Drill Now, Drill here, Pay Less!

Senator Barack Hussein Obama states that the United States cannot drill our way out of the high-energy prices now affecting our nation. That if we even start trying, it will be five to ten years before we can get oil from the ground. For someone who constantly repeats the slogan “YES WE CAN,” he is now saying no, it’s not possible. However, let’s look at some of the achievements the United States accomplished during our illustrious history:

The Trans-Alaska Pipeline System - a major U.S. oil pipeline connecting oil fields in northern Alaska to a sea port where the oil can be shipped to the Lower 48 states for refining - runs north to south, almost 800 miles (1,300 km), from the Arctic Ocean at Prudhoe Bay, Alaska to the Gulf of Alaska at Valdez, Alaska - construction … presented significant challenges due to the remoteness of the terrain and the harshness of the environment … between Arctic Alaska and Valdez, there were three mountain ranges, active fault lines, miles of unstable, boggy ground underlain with frost, and migration paths of caribou and moose - the single 48 inch (1.22 m) diameter pipeline was built between March 27, 1974 to May 31, 1977 at a cost of around US$8 billion – completed construction time: 3 years.

The Manhattan Project - the project to develop the first nuclear weapon (atomic bomb) during World War II - refers specifically to the period of the project from 1941–1946 (5 years) - Albert Einstein’s first letter to President Roosevelt proposing building the atomic bomb was in 1939 – total time from first proposed letter to detonation: 6 years.

The Panama Canal - a man-made canal in Panama which joins the Pacific and Atlantic oceans … one of the largest and most difficult engineering projects ever undertaken, it had an enormous impact on shipping between the two oceans, replacing the long and treacherous route via the Drake Passage and Cape Horn at the southernmost tip of South America – started by the French with the United States taking control in 1904 – completed in 1914 – total United States construction time: 10 years.

The Empire State Building - a 102-story Art Deco skyscraper in New York City - excavation of the site began on January 22, 1930, and construction on the building itself started symbolically on March 17—St.Patrick's Day - The project involved 3,400 workers, mostly immigrants from Europe, along with hundreds of Mohawk iron workers - Governor Smith's grandchildren cut the ribbon on May 1, 1931 – total completion time: 410 days after construction commenced, ahead of schedule and under budget.

The Mt Rushmore Memorial- near Keystone, South Dakota, is a monumental granite sculpture by Gutzon Borglum - represents the first 150 years of the history of the United States of America with 60-foot (18 m) sculptures of the heads of former United States presidents: George Washington (1732–1799), Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826), Theodore Roosevelt (1858–1919), and Abraham Lincoln (1809–1865) - the entire memorial covers 1,278.45 acres (5.17km) and is 5,725 feet (1,745m) above sea level – started in 1927 and completed in 1941 – total completion time: 14 years.

The Hoover Dam - also known as Boulder Dam - a concrete arch-gravity dam in the Black Canyon of the Colorado River, on the border between the U.S. states of Arizona and Nevada - construction began in 1931 and was completed in 1935, more than two years ahead of schedule (during the Great Depression) - when completed in 1935, it was both the world's largest electric power producing facility and the world's largest concrete structure – total construction time: 4 years.

The Moon Landing – May 25, 1961 President Kennedy gave a speech stating the United States will put a man on the moon before the 1970 - the United States achieved the first manned landing on Earth's Moon as part of the Apollo 11 mission commanded by Neil Armstrong. On July 20, 1969, Neil Armstrong, accompanied by Edwin 'Buzz' Aldrin, landed the lunar module Eagle on the surface of the Moon - total time between President Kennedy’s speech and the United States landing on the moon: 8 years – 5 more manned moon landings carried out between 1969 and 1972.

World War II – on December 7, 1941, the United States was still in a depression. Germany and Japan possessed professional armies with years of combat experience. German held most of Europe and Japan had extended beyond their island into China and other Asian nations. By attacking us at Pearl Harbor, the Japanese severely crippled our Pacific Fleet. We did not have the men, the weapons, the equipment, or the experience to go against the two most powerful militaries in the world. Yet in less than 4 years, we not only conquered these two militaristic nation states but we built our military to the biggest and best the world had ever seen. When Ronald Reagan became President, he wanted a 600 ship Navy. At the end of WW II, we had over a 1,000 ships in the Pacific alone.The above is just a handful of what this great nation has accomplished.

