Resistance is futile!

A friend I never met - and never will

Tragedy in Oregon today.  Lisa Zielinski, an integral member of AM radio KYKN in Salem, was murdered in what appears to be domestic violence.

Lisa was one of my many facebook friends - one of many Oregon conservatives who shared her thoughts on the news and events with like minded Oregonians.  I have never met half of my facebook friends in person.  Now there is one I can never meet.  And that is a loss for me, for the community, and for Oregon.  I didn't "know" Lisa - but I read what she wrote.  I made a connection with a wonderful person.  Now that connection - that person - is gone, and I am sad I never got to actually KNOW her.

I am trying hard not to be political as I write this.  But with Arizona still on our minds, I can't help it.  Earlier today, before I heard this news, President Obama was on television giving a speech about the Arizona shootings.  I didn't watch it.  I didn't think the President needed to be there giving a speech in front of grieving family.

I don't have the figures in front of me, but I am guessing something like 20,000 people are murdered each year in this country.  As a general rule, the President doesn't respond directly to most of them.  In any given year, the President doesn't directly respond to ANY murders.  The President only did this because it seemed politically appropriate.

Then I got online, and learned what happened to Lisa.

The President will not speak out about Lisa.  But then, he doesn't need to.  Lisa will be loved by her surviving children, her friends and her community - always.  And Lisa is loved now by her Eternal Lord in Heaven.  Love and faith will heal and restore in ways no political speech ever can.

R.I.P. Lisa.

Today's "makes you go hmmm..."

Divisive hate monger:

  
Please play for us again:

 
Not sure what the message here is from the NFL, but it sure can't be good...

Things that I hate

I hate websites that unexpectedly throw noise at me.  Usually I keep my PC on mute, because random sudden noise - almost always from ads - pisses me off.  But sometimes I want to listen to music on my PC, so I turn off the mute.  Then suddenly in the middle of a song I hear some loud voice start demanding that I refinance my mortgage.

Shut the hell up.

And it's not like I can just direct my browser to keep sound off - after all, I go to many sites, like YouTube, where sound is sort of a good thing.

I wish everyone who made websites would keep all sounds OFF until I actively click on something, like a "play" button, where I could reasonably expect there to be a resulting noise.

Also, I hate people who can't keep noises at a consistent level.  I hate cranking up the volume to hear one video, only to have the next video drive my speakers into clipping.

</rant>

Brutal murder by a domestic terrorist

The news today is tragic.  A good man is killed by some stupid radical extremist.  A person is cut down, just because some insane home-grown terrorist disagreed with the victim's profession.  OK, the victim was controversial, to be sure.  But that is no excuse - especially when, your personal political beliefs notwithstanding, he was doing a job that mainstream America supports.

We must not succumb to the temptation to consider the murderer a hero just because some people think he was justified by his beliefs.  No, we must not condone this action.  We must outright condemn it.  We must call the act what it is: a terrorist attack on American soil.  We must prosecute the murdering animal just as surely as we would prosecute Osama Bin Laden himself.

Unfortunately, I fear that not everyone will see things as I see them.  I can almost hear some people rejoicing.  Well, the hell with them.  I cannot, WILL NOT allow myself to be associated with those people.

Of course, you probably think I am talking about the murder of the abortion doctor.  But I am not.  Although everything I said applies in that case as well, this post is about another act of terrorism, one you probably won't hear about in the mainstream media today.  I am talking about this:

New U.S. Army soldier William Long was gunned down at a recruiting center in Arkansas.

Police in Little Rock, Ark., say a man who likely had "political and religious motives" shot two new Army soldiers, killing one, at a military recruiting center.

Political and religious motives.  The parallels between this and the Tiller murder are stunning.  Except no one in the mainstream media is saying diddly squat about the recruiter killing.  No one in the mainstream media is calling it a terror act.  No one in the maintream media is blaming left-wing news programs for whipping up anti-military sentiment.  No one in the mainstream media is demanding the left disavow and condemn the killing.

