Cognitive Dissonance: Why do people vote for Democrats? A Liberal State of Mind pt.8 (Attack of the Republican Blogs)

Today on your home for young Republicans: Cognitive Dissonance aka A Liberal State of Mind pt.8

Cog-ni-tive (adjective)

1. Of or pertaining to cognition.
2. Of or pertaining to the mental processes of perception, memory, judgment, and reasoning as contrasted with emotional and volatile processes.

Dis-so-nance (noun)

1. Disagreement or incongruity.

To anyone who doesn’t know, this is the feeling of uncomfortable tension that comes from holding two conflicting thoughts in the mind at the same time.

It often increases with the importance of the subject to us, how strongly the dissonant thoughts conflict, and our inability to rationalize and explain away the perceived conflict.

Dissonance is often strong when we believe something about ourselves and then do something against that belief. If I believe I am good but do something bad, then the discomfort I feel as a result is cognitive dissonance.

For example, have you ever been involved in a relationship (romantic, personal, work, ect…) where you spent more time rationalizing the reasons why you’re staying in the situation than realizing the negative effects of staying in said relationship?

“He hits me, but that’s only because I make him mad”

“She cheats on me, but she says she’s going to change”

“I’m a Democrat because my father was a Democrat because my grandfather was a Democrat and so on”

“So what if my taxes were raised? At least I didn’t vote for a Republican”

Notice anything about those statements? They all express a contrary circular logic that dictates that whenever presented with a negative occurrence, the most effective method to deal with it is to find a way to justify it to yourself. While this behavior may make you feel better in the interim, it does nothing to address the root issue or solve the problem. Hence, the same (insert problem here) will keep occurring, uninterrupted, in perpetuity.

I could go on forever with this subject. Most people find it easier to rationalize the actuality of (insert problem here) with a self defeating detachment from reality as opposed to facing the truth. It’s the literal equivalent of continuing to drive your car with the check engine light on in the hopes that it will magically turn itself off. You can ignore it all you want, but sooner or later, your car’s going to break down. Your refusal to accept the truth only leads to your inevitable failure. And that’s truly a liberal state of mind.

Cognitive dissonance is a very powerful motivator in voting which leads people to change one or the other of their conflicting beliefs or actions regarding a candidate, bill, proposition, measure, ect. The discomfort often feels like a tension between the two opposing thoughts.

Say for example, your friend happened to be running for (pick any) office and you knew they weren’t qualified to fill the position. Would you vote for them?

Consequently, if someone you truly disliked were running in opposition to your friend, would you vote against them even though they were more than qualified to fill the position?

The juxtaposition between doing what someone sees as what they’re supposed to do and doing what’s in their best interest has been prevalent in politics forever. Think about how many communities have been harmed or neglected by Democratic leaders for decades and yet their populace still votes Democrat. It’s astonishing.

To relive the tension felt by not acting in self interest, one of three actions will occur: a change of behavior, justifying the behavior by changing the conflicting cognition or justifying the behavior by adding new cognitions.

Dissonance is at its most powerful when it concerns self-image. Feelings of foolishness, immorality and so on (including internal projections during decision-making) are dissonance in action.
If an action has been completed and cannot be undone, then the after-the-fact dissonance compels us to change our beliefs. If beliefs are moved, then the dissonance appears during decision-making, forcing us to take actions we would not have taken before.

Does any of this sound familiar? I thought it might. Keep this in mind when discussing politics with the unenlightened.

In closing, special thanks to all of our Armed Forces, the RNC, the Missouri Republican Party, the Illinois Republican Party, the College Republican National Committee, the National Black Republican Association, the Wall Street Journal, KSDK Channel 5, KTVI Fox 2 News (thanks for the follow on twitter!) Jeanette (this one’s for you) and to all of my Republican Blogs and Bloggers (We’ve already won), my Libertarian blogs and bloggers (join us), my Democrat blogs and bloggers (Stop trying to socialize America), and to all Political blogs and bloggers: Let your voice be heard. GOP in 2012! If you’re not on the right, you’re wrong. Ready by 2011 to win in 2012! Follow STL_Politics on Twitter.
References
Festinger (1957), Festinger and Carlsmith (1959)

It’s More Than Just Politics aka What happens when you put Democrats in office pt.6 (Attack of the Republican Blogs)

Today on your favorite political blog for young Republicans: It’s more than just politics aka yet another example of the ridiculous consequences that occur when you put Democrats into any form of office.

It’s looking like this socialist, clusterf*ck of a healthcare reform bill will face its final committee vote on Tuesday according to top Senate Democrat Harry Reid.

The bill that the Finance Committee will be voting on is a 10-year, $829 billion proposal that supposedly covers 94 percent of eligible Americans while (allegedly) reducing the federal budget.

As you may already know, Reid and other Senate Democrats who happen to be in support of this misguided attempt at healthcare reform have been busy lately characterizing GOP leaders as “partisan protesters” and “divisive”. But the fact is, Senate Dems have purposely mischaracterized or blatantly left out several key details about this bill that many Americans are still not aware of.

It’s only so long that Democrat PAC ads featuring elderly citizens and children and puppies and pretty background music can fool the American people. As much more facts come out about this bill, I’ve noticed the tide starting to shift against this Democratic version of healthcare reform.

For one, this legislation is filled with tax hikes. It starts by taxing those who earn over $10,831 per year and don’t buy health insurance-a tax that increases to $3,800 as income rises. Health Insurance, health care devices and prescription drugs are also taxed, adding to the cost of health care, and decreasing the amount of competition amongst health care related businesses.

The bill also cuts $500 billion in Medicare spending, which includes over $130 billion in cuts to Medicare Advantage and almost $120 billion in Medicare cuts for hospitals and facilities that care for seniors (remember the adorable elderly people featured in their TV ads?). The CBO (Congressional Budget Office) says they expect the Medicare Advantage plans to lose around 2.7. million enrollees over the next ten years as a result of this bill being passed, while also stating that “premiums in the new insurance exchanges would tend to be higher than the average premiums in the current-law individual market…”

In other words, the cost of insurance will increase, as opposed to the claims being made by the Obama administration otherwise. But wait…it gets a lot worse.

This current bill includes what’s being called an “individual mandate”, which in essence would force all Americans to purchase health insurance. Subsidies will be given to those who earn up to three times the federal poverty level, while those who don’t qualify for the subsidies will be taxed up to $3,800 if they don’t buy insurance. So basically, if you can’t afford to buy insurance then you’ll be taxed almost $4,000. Does that make any sense to anyone? Leaving people caught in between being unable to afford insurance and having to pay this nonsensical tax? Ask yourself: If someone living at or below the poverty line had $4,000 to spend in discretionary income-don’t you think they would buy their own insurance as opposed to being taxed for not having it? And where would the tax money come from? If someone’s in what’s considered to be a lower class tax bracket, chances are they don’t pay income taxes anyway and actually get a tax refund every year.

Again, this is just the type of absurdity that can be expected when Democrats get elected to any form of office.

I can go on and on about how forcing all the uninsured into insurance could bring as much as $200 billion a year in new premiums to insurance companies (including $465 billion in subsidies over the next ten years), allowing law enforcement agencies unobstructed access to medical records (do you want that?), how this bill does nothing to add lawsuit reform to help curb frivolous lawsuits…you get the picture.

As Garet Garrett famously stated, “social gains that cost more than society can afford, especially those that are founded on the doctrine of dividing what there is instead of producing more, are bound in a little time to annul themselves.”

Socializing health care will not solve the problem. Raising taxes will not solve the problem. Government intervention will not solve the problem (bailouts anyone?) Punishing those who can’t afford health care will not solve the problem.

