Dear Republicans,

Well here we are at the beginning of our long exile from power. We have two groups to blame for our ouster: the leadership in the Republican party and the selfish American people (see my previous post). Because I have already addressed the issue of the selfishness of the American people, and I have already given fair warning to the Democrats about the next two to four years, it's your turn my brothers and sisters.

I originally was going to do a bullet list of the problems facing the Republicans at this time. However, I felt that maybe it would be better to go in depth with the problems and some possible solutions. I mean we have to be optimistic and have a “Yes we can” attitude.

First of all the leaders of the party must be held accountable for their lackluster performance. We have already shed some like Denny Hastert, but it will take a scorched-earth policy to cleanse us of the scourge of neo-conservatism. We should be die-hard conservatives, pure and simple.

The next thing we must rid ourselves of is the label “compassionate conservative”. The very term should make us cringe. It's as if we're admitting the old liberal chestnut that conservatives are crotchety old Scrooges that want to take the home away from the old widow lady. If we truly believe in the merits of our conservative principles, then it is not necessary for us to say that we are “compassionate” conservatives.

We must not put all of our eggs in one basket. While most of the members of our party are God-fearing people who believe in social conservatism, we can't rely on that one side of our nature to win over the moderates and independents. Abortion is murder, pure and simple, but we have no hope of eliminating that horror if we are still in exile or we don't have a super-majority in the Congress. Gay marriage is slowly being decided on a state-by-state basis, and remember we believe in states' rights, right?

Keeping with the topic of diversification we must also not rely too heavily on security and defense as a crutch. We know we are strong on defense and the American people know we are strong on defense. We don't need to keep reminding people, especially in the current economic climate. Obviously the American people are more concerned at this point with getting something-for-nothing, and robbing those that earned it to give to those that didn't to be concerned at this time with little things like national defense (even though we are still fighting a war of terror).

Next we as a party must become a part of the information age. We cannot sit idly by while people like Moveon.org and Daily Kos corner the market on the high tech sector of campaigning. There are some good sites out there, like RedState.com and PajamasMedia.org, but we have to do more. We have to hit iPods, iPhones, YouTube, Blackberries and new emerging venues. We need to add tools to our arsenal, like Flash animation and Conservative web programming. Again we have a start with sites like Stop-him-now.com (which has apparently ceased to exist) which used Flash animation to poke jabs at Obama and the Dems as a whole. But it never achieved the regularity of liberal forums like MarkFiore.com, only producing sporadic animation. In fact, the site started as Stop-her-now.com, and was directed at Hillary Clinton during the primaries. So it never achieved the coherency of purpose that it needed.

Which brings me to our next point. We cannot continue to target Billary—or now Obama—solely. We must take a broad approach to the entire Democrat party. We can target those that lean too far to the Left, but we also have to target the Dems that are considered moderate of conservative. If we are to gain the necessary seats in the Senate we have to go after all comers.

We must be judicious in our use of the filibuster. We don't want to give the Democrats a reason to use the so-called “nuclear” option. We also can use that refusal to use the filibuster as a way to not go on the record without voting the dreaded “present”. This way it will be easier to put the complete responsibility of Democrat failures solely on their own heads. They won't be able to claim that the reason that things are bad is because of Republican obstructionism.

Finally, any Republican candidate that promises to take only public funding should be immediately disqualified for mental incompetence. We need to target smaller donors, like Obama did in this election. It is the only way we can compete.

We have a long road to hoe brothers and sisters and the days will be long and the winds cold but we can reclaim the Congress and the White House if we are persistent and if we stick to our principles.

Love,

The America Report

Dear Democrats,

I just thought that you should know that in 2006 you did not win back control of congress. I know that it may seem that way at times, especially since you have a good chance at winning the trifecta this year, but you are wrong. It was the Republicans that lost.

You may ask yourself, “What's the difference?”. The difference is that you win by having better ideas than the other guys and by capturing the hearts and minds of the electorate. That is not what happened in 2006 and it is not what is happening this year.

