And we need to make sure to punch the hi- WTF is up with the gay.com ads?

Couldn't disagree more.
Obama being an arch-liberal, teamed up with Reid and Pelosi could just about undue it all. And Frank, lets face it, neither G.W or his Dad were conservative. So, lets call 1994 and the contract with America the last conservative leg. that has been passed. I'm really at a loss for conservative victories since then. So, 14yrs later we are faced with mega liberals, salivating to get into ,lets call it "SUPREME" power. Brother, they get in power, and yes, they can undue everything.

So, get ready for a "go and eat cake" attitude from Washington.

Sorry for the diction and misspelling but I'm at work and have to write in sneaky style. (ie fast and w/o review.)

The problem is, when you have an economic recession combined with a political recession, you get Jimmy Carter.

Do we have a Ronald Reagan in the wings waiting to rescue us from failure of that magnitude?

I'm not sure.

On one hand, even Pelosi seems to understand that tax rebates (i.e. LOWER TAXES!) really are good for the economy and the people.

On the other hand, they will repeal DOMA and push all kinds of fruity liberal garbage on us in just 2 years.

Plus there's the big supreme court question. Replacing Ginsberg with another liberal won't change much, but replacing the new swinger (Kennedy) with an arch liberal could change a lot.

I pray you're right

Seeing as how approval ratings for Congress have hit (yet another) all-time low, I think Democrats are also vulnerable - if Republicans have the stones to go after them. They need to hang the current economic down-turn and gas prices around the necks of Pelosi and Reid every day at every opportunity. Sadly, the testicularly-challenged GOP has not shown any significant willingness to fight.

Matteus is right - and Obama presidency with a Democrat Congress could do enormous damage that could take generations to fix. If he were running with a Republican controlled Congress of a few years ago I might be a bit more sanguine. But you can be sure that, if elected, Obama will unleash his entire liberal playbook and strive to make his "improvements" of America as deep, broad, and permanent as he possibly can.

Interesting you mention Reid...my brother's friend works for Reid. He says Reid is being vetted for VP. Now I don't know if that was drunken wishful thinking at their Obamaque the other day or truth...but it's something that makes me uncomfortable.

Second, I have often heard the opinion of "it has to swing far to the left before we can get it back to the right". I don't like the thought of it, but it may be true.

Third: Ron Paul: think what you will of him, but he has lit a fire under young Rebublicans (well, Libertarian, really) thinkers. They are passionate people and the ones I know have been very inpired to make a grass roots effort in local government. Which is where it has to start.

My biggest concern with an Obama presidency and a heavily Dem congress is: a) my pocketbook b) our safety and c) legislation like the Fairness Doctrine. It will be even more important that we are heard if this is our future.

No, Frank, it really will be the death of the republic if The Obama wins. But he won't, because he's the product of wayyyy too much self-esteem training. And now everyone around him and in the press are treating him as if the coronation has already happened.

And there's more at stake than mere politics. There's still a war on, you know. If The Obama wins, he will promptly surrender in Iraq (and blame GWB for the resulting turmoil). He will then send battalions of lawyers to Afghanistan to go after Bin Laden, ignoring intelligence estimates (I predict) that he will not be there.

And when the lawyers start coming home in body bags, he will yield to public pressure from the left to use diplomacy where "military force" "failed".

And the Islamists will finally get their way.

The Great Fred Thompson had one simple belief; the message would carry the campaign. The Ideas of traditional Conservative values, Federalism, free markets. But as Mary Matlin pointed out, you have to have an effective delivery system if anyone is going to hear that message. To this day Fred Thompson is the only Presidential Candidate that ever tested positive for Ambient.

Bobby Jindal will be done with Louisiana in 8 years. Hopefully he'll have enough experience to know when to draw the separation of the Branches of government, and when to use the checks and balances.

The day I take advice from a Monkey-hatin' blogger like you is the day I stop digging weapons caches.

oh. wait.

uhm...
Judge, I'd like that last remark stricken from the record.

You're right, Frank. We have such access to info and opinion that everything is magnified. We gather 'round the blogfire and tell tales of woe that are quite exaggerated. Sure, the country has been trending left for a few years, but has government policy really affected any of us that much? Are our lives that delicate that some dork in DC has that much sway over us? Not really.

