ESPN has an obsession with Brett Farve.

Last Monday night, during the Green Bay - Chicago game, Tony Kornheiser could just not stop talking about Farve, comparing Farve to BOTH Aaron Rodgers and Kyle Orton, wondering how Green Bay would have ended up if Farve would have stayed a Packer, etc.

Last night, Farve gets interviewed and makes yet another veiled reference to possibly retiring after the year, and suddenly, it is the number one story on ESPN for the rest of the night, including during the football game where Notre Dame stomped a mudhole into Hawaii.

Tomorrow, even though Greeny won't be on his usual morning show, all it is going to end up being is about the Jets vs the Dolphins. Lip service will be paid to Chad Pennington and the Dolphin success, but all the questions and comments will be phrased in a Jet-centric manner.

Brett Farve is past his prime, and has been for a few years now. He got a good season last year because he got a running game from Ryan Grant and the Green Bay defense did not get riddled with injuries. This year, Grant, his backup Brandon Jackson, and the Green Bay defense all had injury issues. Aaron Rodgers put up pro-bowl numbers yet every single game he plays, here's the Farve comparison. Meanwhile, over on the Jets, Farve has two decent running backs in Leon Washington and Thomas Jones, both of which made the pro bowl...and the Jets are losing.

Win or lose, we're going to be subjected to the Farve retirement saga yet again for the next year. I'm so disgusted by the coverage by ESPN on Farve that I am now hoping the Jets get clobbered by the Dolphins, putting them out of the playoffs so I don't have to listen to the glowing praise of an old, broken down quarterback who should have retired while he was ahead. I now want to go through the 'Oh, woe is me' schtick by Greeny because I am sick of his man-crush. It will be all the better if it is Pennington, the man the Jets dumped in order to get Farve, who has the last laugh.

For the record, I'm a Pittsburgh fan. Normally, the Dolphins, Jets, or Packers are not even in a consideration for a game - especially since I do not play fantasy football any longer. The team I used to loathe was the Cowboys (like many in the US), but ESPN has caused me to put the Jets on the top of that list now.

Thanks Kornheiser and Greeny.

In an effort to split things up (and to keep things sane), I'm looking into turning this blog into one more concerned with personal things, my work as a web design/administrator, and my hobbies.

My political rantings will be continuing in a blog tied to a domain name I completely own and control, and which will end up being tied to my new work with the #dontgo Movement (http://dontgomovement.com).

For those of you who don't know, I am the Northwest Region coordinator for #dontgo. In the next few weeks, you will be seeing a lot of exciting things coming from us. My region is geographically the largest. Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Nebraska all fall in my region. The good news in this is very good Republican governors (Sarah Palin in Alaska, Dave Heineman in Nebraska), but also the liberal hotspots of Seattle and Portland.

In this, if you are a conservative or libertarian blogger in the states mentioned, please contact me! One of the projects with #dontgo will need help from a multitude of bloggers at the grassroots level. The benefits from this are the increased traffic to your blogs, which is always wanted by those of you who get ad revenue.

Look, folks, I know my tirades against Obama and the Democrats can be rather venomous. However, spewing death threats, sending out malicious viruses and other such acts is stupid.

I keep saying Obama is the new Mussolini. Remember, Mussolini's economic plan worked up to the point where Italy got stupid and decided to carve out an empire from Ethiopia. Now, all indications that will happen exactly the same, though a tad bit more north (Darfur, Sudan is the northern border of Ethiopia). All indications are Obama's allies are going to try to smash opposition through oppression, but maybe Obama does have a clue. Perhaps he realizes he won, against those big meanie talk radio hosts, so there is no reason for a Fairness Doctrine as the Democrats don't have to run scared of the radio.

Okay, and maybe pigs will fly out of my rear tomorrow, too.

Still, I'm willing to wait on my complaints until AFTER Obama gets into office. Well, against him. Thankfully, the Republicans, as wishy washy as the Senate bunch is, has the votes to filibuster some of the worst things that may come down the pike.

In the meantime, I'm really looking into going to CPAC. Conservatives need to ditch the refuse that drug us into this mess and take back the Republican party from the spineless.

Jumpstarting a Movement

Many sites have been speculating about how the fiscal conservative movement, combined perhaps with help from libertarians, can reconfigure itself for the next election. As I stated on The Next Right blog in the comments concerning this, I believe a 'cloud'-like approach is how we should organize.

Here's the idea:

Set up a certain core of bloggers having specialties on the different aspects of government. For example, a conservative blogger for health care issues, a conservative blogger for environmental issues, etc. These would be true experts in the field in question, not just people like myself (though I could probably handle the high-tech or terrorism blogs).

These are interconnected to one another through a conservative portal. This overall arcing site would tie everything together. Now, theoretically, this would be the RNC website, but if the elitist snobs currently in charge are not removed, the site will have to be elsewhere.

In addition, resources need to be provided for campaigns. Anyone who is a conservative (defined, btw, via a questionnaire), and running for elective office would be allowed to have a small site. This site would allow connections for donations via a service like Slatecard among other resources. These sites would be designed by someone with web experience, though content could be maintained by the various campaigns or via RSS feeds from campaign websites.

Again, resources will also have to be non-electronic in this situation. We cannot let non-conservatives run unopposed, especially in national and high state offices. Yes, this means fielding and providing support to primary opponents of RINOs. No one should be complacent in their office.

We have to be willing to spend the money to make this movement work. We have a lot of disjointed pieces out there, from the talk show hosts, to sites like The New Right, to sites like Free Republic, to candidates like John Culberson, etc. Web 2.0 constructs like Digg, Twitter, Facebook and the like exist, but they are underutilized.

Lastly, we need to move to a next generation of leadership for the fiscal conservative movement. John McCain is going to lose this election more because he looks old than due to principles. Many in our party qualify, but the only way to get them into leadership is to remove the old guard Ford Republicans from their lofty perches. Positions need to be by merit, not by seniority.

We have a good start with all of this, but I don't know if we'll be able to drag McCain over the finish line. In the future, we have people like Sarah Palin, Bobby Jindal, Eric Cantor, and others, and they give us a great potential. Win or lose, we must put things into motion or else that potential will be lost.

Duck Tales

Bill O'Reilly's Talking Points for today concerned Obama, and whether he is a socialist or not. O'Reilly seems to think he's not, but he ended his commentary with "If it quacks like a duck, it may not be a duck."

Let's look closer at this, using the 'duck' analogy:

• Obama got his 'wings' underneath him by working as a community organizer with the group ACORN, whose charter is a mirror image of socialist policies.
• Obama got his 'feet wet' in politics at the home of William Ayres, an avowed Marxist and former terrorist. Obama also endorsed Ayres book, with his picture and dedication inside on original publication.
• Obama 'groomed his feathers' amongst a group called the New Party, a group of Socialists based in Chicago. Obama has denied being a member, but Chicago newspapers at the time disagree with that assessment, calling him a member of the group.
• Obama has been 'flapping his beak' about redistribution of wealth, using terms almost identical to that of Karl Marx.
• Obama is going to cause middle America to fund most of the 'bill' he's trying to impose on corporations, either through job losses or higher prices.

So, Mr. O'Reilly, I think there is more than a 'quack' to prove Obama is a socialist.

