Political Republican Opinion

Political Republican Opinion:

Nancy Pelosi’s characterization that it was the Republicans and, more pointedly, the Bush Administration’s fault, that our nation faces its current economic woes is a bold-faced and politically motivated lie.

In a speech on the Senate floor on May 5, 2006 John McCain said, “I join as a co-sponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.”

The Democrats have blocked Republican Congressional efforts at regulating the economy every step of the way. The following video clip shows who really is at fault for the Fannie Mae-Freddie Mac debacle, for example:

Technorati Tags: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, John McCain, Political Republican Opinion, US economy, us presidential election, wall street bailout

Political Republican Opinion:

Democratic Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, just moments before the “Wall Street Bailout” bill was set for a vote, took the opportunity to turn efforts to save the American economy into a partisan political moment by making a speech that damned the Bush administration and promoted the Democratic Party.

Pelosi began her speech to the assembled House of Representatives by ripping the Bush Administration’s “failed economic policies - policies built on budgetary recklessness, on an anything goes mentality, with no regulation, no supervision, and no discipline in the system.”

“Democrats insisted that legislation responding to this crisis must protect the American people and Main Street from the meltdown on Wall Street,” she continued. “The American people did not decide to dangerously weaken our regulatory and oversight policies. They did not make unwise and risky financial deals. They did not jeopardize the economic security of the nation and they must not pay the cost of this emergency recovery and stabilization bill.” She then went on to outline the “key” provisions that “we … insisted that this bill contain.”

Pelosi finished up her appeal for “bipartisan legislation” with the following: “Today, we will act to avert this crisis, but informed by our experience of the past eight years with the failed economic leadership that has left us capable of meeting the challenges of the future. We choose a different path. In the new year, with a new Congress and a new President, we will break free with a failed past and take America in a New Direction to a better future.”

Gee, I wonder why there may have been a problem getting bipartisan support after a speech like that. This woman has got to be the biggest imbecile to ever hold the position of Speaker of the House. She is clearly the worst Speaker of the House since Thomas Howell Cobb vacated the position in 1851. Cobb, also a Democrat, used his position as Speaker of the House to promote the extension of slavery.

Since being elected by the Democratic majority to her position and promising an effort to lead a bipartisan effort to get things done in Washington, Pelosi has led the most ineffective and worst-rated Congress in American history. Not a single piece of meaningful legislation has been passed since Pelosi was propped up onto the thrown.

The Political Republican Opinion Blog feels that if the Democrats really want to do something to unite the House of Representatives; if they really are serious about winning back the hearts of the American public, they will hold and pass a vote of “no confidence” in Nancy Pelosi, thus removing her from the position that she is so clearly unqualified and undeserving of. At the very least, they should put their top dog on a very short leash and slap a muzzle on her! To avoid the torrent of comments from women that would surely follow if I were to take the dog analogy any further, I’ll switch tacks and simply call her a clown!

Technorati Tags: bailout, Mancy Pelosi, pelosi, Political Republican Opinion, us presidential election, wall street bailout

Political Republican Opinion:

Far too many things need to be done in my “real” life today, to devote the time necessary for a lengthy posting.

I have a list of things I want to accomplish. Things like painting the ceiling, cleaning the car and edging the lawn (I don’t know why I continue to let my wife talk me into a corner lot whenever we purchase a new home).

Then there’s the “honey-do” list: Clean the pool, clear the clutter on the deck and then spot-paint the rust marks left by the furniture that was “guaranteed not to rust.”

I have mounds of laundry to do, a stack of paperwork from my job that needs to go into the computer, a website to re-design, kitty litter boxes to clean and a mechandise page that needs to be set-up for my blog. Oh yeah … and I’m ready for some football!

What the heck am I doing? I have got to get the ball rolling if I stand a chance of getting half this stuff done! In the meantime, I found a great post at The Compass Blog which illustrates the absurdity of wealth re-distribution. Here is a re-print of that post:

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that’s what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until one day, the owner threw them a curve. “Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.” Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes, so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so: The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before and the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

“I only got a dollar out of the $20,” declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, “but he got $10!”

“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got TEN times more than I did!”

“That’s true!!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!”

“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison. “We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!”

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night, the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction (dollar-wise, but not percentage-wise). Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they just might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

Technorati Tags: politcal republican opinion, us presidential election, wealth redistribution

Political Republican Opinion:

I found the following video today and have held onto it until after tonight’s debate.

