Saturday, February 2, 2008
North Carolina Should Have a Choice
McCain's Straight Lies
"Super Tuesday may be the voters' last chance to bring the so-called "straight talk express" to a screeching halt."
We have been hearing for years that Senator John McCain gives "straight talk" and his bus has been endlessly referred to as the "straight talk express." But endless repetition does not make something true.
The fact that McCain makes short, blunt statements does not make him a straight-talker.
There are short, blunt lies -- and he told a big one on the eve of the Florida p
rimary, when he claimed that Mitt Romney had advocated a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq.
rimary, when he claimed that Mitt Romney had advocated a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq.Even the Washington Post, which supports McCain, said that the Senator "has distorted the meaning" of what Governor Romney said, that Romney "has never proposed setting 'a date for withdrawal.'"
During Mitt Romney's ABC News interview that Senator McCain twisted, Governor Romney was asked by the interviewer whether he agreed with President Bush's veto of Congressional legislation setting a timetable for withdrawal, and whether Romney as President would veto similar legislation.
"Of course," was Romney's reply. There was no ambiguity.
Confronted with his lie on Wednesday night's debate, McCain blustered and filibustered in a manner reminiscent of Captain Queeg in "The Caine Mutiny," when he was caught in a lie during a navy inquiry.
When confronted with any of his misdeeds, Senator McCain tends to fall back on his record as a war hero in Vietnam.
Let's talk sense. Benedict Arnold was a war hero but that did not exempt him from condemnation for his later betrayal.
Being a war hero is not a lifetime get-out-of-jail-free card. And becoming President of the United States is not a matter of rewarding an individual for past services. [NOTE: Sowell served as a Marine.]
The Presidency is a heavy responsibility for the future of the nation, including generations yet unborn. Character and integrity are major qualifications.
The passing years and a friendly media have allowed Senator McCain's shortcomings in the character and integrity department to fade into the background.
McCain was one of "the Keating five" -- Senators who used their influence to try to protect a failing savings & loan company, which also became the subject of a corruption investigation.
During the 2000 primaries, the Associated Press reported Senator McCain's joking about people with Alzheimer's.
This went beyond bad taste because (1) it was known at the time that Ronald Reagan was suffering from Alzheimer's and (2) the media to whom McCain was pandering hated Ronald Reagan.
It is especially ironic now to see McCain wrapping himself in the mantle of President Reagan.
With the momentum of his Florida primary win behind him, going into the "Super Tuesday" primaries, John McCain has now been restored to the position of front runner that the media gave him at the outset.
Other Republicans are jumping on his bandwagon. This may have less to do with McCain's own qualities than with the prospect of getting Cabinet posts or Supreme Court appointments as rewards for their political support.
It may all look like a done deal. But the McCain-Kennedy bill giving amnesty to illegal aliens looked like a done deal two years ago -- until the public realized the truth behind the spin and brought that sell-out to a screeching halt.
Super Tuesday may be the voters' last chance to bring the so-called "straight talk express" to a screeching halt.
It should be called the "sell-out express" because McCain has sold out not only with amnesty for illegal aliens but also sold out the First Amendment with the McCain-Feingold "campaign finance reform" bill that was supposed to take big money out of political campaigns, but blatantly has not.
McCain also sold out on judicial nominations by making his own side deal with the Democrats, undercutting Republican attempts to stop Democrats from filibustering judicial nominees instead of voting them up or down.
This is quite a record for someone running as a straight talker.
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. His Web site is www.tsowell.com.
When Dr. Sowell Speaks....
Dr. Thomas Sowell on McCain
Sowell, as you may know, is one of my favorite authors. It is interesting to see how the DemocratLite wing of the Republican Party, the Rockefeller Republicans as they were once known, are lining up behind McCain.
