This site will look much better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.


The Savage Republican



Local Attractions

Favorite Links

Remember, Being a Savage Republican is not where you are from, but what you believe.


Previous Posts

Archives


Saturday, August 26, 2006

The genius of our enemies

When you think you've seen it all, I come across this ingenious trap for our military. Our enemies use what is forbidden to them to trap our military. This picture came as a warning from an FOB (Forward Operating Base) in Iraq. The picture is being sent to other FOB's as a warning to soldiers. I know it would have gotten me a few years back! If you have friends or relatives in the military in Iraq, don't hesitate to send them this picture as a warning. (Hat tip to Captain Ed for the link)





















Endorsements

Well, well....the timing of this certainly could not have been coincidential, could it?

"SILVER SPRING, Md., Aug. 4 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The political action committee of Peace Action, the nation's largest grassroots peace organization, has lent its support to candidates who have consistently supported peace positions, in an election year that is likely to turn on public dissatisfaction with the Iraq war and the generally militarist policies of the Bush Administration.
Topping the list is the endorsement of Ned Lamont, the Connecticut businessman running to unseat three-term Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman. Sen. Lieberman's, a consistent support of Bush policies in Iraq has helped galvanize support for Lamont's rise from little-known underdog to potential victor in next week's primary.
Peace Action PAC also endorsed Senator Daniel Akaka of Hawaii, who expressed his gratitude and appreciation to Peace Action. "I am honored to work with Peace Action in stressing the need for a clear exit strategy from Iraq," Akaka said. "I will continue my efforts in support of Peace Action's mission to establish international peace." Senator Akaka has also aggressively fought the development of new nuclear weapons and supported ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.
Other just-announced endorsements from the nation's largest peace group include:
-- Jerry McNerney, Democratic Nominee for California's 11th Congressional District against U.S. Rep. Richard Pombo
-- Patricia 'Pan' Godchaux, running in the Republican primary for Michigan's 9th Congressional District against seven term incumbent Joe Knollenberg.
-- Rep. Sherrod Brown, the Democratic nominee for the Senate in Ohio; in the last 3 years Rep. Brown has averaged 95 on the Peace Action voting record.
-- Coleen Rowley, challenging John Kline in 2nd district of Minnesota
-- Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA), who has averaged 93 percent on the Peace Action voting record over the past two years and is in a tough primary race.
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV), who has averaged 90 percent on the Peace Action voting record over the past three years." (emphasis mine)

It was exactly 1 year ago that Coleen Rowley and State Senator (and now Gubernatorial Candidate) Becky Lourey went to Crawford TX to join Cindy Sheehan in her protest outside the President's ranch. It was one year ago that Ms. Rowley started polishing her anti-war credentials.

Note the company that Ms. Rowley is in. Rep. Cynthia McKinney, Rep. Sherrod Brown, Sen. Robert Byrd all staunchly left and anti-war. You would think that Ms. Rowley would be proud to be held in such esteemed company and would have the endorsement prominently displayed on her campaign website, wouldn't you? Well if you did think that, you would be incorrect. She lists all sorts of endorsements - the NEA, Clean Water Action, the National Women's Campaign Fund, the Council for a Livable World, the Teamsters - but no mention at all about this endorsement. I wonder why that is?

It is becoming clearer (by the company that she keeps) that Coleen Rowley will toe the line established by the Kos left should she be elected to the US House of Representatives. It is also becoming clearer why Coleen Rowley is the wrong person for the job. Hopefully the residents of Minnesota's 2nd Congressional District will see that as well.

Thursday, August 24, 2006

Baby bust!

I mentioned this theory before, but it came up again. This time in the Wall Street Journal.

"Simply put, liberals have a big baby problem: They're not having enough of them, they haven't for a long time, and their pool of potential new voters is suffering as a result. According to the 2004 General Social Survey, if you picked 100 unrelated politically liberal adults at random, you would find that they had, between them, 147 children. If you picked 100 conservatives, you would find 208 kids. That's a "fertility gap" of 41%. Given that about 80% of people with an identifiable party preference grow up to vote the same way as their parents, this gap translates into lots more little Republicans than little Democrats to vote in future elections. Over the past 30 years this gap has not been below 20%--explaining, to a large extent, the current ineffectiveness of liberal youth voter campaigns today."

