Rock is Back

Rock it to me.

Aside

Life is a journey, and this is my next leg.

Truth

Tentatively, I’m going to start publishing my blog again, but I’ve learned quite a bit since I hung up my blogging tools and went back into private industry. The last time I posted was July 24, 2007. This was before our grand election and anointing of Barrack. As you know, I was aware at that time that Barrack could win, and I even found some things in him to like. Yet, I had settled on the wimpy McCain and kept on defending George W. Bush, at least for his Iraq War policy.

So much has happened since then. I went back to being a technical writer for a successful defense industry firm. I did so well I raised the company’s bottom line substantially and got promoted. However, my heart always remains with politics. By the way, I also got accepted into Mensa this year.

I quit blogging only because I couldn’t make a living at it. To achieve the high quality I was reaching with Truth was taking hours a day, with no compensation. My blog was fairly popular, and won awards, but not popular enough to monetize it. It took about 30 hr of work a week from me. I am proud of this body of work. However, this time around, I’m going to make money at it.

The possible solution for me is another Internet phenomenon, Meetups. I will be forming what I call Rock’s Tribes within this system. You can visit it at Rock's Tribes. I describe it there, as The first conservative Hollywood action and artistic, entertainment, media, and writing troupe.






The goal will be to take back the media, Hollywood, the schools and universities, and so on, for at least some conservative representation. I will, again, be starting small, but this time it will be monetized, which is always the problem, and it will be comprised only of passionate conservatives like me who want to change the world for the good.

As a part of this, I will restart publishing my blog on a weekly basis. At first, I will not invest as much time as previously in it, but if I succeed with Rock’s Tribes, I will one day have help, and will be able to fully participate in the blog again, and eventually to get it monetized, and can then devote myself fulltime to Rock’s Tribes and the Truth blog.

Let me give my first short observations of Barrack and of the Republican Party at present. Barrack is a better president than I could have imagined. He is doing a lot of things I’d have liked him to do. On the other hand, he is pushing, as I believed he would, for his vision of cradle-to-grave government intervention in our lives, which I am opposed to. He is also spending us into the poorhouse. He could have effected the same things by introducing the flat tax, or any number of truly conservative ideas, that would have roared the economy. Instead, he has created a gigantic welfare state. He is also weak on defense.

The Republicans, though, are a sorry mess too. They not only have abandoned their conservative principles, they have lost sight that they need a drastic outreach program to Blacks, Latinos, the young, the poor, the media, Hollywood, the hipsters, and the Internet crowd. I am fine with religious conservatism, but the Repubs also need to broaden the base to include conservatives who concentrate on the economy and defense.

Don’t get me wrong. Schwarzenegger, in my opinion, is a disgrace. So is McCain. They are not conservatives. I do want flexibility, however, with abortion, gay rights (but not marriage, which I believe should be between a man and a woman), and religion.

Basically, what I want, Ladies and Gentlemen, is John F. Kennedy. A cool, hip, sexy conservative who can inspire the country to his brand of conservatism. Yes, you heard me right, Kennedy was conservative. Kennedy was a conservative both on the economy and on defense. The Dems have strayed far from this now, into socialism, communism, and fascism. Where are you, the next John F. Kennedy, or Regan? We need you now.

Another complaint I have about the Repubs is that they are wimps. The left is vicious, with James Carvell, Keith Olberman, and Chris Matthews, Arianna Huffington, and the Daily Kos, for starters, who all get thrills up and down their legs whenever they see Obama. And the Repubs? They are ever so nice. The sweet, wimpy George W. Bush, who never stood up for himself, turning the other cheek. The nice, wimpy Mitt Romney who is the cute little Mormon who never says an unkind word. Compare this with Carvell, Dean, Emmanuel, Pelosi, Huffington, and the rest of the vicious left. We need fighters and attack dogs, who aren’t intimidated by being called radicals, racists, sexists, and homophobes. Hannity, Limbaugh, Levin, Prager, and Elder are a good start. But we need counterparts too for the vicious Alex Baldwan, the stupid Sean Penn, the vapid Michael Moore, and the empty-headed Hollywood left.

We need conservative Madonna’s and Barry Manilow’s.

That’s my job. I’m going to flush them out of hiding, and deliver them to the world. You watch me.

If you want to join me, and set up your own Rock’s Tribe, again, contact me here, or go to my Meetup site, Rock's Tribes. The Meetups themselves will take place near Hollywood, CA (but you could start them in your areas too). We will be making movies, writing books, utiizing the Internet, appearing on the media, and engaging the young and old. We are ready, President Obama.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post:
China, Chinese, Chinese Capitalism, Capitalism, American Capitalism, Chinese blogger, China executes businessman, democracy

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

YouTube Wisdom and the American Stock Market

The

D
ropping
ow

Riding the Tube

As I watched the Democrats battle it out in their YouTube debate last night,

Look to your left and say one good thing and one criticism about your fellow running mate.

"The good thing is, he is running so hard to the left that he is jeopardizing his chance in the election.The bad thing is, she will probably try to learn to play the saxophone next."





I estimate that if anyone of them wins the presidency, the loser will be the American economy.

For example, John Edwards, continuing the Democratic populist demagoguery, signaled that they are coming after "big oil, big insurance, and big drug companies." He forgot trial lawyers, I wonder why?

The February "Crash"

Anyway, the last time I spoke to you about the stock market was in February, right after the scare caused by the Chinese bubble. Well, our market, and the Chinese market, continued onward and upward from then.

So, with China again being talked about as a bubble, and the U.S. stock market too, and after today's dramatic drop, I think it's appropriate once again to address the market.

Disclaimer

I inform you that I am a former stockbroker with Merrill Lynch, Dean Witter and Charles Schwab. I also tell you, though, that I am presently not a professional in the financial field, and that nothing I say here shall be construed as investment advice. You must do your own homework, and make up your own minds. I am not liable for your decisions. In fact, I'll add, do not follow any advice I give. Need that be any clearer?

Bragging Rights

Still, I want to gloat. In February, after that dramatic fall, I said the market would rise again, and it did.

Tomorrow's Stock Market Today

What do I say this time, after a 226-point drop in the DJIA today?

First. Tomorrow, Wednesday, July 25, 2007, the market will be up. Some segments may still be hurting, like the financials and the homebuilders, but other stock sectors will rise. Techs will climb tomorrow for sure.

Predicting tomorrow is the easy part. What about the next three months, and the rest of the year?

Subprime and Mortgage Woes

The subprime fiasco and mortgage problems will weigh down some banks and much housing. This will hurt consumers, who will have to pay rising interest rates, and who will lose the cash benefit of refinancing their homes. People selling their homes will find the market soft. On the other side, buyers of homes will find bargains.

Globalization

Contrary to this, though, is our favorite bugaboo, globalization, which will turn out to be the world's savior this time. For you see, the economy is no longer national; it is global. This is why Amazon (a bellwether tech stock) can be up 14% at this very moment in after-hours trading, even on a day when the rest of the market was down, down, down. The reason? Tech will not be hurt by subprime or mortgage woes, and tech is a global enterprise. Everyone buys from Amazon, even the "communist capitalists" in China. So? Tech will survive.

Most sectors that are global in nature, such as energy, tech, infrastructure, and others like those restaurant chains that reach overseas, as McDonald's does, will be fine. The sectors, though, that depend on localized, American-only profits, especially those related to mortgages and homebuilding here, might face a headwind.

Overall? Global liquidity (& see liquidity info) might just be enough to overcome any and all American subprime and mortgage woes, even within continental America. There's a lot of money out there looking for bargains, and the American stock market is still undervalued in several areas.

I'd bet on a continued rise, but with some sectors hurting. Don't quote me on it. I'm just not as panicked as some.

A Bush in Hand is Worth More Than Ten Communist Cuckoo Birds on a YouTube

I believe that Bush has helped us soar to a great economy, and that the Dems might destroy it. In fact, the only thing that can ruin my scenario of a continued rise in the market, will be President Edwards, Obama, or Clinton.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post: stock market, stock market crash, YouTube Debates, Democratic candidates for president, communism, capitalism, globalization, liquidity

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

Guns, Butter, Pollution, and Death

Cinese
apitalism

Aside

This was a difficult article for me to write. I don't know why.

China's Smoking Capitalism

China's economy is exploding to the upside. It's ironic that this communist country is veering towards capitalism, that Germany and France are reducing taxes, but that the U.S. is getting ready to swerve left—which will destroy an economy that is humming along.

The problem in China is, in fact, that it is growing too fast, if you can imagine this. They are paying the price for this unbridled growth with pollution that chokes you with every breath, and a runaway stock market that worries Chinese officials, and the world, for that matter.










The problem is a kind of 1920's scenario, where ordinary folks are making fortunes, and so they sell their homes and valuables to invest. It's a great big Ponzi scheme that eventually will end. The only thing that might keep it from becoming a disaster is that China's real growth is astronomic, about 20% a year or more.

This means that the rise in the Chinese stock market is based on fundamental growth, and not just speculation. Still, if their market rises too much, it will overtake real value, and the last ones to buy in will be left holding the bag—minus their homes and valuables. This is just what happened in the 1920's in America when people could buy stocks on margin, only putting up 10% of the value of a stock to own it. When the market crashed, people couldn't pay their margin calls, and started jumping out of windows.

Again, China is not an exact copy of 1920's America, as China's monstrous growth will cushion the eventual fall of the market. Still.

Discipline, Chinese Style

So, China, aware of the danger, has tried to calm down its market by raising interest rates, increasing margin requirements, and so on. The next thing they are trying is to "eliminate" those who encourage speculation. They've just arrested a blogger who is the most read on the Chinese Internet, because he gave stock tips that work! (See also: Chinese blogger, and Chinese blogger arrested.

You see, there are still differences between how their form of capitalism works and ours. We might want to jail unethical people too, but we have to go through a legitimate trial first. There's always the question of guilt and innocence. Was this Chinese blogger really doing a bad thing by giving good stock tips? I don't know the details—whether he was revealing insider information or something like this. The Chinese, though, don't know enough to charge him with anything specific either. They arrested him simply because they see him as part of the problem of the overly enthusiastic Chinese markets.

Notice too, how they handled an unethical businessman recently. They executed him, within weeks of his being charged!

Now that's a heavy penalty. Our Enron offenders are rotting in jail, but Chinese crooks get shot.

Examples of American "Discipline"

Witness, again, that some of our worst businessmen are rotting in jail, after long drawn-out trials and appeals. Enron, Martha Stewart, et al.

Here is another example of how we handle our business renegades:

See the Pearl Izumi advertisement, (& Pearl Izumi ad) in the window at the top of today's post, which appeared in Runner's World. There has been an outcry against, and for, the ad. People against the ad call it tasteless, and lurid. Those for it call it edgy. No one will arrest the authors, though, nor anyone at Pearl Izumi, nor their parent company Nautilus.

Some people might want to arrest them, but we don't do that sort of thing. The ad was either in bad taste, or was "edgy." You decide.

So, Whose System Is Better?

Dictatorships and totalitarian governments are always more efficient than democracies. They can arrest people without trials and stop stock speculation by banning it, to a certain extent. They can jail people fast, and shoot them too. Who's going to complain?

But then what? They've lost this creative blogger, and they're going to lose a hundred thousand others like him with initiative, who now will be frightened to stand out. If the guy broke a law, the law should be public and known to all, before any arrest; and there should be a fair trial.

While we'd like to execute Martha Stewart some days, it's better that she had a trial and was found guilty, and made muffins for the prisoners. (Yeah!)

Our system is better, believe me.

Unstoppable

Like I said, though, things like China jailing a blogger and executing a businessman after a show trial, won't hurt China's growth all that much. After all, they have unleashed the tiger of capitalism in their country. This beast can be ridden, but it can't be stopped. Who would want to stop it? They will try to slow it down, at the point of a gun, but this behemoth has thick skin. It is mightier than bullets. It is not just a tiger. It is a flaming tiger. Its heat melts bullets, and defies firing squads.

One day, it might even lead to—yes, you guessed it—democracy.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post:
China, Chinese, Chinese Capitalism, Capitalism, American Capitalism, Chinese blogger, China executes businessman, democracy

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

It's a Wonderful Day in the Neighborhood

I admit it, this is a

R


ant.

Live Earth, Dead Air

Like a lot of people on this globe, I experienced the music on Live Earth. I witnessed Al Gore's hologram and all the brainwashed children brainwashing other children. I found it boring and repulsive, like Mr. Roger's Neighborhood without the intelligence.

Youthful Rebellions Have a Purpose, Sometimes

When I was growing up, we rebelled, like all good teenagers, by absorbing Elvis, Bob Dylan, then the British invasion, headed by the Beatles, and culminating in Woodstock.

Our rebellion with Elvis was the slicked back hair, the swiveling hips, the curled lip, the sex of it all. Our upheaval with Bob Dylan was anti-war and pro-intellectualism.










Our insurgency with the Beatles was against anyone older than we were, the way these oldsters dressed, how they conducted their love lives, and their whole religious and sociological point of view. Woodstock was the ultimate breakdown of society.

All four of these singers, groups and movements led to genuine revolutions. We weren't attempting to emulate Bobbysoxers that loved Frank Sinatra. We were not trying to be anything. We were exuberant youth and actually did believe in the Age of Aquarius.

Heavy Metal and Hip-Hop

The kids of today have heavy metal and hip-hop. Complaining for the sake of complaining. Teenage angst looking for someone to blame, and without a cause.

The Religion of Political Correctness

So, their cause becomes political correctness. They have no religion, so they believe in environmentalism; in the inclusion of all of mankind in their loving embrace, including terrorists; in unbridled hedonism coupled with a hatred of everything military, conservative, and traditional.

Yearning for Woodstock

They've seen Woodstock, and think it was cool, so they emulate it. They lack the revolutionary fervor, though, that we had as kids. They want that fervor, and they think that it consists of chants and slogans and mantras.

True Revolutionaries

I am not totally proud of what we Baby Boomers have wrought on this earth. Yet, we were true revolutionaries. I renounce some of the fanciful ideas of my youth, having seen the value now of business and family and religion. I am happy that we have made advances in environmentalism.

Wannabees

I am not proud, though, of this crop of kids, and this gaggle of celebrities.

Little do they realize that they are the establishment. They are not the revolutionaries.



They agree with all the major news channels and newspapers and PBS and on and on, in their maniacal attack on whatever is good in the world. Their robot-like pronouncements require no moral or political courage. They march in lockstep with everyone else.

The Harm They Do

What's more, they hurt people and damage the world. They slaughter innocents by not supporting the Iraq War. They snatch food away from the poor with their socialism. They bloody the wounded with their socialized medicine. They will wind up mangling the environment too, by not embracing science, and instead praying to their green forest gods in the hysterical religion of irrational environmentalism.

Live Earth is Dangerous to Your Health

The death blow Live Earth strikes is to brainwash our children. There is no room for intelligent discussion on this kind of show. It's all goose stepping and saluting the gods of green and St. Al Gore. The celebrities spout their meaningless banter and proclaim to the world, "See what a good person I am! I am a liberal."

