Attorney General Eric Holder Held in Contempt of Congress with Bipartisan Vote

In a bipartisan vote Eric Holder was held in contempt of congress by a vote of 255-67. Over 100 Democrats decided not to vote at all and simply walked out of the House in protest, but 17 Democrats voted with Republicans to hold Holder in contempt.

This whole situation is regrettable. It is never a good day when a member of the President's cabinet is held in contempt of congress, but there was little choice. Despite Democrats' insistence that thousands of documents have been turned over, many more are being withheld, and these documents need to be turned over to shed light on Fast and Furious, which has led to the death of Boarder Patrol Agent Brian Terry. This is serious business and not to be politicized.

No one should cheer the contempt vote, just accept that it had to happen and could have been avoided altogether if the Attorney General complied with requests of congress.

Supreme Court Upholds Obamacare (Mostly)

In a 5-4 decision the Supreme Court upheld the individual mandate, but it ruled that a mandate using the commerce clause is unconstitutional. Instead the mandate was upheld as a tax, something that President Obama repeatedly denied it was until it went to the Supreme Court, then his Solicitor General argued that it was a tax. Chief Justice John Roberts, a George W. Bush appointee sided with liberals giving them the votes they needed to uphold the mandate.
The court also ruled that the Federal government could not take away current medicaid funding from states that choose not to participate in The Affordable Care Act's (Obamacare) new requirements.

I applaud the latter ruling while strongly disagreeing with the former. The Supreme Court have now ruled that there is no limit to the coercion that the government can use by it's taxing power to control the lives of individuals. It is now more important than ever to defeat President Obama and elect a Republican Senate as well as hold a solid majority in the House.

Romney's Electoral Path to Victory

Romney only needs 6 Obama states to win, or six states and the rest of another McCain lost part of in 2008:
1. Indiana- 11
2. North Carolina- 15
3. Virginia- 13
4. Florida- 29
5. Ohio- 18
And one of these:
6. Nevada- 6
6. Iowa- 6
McCain lost one district in Nebraska giving one of it's electoral votes to Obama.
If Romney wins all of Nebraska's electoral votes this year he can also win with the first five states plus New Hampshire, otherwise it would be a 269/269 tie in the electoral college.

1. Indiana (11)- This state is already considered gone for Obama.
2. North Carolina (15)- Obama won this state by .3% in 2008 at the height of Hope and Change, some polls have put it close with a narrow lead for Obama but he is unlikely to carry it again unless Romney stumbles badly.
3. Virginia (13)- For now Obama has a slight advantage but Romney has a good chance of carrying the state, but if Obama is reelected it could well come down to Virginia.
4. Florida (29)- Obama carried it by less than 3%, Obama and Romney are trading narrow leads but Obama is consistently under 50%. Romney has a good shot of winning it.
5. Ohio (18)- Obama carried it by less than 5% in 2008. The economy is bad there and Obama is under 50% with a small lead or trailing slightly. It will be tougher than Florida but it is winnable for Romney.

The Sixth State:
6a. Nevada (6)- Obama carried this state by 12.5% last time and has a small lead and is over 50% in most polls but unemployment is high in that state and has the potential to make that state competitive.

6b. Iowa (6)- In 2008 Obama carried the state by 9.5% but this year are split, some have Obama leading, others show a small lead for Romney.

6c. New Hampshire (4)- Obama took this state by 9.65% points in 2008 but just like Iowa polls this year are split, anywhere from +9 Obama to +2 Romney. For now I would say Obama has the advantage but that could change.

6d. Colorado (9)- This state was won by the President by 9% in 2008 and Obama has the lead in most if not all polls, for now the advantage is his but some of the polls have him under 50% so Romney's people best keep an eye on the possibility of taking it.

Longer Shots
6e. Wisconsin (10)- This was a 14-point win in 2008 but in 2010 Republicans defeated longtime Democratic Senator Russ Feingold, picked up the Governorship and won both houses of the state legislature. Democrats fought back hard against Republicans and came close to winning back the State Senate in recalls last year, Governor Scott Walker is now in the middle of a recall election of his own that will be decided June 5th. If he loses it will likely be a lost cause for Romney in November, if he wins handily it could well be a state Romney can win. For now however, Obama has the upper hand.