Now of course, the article does not take into account the "rebellion" factor. I know more than a few college Republicans who are Republican partly out of rebellion, just as many of their parents became liberal out of rebellion to their parents. However, are we are seeing with the Junior Logician, politics is partly a learned behavior. The Junior Logician has, on more than one occasion, argued a conservative point of view on a political issue. Heck, he has already stated that he WILL be campaigning for Senator Coleman when he is up for re-election in 2006! However, the liberal indoctrination that he will get in High School and College so who knows what will happen between now and then.

Rebellion factor aside, the fact is that the liberals are just not having kids like the conservatives are. Even if the liberals DID start having 2-4 kids (to catch up with the conservatives) it will take 18 years for those kids to hit the voter rolls. Either way, this will have an effect on future elections.

What part of the war on terrorism do they support?

Love her or hate her, Ann Coulter does bring up a lot of logical points about the ideas and ideals of the left. She usually has the audacity to ask the question that everyone else is afraid to ask. This week's column is not different. What makes this week different is that she finally asks the question that the Democrats are afraid to answer.

"What Part of the War on Terrorism Do They Support?"

Ms. Coulter is right - time after time the Democrats say that they support the war and support the troops. Yet time after time, they vote against giving the President, the Intelligence Community and the troops the tools they need to fight the war on terror.

Ann lays it out better than I ever could. Please go read the article NOW!

Nick Coleman makes up facts again!

Nick Coleman in his article "In a Wayzata yard, 2 signs of trouble for Bush and GOP"
He describes shock at finding someone who lives in Wayzata protesting the president.
Because all rich people are Republicans, how can this be.

So he has a nice interview with Betsy Hannaford who describes herself as a reformed Republican and that George Bush "reformed" her with his war policy etc..

Great story except one problem - Betsy is not a Republican. A quick check of contributions shows she has consistently given to Democrat candidates.

As early as May 2001 (long before Iraq and only a few months after Bush was in office) she is giving money to Bill Luther. She also gave money to Betty McCollum.
Bush must have really reformed her.

The story mentions her husband gave money to Norm, but She gave 5 times that amount to Democrats. I can find no record of her giving to any MN Republican candidates.

So the big story - Rich Liberal Democrats who live in Wayzata take time from racing their Yacht to put up sign to protest president.

Another indepth fact filled report from Nick - but as my friend often says:
"Why are we suprised when a fig tree bears figs"

Sauce, the goose, the gander

I saw this headline,on a link from Drudge, from the Shreveport, LA newspaper "Black students ordered to give up seats to white children". Well, this demanded a closer look, especially as the link was in red. Seems that the bus driver ordered black children at the front of the bus give up their seats to white children. Now, given the accuracy of MSM lately, I'm waiting for the real and full story to come out. That being said, of course the usual victim's groups, NAALCP (National Association for the Advancement of Left wing Colored People),etc calling on the Justice Department to investigate.
Now, reverse the headline to "White students ordered to give up seats to black children".
That headline would be called evidence of affirmative action. It would not only be tolerated by the usual victim's groups, but would also be lustily and mightily defended as fair, just, right and proper. That when it's done to blacks, it's wrong and racist. When it's done to whites, it's the right thing to do.
And this is the hypocrisy that runs rampant when there are "group" rights (and you'll notice there are no groups in the Constitution). When you have a "protected" group with rights, those are not rights. They are government granted "rights", in direct contradiction to the Declaration of Independence and they are correctly called "privileges". And where does "equal protection under the law" then exist"?
And racism has to be redefined to include terms that exclude certain groups.
Finally time to push the reset button on the trip odometer.

A-Klo at the Fair

I was just finishing up the last post listening to Channel 9's morning news when they cut to a shot of Democratic Candidate Amy Klobuchar. Now the guys at KvM have long (and well) covered the lopsided treatment that the local media has given our Senatorial candidates, but I thought I would chime in on this interview.

Tom Butler drew the interviewing duty. He started off welcoming her to the show. Amy talked about her "house" that they just opened there at the fair for people to come get info on the campaign and invited all the viewers to come visit her.