So, I ask you to call your Senator and Representative and tell them YES WE CAN. Tell them that we – the citizens of the United States – want to DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW, PAY LESS!

And So It Starts

On June 16, 2008, I posted a blog entry stating my objections to both Presidential candidates. Neither Senator John McCain nor Senator Barack Hussein Obama is ideal candidates. In my fourth paragraph, I mentioned just a few reasons why Senator Obama should not be President of the United States. I labeled him for what he is – a Marxist. Below is the paragraph I am referring to –

The decision to not vote for Barack Hussein Obama is easy. It is not because he is a Democrat. It is because he is an American hating Marxist. Too harsh? Check out some of his friends - William Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Michael Pfleger, Eric Holder, James A.
Johnson, Tony Rezko. Check out a glimpse of his beliefs of what he really believes concerning the American voter, - “It’s not surprising that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigration sentiment or anti-trade sentiment.” Check out whether he believes in American Individualism or Marxist Collectivism from his recent commencement address – “It’s because you have an obligation to yourself. Because our individual salvation depends on collective salvation. Because thinking only about yourself, fulfilling your immediate wants and needs, betrays a poverty of ambition. Because it’s only when you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you realize your true potential and discover the role you’ll play in
writing the next great chapter in America’s story.” Moreover, what is his opinion of the peaceful transfer of power, from one administration to another? During a Philadelphia Inquirer interview when asked if he "would aggressively go after and investigate whether
crimes have been committed,” this is what Obama had to say –“… if crimes have been committed, they should be investigated.” If that statement is vague, Obama’s own website clarifies this issue – “…and to hold accountable any perpetrators of potential
war crimes.”

Nowhere in my website do I mention Senator Obama’s race or the color of his skin. Yet, this is a comment I received -

Just like the poor bitter undereducated folks clinging to religion who pulled the lever for W in 2000 and 2004, we latte-sipping America-hating socialist elites will be voting for Obama in November and propelling him to victory due to our liberal white guilt.

I'm looking forward to the racist Barack Obama punishing all white people when he becomes elected, including his half-white self and white grandmother. I imagine most of
them will be leaving for Canada.

- William "Mussolini" Bowen

And so it starts. A reply from an Obama supporter brings up race. Perhaps I am too dense to understand the subtleties of liberal humor, but I understand the second paragraph of the comment to imply that I am a racist. That I fear an Obama Presidency because I am afraid that a black man will implement policies that will be harmful to me – a white man. Ha ha.

This is the main weapon the Obama campaign – and his supporters – will use this election cycle. If anyone disagrees with him or his policies, it will be because he is black. Not that his policies will bankrupt America but because we are racist! So much for the candidate who started his campaign as being above race; whose goal was to bring the races together. Well, this strategy may work with Senator McCain and his campaign but it will not work with me. I will continually point out the Marxist views and statements of Senator Obama and no amount of calling me a racist will stop me.

Someone Close To Obama States He Is Not Qualified

There is someone extremely close to Barack Hussein Obama who states he is not qualified to be President of the United States. This person has known Senator Obama all his life and knows him well. Watch this video and see this extremely close individual to Obama state why he is not qualified to be President.

A Conservative Quandary

I find myself in a quandary that I have not experienced since the 1976 Presidential election. In that year, I had to choose to vote for either Gerald Ford or James Carter. I did not vote because I thought that neither was worthy to be President. This election cycle, our choices are Republican Senator John McCain or liberal Democrat Senator Barack Hussein Obama. Neither of these two are worthy of being President of the United States.

Leading up to the 1976 November election, I was not as knowledgeable of politics as I am today. I was not aware of President Ford’s gaffe in his second debate with challenger Jimmy Carter, but I had seen and heard enough of him during his short term as President and I was not impressed. I was also not impressed with former governor James Carter; his lustful heart, his wanting to pardon all Vietnam draft dodgers, and his general born-again smarminess and holier-than-thou persona. So when the November election rolled around, I did not vote.