I saw this posted on the infamous 4chan.org boards. What's so sad is it is quite true, despite the Obamadrones trying to shoot it down.

Notice to All Employees

As of November 5, 2008, when President Obama is officially elected into office, our company will install a few new
policies which are in keeping with his new, inspiring issues of change and fairness:

1. All salespeople will be pooling their sales and bonuses into a common pool that will be divided equally between all of you. This will serve to give those of you who are underachieving a 'fair shake.'

2. All low level workers will be pooling their wages, including overtime, into a common pool, dividing it equally
amongst yourselves. This will help those who are 'too busy for overtime' to reap the rewards from those who have more
spare time and can work extra hours.

3. All top management will now be referred to as 'the government.' We will not participate in this 'pooling'
experience because the law doesn't apply to us.

4. The 'government' will give eloquent speeches to all employees every week, encouraging it's workers to continue to work hard 'for the good of all.'

5. The employees will be thrilled with these new policies because it's 'good to spread the wealth.' Those of you who have underachieved will finally get an opportunity; those of you who have worked hard and had success will feel more
'patriotic.'

6. The last few people who were hired should clean out their desks. Don't feel bad, though, because President Obama will give you free healthcare, free handouts, free oil for heating your home, free food stamps, and he'll let you stay in your home for as long as you want even if you can't pay your mortgage. If you appeal directly to our democratic congress,
you might even get a free flat screen TV and a coupon for free haircuts (shouldn't all Americans be entitled to nice looking
hair?) !!!

If for any reason you are not happy with the new policies, you may want to rethink your vote on November 4th.

In my previous post, I talked of things that will happen under an Obama presidency. Let me now switch gears and discuss a few things that won't happen.

Net Neutrality as it should be
As it is envisioned, net neutrality is supposed to make it so internet service providers do not block content. It is also supposed to prevent the government from imposing censorship. It is the latter part that will not happen. Why do I say that? Remember which party was involved in trying to censor rock album lyrics? It was Tipper Gore and the Democrats who attempted that. Who was the primary sponsor of the anti-child pornography bill, to restrict minor's access to porn? Senator James J Exon, a Democrat from Nebraska was the primary sponsor. (For those who do not know, Senator Exon was also the primary sponsor that created the Internet...not Al Gore, who was just a co-sponsor). Which candidate is in the back pocket of RIAA and MPAA? Obama, who I expect will force any net neutrality bill to include an exception for bit torrent traffic: the exact protocol trying to be freed up by many of those proposing net neutrality. As such, we will not achieve true net neutrality under Obama.

Slowdown of jobs going overseas
As in my previous article, businesses are going to have to make a choice in either raising prices or else reducing costs to pay for Obama's tax increases. A number of companies, including Obama supporters like Google, are eyeing Europe and specifically Ireland for facilities. These will increase in size as the tax burden rises, causing a high tech job drain far greater than what India's call centers have provided.

Decrease in obesity in poor families
The more food prices increase, the more people forsake good meals for cheap, fat-filled meals. Despite efforts by Obama's allies to 'punish' fast food for the obesity epidemic, it will only get worse as the price of food goes up.

Major scientific breakthroughs by the United States
For the next few years, as R&D budgets are cut by companies, and price controls imposed on things like medical products through universal health care, the amount of progress towards scientific breakthroughs will slow. Europe and China, however, are poised to take over in this area. With India now looking towards manned space missions to the moon, China well on its way towards that goal, the European space station and advances there all will dwarf our accomplishments in these areas. Frankly, with the amount of money Obama will be spending on his social engineering experiment, NASA will be nearly depleted.

Education scores
Many who look at our school system realize government interference and dependence on the teacher's union have been an abject failure. Throwing more money at the problem will only make it worse. Add to that a major falacy behind socialism/communism: to have enough people to work in certain jobs, if you are not providing incentives for them to join the workforce, you will have to force people into those jobs. Yes, this is honestly why liberals want illegal immigrants because any attempt to force people to take the menial jobs would cause a civil war. I believe it was Brave New World that had the education system that preselected your career. I know that Futurama's first episode was entirely about this, where people are 'chipped' to determine what career they can become. This is the only way true socialism, the removal of 'greed', and all the other buzzwords of liberalism can come into being. Education scores will continue to fall, and the teacher's union will push to try and eliminate home schooling as an alternative. This is the 'dumbing down' of America many conservatives talk about. Meanwhile, Europe and especially Asia will rise, adding to the scientific progress mentioned above.

I realize I am being a pessimist. But all of these, and many more, will come to pass by electing someone whose entire vision is 'Hope and Change'. His change will be for the worst, and the worst possible scenarios are not something I really want to live through.

So, please America, listen to me and others like me who see through the smokescreen. Do not vote for Obama. If, for some reason, you feel you cannot vote for McCain, vote for Barr. Do not vote for the dissolution of our way of life by voting for Obama.

We predict a lot of things in America: sporting events, weather, and political polls among others. Well, I have some predictions on what will happen if Obama gets elected president.

Inflation above 10%
Obama's tax plans are to supposedly 'reduce the taxes' on '95% of Americans'. However, what is going to happen is a shift in the tax burden from the more obvious income tax to a hidden tax behind every single good and service we pay for in this country. Unlike the FairTax, though, which eliminates all taxes except for an obvious, above-board sales tax, Obama's plan will be hidden and only seen in one statistic - inflation. See, corporations do not actually pay any tax they are assessed. It looks like it, but in actuality, they pass those taxes off to the consumer in higher prices. Obama's doubling of the tax on corporations will just double that portion of a product you purchase. Add to that my next prediction, which will increase the salary-based portion of a product's price, and you can see how inflation is going to end up being worse than under Carter.

Minimum wage will be raised
The minimum wage was originally intended to make sure people were not being forced to work at substandard conditions. Now, it is a hidden welfare program...for labor unions. Why is that? Well, union wages are tied to the minimum wage. As the minimum wage goes up, so does the amount paid to union workers, and it is normally not a 1 to 1 basis. An increase in the minimum wage ends up increasing salaries across the board, thus causing inflation mentioned above.

Unemployment will rise
Companies will have a choice, raise prices due to the policies above, or else move overseas. The only other alternative is cutting workforce, a move already happening in the tech industry. Either way (leaving the country, or cutting jobs), unemployment will rise and continue to rise.

Universal health care will cause our standard of medical care to fall
It's nice to have health insurance coverage, and having health care affordable to those who can't afford it is a good thing. Unfortunately, in the attempts to be beneficial, the government is sticking its nose in where it shouldn't. The result is going to be long waiting periods, fewer doctors, and no money allocated for research into areas of medicine we need to explore. With universal health care, though, comes universal price controls on health care services. Price controls always lead to shortages, as those providing the service lose money. Many doctors currently practicing will retire instead of dealing with the paperwork and garbage generated by the government red tape. The end result? Don't get sick.

Interest rates will rise
Once Ben Bernake is replaced by Obama, the old school economists which have been proven wrong again and again will be back in control. Can you say, Robert Reich, Fed chairman? Since inflation will be rising as above, the reaction from old school economists is to raise interest rates to try and stop inflation. Raising interest rates tightens the money supply. Now, if you have actually been listening to those in favor of the monetary bailout program for financial institutions, the reason that it had to be done is to 'loosen' the money supply for loans...not tighten it.

