Day 3 has ended without a ridiculous press release from Gray Sasser and the Tennessee Democrat Party. Hallelujah!
I was very surprised we were not graced with something creative for Halloween.
But we did have the retraction of a political ad under threat of legal action that was sponsored by them.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Did You Ever Have to Make Up Your Mind?
The threshold of personal wealth in America continues to diminish the more Obama and Biden speak. When will it drop to $100,000?
Maybe after Election Day.
Don't give them the chance, America.
Maybe after Election Day.
Don't give them the chance, America.
So Much for Free Speech
Obviously the editor at Clarksville Online doesn't take kindly to critique.
It struck me after reading their interview with Tim Barnes, Democrat candidate for Senate District 22, that the interviewer showed partiality toward him. He asked what his position was on a variety of issues such as abortion, women's health, the environment, and education. (“I want to be clear that, I was ‘Green’ before it was cool to be ‘Green,’" he pointed out.)
Then the interviewer asked: "What ideas do you bring forward as you go into the Senate..."
This struck me as an unfair commentary by the interview that Barnes had already won the election four days before Election Day.
At the end of the article is a comment section, so I commented that the interviewer seemed biased toward the candidate and the election wasn't over. Admittedly, I'm very passionate that the Tennessee Democrat Party stole Rosalind Kurita's primary victory from her and handed it over to Barnes, so I added something to the effect that if the party wanted the right to change its mind, it should foot the bill for the primary election.
The comments are moderated, but there was nothing exceptionally controversial about what I had written. (I've seen much worse venom complete with swearing on other blogs.)
Well, editor Bill Larsen saw it differently:
I wish I had saved the comment as proof, but I never "attacked" the interviewer. Expressing an opinion that he was biased is not a personal attack; it's my opinion. Attack implies inflammatory remarks, threats, and foul language, none of which were contained in my comment. I felt it was a respectful response, but because it wasn't positive or complimenting like the others that made it past editorial scrutiny, it was rejected.
I can understand moderating comments that meet the criteria I listed. There's some pretty nasty remarks posted to all blogs that offer nothing to the conversation but hate. I've done my best on my blog not to get into that sort of writing. I may poke fun at my liberal friends and call them "goofballs" or even "idiots," but I don't condone vicious name-calling directed at anyone. It may be frustrating to read, but I do believe everyone is entitled to their opinion.
But obviously Clarksville Online doesn't hold itself to such lofty standards.
It struck me after reading their interview with Tim Barnes, Democrat candidate for Senate District 22, that the interviewer showed partiality toward him. He asked what his position was on a variety of issues such as abortion, women's health, the environment, and education. (“I want to be clear that, I was ‘Green’ before it was cool to be ‘Green,’" he pointed out.)
Then the interviewer asked: "What ideas do you bring forward as you go into the Senate..."
This struck me as an unfair commentary by the interview that Barnes had already won the election four days before Election Day.
At the end of the article is a comment section, so I commented that the interviewer seemed biased toward the candidate and the election wasn't over. Admittedly, I'm very passionate that the Tennessee Democrat Party stole Rosalind Kurita's primary victory from her and handed it over to Barnes, so I added something to the effect that if the party wanted the right to change its mind, it should foot the bill for the primary election.
The comments are moderated, but there was nothing exceptionally controversial about what I had written. (I've seen much worse venom complete with swearing on other blogs.)
Well, editor Bill Larsen saw it differently:
I am not publishing your comment on Clarksville Online, here's why. We have a policy for stories and comments of "Attack the issue, never the person." Your comment violated that by accusing our reporter of writing a biased article. Second your comment was off topic, this interview has nothing to do with the Tennessee Democratic Party's actions. If you wanted to discuss the interview, or Mr Barnes issues on a specific topic or in general it would have been perfectly fine. Your pointing out that Mr Barnes has not yet won the election would be fine. If you wish to submit a new comment taking this into consideration, we will consider publishing it[.]We tried to get a similar interview with Sen Kurita but it never came through.
I wish I had saved the comment as proof, but I never "attacked" the interviewer. Expressing an opinion that he was biased is not a personal attack; it's my opinion. Attack implies inflammatory remarks, threats, and foul language, none of which were contained in my comment. I felt it was a respectful response, but because it wasn't positive or complimenting like the others that made it past editorial scrutiny, it was rejected.
I can understand moderating comments that meet the criteria I listed. There's some pretty nasty remarks posted to all blogs that offer nothing to the conversation but hate. I've done my best on my blog not to get into that sort of writing. I may poke fun at my liberal friends and call them "goofballs" or even "idiots," but I don't condone vicious name-calling directed at anyone. It may be frustrating to read, but I do believe everyone is entitled to their opinion.
But obviously Clarksville Online doesn't hold itself to such lofty standards.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Jib-Jabbing at McCain and Obama
The folks that brought us the animated satire "This Land" in 2004 have a new one for the 2008 presidential campaign. The take on Obama fluttering through the fairy tale forest, espousing "the change we must change for the change we hold dear" is dead-on.
Great stuff!
(Warning: contains some offensive language.)
Great stuff!
(Warning: contains some offensive language.)
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
What Better Reason Is There?
Rob Huddleston over at VOLuntarilyConservative found this sticker on a vehicle in Blount County:
The Best Reason to Vote for John McCain...is Barack Obama.
For a conservative like me, it's the best reason to vote for McCain.
The Best Reason to Vote for John McCain...is Barack Obama.
For a conservative like me, it's the best reason to vote for McCain.
No TDP Press Release Wednesday
Day 1 without a ridiculous press release by Gray Sasser and the Tennessee Democrat Party.
Let's try for two, gentlemen.
(If I were a betting man, I can almost assure you we'll see one on Halloween. One warning us about those scary Republicans! Ooooooooooo!)
Let's try for two, gentlemen.
(If I were a betting man, I can almost assure you we'll see one on Halloween. One warning us about those scary Republicans! Ooooooooooo!)
Obama's Not the First African-American Presidential Candidate
I had to shake my head when Aunt B over at Tiny Cat Pants wrote that she "cried like a baby" after voting for the Liberal Messiah. I'm sure for her it was a significant event to cast her ballot for an African-American candidate for president of the United States. She adds:
That's well and good, but it's actually not the first time that an African-American has run for the presidency. If she was registered to vote in 2000, it wasn't even the first time she had the opportunity to do so.
There are many people who have the misguided or uninformed notion that Obama is the first. Not so. I voted for an African-American candidate eight years before the Almighty Barry ever disgraced the national scene.
Amid a crowded field of candidates that included George W. Bush and John McCain in the 2000 Republican primary, I voted for Alan Keyes. It made no difference to me the color of his skin; what mattered was his position against the murder of unborn children, his Christian beliefs, and the conservative principles for which he stood.
It is significant that Obama is the first African-American to be nominated by a major political party for our nation's highest office. But it doesn't make him the right choice for our country.
So when Obama supporters make such a big deal about casting their vote for him because of his race, I have to say with pride I was eight years ahead of ya'll.
Listen, I don’t think Obama is the greatest thing since sliced cheese. I’m not even sure he’ll be a very good president. But I’m proud to be able to vote for him, and I’m proud to vote for him.
That's well and good, but it's actually not the first time that an African-American has run for the presidency. If she was registered to vote in 2000, it wasn't even the first time she had the opportunity to do so.
There are many people who have the misguided or uninformed notion that Obama is the first. Not so. I voted for an African-American candidate eight years before the Almighty Barry ever disgraced the national scene.
Amid a crowded field of candidates that included George W. Bush and John McCain in the 2000 Republican primary, I voted for Alan Keyes. It made no difference to me the color of his skin; what mattered was his position against the murder of unborn children, his Christian beliefs, and the conservative principles for which he stood.
It is significant that Obama is the first African-American to be nominated by a major political party for our nation's highest office. But it doesn't make him the right choice for our country.
So when Obama supporters make such a big deal about casting their vote for him because of his race, I have to say with pride I was eight years ahead of ya'll.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Too Bad Tim Barnes Wasn't Punished for Stealing an Election
Timmy Barnes, loser of the Democrat primary for Senate District 22 but their candidate nonetheless, was slapped on the wrist by the Tennessee Ethics Commission to the tune of $50 for failing to file his campaign's financial information on time.
The candidate lamented:
Not like that whole stolen election thing, right?
This is an excellent opportunity to remind voters of Montgomery, Cheatham, and Houston counties that they should write in the name of Rosalind Kurita for state senate. It's true she's not a Republican, but thanks to the Tennessee Democrat Party, she's not one of them either.
The candidate lamented:
"We thought that it had been filed online, but it did not go through," Barnes said. "By the time we got it filed, it was two days late. They specified it was technical violation, not an ethical violation."
Not like that whole stolen election thing, right?
This is an excellent opportunity to remind voters of Montgomery, Cheatham, and Houston counties that they should write in the name of Rosalind Kurita for state senate. It's true she's not a Republican, but thanks to the Tennessee Democrat Party, she's not one of them either.
