Arizona & Michigan Last Thoughts

Before I shut down the lap top for some much needed rest (for me as well), here are some final thoughts on tonight's primary battles in Arizona and Michigan, which were both won by Mitt Romney.

1. If the current vote totals from Arizona hold up, Romney will have won the state by both more votes, and by a bigger percentage then Senator John McCain did in 2008. Quite the political coup if I say so.

2. Romney is in position to win Michigan by forty thousand more votes then he did in 2008, when not even McCain seriously challenged him in his home state, while his percentage of vote is also a couple points better as well, even though more Democrats crossed over to influence the vote then last time.

3. The Associated Press now has Romney at 157 delegates to Santorum's 77, while Gingrich, and Paul linger far behind. The key point is that Mr. Romney is 11% of the way to securing the nomination and with him the favorite to win over half of next week's primaries, that margin is going to getter better as time goes on.

What say you?

Romney Wins Michigan

After weeks of intense fighting between the two leaders, Mitt Romney has won the Michigan GOP Primary with nearly 85% of precincts reporting. He was thought to be on the decline as Santorum's campaign was thought to be gaining 'momentum' over the weekend, but he is on track to win by four, maybe five points.

With 84% of precincts reporting (via Fox):

Romney - 346,840 (41%)
Santorum - 317,100 (38%)
Ron Paul - 97,961 (12%)
Gingrich - 55,655 (7%)

Mr. Romney just out did his 2008 performance of 338,000 votes, even though only 810,000 votes have been counted, which is nearly 60,000 less then ballots cast overall last time around. So, folks might obsess over Santorum's strong showing, but Romney has both improved his vote totals, percentage, and strength over the last primary.

Not bad for some at risk of losing his native state, eh?

Add this to his victory in Arizona, and tonight is a very good night for Romney, in regards to two major victories, and claiming over 75% of delegates when all votes are counted.

What say you?

Watch Mitt Romney Victory Speech, February 28, 2012

Stream videos at Ustream

Please bookmark!

Watch Santorum Speech Live, 2/28/12

Stream videos at Ustream

Please bookmark!

Arizona Primary Results, 2/28/12

With 76% of precincts reporting:

Romney - 201,941 (48%)
Santorum - 109,805 (26%)
Gingrich - 69,262 (16%)
Ron Paul - 35,812 (8%)

No surprise here: Pundit Press projects that Mitt Romney has won the Republican primary in Arizona. In the long run, however, this might not matter at all if Romney loses Michigan.

Please bookmark!

Live Michigan Primary Results, 2/28/12

Update at 10:19pm- Pundit Press projects that Mitt Romney will win the Michigan Primary.

Update at 10:16pm- With 63.2% reporting:

Mitt Romney- 41.7%
Rick Santorum- 37.3%
Ron Paul- 11.5%
Newt Gingrich- 6.7%

Update at 10:06pm- With 57.7% reporting:

Mitt Romney- 40.3%
Rick Santorum- 36.0%
Ron Paul- 11.5%
Newt Gingrich- 6.6%

Update at 9:59pm- With 48.4% reporting:

Mitt Romney- 40.0%
Rick Santorum- 36.1%
Ron Paul- 11.6%
Newt Gingrich- 6.6%

Update at 9:55pm- With 46.1% reporting:

Mitt Romney- 41.6%
Rick Santorum- 37.5%
Ron Paul- 11.6%
Newt Gingrich- 6.6%

Update at 9:47pm- With 36.1% reporting:

Mitt Romney- 41.0%
Rick Santorum- 38.2%
Ron Paul- 11.7%
Newt Gingrich- 6.4%

Update at 9:42pm- With 34.2% reporting:

Mitt Romney- 41.0%
Rick Santorum- 38.1%
Ron Paul- 11.7%
Newt Gingrich- 6.4%

Update at 9:31pm- With 27.6% reporting:

Mitt Romney- 41.3%
Rick Santorum- 37.9%
Ron Paul- 11.6%
Newt Gingrich- 6.5%

Update at 9:17pm- With 20.0% reporting:

Mitt Romney- 41.0%
Rick Santorum- 38.1%
Ron Paul- 11.4%
Newt Gingrich- 6.6%

Update at 9:11pm- With 17.6% reporting:

Mitt Romney- 41.4%
Rick Santorum- 37.8%
Ron Paul- 11.2%
Newt Gingrich- 6.7%

Update at 9:09pm- With 15.2% reporting:

Mitt Romney- 40.9%
Rick Santorum- 38.4%
Ron Paul- 10.8%
Newt Gingrich- 6.9%

Update at 9:02pm- With 11.2% reporting:

Rick Santorum- 39.8%
Mitt Romney- 39.6%
Ron Paul- 10.9%
Newt Gingrich- 6.7%

Update at 8:58pm- With 10.3% reporting:

Rick Santorum- 40.4%
Mitt Romney- 39.0%
Ron Paul- 10.8%
Newt Gingrich- 6.9%

Update at 8:55pm- With 9.3% reporting:

Rick Santorum- 40.3%
Mitt Romney- 39.0%
Ron Paul- 10.9%
Newt Gingrich- 6.9%

Update at 8:51pm- With 7.8% reporting:

Rick Santorum- 40.9%
Mitt Romney- 38.4%
Ron Paul- 11.0%
Newt Gingrich- 6.7%

Update at 8:48pm- With 6.4% reporting:

Rick Santorum- 39.6%
Mitt Romney- 39.3%
Ron Paul- 11.2%
Newt Gingrich- 6.9%

Update at 8:43pm- With 5.0% reporting:

Rick Santorum- 40.4%
Mitt Romney- 38.5%
Ron Paul- 11.1%
Newt Gingrich- 6.9%

Update at 8:40pm- With 3.9% reporting:

Rick Santorum- 40.0%
Mitt Romney- 39.0%
Ron Paul- 10.8%
Newt Gingrich- 7.1%

Update at 8:37pm- With 3.3% reporting:

Rick Santorum- 39.8%
Mitt Romney- 39.4%
Ron Paul- 10.5%
Newt Gingrich- 7.2%

Update at 8:33pm- With 2.7% reporting:

Rick Santorum- 41.3%
Mitt Romney- 37.9%
Ron Paul- 10.5%
Newt Gingrich- 7.2%

Update at 8:27pm- With 1.6% reporting:

Rick Santorum- 42.1%
Mitt Romney- 36.8%
Ron Paul- 11.0%
Newt Gingrich- 7.0%

Update- With .8% reporting at 8:24pm:

Rick Santorum- 40.8%
Mitt Romney- 35.6%
Ron Paul- 12.1%
Newt Gingrich- 7.7%

With .01% reporting at 8:18pm:

Rick Santorum- 47.6%
Mitt Romney- 34.0%
Ron Paul- 13.6%
Newt Gingrich- 4.9%

Please bookmark!

Michigan Republican Primary Results

UPDATE (11:00 PM)

With 86% of precincts reporting:

Romney - 354,465 (41%)
Santorum - 326,483 (38%)
Ron Paul - 101,175 (12%)
Gingrich - 57,598 (7%)

UPDATE (10:30 PM)

With 76% of precincts reporting, this is my last update:

Romney - 315,851 (41%)
Santorum - 285,103 (37%)
Ron Paul - 88,101 (12%)
Gingrich - 50,465 (7%)

UPDATE (10:25 PM)


UPDATE (10:23 PM)

71% of precincts reporting:

Romney - 296,100 (41%)
Santorum - 266,954 (37%)
Ron Paul - 83,156 (12%)
Gingrich - 47,423 (7%)

UPDATE (10:17 PM)

69% of precincts reporting:

Romney - 287,999 (42%)
Santorum - 258,052 (37%)
Ron Paul - 79,720 (12%)
Gingrich - 46,059 (7%)

UPDATE (10:13 PM)

68% of precincts reporting:

Romney - 279,198 (40%)
Gingrich - 250,149 (36%)
Ron Paul - 79,559 (11%)
Gingrich - 45,838 (7%)

UPDATE (10:10 PM)

With two-thirds of precincts reporting, Romney is leading by thirty thousand votes, or four percent, I think it's safe to say Michigan is going for Mr. Romney...