Since the main focus of the debate was to be on foreign policy matters, much of which centered around the candidates’ positions on war, I wanted people to be able to see how Barack Obama has changed his positions on national defense over a relatively short period of time.

Now, think about what you heard from Barack Obama in the debate tonight and what you saw in the video. Ask yourself this question: Do you really feel like you know where the Democratic Presidential candidate really stands on these issues?

Technorati Tags: barack obama, John McCain, mccain-obama debate, obama, obama-mccain debate, Political Republican Opinion

Political Republican Opinion:

Back in my young, wild, carefree days, when I lived in Chicago, I played softball. The game of softball was invented in Chicago and it is not only a sport, but a way of life there. On and off the field, relationships were formed, business contacts were made and deals were done. The competition was fierce and there were more divisions for ability levels than I have ever seen in any other city.

I played third base and have played third base since I was nine years old. Some people I know would sooner put their hand in a piranha tank before they put their face on the line at the “hot corner,” but it is the only position that I ever felt truly comfortable.

I began, like most people, playing softball in Chicago with a few people I knew and a whole bunch that I didn’t know on a C-League team. The ball field was a place where you had to prove yourself every play. One or two errors, and there was always someone sitting on the bench, waiting to take your place. I know; while moving up in the ranks from C-League to B-League and advancing all the way to AA ball, I spent my fair share of time on the pine, anxious to get the chance to prove myself. Once someone got the starting spot, he would play through unimaginable injuries and pain in order to keep that spot. (You never really knew; the other guy just might be better!)

There is nothing worse than not playing. Sitting on the bench stinks! Too often, a player who sat there for too many games in a row would just stop showing up. “Whatever happened to Petey?” someone would ask four or five weeks later. Someone always knew the “Petey’s” on any given team and would say that he just got tired of not playing. A month later you could count on running into Petey on a ball field somewhere playing for another team – usually on a worse team, if not in a lower league – but Petey was happy to be playing and was now a “star” on a lesser team. Petey would have been much happier starting for the better team in the bigger league, however.

Some people who stopped showing up told the manager, “I only live ten minutes away; if you need me, call me.” Rarely were they ever called. The starters were not about to give up their positions that easily. I’ll never forget the year that we really needed Petey.

One of the teams that I played for had made it to the wildcard round in the playoffs (a one-game, winner advances deal) and just fifteen minutes before the game was to begin, we still only had seven players. The league would allow you to play with as little as eight players but in order to be on equal footing with the other team, all ten players on the field were needed. We were good enough and could have gotten away with just nine players. We had beaten the team we were playing easily all three times we had played them during the regular season. It was time to make some calls!

Several of us jumped on our phones. We called Petey and Mikey and Joey. We called Johnny and Jimmy and even Timmy (who was terrible). We were desperate. None of them could be found. They had found other things to do. What were the odds of them playing in the playoffs when they couldn’t get into a regular season game, after all?

Needless to say, I was pissed! Where were our regular starters? Why had they let the team down? I had no reason to be mad at the bench no-shows. They owed the team nothing. They had never really participated all year.

It turns out that the regulars had valid excuses. Like most of us, they played on several teams and were playing in championship games in other leagues. That’s the problem with softball being a way of life. Like in many other aspects of life, they had to make a choice. No matter what they chose, there was going to be some fallout. They made the correct choice, however, and had put the higher priority over the lower one.

In the height of the financial crisis facing this country, when the stakes are unimaginably high, Barack Obama has stated, “if you need me, call me.” You can’t blame him, really. He’s been sitting on the bench all season as a junior Senator with no hope of getting into the game. He found somewhere else to play, however – somewhere where he can be a “star.”

Technorati Tags: barack obama, financial crisis, obama, Political Republican Opinion

Political Republican Opinion:

I try to post something every day; really, I do! It was just an incredibly long day at work today and I only had a few hours sleep last night because I was finishing my last post, Comparing McCain and Obama on National Defense.

I had resolved myself to taking a break from writing tonight while trying not to feel too guilty about it. I figured I’d just read others’ blogs (both Left and Right) and see what others were talking about. Then, I stumbled upon a moving and passionate video.

