Pray. Vote. Pray.

Blogger AC Kleinheider (at Volunteer Voters) has posted some friendly advice for "Evangelicals" and though I agree with various of his assertions, I have to take issue with a couple:

1. "An evangelical is a 'born again' Christian. Many folks who [were] "saved" were not Republicans before their conversion. They are not natural conservatives. They are conservatives because they are evangelical. They are not natural Republicans or conservatives. They are Republicans because their pastor told them to be essentially."

While AC is correct that one's worldview typically affects their policy priorities, it is insulting to assert that folks who became Republican after becoming "Evangelical" do so "because their pastor told them to be essentially."

2. "The Republicans may talk a good game on social issues but what do they ever do really? Nothing. Republicans have had the majority for a quite a few years now and nothing substantial has come from it."

As a commenter, Jay Bush, points out over at Volunteer Voters, originalist judicial appointments are perhaps the most significant return on Religious Conservatives' investment in the GOP. (As an aside, ironically, populists, democrats, etc. should be supportive of separation of powers and leaving legislating to accountable legislators.) But this comment is something I'm hearing more from those who are desperate to suppress interest among Religious Conservatives. Nice try. Most of us realize that Conservatives in our Federal gov't have hardly had a working majority over the past 6 years, and sending Ford, Jr. in Frist's place isn't going to bring us closer to seeing our policy views effectuated.

3. "Evangelicals have received nothing in exchange for their support of Republicans and they likely never will. Christians need to take in to account that politics is not spiritual activity.

"Faith should direct and influence a person[']s politics but it should not control it."

I'm not sure I completely understand AC's point (or that it is even understandable); is he conflating "faith" and "morals"? In any event, this is perhaps the greatest fallacy in the post.

I believe that casting a vote and being involved in the political process is very much a spiritual activity in the sense that God cares what I do and in the sense that I ought to vote and politic in a fashion consistent with my espoused beliefs or convictions. Indeed, I view politics as a broad application of the Golden Rule and believe that as a citizen in a republican political system I have an obligation to "rule" justly, because public policy has an impact on my neighbor.
To sum up, I like the bumper sticker I saw in 2004: "Pray. Vote. Pray." I believe Christians should pray first for wisdom and character to do what's most consistent with God's character (as with many, if not most, decisions in life, I don't think we can expect God to write His will on a wall). Casting a vote is merely the most elementary form of political involvement, and we should do what we can as "rulers" in a republican form of gov't. At the end of the day, Christians should pray for God's will to be done and for us to accept whatever His will is. Above all, I think this process moves Christians toward having a clear conscience that we have done what we can and we are leaving the results to God.

Here's an interesting op/ed on this issue (from a Catholic, not "Evangelical" perspective) that I came across this evening. I like how she urges Christians to "ponder the principles that inspire our activism." Amen, sister.

Re. judicial nominations

The author of this story (first reported in a Pennsylvania paper?) about judicial nominations mistakenly left out the term "Bloody Red Meat" in her title. Oh well, it appears the President is not going to shy away from a Conservative strong suit in the run up to the election.

But Ann Coulter has a great line in this week's column (raking Sen. Lincoln Chafee over the coals) regarding Democrat judicial blockades:

Democrats subscribe to the Brezhnev doctrine: "What we have, we hold." Their interpretation of elections they win by a plurality is that they have a mandate for Ruth Bader Ginsburg; their interpretation of elections they lose is that this means they get to block all Republican nominees.

Breaking news: Ford, Jr. missed a media opp

Reports from Shelbyville indicate that telegenic Congressman Harold Ford, Jr.--who is vying to replace Bill Frist in the U.S. Senate, may have passed up a media appearance. According to witnesses, "[telegenic, tenacious Ford, Jr.] spent so much time with the crowd, in fact, that he had to cancel a planned radio interview."

Weather forecast raining on Dems' political parade

Blogger Mark Rose over at Right-minded has some good stuff about the underwhelming weather news of late. Unfortunately for the Democratics, there's little sign of the perfect (political) storm.

The Plame game

In this Slate articleChristopher Hitchens drives a stake through through the Lefty meme that "thuggish" Bushies outed CIA Employee Valerie Plame.

