Free Web Site Counter
University A Conservative Harvest: December 2005

Friday, December 23, 2005

A Boston Tea Party …(American Patriot)

The text next to a picture of George Washington on the inside at the top of the Washington Monument says this:

George Washington was not a typical leader of his day. As the popular commander of a victorious army, he could have seized control of the fledgling government. Instead, he resigned to become a private citizen. Twice, the Electoral College unanimously elected him President of the United States. After he served two terms he resisted entreaties to become “President-for-Life,” and retired to his home in Mount Vernon, Virginia. In perhaps his most patriotic act, he stood aside and let representative government flourish.

George Washington was quite a man. I wonder if he had an ego? If he did, he sure was able to keep it in check. He set a precedent for Presidents and elected officials who came after him to follow. Contrast the actions of Washington with those of our elected officials of today. Bill Clinton would love to be President for life. The Republicans talk of electing another Bush. Members of Congress, mostly Senators, are in office for thirty to forty years.

Two weeks ago I toured Washington, D.C. As part our visit my wife and I were given a tour of the Capital. Every citizen must begin a tour of the Capital by starting at his or her respective state Senator’s office. Our tour began with a visit to Senator Dorgan’s office. He was gone because the Senate was no longer in session. As we entered his office the tour guide mentioned that we could “sit in his chair”. I respectfully said it was not that big of a deal (I am not humbled by such power as a Senator’s chair regardless of party). I mentioned to the guide that I someday want the Senator’s job rather than just the chance to sit in his chair. Again, I was asked, “DON’T YOU WANT TO HAVE YOUR PICTURE TAKEN WHILE SITTING IN HIS CHAIR?” It seemed like if I did not that I was somehow being disrespectful or that somehow this was a great honor. Upon asking a few questions about the Senator’s office I learned that the size of office and even the particular building a Senator is in is decided on seniority and prestige. The popular Senators are in a separate building and you get a larger office the longer you are there. I found this a bit juvenile since each state has two Senators. I was not sure why anyone was more important than the other and why office sizes would vary. Our tour of the Capital was interesting and informative. It was easy to see how these men become addicted to their position. An upsetting part of the tour was the inability of the average citizen to see the Senate chamber. We did get to see the Chamber of the House of Representatives but the Senate Chamber was not part of the public tour. I mention this only because it confirms what I firmly believe, the Senate is “THE country club” in this country.

I do not understand the selfishness, the immense ego, and the arrogance our elected leaders have in refusing to allow a true representative government. While many of us change jobs many times over in a lifetime these men and women want to be there for life. Every citizen in this country should have the ability to serve yet it takes a miracle for an incumbent to be defeated only because they want it this way. There are many, many, many citizens of North Dakota that could do the job Dorgan, Conrad, and Pomeroy do. We will just never get the chance because of their desire to be there for life. Do not get me wrong it is not their fault per say. It is the systems fault. It is a disease that infects both political parties. Jerimandering like what Tom Delay did in Texas goes on all over the country so that the other party cannot win. The money needed to win an election removes the chance for the average citizen to serve. The modesty of our elected leaders is far removed from the modesty of George Washington.

Term limits is the ONLY answer to change the direction of our country yet it is never discussed. While we have a limit on the number of terms a President can be in office we do not have a limit on our Congressional members. Why? The Senate, “THE country club” would never allow it. People these guys are there for 30 – 40 years. You know Robert Byrd thinks it is his birth right to be a Senator and he isn't the only one. The pathetic thing is is that Byrd will actually be elected again because the system is made for the incumbant to win. I for the life of me do not understand why the average Joe allows this. If Quenton Burdick were propped up from his grave folks in North Dakota he would be the favorite to win. Each Senator should be allowed to serve two terms. Two terms equals twelve years. Twelve years in Washington is plenty for any one person. After twelve years it is someone else’s turn maybe yours or maybe mine. If ALL Senators are allowed two terms then there is no argument for seniority and the power seniority brings. Representatives should be allowed no more than four terms in office.

