Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Florida House candidate defends Ulmer, Merwin
Florida House candidate Yomin Postelnik defends Jim Ulmer and Edwin Merwin against malicious slander. See http://www.timesanddemocrat.com/articles/2009/10/20/news/doc4ade50c4c131d107943298.txt
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Corrine Brown for President
Democrat tricks would be comical, if they weren’t so blatantly farcical.
At this time in our nation’s history, we need people with ingenuity. So when a congresswoman with little name recognition decides to run for US Senate while simultaneously running for reelection to her House seat, that kind of creative thinking is worth noticing. Sure she dropped out after amassing hundreds of thousands in campaign funds, but you’ve just got to applaud that outside of the box thinking, the kind of thinking that makes sane people pause the nation over.
Still, one cannot help but wonder why Corrine Brown has stopped there. Running for US House and Senate simultaneously allowed her to skirt campaign contribution limits. But a run for the presidency would open up new doors altogether. And judging by Obama’s rating trend, at the end of the day she’d at least come in ahead of the incumbent. I can hear Hillary’s 2012 campaign cry already: “No way, no how, no crazy congresswoman.”
Back to her Senate bid. Did the scheme work? Well, to quote the Florida Times Union’s reporter David Hunt: “The possible Senate run did build some fundraising momentum. Spokesman David Heller said Brown generated about $445,000 in the last quarter. The money was split between her congressional and Senate exploratory funds, but can all be used to finance the House campaign.”
The odds of Corrine Brown being elected to the US Senate, even before she quit the race, were about as good as mine are of being the keynote speaker at an event hosted by the ACLU. She’s not foolish enough to give up her House seat for a long shot run and never started any of the mechanics that would have indicated a serious run for Senate. All of this was nothing more than a creative way to raise more funds for her House campaign - and the American people deserves better.
Take into account all of the above. Then factor in the following: Corrine Brown’s district is one of the poorest in Florida. Her lackluster record in Congress has produced precious little for the people of her district.
Fortunately, there is a solution for her district. It’s just not Corrine Brown.
While Brown was off ostensibly running for both House and Senate (yes, for the purposes of brevity we dare to leave out President, Queen of England and Heiress to Napoleon), someone else managed to launch a campaign to actually take care of the needs of her district. In a welcome change to the politics as usual that until now has been offered as the only choice to the people of her district, that person is proposing real solutions. And he is none other than common sense conservative Mike Yost.
Mike Yost is a man whose caliber we haven’t seen the likes of since Dick Armey. He proposes real solutions for real people. He’s a principled moral and economic conservative who also believes in common sense national security. More importantly, he’s got great ideas and is running for all of the right reasons.
I asked Mike Yost what he thinks of Corrine Brown’s shenanigans. Being that he was the first to expose them, his answer was “not much.” But we did have a conversation that touched on every indepth economic subject, as well as a detailed discussion of the problems facing his district. After a few minutes of conversation, it was clear that Yost is among the most informed and intelligent candidates that the GOP has today and that he possesses a true desire to better life in his district for his soon to be constituents.
Can he win? You’d better believe it!
Demographics have shifted significantly since the District was last redrawn in 2002. Moreover, because his district is economically depressed, the people of the district want solutions. Yost is taking the fight to Brown as no one ever has before. If you want to see his extensive platform and thought provoking updates, visit www.yostforcongress.com.
Then if you want to see what he’s up against and why close to nothing has ever been done under Corrine Brown’s watch, view this most eloquent speech given by Brown from the House floor - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8N2uQ7Fg_Uk. Perhaps it could be the start of an inaugural speech should she indeed decide to run for president (and should Obama’s education plans take hold, upping the prospects for her electoral victory).
Lastly, I do not want readers to think that I’m being in any way facetious in my endorsement of Corrine Brown for President or in the title of this article. I just mean it in a different way than most readers will have understood.
Corrine Brown would be a vast improvement to Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez and I readily endorse her for President of same. Incompetent is infinitely better than ruthless and the same can be said of many other countries, all of which would be far better off with Corrine as their president. But the people of Florida’s Congressional District 3 have a better choice. And they deserve Mike Yost.
At this time in our nation’s history, we need people with ingenuity. So when a congresswoman with little name recognition decides to run for US Senate while simultaneously running for reelection to her House seat, that kind of creative thinking is worth noticing. Sure she dropped out after amassing hundreds of thousands in campaign funds, but you’ve just got to applaud that outside of the box thinking, the kind of thinking that makes sane people pause the nation over.
Still, one cannot help but wonder why Corrine Brown has stopped there. Running for US House and Senate simultaneously allowed her to skirt campaign contribution limits. But a run for the presidency would open up new doors altogether. And judging by Obama’s rating trend, at the end of the day she’d at least come in ahead of the incumbent. I can hear Hillary’s 2012 campaign cry already: “No way, no how, no crazy congresswoman.”
Back to her Senate bid. Did the scheme work? Well, to quote the Florida Times Union’s reporter David Hunt: “The possible Senate run did build some fundraising momentum. Spokesman David Heller said Brown generated about $445,000 in the last quarter. The money was split between her congressional and Senate exploratory funds, but can all be used to finance the House campaign.”
The odds of Corrine Brown being elected to the US Senate, even before she quit the race, were about as good as mine are of being the keynote speaker at an event hosted by the ACLU. She’s not foolish enough to give up her House seat for a long shot run and never started any of the mechanics that would have indicated a serious run for Senate. All of this was nothing more than a creative way to raise more funds for her House campaign - and the American people deserves better.
