Barack is my shepherd, I shall not want
He makes me lay down my Hardball, he stills my dissent to quiet waters
he restores my Camelot soul. He guides me in paths of purple-state unity for his name’s sake.
Even though I walk through the valley of partisan rancor, I will fear no obstructionist, for you are with me.
Your calm and your staff, they comfort me.
You prepare a studio before me, in the presence of the Ditto-heads.
You anoint my head with your charisma; my thrill overflows.
Surely, the audacity of hope and change will follow me all the days of my life,
and I will dwell in the house bought with Rezko forever.
1/15/09 Forget for a moment that Barack Hussein Obama is one of the people that the abortion movement started by Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood seek/sought to exterminate. Obama should be pro-life based simply on the basis of his socialist beliefs. After all, those millions of children that he supports killing could grow up to pay taxes in his “great society.”
12/19/08 “For the more historically minded, it’s a time for nostalgia. The past comes alive as Chicago’s grand tradition of corruption is sustained for another generation. As the Chicago Tribune once wrote, ‘corruption has been as much a part of the landscape as corn, soybeans and skyscrapers.’ According to the Chicago Sun-Times, as of 2006, when Blago’s predecessor, George Ryan, was sent to prison for racketeering, 79 elected officials had been convicted of corruption in the past 30 years. … The New York Times — which, according to Wall Street analysts, is weeks from holding editorial board meetings in a refrigerator box — created the journalistic equivalent of CSI-Wasilla to study every follicle and fiber in Sarah Palin’s background, all the while treating Obama’s Chicago like one of those fairy-tale lands depicted in posters that adorn little girls’ bedroom walls. See there, Suzie? That’s a Pegasus. That’s a pink unicorn. And that’s a beautiful sunflower giving birth to a fully grown Barack Obama, the greatest president ever and the only man in history to be able to pick up manure from the clean end.” –National Review editor Jonah Goldberg
11/24/08 “I want you to meet a priest from Greenville, South Carolina named Rev. Jay Scott Newman. He is the pastor of St. Mary’s Catholic Church in downtown Greenville. And he has become my personal hero. In a nutshell, Fr. Newman told his parishioners that if they voted for Barack Obama, they embraced ‘intrinsic evil’ since Obama’s opponent was a ‘plausible pro-life alternative.’ And as a result, those Obama voters need to seek forgiveness from God before they receive Holy Communion again. Does this guy have guts, or what? Finally, a religious leader comes along and deals with the 800-pound elephant in the room: how do supposedly religious people reject the sanctity of life and support someone who voted against a ‘Born Alive Infant Protection’ law which would protect babies accidentally born alive after a botched abortion? Frankly, if that’s not evil, I’m not sure what is. And it takes a priest in Greenville, South Carolina to rise up against all the moral relativism we face in the world and speak the truth. … When discussing this gutsy priest on my radio show this week, a few liberals called in and complained about him ‘mixing politics with religion.’ It seems to me that life and death issues aren’t very political in nature. At least they shouldn’t be. And the fact that the left has managed to turn the issue of abortion into ‘politics’ is simply a deceitful way to try and make the taking of an unborn baby’s life something as mundane and ordinary as taxes or fixing potholes.” –columnist and radio talk show host Mike Gallagher
11/19/08 “If an American is to amount to anything he must rely upon himself, and not upon the State; he must take pride in his own work, instead of sitting idle to envy the luck of others. He must face life with resolute courage, win victory if he can, and accept defeat if he must, without seeking to place on his fellow man a responsibility which is not theirs.” –Theodore Roosevelt
11/17/08 “I think I tend to give liberals the benefit of the doubt. I happen to believe they are so besotted by their emotions that they can’t help painting themselves into indefensible corners. To blame a liberal for lying and blatant hypocrisy would be as heartless as blaming an alcoholic for drinking. In fact, I suspect that, like alcoholics, liberals suffer from a chemical imbalance. Otherwise, how would you explain the enormous gulf between what they say and what they do? For instance, how often have we read newspaper editorials arguing for Affirmative Action in schools and in the work place? In most cases, those pieces are not being written or edited by members of a racial minority group. So, if they were sincere, shouldn’t these journalists clear out their desks and surrender their jobs to somewhat less qualified, but far more deserving, blacks and Hispanics? Or consider, if you will, how consistently liberals object to tax cuts. They prattle on incessantly about how much the wealthy benefit, ignoring the logic that if there’s a 10% reduction across the board, it figures that the person who pays more will save more. But, when liberals blather about the inequities of tax cuts, you realize they actually believe that if a millionaire saves fifty thousand on his tax bill, the guy who only earns, say, thirty grand-a-year should get the same return! … So, while I acknowledge that liberals can be as loyal and steadfast as cocker spaniels, I have found it is nearly impossible to paper-train them.” –Burt Prelutsky
11/3/08 In the interview that you quote on WBEZ-FM in Chicago, Obama regrets that the Warren Supreme Court “didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution.”
