Monday, December 31, 2007

Some New Year Resolutions…

To defeat Hillary
To defeat the democrats
To hold all politicians accountable
To run for office as an Independent
To run a positive, uplifting, Reganesque campaign
To continue working out
To write another book
To produce another CD
To defeat Hillary and the Democrats
To be a better person, dad, husband, friend, brother, cousin, neighbor, uncle, nephew…
To defeat Hillary
To be the best I can be in my career by managing better, speaking more, creating a valuable experience for the customers of my company…
To write Kathleen in Iraq with continued frequency…
To visit more family this year…
To make it worthwhile to know me by being a good role model for all…

These are my goals for 2008. What are yours?

Saturday, December 29, 2007

The New Year is Here…

And we are about to get our first glimpse into our choices for president. Iowa will vote soon and all eyes will be on her. Peggy Noonan has a good analysis here of the implications of Iowa’s choices. I will not make any predictions but I do have some hopes.

On the democratic side I would like to see Hillary lose; period. On the republican side I would be fine with Mitt, John McCain, and Rudy winning in Iowa. I do not like Huckabee.

It is the start of a roller coaster year and it will take many turns. It will be very telling to see where the American people want our country to go. I hope it is in the right direction…

Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Time Magazine Makes a Huge Mistake!

To designate Vladimir Putin as man of the year over General Petraeus, is an indication of how far out of touch the mainstream media is with the values of our country. They chose him because he brought “stability and renewed impact” to Russia. I guess a good dictator that instills “stability” through murder, terror, and intimidation is more deserving than a man that is offering hope, freedom, and democracy to a country just liberated from a murderous dictator. Ah! The good old days. If only we had more dictators to instill stability.

If only we could have the same stability here. That damn democracy thing is just standing in the way of a stable world. If only Vladimir would change his address to live in say, San Francisco, he could help us implement stability here in the good old US of A. How I long for a day when we no longer have to worry about speaking out against evil because in stable countries, you’re not allowed to do so. Some day maybe we too could have a man of the year like Vladimir.

I haven’t bought a Time magazine in I can’t remember how long. But I can tell you this; I never will again… Pathetic and disgusting is what it is. They should be shut down! Wait that only happens in “stable” countries, for now we are still a democracy; Thank GOD!

Monday, December 17, 2007

Huckabee = Increased Illegal Immigration

Michelle Malkin points out the true Mike Hackabee, and he is just like the others that do not understand the American people’s desire to secure our borders. He is smooth talking, and I have to say he can say the right things with a tinge of humor, but buyer beware. His true actions as Governor are ones I would not support. He is a big government guy with a place in his heart for illegal immigrants, at the same time turning his back on American families. He supported the “Dream Act” which forces American parents to pay for the subsidies for illegal’s to go to in-state colleges.

He is open borders just like George Bush. So if you think George Bush has done a good job on the border, you will love Mike Huckabee. I know people can change over time, but not enough time has passed. We have Mitt and Fred to choose from now if the borders matter to you. They do for me. We will see what the rest of America thinks soon enough…

Doug Lamborn; was it a Coors beer you were drinking?

Doug Lamborn, fresh off of trying to get Pike’s Peak designated a National Monument, is “caught” hob knobbing with lobbyists and drinking all the free beer he could, I’m sure. I just hope he was at least drinking our home brew, Coors. (He is seen twice. Be patient, he is near the end of a very short video clip)

Let me state right here right now, when I run again for congress in 2008, I will pledge to drink only Coors beer, but I will not attend one lobbyist event if elected to congress. I will be spending my time in congress fighting for congressional reforms; sober. One of them will be to reduce the influence of money in congress. I am all for attending constituent events in district 5, but events that are designed to listen and present issues to the constituents.

I will not launch personal attacks on Doug once I announce, but I have to say here and now, he is embarrassing. He is the stereo typical politician and he will be voted out if I have anything to do with it. But my guess is he will have a hard time getting past the 08 republican primary. The good news for Doug is he will have plenty of time to drown his sorrows in beer. Just a thought…

Thursday, December 13, 2007

Sending a Thought and Thanks…

I mailed a small Christmas package to my cousin Kathleen in Iraq today that my family put together, and it got me thinking. It got me thinking about how good we have it here because we have people like my cousin Kathleen, spending their holiday in Iraq, Afghanistan, and all around the world, protecting our God given freedoms. They often don’t see what they do the same way
I do, but I thank God every day for people like Kathleen.