Take into account all of the above. Then factor in the following: Corrine Brown’s district is one of the poorest in Florida. Her lackluster record in Congress has produced precious little for the people of her district.
Fortunately, there is a solution for her district. It’s just not Corrine Brown.
While Brown was off ostensibly running for both House and Senate (yes, for the purposes of brevity we dare to leave out President, Queen of England and Heiress to Napoleon), someone else managed to launch a campaign to actually take care of the needs of her district. In a welcome change to the politics as usual that until now has been offered as the only choice to the people of her district, that person is proposing real solutions. And he is none other than common sense conservative Mike Yost.
Mike Yost is a man whose caliber we haven’t seen the likes of since Dick Armey. He proposes real solutions for real people. He’s a principled moral and economic conservative who also believes in common sense national security. More importantly, he’s got great ideas and is running for all of the right reasons.
I asked Mike Yost what he thinks of Corrine Brown’s shenanigans. Being that he was the first to expose them, his answer was “not much.” But we did have a conversation that touched on every indepth economic subject, as well as a detailed discussion of the problems facing his district. After a few minutes of conversation, it was clear that Yost is among the most informed and intelligent candidates that the GOP has today and that he possesses a true desire to better life in his district for his soon to be constituents.
Can he win? You’d better believe it!
Demographics have shifted significantly since the District was last redrawn in 2002. Moreover, because his district is economically depressed, the people of the district want solutions. Yost is taking the fight to Brown as no one ever has before. If you want to see his extensive platform and thought provoking updates, visit www.yostforcongress.com.
Then if you want to see what he’s up against and why close to nothing has ever been done under Corrine Brown’s watch, view this most eloquent speech given by Brown from the House floor - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8N2uQ7Fg_Uk. Perhaps it could be the start of an inaugural speech should she indeed decide to run for president (and should Obama’s education plans take hold, upping the prospects for her electoral victory).
Lastly, I do not want readers to think that I’m being in any way facetious in my endorsement of Corrine Brown for President or in the title of this article. I just mean it in a different way than most readers will have understood.
Corrine Brown would be a vast improvement to Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez and I readily endorse her for President of same. Incompetent is infinitely better than ruthless and the same can be said of many other countries, all of which would be far better off with Corrine as their president. But the people of Florida’s Congressional District 3 have a better choice. And they deserve Mike Yost.
In Defense of Chairmen Merwin and Ulmer
Two Republican county chairmen in South Carolina wrote an op-ed in support of one of our greatest Senators, Senator Jim DeMint. In their op-ed, they innocently used the argument of the frugality purportedly displayed by some Jews as a role model for sound economic policy. Their choice of words was open to misinterpretation, but their well meaning and intentions were not.
Democrats pounced on one line in the op-ed and even a great Jewish conservative organization, afraid of what this would do to Republican recruitment, wrongly chastised the writers. To be fair, the organization stated that the intentions behind the op-ed seemed fine, but that the wording was problematic. The trouble is, it’s only problematic if you grow up among Jews and know that saying “the Jews who became wealthy” sounds like a slur based on the way it’s been used by those who are less than friendly. These two gentlemen were using Jewish frugality as a compliment, as was clear from the context of their remark.
Democrats are always quick to pounce on any misconstrued line that they can use to portray the party as racist. Republicans need to simply speak the truth. The statement that should have been issued would be one that praises the intent of the county chairs and then explains that a better choice of words could have been used, while pointing out that in their region the meaning of their words was purely complimentary. Attack Democrat scandalmongers, not well meaning conservative op-ed writers.
As a party, we should be less concerned with the hissy fits of Democrats, who know all too well that the more they act out, the greater the reaction they will get. We should be more concerned with defending good party leaders and, when needed, privately training them to avoid unnecessary albeit well meaning remarks that are open to misinterpretation.
The basis of societal harmony demands that when people inadvertently use language that can be construed in a negative light, they be afforded the courtesy of being told as much privately. They can then be asked to issue a clarification. In similar vein, Chairmen Merwin and Ulmer should have been asked to issue a clarification, not have been made the subject of a press release.
I agree that the line “There is a saying that the Jews who are wealthy got that way not by watching dollars, but instead by taking care of the pennies and the dollars taking care of themselves” is a poor choice of words. But I think that this is only obvious to people who’ve grown up in areas where many Jews live and who understand that the same line has been used as an insult.
Furthermore, as the first visibly observant Jewish candidate for state office in my state, as someone who served as a director of the Ten Commandments Commission and who has fought for Judeo-Christian values, allow me to make the following clear: The same liberal Democrats who are quick to yell “anti-Semite” are the same people who’ve attempted to sell out both American and Jewish security in order to curry favor with the world’s “intelligentsia” (a misnomer if ever there were one). By contrast, the Republican Party has stood for the inalienable rights of all people since its founding right through to this day. Republican intent trumps Democrat pandering hands down, no contest, TKO.
Messrs. Merwin and Ulmer are fine people and I’m proud, not ashamed, to be in same the party as they are. When we start parsing words instead of measuring intentions, we all have a problem.