11/1/08 Mark Steyn on Obama’s illegal Aunt Zeituni: “When first I heard about the Undocumented Auntie, I thought I’d finally figured out how this spread-the-wealth thing works: The government taxes Joe the Plumber to fund public housing agencies that illegally provide welfare and accommodation to illegal immigrants thereby freeing up their cash flow to enable them to make illegal campaign contributions to any nephew who might chance to be running for president and get him elected so he can tax Joe the Plumber even more to fund even more public housing for even more illegal immigrants to make even more illegal campaign contributions… Etc.”
10/28/08 “To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.” — Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816
10/22/08 As for me and my Catholic vote, I would sooner cast it for Satan himself than Barack Obama.
10/20/08 “Supposedly, under the Obama tax plan, 95 percent of the American people will get a tax cut. You’d think that at this point the natural skepticism of any sentient being other than 6-week-old puppies might kick in, but apparently not. If you’re wondering why Obama didn’t simply announce that under his plan 112 percent of the American people will get a tax cut, well, they ran it past the focus groups who said that that was all very generous but they’d really like it if he could find a way to stick it to Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh, Karl Rove and whatnot. So 95 percent it is…[O]ur Fact Check Unit ran the numbers on the Obama tax-cut plan and the number is correct: ‘95.’ It’s the words ‘percent’ immediately following that are wrong: that’s a typing error accidentally left in from the first draft. It should read: Under the Obama plan, 95 of the American people will get a tax cut. Joe the Plumber expressed his misgivings about the President-in-waiting’s tax inclinations, and the O-Man smoothly reassured him: ‘It’s not that I want to punish your success,’ he told the bloated plutocrat corporate toilet executive. ‘I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they’ve got a chance for success, too. I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.’ In that sentence about you spreading the wealth around, there’s another typing error: that ‘you’ should read ‘I, Barack.’ ‘You’ will have no say in it.” —Mark Steyn
10/19/08 Choose life….Government has no authority to take away an innocent person’s life. Government exists, instead, to secure the rights of all the people. Some claim they don’t know when life begins. So, if they are hunting and don’t know whether it’s a bear or a man hidden from view, may they shoot? If not, then how do they justify abortion when they are not sure what it destroys? -Father Frank Pavone
10/17/08 In short, Sen. Obama is a politician who has long since left behind even the middle ground on the issue of life. He’s fighting with those who won’t protect a child born alive. A vote for Barack Obama is a vote for activist courts that will continue to smother the open and democratic debate that we deserve and that we need on this issue of life—that’s OK, that debate—at both the state and federal level.” -Sarah Palin
10/9/08 “Obama could have allied himself with all sorts of other people. But, time and again, he allied himself with people who openly expressed their hatred of America. No amount of flags on his campaign platforms this election year can change that.” —Thomas Sowell
10/8/08 “Ahead in the polls, Barack Obama used last night’s debate to portray himself as a nonradical if vague agent of change. Despite John McCain’s best efforts, the Arizona Senator didn’t knock Mr. Obama from his cool evasion or even do much to rebut the Democrat’s routine talking points. This isn’t enough to change the dynamics of the race. Not that Mr. McCain didn’t have opportunities. The Illinois Democrat made his by now familiar claim that eight years of ‘deregulation’ caused the current panic, but Mr. McCain never challenged him to explain what policies he’s referring to. Bill Clinton debunked the deregulation line the other day on the public record, but the Republican never mentioned that. Mr. McCain did make a stab at hanging the failures of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac around Mr. Obama, but without any real explanation for why they mattered or how they represent Washington’s status quo… One of Mr. Obama’s gifts is his ability to glide over contradictions with the greatest of ease. He spent minutes explaining that we spend ‘$10 billion a month’ in Iraq that should be spent here in the U.S. But a short time later he was promoting what sounded like a surge in Afghanistan, and vowing to spend even more money to assist ‘the economies’ of Eastern Europe. He also proposes to provide free health care while claiming he’d cut more spending from the overall budget than his new ideas would cost. If Mr. McCain lets that last claim go unrebutted, he deserves to lose.” —The Wall Street Journal
10/3/08 In 1987, Ronald Reagan commented on useful idiots: “How do you tell a Communist? Well, it’s someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It’s someone who understands Marx and Lenin.”