Actually I found it on another Conservative blog who had found it on another blog who may have, for all I know, found it on yet another blog. I don’t know who to give credit to, so I figured I’d just post the video with a link to the YouTube submitter, following it. It is from a former US soldier who fought in Iraq. I think it sums up the differences between the two candidates in regards to Iraq pretty well.

Originally posted on You Tube by weneedmccain

Technorati Tags: barack obama, Iraq, Iraq War, John McCain, McCain, obama, Political Republican Opinion, us presidential election

Political Republican Opinion:

In the first part of the series comparing John McCain and Barack Obama on the issues, The Political Republican Opinion Blog will focus on national defense. As was stated in the introductory article to the Comparing McCain and Obama series, the two presidential candidates differ widely on many of their positions and this isn’t any exception.

The purpose of this series is not to necessarily show how the candidates differ on the minutia of any given issue, but to show how their positions will impact American taxpayers. When a candidate’s position indicates an increase in spending, the word “INCREASE” will appear, followed by the projected dollar amount, if stated. When a policy results in a decrease in spending or a tax cu or rebate, the word “DECREASE” will appear, followed by the projected dollar amount, if stated. If there appears to be no increase or decrease, “NEITHER” will appear. The Political Republican Opinion Blog will interject comments from time to time when warranted (it is an opinion blog), as well. That said; let’s take a look at the candidates’ positions:

Military Size

Barack Obama feels we need to increase the size of the Army by 65,000 soldiers and the Marines by 27,000 troops. He states that “increasing our end strength will help units retrain and re-equip properly between deployments and decrease the strain on military families.” INCREASE: dollar amount unknown.

John McCain also believes that our existing force is overstretched, adding, “recruitment and retention suffer from extended overseas deployments that keep service personnel away from their homes and families for long periods of time.” INCREASE: dollar amount unknown.

Political Republican Opinion: Here Barack Obama defines the size of increase while McCain does not. How Obama arrives at this figure appears arbitrary but both men seem to agree on this issue. Both are increasing spending on this aspect of national defense.

Taking Care of Military Personnel and their Families

Barack Obama will create a “Military Families Advisory Board to provide a conduit for military families’ concerns to be brought to the attention of senior policymakers and the public … and establish predictability in deployments so that active duty and reserves know what they can and must expect.” INCREASE: dollar amount unknown.

John McCain will continue to fight for “improved military pay and benefits, and an improved quality of life for military families” and will keep working to “ensure that benefits for deployed Reservists and National Guardsmen are brought in line with our active-duty military forces.” INCREASE: dollar amount unknown.

Political Republican Opinion: Both candidates will increase spending in this regard, but in different ways. Obama’s increase is in the size and cost of government while McCain’s spending increase goes directly to the troops. Although John McCain’s increase will probably be greater than Barack Obama’s, at least the money will be going to those soldiers and their families who are enduring the burden of protecting America and the country’s interests.

Equipping our Military

Barack Obama says he believes we must fully support our troops by getting “vitally needed equipment to our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines before lives are lost.” He specifically points out the need to ensure that armored vehicles, body armor and unmanned aerial vehicles are available in order to reduce casualties. INCREASE: dollar amount unknown.

John McCain believes that America must have the “best-manned, best-equipped, and best-supported military in the world.” He states that this “requires addressing force protection needs to make sure that America’s combat personnel have the best safety and survivability equipment available.” INCREASE: dollar amount unknown.

Political Republican Opinion: This is where things begin to go awry for Barack Obama. It is always best to judge a man by his deeds and not simply by his words. In May of 2007, Barack Obama voted against a $120 billion appropriation bill, mostly for war spending in Iraq and Afghanistan that would have helped to provide American troops with much of the sorely needed equipment they were lacking. Only thirteen other Senators voted against this desperately needed funding. John McCain was not one of them.

Missile Defense

Barack Obama says his administration “will support missile defense, but ensure that it is developed in a way that is pragmatic and cost-effective; and, most importantly, does not divert resources from other national security priorities until we are positive the technology will protect the American public.” DECREASE?: dollar amount unknown.

John McCain is a strong advocate of missile defense, both nationally and internationally. He believes that “effective missile defenses are critical to protect America from rogue regimes like North Korea that possess the capability to target America with intercontinental ballistic missiles, from outlaw states like Iran that threaten American forces and American allies with ballistic missiles, and to hedge against potential threats from possible strategic competitors like Russia and China.” NEITHER an increase nor decrease in dollars spent.

