Nathan Sheets

Like many of you, I giggled in delight when I first heard that Hillary had lost the Democratic primary. This was, of course, months ago, and since then Hillary has been a good democrat by dragging on the inevitable.

However, the giggles quickly ended when we saw who had won the primary. A dismal choice indeed. While I've personally always wanted a black in the White House, I was hoping for a good black, not a Democrat black.

We already know that Obama psycholly supported infanticide in Illinois. We also know that he supports abortion throughout all nine months of pregnancy for thirteen year-old girls across state lines without their parents knowledge. He also seems to want to court Iran and "bring the troops home" which will probably contribute in the deaths of even more people than who are being killed while we are there.

Thankfully, Republicans have a candidate that will rally them and remind them of true Republicanism: John McCain! Wait, wait, I'm sorry, I think I went a tad bit overboard there.

*sigh* We're screwed.

Seriously though, I have no idea who will win this election. I think that liberals will be quite pumped with a Hillary and Obama ticket, though we don't know for sure if that's going to happen, because, like democrats, they like to drag this crap out. McCain had better choose a great VP; one whom Republicans like better than McCain himself, or we're definitely going down.

Heck, at this point, I don't even know if I can vote for McCain. He's a liberal, and I don't swing that way when it comes to voting. Perhaps if he were really strong on the life issue I'd totally vote for him, but he's not. He's just a grumpy old war prisoner to me. Woot, woot, go Republicans, go.

Clintonisms: The Amusing, Confusing, and Suspect Musing of Billary (edited by blogging friend Julia Gorin) is a book meant to amuse you, and yet it somehow also manages to make you wet yourself in nervousness at the prospect of Hillary Clinton becoming the next president of the United States.

Indeed, the nervous laughter emanating from my and other Republicans' mouths is not because Hillary Clinton could very well be cantering herself toward the White House as we speak, but rather because she and her husband could both be cantering toward the most powerful position on Earth.

Clintonisms is a collection of quotes by the being known as "Billary" as well as their friends, acquaintances, staff and people who randomly met them, with a wonderfully hilarious forward by Julia. And it will make your skin crawl thinking of Hillary entering the White House.

In the forward, Julia asks the tough questions: "If Bill Clinton was the first black president, would that make Hillary Clinton the second black president? Or is Bill Clinton a self-loathing brother who married a white woman and is a traitor to his race?" These are simply questions that must  be answered, and Julia is not afraid to go there.

Quick Snippets:

His Vivid and Painful Imagination
"I have vivid and painful memories of black churches being burned in my own state when I was a child." --Bill Clinton, about his childhood in Arkansas, where there weren't any church burnings in that time period, June 8, 1996...

...Can Be Like Cuba?
"I pledge allegiance to the America that can be." --Hillary Clinton, as recalled by Chris Matthews, "Hardball", November 2001...

Viva La Revolución
"We just can't trust the American people to make those types of choices. Government has to make those choices for people." --Hillary Clinton, to Illinois Rep. Dennis Hastert about health care, 1993

One particularly interesting chapter was entitled "A Note of Thanks for All You Do", in which we are exposed to the treatment of Hillary's immediate staff throughout the years. She would often use profanity toward them, demand that they do things that were prohibited by their job descriptions and just be a general grump. One Arkansas State Trooper said, "We all got used to her screaming, 'Just get the hell away from me.'", and a secret service agent got a book in the back of the head thanks to Hillary. I'm sure that temper of hers won't flair up when she becomes president, right? Perhaps we can count on her to throw books at the terrorists rather than using manly weapons.

We also get a view of the laws the Clintons have broken, the lies they have told, and the language they use to try to get around tough questions about their sketchy past actions.

I have recently been interested in the scandal involving Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky because only in recent years have I realized how strong of a case it really is. Liberals would have us believe it was "all about sex", but no, it wasn't. The president was a felon, and he lied under oath. With liberals proclaiming that we should all just "mind our own business", the fact remains that any question can be asked of you when you are under oath. You cannot lie, even if the question is "not the business" of the jury and judge.

Liar or Philosopher?
Q: Do you agree with me that the statement, "I was never alone with her," is incorrect? You were alone with Monica Lewinsky, weren't you?
A: Well again...it depends on how you define alone.

Classic.

Julia's book can be ordered from Amazon.com here. You can visit the book's website at Clintonisms.com.

National Review, the nation's biggest conservative publication, endorsed Mitt Romney yesterday.