Keep Bringing Up the Tennessee Income Tax!
Gray Sasser and the Tennessee Democrat Party are at it again. Once again they are rearing the ugly specter of a state income tax to try and whip up votes for their legislative candidates and working in a little revisionist history at the same time.
TDP snoops discovered that former Gov. Don Sundquist recently donated funds from his political action committee Majority Tennessee PAC to several Republican house and senate candidates. The funds were old campaign contributions and Sundquist hasn't been a candidate since his second term as governor ended in 2003.
Sasser awkwardly attempts to use Sundquist's contributions to accuse the recipients of hypocrisy in their opposition to a state income tax:
TDP snoops discovered that former Gov. Don Sundquist recently donated funds from his political action committee Majority Tennessee PAC to several Republican house and senate candidates. The funds were old campaign contributions and Sundquist hasn't been a candidate since his second term as governor ended in 2003.
Sasser awkwardly attempts to use Sundquist's contributions to accuse the recipients of hypocrisy in their opposition to a state income tax:
"'This is yet another example of candidates like Dolores Gresham, Ken Yager and Vance Dennis saying one thing on the campaign trail and then doing another in real life,'" said Democratic Party Chairman Gray Sasser. “They run around their districts claiming they’re against the income tax. Then they turn around and pad their pockets with Don Sundquist’s leftover campaign cash.'
Sasser added: 'We can draw either one of two conclusions: Either they support the income tax, or they’re hypocrites. Either way, Tennessee voters deserve to know the truth.'
Sasser and the TDP are practicing revisionist history, trying to place themselves above the fray that was the income tax revolt of 2001 and 2002. I can't argue with their contention that Gov. Sundquist was the leading proponent of the tax. But to label him as the "father of the income tax plan"--as Sasser does--is preposterous.
There were plenty of surrogates for the income tax. I hate to break it to you Gray, but most were Democrats. At the time, Democrats controlled both houses and thus controlled the agenda. Remember the leadership roles Bob Rochelle (in the senate) and Jimmy Naifeh (in the house) played in trying to ram it through the General Assemby?
Oh, that's right. I forget that Democrats have selective memory loss.
When you keep bringing up the income tax debacle, Gray, you're only reminding voters of the role your party played in the whole mess and only hurting your own party.
In that case, keep bringing it up! Let's have another press release! Real soon!
Not So Fast, Obama Manics!
Is it November 5th already?
Funny, but nobody told me and the rest of the country the Liberal Messiah won the election. Oh, the Liberal Mainstream Media can't wait to make the announcement, but they're doing their best to hold back six more days, trying not to let their excitement show. Democrats and Obama fanatics are beside themselves like little kids waiting for Christmas Day. Some can't handle the stress of it all.
It was bad enough that the "unbiased" moderator of the vice-presidential debate, Gwen Ifill, already had a book in the works that presumed the Liberal Messiah would win. It was "a known factor for months" that she was working on it, a spokesman for her PBS television show remarked.
Now six days before the election, we have a book slated for April 2009 publication entitled Letters to President Obama: Americans Share Our Hopes and Dreams with the First African-American President.
Who cares what the American people think: liberals, the media, and now opportunitist publishers will made the choice for you.
Obviously Skyhorse Publishing is trying to draw attention by announcing the book during the election. But what if McCain wins? "We’ll deal with that if it happens," said Bill Wolfsthal with Skyhorse Publishing. "The book might still be a poignant piece of history if Obama should lose." I'm sure readers will consider a book of letters to a non-existent president a "poignant piece of history" as it lays discarded in the bargain bin of the local bookstore.
An opportunist book such as this one is in bad taste when the votes haven't been counted. Even the New York Times agrees. Imagine if Republicans went around saying such a thing about the Liberal Messiah's fortunes? Presuming the outcome of an election is a slippery slope; just ask the Chicago Tribune and 1948 Republican candidate Thomas Dewey.
It's not the polls, not the press, not the mainstream media that choose. Oh, all three will do their very best to influence the outcome, but it's still the voter that makes the final verdict.
Funny, but nobody told me and the rest of the country the Liberal Messiah won the election. Oh, the Liberal Mainstream Media can't wait to make the announcement, but they're doing their best to hold back six more days, trying not to let their excitement show. Democrats and Obama fanatics are beside themselves like little kids waiting for Christmas Day. Some can't handle the stress of it all.
It was bad enough that the "unbiased" moderator of the vice-presidential debate, Gwen Ifill, already had a book in the works that presumed the Liberal Messiah would win. It was "a known factor for months" that she was working on it, a spokesman for her PBS television show remarked.
Now six days before the election, we have a book slated for April 2009 publication entitled Letters to President Obama: Americans Share Our Hopes and Dreams with the First African-American President.
Who cares what the American people think: liberals, the media, and now opportunitist publishers will made the choice for you.
Obviously Skyhorse Publishing is trying to draw attention by announcing the book during the election. But what if McCain wins? "We’ll deal with that if it happens," said Bill Wolfsthal with Skyhorse Publishing. "The book might still be a poignant piece of history if Obama should lose." I'm sure readers will consider a book of letters to a non-existent president a "poignant piece of history" as it lays discarded in the bargain bin of the local bookstore.
An opportunist book such as this one is in bad taste when the votes haven't been counted. Even the New York Times agrees. Imagine if Republicans went around saying such a thing about the Liberal Messiah's fortunes? Presuming the outcome of an election is a slippery slope; just ask the Chicago Tribune and 1948 Republican candidate Thomas Dewey.
It's not the polls, not the press, not the mainstream media that choose. Oh, all three will do their very best to influence the outcome, but it's still the voter that makes the final verdict.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Tennessee Democrats: Look at the Cow, Not Randy Camp
In a burst of creativity, the Tennessee Democrat Party and their venerable leader, Gray Sasser, have recruited a cow to stalk Delores Gresham, Republican candidate for Senate District 26.
As if voters in southwest Tennessee haven't already been inundated with campaign signs and television ads, now they must contend with a Democrat operative dressed as Bessie the cow littering the countryside with "No-Grant Pledge" leaflets.
This is their innovative ploy to draw attention to the fact that Mrs. Gresham's husband received $26,850 in taxpayer-funded farm grants as part of the Tennessee Agricultural Enhancement Program while she was a state representative. The program was initiated by Democrat Gov. Phil Bredesen to help state farmers and yes, Mrs. Gresham's husband is a farmer. As long as Mr. Gresham applied for the grants just like any other farmer would with no preferential treatment, there's nothing at all wrong with it. Can Gray Sasser prove he didn't?
So now we have Bessie flaunting a Democrat-produced "No-Grant Pledge" that the Democrat candidate, Randy Camp, has signed but Mrs. Gresham has not. It states that if elected, the undersigned candidates would not accept funds from the Tennessee Agricultural Enhancement Program or any other state-funded grants.
Want to know why Camp was so eager to sign this propoganda? Because he's not a farmer! It's easy for a lawyer and a politician to disavow farm grants when it has nothing to do with what he does for a living.
The Gresham family are farmers, and we all know that family farms across the country are struggling to keep the family tradition going. We need them and frankly they could use the extra bit of government help. It's disingenuous for the Tennessee Democrat Party to flaunt Camp's signature on a document that would be detremential to Mrs. Gresham's family's livelihood.
Of course this is just a sideshow by Gray Sasser to divert voter attention away from his own candidate Camp, an admitted adulterer for twenty years. Anyone who cannot be faithful to his spouse cannot be trusted as a public servant. Period.
The Tennessee Democrat Party is a joke. From ridiculous press releases to stolen primaries to volunteers parading in cow costumes, how can voters take this collection of goofballs seriously?
UPDATE: Here's the Democrat operative parading as Bessie the cow. Utterly ridiculous.
As if voters in southwest Tennessee haven't already been inundated with campaign signs and television ads, now they must contend with a Democrat operative dressed as Bessie the cow littering the countryside with "No-Grant Pledge" leaflets.
This is their innovative ploy to draw attention to the fact that Mrs. Gresham's husband received $26,850 in taxpayer-funded farm grants as part of the Tennessee Agricultural Enhancement Program while she was a state representative. The program was initiated by Democrat Gov. Phil Bredesen to help state farmers and yes, Mrs. Gresham's husband is a farmer. As long as Mr. Gresham applied for the grants just like any other farmer would with no preferential treatment, there's nothing at all wrong with it. Can Gray Sasser prove he didn't?
So now we have Bessie flaunting a Democrat-produced "No-Grant Pledge" that the Democrat candidate, Randy Camp, has signed but Mrs. Gresham has not. It states that if elected, the undersigned candidates would not accept funds from the Tennessee Agricultural Enhancement Program or any other state-funded grants.
Want to know why Camp was so eager to sign this propoganda? Because he's not a farmer! It's easy for a lawyer and a politician to disavow farm grants when it has nothing to do with what he does for a living.
