Just taking a moment out of busy preparations for a SERIOUS FEAST to wish everyone a very Merry Christmas!

This year, there were no Christmas Day church gigs, so I've been spending the time with my kids and helping to prepare for the feast. We're expecting a busy day, including a visit from my nutty cousin. We saw her yesterday, but didn't make a big deal out of "Climategate". I don't imagine we will today, either. It's just too funny for us and embarrassing for them to bring it up on such a wonderfully festive day. We get more than enough laughter watching her eat tofu instead of turkey!

What a blast! I hope all of you enjoy your day as much as I stand to!

RWR

Michelle Malkin is reporting that Senator DeMint is attempting to get a vote regarding the constitutionality of DemCare.

I only wish both Malkin and DeMint would have hadthe foresight to push this issue at the beginning of the process, when it could have done some good.

RWR

Update:This vote was on the purchase mandate, not the whole concept. Turns out DeMint is a bit of a wimp on the issue. Of course the Donks voted it down. I guess per Nancy Pelosi ... "Are you serious?"

Yes. Mrs. Pelosi. We are serious. - RWR

The last few days have been a bit hectic here. Hopefully the next few will be better. With Christmas fast approaching, I doubt that, but there's always hope (and change hahaha).

After the New Year (or possibly before), you may see some changes in the patterns here at the RWRepublic, including poet frequency and a possible drop in traffic (if you follow that). I have tentatively accepted a position that will probably keep me off-blog for most of the daytime hours that I have lately been using for research and commenting (commenting at other blogs helps drive traffic here). It's not great money, and there's a long drive involved (that doesn't really bother me that much - Sage will tell you that we both had long drives to the building in which we worked together when we met - where we were grossly underpaid), but it is a pretty awesome long-term opportunity that can still put a pretty good dent in the debts that have accumulated over the last several months of unemployment (and lack of income).

Traffic has been great lately. The goal of 1,000 monthly visits has been met and exceeded every month since it's been set - in fact this will likely be the fourth month that will have approached double that (at post time, there are 60 hits to go to 1500 for the month, and there's over a week to go). Traffic isn't why I blog, as you all know, but it would be a lie to say it's not part of the hobby. As traffic increases, the opportunity to monetize increases with it; and that is always something to consider, especially if there's a chance to make extra money with a blog that I already have. Unfortunately, the engine that has largely driven that increase in traffic over the last four months has been comments in the blogosphere, which may not be as useful once the new job starts.

Hopefully, the loyal readership that's come on will continue to be here, and maybe encourage some friends to come by. I'll do what I can to keep things rolling - this blog had 1,000 hits per month through my entire last job (which was a 2-month contract), and the same problems existed there.

The main thing is that, barring unforeseen circumstances, I will be back to work very soon. That is never a bad thing. So maybe traffic cools down a bit - it's not like I'm going away.

The libs aren't THAT lucky!

RWR

In the second most devastating blizzard in recorded history, my home is buried under about 2 ft. of snow RIGHT NOW. Some global warming would do me very nicely, thank you very much. It's unfortunately not happening.

I imagine Sage is dealing with some deep white powder up in the mountains of New Hampshire as well. I'm sure some global warming would serve him quite nicely. It's not.

Of course, snow is rare in Denmark, yet the very week the global warming nutjobs schedule their precious conference, it's under its own record snowfall - in the first mid-December snow in over a decade. Global warming might have made the conference more pleasant. It didn't.

Poetic justice, if you ask me.

RWR

Cliff Lee
Pitcher Extrordinaire

In one of the stupidest deals imaginable, the Philadelphia Phillies have traded the best pitcher they have had since Steve Carlton. If they wanted Roy Halladay, fine. Trading away the only pitcher on their staff to win a World Series game this past season should NOT have been an option.

I was skeptical of the trade that brought Lee to Philly, to be honest, but the man made a believer out of me. His cool personality and humble attitude turned out to be one of the team's finest assets. There was absolutely no reason to deny Cliff Lee the opportunity to finish out his career at Citizens Bank Park. Has Reuben Amaro contracted Ed Wade disease?

I sense this trade will wind up biting him in the ass.

Go Sharks!

RWR

As I was driving home from the airport today, the ever-so-memorable clip from the Electric Company came to mind:

CAPTAIN: A cup of coffee and a sweet roll.

WAITRESS: We're out of sweet rolls.

CAPTAIN: A glass of milk and a sweet roll.

WAITRESS: We are out of sweet rolls.

CAPTAIN: Iced tea and a sweet roll.

WAITRESS: We are out of sweet rolls.