6f. Minnesota (10)- Like Wisconsin this state is slowly trending Republican. Obama won it by more than 10-points in 2008 but Republicans picked up both houses of the state legislature in 2010 and barely lost the governorship in a 3-way race where the conservative vote was divided. Obama is leading, but is below 50% in some polls. A prospect for Romney to win, but for now advantage Obama.

Obama's Firewall
First, ignore Indiana and North Carolina, since he is not going to win them anyway. Then to win re-election all Obama has to do is win Virginia, Ohio and one of the other states I mentioned, Colorado for example. If that were to happen Obama win have 278 votes in the Electoral College to Romney's 260, thus winning a 2nd term.

To make it brief, he who wins Virginia and Ohio has the best shot at victory.

Obama Now Supports Same-Sex Marriage, Again

Yesterday President Obama finally came out in favor of same-sex marriage. But he had supported it before.

Andrew Kaczynski at Buzzfeed has a more in depth timeline with videos posted as well.
Obama Gay Marriage Timeline

Obama in 1996: "I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages."

Obama in 2004: "My religious faith dictates marriage is between a man and a woman, gay marriage is not a civil right."

Obama in 2008: "I believe marriage is the union between a man and a woman. As a Christian it's also a sacred union."

In 1996 he was running for a very liberal State Senate seat in Illinois. No Republican was going to be elected, his concern was other Democrats in the Primary: So he supported it.

In 2004 he was going statewide, so it was a riskier position to have: So he opposed it.

In 2008 he was running for President, and the majority of Americans were against same-sex marriage at the time: So he was still against it.

Now in 2012 polls have show a narrow plurality to a narrow majority supporting it, and he knows he won't carry states that oppose it that he carried last time, ones like Indiana and North Carolina: So he supports it.

The President has said that he supports states being able to make the decision on same-sex marriage (which happens to be my position, both in support of SSM and states having the right to legalize it or ban it). But is this his real position? I don't doubt he supports same-sex marriage, but it is possible he does not really favor states' rights in this area.

Mitt has the Nomination All but Won, but if He Wins He Better Govern Like A Conservative

With Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich suspending their campaigns and some of Mitt Romney's rivals such as Michele Bachmann endorsing him it is safe to say Romney is the 2012 Republican Nominee for President. He may win in November, he may not.
If he wins he should be mindful of the Tea Party that is successfully defeating sitting Republican congressman and senators out in the primary with less than conservative records. In 2010 Utah Senator Bob Bennett was defeated, this year another Utah Senator has a race on his hands, Orrin Hatch. Hatch will probably win in the end but long time Indiana Senator Richard Lugar may not be so lucky. He is trailing Tea Party challenge and Indiana state Treasurer Richard Mourdock. A Mourdock victory will turn a safe Republican seat into a leaning or likely Republican seat but he is still favored to win.
This all leads to Romney and how he will govern if elected. He does not have to be a rigid ideologue to please the Tea Party as the left would have us believe, but he does have to significantly reduce the deficit and do his absolute best to get real reforms passed. Democrats will likely filibuster most reforms but Romney must try and try hard.
If the deficit is down, regulation is streamlined and conservative judges appointed he will have no contest for the Republican Nomination in 2016 if he wins in 2012. But if the deficit does not go down significantly, and no attempts at conservative reform are made there will be a primary in 2016 and he could lose.

Liberals, Illegal Immigration, and Their Arguments Supporting It

The hysterical, out of proportion response to the Arizona law enforcing federal immigration laws by the left demonstrates with total clarity not only how out of touch they are with the rest of the country, but also how desperate they are to support illegal immigration.

Within days of passage of the law calls for boycotts and demonstrations by the illegal immigration lobby and other far left groups sprung up around the country. These protests are highly organized astroturf protests designed to give the appearance of public disapproval of the Arizona law. But polls show overwhelming approval in Arizona and around the nation for enforcement of immigration laws. Why is the left so desperate to oppose any effort to confront the problem of illegal immigration? The answer is simple: politics.

