Politics and Government in America

The time has come for Mike Huckabee to do what is best for the Republican Party and drop out of the presidential race. Since Iowa, Huckabee has not managed to win a primary. With the exception of South Carolina he has only managed to pull off third place or worse placings in every contest.

The only thing that will be accomplished by Huckabee remaining in the primaries now is that he will continue to split  the conservative vote and allow John McCain to continue to drag the Republican Party towards the left. In California for example, John McCain would lose if Mitt Romney could get the support of ALL conservatives in that election. This is true in almost every Super Tuesday primary except Arizona, New Jersey, and New York.

Many Republicans have said that we need to nominate McCain because he is the only one on our side that can beat Hilary or Barak. This is simply victory for victories sake. There was a time when Republicans stood for something. We used to stand for national security, law and order, smaller government, lower taxes, and the Constitution. Now we want to nominate a guy who has opposed tax cuts, supports amnesty, wants to increase the scope and power of government in the name of fighting global warming, and has led the charge to weaken the first amendment. We must not give up our principles simply to win. That is why the Republicans are now in the minority.

As recently as Sunday, McCain said he would support amnesty and not strengthen border security if he thought he could get away with it. He has also led the charge when it comes to negative campaigning and outright lies, all the while trying to cultivate the image that others are doing it. Recently he hired the team responsible for some of the most negative campaigning in modern politics, a team that once had John McCain as their victim.

There would be no dishonor if Gov. Huckabee dropped out now. He has already outlasted many of the candidates that were considered the front runners. As disappointing as this must be for him, Gov. Huckabee is not going to be the nominee this year. It is time for him to do what is best for the country and his party and drop out of the race. I urge everyone who still believes in conservative values to contact Gov. Huckabee and urge him to drop out before Super Tuesday.

John McCain, who condemned negative campaigning, is now the leading advocate of it. He is trying to convince the American people that Mitt Romney supported a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. However, that is a disingenuous statement, and Senator McCain knows it.

Here is what Governor Romney actually said: “Well there’s no question the president and Prime Minister al-Maliki have to have a series of timetables and milestones that they speak about, but they shouldn’t be for public pronouncement.” Nowhere did Governor Romney ever say that such timetables involve withdrawal or that such timetables are a good idea. He simply acknowledged that such conversation must be taking place. Governor Romney never said that withdrawal would be his policy.

We do know that such discussions do take place. The president has repeatedly said that as the Iraqis step up, we will stand down. It seems ignorant to assume that there are not discussions between the two governments about when that can take place. That does not mean that a pull out is being contemplated, but that plans are being made so that when the time comes, we can make an orderly and safe withdrawal. We did not leave all of our forces in Germany and Japan after World War II and it seems unlikely that we are going to leave all the soldiers in Iraq. Don’t forget that there has already been a small withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan.

McCain had to ignore an interview from the Powerline blog to make this statement. In that interview Mitt Romney expressed support for the surge, stated that the only timetables he would accept would come from the Department of Defense, and dismissed the idea of a pull out as unacceptable. Nearly everyone who has looked at Romney’s statement has determined that there is nothing there. The only people who have determined that Mitt Romney supported a withdrawal is John McCain’s campaign. This is clearly an attempt to turn the debate away from the economy, where McCain says he is weak. This is just the type of “straight talk” that we can do without.

There are some articles floating around on the web right now defending John McCain’s record. Many are written by good conservatives and it is sad to watch them squander their own good name by trying to massage, distort, and stretch McCain’s record into a Reagan conservative, when he’s not. They claim that there are lies being told about the senator and that his record needs to be defended. Well, here we will tell you the truth about John McCain’s record, using his own words where possible.

The first issue they usually raise is the Gang of Fourteen. However, to defend McCain’s record on this, they start by lying about what conservatives say about him. They claim that we say that McCain organized the infamous gang to block conservative judges. We do not; we say that he organized it to block the use of the constitutional option in the senate. The Gang of Fourteen did not ultimately break the log jam of filibusters as some claim, but instead did end up having the functional effect of blocking many conservative judges.