CAPTAIN: Orange juice and a sweet roll?

WAITRESS (Frustrated and angry): WE ARE OUT OF SWEET ROLLS!!!

CAPTAIN: Okay, then I'll just have a sweet roll.

Kind of made me think about what the US government offers us today. The conversation would probably go something like this:

GOVERNMENT: We'll give you socialist progressivism.

PEOPLE: We don't want progressivism.

GOVERNMENT: Fascist progressivism.

PEOPLE: We do not want progressivism.

GOVERNMENT: Capitalist progressivism.

PEOPLE: We do not want progressivism.

GOVERNMENT: Communist progressivism?

PEOPLE (Frustrated and angry): WE DO NOT WANT PROGRESSIVISM!!!

GOVERNMENT: Okay, then we'll just give you progressivism.

Wake up Washington, DC. We're coming for you.

RWR

Last week, I blogged about a poll that showed that the Tea Party movement is largely a conservative movement that would beat the Republican Party in a three-way race, further confirming my assertion that the Republicans are the "third party", and not us Federalists et. al. I would like to revisit that poll today.

The important stuff in the poll amounted to this:

If the election were held today, which party's candidate would you support?

Generic:

Democrat: 36%
Tea Party: 23%
Republican: 18%
Undecided: 22%

Independent voters:

Tea Party: 33%
Undecided: 30%
Democrat: 25%
Republican: 12%

Republican voters:

Republican: 39%
Tea Party: 33%

There's more, but you get the idea. The only demographic that Republicans did any better than third place here was when you went specifically to Republican voters. Is this party washed up or what?

The Tea Party voter is, let's be honest, generally either a Republican or someone to the right thereof. Republicans try to tell you that since we Tea Party people, whether you call us Federalists, Conservatives, Constitutionites, Libertarians, or whatever, are more closely aligned with them than the Democrats, then we should vote for their guy, even though our ideology and beliefs are more both more popular and more constitutional (read that legal) than theirs. If the Republican Party truly wants to survive their current loss of power, wouldn't the smart thing for them to do be to embrace Tea Party-friendly ways, Tea Party-friendly candidates, and a Tea Party-friendly platform? I would sure think so.

Instead they have counted us out, essentially calling us hardheads who would rather see a less liberal candidate lose than have the opportunity to push forward with a less liberal agenda. Well of them I ask, how is that McCain vote working out for you today? Sure, McCain spoke out against this government healthcare crap, but only because HIS version of government healthcare is off the table - oh, and to shut him up, the Donks have put amnesty back onto the table. Are we having fun yet? I sure am.

Why am I having fun while liberals (including Republicans like John McCain) work so hard to tear down the America that the Founding Fathers so sacrificed for? Well hold you head up and smile. It's the Tea Party movement. Had McCain won in 2008, I doubt there would be much of a Tea Party movement, and if there were, it would be quiet. It's hard to come out very strongly against an official that you cast a vote for. In many ways, Barack Obama is one of the best things ever to happen to the United States of America. Look around you. How many people are now interested in the Constitution and what it actually says?

America is about to make a HUGE comeback, with or without the Republicans and Democrats. The Tea Party movement will be dictating the course of history for the foreseeable future. This is where I think the Republican Party has a chance to save their party. Instead of insisting that we go along with their platform and plans, the Republican Party should see the Tea Party movement's power and SIGN ON TO ITS platforms and plans. Abandon big government Republicanism and become the party of the Constitution.

Given who's calling the shots at this juncture, I seriously doubt the Republicans will do this, but if any kind of survival instincts kick in, it is highly plausible. The problem as I see it is that the Republicans have seen this polling data as well, and are still tasting the insides of the Donks' rectums all over Washington, DC. You would think losing the White House to an avowed socialist and having to face the Tea Partiers every day would give them pause. Still, it's something for us to consider if they do come around.

RWR

Well ... sort of.

There are still a couple of elements I want to get back, mainly the red band that always separated the header and the rest of the page and (much more importantly) the random quotes that has been the hallmark of the spontaneity of the RWRepublic.

Comments are, however, up and running. I have picked up the "IntenseDebate" commenting system to replace Haloscan. A couple of things here:

1. To get to the comments, the best way to go is to click the title of the post, which will take you to a page with the post at the top and comments for that post at the bottom. You can also click on the "Comments" link if there is one, but that will give you a plain comment window instead of showing you the post. From there you just do what you've always done, for the most part. IntenseDebate does offer some additional functionality, but if all you want to do is what you've always done, you will do just fine.

