The Texas 18th District Blog

Obama’s vision is far from that of Founding Fathers

by Star Parker

“Pushing back on accusations from John McCain that he’s a socialist, Barack Obama said, “I don’t know what’s next. By the end of the week, he’ll be accusing me of being a secret Communist because I shared my toys in kindergarten. I shared my peanut butter and jelly sandwich.”

Once again, we get the Obama oratorical fog. The problem isn’t what he does with his toys or sandwich, it’s what he sees as legitimate to do, under authority of government, with mine and yours.

“(McCain) has called me a socialist for wanting to roll back the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans so we can finally give tax relief to the middle class.”

Obama’s plans go much further than using the tax code to redistribute wealth.

He’s got about $700 billion in so-called refundable tax credits in mind, direct money transfers to individuals, to finance his social engineering ideas in education, child care, and environmental policy.”

Who says Jews are Smart?

By Jonathan Rosenblum

Virtually his whole public career has been closely intertwined with the unrepentant former Weatherman William Ayers.

Another member of Ayers’ Hyde Park circle was former PLO official and the current Edward Said Professor at Columbia University, Rashid Khalidi, whom Obama credits with opening his eyes to the plight of Palestinians. He has been heavily funded by the virulently anti-Israel George Soros. (link)

Obama has numerous ties to the Nation of Islam, in particular through Tony Rezko, the convicted, Syrian-born racketeer, who partly paid for Obama’s home.

Obama’s foreign policy advisors have included: Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jimmy Carter’s national security advisor and thirty-year critic of Israel; Samantha Powers, who has called for an end to aid to Israel and the introduction of American forces to protect the Palestinians; and Robert Malley, who has made a career of advancing, together with a former Arafat advisor, a revisionist account in which Israel was responsible for the breakdown of Camp David.

*** 

I always like to throw in a little humor to lighten things up.  My daughter and her husband are standing in line in New Jersey to vote right at this moment.  Starbucks is offering free coffee today.  So here is her message to me:

Starbucks is giving away free coffee today if you say you voted.  So Tim tells the people in line just now, that the coffee is free if you voted, but if you voted Democrat you have to pay tax on it!

LOL!

 What an old anecdote about Mo Udall in the hospital reveals about McCain’s character.  (and Slate has not been kind to Republicans)

A nurse entered and seemed surprised to find anyone there, and it wasn’t long before I found out why: Almost no one visits anymore. In his time, which was not very long ago, Mo Udall was one of the most-sought-after men in the Democratic Party. Yet as he dies in a veterans hospital a few miles from the Capitol, he is visited regularly only by a single old political friend, John McCain. “He’s not going to wake up this time,” McCain said.

On the way out of the parking lot, McCain recalled what it was like to be a nobody called upon by a somebody. As he did, his voice acquired the same warmth that colored Russell Feingold’s speech when he described the first call from John McCain. “When you called Feingold … ” I started to ask him. But before I could, he interrupted. “Yeah,” he says, “I thought of Mo.”

 Mark Steyn: Obama’s a better symbol than president

And why not? Obama in the White House, Obama on the dollar bill, Obama on Rushmore would symbolize the possibilities of America more than that narrow list of white-bread protestant presidents to date.

The problem is we’re not electing a symbol, a logo, a two-dimensional image. Long before he emerged on the national stage as Barack the Hope-Giver and Bringer of Change, there was a three-dimensional Barack Obama, a real man who lives in the real world. And that’s where the problem lies.

The senator and his doting Obots in the media have gone to great lengths to obscure what Barack Obama does when he’s not being a symbol: his voting record, his friends, his patrons, his life outside the soft-focus memoirs is deemed nonrelevant to the general hopey-changey vibe. But occasionally we get a glimpse. The offhand aside to Joe the Plumber about “spreading the wealth around” was revealing because it suggests a crude redistributive view of “social justice”. Yet the nimble Hope-a-Dope sidestepper brushed it aside, telling a crowd in Raleigh that next John McCain will be “accusing me of being a secret communist because I shared my toys in kindergarten.”

***

Not only has this party belittled working people in this campaign, it has also been part of tearing down two female candidates.

