This is a follow-up to a the previous post "Sen. Joe Biden: Faith not Science?" that was posted following an interview that Sen. Biden gave Tom Brokaw on Meet the Press Sunday. One of the premises to Mr. Brokaw's probing on the issue of life was a direct result of comments Rep. Nancy Pelosi made just a week or so before stated that:
"church leaders (Pelosi is Catholic) for centuries hadnot been able to agree on when life begins"
If you reference the previous post you will find that Sen. Joe Biden followed this week with:
"as a matter of faith life begins with conception"
I am astonished, but not surprised, the mainstream media has not thought that this correlating statements by two high ranking Democrats deserve more examination. Well, apparently the Catholic Church has made that determination and have in fact rebuked Biden and Pelosi, both Catholic, for the views expressed representing views/positions of the Catholic faith.
House Speaker Pelosi stated that "we don't know" when life begins and "so I don't think anybody can tell you when life begins, human life begins" and she further went on to say that "the Catholic Church for centuries has been discussing this".
The Catholic Church's doctrine committee has criticized House Speaker Pelosi for "misrepresenting the history and nature of the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church on abortion" and Cardinal Justin Rigali of Philadelphia, an area that will be hotly contested by both campaigns this Fall for Pennsylvania's electoral votes stated:
"the teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable, direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either a s an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law....the church's moral teaching never justified or permitted abortion at any stage of development."
The Church went on to say;
"In keeping with this modern understanding (ie the science) the church teaches that from the time of conception (fertilization) each member of the human species must be given the full respect due to a human person, beginning with the respect for the fundamental right to life"
In fact some bishops charge that "the right to choose" is simply an alibi that contradicts Christian and Catholic belief.
While it is not my intent to argue in favor or in opposition to the right to choose, I would like our media to examine the critical thinking that in my view appears void of any logic these politicians use in making these statements.
I was directly asked in college in Cell Biology exactly when life begins and how it begins so I find it that the so-called cream of the crop in Congress in our nation are so science-challenged that they cannot address the issue on a fatual basis.
These two leaders are Catholics who fail to be advocates for the culture of life and as a fellow Catholic it is disturbing at the lack of resolve these Catholics have on the issue and they weaken the Church's moral grounding by not remaining true to the real traditions of the Church.
While there certainly are underlining issues, the greatest issue to me is the complete ignorance, either intentional or not, these leaders in Congress have regarding this line of rhetoric directed at when life begins.
I would much rather of these leaders make the case for the "right" and why it should be a "right" based on intellectual integrity and not this, as Barack Obama says "made-up stuff" these leaders are presenting to our nation.
The facts are and the science is simple:
Conception=Fertilization= Human Life
Any arguement that "we don't know" when life begins is not only misleading but out right ignorant of science and ignorant as to what we are teaching in our educational system throughout the country.
If you are not noticed, these blips hurt the Democrats as the latest polling as shown an increase in % of John McCain's current support amongst Catholics nationally polled now at 70% up sharply from early summer.
In Virginia:
73% of declared Pro-Life voters and 30% of Pro-Choice voters support a McCain/Palin ticket
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Monday, September 8, 2008
Survey USA polling for Virginia: McCain inches Up
The lastest Survey/USA poll conducted for Virginia was conducted (9/5 - 9/7) for weeks after its previous poll which revealed Barack Obama was polling greater than John McCain. The latest poll illustrates a small move by McCain, who now leads Obama in the Commonwealth 49% to 47%.
Frankly, I am waiting for the next Public Policy Polling results to come in in large part because the Survey/USA poll is only a spectrum of 900 respondents of which 807 were registered but only 717 were deemed likely voters.
One interesting point was that both candidates apear to be losing 10% of voters from their own declared Party and Obama earned 15% of the self-declared conservative vote and McCain earned 11% of the liberal vote.
Some of the data:
54% males supported McCain 43% Obama
43% females supported McCain 51% Obama
59% of whites supported McCain 37% Obama
84% of African-Amercians support Obama 14% McCain
73% pro-life support McCain 24% Obama
65% pro choice support Obama 30% McCain
55% of Indepedents McCain 34% Obama
6% polled still undecided
***
42% of respondents "could change mind" Obama
39% of respondents "could change mind" McCain
51% "mind made up" McCain
47% "mind made up" Obama
The map:
The map appears to be very similar to past elections in terms of likely support.
Barack Obama:
Will need to hold John McCain to a modest 25% or less in NOVA where Obama holds his strongest base of support. Barack will reap rewards of newly registered voters and should strongly hold; City of Richmond, Norfolk, Hampton Road, parts of Newport News area and will need to shore up large young voter turnout in Williamsburg (W&M), Christopher Newport, Old Dominion, University of Virginia, Virginia Tech for example to offset gains Mccain may have with older vote in those areas. The I64 corridor should offset McCains numbers in Norfolk (military, veterans) and Va Beach. Obama will need greater turnout in Suffolk to offset Chesepeake. Some have predicted Chesepeake to be split, but I think McCain now is seeing his registrations rising from new conservative voters following the Pat Robertson line. In fact many of these evangelicals are younger ones as well.
John McCain:
Will focus Wednesday in Fairfax, Va at his rally on meesages directed at military, veterans, moderates and independents. Though the rally is in Fairfax, his message will be broader. McCain should secure SW Virginia and much of the I81 corridor of the Valley. He will pick up most of his NOVA support in Stafford, Prince William, Spotsylvania and parts of King George, down into Fredericksburg. McCain will need to win with greater margins to offset NOVA numbers of Obama by votes in Chesterfield, Henrico, Goochland, Louisa, Hanover, Caroline, Powhatan, Amelia, Dinwiddie, Prince Edward. McCain will struggle in parts of Prince George with non-military and will lose by greater margins in Petersburg and the City of Richmond that he will need to offset in Central and rural Virginia by those areas down in Danville, South Boston, Lynchburg and Roanoke and the remaining SW counties.
Frankly, I am waiting for the next Public Policy Polling results to come in in large part because the Survey/USA poll is only a spectrum of 900 respondents of which 807 were registered but only 717 were deemed likely voters.
One interesting point was that both candidates apear to be losing 10% of voters from their own declared Party and Obama earned 15% of the self-declared conservative vote and McCain earned 11% of the liberal vote.
Some of the data:
54% males supported McCain 43% Obama
43% females supported McCain 51% Obama
59% of whites supported McCain 37% Obama
84% of African-Amercians support Obama 14% McCain
73% pro-life support McCain 24% Obama
65% pro choice support Obama 30% McCain
55% of Indepedents McCain 34% Obama
6% polled still undecided
***
42% of respondents "could change mind" Obama
39% of respondents "could change mind" McCain
51% "mind made up" McCain
47% "mind made up" Obama
The map:
The map appears to be very similar to past elections in terms of likely support.