Stop Patting Yourself on Your Backs

Liberals, to me, are not the good people. The saints, the heroes of our society are in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the few back home who speak up for liberty and freedom.

Real Revolution

A genuine revolutionary, with a message worth listening to, will not be serenading ethanol and electric cars. He or she will be belting out pro-American songs that encourage the country in its fight against terror. That person will be the next Bob Dylan. He or she is nowhere in sight.

Let the brain-dead celebrities and vacuous youth show me some courage by speaking the truth, rather than their Marxist slogans, and I'll respect them. I'll worship them, in fact. Isn't that what they want? I'd even bow down to St. Al if he admitted that the sky is not falling.

Common Sense

Yes, let's clean up the environment. No, though, let's not make it a religion. Keep it in the realm of science, open to discussion. There is no room on our planet for Nazi-type propaganda machines, be they Al Gore's, or Michael Moore's, or Madonna's.

Think for yourself people, that's all I ask.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post:
Al Gore, Live Earth, Environmentalism, Green

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

Bush the Nice Guy: When It's a Good Thing, and When It's Not

Warmth


or

Fire

The Bush Scorecard

I feel like a lot of conservatives these days when I see my beloved right wing of the Republican Party in the descendency. I also continue to get whipsawed when I measure my approval rating of President Bush. Since I am like most Americans, on the side of the underdog, I can't help rooting for George W. Still, this blog is about truth, so here we go. I'll get to the nice guy issue in a minute.

Bush is great so far on:
• The decision to invade Irag and depose Saddam
• His attempt to install democracy in Iraq
• Keeping taxes low and our economy humming
• A cluster of traits including persistence, conviction, loyalty, and integrity
• Personal charm, including but not only when he is one-on-one

Bush, in my opinion, falls short on:
• Winning the war in Iraq
• His immigration policy
• Leadership in showing Americans and the world his vision of peace
• His communication skills in public

Bush the Nice Guy

I've said before that one of Bush's character traits is to want to be a nice guy.He desires to be loved by everybody. As a result, his approval rating is one of the lowest for any president in history.

When is it a good thing for Bush to be a nice guy?

Today was one example. President Putin is visiting the Bush family residence in Kennebunkport, Maine. Putin is a bad guy. He is the one leader in our world that could bring back the Gulags if he chose to do that. He has already nationalized private industries and curbed freedom of the press, and may be responsible for outright murder. We could be hard and say we need to put Putin in his place. Yet, I don't see that we'd get much for this. I think Bush is right to coddle up to Putin and pour on the charm.

Why? There is a time to be Reaganesque and say, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" and there is a time to be Bush-like, and say, "We congratulate President Putin on being the only one today to catch a fish."

Russia is not a democracy like ours. It has returned to a sort of democratic autocracy because they didn't know how to run a democracy. The mob took over and there was chaos. Now the Russians have a strongman again, and 70% of them are happy with him. The people wanted it this way. Bush being harsh to Putin would only alienate a whole nation. Sometimes, diplomacy is the right thing.

When is being a nice guy not right?

When waging a war. If you want to be popular as president when you are waging a war, you must win, period. There is no room to be showing the world and your people, in that war, that you are the fairest guy in the battle. You must win.

Nice Guys Finish Last?

So, is it true that nice guys finish last? No, not all the time. They finish first when diplomacy is needed. They finish last in war. Lincoln was a nice guy much of the time. He was vicious, though, in war. Then, when he won, he was the sweetest guy in the world to the losers. That's how it's done.

Give Putin all the lobster he can eat. Give Al-Queda cocktails, Molotov that is, with a dash of bitters.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post: George W. Bush, Vladimir Putin, Mikhail Gorbachev, Abraham Lincoln, war

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

Announcement and Third Party Musings

Technical


Writing



Super


Man

Introducing

Technical Editing/Writing

I wanted to take a moment to introduce my two agencies offering services. The first is, of course, my technical writing firm. I have not built the Website yet, but basically I am offering the service already. I have gathered a team of writers, and we will do any kind of editing or writing, technical and otherwise. You can contact me with projects via this blog, and in the near future I'll have a Website for the service.

Super Man

My second agency has a blog already. This is my Super Man Agency. See the link at the top right of this blog now. I ran this business twice before, once in California and once in Israel, and it was a runaway success both times. This time, though, I want to follow through and make it big.

This is a service whereby I will do anything for you, at your home or office, that is legal.




It is designed to offer unusual or creative solutions to needs and problems, but we'll also do mundane things. I or a member of my staff will go anywhere and do anything that you need.

Examples

The Unusual

We went into a cult and retrieved a boy for his family.
We hired actors to eat at a restaurant the day a buyer was visiting.
We researched a business's competitor onsite to help our client improve his business.

The Ordinary

We arranged to pick up a doggie's poop on a daily basis.
We mowed the lawn of a lady who was afraid of getting robbed by the local help.
We ran errands for an executive.

There You Go

Editing and writing on the one hand, and a service to help you with your special needs.

My Political Comments for the Day

I've watched several political shows this week, including a memorable one on CNBC, where the Republican Party has been written off as dead. Indeed the polls are quite bleak. It looks like it will be the year of the Third Party. One poll shows that folks want a 3rd party more than they want the ones in power now.

I wouldn't mind forming a third party myself. Of course, I wouldn't be the presidential candidate for it. Rather, I'd be a stand-in, until we chose someone to represent us—much like Ross Perot did some years back. If we couldn't settle on a candidate we'd like who'd run, we'd call our party None of the Above, giving Americans a chance to vote for a non-candidate. Who knows? Given the atmosphere lately, None of the Above might win.

Don't worry, I'm just kidding with all this. Well, I'm half-serious, let's say. I still am a conservative and favor the Republican Party. I'm just joining in on the fun, and giving a tongue-in-cheek warning to Republicans that they'd better start representing conservatives, or people like me will form a third, a fourth, and a fifth party.

Anyway, it's an idea.

Peace.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

Whom Do You Love?

The Recent Polls and What They Suggest

P
olls and

erceptions

The '08 Presidential Election

In the most recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll,54% of Americans are inclined to vote for a Democrat for president in the next election; while 31% say they favor a Republican.




Still, in the most recent Quinnipiac University Poll, when the specific candidates are pitted against each other, the story changes.

Rudy Giuliani 44%, Hillary Clinton 45%
John McCain 42%, Hillary Clinton 44%
Fred Thompson 39%, Hillary Clinton 46%

A similar picture manifests with Barack Obama.

Rudy Giuliani 42%, Barack Obama 42%
John McCain 41%, Barack Obama 43%
Fred Thompson 34%, Barack Obama 46%

Presidential Approval Rating

In the most recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, 29% of the American people approve of the overall job President Bush is doing in office, while 66% disapprove. This is a drop of six points since April, and it represents his lowest mark ever on this question in the NBC/Journal poll.

Democratic pollster Jay Campbell, attributes this decline to Republicans. Back in April, 75 percent of Republicans approved of Bush’s job performance, compared with 21 percent who disapproved. Now, only 62 percent of Republicans approve, versus 32 percent who disapprove.

Congress

In the most recent AP-Ipsos poll,

WASHINGTON - People think the Democratic-led Congress is doing just as dreary a job as President Bush, following four months of bitter political standoffs that have seen little progress on Iraq and a host of domestic issues.

The survey found only 35 percent approve of how Congress is handling its job, down 5 percentage points in a month. That gives lawmakers the same bleak approval rating as Bush, who has been mired at about that level since last fall, including his dip to a record low for the AP-Ipsos poll of 32 percent last January.

In another measure of popular discontent, the survey found that 71 percent say the country is on the wrong track - about even with the 73 percent who said so last May, the worst level since the AP-Ipsos poll began in December 2003.

What about Nancy Pelosi? The same AP-Ispsos poll found that:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is a more popular figure than the president and her colleagues on Capitol Hill, though she faces a gender gap in which significantly more women than men support her.

Pelosi's overall approval of 45 percent stood 10 points higher than Bush's and Congress'.

She was seen favorably by 52 percent of women, but only 39 percent of men. While whites are closely split about her, minorities approve of her job by a 15-point margin.

The War in Iraq

In the most recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll, 28 % of the American people approve of the way Bush is handling the war in Iraq, while 68% disapprove.

Illegal Immigration

A new Washington Post-ABC poll and follow-up interviews found that:

click to show/hide the rest of the post

Americans remain divided and uncertain about how best to deal with the estimated 12 million people living illegally in the United States.

More than half of those surveyed said illegal immigrants hurt the country more than help it, an opinion voiced by seven in 10 Republicans and about half of Democrats.

A slim majority believe in creating a pathway to citizenship, with younger people and Democrats far more open to the idea than Republicans and those over 55.

State of the Republican Party

Since I favor Republicans at this time in history, this all represents a big mess for me. Everything seems to be going wrong for conservatives at the same time, and at warp speed and with irreversible momentum.

I know some of my readers think highly of Bush, and that 62% of Republicans still approve of the job he is doing. I am not one of these. I continue to admire his doggedness in the War in Iraq, and for the highly effective War on Terror he has waged. For these, I believe President Bush deserves our everlasting thanks.

I am also happy with him over the economy. He has kept our taxes low, and enabled an expansion to continue in the middle of a major war.

On the other hand, I continue to fault him for the politically correct way he is waging the War in Iraq, with his restrictive rules of engagement. I also don't think he has been expert in his handling of other cultures in the Middle East. Mostly, I believe, he continues to try to be a "nice guy," not realizing that what is needed is firmness and ruthlessness, much as we mustered in World War II. I am also unhappy with his amnesty plan for illegals.

Most of all, I am dissatisfied with him over his inability to lead our country to see what he sees concerning the necessity for the Iraq War, and for his vision for the Middle East. He is content to continue to "do the right things" as he perceives them, without understanding that he must also become a great communicator and salesman, despite his shortcomings in this area.

click to hide most of this post

What Lies Ahead?

If things continue as they are now, Republicans will lose some of their base. They can't afford this. It is still possible for one of the attractive Republican candidates to defeat Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, but even if this happens, Congress will slide even more left than it is now, barring a major shift.

What this means is, look out for your pocketbooks; short the stock market; be ready to join the religion of environmental extremism; expect to lose the War on Terror, for now; and forget about a peaceful Middle East.

Ideally, we'd have some candidate with a world vision that can help shape a more peaceful world. I don't see that candidate yet. Hopefully, someone will be imbued with wisdom and start thinking about the future of the world rather than the next election. I will vote for that person. My suggestion for him or her is, fine—win your primary. Then, however, get serious and start acting presidential. If you can get away with acting presidential even now, do it. Should you still win your primary, you'll have an edge on gravitas over the rest of the candidates in the final election.

Who Has the Potential to be a Great Leader?

Which candidates do have it in them to grow into this presidential persona? I believe they are Clinton, Obama, McCain, Giuliani, and Thompson. Clinton and Obama, of course, have the biggest challenge with this—as they are true liberals, and the world does not need liberal solutions at this time. Yet, Clinton could do it, if she allows herself to grow. Obama could do it if he listens to his innate intelligence, ignoring his poll numbers to an extent.

What about Romney? I doubt he'd have the flexibility to see the world as it really is, but I may be wrong. We'll see. He is, after all, a presidential candidate who would present a pretty face to the world, backed by a high level of intelligence and communication skills.

There, the gauntlet is laid. Who will pick it up?

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, Republican, Democrat, Democratic, Polls, 2008 Election, Conservative, Liberal

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

The Sopranos

Since I still don't have my computer (I should get it back in time for my next post), and not much computer time, I'll spend this post in a bit of levity, which is always good.



I was very disappointed in the Sopranos finale. It's funny that a lot of people, I hear, were disappointed with the Seinfeld finale some years ago--but I loved it. It had the selfish characters in jail, getting their just deserts. It was perfect.

I hated the Sopranos finale though. I thought it was, forgive the expression, a "copout". I hear that most people are disappointed like me, but you can always get some in the the intellectual crowd who say things like "it ended ambiguously", which is, they say, appropriate. They explain that Tony always lived in Purgatory, and so it is good that he ended the show in Purgatory--not in heaven, and not in hell.

I can understand why they didn't want Tony to get whacked. This way, they can do a sequel or a movie, and so on. But something big should have happened to the principles. Yes, Tony is likely to be indicted, as we learned. He could be killed any day. He could even have been killed at that last dinner out.

The old Hollywood formula, though, is that crime doesn't pay. This principle holds true in great literature, too. I think something major should have happened to Tony, or his family. Or, they should have had a narrow escape that made them regret the life they have invited on themselves.

I'm not just talking about a "moral," "just" ending tied up in ribbons and bows. I'm also speaking about drama. The drama in the piece was unbearable, which was good--but it ended with a whimper. Nothing happened. It sucked.

What do you think?

Rock

Obama Passes Clinton, Thompson to Run

While my computer is in shop being repaired, let me at least say this today--Barack has passed Hillary for the time being in the opinion polls. Secondly, Thompson is already at 13% before he has officially declared.

So, guess what? We've got two socialists on the Democratic side, with socialized medicine and a weakening of the military--versus a staunch conservative, who supports the War in Iraq.

One thing is for sure, we're going to get a real choice.

I wonder if our dear country realizes what they are getting themselves into?

Four Posts Today

Memorial Day

Plea for a Job

Chavez I Told You So

Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee

Memorial Day

Heroes




God bless all you people in the armed forces, present and past, living and dead, wounded and whole. We thank you from the bottom of our hearts for your service and sacrifices.

A Grateful Nation

Plea for a Job

Help


I am desperately looking for a job now.




I of course am most qualified for a writing, editing, proofreading, technical writing, filmmaking or a professional blogging situation, but am willing to consider anything at this point.

I have an B.A. in English, an M.S. in psychology, a diploma in computer programming, and have held positions from registered stock broker to social worker to technical writer.

I prefer a job in the Los Angeles area or one on the Internet, but at this point I'm willing to relocate.

Rock

About Chavez, I Told You So

Free Speech

All of you Democratic and liberal apologists for Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro, are you happy now? Are you beginning to see what a thug Chavez is? Cindy? Do you have eyes and half a brain?

Chavez passed the recent law allowing him to have dictatorial powers. Since then, he has been nationalizing oil, telephone, and other industries and there was nary a peep. He's also been playing games with the gold mining companies, refusing, for example, to give a permit to the Canadian Las Christinas gold mine for years. Is he getting ready to do his dictator thing again, stealing assets? Of course, all of this is for the people, right?

Now, he has gone too far, it seems, closing down a TV station.

This finally gives a clue to his people about what he is really doing. Bravo to the demonstrators!




Not only is he leading his country to financial ruin, he is taking away their freedom. Wake up, Venezuela! Wake up Redford, Fonda, and Sheehan!

Rock

Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee

History and


Healing

Note

In this article, I'm not necessarily taking sides. I'm just exploring the forces in play. Still, lessons can be learned.

Coming to Grips with a Flawed Legacy

Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee

is a book, published in 1970, written by Dee Brown, detailing the violent relationship between Native Americans and American expansionism.

I just saw the HBO miniseries based on the book, also entitled Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee.

There has been the usual criticism of such an enormous undertaking, which attempted to boil down this history of two cultures in conflict into a few moments and characters.

