Sunday, September 28, 2008
"Representative John LaBruzzo of Metairie, [Louisianna]. wants to pay poor people to get sterilized and reward rich people for having children. ...He has come up with the idea of voluntary sterilization for the poor. As a reward, they would get $1,000 from the state government. "If we don't break generational welfare trend, lot of people feel taken advantage of, then another problem on our hands. LaBruzzo is also thinking about proposing tax incentives for people not on welfare to encourage them to have children."
Thankfully, New Orleans' Archbishop Alfred Hughes is addressing the issue as reported by USA Today:
"...Archbishop Alfred Hughes has denounced a lawmaker's proposal to pay poor people to undergo sterilization as "an egregious affront to those targeted and blatantly anti-life." "Our lawmakers would do better to focus on policies that promote education and achievement to counteract poverty and the bigotry of low expectations, " Hughes said in a statement Thursday."
The only difference between this Congressmen's line of thought and the forced sterilizations on the poor going on in China is the check. This makes us true American Capitalists.
Saturday, September 27, 2008
Very regrettably, I learned she had an abortion in her past, before I ever knew her. Because of this and how she claimed this ‘procedure’ saved her life, she professed to be a true supporter of abortion rights.
One day, in between classes, she spoke of it in detail to me. Now her opening up to me was not her describing the process of her decision, or the sequences or procedures of that day, it was the specific details of what her child would look like if she were alive that day. She did not know the sex of the baby, but was absolutely convinced it was a little girl. She described every aspect of the description of this little girl to me with such precision, from the spec of green in her eyes, the salty-blonde hair and even the color of the pigtails in her hair. It was obvious that she thought about her child a lot. Her public words told me she supported her decision to have an abortion, but her private words and description told me she regretted it ever since.
She was another victim of Planned Parenthood. An organization that takes women in the front door with seeming compassion and the professional framing of a medical practice, rapes them of their motherhood, collects their payment, then sends them out the backdoor with an emotional scar and endless guilt that will follow them throughout the rest of their life.
Mothers who can not swim will jump in water over their heads to save their children. The maternal instinct is the most predominant and overriding instinct that women have. Abortion is a direct attack at this overwhelming instinct and slices the heart of this instinct out from their soul leaving a non-healing scar. I believe all women whom have an abortion will eventually, in the deepest recesses of their heart, or at least in their subconscious, regret the reality of their act.
I thought about my college friend when I read the following poem written by Ashli at The Sicle Cell blog. She regrets and lives with daily her decision to have an abortion, and wrote this poem to her child on what would be her child’s 11th birthday. She named her baby Tennessee:
"Tennessee, I'm thinking of you on your due date. You would be 11 this year. A little girl at church is 11 today. I watch her grow on Sundays and think of you. Today, in spite of the sadness, in spite of the shame, which there always is, because THAT'S abortion for you--today I thought of the preciousness of your life and the reality of your being. I thought of the beauty of you, and I was and am thankful for the life you were given. I am thankful for the loveliness of your being, which has stayed with me like the sweet lingering scent of a baby's downy-soft nape.
Your name and your life are known. The truth of your death, revealed in all its gory. Death where life was...life where death would have been (your book)...that is the bittersweet song of you.
This year, through the cascade of tears, I celebrate you. For everything you were, everything you could have been, everything you are. Stay with me. Always stay. Be mine anyway; let me love you forever."
I would highly recommend a Rachel’s Vineyard weekend for those women who have horrible scars from their decision to have an abortion. In this weekend, mothers begin the grieving and healing process. They discuss their decision with the support of woman like themselves who know what they are experiencing. They get to name their child, grieve properly and confession is offered for those whom wish to bring themselves to God’s mercy, which we all need.
VCR hero, Fr. Frank Pavone is the spiritual director of this cause and states on their website:
"You have found a safe place to come with your pain -- a pain that you often feel will never go away. Here at Rachel's Vineyard, you will meet people who understand, because they are in the same position that you are. You will meet people who care about you and about the child (or children) you have lost. You will meet people who know the way of healing, and are ready to welcome you into that journey that leads to mercy and peace."
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
This opens up the question that Barack Obama may not be forthright in regard to his beliefs, or at least his tendencies. You couple this with his other misstatement of "my Muslim faith," on This Week with George Stephanopoulos, and more questions could follow.
Please, let me be absolutely clear on this. There is nothing wrong with a person of the Muslim faith, or any other faith for that matter, running for the Presidency or any other political office in America. Their religion should be a non-determining factor. The problem occurs if someone is not being forthright about their beliefs since their beliefs are at the center of their core as a person. And if religious beliefs can be fudged by a person for political expediency, than anything can.
First, for example, the recent Rassmussen poll last week had the Presidential race dead even. McCain and Obama each had 48% of the vote.
Now, let’s go to the small print of this poll, its methodology. Rasmussen had 3,000 respondents. Each of these respondents were "likely voters", meaning they intended to vote in the upcoming election.
Rassmussen called these respondents between 5-9PM on week nights, from 11AM-6PM on Saturday and 1PM -9PM on Sunday.
Now as a point of consideration for all polls, during the week most of my die-hard Republican friends get home between 6-8PM. They work in the private sector. So if we take their middle time in coming home on the weeknights (7PM), they would not be available for 50% of the time when polls normally call during the week.
On the other hand, core supporters of the Democratic Party base, such as teachers, retirees and union workers have a higher probability to be home at these times.
In addition, I believe a person is more likely to partake in a 15 minute automated phone call when you get home at 4:30PM in the afternoon, then if you got home at 7PM at night. So there is some inherent bias in these times to begin with.
Now lets look at our second poll to compare. CNN this week has Obama up by 4 points. Four points ahead of the Rassmussen poll which was taken the same time. What gives?
Here's what gives. When diving into this poll's methodology it states that 1,020 respondents were polled, but 30% of them were not "likely voters" or not even registered to vote.
Compiling "registered voters" instead of "likely voters" always benefits the Democratic Party numbers returned and shades the results towards the Democratic candidate. Democratic voters are more likely to be registered and not show up to the polls than Republicans. That is why the most sophisticated polls use "likely voters."
So in conclusion, the Rassmussen poll had close to 3 times the sampling and 30% more "likely voters" incorporated in it. It is my opinion that the Rassmussen poll would be the one out of these two polls that I would look to.
In keeping how methodologies can screw up results, today the Washington Post came out with a poll that had Obama 9 points ahead. Bill McInturff, a pollster for the McCain campaign, points out that Democrats had a 16 point higher representation in the poll than Republicans, meaning it was 51/36% Democrats to Republicans (trust me on the numbers) when including which way the undecided voters in the poll leaned as well. This means they polled close to 1.5 Democrats for every Republican. Are they kidding? So goes the Washington Post.
In addition, 28% of the Post's respondents, more than 1 out of 4, of those polled were not "likely voters." Garbage In.... Garbage Out. No wonder the ridiculous result.
Now, I would not be surprised to see a 2-3 point swing to Obama with last week's financial crisis. But 9 points?
Com'on guys, polls are your livelihood and your profession. At least try to make it a somewhat fair.
As Mark Twain popularized the saying in America, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
"[A young Karol] Wojtyla asked Padre Pio which of his wounds caused the greatest suffering. ...The priest expected Padre Pio to say it was his chest wound, but instead the Padre replied, "It is my shoulder wound, which no one knows about and has never been cured or treated."
