“The religion that the Prophet Muhammad preached provided his followers an ethical and moral vision for leading a life of righteousness?” Perry/Khan curriculum.

The follow article will makes a person wonder. This article, which appeared on the Big Government blog,  caught my eye regarding one of my favorites in the 2012 presidential sweepstakes:

All traces of Perry/Aga Khan curriculum removed from web

In this post I [the author, not yours truly] included numerous links to the Rick Perry/Aga Khan Islamic curriculum for Texas public schools. The links were to the Google cache of the curriculum material, because several days ago, after we began calling attention to it, the curriculum was taken offline. Accordingly I wrote in that post:

One very odd thing about the Aga Khan/Perry curriculum: since this whole brouhaha started, it has been taken offline. It is now available only in cached form here. Why was it taken down? Was the Perry camp embarrassed by the material that Pamela Geller published here, showing it to be a whitewash of Islamic teaching and history? Or was it taken down because it really is, as Ace says, so “biased against Muslims it will reinforce perceptions [Perry] is some kind of rootin’-tootin’ six-gun shooting cowboy yahoo”?

Is either option favorable to Perry? If it was taken down because it’s a dhimmi whitewash, Perry is tacitly admitting that our criticisms of him were right, and those evaluating Perry should be concerned about his naivete in dealing with the Aga Khan. If it was taken down because it was too honest about Islam and will thus hurt Perry with the dhimmi/Norquist faction of the GOP, Perry is again tacitly admitting that our criticisms of him were right: he is not able or willing to stand up to Norquist and his Islamic supremacist allies. So which is it? What are they hiding? And does it matter? Either way, the deep-sixing of the curriculum proves that we were right about Perry all along.

Continue reading this Big Government blog article here.…

Does Rick Perry Deserves a Closer Look

I hope you will continue reading the rest of  this article. Look, if you are like me, you have liked what you have seen and heard of Rick Perry so far. But, I thought from the beginning that unless we want another hidden pig-in-a-poke taking the whelm of the presidency, we need to look behind the scenes of the always less than incisive reporting of the news media, including my favorite Fox News, and decide for ourselves which of the  presidential candidates best fills our bill of particulars for the next president of the United States.  Having said that, these charges merit close scrutiny and the links in this story will give you some guidance for doing that very thing.

Rick Perry is my pick

Despite all the hoopla being raised about his fitness as a conservative hopeful, Rick Perry remains my pick of those currently in the running or trying to be in the running.

Prospective presidential candidates are put through a grueling marathon to test their resolve and fitness

People seeking to be the presidential candidate of the political party out of power are put through a grueling year or two long marathon race, that tests their resolve and fitness for the office. This marathon much like, though much longer than, the seasonal marathon baseball teams are put through to see which two teams will play in the World Series to decide the world championship. ¹ In such a long contest there is plenty of time for candidates to shoot themselves in the foot and find it best to leave the race, and there is plenty of time for we the people, with the aid of good, unbiased news reporters, to determine who the best candidate is.

A good news reporter is hard to find

It’s that “with the aid of good, unbiased news reporters” part that often fails us. We have to recognize that and make allowances for those reporters we think biased. It isn’t usually very hard to see which are biased and what their biases are. The ability to see through biased reporting is something that comes to some people and never seems to come to others. Usually, the more logical and mature people are the more reliable judges of the character bona fides of the various reporters covering the presidential candidates.

Life ain’t a bowl of cheers

Life isn’t easy and it is not going to change, so get used to it. Just do your very best and that will have be good enough. Even the dumbest among us knows what they want better than does the smartest, most gracious politician. That is why we decide who best represents what we want in a politician.

Related articles

• Why did Texas school district remove Rick Perry’s Islamic curriculum? (creepingsharia.wordpress.com)
• So…. Yeah… The New Smear Is That Rick Perry Is a Dhimmi, Huh? (minx.cc)
• Mitt Romney vs. Rick Perry 2012: It’s personal – Politico (news.google.com)

No related posts.

What fight? Constitutional conservatives must join the fight now to unseat President Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. or his Democrat replacement.

I was hoping against hope Obama would win

During the last presidential election I was hoping against hope Obama would win. Yes, I was a constitutional-conservative Republican then, as I am now, and have been since soon after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. As soon as it dawned on me that Lyndon Johnson would assume the presidency, I knew I could no longer be a Democrat.

The first and last time I voted for a Democrat

That election, which saw John F. Kennedy become our nation’s president, was the first election I was old enough to vote in and the last in which I voted for a Democrat. I was unable to vote in the last election; the one in which an unknown nobody, Barack Hussein Obama, become our president. The reason I was unable to vote is that I was living in the Philippines at the time and, even though I was properly registered in Orange County California as a Republican and had requested an absentee ballot in a timely manner, I did not receive a ballot for that election. And, no, it was not for lack of a good mailing address.

I used to think Georgia and some of the other states in the South—I was born and raised the South—were the best at working bureaucratic miracles. Not so. But that is a story for another time. Putting the best of all faces on the reason I did not receive an absentee ballot to vote in the last presidential election would be to say it was a California-style, bureaucratic miracle.

They took my right to vote away

In a way, I am glad someone in the Orange County election commission office saw fit not to send me a ballot for that election, because I fear I would have vote for McCain, even though I was sure that if he were elected, that would be the end of the Republican and, hence, conservative chances for national or state public office for many years to come, if not forever.

Looking back to that election and beyond, I am not so sure anymore that I want to see another Republican elected to public office.