Barack Obama:
Will need to hold John McCain to a modest 25% or less in NOVA where Obama holds his strongest base of support. Barack will reap rewards of newly registered voters and should strongly hold; City of Richmond, Norfolk, Hampton Road, parts of Newport News area and will need to shore up large young voter turnout in Williamsburg (W&M), Christopher Newport, Old Dominion, University of Virginia, Virginia Tech for example to offset gains Mccain may have with older vote in those areas. The I64 corridor should offset McCains numbers in Norfolk (military, veterans) and Va Beach. Obama will need greater turnout in Suffolk to offset Chesepeake. Some have predicted Chesepeake to be split, but I think McCain now is seeing his registrations rising from new conservative voters following the Pat Robertson line. In fact many of these evangelicals are younger ones as well.
John McCain:
Will focus Wednesday in Fairfax, Va at his rally on meesages directed at military, veterans, moderates and independents. Though the rally is in Fairfax, his message will be broader. McCain should secure SW Virginia and much of the I81 corridor of the Valley. He will pick up most of his NOVA support in Stafford, Prince William, Spotsylvania and parts of King George, down into Fredericksburg. McCain will need to win with greater margins to offset NOVA numbers of Obama by votes in Chesterfield, Henrico, Goochland, Louisa, Hanover, Caroline, Powhatan, Amelia, Dinwiddie, Prince Edward. McCain will struggle in parts of Prince George with non-military and will lose by greater margins in Petersburg and the City of Richmond that he will need to offset in Central and rural Virginia by those areas down in Danville, South Boston, Lynchburg and Roanoke and the remaining SW counties.
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Sen. Joe Biden: Faith not Science?
I have been highly critical of the mainstream media regarding the depth of which they chose to question the record of Senator Joe Biden. Personally, I find Mr. Biden a remarkable politcial figure in our nations history and virtually my entire adult life. I cannot remember a major issue trying our nation at any time in the last twenty years that Joe Biden was not approached for a comment.
When I learned that Sen. Biden would be on Meet the Press this morning, I was confident that Tom Brokaw would be objective and challenge him on the issues as Tim Russert would certainly have. I was sure that Mr. Brokaw would keep in the tradition of the show and not let the interview seem be a talking point one that we have seen all to often this campaign.
The most striking thing I took away from the interview was some deep insight into exactly how it is this Democrat team rationalize their ideals. I was rather shocked to learn that Sen. Biden, a fellow Catholic, would explain his view on abortion as rather a simple view of faith and religion.
Visit here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26591154#26591154
The explaination intrigued me. The idea that "life" begins as he states in his view "at conception" is tied to the society which he refers to as a "pluralistic" culture by way of faith and religion seem to be a valid point on balance given the intense nature of the issue of abortion but I was left a little baffled by the fact that this revelation was coming from the Democratic nominee for Vice President. I do not think you would get an arguement from most Americans regarding "conception" or even fertilization but stressing that it is a direct result of ones religious views and one's faith.
Pardon me, but what about Science?
Our young people learn about reproduction, either sexual or asexual, in a science context like biology not in a religious class. And since there are those in our society who prefer not to allow our young people to learn about religious values or history in our public school systems let stick with the science aspect.
The very notion that religion and values is what determines when life begins or is conceived is interesting given all we teach our children. Scientifically we can determine the age of an embryo not by faith or by religion, but by what we know through science. We know exactly how an embryo should progress through its development through science and not faith.
My hope was that Mr. Brokaw would have followed up the response with these basic truths. Birth and delivery while certainly a blessing from God, is performed through the parameters governing the science, in this case the true medical science, that has been universally accepted. Faith does not determine when an egg is fertilized. Are those couples currently undergoing invitro governed by faith or by the science that is the foundation that would permit such fertilization in the first place.
So my first part was a question of science. My life is deeply rooted in faith but objectively to answer a question of abortion by a Democrat I was surprised that the answer was not based more in the science. And I wonder why not?
Could it be that the science simply does not fit the politics? If science tells us that life begins once an egg is fertilized than of course the arguements brought about by many that promote abortion and partial birth seem rather baseless. So science tells us that life actually begins the moment the embryo enters that first stage of development and of course that is what we teach our young people today in any science class.
And yet, Sen. Biden promotes a notion that life begins at conception as a matter of faith. No mention of science.
That said and if true and it is a matter of faith, should we then accept the Democratic platform on global warming and climate change as a matter of "faith". I thought that those strict constructionists regarding climate change always point to the "science" which they say is indisputable. The science behind the issue requires us to address all the issues. They use the science as a matter of principle in their platform. Al Gore's "Inconvenient Truth" as we were told was based completely on science and as a matter of fact the same proponents of this agenda are the ones who oppose the teaching of creationism along with evolution because it is not rooted in science but faith and religion.
Interesting dicotomy.
Barack Obama and Joe Biden would like to use science as a means of support for their specific arguements and positions on various issues, but dismiss it from the issue of abortion and the killing of a human life. Barack Obama thinks the issue is "above his pay grade" with regard to when life starts/begins exactly and apparently Joe Biden is equally confused given is rationalization regarding "as a matter of faith life begins at conception".
No Joe. As a matter of SCIENTIFIC fact LIFE begins with the fertilization process of the egg in the first developmental stages of an embryo and therefore that is when a life is created/begun and if you would like to argue the point regarding the value of a pro-choice platform that is one thing, but do not confuse the basis of life as a question of "faith".
Fact is their position is a psychological apologetic one in that it provides society with an out should they chose an abortion by instilling a line of psychological compassion for taking of a life by disputing whether that life is really a life or not. They have focused the issue of "rights" upon those in the position of power over the individual (the one opting to abort a life) over that of the powerless ( in this case the unborn) by traveling down this line of faith and religion and since we live in a pluralistic society we have to respect all points of view on this from differing religions.
No Joe.
That is why we use science as a convenant in the first place and our laws should reflect that regardless of religious ideology. Apply the same accepted scientific principles that you so readily apply to other aspects of the Democratic platform and determine to be consistent in how you base your political ideology.
When I learned that Sen. Biden would be on Meet the Press this morning, I was confident that Tom Brokaw would be objective and challenge him on the issues as Tim Russert would certainly have. I was sure that Mr. Brokaw would keep in the tradition of the show and not let the interview seem be a talking point one that we have seen all to often this campaign.
The most striking thing I took away from the interview was some deep insight into exactly how it is this Democrat team rationalize their ideals. I was rather shocked to learn that Sen. Biden, a fellow Catholic, would explain his view on abortion as rather a simple view of faith and religion.
Visit here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26591154#26591154
The explaination intrigued me. The idea that "life" begins as he states in his view "at conception" is tied to the society which he refers to as a "pluralistic" culture by way of faith and religion seem to be a valid point on balance given the intense nature of the issue of abortion but I was left a little baffled by the fact that this revelation was coming from the Democratic nominee for Vice President. I do not think you would get an arguement from most Americans regarding "conception" or even fertilization but stressing that it is a direct result of ones religious views and one's faith.
Pardon me, but what about Science?
Our young people learn about reproduction, either sexual or asexual, in a science context like biology not in a religious class. And since there are those in our society who prefer not to allow our young people to learn about religious values or history in our public school systems let stick with the science aspect.
The very notion that religion and values is what determines when life begins or is conceived is interesting given all we teach our children. Scientifically we can determine the age of an embryo not by faith or by religion, but by what we know through science. We know exactly how an embryo should progress through its development through science and not faith.
