Monday, November 12, 2007

What We Want in a Presidential Candidate

From Cathie Adams of Texas Eagle Forum
Speech given to Family Research Council, October 19, 2007

The media have already designated the frontrunners for the Republican nomination for President and are working overtime to force Republicans to line up behind one of them right now. The Republican National Convention won't take place until next September. Most Republicans are still shopping. We've listened to the presidential debates organized by the networks, but they have ignored or not adequately covered many of the issues we care about. Here are some of the statements we would like to hear from a candidate to be worthy of our backing.

Respect for Traditional Marriage.
It's not enough for our candidate to say "I oppose same-sex marriage." Even John Kerry said that. It's not enough to say "I support a marriage amendment." The President doesn't have a role in adopting constitutional amendments.

We want to know how our candidate, if he becomes President, will use the power of his office to protect traditional marriage between a man and a woman. We want him to promise to use his executive power to fully enforce the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which the GAO says covers 1,138 federal laws affecting the rights of husbands and wives, including many regulations in the income tax code and in the Social Security system.

We want our candidate to promise to sign legislation that would prohibit federal judges from ordering same-sex marriage, or domestic partner benefits like those that accrue to married couples, either by pretending that this is required by the Fourteenth Amendment or by declaring DOMA unconstitutional.

Respect for Life.
It's definitely not enough for a candidate to say "I'm pro-life." It's not sufficient to say he believes Roe v. Wade should be overturned because the President has no power to do that. We want to know what the candidate will do as President to advance protection for unborn babies.

We want him to promise to veto the Freedom of Choice Act, for which the feminists, led by Senator Barbara Boxer, have just started an all-out campaign. The Freedom of Choice Act would prohibit government, at any level, from interfering with our efforts to protect human life. The Freedom of Choice Act would wipe out every single pro-life bill we've passed in the last 34 years, including parental notice, parental consent, the woman's right to know law, waiting periods, fetal homicide, abortion-funding restrictions, and partial-birth abortion bans. We must have certain knowledge that our candidate would veto any such law.

We want sure knowledge that our candidate would veto any bill that would allow or fund embryonic stem cell research. We must be assured that he will sign a bill to prohibit human cloning through somatic cell nuclear transfer or other means.

We want our candidate to pledge to support retention of the same, identical pro-life plank that has been in the Republican Party Platform through the last six Republican National Conventions. That plank proclaims that "the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed."

Protection for Parents' Rights.
We want our presidential candidate to protect parents' rights in public schools by repudiating the offensive and impudent Ninth Circuit Court decision in Fields v. Palmdale, which ruled that parents' fundamental right to control the upbringing of their children "does not extend beyond the threshold of the school door."

Since the federal government gives about $60 billion a year to public schools, we want our candidate to promise to sign school appropriation bills only if they contain language to protect parents' rights to protect their children against such things as nosy questionnaires about sex, drugs and suicide; mental health screening; forcing schoolchildren to be put on psychotropic drugs; courses that promote Islam or homosexuality; bilingual education; classroom materials that parents consider pornographic; giving birth control to 6th grade girls without parents' knowledge or consent; and sex education and sexual orientation courses even if they are masquerading as "diversity" courses.

Opposition to Supremacist Judges.
It's not enough for our candidate to say he will appoint strict constructionist judges.

We want our President to appoint only judges and justices who will promise to enforce the Constitution as it is written. We want our President to appoint only judges and justices who publicly reject the liberal notion that our Constitution is "evolving," or that decisions can be based on "emerging awareness" about morals.

Our presidential candidate must promise to appoint judges who will stand up against the organized campaign to banish the acknowledgment of God from every public school, building and park, turning the United States into a secular or even atheist nation. We want our presidential candidate to endorse and promise to sign legislation, such as the "We the People" bill (H.R. 300), to withdraw power from federal judges to ban the Pledge of Allegiance and the Ten Commandments from public schools and places.

We want our candidate to repeat the best thing President George W. Bush ever said: "We will not stand for judges who undermine democracy by legislating from the bench and try to remake the culture of America by court order."

Protection of American Sovereignty.
We want our President to be a leader in protecting American sovereignty. We want him to reject United Nations treaties because they are always an invasion of our sovereignty. They all set up a monitoring commission to dictate U.S. domestic law, and most of them set up a tribunal of foreign judges to decide disputes and enforce their rulings.

For example, we want our candidate to publicly oppose the United Nations Treaty on the Rights of the Child, which would dictate new rights of the child such as access to any media of the child's choice despite his parents' objections. We want our presidential candidate to oppose the United Nations Treaty on Women (known as CEDAW) which would make abortion a treaty right, and allow foreigners to revise our textbooks to comport with feminist ideology.