Political Republican Opinion: It’s hard to determine by either of the candidates’ statements whether they believe in an increase or decrease in spending on missile defense. John McCain’s position seems to be the status quo, so there may actually be no increase in spending for missile defense systems. Barack Obama’s statement is even more perplexing; it’s hard to tell what it really means. It sounds like double speak for “we’ll look at it if it doesn’t cost any money for you to prove that it works.” If it is somehow proven reliable to his satisfaction, is he saying he will then divert resources away from other “national security priorities” in order to fund the systems? If that is the case, his position is truly terrifying!

Modernizing the Armed Services

Barack Obama believes that we must “build up our special operations forces, civil affairs, information operations, and other units and capabilities that remain in chronic short supply; invest in foreign language training, cultural awareness, and human intelligence and other needed counterinsurgency and stabilization skill sets; and create a more robust capacity to train, equip, and advise foreign security forces, so that local allies are better prepared to confront mutual threats.” Obama further states that we need “greater investment in advanced technology” for our Air Force “recapitalize” our Navy by replacing aging vessels with “smaller, more capable ships, providing the agility to operate close to shore and the reach to rapidly deploy Marines to global crises.” Additionally, Barack Obama will seek a “worldwide ban on weapons that interfere with military and commercial satellites [and] work in cooperation with our allies and the private sector to identify and protect against emerging cyber-threats.” INCREASE: dollar amount unknown.

John McCain believes that we need to adapt “our doctrine, training, and tactics for the kind of conflicts we are most likely to face … [which] calls not just for a larger and more capable military, but for a new mix of military forces, including civil affairs, special operations, and highly mobile forces capable of fighting and prevailing in the conflicts America faces.” He also believes in “procuring advanced weapons systems” and that our new, more modern military “will be engaged in, among other things, counter insurgency, counter terrorism, missile defense, counter proliferation and information warfare.” INCREASE: dollar amount unknown.

Political Republican Opinion: Both of the candidates believe that our military personnel need to be trained in new tactics in order to defeat our enemies and to prevent attacks. Both also believe in investing in advanced weapons systems and technology. Senator Obama’s plan to retrofit the Navy would obviously result in a HUGE spending increase that is not advocated by John McCain on his website. I also wonder how Barack Obama plans to get countries that wish to do us harm from interfering with our military satellites just because we “banned” it. Furthermore, I would contend that a vast majority of the perpetrators of cyber crime may not necessarily be “our allies.”

Smarter Defense Spending

Barack Obama believes we need to “Create Transparency for Military Contractors” and “Restore Honesty, Openness, and Commonsense to Contracting and Procurement.” He states that the nation will “realize savings by reducing the corruption and cost overruns that have become all too routine in defense contracting.” He wants to “end the practice of no-bid contracting … end the abuse of supplemental budgets by creating a system of oversight for war funds as stringent as in the regular budget [and] develop a strategy for determining when contracting makes sense, rather than continually handing off governmental jobs to well-connected companies.” DECREASE: dollar amount unknown.

John McCain supports “significant reform in our defense acquisition process to ensure that dollars spent actually contribute to U.S. security [and has] worked aggressively to reform the defense budgeting process to ensure that America enjoys the best military at the best cost.” He also feels “that our nation’s military spending, except in time of genuine emergency, must be funded by the regular appropriations process, not by “emergency” supplementals that allow defense to be funded outside the normal budget cycle.” John McCain has always been a strong opponent of pork-barrel spending - especially when it comes to the defense budget - adding that “unauthorized earmarks drain our precious defense resources and adversely affect our national security.” DECREASE: dollar amount unknown.

Political Republican Opinion: Both of the candidates have the same positions on this issue and no American (save for executives at Halliburton, perhaps) would argue with spending our tax dollars more wisely. One can only wonder what the administrative costs associated with overseeing this commonsense practice will be. Unfortunately, many morally bankrupt politicians and defense contractors cannot see their patriotic duty because of the giant dollar signs that it hides behind.

Conclusion

It doesn’t seem like a lot of cost-cutting will be going on in the defense department. In fact, it looks like there may very well be quite an increase in spending by both candidates. One can only wonder how much that increase will be and how either candidate can claim to have a position on fixing the economy without discussing the costs associated with programs that they advocate. Maybe their stances on the other issues will be more specific in that regard (I doubt it). Until I compared both men’s positions side by side, however, I never would have guessed that Barack Obama might be the candidate who planned to spend the most on defense!