Tom Butler then asked - you and your opponent differ on issues, why should people vote for you?

A- Klo answered "Mark Kennedy has been in Washington for 6 years - we need a change. Gas prices are up, helath care costs are up. We should be helping the middle class and not the wealthy like Paris Hilton" (maybe A-Klo should read my last post and look at her own donor base before she goes down that road)

Tom Butler asked what is your favorite fair food and thing to do.

A-Klo answered favorite food is cheese curds - favorite thing is Princess Kay and the ladies league when ladies knit sweaters from wool shorn from sheep at the fair and then they lead the sheep around in the sweaters they knitted.

Whoa - such biting questions (she snarks). Honestly, most politicians get softballs like this in fair interviews. Mark Kennedy will be on later this week we'll see if that truism holds for him as well. I hope that the KvM boys make sure to cover that. Oh and AAA - be nice to the media!

I'll take Pot-pourri for $100 Alex...

Well we certainly couldn't see THIS story coming, could we?

"One of the first tests for Washington's new gay civil rights law has an intriguing twist: The complaint was filed by a heterosexual woman. The state's discrimination watchdogs are investigating the case, which claims unmarried straight people should get the same domestic partner benefits as their gay and lesbian co-workers."

I won't say that "I" told you so, but a lot of well known conservative pundits DID tell you that this was going to happen!

Then there is this newsflash:

"Forty-five percent of Americans believe the news media in this country are too liberal, while only 14% say the news media are too conservative. These perceptions of liberal inclination have not changed over the last three years. A majority of Americans who describe their political views as conservative perceive liberal leanings in the media, while only about a third of self-described liberals perceive conservative leanings. "

This article says it all (when it comes to the Democrats understanding of basic economics):

"One of the most poignant moments in the presidential debates prior to the 2004 election occurred when Sen. John Kerry was pontificating about how he would halt the outsourcing of American jobs overseas.After outlining his approach—which predominantly consisted of giving incentives to American businesses to refrain from such nefarious behavior—Kerry was stopped cold by moderator Charles Gibson. To his everlasting credit, Gibson asked how Kerry could reasonably expect this to be effective when any incentives that could be offered would still pale by comparison to the amount companies would save by paying so much less per worker abroad than American workers would have to receive. To this, Kerry could only sheepishly reply that he never said he’d be able to stop all outsourcing.This exchange largely served to puncture Kerry’s balloon on an issue the Democrats had pinned high hopes on in seeking to derail President Bush’s re-election.This anecdote is highly relevant to numerous issues today in which even an elementary knowledge of economics is all that would be required to discern the folly of very dubious (albeit politically popular) proposals." (emphasis added)

Lastly is this. Remember the cannard about the Republican Party being the party of the "rich"?

"In this analysis, we examined only those Fortune 100 companies that operated nonprofit charitable foundations that made grants to groups we identified as on either the political right or left. That reduced the number to 53 corporate foundations. (See page 20.) We examined the most recent tax- return filings for these foundations (IRS Form 990) and compiled the dollar values for grants and matching gifts to left-wing groups and right-wing groups.The results are the exact opposite of the common perception. The Fortune 100 foundations gave more money to the political left. In fact, the grant-making was lopsided: The political left received nearly $59 million, while the political right received only about $4 million, a ratio of 14.5 to 1. " (emphasis again added)

Hmmmmm......that certainly gives one pause for thought, doesn't it?

Tuesday, August 22, 2006

Media honesty I long for

I came across this cartoon from Townhall. Being forthright is NOT a long suit of the MSM:


















Now, if we had media that would be honest and forthright about the swindle called Social Security, Medicare bankrupting all of America, the failure of the War on Poverty, how CAFE standards kill people (aka SUV's save lives!), alternative fuel subsidies are a total waste, etc...

"Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp. Or what's a heaven for?"-Browning

Duck and dodge - cut and run

I recently received a press release for a Congressional candidate from Seattle . This candidate happens to be a friend of mine which is why I got the press release. In the release is below:

Beren: McDermott weak on terrorism and avoiding debate
Steve Beren for Congress (WA - 7th C.D.) www.berenforcongress.com

Britain has successfully broken up a terrorist plot to blow up planes flying to the United States. The uncovering of this plot drives home the fact that we are a nation at war with Islamic fascism. But Jim McDermott and the Democratic Party are weak on national security, with a pre-9/11 mentality. They don't have a clue how to fight terrorism. McDermott opposes the terrorist wiretapping program and the Patriot Act - precisely the tools we need to continue successfully disrupting the enemy's plans.