We want our presidential candidate to oppose the United Nations Law of the Sea Treaty, which would make all American use of the oceans, and the minerals at the bottom of the seas, subject to the International Seabed Authority in Jamaica and to the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea in Germany. We want our presidential candidate to come right out and say: Ronald Reagan was right in opposing the treaty, and George W. Bush is wrong in cooperating with Democratic Senator Joe Biden in trying to get the Senate to ratify it.

In all these UN treaty tribunals, the United States has only one vote out of about 150 countries, the same vote as Communist Cuba. Based on past experience, we can assume they will regularly rule against us. Every United Nations treaty is a major loss of U.S. sovereignty.

We want our candidate for President to promise that the Security and Prosperity Partnership will not be a stepping-stone to a North American Union modeled on the European Union. When Fox News asked President Bush about this at his Canadian news conference in August, he refused to deny that his Security and Prosperity Partnership is the prelude to a North American Union. We expect the presidential candidate we support to announce that Bush will never allow the United States to be economically integrated with Mexico and Canada, and will never allow the free movement of labor across open borders.

We want our candidate to support English as our official language. English is the primary factor that makes us what our national motto promises: e pluribus unum, out of many, one people. We must reject divisive talk about multiculturalism and diversity. We want to assimilate our legal immigrants into the American way of life, our laws, our language, and our culture.

We want our presidential candidate to promise to rescind Bill Clinton's Executive Order 13166 that requires anyone who receives federal funds (such as doctors and hospitals) to provide all services in foreign languages.

We want to know whether or not our presidential candidate favors foreign countries or foreign corporations owning our highways, our ports, or other infrastructure.

We want our presidential candidate to pledge to veto any bill that reduces the precious constitutional right of small inventors to ownership of their inventions. The right of inventors to own their own inventions was established as a constitutional "right" even before the more famous rights were added by constitutional amendments. Our original and unique constitutional system of assuring the property right of inventors is the reason why 95% of the world's great inventions are American, and the reason why we have achieved such economic prosperity. This constitutional right must be preserved.

Stop Illegal Aliens from Entering Our Country.
We want our candidate for President to announce that he considers it a presidential duty to prevent illegal entry into our country. We want him to be forthright in praising the American people for successfully demanding that the U.S. Senate defeat the Bush-Kennedy Amnesty bill earlier this year.

We want our candidate to promise that he will never try to bamboozle us with a similar so-called "comprehensive" immigration bill or a so-called "DREAM Act," that includes amnesty for the millions of illegal aliens now in our country. We want our candidate to reject any bill that would bring into our country hundreds of thousands more aliens who are falsely called "guest workers," most of whom have never been to high school and will take jobs from our own millions of high-school dropouts who desperately need entry-level low-paid jobs to start building their lives.

We want our presidential candidate to keep the lid on the multinationals' attempt to bring in thousands more foreigners on H-1B visas, who take jobs from our college graduates, especially our engineers and computer specialists. We want to hear our candidate's plan for getting the "guest workers" already here to leave our country when their visas expire.

We want our candidate to tell us how he will lift the tax burden that Americans suffer today in providing the net value of $20,000 a year to every illegal alien household. (That figure is provided by the Heritage Foundation.)

We want our candidate to tell us exactly what he will do to prevent the entry of the 85% of illegal drugs that come over our southern border.

We want our candidate to promise to enforce the law against employers hiring illegal aliens. The illegals and foreigners on visas are paid less than Americans, and so they depress American wages. The law of supply and demand works. The greater the supply of labor, the lower the wage.

We want our candidate to reject George W. Bush's plan called "totalization" which would put illegal aliens into our Social Security system.

We want our candidate to build the 854-mile fence that the Secure Fence Law requires. We want our candidate to pardon Border Guards Ignatio Ramos and Jose Compean who are unjustly imprisoned for intercepting a professional Mexican drug smuggler.

We want our candidate to stop the entry of Mexican trucks on our highways and roads. Even Bill Clinton, bless him, kept out the Mexican trucks.

Protection of American Jobs.
The Republican presidential debate in economically depressed Michigan showed that the top-tier Republican candidates are out of touch with the voters on economic issues. It was so disappointing that most of the Republican candidates offered nothing about the economy that touches the lives of middle-class Americans. They are an enormous bloc of voters who joined with social conservatives to elect and re-elect Ronald Reagan.

Let's be frank: the Values Voters who put the social issues at the top of their agenda are the largest bloc in the Republican Party, but they are not a majority. Reagan was elected with a coalition of social conservatives and working-class Americans who need good jobs and hope to live the American dream.