The combination of above, plus the tightening of money supply will lead to a depression as bad, if not worse, than the Great Depression.

Here are some minor things you will see:

Troops will be withdrawn from Iraq and Afghanistan, only to be forced into Sudan, creating a greater crisis as China moves to oppose us.
Welcome to the new Cold War, with China replacing Russia as our opponent. See, Obama will move to protect Africa while ditching the Middle East. Unlike Iraq and Afghanistan, where we had to remove the governments first before we could fix things, Obama will try not to do that with Sudan. This will create a major incident for Obama. If he tries to remove the government, though, it could end up a bigger mess. Sudan is a no-win situation in any event, unlike Iraq and Afghanistan where some success could be quantified.

Iran will either get a nuke, or Israel will act to stop them.
This is, I believe, what Biden was referring to. And I think Biden showed his hand in saying Obama will chastise Israel, instead of Iran, if Israel moves.

Global 'climate change' advocates will get Kyoto passed
Even though many scientists believe we are going into a cooling period, the global warming crowd will get their dream treaty of Kyoto signed by an Obama administration. The restrictions in that treaty will cause even more costs to be passed onto the American people, despite claims of taxing 'Big Oil'. See my inflation statement above. Just what we need is more pressure in that direction.

CSPI will attempt a class action lawsuit against fast food restaurants
Local attempts at these lawsuits have been stymied. With Obama in charge, though, I expect to see a large national suit similiar to the tobacco suit which has done so much to curb smoking...not.

Smoking will be prohibited in cars, and in homes with children
This is where the smoking nannies are headed. It is all 'for the children', you know.

RIAA and MPAA will step up lawsuits against citizens for minor infractions
Folks, there is no coincidence that almost every performer, entertainer, and executive in the music and film industries are backing Obama. It is not because of policies, but it all comes down to money, and you are going to end up paying for it.

Attempted implementation of the Fairness Doctrine
The liberals like this 'fairness' garbage too much, and think they can blunt the Republicans by trying to bring back this old version of censorship. First, I think there already are contingency plans against this sort of thing by radio. Second, I think there are plans to make sure television stations and newspapers fall into it this time. This is going to backfire big on the Obama backers, as they lose the anti-Bush libertarians.

Abortion on demand
No restrictions on abortion will be passed, and many current restrictions will be repealed.

Internet purchases will be taxed
Democratic governors are pushing this issue, and have for a number of years. A combination of Republicans and Democrats in Congress have prevented this from happening. However, the biggest advocate of taxing the Internet is none other than Nancy Pelosi. With the votes she can muster on her side, I predict sales tax will be implemented for sites such as Amazon and eBay.

Slavery reparations
The Civil War has been over for 140+ years. No one is alive today who was a slave. My family moved to this country just after the Civil War in one case (dad side), and after the turn of the century on the other. My family never owned slaves in its entire existence, so why am I the one blamed for slavery and why do I have to pay out of my pocket for it? Yet, Obama's cronies will push for compensation for slavery years after the fact. Let us get this straight: the Asian-Americans interned in World War II deserved reparations. I believe American Indians deserve just compensation for the land which was stolen from them (but not return of that land). But slaves were not only given freedom, but they were allowed to take over plantations that were surrendered.

I, among other conservatives and libertarians, will be labeled as a racist.
I'm really expecting this to happen no matter the outcome, but the amount of intimidation used against those speaking out against Obama and his policies will only grow worse until someone cracks. When that happens, things are going to get really ugly. In the interim, expect to see a resurgence of the KKK or other like-minded groups. The more people are called racist, the more apt they are to start acting that way. It is negative reinforcement, but Obama's policies that will hurt inner city people far more than they expect have to have a scapegoat in order to protect Obama. Will it get as bad as Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe? If it does, this county will be headed towards a second Civil War. I hate to be a pessimist on this, but I can see it happening.

For the record, I am NOT a racist. I wanted JC Watts to run for President. I would have voted for Condi Rice. I get along will with all of my multicultural co-workers. My dad's entire construction crew was either black or hispanic, or a combination thereof and I worked a season with those guys. But I will still be labeled one because I will never kowtow to any Marxist, no matter their skin color.

There are many more things that will happen, all of which will restrict our freedom and our pocketbooks in the next four years. Of course, we'll be told things are just fine, etc. by the press in order to placate Obama's goons.

Economists Statement On Barack Obama’s Risky Economic Proposals

100 ECONOMISTS WARN THAT WITH CURRENT WEAK FINANCIAL CONDITIONS BARACK OBAMA’S PROPOSALS RUN A HIGH RISK OF THROWING THE US ECONOMY INTO A DEEP RECESSION

ARLINGTON, VA – Today, McCain-Palin 2008 released the following statement signed by 100 distinguished and experienced economists at major American universities and research organizations, including five Nobel Prize winners Gary Becker, James Buchanan, Robert Mundell, Edward Prescott, and Vernon Smith. The economists explain why Barack Obama’s proposals, including “misguided tax hikes,” would “decrease the number of jobs in America.” The prospects of such tax rate increases under Barack Obama are already harming the economy. The economists conclude that “Barack Obama’s economic proposals are wrong for the American economy.” The proposals “defy both economic reason and economic experience.”

The full economists’ statement on Barack Obama’s economic proposals and a complete list of economists who support it follows:

Barack Obama argues that his proposals to raise tax rates and halt international trade agreements would benefit the American economy. They would do nothing of the sort. Economic analysis and historical experience show that they would do the opposite. They would reduce economic growth and decrease the number of jobs in America. Moreover, with the credit crunch, the housing slump, and high energy prices weakening the U.S. economy, his proposals run a high risk of throwing the economy into a deep recession. It was exactly such misguided tax hikes and protectionism, enacted when the U.S. economy was weak in the early 1930s, that greatly increased the severity of the Great Depression.

We are very concerned with Barack Obama’s opposition to trade agreements such as the pending one with Colombia, the new one with Central America, or the established one with Canada and Mexico. Exports from the United States to other countries create jobs for Americans. Imports make goods available to Americans at lower prices and are a particular benefit to families and individuals with low incomes. International trade is also a powerful source of strength in a weak economy. In the second quarter of this year, for example, increased international trade did far more to stimulate the U.S. economy than the federal government’s “stimulus” package.

Ironically, rather than supporting international trade, Barack Obama is now proposing yet another so-called stimulus package, which would do very little to grow the economy. And his proposal to finance the package with higher taxes on oil would raise oil prices directly and by reducing exploration and production.

We are equally concerned with his proposals to increase tax rates on labor income and investment. His dividend and capital gains tax increases would reduce investment and cut into the savings of millions of Americans. His proposals to increase income and payroll tax rates would discourage the formation and expansion of small businesses and reduce employment and take-home pay, as would his mandates on firms to provide expensive health insurance.

After hearing such economic criticism of his proposals, Barack Obama has apparently suggested to some people that he might postpone his tax increases, perhaps to 2010. But it is a mistake to think that postponing such tax increases would prevent their harmful effect on the economy today. The prospect of such tax rate increases in 2010 is already a drag on the economy. Businesses considering whether to hire workers today and expand their operations have time horizons longer than a year or two, so the prospect of higher taxes starting in 2009 or 2010 reduces hiring and investment in 2008.