The Gresham family are farmers, and we all know that family farms across the country are struggling to keep the family tradition going. We need them and frankly they could use the extra bit of government help. It's disingenuous for the Tennessee Democrat Party to flaunt Camp's signature on a document that would be detremential to Mrs. Gresham's family's livelihood.
Of course this is just a sideshow by Gray Sasser to divert voter attention away from his own candidate Camp, an admitted adulterer for twenty years. Anyone who cannot be faithful to his spouse cannot be trusted as a public servant. Period.
The Tennessee Democrat Party is a joke. From ridiculous press releases to stolen primaries to volunteers parading in cow costumes, how can voters take this collection of goofballs seriously?
UPDATE: Here's the Democrat operative parading as Bessie the cow. Utterly ridiculous.
Anyone But John Tanner for Congress
Listeners of West Tennessee talk radio host Mike Slater have made their decision.
After his call to arms against the re-election of John Tanner, U.S. representative of Tennessee's Eighth Congressional District who has had a stranglehold on the seat since I was a senior in high school (20 years), the self-styled SlaterRaiders have selected Craig R. Steinfels to be their write-in candidate. He bested seven other listeners in a series of on-air debates to determine who would represent SlaterRaiders in the election.
It's a creative way to present an alternative candidate to Tanner, who is unopposed for his eleventh term in Congress, and utilize the reach of talk radio to promote the candidacy of an average Joe. It's a shame that while votes for Steinfels will be counted, they won't count against Tanner because Steinfels wasn't registered as a write-in candidate until the deadline had past. Still, it's better to write in Craig R. Steinfels than not vote for Tanner (as I did). I only wish I knew about it before I voted early.
If nothing else, a few thousand write-in votes for Mr. Steinfels is better than giving them to Tanner just because he's the only candidate for Congress.
After his call to arms against the re-election of John Tanner, U.S. representative of Tennessee's Eighth Congressional District who has had a stranglehold on the seat since I was a senior in high school (20 years), the self-styled SlaterRaiders have selected Craig R. Steinfels to be their write-in candidate. He bested seven other listeners in a series of on-air debates to determine who would represent SlaterRaiders in the election.
It's a creative way to present an alternative candidate to Tanner, who is unopposed for his eleventh term in Congress, and utilize the reach of talk radio to promote the candidacy of an average Joe. It's a shame that while votes for Steinfels will be counted, they won't count against Tanner because Steinfels wasn't registered as a write-in candidate until the deadline had past. Still, it's better to write in Craig R. Steinfels than not vote for Tanner (as I did). I only wish I knew about it before I voted early.
If nothing else, a few thousand write-in votes for Mr. Steinfels is better than giving them to Tanner just because he's the only candidate for Congress.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Citizen's Arraist! Citizen's Arraist!
Gomer Pyle is in San Francisco, and he's a crazy woman.
Some kook from the anti-war group Code Pink injected herself into a mortgage bankers meeting in San Francisco yesterday and tried to arrest former Bush advisor Karl Rove for "treason." Rove, seated, ignored her as she stood on stage for several seconds, asking why a woman wasn't part of the discussion, reaching for Rove's hand, and pulling out a pair of handcuffs.
He pulled his arm back from her as security finally escorted her off stage as she ranted about "Citizen's arrest! Citizen's arrest!"
Now where have I heard that before? Oh yeah...
Some kook from the anti-war group Code Pink injected herself into a mortgage bankers meeting in San Francisco yesterday and tried to arrest former Bush advisor Karl Rove for "treason." Rove, seated, ignored her as she stood on stage for several seconds, asking why a woman wasn't part of the discussion, reaching for Rove's hand, and pulling out a pair of handcuffs.
He pulled his arm back from her as security finally escorted her off stage as she ranted about "Citizen's arrest! Citizen's arrest!"
Now where have I heard that before? Oh yeah...
Liberals Are Cracking Under the Pressure
This election is really getting to the liberals. The pressure is just too much for their pitiful brains to handle. They can't eat, they can't sleep, they can't function. It's hilarious!
The Liberal Messiah may be up in the polls but it's not enough to calm their fears. They've been through this before, you know. Eight long, painful years in the wilderness, separated from the Promised Land of presidential power and influence with only the memories of past failures to keep them going.
They are consumed by what will happen. What if McCain wins? What will I do? Should I get my passport and skip the country? What would Alec Baldwin say?
On a normal day, Sharon Cobb is entertaining to read. Not because she has anything intelligent to add to the political conversation. Bless her heart, she posts some ridiculous rants filled with venom but nothing to back it up. Now she's cracking under the pressure. It's really getting to her. She writes:
Fellow liberal blogger Larry David is also coming undone:
It's funny but sad at the same time. Sad that political junkie liberals have nothing else in their lives to focus on than this election. Their moods are dictated by what's happening on the campaign trail: Is Obama having a good day? Did Biden say something stupid? What's Sarah Palin said today that will cause me to loathe her even more than I already do? I believe these people actually believe Obama is their Messiah.
Do these people have families? Do these people have actual lives?
One of the side effects of liberalism must be obsession. These people really need psychiatric help. The election is consuming them beyond reason. When you go to a doctor and the first answer that comes to mind when asked if you feel threatened or if anyone is harming you is "Bush/Cheney"--as Sarah Cobb admits to doing--something's wrong. If you honestly believe the president and vice-president of the United States are out to get you, it's time for a one-way trip to a padded cell.
God forbid if Senator Government actually wins this election, I won't throw in the towel and say, "I'm outta this country." Because I have a life, I have a family, I have interests outside of who is president of the United States. I won't like it, but (hopefully) it won't be the end of the world.
The eight years that Bill Clinton was in office were trying times for our country. His behavior was humiliating for our nation and he tarnished the presidency. But I lived through it, went on with my life, and wasn't consumed by it. And after eight years, he was gone never to return.
The scary part is these mindless Obama zombies fueled on nothing but caffeine, cigarettes, and pure hatred for anyone or anything Republican are out there in our towns and cities, maybe even our neighborhoods. Obviously they're unstable. Maybe we need the police out in force before Election Day rather than on it.
The Liberal Messiah may be up in the polls but it's not enough to calm their fears. They've been through this before, you know. Eight long, painful years in the wilderness, separated from the Promised Land of presidential power and influence with only the memories of past failures to keep them going.
They are consumed by what will happen. What if McCain wins? What will I do? Should I get my passport and skip the country? What would Alec Baldwin say?
On a normal day, Sharon Cobb is entertaining to read. Not because she has anything intelligent to add to the political conversation. Bless her heart, she posts some ridiculous rants filled with venom but nothing to back it up. Now she's cracking under the pressure. It's really getting to her. She writes:
I'm friggin crumbling. My nighttime enjoyment reading has been replaced with Newsweek, Time and late night phone calls to friends equally obsessed with this election.
Upon rising, when I look at the clock and it says "6:30," I have to figure out if that's AM or PM. Once I figure out if I'm watching Good Morning America or the evening news, I turn on the television before pouring a cup of herbal tea, which has now been replaced with high octane coffee.
I think it's a real tossup to see which one of my friends and/or I crack before November 4.
So, anyone else a little stressed out over this election?
Fellow liberal blogger Larry David is also coming undone:
I just don't like what I've turned into -- and frankly I wasn't that crazy about me even before the turn. This election is having the same effect on me as marijuana. All of my worst qualities have been exacerbated. I'm paranoid, obsessive, nervous, and totally mental. It's one long, intense, bad trip. I need to come down. Soon.
It's funny but sad at the same time. Sad that political junkie liberals have nothing else in their lives to focus on than this election. Their moods are dictated by what's happening on the campaign trail: Is Obama having a good day? Did Biden say something stupid? What's Sarah Palin said today that will cause me to loathe her even more than I already do? I believe these people actually believe Obama is their Messiah.
Do these people have families? Do these people have actual lives?
One of the side effects of liberalism must be obsession. These people really need psychiatric help. The election is consuming them beyond reason. When you go to a doctor and the first answer that comes to mind when asked if you feel threatened or if anyone is harming you is "Bush/Cheney"--as Sarah Cobb admits to doing--something's wrong. If you honestly believe the president and vice-president of the United States are out to get you, it's time for a one-way trip to a padded cell.
God forbid if Senator Government actually wins this election, I won't throw in the towel and say, "I'm outta this country." Because I have a life, I have a family, I have interests outside of who is president of the United States. I won't like it, but (hopefully) it won't be the end of the world.
The eight years that Bill Clinton was in office were trying times for our country. His behavior was humiliating for our nation and he tarnished the presidency. But I lived through it, went on with my life, and wasn't consumed by it. And after eight years, he was gone never to return.
The scary part is these mindless Obama zombies fueled on nothing but caffeine, cigarettes, and pure hatred for anyone or anything Republican are out there in our towns and cities, maybe even our neighborhoods. Obviously they're unstable. Maybe we need the police out in force before Election Day rather than on it.