UPDATE (10:06 PM)

65% of precincts reporting:

Romney - 264,079 (40%)
Santorum - 236,041 (36%)
Ron Paul - 75,274 (11%)
Gingrich - 43,232 (7%)

UPDATE (9:59 PM)

My connection has been down, sorry for the delay.

59% of precincts (switched to Fox from NY Times):

Romney - 235,086 (40%)
Santorum - 212,559 (36%)
Ron Paul - 67,075 (12%)
Gingrich - 39,411 (7%)

UPDATE (9:47 PM)

36% of precincts reporting:

Romney - 174,569 (41.0%)
Santorum - 162,547 (38.2%)
Ron Paul - 49,783 (11.7%)
Gingrich - 27,428 (6.4%)

UPDATE (9:44 PM)

34% of precincts reporting:

Romney - 166,563 (41.0%)
Santorum - 154,872 (38.1%)
Ron Paul - 47,458 (11.7%)
Gingrich - 26,174 (6.4%)

UPDATE (9:34 PM)

31% of precincts reporting:

Romney - 153,193 (41.3%)
Santorum - 139,992 (37.7%)
Ron Paul - 43,298 (11.7%)
Gingrich - 24,010 (6.5%)

UPDATE (9:31 PM)

28% of precincts reporting:

Romney - 140,667 (41.3%)
Santorum - 129,075 (37.9%)
Ron Paul - 39,472 (11.6%)
Gingrich - 22,155 (6.5%)

UPDATE (9:27 PM)

27% of precincts reporting:

Romney - 133,715 (41.1%)
Santorum - 123,449 (38.0%)
Ron Paul - 37,592 (11.6%)
Gingrich - 21,342 (6.6%)

UPDATE (9:24 PM)

24% of precincts reporting:

Romney - 126,616 (41.2%)
Santorum - 116,391 (38.0%)
Ron Paul - 34,703 (11.3%)
Gingrich - 20,360 (6.6%)

Karl Rove just predicted Romney will win on Fox.

UPDATE (9:20 PM)

22% of precincts reporting:

Romney - 116,226 (41.2%)
Santorum - 106,988 (37.9%)
Ron Paul - 32,097 (11.4%)
Gingrich - 18,703 (6.6%)

UPDATE (9:15 PM)

18% of precincts reporting:

Romney - 97,621 (41.4%)
Santorum - 89,040 (37.8%)
Ron Paul - 26,323 (11.2%)
Gingrich - 15,828 (6.7%)

UPDATE (9:11 PM)

15% of precincts reporting:

Romney - 81,063 (40.9%)
Santorum - 76,248 (38.4%)
Ron Paul - 21,447 (10.8%)
Gingrich - 13,623 (6.9%)

UPDATE (9:08 PM)

12% of precincts reporting:

Romney - 69,527 (41.0%)
Santorum - 65,429 (38.5%)
Ron Paul - 18,245 (10.7%)
Gingrich - 11,561 (6.8%)

UPDATE (9:05 PM)

11% of precincts reporting:

Santorum - 55,967 (39.8%)
Romney - 55,734 (39.6%)
Ron Paul - 15,377 (10.9%)
Gingrich - 9,487 (6.7%)

UPDATE (9:00 PM)

11% of precincts reporting:

Santorum - 51,516 (40.2%)
Romney - 50,057 (39.1%)
Ron Paul - 13,926 (10.9%)
Gingrich - 8,824 (6.9%)

UPDATE (8:58 PM)

10% of precints reporting:

Santorum - 49,566 (40.4%)
Romney - 47,891 (39.0%)
Ron Paul - 13,295 (10.8%)
Gingrich - 8,474 (6.9%)

UPDATE (8:56 PM)

9% of precints reporting:

Santorum - 45,231 (40.3%)
Romney - 43,822 (39.0%)
Ron Paul - 12,199 (10.9%)
Gingrich - 7,696 (6.9%)

UPDATE (8:53 PM)

8% of precints reporting:

Santorum - 39,405 (40.9%)
Romney - 36,987 (38.4%)
Ron Paul - 10,560 (11.0%)
Gingrich - 6,493 (6.7%)

UPDATE (8:48 PM)

6% of precints reporting:

Santorum - 30,881 (39.6%)
Romney - 30,607 (39.3%)
Ron Paul - 8,718 (11.2%)
Gingrich - 5,414 (6.9%)

This race is not going to be decided early, folks.

UPDATE (8:43 PM)

5% of precints reporting:

Santorum - 23,427 (40.4%)
Romney - 22,318 (38.5%)
Ron Paul - 6,416 (11.1%)
Gingrich - 4,021 (6.9%)

UPDATE (8:37 PM)

4% of precints reporting:

Santorum - 18,854 (40.0%)
Romney - 18,397 (39.0%)
Ron Paul - 5,109 (10.8%)
Gingrich - 3,346 (7.1%)

UPDATE (8:35 PM)

3% of precints reporting:

Santorum - 13,091 (41.3%)
Romney - 12,015 (37.9%)
Ron Paul - 3,334 (10.5)
Gingrich - 2,291 (7.2%)

UPDATE (8:31 PM)

2% of precints reporting:

Santorum - 8,134 (42.1%)
Romney - 7,126 (36.8%)
Ron Paul - 2,119 (11.0%)
Gingrich - 1,361 (7.0%)

UPDATE (8:28 PM)

1% of precints reporting:

Santorum - 3,622 (40.8%)
Romney - 3,162 (35.6%)
Ron Paul - 1,074 (12.1%)
Gingrich - 679 (7.7%)

UPDATE (8:20 PM)

The first results are in:

Santorum - 49 (47.6%)
Romney - 35 (34.0%)
Ron Paul - 14 (13.6%)
Gingrich - 5 (4.9%)

UPDATE (8:00 PM)

Polls are closing across parts of Michigan right now. Exit polls show 10% of primary voters today were Democrats, so make of that what you will.

--Original Article--

The final votes in today's much anticipated Michigan Republican primary are being cast as precints slowly start to close. The main candidates have been criss-crossing the lower peninsula in hopes of gaining last minute votes, but when the results start rolling in, none of that will have mattered.

Pundit Press will be covering the Michigan results until someone wins, and if pre-primary polls are accurate that could mean until late tonight, as voters were split right down the middle about these two candidates as late as Public Policy Polling's last survey yesterday afternoon.

Stay tuned.

About that Claim of Going Broke at Georgetown

So we have this young woman, Sandra Fluke, lying testifying in front of a congressional hearing about the high costs of birth control; students are going broke.  One would think that someone that is smart enough to get into Georgetown law would be able to do what I did in less than a minute.  I googled the locations of Planned Parenthood that are close to the campus. Guess what?  There are four different locations less than 10 miles from campus.  

Oh and you know what else, Target sells generic brand birth control pills for $9 per month.  Let's see that is $108 per year if my math is correct; 9 x 12 yeah that equals 108.  I have no idea what PP charges for birth control but I can't imagine it is much different than Target.  I bet the average Hoya spends more than that on coffee every year.  