The thing that you don't seem to comprehend is that the majority of Americans are still center-right in their political leanings. They know that you are controlled by far left-wing groups and individuals like Moveon.org, Daily Kos and George Soros, as well as ninety-nine percent of Hollywood. But they were angry at the Republicans for what they had failed to do, which was shrink the size of government and cut spending. They were also angry that not only did the Republicans not decrease the size of the imperial federal government, they doubled it's size and its spending.

Now if this was the election after the 9/11 attacks, you wouldn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of getting elected. This is because another flaw of the Democrat party is that you have a great disdain for the military. You believe that all conflict resolution should be handled by the UN. You call terrorists “freedom fighters” and give them cushy, tenured positions in your liberal colleges. And most of all most of the current Democrat party is truly anti-American. This might play well in San Fransisco or Hollywood, but not in the rest of the country.

Unfortunately, the American people are scared about their financial freedom this election. They see the damage caused by unscrupulous mortgage lenders—some of which were protected by Democrats in congress—that gave loans to people who really could not afford them and had bad credit. Unfortunately for the Republicans, they are seen as the party of the business sector and this is largely true. Also to the Republicans' detriment is the fact that the current president is a Republican and people usually blame the party of the sitting president. President bush has very low approval ratings but congress' approval ratings are much lower than his, and congress has been in your hands for the past two years. This helps to prove the case for saying that you didn't win, the Republicans lost. If the president, who is a Republican, has higher approval ratings than the Democrat controlled congress, then the only reason for your success in 2006 and your predicted success this year is that the country is really punishing the Republicans.

I say all of this to give a warning. You will not be able to get away with your extreme liberal agenda, at least not for very long. You may achieve total supremacy in both house of the legislature along with the White House and you may attempt some of your goals but in two years the entire House and a third of the Senate come up for reelection. If you overreach the American people will slap you down. In addition, the majority of the electorate are people of faith, so your secular/atheistic agenda won't fly either. Even if you win the big prize this year you may not be able to follow through on your machinations because your desire to be reelected is stronger than your agenda.

But we know you too well. You can't resist a power grab. After all for the past twelve years you have screamed that you're going to take America back, as if it were your own personal plaything. The American people own this country not one party. So watch your back. You can try redrawing electoral maps and stacking the states' AG offices and the judiciary with liberals, but Americans won't tolerate that for too long. Yours is the party of dependence on government, of welfare and redistribution of wealth, of abortion and disdain for religion and faith, and of socialism and the supremacy of the State. We don't want rationed health care or to be taxed by the UN and the rest of the world. We don't want to save the environment at the expense of our standard of living or our jobs. Sooner or later no matter what you do to try to stop the inevitable backlash, the American people will slap you back down.

Love,
The America Report

For decades the world has claimed that Americans are selfish and boorish. In the past it was easy for those of us firmly seated on the Right to put that down as nothing more than envy and jealousy for the standard of living and freedom that we enjoy in this country. However, as is usually the case in times of hardship the true character of a people comes out, and it certainly has reared itself here in America.

For nearly twelve years the American people put their morals ahead of selfishness. This "moral center" dictated their political choices and ushered in the Republican revolution and helped to put George W. Bush in office for two terms. But by 2006, the American people had become disillusioned by the Republicans refusal or inability to reduce the size of government and spending in general. They had also been stung by scandals that had attacked Republican politicians. The final straw (and one that the MSM gave far too much weight to) was the war in Iraq. So in November of '06 Republicans lost control of both houses of congress and the Democrat takeover began.

I have been unclear as to the ACTUAL reasons behind the shift in loyalties, vacillating back and forth between believing it was due to honest outrage and that it was simply "anybody but the Republicans". In fact I do believe that the Dems did not WIN in '06, the Republicans LOST.

But now I have a firmer grasp on what led to the ouster of the Republicans. People in this country are selfish. This was not so clear two years ago but the success of a neophyte candidate like Barack Obama has shown me that selfishness is the true dominating factor in this whole mess. We have the choice in this country between a man who served his country and nearly died TWICE doing so, or a man who spent the better part of his life disdaining America and attending a church that spewed anti-American vitriol on a regular basis. If we were living in the better times of the late '90's or early '00's I do not think that Obama would be anywhere near as popular as he is now. But we don't.

