College Conservatives, Stay Strong!

A word of advice for you college conservatives out there; take every word your political science professors say with a grain of salt. Being a political science and international relations major I have taken my fair share of classes with liberal professors professing their ideas. It is not easy for conservatives like us to constantly be berated in class by PhD's who claim that every cornerstone and pillar to the conservative ideology is baseless and stupid. The result of this berating has us constantly questioning and defending our opinions, which should not happen when we are in class to become more educated citizens and in turn make more informed decisions. How can we make educated decisions when our entire college years have been dominated by liberal professors professing only one side of the argument? The result, whether intentional or not, is that instead of producing informed citizens who can make their own decisions, they manufacture people with the same opinions as their teachers. As liberals I thought that they were suppose to be open to differing ideas, understanding and tolerant of others? I guess not when it comes to the bullying of college kids by educated, and proven political scientists. These professors don't care that they are there to present the facts and let us, the students, make our own decisions regarding the correct course of action or stance on an issue. They are arrogant people who think their opinion is the right one and that all others are meritless and foolish. I am perfectly fine with having a left-leaning professor who states his/her opinions but only when their statement is accompanied by "but that's just my opinion" or some other variation. It can not be expected to learn from professors that do not have opinions or beliefs, after all they have been studying politics for most of their lives. All that we ask is that they keep their opinion in check and realize that there is more than one point-of-view. So to you college conservatives, no matter how few you are, be strong and do not secumb to the tongue-lashing of your professors. After all, if you do make it out of college and still believe in your conservative ideas your that much stronger. Your beliefs will be severely tested but remember their opinions are not the only reasonable and acceptable opinions out there, no matter how much they make you think otherwise.

How America is Paying for the Democratic Party to Prosper

$819 billion, how can one fathom an amount of money so large, so fictitious, so absurd that would even make Bill Gates gag? At first glance, one may think (well maybe not us fiscal conservatives), 'Great Obama is really pushing to get our economy pumping!', but with a closer look, one can really see all of the earmarks and pork barrel spending that frankly, should cause quite a stir (but won't). The 647 page document that is the Stimulus gives Democrats a great chance to bank on all of the promises they have made in the past. Luckily, at least some of their earmarks got cut out of the original bill because of some controversy, $200 million for new contraceptive service and $20 million to renovate the National Mall. Fox news reported that "$25 million for new ATV trails; $400 million for the National Endowment for the Arts; $400 million for global warming research; $335 million for the Centers for Disease Control to combat sexually-transmitted diseases; and $650 million coupons to subsidize TV viewers for digital television conversion. " are all in the stimulus. Isn't the point of the stimulus to stimulate the economy, not reward past promises? How on earth does $25 million for ATV trails stimulate our economy? Can't we find better things to do with that money? If this is a violation of the people's trust in government, then I do not know what is. With the same logic, if the Republicans were in charge, we could add 'stimulus' money to purchase more hunting land for hunters, expand aid for faith based rehabilitation, and increase wages for soldiers! Why wouldn't we satisfy our base and entrench our foothold on capitol hill (oh wait, we wouldn't, anyone heard of moral responsibility). NOT ONE REPUBLICAN VOTED FOR THE STIMULUS. We are allowing the party in power to make good on all of these promises on our tax dollars! Democrats defend the bill by pointing to the $30 billion in the stimulus for infrastructure. …….hold on, 3.66% of the total stimulus is for infrastructure? What a success! Well, congrats to all of you ATV riders, at least someone will benefit!

Inauguration

I would like everyone to take a look at the article I posted on the right hand side of the blog. I think this guy puts it best. "My hopes and expectations for Obama, therefore, are much more reasonable, and I will be able to take in the history and the pomp without the accompanying anxiety that Inauguration Day will bring to my more liberal friends." We need to step back and look at this day as a day to respect the amazing ability that our country can change power peacefully. Come tomorrow, we can be go back to battling and debating policy, but today, just relax and enjoy the fact that we no longer have to listen to liberal rants about President Bush. When liberals say negative things about American policy, we no longer have to hold this illogical burden of trying to defend policies that are neither conservative in nature nor a political issue. Just relax as the Democrat takes control of the wheel and tries to drive through the same bumpy road that we have been driving. As cliché as it may seem, the driver driving has little to do with the road ahead and will hit the same bumps and potholes as another driver would.