Yomin Postelnik
Candidate for Florida House of Representatives
Republican Committeeman and Conservative Writer
Democrats pounced on one line in the op-ed and even a great Jewish conservative organization, afraid of what this would do to Republican recruitment, wrongly chastised the writers. To be fair, the organization stated that the intentions behind the op-ed seemed fine, but that the wording was problematic. The trouble is, it’s only problematic if you grow up among Jews and know that saying “the Jews who became wealthy” sounds like a slur based on the way it’s been used by those who are less than friendly. These two gentlemen were using Jewish frugality as a compliment, as was clear from the context of their remark.
Democrats are always quick to pounce on any misconstrued line that they can use to portray the party as racist. Republicans need to simply speak the truth. The statement that should have been issued would be one that praises the intent of the county chairs and then explains that a better choice of words could have been used, while pointing out that in their region the meaning of their words was purely complimentary. Attack Democrat scandalmongers, not well meaning conservative op-ed writers.
As a party, we should be less concerned with the hissy fits of Democrats, who know all too well that the more they act out, the greater the reaction they will get. We should be more concerned with defending good party leaders and, when needed, privately training them to avoid unnecessary albeit well meaning remarks that are open to misinterpretation.
The basis of societal harmony demands that when people inadvertently use language that can be construed in a negative light, they be afforded the courtesy of being told as much privately. They can then be asked to issue a clarification. In similar vein, Chairmen Merwin and Ulmer should have been asked to issue a clarification, not have been made the subject of a press release.
I agree that the line “There is a saying that the Jews who are wealthy got that way not by watching dollars, but instead by taking care of the pennies and the dollars taking care of themselves” is a poor choice of words. But I think that this is only obvious to people who’ve grown up in areas where many Jews live and who understand that the same line has been used as an insult.
Furthermore, as the first visibly observant Jewish candidate for state office in my state, as someone who served as a director of the Ten Commandments Commission and who has fought for Judeo-Christian values, allow me to make the following clear: The same liberal Democrats who are quick to yell “anti-Semite” are the same people who’ve attempted to sell out both American and Jewish security in order to curry favor with the world’s “intelligentsia” (a misnomer if ever there were one). By contrast, the Republican Party has stood for the inalienable rights of all people since its founding right through to this day. Republican intent trumps Democrat pandering hands down, no contest, TKO.
Messrs. Merwin and Ulmer are fine people and I’m proud, not ashamed, to be in same the party as they are. When we start parsing words instead of measuring intentions, we all have a problem.
Yomin Postelnik
Candidate for Florida House of Representatives
Republican Committeeman and Conservative Writer
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Gaddafi / Biden 2012
In 2003, Gaddafi agreed to cooperate with the President of the United States. So how nice it was of Barack Obama to return the favor and now agree so wholeheartedly with Gaddafi.
Obama’s moral relativism is at best shockingly and dangerously naïve. At worst, it’s something far more nefarious. But the problem is that this bankrupt philosophy has become a hallmark of liberalism and of today’s “Democratic” Party.
Moral relativism equates killers and mass murderers like Stalin with those who oppose such brutalities. It equates the burglar with the homeowner trying to defend his family and totalitarianism with those who patriotically resist it. The end result is one of cowardice in the face of evil and the development of a hazy world outlook where fact and fiction are mixed in a way that makes Alice’s Wonderland look sane, orderly and appealing. Indeed, such is the view of most Democrats.
So let’s make this clear. America, a nation that has fought against tyranny the world over has nothing to apologize for (other than for electing people like Obama). Sure, many things are far from perfect, but liberals never address real societal problems. They leave real leadership to conservative Republicans while they moan and groan and publicly defame their own nation on the international stage.
And while we’re at it, your attack on Israel was shameful as well, Mr. Obama. It’s reminiscent of how you treat allies like Great Britain. (Or did you think there was anything statesmanlike about unceremoniously turfing the Churchill bust in their Prime Minister’s face along with a package of DVDs that don’t work in the UK and then following up that class act by giving the Queen an iPod?) It smacks of how you treated Honduras after members of that nation’s ruling party saw fit to remove a thug who had usurped their constitution. All in all, your actions are shameful, they’re disgraceful and you should resign.
But to set the record straight after your outburst at the UN, let me say this much:
Just as America has nothing to apologize for, so too Israel, a country that has taken more precautions to protect the lives of civilians on the other side than any other and who has never started a single one of the wars that were brought upon it, has nothing to apologize for.
Yes, Israel won an increased amount of land in 1967. But Israel did not start that battle. They won it after they were aggressively surrounded by enemies on all sides who were very openly set on Israel’s destruction.
If the battle in Israel were a battle between Chicagoans and people from Detroit; if one side never made an aggressive move while the other side had openly targeted women and children, may G-d protect everyone, the side who justice and decency was on would be clear to all. It is also noteworthy that every discussion of regional peace has been about nothing more than how much Israel would give versus how much its enemies would stop attacking it should they receive something. And each time that Israel gave land, terrorists were emboldened. Netanyahu is right when he says that promoting mutual business, not dangerous land concessions, is the only possible road for peace in the Middle East.
Yet the strange thing is that in Israel, both the right as well as much of the left have come to understand that the only way to stand up to terror is to, well, stand up to it. That’s why Netanyahu and Ehud Barak were able to form a coalition. The only one who doesn’t get it is Tzipi Livni, who to her credit, is doing whatever she can to dispel the notion that all Jews are smart.
And who is harmed by Obama’s outbursts and insanely foolish worldview? America - because in today’s world, America cannot show weakness. Such an attitude invites contempt and emboldens our enemies.