Since I expect the current banking fraud scandal to make the S&L/Keating 5 scandal look mild, having
him at the head of the ticket is a losers bet. When Ann Coulter says she'd rather vote for Hillary than McCain, it should give the Bush-boys backing McCain pause, because a lot of people feel the same way. The power before principle "leaders" may take the lemmings over a cliff, but I'm with Peggy Noonan and tired of making excuses for economic policies that promote dishonesty rather than integrity.
him at the head of the ticket is a losers bet. When Ann Coulter says she'd rather vote for Hillary than McCain, it should give the Bush-boys backing McCain pause, because a lot of people feel the same way. The power before principle "leaders" may take the lemmings over a cliff, but I'm with Peggy Noonan and tired of making excuses for economic policies that promote dishonesty rather than integrity.As Christopher Ruddy said, "Some pundits suggest that GOP voters will rally around McCain no matter what — even if a “ham sandwich” were running against Hillary Clinton, the likely Democratic opponent. "I strongly disagree with this sentiment. After eight years of being disappointed by the Bush administration, Reagan Republicans are likely to vote their conscience this year rather than the party line.
"John McCain needs to give them some really good reasons to make them think twice. Hillary won’t be reason enough."There's too much fraud, fed and financial malfeasance behind the current bubble bust to get behind a candidate so closely tied to the Bush machine. If the Republicans do, I think they'll regret it.
You've probably seen this. Dodson isn't seeking political power; notice how those who are, though they claim to be "leaders," are willing to follow anyone who says what they want to hear if they think he may win.
Dr. Dobson: I Will Never Vote for McCain
February 1, 2008 12:07 PM
While John McCain has risen to the top of the heap among contenders for the Republican presidential nomination, Focus on the Family founder James Dobson remains adamant that he will not support McCain’s bid for the White House.
While John McCain has risen to the top of the heap among contenders for the Republican presidential nomination, Focus on the Family founder James Dobson remains adamant that he will not support McCain’s bid for the White House.
Dobson, one of the nation’s most influential evangelical Christians, declared more than a year ago that he wouldn't support McCain under any circumstances, saying McCain didn't support traditional marriage values.
A Dobson spokesman told the New York Times’ David Kirkpatrick Wednesday that he stood by that position, and as a matter of conscience could never vote for the Arizona Senator.
According to the paper, Dobson is joined by a slew of other prominent conservatives who oppose McCain on a number of issues:
- Talk radio host Mark Levin urged visitors to the National Review’s Web site to “rally for Romney” to ward off a McCain win, saying: “Conservatives need to act now, before it is too late.”
- Talker Rush Limbaugh told listeners on Thursday: “McCain is in a lot of these places not actually the Republican candidate. He is the candidate of enough Republicans, but [also] independents and moderates and probably even some liberals.”
- Pat Toomey, president of the anti-tax organization Club for Growth, said in comments reported by the New York Times: “I have yet to see McCain make any attempts to reach out to free market conservatives.”
Conservatives fault McCain for voting against President Bush’s tax cuts and a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, and for supporting embryonic stem cell research, looser immigration rules and stricter environmental regulations.
Conservatives were particularly irked when McCain made a deal with Democrats to break a deadlock on judicial nominations, according to the Times.
Anger over that compromise was rekindled this week when Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund wrote that McCain had privately criticized Bush’s Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito because “he wore his conservatism on his sleeve.” The McCain campaign denied that report.
Following McCain successes in early primary states, however, other conservatives are beginning to warm up to his campaign:
- Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist, who previously opposed a McCain nomination, said: “He has moved in the right direction strongly and forcefully on taxes.”
- Former McCain foe Tony Perkins, a prominent Christian conservative, told the Times: “I have no residual issue with John McCain,” adding the candidate needed to “better communicate” his stand on social issues.
- Richard Land, an official with the South Baptist Convention, agreed, noting that McCain “is strongly pro-life.” He said: “When I hear Rush Limbaugh say that a McCain nomination would destroy the Republican Party, what I want to say to Rush is, ‘You need to get out of the studio more and talk to real people.’”
