Big Dogs House

High Tech Lynching

Oct 31, 2011 Opinion

While the left screams about TEA Party members wanting blacks lynched (a baseless claim) the left is engaging in a high tech lynching of a black conservative. The story that Herman Cain was accused of sexual harassment and that an investigation turned up nothing has not stopped the left wing media (the Democrat wing) from lynching him. The baseless claims line up with the smear job The New York Times did in manufacturing (in 2008) the equally baseless claim that John McCain had an affair.

The left is very fast to jump on the lynch train when it comes to Herman Cain even though the allegations appear baseless. When it comes to their own they ignore the facts to provide protection.

Bill Clinton accused of rape and caught (and verified via DNA) having sex with an intern. He lied about it and the Democrats defended him during the impeachment he suffered for perjury. The left said it was a personal affair, a matter of sex between consenting adults. Nothing to see here so move along.

John Edwards is another example. He denied, denied, denied and then bam, the facts came out and not only did he have an affair while his poor wife was dying of cancer, he fathered a child. He was eventually shunned by his party but not until the evidence was so overwhelming (and sleazy) that there was no way to deny it.

Jesse Jackson, the paragon of virtue, fathered a child with someone that was not his wife. He is still regarded as a spokesperson for the disadvantaged minorities in this country (or those who have been told so often they are disadvantaged that they act like it).

We are all human beings and we all make mistakes. These men suffered their issues in public because of who they are. The untold numbers of people in the same situations are unknown to all except their family and friends because they do not live in the public’s eye.

The problem arises when allegations such as those against McCain and Herman Cain are manufactured and people do not give them the benefit of the doubt because of politics. Clinton and Edwards deny it so it must be false. Cain denies it and he is lying…

Wouldn’t it be better if the NYT did not make up the McCain story?

Wouldn’t it be better if Cain received the same consideration Clinton and Edwards did when the left kept telling us nothing was going on? It has not been shown that Cain did anything wrong. If it turns out that he did then fine, skewer him and send him on his way.

The idea that he needs to be ruined over baseless accusations is one of the things wrong in our political system.

It would have been nice though, if the MSM had spent as much time vetting Obama as it does looking to destroy Republicans.

Certainly there were a few things in Obama’s past that were liabilities. Of course they are not a problem when the MSM is burying legitimate stories.

Then again, the left only lynches blacks who have strayed away from the Democrat plantation.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Tags: cain, Clinton, demoicrats, edwards, lies, McCain, msm, Obama, scandal, sex, vetting

John McCain’s Principled Immigration Stance

May 12, 2010 Political

Of course the title of this post is sarcastic because John McCain, Mr. Straight Talk, is not talking the same straight talk he was back when immigration reform was a hot button issue. When George Bush wanted to grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens John McCain was on board with the entire process. The uproar from the citizens of this country is the only thing that kept Congress from granting amnesty to millions of law breakers.

Back then McCain did not have a care in the world and he was courting the Hispanic population (how did that work out for you John) he could claim he was a Maverick and that he did not toe the party line. Yes, that was then but now he is singing a different story. Perhaps it is because he has watched as incumbents from both parties were voted out in their primaries. More likely it is because he is in a very tight race for his Senate seat and he might just lose.

It is not hard to see that McCain is in a tight race because his whole stance on illegal immigration has changed. Back when McCain was courting the illegal vote he told an interviewer that he did not think a fence was the way to go but if they (those opposed to illegals) want a fence I’ll build the G-d damned thing. Now he is a big proponent for the fence. His latest ad has him walking along with a law enforcement officer and McCain blames illegals for all the bad things taking place (much of which is true) and then says we need to build the danged fence. The viewer is left with a warm and fuzzy feeling as the officer says you’re one of us.

McCain was not one of us when he was working very hard trying to get amnesty for the lawbreakers. McCain was not one of us when he was shunning the idea of a fence and he was not one of us when he was working with the left and all the La Raza types to reward criminals (all the time ignoring the will of a huge majority of citizens). No, McCain became one of us when he saw a challenger with a good chance of beating him. McCain is trying to be one of us now that Arizona has passed a tough law against illegal immigration, a law that about 70% of the state’s legal population approves of. John McCain can see that if 70% approve of this law then he had better try to appear anti illegal and hope that no one remembers his past position on the issue if he wants to have a chance to be reelected.

It is time for John McCain to go. In fact it is well past time for him to go. I think he would have been a better president than the guy we have now but mostly because he has leadership experience and has actually sacrificed for this country. And McCain would not have been as radical as Obama.