Bill “I didn’t have sex with the girl” Clinton was the most conservative since Ronald Reagan

As disturbing and distasteful as the thought is, I believe Bill “I didn’t have sex with the girl” Clinton was the most conservative president we have had since Ronald Reagan, the all-time greatest constitutional-conservative Republican, and second greatest president ever, was in office. To simply call the other two Republicans, George “Read my lips” H. W. Bush and George “Dubya” W. Bush, economic liberals is to stretch the credulity to the breaking point. Ole “Read my lips” was an economic liberal, his son, “Dubya,” was an economic ultraliberal, and I don’t recall either of them vetoing many of the spending bills that came to their desks. Neither man cared much for constitutional niceties either, plus they were both entitlement enthusiasts. Put together, they gave us 12-years of economic liberal hell.

McCain would have been worse than the Bushes

No, the Bushes, as likeable, patriotic, and just in many of their decisions, as they were, they were not by any stretch constitutional conservatives. Sorry to say, I voted for both of them, because I saw them as the lesser of two evils.

Could John McCain be any worse than either of the Bushes? The answer is: yes. John McCain suffers from some of the same diseases that afflicts liberals. While he appears to be a cultural conservative, he appears insipid and a namby-pamby in the face of hard political and economic decisions and, like the Bushes, he is an F.D.R. New Deal-style spendthrift. And, to my knowledge, he, like Obama, has never run even the smallest business or had a job in the private sector.

Still Namby-Pamby McCain was and is a patriot

In his favor I will say John McCain service to his country as a naval aviator during the Vietnam War does recommend him and he certainly deserves our everlasting gratitude. His military service and heroism shows that at one time the man had a fire burning in his belly, but time has all but smothered that fire. Still, military service, of however much heroism, does not a president make, much less a constitutional-conservative president.

All of his experiences brought John McCain to a point in life that, had he been elected president, he might well have destroyed the Republican Party as the party of political conservatism.

We must stand up for what is right; we must join the fight now!

So where does that put us today? As I see it, unless the old guard Republicans in the House and Senate bow to the reality of the truths it has been shown by the modern-day Tea Party, the Republican Party will not win the coming presidential election. To counter that possibility, constitutional conservatives in the House and Senate must join with the Tea Party in supporting a common presidential candidate. Otherwise Obama will get his chance to finish bringing about the revolution his mentors: his father, Barack Hussein Obama, Sr.; Saul Alinsky, the community organizer, author of Rules for Radicals; and Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s United Church of Christ pastor for 12-years; and his other Marxist-socialists associates like Van Jones, the avowed communist; and Bill Ayers, the radical of the Weather Underground Organization faction of the Students for a Democratic Society, and professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, College of Education, have been working to bring to fruition for many years.

The time is now to join the fight for freedom and the American way

It is time. Let us join the fight now: today. We must elect a true constitutional-conservative, God-fearing president this time around, as this may be our last chance to save our God-given inalienable rights, our freedom, and the American way.

Agree or disagree?

Please favor the rest of us with your considered thoughts on this matter in comments.

Related articles

• Ed Harris Cast As John McCain In ‘Game Change’ (huffingtonpost.com)
• National Journal: McCain Tops List of Most Conservative Senators (thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com)
• McCain: U.S. should continue active role in Libya (thehill.com)
• So this is John McCain’s reward (salon.com)

Related posts:

1. The Right Change
2. Healthcare Bill Roll-Call Vote List

As some of you already know, Hillsdale College is one of the very few colleges and universities that refuses to accept any funding of any kind from the U.S. Government.

The founding Articles of Association of the Hillsdale College states it is to provide an education of a sort that will perpetuate the blessing of “civil and religious liberty and intelligent piety” of our nation.

This free offer,  which will be available for a limited time only. Styled The Constitution Reader, the  course commences with an in-depth look at the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution, and continues on by covering such things as the Founders’ understanding of human nature, the rule of law and the distinctions between a tyrannical and the connection between rights and duties. These and other things pertinent to maintaining the freedoms we enjoy are covered by this free course.

The course also covers some of the other primary source documents from the time of the founding of our nation, plus it covers the constitutional crisis caused by the secession of the 1850s leading up to the War Between the States, a.k.a., the Civil War, as well as the departure from constitutional principles and practices of the Progressive Movement and that movement’s modern heirs.

Here is what Hillsdale College says about this course: In short, this Reader is collated to convey the conditions of liberty, the extent to which and manner in which those conditions have been undermined, and how they might be recovered and preserved.

All true American patriots will profit from this course.

Go to http://rushforhillsdale.com to sign up for this free course. Yes, even though I am an Imprimis subscriber, I first heard about this course today on the Rush Limbaugh Show.

Please do it now. You will be glad you did.

Related articles

• Hillsdale College Student Speaks About Conservatism (jlue.wordpress.com)
• Columbia University (jlue.wordpress.com)

Related posts:

1. Manhattan Declaration.org: Limited Time Offer

If you think Obama is destroying America, you have a lot of company

It is no longer a question of whether Obama is destroying the greatest nation the world has ever known. It has become abundantly clear that, since he has been our chief executive, he has been destroying everything America is and believes in; viz., her economy, her faith, her heritage, her culture, and her future.

Here is the question: is President Obama destroying America on purpose

I suspect he is, but I remain uncertain. Here is why. On the face of it, there are only two possibilities: either Obama is deliberately destroying America or he is a true believer in liberal progressivism. As many times as it has been discredited, to be a true believer in liberal progressivism, he would have to be a stupid fool to continue being a true believer. I think he is not stupid or a fool, so what is the answer?

I am convinced that, like Adlai Stevenson was many years ago, Mr. Obama is a very intelligent fellow.

I am not sure many of you remember Mr. Stevenson. Adlai Ewing Stevenson II (February 5, 1900 – July 14, 1965) was a politician, known for his intellectual manner, oratorical eloquence, and promotion of liberal causes of the Democrat Party. He served as the 31st Governor of Illinois. He was the Democrat Party’s presidential nominee in 1952 and 1956. He lost both those races to Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower.

