The Republican party torn asunder?

In a complete about face, Bush is now trying to appease the left by embracing the myth of global warming

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=azDnIuQABog8&refer=worldwide

Should I say Hello Arnold?

And Al Gore must be correct, he says that there is a consensus among scientists on Global Warming. Read here Nasa's top scientist Michael Griffin questons Global Warming http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=3229696&page=1 Oh no! That is like questioning the second coming to the Global Warming religious fanatics. What heresy! Will Griffin be fired from Nasa? Sounds like a consensus to me.

What is going on here? Ok, Bush got the economy going by decreasing taxes, he correctly and steadfastly fights the war on terror - congratulations, but...

1) His prosecution of the war has been dubious at best. He fights the war as if we are playing tiddly winks. The benefit of the doubt always goes to the terrorist.

2) He lambasts his base for being against a massive amnesty plan. He thinks his base is full of idiots. if you put lipstick on a pig, it is still a pig. He says trust the government to secure the borders - we've done that. He is offering the Mexican-Americans citizenship, and what do they do, they boo Miss USA. Bush is destroying the Republican party. Any proposal by Kennedy and La Raza should be suspect anyway. Imagine a party of White Americans called, "The Race." Even the New York Times reported Bush's disdain for his own Republican party -

President Bush today accused opponents of his proposed immigration measure of fear-mongering to defeat it in Congress, and took on his own conservative political base as he did so.
“If you want to scare the American people, what you say is the bill’s an amnesty bill,” Mr. Bush said this afternoon at a training center for border enforcement agents located in this town in Georgia’s southeastern corner. “That’s empty political rhetoric, trying to frighten our citizens.”

This amnesty bill is our answer to 9/11?


3) He signs into law a massive medicare drug plan when medicare is already going bankrupt.

4) He signs the McCain-Feingold finance reform bill which has turned out to be a bonanza for the left, the corrupt George Soros and moveon.org.

5) His loyalty to those who work for him is so strong, he refuses to fire anyone who proves to be incompetent (i.e. Mineta)

6) His spending has been out of control (even without Iraq). Reagan tripled the deficit, but Reagan's purpose was to bankrupt the Soviet Union which he successfully did. There is no point to Bush's spending.

I believe that going to war with Iraq was a necessary evil. To this day, I believe there were WMDs in Iraq. Hussein had eight months to get rid of them, and even if he didn't have them, the plans were there to reconstitute them.

Mr President, there is a reason your poll numbers are low. Get it through your head, the left will always hate you. What is next? - A private screening of Michael Moore's Movie Sicko.

We need someone to give back the power to the people and return us to the conservative movement from whence we began.

Today's wallstreet journal opinion piece by Peggy Noonan is a must read.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110010148

In part Noonan writes

What conservatives and Republicans must recognize is that the White House has broken with them. What President Bush is doing, and has been doing for some time, is sundering a great political coalition. This is sad, and it holds implications not only for one political party but for the American future

I have a liberal friend who always says, "Bush is an idiot!!" Was she right? My fear is Bush has opened such a wide chasm, the Democrats will regain the white house and then we will all be in trouble.

Mr. President, if the Democrats win in 2008, it will be your fault. You are a neo-liberal, and you have abandoned conservative values.

A dictator in Venezuela?

If you haven't read about Chavez shutting down the only television station RCTV that opposes chavez, read the following timeline of a Fox Journalist.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,275912,00.html

11:58 p.m.: Like clockwork, the channel goes off the air. The music stops; the TV now features a spinning “TVes” logo, which stands for the new socialist, Chavez controlled TV station.

People are crying and screaming. Grown men have tears spreading down their cheeks. The night is steamy and tempers begin the flare. People seem to understand that they have lost more than their favorite Venezuelan network; they are continuing to lose their country to a man intent on becoming a dictator.


Jimmy Carter and Cindy Sheehan must be jumping up and down for joy. I wonder what Ortega is thinking in Nicaragua, of course he doesn't have the oil Chavez has. Pay attention United States, Chavez presents a real threat to our security especial the way he has been using his oil money to buy the loyalty of other Latin American Counrities.

The GOP debate May 15 - if I may opine

So, who got to watch the GOP debate last night? I think, there should have been at least ten more people to add to the ten they already had. Then, maybe it could have been like a church social. Every candidate should have been required to wear a “My name is _____” tag. - You know those tags you are suppose to wear at church. I am a political junkie, but I swear, I didn’t know half the guys up there. I mean who was that guy with two first names, Ron Paul or Paul Ron – Geez!

Now everyone knows that President Reagan was the greatest president of our time. But, I think we should make these debates a little less boring by making them into a game. Ok – ready, anyone who invokes the name of Reagan will automatically have to sit down. By the end of the game, I would bet five would be the only ones left standing.