I am sick and tired of hearing Jim McDermott say this is a so-called war, that this is a so-called threat, that this is so-called terrorism, that it's all hype.

The war is real, the threat of terrorism is real, the effort of Islamic fascists to acquire nuclear weapons is real, the attempt to destroy Israel. National defense, homeland security, protection of our ports, and disruption of the terrorists must remain priorities.

McDermott says there is no way we can win the war, and he says we should completely withdraw from Iraq before election day. Such a defeatist approach is not only wrong - it is dangerous. McDermott is entitled to his opinion, but he also needs to be held accountable. He should defend his views in an open forum, and that's why I've challenged him to a series of debates. So far, he has tried to avoid my challenge.

But Jim McDermott and I WILL debate! I won't let him be a debate dodger. He can cut and run - but he can't hide!

Steve Beren for Congress (WA - 7th CD)
www.berenforcongress.com
(206) 240-1841
* Lower taxes and limited government
* Protect our ports and borders
* Victory in the war against terrorism
This communication paid for and authorized by Beren for Congress

Now, reading this it struck me that there has indeed been little debate so I did some digging. In the Klobuchar/Bell/Kennedy race, only Ford Bell and Mark Kennedy debated. Ms. Klobuchar declined to attend all debates. In the 7th CD, incumbent Collin Peterson was a no show at a debate that included a primary challenger to Peterson, the Republican candidate AND the Constitution Party Candidate. In the 2nd CD, Coleen Rowley has finally accepted (after many local attempts) an invitation to debate incumbent John Kline. The debates that she finally accepted were RADIO debates and not live in front of constituent debates! The same scene is playing out in Minnesota's 6th CD as well. All over Minnesota (and apparently all over the country if my friend's campaign is any indication) Democratic candidates for office are engaging in the same tactic that they are advocating for our troops - avoid engaging the enemy at ALL COSTS. It's the same old cut and run that they advocate for our troops.

If they can't even stand up to defend what they believe in a debate format, how are they going to defend the country if (God forbid) we are ever attacked again! The choice is becoming clearer by the minute. If the Democrats can't even stand up for their "firmly held beliefs" how are they going to stand up for the country?

I would be very interested in hearing of any similar situations out there.

Monday, August 21, 2006

One more into memory and history

I know you've all seen the photograph. Black and white. Taken in an instant on a place called Sulphur Island as the camera was swung around and the shutter clicked. Nothing amazing. The subjects were there because thievery was feared. And trophy hunting the norm. The real excitement had already happened and they were making sure there was no taking of souvenirs. The photographer was so unimpressed he nearly didn't make the trip. As it was, he decided to take the climb. And clicked his shutter and in that unplanned instant took the most recognizable photograph of WWII. The second flag raising on Iwo Jima by five Marines and one Navy Corpsman.
Joe Rosenthal , the photographer of that immortal photograph, passed away on Saturday.
The first flag had gone up on the top of Mount Surabachi. All across the island and onboard ship Marines and sailors all shouted and whooped as the ships off the beach all blew their horns. This was the first flag raised on Japanese territory. And an astute officer sent a second group up to replace that flag as he knew some enterprising Marine was going to borrow it for a few decades to display in a modest setting somewhere back in the United States. The officer also wanted a larger flag to be more easily seen. So, the five Marines and the Navy Corpsman trudged up the mountain with the "replacement flag" as they called it. A flag that had been recovered from a ship sunk at Pearl Harbor. Joe Rosenthal had missed the first flag raising and didn't see much worth in going on a long hike to perhaps photograph a non-event, but decided to go anyhow. And as those six men were preparing to raise a replacement flag, someone said "there it goes" and Joe Rosenthal ,in an instant , swung his camera in the general direction and made history for himself and six faceless men on an extinct volcano on an outpost of hell where three of those men would not live to get off the island.
The surviving three, who were taken out of combat, have now also passed away, the last being the Navy Corpsman, John "Doc" Bradley in 1994. I know as much about the second flag raising as I do because of a book written by Doc Bradley's son called "Flags of Our Fathers" My brother bought the book for me after seeing both the original and replacement flag side by side in Washington, D.C. The book is worth the read.
But, not to end a downer note, there is one flag raiser still alive. His name is Chuck Lindberg. And he lives here in Minnesota. He is one of the original flag raisers.
Here is a picture of the original flag raising. Chuck Lindberg is just behind the man in the foreground with the M-1 carbine.




















