Michelle Bachmann, the most conservative and articulate 2012 GOP presidential candidate, dropped out of the race after her poor showing in Iowa last week. Herman Cain’s disappointing withdrawal last month over spurious sexual harassment allegations suggests we won’t be discussing a flat federal income tax for at least another election cycle. John Huntsman was a surprisingly conservative governor of Utah, and could still benefit from the shell game Republican voters have been playing with their candidates for the past six months—if voters ever notice he’s running. Mitt Romney is an unreliable conservative; Newt Gingrich is a combustible bloviator; and Ron Paul is a nutty America-hater.
What about Rick Perry? Last September, he was the GOP’s latest, greatest hope for about three invigorating weeks. The only—only—reason Republican voters abandoned him in droves after his bump in the polls was his clunky and unscripted performance in the first few debates—a flaw he’s long since overcome. Perry’s marble-mouthed tendencies have been limited thus far to one format—the presidential primary debate—and even there he’s improved dramatically, such that commentators have been gushing, “Perry had a really good night!” and “This was the best Perry debate performance so far!”
(I don’t fault Perry for not being able to remember the third agency he would close; there are so many I would shut down, I also would lose track. When Ron Paul helpfully offered “EPA?” I would have said, “That too!”) read more »
If I was a total stranger who had never seen or heard of Barack Hussein Obama, I would say he was stoned when that picture was taken. As far as I’m concerned, the picture speaks for itself. It is the face of self-indulgence. It is the face of dissipation. Soon to become the face of desperation.
In medieval times, he would have been given a name such as ‘Obama the Usurper’, or ‘Obama the Destroyer’. Most likely though, the appellation that would stick would have been given to him not by his cronies but by ‘the little people’. And that nomenclature would be ‘Obama the Weak’.
Judged objectively, the last three years under Barack Hussein Obama will go down in history as three of the worst years in our history. We’ve been suffering under the depredations of the Obama crowd long enough. It’s time to take the fight against the enemies of freedom to the next level. read more »
While the left-wing media delight over Republican 2012 presidential nominees’ slugfest in early-state caucuses and primaries in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, some forward-thinking conservatives are engaged in a constructive plan to win the general election no matter who the nominee is.
Crafty Republican National Committee staffers are compiling a 500-page document, known informally as “The Book,” that juxtaposes direct quotes and video clips of Obama making grandiose promises with statistics on the reality of how his efforts have turned out. The compendium, which covers 2008-2011, promises to be a virtual treasure trove of fodder for 2012 general election GOP campaign ads, chock full of sound bites coupled with cold, hard facts that will yield devastating and irrefutable attack ads. RNC communications director Sean Spicer boasts, “We have everything he has done and said catalogued six ways to Sunday.” read more »
Given that we all usually have room for improvement in our lives, resolutions are always a good idea. They are even more important when there is so much to be gained (or lost) for not bettering ourselves. So it is with this coming election year for conservatives.
With that in mind, the following resolutions are offered up for conservatives everywhere in 2012:
#1) Don't be a cannibal. No matter who you are for in any given race, don’t “go cannibal” on fellow conservatives over who they support. You might win for the moment, but you’ll lose productive relationships in the long run.
As for the presidential race, whoever the Republican nominee is, he will not be perfect and will probably be "high maintenance" from a policy standpoint. But as a movement, conservatives are much better prepared to deal with such politicians than in years past. And remember, ANY Republican president, no matter how squishy they may be, will have absolutely no choice whatsoever but to sign a bill repealing Obamacare. To borrow a phrase, keep your eyes on the prize. read more »
It’s the year most of the country has been waiting for. Ever since it realized it had elected a monster president and a ravenous horde of Marxists intent on institutionalizing European style (or worse) socialism in this country. It’s highly probable that 2012 will be one of those ‘pivotal’ years that historians glory over… after the fact. Problem with that is that we are the facts. And 2012 is a slate yet to be written on.
The world is an increasingly dangerous place and, under President Barack Hussein Obama, even more so for America. This is a man who identifies more with the stated enemies of this Republic than with American citizens.
Those who read my columns will remember that in my business one can put in an outrageous number of hours, which can result in precluding my writing. No, it’s not because I can’t write when I’m dog tired. It’s more because I don’t have time to do the requisite research.
Dee, the very efficient editor of this little shooting match, can’t do it for me. She is just about maxed out too… which would explain why we haven’t seen an article from her in a while. She’s a pretty good writer in her own right.
Regular readers will remember my (former) IDF buddy, Jackie. He just returned from a couple of weeks in Israel. We both work for the same company and I was talking to him out of earshot of any staff. We were talking about Israel. So, you say, what’s the big deal? You’ve talked to him before. Prying information out of Jackie is like trying to open a giant clam with a pair of chopsticks. We’ve both watched the Iran/Middle East crisis develop with not a little trepidation. He, because Israel is his home of origin (he has family there). Me, because I’ve been fascinated by history and the events that shaped history. A life-long avocation that has taught me that history, in many ways, does repeat itself. read more »
Time magazine recently awarded its vaunted Person of the Year title to “The Protestor.”
The increasingly irrelevant weekly has been moving away from traditional designations of actual, individual human beings as Person of the Year for a while now. Apparently the left-leaning journal has been ever more swayed by the collectivist notion that there are no individual heroes or titans that drive the world—just influences, movements, and groundswells. Recent winners of Time’s award have consisted of The Peacemakers (including founder of modern terrorism Yasser Arafat), The Whistleblowers (including an Enron staffer who warned about bad accounting practices), and The Good Samaritans (including certified bobblehead Bono).
At least those titles went to groups of several persons each. Time’s latest choice encompasses literally millions of human beings. It’s as vague and vacuous as the phrase “War on Poverty.”
(I suppose we shouldn’t be surprised at Time’s latest addle-headed selection; this is the same magazine that chose Vladimir Putin as Person of the Year in 2007 and, um, “You” in 2006.)
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances”.
Words. Simple and direct. No society on Earth had ever heard their like before… they were truly as revolutionary as the revolution that spawned them. It was the beginning of the evolution of the freest, most open and dynamic nation/state in history. Cobbled together from a handful of often cantankerous and contrarily independent colonies. How, then, were these wildly disparate groups of peoples forged into the instrument for truth and freedom that is the United States of America?
We know that we stand on the shoulders of giants. Even a cursory glance through our founding documents reveals them to be the inspired works of thoughtful, highly educated (most of them were reading Homer in the original Greek by the time they were 12 or 13 and doing trigonometry and calculus as well) men who risked everything to birth this nation of free men, against odds that reason said were impossible.
Information was passed from person to person. The papers of the period were mostly one page ‘broadsheets’ which could often be found plastered to the wall of the local tavern. Political views and opinions were often printed in pamphlets which were circulated through the towns and villages. There were no ‘professional’ journalists… only individual Americans speaking their minds and hearts. read more »
Over the past few weeks, a controversy has been brewing between conservative commentators Ann Coulter and Mark Levin over the relative fitness of frontrunners Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination.
In her columns and TV appearances, Coulter has been stumping for Romney and stomping all over Gingrich. On his syndicated radio talk show, Levin has been denouncing Romney as a non-conservative and bolstering Gingrich as a flawed but superior alternative.
The tiff echoes Coulter’s endorsement earlier this year of Chris Christie, before he insisted he wasn’t running, and Levin’s dismissal of Christie as a RINO. In both cases, Levin has expressed contempt for the “Republican establishment” trying to decide the GOP nominee, though it would be hard to characterize Coulter as part of any establishment.
Coulter’s endorsement of Romney is a bit puzzling, when one recalls her animosity toward John McCain and her tongue-in-cheek threat to campaign for Hillary Clinton if McCain got the 2008 Republican presidential nomination. Coulter argued then that Republicans do not win elections when they run moderate candidates, because such candidates appear ideologically weak against genuine leftists such as Obama. On the contrary, because this is a center-right country, Republicans win when they run unapologetic conservatives such as Ronald Reagan, who offer a contrasting alternative to the Democratic candidate. read more »
Frontrunner-of-the-month GOP presidential contender Newt Gingrich caused a stir at Saturday night’s Iowa debate when he affirmed his previous characterization of “an invented Palestinian people, who are in fact Arabs and were historically part of the Arab community.”
For once, Gingrich is correct.
The label “Palestine” was used historically to refer to the area between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River (and beyond); the term had no political import. During the first half of the 20th century, “Palestinian” referred largely to Jews living in Palestine. The Palestine Post, for example, was printed in Hebrew and English, and in 1950 was renamed The Jerusalem Post.
The British, who controlled Palestine after WWI, divided it in two in 1923, giving 75% of the land—the area that is now Jordan—to Palestinian Arabs, and the remaining 25% to Palestinian Jews. But that wasn’t good enough to satisfy regional Arab despots.
In 1947, the United Nations proposed a partition plan to create side-by-side Jewish and Arab states out of the 25% that was left of the original Palestine, west of the Jordan River. The Arab regimes surrounding Palestine rejected this deal; this resulted in the 1947-1948 Civil War and the creation of the Jewish state. read more »
What is it that the Washington Republican establishment and the DeMarxists of Barack Hussein Obama’s regime have in common with one another? Status quo. The Marxi-Socialists attempting to enslave this free country of free people strongly wish to maintain the status quo of their Marxist Chief, Barack Obama. The Beltway-Georgetown ‘insider’ Republicrats, on the other hand, have an agenda altogether different.
The tenacity with which the Washington Republican establishment has sought to control and direct the Republican primary process has not gone unnoticed by Americans, and it appears to be backfiring. Not that you’d know it by the mindless bleatings of the Lame Stream Press. There’s an awful lot of noise out there regarding Mitt Romney (the GOP establishment presumed candidate), the man the LSM and the Obama camp would like to run against.
Almost every average polling result shows President Obama beating Romney. Okay, that explains why the lefties are enamored of the too smooth and somewhat oily Mr. Romney. On the other hand, there’s good reason Mitt can’t get out of the twenties.
Conservatives don’t trust Romney. We see him for what he is. An opportunistic politician who, at one or more points in his career, has flipped on every major issue in the Conservative playbook. He started his career as a pro-choice liberal. Recent forays into what he calls Conservatism lack conviction. read more »