...Centuries earlier, Our Lord himself had revealed to St. Bernard of Clairvaux in a vision, that his shoulder wound from carrying the heavy wooden cross caused him his greatest suffering, and that the cross tore into his flesh right up to the shoulder bone.
At one time, Padre had confided to ...Brother Modestino Fucci... that his greatest pains occurred when he changed his undershirt. ... [O]n February 4, 1971, [Brother] Modestino was assigned the task of taking an inventory of all the items in the deceased Padre’s cell in the friary... he discovered that one of Padre Pio’s undershirts bore a circle of bloodstains in the area of the right shoulder.
On that very evening of February 4, 1971, Brother Modestino asked Padre Pio in prayer to enlighten him about the meaning of the bloodstained undershirt. ... [Modestino awoke] at 1:00 AM with a terrible, excruciating pain in his shoulder, as if he had been sliced with a knife up to the shoulder bone. He felt that he would die from the pain if it continued, but it lasted only a short time. Then the room became filled with the aroma of a heavenly perfume of flowers – the sign of Padre Pio’s spiritual presence – and he heard a voice saying ..."This is what I had to suffer!"
There are always lessons to learn from the saints. St. Pio concealed his worse suffering from being acknowledge by others, offering the suffering up in silence.
Padre Pio, Pray for Us!
Monday, September 22, 2008
The guidelines would be that an eligible person for election would have to be American born and have exposure at a national level. To come up with this list, I spoke with someone whom I believe is a leading authority on the pro-life cause, and its history, in America. We bounced ideas off each other, and came up with the following list of whom we would select as the inaugural class trying to cover the multi-facets of the cause and our society:
Bernard Nathanson: A founding member of NARAL and responsible for 75,000 abortions during his OBGYN career, Nathanson’s heart and views were converted as ultrasound became more sophisticated. He became a leading voice in the vanguard of the pro-life cause. His VHS video, The Silent Scream, was widely distributed in the early 1980’s where he gave a detailed window to the womb showing the viability of the baby and the horror of the abortion procedure.
Henry Hyde: A congressman who represented the 6th district of Illinois. Author of the Hyde Amendment that in 1976 prevented federal funds being used for abortion. With this signed legislation, he became the first person to register a victory against the Roe v. Wade decision. For over 30 years Hyde was a stalwart for the defense of unborn children on Capitol Hill.
Randall Terry: Founded Operation Rescue in 1987. Arrested over 40 times for civil disobedience at abortion clinics across America. Terry and his organization provided the activist wing of the pro-life movement an existence and created havoc for the abortion industry saving thousands of babies. Served as a spokesman for the Terri Schiavo family.
Cardinal John O’Connor: One of the strongest pro-life voices for the Catholic Church in America in the past 30 years. The Archbishop of the Diocese of New York City for 16 years and made the pro-life cause a cornerstone of the Diocese. Told any woman who was thinking of an abortion to come to him personally and he will get her help to her keep her baby. Caused fits for Catholic politicians Mario Cuomo and Geraldine Ferraro and their political deflection that they're "personally opposed to, but publically in support of abortion" stating this view was morally unacceptable.
For over 40 years represented an unyielding pro-life voice in Republican administrations, print and television media. For seventeen years, appeared on Crossfire and defended and explained the pro-life position to America. Flanked George H.W. Bush in a 1992 Presidential run causing him to strengthen his social conservative positions. Gave one of the defining pro-life speeches in memory stating we are in a "cultural war for the soul of America," at Republican National Convention the same year.
A few notes of interest with this list. Although religious affiliations were not a consideration while compiling this list, all five listed ended up being Catholic. Nathanson and Terry converted. Some of the above listed did have problems within their personal lives but we have to give them their due in the pro-life cause.
Please understand this is one opinion of who should be honored. In no way do I want to take away from acknowledging anyone’s pro-life efforts or dedication to our cause . There were so many other names mentioned in the discussion (honorable mentions) including: Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Rush Limbaugh, Fr. Frank Pavone, Ronald Reagan, Sam Brownback, Alan Keyes, Judie Brown, Gov. Robert Casey, Dr. Carolyn Gerster, Rev. Billy Graham, etc…
I would love to hear if you think we got it right, or anyone else’s list.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Big Hat tip on this article to VCR friend Leticia at Causa Nostrae Laetitiae.
"...Our country’s richest woman [Oprah] is easily one of the most spiritually bankrupt people in America and also one of the most shockingly popular. How does a New Age con artist like Oprah get so many people to literally adore her? She did not make $260 million last year by feeding people solid food. She deals in fads, feelings and frauds—it’s that simple—and apparently she is very effective at convincing people to follow her well-packaged crock of nonsense. Of a recent political speech, she admitted fawningly that she had “cried her eyelashes off” when she heard it, and I am sure her crocodile tears were persuasive to her vast audience. For people schooled in the truth, the reaction would be very different: I saw the same speech and could barely keep myself from throwing up, but they don’t pay me $260 million a year. [Blogger Note: Bonus points on the nausea theme, Father.]
When asked why she refused to interview her anointed one’s political opponent, she balked and got caught in a nasty public relations double-bind which is what usually happens to people who play games with their own popularity. Her refusal would have been easier to swallow if she had just said simply that she didn’t like the other candidate and didn’t want her on the show; that we can accept! But then again, basic honesty is probably above Oprah’s pay grade. [Blogger Note 2: Double bonus points on the pay grade reference, Father.]The truth is that Oprah has put her social clout to partisan political use, and when she was called on to be fair, she just couldn’t admit that she was playing the political hack.
I do think Oprah’s menace is fundamentally spiritual though, and that it feeds off the growing spiritual superficiality of the American populace. Its treachery is not to be underestimated. Oprah not only believes in but forcefully advocates pernicious New Age trends like Helen Schucman’s A Course In Miracles and Eckhart Tolle’s terrible esoteric movement that is trampling down Christian values and opening up a spiritual vacuum in the hearts of millions as we speak. Having the life sucked out of our souls by spiritually bankrupt “celebrities” is a slow spiritual death, to put it mildly. However, Oprah is just the worst case scenario of what is reaching epidemic proportions in a personality-obsessed, spiritually infantile and media-saturated culture."
Bravo, God Bless, Father!
Pro-life columnist Mona Charen yesterday contributed to the end of the lie that babies never survive an abortion attempt. She brings up the Jill Stanek story, that I covered, and The Born Alive Infant Protection Act that Barack Obama provided the only vote against in the Illinois State legislature.
Charen also cited a lab technician’s story, Shelley Lowe, who testified with Stanek but whose story is less known, and her experience with a baby who survived an abortion:
"A young woman who had undergone just the first cervix-opening phase of a partial-birth abortion gave birth in the emergency room. The doctor placed the 22-week-old baby in a specimen dish to be taken to the lab. According to the report, when Ms. Lowe "saw the baby girl in the dish she was stunned when she saw the girl gasping for air. 'I don't think I can do that,' Ms. Lowe reportedly said. 'This baby is alive.'" Lowe asked permission to hold the baby until she died. She wrapped the child she dubbed "Baby Hope" in a blanket and sang to her. Breathing room air without any other supports, Baby Hope lived for three hours."