Maybe "Democratic" Party is appropriate

This is an interesting post/quote over at No Quarters Blog. Maybe it isn't inaccurate to refer to the other political party as "the Democratic Party."

Kerry rewriting history, again

It appears, after all, that Kerry's presidential aspirations did receive more than an abrasion on the forearm in the jungles of Ohio in 2004.

Damned if you do . . .

This law--overturned by a Florida judge on behalf of Left-leaning political types, is the type of law that would deter groups from destroying voter registration forms as is alleged of late. Obviously the law could be abused in its enforcement. But prosecutors always have discretion and I don't suspect they would hammer/bankrupt the League of Women Voters if they failed to timely turn in registrations due to a hurricane.

This law is an example of efforts to strengthen election oversight because you don't readily get "do overs" in elections, so those who are prone to break the rules need to be motivated not to risk getting caught. But it bothers me that every attempt to deter fraud in elections is treated by the Left as an infringement of a Constitutional right or an effort to disenfranchise people.

Free Market v. Statism

Two articles about the Free Market from brandchannel.com that caught my eye this a.m. Gotta love the Free Market.

In France, food marketers have eschewed trying to get certified as "Organic" (actually, they say "agriculture biologique"--as Steve Martin used to say, "Those French have a different word for everything"). Rather, grocers are simply selling stuff that is pretty healthy rather than try to jump through the gov'tal hoops (which are attentively controlled by the environmental Left, no doubt) to have the "Bio" label . . . and consumers are satisfied.

In the U.S., AOL's gig appears to be up as its value has dropped from a high of $200billion to now only $20billion, but here's the best paragraph from the article.

AOL’s original success, by design or providence, was based solidly on the naiveté of web users. If it figures to tie the future on the same assumptions, its obituary can probably be put into the rush-to-publish pile right now. The idea of AOL (or any portal) as a user’s only conduit to experience and find online content is dead. If AOL is to cheat death, it will need to embrace the idea that its users are far past the idea of needing an Internet nanny to help them through this crazy, newfangled computery thingy.

Impressed?! Wait 'til you hear the facts . . .

This article, entitled "Major black candidates at record high" is intriguing because it glosses over the fact that this "record" year is far and away a Republican phenomenon. The article states,

From Maryland to Tennessee to Ohio, the 2006 elections already hold a place in the history books: More black candidates from both major parties are mounting serious campaigns for upper-tier office - senator or governor - than ever before.
Even more noteworthy, three of the six men are Republican, a party that has struggled to boost its black affiliation above 10 percent.

And even MORE NOTEWORTHY is that two of the Democrats included in this story are likely to lose their respective primary . . . the Republicans being counted are all the GOP nominee (notice how the reporter even insinuates that the GOP worked to defeat a black nominee in Michigan by recruiting a white candidate to run against him).

In sum, after the primaries, this story would be much more difficult to write without undermining the "Republicans are racist" myth which must be perpetuated to keep the Democrat Party electorally competitive.

Here's an earlier post to similar articles on this subject.

What we have here is a failure to communicate

E.J. Dionne (okay, I skimmed through his archives in one sitting the other night--catchy titles!!) has written a glowing article about Australian PM John Howard and how he is working a strategery that would benefit the GOP in America. But what I got from the article is that Howard is simply an excellent communicator.

This article from NationalReview.com highlights Bush's challenge (both personally and subject-wise) in communicating a compelling vision for his strategy in the GWOT. Because of the laziness of the audience (the American public), the President has to be a great communicator--to be able to cause the audience to learn. Dubya certainly will not get any assistance in communicating his vision from the so-called MSM.

(Incidentally, as I've observed the candidates vying for Bill Frist's seat, I believe that Harold Ford, Jr.'s potential in this race is owning to his excellent communication skills--vacuous ideas, when communicated or delivered well, will often win a popularity contest over simple truths poorly stated.)

Culpability v. concession

E.J. Dionne made the following comment in a piece about the Ned Lamonting of the Democrat Party and it reminded me of the principle the Left overlooks concerning its opposition to the GWOT (The Iraq Phase):

". . . if being against the Iraq War makes you "extreme left,'' then the administration has succeeded in pushing 60 percent of Americans into that camp. That's the proportion opposed to the war in the new CNN Poll."