Having said that, there is not much difference between the two of them in most other regards.

I predict that McCain will lose the primary. The people in Arizona are going to look at the commercial and laugh at tough guy McCain and his supposed stance on illegal immigration.

RINOs are in as much trouble as the Democrats.

Source:
ABC

Never surrender, never submit.

Tags: arizona, border, ILLEGAL immigration, McCain

McCain Was Misled On TARP?

Feb 22, 2010 Political

John McCain is in a real dogfight for his Senate seat as Republican J.D. Hayworth is mounting a respectable campaign and is beating up on McCain for his RINO history. McCain feels the heat and he is resorting to the same arguments Democrats used once the war on terror became unpopular. Astute readers will remember that Democrats ran around claiming they were misled on the war (and by the man they claim is dumb).

Yes, now that McCain is being beaten up for his support of a program that many Americans did not agree with he is claiming that he was misled.

McCain has been around the block more times than the ice cream man so he is aware of what goes on in this country and this is true with TARP. He was well aware that a lot of people opposed the TARP and he has an understanding of the financial system. If he was this easily “misled” and did not understand what was going on then why was he running for the presidency?

I voted for John McCain because he has a track record of service to this country, served honorably in Vietnam, endured unimaginable torture at the hands of our enemy, and was a better choice than Obama. But he is no conservative and he has as much responsibility for the situation we are in as others in Congress.

He is now facing a person who has a chance to beat him and McCain is resorting to the old “I was misled” excuse.

He is not taking responsibility for his actions.

He needs to go this year as do a lot of people in both parties. It is time to clean out the closet and get rid of those who have lost touch with the voters and with reality.

Source:
AZCentral

Tags: Democrats, McCain, misled, Obama

Obama Wants Spending Freeze He Once Opposed

Jan 26, 2010 Political

What a difference a campaign makes. Back when Obama was a candidate he opposed the idea of a spending freeze. In the presidential debates John McCain said he would consider a spending freeze for the government except for veteran’s programs, national security and certain other vital programs. Obama said that the problem with this was that it was taking a hatchet to the budget when a scalpel was needed. Obama said that the freeze would halt vital programs that would hurt people.

Obama is expected to call for a spending freeze during tomorrow night’s State of the Union Address:

The freeze would take effect in October and limit the overall budget for agencies other than the military, veterans affairs, homeland security and certain international programs to $447 billion a year for the remainder of Obama’s first term, senior administration officials said Monday, imposing sharp limits on his ability to begin initiatives in education, the environment and other areas of domestic policy. Washington Post

When John McCain proposed this idea Obama poo pooed it but now that he finds it necessary to tact to the right he is in favor of it. The right is not happy because Obama raised the budgets of most agencies by as much as 50% so the freeze will be at a higher level and the left is upset because it does not want any freeze on its ability to spend, spend, spend.

By requesting this freeze Obama is admitting that the country cannot afford his agenda. He tried pushing it and the public became outraged at the excessive spending particularly in these hard economic times. Obama has ceded the fact that we cannot afford what he wants and has given the right ammunition. Any Democrats who oppose the freeze will be labeled as out of touch while the right points out that even Obama wants the freeze. If things in the economy get better during Obama’s time in office and he tries to push his agenda the public will quickly be reminded that he admitted we could not afford what he wants.

Considering that Obama has tripled the deficit which will hit 1.4 TRILLION dollars again this year, the freeze amounts to very little but it is nothing different than what McCain called for and Obama discounted out of hand. Obama is a rookie and this pandering to the middle class will not work. People have seen the man behind the curtain and they do not like what they have seen.

Nancy Pelosi tried to pin the deficit increase on Bush but Gateway Pundit sets the record straight:

For the record, during the Bush years, despite the 2000 Recession, the attacks on 9-11, the stock market scandals, Hurricane Katrina, and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Bush Administration was able to reduce the budget deficit from 412 billion dollars in 2004 to 162 billion dollars in 2007, a sixty percent drop. In 2004 the federal budget deficit was 412 billion dollars. In 2005 it dropped to 318 billion dollars. In 2006 the deficit dipped to 248 billion dollars. And, in 2007 it fell below 200 billion to 162 billion dollars. During the Bush years the average unemployment rate was 5.2 percent, the economy saw the strongest productivity growth in four decades and there was robust GDP growth. These were amazing accomplishments considering the unexpected challenges. You certainly didn’t read much about this in the press.