Gianna Jessen was the same as this baby in the specimen dish but she survived to become a living adult. After being burned in uterine with saline solution for 18 hours, this baby’s will to live resulted in the abortion doctor having to sign her birth certificate. She weighed only 2 pounds at birth. At 17 months, she was diagnosed with cerebral palsy; a byproduct of the lack of oxygen her brain received during the abortion attempt.
Hariet Beecher Stowe is credit by most to be a contributing factor to the American Civil War. Abraham Lincoln was quoted as having declared, "So this is the little lady who made this big war." Stowe ignited the Abolitionist Movement with her book, Uncle Tom’s Cabin. It allowed white people to see slavery through the eyes of a slave. How children were ripped away from their mothers in the slave trade, their horrible treatment and how they did infact belong to the same God. It forced Americans to humanly relate to the slaves, and acknowledge the truth. Stowe provided a figurative voice for the voiceless.
Gianna Jessen, is extremely dangerous because she is doing the same exact thing. You are actually talking to that "clump of cells", that pro-abortionists claim is not a life and should not have any rights. You see the difficulties she has in life caused by an inherently evil procedure. She can speak for the 46 million babies who can not because they were successfully killed by their abortion since Roe v. Wade. She will force people to humanly relate to fetuses and acknowledge the truth that they are people - members of the same race - and entitled to protection. Jessen is providing a literal voice for the voiceless.
Jessen was on Hannity and Colmes this week. As she told her incredible story and the truth of what she was saying overcame the studio, it was Alan Colmes’ turn to "cross-examine" her. You could tell there was nowhere he would least like to be. He did not know how to handle her. What was he going to say, "Congratulations on making it through your botched abortion?" Fr. Corapi always says, "The truth, is the truth, is the truth!" It does not change. Man, despite his efforts, can not position the truth any differently from what it is, it exists exclusively to anything else.
With this understanding, please click on this link and play the commercial that features Gianna Jessen, and you will see why she is the most dangerous woman in America.
Friday, September 19, 2008
The map is called the "Shift to McCain." He cites the Palin nomination and the backlash from her vile treatment by unmarried woman as the prime reason for this shift.
"Benedict said during a meeting with a U.S.-based interfaith group that he wanted any prejudice against [Pius XII] to be overcome, praising what he called Pius's "courageous and paternal dedication" in trying to save Jews.
"Wherever possible he spared no effort in intervening in their favor either directly or through instructions given to other individuals or to institutions of the Catholic Church," Benedict said.
...Benedict said that Pius' many interventions were "made secretly and silently, precisely because, given the concrete situation of that difficult historical moment, only in this way was it possible to avoid the worst and save the greatest number of Jews."
Benedict is a very gentle shepherd who will speak the truth regardless of the backlash.
For those who are not aware of the overwhelming praise that Pius XII received from the Jewish community for all his assistance during the darkest days of the Holocaust, please click here.
Despite all attempts at revisionist history the truth remains the truth.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
If this was true, wouldn't Samuel Adams and the Sons of Liberty being drinking their tea in Boston parlors instead of dumping their tea in Boston Harbor?
To qualify to be the President of the United States, you must be at least 35 years of age, a resident of the U.S. for 14 years and a natural born citizen.
Philip J. Berg, a former Pennsylvanian Deputy Attorney General and the Democratic Party Chairman of Montgomery County, PA, filed a lawsuit against Barack Obama challenging his eligibility to serve as President. He claims that Obama is not a citizen of this country based on his grandmother and siblings stating he was physically born in Kenya. In addition, he states that Obama forfeited his U.S. citizenship in the past because he became a citizen of Indonesia. Indonesia does not allow dual citizenship.
So why would a Democratic Party chairman cause Barack Obama this grief? He believes the Republicans know these facts and are going to drop a November 1st, bomb in the news media. Mr. Berg claims he is trying to prevent this.
Mr. Berg filed a motion of expedited discovery and deposition. Obama has to answer the lawsuit by September 24th.
It should be stated that Berg is a former Hillary supporter and has some extreme perceptions. But it is worth to note that this lawsuit is out there.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
"China is working with Cuba to tap into the oil and gas reserves off the coast of Florida. Even though the Cuban side of the straits are within sight of Key West, Fla., there is no American drilling allowed, despite the lifting of restrictions by President Bush, and the support of Republican Gov. Charlie Crist.
Even the support of drilling off the Florida coast awaits Congressional approval, which will not come...
In addition, Chinese firms are planning to start slant drilling [meaning they are drilling diagonally not straight down] off the Cuban coast near the Florida Straits, tapping into U.S. oil reserves that are estimated at 4.6 to 9.3 billion barrels.
...In setting up a working arrangement for oil development in the Florida Straits, China has already reopened an abandoned Russian oil refinery in Cuba."
We are fools.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
"I had a problem with alcohol and cocaine. … I remember that in this little prep school that I went to, the Dwight Englewood School in New Jersey, we had to say the Lord's Prayer in homeroom. Every morning at your desk you put your head down and say the Lord's Prayer. I was there grade seven through twelve, so it's something you remember. When I was going into this dark abyss with alcohol and cocaine, after some terrible binge, I can remember lying in bed desperate and I started saying the Lord's Prayer. What made me do that? Just--I was desperate, I was trying to ask for help. You know, who was going to get me out of this? I started searching for God.
… One day Father C. John McCloskey [a former gold trader himself] appeared at Bear Stearns. My secretary said, "This priest is here to see you." No appointment, but a lot of the partners donated to various charities. So I was ready to pull out my checkbook and write a thousand dollars to whatever. But this guy didn't want any money. He was a friend of [a friend whom I had spoken to about my curiosity in Catholicism] and he wanted to talk to me. And he was a very engaging man. (Blogger Note: Fr. McCloskey is an Opus Dei priest that has been responsible for many high-profile conversions: Robert Bork, Robert Novak, Republican Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas, New York gubernatorial candidate Lewis Lehrman, Abortion doctor-turned-pro-lifer Bernard Nathanson.)
[With addiction] You become so self-centered and self-willed that you decide you can do anything, without regard for others. I wasn't showing up for events, for friends, for my wife. I'd go missing in action for days. I've made amends to people directly, but still, I'm ashamed about that period… as I hit bottom, I lost jobs, lost all income, lost friends, and very nearly lost my wife. I was willing to surrender and take it on faith that I had to change my life.
…I was going to Mass on Sundays. And we recite the Nicene Creed, the church's statement of beliefs. There came this one day when I stopped just mouthing it and read it in an intellectual, cognitive way, and realized there's a whole story here. If you read the eucharistic part of the Mass, there's a whole story there and it's a fabulous story.
...It's--we are partaking of the body and blood of Christ. That's what I understand the Eucharist to be. We are pledging our faith in him and what he taught and all of a sudden it clicked, that Jesus Christ does not want me to touch alcohol or drugs because I wreck my body and I wreck his body and I wreck my life. Jesus died for me, too. And that is my redemption.
...The basic thought in [Fr. Richard John Neuhaus's book, Death on a Friday Afternoon] is that even we optimistic Americans mustn't ever forget that Jesus spent that time on the cross, painfully. His crown of thorns was sticking into his skull, he was nailed to the cross, and it was horrible. The book had an impact on me, because in my own mundane, low-level way, I was on the cross. I don't know if I've had salvation, but I have had a change. Sobriety is one of the keys to my faith."