While he was an eloquent orator, he was not a good extemporaneous speaker. When he spoke extemporaneously he hemmed and hawed constantly. I believe this hemming and hawing was the result of his acute intelligence, which would shower him with so many possibilities of how to deliver a given thought, as he was trying to do just that, that he was forced constantly to sift through them to find just the right words to precisely express the thought he wished to deliver.

Do you see the resemblance between Adlai Stevenson and Barack Obama? I do, I see them as very much alike.

I have been amaze over the years how often highly intelligent people arrive at very stupid conclusions. I think that may be what has lead Obama to so many absurd conclusions. His intelligence certainly lead Mr. Stevenson to many absurd conclusion.

President Obama is destroying America

My ‘Top 10 List’ of how the Obama is destroying America by over spending and under performing:

1. Debt, debt, and more debt. Unprecedented budget deficits into the foreseeable future.
2. European socialist-style spending. Spending like crazy across the board.
3. Spend, spend, spend. Billion for high-speed rail. Why? What is the ROI for the taxpayer.
4. Freezing past spending in place. Having presided over  vastly increased discretionary spending, he now wants to freeze those increases in place. This on top of the staggering discretionary spending increases of George Dubya.
5. Expanding government. He is expanding our federal government at an unprecedented pace.
6. More and higher taxes. Obama proposes $1.6 trillion in new taxes on families and businesses during the coming decade.
7. No entitlements will be reformed. Really? This despite the fact Social Security and Medicare are forecast to permanently be in the red.
8. Fake defense budget cuts. Some tiny Pentagon budget cuts actually amount to a small defense spending increases.
9. Rosy assumptions. ‘Nuff said.   Obama anticipates overly high economic growth and jobless rate.
10. Obamacare will need more money. Includes money to implement an alphabet soup of healthcare related changes and increases.

I have attenuated this list and its explanations as much as possible. Still, I think there is enough to enable you to see that President Obama is bent on destroying America as an economic powerhouse to bring us to our knees and ready us for the next step in establishing a socialist and, indeed, finally a communist America made up of 50 soviets rather than 50 sovereign states.

The other aspects of the character of the United States of America: her faith, her heritage, her culture, and her future, have been addressed and will be addressed over and over again as the fight continues to make Obama a one-term president.

Agree or disagree?

Please favor the rest of us with your considered thoughts on this matter in comments.

Related articles

• Medved: Stop Saying That Obama Wants to Destroy America (outsidethebeltway.com)
• Obama, RINOs, and the Media are Destroying America (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• OBAMA TO THE NEXT GENERATION: SCREW YOU, SUCKERS! Hard to argue with this take, but I’m surprised … (pajamasmedia.com)

Related posts:

1. Will Obama Dismantle America Before She Wakes Up?
2. Will the United States of America Become a Socialist Country in 2010?
3. November election results will vindicate or undercut Obama

Congress did take a profound turn to the right today

Yes, Congress lurched sharply to the right today, but just how far to the right did Congress really go and how long lasting will that sharp right turn turnout to be? That is a good question. Both leaders of the U.S. Senate, Harry Reid (D – Nevada), the Majority Leader, and Sen. Mitch McConnell (R – Kentucky), the Minority Leader, remained the same. Thank God though, the leadership of the House changed hands from Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D – California) to Rep. John Boehner (R – Ohio).

The Republicans picked up a few seats in the Senate, including the one formerly held by Mr. Obama, and they picked up a modern record of seats in the House. Republicans now have 47 of 100 seats in the Senate and 242 of 435 seats in the House of Representatives. So the Republicans remain in the minority in the Senate, but they are a decided majority in the House.

The real question

In the end, the real question is how many of the reelected or newly elected Republicans are RINOs (Republicans In Name Only; read: liberals), how many are moderates, and how many are Tea Party friendly constitutional conservatives? This year and next year are in, my estimation, the final decision years for the Republican Party. The reason I say that is that the driving force in this last election was the Tea Party Movement. The Tea Party people will not stand for anything short of a real effort to take our government back in the name of the people.

The beginnings of the Tea Party Movement

The modern day Tea Party Movement is new all right, but its roots go back to the very beginning of the founding fathers movement to establish these United States, when a bunch of Colonial Americans rebelled against the British Government attempt to establish a monopoly on the importation of tea into the colonies. That rebellion took the form of what history today calls the Boston Tea Party, from the Boston Tea Party of 1773, when Colonial rebels prevented the British from unloading taxed tea into the City of Boston by dumping over 300 chests of tea into the Boston Harbor.

What provoked the modern day Tea Party Movement was the recent series of anti-American political acts of our government. The acts I am referring to were the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, and the series of healthcare reform bills; including that crowning act of libertarian apostasy, Obamacare, that followed in 2010. Those acts proved to be ideal fodder in 2009 for a whole host of conservative talk radio hosts, bloggers, and conservative politicians across the country who united against the earmarks and pork barrel spending enacted in the 2009 stimulus package and the other so-called stimulus packages that soon followed.

The movers and shakers of the modern Tea Party Movement

The Gadsden Flag – The Flag of the Tea Party

Early leaders of the Tea Party Movement include the blogger, Keli Carender, who I understand was in fact the pioneering founder of modern Tea Party Movement. She is Liberty Belle on her blog, Redistributing Knowledge. I believe the first widely known person to hop on Keli’s bandwagon in the cause of spreading the Tea Party political philosophy was Michelle Malkin, a conservative blogger and Fox News contributor. Michelle blogs Michelle Malkin.

Fox News soon took the radio and television leadership in spreading the Tea Party political philosophy of limited government, controlling government spending; and protecting our boarders, language, and culture. The above are just a few of the original and current leaders of the Tea Party Movement.