"Our guiding principle has always been to select the most conservative viable candidate. In our judgment, that candidate is Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts. Unlike some other candidates in the race, Romney is a full-spectrum conservative: a supporter of free-market economics and limited government, moral causes such as the right to life and the preservation of marriage, and a foreign policy based on the national interest. While he has not talked much about the importance of resisting ethnic balkanization — none of the major candidates has — he supports enforcing the immigration laws and opposes amnesty. Those are important steps in the right direction."
...
Uniting the conservative coalition is not enough to win a presidential election, but it is a prerequisite for building on that coalition. Rudolph Giuliani did extraordinary work as mayor of New York and was inspirational on 9/11. But he and Mike Huckabee would pull apart the coalition from opposite ends: Giuliani alienating the social conservatives, and Huckabee the economic (and foreign-policy) conservatives. A Republican party that abandoned either limited government or moral standards would be much diminished in the service it could give the country.
...
Fred Thompson is as conservative as Romney, and has distinguished himself with serious proposals on Social Security, immigration, and defense. But Thompson has never run any large enterprise — and he has not run his campaign well, either. Conservatives were excited this spring to hear that he might enter the race, but have been disappointed by the reality. He has been fading in crucial early states. He has not yet passed the threshold test of establishing for voters that he truly wants to be president.

This is pretty much where I am. While I think the National Review did a good job in sounding enthusiastic about Romney, they obviously had to think long and hard to choose which of the candidates to choose, since, in all reality, they are all a disappointment in one way or another.

I hope that if Romney becomes our candidate that he will be able to get everyone around him excited to oppose Hillary. I've said it in the past: I like Mitt, and he sure would make a much better president than Hillary, or, for that matter, any democrat.

While pro-choice advocates sometimes give the pretense of wanting to "work together" with the anti-choicers to "reduce abortion rates", it becomes pretty clear right away what the real plan is. The pro-choicers have a pact amongst themselves to never, ever give an inch when it comes to advocating the killing of the unborn.

As opposed to pro-lifers, who constantly make compromises in order to save children. Perhaps it's because we have a lot more at stake (human life) than they do (the inability to have unprotected sex with strangers sans consequence), but you'll find that pro-lifers will constantly be doing things they don't really want to do in order to squeeze in any sane reason into the abortion debate, particularly with law.

While the phrase "rape and incest" elicits a strong desire in me to lash out violently (proving pro-choicers' suspicions all along!), I (and all pro-lifers) realize that the public is fixated on this stupid phrase. Like I've said before, pro-choicers (who don't believe that there are "good reasons" or "bad reasons" to get your abortion anyway) throw out this phrase as casually as "Nice shoes!" or "Merry Christmas!" People have stopped thinking about actual rape and incest victims and simply parrot some kind of objection to parental notification for abortions on 12 year-olds.

The Democrats have a huge problem. It's hard trying to look sane when you have the most extreme abortion stance possible: abortion throughout all nine months of pregnancy. Obama and Clinton both have this view. They need it too: the people who speak for pro-choicers in this country, NARAL and Planned Parenthood, hold tremendous political power in their endorsements. And if you are against the "non-existent but medically necessary" partial-birth abortions but are yet pro-choice in every other way, God help you. Emily's List, a group of paranoid old women clutching coat hangers, gives millions of dollars to female politicians who support sucking the brains out of unborn babies in the 8th month. Oops, I mean "choice".

Because of the money and endorsements that are on the line, Democrats don't have much wiggle room. This is why they all tell us either that "abortion is a sad decision, but..." or even "I'm personally against abortion, but..." Note to Democrats: no one cares! What we want to hear is "Abortion is murder, boo-ya..." And giving this to us is...well, Ron Paul.

The president can do relatively little given the current and past make ups of Congress. Even with a Republican majority, there are too many wishy-washy (aka, non-conservative) Republicans with seats. They give us parental notification and expect us to be in awe of their "respect for life". Please. What pro-life advocates want are actual laws that may stop a girl from actually getting an abortion. We can only harass abortion clinics for so long by passing bills holding them to an actual standard like not having blood smeared on the walls or washing their hands between clients. But the fun of that is quickly subsiding. Now, with more and more future pro-choicers being aborted and more and more people becoming educated about the detriment of abortion to society, change is afoot. At least some of the wishy-washy Republicans will be able to hide behind their oh-so-brave votes for parental notification when the country has a drastic change of heart about abortion. The democrats will still be sitting there, claiming that the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban was "bad for women".