The changing demographics in America brought about by illegal immigration will give the left ever increasing power, especially if the communities formed by illegals do not integrate into American society. The left, for all their denials and protestations, know that they are out of touch on most issues with the American public, yet they are determined to take America as far to the left as they can. So how can they take this country to where they want it to go? They must import the new majority.

Of course they cannot outright say they support illegal immigration without incurring the wrath of the electorate so they use the race card to tar and feather those who want to enforce immigration laws as racist, and frame the language of amnesty in the foggiest possible light: "A path to citizenship."

To attempt to blunt enforcement arguments directly they will paint the possibility of securing the border as hopeless and raise the strawman of deportation of every single last illegal in the nation being an equally impossible task. Yes, even if we enforce the laws on the books and get all the resources needed we will not find and deport every single last illegal in the country, but that is no reason not to enforce immigration laws. Not every armed robbery or murder will be solved, that isn't reason not to try to solve as many as possible.

The GOP is in Serious Danger of Losing the Presidential Election

With Obama's approval rating now creeping up into the high 40s and a Republican Presidential Primary that could end up with a weak candidate, or just as bad, a brokered convention the once good chance of winning back the White House in 2012 is slipping away.
Newt Gingrich won Saturday's South Carolina Primary resoundingly in a stunning rebuke of former front runner Mitt Romney. And now Gingrich leads in Florida by double digits. And to add to that infighting and supporters for candidates loathing the opposition enough that they may not support the winner if their man isn't the Nominee are making President Obama's chances at a 2nd Term better every week.
If Gingrich nets several large states before once again falling, and Santorum does the same with Romney winning some states and showing upa strong second in others this could very well leave no candidate with a majority of delegates. This will lead to a brokered convention with candidates scrambling to make deals with rivals for delegates and a lot more bad blood than there is even now.
Furthermore the only one of the top three candidates, Romney, Gingrich, and Santorum who comes close to winning is Romney. Santorum will send independents away in droves with his heavy-handed social conservative rhetoric and Newt has enough baggage and a tendency for gaffes that will also hurt his chances if he wins the nomination.
Romney may not even win, but he has a chance. And he won't hurt House and Senate candidates down-ticket like the others. Republicans don't have long to fix the mess they are in, and the stakes couldn't be higher.

Kim Jong-il is Dead

I have no idea what this means for North Korea let alone the world. Likely his son and successor Kim Jong-un will carry on the totalitarian polices of the ghastly regime. I would love to be proven wrong in this, even some progress toward freedom is better than none, but I'm not holding my breath.

Why Can't Republicans Come Up With A Stronger Field?

With unemployment over 8.5% and a President that is out of touch ideologically with voters you would think this election would be a cake walk for Republicans. But it isn't.
President Obama either leads, is tied with, or at worst is slightly behind every single candidate on a regular basis, the only candidate in the top tier who leads him occasionally is Mitt Romney and the lead is not impressive. Generic Republican has lead the President more or less consistently but not any of these candidates. If only Generic Republican was the nominee the GOP would be set.
All the candidates are flawed to some extent. Mitt Romney has Romneycare to answer for as well as layoffs in companies he managed, and although he has been getting better at answering these charges he will be confronted with them in the General if he gets the nomination. You can count on that. Newt Gingrich has marital infidelity, taking money from Fannie and Freddie and numerous missteps in the past against him, including appearing in a climate change ad with Nancy Pelosi. He appears to be on the decline.
Santorum and Bachmann have no appeal with the center, which will absolutely be needed to win next year. Bachmann has only a few years experience in Washington, and several years of experience in each house the Minnesota legislature combined so she will likely suffer a stature problem in the General. And Santorum lost his last election in a landslide, that should make any Republican primary voter think twice about his chances of winning a national election against an entrenched incumbent.
Next we have Rick Perry, his poor debating skills, troublesome statements on illegal immigration and George W Bush like swagger (he was Bush's Lieutenant Governor in Texas) make his prospects against an above average debater like Obama in a country that still has a hangover from the Bush years less than appealing. And need anything be said about Ron Paul? The man has no chance at the nomination, he is over 70 years old and his foreign policy positions would likely trigger a 3rd party or independent run by conservatives if somehow over all the odds he managed to capture the nod.
The only other candidate than Romney who has a decent chance of winning is Jon Huntsman. But he is nowhere in the polls and some of his statements have angered conservatives. He also, unfairly I believe, loses points for being President Obama's Ambassador to China. This really shouldn't be counted against him, anyone who can offer service to his country or his President should if it doesn't violate his personal convictions.
It's too late for latecomers so we are stuck with this field. The only comfort is that the President is still unpopular and has been far below the critical 50% an incumbent should have to feel secure against Mitt Romney the still likely, although not inevitable Republican Nominee. Because the nominee will also have an affect on House and Senate races. A strong one will carry seats for Republicans over the top and a weak one will sink the prospects of candidates who might otherwise win.

