Newt. NEWT?

When Newt Gingrich first started rising in the polls as Hermann Cain fell, I thought it was just a fluke. But now I am starting to get a little nervous about it. Does anyone else see a John McCain 2008 movement happening? The liberal media seems almost giddy about broadcasting Gingrich's success, though they haven't done that for anyone else who's done as well. I'm just waiting for the New York Times to endorse him as they did McCain in 2008 to seal the deal. Don't people realize that the left would LOVE for Obama to run against him? Two big strikes against Newt in my mind: 1) It seems unlikely he can unseat the much younger, much cooler, much more funded current president. Let's be real, Americans are not exactly deep these days. 2) If he did win, he's the left would LOVE to work with him. That is not a positive in my conservative mind. Have you noticed he only has a handful of other conservative politicians endorsing him? Too many have worked with him and don't want to do it again. Yeah...great choice.

The Tea Party has completely failed if Newt is the GOP candidate. Anti-big government? Newt has been a big part of creating the current monster. Anti flip-flopper? He makes Romney look like nothing in the over-used "flip flopping" accusations.

This article from National Review is a good summary of what is NOT being discussed about Newt Gingrich. Click here for the article.

I still can't believe that as Romney fails in gaining the conservative voters, Gingrich is succeeding. What about Ron Paul? Even Rick Santorum, people? Gingrich is very good at articulating ideas and I think he would make a fabulous Fox News contributor and/or best selling author for the remainder of his career.

Strange Campaigning

This is one of the strangest campaign commercials. I really like Hermann Cain, but he needs some better campaign people to pay attention to this stuff. Watch the entire minute and you'll see what I mean.

I really felt for Hermann Cain last night while he was getting beat up for his 9-9-9 plan. As I've looked for feedback on the debate and his rising poll numbers, however, most of what I can find is all about his race instead of his credentials. Last night, Bill O'Reilly had two liberal black guests on his show who were slamming Cain and his betrayal of blacks. He is such an impressive person, not to mention a great example of the American dream, I can't imagine why blacks would put him down.

I thought this article by Charles Hurt in the Washington Times hit close to home on why the hate for Cain. It's edgy, no doubt. I think the author is mostly correct in his analysis, but I still found it a little uncomfortable to actually read the words. The truth just sounds so bad.

A snippet or two:

Liberals tolerate blacks and they endure conservatives. But they cannot abide a successful, independent-minded black who dares to step out of line and reject the enslavement of the Plantation Party.

and,

It is because black conservatives — like all conservatives — reject the pact Democratic Party bosses have made with black voters. That pact is governed by two overriding commandments.

First, you shall always be dependent upon the government. Second, never shall you be encouraged to take risks or venture far enough away from the government to be independent and successful. You will forever be enveloped — or entangled — in a government safety net.

In return, these black voters are expected every Election Day to put aside their doubts, stifle their frustrations and forget their ongoing despairs and — like zombies — walk into the polling booth and once again pull the lever for the Democrats.

Um, yikes. Fierce but true or way off base?

Politics and Religion and Bears, oh my!

Republican primary debates have been happening like crazy this month & I'm doing my best to pay attention! It's such a strange flip flop going constantly from the insanity of the current White House to the possibilities that the current Republican candidates hold.

The last debate, Fox News/Google, was really good in a lot of ways. My favorite thing about it: most of the candidates did well except for my least favorite candidate - Rick Perry. Hermann Cain did well. Mitt Romney did well. Ron Paul did well. Michelle Bachmann was okay and at least didn't annoy me. Rick Santorum was strong when given a chance to participate. Newt Gingrich, as always, says a lot in a concise fashion that makes sense...I still oddly don't feel the need to vote for him. Jon Huntsman was less creepy and rigid than the last debate. And...oh yeah, that guy I keep forgetting about...Gary Johnson.

