Monday, January 14, 2008

Another Reason Not To Elect A RINO

The Bush Administration's leading lawyer would restrict gun ownership:

Since "unrestricted' private ownership of guns clearly threatens the public safety, the 2nd Amendment can be interpreted to allow a variety of gun restrictions, according to the Bush administration.

The argument was delivered by U.S. Solicitor General Paul D. Clement in a brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in the ongoing arguments over the legality of a District of Columbia ban on handguns in homes, according to a report from the Los Angeles Times.

Clement suggested that gun rights are limited and subject to "reasonable regulation" and said all federal limits on guns should be upheld.

"Given the unquestionable threat to public safety that unrestricted private firearm possession would entail, various categories of firearm-related regulation are permitted by the 2nd Amendment," he wrote in the brief, the Times reported.

He noted especially the federal ban on machine guns and those many other "particularly dangerous types of firearms," and endorsed restrictions on gun ownership by felons, those subject to restraining orders, drug users and "mental defectives."

His arguments came in the closely watched Washington, D.C., ban that would prevent residents from keeping handguns in their homes for self-defense.

Read the rest at the link above.

This is just another example of what you get when you put a RINO like Bush in the White House. Sure, he's good on taxes and the War,etc.. But you have to fight the person you voted for on immigration, guns, spending, etc... That is why this election is so important to get right. We need someone that will stand up for almost all conservative principals.

Sign This Petition

If the second amendment is important to you, go sign this petition.

Friday, January 11, 2008

Human Events "Reagan's Favorite Paper" Endorses Fred

From Human Events:

We begin by recalling the profound words of Ronald Reagan at the Conservative Political Action Conference Feb. 15, 1975: “A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency or simply to swell its numbers.” We believed that then, and we believe it now. The issue for us -- and for the conservative community -- boils down to which of the candidates is most representative of the fundamental conservative principles we believe in. The answer is Fred Thompson.

...

We make this endorsement on the basis of much research, having interviewed Sen. Thompson and some of his opponents, as well as examining what they have all said and done. We conclude that Thompson is a solid conservative whose judgment is grounded in our principles.

Read the entire article at the link. Human Events goes on to describe each candidate, as well as going in depth on Fred's record.

This is a major endorsement for Fred. I hope he can run with it. He needs to start catching on fast.

Win, Fred, Win

Is Giuliani Having Money Trouble?

I sure do hope so:

About a dozen senior campaign staffers for Rudy Giuliani are forgoing their January paychecks, a sign of possible money trouble for the Republican
presidential candidate and last year's national front-runner.


The article goes on to suggest they have enough money, but it can't hurt to have more. A Rudy Giuliani nomination would be a disaster for the Republican party, which has already moved too far to the left. I hope the people of Florida come to the realization that Rudy is not the best candidate to put forward in the race for 08.

Monday, January 7, 2008

Fred To Be On The O'Reilly Factor Tonight

I was getting ready to e-mail Fred at Fred08 to tell him he needs to accept O'Reilly's invitation when I found this:


Fred will be on The O’Reilly Factor tonight. I know a lot of you have wanted Fred on that show for months. Now, it will happen.

If you are going to watch LSU and Ohio State play, record O'Reilly.

Win, Fred, Win

Republican Forum

I thought Fred had an excellent night last night. He seems to be the only candidate that is willing to talk seriously about the issues. The rest of them seem to just be interested in doing sound bites. Of course, that seems to be what the people want to here. What some others had to say about his performance:

Mary Katharine Ham:

2. Fred: I actually thought Fred was strongest, but Mitt had more to gain, so I gave the first place to him. The focus group says I'm dead wrong, but I thought he was knowledgeable and made the others look less mature with the depth of his answers. I think he's got a more comfortable style that works for him in debates and ought to serve him well in South Carolina, where voters are more predisposed to the rambly country-boy style.

Erick at Red State:

I think Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney did the best tonight. Mitt seemed even paced all night. Thompson was the adult in the room, willing to talk about the tough truths.

Jim Addison at Wizbang:

Fred Thompson ~ continued his strong performance from Saturday. Some people dislike his speaking style, but his remarks were substantive and on point. This is the man many conservatives expected.

PoliPundit:

Of all the top tier candidates, Fred Thompson is the only one who understands the true problems of illegal immigration and what the meaning of amnesty is. Letting those who commit a crime to come here and pay a fine to stay here is Amnesty.

Last nights ABC News debate spend a nice amount of time on illegal immigration and after hearing many of the candidates gift wrap there amnesty plan for illegal immigrants, Thompson gave them a lesson on amnesty:

“Here’s my definition of amnesty. If you get something that you otherwise didn’t have, to the extent that you get it, that’s amnesty. You steal a television and a radio and get caught and have to give back the television, that’s amnesty. That’s not as much amnesty as if you get to keep everything. But if you get citizenship, or a pathway to citizenship and get to remain in this country because of your illegal activity, that’s amnesty to that extent.”

Win, Fred, Win

Friday, January 4, 2008

Rush Has Some More Good Words About Fred

Go on over to Rush and see what I am talking about.

Be sure and read the whole thing because there is some stuff in there about the Politico hit piece as well.

Every time I hear Fred speak it becomes more clear to me that he is the right man for the job.

I am not all that exited about the results of the Iowa Caucus but I thought he would come in third. McCain has surprised me. I guess a lot of people have forgotten about "Amnesty".

In case you didn't know, Wyoming is holding its primary tomorrow. Thought you might like to know. They moved the date up so they lost half there delegates. They get 14 instead of 28 this year.

Win, Fred, Win

The Mind Of The MSM

The unemployment rate went up to 5%. You would think the bottom is dropping out of the market by listening to the MSM reports. If only Bill was still in charge:


Gateway Pundit has a great post up about the unemployment rate and a good comparison between the media coverage between a 5% unemployment rate under the Bush administration, and a 5.4% rate under the Clinton administration.

Thursday, January 3, 2008

Iowa Caucus

It is time to see which direction the people of Iowa want this country to go. I would offer a prediction on tonight's results but it is impossible for anyone to determine. I have been reading all day and even the best bloggers and columnists have no idea what is going to happen.

I think there will be many surprises tonight.

As far as the Democrats go, it is a three way race and anyone could win.

On the Republican side it seems that Romney or Huckabee will bring home the prize. It does not matter to me which of these two it is, they are both Rinos anyway.

I support Fred Thompson. I have seen Thompson's numbers being predicted from 5% to 28%, and placing 5th to 1st. The fact of the matter is this- no one could possibly have any idea what is going to happen tonight.

It should be a fun night tonight.

Win, Fred, Win

Wednesday, January 2, 2008

Fred's Message To Iowa

Watch this video:

If you do not think this sounds like the best candidate in the race, then you are not a conservative.

Now read this:

This morning Fox and Friends concentrated on three candidates in relation the Iowa caucuses on Thursday night: the two lead candidates in the polls, Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney - and John McCain... this was in spite of the fact that Senator McCain is not in Iowa (he is in New Hampshire) and that Fred Thompson is ahead of John McCain is most of Iowa polls.

This is a part of pattern: last night Fred Thompson was on Fox News Sunday, but in the panel discussion, later in the show, the panellists ignored Fred Thompson. He is attacked by people, including me, for not going on enough television shows - but when he does go on what he says is ignored, so perhaps I see why he does not clamour to go on. Yesterday morning Fox and Friends, like the rest of the media, was busy laughing at Fred Thompson's comments about not being obsessed with politics: "If one is not passionate about campaigning one should not run for office," was the message of the media.

But what sort of person is passionate about the political process? Not getting things done - but the process of gaining votes. Of going around pretending to be close personal friends with lots and lots of people one has never met before?

Fred Thompson is in the middle of a 40 town Iowa tour - so he is hardly lazy. And he does go on television shows - thus dealing with critics, such as myself, who attacked him for not going on enough shows. But what sort of person would enjoy all this?

A lunatic. Someone who was interested in office for its own sake - not as a means to reduce the size and scope of government.

...

No - someone has to enjoy the prospect for office for its own sake, not to reduce the size and scope of government and restore a Federal Republic. One must enjoy the whole process of politics - i.e. be crazy. Or one must pretend to enjoy it - i.e. be a liar.

And then people complain that politicians are either crazy or corrupt. When they shoo away anyone who comes along who is neither crazy or corrupt.

Win, Fred, Win

Back And Ready To Go

December is a hectic time for me. With hunting season and Christmas over with I am ready to get back at it.

Friday, December 21, 2007

McCain Surging In The Polls

John "amnesty" McCain is surging in the polls":

McCain's NH momentum is exactly what his campaign was hoping for. But his better showing in IA and nationally is still a bit surprising. In the best case scenario for McCain, he comes in 3rd in IA, 1st in NH, and the momentum helps him win MI (as he did in 2000) and then SC where the race is very narrow right now. That would make the race functionally a Rudy v. McCain Super Tuesday and beyond. But a more likely scenario is still a 4th or 5th in IA, 2nd in NH, and no wins before Super Tuesday. It's hard to see where McCain goes without a NH win.

It seems many Republicans have found it in there hearts to forgive McCain for this past years fiasco over amnesty. I can not.

I have stated this before and I would like to put it on record one more time: I will not vote for anyone who supported that bill.

Thursday, December 20, 2007

Poll

Michelle Malkin has a poll up: "Which GOP candidate do you support?". Go on over and vote.

As of 3:08pm, the results are:

Thompson- 46%
Romney- 16%
Giuliani- 9%
Hunter- 8%
Paul- 5%
Huckabee and McCain are tied with 3%

Wednesday, December 19, 2007

"The Fourth Quarter"

Fred was on Hannity & Colmes last night. Watch the video:

Part 1:



Part 2:



A lot of people are writing about Fred's witty remarks, such as "I’m not raising my hand until Chief Justice John Roberts swears me in." While these are good, the meat of the interviews with Fred is the fact that he gets it. He understands the issues and is willing to stand up for his positions on these issues.

He is not going to pander, like the rest of them. Of course, he is the only candidate (Democrat or Republican) who can stand up for his past and still have a shot at winning the race.

Win, Fred, Win

Monday, December 17, 2007

Romney would ban "Weapons Of Unusual Lethality"

First of all watch this video:



Romney has a habit of flip flopping on the issues. He is not doing that here. He will support gun bans. He talks a good game, but he will not stand up to the anti-gun crowd.

What is a weapon of unusual lethality?

What gun could be described by this statement?

All guns can be described with that statement. Any gun can be used in a lethal manner.

Terms such as this are used to mask a candidates true feelings on an issue.