The night that Obama was elected, people at the local McCain party turned to me and asked in a very concerned manner, “what about Israel?” I answered that Israel understands terror. Much of America does not and therefore I worry for its safety. We cannot take our eye off the ball and that weakness in the face of terror would only harm America, may G-d protect this land and our allies.
Let me be clear. While Obama and Biden may be the most naïve of fools ever to occupy our nation’s highest offices (with the possible exception of one peanut farmer who shall remain clueless), the American people know better and will demand a swift reaction against anyone who seeks to harm this nation. I’m just worried about the message that Obama is sending, not about our national resolve.
Obama and his gang have behaved like reckless school children with the US finances. No one with even a rudimentary understanding of history would have order the printing of a trillion US dollars, causing China, Russia and others to start a stampede against our currency. In foreign affairs Obama is seen as simply one of the group, not as the leader of the free world. His leadership is as shameful as his worldview is ridiculous and the sad fact is that his harmful outlook is shared by most of his party.
So what’s next for Democrats? A Gaddafi/Clinton ticket in 2012? Sounds like the next logical progression of a morally bankrupt and ideologically idiotic party. But then whatever would they do with Joe Biden? Not to worry. Perhaps Barney Frank needs a new congressional page.
Obama’s moral relativism is at best shockingly and dangerously naïve. At worst, it’s something far more nefarious. But the problem is that this bankrupt philosophy has become a hallmark of liberalism and of today’s “Democratic” Party.
Moral relativism equates killers and mass murderers like Stalin with those who oppose such brutalities. It equates the burglar with the homeowner trying to defend his family and totalitarianism with those who patriotically resist it. The end result is one of cowardice in the face of evil and the development of a hazy world outlook where fact and fiction are mixed in a way that makes Alice’s Wonderland look sane, orderly and appealing. Indeed, such is the view of most Democrats.
So let’s make this clear. America, a nation that has fought against tyranny the world over has nothing to apologize for (other than for electing people like Obama). Sure, many things are far from perfect, but liberals never address real societal problems. They leave real leadership to conservative Republicans while they moan and groan and publicly defame their own nation on the international stage.
And while we’re at it, your attack on Israel was shameful as well, Mr. Obama. It’s reminiscent of how you treat allies like Great Britain. (Or did you think there was anything statesmanlike about unceremoniously turfing the Churchill bust in their Prime Minister’s face along with a package of DVDs that don’t work in the UK and then following up that class act by giving the Queen an iPod?) It smacks of how you treated Honduras after members of that nation’s ruling party saw fit to remove a thug who had usurped their constitution. All in all, your actions are shameful, they’re disgraceful and you should resign.
But to set the record straight after your outburst at the UN, let me say this much:
Just as America has nothing to apologize for, so too Israel, a country that has taken more precautions to protect the lives of civilians on the other side than any other and who has never started a single one of the wars that were brought upon it, has nothing to apologize for.
Yes, Israel won an increased amount of land in 1967. But Israel did not start that battle. They won it after they were aggressively surrounded by enemies on all sides who were very openly set on Israel’s destruction.
If the battle in Israel were a battle between Chicagoans and people from Detroit; if one side never made an aggressive move while the other side had openly targeted women and children, may G-d protect everyone, the side who justice and decency was on would be clear to all. It is also noteworthy that every discussion of regional peace has been about nothing more than how much Israel would give versus how much its enemies would stop attacking it should they receive something. And each time that Israel gave land, terrorists were emboldened. Netanyahu is right when he says that promoting mutual business, not dangerous land concessions, is the only possible road for peace in the Middle East.
Yet the strange thing is that in Israel, both the right as well as much of the left have come to understand that the only way to stand up to terror is to, well, stand up to it. That’s why Netanyahu and Ehud Barak were able to form a coalition. The only one who doesn’t get it is Tzipi Livni, who to her credit, is doing whatever she can to dispel the notion that all Jews are smart.
And who is harmed by Obama’s outbursts and insanely foolish worldview? America - because in today’s world, America cannot show weakness. Such an attitude invites contempt and emboldens our enemies.
The night that Obama was elected, people at the local McCain party turned to me and asked in a very concerned manner, “what about Israel?” I answered that Israel understands terror. Much of America does not and therefore I worry for its safety. We cannot take our eye off the ball and that weakness in the face of terror would only harm America, may G-d protect this land and our allies.
Let me be clear. While Obama and Biden may be the most naïve of fools ever to occupy our nation’s highest offices (with the possible exception of one peanut farmer who shall remain clueless), the American people know better and will demand a swift reaction against anyone who seeks to harm this nation. I’m just worried about the message that Obama is sending, not about our national resolve.
Obama and his gang have behaved like reckless school children with the US finances. No one with even a rudimentary understanding of history would have order the printing of a trillion US dollars, causing China, Russia and others to start a stampede against our currency. In foreign affairs Obama is seen as simply one of the group, not as the leader of the free world. His leadership is as shameful as his worldview is ridiculous and the sad fact is that his harmful outlook is shared by most of his party.
So what’s next for Democrats? A Gaddafi/Clinton ticket in 2012? Sounds like the next logical progression of a morally bankrupt and ideologically idiotic party. But then whatever would they do with Joe Biden? Not to worry. Perhaps Barney Frank needs a new congressional page.