Tim Barnes' Puppet Dance
Here's an interesting homemade video for Tennessee state senator Rosalind Kurita's write-in campaign for Senate District 22 that was posted on the Tennessean's comments section.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Gray Sasser Can't Let Go of Rosalind Kurita
It's interesting that Gray Sasser can't seem to let go of Rosalind Kurita.Despite the fact that the Tennessee Democrat Party pulled the rug out from under her nomination for Senate District 22 and hand-picked the nominee of its choosing, its venerable leader uses every opportunity to fire out press releases and belittle her with snide--and frankly ridiculous--quotes.
Ricky Wallace, a Montgomery County Democrat who nominated Tim Barnes at the kangaroo court called a nominating convention, claims that Sen. Kurita pulled almost $26,000.00 from her political action committee to help finance her campaign, exceeding the limit of $7,500 for a primary or general election. Wallace filed a complaint with the state Registry of Election Finance and wants her to reimburse the PAC and be punished for what she allegedly did.
The Tennessee Democrat Party is only too happy to share this juicy tidbit, adding:
“Unfortunately, Sen. Kurita is so power-hungry that she’s flagrantly violating Tennessee’s campaign finance law,” said Tennessee Democratic Party Chairman Gray Sasser. “She broke the law by crossing the one hundred foot boundary during the primary, and now, she’s cheating by illegally using PAC funds to cover her campaign expenses.”
“We’re also calling on Sen. Kurita to abandon her frivolous lawsuits, obey the law, and stop funneling illegal contributions through her PAC.”
I've posted on the whole stolen election debacle numerous times, so I won't rehash it all here. But it's ironic that Gray Sasser would invoke such strong language as "power hungry" and "cheating" and attribute them to Sen. Kurita. It was the power hungry Democrat Party that couldn't stand the fact that she voted to retire a tired old man who had no business being senate speaker and lieutenant governor, a vote that ceded control of the state senate to the GOP for the first time since Reconstruction. The first time! And who's power hungry again, Gray?
The definition of "cheat" is "to practice fraud or trickery." While it may not have been fraudulent what Tennessee Democrats did in taking the nomination fom Sen. Kurita--rightfully won at the ballot box--and handing it over to Tim Barnes, it was trickery; it was a cruel trick that deprived the voters in Montgomery, Cheatham, and Houston counties of their choice for the Democrat nomination. A choice that the Democrat Party allowed voters to make in a taxpayer funded primary, yet one that they could change at their discretion.
Changing the rules once the contest is over: now that's cheating.
I hope Sen. Kurita overcomes the odds, wins re-election, and voters send the Tennessee Democrat Party a clear message that it can't change the result of a taxpayer funded primary election because it doesn't like the outcome.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Obama Supporters Crash a Sarah Palin Rally
Under the title of "Palindrones Gone Wild," Enclave showcases video of two Obama supporters who were roughed up at a recent Sarah Palin rally. "Just another day at a typical Sarah Palin rally," the blog claims.
The question that should be asked is: What were they doing at a Palin rally in the first place? The answer is fairly obvious: to cause trouble. The guys admitted they were chanting "Obama" and booing and they're actually surprised supporters of Sarah Palin reacted? These guys had no business being there in the first place. They were looking for a reaction and--surprise!--they got it.
Liberals will claim they have the right to be at a Republican rally, but really, why be somewhere your opinions wouldn't be welcome? To start something and get your faces on video. Mission accomplished, bozos.
The question that should be asked is: What were they doing at a Palin rally in the first place? The answer is fairly obvious: to cause trouble. The guys admitted they were chanting "Obama" and booing and they're actually surprised supporters of Sarah Palin reacted? These guys had no business being there in the first place. They were looking for a reaction and--surprise!--they got it.
Liberals will claim they have the right to be at a Republican rally, but really, why be somewhere your opinions wouldn't be welcome? To start something and get your faces on video. Mission accomplished, bozos.
Why Have An Election at All?
Gail Kerr with the Tennessean offers her take on Sen. Rosalind Kurita's stolen election for Tennessee Senate District 22. She makes the same point I do: why have taxpayers fund a political party's primary if the party can change the result at its discretion? Mindboggling.
It's no surprise that all the recent endorsements but two made by the editorial staff of the Tennessean are Democratic incumbents or candidates. (The first exception being incumbent Republican Susan Lynn for House District 57, though it was buffered with the comment that "this newspaper disagrees with Lynn on several issues.") The next exception was Rosalind Kurita, meaning that experience trumped partisanship for a change.
With early voting beginning yesterday, I would encourage voters in Montgomery, Cheatham, and Houston counties to write in Sen. Kurita's name on the ballot. If you're not sure how, ask a polling person for assistance.
Send the Tennessee Democratic Party a clear message that it cannot change the outcome of an election and dismiss the will of the people.
It may be legal in Tennessee, but it isn't right.
It's no surprise that all the recent endorsements but two made by the editorial staff of the Tennessean are Democratic incumbents or candidates. (The first exception being incumbent Republican Susan Lynn for House District 57, though it was buffered with the comment that "this newspaper disagrees with Lynn on several issues.") The next exception was Rosalind Kurita, meaning that experience trumped partisanship for a change.
With early voting beginning yesterday, I would encourage voters in Montgomery, Cheatham, and Houston counties to write in Sen. Kurita's name on the ballot. If you're not sure how, ask a polling person for assistance.
Send the Tennessee Democratic Party a clear message that it cannot change the outcome of an election and dismiss the will of the people.
It may be legal in Tennessee, but it isn't right.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
If Fox Cost Obama Three Points, How Many Has McCain Lost to the Liberal Media?
Obama claims that Fox News' coverage of his campaign has cost him up to three points in his poll numbers. Here's what he told the New York Times:
Exactly.
Because the rest of the mainstream media is rooting for him to win, tosses him softballs and allows him to skirt his answers, and treats him like a political superstar, it means Fox News is too hard on him when it scrutinizes him and his campaign more than he's used to.
In the same article, Obama admits (wow, he actually admits to something!) that his statement about blue-collar Americans being “bitter" about losing their jobs and "cling[ing] to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them" as being "my biggest boneheaded move." No kidding.
If Fox News cost Obama two or three points, how many has John McCain lost to the one-sided mainstream media that portrays him 24/7 as a racist, out-of-touch, Washington Times reading, gun-toting, Vietnam War veteran, angry moderate?
“I am convinced that if there were no Fox News, I might be two or three points higher in the poll...If I were watching Fox News, I wouldn’t vote for me, right? Because the way I’m portrayed 24/7 is as a freak! I am the latte-sipping, New York Times-reading, Volvo-driving, no-gun-owning, effete, politically correct, arrogant liberal. Who wants somebody like that?"
Exactly.
Because the rest of the mainstream media is rooting for him to win, tosses him softballs and allows him to skirt his answers, and treats him like a political superstar, it means Fox News is too hard on him when it scrutinizes him and his campaign more than he's used to.
In the same article, Obama admits (wow, he actually admits to something!) that his statement about blue-collar Americans being “bitter" about losing their jobs and "cling[ing] to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them" as being "my biggest boneheaded move." No kidding.
If Fox News cost Obama two or three points, how many has John McCain lost to the one-sided mainstream media that portrays him 24/7 as a racist, out-of-touch, Washington Times reading, gun-toting, Vietnam War veteran, angry moderate?
"Senator Government": The Third McCain-Obama Debate
Here's my take on the third and final debate of the 2008 presidential election.
First, Bob Schieffer did a much better job as moderator than his two predecessors. There were questions asked that hadn't been addressed in the previous debates such as the candidates' stances on partial birth abortion. The format with the candidates sitting at a table close to one another made for a more interactive exchange between them.
John McCain did a much better job in this debate that in the previous two. He made eye contact with Obama and addressed him on several occasions instead of looking only toward the moderator, as he did in the first debate. He more capably challenged Obama on his policy proposals and his connections to Bill Ayers and ACORN. He made Joe Wurzelbacher (or "Joe the Plumber" has McCain called him) a household name and a symbol of what Obama's tax plan would do to small businesses. And he finally called Obama out for the incessant comparisions with President Bush in a very pointed and effective manner:
Granted, McCain is not an eloquent speaker. He probably talks like a lot of us would if we were on national television: his voice breaks and sometimes he looks stiff or uncomfortable. He's actually more like us than one so polished and refined as his high exaltedness, the great Liberal Messiah.
Obama was Obama: eloquent in speech but devoid of substance to back it up. Truly a man of too many words. He's cool, slick, and acts like it's all no big deal for him; in other words, he looks and acts like a politician. (Where's the change in that?) There were the extended "uh's" and a few sentences that started with "Look..." that are standard fare with Obama. If he was a college professor, he would put me to sleep. (That's right: for a time he was a college professor!) The man talks on and on and on. It takes a moderator or a well-placed "uh..." to interrupt him. He reminds me so much of Bill Clinton in this respect. Obama is in love with the sound of his own voice. Trouble is, it's the same tired rhetoric that never changes and the repetitive talking points over and over again: tax cuts for 95% of Americans, the failed economic policies of the last eight years, McCain is Bush, blah, blah, blah.