—

The final straw came the other week when Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher (a.k.a Joe the Plumber) asked a question about higher taxes for small businesses. Instead of celebrating his aspirations, they were mocked. He wasn’t “a real plumber,” and “They’re fighting for Joe the Hedge-Fund manager,” and the patronizing, “I’ve got nothing but love for Joe the Plumber.”

Having worked in politics, I know that absolutely none of this is on the level. This back and forth is posturing, a charade, and a political game. These lines are what I refer to as “hooker lines”—a sure thing to get applause and the press to scribble as if they’re reporting meaningful news.

As the nation slouches toward disaster, the level of political discourse is unworthy of this moment in history. We have Republicans raising Ayers and Democrats fostering ageism with “erratic” and jokes about Depends. Sexism. Racism. Ageism and maybe some Socialism have all made their ugly cameos in election 2008. It’s not inspiring. Perhaps this is why I found the initial mocking of Joe so offensive and I realized an old line applied: “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party; the Democratic Party left me.”

 ***

***

Shield laws in the United States (wikipedia)  As I mentioned months ago Wikipedia is not an academic source but a great place to get a quick summary and starting point.

A “shield law” is legislation designed to provide a news reporter with the right to refuse to testify as to information and/or sources of information obtained during the newsgathering and dissemination process.

There is no federal shield law (although a limited one has been passed by the House and awaits a Senate vote as of July 2008), and state shield laws vary in scope, as further discussed in this article. In general, however, a shield law aims to provide the classic protection of, “a reporter cannot be forced to reveal his or her source” law.

Veteran reporter Judith Miller joins Fox News

NEW YORK (Hollywood Reporter) – Former New York Times reporter Judith Miller, who spent 85 days in jail for contempt of court during the Valerie Plame affair, has joined the Fox News Channel as a contributor, the network said Monday.

Miller will be an analyst at Fox News on security and international affairs and write for FoxNews.com.

Before joining Fox News Channel, Miller was a New York Times reporter for 25 years. She was jailed in 2005 when she declined to reveal the name of a confidential source to a federal grand jury investigating Plame’s unmasking as a CIA operative.

Miller won the 2002 Pulitzer Prize for Explanatory Reporting about terrorism and has written about that topic and many others. She also is an adjunct at the Manhattan Institute.

 “a special prosecutor’s zeal to get a conviction in a case involving a non-crime”

More recently, Colin Powell sat silent while two lives were ruined in a special prosecutor’s zeal to get a conviction in a case involving a non-crime: telling columnist Robert Novak that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA.

The full story is told in Novak’s book, “The Prince of Darkness.” What is relevant here is that a New York Times reporter went to jail for refusing to tell who had revealed Ms. Plame’s occupation to her, and White House aide Scooter Libby was convicted of perjury because his memory of what he said did not match the memories of some reporters– whose memories did not match each other’s.

All the while Colin Powell knew that his own subordinate, Richard Armitage, was the one who had told Robert Novak that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA. Neither Armitage nor anybody else was convicted for that because there was no crime to convict them of.

The only crimes were those created in the course of the investigation, unless the silence of Richard Armitage and Colin Powell are regarded as moral crimes.

I think a grave injustice was done to a number of people in the instances cited above.  On the other hand this recent Rashid Khalidi story concerning the LA Times is a different aspect of the issue.  An unidentified source says he videotaped a dinner at which politically sensitive issues were discussed.  Khalidi and Obama were at the dinner.  The source gave a tape to the L A Times with the condition that they not release it.  They say they released a transcript.  One issue is how do we know the integrity of the transcript.  There’s been a lot of news articles about that this week see  here In Camera.

Not releasing the tape has created a lot of negative speculation that what is on the tape could be harmful to Obama.  Apparently the transcript wasn’t.  I haven’t read it.  So if a reporter doesn’t disclose sources it leads to speculation about the credibility of the reporter and the sources.  If a reporter discloses sources, it puts the reporter out of business. 

My experience as an auditor was if someone told me where to look for a problem that they new existed I kept their identity secret from everyone.  I then had a subordinate audit or I personally audited the information and if I found problems I reported them as routine audit findings.  If a reporter invents issues and reports them as actual that too is harmful.