How bad will 2010 be for Republicans?

A lot of conservatives have been wondering what 2010 holds in store for the Republican Party. I knew the party that held the presidency usually lost some seats in the midterms but I was not sure to what extent, here is what I found since 1950……

1950- Dems control presidency lost 28 House, 5 Senate

1954- Reps control presidency lost 18 House, 1 Senate

1958- Reps lost 50 House, 16 Senate

1962- Dems lost 45 House, gained 4 Senate

1966 Dems lost 47 House, lost 3 Senate

1970- Reps lost 12 House, 3 Senate

1974- Reps lost 49 House, 3 Senate

1978- Dems lost 15 House, 3 Senate

1982- Reps lost 27 House, 0 Senate

1986- Reps lost 8 House, 5 Senate

1990- Reps lost 8 House, 1 Senate

1994- Dems lost 54 House, 8 Senate

1998- Dems gained 5 House, 0 Senate

2002- Reps gained 6 House, 2 Senate

2006- Reps lost 30 House, 6 Senate

So 11 out of 15 midterm elections since 1950 ended in the party that controlled the presidency losing seats in both the House and Senate.

Roland Burris

There is one thing that has baffled me recently. How in the world can former state Attorney General Roland Burris sleep at night? There is something to be said about someone who accepts an appointment from someone (that someone being Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich) when that someone is under investigation for bribery for that position they were being appointed to. I am not saying that Roland Burris is not qualified for the job, but I am saying he should have said, thanks, but no thanks, I will wait for everything to clear up and try to get appointed by whatever other body would get your (Governor Rod Blagojevich's) appointing ability. This whole incident just screams Illinois politics and when Burris is surrounded by a tainted legacy, he will know why.

Affirmative WHAT?

Affirmative action is an outdated, unconstitutional, unfair, progressively corrosive policy that needs to be eliminated by our politicians in Washington. First, I’d like to point out that the 14^th Amendment gives all US citizens equal protection under the law. How then can we look at two different people and give one preference over the other on physical appearance only? How then can we look at two people, regardless of color or creed and tell them that one of them has a specific genetic trait that is more preferable for admission or employment. How then was this policy put into practice in the first place? One of the building blocks of our nation, the Declaration of Independence states that, “All men are created equal”.

I’d like the time to even contrast this policy to that of basic economics. I think it is hard to find someone to disagree with the fact that for our country to compete on the global stage, then we need the best and brightest representing us both in foreign countries and domestically. Well, affirmative action takes this policy and throws it upside down. It takes the most qualified applicants and sets them aside for those that are less qualified but belong to some minority group. I am not saying that minorities will not sometimes be the most qualified; I am saying that when they are not the most qualified, they should not be hired. I would even go as far as to say that on applications for anything, having the race of the applicant on the application should be illegal. It is nobody’s business what race or ethnic background you are from, employer or admissions counselors should not even see this information.

I understand that many liberals point out that lower class black people are born with fewer opportunities than upper and middle class white people. What I do not understand is why one needs to look at race to attack an economic issue. What better to help poor people than by focusing on….well….being poor….rather than race. Isn’t actually being poor a more accurate portrayal of being poor than the race of that person? Why does Kobe Bryant’s child have an edge over your or my child? If such a program promoting equality of opportunity is enacted, then why are we looking at race over economic status?

In 2003, the Supreme Court ruled in a case about college admissions at the University of Michigan that race can be used in college admissions, but it cannot be the overriding factor. This ruling that the Supreme Court decided, lets every college deal with something that is very subjective. The student who challenged this program was upset that in admissions at the University of Michigan, a point system was used. A student had to receive a certain number of points to be accepted to the University of Michigan. For a perfect SAT score, the student would receive 12 points, but for belonging to a racial minority the student would receive 20 points. The lawyers for the plaintiff said that 20 points was equivalent to a whole grade point increase. Clarence Thomas (who is by the way, African American), in his dissenting opinion, said, " The law school, of its own choosing, and for its own purposes, maintains an exclusionary admissions system that it knows produces racially disproportionate results. Racial discrimination is not a permissible solution to the self-inflicted wounds of this elitist admissions policy." I will be thankful though that in previous decisions, race was allowed to be used in admission, but racial quotas were banned. Maybe one day our Supreme Court justices will wise up and make a better decision.

I was not alive when JFK introduced this program. I do not know what it was like to live with extreme racism and prejudice. I do not understand the so called race wars of the 60’s. What I do know is that in today’s day and age, affirmative action not only does little to prevent racism, but it fosters anger and resentment from lower class white citizens because they are born with the same lack of opportunities that their lower class black neighbors are born with. It is not 1961, and as hard as it might be for liberals to end a program that (the only man who may be more Jesus like than Obama) JFK started, it needs to be done.

Please God Not Kennedy

Unless you have been living under a rock the past few weeks you know that
Caroline Kennedy, the daughter of the late John F. Kennedy, is seeking the
Senate seat soon to be vacated by Hillary Clinton. Carline Kennedy, who has
always shied away from the spotlight, does not deserve to be considered for
this position. She has no qualifications that Kristin Gillibrand, Brian
Higgins, Andrew Cuomo, Steve Israel, or Thomas Suozzi lack, except for maybe
her last name. Although I strongly disagree with the views of all these
politicians, they have experience and have been in politics for most of
their career. Ms. Kennedy on the other hand, must think that she has a right
to the seat due to her last name because she certainly knows she's not
qualified enough for the position. Ms. Kennedy claims that being a mom,
being a Kennedy and being the director of the Office of Strategic
Partnerships for the New York City Department of Education (a three-day a
week job) has prepared her for the United States Senate. She has yet to take
stances in which she would depart from either Mayor Bloomberg or the
Democratic Party and she has yet to disclose her financial statements or
state disagreements she has with other potential appointees. She claims that
she would be a good representative of all New Yorkers, yet she has never
ventured past her multi-million dollar penthouse suite in lower Manhattan.
There is more to the state of New York than just the five boroughs and Long
Island. I think it is also important to note that since registering to vote
in 1988..."Records show Kennedy did not pull the lever for any of her fellow
Democrats in city primary races for mayor in 1989, 1993 and 1997 and 2005,
which Republicans went on to win three out of four times in the general
election. She was also AWOL for the primary and general elections in 1994,
when Sen. Daniel Moynihan was running for reelection to the seat Kennedy
hopes to hold. "-nydailynews

Just two months removed from Sarah Palin and all of the criticism for her
lack of qualifications, Caroline Kennedy, is trying to be appointed to the
Senate (believe it or not, Palin is the Governor of Alaska, Kennedy has
never held public office). For someone who hasn't always voted and doesn't
value the democratic process, being appointed is the ideal way for her to
take office. It is the only way she would have a chance at getting to
Capitol Hill, especially for someone who in a recent 30 minute interview
with cable station NY1 said the words "you know" 168
times.-thewallstreetjournal God knows that if she were to run for election
with her lack-luster resume she would surely lose. Despite these facts and
her utter lack of qualifications, the prospect of having a qualified Senator
is not looking too bright. She thinks that because she is a Kennedy she does
not have to work her way up the food chain, gain experience or any of that.
David Patterson, as the governor of New York, will appoint someone to finish
out Clinton's term, which ends in 2012. This person will most likely be
Caroline Kennedy. Let's face it, David Patterson is a nobody, he wasn't even
suppose to be governor, but if he appoints Ms. Kennedy to the Senate, he
would have an influential and powerful friend for life. He would be doing
her a huge favor because it really is her only chance to become Senator of
New York.

God Bless America

Gov. Barkley?

Charles Barkley, former NBA star and current television analyst, has likely never been accused of being too restrained or too quiet. Instead, Barkley has earned a great deal of attention for himself by making outlandish comments to nearly any reporter that will listen. Unfortunately for his prospective political career -- Barkley has stated he intends to run for Governor of Alabama in 2012 -- his latest statement was given to a police officer, not a reporter, and will be published in public record, not on a newspaper sports page.

After being cited for DUI and being taken to the local Scottsdale police department, Barkley gave incriminating statements to the investigating officer.



This incident report, acquired by thesmokinggun.com, indicates that Barkley failed to obey a stop sign because he was hurrying to pick up his "date" for the evening. You can read about her (alleged?) talents in the document above.

We probably won't know for some time how this latest incident will affect the political career of Charles Barkley. However, given the MSM's penchant to destroy public figures accused of adultery or sexual misconduct, Barkley might save his reputation by staying out of the public light for a year or two.