10/1/08 “Something is very wrong with a legal system that says doctors are mandated to pronounce babies dead but are not mandated to assess babies for life and chances of survival. In other words, our laws currently say that babies have no rights to medical oversight until they are dead. We look the other way and pretend that these babies aren’t human while they’re alive but human only after they are dead. We issue these babies both birth and death certificates, but it is really only the death certificate that matters. No other children in America are medically abandoned like this.” -Jill Stanek
9/29/08 “The preamble of the Constitution states it was created to ‘promote the general welfare,’ not ensure it. The bailout bill says it ‘provides authority to the treasury secretary to … ensure the economic well-being of Americans.’ This abrogates the Constitution. When the government tries to run the economy, it always fails.” -Rush Limbaugh
“The New York Times reported that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were ‘under heavy assault by the Republicans,’ but these entities still had ‘important political allies’ in the Democrats. Now, at a cost of hundreds of billions of dollars, middle-class taxpayers are going to be forced to bail out the Democrats’ two most important constituent groups: rich Wall Street bankers and welfare recipients. Political correctness had already ruined education, sports, science and entertainment. But it took a Democratic president with a Democratic congress for political correctness to wreck the financial industry.” -Ann Coulter
9/24/08 “Joe Biden isn’t backing down from his startling claim last week that raising taxes on the rich is the ‘patriotic’ thing to do. [In fact,] he upped the ante, thundering that he also has Jesus in his corner. ‘Catholic social doctrine as I was taught it is, you take care of people who need the help the most,’ Mr. Biden preached to a group of union supporters… We won’t get into a theological debate with Mr. Biden, except to say that Biblical tax rates tended to run around 10%, not the 39.6%-plus that Barack Obama’s tax plan calls for. As for patriotism, maybe the young Joe Biden missed school the day the Boston Tea Party was being taught. There’s also the point that if you want to finance a war, you need a strong enough economy to throw off the tax revenues to pay for it. As we learned in the 1980s under Reagan, lower taxes that help an economy grow can finance a defense buildup that helps win the Cold War. By that standard, cuts in marginal income tax rates deserve to be called patriotic. Regarding taxes and social justice, the issue is whether the high taxes that Mr. Biden favors promote economic growth and prosperity, not least for America’s poorest citizens. There he doesn’t have evidence on his side. Studies from around the world, including the annual Wall Street Journal-Heritage Foundation Index of Economic Freedom, conclusively indicate that countries that keep taxes low tend to have the least amount of poverty. As for fairness, we’d note that today the top 1% of taxpayers pay twice as large a share of income taxes (39%) at a 35% rate than they did in 1980, when they were taxed at a rate of 70% yet paid only 19% of income taxes. In that sense, the tax code is more ‘progressive’ now. By the way, Mr. Biden and his wife recently released their tax returns, and they reported an average of $380, or 0.2% of their income, in annual charitable contributions over a 10-year period. The national average was about 2% of income.” —The Wall Street Journal
9/23/08 “The credit crunch and foreclosure problems are failures of government policy. In fact, what we see now is a market correction to foolhardy government policy. Congress’ move to bailout lenders and borrowers who made poor decisions will simply create incentives for people to make unwise decisions in the future.” —Walter Williams
9/22/08 “One has to wonder just how much more Democrats will milk class-warfare politics before people wake up to their deception. No matter what economic problems we face, Democrats always find a way to blame them on the ‘rich’ and the Bush tax cuts. Why? Because it rallies their base and—they hope—will alienate enough others against evil Bush Republicans to give Democrats a prohibitive advantage on domestic issues. Joe Biden even blamed the current mortgage crisis on the Bush tax cuts. He said: ‘We should try to correct the problems that caused this… [which are] the profligate tax cuts to the very, very wealthy that John [McCain] wants to continue.’ Never mind that low- and middle-income earners received greater tax rate reductions than the highest-income earners; that doesn’t fit within the Democrats’ class-envy template. Forget the reckless legislation forcing financial institutions to lend money to people who probably couldn’t pay it back—to satisfy the liberals’ obsession with looking compassionate and pandering to minorities. Forget that Obama was the second-highest recipient of campaign cash from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (according to the Center for Responsive Politics), cash aimed at keeping congressional regulators off their backs… Despite the Democrats’ destructive practice of blaming every economic woe—from Enron to rising oil prices—on the Bush tax cuts, the tax cuts had nothing to do with those problems, including the mortgage crisis.” —David Limbaugh