Since I live in the greater DC area I can tell you that they have a very aggressive free condom program here.  The reason being that Washington, DC has one of the highest rates of AIDS/HIV infection in the nation.  (Maybe having a lot of sex with local people may not be a good idea, just a thought). The website that tells you how and where you can get your free condoms is in seven different languages, too.  

Isn't it illegal to testify falsely in front of Congress?  I think that is called perjury, but what do I know?   I am not in Georgetown Law School.  Where do the dems find these people who are willing to lie so patently and openly? 

Please bookmark!

Video: Longest Paper Airplane Flight

Or at least that's what they're claiming:

Please bookmark!

Romney Wins Arizona

No surprise here: Pundit Press projects that Mitt Romney has won the Republican primary in Arizona. In the long run, however, this might not matter at all if Romney loses Michigan.

Please bookmark!

Michigan Republicans Vote

It's finally here.
Photograph by The Detroit News
After weeks of fierce campaigning between Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum in the Wolverine State, voters are heading to the polls as I write this. They are not only awarding delegates tonight, but quite possibly sacred momentum to the eventual victor, as the candidates sprint through 13 contests in one week.

So what should you look out for?

1. Delegates - Michigan awards their 30 delegates proportionally, so the difference between winning, and losing will matter in the delegate race, especially since Romney's guaranteed 29 to start the night off from Arizona's winnter-take-all primary bout, which he leads by almost twenty points right now.

2. Democrats - Michigan is another of those open primary states, where anyone can vote in the GOP, or Democrat races, regardless of registration. And today that matters, because Democrats and unions are actively encouraging cross-over voting to sabotage Romney's small lead among Republicans, not to mention Santorum's robo-calls to Democrats attacking Romney for opposing the auto bailouts.

3. Voting - Almost 20% of all votes cast will have been absentees, or early votes, which Romney has worked hard on getting. Some estimate near 60% of those early ballots are for Romney, so if turnout falls below expectations, or if he performs equal to Santorum in votes cast today, he will comfortably win.

Most importantly, if you reside in Michigan and you're a Republican, please head out to the polls and vote!

What say you?

Video: The Con Artist

Please bookmark!

Check Out AskGamblers' CasinoRank

AskGamblers is offering users a new tool to rank online casinos. This new algorithm will allow users better access to the casino sites online. There are reviews available to users to choose which ones they may like, including looking for a casino forum. AskGamblers also offers the most advanced complaints feature online. By going to the site itself, you can see its advantages, such as a no deposit bonus.

By using the new indexing tools, it's easier to search through the available online casinos. AskGamblers not only lets users not have to pay a fee to join the site, but has multiple methods to reward them. The site allows you to match bonuses to make sure you maximize the money that you us on AskGamblers.

Lastly, if you ever want to discuss your own experiences with AskGamblers, you can participate in the casino forum. You can discuss many different topics through hundreds of threads with thousands of other users and administrators. So check it out today.

Please bookmark!

Hank for Senate

A cat is running for US Senate in Virginia. You read that right. A cat named Hank is hoping to secure your vote come November. Here's his campaign ad:

Please bookmark!

Predictions for Michigan Primary

So far I've gotten all of my predictions correct (at least on who would win, that is), including Iowa. So I feel the need to predict Michigan as well. As much as it pains me to do so, I think Mitt Romney will pull it out in a squeaker against Santorum, while Dr. Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich will come in a distant third and fourth, respectively. Here are the percentages I'm predicting:

Mitt Romney- 37.9%
Rick Santorum- 36.8%
Ron Paul- 10.2%
Newt Gingrich- 9.7%

Please bookmark!

Michigan: Santorum's Disgrace

Hundreds of thousands of Michiganders will be heading to the polls in a few hours to decide the hotly contested Republican Primary bout between Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum, but the last ditch plans Santorum has been implementing in the state should be the downfall of his candidacy.

According to Public Policy Polling, the race is in a statistical dead head right now that could go either way, but one interesting fact note should cause Republicans to pause: Romney leads among registered Republicans (43-38%), while Santorum picks up his small one-point lead among Democrats - who are behind him 47-10%.

Some might claim these are blue dogs, but there's no standing for that, because Santorum's campaign is currently running robo-calls to Democrat voters attacking Mitt Romney for opposing the auto bailout, while Democratic consultants are attempting to get their ranks to cross party lines tomorrow, and back Santorum to hurt Romney's chances...

Wow. And I thought this was the Republican primary.

Call Romney whatever you want, but when the going got tough - he went after his opponent's actual track records; he didn't attempt to bring voters from the opposing party into the fray and steal a win.

It's apparent who I support in the primary, and I'm not asking you to back my man, but please think about the actions of Santorum and whether their consistent with how Conservative Republicans are supposed to act. And remember, please vote and get all your friends too, this is important and every one should be involved.

What say you?

Video: Obama as 'The Con Artist'

Nice video from Raising Red:

Please bookmark!

SEALs Claim Box Office Victory

The nationwide release of Act of Valor resulted in the eight U.S. Navy SEAL's who acted their roles defeating the latest, and not so greatest, movies out of Hollywood and coming out victorious in both money per theatre ($8,054) and the weekend ($24,476,632).

Tyler Perry's Good Deeds was the closest competitor at just $15 million.

I have not seen the movie yet, but I've been rooting for its success ever since I learned of the role our heroic, and often under-valued SEAL's have in this, from what I've seen regular people say (not New York, or LA film snobs), exceptional war film. And the greatest thing is that they doubled the money spent making the film already...

Congratulations to the creators, actors and SEAL's who came together and brought us this film. I am hopeful this astonishing upset in the box office will lead to more pro-military films coming to cinema's nationwide, or at the least finally end the Hollywood legacy of anti-military ideological skits for good.

What say you?

TJ Lane Poem

Accused shooter TJ Lane apparently wrote some pretty poor poetry before the rampage. Here's a portion found on his facebook:

"I'm on the lamb but I ain't no sheep. I am Death. And you have always been the sod. So repulsive and so odd. You never even deserved the presence of God, and yet, I am here. Around your cradle I plod. Came on foot, without shod. How improper, how rude. However, they shall not mind the mud on my feet if there is blood on your sheet. Now! Feel death, not just mocking you. Not just stalking you but inside of you. Wriggle and writhe. Feel smaller beneath my might. Seizure in the Pestilence that is my scythe. Die, all of you."
TJ Lane allegedly had a Twitter account that has been pulled due to the shooting. The alleged shooter also had a facebook account where he apparently put up this photoHis arrest photo can be seen here. And his yearbook picture.

Please bookmark!

Yearbook Photo of Shooting Suspect TJ Lane UPDATED: More pictures of Lane added

Here is the Chardon High School yearbook photo of shooting suspect TJ Lane.

Here are more pics of Lane via Facebook.

Please bookmark!

TJ Lane Identified as Chardon, Ohio Shooter

This has not been confirmed by the media, but twitter is abuzz with the possible name of the Chardon, Ohio shooter. According to the social media, the student opened fire on the school, killing one and injuring four others.

Here's a photo that comes to us from Now Public. It allegedly comes from one of his facebook pictures.

His purported facebook is here.

UPDATE: His arrest photo. And his yearbook picture. And his crappy poetry.

UPDATE: It appears that the picture above is of another individual that allegedly threatened a school shooting.

Please bookmark!

Please bookmark!

TJ Lane Twitter Account

TJ Lane allegedly had a Twitter account that has been pulled due to the shooting. The alleged shooter also had a facebook account where he apparently put up this photo.

According to Twitter users, he also put up this picture on his Twitter account last night.

His arrest photo can be seen here. And his yearbook picture. And his crappy poetry.

UPDATE: It appears that this is not the same person that conducted the shooting. No confirmation on who it is.

