Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Kerry, Rangel Ruin Dems
Clearly angered, the lanky senator John Kerry had a hissy fit on Tueday, blaring that he wasn't about to be cowed by Tony Snow's response to his rather ignorant military statement. He defiantly and in no uncertain terms declared Tuesday that he would "apologize to no one" for this statement,
"You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. And if you don't, you get stuck in Iraq,"
Kerry has just ruined any chance of dems winning congress. Dems will fail in an attempt to make this into a joke. It is the dumbest comment ever made by a congressman next to Dick Durbin's that our soldiers are no better than Hitler's.
These democrats are the most vile garbage in the country. They are no better than terrorists' in Iraq! Make no mistake, American soldiers are fighting both.
White House spokesman Tony Snow told reporters at his daily briefing Tuesday that Kerry's comments are emblematic of his disdain for the military.
"In response to White House Press Secretary Tony Snow, assorted right wing nut-jobs, and right wing talk show hosts," Kerry whined his opponent was distorting his comments to divert attention from what he called a dismal record on Iraq.
John Kerry:"I'm sick and tired of these despicable Republican attacks that always seem to come from those who never can be found to serve in war, but love to attack those who did. I'm not going to be lectured by a stuffed suit White House mouthpiece standing behind a podium, or doughy Rush Limbaugh, who no doubt today will take a break from belittling Michael J. Fox's Parkinson's disease to start lying about me just as they have lied about Iraq. It disgusts me."
Thanks John, that should help get Republicans to the polls. Now democrats are bailing on Kerry. Iowa candidate asks Kerry to cancel campaign visit.
Can you imagine if Kerry had won in 2004? America might look like Iraq, which is really what democrats must want as all they've ever done is bash everything America does to defeat terrorism. Dems hate that America hasn't been attacked since 9/11, and that the economy is good without massive taxes imposed on the public. With their Robin Hood mentality, they just don't get it.
AMVETS' National Commander expressed disbelief and disappointment in the comments by Senator John Kerry Monday.“For the Senator to suggest that today’s United States military is made up of uneducated men and women who didn’t ‘study hard’ or ‘make an effort to be smart’ is ridiculous and appalling,”AMVETS National Commander Thomas C. McGriff said Tuesday. “The men and women in uniform today make up the most advanced, highly-educated force ever seen. To suggest otherwise is a slap in the face to every soldier, sailor, airman, Marine and Coast Guardsman who has spent countless hours working to better him or herself. This is also an insult to every person and organization who has worked tirelessly to provide our troops and their families with education benefits.
“Senator Kerry should retract his remarks and apologize immediately,” McGriff said after listening to comments made by Senator Kerry at a political rally in Pasadena, Calif., Monday. “It is especially outrageous coming from a member of the U.S. Senate.”
Kerry should be banned from lecturing American students as he spouts treason, like his anti-American mentor Ted Kennedy did during the 1980's against President Ronald Reagan's work to end Communism and win the Cold War.
Vietnam is the liberals favorite ammo to bash the war, but it was only because of their type, that the U.S. lost on the verge of victory with John Kerry's incessant lying to congress to deflect from his own war crimes.
House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, also called on Kerry to apologize, labeling his comments
"disrespectful and insulting to the men and women serving in our military."
Gen. Wesley Clark agreed that Kerry's remarks are not helpful to Democrats in general.
"I can not explain anything John Kerry said," said Clark, who also ran for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination. Clark added that he's spoken to military leaders about the next troop rotation coming. "They tell me the troops are ready. The families are ready back here. They know what they're facing. It's the best army we've ever had."
In a separate disgusting display of democratic angst, Rep. Charles Rangel (D) NY, who would be on tap to take the top post in the House tax-writing panel if Democrats win the House majority next Tuesday, called Vice President Dick Cheney a "son of a bitch" after the vice president said Rangel would raise taxes as head of the Ways and Means Committee.
Rangel has admitted that there is not one tax cut he would keep. This would let the tax cuts expire, thus raising them to the levels during the last recession.
Vice President Dick Cheney in an interview on FOX News' Neil Cavuto on Monday:
"Charlie has said there's not a single one of the Bush tax cuts he thinks should be extended. And he could achieve that objective simply by not acting. Unless there's an affirmative action by Congress, legislation passed to keep those rates low, those rates are going back up, and he'd have a massive tax increase."
In Tuesday editions of The New York Post, Rangel suggested Cheney needs professional treatment.
"He's such a real son of a bitch, he just enjoys a confrontation," Rangel said, describing himself to the newspaper as "warm and personable." He told the newspaper Cheney may need to go to "rehab" for "whatever personality deficit he may have suffered."
"When you have those sorts of problems, you're supposed to seek help," Rangel said. "He acknowledged that he has problems with communication."
What a mature statement from a member of congress, huh? Rangel and democrats have proven themselves so weak they are unable handle even verbal confrontations.
Snow said he talked to Cheney, who got a big laugh from Rangel's remarks.
"In a year in which, again, on these key issues, the Democrats don't have a plan, it does appear that they have an anger management problem."
Indeed, the left has literally gone quite insane in their hatred. All Republican's have to do is allow democrat's to talk themselves into losing. Democrat's are clearly not ready or able to lead this nation. God forbid they gain control of anything.