Many soldiers like Kathleen are not political, and don’t equate what they do with the political landscape, but if it wasn’t for our soldiers protecting our liberties around the world, politics would be different. These soldiers allow us to be free from the tyranny of foreign governments, they allow us to bargain from a position of strength, and they allow us to argue our points without the threat of interference from those that might wish to take advantage of our differences. They are the confidence we hold when we choose to confront the evil of our world. It is because of them, we are respected around the world no matter what their critics say. Without our troops, the evil of this world would have no boundary.

Without these soldiers we risk a different and cruel world. Our soldiers show the rest of the world what it is to truly be American; selfless, compassionate, freedom loving, and the beacon of hope for all suppressed people of the world. Sometimes I wish the world would show more appreciation. I have to believe deep down the people that have been freed from the likes of Saddam, and the Taliban, do appreciate our efforts. To think otherwise would be too depressing.

So thank you Kathleen, thank you to all the soldiers and their families during this Christmas season, and every day, for keeping me and my family safe. I thank you for representing us around the world with such dedication and honor. And thank you Kathleen for teaching my children how important it is to make sacrifices for the freedom they enjoy. They love writing to you, and it fills my heart that they have such a wonderful pen pal and role model.

I hope everyone writes a letter to our troops to show them they are not alone. We are thinking of you here, over there, and we pray for your safety. God Bless…

Wednesday, December 12, 2007

House Democrats who Slammed Christianity and Supported Islam...

Nine Democrats voted against the Christmas resolution. They are: Rep. Gary Ackerman (N.Y.), Rep. Yvette Clarke (N.Y.), Rep. Diane DeGette (Colo.), Rep. Alcee Hastings (Fla.), Rep. Barbara Lee (Calif.), Rep. Jim McDermott (Wash.), Rep. Robert Scott (Va.), Rep. Pete Stark (Calif.) and Rep. Lynn Woolsey (Calif.).

Another nine Democrats chose to vote “present.” They are: Rep. Hon Conyers (Mich.), Rep. Barney Frank (Mass.), Rep. Rush Holt (N.Y.), Rep. Jan Schakowsky (Ill.), Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Fla.), Rep. Peter Welch (Vt.) and Rep. John Yarmuth (Ky.)

Each of them supported the Ramadan resolution except for Rep. Lee, who did not vote.

Anyone that lives in these districts beware. These are the people who will sell out America for political correctness. We do not need to recognize Islam in this country. Islam has no founding in this great nation. It is a threat to this nation and we must resist all efforts to allow this religion any standing within our government or public awareness. It is a political movement not a religion. It is certainly not a “religion of peace”. Wake up and throw these guys out before it’s too late…

Do We Want Bill In The White House Again?

You really have to ask yourself the question; do we need Bill Clinton back in the White House? I have had many a conversation with my children explaining the bad behavior of Bill Clinton, and why character matters in a leader. Charisma is not enough; it is the character of a person that makes a great leader.

The times were different when Bill occupied the White House in the 90’s. We were in the internet revolution, and few were paying attention to the world around us; especially Bill. He ignored the threat of terror, the bubble of the stock market, the crooks at the helms of corporations like Global Crossing, all the while “entertaining” interns in the Oval Office. It was like the roaring 20’s all over again. Mean while lone voices in the wilderness, mostly conservatives, were trying to bring attention to the important issues of the day. It was not enough to say I told you so, because this was our country and our future being handled by this pathological personality.

Hillary was right there doing her best to influence policy. She now touts that as her “experience”, but what an experience it was. She attempted to ruin our healthcare system by socializing it. The people rejected it, and therefore rejected Hillary. If we recall her experience, she was conducting secret meetings, handpicking committees and panels from her stable of lackey’s, and doing her best to dictate to the American people what was best for their health. One small sample of the “experience” she will bring back to the White House.