On economics, most Republican presidential candidates just give us tired old platitudes. They talked about cutting spending. But most Americans don't believe they will do that because Republicans did not cut spending when they had control of both Congress and the White House. The candidates talked about the line-item veto. But that is irrelevant because it's unconstitutional.

The candidates repeated the slogan "free trade." They had better wake up and face reality. The Wall Street Journal-NBC poll reported that Republican voters, by a nearly 2-to-1 margin, now believe that free trade is bad for the U.S. economy because it costs jobs. Grassroots Republicans reached this conclusion because so many of their friends have lost good manufacturing jobs and had to take jobs at a third the pay, and because the wives have to go to work to pay for the groceries and the mortgage.

We want to hear the plan of our presidential candidate for dealing with the way foreign countries discriminate against U.S. producers and products by subsidies and tax-rebates.

The leading Republican presidential candidates in the Michigan debate just said that we must be more competitive with foreign producers. That's absurd. There is no way we can be competitive with Chinese factory workers who are paid 30 cents an hour with no benefits.

One candidate suggested that better U.S. technology will enable us to compete. That's also absurd. The Chinese are stealing our technology and our inventions and still work their people at 30 cents an hour. Some suggested that better education, with more math and science, will make us competitive. That's absurd, too. Our college graduates cannot compete with Asian engineers and computer techies who work for $10,000 a year.

The top-tier Republican presidential candidates showed little or no compassion for the three million Americans who have lost their jobs to globalism. It's no wonder that polls now show that Americans believe Democrats are better at dealing with the economy than Republicans.

Our candidate for President must reject the trade deals that are unfair to American workers. We want our President to protect us from the hostility of the World Trade Organization, another treaty that has been detrimental to Americans.

The World Trade Organization has ruled against the United States in 40 out of 47 cases. Why is anybody surprised? Why do we put up with the globalists who put our country into trade agreements and world organizations dominated by foreigners who hate and envy us, and who rule against us every chance they get?

The latest outrage of the World Trade Organization is to rule that we must repeal our law against internet gambling because it violates free trade in "recreational services." If we do not comply with this ruling, the World Trade Organization will assess billions of dollars in damages against us. There is no appeal from a World Trade Organization ruling, or from the decision of any United Nations tribunal.

We want to hear whether or not our presidential candidate supports the "global economy" — which forces Americans to compete against pitifully low wages, slave labor, and discriminatory practices imposed by foreign countries and foreign tribunals.

We want leadership to make sure that our economy produces good jobs that enable guys to buy a home and a car, support their families, live the American dream, and confidently expect their children to have an even better life.

We're listening to the candidates and we're waiting to hear them address the issues we care about.

Monday, October 01, 2007

Aggieland...a little slice of heaven. MOO!


As you may know, I rarely blog about sports. It seems that the game of politics is enough to follow. However, I had more fun at the Texas A&M game this weekend than I have had in a very long time. My host was a very gracious and proud Aggie who was eager to introduce me to Kyle Field. Midnight "Yell Practice" was a one-of-a-kind experience. Apparently Texas A&M is the only school in the world that does this. (I got this fact from a reliable Aggie source.) The marching band at the game was amazing, and put the wimpy little Baylor band to shame. They say that A&M's group is the largest military marching band in the world! The university is steeped in proud and significant traditions that prove to be nothing short of addicting, even mezmerizing. If you're one of those people who is annoyed by the strong school spirit exhibited by Aggies, I guess you've never gotten to experience it for yourself. Of course, to me Texas A&M is the perfect school: heavily conservative, heavily Christian, heavily patriotic, and heavily agricultural. What's not to love?

It is a striking contrast from their evil rivals in orange. Speaking of which, I do feel badly for their poor mascot with the long horns. You know the one. He is so heavily sedated at the games that he cannot even stand up most of the time. I'll bet the animal rights activists in Austin don't know that! And guess who cares for this ball-less bull? Yep! The best ag school in the country! Of course they do a professional job and keep school rivalry out of the operating room, right? Not entirely. Since t.u. Austin butchers and EATS their mascot when he dies, the surgeons at A&M make sure they jam Texas A&M pins into his ribs whenever he's opened up. Apparently this does not harm him while he is's just a great jab at the enemy upon his death. Perhaps this is an urban legend...but I'd like to think it's true.

