About Me

Name:Steve
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

Evolution or Intelligent Design?

Posted by Steve on Wednesday, November 29, 2006 8:44:17 PM
Today while setting up for a lab, I heard a clip from another instructor about evolution. In the clip, one of the authors of the textbook we use was interviewed about evolution. The exchange was humorous and entertaining. The problem with the interview is that the interviewer and the interviewee set up a straw dog for Intelligent Design and then proceeded to shoot it down.

The straw dog is that all Intelligent Design people believe that everything was created exactly as it is today. That is not how I understand Intelligent Design. Intelligent Design differs from Evolution in that Intelligent Design explains how life began without breaking any of the laws of biology. Evolution has to break the laws of biology to explain how life began. After life came upon the earth, it started changing to forces of nature and man. These changes we call evolution. We do know that evolution occurs in the short term. We do not know if evolution works over the long term, because nobody has been around long enough. And the fossil evidence is incomplete in regards to life. There are huge gaps that we still need to fill. We are filling them as we speak, but they are still huge gaps.

Intelligent Design says that something placed life here on earth to start everything in motion. Was it placed as a single cell or a tree? We do not know the answer. People believe that things were placed here completely constructed. People also believe that things were placed here that would evolve into what we know of today. Which is the true way things were placed here? There is no way of knowing for sure, now. Science is trying to find the answers to those and other questions. Will we ever know the answers to these questions? Probably not, as if life were placed here as cells, there would be no fossil evidence.

If life were placed here whole, there would be evidence. There would be a time with no life and then suddenly time with life. We have not found that type of evidence. That leads me to believe that life was placed here as soft tissue. There was no hard tissue in the life placed upon the earth. This would account for all the evidence we have at this time. Is this the final answer? No. We are still searching for the elusive early evidence. We may yet find evidence to lead one to conclude one way or the other, but not at this time. At this time the evidence looks like it points in one direction. That could be deceptive. We may just have uncovered the part of the arrow that points in one direction. When we uncover the full arrow, we discover it points in another direction. I would love to be here when this is discovered. I doubt that will happen as I am one of the older baby boomers.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Who Really Cares

Posted by Steve on Wednesday, November 29, 2006 1:15:14 AM
Arthur Brooks has come out with a book called " Who Really Cares". It details who gives the most to charities and other non-profits in society. In every level of giving, people who believe in individual responsibility (conservatives) give more than those that believe in government (liberals).

He documents this even to donating blood. He says that blood donations would be up 45% if liberals gave at the same rate as conservatives. Those percentages hold true for almost every type of giving you can think of.

That conservatives give more than liberals does not surprise me. Liberals always are more talk than do anyway. What surprised me is that conservatives gave more in every kind of giving. I would have thought that working with little league  or the pta would have similar results. The organizations would not function without conservatives. This is not saying that liberals do not give. Some liberals give a lot. It is just that most liberals do not give. That is the point.

The world view is entirely different for conservatives and liberals. Conservatives believe in individual responsibility. That means that the individual is responsible for his/her own way in life. He/she should provide for those around them that do not have the basic necessities of life. When a conservative makes his/her way in the world, it is his/her responsiblity to take care of his/her familiy first. After the family is provided for, then you take care of the needy. For a liberal, it is the responsibility of government to take care of the needy. It is the government that will do anything. The individual is not resonsible for anything, except to pay for government.

I am glad I am a conservative. I like being an individual. I like looking out for my family. I like working in my community. It gives me a full life to be involved in the life of my family and their activities. I would hate to think that government was responsible for taking care of anything. I would like to see less government. Sometimes I would like to have lived in simpler times with less government. I do not like all this government regulation we have around us now. That is why I support conservatives for office. I constantly get disappointed when they give me more government. I want less government. Get rid of a lot of government programs. There is nothing so permanent as a government program.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Al Gore's Global Warming

Posted by Steve on Monday, November 27, 2006 11:59:31 AM
Reports are out that the hurricane season is the mildest in over 10 years. That is bad news for the global warming nuts. If global warming were occurring, the hurricane season should have been as bad as the last one or even worse. That would have emphasized how important it is to do something about global warming. But, not one hurricane hit the United States. We got a couple of tropical storms and everyone paniced.

My theory on global warming is that it is occurring in Al Gore. The more he talks, the more the temperature rises inside of him. Soon, all that warming will be spewed out on the American people and we will be mesmerized by the heat. The warming inside Al Gore is caused by humans.