Please bookmark!

TJ Lane Arrest Photo

This comes to us from WKYC:

The Chardon Ohio suspect is likely student TJ Lane. His facebook profile was found. Apparently, he put up a chilling photo on his profile. His Twitter page was removed but one picture remained. And his yearbook picture. And his crappy poetry.

Please bookmark!

TJ Lane Picture

The Chardon Ohio suspect is likely student TJ Lane. His facebook profile was found. Apparently, he put up a chilling photo on his profile. His Twitter page was removed but one picture remained.

UPDATE: His arrest photo. And his yearbook picture. And his crappy poetry.

UPDATE: It appears that this is not the same person that conducted the shooting. No confirmation on who it is.

Please bookmark!

TJ Lane Facebook Found

Social media is reporting that a student named TJ Lane was the Chardon, Ohio shooter. According to other students, he put a threatening message on Twitter yesterday.

His facebook has been found here.

Here's a screenshot. His friends' names were redacted.

This picture was put on his Facebook page. His Twitter page was removed but one picture remained.

UPDATE: His arrest photo. And his yearbook picture. And his crappy poetry.

Please bookmark!

Chardon Ohio Press Conference Video

A video of the press conference can be found here:


Please bookmark!

Breaking: Shooting at Chardon, Ohio School

There has been a shooting at a school in Ohio today. Five students were injured and a suspect has been apprehended. We will bring you more news as it comes in.

Initial reports were that four students were shot. But at a news conference about 10:30 a.m., officials said there was a fifth victim.

The youth who was arrested had fled the high school building, but was caught on Woodin Road in Chardon Township, a law officer said. The boy is being processed at the sheriff's office, according to reports about 9 a.m.

Please bookmark!

Chardon Ohio Shooter Identified as TJ Lane

This has not been confirmed by the media, but twitter is abuzz with the possible name of the Chardon, Ohio shooter. According to the social media, the student opened fire on the school, killing one and injuring four others.

Here's a photo that comes to us from Now Public. It allegedly comes from one of his facebook pictures.
His purported facebook is here.

UPDATE: His arrest photo.

Please bookmark!

Video: Sacha Baron Cohen Dumps Ashes on Ryan Seacrest

Please bookmark!

Interview with Conservative Refocus

Pundit Press is proud to present interview number 53 in our ongoing series. Today we're interviewing Barry and Kim, the editors of the political site Conservative Refocus. We thank them for their time and participation.

1. When and why did you start Conservative Refocus?


In mid-2009, I began noticing something I had never seen before--ever--in my America. It was creeping into the mindsets of myriad business associates, some members of the media, and most of the people that I ran into in day-to-day life. It was actual fear, and it was not from a foreign attacker, not even so much towards the economy, but rather it was a both new and tangible fear of our Federal Government and what it was trying to accomplish. Not only that, only a relative few, at the time, within the media and certain websites were speaking directly to these fears. These individuals were standing alone in a storm, and they needed every bit of help they could get. I felt wrong in knowing I could help out in my own way, and yet was doing nothing beyond noticing and taking part in the angst as it continually unfolded.

I slowly began to smolder in anger at what was happening both all around us and to us, as Americans, and started speaking out on Facebook. Many friends began expressing an opinion that I should create a forum, and another good friend, Kim Stallings, who is a former academian and author of several well-known college texts, holding a Masters in English with a concentration in argumentation, offered to help create a site, serving as editor and webmaster, while I would be the writer. I can remember her asking, “what should we call it?” and while busy working on a business problem, I flippantly suggested Refocus. She asked, “Is that it?” I replied well…..I don’t know, “Conservative Refocus,” and that’s how the site was born.


In February 2009, I lost my job due to the troubled economy...and began a tremendous journey of transformation, realization, and true "self" education. Barry was largely my "teacher" during this time--helping me to sort through my experiences and understand how what this country was going through under the Obama administration was connected. During our conversations, I recognized in Barry someone who possessed a breadth and depth of historical knowledge, sharp critical thinking skills, a commitment to keeping up with current events, and an extraordinary passion for and ability to communicate; he was--I knew--a voice that needed to be heard. So I encouraged him to put his voice "out there"...lending my web skills, editorial skills, graphics skills,marketing skills, etc...and Conservative Refocus was born in August of 2009. Barry was meant to join the conversation and MOVE it in a particular direction--and he has DONE that. To educate. To inspire. When we started the site, I "knew" on some level it was going to be important and successful, but I think we're both constantly amazed at how far we've come in such a short amount of time...and we have only just begun.

2. What's the best part about running your site?


Publishing an article and watching it take-off is very satisfying, to me. But the even greater part is being able to add a slightly different voice to the conversation, one that is often steeped in analytical sarcasm, sometimes funny and entertaining, but always teaching and informing about what true Conservatism actually is, or how we should interpret a piece of news. The other part in running the news,along with the ariticles, is about finding out precisely what’s happening all over the world and displaying it, from the angle of understanding how this thing over 2,500 miles away could have an impact on our lives, in America. But an even more interesting part is the amount of international interest we have garnered. People everywhere are searching for answers, and we have many of those answers in our site, folded into the wisdom of the US Constitution, but displayed in a slightly different angle. We mock any and everyone in power, including many of our own within the Republican Party, if we feel they are straying from Conservative values. But first and foremost, we have fun. Finally, I have been contacted by a number of high-profile people, and many normal,every-day Americans who thank us for doing what we’re doing. Some of these folks are people that I had never dreamed of meeting, even nominally, but they contact us from the various articles that are written, which are often possessing an entirely different viewpoint, sometimes wicked, sometimes poignant, but always centered around the real truth. Not one week goes by where Kim doesn’t come to me or I go to her and say, “hey, guess who dropped us a note today?” I find that fascinating for a farm boy from Union County who ran off and joined the US navy and then bred himself into the Business world, a world which I love dearly, by the way.


There are so many awesome things about working with Barry on CR. The constant education, working through ideas with Barry and watching as he analyzes and synthesizes what's truly going on in this country, seeing the response from our audience, watching the site continually grow and impact so many people. And, like Barry said, it's amazing to have people like former Governor of New York, George Pataki, Michael Reagan, even Newt Gingrich--just to name a few--reading and reaching out to us in one way or another. (Newt Gingrich recently publicly thanked Barry--after the SC primary--on his official Facebook site--along with about 50 other people--just after we published the article "An Unbeliever's Guide to the Establishment: To Question with Boldness.")

3. How is Romney weak in the general election? Does he have any redeeming features?


Romneycare will be hard for Mitt to overcome in general, simply because Romney will lose one of the main selling points of Conservatism over Statism if he is selected to run against the Messiah. And by the way, this “language of the left” concerning criticizing Romney is B.S. that the establishment has many hard-core Conservatives eating up. Their stance on this is nothing but pie-in-the sky avoidance of some very serious issues that Romney will have to overcome in his past. I try to remind everyone that the Conservative media will not be accused of not vetting our candidate, as the mainstream media failed miserably at in Obama’s Democratic nomination. Redeeming issue? He has quite a few, and I would be far more comfortable with Romney than Obama, Mitt knows capitalism, he knows trade, and he has been a screaming success in business. But remember, these candidates always run to their base, in our case being the Conservative base of the Republcian party, and then they fall back to their normal positionings while governing. Romney would seem to fall somewhere around the center, at best, based upon his past, and that’s a concern. We must have someone who is thoroughly Conservative to solve these massive problems that we face, and wisdom will be operative in whomever we choose.


