I thought these were pretty good reading.

Interesting story of how ethanol (the wine of the religion of global warming) will starve the world.
http://www.nysun.com/news/f…eclipsing-climate-change

Another reason why I won’t vote at the 2008 presidential election (we have three pussy democrats running).
http://www.reuters.com/article/mark…2535509420080425

Now why would anyone think that the NY Times has an opinion on the matter?

A closer look at who’s running

Also in Politics:

• Where the candidates stand on the issues
• Election results to date
• Continuous coverage of the 2008 election

So Hillary looks twenty years younger than she is, Obama looks proud and somber, and McCain looks like a raving mad lunatic. No slant here at all. LOL. This is just too much.

So Geraldine Ferraro stepped down from her role in the Clinton campaign because she said this obviously bigoted and racist comment:

“If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept,” she said.

Anyone else see this as just a little scary? Read it again…is it POSSIBLE she has a point? There’s an equal chance she’s WAY off. Quite possibly Obama’s popularity isn’t at ALL attached to his skin color…but in what way is having the opinion that race is a powerful force behind his popularity off-limits?

Has the political correctness gotten so intense, Geraldine Ferraro can’t have an opinion about the role of skin color in a Presidential campaign?

The Democratic party is slowly losing its mind.

Turns out Clinton bought stock footage from 10 years ago for the TV ad of a little girl sleeping soundly in bed while Hillary answers the phone and keeps her safe.

Obviously the girl didn’t even know about it until her brother noticed on Jon Stewart’s show last Thursday. She prefers Obama’s “positive view of the future” to Clinton’s “fear-mongering”:

Knowles, a high school senior at Bonney Lake, Wash., turns 18 next month. She has been campaigning for Obama and attended his rally at Seattle’s KeyArena on Feb. 8. Her mother, Pam, told The News Tribune of Tacoma that Casey cried and trembled after shaking the candidate’s hand.

At least she didn’t faint:

Now this has the potential to be a huge nasty disaster:

Even if a consensus emerges, the answer to a key question — who would pay for mail revotes — remains up in the air. The states have said taxpayers won’t foot the bill. And Mr. Dean insisted the national party would be saving its money to defeat the presumptive Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain.

“The first thing we’re going to do is follow the rules,” he said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” For the party to feel united and defeat Sen. McCain, “the loser of the race has to feel that they’ve been treated fairly within the rules.”

Nonsense…the potential loser of this race is trying to change the rules in the middle of the game and it WILL cost the party money that they could supposedly spend on the General Election. But what are rules anyway?

Just voted for Ron Paul.  Jon Cornyn is running against a Texas secessionist, so I had to vote for him in the primary too.  If it looked like Huckabee had a chance, I’d vote McCain, but as it is I had to raise my fist in protest and vote my heart, now that my man Romney is out of the race.

Hillary is going to win Texas.  Oklahoma and Tennessee went pretty solidly for the Billiary, and I see northern and western Texas democrats voting the same way.  Obama has momentum, and it will be close.

Hillary wins Ohio with a good bit of unnecessary pandering to the Jews, using the unfortunate endorsement of Louis Farrakhan against Obama.  Cleveland and Columbus has it’s fair share of politically moderate Jews and they will break for Hillary.  Ohio State will demonstrate that it is not like Wisconsin and turnout among the college kids will be low and won’t necessarily break for Obama.  This is John Edwards country and some people may just stay at home.

With a win at Rhode Island that makes three wins out of four, and even though Texas will be close that puts 7 out of the 10 most populous states in Hillary’s favor, a stat which she will use to pry superdelegates her way.  This dreadful charade shall continue until the convention as the remaining states will break evenly for The Liar (Kentucky Indiana, Pennsylvania, West Virginia) and Barack (all the rest).  Will the GOP just start calling him Black Hussein Osama in order to aid and abet The Liar?  Tune in next week at any of your major news networks.

This is funny…

John McCain is refusing to renounce the endorsement of a prominent Texas televangelist who Democrats say peddles anti-Catholic and other intolerant speech.Instead, the Republican presidential candidate issued a statement Friday afternoon saying he had unspecified disagreements with the San Antonio megachurch leader, John Hagee. Hagee endorsed him at a news conference Wednesday in San Antonio.

“However, in no way did I intend for his endorsement to suggest that I in turn agree with all of Pastor Hagee’s views, which I obviously do not,” McCain said in the statement.

His campaign issued the statement after two days of criticism from the Democratic National Committee, the Catholic League and Catholics United.