No one in the mainstream media gives a shit.  And do you know why they won't say squat?  Probably because they don't want anyone to blame things like religion or ethnicity in this crime - they save such things for conservative Christians only.

I am sorry for Tiller and his family.  You can apply everything I wrote in the opening of this post to the story of his murder.  But the left had damn well better apply the same standards of decency to the islamofacist terrorist asshole who opened fire on a military recruiting center where patriotic Americans were doing their duty.

Don't hold your breath.

Did McCain win the election last Saturday?

The biggest problem McCain has faced in drawing support so far has been in energizing the conservative Republican base.  Well, after hearing listener response on Rush and the opening of the Hannity show, I think that problem has been solved... at least, for now...

Folks from all across America are repeating many of the things I said in the post directly below this one.  I predict a massive surge for McCain - and the momentum will continue to build even during the DNC convention (the conservative base will be rallied even more by seeing what the left really stands for).  Add in a 60-day ad campaign comparing "Saddleback McCain" to the inexperienced leftist Obama, and there is no way McCain can lose... unless...

Unless McCain grinds his momentum to a stop with a controversial VP choice.  If the Saddleback performance hadn't occurred, and McCain still needed to shake things up, he might be tempted to do something daring, like choosing Joe Lieberman.  But now McCain is in a position where his strategy should be "do no harm."

Because of this, I expect McCain will eliminate from consideration Joe Lieberman, and possibly also Tom Ridge, Rudy Giuliani, or Lindsey Graham.  I am not certain what this means for Mitt Romney: it is unfortunate that Mike Huckabee is still out there attacking Romney, even though the primaries are over.  This does nothing to help the GOP, or Huckabee, for that matter.  McCain no longer has a problem with values-voters, so there is ZERO possibility of him choosing Huckabee to shore up a weakness.  So Huckabee is doing nothing for himself or the party here in attacking Romney.  So Romney may or may not be out of the running if Huckabee's rants have any impact.

Who is left?  Well, Pawlenty is still an option, but he is such a yawner!  I'd like to McCain find a running mate who not only will keep the base upbeat but also add a little pizzazz to the ticket.  Bobby Jindal has already pulled a Sherman in stating he doesn't want the job.  So... Sarah Palin?  But would her relative inexperience on the national scene be a liability?  Fred Thompson?  The base loves him, but did the media damage him too much in the primary?

I've heard a few people bring up some "dark horse" names like Mike Leavitt and John Engler.  I think either one could do a good job, but would their relative anonymity among the general population do anything positive for McCain?

Folks are still talking about Colin Powell... for both candidates.  I could see him working with McCain, and I could see McCain choosing him.  But there are more and more rumors about Obama and Powell teaming up somehow.  I guess all we can do is wait and see with Powell.  But there is one other military leader who just might make a surprise appearance on the GOP ticket:

David Petraeus

McCain named Petraeus first among people to whom he would turn for guidance.  He is a true hero and our number one expert on the Middle East.  He also had a strong background before the Iraq War working with NATO in Eastern Europe; given the Russia/Georgia situation, we need that sort of experience.  And let's not overlook his intellectual credentials: he earned his M.P.A. and Ph.D. from Princeton while serving full-time in the Army.

I have no idea where Petraeus stands on non-military issues.  But he is clearly an attractive potential candidate, who has already impressed McCain.  I would not be surprised if McCain is very, very quietly vetting Petraeus and asking him detailed questions about his beliefs on social and economic issues.

So... assuming Petraeus embraces typical conservative Republican ideas about socio-economic matters, what would you think about him on the ticket?

DIE! DIE! DIE!

Am I the only person out there who wishes slow and painful death for whoever wrote those annoying "Free Credit Report dot com" commercials that blast the airwaves during every news show?

I particularly hate the "I married my dream girl" commercial.  Not only is the singer an ugly and dirty hippie pig, not only is the song itself insipid and annoying, but the very message is an insult to the sanctity of marriage.