The only feasible solution is to elect the party in 2010 and 2012 that’s committed to cutting waste, lowering taxes, lessening bureaucracy, strengthening our country and providing economic growth and opportunities to all Americans; that party is the Republican Party. Vote GOP!

In closing, I’d like to give a special thanks to all of our Armed Forces, the RNC, the Missouri Republican Party, the Illinois Republican Party, Freedom Works, the College Republican National Committee, the National Black Republican Association, the Wall Street Journal, KSDK Channel 5, KTVI Fox 2 News (thanks for the follow on twitter!), the best assistant/god sister/too many things to name aka Jeanette (your aura…get it?), Missy (I just do like Just had said) and to all of my Republican Blogs and Bloggers (We’ve already won), my Libertarian blogs and bloggers (join us), my Democrat blogs and bloggers (Stop trying to socialize America), and to all Political blogs and bloggers: Let your voice be heard. GOP in 2012! If you’re not on the right, you’re wrong. Ready by 2011 to win in 2012! Follow STL_Politics on Twitter.
Links: http://freedomworks.org

http://grandoldparty2011.blogspot.com

“Obamacare” aka what happens when you put Democrats in office pt.5 (Attack of the Republican blogs)

Today on your new home for all young Republicans: Change. As you’ve all noticed, I’ve recently made some changes to my site that I think will make it more accessible to all of my readers. It’s a new look, and a new format. But as some things change-others will always remain the same. Liberals will always be idiots.

Have you ever encountered someone in a bar that happened to be so blatantly ignorant about politics that you just wanted to grab them and choke them? Someone who’s’ never bothered to research the history, agenda or voting record of any person they’ve ever voted for but who complains when their taxes go up? Someone who’s’ never came to the realization that who you put into any office (local, state, federal) directly affects what legislation is or isn’t passed and how those decisions directly affect their life?

Unfortunately (or fortunately for us in 2012), I see this type of destructive, self-deprecating behavior on a daily basis. It’s almost like most democrats are suffering from abusive spouse syndrome.

This week, in yet another example of Democrat Party lunacy, House leaders are proposing adding a tax on insurers in their bizarre attempt to reduce the price of their misguided (socialist) health care bill. Read more:

By Deirdre Walsh
CNN
WASHINGTON (CNN)
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Friday that an excise tax on high-end insurance plans, similar to the one included in the Senate Finance Committee’s health care overhaul legislation, was “under consideration.”
But Pelosi added that leaders are looking at other proposals to offset the costs of the bill.
“We have to see how much money we need, and if we’re taking the bill down in costs, there are other provisions in the Senate bill that bend the curve that might be more palatable. We’ll see,” she added.
House Democratic leaders and key committee chairmen met Friday to try to come up with a final version of the House health care bill. Much of the discussion centered on how to cut about $200 billion in costs from the measure.
The Congressional Budget Office estimated that the House bill costs $1.1 trillion over 10 years, but President Obama told Congress he wants a bill that costs $900 billion.
The House Democrats’ health care plan includes a surtax on wealthy Americans. The graduated tax would apply to families making more than $350,000 a year, with the rate increasing as income levels go up. But a number of freshmen Democrats argued that the initial income level should be raised so the tax doesn’t unfairly burden small businesses.
Leaders have now agreed to apply the surtax on those making more than $1 million a year. But losing some revenue from the surtax is forcing Democratic leaders to look for other sources of funding.
Democratic leadership aides say that if the House moves ahead with a tax on insurers, it would probably modify the Senate Finance Committee version, because many Democrats are worried the Senate plan would hit middle-class families.
See what happens when you put democrats in office? In closing, special thanks to all of our Armed Forces, the RNC, the Missouri Republican Party, the Illinois Republican Party, the College Republican National Committee, the National Black Republican Association, the Wall Street Journal, KSDK Channel 5, KTVI Fox 2 News (thanks for the follow on twitter!) and to all of my Republican Blogs and Bloggers (We’ve already won), my Libertarian blogs and bloggers (join us), my Democrat blogs and bloggers (Stop trying to socialize America), and to all Political blogs and bloggers: Let your voice be heard. GOP in 2012! If you’re not on the right, you’re wrong. Ready by 2011 to win in 2012! Follow STL_Politics on Twitter.

Class is Back in Session! A Republican State of Mind

Today on my Republican Blog: Class is back in Session! This is just a little something for everyone to think about when deciding who to vote for in this next upcoming election and also a life lesson for anyone who’s never taken a class in political science (you can apply this to any aspect of your life). Congrats to N. Reimer, D.W. Simon and J. Romance for enlightening the masses! The irrational actor model is coming next (thanks Wash U). And don’t forget to give thanks to our Armed Forces on this remembrance of 9/11. Enjoy:

What values, what understanding of political phenomena, and what grasp of public policy alternatives actually influence decision making? How adequate is the machinery available to decision makers? What are the consequences of our public policy decisions? How is power wielded, and how are political conflicts resolved?
To answer these questions we present the following models: (1) the rational actor, (2) the political actor, (3) the organizational actor, (4) the elitist actor, and (5) the idiosyncratic actor. While these models are not mutually exclusive, they emphasize different factors in, and different approaches to, decision making.
In the rational actor model of decision making, decision makers seek to accomplish four tasks: accurately identify the problem that confronts them; take into account the key factors that bear on the problem; critically examine alternative courses of action; and make a choice that will wisely maximize benefits and minimize costs.
In the political actor model, decision making is not essentially rational deliberation. Rather, it is characterized by decision makers involved in a struggle for power, and decisions emerge from that struggle. This kind of decision making necessitates bargaining, accommodation, and consensus, as well as controversy, conflict, bluff, threat, and even deceit. The bottom line is that key decisions are most often the result of bargaining among diverse political interests.
The organizational actor model affirms the organization’s crucial role in decision making, and it stresses the importance of the organization’s vital interests, standard operating procedures (SOPs), and capabilities. It emphasizes how the organization sees problems, obtains information, shapes alternatives, assesses costs and benefits, and makes choices.
The elitist actor model of decision making asserts that very powerful individuals or limited groups of influential people, known as elites, make the really significant decisions in politics, and they do so to protect their own self-interest and power.
Finally, the idiosyncratic actor model of decision making recognizes the role of personality in politics. Factors such as the personal intuition, communication skills, charisma, compassion, demagoguery, ruthlessness, or dogmatism of a leader become important to understanding his or her decisions. A decision maker’s role may be destructive, as in the case of leaders like Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, and Saddam Hussein, or it may be creative, as in the case of Winston Churchill, Mohandas Gandhi, and Martin Luther King Jr.

In closing, special thanks again to all of our Armed Forces, the RNC, the Missouri Republican Party, the Illinois Republican Party, the College Republican National Committee, the National Black Republican Association, the Wall Street Journal, KSDK Channel 5, KTVI Fox 2 News, my personal assistant /gf #2 Jeanette (partners in crime), Missy (don’t make me take this to twitter-say yes already), Kevin (you’ll get this…share it with your co-workers), Joe Wilson (thank you), and to all of my Republican Blogs and Bloggers (He’s lying), my Libertarian blogs and bloggers (you know he’s lying), my Democrat blogs and bloggers (seriously; you know he’s lying. Stop trying to socialize America), and to all Political blogs and bloggers: Let your voice be heard. GOP in 2012! If you’re not on the right, you’re wrong. Ready by 2011 to win in 2012! And if John doesn’t get his truck back there’s gonna be an issue. Do Remember to follow STL_Politics on Twitter.

Let’s Debate! Barack Obama’s Healthcare Reform debacle aka What happens when you put Democrats in office pt.4 (Attack of the Republican Blogs)

Today on my Republican blog: Let’s Debate! The debacle of Barack Obama’s Healthcare Reform Plan aka what happens when you put democrats in office.

