It’s Over, with an Ugly Power Grab

A power grab swept under the rug by the RNC, by FOX, by Rush Limbaugh…

Unable to win by the rules, the RNC estblishment bulldozed a  last-minute rule switch at the Convention yesterday:

Ron Paul had accumulated petitions from enough states (6) to be nominated legitimately, which might also have opened the convention to candidates other than just Mitt Romney and Ron Paul.  According to RNC rules, Ron Paul would have to be listed as a candidate, and a brokered convention, as previously described in Presumtive Nominee, would have followed.
The RNC establishment, wanting only Mitt Romney and wishing to avoid the brokered convention,  drafted a new set of rules which would require petitions from 8 states to nominate a candidate, instead of the previously required 5. This attempt at alteration of the rules after the fact to eliminate an undesired candidate after he has already satisfied the rules of qualification was underhanded, to say the least. But then it got even more ugly.
When it came to the actual vote on the rule change, John Boehner railroaded the vote through dishonestly, announcing that in the opinion of the chair (his opinion) the “ayes have it,” when in fact the sound track of the above video will show clearly that the “ayes” did NOT have it, and Boehner was subsequently booed for the bad call.

What Happened Here?

The Republican Party “establishment” has for decades been drifting towards liberalism through compromise with Democrats.  They have not had much objection from conservative voters, who in prosperous times had less objection to expanding government and expanding spending.

Now, in dire economic times, when unemployment is somewhere between 8 and 15% (depending on how and who defines it), when half of college graduates cannot get jobs, and 85% of college graduates move back in with their parents, when the average American has lost $4,019 due to the economy and the average American’s worth has dropped 39%, Americans have become more conservative.  Americans see the need to conserve.  Numerous movements, including the Tea Party, have placed pressure on Republicans to become more conservative.

The Republican “establishment,” the “old boys,” don’t want to change.  Either they think that they know better than the grass roots “regular guy” (you and me, the voter), or they want to protect their privileged positions and benefits.  There could even be a chance that the powerful liberal-social-engineering-spenders like Soros, Turner or Gates, might be a bit smarter than we give them credit for.  They might have been covering their bets in both parties all along.   There may be some puppets in the Republican Party who take orders from elsewhere.  Democrats have just used fake “Republicans” in their campaign ads, who’s to say they don’t run fake “Republicans” for office?

So There’s a War Going on Within the Republican Party

So there’s a war going on, and the above video illustrates it.
That was the “floor fight” predicted yesterday.
Boehner’s dishonest handling of the vote on the rule change in the above video, as well as Fox’s Ben Swann’s questions Romney’s truthfulness and tactics, show that the liberal, “establishment” half of Republicans are using some pretty dirty tricks.
They are not the only ones not playing it fair. They now seem to have some of the conservative media in their pockets.  FOX News, and even Rush Limbaugh, have stayed away from this story.  They are almost a guilty as the liberal media has been, in failure to report important stories and placating those who are powerful.

We’ve Lost this Battle

It’s pretty clear that we’ve lost this battle of the nomination.

John Boehner falling off pedestal

The fat lady sings “Yes, it’s over.”  The nomination has finally (however undemocratically and dishonestly) been made.
Some of our heroes have fallen; particularly John Boehner.
When the pride of our conservative leaders becomes so inflated that they forget for whom they work, and they try to defy the wishes of their electorate, they become very much like Obama.

The War is Not Over.

“Establishment” Republicans are  the product of the prosperous and liberal past, and are gradually being replaced with new more principled conservatives.
Paul Ryan is an example of that shift. So are some of the Governors who spoke at the Convention last night.
Tough new leaders who are willing to implement tough new reforms.  Scott Walker got a standing ovation last night.
America’s growing grass-roots conservatism will eventually displace the old Republican “establishment” and the required changes will be made. The angry people in the video above are not going home defeated.

The Next Battle

The next battle will be defined in three stages:

• First, Obama needs to be defeated. We will campaign for, and elect, Mitt Romney (gulp!).
  His imperfections are not (yet) as large as Obama’s.
• Then, America’s new grass roots conservatives will have to work hard to hold Mitt Romney to his promises, to keep Mitt accountable to the American people, for whom he works.
• Finally, the next Republican Convention will require some rule changes if we don’t want to drift into conservative totalitarian rule in place of Obama’s liberal totalitarian rule.
• 

So Where is God?