So if Dems do lose again next week, will any call for Kerry's head? Nope. They only do that if it's a Republican who makes bad comments, as they did with Minority Leader Trent Lott. But I digress.
As I've suggested before, Democrat's are going to have to rebuild their entire platform all over again with a new generation, as this group of out-of-touch old liberals has made a total shambles of the party.
With democrat's in support and promotion of abortion for oxymoronic Planned Parenthood, democrat's have little chance of being a majority in America again as their numbers decrease. However, should Republicans keep ignoring their base, going against party values and fiscal restraint, democrats may not be as effected, and could one unfortunate day, win again.
Let's not let it happen, Vote!
© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.|
Monday, October 30, 2006
Fox update on stem cells/cloning
To clarify; the following in quotes is not an attack on Michael J. Fox, simply a presentation of real facts based on Fox's own words. My personal views follow after.
On page 2 of a four page article in an interview on ABC with MJ Fox concerning his stance on stem cell research, Fox says that he has NOT READ the proposed bill, and is basing it on what others have told him. In other words, he is following a script.
"The only thing is, we would like to include embryonic stem cell research, which our scientists say has the best hope for cures and breakthroughs.
See, we're in agreement. I think that when they say talk about not being fair, there has been, again, not as much focus on the content of the ad. It's really the appearance of the ad. But really, because all the statements are verifiable and to direct comparison, it is, in effect, an ad for their position. If you see the ad and you agree with their position, and there are people that do, then it should incentive you to vote for them.
Stephanopoulos: In the ad now running in Missouri, Jim Caviezel speaks in Aramaic. It means, "You betray me with a kiss." And his position, his point, is that actually even though down in Missouri they say the initiative is against cloning, it's actually going to allow human cloning.
Fox: Well, I don't think that's true. You know, I campaigned for Claire McCaskill. And so I have to qualify it by saying I'm not qualified to speak on the page-to-page content of the initiative. Although, I am quite sure that I'll agree with it in spirit, I don't know, I— On full disclosure, I haven't read it, and that's why I didn't put myself up for it distinctly.
But I've made this point before, and I really am sincere in it, that anybody who's prayed on this, and thought about it, and really considered it and can't get their mind around or their heart around the idea of embryonic stem cell research, I'd go to war for your right to believe that. And you're right to feel that. I respect it. I truly do."
Here is the link to the full article... Michael J. Fox Fires Back at Critics
My view is this: Since Fox has not read the Bill to be voted on, that does indeed allow for human cloning (in a deceptive manner) to become part of Missouri's state constitution, how can he say that it is in anyway ethical, and then have the gall to say he's prayed about it? Fox says he's sure he would agree with it in spirit. But does Fox believe that Clones will have a spirit?
As I said in my Cloning web of lies paragraph posted previously below, "Liberals see this (stem cells) as an issue to keep abortion legal from challenges."
By getting this put into a state constitution, democrats will open the door to passage in all states, (just as they're trying to do with gay marriage) and they have purposely confused the issue with cloning. It is clearly on the agenda of democrats to continue with infanticide. 50 million murdered babies is still not enough for them.
Again, "This is reason enough for voting (Republican) to keep them (Democrats) from gaining power."
Human cloning is nowhere near ethical, and that is unlikely to be resolved anytime soon (I hope), if ever. But in these days, you never know.
© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.|
Thursday, October 26, 2006
Frightful Midterm Election
Given confidence from the majority of American's in 2004 to control all three branches of government, to do what is right for the nation and set it on a course for progress, Republican's in congress have squandered many opportunities while neglecting their party's advertised platform to limit government spending.
Republicans in the 1990s gave line-item veto power to the Democratic president, but have not given it to their own current Republican president, likely for fear that he would use it. That fear is why some Republicans' will be replaced in November.
While the GOP holds all three branches of government, they have not taken the bold initiatives needed for a party in power. Any resulting discontent from their constituents could swing congress to the liberals, who will repeal all or most of president Bush's accomplishments, including the tax cuts which haven't been made permanent by his own team for fear of democrat cries in the media. Even so, it is beyond debate how the tax cuts have given a huge boost to the economy and provided it with nearly 7 million new jobs, the lowest unemployment rate, expanded housing market, large capital gains for individual investors, low interest rates, etc..
As recently pointed out by Investors Business Daily, since the Bush tax cuts took effect in 2003,
"the economy has added $1.26 trillion in real output, $14.4 trillion in net wealth and 5.8 million new jobs."But that progress doesn't seem to matter to the liberals, whose only real goal is to raise income tax rates. "Taxing the rich" will be the leading economic argument of a 2007 Democratic House, and a rollback tax bill of some kind could be voted on. The job number is actually higher as said above.
Shall the American public erase all the positives of the past 5 years, and go back to the falsehoods of the 1990's? Republican's have given in to increased federal spending by some $750 billion since 2001, and for fiscal 2006 approved 10,000 earmarks costing $29 billion. But as usual, Democrats wanted even more, and if they win the midterm elections, they'll probably get it unless president Bush uses his veto pen. With Democrats never passing on spending bills they didn't love – except for military and defense purposes proven by their votes against the war and the national Missile Defense System – they are chomping at the bit to spend like drunken sailors once again.
