Category: Politics

“If, to please the people, we offer what we ourselves disapprove, how can we after-wards defend our work? Let us raise a standard to which the wise and the honest can repair. The event is in the hand of God.”

George Washington, as quoted by Gouverneur Morris in Farrand’s Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, March 25, 1787

Think about this in terms of voting for the lesser of two evils.

Question — With the bailout have we seen the best of Washington this week or the worse of Washington this week?

Biden — We need more regulation. Offers socialist types of Reform. Insists that Obama alone has a economic plan where only the rich don’t get tax breaks.

Palin — Also need more reforms. Middle class is worried. John McCain is a statesman who has arisen above the fray in order to suspend the economy. McCain alone warned about the coming disaster.

They spent some time arguing about McCain saying that the fundamentals of our economy are sound. Biden, being a marxist, insists that we need a thorough cleansing in order to strengthen our economy.

Question — Who is to fault for sub-prime mortgages.

Palin blames predatory lenders and their greed (groan). She completely fails to mention how the government made laws that insisted that lenders make sub-prime loans to minorities. She’s an idiot.

Biden says that Obama warned of the coming disaster while McCain wanted deregulation. Biden, likewise, misses the idea that the government is culpable for the sub-prime mess. Biden insists on more regulation which means that he wants more of a command and control economy.

Palin retorts that Obama and Biden are classic tax and spend liberals. Finally somebody is calling them on Democrat penchant to grow the government.

Biden denies that Obama is a tax raiser.

Already it is clear that Palin is going to be fine. Biden presses that Palin didn’t defend McCain on his desire to vote against regulation. Biden is grinning like a Cheshire cat when he looks at Palin.

Question — Discuss your candidates respective tax plans.

Biden — Insists that McCain will not help the middle class with his tax plan. Insist that McCain only wants to help the rich.

Palin — Says Biden is for redistribution of wealth. Calls Biden on the reality that Obama’s tax plan will hurt small business. Cites Biden’s nonsense on saying that paying taxes is patriotic. Advocates Government get out of taxpayers in pockets. Palin says that McCain’s health care plan which is based on incentives as opposed to mandatory health care as dictated by the Government. Reminds the voter how inept the government is when it runs programs.

Biden — Responds to the redistribution of wealth charge by Palin by saying it isn’t redistribution but rather it is “fairness.” Biden is citing Marx here … “From those with plenty to those with need.”

Palin’s make up looks nice. She decided to wear black. That was interesting.

Question — What promises have you and your campaigns made that you can’t keep in light of the financial problems we are now in.

Biden — Foreign aid might have to decrease. We will eliminate wasteful spending (yeah, right). Going to go after those who move their address to offshore in order to avoid taxation.

Palin — Didn’t answer the question. Instead slammed Obama for voting for energy plan for giving tax breaks to oil company. McCain hasn’t made promises on economy that he can’t keep.

Biden — Insists that McCain wants to give the rich oil companies more tax breaks.

Question — Concerning Bankruptcy laws.

Palin – Keeps blaming corruption and greed of Wall Street for our current mess. Says we should thank McCain for at least trying to warn about sub-prime. I don’t she knows anything about bankruptcy laws.

Biden — Voted the opposite way as Obama on the bankruptcy laws. Insists that the government ought to have the ability to lower home owners interest and principle on their homes. Talk about socialism. The government is going to come in and tell the seller he no longer is going to get the profit he thought he was going do from the sell of his property.

Palin — Faults Obama and Biden for being against energy independence. What that has to do with bankruptcy laws is beyond me.

Question — Energy issues and climate change. Global warning.

Palin — Says that climate change is real but doesn’t necessarily believe that it has to do with the actions of man. Doesn’t want to argue about the causes. We just need to do something about it. Reduce emissions. Bret asks, “But if we don’t know why the climate is changing how can we do something about it?”

Biden — Believes in global warming and that it is made made. Says what Bret asked above. Faults McCain for voting 20 times against alternative energy plans. Says we should invest in clean coal technology. I think Biden and Obama are in the pocket of tree huggers.