Welcome Back Carter, Now Please Go Away
09/17/09
Jimmy Carter is a fool. That may not be the most civil of descriptions, but it is the most fitting one. Sometimes it’s more important to be factually correct than to be politically so.
Carter’s statement that Rep. Wilson is a “racist” for calling out Barack Obama on a mistruth is as troubling as the needless and petty resolution passed by his party, if not more so. And in making that statement, Jimmy Carter brings hypocrisy to a new art form.
The Democrats’ own Senate president pro-tempore, Carter’s own Senate majority leader, is an unrepentant former member of the Ku Klux Klan who as recently as 2001 used the n-word on national TV in one of the most tasteless and sickening exchanges since, well… since the Carter administration. Yet Democrats and Jimmy Carter have the temerity to call us racist - we Republicans who have stood up against racism since the very founding of our party.
Republicans have always been the civil rights party. This was true in both the 1860s as well as the 1960s. Charlton Heston was a great civil rights leader and Martin Luther King Jr. was a Republican. In the meantime, the Democratic Party has gone from being led by the likes of Hubert Humphrey, Scoop Jackson and Daniel Patrick Moynihan to boasting such luminaries as Diane “Castro” Watson, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and Jimmy Carter among its highest ranks and to being organized on the ground level by the likes of Louis Farrakhan.
Carter’s tactic is as dangerous as it is shameful. Those who use the smear of “racism” lightly only increase paranoia and further divide the citizens of this great nation. Using accusations of racism as a political weapon is shameful.
Far worse still is the use of false accusations of racism to stifle political dissent. There can be few things more harmful to the health of a democracy. What’s more, holding someone above reproach because of his or her race is the very definition of racism. Such an attitude also allows for the unchecked growth of federal power.
I asked Bernard Sansaricq, the GOP’s first Caribbean-American congressional candidate, what he thinks about the situation. Sansaricq is the former President of the Haitian Senate and a renown human rights leader. He is running against Alcee Hastings, a Carter appointed judge who was impeached by the entire Congress.
Sansaricq’s answer was unequivocal and shows what a powerful candidate the GOP has in him: “Lack of decorum or not, Representative Joe Wilson shouted the honest truth, a cry from the heart of a great American. You can be sure that before too long, you will see signs popping up all over the country calling for ‘Joe Wilson for President 2012.’ We need straight shooters in Washington, DC and lack of decorum or not, Joe Wilson is a straight shooter and will have my vote for whichever office he chooses to run for, including the presidency.” Amen to that, Senator Sansaricq.
As far as Carter is concerned, some people should just stick to planting peanuts – no insult to the intelligent and hard working peanut farmers of America. We should only ridicule demagogues who plant peanuts.
Jimmy Carter is a fool. That may not be the most civil of descriptions, but it is the most fitting one. Sometimes it’s more important to be factually correct than to be politically so.
Carter’s statement that Rep. Wilson is a “racist” for calling out Barack Obama on a mistruth is as troubling as the needless and petty resolution passed by his party, if not more so. And in making that statement, Jimmy Carter brings hypocrisy to a new art form.
The Democrats’ own Senate president pro-tempore, Carter’s own Senate majority leader, is an unrepentant former member of the Ku Klux Klan who as recently as 2001 used the n-word on national TV in one of the most tasteless and sickening exchanges since, well… since the Carter administration. Yet Democrats and Jimmy Carter have the temerity to call us racist - we Republicans who have stood up against racism since the very founding of our party.
Republicans have always been the civil rights party. This was true in both the 1860s as well as the 1960s. Charlton Heston was a great civil rights leader and Martin Luther King Jr. was a Republican. In the meantime, the Democratic Party has gone from being led by the likes of Hubert Humphrey, Scoop Jackson and Daniel Patrick Moynihan to boasting such luminaries as Diane “Castro” Watson, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and Jimmy Carter among its highest ranks and to being organized on the ground level by the likes of Louis Farrakhan.
Carter’s tactic is as dangerous as it is shameful. Those who use the smear of “racism” lightly only increase paranoia and further divide the citizens of this great nation. Using accusations of racism as a political weapon is shameful.
Far worse still is the use of false accusations of racism to stifle political dissent. There can be few things more harmful to the health of a democracy. What’s more, holding someone above reproach because of his or her race is the very definition of racism. Such an attitude also allows for the unchecked growth of federal power.
I asked Bernard Sansaricq, the GOP’s first Caribbean-American congressional candidate, what he thinks about the situation. Sansaricq is the former President of the Haitian Senate and a renown human rights leader. He is running against Alcee Hastings, a Carter appointed judge who was impeached by the entire Congress.
Sansaricq’s answer was unequivocal and shows what a powerful candidate the GOP has in him: “Lack of decorum or not, Representative Joe Wilson shouted the honest truth, a cry from the heart of a great American. You can be sure that before too long, you will see signs popping up all over the country calling for ‘Joe Wilson for President 2012.’ We need straight shooters in Washington, DC and lack of decorum or not, Joe Wilson is a straight shooter and will have my vote for whichever office he chooses to run for, including the presidency.” Amen to that, Senator Sansaricq.
As far as Carter is concerned, some people should just stick to planting peanuts – no insult to the intelligent and hard working peanut farmers of America. We should only ridicule demagogues who plant peanuts.
Congressman Joe Wilson for US Senate
09/16/09
The American people often engage in robust debate. So do the citizens and (even the) parliamentarians of Britain and other Western countries. It’s considered a healthy aspect of most democracies, albeit an annoying one.
