Wednesday, May 30, 2007

Yabba Dabba (Friggin) Do!!!

My good friend Phil believes that, if there is a Republican who can beat out Hillary, it is Fred Thompson. He thinks that Rudy's too moderate to energize the Republican base, and that Romney is still a moderate deep down as well, despite the rhetoric. McCain, well, he's just a couple deuces short of a full deck.

But Fred Thompson, more than anyone in the field, has a folksy, populist, Reagan-like appeal. Thompson presents well on TV, and Arthur Branch is embedded in many of our minds in the same way that "The Gipper" was in a former generation. Not only that, Thompson has the wherewithal to look Michael Moore in the eye, tell him he's nuts, and then blow a big puff of smoke in his face. That, my friends, is the testicular fortitude that a Republican presidential candidate needs to have.

Now, all of the big conservative radio guys have held off of a full endorsement of a particular candidate. My bet is that, as we get closer to this thing, that's going to change. Thompson is the kind of candidate that someone like a Sean Hannity or even a Rush Limbaugh can get behind, I believe.

Reagan said it once, "How can a president not be an actor?" I can see Fred saying that. Reagan also said, "Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them." I can see Fred saying that, too.

It is looking like Fred is finally going to declare, quite fittingly, on Independence Day. Let Freedom Ring!

Tuesday, May 29, 2007

A parting shot.

Cindy Sheehan is going home.

I've always given my support to freedom of speech, even when I disagreed with it. I have always supported Cindy Sheehan's right to get out there and display her beliefs. As long as free speech doesn't mean violence or subversion, I'm quite glad to hear that there are a variety of voices out there. Even when others say things I don't like, I see it as an opportunity to express my own views.

Now, on her way out of public life, Cindy Sheehan has exercised her freedom of speech once again to say something quite interesting:

""Goodbye America ... you are not the country that I love and I finally realized no matter how much I sacrifice, I cant make you be that country unless you want it."

You see, I've said before that antiwar folks very often just hate America. When I say something like that, everyone else gets up in arms and says "you can't question my patriotism just because we disagree!" Historically, I've backed down, because I really am not comfortable challenging someones motives. I can challenge their beliefs or actions, but motives are internal, and between them and their God.

But when someone like Cindy Sheehan puts it all out there, you've got to wonder: how many people on the left really do hate America, and feel like it has to be made into a better country through things like protest? Cindy Sheehan will do a lot more towards making America better now that she's going home, trying to mend her family ties and, one hopes, become a hard-working productive citizen.

Thursday, May 24, 2007

UNITED we stand.

I knew then, on September 15 of 2001, when I first saw the goofy liberals printing "United We Stand" bumper stickers that the waves of emotion would eventually die down and they would return to their American-hating ways. I knew they'd wind up accusing Bush of warmongering, even though war in Iraq was over a year and a half away. I kept silent, because I believed that I should have given them the benefit of the doubt.

Boy, was I wrong:



You see, the fact of the matter is that good politicians say things that are politically expedient. I know that should seem obvious, but sometimes I forget. You know, like when our country was attacked by militant Islamic fundamentalists. Does anyone out there on the left remember that?

I believed then (naively, it would seem) that just because people like John Edwards didn't agree with me on most political issues didn't mean they didn't love their country, or that they wouldn't prefer their own country to their country's enemies. But to declare how united we are in the midst of the crisis, it would seem, was just another bumper sticker for John Edwards.

O'Reily knew it then. This is one of those times I wish he'd been wrong.

Wednesday, May 16, 2007

Three weeks in hiding

I decided that it was time to take some time away from the political commentary scene for a bit. I was getting way too frustrated with way too many things. And, since Rosie decided to leave the View, I felt like my work was, at least for a little while, done ;)

Anyways, I've got to admit that I'm finally getting a bit excited about 2008. While my Michigan heritage wants me to support Romney for the GOP, and while my emotional knee-jerk reaction is to support Rudy for his post-9/11 spirit, I can't help but be frustrated with these guys. Romney's record is more center than it is right, and that's just frustrating. Rudy is out there somewhere near the loony left on the social issues. And McCain, well, he just seems to be out there somewhere all around. Certainly I can't vote for the guy who came up with Campaign Finance Reform. Like many conservatives in the GOP, I'm frustrated. On top of that, I'm not sure any of these guys can really beat Hillary.

But I bet this guy can. Who else in the Republican field has the audacity to blow smoke in the face of Michael Moore, other than Fred Thompson? Even Bush, for all the suggestions by his enemies that he's just a cowboy, had a relatively tame reaction to Moore's Farenheit 9/11. But this just took balls. Big ones. The kind that we need our president to have in order to stand up to radical Islam, for example. While I like Newt, and would be happy to see him as president, I think Fred Thompson may be the last, best hope for both conservatism and for the GOP.