Several politicians have joined in the Tea Party Movement fight for sanity in government. They include: Governor Sarah Palin, Rep. Mike Pence, Rep. Paul Ryan, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R – Minnesota)  and the Pauls; Rep. Ron Paul (R – Texas) and his son, Sen. Rand Paul (R – Kentucky), and others.

The Tea Party movement embodies the pulse of the silent majority

The point is, the Tea Party Movement is the one movement today that embodies the political pulse of what was until now seen as the silent majority in the United States. That majority is no longer silent, folks. If the Republicans in Congress don’t listen to the will of the people as expressed in the Tea Party Movement, they will be fired at the end of their current term of office. The one thing that modern politicians are good at is getting reelected, so we can expect to see many RINOs and other liberals taking up the clarion call of the battle trumpeter to fight for the U.S. Constitution in light of the intent of our country’s founding fathers and their Declaration of Independence.

I was please to witness the change of power today of the House

Earlier today I witnessed the change of power in the House of Representatives from the Democrats to the Republicans. It looked for a while like former Speaker Pelosi was going to filibuster the change, but finally she stopped talking and gave the gavel of the office to the new Speaker, John Boehner. Everything Rep. Boehner said in accepting the gavel was music to my constitutional conservative ears. I believe John Boehner was sincere when he said, “Welcome to the People’s House, welcome to the 112th Congress,” and, I am paraphrasing here, America is more than a country; America is an idea. I believe he meant everything he said, but time will tell if he and the Republican majority will put his sweet words into action. If not; out they go!

Related articles

• Pelosi Hands Over Gavel As Speaker Of The House | John Boehner Likely Successor [Video] (realestateradiousa.com)
• Republicans take charge of House (bbc.co.uk)
• Little Pomp and Circumstance When Boehner Takes Over as Speaker (politicsdaily.com)
• Here We Go Again (oup.com)
• Boehner Takes The Gavel (outsidethebeltway.com)

No related posts.

By George F. Will

Sunday, October 10, 2010

Promoting his new book, Jimmy Carter , whose version of Christianity allows ample scope for what some Christians consider the sin of pride, has been doing something at which he has had long practice — praising himself. He is, he says, “probably superior” to all other ex-presidents, and would have enacted comprehensive health care if a selfish Ted Kennedy had not sabotaged his plan.

Actually, one reason Carter, who promised to deliver government “as good as the American people,” lost 44 states in his 1980 reelection bid was that voters believed he considered himself too good for them. And they thought he did not know them — that he was disconnected from the way most people thought and felt.

Eight years later, another Democratic presidential candidate had a comparable problem. Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis had vetoed a bill that would have required public schoolteachers to lead their classes in the Pledge of Allegiance. Perhaps the bill was constitutionally problematic. But a presidential campaign is not a law seminar. Dukakis’s incomprehension of American political culture outside of Massachusetts was apparent when, responding to Republican insinuations about his patriotism, he said dismissively that “every first-year law student” studies flag-salute cases that vindicate his position.

Today, Barack Obama, a chronic campaigner, is out and about trying to arouse the masses against the inequity of not raising taxes on “the rich.” He opposes extending the Bush tax rates—they are due to expire Dec. 31, when a higher rate is restored — for “millionaires and billionaires.”

And for quarter-millionaires. Expiration would mean an increase for households with incomes of at least $250,000. Obama’s $750,000 fudge sweeps many people into the plutocracy. In Obama’s Chicago, a high school principal can earn $148,000. A police officer with 25 years on the force can earn $114,000 — not counting overtime. If the principal and the officer are married, supposedly they are rich.

During the 2008 campaign, Obama said that the rich begin at $150,000. If so, both the principal and the police officer are perilously close to becoming targets of liberal redistributionists.

The damage that has been done to the Democratic brand in just 20 months has encouraged comparisons of Obama to Carter, who seemed miniaturized by the presidency, and to Dukakis, who seemed mystified that Massachusetts’s political culture was not the national norm. There also is, however, an Obama resemblance to Lyndon Johnson.

Obama became president knowing next to nothing about Washington. Johnson began his career as a congressional staffer and spent almost all of his pre-presidential adulthood in Washington. But there is this similarity between them: overreaching.

Obama’s overreaching is testimony to what 44 years can do to a party’s memory. It has forgotten the 1966 elections, which cost Democrats three Senate and 47 House seats, abruptly terminating two years of liberal happiness that had followed 28 fallow years.

In 1938, five years into the New Deal, the public was weary of Washington’s hyperkinesis. Voters recoiled against FDR’s attempt to “pack” the Supreme Court by enlarging it, and his related attempt to purge conservative Democrats from Congress. After 1938, Republicans and conservative Democrats prevented a durable liberal legislative majority. Until the 1964 anti-Goldwater landslide.

Johnson carried 44 states, Democrats gained two Senate and 38 House seats, and hyperkinesis returned in the form of the Great Society agenda. Since 1966, liberal overreaching has been difficult. After November, it will be impossible, for many years. For Obama, the worst result next month might be for Democrats to retain control of both houses of Congress. If they do, their majorities will be paralyzingly small. And their remaining moderates will be more resistant to the liberal leadership: The moderates will have survived not because of, but in spite of, those leaders.

Today, if you see Obama in a political ad, you are almost certainly watching a Republican ad. And a recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll shows that more than twice as many people view House Speaker Nancy Pelosi negatively (50 percent) than positively (22 percent).

If Democrats retain control of Congress, Obama will seek reelection while being perceived as responsible for everything in Washington, where everything is perceived to be dysfunctional. And anti-Washington fever may be worse than it is today, because the 2010 elections will not seem to have changed very much.

If Democrats lose both houses, Obama will seem repudiated. If they lose neither, he will seem impotent. So, if Democrats lose big, he loses big. If they lose smaller, he loses bigger.

