Most in conservative circles are in love with her. Some are expecting McCain's downfall as a result of this choice.
I tend to think Gov. Sarah Palin is going to work out quite swimmingly for McCain.
Let us establish one simple fact here:
Sarah Palin has more executive experience than both Senator Obama and Senator Biden.
Let us also establish something else:
Sarah Palin rose to prominence because she FOUGHT corruption in her state, and primarily in her own party. Obama rose to power because he WORKED WITH the corrupt Chicago political machine. Quite a difference in character.
What is funny is how the leftist lapdogs in the media, and their owners in the Democratic party have shifted the argument to "expeeeeeerience" now. The phrase a "heartbeat away" keeps popping up all over the lefty media these days. Why?
If we are soooo concerned about sending Sarah Palin to be second in line to the presidency, why THE HELL AREN'T WE WORRIED ABOUT SOMEONE WITH LESS EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE, that is Obama, BEING FIRST IN LINE!!!!??!?!?!?!? How come that never came up? What blatant hypocrisy!
No one EVER questioned Obama's experience in the media, simply because he was so amazing everyone just KNEW he could handle anything thrown his way. Palin does not receive the same reassurance from the dirt bags on the tube and in our failing papers. All she gets is criticism for being a small town girl, having a baby with down syndrome, and being "inexperienced."
Sarah Palin has excited the conservative base. This was a crucial move on John McCain's part, as so many conservatives have been (rightfully so) suspicious of him. He now has them, and the duo must work in conjunction with each other to energize the base even more.
She is a strong candidate. Palin has an EIGHTY percent approval rating in Alaska. She is not afraid to veto spending bills everyday (300 in one year). She has fought the corruption of the GOP in Alaska, and left prominent posts in protest over it. To think that she is going to let Joe Blow Biden stomp all over her in the debates is ludicrous, and to think that she has NO KNOWLEDGE whatsoever about foreign policy is ludicrous as well. I realize Joe Biden is the supposed "foreign policy expert," but perhaps he is a foreign policy expert who was wrong on the war with Islamic terrorism, and the Cold War, as Mark Steyn so eloquently put it.
I suspect she will do wonders for John McCain. She is indeed a risk, but if the two of them play their cards correctly, they will stomp Obama/Biden like the bugs they are.
While Obama speaks of change, the new politic, and other hopeful platitudes, he simultaneously picks a candidate who has spent 35 years inside beltway Washington.
McCain chose the true outsider. The true wild card. Someone with the strength to call those in her own party out. That is something lacking these days. While the Obama campaign talks about changing the world, changing America, changing truffles or what have you, McCain has chosen the candidate that can actually bring change.
Change is fine, as long as there is substance beneath it. Obama/Biden offers nothing. A "bridge to nowhere." McCain/Palin is something substantial. Something reformist. While the McCain camp will put forth ideas about fixing social security, winning the war in Iraq, and cutting spending, the Obama camp will come out with the same..
"I am my brother's keeper" B.S. Barry, your brother in Kenya lives in a hut on a dollar a day. Are you your brother's keeper?
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Monday, August 25, 2008
"F*** Fox News!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDGhs_LN7Fk
Since they cannot defend their beliefs with anything logical (as there is nothing logical behind it), they resort to screaming "Fuck Fox News, Fuck Fox News!"
These people are so aggressive. They are not peaceful. They are angry and filled with hatred. The peace movement is a farce.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D74Xs1VuYAE
Another fine example of "peaceful protesting." I suppose assaulting cameramen is peaceful. These people are so mentally debased.
I have experienced this sort of intimidation, with 50 or more people surrounding you, screaming in your face, and calling you "fascist!"
Isn't it ironic? We conservatives never engage in this sort of bullying. We NEVER engage in assault, or violence, or public insanity. We NEVER surround one or two people and scream at them. However, the above scenarios ALWAYS happen at "peaceful anti-war protests."
I know from experience. They surround you, a crowd of 40, 50 or more, yelling at you, shoving you, calling you names, a neo-nazi, a neo-con, a fascist, a racist, and anything else they can conjure up. They corner you, try to intimidate you, try to hurt you.
They are just lucky I didn't have a bat with me back in '06.
Who tries to silence opposition? The left.
Who tries to intimidate others with different opinions at rallies and protests? The left.
Who are the ones tossing molotov cocktails, feces, and other disgusting things at war memorials, veterans, police, and recruitment centers? The left.
