Showing posts with label GOP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label GOP. Show all posts

Sunday, August 14, 2011

The Tea Party Must Reject Ron Paul


Ron Paul_Congressional image

During these troubled economic times and the Left’s assault upon decent & sane Americans in the Tea Party, as found in the Staten Island Tea Party, hopefully the idea and wonderful work of the “Tea Party” is not hijacked by the Ron Paul camp.

Absent domestic economic policy, Ron Paul cannot share the values of the Tea Party while rejecting adequate protection of the Constitution from Shariah Law and other foreign designs. Paul’s followers undoubtedly include patriotic Americans, but similar to the Obama camp many are also on the extreme fringe.

During economic duress it may be tempting to jump on the Ron Paul band wagon, for his economic savvy resonates very well with conservative fiscal values, but the ignorance of his foreign policy makes a Ron Paul presidency just as dangerous as an Obama presidency...if not worse.

As the Democratic Party was hijacked by the George Soros crowd and other far left radicals and the GOP Party has its fringe extreme, the Tea Party if not careful can be hijacked by the Ron Paul camp and the ‘well meaning’ anarcho-libertarian faction of that Party.

Anarchy should never be confused with a zeal for smaller government. Additionally, exploiting this nation’s poor foreign policy decisions of the past to justify giving our present enemies cart blanche is reckless; it is worse than those failures that are being exploited.

Granted, the Tea Party is not a national political Party, however, the grassroots movement has without question gained notoriety, respect and influence in the political discourse and direction of our nation. The Obama administration exploited the Tea Party’s success by scape-goating the grassroots movement for his failed economic policies.

In order for the tea Party to have and maintain success in rescuing the republic from the failed policies of elected officials, the Tea Party must maintain its credibility and relevance. In order to keep such status, the Tea Party cannot devolve into an isolationist and pro-shariah clan that embraces anarchy.

It runs counter to our Constitution when a leader, and presidential hopeful, fails to protect our sacred document from both foreign and domestic enemies.

What good is Ron Paul’s economic savvy if Shariah law and its adherents are allowed to go unchecked? Dhimmitude and subjugation will be the more benign aspects of a Shariah compliant U.S.

If Ron Paul has his way, an American policy will also embrace a nuclear Iran and an abandonment of Israel.

Is the motivation of a Ron Paul’s dangerous foreign policy stance a mindset that delineates the folly of “A friend (Islamofascists) of my enemy (Israel) is my friend”?

History has taught us the dangers of appeasement. Winston Churchill put it quite succinctly if not eloquently when he said, “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.”

Again, what good is Ron Paul’s economic savvy when he refuses basic protection against foreign radical regimes and desires to abandon important allies, especially allies in our continued fight against terrorism?

Does Paul think that because we were once a free nation that the new foreign tyrants will allow the women of our nation to choose the color of their burqas?

A champion of the Constitution will protect the same from both foreign and domestic enemies. A scholar of the Constitution will have the capability of understanding that the first amendment does not give protection to organizations, religious or otherwise, from usurping the Constitution while endeavoring to conquer the American people.

A Ron Paul’s presidency will give up essential liberty by grossly abandoning temporal security.

Below advertisement post view Mark Levin video and commentary on Ron Paul or click here

Mark Levin Commentary and YouTube Video on Ron Paul

From therightscoop.com:

Levin says there is no groundswell of support for Ron Paul even though his activists try to create the illusion of support in these straw polls. And he’s not the founder of the Tea Party, as most of the Tea Party wouldn’t even vote for him due to his ideas on foreign policy.

Levin asks why should we care if it’s natural that Iran would want nukes. He says Adolf Hitler would likely have wanted nukes too. I wonder, would Paul have been OK with that?

Video:




Friday, November 5, 2010

Historic House Win for the GOP



Historic House Win for the GOP

The midterm elections of 2010 resulted in a historic win for the GOP in which they gained a majority in the House of Representatives.

The midterm elections of 2010 resulted in a historic win for the GOP in which they gained a majority in the House of Representatives.

The Republicans needed 39 seats to win back the House and pending any recount votes it appears they won 64 seats or more, with the count not complete 2-days after the election.

The GOP will reclaim their majority status when the new 112th United States Congress convenes in January 2011 following the 2010 midterm elections.