The agreement that was worked out actually only allowed votes on three nominees. Four other nominees were specifically excluded from the agreement. One nominee, William Haynes is still being filibustered in the Senate, by John McCain. So the truth is that the Gang of Fourteen did block the nomination of conservative judges and the only thing it secured was the ability of one senator to prevent the president and the senate from doing their constitutional duty in appointing federal officers.

The next thing that they take issue with is that people call John McCain out on his tax record. They say that John McCain has consistently supported cutting and simplifying taxes through out his 25 year career. His record says differently. In 2005 John McCain said about repealing or lowering the estate tax, “I follow the path of a great Republican, Teddy Roosevelt, who talked about the malefactors of great wealth and gave us the estate tax. I oppose the rich passing on fortunes.” In his own words Sen. McCain say that he supports the estate tax and thinks that government should decide what the wealthy do with their money when they die.

In 2004 John McCain said “I voted against the tax cuts because of the disporportional amount that went to the wealthiest Americans.” in 2008 Sen. McCain says he voted against them because there were not enough spending cuts. Which is it senator? John McCain also claims to have never voted for a tax increase, but in 1998 he voted for a 282% tax increase on cigarettes. He later claimed that it was not a tax increase but “an increase in fees.” Why is he now saying that Mitt Romney raising fees in his state was the same as a tax increase? He also voiced his support for raising social security taxes as a “fix” for the social security problem. These examples and others show a trend towards being supportive of taxes, not anti-tax.

Next they take offense at the statement that John McCain is pro-amnesty when it comes to illegal immigrants. However, amnesty is the word that Sen. McCain himself used when he described his plan. In 2003 he said “amnesty has to be an important part because there are people who have lived in this country for 20, 30, or 40 years, who have raised children here and payed taxes here and are not citizens.” He also said “I think we can set up a program where amnesty is extended to a certain number of people who are eligible…” Clearly Sen. McCain supports amnesty.

Finally they try and tell us that McCain-Feingold is not an assault on free speech. Even the Washington Post, the second most liberal newspaper in the United States, said that it is intellectually impossible to defend the First Amendment and campaign finance reform. The problem with this issue is that it depends on how you define protecting or attacking free speech. The argument against McCain Feingold having is that the disscussion of political issue and candidates is more active and free formed than it ever was. However, if you are a Constitutionalist than you believe, as I do, that the phrase “Congress shall make no law…” means any law restricting anyones ability to speak out is a Constitutional violation.

As I have shown, John McCain has been all over the spectrum on his views. He has even said he did many things that he now condemns other candidates of doing. Yet Mitt Romney is 6 times more likely to be labeled as a flip flopper than John McCain. Romney has tried to explain to the American people why he has changed his views, but McCain is never questioned on the facts. Demand the same disclosure from John McCain that incestuous media has been demanding of Mitt Romney.

By now, I’m sure that most everyone has heard the media call John McCain “the Republican frontrunner” in their reports. However, they are not being honest, as if that was any surprise. Just look at the delegate count, Mitt Romney is in front, followed by Mike Huckabee. John McCain is third in delegates, so how is he the Republican frontrunner?

Remember last week when the media was spending all their time speculating who would be the first to win two contests, McCain or Huckabee? At the time Romney had already won two contests at that point, and he would win his third on the same day that everyone was salivating over one of the two others winning their second. More Republicans have voted for Mitt Romney than have voted for either Huckabee or McCain. Don’t fall for the media’s tricks, they want McCain or Huckabee to be the Republican nominee so Hillary or Obama can become president.

People often ask me “why do you think Romney can win, when he hasn’t even won a primary yet?” Well it’s simple, we haven’t had a Republican primary so far. Open primaries are not Republican primaries, they are primaries where Democrats come and try and skew the process towards a candidate that they think that their nominee can beat.