One more. At the Longhorn game I went to earlier in the season, I asked several people how BEVO got his name. No one could tell me. Finally, someone in The Texas Club said it was named "after a brand that got messed up and looked like it said BEVO". I ran this by my Aggie host yesterday and was quickly corrected. Apparently in 1915, A&M played their rivals and won in a shutout game, 13 - 0. Some industrious ag students created a large brand commemorating the event. "13 - 0". They snuck into Austin in the dead of night and branded their bully mascot. In the morning, Austin was horrified but got their spin doctors on it right away. They decided to cover up the score on the side of their bovine by morphing it into letters: B-E-V-O.

I have these stories from a reliable but biased source. I don't really care if they are true or not; I want to believe them. I guess that makes me an Aggie at heart. WHOOP!

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

Sensing danger and dodging idiots.

If it's true that 1/5 of American adults can't locate our country on a world map, we are in more trouble than I originally thought. If it's true that you don't have to be intelligent to be successful in our country, you just have to look good—we are in double trouble. So what we have in modern-day America is a lot of beautiful idiots running around winning friends and influencing people.

Six years ago this morning, patriots and idiots alike watched as our own airliners, our planes flown by non-Americans that we let into our country, gored three of our greatest buildings. Our former symbols of protection and wealth billowed smoke for days, weeks. We felt shock, anger, and a new sense of national unity—for awhile. Cynics predicted that we would have short memories of these attacks. I prayed they would be wrong.

In each year since 2001, I wake up on the morning of September 11th and try to figure out what I should do. It's "Patriot Day" on my calendar, but what does that mean? Do I wear red? Sport a flag lapel pin? It doesn't really sound right to wish your friends "Happy Patriot Day". There's not much to be happy about when you remember the events for which it bears its name.

However, my first phone call of the morning was regarding September 11, 2001. We talked about those friends we had who were "supposed" to be at work but who mysteriously got sick to their stomachs and had a bad feeling about going in that day. Those folks lived to tell their stories and their lives are changed as a result. As we talked, I wondered about the victims of 9-11 who ignored their gut instincts. Did they deserve to die? How many of the dead had no inclination that this would be their last day? (I'd guess most.) So one thing that haunts me is that there probably were some people out of the nearly 3,000 dead who sensed danger and ignored it. Doubly tragic.

I feel an increasing sense of urgency to protect this great nation, this republic we were given, from slipping into the pages of history. My mind is constantly churning with things we should be doing and ways to communicate the true state of the union to the masses. I guess you could say that restoring our country is the constant bee in my bonnet, and will be the subject of upcoming blogs. In the meantime, it's Patriot Day. Do something meaningful with it. (Perhaps you could show 1/5 of Americans a map! While you're at it, point out Saudi Arabia. I hear they still have a lot of guys who want to be pilots.)

Friday, July 13, 2007

Texas Young Republicans Give Up Beer for Babies!

On August 17, hundreds of Texas Young Republicans will descend upon Austin for their annual convention. Usually that Friday afternoon consists of hotel check-ins and an early (uh-hum!) VERY early Happy Hour. This year's convention hosts, the Austin Young Republicans, have decided to mix it up a little bit instead. To show Austin that young professional Republicans truly do care about others in their community, the convention is offering a pro-life service project for those who would like to participate.

Of course, this will delay Happy Hour for the participants by two full hours. That equates to about eight beers, depending upon how Irish you are. Or how Texan. At any rate, even in this instance, compassion requires sacrifice.

There is a limited number of convention attendees that Texas Alliance for Life can accommodate that afternoon, so please sign up for the Pro-Life Service Project soon if you are attending convention. The Austin YRs will be taking your names and t-shirt sizes. Participants will be helping a few local pregnancy care centers handle their donated items for single mothers and their babies.

Suffice it to say that the YRs who donate their time on August 17th will truly have something to celebrate when they re-join the group at 6:00 p.m. After all, doesn't so much of politics require successfully kissing babies and shaking hands?

For more information on the convention:

Monday, June 11, 2007

I'd like half an order of Thompson and half an order of Huckabee, with a side of Ron Paul, please.

A friend's blog recently made the case for Huckabee triumphing over Thompson as an appropriate candidate. This was my response.

"Would you support a Thompson / Huckabee ticket?

"I like Mike a lot, but I wonder (like Erik Brown says) if he might be too nice to be president in this day and age. The strongest thing that Thompson has in common with Reagan is that the people are asking him to run. They are begging him to run. Face it, an awesome man like Mike Huckabee is still a second tier candidate unable to get any of the swing vote by nature of his unknown name. Thompson is a stubborn man who will not change his beliefs for anybody. He is resolute. This might make him unfair at times, unlike Reagan who had a strong spine, a soft heart and a sense of justice. But in this day and age we don't need a flip-flopper like many of the other top candidates. We don't need someone who will sell our morals down the river when it comes to a vote. Everyone makes mistakes in personal relationships...(regarding Thompson's failed marriage of 26 years). Do these marks on our records keep us from our political aspirations? Hardly. Nor should they.

