On this holiday weekend of celebration of the birth of the greatest country, I support Sean Harrington, a high school student who is challenging his school's position against saying the Pledge of Allegiance in the classroom. Students who want to recite it, should have the freedom to do so. The argument is that the "Pledge" offends some students and their families. Really! The students can remain silent. The objecting students can't decide to leave or remain in this country, but the objecting adults in their families can go somewhere else.
I have been searching, but have yet to find a video clip of a segment on the TV show, The View where this Pledge topic was discussed on June 29th. To digress a little, I connect somewhat with View lady, Sherri Shepherd, because, just 6 years ago, my opinions were just about identical to her's. She is liberal and in the tank for the Pres., but does hold a few conservative views. Elisabeth Hasselbeck who is the lone conservative on the show, will get support from Sherri Shepherd from time to time. Not so from the other View ladies, Whoppi Goldberg, Joy Behar or Barbara Walters.
In discussing Sean Harrington's effort to have the Pledge of Allegiance recited in the classroom, Ms. Shepherd jumped in faster than Ms. Hasselbeck in her support for saying the "Pledge." Her response included, "This is a great country." Of course Joy Behar was trying to defend not saying it, because of the "under God" clause. When Whoopi Goldberg asked the ladies if they could say the "Pledge," Ms. Shepherd and Ms. Hasselbeck went right into the recitation. Joy Behar just sat there.
I find people's assumptions interesting in the chatroom of Philly's urban early morning radio talk show host. I myself have been called a closet Muslim by some character who claims to be a male of Sicilian heritage in the chat room. This person tries to anger the chatterers with his stereotypical racial comments like using the name Shamica when referring to black females. Some chatterers engage him, while others feel he should be ignored. I do not agree with the ignoring, because when that is done, he takes advantage of having the chatroom to himself and goes crazy with all kinds of wild racial comments.
When this person called me a closet Muslim, I let him have it with the saving grace of Jesus Christ and he backed off with, "Okay, I get it!" I do manage to have a decent conversation with him from time to time. Because of the way this person behaves in the chat room, the majority of the chatterers automatically assume he is a conservative Republican. The assumption is incorrect. He is a libertarian who despises Democrats and most Republicans equally.
Because, I don't back off of my conservative beliefs, I get called sellout, water carrier, etc. by those who who are relatively new in the chat room. The veterans in the room who identify as liberal Democrats along with a socialist or two realize the name calling is ineffective with me. After all, the names come when they can't back up their argument or refute mine. One time, after a person called me names instead of showing proof for his/her position, I made he/she so angry with my responses backed up with links proving the conservative position to be right that they left the chatroom. The assumptions with me are that I am financially rich and a male (both incorrect and laughable). They assume that I could not be a black woman believing that conservative crap.
Although I still listen to the urban talker in the morning, I am currently unable to take part in the chatroom to the degree that I have done in the past. I now manage to get in there mostly once a week, and when I do, it is still interesting and fun.
I know that there are those who identify as liberals and look askance at conservatives, while holding some conservative views. I see it in my family. There is one family member who I will call Linda (not the real name). She is definitely not a fan of conservatives, Ann Coulter or Michelle Malkin, but strongly shares their views on illegal immigration. Linda is a little uncomfortable that she is in agreement with anything where these two women are concerned, because she is a dyed in the wool Democrat and a strong Obama supporter. Her blood tends to boil otherwise when she hears anything else coming from Ms. Coulter or Ms. Malkin.
When it comes to letting an illegal immigrant stay in this country and become a citizen, Linda can't understand how anyone can be okay about that. Linda remembers how Haitians tried to come to this country illegally in boats during the Clinton administration and were caught and sent back. She feels anyone else crossing the U.S. borders illegally should be caught and sent back too. She shakes her head in disgust at all these politicians, celebrities and other media types who support citizenship for illegals. To her, it is rewarding criminal behavior.
Linda likes the new Arizona Immigration Law and is having a hard time reckoning with the President and Democrat/liberals seeing it as discriminatory. I have called to her attention that the Democrat Party sees these illegal immigrants as additions to the Democrat Party voting rolls. Linda does not like that one bit. But then, this is not enough to get Linda to jump off the Democratic Ship.
The Coffee Party was designed to be the liberal left answer to the conservative right with the Tea Party. It is already flopping in comparison to where the Tea Party was at this same juncture last year. The National Coffee Party day received tremendous build up on the the two liberal bent but not all that well viewed cable news channels, MSNBC and CNN. The Coffee party has been able to establish thirty chapters. So why did their first national event fizzle?
I see the Coffee Party flop due to high levels of emotionalism over getting out and doing what it takes to get a message out. Emotionalism abounds on the left, but when it comes to following up and getting behind what they believe in, most liberal left folks today are nowhere to be found. The opposing Right wing Tea Party continues to flourish with "do something" people not just emotional criers.
The fact is that there are many liberals in this country, but the more conservative Fox News decimating the liberal bent MSNBC and CNN cable news channels combined in viewer ratings tells you something about which political side is more up on current events. The same thing with talk radio. In the very liberal Philly listening area, left wing liberal talk for the most part can only be found on the solo urban talk radio station that is not that high up in the local radio ratings.
When I identified with the left, I use to get so perturbed by those on the right saying that liberals were led by emotions, but now I understand. Folks on the liberal left are largely full of emotionalism. Reasoning based on the correct facts come some place down the line. The health care debate is a good example. I do believe health care warrants some re-examining and some kinds of reform. But what is being put forth as reform in the current health care bill is wrong. Liberal Democratic folks want it based on emotion no matter the cost.
The Tea Party people are out in force today in protest of the health care bill. Tea Party people along with conservatives/Republicans have been jamming the phone lines telling their representatives and senators to not vote for this health care bills. Where are the Coffee Partiers?