For those people who no one knows, those impecunious characters that have trouble raising enough money to stay in the race for more than a week after the initial primaries, need to get their names out with a one line zinger that will be in the newspapers the following day. Of course, I am not talking about Ron Paul who blamed 9/11 on the U.S. for our policies in the Middle East. Yes, everyone will know who he is, but at the same time, we will wonder if he got his talking points on some conspiracy website or from Rosie O’Donnell. He is the one person that if nominated, I would consider Hillary Clinton. The diatribe from Ron Paul did, however, give a great opening to Gulinani when he rebuked Ron Paul, asking him for an apology at the same time. And, the fight is on…..

Guliani must have listened to the press from his last debate. He needed to talk less about abortion and more about 9/11; Ron Paul gave him this one.

Tom Tacredo said we need a Jack Baur – good one. Romney said, “My fear is that McCain-Kennedy would do to immigration what McCain-Feingold has done to campaign finance and money in politics, and that’s bad." – Nice. Huckabee said “we’ve had a Congress that’s spent money like John Edwards at a beauty shop.” when asked about taxes and spending. John McCain used the same drunken sailor line he used in the first debate – Time for new material. Ok, one of the candidates (I can’t remember the name) said that there are as many scientists who believe global warming is not caused by human intervention as scientists who do. Finally – someone is challenging the global warming myth. It’s about time since it is quite popular. Even the left got to most of the Republicans on this one.

McCain was McCain. He defended his Kennedy-McCain Immigration bill stating the Fort Dix six were here illegally on visas. Didn’t anyone tell him that at least two of them came from the Mexico-Texas border? He defended his no-torture policy, and he said we need to reach out to our friends. Did anyone tell him about the change in presidency in France with Sarkozy who has stated he wants to be our friend in spite of our differences, or with pro-American Angela Markel in Germany? There is the new conservative party leader Stephen Harper in Canada. When confronted with his anti-Republican issues like the McCain-Feingold bill on finance reform (which gave rise to the corrupt George Soros), he said, “I don’t intend to block things.” You are telling me – even if it means lying in bed with the most liberal of Democrats. Not, in my wildest dreams would I vote for McCain.

The more I learn about Mitt Romney, the more I like him. I think Giuliani would make a good president. Before 9/11, I would automatically exclude a candidate if he were not pro-life, but that issue has been somewhat pushed aside for security. It is said that Giuliani is the only one who could beat Hillary. Of course, we need someone who can beat Hillary, but Hillary has been making so many guffaws lately – it might turn out similar to the Sarkozy-Royal elections in France I want to hear more about Fred Thompson. Fred Thompson responded to Michael Moore http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=611 regarding his challenge to a health care debate when Thompson wrote an op-ed about Moore’s trip to Cuba. We may be in for a good surprise from Thompson. NBC said they do not expect Thompson on Law and Order next season. http://thecelebritycafe.com/features/9940.html . There must be a reason.

Is it too much to ask for a candidate whose first priority is the Security of the United States including the Security of the borders without amnesty, a candidate who believes in reigning in spending, understanding that tax cuts grow the economy, knowing that all life is valuable beginning at conception, and that global warming is just a ploy for more government intervention.

Well, that’s my take….

Congratulations France

It has been my contention that the typical Frenchman is not anti-American. This was a myth propagated by Chirac, the left, and the liberal media both in the United States and France, and the proof was in yesterday’s French elections where Sarkozy won with 53.06% of the vote beating France’s Hillary Clinton's Ségolène Royal.

This is not good news for the Clinton camp. First, the democrats lost their issue that Europe is not our friend. France will now be an ally of the United States. “Freedom” Fries can now retain the name of “French” Fries. Bill O’reilly has lifted his boycott of France.

Illegal immigration is an issue that resonates both in Europe and in the United States. The candidate who comes out strong on both terrorism and immigration will win the next presidential election. I have yet to see any candidate come out with any tendentious view on illegal immigration. This means that Hillary does not have a lock on the next presidency. (Note: The alleged terror plot on Fort Dix was mostly perpetrated by illegal aliens from the Middle East.)

Sarkozy, the president of UMP, the French conservative party wants a liberalized economy based on American and British examples. He is a skilled orator, and wants to be a friend of the United States. His main issue was immigration. The French are tired of the parasitic immigrants pouring in from impoverished African nations. As in the United States, most French politicians are afraid of speaking about illegal immigration for fear of being called racists. Apparently, Sarkozy understood the French frustration about immigration. He wants to design a quota system to allow skilled immigrant workers into the French economy, and stop the flood of illegal immigrants, (what a novel concept – Can anyone tell Bush that?).