I have serious reservations about Romney based on what we're learned about his past in our research. The mainstream media is not adequately reporting or focusing on these things--the goings-on with Bain Capital, for instance. His position on many issues has changed to suit his purposes at a given time. He's not the "Golden Ticket" that many people believe he is. Barry's October 2011 article, "A Cautionary Tale: The 2012 Obama/Romney Presidential Debate" paints a pretty realistic picture of what we might face should Romney win the GOP nomination.

4. Has President Obama been better or worse than what you feared?


Far, far, worse than I ever could have imagined. Obama has become a caricature of himself, something that should soon come out as the year progresses.


Obama is a nightmare. He has so severely damaged this country, damaged the People he was elected to serve. We are beaten down and SO divided--which is his plan as he follows Saul Alinsky's "Rules" to the letter. Four more years of Obama? I can't even begin to imagine the dark path that would lead us down.

5. What Republican do you wish ran this year?


Well, I get misty-eyed when I think of how bad we need Ronald Reagan, right now, but I did kind of hope that SC Senator Jim Demint might run. He would have been formidable, I think. There are a number of others, Trump, might have been interesting, indeed, but he’s out; no way he plays now--far, far, too late, and he knows it. Just ignore him for the rest of this cycle is the best advice that I could give. But now, Trump, oh yeah, now there is a businessman who makes even Romney pause, even while he continually reminds us of how inter-galactically successful he is--looks like Gilligan on a dissolving raft with sharks circling. I mean, look, bragging, with regard to Romney and some few others, can often be thought of as the act of trying to convince someone of something that you're not even sure about yourself; get real, people.


I'm with Barry on Ronald Reagan--such an amazing leader. But without Reagan, or his clone, the Conservative I support IS running--Newt Gingrich. He has such a breadth and depth of knowledge and experience--reasoned ideas for change that would repair the damage Obama has done. He is ALREADY presidential. I can't think of anyone else I would choose to enter the race.

6. Anything else you'd like to add?

Barry and Kim:

We really appreciate the opportunity to take part in this, and thanks so much.

Please bookmark!

Newspaper: "US to Announce Aerial Blockade on Syria"

As reported by Ynet:
The Pentagon is readying for the possibility of intervention in Syria, aiming to halt Syrian President Bashsar Assad's violent crackdown on protesters, the newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat reported Saturday, citing a US military offical.

According to the official, the intervention scenario calls for the establishment of a buffer zone on the Turkish border, in order to receive Syrian refugees. The Red Cross would then provide the civilians humanitarian aid, before NATO crews would arrive from Turkey and join the efforts.

The measure would pave the way for the US to declare an aerial blockade on Syria.

The intercession is to be modeled after NATO's efforts in Kosovo, which brought an end to the Serbian control of the region. NATO's plan of action included prolonged aerial shelling.

The US' diplomatic efforts have yet to yield an effective international resolution that would stop the bloodshed. More than 100 protesters have died over the weekend alone, human rights activists said.
Please bookmark!



"The truth is that Barak Obama is
a committed and active Christian."

         Of what, if any, religious faith is our current President? This, unfortunately, is one of many questions about him to which the American people have no answers. For the first time in U.S. history, our people were asked to vote for, and now to vote a second time for, a man about whom less is known than any other president. Our disgrace of a “media” made sure of that, asking no question and reporting no item that might, in the most trivial way, derail the Hope and Change president from his destiny.
Unfortunately, the steady, moderate, electable John McCain did more than his share to keep us in the dark about Hope and Change. In 2008, believe it or not, McCain hired one Mark McKinnon as his “chief advertising strategist.” This in spite of the fact that McKinnon had told him he would not work against an Obama candidacy. McKinnon said that Mr. Obama’s election to the presidency “would send a great message to the country and the world.” McKinnon reportedly told McCain on more than one occasion that if McCain said anything disparaging about Obama, McKinnon would be “outta here.”
So why does Obama’s religious belief, if any, matter? That is, aside from the quaint notion that a free people should be entitled to have some information about the person they are asked to vote for? And aside from his recent demands that the Catholic Church violate its millennia-old religious beliefs and provide free condoms and abortifacients to all of its employees?  And aside from his self-described “spiritual mentor” having a propensity to rage from his pulpit that God should “damn America”?

Granted the Constitution explicitly prohibits a religious test for president. But nowhere in the document does it suggest a candidate has the right to cruise through one or more entire election processes without divulging anything whatsoever about his background or his personal beliefs. In fact, it presupposes a vigorous free press and a vigorous political opposition, neither of which seemed to be functioning in 2008.
Had the system functioned as it should, we might not have had to take the word of such as “Obama For America” about his “committed and active” Christianity. We would know a lot more about his religious, philosophical, and intellectual aspects had we learned how he presented himself on his applications to Occidental College, Columbia, and Harvard; what courses he took; what professors he preferred; what, if anything, he wrote; what grades he got; what he majored in. We learned none of that.
 But lets move on to 2012. Candidate Rick Santorum questioned the nature of Obama’s “faith” and the White House shrieked that Santorum went “well over the line.” Investors’ Business Daily has an excellent analysis of that exchange here. The "truth" from the opening quotation above might more accurately have read “. . . that Barack Obama is a committed and active Marxist.”

Afghan protesters burn Barak Obama in effigy, 2/22/12
At the least he seems to have a greater affinity for Islam than for Christianity. Recently he apologized to Afghanistan (and all of Islam) for the inadvertent burning of the Muslim Holy Book, proclaiming that those responsible will 
be “held accountable.” How we shall hold “accountable” Americans who carried out an admittedly “inadvertent” act should prove interesting. But several other 
things should also prove interesting:

1)  In the aftermath of the inadvertent act, many decidedly intentional acts took place, including an Afghan in military uniform walking up to and shooting to death two U.S. military personnel. Did we hear our Commander-in-Chief demand an apology from Hamid Karzai for those murder? Or demand that the Afghan shooter be “held accountable”?

2)  In the same aftermath the Taliban on Thursday called on Afghans to attack foreign troops, and their spokesman issued a statement ordering its commanders to embrace and protect the families of any Afghan policeman or soldier who turns his gun on foreign troops. "Call them heroes," he said. Shall we hold our breath waiting for our Commander-in-Chief to rethink his plan to negotiate with the Taliban?

3) Obviously the Taliban spokesman's statement was more powerful than our Commander-in-Chief's obsequious apology.  Today [2/25/12] two American officers were found dead of gunshot wounds deep inside the heavily fortified Afghan interior ministry.  "There is CCTV there and special locks.  The killer would have had to have the highest security (clearance) to get to the room where they were killed," a source told Reuters.  Perhaps our Commander-in-Chief will now want to fly there personally for a deep-body bow and some genuine groveling.

4)  In Afghanistan's recent past (2009), Bibles were intentionally burned by U.S. military personnel, under orders from higher up.  Did you miss our Commander-in-Chief's apology to Christians throughout the world?  Probably so.  You have in fact heard him refer often to the "Holy Quran."  Have you ever heard him refer to the "Holy Bible"?  Probably not.

There are two things we can still count on: we can bet that, whoever the Republican nominee is, his religious and philosophical beliefs will be microscopically examined, critiqued, and torn apart by our "media."  Obama?  Not at all.  Too personal.  "Over the line." And, for those who do believe in Christianity, we can still say "God help us."

MO Atty

Today's topic is "juxtaposition"

I was reading the newspaper yesterday and read a very interesting column. Thought about it for a little while, and then moved on to reading other things.

And then this morning, I open up the op-ed pages, and read another very interesting column. See what you think of each. Here is the first:

When debate is maddening


Friday, February 24, 2012

LITTLE ROCK — A few years ago Ann Coulter published a book titled How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must). With all due respect, Coulter, one of my favorite conservative eye-pokers, was wrong. There is no “how” in talking to a liberal. You can’t talk to a liberal, period.