"I haven't researched Mike too much, but I would like to know his position on the border and immigration. Also, does he have the ability to make the right things happen on that?

"The only thing I have against Thompson...and it's something that every other candidate except Ron Paul shares in that he is a globalist. I have faced the fact that any way the race falls, we will get another globalist in office, just like the Bushes two and Clinton. The lone detractor in this go-round is Ron Paul, and many sadly consider him to be a looney. If I can't get someone in there to immediately tighten the borders, protect our sovereignty, and abolish the IRS, my hope is that Thompson puts his hat in the ring and gives true conservatives someone to vote for who can WIN."

What say you, reader?

Wednesday, May 30, 2007

Tit for tat: a stimulating piece of fan mail!

Check out my fan mail, followed by my response! Let me know what you think.

----------------- Original Message TO KJ-----------------
From: Jen DeLand
Date: May 24, 2007 11:15 AM

obviously you are extremly ignornant or just plain one of the stupidist people in the usa. Do you even have a clue about anything w. the war w/ the news w/ the budget cuts that are hurting our kids because of bush. You really think all those kids in Columbine should have died why would you want all those kids dead in the most deadly high school shooting, why would you be against lowering gas prices, why would you be against tightening our boarders so aliens do get in why would you want to hurt millions of americans you are evil think before you speak weirdo


Wow, you have an amazing way with words. I agree that we need to tighten our borders and I am actively trying to do something about it, including speaking up for the wrongly imprisoned border agents and petitioning Bush, hopefully soon IN PERSON. I care about this country greatly! I also think we need to only use domestic oil while we develop other methods, because our dependance on the foreign oil that makes terrorists rich is killing our country, quite literally.

Columbine had nothing to do with Bush, and Michael Moore has used that tragic incident for his own personal gains. Angry boys who don't have their father's support in a real way will turn to the darkness that beckons them from all kinds of places: internet, violent video games, porn, sadistic movies, hateful writings, etc. We cannot underestimate the power of true evil in this world, and every one of us has the capability of doing that kind of damage. But most of us do not.
I believe the comment you are referring to was one I left on a someone's MySpace page and it was actually just a book title I picked up at Barnes and Noble. It was really fun to ask the sales clerk if she could find it. I just went in and said, "Do you have that book called Michael Moore is a...?" and she said loudly, "Michael Moore is a Big Fat Stupid White Man!" It was classic. Anyway, if you are truly openminded, you should read it. It's a little orange and green book with a lot to say. Remember that there are two sides to everything and a fair judge listens to both of them.

All the best to you in your research. And, in the future, at the very least, I encourage you to use spellcheck, as many people judge one's intelligence level by one's ability to write and speak well.



P.S. If you don't want to buy the book, I will send you my copy! I read it years ago.
Michael Moore Is A Big Fat Stupid White Man By David T. Hardy
Release date: By 29 June, 2004

Monday, May 14, 2007

My coma.

Yes folks, I was in a "virtual coma" since the day after Christmas. Fortunately, no one denied me food and water. I did not starve or dehydrate to death (those are my worst fears!) and I am back, feeling very much alive.

Of course, I have many things weighing on my mind as, I am sure, do you. I wake up pondering the future of our national sovereignty. I wonder which of the 20+ people running for president will be the one who succeeds in inking the deal on our betrayal. Perhaps that makes me a pessimist. Perhaps that makes me a conspiracy theorist. Perhaps that just makes me a realist. Regardless, I applaud those brave souls who are paying attention. I commend the leaders among us who are fearless enough to break ranks with the very powerful political establishments of our day. And I join those who are willing to issue the warning, "If you are not paying attention to what is happening in your country, you will lose your country." To which I'd like to add, "And you will deserve it." (insert evil laughter)

Yes, when and if I become a kids will get spankings when they are bad. And no, I won't ever move back to California. (Apparently you can't spank your kids there or the state will take them.)

All of this to say that the only presidential candidate I see who is brave enough to tell it like it is AND consistently stand up for the sovereignty of our country is Ron Paul. Tom Tancredo has some good thoughts on the subject, too. I guess I have a soft spot in my heart for the rogue Republicans who get barbecued by the Republican National Committee.

Just the other day, the RNC sent me a survey along with a fundraising letter to cover the cost of processing my opinions. Yeah. I gave them my opinions about the direction our country should take, as well as a donation. I sealed two shiny pennies into that envelope and mailed it to the RNC.

And that's my two cents.