And here is a picture showing both flags in the same frame. The replacement has just been raised in the background.(all images from IwoJima.com )


















And here is Joe Rosenthal's uncropped picture:

























And now, Mr. Rosenthal, like so many WWII veterans, has passed from living history to memory.

Sunday, August 20, 2006

Multiculturalism bad? Really?????

WOW - I didn't think anyone would have the intestinal fortitude to print this headline.

" Multiculturalism is to blame for perverting young Muslims "

While the article itself does not say that, it does do an admirable job of putting to rest the myth that there is a "reason" for the hatred that the radicals have for "the West".

"Islamic radicalism did not begin with Muslim grievances over Western foreign policy in Iraq or Afghanistan. It has deep roots, going back to the 13th-century reformer Ibn Taimiyya, through Wahhabism to modern ideologues such as Sayyid Qutb in Egypt or Maududi in Pakistan. "

The telling thing, that most people will miss, is this:

"Given the world view that has given rise to such grievances, there can never be sufficient appeasement, and new demands will continue to be made" (emphasis added)

That is the one thing that the left just will never get! No matter what we do it will never be enough for the Islamofascists. If you don't believe me look at what
happened to someone who had the audacity to question CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations).

"I went to the event because CAIR had advertised that it was open to the public, and regardless, it was held on a public sidewalk in front of a Federal building. I had every right to be there. It was clear that they had a message they wanted to express, and I hoped to get them to speak beyond their scripted press release comments…to get some straight answers about how they really feel about the violence and terrorism committed by Hezbollah that provoked the Israeli response.

I wasn’t there more than a couple of minutes when I began to interview a gentleman wearing a kafiyyeh that concealed everything but his eyes. I was asking him about his support for Hezbollah when Dr. Al-Akhras approached us and began telling everyone in the vicinity not to speak to me. I then asked him what his message and I kept rolling as he explained how they were there opposing terror. He was clearly agitated. It was when several of them were telling me about Israel bombing innocent civilians, and I responded by asking them about Hezbollah missiles being fired into Israel killing innocent civilians that Al-Akhras lunged at me and grabbed ahold of my camera as I was filming.

At 5’3” and 100 pounds, “ciaospirit” is not a physically intimidating figure. Yet she says Dr. Al-Akhras assaulted her a second time as she was filming him as he addressed the rally – again, all captured on a video she made available on her blog."

One thing that Americans need to be made aware of is this:

"Thirty percent of British Muslims would prefer to live under Sharia (Islamic religious) law than under British law."

Read that again and let it sink in....30% of British Muslims would prefer to live under Sharia law than live in a free democratic society! But wait there is more:

"Forty-five percent say 9/11 was a conspiracy by the American and Israeli governments. (they must be the ones that watch Countdown with Keith Olbermann - ed) This figure is more than twice as high as those who say it was not a conspiracy. Tragically, almost one in four British Muslims believe that last year's 7/7 attacks on London were justified because of British support for the U.S.-led war on terror.

When asked, "Is Britain my country or their country?" only one in four say it is. Thirty percent of British Muslims would prefer to live under Sharia (Islamic religious) law than under British law. According to the report, "Half of those who express a preference for living under Sharia law say that, given the choice, they would move to a country governed by those laws."

Twenty-eight percent hope for the U.K. one day to become a fundamentalist Islamic state. This comports with last year's Daily Telegraph newspaper survey that found one-third of British Muslims believe that Western society is decadent and immoral and that Muslims should seek to end it. " (emphasis added)

Are you starting to see yet, dear reader, what it is we are up against?

Cross posted at
Ladies Logic