Source: Washington Post

Related articles

• Obama Gets Political Advice, From Mike Dukakis (outsidethebeltway.com)
• Obama Gets Advice From Another Proven Winner (michellemalkin.com)
• Old, Unelectable Democrats Have Lots of Advice for Barack Obama (newsweek.com)
• The Conservative Tide (powerlineblog.com)
• Dukakis’s directions – Globe: Ex-candidate advised W.H. (politico.com)
• Few Dems eager to campaign with Obama (sfgate.com)
• Good News: Dukakis Advising Democrats (michellemalkin.com)
• Dems feud over plan to fix deficits (politico.com)

Related posts:

1. Pres. Obama wants Elective Surgery on Health Care
2. Fallout from the Republican Victory in Massachusetts Continues to Pour Down on Obama
3. Will Obama Dismantle America Before She Wakes Up?

When Sarah Palin, in a rambling lakeside announcement last July in Wasilla, said she was quitting as governor of Alaska because of the abuse she and her family were taking from petty politicians and a feral press, she was written off as dead by the pundits.

“A quitter, can’t take the heat,” was the Beltway consensus.

Yet, it seems that was no more the end of Sarah than it was the end of Richard Nixon when, after losing to Gov. Pat Brown in California in 1962, he spat at the press: “Just think how much you’re going to be missing. You won’t have Nixon to kick around anymore because, gentlemen, this is my last press conference.”

Six years later, Nixon took the oath on the Capitol steps.

And though the media have painted Palin as a ditz, no politician in memory has conducted a more brilliant pre-presidential campaign, if that is what she is about, than the lady who calls herself “the Mama Grizzly.”

Consider Tuesday. Palin had gambled big by going into South Carolina to endorse Nikki Haley, a state legislator running last for the GOP nomination for governor — against the lieutenant governor, the attorney general and a congressman.

Haley instantly vaulted into the lead, taking 49 percent on primary day, and is headed for the governor’s mansion — in a Palmetto State that holds what is often the decisive primary in presidential nomination runs.

Nikki was Sarah’s kind of conservative with a populist touch.

But Terry Branstad is not. This ex-governor of Iowa, who served four terms ending in 1998, is a moderate. Yet Palin endorsed him in his comeback bid over a conservative backed by Dr. James Dobson and Mike Huckabee.

After his victory Tuesday, Branstad, too, is headed for the governor’s mansion in a state that hosts the first big battle of 2012 — the Iowa caucuses.

By bringing conservatives to Branstad’s camp, Palin can claim some credit for returning him to office, though Mitt Romney backed Branstad earlier and his and Branstad’s staffs are said to be wired.

The endorsement of Branstad suggests Palin, a politician of principle, has a pragmatic streak. She acts not only out of instinct but cold calculation. How else to explain the Branstad endorsement over a social conservative than a decision to befriend a future GOP governor in the first battleground state of 2012?

Other interventions this cycle reveal Palin to be far more savvy than the caricature drawn by the left.

Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, a colleague of Palin’s in the GOP Governor’s Association, was facing an uphill battle against Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, who had the backing of Dick Cheney — Mr. National Security and the most visible national Republican of 2009.

Cheney went to Texas for Hutchison. Palin went in for Perry, who had scrambled to the Tea Party right, even raising the specter of secession. Perry won in a walk. Palin 1, Cheney 0.

Perry will lead the second-largest bloc of delegates to the GOP convention in Tampa, Fla. The largest will come from California, where Carly Fiorina — another one of Palin’s mama grizzlies — won the GOP Senate nod on Tuesday. Palin had endorsed her over the more conservative Chuck DeVore.

In Kentucky, where the establishment backed Mitch McConnell’s handpicked successor to Sen. Jim Bunning, Trey Grayson, and Cheney went in for Grayson, Palin endorsed Rand Paul, son of Ron Paul, who has a loyal libertarian following.

With Palin and Tea Party backing, Rand won. The Pauls, too, owe a debt to Sarah. Palin 2, Cheney 0.

In Arizona, Palin, who is closer in her politics to J.D. Hayworth, came to campaign for embattled Sen. John McCain, who chose her as his running mate and made her a star.

McCain’s aides have been anonymously trashing Sarah as an airhead who had caused the ticket’s defeat. She repaid their disloyalty with unqualified loyalty to McCain, who is unlikely to forget what she did, at some cost to herself.

But it was Sarah’s first intervention, in New York’s 23rd Congressional District, where she showed a boldness that marks the better politicians.

Liberal Republican Dede Scozzafava was handpicked by the party to face Democrat Bill Owens in the Republican district. Doug Hoffman, endorsed by the Conservative Party, jumped in. Newt Gingrich urged Republicans to stand by the pro-choice, pro-gay-rights Scozzafava.

Palin went rogue and declared for Hoffman, who surged past Scozzafava, who fell to third, bowed out and endorsed Owens, who won by two. That was the first manifestation of Palin Power. Palin 1, Newt 0.

Looking over Palin’s endorsements — McCain over J.D., Fiorina over DeVore, Branstad over Bob Vander Plaats and Rod Roberts — the lady is not running for Mrs. Conservative. The one explanation that makes the most sense of all the seeming inconsistencies in endorsements is that Mama Grizzly is thinking about moving the Wasilla brood into the big house.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Predator Palin (lewrockwell.com)
• Another Winner on Tuesday: The Palin Endorsement (time.com)
• Another Winner on Tuesday: The Palin Endorsement (time.com)
• Palin Backs “Mama Grizzlies” (politicalwire.com)
• Sarah Palin Endorsements Stir 2012 Election Talk (huffingtonpost.com)
• Palin’s picks display pragmatism, stirs 2012 talk (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Palin more pragmatic than friends, foes expect (msnbc.msn.com)

No related posts.

I had intended to write a longer article to go with this list but chose not to, as I feared such an article would take away from the full impact of this list itself. I will just say that the votes for or against this bill where votes for or against socialism. I say that because nationalized healthcare has always been the last nail in the coffin of freedom.