Since that time, I proudly voted in every Presidential election. I voted proudly for Ronald Reagan in 1980 and 1984 because I admired his love of this country, his praise for liberty and freedom, and his forceful manner. In 1988, I voted proudly for George H.W. Bush, because of job security and, like so many others, I believed him when he promised no new taxes. After he betrayed his promise, I considered him another Gerald Ford and thus in 1992; I joined the 19 percent who voted for Ross Perot, unfortunately handing the Presidency to Bill Clinton. I voted for Bob Dole in 1996, knowing he was not a staunch conservative but I also knew he was a decent man who loved his country, unlike Bill Clinton. In 2000, I voted for George W. Bush and after September 11, 2001, I – along with millions of American citizens – was glad he was the president. Because he decided to take the fight to the terrorists, I proudly voted for him in 2004. Now, in 2008, I am quickly realizing that I may not vote for either of the two candidates in this election.

The decision to not vote for Barack Hussein Obama is easy. It is not because he is a Democrat. It is because he is an American hating Marxist. Too harsh? Check out some of his friends - William Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Michael Pfleger, Eric Holder, James A. Johnson, Tony Rezko. Check out a glimpse of his beliefs of what he really believes concerning the American voter, - “It’s not surprising that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigration sentiment or anti-trade sentiment.” Check out whether he believes in American Individualism or Marxist Collectivism from his recent commencement address – “It’s because you have an obligation to yourself. Because our individual salvation depends on collective salvation. Because thinking only about yourself, fulfilling your immediate wants and needs, betrays a poverty of ambition. Because it’s only when you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you realize your true potential and discover the role you’ll play in writing the next great chapter in America’s story.” Moreover, what is his opinion of the peaceful transfer of power, from one administration to another? During a Philadelphia Inquirer interview when asked if he "would aggressively go after and investigate whether crimes have been committed,” this is what Obama had to say –“… if crimes have been committed, they should be investigated.” If that statement is vague, Obama’s own website clarifies this issue – “…and to hold accountable any perpetrators of potential war crimes.”

I have not yet decided whether I will vote for Senator John McCain. Even though he is a Republican, he is not a conservative. In fact, he continually goes out of his way to insult and distance himself from conservatives, never passing by a moment to stick a thumb in our collective eye. His propensity for “straight talk” is nothing but a sham. His defenders attempt to persuade conservatives to vote for him by making various statements that they believe will convince us to vote for him.

Senator McCain tells conservatives he will continue the War on Terror after President Bush leaves office. However, his stance concerning holding the extreme terrorists at GITMO is no different from the Democrats. John McCain wants to bring the terrorists from GITMO, place them in the United States, and give them full Constitutional rights and try them in our courts. Only because he believes it makes the United States look bad throughout the world. Never mind the fact that we are involved in a war and not a criminal action. He would rather have classified information released into the public record than offend the French.

Senator McCain tells us he is Pro-Life. Yet he supports embryonic stem-cell research. Listen to what Terence P. Jeffrey has to say concerning John McCain’s alleged pro-life stance. Whether it is McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, McCain-Lieberman, or his gang of fourteen, his political positions adhere more to liberals than to conservatives. He has proved he can work with liberal Democrats. However, he has yet to prove he can work with conservatives.

Therefore, this is my predicament – whether to vote against Senator Barack Hussein Obama or stay home. Notice, I did not say vote for Senator John McCain. Because when I vote, I am voting for someone or something. John McCain and his supporters have stated time after time their disdain for conservatives. Their plan is to court Democrats and Independents, not conservatives. They take my support and vote for granted. Well, my vote and support depends on whom Senator McCain picks for Vice-President.

SOMETHING TO PONDER FROM MICHELLE MALKIN

Michelle Malkin's recent column - Planned Parenthood's Obscene Profits - skewers the right and left. She asks, correctly in my opinion, where are the Republican leaders and why do they allow the left and Planned Parenthood to get away with what they do. Read the column. As always, your comments and opinions are more than welcomed.

PRIVATE FIRST CLASS ROSS ANDREW MCGINNIS

Private First Class Ross McGinnis received the Medal of Honor posthumously last week from President Bush. We should all remember that it is people like him and his family that make this country great. And without individuals such as Private McGinnis, we would not have this country today.

John 15:13 reminds all of us - Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends. Four men are alive today because of the selfless act of Private McGinnis. His bravery, his sacrifice, provides the freedom for shallow men and women in the United States to spit on our country and disgrace our flag. Think about it!

SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT

"The monstrous evils of the twentieth century have shown us that the greediest money grubbers are gentle doves compared with money-hating wolves like Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler, who in less than three decades killed or maimed nearly a hundred million men, women, and children and brought untold suffering to a large portion of mankind."

- Eric Hoffer

MAXINE WATERS LETTING THE CAT OUT OF THE BAG

Have you seen this video. It was reported on talk radio last week and got some play on FOX News. I don't care what political affilation you are, this should alarm you. The question you have to ask yourself is what are you going to do about it.

DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW, PAY LESS!

I saw this political cartoon today and it made me wonder – not for the first time – when will the citizens of this country begin to understand what is happening.
Recently President Bush – when he visited Saudi Arabia – asked the Saudi’s to produce more oil in order to bring prices down. Asked, requested or begged – it does not matter what word anyone wants to use – he wanted the Saudi’s to do what we – the United States – is unable and unwilling to do. That is DRILL FOR OIL!
That is why I am upset with the Republican Party. Nobody wants to lead. Nobody wants to take a stand. I get tired of telling people the same thing time after time. We – the United States – have not built a refinery since 1976. We cannot build nuclear power plants. Eight-five percent of our coastline is off limits for drilling yet the Chinese are drilling right off the Florida straits. We cannot drill in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) yet the sole reason ANWR exists was to drill at a time when the technology would do the least damage to the environment. I could go on. The question now is what group is responsible for our high-energy prices? What group is responsible for our dependency on foreign oil? What group prevents the United States from drilling within our country and building new refineries?
It is the United States Congress!
Look at the political cartoon again. Whatever your feelings or thoughts concerning President Bush, he represents the United States. In essence, the cartoon depicts the United States begging a cartel that funds and supports the very terrorists we are fighting for more oil. It does not matter one bit whether Senator’s McCain, Clinton, or Barack Hussein Obama win in November. One year from now, it will be one of those three – representing the United States of America – on bended knee begging an antagonistic oil cartel for more oil.
You can talk all you want concerning alternative energy sources. However, there is no alternative fuel source to run your vehicle coming on line in the near future. As of this writing, gasoline is already at four dollars a gallon. There is talk of gas being five dollars a gallon by Labor Day and at ten to twelve dollars a gallon by this time next year. Those of you reading this who commutes to work – are you ready for that? Anyone with children – are you ready for your schools ending transportation for all after-school activities? That means you have to transport your children, which means more money out of your wallet for gas. Are you ready for milk that costs four, five, ten dollars a gallon? The cost of everything you consume will go up while your salaries stagnate. Are you ready for that?
There is a solution. You need to call your Congressman and Senators, telling them we – the United States – needs to start drilling now. They work for you, not special interests environmental groups. Get involved! That also means you Republicans! From grass-root organizations to national leaders, stop being milquetoasts! Stand up for America and fight for our energy independence! As a great President once said – if not now, when? Alternatively, do you want future generations of Americans begging at the feet of despots? Demand from Congress – DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW, PAY LESS!
AVERAGE PRICE PER GALLON
HOW CONGRESS ACTS

ANN COULTER'S WEEKLY COLUMN

Ann Coutler's new weekly column is titled IF WE COULD TALK TO THE ANIMALS.

This week, she skewers the liberals as they squeal and whine about President Bush's speech at the Israeli Knesset. Ann Coulter provided good information concerning Sen. William Edgar Borah. Click on the link to find out more about him and see if he reminds you of today's Republicans.

WHAT ARE YOU?

Do you consider yourself a Republican?

An internet dictionary defines Republican as 1. a person who favors a republican form of government. 2. a member of the Republican party.

Now, do you fall under definition one or definition two?

Another question – is the United States a Democracy or a Constitutional Republic?

A Democracy is 1. government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system. 2. a state having such a form of government: The United States and Canada are democracies. 3. a state of society characterized by formal equality of rights and privileges. 4. political or social equality; democratic spirit. 5. the common people of a community as distinguished from any privileged class; the common people with respect to their political power.