Who screams at my 80 year old WW2 veteran buddy, Dominick, flipping him off and yelling "fuck you"? Leftists.
Who pushed me around, calling me a traitor, only to call the police on ME? A leftist.
You tell me who is "peaceful."
I know you hippies feel you're doing the "right thing." You couldn't be more wrong.
Posted by Conor H.
Since they cannot defend their beliefs with anything logical (as there is nothing logical behind it), they resort to screaming "Fuck Fox News, Fuck Fox News!"
These people are so aggressive. They are not peaceful. They are angry and filled with hatred. The peace movement is a farce.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D74Xs1VuYAE
Another fine example of "peaceful protesting." I suppose assaulting cameramen is peaceful. These people are so mentally debased.
I have experienced this sort of intimidation, with 50 or more people surrounding you, screaming in your face, and calling you "fascist!"
Isn't it ironic? We conservatives never engage in this sort of bullying. We NEVER engage in assault, or violence, or public insanity. We NEVER surround one or two people and scream at them. However, the above scenarios ALWAYS happen at "peaceful anti-war protests."
I know from experience. They surround you, a crowd of 40, 50 or more, yelling at you, shoving you, calling you names, a neo-nazi, a neo-con, a fascist, a racist, and anything else they can conjure up. They corner you, try to intimidate you, try to hurt you.
They are just lucky I didn't have a bat with me back in '06.
Who tries to silence opposition? The left.
Who tries to intimidate others with different opinions at rallies and protests? The left.
Who are the ones tossing molotov cocktails, feces, and other disgusting things at war memorials, veterans, police, and recruitment centers? The left.
Who screams at my 80 year old WW2 veteran buddy, Dominick, flipping him off and yelling "fuck you"? Leftists.
Who pushed me around, calling me a traitor, only to call the police on ME? A leftist.
You tell me who is "peaceful."
I know you hippies feel you're doing the "right thing." You couldn't be more wrong.
Posted by Conor H.
The "Humanity of the Taliban"
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article1602644.ece#OTC-RSS&ATTR=News
"But BBC World News correspondent Doucet claimed the public also want to seeing the kinder side of the Afghan extremists. Asked what was missing in media coverage, she said: “It may sound odd but the humanity of the Taliban, because they are a wide, very diverse group of people.”
Why has the left been on the side of the Islamic terrorists since day one? Why are they supporting a group of people that detonates bombs in markets, filled with women and children in Baghdad? Why do they side with those who have killed thousands of people in our country, bombed weddings in Jordan, killed 150 school kids in Beslan, and beheaded Christian schoolgirls in Indonesia?
The behavior of the left is absolutely sickening and it knows no lows; no bounds. Just when you think you have seen the worst of them, they come out with something even more ridiculous. They are a traitorous bunch, always spitting out moral equivalency between us and the Islamists, always warning us about the evils of Christianity, while praising the goodness of Islam.
We should not care about the "diversity" of the Taliban. We should care about US forces killing the Taliban dead.
"But BBC World News correspondent Doucet claimed the public also want to seeing the kinder side of the Afghan extremists. Asked what was missing in media coverage, she said: “It may sound odd but the humanity of the Taliban, because they are a wide, very diverse group of people.”
Why has the left been on the side of the Islamic terrorists since day one? Why are they supporting a group of people that detonates bombs in markets, filled with women and children in Baghdad? Why do they side with those who have killed thousands of people in our country, bombed weddings in Jordan, killed 150 school kids in Beslan, and beheaded Christian schoolgirls in Indonesia?
The behavior of the left is absolutely sickening and it knows no lows; no bounds. Just when you think you have seen the worst of them, they come out with something even more ridiculous. They are a traitorous bunch, always spitting out moral equivalency between us and the Islamists, always warning us about the evils of Christianity, while praising the goodness of Islam.
We should not care about the "diversity" of the Taliban. We should care about US forces killing the Taliban dead.
Sunday, August 24, 2008
Free Speech, Reserved
As usual, free speech is only reserved for those on the left-wing of the Democratic party. Typically, those on the left tend to use the words "racist," "Islamophobe," and other emotional phrases to silence those who do not agree with them.
Here is another fine example of how those on the left treat those who do not exemplify their beliefs and positions. As George Orwell astutely pointed out:
"Pacifism is objective pro-fascist. This is elementary common sense."
Why is the peace movement the most angry, the most outrageous, and the most aggressive movement in the country? Hard to say. The most simple answer is because they aren't peaceful people. They are filled with hatred.