It is imperative that in order to avoid this free fall into the abyss of slavery to want that we elect leaders and legislators at all levels of government who are strong Constitutional Conservatives and who will bring us back to the path of freedom our founders intended us to follow when first they gave us a Democratic Federal Republican form of government unlike any other the world has ever known.

I firmly believe, as did Ronald Reagan that the goal can be attained only by revitalizing the carcass of the Republican Party. Yes, I said carcass and that is what I meant, for our Republican leadership over the years since Reagan have consistently lead us down the road of socialism that was being charted by the modern day liberal Democrat Party.

If we do not turn our country around in the 2010 elections, we stand to completely lose the freedom our founders. That is to say, the 2010 elections are our last chance, short of armed rebellion, to take back our country and put it on the path of freedom as outlined in our founding documents, the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution.

If you do not have a copy of these documents, you will find good copies of them here. Read them. Other than the Holy Bible, they are the most important documents for our guidance as a nation. The world needs us to win this battle, else where will they be able to look for leadership. We must restore our status as the shinning city on the hill.

As further reading in the interests of maintaining our freedoms, I recommend Sean Hannity’s Conservative Victory and David Barton’s Original Intent. Both of these are very informative, relatively short, easy reads. The former is about Obama and defeating his radical agenda, and the second is about the intent of our founders, regarding the courts, the constitution, and religion. I believe that at the cost of very little time and money these two books will inform you without wearing you out.

Educate yourselves. Your elected political leaders and legislators and, with one lone exception, the entrenched national media will not properly educate you. That lone exception is Fox News.

Fox News, like Americans in general and much like our founding fathers before us, is right-leaning, and conservative to out-right libertarian. It is because Fox is a conservative network that prides itself on covering all the more popular sides of the issues in depth that it is the lone national network we can trust to give us most of what we need to know or gives us an idea where to find what is lacking, so we can better preserve the patrimony given us by our founders.

It must be said that we, the people, have not always done a good job of preserving our patrimony, but then we have not always had a network that tells-it-like-it-is as does Fox News.

Inform yourself, then vote your conscience in 2010. A vote for a Constitutional Conservative is a vote for freedom.

Remember in November how your legislators voted.

Failure is not an option. The time is the 2010 election. The 2012 election is too late.

(Y=Yes, N=No)

ALABAMA

Democrats – Bright, N; Davis, N.

Republicans – Aderholt, N; Bachus, N; Bonner, N; Griffith, N; Rogers, N.

ALASKA

Republicans – Young, N.

ARIZONA

Democrats – Giffords, Y; Grijalva, Y; Kirkpatrick, Y; Mitchell, Y; Pastor, Y.

Republicans – Flake, N; Franks, N; Shadegg, N.

ARKANSAS

Democrats – Berry, N; Ross, N; Snyder, Y.

Republicans – Boozman, N.

CALIFORNIA

Democrats – Baca, Y; Becerra, Y; Berman, Y; Capps, Y; Cardoza, Y; Chu, Y; Costa, Y; Davis, Y; Eshoo, Y; Farr, Y; Filner, Y; Garamendi, Y; Harman, Y; Honda, Y; Lee, Y; Lofgren, Zoe, Y; Matsui, Y; McNerney, Y; Miller, George, Y; Napolitano, Y; Pelosi, Y; Richardson, Y; Roybal-Allard, Y; Sanchez, Linda T., Y; Sanchez, Loretta, Y; Schiff, Y; Sherman, Y; Speier, Y; Stark, Y; Thompson, Y; Waters, Y; Watson, Y; Waxman, Y; Woolsey, Y.

Republicans – Bilbray, N; Bono Mack, N; Calvert, N; Campbell, N; Dreier, N; Gallegly, N; Herger, N; Hunter, N; Issa, N; Lewis, N; Lungren, Daniel E., N; McCarthy, N; McClintock, N; McKeon, N; Miller, Gary, N; Nunes, N; Radanovich, N; Rohrabacher, N; Royce, N.

COLORADO

Democrats – DeGette, Y; Markey, Y; Perlmutter, Y; Polis, Y; Salazar, Y.

Republicans – Coffman, N; Lamborn, N.

CONNECTICUT

Democrats – Courtney, Y; DeLauro, Y; Himes, Y; Larson, Y; Murphy, Y.

DELAWARE

Republicans – Castle, N.

FLORIDA

Democrats – Boyd, Y; Brown, Corrine, Y; Castor, Y; Grayson, Y; Hastings, Y; Klein, Y; Kosmas, Y; Meek, Y; Wasserman Schultz, Y.

Republicans – Bilirakis, N; Brown-Waite, Ginny, N; Buchanan, N; Crenshaw, N; Diaz-Balart, L., N; Diaz-Balart, M., N; Mack, N; Mica, N; Miller, N; Posey, N; Putnam, N; Rooney, N; Ros-Lehtinen, N; Stearns, N; Young, N.

GEORGIA

Democrats – Barrow, N; Bishop, Y; Johnson, Y; Lewis, Y; Marshall, N; Scott, Y.

Republicans – Broun, N; Deal, N; Gingrey, N; Kingston, N; Linder, N; Price, N; Westmoreland, N.

HAWAII

Democrats – Hirono, Y.

IDAHO

Democrats – Minnick, N.

Republicans – Simpson, N.

ILLINOIS

Democrats – Bean, Y; Costello, Y; Davis, Y; Foster, Y; Gutierrez, Y; Halvorson, Y; Hare, Y; Jackson, Y; Lipinski, N; Quigley, Y; Rush, Y; Schakowsky, Y.

Republicans – Biggert, N; Johnson, N; Kirk, N; Manzullo, N; Roskam, N; Schock, N; Shimkus, N.