So what is it about Obama, and the Dems in general, that is convincing the majority of Americans to sweep them into unprecedented power? The Dems are promising "to spread the wealth". Somewhere along the way, probably in government schools among other places, Americans have been taught that it is the job of the imperial federal government to spread the wealth from the people who earn it to the people who didn't.

And now the Dems are couching it in terms like "fairness" and "patriotism". When you hear any politician tell you that it is your patriotic duty to share your wealth at the point of a gun with people who didn't earn it in the interest of fairness, you've walked into the land of socialism. "From each according to his means, to each according to his needs". That was Karl Marx the father of modern socialism and communism. We spent the better part of the twentieth century fighting communism and socialism around the world. But now times are tough and because the liberal politicians in this country promise people that they are going to give them something for nothing they are willing to throw away their freedoms in the hopes of a quick buck and a pacifier to suck on at night.

Oh yeah that's fair

Those of you who have better things to do than listen to politics all of the time or listen to liberal talk radio may not have ever heard of Randi Rhodes. So you can be forgiven for scratching your heads when I mention this vile woman's name. However, it may be time for you to listen up.

 Rhodes has been a liberal talk radio host since the heady days of Air America. In fact she was sacked from that job because she called Hillary Clinton and Geraldine Ferraro ____ing whores (use your imagination). Her current place of employment id "progressive" talk network Nova M Radio. Well over the last week or so she has shown that her intelligence hasn't grown any.

 First she claimed that Senator John McCain was treated well by his captors while a POW in Vietnam. This must explain why he walks with a limp and can't raise his arms above his shoulders. The latest bit of wisdom to ooze from her lips is about Sarah Palin. She claims that Govenor Palin  is like a molester of teenage boys. Maybe Rhodes just hates women in general.

Last year this sterling example of liberal character tripped on the sidewalk near her home and claimed that she had been the victim of a hate crime. The culprit: right-wing muggers. As you can see this woman is just a lovely individual that needs compassion and maybe a little Thorazine.

I have released my first of my new weekly (hopefully) political animations. This one is entitled "Obama's Head". I was going for a direct assault on Mark Fiore's monopoly on animated political cartoons. Like many things dealing with the latest technology it seems that the Left has the upper hand on the Right when it comes to animated political punditry. Tell me what you think.

An atheist is suing the U.S. Army because he was allegedly harassed by other soldiers for his beliefs (or lack thereof). Now if this did happen I would say that it was wrong and that something needs to be done about it.

However, I always question the voracity of allegations such as this when made by atheists and agnostics. For the the last century or so nonbelievers have made it their mission in life to generally be a thorn in the side of believers and do everything in their power to tear down Christianity.

Notice I didn't say religion since it seems that they really only attack Christians. They claim to believe in religious freedom or freedom from religion but they don't practice what they preach, no pun intended. For people who claim not to believe in any higher power they sure do protest a lot. If there is no God and we all cease to exist when we die then it seems to me that they are wasting an awful lot of time fighting a "nonexistent" foe.

And why do they seem to direct most if not all of their animus toward Christians. Not Jews, Muslims, Buddhists or Scientologists. Just Christians. Something to think about.

Well will wonders never cease? I actually made onto the CNN/YouTube Republican presidential debate. I have spent the day taling to reporters believe it not.

Here is a link to an article about it in the Birmingham News.

The New York Times has an interesting article about the military success in Iraq and the new balancing act (flip flopping) that the Dems are having to maneuver:

As violence declines in Baghdad, the leading Democratic presidential candidates are undertaking a new and challenging balancing act on Iraq: acknowledging that success, trying to shift the focus to the lack of political progress there, and highlighting more domestic concerns like health care and the economy.

When we win in Iraq I bet that the Dems will try to take the credit for it.

Thanks go to Drudge for this.

Well Hugo is again showing himself to be the dictator that he claims Bush to be. This post by Hugh Hewitt is just further proof that the darling of liberal Hollywood is nothing more than a power hungry, tin-pot dictator with delusions of grandeur.

Well the Pentagon has released a statement regarding the return of signing bonuses. According to them the notices that were sent to injured soldiers saying that they had to return their signing bonus were sent by mistake.

Whoops.

Gee, imagine that, the vaunted Federal government made a mistake. But wait that can't be. It must be all Bush's fault.

Yeah right!

The case of Elvira Arellano and other instances of illegal immigrants seeking sanctuary in various places in this country has brought up the trouble possibility of the return of a medieval concept: the city-state. Several cities in this country have declared themselves "sanctuary cities" for illegal immigrants. This is a violation of federal law.

The Constitution of the United States distributes certain powers to the federal government, reserving all other powers for the states. One of the duties of the federal government is to protect the people from foreign threats. One of the ways that it does this is by regulating the flow of people entering this country. In order to do this it relies on state and local law enforcement to keep it advised when they detain suspects that they believe might be here illegally.

After 9/11 security tightened everywhere around the country except at the borders, particularly the border with Mexico. Billions of dollars were given to state and local governments for the express purpose of “homeland security”. This security requires that federal, state and local law enforcement agencies cooperate in intelligence gathering and the apprehension of suspects. Unfortunately some cities refused to be a part of the United States instead preferring to declare themselves “sanctuary cities” for illegal aliens. This means that the police and other law enforcement agencies are not allowed to determine if a suspect—even of a violent crime—is an illegal or not.

These cities seem to have no problem taking federal funds for their social services, but when the feds need them it's just too bad. Since the Patriot Act and subsequent national security legislation were signed, cities have been wrangling for their share of the funding pie. Some of the larger cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco felt shorted because smaller communities were receiving nearly equal amounts of federal dollars. The larger cities demanded that the money be redistributed to them since, as they claimed, they were more likely targets.

The hypocrisy is that these same cities refuse to determine whether their residents are here legally. This strikes me as the antithesis of “security”. Considering how many illegals turn out to be guilty of other crimes in addition to their immigration violations, it concerns me that there are cities who are harboring criminals.

I was listening to Neal Boortz this morning and he was reading a story about one of our soldiers that had been injured so severely in Iraq that he was unable to return to duty. In response, the Defense Department sent him a letter informing him that he would have to return around $3000 of his enlistment bonus because he didn't fulfill his commitment.

What the f#&k?!

It's bad enough that this soldier was permanently disabled in service to his company. But now bureaucratic pencil pushers in the Pentagon are trying to bleed him for his signing bonus? This kind of governmental b.s. is why I'm a libertarian.

When I find some more info I will post it, hopefully with a news link.

This is the animation that I did for the YouTube Republican debate. It refers to the FairTax, a proposal that would eliminate the IRS and repeal the 16th amendment to the Constitution in favor of a national retail sales tax. To find more info on the FairTax go to FairTax.org.

The animation was done in ToonBoom Studio and compressed in Ulead Media Studio Pro.

Wow! I just realized that it has been over two months since my last entry. Well I have been working on some political animations as of late and that is keeping me busy.

There are two animations that I am working on to submit to the YouTube Republican debate in September. One is on the Fair Tax and the other is on downsizing the federal government. If I have enough time I would like to also do one on the Fairness Doctrine. But I procrastinate notoriously so I'll be blessed if I get the Fair Tax spot done.

I just read an AP report that Fox made a mistake with one of its segments and now Rep. John Conyers D-Mich., is playing the tried and true Democrat race card. Fox was reporting about the recent indictment of Rep. William J. Jefferson of New Orleans (and another Dem-bulb) and they accidentally showed archive footage of Conyers. This is a common mistake that happens all of the time in the hectic world of 24-hour news. Stuff happens.

However, as with most brain-dead liberals, Conyers jumps on a mistake and turns it into a racial incident. I mean what would have happened if they had run footage of John Edwards when they were talking about Bill Richardson? Would Conyers then say that Fox was racially biased against white men, in favor of Hispanic men or vice versa?

But we all know that the only way for some Dems to get reelected is to play to there ignorant base. Because we all know that Fox news is racist and that Carl Rove secretly runs the world, and that Rosie O'Donnell blew up the World Trade Center. Lions and tigers and bears, oh my.