For further examples, check out these two sites:
http://zombietime.com
http://lookingattheleft.com
WARNING: Some of the content is not work friendly. Seeing as many leftists enjoy protesting naked, or protesting with extremely vulgar slogans on signs, it would be smart to not browse through these at work.
Here is another fine example of how those on the left treat those who do not exemplify their beliefs and positions. As George Orwell astutely pointed out:
"Pacifism is objective pro-fascist. This is elementary common sense."
Why is the peace movement the most angry, the most outrageous, and the most aggressive movement in the country? Hard to say. The most simple answer is because they aren't peaceful people. They are filled with hatred.
For further examples, check out these two sites:
http://zombietime.com
http://lookingattheleft.com
WARNING: Some of the content is not work friendly. Seeing as many leftists enjoy protesting naked, or protesting with extremely vulgar slogans on signs, it would be smart to not browse through these at work.
Friday, August 22, 2008
Barry picks Loose Lips for Veep
The Messiah has chosen his leading disciple, and it is Joe Biden, senator from Delaware.
The cable news media have been squawking all day about who Senator Obama was going to pick to be his running mate. I think Chris Matthews had another thrill run up his leg all day thinking about the Messiah's pick.
Bits and pieces of information have been leaking out slowly over the hours in the form of who would not be on the ticket.
When news came out that Hilary Clinton was not going to be Obama's veep, the discussion turned sour as hostile Hilary fans took their final insult. The in-fighting within the Democratic party between the Hilary supporters and the Obama disciples is going to be very interesting, an ultimately, in my opinion, the game breaker. But picking Joe Biden as his running mate only adds to the losing strategy that the Dems are employing. This is the man who gives verbose, ad hoc, Castro-like speeches. And he is the man who said of the Messiah:
I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.Well, that's swell. It doesn't take much to become Obama's wingman. Just let him know he's a 'clean and nice-looking guy.' Who would have thunk it that loose lips would eventually become Barry's veep.
If for nothing else, Senator Biden will prove to be a rich bank of quotable gaffes in this historic presidential campaign.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Barack Roll
I apologize for the lack of substantive entries in the past week, but all of us here at The Patriot have been bogged down in trying to get ready for the coming year.
Nevertheless, now is a good time for some laughs before we all get back into the grind of the school year.
So, here, for your entertainment, is Barack Obama to Barack Roll you.
Barack Roll
Nevertheless, now is a good time for some laughs before we all get back into the grind of the school year.
So, here, for your entertainment, is Barack Obama to Barack Roll you.
Barack Roll
Saturday, August 9, 2008
Friday, August 8, 2008
The Pledge
The other day at a campaign rally, Barack Obama was interrupted midstream by a man in the audience. The man complained that Obama had not recited the pledge of allegiance. Senator Obama, showing himself to be a skilled politician to say the least, invited the man to lead the audience in saying the pledge. And so they did. To the man, Obama said, "Thank you, sir, appreciate it."
This story of the encounter between Obama and the plaintive heckler reminded me of perhaps the most glorious moment of my high school career. I was not particularly cognizant of my own politic beliefs at the time, but even in those early years, I had an instinctive appreciation for our country and our way of life. Accordingly, even before I understood the broader implications of saying or not saying the pledge, I never resented the fact that every day in school we would express our commitment to this wonderful nation in a simple little pledge.
It struck me as odd, then, that in my senior year, a few of the 'rebels' would not stand with us while we all said the pledge. Not coincidently, but not apparent to me at the time, these students were all self-identified liberals. And, as it were, they were the ones who identified themselves as the 'intellectuals' in our little home room.
At first I wasn't too disturbed by their not taking part in the pledge. Their loss. But as the year went on, I began to realize the irony of their gesture. Their motivations were probably varied, but I'm pretty certain that these defiant homeroom protesters were trying to show their disapproval of the fact that the pledge included the phrase, 'One nation under God,' or they were just carrying on in the same knee-jerk anti-authoritarian tradition that their parents -products of the 60's and 70's - passed on to them. Likely, they were united in some way or another by an antipathy or outright hatred for the United States, a feeling not uncommon among those on the left.
One day, right before the end of senior year, the daily routine dissolved. One of the girls in the room said to one of our homeroom rebels, "Why do you have to be different than everyone else? Can't you just say the pledge like the rest of us? What's your problem?"
As the leader of the anti-pledge gang began to utter his retort, citing 'freedom of speech', I cut him off.