The Federal Government has whistleblower protection laws that are to protect someone who reports a contractor or employee ripping off the government.  The whistleblower gets a financial reward and usually suffers job loss and a lot of harassment.  Look here:

Save Talk Radio

“Congress is just 23 signatures away from a vote that could finally end the archaic Fairness Doctrine and create a permanent free-market system for talk radio. Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) continues to urge congress members to sign the Broadcaster Freedom Act discharge petition. The petition will “prevent the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from repromulgating the fairness doctrine,” originally initiated in the 1930s under Franklin Roosevelt.

During its glory days, the Fairness Doctrine was never applied to ensure conservatives’ air time. In fact, conservative voices were shunned while liberal bias seemed to mysteriously remain under the radar of the FCC. The Fairness Doctrine’s attempt at “fairness” created the most imbalanced media atmosphere possible. Or, some journalists simply avoided any coverage of controversial issues in order to avoid the nuisance of finding contrasting viewpoints on every issue raised in a story.”

As mentioned in the quote above the act dates back to the 1930’s.  Except for the Eisenhower anomaly, the democrats controlled congress for about 70 of those years.  Republicans controlled congress for a couple years during the Eisenhower administration, they got control again in 1994 after Clinton reneged on his campaign promise to not raise taxes.  The republicans lost control in 2006 because they spent like democrats.

So, setting aside the dozen or so years since the 1930’s that the republicans controlled congress let’s talk about the others.  The fairness doctrine allowed a democrat to get air time everytime a republican made a speech or ran an ad.  It annoyed me most of those years because I didn’t care about politics but wanted to watch my TV shows and relax to rebuild my energy for another work day.  Instead of a short speech or in the case of the State of the Union I got 2 lengthy speeches.  Also it gave the democrats the last word.

My recollection is that the followup speeches were free air time for the democrats.  Regardless that airtime kept them in front of the people not to get their message out but to attempt to poke holes in the preceding speech.

PENCE UNVEILS BILL TO PROHIBIT RETURN OF “FAIRNESS DOCTRINE” FOR TALK RADIO (link to article)
“There is Nothing Fair about the Fairness Doctrine”

“”The American people love a fair fight, especially where the issues of the day are debated. In a free market, fairness should be determined based upon equal opportunity, not equal results. As some voices are calling for Congress to enforce their idea of ‘fairness’ upon the American people, it would be good for us to proceed with caution whenever some would achieve their ‘fairness’ by limiting the freedom of others.

“Beginning in 1949, the Federal Communications Commission and its precursor developed and enforced the so-called Fairness Doctrine. The Fairness Doctrine required broadcasters to present controversial issues in a fair and balanced manner. However, because of the lack of clarity in the Commission’s ruling, broadcasters opted to offer non-controversial programming in lieu of hours of paperwork or countless legal fees.”

I recall a fictional TV series (The Senator Series) that ran on Sunday evenings back around 1970.  Hal Holbrook played a senior senator chairing a committee. It peaked my interest because it was so well done.  However, it pointed out some things congress didn’t like so the TV station was forced to kill the show.  It made me angry and it said that what Holbrook had been communicating was true.

The only TV station I watch for news is Fox News Channel.  My wife likes the local news so I get some exposure to other than Fox but the others don’t go into the same depth.  I pick up a lot of information not from Hannity or O’Reilly but from their guests.  Hannity, O’Reilly, Fox and Friends and the others that are on all day make available both sides of each story and present experts.  Or at least people who have above average information and understanding.  Karl Rove and Dick Morris have impressed me so much not only with what they say but how they say it I think they are truly professional.

Now radio: without Rush or Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham I would have no reason to listen to radio.  I found them before I retired and was a commuter.  I used to listen to NPR, their music was good but when they presented a political view on the taxpayers dollar I felt cheated.  I listened to NPR for many years before the alternatives were available.  Rush gave me insight and analysis that contradicted NPR but agreed with opinions I had formed over my lifetime.  He had better insight and more details as well.  Driving to work in the morning the selection available was limited so I listened to Laura Schlessinger.  She performs a necessary service to her listeners.