9/17/08 “Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has a great twofer pitch: ‘green jobs.’… Governments create no wealth. They only move it around while taking a cut for their trouble. So any jobs created over here come at the expense of jobs that would have been created over there… One reason decentralized markets are preferable to government central planning is that human beings are fallible. Mistakes are inevitable. Some investments will be errors. Mistakes in the market tend to be on a comparatively small scale. If one company invests in plug-in hybrids and it goes bust, only a relatively few people suffer. The assets of the bankrupt firm pass into more capable hands. But decisions by government, especially the federal government, affect all of us. When government makes a mistake, the bureaucracy can’t go bankrupt. Instead, it will use its failure to justify increased appropriations in the next budget. If ‘green jobs’ make so much sense, the market will create them. They will be created by private entrepreneurs and venture capitalists who are eager to profit from winning investments. The best ideas will rise to the top, and green energy will gradually replace coal and oil. If politicians were serious about creating jobs and cleaner technologies, they would step aside and let the free market go to work.” —John Stossel
9/16/08 McCain advisor Carly Fiorina blames President Bush for not regulating the mortgage business. Even former Clinton cabinet member Robert B. Reich admits Democrats share blame. Democrats and Clinton cronies got rich on Fannie and Freddie and gave mortgages to people who couldn’t afford them.
» Investor’s Business Daily: The Real Culprits In This Meltdown
9/15/08 “On Sept. 8, Fox News broadcast an interview between Obama and Bill O’Reilly that focused on taxation and the economy. Obama repeated his pledge to cut taxes for 95 percent of Americans, while raising taxes on the tiny fraction who earn more than $250,000… His tax proposal, he explained, was a matter of civility: ‘If I am sitting pretty and you’ve got a waitress who is making minimum wage plus tips, and I can afford it and she can’t, what’s the big deal for me to say, I’m going to pay a little bit more? That’s neighborliness.’ If that is Obama’s rationale for making the tax code even more steeply progressive than it already is, it’s no wonder voters are having second thoughts about his economic aptitude. ‘Neighborliness.’ Perhaps that word has a nonstandard meaning to someone whose home adjoined the property of convicted swindler Tony Rezko, but extracting money by force from someone who earned it in order to give it to someone who didn’t is not usually spoken of as neighborly. If Citizen Obama, ‘sitting pretty,’ reaches into his own pocket and helps out the waitress with a large tip, he has shown a neighborly spirit. But there is nothing neighborly about using the tax code to compel someone else to pay the waitress that tip. Taxation is not generosity, it is confiscation at gunpoint. Does Obama not understand the difference? Perhaps he doesn’t. Eager though he may be to compel ‘neighborliness’ in others, he has not been nearly so avid about demonstrating it himself. Barack and Michelle Obama’s tax returns show that from 2000 through 2004, when their adjusted gross income averaged nearly a quarter of a million dollars a year, their annual charitable donations amounted to just $2,154—less than nine-tenths of 1 percent. Not until he entered the US Senate in 2005 and began to be spoken of as a presidential possibility did the Obamas’ ‘neighborliness’ become more evident. (In 2005-2007, they gave 5.5 percent of their income to charity.)” —Jeff Jacoby (courtesy PatriotPost.com)
9/12/08 Name that year: Average hourly earnings were up 4.3 percent over the summer months; almost 49 percent of U.S. industries reported adding jobs; the economy grew by 3.3 percent in the second quarter, and productivity swelled by 4.3 percent. If you said 2008, you are not only correct but also unwelcome in the mainstream media—and in Democrat politics (but we repeat ourselves). Amid continued rants over the “recession that wasn’t” (and still isn’t, to date) the Left is intent on pounding the 6.1 percent unemployment rate, which, while accurate and higher than last year’s five-percent rate, actually equals the nation’s average unemployment rate for the past 38 years. Still, Democrats in Congress are already pushing for a second $50-billion stimulus package. Did we point out that the unemployment rate really started going up after the first stimulus package? (courtesy of PatriotPost.com)
9/10/08 “Obama and his running mate, Sen. Joe Biden, see America as a nation in which government plays a primary role in individual lives. John McCain and Sarah Palin see the individual as primary and government as a protector of freedom that can help the less fortunate become self-sustaining.” —Cal Thomas More great excerpts from the speeches at the RNC:
We need a president who understands that you don’t make citizens prosperous by making Washington richer, and you don’t lift an economic downturn by imposing one of the largest tax increases in American history. Now our opponents tell you not to worry about their tax increases. They tell you they are not going to tax your family. No, they’re just going to tax “businesses”! So unless you buy something from a “business”, like groceries or clothes or gasoline… or unless you get a paycheck from a big or a small “business,” don’t worry… it’s not going to affect you. They say they are not going to take any water out of your side of the bucket, just the “other” side of the bucket! That’s their idea of tax reform.