My hope was that Mr. Brokaw would have followed up the response with these basic truths. Birth and delivery while certainly a blessing from God, is performed through the parameters governing the science, in this case the true medical science, that has been universally accepted. Faith does not determine when an egg is fertilized. Are those couples currently undergoing invitro governed by faith or by the science that is the foundation that would permit such fertilization in the first place.
So my first part was a question of science. My life is deeply rooted in faith but objectively to answer a question of abortion by a Democrat I was surprised that the answer was not based more in the science. And I wonder why not?
Could it be that the science simply does not fit the politics? If science tells us that life begins once an egg is fertilized than of course the arguements brought about by many that promote abortion and partial birth seem rather baseless. So science tells us that life actually begins the moment the embryo enters that first stage of development and of course that is what we teach our young people today in any science class.
And yet, Sen. Biden promotes a notion that life begins at conception as a matter of faith. No mention of science.
That said and if true and it is a matter of faith, should we then accept the Democratic platform on global warming and climate change as a matter of "faith". I thought that those strict constructionists regarding climate change always point to the "science" which they say is indisputable. The science behind the issue requires us to address all the issues. They use the science as a matter of principle in their platform. Al Gore's "Inconvenient Truth" as we were told was based completely on science and as a matter of fact the same proponents of this agenda are the ones who oppose the teaching of creationism along with evolution because it is not rooted in science but faith and religion.
Interesting dicotomy.
Barack Obama and Joe Biden would like to use science as a means of support for their specific arguements and positions on various issues, but dismiss it from the issue of abortion and the killing of a human life. Barack Obama thinks the issue is "above his pay grade" with regard to when life starts/begins exactly and apparently Joe Biden is equally confused given is rationalization regarding "as a matter of faith life begins at conception".
No Joe. As a matter of SCIENTIFIC fact LIFE begins with the fertilization process of the egg in the first developmental stages of an embryo and therefore that is when a life is created/begun and if you would like to argue the point regarding the value of a pro-choice platform that is one thing, but do not confuse the basis of life as a question of "faith".
Fact is their position is a psychological apologetic one in that it provides society with an out should they chose an abortion by instilling a line of psychological compassion for taking of a life by disputing whether that life is really a life or not. They have focused the issue of "rights" upon those in the position of power over the individual (the one opting to abort a life) over that of the powerless ( in this case the unborn) by traveling down this line of faith and religion and since we live in a pluralistic society we have to respect all points of view on this from differing religions.
No Joe.
That is why we use science as a convenant in the first place and our laws should reflect that regardless of religious ideology. Apply the same accepted scientific principles that you so readily apply to other aspects of the Democratic platform and determine to be consistent in how you base your political ideology.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Raising Kaine: Using Sexism and Racism
As a Virginian, I have absolutely no issue with people who wish to tout whatever their agenda is from whatever soapbox they wish to tout it but it really reveals alot about the the real nature of teh current culture war being fought.
I do not recall such viseral attacks against Joe Biden upon his selection as the VP candidate by Barack Obama. I do remember his positions being challenged in the context of Obama's record like the War on Iraq. Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton both supported the War and the fact that Obama did not is a vaild line to draw distinction. I do not recall the level of family attacks brought upon the Biden family as the left has dealt the Sarah Palin family.
Visit sites like Daily Kos and our own Raising Kaine rag and new get the kind of America these folks see as the future. Sexism is fine when it suits there political ends I guess. Sexism is fine in the context of protecting liberalism I guess. Apparently, its not the issues they want to discuss or uncover, its not the policy that they want to debate, its about tearing people down for political expediency. Its about embarking on a path of destruction and laying wake to families for no other purpose than because they like to do it. Why?
The conservative nature of Sarah Palin is obviously a direct threat to what liberals seek to bring about in America over the next decade.
Look I have my views and my own bias but I can come to a point of critical thinking regardling issues where I can see what makes sense in the Obama platform and also what I gravitate towards in the Mccain platform. The differecnes lie in the fact that none of these people behind rags like Raising Kaine want to debate issues, what to solve issues or want to examine the pro and cons of different path regarding solutions. Instead its all or none proposition bound by a refusal to respect anyhting offered up by anyone with an (R) next to their name that border what I would risk calling the next wave of hate in this country.
Did the protestors in Denver destroy property? Did the protestors place police and fire at risk? What does it say about a protest backed by the far left in terms of thei value systems? this has nothing to do with the right to assembly. It goes further than that. In a pro-Democratic town within a pro-Democrat state, they have sought destrcution and mayhem for the benefit of whom exactly?
Now I know I have been very critical of Raising Kaine, but this week demonstrates a level of hate that is reminiscent of the Allen campaign brought about by those behind the blogging community. Its about sound bites and less than factual spins brought about to instill a sense of fear and rally hate in those that would be inclined to exhibit such behavior. Of course, there is no requirement for a blog to be open to all sides and afterall its a online community afterall for liberals but the part that scares this Virginian is that its viewership is increasing.
It is not just an issue of feeling George Bush has failed or that they have a different positions on issues than the nominees of the GOP, its the level of hate and the means to which they will go "knowingly" to ruin or disparage the reputation of someone independent of the issues. The take events that suit their purposes and spin those into a tabloid portrayal of threads that frankly shame all Virginians.
They do not just do these things soley against the GOP. Often they will attack our own Governor whom they feel who them is office with regard to him putting Virginia first and not their agenda on climate change, coal, or matters like the Wise County plant. Its the manner in which they seek to advance their agenda that should be alarming.
Just look how they rationalize how their candidates "qualifications" are somehow rock solid simply based on the fact they are Democrats. They refuse to concede any ground on any issue and in fact reject bipartisanship at all levels.
They have no issue with attacking a woman and her family for political purposes and when the truth is revealed that they got it wrong, like the implication that Sarah Palin's newborn was actually her daughters and not her own, they move on and pass it off as being a "diary" and they are not responsible for "diaries" on the site that the run as a community. They use this a cover frankly in my view.
If someone hung a rope in your yard from a tree in your front yard with a noose who do you think the law and people would come after? Thats right. The homeowner.
You provide a medium for people to dispense hatred then you deserve to be called out for it. There will be an immense backlash in the coming years I feel against such digital plantation owners of these communities that are simply one notch about those skinhead rags in my view. Are not these communities becoming bastions of hate?
Do not get me wrong there are blogging communities on the right that behave in the same manner and need to be called out for their role as well.
The scary aspect of such rags these days is they raise money for Parties and act in the role of a PAC which calls into question whether Parties are using these mediums to do their own "unofficial" bidding. To get rumors viral for their benefit with never having to defend their role in it whatsoever.