Palin — Says, “Drill baby drill.” Faults Obama and Biden for voting against trying to make America energy independent. Obviously thinks that we have oil and natural gas that would go a long way towards making us independent.

Question — Do you support extending same sex benefits to couples.

Biden — Absolutely. It’s only fair. The constitution calls for it. Faggot couples are no different then heterosexual couples.

Palin — Waffled. Not if it means redefining marriage. But insists that she is tolerant. Palin does not support re-defining marriage as anything but one man and one woman.

Biden — Obama and Biden do not support buggery marriage. Biden says Palin and his position are the same.

Question — Exit strategy Iraq.

Palin — Cites success of surge. Faults Dems for opposing the surge. Faults Obama for voting against funding troops in Iraq. Notes Biden denounced Obama for the vote when it happened. Must have victory before we leave in Iraq.

Biden — Says Palin offered no plan (not true actually… Palin said victory is plan). Says that McCain voted same way as Obama on funding. (I wonder what the truth is on this one.) Obama says we should withdraw over 16 months. This is boneheaded. If your enemy knows when you’re leaving they will dig in until the 16 months is past.

Palin — Says that Obama Biden plan is white flag of surrender. Zing. Cites Biden saying that Biden wanted to run with McCain on his ticket. Cites Biden saying that Obama wasn’t ready.

Biden — Says that McCain has been dead wrong on the fundamental issues of war.

Question — Iran and Pakistan. Which is more dangerous … “A nuclear Iran or a unstable Pakistan?”

Biden — Both are dangerous. Biden says we need to focus not on Iraq as McCain says but rather on Afghanistan. Need to nation building in Afghanistan.

Palin — Both are dangerous. Tells Biden that it was Petraeus and leader of Al Quida that both said the central point of conflict is in Iraq. Claims Iranian leader is insane due to his statements on Israel. Cites Obama’s willingness to meet with this leader without preconditions. Zing. Cites other insane leader like Castro brothers and South Korean leaders.

Palin is holding her own. She is not coming across as bad as her interviews with Couric and Gibson.

Say’s that Obama isn’t a serious candidate when he says that he’d meet with foreign leaders without precondition.

Say’s that Obama never said what he said.

Biden — Faults McCain for not being willing to speak with Iran.

Commentary — Obama put his foot in his mouth on this one and Biden and Obama have been spinning ever since.

Question — On Israel.

Palin — Two state solution (State of Palestine … State Of Israel) is the answer in the middle east.

Biden — No one is a better friend of Israel then Biden. Lights suddenly went on for me. Biden was picked by Obama in order to comfort the Jews, since they were so ill at ease with Obama’s Muslim connections. Faults Bush administration for its policy.

Palin — Claims that like Biden she is also a Israel lover.

Biden — Claims that Bush and McCain policies on the Middle East are the same. Trying to tie McCain to Bush.

Question — Interventionism and Nukes.

Palin — Foreign countries with madmen leaders can’t be allowed to have Nukes. Editorial comment — We are the policeman of the world. Switches to Afghanistan. McCain administration would be different then Bush’s in Afghanistan by practicing surge in Afghanistan. Cites Obama’s comment about how we are strafing villages in Afghanistan.

Biden — Says a surge in Afghanistan won’t work. Faults McCain for a voting record on arms control.

Palin — Contradicts Biden’s claim that surge in Afghanistan won’t work. Editorial comment. Both are for nation building.

Fact checkers will have to find what the lead General in Afghanistan actually said whether or not a surge will actually work in Afghanistan.

Question — Biden you’ve been an interventionist. Is that a correct policy?

Biden — When it works it is the right policy. Biden insists that in the former Yugoslavia his interventionist policies have been a success. I’d like to hear Serdja Trifkovic would say to that. Says we need to go into Darfur. We should intervene to stop genocide.