So when Democrats voted their disapproval of Representative Joe Wilson, they did a disservice to the American people. They also did a disservice to democracy, which was once a core principle of their party, but sadly is no more.
I’m all for civility. I’m even more for healthy, pointed, passionate dissent. Such dissent harms no one and has the potential to diffuse situations, as it allows each side to present their respective points of view with focused devotion.
Civility and indignation are two equally important aspects to the political health of a democratic republic. Civility allows us to discuss issues and righteous indignation allows us to express our passion in words. Rigorous dissent is healthy and needed. It’s what separates first class societies that engage in rigorous debate from countries that settle their disputes by way of mob violence.
Over the past eight years, I’ve heard Democrat activists and many of their Washington leaders yell an unending and ferocious tirade of curses and accusations at Republicans, at all Republicans. And as tasteless, wrongheaded and false as those tirades were, I would never dream of trying to stifle honest opposition. No Republican would.
What’s even more outrageous is that Congressman Wilson’s comment that President Barack Obama is a liar (which, based on both the Senate version at the time, as well as a proper reading of the House version, was a fair statement) pales in comparison to statements by Senator Dick Durbin, the number two ranking Democrat who compared our American troops to Nazis on the Senate floor. And “pales in comparison” is putting it extremely mildly.
I guess you can only yell outrageous obscenities from the floor of the US Senate. In the House, one must show decorum at all times. Well then, let me be the first to endorse Joe Wilson for US Senate. The difference is that he was standing up for the interests his constituents, not falsely maligning American heroes who risk their lives on behalf of the nation. Maybe that’s what congressional Democrats have a problem with.
Furthermore, in the 2006 State of the Union address, Democrats interrupted mid-sentence. The reaction was a smile from then President Bush followed by a one liner that turned the tables back on them. Not a single person in the chamber didn’t enjoy the exchange, and unlike Joe Wilson, they did not apologize.
Congressman Wilson’s statement also seems downright complimentary compared to that of former Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, who went on national TV accusing our troops of harassing women and children. Of course, false accusations against American troops are nothing new for Senator Kerry. Just ask any Vietnam veteran.
President Obama may be many things. But he’s not more honorable than our American soldiers. He’s also not above reproof.
What congressional Democrats have shown by last night’s vote is how thin skinned all but 17 of them are, not to mention hypocritical.
The American people often engage in robust debate. So do the citizens and (even the) parliamentarians of Britain and other Western countries. It’s considered a healthy aspect of most democracies, albeit an annoying one.
So when Democrats voted their disapproval of Representative Joe Wilson, they did a disservice to the American people. They also did a disservice to democracy, which was once a core principle of their party, but sadly is no more.
I’m all for civility. I’m even more for healthy, pointed, passionate dissent. Such dissent harms no one and has the potential to diffuse situations, as it allows each side to present their respective points of view with focused devotion.
Civility and indignation are two equally important aspects to the political health of a democratic republic. Civility allows us to discuss issues and righteous indignation allows us to express our passion in words. Rigorous dissent is healthy and needed. It’s what separates first class societies that engage in rigorous debate from countries that settle their disputes by way of mob violence.
Over the past eight years, I’ve heard Democrat activists and many of their Washington leaders yell an unending and ferocious tirade of curses and accusations at Republicans, at all Republicans. And as tasteless, wrongheaded and false as those tirades were, I would never dream of trying to stifle honest opposition. No Republican would.
What’s even more outrageous is that Congressman Wilson’s comment that President Barack Obama is a liar (which, based on both the Senate version at the time, as well as a proper reading of the House version, was a fair statement) pales in comparison to statements by Senator Dick Durbin, the number two ranking Democrat who compared our American troops to Nazis on the Senate floor. And “pales in comparison” is putting it extremely mildly.
I guess you can only yell outrageous obscenities from the floor of the US Senate. In the House, one must show decorum at all times. Well then, let me be the first to endorse Joe Wilson for US Senate. The difference is that he was standing up for the interests his constituents, not falsely maligning American heroes who risk their lives on behalf of the nation. Maybe that’s what congressional Democrats have a problem with.
Furthermore, in the 2006 State of the Union address, Democrats interrupted mid-sentence. The reaction was a smile from then President Bush followed by a one liner that turned the tables back on them. Not a single person in the chamber didn’t enjoy the exchange, and unlike Joe Wilson, they did not apologize.
Congressman Wilson’s statement also seems downright complimentary compared to that of former Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, who went on national TV accusing our troops of harassing women and children. Of course, false accusations against American troops are nothing new for Senator Kerry. Just ask any Vietnam veteran.
President Obama may be many things. But he’s not more honorable than our American soldiers. He’s also not above reproof.
What congressional Democrats have shown by last night’s vote is how thin skinned all but 17 of them are, not to mention hypocritical.
Why Jews Should No Longer Vote Democrat
Obama’s foreign policy is troubling. Barack Obama has not only alienated Israel, America’s most steadfast ally and given hope to thugs everywhere with his Honduras debacle. Great Britain was also shamed by his actions. Simply put, a man who goes to Buckingham Palace and hands the Queen an I-pod is a lunatic, not a president. But that and the hostile return of the Churchill bust marked this administration’s first overture to the UK.
America has nothing to apologize for. Likewise, Israel, a country that has taken more precautions to protect the lives of civilians on the other side and who has never started a single one of the wars that were brought upon it also has nothing to apologize for.
