About Me

Name:Part of the solution
Location: Oak Ridge, NC
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

We Can Dream!

Posted by Part of the solution on Thursday, April 24, 2008 9:55:24 AM
If Hillary Clinton pulls off this nomination, she will have done more to advance conservatism than any candidate since Ronald Reagan!  Michael Barone, one of the best analysts in the country, makes a Clinton victory over Obama sound plausible.  Here is the link:

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/barone/2008/4/23/pennsylvania-results-mean-clinton-could-win-the-popular-vote-and-obama-the-pledged-delegate-count.html
 
The democrats' dilemna is pretty basic.  Who can superdelegates afford to disappoint?  Do they willing give away the Presidency in a year that they should handily win it, or do they risk destroying their most loyal constituency?  Jacksonian democrats, as Barone refers to them, will simply not vote for Barrack Obama for President of the United States.  There seems no chance of Obama winning in November.  But, should the superdelegates take away his nomination, the risks to the overall democratic party are far greater. 
 
As Barone clearly points out, the liberal wing, which controls the democratic party, will not nominate a moderate for the Presidency.  It boggles the mind to realize that Hillary is the more conservative of the democratic candidates!  But, I digress.  Taking away the nomination from Obama, most likely will cause Americans that happen to be black to disengage from the political process.  They probably won't vote for a republican, but, most likely, they'll stay home.  It's clear that Americans that happen to be black are the only loyal democrat constituency left.  In 2000 and 2004 almost 90% of which voted for Gore and Kerry.  Imagine what would have happened without just 25% of that vote.  This core democrat constiuency is the only one keeping the entire party competitive.
 
Jacksonian democrats have defected to the republican side many times in national elections.  However, in local and state contests they mostly return to the democratic candidate.  After all, the candidate in their locale is most often a moderate.  In the end, democrats are stuck with Obama.  The party can give away the Presidency, while building on their majority in Congress and at the state levels.  To do otherwise, would spell the end of the democratic party.  We can dream!
 
Ann Coulter has a witty column regarding the company that Obama and Clinton keep.  I loved this line:  "On one hand, Obama pals around with terrorists. On the other hand, Hillary pals around with James Carville. Advantage: Obama."

http://www.anncoulter.com/
 
George Will has written an excellent article on the state of education in this country.  He starts by referring back to 1983.

"If an unfriendly power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war.

-- "A Nation At Risk" (1983)"

 
 
 



 
 
 
 
 
Tags: election  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Election News and Notes

Posted by Part of the solution on Monday, April 07, 2008 10:59:48 AM
Hillary's Real Problem
  
   Hillary's campaign has been caught in another lie.  This time the lie centers around a vital part of her campaign stump speech regarding nationalized health care.  In Hillary's story, a pregnant woman was denied treatment, and, as a result, both she and her baby died.  The reality is that the woman was never denied treatment.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/05/us/politics/05woman.html?_r=1&ei=5090&en=7824b4f8ea3b363d&ex=1365134400&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin

   Over the last several months there have been many theories put forth as to why Hillary Clinton is losing the democratic primary to Barrack Obama.  One that has been often overlooked is that, for the first time in Clinton's political career, she is being challenged by the main stream media.  For eight years of her husband's presidency, the Clintons got a pass from most media sources.  At that time, the Clintons were heavily favored by the media.  Today, the media favors Obama. 
   This has clearly been a problem for Hillary's campaign.  Since the Clintons had never really been vetted by the MSM, the campaign has no idea how to handle the scrutiny.  Throughout the Clinton Presidency every criticism of  the Clintons was portrayed as an attack by "the right wing conspiracy."  The media was more than happy to spread the propaganda because the Clintons were one of their own.
   During this campaign only Clinton apologists, such as Democratic strategist Tanya Acker, are willing to accept what James Taranto calls the "fake but accurate" portrayal of information. On Fox News, Ms. Acker said that even though Hillary got the details wrong, the idea is still correct. In other words, the story itself is false, but since the concept fits the generally held belief of liberals, the idea behind the story is actually true.  In the end, apologists will not be enough to save the Clintons. 
   Any chance the Obama campaign will be similarly scrutinized?  None.
 
The Subprime Crisis and the 3 Candidates.
 
George Will, a must read for conservatives, wrote an excellent comparison on the Obama, Clinton, and McCain "solutions" for Subprime mortgages. 
 
Foreign Policy Issues for the Next President
 
   Henry Kissinger wrote an outstanding piece today on the changing foreign landscape.  He puts forth the idea that the next President will have to deal with three revolutions that are happening simultaneously:  "(a) the transformation of the traditional state system of Europe; (b) the radical Islamist challenge to historic notions of sovereignty; and (c) the drift of the center of gravity of international affairs from the Atlantic to the Pacific and Indian Oceans."
   The common thread between all three revolutions is the ongoing role of the nation state.   Interesting read.
 
 
 
 
 
 
Tags: Politics  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Drilling Big Oil.....again.

Posted by Part of the solution on Saturday, April 05, 2008 2:14:42 PM
 

Here are some questions to ask yourself...When did it become evil to make money in America?  When did we decide that someone could actually make too much profit?  Why is NO ONE, even the oil executives, explaining who actually benefits from the profits?  Just once, I want to hear someone state that 41% of XOM stock is owned by pension and other retirement plans, and that, yes, you too can own XOM stock.  You can purchase XOM shares Monday through Friday between the hours of 9:30 am to 4 pm EST.

Anyway, "Big Oil" executives were once again paraded to Capitol hill this week.  Here is a lowlight...ur...highlight:  

"On April Fool's Day, the biggest joke of all is being played on American families by big oil," said Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., chairman of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming

"Last year these companies alone made over $123 billion in profit," said Markey. "What is the oil industry doing with all this profit? Unfortunately, it goes as much to financial engineering as to renewable engineering."

Markey hammered Exxon's Simon over the company's investment in renewable energy. "Why is Exxon Mobil resisting the renewable energy revolution?" asked Markey.

Now there's an idea, let's force a business to invest in its competitors' product development!!!  Think this is what Americans should be doing to business people?  Before you answer that, let's change, for the sake of argument, the industry for a moment.  Let's use the egg industry.  So you have some background, oil prices are up about 26% year to date, while egg prices are up about 43% year to date.  The largest US oil company is ExxonMobil, the largest US egg producer is Cal-Maine Foods, Inc.  CALM had profits of $35 million in 2005 and last year had profits of $119 million.  Now, let's take Rep. Markey's comments and apply them to a "Big Egg" executive....

"On April Fool's Day, the biggest joke of all is being played on American families by big egg producers," said Rep. Leonard Boswell, D-IA., chairman of the Select Committee on Livestock, Dairy and Poultry.

"Last year this company alone made over $119 million in profit," said Markey. "What is the egg producing company doing with all this profit? Unfortunately, it goes as much to financial engineering as to fruit and vegetable engineering."

Markey hammered Cal-Maine's CEO, Fred Adams over the company's investment in fruit and vegetable production. "Why is Cal-Maine Foods resisting the fruit and vegetable revolution?" asked Markey.

In other words, Mr. Egg producer you need to invest your profits in your competitor's product development.  How much of your company's hard earned profits are you giving to new fruit and vegetable research?  After all, if we think oil companies should be funding energy alternatives, then shouldn't egg producers fund egg alternatives?  Sounds pretty ridiculous doesn't it?  Wake up America!  Capitalism helped us become the wealthliest country in the history of the world.  Continuing to embrace Capitalism, not Capitolism, is the only way to retain that status. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »