Constitution says and what can be legislated and what can’t without first getting an Amendment.

She understands that Israel is our “greatest ally” and that the President of Iran is a “genocidal maniac.” Something the current occupant of the White House has no clue about.

Now I’ll admit that I have a bit of an issue rooting for underdogs. I wanted Giuliani because I found him to be the perfect mix of conservative economics, moderate social policy, and neoconservative foreign policy. But I can’t get that so what choices do I have left:

Conservative Economics Neo Conservative Foreign policy Moderate Social Policy
Romney Theory yes, practice ? Yes No
Perry No No No
Santorum Yes No Hell No
Cain Yes He doesn’t even know what foreign policy is No
Huntsman No No ?
Paul Yes Hell No Nothing about this man is moderate
Newt Yes—kind of Yes—kind of Kind of, I guess
Bachman Yes Yes Not really, but it doesn’t seem to be her main thrust

And as Meatloaf said, “two out of three ain’t bad.” So I will continue to support Michele until I can’t.

But the fact that she wants to flatten the tax code ( I can’t trust Romney in this), remove regulations, overturn ObamaCare, abolish the Department of Education, drill for oil, close the border (I certainly can’t trust Perry for this), change anchor baby status, blow up the bad guys (Cain would screw things up, Huntsman would bow down to his Chinese overlords, and Paul would support starting up Auschwitz again), reform Social Security, and stay within the actual boundaries of the Constitution (I can’t trust Santorum for this). Michele is my candidate.

But please, if you think I’m stupid give me a reason.  Show me why I as a fiscal conservative and foreign policy neoconservative should support any other candidate on ethical and policy reasons.  I don’t want to hear about the fact that she can’t be elected, because she could be if people dropped the she can’t be elected argument.  And I suspect that in terms of policy you have nothing but misogyny.  But please prove me wrong.  I dare you.

5 Comments

Filed under Capitalism, Conservative, Constitution, Economics, Education, Election 2012, Evils of Liberalism, Gay Rights, GOP, Individualism, Michele Bachmann, Patriotism, politics, Rudy Giuliani, Unjust legislation, War on Terrorism