There are many beautiful aspects of this conversion story. I think the most striking is that a political and Wall St. power broker reverted to a simple prayer he learned as a child when he hit rock bottom and found comfort in it.
I have followed Larry for many years, and I have to say after his conversion there is a compelling meekness about him, a noticeable humility that he did not have during his early years. A change that comes from acknowledging God's power and submitting completely to His will.
So the next time you see Larry on T.V., or hear him on the radio, be proud that he is a member of our Church and say a prayer for him that Christ will shield him from his addictions, which never completely go away. I always do.
Monday, September 15, 2008
"[Professor Knowl] identified [within the writing] a previously unrecognized Jewish notion that the blood of the messiah is necessary in order to bring about national redemption. The idea of a tortured messiah who was resurrected three days after his death was adopted by Judaism before the birth of Jesus. The main ideas of the Jesus myth existed in Judaism,"
"The text changes the way we look at the historical Jesus, and provides a missing link connecting Judaism and Christianity,"
So a century before the birth of a babe in a stable, the Jewish community was aware of a suffering Messiah who would be resurrected three days after his death. I have chills.
- 3 polls in Nevada show the state just turned to McCain
- McCain takes a few point lead over Obama in Colorado
- McCain has tied Obama in Pennsylvania
- McCain has tied Obama in Minnesota
- And McCain is within one point of the margin of error in New York
I have lived in New York all my life and have never remember a Republican Presidential candidate being this close to his Democratic rival.
My favorite use for lipstick is coloring blue states red!
For instance, he delineates the different, subconscious codes that Americans and the French have in regard to cheese. For Americans, cheese is dead; put it in the refrigerator – don’t let it spoil! For the French the cheese is alive. Buy it as needed, purchasing it according to the cheese's life-expectency clock in their heads. He states:
"The French like the taste before safety. Americans want safety before the taste."
It is an interesting concept. His PBS interview is definitely worth a read for anyone ever wanting to market a product.
Now, I am not sure I agree with everything Rapaille says, and I think he has created for himself a pretty good shtick, the “French psychologists; super, premier code unlocker,” through which he charges a hefty premium. Being a marketing person myself, I tend to go for a more tangible reality when positioning and marketing a product. From my perspective, it is, "What is true the essence of the product?" So with this background piece, here is what I believe as the true essence, or subconscious codes, of the national candidates for the 2008 election. I believe if you get to their true essences, you will be able to get to a better view of who is going to win the election.
John McCain: His subconscious code is “Prison-of-War”. Everyone knows his story. People have this dark curiosity about this chapter of his life and don't know what the specific details are. When people call him "a patriot" or "honorable", they are not refering to McCain the Senator, they are really referring to his POW story.
Sara Palin: Her subconscious code, I believe, is “Mother” There are many politicians in the media today, very few that can tear down a convention with a speech and then moments later hug her 4-month-old on national television. She is so much a "Mother" that she started her activist career in the PTA, again underscoring her as a mother. The intense hatred towards her is probably based on this underlying code. Stay at home mom’s aren’t knowledgeable, bringing a Down Syndrome baby to term is not practical, a mother who is sending her son off to Iraq to a wrong war, etc... “Mother” is definitely the code.
Barack Obama: His subconscious code is “Dynamic”. He represents change, which is the definition of dynamic. He represents the Democrats wanting to change the control of Bush government, as he personally represents a change to the genetic make up of the Presidency. "I don't look like the guys on the currency." The code, “Dynamic” also subconsciously underscores his personality and oratory skills. I believe this is his term.
Joe Biden: He was the most difficult for me to define. I finally settled with the code: “Scrapper.” It speaks to his style of enjoying a fight. It speaks to the challenges in his life that he had to overcome, including the death of family members. It speaks of his Scranton upbringing. It speaks of his appearance; rolled up sleeves, displaced hair, sloping eyes. When people mention blue-collar with Biden, they are really speaking to his roots not his present day tendencies, and how he climbed his way to success.
So there are my codes. The 2008 Presidential Election will feature Prisoner-of-War/Mother verses Dynamic/Scrapper. I believe the Republicans have the better subconscious code ticket. Time will tell.
Saturday, September 13, 2008
First, Palin mentions she has met with heads of countries, but none with complete negotiating abilities. Note that the President of the U.S.A. does not have complete negotiating abilities. ABC edited this clarification out and presented it as Palin having never met with any heads of any countries.
Second, Palin mentions how important it is that we keep good relations with Russia. "We can not repeat a Cold War." The Gibson interview made it sound like Palin was moving towards a complete, head-on for a war with Russia over the Georgia conflict.
Palin also stated in regard to Israel defending themselves against Iran: "... I agree with John McCain that nuclear weapons in the hands of those who would seek to destroy our allies, in this case, we’re talking about Israel, we’re talking about Ahmadinejad’s comment about Israel being the “stinking corpse, should be wiped off the face of the earth,” that’s atrocious. That’s unacceptable." ABC news parlayed this more articulate answer into Palin repeatedly saying just "You can't second guess Israel..." making her look like a prepared parrot.
Mark Levine did all a favor by posting this.
"Gambling911.com reporter Carrie Stroup has been in communication with Sportsbook.com marketing to confirm the odds [of Clinton replacing Biden on the ticket] offering some time Monday or Tuesday.
One scenario: Biden steps down in the wake of the Russia/Georgia hostilities. The idea being that Biden could best serve the country as Secretary of State. "
Today on the Larry Kudlow radio show there was a guest who said a high-ranking Democratic strategists told him there is immense pressure on Obama to bounce Biden for Clinton.
"Basically, it's this: John McCain only endangers Democratic chances of victory this November, but Sarah Palin is an existential threat to the [existence of the] Democratic Party.
...Democrats can't stomach seeing the feminist movement's impetus for greater female political participation and empowerment "hijacked" by a pro-life woman who espouses traditional values. They must obliterate her, lest her popularity eat away at their party's core.
...She may become the first woman in national office - yet the Democrats, feminists and liberals can't control her, and that burns them up.
Elections come and go, but Palin is a far more fundamental threat to the Democratic Party."
You nailed the truth, Mr. Morris.
Friday, September 12, 2008
That day can never be forgotten. The Americans that we lost who were guilty of nothing else but going to work on a Tuesday morning, the brave fireman who rushed up dozens of flights of stairs to help people and whom must have realized at a certain point that there was no going back, and the many Americans who acted heroically across the country include some that fought for control over an airplane in flight. God embrace all their souls.
We must also never forget that the evil that murdered 3,000 people is still out there and vigilant. We must be as vigilant.
The following link is an address that President Bush gave at the National Cathedral on September 14th. I have always felt this was President Bush's best speech ever given and it surprisingly received very little fan fair. I promise you it is worth a read again as we pass the anniversary.
First, overall I do not think Gibson was a bad overall choice as an initial interview. Charlie Gibson is one of the very few news personalities that can host a wake up show in the morning and a nightly news program in the evening. He freely changes, literally, from “Charlie” in the A.M, and “Charles” in the evening on a dime depending on his hosting responsibilities.With this, Gibson has a homespun audience and a world-view audience. He would not alienate his home-spun viewers by completely destroying Palin, such as other news personalities would gleefully do. Also, the McCain campaign can play that she had been interviewed by a major news agency and network upon completion of the interview.
