Right Up Front on the Radio

The Rebellion Radio Vigilante Show covered the porn club controversy. I did some commentary on the show.

Nick and Ryan are great guys and you should definitely subscribe to this podcast. They do great work.

You can listen here:

http://www.nowlive.com/member.asp?id=100238756&showmode=schedule

It's labeled "porn club controversy".

I'm in at the 39 minute mark.

Islam, The Religion of Peace

Thousands of Sudanese, many armed with clubs and swords and beating drums, burned pictures of a British teacher Friday and demanded her execution for insulting Islam by letting her students name a teddy bear Muhammad.

Thus began an AP article on the plight of Gillian Gibbans, who is now being hidden by the government for fear she may be murdered. Adherers to the "religion of peace" have been demanding her head on a crescent platter since the news of her stuffed animal's name broke out. They are marching in the streets with clubs and sticks, demanding the right to stone her to death. You see, you can name your child Muhammad, but not your teddy bear. Its one of those peculiar Islamic rules that we're supposed to respect even though it doesn't necessarily make much sense.

All of this, of course, is taking place in that beacon of liberty and human dignity, Sudan, which was named a member of the UN Human Rights Council shortly after the United States was booted out.

Meanwhile, here in America, "intolerant" and "closed-minded" Christians have seen crucifixes submerged in urine and statues of the Virgin Mary defiled with pornographic images and human feces, all in the name of "art". And in response to all of that, Christians worldwide...did nothing. There were no protests. No boycotts. No fights. No one was killed. No one was even jailed, or reprimanded.

So what's up with Islam? Is it really a religion of peace? If its followers in so many places around the world are any example of its teachings, then I'd not think so.

My Huckabee Conversion

Those of you who kept up with the early days of this blog probably remember that, up until recently, I was a supporter of Rudy Giuliani for the Republican nomination. I have been posting some very pro-Huckabee blogs for a while now, but yesterday Russ made a comment that he noticed I had officially switched my preference on facebook.com to Mike Huckabee. Russ suggested that I explain this change of heart to the readers, as it may provide interesting insight into what we're seeing in many republican voters at the moment.

I'll start by explaining why I was supporting Rudy Giuliani. I have long admired Mayor Giuliani for his post 9/11 leadership and his record of getting things done. Something that I have seen as lacking with our current administration is the ability to really manage and to create results. The desire is there, sure, but they just don't follow through. I thought that Rudy would be the guy to get things done. I also based my support largely on the idea that he was the most well known republican and therefore the most likely to beat Hillary Clinton (though the Democratic race seems a bit more up for grabs these days). I found early in the campaign that Rudy was just not as inspiring as I expected he would be. He just plain never convinced me. He never made me believe.

It was in the early debates that I began to notice Mike Huckabee. My initial thought was "I like this guy, but he can't win." As I began to follow his campaign more closely, I became more and more impressed. The guy can connect with voters better than any candidate I've seen in a long time. Mike Huckabee won four elections in a state which is dominated by the Clinton-Democratic machine. As a Republican governor in a very hostile democratic state, Mike Huckabee got results. I began to feel that Huckabee had those qualities that Giuliani was missing. I remained hesitant about Governor Huckabee's chances of winning the nomination. He faced low name ID and was struggling to raise money. It has now become clear that, against the odds, Mike Huckabee could go all the way. The money is starting to pour in and his poll numbers are surging in state after state. This is what has impressed me the most, because he is spending almost all of his time in Iowa and New Hampshire and yet is beginning to surge in Florida and South Carolina. The latest poll by American Research Group in South Carolina shows Huckabee gaining 13 points in the polls over the last month. Intrade is now trading Huckabee at 55.1 and Romney at 38.0 in Iowa. These latest developments led Jack McIntyre at RCP, to declare Romney the underdog in Iowa. It has become quite clear that Mike Huckabee is in this thing to win.

These factors, combined with more recent concerns about Giuliani's ethics and the kind of people he surrounds himself with have led me to put my support fully behind Mike Huckabee. I believe that Governor Huckabee has the most consistent record, the most executive experience, and the best ability to connect out of all of the candidates on either side. Most importantly, I believe he is the right man for the job.

Facebook Users, Beware!

I know this is a break from the usual stuff we talk about here, but Drudge is reporting via NYT about a program that Facebook is now using called Beacon. I had never heard of it before, and I use Facebook regularly. I thought all facebook users might want to take a look at the article, located here.

In my view this goes entirely too far. As the article states, about 700,000 Facebook users protested the "news feed" addition, and yet the executives at Facebook decided to keep it. Now this?

We are losing more and more control over our own information, and we don't even know about it! Scary stuff.

More On CNN/"Boob Tube" Debate

It is looking more and more like the Clinton campaign wasn't working alone, but hand in hand with CNN as they prepared the questions for last night's Republican debate. John Gibson is reporting today that of the roughly 5,000 entries, 20 questioners were selected and flown to Flordia to be present at the debate. Of those, only two got to ask follow up questions live while the debate was in progress. Of course, as we all now know one of them, Mr. Kerr, is on the Clinton Gay and Lesbian committee and also her Veterans committee.

What is interesting about this, is that Bill Bennett (appearing on CNN) was contacted during the post debate analysis immediately proceeding the debate and told that Kerr was an imposter. How could Bill Bennett get that information so quickly following the debate from conservative bloggers while CNN, which had weeks to prepare and check records to insure impartiality, is claiming total ignorance? Simple. It was either planned that way to embarass the Republican candidates, or CNN is so incompetent that it let this slip through the cracks. Either scenario is completely possible.

