03.07.08
New Video Site
We have incorporated as Visual Appeal Enterprises LLC. You can find our new site here: http://visualappeal.org/
John McCain - The Next President
One of the things that comes up on talk radio and among my fellow Conservatives is whether or not John McCain is actually a Conservative. I believe he is and will be taking some time today to point out why.
I’d like to start by saying that John McCain was not my first choice for the Republican nominee. I would have preferred Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee even though they both have positions that I do not agree with. I think we can all agree that there are things that John McCain has done that we disagree with. I am a solid Conservative and understand that we don’t always get 100% of what we want. Likewise, Ronald Reagan was more “liberal” on a number of issues than I would have liked. We tend to look to Reagan as our standard-bearer and I believe we should. In my opinion Ronald Reagan was the best president of the 20th century and possibly of our entire country’s history.
Here are the reasons that I believe John McCain is a Conservative and why he should be the next president of the United States:
1) John McCain has a lifetime Conservative rating of 82%. Tom Tancredo’s is 87%. That’s very good considering that Barack Obama has a 100% Liberal voting record and Hillary a 97% Liberal voting record. John McCain was ranked as the 2nd most Conservative Republican in the 109th Congress. See here for details: http://voteview.com/SEN109.HTM.
2) John McCain is 100% Pro-Life. He has voted for EVERY single Pro-Life bill in his lengthy House and Senate career.
3) John McCain has NEVER voted for a tax increase. I know he voted against both of president Bush’s tax cuts and that he was only one of two Republicans who did that. He also made some ridiculous comments. However, he has since voted twice to make the tax cuts permanent. When asked why he said, “because they work.” He has also promised to fight to make the tax cuts permanent.
4) John McCain has pledged that he will NOT raise taxes and that he WILL reduce government waste. Ronald Reagan actually raised taxes and government spending soared nearly out of control.
5) John McCain believes in School choice and vouchers and has promised to fight for that.
6) John McCain has NEVER done an Earmark in his entire career! That’s really saying a lot. Both Barack and Hillary have done this many, many times.
7) John McCain has promised to fight terrorism and to protect America and her interests around the world. Here is an area where he has excelled and a strong military has long been a Conservative issue. We can count on him to follow Reagan’s leadership on this with “peace through strength.”
8) John McCain was hand picked by Ronald Reagan to join the “Reagan Revolution.”
9) John McCain has voted for every single Conservative justice including Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas. It was because of his efforts, in part, that Chief Justice John Roberts and Samuel Alito were put on the bench of the Supreme Court. He believes that justices should look to the constitution as their guide as opposed to what the liberals like Barack and Hillary believe which is that justices should legislate from the bench. McCain has repeatedly pledged to put justices on the bench like: Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, John Roberts and Samuel Alito. This is by far one of the most important legacies that any president can have.
10) John McCain has campaigned for Republicans, including his former rival President George W. Bush in 2004. He has fought hard to make sure that Republicans get elected. During 2006 he raised $10.5 million dollars for Republican candidates.
11) John McCain strongly believes in Free Trade; an important Conservative value.
12) John McCain supports mandatory sentencing in the criminal justice system.
13) John McCain believes in Capital Punishment.
14) John McCain favors Private Social Security Accounts as a means of saving the failing system.
15) John McCain has long favored Welfare Reform and was part of the Republic-led reform during the Clinton era.
16) John McCain opposes a government takeover of the health care system and as a rule opposes an overly intrusive government. He’s more in line with Reagan who believed that it is government’s job to “get out of the way!”
Can I find positions that John McCain holds that I disagree with? You bet! I do believe we need to “hold his feet to the fire” so to speak. However, I do not believe we should continue to ridicule and belittle him. Some of the most ridiculous statements I’ve heard have come from radio talk show host Lars Larson. I used to listen to Lars all the time and even spent time working to get him on his current national show. I have totally lost interest this past week. Lars spends most of his time talking about immigration. I do believe this is important but every day I turn it on it’s one of the first things I hear him say. Lately he’s been saying in regards to the upcoming election that he doesn’t know what he’s going to do. He’s going to think about sitting this one out or voting for another candidate to send a message. His argument is that it took four years of Jimmy Carter to get Ronald Reagan. That’s not logical and I don’t believe that we should use that as some sort of formula for success. I remember hearing the same thing when Bill Clinton was running against Bush 41. We ended up with eight years of the second worst president (only behind Jimmy Carter) in all of the 20th century. Did eight years of a bad president get us another Ronald Reagan? The answer to that is an emphatic “No!” To take this sort of position is to allow America to suffer just because you disagree with the Republican candidate on a number of issues. Talk about your RINOs. It’s time to switch off Lars Larson and listen to some more intelligent talk show hosts like Michael Medved. I’m also disappointed in Mark Levin who I generally like a lot. This grade-school name-calling of John McCain as John McLame has got to go. Mark I have a lot of respect for you and you’re more mature than that.