That being said, I think Gibson purposely made some of the questions quiet difficult. He had to prove himself as a tough interviewer and redeem himself for past political moderating blunders.
For instance, if Palin answered “no” about admitting Georgia into NATO, Gibson would respond, “So you would not protect an established democracy against an invading Communist country?” When she answered “yes”, Gibson pulled a, “So you think it is worth full-scale war with Russia?” There was no way out for her, and this is why career politicians always carry dodge answers like “The members of NATO decide who can have admittance, and this would be better addressed to all of them...” in their deck of cards. The problem is that Palin is not a professional politician. That is her appeal and her struggle. If she had to give a direct answer, she gave the right one on this issue.
Secondly, Palin was frozen by the question of the Bush Doctrine, and that was a noticeable misstep making her look inexperienced. I, sometimes, feel that I am the last George W. Bush supporter in America. Acknowledging that I am a huge supporter, if someone asked me to define the Bush Doctrine; I would not know detailed specifics and only probably be able to give the general flavor. As a note, the coiner of the phrase "Bush Doctrine" believes Charlie Gibson got his interpretation wrong as well.
I would also say that if she was going to completely blow a question in this interview, this was the one. The Obama camp tries day and night to tie her and Senator McCain to the the Bush administration's ankle. Here, she is so far away from GW, she does not even know his policies specifically. It could be spun in a good way if handled properly.
Her answer in regard to God having a master plan for the world endeared her to all of her base supporters, as she did not waiver on her faith. Also, the “war as a last result” also must have strengthened her independent support. These answers were very compelling and seemed very authentic.
And finally, oh yes, the “hubris” line. This shows you how difficult an interview she is and how she is not the only one with skin in the game when she is being interviewed. The definition of hubris is ”an exaggerated self-pride or confidence”. Gibson asked Obama a similar question last year, asking the Senator whether he asks himself, "I must have hubris to run for this office". This comment was mentioning when Gibson wasn't giving Obama a gushing genealogy review. The problem was Gibson made it a commentary to Palin, and not hypothetical as he did to Obama, saying "You must have some hubris..." A nuance that created bias. Palin should have called him on it that precise moment. It would have set the tone of the interview and put Gibson on the defensive.
Overall, if her convention speech was a perfect 10.0, I give her a 6.5 on the interview. No death blows or insurmountable mistakes. She didn’t exactly ask a man in a wheelchair to stand up.
I found it interesting that CBS news said she didn't look confident, and The New York Times said she was too confident because she had all the answers rehearsed. The liberals should really get together on their propaganda.
Finally, please understand that she kissed her son goodbye that morning and sent him off to war so it probably was not an easy day for her to sit down and do her first interview. I took my child to her first day of pre-K last week and my knees were buckling. I would not be my best in a situation where I would have to be very sharp right after that.
I expect Palin to be much better in the balance of the interview when domestic issues and energy are discussed.
Post Note 9/13: Mark Levine posted a full segment of the Gibson/Palin interview on his site, and there is some question as to whether the interview was edited in an unfavorable way to Gov. Palin.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Here is how I believe this played out. When the interview was awarded to ABC, high ranking officials, maybe even Brian Williams himself, called the McCain campaign questioning the campaign’s decision. The McCain campaign told them that Olbermann’s and Matthews’ extreme bias and blatant, prolonged attacks on Palin prevented them from having any consideration for the interview.
Williams, when he heard that frick and frack’s antics cost him the exclusive, blew a gasket and to keep their World News Anchor happy corrective actions were taken by NBC. The corrective action is now that only Brian Williams will be sitting in the political anchor desk to prevent anything like this from ever happening again.
I also believe that Brian Williams must look at these two with suspect, as not being true journalists, which makes their contributions to the lost of this interview even more unpalatable.
Chris Matthews came from the political world, Jimmy Carter/Tip O’Neill, and is a beer-drinking, armchair politician who does not have sophisticated reporter credentials. Keith Olbermann came from a sporting network, and does not have any sophisticated political credentials. This must have killed Brian Williams.
Jon Stewart of the Daily Show must have irked William even more that weekend when considering how the network has lost control of everything, including its anchors, asked:
"Is there no control?" host Jon Stewart asked him. "`Is it `Lord of the Flies?'"
A sheepish Williams said that every family has a dynamic of its own.
"But does MSNBC have to be the Lohans?" Stewart said."
"During a stop in Columbia, Mo., Biden was speaking before a large crowd when he decided to give special recognition to State Senator Chuck Graham.
"Chuck, stand up, let the people see you," Biden shouted.
However, Biden did not realize that Graham is confined to a wheelchair.
"Oh, God love you. What am I talking about? I'll tell you what, you're making everybody else stand up, old pal. I'll tell you what, everybody else stand up for Chuck. Stand up for Chuck!" Biden said."
And then today, Biden mentioned that Hillary Clinton would make a better vice-president choice than him, not considering what the fall out from this statement would be with all the flack Obama took for not picking her in the first place. As I alluded to, she is always in the background. I hope this isn't the start of the transition.
"Biden replied [to Tom Brokaw's question as to when human life begins], "I'd say, look, I know when it begins for me. It's a personal and private issue. For me, as a Roman Catholic, I'm prepared to accept the teachings of my church." Biden then added, "I'm prepared as a matter of faith to accept that life begins at the moment of conception. But that is my judgment. For me to impose that judgment on everyone else who is equally and maybe even more devout than I am seems to me is inappropriate in a pluralistic society."
Archbishop Chaput was again right there calling him on it; doing what the Archbishop does best:
"It’s certainly true that we need to acknowledge the views of other people and compromise whenever possible – but not at the expense of a developing child’s right to life. Abortion is a foundational issue; it is not an issue like housing policy or the price of foreign oil. It always involves the intentional killing of an innocent life, and it is always, grievously wrong. If, as Sen. Biden said, “I’m prepared as a matter of faith [emphasis added] to accept that life begins at the moment of conception,” then he is not merely wrong about the science of new life; he also fails to defend the innocent life he already knows is there.
In his Meet the Press interview, Sen. Biden used a morally exhausted argument that American Catholics have been hearing for 40 years: i.e., that Catholics can’t “impose” their religiously based views on the rest of the country. But resistance to abortion is a matter of human rights, not religious opinion. And the senator knows very well as a lawmaker that all law involves the imposition of some people’s convictions on everyone else. That is the nature of the law. American Catholics have allowed themselves to be bullied into accepting the destruction of more than a million developing unborn children a year. Other people have imposed their “pro-choice” beliefs on American society without any remorse for decades."
Kudos, Archbishop! America is lucky to have a shepherd like you who preaches the unfiltered gospel.
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
"Pushing a fund-raiser later this month, a finance staff member sent a sharply worded note last week to Illinois members of its national finance committee, calling their recent efforts "extremely anemic."
At a convention-week meeting in Denver of the campaign’s top fund-raisers, buttons with the image of a money tree were distributed to those who had already contributed the maximum $2,300 to the general election, a subtle reminder to those who had failed to ante up.