Once again in yet another example of the dems blaming Republicans for everything, Barack Obama has called for an “honest debate” on his train wreck of a healthcare reform plan.

“This is an issue of vital concern to every American, and I’m glad that so many are engaged, but it should also be an honest debate, not one dominated by willful misrepresentations and outright distortion, spread by the very folks who would benefit the most by keeping things exactly how they are,” Obama said in his weekly radio and internet address.

If I’m not mistaken, that sounds to me that anyone who speaks out against his idea of socialized healthcare is being dishonest. Realistically, anyone who’s studied his vague, confusing plan can easily see that there’s a few fundamental problems that exist within it.

Even Obama backtracked this week on his own plan, angering his liberal base by saying that he would be ok with a plan that lacked a government run-health care option. I thought that was the core basis of this nonsense in the first place?

“This is one idea among many to provide more competition and choice, especially in the many places around the country where just one insurer thoroughly dominates the marketplace,” Obama said. “Let me repeat: It would just be one option: those who prefer their private insurer would be under no obligation to shift to a public plan.”

Wait a minute: this sounds like the typical liberal flip flop and yet another example of democrats confusing the will of the American people for some mysterious Republican conspiracy to block their (socialist) goals.

I can tell honestly tell you that most of the people I’ve talked to who’ve attended any town hall meetings were genuinely concerned about the proposed changes to their healthcare. Yes, there were some individuals who attended meetings just to be disruptive or bring attention to whatever cause they’re trying to promote at the moment, but that was from both sides.

So this ridiculous notion that Republicans are somehow turning the public against this (socialized) healthcare plan is utterly laughable.

I think it has more to do with the fact that most Americans can see thru the cloudy haze of the democrats’ attempt to socialize healthcare in this country (among other things). It’s inefficient, limits choices and hemorrhages taxpayer money. I’m just guessing that people other than Republicans can see that.

Two weeks ago, the Post Office was called a “high risk” federal agency by the Government Accountability Office and the USPS is expected to have a loss of 7 billion dollars this year. And even Obama has said that Fed Ex and UPS offer more efficient service!

So what does this tell us? Maybe that the private sector is much more capable of running a profitable business than the government will ever be. This country was built on the hard work, innovation and determination of individuals; not on bureaucracy. Don’t believe me? When’s the last time you’ve been to the DMV? Do you really want the government running your healthcare?

So with that being said, I’d like to give a special thanks to all of our Armed Forces, the RNC, the Missouri Republican Party, the Illinois Republican Party, the College Republican National Committee, the National Black Republican Association, the Wall Street Journal, KSDK Channel 5, KTVI Fox 2 News, my personal assistant /gf #2 Jeanette (you’re f*cking with my education), Missy (stop it already), DeAngelo (hey jealousy), Kevin (stop the lottery people), Corey (you’re about to be a millionaire), and to all of my Republican Blogs and Bloggers (They’re really giving 2012 to us on a silver platter), my Libertarian blogs and bloggers (what’s next?), my Democrat blogs and bloggers (you’re entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts), and to all Political blogs and bloggers: Let your voice be heard. GOP in 2012! If you’re not on the right, you’re wrong. Ready by 2011 to win in 2012! Cash for clunkers anyone? That’s what happens when you put democrats in office. Follow STL_Politics on Twitter

Come Fly With Me! What happens when you put Democrats in office? pt.3 The TSA’s new rules (Attack of the Republican Blogs)

Today on my Republican blog: Come fly with me: Yet another example of the lunacy that occurs when you elect democrats into office.

To those of you who’ve booked a flight today, you may have noticed that you were asked two questions that were totally unrelated to your travel plans: (1) your birth date and (2) your gender. What this information has to do with purchasing a plane ticket is completely beyond me.

Starting today, many air travelers will be asked for their birth date and gender when making airline reservations.

In the latest bizarre manifestation of the so-called “Secure Flight” program, which switches the responsibility of checking passenger’s identities from a particular airline to the government (socialism), the TSA has said that it has made this decision to create more “public visibility”.

Previously, airlines checked passenger identities against a list of known or suspected terrorists. But to anyone who remembers, the 9/11 commission decided that the government would be better suited to handle this responsibility since they’re the ones who compile the “terror watch lists”.

According to the TSA, government control increases security and reduces the number of people who’re mistaken for terrorists. That part I agree with. But the thought of being required to provide my birth date and gender to a ticket agent over the phone or to an airline’s website just begs the question: what information do they have to check it against?

Since most reservations are made over the phone or online, theoretically they already have my name and my credit card information. So what exactly does my age or my gender have to do with booking a flight? It’s not like its going be printed on my boarding pass. Are we really in the age of big brother?

Hypothetically, if I were to tell the agent that I’m 29 when I’m really 30; does he or she have any way to find out if I’m being honest? If someone named Pat, who’s really a woman, were to say she that she’s a man; would there be any way for the TSA to find out? This is just yet another example of the socialization of the United States, yet another example of the increased bureaucracy we’ve seen from the Obama administration and so on and so on and so on.

To those of you who voted for change: congratulations. The change we received is higher taxes, an attempt at socialized healthcare and now this TSA nonsense. Where does it end? Allow me to tell you: when the new Republican Party takes this country back in 2010 and 2012. I’m all in favor of screening passengers against a list of suspected terrorists; I’d love not to be on a plane with one, but it’s just starting to seem to me that since we’ve had a this administration, our country is starting to look more and more like…well…you know what I was going to say.

Can we please stop this socialism, stop the development of this big brother state, stop the transfer of money from the rich to the not so rich (capital gains taxes anyone?), stop electing people who’ll censor anyone who’s critical of them (how’s your blog doing?), and remember that at the end of the day…we’re all Americans.

Please people- remember that this is 2009. We have very wonderful things (I’m about to get sarcastic) such as the internet, tv, talk radio, newspapers, ect, ect, ect. You have no excuse for not being informed about the agenda of the people that you elect to office. Wake up! You can’t complain if you don’t vote. And you definitely can’t complain if you vote for a democrat.

But in closing, special thanks to all of our Armed Forces, the RNC, the Missouri Republican Party, the Illinois Republican Party, the College Republican National Committee, the National Black Republican Association, the Wall Street Journal, KSDK Channel 5, KTVI Fox 2 News, my personal assistant /gf #2 Jeanette, Missy (is this thing on?), Joy (no really- is this thing on?), Kevin (move to the right), all of my Republican Blogs and Bloggers (They’re really giving 2012 to us on a silver platter), my Libertarian blogs and bloggers (booked a flight today?), my Democrat blogs and bloggers (we’ll be at your town halls!), and to all Political blogs and bloggers: Let your voice be heard. GOP in 2012! If you’re not on the right, you’re wrong. Ready by 2011 to win in 2012! And to all my Illinois residents who enjoy having a spirit every once and a while: how do you like the tax on beer, wine and liquor going up 90% on September 1st? This is what happens when you put democrats in office. Follow STL_Politics on twitter!

