Obama





OK, the TV networks have drawn their lines - And unfairly I might add. The American electorate are exposed to a disproportionate and unfair coverage of the two presumptive nominees of the office of President of the United States. The bottom line - Obama does not need all the money given to the campaign for campaign ads, he has been getting enormous amounts of FREE media coverage from the major networks. What does this tell us regarding our media, and what fills the eyes, ears, and hearts of our American population? Let me fill you in.

In communist nations, their populations hear and see what has been decided they hear and see. In dictatorships which claim some semblance of democracy by allowing elections, they are often biased, allowing little to NO input as members of a nation cast their ballot.

Is this what our nation has come to? The American electorate has little exposure to our Republican candidate, John S. McCain, a man of character, dignity, credibility; and a Patriot who loves our beloved nation more than himself. Yet the liberal media has chosen to give the Democratic candidate the brunt of exposure. I challenge the media, however, this: If you choose to cover this Democratic candidate, Obama, at least be fair and balanced in your coverage. You can NOT erase TWENTY (20) years of a church Obama held dear to him which preached hate - HATE against the United States. Hate against whites. Pure and adulterated hate against anyone, and any institution and nation, including our own beloved United States of America which was not in agreement with their doctrine.  read more »









Happy 4th of July to all Americans. This Country proves that Protest and Democracy works. It's not perfect but its the best in the world.
I spend this 4th of July with my family but I am also protesting. That is what the founding fathers were doing when they decided to sign the Declaration of Independence. They fought for what they wanted which was freedom.
I find myself in the same position. I find myself rebelling against my Party which told me I was no longer needed. They told me I was not the type of person they wanted in their party. They told me I was uneducated or white or a female. They told me I was poor or blue collar. They told me to stay home if I didn't like the fact that the Nominee was going to be selected not elected. They did not listen to our voices of protest and ignored our votes. They backed their man for whatever reason.
I own my vote and from now on both Political Parties and all candidates for whatever office they seek are going to have to work for my vote. They are going to have to be politically courageous and actually stand for something.
I no longer wished to be threatened with Roe vs Wade. I am not a one issue person and am insulted that anyone would assume I am.
I may not agree with Republicans on most issue I will say I have never witnessed the Republicans stealing an election from another Republican. Could this be why the Democrats hardly ever win.
I spend this fourth a little different then I have ever done so before but Protest is the American way.









When will the people of Pennsylvania finally have the opportunity to meet and greet John McCain without putting up or raising thousands upon thousands of dollars? Where is the grass roots campaign of 2000 that worked so well, and had the passion which is lacking in 2008.

A PA County GOP Committee Chairman succinctly answered this question after he received an email that county McCain supporters were to donate $50.00 a piece in the hopes of reaching the $1,000 mark in order to buy "Yard Signs!!??" The Chairman went on to say that in larger counties where there are fat cats who can donate large sums, big money is lacking in smaller rural counties such as his own. This gentlemen stated that they relied on having yard signs to hand out at summer county events, and that his particular county yards would be void of John McCain signs due to the ludicrous request from the McCain Campaign.  read more »









Hi everyone. I just wanted to call to your attention Larry Johnson's website(NoQuarterUSA.net) that has an incredible amount of oppo-research on Obama. His recitation of Obama's rise and connections in Chicago is incredibly thorough. Type in "Ayers"in the search box in his archives and be sure click on the links that are liberally scattered through out his report. His documentation and verification is scholarly at a minimum.

Ther are alot of dem's out there that are repulsed by thought of Obama as POTUS. As an Independent voter, I think the rep's need callaborate with many in of HRC's supporters that feel completely dis-enfrachised and betrayed the DNC and it's "Rules and Bylaws Committee"

McCain or the Abyss, you decide!









In a year where Republicans in general look to be in trouble, it is absolutely amazing to me that the Democrats are going to nominate Barack Obama. Given Hillary's latest string of wins (an ARG poll also shows her winning South Dakota and close in Montana, which would be really embarassing for Obama) and the decision about delegates, Hillary is very close to winning the popular vote under all of the scenarios -- even the one that gives the uncommitted votes in Michigan to Obama.