Believe me, I’ve tried. I’ve got a liberal mother, four liberal siblings and their assorted liberal offspring, and a horde of liberal friends. (I went to college and grad school.) Whenever I advance to them even the mildest of challenges to liberal orthodoxies, on topics ranging from the welfare state to illegal immigration to abortion, I’m greeted with name-calling, obscenities, shout-overs and, finally, the gravelike silence of ostracism.

The problem is this: We conservatives think liberals are silly; they think we’re evil (emphasis mine). Tell a liberal that you hope President Barack Obama will be defeated in the coming election, and you’ll be branded a racist. Voice your opposition to same-sex marriage, and you’re a homophobe. Express outrage at the idea of building a mosque anywhere near where one of the planes’ fuselages fell in the 9/11 massacre, and you’re an Islamophobe. If you support the Tea Party, or Rick Santorum for president, or defunding Planned Parenthood, or setting up credible border enforcement, you could be all of the above plus more: anti-woman, anti-poor, anti-tolerance and a fascist to boot.

Liberals go on and on about the Manichaeism of conservatives: how quick we supposedly are to divide a morally gray world into black and white. But nothing beats the Manichaeism of liberals: Their causes are holy, and ours deserve a bucketful of scatology on Daily Kos. (emphasis mine)

Here are some characteristics of liberals that make it impossible to carry on a civilized debate with them: The personal is always the political, and vice versa. I nearly lost one of my oldest and dearest friends in 2004 after she forwarded me an email containing an incendiary anti-George W. Bush op-ed by the leftist novelist E.L. Doctorow.Among other charges in the op-ed, which made Bush look about as caring as King George III in the run-up to the Revolutionary War, Doctorow claimed Bush didn’t care about the “40 percent” of Americans “who cannot afford health insurance.” “Do you really believe this?” I emailed back, pointing out that Doctorow had gotten his numbers jumbled. It was not 40 percent but 40 million Americans-more like 15 percent-who lacked health insurance for various reasons back then. It took six years for my friend and I to mend our sundered relationship.

Liberals constantly violate the rule that politics and religion should be off-limits in social discourse. Toward the end of 2008, I received an invitation to some friends’ Christmas party. Actually, it was a “holiday” party, since liberals never say Christmas. The invitation informed me that we would be celebrating, among other things, the end of “eight years of Republican chicanery.” Those friends weren’t the only ones. A college pal’s Christmas-er, holiday-card mailed around the same time rejoiced, “Our man won!” Our man? Liberals simply assume that if you possess a post-secondary degree and you’ve heard of Plato, you, too would like to try Dick Cheney for war crimes. Then, when they find out you’re not on board, their faces petrify into Easter Island stone heads as they make a mental note to delete you from their iPhone address books.

A conversation with a liberal is a minefield of political-correctness booby traps. Two years ago, as I was defending my doctoral dissertation on a medieval topic, I mentioned that wealthy women of that time often functioned as patrons of the arts, commissioning beautifully decorated religious books. “Women like pretty things,” I said. OMG! I looked around at the three learned but liberal female professors on the committee, their smiles suddenly frozen into rictuses, groans issuing from their lips. How was I going to tell my husband, who had already made the reservations for a celebratory dinner, that I’d failed the defense? (Fortunately, I didn’t, but it was a scary moment.)

It’s always like that: chance observations about human nature or obvious sex differences draw blood from the paper-thin epidermis of wounded liberals. You can’t say that guys really do drive better than girls. You can’t say that girls are worse at math. You can’t even say “girls.”

I don’t have this problem with my libertarian friends, who are up for debating just about anything, especially libertarians’ favorite topic, drug legalization. But when it comes to liberals-well, I love my liberal family, friends and academic colleagues, but I try to stick to safe conversational topics (emphasis mine) such as literature, music, food and gossip.Until one of them-as so often happens-asks, “Don’t you think we ought to boycott Fox News/ the Susan G. Komen foundation/ the state of Arizona/pick a pariah of your choice?”

And when I disagree, I’m the fascist.


Charlotte Allen is the author of The Human Christ: The Search for the Historical Jesus.

Okay, now let's compare and contrast with another column that ran today in pretty much the same space.

We are not the same


Saturday, February 25, 2012

LITTLE ROCK — I recently played poker with a bunch of Republicans. My husband and I, both bleeding-heart liberals, are part owners of a cabin in the Sierra outside Fresno, California, a very conservative area. The Camp Sierra Association president has an annual poker game, and this year we, the newcomers, were invited.

No one mentioned politics. We talked instead about our kids and Las Vegas and the odd warm weather. There was a lot of laughter and a lot of very good Scotch. I had fun even though I lost $4.

When the game was over, we walked home with our across-the-road neighbors and invited them in for a final nightcap.

They are the best neighbors in the world. Always ready with a tool, an ingredient or a jump-start for the car. Whatever you need, if they have it, they will give it. They are a lovely family: husband, wife and four smart, funny, polite children. I was sure they were Democrats.

As the husband sat down in our living room with his drink, he announced, “The Tea Party is not racist.” We just looked at him. “The Tea Party is not racist,” he continued, “because I am a member of the Tea Party.”

I laughed. I thought he was joking, but he quickly made it clear he was not. He is white and his wife is African-American. And they belong to the Tea Party. They don’t care who becomes our next president as long as it isn’t Barack Obama. The conversation devolved from there until he was shouting, I was shouting, his wife was trying to calm him down, my husband was trying to calm me down, and our other friends—Democrats—were trying to keep everybody from breaking the furniture.

We argued about health care and welfare, President Obama’s nationality and religion, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. We did not agree on anything. But honestly, the issues were not important. What matters is how personal it quickly became, how vitriolic, how filled with hate. He said I was sucking the country dry with my support of food stamps and public education. He said I needed to get off my butt and take care of myself. I suggested he sign his kids up to die in Iran, the next place he thinks we should attack. He called me a spoiled idiot and worse. I called him selfish, shortsighted and worse. It was awful, and it went on until after 3 a.m.

The next morning, they knocked on our door and we apologized to each other and laughed sheepishly. All in good fun, the wife said. It was the Scotch talking, my husband replied. But my feelings about them are changed. I cannot respect them as I did before. And as they headed back across the street, I saw the look they gave each other: They don’t like us anymore, either.

My mother had Republican friends. She was a lifelong Democrat, worked with the Adlai Stevenson for president campaign and was a precinct chairman for Hubert Humphrey. She was ashamed of Richard Nixon and thought Ronald Reagan was misguided. Still, she didn’t hate Republicans. She disagreed with their politics and they with hers, but she believed people, no matter how they vote, are basically all the same.

I don’t agree. I don’t want to be friends with someone who is a member of the Tea Party or is a Newt Gingrich Republican. We are not the same. (emphasis mine) I equate their political views with thoughtlessness, intolerance and narcissism. I think they are not kind or empathetic. And my neighbor made it clear that he does not respect my opinions or me.

You’re what’s wrong with this country!” he shouted. “No, you are!” was my intelligent retort. In only one area could we agree: We each would prefer the other just didn’t exist. If only they would all go live in Gingrich’s moon colony. If only we would all move to Canada with the other socialists. My mother would have been horrified, but times have changed.

My neighbors want good jobs, nice houses and security for their four children. They want to be able to retire before they get too old so they can spend more time at their cabin. They love the Sierra Nevada and want it to remain pristine. I want those things, too. I want it for their children as well as mine, and for all children everywhere. Of course I do. And that’s what I find so frustrating.