No questions about education. No questions about health care. And now we have news that at least two more of the questioners CNN chose are declared supporters of John Edwards and Barrack Obama. My, my. It does not get much better than this.

NOTE: Michel Malkin is ALL OVER THIS!

BREAKING: HILLARY PLANT AT GOP DEBATE

This is going to be pretty big once it all comes out tomorrow. Apparently HillarY is not only planting questioners at her own townhalls, but also is planting questions at the Republican debates as well:

Huckabee: Making Mole Hills Out of Mountains

That is precisely what Mike Huckabee has done to Mitt Romney's once mountainous lead in the first in the nation Iowa polls. As recently as just one month ago, Romney enjoyed double digit leads in most polls and on the RCP charts. Today, Romney's lead is just under 3 points, with the latest Rasmussen Poll showing Huckabee narrowly edging out Romney 28 to 25 percent. He is also creeping up on Giuliani in Florida, where Rudy must win. This is surprising news, and changes the entire landscape of the debate.

Romney still leads by a large 14.5 point margin in the number two state of New Hampshire and has opened up a 4 point lead in the number four state of South Carolina. Michigan votes third where Romney trails Giuliani by about 3 points. As I have said many times in the past, if Romney is able to win at least three of those first four states, then Giuliani could be finished. But the prospect of a Huckabee victory in Iowa changes all of that.

If Huckabee is able to achieve a victory in Iowa, that could totally void the impact of a Romney victory in New Hampshire, giving Giuliani a chance in Michigan, which would in turn void a possible Romney victory in South Carolina, giving Giuliani the opening he would need to keep his hopes alive in Florida.

As Huckabee's numbers increase, though, so does the criticism surrounding his days as governor of Arkansas. Tom alluded to that in a previous column on this blog. The question is, will this criticism keep Huckabee in Romney's rear view mirror long enough for him to win in Iowa and proceed with his landslide in New Hampshire, possibly carrying on into his native Michigan and then South Carolina.

We will find out soon enough. The first votes will be cast in Iowa on January 3rd.

My (brief) Two Cents On The CNN/YouTube Debate

Tonight's CNN/YouTube debate surely was the most energetic and engaging debate I have yet seen amongst the Republican candidates for president. Each candidate had truly shining moments and truly embarassing moments as well. The best/worst of some of the candidates:

John McCain:
As usual, Senator McCain sounds strongest when talking about foreign policy issues. Other than that, he did little to help his campaign effort. I completely disagree with many of the analysts immediate proceeding the debate who said he sounded "presidential" and had "found his voice". He sounded old and tired, often as if he was searching for an answer that just wasn't coming to him when asked about issues like immigration and spending. But he did have one of the strongest lines of the night, in which he accosted Ron Paul, saying the message the soldiers gave him for Mr. Paul was "Let us win! Let us win!"

Mike Huckabee:
Although he did not give the best answer of the night (or even the second best) he also had virtually no waffles, and this earns him a place near the top at this debate. His sounded self-assured and truly eminated a "top-tier" persona since his recent uptick in the polls. I would truly have to say he did not have a "best" or "worst" moment. He delivered a strong and consistent performance that I believe will ultimately help him in the polls. He also had the laugh of the night; when asked "What would Jesus do?" in regards to captial punishment he answered, "Jesus was smart enough not to run for public office".

Mitt Romney:
Romney had an impressive sparring match with Rudy at the outset of the debate. Mitt Romney was the hands down winner with Giuliani actually being booed at the end of the exchange.

Romney was given another chance to shine when a black father and son asked what the candidates would do to curb inner city, black-on-black violence. Romney hit this one out of the park, commenting that the young lad was lucky to have a father at his side since 68% of black children are born out of wedlock. This transitioned into the usual Romney dialogue about how important the American family is, etc. It got rave reviews from the audience.

Mitt's low point of the night was exceptionally low, and he came off looking like a politician caught in the headlights of a question for which he had no rehearsed answer. When asked to account for a statement he made during a previous campaign, in which he said he looked forward to the day gays could serve openly in the military, he completely stumbled over his answer (clearly blind-sided by the question) and was laughed at by the audience...literally. He also gave a silly answer that made him look ridiculous when asked if he had any guns in his home.

Rudy Giluiani:
Rudy needed a strong performance tonight to maintain his front runner status and he totally blew it. There is no way around this one. He was booed twice and appeared weak and visually uncomfortable having to talk about issues like gun control, abortion, and immigration. Like Huckabee, he had no real shining moment. Unlike Huckabee, he was consistently bad and unsure of himself throughout the evening.

Fred Thompson...
...needs to drop out of the race. His campaign was over as soon as it began.

Update: Iowa Rasmussen Poll

A new Rasmussen poll of likely Iowa Caucus goers which was released today shows Mike Huckabee in first place. According to Rasmussen, Huckabee has come up from behind and is now leading by three points. With his new position in the polls, Governor Huckabee is likely to come under increased scrutiny and attack from his opponents. An article Brierbart article this morning discusses Huckabees efforts to gloss over his record as Governor of Arkansas. The article points to tax increases and ethics complaints as the biggest problems with his record. It also states that Huckabee has tried to downplay his role in the pardon of Wayne Dumond, a convicted rapist who committed murder after his release. Another noteworthy article appeared on RCP earlier today. The article is by Dick Morris and is primarily a defense of Huckabee's record as a fiscal conservative. In the interest of disclosure, Morris was a member of Huckabee's staff while he was living in Arkansas.