Marriage is something "for richer, for poorer; for better, for worse."  Yet here is this commercial in which the @$$ hole singer derides his wife for her poor credit rating.  I don't know about you, but I find this to be one of the least tasteful ads, ever.  Couples go through money problems.  It happens to almost all of us.  It has happened to me.  It has happened to other members of my family.  People lose jobs.  People have investments go south.  People have medical problems.  You know what a good spouse is supposed to do?  STEP UP AND BE SUPPORTIVE!  Make sacrifices.  Work jobs you don't like.  Help the family make it through.  Most of all, remember your vow to love and cherish for richer for poorer.  You know what you DON'T do?  You don't sing a mocking song about how you shouldn't have married the bitch.

Honey, dump the guitar-playing loser.  You can do better than him!  He doesn't love you.  He doesn't respect you.  He has no respect for the sanctity of marriage.  Go find a nice, clean-cut man - one with a real job who doesn't just sit around the house playing guitar with his stoner buddies - and discover what real love is.

And shame on you, evil corporation, for running this commercial!  Readers, you should be outraged.  You should boycott this company as long as this commerical runs.

I will never, NEVER, use the services of Free Credit Report dot com.  I won't even give them the courtesy of a link.  And please, please, will all the TV and radio stations out there stop running these commercials?  When I see/hear one, I change the channel.  I urge all of you readers to do the same - and inform your local channels that they are losing you.

Inspired by Rush this morning...

How Hillary came back to win New Hampshire:

Fly, my pretties!

Gilchrist is nuts

I listened to Lars talk to Gilchrist on the air about the Huckabee endorsement.  Here is a clip from the show:

Download 121207_gilchrist.mp3

It runs about 12 minutes.  Lars didn't pound Gilchrist into the dirt the way he did with a certain other figure who came off the wrong way on immigration.  But he did ask tough questions, and make it clear he is in disagreement.  He wasn't very apologetic.

I e-mailed the following to Lars, and he wrote back in agreement:

Gilchrist came off as a serious Kool Aid drinker. 

First, he kept saying again and again the choice is Giuliani or Huckabee.  Um… isn’t there also a guy named Thompson in this race, and hasn’t he been polling about as well as Huckabee nationally? 

Second, he kept talking about how “only” Huckabee has a written plan.  Um… didn’t Thompson lead the way by being the FIRST of the GOP candidates to put a comprehensive immigration plan on the web?  You can read it here: 

http://fred08.com/virtual/Immigration.aspx 

I’ve compared this to Huckabee’s plan, and it is far stronger.  Notice that “NO AMNESTY” is PLANK NUMBER ONE of the platform!  Huckabee’s plan sounds good, but if you read the details he talks about things like “fast tracks” to help people more quickly become legal immigrants – doesn’t that sound just like the “path to citizenship” for illegals?  You know… what Bush and McCain want?  Would President Huckabee “fast track” legal status for, say, illegal immigrant children who want to go to college in the U.S. with taxpayer scholarships? 

Third, he seemed so impressed by the whole “well, he may have a bad record, but he says he will do better now” idea.  Well, by that logic, he should be jumping for joy over Bush and McCain, since they both say “hey, we hear ya, and we know amnesty is a problem.”  Problem is, neither one has actually DONE anything to show they practice what they preach.  Actions speak far louder than words.  Duncan Hunter has fought tooth and nail to get a border fence built.  I believe him when he says he will finish the job Bush hasn’t.  I don’t need to see a written “plan” on a website to believe him.  In contrast, Huckabee has acted in complete contempt for the interests of national sovereignty and our citizens and legitimate legal immigrants.  Why should I believe he will do ANYTHING he has up on his website? 

Finally, he dissed Tancredo and Hunter because they have small support.  Um… Well, until a few weeks ago, Huckabee was right down there at the bottom with them.  You know what happened?  He got some important endorsements that motivated a very important bloc – the evangelical Christians.  Now he is a top candidate.  Couldn’t endorsements from important people who lead other movements among the conservative voters, people like Gilchrist, have given a boost to Hunter or Tancredo, elevating one of them? 