The Senate has always had more than its share of smooth talkers. And big talkers. It still has…[T]he Democrats present a history making nominee for president. History making in that he is the most liberal, most inexperienced nominee to ever run for President. Apparently they believe that he would match up well with the history making, Democrat-controlled Congress. History making because it’s the least accomplished and most unpopular Congress in our nation’s history.
We need a president and vice president who will take the federal bureaucracy by the scruff of the neck and give it a good shaking. And we need a president who doesn’t think that the protection of the unborn or a newly born baby is above his pay grade. The man who will be that president is John McCain.
John McCain’s bones may have been broken but his spirit never was. Now, being a POW certainly doesn’t qualify anyone to be president. But it does reveal character. This is the kind of character that civilizations from the beginning of history have sought in their leaders. Strength. Courage. Humility. Wisdom. Duty. Honor. A man who never quits is never defeated.
The respect [McCain] is given around the world is not because of a teleprompter speech designed to appeal to American critics abroad, but because of decades of clearly demonstrated character and statesmanship. It’s pretty clear there are two questions we will never have to ask ourselves, “Who is this man?” and “Can we trust this man with the presidency?”
What is a Democrat like me doing at a Republican convention like this? The answer is simple. I’m here to support John McCain because country matters more than party.
My Democratic friends know all about John’s record of independence and accomplishment. Maybe that’s why some of them are spending so much time and so much money trying to convince voters that John McCain is someone else. I’m here, as a Democrat myself, to tell you: Don’t be fooled. God only made one John McCain, and he is his own man.
Sen. Obama is a gifted and eloquent young man, but eloquence is no substitute for a record.
I spent 25 years in the private sector. I’ve done business in many foreign countries. I know why jobs come and why they go away. And I know that liberals don’t have a clue. [Democrats] think we have the biggest and strongest economy in the world because of our government. They’re wrong. America is strong because of the ingenuity and entrepreneurship and hard work of the American people.
When John McCain received his country’s call to service, he did not hesitate and he did not choose the easy path. He sat alone in the cockpit, taking off from an aircraft carrier, to fly in the unfriendly skies, knowing that there was a good chance he might not make it back. And one day, he didn’t make it back. He was shot down and captured, brutally tortured. He could have eased his own pain, even cut short his imprisonment, just by uttering a few simple worlds renouncing his country. But then, as now, John McCain put his country first. And he knew—he knew that to return with honor later was better than to return without it now.
John McCain doesn’t want the kind of change that allows the government to reach even deeper into your paycheck and pick your pocket, your doctor, your child’s school, or even the kind of car you drive, or tell you how much you have to inflate your tires.
Let me make something clear tonight: I’m not a Republican because I grew up rich. I’m a Republican because I didn’t want to spend the rest of my life poor, waiting for the government to rescue me.
We agree with Joe Biden. Tough times require strong leadership, and this is no time for on-the-job training. Change is not a destination, just as hope is not a strategy.
Governor Palin represents a new generation. She’s already one of the most successful governors in America and the most popular. And she’s already had more executive experience than the entire Democratic ticket combined. She’s been a mayor. I love that. I’m sorry that Barack Obama feels that her hometown isn’t cosmopolitan enough. Maybe they cling to religion there.