2. IntenseDebate does visibly slow down page loading time. It's not a huge deal, but sometimes you sometimes may want to hit your "refresh" button if it seems to have locked up. I have usually found this to help.

3. Sometimes your comment will be held for moderation. I have not yet reviewed ID's moderation rules or looked at how I could adjust them, but unless you really piss me off or something, you will not have a problem with getting your comments approved so please don't sweat it.

4. Comment length limits are shorter than Haloscan's. You still get a lot of room, but don't be afraid to put up a "Continued" comment if you so wish.

5. There is no simple importation mechanism to bring the old comments over. I have backed them up and will gradually see to it that they are added to their respective posts. Comments brought over from Haloscan will have a timestamp added to them in the format YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SS. If you see "-5:00" appended to the end, you can safely ignore it.

Hopefully ID doesn't aspire to pulling a similar stunt to the course of action chosen by Haloscan. It really pissed me off that they gave no notice whatsoever so that people could make proper preparations to change services if they saw fit. It's not that their price is unreasonable, I just can't afford it right now in my current state of employment (which could be improving very soon - knock on wood).

Please let me know about any concerns you have with the new comment system.

RWR

Haloscan is discontinuing its free comment service, and the free comment services available do not support "Classic Blogger", which is causing me to at least temporarily take down the kick-ass template I've been using.

For the time being, please do not leave any comments on this blog. The comments have already been backed up, and anything you put here WILL BE LOST, as I will be moving forward with a new comment service and upgrading the template in the hopes that I will be able to re-establish some semblance of the old one.

Please check back often so that you will know when the upgrades are complete.

RWR

Update: As you can see, much of the page is back. However, there are still some issues:

1. Clicking the title is not necessarily a permalink as before. It may take you to a link relevant to the post. (Resolved - Clicking the title will always give you the permalink now.)

2. There isn't always a comment link on each post. To comment, you will need to click on the permalink, which isn't always there. (Resolved.)

3. Some of the graphics and cool stuff is gone - hopefully temporarily. I can't see the RWRepublic without our trusty random quotes! (Most graphics are back, save one that I really liked (the red band below the header. Random quotes are sadly still an issue.)

4. To comment, click the title for the permalink, and the comment box will be below the post.

5. It looks like I'm going to have to transfer all of the comments from the last five years by hand - grrr. Unfortunately, they weren't backed up in chronological order so it will be a sporadic kind of process. On transferred comments, I will bring over the timestamps as well and include them inside the comments.

Time to set the cross-hairs. Get the tar and feathers ready. U.S. District Judge Nina Gershon opened her mouth today and promptly slid her tongue deeply into the rectum of ACORN:

Gershon said in her ruling that ACORN had raised a "fundamental issue of separation of powers. They have been singled out by Congress for punishment that directly and immediately affects their ability to continue to obtain federal funding, in the absence of any judicial, or even administrative, process adjudicating guilt."

No word on which article and section of the Constitution allowed ACORN to receive the money in the first place.

Rope. Tree. Judge.

Some assembly required.

RWR

Yet another terrorist has assumed room temperature, courtesy of the United States military. You go Barack (yes ... he gets credit - remember when he does good stuff he gets credit and when he screws the pooch he gets an earful)!

[Saleh al-Somali] was engaged in plotting throughout the world, which, given his role, probably included planning attacks against the United States and Europe. He took strategic guidance from Al Qaeda's top leadership and translated it into operational blueprints for prospective terrorist attacks.

Unfortunately, a picture of the scumbag wasn't available.

RWR

The New Jersey Senate delayed a vote today on "gay marriage" - because the votes for passage weren't there.

This is a positive step. New Jerseyans do not want this, so it's important that it isn't foisted upon us. Of course, there are a few points that need to be addressed, as noted in the piece:

In testimony Monday, gay and lesbian couples said they had been denied access to their partners in hospitals and benefits such as health insurance under civil unions.

The solution here isn't to pervert the institution of marriage, but to address the concerns regarding access to hospital patients and health benefits. I am not gay, nor do I ever intend to be, but I have been denied access to a hospitalized friend on the basis that I was not related or married to him. This particular situation actually required me to have access to my friend, but I was denied for the same reasons these people are being denied the same. People should be able to name ANYONE on their insurance policies as long as they are willing to pay the premium. Patients should be the ones to determine who their visitors get to be when they are hospitalized instead of some hospital policy that narrowly defines such eligibility. This does not have to be an issue for gay people, as all people are affected by these things.

As for being able to marry whomever you want, gay people already have the same rights to marriage as the rest of us. They simply must choose as a spouse a member of the opposite gender just like the rest of us. We all have rules in life that we must live under that we don't like (65 miles per hour? Please.). This is no different.