In order to take back the House and Senate we must get people to the polls to vote for Republicans. That will not happen if we continue to knock our candidate. Remember the presidency is only a part of the equation. It is imperative that we retake the House and Senate and that can only happen if we convince people that we have a “better” vision for America. Notice I didn’t say perfect, but it is far better than anything the two Liberal Democrats have to offer.
There is only one way for John McCain to lose this and that is if he doesn’t pick a fairly Conservative AND young running mate. This is an absolute requirement. If he picks someone like Hagel (sp?) it’s all over. His VP doesn’t need to be the most conservative but they do need to be recognized by those of us who are solid Conservatives as one of us. This choice must be someone that we want to vote for in four years as I think it’s likely that John McCain will only be a one-term president. This person must be a standard bearer for the Conservative cause. That means they need to get the message in front of the American people and explain why Conservative values are the best for the country.
So let’s stand up and fight for our Conservative values. Let’s put aside the animosity and support the best candidate for the president of the United States - John McCain. Start telling people now about all the positive reasons to vote for John McCain and why Republicans must be returned to power in the Congress and in State Houses across the nation. May God bless you and may God bless America.
Check out my blog, “Why I am a Republican”
10.27.06
Open Letter to Susan Estrich
This is in response to Susan’s ridiculous article on FoxNews on 10/22/06 called “Republicans Abandon President on Sinking Ship.”
I agree that Republicans have made mistakes. However, it is the Democrats and their very powerful allies: the mainstream media, Hollywood, and the ultra-rich that are trying to make things seem different than they really are. I have a feeling that you will not be eating steak on November 8th unless you buy it. We are very aware of all the terrible things that will happen if Democrats were to win and that motivates us more than anything. But besides that it is the Republicans who have done so much for this country and actually have a plan for the future of America. The economy is in incredible shape,we ARE winning the war on terror (though this is a very bad time right now), unemployment is historically low, consumer confidence is high, the stock market has hit many all-time records, new home building has gone up, more people own homes than any time in history, etc. and it is largely due to the Republicans. It is Republicans that want to put a stop to abnormal and perverted relationships changing the definition of marriage. It is the Republicans who are willing to protect the most defenseless among us: the babies in the womb. It is Republicans who have fought for and passed tax cuts for EVERYONE. The rich, as you like to refer to anyone who makes more than $70,000 a year, are the ones who pay the bulk of the taxes. Tax revenues are at an all time high. The government is taking in much more money even though taxes are lower. It is the Republicans who have passed the bill to protect our southern border and to build a fence. It is the Republicans who are going to win in this election because it is the Republicans who have a vision for America.
Permalink Comments off
06.09.06
Oregon Catalyst
Check Here for great commentary from a Conservative point of view
Permalink Comments off
11.20.05
At the Foot of the Cross
BACKGROUND: This was written and published by Charles Colson the founder of Prison Fellowship. Colson was a figure in the Nixon administration and served time in prison for his role in the Watergate scandal and that spiraled into the historic resignation of Richard Nixon. Colson’s imprisonment led to his becoming a Christian and founding Prison Fellowship. Each year, Prison Fellowship sponsors “Angel Tree,” an effort that gives Christmas gifts to tens of thousands of the children of prison inmates. On December 22, 2003, President and Mrs. Bush attended an Angel Tree event at the Shiloh Baptist Church in Alexandria. That is the event described in this story by Charles Colson.
Angel Tree, our Prison Fellowship program for prisoners’ children, is one of the great unheralded volunteer outreaches in America. Over the Christmas holidays these past few weeks, approximately 100,000 volunteers delivered Angel Tree gifts to more than 525,000 children of inmates.