Christopher Hitchens- A Powerful Voice for Atheism: Dead at 62

Hitchens had been battling cancer for some time but it did come as a shock when I read the news that he had died.
He was one of the most intelligent and relentless critics of religion of recent memory. He had a way of destroying the arguments of the religious with a ruthless glee that made his supporters cheer and his critics howl. He was one of the main voices I listened to when I was still new to Atheism. I never knew the man, like many of his supporters I would have liked to, but also like many of his supporters I felt I knew him in a sense from his writing and his famous debates his religious opponents.
I am certain his book God is Not Great will be read for many years to come and admired and scorned as an unapologetic, take-no-prisoners argument against all religion and superstition.
Hitchens was also noted for being a steadfast supporter of the Iraq War, a position which drew criticism and sometimes contempt from the Left. But Hitchens himself never really left the Left, he may have softened from the days when he called himself a Socialist but he was never a conservative.
Even though I am firmly a creature of the Right I will miss his razor-sharp intellect and his give-'em-hell approach to taking on religion.

Earthquake in Canada

Canada's May 2 Federal Election changed to landscape of Canadian politics is a big way.
Going in to the election things looked like this:
Conservatives: 143
Liberals: 77
NDP: 37
BQ: 47
Green: 0

With only 143 out of 308 seats in the House of Commons the Conservatives had a minority government. After the Liberal party leader, Michael Ignatieff, introduced a motion of no-confidence against the government it passed which triggered elections.
The led by Prime Minister Stephen Harper Conservatives won a majority government, the Liberals, a long entrenched institution in Canada was pushed back to a distant 3rd place losing not only their official opposition status but Ignatieff lost his own seat to a Conservative. The NDP, a hard left party sky-rocketed into 2nd place with their best ever showing in history by far. Many of the seats they won came at the expense of the BQ, Quebec's separatist party which was nearly wiped off the map completely. Like the Liberals, the BQ also lost the seat of their leader, Gilles Duceppe. But in this case he lost to an NDP candidate.

The new map looks like this.
Conservatives: 167
NDP: 102
Liberals: 34
BQ: 4
Green: 1

Whether or not the Liberals can recover is up for debate but the Bloc Quebecois is finished as a political force in Quebec. And the Conservatives will have at least four years to govern as a majority.

Osama bin Laden is Dead

On May 1 2011 Americans got the news they have been wanting to hear since 9/11. A team of US Navy SEALs raided his compound in Pakistan, not far from a Pakistani military academy. Osama bin Laden was killed along with one of bin Laden's adult sons.
This is great news for the War on Terror and for free people everywhere in the world.

Election 2010 Post Mortem

There is no other way to put this: last night's election was historic. Republicans picked up a minimum of 60 seats in the House of Representatives, the biggest pickup by a party since 1948.

House
Republicans will have a minimum of 239 seats but will likely end up with between 240 and 242 by the time all the races are called. The Democrats will have less than 200 members of the House for the first time since 1946.
So far, 49 incumbent Democrats have been defeated including 3 Committee Chairmen: James Oberstar (MN-8)- Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Ike Skelton (MO-4)- Armed Services Committee, and John Spratt (SC-5)- Budget Committee. Two Republicans incumbents were defeated, Charles Djou (HI-1), and Joseph Cao (LA-3).