RWR

More proof that I'm right about the Republicans and the TeaParty movement.

It's now merely a question of exactly how to set up the new party. I say we put all out heads together and make it happen. If the Republicans decide to GENUINELY change, I can see us "Teabaggers" running with them, but the chances of that happening are slim to none, and slim is busy frantically packing his bags.

RWR

Most people here know that my position on Sarah Palin is hopeful but with serious skepticism and pessimism. She just hasn't proven herself as a conservative at all, and her eagerness to jump onto the McCain bus, only to be thrown under it in an all too predictable fashion, merely made all of this worse.

Still, she does have a great personality and a sense of humor that could eventually bring her around. Regardless of what you think of Sarah (Sage, this means you hahaha), you have to laugh at this one ...

As for the president, Palin joked that she was looking at a magazine cover of Obama and Chinese president Hu Jinato during an airplane flight. A nearby passenger stated, "Hu's the Communist," she related.

And, Palin said, "I thought he was asking a question."

If this woman comes forth with a truly conservative agenda (which is unlikely), she's got a shot at winning the presidency. Sadly, I don't see her cult following as being anywhere near as charismatic or enthusiastic as Obama's. She will have to come forth with the kind of agenda the Tea Partiers will like if she's even to have a chance. One thing she does have going for her: both Democrats and mainstream Republicans hate her guts. While that's clearly not enough, it's got to count for something.

I'll believe it when I see it. At any rate, the quote is hilarious and spot on.

RWR

It is an essential, natural right, that a man shall quietly enjoy, and have the sole disposal of his own property. ... The Utopian schemes of leveling, and a community of goods, are as visionary and impracticable, as those which vest all property in the Crown, are arbitrary, despotic, and in our government unconstitutional. Now, what property can the colonists be conceived to have, if their money be granted away by others, without their consent?

- Samuel Adams, January 12, 1768

I was assailed yet again today at MichelleMalkin.com.

I wonder if these Republicans know that when they expect everyone to toe their party line, they look just like the Democrats they say they want to defeat.

We all counted you out a long time ago, RWR. You are just a noisemaker trying to bleed off conservatives from the real struggle to keep our country from sinking further into the pit.

No one is counting on you. You are part of the problem, not part of the solution. You always will be part of the problem. If a candidate you liked ever got close to mattering, you would turn on him.

We can count on you for that.

First of all, there are a whole lotta questions that have to be asked of Sarah Palin before anyone can establish her as "conservative", yet you and others blindly line up behind her as if she's some kind of god(dess). Sorry bub. We already have that now, and it sucks.

The people who are the problem are those who continue to blindly follow a political party that has never espoused their ideas and beliefs. Reagan was elected despite the Republicans, not with their support. What’s worse is that the "in" thing for Republicans is to pretend they are the new Reagan. These people are trying to "take back" a political party they never had in the first place. They are more than happy to support a government "healthcare plan" as long as it isn't created by Democrats. Never mind that government meddling in such matters is illegal – inconvenient little tidbit there, huh?

If/when Republicans choose to run acceptable candidates, I will support them. Christie was pretty close for a New Jerseyan, and I did vote for him, but there is a lot of work to do in convincing people that the Constitution must be followed. Once that happens, Republicans and Democrats had better wise up or they will either be taken over by conservatives such as yourself or replaced with factions true to the Founders' vision such as those I support.

You need people like me, Roland; and you need us a lot more than we need you. Your decision to be content to support liberals simply because they're less liberal than the Donks merely plays into the Donks' hands. You need people like me to force the debate to the right because people like you don’t have the courage to do it. For proof, try to name one legislator in DC that you would support who has opposed healthcare reform (or the stimulus – or the bailouts) on the basis that the Constitution forbids its passage. This is both the simplest and strongest argument against these intolerable acts, and I haven't heard anyone standing on them.

No, my good friend, your LOTE position is the problem. I understand it very well, since I used to hold it myself. The day will come when you will recognize this. In the meantime, it would be wise for you to stop demonizing me by calling me a "noisemaker" and "part of the problem". All you're doing is adding to the nasty taste of the crow you’re going to have to eat later.

RWR
www.rightwingrocker.com

Actually, I have heard people standing on the Constitution. The problem remains that they have been town-hall and tea party attendees. It's time to elect some of these people. If the Republican Party and its members want my vote, they will have to present appropriate candidates. End of story.

RWR

I don't need to listen to him read his speech tonight.

I don't need to know what he (or anyone else, for that matter) has to say.