Well, the Bush Administration knows there is the "extreme Left" which is intent on undermining Bush and demagoguing the War in Iraq without regard for troop morale or inspiring our Country's enemies, and the Average American who is understandably influenced by the incessant drumbeat of how bad things are in Iraq and how there was no reason (other than Oil, Lies, Vengeance, Neo-Conservatism, Globalism, Imperialism, Zionism, etc. etc.) for addressing the problem of Saddam's Iraq.

The "cut and run" characterization is so fitting, because if people dying warrants "cutting and running," there is no war that the Left will support in our struggle with Islamofascism.

Impressive candidate and campaign

Twice in the last week I've heard interesting and flattering news stories about Michael McGavick's campaign against incumbent U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA).

First was a story about how to handle a campaign "tracker" which came to light following Macaca-gate, and though I don't think that George Allen has anything substantive to apologize for (by substantive, I mean he meant no offense to Sidarth, the tracker), I believe that McGavick provides a great model in that context.

Today it was a story about McGavick going public with admissions of personal and professional mistakes. This seems like an excellent way to pre-empt character assassination--an attack which is inevitable, frankly. Better to present the mistakes in a light most favorable to you and far enough in advance to make them "old news" by election day.

Ahem . . . Bredesen NOT on "Campaign Trail"

The headline on this NewsChannel5.com article reads more like a press release (from Bredesen's campaign) than it does a report: "Bredeson's [sic] Illness Not Slowing Down Campaign Trail," (note: they probably wouldn't have misspelled his name in a press release). Understandably the campaign would want to put the most positive spin on a fact--that Bredesen has an unknown ailment warranting investigation by physicians at the world-renowned Mayo Clinic. But why should NewsChannel5?

This headline is misleading--the story is that Bredesen is NOT on the "campaign trail," a term used to refer to the candidate's travels and not to the delivery of a ton of signs to a candidate's headquarters. And is it news that worker bees at the HQ are keeping busy and that Bredesen said--through a spokesman, that they should keep on keepin' on?

If you think about it, this awkward headline is just about the only one that would diminish the seriousness of this illness and communicate to readers, "Move along. There's nothing to see here."

Cross-posted to JIMbrysonforTNGovernorBlog.

The CRAT's out of the bag . . .

It appears that folks are noticing that some Republicans do not use the adjective "Democratic" to refer to the Democrat Party. (It has gotten some local "Democrat" upset, too--the self-monikered Music Row Democrats, in particular).

To be frank, I hadn't noticed that many others using the word "Democrat" in lieu of "Democratic"--but according to Hendrik Hertzberg (and boy did he ever get to the bottom of this issue) Republicans all the way up to the titular head of our party--Dubya, are beginning to use the term "Democrat" to modify the other party. Indeed, I have over the past year encouraged a couple of nationally-known pundits in email correspondence to use the more accurate term--"Democrat," but I had not observed my movement getting any traction. I had no idea that I was a part of such a well-disciplined conspiracy!

Ironically, Democrats seem to be complaining about the use of "Democrat" even though they want us to accommodate their preference of using "Democrat" in some contexts and "Democratic" in others. My view is that "democratic" is a (positively) loaded term and it is too much trouble to qualify things as "small D democratic," so if Dems want me to call them "Democrats" as opposed to "Democratics," then I will be consistent and call them the "Democrat Party."

It depends on the definition of "politics"

John Rodgers of The Nashville City Paper is reporting that Environmental Activist and local attorney Joe Prochaska asserts his lawsuit against "the Corker Defendants" (Prochaska's words) is not political. OK, I'll take his word on it, but only inasmuch as it relates to this particular senate race at this particular moment.

The fact is that for the Left's "environmentalist" faction, Wal-mart is target A-number-one (pun intended) followed closely behind by the subspecies of "developer." And the clash between two worldviews is perpetual: Preservationists think that development is usually bad, that nothing should change to accommodate man (because man is simply a higher order of "macaca"), and that land development is driven by either greed or speciesism. Non-Preservationists disagree.

You can see why the clash is perpetual.

Pro-immigrant and Anti-illegal immigration?