I know I'm a traitor of sorts for not supporting the Texas governor. And he's an Aggie at that, so of course I should be swayed...however, he's big crony government at it's finest. All the guy knows how to do is make buddies and I think we've had enough of that. If I didn't dislike him already, I really disliked his handling of this week's scandal with his Baptist pastor's bigotry. Bad move. More about that later...

Tonight I listened to the Bloomberg debate. It was only broadcast to Iowa and New Hampshire. The interesting thing was listening to the candidates question each other. Very funny, really, but some really good points were brought up in them. Gingrich, Cain, Perry, and Huntsman asked Romney questions. Bachmann gave a zinger of a question to Perry. Paul and Santorum questioned Cain. Romney asked a question of Bachmann. Once again at the end of the debate I still thought everyone looked a little stronger than last time except for Perry. He keeps saying the same things over and over again. He touts the successes of Texas so much it's getting boring. People don't realize that the Texas governor is one of the least powerful governors in the country. What do I mean? All of the success in Texas has very little to do with him.

I should just put it out there now, that I am turning into a Romney supporter. I'm still watching everyone & rooting for some favorites (as well as rooting for a few failures) but I do like Romney. I like Tim Pawlenty, and he's endorsed Romney. I really like Chris Christie and he endorsed Romney today. Is he the perfect candidate? Maybe not, but the positives for our economy and our foreign policy could be great.

Romney has some hurdles to overcome, mainly, the Massachusetts health care he worked on as governor. I think it's a hurdle because the media and his competition are politicizing it to be more controversial than it is. I mean, 5-6 years ago the health care debate was so new for most people. If American's had looked at what was done in Massachusetts back when he was doing it, they might have liked it. In 2008 when he ran for president, I thought the plan sounded great. Just being honest here. His health care bill targeted the people in their state who could afford insurance and chose to take the risk knowing full well that when they got sick the taxpayer would pick up the bill. Taxes were not raised, "death panels" were not established, and most importantly it did not establish the framework for the Massachusetts government to take over the medical industry the way that Obamacare did. Do I understand the constitutional implications of giving the government power to make me purchase something better now? Yes. Did I see it that way 4 years ago? No. Did you? I doubt it, but kudos to you if you did! We've all gotten a lot smarter in the last 4 years so why not accept the same of our candidates?

I can't let the opportunity pass me to discuss the religious nonsense that was brought up this week by Robert Jeffress, Rick Perry's pastor, as he called Mormonism a cult and non-Christian. Rick Perry refused to correct his pastor and truly seems comfortable with the introduction of this divisive language into the race. Mike Huckabee was one of my top candidates in 2008 and when he played the anti-Mormon card he lost me. It just hits me in the pit of my stomach.

If we start evaluating our political candidates on their perceived level of Christianity we all lose. Everyone who believes in protecting the Judeo-Christian principles this country was founded on absolutely must stick together. If we divide ourselves based on religion, then we loose this most precious battle. At the core of our problems today is the great debate on where our liberty comes from. Some in the world believe that liberty comes from government. I believe it comes from God and government can protect it or take it away bit by bit. Those who believe liberty comes from government are afraid of what will happen when ALL of the people who believe liberty comes from God, whatever their definition of God is, stand together to protect that liberty. This discussion simply cannot be allowed to distract conservatives from the more important matters at stake. If we all want to continue freely worshiping as we wish, we have no choice but to stand together.

Nothing to say on the bears here...just seemed like I was hitting on the two most controversial topics in the same post so I should throw something else scary in!

CNN Tea Party Debate

I'm taking just 5 minutes to blog about last night's debate. I'll see if I can stick to that...

I missed the first hour, so my analysis is not truly complete and I can't break down every candidate as before. Partly because of time, but partly because we just didn't hear much of some of them, like Hermann Cain and Rick Santorum.

For the three front runners, I think it was a positive debate for Michelle Bachmann, negative for Rick Perry, and inconsequential for Mitt Romney. Bachmann played a feisty offense, Perry was on defense for most of what I saw, and Romney seemed about the same as always. If anything, I think the night of attacks on Perry may have helped Romney.