My views on all these things—gay marriage, abortion, the war in Iraq, health care, education, food stamps, even NPR and PBS funding—seem so logical to me. Of course we need to take care of those less fortunate; of course we want everybody to have the joy and legal benefits of a life partner; of course we want every baby to be wanted and every person to be safe, healthy, informed and looking forward to a better future.

These things are no-brainers to me, and it kills me that my neighbor disagrees. I wonder what would happen if he woke up one morning to find that his son had been killed in Iraq or that his 15-year-old daughter was pregnant or that his favorite sister was gay. What if he suddenly lost his job, his wife got cancer, there was no insurance and not much food? I’m not saying I want life to knock him around. But would he still feel that the government shouldn’t be helping anybody out?

Next time I drive to our cabin, I’m going to make sure I take everything I could possibly need. I don’t want to ask my neighbors for help. I hope it’s their weekend to stay home.


Diana Wagman is the author of the novels Skin Deep, Spontaneous, and Bump.

I really wanted to fisk this column, but then I thought this would be an excellent topic for people to kick around for a little while. Both columns have things to be critical of. For instance, in the first column, I'm pretty sure that Ms. Allen has her tongue firmly planted in her cheek when she stated that liberals don't say Christmas, but instead say holiday. Perhaps a large majority of them do, but not all liberals use holiday instead of Christmas. Such over-generalization should be more plainly labeled as humor, especially when we're talking about liberals' sense of humor (or lack thereof). But let me make three observations.

First, notice just the general tone of the two articles. One is positive and tries to delve into the minds of others; the other is negative and doesn't want anything to do with others. Notice the parts in each article that I emphasized.

Next, on the topic of the second article and the instigation of the topics by the conservative friend. I'm thinking that maybe something else was said other than "our kids and Vegas and the odd warm weather" at the poker game, and the friend was reacting to that. After all, it would be awfully odd to just walk into somebody's house and announce that you are not a racist. Nonetheless, the conservative friend erred by walking into somebody else's house and starting a contentious subject in such a way.

Finally, I'd like to answer the questions that are asked at the end of the second column. I can't speak for anybody but myself, but I imagine that my answers would be echoed by every conservative that reads this. Mrs. Wagman asks the question of "would he still feel that the government shouldn't help out" when it comes to teen-age pregnancy, homosexuality, no insurance, and food shortage, among other things. And I think my answers would be yeah, no change on any of my answers.

How about you? Do you think your answers would change? Why or why not?

Please bookmark!

Why Romney Will Win Michigan

The battle for Michigan is in its final stages, as Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney zigzag across the crucial state for last second voters, however, I am almost completely certain that Romney will win regardless of what Santorum does over the next couple of days, because of his message right now.

Romney, who has regained the lead after working tirelessly to overcome Santorum's trifecta, is on newfound campaign ground: tea party adherents. He's making the case, positively, that he not only qualifies as a conservative candidate, but as the strongest one to take on President Obama this fall.

Most tea partiers still look at Romney with suspicion, but the fact he's out of his comfort zone and reaching out to tea partiers instead of locking up moderates, or regular conservatives, shows me his campaign is extremely confident their base will come strong for him, and now he's venturing out to Santorum's base to gain a little more.

Another indicator is Santorum's own messaging towards Romney these past couple of days. Gone, absolutely gone, is nice Rick as he refers to Mitt Romney as an Occupy Wall Street adherent.... all because he favors limiting deductions for the uber-wealthy, while pushing to decrease everyone's income taxes by 20%.

The last thing Republican voters want to see is one candidate calling another leftist codewords and injecting class warfare into the race. It destroyed Newt Gingrich when he attacked Romney's Bain success, and it will do the same to Santorum for equating the former governor with socialists, who want to destroy the wealthy, which would seem counter-productive for someone as wealthy as Mr. Romney.

When the results come out Tuesday night and Romney is the victor, just remember this article: the candidate won by being positive and reintroducing his roots to voters, while the loser went with an class warfare argument that backfired.

What say you?

Investor: Oil Will Rise Until Economy 'Breaks'

Please bookmark!

Video" Why is Obama 'Indignant' Over Gas Prices?

Please bookmark!

Obama Weekly Address: Well, You Know Drilling Isn't Really Such a Great Idea

Geniuses, all.

Please bookmark!

Sarah Palin Divorce?

Apparently, she came close to divorcing her husband back in 2007. From the Mail Online:
Sarah Palin contemplated divorce in 2007, emails covering her tenure as governor of Alaska indicate.

Her job had taken a toll on her marriage long before she even became McCain's running mate, emails released yesterday insinuate.

In a September 26, 2007, email to aide Kris Perry and her husband Todd, titled 'Marital Problems,' Palin wrote: 'So speaking of... If we, er, when we get a divorce, does that quell 'conflict of interest' accusations about BP?'

In 2007 Todd Palin resigned from his job at BP, because of a perceived conflict of interest as his wife's administration were in midst of negotiations with the oil company over natural gas pipeline.

Todd had worked for BP for 18 years, and after taking an absence of leave in 2007, returned to the company in a different role nine months later. He stepped down again in 2009.

Rumours about a breakdown in the Palins' marriage have been swirling for years. Both Palins had extra marital affairs including one as early as 1996, according to the National Enquirer. And the reports that Sarah allegedly had an affair with Todd's business partner Brad Hanson themselves led to a deterioration in their marriage, according to the blog, the Alaska Report.
Please bookmark!

Orlando Nike Riot

And just when you thought things couldn't get weirder:

Riot erupts at Florida Mall during Nike All Star collection sneaker release event: MyFoxORLANDO.com

Please bookmark!

Republican Pulls Ahead in MT Senate Poll

Democrat Jon Tester won election to the Senate in 2006 on a wave of public discontent. Against incumbent Conrad Burns, he won by .9% and with under 50% of the vote. Burns had an approval rating of under 40%.

Now, Tester is up against Congressman and former Lieutenant Governor Denny Rehberg. According to Rasmussen's polling, Rehberg is ahead of the incumbent.

Rehberg: 47%
Tester: 44%
Other/und: 10%

The fact that Tester is significantly under 50% is a real notch against him at this point in the race. The people of Montana have a libertarian streak and strongly oppose ObamaCare. When Tester ran in 2006, he ran as a moderate and then voted for the health care overhaul.

Please bookmark!

Mileage Tips 2012

With gas prices pushing higher and higher, drivers are trying to get the most out of every gallon. Here are a few tips that you can use.

- The optimal gas mileage speed for most vehicles is 45 miles per hour. If you're on a back road with no one around, watch your gas mileage spike.

- On the highway, driving at 55 compared to 70 will save you MPGs, especially on long trips.

- Make sure to get regular oil changes.

- Make sure to keep your tires inflated.

- If possible during the summer, use the vent instead of the AC.

- Cars with standard transmission get a little better mileage.

- Cruise control will help with mileage and could prevent speeding tickets.

- Use a bike if possible! Gas is getting too darn expensive!

Please bookmark!

Fear of Grave Robbers Robbing Whitney Houston's Tomb

Weird. Just weird.

Fears that ghouls will plunder her resting place were triggered after it was revealed she was buried wearing up to £300,000 of jewels and designer clothes.

Please bookmark!

Video of Ron Paul / Santorum "Aggressive" Handshake

The talk of the internet... Apparently, a lot of people are talking about the handshake that Senator Rick Santorum gave Congressman Ron Paul at last night's debate. It's not clear if the handshake was aggressive or joking in manner. The two had been exchanging jabs several times last night.

Please bookmark!

