So much for the Oscar ceremony nobody watched. Let’s be honest, Hollywood could care less. The sponsors lost money, but the network got paid, the production crew got paid, and the celebrities got more of the attention they crave.

It’s redundant to say, “Hollywood doesn’t get it”. They continue to create message movies that talk down to their audiences. They continue to assume that because they play military personnel and spouses in movies, they’re qualified to lecture the rest of us lowly patrons about how wrong all war is. They continue to believe once we know whom they support for president; we’ll admire their wisdom and vote in a similar fashion.

Here’s the problem with The Oscars, The Golden Globe Awards, The Spirit Awards, et al. People are tired of spoiled, stoned, a-couple-of-days-off-rehab millionaire actors and actresses (they hate that word) appearing at another ceremony where they get to tell the world just how wonderful and talented they are. Aren’t the lofty paychecks enough to keep them happy?

Outside of the Espy’s, how many ceremonies do we see where multi-millionaire athletes repeatedly pat themselves on their own backs? Hollywood stars are so wrapped up in their self-importance that they feel this continued need to be seen as adored and relevant.

And enough of the Hollywood “dishonesty” about their supporting the soldiers. If this weren’t a Daily Dose mass mailer, I’d use another word.  Continued...

 So, what are we talking about today?

Michelle Obama’s “pride”, Joran’s dope-induced braggadocio, Hillary on Barack’s “change we can Xerox”, Drew Peterson’s borrowed time, Ralph Nader’s every-four-year crusade, The New York Times’ McCaining, Oscars for films few have seen, the snow, and the rain?

If not for these, just what might we be talking about? One story would surely be the lead. It’s just a question of how the mainstream media would handle it.

According to Fox News…

MINNEAPOLIS — A woman who authorities say is in the country illegally and using an alias was charged Friday with four counts of criminal vehicular homicide and two lesser charges in a school bus crash that killed four children.

This is a no-brainer, that is unless you’re trapped in the progressive mindset.

How should they handle a story where “the children” are victims of a woman (normally media-coveted), who just happens to be an illegal alien (an unfairly persecuted victim of xenophobia)? Simple. Just ignore it.

A woman who identified herself as Alianiss Nunez Morales, 23, of Minnesota, was driving a van that failed to stop at a stop sign Tuesday before hitting a bus carrying 28 students from Lakeview School, Lyon County Attorney Richard Maes said. The accident happened near the small town of Cottonwood, in southwestern Minnesota.

Regrettably, this is not news.   Continued...

Words mean things.

On one hand, they can be meaningless. Their use can be a coincidence. They can be taken out of context. They can be unintentional. Or they can be an example of how someone thinks.

This may be coincidence, but it may also be an indication of what Barack Obama thinks of the America he may inherit to lead.

After last Tuesday night’s primary victories, he was talking to thousands at a rally in Houston. Near the close, he said…

“I was convinced, most of all, that change in America does not happen from the top down. It happens from the bottom up. Some of you know I used to work as a community organizer with churches on the south side of Chicago after the steel plants had laid thousands of people off. And we brought together black and white and Hispanic to try to create job-training programs for the unemployed and bring economic development to neighborhoods that had fallen on hard times.

 And it was the best education I ever had, because it taught me that ordinary people can do extraordinary things when they're given an opportunity.”

– 2/19/08

Who are “ordinary people”? I know what he means, but especially when you’re running for the job with the most clout in the world, one must be very careful about the words you use. Just ask Pakistan.  Continued...

Let’s not be too idealistic here. One would hope the media would be fair, but reality is another thing. The New York Times is supposed to be journalism’s crème de la crème. Maybe she once was, but the recent hit piece on John McCain is a clear illustration of the Gray Lady’s coming role in the 2008 Presidential Election.

What role, do you ask? One of making sure a Democrat wins the White House.

Since the “revelation” that officially breaks today, about rumored “special treatment” from Senator McCain to a female lobbyist, what are we no longer talking about? Barack Obama’s supposed plagiarism of Deval Patrick’s speeches? Michelle Obama’s lack of pride in America? Hillary Clinton’s campaign Hindenburg, going down in flames?

Those are, literally, yesterday’s news stories. Those would’ve been today’s hot topics. But now, it’s all eyes front on John McCain.

Don’t get me wrong; I’m not shedding tears for McCain.  continued...

I must admit, up until yesterday most of us were hoping the Republican nominee for president would go up against Hillary Clinton. She has the obvious negatives and would be a statue of a sparring partner for her GOP opponent to beat up on. The Barack Obama tidal wave was, and still is, a disciplined, Pied Piper-like phenomenon that enjoys the love and admiration of his supporters and media alike.

As I said, that is, until yesterday. Remember the damage an unleashed Teresa Heinz Kerry did to her husband’s campaign. Yesterday, Michelle Obama may have started down that same road, and did so sober.

In front of 600 or so adoring supporters at the Capitol Theater in Madison, Michelle Obama said…

“For the first time in my adult lifetime, I'm really proud of my country. And not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change. And I have been desperate to see our country moving in that direction. And just not feeling so alone in my frustration and disappointment I've seen people who are hungry to be unified around some basic, common issues and it's made me proud.”

Because of the delicate elements involved, the press has been asking what she meant more than why she meant it. It’s obvious she’s caught up in the historical nature of her husband’s candidacy, as many Blacks and/or liberals felt they’d never see this day in “racist America”. Judging from the history of the Democrat Party, I don’t blame them, but I’ll not get off topic at this time.  more...

The next few months leading up to the Democrat National Convention are going to be quite entertaining, as a couple of myths the left has propped up as truths dissolve before our very eyes.

Myth 1: Republicans and Voter Disenfranchisement

In the aftermaths of the last two presidential elections, there was one constant progressive recitation: “The Republicans stole the election.” There were many charges of voter disenfranchisement, and some were specific alleging that the Black vote was screwed with. Despite the fact there were many independent, media recounts of the votes and in each case George W. Bush won, the chants of vote suppression and manipulation continues to this day.

I’ve tried to utilize logic to dispel those conspiracy theories. For example, I can remember no report in the Black community where a witness was quoted as saying some lily-white Republican came in and absconded with ballot boxes, or some ballsy, unarmed Republicans were “intimidating” Blacks from entering a poling place. Aside from Bush, how many Republicans are thought of as to be that stupid?

Yet the accusations persist. The phrase “Count every vote” remains popular to this day.

Myth 2: Democrats Count Every Vote

Despite the fact there were some recent vote tabulation irregularities in Mrs. Clinton’s “home state” of New York, Democrats lecture the rest of us on the moral obligation to count every vote.

Stock up on that popcorn, people, because we have the makings for some riotous behavior.   more...

Cleon Skoussen would say, “I told you so.”

With the coming general election, and the impressive youth movement within, one can only conclude Skoussen was a visionary. When watching today’s young people gush over Barack Obama, pledging allegiance to the Democrat Party, the phrase “Mission Accomplished” comes to mind.

The former FBI agent, in his 1958 book, “The Naked Communist”, enumerated several goals the left would take to obtain, and maintain, power in the United States. Some of those “goals” included…

“Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current communist propaganda.

 “Get control of the teachers associations.

 “Gain control of all student newspapers.”

But when it comes to today’s successful infiltration into academia, the phrase “Give ‘em an inch, and they think they’re rulers” come to mind.

According to Paul Rogers of The Mercury News, “A Silicon Valley lawmaker is gaining momentum with a bill that would require "climate change" to be among the science topics that all California public school students are taught.

"You can't have a science curriculum that is relevant and current if it doesn't deal with the science behind climate change," Simitian said. "This is a phenomenon of global importance and our kids ought to understand the science behind that phenomenon."

It’s not enough that today’s youth seem ill equipped with the basics.   more...

However, there will be one direction that fingers will not be pointed: at the faculty and the climate they’ve created on campus.

Think about it. Going to school nowadays must be a bummer, for the most part.

You have the notion drummed into your little head that the world is coming to an end because you left your dorm light on while you went to the bathroom. The curse of “man-made” global warming is something their professors claim will come to fruition during their students’ lifetime.

All the bad stuff will affect them and their kids.

You have some women’s studies departments that push the idea that men still seek to keep females barefoot and pregnant. The idea could be pushed, depending on the intensity of the professor, that all men are capable of rape. Female students will find it very difficult to trust any man she meets, and most male students will find themselves resentful of being lumped in with those who are disrespectful of women.

How does a guy ask a girl out on a date, under those circumstances? He doesn’t know if she’ll say “yes”, “no”, or scream sexual harassment. The result: Tension and all it takes is one instance of date rape or a false accusation to create a toxic atmosphere throughout the entire campus.

One plague of our society is adults that prey on children. Some of their attacks are not only sexual in nature. Some times those attacks are violent, and the victim is either injured or sometimes killed.