Here's a great op/ed about the simplistic assertion that one is "pro-immigrant" and "anti-illegal immigration." I try to temper my pronouncements on this subject because I think immigration is fine as long as immigrants buy into what makes America great and otherwise assimilate.

Interdependency and gov't policy

Here's an interesting report from Gail Kerr at The Tennessean about how Kentucky's lax (in relation to Tennessee's) helmet law is affecting Tennesseans.

Actually, when I think of how interdependency breeds (gov't) intervention, the example I've always thought of was motorcycle helmet laws (a close second is seatbelt laws, but that is different because it involves a duty to care for children, in my opinion).

I urge you to read the article, but Kerr's thesis is,

A moronic Kentucky law [allowing people to ride motorcycles without helmets] is costing Vanderbilt University Medical Center — and that means Middle Tennessee taxpayers and the hospital's paying customers — millions of dollars.

This is part of the reason that economics is so valuable for crafting public policy . . . too often politicians ignore potential or actual unintended consequences in the interest of expedience or pleasing a particular constituency. And too often, citizens will demand to have their cake and eat it too. That's why pandering to "voters" is so tempting but so distasteful.

Re. Israel and Lebanon

I had a fascinating discussion with a close friend last evening about the current Israeli/Lebanese conflict and, as a result, I am both less apathetic about the situation and more sympathetic to criticisms of Israel. This friend and I agree on most political issues, but he has deep roots in that region of the world as well as extensive military experience . . . both of which may contribute to his different perspective on these matters.

In particular, I am persuaded (for the time being, at least) that Israel over-reached in the recent conflict. But I have to say that I think Israel is often frivolously criticized for whatever it does because of deep partisan opposition, rather than legitimate, even-handed disagreements. Thus, as with Dubya's plainly-less-than-perfect administration, I am inclined to defend Israel from harsh and disingenuous criticism.

He has directed me to some sites that offer a more balanced view of the flaws of current Israeli policy:
www.nkusa.org
www.jewsnotzionists.org

I've only skimmed these sites, and am not persuaded of their credibility (to me) yet, but we'll see.

Whaddya know? Bigot at Wal-Mart . . .

I hesitantly clicked on the link reading "Wal-Mart envoy quits after racist remarks" because I wasn't eager to read a story legitimately or illegitimately (especially the latter) bashing Wal-Mart. Well lo and behold, it was a racist series of comments from Andrew Young! Is it even possible for a Liberal icon to be a racist?

Of course, this story will taste bittersweet to many on the Left who will say it was more offensive that he worked for Wal-Mart (the company the Left loves to hate) than that he made a bigoted statement.

Willy Wonka would be outraged

A chocolate factory employee recently became trapped waist-deep in the product.

"F" for federal decision prohibiting surveillance of Al Qaeda phone calls

You probably won't want to read all of this op/ed by attorney Bryan Cunningham about the recent Federal decision declaring surveillance of phone calls with Al Qaeda "unconstitutional."

Nevertheless, it is a scathing analysis of the legal "reasoning" and baseless conclusions of District Judge Anna Diggs-Taylor.

"Overcoming Adoption's Racial Barriers"

This is an intriguing NYTimes article about transracial adoption in America. The report is interesting because I have a half-dozen friends who have adopted children of african-american descent. But it is also interesting because of the blatant racism of Left-leaning groups who oppose or have until recently opposed trans-racial adoption (read: "children of color" being adopted by "white" couples). So much for the melting pot. So much for "not caring about children after they're born." So much for not prejudging a person based on the color of their skin.

"Petitioning for Life"

Here's a moving abortion op/ed about choosing life over death. Changed hearts will change law.

Timberlake a sad, strange, little man

This article about Justin Timberlake's continuing push to matter to somebody. And would someone please give that man a razor?

maCaca es suCaca

I suggest you check out Commonwealth Conservative's coverage of this "incident." I'm catching flak for hinting that tracker dude was "freaky"--above is a pic of the tracker from Commonwealth Conservative.

Sorry, but out here in real America, that's freaky.