You know, I almost never find it appropriate to quote Dennis Kucinich, but he said one thing back in 2004 that really sparkled for me.  When asked why he was still in the race, despite having no chance at winning, he said “I can win if you support me!”  And so I believe we SHOULD support the candidates we LIKE rather than the candidates we “think” can win.  That’s how winning IDEAS build up steam. 

If Gilchrist had supported Thompson, Hunter, or Tancredo, maybe he wouldn’t be backing the “winning” candidate.  But he would be backing the winning IDEA, and would be in a position to continue pushing that idea.  Now, he isn’t backing ideas so much as “winners.”  Well, if Huckabee wins, and ends up with an actual immigration plan consistent with his past, consistent with Bush and McCain, then that BAD idea has been legitimized, because people will remember “hey, this is the guy that Minuteman fellow supported, so this must be what real immigration reform looks like.” 

I think a good idea just lost out to a slick candidate.  If elected President, Mike Huckabee might very be just like the Republican Bill Clinton: he panders to the base in order to win their favor, but then when push comes to shove, he forgets who took him to the prom.  Think about how angry gays are with “don’t ask, don’t tell.”  Um… wasn’t that a CLINTON policy?  That’s what happens you tie your special interest to the “popular” candidate instead of the ones whose principles actually match your own. 

I don’t think Gilchrist gave a satisfactory explanation AT ALL.  He has seriously discredited his own cause by backing someone whose record is so suspect.

Callers to the show sounded pretty disappointed in Gilchrist.  All I can say is: I hope those 30 pieces of silver work out for you...

There was a primary debate

Unfortunately, the idiots at CNN forgot the word "primary."  They just don't seem to get it.  The REPUBLICAN primary is a battle for REPUBLICAN votes.  It is NOT a general election.  People voting in REPUBLICAN primaries DO NOT CARE about touchy feely liberal PC issues.  Yet, the idiots at CNN, with the support of every idiot with a webcam through YouTube, felt compelled to ask inane useless question after inane useless question.

SAVE IT FOR THE GENERAL!

Meanwhile, the moderator must have thought that only Giuliani and Romney were worth anything, because only they got the good questions they could use to really hammer their campaign points (and each other).

Is there anyone else here?  Anyone?  Beuler?

You know what the GOP needs to do?  They need to agree to a primary candidate debate on the Rush Limbaugh show, where they will only be asked questions that likely Republican primary voters care about.

UPDATE: I just turned on Rush, and he is opening his show by complaining about the debate...

(un)fairness doctrine

Liberals want the "fairness" doctrine to stifle conservative talk radio.  Funny, I thought they were the people of "free speech."

Conservatives are trying to block the fairness doctrine, but don't have majority control in Congress anymore (some, like me, would say "conservatives" never had it anyway, despite there having been more "R" members of Congress from 1994 through 2006...).  It could be an uphill battle for the Right.

Of course, if the fairness doctrine were put into place, there would immediately be a federal lawsuit on First Amendment grounds.  Any competant judge would have to issue an injunction against implementation until the end of the case, because loss of First Amendment rights is an irreparable harm, and if there is any legal question, the rights must be protected until the question is answered.  The case would go to the U.S. Supreme Court, which (hopefully) would rule the doctrine is, in fact, a prima facie violation of the rights to freedom of speech and freedom of press - possibly even also freedom of assembly and freedom of religion.  So it wouldn't matter if the doctrine were re-enacted.  It would simply be a big annoyance that would take a year or more to resolve.

What the conservatives need to do is try a new tactic: embrace the fairness doctrine, but do so by trying to make it part of the PATRIOT Act.  Say we need it to fight terror.  Then, the left will have no choice but to oppose it.  Talk radio, Drudge, etc., will be saved.