Another Huckabee Surprise

A new set of head to head match up polls done by Zogby show all of the top five republican candidates beating Hillary. This story has gotten a lot of attention over the last couple of days but there is another aspect to it that has been largely ignored. Of those top five republicans, you might be surprised by who beats Clinton by the widest margin. I'll give you a hint. It's the candidate that everyone says is "a great candidate but can't win the general election". It's the candidate who everyone says doesn't have the money to compete. It's the candidate who former Bush advisor Dan Bartlett called "the best candidate" but said his last name was "too hick" to get elected. It's Mike Huckabee.

I keep hearing that, although Huckabee has closed the gap in Iowa, (multiple polls now showing him in a dead heat with Mitt Romney) his lack of funds will prevent him from capitalizing on a surprise win in that state. What the pundits fail to mention is that, Huckabee's poor fundraising should have prevented him from competing in Iowa in the first place. The guy has caught fire through good ol' fashion grassroots campaigning and sheer charisma. A new surprise poll in Florida shows Huckabee closing the gap in that key primary state as well. Over the last month, Huckabee has cut significantly into Giuliani's lead. A loss in Florida would spell the end for Rudy Giuliani's presidential ambitions. Huckabee's fundraising grows exponentially every day and he has even begun airing ads in Iowa.

So what's going on in Florida? Huckabee is spending all of his time and money on Iowa but has begun to surge in Florida. He has cut into Giuliani's superior political machine just as he did Romney's in Iowa. In a political race where money is everything, it might just be the one who's broke that cashes in.

In case you haven't seen it, here is Huckabee's second ad entitled "Believe":

Escorting Trent Lott...Out of The Senate

EDIT (12/02/2007): Since the posting of this column, more than one source very close to Mr. Nicholas have contacted me to say that these charges are absolutely false, stressing again that Mr. Nicholas has never met, seen, or spoken with Senator Lott. Due to the integrity of these sources and the fact that the mainstream media has yet to pick this up leads me to believe that these allegations are false, despite what I initially wrote below.

The media is reporting that Mississippi Senator Trent Lott is retiring to pursue a career in the lobbying business. This seems legit; after all, lots of politicians go the private sector route after leaving public office, and usually for much better pay. But there could be more to this than meets the eye.

Other blogs have been reporting that Mr. Lott is retiring because of his connections to a gay escort based out of my very own San Antonio. Even more interesting, is that I have about 3 degrees of seperation from said escort, which is how I received my own bit of reliable information on this scandal. (In defense of my own honor and decency, I have never met the escort, only know acquaintances of his).

According to the blog Big Head DC, the escort in question, Benjamin Nicholas, has virtually admitted via email to having a business relationship with the Senator.

For his part, Mr. Nicholas is publicly insisiting no business relationship "currently" exists (whatever that means), and has gone so far as to categorically deny the accusations on his own blog 15 minutes, saying, "It never happened". (emphasis his)

My source confirms that Mr. Nicholas is seeking legal counsel on the issue and is insisting behind closed doors that someone is using his name without his knowledge. My source personally believes the allegations are probably true, although he did stress probably as opposed to definitely.

After reading the information at Big Head DC and conferring with my own sources, my hunch is that Mr. Nicholas is doing his best to remain professional (whatever that means to an escort) by attempting to protect his client list. In any case, even the implication of impropriety on the part of the Senate's #2 Republican is the last thing the GOP needs. I'll post more as I get more information. In the meantime, let the speculations begin!

EDIT: Nicholas continues to deny the accusations in an email to the Huffington Post.

Romney the Bigot? Yeah, right.

Irritated that Mitt Romney has not lost any ground in Iowa despite Huckabee's gains there, critics are pulling out all the stops to try and hinder his ascent to the presidency.

Writing in the Christian Science Monitor, Monsoor Ijaz describes a recent encounter he had with Romney while campaigning in Nevada. According to Monsoor, "I asked Mr. Romney whether he would consider including qualified Americans of the Islamic faith in his cabinet as advisers on national security matters, given his position that "jihadism"(emphasis added) is the principal foreign policy threat facing America today."

Fair question, I suppose. But what Ijaz says was Romney's reply is perplexing. According to Ijaz, Romney told him he didn't feel a Muslim would be necessary to fill any cabinet position "based on the numbers of American Muslims [as a percentage] in our population...". Now why would anybody give that answer when the question was about a Muslim's utility in the cabinet in the context of national security? I'll be honest, I think Mr. Monsoor might be fudging the truth here a little bit. Oh, screw it, I'll just say it; the man's lying.

Romney's recollection of the encounter seems much more plausible, even probable, as it actually answers the question Ijaz says he asked. In response to the query, Romney insists:

“His question was, 'did I need to have a Muslim in my cabinet to be able to confront radical jihad and would it be important to have a Muslim in my cabinet,'" said Romney. "And I said, ‘No I don’t think that you have to have a Muslim in the cabinet to be able to take on radical jihad any more than during the Second World War we needed to have a Japanese-American to help us understand the threat that was coming from Japan,’ or something of that nature.”