Palin — Says Biden voted for war and now he is against it. Notes Biden’s many contradictions between before he was Obama’s VP and after he was Obama’s VP. Implies Biden is a typical Washington insider. Zing. Agrees that we need to go into Darfur. Both want to be the world’s policemen.

Biden — Discusses when we should or shouldn’t go in to a country.

Genocide is a reason.
Terrorism is a reason.
Killing Americans is a reason.

Insists that contrary to Palin’s statement that he has never supported McCain’s position.

Palin — Says that Biden did vote McCain’s positions.

Fact Checkers will be all over this disagreement.

Question — How would a Biden administration differ from an Obama administration?

Biden — I would carry out Obama’s policies. Then goes on to say how great an Obama administration would be.

Question — How would a Palin administration differ from a McCain administration?

Palin — Subtly notes that as two Mavericks there is complete agreement. Notes that she would drill in Anwar which McCain disagrees. Except for that she seems to suggest that she would follow the McCain principles although there is coming through the idea that she would be for small government and getting the government off the back of middle America. Finishes by saying that Obama Biden is a tax and spend ticket.

Biden — Again seeks to connect McCain to Bush. Insists that Republican is for the rich.

Palin — Chastises Biden for always looking back. Second time she’s done that. Says that teachers need to be paid for. Family is full of teachers. Obviously is clueless about the problems of education. NEA wins no matter who is elected apparently. Need to invest more in education. This reveals that she doesn’t really understand limited government.

Question — What does the VP do?

Palin — Presides over the Senate. Supportive of President’s policy. Insists that she would emphasize energy issues, children with special needs issues, reform government issues.

Biden — Barack has asked me to be the point person in the legislation process for an Obama administration. Won’t have a portfolio in a Obama administation.

Question — Do you believe that VP is both Executive and Legislative position as Dick Cheney does?

Palin — Yes, I agree the VP has flexibility to operate both in Executive and legislative realms.

Biden — Cheney has been the worst VP in the history of America. Constitution does not allow VP to be part of legislative branch. Obviously hates Cheney.

Question — Is Convention wisdom correct.

Palin — CW says I’m not experienced. She notes that she is the only one with Executive experience. Say’s her choice was also about the idea that she connects with middle America. Mentions that she shares a Worldview with McCain of America exceptionalism and that we should be a city set on a hill. I notice that Palin keeps using the word “Worldview.” I wish someone would ask her what she means by that.

Biden — CW says I lack discipline. I’m not going to change after 35 years in the Senate. Cites his experience. Politicizes the death of his wife and children saying that he understands middle America saying he knows what it means to be a single Dad.

Palin — McCain is the candidate of change. He is the Maverick.

Biden — McCain is no Maverick. Cites how he is just another Republican drone.

Observation — Palin has not attacked Obama as much as Biden as attacked McCain.

Question — Single issue that you switched on after holding a view for a long time.

Biden — Yes. I used to think that a SCOTUS candidate was fine as long as the candidate was morally upright. After five years I realized that ideology is a reason to reject a SCOTUS Candidate.

Palin — On major issues “no,” though she has been able to compromise on budgetary issues.

Final Question — How will you be bi-partisan?

Biden — McCain would agree that I am a bi-partisan guy.

Palin — You appoint who is qualified regardless of their party stripe. Segues to who voter should vote for. She says Republicans will create jobs by getting government off people’s back while Dems are tax and spend liberals who don’t want to be energy independent.

Closing Statements

Palin — I prefer this format to formats where the media serves as a filter I have to work through. We have to fight. Fight for freedom. You know, I think that Palin really has some small government instincts, though I also think she has some real inconsistencies here.

Biden — Most important election in history. Mentions again that McCain is for the rich. Says that Obama Biden will bring hope back to America.

Analysis —

Palin held her own. Biden didn’t give us any obvious gaffes.

She was trying to connect with middle America. He was beating on McCain.

