May 23, 2012 Political
Even though Barack Obama secretly flew to the Osama bin Laden compound, fast roped into it, fought his way to the room housing the terrorist before shooting him and then flew back to America in time to clean up and make a national speech about his heroics, he is struggling.
An inmate took a lot of votes in the West Virginia primary, a relatively unknown Democrat in Arkansas gave Obama a run for his money (of which he spent a lot) and in Kentucky “uncommitted” received a lot of votes. In other words, Obama is not showing well in some states. If his policies and his performance were actually good he would be mopping the floor with any challengers. Actually, he would not likely have any challengers in the first place.
But Obama has lost jobs, unemployment has remained high, he has added to the deficit and the debt, he has failed to close Gitmo, he passed Obamacare against the wishes of a majority of the country and he “evolved” to a position of supporting gay marriage. All these things are not sitting well and far too many Americans are out of work and the economy is in a mess.
So Obama is not doing well.
While I clearly indicated why Obama is having difficulty, many Democrats see a different reason for these problems. It is racism.
Yep, the Democrats think that Obama did poorly in these places because white Democrats in these hayseed states don’t like a black guy running the store. They don’t consider that these folks might be dissatisfied with Obama’s job performance because they think he is doing just fine so the only explanation MUST be that they are racists.
The same group that ignores the New Black Panther Party, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and all the other racists and race hustlers concludes that white Democrats in certain states are not voting for Obama because they are racists. The idea that these Democrats might be a bit more conservative and are not on board with the far left liberal platform of Obama will not cross their minds because they are unable to comprehend Democrats who do not toe the party line and follow the Messiah like good Democrats should.
Are there racists? Yes (and in both parties) but if racism was that bad Obama would never have won.
This is not new. The linked article leads one to believe that Obama lost these same areas to Hillary in the primary because they must be racist. Perhaps the Democrats in those areas actually knew Hillary Clinton had more experience and leadership potential than Obama who never held a real job. It would appear that these folks were right as Obama has been out of his league since he won in 2008.
I am tired of racism being the excuse for failure. There are plenty of reasons that Obama is doing poorly not one of which is racism.
This group only knows the blame game. Obama blames Bush and his minions blame racism.
And my friends, this is not leadership…
Never surrender, never submit.
May 9, 2012 Political
Barack Obama is not well liked in West Virginia. His policies involving the coal industry, a major source of income for West Virginia, are unfriendly to the industry and people are not happy with him.
The criminal in the White House faced a rather unique challenger in the Democrat primary in West Virginia. A Texas inmate filed the necessary paperwork to be on the ballot in that state and was Obama’s challenger.
Keith Judd, who is serving time in a Texas jail, received 40% of the votes in the primary race.
That’s right, Barack Obama received 60% of the vote and an inmate received 40%.
The inmate gave the criminal a run for his money in a race that featured the equivalent of “no vote” for the incumbent. This is a pattern that has played out in a number of states only West Virginia is the first place where he ran against an inmate.
Incidentally, the inmate did better than people in other states who are running against Obama.
Obama lost West Virginia in the 2008 election to both Hillary Clinton in the primary and John McCain in the general election so it is very unlikely that he will take the state this November particularly with his stance on coal.
But it is a very embarrassing result for the Obama campaign and the headline splashed across Drudge draws more attention to it than the campaign would want.
This is even better than the picture of the empty seats Obama spoke to earlier this week.
Never surrender, never submit.
Apr 29, 2010 Political
Three weeks ago in a Fox News interview, Charlie Crist of Florida was asked five times if he was going to run as an Independent in the Senate race. Five times Charlie Crist answered “No”. He looked into the camera and said that he was running as a Republican and that he would run as one in the Senate primary.
Today Crist is expected to announce that he will run as an Independent in the Senate race. There is a good chance that he will win because the Democrat is a weak candidate and the voters in that party might decide the only way to get someone who thinks the way they do into the Senate is to vote for Crist.
This departure, especially after five consecutive denials, should cause any Republicans who were considering voting for Crist to reevaluate their positions. He cannot be trusted. How can anyone listen to anything he says or promises and believe that he is telling them the truth?
It is time for conservatives and Republicans in Florida to move over to Marco Rubio, the only real conservative in the race, and leave Crist behind. I would also think that it would be only fair for those who donated to Crist to ask for their money back. He took it when he was running as a Republican and today he will leave the party.
A piece of advice to Mr. Rubio. Get the footage of the interview Crist gave where he said that he would not run as an Independent and make a campaign ad out of it.
Washington DC needs people who are concerned about the country and will work to make it a better place. America does not need self serving people who think only of themselves.
We have enough of them in DC already.
Never surrender, never submit.
Mar 25, 2009 Political
The RINO known as Arlen Specter is in trouble and he knows it. He narrowly won his last election bid and now he is in worse shape than he was then. Republicans are very upset with him for voting for the stimulus package. This is not the first time Specter has bucked the party and voted with the Democrats. Not that there is anything wrong with voting with the Democrats unless of course what you are voting for is in opposition to the principles of the party.
After Specter cast his vote for the stimulus the calls for getting rid of him began. Many, such as yours truly, wrote to the RNC and told them no more money until all funding for the three turncoats stops and the RNC works to replace them. I know quite a few who wrote similar letters.