Offering only pain for no gain, a democrat economy will come with massive tax hikes that will increase unemployment, while they take America backwards by making us all feel guilty for being the world's richest nation. Dems love to use the media to throw out emotional tag lines such as "We can do better," and "We must do more," etc. But notice it is always we and not them. Putting democrats in charge will only cause more problems for society, as proven from their past failures during the Carter and Clinton administrations, while they claim otherwise regardless of the facts. Dems have yet to figure out why they lost congress in 1994 so badly, but hopefully the majority still remembers, and won't let them in again.
Republican's in fearing democrat attacks, never brought individual ownership of Social Security retirement accounts to a vote, thus insulating themselves from leftist critics. They've done little on health care, giving the left more ammo for government control over the world's best health care system to make it more like Canada's and the U.K., where people wait months for an appointment and longer for treatment on the cheap.
Some Conservative principles seem to have been put aside by this congress, while ethical principles have been ignored by some bad apples like DeLay, Foley, Abramoff in the party America looks to for good values and morality. Of course there will always be those who are planted in the party to cause such disruptions, so they must and will be weeded out eventually, perhaps very soon.
With the stock market reaching new highs and strong employment, democrats will have to be at their best to deceive the public with doom and gloom scenario's about the economy, as they did in 1991 with Bill Clinton's attacks on the Reagan/Bush boom during a small and yet predicted recession. But they don't have that now, so dems and their 527 media machine will make up numbers and scary stories to "suggest" the economy is failing, or that only the rich (like John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Ted Kennedy and Harry Reid) will survive.
Power hungry Democrats claim to care for the poor when all they really care about is getting their votes to enable them to steal their hard earned money using lies about taking it from the rich, their hero's like socialist Noam Chomsky define as anyone making a "certain amount," fluctuating as they deem necessary for "the common good."
With the war in Iraq dragging on and the media playing up every car bombing and death as if it were another 9/11, Republican's are worried about the negative impact on the public psyche from the whiney left rantings about bringing the troops home, closing international trade, drawing the shades and hiding within our borders. Democrats offer no plan to win the war, voicing wildly that Iraq is another Vietnam disaster, which is like comparing the jungle to the desert.
While president Bush has been cautious about changing tactics, he is letting the situation on the ground determine the adjustments required when called for by the generals in battle, which is the opposite of how Democrats did it in Vietnam by micro-managing the war from the White House and Pentagon.
Despite the rants of Michael Savage claiming on radio that Bush is following their repetitive script, Bush is showing by his actions that he's adaptable, and isn't going to panic. No war is perfect or ever has been, and to expect it to be, as do liberals, is unrealistic and dangerous. But Bush and the administration seem to be caving to the whims of panty-waist liberals by downplaying "Stay the course" which means to win the war, not run away like libs desire. There are and will continue to be many turns on the course to defeating these evil enemies of freedom wanting to rule the world through forced religion, suppression, violence, and death. Unfortunately, this long overdue war will outlast this administration.
According to FT.com, Bush has "moved from expressing “serious concern” about Iraq, while emphasising progress was being made, to being resolute about the ultimate outcome in the country but flexible about military tactics to attain that end.
Mr Bush acknowledged the US’s most immediate goal was “to prevent a full-scale civil war from happening in the first place”.
He stressed his role as commander-in-chief – “the ultimate accountability rests with me” – even as he deferred to the commanders on the ground to dictate troop levels.
As Cal Thomas' well reasoned article Rumsfeld's Prophecy Has Come True, points out,
Using a justification for fighting terrorism that would resurface in the current war, Rumsfeld said, "Terrorism is a form of warfare and must be treated as such... weakness invites aggression. Simply standing in a defensive position, absorbing blows, is not enough. Terrorism must be deterred." In his 1984 speech, Rumsfeld said terrorism cannot be eliminated, but it can be made to function at a "low level" that will allow governments to function. He repeated that thought at lunch and added that the United States is somewhat at a disadvantage because the terrorists don't have a media that challenges their policies, they have no hierarchy and they "get to lie every day with no accountability." Speculating again about the future, Rumsfeld said, "there will be no conventional wars in the near future and no way the military can win or lose a war.""
On Wednesday October 25, president Bush sought to align himself with US public opinion when he said he was “not satisfied either” with rising violence in Iraq. But he warned that US troops were needed to “prevent a full-scale civil war”.
That is some distance from the definitions set out in November in the Victory in Iraq document. It said the short-term view of victory was an “Iraq that is making steady progress in fighting terrorists, meeting political milestones, building democratic institutions, and standing up security forces”. The medium-term goal was to have a “fully constitutional government in place”.
Mr. Bush said he would consider any “proposal that will help us achieve victory” but declined to say whether he would directly engage with Iran and Syria to resolve tensions.
“Iran and Syria understand full well that the world expects them to help Iraq.”
The flaw to this reasoning is to expect Iran and Syria to help us at all, when their oft-stated goal is to eradicate Israel and America from the Middle East using Islamic terror and if possible, nuclear weapons. It is dubious vegas odds makers would give a spread on terrorist sponsoring states helping the world.
Although Mr Bush said he had no intention of “standing in the crossfire between rival factions in Iraq”, officials and analysts in the Middle East – and some Republican loyalists – are saying US troops already face that direct challenge. Gee, no kidding?