Ron Paul made some really good comments, my favorite regarding health care. He was asked what he thinks the fate of the uninsured should be when they get sick, specifically whether society should just let them die. His answer was really perfect. Saying that the government is not responsible for giving people a free ride when they fall on bad luck is not synonymous with saying society should turn their back. He cited how in the 60s these scenarios were dealt with by family, friends, neighbors, and the churches and it kept the costs of health care from exploding as they have now. I LOVE it when someone who has the stage says something I believe to the core. If our "society" of families, friends, neighbors, and churches would start watching out for each other again they would realize how unnecessary and ineffective the government is. Even if Ron Paul does not get the nomination, I am really glad he is running. He is doing a lot of good to help concerned citizens understand the consequences of abused government power.

There. That's all I've got for today. There is another debate September 22nd. I missed last week's because I knew there was one yesterday so when I heard about last week's I thought it was a mistake. No mistake, it is debate season in full swing so tune in!

Oh - just one other comment I have to make...the crowd last night, which I think was suppose to be Tea Party members was one of the rudest I've seen in a debate. They booed EVERYONE at one point or another I think. No respect at all. Not cool. Acting like Democrats or something...

Sad, but True

I can't stand Jon Stewart's thoughts on a lot of things, but this is a good clip. It's funny, kind of sad, and mostly true. Ron Paul is the candidate most in line with the Tea Party and what may be a middle American ideological movement but even good ole' Fox News ignores him most of the time. Enjoy!

The Daily Show
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

Special thanks to Holly for sharing! :)

Iowa GOP Debate

I had the chance to watch the Iowa GOP Debate this week and even took some notes. Overall I enjoyed the debate. They attacked President Obama quite a bit, as well as each other. I felt like I came away more informed and even may have changed my opinions on a few topics after watching so it was certainly not a waste of 2 hours (or less with DVR!) Here's what I took away from each candidate, in no particular order:

Newt Gingrich - Former Speaker of the House, Twenty years in the House of Representatives, currently acts as a political commentator.

I am not a huge fan of Gingrich as a presidential candidate, but I do enjoy him as a commentator. Anytime I get a chance to listen to him talk about immigration, tax reform, or welfare reform I feel like I come away a little more informed. That's how I felt about his performance at the debate. Informative, yes. Did it make me want to vote for him? No. He was pretty snappy at poor Bret Baier, which was entertaining for sure.

Mitt Romney - Businessman and former Governor of Massachusetts.

As I was in the car on Friday, I heard someone on the radio commenting on how the other GOP candidates didn't do much to put a dent in Romney during the debate. That kinda sums up his performance though. If I were uninformed about Romney, I'm not sure that I would have been won over much by his performance. However, as the current national front runner the others left him pretty unscathed.

I didn't like how he dodged a question about a tax increase while he was Governor. Things I liked: He's all about corporate tax breaks, less regulation on business, trade policies that are pro-America, energy independence, and fiscal responsibility. He is in favor of defining marriage at the Federal level as between a man and a woman. One interesting thing he offered when questioned about further extension of unemployment benefits: He would create a personal unemployment account for each person with a limited dollar value. The individual would be responsible for managing that fund to meet their needs while they are searching for a job. I like hearing actual ideas from candidates about how to cut our welfare spending. This idea is worth discussing.

Pawlenty went after him about the Massachusetts healthcare bill he signed into law and I think he actually turned it around well stating his belief in states rights. Being a fan of states rights, it was hard to not listen and agree. If the people of Massachusetts want government healthcare, then maybe they should have it.

The above on Romney looks like a summary of one of his books, but this is really how much information he managed to give about himself in the debate. I think that was a huge positive for him.

Michelle Bachmann - Current member of the House of Representatives, representing Minnesota.