Sarah Palin delivered a speech Wednesday night that drew 41,000,000 viewers—almost as many viewers as the Democrat’s presidential candidate, Barack Obama, drew for his keynote speech last Thursday night. Notably, 10 networks carried Obama’s speech while only six carried Gov. Palin’s remarks. Those who tuned in for Gov. Palin’s comments understand why she attracted that many viewers. Read on:
I had the privilege of living most of my life in a small town. I was just your average hockey mom, and signed up for the PTA because I wanted to make my kids’ public education better. When I ran for city council, I didn’t need focus groups and voter profiles because I knew those voters, and knew their families, too. Before I became governor of the great state of Alaska, I was mayor of my hometown. And since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involves. I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a “community organizer,” except that you have actual responsibilities.
I might add that in small towns, we don’t quite know what to make of a candidate who lavishes praise on working people when they are listening, and then talks about how bitterly they cling to their religion and guns when those people aren’t listening. We tend to prefer candidates who don’t talk about us one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco.
As for my running mate, you can be certain that wherever he goes, and whoever is listening, John McCain is the same man.
I’m not a member of the permanent political establishment. I’ve learned quickly, these past few days, that if you’re not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone But here’s a little news flash for all those reporters and commentators: I’m not going to Washington to seek their good opinion. I’m going to Washington to serve the people of this country. Americans expect us to go to Washington for the right reasons, and not just to mingle with the right people.
Barack Obama has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or even a reform, not even in the State Senate. This is a man who can give an entire speech about the wars America is fighting and never use the word “victory,” except when he’s talking about his own campaign. But when the cloud of rhetoric has passed… when the roar of the crowd fades away… when the stadium lights go out, and those Styrofoam Greek columns are hauled back to some studio lot—what exactly is our opponent’s plan? What does he actually seek to accomplish, after he’s done turning back the waters and healing the planet? The answer is to make government bigger… take more of your money… give you more orders from Washington… and to reduce the strength of America in a dangerous world.
America needs more energy; our opponent is against producing it. Victory in Iraq is finally in sight, and he wants to forfeit. Terrorist states are seeking nuclear weapons without delay; he wants to meet them without preconditions. Al Qaida terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America, and he’s worried that someone won’t read them their rights. Government is too big; he wants to grow it. Congress spends too much money; he promises more. Taxes are too high, and he wants to raise them. His tax increases are the fine print in his economic plan. And let me be specific: The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, and raise payroll taxes, and raise investment income taxes, and raise the death tax, and raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars… How are you going to be better off if our opponent adds a massive tax burden to the American economy?
Here’s how I look at the choice Americans face in this election. In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers. And then there are those, like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change.
My fellow citizens, the American presidency is not supposed to be a journey of ‘personal discovery.’ This world of threats and dangers is not just a community, and it doesn’t just need an organizer.
Though both Senator Obama and Senator Biden have been going on lately about how they are always, quote, ‘fighting for you,’ let us face the matter squarely. There is only one man in this election who has ever really fought for you… in places where winning means survival and defeat means death… and that man is John McCain.
Our nominee… is a leader who’s not looking for a fight, but is not afraid of one either.
He’s a man who wore the uniform of this country for 22 years, and refused to break faith with those troops in Iraq who have now brought victory within sight. And as the mother of one of those troops, that is exactly the kind of man I want as commander in chief.
“Liberals create economic circumstances that force businesses to lay people off, and then liberals blame capitalism for failing. When the economy is strong, liberals want to grow government. When the economy is weak, they want to grow government. There is no business cycle in government. There is just growth.” -Rush Limbaugh
There couldn’t be a clearer difference between conservatives and liberals than this one…
“If my daughter makes a mistake, I don’t want her punished with a baby”Palin…
“As [our daughter] faces the responsibilities of adulthood, she knows she has our unconditional love and support.” (also… “Bristol and the young man she will marry are going to realize very quickly the difficulties of raising a child, which is why they will have the love and support of our entire family)
“I do not know if Gov. Sarah Palin will make a good Vice-President. I do know she is being an exceptional mom, also in moments of crisis. Some have said, in many, many ways, “Big deal!” But most of these are men. I ask if any of us guys could be a mom of five, with a handicapped child, achieve an 83% approval rating as state governor, and smile all the way through a prime time speech, after the week this woman has just had.” -Father Jonathan Morris (see full article on Too Good page)
More Sarah Palin quotes from last night’s speech:
“Victory in Iraq is finally in sight; he wants to forfeit,” she said of the Democratic presidential nominee.
“Al-Qaida terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America; he’s worried that someone won’t read them their rights.