Besides, we have the guns. Even if everything goes ten times worse than the worst-case scenario, living as an armed bandit in a fuel-starved totalitarian deathworld has a certain strange appeal to me. WOLVERINES!

innominatus,

I can already see you carving your tally in the stock of your rifle.

For comfort I lean on the fact that his 2012 re-election campaign will pretty much begin the day he is inaugurated, so he won't be able to get too crazy during his first term. We just have to hope that the media's love affair with him sours in that time.

Yeah, like the lefties in Hollywood and MSM will be anything but a butt-kisser to their fellow lefties in the POTUS, Congress, and SCOTUS - unlike the way they've massacred Dubya and Co. for the past 8 years.

Your post earlier today pointed out that BHO is off-limits for any kind of critique or humor; expect more of the same kid-gloves treatment in a Hussein administration, or else be unfairly labeled a racist.

Add the oxymoronic "Fairness Doctrine," and you will guarantee that conservative successes, principles and candidates will never see the light of day.

And when the lawyers start coming home in body bags, he will yield to public pressure from the left to use diplomacy where "military force" "failed".

And the Islamists will finally get their way.

#8 - Posted by: Socrates on July 16, 2008 11:33 AM

I'm tired of listening to the libs whine about Iraq and all the Stans. I say flip them all the bird, tell them they need to clean their own house, and then bring our troops home. Then we tell them that if they still want a piece of us, bring it on. We would totally kick their asses playing on our home field.
I have that kind of confidence in real Americans. We should just give the pseudo-Americans what they deserve, war on our own soil. Of course, there is a slight chance that the Stanigans will be too busy patting themselves on the back for their "victory over the great Satan" that they won't even bother coming after us. In which case we save $gazillions maybe even $brazillians and they keep their 7th century asses in their own dark corner of the world. (BTW - we should cancel all their visas also)
How many IMAOers wouldn't be willing to expend a few rounds of ammo defending the home turf from ME nutjobs who want everyone to bow to their Allah? This could actually happen if BO takes up residence at 1600 Penn Ave. Imagine the fun and added challenge of moving targets.

#15 - Posted by: echo5a on July 16, 2008 03:06 PM

I'm pretty sure the point is we don't want to fight a war on our soil with our civilians gettting shot up all the time. Not to mention, the terrorists are unlikely to come in with guns blazing, looking for a showdown with the best military in the world. They're more likely to come in with their planes crashing and bombs being set off in crowds of people.

That's why we're over in the middle east: if they have responsible, representative, non-psycho-killer governments, they can crack down on the terrorist problem at that end, and we never have to deal with them. That's why it's worth however many "brazillion dollars" and that's why nobody here liked Ron Paul. (besides the fact that he was moonbat crazy)

Echo5a

I get the Libertarian thing, but I’m going to have to agree with Ernie on this one. You make some good points. Everyone should experience the joy of taking down an evil, child killing, terrorist. Hell, I believe good Americans should pay for the honor of joining the military so they go overseas and take down terrorist. My biggest fear is at the rate we’re killing terrorist around the world, there will be no terrorist to take down when my son, Peter, is old enough to join the Military. I know the Libertarian platform is stay out of other countries affairs, But that has never worked for our country, Even when the founding fathers were in charge, IE. War with Tripoli, and War of 1812.

Everyone can look back and think what they want about what we should have done in the war on terror. That’s their right as an American. But What is important is what is the situation today, and what is best for America? I have yet to hear a realistic scenario where anybody but Iran benefits from us rapidly withdrawing from Iraq & Afghanistan before the country is stabilized. (In my book, Iran is next. Those bastards have had it coming for 30 years now.) Today half of Iraq’s providences are under Iraqi security forces. Afghanistan been heating up a little, but so far nothing our guys can’t handle. The war on terror is like a check engine light on your car. If you just bite the bullet and get it fixed, it won’t cost you nearly as much when your whole car eventually breaks down.

