Why Republicans for Amnesty/Open Borders have no brians aka The Snake eating its own tail

In American Poltics it seems to be something like a rule that the most obvious exsplanations, answers and solutions (usually in regard to issues that make white people uneasy like race and immgration) cannot and will not be said or written in the mainstream media media.

Usually the reason why your barber Lou can so often give you a more common sence anyalsis than the entire media is mere fear and corruption. The denizens of DC-NYC poltical and social life who monopolize poltical anlaysis have dinner partys to worry about being invited to, valuable relationships (with poltical powerplayers) they don't want to needlessly squander (by unnescarily speaking truth) or else they live in constant fear of angrying the PC police on the right and left (who theyre friends are) and being marginalized in turn, relagated away from mainstream eminence to the great but obscure websites like Vdare.com (hence Steve Sailer).

But sometimes the reason the obvious is ignored is simply mysterious. For instance, why is it that no one recognizes the tragic stupidity of consertives for open borders or amnesty.

I recently watched a "principled" liberterian argue against a border fence and immgration laws all together, going so far to tell the crowrd before him that he felt the distinction between america and mexico should ideally be one as trivial as that between maryland and conticutt, basically a mere techinuilty.

Could this man not see why his "principled" ideas were- in this instance- self defeating. It would be hard to believe that such consvetives and republicans as George Will, John Mccain, George Bush, Lindsey Graham who support amnesty don't grasp the most basic effects the policy they advocate would have. Do they not know who they would be granted citzenship to in the millions? Do they not know what most 8th graders could figure in a few minuetes? that virtually making 20 million poor latinos citizens (overnight) equals something like the de facto importation of atleast about 16 million new democratic voters who will help bury conservtism.

Karl Rove who in a matter of a few years has gone from being known idoticlly as the great "evil genius" of american poltics to being a guy who is self evidently not very good at his job, would argue with the same myopic logic that made him assure us mccain would win in 2008, that latino immgrants are social consertive and thus are natural republicans. Rove's mind operates like a bad computer unable to do two things at one time. Thus Rove cannot grasp that while latinos may indeed be religous (atleast when they arrive) that they are also poor, and while they may be not amused by gay marriage, they are more willing to vote for free health care than too ban gay marriage and to cut theyre employers taxes.

The fact that anybody who professes to care about conservtism, free markets, limited goverment, indivual liberty can't see how those principles are imperiled by a open borders policy in regards to the southern border and/or the granting of amnesty for 20 million poor urban and uneducated latinos who are remaining poor urban and uneducated even after they become citizens is a bad idea, suggests strongly that said person is probably weak minded.

And i don't think poor urban and uneducated latinos gets across fully the type of people i'm talking about and just how destine they are to vote democrat from now until enternity.

These people will vote republican when either they win the lottery or the Republican party becomes the true party of Huckabee, social conservtive and progessive on demoestic policy. In other words they will vote republican only when the republican party dies and becomes simply Democrat Lite. You can forget all about those fine old liberterian conservtive principles, the term vouchers will become as archaic as the term viceroy, and the names of Hayek and Adam Smith, Rothbard and Mencken will be as foreign to the ear as Carletoon S. Coon. And if only the liberterian idiots and the compassionate conservtive blowhards like George Bush and his lame crew Micheal Gerson and William Kristol and John Mccain and Norman Podhoretz could see how there "hardcore liberterian principles" and their "compassionate conservtism", respectivly obliterated conservtism and libertianism and America itself. There faces would melt right off like the wird Nazi with the scar on his palm did at the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark.


THE TIME FOR HISPANIC IMMGRATION PANDERING ON THE RIGHT IS OVER. THE CONSERVTIVE MOVEMENT IS NEARING WHAT ALMOST CRETAINLY BE IT'S DEATH IF IMMGRATION IS NOT HALTED NOW OR IF THE DEMOCRATS APALLING AMNESTY BILL IS PASSED. ERECTING A BORDER FENCE, ABOLISHING THE 14th AMNEDMENT, ENDING CHAIN MIGRATION, CUTTING OFF ALL ENTITLMENTS TO ILLEGALS, VIGOROUSLY GOING AFTER SANCUTAURY CITYS, ILLEGAL HIDEOUTS AND BUSINESS' WHICH EMPLOY ILLEGALS AT THE STATE AND FEDERAL LEVELS MUST BE RIGHT NOW THE NUMBER ONE Priority of all republicans and of all real american patriots or in the very least of anybody who even remotely gives a damn about the enviorment, national unity, national soveirgnity, patriotism, decreasing suburban sprawl, improving the schools, lowering the debt, better and cheaper health care, lower taxes, better neigborhoods, the black community, limited goverment, indivual liberty, school choice and a colorblind scociety with colorblind laws. For all of these causes the enviorment chiefly among them are imperiled by illegal immgration and in truth legal and illegal mass immgration in general paticularily from latin america and the 3rd world where 95 percent of those who have immgrated to america since 1965 have come from.