Did McCain win the debate? I would honestly have to say he held his own (as he did in the previous debates), but there was no decisive moment on either side that gave the other a resounding claim to victory. Of course most will say Obama won simply because McCain failed to deliver a knockout blow against him. On the other hand, Obama was on the defensive for most of the night and made none of his own either, but the pressure was more on McCain rather than Obama to land that punch. Because he didn't, I suppose Obama won the debate by default.
The one phrase that stands out from all three debates was when McCain inadvertedly gave us the newest yet most perfect title for the Liberal Messiah: "Senator Government." Nothing more fitting has been said to summarize the political philosophy of Barack Obama. Like any good liberal, he believe not only in government but a larger and more powerful government to solve all our country's woes.
Need socialized health care? Big government!
Need your personal wealth spread around? Big government!
Need something's hand in your wallet? Big government!
Need their other hand to hold the rest of your life? Big government!
McCain has a daunting task in the next 19 days making up ground in the polls among undecided voters. Many Democrats forget where Obama was just a little over a month ago; their overconfidence could very well backfire.
First, Bob Schieffer did a much better job as moderator than his two predecessors. There were questions asked that hadn't been addressed in the previous debates such as the candidates' stances on partial birth abortion. The format with the candidates sitting at a table close to one another made for a more interactive exchange between them.
John McCain did a much better job in this debate that in the previous two. He made eye contact with Obama and addressed him on several occasions instead of looking only toward the moderator, as he did in the first debate. He more capably challenged Obama on his policy proposals and his connections to Bill Ayers and ACORN. He made Joe Wurzelbacher (or "Joe the Plumber" has McCain called him) a household name and a symbol of what Obama's tax plan would do to small businesses. And he finally called Obama out for the incessant comparisions with President Bush in a very pointed and effective manner:
"Senator Obama, I am not President Bush. If you want to run against President Bush, you should have run four years ago."
Granted, McCain is not an eloquent speaker. He probably talks like a lot of us would if we were on national television: his voice breaks and sometimes he looks stiff or uncomfortable. He's actually more like us than one so polished and refined as his high exaltedness, the great Liberal Messiah.
Obama was Obama: eloquent in speech but devoid of substance to back it up. Truly a man of too many words. He's cool, slick, and acts like it's all no big deal for him; in other words, he looks and acts like a politician. (Where's the change in that?) There were the extended "uh's" and a few sentences that started with "Look..." that are standard fare with Obama. If he was a college professor, he would put me to sleep. (That's right: for a time he was a college professor!) The man talks on and on and on. It takes a moderator or a well-placed "uh..." to interrupt him. He reminds me so much of Bill Clinton in this respect. Obama is in love with the sound of his own voice. Trouble is, it's the same tired rhetoric that never changes and the repetitive talking points over and over again: tax cuts for 95% of Americans, the failed economic policies of the last eight years, McCain is Bush, blah, blah, blah.
Did McCain win the debate? I would honestly have to say he held his own (as he did in the previous debates), but there was no decisive moment on either side that gave the other a resounding claim to victory. Of course most will say Obama won simply because McCain failed to deliver a knockout blow against him. On the other hand, Obama was on the defensive for most of the night and made none of his own either, but the pressure was more on McCain rather than Obama to land that punch. Because he didn't, I suppose Obama won the debate by default.
The one phrase that stands out from all three debates was when McCain inadvertedly gave us the newest yet most perfect title for the Liberal Messiah: "Senator Government." Nothing more fitting has been said to summarize the political philosophy of Barack Obama. Like any good liberal, he believe not only in government but a larger and more powerful government to solve all our country's woes.
Need socialized health care? Big government!
Need your personal wealth spread around? Big government!
Need something's hand in your wallet? Big government!
Need their other hand to hold the rest of your life? Big government!
McCain has a daunting task in the next 19 days making up ground in the polls among undecided voters. Many Democrats forget where Obama was just a little over a month ago; their overconfidence could very well backfire.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Tennessee Democratic Party Believes Stolen Election Fight is Over
The Tennessee Democrat Party and their venerable leader, Gray Sasser, consider the ruling by U.S. District Judge Robert Echols to be the final verdict for Sen. Rosalind Kurita's lawsuit against them. (She will undoubtedly appeal to the 6th Circuit Court.) It didn't take long for Sasser to come out with a press release claiming victory:
If the ruling is upheld and Sen. Kurita's write-in campaign is unsuccessful, the Tennessee Democratic Party will have proven that it can overturn the will of the voters at their own discretion. Who needs an election anyway?
"We are obviously pleased with the ruling. She has now had her day in court twice, and the judge ruled that the Democratic Party was well within its legal bounds to nominate Tim Barnes as our Democratic nominee. Furthermore, the Tennessee Democratic Party acted in a fair and judicious manner, making every effort to keep this matter open to the public. We are now looking forward to Election Day."
If the ruling is upheld and Sen. Kurita's write-in campaign is unsuccessful, the Tennessee Democratic Party will have proven that it can overturn the will of the voters at their own discretion. Who needs an election anyway?
Rosalind Kurita's Stolen Election Lawsuit Thrown Out
Sen. Rosalind Kurita suffered a setback this afternoon in her bid to regain the Democratic nomination for Tennessee Senate District 22. U.S. District Court Judge Robert Echols rejected her assertions that her name should be placed back on the ballot and that the state law governing primary elections be ruled unconstitutional.
It's expected that she will appeal the decision.
"The state statute allows the State Primary Board the final decision of selecting its party nominee if a primary election is contested,” Echols wrote.
It's expected that she will appeal the decision.
I'm John Tanner and I've Been Here Too Long: The Career Politician
I really have a problem with entrenched incumbents in public office, whether it's a small town city councilman or a United States senator. That's why term limits are necessary to restrain politicians who can't keep themselves from running for re-election. I simply don't agree with the argument that voters create term limits by voting someone out of office. An incumbent--especially one that's been there 10 years or more--carries name recognition, a barrel full of pork and other goodies, and a hefty war chest to finance his/her campaigns. It's difficult for a fresh face to compete with them.
If we really want change in Washington and at the state level, we need to get rid of the same old tired people that keep going back there time and again. And the best way to do it is term limits.
One example is John Tanner, U.S. representative of Tennessee's 8th Congressional District. I can't say he's my representative because I've never voted for him, even though he represents the district where I live. He's one of those moderate-to-conservative (or "Blue Dog") Democrats, which is another way of saying he's a Southerner who won't join the political party that shares many of his positions and values but stays with the one that's far left of them. Yet because he's a Democrat, he still votes along with them when the time comes. This is why I refuse to give him my vote (not that he really needs it because he's running unopposed yet again).
(I've always wondered why moderate-to-conservative Democrats are called "Blue Dogs." According to Tanner's Congressional biography, the name came about "because its members felt they had been 'squeezed from the left and the right until they turned blue in the face.'" Learn something new every day.)
In my lifetime, there have been but two men who have represented the 8th Congressional District: Ed Jones and John Tanner. Jones was elected in 1969 and served until his retirement twenty years later. His protege is following the same path and will have served just as long after he's re-elected to his eleventh term this year.
I've always loved history and like many kids, I grew up wanting to become president of the United States. That notion was later minimized when I just wanted to run for either a house or senate seat in the Tennessee General Assembly. I wanted to serve the interests of the people where I lived and considered public office a position where any citizen could--and should--serve.
I don't believe in the career politician, at least not one that dominates the same office for a generation or longer. That's not the way it was intended by the founding fathers. It has resulted in political dynasties of family or party that prevent others just as capable from serving. The Ford family of Memphis is a perfect example: father Harold Ford Sr. served as U.S. representative for 22 years (1975-97) and was succeeded by his son, Harold Ford Jr., who held it until his failed bid for U.S. Senate in 2006. Harold Sr.'s older brother John Ford represented Senate District 29 for 31 years before he resigned after his involvement in the Tennessee Waltz investigation in 2005. And who should run for his vacant seat but his sister Ophelia to keep it in the family.
Unfortunately, as long as there's nothing preventing them from running in each election, the entrenched incumbent will continue to mire the political landscape in Nashville and Washington.
If we really want change in Washington and at the state level, we need to get rid of the same old tired people that keep going back there time and again. And the best way to do it is term limits.
One example is John Tanner, U.S. representative of Tennessee's 8th Congressional District. I can't say he's my representative because I've never voted for him, even though he represents the district where I live. He's one of those moderate-to-conservative (or "Blue Dog") Democrats, which is another way of saying he's a Southerner who won't join the political party that shares many of his positions and values but stays with the one that's far left of them. Yet because he's a Democrat, he still votes along with them when the time comes. This is why I refuse to give him my vote (not that he really needs it because he's running unopposed yet again).