The signs of concern have become evident in recent weeks as early fund-raising totals have suggested that Mr. Obama’s decision to bypass public financing may not necessarily afford him the commanding financing advantage over Senator John McCain that many had originally predicted."
As his finances start to downturn, Hillary feminist’s are now sticking up for Sarah Palin. Women Count, an organization that was founded by Hillary Clinton supporters, issued this press release on September 2nd:
"The very notion that Sarah Palin should not have accepted this nomination because she is a mother with demanding challenges underscores just how far we have to go.
WomenCount has promised that we would jump on these examples of sexism. Here’s where YOU come in. Tell the media to back off, and we’ll forward your messages to the right places. [Blogger Note: They are actually asking their membership to participate in a letter writting campaign for Palin.]
Stamping out sexism is about shifting the culture. It will be good for America to watch Sarah Palin on the campaign trail – bouncing from parenting to politics. That’s how most women function – multi-tasking, leaning on friends and family, and waking up each morning and doing it all again.
…WomenCount was born of the passion its founders had for Hillary Clinton’s clear view of social issues and progressive values. We cannot pretend that Governor Palin meets any standard of progressive politics or social values.
But regardless of the candidates’ ideology, we will work to stamp out sexism when we see it on the campaign trail. To paraphrase the words of one blogger who said it best over the weekend: We will defend Sarah Palin against misogynist smears not because we like her or support her, but because that’s how feminism works."
Add to this a host of interview gaffes by Obama recently and "Foot-in-Mouth" Biden mentioning that parents with special need kids should support stem cell research, his campaign is in complete disarray. All as the result of one Alaskan.
Gift for your favorite liberal.
Monday, September 8, 2008
He runs in political circles. President Bush trusted him enough to make him the chief strategist in charge of overseeing the course of both the John Roberts and Sam Alito Supreme Court nominations.
In July of this year, he took over the day to day operations of running the presidential campaign of John McCain. The New York Times noted the change in campaign tempo as soon as Schmidt took over:
"It was what aides to Senator John McCain describe as probably the worst night of his campaign. As Senator Barack Obama claimed the Democratic nomination before a cheering sea of faces on national television, Mr. McCain countered with a lackluster speech in a half-empty hall, posed in front of a pea-green screen that became fodder for late-night comedy.
Steve Schmidt, a senior adviser to Mr. McCain who worked on President Bush’s campaign in 2004, could barely hide his fury in the coming days, as he announced — to anyone who would listen — that he would personally make certain the McCain campaign would never again embarrass Mr. McCain.
"Fun Steve is dead," Mr. Schmidt said.
In the three months since that night in June, the McCain organization has become a campaign transformed: an elbows-out, risk-taking, disciplined machine that was on display here last week at the Republican convention that nominated Mr. McCain."
To see Schmidts' impact on the race, I would suggest you follow this following link when you are done reading this post. The McCain rocket ship took off in July when Schmidt took over. It was not a coincident.
The New York Times continues about Schmidt:
"He brings a single-minded intensity and focus to the campaigns he’s involved in," said Howard Wolfson, who oversaw the war room of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton as an adviser in her campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination. "He’s the guy who knows the value of waking up every day and knowing what you are going to say at end of the day about your candidate and your opponent."
Schmidt should be good, he was an apprentice and learned from the best, Karl Rove, in the 2004 Bush Presidential Election. Schmidt ran Bush's war room.
Schmidt was one of the two top McCain aids that met with Sarah Palin on the initial vice-president interview. I have a feeling that he was instrumental in the Palin decision.
Schmidt's former mentor, Rove, came out very strongly against the Palin nomination when it was announced. Apparently, sometimes the teacher becomes the student.
I give it a 25% chance. I might be crazy, but people thought I was crazy when I mentioned Sarah Palin for VP.
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Somewhere, deep in the bowls of the Obama camp, a strategist has his forehead in his palms saying, "What are we going to do about this Palin problem?"
Although Democrats would be absolutely outraged with a Republican associated with this sacred term, I am coming to realize over the past few days than the term can be used for Sarah Palin, describing her as the "New Camelot."
John F. Kennedy was 43 years when elected President. He was a dynamic personality, and could move millions with his oratory skills. He released youthful energy and excitement wherever he went that ignited his supporters. He was more than a politician, he was a celebrity personality with a vision that people bought into.
In the 1960’s, Americans were totally obsessed with first lady Jacqueline Kennedy. She embodied the perfect upbringing, class and style. Every woman in America wanted to know what she was wearing, what she was thinking and how she was renovating the White House. America could not have enough of her. She had beautiful children who played in the Oval Office. Her style affected a generation.
My observation, whether some will agree with it or not, is that Sarah Palin is the "New Camelot". But... she is JFK and Jacqueline Kennedy all rolled up in one.
She is a 44 year-old, dynamic personality that can move millions with her oratory skills. She releases youthful excitement anywhere she goes. McCain’s rallies, pre-Palin, involved modest crowds. Now the lines to get into the McCain/Palin rallies are non-ending. When McCain and Palin are on stage, whom do you find yourself looking at? She ignited the Social-Conservative base of the Republican Party and her supporters are completely energized. She transcended her politician status and has become a celebrity personality.
In addition, American’s are totally obsessed with her. There was a report two days after her convention speech that eye glass stores ran out of female, frame-less glasses. There are reports that women are copying her hairstyle and clothes. I went to the supermarket today. Her picture was on three women magazines. America can’t get enough of her or her family and beautiful small children.
Democrats should not be outraged at this comparison. This should be seen as a natural progression. With women rising to more roles of authority in our society, and in the world, a "New Camelot" was bound to come along. I am glad her name is Sarah Palin.
Saturday, September 6, 2008
Mary Ellen Barrett wrote a beautiful piece about a priest’s homily for mothers where he spoke about "Third Watch" praying:
"Several years ago a priest, whose homilies always taught me something, gave a great one about a time of night called third watch. That time when no one is awake except policemen, firemen, emergency workers, priests and mothers. He spoke of how on every third watch he covered he had to go out and minister to someone in their last hours and comfort those who mourned. Many people seem to die in the early hours of the day.
This priest said that mothers too were often up at this time tending to their sleepless children. Teething and colic; nightmares and strange sounds; tummy aches and sniffles. All conspire to keep parents from their regular and greatly needed slumber. He made the point that mothers could be a great resource of prayer at this time of night. They could do God's work so easily as they minister to their children.
His words came back to me last night as I watched my little one sleep. How I had, many times, used this time to say a rosary, offer up prayers for some intention or begged the Blessed Mother to intercede on my behalf, mostly for more sleep. I thought that maybe this time was ordained by God for mothers and fathers to offer up for those in need. Those who leave this world in the dead of night and are in desperate need of prayers. Maybe this time should be for the Holy Souls in Purgatory.
So as I watched a little chest rise and fall and sweet little eyelids flutter I prayed for those who had no one to pray for them. I offered up my exhaustion and major laundry chores for those in purgatory. I contemplated those who didn't have a warm bed, a roof over their heads and a loving family. I asked God to protect them and the saints to pray for those who are alone.
When you are a busy mom you find it difficult to carve out time for prayer. There really can't be a contemplative time in the day that can be dedicated to Our Lord. So these little moments of quiet can become our prayer time. Maybe that's why a baby periodically needs a mother in the night. God is, perhaps, calling us to prayer. Perhaps these times He uses to call us to think of Him and to make our vocation of motherhood our constant prayer."