Next up in the Comparing McCain and Obama Series: The Economy and Taxes … coming soon!

Technorati Tags: barack obama, Comparing McCain and Obama, John McCain, McCain, national defense, obama, Political Republican Opinion, us presidential election

Political Republican Opinion:

As I was in the process of finishing up my National Defense Issue post in the Comparing McCain and Obama Series, I became distracted by an article that appeared on The Washington Times online. The article explores the possibility that the 2008 presidential contest could finish in an Electoral College 269-269 tie.

Think it can’t happen? “Take the 2004 map and switch Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado into the Blue column, which is what the poll numbers indicate. Then, take New Hampshire and give it to McCain, which is what two recent polls suggest is going to happen. There is your tie,” the article states. Another possible scenario offereded in The Washington Times article is, “if … John McCain wins Ohio, Virginia, New Hampshire and Indiana - not at all far-fetched - and Mr. Obama takes reliably Democratic states Pennsylvania and Michigan, and flips Colorado (in which he holds a slight poll lead), with the two splitting New Mexico and Nevada, the electoral vote would be tied at 269.” Then, what would happen?

Well, according to the article, things get pretty dicey as far as the U.S. Constitution is concerned. The framers of the Constitution were fairly vague in their wording of the procedures that would follow. The confusion all centers on whether the currently sitting Congress would determine the tie-breaker or whether the newly elected Congress would.

The Constitution states that the House of Representatives “shall immediately” choose by ballot, the new President. Because the Electoral College ballots are counted in December, some argue that the outgoing Congress would be in charge of making the decision.

Others argue that operative - and decisive - verbiage was set out in U.S. Code Title 3, Chapter 1, Section 15, in 1934. It states that “”Congress shall be in session on the sixth day of January succeeding every meeting of the electors. The Senate and House of Representatives shall meet in the Hall of the House of Representatives at the hour of 1 o’clock in the afternoon on that day.”

The Constitution further provides that the Senate would choose the Vice President in such a scenario. This means that we could have an Obama-Palin White House or a McCain-Biden one. The possibility exists that Dick Cheney may be responsible for selecting the next Vice President, as well!

Other possible scenarios?

The newly elected House is unable to come up with a majority in which case, the burden falls upon the newly elected Senate to choose an acting President until the House can break the deadlock. The Washington Times article assumes in this scenario, that a Democrat-controlled Senate may choose Joe Biden as the acting President, should the House be unable to break the tie by noon on January 20, 2009 – inauguration day.

In another equally far-fetched scenario, neither the House nor the Senate is able to come up with a majority for the President or Vice President by January 20th. In this case, the Speaker of the House, currently Nancy Pelosi, would become the acting President until the whole mess is settled.

Regardless of which scenario you choose, The Political Republican Opinion Blog feels there would be a lengthy series of legal challenges that might leave the office of the President of the United States legally “vacant” for years. If precedent is any indicator, however, the same issue was decided in 1800, when Thomas Jefferson was appointed President by the newly elected House of Representatives in February after an Electoral College tie with Raymond Burr.

A fun read, all-in-all! See the complete article here: 269 tie: An electoral college ‘doomsday’? Oh … and I’m almost done with the previously mentioned National Defense Issue post, coming soon to a computer near you …

Technorati Tags: Biden, electoral college, Joe Biden, John McCain, McCain, nancy pelosi, Palin, pelosi, Political Republican Opinion, Sarah Palin, us constitution, us presidential election

Political Republican Opinion:

It’s now down to the nitty gritty. With only 42 days left until the presidential elections, it is time for someone to do a side by side comparison of the two presidential candidates on the issues that America faces today.

The Political Republican Opinion Blog hopes to do just that in a crash course that will hopefully give some insight into the two candidates’ positions, as stated by their individual websites. One of these politicians, that will go nameless at this point, has changed his stances on the issues greatly over the last several months. I will not go back and change a post if a candidate changes his position on an issue. It will just have to stand “as is,” at the time of writing.