INDIANA

Democrats – Carson, Y; Donnelly, Y; Ellsworth, Y; Hill, Y; Visclosky, Y.

Republicans – Burton, N; Buyer, N; Pence, N; Souder, N.

IOWA

Democrats – Boswell, Y; Braley, Y; Loebsack, Y.

Republicans – King, N; Latham, N.

KANSAS

Democrats – Moore, Y.

Republicans – Jenkins, N; Moran, N; Tiahrt, N.

KENTUCKY

Democrats – Chandler, N; Yarmuth, Y.

Republicans – Davis, N; Guthrie, N; Rogers, N; Whitfield, N.

LOUISIANA

Democrats – Melancon, N.

Republicans – Alexander, N; Boustany, N; Cao, N; Cassidy, N; Fleming, N; Scalise, N.

MAINE

Democrats – Michaud, Y; Pingree, Y.

MARYLAND

Democrats – Cummings, Y; Edwards, Y; Hoyer, Y; Kratovil, N; Ruppersberger, Y; Sarbanes, Y; Van Hollen, Y.

Republicans – Bartlett, N.

MASSACHUSETTS

Democrats – Capuano, Y; Delahunt, Y; Frank, Y; Lynch, N; Markey, Y; McGovern, Y; Neal, Y; Olver, Y; Tierney, Y; Tsongas, Y.

MICHIGAN

Democrats – Conyers, Y; Dingell, Y; Kildee, Y; Kilpatrick, Y; Levin, Y; Peters, Y; Schauer, Y; Stupak, Y.

Republicans – Camp, N; Ehlers, N; Hoekstra, N; McCotter, N; Miller, N; Rogers, N; Upton, N.

MINNESOTA

Democrats – Ellison, Y; McCollum, Y; Oberstar, Y; Peterson, N; Walz, Y.

Republicans – Bachmann, N; Kline, N; Paulsen, N.

MISSISSIPPI

Democrats – Childers, N; Taylor, N; Thompson, Y.

Republicans – Harper, N.

MISSOURI

Democrats – Carnahan, Y; Clay, Y; Cleaver, Y; Skelton, N.

Republicans – Akin, N; Blunt, N; Emerson, N; Graves, N; Luetkemeyer, N.

MONTANA

Republicans – Rehberg, N.

NEBRASKA

Republicans – Fortenberry, N; Smith, N; Terry, N.

NEVADA

Democrats – Berkley, Y; Titus, Y.

Republicans – Heller, N.

NEW HAMPSHIRE

Democrats – Hodes, Y; Shea-Porter, Y.

NEW JERSEY

Democrats – Adler, N; Andrews, Y; Holt, Y; Pallone, Y; Pascrell, Y; Payne, Y; Rothman, Y; Sires, Y.

Republicans – Frelinghuysen, N; Garrett, N; Lance, N; LoBiondo, N; Smith, N.

NEW MEXICO

Democrats – Heinrich, Y; Lujan, Y; Teague, N.

NEW YORK

Democrats – Ackerman, Y; Arcuri, N; Bishop, Y; Clarke, Y; Crowley, Y; Engel, Y; Hall, Y; Higgins, Y; Hinchey, Y; Israel, Y; Lowey, Y; Maffei, Y; Maloney, Y; McCarthy, Y; McMahon, N; Meeks, Y; Murphy, Y; Nadler, Y; Owens, Y; Rangel, Y; Serrano, Y; Slaughter, Y; Tonko, Y; Towns, Y; Velazquez, Y; Weiner, Y.

Republicans – King, N; Lee, N.

NORTH CAROLINA

Democrats – Butterfield, Y; Etheridge, Y; Kissell, N; McIntyre, N; Miller, Y; Price, Y; Shuler, N; Watt, Y.

Republicans – Coble, N; Foxx, N; Jones, N; McHenry, N; Myrick, N.

NORTH DAKOTA

Democrats – Pomeroy, Y.

OHIO

Democrats – Boccieri, Y; Driehaus, Y; Fudge, Y; Kaptur, Y; Kilroy, Y; Kucinich, Y; Ryan, Y; Space, N; Sutton, Y; Wilson, Y.

Republicans – Austria, N; Boehner, N; Jordan, N; LaTourette, N; Latta, N; Schmidt, N; Tiberi, N; Turner, N.

OKLAHOMA

Democrats – Boren, N.

Republicans – Cole, N; Fallin, N; Lucas, N; Sullivan, N.

OREGON

Democrats – Blumenauer, Y; DeFazio, Y; Schrader, Y; Wu, Y.

Republicans – Walden, N.

PENNSYLVANIA

Democrats – Altmire, N; Brady, Y; Carney, Y; Dahlkemper, Y; Doyle, Y; Fattah, Y; Holden, N; Kanjorski, Y; Murphy, Patrick, Y; Schwartz, Y; Sestak, Y.

Republicans – Dent, N; Gerlach, N; Murphy, Tim, N; Pitts, N; Platts, N; Shuster, N; Thompson, N.

RHODE ISLAND

Democrats – Kennedy, Y; Langevin, Y.

SOUTH CAROLINA

Democrats – Clyburn, Y; Spratt, Y.

Republicans – Barrett, N; Brown, N; Inglis, N; Wilson, N.

SOUTH DAKOTA

Democrats – Herseth Sandlin, N.

TENNESSEE

Democrats – Cohen, Y; Cooper, Y; Davis, N; Gordon, Y; Tanner, N.

Republicans – Blackburn, N; Duncan, N; Roe, N; Wamp, N.

TEXAS

Democrats – Cuellar, Y; Doggett, Y; Edwards, N; Gonzalez, Y; Green, Al, Y; Green, Gene, Y; Hinojosa, Y; Jackson Lee, Y; Johnson, E. B., Y; Ortiz, Y; Reyes, Y; Rodriguez, Y.