This week in a thread over at raising kaine there are a variety of Sarah Palin threads that offer up baseless allegations like "baby wolf killer" without any backstory as a mean of firing up animal rights folks against Palin. What they do not tell you is it was the Native Peoples of Alaska and the Tribal Adminstration that sought the ordinance to reduce the wolf population after results from the Alaska Virology Lab confirmed that there was an increase in rabied among the Elmendorf Wolf Pack that was attacking not only dogs but people as well. Areas like Marshall, AK actually ordered an alert status regarding children in the community and a curfew in the town in response. RK and the liberals seek to tie these ordinances to reduce the wolk population as the measures of "flatearthers" and "anti-environmentalists" when the order had nothing to do with oil but the safety of the areas in question. This is just one example of the twist and bend effect with no evidence or backstory provided.
Another is how they portray Governors as having no real command of the National Guard units as they seek to diminish the record or any achievement or qualification of Sarah Palin. These same folks had no issue with touting Gov. Kaines though in this area when he was a potential VP selection. Kaine, a former Mayor, even has to find this line of attack against Palin laughable. As they contend that Palin has never done "anything" in terms of the Alaskan National Guard they demonstrate their complete void of facts and intelligence. Control of the Guard is within the Executive Authority of every State Constitution in the Union. A Governor is responsible for the Guard and appoint all of its General and Flag officers whioch are confirmed by the State legislature. The Federal government for deployment purposes requests units from States which goes through the Governor's office and yet they contend that palin has nothing to do with her Guard units at all. Void of truth and void of intelligence.
If you try to explain this to those liberals you points fall on deaf ears and occaisionally you will get the honorable "troll"rating for challenging their warped talking point agenda baseless of any facts. Its a badge of honor frankly.
The other day, Lowell Feld, one of the founders of Raising Kaine, participated in a thread and stated the reason why there was just a disparity between the recent Mark Warner polling data where he was polling 7o% of the vote and Barack Obama's 47% in his race against McCain was racism. With no facts or evidence in hand from respondents from the Public Policy poll , his simple conclusion was Virginians not supporting Barack Obama who are supporting Mark warner are those who are "racist".
Racist? Really? So with no evidence and no facts it is rational to call 23% of those respondents "racist" simply because they feeled compelled to support Mark Warner but not Barack Obama.
Racist?
It could not be that a majority of Virginians are conservative and find Mark Warner a moderate Virginia Democrat and find Barack Obama an ultra-liberal aligned with the agenda of the folks at Raising Kaine could it?
Racist?
Could it be an overwhelming number of Virginians either are veterans or have veterans in their families here in Virginia and believe John McCain's service to our country, which of course the liberals dismiss b/c his military service occurred in an unpopular war that they did not support by the way, makes him a remarkable person and candidate in this election when compared to Barack Obama's lack of military service or experience?
Racist?
Really Lowell? If you could back that up with some actual facts and evidence that would be wonderful, otherwise how about not alienating small town Virginians from the Democratic Party and insulting conservative Democrats who are attracted to Mark Warner's message and not your message of division and hate promoted on Raising Kaine against the wonderful people of the Commonwealth.
I could care less if someone is Democrat, Republican, Liberal or Conservative in the context of this because we are all Virginians.
Mr. Feld, you and the Raising Kaine community may seek to turn Virginia into the next Maryland as you and the diarists jhave promoted in the past, but I believe most Virginians reject you and your tact on principle.
I do not recall such viseral attacks against Joe Biden upon his selection as the VP candidate by Barack Obama. I do remember his positions being challenged in the context of Obama's record like the War on Iraq. Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton both supported the War and the fact that Obama did not is a vaild line to draw distinction. I do not recall the level of family attacks brought upon the Biden family as the left has dealt the Sarah Palin family.
Visit sites like Daily Kos and our own Raising Kaine rag and new get the kind of America these folks see as the future. Sexism is fine when it suits there political ends I guess. Sexism is fine in the context of protecting liberalism I guess. Apparently, its not the issues they want to discuss or uncover, its not the policy that they want to debate, its about tearing people down for political expediency. Its about embarking on a path of destruction and laying wake to families for no other purpose than because they like to do it. Why?
The conservative nature of Sarah Palin is obviously a direct threat to what liberals seek to bring about in America over the next decade.
Look I have my views and my own bias but I can come to a point of critical thinking regardling issues where I can see what makes sense in the Obama platform and also what I gravitate towards in the Mccain platform. The differecnes lie in the fact that none of these people behind rags like Raising Kaine want to debate issues, what to solve issues or want to examine the pro and cons of different path regarding solutions. Instead its all or none proposition bound by a refusal to respect anyhting offered up by anyone with an (R) next to their name that border what I would risk calling the next wave of hate in this country.
Did the protestors in Denver destroy property? Did the protestors place police and fire at risk? What does it say about a protest backed by the far left in terms of thei value systems? this has nothing to do with the right to assembly. It goes further than that. In a pro-Democratic town within a pro-Democrat state, they have sought destrcution and mayhem for the benefit of whom exactly?
Now I know I have been very critical of Raising Kaine, but this week demonstrates a level of hate that is reminiscent of the Allen campaign brought about by those behind the blogging community. Its about sound bites and less than factual spins brought about to instill a sense of fear and rally hate in those that would be inclined to exhibit such behavior. Of course, there is no requirement for a blog to be open to all sides and afterall its a online community afterall for liberals but the part that scares this Virginian is that its viewership is increasing.
It is not just an issue of feeling George Bush has failed or that they have a different positions on issues than the nominees of the GOP, its the level of hate and the means to which they will go "knowingly" to ruin or disparage the reputation of someone independent of the issues. The take events that suit their purposes and spin those into a tabloid portrayal of threads that frankly shame all Virginians.
They do not just do these things soley against the GOP. Often they will attack our own Governor whom they feel who them is office with regard to him putting Virginia first and not their agenda on climate change, coal, or matters like the Wise County plant. Its the manner in which they seek to advance their agenda that should be alarming.
Just look how they rationalize how their candidates "qualifications" are somehow rock solid simply based on the fact they are Democrats. They refuse to concede any ground on any issue and in fact reject bipartisanship at all levels.
They have no issue with attacking a woman and her family for political purposes and when the truth is revealed that they got it wrong, like the implication that Sarah Palin's newborn was actually her daughters and not her own, they move on and pass it off as being a "diary" and they are not responsible for "diaries" on the site that the run as a community. They use this a cover frankly in my view.
If someone hung a rope in your yard from a tree in your front yard with a noose who do you think the law and people would come after? Thats right. The homeowner.
You provide a medium for people to dispense hatred then you deserve to be called out for it. There will be an immense backlash in the coming years I feel against such digital plantation owners of these communities that are simply one notch about those skinhead rags in my view. Are not these communities becoming bastions of hate?
Do not get me wrong there are blogging communities on the right that behave in the same manner and need to be called out for their role as well.
The scary aspect of such rags these days is they raise money for Parties and act in the role of a PAC which calls into question whether Parties are using these mediums to do their own "unofficial" bidding. To get rumors viral for their benefit with never having to defend their role in it whatsoever.