In my estimation this won’t move the poll numbers. However, what it does do is it delivers Palin from the Bimbo characterization that I had her slipping into. Whatever happens in 2008 election, with this debate, Palin made herself a player in future Presidential elections. She exceeded expectations.

I wish Palin’s convictions were at the top of the ticket.

Over at American Vision they continue to bang the drum against voting third party. This time it is Eric Rauch who steps up with an article that borders on insantiy entitled, “A Plea For Sanity.”

In Mr. Rauch’s first paragraph he manages to accuse those of us who disagree with his brown-nosing the Republican Party as “losing our minds.” Mr. Rauch concedes that except for the three months surrounding a Presidential election cycle those to whom he is referring are the best of the best, but then he laments that we lose our minds during the Presidential election cycle. I don’t know why Mr. Rauch limits our insanity to the three months surrounding a presidential election cycle as I almost never vote Republican no matter what the election cycle.

Mr. Rauch’s evidence for our insanity seems to be that we will vote our conscience, which, quite to his chagrin, means that we won’t vote Republican. Maybe we should start a support group called, “Independents Anonymous.”

Bret — “Hi, my name is Bret, I’m Christian but I’m still an Independent.”

Group — “Hi Bret.”

Maybe Mr. Rauch would like us to go on Thorazine during these three months in order to help us get past our fits of insanity.

Really, the idea that people have lost their minds simply because they won’t drink the kool-aid that Republicans serve up in every election cycle or simply because they actually believe in the idea of “voting their conscience” is an idea that has itself slipped quite beyond madness into the realm of the surreal.

Next, Mr. Rauch seems to imply that since God chose the leaders in the Old Testament those of us living in Republics therefore don’t have to be concerned with the voice of conscience when we vote in November. Now, how it is the two ideas, that God chose the OT Kings therefore means we don’t have to be concerned with the voice of conscience in our vote in November fit together is quite beyond my ability to reconcile … but then I’m not the one who is arguing from the Twilight Zone. The connection seems to be that since we are not voting for king, messiah, dictator, or even judge, but only for a chief executive who has specific enumerated powers according to the Constitution, (which, by the way, are constantly ignored) we therefore are relieved of being answerable to God for our vote. But that is only a guess on my part on how Erich’s reasoning is working. If you want somebody to make sense of this hash you’ll have to write Erich.

Erich then continues to reason from the outer limits of the Twilight Zone by advancing the idea that since David was an adulterer and murderer after God chose Him to be King therefore it is acceptable to vote for known adulterers and murderers in order to make them President. I’m not making this up. I couldn’t if I tried. Now, to be fair to Erich, I quite agree that “just because a man may be qualified to be an elder or deacon in the Church, does not automatically qualify him to be the President.” That is most certainly true, unless of course, that man is running against two known socialists, and then he would be less unqualified then the Socialists and so worthy of being voted for.

Erich goes on to talk about how the founding father’s learned about the terror of tyranny of King George and so created a Constitutional system that prevented power from being absolutized and he makes this argument while at the same time advocating that we vote for someone who makes King George look like a paleo-conservative. Erich is correct that our system is one of checks and balances but he is wrong to implore us to vote for somebody who will continue to ignore the Constitution.

Next, Erich quotes from R. C. Sproul Jr.. It is a fine quote. It does nothing to advance his argument but it is still a fine quote.

And then Erich says something that got me laughing so hard I had to call a friend to share the mirth. Erich said,

“I think Sproul overstates (as do many at this crucial time) the significance of the vote. Voting does not necessarily imply endorsement or approval.”

Um… Earth to Erich… testing … 1, 2, 3 … Ground control to Eric…

When we vote, we vote for somebody. When you vote for somebody you are by necessity endorsing and approving them. Now you may hate the fact that you are endorsing and approving them. You may wish that you hadn’t endorsed or approved them, but make no mistake Erich, you have, by your vote, endorsed or approved them. I mean, come on … they don’t divvy up the votes candidates get between the votes that were an endorsement and an approval and the votes that were not endorsements or approval. There is no such thing as a “non-endorsement vote.”