Bachmann has gained a lot of public recognition through the Tea Party and she's very good at sticking to the Tea Party rhetoric. She threw out a few punch lines, which I thought made her look silly. Bachmann is a huge champion of smaller government and I was really eager to see good things from her.

All in all, I think she did a good job and I've generally liked her as far as I've been aware of her. I also think she accomplished something important in the debate by fighting with Tim Pawlenty a bit. If the debate had been just between the two of them, I think she won. A few things I learned about her: She is also in favor of a Federal marriage amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. She also authored the Light bulb Freedom of Choice Act - OH YEAH! My ears perked up at that simply because I get a little crazy every time I go to the hardware store for light bulbs and can't find anything but corkscrews to put in my fans. Government needs to get far far away from my light bulbs. Like they have nothing better to do? I think Bachmann did really well in the debate once she warmed up.

Jon Huntsman, Jr. - Most recently, the U.S. Ambassador to China. Prior to that he was Governor of Utah.

I didn't know much about Huntsman until this debate. His resume is very impressive. I had heard he was a little liberal on a few things, and he confirmed that in the debate. While he believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman, he is for civil unions. He got some heat for being in favor of Cap and Trade as Governor of Utah as well. Aside from that, he is extremely knowledgeable on business and would certainly have great insight on America's position in the global market. He got a bonus point from me when he stated his position on No Child Left Behind (against it) and further stated that education should be a local issue. I totally agree with that. He wasn't terribly personable but I still think I learned something more and the debate was favorable for him.

Rick Santorum - Former U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania.

My notes on Santorum were slim. He doesn't get a lot of attention, even in debates, but he also seems to say the same thing over and over again. He argued a lot with the other candidates on moral issues and took Ron Paul on several times regarding Iran. Santorum clearly defined himself as a very strong moral conservative, which is probably a smart way to try to differentiate himself from the competition. Still, with the economy waving in the wind like it is he didn't offer much that made him look strong in that arena other than the general plan to cut the corporate tax rate and welfare reform. I really don't see this candidate going on.

Herman Cain - Former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, and (most well-known) CEO of Godfather's Pizza.

I LOVE this guy! He is really fun to watch in a debate. I think Cain did really well this week. He stayed pretty clear of his usual "bullet point" talking where he gives each part of his answer a number. I found that distracting in other debates, though I'm sure he was just trying to make it easy for people to follow.

The worst thing about Cain: He gets himself in trouble sometimes running his mouth. He's the easy target of all the candidates cause he's always going on the record about something controversial from Mormonism to electric fences on the border to Sharia Law. I actually agree with his stance that Sharia Law has no place mingling in our courts, but he still seemed to step right into a mess when he commented on it.

Best things about Cain: His business experience and pro-growth plans. He doesn't just state the tax cuts he believes are necessary. He insists that they must be permanent to remove the uncertainty for taxpayers and businesses. I couldn't agree more. How can anyone make plans when the current tax code is only good for a few months/years at a time?

He also wants the government to get their hands out of our education system. Education should be a local issue. Agreed.

Ron Paul - Physician and member of the House of Representatives.

I think this was one of Ron Paul's best debates. Aside from his usual anti-war rants which dance in and out of my comfort zone, he used this debate to make some of his other stances known. Regarding health care, he is in favor of making health savings accounts more available. This has been our first year of an HSA and we have really liked it. I think the personal responsibility an HSA encourages also purchases some peace of mind.

Other points I took down: He thinks marriage should be defined at the state level, which sets him apart from his peers. He also wants to audit and eventually close down the Fed. Again, on war he set himself apart from his peers by downplaying the idea that Iran is a threat to our national security. That just sounds naive to me, but maybe I'm the one who is naive.

My favorite statement from Paul tonight was that liberty is from our Creator. I completely agree with the Libertarian theories that drive Ron Paul, even though I'm not optimistic about untangling the mess that is our government now. This statement though, rings true to my core. America is in trouble right now because people have the misconception that our rights are given or granted to us by an all powerful government. God gave us liberty and all the government can do is protect it or take it away bit by bit. When we shift to believing that the government is where our liberty is derived, we've forfeited that liberty.