Talk radio fills a very necessary role.  The liberals have Air America (if its still on), NPR (taxpayer subsidized) and whatever else is available in other parts of the country.

Congress knows that if you are only exposed to the liberal point of view over and over you are possibly going to think their view is wonderful.  For sure it works for those who do not get information from more than one source.  The typical TV anchor doesn’t understand what he or she is reading on the air or is restricted by the TV station editors.  Rush, Hannity, Laura Ingraham et al can do the background research, take as much time as they want to explain an event and then have callers from all points of view critique them.  In my experience as long as a caller is polite, germaine to the current topic they let you listen to the caller personally state his/her question.  If these talk show hosts should be propagandists or just plain inaccurate too often they would lose my interest and probably other listeners as well (and airtime ad buyers). 

I became interested in politics in the early 1980’s because of a lobbying effort my employer was involved in.  We were writing letters to representatives and senators to save our industry.  The whole concept woke me up.  I think I also had more time available in the evenings to read and follow political events.  Prior to that I was in the military, then college, then I worked lots of overtime building my career.  As I mentioned  Hal Holbrook also got my attention.  Killing talk radio would be totalitarian and a major disservice to the American people.  It would once again lead to decade after decade of democrat control of both houses of congress.

Ann Coulter recently remarked about an Obama statement “If it weren’t for talk radio I would be 3 points higher in the polls.”  Her comment was that if it wasn’t for CNN, ABC, MSNBC, CBS, etc. he would be 10 points behind.  I agree with her.

In 1993 I learned about the existence of Rush.  In one of his broadcasts just around the time I started listening to him he talked about “Bias Jobs”.  He explained that the Bureau of Labor Statistics has an estimated number that they use to take seasonal swings out of quarter to quarter comparisons.  It would be like adding some jobs to the employed figures to take into account hurricanes Ike and Katrina.  Employment had to decrease since workplaces were destroyed.  If you wanted to compare quarter to quarter figures to judge national economic policies you have to make an adjustment.  Rush’s point at the time was that the BLS was inflating bias jobs so that when subtracted from the total workforce, unemployed was lower than reality.   When you look at the link I provided earlier this week to the BLS employment charts you see 4% around 1993, 1994 that may not be accurate.  Another thing I learned from Rush was the significance of the minimum wage.  Congress doesn’t really get excited about burger flippers and shelve stockers.  These are usually recent high school graduates building a work history or earning money to assist with college expenses.  The real significance of minimum wage is that union contracts are based on it.  A journeyman plumber may be paid by a formula that is 10 times the minimum wage. So when the burger flipper gets a $.50 an hour increase, the union plumber gets a $5.00 an hour increase.  The percent coming out of the union members paycheck for union benefits and dues goes up enough to make a difference.

A little while ago this morning I heard a guest on Fox News say that as a result of Republican policies during the great depression Roosevelt stayed in office for a decade and a half.  Maybe as a result of the Fairness doctrine Roosevelt stayed in office.  Radio and newspapers were the only means of communication and in early 1930’s average working people probably couldn’t afford either of them.  I read economists on the Ludwig Von Mises website tear apart the Roosevelt policies of the 1930’s (they are Libertarian but reading them made me braoden my perspective).  In summary I think killing talk radio would be morally criminal and deprive Americans of knowledge they wouldn’t get elsewhere.

Since I was so long winded in this post, I’ll address your other concerns in another post.

Thomas Sowell 

Let us hope that today’s Israeli government understands that issue the same way as regards Iran, since ours may not.

Despite the media hype that we need to rehabilitate ourselves in the eyes of the world, the United States of America remains the number one destination of immigrants from around the world, some of whom take desperate chances with their lives to get here, whether across the waters of the Caribbean or by crossing our dangerous southwest desert.

Mychal Massie

“Is freedom of speech in Obama’s lexicon?
Tuesday October 28, 2008 by Mychal Massie — Obama has staked his presidential aspirations on “change” and being the advocate for the middle class, i.e., the people. Yet it appears that one of the primary changes he will exact is to strip the “people” of their constitutional right to freedom of speech by ensuring that they pay a painful pr …”

Obama just said “we are 4 days away...” from election day.  Finally, a truthful utterance!