You didn’t read about this in the newspapers, nor would I expect that you should. It’s not really that newsworthy that Christians help people in need. But there are two of our volunteers, who delivered forty presents, that I think you should have read about but didn’t. For reasons best known to themselves, the media ignored the fact that two of the volunteers were President and Mrs. George Bush. And they delivered gifts to forty inner-city kids in a church basement three days before Christmas.
President and Mrs. Bush arrived at three-o’clock, Monday, December 22, at the Shiloh Baptist Church in Alexandria, Virginia. Now, presidents don’t move anywhere without a great deal of fuss. The police were out, the roads blocked, and Secret Service were roaming around the church. And when the president arrived, he was accompanied not only by his own team, but also by a pool of reporters, forty or so members of the press. For ten minutes they popped their flashbulbs, scribbled their notes, and then were ushered out.
I remember from my days with President Nixon what photo opportunities are: Get the picture and leave. So I thought the Bushes would shortly depart, but they didn’t. They stayed long after the cameras were gone to greet every child, to have their picture taken with them, their mothers, and their grandmothers, to talk with them, and to ask questions. Though the press didn’t report it, I noticed that both the president and Mrs. Bush talked to the Hispanic children in Spanish.
Just before the president left, I introduced him to Al Lawrence, a member of our staff. I told the president that I had met Al more than twenty years ago in a prison. Jesus had got hold of Al’s life, and he’s been working for us ever since. Then I told the president that Al’s son was now a freshman at Yale. At that point the president stopped, exclaimed, “We’re both Yale parents,” and threw his arms around Al Lawrence-an African-American ex-offender being embraced by the president of the United States in a church basement. The ground is indeed level at the foot of the cross.
I tell you this story because it’s a wonderful Christmas story, and you probably haven’t heard it. With all those reporters who crowded into that basement, the visit resulted in almost universal media silence.
I suppose there are many explanations for this, but I’ll offer mine. The president is a Christian who really cares for “the least of these,” who does this not for photo ops, but because he’s genuine. That is something that his detractors in the media simply can’t handle. Conservatives caring for the poor? Never. It dashes the stereotypes.
But surely Christians ought to be rejoicing that the most powerful man in the world and his wife, a couple of days before Christmas, had a wonderful visit with the most powerless people in our society.
After all, that echoes the Christmas message, doesn’t it? The most powerful came to be with the least powerful to give us hope.
Permalink Comments off
11.02.05
Democrats’ Meltdown
Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader, said of the Democrats move to have a closed door session that they “hijacked” the chamber. I couldn’t agree more. Democrats claim that the demand for a closed door session (which has rarely been used) was prompted by “misinformation and disinformation” given by President Bush and his administration prior to entry into the war in Iraq and also a failure of Republicans to look into it. What’s odd is the timing of all of this. Why today? Why not last year? Why not last month?
What the Democrats did today was reprehensible and will likely cause them to lose even more of their already fragile grip on power. The Democrats led this country down the wrong path for more than 40 years and now they are having a total meltdown because they are losing their power. They know that Samuel Alito WILL be confirmed as the next associate justice of the Supreme Court. They know that the economy is doing great - thanks to president Bush and the Republicans work on tax cuts. They see that the map of the United States is covered with red. The Republicans now hold a majority of State Legislatures, Governors, as well as both houses of Congress, and the Executive Branch.
Now is not the time to back down on our principles. Now is the time to fight for the things we believe in. The Democrats only have one message: “Destroy president Bush and his entire administration.” On the other hand the Republicans have a message that truly is compassionate. We believe in a strong economy by giving everyone a tax cut. More lower income people benefited from the recent tax cuts. We believe in a strong national defense. We believe in giving people jobs based on their skills and not some criteria such as their race or gender. We believe that the borders must be protected at all costs. We believe that the individual is responsible for their own actions and should be held accountable for them. I hold that principle as a high standard regardless of party. We believe that Americans should be free to send their kids to the school of their choice. We believe that we should maintain the right to “keep and bear arms.” We believe that America is the greatest country on the face of the earth and that we have been given a special place in human history by God. Our country was founded on the principles of a majority of people who believed that “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” I agree.
