Saturday, February 27, 2010

Ron Paul wins the CPAC staw poll. What??

I was very surprised- no, I was shocked; I was shocked that Ron Paul won the CPAC staw poll. It took me completely by surprise. I guess that tells you what kind of political pundit I am.

No other candidate even came close in the CPAC poll. He was the only candidate to score in the double digits. I don't know if the CPAC poll is significant or not. CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) is, however, a respectable mainstream conservative gathering. It is the nation’s largest gathering of conservatives annually and it is a project of the American Conservative Union Foundation. This year was the biggest gathering ever for CPAC with over 9000 people in attendance.

We have witnessed an amazing growth of grassroots conservative activism this year with the summer town hall meetings and tea parties. Here in Nashville, we have seen a growth in the Republican Party and various libertarian and conservative groups have also been springing up. I assumed that most of the growth in activism was still a reflection of a mainstream conservative movement, however. I consider Ron Paul far removed from the mainstream.

The area where I most disagree with Ron Paul is in the area of national defense. I strongly disagreed with the decision of the Bush administration to invade Iraq. I thought that was an unnecessary war and that we were misled to get us in it. Despite my anti-war stance toward that particular conflict however, I still believe we have vital interest in the world and must be engaged in the world. We must have a strong national defense. I am not an isolationist or a pacifist.

I am also not ready to abolish the Federal Reserve. I think maybe the Fed needs reformed and a maybe a little less independence. It should be studied and reevaluated but I think we need a National Bank or something like it. I am probably most bothered by Ron Paul's flirtation with and refusal to disavow the 9-11 truthers.

I would like to know what you think about Ron Paul. What do you think about the his showing in the CPAC poll? Do you think there is any chance he could win the 2012 Republican nomination? Do you think he is electable should he get the 2012 Republican nomination?

I have placed two polls in the sidebar. Please cast your vote in these polls. Also, please feel free to leave me a comment. If you are a blogger and have blogged on the topic feel free to leave a link. If you would like to share your views on the Ron Paul phenomena in more detail, drop me an email. If you would like to submit an essay for publication, I will consider publishing it.

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Friday, February 26, 2010

"Barack" is an arrogant jerk

Watching the health care summit, I thought "Barack" came across as arrogant and condescending. I was struck by how Barack referred to everyone by their first name, calling Senator John McCain, who is certainly old enough to be his father, as “John” yet all of the senators referred to Barack as “Mr. President.” Later, I heard on CNN commentary that there was a pre-negotiated protocol for the meetings which demanded this.

This is an outrage. If senators must call the President “Mr. President” then he should return the courtesy by referring to the senators as “Senator.” Republicans should never have gone into this meeting as subjects. Those ground rules should have scuttled the meeting.

Does Barack think he is the Pope or a King? I am not opposed to formality and use of title, but it should be a two way street. Why did not Barack just go for “Your Highness” or "Your Excellency" or “Exalted Leader?” Who does he think he is? What nation does he think he is governing? (Or, is that ruling?) Despite my dislike for Barack’s policies, in my blogging and conversation I usually refer to Barack as “The President” or “President Obama” out of respect for the office. For the next few days it will just be “Barack.”

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories

Sunday, February 21, 2010

More Bad News for the Global Warming Alarmist: Arizona quits the WCI.

There are more problems for the united front to support the settled science and solid consensus of global warming.

The Western Climate Initiative is an agreement between California, Montana, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah and Washington and the Canadian provinces of British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec to develop a regional target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and develop their own system of cap and trade. The WCI was established in February 2007 and grew out of efforts in the western states to establish such a compact that date back to 2003. With the economic might of California as the anchor for this initiative, there was a view that these eleven jurisdictions could force a cap and trade system on the rest of the nation.

In establishing the WCI, then Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano said, “In the absence of meaningful federal action, it is up to the states to take action to address climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in this country.”

This month, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer announced that her state would no longer participate in the WCI saying "Right now, given the economic downturn, given the complexity of the cap-and-trade scheme being developed, we're not going to be supportive of it."

Other jurisdictions are also going wobbly on the work of the WCI and showing less energy in moving forward. The WCI may fall apart or it may just become impotent, but the wind is out of the sail for a regional cap and trade.

What should the global warming community do? They need to shout even louder that the science is settled and the consensus is solid. They need to keep ignoring Climategate, and glaciergate, and the admissions of Phil Jones. They need more of that symbolic stuff like a big world-wide rock concert or turning off all the lights for an hour. That ought to do the trick.

Stumble Upon Toolbar
My Zimbio
Top Stories