I'm unconvinced

The "George Allen/Macaca Incident" story is picking up steam. Dems/Libs in the blogosphere (hat tip, AC Kleinheider) are asserting that this alleged slur (which, prior to now, noone in question had ever heard of, much less been offended by) was uttered by Allen as "code" to his White Power Brethren while looking into a video camera filming him uttering the said alleged slur. Oh, and they are linking to a Liberal's blog as etymological authority for their assertion that the word "macaca" (phonetic) is a racial slur.

Maybe, gang; but you'll have to do better than that to convince someone other than a hard-core Republican-hater. In fact, I think that this whole "story" reflects a weakness of the blogosphere as journalistic venture. This is a "story" because enough people want it to be a story and can rant about it with little to no editorial control.

Sounds like Patrick Kennedy's fateful tale . . .

This story from NJ--about the state Attorney General's improper intervention in a traffic stop, sounds an awful lot like Congressman Patrick Kennedy's preferential treatment in DC. Yikes.

I'm glad she (the NJ AG) has resigned, but I can't help but wonder if this relates to "issues" Liberals have with rule of law.

Magnanimous sign

I like the attitude of this sign:


You can purchase it and other nice signs at VictoryStore.com, if you want.

"Hang up and drive"

An interesting study about what we all observe (that is, unless we're continually distracted from such observations because we're talking on a mobile phone) while driving: talking on a cell phone while driving affects our driving. It doesn't matter that it is hands free. From my time as a prosecutor, I learned that we test for impairment by giving suspects "divided attention tasks" because driving epitomizes multi-tasking and "substances" impair our ability to do it. Involvement in highly-engaging conversation compounds the challenge of driving/reacting-while-driving.

Now; if I could only discipline myself not to use my mobile phone while driving, I could get a "hang up and drive" bumper sticker.

(ma)Caca is right . . .

I feel sorry for Sen. George Allen (R-VA). He is running for re-election and I think he has a lot of potential as a presidential candidate . . . I've always thought he had "Charisma" which has become nigh unto essential on the national level.

But he is in the news today because of an off-handed remark that is being twisted to appear nativist or racist or just plain ol' mean-spirited.

He is being trailed at every campaign appearance--even to the boondockish towns and hamlets of the state, by an operative for his opponent. The operative happens to be dark-complected as he has Indian heritage, and Allen pointed him out at a rally with comments that are being spun as nativist (and I have to admit, out of context they sound that way). You need to read the whole article, but you know being trailed and constantly recorded would get annoying. And of course a freak dressing operative would acquire a nickname in the campaign. And you know it would be hard not to mock a lone operative for "crashing" every event you hosted . . . and you still have to control your tongue in a campaign. I think this is the downside of the folksy charm and swagger that generally accompanies "Charisma."

Here's a good report about it . . . be sure and read the whole thing.

UPDATE: Here's actual footage of the alleged racial/nativist/mean statement by Sen. George Allen. It is even more obvious after watching it that Allen is calling out the campaign tracker's boss for being out of touch with real Virginians. The tracker is following them around; they're going all over Virginia; places that Allen's opponent won't go; his opponent is from inside the Beltway and is currently at a fundraiser in Hollywood; the tracker should show the tapes to his boss to let him know what real Virginia is like, etc. Watch it yourself. What a non-scandal.

Blogging for JIM Bryson

Some of you may know, but I am a contributor over at JIM Bryson for Governor (the unofficial blog). We've undergone a bit of a redesign and it is heating up as more attention shifts to the governor's race. Jim rose to be the go-to Conservative leader while only a freshman in the state senate. He is a successful businessman (though he didn't hit the jackpot like Businessman Bredesen . . .) and someone with red-state values . . . qualities we'll want if and when the economy is faltering.

Check out the blog for timely news and analysis regarding the Tennessee governor's race.

"Talking issues"

One of the things that get's tiring during election season is candidates complaining about their opponents' purported unwillingness to "talk about issues." (see below).

Well, over at Jim Bryson's official website they're offering podcasts of Jim discussing various issues in on-the-record interviews with the Media.

If you are tired of 30-second airpuf TV ads, these are tasty and nutritious treats.

Democrat party's "self-image problem"

E.J. Dionne asserts in this op/ed that the Democrats have a self-image problem and will be unable to build a "durable majority" until they find a solution.