You're all missing the much more immediate problem: thousands of jungle bunnies rioting whether Obama wins (it's our turn now, muthaf---a!) or loses (we wuz robbed!). Now to all you gun-owners out in Pigeon Holler, this might not be that big a deal. But as an unarmed-by-law whitey living a brick toss from Harlem, this is troubling.

Preach it, Frank!

How ever, I still pine for a "government resembles something from a Heinlein novel"... I'd really like that, especially the one from Starship Troopers.

open season on whitey OR ELSE

in this age where many things take less than a second, you would be surprised what someone can screw up in little than 4 years

18 - I suggest an extended vacation in November; perhaps to South Dakota.
Mt. Rushmore is lovely in the fall, population density is low and everyone owns guns.
Get an absentee ballot and increase your homeowner or apartment insurance before you leave.
Dress warm.
Buy a few souvenirs while you're there; something in .45 cal or 12 ga for preference.
It's better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6.

Frank that's brilliant. Next time your on a cruise, why not let a monkey steer the ship. What can he hurt in the middle of the ocean. (Theme from Titanic begins to play in the background)

There's one big problem Frank. We conservatives can NOT work together. Let's not forget the debacle before the primary. Let's not forget that several candidates forced another out, primarily over an issue that should never have been focused on in the first place.

Until we in the Conservative movement learn to treat each other and our differences with some element of respect we will continue to lose influence with not just those in the middle and on the left but with many of us on the right as well. We reinforce the steriotypes of intolerant, close minded, zealots perpetrated on us by the left.

We should be better than that. We have to be, unless we want to kiss our freedom, liberty and rights good bye.

Ernie and Richard,

I also understand your positions, but since we have no politicians who will fight the enemy by making use of their own resources, (or in this case the resources of those on whose behalf we are waging this war) we are simply going to squander our money and end up that much more in debt to other nations e.g. China. We borrow money now at a ridiculous rate. If we intend to persist in this action, I'd better start seeing my Iraqi oil heading this way, and more of the provisions for our troops coming out of the local economy, if not through outright siezure, then at a deep discount. Sun Tzu, whos writings have been studied by military leaders down through the years, said all this many centuries ago. We will only bankrupt ourselves all the more by fighting this war in such a manner.
If we allow our economy to tank, believing that we are buying lasting safety, we will only drag the rest of the world with us into economic depression. As it is the government doesn't have enough sense to stop printing money when we have nothing to back it with. What do we really produce in the US now that holds value and isn't consumed? We export grain and such. Great, but it only lasts until it is eaten. We base the value of our dollar at least partially on the oil we commit to buying. When the value of that dollar dips so low that few can buy the oil to burn, our dollars will be considered basically worthless, and trade becomes exponentially more difficult. At that point our economy will not just be set back, it will be dead. We will at that point be starting over, and it will be a long hard slog.
The ones who will be hurt the least will be the ones who don't deal much with the civilized world. The camel jockeys living in goat hair tents and tribes living in the jungles bartering and trading mostly in their localized economy will hardly notice the outside world has crumbled.
No we don't need an extended stay in Iraq, we need to make decisive, devastating strikes against the perpetrators of terrorism, then we should back away a bit. We should remain in close enough proximity to slap them down again quickly, but with our technology, that would be anywhere within roughly 10,000 miles. We should also refrain from making empty threats as Bush did when he warned the world to not harbor terrorists. We have concentrated all our efforts on two countries, and done little elsewhere. We let Iranian boats, puny as they were, charge our ships in the Gulf with not even so much as a shot across their bows. The gretest show of our military might was our march to Baghdad. Libya crapped their pants, and confessed their sins. That was the point where we should have gathered the sheiks and told them it was their country, we had rid them of the tyrant, now they needed to keep the peace. We could then extend a helping hand while also maintaining a nearby military presence.
I know that this is all armchair quarterbacking, but I landed at Dhahran in 1990, and my son who was five then recently returned from Ramadi, and . The thing that pisses me off, is that if we continue doing things like this, successive generations of my family will likely end up right back in the same rehashed war for the forseeable future.
I therefor say let the sand fleas have their damn desert and their oil. Maybe we stick it out long enough to crank up new Nuke plants and other energy sources here at home, but we get ourselves out from under their oily thumb as quickly as possible. Then we stop financing the terrorists by buying ME oil. Only by production of real goods in this country, will we make a truly strong economy.
There isn't one candidate left in the campain who has a clue about the fragility of our house of cards economy. Because of this, we will sink deeper into foreign debt and the American people will attempt to buy safety in the form of more government.
Sorry for the extended rant, but I do think we are screwed.