We can do something about it. We need to reduce the pollution entering his brain. The way to reduce the pollution levels is to restrict his reading to Hugh Hewitt and Mary Katherine Ham. We might allow another author recommended by Hugh or Mary, but they would have to be carefully screened.

After a couple of years of reduced emissions entering his head, the result should be a reduction in the overheating of Al Gore's brain. He might even be able to speak in complete sentences again and stop the shrill screaming. That would reduce the pollution levels in our nations airwaves. I predict that it would take at least two years of restricting his input to produce any noticable difference. It may even take longer. The amount of time would depend on Al Gore's ability to take in information that is truthful. He has been so far outside of the mainstream of society, he may take a long time to recover.

After reducing the global warming in Al Gore, we should then start on other proponents of global warming one at a time. It would be best to start with the big fish. If the big fish can stop producing the pollution about global warming, people can start believing in the truth. Again, falsehoods have been sold as truth for so long that the truth telling will take a while to sell. The problem with the truth is that it is not as sexy as the falsehoods. It makes no dramatic predictions. It is not a doomsday scenario. That is why people like to believe in global warming. It is so much more fun and exciting.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Black Friday

Posted by Steve on Saturday, November 25, 2006 9:54:10 AM
Thanksgiving is a great family holiday. We had all my grown kids over for turkey and the fixings. We had a great time playing with all the grand kids and watching football on Dad's new hi def TV. My kids were impressed that Dad finally has some technology that beats the technology they have in their own homes. I suspect that Christmas will be a technology Christmas this year.

On Friday, I had to take my youngest son to work at 4 am. Since I was up and could not go back to sleep, I participated in "Black Friday". Black Friday is the busiest day of the year and one that puts many businesses in the black for the year. That is why the name "Black Friday".

I went and stood in line for an hour to buy a chair for my computer office. I then went to a second store to purchase movies for our trip to Texas. There I stood in line for three hours waiting to pay for the merchandize. I spent 15 minutes picking out things and 3 hours in line. There must be a better way. At the first store, I stood in line to get in for an hour and spent 1 hour picking out things and checking out.

Every year I say I will not do this again. Every year, I somehow find a reason for me to go and participate in this buying frenzy. I did get to have a nice talk to a lady and her daughter who were on their first "Black Friday" experience. We actually had a lot in common. The daughter had a daughter that was the same age as the granddaughter I am raising. In three hours, you get to talk about a lot of different topics. After Bobby Kennedy was shot, she moved to Italy for a few years. I thought as much as she was talking a foreign language to her husband and it was not Spanish or any other language I am familiar with. I knew it was a romantic language. I suspected Italian or maybe Portuguese.

My wife found me in the second store. We then had breakfast at McDonald's and decided who would do what next. I bought groceries and she did some more Christmas shopping. After that, I was so beat I went home and took a nap. It really helped. Though, for the rest of the day, I had little or no energy.

Today, I had to get up early to get my son to an activity. I am already tired and it is only a quarter to eight in the morning. I am going to have to take it easy today if I am going to last the day through.

I am monitoring what is happening in the middle east. It appears that Iran and Syria are convinced that Democrats mean what they say. Cut and run will be the order of the day for the next two years. They will take full advantage and expand their power base while we shrink ours. Not a good start to the Democrat years.

The other events that bother me involves Russia. The dissident in England got poisoned and died. They found polonium in him. It is a very rare element. He had to be poisoned by an outside source. The only ones that could want him dead are the Russians. The Russians are also selling missile technology to the Iranians. This is not a good development for peace in the middle east. It is a recipe for war in the middle east, most likely involving Israel. That is what most Muslims want, destruction of Israel. With these missiles and the nuclear technology, the Iranians may just have the tools necessary to do just that.

Things are not looking good around the world. We are looking weaker in the eyes of all the world. No amount of non-truth telling by Democrats will hide the truth that we look weaker with Democrats in charge. We are weaker with Democrats in charge. They are less likely to respond to an aggressive act with military action. That will get people to walk all over you. You cannot be perceived as the wimp by the world community. You have to be perceived as strong. Democrats are wimps. They prove it every day and with every word they say. We made a huge mistake on November 7. We will pay dearly for that mistake.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Thanksgiving

Posted by Steve on Wednesday, November 22, 2006 11:40:49 AM
This is the time to think of what we are thankful for. I am most thankful for my family. I have been blessed with seven children (four boys, three girls) and five grandchildren (one boy, four girls). The best thing is that almost all of them live in the Phoenix area. Only my youngest daughter lives far away (Texas), but she is moving back in March when her lease runs out on her apartment.