Yes, Israel won an increased amount of land in 1967. But Israel did not start that battle. They won it after they were aggressively surrounded by enemies on all sides who were very openly set on Israel’s destruction.
If the battle in Israel was a battle between Chicagoans and people from Detroit; if one side never made an aggressive move while the other side had openly targeted women and children, may G-d protect all, the side who justice and decency was on would be clear to all. It is also noteworthy that every discussion of regional peace has been about nothing more than how much Israel would give versus how much its enemies would stop attacking it. And each time that Israel gave land, the terrorists were emboldened. Netanyahu is right when he says that promoting mutual business, not dangerous land concessions, is the only possible road for peace.
Yet the strange thing is that in Israel, both the right as well as much of the left have come to understand that the only way to stand up to terror is to, well, stand up to it. That’s why Netanyahu and Ehud Barak were able to form a coalition. The only one who doesn’t get it is Tzipi Livni, who to her credit, is doing whatever she can to dispel the notion that all Jews are smart.
America cannot show weakness. Such an attitude invites contempt and emboldens our enemies. When Obama was elected, people turned to me at the local McCain party and asked, very concerned, “what about Israel?” I answered that we cannot take our eye off the ball and that weakness in the face of terror would only harm America, may G-d protect this land and our allies.
I know that many of us have friends who are staunchly Democrat. Yet they fail to understand what the Democratic Party has become. For much of our history, the Republican Party was the clear civil rights party. In the 1930s, an economic debate over how to end the depression split the parties, with both sides making compelling arguments as each proposed solutions that they saw best to revamp the economy. At that time, most Jews and most of the American people sided with FDR.
Let this much be clear. No matter what side you were on of the economic debate of the 1940s, one thing is certain. The tables have turned, the parties have flipped and the party of Hubert Humphrey, Scoop Jackson and Daniel Patrick Moynihan has become the party of Diane Watson, Jimmy Carter and Louis Farrakhan.
Compassion is no longer a part of their agenda. Republicans, not Democrats, cut taxes on the poorest income bracket by a third. Democrats sought to reverse this until they realized that they could just cap and trade that bracket instead.
Likewise, Republicans, not Democrats, organized the most comprehensive homeland security overhaul in the aftermath of 9-11 as Democrats sat back and wondered what to do.
Republicans, not Democrats, sounded the alarm in 2002 about the pending mortgage crisis and the abuses of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.
And Republicans, not Democrats, put forward sensible prescription drug coverage for seniors that did not rob them of all healthcare options or put them under the control of statist non-doctor panels.
So when people ask why you are a Republican, why not answer this?:
I’m a Republican because I believe that hard working people should be encouraged to make jobs for others, not hindered in that task. That’s why I’m a Republican!
I’m a Republican because I believe that seniors are our most valuable members of society and they deserve far better than second rate government rationed so-called healthcare. That’s why I’m a Republican!
I’m a Republican because I believe that people should be protected and that madmen should be stopped. That’s why I’m a Republican!
And I’m a Republican because I believe that age old values and wisdom are better than feel good momentary fixes. That’s why I’m a Republican.
The problem with the Obama administration does not stop and end with Barack Obama. Hillary Clinton has repeatedly shown a lack of understanding of the nature of terror and Iran has no greater friend than Joe Biden. When you hear about “conservative Democrats in Congress” you need to ask what exactly is conservative or even slightly moderate about acquiescence to the lunacy of this administration. Increasingly, the words “conservative Democrat” are as much a misnomer as calling Congressman Barney Frank “erudite.” It’s like calling Joe Biden “articulate!”
You see, Democrats and the state media fail to realize that Mahmoud Abbas is anything but a moderate. He was a high ranking PLO member when the PLO, not Hamas as wrongly reported, made the suicide bombing Mickey Mouse. He’s never backed down from his calls to violence to fellow PLO members. Simply put, in the eyes of the media, a moderate is a murderer with a smile on his face.
Had local politicians and the equivalent of state representatives stood up in Chile in the late 1960s there would have been no radical government of Salvador Allende that terrorized the populace.
Had local politicians stood up in Venezuela in the early 1990s, there would have been no Hugo Chavez.
And had local leaders raised their voices in Cuba in the 1950s, the murder squads of Fidel Castro and Che Guevara would have gone to Russia instead of wreaking havoc 90 miles off of our shores.
We need to be keenly aware that failed dogmas have been allowed to take hold on every continent of our globe because local leaders have failed to articulate their sound beliefs. And we need to stand up and do something about it.
Jews believe in human rights and by and large have been among the chief proponents of a better society for all since the beginning. It is high time for all Jews, all Christians, all people of faith and all decent people to abandon the vestiges of the Democratic Party, a name that has become yet another misnomer.
The Biblical traditions upon which this nation was founded tell us that G-d will eventually perfect the world. Indeed, over the past 25 years, we’ve seen many breakthroughs in medicine and technology and most of all, in human rights.
But during these last trying times each of us has a role to play to promote better government and to do our part to ensure a better society for all; one that values human rights, one that values age old traditions and one that values people, families and community.
We will not let the superficial dictate to us, no matter how strong their platform. Their world view has failed time and time again. What we will do is stand with innocents, stand with what is right and promote common decency. In those matters, we are assured of victory and each of us have a crucial role to play.