Hold your ground!
Hold your ground!
Sons(1) of Gondor(2), of Rohan(3), my brothers(4)!
I see in your eyes the same fear that would take the heart of me.
A day may come when the courage of Men(5) fails...when we forsake our friends and break all bonds of fellowship.
But it is not this day.
An hour of wolves and shattered shields when the age of Men(6) comes crashing down.
But it is not this day.
This day we fight!
By all that you hold dear on this good earth I bid you stand, Men(7) of the West(8)!

(1) and daughters
(2) the red states
(3) fly-over country
(4) and sisters
(5) and Women
(6) ditto
(7) ditto
(8) and East, North and South

It's hard to be inspiring and inclusive at the same time!

I agree with Seanmahair AND Frank.
We could stay asleep or keep arguing among ourselves until the All-Embracing, Overprotective Caring Nanny State becomes the All-Intrusive, Overwhelming Abusive Step-Father State.
If that happens we might be in for a bad patch.
(Ask Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, Hungary, Romania, East Germany etc. how long a bad patch can last.)
But madness ends and Liberty returns.
I have no faith in politicians.
I have faith in God and in the stubborn will of free men and women to hold onto and take back what is theirs!
I love you guys!

"Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand!"
Ephesians 6:13

(apologies to Peter Jackson, Tolkien, and St. Paul)

# 26
Can I get an Amen, brothers and sisters!

I love the analogy. It fits especially with the current crop of no-goodniks in charge on the left.
*Lord of the Redundant-Staring BH Obama as Saron, Harry Reid as Sarumon, and Nancy Pelosi as Golum.

Nancy Pelosi as Golum? Hardly. Golum had some sense of loyalty, at least in the beginning. Pelosi is more like Sarumon than any of the rest. A power-mad witch bend on world domination.

Another literary allegory
Henry V-Shakespeare

Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host,
That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his passport shall be made
And crowns for convoy put into his purse:
We would not die in that man's company
That fears his fellowship to die with us.........

From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remember'd;
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition:
And gentlemen(1) in England(2) now a-bed
Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,

1. and gentlewomen
2. everywhere people fight for freedom, liberty and justice.

This is my favorite LOTR scene. It was when Gandalf charged Frodo with taking the ring to Mt. Doom to destroy it:

"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo. "So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us. And already, Frodo, our time is beginning to look black. The Enemy is fast becoming very strong. His plans are far from ripe, I think, but they are ripening. We shall be hard put to it. We should be very hard put to it, even if it were not for this dreadful chance."

Echo5a,

I understand your skepticism on the economy. But I don’t see where stopping the war is the best answer in the long run. You mention that we should need to make decisive, devastating strikes against the terrorist and then back away. I can’t think of any historical instances where that has worked, To the contrary I only see where that was our entire SOP since the early 80’s and it failed miserably. We would fire at Iraqi positions when Saddam wouldn’t respect the no fly zone. Clinton did missile attacks on areas where he thought Bin Laden was. Neither stopped Saddam from slaughtering his own people and paying off the U.N, or Bin Laden from bombing embassies and the U.S.S Cole.

In his latest memoir, President Bush Sr. wrote he didn’t want to occupy Iraq because he was afraid he would lose his coalition, and he would be in a counterinsurgency battle field like we were before the Surge. He gave General Powel the order to remove the Iraqi army from Kuwait, and push them back to Baghdad. I will argue that if we removed Saddam and stayed to stabilize the county, your son would have only seen Iraq through old Photos from CNN. I personally would like to finish this so when my kids go there, they don’t have to go as infantry soldiers. Hopefully by then we’ll have other countries to invade. I heard Mongolia is beautiful in the summer.

like Sun Tzu. An even better General was the Glorious General George S. Patton Jr. We remember in the opening of the movie where he told his troops, “ I don't want to get any messages saying that "we are holding our position." We're not holding anything. Let the Hun do that!” The real Patton backed this up by running the 3rd Army straight into Germany. The end result was equality horrible. Germany hasn’t evaded France in almost 70 years. (Hey Germany. Don’t you think it’s about time to do that again?)