Given that, and the fact Hillary has done so well in all the swing states, it is simply amazing to me-- and funny, in some ways -- that the Democrat superdelegates seem hell bent on nominating Obama, who I think will prove to be a disaster for them -- even though they have an out with the popular vote thing.

The pastor problems are issues...add that to the Michelle Obama video incident, and obama's extreme positions on the war, I think McCain will end up winning by a pretty solid electoral margin. If Hillary were the nominee, I would say we were in trouble. I have to say that though I disagree with her, Hillary has come across as a much more reasonable figure over time ... and would probably beat McCain in the general. Obama, however, I think will be this year's Michael Dukakis.

Not saying Obama isn't formidable -- he is a great campaigner -- but we are quite fortunate that the Dems are going down that road.









Well Nancy, I would suggest you have quite a task at hand - being the "great uniter." The question is where do you start? The media's question to you is, "How to unite the party?" More specifically, my question to you is, "How do you unite the electorate?"

Hillary has blown the cover and roof off the DNC Rules Committee. If things were going a little better for her, she may not have, but this is her last stand. Now your major problem, Nancy, is to explain all this to your electorate - your electorate who braved the elements to make this 2008 primary season one of the highest voter turnout in recent history. You would have to explain to confused and baffled American voters where in the constitution it gives the DNC Rules Committee the authority to deny Florida and Michigan voters the right to have their delegates seated at the convention. Denied because they had to have their knuckles smacked hard for setting their primary dates when they did.

But you can assure them that your DNC Rules Committee split the baby on Saturday, May 31, 2008. Never mind the electoral vote - that never really counted anyway, did it? No, somehow the DNC Rules Committee found a way to "almost" split the delegates in both states - EVEN a state in which Obama's name was not on the ballot, Michigan.  read more »









I operate on the premise, that: 'All things work together for good for those of us who love God, for those of us who are called according to his purpose.'

What is important and critical to the success or failure in Iraq or for a John McCain candidacy is in finding the right Vice Presidential candidate to accommodate him.

Someone that has proven spiritual attributes.

I am not talking about someone who thinks he is 'blessed' by name, but of someone who has demonstrated in his life some positive prophetic characteristics.

I am not talking about someone who has been blessed with a million dollars, won a national lottery or 20 elections.

This is the challenge: Find the reverse of what the 'children of mammon' look for in a political candidate, and the country will have found the right person or persons to compliment the candidacy of John McCain.  read more »







The Mad Irish Man's Conservative Consortium

Campaign Responds . . .

“There should be no confusion, John McCain has always believed that serious engagement would require mandatory conditions and Hamas must change itself fundamentally – renounce violence, abandon its goal of eradicating Israel and accept a two state solution. John McCain’s position is clear and has always been clear, the President of the United States should not unconditionally meet with leaders of Iran, Hamas or Hezbollah. Barack Obama has made his position equally clear, and has pledged to meet unconditionally with Iran’s leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the leaders of other rogue regimes, which shows incredibly dangerous and weak judgment.” ---Tucker Bounds, spokesman John McCain 2008 After The Palestinian Election, John McCain Said In A Statement That "Hamas Is Not A Partner For Peace So Long As They Advocate The Overthrow Of Israel." "In the wake of yesterday's Palestinian elections, Hamas must change itself fundamentally - renounce violence, abandon its goal of eradicating Israel and accept the two-state solution. These elections are evidence that democracy is indeed spreading in the Middle East, but Hamas is not a partner for peace so long as they advocate the overthrow of Israel." (Office Of U.S. Senator John McCain, "Sen. McCain Reacts To Palestinian Election," Press Release, 1/26/06) From Davos, John McCain Says Hamas Must Renounce Its Commitment To The Extinction Of The State Of Israel. CNN'S BETTY NGUYEN: " All right, let's shift over to the global front. The Bush administration is reviewing all aspects of U.S. aid to the Palestinians now that Hamas has won the elections. And I do have to quote you here. A State Department spokesman did say this: 'To be very clear' – and I'm quoting now – 'we do not provide money to terrorist organizations.' What does this do to the U.S. relationship with the Palestinians?" MCCAIN: "Well, hopefully, that Hamas now that they are going to govern, will be motivated to renounce this commitment to the extinction of the state of Israel. Then we can do business again, we can resume aid, we can resume the peace process." (CNN's "Saturday Morning News," 1/28/06) · CNN's Suzanne Malveaux: "Straight Talk For Hamas By U.S. Senator John McCain." SEN. JOHN MCCAIN: "Hopefully that Hamas, now that they are going to govern, will be motivated to renounce this commitment to the extinction of the State of Israel. Then we can do business again." CNN'S SUZANNE MALVEAUX: "Straight talk for Hamas by U.S. Senator John McCain." (CNN's "Live Saturday," 1/28/06)