America has nothing to apologize for. Likewise, Israel, a country that has taken more precautions to protect the lives of civilians on the other side and who has never started a single one of the wars that were brought upon it also has nothing to apologize for.
Yes, Israel won an increased amount of land in 1967. But Israel did not start that battle. They won it after they were aggressively surrounded by enemies on all sides who were very openly set on Israel’s destruction.
If the battle in Israel was a battle between Chicagoans and people from Detroit; if one side never made an aggressive move while the other side had openly targeted women and children, may G-d protect all, the side who justice and decency was on would be clear to all. It is also noteworthy that every discussion of regional peace has been about nothing more than how much Israel would give versus how much its enemies would stop attacking it. And each time that Israel gave land, the terrorists were emboldened. Netanyahu is right when he says that promoting mutual business, not dangerous land concessions, is the only possible road for peace.
Yet the strange thing is that in Israel, both the right as well as much of the left have come to understand that the only way to stand up to terror is to, well, stand up to it. That’s why Netanyahu and Ehud Barak were able to form a coalition. The only one who doesn’t get it is Tzipi Livni, who to her credit, is doing whatever she can to dispel the notion that all Jews are smart.
America cannot show weakness. Such an attitude invites contempt and emboldens our enemies. When Obama was elected, people turned to me at the local McCain party and asked, very concerned, “what about Israel?” I answered that we cannot take our eye off the ball and that weakness in the face of terror would only harm America, may G-d protect this land and our allies.
I know that many of us have friends who are staunchly Democrat. Yet they fail to understand what the Democratic Party has become. For much of our history, the Republican Party was the clear civil rights party. In the 1930s, an economic debate over how to end the depression split the parties, with both sides making compelling arguments as each proposed solutions that they saw best to revamp the economy. At that time, most Jews and most of the American people sided with FDR.
Let this much be clear. No matter what side you were on of the economic debate of the 1940s, one thing is certain. The tables have turned, the parties have flipped and the party of Hubert Humphrey, Scoop Jackson and Daniel Patrick Moynihan has become the party of Diane Watson, Jimmy Carter and Louis Farrakhan.
Compassion is no longer a part of their agenda. Republicans, not Democrats, cut taxes on the poorest income bracket by a third. Democrats sought to reverse this until they realized that they could just cap and trade that bracket instead.
Likewise, Republicans, not Democrats, organized the most comprehensive homeland security overhaul in the aftermath of 9-11 as Democrats sat back and wondered what to do.
Republicans, not Democrats, sounded the alarm in 2002 about the pending mortgage crisis and the abuses of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.
And Republicans, not Democrats, put forward sensible prescription drug coverage for seniors that did not rob them of all healthcare options or put them under the control of statist non-doctor panels.
So when people ask why you are a Republican, why not answer this?:
I’m a Republican because I believe that hard working people should be encouraged to make jobs for others, not hindered in that task. That’s why I’m a Republican!
I’m a Republican because I believe that seniors are our most valuable members of society and they deserve far better than second rate government rationed so-called healthcare. That’s why I’m a Republican!
I’m a Republican because I believe that people should be protected and that madmen should be stopped. That’s why I’m a Republican!
And I’m a Republican because I believe that age old values and wisdom are better than feel good momentary fixes. That’s why I’m a Republican.
The problem with the Obama administration does not stop and end with Barack Obama. Hillary Clinton has repeatedly shown a lack of understanding of the nature of terror and Iran has no greater friend than Joe Biden. When you hear about “conservative Democrats in Congress” you need to ask what exactly is conservative or even slightly moderate about acquiescence to the lunacy of this administration. Increasingly, the words “conservative Democrat” are as much a misnomer as calling Congressman Barney Frank “erudite.” It’s like calling Joe Biden “articulate!”
You see, Democrats and the state media fail to realize that Mahmoud Abbas is anything but a moderate. He was a high ranking PLO member when the PLO, not Hamas as wrongly reported, made the suicide bombing Mickey Mouse. He’s never backed down from his calls to violence to fellow PLO members. Simply put, in the eyes of the media, a moderate is a murderer with a smile on his face.
Had local politicians and the equivalent of state representatives stood up in Chile in the late 1960s there would have been no radical government of Salvador Allende that terrorized the populace.
Had local politicians stood up in Venezuela in the early 1990s, there would have been no Hugo Chavez.
And had local leaders raised their voices in Cuba in the 1950s, the murder squads of Fidel Castro and Che Guevara would have gone to Russia instead of wreaking havoc 90 miles off of our shores.
We need to be keenly aware that failed dogmas have been allowed to take hold on every continent of our globe because local leaders have failed to articulate their sound beliefs. And we need to stand up and do something about it.
Jews believe in human rights and by and large have been among the chief proponents of a better society for all since the beginning. It is high time for all Jews, all Christians, all people of faith and all decent people to abandon the vestiges of the Democratic Party, a name that has become yet another misnomer.
The Biblical traditions upon which this nation was founded tell us that G-d will eventually perfect the world. Indeed, over the past 25 years, we’ve seen many breakthroughs in medicine and technology and most of all, in human rights.
But during these last trying times each of us has a role to play to promote better government and to do our part to ensure a better society for all; one that values human rights, one that values age old traditions and one that values people, families and community.
We will not let the superficial dictate to us, no matter how strong their platform. Their world view has failed time and time again. What we will do is stand with innocents, stand with what is right and promote common decency. In those matters, we are assured of victory and each of us have a crucial role to play.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