This week in a thread over at raising kaine there are a variety of Sarah Palin threads that offer up baseless allegations like "baby wolf killer" without any backstory as a mean of firing up animal rights folks against Palin. What they do not tell you is it was the Native Peoples of Alaska and the Tribal Adminstration that sought the ordinance to reduce the wolf population after results from the Alaska Virology Lab confirmed that there was an increase in rabied among the Elmendorf Wolf Pack that was attacking not only dogs but people as well. Areas like Marshall, AK actually ordered an alert status regarding children in the community and a curfew in the town in response. RK and the liberals seek to tie these ordinances to reduce the wolk population as the measures of "flatearthers" and "anti-environmentalists" when the order had nothing to do with oil but the safety of the areas in question. This is just one example of the twist and bend effect with no evidence or backstory provided.
Another is how they portray Governors as having no real command of the National Guard units as they seek to diminish the record or any achievement or qualification of Sarah Palin. These same folks had no issue with touting Gov. Kaines though in this area when he was a potential VP selection. Kaine, a former Mayor, even has to find this line of attack against Palin laughable. As they contend that Palin has never done "anything" in terms of the Alaskan National Guard they demonstrate their complete void of facts and intelligence. Control of the Guard is within the Executive Authority of every State Constitution in the Union. A Governor is responsible for the Guard and appoint all of its General and Flag officers whioch are confirmed by the State legislature. The Federal government for deployment purposes requests units from States which goes through the Governor's office and yet they contend that palin has nothing to do with her Guard units at all. Void of truth and void of intelligence.
If you try to explain this to those liberals you points fall on deaf ears and occaisionally you will get the honorable "troll"rating for challenging their warped talking point agenda baseless of any facts. Its a badge of honor frankly.
The other day, Lowell Feld, one of the founders of Raising Kaine, participated in a thread and stated the reason why there was just a disparity between the recent Mark Warner polling data where he was polling 7o% of the vote and Barack Obama's 47% in his race against McCain was racism. With no facts or evidence in hand from respondents from the Public Policy poll , his simple conclusion was Virginians not supporting Barack Obama who are supporting Mark warner are those who are "racist".
Racist? Really? So with no evidence and no facts it is rational to call 23% of those respondents "racist" simply because they feeled compelled to support Mark Warner but not Barack Obama.
Racist?
It could not be that a majority of Virginians are conservative and find Mark Warner a moderate Virginia Democrat and find Barack Obama an ultra-liberal aligned with the agenda of the folks at Raising Kaine could it?
Racist?
Could it be an overwhelming number of Virginians either are veterans or have veterans in their families here in Virginia and believe John McCain's service to our country, which of course the liberals dismiss b/c his military service occurred in an unpopular war that they did not support by the way, makes him a remarkable person and candidate in this election when compared to Barack Obama's lack of military service or experience?
Racist?
Really Lowell? If you could back that up with some actual facts and evidence that would be wonderful, otherwise how about not alienating small town Virginians from the Democratic Party and insulting conservative Democrats who are attracted to Mark Warner's message and not your message of division and hate promoted on Raising Kaine against the wonderful people of the Commonwealth.
I could care less if someone is Democrat, Republican, Liberal or Conservative in the context of this because we are all Virginians.
Mr. Feld, you and the Raising Kaine community may seek to turn Virginia into the next Maryland as you and the diarists jhave promoted in the past, but I believe most Virginians reject you and your tact on principle.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Olbermann & Mathews diminish Profession and even Woodrow Wilson
You have to admit if you thought that the liberal media was going to play fair, you know the so-called "fairness Doctrine" advocates than maybe the mothpieces of the Democratic Party ought actaully validate or in this case "vett" their commentary.
As Keith Olbermann , fired from Fox Network after being fired from ESPN and Chris Mathews take lead from the Daily Kos as what appears to be their only source and apparently the new research department of MSNBC they get caught playing their own version of hardball with the facts.
Make no mistake. The allegiances of Mathews and Olbermann are easily transparent. But to follow the daily Kos line of attack against Gov. Sarah Palin and the validity of her childs suffering from down syndrome actually being born to Mrs. Palins daughter and not her not only crosses the line but the two and MSNBC as a whole appear ready to advance other talking points by the daily Kos without any fact checking of their own.
Olbermann and Mathews inform its viewers that Sarah Palin was a member of the Alaskan Independence Party and actively sought the seccession of Alaska from the lower 48. The source that would prompt this prime time relevation would be the blog Daily Kos and of course they ran with it.
As it turnd out the Daily Kos, the blog that sponsored its conferecne in which the likes of Obama and Clinton attended in the Spring, in anattempt to smear Gov. Sarah Palin on the internet failed to inform MSNBC that its information was purely fictitious; okay completely made up.
Any apologies or retractions? Of course not, you see MSNBC is an opinion medium not a news medium. Its "The Place for Politics" alright, the place as they see it. Not only have they engaged in rumors and inuendo against Gov. Palin but have even gone after her 17 year old daughter Bristol.
Apparently they would like to "vett" Bristol Palin and her boyfriend more so than Barack Obama. They make no mention that Barack Obama backstory his he to was conceived out of wedlock and born in 1961 to an 18 year old. After 19 months on the campaign trail and that was not apparently news worthy enough to make any of the daily shows on MSNBC and yet all now they talk about is Palin's daughter determination to keep her child and somehow make that out to be sensational.
Later in the night the two discuss parts of Thompson's speech and reference his views regarding Barack Obama being the "most liberal and most inexperiencned nominee" in modern history responded with asking what Republicans would have thought about Woodrow Wilson's experience as solely a college professor from Princeton? Implication being he was th least experienced.
Well Keith and Chrsi if you studied up before you spoke you might have learned that Woodrow Wilson was Governor of New Jersey in 1910 before running for President. Governor. So Wilson had three years "Executive Experience" fellas and that still makes your guy Barack Obama the least experience nominee.
No fact checking, no "vetting" of the truth, just partisan off the cuff hacks against two incredible Americans.
MSNBC continues to not only embarrass the "news: division of NBC and diminish any faith people have in modern journalism but I wonder just how long Tom Brokov and Brian Williams can continue with the course of this network. These men have had respectable careers as true journalists and gentlman and their legacy at NBC is being tarnished by the networks new political hacks.
As Keith Olbermann , fired from Fox Network after being fired from ESPN and Chris Mathews take lead from the Daily Kos as what appears to be their only source and apparently the new research department of MSNBC they get caught playing their own version of hardball with the facts.
Make no mistake. The allegiances of Mathews and Olbermann are easily transparent. But to follow the daily Kos line of attack against Gov. Sarah Palin and the validity of her childs suffering from down syndrome actually being born to Mrs. Palins daughter and not her not only crosses the line but the two and MSNBC as a whole appear ready to advance other talking points by the daily Kos without any fact checking of their own.
Olbermann and Mathews inform its viewers that Sarah Palin was a member of the Alaskan Independence Party and actively sought the seccession of Alaska from the lower 48. The source that would prompt this prime time relevation would be the blog Daily Kos and of course they ran with it.
As it turnd out the Daily Kos, the blog that sponsored its conferecne in which the likes of Obama and Clinton attended in the Spring, in anattempt to smear Gov. Sarah Palin on the internet failed to inform MSNBC that its information was purely fictitious; okay completely made up.