While I’m not an expert in the field, our news media is complete with stories of adults who are repeat offenders. They commit their offense, are incarcerated, just to commit another attack shortly after release. It’s been argued that these people aren’t capable of rehabilitation. As their crime is so heinous that one strike is too generous, I’ve always wondered why the death penalty is not an immediate option for such criminal violations.

It would appear that pedophiles are one of America’s protected classes.

If a man attacks a woman, now we have a SERIOUS crime. Especially, if that woman is “attractive”, Greta Van Susteren will cover that story from arrest to verdict. Whether we’re talking about O.J., Robert Blake, Scott Peterson, Drew Peterson, Cesar Laurean, or Bobby Cutts Jr., men killing women invite disproportionate coverage because it fits a societal template: the evil man preying upon the poor defenseless woman. That man is an instant candidate for the death penalty in the court of public opinion, and few sympathize with him.

If a man stalks a woman and she obtains a restraining order, it is extremely rare for anyone to argue that his rights to freedom of movement have been restricted. The woman is a victim and is publicly granted all the protections, and positive press, our judicial system and media can offer.

Yet when a pedophile is released from prison and seeks to live in an area near a school, there’s always someone who argues that he has a right to live where he wants, and the fact that it may be near an elementary school is a mere nuisance.   more...

Many are still incensed by Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell’s editorial board comments in Monday’s Pittsburgh Post-Gazette…

“You've got conservative whites here, and I think there are some whites who are probably not ready to vote for an African-American candidate.”

That, along with the introduction of race as a component of the Democrat presidential nomination process, has alarmed many liberals who believed they were above all that.

I contend, that kind of thinking is in their blood.  As far as Rendell’s comments, he’s more ignorant than racist.

Since “conservative whites” are… conservative, the chances they would vote for a Democrat in the first place is slim.  Conservative whites will probably vote Republican, so Rendell’s is a fallacious premise.  The fact that he got specific and said that some whites “are probably not ready to vote for an African-American” reflects badly on those who feel themselves the embodiment of positive race relations.

If anything, Barack Obama’s presidential candidacy will spotlight just who’s been the premiere racists in America today, just as their self-revised history proves it’s always been: the Democrat Party.

On a local cable access program yesterday of a Black History Month presentation, an African professor talked on and on about race.  However, he was also a victim of revisionist history.  He went on about how brave and noble the abolitionists to slavery were, and how evil the slave owners were.

He cited the names of many of the early Presidents of the United States who were slave owners.  However, not once did he tell his students that the abolitionists would eventually become the Republican Party, and that almost all of those presidents who were slave owners were proud Democrats.

more...

By Bob Parks, Intel Radio Network

So here we are: another big Tuesday Election Day and the presidential races are a toss up.  How can this be?  I was made to believe this race was all about inevitability?

We were all told by ideological opponents and the all-knowing punditry that should Hillary Rodham Clinton decide to run for president, she would mop up the floor with those few opponents stupid enough to dare challenge her.

We were told to be ready for the juggernaut called “The Clinton Machine.”  On behalf of Hillary, thousands of foot soldiers were ready, at a moment’s notice, to take to the streets and sop up the support of those who would be falling over themselves to vote for the “smartest woman in the world”.

Claiming last August that Hillary was a “fatally flawed” candidate, former Bush advisor Karl Rove said…

 

“There is no frontrunner who has entered the primary season with negatives as high as she has in the history of modern polling.  She is going into the general election, depending on what poll you look at, with high forties on the negative side and just below that on the positive side.  There is nobody who has ever won the presidency who has started out in that position.”

But hey, what does Karl Rove know about anything?  Like Nita Lowey, we were all told to just get out the way.  The inevitable was about to happen.

Yeah, well tell that to the Patriots.

Today, we have the rats ditching the sinking Hillary Clinton ship.  There is talk about donors and superdelegates “fleeing ”.  The Hollywood superficials are abandoning her for the newer, hip fad: Barack Obama.  The entertainment intelligentsia wants to be a part of history (which if you think about it, a Hillary presidency would too have provided).  But you know what they say, “With friends like these….”

more...

Last summer, I was offered the opportunity to produce a documentary on Ronald Reagan’s winning of the Cold War over the Soviets.  As we all know, he won that war, not with Mutually Assured Destruction, but with a speech.

It’s fascinating how much we weren’t taught about President Reagan in school, and how skewed what we were taught was.  But reliving the Reagan years again makes me see how almost laughable some of our presidential candidates were and are, invoking his name and attempting to emulate his stature.

 

The main difference is that Ronald Reagan’s politics were sincere.  Note to today’s presidential candidates: Reagan was an unashamed conservative and won his elections handily.  The word “landslide” is quite appropriately applied.

Like today, America’s enemies back then weren’t playing games.  The Russians sought to annex Afghanistan and were actively seeking a logistical, military presence mere miles from the United States.  Ronald Reagan did not seek the blessing of the media and academic elites.  He wasn’t constantly monitoring his favorability numbers.  He had one purpose, and one purpose only: keeping America safe and people free.

Ronald Reagan respected religion, but didn’t wear it on his political sleeve.  He didn’t try to show voters that his beliefs were stronger or more sincere than others.  Therefore, he didn’t have to defend his beliefs and morals to a hostile media that, in some cases, had neither.

As a conservative, Ronald Reagan was the real deal.  He didn’t try to come off as a moderate, disguising his conservatism.  He governed as president, the same way he governed as Governor of California: on conservative principles, ignoring the insults of his critics.

Ronald Reagan was portrayed as old and lacking the intelligence of his liberal counterparts.  Funny how he was too dim to lead yet was smart enough to handily defeat his presidential opponents, and do so without compromising the principles of those of whom he asked for support.

Our candidates today could learn something from Ronald Reagan.  more...

A Republican lawmaker in Colorado is under fire for his poor choice of words, but was he really that far off the mark…?

According to the Associated Press, on Wednesday appearing at a GOP legislative caucus in Denver, Colorado Springs Republican Rep. Larry Liston said…

“In my parents’ day and age, (unmarried teen parents) were sent away, they were shunned, they were called what they are.  There was at least a sense of shame.  There’s no sense of shame today.  Society condones it...  I think it’s wrong.  They’re sl..s.  And I don’t mean just the women.  I mean the men, too.”

Now while Representative Liston apparently went out of his way to be gender neutral, the word “sl.t” is not, thus he, not unexpectedly, incurred the wrath of his community.

“I feel that he owes the apology somewhere, whether it’s to the same group that he spoke to before or someone else.”
– Rep. Stella Garza Hicks

Of course today when boxed into a corner, apologies of humiliation are in order, so Liston succumbed.

“The derogatory term I used was offensive and inappropriate and I would like to apologize for using it.  Because of my unfortunate choice of language, the message that I was trying to get across about personal responsibility, and parental responsibility, has been overshadowed.  I certainly regret using the term I did.”

But let’s leave out the fact that Liston used a poor choice of word.  Was he that far off the mark?

more,,,

Paying Politics

Here is yet one more instance where politics has me disillusioned.  Not really, but work with me here….

I grew up to believe that people got into politics to channel their passion.  I grew up to believe that people got into politics to help fellow citizens and to make our neighborhoods, towns, cities, districts, states, and/or nation better.

But it would appear that more and more people get into politics today to get rich.  A little power, on top of that, doesn’t hurt either.

With the revelation yesterday that Hillary Clinton infused her presidential campaign with $5 million of her own money, I thought, “Isn’t that special.”  At the same time, I kinda recall both her and Bill being tens of millions of dollars in debt at the end of The Clinton Years.  Most of that being legal fees due to Bill’s off-the-clock antics.

But it would appear the Clintons made those years work for them in a big way.

"I never had a nickel to my name until I got out of the White House, and now I'm a millionaire, the most favored person for the Washington Republicans.  I get a tax cut every year, no matter what our needs are."
– Bill Clinton, Fall 2006

I guess; if you’ve got it, flaunt it.

Don’t get me wrong;   more....

The Youth Vote ‘08

By Bob Parks, IRN

While Republicans are scurrying to galvanize the conservative and Latino vote, they neglect one group of the new electorate at their peril: the youth.

The left has made great gains at creating little liberals.  One need only watch the responses of younger voters, while being stereotypically flaky, these young people are today caught up in the trendy winds of “change”.  The word “Republican” is a dirty word, and they efficiently recite the obvious sentiments of their progressive professors.

Let me give you a couple of examples of how this works….

Let’s say a college was to hold a forum on obese people.  One would figure they’d have a panel of five or six fat people all giving examples of how it is to be living large in America.  I’d be willing to bet there’d be no one on that panel who’d play Devil’s Advocate, calling them whiners and giving an opposing point of view.

THAT would be “mean-sprited”.

A few years ago, I was invited by a student to be a guest panelist for a discussion on “The Rise of Black Conservatism” at Stanford Law College.  Judging from the name of the topic alone, I assumed that the panel would be made up prominent Black conservatives who would proudly articulate our positions.  I was deeply flattered to be included in such a panel.

But what was I thinking…?

more...