<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>GOP Bloggers</title>
<link>http://www.gopbloggers.org/</link>
<description></description>
<copyright>Copyright 2008</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 03:40:59 -0500</lastBuildDate>
<generator>http://www.movabletype.org/?v=3.2</generator>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

<item>
<title>Pelosi Plays the Fool</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>I've repeatedly said that Harry Reid is the most delusional leader that the House or Senate have ever seen. After reading <a href="http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/pelosi-drilling-in-protected-areas-a-hoax-2008-07-10.html" target="_blank"><strong>this article in the Hill Magazine</strong></a>, I'm forced to rethink that. It's possible that Nancy Pelosi may have eclipsed Sen. Reid. Here's what I'm basing that opinion on:</p>

<blockquote>House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) on Thursday shut the door on expanding oil and gas drilling beyond areas that have already been approved for energy exploration, drawing a clear distinction from her counterparts in charge of the Senate.
<strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">“This call for drilling in areas that are protected is a hoax, it’s an absolute hoax on the part of the Republicans and this administration”</span></strong> Pelosi said at her weekly press conference. “It’s a decoy to punt your attention away from the fact that their policies have produced $4-a-gallon gasoline.”
Pelosi’s stand may put her at odds with a growing number of members of the Democratic Caucus who have been moving toward possible compromises with Republicans on ways to expand domestic energy production.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) on Wednesday told reporters that expanded offshore drilling is not off the table, and that Democrats will take a look at whether states should be able to choose to drill off their coasts. “I’m not knee-jerk-opposed to anything,” Reid said.</blockquote>Reid's signalling that he's open to increasing exploration, though I suspect that that's because he knows that Pelosi will stop the bill in the House.

<p>When Ms. Pelosi says that drilling is a hoax, how does she explain the cuban Economic Zone?<br />
<a href="http://bp0.blogger.com/__bmZ2TwSHRU/SHb45XZ7mcI/AAAAAAAAAGI/9qB9OV4tFS4/s1600-h/Cuban+Economic+Zone.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5221634482401679810" style="CURSOR: hand" alt="" src="http://bp0.blogger.com/__bmZ2TwSHRU/SHb45XZ7mcI/AAAAAAAAAGI/9qB9OV4tFS4/s400/Cuban+Economic+Zone.jpg" border="0" /></a></p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005205.php</link>
<guid>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005205.php</guid>
<category>Pelosi Watch</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 03:40:59 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Heading For a Showdown</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>It's obvious that we're heading for a showdown between Senate Democrats and 'Big Oil'. The Senate is ratcheting things up with their (non) energy plan. Here's a <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,364846,00.html" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">few details</span></strong></a> of their non-plan:</p>

<blockquote>The Democrats' energy package also would:

<ul><li>Make oil and gas price gouging a federal crime, with stiff penalties of up to $5 million during a presidentially declared energy emergency. </li><li>Authorize the Justice Department to bring charges of price fixing against countries that belong to the OPEC oil cartel. </li><li>Require traders to put up more collateral in the energy futures markets to curb speculation.</li></ul></li></blockquote>This isn't productive. Then again, the Democrats have been unproductive for the most part since retaking the majority. (I'm thankful for that because their agenda is radical.) As I said here, increasing taxes on oil companies while preventing them from producing more oil here at home is counterproductive.

<p>The only thing it's good for is to have Democrats thump their chests and say 'We're punishing evil big oil'. It apparently isn't important that they've done nothing to be part of the solution. In fact, it apparently isn't that important that they're part of the problem.</p>

<p>People are looking for solutions. The Democrats' plan (I'm using the term loosely) isn't a solution; it's a political ploy. If Republicans keep pushing <a href="http://www.americansolutions.com/actioncenter/petitions/?Guid=54ec6e43-75a8-445b-aa7b-346a1e096659" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">Newt's plan</span></strong></a>, they'll quickly be seen as having a solution. If Republicans are seen as having the solution, they'll get a big fundraising lift and in the polls.</p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005204.php</link>
<guid>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005204.php</guid>
<category>Energy</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2008 11:35:08 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Obama&apos;s Nightmare Scenario</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/06/clinton_supporters_offer_to_he.php" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">Marc Ambinder is reporting something</span></strong></a> that's sure to bother King Obama:</p>