Now that actually answers the question, something I believe Romney would be prone to do. The question was not tricky. It was not harmful. It seemed to have been asked in good faith. But Mr. Monsoor wanted to hear one answer, and he got another. How do we know he wants a Muslim on the cabinet? Well, not only because he is one, but because the title of his own column is, "A Muslim Belongs In The Cabinet". Now he's got his panties in a knot and wants the world to know about it.

Moreover, if Romney believes his answer of "no Muslims needed" is politically costly, then why is he still saying "no Muslims needed"? The whole thing just doesn't make any sense, which is just another reasy why I believe Mr. Monsoor is fishing for a scandal. But don't expect that to stop a desperate John McCain, who is already taking pot shots at the former Governor over the issue.

All of this, only to find out that Mr. Monsoor is a former Democratic fundraiser. I think that just about settles the question over who is being honest here.

Republicans Sweep Hillary In Head to Head Matchups

In the latest Zogby Interactive poll, Democrat Hillary Clinton trails all of the Republican front runners in seperate head-to-head matchups.

As late as July, Clinton was polling well ahead of her Republican counterparts by as many as 10 points. Now each lead her by a margin of 3-5 points, in a survey with a margin of error of only one percent. It turns out the only "boys" ganing up on her are from our side. Over 9,000 people were surveyed in the poll, adding more clout to other surveys showing fully half of the American electorate absolutely will not vote for Mrs. Clinton in any circumstance.

Now, if we could only insure that the Democrats are stupid enough to actually nominate her.

Lott To Resign

Trent Lott the former Senate Majority Leader is announcing that he will resign by the end of the year in a press conference later today. Details are sketchy, more information to follow.

The All Seeing John Kass

In his latest piece, Mr. John Kass, writing for the Chicago Tribune, has offered us the light at the end of the tunnel in the stem cell debate. Indeed, it is probably the most in depth analysis to date. According to Mr. Kass, "Abortion is at the heart of the stem cell debate."

Well, zippity doo dah, Captain Obvious. You sure have struck a gold mine! As if only he was born with a whole brain, Mr. Kass seems to talk down to his readers with his take on the issue. Seriously, did any of you out there not recognize this before his space-filler of a column was published? Well of course not; Right Up Front readers are smarter than that.

Of course, we've known since 1998, when stem cells were discovered, that it was intrisically linked to the debate over the right of "human life unborn", as Mr. Kass calls it. And this is why, as I pointed out in my initial column on the new skin cell discovery, liberals cannot acquiesce to using skin cells instead of embryonic stem cells; that would mean ultimately admitting that it is more moral to use the skin cells than the stem cells. Its just that simple. So rather than use the uncontroversial skin cells, they continue to insist we keep killing babies to satisfy their unquenchable lust for human life.

I'm beginning to think they just can't sleep at night unless they have as much blood on their hands as possible.

Will McCain Magic Strike Twice In The Granite State?

On the Chris Matthew’s show this Sunday morning the topic turned to Senator McCain and whether or not his climbing poll numbers in New Hampshire will transcend into a win. The other question is more important though: If McCain wins New Hampshire, how will he do in the rest of the primary field?

Romney continues to do well in Iowa despite surging numbers for Mike Huckabee who like a saint of sorts has swooped in for Christian Conservatives. In New Hampshire, it’s Romney and McCain in the top tier polls, but will Romney momentum from Iowa translate into votes in New Hampshire and will Giuliani’s national lead touch down in the granite state?

All this political hoopla means one thing: we may not be done with nominating a candidate as soon as we thought. Personally, I would love to see a dog fight. Yes, a dog fight between Romney, McCain and Rudy till the convention. Filled with the half lies and dirty tricks we love to hate so much in a presidential campaign. To be honest, republicans do a hell of a lot better running negative campaigns than democrats do. Sure, we’d like to think that we want a clean campaign but who wants to watch that?

Whether or not McCain wins New Hampshire is somewhat too soon to know but for the sake of political junkies everywhere let’s hope he does.

Welcome, Andrew Powaleny

Right Up Front is happy to welcome Mr. Andrew Powaleny as our newest contributor to the blog! I think I will let him introduce himself, but I trust you will all find him an excellent read. And besides being a conservative intellectual of unprecedented proportions, he also has great hair!

Welcome aboard, Andrew!

Giuliani Caught In Hypocritical Lecture

As the primary season heats up with only 45 days to go, Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani took off the gloves as they threw heated exchanges at each other. But it was Rudy who should have kept his mouth shut in this case.

Apparently, the honorable mayor has uncovered a case in which Judge Kathe Tuttman, whom Romney appointed, freed a convicted killer without bail who was just this Monday charged with committing two more murders since his release. Says Mr. Giuliani, "The governor is going to have to explain his appointment and the judge is going to have to explain her decision."

Now, I don't know about any of you, but if I were going to make a list of people who should be lecturing anyone about appointments, Rudy would be on the hard rock bottom of it. Can you say Bernard Kerik?

For his part, Governor Romney called for the judge's resignation, saying she "showed an inexplicable lack of good judgment in a hearing that decided to put someone on the street who had not only in the past been convicted of manslaughter, but had threatened the lives of other individuals and was a flight risk."

In an interesting twist the killer, Daniel Tavares Jr, has also made threats against Romney.