The fact that there are even republicans let alone democrats or any americans advocating granting 20 millions citzenship to illegals in addition now to the free health, public education and welfare we alreday provide illegals free of charge is a absolute disgrace. We in 2008 also give hispanics a republican candiate not to be forgotten.

HAVE NO DOUBT ABOUT IT. THE DAY THE TREASONOUS DEMOCRATS PASS THERE DISGUSTING AMNESTY BILL IS THE DAY WE SAY GOODBYE TO AMERICA ON IT'S LONG TRIP TO BECOMING A NIGHTMARE THAT OUR GRANDFATHERS WOULD NOT RECOGNIZE AND WOULD NOT WNAT TO EVER RECOGNIZE AS THAT GREAT COUNTRY THEY LIVED IN.


Heres a video that shows you quickly how appaling and treasnous that amnesty bill is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H01N7y8QO-c

John Derbyshire, telling it like it is

"Radio Derb with your host John Derbyshire" (a british Tory emigre turned average Joe/middle class hero) is one of those things that gives one hope and makes life signficantly more enjoyable. The commentary peppered with great brutal anglo humour is the most refreshing dose of common sence avialable to us.

heres this weeks RadioDerb, a dman good one i might add:

http://radio.nationalreview.com/radioderb/post/?q=NmM3ZmYxODdkNmI4YzI2Y2YyNjhmMzg0MzBhNTA5NjM=

Note: Derbyshire and Steve Sailer are kind of a great pair. Sailer also tells it how it is in very much the same way. BOth are a few of the rare conservtive who can speak truthfully on racial shake down artists, illegal immgration, and other similiar issues. Derbyshire writes a column for National Review and does his radio show and keeps a diary at NRO.com. He also writes for "the american conservtive" whose film critic is Steve Sailer who keeps a brillant blog Isteve.com and writes for the equally valuable Vdare.com which has a great blog aswell.

Apalling liberal bias vol. 1

It's hard to listen to NPR (which i once religous did) and the rest of the Mainstream (Liberal) Media once you know about the news such media organizations including even FOX news refuse to cover for purely poltical reasons. This gets to why liberals-although most acknowledge that there is a left wing bias- have difficulty grasping the full scope of liberal media bias because liberals don't read National Review or any of the other conservtive websites,blogs and magazines that actually cover the storys the MSM shame-facedly ignore.

One of the easiest ways to sort out reasonable liberals from unreasonable ones is to ask if they think the media has a left wing tilt. It's one of those oddities -like why kansas city is actually in missouri -that the big media watchdog entinties are run not by conservtives but by liberals so nuts that they claim to cover and expose a media with a ergegious right wing bias! These include Mediamatters.com (which seems to be operated by the producers and interns of MSNBC), Eric Alterman who wrote a book and writes a regular column in The Nation magazine entitled "What Liberal Media?", and Crooksandliars.com run by John Amato (who is for the record a part time member of Duran Duran's back up band). These people must have the hardest jobs around: trying to convince the world, like raving homeless people, that the media has a right wing tilt. Why don't they try something easier like becoming priests, joining the flat earth scociety or try becoming door to door scientology missionaries.

I have pity also for the figureheads of the liberal media, Keith Oblerman, Rachel Maddow, NPR and the whole rest of the gang. They used to be journalists when we had Bush in the oval office. Back then they actually reported inconvient news. They actually asked tuff questions rather than ask the chief executive about his dog. Now Oblerman and Maddow and the rest of the crew are a cross between being Obama staffers and pure RADIO FREE EUROPE style propgandists. They too have a seemingly hard job for they will spend the next 4 years ignoring news inconvient to "the One", calling republicans racists, and covering how great obama is.