<blockquote>Matt Burns, the spokesman for the GOP convention in St. Paul e-mails to say that the RNC's convention office in St. Paul has received numerous telephone calls in the last few hours from people who identify themselves as Clinton supporters asking how they can help Sen. McCain.</blockquote>So much for disaffected Hillary people making their way back to the Democratic side, huh? This is Obama's nightmare scenario. 

<p>H/T: <a href="http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/06/bubba-blues.html" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">Gateway Pundit</span></strong></a></p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005203.php</link>
<guid>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005203.php</guid>
<category>Obama Watch</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 11:50:35 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Pro-Growth Capitalism is Far Right Now?</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Based on <a href="http://www.sctimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080528/OPINION/105280027/1006" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">this St. Cloud Times editorial</span></strong></a>, written by James Mogen, pro-growth capitalism is now part of the far right. Here's how Mr. Mogen arrives at that conclusion:</p>

<blockquote>Continuing to use her office for campaign activities, Rep. Michele Bachmann recently touted her support from the right-wing radical organization Club for Growth on her congressional Web site. The club is a far right-wing group made up of Wall Street financiers. You may be familiar with the group for its negative ads in 2004.

<p>Instead of denouncing extreme groups like them, Bachmann is proud of its support and is now taking direction from the club. After the club demanded that representatives submit to their “key votes,” Bachmann opposed the recently passed farm bill, which promises to bring major support for area farmers, environmental initiatives and hungry children and families.</blockquote>CFG is a "right-wing radical organization"? Based on what criteria? Mr. Mogen doesn't give us the criteria by which he arrived at that conclusion. Instead, this is typical of his 'logic':</p>

<blockquote>This group, like Bachmann, is far more conservative than the Minnesotans she is supposed to represent.

<p>In fact, the club has been known to go after moderates who vote their district. The club’s support for Bachmann illustrates her own far-right positions are out of line with those of the 6th District.</blockquote>Saying that Rep. Bachmann is "far more conservative than the district" she's supposed to represent doesn't make sense. If this were true, how did she get elected? Mr. Mogen certainly can't honestly say that Rep. Bachmann ran as a squishy moderate, either. Anytime I hear someone speaking with this type of certitude, I worry because there isn't room for differing perspectives.</p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005202.php</link>
<guid>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005202.php</guid>
<category>House</category>
<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 03:23:19 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Sen. McCain Hit His Highness Hard</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Lost in the discussion about what the Golden Child's motivation was in talking about his <del datetime="2008-05-29T05:05:40+00:00"><strong>uncle...um, great-uncle</strong></del>...um...grandfather liberating <del datetime="2008-05-29T05:05:40+00:00"><strong>Auschwitz</del></strong>...um...Buchenwald is how intellectually curious Sen. Obama is <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/28/campaign.wrap/" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">while challenging his decisionmaking and understanding of Iraq</span></strong></a>. Here's how Sen. McCain accomplished that:</p>

<blockquote>"Sen. Obama has been to Iraq once, a little over two years ago he went and he has never seized the opportunity except in a hearing to meet with Gen. [David] Petraeus," McCain said at a campaign event in Reno, Nevada. "My friends, this is about leadership and learning."