In sum, Barack Obama’s economic proposals are wrong for the American economy. They defy both economic reason and economic experience.

Robert Barro, Harvard University

Gary Becker, University of Chicago

Sanjai Bhagat, University of Colorado

Michael Block, University of Arizona

Brock Blomberg, Claremont-McKenna University

Michael Bordo, Rutgers University

Michael Boskin, Stanford University

Ike Brannon, McCain-Palin 2008

James Buchanan, George Mason University

Todd Buchholtz, Two Oceans Fund

Charles Calomiris, Columbia University

Jim Carter, Vienna VA

Barry Chiswick, University of Illinois at Chicago

John Cogan, Hoover Institution

Kathleen Cooper, Southern Methodist University

Ted Covey, McLean VA

Dan Crippen, former CBO Director

Mario Crucini, Vanderbilt

Steve Davis, University of Chicago

Christopher DeMuth, American Enterprise Institute

William Dewald, Ohio State University

Frank Diebold, University of Pennsylvania

Isaac Ehrlich, State University of New York at Buffalo

Paul Evans, Ohio State University

Dan Feenberg, NBER

Martin Feldstein, Harvard University

Eric Fisher, California Polytechnic State University

Kristin Forbes, MIT

Timothy Fuerst, Bowling Green State University

Diana Furchtgott-Roth, Hudson Institute

Paul Gregory, University of Houston

Earl Grinols, Baylor University

Rik Hafer, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville

Gary Hansen, UCLA

Eric Hanushek, Hoover Institutions

Kevin Hassett, American Enterprise Institute

Arlene Holen, Technology Policy Institute

Douglas Holtz-Eakin, McCain-Palin 2008

Glenn Hubbard, Columbia University

Owen Irvine, Michigan State University

Mike Jensen, Harvard University

Steven Kaplan, University of Chicago

Robert King, Boston University

Meir Kohn, Dartmouth

Marvin Kosters, American Enterprise Institute

Anne Krueger, Johns Hopkins University

Phil Levy, American Enterprise Institute

Larry Lindsey, The Lindsey Group

Paul W. MacAvoy. Yale University

John Makin, American Enterprise Institute

Burton Malkiel, Princeton University

Bennett McCallum, Carnegie-Mellon University

Paul McCracken, University of Michigan

Will Melick, Kenyon College

Allan Meltzer, Carnegie-Mellon University

Enrique Mendoza, University of Maryland

Jim Miller, George Mason University

Michael Moore, George Washington University

Robert Mundell, Columbia University

Tim Muris, George Mason University

Kevin Murphy, University of Chicago

Richard Muth, Emory University

Charles Nelson, University of Washington

Bill Niskanen, Cato Institute

June O’Neill, Baruch College, CUNY

Lydia Ortega, San Jose State University

Steve Parente, University of Minnesota

William Poole, University of Delaware

Michael Porter, Harvard University

Barry Poulson, University of Colorado, Boulder

Edward Prescott, Arizona State University

Kenneth Rogoff, Harvard University

Richard Roll, UCLA

Harvey Rosen, Princeton University

Robert Rossana, Wayne State University

Mark Rush, University of Florida

Tom Saving, Texas A&M University

Anna Schwartz, NBER

George Shultz, Stanford University

Chester Spatt, Carnegie-Mellon University

David Spencer, Brigham Young University

Beryl Sprinkle, Former Chair Council of Economic Advisers

Houston Stokes, University of Illinois in Chicago

Robert Tamura, Clemson University

Jack Tatum, Indiana State University

John Taylor, Stanford University

Richard Vedder, Ohio University

William B. Walstad, University of Nebraska

Murray Weidenbaum, Washington University in St. Louis

Arnold Zellner, University of Chicago

The speech Sarah Palin was going to give at the UN demonstration against Iran, blocked by the liberals in the Obama camp because Sarah is more articulate than their presidential candidate: (thanks to the New York Sun for printing this)

I am honored to be with you and with leaders from across this great country -- leaders from different faiths and political parties united in a single voice of outrage.

Tomorrow, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will come to New York -- to the heart of what he calls the Great Satan -- and speak freely in this, a country whose demise he has called for.

Ahmadinejad may choose his words carefully, but underneath all of the rhetoric is an agenda that threatens all who seek a safer and freer world. We gather here today to highlight the Iranian dictator's intentions and to call for action to thwart him.

He must be stopped.

The world must awake to the threat this man poses to all of us. Ahmadinejad denies that the Holocaust ever took place. He dreams of being an agent in a "Final Solution" -- the elimination of the Jewish people. He has called Israel a "stinking corpse" that is "on its way to annihilation." Such talk cannot be dismissed as the ravings of a madman -- not when Iran just this summer tested long-range Shahab-3 missiles capable of striking Tel Aviv, not when the Iranian nuclear program is nearing completion, and not when Iran sponsors terrorists that threaten and kill innocent people around the world.

The Iranian government wants nuclear weapons. The International Atomic Energy Agency reports that Iran is running at least 3,800 centrifuges and that its uranium enrichment capacity is rapidly improving. According to news reports, U.S. intelligence agencies believe the Iranians may have enough nuclear material to produce a bomb within a year.

The world has condemned these activities. The United Nations Security Council has demanded that Iran suspend its illegal nuclear enrichment activities. It has levied three rounds of sanctions. How has Ahmadinejad responded? With the declaration that the "Iranian nation would not retreat one iota" from its nuclear program.

So, what should we do about this growing threat? First, we must succeed in Iraq. If we fail there, it will jeopardize the democracy the Iraqis have worked so hard to build, and empower the extremists in neighboring Iran. Iran has armed and trained terrorists who have killed our soldiers in Iraq, and it is Iran that would benefit from an American defeat in Iraq.

If we retreat without leaving a stable Iraq, Iran's nuclear ambitions will be bolstered. If Iran acquires nuclear weapons -- they could share them tomorrow with the terrorists they finance, arm, and train today. Iranian nuclear weapons would set off a dangerous regional nuclear arms race that would make all of us less safe.

But Iran is not only a regional threat; it threatens the entire world. It is the no. 1 state sponsor of terrorism. It sponsors the world's most vicious terrorist groups, Hamas and Hezbollah. Together, Iran and its terrorists are responsible for the deaths of Americans in Lebanon in the 1980s, in Saudi Arabia in the 1990s, and in Iraq today. They have murdered Iraqis, Lebanese, Palestinians, and other Muslims who have resisted Iran's desire to dominate the region. They have persecuted countless people simply because they are Jewish.

Iran is responsible for attacks not only on Israelis, but on Jews living as far away as Argentina. Anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial are part of Iran's official ideology and murder is part of its official policy. Not even Iranian citizens are safe from their government's threat to those who want to live, work, and worship in peace. Politically-motivated abductions, torture, death by stoning, flogging, and amputations are just some of its state-sanctioned punishments.

It is said that the measure of a country is the treatment of its most vulnerable citizens. By that standard, the Iranian government is both oppressive and barbaric. Under Ahmadinejad's rule, Iranian women are some of the most vulnerable citizens.