Of my seven children, three were natural children and four were adopted. We had three boys and were told that if we tried for a fourth child another woman would raise the children. We decided to adopt to get the family we wanted. We then adopted four children, three girls and a boy. Having a large family has been a challenge. We have had to deal with many problems. Many of our making and many not of our making. Would I do it all again? Yes, I would do it all again. Even knowing all of the problems that would crop up. If I could anticipate the problems, I may do some things differently. But, overall I would still do the same things. We tried our best for the children and times we were living in.

We are currently raising one of our grandchildren. She is seven, almost eight. She has lived with us her entire life. That has been a challenge to raise a child when you are older. I cannot do the the things that I did when I was younger. I am a better parent, as I do not get so excited over smaller problems. I wish I had the energy that I had when I was younger. It would allow me to play more with her. But overall I think we are raising her quite well.

My oldest son has two daughters. They are about 16 months apart. That is really close. We do not get to see them enough. My son's wife thinks the problems my children have had are all my fault and keeps them away from us. Her parents can see the girls any time they want. That hurts a lot. I do not like being separated from my family. They do come over for special events, so I get to see them six to seven times a year. That is not enough. They will probably not have any more children. That is a shame. I would love to have my oldest son have a son to carry on the family name.

My youngest son was married and had a daughter. Because of some problems, they got a divorce. We do not get to see my granddaughter much. We have seen her once or twice in the last year. But, my son and his ex-wife are seeing each other and will probably get remarried when it is possible again. Then we will get to see this granddaughter more.

My only grandson we do get to see. He lives close and is only a few weeks old. The only problem with the grandson is that he does not have my last name. He cannot carry on the family name.

There are two other grandchildren on the way. My second and third daughters are pregnant. My youngest daughter is due within the month with a son. My second daughter is due in April. We do not know the sex of this one, yet.

All of my children and their families will be her for Thanksgiving, except for my daugher in Texas. She is pregnant and cannot make the trip. In fact, she might even have the baby for Thanksgiving. It will be fun to play with the little kids and talk to the older ones. Thanksgiving is my favorite holiday of the year. It is because it is the most family friendly holiday of the year. Everybody gets together for Thanksgiving and has a meal and a talk. That is the way things should be in life. I really treasure the chance to see everybody and enjoy their company.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Draft?

Posted by Steve on Tuesday, November 21, 2006 11:12:11 AM
Charles Rangel of New York made the suggestion that the draft should be re-instated. That idea was immediately shot down by his own Democrats. He made the suggestion to hurt President Bush and the war effort. The weenies will not like thinking they may actually have to serve their country. They will then blame President Bush for Charlie Rangel's stupid suggestion. They will not think of where the suggestion came from and why.

The draft would not really be a bad idea. It would get people into the military that would not ordinarily go. The problem with those people is that they would not have the dedication needed in today's military. The initial net effect would be negative as the quality of the military would decline. The numbers would increase which would be good. Quantity is not better than quality in today's high tech military. The long term effect would probably still be negative as the quality declined, our ability to defend ourselves would also decline. The only advantage would be that those that served would be veterans and they would probably support veterans programs. That would be a positive thing for the military.

The only reason the suggestion was made was political. Charlie Rangel knows that people will not question what party he belongs to. He knows they will blame the person running the military for forcing a congressman to talk about re-instating the draft. Politics is such a cut-throat game. I am glad I did not get into politics. I may have a great interest, but I never could be so cut-throat as to pull something so stupid as Charlie Rangel. I would have to play the game honestly. That would probably have made my political career rather short. I could not have countered the lies fast enough. I could not have conceived of the lie, so I would have a hard time countering the lie with the truth. I would have to have the lie explained to me to help me understand where it was coming from.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Let Democrats be Democrats

Posted by Steve on Monday, November 20, 2006 7:56:26 PM
Rush Limbaugh is quoted as saying that we need to allow Democrats to be what they are. We all know what Democrats are. Their corruption has no bounds. They even wear their corruption on their sleeve as a badge of honor. One prime example is Alcee Hastings. He is a congressman from Florida. Some time ago, he was a Federal Judge. He was so corrupt as a Federal Judge that even the Democrats (all but 3) voted to impeach him. There have only been 10 judges impeached in over 200 years. That took some corruption to be one of the 10 impeached judges. The Democrats are going to put this person in as Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. He will be able to have access to the most secret documents in the government. He is a demonstrated corrupt individual. How long before US secrets start showing up in China and Iran and any other country willing to pay Alcee Hastings for the information? The Democrats would never investigate him for corruption. Democrats never do such things.