Where there is no comparative position on any given topic, I will not cover it. For instance, Barack Obama has numerous pages devoted to the subject of civil rights. Since this subject is not addressed by the John McCain website, I cannot be so presumptuous as to infer that it is not an issue that McCain cares about any more than I can declare that Barack Obama is more concerned about the rights of minorities than non-minorities. Therefore, in instances such as this, neither politician will have their positions highlighted.

Furthermore, since the economy is the issue first and foremost on the minds of Americans, I will try to highlight only those issues that have an impact on how taxpayers’ dollars are going to be spent or on items that put more dollars in the pockets of American citizens. This will help to weed out the redundancies and unnecessary lengthy discourses that each candidate has filled their pages with. I just want the meat (sorry, to the vegetarians I may have just offended).

Frankly, The Political Republican Opinion Blog does not look forward to this self-imposed, ambitious assignment, since the research is pretty dry reading and it puts a cramp in my ability to creatively express myself, otherwise. Unfortunately, no one else seems to want to take the time to do it either. This may be the most important presidential election of our times; the candidates have very different views on many of the issues. Since they are not talking specifics, I’ll do it for them.

I hope this endeavor will help some fence-sitter out there to come up with a reason to support one candidate or the other and, more importantly, to exercise the freedom to vote that is a luxury that many countries’ citizens only can dream of.

As always, I look forward to your comments, insights and contributions!

Coming Next: Comparing John McCain and Barack Obama on National Defense

Technorati Tags: barack obama, comparing Barack Obama and John McCain, comparing John McCain and Barack Obama, Comparing McCain and Obama, comparing Obama and McCain, John McCain, McCain, obama, Political Republican Opinion

Political Republican Opinion:

Today, The Political Republican Opinion Blog offers a little bit of this and a little bit of that. We have a news executive worried about Barack Obama’s policies turning the world even further against America, a crazy, panicked Democrat on a radio talk show and the latest whimsical look at politics from our good ole’ boys at the Red State Update.

First up: Rupert Murdoch is interviewed by Neil Cavuto. In the interview, Murdoch, who many Democratic bloggers have been touting as Obama supporter, states that Obama is going to increase American and worldwide inflation, cause unemployment to soar and ruin what exists of our relationships with the rest of the world. See the video here:

Next, The Political Republican Opinion Blog has found a deranged caller on the John Gibson radio show. She calls Sarah Palin trailer park trash, claims that there are only 5,000 people who live in Alaska and I lost count of how many times she calls Sarah Palin a bitch. Other highlights include a caller who derides Palin for “birthing retarded babies” and the always intelligent discourse, “eat shit and die!” Clearly, the Democrats are the Party of Intellects. Check it out here:

And finally, our friends at the Red State Update offer their views on the latest disrespect that is being shown by celebrity Democrats to Sarah Palin. Featured are Oprah Winfrey, Matt Damon, Lindsay Lohan, Barbara Walters and Meg Ryan. You may view their perspective, below:

Even on a slow day, The Political Republican Opinion Blog scours the web to find you the finest in political commentary. Got any of your own? Reply, below:

Technorati Tags: barack obama, barbara walters, lindsay lohan, matt damon, meg ryan, obama, Palin, Political Republican, red state update, rupert murdoch, Sarah Palin

Political Republican Opinion:

As the editor and chief contributor to The Political Republican Opinion blog, I watch, listen to and read politics, both Left and Right, at every given opportunity. I happened to hear this letter being read on a radio show and did some searching and finally found it. (Note to self: pay more attention to people’s names and publication names and you will save yourself hours of research). It was a letter to the editor of the Richmond, VA Times-Dispatch. The letter is absolutely chilling:

Richmond Times-Dispatch, Monday, July 7, 2008

Dear Editor, Times-Dispatch:

Each year I get to celebrate Independence Day twice. On June 30, I celebrate my independence day, and on July 4, I celebrate America’s. This year is special, because it marks the 40th anniversary of my independence.

On June 30, 1968, I escaped Communist Cuba, and a few months later, I was in the United States to stay. That I happened to arrive in Richmond on Thanksgiving Day is just part of the story, but I digress.

I’ve thought a lot about the anniversary this year. The election-year rhetoric has made me think a lot about Cuba and what transpired there. In the late 1950s, most Cubans thought Cuba needed a change, so when a young leader came along, every Cuban was at least receptive.