If an Iranian woman shows too much hair in public, she risks being beaten or killed.

If she walks down a public street in clothing that violates the state dress code, she could be arrested.

But in the face of this harsh regime, the Iranian women have shown courage. Despite threats to their lives and their families, Iranian women have sought better treatment through the "One Million Signatures Campaign Demanding Changes to Discriminatory Laws." The authorities have reacted with predictable barbarism. Last year, women's rights activist Delaram Ali was sentenced to 20 lashes and 10 months in prison for committing the crime of "propaganda against the system." After international protests, the judiciary reduced her sentence to "only" 10 lashes and 36 months in prison and then temporarily suspended her sentence. She still faces the threat of imprisonment.

Earlier this year, Senator Clinton said that "Iran is seeking nuclear weapons, and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps is in the forefront of that" effort. Senator Clinton argued that part of our response must include stronger sanctions, including the designation of the IRGC as a terrorist organization. John McCain and I could not agree more.

Senator Clinton understands the nature of this threat and what we must do to confront it. This is an issue that should unite all Americans. Iran should not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. Period. And in a single voice, we must be loud enough for the whole world to hear: Stop Iran!

Only by working together, across national, religious, and political differences, can we alter this regime's dangerous behavior. Iran has many vulnerabilities, including a regime weakened by sanctions and a population eager to embrace opportunities with the West. We must increase economic pressure to change Iran's behavior.

Tomorrow, Ahmadinejad will come to New York. On our soil, he will exercise the right of freedom of speech -- a right he denies his own people. He will share his hateful agenda with the world. Our task is to focus the world on what can be done to stop him.

We must rally the world to press for truly tough sanctions at the U.N. or with our allies if Iran's allies continue to block action in the U.N. We must start with restrictions on Iran's refined petroleum imports.

We must reduce our dependency on foreign oil to weaken Iran's economic influence.

We must target the regime's assets abroad; bank accounts, investments, and trading partners.

President Ahmadinejad should be held accountable for inciting genocide, a crime under international law.

We must sanction Iran's Central Bank and the Revolutionary Guard Corps -- which no one should doubt is a terrorist organization.

Together, we can stop Iran's nuclear program.

Senator McCain has made a solemn commitment that I strongly endorse: Never again will we risk another Holocaust. And this is not a wish, a request, or a plea to Israel's enemies. This is a promise that the United States and Israel will honor, against any enemy who cares to test us. It is John McCain's promise and it is my promise.

Thank you.

It is now official.

I will be voting for John McCain with absolutely no reservations now for President of the United States.

What made me drop my reservations?

Simple: John McCain chose someone who should be an inspiration to us all to be his vice presidential nominee - Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska.

Sarah Palin will be attacked by the Left as being too young, too inexperienced, and with no foreign policy experience. Sounds a whole lot like the Left's presidential nominee, but with one major exception. Sarah Palin has accomplished tangible change in the former corruption that gripped the state of Alaska. Contrast this with Mr Change who has always been all talk and no tangible results, except for getting a good job for his wife and a house through a convicted felon.

Sarah Palin has the experience as an executive, something sorely lacking in all the rest of the people on the tickets. That viewpoint, and that ability to manage multiple departments, is critical for the job. Honestly, it is why Bush was a better choice over either Gore or Kerry, regardless of political leanings - GWB had the experience in managing people.

Palin is more than a pretty face, she is smart. She also knows energy policy, as she has managed the state where much of our domestic oil has been supplied. She also would not have been elected if she did not have a true concern for the environment, not this fake anti-capitalist movement that has gripped the Left.

Palin knows the family, having five children of her own. Her oldest is deploying to Iraq, so the typical Michael Moore claptrap does not work on her saying politicians don't have their children going off to war. Palin is also pro-life, realizing the importance of children being able to experience the world as we have, at minimum.

I am very pleased with the choice of Sarah Palin as John McCain's running mate. She will make an excellent Vice President.

I've been doing a lot of Twittering this month, but very little on the blog end of things. I find that Twitter is a great little product, where I can type my thoughts as they come to me in 140 byte-sized chunks.

But I need to explain a bit about my last couple of Tweets.

Today, Wednesday, August 27th is when Barack Obama's VP pick, Joe Biden, speaks at the convention. Tomorrow, Barackus Husseinus Obamatine speaks at his mock Roman stage ala Invesco Field. The news media is going to be swarming all over the speech, analyzing every little tidbit they can on Friday.

In the process, McCain's VP pick is going to be buried.

For maximum effect, McCain needs to come out today, by 2:30 central, and announce his VP choice. This will get the media to start contrasting the two VP candidates against one another, where McCain's choice should win the comparison. This totally disrupts Biden's speech bump that will lead into Obama's speech tomorrow, and forces it to not be buried on the back pages on Friday, when the media is having their orgasms of delight over whatever Obama says.

Once again, we have a situation with Obama and company playing elitist. Obama got in front of an audience and said America needs to drop driving SUVs and using so much air conditioning. Of course, right after the speech, he jumped into an SUV with the air conditioner blowing full blast.

To any sane individual, this is hypocrisy at its height. But see, that's the problem with many on both the right and left...for them it is not.

Once again I go back to the book I loathe so much, Plato's Republic, to explain the situation that is going on with things like this, or Al Gore's ranch able to power a small town while he whines about global warming.

In Republic, Plato envisions what he considers the perfect society. Three layers comprise this society - the Intellectuals, the Soldiers, and everyone else. The Intellectuals make the rules. The only voting that occurs involves those selected for this elite group. The common folk and the soldiers do not vote on anything. They just sit there and realize, gee...these Intellectuals are so smart, they know what's best for us moreso than we do. So, they sit there and take it. This means the Intellectuals are immune to their own pronouncements, if the want to be, as they 'know better'.

This is exactly the mentality of the liberal elite running the Democratic party. They seem to think they know what is best for the masses, but the elite, being the Intellectuals above, can exempt themselves from the rules. Many in the Republican party hierarchy think this same way these days.

I'm sure you can see the obvious problems with this, but I'll spell them out anyways. Freedom is surpressed, if the Intellectuals want it to be. Only they have the freedom to think and act, everyone else must obey their orders. This is not a free society that Plato envisions, and is why Aristotle challenged this view.

There is no room for capitalism, religion, or other things that promote diversity in this kind of society. It is a command-driven economy and society. For most of us, this is totalitarian, and some would call it Marxist or Naziism.

Well, surprise...Marx based Marxism on Plato's Republic, or a variant thereof. Surprise, so did Adolf Hitler base his Mein Kampf off of Plato's Republic. The only difference between the two was the forces of internationalism vs nationalism. Read Marx and read Hitler, and you see how much the two parallel with the exception of this one factor.

We conservatives and libertarians must reject this supposed 'perfect society', because it isn't perfect. This is a society envisioned by a philosopher before weapons were made of steel, let alone things like gunpowder, or technology existing today like telephones and computers. This is a society where ignorance was assumed, and thus why the Intellectuals were isolated and led because they were the only ones informed.

That is not the society of today. With cell phones, the internet, the media, and other avenues to get at the facts, we are all Intellectuals if we so desire. We are not preselected, like Plato envisioned, to become an Intellectual. We make it happen ourselves.