However, I give high marks to the miniseries. It's ridiculous to criticize it as an oversimplification, when it had to be made simple in order to be watchable. The same can be said of Roots, Pearl Harbor, or Flags of Our Fathers. Besides, I did not find this HBO special to be overly simplified. In fact, it attempts to present the complexity of the situation and the conflicts.

The Usual Liberal Interpretation of History

is: white Europeans are the evil monsters of the universe and the cause of all ills in the world.

Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee

did not take this easy path, as it very well could have. The Indians were not presented as saints, nor their culture as the pristine ideal. Whites were not depicted as uncomplicated evil. There were men and women on both sides who were sincerely interested in the welfare of the Indians, and working, if naively, towards this goal.

Reality

Both sides bear some blame for what happened to Native Americans; and both sides are innocent.

The Indians themselves were warlike and expansionist, killing and conquering each other for land and bounty. The Europeans, though, just did this better than anyone. They developed the art of war to its highest form, and backed it up with a religious belief in the superiority of their God and Manifest Destiny.

click to show/hide the rest of the post

The liberal ideal now would be for the Europeans to have resisted building a country in America. The Europeans just should have left America in its pristine condition, without railroads and industry, and without the principles of land ownership and capitalism.

No matter how wonderful Indian culture was, and is, this could never have happened. There are forces bigger than any culture. The human race was meant to explore, expand, grow, and develop. This can't be stopped.

Manifest Destiny

If it isn't Manifest Destiny, it is what led natives from Tahiti to paddle to Hawaii 1000 years ago and impose their rule on the natives.

Liberal Mindset

Because they weren't white Europeans, though, these Tahitians are not called evil.

Property Rights

I realize that there are legal questions that do involve broken promises and the theft of lands, and so on. Yet, according to Indian history, they themselves did not have the concept of property rights. How do you reconcile a culture with no property rights and one that has property rights, when speaking about a specific plot of land?

Our courts have spoken, granting Indians the return of some lands, and compensation for other lands "taken." Plus, there is the casino thing.

The First Welfare State

One of the tragedies, though, for America and for its Native Americans, was the creation of the first welfare state. Well-meaning liberals of the time designed the reservation system, in order to be "good" to the Indians and give them their food, clothing, and lodging. It was the first paternalistic government program, and it included all the liberal philosophies. The government knew best what was good for the Indians. They should have Christian names, worship the Christian God, study Christian history and so on.

Gambling on the Future

The only turnaround for Indians in their post 19th century history has been the granting of unregulated casinos on their lands. This was not welfare. It is capitalism, and it is working for several tribes.

The Natural Forces

Whatever happens now, we must realize that solutions must be founded on the natural tides of history. We cannot turn back the clock. Even if we could, would the world be better off today if America was left in its former pristine state? No railroads, no industry, no property rights? What if the Europeans had been saints, and, while still creating a European system in America, had resisted the urge to "steal" lands? Well, and this must be emphasized again, then America could not have developed as it has.

It's not the "evil" Europeans that moved the human race forward. It's the nature of man himself/herself. The industrialization of America was going to happen.

Our Legacy

Though perhaps unjust and unfair, the Indian ideal remains with us in the thousands of acres of land in America granted to no one, owned by no one, earmarked as natural preserves. These lands are open to all. So, industrialization has occurred, and the preservation of pristine land has occurred.

The specific plots of land, though, that the Indians claimed as their natural homelands—were taken earlier from other Indians, by Indians. In the end, the game of musical chairs ended, and the Europeans landed on these lands, and crystallized the endgame into law.

Now, militaristic expansionism is no longer tolerated. Indians will no longer be invading new territories and claiming them for themselves. And Europeans have given up their imperialistic empire.

The Next Natural Tide

What is the next "tide of nature"? I suspect it's immigration, the burgeoning birth rate of Hispanics, and the browning of America. Now that the rule of law is in place, genocides won't work anymore. What is Nature telling us now? Expansionism is happening under the aegis of democracy. One force of Nature is the large Hispanic family, buttressed by Catholicism, supported by Hispanic culture. One political force is American liberalism, which wants all the Hispanics alive to immigrate to the United States, and for them to be fruitful and multiply. An opposing force is some on the conservative side, who want to preserve America as a diverse country, but with one language and culture.

Disappearing Diversity

Oddly, since America will one day be predominantly Hispanic, our diversity is disappearing.

click to hide most of this post

The Lessons of the Indian Conflict

No one can't get in the way of the nature of mankind.

Expansionism will occur, one way or another.

Solutions to the human misery caused by dislocations must be in sync with natural forces.

The welfare state doesn't work. Capitalism does.

The law is mankind's best attempt to be fair.

Violence will occur, and sometimes unfairly.

Part of this is because there are forces of nature bigger than the individuals or cultures involved. Then, though, after the violence, men and women must try to make sense of it all, and bring some fairness and compassion into the equation. The human race must do the best it can to balance the forces of nature with its natural inner yearning for fairness and compassion.

Relavance to Our Present Dilemma

Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee shows the complexities of these issues. We must revisit these conundrums now in our handling of illegal immigration matters.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post: Wounded Knee, Indian Treaties, illegal immigration, Indians, Native Americans, Manifest Destiny, Indian reservations, welfare state, property rights, Indian casinos, national parks, browning of America

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

Handicapping the Candidates

To My Dear Readers

I apologize for missing posts lately. The reasons have been computer and personal problems. For the moment, I have "adequately" fixed the computer problems. As for my personal problems, I am living through a dramatic crisis in my life. I will try to post as usual, but part of this is in the hands of God. I appreciate your prayers and concern. Still, we've got our contribution to the world to take care of as bloggers, so here finally is my next post. I'll get it posted barebones now, and be adding the links in it as soon as possible.


Hope

That Presidential Glow

Nothing is so important for the future of our country than whom we choose as our next president. The reason is that it is likely that both houses of Congress will likely remain in Democratic hands for some time. If the nation chooses a Democrat for president, we will have the danger of unchecked leftism. If the country chooses a Republican for president, we will have the same situation we have now—a sort of lame duck president, but who has at least veto power to stop Democratic excess. In either case, whoever occupies the Oval Office will partially determine the directions we take.

I've already reported on the first Democratic and Republican debates. I've now seen the second Republican debate.

Plus, I've watched the individual interviews of a few of the candidates on the Sunday talk shows. These appearances offer me the chance to amend my impression of a few of the contenders.

Barack O Mania

I'll start with Barack Obama, whom I saw on a few programs. I have to admit that he came across as quite bright. Plus, he is smart enough to stop sounding so exclusively liberal.




He even stated that he is conservative on some issues.

I'm not listening so much to the crafted positions of the candidates, which can be changed depending on the weather. Rather, I am looking for reasonableness, insight, and candor.

One thing I admire about Barack is that he does not use his ethnicity—neither for advantage, nor as an excuse. For example, he states that if he loses the run for the presidency, it won't be because of his race. It will be, and I am paraphrasing Senator Obama, because "I didn't articulate my position clearly and passionately enough for people to vote for me." Bravo!

In addition, Barack is sounding and looking presidential. Nothing he said on the War in Iraq, nor on the economy, sounded unreasonable.

Yes, he remains a liberal, but he's not a liberal I fear. I can start to relax with this guy.

I probably won't vote for him, but at least I'm beginning to feel that he won't ruin the country, as I believe Hillary would.

The Second Republican Debate

I was pleased to see that several of the Republican candidates did better than in the first debate. Of course, they say that Rudy Giuliani won this round, especially with his justified anger at Senator Paul, who implied that the United States brought on the 9/11 attack on itself. Rudy showed his commanding self. He did not, however, win over the conservatives of the party. For example, Bay Bucanan was on the talk shows dissing Rudy as a candidate not suitable for the Republican Party.

John McCain was commanding in this second debate also. He too, though, is not a conservative favorite.

Mitt Romney was pretty good too, and is a conservative favorite, although I guess that his Mormon religion is hurting him with some. He remains the most photogenic candidate, as is his wife; and very articulate.

Hard corps conservatives are waiting for Newt and Senator Thompson to enter the fray.

Handicapping the Race

If this were a horse race, I'd give the following payoffs.

For the Democrats:
Hillary 2 to 1
Barack 4 to 1
Edwards 12 to 1

For the Repulbicans:
Rudy 2 to 1
Mitt 3 to 1
McCain 4 to 1
Fred Thompson 8 to 1
Newt 20 to 1

Just a Guess

Hillary/Barack beats Giuliani/McCain in the general election.

However, Thompson/Mitt beats Hillary/Barack.

What do you think?

Post Coming Tomorrow

Lotta stuff going on. I will get the article out tomorrow. Thanks for checking in.

Plus, I promise to visit this week my favorite blogs.

Rock

Left and Right Turns

The Political Pendulum

The

Right Stuff

Veering Left

The country veering most left at this time in history is Venezuela, with Hugo Chavez going forward with his goal of a "classless society." All the Marxists are cheering him as he nationalizes oil companies and banks, and forces other companies into agreements that will guarantee social benefits. On the one hand, his goals are quite noble. He seems like he is truly trying to help the people (as much as any dictator can and still fill his own pockets). On the other hand, he is outright stealing from companies that came in with agreements and contracts which he has now nullified. The question is, who in the future will invest in Venezuela? If you owned a private company, would you gamble your hard won assets on whether Hugo will honor any agreement you sign with him?

Just as with Castro, Mr. Chavez will find that stealing from companies now will make him a hero short term, but will deprive the people of millions of dollars in the long run. The growth of his country will suffer due to his bad relations with the world.

Marxism has been tried, Mr. Chavez, and it doesn't work.

Veering Right

One of the countries that is veering right at this time is, surprise, surprise—France! I can't believe it. The French have elected a conservative over a socialist, Nikolas Sarkozy. He is going to get tough on immigration, be kind to business, and try to lower taxes. Let's move to France! In addition, he wants to improve relations with the United States.

Don't be surprised, also, if another country known for leftism veers right in the coming years. Fidel Castro is rumored to be in his last days on earth. His brother, Raul, appears to be much more friendly to Western nations, and to capitalism. What will Hugo say? Cuba will explode with growth if this shift happens.

France and Cuba veering right? Are we living in a dream?

Veering Left

Sadly, while France and Cuba might be heading in a positive direction, we, the United States of America, are one of the countries veering left. On the rise are the Marxists of the Democratic Party.

The Debates

I watched both the Democratic and Republican debates. The Democrats all admitted they will raise taxes, increase regulations, force the color green on the world, and decrease world security by marginalizing the war on terror. I could barely force myself to watch. Yet, the country seems dead set on electing one of them.

No wonder. The Republicans were pro-business, but lacked vigor. They were not as passionate as they should have been either about Iraq or the war on terror, with the possible exception of McCain. They appeared meek and back to cowering in Panderland. All of them paid homage to Ronald Reagan, but there wasn't a Ronald among them. The only thing they appeared passionate about was religion. Pardon me, but I don't think faith is the issue. I don't want a president who is pastor-in-chief. I want someone passionate about winning the war on terror, and helping capitalism live and thrive. Let's keep church and state separate.

The Sad State of the Right

Fire in the Belly

I'm not even impressed with Newt anymore. He is "waiting," before he decides whether to run, and on the talk shows he sounds so green he could be Al Gore's brother. I'm not happy with Fred Thompson either, the great conservative hero. He's not in the fight yet either. Like Newt, he's "waiting."

A president needs fire in the belly. If you're not absolutely sure you're the man, or woman, then don't bother running. The U.S. will never elect Newt now. He's demonstrated he doesn't want it badly enough. I doubt they'll choose Thompson either. He's too late, cancer or no cancer.

Weak

Especially weak on the dais was Rudy Giuliani. He still is the frontrunner, but he'd better turn in better performances than this debate if he wants to win. He must come across as a giant, not as a meek defender of his pro-choice views. He's got to get back to the lion he was post 9/11.

A Fair Performance

McCain gave the best account of himself among the Republicans. He had some fire and he distinguished himself with his zeal on the War in Iraq.

Presidential Aura

Looking for the Glow

I try to look for the presidential aura in candidates, and I'm not sure I see it yet in anyone. I cringe when I imagine Hillary back in the White House. I don't see Obama ready yet to make sophisticated decisions. My stomach turns when I think of demagogue Edwards as president.

Yet, I don't see the presidential aura surrounding any Republicans either. I pray they start connecting to their personal power and the supremacy of truth. It can still happen.

Seeking a Leader

It's still early, but I'm looking for a leader that can stop this country's disastrous lurch to the left.

Thank God for France. Vive la France!

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post: leftist, right-wing, Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, Raul Castro, Marxism, Socialism, Republican Debate, Democratic Debate, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Newt Gingrich, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Barack Obama, Nikolas Sarkozy

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

Some Things Just Burn My Ass

(Contributed by Sarge Charlie, at the preceding link.)

What and old soldier thinks....

Four years ago yesterday, the headlines were “Commander in Chief lands on USS Lincoln”, since that time the media and the political opponents of the President have besmirched this action as phoney, and grandstanding. Maybe so, but I saw it differently. I saw a president willing to meet the returning warriors and just say thank you. If that is political grandstanding then it is good grandstanding. This old soldier swelled with pride when that jet landed on the deck of the Lincoln, tears swelled in my eyes when I saw a man as important as the President of the United States willing to take the time to say thanks. A small thing, hell no, the effect this had on moral of the military forces of this country was overwhelming. Anyone who cannot understand that needs to stand the post, walk in harms way, suck it up when someone is trying to kill you, then you will understand.

Fast forward four years, the Congress passed an Emergency Funding Bill, a surrender bill, last Friday, April 27, 2007. Purely for political gain, the Congress sat on this most important piece of Legislation that they have produced in today’s Congress for four days so they could further besmirch our President. It was a truly shameful attempt to destroy the moral of Americas fighting force. What the hell is wrong with these people, are they cowards, or worse, traitors, we have men and women in harms way and while Senator Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. smirks while uttering the words “we will shove this down the presidents throat.” I consider the source and try to ignore what he said, but he is a candidate, trying to be President of the United States. I will not say what I would like to shove down his throat.

This crap is not funny folks, it is serious and deadly, soldiers are in harms way, they need what they need, and we should give it to them, no strings attached. What is happening is shameful, truly shameful.

And that is what I have to say about that.

The Monster

My article this week got "eaten" by my computer. When it rains, it pours. Everything went wrong. I was up all night repairing the drives and software. Anyway, I'll have the article re-written, or a new article, sometime this week--at least by Sunday I assume. In the meantime, I'll try to visit some of my favorite blogs.

This is a momentous time.

Take care.

Rock

Sometimes I Stand Alone

Happy Un-Earth Day

God is
reen

The Madness

I usually write some kind of a researched piece. Today, though, there is no need. Those of you who are convinced, are convinced. On the other hand, those of you who get the truth, get it. I've tried to present the logic and background of my position on this issue, but it doesn't seem to work. The globe is in the grips of a mass hysteria.


The reasons for it are that many liberals have no religion, so this has become their religion. Plus, many religious people are joining the hysteria too, because the arguments for the mythology seem reasonable.