Victor Davis Hanson said in The Dark Ages -- Live From the Middle East!
"Since Sept. 11, the West has fought enemies who are determined to bring back the nightmarish world that we thought was long past. And there are lessons Westerners can learn from radical Islamists' ghastly efforts.
First, the Western liberal tradition is fragile and can still disappear. Just because we have sophisticated cell phones, CAT scanners and jets does not ensure that we are permanently civilized or safe. Technology used by the civilized for positive purposes can easily be manipulated by barbarians for destruction."
Emotional tactics 2006
Have the majority of voters become smart enough to see through democrat deceptions? Being experts at creating false fear in the media while ignoring the truth about terrorist enemies, even while at war, the left will create deceitful campaigns to get votes and exploit suffering for politics.
Back to the Future democrats are victimizing people like Parkinson's ridden actor Michael J. Fox (who falsely played republican supporter Alex P. Keaton), and injured military vet Tammy Duckworth to make people feel guilty about disease and war is another deceptive tactic used by democrats to pull on the emotional strings of bleeding hearts. Democrat's say they "will make cripples walk" if only they will vote for them, as ex-senator John Edwards and John (Swift boat) Kerry insisted in the last week before the 2004 election with promises of–to date unproven–embryonic stem cell cures.
Cloning web of lies
Voters in Missouri on Nov. 7 will decide whether to approve that 2,000-word proposal, a plan that has been billed as a "cloning ban" by its supporters. However, the document itself shows that the only human cloning that it bans is the actual production of a living human being from a clone, and it actually enshrines in the state constitution the right to clone human embryos for "research" purposes.
Liberals see this as an issue to keep abortion legal from challenges. This is reason enough for voting to keep them from gaining power.
While Amendment 2 is advertised by supporters as a ban on human cloning, said Suppan, "in the 2,000 words you won't read, it makes cloning a constitutional right".
See: Celebs tell Missourians to vote no on cloning.
Michael J. Fox claims, despite embryonic stem cell research not having helped a single patient,
"George Bush and Michael Steele would put limits on the most promising stem cell research."Obviously, Fox wants to open the door to whatever may help him personally, even if morally unjustified and/or wrong for humanity. We feel his pain, but killing embryo's for the sake of potential research is unethical when there are other ways to achieve the same results.
A new study by Steven Goldman and colleagues at the University of Rochester Medical Center finds embryonic stem cells cause tumors when inserted into rats that have Parkinson's. As a result, patients like Fox would likely be killed or face severe problems if treated with embryonic stem cells.
Again Fox claims that Senator Jim Talent opposes all kinds of stem cell research. "Unfortunately Senator Jim Talent opposes expanding stem cell research," Fox claims. "Senator Talent even wanted to criminalize the science that gives us a chance for hope." This is fraudulent deception and a blatant misrepresentation of the facts prescribed by the Democrats.
The truth is that Mr. Talent has voted in favor of spending millions in federal funds for adult stem cell research, the only kind of research that has ever cured a single patient.
As always, go by the votes, not the hype!
Confusing the pubic is now what democrats must do to win, so they will continue to say anything despite evidence to the contrary to push their wicked agenda against the people in hopes of gaining power over them.
Oh what a tangled Webb Dems weave... to deceive!
© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.|
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
It look$ bad Harry, real bad
SENATE Minority Leader Harry Reid's hypocrisy may fool undiscerning liberals, but others will see through his attempts to cover-up his deceptions as Mr. Reid's ethics woes continue to pile up. An Associated Press expose shows that Reid pushed through changes in federal law that helped the senator get rich - via complex land deals with a lobbyist who's also tied up in a federal bribery case.
After getting caught in a Land Deal scandal worth over a million dollars, Democrat Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid is now attempting to fool the public by playing innocent pointing the finger at Republicans who've exposed him.
"Last month, Republicans openly boasted that they would engage in a campaign of personal attacks and smears to hold onto power in Washington. In recent days, we witnessed their latest attempt to do just that."
You'll notice that Reid never gives specific examples for his charges, because he's lying. Any cop on the street could tell you that his accusations and spins give away his guilt.
Reid said: "Republicans may believe in cover-ups. I believe in ensuring all facts come to light." Yeah, after getting busted!
See, NOW he wants the facts out, after he was caught and exposed, trying desperately to get in front of it and make it go away with more lies on top of lies. Had he not been exposed you can be sure this land deal would've remained undisclosed forever, and he'd of surely destroyed the documents like Sandy Berger did in covering up his failures before 9/11.
"Last week, a highly misleading report by the Associated Press implied that I made a profit selling land I no longer owned. That article was wrong. Here are the facts: I bought the land in 1998, I sold it in 2004, and I listed my ownership of the land on official Senate disclosure forms every single year."
No Harry, you're wrong! Why are press reports only "misleading" when they're against democrats? If Reid is found guilty, he'll claim to the media that the Lord is on his side as he runs for cover before sentencing.
The facts, the real facts are that Reid did not disclose the information when he should have, thus breaking senate rules which is reason for prosecution. The meaning of "is" is that he's guilty, and he should be removed from office immediately. However, this might put an even worse liar in his place with Rahm Emmanuel of Illinois, which could be what power hungry dems have up their greasy sleeves.