<p>Again raising the issue of Obama's willingness to meet with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, McCain also said of the Illinois senator, "He wants to sit down with the president of Iran but hasn't yet sat down with Gen. Petraeus, the leader of our troops in Iraq?"</blockquote>I'd think that a minimal requirement for being commander-in-chief is learning firsthand what our guys are doing, especially in war zones. Another requirement would be understanding the consequences of the decisions he makes. We can only speculate on the damage Sen. Obama's immediate troop withdrawal policy would have on the region, on the jihadists and on the Maliki government. What's beyond speculation, though, is that removing our troops at the rate Sen. Obama is talking about would embolden the jihadists.<br />
</p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005201.php</link>
<guid>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005201.php</guid>
<category></category>
<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 01:31:03 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>The Path To The Majority</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>The Republican Party isn't the majority party here in Minnesota nor in our nation's capital for a variety of reasons. I'd submit that the biggest reason why we aren't the majority party is because we stopped being the party of ideas. Here in Minnesota, though, we're taking corrective action, action that doesn't rely on the state party.</p>

<p>Instead, what a group of activists have done is turned the MOB (Minnesota Organization of Bloggers) into the Activists' News Network. Many of our state legislators stay in touch with what's important to working class people by reading blogs like <a href="http://www.looktruenorth.com/" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">True North</span></strong></a><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">, </span></strong><a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">Powerline</span></strong></a><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">, </span></strong><a href="http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">MDE</span></strong></a><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">, </span></strong><a href="http://www.scsuscholars.com/" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">SCSUScholars</span></strong></a><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">, </span></strong><a href="http://www.letfreedomringblog.com/" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">Let Freedom Ring</span></strong></a><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">, </span></strong><a href="http://www.ladieslogic.com/" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">Ladies Logic</span></strong></a> and <a href="http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/index.php" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">Shot In The Dark</span></strong></a>. Our House GOP leadership reads the blogs on a daily basis, as do their staff.</p>

<p>The House GOP Caucus has used this to stay in touch with what's important with activists. That's important because the activists/citizen journalists stay in touch with their neighbors, co-workers and friends. I can't emphasize this point enough. If the GOP wants to return to majority status anytime soon, it has to start with listening to what the people are saying.</p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005200.php</link>
<guid>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005200.php</guid>
<category>Grassroots</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 16:46:21 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Obama: That Pesky Hillary Just Won&apos;t Go Away</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Barack Obama is really acquiring a whiny tone to his statements. It isn't appealing for the supposed unifier of all things political to have such a negative tone. This time, he's whining that Hillary is stirring up trouble with the Florida delegation to the Democratic Convention. Here's his <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN2426696820080525?virtualBrandChannel=10112" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">latest whiny diatribe</span></strong></a>:</p>

<blockquote>"The Clinton campaign has been stirring this up for fairly transparent reasons," Obama told reporters on the plane from San Juan, Puerto Rico, to Chicago, adding she had not done so earlier in the race when she did not need the delegates to win.

<p>"Let's not...pretend that we don't know what's going on. I mean this is, from their perspective, their last slender hope to make arguments about how they can win, and I understand that," Obama said.</blockquote>It's rather slick that <a href="http://www.letfreedomringblog.com/?p=2766" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">Sen. Obama didn't talk about the legality</span></strong></a> of not seating the Florida delegation. that's the last thing he wants to talk about. It appears as though winning is more important to Sen. Obama than is the potential disenfranchisement of almost 2 million voters. That's a pretty partisan move for THE postpartisan candidate, isn' it?<br />
</p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005199.php</link>
<guid>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005199.php</guid>
<category></category>
<pubDate>Sun, 25 May 2008 21:40:53 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Do We Need a &quot;Reasonable Regulation Board&quot;?</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>I just wrote about <a href="http://www.letfreedomringblog.com/?p=2770" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">Rep. Paul Kanjorski's corruption</span></strong></a>. Now I find that <a href="http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/23183.html" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">he's anti-capitalist</span></strong></a>, too:</p>

<blockquote>The current high price of gas has led to a lot of crazy proposals from gas tax holidays to creating a tax deduction based upon energy consumption. But Rep. Paul Kanjorski's (D-PA) may top them all in terms of its stupidity. From the Times Leader, Kanjorski's plan would do the following:

<ul><li>H.R. 5800 would tax industries’ windfall profits. </li><li>The bill would set up a Reasonable Profits Board to determine when these companies’ profits are in excess, and then tax them on those windfall profits. </li><li>As oil and gas companies’ windfall profits increase, so would the tax rate for those companies. </li><li>Kanjorski said his legislation will encourage oil companies to lower prices to prevent them from receiving higher tax rates.</li></ul></li></blockquote>Here's what the Tax Foundation said about Kanjorski's economic model:]]></description>
<link>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005198.php</link>
<guid>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005198.php</guid>
<category>Taxes</category>
<pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2008 04:22:33 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Conservatism’s Demise? Not Hardly Says Sen. Thompson</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121150049025115903.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">Fred Thompson's op-ed</span></strong></a> in this morning's WSJ is just what conservatives need to hear at exactly the right time. Here's one of Sen. Thompson's reminders as to what's possible when conservatives stick with their first principles:</p>

<blockquote>The power of conservative principles is borne out in the most strong, prosperous and free country in the history of the world. In the U.S., basic constitutional government has been preserved, foreign tyrannies have been defeated, our failed welfare system was reformed, and the confiscatory income tax rates of a few decades ago have been substantially reduced. This may be why the party where most conservatives reside, the Republican Party, has won seven of the last 10 presidential elections.</blockquote>Americans haven't tired of having common sense applied to our nation's most troubling problems. Instead, Americans have recognized that conservative principles haven't been applied nearly often enough. I suspect that Americans have felt let down that today's 'conservatism' isn't Reaganite conservatism.]]></description>
<link>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005197.php</link>
<guid>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005197.php</guid>
<category>Fred Thompson Watch</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 11:39:38 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Florida D&apos;s File Suit Against DNC</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Though Howard Dean wants all his problems to disappear, that won't happen now that <a href="http://www.miamiherald.com/campaign08/story/543090.html" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">the Florida Democratic Party filed a lawsuit against the DNC for disenfranchising their voters</span></strong></a>. This comes just a day after <a href="http://www.letfreedomringblog.com/?p=2761" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">Hillary threatened to take that fight</span></strong></a> straight to the Convention in Denver.</p>

<blockquote>Florida's history of discrimination against African Americans should force the national Democratic Party to count all of the state's delegates at its national convention, a federal lawsuit filed Thursday claims.

<p>The suit, filed by state Senate Democratic Leader Steve Geller and two other Democrats, claims that the federal Voting Rights Act prohibits the national party from stripping the state of its convention delegates.</p>

<p>The Civil Rights-era law requires the U.S. Justice Department to approve any significant voting change in Florida to make sure it doesn't disenfranchise minority voters. Geller argues that includes the Democratic National Committee's demand that Florida switch "from a state-run primary to party-run caucus system" to avoid losing its delegates.</p>

<p>"The purpose of this lawsuit is not to support one candidate over another; it's to enforce one of the most basic tenets of our democracy: Count the votes as they were cast," Geller said in announcing the lawsuit.</blockquote>This isn't the first time that the DNC has been accused of holding primaries that weren't all that democratic. <a href="http://www.letfreedomringblog.com/?p=2678" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">Gov. Ed Rendell made a similar accusation</span></strong></a> in late April:<br />
</p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005196.php</link>
<guid>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005196.php</guid>
<category></category>
<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 10:24:25 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Obama the Uniter?</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Most of Barack Obama's success in the early primaries is attributable to his selling the notion that he would step beyond the partisan politics practiced by mere mortals. He would be a uniter of all people, causing racism and poverty to disappear. Now that the bloom is off that rose, facts are contradicting that image. The Detroit Free Press is reporting that <a href="http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080515/NEWS05/80515096/1007/NEWS" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">Sen. Obama met with one of the most anti-semitic Muslim clerics in America</span></strong></a> during his recent visit to Michigan. Here's some of the details:</p>

<blockquote>Imam Hassan Qazwini, head of the Islamic Center of America, said in an email that he met with Obama at Macomb Community College. A mosque spokesman, Eide Alawan, confirmed that the meeting took place. During the meeting, the two discussed the Presidential election, the Arab-Israeli conflict, and the Iraq war, according to Qazwini.</blockquote>As usual, Debbie Schlussel asked the <a href="http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2008/05/the_company_he.html" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">most important question</span></strong></a>:

<blockquote>Barack Obama claims he's against HAMAS and Hezbollah and is offended by President Bush's speech in Israel about Obama's ethos of "appeasement." So why is he <a href="http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080515/NEWS05/80515096" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">meeting with one of Hezbollah's most important imams and agents</span></strong></a> in America, Imam <a href="http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2001/03/funding_islamic.html" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">Hassan Qazwini</span></strong></a>? And why is this open anti-Semite and supporter of Israel's annihilation getting to discuss "the Arab-Israeli conflict" in a private one-on-one meeting with Obama? What was said? I think we can do the math.</blockquote>This week, Sen. Obama took offense at being called an appeaser, then spent the rest of the week <a href="http://www.letfreedomringblog.com/?p=2737" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">distancing himself from his statement at the YouTube debate</span></strong></a>. One of his minions even tried ignoring the fact that Obama originally said that he'd meet with Ahmadinejad, Castro, Chavez and Kim Jung Il without preconditions. ]]></description>
<link>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005195.php</link>
<guid>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005195.php</guid>
<category>Obama Watch</category>
<pubDate>Sun, 18 May 2008 13:08:30 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Stop Telling Me It&apos;s Over</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/columnists/zito/" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">Salena Zito has a must read post on her Primary Colors blog</span></strong></a> that talks about the disconnect between superdelegates and voters. It's a stinging rebuke of the Democrats' nominating process, too.</p>

<blockquote>Joe Andrew, a Democratic National Committee chair for five minutes, lives and operates out of Washington, D.C. But when it comes to giving news conferences about the presidential campaign, his podium is in Indianapolis. That is where Andrew went from Beltway boy to Hoosier to make his "big" announcement on changing sides from Sen. Hillary Clinton to Sen. Barack Obama.

<p>And the whole word gasped.</p>

<p>Well, not really the whole world. In all honesty, the collective gasp was heard from within the Beltway, that patch of geography where the chattering elite class of politicos live, breathe and eat.</p>

<p>But drive 15 minutes in any direction outside of the Beltway, and no one knows who Joe Andrew is or why his deflection should affect their vote.</p>

<p>Here is the problem that the media seems to ignore in this race for the Democrats: While there is plenty of headlines and pontifications about superdelegates moving their support to Obama, there is a curious dismissal of Clinton's string of strong wins with the John Deere voters.</blockquote>The reality is that elitist Democratic Washingtonians love being in the power chair. They love to think that their's is the final opinion, that their's is the opinion that matters most.</p>

<p>As blogs become the voice of Mainstreet America, the superdelegates' opinions matter less and less. That's where the disconnect is most clearly seen. At the center of this is Howard Dean, the man who fancies himself as an outsider. In reality, he, like Markos Moulitsas, is a Washington insider with a brash voice pretending to speak for the people.</p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005194.php</link>
<guid>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005194.php</guid>
<category></category>
<pubDate>Sun, 04 May 2008 13:38:43 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Rep. Bachmann on Earmarks</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Michele Bachmann, my representative, has been unfairly criticized for signing a pledge that she wouldn't accept earmarks. Her political opponents didn't bother finding out why she made this pledge. Thursday afternoon, I got a mailing from Rep. Bachmann that explains her position on earmarks. It also tells about what she's doing to take the corruption out of the earmark process. First, here's Michele's explanation on why she took the pledge:</p>

<blockquote>Like you, the status of the DeSoto Bridge repairs is very important to me. There are few arteries or bridges more vital to the St. Cloud area. Regrettably, it's critical projects just like this that are shortchanged most by rampant pork barrel spending in Washington.