“Government is too big; he wants to grow it.”
“I might add that in small towns we don’t quite know what to make of a candidate who lavishes praise on working people when they are listening and then talks about how bitterly they cling to their religion and guns when those people aren’t.”
From last night’s RNC:
“Now our opponents tell you not to worry about their tax increases. They tell you they are not going to tax your family. No, they’re just going to tax ‘businesses.’ So unless you buy something from a ‘business,’ like groceries or clothes or gasoline… or unless you get a paycheck from a big or a small ‘business,’ don’t worry… it’s not going to affect you. They say they are not going to take any water out of your side of the bucket, just the ‘other’ side of the bucket! That’s their idea of tax reform.” —Fred Thompson
On Gov. Palin’s daughter’s pregnancy:
“Every parent with a child has hoped that this never happens to their daughter. They don’t appreciate political hacks trying to make hay out of it. It is a tradition that Americans understand that families are not part of political campaigns. The smart Democrats — and I think there probably are a couple — don’t want to debate Bristol Palin’s pregnancy. The problem is, the wackos run their party now.” -Rush Limbaugh
“The greatest threat to mankind’s prosperity is government. A recent example is Zimbabwe’s increasing misery. Like our country, Zimbabwe had a flourishing agriculture sector, so much so it was called the breadbasket of southern Africa. Today, its people are on the brink of starvation as a result of its government. It’s the same story in many countries—government interference with mankind’s natural tendency to engage in wealth-producing activities. Blaming poverty on overpopulation not only lets governments off the hook; it encourages the enactment of harmful policies.” —Walter Williams
“There is nothing Barack Obama could teach Sarah Palin, but he would have all kinds of questions for her: ‘Can you show me the proper and safe way to handle and fire a gun? Are all NRA members as pretty as you are? Is hunting scary? Do you bait your own hooks? When you found out your baby would be born with Down syndrome, did you consider killing it before or after the due date?'” -Rush Limbaugh
“Watch the Drive-Bys scramble to destroy Gov. Palin. They’ll attack her for having a baby at 44, and for neglecting her Downs syndrome baby by having a job. They’ll say a woman’s place is in the home! They’ll reverse on everything, because liberals and feminists hate conservatives so much.” -Rush Limbaugh
What does it mean?: “All of us driven by a simple belief that the world as it is just won’t do—that we have an obligation to fight for the world as it should be. That is the thread that connects our hearts. That is the thread that runs through my journey and Barack’s journey and so many other improbable journeys that have brought us here tonight, where the current of history meets this new tide of hope. That is why I love this country.” —Michelle Obama **“She loves her country because of the thread that runs through the journey where the current meets the tide?” —James Taranto
“[W]hat does one call a lawmaker who would condemn to death the child survivor of a botched abortion by permitting doctors to refuse that child, once born alive, potentially life-saving medical treatment and nutrition? A number of things come to mind. Mr. President isn’t one of them.” —Matt Barber
It’s either a gross misrepresentation or self-delusion to argue that abortion is simply one issue among many for observant Catholics and that economic policy or foreign affairs can outweigh it. -Ed Morrissey
This week, Barack Obama’s challenge is to select a running mate who’s young, hip, and whose accomplishments in life don’t overshadow Obama’s. Allow me to suggest Kevin Federline. -Ann Coulter
“[John McCain] should ask Obama to join him in a town meeting on lessons from Russia’s aggression. Both candidates favor NATO membership for Georgia and Ukraine, perhaps Vladimir Putin’s next victim. But does Russia’s behavior cause Obama to rethink reliance on ‘soft power’ —dialogue, disapproval, diplomacy, economic carrots and sticks—which Putin considers almost an oxymoron? Does Russia’s resort to military coercion, and its arsenal of intercontinental ballistic missiles, cause Obama to revise his resistance to missile defense? Obama, unlike McCain, believes Russia belongs in the G-8. Does Obama think Russia should be admitted to the World Trade Organization? Does Obama consider Putin helpful regarding Iran?… McCain must convince voters that Obama’s complacent confidence in the taming abilities of soft power is the effect of liberalism’s scary sentimentalism about a dangerous thing, human nature, and a fiction, ‘the community of nations.’ McCain is hardly the change many people have been eagerly waiting for, but Putin is part of the change we must confront. Until Russian tanks rolled into Georgia, it seemed that not even the Democratic Party could lose this election. But it might if McCain can make it turn on the question of who is ornery enough to give Putin a convincing, deterring telephone call at 3 a.m.” —George Will
“The reaction of the American Left to John Edwards’s sex scandal is nothing short of flabbergasting. Since when is sex outside of marriage a disqualifier for merely speaking at a political convention? Since when is having sexual relations with that woman in your office anything wrong? Since when do we judge? The difference here seems to be that Elizabeth Edwards has cancer. So only fatal disease makes the bonds of marriage sacred? Although the last thing I want to look to be doing is making excuses for adultery—what he did was wrong—the John Edwards incident begs Americans to look in the mirror. If we think what John Edwards did with Rielle Hunter is wrong, why do we think it’s wrong? Because marriage is at the foundation of our society and we should do what we can to protect every last one? Or simply because having fun while your wife is fighting a fatal disease is a lousy thing to do? I don’t know how we can condemn John Edwards when Americans have been known to cheer for cheaters in movies, watch celebs do it all the time as a form of perverse entertainment, and even insist we’re not sure what exactly ‘marriage’ means.” —Kathryn Jean Lopez
How to be a Good Writer: (courtesy of plainlanguage.gov in Reader’s Digest)
I fail on all of these.
Avoid cliches like the plague–they’re old hat.
Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are unnecessary.
Do not use a foreign word when there is an adequate English quid pro quo.
Exaggeration is a billion times worse than understatement.
Don’t repeat yourself, or say again what you have said before.
Be more or less specific.
Proofread carefully to see if you any words out.
G.K. Chesterton on motherhood:
How can it be a large career to tell other people’s children about the Rule of Three, and a small career to tell one’s own children about the universe? How can it be broad to be the same thing to everyone, and narrow to be everything to someone? No; a woman’s function is laborious, but because it is gigantic, not because it is minute. I will pity Mrs. Jones for the hugeness of her task; I will never pity her for its smallness
“The ‘windfall profits’ tax is back, with Barack Obama stumping again to apply it to a handful of big oil companies. Which raises a few questions: What is a ‘windfall’ profit anyway? How does it differ from your everyday, run of the mill profit? Is it some absolute number, a matter of return on equity or sales—or does it merely depend on who earns it? Enquiring entrepreneurs want to know. Unfortunately, Mr. Obama’s ‘emergency’ plan, announced on Friday, doesn’t offer any clarity. To pay for ‘stimulus’ checks of $1,000 for families and $500 for individuals, the Senator says government would take ‘a reasonable share’ of oil company profits. Mr. Obama didn’t bother to define ‘reasonable’… This extraordinary redefinition of free-market success could use some parsing. Take Exxon Mobil, which on Thursday reported the highest quarterly profit ever and is the main target of any ‘windfall’ tax surcharge. Yet if its profits are at record highs, its tax bills are already at record highs too. Between 2003 and 2007, Exxon paid $64.7 billion in U.S. taxes, exceeding its after-tax U.S. earnings by more than $19 billion. That sounds like a government windfall to us, but perhaps we’re missing some… business subtlety. Maybe [Obama has] in mind profit margins as a percentage of sales. Yet by that standard Exxon’s profits don’t seem so large. Exxon’s profit margin stood at 10% for 2007, which is hardly out of line with the oil and gas industry average of 8.3%, or the 8.9% for U.S. manufacturing (excluding the sputtering auto makers). If that’s what constitutes windfall profits, most of corporate America would qualify… The fun part about this game is anyone can play. Jim Johnson, formerly of Fannie Mae and formerly a political fixer for Mr. Obama, reaped a windfall before Fannie’s multibillion-dollar accounting scandal. Bill Clinton took down as much as $15 million working as a rainmaker for billionaire financier Ron Burkle’s Yucaipa Companies. This may be the very definition of ‘windfall.’… The point is that what constitutes an abnormal profit is entirely arbitrary. It is in the eye of the political beholder, who is usually looking to soak some unpopular business. In other words, a windfall is nothing more than a profit earned by a business that some politician dislikes. And a tax on that profit is merely a form of politically motivated expropriation. It’s what politicians do in Venezuela, not in a free country.” —The Wall Street Journal
Break free from the Constitution? How can a man who believes that Constitutional constraints are an obstacle to be overcome possibly take the Presidential oath (which is set forth in Article 2, Sec. 1 of the Constitution) to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States” without perjuring himself? —Factualist