"The Ethics Committee has not yet advised me whether I should file these amended forms, but even if I am not required to do so I am happy to go beyond what is needed to provide the fullest disclosure. The amended forms make clear what was true all along - I owned the land through the LLC when I sold it in 2004."
Not required? Harry, it was required in the rules that you are required to know for your job!
Go beyond? Harry, you tried to cover it all up for years! As a member of the party who says you're not for the rich, you sure don't show it. The scam of democrats to portray themselves as caring about poor people is just another show of evil contradictions by the left.
Harry continues his blatant attempt to cover up his illegal deal...
"Also, in the course of preparing the amended disclosure forms, my staff has identified some clerical errors and two minor matters that were inadvertently left off my original disclosure forms. First, in 2004 I sold about one third of an acre in my hometown of Searchlight. Second, a quarter acre of land that I received from my brother in 1985 appreciated in value above the $1,000 reporting threshold at some point in recent years. Both of these items will be listed on my amended disclosure forms."
Amended? Imagine the screams coming from the left if Harry was a republican. "Harry Reid should be ashamed of himself, impeached, tarred and feathered and thrown in jail for this obvious cover-up!" Like the Foley thang, dems would try to keep his name in the media for months, and of course a (best selling) book would have to be written by Bob Woodward. Democrats have become all to predictable using the same lame script for years while expecting different results. These are certainly not the people we need leading this nation, especially during wartime.
Reid also announced he "failed to disclose" (cover-up) two other land transactions on his prior ethics reports and would account for those on his amended reports. That leaves the question of, How many land deals has Reid done? More investigations are coming!
Now Mr. Reid is trying to make nice by claiming insider campaign payoffs were actually a personal "donation."
Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid has been using campaign donations instead of his personal money to pay Christmas bonuses for the support staff at the Ritz-Carlton where he lives in an upscale condominium. Federal election law bars candidates from converting political donations for personal use. See: REID'S SMELLY WINDFALL.
Oh, yeah, Reid really cares about the poor folks while he lives it up at the Ritz. Sometimes you gotta wonder if these leftist liars in congress are sane or just plain evil.
"Finally, I have acted today to respond to another issue some plan to raise. I have sent a personal check in the amount of $3,300 to my political campaign to fully reimburse the campaign for donations it made over several years to the employee holiday fund in my apartment building. These donations were made to thank the men and women who work in the building for the extra work they do as a result of my political activities, and for helping the security officers assigned to me because of my Senate position. The donations came from my campaign - no taxpayer dollars were ever involved."
This is the way Democrats do it folks. They do dirty deals and cover them up. Then when they get caught, they switch names and change the terms as if they've done nothing wrong, believing they are above the law and can do anything they want. But if a Republican had done the same thing, they'd by screaming foul and demanding his or her removal. This is the double standard of the left, who observe no ethical boundaries until after they are caught and charged with ethical violations.
It isn't working anymore Harry, thanks to the NEW media, you're done and so are the democrats!
© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.|
Friday, October 13, 2006
Polls, to Live or Die for?
With the media coming out with new polls every hour of everyday showing imminent doom for the GOP in November, I can only conclude that democrat's are in for another defeat.
How's that? Well remember that in 2000, 2002 and 2004, democrats' and their media propaganda machine were putting out all kinds of polls predicting huge wins for them, only to wake up the next day thinking they were in a Groundhog Day nightmare.
About 75 percent of respondents to an ABC News/Washington Post survey taken Oct. 5 to 8 didn't think Democrats would have handled the Foley situation any better. About two-thirds thought the Democrats' pursuit of the issue was motivated by political gain.
Another survey, by the Pew Research Center Sept. 21 to Oct. 4, showed no gain in the margin by which voters preferred Democrats to Republicans, 13 percentage points.
In fact, the job approval of Republican leaders went up one point after Foley resigned, to 34 percent.
Is the 2006 midterm going to be different? Doubtful, but it could be. If it is, would it be due to the democrat's October surprise of outing Mark Foley? Could be, but again that's doubtful. One bad ingredient doesn't mean you throw out the whole enchilada. You replace it and move on. Republicans need to clean their own house, not straying from the Conservative base in trying to appease moderates who often lean toward whatever is perceived popular at the time – even when it's an obvious ploy by the left – as their political survival dictates.
Democrats are desperate for power, but the question is... are they ready for it? The answer becomes clearer with every negative ad played on radio targeting republicans' with Tokyo Rose advice that they should stay home on election day.
One can sense, the more they play those propaganda ads, the better for GOP wins.
As noted by Tony Blankley in the Washington Times 10/11/06, Democrats not ready to lead,
"According to The Washington Post, "the Democrats have gone through seven different slogans so far this year trying to find a campaign theme. This abysmal failure of the congressional Democrats to even partially prepare themselves for responsible government, should be a warning to American voters -- both conservatives and moderates, both Republicans and independents -- that as the Democrats have not yet even healed themselves, they are surely not yet prepared to help heal the country."
Suddenly, new revelations have come to light about Senate Democratic Minority Leader Harry Reid, about a shady land deal where he collected $1.1 million from a Las Vegas land sale. The problem for Reid is that property deeds show he hadn't personally owned the property for three years.
Kent Cooper, who oversaw government disclosure reports for federal candidates for two decades in the Federal Election Commission, said Reid's failure to report the 2001 sale and his ties to Brown's company violated Senate rules.