<p>That's why I've taken a pledge to not take any earmarks this year while working with my colleagues from both sides of the aisle who are determined to reform the earmarking system. It is our hope to replace a system of backroom backscratching with one in which projects are judged on merit and each of your tax dollars is spent wisely on real priorities.</blockquote>Contrary to what her political opponents say, Rep. Bachmann isn't opposed to earmarks:<br />
</p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005193.php</link>
<guid>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005193.php</guid>
<category>House</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2008 03:18:33 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Greta Takes Obama To The Woodshed</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Wow!!! Greta van Susteren just posted something on the <a href="http://gretawire.foxnews.com/2008/04/29/senator-obama-and-reverend-wright/" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">Pastor J-Wright-Obama controversy</span></strong></a>. To say that it was a blistering attack on Sen. Obama's observational skills is understatement. First, <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D90BM7UG1&amp;show_article=1" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">here's what the AP is reporting</span></strong></a> on Sen. Obama's statement:</p>

<blockquote>Democrat Barack Obama says he was outraged by the comments of his former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and saddened by the spectacle of his appearance on Monday. Wright said Monday that criticism surrounding his fiery sermons is an attack on the black church.

<p>Obama told reporters Tuesday that Wright's comments do not accurately portray the perspective of the black church. Obama said, "I am outraged by the comments that were made and saddened by the spectacle that we saw yesterday."</p>

<p>Wright's incendiary comments have dogged Obama's presidential campaign.</blockquote>Let's give Greta credit for asking the most pertinent questions in this paragraph:</p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005192.php</link>
<guid>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005192.php</guid>
<category>Obama Watch</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 29 Apr 2008 14:41:37 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>The Ugly Messy Truth</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>When the final analysis is written about this year's Democratic nominating process, <a href="http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/04/21/mcgovern_hart/" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">this statement</span></strong></a> will surely be proven right:</p>

<blockquote>Before this year's historic campaign, poisoned at the root by overt and ugly <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/sexism/index.html" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">sexism</span></strong></a> and covert and coded <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/racism/index.html" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">racism</span></strong>,</a> Democrats have never been asked to choose quite so nakedly which absolutely necessary demographic they would like to do without. Here is the question, a cynic might suggest, that the <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/democratic_party/index.html" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">Democratic Party</span></strong></a> must answer this summer: Do we want to lose because we drove away <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/african_americans/index.html" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">blacks</span></strong></a> or because we drove away white <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/women/index.html" target="_blank"><strong><span style="color:#cc0000;">women</span></strong></a>?</blockquote>Early in the process, GOP strategists rightfully worried about Hillary's and Obama's big turnouts. What's needed, in my opinion, is something that happened right after George Bush's re-election. That's when the Nutroots pushed Howard Dean down the DNC's throats. From Day One, disaster was predictable, even inevitable. The Nutroots saw the Clinton/DLC connection as GOP lite. The Clintons saw the Nutroots as McGovernite losers. In other words, they hated each other.

<p>In fact, it's more accurate to say that this rift first started with Howard Dean's presidential campaign. He repeatedly said that he represented the "Democratic wing of the Democratic Party." That rift got wider in August, 2006, when Ned Lamont defeated Joe Lieberman in the Democratic primary in Connecticut. That night, a new type of Democrat was born: Lieberman Democrats. Brendan Loy typifies Lieberman Democrats, socially and economically liberal but hawkish about national security.</p>

<p>Let's return to the present. Pennsylvania's primary is a perfect illustration of the split that's becoming more apparent each day. Blue collar Democrats will vote overwhelmingly for Hillary. Rich, white liberals will join African Americans in enthusiastically voting for Sen. Obama. Once Sen. Obama wins the nomination, alot of Hillary's DLC supporters will leave the Democrats' coalition and vote for John McCain.</p>

<p>While it'd be wrong to think that these DLC types to abandon the Democratic in dramatic numbers, their defections would be catastrophic for the Democrats.</p>

<p>What's that got to do with this year's race? Sunday night, I talked with a political insider in Pennsylvania. This insider told me that Sen. McCain has a definite shot at putting Pennsylvania in the red state column, regardless of the candidate. That figures to be the case in other blue collar states across the country.</p>]]></description>
<link>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005191.php</link>
<guid>http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/005191.php</guid>
<category></category>
<pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2008 04:16:39 -0500</pubDate>
</item>


</channel>
</rss>