Ask yourself this simple question:

Is Barack Hussein Obama in a position of any sort of credibility when it comes to enumerating a "war strategy"?

If you answer it honestly, you're in the same boat I am ...

RWR

h/t: Grouchy Old Cripple

Update: For a good laugh, check out this thread at DU!

Every year, it seems we must be reminded of why we have Thanksgiving (and this year more than ever).

Here it is again, for all idiots, ignoramuses, scholars, and people who just like to be in the know.

Enjoy!

RWR

This rules!

Enjoy!

h/t to the BlogFather of the RWRepublic, Emperor Darth Misha I for posting this for me to find!

RWR

Michelle Malkin and others are reporting on the scandal that should have been brought to light decades ago.

Turns out, though, we now have a smoking gun in the "Global Cooling "Global Warming" "CLIMATE CHANGE" hoax.

I must say, it's about fucking time.

RWR

Barbara Boxer is in deep shit. It seems there's a conservative with Federalist tendencies running against her in 2010.

Chuck DeVore's basic platform states the following:

* Chuck DeVore believes government's most important role is to secure our rights. This was the Founders' view of government too. Bigger government encroaches on our liberty.
* Chuck opposed the bailouts, the stimulus package and the big government auto industry takeover.
* Chuck has a strong voting record fighting for increased domestic energy production and he has strongly opposes Barbara Boxer's Cap & Trade energy tax scheme
* California faces an unprecedented challenge due to a drought made worse by arcane environmental laws.
* Assemblyman DeVore is a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army retired Reserve. He also worked as a Reagan White House appointee in the Pentagon. Chuck supports a strong military and defense for our country.
* Chuck supports strong controls on our borders and considers this issue to be of vital national importance.
* Chuck has a proven voting record of fighting for our Constitutional rights.

DeVore cites the Declaration of Independence in his passages on the role of government. His assessment is spot-on.

On taxes, he correctly points out that high taxes enable an increasingly large government that has forgotten its aforementioned role, again quoting the Declaration.

He isn’t as strong on healthcare, parroting the usual high costs and demonstrably poor results of the proposed plans, but does correctly acknowledge that "Government created many of today's healthcare problems -- and so it makes no sense to turn to government to solve them."

On energy, he's basically a Republican. Good points made, but no reference to the blatant illegality of the government regulating energy production in the first place.

On California's current drought, Chuck supports turning the water back on in California. While this is a no-brainer, Barbara Boxer has staunchly stood in the way of doing it, causing rampant unemployment and a food shortage that will be felt nationwide.

His comments on "family values" are better applied to his decision to support only originalist judges:

In a prospective judge, I'll look for those who understand that the role of government is to secure our "unalienable" rights as set forth in the preamble of the Declaration of Independence and that the Judicial Branch's role is not to legislate from the bench.

Sure, this does affect the implementation of values, but it's much more important in its effect on the implementation of the Constitution. I should shoot off a note to the campaign haha.

Sage would love Chuck's position on the military:

While a strong supporter of a robust and modern volunteer military, Chuck has been a consistent skeptic of direct military intervention since the 1980s, preferring instead to encourage those who want freedom and democracy overseas with more indirect methods, if possible. Chuck knows that we neither have enough people [nor] treasure to be a global policeman for decades.

We should have a robust, state-of-the-art military, and we should only use it to kick the asses of those who choose to do us harm. Good call, Chuck. One possible issue, however, would be the "more indirect methods" of supporting the freedom fighters of the world. If we're sending them guns and ammo at our own expense, that's not a good thing. If our gun manufacturers are selling them to them, that's another matter entirely - get the picture?

Chuck's position on criminal trespass of illegal aliens is correct, however, as I have often stated, it is a mistake to use the word "immigrants" to describe these people, as they have none of the required traits of immigrants. Call them what they are: illegal aliens.

Chuck’s stand on the First and Second Amendments is spot-on.

Of course, no assessment of a politician would be complete without a conservative rating. Looking at his voting record, only a single vote for rent control catches my eye. He also voted for clearer definitions of sentences for drug offenders who had violated their probation. Since this was not a vote on the "drug war" itself, but rather a clarification of a convict's rights, I'm not sure I can count it against him. Chuck is going to have to come in very high on the conservative scale – somewhere in the 90-95% range. This guy is no joke.

Of course, Sage is much better at digging up dirt on these guys than I am, but at this juncture, not only is Chuck DeVore better than Barbara Boxer, but he's also head and shoulders above his Republican challenger – yeah I know – big surprise there. The Republican wants you to vote for her because she's a woman. Yeah, California did that with Boxer and look at what it got - nice job, Skippy. On the issues, it looks like California would be doing itself a favor by electing Chuck DeVore.