A Constitutional Republic is defined as a state where the head of state and other officials are elected as representatives of the people, and must govern according to existing constitutional law that limits the government's power over citizens. In a constitutional republic, executive, legislative, and judicial powers are separated into distinct branches and the will of the majority of the population is tempered by protections for individual rights so that no individual or group has absolute power. The fact that a constitution exists that limits the government's power makes the state constitutional. That the head(s) of state and other officials are chosen by election, rather than inheriting their positions, and that their decisions are subject to judicial review makes a state republican.

The answer to this question is a Constitutional Republic and definition 2 for a Democracy is absolutely wrong!

Next question – are you a Republican or a conservative? The same internet dictionary defines conservative as 1. disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change. 2. a person who is conservative in principles, actions, habits, etc. 3. a supporter of conservative political policies.

Most people, when discussing the two major political parties in the United States, tend to lump Democrats as liberal and Republicans as conservative. As I have already defined conservative, what then is a liberal? The internet dictionary defines liberal as 1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs. 2. (often initial capital letter ) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform. 3. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties. 4. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers. 5. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies. 6. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc. 7. a person of liberal principles or views, esp. in politics or religion.

Can you be a conservative Democrat or a liberal Republican? The answer is yes. The key is adherence to the Constitution.

So I repeat, are you a Republican or a Conservative. If you state you are a conservative, do you fully support the definition given above? Or do you consider yourself a Republican because you belong to that particular party? I ask these questions because I want people to start thinking where they stand and what they believe. Because your stance and beliefs determine what kind of leader you are and who you select as a leader. I am a conservative and I want conservatives leading the Republican Party.

It is my opinion that the Republican Party – starting with local grassroots organizations and leading to the President of the United States – are Republicans because they belong to the party. It is also my belief that the Republican Party is bereft of leaders. Conservatives do not lack in ideas. Our ideas begin with the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution. How many Republican leaders today expound on these two great documents?

I want you to think about this while I list the four main concerns that future conservative leaders need to address in the forthcoming years. These concerns are terrorism, immigration, energy, and .taxes. I will leave now to let you think about these concerns and how our ‘leaders’ are handling them.

NO COMPROMISE or NoCo

This post is about music.

I have a co-worker who is the drummer of the band No Compromise or NoCo. I have added them in My Favorite Links section in an effort to help him and his band get exposure. Click on the No Compromise link to get to their website and listen to some of their music. If it's not your cup of tea, just ignore it. If you like the music, drop them a line and let them know. Also, pass it around and let others listen.

Hope you like it.

PRESIDENT BUSH ADDRESSES MEMBERS OF THE KNESSET

President Bush gave a speech yesterday – May 15, 2008 – to the Israeli Knesset that is causing consternation amongst liberals. If you want to read the entire speech – and it is an excellent speech – you can go here and read it. What I want to do is discuss the portion of his speech that is causing the liberal Democrats to gnash their teeth and rent their clothes. The offending passage is this –

“There are good and decent people who cannot fathom the darkness in these men and try to explain away their words. It's natural, but it is deadly wrong. As witnesses to evil in the past, we carry a solemn responsibility to take these words seriously. Jews and Americans have seen the consequences of disregarding the words of leaders who espouse hatred. And that is a mistake the world must not repeat in the 21st century."

"Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: "Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided." We have an obligation to call this what it is -- the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history."

Shortly after speaking the above words, Senator Barack Obama, whose middle name must never be mentioned (unless by the Senator himself), complained these words were aimed at him. However, Senator Barack Obama recently stated –

"I think it's language that's reflective of George Bush. We have had a foreign policy of bluster and saber rattling," Obama said of Clinton's threat to "totally obliterate" Iran if it attacked Israel.

"It is important that we use language that sends a signal to the world community that we're shifting from the sort of cowboy diplomacy, or lack of diplomacy, that we've seen out of George Bush," the Illinois senator said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

You can also read about Senator Barack Obama’s plans concerning Iran in his Blueprint For Change starting at page fifty. This excerpt should give you an example what he would do -

“Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions. Now is the time to pressure Iran directly to change their troubling behavior. Obama would offer the Iranian regime a choice. If Iran abandons its nuclear program and support for terrorism, we will offer incentives like membership in the World Trade Organization, economic investments, and a move toward normal diplomatic relations. If Iran continues its troubling behavior, we will step up our economic pressure and political isolation. Seeking this kind of comprehensive settlement with Iran is our best way to make progress.”