Permalink Comments off
11.01.05
A Sigh of Relief
Today I’m breathing a sigh of relief as president Bush named judge Samuel Alito to replace justice Sandra Day O’Conner on the Supreme Court. Based on what I’ve heard today, the conservatives in America (Democrats, Independents and Republicans) are virtually unaminous behind Alito. The strong opposition by the liberals (primarily all Democrats) has been fierce. Their desparation shows how inconsistent and hypocritical they are. They have argued on many occasions how president Clinton’s judicial nominees deserved an up or down vote. Now they want to make sure that Alito is not “too conservative” or “out of the mainstream of America.” Being listening carefully because you will hear these talking points repeated thousands of times and willingly broadcast by the ultra-liberal, truly out of the mainstream, media. What’s so amazing is that the Republicans voted overwhelmingly to confirm justice Ginsberg. Keep in mind that most who voted for her vehemently disagree with her philosophy of liberalism.
I’m also relieved that we are no longer trying to get Harriet Miers confirmed. I agree with Michael Medved that this will likely go down in history as one of president Bush’s biggest mistakes. I know that I initially supported Miers but my position has changed dramatically over the last couple of weeks. The more I learned about her, the more concerned I became. As a conservative I do not want to hear arguments like, “she broke the glass ceiling,” or “she’s been a trusted advisor,” or even “I know Harriet Miers and she will make a great justice.” That just doesn’t cut it for me.
Notice the difference in the approach taken when announcing judge Alito. In president Bush’s opening remarks he said, “Judge Alito is one of the most accomplished and respected judges in America, and his long career in public service has given him an extraordinary breadth of experience.” He went on to say, “As a Justice Department official, federal prosecutor and judge on the United States Court of Appeals, Sam Alito has shown a mastery of the law, a deep commitment of justice, and he is a man of enormous character. He’s scholarly, fair-minded and principled, and these qualities will serve our nation well on the highest court of the land.”
For those who would like to bring up judicial experience as being of prime importance: “Judge Alito has served with distinction on that court for 15 years and now has more prior judicial experience than any Supreme Court nominee in more than 70 years.” Furthermore, Judge Alito has argued 12 Supreme Court cases and argued at least two dozen court of appeals cases and handled at least 50 other cases.
Most importantly: Judge Alito was nominated by President George H. Bush to the federal bench in 1990. He was unanimously confirmed by the Senate.
My prediction at this point is that the Democrats will yell and scream, the gang of 14 will do a bunch of TV interviews discussing how we need to approach this caustiously, and when he finally gets a chance for an up or down vote he will be confirmed by roughly 74-26.
Your comments are welcome.
Permalink Comments off
10.04.05
Harriet Miers Nominated for Supreme Court
Today, as Chief Justice John Roberts ushers in a new era on the Supreme Court, president Bush named Harriet Miers to be the next associate justice of the Supreme Court. She will be replacing the retiring Sandra Day O’Conner.
I first learned of this nomination on the Laura Ingraham radio show on my way to work this morning. What I heard made me think that this was the worst possible pick. A little later I caught some of Rush Limbaugh who eased my fears. You see, I have never even heard the name Harriet Miers until today so I had no idea what to think. All I had to rely on was the mainstream media, FoxNews online, and talk radio. I was beginning to become more and more optimistic as I listened to Michael Medved and Sean Hannity on my lunch break. Medved’s main point was that president Bush has made fantastic choices to the courts so far so there’s no reason to think he would depart from that now. I believe that president Bush is a man of his word and he promised us that he would put people on the court that would interpret the law and not seek to create law.
Then on the way home I listened to a little of the repeat of Laura Ingraham and she was very down on the president’s choice. This is something that baffles me as she is someone whom I have a lot of respect for. It is similar to the bizarre rejection of John Roberts by Anne Coulter who I also think is a fantastic conservative.
Some people are concerned that Ms. Miers has been praised by prominent Democrats. Keep in mind that these same people praised John Roberts and then voted against him anyway. Is it possible that they are just trying to get us to doubt that she is the kind of justice we expect? After all, if the Democrats are for her there must be something wrong with her. Right? Well that’s what the Democrats are hoping you’ll think.
I was also assaulted by a few minutes of what some call the raving, out-of-control, Michael Savage. I’m not surprised that he is making this out to be the equivalent of the Nazi holocaust (I don’t think he really said that but he relates everything to that). He is extremely pessimistic and cynical and doesn’t use rational thought processes at times. I generally can’t handle more than a minute or two of him and don’t put any stock in what he says. It’s just interesting to hear opinions from others even if those opinions are harmful to the Conservative cause.