I'm speaking, of course, of the green madness. The Inconvenient Truth illness. Arrogant Hollywood stars fly in their jet planes, ride in their limos, and live in their air-conditioned mansions while advising the rest of us to ride the bus and use one-ply toilet paper. It's disgusting.

Yes, Let's Go Green

Again, I don't mind that we go green. I do care, though, that we be reasonable. I know many of you don't hear this on the media, who are co-conspirators in the myths, but hundreds of scientists do not believe that global warming is caused by mankind's actions—but rather by the natural cycles of the Earth. Tell that to the masses.

To Sheryl Crow: Do Some Reading

To Sheryl Crow, stop ruining the environment with your obsessions. To the people who want to get things right on this issue, it is your responsibility to get educated. Go back to school or do some relevant reading, and learn the scientific method, which requires evidence, not mantras. Do the world the favor, too, of exploring the opposing arguments. Believe me, Al Gore and you, Sheryl, are not experts on what is or is not happening to the world's climate.

Global Warming?

For the last time, yes, there might be global warming. But, Kyoto will not help. Read how little Kyoto will do to offset the warming. You'll be shocked.

The Best Ways to Save the Environment

For the last time, yes, go green, but don't ruin the world doing it.

You want the two best ways to save the environment? Control population growth, and develop technology. The more people—the more cars, the more air-conditioners, the more ... you get it—the more CO2. Plus, technology is not the enemy. Industry is not the enemy. Just the opposite.

Fewer people. Better technology. Simple.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post:
Environmentalism, Green, Al Gore, Sheryl Crow

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

The African-American Experience and Imus

Alex Haley

Roots

Our American Cultural Reality

The country has been talking non-stop about the Imus event (see last post An Old IgnorImus). It is such a pivotal phenomenon in America at this time that it deserves more contemplation. I just saw Roots, the 1977 American television award-winning miniseries. Juxtaposing the Imus story and Roots gives much food for thought.

The question is, what has happened to Black culture over time—from its African roots, to the horrible time of slavery, and Reconstruction, to the Civil Rights movement, and on up to the Imus story?

I don't propose to write a detailed thesis here. I just want to express a few thoughts on the hopes and dreams of the good Black people in this country, as I understand from being an outsider looking in.

Roots

I'm sure most of you have already seen the record-breaking mini-series, Roots. I was out of the country when the series showed in the U.S. originally, and so for all my life I've never seen it. I finally got to view this great television series on DirectTV the last few nights. I watched the whole thing. I was richly rewarded.

I went into it skeptical, since it had such great hype. I was afraid it would be politically correct and another liberal propaganda piece. It wasn't. It is a beautiful work of art and history that brings wonderful and noble characters to life.



It humanizes slavery, and fleshes out the slave traders, owners, and the slaves.

Some Critiques of Roots

click to show/hide the rest of the post

Roots does idealize the slaves, but you know what—I have entered the homes of African-American foster parents for some years (when I was a social worker), and I can definitely say that I experienced the same kind of quiet dignity that Roots portrays. Nothing in Roots reads untrue for me.

Anti-White?

One thing I disliked about Roots was the total anti-White sentiment that was expressed by most of the slaves. Yet, who am I kidding—what else would a slave feel but hatred and contempt for the slave owners who denied him/her their freedom, slept with their women, physically and emotionally abused them, and robbed them of money, property and their very names? It's totally understandable. Besides, there were plenty of good white characters in the series, like Old George and his wife.

Islam

I wasn't crazy either about Kunta Kinte being a Muslim. Of course I feel this way because of 9/11 and terrorist reasons, which were not a factor at the time of the making of Roots. So, I'll give it a pass on this one.

Afro-Centrism

One main objection I have to the series is the insistence on Afro-centrism. I guess you might say I disagree with Alex Haley's main premise—that in order to be free, you must know your roots. I think you are free in America as an American. You don't need to be hyphenated to be a full human being. If you celebrate your roots, that's fine—but not to the extent that you separate yourself, so that you are not a part of the whole, as a full member of America.

click to hide most of this post

Lessons of Roots

Family

What I think is lost in modern African-American society is the sense of complete family that is present in Roots. Despite the slave traders and owners, the characters in Roots fought hard to keep the whole family together, including the presence of a strong father. Present-day African American families often are missing a father, and/or have parents who are not married.

Respect for Women

Plus, present in Roots is respect for women. This is absent in many hip-hop records and rap music. Imus was supposedly trying to be cool and "in" with his Black brothers by mentioning "hos" in the comments that got him fired. It seems it's not okay for a White guy to say this, but it is okay for a Black guy.

Chicken George

The wonderful character Chicken George, played brilliantly by Ben Vereen, was, like all the central Roots characters, a living human being. He rose from slavery to become a wealthy landowner and form a Tenessee town of former slaves. He used his love of cockfighting to become the expert at it. He earned enough to buy his freedom and escape the misery of servitude, and then rescue his whole family from the evil of racist Whites. He is truly an example of the American Dream, in its richest sense.

Learning from Roots and Imus

This is a good time for Blacks and Whites to contemplate what is and is not acceptable in music and public discourse. I think it is important, as Alex Haley knew, to get back to the best parts of our roots, which for both Whites and Blacks means returning to the importance of intact families, a quiet dignity, and respect for strong, responsible men and persevering, dignified women. God bless Chicken George, his family, and their descendents.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post: Roots, Alex Haley, Kunta Kinte, Old George, slavery, African-American culture, African-American history, Reconstruction, Civil Rights Movement, Imus controversy, African-American families

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

An Old IgnorImus

Inexcusable.

Foot In Mouth Disease

Metromix. Jackson, protesters blast Imus comments: "On his Wednesday show, 'Imus in the Morning,' the host referred to members of the Rutgers team as 'nappy-headed hos.'"

At the same time radio provocateur Don Imus was appearing on Rev. Al Sharpton's show to discuss his controversial comments about the Rutgers women's basketball team, protesters gathered outside NBC Tower in Chicago calling for his ouster.

Led by the Rev. Jesse Jackson and other members of his Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, about 50 protesters held signs reading "no apologies, no forgiveness" and chanted, "Imus must go" while walking on the sidewalk outside the high-rise building on Columbus Drive.

Nasty Fellow

I do listen to Imus sometimes. I've never liked the man, though. Imus is always mean-spirited, and, of course, he is mostly liberal, which makes him doubly unlikable to me.

He is almost as vicious sometimes as Keith Olberman.

Mel, Michael, and Don

Still, most of the time I stick up for people who make the mistake of putting their foot in their mouth—ala Mel Gibson. (Gibson's gaffe.) As you may remember, though, I did not defend "Kramer" (Michael Richards), because of the sniveling, racist way he apologized. And now, I cannot stand up for Don Imus. My reason is that his comment was so over the top that it is unforgivable. Yes, it makes it easier for me to condemn him since I don't like the man anyway. Yet, I believe I'd denounce anyone who would make such an insensitive remark.

Even Senility Would not Justify It

There is no excuse for the remark, period. The man is getting old and so might not be in charge of his faculties so much anymore—he comes off as a crotchety old curmudgeon anyway. Yet, still, and again, this cannot be an excuse. If he can't control his mouth to this gross extent, he doesn't deserve to be on the air.

Me and Jesse

So, for the first time in my recent life, I find myself in agreement with Jesse Jackson. Imus must go. I don't want anyone on the air who can say such hurtful things, even on a bad day.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post:
racism, Don Imus, Mel Gibson, Michael Richards, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Imus in the Morning

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

Chess Match

The

Hostages are
Pawns in a global game.

No Spin

The world is so complicated now (perhaps it always is) that it makes my head spin. Since this is a bigger no-spin zone than
O'Reilly, I've got to get a hold of myself and stand my ground. If the world situation affects me this way, I suppose it affects a few others similarly. I don't envy George W. Bush, nor members of Congress, nor, for that fact, the American voter.

Nukes and Hostages

Iran, feeling that it has not gotten the respect it deserves, and feeling threatened by sanctions, reached out and grabbed someone—a number of British hostages who we're not supposed to call hostages.

Iran's move, after the kidnapping, was to parade the hostages with their "confessions."

Iran Monday showed no sign of bowing to diplomatic pressure to release 15 British sailors and Marines detained for over a week, saying all the captives have confessed to illegally entering Iranian waters.

Iran's state-run IRIB network reported Monday that all 15 confessed on video, but "due to certain changes in the last two days in the sensational British policies, the detailed interviews will not be aired."

Blair's move was to half-apologize and use quiet diplomacy.

"We are anxious that this matter be resolved as quickly as possible, and that it be resolved by diplomatic means, and we are bending every single effort to that. . . . We are in direct bilateral communication with the Iranians," British Defence Minister Des Browne told reporters yesterday.

Bush's move was to call the kidnapees hostages, and move in the aircraft carriers.

"The British hostages issue is a serious issue because the Iranians took these people out of Iraqi waters, and it's inexcusable behaviour," Mr. Bush said in response to a reporter's question during a press conference at the Camp David retreat.

Who is Winning?

Iran gets to have higher oil prices, which will help their economy. Britain and the United States, so far, though, get a boost in public opinion worldwide, as compared with Iran.

Several commentators are saying, though, that Bush went too far in calling the prisoners hostages. They fear that this will provoke Iran into keeping the prisoners longer.

The bedrock truth is that this whole incident will not delay sanctions against Iran, and the world seems even more united in seeing that Iran not obtain nuclear weapons.

Another 444-day Hostage Crisis?

Can the situation escalate into a repeat of the 1979 Iran hostage crisis, which lasted from November 4, 1979, through January 20, 1981?

I don't think so. Though Bush is a weakened president, a lame duck with low approval ratings, he has no shortage of backbone, as was the case with Jimmy Carter.

Iran took the hostages in the Carter era because they thought they could get away with it. They took the hostages this time as a daring act of pique. They are hoping to change the status quo.

There is not a chance in a million, though, that they can keep these hostages for 444 days. As long as Bush and Blair are in charge, this won't happen.

Iran's Boldness

Why did Iran think they could get away with even this stunt, as it is? Well here, I have to concede that they know Bush and Blair can't do anything in the short run—yes, due to their lack of approval, and the public's war fatigue, but also due to the takeover of the United States Congress by leftist pacifists, who always bring more violence to the world than they prevent.

Still, neither Bush nor Blair will let this situation stand for long.

Check and Mate

Is it a chess game? Yes, but eventually, sooner rather than later, the West will checkmate Iran on this one. Ahmadinejad will have made his point, though, that he can stir up trouble and roil our markets anytime he chooses.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post: Iran, British hostages, Ahmadinejad, 1979 Iranian hostage crisis, Jimmy Carter, George Bush, Tony Blair, Bill O'Reilly, Iranian nuclear crisis, Iranian sanctions

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

A Different Look At Our Second Biggest Problem

Illegal
mmigration

What the Liberal Press Won't Tell You

Another Former Liberal Turning to "Right"eous Heroism

Where Los Angeles Lives | Pro and Anti-Immigration Rallies Clash in Downtown: Ana Beatriz Cholo, The Associated Press, March 26, 2007

Dueling immigration rallies Sunday marked the
one-year anniversary of a massive pro-immigrant demonstration that jammed downtown streets with a half-million protesters and framed new debate in Washington.

Standing among the anti-illegal immigration protesters was 76-year-old Esther Lofton. Lofton said she was representing "my community, the black community" of Watts - an area that has seen a surge of Hispanic immigrants in the past decade. She said she is against illegal immigration regardless of race.

"I'm not out here just fighting Hispanics," she said. "I'm out here fighting illegal immigration. This is my first march, but I hope to get something started."

Ted Hayes was the leader of this rally in Los Angeles, but he was not interviewed by any newspaper, nor any television station. Being Black, he's not the right face for the liberal media to display, considering that he is deeply anti-illegal immigration. He is a hero to me, much like other liberal heroes like Tammly Bruce, Zel Miller, and Joe Lieberman, who take unpopular stands on issues they strongly believe. I am especially proud of Ted Hayes, since he is finally getting Blacks aroused against illegal immigration, which hurts Blacks more than any other group, taking skilled and unskilled jobs away from their community.





During the rally, one thuggish demonstrator dirtied the American flag, threw it to the ground, spit and stomped on it. Ted Hayes went to the flag, picked it up, and smothered it in kisses.

Ted Hayes Says: Biggest Threat to Blacks Since Slavery

Some months ago, Ted had this exchange with Sean Hannity on Fox News:

HANNITY: You're under fire for saying the biggest threat to blacks in America since slavery is illegal immigration. A lot of people don't like the fact that you made that analogy. How do you...

HAYES: Absolutely. Because it's true.

HANNITY: I've known you a long time. You never — you never shy away from a fight or a controversy. What did you mean by that for maybe somebody who didn't understand what you meant?

HAYES: If this illegal immigration process continues, it is going to completely destroy us. We are losing our homes, our lands, our houses, our employment.

Mr. Hayes

click to show/hide the rest of this section

Theodore "Ted" Hayes, Jr. is an American advocate for the homeless and has recently become an activist for the Republican Party.

Hayes' liberal activism began in January 1985, when Justiceville, a community of homeless people in Los Angeles, was founded. It survived for five months, until authorities moved to shut down the shantytown. When they did, Hayes entered 35-day fast in protest.

In 1993 he founded Dome Village, a Los Angeles homeless facility consisting of geodesic domes designed by architect Craig Chamberlain and funded by ARCO. During the same year, he ran for mayor of Los Angeles during the primary election, receiving 0.63% of the vote. In the mid-1990s, he organized a youth- and homeless cricket team that toured Ireland and England and inspired an opera. He is also the current president of the Los Angeles Social Cricket Alliance.

At the 2000 Democratic National Convention, Hayes, who was leading a contingent of homelessness activists, was shot with a rubber bullet by police.

In 2001 he ran unsuccessfully for the Los Angeles City Council seat of the 9th district, receiving 5.3% of the vote. After the September 11 terrorist attacks, he was criticized by Muslim leaders for his role in persuading the Los Angeles City Council to pass a resolution demanding that Muslims take a stronger stance against global terrorism. Recently, he has become a vocal critic of illegal immigration, joining the Minutemen Project at protests and staging his own. There was an altercation at an anti-illegal immigration rally at Leimert Park organized by Hayes.

click to hide most of this section

Another Aspect of Illegal Immigration

The Southland's hidden Third World slums - Los Angeles Times: "In the Coachella Valley, hundreds of trailer parks house desperately poor Latino workers amid burning trash, mud, contaminated water," by David Kelly, Times Staff Writer, March 26, 2007.

click to show/hide the rest of this section

THERMAL, CALIF.

Like most of their neighbors in the sprawling, ramshackle Oasis Mobile Home Park, the Aguilars have no heat, no hot water. On cold nights, the family of eight stays warm by bundling up in layers of sweaters and sleeps packed together in two tiny rooms.

Bathing is a luxury that requires using valuable propane to boil gallons of water. So the farmworker clan spends a lot of time dirty.

Jose Aguilar, a wiry 9-year-old, has found a way around the bath problem. He just waits until dinner. "My mom makes frijoles,' he said, 'then I take a bath in that water."

The purpose of this article, of course, appearing in the Left-Angeles Times, is to make you feel sorry for illegal immigrants. I have a different response to it. I believe this is what you can expect when you have an unregulated invasion of our country. Like Ted Hayes, I have nothing against Hispanics. I do have something against filling our nation with unskilled, uneducated, poverty-stricken people who will naturally turn to crime or at least undercut our wages. I continue to repeat, too, that I resent people coming to our nation who do not want to become Americans, will not learn our language, and who bankrupt our hospitals, fill our prisons, and lower the standards in our schools.

Many Hispanics, and now, as we've seen with Ted Hayes and other Blacks, feel the same way. Any Hispanic who comes to America wanting to be an American, willing to work hard, get educated, learn our language, and eschew gangs, to me, is welcome. We do not promote this kind of immigration, however, by being "kind" to all comers. Reality has to set in. Despite our riches, we cannot feed the whole world. If we try, then we will become Third World ourselves, and this cannot be good for anyone. Go to the Oasis Mobile Home Park to see liberal heaven.

click to hide most of this section

The Solutions?

What is the solution for us? A sensible immigration policy.

What is the solution for poor Mexicans? Believe it or not, it remains in helping and persuading Mexico to treat its citizens better, develop capitalism, decrease corruption, and take care of their own poor. Yes, we need a wall; better border enforcement; and penalties for businesses that hire illegals. Plus, we must stop feeling guilty. We cannot import all the world's poor. The best thing we can do for them is spread democracy, and support the rise of capitalism—as we see happening in China. The Chinese poor no longer need our charity, do they? Neither will Mexico if they change direction.

In conclusion, I salute you Ted Hayes; and I point to the Oasis Mobile Home Park as the vision we want to avoid in America.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post: illegal immigration, conservative, liberal, Ted Hayes, Minuteman Project

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

A Classical Liberal's View on Iraq

ovelyL
ife-saving
iberals

Good Guys and Gals

There are several living Democrats whom I admire. A short list would include of course Joe Lieberman, Zell Miller, Tammy Bruce, and even Bill Richardson (for his integrity and honesty), and well, let's see—I'm thinking.

A Liberal with Integrity Defends the Iraq War

There is one liberal, however, whom I admire as much as anyone, even as much as such heroes as Larry Elder, Tom Tancredo, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham.

Christopher Hitchens.

The man is the epitome of what I call the Classical Liberal. He is liberal in many of his viewpoints, but counterbalances this with being strong on defense, a lover of America, and a man who tells the truth,





without demagoguery.

A rare bird these days. He ought to be cherished.

The great one speaks about the Iraq War: So, Mr. Hitchens, weren't you wrong about Iraq? - By Christopher Hitchens - Slate Magazine: Fighting words: Hard questions, four years later. By Christopher Hitchens, Posted Monday, March 19, 2007, at 1:53 PM ET

Four years after the first coalition soldiers crossed the Iraqi border, one can attract pitying looks (at best) if one does not take the view that the whole engagement could have been and should have been avoided. Those who were opposed to the operation from the beginning now claim vindication, and many of those who supported it say that if they had known then what they know now, they would have spoken or voted differently.

What exactly does it mean to take the latter position? At what point, in other words, ought the putative supporter to have stepped off the train? The question isn't as easy to answer as some people would have you believe. Suppose we run through the actual timeline:

It's a great defense of the Iraq War, and you can go to the above link to read the article. He writes it better than I, so I'll just direct you to it.

Opportunistic Blathering

I, like you, have been hearing the demagogic John Kerry present the other side, and just about every Democrat trying to turn soldiers' lives into political capital.

Too Busy Protesting to See Reality

What is ironic, with all the anti-war protests lately, and the shameless vote-seeking, is that the surge is reportedly actually going quite well. Despite all the complaining by anti-war groups and the left, people on the ground, including Iraqi's and American soldiers, are saying that they are starting to feel safer.

Terrorists Love the Left

Of course, this is only a temporary phenomenon, as the terrorists know that the left continues its drumbeat to remove the troops, thereby ensuring that we will be withdrawing in the sometime not so distant future.

The sad thing is that much of the public is buying the left's propaganda. Too bad. If we do withdraw prematurely, then we might be snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post: liberal, conservative, Christopher Hitchens, Larry Elder, Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingraham, Bill Richardson, John Kerry, Iraq War, demagoguery, classical liberalism, troop surge, Zel Miller, Tammy Bruce, Tom Tancredo, Ann Coulter

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

A Documentary on Michael Moore

What Goes Around Comes Around

I find this hilarious. It validates my judgment to myself. I was thinking of making a documentary about Michael Moore, showing his hypocrisy, and voila, a pair of liberals beat me to it. Of course, they didn't mean to be negative. They practically worship the guy. Still, his duplicity shines through their film.

Documentary questions Moore's tactics - Yahoo! News: By Christy Lemire, AP Movie Writer.

AUSTIN, Texas - As documentary filmmakers, Debbie Melnyk and Rick Caine looked up to Michael Moore.

Then they tried to do a documentary of their own about him — and ran into the same sort of resistance Moore himself famously faces in his own films.

The result is "Manufacturing Dissent," which turns the camera on the confrontational documentarian and examines some of his methods. Among their revelations in the movie, which had its world premiere Saturday night at the South by Southwest film festival: That Moore actually did speak with then-General Motors chairman Roger Smith, the evasive subject of his 1989 debut Roger & Me, but chose to withhold that footage from the final cut.

The husband-and-wife directors spent over two years making the movie, which follows Moore on his college tour promoting 2004's Fahrenheit 9/11. The film shows Melnyk repeatedly approaching Moore for an interview and being rejected; members of Moore's team also kick the couple out of the audience at one of his speeches, saying they weren't allowed to be shooting there.

You can read the full article to get all the details. The point is, Michael Moore's whole reason for making the documentary Roger and Me was that Roger (Roger Smith) supposedly was inaccessible, and wouldn't meet with Moore. Whoops! I guess Mr. Moore wasn't entirely honest was he? His other documentaries are just as full of holes, as is Mr. Gore's An Inconvenient Truth.

Great Editing

Left-wing documentaries, and organizations for that matter, are like this. They are propaganda pieces designed to inflame people and set up fundraising for pet projects. Gore's got the whole world scared. Hollywood continues to honor people like Moore and Gore. I'd rather have "more gore," Hollywood horror movies, than anything Moore and Gore manufacture. I will see their movies, because they are entertaining. I feel bad about them, though, because they masquerade as truth, and people believe them.

We ought to have a board of Truth that looks into the validity of the claims of documentaries, including left- and right-wing films. After all, you can lie with pictures, photos, and interviews. It all depends on the editing. If you're Michael Moore you just leave out the fact that you did meet with Roger. If you're Gore, you leave out the scientists who don't believe that global warming is as bad as he says it is.

Leftists are great editors.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post: Michael Moore, Al Gore, Liberals, Conservatives, Roger & Me, Farenheit 9/11

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

Market Crash?

Panic

Speaking as a Former Stockbroker

I am a former stockbroker for Merrill Lynch, Dean Witter, and Charles Schwab. I currently am not involved in the investment business. I have no special expertise in the field except for my brokerage experience. So, what I'm about to say is not investment advice, and I wouldn't pretend that it was.

On the other hand, I did have the benefit of great training and experience with these top-notch firms, I was a licensed broker, and I learned some valuable lessons. So, now, I offer you the benefit of my hard-won wisdom in the field. I feel compelled to say something, as I know that many people are hurting at this time because of the market.

I'm going to make this short, and keep it simple. I am advising you in a general way, but not with any specifics. Take what I say into account when you make your market decisions in the coming weeks.

Simple Principles

I am going to say only two simple things. What goes up, comes down; and vice versa.


And, the best time to buy quality stocks in the stock market, is when stocks are falling, and/or at a bottom. Contrarily, the worst time to buy any stock is when it is at a high point, when the stocks are wildly rising.

Buy low, sell high.

Amateurs Lose with Market Tops and Market Bottoms

Amateurs make two mistakes. They panic on the way up, and they panic on the way down. The panic on the way up leads them to buy at market tops. This is where they fear they are going to miss the next move up. This panic is motivated by greed, and the fear they will miss out on profit. The panic on the way down is caused by despair, and wanting to preserve what little capital they have left.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt said, "There is nothing to fear but fear itself." How true.

The Clever Investor

So, what strategy should the investor take? The wise investor doesn't care whether the market is rising or falling. He/she does not panic, but adopts a strategy that wins in either case.

click to show/hide the rest of the post

A Rising Market

The clever investor buys aggressive stocks on the way up. Then, when the market has been rising and rising, begins to buy less aggressive stocks, switching eventually to defensive stocks, and starts selling the aggressive stocks he/she has already bought. On the way up, he/she eventually shifts more and more to a cash position, choosing bonds instead of stocks.

A Falling Market

On the way down from a top, the clever investor starts converting cash and bonds into shares in the stock market. Initially, he/she begins by buying defensive stocks. As the downturn in the market progresses, he/she starts buying aggressive stocks again.

The Secret

What is the secret? Being contrary. Whatever the "little people" are doing, do the opposite. This makes sense, since the "little people" rush to buy at market tops, and rush to sell at market bottoms. The "little people" lose all the time during market swings.

So, resist your impulses. Don't jump in and try to guess market tops and market bottoms. No one can do this. Instead, average in and average out. As the market rises, begin taking some money out and putting it into bonds, as well as start selling aggressive stocks and replacing them with defensive stocks. Vice versa when the market is falling. Begin taking bond money out and buying defensive stocks, and later aggressive stocks.

You want to be buying heavily the further the market falls, and selling heavily the further the market rises.

If You're Stuck in Positions and Run Out of Money

If you run out of money on the way down, don't panic and sell. Just wait. Park your money and don't look. Only sell then if the fundamentals in your stocks have changed—as when one of the companies whose stock you own is going bankrupt. Then, get out, preferably on days when the market is up, and accept your losses. Otherwise, accept your paper losses and don't look at the market until it hits bottom and begins to rise again.

Investing Wisely

This is a difficult course to take. But it is highly profitable. You wind up buying low and selling high. This is gold. The market professional dreams of market bottoms. It is the only opportunity to make obscene riches. He/she is grateful for market tops too, because this is when he/she can take the profits he/she has made from earlier buying when the market was low.

What to Do Now

What does that mean for today's miserable situation? If you have discretionary funds you can spare to put into the market now, you are very lucky. Start now buying quality companies on their way down. The more the market falls, the more you will buy. Don't count on any quick turnaround—if this is a true bear market, the market might not turn for years. If you can afford to lose some money, buy aggressive stocks. If you want to be more conservative, start buying defensive stocks. If you are stuck in positions, don't panic. Ride out the market drop and don't even look at it. Just make sure that the companies whose stock you have bought are quality companies. If they aren't any more, then sell them when you get a chance on up days in the market.

click to hide most of this post

Market Crash?

Is this a market crash, shades of '29? Probably not. Is it the beginning of a bear market? Probably not. It's most likely a correction in a continuing bull market, but this doesn't matter. In truth, we don't know if this present market is in a correction, or a crash. If it's in a correction, then it will rise again in a few weeks or months. If it's a bear market or a crash, then it will continue to fall. Whatever happens, it shouldn't concern us. We need to be brave, and stick with a long-term strategy that is appropriate in either case. This will lead to prosperity, whether the market rises or falls.

Other Strategies

Of course, there are other tactics to deal with a market crash, like selling short, or selling covered calls, but these are for the professionals. If you have a trusted broker, you can ask him/her about these, realizing that they are risky.

Good Luck

That's it. Easier said than done. Best of luck to you.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post: Iraq

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

Hollywood's Night

Oscar

Not a Big Fan

I'm a big fan of movies, but not of present-day Hollywood. Since the present crop of stars are so shallow, in my opinion, I am not overly eager to watch their annual self-worship.

One thing I dislike is the hypocrisy. These guys, with their air-conditioned limousines, energy-guzzling mansions, gas-powered boats, private jets, and other toys for the rich deliver more CO2 into the atmosphere than a thousand coal plants, yet they are so sanctimonious about the environment.

Fact: A Gulfstream III private jet releases 10,000 pounds of carbon dioxide an hour.

See Gore isn't quite as green as he's led the world to believe - USATODAY.com:

Public records reveal that as Gore lectures Americans on excessive consumption, he and his wife Tipper live in two properties: a 10,000-square-foot, 20-room, eight-bathroom home in Nashville, and a 4,000-square-foot home in Arlington, Va. (He also has a third home in Carthage, Tenn.) For someone rallying the planet to pursue a path of extreme personal sacrifice, Gore requires little from himself.

They bash capitalism, which provides them their living. They are anti-business, while at the same time stuffing cash in their pockets from the companies paying for commercials they star in. They are anti-war, any war, just or not, though it's these wars that ensure them their freedom. Many of them are even anti-American, with a snobbism about the country that elevated them to fame and fortune.

It Wasn't Too Bad

The Oscars last night did not inflame me as much as they sometimes can. I am always aware of watching them with two personas. One persona is Rock the everyday guy, who likes to just relax and have a good time with them. The other persona is Rock the concerned citizen, who is focused on the usual harm that Hollywood does to our society. I was able to relax most of this Oscar presentation and not get overly concerned. One reason might be that I TIVO the thing now instead of listening to it raw. So, I skip over the endless Thank You's and most of the commercials. I admit that maybe I missed some inflammatory remarks.

All Praise Be to Gore Almighty

The segment that did bother me was the hero worship of the inconveniently truthy Al Gore.

click to show/hide the rest of the post

I know that some of my Republican friends are taken in by the global warming hysteria too, so I find myself quite alone sometimes in calling for calm and perspective on the subject. Nonetheless, every week now, more and more reputable scientists are saying that we don't yet know if global warming is a serious problem or not, and we certainly aren't sure that it is manmade. Yet, for leftists, the thing has taken on the air of a religion, much like liberalism in general.

Al Gore is God now. They might as well just open up the heavens and take him up. I'm convinced that if he ran for president this time, he'd have a real chance.

Most of the Time, They Shut Up and Sang

Anyway, Hollywood seemed to be somewhat muted on the political front this Oscars, thank goodness. Ellen DeGeneris only made one dumb liberal remark, the usual leftist slur that Al Gore really won the election, laugh laugh. Most of the time, though, she and the actors, actresses, singers and dancers shut up and sang. Of course, there were the usual liberal choices for awards, like Gore's flick and Melissa Etheridge's song for it, I Need to Wake Up. I do agree that she needs to wake up, as do all her liberal friends. If she wants to go green, then let her carpool to the next Oscars.

Good Day for Minorities

I'm happy that it was a good day for African Americans and other minorities, except for Eddie Murphy. Forest Whitaker won best actor for his charismatic performance as Ugandan dictator Idi Amin. Jennifer Hudson, a former American Idol contestant, scored the best supporting actress award for her debut performance in the musical Dreamgirls. Murphy was the favorite in the Best Supporting Actor category, but Alan Arkin got the nod. Some say it was because of Murphy's recent release of the low-brow Norbit that hurt his chances.

click to hide most of this post

It Was a Bit Boring, and I Know What Could Rev It Up

DeGeneres, I think, did a good job, but the show was a bit boring. They ought to ban people reading from lists. Thank goodness for TIVO.

I repeat, again, and again, just think what a patriotic Hollywood could accomplish for themselves, let alone for America. Their ratings would soar. They'd have the country cheering and tuning in, I believe, if they were gung ho behind the troops, praising the President, and showing respect for America. I'd watch that show without my TIVO.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post: The Oscars, Hollywood, Hollywood Liberals, Ellen DeGeneres, Al Gore, An Inconvenient Truth, Melissa Etheridge, Forest Whitaker, Eddie Murphy, Jennifer Hudson, American Idol, Dreamgirls, Alan Arkin, Norbit

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

Bush's Star and the American Future

Bush

And
merica

Bush and Bush's Progress on Some Important Issues of Our Time

There are many things going on at this time on the world news platform. Everything seems in flux. This post is a gut check on our future with Bush at this moment in time with regard to some of the important issues. It is personal and subjective. The connection with truth is just one person's view of things, and it will only be valid to the extent that other people's views are added.

Bush Overall

Bush appears to be on the upswing at this time. His poll numbers are lower than ever, yet there is something noble and presidential about him lately. He seems to be combining persistence with flexibility.




He is sticking with his positions on important issues, but is open to other ways of seeing things. I've listened to him speaking both on and off the cuff, and he is actually more eloquent than ever. He has taken the path of effectiveness. He concedes reality, that he is a lame duck president and that he might not be articulate at times; but he still wields power, and his communicating skills are improving with his self-acceptance. He certainly has a vision for the world, and he is starting to depict it with some skill.

I think this puts Bush in a good position. His poll numbers will rise.

Iraq

Bush is following through with his idea of a troop surge in Iraq despite opposition in America from most Democrats, some Republicans, and many voters. He is listening to the military commanders on the ground. One huge problem lately is American losses of helicopters, along with their personnel.

click to show/hide the rest of the post

I am reminded that this is exactly how Osama bin Laden, with American help and shoulder fired missiles, drove the Soviets from Afghanistan several years ago. The military, with Bush's blessing, is going to adjust to this new threat, however, unlike the Russians.

Democrats are the ones, I believe, in the untenable position on Iraq. Though the American people are disillusioned with Iraq and want the U.S. to get out, they are becoming aware of the bloody aftermath that will follow if the U.S. leaves. Moderate Democrats have gone on record with their votes and statements that they think the surge will fail. This puts them in the position of having to cheer for American failure in Iraq. They have always cheered for American failure in Iraq, in my opinion; but with these votes, this anti-American sentiment is exposed. Will Ted Kennedy, for example, ever say "Good job!" to Bush if the troop surge works? Never. Kennedy has committed to the failure of the surge, and will be looking for any signs that he has been right.

The Democrats have made the mistake of playing to the polls, instead of doing what is right. The American people will see through this.

If the surge doesn't work, then at least Bush will have tried. If it does work, then the world will be a better place; Democrats will be exposed as the demagogues they are; and Bush's stature will soar.

Nuclear Issues with Korea and Iran

Bush just had a major success with his "stubborn" policy with Korea. Thanks to the arm-twisting of the Chinese, Korea has agreed to stop developing nuclear weapons. This is a major diplomatic success for Bush. Former U.N. ambassador John Bolton, independent as ever, thinks the United States is being bamboozled, much like happened to Clinton, where the North Koreans sign an agreement and then ignore it. In my opinion, though, this time is different, since, thanks to Bush's wisdom, China is included in the enforcement of the agreement; and North Korea does not want to cross China. Here again, the Democrats will not give Bush credit for this historic achievement, but the American people will.

If Bush is lucky, he can turn around now and use much the same tactic with Iran. In this case, with Korea as the model, he can urge the European powers, and Russia, to do the arm-twisting with Iran. This is not so far-fetched as it once seemed now that the Korean situation seems to have been solved.

Putin has been sounding hysterically critical of the U.S. lately, but Bush is not taking the bait. He is not responding in kind to Russia. This is just more evidence that Bush has matured into quite a diplomat as of late. He is acting and sounding presidential on the world stage, and his steadfastness is bearing fruit.

Global Warming

Every day now there is another scientist speaking up that the world is in hysteria about global warming, and that there is no evidence that the warming is caused by mankind's behavior. Yet, the consensus is there that Al Gore is right about the issue. To me, we are in the middle of another Copernicus syndrome. It is as if 75% of the scientists and an even higher percentage of the people were saying the sun revolves around the earth and not vice versa.

All I can do is keep expressing the truth, along with the 25% of the scientists who know what they are talking about.

This is the truth:

The earth may be getting warmer, but not as dramatically as feared. Some ice is melting on the globe, but other ice is thickening. Sea levels may rise, but only inches, and not the twenty feet that Al Gore preaches. Climate change may occur, but this is largely unpredictable. Computer models are highly complex, and bear little resemblance to reality. Plus, the effect of CO2 levels on global warming is not proven. There have been times in earth's history when CO2 levels were higher than now, and the earth was colder at those times than it is now. According to the same scientists who believe in the global warming hysteria, following Kyoto and decreasing CO2 levels will have a negligible effect on global warming anyway.

Unfortunately, Bush is buying in to the hysteria, as most world leaders have. So, we are on the verge of spending billions of dollars on corrective measures that have no guarantee of success. As I've said before, I think we ought to go green, and develop alternative forms of renewable energy, but we ought not to get hysterical about it. The sky is not falling.

Bush is wrong on this one. Let's hope he doesn't become a lemming.

Social Security

The Democrats have successfully demagogued this issue, and it is dead. The left have frightened Americans and especially seniors that privatizing Social Security would mean fewer or less secure benefits, while the opposite is true. Bush never did a good job of explaining this issue to the American people, and it appears as if his time is running out on it.

Capitalism

The Social Security issue is emblematic of Bush's inability to preach capitalism to the people. This is why the socialist left is rising, with people like Nancy Pelosi and Ted Kennedy taking center stage. It would be very easy to use socialist countries as illustrations, for example, of the kind of bureaucratic nightmares that occur with socialized medicine. Bush, the first president in history with an M.B.A., is just not teaching capitalism effectively.

click to hide most of this post

The Future

I deliberately deferred some important issues to another time, like immigration.

That said, I sense that the future for Bush will be positive, with some setbacks along the way. Iraq will work out better than expected, although not ideal. Bush's Korean policy will succeed, and even Iran will come around. America will go green, hopefully not hysterically. Because of Bush's rising stature, at home and around the world, the U.S. will even take one last look at some of Bush's overlooked programs, like Social Security.

In short, I believe the worst is over for Bush, and for America. Bush's star is rising. I believe historians will agree that we have just now reached a positive tipping point. They will judge that Iraq was worth it. They will perceive that the world was made a better and safer place thanks to Bush, the American military, and a steadfast diplomacy that can only come after a demonstration of resolve.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post: George W. Bush, Vladimir Putin, Ted Kennedy, the Iraq War, Korea, Iran, nuclear weapons, troop surge, Social Security reform, Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan, global warming, Al Gore, John Bolton

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

Obamamania

Barack

Historic Election

This is going to be one of the most fascinating presidential races in U.S. history. For the first time in 80 years there is no one running who was a Vice President or President, and the field is wide open. It is open in this way, and in every other way. This race will be multi-cultural, multi-racial, multi-gender, and multi-religious.







There is the first Hispanic running. The first Black with a real chance of winning. The first female with a real chance of winning. A Mormon. True liberals, and true conservatives, and those in-between.

All this in the middle of an unpopular war that will determine the fate of mankind, let alone of this country. The United States is on the brink of turning into a socialist country too, worried so much about global warming and other manufactured issues and myths that the far left has a real chance of taking over the country. It is even rumored that a sleeper candidate could announce at any time now, and instantly overtake the whole crowd, Mr. Al "Inconvenient Truth" Gore, father of all demagogues.

Obama and Other Great Speakers

I watched, as many of you did too, Barack Obama's declaration of candidacy in Springfield, Illinois, where Lincoln once announced his candidacy too. Though I am, as you know, a conservative on many issues, a libertarian on others, a liberal on some, and on a few issues a libertine; with the nomer neo-con being the closest philosophy to my heart—I was enthralled with Barack's speech and delivery. To me, it was electrifying, and it sent chills down my back. Finally, a politician who can deliver a great speech.

click to show/hide the rest of the post

I haven't seen this in my lifetime since John F. Kennedy. Yes, you're right, Bill Clinton could do it too, but Clinton was so much a demagogue in my eyes that the words did not chill my backbone, they chilled my heart. Other great speakers of the 20th and 21st century were Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, Adolf Hitler (a great spokesperson for evil), Martin Luther King and Ronald Reagan. Barrack is not in their league, none of them. But he stands head and shoulders over the rest of the current pack. Compare him with Hillary and she comes off as shrill, marmish, with a pinched face, anger in her heart, and with a stick up her rear.

Articulosity

Plus, he is ARTICULATE. There, I've said it. The African-American community is all a twitter about Biden and now Bush calling Barack this nasty word. It demeans, they think, all African-Americans. That's how far political correctness has come, my friends. We can't even compliment Blacks now without being called racists. Well, I do understand the concern. After all, the implication is that this Black is articulate, which is surprising—after all, there are very few articulate African-Americans. Ouch.

So, let me clarify for all of you, and for my dear African-American friends. It is not surprising to me that we've discovered an articulate Black. There are many well-spoken African-Americans. When I say that Barack Obama is articulate, I don't mean to compare him with other Blacks. I mean to say that this guy is A R T I C U L A T E period. He is articulate compared to all races, to all White folks, to all humans. The guy can speak. He can communicate. He is bright, insightful, and his words flow easily and with passion.

I'm not surprised that we have found an articulate Black. I'm surprised that we've found an articulate politician. They are rare these days. You don't have to just think of the anti-articulate Bush. Just think of Hillary. Compared to her husband Bill, she's autistic. Like I say, Barack is not in the same league as Martin Luther King or John F. Kennedy, but he's a person that can mesmerize a crowd.

Othello versus Lady Macbeth

I also sense in him that he has a kind of goodness. He does have the fire in the belly that a presidential candidate needs, but I don't sense he has any lizard-like go-for-the-throat coldness that Hillary has, thank God. Hillary would slash the jugular of her child to become President. Barack would try to find another way. He truly believes, it appears, in his mission of goodness. Barack is Othello, misguided into liberalism, but with a good heart. Hillary is our Lady Macbeth, plotting for political power regardless of casualties like the truth.

click to hide most of this post

What to Do With Barack?

Talent Wasted on Liberalism

Alas, Barack is an idiot by default, by my definition. He's a liberal.

Left of Center But Less Of a Demagogue

I could love this man, almost. It's a crying shame he's on the wrong side. It's disastrous that he really is a bleeding heart liberal with a soak the rich, class warfare, socialist, anti-military, multi-cultural mushy mushy heart and head. He is all this, believe me. Just examine his voting record. He's a liberal to the bone. The enemy. Yet, my deepest antipathy for the left is reserved for demagogues, and I get the feeling that he is less of a demagogue than the rest of them. He truly believes in his liberal nonsense.

What do I do with him? He will be president one day, or vice president, or hold some other high office beyond Senator.

I don't know what to do with him. I rest assured, though, that he sounds like a reasonable idiot. He seems practical. He won't totally destroy the country, it appears, like Hillary would. So, my decision for now is to thank God that He has sent us an attractive liberal who could break down racial barriers and add a bit of honor and character to the dismal crowd of leftists inhabiting the Democratic Party.

Amen.

Advice for the Republican Party

As for the Republicans, the only way that you can beat a ticket with Obama on it, would be for you to nominate a Giuliani/McCain ticket, or, better yet, a Giuliani/Condoleeza Rice ticket. Or, make sure that if Hillary is the nominee, that you contrast this female crocodile with the sweet brilliance of her charismatic running mate. Ensure that the country sees Hillary for what is in her arctic heart. If the people look past Hillary and concentrate more on Obama, then you, conservatives, are in trouble.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Othello, Lady Macbeth, John McCain, Condoleeza Rice, Rudy Giuliani

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

The War in Iraq and Paris Hilton

Paris

Reinventing the Taliban?

I saw a wonderful film this week, Reinventing the Taliban?, which showed some of the rich cultural life in Pakistan and helped me jump to my obvious conclusion about one major reason why radical Muslims hate the United States.




See: Reinventing the Taliban?, a a Discovery Channel Production.

When Sharmeen Obaid returned to Karachi after attending college in the U.S., she was alarmed by what she saw: a fundamentalist political party on the rise and strictly interpreted Islamic laws that were gradually eliminating freedom of expression. This program follows Ms. Obaid in her travels throughout Pakistan as she exposes inequity and injustice, particularly in regard to women, while seeking to understand why and how the Taliban's ideology is being given new life in her home country. A diverse sampling of pro- and anti-Taliban voices is heard, and footage of rallies and protests is included.

Sharmeen Obaid:

is a journalist and a documentary filmmaker. She was born and raised in Pakistan and has received her higher education in the United States. Her documentary films have been aired on Discovery Times channel and PBS/Frontline World. Her first documentary, "Terror's Children," addresses the plight of Afghan children living in refugee camps in Pakistan. The film won the American Women in Radio and Television Gracie Award and the Overseas Press Club Award this year. Sharmeen's second documentary, "Re-inventing the Taliban," is about the rise of religious fundamentalism in the Northwest Frontier Province of Pakistan. That documentary just earned her the Banff Rockie Special Jury Award. Her most recent film is "On A Razor's Edge," which aired on PBS Frontline World on March 25th 2004. It is a documentary about the recent peace movement between India and Pakistan.

The Players

Pervez Musharraf

Ms. Obaid describes Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf as progressive, and tolerant. Indeed, the clips she showed of him do confirm this. He is of Muhajir descent and considered to be the first Pakistani Muhajir to be able to get to the highest rank both in Pakistani government and military.

click to show/hide the rest of this section

The Taliban

Mostly Pashtuns, The Taliban are:

a Sunni strictly puritanical Islamist movement that ruled most of Afghanistan from 1996 until 2001, and are currently engaged in a protracted guerilla war against NATO forces within Afghanistan.

The word Taliban is the Pashto plural form of the Arabic طالب Tālib, "student". The group gets its name from the fact that its membership is drawn from the students of religious seminaries, or madrasahs, in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Osama bin Laden

Osama bin Laden is a Saudi Arabian militant Islamist and is widely believed to be one of the founders of the organization called al-Qaeda, responsible for terror, including the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center. In conjunction with several other Islamic scholars, bin Laden issued a fatwa (Islamic religious edict), that Muslims should kill civilians and military personnel from the United States and allied countries until they withdraw support for Israel and withdraw military forces from Islamic countries.

The MMA

The major fundamentalist Islamic Party in Pakistan is the MMA, Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal, an Islamic alliance between religious-political parties in Pakistan.

In the Pakistani parliament, the MMA is a coalition opposition, formed after Pakistan became a part of the "Global War on Terror". The coalition is united against the current government of President Pervez Musharraf because of his support for the United States' fight against what they consider to be global terrorism and allegedly putting the demands of the United States above the demands of his own people.

The MMA's

leaders are strongly opposed to the US-led anti-terrorism campaign in neighboring Afghanistan that ousted the Taliban from power. The group believed Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf had become a tool of US foreign policy. The MMA campaigned on promises to enforce Sharia law and in support of the withdrawal of US forces based in Pakistan in the campaign against international terrorism.

click to hide most of this section

From the Sacred to the Profane

Ms. Obaid's tour of Pakistan took us inside the people sympathizing with the fundamentalist MMA, with the Taliban, and with Osama bin Laden. It also took us, however, inside what she calls 90% of the country, the secular Islamists.

The Taliban Sympathizers

were male-dominated, with women wearing Burkas and staying off the streets.

The Secular Islamists

See Liberal movements within Islam:

Since the 19th century, Muslim progressives have produced a considerable body of liberal thoughts within Islam (in Arabic: "interpretation-based Islam"; or "progressive Islam" - but some consider progressive Islam and liberal Islam as two distinct movements. These have in common a religious outlook that depends mainly on ijtihad or re-interpretations of scriptures. Liberal Muslims interpret the Qur'an and Hadith from their personal perspective rather than the traditional Muslim point of view. Liberals generally claim that they are returning to the principles of the early Muslim community and to the ethical and pluralistic intent of their scripture.

You have at one end of the cultural spectrum the fundamentalist MMA, and at the other end, the secular Muslims who allow sexy Pakistani models at the Lahore fashion show, slightly more demure than in the U.S., but still with the same half-naked, sexualized performances. In fact, one group of actresses covered in the film was putting on The Vagina Monologues.

click to show/hide the rest of this section

The Vagina Monologues is an Obie Award-winning episodic play written by Eve Ensler, which premiered at the off-Broadway Westside Theatre in 1996. Ensler originally starred in the production, playing all the various women who share their views about their vaginas with the audience; when she left the play it was recast with three celebrity monologists. The production has been staged internationally, and a television version featuring Ensler was produced by cable TV channel HBO.

The play, risqué in any culture, is an invitation only event in Pakistan. Beautiful Pakistani actress Ayesha Alam, who is a member of the troupe that is staging the production in India, told BBC News Online about the problems of showing it in her own country.

It was very difficult to perform the Monologues in Pakistan. It even got discussed in the national assembly. Many thought that the play was promoting promiscuity, was against our culture and our religion.

Ms. Alam has received death threats, and six playhouses in Lahore have been shut down due to the performances. Ayesha is brave in the face of other threats too, like someone throwing acid on her face. She says the majority of Pakistanis want nothing to do with extremist Islam, and their "narrow view," although their "popularity is gaining." Ayesha says that though the MMA is a minority, they are more powerful than their numbers because of death threats.

click to hide most of this section

Fundamentalism versus Secularism in Pakistan

My overall impression of Pakistan is that it is a wonderful country with an exquisite cultural background. One of the most beautiful arts is the magnificent male dancing. This is emblematic of the problems, though. Only males show up for anything important, including the dancing. This occurs even with the secular Muslims. With the fundamentalist Muslims it's even worse—with their women unseen anywhere, and when they do peek out, you catch them covered head to toe, some even without eye slits. According to Ms. Obaid and Ms. Alum, the MMA represents a highly motivated minority of millions and millions who are gaining momentum.

Why are They Angry? Why Do They Hate Us?

What then, is all the fuss? Why are these people so enraged? What motivates them to support Osama bin Laden, al-Queda, and the Taliban; cheer when U.S. towers fall; travel to the United States with evil in mind, and to Iraq; and strap bombs to their children's chests?

Control over Women; Order in the Family

It's obvious. The fundamentalists want control over their women. They view females as their property, and as sexual creatures that must be imprisoned. Their women must be covered head to toe, and not allowed out. They must be watched, and guarded. They will be punished if they stray. The man can divorce her easily. They want her to have no property rights, no voting rights, no sexual rights, no rights at all.












Paris burning

The Abomination of the West

The West, to the fundamentalists, is a nightmare. Western values bring sexy models, women dressing provocatively, strippers, whores, and the Vagina Monologues. Their biggest fear is Paris Hilton, an unchained, unleashed, unclothed sexual machine, without any purpose except to enjoy the flesh and wallow in decadence. This is their nightmare daughter, or wife.

Their women emulating the sexy models or Paris Hilton would mean, to them, the emasculation of the men, the breakup of family and tradition, and the end of order in society.

Family Values

The fundamentalist Muslims are fighting for family values! Not our family values, to be sure, but theirs.

An average American guy might understand this for a moment if he considers his view of strippers and prostitutes. This average American Joe might think exotic dancers and "whores" are just fine, but he doesn't want his girlfriend or his wife doing it. A lot of American men are not even happy about their partners going to Chippendales, or to a bachelorette party that has male strippers. American men can feel quite possessive of their ladies.

Fundamentalist Muslims feel they've got a good thing going. They have a patriarchy with the backing of law, Sharia. They are in total control. If they catch their wife cheating, they are allowed to kill her.

The advance of the West means an end to this control for them. Secularization is their enemy. They are fighting against the idea of Paris Hilton. They hate the West because of what she represents.

Disclaimer

click to show/hide the rest of this section

I'm not blaming Paris Hilton for the War in Iraq. I blame the fundamentalists. I'm fine with Hilton, ditz and all. Yet I do understand where the fundamentalist urge comes from. Men have always had a hard time not thinking of their women as property, even in the West. After all, though I love looking at Paris Hilton, and enjoy her antics from afar, I wouldn't want her as my wife, would you? (Except in California, where there is community property!)

Hope

I was pleased to hear that in Pakistan 90% of the people are secular Muslims, and that they don't support extremism. This is a great relief, if this is true. On the other hand, even the secularists there have a ways to go, it seems, when it comes to true freedom.

click to hide most of this section

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post:
Paris Hilton, The Vagina Monologues, Burka, fundamentalist Islam, the Taliban, MMA, Pakistan, al-Queda, Osama bin Laden, Reinventing the Taliban?, secular Islam, Pervez Musharraf, Pashtun, Sunni, Fatwa, War on Terror, ijtihad, Qur'an, Hadith, Sharia

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

Comment Post: Based on Republicans versus Democrats on Race Issues

Comment Post




This is what I'll call a Comment Post. It is not a true post, as it is more informal. It elevates a comment, or a comment exchange between a reader and myself, into a post. It can give prominence to an extended or astute comment. I'll be using these occasionally on Tuesday through Sunday's, as I post on Mondays now.

The following is a comment exchange between paz y amour and myself on Friday's post, Republicans versus Democrats on Race Issues.

The Comment Exchange

Paz, thank you so much for your comments. You said:

I wasn't arguing the historical merits of Democrat/Republican help to the causes of Black progression, I was saying that the perception of Republicans is not popular in the Black community as a whole and giving the historical elements that give rise to that sentiment. I'm not saying one is better than the other- in fact, they're more alike than ever before in history!

Interesting point. My goal, as you know, is to counter wrong perceptions. The perception that Republicans are anti-Black now is wrong. The idea that both parties are the same on this issue is wrong. I've stated my case in my comments in the post. I can't state it any better. I still think there is a qualitative difference between the pandering Democrats and the homage to Blacks given by Bush, in the form of real power.

click to show/hide the rest of the post

"Paz, every time a White Democrat goes into a Black church or speaks to a Black audience and agrees with the audience that there is widespread racism against Blacks...this is pandering and enabling"

How is this any different than a "conservative" politician speaking in front of a Evangelist Christian audience and saying that there are wide-spread anti-Christian activities, the government is anti-family values and gays shouldn't be able to get married. Isn't THAT what the audience would want to hear in order for them to support that lawmaker seeking election? Politicians of both sides pander to get support- that's what they do BEST. Isn't that how Bush and A LOT of Republicans got elected in 2000/2004- pandering to jaded religious conservatives? In fact I would argue that the folks in office who DON'T pander are vastly in the minority.

You have a point here. Bush does pander. When I've seen him do it I've cringed. Yet, he genuinely likes Blacks too, and he's proven it. Again, he's given them real power. As far as issues like anti-Christian activities, anti-family values, and gays not being able to be married, yes, these are wedge issues. The Republicans do use them when they are in trouble in elections. They did it in 2006 and it didn't work. The idea that all politicians pander might be true for most politicians, but we can always hope for a true leader. I don't see one at present.

I've noticed more Black republican strategists and spokespeople on CNN and Fox "news" over the past few years. Could giving Republicans more color on television be perceived as gratuitous pandering? Maybe.

How cynical, paz. This means that FOX can never win in your eyes. Whites can never win. If you ignore Blacks you are racist. If you include them you're racist. Give me a break. Again, this is the liberal tendency, whether you classify yourself as liberal or not, to place so much emphasis on motive. Forget motives. You can't read people's minds. Pay attention to their behaviors. If they include Blacks, be happy, no matter the motivation.

Pandering means doing or saying things just to gain favor, while abandoning core values. If you are anti-Black and you honor Blacks, who cares? If this is the way they "pander" then pray for more pandering! Destructive pandering is when a politician says to Blacks, "You haven't a chance to succeed in this racist society," gaining votes, but causing real psychological harm to his audience.

You cannot ever watch FOX news and find any concrete evidence of any anti-Black sentiment. In fact, they are very inclusive. To accuse them of pandering by having Blacks on the program is absurd, and an example of reaching to find discrimination. A real paranoia.

"Historically, the Republican Party was founded on an anti-slavery platform, as opposed to the slave-holding and pro-slavery Democrats."

And historically, Black people overwhelmingly supported Republicans- that is until the late 30's when most overwhelmingly shifted to the Democratic party, due in large part to the lack of REAL social change since Reconstruction and feelings of political abandonment. Democrats as a whole weren't opposed to civil rights as you claim- you're referring to the so-called racist Dixiecrats of the 50's who were "democrats" by name, but didn't embrace the ideals of their noble predecessors. They obviously had NO support from Black folks. And just a side note, the most vehement Dixiecrat Strom Thurmond became a (gasp) Republican in 1964-right in the heart of the civil rights movement. I'm sure that helped bring Black people back into the Republican folds.

I disagree with your facts and conclusions. See my post comments. You ignore many of the points I brought up. You label Democrats who were racists as "Dixiecrats." Yes, that's what they were called, but they were registered Democrats, and racists. Period. You can't just disown them from the party. While the Northern Republicans fought the Civil War to free the slaves, Blacks after the Civil War won seats in legislatures and statehouses, and these Blacks were removed, and the election laws were changed. By whom? By Democrats.

Hey, the Dems have Rob Byrd (among others), the Repubs have George Allen (among others)...

You compare Robert Byrd's leadership in the Ku Klux Klan with George Allen's faux pax? How insulting, and how absurd.

"Again, "trickle-down Reaganomics" did work, as evidenced in the Clinton years"

As your reliable Wikipedia says, Reagan's economic success is still being debated (just like global warming, no?). All I know is that when Black people talk of the 80's, not much positive is said about it. I can agree that Clinton may have benefited from Reagan's policies, but the perception is that Black prosperity was hindered in the 80's, not helped.

Again, wrong perceptions are what I am fighting.

By the way, if you haven't noticed, Wikepedia veers far left. It is not reliable in its politics; it is dead wrong. Every article has a leftist slant. So, I never trust its conclusions. However, it is pretty good on facts. So, when it concludes something like, "global warming is caused by human pollution," they are in the hysteria, cuckoo, twilight zone. But, when they say that the earth has been warming, a fact, I trust them.

"Katrina.... This was not a race thing, paz. This was an incompetence thing."

Grand ole Katrina. I didn't say that Bush's incompetence was racially based, I was saying the PERCEPTION is that it was and another "example" of Republicans not caring about the welfare of Black people. Regardless, it's hard for be to believe that if Beverly Hills had been flooded that it would have taken almost a week for help to arrive- hmmm....

Bush took the same time to respond in Mississippi. You don't hear about any Bush "racism" in Mississippi, though, because that state had a competent governor and local governments that did not have busses left unused. The equally incompetent Mayor and Governor of Louisiana pass unscathed with your criticism. Are they racist?

"Lincoln, Eisenhower, and Bush are three presidents who have made great contributions to Black advancement."

2 out of 3 aren't bad. It's hard to say what contribution Bush has had on Black advancement. Yes he has high ranking Black members of his cabinet- some of the smartest people in US government I might add, but don't you think it's a bit too early to tell how it will effect Blacks in the future?

Appointing Blacks to high office can't hurt. Plus, the perception that he is racist, if anyone believes this, is absurd.

I know how much you love the guy, but we'll be able to judge in say 20 years, but not now.

I don't love the guy. Sarge Charlie loves him, and I understand why he does. I am personally disappointed in him. He is too much a panderer for my taste, too much of a "good guy" in Iraq, and has given away our country with his immigration policies. I like him because of his War on Terror, and invading Iraq, and keeping taxes low. Otherwise, he is a leftist or a panderer, and an ineffective communicator.

click to hide most of this post

"Republicans have the best record, on everything from civil rights to economics, that can lift the Blacks into the middle class."

Another debatable point. It seems that each "good" leader with regard to race has made good decisions based on their predecessors- FDR-Truman-Eisenhower-JFK-LBJ etc. Are Republicans really the "best" or is it your bias? I can readily admit that growing up in a house that voted for Democrats has caused me to look less favorably at Repubs, BUT I will vote for anyone if I like their politics better than the next person- thus bucking the "perception" of republicans. I don't believe either of them have Black interests at heart, regardless of what they say.

Respectfully, I believe Republicans are sincere in their caring for Blacks, while Democrats are using them to gain votes. Again, you put Whites, and Republicans, in no-win situations. If they ignore Blacks or do them harm, they are racists. If they do good things for Blacks, they are still racists, because of what is in their hearts, according to you. They can't win, and that's not fair, paz.

Rock

Announcement: Truth on Monday Mornings

To My Dear Readers

New Policy: A Post Each Monday Morning

I assume there will be several changes in this blog over its life. This will be one of them.

I've been considering this a long time and have finally decided to do it. I am transforming this blog from a daily to a weekly post. I will from now on post once a week, on Monday mornings. This will be in effect, I assume, until I can go professional as a blogger or journalist, or in some other way have more time.

I'll reserve the right to post a comment or two as an informal post during the week, or an observation, or a new cartoon, and so on. I'll also elevate extended or astute comments into informal posts during the week. Plus, I'll update my header daily, with a pithy comment. Otherwise, I'll wait for Monday mornings.

My reasons for doing this are: I will be able to research a whole week if I need it for any one article. I will have time to visit other blogs and leave comments. Plus, this format will give my readers a whole week to comment on any particular post, if they want. This is good for me, as I invest my heart into each article, and one week's consideration of each post seems appropriate.

As I love researching, writing, and posting, I will miss the daily post, and I will return to it, or its equivalent, whenever I can.

Unchained Memories

I was watching this morning Unchained Memories: Readings from the Slave Narratives, and it was deeply moving. Yes, I am appalled at slavery and what it wrought on our dear brothers and sisters. I am also appalled, though, at the thought of man's inhumanity to man. It's just hard to believe, sometimes, how cruel we can be.

We've seen this kind of brutality in the behaviors of tyrants, in good folks turning bad in hard times or war, and in minor ways through such things as cuttroat business practices.

God sure set us up for many tests while we live on this earth.

Next post is on Monday morning.

God bless.

Rock

Republicans versus Democrats on Race Issues

Bigotry

An African-American Viewpoint on the Republican Party versus a Compassionate Conservative White's Response

Once again, I am indebted to paz y amour, from the wonderful blog the path, for an extensive comment that shows deep consideration on his part. It is a well-thought-out treatise on how Blacks feel about the Republican Party, a response to yesterday's post, Shoulda Been Biden His Time, about Senator Joe Biden's unfortunate and unintentionally racist but revealing remarks about Senator Barack Obama.

Since paz so well communicates one point of view, I am again elevating a paz comment to a post. This time, though, I am including my comments as part of the post, since I am so passionately opposed to paz' view on this. Where does the truth lie? I believe it lies with my viewpoint. Paz believes it lies with his.

Please be advised, while paz' arguments are well presented, he was unaware that I would be posting them. I have his permission from the past to use his comments, when warranted, as posts. Still, he did not have the time in his comments to research, and he therefore is at somewhat of a disadvantage to me. So, this duel is unfair. With time and preparation, paz could have offered further points to advance his thesis, and counter mine. Therefore, don't look upon it as who won or lost the debate. Rather, view it as an expression of two opposing points of view, and learn from both sides.

After all, we're dealing not just with facts, but also with feelings, perceptions, and apperceptions.

Paz on How African-Americans Feel About the Republican Party

Rock's Counter Arguments

The Oops Comment

Ah, the power of the "oops" comment. Apparently your president isn't the only one who says stupid things. I agree that comments like this are unspoken thoughts that slip out from time to time and speak volumes about how some rich White (undercover)racist politicians feel about minorities-





Forgive me paz, but Bush is not just "my" president, he is also "your" president.

It's good, though, that we agree on the nature of Senator Biden's comment.

Ignorance or Racism?

and I loved your line about them being "marveled when they just show up". So true, at least that is how it comes out. As usual, I have to disagree though with your view that it's a demogoguing Democrat issue when in fact it's evidence of individual ignorance- NOT widespread racism on the part of the democrats.

Paz, every time a White Democrat goes into a Black church or speaks to a Black audience and agrees with the audience that there is widespread racism against Blacks, or accepts the plea for a bigger welfare state, or trumpets the view that cops are prejudiced against Blacks, this is pandering and enabling. I realize that Bush has the same tendency, but Democrats on the whole use this strategy as a mainstay.

click to show/hide the rest of the post

Republicans versus Democrats on Pandering

I would argue that Republicans are just as likely as Democrats to have a pandering racist attitude- however your disdain for Dems will surely bias you from seeing that.

My disdain for Dems is based on example after example. Yes, there are Republicans who do this too, but fewer by far.

The True History and Present Reality

Black people have traditionally been distrustful of politicians, regardless of party. You feel that Dems "demagogue" Black people but the point you're missing is that the Republican party offers (and has historically offered) little or no rational alternative. All the recent scandals that have plagued Republicans haven't helped!

Historically, the Republican Party was founded on an anti-slavery platform, as opposed to the slave-holding and pro-slavery Democrats. The rational alternatives now that Republicans offer are: a rising middle class thanks to Bush's tax cuts; the highest level of Black home ownership in history; African-American cabinet members, government appointees, a Supreme Court Justice, and a drive for African-American party membership and power. These are not just talk, but real action.

As far as the scandals go, I concede your point on this issue.

Black Advancement: Greater under Republicans or Democrats?

Consider that over the last century, the U.S. presidents who presided over periods of great strides in Black history were ALL Democrats. FDR- when Blacks were allowed into the military as equals for the first time, LBJ when Blacks gained LEGAL social/political equality, and Clinton when Blacks FINALLY gained economic equality. Black folks LOVE Bill Clinton because so many moved into the middle class bracket during those 8 years. Whatever their motivation for bringing about social change for African Americans, Democrats as a party have been perceived as having a HUGE positive impact on the lives of Black people in this country. The same can't be said for their Republican counterparts- not in the least.

How about the U.S. president who made the greatest stride of all for Blacks, Abraham Lincoln? Blacks love Clinton for their moving into the middle class, when in reality it was Reagan lowering taxes that was responsible for the Clinton prosperity. Yes, Clinton didn't muck it up, like so many Democrats have, so I give him credit for this, but it was Reagan that led to the rise. Under Bush, there are more African-American homeowners than at any time in history, with the biggest African-American middle class in history.

Eisenhower

Think about the Eisenhower days when Black soldiers went to
Korea thinking it would help with social change only to return as second-class citizens under segregation and Jim Crow.

Soldiers sent by Eisenhower to protect Black students in Little Rock, Arkansas, 1957

Au contraire. The worst of the bigotry and segregation at that time occurred in the South, under universal Democratic Party rule. Eisenhower inherited FDR and Truman's policies on the armed forces, and also the Black soldiers' treatment when they returned from war. Much of the Korean War was under Truman. Eisenhower was not happy with the treatment of Blacks. He took action. Eisenhower was the first modern president to pass and enforce civil rights legislation.Under this Republican president, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its historic Brown vs. the Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483, on May 17, 1954. The decision declared all laws establishing segregated schools to be unconstitutional, and it called for the desegregation of all schools in the nation. Eisenhower sent U.S. troops to enforce the Supreme Courts' historic decision. Opposing Eisenhower was Orval Eugene Faubus (7 January 1910–14 December 1994), a six-term Democratic Governor of Arkansas, infamous for his 1957 stand against integration of Little Rock, Arkansas, schools in defiance of U.S. Supreme Court rulings

Eisenhower also took steps to end segregation in federal jurisdiction, and hired African-Americans to work at the White House. Growing awareness of racial injustice in the South prompted the Eisenhower administration to draft legislation leading to the Civil Rights Act of 1957, the first civil rights legislation enacted in the United States since Reconstruction. The new law was a building block for the sweeping Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the 1965 Voting Rights Act. LBJ was the beneficiary of Eisenhower's groundbreaking work.

Reagan

Think about the Reagan days when "trickle-down Reaganomics" basically kept Blacks OUT of the Middle Class.

Again, "trickle-down Reaganomics" did work, as evidenced in the Clinton years, when Clinton, unlike past Democrats, did not dismantle the Reagan Revolution, and in fact was distinctly conservative on economics, much like Republicans. Clinton, you remember, enacted welfare reform, a Republican idea.

Katrina

Think about a year and a half ago when GWB simply flew over flooded New Orleans and returned to his ranch without doing a thing- while thousands were stranded.

This was not a race thing, paz. This was an incompetence thing. You can't keep pummeling Bush that he is incompetent on a whole host of issues and then suddenly say that he could have been competent on New Orleans but chose not to be because of race.

Republican versus Democratic Track Record with Blacks

In other words, Republican leaders (besides Lincoln of course) have a bad track record as far a Black people are concerned and it's gonna take A LOT to change the negative view. In other words, Dems are the lesser of two evils- and isn't that how we usually vote anyway?

Lincoln, Eisenhower, and Bush are three presidents who have made great contributions to Black advancement. Lincoln freed the slaves and was loved by Blacks. Eisenhower sent in troops to enforce civil rights, and appointed Blacks, for the first time, to positions in government. Bush has appointed more Blacks to positions of high power than any other president, bar none. You have proven my point. You seem blind to these contributions. Why? Because you've heard so often that Republicans are against Blacks. It simply isn't true. It may have been true at one time, just as with Democrats. Dems still have an ex Ku Klux Klan Exalted Cyclops as a Democratic Senator, Robert Byrd.

click to hide most of this post

Trickery, Demagoguery, or Loyalty?

So my dear Rock, you view Black support of the Democrats as a result of severe trickery, when in fact, it's the result of severe loyalty. Though you think the Dems are insulting in their "pandering" of Black people, there is nothing more insulting than the lack of political support Blacks have gotten from Republicans over the years. Will it change? Maybe. But for now, you'll have to continue to wonder why Blacks are "blind" in their support, when in fact, we are not so blind. History is a bit hard to forget....

Paz, you obviously are sincere. I believe, though, that not only does the Republican Party hold the key to the Black middle class for the future, but that history does show a great devotion to civil rights from the Republicans. Yes, it took a long time to develop, but those growing pains are over. In truth, the most virulent bigots in our history have been Democrats, with their pro-slavery stance at the beginning, their support of the Ku Klux Klan after that, their bigotry in the South in the fifties (which Eisenhower fought), and their soft bigotry and pandering now.

My Conclusion

If Blacks want to continue looking to the past, fine—Republicans have the best record, on everything from civil rights to economics, that can lift the Blacks into the middle class. As for the present, just look at the pictures of Bush's previous and present cabinet, and power brokers. Peruse the photos of the Supreme Court. This is unacknowledged groundbreaking advancement on all fronts, under a Republican, again.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post:
racism, Ku Klux Klan, Democrat, Republican, Little Rock, Eisenhower, LBJ, FDR, George W. Bush, Joe Biden, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Abraham Lincoln, Reconstruction, Jim Crow, Ronald Reagan, Reaganomics, The Reagan Revolution, Korean War, Civil Rights Movement

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

Shoulda Been Biden his Time

Soul
of a liberal

Oops!

Biden Unwraps His Bid for '08 With an Oops! - New York Times: WASHINGTON, Jan. 31, 2007. In an era of meticulous political choreography, the staging of the kickoff for this presidential candidacy could hardly have gone worse.

Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, who announced his candidacy on Wednesday with the hope that he could ride his foreign policy expertise into contention for the Democratic nomination, instead spent the day struggling to explain his description of Senator Barack Obama, the Illinois Democrat running for president, as “the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.”

The remark, published Wednesday in The New York Observer, left Mr. Biden’s campaign struggling to survive its first hours and injected race more directly into the presidential contest. The day ended, appropriately enough for the way politics is practiced now, with Mr. Biden explaining himself to Jon Stewart on Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show.”

Racism

I think a liberal leader has gotten caught for exactly the attitude that is felt but unspoken among their ilk.






The disclaimers are coming hot and heavy that he didn't really mean it the way it sounded. Au contraire. Liberal leaders are the true racists at this time in history. Exactly as Bush has said for years, they harbor in their hearts the soft bigotry of low expectations, patronizing blacks and Hispanics and marveling when they just show up.

click to show/hide the rest of the post

The Obama Halo

I have nothing against Barack Obama. I agree with some of the hype that he is a potential star. And yes, to be honest, as this is what this blog is all about, part of the mystique is that he is black. I yearn for a black candidate that can put an end to the unfair charge that America is still racist. So I find myself rooting for Obama, because he is black, and because he is articulate, and because he has captured the imagination with some charisma, and all this means he has a chance.

I have to watch myself, though. I have this tendency to put a halo around Obama. When I look at his voting record, he is a pure liberal. Liberals are not good for the country at this time. Ergo, Obama would not be good for the country. Still, and I am being dead honest, I sense something more in him, aside from his race, and aside from his ill-chosen liberalism. I detect some common sense in him. Common sense can steer a person away from nonsense. Sometimes, away from the nonsense of his party.

Take Away the Halo

Let's put it this way. I desperately don't want a liberal to win the presidency in '08. I fear our country is veering fast towards socialism and a crippling weakness in the face of terrorism and other threats. But if a liberal has to win, then I'd fear Obama less than any other Democrat who has a chance in this race. Even taking away the halo, Obama has something solid about him.

Advice for White Liberals

I have some advice for liberal whites, though, and this is good for the rest of us too. The best way to honor African-Americans, or Hispanics for that matter, is to treat them as your equals. Don't patronize them. Catch yourself when you want to surround them with halos, good or bad; which means treating them with discrimination, positive or negative. Both are dehumanizing.

Treating people as equals means being honest with them, and judging them fairly. Obama, for example, needs to be considered on the content of his character, by his words, and by his deeds. I'll give you an example of what I mean. My opinion of him as a presidential candidate is that he doesn't have the heft yet to be president. He is bright and articulate, and I'd love that in a president, but he needs to understand the world more. I wouldn't trust him yet with Iraq.

Of course, I wouldn't trust any Democrat with Iraq except Joe Lieberman.

Still, my earlier statement stands. If I have to trust a liberal with Iraq, other than Lieberman, I fear Obama less than the others, because of his common sense, and his ability to learn quickly.

Democrat equals Demagogue

Democrats have chosen, over the last fifty or so years, not only to patronize blacks, but to demagogue them. This means they communicate with them by playing to their fears. The underlying assumption is that blacks are not bright enough to see through this. Unfortunately, the strategy has worked. Blacks vote overwhelmingly Democratic. What a crock. The party that uses them has gained their confidence. The party that preaches what could lift them up, the Republicans, is scorned.

click to hide most of this post

Bring on the Gaffs!

One day, through gaffs like Biden's, maybe blacks will see through the Democratic hypocrisy, and realize that a good economy, effective policing, a strong defense, and family values are good for them, as opposed to the welfare state that Democrats promise.

Biden did us a favor. He allowed us to look into the soul of the white liberal.

Disclaimer

There probably are a small number of true progressives and true classical liberals among the Democratic and leftist leaders of today. This post of course does not apply to them. They represent an honest disagreement with the right, unlike the corrupt demagoguery of the mainstream Democratic Party leadership.

Plus, I realize that not all liberal leaders are racists; and that those who are racists do not see themselves as such. Their racism is hidden even to themselves, and it is a racism without malice. It is just as harmful, though, as deliberate persecution.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post: Joe Biden, Democrat, liberal, conservative, racism, Barack Obama, the soft bigotry of low expectations, George W. Bush, progressives, classical liberalism

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

Unperky Ratings for Couric

Couric
rashes

Gender Bias?

"Gender" Blamed for Katie Couric's Low Ratings: Tuesday, Jan. 30, 2007

CBS News and Sports President Sean McManus says that gender bias may play a role in the disappointing ratings Katie Couric has been getting on CBS Evening News.

"I think it is a fact there are probably people, both men and women, who are perhaps uncomfortable having a woman anchor the news," McManus told the media industry publication Broadcasting & Cable.

"The way she is scrutinized, I think sometimes unfairly, quite frankly, I think a lot of that has to do with gender."

McManus maintained that as a woman, Couric has to be concerned about 'a lot of things the male anchor doesn't have to worry about, like how she looks or what she is wearing."

The Real Reasons for Couric's Low Ratings

With all due respect to Mr. McManus, I believe the reason Couric's numbers have fallen is not because she is different, ala being a woman, but that she is the same. She is the same old touchy feely liberal bias wrapped up in a new gender and new clothes.




Despite her attempts at being objective, with her Free Speech segments, her underlying sympathies show through loud and clear. What makes FOX so appealing on cable is that they give voice to a side that has been neglected by the other media. The same can be said for talk radio. When the people have a choice, they go for Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity<