If I were psychic I couldn’t have made a better call. I make no metaphysical claims… quite the contrary. Ever since the 2010 elections, the Republicrats and the Lame Stream lap dogs of the Obama regime have been at great pains to convince us, convince you, that we were an aberration, a momentary phenomenon, a freak of nature. We would soon be absorbed into the Republican establishment, which would once again rule all of us rubes with wisdom… nay, true sagacity.

We talked at great length about Mitt Romney and the central and overriding fact that he is a big government Republican in the establishment mold. Worse yet, he’s moderate to liberal on most issues that really matter to fully 60% of the citizens of this country that consider themselves to be conservative.

That’s the one thing that Mitt Romney is not. No matter what the repeated battery from his PACs… those unaccountable political garbage grinders behind which Mr. Milquetoast can hide, while devastating anyone who is perceived as a threat to his vanilla Republicrat candidacy. Ask Herman Cain.  read more »

A ‘back blast’ is the blast cone behind certain weapons that utilize the back blast to minimize recoil. ‘Walking into your own back blast’ is a term for just plain stupidity. When I was in the Marine Corps, walking behind a 106 recoilless rifle would get you dead if you were close, or just knock you on your ass and maybe blow out your eardrums from about 15 to 30 feet away. Not a smart move.

ABC and, by association, all of the DNC/Administration surrogates of the Lame Stream press may have stepped in it with the brazenly timed, extremely shallow interview with Newt Gingrich’s ex-wife of some eighteen years, Marianne. Naturally, as with all of these DeMarxist straw horses, they posit all of these things as fact when, in fact, almost all of these Marxist publicity stunts turn out to have back stories they aren’t anxious to have see the light of day.  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 20^th 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 »