"It is especially disconcerting when you have a member of the leadership, of either party, not putting in the effort to make sure this is a complete and accurate report," said Cooper. "That says something to other members. It says something to the Ethics Committee."There's more here... Reid Got $1M in Land Sale. Where is the outrage from the media with calls for him to step down? If this had been a republican, say like Jack Abramoff, it would be 72 point headlines in every paper for weeks on end!
After Bill Clinton's recent debacle on FOX News, His & Hers war room quickly decided to play the Foley card they'd been holding for months while feigning concern for young pages. However, such a move came too soon, and they will be forced to continue using that card for another month up to election day, by which time the nation will be tired of hearing it, if they aren't already, and realize democrats have nothing but negativity and back-sliding to offer.
For Republicans voters to stay home and skip the vote, it would likely be that they've become disappointed in their own leadership, not because democrats have done anything, as they have yet to come out with any other plans or ideas to lead. A list of complaints is simply not an agenda.
The way voters cast their ballots will have a direct impact on their pocketbooks, said president Bush on Tuesday.
"Whether you are a worker worried about the size of your paycheck . . . or a business owner who is thinking about hiring more workers . . . or a family worried about gas prices or health care costs, the last thing you need now is a higher tax bill," he said. "To keep this economy growing and delivering prosperity to more Americans, we need to make the tax relief permanent."
Indeed, Democrats' cannot hide the fact they want to raise taxes on the American public even higher than during their last tenure, that ended in a recession, as they feel it is the government's money, not those who worked for it.
The Republicans' benefit whenever the political dialogue turns to national security. "The whole thing with North Korea makes people realize the benefits of having a strong President like George W. Bush," said Tony Perkins, president of the conservative Family Research Council. "This brings the focus back to the reasons people support the President." Writing in last Sunday's The Washington Post, Democratic pollster Vic Fingerhut warned his party, "Iraq is a loser for Dems, too," arguing that for nearly 50 years,
"poll after poll has shown that the Democrats have very limited credibility with the American public on foreign policy issues — particularly among the swing voters who have a disproportionate say in the outcome of U.S. elections."
For all the faults of Republicans, Democrats would be worse, as evidenced during the Clinton sex and corporate corruption scandals of the 1990's. Democrat's inept handling of North Korea and Islamic terrorism have cost America far too much, including nearly 3000 civilian lives on 9/11/01. So it is doubtful democrats will be voted back into power next month. With two wars going, along with the overall war on terror, and two Axis of Evil states (North Korea/Iran) working on nuclear weapons, now is not be the best time for a sea-change in congress.
If however, Democrats' – who say "the president's policies have made America less secure" – do win either or both the House or Senate, the war in Iraq and Afghanistan will surely be lost, just as it was in Vietnam because of leftist liberals cut and run defeatism. It took decades for America to recover from that debacle. All the work and lives sacrificed will be for naught.
Democrat's have no plan for national security, only appeasement of our enemies, having said they will cut the Anti-Missile Defense Shield, to the great delight of socialist dictator Hugo Chavez, Russia's president Putin, Kim Jong Il of North Korea, and Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadjihad and the Mullah's who are Promising no retreat on enrichment.
This time, the polls show the result of dems gaining power would be inconceivably worse for all, and America may not recover as it stands today.
© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.|
Sunday, October 08, 2006
Foley Flops for Dems
Over the past week, American's have been under the delusion of the Foley scandal, that really was more of prank started by male pages who were playing with Foley's desires using emails and instant messages. The liberal media branch of ABC picked this insidiousness off the internet and ran with it, likley following orders from Democratic Chairman Howard Dean.
Democrats were all too happy to use this for an "October Surprise" to distract the nation from what was happening in Iraq, trying to knock out the House leadership with a media barrage.
Also ignored by the left was the booming economy and huge drop in the deficit of $250 Billion. The Congressional Budget Office's latest estimate is $10 billion below CBO predictions issued in August and well below a July White House prediction of $296 billion.
House speaker dreadful Nancy Pelosi says she will "roll back tax cuts" if she becomes speaker of the House, which means she will raise taxes as high as she possible can get away with. She will insist on cutting and running out of Iraq with our tails between our legs.
The ultra-liberal Ms. Pelosi would pass legislation for abortion on demand at any stage of pregnancy up to and even after delivery. The potential for political power is clear to her and that is all she cares about. "It's an opportunity for growth among women" for the Democrats, she said. "They don't always vote and this could be a motivation." See Pelosi's goals to Drain GOP 'Swamp
A speaker Pelosi will run to the do-nothing United Nations to prosecute our military under the control of the world court established by the global control of the European Union that is attempting to displace the U.S. as the world's security guard and peacemaker.
But the UN has never brought peace anywhere in the world. In fact the UN ignores the very genocide's it was created to prevent until millions are dead, and even then can do little about it without America getting involved.
Relying on The European Union is very likely to have devastating consequences as they appease all enemies of freedom, including Arab-Islamic terrorists' in the middle east. But liberals will gladly turn America's soverignty over to the EU's High Representative, Javier Solana who has been the only one to hold this title. He also holds the title as head of NATO.