This column reminded me of my car radio many years ago. These "3rd Watch" hours of the night seemingly to me have a stronger signal from God because of the stillness and quietness that accompany them. "Be still, and know that I am God" (Psalm 46:10). In these hours you are isolated from you waking-hours distractions. There is less peripheral interference with your intimate moments with God just like the radio's nocturnal signal. Ms. Barrett wrote this from a mother’s perspective, but it also rings true to fathers with children, children taking care of their elder parents or sick family members, graveyard-shift workers, college students cramming for the big tests, or financial breadwinners that have trouble sleeping at night because of their many financial pressures. Don’t lose these special, intimate opportunities.
Htip: The Family Denn
Friday, September 5, 2008
A mainstream media platitude that was stated over, and over, again almost seemed as if it was taken straight from the Obama talking points play book. It framed Governor Palin as nothing more than a "Mayberry" mayor without any experience, who is one, 72-year-old* heartbeat away from a position she would not be able to handle - she was "fragile". (*By the way, did we all see John McCain’s 94-year-old mother and her spunk last night? After seeing this I thought to myself jokingly maybe McCain might be "two-termer".)
I think that there is an unquestionable truth that Sarah Palin has more pertinent experience to the Presidency than Barack Obama does. Two years of executive experience as governor trumps four years of voting on legislation with 99 other Senators. People who do not admit this are not being intellectually honest. This fact is so true and worrisome, that the Obama camp has ceased referring to Palin in relation to her governor status, and talks about her solely as a mayor of a small Northern Exposure town.
Now that I stated the reality, let me say that experience means nothing before the election and everything after the election. Voters will use this argument to support their candidate who they are all ready voting for in their minds. When they have the experience on there side it is important, when they don’t then it is a campaign of change and an outsider coming in. To their credit, the McCain campaign has covered both of these bases by positioning John McCain as being both strong on experience and an outside of change.
Experience means nothing. If experience was important, George H. W. Bush - who it was believed had the best resume in Washington - would have never lost to Ronald Reagan in the primaries. If experience was important, an incumbent president would never lose to any challenger. Go ask Hillary Clinton who is eating her breakfast in Chappaqua these days how important experience is to the voters.
It is not about experience, voters vote for whom they like, period. And they like candidates based on how they feel the candidate relates to them.
This is the second thing the MSM does not get about Sarah Palin. How likable she is and how many millions of people she is forming an intimate bond with quickly. 40 years after the assassination of John F. Kennedy, people still have affection for his daughter and son, until his untimely passing, because they remember them under the desk in the oval office peaking out. That is the family voters wanted to support.
Sarah Palin embraced her Down Syndrome baby on stage Wednesday after her blazing speech. Viewers saw her youngest daughter drenching the baby’s hair down with an excessive amount of her saliva during the same speech, and that is the family that voters are going to want to support.
Rassmussen reports today that Sarah Palin now has a higher approval rating (58%) nationally than both John McCain and Barack Obama. She has been in the national spotlight for just over a week. Please understand that this approval rating is after the liberals threw every possible scandal and the kitchen sink at her. She has an even higher approval rating with voters who are not affiliated with a major party. The Obama camp, again, must be panicking. These are the votes they need.
So the mainstream media will keep harping on Governor Palin’s experience hoping that somewhere with someone it will matter. That wish and a token will get the mainstream media on the subway. If I could tell the MSM one thing, it would be, "It’s the likability factor, stupid!"
"Eighty percent (80%) of Republicans say reporters are trying to hurt the GOP vice presidential nominee, and 28% of Democrats agree. Only six percent (6%) of Republicans – and even fewer Democrats (4%)– think the reporting is intended to help her."
So what those who have an opinion on media bias are telling to Rasmussen, is that Republicans believe 13 to 1, and Democrats 7 to 1, that the news media is trying to hurt Sarah Palin rather than help her.
MSNBC reports on the backlash from the Sarah Palin US Weekly Cover with the politically-motivated title, "Babies, Lies and Scandal." There are reports that anywhere from 5,000-10,000 subscribers canceled their subscription based on this bias.
"...Although some liberal Democrats dismiss them as “Palinbots” for their reflexive devotion, these women are as dedicated to Ms. Palin as the women Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democrat of New York, called her sisterhood of the traveling pantsuits were to their very different version of the modern female politician.
These are women who dip in and out of the work force, believe in prayer and spend their days trying to keep the crayon off the walls. They feel they have been looked down on by Clinton feminists and ignored by the power structure in the Republican Party. The fact that Ms. Palin has five children, including Trig, a newborn with Down syndrome, only makes her that much more part of the sisterhood.
“I’m not that into politics,” said Delores Field, an Alaska Inupiat from Eagle River, near Anchorage, who does not consider herself a Democrat or a Republican. “I’m just going to vote for Trig Van Palin’s mom.”
...Like many women in the valley where Ms. Palin comes from, her appeal here, and in recent days across the country, is more about who she is — that is, a devout Christian with a husband who supports her career, but a person who is not afraid to show up in public with a baby on her hip."
Governor Palin is going to be a hornet's nest to handle for Camp Obama. They can't hit her hard hard and they can't ignore her. They are frozen in the middle. Republican strategist Kevin Madden states, [Obama's campaign is] like a lion tiptoeing around a turtle — they don't know what to do with [her]."
It is a little less direct than the statements from Cardinal Egan and Archbishop Chaput.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
There are too many points to make about her speech of perfection, but here are a few points that I would like to make:
First, last night was very successful at throwing the experience debate back at the Obama camp, as now the argument has become who is more qualified, Barack Obama or Gov. Sarah Palin. It does not matter how you answer this question. The fact that we are comparing the top of one ticket, to the bottom of the other ticket has the argument being won by the Republicans, regardless. The dynamic power of Barack Obama was neutralized by the dynamic power of Sarah Palin, and the comparisons then ensued as if they were running for an equal office. In addition, I am in no way a supporter of Rudy Giuliani, but he served his party well last night.
Secondly, Palin very skillfully framed Obama as an elitist. Something that is difficult to do when dealing with a candidate who did not come from wealth. She defended small-town-American life versus a Harvard-educated, condescending candidate that ridiculed a nation's lifestyle in private.
Thirdly, she harpooned a "fake label" into the side of the Democratic Presidential candidate where it will be stuck for a while. The line about the Styrofoam Greek columns going back to the studio lot had nothing to do with convention props being returned and everything to do with Barack Obama. It was a truly brilliant line - I wish I wrote it. Styrofoam was a perfect, subconscious adjective making you think of deception, lightweight and not sturdy. Barack Obama.
Finally, the most earth-crushing line from the speech was Gov. Palin offering her services to be an advocate in "the White House" for parents of challenged kids. Speaking from experience, and having had a handicap sibling, parents of mentally- or physically-challenged kids don’t know where they are going to get the energy to meet the next day’s challenge with their children. This physical worry is met equally by an emotional worry as they ponder about their child’s future and who will take care of them if something happens to them because they are so run-down. I think her vow released an epicenter of emotional support for these parents that instantaneously created a strong bond between the Governor and these fatigued parents. A friend at worked called me first thing this morning who has a slightly, autistic son. He immediately told me that it was a great speech solely mentioning that line. That line was the whole speech for him.