I would have preferred a cleaner and fairer fight at the RNC yesterday, with a better outcome.  I wish we had an (undivided) Republican establishment which respects and enforces it’s own rules, and I wish we could have had a brokered convention to choose the next Reagan or Lincoln for America.  But God’s wisdom, His choices and His intervention are not for us to fathom.  We keep faith in God and watch further developments.

We work to defeat the Abortion President, Obama.
A nation which kills it’s own children cannot prosper.
Neither morally, nor economically.

I love how the left and this president talks about inclusion as they advocate the discarding and destruction of over 1 million children every year. Some inclusion. We stand for the truth. We stand for life. We stand for love, and we will win. – Rick Santorum

God bless and help America!

Akin and the Media’s Double Standard:

Todd Akin

(Post Script added below on 8-24-12)

-Double Standard on criticizing  conservatives but not liberals
-Double Standard on defining “choice” as only one choice
-Double Standard on defining women’s rights and women’s opinions

What a double standard exercised by the mainstream press!

Criticising Conservatives But Not Liberals

• Janet Napolitano is not attacked for sexual harassment and systematic intimidation of men at the top levels of the DHS.
• Joe Biden is not attacked for his “y’all in chains” comments.
• Barack Obama’s campaign is not attacked for the “Romney killed Soptic’s wife and did not care” campaign ad.

Yet Rep. Todd Akin, not even a medical expert, is being attacked for believing that the violent nature of rape might prevent conception, a concept suggested by medical doctors online! Duh, maybe the stress of a rape might affect the outcome; after all, stress is one of the leading causes of infertility in 2012.  People, including members of his own party, are demanding that Akin drop out of the Missouri Senate race as a result of stating this medical opinion.

Liberals are just looking for any dirty tactic to knock out contenders for Senate seats. Why don’t they clean up their own act first?  And why are Republicans so quick to join in and go on the defensive?

True Pro-Choice

True choice would let a woman be rewarded equally for choosing life.  If the government doesn’t contribute towards raising children, why should it contribute towards destroying them?

Women’s Rights and Women’s Votes

The squeaky wheel minority who just doesn't get the point.

Liberals might also stop claiming women’s votes and fabricating the non-existant “War on Women.”  It is unwarranted to imply that Democrats represent women’s interests better than Republicans do. Actually, conservatism outweighs liberalism in both genders – Gallup poll. More than half of all women are conservatives, yet the liberals lie, and claim to represent their interests.  Liberals claim that conservatives, the group favored by both women and men, is declaring a war on women.  How can anybody take them seriously?

Moreover, 2/3 of America (including women) opposes federal funding of abortion, yet liberals ignore that.

Republicans should focus on how liberals LIE, and how they are ANTIi-democracy and ANTI-choice, rather than rushing to cooperate with liberals in picking off conservatives one by one for errors that they make.

What Women Want- Media and Liberals Have it Wrong

Most women love and want their babies, and don’t appreciate the suggestion that their baby is a burden which should be painfully dismembered and discarded. 64% of women who have abortions were coerced, pressured by others into abortion.  Abortion is the unfair choice.

Liberals brag about providing free $7 birth control pills through ObamaCare mandates, but do nothing to strengthen the family, or to help women keep their babies, which is the BEST way to raise good future citizens. Providing pills thorugh ObamaCare is simply a cheap trick for buying votes, which insults women by presuming their ignorance.

The REAL War on Women

Obama mandating what's good for women

The REAL War on Women is being waged by the Obama Administration and it is waged on a woman’s intelligence.  Obama offers to buy women’s votes, an intellectual prostitution of sorts, and implies that women are so stupid that they will get on board : “You are so stupid that I can purchase your vote for $7 worth of birth control pills per month, and you will not notice that you still have to pay for your own aspirin, food, rent, and everything else.  For $84 per year, I get your vote, and you foolishly believe that I have your bests interests at heart.”