Government would be returned to the people. Fresh ideas would flourish. People would feel they have a stake in their government. I have said it before term limits are so powerful they would probably cure the common cold. Serving in Washington should not be a membership to a country club, it should be about modesty and patriotism. There is no more amazing American patriot than George Washington. It is sad we have no George Washington’s in today’s Washington, D.C. instead we are stuck with men and women who are full of themselves. If we had term limits so other citizens could serve we may find the next George Washington. I most certainly know there is no Washington in the current officials. Wake up people………term limits is something we should all require.

Thursday, December 22, 2005

A Boston Tea Party …(Knock It Off)

Go for it. Come on, I beg you, do it. Please, please, please start the impeachment talk. Take it all the way. Democrats, liberals, progressives…….what ever you are calling yourselves these days, begin the impeachment process. Talk to the American public about your outrage of this President spying on people in America talking to suspected terrorists overseas. Tell them he needs to be impeached because of it.

Genuine impeachment discussion and the debate that follows will be the best gift any Republican could ever imagine. What an easy argument to win. The only problem is Dems like to talk big but never follow through on anything so it is probably just a pipe dream. How sweet it would be though……..being able to use as your defense that you were just protecting America from terrorists.

The Dems have all the evidence they need. This President has admitted already to doing it and so has everyone in his administration. So why not impeach if they feel so strongly about it? The entire nation heard him agree to doing it. You won’t see him testifying in front of a grand jury saying “it depends on the meaning of what “is” is”. The case is open and shut, so Dems impeach to your little hearts content then sit back and watch your entire future go up in smoke.

Those of you old enough to remember the Commercial where Robert Conrad places an Everready battery on his shoulder and says, “Go ahead, knock it off, I dare you”. Well I am daring the Dems to impeach………..come on … I dare you. You don’t have the guts! We all know you want too, we all know ever since he won the election over Al Gore you have wanted pay back. Well, here is your chance……..he admits to spying on suspected calls overseas to known terrorists. I can just see it…….the Dems impeach and President Bush’s approval ratings go through the roof. It is a wonderful world we live in…..isn’t it?

Wednesday, December 21, 2005

A True Lemming

Cry Of The Loon ...(The Smoking Gun)

What follows is a transcript from a CSPAN interview between Brian Lamb and Randi Rhodes on December 18th. It confirms what everyone believed about the decision of Democrats to use Ed Schultz as there mouthpiece. Please read and enjoy.