(I've always wondered why moderate-to-conservative Democrats are called "Blue Dogs." According to Tanner's Congressional biography, the name came about "because its members felt they had been 'squeezed from the left and the right until they turned blue in the face.'" Learn something new every day.)
In my lifetime, there have been but two men who have represented the 8th Congressional District: Ed Jones and John Tanner. Jones was elected in 1969 and served until his retirement twenty years later. His protege is following the same path and will have served just as long after he's re-elected to his eleventh term this year.
I've always loved history and like many kids, I grew up wanting to become president of the United States. That notion was later minimized when I just wanted to run for either a house or senate seat in the Tennessee General Assembly. I wanted to serve the interests of the people where I lived and considered public office a position where any citizen could--and should--serve.
I don't believe in the career politician, at least not one that dominates the same office for a generation or longer. That's not the way it was intended by the founding fathers. It has resulted in political dynasties of family or party that prevent others just as capable from serving. The Ford family of Memphis is a perfect example: father Harold Ford Sr. served as U.S. representative for 22 years (1975-97) and was succeeded by his son, Harold Ford Jr., who held it until his failed bid for U.S. Senate in 2006. Harold Sr.'s older brother John Ford represented Senate District 29 for 31 years before he resigned after his involvement in the Tennessee Waltz investigation in 2005. And who should run for his vacant seat but his sister Ophelia to keep it in the family.
Unfortunately, as long as there's nothing preventing them from running in each election, the entrenched incumbent will continue to mire the political landscape in Nashville and Washington.
Did You Know It's All Over? By a Landslide, No Less!
If one believes the liberal mainstream media and Democrats themselves, the election is all but over. His high exaltedness, the great Liberal Messiah Barack Obama, can very well begin "measuring the drapes," as John McCain related. Now comes an outlandish prophecy by John Harris, editor-in-chief at Politico:
This has to be the most absurd statement I've read thus far in this presidential campaign. Foreseeing "an Electoral College blowout" in favor of Obama is way beyond optimistic for the Democratic Party. The Liberal Messiah might have the edge right now, but I believe it's still a very fluid election. A major event or crisis could tip the balance either way in the next three weeks. If Wall Street were to right itself somewhat and the economy stabilizes a bit, it would be bad news for Obama. He needs a gloomy forecast to capitalize on the fears of the American people; it's what his campaign is built on.
And to prophecize that should he win, Obama would be "the most powerful president we've seen" since Lyndon Johnson or George W. Bush makes me want to roll in the floor with side-splitting laughter. Are you kidding?? If he were to win (God help us), he would lead a fractured nation not unlike after the 2000 election. The result may not be as close, but there will be plenty of animosity against him and his policies. A landslide would be a mandate; Obama won't have such a luxary, I promise.
I for one am not ready to concede the election to Obama, much less give him a landslide victory.
"We are on the brink of an Electoral College blowout, and there is a possibility for huge Democratic gains in the Senate, which means Barack Obama could be the most powerful president we've seen since George W. Bush in the years immediately following 9-11, or Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964," Mr. Harris said. "That shows how starkly the premises of national politics have changed."
This has to be the most absurd statement I've read thus far in this presidential campaign. Foreseeing "an Electoral College blowout" in favor of Obama is way beyond optimistic for the Democratic Party. The Liberal Messiah might have the edge right now, but I believe it's still a very fluid election. A major event or crisis could tip the balance either way in the next three weeks. If Wall Street were to right itself somewhat and the economy stabilizes a bit, it would be bad news for Obama. He needs a gloomy forecast to capitalize on the fears of the American people; it's what his campaign is built on.
And to prophecize that should he win, Obama would be "the most powerful president we've seen" since Lyndon Johnson or George W. Bush makes me want to roll in the floor with side-splitting laughter. Are you kidding?? If he were to win (God help us), he would lead a fractured nation not unlike after the 2000 election. The result may not be as close, but there will be plenty of animosity against him and his policies. A landslide would be a mandate; Obama won't have such a luxary, I promise.
I for one am not ready to concede the election to Obama, much less give him a landslide victory.
Music Row for McCain Pre-Election Get-Togethers
Tennessee Victory '08 posted the following announcement for gatherings in Nashville, TN before Election Day:Music Row for McCain has scheduled two more events before election day. The following events, which are free and open to the public, are scheduled:
Monday, October 20, 5:30PM - 7:30PM, Douglas Corner Cafe
Tuesday, October 28, 5:30PM - 7:30PM, Wildhorse Saloon.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Barack Obama and ACORN
Here's the latest ad by the McCain/Palin campaign spotlighting Barrack Obama's association with the controversial political organization ACORN.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Sexism and Sarah Palin's Legs
Tennessee Guerrilla Women complains that photographers covering the McCain/Palin campaign--particularly those from Reuters--keep taking pictures of Gov. Sarah Palin's legs, which the blogger asserts is sexist and demeaning toward her. She writes:Reuters sure has a thing for Governor Sarah Palin's legs. Will Reuters photographers soon be bringing us some close-ups of Governor Sarah Palin's breasts?
Who exactly are these photos for? Are they for Sarah Palin's voters? Or are there some serious sexist cretins over at Reuters? How do they say it? Oh, yeah. Reuters is a leg man.
The Sarah Palin Sexism Watch (yes, there's actually a blog devoted to it) has the same complaint. "The photographer was apparently unable to take pictures of Palin's supporters without including her legs in the shot," it noted.
I thought it was funny at first, but now I have to admit both ladies have a point. Searching through the Reuters archives and on the Web, I found several photos that utilize Gov. Palin's legs' to focus on one or more spectators in the audience and a few that seem to have no other purpose than to focus totally on her legs or feet.
Is it demeaning--even disrespectful--for cameras to focus there rather than on her face? Sure. This photo seems especially inappropriate, making it look like the kid's at a strip club:
Are news photographers blatantly sexist? I really don't think so. Maybe they're trying to convey a "woman in power" aspect by focusing on the governor's high-heeled feet and calves. I don't know. Being a male, I personally don't have a problem with it. But would I want photographers to start focusing their lenses on John McCain, Barack Obama, or Joe Biden's legs and feet? Or on worse places?
...Like Obama's big ears and ugly wart? Yuck. :)
Tim Barnes' Arrogance
Here's a video that shows the contempt Tim Barnes holds for Sen. Rosalind Kurita. Even John McCain and Barack Obama can shake hands after their debates! She made the effort and extended her hand to his shoulder, which was turning away and off stage. Tempers may rise and feelings may get hurt during the course of a campaign, but there was no excuse for such disrepect that Barnes exhibited. This, dear voters, is the Tennessee Democratic Party's hand-picked candidate for Senate District 22.
Rosalind Kurita Ads
Sen. Rosalind Kurita has two new ads that are running on cable television in Montgomery, Cheatham, and Houston counties. They help explain how voters can write her name in on November 4. I encourage voters in these counties to support Sen. Kurita and send the Tennessee Democratic Party a clear message that they can't constrain your voice and make the loser their hand-picked candidate.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Bob Tuke, Bless His Heart
Bob Tuke, bless his heart. He's trying his best to make himself significant in the campaign against U.S. Senator Lamar Alexander. Everyone knows he's the sacrificial lamb for the Tennessee Democrat Party. But like the little kid in the back of the crowd, he's jumping up and down, waving his arms frantically, doing his best to remind folks he's still in the race.He received a token nod from the Liberal Messiah, Barack Obama, at Al and Tipper Gore's post-debate get-together at their upscale Belle Meade estate. Obama told the Democratic choir that "we want to make sure that we elect Bob Tuke." Someone with the Boston Globe even bothered to ask him about the Liberal Messiah's campaign (but not his own). "I'm delighted to see his much more aggressive response," he responded. "I'm a Marine. If these people want to fight, they ought to buckle their chinstraps."
Trouble is, Tuke has been shooting blanks in his own campaign. He has tried to convince the media through his own polling that he has cut Sen. Alexander's lead to what they described as "a slim 50%-38% margin." A Mason-Dixon poll commissioned by the Knoxville News-Sentinel, however, placed the margin at 57% to 33% on Sept. 29. As Pith in the Wind pointed out, Alexander's campaign doesn't even refer to Tuke by name and certainly isn't worried about the competition.
It was going to be a tough road for any Democrat to take on the popular incumbent senator. Knowing the challenge, no big names wanted the nomination. But party bosses couldn't let Alexander run unopposed, so Tuke was plucked from a mediocre pool of candidates in the primary to take one for the party.
UPDATE: Jeff Woods at the Nashville Scene has written a favorable article on Bob Tuke's campaign that's worth reading.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Major League Baseball during the Bush Presidency
Here are the final regular season standings for the American and National Leagues during the presidency of George W. Bush (2001-09). The top 5 teams during his tenure were the New York Yankees (775-518); Boston Red Sox (740-555); St. Louis Cardinals (727-568); Oakland Athletics (724-571); and the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim (721-575). The top National League club was my favorite team, the Cards! (This list is courtesy of Society for American Baseball Research member Brad Sullivan.)