Rep. Murtha was caught in the Abscam net years ago. He is caught on tape discussing how to accept a bribe to make it look like he is not accepting a bribe. He was seriously considered for the #2 position in the Democrat leadership. He was endorsed by Nancy Pelosi, the new Speaker of the House. She wanted him for the position. She wanted the corrupt congressman to be in a leadership position.

Republicans do get caught taking bribes. They are always expelled from congress when found out. Democrats are re-elected numerous times after they are found with their fingers in the till. Rep. Jefferson from LA is an example. He was found to have taken a $100,000 bribe. He put $90,000 in his office freezer and spent $10,000. Even with that hanging over him, the voters in his district returned him to office. JD Hayworth lost his re-election bid because he received a couple of thousand dollars from Jack Abramoff in 1998 and 1999. Jack Abramoff was not discovered to be a problem until 2006. Let's compare how each party treats those that are suspected of corruption: Republicans, $2-3,000 out; Democrats, $100,000, in.

When a Democrat gets caught in a sexual scandal, they stand up and say it is their right. They defy anyone from doing anything. Their voters then, like sheep, return them to congress for as long as they want.  Republicans at least have the decency to resign from congress when caught messing around. Mark Foley did not even touch the under age individuals. The Democrat accused of this actually had sexual relations with the underage individual.

For the next two years, we just have to allow Democrats to be Democrats. We have to make sure that everyone knows exactly what the Democrats are up to at all times. If we make sure that all their missteps are known by all, their time in the sun will be short. In fact, some of the "conservative" Democrats they recruited and elected may get disgusted with all the hijinks. Some could actually switch to the Republican ranks and we could pick up those seats.

We cannot rely on Democrats self-destructing. We must come up with our core values. We need to articulate those core values. We need to stand firm on those core values. We cannot play defense. Defense may win championships, but the best defense is a good offense. If your offense is on the field 3/4 of the time, your defense will look great. We need to play offense as much as possible for the next two years. That will keep the Democrats on the defensive and make picking up the House, Senate and White House that much easier.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Sky is NOT Falling

Posted by Steve on Saturday, November 18, 2006 12:13:56 PM
With the debacle on November 7 and the leadership elections in the last week, one thing is clear, the sky is not falling. Things looked bleak on November 8 and for a few days. But, things are definitely looking up. Are they the best they could be according to me, no. Should they be set up exactly the way I want it? No, things will fall how they will according to the needs of the day.

For example, Mitch McConnell is making sounds like he is exactly the person needed for the Republican leadership position in the Senate. He made comments that lead me to believe that he will lstand tall when looking at judges. He will not bend to the whim of Democrat desires. John McCain is trying to paper over his huge mistake of the Gang of 14. That alliance got some judges through with a minimum of opposition. But, it left the filibuster option still on the table and not decided. That was a monumental mistake. It is one that John McCain will have to own up to before he will be seriously considered for the Republican nomination for President.

Having Trent Lott in the number two position in the Senate is not looking good. He took the opportunity of interviews after his election to bash the Bush administration. That is not the way to show you are a team player. You do not dump on the team leader and then say you are a team player. A team player works to build up the team.

Nancy Pelosi is showing a tin ear for leadership. That looks good for the next two years. If she continues to exhibit the tin ear she is showing now, the House will be Republican in 2008. I doubt that the Democrats will allow her to display the tin ear too much. If it becomes a problem, they will cut her off at the knees and replace her. Democrats are ruthless when it comes time to play the game of politics. Republicans sometimes are not sure that they should get their hands dirty playing politics.