We cannot keep putting into power people who think like Plato on either side of the aisle. Unfortunately, because too many people are buying into the Republic's false premises, we end up like we are today, on the verge of destroying our working society trying to emulate a 2,200 year old philosopher's vision. A vision that, when attempted previously over those years, has failed miserably time and time again.

Disaster recovery plans. Everyone has them. Even the incompetent boobs at FEMA have them.

Except my company.

This is what you get when the people in government have their priorities all screwed up. As you may or may not know, I work for a merged city-county IT department...who can't get along with itself, let alone with the customers some days.

It's time for me to vent a little on this, as I'm just tired of saying 'I told you so'. This is not rocket science we are talking about here, this is about data recovery in the case of a disaster. You know, like a tornado blowing through the center of town, etc.

Let's add to that data integrity issues as well. I've been working for three weeks to find a way to convert an old postgresql database into the db2 format needed to run the java application built to replace my little, poorly designed php application. Not possible. The data is too mucked up in my system, combined with the idiosyncracies of DB2. Thus, the solution is data entry.

Between the two areas, my mental state is fractured.

At least in 2 weeks, I'll be in Las Vegas at DefCon 16, on a 'business trip' that I get to pay for myself...because my company is too cheap to do so, even though I'm the guy who has to defend our web servers and applications from the Chinese.

Detect a little bitterness? Naw, couldn't be...

I have been involved over the past week in the controversy and discussion concerning social networks and their restrictions by Congress against their members using them.

First, I have to say this is the first issue in a long time that has really gotten me motivated into getting the word out to friends and others I know. I'm glad to have discussed things with Representative John Culberson of Texas over Twitter. Twitter is a great service. (I'm @Ltfngr there)

Second, I find it sad that many on the left do not understand how restrictions of any sort on free speech will hurt them just as much as it hurts us on the right, no matter our profession. Congress should be the place, if anywhere, where free expression of ideas should be allowed. Now, I have no problem with putting a couple of things in place - no Twittering/Qiking on the floor, for example - but honestly, members of Congress were elected to lead, not cower like sheep when the topic of Internet accessibility is brought up.

Third, this entire controversy just shows how out of touch both sides' leadership has been when it comes to the Internet and social networks. Moveon.org, who I rail about usually, was a pioneer in using social networks to get their message out. It is time for the right to get their head out of the sand and do the same, and do it better.

Fourth, and last, though the truth can get obscured and denied on the Internet, when the truth finally spreads, it triumphs. Failure in using the Internet to spread the truth has led to idiots out there believing all sorts of conspiracy theories, social marxism, and blinds people to the intentions of people. Traditional media cowers and is afraid of the truth getting out on the Internet, and those who got the jump with their lies are beginning to be exposed (again, Moveon, Code Pink, Acorn, and other marxists nee 'progressives'). That's why some are jumping to try and block open discussions by Congress over social networks. They are afraid of the truth getting out there. Congressional leaders are afraid of the truth of their incompetence getting out to the masses.

And before you bash me, please understand there are some, like Dan Young of Alaska, who are labelled as Republican that I have similar problems with. The idea behind compassionate conservatism have been co-oped by those in favor of big government that claim to be from the right. The more light that opens up, the more these sorts will be exposed for the frauds they truely are, regardless of party.

So, the House Democrats are so afraid of the truth getting out to the people and constituents, they want to restrict members access to the Internet social networking sites, such as Twitter, Blogger, and YouTube.

Please note: All of these sites are FREE, though they may have advertisements. Facebook, Myspace, etc. do not violate any sort of 'franking' rules what so ever. The restrictions placed on 'franking' are primarily so members do not spend taxpayer funds on campaign messages that are strictly politicking, versus real information.

Surprise, all members have campaign websites that DO just that. At least, all members that have at least a bit of intelligence.

Here we have the Democrats, who so many of the liberal 'techies' out there support, attempting to stifle free speech protected by the First Amendment over the Internet.

This is a violation not only of that, but of Net Neutrality, advocated by...you guessed it, as many liberals as conservatives out there!

Think about it - Democrats: The Party of Censorship. A few videos, a few ads, and I think a lot of the young people support currently backing Obama suddenly begin having second thoughts. This is an issue that could be the key to driving a large wedge between the Congress and presidential vote, let alone between the presidential candidates.

I hope the weak willed in the Republican party finally begin the push back against the 'inevitable' Democratic victory in the House by just pounding this issue to death, endorsing Net Neutrality for all - meaning all forms of media.

Let's take back this issue, shall we?

Google Shuts Down Anti-Obama Sites on its Blogger Platform, NewsBusters.

What they did was go to the Blogspot addresses found on the site of the NoObama coalition called Just Say No Deal and constantly hit the "mark as spam" link so that Google's Blogger would be flooded with spam warnings. This caused Google/Blogger to freeze the sites marked.

Apparently, this campaign merely took advantage of Google/Blogger's flawed system of finding spam blogs. So, it looks like what we have here is an Obama dirty trick to shut down political opposition. Looks like Obmatons aren't much for that whole democracy thing, eh?

Interesting little tidbit there, isn't it? This is the kind of garbage the Communists supporting Obama engage in, in order to stifle free speech. This is what is coming when Obama is elected. Expect stories like this to become more and more frequent as they try to suppress the truth about their Manchurian candidate.

How many homicides are committed in Washington DC in a year?

So far, according to the police's website, there has been 65 through May. Down 1 from last year. (why the website says -2 just proves more things)

In comparison, as of April, Omaha had 11, equal to last year.

Omaha operates under the state's concealed-carry law. Washington DC, twice the size of Omaha, had 6 times the homicide rate. They operate under a total gun ban.

Sorry, Obama...once again, the liberal theory flies into the wall of the real.

On how many issues are the liberal intellectual 'theories' about how things should work fail? Gun control is but just one of those areas. But why the RNC, McCain, and those wealthy enough to be able to help them make ad buys do not act on this sort of information is beyond me. I am beginning to hark wistfully back to the days of 'straight talking' Ross Perot. Though I think the man was crazy, he at least put the statistics in front of people.

I've decided it is time for me to be even more vocal. Yes, this means I am finally enabling comments on the blog.

Due to what I have seen at other conservative blogs, I have had commenting turned off for quite a while now on this one. I did not want to sit and have to play policeman while I have other things to do. Contrary to what you may think, it was not because I did not want criticism of my views, but I want true, constructive criticism. Unfortunately, there are too many people who cannot behave rationally when it comes to the Internet.

What I am not going to promise is a more regular schedule of postings on the blog, though the comments may unintentionally do that. The last time I promised to put more comments onto the blog, it was 8 months before I started posting again.

The Democrats are about to run out of real estate. There is only a few more months of the 'Love Guru' influence on Obama before he has to start stating what 'change' he is really touting.

Those in the know realize the 'change' Obama is for is change towards a government more in line with that of the National Socialists. Do you really think Obama will legalize drug usage beyond medical marijuana? Do you really think Obama will stop the attacks on piracy by the RIAA and MPAA (especially considering most of the members in the sponsoring organizations of those two entities have endorsed him)? Do you actually think we'll get out of Iraq? Do you think he will actually rescind the Patriot Act?