AMERICAN LEAGUE
East
New York Yankees 775-518 .599 --
Boston Red Sox 740-555 .571 36
Toronto Blue Jays 647-648 .4996 129
Baltimore Orioles 560-734 .433 215.5
Tampa Bay(D)Rays 541-753 .418 234.5
Central
Minnesota Twins 707-589 .546 --
Chicago White Sox 683-614 .527 24.5
Cleveland Indians 661-635 .510 46
Detroit Tigers 564-731 .436 142.5
Kansas City Royals 530-766 .409 177
West
Oakland Athletics 724-571 .559 --
Anaheim/LA Angels 721-575 .556 3.5
Seattle Mariners 661-635 .510 63.5
Texas Rangers 618-678 .477 106.5
NATIONAL LEAGUE
East
Atlanta Braves 711-583 .549 --
Philadelphia Phillies 692-603 .534 19.5
New York Mets 651-643 .503 60
Florida Marlins 645-650 .498 66.5
Montreal/Washington 585-710 .452 126.5
Central
St. Louis Cardinals 727-568 .561 --
Houston Astros 686-609 .530 41
Chicago Cubs 659-636 .509 68
Milwaukee Brewers 588-707 .4540 139
Cincinnati Reds 588-708 .4537 139.5
Pittsburgh Pirates 550-744 .425 176.5
West
Los Angeles Dodgers 681-615 .525 --
San Francisco Giants 670-623 .518 9.5
Arizona Diamondbacks 650-646 .502 31
San Diego Padres 618-679 .477 63.5
Colorado Rockies 595-702 .459 86.5
Ooo, Saracuda!
Over on the Hard Reset blog, there was posted a video clip with Gov. Sarah Palin responding to a heckler with poise and class. I thought it was a great response.
Tennessee Democratic Party Can't Help But Attack Rosalind Kurita
As A.C. Kleinheider at Nashville Post Politics points out, Gray Sasser and the Tennessee Democratic Party cannot stop attacking Sen. Rosalind Kurita and her write-in campaign. It seems he cannot help but justify why the party did what it did to her. (As I pointed out last Thursday, state Democrats must be worried about voter backlash; otherwise why bother?) And the more Sasser talks, the more truth about why they did it seeps out. As quoted by Clarksville Online:
One Kurita supporter offers a passionate defense of her candidacy; another defends the voter's right to cast their ballot in the primary of their choosing.
Meanwhile Sen. Kurita picked up the endorsement of the National Rifle Association. "I am pleased at the continued support of the National Rifle Association and their membership,” she responded. “I fully support the constitutional right to bear arms. It is important that elected officials fight for all constitutional rights, whether they be speech, voting rights or any other of the precious freedoms written into our founding documents.”
On the lawsuit front, state officials assert that it's too late to place Sen. Kurita's name on the ballots in Montgomery, Cheatham, and Houston counties because absentee ballots have already been mailed and they would like the suit dismissed. Tennessee Attorney General Robert E. Cooper also claimed a primary election was beyond the jurisdiction of the federal courts.
"I don't think there will be anything really resolved in federal court on Friday, and I anticipate that it will probably be appealed to the next level, which is the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals," Sen. Kurita responded.
“In fact, the only backroom deal in this long, sordid saga was cut long before the Aug. 7 primary, when Sen. Kurita went back on her word to her Democratic colleagues and supported Republican Ron Ramsey for Senate speaker and lieutenant governor,” Sasser said.
One Kurita supporter offers a passionate defense of her candidacy; another defends the voter's right to cast their ballot in the primary of their choosing.
Meanwhile Sen. Kurita picked up the endorsement of the National Rifle Association. "I am pleased at the continued support of the National Rifle Association and their membership,” she responded. “I fully support the constitutional right to bear arms. It is important that elected officials fight for all constitutional rights, whether they be speech, voting rights or any other of the precious freedoms written into our founding documents.”
On the lawsuit front, state officials assert that it's too late to place Sen. Kurita's name on the ballots in Montgomery, Cheatham, and Houston counties because absentee ballots have already been mailed and they would like the suit dismissed. Tennessee Attorney General Robert E. Cooper also claimed a primary election was beyond the jurisdiction of the federal courts.
"I don't think there will be anything really resolved in federal court on Friday, and I anticipate that it will probably be appealed to the next level, which is the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals," Sen. Kurita responded.
Monday, October 6, 2008
A Voice in the Democratic Wilderness
A supporter of Senator Rosalind Kurita shares his perspective on the hearing by the Tennessee Democratic Party Executive Committee that ousted her from the party's nomination. Mind you, he is not one of those conspiratorial Republicans who voted in the Democratic primary, but a self-professed "lifelong Democrat" who sees what his party did as an injustice to Sen. Kurita and to the electorate. At one point during the hearing, he felt led to leave the room when he voiced his opposition to what the committee was doing.
This is not a Republican vs. Democrat issue as the state Democratic Party wants to make it. As I've stated throughout this blog, it's a matter of ethical conduct and honoring the wishes of the voters of Senate District 22. It's up to the voters not to validate what the state Democratic Party did to Sen. Kurita with a vote for the presumptive Democratic candidate, Tim Barnes. Take a few extra minutes to write in her name on November 4. If the Democratic bosses are allowed to do it once, it will happen again at their own discretion.
Clarksville Online provides the following steps voters in Montgomery County should take to write in Sen. Kurita's name:
...I was challenged by party officials and told I had no right to voice my opinion of the proceedings. That is when I started to get angry and responded 'but, I am a voter!' It was clear that the party officials were very concerned that an insurgency might erupt and began hurrying toward me telling me to leave. That is when I went on to shout as I was voluntarily leaving 'the Executive Committee should do its job and vote on the basis of the facts and the evidence, not vengeance.' I did not need to be escorted out, but I am certain that I would have been escorted out had I stayed any longer.
This is not a Republican vs. Democrat issue as the state Democratic Party wants to make it. As I've stated throughout this blog, it's a matter of ethical conduct and honoring the wishes of the voters of Senate District 22. It's up to the voters not to validate what the state Democratic Party did to Sen. Kurita with a vote for the presumptive Democratic candidate, Tim Barnes. Take a few extra minutes to write in her name on November 4. If the Democratic bosses are allowed to do it once, it will happen again at their own discretion.
Clarksville Online provides the following steps voters in Montgomery County should take to write in Sen. Kurita's name:
You will cast your vote for President, U.S. Senator, U.S. Representative and then State Senator. You will see Tim Barnes name as the Democratic nominee. Directly under his name you will see WRITE IN. Push the button beside WRITE IN.
- The screen will change and the letters of the alphabet (A-Z) will appear. Place an X beside each letter: K – U – R – I – T – A . You will see KURITA spelled out in the middle of the screen.
- Once you have typed KURITA just press the done button at the bottom to accept and return to the former screen.
- You should now see Kurita with an X beside it underneath Tim Barnes name on the ballot. You can now continue on with the remainder of the ballot.
Remember – you can always ask an election worker to help you with this process.
Democrats Still Trying to Rationalize Stolen Election
Democrats continue to defend and rationalize the stolen election in Tennessee Senate District 22 in the pages of the Clarksville Leaf-Chronicle. One reader opines:
I've argued this point for the past month on this blog. It's true the state Democratic Party had the right to do what it did, but it was a politically expedient decision that invalidated the choice of the voters in District 22. The party that admonishes Republicans that "every vote counts" is the same party that pulled off this act of political thievery. Democrats can try to convince voters and themselves it's not the case, but no amount of political correctness can mask the fact.
They don't like that Republicans voted in their primary, but they fail to mention there were only two candidates for the senate seat and both were Democrats. They must be reminded (obviously) that Republicans are still voters and in the state of Tennessee, voters are allowed to participate in whichever primary they choose. If a voter in Montgomery, Cheatham, or Houston counties wanted to vote for their representative in the state senate, they had to vote in the Democratic primary. I understand this must be a difficult concept for some Democrats to comprehend. As Dr. Seuss would've put it, "A voter is a voter no matter who he is."
Some Democrats by nature are conspiracy theorists. If anything goes wrong for them, it's the fault of Republicans. Back in the day, Hillary Clinton lamented "the vast right wing conspiracy" out to get her faithful and beloved husband. This particular Leaf-Chronicle reader rattles off the standard Democratic talking point that there was a "concerted effort by the Republican Party to influence the election." Yes, we admit it: every single Republican voter in the three counties got together at a clandestine hideaway and concocted an ingenious plot to steal the election away from the rightful candidate, Tim Barnes. O, the guilt is unbearable that we had the nerve, the audacity, the unmitigated gall to pull off such a dastardly usurpation of the democratic process.