You write this stuff and actually have the chutzpah to suggest I’m the one losing my mind?

Next the Erich Rauch, doing his best Captain Obvious impersonation, offers this gem,

“Christians only want to talk about third party candidates when the two majority candidates don’t pass their scorecard.”

Well, jeepers Erich, should we only start talking about third party candidates when the two majority candidates do pass our scorecards? I mean, when else would we ever start talking about third party candidates except when the candidates of the two major parties are complete socialists?

Next Erich insists that those homeschoolers who vote third party are not really being true to their grassroot principles by voting third party. It seems to me by Erich’s reasoning that, as homeschoolers what we should have done to be consistent with Erich’s take is to have left our children in the government schools in order to bring reform from within the schools, just as he wants us to stay in the Republican party so that we can bring reform to the Republican Party. Think about it Erich. We are the ones being consistent here. We left the schools because we knew they were ponds of scum and now we are leaving the major parties because we likewise know they are ponds of scum.

Erich finishes his brilliant piece by calling our refusal to vote for Republican socialists as those who are involved in a “humanist response.” Now, how a refusal to vote for a Socialist is a humanist response is an idea that only someone who has lost their mind could ever try to advance. Erich needs to know that in voting third party I am not, in his words, only concerned about myself, but rather I believe that by voting for Republican I would be helping to destroy this country.

In his article Erich called referred to those who didn’t agree with him about voting for Republican socialists as having lost their mind. He said that we were involved in a “humanist response.” He said that we were only concerned about ourselves. Those are fighting words and he has received a fighting response.

I just heard on the radio that the Congress won’t be getting back to the Economic problem until Thursday in order to make way for the Jewish Holiday Rosh Hashanah (Jewish New Year) which begins at sundown on Monday September 29 and ends at nightfall on Wednesday October 1. Maybe we can do something to extend the Jewish holiday so that Congress won’t be back in session until the market finds its bottom.

One wonders if all this was happening during the Christmas season if there would be the same sensitivity to the Christian holiday.

Interestingly there are 43 members of the US Congress who are Jewish (29 Democrats / 1 Republican) which represents about 7 % of the house. In the US Senate the Jewish representation is at 13% (9 Democrats 2 Independents 2 Republicans. That is a pretty good representation when you consider Jews comprise about 2.5% of the US population.

What else is interesting is that when you look at those names they comprise some of the most Liberal members of the US Congress.

You know it wouldn’t be very hard at this point for John McCain to make this election one in which the American people are asked to decide between socialism and freedom. Just recently I read that Obama is slamming McCain for being in favor of deregulation. Well, by necessity this means that Obama is for government regulation.

Why not throw out the confusing terms regulation vs. deregulation and start talking about what is behind those terms. Obama is admitting that he is in favor of Centralized planning of our economy. He is admitting that he is against free markets and free people. It doesn’t get much simpler then this. McCain could campaign on being for freedom while Obama is for slavery. It wouldn’t take that much to paint that picture and paint it convincingly.

One thing though that McCain would have to do is to come out powerfully against this bailout. Then he could travel the country playing the roll of populist and freedom lover both at the same time. He could paint Obama, with his support for the bailout as being for the rich, for socializing our financial sector, and for enslaving the middle class for the next two generations. McCain would ignite a firestorm of support if he just started running against big government socialists.

If McCain did this Palin suddenly becomes even more of an asset because she would be released to be Palin. I honestly believe that woman believes in things like free markets, smaller government, and serious reform but having been tied to McCain she has lost her voice. If McCain would craft this election as Freedom vs. Slavery Palin would be free to voice convictions that come natural to her.

But he won’t do it. He won’t do it because he hasn’t got it in him to see the opportunity that Obama and this crisis is giving him. The American voter isn’t stupid. They are against this bailout and they are against knowing full well that not doing a bailout is going to bring some economic hard times. If McCain would only tap into that it would change everything.