State Republican parties should concentrate on finding candidates to promote in each congressional district that they lost in 2006. If they field strong candidates in all races in 2008, they have an excellent shot at returning to power. Many seats the Democrats took in 2006 were Republican seats. They will be Republican seats again, if the Republicans field credible candidates. Right there, that should just about eliminate the Democrat majority in the House. In the Senate it will be much more difficult to return to the majority until these disasters elected in 2006 are up for reelection. It looks like a divided Senate with one party ruling with a 51-49 advantage will be the order of the day for the next six years.

Long term the Republicans can return to power by 2008, if they get their act together and return to being Republicans. People want to elect Republicans. They do not want to elect Republicans that are trying to be Democrats. Democrats make better Democrats. Republicans make better Republicans. When one tries to be the other, it never works well for long. Voters in districts and states that elected "conservative" Democrats will find that out real soon. They may wish for a do-over of the 2006 elections before too much time has elapsed. That may make it that much easier to recapture the House and the Senate.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Republican Leadership

Posted by Steve on Friday, November 17, 2006 3:59:46 PM
Well, both the Republicans and Democrats took the time this week to pick their leaders for the new congress that starts in January. Republicans kept Boehner and Blunt in the House. Democrats chose Pelosi and Steyner. Republicans chose McConnell and Lott in the Senate with Kyl as third (good choice). The Democrats stuck with Dingy Harry Reid.

What does it all mean? That remains to be seen. Pelosi wanted Murtha as her second in command. She was defeated in that wish. As a Republican, Murtha would have been great. He is obviously corrupt. It would have made a great group to campaign against. The current group will be more difficult, but not impossible. They seem to be tone deaf and love to wash their dirty laundry in public.

Boehner and Blunt in the Republican House is no real change from the old leadership. They both just moved up one seat. Their advantage is that nobody knows them. Their disadvantage is that the Republicans don't really know them either. Are they the right ones for the job? We will not know that for some time to come. Mary Katherine Ham says that she believes that they will be good. I would have liked to have seen a more radical change. A bigger change would signal a greater indication that they intend to make the changes necessary to get back into the majority.

In the Senate, the Democrat leadership is being implicated by Jack Abramoff. That is great. We can paint them as corrupt and probably successfully pull it off. Dingy Harry likes to rely on the lie as his greatest weapon. That will also work for the Republicans. This is not the time for lies. This is the time for the truth. The more truth, the more chance of success.

The Republicans selected Mitch McConnell. He is a tell it like it is kind of guy. I think he can be articulate and successful. I am concerned with Trent Lott. Lott was sent off in disgrace in the last congress for having a tin ear. He may be a great vote counter, which post he now holds, but I do have concerns. Selecting Jon Kyl as third is a great move. Jon Kyl is one of the great men who happens to be a Senator. I would love to see Jon Kyl move up in the leadership. He has the gift for getting his message across. I have great thoughts in what Jon Kyl brings to the table.

Boiling all that down to what does it mean is relatively simple. The Democrats in the Senate will be inarticulate and combative. They will not get things done and then poorly. In the House, Democrats have a leader with a tin ear. She does not have the great feel that a good majority leader needs to have to be successful. Newt Gingrich had the gift and was supremely successful. He just had his downfall with his ex-wife. All in all, it looks good for the GOP in 2008. We will be running candidates in districts that are really Republican districts. We will be running against a Democrat congress that will be more of a circular firing squad than a successful congress. All we will need to really pull off the big turn around is a good leader at the top of the ticket to defeat the Democrat nominee.  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Leadership

Posted by Steve on Wednesday, November 15, 2006 7:08:23 PM
Leadership is something that you have to earn. Just because you call yourself a leader doesn't make you a leader. Many an officer in charge of a group of men in combat learned that they may have been in "charge", but they were not the leader. The leader is someone who everyone looks up to and will follow. A leader leads by example. Old style leaders led from the front. It has become fashionable for leaders to lead from behind.

Leading from behind can work. But, it takes a truly great leader to get the most out of those he/she leads. Leading from the front puts you out in front for all to see. They can see you and your example. It inspires those to put forth maximum effort. As long as they can see you putting forth your maximum effort, they will put forth their maximum effort. The problem with this method is when the leader gets struck down, the group tends to disintegrate.

Leading from the back is more difficult. People cannot see you actually leading. They have to have faith that you are actually leading. This method can be effective. It helps if the group sees you have one success after another. After awhile, they do not need to see you lead, they just need to  know you had a hand in the planning to have faith in the plan. This method works until you meet stiff opposition.