Democrats Losing Their Grip On 2008

It does not have the drama of the Inchon landing or the sweep of the Union comeback in the summer of 1864. But the turnabout of American fortunes in Iraq over the past several months is of equal moment -- a war seemingly lost, now winnable. The violence in Iraq has been dramatically reduced. Political allegiances have been radically reversed. The revival of ordinary life in many cities is palpable. Something important is happening. - Charles Krauthammer

Indeed, something important is happening, though not only what Mr. Krauthammer's typically methodical analysis concludes. No, not only is the view of the war becoming more and more "winnable" to the American people, but so too is the view of Republicans on their prospects in 2008.

If the 2006 midterm election was a referendum on the Iraq War, thus sweeping Democrats to healthy majorities in the Congress, then it would be logical that 2008 will be a referendum on what they did about it. And what have they done? Nothing. And so there is little to discuss. More impressive than the Democrats anti-war efforts is what the President and congressional Republicans have done. Unwavering in the face of lost elections and dismal approval ratings they have steadfastly stood on principle for something they knew to be right. They have supported the military effort and we are now seeing the results of their political bravery.

And now Democrats are struggling to decide how to handle the good news from Iraq. As usual, rooting for America is difficult at this juncture since their only hope to maintain their congressional majorities and gain the White House is to help insure that America loses in Iraq. And so they do what comes naturally...they root for the enemy instead, and plead for America's surrender.

But when the reports from Iraq become so positive that even the New York Times is conceding improvements, well, Democrats have a good reason to be worried about their hopes for 2008.

I am not so foolish as to predict a Republican majority in either chamber come the day after the election. But the outlook is more and more hopeful that we can keep the White House.

Now Thats One Cheap Dollar!

There is an excellent article in the Times of London today by Gerard Baker. Writing about the declining value of the American dollar, Baker makes a good case for continued (or for some, renewed) optimism about the American economy.

An excerpt:

If you're still sceptical, ask yourself this: is it probable that the shift in the relative value of the dollar and the euro represents a bet by the world's investors that Europe — strike-torn, productivity-challenged, demographically doomed Europe — is the world's economic future, rather than the US...?

Great information I think you all should read.

United We Win

"For God's sake, my dear friends, take up your pen, select their most striking heresies, and cut them to pieces in the face of the public".

Today marked our 100th column here at Right Up Front in our short three months of existence. It was written by our dear friend, Laura Elizabeth Morales, whose steadfastness in growing the conservative women's movement should be, and is, highly regarded. In addition to today's milestone, yesterday saw another, when our column was published on the travesty of liberal blather meandering around as children's entertainment over at Nickelodeon. That day saw our readership more than double. And so, today, on this Thanksgiving, I would like to thank all of our readers who make all of this possible; because believe me, we wouldn't write if no one was reading.

I also wanted to stress the importance of action. Conservativism cannot be sustained by merely reading articles by like minded people, and it cannot grow by simply voting for our favorite pro-life candidates. The survival and growth of our conservative values rely on our actions. And so, I would ask each of you, how often do you take action? How often do you make phone calls to radio shows? Write letters to the editors of your city or campus newspapers? How many of you raise your hands in class when a professor on a liberal rampage goes completely off the deep end?

I am asking you all to stand up and speak out. And where do you find the conviction to do this?

Be brave.

Never be afraid of what you know in your heart is right. Never be afraid to say you do not know, as long as you always seek the truth. And do not be afraid of the truth, for the truth will always lead you to conservative conclusions. Challenge liberals wherever you find them. Admit when you may be wrong, but always remember a liberal is never right.

Never give up.

For too long, conservatives have been silenced by a media with an agenda and an academic environment with a mission to corrupt and indoctrinate America's youth. And we have allowed it to happen.

We do not yell, for it is not in our nature to get flustered. We do not protest, for we haven't the time. Most of us are too busy at our job or raising the children we did not abort to get very involved in a movement. But I say you must do something, lest our own values die. Stand up for life. Stand up for freedom. Stand up for liberty, and patriotism, and equality.

Stand up and speak out! Because together, we will win.

How Feminism Disarms Women

I have a new column out with the Independent this week. A recurring theme with my research right now is on the concept of feminism and what it means to be a real feminist. In this week's column I make several quips about arming oneself against violence.

For a taste of the subject matter I said:

Women have betrayed women, and as a female I must state with pride that the women’s movement got significant rights and advancements for females. The fight for suffrage and equal rights was a fabulous and novel concept, but this successful and glorious movement has been hijacked by women like Nancy Pelosi, Gloria Steinem, and Eve Ensler. One of the most infamous examples of how women have betrayed women is the play The Vagina Monologues, by Ensler. Women in the play scream “vagina” at the top of their lungs in a call for “ending violence against women.” Women, our movement is about choice, and it is your choice to combat this type of feminism and reclaim the original purpose of the movement.

Not entirely controversial right? Perhaps it was my mention of encouraging women to get their concealed carry licenses to arm themselves against violence.

Feminism should be about equality, strength and sisterhood. In my “women in politics” class thus far I have learned that capitalism perpetuates patriarchy and that masculinity is shunned upon for its oppressive nature. Feminism should not be about abortion, hating patriarchy and screaming “vagina” as a cry against violence.

Christina Hoff Sommers, author of the book “Who Stole Feminism: How Women Have Betrayed Women”, sums it up best by saying, “Now you ask a group of young women on the college campus, 'How many of you are feminists?' Very few will raise their hands because young women don't want to be associated with it anymore because they know it means male-bashing, it means being a victim, and it means being bitter and angry.”