Tea Party Movement The Republican Party is facing the impact of the Tea Party movement which contains many disgruntled Republican voters. The infighting amongst Republicans voters could cost the party victories during this time, when the Democrat party is realizing that it could lose a lot of seats in both houses of Congress. This could happen in the Nevada senatorial race. Senate leader Harry Reid has been looking a lot like a real goner. He could be another Democrat congressional majority leader getting voted out of office like former Democratic Speaker of the House, Tom Foley.
The Tea Party people have established themselves as a third political party in Nevada. They want to run a senatorial candidate. When Sen. Reid got wind of this, his spirits must have perked up tremendously. A Tea party candidate will increased Sen. Reid's chances for re-election. The vote on the Republican side will split between the Tea Party and Republican candidates like what happened in New York's 23rd congressional district where the Democrat, Bill Owens won against a Republican and the conservative Independent. When there are 3 candidates, the independent/3rd party always hurts one major political party, while the other major party gets the victory.
The Tea Party folks and the Republican Party have to come together, because divided they fall. Despite what former Vice Pres. Cheney has said, Tea Party/Republican battles will lead to Barack Obama getting a second term. His administration will have more years to impose destructive policies on us and continue to raise the debt ceiling. The Democrats will not have a super majority, but nevertheless they will have a majority in both houses of Congress.
I am in agreement with Rush Limbaugh and Dick Morris who both believe the Tea Party movement becoming a third party will hurt the Republican Party and keep Democrats in power. The example they both cite is Ross Perot splitting the Republican vote which caused George Herbert Walker Bush to lose to Bill Clinton. On the Democratic side, they also cite Ralph Nader doing damage to Al Gore in 2000. Democrats in my neck of the woods hope the Tea Party folks and the Republican Party continue to battle without resolution.
One of these years I am going to make it to CPAC. Until then, I will have to settle for watching it on c-span and on my computer. Last year, I found CPAC to be more exciting than the Republican convention. The conference provided a bright glimmer of hope, when those on the conservative side were down and out in the political realm.
This year CPAC is very energizing and riveting. Now there is one thing I find interesting and a little strange. And that is the absence of Sarah Palin. I could be wrong, because she can show up as a surprise. But if that doesn't happen, don't you think she should be there?
If I had gone to CPAC, I would have definitely been in attendance at this CPAC forum on the Islamist jihad on America.
I am surrounded by folks who are satisfied with Pres. Obama. I continually hear how his distractors are so critical and work against him and will not give him a chance (yes and its Bush's fault). I am also acquainted through Internet forums with those who support the Pres., no matter what. They refuse to believe that Pres. Obama has lost a lot of voter support and could possibly lose re-election. One person on the local urban talk radio chatboard feels these polls showing the dwindling support are polluted with the opinions of those who voted against him in the first place.
To digress a little, this one person says I annoy him/her with my conservative Republican positions. I assume this person is somewhat nerved by black Republicans. They can't support their liberal/left positions. Present a fact that is positive about conservative/Republican position or negative to the liberal Democrats that can't be refuted and he/she will insult you.
Wednesday evening the Pres. gives his State of the Union Address. Will this be the beginning of a change of course? What is Pres. Obama thinking with elections of the two Republican governors and a Republican winning the Mass. senatorial seat held 47 years by the late Democrat, Edward "Ted" Kennedy? He could not even get his health care reform bill passed into law while he had a congressional Democratic super majority.
Pres. Obama is already talking a spending freeze (after the tremendous spending of 2009). Will he take a page from the Bill Clinton playbook? Remember into the middle of the former president's first term, both houses of Congress went Republican for the first time in over 40 years. He moved away from the left and went center with the help of Dick Morris who went completely conservative. It worked and Bill Clinton was re-elected president in a year that was other wise Republican in the election results across the country.
There is a sweet victory in the state of Massachusetts. Republican Scott Brown won over Democrat Martha Coakley. This victory came about through presumption and indifference on the Democrat side, voters choosing the best person irrespective of political party, voters choosing someone they feel will go against the Obama government based solutions agenda and no Republican/conservative infighting. For those on the Republican/conservative side, we need to pay attention in order to win back more congressional seats and do to Obama what the 1994 Republican Congress did to former Pres. Bill Clinton.
Scott Brown is a Republican but some would say he is not a conservative's conservative. But any kind of a Republican getting elected in the very liberal Mass. is something else. Liberal Democrats are shall we say stunned! I kind of thought it was going to be close enough that this election would drag out in recounts like the Coleman/Franken affair. It is so great that the victory was very decisive and that no later discovered voting ballots of dead people will be able to come into play to reverse this present voting outcome.
It was interesting to listen to reasons why Martha Coakley lost on the local urban radio talk program this morning. Pres. Obama was criticized for not sticking to his agenda and trying to woo the Republicans. How is that for sounding way off base? It was sticking to his agenda, especially with the health care bill that most in this country do not want that got Scott Brown elected.
Local urban radio chatboard folks did not get nasty with me with my comments against their reasoning. That was a little surprising. In fact, they ignored my comments on Brown/Coakley. I guess they thought I was rubbing it in. I was, but in not in a nasty "I told you so" way.
Just think! Republican Senator Brown who will now take over the Democrat seat of the late Edward "Ted" Kennedy who held it for 47 years. WOW!
My Opera
On this holiday weekend of celebration of the birth of the greatest country, I support Sean Harrington, a high school student who is challenging his school's position against saying the Pledge of Allegiance in the classroom. Students who want to recite it, should have the freedom to do so. The argument is that the "Pledge" offends some students and their families. Really! The students can remain silent. The objecting students can't decide to leave or remain in this country, but the objecting adults in their families can go somewhere else.