Next I turned the channel to listen to Lars Larson and was very surprised that he has reservations about this nomination as well. His biggest concern is that she has never been a judge. He used the analogy of hiring a painter who had never painted before. With all due respect Lars, this is not the same as a skilled labor position. What we are talking about here is someone who can read the constitution and be able to interpret what it says without integrating their own beliefs. It’s important to note that there have been numerous other appointments to the Supreme Court who were not judges, including the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist. Not only that but it’s going to be hard for the Democrats to criticize her on these grounds since they have been stating for months that that is exactly what president Bush should do. His other concern was that he didn’t know how she comes down on the second ammendment. According to Ms. Miers: “It is the responsibility of every generation to be true to the founders’ vision of the proper role of the courts in our society.” She also said, “If confirmed, I recognize that I will have a tremendous responsibility to keep our judicial system strong and to help ensure that the courts meet their obligations to strictly apply the laws and the Constitution.” What more can you ask for? President Bush believes she is a woman of integrity and just last year said that she is, “a trusted adviser on whom I have long relied for straightforward advice.”
The great news is that so many of the people I have the most respect for are all in favor of her nomination: Dr. James Dobson, Jay Sekulow from the American Center for Law & Justice and many others.
I believe that Harriet Miers will be confirmed to be the next associate justice on the Supreme Court but not without the usual name-calling and scare tactics by liberal groups. No matter what she says or does the likes of Diane Feinstein, Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, and the rest will never vote for her. They will likely try to come up with some item that makes this nomination soar to the level of “extraordinary circumstances.” That’s the criteria needed to allow for a filibuster; it will never happen. She will likely not receive as many votes as John Roberts but it should be something like 65-35.
10.01.05
John Roberts Confirmed
The confirmation of John G. Roberts on September 29, 2005 to be the 17th Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is great news. He was confirmed by a large majority of 78-22.
This is a huge victory for president Bush and serves to prove that he does not need to pick someone just because it will be easier to get them confirmed. All this talk about finding a “consensus nominee” is ludicrous. The qualifications for being on the Supreme Court do not include popularity, consensus, or their willingness to uphold Roe V. Wade. The single most important qualification for the job of being on the Supreme Court is that he or she adheres to the Constitution. Not France’s laws, or other nations, but America’s founding principles written for all to see. It is not to make law but to interpret the law.
It has become abuntantly clear that the liberal Democrats are going to oppose any judge that president Bush appoints to the Supreme Court. When Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid and their liberal allies said that they would look at John Roberts with an open mind; most of us knew how deceptive that was. I believe that they had to put on the charade and pretend like they were honestly scrutinizing him and trying to learn more about him, but at the end of the day it was a foregone conclusion that they would vote against him.
One of the groups fighting against all Conservative judges is the very liberal group People for the American Way. They continue to put forth the notion that president Bush must pick a “consensus nominee.” Ralph Neas, the president of this organization said, “There are a number of distinguished judges — first appointed to the federal bench by Republican presidents — who would, like Sandra Day O’Connor, likely receive overwhelming bipartisan support to replace her.” They have even gotten to the point of presenting a list of acceptable nominees: Jose Cabranes, Edward Prado, Sonia Sotomayor and Ann Williams. It is the height of ignorance and arrogance to suggest that the president appoint nominees from a selected list. It is the president’s job and responsibility to analyze all qualified candidates that he believes will adhere to the Constitution. Once the president has made his choice it is up to the Senate to vote “yes” or “no” as to whether the candidate is qualified or not. The history of this could not be clearer - Senators have done just that, even if they disagree with their political views or philosophy. When Justice Ginsberg was going through the confirmation process virtually every Republican voted for her even though most of them did not like her point of view. All we ask is for is an up or down vote. We don’t need more mud-slinging and attempts to discredit honorable people.
I do agree with Neas on this statement: “The stakes are particularly high with the replacement for O’Connor, a mainstream conservative who often provided the decisive vote to uphold many rights and protections.” The stakes indeed are very high. President Bush must stick to his campaign promises and pick judges who are in the mold of Scalia and Thomas. So far president Bush has a great track record. I can’t think of any president in my life time that has been so consistent in picking judges who will actually interpret the Constitution instead of legislating from the bench. There have been far too many justices in recent years who have simply made up laws to fit their own personal political agenda.
Congratulations Chief Justice Roberts and Thank You president Bush for keeping your word!
Permalink Comments off