Democrats quoted Hagee as saying the Catholic Church conspired with Nazis against the Jews and that Hurricane Katrina was God’s retribution for homosexual sin, and they recited his demeaning comments about women and flip remarks about slavery.

Especially when you compare it to this.

Farrakhan has drawn widespread attention in the past for making anti-Semitic remarks, including calling Judaism a “gutter religion.” In recent years, officials with the Nation of Islam have said they favor unity and tolerance among religions, and Farrakhan now often quotes the texts of other religions in his speeches.

Officials with the Nation have long argued that Farrakhan’s comments are often taken out of context.

During Tuesday’s debate, Russert pressed Obama about whether he accepts Farrakhan’s support. The senator responded that while both he and Farrakhan live in Chicago, that’s where their ties end.

Now compare this guy to this guy.

Anyone still not think Bernie Goldberg MIGHT have a point about bias in the media?

This doesn’t really surprise me, because I read “Audacity of Hope.”  In the book it is very evident that Obama has made his Christian affiliation based on convenience and politics (he essentially says it).  It didn’t really disturb me too much, but I’ve made it evident before (can’t find the post–but I’m sure I did…really) that it wasn’t my favorite thing about him.

But to be a member of this Church goes a little beyond the pail.

As someone who has recently (admittedly cautiously–and so far unsuccessfully) confronted the racist tendencies of his own Church back home, it disturbs me that someone with as good of a chance to be President as Senator Obama would be a member of a Church with so much racist dogma that it would give Lewis Farrakhan an award for “Person of the Year.”

My good friend, Jimmy, constantly tells me:  Satan is a divider.  Anyone who not only visits, talks to, acknowledges, but is a member of such a divisive and racist congregation is going to have a hard time convincing me that he’s really a uniter.

You see, I’m beginning to think that Senator Obama thought that if he wrote this cool book, that people would just stop paying attention and trust him.  The problem I suppose is that the book made many START to pay attention to him.  And that hasn’t been good for him.

There’s only one question for me really:

If a high-profile Presidential Candidate belonged to or closely affiliated with a WHITE racialist Church, would we hear about in the press?

And the corollary: And what if they were a pro-choice, Universal Health Care-supporting, anti-war, Democrat that belonged to a WHITE racialist Church?

In other words:  Is Obama getting a free pass on this relationship because he’s a Democrat or because he’s Black?  Or both?

If anyone was under the delusion that Huckabee is just way too “Progressive” then they should probably think twice before recommending that Governor Pawlenty of Minnesota take that VP spot. 

George Will takes a look at a few other options, and ends it with a small sales pitch for Governor Pawlenty who he considers “a center-right politician in a center-right country.”  Sigh…(eyes rolling).  Lord knows we couldn’t have one of those pesky Christians occupying the White House.  It’s apparently better to have a blatantly liberal Republican than a Christian Conservative who has the audacity to at some point be a preacher.   It’s amazing how we can overlook pure left-wingness to castigate “Christian Populists”.

However, in the same article that George Will lumps together Huckabee and Edwards, I did find this little gem (sort of off-topic):

Economist Stephen Rose, defining the middle class as households with annual incomes between $30,000 and $100,000, says a smaller percentage of Americans are in that category than in 1979 — because the percentage of Americans earning more than $100,000 has doubled from 12 to 24, while the percentage earning less than $30,000 is unchanged. “So,” Rose says, “the entire ‘decline’ of the middle class came from people moving up the income ladder.” Even as housing values declined in 2007, the net worth of households increased.

Yet another example of someone who only understands their little portion of Conservatism and chooses to ignore the rest.

Someone help me come up with a good name for Libertarians posing as Conservatives. Maybe CINOs, or Libervatives…

I really wanted this guy to run for President.  I was shocked and appalled at the way he was treated by the FEC ala McCain/Feingold, and will always wonder what could have been.  At the CPAC last week Newt had clear and concise ideas for the Conservative Government.

It is probably one of the most instructive speeches outlining truly logical Conservatism I’ve heard in quite a while.  Three very interesting things struck me as inevitable for the survival of the Conservative movement:

1) Declaration of Independence from the Republican Party.
2) A halt with the obsession of the Oval Office and all that Washington for our leadership.
3) A renewed focus on Conservative GOVERNMENT instead of packaged consultant-driven campaigns.

So in other words:

1) A movement of ideas and not personalities.
2) Bottom-up politics instead of top-down–starting with Boards of Supervisors, etc.
3) Keeping our promises and earning the America’s trust.

Anyway, you gotta see the whole thing…