When the young leader spoke eloquently and passionately and denounced the old system, the press fell in love with him. They never questioned who his friends were or what he really believed in. When he said he would help the farmers and the poor and bring free medical care and education to all, everyone followed. When he said he would bring justice and equality to all, everyone said, ‘Praise the Lord.’ And when the young leader said, ‘I will be for change and I’ll bring you change,’ everyone yelled, ‘Viva Fidel!’

But nobody asked about the change, so by the time the executioner’s guns went silent, the people’s guns had been taken away. By the time everyone was equal, they were equally poor, hungry, and oppressed. By the time everyone received their free education, it was worth nothing. By the time the press noticed, it was too late, because they were now working for him. By the time the change was finally implemented, Cuba had been knocked down a couple of notches to Third-World status. By the time the change was over, more than a million people had taken to boats, rafts, and inner tubes. You can call those who made it ashore anywhere else in the world the most fortunate Cubans. And now I’m back to the beginning of my story.

Luckily, we in America would never fall for a young leader who promised change without asking, what change? How will you carry it out? What will it cost America?

Would we?

Manuel Alvarez, JR.

There is nothing that The Political Republican Opinion blog can add; the letter speaks for itself!

Technorati Tags: barack obama, communism, cuba, fidel castro, Political Republican, us presidential election

Political Republican Opinion:

Two years ago, Democrats pleaded with voters to elect them in order to turn the economy around and voters responded. In Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s acceptance speech, she stated, “The election of 2006 was a call to change - not merely to change the control of Congress, but for a new direction for our country.”

In the two years since Democrats have taken over with a majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, gasoline prices have risen from an average of $2.19 per gallon to a high of $4.11 per gallon before “falling” to today’s average price of $3.83 per gallon. That’s a whopping 74% increase.

Barack Obama, the Democratic Party’s Presidential nominee, has said that he “would have preferred a more gradual increase” in gas prices. I think the rest of America would agree with The Political Republican Opinion blog, that we would have preferred no increase at all!

The up and down roller coaster of the Dow Jones Industrial average has now reached a level of more than 1,000 points below the level that it was at when the Democrats took control of both houses of the Congress. The median average home price has fallen from $236,200 to $212,400 during that same time span. So, while our transportation costs have gone up, the price of our homes has gone down. What else is important in the everyday lives of Americans? Hmmm … let me see … oh, yes, food!

The cost of flour has risen 70%, bread has gone up 40%, potatoes are 40% higher, and margarine is almost 39% more expensive. Add to that the fact that electricity is 20% higher and heating oil is 27% more expensive and Americans have struggled even more with the Democrats in charge. The really scary part is that we have watched all of this happen in just two years!

Now, with banks and insurance companies going bust and Americans’ investments, savings and retirement funds hanging in the balance, what is the Democrats’ answer? … to just go home!

Lawmakers say that they will probably take no action before their planned adjournments, beginning Sept. 26 for the House and a week later for the Senate. They haven’t ruled out returning after the Nov. 4 elections, but they would rather wait until after the elections and take the matter up next year unless Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke call for their help.

Democratic Senate majority leader Harry Reid said yesterday, “No one knows what to do. We are in new territory here. This is a different game. We’re not here playing soccer, basketball or football, this is a new game and we’re going to have to figure out how to do it.” As usual, Democrats have no problem criticizing “Republican leadership” for the crisis but have no answers of their own. Oh … except “we need CHANGE.”

And what does Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi think of Congress’ decision to make no decisions? She defended the latest Congressional vacation, saying that they could always return “if there’s a need to.”

“IF THERE’S A NEED TO?” I seem to recall this was the same position Pelosi took when a large majority of the American people were begging for Congress to allow more drilling in and off the coast of the United States. She would not allow a vote and sent the House home. What have they done since then? Absolutely nothing!

Who do these people get their work ethic from, George Costanza? It’s time to wake up America! Democrats, Republicans and Independents surely must see that this is not leadership; this is running away when times get tough – the same position, incidentally, that Democrats promoted when things were not going swimmingly well in Iraq.

Republicans, it’s time to get rid of the do-nothings in Washington by getting to the polls and taking the House and Senate back. It’s time to unseat these horrible leaders and replace them with people who will do what responsible adults do when there is work to be done. If it is really important, real leaders stay at work until the job is done!

The Political Republican Opinion blog welcomes your comments …

Technorati Tags: