Memories: Fan made thundercats trailer is a blast from the past

Well,

Long overdue for a post election thought and what should get me out of my hole but a blast from the past. As a youngish 30 something I’m sure I am only one of legions of people who crossed paths with the thundercats cartoon of the mid 80’s

Even then it was a guilty pleasure..lol.. I used to prance around with the cats fighting for good.. and pray against any spirits that might try to come though my TV when Mum Ra was saying his ‘evil spirits’ incantation. Yes, I was a spiritually informed youth… but not strong willed enough to give up after school cartoons.

(side note) Can I just say how my innocence was dashed when I finally came to realize that so many of the cartoons were premised on an innoculation of children against sensitivity to witchcraft and even the worship of false gods? There was always some RA that was the object of worship or terror in those things.. She Ra, Mum Ra.. and countless others. Ra was an Egyptian god.. that was 20 th century America people.. You couldn’t make a futuristic cartoon about good and evil without revisiting our pagan past?

But I digress..

I’m not a fan girl.. and don’t heavily follow the comic/cartoon movie scene. I actually came across this fan made thundercats trailer on.. *gasp* a political website, Hotair.com

It has very deservedly gone viral.

Wormy, a San Fran based graphic artist poured a year of his life into splicing together and editing frame by frame in photoshop, what has to be scenes from at least 10 diffeent movies and tv shows, to create a dramatic and believable 2 minute plus, trailer for a live action thundercats movie. (It’s already become an internet game trying to guess the source material that was used)

There is a movie planned..a CGI one, a’ la Baeowolf, but geekdom is of the firm belief that it will bomb. With the amount of buzz this trailer has gotten on the web, producers would be well served to model their CGI version after the visual and emotional tone that Wormy put together.

Would be awesome if they could actually snag the actors he cast to make them CGI characters too! LOL (Is that cheaper that live action acting?)

The purists in geekdom insist that only this exact movie, with this cast, in live action, will now suffice.

Wormy has thrown down the gauntlet. Can or should Hollywood try to pick it up?

Thoughts? Comments?

Keep it family friendly! This trailer has had the power to evoke any number of four letter expletives on the fanboy community sites..lol I’m sure they would welcome your more colorful assessments there.

Be sure to visit Wormytv at his blogspot site and give him some direct feedback as well.

Enjoy!

Did Biden’s ‘Gaffe’ Signal Coming Flip on Foreign Policy?

The netroots is buzzing with the news of Biden’s latest apparent gaffe.

Apparently he warned a group of lefty fundraisers that Obama would be tested on the national security front within his first 6 months in office, and that America would be dissappointed in his response. He begged his audience to stand by the administration when the poll numbers reflect dissaproval with Obama’s handling of the situation.

The right has jumped on this as a clear example of Biden’s lack of trust in Obama’s ability to handle a crisis correctly, an the left is disgusted at what appears to be a monumental gaffe on Biden’s part.

I think both perspectives are incorrect, and that the true meaning of Biden’s ominous warning may actually be cause for conservatives to feel less terrified of an Obama administration.. at least on one front.

We are all forgetting to take one very important thing into account. The hubris of the left.

Obama/Biden, the media and just about everyone out there with a public megaphone, (barring conservative talk radio) is convinced that the democratic ticket is going to carry the day. They are also foolish enough to assume that this means they have a mandate from the entire nation, and that essentially this nation as a people has moved to the left, especially on foreign policy.

In the minds of this ticket, the approval of America would be dependent on an Obama administration conducting the sort of defeatist, white flag, all talk and no action appeasement foreign policy, as has been transmitted to the public on the stump.

I suspect that some of the national security briefings that the transition teams have been getting have been a serious reality check regarding that apporach, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Biden is trying to prepare their lefty base for some ‘dissappointment’ when the reality on the ground dictates a policy that may be more pre-emptive and aggressive that they may be expecting.

(Remember, this is the same Obama team that is on the record that a pre-emptive, unapproved strike inside Pakistan is under open consideration if neccessary)

In may ways, I think one of the biggest cons Obama has pulled on his base, is convincing them that he is the anti-war candidate. I think he may be more willing to take military action than even McCain, perhaps unwisely, with terrible consequences, because he won’t want to be seen as ‘soft’.

Read Biden’s comments again, assuming that Biden is talking to the left, about the left being dissapointed in a Bush style response to crisis, and tell me if this interpretation could make sense.

Mark my words,” the Democratic vice presidential nominee warned at the second of his two Seattle fundraisers Sunday. “It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We’re about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don’t remember anything else I said. Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.”

“I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate,” Biden said to Emerald City supporters, mentioning the Middle East and Russia as possibilities. “And he’s gonna need help. And the kind of help he’s gonna need is, he’s gonna need you – not financially to help him – we’re gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it’s not gonna be apparent initially, it’s not gonna be apparent that we’re right.”

The Obama team is going to need the influence of these powerful left wing democrats in THE COMMUNITY.

What community? I suggest the left wing community.

And I’m only too happy to go along with any policy that could upset that particular group of individuals.

Obama has tried to be all things to all people in this election. So no one really knows what they’re going to get. The bail out practically guarantees a freeze on universal anything, AND a raise in taxes. We could probably be fairly sure of a left dominated SCOTUS, but I suspect that when American lives are on the line the Obama administration may go out on a limb and make the hard choice to do the right thing.

Or this could all be gobbedy gook, and Biden is just THAT STUPID.. in which case, WOW.. just..wow.

I’d rather not have to take the chance of finding out though.

‘HUCKABEE’: Joe The Plumber Tells His Side of The Story

Joe takes the time to have a chat with Mike Huckabee in an exclusive sit down this weekend. Show repeats Sunday night at 8 pm. ET and again at 11 pm.

Joe was booked by Huckabee before the presidential debate that made him a household name. (I guess Mike was once again, ahead of the curve on this one)

Huckabee is correct in pointing out that if McCain manages to pull this one out, it will be on the back of the ‘ordinary Joes’ who asked the hard questions that the press was afraid to.

Check out the show replay for an interesting Al Sharpton take on the ACORN scandal, (not what you’d expect) and a country rendition of ‘Drill here, Drill now’ that’s probably headed straight to the top of the country charts.

“HUCKABEE” Premieres to Rave Reviews

The much anticipated show of the former governor of Arkansas and presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, premiered as an oaisis of reason during the frenzied 24 hour coverage of the Bailout madness on Capitol Hill this weekend, and amidst the furious post presidential debate spin.

 Fox premiered its new show ‘Huckabee’, after a two hour debate analysis special of Hannity and Colmes which should have secured a fairly strong retention of viewership, if the feverish anticipation of Huckabee’s election supporter base would not have been enough in and of itself to secure good ratings.

The show featured the innovative format of an unscripted audience ‘townhall style’ Q and A along with more traditional elements of talk shows like the requisite host monologue and guest segments.

A few things stood out to viewers and new fans of the show. Huckabee did not make himself the ‘star’ of the show. He was a brilliant facilitator, in the sense that he actually allowed his guests to fully answer questions or make commentary without interruption; a lesson that the Hannity’s and O’Riley’s of the talk world would be well advised to learn. As a result there was almost no crosstalk to devolve into a shouting match, and the feeling tone of the entire show was much more reminiscent of an Oprah or Ellen sit down than a pundit’s sound off. He was warm, personable and funny without being over the top.

This is not to say that the show was not substantive. It was very much so. The segment with Elizabeth Hasselback of The View, which could have had the potential to devolve into a fluff piece about her role on the show, actually featured the roll out of the now infamous God ____ America clip of Rev. Wright as the set up for Elizabeth’s commentary of her interrogation of Obama for his relationship with Wright on an episode of The View. Without sensationalizing or editorializing about Obama himself, Huckabee provided a forum for a discussion of some of the concerns that association raised. This was significant, mainly because to date, Rev. Wright has been off the table for discussion during the campaign, and the inclusion of the clip could provoke an outcry from hardcore Obama supporters.

The segment signaled two things, Huckabee will not be afraid to take on controversial subjects, and that while he will be ‘vertical’ or positive and forward looking in his commentary, he is still a conservative. This first guest spot was clearly a red meat nod to the base.

Also featured in this opening show was some substantive economic commentary by a first rate line up of guests: Alexis Glick, producer of one of the Fox business shows, David Ramsey, popular host of his own business show, and Geraldine Ferrarro, whose role was to give some congressional perspective on what might be going on behind closed doors during the bailout talks.

While there was a sense of urgency about the need of the bailout package discussed, it was with distinctly comforting overtones. Ferraro pointed out that we’ve made money on previous similar deals, Ramsey postulated that the world did not come to an end when no deal was brokered by Friday, and Glick redirected attention to the root cause of the problem which she tied to the Democrat sponsored and pushed Community Reinvestment Act. Huckabee himself proposed the stimulation of the economy via the elimination of the capital gains tax as one example of something that could be part of a non-bailout package which he is deeply opposed to.

Interspersed between segments and ads, were the audience interaction segments where audience members were able to direct questions to both Mike and the guests at different points in the program. The connectivity and authenticity of those moments are sure to be a major part of the appeal of this show, and I think those moments should be increased, even if it means cutting the length of one of the guest segments.

The creation of the Fox news house band was a stroke of genius. There is a certain appeal to seeing folks you have known in front of the camera in one capacity, in another. Especially if they actually have talent. Further, by reaching out into the Fox family and giving them a sense of ‘ownsership’ in the program, Huckabee will begin to neutralize some of the resistance that there may have been to him there in some quarters. Make no mistake, Huckabee will run for office again someday, probably for president. He’s young enough to wait 20 years if he has to, and as we have seen this election, things are so much easier when you’re not fighting the media all the way through the process.

While no details have yet surfaced about how the show did ratings wise, or in MSM commentary, feedback in the netroots has been positive where discussion has been taking place. The consensus was that an hour of Huckabee is not enough.

Following are a sample of some of the comments posted to Huckabee’s PAC blog and on other message boards around the web.

 

We had –actually still having–a “watch party” for Huckabee. The best description comes from a neighbor who was not a Huckabee supporter during the primary. He said it was about time there was a talk show host who was not only smart and funny but also kind. If he had known more about Mike during the primaries, he would have voted for him instead of Thompson.

Loved Huck’s new show and the first place I went was to shoot an email to Fox letting them know it was GREAT!! I also ps that the band idea, pulling folks from Fox with all different types of jobs there was pure genius!! Like America, diverse!!! Loved the question section at the beginning where Mike just answered off the cuff. He is so good at that!!! Loved the interview with Elizabeth. The bailout disucssion seemed a little rushed (everyone tried to talk too long), but other than the fact that maybe Fox needs to give Mike 2 hours instead of one, it was GREAT!!! I will be watching tomorrow night when I have folks coming over for dinner. We are having a “Huckabee” party.

Didn’t really know what to expect from the show, but I thought the whole format was very well conceived and executed. There wasn’t a moment of the show where I felt uninterested in. I like the fact that Mike lets his guests speak without interrupteing them (e.g. Hannity). The economic discussion was excellent except that I wished it had gone on a bit longer so the guests could have debated the subject a bit more in depth (darn time constraints). Wasn’t sure what to expect from the band, but they were pretty good too.

 

My dad and I watched the show and enjoyed it very much.

loved the question and answer part. the response to the question about barrowing from a 401 to pay off high credit bill. was one that our family had struggled with the thought of. glad to find the answer, before we made the mistake. Thanks.

Almost 100 comments have been posted to the pac blog thus far, and I’m sure many more will come once the Sunday night viewers get their opportunity to experience the show first hand. If you haven’t had the opportunity to catch the show, do so. The repeat showing should air at 8pm ET tonight assuming that news of a deal on the bailout doesn’t trump regular programming.

Former members of the Huckabee campaign observed to an attendee at the taping yesterday, that the show was not scheduled to begin airing until Janurary, obviously the Fox bigwigs know a cash cow when they see one. Huckabee will be very profitable for the network if his track record of maximum reward with limited investment holds true.

The full tale has yet to be told, but as a first at bat, ‘Huckabee’ definately makes a solid base hit.

His Handmaiden

Links to review commetary

http://my.huckpac.com/?FuseAction=Blogs.View&Blog_id=1904

http://forum.hucksarmy.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=15922&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=45

Polling Trends Improve Huckabee’s VP Odds

Over in camp Huck we keep an eye on polls.

Not so much on the unscientific internet kind, (although those are fun too) as much as on the national polling done on the state of the race between the two presumptive nominees.

We’re not so blind in our support of Huckabee and our platform, as to not realize that McCain’s eventual pick for veep will be the one who can help him win, based on the strategic play for state flips between the two.

We were, as a result, pretty bummed to read after Ted Strickland announced he was taking himself off the table for democratic vp, that Obama seemed to be ceding the rustbelt to McCain and had started to float the idea of a strategy of trying to flip Nevada, New Mexico,Colorado, and other mountain west states. http://patriotroom.com/?p=432

Anybody with a political brain knows that’s advantage Mitt territory.

(And Nooo I’m not hating on Mitt, I’m just saying Mike’s my guy, so it didn’t feel great to see his chances appearing to slip away.)

Some may well say that the rustbelt blue states also play to Mitt’s strengths, and that may be true, but only if he runs in them as a ‘populist,’ fairly similar to how he ran in MI, and that didn’t go over so well with the fiscon wing of the base. And I don’t think he’d want to ‘sully’ his conservative credentials for the future in taking that rout, but that’s just my opinion.

We think Mike is actually the stonger veep pick for the Penn/Ohio heartland pickups because of his significant appeal to Hillary’s blue collar crowd. (Mike’s true base was always more working class than ‘evangelical’.. class was the lowest common denominator across all of his support groups)

In fact, you could almost lay John King’s democratic and republican big boards over one another on primary nights and find an exact match between Mike and Hillary and Obama and McCain. There is no doubt that Hillary’s rural vote is going to be a serious game changer here.

But I digress..

Word was, McCain was holding the rustbelt on his own without veep help and Obama was turning his eyes west. It looked like Mike would get to keep his new day job at Fox after all.

And then came the latest round of polls: Former congresman John Leboutellier on his blog comments: http://leboutillier.blogspot.com/

The new spate of Quinnipiac polls from Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania have rocked the GOP political establishment.

Here is the brief overview from Quinnipiac:

This is the first time Sen. Obama has led in all three states. No one has been elected President since 1960 without taking two of these three largest swing states in the Electoral College. Results from the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University polls show:

Florida: Obama edges McCain 47 – 43 percent;

Ohio: Obama tops McCain 48 – 42 percent;

Pennsylvania: Obama leads McCain 52 – 40 percent.

In the three states, Obama leads McCain 10 to 23 percentage points among women, while men are too close to call. The Democrat trails among white voters in Florida and Ohio, but gets more than 90 percent of black voters in each state. He also has double-digit leads among young voters in each state. “Finally getting Sen. Hillary Clinton out of the race has been a big boost for Sen. Barack Obama. He now leads in all three of the major swing states, although his margins in Florida and Ohio are small,” said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

Believe me: these results – especially in Florida (thought to be secure for McCain) and Ohio (very winnable for the GOP – especially with Governor Ted Strickland stating he would not accept the Veep slot from Obama) – have shaken the McCain campaign and renewed the fear that an anti-GOP, anti-Bush tsunami is rolling in this fall – and it may take not only McCain along with it but dozens of GOP House and Senate hopefuls, as well.
 

It appears that Obama may be neutralizing some of McCain’s opportunities to pick up blue states. That leaves us status quo until you discover the progress that Obama is making towards flipping some states that went red in the last general election.

First, Iowa. Mccain didn’t really campaign there during the primaries, focusing his energies on NH. But it was unlikely,’white as the driven snow’ Iowa, that gave Obama his first big win and set him on the path to the nomination. They ‘know’ him, and like him there, a lot.

James Barnes in a National Journal article today reports:

http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/pi_20080621_5575.php
 

“Because Iowans have a relationship [with Obama] they’re less likely to buy into the negative imaging attacks that McCain and, especially, the [independent] ‘527s’ will do in Iowa,” Norris said. “Iowans are going to say, ‘This guy is not that; he won the caucuses.’ ”
 

And on Mccain’s chances:

If his campaign has sometimes created the impression that McCain is indifferent to Iowa, his opposition to popular subsidies at times has made him seem downright hostile to the state’s interests.

In opening a town hall meeting in Des Moines last month, McCain attacked another economic boon to the state, the farm bill with its many crop supports. Playing his favorite role of maverick, the Arizonan told Iowans that if he were president he’d veto the measure.
 

Iowa, is one reason McCain should give Huckabee a secod look for veep. The only way he is going to hold Iowa red, is if he can maximise the turnout in Iowa’s rural conservative base, and Huckabee has proven that he can do that on a dime.

Another recent polling indicator that may shift the veep winds Huckabee’s way, is bad news out of the south. Obama is now in a polling dead heat with McCain in Georgia, and showing signs of strengthening his positions in other swing states like Missouri.

From Insider Advantage 6/19: http://www.southernpoliticalreport.com/storylink_619_444.aspx

June 19, 2008 — A New InsiderAdvantage / PollPositionsurvey conducted June 18 of registered likely voters in the November presidential contest shows Sen. John McCain leading Sen. Barack Obama by a single point in Georgia, making the race in Georgia a statistical tie. Libertarian Bob Barr, a former Republican Congressman from Georgia, received 6 percent of the vote.  The telephone survey of 408 registered likely voters is weighted for age, race, gender, and political affiliation. The survey has a margin of error of +/- 5%. It was conducted with InsiderAdvantage’s research partner Majority Opinion Research. PollPosition is InsiderAdvantage’s new branding name (look for additional information and expansion of PollPosition in the coming months). 

The Results:

McCain: 44%

Obama: 43%

Barr: 6%

Undecided: 7%

My view is that Georgia, the 9^th largest state in the nation with 15 electoral votes, will remain a major new battleground state through November. This changes the landscape of electoral politics as Georgia, North Carolina, Virginia, and perhaps another surprise southern state, join Florida as potential “swing states,” that cannot be presumed to vote Republican in 2008.”

Now granted, earlier polling did not reveal as much strength for Obama on the southern front, but as they say, time heals all wounds, and some of Hillary’s voters may be going home.

There is a chance that the winds of change may blow through the polls once again, but as emotions stabalize after the bitter democratic primaries, I think the trends we are seeing will hold fast and expand.

That means, as of now, Mccain needs a vice presidential pick who can help him hold Iowa, as well as southern states that are trending Obama, he also needs someone with enough blue colar appeal to stengthen his chance of taking the rustbelt to counter any losses that he may absorb in the south/mountain west, (although, for the record USA Survey polling showed that Huckabee polled extremely well in many swing states not traditionally considered his forte. ) http://www.teamhuck.com/

SurveyUSA Polling Strongly Indicates that Voters Prefer Huckabee
6/3: Massachusetts Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Huckabee, 2nd: Lieberman & Romney, 4th: Pawlenty

6/3: New York Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Lieberman, 2nd: Huckabee, 3rd: Romney, 4th: Pawlenty

6/3: Iowa Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Huckabee, 2nd: Romney, 3rd: Lieberman, 4th: Pawlenty

6/3: Kentucky Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Huckabee, 2nd: Romney, 3rd: Lieberman, 4th: Pawlenty

6/3: Alabama Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Huckabee, 2nd: Lieberman & Pawlenty, 4th: Romney

6/2: Minnesota Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Pawlenty, 2nd: Huckabee & Romney, 4th: Lieberman

6/2: Oregon Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Huckabee, 2nd: Romney, 3rd: Lieberman, 4th: Pawlenty

6/2: Washington State Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Romney, 2nd: Huckabee, 3rd: Lieberman, 4th: Pawlenty

6/1: Nebraska Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Huckabee, 2nd: Romney, 3rd: Lieberman, 4th: Pawlenty

5/30: Wisconsin Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Huckabee & Lieberman, 3rd: Romney, 4th: Pawlenty

5/29: Kansas Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Huckabee, 2nd: Romney, 3rd:Lieberman, 4th: Pawlenty

5/23: Ohio Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Huckabee, 2nd: Lieberman, 3rd: Romney, 4th: Pawlenty

5/21: California Polling vs. Obama (see how results were calculated)
Best: Huckabee, 2nd: Romney, 3rd: Lieberman, 4th: Pawlenty

There are many conservatives who do not like Huckabee on a personal or political level. But I think those seeking to put forward the argument that he brings ‘nothing’ to the table as a vp pick are living in dreamland.

Huckabee supporters  are prepared to accept the outcome if the path to victory overlooks picking Mike as vp. We may not like it, but would embrace any clearly pro-life vp in a heartbeat. The question is, would the rest of the GOP base get on board if the path to victory included accepting Mike Huckabee as VP. Sadly, I’m not so sure of that.

Time will tell the tale.

Defining Huckabee’s Demons

I don’t particularly like Townhall’s Matt Lewis.

He is one columnist who milked the Huckabee/Romney camp rivalry for all it was worth, writing provoking commentary designed to earn him hundreds of hits and hundreds of comments.

I guess that made him feel good about himself.

He’s at it again in his reaction to and ‘analysis’ of Huckabee’s advice to the GOP that we not try to win the election by ‘demonizing’ Obama.

http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/1b348839-9530-4db1-99a9-9b1986f2a9bd?comments=true#comments

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

Message to Huckabee …

Posted by: Matt Lewis at 3:42 PM

Mike Huckabee has warned Republicans to lay off Barack Obama.  My thought:  This is a bit patronizing.  Why should Republicans treat Obama any differently than any other candidate?  … Of course Republicans shouldn’t make racist attacks — that’s a given.  But politics is rough-and-tumble — it has always been that way, and, in my estimation, it’s healthy for Democracy.  We will have achieved equality when Obama is free to be (as Huckabee might say) “demonized” — just like every other presidential candidate in the history of America has been …

 

Hummm.. patronizing?

It’s not patronizing if the republicans really need to hear the warning and apply it. We like to think we are above those types of obviously ‘cross the line’ tactics:

Try telling that to republicans forwarding emails that Obama is the Anti-Christ,

Or to talk show hosts who pretend that calling him Barack HUSSEIN Obama is not intended to produce a knee jerk negative response i a post 9/11 world.

Or to those same talkers doing everything in their power to imply that Obama hates America.

How about telling that to the Texas republicans at their convention who wore buttons saying ‘If Obama wins the white house, will it still be called the white house?”

I could never vote for Obama in a million years but we HAVE to find a way to fight him on the Issues, and not on his ‘patriotism, or try to play ‘guilt by association’  or by saying the terrorists will be dancing in the street if he wins, or by asking, is Barack really a muslim?

I don’t expect that McCain’s campaign will fight that front, but we ALL know the 527’s are going to find a way to go there, directly or indirectly.

Yes, these will evoke an emotional reaction, but it will happen on both sides of the isle. Sure you may convince a few republicans sitting on the fence to vote McCain, but at the same time you will convince millions more democrats who may be sitting on the fence that the GOP is playing true to its percieved fearmongering/bigoted form.

Obama will ALWAYS win if we try to battle him in the realm of emotion.. One soaring, ‘Still I Stand’ sppech will wipe away every doubt planted by 527’s dirty work. We cannot win on his turf.

He has to be defeated in the realm of REASON. Hillary took him to school on policy, she waited too late to find the key, but we would do well to learn from her mistakes.

Matt Lewis’s little dig at Mike produced the usual plethora of Huck Derangement Syndrome responses, including this little number:

The problem with what Huckabee said is that it reveals what he thinks of conservatives, that he believes that conservatives are racists that will resort to racist attacks on the first black presidential candidate, unless he staves them off with his pastoral wisdom.

So it’s not that I think he supports Obama or anything. He’s just once again revealing his contempt for conservatives, just like he did back in the primary.

Uhhh.. what?

Mike didn’t  ‘reveal’ his secret contempt for conservatives.

He made an observation based on tangible evidence of the direction that the GOP is thinking of taking in this election. He listen’s to talk radio, he saw the GOP ads that were run in the Southern special elections, which the GOP LOST, because they tried to run a negative campaign based on emotional guilt by Obama association.

I cannot emphasize enough how right Huckabee is on this subject. The GOP will LOSE in a landslide if they try to make this a character defamation ‘swift boat’ campaign. Obama is no Kerry to take a hit laying down, and the backlash could propell him into the whitehouse.

And for the record, as once again Lewis’s post intentionally tried to make Mike into an Obama sympathizer, here is a comment from Jarrod, on the site, to provide some context of the further development of Huckabee’s thoughts on Obama.

Jarrod writes:	Wednesday, June, 18, 2008 5:50 PM
Favorite Pastime
It seems one of the favorite pastimes here at Townhall is demonizing Mike Huckabee, posting quotes in order to point out once again what a idiot traitor to Republican principles ‘Huckles’ is. Here are some other quotes from the same story: “I am grateful for Barack Obama and his magnificent climb and the journey that he has taken. But then I will tell you, he has gone far enough this year.” Ultimately, he said the election should be about substantive issues, not symbolism. Huckabee hit Obama on higher taxes, his inexperience, and foreign policy. . . . . . Issues of national security and foreign policy-not necessarily the Supreme Court or tax rates-are paramount in this election, he suggested. “This election is not so much about whether our great grandkids will live in a nice house. This election may well be whether our great grandchildren live at all. That’s how serious it is and we need a serious candidate for president, who understands what we face and how to face it.” He said Obama could not point to a single accomplishment in his time in the U.S. Senate or Illinois Legislature that advanced national security or aided the economy. He contrasted that with the experience of Republican nominee John McCain. “Frankly, this is no time for driver ed,” Huckabee said. “This is a time for a seasoned, serious person behind the wheel of the country.” Maybe it is his experience as a Christian pastor, but what a lot of non-conservatives notice, and appreciate about Huckabee is that he has the ability to condemn the sin (like he condemns Obama’s policies above) but not the sinner (Obama himself). I don’t understand why so many conservatives find that ability so contemptible.

I couldn’t have said it better myself.

His Handmaiden

Huckabee and the Fox Red Herring

Why is it that folks see what they want to see in a story?

Blogospheric buzz reveals the Huck Haters on both sides of the isle rubbing their hands in glee at the thought that Huck has thrown in the towel and ‘moved on’ with his contracted gig to ‘contribute’ to Fox news Election Headquarters program.

Does no one realize that clauses can be built into a contract that would provide legal ways for him to exit the arrangement without liability? There is no way Huck signed that contract without a clause that gets him released in the event that he is selected as VP. He’s not stupid. Focused, ambitious..a political tactician..but not stupid.

In the meantime.. the naive drop their guard, thinking he is lost to the ‘entertainment’ element of the political game. In fact, with one brilliant move, he has positioned himself to get more involved than ever in this political cycle.

He gets free airtime to connect with a a faction of the GOP that was reluctant to embrace him, and his name recognition goes through the roof. The opportunity that Huckabee will get to peel away the layers of cricature that were painted onto his frame during the primaries is priceless. And by signing on with the network that could most easily disrupt his efforts to redeem his image, he has effectively silenced his biggest opposition. Fox has yet to eat one of its own.

With his natural ability to use the media to connect, Huck can use the summer months to make inroads with the GOP base that would make him priceless as a VP candidate for McCain, while providing him with a larger platform to continue his current PR surrogacy for McCain’s candidacy. There are a LOT of social conservatives who stopped watching Fox during the primaries who will tune in again, and many of them have yet to be convinced to support him fully. Huckabee can help bring those folks to water, even if he cannot make them drink.

And if he doesn’t get chosen.. he still has an open door into the homes of potential future voters.

The man is a political genius.. You don’t think he knew that Fox has been the network most biased AGAINST his candidacy? He could have gone with MSNBC and be subject to the continued accusation that he is a closet liberal.

Instead he has gone into the lions den to reshape the debate from the inside out. Just what his grassroots base is doing at the local level with the candidates endorsed and supported by his PAC

The establishment underestimates Huckabee at their peril. He is nobody’s fool.

You don’t get to the top without knowing how to the play the game, and Huckabee is proving to be one of the best at strategy. While some may sneer and call this ‘opportunism’ I can only shake my head in amazement. There is something in the water in Arkansas..lol

Good job Gov.

What the GOP needs: Visionary Leaders

Today the congressional caucus of the GOP unveiled their “bold new economic plan” for stealing some of the wind from the democratic sails as we move forward into preparations for the general election. These plans included agressive proposals for finally pushing forward with oil and gas exploration and extraction, and a move towards long overdue tax reform.

 

“To protect consumers, the House GOP plan would harness new technologies and unlock America’s energy resources in the Alaskan coastal plain, deep ocean energy zones, and elsewhere to lower gas prices, create jobs, and break America’s dependence on foreign sources of energy. To protect taxpayers from pork-barreling politicians and wasteful Washington spending, our plan would establish an immediate earmark moratorium and prohibit federal spending from growing faster than the overall economy. And to protect American families and small businesses, the Republican blueprint would stop the Democrats’ largest tax hike in history, eliminate the Alternative Minimum Tax, and give taxpayers the option of paying a flat tax and filing their taxes on a single page.”

http://republicanleader.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=93622

 

After taking a moment to give our people a mental clap on the back, frustration and to some extent despair reared it’s ugly head in my heart.

Our radical new plan, is in effect a watered down version of some of the platform issues that made Mike Huckabee so attractive to his supporters. The same Huckabee vision that was shot down by party elites as one that was not well thought out, or practically impossible to accomplish.

When I thought further of the tumultuous ride we have all been on in this econonomy and society in general these last crazy months of the political silly season, I found more and more examples of Huckabee’s foresight on issues that later came to be the talk of the day.

Let’s start with the economy. During one of the early debates, Huckabee was the only GOP candidate to answer a question about the state of the economy with a ‘non party line,’ but truthful answer. For the working class American, the economy was not doing very well at all; and he was right. Within a month of that debate, the sqeeze that the working class was feeling, had crept into the middle class sensibility, and the stock market was on the fritz. Now the struggling economy is “issue number one”.

On the war on terror, Huckabee wrote a comprehensive analysis of current strategy in the middle east, and proposed that we needed to be focusing more on Pakistan and holding them more accountable for helping us in the GWOT, given the amount of resources we are pouring into their coffers. He was ridiculed for suggesting that the Bush administration had a ‘bunker mentality’ to the war, and his position on Pakistan was laughed out of town. A few weeks later, Bhutto was assasinated, democracy took a few steps backward in Pakistan, and an environment of political unrest increased the chances that Pakistan would fall into the hands of the extremists in its midst. Who’s laughing now?

Anybody who ever watched a republican debate was sure to hear the mantra from Huckabee, ‘We need to be able to feed ourselves, fuel ourselves, and defend ourselves,” if we are to stay free.

He suggested, again to ridicule, that America needed to start exploring all options, alternative and fossil, to ensure our energy independence within ten years. He even went so far as to draw paralells with the pace of the progress that was made by Kennedy in the space race. He did not talk about long term planning, he talked about doing it NOW, and agressively. Now we are paying over four dollars a gallon for gas, and everybody wants to ‘Drill now” with the ultimate effect of possibly being energy independent within the decade.

Huckabee talked about the importance of being able to feed ourselves, and implementing policies that would insure that our food supply did not have to come from external sources. This may seem to be common sense, but he was the ONLY candidate, on either side of the isle to talk openly about food sustainability on the campaign trail. Now, the world is in the middle of a food crisis. Rice and flour are being rationed at Wal-Mart and Cost-Co. Food prices are going up in part because of poor policy implemented regarding biofuel mandates, and there are riots in the streets in developed and third world countries alike. why was Huckabee the only one with the vision to adress this critical subject as part of his policy platform?

Huckabee also talked about the danger inherant in outsourcing our self defense. Again, this was not part of ANY other candidates talking points on the stump. Along comes the scandal of the outsourcing of our fuel tanker pentagon contract to a European based company. Now ‘Outsourcing our defense’ is the latest buzzword on the talk circuit.

Huckabee was howled out of town for daring to suggest that our Tax system needs a massive overhaul. He was considered naieve for adopting a platform issue in the Fair Tax that ‘could never be passed.’ Well somebody needs to do something!! Tax reform MUST be on the agenda of one party or the other, and whoever latches on to it first will have a winning platform for years to come. It looks like the GOP is taking a step in the right direction with the disclosures in today’s statement.

Huckabee was the only GOP candidate to call the stimulus package the farce that it is, pointing out that it only stimulates the economies of the very countries with whom we have a terrible trade deficit imbalance. Many lauded, and some decried his suggestion that working on restoring our infrastructure would  stimulate our local economies, while providing jobs and strengthening the foundations that ensure our transportation veins remain open for commerce. The tragedy of the bridge collapse in Minneapolis. subsequently made the subject of our rotting infrastructure take center stage for weeks on end. Now many in congress on the left and the right are advocating for infrastructure development in their home states as a means of stimulating economic growth.

When all is said and done, time and time again, the wisdom and foresight that Huckabee has demonstrated in sensing what issues need to be highlighted and adressed is nothing short of astonishing. It shouldn’t be, he has governed for ten and a half years successfully, even if his detractors prefer the spin that he is a preacher on a political holiday.

It is high time that this man get some of the respect that he deserves for being a brilliant and visionary politician. If you’re going to adopt and implement his ideas, at least have the courage to admit that he’s not the ‘hick, knuckledragging, snake oil salesman, Huckabilly’ that so many of you, liberal and conservative alike, have deemed him to be.

America may never know the gem it lost by not having the courage to believe that somone so unorthodox, and yet so intimately connected with her heart, could make it all the way to the oval office. She may yet be lucky enough to benifit from his vision, if John McCain finds the courage in his heart to do the hard thing and offer him the veep spot.

I can only hope.

His Handmaiden

 

Banishing The Huckabee Boogeyman

So now we know…. It will be Barack Obama and John McCain contending head to head in contest to be the president of these united states, and early polling seems to indicate that the vice presidential pick of each gentleman will have a significant influence on how each candidate fares in any number of swing states.

There is a chance, no one knows how great, or how small, that John McCain may decide that the former governor of Arkansas Mike Huckabee, may be the person he needs on his ticket to give him the best chance at winning in the currently democratic friendly electoral environment.

There are many, many self described conservatives who have said this would be the last straw, that they would not vote for a McCain/Huckabee ticket. Much of this hostility is rooted in opinions formed of the man, out of the nuggets produced by opposition research in the primaries. Nuggets designed to paint Huckabee in the worst possible light.

Just as we have gone through the process of sifting through the partisan rhetoric to find the areas on which McCain and conservatives can agree, I believe that it is time to start making the case for acceptance of individuals who though not perfectly aligned with our multi-pronged philosophies, may perhaps find themselves on the ticket and in need of our support.

I do not limit this evaluation to Huckabee alone. I would love for someone to make Mitt’s case as well, as it is foolish to believe that the entire conservative base is united behind the idea of Mitt for VP, especially in regards to the social conservative wing of the party.

I do not believe in reinventing the wheel. A fairly comprehensive summary of Mike Huckabee’s governing philosophy and positions on the issues was written by Joe Carter, a member of his rapid response on line team during the campaign. I am not sure how significant its impact was at the time, but I would like to reintroduce it to the blogosphere for your consideration.

As with most politicians, some of Mike’s positions have evolved or been refined over time. Some may define this as a ‘flip’ but I challenge you to find a ‘flop.’ Huckabee has never moved back and forth on the same subject multiple times. He has always delievered on his campaign promises and on his word in general. As a result, his supporters feel safe in believing that his current political platform does indeed represent who and what he would be about in the whitehouse, in any capacity.

Please attempt for a few minutes to lay your preconceptions to the side and ‘discover’ Mike Huckabee for the first time again. I am not asking you to decide if he is a ‘conservative’ by whatever definition you may use, but rather, to think about if someone with these governing philosophies would be a conservative influence on a president McCain, and ultimately, if a team of these two individuals is more acceptable than a Barack Obama administration.

The article is lengthy, but well worth the read. Thanks for your time, and please be polite in your commentary, even if you forcefully disagree. Here is the link to the original source:

http://www.evangelicaloutpost.com/archives/004182.html

For the past few months I’ve been defending Governor Mike Huckabee against an onslaught of attacks on his character, positions, and record. When I worked for the campaign I spent a significant portion of my time clearing up misconceptions for journalists and parrying dishonest accusations made by other campaigns. And here on this blog I’ve written numerous posts responding to the questions posed by bloggers and rebutting claims made by sundry interest groups.Yet all this time I’ve failed to make a positive case for why I feel Governor Huckabee to be the most visionary and conservative candidate in the race. I naively assumed that everyone was seeing what I was seeing. Indeed, I’m embarrassed to admit that I failed to recognize that not everyone would have the same familiarity with his policy positions as his former Director of Research.

To rectify this situation I’ve compiled a list of his most significant policy positions on a range of issues–from tax reform to national security. While all of this information can be found online, I thought it would be useful to cut away the excess verbiage in order to provide as succinct a set of statements as possible. I’ve also included a prefatory section that explains Governor Huckabee’s philosophy of governance.

Although this compilation is not exhaustive, I do believe that it provides a useful outline for anyone who wants to familiarize themselves on Huckabee’s true positions on the issues.

Philosophy of Governance

Governor Mike Huckabee: “To me conservative governance means following the “original intent” of the Founding Fathers, it means recognizing that Jefferson won the debate with Hamilton, and that we want very strong, energetic, innovative states, with government both as limited as possible and as close to the people as possible. The states should not usurp functions that can be handled locally, and the federal government should not usurp functions that can be handled by the states. An important part of being a conservative President for me would be strengthening federalism. Conservative governance also means an emphasis on personal responsibility and letting the free market function unencumbered, so that Americans have tremendous opportunity, but not a guaranteed outcome. It means smaller, more efficient government; lower government spending; lower taxes. It means keeping the government out of our lives and letting families keep as much of the money they earn and make as many of their own decisions as possible. It means allowing younger workers to have personal Social Security accounts. It means getting entitlements under control.

I believe that our rights come from God, not from our government; that the people should retain as much power and be left alone as much as possible; that the federal government should not do what can be done at the local or state level; that our government belongs to the people, not the lobbyists and special interests; that government at all levels exists to serve the people and not the other way around; that we must respect the separation of powers and no branch should usurp the authority of another; that my greatest responsibility is to protect the American people from all threats; that the free market, low taxes, and minimal regulation are the keys to economic growth and prosperity; that Americans are owed equal opportunity, but not an equal outcome; that we are a culture of life and recognize that each individual has intrinsic value and worth; that we are only as strong as our families; that we owe a huge debt to those who have given their lives for this country to protect the freedoms and way of life for which they sacrificed.

I would weigh all of my decisions in the context of those principles to assure that I am doing the right thing and not the popular or expedient thing. I will always err on the side of protecting life, strengthening our families, and protecting our citizens and our country from possible threats to their safety.”

(Response provided to the American Conservative Union)

Issues and Positions

Tax Reform

-Make all tuition for higher education tax-deductible

-Make health insurance tax deductible for individuals and families as it now is for businesses. (Low income families would get tax credits instead of deductions.)

-Preserve and expand President Bush’s tax cuts

-Eliminate the marriage penalty

-Cut taxes on savings

-Eliminate the Death Tax

-Reduce counterproductively high personal and corporate marginal tax rates.

-Encourage “baby boomers” who plan to work into their late 60’s or even beyond by giving them tax breaks, like additional exemptions or a “working senior” deduction.

-Long-term goal: implementation of the FairTax so that American workers keep their entire paycheck, American businesses can compete on a level-playing field with their foreign competitors, and so that we can brings jobs and investment that are currently parked off-shore back to the United States.

Economy

-Subprime mortgage crisis: begin a second round of negotiations with subprime lenders with an eye toward expansion of the “Hope Now” program.

-Cut burdensome red tape that drives up the cost of products and keeps employers from hiring more workers or raising wages.

-Reduce frivolous lawsuits which drive up costs of products and medical care.

-Institute free trade that is fair to America. We will expect our trading partners to live up to their obligations—everyone must play by fair rules.

-Open new markets for American products.

-Ensure the Federal Reserve adapts a pro-growth, low-inflation policy.

-Veto earmarks and unnecessary discretionary spending

Energy Independence

-Implement a national energy security policy which will end our dependence on Middle Eastern oil within ten years by conserving, exploring, and inventing our way to independence in energy.

-pursue all avenues of alternative energy: nuclear, wind, solar, hydrogen, clean coal, biodiesel, and biomass.

-Remove red tape that slows innovation, allow the free market to sort out what makes the most sense economically.

-Set aside a federal research and development budget that will be matched by the private sector to seek the best new products in alternative fuels.

Social Issues

-Support passage of a constitutional amendment to protect the right to life.

-Support passage of a constitutional amendment that defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman.

-Oppose all embryo-destructive research.

-Veto any pro-abortion legislation, including federal funding for Planned Parenthood.

Education

-Make all tuition for higher education tax-deductible

-Support the rights of parents to home school their children

-Support states that want to create more charter schools or implement public school choice.

-Allow states to develop their own benchmarks.

-Work towards a clear distinction between the federal role in assisting and empowering states and in usurping the right of states to carry out the education programs for their students

Healthcare

-Advocate policies that will encourage the private sector to seek innovative ways to bring down costs and improve the free market for health care services.

-Reform medical liability

-Support the adoption of electronic record keeping

-Make health insurance more portable from one job to another

-Expand health savings accounts to include all Americans.

-Making health insurance tax deductible for individuals and families as it now is for businesses. (Low income families would get tax credits instead of deductions.)

-Encourage the states’ role as laboratories for new market-based approaches.

Immigration

-Ensure that an interlocking surveillance camera system is installed along the border by July 1, 2010.

-Ensure that the border fence construction is completed by July 1, 2010.

-Increase the number of border patrol agents.

-Fully support all law enforcement personnel tasked with enforcing immigration law.

-Policies that promote or tolerate amnesty will be rejected.

-Propose to provide all illegal immigrants a 120-day window to register with the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services and leave the country. Those who register and return to their home country will face no penalty if they later apply to immigrate or visit; those who do not return home will be, when caught, barred from future reentry for a period of 10 years.

-This is not a “touchback” provision. Those who leave this country and apply to return from their home country would go to the back of the line.

-Employment is the chief draw for most illegal immigrants and denying them jobs is the centerpiece of an attrition strategy.

-Impose steep fines and penalties on employers that violate the law.

-Institute a universal, mandatory citizenship verification system as part of the normal hiring process.

-Prevent the IRS and the Social Security Administration from accepting fraudulent Social Security numbers or numbers that don’t match the employees’ names.

-Promote better cooperation on enforcement by supporting legislative measures such as the CLEAR Act, which aims to systematize the relationship between local law and federal immigration officials.

-Encourage immigration-law training for police. Local authorities must be provided the tools, training, and funding they need so local police can turn illegal immigrants over to the federal authorities.

-End exemptions for Mexicans and Canadians to the US-VISIT program, which tracks the arrival and departure of foreign visitors. Since these countries account for the vast majority of foreigners coming here (85 percent), such a policy clearly violates Congress’ intent in mandating this check-in/check-out system.

-Reject Mexico’s “matricula consular” card, which functions as an illegal-immigrant identification card.

-Inform foreign governments when their former citizens become naturalized U.S. citizens.

-Impose civil and/or criminal penalties on American citizens who illegitimately use their dual status (e.g., using a foreign passport, voting in elections in both a foreign country and the U.S.).

-Eliminate the visa lottery system and the admission category for adult brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens.

-Increase visas for highly-skilled and highly-educated applicants.

-Expedite processing for those who serve honorably in the U.S. Armed Forces.

-Improve our immigration process so that those patiently and responsibly seeking to come here legally will not have to wait decades to share in the American dream.

Judges

-Huckabee’s judicial philosophy: “I believes that the Constitution must be interpreted according to its original meaning, and flatly reject the notion of a “living Constitution.” The meaning of the Constitution cannot be changed by judicial fiat. The powers delegated to the federal government by the Constitution come from “We the People,” and judges have no right to prohibit the people from passing democratically-enacted laws unless we have explicitly authorized them to do so. Nor can vaguely-worded language in the Constitution be used by judges to give them power over subjects the framers never intended our founding document to address. As such, any interpretation of the Constitution that is based on “evolving standards of decency,” penumbras, or any other judicial fiction, is antithetical to the rule of law, and must be forcefully challenged.”

-Appoint justices and judges who not only share his judicial philosophy (e.g., Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Antonin Scalia, Justice Clarence Thomas, and Justice Samuel Alito), but who also have established themselves within the conservative legal community as faithful adherents of originalism and textualism.

Social Security

-Allow younger workers the option of personal accounts.

-Allow letting people take the money in their account at retirement and buy an annuity.

-Encourage “baby boomers” who plan to work into their late 60’s or even beyond by giving them tax breaks, like additional exemptions or a “working senior” deduction.

-Since some retirees don’t need their Social Security to retire comfortably, offer them the option of a tax-free lump sum for their children or grandchildren to get when they die, which would delay some payments for decades.

National Sovereignty

-Oppose the Law of the Sea Treaty.

-Oppose the U. N. Convention on the Rights of the Child.

-Oppose the North American Union,.

-Oppose the Kyoto Treaty.

Veteran’s Affairs
Veterans will be provided the following “Bill of Rights”:

-The right to a mandatory rather than a discretionary mechanism for funding veterans’ health care, to eliminate year-to-year uncertainty that the funds they need will be there for them

-The right to obtain full and clear explanation of all benefits and comprehensive assistance in obtaining those benefits.

-The right to have a claim processed within six months.

-The right to the fullest possible accounting of the fate of POW/MIAs and the right to be designated as POW/MIA.

-The right to access state-of-the-art treatment facilities for traumatic brain injuries.

-The right of National Guard and Reserve personnel called to active service to receive the same benefits as active duty veterans.

-The right of disabled veterans to receive both their military retirement and VA compensation.

-The right of wounded Reserve troops to be treated like their active duty counterparts until their claims have been processed.

-The right of wounded veterans and those who have served in combat theaters to a comprehensive GI bill that provides full tuition, books, fees, and living expenses at any institution to which the veteran is accepted.

National Security

-Increase defense spending to six percent of GDP.

-Build new planes, new armed vehicles, new robotic land and air vehicles, new ships all right here in America.

-Recruit and train thousands of new troops and bring our National Guard and Reserves back home. We must increase the size of the U.S. Army and the Marine Corps by about 92,000 troops within two to three years without lowering enlistment standards.

-Improve the nation’s aging infrastructure (roads, bridges, water systems, sewer systems, etc.).

-Active-duty forces should not be used for nation building. We must return to our policy of using other government agencies to build schools, hospitals, roads, sewage treatment plants, water filtration systems, electrical facilities, and legal and banking systems.

-If we are required to undertake a large invasion we must use overwhelming force.

-[The GWOT] — The Commander-in-Chief has an obligation to clearly communicate to the American people the nature of the war we are fighting, especially the goal of the jihadists: to kill every last one of us, destroy civilization as we know it, and to establish a theocratic caliphate without national borders.

-[The GWOT] — The United States’ biggest challenge in the Arab and Muslim worlds is the lack of a viable moderate alternative to radicalism. Although we cannot export democracy we should nurture moderate forces that present an alternative to the jihadists.

-[The GWOT] — The goal in the Arab and Muslim worlds will be to calibrate a course between maintaining stability and promoting democracy. We must not act too hastily but we must act. Specifically, we can help by aiding or promoting basic sanitation, health care, education, jobs, a free press, and fair court systems within these areas.

-[The GWOT] — We must reduce our dependence on foreign oil if we are going to defeat jihadism.

-[The GWOT] — We must strengthen both our human intelligence resources and our military assets in order to eliminate the current threat.

-[Iraq] — We should not withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq any faster than General David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander there, recommends. Troops must be brought home based on the conditions on the ground, not on artificial timetables.

-[The Kurds] — We must encourage Turkey to continue to improve life for its Kurds, and we must encourage the Turkish Kurds to address their grievances through the political process, including through the 20 deputies currently representing them in parliament.

-[The Kurds] — We should be willing to provide the Turks with actionable intelligence to go after the PKK (Kurdistan Workers’ Party) with limited air strikes and commando raids. A even better method would be to train and equip Iraqi Kurds to fight the PKK and rid themselves of this menace.

-[Iran] — The military option for dealing with Iran should not be taken off the table.

-[Iran] — Iran is a nation that has to be contained, just as the Soviet Union was during the Cold War. In order to contain Iran, it is essential to win in Iraq. We cannot allow Iran to push its theocracy into Iraq and then expand it further west.

-[Iran] — We must be as aggressive diplomatically as we have been militarily since 9/11. We must intensify our diplomatic efforts with China, India, Russia, South Korea, and European states and persuade them to put more economic pressure on Iran.

-[Iran] — Despite the protestations of Congressional Democrats, we should support and continue President Bush’s new sanctions against Iran, his decision to designate Iran’s Revolutionary Guards as a proliferator of weapons of mass destruction, and the classifications of al Quds force as a supporter of terrorism. We must also encourage our state and private pension funds to divest themselves of Iran-related assets.

-[Iran] — Despite the protestations of Russia, we should move forward with the current plan to set up ten missile interceptors in Poland and a radar system in the Czech Republic to protect Europe from Iranian missiles.

-[Iran] — We should reestablish diplomatic relations with Iran but only after the Iranians have made concessions that serve to create a less hostile relationship.

-[Iran] — Iran must not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. However, a range of incentives (e.g., trade and economic assistance, full diplomatic relations, and security guarantees) should be offered before moving forward with military action. Before we put our troops at risk in Iran, we should exhaust all diplomatic and economic options.

-[Pakistan] — On September 12, 2001, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf agreed to sever his relationship with the Taliban and let us fight al Qaeda inside Pakistan. But distracted by Iraq, we have since allowed him to go back on his word. We should pressure him to remain firm in his commitment to us.

-[Pakistan] — Because the next attack on the U.S. will have been planned in Pakistan, we must go after al Qaeda’s safe havens in that country. The threat of an attack on us is far graver than the risk that a quick and limited strike against al Qaeda would bring extremists to power in Pakistan.

-[Pakistan] — Musharraf has spent far more energy and enthusiasm sidelining the moderate Pakistani forces (like former Prime Ministers Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif) than he has in going after religious extremists and terrorists. We must have a “Pakistan policy” rather than just a “Musharraf policy.”

-[Pakistan] — We must use our friendly ties with India to encourage and help it improve its relationship with Pakistan and to push for increased trade and cooperation between the two countries, all to bring greater stability to the South Asian region.

What the Democrats are doing ‘Right’: The Blue Dog Acendency

If ever there was evidence needed to prove that the GOP finds itself in a place where its message lacks resonance with with the American voting public, it was provided by the stunning special election upsets that have taken place in recent weeks in traditionally Republican strongholds. The Republican losses appear to be a disturbing precursor of things to come.

These losses set the House and Senate Republicans atwitter as they came to realize that there was no longer any seat that could be considered a ‘safe seat,’ and started the main stream liberal media buzzing happily about the coming Democratic apocalypse.

What no one seems to be talking about however, is HOW the dems are winning in these GOP strongholds. They are doing it by running as far to the right as they can, without actually being a Repubican conservative. If this trend continues, and if elected officials actually follow through on the platforms on which they run, a Democratic ‘majority’ may not be the liberal nightmare we see coming down the pike after all. That caucus may in fact be a party potentially divided against itself, with senators and congressmen ripe for crossover picking.

This does not mean that Republicans shouldn’t fight agressively to retain or win seats in the fall. It does mean, however, that Americans in general may not suffer as much ‘damage’ as they might, if a Democratic majority in congress was more liberal than conservative.

The congressional Blue Dogs are increasing in numbers, and continue to flex their clout, (as they have demonstrated already at least once this session, see link beow)

http://republicanleader.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=90894

Their presence in congress, along with that of Republicans who have rediscovered their conservative roots, may be enough to stymie much of the liberal tax and spend agenda that the Pelosi coalition might try to push through.

On a recent MSNBC Sunday morning round table analysis, Harold Ford Jr. (D) observed that there was a ‘lesson to be learned’ by Democrats from the southern special election upsets. “Democrats cannot run liberal campaigns” he said. Republican panelists in on the discussion, including former presidential candidate governor Mike Huckabee, pointed out the dangers that would be inherant in running against conservative Democrats, including the possible backlash caused by attempting to smear them generically as ‘liberal’ if they are known within the community as being pro-life, pro-gun and otherwise ‘conservative’ by the layman’s standards. Republicans are going to have to run as conservatives, and not ‘against ‘liberals’ if they want to be successful.

The one good thing about the leftist extremism being discovered this primary cycle, scary as it is,..is that it is forcing the true Democratic base to find their moderate center identity again. More and more on pro Hillary blogs, I’m seeing Barack Obama labled Marxist/Socialist. Many who were swept up in Move On sympathy for Bill, have realized just how far left of center their party has veered, and are determined to win it back; even if that means electing John McCain.

As events unfolded this primary season, it became more and more obvious, to me at least, that the survival of the right, seems tied to its ability to be the dominant partner of the ‘conservative Middle’. This is why John McCain and Mike Huckabee with their almost populist appeal, were the last men standing on the right. The great irony of Obama’s campaign, is that he’s running as the great unifier, when every indication is that his idea of unity, is everybody taking two steps to the left. Not going to happen.

But the people do want change…so where does that leave us? I’m going to make a stretch and argue that McCain/Moderate conservative VP is going to hold the whitehouse, because Obama will not be able to find his way to the center again if the opposition research and 527s have their way. But I think the dems are going to crush the GOP in the congressional races.

Watch for the make up of the majority though. The Democrats if they are smart, will run Blue Dogs in conservative districts, and they may be our ace in the hole on the really big bills. (I hope!)

If a ‘moderate’ president McCain has a largely ‘moderate’ congress to work with, it is to be hoped that ‘moderately more’ progress can be made in Washington that we have seen in recent years.

Maybe the Next Right… is the Middle.

His Handmaiden