I would have like to have been a fly on the wall when Obama heard this advocacy line. It must have been an epicenter for him as well, shaking him to the bone as he realized this is not an unqualified woman standing at the podium with 36 million people listening, it is a mother who can form emotional bonds wth the masses. This could strike at the heart of the Democrat illusion that they take care of the most downtrodden in our society and Republican’s don’t care. It’s "Morning in America" again, with a very compassionate, Alaskan sunrise.
Here is Gov. Palin's Speech.
Sarah Palin is a conviction politician, a naturally compelling speaker and someone who can relate to her audience on very human terms. America has just learned why Mrs. Palin enjoys the highest approval ratings of any governor in America." - The Wall St. Journal
With all the problems that the mudslinging and lies brought to Sarah Palin this week, no one has more problems this morning than Barack Obama and the Democratic Party after Gov. Palin's speech.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Today, many major newspapers, here is the Boston Globe, cited a poll the dealt with how woman perceive Governor Palin.
"...59 percent of female voters say McCain picked the first-term Alaska governor "out of political considerations," while only 20 percent say he chose her based on experience on qualifications. That's the reverse of how female voters regard Obama's choice of Joe Biden, the poll found.
...And told about her position on abortion -- she opposes it even in cases of rape and incest -- 56 percent said that gave them a less favorable view of Palin."
Now, who is behind this reputable poll? Is it Rasmussen? Is it Zogby? It is Gallup? No, not quite. It is Emily's List, one of the most militant pro-abortion organizations in America. You can tell they had an agenda by the last comment above. But newspapers ran with it as if it was objectively data driven. I would ask the Boston Globe and other newspapers, would they ever cite a poll on gun control financed by the N.R.A.?
- The latest nationwide survey, conducted 8/29-30, shows McCain/Palin at 47%, compared to 45% support for Obama/Biden. A statistical tie.
- Overall, 52% said the selection of Palin as McCain's Vice Presidential nominee helps the ticket, (Blogger Note: Zogby mentioned a week early that 43% of those polled thought Biden was a good pick, so Palin scored higher.)
- "A very important demographic in this election is going to be the politically independent woman, 15% of whom in our latest survey are undecided." (Blogger Note: This is why the smear campaign against Sarah Palin is going to backfire on the Democrats.)
- The survey shows that 22% of Hillary Clinton supporters in the primary and caucus earlier this year are now supporting John McCain.
- "This contest is likely to be very close until the weekend before the election - then the dam may break and support may flood one way or the other."
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
1) In 2005, Barack Obama request $1.4 million in earmarks for a nursing home in Chicago. The lobbyist that approached him? Joe Biden’s son, Hunter. The nursing home eventually received $192,000 from the Obama/Biden Jr. partnership. $320,000 was paid to Hunter Biden’s lobbyist organization for his services, so the nursing home ended up losing on the deal, but not Hunter.
2) In 2006, Hunter and Obama were at it again. Obama requested $2 million dollars for a cancer hospital that Hunter Biden served as a prime lobbyist for. To date the hospital has received no money. Biden Jr.’s firm was paid $120,000 for representing the hospital, again making it a losing deal for everyone but Hunter.
3) Hunter Biden had a $100,000 consulting deal with Delaware’s biggest company MBNA. Strange that this company is in the same state where his father is a Senator. At the same time, Big Papa Joe Biden was working on a bill that would make it harder for people with credit cards problems to file for bankruptcy, benefiting companies like MBNA. This could be seen as a Quid Pro Quo?
4) The conflict of interests didn’t finish there. Hunter Biden was a lobbyist for Napster, the Internet music download company. Guess who was a senior member of the Senate committee that oversees intellectual property rights, which was a hot topic with Napster? That’s right, Big Papa Biden.
So the media will continue to attack a 17-year-old girl who is in a very traumatic moment in her life on an issue that is non-related to politics, other than her mom is a politician. She will continue to see her face and stomach plastered all over the news with a litany of other false scandals.
And the media will continue to ignore little Joe Biden whose dealings are 100% related and existing in the political realm.
Please understand what is happening here. The liberal media has an agenda. They are determined that Sarah Palin will not be elected.
So over the weekend when Barack Obama was being a very decent person saying children should be "off limits", as everything with Obama, this takes on new meaning when you know the true facts and his true motives.
Many years back, I read an incredible article that stated every U.S. President, with the exception of two, could be definitively traced back to a common ancestor. Here is a site that goes through some of these blood relations. The two that the article claimed were not related to this "Presidential royal blood-line" were John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan.
It is easy to understand how Kennedy was not related being Irish Catholic, and not Protestant as all the other presidents. What was the reason for Reagan not being related to other Presidents? He came from the "annals of the poor." He born into extreme poverty and achieved the highest level of a self-made men, the presidency.
I bring this background up for a reason. It is a prime basis in understanding the Reagan Democrats, the demographic that the Obama campaign should be the most concerned about losing with the name of Sarah Palin to the ticket. This will determine the election.
Over the past years, we have heard the notion of Red and Blue States, ad nauseam. To understand the Reagan Democrats were must consider the separation of different colors, white and blue-collars. The Reagan Democrats are blue-collar workers who work extremely hard and just get by meeting all their bills and all their responsibilities weekly. They view white collar workers as making too much money for never getting their hands dirty and view Republicans as rich guys who do not care about them or society, only caring about the money they make.
These RD's have been handed down their Democrat Party heritage from their fathers and their grandfathers, the same way a family would hand down the love of the Boston Red Sox by taking their 5 year-old son/grandson to his first game at Fenway. The Democratic Party is a cultural definition for them. It is who they are.
They are for the most part Catholic, but are not in love with the extreme position that the Democratic Party has adapted on abortion. It pings their conscience, but they offset this with the incorrect justification that their party is the one that feeds and takes care of the poor, in line with Church doctrine so the two issues cancel each other out.
Ronald Reagan broke through to these Democrats partly because of his Irish heritage. But mostly, they view Reagan as one of their own that they could trust because he came from their ranks, poverty. He was not a banker trying to exploit them. He was not a lawyer, with a manicure and charging them $200 an hour for the necessity of writing a will for them. He was from their social lot and with this acceptance they believed he shared their values.
Governor Sarah Palin has the strong possibility of hi-jacking these Reagan Democrats. She is from a modest background like them. Her father, a teacher; her mother, a secretary. She was a hockey mom loading her kids into the car and chauffeuring them to their games on the weekends just a few years ago. She and her husband both carried union cards. She speaks plainly with phrases like, "Thanks, but no thanks…" She is from their social lot and with this acceptance they could believe she shares their values.
As of yesterday, there are other similarities.
Reagan had family problems. His father was an abusive alcoholic. Some of Reagan's kids were problems in their own right. The working class related to these family stresses.
Palin's daughter is now pregnant, and per her press release she is handling it head on, as best she can. Hopefully these working class people will approve.
This is the greatest danger for Obama as his campaign keeps worrying about keeping the women's vote with her and not the Reagan Democrats.
Barack Obama had better hope that the electorate of Reagan Democrats in the next sixty days or so doesn’t realize that Sarah Palin is truly one of their own.