What happens when you put Democrats in office? pt.1-Barack Obama’s “Beer Summit” (Attack of the Republican Blogs)

Today on my Republican blog: What happens when you put democrats in office? In yet another example of the president’s current and relentless effort to make americans vote Republican in 2010 and 2012, Barack Obama hosted a so called “beer summit” this Thursday in response to what has become one of the White Houses’ most entertaining clusterf*cks to date. What started as a police officer arresting an (understandably) agitated burglary suspect has now (somehow) became a catalyst for a bizarre debate on race relations in 2009. And thanks to Obama, this has (somehow) now gone global. On Thursday, Pres. Obama brought Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates jr. and Cambridge, Massachusetts police Sgt. Joseph Crowley together to share a few beers on a patio near the Rose Garden to discuss the July 16th arrest of Gates by Crowley that instantly became a national story when the president made a statement that included a remark stating that the Cambridge police department “acted stupidly.” For those that don’t already know the details of this incident; please allow me to explain. A neighbor of Gates happened to see what appeared to be two men attempting to break into a house across the street from her home. As the newly released 911 tapes show, the caller never indicated to police that the suspects were of African-American race. Unfortunately for President Obama, he jumped the gun on this one and made that ill informed remark. It turns out Gates and a taxi driver were trying to break into his home because he was apparently locked out. Now think about this: If you don’t want police investigating reports of home break-ins, then what are you paying taxes for? I know that racial profiling does exist-but not in this case. Well, you can read all about it right now. But first, I have to give my thanks to Philip Elliott from the Associated Press, all of our Armed Forces members, the RNC, the Missouri Republican Party, the Illinois Republican Party, the College Republican National Committee, the National Black Republican Association, the Wall Street Journal, KSDK Channel 5, KTVI Fox 2 News, my personal assistant /gf #2 Jeanette, all of my Republican Blogs and Bloggers (they want us to win), my Libertarian blogs and bloggers (like your tax hikes? Join the right), my Democrat blogs and bloggers (keep giving 2012 to us on a silver platter!), and to all Political blogs and bloggers: Let your voice be heard. GOP in 2012! If you’re not on the right, you’re wrong. Ready by 2011 to win in 2012! Enjoy!

WASHINGTON (AP) – The black scholar and the white police sergeant who arrested him agreed to disagree and promised to talk again, a gracious conclusion to the first round of an eye-opening dialogue on race that allows President Barack Obama to get back to selling his health care plan to skeptical Americans.
After accepting Obama’s invitation to discuss the July 16 incident over a beer Thursday evening at the White House, both Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. and Cambridge, Mass., police Sgt. Joseph Crowley thanked Obama for the cold ones served on a patio near the Rose Garden. Neither they nor the president offered apologies for their roles in the affair.
Obama became embroiled in the debate over whether Crowley was justified in arresting Gates at his Cambridge home when the president told a news conference last week that police had “acted stupidly.” He quickly backtracked in the face of police complaints, acknowledged he should have used different language to express his concerns, and invited the two men to join him for a beer.
“I have always believed that what brings us together is stronger than what pulls us apart,” Obama said after the highly anticipated, 40-minute conversation. “I am confident that has happened here tonight, and I am hopeful that all of us are able to draw this positive lesson from this episode.”
White House officials were content to let Obama’s involvement in the incident end right there. Gates and Crowley said they were eager to get back to work, although both pledged future talks aimed at better understanding.
Gates said he hoped the entire experience would prove to be an “occasion for education, not recrimination,” adding that the burden now rests with him and Crowley to use the opportunity to foster wider awareness of the dangers facing police officers and the fears that some blacks have about racial profiling.
In a nod to all that’s facing Obama, his friend, Gates added, “It turns out that the president just might have a few other things on his plate as well.”
“We agreed to move forward,” Crowley said later when asked whether anything had been solved. “I think what you had today was two gentlemen agreeing to disagree on a particular issue. I don’t think that we spent too much time dwelling on the past. We spent a lot of time discussing the future.”
That’s precisely where the White House wants the public to be looking. Although Obama had invited Crowley and Gates as part of what he called a “teachable moment,” it was barely seen by the masses. The permitted news coverage allowed the public to get the we’ve-come-together photos and video footage that the White House wanted, while keeping the discussion private among the men.
“I noticed this has been called the ‘Beer Summit.’ It’s a clever term, but this is not a summit, guys,” Obama told reporters in the Oval Office before the meeting, trying to lower expectations. “This is three folks having a drink at the end of the day, and hopefully giving people an opportunity to listen to each other. And that’s really all it is. This is not a university seminar.”
The incident that brought them together was well known by the time the three men met, joined by Vice President Joe Biden: Crowley had investigated a potential burglary at Gates’ house and ended up arresting the protesting professor for disorderly conduct. The matter mushroomed into a debate on racial profiling, fueled by Obama’s “acted stupidly” remark.
Vesla Weaver, a political scientist who studies race and criminal justice at the University of Virginia, said she doesn’t fault Obama, the nation’s first black president, for not pushing the conversation to a broader discussion of racial injustice. “He’s in a bit of a difficult spot,” she said, given the nation’s extremely sensitive reactions to matters of race.
Crowley told reporters that Obama served merely as a facilitator.
“He provided the beer. He contributed in a small part,” Crowley said. “He really wanted to bring two people together to try to solve not only a local issue in Cambridge but also what has become a national issue.”
So much of a national issue that Obama’s popularity took a hit, especially among white voters, according to a poll released Thursday.
The survey by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center found that 41 percent of respondents disapproved of Obama’s handling of the Gates arrest, compared with 29 percent who approved. Among whites in general, more disapprove than approve of his comments by a 2-1 margin.

Barack Obama’s Heathcare Reform Plan- Once Again…Let’s Socialize! A Liberal State of Mind pt. 2 (Attack of the Republican Blogs)

Today on my Republican blog: Once again, let’s socialize! (The current state of the Democratic Party aka the Republican version of The Best Week Ever). For a group of individuals who’ve spent the last few years campaigning (and somehow winning) on the promise of making a change in politics, it’s extraordinarily funny to see just how much in disarray the democratic party is in today. From my perspective, it looks like the only change they’re trying to affect is socialism- and they’re not even good at accomplishing that. From nationalizing banks, car manufactures, TARP, and now this health care initiative fiasco? It’s almost like democrats are trying to give us (Republicans) the country back in 2010 and 2012. That’s the exact reason that I keep saying we’ll be ready by 2011 to win in 2012. I just had a gut feeling from the beginning that if democrats got into any form of office in 2008, they would do what liberals always seem to do: find new and innovative ways to ruin America. As evidenced by Barack Obama’s national (socialized) health care plan, it’s apparent that they’re just picking up just where Hillary Clinton left off in the mid 90’s. I’m just assuming that most democrats just enjoy failing at everything they do. Think about it. Whatever city or town or municipality you happen to live in, take a second and ask yourself what ward or district or community has the most crime, the most unemployment, the lowest property values, the worst schools, ect, ect, ect. Now ask yourself this: what party does the mayor, alderman, committee members, county executive, school board members, senators, state representatives, local politicians, ect, ect, ect belong to? If you couldn’t guess- it’s the Democratic Party. It’s so perplexing to me that the very people who claim to be the party of the people (look up democracy), who claim to care about their children and their grandchildren’s future (global warming anyone?) would vote these indecisive, liberal clowns into office at all levels; year, after year, after year. To us (Republicans) it’s really of little consequence now, because we all know that each day that passes by, you’ll have more time to introduce more asinine, trite, nonsensical proposals, propositions, bills, legislation and other comedy that your party thinks will fool the American people. And guess what? Nobody’s buying it. What have we gotten so far with democratic leadership? Higher taxes, a larger government presence and an off kilter attempt at socialization. Wake up people! 2012 is ours and we’re currently organizing this very second for 2010 and 2012. But before I let you read this funny (to Republicans) and accurate article my friend e-mailed me, I have to give my respect and thanks to Erica Werner and Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar from the Associated Press, all of our Armed Forces, the RNC, the Missouri Republican Party, the Illinois Republican Party, the College Republican National Committee, the National Black Republican Association, the Wall Street Journal, KSDK Channel 5, KTVI Fox 2 News, my personal assistant /gf #2 Jeanette, all of my Republican Blogs and Bloggers (I’m still here!), my Libertarian blogs and bloggers (like your tax hikes?), my Democrat blogs and bloggers (keep giving 2012 to us on a silver platter!), and to all Political blogs and bloggers: Let your voice be heard. GOP in 2012! If you’re not on the right, you’re wrong. Ready by 2011 to win in 2012! And visit http://grandoldparty2011.blogspot.com Enjoy!