Note: not all historic gains resulted in a majority representation for that Party.

Most presidents lose seats during the midterms, but the Democrats lost the most seats of any midterm since 1938 when the Republicans gained 81 seats in the House of Representatives; 72 seats from the Democrats and other seats from Progressive and Farmer-Labor Parties.

The U.S. House election of 1946, in the middle of Harry Truman's first term, resulted in a Republican majority, with the Republicans picking up 55 seats.

The U.S. House election of 1994, in the middle of Bill Clinton’s first term, resulted in a majority of seats for the Republicans for the first time since 1954, with the GOP winning 54 seats.

Prior to the ’94 election, the Democratic Party had run the House for all but six of the preceding 62 years. In 1994 the GOP united behind Newt Gingrich's Contract with America and took back the House.

In the middle of George Bush’s first term, during the House election of 2002, the GOP gained 8 seats maintaining their majority. Such gains only occurred three other times during midterm elections; in 1902, 1934, and in 1998, which was Bill Clinton’s second term and the gain did not result in a majority for the Democrats.

Following the 2006 elections, Democrats took control of the House as well as the Senate. In the 2008 elections, which coincided with Barack Obama's victory, Democrats increased their majorities in both chambers.

CONTINUE READING

Monday, July 12, 2010

Rick Lazio challenges Andrew Cuomo to investigate Cordoba Mosque near Ground Zero

Monday, July 12th, 2010
Rick Lazio (GOP candidate for NY governor) called on Andrew Cuomo, the current Attorney General for New York and Democratic gubernatorial candidate to investigate the Cordoba House mosque to be constructed near ground Zero Keep Reading »

Sunday, November 8, 2009

Healthcare Roll Call Vote Including Joseph Cao's Only Republican Vote

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 887
(Democrats in roman; Republicans in italic; Independents underlined)

Click here for results

One Republican voted with the Party that is destroying our republic. Congressman Ahn "Joseph" Cao (RINO-LA) was heavily recruited by Rahm Emanuel and Barack Obama, Cao sold his soul and voted with the Democrats. Final roll call vote is 220-215.

Cao cites the Stupak amendment to extend the ban on federal abortion subsidies as the clincher. Click here for the Stupak 240-194 roll call vote. Cao pathetically rolled over for the Obama administration and will now try and justify that by claiming a principled alignment with the GOP's stance against tax payer funded abortion.

Don't be fooled, Congressman Cao allowed his political weakness to trump his Patriotism and better sense.

From Malkin's site:

Cao backed the S-CHIP expansion, the $108 billion IMF bailout, and the omni-waste spending bill. And he voted to rebuke GOP Rep. Joe Wilson for calling out President Obama on his health care lies.

Cao reveals the cheap price he received for his soul: a commitment from President Obama that he would work together to address the health care issues of Louisiana, including the FMAP crisis and community disaster loan forgiveness, as well as issues related to Charity and Methodist Hospitals. [end]

Can you imagine anyone believing in a "commitment" from This president? Only the willfully ignorant can feed on such grain.

Charles Rangel and Nancy Pelosi do not have the integrity or competence to successfully manage a grocery store trip... and yet they are trusted with the keys to the entire supermarket chain.

This health care take over accounts for about one-sixth of the entire economy, more than any other industry... That ladies and gentlemen is the reason why they (Obama admin) rammed it down America's throat, those that convincingly control the purse strings control the dole. We are goose-stepping closer and closer to socialism, welcome to an Obamanation.



















Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Conservative vs Liberal

elephantFlag

(H/T Phil) Author unknown

If a conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.

If a liberal doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.

If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat.

If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.

If a conservative sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how to defeat his enemy.

A liberal wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.

If a conservative is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.

If a liberal is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.

If a person of color is conservative, they see themselves as independently successful.

Their liberal counterparts see themselves as victims in need of government protection.

If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.

A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.

If a conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.

Liberals demand that those they don't like be shut down.

If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.

A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced. (Unless it's a foreign religion, of course!)

If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.

A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his.

If a conservative slips and falls in a store, he gets up, laughs and is embarrassed.

If a liberal slips and falls, he grabs his neck, moans like he's in labor and then sues.

If a conservative reads this, he'll forward it so his friends can have a good laugh.

A liberal will delete it because he's "offended"...