Republicans Should Spend Less Time Reacting to Democrat (Alinsky) Attacks, and Spend More Time Attacking the Dissolute and Illogical Morality  and Bad Policies of the Obama Adminsitration

Post Script:

Republicans Abandoning their Wounded

Today (8-24-12) a CNS News article by Patrick J. Buchanan, A Grand Old Party in Panic, discusses “the great failing of American conservatives is they do not retrieve their wounded.” Apparently, the Family Research Council also came to the defense of Todd Akin.

In addition to the above CNS speculations on whether the GOP is dumping their wounded because they are nervous about the popularity of their social and moral positions, I will suggest that recent in-fighting in the Republican Party may also influence the willingness of some “moderate” Republicans to discard their more staunchly conservative colleagues.  See The Presumptive Nominee, or The Secret Insurrection.

Medical Malpractice

Yesterday (8-23-12) a FOX opinion, written by psychiatrist Dr. Keith Ablow, blasted Todd Akin, putting words in his mouth, or rather, attributing thoughts to him, and then proceeded to psychoanalyze him in a most unflattering and unjustified way.  Dr. Ablow actually  suggested that Todd Akin believes that “women consciously or unconsciously wanted to be fertilized by the men they are identifying as their rapists.”

Ablow’s analysis was based on projection and supposition, and not on what Todd Akin had actually said.
Dr. Ablow should lose his medical license over such unprofessional meddling in politics if he does not publish an apology and a retraction.

In actual fact, Todd Akins’ reasoning may have been quite simple:  stress is well known to be one of the major causes of infertility.  Rape clearly produces a phenomenal level of stress.  An online doctor at Christian Life Resources claims that rape rarely produces pregnancy, and analyzes the scientific reasons why this might be true. Whether this analysis is correct or not, Todd Akin cannot be blamed for believing it, or some similar scientific analysis.  Maybe the level of stress and terror in a rape could prevent conception; nobody has the data to indicate either way.

A Double Standard in Defining Rape

Finally, Todd Akin’s use of the word “legitimate” rape distinguishes the rape from a statutory rape, in which, for example, a 17-year-old woman could have willingly participated, yet is legally labeled a rape. Our culture cannot simultaneously allow Planned Parenthood to hand out condoms to 12-year-olds with instructions on their use, then lynch any man who slept with a 17-year-old. What about her 18-year-old boyfriend who has been sleeping with her for 5 years, but now he is 18 and she is 17, and suddenly it’s statutory rape? What about casual college “hook-ups,” in which the 17-year-old freshman (freshwoman) lies about her age?

The term “legitimate” rape also distinguishes rapes from false accusations, which are a possibility in the real world.

This is the United States of America, and no woman should have the power to destroy the career and life of any man of her choice by simply accusing him of rape.
If men are guilty until proven innocent, our democracy and our Constitution are a farce.
Women are not guilty until proven innocent, at least not yet.

America Deserves Better!

Obama’s Campaign Uses “Despicable” Lies:

The above ad refers to the Obama campaign ad linking Mitt Romney to a woman’s death from cancer.

CNN debunked the fallacious pro-Obama ad, callling it “despicable.”

The Obama ad contains false statements and tries to link Mitt Romney to a death which occurred years after Mitt Romney’s departure from Bain Capital. The ad tries to blame the death on lack of insurance following closing of a steel plant, when in actual fact the man in the ad (Joe Soptic) was offered a severance package which would allow him to get insurance, and his wife continued to have insurance from her employer.

Obama Fails to Condemn the Despicable Lies

In addition to President Obama’s refusal to condemn the “Romney killed my wife” ad put out by super PAC Priorities USA, the Obama campaign was caught in a lie over Joe Soptic, and a possible violation of the law.

Vote for Morality.
Vote Against Barack Obama

You Tube: 65 Outrageous Lies by President Obama

(from Sept, 2011; recent lies not included.)

“I Follow Hate”

or

Why Do Liberals Keep Shooting Themselves in the Foot?

I’ve just been “followed” on Twitter by an anonymous somebody who calls themselves ifollowHATE. 

Most people on twitter follow what they LIKE, not what they HATE.
Hate is quite discordant with the cute little twitter bird, which represents a social network with members “chirping” or “tweeting” information to each other for the purpose of networking.

Self-Definition

Yes, I know, ifollowHATE is not indicating that he or she hates me.  They are implying that I hate, and this is their attempt to label me as hateful.