WASHINGTON – Dissension within Democratic ranks over President Barack Obama’s health care initiative all but paralyzed the House Friday, typifying just how many political land mines are littering the path to enactment.
The Obama White House figured on some pushback from congressional Republicans, but leaders of his own Democratic Party struggled to get things moving. A powerful House committee chairman threatened to force a floor vote to break the impasse within Democratic ranks — a drastic step that could roil the House.
Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., said negotiations with fiscally conservative Democrats on his panel cannot continue indefinitely. But a floor vote would put fellow Democrats in an exposed position, having to cast a vote on a $544-billion upper-income tax increase that the Senate is unlikely to embrace to help pay for covering the millions of uninsured Americans.
The problems on the House side of the Capitol come a day after Senate Democratic leaders announced they would not go ahead as planned with a floor vote before Congress departs for its August recess. Senate Democrats are also divided. While some are negotiating with Republicans, others want to plow ahead on their own.
“We’re going to have to look at perhaps bypassing the (Energy and Commerce) committee because we’ve got to get moving on this legislation,” Waxman said. “I hope we don’t come to that conclusion.”
Two House panels have already passed legislation. Waxman is stymied because seven conservatives on his committee — part of a group called the Blue Dog Democrats — are sticking together.
Negotiations are continuing, but Waxman said he’s running out of patience.
“We’re not going to let them empower the Republicans to control the committee,” he said.
“This can’t be an interminable discussion,” Waxman added. He’s agreed to a study to address why Medicare rates are lower in rural areas in hopes of mollifying the Blue Dogs, many of whom represent small town constituencies. Billions of dollars are potentially at stake. Meanwhile, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said he hoped the talks would end on a positive note and the bill could proceed through Waxman’s committee.
As lawmakers continued to haggle, the White House said Obama will keep working on health care in August even if Congress goes home.
“Nobody in planning meetings decided we should just take August off,” said White House press secretary Robert Gibbs. “For a long time we planned to continue the discussion on the issues that are important, be it the economy, health care … education. That had always in many ways been priced into the scenario.”
Obama envisions legislation that would, for the first time, require all Americans to be insured. A new government insurance program would compete with private insurers, and insurance companies would be barred from excluding people with pre-existing conditions. The goals are to hold down costs and extend coverage to most of the 50 million uninsured. The price tag: $1 trillion-plus over a decade.
Obama met Friday morning at the White House with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont. Reid said Thursday that the panel will push to complete a bill before the Senate breaks Aug. 7. Baucus has been negotiating with the panel’s Republicans in hopes of producing a bipartisan bill.
Finance Committee negotiators are looking at a bill that probably won’t satisfy Democratic liberals. One of their top goals is a new government-sponsored insurance plan, and that was a centerpiece of legislation passed by the Senate’s health committee. But Finance Committee members are looking at nonprofit co-ops instead.
In the House, the Blue Dogs want more done to try to control rising medical costs.
Democratic leaders say the back-and-forth is a normal part of the legislative process, but Republicans are latching on to the disarray in delight. The Republican National Committee has taken to issuing news releases headlined “Chaos” that highlight disagreements within the Democrats’ ranks.
In a Tweeter post on Friday, Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, gave a shout-out to the Democratic dissidents: “bludogs keep barkin.” Grassley is Baucus’ counterpart in the Senate health care negotiations.

Once Again…Let’s Socialize! A Liberal State of Mind pt. 2 (Attack of the Republican Blogs)

Today on my Republican blog: Once again, let’s socialize! (The current state of the Democratic Party aka the Republican version of The Best Week Ever). For a group of individuals who’ve spent the last few years campaigning (and somehow winning) on the promise of making a change in politics, it’s extraordinarily funny to see just how much in disarray the democratic party is in today. From my perspective, it looks like the only change they’re trying to affect is socialism- and they’re not even good at accomplishing that. From nationalizing banks, car manufactures, TARP, and now this health care initiative fiasco? It’s almost like democrats are trying to give us (Republicans) the country back in 2010 and 2012. That’s the exact reason that I keep saying we’ll be ready by 2011 to win in 2012. I just had a gut feeling from the beginning that if democrats got into any form of office in 2008, they would do what liberals always seem to do: find new and innovative ways to ruin America. As evidenced by Barack Obama’s national (socialized) health care plan, it’s apparent that they’re just picking up just where Hillary Clinton left off in the mid 90’s. I’m just assuming that most democrats just enjoy failing at everything they do. Think about it. Whatever city or town or municipality you happen to live in, take a second and ask yourself what ward or district or community has the most crime, the most unemployment, the lowest property values, the worst schools, ect, ect, ect. Now ask yourself this: what party does the mayor, alderman, committee members, county executive, school board members, senators, state representatives, local politicians, ect, ect, ect belong to? If you couldn’t guess- it’s the Democratic Party. It’s so perplexing to me that the very people who claim to be the party of the people (look up democracy), who claim to care about their children and their grandchildren’s future (global warming anyone?) would vote these indecisive, liberal clowns into office at all levels; year, after year, after year. To us (Republicans) it’s really of little consequence now, because we all know that each day that passes by, you’ll have more time to introduce more asinine, trite, nonsensical proposals, propositions, bills, legislation and other comedy that your party thinks will fool the American people. And guess what? Nobody’s buying it. What have we gotten so far with democratic leadership? Higher taxes, a larger government presence and an off kilter attempt at socialization. Wake up people! 2012 is ours and we’re currently organizing this very second for 2010 and 2012. But before I let you read this funny (to Republicans) and accurate article my friend e-mailed me, I have to give my respect and thanks to Erica Werner and Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar from the Associated Press, all of our Armed Forces, the RNC, the Missouri Republican Party, the Illinois Republican Party, the College Republican National Committee, the National Black Republican Association, the Wall Street Journal, KSDK Channel 5, KTVI Fox 2 News, my personal assistant /gf #2 Jeanette, all of my Republican Blogs and Bloggers (I’m still here!), my Libertarian blogs and bloggers (like your tax hikes?), my Democrat blogs and bloggers (keep giving 2012 to us on a silver platter!), and to all Political blogs and bloggers: Let your voice be heard. GOP in 2012! If you’re not on the right, you’re wrong. Ready by 2011 to win in 2012! Enjoy!