In the political arena, leading from the front is a good plan. It is impractical in the long term, but is useful in spurts. It is important for your people to see you fighting the foe and defeating them in combat. It is best to do this without taking too many hits. Once your leadership is established, then you can start leading from the rear. You may still need an occassional foray out in front, but for the most part the group will follow your lead.

Right now, in the Republican party, we do not have anyone that can lead from the front. We do not have anybody who can lead from the rear either. We need someone to step up to the plate and strike down the evil Democrats. The person needs to be articulate and knowledgeable of the facts. They need to be able to state Republican principles clearly and with feeling. He then needs to be able to beat down the predictable Democrat opposition to doing anything important. Democrats are afraid to do anything important. They are only going to tackle and try to solve problems that are already mostly solved. Or they will take on the unsolvable problem that nobody can solve. That is why they take on mundane small issues or big issues like global warming. They refuse to acknowledge that regular issues are really problems. They just like to blame white men for creating the problems.

In the Republican party, we need to identify leaders soon. We have maybe six months until we have to have leaders in place. The leaders have to be able to take on the Democrats and defeat their hate speech with class. In the past, we just caved when the Democrats started calling us names. We cannot do that in the next two years. In the next two years, we have to stand up for principles and ideas. We have to stand and be counted. The principles and ideas are there. Everyone generally agrees on what they are. We just have to find someone with the intestinal fortitude to actually stand up and be counted.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Aftermath III

Posted by Steve on Saturday, November 11, 2006 12:46:47 PM
Election workers in Maricopa County are diligently counting votes from last Tuesday's election. JD Hayworth was losing by about 8,000 votes on election day. As of this morning, it is down to about 5700 votes. It is closing, but probably not fast enough for him to pull out a victory.

In my State House district, the Republican, Nichols now holds a 335 vote lead over the Democrat. That is a great improvement over election day where the Democrat held an 8 vote lead. My district is heavily Republican and to have a Democrat in office would have been awful. My district would not have been represented in the state. The two representatives would have canceled each other out. I believe that was the goal of the Arizona Republic when they endorsed the Democrat for the House seat. It is good to see that justice prevailed, finally. There may have to be a recount as the vote is so close, I am not sure. It may also hinge on whether the Democrat is honest and will concede before a recount may be needed.

As Republicans, we got away from what most of us became Republicans for. I became a Republican for lower taxes, smaller government, strong defense, controlling the borders, judges that rule on the law not make law and respect for others within the law. If all Republicans had kept to those principles, we would have had a landslide for Republican rule. Unfortunately, when our elected representatives got to Washington, they thought they were supposed to make government bigger. The drug entitlement is a boondoggle. It is going to cost way more than anyone thought. It is way more difficult to administer than anyone thought. Those are both typical of government and government programs.

My fear is that President Bush will try to get along with Democrats during the next two years. That will mean signing Democrat laws into law and undermining the Constitution. I just hope he has enough backbone to veto any bill that tries to repeal the tax cuts. Of course, they only have to do nothing to repeal the tax cuts. That was a glaring error at the time the bill was passed. It has come back to haunt those that wrote that provision into the law. President Bush should veto any Democrat bill that goes against the Constitution. I have my doubts that he will. He signed McCain/Feingold even when he said it was unconstitutional.

We now have to look to 2008. There are articles that McCain has plans to be on the 2008 ticket. He is despised by the conservative base of the party. The only ones that really think he has a chance are those in the main stream media. The conservative base will follow anyone but McCain. McCain is unreliable as a conservative. He can talk a good game. But, when the chips are down, he goes and pulls a Democrat on us. McCain just does not have the intestinal fortitude to be a conservative. He will buckle under to any Democrat pressure. That is how we got that gang of 14 that stopped the constitutional option from being played for judges. Now that chance is gone for a long time to come.

My early bet is on Mitt Romney to get the Republican nomination for President. He is everything you want in a Presidential nominee. He is smart, articulate and good looking. He has good conservative credentials. He has seen success everywhere he has been. He got a Democratic legislature to pass Republican laws in the most Democratic state in the country. That is quite an achievement.