You do have to wonder about people who define themselves not by what they believe, but by whom they judge, whom they oppose, and whom they hate.
The Freedom From Religion Foundation, for example, has been one of those rare groups which define their beliefs by a negative and whose activities center on interfering with the beliefs of others.

ifollowHATE has by no means isolated me alone.  ifollowHATE follows 2,247 people and groups on Twitter, and has made 7,544 tweets.  Clearly not a casual tweeter, nor a casual activity.  Quite a bit of effort has been invested in this hate-labeling campaign.

Why Me?

ifollowHATE was probably inspired to follow me on Twitter by my recent article on Gay Marriage and Homosexuality.  ifollowHATE self-identifies on Twitter as:

“I follow people that follow the group that fans the flames of hostility against blacks and gays (their words, their admission)”

Ironically, my article, although disagreeing with the radical gay agenda, was anything but hateful.  I challenge ifollowHATE or anyone else to find a hateful remark in my article.

Where’s the Logic?

Most would expect those who promote the gay lifestyle to direct their efforts toward explaining the benefits of their philosophy.
Or, perhaps, to defend criticisms others make against their philosophy.
But scanning the Internet for websites which disagree with you, and labeling them hateful without explanation is not a marketing philosophy that is likely to sell an idea.

Intimidation

So if ifollowHATE’s motivation is not promotion of the gay lifestyle, what is it?

ifollowHATE’s intention is probably intimidation.  Conservative bloggers are frequently targeted by radicals, as Michelle Malkin describes.

Yesterday, Michelle Malkin posted Free Speech Zone, showing solidarity for targeted conservative bloggers, whose ranks I have apparently officially joined today.   Michelle writes:

Over the past eight years that I’ve been blogging and operating Internet media companies, I’ve witnessed or experienced firsthand some of the most unhinged behavior against conservatives — from individual harassment and intimidation, to e-mail bombs and e-mail hackings, to troll infestations, distributed denial of service attacks, coordinated spam block attacks, and death threats.

Michelle’s reaction to threats:

Over the past twenty years that I’ve worked in daily opinion journalism, written books, and traveled across the country speaking in every type of venue, I’ve always believed that the most effective response to attempted censorship of conservatives is more speech, not less.

More. Louder. Bolder.

Internet Bullying

This internet targeting of conservative bloggers, or internet bullying, seems to be a common tactic utilized by the left.
All part of Alinsky tactics, or trying to justify the use of dirty tactics to achieve one’s goals.

And, like most bullies, ifollowHATE  is cowardly and hides behind anonymity. Like most bullies, their chances of success are slim.

Revealing Name

So ifollowHATE spends his or her time pursuing, judging and labeling others, behind an anonymous mask.
Ironically, this makes ifollowHATE more hateful than the people they are presuming to judge.  ifollowHATE really does follow hate; but the hate is found in their own heart, not in the hearts of those whom they try to label.

Half of America Hates

Some of the individuals and groups labeled by ifollowHATE as being hateful include:

American Papist, Catholic Music, Catholic News Service, Catholic Radio Dramas, Catholic Writers Guild, National Organization for Marriage, and The Witty Catholic

Not bad company I have just joined!
This list also indicates that ifollowHATE’s hate seems to be directed primarily at Catholics.

And, according to ifollowHATE’s  definition of hatefulness – disagreement with the radical gay agenda –half of America must hate, too.

Who Gets to Define America’s Moral Values?

When it comes to the marriage question, 1.7% of the population, gays, is trying to dictate the law to 98.3% of America, those who are straight.

It’s actually even less than 1.7% trying to dictate the law, since the vast majority of gays do not seek gay marriage.

What can radicals be thinking?  That Americans will take well to intimidation by minority?  The more they step up the aggression and the ridicule, the less likely they are to succeed.  They are shooting themselves in the foot.

So What has ifollowHATE   accomplished?

Am I planning to return ifollowHATE’s follow?
Not highly likely.
So ifollowHATE is not likely to network effectively on Twitter.

Will   ifollowHATE succeed in spreading their philosophy by this method?
Probably not.