I said, "Ben, I know you all think you're being very cool by not standing for the pledge, and you think you're showing us how much you disapprove of the pledge and the country it represents, but do realize that by staying seated while the rest of us stand, you're actually doing the most American thing you can possibly do: you're exercising a right to not speak against your will, a right that is quintessentially American. Do you think you'd be shown the same kind of tolerance for your defiance in the countries you and your group openly admire? So, although it is your right to not stand for the pledge, you have to laugh at the fact that at the same time that you are trying to express your contempt for our country, you're actually exemplifying it's unparalleled goodness and freedom. Good job!"
I didn't mean to say any of this, but my disgust with this group had built up for so many months that I had to say something. And I was not alone in feeling this way. Almost like a scene from out of a teen movie, I received the applause from the whole class, including my teacher. I had no clue I'd get that kind of response, but that was probably one of the most memorable moments of my high school career. I hope my classmates understood my message, and that for them, the moment was equally memorable.
This story of the encounter between Obama and the plaintive heckler reminded me of perhaps the most glorious moment of my high school career. I was not particularly cognizant of my own politic beliefs at the time, but even in those early years, I had an instinctive appreciation for our country and our way of life. Accordingly, even before I understood the broader implications of saying or not saying the pledge, I never resented the fact that every day in school we would express our commitment to this wonderful nation in a simple little pledge.
It struck me as odd, then, that in my senior year, a few of the 'rebels' would not stand with us while we all said the pledge. Not coincidently, but not apparent to me at the time, these students were all self-identified liberals. And, as it were, they were the ones who identified themselves as the 'intellectuals' in our little home room.
At first I wasn't too disturbed by their not taking part in the pledge. Their loss. But as the year went on, I began to realize the irony of their gesture. Their motivations were probably varied, but I'm pretty certain that these defiant homeroom protesters were trying to show their disapproval of the fact that the pledge included the phrase, 'One nation under God,' or they were just carrying on in the same knee-jerk anti-authoritarian tradition that their parents -products of the 60's and 70's - passed on to them. Likely, they were united in some way or another by an antipathy or outright hatred for the United States, a feeling not uncommon among those on the left.
One day, right before the end of senior year, the daily routine dissolved. One of the girls in the room said to one of our homeroom rebels, "Why do you have to be different than everyone else? Can't you just say the pledge like the rest of us? What's your problem?"
As the leader of the anti-pledge gang began to utter his retort, citing 'freedom of speech', I cut him off.
I said, "Ben, I know you all think you're being very cool by not standing for the pledge, and you think you're showing us how much you disapprove of the pledge and the country it represents, but do realize that by staying seated while the rest of us stand, you're actually doing the most American thing you can possibly do: you're exercising a right to not speak against your will, a right that is quintessentially American. Do you think you'd be shown the same kind of tolerance for your defiance in the countries you and your group openly admire? So, although it is your right to not stand for the pledge, you have to laugh at the fact that at the same time that you are trying to express your contempt for our country, you're actually exemplifying it's unparalleled goodness and freedom. Good job!"
I didn't mean to say any of this, but my disgust with this group had built up for so many months that I had to say something. And I was not alone in feeling this way. Almost like a scene from out of a teen movie, I received the applause from the whole class, including my teacher. I had no clue I'd get that kind of response, but that was probably one of the most memorable moments of my high school career. I hope my classmates understood my message, and that for them, the moment was equally memorable.
Thursday, August 7, 2008
Paris for President... That's Hot!
Apparently Barack Obama wasn't the only person to get his panties in a knot over the recent 'Celebrity' Ad from the McCain camp. Paris Hilton, the omnipresent bimbo socialite, is used in the ad to suggest that Monsieur Obama is of the same ilk - uberfamous, but for no good reason other than the incessant fawning of his media disciples. Well, Paris didn't like that too much, so she took to the net to blast both candidates and to offer her own plan for America.
That's Hot!
That's Hot!