Senate
The Senate was a more mixed picture. Republicans have picked up 6 seats so far while successfully defending all of their own. The GOP picked up open seats in Illinois, Indiana, North Dakota, and Pennsylvania. But failed to pick open seats in Connecticut, Delaware, and West Virginia. Two Democratic incumbents were knocked off, Blanche Lincoln in Arkansas by a landslide, and Russ Feingold in Wisconsin by a narrow but comfortable margin. Targeted Democrats survived in California, Colorado, and Nevada. Washington has yet to be called but the Democrat is leading by 1-2 percent.
Alaska has also yet to be called with Lisa Murkowski apparently leading by 6-7 points in a write-in campaign over Tea Party candidate Joe Miller. Since Democrat Scott McAdams will finish in 3rd place and both Miller and Murkowski have vowed to caucus with Republicans that seat can safely be called a Republican hold.

Governorships
Republican now have the majority of governorships after the 2010 Elections. The have captured state houses from Democrats in Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. Races in Oregon and Illinois have yet to be called but Democrats are leading in both.
Democrats took California, and Hawaii from the GOP but are leading in Minnesota and Connecticut as well, although some outlets have already called Connecticut for the Democrats already. Republicans have also lost Rhode Island to independent candidate Lincoln Chafee, a former Republican Senator.

State Legislatures
Democrats came into the election with a significant advantage but so far have lost 18 state legislatures: Alabama House and Senate, Indiana House, Iowa House, Maine House and Senate, Michigan House, Minnesota House and Senate, Montana House (which was 50/50 before), New Hampshire Senate, New York Senate, North Carolina House and Senate, Ohio House, Pennsylvania House, and the Wisconsin House and Senate. The Oregon House which was under firm Democratic control before the election is now split 30/30.

The winning of the House of Representatives by Republicans and the severely narrowed Democratic majority in the Senate will put a very effective block on any left-wing legislation that President Obama may wish to pass, and the pick ups in Governorships and state legislatures bodes well for Republicans in the upcoming redistricting that will reshape the electoral map.

Tea Party
Tea Party energy is what is primarily what made the gains Republicans won possible, but they have a mixed record of success in the Senate: Marco Rubio and Rand Paul won big victories in Republican seats, and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania won seats previously held by Democrats. But Sharon Angle was defeated by Harry Reid by 5 points in Nevada and Ken Buck lost to Michael Bennett in Colorado, and O'Donnell cost Republicans a sure victory in Delaware and Joe Miller appears headed for defeat in Alaska to moderate Republican Lisa Murkowski.
Toomey, and Rubio proved strong conservatives can win swing states and nominal blue states, but the Tea Party defeats also prove that the Tea Party must be more careful to nominate credible candidates.

Predictions: 2010 Elections 10/31/10

The election is just 2 days away and Republicans are poised to take control of at least one chamber of congress. Some Governor and Senate races are beginning to tighten as House races are generally headed in the direction of Republicans.

I predict a 60 or so net pick up for Republicans in the House, giving them control by at least a 20 seat margin. Although there are far more seats in play I think that some of these seats will in the end send the Democrat back to Washington, albeit narrowly which will make them think twice about voting party line with the left.

The Senate could go Republican, but in the end I don't think it will. Connecticut is now a near lost hope for Republicans, as is Delaware. However, Arkansas, North Dakota, and Indiana are lost for Democrats. Wisconsin is almost as hopeless for the Dems. That's 4. But several tossups look to make election night interesting: Pennsylvania, Colorado, Nevada, Illinois, West Virginia, Washington, and California are all considered tossups.
Among those Pennsylvania, Nevada, and Colorado seem headed for the Republican column. Illinois looks slightly tilted Republican as well, but not as much. It is also unknown is the Democratic candidate will receive a bounce from last minute campaigning by President Obama, who is still popular in that state. If those seats go Republican that will be a pick up of 8.
In West Virginia Manchin is headed up in the polls, the most Recent Rasmussen poll has him up 49-46% over his Republican opponent.
Washington is neck and neck between Democrat Senator Murray and Republican challenger Rossi. But this state is Blue by nature so the edge has to go to Murray. Finally in California, 3-term Senator Barbara Boxer is within the margin of error ahead of Businesswoman Carly Fiorina. Boxer has been consistently ahead, but also, consistently under 50%, a danger for any incumbent. I wouldn't rule out an upset for any of these races, but odds are at least two, if not all three of them, will stay Democratic.
I'd say Republicans will pick up 7-9 seats in the Senate.