Actually,  by focusing all his or her efforts solely on attacking all who disagree with them without explanation, ifollowHATE simply makes themselves look foolish, damaging their cause.

What a sad waste of time!

Gay Marriage and Homosexuality

Homosexuality is a hot topic that was bound to make it onto this cultural values blog at some point.
The Catholic Church’s position on homosexuality (which I support) is not popular in Madison, where I live. Madison is a very liberal– no, radical place. Home of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, and numerous other radical groups.

I have delayed discussing homosexuality on my blog in the past.  Primarily because I would rather focus on the “wooden beam in my own eye” before pointing out “the splinter in my brother’s eye.” Matthew 7:3   In other words, I am in no rush to discuss the sins of others.  I am also no expert on this subject.

Why do you notice the splinter in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye?
How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove that splinter from your eye,’ while the wooden beam is in your eye?
You hypocrite, remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother’s eye. – Matthew 7:3  

 However, recent events in the news have brought the subject of homosexuality to the forefront of public discussion again, and perhaps it is time for me to weigh in with some thoughts.  I will defer to experts on the subject and provide some useful references below for those who are interested in understanding why the preservation of traditional morality and of traditional marriage is so important to so many Americans.

Recent events:

Vice President Biden announced five days ago that he was ‘absolutely comfortable” with homosexual marriage, thus putting President Obama on the spot regarding Obama’s position on homosexuality.

Obama "evolving"

Most recently, President Obama had said that his position on homosexual marriage , although he was opposed a few years ago, is “evolving.”  So now President Obama was placed on the hot seat regarding this issue.
Three days ago, North Carolina approved and amendment banning gay marriage, and banning same-sex civil unions as well.

Yesterday, President Obama announced his personal support of gay marriage, after statements in the past opposing gay marriage.  He attributed this change to his “evolving stance” on gay marriage.

The other two Presidential candidates (Mitt Romney and Ron Paul), mirroring the values of the majority of Americans, still stick to the traditional definition of marriage as one man- one woman.  And no, the Republican primary is not yet over!  (Updated post coming soon.)

.

.

.

.

Where Does America Stand on Gay Marriage?

Some data indicates majority support of gay marriage

.

Gallup results indicate that half of Americans support legal gay marriage.
The results seem to be hovering right around 50/50, within the margin of error, within the last two years.

CNN polls indicate that a slight majority of Americans support gay marriage (50% support, 48% oppose).

.

Some data indicates majority opposition to gay marriage

North Carolina’s passage of a state constitutional amendment legally preventing gay matrimony yesterday makes North Carolina the 30^th state to implement a ban on same-sex marriage.  30 States out of 50 is 60%.  This implies that 60% of America opposes gay marriage. continue reading…

Commitment to Truth

or

Romney vs. Santorum?

.

.

Fortune Cookie

.

Fortune cookie yesterday:

If you tell the truth you don’t have to remember anything.

Good advice for Presidential candidates this election year!

Truth can be, and has been analyzed both by me and by more noteworthy philosophers throughout millennia of history.  Cultures have differing attitudes towards truth and toward its value.

Without embarking on a long philosophical discussion, suffice it to say that the foundations of European and United States governments rest on Christian principles; that Christ is the Word and the Truth; and that our innate common sense indicates the importance of truth during an election year.  A vote is meaningless if it is cast for a lie.

Democracy does not work when candidates lie.

Election year compels us to question the trustworthiness, truthfulness, and dependability of political candidates.

Barak Obama

Our President Barak Obama is not famous for truthfulness.  The issue under consideration by the Supreme Court today, the constitutionality of ObamaCare, is one prime example of Obama’s lack of commitment to truth.  ObamaCare was passed only very narrowly, and only after Obama promised Stupak, who was holding out for the exclusion of abortion from ObamaCare, that abortion would be definitely be excluded from ObamaCare.  70% of Americans oppose federal funding of abortion, yet the Obama administration has included abortion in ObamaCare.  That’s a pretty big lie, going back on a public promise, and railroading federal funding of something that half of America considers equivalent to murder and to the Holocaust, and something for which 70% of America opposes public funding.