Tim Pawlenty - Former Governor of Minnesota.

I like T-Paw, but I don't think he did well in the debate. Michelle Bachmann looked like the winner in their scuffles and I kind of hated to see that. I prefer a candidate with experience as a governor and really thought Pawlenty would be a contender in this race. He seems to disappear a bit among the others. He is very socially conservative and has an impeccable pro-life record. His record on budgeting and debt reduction in Minnesota is also a strong plus for him. To me, he seems like the exact opposite of our current President in background and beliefs. He's just not shaking things up enough to get people's attention, but I do kinda wish people would give him a look. The guy is clean as a whistle, to a fault I guess.

If you didn't watch the debate, I would at least read about it or watch bits and pieces. If I had to rank winners, I'd say Romney was #1 mostly because he was on top before and nobody knocked him down. He also took every opportunity he was given to be informative about himself, which I think was effective. #2 Hermann Cain - he was scrappy and debated really well. I thought he got a lot of time in this debate and it was mostly positive for him. #3 Ron Paul - his war rantings still made me nervous but he delivered all of his other points really well. I think Ron Paul's ideas become more accepted and understood every time he debates.

Quotable Quote

The interesting thing about what we see happening in our country today is that it's happened before. You know, "history repeats itself" and all that good stuff. It really does. Mankind is just really not very original in our societal tendencies. We rise, we fall, we know what's right and don't do it, then we get into trouble and start doing what we know we should have been doing all along.

What's unique about our situation in America is that I'm not sure anymore that many of our citizens have much of a compass. The family is breaking down along with personal responsibility for one's actions. Nobody knows relative current events, much less historical events. I heard this quote earlier in the week and it struck me for a number of reasons:

"In the end, more than freedom, they wanted security. They wanted a comfortable life, and they lost it all – security, comfort, and freedom. When the Athenians finally wanted not to give to society but for society to give to them, when the freedom they wished for most was freedom from responsibility, then Athens ceased to be free and was never free again."

Edward Gibbon, "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire", 1776

I thought the word choice of security, comfort, and freedom was on the mark. This is what everyone seems to want today and feel that they deserve. There is a catch though. If someone else provides the security and comfort you desire, then you have forfeited some degree of freedom. As our country creeps closer to the tipping point of more people receiving than giving (remember right now 46% of Americans do NOT pay federal income taxes and more than 30% actually make money from the government from the tax system), the latter part of the quote seems fitting. Americans today do not want to "give to society" but prefer "society to give to them" and freedom from responsibility is the most en vogue trend out there.

I think these attitudes are so prevalent that it's easy for some of us who even agree with concepts of fiscal responsibility and self reliance can stand a good look in the mirror. There are times when I catch myself kicking against the very habits and decisions that would keep me free. Nobody is entitled to comfort and security. The attitude is everywhere and it's very catching!

I'm hoping this week's news, particularly in the financial markets, is very boring...

As the World Turns

It's been so long since I blogged that today as I sat down, I was very happy to see that Blogger still remembered my password. I'm not sure I do!

What a crazy, twilight zone sort of few months we have had. So amazing, at times I wanted to sit down and blog but I just didn't know how to collect my thoughts. I was completely irritated during the entire debate on the debt ceiling, but as we rounded into the last week of debate it was truly amazing.

I feel like we, the people, have been wagged. What do I mean? You know, the tail is wagging the dog. Big time. The class warfare that has been encouraged from the top is astounding. The bitter, non-negotiable words that were said right before everyone shook hands and miraculously made a deal just blew me away. I don't know what I was really expecting on August 2nd, but what happened really surprised me.