I am unsure of who else the Republicans will have in the field. Sec. Rice would also be a strong candidate. But she has said she will not run. Giuliani is too liberal to be nominated in 2008 after the debacle of 2006. Sen. Frist fumbled the ball in the Senate these last couple of years. He will not be a viable candidate. There are no others that I am aware of at this time. Giuliani and McCain are the darlings of the MSM. But, they also have values closer to the MSM than Romney. We shall see how things shape up. Republicans are in need of a strong leader. I hope we find one soon.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Aftermath II

Posted by Steve on Thursday, November 09, 2006 5:26:05 PM
We now are stuck with a Democrat House and Senate for the next two years. Having a Democrat House for two years is bad enough, you can vote them out after two years. But, a Democrat Senate is a bigger problem. You are stuck with the idiots you elected this election for six years. That is a long time for these new Democrat Senators to screw up everything in Washington and the country.

The State House of Representatives race is still listed as an eight vote margin. That is an impossibly close margin. There are still 200,000 ballots to be counted in Maricopa County as of last night. That margin is sure to change. I am unsure as to when the Secretary of State will update the counts for the various races. She is probably working on the major races still undecided like Congressional District 5 between JD Hayworth and Harry Mitchell. That is a few thousand votes apart. With the 200,000 figure to work from, that would make about 75,000 of them in that congressional district. That could still effect the outcome of that congressional race.

We will be stuck with the results of this election for a long time in the future. It is my hope that the next two years puts a crimp in the ability of Hillery to advance her candidacy. She would be a disaster for the country. She believes in the communist ideals. She would work to implement them if elected President. I can only hope that the Democrat Senate makes such fools of themselves that no Democrat Senator could possibly be elected President of the United States in the near future.

We need someone to stand out from the crowd and articulate conservative principles. He/she needs to give them full voice and not back down to Democrat slams that will come. It would be good if that person could give back as well or better than they receive. That would really energize the base. To have someone who can stand toe to toe with the Dims and give them the tongue lashing they so truly deserve.

Right now Mitt Romney looks like the best of the candidates. He is articulate and good looking. He has a successful record as leader of the Utah Olympics and as Governor of Massachusetts. He does have a religion problem, but if he can be articulate for conservative principles, nobody will care. John McCain would be a disaster for the Republican party in 2008. He could not be elected dog catcher. He may energize the Washington Post, but he does not energize the Republican base. We have to vote for President. The Washington Post and other MSM think they are the ones that should make the decision. We, the voters, make the decision on who the next President will be. That person will be the one who can articulate the conservative position best. Right now that position is open. Mitt Romney would be the front runner. John McCain stabbed us in the back for 2006. He cannot now take up the banner and say he is Mr. Conservative. He is not a conservative. He is a liberal that masquerades as a conservative.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Aftermath

Posted by Steve on Wednesday, November 08, 2006 5:37:11 PM
What happened last night? Rush said it best that we stood for nothing. Over the last 6 years, we tried to be Democrats. There is nothing worse than a Republican trying to be a Democrat. We just cannot pull it off convincingly. The only thing that can even compare is a Democrat trying to be a Republican. They are not even very convincing at all. At least we can fool them longer when we are trying to be Democrats.

Who says your vote does not count. Just prior to my writing in this blog, I checked on my State House of Representatives race. There are 8 votes separating the Democrat and the Republican as of 10:25 this morning. That is the closest race I can remember in my lifetime of voting. The only closer one was the one vote margin in the Senior class President in my High School. Right now, Steve Nichols is 8 votes down to the Democrat. I sure hope he pulls it out. I would not like to have my representatives cancel each other out on all the votes.

The Republican party needs to get back to where we were in 1994. In 1994, we stood for smaller government and a strong defense. Right now, we do not really stand for much. We have two years to turn things around before the 2008 Presidential election kicks in. That should be enough time to get the soul searching done and get a coherent plan in place. We now need to find excellent, not just good, candidates to run against the Democrats that hold the seats we need to win in 2008. That will take some arm twisting and dedication. Here in Arizona, it should not be a problem. Nationally, I am not sure if there are enough good people to run. My experience in North Dakota tells me there could be problems of good candidates. North Dakota is a red state that has two Democrat Senators. That should not be the case, but good Republican candidates are hard to find to run against the incumbant senators. Michael steele needs to run for something else in 2 years. He was an excellent candidate that almost won.

Many pundits, Hugh Hewitt being the best, are saying this result is the worst thing for Hillery. She now has to run from a majority group that she will not lead. That will be difficult to tout your leadership, when you are not the leader. People will also get to see the damage 2 years of Democrat laws will do. The economy will really go into the tank within the next two years. She will try to put it on Bush, but everyone will know it was the Democrat tax increases that killed the golden goose.