If you believe any of that, you had better look again at the candidates running. Obama is the candidate for those advocating a police state, not freedom. It amazes me how he can put up a smokescreen and avoid the truth like he does.

A huge deal is being made in the news media concerning Scott McClellan's new book that supposedly 'exposes the truth' about the Bush administration.

Of course, all those media outlets are neglecting to state the publisher of the book is owned by a company controlled by George Soros. Remember the story a few weeks ago about David Brock (the previous Republican turned ultraliberal) going to meet with Soros in New York about something? I am guessing McClellan's book was the subject of that meeting.

McClellan, like his namesake from the Civil War, has decided to harm a sitting president in the middle of a war based primarily on promoting freedom by coming out and attacking him. Now, whether he turns out as rabid as Brock has will be determined. However, this does prove one major thing about the Bush administration even if most of the speculation in the book about what happened in meetings McClellan did not attend is not true:

The Bush administration's hiring practices leave something to be desired.

This is why 'yes-men' are the worst possible thing to surround yourself with when you are in a position of authority. Sorry, Scotty, but that's what you were. You may now be having a crisis of conscience, but you were a yes-man. Now, you are a yes-man to Brock and Soros because you want to be liked, even though the only reason you kept the job you had was because you kowtowed well.

Let's be honest, McClellan's ineptitude at his job is one of the prime reasons Bush's ratings are now abysmal. The decline started because of McClellan's inability to be a spokesman. That started the Bush administration on the wrong foot, and it has spiraled downward ever since.

This from Lynn Abbey:

I'm still sorting this out myself, but realizing that pretty much
everyone on this list is at least peripherally aware that I was
married to Bob Asprin, I thought I should pass the word...

Bob died yesterday afternoon (May 22, 2008). It was sudden and
unexpected, probably a heart attack. A friend was supposed to take
him to the airport as he was scheduled to be Guest-of-Honor at Marcon
this weekend.

She found him on his sofa with one of Terry Prachett's books open on
his chest.

I hope he had simply dozed off and passed in his sleep.

When my thoughts are a bit more organized, I plan to post them...and
some pictures from the good times...on my blog
(http://www.lynnabbey.com/blog).

It's a strange, strange day....

Lynn

I am losing way, way too many of my inspirations this year. First, William Buckley, then Gary Gygax, and now the sudden death of Robert Asprin, author of the Thieves World, Phule's Company, and other books.

I feel old.

I am really getting fed up with my own party on a number of things.

First and foremost: let's get our house in order before we can claim to have the ability to get the country in order.

There have been way too many philanderers, cheats, etc. elected to office as Republicans. The fact Dan Young, to take an example, is still leading in the polls even after the 'road to nowhere' garbage is just shameful. He is the poster boy for earmark corruption. The fact the national organization turns a blind eye to people like him just helps with Obama's 'change' bull.

Next, the party needs to get some spine. Stop trying to kiss up to the press, they will never be on our side. In the end, it is truth that will win the day. Yes, the American people CAN handle the truth when they are presented it. It is the Left that has to run behind smoke and mirrors.

Tell the truth about Obama's communist advisers. Tell the truth about his affiliations with black separatist terrorists. Tell the truth about his hatred of Jews and the Israeli state. Tell the truth about his 'change' being nothing but a smokescreen in order to force us to a lower standard of living.

Tell the truth about candidates running for the House and Senate that say one thing, but then do another when they get elected. Show them examples. Use their old campaign promises against them.

Point out the truth about the rape gangs supported by Saddam Hussein. Point out that the standard of living of the average Iraqi is improving by leaps and bounds. Show how women, and religion, are no longer being suppressed due to our invasion of Iraq. Stop letting the Left frame the war with the entire WMD mistake, when that was but one reason to get rid of Hussein. Put some of the Iraqis who have welcomed us to free them on our advertisements.

Third, stop hamstringing ourselves by not talking about the real issues. The Left politicizes the war, yet we cannot? That's ridiculous. It is time to put it out there. Even if you believe in climate change, point out that we've already been wrong on some things like the ozone layer, so emphasize more money for research, not radical plans based on some ubiquitous 'carbon footprint' baloney that has only been concocted within the past two years.

We've already blown it by putting up as our nominee one of the worst candidates we could find. Now we're stuck with him, but that doesn't mean we cannot prove Obama and his buddies at Daily KOS and MoveOn are infinitely worse for the kind of 'change' they will attempt to bring. 'Change' for the sake of change never, ever works out.

I was listening to Mike & Mike this morning, and they had a little argument concerning whether a football coach watching film was more or less intellectual than a chess match.

Here's the problem: I would never let anyone called an 'intellectual' or 'academic' make policy decisions, decide our leadership in the country, etc. Of course, the 'eggheads' (as mentioned by a Clinton supporter) all are on the Obama bandwagon, and yet another reason not to support the man.

Of course, you college students out there who want to be a part of that 'intellectual' crowd are going to wonder why I make such a statement.

An academic works in the field of theory. You make a theory, try to prove or disprove it. If it is disproven, you create a new theory and start again. If it is proven, then you declare it good and move to another area to start the process again.

An academic, though, does not adapt on the fly. They deal in the black and white, not the shades of gray. Something is either right or wrong when it comes to theories.

Now, a football coach, businessman, farmer, or even president of the United States does not have the luxury of a stop and start. A farmer, if his crops are not growing at a slow pace, does not have the luxury of halting everything, replanting his crop, and trying again. A president does not have the luxury of stopping an action or policy suddenly and restopping it, as the momentum is carried through. Even if a mistake is made, that mistake carries on for a long time and in many cases needs to be 'rode out' to the end. It isn't enough for a coach to stop and start a defense because it does not work, he has to adapt the defense as the game is being played and fix any fundamental errors through teaching between games. He can't just dump the entire defensive team and start over.

In the lives of non-academics, actions have far reaching consequences. Things can change over days, months, and even years. For an example, we just cannot suddenly stop Nafta. That has consequences. We cannot just stand up and walk out of Iraq. That has consequences not only for us, for the Iraqi people. You can debate until you are blue in the face about whether we should have attacked in the first place (Personally, I wish the secondary reasons were emphasized more on this, as I think going in WAS a good idea), but you just can't 'stop the theory' like I describe above that the academics want. The world does not work like a laboratory.

Here's another example: the global warming crowd have whined for years about the fact the ozone layer hole needs closing. We must close the hole, they trumpeted. Now, the hole IS closing, and guess what? It's causing MORE warming by doing so. Again, the world is not a lab. Actions have consequences, and many of those consequences cannot be foreseen even by the academics and their theories.

It is frustrating that we are going to elect the academics' chosen candidate for president. By the time we all realize he's in over his head, the damage will be done.

Forty eight years ago, due to the fact certain individuals could not read the Constitution, Congress passed the Civil Rights Act.

Around the time of that action, and the various marches and demonstrations, Martin Luther King spoke the words "I have a dream." He dreamed of a world where skin color made no difference. He dreamed of a world where 'content of a man's character' was what defined him in society.

Forty years later...

We have a black political candidate who, like other 'leaders' in the community cannot get over, not only forty years ago, but 140 years ago. Martin Luther King asked for men to look forward, to propel our country to greatness. The popular black leadership have no desire to try and move forward, just mire all of us in the past.