37 Governorships are up this year and Republicans stand to pick up several. Rasmussen has Republicans picking up Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Wisconsin, and Wyoming for sure. Illinois, and Pennsylvania are also leaning that way. That is 11 seats.
Ohio, Oregon, and Massachusetts, all Democrat seats, are tossups, but Ohio does look like it will go Republican. Rhode Island is a 3-way race with the Republican a distant 3rd in every poll so that seat will either go independent or Democrat. Hawaii had been a near certain Democrat pick up but recent tightening in polls have shown a close race. However other, newer polls have shown former Democratic congressman Neil Abercrombie pulling ahead once again of Lt Governor Duke Aiona. When this election is over I expect Republicans to have between 31 and 33 governorships.

My Predictions:
House- About +60 GOP (239 House seats)
Senate- +7-9 GOP (48-50 Senate seats)
Governorships- +7-9 GOP (31-33 Governorships)

A larger than expected Republican turnout could mean even greater gains than expected, just like last minute liberal enthusiasm could reduce expected gains.

Check out these sites for the latest on the Election:

Rasmussen Reports
Real Clear Politics

Senate 2010 Predictions 9/30

As of today all Republican held seats seem safe. But Rasmussen has 3 Democratic seats currently rated Sold GOP: Arkansas, Indiana, and North Dakota. Also, three others are rated Lean GOP: Colorado, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. With those seats alone Republicans would gain six seats. Illinois is and has been even for some time, and Nevada and Washington have drifted between even and a slight lead for the incumbent. Finally West Virginia has become even recently as the race has become nationalized.

If I were to guess I would say Republicans would pick up: Arkansas, Indiana, North Dakota, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and West Virginia. That's 7.

They will also pick up at least one, but possibly two or three of the following: Illinois, Washington, and Nevada. That's 8-10 seats.
My prediction: A 9 seat gain for Republicans. That would give us a 50/50 Senate with the two independents siding with the Democrats and Vice President Biden breaking the tie.

You can take a closer look at the polls I made my predictions from at:
Rasmussen: Senate Balance of Power

Real Healthcare Reform is Needed, Not a Left-Wing Monstrosity

The Democrats could have had an easy win last year by passing a simple set of reforms to improve the healthcare system. Instead chose to go down the road of the worst mix of ideological obstinacy and special interest capitulation. They even openly and blatantly bribed senators on the fence to try to pass their bill. They ignored public will and paid the price in Massachusetts, with the cost of their filibuster-proof senate, and, the seat of one of the left's most beloved icons Ted Kennedy going to Republicans.

What kind of bill could they have passed for an easy win? Just a few easy reforms would have gone a long way with the public's good will:
1. Interstate Competition
2. Portability when employees change jobs
3. Don't allow companies to drop customers when they get sick
4. Tort reform
5. Pre-existing conditions

The first three would have been easy, with no real opposition to block it, tort reform would have had opposition by the trial lawyers but could have been done. Pre-existing conditions may have been difficult. What reason would an insurance company have for taking someone with a condition that they know for a fact will cost them much more then the customer could possibly put in? However, even this could have been done with smart and delicate legislation.

America would have been better off with a bill with the provisions stated, but the Democrats chose to go the ideological and special interest routes. If Republicans know what is good for them, and they manage to regain the majority in the midterm elections, they would be wise to pass smart, simple, and effective healthcare reform if they want to help the country and themselves at the same time.

Republicans, Conservatives, and 3rd Parties

The fact that the Republicans had everything for 4 years and expanded government is disheartening, almost to the point of wanting to leaving the party. However, seeing what the Democrats have done when they have complete power made me realize that the Republicans at their worst are still better than the Democrats at their best. The Democrats are getting more unpopular by the week and will face crushing defeats in upcoming elections. The only thing that can stop this and give the left even more power is a divided conservative movement.