Other lies of President Obama’s include :

• Saying that 80% of Americans support higher taxes (actually 34% support)
• Claiming his mother was denied health insurance (not true)
• Pledging not to raise taxes on families making less than $250,000
• Promising shovel-ready construction jobs with stimulus; later telling the NY Times there’s no such thing as shovel-ready projects.
• Pledging that Americans would be able to keep their doctors under ObamaCare
• Claiming he would not reward lobbyist with jobs
• Making false statements about the involvement of foreign money in U.S. elections
• Misrepresenting Arizona’s immigration law
• Pledging transparency, then refusing 1/3 of Freedom of Information Act requests, failing to televise health-care negotiations on C-SPAN, and failing to wait 5 days so people could read the ObamaCare legislation online.
• Violating his Oath of Office, by failing to protect the Constitution and ignoring the 10^th amendment, which states that all powers, which the Constitution does not specifically allocate or prohibit, are reserved to the states (to the people).   President Obama has claimed many powers for the Executive branch; primary example is ObamaCare.
• Additional lies
• Obama’s biggest lies

With Obama, when it’s not lies, it’s disregard for and manipulation of the will of the American people, which is just as serious.  In fact, today, President Obama was caught on a hot microphone betraying his electorate, asking Russian President Medvedev to put off discussions of nuclear defense reductions until after the November election, when Obama would have more “flexibility” (to disregard the will of the people). continue reading…

The Bigotry of the Left

or

Defending Rush Limbaugh

or

Knights in Shining Armor

.

Rush Limbaugh, Sandra Fluke

Rush Limbaugh Called a Woman Names

Rush Limbaugh recently called a one woman a slut and prostitute on his radio program.  I happened to be listening to the broadcast at the time, and found his tirade to be “Rush Limbaugh.”   I did not think he meant it literally; he seemed to be doing it for comic effect.

I have never advocated dirty fighting or name-calling, and I make an effort to eliminate such tactics from my own writing.  But in this case, I must rush to Rush Limbaugh’s defense.  Rush Limbaugh’s name-calling was pretty unremarkable, given the 2012 cultural benchmark for salty language set by the likes of Ed Schultz, Jon Stewart, Jay Leno, and even local middle school playgrounds in Madison, WI, where I live.

Transcript of Rush’s Offending Statement:

RUSH: What does it say about the college co-ed Sandra Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex, what does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She’s having so much sex she can’t afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We’re the pimps. (interruption) The johns? We would be the johns? No! We’re not the johns. (interruption) Yeah, that’s right. Pimp’s not the right word. Okay, so she’s not a slut. She’s “round heeled.” I take it back.

Rush Limbaugh’s Message

Although Rush Limbaugh’s name-calling was not very remarkable, his main message preceding the comical name-calling tirade was remarkable.   The point that sexually over-active people are not making wise choices and that there is no reason the rest of us should be paying for their questionable recreational sexual activities, which we do not ourselves approve of or participate in, is a good one.  Rush’s passionate defense of traditional morality, under which people who behave promiscuously are regarded as sources of moral and medical risk, Rush’s defense of a morality which 70% of America supports, warmed my heart.  This man’s courage in stating the truth with some passion made him a knight in shining armor in my book.

Crucifixion by the Left

But the left, assisted by the (left-dominated) media, completely ignored the logical analysis Rush Limbaugh provided of government-guaranteed, free-of-charge, free-of-consequence government-encouraged and public school-taught sexual experimentation, which will only destroy our society if permitted to proceed. continue reading…

Herman Cain: Guilty or Not Guilty?

and Why Does it Matter?

False accusations should be punishable by law.

Herman Cain Suspends Campaign

Two Possibilities

The recent attacks on Herman Cain, the swiftness of his “trial” by media, and his rapid exit from the Republican presidential primary race have left many bewildered.  There lingers an uneasiness, as though a lynching had just occurred, and nobody objected.

There are two possibilities; that Herman Cain is guilty of recent accusations of sexual harassment and marital infidelity, or that he is innocent of these accusations.  We simply do not know which is the case.

If Cain were guilty, that would be unfortunate. His moral integrity would certainly be blemished.  However, to be fair, it must be pointed out that similar issues did not get in the way of Gingrich’s, Clinton’s, or JFK’s public careers.  In a society that has just removed the ban on bestiality in the military, with the White House laughingly declining to comment, surely Herman Cain’s weakness would not be as staggering as such transgressions might have been in the past?