LAMB: Go back to the meeting, how long were you there?
RHODES: Where?
LAMB: With the Senators?
RHODES: I think they gave me an hour or so. And it was very – we ate lunch, which of course, I didn‘t eat, because I was terrified. But 30 Senators showed up. I was amazed. For me it was like, I kept saying, when I got on the air, I talked about it and I said it was like being at Walt Disney World. Do you ever got to like the good Disney hotels in Disney and you see your favorite characters? Like Mickey comes out and Donald comes out. I go, well I watch C-SPAN, so like these are my characters – these are my TV characters. And it was like, you know, here comes (INAUDIBLE). And you know, let‘s face it a lot of Senators aren‘t recognized by people.
I was going oh my God, that‘s (INAUDIBLE). Oh my God, that‘s Dick Durbin. Oh my god, that‘s Dorgan. Oh my God, that‘s Tom Daschle. Oh my god, and, you know, everybody knows Hillary, obviously, she was First Lady of the United States. But how many recognize Barbara Mikulski and know that she makes a mean crab cake.
You know, so it was fantastic. I was too nervous to eat. I guess they liked me. And so then they organized a lunch at Mary Landrieu‘s house. And I was invited to this lunch. And again, it was, you know, democrat senators with an interest in media and getting our message out. And they thought that – they had had 30 people that they had spoken two, and it came down to two that they really liked and thought could do it. And it was me and this guy at Schultz (ph).
LAMB: From North Dakota?
RHODES: Yes. And he was there because Daschle was scarred.
LAMB: He‘s South Dakota, but he‘s from that area.
RHODES: Yes, I do that too. Anyway, I …
LAMB: And they were going to select one of the two of you?
RHODES: They were – I don‘t know exactly what the plan was, I do now. I didn‘t that day. And all I know is that Ed got up and he made this big presentation. And then they looked at me and I thought was just there to have lunch. And I remember being terrific. I don‘t like public speaking, all that much. It‘s weird with people, you know, I‘m so used to my little cubicle.
And so I remember, I didn‘t even get up to the front of the room, I was too scared. I was sitting next to Senator Durbin who‘s very funny. I mean he was – he had me entertained the whole lunch. On the other side of me, I won‘t say who it was, it wasn‘t a politician, there was a man who explaining my lunch to me, like oh you poor sweet little country mouse, you won‘t understand the fancy Washington food. This is squash.
LAMB: In the Senate?
RHODES: No. It wasn‘t a politician.
LAMB: This is Mary Landrieu‘s house.
RHODES: It was at her house. It wasn‘t a servant either. It was an invited guest. And he was saying OK, this is a squash, and in it is squash soup. And they just serve it in the squash. And I was like, I was so insulted, plus I was nervous. And then all of a sudden I hear my name, and applause, and I‘m like so I put my knee on my chair, and I just – I stood up and I was like I was shaking. I didn‘t even know what I was supposed to be talking about. And the next thing I know I hear 250, 350. I hear and I think they‘re giving dollars, a silent auction, a charity. You know, they‘re giving to rescue aid. It turns out it was 250,000, 350,000.
LAMB: So these are business people in the…
RHODES: What it was, it was the best donors that the Senate could find for me. And this is the way Washington operates, so they were being kind.
LAMB: Did you like that when you saw that all of that?
RHODES: I hated it. I actually got on the air, and said I feel like I just got off the Amistad. I feel like I‘ve just been on the slave auction block. Now I know what it feels like to be auctioned off.
LAMB: What were they going to do with the money?
RHODES: They were going to start a syndication for us. They were going to give us, you know, the money we needed to start it up.
LAMB: And Ed Schultz (ph) is now on Air America.
RHODES: He took the money. I actually gave him the money that day. I stood outside. I did my broadcast in Washington that day. And I went downstairs and I said, you can have it. Whatever they raise, I don‘t want it. I‘m just – first of all I‘m not going to be mouthpiece for the party. I don‘t agree with a lot of the things that they say and do. And I need to be free to say so. I don‘t walk – I‘m not a republican. I‘m not a trained sheep. I‘m not a lemming. I don‘t just follow.
The reason why democrats are democrats is because we‘re born leaders. We don‘t want a strong leader. That‘s why we can‘t even agree on a meeting. Democrats will meet for 15 minutes about how to meet because everybody‘s got the best idea. We‘ll serve Danish. No I think Danish could be sloppy. Let‘s do a cracker. This is democrats everybody‘s got the big idea, which is why it‘s so insulting when they say democrats have no ideas. We have great ideas, but we have too many of them.

Watch the entire show here: listen

Tuesday, December 20, 2005

A Boston Tea Party …(Germans Bombed Pearl Harbor)

History is a valuable tool. In today’s what have you done for me lately world, history is rather short-term. Many in today’s world think two years ago is a long time ago. I say this because of all the talk from the left on “what does victory mean”, the number of deaths in Iraq, and “this war is not winnable”.

Democrats evidently believe wars are easy, victory is whatever one defines it to be, and while each death in Iraq is tragic and honorable over two thousand of them is a large number. History tells us differently however. I am no historic scholar but I am quite certain that in WWII and most other wars there were times when it looked as if American victory was hanging in the balance. Visit the Holocaust Museum in Washington, D.C. and you will learn that weather played a major part in the German’s losing on the Eastern front. History also shows us there are not degrees of victory. Victory means only one thing. When there is surrender or when one party’s ability to wage war is eliminated. In relation to previous wars the number of deaths the United States has incurred is rather small. For example four hundred thousand Americans died in WWII.

History gives us a perspective of the difficulties each generation faced in war time. It is this perspective that is lost on many on the left. President Bush would do well to reference historical events, numbers, and hardships to contradict the selfish demands of Democrats. I believe Democrats purposely avoid such references in order to make us soft. It is either that or they have no historical orientation. They quite often sound like John ‘Bluto” Blutarsky in the movie “Animal House” when he said, “Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?” Every day it becomes more certain they should leave wars to the adults and stick to social issues. They no longer have the ability to lead in a time of war that Wilson, Roosevelt, and Truman had. Those Democrats thought America was a wonderful country while the left of today isn’t quite so certain.