Also: Here is a good interview posted at ronpaulforums.com.

RWR

The need for the Tea Party movement has given conservatives the opportunity of a lifetime. The concept of returning America to her federalist origins is both exciting and realistic, thanks to Barack Obama (strangely enough). These "progressives" (read that communists, socialists, fascists, etc.) have finally awakened the American People from their long slumber.

If the Federalist Party Platform reflects your views, check out The Second American Revolution (http://friendsofneofederalism.blogspot.com/), as well as the American Federalist Party Blog (http://federalistpartyblog.blogspot.com/). The former is brand new, and will feature Sage's work, as well as anything I post that seems inspirational for the Federalist Movement. More bloggers will be added to these, especially the former. Drop me your email if you'd write, and I'll get you set up.

Finally, a place where conservatives can strut our stuff!

RWR

When I saw this post by RgihtwigSparkle, it brought to mind a comment I once saw from Sage on Mr. Minority's blog:

Sadly, I believe that the day is not far when we will look at the Boosh days as the "good ole days"!

RightwingSparkle shows us why today we are doing just that. Of course, Bush did plenty for us to complain about, and to expect McLameass to have been much better than Obama would have been foolish, but it does seem that we have reason already to wish we were fighting Bush than Obama.

Of course, there is the up-side. Obama has thrown things into such a tail-spin that Americans who were previously complacent are now doing their duty and speaking out against these usurpers. McLameass would not likely have brought this about. Good for America!

RWR

Just Google it for the links. There are too many people calling the administration on this to keep it all straight. Of course, it's no surprise that Obama and his gang of criminals in Washington are lying about their so-called "stimulus", which is really nothing more than an advance for Donk campaign funds for 2010 and 2012. Here's a chart of some of the lies that were told on the government's page that's supposed to monitor the "stimulus". This chart DOES NOT include the $6.4 billion that went to 440 bogus congressional districts - enough fake congressional districts to DOUBLE THE SIZE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Now in all fairness, there will be mistakes made. But mistakes of this magnitude and nature have to have you wondering whether you want this same government in control of which doctors you may see and when, even if you do believe that somehow the government is actually authorized to do so.

Furthermore, if this administration is this serious about lying to the people, how can you trust the numbers that aren't demonstrably bogus? Bogus predictions about "pass this or you just might see 9% unemployment", when passing that very bill (illegally at that) brought about 10.2% unemployment AND CLIMBING, bogus numbers on actual stimulus spending, bogus claims that "healthcare reform" isn't an attempt to put private insurers out of business ... Are we seeing a pattern here? How about bogus claims that the current occupant of the White House is a natural-born citizen of the United States? Has anyone shown proof? Why not?

Here is a guy who has spent at least close to a million dollars to stop inquiries into an issue that would cost a mere ten to twenty bucks to put to rest IF there weren't something damning to hide. If he's lying about the stimulus, which he is, and he's lying about the economy, which he is, and he's lying about healthcare, which he is - and taking all these lies this seriously to boot, then why would it be such a stretch that he's lying about his status as a natural-born citizen?

Had the Democratic Party not jumped so quickly at the chance to be able to call America racist for not electing their guy, we would have all these same lies coming from either Hitlery or McShithead. At least Hitlery was born on US soil to American parent. Not that the Republicrats give a damn about the Constitution anyway.

The point is that we've been fed lie after lie after lie after lie for a hundred years from these shitbags. Why should we start believing them now? Why should we allow them to keep the power they have wrested from our very hands for a single day longer? Why should we trust them with our retirement? With our charity? With our safety? The answer, of course, is that we shouldn't - That was the whole point of the Declaration of Independence in the first place. It was the whole point of the Bill of Rights. It's the whole point of being free. As I've said before, with the exception of those few powers the Constitution grants it, WE DON'T NEED A FEDERAL GOVERNMENT!!!! At this point, who would want it?

RWR

RWR

New York, Doug Hoffman, and Nancy Pelosi may have jumped the gun.

RWR

Published on a seemingly anonymous blog on MyFox Orlando, here is a pretty good summary of some pretty extensive research regarding the circumstances of Barack Obama's actual birth. Mind you, most of it is only relevant with regard to the place of birth and not with regard to the dual citizenship issues Mr. Obama has. I've posted it in its entirety, but there are links that you may want to check out.

JUST THE FACTS

The documents that we found when conducting our research into Barack Obama Jr.'s citizenship are displayed on this page. This is what we know about Barack Obama Jr.'s parents and his citizenship.