If I had much faith in the politicians involved before last week, I really lost it all after the "deal" that was made. It was no deal. Maybe some individuals in Washington won, but I'm certain the rest of us lost. Nobody really made any real cuts. The bad habits that have gotten us where we are have no reason to change. It was almost eerie the way some people were celebrating, when there was nothing to celebrate. I was especially shocked by the way the progressive left engaged in hateful rhetoric towards the Tea Party giving them "credit" for bowling over the President and demanding what they wanted in terrorist style. The Tea Party did NOT win last week. No way. But now the left media is trying to paint it that way and stir up their base. Great. I was hoping their base was about as complacent as the right was under George W. Bush.

If the Tea Party had one, some of this week's headlines might be different. The White House touted the S&P's threat to lower our credit rating to AA from AAA as a major reason to raise the debt ceiling, but wait...just today ABC reported that the federal government is expecting a downgrade in their rating due to "the political confusion surrounding the process of raising the debt ceiling and lack of confidence that the political system will be able to agree to more deficit reduction." Is this really a surprise?

Oh, and China is still planning to diversify away from the dollar. Hmmm. Shocking really. I guess the President's scare tactics worked on more than just the American people. Unforeseen side effect? I don't really think so. I know this sounds insanely negative, but I am not so sure the bad economy is a bad thing for Obama's reelection. Under President Obama, the number of people on food stamps (you know, the snazzy sounding SNAP program) has gone from 22 million to 44 million. It's 14.3% of the population. Oh wait, that was a few months ago. Now it's touted as 45.8 on Drudge Report. You think those folks would vote for a fiscal conservative? The more that our citizens must depend on the government, the better it is for President Obama. I'm not sure that the people who are rounding into their second year of unemployment benefits are in a hurry to get someone in office who things 22 months of free money is too long.

Need a positive spin? Okay, I'll give you one. My husband and I are not really Greta van Susteren fans, but we both enjoyed one particular question she raised in all of this great debt debate. Why do we care that S&P and Moody's are threatening to downgrade our credit rating? They are the ones who triggered the collapse of the housing market in 2007 when they rapidly downgraded "inflated ratings they slapped on complex mortgage-backed securities." The Senate has been investigating them for years. It's a messy loop of buddies rating their buddies up there. One article I read today (from ABC of course) cited lack of tax increases in the debt ceiling bill as a reason to downgrade us. If that's not somebody in the rating industry using their influence I don't know what is. The positive part of that? I had no idea about any of this, did you? I just loved that someone brought this little tidbit of how the world turns to my attention. It seldom happens and I always appreciate it.

I Can't Look

Do you ever feel like just putting your head in the sand instead of watching the news? If I want to see what is going on in the world lately, I find that I turn on the news or go searching the news websites and come away with a lot of nothing. Not nothing, something. Junk. The talking heads are wasting my time.

What have I learned lately? I know that we are into our third war now, even though we have a supposed anti-war president. The President acted without Congress, which has upset a lot of people. Bush acted with Congress and it upset a lot of people.

Also, we've hit the one year anniversary of ObamaCare being signed into law and corporate supporters continue to drop like flies. They say it is not affordable as we are entering the much discussed and forewarned about second dip of the "double dip recession." All of the information was available last year, why didn't they say something then?

Here's what it looks like to me: Washington still isn't behaving constitutionally or doing much of anything rational and Americans seem as fickle as ever.

Since we are so bored with all of the chaos all over the world, people are starting to talk about the 2012 run for President. Fickle, no? I confess was persuaded by the hype and "might" have ordered a "few" books by "some" of the potential "candidates." It's done already so I can't be fickle and change my mind. I'll put up some book reports when I finish some of my reading!

It's a sad state of affairs when I find that the most uplifting and motivating thing in current events is the courageous way the Japanese are facing their current plight. Our media seems so focused in finding fault or placing blame, yet that is an American message. The message I hear coming out of Japan through blogs and smaller internet news sites is one of strength and dignity. Nobody is mad that they haven't received their free stuff yet. The people seem to be unified by their disaster. They are just supporting each other and trying to get through this terrible tragedy. Really amazing.