Its far too infurating and time consuming to be a watchdog myself. Also I am a real person and not yet a member of the media bubble. i try to avoid the propgandists but sometimes like yesterday i turn on NPR.

So from time to time when i can't help but be scandalized by the bias i'll try to keep a tab of the bilge on this blog.

Instance 1.

i will provide about a 100 of these but heres just one of many

this is news the liberal media refuses to cover. and if you can find it reported on NPR or ABC or NBC or even FOX i will pay you good money

Obama's housing bill which will have taxpayers pay for other people's mortage in order to save them from impending foreclosures will include illegals!

In other words, tax payers who have done the hard work and saved to pay their own mortages and avoid foreclousre will not only be paying for the irresponiciblity of fellow citizens but now also reckless and irresponciblee illegals.

So now american tax payers pay for illegals to get free health care, free welfare checks and food stamps, free loans for college tuition.

and yet no one covers it! you will never hear this story on NPR for example because that would be too intolerant and mean of course. Such news that everyone would be intrested in learning about doesn't past the taste test of the ivy league liberals who decide what news gets reported for such people are the same shameful americans that march arm and arm with illegals brandishing signs that read "la reconquestdora!" at May Day immgration rallys. Liberals like Obama who did just that in CHicago in 2006 and likes to boast of doing so to latino audiences after he demans that those against giving 20 million illegals free helath care and citzenship and welfare and driving licences to stop practising "the poltics of hatred and intolerance".

Instances 2.
i turn on NPR yesterday, what are they reporting on? Obama's stimulus.good but what about it?

maybe they'd like to tell americans something that don't know that they'd like to know like how in Obama's stimulus there is 3 billion dollars for tatatto removal programs.

maybe they could report that Obama has been woefully failing to uphold his promise to cut wasteful spending and programs by stuffing his stimulus full of outragous pet projects that have nothing to do remotely with the econmy let alone stimulating it such as the above.

but instead they don't even mention any of that which people would like to know about and talk about how great the stimulus is, reporting on how it will help build new roads.

Stuff non-white people like

I just read/listened to "Stuff What People Like" by Christian Lander, which is hilarous and the best piece of anthropology since Gibbon's "The Decline of the Roman Empire". I highly recomend getting it on audiobook. Just a note: in truth the book should be titled "stuff yuppies like".

The Book made me think:there should be and will never be a "Stuff Black People Like" cause making generalizations about people who aren't white is racist of course. But i don't subscribe to such double standards. i don't treat people differently according to the color of their skin. so:

Stuff Black People Like

1. Not Swimming


This is weird but true. Black people don't swim. For instance, at my school we had two pools for when we swam in gym. The pool that was deepests at 5 feet for almost every black kid in class and the regular pool for the whities and the 3 other black kids in my class.

J school is for idiots

The San Fransico Chronicle may die by the end of this week. Rocky Mountain News said goodbye today. The NY times has basically taken out a second mortage. Newsweek may be dead in 2 years. Newsweek! In a decade it's foreseeable that Clevland, Milwauke, Minnapolis and other similiar major american citys will have no daily newspapers.

Conclusion:

If your heading off to Journalism school next year, your either dumb or nuts or extremly confident about your writing ability and/or the future of online journalism.

If you have a loved one planning to go to J-School please stage a intervention. seriously.

Bobby Jindal is a really nerdy robot

on Jindal:

1. he has a weird face.

2. it is a odd phenmon how asians in the south tend to have the thickest southern accents of all.

3. In case anyone wants to bemoan america as a racist nation in any of sly ways people/liberals like to call america a racist nation, remind them that in 2012 there is a good chance there will not be a white candiate running for presidnet of 75 percent white nation, and not even latino vs. black, black guy vs. indian catholic.

4. on the matter of JINDAL, MICHEAL STEELE, AND CLARENCE THOMAS, why is it that conservtives of color so upset liberals and make them role their eyes?

5. He can never be president. far too weird looking, not enough facial cementry, not leading man enough.

6.The GOP doesn't get it: you have to try to debunk the negative sterotypes of republicans not embrace them at every turn. Jindal strikes most people as simply nerdy particularily in his responce to obama. Nerdy Jesus Freaks from India, despite what some may think, actually is another republican caracture (hence Dinesh D'souza and Ramesh POnnuru).

a list all the different types of republican caractures:

1. hockey moms into jesus with annoying folksy accents who love hugging and smooches.

2. Jesus Freaks

3. pro life nuts.
4. Old greay catholics

5. coroporate stooges in their 50's , golfer, badly dressed, balding, cigar smoking, heart diease, divorce, estranged kids, listens to Rush Limbaugh.

6. Catholic Indian-americans.

7. Christian Asians who are really smart and organized.

8. Bubba and the good ole' boys and joe six pack too.

9. west virgina

10. the few cowboys left

11. recovoring crack and meth addicts or former pornstars who have turned to jesus.

12. Don King (question: is Don King still a republican?) and 50 cent

MY MCCAIN AD

I'm not scared of people supposedly saying Obama is a muslim, especially cause liberals are the only people who i hearing telling me that ppl say obama is mulsim. If i were to hear someone saying that though, i like 99 percent of americans would think it laughable.

what does scare me is Barak Obama being annoinated a healer/redeemer of america, who people truelly believe cannot and never has tried to decieve or polarize in the name of poltical points. Especially because under his patina of niceness and charsmia, Obama has made some despicable remarks (which i'll show in my next post) and put out some very sly lies. While Joe Biden has just all out been lying shamelessly. Slyness is Obama's speciallity. along with hazyiness, convinsing people to support him because they like him but not because they esepcially like or even know how he wants to change america, and his amazing abilty to talk completly differently on an issue and presenting himself in a completly differently light dependning on whatever audeince is before him.

the icon like devotion obamaniacs have for their leader is offputting considering how much merely has to do with a fetisization of his skin color. Electing a black guy, like marching in a May Day Amnesty rally with a "this is not your land" sign, these things put liberals in the spot they always want to be in: the ultra progressive subversive cutting edge. THere beyond patriotsm, man. Waving a flag is not something a black lesbian lit major from Brown does. They don't believe in borders or nations, or right or wrong or even truth. cause it's all subjective, man. They're not Americans. they're citizens of the world! they're all one step away from working for the ACLU! Honestly, the prospect of having someone who could very well be the head of the ACLU right now: Obama, as president is lightyears more distrubing that that dumb gal with pretty good stances, Sara Palin. but to be honest if Sara Palin is dumb because of the answer she gave on the Bush doctrine, then by that standard most women in america are morons. put them in that Gibson interview, with that guy coming at you like a hawk. most women would run out of the room for a court order!

What scares me is having to watch how blantantly obvious it is that the DEmocratic party's meal ticket is econmic distress. They're playing this fincial meltdown perfectly: keeping there econmic plans extremely hazy like Mccains because they know americans won't go ga ga over gov. run health care and French style big govrement the way americans will go ga ga for Obama ....just being so Obamalicious.

Obama will ride this crisis into the presidency even though he would anyways cause Mccain and Palin have run a awful campiaign and haven't even challenged Obama to delve into his any of his plans, making the huge mistake of going after BIll Ayers instead of running commercials with scripts like this that i wrote and sent to the MCcain camp today, tell me what you think:

voiceover: "THE NEXT PRESIDENT WILL INHERENT A MASSSIVE DEBT AND A ENTITLMENT and SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM IN CRISIS THAT WE CAN"T AFFORD. MCCAIN WILL BALANCE THE BUDGET, CUT PROGRAMS THAT DON"T WORK, GET OUT US OUT OF THE DEPTHS OF DEBT.

UNLIKE OBAMA, MCCAIN DOESN"T JUST TALK THE TALK, MODIFYING HIMSELF FOR EVERY AUDIENCE AS OBAMA HAS BUILT HIS CELEBRITY DOING. OBAMA STARTED RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT 2 YEARS INTO HIS FIRST SENATE TERM BECAUSE ONE SPEECH HE MADE IN 2004.


BUT WHAT DOES OBAMA PROMISE TO DO? HE"LL SPEND MORE ACROSS THE BOARD. THINKING HE CAN FIX THINGS LIKE OUR BROKEN EDUCATION SYSTEM BY THROWING MORE CASH AT MEDIOCRE BEAURCRATS. AND DON"T FORGET THE PORK THAT WILL BE OUT OFCONTROL WHEN THE DEMOCRATS TAKE ALL THREE BRANCHES. THAT"S RIGHT HE"LL BEEF UP BEAUCRACY BUT WON"T GIVE YOU SCHOOL CHOOSE. HE"LL PUT US DEEPER IN DEBT WEAKENING THE DOLLAR EVEN MORE. THEN HE'LL THROW AWAY THE BEST HEALTH CARE IN THE WORLD TO ADD THE BIGGEST ENTITLMENT OF ALL, WHICH WE CAN NEVER REMOVE, ON TOP OF ALL THOSE OTHER ENTILMENTS WE CAN"T AFFORD: FRENCH STYLE GOV. RUN HEALTH, PUTTING US ON THE FAST TRACK TO HAVING NO FREE MARKET HEALTH CARE AT ALL, CREATING HIGHER TAXES AND DECREASING QUALITY OF CARE.

IS THIS WHAT WE NEED IN A TIME OF ECONOMIC CRISIS? A CHARMING UNTESTED LEFTIST PROFESSOR WHO STARTED HIS RUN FOR PRESIDENT WITH 2 YEARS OF SENATE AND D.C. EXSPERIENCE UNDER HIS BELT, PROMISING TO SINK US DEEPER IN DEBT AND GIVE US EUROPEAN STYLE BIG GOV.?
THE ANSWER IS NO. VOTE MCCAIN."

more effective than BIll ayers right? Have you even heard MCCAIN make these arguments?!

America's future? look to Peter Hitchen's Britian

A chilling post on Peter Hitchens Mail on Sunday blog, by the name of "80m Britons, and no one you can trust. A future I’m glad to miss". This is really why i think we need to control the border:

Our Brussels masters predict that Britain will soon be the most crowded country in the whole of Europe. Presumably this is what they want, since it is their laws that have destroyed our borders and abolished British citizenship and British passports (that wretched puce thing in your pocket is an EU passport, not a British one, and the further east you go, the easier they are to get).

The European Commission says there will be almost 80million people crammed into our landscape by 2058. Just imagine all that concrete, the thousands of square miles (or square kilometres as they will be by then) chewed up by bulldozers.

Imagine the unending 24-hour whoosh and grind of traffic, the bulging trains, the seething, noisy, litter-strewn parks on hot summer Sundays, the crowded schools, the endless waits at enormous polyclinics to see a doctor you’ve never met before and will never see again, who probably doesn’t have English as a first language, and the multicultural schools where half the class will always be from somewhere else. I’m quite glad to think I’ll be dead by then.

I’ve always been unmoved by arguments that immigration ‘benefits’ the country economically. Maybe it does, if you eat at restaurants rather than working in them, and then hurry away to expensive areas where no immigrants live. But for most people it’s an unmixed curse.

For the migrants themselves it is often a journey into exploitation and squalor, miserable pay and ten-to-a-room living conditions. It holds down wages and puts unwanted pressure on services, transport and housing which are already under strain.

But there’s something else about it that is profoundly, heartbreakingly sad. When so many of our fellow creatures don’t speak our language, don’t understand our laws and customs, don’t know our history, can’t read our facial expressions or work out when we’re joking, we live at a lower level than we did before.

This was summed up for me by an article in a magazine for Poles working in Britain. Please don’t take this as some kind of rant against Poles. If this country is going to be repopulated by anyone, I’d like it to be Poles, whose hard work, resilience and general civilisation can teach a lot of our own young people a useful lesson.

the war on boys and our educational crisis

If the teacher unions ruled the world (which they almost do) this is what they'd make school children everywhere do for their dear leader, the bold protectorate of their monopoly, Mr.Obama.

http://www.blip.tv/file/1312572

I luridly rembeber begiging made to do this degrading type of sing along nonsence a couple times a year at my elementray school up until some absurdly embarrsing age. I hated it.

I believe there's alot to this argument about the feminization of boys and the war on boys. I often felt growning up that i was a boy attending a girls nursery school.

This video is quite persuaive in that respect. Call me crazy but i could see it shown a couple decades from now in the trial of one the boys in this video who grew up to be a gay child molester.
The acts shown in the video would strike me as just fine if they were doing this sort of thing in a girls school. There's something very peverse and disturbing about seeing these epicene little boys in this video, in their baby blue Obama t-shirts swaying gayily. It's seems like they've already been thorougly sterilized and stigmatized for their male agressive, compeitive instinstics. This is a national epdmic in my view. They've gotten rid of dodgeball which most young boys devootely love and look forward to because it's too "mean spirited and agressive" a game. They've replaced it with sing alongs about Obama and flowers and love.

This is what you get when you only let people who go to teacher college teach: a bunch of women, who are pretty dumb punishing boys for not acting like little girls. That's just elementrary school. Then when they get to high they don't learn their constuition but learn about the evils of America and get indoctrinated into liberalism. Entire generations are being despoiled.

American education is in crisis, and it's not even being talked about in the presidential race.

I think i rather agree with this assesment of Palin and the presidency. intellectual capicty does not equal a good president. common sence and good instintics and judgment do. Harry Truman vs. Jimmy Carter case and point. The idea that she'll nuke russia is absurd. so indeed i would say i'd rather have a president Palin than a presidnet Obama.
though i do wish polticians were more intellectual and candid. Infact in my perfect world, the best non fiction writers would be polticians.

here is a good segment of John Derbyshires September Diary on National Review Online

the ny times magazine interview you must read

below is by far, in my view, the best, most heated and fierce debroah solmon ny times magazine interview ever conducted.
The interview is with Charles Murray, who just wrote the great and real short "real education". He is a undoubtly a national treasure whom i find its nearly impossible to disagree with. i love how bold he is on Palin at the end. i really think this interview ended up with intellectual blows exchanged.

a must read.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/magazine/21wwln-Q4-t.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Although attending college has long been a staple of the American dream, you argue in your new book, “Real Education,” that too many kids are now heading to four-year colleges and wasting their time in pursuit of a bachelor’s degree. Yes. Let’s stop this business of the B.A., this meaningless credential. And let’s talk about having something kids can take to an employer that says what they know, not where they learned it.

You’re not the first social scientist to knock the liberal arts, but you may be the first to insist that only 20 percent of all college students have the brains and abilities to understand their assigned reading. Eighty percent are not able to deal with college-level material, traditionally understood. Someone can sit down with Paul Samuelson’s textbook and stare at the pages and know what most of the words mean. That does not mean that they walk away from it understanding economics as it is taught in the textbook.

What do you propose that 18-year-olds do instead of trying to learn the difference between macro- and microeconomics? Oh, the world of work out there!

I’m sure you’re aware that unemployment is very high right now. There are very few unemployed first-rate electricians. I can get a good doctor in a minute and a half. Getting a really good electrician — that’s hard. If you want jobs that are in high demand, go to any kind of skilled labor. And by labor, I mean things that pay $30 or $40 an hour.

Do you see your new book as an extension of the “The Bell Curve,” which caused an uproar in 1994 by suggesting that people are only as promising as their I.Q. scores? In many ways, it is a distillation of things I’ve been thinking since “The Bell Curve.”

Europeans have historically defined themselves through inherited traits and titles, but isn’t America a country where we are supposed to define ourselves through acts of will? I wonder if there is a single, solitary, real-live public-school teacher who agrees with the proposition that it’s all a matter of will. To me, the fact that ability varies — and varies in ways that are impossible to change — is a fact that we learn in first grade.

I believe that given the opportunity, most people could do most anything. You’re out of touch with reality in that regard. You have not hung around with kids who are well in the lower half of the ability distribution.

Have you? For nearly two decades, you’ve been at the American Enterprise Institute, the conservative think tank in Washington. Why would a self-declared libertarian, the party that glorifies individualism, spend his career on the dole? But I am not spending my career on the dole. People are voluntarily giving money to A.E.I. — there is no government money — because they think the work we do is valuable.

Aren’t think tanks basically welfare for intellectuals? Actually, the interesting thing there is the extent to which it’s the think tanks in the last 15 years that have been producing the stuff that has had the most effect on the debate, as opposed to colleges.

What do you make of the fact that John McCain was ranked 894 in a class of 899 when he graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy? I like to think that the reason he ranked so low is that he was out drinking beer, as opposed to just unable to learn stuff.

What do you think of Sarah Palin? I’m in love. Truly and deeply in love.

She attended five colleges in six years. So what?

Why is the McCain clan so eager to advertise its anti-intellectualism? The last thing we need are more pointy-headed intellectuals running the government. Probably the smartest president we’ve had in terms of I.Q. in the last 50 years was Jimmy Carter, and I think he is the worst president of the last 50 years.

Obama Youth: guess what black fraternities do on there free time

this is good news for all those condenscding, naive people who think black people will stop complaining about racism and do better if Obama gets elected.

but for me this is just scary, scary and bizarely hilarious. obama fans beware this may make you slightly embarssed for a moment.enjoy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUEQz5dltmI

this does a lot in the way of legitimazing the argument of my next evanstonian columnm as you'll see when i post the thing.

the rise of obama youth. not a shock to me.

p.s.

how many millions of wasted hours can be atrributed to youtube?

why not GUilliani?

Mccain should have picked Rudy.

conservative ideas are getting horrible press these days, they need polticians who have the intellect to adovocate for them succefully. Palin doesn't. Rudy does.

Rudy would have strengthned Mccain's maverick argument, extended his indepdent voter reach, and he would have defintly streghtned Mccain's now abandon and discredited exsperience argument.

education, immgration?

why was immgration and education not brought up in the debate questions!?

a scandal.

The Vp debate

Biden killed. He pushed every one of the right buttons.

If people could really talk truthful now, conservtives like me would be saying to there liberal freiends "you think it's hard to listen to Palin? I believe in the posistions she so severly fails to defend and argue for. you don't know how much i cringe!"

she did not have a big gaffe, she did not turn in a embarrsing performance in general but she turned in a losing performance.

Palin's white flag comment i felt was out of line. You shouldn't be saying such things about people who think we should leave in 16 months or tommrow! the costs are huge, the patriotism card falls flat in this vein.

and she diverted so many questions!
good grief.

no palin, please.

the opinion polls will show if people are really buying Palin's folskyness.

In praise of staright forwardness and candor

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=palin+cbs&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&sa=N&tab=wv&oi=property_suggestions&resnum=0&ct=property-revision&cd=2#q=palin%20cbs%20reads&emb=0

First of all as the above video demonstrates, Palin is embrassing often. To be honest she looks to me like a hockey mom stuck in a bad dream where she is running for vice president and has to answer all the press' questions when she really desperatly just wants to say "i don't know!" and go home and play with her baby, Trig.

But i also think Palin views things in a clear way that is often muddled by academics and people who fancy themselves as "intellectual". Some may laugh when she says that she wouldn't question Isreal if they attacked Iran's nuclear facilties because she as she says she sees Amnejihad as a "bad guy" and Israeli's as good guys. I don't. In fact it's quite refreshing to hear people calling it like it is in that way.


There is one area inwhich i think her being opposite of Obama is a good thing and that is that she doesn't bullshit cause she isn't agile enough to bullshit. Obama is spectacular at not answering questions and giving supremly hazy ones when he does answer, and it's because he's so articulate. Palin and Bush's minds unlike Clinton's, for instance, don't allow them to lie like Clinton did.

There are many issues where Palin's clear sightdness is infinetly preferable to Obama's harvard educated intellect. Palin just see's what has to be done, bottom line(and her instinics i think tend to be pretty good):

immgration? Build a fence. Deport those caught. Penatlize empoleyers who hire illegals. Stop giving wel fair to illegals.

Iranian nukes? Iran must never get nukes. The things the iranian theocrats have said and done make that unacceptable and we will do whatever nesscary to stop them from acquiring nukes.

Diplomacy with Iran? The europeans have tried it for 4 years and it's been proven futile. The Iranians have broken every treaty and agreement theyve gone into on such matters.

Making education better? Give Parents the power of choice with vouchers, make schools compete. Tv's and radio's have gotten better and cheaper only because they've had to compete, why exzempt something as important as education from such productive compeition?


Lowering Energy prices? Advance altertive energys but also drill for oil that we have untapped. we are going to buy oil, why not put money in the treasury in Washington D.C. rather than ones in Tehran and Riyadhi?

Obama on the otherhand will answer these questions differntly for whatever paticular audience he is speaking for. For Obama, when asked why he sat in the pews of a america hating reverend who happened to be his mentor he gives a 40 minuete speech on race and doesn't answer the question though he impressive all the Ivy league intellectuals. It was a elouqnt speech writing like a Harvard dissertation, but it's core points where fraudglent and deplorable and it compeltly avoided the question of why he stayed in Trinty UNited for 20 years.

I think it's about time we gave a little praise to straight forwardness and transperency given that it is so rare among Polticians.