Maybe this will all work out for the good. I am not feeling too good about things right now. I am not blaming the Democrats for our being stupid and fumbling away the ball. There was voter fraud committed by Democrats. That was documented prior to the start of election day. But that is not what caused this problem. Republicans running away from Republican principles caused this problem. We need to fix those problems and we cannot lose in 2008.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Election Day

Posted by Steve on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 10:03:26 PM
Today is election day. I am apprehensive as to the outcome of the election. I get this way even if I know of a surety that my side will prevail big time everywhere. I am not so sure this year.

There are reports of heavy turnout everywhere. That bodes well for the Republicans. Republicans get out the vote better than Democrats. We use volunteers that believe in the cause. The Democrat party uses paid people to get out the vote. We have a more targeted approach to getting out the vote. They have a shotgun approach. We know who votes Republican and work to get that person to the polls. They have a demographic that they believe might vote Democratic and try to get them to the polls. They also use the dead voting block and the paid block of those they pick up in the streets of any city.

My Representative will be Jeff Flake. It would take a major upset for him to lose. My Senator will be Jon Kyl. He ran a smart campaign. He should easily defeat the defeatocrat Jim Pederson. I am sorry to say my governor will be a repeat of the disaster of the last four years. It is a wonder that people cannot see what damage she has done.

Nationally, I am unsure of how things are working out. I have faith that in the end the Republicans will hold the Senate and the House. I am reasonably sure that the Senate is secure. The House is less secure in my mind. All 435 House seats are up for election. When there are that many local elections at one time, it is almost impossible to tell what will happen overall. Will the Defeatocrats gain enough House seats to put a communist in charge? We will know in the morning. I still have faith. The polls do not look good. The exit polls did not come out looking good. Those were expected. It still does not help ones confidence to have all that go against you to still have confidence. Picking up Maryland's Senate seat would do wonders for my confidence. Time will be the judge of all.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Campaign Commercials

Posted by Steve on Monday, November 06, 2006 3:15:15 PM
Today on the way in to the office, I heard a campaign commercial that was almost beyond belief. It was supposed to be for Jim Pederson. It said that he did not support amnesty. That is true if you use the word amnesty. He supports a program that does exactly what amnesty does, he just does not call it amnesty. So, I guess that person was telling the truth, even if it was stretched a long long way.

The second point is that Jim Pederson does not support illegal immigration. That is true that he does not support people coming here illegally. But, he does not believe that we should do anything to stop people from coming here illegally. He wants his cake and to be able to eat it too.

Jim Pederson is not for cutting and running in Iraq. He is for taking the soldiers in Iraq and redeploying them to Okinawa. That way they can respond faster to problems in the middle east. The last time I checked a map, Okinawa was in the Far East, not the Middle East. That is cutting and running, just calling it another name.

All three of those examples show that the Democrat position is exactly what the Republicans say it is. The Democrats just do not call it what the Republicans call it. They do that because the Republicans are using the words that describe what will happen and they are trying to hide what will happen.

The commercial I heard was supposed to be by a Sheriff from Pima County. He was supposed to be a Democrat. If it was the person that it said it was, the person is a Democrat kool-aid drinker. He would support a monkey if it had a "D" after its name. The person said he had been in law enforcement for 49 years, that would make him over 70 years old. The person would have to be senile and suffering from dementia to believe that Jim Pederson does not support amnesty. The last comment was unkind. But, I do not understand how a person that can read and write say that Jim Pederson does not support amnesty. That could only be true if you were looking for the word amnesty in Jim Pederson's statement. Of course he will not put it in there. To do so would validate everything the Republicans are saying about him. He just describes amnesty and calls it something else. He does that with all of his other positions as well. He describes exactly the same thing the Republicans describe, he just calls it something else. The problem is that some people actually believe that there is a difference between what the Republicans say his position is and what he says his position is. Those people should not be allowed to vote. They obviously are not smart enough to catch someone in a lie. The problem is their vote counts just as much as someone who can tell that Jim Pederson's positions are exactly what the Republicans say they are.

I still stand by my prediction that the Republicans will hold onto the Senate and the House. I believe they have a good shot at picking up a seat in the Senate. The House will be much closer, maybe staying close to the current levels.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous12…2425262728293031323334Next »