So far if you look at the numbers, Mitt Romney has won among Republicans voting in the primaries so far. Furthermore, Sen. John McCain is running on a decidedly un-Republican  platform. Since Ronald Reagan, Republicans have stood for lower taxes, support of the 2nd amendment, support for traditional American values, and opposition to illegal immigration. McCain has been consistent in voting against tax cuts, against gun owner rights, and in favor for amnesty for illegal immigrants. Those who knew him best have even said that he is not good on  traditional values, as he believes that the best decisions come from Washington D.C. rather than from the American people. Former Sen. Rick Santorum said of McCain:

“And then on the issue of, on social conservative issues, you point to me one time John McCain every took the floor of the United States Senate to talk about a social conservative issue. It never happened. I mean, this is a guy who says he believes in these things, but I can tell you, inside the room, when we were in these meetings, there was nobody who fought harder not to have these votes before the United States Senate on some of the most important social conservative issues, whether it’s marriage or abortion or the like. He always fought against us to even bring them up, because he was uncomfortable voting for them.” The Hugh Hewitt Show Jan. 08, 2008

Hasn’t anyone wondered why the hit & run media has such a love affair with John McCain? Well for starters, McCain-Feingold gave the biggest boost in power since the invention of writing. John McCain went and made a mostly liberal industry the only source of information about political candidates during the time that we know most people are deciding who to vote for. Now that same media is talking him up in a compressed election cycle where there is no period of 30 days between primaries, meaning no one can run ads outlining candidates positions on issues between the primaries. Anyone else curious how the cycle became so compressed at a time that benefits Sen. McCain’s presidential ambitions. I am not usually one to buy into conspiracy theories, but this one has me scratching my head in thought.

New Hampshire and Iowa have taught us that there is no such thing as a sure thing in this election cycle. However, if there is one thing I would suggest betting on its that Hilary Clinton will be the Democratic nominee when everything is said and done. There are a few good reasons why.

First, Hilary is the establishment candidate is the Democratic field. There have only been two votes held so far and Hilary, thanks to the so-called superdelegates, already has 183 delegates for the convention. Barak Obama only has 78 delegates, which means Hilary has a commanding lead in the one place that counts. Sen. Obama is going to have to work hard to cut into that deficit, and although it is possible, Hilary is polling well in many of the big delegate states like New York and California.

Second, Hilary is practically an incumbent in the Democratic Party. Her husband was president just eight years ago, and his foibles and scandles made her a household name. This works well for Hilary, who has managed to keep herself in the public eye as a senator, which is no easy task. Sen. Obama is a relative unknown and, even though he has the support of Oprah, is no match for the seasoned veterans of the Clinton election machine.

Third, it would be more noteworthy in many people’s eyes for the Democrats to nominate the first woman presidential candidate than the first African-American. Hilary has consistantly placed her gender as a qualification for president. Remeber when she was pushing the whole change thing a few weeks back, she said that being the first woman president would be a big change. She has also claimed that the other candidates were ganging up on her because she was a woman, etc. Sen. Obama has consistantly down played his race, except when attacking Mitt Romney about percieved racist beliefs of his church.

I hope I am wrong, I would rather have Obama as president than Hilary since the Republicans seem eager to throw themselves over the cliff and onto the rocks. However, unless the national trends undergo a seismic shift it seems likely that Hilary will get the nomination. This is dangerous for the Democratic Party and for the United States of America.

There seems to be a problem with John McCain’s victory in New Hampshire. He lost the two most important categories for a REPUBLICAN candidate to win. According to exit polling from CNN.com Mitt Romney won more votes from people who identified themselves as Republicans and from people who identified themselves as conservatives. Mitt Romney won the vote of those who are very worried about terrorism and from those who think cutting taxes is the important issue. He also won the vote of optimistic people, and those who believe that a candidate should share the values of the voter. He also won the vote of those who believe that the issues are the most important thing in this campaign.

So what does this mean? It means that those who think that Mitt Romney is out of the race for the Republican nomination are  mistaken. They are basing their results on flawed data. Romney has more pledged delagates than McCain or Huckabbe, who most pundits are saying will be the two to beat. In Iowa, where only Republicans voted, John McCain came in fourth and he didn’t even place in Wyoming. These are places where the Republicans should be looking, not New Hampshire.