Christina Hoff Sommers is bound to be the one to anger the radical feminists because she speaks to gender equality rather than gender privilege.

Of course no column of mine is complete without at least something to let the hate mail pour on in.

Lucky for men, organizations like the Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute are out there to help leading ladies (and gentlemen) bring female speakers to their college campuses to help bring balance to the anti-male women and gender studies departments. These speakers are traditionally shunned by women and gender studies departments and include Michelle Malkin, blogger and journalist, Amanda Carpenter, author and journalist, and Christina Hoff Sommers, the equity feminist. Ladies, the “real” way to start taking back the night, is to learn to accept both genders as equal beings.

And, of course, never forget the power of a good Glock and some practice trips to the shooting range.

Of course, at the mention of the word Glock, someone had this to say:

The last point I'd like to make is related to the Glock. Good luck with that. As a person who's been down there in the gutter with females, males, and children in ER's throughout the city...I can tell you that a Glock won't do you a whole lot of good when the person trying to hurt you is either your husband/boyfriend/family member or a close acquaintance.

Any martial arts expert would be the first to let you know that "putting all your eggs in one basket," so to speak is a sure path to placing yourself in more, not less, danger. As a brown belt myself, I can tell you that screaming VAGINA in a parking lot with your hands full of shopping bags is a much more effective form of defense than digging through all your belongings in search of a Glock, the way you would search for your cell phone. At any rate, it would be sure to attract attention, which is exactly what you want if someone is attacking you.

Alright, I'll be the one with a holster for my Glock when I'm out shopping instead of the woman screaming "vagina" to save herself. While screaming "vagina" may certainly attract attention, attention doesn't always save you.

My mom was mugged in broad daylight, screaming for help, and no one helped her, it drew little attention in the bustling parking lot. In fact, she fought off her assailant and managed to keep her purse and her life.

I'm not going to take the same chance.

The problem with the commentator is that she assumes I will shove my concealed weapon to the bottom of my cute purse and not be ready if I need it. I'm certain I'll either wear a holster with my weapon or carry a purse that is equipped with the space to add in a holster or some sort of pocket. The same argument can be used against carrying pepper spray. Lucky for women guns are made small enough to be able to carry in a variety of handbags with a variety of options as to how to carry it.

In honor of the article comments that refer to me as a mini Ann Coulter I'll leave you with a quote from the agent provocateur:

"Only one policy has ever been shown to deter mass murder: concealed-carry laws. In a comprehensive study of all public, multiple-shooting incidents in America between 1977 and 1999, the inestimable economists John Lott and Bill Landes found that concealed-carry laws were the only laws that had any beneficial effect. And the effect was not insignificant. States that allowed citizens to carry concealed handguns reduced multiple-shooting attacks by 60 percent and reduced the death and injury from these attacks by nearly 80 percent."

Romney Goes On Offense As Huckabee Comes From Behind

With the latest Iowa polls showing Governor Mike Huckabee quickly gaining on Governor Mitt Romney, the former CEO is stepping up his criticism of Mr. Huckabee's immigration position as governor of Arkansas. This is going to be a huge hurdle for Huckabee to clear if he wishes to win over the GOP faithful. Offering scholarships to illegal immigrants, Mike? I dunno how I feel about that.

In this Fox News Report, Romney is far too soft on Huckabee on this issue, in my opinion. Huckabee's position on illegal immigrants in his state could have a dramatic impact on his ability to sustain his current upward trend, something he must do. So it is vital that Romney expose that delicate underbelly in a fiery way.

Keep in mind, while Huckabee has been on the rise in Iowa, so has Romney, though not by nearly as much. Then again, Huckabee's numbers have had nowhere to go but up until recently. But Romney has accomplished a nearly insurmountable lead in New Hampshire, and is now ahead in South Carolina, though only by a small margin.

If Romney can fend off Huckabee in Iowa, and clobber the competition in New Hampshire, he just might edge out Giuliani in Michigan, which would then put him in a great position to handily win South Carolina. That would put Giuliani up against a four time winner going into Florida, where the former mayor must win to stay viable. Personally, I don't think he can do it if that scenario plays out.

Sheesh, I can't wait for January!

Blood Thirsty Liberals Can't Get Enough

New scientific research now shows it is possible to create equivalents to embryonic stem cells without actually killing human life. The new method of research is in its infant stages, but the loons of the left are already defending their murderous ways. Unwavering in the face of the report, liberals are insisting we must kill as much life as possible until the new method has been proven using impossible standards that they only apply to research that stands in their way (aka, actual science).

"I don't think this changes the debate," said Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), a key participant in the House debate. "We still need to encourage all types of research." And, of course, by "all types" the Democratic congresswoman means any type that destroys life.

Rather than rejoice at the possibility of wading out of the morally hazy debate of embyonic stem cell research by being able to circumvent them altogether, liberals are bellyaching that they can't kill anymore unborn babies.

"While this is exciting basic research, it could still take years to get this to work in humans in a way that could be used clinically," said Robert Lanza, chief scientific officer of Advanced Cell Technology in Worcester, Mass. "I cannot overstate that this is early-stage research and that we should not abandon other areas of stem cell research."

Allow me to translate: "Please allow us to massacre as many defenseless lives as possible while we still have time"

It never fails. They will do absolutely anything to kill life. Unless, of course, its a terrorists life, in which case they are even against harsh interrogation techniques, ever, under any circumstances. You know, because that would be morally repugnant.

Boycott Nickelodeon

I want to thank Michel Malkin for initially exposing this on her own site. It is about time someone blows the whistle on the indoctrination of America's youth by one of their prime sources of entertainment, Nickelodeon. Check out this video and then contact the producers of Nickelodeon at 818-736-3000. Ask for Allison Dexter and get your voice heard.

I know many of you no longer watch Nickelodeon, and you may not have children yet, myself included. But I am now encouraging everyone to boycott this network.

As Brendan Steinhauser of The Conservative Revolution says, "If they are going to do a piece on young activists, that’s fine. But they should at least provide a balanced look at conservatives, liberals, libertarians, greens, etc.. Instead, this propaganda piece is meant to indoctrinate young children into the left-wing mindset."

NOTE (11/21/2007): Apparently moved to act by my blog [ :) ], Human Events has published a new article just this morning about this very subject. A must read!!

Rhyme Without Reason

I received this via email from a good friend of mine today and felt like sharing it with all of you. Enjoy.

Tax his land,
Tax his bed,
Tax the table
At which he's fed.

Tax his tractor,
Tax his mule,
Teach him taxes
Are the rule.

Tax his cow,
Tax his goat,
Tax his pants,
Tax his coat.

Tax his ties,
Tax his shirt,
Tax his work,
Tax his dirt.

Tax his tobacco,
Tax his drink,
Tax him if he
Tries to think.

Tax his cigars,
Tax his beers,
If he cries, then
Tax his tears.

Tax his car,
Tax his gas,
Find other ways
To tax his ass.

Tax all he has
Then let him know,
That you won't be done
Till he has no dough.

When he screams and hollers,
Then tax him some more,
Tax him till
He's good and sore.

Then tax his coffin ,
Tax his grave,
Tax the sod in
Which he's laid.

Put these words
upon his tomb,
" Taxes drove me to my doom..."

When he's gone,
Do not relax,
Its time to apply
The inheritance tax.

Media Continues to Lose Integrity: Demeans Women at UTSA

In an earlier post I discussed a little about Dr. Miriam Grossman, a senior fellow with the Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute, and her mission to protect all women and girls from the politically correct concerned world in campus health initiatives. All of this linked back to the forming a new club at UTSA called "Club X", a club devoted to viewing pornography, discussing sexual escapades, and even creating pornography.

I attended the meeting to get a little more insight about what was going through these kids heads and had a horrifying account of the type of things the club was promoting: promiscuity, violence against women, objectification of both genders, and so many other things.

One thing that stood out is the fact that two reporters, one from the Independent, and one from the Paisano, which are both media outlets for UTSA, decided to play along in naming fetishes in front of the TV news crews, security, campus leaders, and porn aficionados.

One reporter, who used a pseudonym on his column, Mike Sanch, "reported" the following:

They went around the room to people who wanted to respond -- various responses like biting, submission, domination, oral, anal and some other topics were raised. Once they arrived to question my sexual desires , I cautiously looked around, made eye contact with the blonde then responded, “Well I’m here as part of the media, but I’ll play along and say, role playing, and tonight I’ll be the reporter.” Laughter ensued. I swear I saw the blonde bite her lower lip in that sexy way hot girls do.

There we were. Babes, weird looking dudes, not so good looking chicks, policeman, overweight cameraman who had been dreaming of this for their whole career, and the hot news lady from K-SAT 12 all listening to a bunch of college students’ talk about their favorite sexual positions and fetishes. How genuinely American, I thought to myself with a smile on my face.

I'm sure the founding fathers of America would think this is genuinely American...

Granted this "news" report reads like a thirteen year old boy's journal about his first encounter with a copy of Penthouse, it's important to note that the media coverage on this issue has been soft. Media outlets need to throw the club founder some hardball questions. Media outlets need to expose what the club really does, what it really stands for, and who it really hurts.

The article ends with this:

But then some old lady brought out her whips and leather straps, and it got weird. The meeting ended shortly after, and the hardcore porn enthusiasts followed Starr and Steveson to a private home to watch masochism porn.

I on the other hand, somehow ended up at a strip club.

The woman who brought out the whips did get to whipping one of her colleagues at the meeting, declaring that she'd be ashamed of her mother ever found out she was doing this. Of course, news cameras, security, student leaders, and even an orientation tour group were present at UTSA's open gathering area, the Ski Lodge, to see the debacle unfold.

When will there be a return to modesty?

You can check out my new column at the Independent here. For a taste:

The Luce Policy Institute also gave me an eye opening glance into the V-Day campaign and the Vagina Monologues, a play that promotes sexuality more than defense for women. Women, it’s a dangerous world out there and screaming “vagina” at the top of your lungs is not going to stop an assailant from mugging or attacking you. Rather than viewing a play that endorses the rape of a minor, forced into intoxication, and suggests that the only normal male is a pervert who likes to look at vaginas, find a self-defense class and take it. Better still, sign up for your concealed carry license. Theatrical over-sexed plays and rallies are not going to end violence against women nor will they make you any more prepared to stop an assailant from harming you. In fact these productions only serve to cheapen the image of feminists and reduce the positive impact of all things associated with feminism.