Gingrich, Clinton, JFK

If Cain were innocent, however, then the extent of the coordinated slanderous attack on Cain would be historically significant and unnerving.  If President Obama’s campaign was prepared to coordinate such a vicious and fallacious attack on an opposing candidate, that really would make a story dwarfing other stories of political ethical misconduct, including Watergate and the more recent Blagojevich affair.

continue reading…

Prosser-Bradley Investigation Ends
“Chief, I Have Lost Confidence in Your Leadership”
Supreme Court Disgraced
Democrat Delays and Cover-Ups Yet Again?

Justice Prosser has finally been cleared in “Chokegate,” two months after Justice Bradley made the false allegations. National Review Online

Yet disturbing problems remain for Wisconsin in the aftermath of this scandal.

How is Justice Prosser supposed to regain his reputation?

How is Justice Prosser supposed to regain his reputation after Wisconsin Democrats tried to smear it twice with lies twice this year? –

• First smear attempt during election (Kloppenburg’s attempted smear)
• Second smear attempt during collective bargaining law ruling (see 3 links at SyteReitz.com for more):
  Which Supreme Court Justice Assaulted Which Justice?
  Media Malpractice and Justice Prosser
  Why the Prosser-Bradley Choking Investigation Is So Prolonged?

Which individuals need to apologize to Justice Prosser?
Where does David Prosser go to get his reputation back?

Why was Justice Prosser’s accuser, Justice Bradley, not charged?

Why was Justice Prosser’s accuser, Justice Bradley, not charged with politically motivated false accusation of criminal conduct against a fellow member of the bench, as well as with assault of a Supreme Court Justice?

Three Supreme Court Justices who were present support Justice Prosser’s innocence and refute Bradley’s account. They say that it was Justice Bradley who attacked Justice Prosser with raised fists, which caused Justice Prosser to

"smack upside the head"

block her, while a third Justice, Justice Roggensack, pulled Bradley off Prosser (National Review Online).  This report is quite credible, since Justice Bradley was previously known to strike a fellow Justice– she had whacked Justice Gableman on the head for addressing the Chief Justice by her first name previously, NOT in jest.  Apparently, Justice Bradley has a very protective attitude toward Chief Justice Abrahamson, and is quick to attack anyone who does not treat her as Bradley sees fit.   So why is Justice Bradley not being charged with criminal conduct? continue reading…

What’s STILL going on in Wisconsin?
or
Circus Madison Goes On
or
How Minority Can Dominate in Democracy
or
What to Do with Badly Behaving Adults?

Liberal to Conservative Shift in Wisconsin

Circus Maximus- Rome, 326BC-549AD.  Ancient site famous for chariot races, gladiator fights, Christian slaughter and games, as well as local marketplace.

Conservative fiscal thinking is catching on, and now “conservative is the new liberal.” Not only in Wisconsin, but in our entire nation.  As power shifts from liberals to conservatives, liberals are not relinquishing power gracefully.  They are frantically employing unethical Alinsky tactics , trying to get their way (despite being the minority),  “by hook or by crook”.

The power shift was very dramatic in Wisconsin, where Democrats have long been accustomed to being in power.  The situation was exacerbated by the fact that the state capitol of Wisconsin, Madison, has remained very liberal, and now has become an island of liberalism surrounded by a sea of conservatism in Wisconsin.

Madison Disapproves

Many people and officials in Madison do not approve of the conservative changes voted in by the rest of Wisconsin.  Yet the Capitol

The Madison Capitol Building- stage for extreme events in Wisconsin, capturing the attention of  the entire nation this year.

building, which houses the legislative chambers and the Governor’s Office, the place where conservative changes are now being implemented, is the central fixture around which all of downtown Madison is clustered.

One local liberal paper recently featured a front-page article entitled “Not my Madison,” in which the author bemoaned  “a new sense that normal citizens can’t change anything.”  The numerous long-ensconced Madison Democrats had come to feel an entitlement to Madison as well as to control of the State Government.  When conservatives finally gained power, liberals have become outraged and took over the Capitol, disrupting the smooth functioning of the Democratic process. continue reading…