The right thing to do is not ditch the party and ensure conservatism's demise, but to change the Republican party. Third party conservatives should get inside the party and work to change the it themselves, and we need to invite Libertarians in as well. Although I don't agree with them on everything, most of them have a passion for shrinking government that Republicans could use.

Conservatives should also consider infiltrating the Democratic party as well, the Democratic Party has drifted so far left that moonbats are in charge of both houses of congress and the Presidency. We should run conservatives in Democratic primaries where a Conservative has a decent chance of winning. However, we should only support Conservative Democrats who can say no to their leadership.

In short, Conservatives should think beyond the Republican party, but Conservative 3rd parties will only hurt the Conservative movement.

How many liberals does it take to screw in a light bulb?

How many liberals does it take to screw in a light bulb?

Five for the actual installation as required by union rules, 3 for monitoring
the installers, a committee of 25 for regulatory over site, 65 staffers for the
committee members, 45 for another committee regarding environmental impact, 16
to run the environmental committee's private jet, 85 staffers for the
environmental committee, 35 more to write up the rules for the committees, an
organizing committee of 15 to set up the whole thing, 1 light bulb czar
appointed by the organizing committee to pretend he is solving the problem, and
1 PR guy to deal with the public backlash and blame the enormous cost of the
project on the Republicans and big business.

Republicans Will Need 60 Senators For Conservative Reform

In just a few months under the far left leadership of President Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid America's policies have been pushed drastically to the left. And it may get worse if they don't suffer massive losses in at least one house of congress next year. Such a defeat would only give them pause and causing them to slow down for a spell before continuing to advance their far-left agenda.

In fact, even if Republicans are able to take back both houses of congress and the White House in 2012 the Democrats will stonewall 90% of a Conservative reform agenda. The Democrats as a minority will use the filibuster at every conceivable opportunity. Then they will use this to call the majority a do-nothing congress and hope things fall apart enough for them to be able to slither into power again.

America needs several reforms that Democrats will never support. Offshore drilling, real tort reform, securing our boarders, streamlining government, campaign finance freedom, education reform, tax reform, and smart deregulation to name some needed reforms.

Unless the filibuster is taken away from the Democrats as an option they will stonewall and demonize every single reform that they can. To stop this, Republicans need 60 Senate seats minimum, preferably 61-63 to be able to handle the odd defection or two on some issues, and a majority in the House of Representatives, a House with at least 240 Republicans would be needed to handle defections and Democratic pressure of vulnerable Republicans from left-wing special interest groups.

If Republicans can mount a smart enough campaign they can retake the majority in the House in 2010 and reduce the Democratic majority in the Senate, defeat Obama in 2012, and retake in Senate in 2012 or 2014. Getting a 60 seat majority would likely take at least one or two cycles more, unless Republicans are lucky. I'm pessimistic of the likelihood of this happening, but Republicans must try if they are to enact positive change for the country.

Bernard Goldberg's Brilliant Plan on Affirmative Action

On the O'Reilly Factor today, Conservative author Bernard Goldberg gave an ingenious solution that would satisfy both sides of the affirmative action debate. White Americans who really believe America would be a better place with affirmative action should give up their jobs on the condition that the person who replaces them is not white.

If they are serious about their desire for "justice" they would have no problem with offering their job, after all, many people have given a lot more for civil rights. When you think about it most of them would not even have to give up their jobs. All they need to do is offer to give up their job and once racial equity has been established in the workplaces across America the remaining liberals can keep their jobs.

I would be curious to hear what objections white proponents of affirmative action would have to this plan, it would change America forever and give minorities the equity in the workplace they have long sought.

If the left does object to this it will confirm what I have always suspected about them, they don't mind using the government to force other people to sacrifice for their ideological beliefs, as long as they don't have to sacrifice anything.

I suspect we will see fierce attacks on both Goldberg and his idea by the left without actually addressing why they oppose it. The reason being that Goldberg's plan, whether serious or not, exposes the left for exactly what they are, and they won't let that stand without demonizing the man and the idea without actually addressing the particulars.