Monday, December 19, 2005

A Boston Tea Party ...(Accomplice)

Accomplice - An associate in wrongdoing, especially one who aids or abets another in a criminal act, either as a principal or an accessory.

One thing I try to do is tell things exactly the way I see them. It seems fairly obvious to me that we have a lot of “accomplicing” going on here. Day after day, week after week, Democrats, the mainstream media, and sources inside our federal government are working against progress in Iraq or at a minimum destroying the Presidency of a Republican. Never before has their been an administration, who is fighting a real war, faced with such a continual deluge of “accomplicing”.

Each of the accomplices does not care about truth but rather feels the end justify the means. Examples abound:

1. A historical election in Iraq is instantly minimalized rather than detailing its importance.
2. A story of secret surveillance by the NSA is front page news on the same day voting takes place on the Patriot Act and is leaked by sources inside the government.
3. The Patriot Act is voted down with 100% Democratic support.
4. Constant talk of torture of terrorists is reported.
5. Secret prisons in foreign lands are leaked.
6. Liberals demand American troops leave Iraq and the war is not winnable.

I only list a FEW of the most recent instances where those inside our country willingly place the country in further danger for political purposes. Please list more examples and the names of the accomplice in the comment section.

Those of us who find such anti-American support pitiful need to remember. We need to remember in case we are attacked again so that we can hold the accomplices in judgment. I say this because it is getting ridiculous. Democrats and the willing press say not one single positive comment about the war. They have been blatantly obvious what there motives are. They are an accomplice. They are not just expressing their freedom of speech. Freedom of speech on occasion would include a positive comment or two or at a minimum begrudgingly admitting when something went well (the recent election). Accomplices consciously work in helping the wrongdoers. It is because it is so apparent and unrelenting that we must speak out. As each day passes these accomplices look more and more like the enemy. As Michael Savage says, “They are the enemy within.” It becomes more evident by the day.

Friday, December 16, 2005

A Boston Tea Party …(Hit List)

Today the “greatest and most elite country club in the nation” the U.S. Senate voted to set back the Patriot Act to pre 9/11 levels. Republicans were not able to must enough Democrat votes to over come a threatened filibuster so the Patriot Act, which is set to expire on 12/31, will cease to exist in its current state.

So two weeks after the 9/11 commission states the obvious that our federal government is not doing enough to protect us from terrorism the entire Democratic Party decides to place us at a higher risk. Not surprisingly, the two servants of North Dakota, Senators Dorgan and Conrad, voted with the others in their party. Senator Dorgan is under attack from his involvement with Jack Abramoff and Conrad failed to distance himself from Howard Dean’s remarks about America not being able to win in Iraq like Earl Pomeroy did.

A representative of Dorgan’s office gave me a tour of the capital last week. He commented to me that the Senator does not care if you are a Republican or a Democrat but rather he is concerned with doing what is best for the citizens of North Dakota. I maybe naive but I am willing to bet most North Dakotan’s are in favor of extending the Patriot Act in its current state. Dorgan’s and Conrad’s idea of doing what is best for North Dakota translates to “I know what is best for North Dakota.

The “no” vote by Democrats today places them on the “hit list”. Their vote will make it easier for terrorists to function in this country and the next time we are hit by a terrorist attack the list of “no” votes is where we can begin to place blame. Every day we move further away from 9/11 we seem less able to win the war against terrorism. It is if Democrats don’t think we will ever be attacked again. It was a one time unusual event to them.

Wednesday, December 14, 2005

A Boston Tea Party …(Dear Santa)

Dear Santa,

It has been quite a few years since I have written you a letter for Christmas. I hope you will accept my letter as you have in the past. Hopefully, all things are going well for you at the North Pole. Please say hello to all the elves for me and give Rudolph a hug from me. There will be cookies and milk awaiting you at the bottom of the chimney as always. My children are very anxious for Christmas eve.