But there is so much more. They are one of the most “connected” families in America with some really “questionable” connections. I for one am Clintoned out. We have had enough Clinton’s, Bush’s, Kennedy’s, and Cuomo’s for ten life times. Let’s start electing the “real” people of this country. Let’s stop electing people because we recognize their name or because they have “celebrity” status. Let’s start electing real leaders. Let’s send the Clinton’s packing. Please…

Tuesday, December 11, 2007

Oprah and the political process...

Oprah is supporting Barrack Obama, and recently stumped for him in South Carolina, attracting 30,000 spectators. But were they there for political reasons or because of the ”O” factor? Politics is a funny business, and star power rarely translates into votes. People that tend to vote in primaries are a “special” breed. I am one of them. I don’t give a hoot who Oprah endorses, or Susan Sarandon, or Julia Roberts endorses, I vote for the candidate that appeals to me and me only.

Poll after poll suggests, people that are likely to vote, and even more likely to vote in a primary, are not impacted by celebrity or other politician’s endorsements. They do have an impact on the “casual” voter, but they often don’t vote, and they rarely vote in primaries. So did Oprah expose Barrack to an audience he may not have had before? Probably. But unless Oprah is expected to show up at every polling place in every state, during every primary, it probably won’t be a huge impact.

Besides, the Clinton “machine” will begin calling in the favors and dolling out the dollars to get their “supporters” to start doing the “hard” work of destroying Obama, twisting the arms of party loyalists, and calling in the “chits” they have divvied out over the years. That is what will bring in the votes. Sad but true…

Thursday, December 6, 2007

O’Reilly Uses Kid Gloves with Racist Sharpton…

Al Sharpton is a racist. He is the textbook definition of how a true racist sees the world. Al Sharpton takes every opportunity to define every issue through racial glasses. Bill O’Reilly is not stupid but he gave him a huge pass the other night on his show, and actually legitimized the views of the anti white, anti Semitic “minister”.

He had Sharpton on as his guest to discuss Don Imus’ return to radio after being run off the air by the likes of Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. Everyone knows the incident and Imus apologized a gazillion times for remarks that were inappropriate, not unusual for him, but directed toward the Rutgers’s woman’s basketball team who did not deserve the comment made about them. Imus has been an idiot in my eyes well before this incident. But what irked me was the hypocrisy and double standard when talking about Al Sharpton’s legitimacy in this debate.

Sharpton has a history of enflamed rhetoric against the police, usually white police, and he is on the record with anti white rhetoric in many of his “speeches”, and he was responsible for the racial tensions of the Tawana Brawley case. He accused 6 white men, some of them police officers with the rape of a black woman that was later revealed as a hoax.

In 1991 he incited a riot by claiming a Jewish man was responsible for killing a black kid in Harlem purposely when it was an accident. An innocent Hasidic Jew walking by the “protest” was stabbed to death because of Sharpton’s actions.

In 1995 Sharpton accused another Jewish man of raising the rent on a black tenant to “allow them to move this brother so that some white interloper can expand his business." Because of Sharpton’s rhetoric and action “ On Dec. 8, one of the protesters bursts into Freddy's, shoots four employees point-blank, then sets the store on fire. Seven employees die in the inferno.”

And the list goes on. It is long and ugly. He is to the black race what the Klu Klux Klan is to the white race, only given credibility. And that’s where my outrage comes in toward O’Reilly. O’Reilly said to Sharpton about the Imus issue” you just want to let the media know where the line of decency is with the Imus situation, that’s a legitimate message and I agree with you”. (These words are not verbatim but really, really close)

So here we have the highest profile racist, on the highest rated program on cable, being given a free pass and credibility as a spokesman for all black people. God help us is all I can say. This man is vile and poisonous to our country. He lives in the past and he thrives on division. He should not have a stage; he should be in a cell. O’Reilly blew it big time…

Wednesday, December 5, 2007

Mormons, Evangelicals, and Bigots…

There is a lot of talk about Romney’s upcoming speech, supposedly focusing on the Mormon religion he has been a member of all of his life. There is a discomfort in the Evangelical community about having a Mormon in the White House. But is that bigotry?