Any apologies or retractions? Of course not, you see MSNBC is an opinion medium not a news medium. Its "The Place for Politics" alright, the place as they see it. Not only have they engaged in rumors and inuendo against Gov. Palin but have even gone after her 17 year old daughter Bristol.
Apparently they would like to "vett" Bristol Palin and her boyfriend more so than Barack Obama. They make no mention that Barack Obama backstory his he to was conceived out of wedlock and born in 1961 to an 18 year old. After 19 months on the campaign trail and that was not apparently news worthy enough to make any of the daily shows on MSNBC and yet all now they talk about is Palin's daughter determination to keep her child and somehow make that out to be sensational.
Later in the night the two discuss parts of Thompson's speech and reference his views regarding Barack Obama being the "most liberal and most inexperiencned nominee" in modern history responded with asking what Republicans would have thought about Woodrow Wilson's experience as solely a college professor from Princeton? Implication being he was th least experienced.
Well Keith and Chrsi if you studied up before you spoke you might have learned that Woodrow Wilson was Governor of New Jersey in 1910 before running for President. Governor. So Wilson had three years "Executive Experience" fellas and that still makes your guy Barack Obama the least experience nominee.
No fact checking, no "vetting" of the truth, just partisan off the cuff hacks against two incredible Americans.
MSNBC continues to not only embarrass the "news: division of NBC and diminish any faith people have in modern journalism but I wonder just how long Tom Brokov and Brian Williams can continue with the course of this network. These men have had respectable careers as true journalists and gentlman and their legacy at NBC is being tarnished by the networks new political hacks.
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Independent Labor Day BBQ: Moving Red & Blue
While the mainstream media and Washington insiders seek to advance agendas or perpuate the divisive nature of modern politics for their own personal gain, many Americans are beginning to tune out such mediums and hunker down in terms of this election season.
Speaking with quite a few Virginia conservatives, both Democrat and Republican, and Independents at the Labor Day BBQ and cookout it has become obvious that the middle is rejecting the politics of division and committing to making determinations as to what is best for the country and not respective Parties.
People need to understand that it is in their best interest to put their communities first and not look to Washington as the place that should be shaping our lives. Certainly, the nations capital plays a role but those that impact our daily lives the most are those local leaders that rarely if ever get held accountable for actions taken that directly effect our schools, roads, safety, and quality of life.
What we learn with having civil discussions within the community independent of forced ideological differences by those forces that seek to profit from such divisions created the Parties is that in most of us all seek the same things for our lives and our families. Everyone wants our children to be provided the very best opportunities to succeed, that our neighborhoods are as safe as possible, that our elderly or respected and cared for, that our roads and infrastructure are funded, and that their is a balance between the contribution of the business community and the individual in terms of tax revenues to fund budgets.
Citizens want leadership not politics. In 2006, citizens voiced opposition to the status quo only to hand over Congress to the same crowd that simply wears a different hat. The past two years we have witnessed the most incompetent leadership in Washiongton, both in the Congress and in the White House. There is varying degrees that everyone will agree, but there is no denying that Washington is broken on every level.
Citizens cannot sit idlely by and allow their County or City governments to go the same way. We have seen the problems in the City of Richmond that has disturbed many residents and triggered the overwhelming rejection of Regionalism in the greater Richmond area. Taking government back does not begin with lofty rhetoric but with real change and real leadership whose only vested interest is moving the country and its future in the right direction.
This election will be all about faith. Not faith in the traditional mainstream media portrayal but faith in the men and woman we elect to office on a real personal level. We have to be confident in the individual that they truly represent change and are willing to work for change regardless of the personal and political cost. These leaders should be servants of the will of the people and not the will of a few Party bosses.
My concensus is in talking with folks is that most Virginians that are true conservatives or at least lean that way feel they have two ways to express what they feel the direction should be and what the focus should be through our upcoming elections. Its is apparent that these Virginia conservatives and Independents will be supporting:
President: John S. McCain/ Sarak Palin (R)
Senate: Mark Warner (D)
Indepedents have always seen McCain as one of the champions, but the backlash to the media constant attacks on Sarah Palin are moving Conservatives (both Democrat and Republican) to McCain as well. Of course, the social conservative wing of the GOP here in Virginia embrace Mrs. Palin, but I think that the national groups are underestimating the quality of judgement that Virginians display in Presidential elections. It reinforces why Virginia can have a Democratic Governor and Assembly at times and still support Republicans for President. The mainstream media like to place Virginia up as a toss-up State for the upcoming election, but frankly I think they are misjudging the overall will of the people and are banking on the center made up of conservatives of both Parties and Independents moving toward Barack Obama.
There is absolutely no sign of that happening on the ground. Liberals will point to the latest polls where Obama is beating McCain before his selection of Palin 47-45, but 26% of those responding are Independents and 8% are Undecided and the same respondents say that 75% of them (Democrats, Republicans, Independents combined) support Mark Warner for US Senate.
Why? You will not find any explaination from the left or its blogs nor will you at major media outlets because now in August it does not serve their agenda. In fact, it undermines it. If Virginia is such a toss-up State, how can there be such a disparity between the number of folks supporting Mark Warner and those Obama from the same polling pool?
The answer? The middle/center of Virginia conservatives. Most Independents are conservatives in ideology not liberal, but on many issues are closer to the libertarian point of view on issues or have left the GOP in rejection of the GOP platforms focus ona pure pro-life agenda which they may reject but are aligned on a greater number of other issues than they are with the liberal, controlling arm of the Democrat Party.
Mark Warner has proven to conservatives his ability to govern from a moderate point of view on balance. People realize that he raised taxes, but also that on balance as a Democrat he is on the complete opposite end than say an Obama or Howard Dean. His speech at the convention reinforced this idea. He spoke of bipartisanship.
If the center supports and gets John McCain elected, who better to work with a McCain administration than a moderate Democrat over a Jim Gilmore who represents the far right of the Virginia GOP. I ask many people here, "downstaters" as the liberals in NOVA like to passionately call us all, if Tom Davis would have made a difference and most folks answered Yes.
Tom Davis in my view would have appealed greater to the center and all Virginia conservatives than Gilmore has and with any surge in McCain's numbers would have helped the GOP in that Senate race. The insiders dealt their hand and in the end they will suffer for it from a political perspective. In short, for a majority of the center to have voted against a Warner campaign, Tom Davis should have been the selection.
That said though. There is no indication from conservative I speak with daily that Mark Warner is delivering those that support him over to supporting Barack Obama. The case has not and is not being made by the Warner campaign as they have within the scope of Virginia shifted to the Obama lines of attacks in an attempt to get behind Obama which is alienating the center from supporting Obama. Fact is, they know Warner and have connected with him on issues but not Obama. The more they learn about the platform the less inclined it seems they are to embrace Barack Obama.
Throw in the attacks, personal and political, by the media and blogs against Sarah Palin and the anarchists marching on a Convention is such a destructive manner that most Americans find dispicable spells real trouble with conservatives.
So, Virginians are moving both Red (Presidential) and Blue(Senate) all the while this goes unnoticed by the mainstream media who just a few short months ago were stating how Democrats Kaine and Warner and Webb would deliver Virginia to the Obama camp and support a Democrat for the first time in virtually thirty years. It was a great talking point to influence the "change" mantra brought about by the favorable media coverage of Obama back then but the reality on the ground it seems is not working in that way frankly.