It sounds like appeasement to me. But that’s beside the point. Why is Senator Obama and the other liberal Democrats complaining about President Bush’s statement? The only time the word ‘Democrat’ appears in the speech is in the word ‘democratic.’ President Bush mentions no Democrat Senator by name.

Governor Mitt Romney said it best – “When you throw a rock over a fence, the dog that yelps is the one who got hit.” President Bush threw one big rock over the fence yesterday, hitting nearly Democratic Senator and Congressmen. Remember this when you go to the polls this November.

THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE

Since I will be discussing and referring to the Declaration of Independence from time to time, I thought it necessary to post it for anyone to read.

In Congress, July 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new guards for their future security — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. — The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our People, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from Punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free system of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislature, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions we have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have we been wanting in attention to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

THE REPUBLICAN PARTY

I have a question for you. Do you consider yourself a Republican? If so, why? What is your historical knowledge of the Republican Party? Do you know how it started? Can you state the Republican Party platform?

The Republican Party – as stated in Wikipedia – states in part –

Founded in 1854 by anti-slavery expansion activists and modernizers, the Republican Party rose to prominence with the election of Abraham Lincoln, the first Republican president. The party presided over the American Civil War and Reconstruction and was harried by internal factions and scandals toward the end of the 19th century. Today, the Republican Party supports a conservative platform (as far as American politics are concerned), with further foundations in economic liberalism, fiscal conservatism, and social conservatism.

The origins of the Republican Party is more complex than the simple explanation above. Due to the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, prominent Northern leaders decided there was a need for a new political party. The first proto-Republican party occurred in Ripon, Wisconsin in early 1854. June 6, 1854, at Jackson, Michigan, the new political party held a mass meeting. This led the new Republicans holding their first organizing convention on February 22, 1856 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. June 17, 1856, the Republican Party became a unified political party in Philadelphia. What was their first political platform?

The Republican Platform of 1856 stated their opposition to the Missouri Compromise, opposition to the expansion of slavery, and a return to the principles of the Declaration of Independence. Specifically, a return to these three main points of the Declaration – “…that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

My point is why do you never hear any Republican leader talk about this? The Republican Party was founded on the principles of freedom and equality for all. The Republican Party has a history of fighting against slavery, segregation, Jim Crow laws, and fighting for Civil Rights. The 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution is proof of my statement. Yet it seems that most Republicans want to run away from their origins and history.

I ask you again – are you a Republican and why? Do you agree with their first party platform? Do you think today’s Republican leaders exemplify the ideals and principles of the Republican Party?

I hope this will be an ongoing discussion.

INTRODUCTION

Welcome aboard. My first blog. My first post. Let me introduce myself.

I am a fifty-year old happily married conservative becoming more and more disgusted with the Republican Party. I consider myself an American, a conservative and a Christian. Why in that order?

First, I am an American because by the grace of God, the United States of America is where I was born and raised. I consider myself fortunate that I attended public schools that taught and reinforced American ideals and patriotism. Secondly, I consider myself a conservative because I have experienced and can bear witness that conservative ideals and philosophy is what makes this country the leader of the free world. Lastly, I am a Christian because I believe in Jesus Christ though there are many times when my behavior does not reflect my beliefs. However, I have witnessed His power when countless others and I prayed for the removal of cancer from my wife. She has now been cancer free for over ten years.

There are several reasons why I started this blog. At the risk of sounding presumptuous, one reason I started this blog to hopefully provide thought provoking information and discussion for anyone who find their way here.

The second reason is to point out that being a Republican is not quite the same as being a conservative. Is that confusing? Well, over time, I hope you will see the difference.

My third reason is based on my belief that that the Republican Party is in serious trouble. There are no leaders. There is no one stating conservative ideals and principles. Basically, it is up to us - the citizens - to start at the grassroot level and once again build a conservative Republican party. So I ask those who find their way here and believe the Republican Party is in dire straits, to begin your own blogs. Help get the word out and rebuild the Republican Party.

Please feel free to copy the URL of this blog and pass it on to your friends and family. Join in discussions. Ask questions. I will not tolerate foul language and I will delete any post containing same. Nor will I tolerate any posts that argue for the sake of arguing. So again, welcome aboard and I hope you enjoy yourself.