I would bet the house that almost everyone here shares your disgust of the out of hand debt we are getting ourselves into, and would agree that Iraq at this point can start pulling some of the financial weight, especially in the reconstruction of Iraq( Money wise, not actually running the projects. We don’t have that kind of time). But pulling out now will only will guarantee that your grandson will be able to get that extra kicker for his GI bill for being a war vet.

I got it covered.

Politics is cyclical. It's not like you have a couple victories for conservatives and then before you know it the government resembles something from a Heinlein novel.

Uh... let's be careful with those blanket statements about Heinlein. His novels and political POV varied wildly over his career.

For example, you were probably thinking of the radical right-wing setup in Starship Troopers, on of his later works, when you wrote the above quote. However... if liberalism gets a huge upswing [insert appropriate Obama joke here], it might start resembling Heinlein's first novel: an awkward, poorly conceived, overly preachy socialist utopia work called For Us, The Living. In that novel's setting, extreme economic socialism and "social libertarianism" combined to form a world where the banking system was completely overthrown, every citizen received money from the government instead of working, clothing was optional in public, and artists/actors became the most respected class in the nation.

It even contains a badly argued economic analysis and justification for socialism as an appendix to the main work! Needless to say the economic science therein is bunk. But it was written in 1939, during the Depression and before the WWII economic recovery, so perhaps he can be forgiven for thinking at the time that socialism was both inevitable and a Good Thing. (Certainly he gets credit for reversing his views in light of the post-war evidence, instead of clinging to discredited liberal dogma.)

BigRichardSmall,
I would hardly classify any of the actions in the interlude to be decisive or devastating. We did it half assed. We also left Saddam in power with the first go 'round. We didn't gather tribal leaders and hand them the reigns, we just walked out. GHWB didn't need a long lasting occupation any more than GWB did. He just slapped Saddam and left him to simmer, stew, and plot his revenge. (and take out some of his frustration on his own people)
I see most people do not grasp many of my points, I must not be making myself clear at all. I am not advocating throwing up our hands and quitting. I am saying that if we go to war, pour out our rath quickly and overwhelmingly on the enemy. To end wars takes more brutality than most of our "leaders" are willing to even contemplate. Yes, many will die who shouldn't. I know the peace-niks cringe when we say that is regrettable. It just happens to be a horrible fact that innocents die in war too. Kings and soldiers are often found in the midst of the people, and cannot always be drawn out away from the population. The art and instruments of war are by design messy and deadly to all in their reach. The artifacts of war are dead and broken bodies of soldiers, women and children. Once we make horrific examples of a few terrorist enclaves, eyes and ears will be opened. Libya is a prime example.
I make the assertion that we won in Iraq long ago, and because we did not solidify that victory in the minds of the world, but went soft from a political standpoint and tied the hands of our warriors, our decisive victory erroded.
I am not sure of the origin, but this is one of the most profound and pertinent statements I have ever heard:
The nation that draws too great a distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools.
I think we have gone far enough down that path. We already allow cowards to do too much of the thinking. Let us not allow too many fools to do our fighting. We have a few fools mixed in amongst our Generals. Fortunately one fool by the name of Wesley Clark is no longer on the battlefield.

4 of 7
I can distinguish much of Tolkien and, of course pieces of Paul's epistles, but I would have to admit that I probably couldn't tell if something was written by Peter Jackson or Phil Jackson, but I like that line:
I have no faith in politicians.
I have faith in God and in the stubborn will of free men and women to hold onto and take back what is theirs!

35 - echo5a. Thanks.
This site seems to inspire me.
Peter Jackson co-wrote/directed "The Return of The King".
I got the 'Stand your ground!' speech from the movie, not directly from Prof. Tolkiens' novel.