When we turn our focus on this election and the debates, we need to make sure that we do not forget or take our eye of those leaders here at home that are impacting our lives with EVERY vote they cast.
In speaking with those from Chesterfield ,I know we have alot of work to do here in getting our County back on track and while the current Board of Supervisors may be in its infancy there is a large amount of frustration with the direction the Board is moving. More on this to follow.
Speaking with quite a few Virginia conservatives, both Democrat and Republican, and Independents at the Labor Day BBQ and cookout it has become obvious that the middle is rejecting the politics of division and committing to making determinations as to what is best for the country and not respective Parties.
People need to understand that it is in their best interest to put their communities first and not look to Washington as the place that should be shaping our lives. Certainly, the nations capital plays a role but those that impact our daily lives the most are those local leaders that rarely if ever get held accountable for actions taken that directly effect our schools, roads, safety, and quality of life.
What we learn with having civil discussions within the community independent of forced ideological differences by those forces that seek to profit from such divisions created the Parties is that in most of us all seek the same things for our lives and our families. Everyone wants our children to be provided the very best opportunities to succeed, that our neighborhoods are as safe as possible, that our elderly or respected and cared for, that our roads and infrastructure are funded, and that their is a balance between the contribution of the business community and the individual in terms of tax revenues to fund budgets.
Citizens want leadership not politics. In 2006, citizens voiced opposition to the status quo only to hand over Congress to the same crowd that simply wears a different hat. The past two years we have witnessed the most incompetent leadership in Washiongton, both in the Congress and in the White House. There is varying degrees that everyone will agree, but there is no denying that Washington is broken on every level.
Citizens cannot sit idlely by and allow their County or City governments to go the same way. We have seen the problems in the City of Richmond that has disturbed many residents and triggered the overwhelming rejection of Regionalism in the greater Richmond area. Taking government back does not begin with lofty rhetoric but with real change and real leadership whose only vested interest is moving the country and its future in the right direction.
This election will be all about faith. Not faith in the traditional mainstream media portrayal but faith in the men and woman we elect to office on a real personal level. We have to be confident in the individual that they truly represent change and are willing to work for change regardless of the personal and political cost. These leaders should be servants of the will of the people and not the will of a few Party bosses.
My concensus is in talking with folks is that most Virginians that are true conservatives or at least lean that way feel they have two ways to express what they feel the direction should be and what the focus should be through our upcoming elections. Its is apparent that these Virginia conservatives and Independents will be supporting:
President: John S. McCain/ Sarak Palin (R)
Senate: Mark Warner (D)
Indepedents have always seen McCain as one of the champions, but the backlash to the media constant attacks on Sarah Palin are moving Conservatives (both Democrat and Republican) to McCain as well. Of course, the social conservative wing of the GOP here in Virginia embrace Mrs. Palin, but I think that the national groups are underestimating the quality of judgement that Virginians display in Presidential elections. It reinforces why Virginia can have a Democratic Governor and Assembly at times and still support Republicans for President. The mainstream media like to place Virginia up as a toss-up State for the upcoming election, but frankly I think they are misjudging the overall will of the people and are banking on the center made up of conservatives of both Parties and Independents moving toward Barack Obama.
There is absolutely no sign of that happening on the ground. Liberals will point to the latest polls where Obama is beating McCain before his selection of Palin 47-45, but 26% of those responding are Independents and 8% are Undecided and the same respondents say that 75% of them (Democrats, Republicans, Independents combined) support Mark Warner for US Senate.
Why? You will not find any explaination from the left or its blogs nor will you at major media outlets because now in August it does not serve their agenda. In fact, it undermines it. If Virginia is such a toss-up State, how can there be such a disparity between the number of folks supporting Mark Warner and those Obama from the same polling pool?
The answer? The middle/center of Virginia conservatives. Most Independents are conservatives in ideology not liberal, but on many issues are closer to the libertarian point of view on issues or have left the GOP in rejection of the GOP platforms focus ona pure pro-life agenda which they may reject but are aligned on a greater number of other issues than they are with the liberal, controlling arm of the Democrat Party.
Mark Warner has proven to conservatives his ability to govern from a moderate point of view on balance. People realize that he raised taxes, but also that on balance as a Democrat he is on the complete opposite end than say an Obama or Howard Dean. His speech at the convention reinforced this idea. He spoke of bipartisanship.
If the center supports and gets John McCain elected, who better to work with a McCain administration than a moderate Democrat over a Jim Gilmore who represents the far right of the Virginia GOP. I ask many people here, "downstaters" as the liberals in NOVA like to passionately call us all, if Tom Davis would have made a difference and most folks answered Yes.
Tom Davis in my view would have appealed greater to the center and all Virginia conservatives than Gilmore has and with any surge in McCain's numbers would have helped the GOP in that Senate race. The insiders dealt their hand and in the end they will suffer for it from a political perspective. In short, for a majority of the center to have voted against a Warner campaign, Tom Davis should have been the selection.
That said though. There is no indication from conservative I speak with daily that Mark Warner is delivering those that support him over to supporting Barack Obama. The case has not and is not being made by the Warner campaign as they have within the scope of Virginia shifted to the Obama lines of attacks in an attempt to get behind Obama which is alienating the center from supporting Obama. Fact is, they know Warner and have connected with him on issues but not Obama. The more they learn about the platform the less inclined it seems they are to embrace Barack Obama.
Throw in the attacks, personal and political, by the media and blogs against Sarah Palin and the anarchists marching on a Convention is such a destructive manner that most Americans find dispicable spells real trouble with conservatives.
So, Virginians are moving both Red (Presidential) and Blue(Senate) all the while this goes unnoticed by the mainstream media who just a few short months ago were stating how Democrats Kaine and Warner and Webb would deliver Virginia to the Obama camp and support a Democrat for the first time in virtually thirty years. It was a great talking point to influence the "change" mantra brought about by the favorable media coverage of Obama back then but the reality on the ground it seems is not working in that way frankly.
When we turn our focus on this election and the debates, we need to make sure that we do not forget or take our eye of those leaders here at home that are impacting our lives with EVERY vote they cast.
In speaking with those from Chesterfield ,I know we have alot of work to do here in getting our County back on track and while the current Board of Supervisors may be in its infancy there is a large amount of frustration with the direction the Board is moving. More on this to follow.
Saturday, August 30, 2008
The Reality of Division
There have always seem to be two great myths perpetuated upon Amercian politics and that is that Republicans are so how more or better qualified to lead foriegn policy and that Democrats represent an inclusive ideology that seeks the progress of the little guy or working class.
This year is proving to demonstrate that the case for both can certainly be challenged.
I was absolutely amazed yesterday following the announcement of Sarah Palin as John McCain's running mate at the level of immediate attack from those who say they support the advancement of woman in this country. The Democrats like to think they are the champion in this respect but in the days behavior we witnessed afterall that the historic campaign by Hillary Clinton was merely a ruse orchestrated as a polticical campaign strategy. The idea that it was a "first woman" scenario was proved to be smoke as it was actually all about "Hillary" not a movement for the advancement of women or the glass ceiling thresold.