Specter is now on defense and working to see how he can save his seat. He recently went to the state Republicans and tried to persuade them to change the primary rules so Independents can vote in primary elections. This was not well received:
In recent days, Specter has quietly lobbied Republicans who control the state Senate to support a proposal that would allow independents to vote in the Republican or Democratic primary. He has called individual senators and spoke before the entire caucus – on that and other subjects – earlier this week.
One senator who attended the caucus said it was tough sell.
“It was apparent that he wanted the support” of the caucus, said Sen. John H. Eichelberger, R-Blair, who supports Toomey. “I could tell from the looks in the room and the comments that were made that there wasn’t much support for it.”
Specter said Friday that the idea has merit.
“It would obviously help me, but beyond my own situation it would help the party,” he said in a telephone interview Friday. Centre Daily
Specter acts as if this is for the good of the party when everyone knows only the first half of his statement was of any concern to him. That was the part where he said “It would obviously help me.” That is all he cares about because he knows he is in trouble.
Further proof is in his recent change on Card Check. Specter had been in favor of it in the past and he indicated that he was going to vote for it this time but he has had a change of heart. He has now stated that he will not vote in favor of card check. Perhaps it is because he is in trouble and Republicans oppose card check. Specter wants to be able to pretend that he actually espouses conservative views. If he is successful in winning reelection he will be right back on the left of the aisle voting for things that Republicans oppose.
This is what he did in 2004. He was in a bad way until he received support from George Bush and Rick Santorum. Republicans all over were calling for Specter to be replaced but after those two endorsements he narrowly won. After he won he was right back with the left.
Now is the time to pick him off and replace him. I know there is a risk of a Democrat winning the general election but will that make much difference? If the Senator is going to vote with the Democrats he might as well be a Democrat. If I lived In PA and Specter were running against a Democrat I would vote for the Dem just to get rid of him.
By 2010 the Democrats will have screwed things up so badly that they will lose seats in both chambers. Might not be a lot but it will be enough in the Senate to change the balance of power and make it tough for Obama and the Democrats to run roughshod over the place. The way things look Harry Reid will probably be gone so it will be a wash if Specter’s seat is picked up by a Democrat.
In any event, Specter has to go. He knows he is in trouble and he is doing everything he can, including rigging the primary, in order to win.
He got his chance and he blew it. People wanted him gone in 2004 and he received help and won. He did not learn his lesson and now he wants to be rewarded again for screwing over his party.
This is the time to get rid of him. People of Pennsylvania, don’t let us down. Get rid of him in 2010.
We need to get rid of the other RINOs as well.
The DNC has been put in a terrible bind by the Democratic Politicians in Florida and Michigan who decided that they wanted to hold their primaries early. The DNC told these leaders that if they did so they would not be able to seat their delegates. The states moved their primaries and the candidates all agreed not to campaign in either state because of the DNC ruling. The DNC figured it could be heavy handed with its threats and that the states would back down. When the states did not back down the sanctions were imposed and it did not, at the time, seem like a big deal because Hillary Clinton was the candidate in waiting. Everyone assumed she would be the winner and that is why these states had early primaries, they wanted to have a say in the process.
The Republicans had a front runner in Rudy but took a more conservative approach and decided to strip half of the delegates from any state that went early. This approach has been seen as fair and has caused no real complaints on the Republican side. The Democrats, however, have a real mess on their hands. It did not start out this way. Everyone expected Hillary to win and she, along with the others, agreed that they would not participate in the states that went early and they were all fine with the decisions of the DNC. Then Hillary turned out not to be the winner. She was getting trounced by Obama and all of the sudden she decides that Florida and Michigan should count.
It always seemed to me that the DNC made the wrong decision from the start because they were so damned adamant about every vote counting in 2000 (even all their dead voters and people’s pets). The word disenfranchisement became part of the vocabulary of people who can’t spell DNC and it was the ugly Republicans who were keeping votes from counting. That all turned out to be a bunch of bunk but after all the caterwauling from the Democrats about every vote counting they would come up with something better than not counting every vote.
A lot of people in Florida and Michigan feel disenfranchised (now that they know what it means) and they are upset that their votes, so far do not count. The DNC feels that it has to at least give the appearance of being tough and having rules but they do not want to tick off people in two states they must have to win. What message will they send? Will they keep it so that no votes count and risk losing the states or will they allow some or all of the delegates to be seated thus telling people that while the DNC has rules it is OK to break them. Unless they stick to their original edict, one which all parties knew and agreed to, then they are waffling in favor of politics. How can we expect these people to run our country when they have no respect for rules, not even the ones they establish?
To the Democrats in Michigan and Florida, it was your party leaders who allowed this to happen. If you want to be mad be mad at them. Vote them out of office and replace them with people who can lead. As for being disenfranchised, that is what happens when you allow greed to top the rules. Your states were so greedy to make a difference that they broke the rules. Don’t worry, we in the Republican party would welcome you with open arms. We will count your votes. You Hillary supporters who think she got shafted, vote for our guy to show your party that you disapprove of their leadership. You Obama supporters who feel that he is getting screwed because he did not campaign in those states and therefore did not do well (to know him is to love him) vote for McCain just to show your party that you will not be taken for granted. We will not disenfranchise you like your party did.
The Democrats are working this out. They will bend the rules in some fashion to allow at least some of the delegates to be seated. This is contrary to the rules they established but they are trying to appease people. They are the party of appeasement and they have a candidate in the lead who will meet with unfriendly nations without precondition so that he can appease them. This is the DNC platform, appeasement and they are showing it with regard to Florida and Michigan.
They want to be everything to everybody and that is not leadership.