Republicans – Barton, N; Brady, N; Burgess, N; Carter, N; Conaway, N; Culberson, N; Gohmert, N; Granger, N; Hall, N; Hensarling, N; Johnson, Sam, N; Marchant, N; McCaul, N; Neugebauer, N; Olson, N; Paul, N; Poe, N; Sessions, N; Smith, N; Thornberry, N.

UTAH

Democrats – Matheson, N.

Republicans – Bishop, N; Chaffetz, N.

VERMONT

Democrats – Welch, Y.

VIRGINIA

Democrats – Boucher, N; Connolly, Y; Moran, Y; Nye, N; Perriello, Y; Scott, Y.

Republicans – Cantor, N; Forbes, N; Goodlatte, N; Wittman, N; Wolf, N.

WASHINGTON

Democrats – Baird, Y; Dicks, Y; Inslee, Y; Larsen, Y; McDermott, Y; Smith, Y.

Republicans – Hastings, N; McMorris Rodgers, N; Reichert, N.

WEST VIRGINIA

Democrats – Mollohan, Y; Rahall, Y.

Republicans – Capito, N.

WISCONSIN

Democrats – Baldwin, Y; Kagen, Y; Kind, Y; Moore, Y; Obey, Y.

Republicans – Petri, N; Ryan, N; Sensenbrenner, N.

WYOMING

Republicans – Lummis, N.

Related posts:

1. Stop ObamaCare Sickness Now. Final Vote Scheduled Sunday. Call! Call! Call!
2. Controlling Leviathan: The Battle for Limited Government
3. Will the United States of America Become a Socialist Country in 2010?

We can hope for a Democratic loss in Massachusetts tomorrow, but we cannot afford to expect it. An unfulfilled hope is bad enough; an unfulfilled expectation can be devastating.

A win by Scott Brown will be a vote against ObamaCare and that is wonderful, but don’t be too disappointed later when you discover Scott Brown is a “RINO” (Republican In Name Only). A win in Massachusetts for the Republican Party is a win for better government. Be happy with that for now.

We must take what we can get in Massachusetts; after all, politics in that state has been off-the-chart leftist politics for a long, long time. Change comes one step at a time.

Make no mistake about it; what is happening in Massachusetts has and will continue to affect the whole country. That fact stands whether the Republicans win or lose at the ballot box tomorrow.

The shift that has already taken place there would have been unthinkable just a few months back.

It is time to shout for joy at the great strides Massachusetts has taken toward conservatism. It was the home of the original tea party, don’t forget. Good things can happen there and they are in the throws of happening now: today.

Related posts:

1. Will the United States of America Become a Socialist Country in 2010?
2. Controlling Leviathan: The Battle for Limited Government

America's founding fathers signing the Declaration of Independence

In October My Personal Introspections blog published a post that asked if the United States would fall apart in 2010, as predicted by Professor Igor Panarin and dutifully reported by IZVESTIA. Today the question is will the United States become a socialist country in 2010.

The answer will be yes, if our legislators pass the Obama/Reid/Pelosi health care legislation now being considered and if we, the people, accept this new status quo without a fight. We can stand up and fight to stop this from happening by speaking up and engaging in civil disobedience when and if necessary.

Recently our church leaders across the United States have joined in signing a document called The Manhattan Declaration, which says in part: “We will not be intimidated into silence or acquiescence or the violation of our consciences by any power on earth, be it cultural or political, regardless of the consequences to ourselves.” If you would like to sign this declaration, just click here and you will be taken to The Manhattan Declaration website where you can sign it and become a fellow freedom warrior.

Some very promising news has just come out of Massachusetts concerning the U.S. Senate race going on there between Republican Massachusetts state Senator Scott Brown and Democratic state Attorney General Martha Coakley in the general election race to fill the seat vacated by the death of Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.). Brown, who started out behind Coakley some 30%, has substantially moved up in the polls. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely voters in the state finds Coakley ahead of Brown 50% to 41%, with 1% preferring some other candidate, and 7% undecided. This means Brown has closed the gap in that senatorial race to 7%. Should he win, the Democrats would lose their filibuster proof majority in the Senate, which would potentially stop the Democratic health care legislation in its tracks. It would be a seismic shift in the political structure of Massachusetts and of the United States Senate. Let’s hope he wins.

Watch this video and see what you think about Scott Brown’s political philosophy and chances. At the very least I think you will be taken by the commercial for Scott Brown for Senate included in the video.

It has just been reported that Democratic Senator Byron Dorgan has just decided not to run in the coming election. He is 22% behind the Republican candidate, so it is not hard to see why he has given up.

Republicans have a good chance to win in seven other states, as well, so not all is lost for freedom in America.

Just remember that God is alive and He is in charge. Now, go to work, do your best and all will be well. The alternative is too terrible to consider.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Tuesday’s campaign round-up (washingtonmonthly.com)
• Polling and Political Wrap-Up, 1/4/10 (dailykos.com)
• Wednesday’s campaign round-up (washingtonmonthly.com)
• MA-Senate Race – GOP Candidate Invokes JFK in Ad (mydd.com)
• Is it really possible that the next Senator from Massachusetts… (althouse.blogspot.com)
• Negotiations Will Occur on Health Bill, Progressives Have Opportunity to Make Them Fruitful (news.firedoglake.com)
• The Dream Will Never Die (online.wsj.com)
• Dorothy meets a member of the 1% club behind the curtain (iflizwerequeen.com)
• Could Massachussetts Elect a Republican to Kennedy’s Seat? (meganmcardle.theatlantic.com)

Related posts:

1. Will the United States of America Fall Apart in July 2010?
2. Poll Reveals Trauma of Joblessness in U.S.
3. Controlling Leviathan: The Battle for Limited Government