I was listening to Hugh Hewitt’s radio program the other day, and a caller, obviously a Christian, tried to explain to Hugh why he was uncomfortable with voting for Mitt, based on him being a practicing Mormon. Hugh called him a bigot. He likened it to not voting for Obama because he is black. Wrong, wrong, wrong, and a faulty comparison; here’s why. What religion you follow and practice is a choice of free will, and says something about your character; being black, white, Hispanic, Asian, or any race, is what you are born into and you have no choice. Bill Clinton cannot choose to be black even though he has tried.

So as a voter, if I evaluate the Mormon religion, the Muslim religion, and Scientology, and I come to the conclusion that to choose that religion is a flaw in character; that is not bigotry. It is a reflection of someone’s ability to make good judgments. It doesn’t mean I will not respect the people that choose to follow a particular religion, it only means in my judgment; that is a bad judgment. Now I like Mitt and would vote for him over any of the democratic choices in a heartbeat, but I understand where that caller, and many others like him, are coming from, and it is not bigotry.

I would vote for a black president in a minute if they had the values and character I find important in a leader. I would not vote for a Muslim or Scientologist because in my evaluation of those “religions”, they do not share the fundamental beliefs that I believe are important to the future of this country.

Religion has a limited function in our government and that’s the way it should stay, but our foundation is based on Christian and Judeo values, and they are the character of this nation. These values are what have made this country the greatest in the world. I want someone that has an understanding of that character and the history of this nation to represent me, especially our president. That is why the founders put the requirement directly into the constitution that our president must be a citizen born in the US. It doesn’t say this person must be a Christian, but it is a qualifier with the same purpose; an understanding of the values and character of this country.

Mixing religion and politics is emotional and dangerous. But evaluating a person on the religion they choose is not bigotry, it’s a strong indication of their core beliefs. If those beliefs are in conflict with yours, it is appropriate to evaluate that in your decision for choosing a candidate. I am sure many will try to claim Evangelicals as bigots in this election cycle because they are uncomfortable with people of religion, but Evangelicals as a group are not bigots, they are just evaluating the impact a candidate will have on the character of this nation. It is their choice to make. Just a thought…

Monday, December 3, 2007

Colorado Pols Make My Point About the Party System…

Colorado Pols is a great web site if you want to find out what the “insiders” of politics here in Colorado are thinking. I review it often. My name was actually mentioned there under the post; “El Paso Co. Repubs indicating Rayburn and Lamborn will petition on ballot, by-passing 5th CD caucus” (Nice to see someone remembered my name). For my many out of state viewers, I will not address the “inside” issues here, but rather the larger impact of the party selection process for candidates, and why it has “poisoned” the political process of our nation.

The parties are giving us candidates that do not reflect the need of our electorate because the process continues to be a contest in promising support to specific powerful special interest groups in the Republican Party (RP). For example; the Right to Life groups are very influential in the party, and they want a candidate like Doug Lamborn because basically that is Doug’s issue, and it guarantees their agenda moves forward. Special interests want people they can “influence and control”. The same thing goes on in the Democratic Party, these one issue groups are wielding disproportionate power over the candidate selection process within the parties. It is “poison” for the political system at large.

What we have at the national level is 535 Doug Lamborns, and the interest parties they represent, with power and influence over the national agenda that does not fit the priorities we must face as a nation. I am not saying abortion is not an important issue, it is, what I am saying is we are watching our borders being overwhelmed by people we know nothing about, entering our country illegally, a Social Security system heading for bankruptcy; fast, politicians threatening to have the government take over our healthcare decisions, and a federal budget that is so out of control most people have given up on any concept of making cuts and fighting for efficiency. The parties have “Balkanized” the issues without anyone stepping back and looking at how all these issues together impact the country as a whole. That would be called leadership.

So what we have is a “pawn”, Doug Lamborn, promoting the pro life stance without any effort to impact the larger issues that important to this nation. He is being challenged in the process by two other republicans but the focus should not be which candidate is best for the party faithful, it should be about who is the best candidate for the district and the country. The party system has lost site of the big picture. That is why I am petitioning on as an unaffiliated candidate this year.

Someone has to step in here and be a leader for the big picture. I am sure the “insiders” at the Colorado Polls will disagree, but I am betting the public at large may think differently. Just a thought, just a hope…