WASHINGTON – Dissension within Democratic ranks over President Barack Obama’s health care initiative all but paralyzed the House Friday, typifying just how many political land mines are littering the path to enactment.
The Obama White House figured on some pushback from congressional Republicans, but leaders of his own Democratic Party struggled to get things moving. A powerful House committee chairman threatened to force a floor vote to break the impasse within Democratic ranks — a drastic step that could roil the House.
Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., said negotiations with fiscally conservative Democrats on his panel cannot continue indefinitely. But a floor vote would put fellow Democrats in an exposed position, having to cast a vote on a $544-billion upper-income tax increase that the Senate is unlikely to embrace to help pay for covering the millions of uninsured Americans.
The problems on the House side of the Capitol come a day after Senate Democratic leaders announced they would not go ahead as planned with a floor vote before Congress departs for its August recess. Senate Democrats are also divided. While some are negotiating with Republicans, others want to plow ahead on their own.
“We’re going to have to look at perhaps bypassing the (Energy and Commerce) committee because we’ve got to get moving on this legislation,” Waxman said. “I hope we don’t come to that conclusion.”
Two House panels have already passed legislation. Waxman is stymied because seven conservatives on his committee — part of a group called the Blue Dog Democrats — are sticking together.
Negotiations are continuing, but Waxman said he’s running out of patience.
“We’re not going to let them empower the Republicans to control the committee,” he said.
“This can’t be an interminable discussion,” Waxman added. He’s agreed to a study to address why Medicare rates are lower in rural areas in hopes of mollifying the Blue Dogs, many of whom represent small town constituencies. Billions of dollars are potentially at stake. Meanwhile, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said he hoped the talks would end on a positive note and the bill could proceed through Waxman’s committee.
As lawmakers continued to haggle, the White House said Obama will keep working on health care in August even if Congress goes home.
“Nobody in planning meetings decided we should just take August off,” said White House press secretary Robert Gibbs. “For a long time we planned to continue the discussion on the issues that are important, be it the economy, health care … education. That had always in many ways been priced into the scenario.”
Obama envisions legislation that would, for the first time, require all Americans to be insured. A new government insurance program would compete with private insurers, and insurance companies would be barred from excluding people with pre-existing conditions. The goals are to hold down costs and extend coverage to most of the 50 million uninsured. The price tag: $1 trillion-plus over a decade.
Obama met Friday morning at the White House with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont. Reid said Thursday that the panel will push to complete a bill before the Senate breaks Aug. 7. Baucus has been negotiating with the panel’s Republicans in hopes of producing a bipartisan bill.
Finance Committee negotiators are looking at a bill that probably won’t satisfy Democratic liberals. One of their top goals is a new government-sponsored insurance plan, and that was a centerpiece of legislation passed by the Senate’s health committee. But Finance Committee members are looking at nonprofit co-ops instead.
In the House, the Blue Dogs want more done to try to control rising medical costs.
Democratic leaders say the back-and-forth is a normal part of the legislative process, but Republicans are latching on to the disarray in delight. The Republican National Committee has taken to issuing news releases headlined “Chaos” that highlight disagreements within the Democrats’ ranks.
In a Tweeter post on Friday, Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, gave a shout-out to the Democratic dissidents: “bludogs keep barkin.” Grassley is Baucus’ counterpart in the Senate health care negotiations.

Happy 4th of July! (A Republican State of Mind)

Today on my Republican blog: It’s Independence Day and I just want to give a huge thanks to all of our Armed Forces. As the son of a father who retired from the United States Air Force, I understand the sacrifice, strength and discipline that it takes to be in the military. So on this day, we have to give praise to all those defending our freedom at home and overseas. To all of the Airmen, Soldiers, Marines, Sailors and Reserves: Thank You. Your dedication to this great country will never go unrecognized as long as people like myself are here. So in closing, I’d like to leave you with what we all learned as little children and what our Armed Forces defend every day. Here is the Pledge of Allegiance:

I pledge allegiance
to the flag
of the United States of America
and to the Republic
for which it stands,
one nation,
under God,
indivisible,
with liberty
and justice for all.

So before I go, I’d like to give a very special thanks to our military (what’s up James; told you I’d mention your name!), the RNC, the Missouri Republican Party, the Illinois Republican Party, the College Republican National Committee, the National Black Republican Association, the Wall Street Journal, KSDK Channel 5, and KTVI Fox 2 News. To all of my Republican Blogs and Bloggers (happy 4th), my Libertarian blogs and bloggers (happy 4th), my Democrat blogs and bloggers (read this again), and to all Political blogs and bloggers: Let your voice be heard. GOP in 2012! If you’re not on the right, you’re wrong. Ready by 2011 to win in 2012! And a Happy 4th of July to everyone! Fly your flags people!

Happy Fathers Day! (Attack of the Republican Blogs)

Today on my Republican Blog: Happy Fathers Day! I owe the other half of my Republican state of mind to my dad. He’s always done what ever was necessary to provide for his family, never backed down from anything and always supported me (even thong I haven’t been the best son at times), so to my father: I love you. So before I go, I’d like to give a special thanks to my dad (lets go fishing), the RNC, the Missouri Republican Party, the Illinois Republican Party, the College Republican National Committee, the National Black Republican Association, the Wall Street Journal, KSDK Channel 5, and KTVI Fox 2 News. To all of my Republican Blogs and Bloggers (embrace the future of our party), my Libertarian blogs and bloggers, my Democrat blogs and bloggers (write your dad a thank you post; we already did it), and to all Political blogs and bloggers: Let your voice be heard. GOP in 2012! If you’re not on the right, you’re wrong. Ready by 2011 to win in 2012! Twitter me!

Let’s Socialize! A Liberal State of Mind (Attack of the Republican Blogs)

Today on my Republican blog: Let’s socialize! As I’ve been watching this NBC special on Barack Obama, I came to realize one thing: Liberals truly don’t own dictionaries. I know I’ve said it before, but that was just speculation and my own personal opinion. Now I know this to be factual. Don’t believe me? To all of my democrat friends (Republicans already know this) allow me to give you the definition of the word socialism. Does any of this sound familiar?

so-cial-ism
–noun
1. A theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
2. Procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
3. (In Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.

Think about it. Well, that’s my diction lesson for tonight. So before I go, I’d like to give a special thanks to the RNC, the Missouri Republican Party, the Illinois Republican Party, the College Republican National Committee, the National Black Republican Association, the Wall Street Journal, KSDK Channel 5, and KTVI Fox 2 News. To all of my Republican Blogs and Bloggers (embrace the future of our party), my Libertarian blogs and bloggers, my Democrat blogs and bloggers (google Merriam-Webster), and to all Political blogs and bloggers: Let your voice be heard. GOP in 2012! If you’re not on the right, you’re wrong. Ready by 2011 to win in 2012! Enjoy.

Rewind! The Genius of Leo Strauss: A Republican State of Mind (Attack of the Republican Blogs)

Today on my Republican blog: The genius of Leo Strauss. This is a very special treat for all of my Republicans. I know most of you are already well versed in the works of Leo Strauss and politics, so I decided to post this for all of the confused liberals who either misrepresent Leo Strauss’s teachings on purpose or just out of sheer ignorance. It’s an article from the June 7, 2003 edition of the New York Times. And guess who wrote it? Jenny Strauss Clay. I would think she would know her father a little better than anyone else. Just a bit of advice to my left leaning friends: go to Borders or get a library card and read one of Strauss’s books. I suggest you start with Natural Right and History. I know almost all of it’s going to go over your head at first, but don’t be discouraged. Read it again. And then read it again and again and again until it starts to make sense to you. And once you come to the realization that everything you’ve always believed in is false…that’s when the healing starts. At that point, the Republican Party won’t look so bad to you anymore. In closing, I’d like to give a special thanks to the RNC, the Missouri Republican Party, the Illinois Republican Party, the College Republican National Committee, the Wall Street Journal, KSDK Channel 5 and KTVI Fox 2 News. To all of my Republicans and Republican blogs and bloggers, my Libertarians and Libertarian blogs and bloggers, my Democrats and Democratic blogs and bloggers (come to the light), and to all Political blogs and bloggers: Let your voice be heard. GOP in 2012! Enjoy