Heritage Foundation Requests Obama to Pull False Ad

Plundering the Plumber’s Records

If Joe the Plumber were Jawad the Suspected Terrorist, civil liberties activists would stampede the halls of Congress on his behalf. Liberal columnists would hyperventilate over the outrageous invasions of his privacy by Ohio state and local employees. The ACLU would demand the Big Brother snoopers’ heads. And Democratic leaders would convene immediate hearings and parade him around the Beltway as the new poster boy/victim of unlawful domestic spying.

But because peaceful American citizen Joe Wurzelbacher is an outspoken enemy of socialism, rather than an enemy of America, the defenders of privacy have responded to his plight with an impenetrable cone of silence.

I enjoyed Ken’s post; “Best Political Video of the Year”

You just have to love Black Republicans that have the cohunes to speak their mind, especially when they are hailing from the dregs of Democrat Hell as these guys do from California. All my “kudos” go for the folks at machosauceproduction.

Those guys are “Pace-Setters” for American Black Republicans. Can we set up a new blog category; “Black Republicans” to try and help promote their voice here? Maybe we can encourage Texas Black Republicans to speak out like California Black Republicans are.

I looked into Macho Sauce Production and found another video I want to present here. It’s simple and straight to the point describing why they chose to be Republican:

These guys are straight out and right to the point. You have to love them for who they are. Let’s promote their endeavors here.

Engineer2

This video has more to say than all political candidates have said in the sum total of their campaign appearances & debates.  Its a must watch this campaign year, one of the best I’ve seen. It’s refreshing to see the truth pick it’s head up over the millions of dollars of political rhetoritic we are being inundated with this election year, especially when the Democrats are hammering Fox Network for being “Right” while CNN is even further “Left”.

Thank you machosauceproduction  for taking the time to present sanity in these uncertain times. This is one of the best and most honest political videos I have seen this year:

Checking Site stats, I found a link to this video… I believe author Exyankee probably posted a link to it in one of his blogs.

Thanks for having the insight to bring this video to the forefront here!

He should be out campaigning with Joe the Plumber and Sarah Palin!

Ken 

This weekend I was e-mailed a disturbing e-mail by one of the Faulk For Congress Campaign workers and was asked to place it on this blog. I have copied it below just as I received it: 

October 24, 2008
Approximately 3:00 pm

Today, my daughter and I were campaigning outside the Metropolitan Multi-Service Center at 1475 West Gray. We had an unfortunate experience with Ms. Peggy Turner, a city employee of the center as a recreational therapist. She had taken down some of the John Faulk signs, and was walking towards the parking lot. I asked her why she was taking the signs, and she said that these signs are too large, they cannot be placed here. I said that is fine, we will take them down, but please give them back to me. I said we would place these signs upside down on the ground, so no one can see them. Peggy stated to the effect that it was not good enough; you must take them off premises.

Peggy Turner taking Faulk For Congress Campaign Signs:

I called Mr. Faulk, and a similar event happened this past Monday, and at that time, Mr. Faulk asked Ms. Tuner to call for a police officer to issue a municipal citation. An HPD talked with Mr. Faulk and explained that he would contact a City of Houston prosecutor to determine if there was a size limit for political signs; therefore, the signs should not be taken down. The HPD sergeant informed Mr. Faulk that in fact there was no limit or restrictions on political signs. Ms. Turner knew that the signs were acceptable, and they should NOT BE removed. However, she took it upon herself to take down John Faulk signs, being deceitful giving me information she knew was false and committing theft of personal property in excess of $75.

John Faulk discusses illegal sign removal with Houston Police:

Obviously, there are concerns on several levels:

• Why is a City of Houston employee, who is paid by taxpayer dollars, taking down political signs while she is on the job even after she was told not to? Believe me, she was NOT providing any recreational therapy to anyone in my view for the three hours at the poll.
• Why did she knowingly lie to me?
• Why is a recreational therapist and not an election official regulating political signs?
• Why when given information previously that it is permitted to have any size political signs in front of polling places, did she take it upon self to AGAIN violate the rule?
• Why was she only concerned about John Faulk?s sign and not any of the other candidates?

Is this what we have to look forward to with a Democratic political machine???

