Hope & Change I Wish For Someday

The vid is an interview Glenn Beck had with Mliheil Saakashvili, President of Georgia, and I was very impressed for many reasons, As I watched I thought how would a Frank Luntz conservative focus respond to his message. I imagined the graph line shooting to the top and pegging as they heard the man speak. I supported Fred, but he didn't show passion for freedom and core values when he spoke the way this guy does.

Here is two quotes from this guy:

It is time for the government to be afraid of the people and not the other way around.

The government is going to help you in the best way possible by doing nothing for you, but by getting out of your way. I exaggerate, but you understand. Of course we will provide the infrastructure and help get rid of corruption, but you have all succeeded by your own initiative and enterprise, so you should congratulate yourselves.

Here are examples of what he did when he first took office.

We fired the entire police force of the country. And that was one of the most corrupt police forces throughout the European continent. We fired more than 40,000 people.

We recruited new people within several months. But here`s what the result is. You know, the previous police force had only five percent of population`s trust and confidence, according to the Gallup poll. Now we have more than 70.

So police moved from being universally hated to being universally loved by the people and having support of the people. And there are other radical reforms which we also applied -- cutting red tape, you know, downsizing the government`s functions.

one of the main things is to develop people`s initiatives, to empower people, to give them the sense that they are the ones to build their own country. They shouldn`t be looking at the government, because in our case, the more government intervenes, the worse it is.

You know, we cut red tape. You know, what`s our resource? We don`t have much of oil and gas, what`s our resource in our part of the world?

Our resource is having no red tape, having no corruption, having an efficient government. A small government, because big government, as a rule, means, in our case, corruption and inefficiency. Basically empowering people, giving them initiative, and basically encouraging initiative, because after all, after so many years of communism, after so many years of inaction, after so many years of cynicism and cynical rule, you need basically a new mentality to tell people, well, we are on our own. Our government is there to help when it can, and most of the times we can help ourselves to build our own country.

And after all, when people don`t give credit to some smart leaders, or smart governments, but saying, OK, this is up to us, this is our country, we have to build it, you get an entirely new nation. And that`s exactly what we are seeing in my country, in my part of the world.

You know, you succeed by giving people more freedom. Freedom is the key word. Encouraging initiatives is the other thing, and having a government that knows its place and doesn`t want to overplay its hand, but also can be very efficient when it`s necessary to encourage that freedom is something that really helps and gets the results.

It's unfortunate that there is no choice like this for me when I vote in November. Of course there are big differences between the eventual Democratic nominee and John McCain, and I could never vote for the Democrat when I think about who will be the next CinC. Some of the things I disagree with Pres. Bush about are going to remain a disagreement for me with Pres. McCain. I do have high hope for a certain Governor of the state of Louisiana to one day run for POTUS. Unless something happens that changes him for the worse, I believe Bobby Jindall understands having a government that knows its place and doesn't overplay its hand.

Say it aint so, John. Take it back what you told Imus

On April 28, 2006 Don Imus show John McCain said the following:

I work in Washington and I know that money corrupts. And I and a lot of other people were trying to stop that corruption. Obviously, from what we've been seeing lately, we didn't complete the job. But I would rather have a clean government than one where quote First Amendment rights are being respected that has become corrupt. If I had my choice, I'd rather have the clean government.

George Wills wrote a piece in the WaPo about this conversation McCain had with Imus. Some salient points in his piece:

On April 28, on Don Imus's radio program, discussing the charge that the McCain-Feingold law abridges freedom of speech by regulating the quantity, content and timing of political speech, John McCain did not really reject the charge.

McCain seems to regard unregulated political speech as an inherent invitation to corruption. And he seems to believe that anything done in the name of "leveling the playing field" for political competition is immune from First Amendment challenges.

the stark contradiction in McCain's doctrine
In the language of McCain's Imus appearance, the government is very much not "clean," but it is so clean it can be trusted to regulate speech about itself.

McCain favors judges who think the Constitution is so radically elastic that government regulation of speech about itself is compatible with the First Amendment. Can President McCain be counted on to nominate justices who would correct such constitutional elasticities as the court's discovery of a virtually unlimited right -- one unnoticed between 1787 and 1973 -- to abortion?

McCain told Imus that he would, if necessary, sacrifice "quote First Amendment rights" to achieve "clean" government. If on Jan. 20, 2009, he were to swear to defend the Constitution, would he be thinking that the oath refers only to "the quote Constitution"? And what would that mean?

On March 11, 2008 President George W. Bush attended and spoke at the National Religious Broadcasters 2008 convention in Nashville, TN.

Here are some of the salient points he made in this speech

The very first amendment to our Constitution includes the freedom of speech and the freedom of religion. Founders believed these unalienable rights were endowed to us by our Creator. They are vital to a healthy democracy, and we must never let anyone take those freedoms away.

We know who these advocates of so-called balance really have in their sights: shows hosted by people like Rush Limbaugh or James Dobson, or many of you here today. By insisting on so-called balance, they want to silence those they don't agree with. The truth of the matter is, they know they cannot prevail in the public debate of ideas. They don't acknowledge that you are the balance; that you give voice. The country should not be afraid of the diversity of opinions. After all, we're strengthened by diversity of opinions.

We love freedom in America, and we're the leader of the world not because we try to limit freedom, but because we've helped to spread it. You and I know that freedom has the power to transform lives. You and I know that free societies are more peaceful and more prosperous. You and I know that if given the chance, men and women and children in every society on Earth will choose a life of freedom -- if just given a chance. Unless, of course, you don't believe freedom is a gift from the Almighty. The liberty we value is not ours alone. Freedom is not America's gift to the world; it is God's gift to all humanity.

It is no coincidence that the region of the world that is the least free is also the most violent and dangerous. For too long the world was content to ignore oppression -- oppressive forms of government in the Middle East, in the name of stability.

The result was that a generation of young people grew up with little hope of improving their lives, and many fell under the sway of violent extremism. The birthplace of three of the world's great religions became the home of suicide bombers. And resentments that began on the streets in the Middle East killed innocent people in trains and airplanes and office buildings around the world.

My President is often roundly accused of speaking poorly and incoherently. Yet these words in this speech were quite crystal clear to me in their meaning. I only wish these words had come to the forefront of his brain when the McCain-Feingold bill was placed in front of him for his signature to become law.

Recently at RedState I read this comment

If conservatives decide to attack McCain and try to make him lose (by not voting for him and by doing Democrat's dirty work) then there is no reason they should expect a seat at the table.

If the table is the Republican Party, and this new Republican Party becomes destructive to certain unalienable Rights, then not only do I not expect a seat at the table. I do not want a seat at the table.

Today in Nashville Pres. Bush showed John how to talk about core principle values. I realize John has been busy lately, but maybe he has a friend who can call John’s attention to this matter. There is still time between now and November, and I don’t think John taking it back on his quote First Amendment statement to Don Imus will cause all of the moderates and independents to stop supporting him.

From the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Kenyans Want To Get Hillary's Goat & Hope She Has A Cow

I ran across this headline from Reuters today, Clinton faces Kenya cattle fine over Obama photo An excerpt from the article

Wajir elders resolved to file an official complaint with the U.S. Embassy in Nairobi, dropping earlier plans to hold a protest after Friday prayers.

They said they would also convene a traditional Somali court to investigate the matter. It can impose fines that are payable in cattle, goats or camels.

"We will go ahead with this case whether Senator Clinton or Democratic party leaders turn up or not," said Mohamed Ibrahim, a member of the clan that hosted Obama during his trip. "But this whole thing can be avoided if only an apology is made."

In addition to to Wajir elders, Hillary also has a group of Somali immigrants in Minnesota who are upset.

Omar Jamal is head of the St Paul, Minnesota-based Somali Justice Advocacy Centre.

His lobby group, which works with Somali immigrants in the United States, has also demanded an apology from Clinton's camp.

"They are trying to make a link between a man who could be the next U.S. president and a country with al Qaeda terrorist activities. They're trying to tell citizens, look who you might be voting for," he told Reuters by telephone.

I just don't know quite to say about Hillary's problems here. I just have questions. Are these people going to get Hillary's goat? Is Hillary going to have a cow over making things right?

Maybe it is just me, but this flare up strikes me as something very similar to the Danish cartoon flap. The idea that a free press can publish an image that offends because they are a free press is a concept some cannot grasp. Perhaps this is because they have never lived in freedom. They just don't understand how it is possible to both be offended and defend the free speech rights of those who offend them.

As for the accusations of Minnesota based Omar Jamal about all I can say is HUH? The Clinton campaign is not trying to make a link between a man who could be the next US President and a country with al Qaeda terrorist activities. Any links that exist are there because of the decisions and choices that Sen. Barack Obama has made. The Hillary campaign did not tell Obama to travel to that village and get photographed in the Somali garb. The Hillary campaign did not tell Obama to travel to Kenya to campaign for the guy running for President there who had the support of the Kenya muslims because he promised them that if elected he would impose sharia law and madrassa schools. Obama makes the links himself not the Hillary campaign.

Now the part about them trying to tell citizens look who you might be voting for, he is absolutely correct.

The next President of the United States will be a War President.

Choose wisely, because your life does depend on it.