The Forbidden Word Impeach

What does History tell us about the impeachment of an American President?  It has only happened twice. 
Today Lincoln is an icon.  His Roman style temple and oversized statue dominate one end of the National Mall.  But in 1864 he was an embattled president caught in a war he couldn’t win and running against George B. McClellan, a popular general who said he could end it.  Even History was against Lincoln. No president had won a second term in over thirty years.  Mr. Lincoln needed all the allies he could muster to win.  So the first Republicans led by the President tried to split the opposition.  They changed the party name to the National Union Party and chose a Southern Democrat as a running mate.  In a surprise to everyone including Lincoln, he won re-election positioning Johnson one heartbeat away from the Oval Office. 
After the worst mistake by a Southern sympathizer since the attack on Fort Sumter, the assassination of Lincoln, Andrew Johnson assumed the presidency and almost immediately ran afoul of the Radical Republicans who had a three to one majority in Congress and who wanted to punish the South.  Johnson was the only Southern Senator to remain loyal to the Union.  He served as the Union imposed military governor of Tennessee until chosen to run for Vice President.   A mere forty one days into Lincoln’s second term Johnson was sworn in.  When he sought to allow the South a path back into the Union that re-imposed limitations upon the freed slaves and ensured the rise of ex-Confederates to power, he was impeached for breaking a law concerning the firing of appointees.  After a contentious trial he was acquitted by one vote. 
Johnson and his presidency survived, barely.  He was afterwards relegated to irrelevancy and served as a mere caretaker until General Grant came along to become the face of Reconstruction.  In this first impeachment battle the President was acquitted, but Congress won. 
If you ask the average person who lived through the national ordeal President Clinton was impeached because of his scandalous tryst with a young intern in the Oval Office.  Though this was a shameful betrayal of trust, it was not the reason he was impeached.  He was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice in a legal matter that had nothing at all to do with Monica Lewinsky.  And even though Clinton was later found in contempt by a federal judge for lying under oath and was later disbarred for ethical violations it was the leadership of the House that impeached him that paid the political price.  The Senate which on a strict party line vote (all the Progressives voted to acquit), came out relatively unscathed.  Today we are constantly told by the Progressive Press Mr. Clinton is a beloved elder statesman. 
Etched upon the memory of the Republican wing of the party of power is the knowledge that unless there is a Senate willing to convict there is no glory in being a House ready to indict. 
Republics rise and republics fall.  They rise due to the explosion of creativity and production which always accompanies freedom, and they fall when demagogues convince a majority that they deserve a free ride at the expense of a minority. The good thing about History is that if we are wise enough we can learn from other people’s mistakes.  And if we aren’t going to allow History to instruct us we should at least be wise enough to allow it to warn us. 
Our History teaches us that the impeachment process is possible to initiate but difficult to consummate.  So what are we to do if History warns us that what we are witnessing is the fall of our republic?  Have we learned enough from History to navigate our way through to a safe harbor, or are we helpless in the face of a hurricane of transformation? 
Due to the information developed by the American intelligence community and the bravery of Navy Seal Team Six we learned that the leader of Al Qaeda, the fraternity of terrorists America finds itself endlessly destroying, was not hiding in a cave.  He was instead living in a compound barely 1,000 yards from the military academy of our principle ally in our decade long undeclared war.  Today’s Hitler is dead, yet the war goes on as if nothing has happened.  We have victory after victory with no conclusion and no peace in sight.   
Looking at our current economic and social situation America appears more like an occupied nation than the victor of the Cold War and the sole remaining Super Power on Earth.  Perhaps it is time to conceptualize the idea that our existential enemy is not a rag-tag group of malcontents dedicated to turning back the clock by six centuries.  The enemy that poses a mortal threat to our way of life is instead the homegrown Progressive Movement that has labored for more than a century to subvert our education, corrupt our politics, and evolve their way from constitutionally limited government to central planning and total control. 
The visible head of the Progressive Movement today is President Barack Obama.  As portrayed by the Corporations Once Known as the Mainstream Media he is not just an Alinsky style community organizer, he is a constitutional scholar.  We are told endlessly that he was a professor of constitutional law at the University of Chicago.  Leaving the reality of these claims aside suffice it to say that this constitutional scholar professes to believe that the constitution is a flawed document because it does not provide for positive rights such as guarantees of housing, jobs, etc.  The kind of rights that the constitutions of the Soviet Union did and of Red China does provide its slaves, I mean citizens.  Not to worry our constitutional scholar-in-chief also believes that our Constitution, written to set strict limits on the federal government is a living document that each generation is free to interpret: that is, change at will.   
President Obama has presided over the most calamitous decline in American prestige and influence since his fellow Progressive Jimmy Carter disgraced the office.  Mr. Obama’s apology tours, his over-the-top spending which are nothing less than cross generational theft are eclipsed by his blatant assaults upon the very core of his responsibility: the integrity of the Constitution. 
The president of the United States is sworn to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution, but instead Mr. Obama has trampled upon the letter as well as the spirit of this document meant to define the perimeters of federal power.   
Unconfirmed Czars rule like potentates over shadow departments dispensing huge budgets while creating a parallel government outside of citizen scrutiny or control.  Appointees at the National Labor Relations Board work at subordinating the nation to organized labor.  A rogue justice department provides guns to Mexican cartels, refuses to prosecute obvious instances of voter intimidation, gives a pass to Islamist groups,  and stonewalls Congress, while aggressively going after peaceful pro-life demonstrators and America’s Sheriff Joe Arpaio.  They sue states that try to enforce immigration laws they ignore and seek to try the perpetrators of 9-11 in a New York trial that would parade itself through our national consciousness like a Broadway production of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Superstar.  
Beyond these abuses of power there are two glaring examples of the type of blatant transgressions of clear constitutional limits which, if not addressed set a precedent that may stand in the future as signs of the times that were missed at the time.  If not addressed, they will point accusing fingers at a generation asleep at the switch when the bounds of limited government were finally breached. 
Ruling by decree from Chicago-on-the-Potomac our Leader has taken us to war without even consulting Congress and made recess appointments while Congress was in session.  
Mr. Obama has said he can rule without Congress because he can’t wait.  He travels the country at tax payer expense campaigning for four more years to seal the deal, inflaming class warfare, and dispensing government giveaways to buy votes.  These two egregious affronts to the Constitution lie at the feet of the Washington Monument passed over by the media and explained away by the government’s propaganda arm.  And what does the loyal opposition do?  They huff and they puff but actually they do nothing. 
Only two Congressmen had the integrity to point out that presidents are not allowed to take us to war by whim. And only one had the courage to point out that making high level appointments without Senate confirmation while the Senate is in session is more than bad form: it is unconstitutional and more compatible with a dictatorship than a republic. 
We stand before the yawning maw of collectivism presided over by a self-proclaimed transformational president seeking to change us from what we have been to what he thinks we should be.  Mr. Obama is supported by what amounts to a personality cult in the media and a legion of fellow citizens addicted to either distributing or receiving the dole.  The Republican candidates are standing in a circular firing squad working hard at allowing the Progressive Media make them look like the bar scene from Star Wars.  At the same time the media gives the President a pass for everything from gas prices to artificially deflated unemployment figures.  If America as we have known her is to survive, we must elect a Congress with enough courage and enough votes to do what must be done.  The Congress we have now is passive in the face of serial provocations and outright illegality.  They will not call Mr. Obama to account on anything so he feels free to do everything. 
If he wins again we all lose unless we replace those who merely go along to get along with those who are willing to speak the forbidden word…Impeach! 
Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion for Southside Virginia Community College.  He is the Historian of the Future and the author of the History of the Future @ http://drrobertowens.com © 2012 Robert R. Owens drrobertowens@hotmail.com  Follow Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook or Twitter @ Drrobertowens