God Help us ALL.

Concerned American for Preservation of Freedom and Liberty

Flying a Flag Upside-Down is an International Symbol of Distress – Is America That Broken?

This weekend I watched yet another Hollywood Oscar nominated statement movie starring Tommy Lee Jones, entitled; “In the Valley of Elah”. It was a good thought provoking movie.

Not having ever served in the military or being a mariner, I didn’t realize that flying a flag upside-down was an international symbol of distress:

It seems like we are losing more focus on who we are and what we want and need every day. 

I hope this year that Americans understand before they go to the polls and elect a (One-Party) Democrat President, Senate and House (Congress) that, that choice will clear the way for a Socialist encroachment of Government beyond belief.

All Americans want and need change. But we need to maintain some “checks & balances” to keep socialist policy and agendas from sailing through clear and unchecked.

In the Great Depression we were cast into a hell that took a long time to recover from by similar policies being advocated by the Democrat party right now, every day in the news.

Flying the American flag upside-down doesn’t show disrespect. It’s simply an International Symbol of Distress.

If we elect a One-Party Government either Democrat or Republican, healthy “Checks & Balances” will be challenged in a way that could charge the American public with a great deal of malcontent, even more than we have now.

Maybe America is broken. Maybe we are broken by an antiquated 2-party system that is almost assured to bring us more of the same, no matter who we elect this year.

If we go to the polls as uneducated Americans and elect a Democrat President and a Democrat Congress (House and Senate), we will shoot ourselves in the foot and I would expect to see quite a few flags flying upside-down just after the elections.

If we ever stupidly elect a one-party government, especially Democrats pressing Socialist agendas… we probably deserve just what we’ll get:

• Bloated Government
• Higher Taxes
• Loss of Personal Choice
• Higher Unemployment
• Loss of Medical Insurance Choices
• Extended Government Interference
• Personal Invasion in our lives

It won’t be pretty! I don’t particularly like to see the American flag flying upside-down and neither will you. If you feel distressed now, wait till you see what happens if you make the wrong “change” choices at the voting booth this year.

Yes America is broken, but we were broken by both parties, including the Democrats who have led both “Houses of Congress” (Senate & House) for 2 years without commanding governance… and the news media is guilty of helping them wash their hands of guilt. It’s time to replace the guilty parties, including Sheila Jackson Lee.

If Americans go to the polls and elect a full Democrat Government we will take one giant step toward Socialism, which will cause great distress and malcontent for many.

If that happens, take note that Americans who decide to fly their flags upside-down aren’t being disrespectful, they are simply making a statement against those that turned America upside-down, disregarding the basic freedoms we have always stood for.

Again and again Obama has made reference to a new Socialistic American Health System based on “Preventitive Medicine”. I don’t know about you, but my wife and I don’t need or want to recieve letters or e-mails from our government mandating proctologist or gynecologist visits! Do we really want to go there?

This whole social medicine issue is so absurd, it’s obscene. You won’t believe the government’s incursion into your personal lives if and when we go there! I really don’t think any of us need them “to ram it up any further” than they already have with this economic bail out package stuffed with abject disrespect for the American taxpayer. Do you really want that kind of governance over your health system too?

I sincerely hope all American voters realize that this is probably the most important vote they will ever cast in their lifetime and that we all go to the polls educated and ready to vote for individual candidates at all levels. This isn’t a year where any of us can go into the voting booth and just jerk a single party lever and walk out with a good conscience that we’ve served our fellow Americans, family, friends or ourselves as we should have.

Engineer2

Let’s work together to put John Faulk in office. We need to elect members of Congress with strong financial backgrounds.

Walter Williams on Political Monopoly

Star Parker on CEOs

Supreme Court Upholds Violation of Federal Law in Ohio 

Our Supreme court may be in deep trouble.  They acknowledged that the Ohio Secretary of State is guilty of complicity in committing voter fraud.  They concluded though that the Ohio Republican Party had no legal standing to sue or get an injunction.  Under the legal concept of misprision though they had better report their knowledge of the crime or they face jail.  Since they agreed that it was a crime they have a legal obligation to report it to prosecutors.

