Almost two years after the mortgage crisis and stock market crash, no one seems to wonder about the “September surprise” that shifted the 2008 presidential election to an unknown leftist politician who had been elected to the Senate only two years before. A pulp-fiction writer could hardly have created a more contrived and bizarre story. But this was not make-believe. No, it is now our own gritty reality show that we only wish we could turn off. 

The Tea Party movement is trying hard to separate itself from the Republican Party, even to the point of threatening to run as a third party in some races.  If Tea Party supporters consider that they are acting in the finest tradition of the American revolutionary spirit, then they should reject a third party movement except in extraordinary circumstances – like supporting Doug Hoffman in the New York House race last year.

The Libertarian Party is a small fringe party. Few Americans vote for its candidates when given the chance. But there is disturbing evidence that libertarians may be trying to use the Tea Party movement to further their own peculiar agenda. That evidence is in the form of reports that numerous Tea Party members want to concentrate on economic issues and downplay social issues, supposedly because the latter are “divisive.” But many many conservatives do NOT want to downplay social issues. Quite the contrary. So, are those Tea Partiers who DO want to downplay them true conservatives, or are they really more libertarian than conservative?

Will Obama Suspend the Mid Term Election? - More and more politics-watchers are coming around to the conclusion that the scheduled Mid-Term Election in November of 2010 will be a political bloodbath for the Democratic Party. It is beginning to appear as if the democrats may, indeed, lose control of BOTH houses of the Congress. As a conservative I can only hope and pray they do.

And of course the wimpy “Republicrats” are aghast that “Demercrats” being called out for what they are?(1)

It was an odd week for a staunch conservative to be in agreement with Barack Obama. In the wake of Republican Scott Brown’s dramatic Senate victory in Massachusetts, Democrat leaders were stunned and shaken. But as usual, they quickly gathered themselves and coordinated a strategy of interpreting Brown’s election in terms that they hoped would minimize damage to their agenda. And this effort was led, of course, by Obama himself.

You may be a Scott Brown voter if:  Unlike Martha Coakley’s campaign, you know how to spell “Massachusetts.”

Did you ever think you’d see the day when America was run by the assumed-in-their-own-minds monarchical class--set up by those we thought--had been elected by US citizens? Really, did you? Well, I certainly didn’t. But, here we are in the midst of the USA’s own Reign of Terror by those who would be kings and queens. With regards to the US Congress, Executive Branch of government and Marxist/Democrat ruled (not governed) States the term ‘arrogance’ is no longer a satisfactory moniker applied to those who view themselves as said rulers rather than elected officials. I would suggest ‘proudly condescending’.

The McCain radio ads running in Arizona are as pathetic as the candidate, they are the ‘same old pap’ by a very old sounding man.  These are some of the sorriest campaign commercials I have ever heard.

Passage of the health-care bill will be, for the administration, a catastrophic victory. If it is voted through in time for the State of the Union Address, as President Obama hopes, half the chamber will rise to their feet and cheer. They will be cheering their own demise.

Many are puzzled that Democrats persist in ramming unpopular and destructive legislation down our collective throats with no apparent concern for their plummeting poll numbers. A widespread belief is that the Democrats are committing political suicide and will be swept from one or both houses of Congress with unprecedented electoral losses next November. But since Democrat politicians rarely do things that will not ultimately benefit themselves, this column asked two weeks ago, “What do they know that we don’t?”

Washington, D.C. (January 6, 2010)—Republican Jewish Coalition Executive Director Matthew Brooks released the following statement today: The sense that Democrat incumbents are abandoning a sinking ship was strengthened by the announcements that Democrat Senators Chris Dodd (CT) and Byron Dorgan (ND) will not seek re-election this year. This brings the number of Senate seats open after Democrat retirements to four. On the House side, ten Democrats have already announced their retirements.

During President Obama’s West Point address last week in which he committed 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan, he referred to his opposition to the war in Iraq, which he first voiced at a 2002 anti-war rally said to have helped launch his political career.

Throughout our history, we have seen the office of the President of the United States occupied by some of the most brilliant and well-educated people on the planet. They come from a variety of backgrounds – some from wealthy political dynasties like the Kennedy family, others from relative poverty like Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton.  Most had a college education. Some, like Zachary Taylor did not. Many also served with honor in the US military. 

It seems that there are always two schools of thought regarding whether the “private life” of a candidate for elected office or an officeholder is “fair game” for public debate. Those who believe that a person’s morality and character are entirely separate from their business and political affairs are on one side; those who believe that who we are dictates what we do are on another.