Barack Obama Jr. aka Barack H. Obama Jr. aka Barry Soetoro aka Barack Soetoro aka Barry Dunham aka Barry Obama aka Barack Hussein Obama

Barack Obama Jr.'s mother is Stanley Ann Dunham, aka Ann Dunham, aka Stanley Ann Obama aka Ann Obama, aka Stanley Ann Soetoro, aka Ann Soetoro.

Barack Obama Jr. was born to Barack Obama Sr., a citizen of Kenya and Stanley Ann Dunham, a citizen of the U.S.

Barack Obama Jr.'s mother, Ann Dunham, divorced Barack Obama Jr's father in or about 1963 when Barack Obama Jr was two years old.

Then Barack Obama Jr.'s mother, Ann Dunham, married Lolo Soetoro, a citizen of Indonesia. Lolo Soetoro legally acknowledged Barack H. Obama, Jr. et al. as his son and/or adopted him.

While Ann Dunham (Soetoro) aka Stanley Ann Soetoro was married to Lolo Soertoro, Barack Obama Jr. was enrolled in the public school in Indonesia as Barry Soetoro, an Indonesian citizen.

On August 20, 1980, Stanley Ann Soetoro, initiated divorce proceedings from Lolo Soetoro in Honolulu, HI. click here to view court docket

When asked, Barack H. Obama, Jr., et al claims he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii however, claims to have been born in two (2) separate hospitals. According to Barack H. Obama's Kenyan grandmother, Barack, Jr. was born in Mombosa, Kenya and she was present during his birth. The Kenyan Government, claim they have the birthing records of Barack H. Obama, Jr. and the birth delivery records of Ann Obama, from Barack H. Obama, Jr.'s birth in Mombosa, Kenya, however, they have sealed the birth records of Barack H. Obama, et al, birth in Mombosa, Kenya and labled them top secret as a result of the presidential election.

The questions are, "where was Barack Obama Jr. born"? Is Barack Obama, Jr. a/k/a Barry Soetoro still an Indonesian Citizen? What is Barack Obama, Jr. a/k/a Barry Soetoro's legal name?

02/18/08: Star Bulletin News Article Obama backers stress importance of caucuses, page 2, "He was born in Kapiolani Medical Center for Women & Children"

11/04: The Rainbow Edition, Volume 2, Issue 3, Education Laboratory School, page 2, "Barack Obama was born on August 4, 1961 at the Queen's Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii"

10/2008: Interview with Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.'s Kenyan grandmother, Sarah Obama during a taped interview at her home in Kenya was adamant "Barack, Jr. was born in Mombosa, Kenya and I was present during his birth."

10/30/08: Affidavit of Reverend Kweli Shuhubia, "Barack Hussein Obama, Jr., the United States Presidential candidate, was born in Mombosa Kenya" "Kenyan Officials with the Provincial Civil Registrar stated there were records of Ann Dunham giving birth to Barack Hussein Obama, III in Mombosa , Kenya on August 4, 1961 and confirmed the birthing records of Barack H. Obama, Jr. and his mother were present, however, the file on Barack H. Obama, Jr. was classified and profiled. The Official explained Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. birth in Kenya is top secret."

10/27/08: Affidavit of Bishop Ron McRae, "US Senator Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim and not a Christian, and that he was born in Mombasa, Kenya and not in the State of Hawaii"

01/01/68: Indonesian School Record, "Name of School: Fransiskus Assisi School, Name: Barry Soetoro, Citizenship: Indonesian, Name of Parent: Lolo Soetoro, M.A. The school records indicate that Barack Obama Jr. aka Barry Soetoro attended first grade in Indonesia and that he was born in Honolulu Hawaii on 08/04/1961 and his father is Lolo Soetoro.



NOW KEEP IN MIND THAT OBAMA'S COUSIN WHO IS THE PRIME MINISTER OF KENYA HAS ORDERED NO FAMILY MEMBER [CAN] TALK TO ANYONE ABOUT OBAMA UNLESS HIS OFFICE APPROVES IT.

You decide. Based upon this recent post at The Post & Email, it seems that Obama's birth in Hawaii must have taken place sometime between June 27, 2004 and August 28, 2006, given these facts noted in the post:

Regarding his claims, we can summarize what is known:

1. As of Monday, Aug. 28, 2006, Obama’s Campaign was putting out that he was born in Hawaii. This is known from the introductory speech given by Prof. George A. O. Magoha, Vice-Chancellor of the University of Nairobi, on the occasion of a speech given there by Senator Obama that day. (One presumes that the Vice-Chancellor was given notes from the Obama campaign, as is customary on such occasions)

2. From the newspaper reports above, it is clear that the Obama campaign was putting out that he was born in Kenya, or overseas, during the period of June 27, 2004, until January 8, 2006.