United States federal law

“Misprision of felony” is still an offense under United States federal law after being codified in 1909 under 18 U.S.C. § 4:

Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Misprision

First Amendment 

““I am convinced that if there were no Fox News, I might be two or three points higher in the polls,” he said” He being Obama.

“By the way, what Obama fails to mention is that without NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, Time, Newsweek, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Boston Globe, and the Los Angeles Times doing his cheerleading every day, John McCain would be up by 10 points.”

Read Monica Crowley here

It’s up to us to elect members of Congress who will represent us. Let’s work together to put John Faulk in office. We need to elect members of Congress with strong financial backgrounds.

Below is a table with a comparison of views on issues by the candidates; John Faulk and Sheila Jackson Lee in their race for the Texas 18 Congressional seat.

Candidate views represented above are presented true and accurately as best I know. Make sure and bookmark this page because this table may change as we wind down to election day, most everyone seems to be “flip-flopping” this year, except John.

Ken

You can help us send John Faulk to Congress today.

A Great Summation of America Today

In his article, Professor Mike Adams refers to Bernie Goldberg’s book; “100 People Who Are Screwing Up America”. He is not picking on any minority but all minorities. It seems today everyone is in a minority group, the elderly, the not quite elderly (over 40), the jews, the blacks, the hispanics, the illegal Mexicans, the Asians, the disabled or physically challenged, the less fortunate by birth, and on and on:

Without question, the best of those essays is one called;

“I’m offended, therefore I am.”

I agree with Goldberg’s suggestion that our new national motto should be “What’s in it for me?” I also like that he recognizes that self-pity is at the core of identity politics, which has produced a nation in which the majority of Americans now proudly boast that they are in some way “disadvantaged.” He also recognizes that this is a transparent effort to compete for advantages unavailable to the minority of Americans who are “advantaged.”

Fortunately not only in their first 100 hours but in the entire 2 year session so far congress hasn’t accomplished much more than to officially honor some outstanding individuals.

Liberals: Governing from the Middle–of Nowhere

Promising a more “moderate” approach, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) are continuing to spin the Democrats’ extreme social makeover. Today’s edition of The New York Times quotes several liberals who insist that while in power, their party will work to find common ground on issues as divisive as abortion and homosexuality. Judging by their first “100 Hours,” the only thing liberals have managed to compromise on is principle. Thus far, they have passed or introduced bills that would expand funds for research that destroys human embryos, stifle grassroots organizations through lobbying reform, and police individuals’ thoughts in revised “hate crimes” legislation. If this is what it means to govern from the middle, then I would hate to see them lead from the Left.

The common goal of the new Congress is not compromise, but a concentrated effort to silence conservatives. In the Senate, Democrats pounced on lobbying reform, which, if not amended, would subject groups like FRC (Family Research Council) to reporting requirements that would limit the timeliness of our efforts to educate voters.

On January 5, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) introduced a “hate crimes” bill that would create additional penalties for felonies committed because of the victims’ “perceived or actual” identity, such as sexual orientation, gender, or disability. Instead of punishing people solely for their actions, law enforcers would be asked to determine any bias the offender had toward “a protected class” before the crime occurred. The bill also leaves the country vulnerable to the government’s definition of “hate,” which is bound to be both vague and whatever is in vogue. Contrary to what liberals claim, the result wouldn’t end discrimination or promote tolerance but suffocate the right of free speech, a seemingly common goal of the new leadership.

Over the weekend, the National Conference for Media Reform talked openly about reviving the failed “Fairness Doctrine,” which would require broadcasters to present controversial topics in a “balanced and honest” manner. It was a policy first introduced in 1949 and overturned in 1987 because it was too difficult to enforce. These days, with the proliferation of the internet and bloggers, it is impossible to monopolize the media with any one viewpoint. Resurrecting the Fairness Doctrine would only give the FCC license to intimidate and silence political opposition–a trend the Democrats seem all too willing to accommodate.

Is it “Fairness” when a TV show host attracts sponsor to pay for advertising time because they like the shows format, topics and guests, then without invitation someone with an opposing opinion is required to be given free airtime. What is fair about that. Let the holder of the differing opinion buy airtime or find a sponsor.