The treatment of Sarah Palin was proof of that. The Democrats this whole season have been about divisive politics from within their own ranks. It was the left and the media that contributed to the whole Appalachia episode and the portrayal that all those voters were simply not voitng for Obama because of race. It was the ranks within that created the tension between the Clinton/Obama campaign over race and then over gender politics and yet they give themselves a pass everytime and then go after Republicans as racists for its immirgration positions. The double-standard always seems to work in the Democrat favor it seems.
With the selection of Sarah Palin we now can learn a great deal about just how geniune the feminist movement within the Democratic Party truly is.
Fact is the Democrat Primary was not about a "woman" but merely about the manipulation of the construct by the Clinton campaign in attempt to make it so. If it were than the annoucement of Sarah Palin would have been seen as a great historical achievement, instead MSNBC and the like sough to undermine and diminish her because she happens to belong to a different Party.
On a Gender basis and politics aside; its historic folks. The first time a Republican woman has been selected as a running mate. Are the Democrats more concerned with Party lines and allegiances than they are in recognizing this achievement? Are they more concerned about it being one of there female leaders and not merely an American woman? It is saddening that a Party that appears to be about such equal rights would dish a fellow woman in the manner in which they had yesterday regardless of politics.
John McCain is supposed to the one so unconcerned with equal pay or equal advancement opportunities and yet it is he who has thrown the gauntlet down and not the Democrats. Now do not get me wrong, the Democrats had the opportunity with the likes of selections from Clinton and other female executives but Barack Obama chose to go in another direction. Instead of asking Obama why it is he chsoe to do so; the media like MSNBC slams McCain implying his selection is meritless and purely a political move and downplaying the historical significance.
Let me go on record here and now that with the death of Tim Russert, these baffons at MSNBC and GE are single handedly ruining the reputation (historic by the way) of the NBC news tradition. Thats fine if they want to go the way of the left but how about some truth in labeling when you become conduits for discrediting Palin in the same tactical manner in which they allowed and contributed to the defeat of Hillary Clinton in the Primary. The Obama campaign and the media are simply now turning their sites on Palin as they reload the same gender/race game they allowed to be played on Clinton.
Instead of providing the public the facts on the Palin record, which a real news organization would seek to do, they dug down deep into defensive posture mood and sought to undermine the selection almost instantanously. Why? Could it be that they were frustrated they got douped by the Republicans and it left them scrambling for talking points and proved how ill-prepared such professionals were for such selections. After all they were pre-loaded with talking points against a Romney or a Ridge selection.
The fact that these media insiders and Washingtonian step children of gridlock were clueless about Gov. Palin demonstrates she is certainly not ONE of them friends.
I have not as of yet gone through Palin's record entirely, but she appears refreshing thus far in terms of the old tired construct of Washington and the fact that the media types do not appear to be so endeared to her thus far may not be a bad thing.
Maybe she can prove able to put them in their place the way she has the corrupted politics in Alaska. Regardless of Party, the slection is historic and should be treated by the media as such. Instead they want to simply spin in in terms of "selection" and not the historical significance it represents.
As a father of three young girls, its a proud day in America when a woman of either Party can accomplish such a feat and I can look upon my girls with a little greater hope for their future in this world.
This year is proving to demonstrate that the case for both can certainly be challenged.
I was absolutely amazed yesterday following the announcement of Sarah Palin as John McCain's running mate at the level of immediate attack from those who say they support the advancement of woman in this country. The Democrats like to think they are the champion in this respect but in the days behavior we witnessed afterall that the historic campaign by Hillary Clinton was merely a ruse orchestrated as a polticical campaign strategy. The idea that it was a "first woman" scenario was proved to be smoke as it was actually all about "Hillary" not a movement for the advancement of women or the glass ceiling thresold.
The treatment of Sarah Palin was proof of that. The Democrats this whole season have been about divisive politics from within their own ranks. It was the left and the media that contributed to the whole Appalachia episode and the portrayal that all those voters were simply not voitng for Obama because of race. It was the ranks within that created the tension between the Clinton/Obama campaign over race and then over gender politics and yet they give themselves a pass everytime and then go after Republicans as racists for its immirgration positions. The double-standard always seems to work in the Democrat favor it seems.
With the selection of Sarah Palin we now can learn a great deal about just how geniune the feminist movement within the Democratic Party truly is.
Fact is the Democrat Primary was not about a "woman" but merely about the manipulation of the construct by the Clinton campaign in attempt to make it so. If it were than the annoucement of Sarah Palin would have been seen as a great historical achievement, instead MSNBC and the like sough to undermine and diminish her because she happens to belong to a different Party.
On a Gender basis and politics aside; its historic folks. The first time a Republican woman has been selected as a running mate. Are the Democrats more concerned with Party lines and allegiances than they are in recognizing this achievement? Are they more concerned about it being one of there female leaders and not merely an American woman? It is saddening that a Party that appears to be about such equal rights would dish a fellow woman in the manner in which they had yesterday regardless of politics.
John McCain is supposed to the one so unconcerned with equal pay or equal advancement opportunities and yet it is he who has thrown the gauntlet down and not the Democrats. Now do not get me wrong, the Democrats had the opportunity with the likes of selections from Clinton and other female executives but Barack Obama chose to go in another direction. Instead of asking Obama why it is he chsoe to do so; the media like MSNBC slams McCain implying his selection is meritless and purely a political move and downplaying the historical significance.
Let me go on record here and now that with the death of Tim Russert, these baffons at MSNBC and GE are single handedly ruining the reputation (historic by the way) of the NBC news tradition. Thats fine if they want to go the way of the left but how about some truth in labeling when you become conduits for discrediting Palin in the same tactical manner in which they allowed and contributed to the defeat of Hillary Clinton in the Primary. The Obama campaign and the media are simply now turning their sites on Palin as they reload the same gender/race game they allowed to be played on Clinton.
Instead of providing the public the facts on the Palin record, which a real news organization would seek to do, they dug down deep into defensive posture mood and sought to undermine the selection almost instantanously. Why? Could it be that they were frustrated they got douped by the Republicans and it left them scrambling for talking points and proved how ill-prepared such professionals were for such selections. After all they were pre-loaded with talking points against a Romney or a Ridge selection.
The fact that these media insiders and Washingtonian step children of gridlock were clueless about Gov. Palin demonstrates she is certainly not ONE of them friends.
I have not as of yet gone through Palin's record entirely, but she appears refreshing thus far in terms of the old tired construct of Washington and the fact that the media types do not appear to be so endeared to her thus far may not be a bad thing.
Maybe she can prove able to put them in their place the way she has the corrupted politics in Alaska. Regardless of Party, the slection is historic and should be treated by the media as such. Instead they want to simply spin in in terms of "selection" and not the historical significance it represents.
As a father of three young girls, its a proud day in America when a woman of either Party can accomplish such a feat and I can look upon my girls with a little greater hope for their future in this world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