3. In October of 2004, during the ABC Chicago Affiliate’s broadcast of the Obama-Keyes debates, Obama openly admitted — he conceded — that he was not a natural born citizen. (C-Span aired the uncut version of the debates, which contained this exchange, in the second half of April, 2005)

4. It is known from a classmate of Obama at Harvard University, that while at Harvard, Obama at least on one occasion admitted that he was born in Kenya. (This friend went on record on a call in radio program in Idaho in early July, 2009)

Again, lots of links. Check them out.

RWR

John Hawkins and Conor Friedersdorf have set themselves into a debate about the direction the Right should take in moving forward. In my opinion, they're both standing on the dock waving hankies at the boat.

Hawk brings up conservative infighting, the failed welfare state, the Reagan agenda, and failure to target minority groups as the four things to address in this segment of the "debate". None of this is particularly relevant, though, with regard to the conservative movement.

Conservative infighting - The Founding Fathers would have called this "debate". Greta van Susteren would call it "the marketplace of ideas". Conservatives have been wrongly demonized for far too long with far too high a price for us to allow our beloved country to continue down the path it's been on for a hundred years. Of course we're going to fight. The very survival of our nation is at stake.

The welfare state - The welfare state is reaching a tipping point? Really? You're just noticing this now, long after the tipping point has come and gone? Illegal welfare programs make up a larger portion of the federal budget than defense, all with no authorization for the federal government to even be involved, and NOW you start complaining? Sorry, John. That ship left port years ago.

The Reagan agenda - Without getting into specifics, Hawkins bemoans the Reagan agenda:

Conservatives WILL NOT win by following the "Reagan agenda" because Reagan's agenda was designed, using conservative principles, to deal with the political situation of his day. Some of those battles have been won. Others have been irrevocably lost. Some have grown in importance. Others have lessened.

I submit that with regard to much of the Reagan agenda, there isn't much difference between the political situation of today as opposed to Reagan's time. Still, even if you accept Hawk's premise, your result is likely to be a candidate/agenda to the left of Reagan, which is unacceptable. Because of today's "political situation", Reagan would be far too liberal to be able to get the job done.

Minority outreach - The solution to minority participation in the conservative agenda is not to be just showing up at every racist liberal minority event on the calendar, but instead to show that we don't look at someone's minority status at all. No one should get the special treatment Hawk seems to suggest we give these people. Simply invite them to the events we go to, and be done with it.

Friedersdorf's piece wasn't as readable, but in a nutshell, said that those elected in 2000 as "conservatives" didn't govern as such. Well, duh. He also pointed to infighting - and didn't even take a side. The whole thing was an analysis piece of why conservatives failed in the last term.

Guys. You need to wake up. Conservatives didn't fail in the last term. Republicans did - and they failed so dismally that they brought about the kind of change that our free nation will not easily survive. Luckily, the change was so drastic that it brought about a real conservative revolution that stands to save America from her captors, despite Republican efforts to re-deliver her to them.

Doug Hoffman's impressive showing in New York is clear evidence that the conservative movement is strong enough to withstand the foolishness of the Democratic Party and its accomplices in the so-called "opposition". Here's a guy who only a few weeks before Election Day was a complete unknown - just an accountant with an idea - and with a more conservative agenda than either other candidate, he came closer to winning the election than John McCain did in his presidential effort last year. If you can come that close, you can win. After all, it was perceived by many that McCain could win ...

Hawkins and Friedersdorf are both of the delusion that Conservatism lives in the Republican Party. It does not. It lives in the hearts of conservatives like you and me. If Hoffman showed us nothing else, he showed us that conservatives don't need the Republican Party to be successful. Whether you think he's the future of conservatism or not, you must acknowledge his having shown us that we aren't some piddly little faction that can be ignored. True to form, the Republicans are still ignoring us, so to suggest that reform within that party is the key to advancing our belief system is a fucking joke.

We don't need the Republican Party, and they don't seem to understand that they need us. That's not our problem. Our problem is the liberal progressivism that plagues our great nation. If the Republicans want to do something about that, they are free to join us. In the meantime, we'll stand up for what we believe in: the vision of the Founding Fathers.

RWR

Here's the roll call vote from today's House of Representatives defiance of the American People and her Constitution.

If your congress-critter voted Yay, it's time right now to start the process of showing them the door.

RWR