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Say No to Rebate Checks for Illegals
When word got out that illegal aliens would be receiving "rebate checks" from the House-passed version of the proposed Bush stimulus package, what did our elected leaders in Congress do?
They denied it!
According to a report in The Hill:
"House leaders sought to squelch rumors Wednesday that economic stimulus checks may end up in the hands of illegal immigrants."
Some nerve, huh?
Thanks to GrassTopsUSA
Putting the Heat on Mike Easley and the General Assembly
Shubert, endorsed by of the 9-11 Families for a Secure America has made a key talking point out of the continued ease with which illegal aliens can get North Carolina driver’s licenses.
Shubert tells me that, despite claims from Easley that driver’s license requirements have been tightened by a February directive from his office, the opposite is true.
Here according to Shubert, is the recent history of North Carolina driver’s license requirements:
“Prior to 9-11, North Carolina law said that license applicants must provide a social security number and proof of residence, but the Attorney General's office (the position was then held by Easley) told DMV to ignore the law. Some of us tried to tighten up the rules for issuing licenses. Instead, right after 9-11, the Democrats put language in the budget that actually made the law worse than it was before 9-11.
”Before 9-11, aliens couldn't use a Taxpayer Identification Number to get a license but S1005 made that legal. Before 9-11, matricula cards weren't mentioned in the law. S1005 said the matricula was ‘a reasonably reliable’ indicator of residence and included it with the other proofs that were acceptable.
“Most bizarre of all, S1005 added a provision that required the department to permit any applicant who had NO proof of residence to sign an affidavit and use that as proof of residence. DMV will give any applicant an affidavit to sign on the spot."
Peter Gadiel, speaking on behalf of the 9-11 Families, said that Shubert won the group’s support because she is the only candidate running on a strong immigration reform platform. Shubert, in addition to her efforts to expose driver’s license fraud, is speaking out to raise awareness among citizens that illegal immigration directly impacts jobs and wages.
Disappointingly but not surprisingly, the major state’s major dailies, the Charlotte Observer (Contact Chairman and Publisher Pete Ridder at pridder@charlotteobserver.com) and the News and Observer (contact editor jruffin@newsobserver.com and political reporter Lynn Bonner at lbonner@newsobserver.com) give Shubert scant coverage.
Shubert tells me that, despite claims from Easley that driver’s license requirements have been tightened by a February directive from his office, the opposite is true.
Here according to Shubert, is the recent history of North Carolina driver’s license requirements:
“Prior to 9-11, North Carolina law said that license applicants must provide a social security number and proof of residence, but the Attorney General's office (the position was then held by Easley) told DMV to ignore the law. Some of us tried to tighten up the rules for issuing licenses. Instead, right after 9-11, the Democrats put language in the budget that actually made the law worse than it was before 9-11.
”Before 9-11, aliens couldn't use a Taxpayer Identification Number to get a license but S1005 made that legal. Before 9-11, matricula cards weren't mentioned in the law. S1005 said the matricula was ‘a reasonably reliable’ indicator of residence and included it with the other proofs that were acceptable.
“Most bizarre of all, S1005 added a provision that required the department to permit any applicant who had NO proof of residence to sign an affidavit and use that as proof of residence. DMV will give any applicant an affidavit to sign on the spot."
Peter Gadiel, speaking on behalf of the 9-11 Families, said that Shubert won the group’s support because she is the only candidate running on a strong immigration reform platform. Shubert, in addition to her efforts to expose driver’s license fraud, is speaking out to raise awareness among citizens that illegal immigration directly impacts jobs and wages.
Disappointingly but not surprisingly, the major state’s major dailies, the Charlotte Observer (Contact Chairman and Publisher Pete Ridder at pridder@charlotteobserver.com) and the News and Observer (contact editor jruffin@newsobserver.com and political reporter Lynn Bonner at lbonner@newsobserver.com) give Shubert scant coverage.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