But, things changed in 2007. Democrats took over Congress, gas prices started to rise, and at the end of the year and into 2008 several financial institutions started to crumble as the housing bubble began to burst. Of course, it should be noted that President Bush publicly called for the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted. Democrats, on the other hand, blocked reform numerous times. It was later reported after the 2008 election that Bush had nothing to do with the financial crisis. Hoover Institution visiting fellow Scott S. Powell wrote in Barron’s in February of 2009 that the present crisis began in the 1970s, during the Carter administration, with passage of the Community Reinvestment Act to stem bank redlining and liberalize lending in order to extend home ownership in lower-income communities. This risk was acknowledged in the Bush administration’s first fiscal-year budget, released in April 2001. Sadly these warnings were ignored by Congress.

Obama said he would rather be a real good one term president than a mediocre two term one. Of course people who have real good first ones usually get a second one. Obama will be lucky to be as high as mediocre when his first (and only) term ends.

Barack Obama took an axe
And gave the budget 40 whacks
When the libs saw what he’d done
His term in office was just one.

Others:
Pajamas Media
Real Clear Politics (video of Obama opposing spending freeze on four different occasions)

Tags: budget freeze, debate, lie, McCain, Obama

Who Is This John McCain?

Jan 8, 2010 Political

John McCain is running for reelection in Arizona and his campaign ads are already out. I have seen the transcripts of several of them and I am having a hard time figuring out who the McCain the ads talk about is. John McCain, the Senator from Arizona, has ads telling the people of the great state of Arizona that he bumps heads everyday with Barack Obama and that if he gets a bruise or two along the way, that is fine.

“I stand in his way every day,” McCain says. “If I get a bruise or two knocking some sense into heads in Washington, so be it.”

John McCain refused to bump heads with Obama in any meaningful way in the past election. Obama won that battle and, with majorities in both chambers, he is winning most other battles as well regardless of the bruises McCain gets. Another ad discusses McCain’s time as a POW and then goes on to say:

“But perhaps no battle in our lifetime is more vital than the one John McCain fights now… a battle to save America, save our jobs…

The ad discusses McCain and slashing spending as well as bloated government programs. For the most part McCain has been true to this with regard to his own actions. I have heard that he does not put earmarks in bills (though I also heard he has put small ones in). When he was running for president he said that he would veto bills with earmarks and name names of those who inserted them.

But he votes for them. When the Republicans were in power they controlled the legislation and they loaded bills with earmarks just like the Democrats did then and both parties do now. Pork projects are not party specific. If McCain is serious about no earmarks then he should not vote for any legislation that contains earmarks no matter who inserted them.

This bluster comes when his party is not in power and when he is running for reelection and, oh by the way, has a primary challenger. John, you cannot have it both ways. You were not this blusterous when your party was in control and spending like there was no tomorrow. You were not this blusterous when you supported the Bush TARP. You might claim to bump heads with Obama but you both voted for the TARP and that was the wrong thing to do.

The folks in Arizona might believe that you are going to save America and that is for them to decide on election day but the country decided that you were not that person in 2008. While you might have been better than Obama many folks believe there is not much difference between the two of you.

Claiming to be a conservative and then working with Ted Kennedy on things like amnesty for illegals does not send a very good message. Your primary opponent is very much against immigration reform and that puts him higher on the scale than you. In the overall scheme of things you are with Obama on this issue as both of you supported the last attempt at amnesty.

John, I have no doubt you are an honorable man and I admire your service to this country. You went through things many of us could not endure but you have allowed your years in the Senate to change you into a go along to get along guy until it is inconvenient.

You were not the choice of most Republicans in the last election. You were the choice of the media and you were pushed on us. If it had not been for Sarah Palin being your running mate I believe that Obama would have nearly run the table on you. People voted for her, not for you because she holds conservative values and she walks the walk.

And keep in mind John, you were a darling of the left as well. They liked the way you worked with their politicians, the papers loved you, and you were seen as a guy who they could work with which is why they pushed you. They felt that you were the lesser of all evils if their guy lost. But look at how they threw you to the wolves during the last election. I would have thought you might have learned from this but you have this history of talking tough (that “straight talk”) about things and then compromising when it is convenient.

So I ask; Who is this John McCain that has ads in Arizona? It is not the guy who ran for the presidency a year ago.

Not even close.

And it is not the guy Arizona will get if he wins reelection.

Source:
The Swamp

Tags: ads, election, McCain, Obama, tough talk