But this also brings up another point. How valid can a primary really be when members of the opposite party are allowed to vote. Two percent of the voters in the Republican primary were Democrats, and 37% were independents. This is not a good way to nominate a Republican candidate. The Republican primaries should be for the Republicans to decide their leaders, and the Democratic primaries should be for the Democrats to pick their leader. The primaries are not the general election and should not be treated that way.

I was reading the “Democratic Daily” and saw an article from January 5th that was on a subject that I have discussed before. It was about “Mormons and Government,” and claimed that a Mitt Romney presidency would cause “…an impermissible mixing of church and state …” This from a website promising “common sense conversation.”

As I have pointed out, Harry Reid D-NV is a Mormon and the senate majority leader. Now, the issue of “…an impermissible mixing of church and state …” was not brought up when Sen. Reid was running for and elected majority leader. Nor was it raised when any of the fifteen other members of the LDS Church were elected to congress. So why is it now a problem for Democrats?

Simply put, its because Romney can win. You should know that the “Democratic Daily” was founded by a member of John Kerry’s website staff, and often features pieces by John Kerry himself. It also seems to have sided with Hillary, running articles about how sexism is affecting Hillary’s news coverage and her vote count, and how Obama is more appealing to the right wing than the left.

The fact of the matter is, as I have stated before, the Democrats are afraid of Mitt Romney. Susan Estrich, Democrat strategist and contributing editor for the Los Angeles Times, said that Mike Huckabee is “a Democrats dream.” McCain is best friends with Ted Kennedy and Russ Feingold, the guy who made his name trying to impeach President Bush. Mitt Romney is the only viable Republican candidate with a conservative record, the Democrats know it, and they are willing to do anything to keep him from being the nominee.

Following Sunday’s Fox News debate, Sean Hannity and some of his staff was walking down the street in Manchester, New Hampshire when they were ambushed by Ron Paul supporters. These supporters were chanting things like “you suck Sean” and throwing snowballs at Mr. Hannity and his supporters.

Now this is not the first time that Ron Paul’s supporters have shown a mob mentality. On December 2, 2007, Ron Paul’s supporters disrupted a rally for Rudy Giuliani in Marietta, Georgia by refusing to allow Rudy to enter the town square where he was supposed to speak. And don’t forget that Ron Paul’s supporters threatened to throw Rudy off the Mackinac Island ferry back in September.

This mob mentality has shown that Ron Paul’s supporters are really nutcases who have no tolerance for anyone who doesn’t share their views. Regardless of how you feel about the other candidates, they have faith in the system. They believe that America works and that the system should be allowed to do its job.

Ron Paul’s followers don’t seem to believe in democracy. They believe in mob rule. They believe that their candidate is not winning, not because his message doesn’t appeal to Americans, but because of some conspiracy against Congressman Paul. I am going to go on the record as predicting that Ron Paul will run as a third party candidate when he doesn’t get the Republican nomination. I will further predict that we can expect riots in the streets when Ron Paul doesn’t become President. Finally I will predict that when Hillary is elected president, it won’t be long before we discover that, like Ross Perot, Ron Paul was a Democrat spoiler intended to get a Clinton elected. Ron Paul is not a Republican, he resigned from the Republican Party many years ago. He is simply a schill for the Clinton campaign.

We have already told you about Ron Paul’s various attempts to rewrite history. We chronicled his attempts to say that America has never been attacked, that Abe Lincoln started the Civil War, and that Iran has no army. Well today the Ron Paul campaign is at it again.

Former senator Barry Goldwater Jr., a Ron Paul supporter and spokesman, was on the Fox News Channel this morning. He was condemning Fox News for not having included Ron Paul in last night’s Republican debate. During his tounge-lashing he said that Paul should have been included in the debate because “he came in third in Iowa.”

Now we all know that Ron Paul and his supporters have a tendency to ignore the truth in favor of their own convoluted theories about history and the Constitution. However, this is a new low point, even for them. Paul might of finished 5th, maybe, but he clearly did not finish third. This should illustrate to everyone that Ron Paul is simply about advancing an agenda. He is not a principled man like his supporters claim, but a calculating individual intent on weakening the United States with his visions of “returning” America to his twisted vision of the Constitution.