Shared with the My Fellow McCain Victory 08 Bloggers at
84 Rules,Adam J Schmidt,Agkyra,Agora politikos,Ahwatukee Musings,America For John McCain,Americas Best Choice,Armchair Everything,ARRA News Service,Asian Americans For McCain,Asymmetric,AzaMatterofact,Basils Blog,
Blogs For John McCain's Victory,Blogs For Victory,Blogs4McCain,
Blue And New,Blue Grass Red State,Blue Star Chronicles,Born Again Redneck,Brainster,BroadSideoftheBarn,But I Am A Liberal,California For McCain,Campaign2008VictoryA,Catskill commentator,Chas' compilation,coleCurtis-The McCain Monitor,College Republican Federation of Virginia,Conservative For Change,Curtis Schweitzer,DC Republican,Deomocrats & MediaSpin Vs. Facts,Democrats For Sale,Election 2008,Election Night HQ,Elyery Landavazo,EvangelicalsForMcCain,Falling Panda,Faultline USA,Frog Blog Of Louis la Vache,Generation X Dad,Georgians For McCain,GOP Convention Blog,Hoosiers4McCain,How I Lost My Heart,Il rumore Dei mie Venti-RDM20,Independent Jim,Iraqi For John McCain,Johnny Miller blog,Lee Volger's Political Points,Les Recettes de Louis la Vache,Liberal Republican,Liberalstein Political Limozeen,Libertas01,
M-J in the Republic,MacPac08,The Mad Irish Man's Conservative Consortium,The Mad Irish Man On TownHall.com,
Marathon Pundit,Mass For McCain,McCain Blogette,McCain Blogger Resources,McCain Blogs,McCain Jewish Coalition of Illinois,McCain Mondays,McCain Online Volunteer,McCain States,McCain Talk,McCain Volunteer,McCainHQ08 Yahoo Group,McCainiac,McCainocrats,McCainVictory08,Metaxupolis,
Michael Johns,Missourians for McCain,Moms for McCain,My vast right wing conspiracy,MyMcCainBlog,Myth Debunker,New Jersey for John McCain,New Mexico for John McCain,NH4McCAIN,NJ for McCain,NY for McCain,Official McCain Blog,Ohio for John McCain,Oklahoma for John McCain,Only Electable Conservative,PA Educators for McCain,Pajama Pack,Pardon My French,Partisan American,Pennsylvania for John McCain,Pink Flamingo,Pirate's Cove,Politico Mafioso,Porter County Politics,Primary Cuts,Provocateur,Purple People Vote,Real World Libertarian,Reality Bytes,Right Wing Nation,Right Wing Sparkle,Rudy Supporters for McCain Blog,Rudy Supporters for McCain Yahoo Group,San Francisco Bay Daily Photo,Sanity 102,StandUpForMcCain,Steve Maloney GOP,Thought Stew,Todd Biggs,Tree Hugging Republican,Unite McCain Campaign,Vets 4 McCain,Vets For McCain,Virginia 4 McCain,Voting McCain 08,watersblogged!,Why McCain?,Wisconsin4McCain,With Both HandsSheridan Folger,