"We are committed to upholding and developing International Law. The fundamental framework for international relations is the United Nations Charter. The United Nations Security Council has the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. Strengthening the United Nations, equipping it to fulfill its responsibilities and to act effectively, is a European priority."
But who has suffered more damage from the Foley fallout, Republican's or Democrat's? Seems democrat's have shot their load with the Foley story and have nothing else to offer in the way of a plan to lead the nation. With the economy at all time highs, Democrat's are left with cheap shots about sexual emails that hardly seem conscionable, having defended actual criminal misconduct of their congressional party members in Dan Crain and Gerry Studds from the recent past.
Update: Page Scandal-Scarred Democrat Gerry Studds Dies.
As Michael Barone notes:
"In 1983, the House administered a lesser punishment–censure–when Republican Dan Crane and Democrat Gerry Studds admitted to having had sex with two pages, Crane with a 17-year-old girl and Studds with a 17-year-old boy. So the standard seems to be that having sex with a serving page, for whom Congress has custodial responsibility, merits censure. But sending dirty IMs to a former page, for whom Congress no longer has custodial responsibility, merits the much harsher penalty of expulsion."
Mel Reynolds was even pardoned by President Clinton for his rape of a 17 year old girl as payback for political favors on his last day.
Mr. Ben Stein puts Foley in Perspective:
"We do not devote more than a few instants each month to the rape and murder in Congo. We barely notice the rape and genocide in Darfur. No one on earth except George W. Bush and John Bolton and Condoleezza Rice is trying to stop two maniacs from acquiring nuclear weapons even though one of them has promised to wipe out Israel if he gets them. But we can devote 24 hours a day, day after day, to the e-mails of one nutty Member of Congress to a teenage boy."
The world stops at any mention of republican's having sex, but glosses over the left's constant advancement of sexual promiscuity in the media, both old and new.
Democrat ads are now targeting Christians because of Mark Foley's emails. The left actually thinks they can fool the majority into believing the party that promotes gays, pedophiles, criminals, prostitutes and evil Billionaires actually cares about morals and values. They don't!
During the same days our nations attention was being pulled to this silly little scandal, hundreds were being killed in Iraq, including 22 U.S. soldiers. What have democrats been doing about it? Creating these stupid scandals for political gain, which will once again have a backfire effect they will not understand.
For Democrats, everything is politics. They will do and say anything true or not if it advances their goal to force socialism onto American citizens while destroying the U.S. Constitution and individual freedom.
Conservatives need to stand up and be counted. It would be best if "Moderate" candidates (RINO's) were voted out of the Republican party because they usually do more harm than good no matter what district they're in.
This election in November is crucial for saving America's freedom from Islamic advancement, furthering conservative goals, morals and values while ending the liberalization of all immorality and anti-Americanism from those who have no concept of right, wrong, truth or lies being fed to them from leftist teachers, professors, politicians and the media. These people need to be exposed for tearing down this nation while aiding foreign enemies, now.
Islam Creeping In
According to Northeast Intelligence Network posted on 10/7/2006, Keith ELLISON, candidate for Minnesota's 5th Congressional District and a former member of the Nation of Islam, has received nearly twice as much money in campaign contributions than his opponent, Alan FINE. In a brochure sent by FINE to 100,000 voters, ELLISON was criticized for accepting campaign contributions from questionable sources "having ties to Islamic terrorism." Equally important but receiving scant attention is the stated objective of Omar AHMAD, a significant donor to ELLISON'S campaign:
"Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Qur'an should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth"
In September, NEIN raised the issue of a potential constitutional crisis should ELLISON decide to practice his religion, which would require him to swear his allegiance to Sharia over the US constitution.
This is how Islam starts over taking nations. In the U.K. they are having many problems with muslims who refuse to blend into society. Islamic women wear full black veils with only their eyes showing as if they're bandits or criminals. This has made many very fearful of what they may be hiding. They question if they could be potential suicide bombers awaiting their cue.
In these days of random terrorism, such concerns are well justified. However, people should not become paralyzed from living normally.
© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.|
Thursday, October 05, 2006
FLASH! Democrat PRANK gone Awry!
Now Democrat's have dug their own grave by their Gay bashing remarks and dirty tricks against Mark Foley, House Speaker Hastert and Republicans using pranks created by Pages using the internet in an ugly political move to gain power.
As seen on the Drudge Report, "According to one Oklahoma source who knows the former page very well, Edmund, a conservative Republican, goaded Foley to type embarrassing comments that were then shared with a small group of young Hill politicos. The prank went awry when the saved IM sessions got into the hands of political operatives favorable to Democrats. This source, an ally of Edmund, also adamantly reports that the former page is not a homosexual. The prank scenario was confirmed by a second associate of Edmund.
The news come on the heels that former FBI Chief Louis Free has been named to investigate the mess."
Democrats and the LIBERAL media mongrels (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, PBS) will NEVER be trusted or taken seriously on ANY of their lame accusations... EVER AGAIN!
Democrats are nothing but desperate whiners who are way, way out of touch with reality, and certainly cannot be trusted with national security, leading the congress or the presidency. Dems are the party of Enquiring minds and emotional misfits who base everything on conspiracy theories and innuendo instead of facts and logic. That is why they let terrorism run rampant for 8 years during the Clintoon administration of morons.