New Liberal Taking Point: We Need Public Competition

A new talking point the left is using for things like health insurance and the like is, what's the problems with a little public competition. This is an attempt to annex conservative arguments about competition and free-enterprise.

What they purposely avoid telling you is that when the private sector has the government as competition it is never a fair fight. The government has a bottomless pit of money that they can use to drive competition out of the market. All they have to do is lower their prices to a point where competitors can't maintain a profit if they match their prices and services. These lower prices would be explained as making their service affordable to lower income Americans, and while it would help the poor afford the service, it would also kill free enterprise by giving an unfair advantage to the so-called public competition.

Once the competition has been effectively eliminated, like in the private sector, either prices would go up and/or services would be cut. This is why the government needs to stay out of the private sector.

Protests in Iran Not Going Away.

Despite the Iranian Supreme Leader's demand for an end to protests, they continue. No one knows how far these protests will go. Will they bring the regime down? Probably not, but never say never. Whether it happens in a month or in 20 years theocracy's days are numbered.
If anything these demonstrations prove something many have known all along: the Iranian people want democracy. They value the right to determine who leads them just like we do. Iranian youth especially are much more modern than the those who run their country. Their values, while not exactly like ours, are modern.
Afghanistan is free and Iraq is free, I hope Iran is soon to follow.

George Tiller Murdered in Church

The murder of Dr. George Tiller on Sunday shocked the nation and has been condemned by people on both sides of the abortion debate. He was gunned down in his church in an act so low and despicable it defies description.

All violence in the name of opposition to abortion must be and is condemned by the real pro-life community. Acts like the horrific murder of Dr. Tiller are not only a violation of basic human decency, and the rules of law and civilization, but they hurt the pro-life cause.

I won't gloss over what Tiller did. It was wrong and I would have liked to have seen him shut down, but never in a million years would I or any decent person wish to see him hurt, let alone killed. It is a sad day in America when someone decides to take the law into their own hands and become judge, jury, and executioner.

California Supreme Court Upholds Prop 8

In a 6-1 decision the California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8 which defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. At the same time they ruled that the 18,000 marriages of same-sex couples will not be voided.

This was the right call. The people passed a constitutional amendment to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, overturning it would be declaring a part of the state constitution unconstitutional. It would have been a dangerous court precedent and a new low for judicial activists. Fortunately they made the right decision.

Proponents of same-sex marriage have already started collecting signatures for their own ballot proposition to repeal prop 8. I wish them luck. Prop 8 only passed with 52% of the vote, and this was with the backlash of judicial activism, I think it stands a decent chance of passing.

Obama Picks Sotomayor for the Supreme Court

President Obama made his first pick for the Supreme Court today, judge Sonia Sotomayor. Like the Justice she replaces, David Souter, she is a liberal. Not only is she a liberal, but she is a judical activist who thinks the courts are there to make policy.
Conservatives must make a case to oppose her. Although it is likely hopeless, conservative must make an active effort to inform the people of her record and her philosophy as a judicial activist. This can be used to boost Republican turnout in the 2010 congressional elections, and help conservatives prepare for the judicial pick, which could well be a replacement for a conservative Justice.
The left's arguments to Conservative opposition are predicable:
1. Republicans are the party of no.
This is easy to rebut, liberals oppose practically every conservative appointed to the supreme court, and many to the lower courts. Why is opposition to a supreme court pick wrong when liberals do it every time to a conservative? Hypocrisy? I think so.
2. But she was appointed by a Republican, the first President Bush.
This is true, but it doesn't matter. Her voting record and public statements are those of a liberal judicial activist.
3. The 3rd argument will be a base and despicable attempt to paint Republicans as racists and/or sexists for opposing a Hispanic woman.
Liberals opposed Janice Rogers Brown's appointment to a lower court, stalling her appointment for years. She is a black woman. Were the liberals who opposed her racist or sexist? If the answer by a liberal you ask is no, then why are Conservative who oppose Sotomayor racist and/or sexist? The answer is they are not.
These arguments need to be shot down before they are made. The left knows that if they repeat a lie enough times it will stick, and that is precisely what they hope to do.