Mr. Obama claims he is for change, but the only change he wants is a change to a socialist police state. He associates with those who advocate a violent overthrow of the country he's trying to become president of, and yet the media is so afraid to report on this because they may be labeled as 'racists'.

Because we whites are so afraid of that label, we're going to let Obama get a pass on his true politics. In order to avoid 'offending' people, we're going to end up with Karl Marx.

All this race talk is being used to obscure the truth about Obama's politics. I admired Martin Luther King, who was shot just before I was born. Martin Luther King was a great man, and those that truly emulate him, I respect. I've read the 'I have a dream' speech dozens upon dozens of times. The entire point of that speech is 'Let's move forward, into the future, and make the world better for all of us in the American Way.' It was not 'Let's push backwards and start racial divisions and impose the worst economic and social environment possible to destroy the American Way.'

Remember, folks...popular elections heralded in such prime examples of Obama's politics as Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Hitler, and Mugabe.

In less than a week, two of my idols have passed away.

First, mentioned in a previous blog post, was William F. Buckley, who helped define what it is to be a conservative.

On March 3rd, I lost my second idol.

E. Gary Gygax helped create the hobby I have enjoyed since 1977, when I first discovered the game of Dungeons and Dragons as a 5th grader. Bored out of my skull at Wednesday night church, my friend at the time, Jim Rapchinski, brought a new book with him. That book ended up changing my life.

Oh, my first adventure wasn't spectacular to say the least. It was 'In Search of the Unknown', the module that came packaged in the blue box. I died in the first encounter, with the character I chose out of the back of pregenerated characters. Not surprisingly, it was a kobold that did my poor little fighter in, but that little kobold hooked me.

Over the years, my love of the game waxed and waned. I always came back to it, however. Fifteen years later, I was writing for Hero Games and the Champions RPG, but my Dungeon Masters Guide, Player's Handbook, and Monster Manual did not collect dust. Twenty years later, I had moved on to writing things for Shadowrun, but I always kept coming back to the various incarnations of Dungeons and Dragons.

As August approaches, and the fourth edition of the game about to debut, the grandfather of gaming has passed away. Those millions of people playing World of Warcraft, Everquest, or another fantasy game either online or off have Gary to thank for the kickstart he gave.

Some of you know what Gary went through over the years. His love of his creation blinded him many times to the things going on around him. Because of that, he ended up losing control of his game's publication. His later attempts at games seemed half-hearted sometimes, but he was gentlemanly enough to not become a vocal critic of what happened to his creation.

Gary was a critic, though, to those who subscribed to his private mailing lists. In politics, he was very libertarian in thinking, yet as pro-defense as anyone after 9/11. On gaming, he mourned what he once called his biggest failure, allowing the skills in Oriental Adventures. With 2nd, and then 3rd editions focusing so much on dice rolling to resolve skills, Gary stated that role playing was suffering.

Gary begrudingly accepted online games for the same reason. Gary was all about taking the role of a character in the game, and not relying on player dice rolls. This seemed contradictory for the man whose works were scattered with so many random tables and generators, but Gary created those tables for the gamemaster, not the player.

A few years ago, when I was trying to get 'Living Erde' off the ground and before the RPGA squashed all non-company games from its line up, I met Gary at GenCon. He was the nicest man, willing to talk your ears off about fantasy genres. But, even then, you could tell his health was failing. Honestly, I am surprised he lasted as long as he did with his health issues cropping up.

Still, at the age of 70, E. Gary Gygax died way before his time. Many different tributes to Gary have made comments about 'failing his saving throw vs death', and he would have laughed at them. That was the thing about Gary, he had gone through his stage of being bitter about losing control of TSR, Inc., but in his later years, he could laugh at himself. He appeared as himself in an episode of Futurama, again making fun of his attraction to random tables.

The world is going to miss Gary. Even though I did not know him very well, I know I already do.

I just logged into Drudge Report to check on what the hot stories were today. I thought it would be yet another Obama vs McCain vs Hillary story, but instead I was confronted with:

RIP, WFB

I did not have to click on the link to know who 'WFB' was.

William F Buckley was one of the main reasons I call myself a conservative. The story of how he built National Review, and energized the emerging conservative movement has inspired me and helped shape my political views over the years.

WFB's views and my views are almost identical down the line.

All I can say is at least he won't be around to watch the near communist Obama taking on the liberal McCain for president.

God speed, Mr. Buckley. We will miss your insights and guidance through the rough waters ahead.

Well, the reason I believe the primary system needs reformed has come true. It looks like the Republicans are going to bend over and support someone whose mental stability I question.

This front-loaded primary system is inherently unfair on both sides of the aisle. Voting should take place in the primaries in reverse population order, so the small states get their say in things, and the larger states like California can be how a candidate coalesces their popularity into a victory.

Instead, come May when I get to vote, I'm only going to have one candidate on the ballot. (maybe 2, if Ron Paul doesn't drop out).

Between McCain and Paul, I'll go Paul. Seriously, despite all my griping in previous columns, at least I know how Paul will act.

I'm actually beginning to hope for Bloomberg to run, which is scary as I normally hate third party candidates.

Well, Huckleberry and Droopy have won their respective caucuses over in Iowa.

Now they get to see whether they can stand the heat about to be thrown their way. I suspect Obama can survive the Clinton attack better than Huckabee will withstand Romney's assault.

Unfortunately, I'm now resolved to the fact we're getting someone worse than George W Bush no matter who ends up on top. Within a year after the election, I expect both sides to come to the same conclusion.

Thank God in 2012, Mike Johanns will be ready to run.

Iowa, here's the appeal:

Vote for Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, Alan Keyes, or Duncan Hunter.

Although I do a lot of Romney defending here, I cannot say I'm sold on him. Keyes and Hunter will be out of the race by the time I get the chance to vote, unfortunately. Iowans, you have that chance.

On the Democrat side, none of the above, or write in Joe Lieberman, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, or someone else that actually holds the principles of FDR and JFK. None of your current choices do that at all. They hold to the principles of Che Guevarra, Josef Stalin, and Mao Tse Tung. The Republican candidates are bad, but the Democrats have much worse.

Hopefully, this country will still be around in four years after this fiasco and we'll get someone with a clue to run and stop the slide that starts November 2008.

I never thought I would discuss religion so much on this blog. I especially never thought Republicans would be so bone headed as to make it an issue in the presidential campaign.

But, here we go again.

Is Mormonism a cult?

When it was first formed, yes. But...so was Christianity when it first formed. It was a Jewish Cult.

Unlike Islam, though, or today's cults like the cults that have killed themselves due to comets, supposed invasion, or putting firewood up against the door when the government was using incendiary rounds, those that have followed the Mormon faith have allowed themselves to adapt to make their faith less of a cult and more mainstream.

Yet, here we have the bigots going after them yet again in the press and on the campaign.

Meanwhile, someone with a blatantly Islamic background, due to his own name, is not asked one iota of questions about his faith, whether he's a Muslim or not, or other questions that could actually impact the security of the country. Nor is someone who funds a major leftist organization asked about his cult, Scientology. Nope. Those cults we don't talk about. We have to dredge out attacks that are over a hundred years old against the one 'semi-complete' package conservative that has popularity.

Nice job, Huckabee.