Huckabee Releases First TV Spot

This week, Mike Huckabee unveiled his first TV spot which will be airing in Iowa.

Check it out:


Although, it has faced some criticism for not being serious enough, the ad seems to have accomplished what it was designed to accomplish. According to Governor Huckabee, the purpose of the ad was to generate buzz and to give Americans a break from the serious politics over the thanksgiving holiday. It seems to have worked. The ad was aired multiple times on Fox News and CNN, and the campaign's web traffic reflects the buzz. Governor Huckabee has promised serious issues oriented ads begging next week with what he calls a "unique" presentation. Some great TV spots could be just what Huckabee needs to surpass Romney for a win in Iowa. Time will tell. On another note, Governor Huckabee picked up endorsements today from motivational speaker Zig Ziglar, and NYT best selling author Jerry Jenkins.

Why Not Duncan Hunter?

Our good friend, Justin Higgins, over at Right On The Right recently published a short column praising Congressman Duncan Hunter.

It immediately reminded me of my own column praising Mr. Hunter just last month for his stellar congressional record, for which he receives little to no credit. So, once again inspired by the good congressman, I dug up another video clip. And, once again, I think you'll like what you hear.



Gosh, I love this guy.

Giuliani In Denial

Rudy Giuliani is planning to increase his ad presence in New Hampshire as well as take a weekend bus tour of the Granite State in a last ditch effort to cut back a huge Romney uptick in the polls. Recognizing the importance of the early states, Giuliani has been seen more often in New Hampshire, where he trails Romney by as many as 20 points.

In a huge upset to Mr. Giuliani, former Governor and 9/11 Commission co-chair Tom Kean, Sr., endorsed Senator John McCain for president. Rudy dismissed the endorsement, saying "There are a lot of Republicans, I'm not going to get all the votes or all the endorsements." True, Mr. Mayor, but with 100% name recognition you should sure be doing better than just 28% in national polls.

The truth is that Rudy Giuliani is facing the very real possibility of being yesterday's news after the most likely scenarios play out in the first primaries. Scenario oen has Mitt Romney winning both Iowa and New Hampshire, with Mike Huckabee pulling off a huge second place finish, automatically making him competitive in NH. The tidal wave of media coverage for those two men will drown out the cries of a defeated Giuliani campaign as it finds itself struggling to stay viable.

The second scenario has Mike Huckabee coming out of nowhere to become the winner in Iowa. Now that's a media story that just won't stop. Then a crippled Romney limps into New Hampshire. Of course, with such a huge (and growing) lead in NH, Romney is pretty much the certain to be the winner. But fresh off of a big win in Iowa, Mike Huckabee could edge out Giuliani for second. That would be a huge upset for Giuliani, coming in a distant third or fourth place in the first two states, immediately casting him as the Howard Dean of the Republicans 2008 primaries.

Of course, there was a time everyone thought Mitt had Iowa in the bag also, which now seems to be in question.

But, at the end of the day, Giulania's only hope is to win Florida, the first of the "winner take all" primaries. And therein lies the problem for the former mayor. The last thing you want to do is hedge your bets on a single state after your opponents have won enormous or impressive come from behind victories.

Bottom line: Giuliani has a lot of catching up to do, no matter how you look at it.

Did Mitt Romney Push Poll Himself?

According to Mark Hemingway of National Review Online, it certainly seems possible. As word of this connection breaks loose, Mitt Romney is going to have lots of explaining to do. Already facing accusations of dishonesty for his "flip flop" on abortion and other social issues, this is the last thing the Romney camp needs to deal with. A Romney supporter myself, my default reaction is to say "NO, can't be, never." But if I had to be honest...well, it certainly doesn't smell good,and we work in a business where smell is all that is needed to ruin you.

It is worth noting, though, that the same firm has been linked to Rudy Giuliani as well. Anyway, you decide. As per usual, you can check out the article for yourself by clicking on the title of the column.

Romney responded in kind by dispatching campaign spokesman Kevin Madden:

Let me be perfectly clear: our campaign was not and is not involved with any efforts to engage in alleged push polling calls against our own candidate.
The insinuation made by the National Review post is highly misleading, and I emphatically reject the entire premise of the headline and the theories promoted by anonymous political consultants cited in the posting.

Even cursory reviews of news reports would indicate that the research firm in question, Western Wats, is a prominent research collection company that was used by firms that are currently employed by rival campaigns. But, our campaign has been careful not to accuse anyone, especially since we have contacted the Office of the Attorney General in New Hampshire in an effort to get to the bottom of this matter.

Again, our campaign is not involved with efforts against our own candidate, and I reject outright even the slightest insinuation to the contrary.

Cheer up, Republicans

RCP has posted a semi-comprehensive list of head to head matchups, pitting front-running Republicans against their Democrat counterparts. And the results are not surprising, although maybe not as hopeful as Democrats would like, and not quite as disparaging as Republicans are making out.

To make a long story short, let us begin by saying that we are losing to both Hillary and B. Hussein in virtually any contest. But while Clinton/Obama lead all of the Republican contenders, the spread is interesting to me, and worth talking about here. The biggest loss Republicans face is a Romney/Clinton matchup, in which the former Governor of Massachussets only loses by 10 points. That's right, I said "only". Consider if you will, a candidate who has only campaigned in the very early states trailing Hillary, who has 100% name recognition, by only ten points. This is not a lot