That's funny: sounds just like what the Democratic state executive committee did to Senator Rosalind Kurita.
Under law passed in 1972, Democrats and Republicans have absolute authority on who their party's nominee should be. The Democratic Party voided the Barnes-Kurita election due to numerous irregularities, including voters being misled by poll workers and a concerted effort by the Republican Party to influence the election.
I've argued this point for the past month on this blog. It's true the state Democratic Party had the right to do what it did, but it was a politically expedient decision that invalidated the choice of the voters in District 22. The party that admonishes Republicans that "every vote counts" is the same party that pulled off this act of political thievery. Democrats can try to convince voters and themselves it's not the case, but no amount of political correctness can mask the fact.
They don't like that Republicans voted in their primary, but they fail to mention there were only two candidates for the senate seat and both were Democrats. They must be reminded (obviously) that Republicans are still voters and in the state of Tennessee, voters are allowed to participate in whichever primary they choose. If a voter in Montgomery, Cheatham, or Houston counties wanted to vote for their representative in the state senate, they had to vote in the Democratic primary. I understand this must be a difficult concept for some Democrats to comprehend. As Dr. Seuss would've put it, "A voter is a voter no matter who he is."
Some Democrats by nature are conspiracy theorists. If anything goes wrong for them, it's the fault of Republicans. Back in the day, Hillary Clinton lamented "the vast right wing conspiracy" out to get her faithful and beloved husband. This particular Leaf-Chronicle reader rattles off the standard Democratic talking point that there was a "concerted effort by the Republican Party to influence the election." Yes, we admit it: every single Republican voter in the three counties got together at a clandestine hideaway and concocted an ingenious plot to steal the election away from the rightful candidate, Tim Barnes. O, the guilt is unbearable that we had the nerve, the audacity, the unmitigated gall to pull off such a dastardly usurpation of the democratic process.
That's funny: sounds just like what the Democratic state executive committee did to Senator Rosalind Kurita.
Fall in the Air and Cotton in the Fields
One of the things I miss about living in West Tennessee is the cotton fields. I had the chance to drive down several country roads last week and see the fields of white scattered beside them. The air was cool, the sky sunny, and the leaves were beginning to change colors. It won't be long before they're picked clean and left barren till next fall. Living in Middle Tennessee deprives me of the daily opportunity to see the snow white fields that I remember when I was young. Now I have the chance to drive past tobacco fields and smoking barns, which is another reminder that the seasons are changing. But I still love to drive past those cotton fields back home and marvel at their white beauty.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Sarah Palin Bounces Back
After two weeks of brutal negative media coverage and a lack of confidence among some conservatives, Gov. Sarah Palin did an outstanding job tonight in the vice-presidential debate with Sen. Joe Biden. Admittedly, I was apprehensive leading up to the debate, worried that she might stumble or stutter her words, show indecisiveness, or simply be in over her head.
But Gov. Palin held her own tonight, displaying the self-confident and determined personality that won over conservative support for her at the Republican National Convention. By comparison, Sen. Joe Biden was rather stoic and unexciting in his style. He kept up a barrage of statistics and percentages that I think confuses and bores people more than it educates them. There were no serious gaffes made by either candidate.
Gov. Palin's performance renewed my confidence in her ability to be a capable running mate and potential vice-president of the United States. It was certainly more memorable and impressionable than Joe Biden's. She talked directly to the American people and yes, she even looked at her opponent when she addressed him. I think the "maverick" line she attributes to Sen. John McCain wears thin over time and Biden eventually used it to his advantage. That would be my only criticism of her overall performance during the debate.
I believe people will be talking tomorrow more about how Sarah Palin did than how Biden did.
But Gov. Palin held her own tonight, displaying the self-confident and determined personality that won over conservative support for her at the Republican National Convention. By comparison, Sen. Joe Biden was rather stoic and unexciting in his style. He kept up a barrage of statistics and percentages that I think confuses and bores people more than it educates them. There were no serious gaffes made by either candidate.
Gov. Palin's performance renewed my confidence in her ability to be a capable running mate and potential vice-president of the United States. It was certainly more memorable and impressionable than Joe Biden's. She talked directly to the American people and yes, she even looked at her opponent when she addressed him. I think the "maverick" line she attributes to Sen. John McCain wears thin over time and Biden eventually used it to his advantage. That would be my only criticism of her overall performance during the debate.
I believe people will be talking tomorrow more about how Sarah Palin did than how Biden did.
Democratic Women Toe the Party Line
The National Federation of Democratic Women have followed the party line and endorsed Tim Barnes for state senate District 22 rather than the incumbent, Senator Rosalind Kurita.
Is there any sense of right and wrong in the Democratic Party, regardless of partisan politics? The Tennessee Democratic Party executive committee decrees that the loser of an election is the winner and everyone in the party drinks the Kool-Aid, nods in agreement, and turns against their one of their own. Are there any Democrats in Montgomery, Cheatham, or Houston counties--or anywhere else in Tennessee--who can see this issue what what it really is: stealing an election away from the rightful winner because of a party vendetta? I shake my head in disbelief.
Is there any sense of right and wrong in the Democratic Party, regardless of partisan politics? The Tennessee Democratic Party executive committee decrees that the loser of an election is the winner and everyone in the party drinks the Kool-Aid, nods in agreement, and turns against their one of their own. Are there any Democrats in Montgomery, Cheatham, or Houston counties--or anywhere else in Tennessee--who can see this issue what what it really is: stealing an election away from the rightful winner because of a party vendetta? I shake my head in disbelief.
Phil Bredesen and Tennessee Democrats Show Off Their Morals
No surprise that Gov. Phil Bredesen and the state Democratic leadership are getting behind Tim Barnes's stolen candidacy for state senate in District 22. Yesterday they all gathered in Nashville to flaunt their support for him, including Sen. Thelma Harper and House speaker Jimmy Naifeh. Isn't it wonderful these elected leaders display their morals and principles by advocating the overturn of an election in favor of the loser? I'm so proud to be a Tennessean.
Jimmy Naifeh and Tim Barnes
Rosalind Kurita's Chances Must Worry Tennessee Democrats
Yesterday A.C. Kleinheider posted a very interesting essay on Senator Rosalind Kurita's expulsion from the state Democratic Party. It's in response to a ridiculous press release by the party in response to her Republican-hosted fundraiser last night in Nashville. It reads:
Obviously state Democrats will jab at Senator Kurita with any angle they can create in their imaginations. And it's been a long time since we've heard Don Sundquist's name brought up in political conversation. The income tax may have been Sundquist's idea, but it was Democrats who fervently pushed it for him. Once again, Democrats have self-inflicted memory loss and try to revise history. I always thought the "income tax wing" in state politics was the Democratic Party. Wasn't it Democratic senator Bob Rochelle who was the chief proponent of the measure? Do Tennessee Democrats really want to resurrect memories of the contentious income tax debate a month before the election?
If Senator Kurita's write-in campaign is "floundering" as Gray Sasser claims, why is he so worried about her that he has to issue press releases about her, and with such far-fetched claims? If she's such a non-factor, why bother bringing her name up? Because Gray Sasser and the Tennessee Democratic Party are worried about her. The odds are historically stacked against a write-in candidate, yet there must be uneasiness about backlash from her stolen election for Democrats to continue attacking her.
Rosalind Kurita has shown her true political stripes by putting her career ahead of her principles. Tennessee Democratic Party Chairman Gray Sasser released the following statement in response to a fundraiser for Kurita tonight at the Cherokee Equity Corporation. Cherokee Equity Corporation board member Justin Wilson, in his capacity as Deputy Governor to Republican Governor Don Sundquist, was one of the architects behind Sundquist's disastrous state income tax plans.
"Rosalind will say or do anything to help her floundering campaign. Kurita now sides with the income tax proponents of the Tennessee Republican Party for her personal career advancement and for no other reason. Today, we find that she has cast her lot with Don Sundquist and the income tax wing of the Tennessee GOP. She is so desperate to fund her campaign that she will cozy up to any special interest."
Obviously state Democrats will jab at Senator Kurita with any angle they can create in their imaginations. And it's been a long time since we've heard Don Sundquist's name brought up in political conversation. The income tax may have been Sundquist's idea, but it was Democrats who fervently pushed it for him. Once again, Democrats have self-inflicted memory loss and try to revise history. I always thought the "income tax wing" in state politics was the Democratic Party. Wasn't it Democratic senator Bob Rochelle who was the chief proponent of the measure? Do Tennessee Democrats really want to resurrect memories of the contentious income tax debate a month before the election?
If Senator Kurita's write-in campaign is "floundering" as Gray Sasser claims, why is he so worried about her that he has to issue press releases about her, and with such far-fetched claims? If she's such a non-factor, why bother bringing her name up? Because Gray Sasser and the Tennessee Democratic Party are worried about her. The odds are historically stacked against a write-in candidate, yet there must be uneasiness about backlash from her stolen election for Democrats to continue attacking her.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)