Update: Sorry to burst the democrats bubble (not), but the "boy" Foley emailed was actually 18 at the time. So it looks like democrats have lied to the public once again by sensationalizing against the GOP, much like they tried to do with Dan Ranter before the 2004 elections. This will not sit well with voters.
On Tuesday ABC news released a high-impact instant message exchange between Foley and, as ABC explained, a young boy "under the age of 18."
But upon reviewing the records, it has been learned the young MAN was in fact over the age of 18 at the time of the exchange.
The hot air being deflated from the left sounds like a jet engine. Just another red herring, hyped-up non-story. Pity the libs, they just can't catch a break!
Hastert said: "I think the base has to realize after a while, 'Who knew about it? Who knew what, when?' When the base finds out who's feeding this monster, they're not going to be happy. The people who want to see this thing blow up are ABC News and a lot of Democratic operatives, people funded by George Soros."
Hastert understands that operatives aligned with former President Bill Clinton knew about the allegations and were likely behind the disclosures in the closing weeks before the Nov. 7 elections, after Clinton's melt-down in an interveiw by FOX News. (See below for the story.)
With nothing to offer the nation, with the economy at its highest level in history, the left is out of ammunition having to resort to gossip from the internet. This story is just that, a story inflamed by the leftist losers destroying the democrat party.
Dems may come close next month, but they won't regain power. National security along with a good and this time real economy trumps hypocritical sex allegations by a desperate minority, especially in this post 9/11 real world.
© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.|
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
Dems Betting on Foley?
Ever notice that Democrats are always pointing their fingers at others? Democrat's clearly have nothing to help America. All they have are accusations and mud to throw. No plans to win the war. No plan on how to deal with Iran and Nuclear terror. No economic plan, except to raise taxes as high as they can, as recently stated by senator Charles Rangel (D-NY).
Suddenly a hot new book comes out by Bob Woodward, admitted by the author to be timed for the elections, and this Foley thing comes blaring out of nowhere. Dems have been using this same script for 5 years, proving they have zero ideas and are stuck in the past.
So, what did Democrats know, and when did they know it? How long have democrats known about this thing with Foley? Were they keeping it for an October surprise since their leads in the polls shrunk to nothing?
Is it possible that dems were more in the loop on this than the GOP leaders? Were they hiding it while boys were being preyed upon?
Dems are telling us they're shocked, but are all too willing to give a pass for the same sexual behaviors committed by members of their own party.
Certainly Mark Foley deserves some punishment and it is good he's out of congress, having ducked into the rehab clinic. But isnt' it funny how democrats gave their president Clinton and his cigar a pass for molesting young women time after time, when everyone knew he was a rapist going back to Arkansas, after he lied under oath as president, and then to the entire nation about it on TV?
The hypocrisy of democrats never ceases to amaze. Democrats are unable to debate the Republicans on the real issues. They are on a their own "warpath" to build voter "hate" against the GOP and President Bush at all costs.
Democrat's have defended the same issue they're attacking with now.
Mr. Foley resigned within minutes of being told that ABC News had copies of his salacious e-mails and text messages indicates he at least felt shame for his actions. Can the same be said for Democrats?
• In 1983, then-Democratic Rep. Gerry Studds of Massachusetts was caught in a similar situation. In his case, Studds had sex with a male teenage page — something Foley hasn't been charged with.
Did Studds express contrition? Resign? Quite the contrary. He rejected Congress' censure of him and continued to represent his district until his retirement in 1996.
• In 1989, Rep. Barney Frank, also of Massachusetts, admitted he'd lived with Steve Gobie, a male prostitute who ran a gay sex-for-hire ring out of Frank's apartment. Frank, it was later discovered, used his position to fix 33 parking tickets for Gobie.
What happened to Frank? The House voted 408-18 to reprimand him — a slap on the wrist. Today he's an honored Democratic member of Congress, much in demand as a speaker and "conscience of the party."
• In 2001, President Clinton, who had his own intern problem, commuted the prison sentence of Illinois Rep. Mel Reynolds, who had sex with a 16-year-old campaign volunteer and pressured her to lie about it. (Reynolds also was convicted of campaign spending violations.) Jesse Jackson added Reynolds to Rainbow/PUSH Coalition's payroll in Chicago.
A win in November for democrats will have them going back to the days of excusing corruption and lies in their own party, as democrats are far more guilty of unethical and unlawful conduct than Republican's, as evidenced through the 1990's.
Once again it's easy see this all backfiring on Democrats.
What if the inappropriate relationship were between a congressman and a 16-year-old female page? Would GOP leaders face the same outrage for missing the warning signs? What if we were judging their actions toward a congresswoman who asked for a picture of a 16-year-old female page? What if we were judging their actions toward a president having sex with an intern?
For GOP leaders to pay a heavy political price requires either more evidence that they really knew what Foley was doing or for Democrats to form an alliance, at some level, with people who find homosexuality outrageous no matter what the age. Yet democrats embrace homosexuality, voting to back gay marriage. How many gay liberals have had sex with pages? That is well worth investigating, especially if democrats don't shut their mouths quick!
How many homosexual democrats have in the past or are currently preying on young pages or interns either personally or on the internet? Investigations are surely underway.
Their last president was certainly a sexual predator who they still back to this day, and yet they have the gall to make these accusations for political gain. It's shamefull, really!
© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.|