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Essential Reading
Here is a quick list of 'must-reads' for all of you who wish to expand your understanding of conservatism and libertarianism. These are the sorts of books that will deeply affect you and force you to reconsider the stances you've taken up to now. More importantly, studying the rich intellectual heritage of American conservative and libertarian ideas will arm you with the necessary knowledge to push back those who assail them. If you've never heard of or read any of these works before, then you're in for a real treat. Cliche as it sounds, most of these books have been life-changing for millions of people who identify with the fundamental principles of a free society. So, here they are. I'll categorize them by author. You see that some of these authors are contemporary, while others are quite old, but it is great
F.A. Hayek
1. The Road to Serfdom
2. The Constitution of Liberty
3. The Fatal Conceit
Thomas Sowell
1. The Vision of the Anointed
2. Conflict of Visions: the ideological origins of political struggles.
3. Basic Economics
4. Knowledge and Decisions
5. Cosmic Justice
Milton Friedman
1. Free to Choose
2. Capitalism and Freedom
Russell Kirk
1. The Conservative Mind
Adam Smith
1. Wealth of Nations
Barry Goldwater
1. Conscience of a Conservative
Alfred Regnery
1. Upstream
William F. Buckley
1. God and Man at Yale
John Locke
1. Two Treatises on Government
Edmund Burke
1. Reflections on the French Revolution
John Jay, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton
1. The Federalist Papers
Thomas Jefferson
1. Declaration of Independence
James Madison (mostly)
1. The Constitution of the United States of America
George Nash
1. The Conservative Intellectual Movement in America since 1945
Bernard Bailyn
1. The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution
David Boaz
1. Libertarianism: A Primer
Ludwig von Mises
1. Human Action
Dinesh D'Souza
1. Letters to a Young Conservative
Allan Bloom
1. The Closing of the American Mind
Clarence Thomas
1. My Grandfather's Son
Ronald Reagan
The Reagan Diaries
This is a short list that I've taken off the top of my head. Please do comment and add to the list.
Addenda: Here are other similar lists compiled by groups such as the Young America Foundation.
1. YAF Reading List
2. Jonah Goldberg's Picks
F.A. Hayek
1. The Road to Serfdom
2. The Constitution of Liberty
3. The Fatal Conceit
Thomas Sowell
1. The Vision of the Anointed
2. Conflict of Visions: the ideological origins of political struggles.
3. Basic Economics
4. Knowledge and Decisions
5. Cosmic Justice
Milton Friedman
1. Free to Choose
2. Capitalism and Freedom
Russell Kirk
1. The Conservative Mind
Adam Smith
1. Wealth of Nations
Barry Goldwater
1. Conscience of a Conservative
Alfred Regnery
1. Upstream
William F. Buckley
1. God and Man at Yale
John Locke
1. Two Treatises on Government
Edmund Burke
1. Reflections on the French Revolution
John Jay, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton
1. The Federalist Papers
Thomas Jefferson
1. Declaration of Independence
James Madison (mostly)
1. The Constitution of the United States of America
George Nash
1. The Conservative Intellectual Movement in America since 1945
Bernard Bailyn
1. The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution
David Boaz
1. Libertarianism: A Primer
Ludwig von Mises
1. Human Action
Dinesh D'Souza
1. Letters to a Young Conservative
Allan Bloom
1. The Closing of the American Mind
Clarence Thomas
1. My Grandfather's Son
Ronald Reagan
The Reagan Diaries
This is a short list that I've taken off the top of my head. Please do comment and add to the list.
Addenda: Here are other similar lists compiled by groups such as the Young America Foundation.
1. YAF Reading List
2. Jonah Goldberg's Picks
Flip-Flop For Obama
With the focus of national politics this week on energy policies, Barack Obama has gone back on his original plan to not tap the national strategic oil reserve. He instead suggested selling 70 million barrels of oil for, "less expensive crude." Obama said that the measure has been used in the past to lower gasoline prices in a matter of only two weeks.
Less than a month ago, Obama said that the oil reserve should not be exploited as a means to lower energy costs. He backed a congressional resolution that intended to suspend adding to the strategic oil reserves.
Obama also said that the U.S. should tap the National Petrolium Reserve in Alaska to increase oil and gasoline production.
Obama's 180 is surely the first occurrence of what is to be many new energy stretegies employed by the two presidential candidates this week. Energy is at the fore-front of political news and, as gas prices continue to drop, this week could prove to be a make-or-break time for the two presidential hopefuls.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-CFz21lG4g
Less than a month ago, Obama said that the oil reserve should not be exploited as a means to lower energy costs. He backed a congressional resolution that intended to suspend adding to the strategic oil reserves.
Obama also said that the U.S. should tap the National Petrolium Reserve in Alaska to increase oil and gasoline production.
Obama's 180 is surely the first occurrence of what is to be many new energy stretegies employed by the two presidential candidates this week. Energy is at the fore-front of political news and, as gas prices continue to drop, this week could prove to be a make-or-break time for the two presidential hopefuls.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-CFz21lG4g
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