June 7, 2003
The Real Leo Strauss
By Jenny Strauss Clay
Recent news articles have portrayed my father, Leo Strauss, as the mastermind behind the neoconservative ideologues who control United States foreign policy. He reaches out from his 30-year-old grave, we are told, to direct a ”cabal” (a word with distinct anti-Semitic overtones) of Bush administration figures hoping to subject the American people to rule by a ruthless elite. I do not recognize the Leo Strauss presented in these articles.
My father was not a politician. He taught political theory, primarily at the University of Chicago. He was a conservative insofar as he did not think that change is necessarily change for the better.
Leo Strauss believed in the intrinsic dignity of the political. He believed in and defended liberal democracy; although he was not blind to its flaws, he felt it was the best form of government that could be realized, ”the last best hope.” He was an enemy of any regime that aspired to global domination. He despised utopianism — in our time, Nazism and Communism — which is predicated on the denial of a fundamental and even noble feature of human nature: love of one’s own. His heroes were Churchill and Lincoln. He was not an observant Jew, but he loved the Jewish people and he saw the establishment of Israel as essential to their survival.
To me, what characterized him above all else was his total lack of vanity and self-importance. As a result, he had no interest in honors within the academy, and was completely unsuited to political ambition. His own earliest passion, he confessed, was to spend his life raising rabbits (Flemish Giants) and reading Plato.
He was first and foremost a teacher. He did not seek to mold people in his own image. Rather, he was devoted to helping young people see the world as it is, in all its misery and splendor. The objects of his teaching were the Great Books, those works generally recognized as the foundation of a liberal education. But that alone was not a sufficient reason for reading them.
He began where good teachers should begin, from his students’ received opinions, in order to scrutinize their foundation. At that time, as is still true today, academia leaned to the left; hence such questioning required an examination of the left’s tenets. Had the prevailing beliefs been different, they too would have been subject to his skeptical inquiry.
Among the received opinions of the time was an unquestioned faith in progress and science combined with a queasiness regarding any kind of moral judgment, or ”relativism.” Many young people were confused, without a compass, with nothing substantial to admire. My father’s turning them to the Great Books was thus motivated not merely by aesthetic or antiquarian interest, but by a search for an understanding of mankind’s present predicament: what were its sources and what, if any, were the alternatives? The latter he found in the writings of the ancient Greeks.
Furthermore, he insistently confronted his students with the question of the ”good life.” For him, the choice boiled down to the life in accordance with Revelation or the life according to Reason — Jerusalem versus Athens. The vitality of Western tradition, he felt, lay in the invigorating tension between the two.
My father saw reading not as a passive exercise but as taking part in an active dialogue with the great minds of the past. One had to read with great care, great respect, and try, as he always said, to ”understand the author as he understood himself.” Today this task, admittedly difficult and demanding, is dismissed in fashionable academia as impossible. Rather, we are told, each reader inevitably constructs his own text over which the author has no control, and the writer’s intentions are irrelevant.
The fact is that Leo Strauss also recognized a multiplicity of readers, but he had enough faith in his authors to assume that they, too, recognized that they would have a diverse readership. Some of their readers, the ancients realized, would want only to find their own views and prejudices confirmed; others might be willing to open themselves to new, perhaps unconventional or unpopular, ideas. I personally think my father’s rediscovery of the art of writing for different kinds of readers will be his most lasting legacy.
Although I was never a student of my father’s, I sat in on a class of his in the 1960′s; I think it was on Xenophon’s ”Cyropaedia.” He was a small, unprepossessing and, truth be told, ugly man (daughters are their parents’ worst critics), with none of the charisma that one associates with ”great teachers.” And yet there was something utterly charming. One of the students would read little chunks of the text, and my father would comment and call for discussion. What marked this class was a combination of an engagement with questions of the highest seriousness (in this case, what is the best form of government) with the laughter of intellectual play.
It was magic. If only the truth had the power to make the misrepresentations of his achievement vanish like smoke and dust.

Remember this? March(ing) on: Rolling, Rolling, Roland Burris (Originaly posted 03-02-09)

Today on my Republican Blog: I’m not certain what they’ve been putting in the water of Chicago politicians all these years; but I’ve gotta try it. It apparently makes you immune to all reality and common sense. Case in point: Roland Burris’s continuing refusal to step down from the senate seat that we all know he bought and subsequently lied about buying. As I’ve said before on previous posts: do not accept this appointment because if you do, no one will take anything you do in the senate seriously and you’ll just be embarrassing yourself. Well, back to the future(cast). Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn, also a dem, has just said that he’s giving Burris two weeks to step down before he urges Illinois lawmakers to consider a special election. I hate to say I told you so…but I told you so. This train wreck of a situation has us all now watching Burris holding press conferences and reading his ridiculous news releases; all in his attempt to disprove what we now know has just been confirmed. Mr. Burris, I don’t know if you read the news, but Illinois state attorney general, Lisa Madigan (D), issued an opinion stating that a special election will probably happen. And by the way, Alexi Giannoulias (Illinois state treasurer), U.S. Reps Mark Kirk and Peter Roskam, and also William Daley (the brother of the mayor), are all waiting to attack. The piranhas are starting to taste blood in the water; and they’re ready to bite. Stop this nonsense and just resign. And to the people of Illinois: when this special election is held, could you please stop your historic addiction to democrats ruining your state and vote Republican? So to all my Republican blogs and bloggers, my Libertarian blogs and blogger, and especially my Democrat blogs and bloggers (told you so): let your voice be heard. GOP in 2012! See you in a minute!

Happy Mother’s Day! A Republican State of Mind (Attack of the Republican Blogs)

Today on my Republican Blog: Happy Mother’s Day! To all of the mothers out there, I’d just like to take a moment to say happy mother’s day. To be honest, most of us don’t truly appreciate the sacrifices our mothers have made in their lives to make us the individuals that we are today. We’ve all gone through the different stages of needing our mothers (as a baby) to thinking we know everything (as a teenager); to eventually needing your mothers help and advise at times (as an adult). So to all mothers reading this: enjoy your day! And to my mother: I know I haven’t been the best son at all times, but I love you for always supporting me and instilling in me the value of taking care of family first. And that people, is a Republican state of mind. In closing, I’d like to give a special thanks to the RNC, the Missouri Republican Party, the Illinois Republican Party, the College Republican National Committee, the National Black Republican Association, the Wall Street Journal, KSDK Channel 5, and KTVI Fox 2 News. To all of my Republican Blogs and Bloggers, my Libertarian blogs and bloggers, my Democrat blogs and bloggers (apologize to your mothers), and to all Political blogs and bloggers: Let your voice be heard. GOP in 2012! If you’re not on the right, you’re wrong. And I love you Mom!

Another Oldie but Goodie: Jealousy (A Liberal State of Mind pt.3 from 03-16-09)

Today on my Republican blog: Jealousy. It seems to be a strong liberal trait these days. For all of you libs that don’t own dictionaries (I know most of you obviously don’t), allow me to define it for you:

1. Jealous resentment against a rival, a person enjoying success or advantage, etc., or against another’s success or advantage itself.

2. Mental uneasiness from suspicion or fear of rivalry, unfaithfulness, etc., as in love or aims.

3. Vigilance in maintaining or guarding something.

4. A jealous feeling, disposition, state, or mood.

Sound familiar? I’ve noticed a lot of that sentiment in the democratic party lately. And what’s so confusing to me is the fact that you guys are actually in control right now. Is the Obama honeymoon period over? Are you starting to realize that in 2010 you may not fare well? Are you now feeling the pinch of the new tax hikes, let alone whatever new tax raises this administration has planned for the next four years that no one even knows about yet? Are you scared that in 2012 the new Republican Party will take back our government? Is it because you can see and hear us gearing up to destroy you? Well, whatever the reason, stop with all the jealousy- it’s a weak emotion. Talk sh*t about how Rush Limbaugh runs our party all you want, try to pretend like Michael Steele doesn’t exist all you want, pretend like higher taxes are a good thing all you want; but you know what’s going to happen in a few years. We’re building a newer, younger GOP and we’re coming to get you. Enjoy your moment in the sun, but just know we see the green in your eyes. So to all my Republican political blogs and bloggers, to all my Libertarian political blogs and bloggers, and to all my Democrat political blogs and bloggers (your ship is slowly sinking): Let your voice be heard. GOP in 2012! See you later.

