Just a wonderful post over at The American Thinker about why the left doesn’t understand conservatives, but how we do understand the “progressives”. I just wish I could write as well as this:
But we also know that when liberals look at conservatives, no such courtesy or openness of mind is extended. They don’t see considered issues, critical thought, or the faintest possibility of reason. They see white trash men waving bibles at teen brides, while a gaggle of kids groom each other for lice on a cracked linoleum floor. ‘Bitter clingers’ who mindlessly adhere to second-amendment rights so they can shoot baby possum off a tin fence on slow friday nights. The other sort of conservative invariably invokes 19th century robber barons, plutocrat industrialists swollen with loot plundered from the proletariat, abating their whipping of Dickensian child labor just long enough to polish a monocle.
The whole thing is very much worth your time. And I will swallow my jealousy and get to work on my writing skills. Which is probably another conservative thing liberals don’t get. I know I need to work harder – they just expect someone to forgive their spelling.
The Democrats are getting very tired of the Republicans opposing their wonderful plan to destroy America – but it looks like the Republicans have beaten back the most recent attempt to allow tax increases and other destructive measures to just sail through the House without the accountability of actually requiring members to vote on them:
Bottom line – the Democrats are preventing their Members from having to vote on the tax increases that they are trying to impose on the American People.
FURTHER UPDATE: It’s over. House Republicans are proclaiming victory as Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer have abandoned their effort to change the rules to allow their majority to operate with more stealth.
Let’s give some credit to conservatives in the House. The conventional wisdom is that in the House, unlike the Senate, the minority is more or less powerless. But the House Republicans seem to be well led and to be using effective tactics. They have foiled a number of pieces of bad and unpopular legislation with motions to recommit; hence today’s effort by the Democrats to change the rules to take that option away from the minority.
Karl Maher has done some very interesting work on political contributions from people living in Colorado:
Here’s the table. The FEC column includes contributions to federal candidates, PACs and parties; the IRS column is for 527 contributions; and the State column includes contributions to state candidates and committees. This is money contributed between Jan. 1, 2005, and today. The Clear Peak money noted above isn’t included; it’s not on the IRS site yet and the news reports don’t say who gave how much. The Republicans in the table are Pete Coors and Bruce Benson.
So there you have it. I’ll finish up by noting once again that I don’t have a problem with money in politics. I don’t have a problem with contributors lobbying for pet projects. But I need to know who’s pulling strings. I need transparency. Current campaign contribution reports don’t fulfill that need. The system needs to be fixed.
I also think that the current system of limiting political contributions is one that a) forces the money to go into lots of anonmyous organizations where it is difficult to know who is giving what and b) is basically unconstitutional.
If transplanted Californians want to move here and give tons of money to eco-freak and Democrat groups – they should feel free. But we need to have a very transparent way of identifying them and the amounts they are giving. Personally I hope their millions of dollars are wasted, but the fact that they have the money and are willing to give it is a good thing. Nice way to keep American politics from being funded by the government – which would pretty much kill it completely (for example see Eurabia).
The Republican (and Socialist/Communist) party members got together this past Tuesday (21 March). I am a member of precinct 290, which had the second highest percentage of votes for President Bush in 2004. Therefore, we get 11 delegates and 11 alternates to the county assembly. We also get 2 delegates and alternates to the Congressional District 5, and the state assembly.
These latter two are probably the most important. As Joel Hefley is not running for reelection, there has been a huge outpouring of interest in Congressional District 5 by Republican Candidates. As for where they stand:
John Anderson – former El Paso county sherrif, and the only candidate to had declared prior to the announcement by Hefley that he wasn't running. Mr. Anderson has really good stand on gun rights – he was very good at allowing concealed handgun permits all during the time that he was in office. His efforts probably lead to the recent passage of the "shall issue" bill that passed the legislature two years ago.
Jeff Crank – former chief of staff for Congressman Hefley. He very recently moved back to town and is currently serving as the president of the Chamber of Commerce. However, most of his political experience and background is Washington, D.C.
Doug Lamborn – currently serving as State Senator in El Paso County. Previously served as State House Representative – total of 12 years in the Colorado Legislature. Very strong pro-life candidate – for years he has submitted bills to protect the unborn.
Duncan Bremer – served as El Pas county commissioner for 8 years. Currently not serving in any public office, but strong conservative credentials. Brother of Paul Bremer, the Iraq representative.
Lionel Rivera – current mayor of Colorado Springs. He announced his candidacy on Tuesday.
Of all these candidates only two received any support at the meeting – Doug Lamborn and Duncan Bremer. I think this is a bad omen for Jeff Crank. It seems that the party machinery is lining up behind him – Hefly announced his endorsement of Crank on Tuesday, the head of the state Republican Party has resigned to take a position with the Crank campaign–it feels like a push behind him. However, in the grassroots there is definitely a feeling of "why take someone from Washington when we have perfectly good home-grown candidates?"
My support lies with Doug Lamborn. I think that he has earned his stripes in the Colorado Legislature. And if you think its easy to take a pro-choice stand in Denver, you haven't seen the push that will come from the MSM and the Boulder intelligentsia.
The issue is really one of degree. Whoever the Republicans nominate will end up with the seat unless something completely untoward happens. El Paso county has had some influx from California, but a lot of them are conservatives who are disgusted with the way that state is falling off into the liberalism sea.