I write this letter so that you may know what I want for Christmas this year. I am sure you are receiving many of these same letters this year so maybe you could include them all in one big wish. You are probably receiving so many of the same requests this year because my friends and I are really getting desperate. The media has done all they can to help us with our wish but I felt we needed someone even more powerful so I decided to write you. The gift I would like for Christmas this year is for America to lose the war in Iraq. The Iraqis have a vote tomorrow and it would be wonderful if you could arrange for it to go badly. Please don’t misunderstand I do not want anymore American soldiers to die; it is just that it would help my friends and I politically if this war went badly for our country. If you could somehow make sure we lose the war without another loss of life that would be great.

I realize this is an unusual request but I am hopeful that you will grant me this as my gift. You see my friends and I have placed our loyalty to those Iraqis who want us out of their country. The citizens of Iraq have been very impressive in turning out for prior elections. The election tomorrow is to elect a parliament and a rather large turnout is expected. I therefore am faxing this letter to you so that it may get to you immediately. I would be so grateful if you could help turn this war back into the favor of the insurgents. If you receive this letter and it is to late to make the elections go badly tomorrow feel free to do whatever is possible to make the war go badly for this President. If I receive this gift from you I can guarantee you my request next year would be for a Democrat to win the Presidency in 2008. Next year’s gift would be much easier if you grant the one for this year. Maybe that is the way you can sell this to your elves, just tell them the hard part is this year and next year my gift will be easier because of the hard work they did for me this year.

I appreciate your time Santa. My kids and I just love you. I am confident you will be able to provide me with the gift I requested. You always have. I still have that red wagon you brought me in 1965.

Your Friend,
A Common Democrat

P.S. Please destroy this letter after you read it and deny ever seeing it.

Wednesday, December 07, 2005

Cry Of The Loon ...(Power of Eating Crabs)

Cry Of The Loon …(Quality Time)

Well troops you have heard him now for two days and I want to say I am sorry you have had too. Yes it is with regret The Ed Schultz show, big Eddie, Ed-head gear has hit armed forces radio. I thought I might take a few minutes to explain to you wonderful men and women who and what you are about to hear on a daily basis.

First a bit about Ed Schultz, Ed is loud, opinionated, childish, sophomoric, a bully, cowardice, arrogant, and without any true convictions. Among his heroes are Ted Kennedy, Robert Bird, John Kerry, Dick Durbin, and Barbara Boxer. His predictions are usually correct about 15% of the time. His show differs from the more professional talk shows in that most hosts talk about their opinions on the issues of the day. Ed prefers to be a “facilitator” or nothing more than a message board for any point of view on the left regardless of how radical. It is because of this that when you listen to his show it will seem discombobulated. On most occasions you will never quite be sure what the host really feels about an issue. Ed does not want to offend any listener for fear they may stop listening.

The real issue and I would say problem with having you, our great troops, listen to him on a daily basis is that you will not hear point blank all the negativism from the many people in this country that don’t agree with your mission. You are going to hear that they say they support you but believe you will lose. You will hear how you are actually a negative in the country of Iraq regardless of how many good deeds you are doing for the people there. I want you to know that if it were up to many of us you would only hear support for you efforts. Do not be fooled when Ed says he supports troops because he supports more veteran’s benefits. This is his one stance for being pro military. To be a true supporter you people deserve our entire backing especially when times are most difficult for you. Ed said yesterday he agrees with Howard Dean that you cannot win this war. Please know that many of us are behind you 100% and know in our hearts if your allowed to you will win this war and come home as heroes. My suggestion is when The Ed Schultz show is on the air that you turn it off. In this politically correct world Ed’s followers demand equal time but equal time does not mean quality time.

Monday, December 05, 2005

A Boston Tea Party …(Armey Axioms)

People that know me, know many things get on my nerves and when something is on my nerves the person or idea usually gets to hear about it. Sunday in the “Wall Street Journal” former Republican Congressman Dick Armey wrote an op-ed piece. I have been biting my tongue for a number of weeks and this op-ed finally broke the camel’s back.