Rewind! Don’t Argue with (Liberal Democrat) Fools: A Republican State of Mind pt.2

Today on my Republican blog: A wise man once told me not to argue with fools; because from a distance, no one can tell who is who. This is entirely directed at my liberal friends (my Republican friends already know this concept), so libs pay attention. When you liberal democrats try to debate your trite and vapid points, have you ever noticed that you consistently exhibit the same behaviorisms and tactics when you come to the realization that you’ve lost? Allow me to show you the fallacies of logic and rhetoric. Does any of this sound familiar?

Common fallacies of logic and rhetoric:
• Ad hominem – attacking the arguer and not the argument.
• Argument from “authority”.
• Argument from adverse consequences (putting pressure on the decision maker by pointing out dire consequences of an “unfavourable” decision).
• Appeal to ignorance (absence of evidence is not evidence of absence).
• Special pleading (typically referring to god’s will).
• Begging the question (assuming an answer in the way the question is phrased).
• Observational selection (counting the hits and forgetting the misses).
• Statistics of small numbers (such as drawing conclusions from inadequate sample sizes).
• Misunderstanding the nature of statistics (President Eisenhower expressing astonishment and alarm on discovering that fully half of all Americans have below average intelligence!)
• Inconsistency (e.g. military expenditures based on worst case scenarios but scientific projections on environmental dangers thriftily ignored because they are not “proved”).
• Non sequitur – “it does not follow” – the logic falls down.
• Post hoc, ergo propter hoc – “it happened after so it was caused by” – confusion of cause and effect.
• Meaningless question (“what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?).
• Excluded middle -considering only the two extremes in a range of possibilities (making the “other side” look worse than it really is).
• Short-term v. long-term – a subset of excluded middle (“why pursue fundamental science when we have so huge a budget deficit?”).
• Slippery slope – a subset of excluded middle -unwarranted extrapolation of the effects (give an inch and they will take a mile).
• Confusion of correlation and causation.
• Straw man – caricaturing (or stereotyping) a position to make it easier to attack.
• Suppressed evidence or half-truths.
• Weasel words – for example, use of euphemisms for war such as “police action” to get around limitations on Presidential powers. “An important art of politicians is to find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the public”.

These are all rules that we learned as children (on the right) of how to detect when you’ve won a debate or an argument against a liberal. So yes, if we (on the right) come off as a little bit arrogant or dismissive, it’s only because we know that your point and premise are both invalid and not even worth discussing. Why would we continue have a discourse with you? It’s pointless! Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts. Somehow people on the left always seem to reverse that actuality. Sorry for this post being so short, but I just had to bring you liberal democrats back to reality and remind my Republican friends of why it’s so frustrating talking to anyone on the left. In closing, I’d like to give a special thanks to the RNC, the Missouri Republican Party, the Illinois Republican Party, the College Republican National Committee, the National Black Republican Association, the Wall Street Journal, KSDK Channel 5, and KTVI Fox 2 News. To all of my Republican Blogs and Bloggers, my Libertarian blogs and bloggers, my Democrat blogs and bloggers (stop it already), and to all Political blogs and bloggers: Let your voice be heard. GOP in 2012! If you’re not on the right, you’re wrong.

Don’t Argue with (Liberal Democrat) Fools: A Republican State of Mind pt.2

Today on my Republican blog: A wise man once told me not to argue with fools; because from a distance, no one can tell who is who. This is entirely directed at my liberal friends (my Republican friends already know this concept), so libs pay attention. When you liberal democrats try to debate your trite and vapid points, have you ever noticed that you consistently exhibit the same behaviorisms and tactics when you come to the realization that you’ve lost? Allow me to show you the fallacies of logic and rhetoric. Does any of this sound familiar?

Common fallacies of logic and rhetoric:
• Ad hominem – attacking the arguer and not the argument.
• Argument from “authority”.
• Argument from adverse consequences (putting pressure on the decision maker by pointing out dire consequences of an “unfavourable” decision).
• Appeal to ignorance (absence of evidence is not evidence of absence).
• Special pleading (typically referring to god’s will).
• Begging the question (assuming an answer in the way the question is phrased).
• Observational selection (counting the hits and forgetting the misses).
• Statistics of small numbers (such as drawing conclusions from inadequate sample sizes).
• Misunderstanding the nature of statistics (President Eisenhower expressing astonishment and alarm on discovering that fully half of all Americans have below average intelligence!)
• Inconsistency (e.g. military expenditures based on worst case scenarios but scientific projections on environmental dangers thriftily ignored because they are not “proved”).
• Non sequitur – “it does not follow” – the logic falls down.
• Post hoc, ergo propter hoc – “it happened after so it was caused by” – confusion of cause and effect.
• Meaningless question (“what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?).
• Excluded middle -considering only the two extremes in a range of possibilities (making the “other side” look worse than it really is).
• Short-term v. long-term – a subset of excluded middle (“why pursue fundamental science when we have so huge a budget deficit?”).
• Slippery slope – a subset of excluded middle -unwarranted extrapolation of the effects (give an inch and they will take a mile).
• Confusion of correlation and causation.
• Straw man – caricaturing (or stereotyping) a position to make it easier to attack.
• Suppressed evidence or half-truths.
• Weasel words – for example, use of euphemisms for war such as “police action” to get around limitations on Presidential powers. “An important art of politicians is to find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the public”.

These are all rules that we learned as children (on the right) of how to detect when you’ve won a debate or an argument against a liberal. So yes, if we (on the right) come off as a little bit arrogant or dismissive, it’s only because we know that your point and premise are both invalid and not even worth discussing. Why would we continue have a discourse with you? It’s pointless! Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts. Somehow people on the left always seem to reverse that actuality. Sorry for this post being so short, but I just had to bring you liberal democrats back to reality and remind my Republican friends of why it’s so frustrating talking to anyone on the left. In closing, I’d like to give a special thanks to the RNC, the Missouri Republican Party, the Illinois Republican Party, the College Republican National Committee, the National Black Republican Association, the Wall Street Journal, KSDK Channel 5, and KTVI Fox 2 News. To all of my Republican Blogs and Bloggers, my Libertarian blogs and bloggers, my Democrat blogs and bloggers (stop it already), and to all Political blogs and bloggers: Let your voice be heard. GOP in 2012! If you’re not on the right, you’re wrong.

Why Do Black Folks Join Conservatives? Once Again…Attack of the Republican Blogs

Today on my Republican blog: “Why don’t black folks join conservatives?” This is in response to a blog that posed this very question (verbatim) earlier today. I’m going to keep this post very succinct, since I’m coming to realize that a liberal state of mind overrides all facts and logic. But anyway, why do African-Americans join the Republican Party? One word: Dixiecrats. Start there and work backwards. As I’ve said before, feel free to get a library card or go to a bookstore and do your history. As a matter of fact, since said libs have their own blogs, I’m quite certain they must have some form of computer access- use it. Google will help you out a lot. And by the way, Martin Luther King jr. was a Republican. Do your research African-American Democrats! And also visit the National Black Republican Association at http://www.nbra.info. So while it’s not a surprise that a liberal state of mind is still prevalent, hopefully you democrats will eventually move to the right. You’re really Republicans…you just don’t know it yet. With that said, I’d like to give a special thanks to the RNC, the Missouri Republican Party, the Illinois Republican Party, the College Republican National Committee, the National Black Republican Association, the Wall Street Journal, KSDK Channel 5, and KTVI Fox 2 News. To all of my Republican Blogs and Bloggers, my Libertarian blogs and bloggers, my Democrat blogs and bloggers (stop it already), and to all Political blogs and bloggers: Let your voice be heard. GOP in 2012! And read more books people!