Colorado GOP Debate: Winners and Whiners

Standard

The Republican National Committee is being criticized by Conservatives competing for the presidential nomination because they allow obviously anti-Republican media organizations (CNBC and CNN) to organize and moderate their debates.

Yes, the questions were full of Liberal bias; and Yes, they were at times rude as well as stupid; and Yes, most of the questions, as asked, never really touched on most of the major issues facing the country. This perhaps should not have been expected from a professional media organization, but it was what it was!

The candidates debate and post-debate reactions, however, should not have been to whine and complain like school children after a difficult test. These guys, and this lady, are competing for the what was, before Obama, the most prestigious political office in the world. If any one of them can’t handle the kind of highly-biased, outrageously unprofessional questions supplied by CNBC, that person should seriously consider dropping out of the race before they waste any more of their, or their contributor’s, money.

The RNC, perhaps unwittingly, did the potential voters (and the candidates themselves) a favor by allowing us to see how they react to uncomfortable and hostile questioning. The winners are the candidates who made the best of a bad thing; those who were able to turn bad questions into quality policy statements.

The biggest losers are the one’s who complained the loudest, primarily Ted Cruz and Chris Christie. To me, personally, the fact that Ted Cruz chose to spend any debate time whining, rather than making the best of his opportunity to elaborate on his approach to an important issue, is most disappointing. Cruz, IMO, is one of the three candidates who would make the best, most successful president in 2016 and beyond.

Nothing wrong with voicing your displeasure over the situation, but doing that too obtrusively just gives ammunition to the opposition; and they will use it just like I did at the beginning of this post when I likened the candidates’ reactions to the whining and complaining of “school children after a difficult test.”

Truth is, ANY of the candidates on that stage in Colorado this week would undoubtedly be 300 % better for America than the man who currently works every day from the oval office to tear away another piece from the fabric of our society and from the Constitution itself.

News Can Be Fun (and the more you think about it, the funnier it gets.)

Standard

A quick and jaundiced look at three of Tuesday’s top news stories from my favorite news aggregator: Google News (news.google.com).

(Just having a light moment, no offense intended to Republicans, Democrats, Muslim bombers, sex addicts, rapists or their lawyers.)

1) Paul Ryan has agreed to run for the position of Speaker of the House of Representatives — but ONLY if he is guaranteed to win and only if he gets weekends off.

(Unofficial word on the street is: Vice President Biden is so impressed with Ryan’s proposition that he has decided to demand the same conditions when he announces that he is running for the Democratic nomination for president.)

……………..
2) Ahmed Mohammed, the Texas teen who was arrested for bringing a homemade clock to school that looked like a bomb, visited the president of Qatar last week and has since announced that he and his family are moving to Qatar.

(Where he can learn to make a real bomb that looks like a harmless clock)

………………

3) Bill Cosby’s lead lawyer has quit.

(You know you’re in pretty bad legal trouble when your lawyer is worried that defending you will damage HIS reputation.)

Liberalism: Naive or Diabolical

Standard

This past week brought with it another lesson for voters: take what you read and hear in the media (even some of the “Conservative” media) with ‘a grain of salt.’ Cases in point are the insinuations against Dr. Ben Carson and the consistent editorializing and misinterpreting of what he says.

As an example, Dr. Carson made the simple, logical statement that he feels that “the likelihood of Hitler accomplishing his goals” (the goal of exterminating the Jewish people, from the face of Germany and then from the world) “would have been greatly diminished if the people had been armed.”

It’s very hard for me to rationalize opposition to that statement. Carson was NOT saying that the Holocaust would not have happened. Obviously the power and armament of the German Army would most likely have eventually overwhelmed even the most well armed and aggressive civilian opponents of Hitler’s plans, Carson was simply voicing the common sense dictum that you have a much greater chance of not being defeated if you are equipped to fight back. The problem is, Ben Carson is trying to express this common sense to people who stopped listening as soon as he said the name ‘Hitler.’

Hitler’s name is a sore spot with people who support Liberal causes, especially gun control which was the particular Liberal cause that Carson was attacking.

“I’m telling you there’s a reason these dictatorial people take guns first.” Carson told Wolf Blitzer in the CNN interview.

The immediate problem with suggesting to a Liberal that gun control does not prevent murder, but instead prevents self-defense is that that fact (and it IS a fact) is an indictment of a core Liberal belief that guns are more dangerous than people; and more than that, it is an indictment of their beloved President Obama.

What, predictably, is the first thing that will happen after some crazy shoots and kills a group of people? Obama will be on TV calling for “more gun control” and either ignoring or dismissing the growing number of voices that are asking: What If?

WHAT IF there were guns being carried by one or more people in a group being attacked by a shooter? It will save many lives if the shooter is put down as soon as he shows his gun or at least immediately after his first shot.

WHAT IF  there were no “gun free zones.” It would prevent a majority of mass shooting attempts (by all but the most suicidal shooters) if it is obvious to a perpetrator that he will not be able to walk away from the situation.

Obama is a well educated man and a clever manipulator of people and situations. Don’t you think that he realizes that gun control does nothing but disarm the people who would not consider using a gun for anything but self defense or hunting?

Isn’t it obvious that that is exactly the point Dr. Carson was making with his Hitler analogy?

Time and time again President Obama has clearly illustrated his contempt for the Constitution, his disregard for National as well as personal self-defense and his determination to change the face of America.

America does not need a facelift! Nor does it need a Liberal successor to Obama, who will continue guiding America on the destructive course Obama has set for it.

In my opinion, what America needs is a president with common sense, a dislike of politics as usual, a disregard for political correctness, great respect for the United States Constitution and an unbounded dedication to restoring America to its former greatness.

In my view, there are only a few contenders for the presidency who fit that description. Watch the Liberal media (CNN, MSNBC and most networks) and you will see those few contenders regularly denigrated, dismissed and/or misinterpreted.