For months I have watched Newt Gingrich and occasionally Dick Armey speak about conservative principles. Often they reminisce about those good ol’days when Republicans swept into power in 1994 with the Contract for America. As Armey wrote on Sunday, “In 1994, Republicans took control of the House for the first time in 40 years, running on the Contract with America, a clearly articulated public policy agenda based on smaller, smarter government.” Gingrich has also been traveling the country and showing up on FOX NEWS as the residential conservative expert. He even wrote a book, which I read, entitled “Winning the Future” which resembles an updated Contract with America.

But enough is enough, someone needs to tell the truth here. It is all fine and dandy for Gingrich and Armey to spew true conservative thoughts now that they are released from the chains that bound them to special interests. We should not, however, let them revise history so they are portrayed as conservative saints. There is plenty of evidence, if you are interested, contradicting the conservative leadership of these two conservative prima donnas. It was these two gentlemen that told those young guns bent on reforming government in 1994 that they needed to calm down. Now that Republicans had finally taken control of the House some of the reforms they ran on needed to be put aside in order for them to keep control.

It is not honest for them to get off Scott free. I would argue Armey and Gingrich started pushing the ball down the hill and it now has turned into a giant boulder. They put a halt to sweeping reform when it was possible in 1994 and the few years after. They became, like they all do, intoxicated with being in power. I will accept that maybe they have come to their senses now that they are on the outside looking in. I will also accept that the problems of Republicans governing as Democrats have become increasingly obscene in the years since. I, though, will not stand by and allow these two men to remain blameless. I realize most Republicans in Washington and those who cuddle up to them in the media don’t like to air dirty laundry but Gingrich and Armey halted a revolution and that cannot be forgotten. All sins are forgiven eventually but I for one will never forget. There were many of those newly elected congressmen who quit after a couple of terms because these two in leadership prevented the ultimate revolution.

The way they talk now it is easy to see the freedom one feels being on the outside. It is to bad this same type of freedom is not felt when in office. For these two men to criticize those now in office seems a bit hypocritical. Armey often talks about “Armey Axioms”, well here is one: You had your chance in 1994 and that chance may never happen again.

Thursday, December 01, 2005

A Boston Tea Party …(Bandwagon Jumper)

Try for a minute to get inside a current Democrat’s mind. I know it is hard and even a little scary but try. First you have to start with an attitude that someone else is keeping you from succeeding and next you always try to have it both ways. It is blatantly obvious to anyone with a sane mind that the Democrats are hoping we lose the war because it will benefit them politically. They know if this war succeeds while George Bush is President their chances of taking the presidency in the near future is minimal. If the war goes terribly then their chances increase exponentially.

A few months back I asked Bill O’Reilly on his radio show whether the Dems wanted it both ways by being against the war (being on the correct side if the war fails) while at the same time saying of course they want us to win (again being pro America if the war succeeds). O’Reilly agreed that it seemed a bit contradictory in saying you are pro American but against the war. In the months since that call the left has increased its anti-war stance. Today Nancy Pelosi joined John Murtha in calling for the immediate withdrawal of troops. Almost every leading Democrat will purposely never mention any positive signs of success in Iraq. In every instance they have sided with the enemy over their country from lawyers for prisoners at Guitmo to the setting of a timetable for withdrawal. There has not been a single instance where unanimously the Democratic leadership has been on the side of this President. While Joe Lieberman may have made a great Vice Presidential candidate he is a pariah for his siding with the current administration’s plan in Iraq. So I ask again, get in the mind of a Democrat. What happens when we win? What is their plan to spin all the anti-war rhetoric into a victory cheer?

While Democrats may be misguided and foolish they are not completely stupid. They must know that a party without any vocalized platform other than legalized abortion does not stand a prayer of winning the presidency for a generation if this war is successful. So they must have a strategic plan just in case God forbid America is victorious in Iraq. But what could it be? They will certainly want to take some of the credit. They will want to bask themselves in the glory just like any other bandwagon jumper.

I must say I cannot figure out a way this is possible. I am trying to think like a Democrat but I cannot figure out how I can turn being negative into being positive. Whew! In a way this is a good thing. Who wants to be able to think that way? Not me. If you have any suggestion how the Dems will spin this after we win please add them in the comment section. How do you stand against something then rejoice in the success of victory? You know somehow they will, they always do, but how is a riddle left for people more devious than I.