Once I typed it out I noticed its' similarity to Ephesians 6:13, one of my favorite verses (It's tattooed on my left shoulder) so I added that too.

The bit in the middle is mine.

I liked what you wrote above about thinking done by cowards and fighting done by fools.
C.S. Lewis wrote an essay about needing to revive the virtue of chivalry in our time.
Chivalry taught the knights (the warrior class) to be gentle towards non-combatants, able to appreciate art, and show mercy and justice in their dealings with other classes while maintaining the ability to kick ass and take names without hesitation when necessary.
This combination of virtues doesn't come naturally.
It has to be worked at.
Without chivalry Lewis feared that western society would become stratified into those who appreciate the finer things in life but can't defend them and those who Can fight but don't understand the underlying ideals that are the only things worth fighting for!
I think Our warriors are doing fine as regards chivalry, it's our politicians who lack nobility!
I reread Tolkien, encountering characters like Aragorn and Faramir, men who can fight And think, and sigh.

27 - seanmahair. Amen. I used to Think the junior Senator from Illinois was more like Saruman because of his talent for speechifyin'. But now he shows certain parallels to another character:

The Lieutenant of the Tower of Barad-dur!

The Lieutenant.______________The Senator.

'a tall and evil shape'______tall and creepy

'mounted upon a black
horse, if horse it was; for
it was huge and hideous, and
its face was a frightful
mask, more like a skull than
a living head, and in the
sockets of its eyes and in
its nostrils there burned
a flame.'____________________Married to Michelle

'his name is remembered in
no tale; for he himself had
forgotten it'________________Doesn't like to be
_____________________________reminded of him
_____________________________middle name

'I am the Mouth of Sauron'___tool of George Soros

'came of the race of those
that are named the Black
Numenoreans; for they
established their dwellings
in Middle-earth during the
years of Sauron's domination,
and they worshiped him,
being enamoured of evil knowledge.'___________________no slave blood

'entered the service of the
Dark Tower when it first
rose again, and because of
his cunning he grew ever
higher in the Lord's favour;
and he learned great sorcery,
and knew much of the mind of
Sauron'______________________attended Rev.
_____________________________Wrights' church for
_____________________________20 years

'and he was more cruel than
any orc.'____________________more liberal than
_____________________________Ted Kennedy

'"Is there anyone in this rout
with authority to treat with
me?" he asked. "or indeed with
wit to understand me?"'_________elitist

'though Aragorn did not stir
nor move hand to weapon, the
other quailed and gave back
as if menaced with a blow. "I
am a herald and ambassador,
and may not be assailed!" he
cried.'______________________doesn't handle criti-
_____________________________cism very well

'Looking in the messenger's
eyes they read his thought.
He was to be that lieutenant,
and gather all that remained
of the West under his sway;
he would be their tyrant and
they his slaves.'____________Change you can
_____________________________believe in!

'Then the Messenger of Mordor
laughed no more. His face was
twisted with amazement and
anger to the likeness of some
wild beast that, as it
crouches on its prey, is smitten
on the muzzle with a stinging rod.
Rage filled him and his mouth
slavered, and shapeless sounds
of fury came strangling from
his throat. But he looked at
the fell faces of the Captains
and their deadly eyes, and
fear overcame his wrath. He gave
a great cry, and turned, leaped
upon his steed, and with his
company galloped madly back to
Cirith Gorgor.'_______________will do the same
______________________________if asked any hard
______________________________questions during
______________________________his upcoming trip
______________________________to Iraq

LOTR, Return of the King, Book V, Chapter 10
'The Black Gate Opens'.

echo5a and anyone else still reading this post.

I would have to agree with you on you post about using the military. I would also Agree with your evaluation in your last post of the running of the war. Collin Powell instituted the Powell doctrine. In basic terms we go in hard or we don't go in at all. Bob Woodward wrote a little about Tommy Franks and Collin Powel in his book "Plan of Attack". Basicly it was Rumsfelds Idea since he planned on being there for a while.

Hopefully the next time we take down an County (coughIranCough) We go in full tilt or don't go in at all. If we decide not to go in I just hope we drop a ton of weapons off to the Kurds in Northern Iraq and let them take the ball.