According to Forbes magazine, France leads the world in taxes. Forbes uses a misery index. Misery, of course, means the higher taxes you pay, the more misery you live in. Forbes adds all taxes imposed by the government, corporate Income tax, personal income tax, wealth tax, employer and employee social security and the Vat and a misery index is derived. France’s misery index is 166.8 (See the May 21st issue of Forbes) and the USA’s misery index is 115. Sarkozy favors a five point or larger reduction in the top corporate tax rate while Royale wanted another individual flat tax on top of the existing progressive income tax and flat tax. This is why it is so hard to get ahead in France because of the heavy tax burden.

To be fair and balance it is interesting to read a French perspective on their tax burden. http://www.forbes.com/2007/05/03/forbes-misery-france-oped-cx_pf_0503favre.html

Whether or not Sarkozy can fulfill what France needs to grow its economy is yet to be seen. France has been well entrenched in its welfare system since World War II. Its guaranteed employment may also be hard to unravel as evidenced by the recent riots in the French suburbs. This has contributed to France’s double digit unemployment rate. But the fact Sarkozy was elected bodes well for the future of the country, and demonstrates that the French want change.

An article of le monde says, (translation below).

Le président élu Nicolas Sarkozy a déclaré dimanche que les "amis américains" de la France "pouvaient compter" sur son amitié et que la France "serait toujours à leur côté quand ils auraient besoin d'elle".
"Je veux lancer un appel à nos amis américains pour leur dire qu'ils peuvent compter sur notre amitié", a déclaré M. Sarkozy, peu après l'annonce de sa victoire.
"Je veux leur dire que la France sera toujours à leur côté quand ils auront besoin d'elle. Je veux leur dire aussi que l'amitié c'est d'accepter aussi que ses amis puissent penser différemment", a poursuivi le nouveau président.
M. Sarkozy a également appelé Washington à prendre "la tête du combat" en faveur de l'environnement, "parce que ce qui est en jeu c'est le sort de l'humanité". http://www.lemonde.fr/web/depeches/0,14-0,39-30789207@7-354,0.html

Transalation

The president-elect Nicolas Sarkozy declared Sunday that the American Friends of France “can count” on their friendship and that France “would always be on their side when they need it.”
“I would like to make an appeal to our American friends by telling them that they can count on our friendship” declared M Sarkozy, after announcing his victory.
“I would like to say that France will always be at their side when they need it. I would like to tell them also that Friendship means we can think differently”, continued the new president.
M Sarkozy has also appealed Washington to take “the lead” in favor of the environment, “because what is at stake is the fate of all humanity.”

When he refers to the environment, he is talking about global warming. OK – so it’s not perfect (nobody told the French that global warming is a fraud perpetrated by Al Gore and his ilk), but it still is a step in the right direction.

I predict in the next elections in Spain, Zapatero will lose. Spain is also a friend of the United States – it is their current administration that is anti-American, not the populace. Zapatero won as a knee-jerk reaction resulting from the bombing of Madrid. 90% of Spain (and France) are against the war in Iraq, but Spain would have reelected Aznar had it not been for the capitulation caused by the Madrid bombings. Aznar was a driving force in Spain’s economy, and Zapatero is turning out to be a disaster. I predict that at the end of Zapatero’s term, the socialists will lose power again, and the conservatives, “el partido popular” will regain power, and Spain will once again be a friend of the United States.

The left will be relegated to the hallways of the naiveté of the United States Educational System.

Having large families should be frowned upon as an environmental misdemeanour in the same way as frequent long-haul flights, driving a 4x4 car and failing to reuse plastic bags, according to a report to be published tomorrow by a green think tank.
The paper by the Optimum Population Trust (OPT) will say that if couples had two children instead of three they could cut their family’s carbon dioxide output by the equivalent of 620 return flights a year between London and New York.

John Guillebaud, co-chairman of OPT and emeritus professor of family planning at University College London, said: “The effect on the planet of having one child less is an order of magnitude greater than all these other things we might do, such as switching off lights. An extra child is the equivalent of a lot of flights across the planet.

“The greatest thing anyone in Britain could do to help the future of the planet would be to have one less child.”


Well, considering it takes 2.1 people to just maintain current population levels, Europe needs much higher levels than that to support their massive welfare system. But Europe is on its way to extinction. Their current levels are way below that around 1.7 in Britain while Muslims are propagating at the rate of 7 to 1. The left's delusional mindset continues to believe global warming is the greater threat while Muslims clandestinely Islamize Europe.

It doesn't take a genius to know that comparing the Muslim birthrate in Europe to the rest of Europe's birthrate to figure out what Europe will become. The only good news coming from Europe is Conservative Nicolas Sarkozy won France's presidential election. This could bode well for the United states, and France could once again become an ally of the United States.

I guess the French realize their mass immigration from North Africa is not doing them any good, and their massive welfare system is bankrupting the country. The French seemed to realize the left is bad for the country. Mexico realized the same thing.

My fear now is the United States won't realize it in the coming elections, and it is Bush's fault, but if the left takes over here - God Help Us!