When Americans are deciding this November who should be the next President of our great nation there are many things to look at. For me one of the most important things is what kind of justices they will nominate for the Supreme Court. One can make a good argument that the 9 people on the court are the most powerful in our nation, they can strike down laws or actions by any other branch both federal and state. There are currently 6 Justices that are 68 or older, with one being 88 years old, so the next President will likely nominate at least 1 Justice to the highest court in the land. So lets look at what the two presumptive nominees have said regarding judicial appointments. Senator McCain said in a speech on May 6th, "I will look for accomplished men and women with a proven record of excellence in the law, and a proven commitment to judicial restraint. I will look for people in the cast of John Roberts, Samuel Alito, and my friend the late William Rehnquist -- jurists of the highest caliber who know their own minds, and know the law, and know the difference. My nominees will understand that there are clear limits to the scope of judicial power, and clear limits to the scope of federal power. They will be men and women of experience and wisdom, and the humility that comes with both. They will do their work with impartiality, honor, and humanity, with an alert conscience, immune to flattery and fashionable theory, and faithful in all things to the Constitution of the United States." On the other hand Senator Obama has said that in order for a justice to be acceptable he has to share "one's deepest values, one's core concerns, one's broader perspectives on how the world works, and the depth and breadth of one's empathy." The things Senator Obama looks for would make sense if you were selecting a therapist , but not a Supreme Court Justice. One's empathy is completely irrelevant to interpreting the law. The Supreme Court is supposed to be impartial and not inject one's personal feelings into cases, but strictly interpret the law. You would think since Obama graduated from Harvard Law School and was a Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School he would know that empathy isn't relevant but you would be wrong. Senator Obama is just like all other liberals when is comes to the courts, they want to use it as a tool to advance agendas they can't through normal democratic means, I'll give an example. Let's take probably the most hot button issue that has come before the court, abortion. The famous case Roe v. Wade made it so that states couldn't outlaw abortion, if you support abortions then you would probably say that's good, but the court doesn't decided what is good. The question of the constitutionality of abortion isn't a question of whether it's moral or pragmatic but whether there is a constitutional right to have an abortion. Liberal justices have invented a right of abortion that is found nowhere in the constitutional because they think a women should have the right to choose. The flaw in this logic lies in the fact that we live in a democracy where what is or isn't moral or pragmatic isn't decided by 9 people in black robes, but by the people through elected representatives. In Roe v. Wade the legislature of the state of Texas had decided they didn't want abortion, but the Supreme Court took the power of the people to decided away. If there were votes in each state to decide whether the people wanted abortion to be legal or not some states would want it legal others would not, and that is democracy. Instead of this method, which is the method the founders put in our constitution, Obama wants to appoint justices who find rights in the "penumbras" of other provisions, like the court did in Griswald v. Connecticut. The choice in November will be a clear one between Senator McCain's vision of a Supreme Court which lets the people decide ambiguous moral questions and just simply interprets the law, or Senator Obama's vision of a Supreme Court which creates rights it likes (abortion, privacy ect.) and dismisses rights it doesn't (gun, property ect.). In the next presidential term, with liberal justices Ruth Ginsburg and John Stevens turning 79 and 92 respectively, there is a real opportunity to have 6 solid originalist justices on the court. To me on the issue of justices there is no question, John McCain is the right choice.








Sen. John McCain made a major address today on the kind of judges he would nominate if elected President. McCain made it clear he believes in a conservative, strict constructionist philosophy on the order of Chief Justice John Roberts, and Justice Samuel Alito. You can hear a key portion of McCain's remarks in the video above.

Read the Full Text of Sen. McCain's Speech

NOTE: Notice Sen. McCain was accompanied to Wake Forest for the speech by Sen. Fred Thompson, a strong proponent of the Strict Constructionist philosophy for Judges.

Republican presidential candidate John McCain, seeking to shore up conservative support, vowed to model his Supreme Court appointees after George W. Bush's and accused his Democratic opponents of favoring ``activist'' judges.

McCain today said Democrats Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton ``don't seem to mind at all when fundamental questions of social policy are preemptively decided by judges instead of by the people and their elected representatives.''

The speech, given at the Wake Forest University chapel in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, marked McCain's most detailed comments on his criteria for appointing judges. McCain hailed Bush's appointees, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, as ``jurists of the highest caliber who know their own minds, and know the law, and know the difference.''  read more »





Syndicate content