I disagree. The problem with the Democrat Party is that it is a coalition of narrow special interest groups with scant overlapping interests. Thankfully for them, Bush-hatred has provided somewhat of a common cause these past six years (of course, they've also had the "it sucks to be out of power" cause for a bit longer). But a party which pieces together a coalition whose members' only common objective is keeping/obtaining power is fragile; and the "coalition" will tend to fade from view in all but Presidential elections or campaigns with rock-star candidates (as Dionne asserts happens to Dems).

A Foreign Policy Rorschach Test

I was thinking the other day of the current fighting going on in Lebanon between Israel and Hezbollah and it occurred to me that this "conflict" is a sort of microcosm of Civilization's conflict with Islamofascism. Accordingly, I believe that an informed person's view of the situation might serve as a sort of foreign policy Rorschach test.

Bill Bennett has has written an op/ed along those lines. Key quote:

Let Kofi Annan condemn Israel. Let ex-State Department officials wring their hands. Let the Security Council issue its condemnations if it must. But at the end of the diplomatic doublespeak and the denunciations of editorial writers here and abroad, let the countries on the frontlines, fighting for their existence, act like any normal country would under attack and save themselves. In so doing, they will save those who also strive to be normal, democratic, and free.

Harold Ford, Jr.,other Dems, changing their tune

Interesting to see that Ford, Jr. was double-talking about the scuttled terrorist attacks in Britain; he appears to be trying to get out in front of this issue:
"Lets figure out how the Brits foiled the attack, what tools prime minister Blair has that President Bush has not had. And let Congress immediately give those to our president. . . . "

Wow, he wants to give more "tools" to Dubya--that's news to all of his [Ford Jr.'s] "netroot" supporters. But I also hear the Schumers and Feingolds are hunky-dorey with giving the President more authority "just as long as it is consistent with the Constitution." Well, of course we won't agree to that, senators.

Harold Fraud, Jr. sounds a lot like Ed Bryant . . .

I just learned from a Chattanooga Times Free Press pipe bomb . . . er, editorial that Bob Corker's primary spending was as bad as Ford, Jr.'s (laughable) and that Harold Ford, Jr. believes we should really, really try hard to find an energy breakthrough:

In Congress, Rep. Ford has consistently supported legislation to reduce the U.S. addiction to oil, and he sees the opportunity before us. "We need to go back to the kind of big ideas and bold thinking that made this country great," he says, "We need to create this generation’s moon shot by becoming energy self-sufficient by 2025."

This reminds me an awful lot of Ed Bryant's frequent proposal during the GOP primary (which the CTFP thinks was a cakewalk akin to the primary of the Democrat Party). From a weeks old Commercial Appeal story:

Saying he believes oil prices will continue to rise, Bryant also renewed his call for a project -- as strong he said as World War II's Manhattan Project and President Kennedy's push for a moon landing -- that would "commit America to developing and (mass-)producing alternative-fuel vehicles in five years."

I knew that Ford, Jr. was going to try and sound like a Conservative during this campaign but an impersonation of Ed Bryant is a surprise.

I wonder if he can do a good W.C. Fields?


I can't find the actual op/ed online, but Ford, Jr. has it at his website . . . hey, it may have originated over there from the way it reads.

Uh oh, did Bushitler violate British Islamofascists' rights?

Kudos to American intelligence for their part in foiling the most recent terrorist scheme.

UPDATE: As Rich Lowry states in this NRO op/ed, the Left routinely ignores the implications of their efforts to impugn this administration's every effort to wage the war on Islamofascism.

That Karl Rove is busy, busy, busy . . .

Even while the President is on vacation, that evil Karl Rove appears to have been busy strategizing about how to scare Americans into a "unitary executive"!!! Or, at least that's what Dems are thinking today . . .

Despicable "parents"

This report of a family using children to steal jewelry reminds me of the Irish/gypsy woman caught on a video surveillance camera a couple years ago slugging her "mule" daughter after a mother-daughter shoplifting outing. Remember that case? Despicable people.

Black GOP candidates a "novelty"?

In an attempt to illustrate the persistent American racial divide, Stuart Rothenberg, the author of this online article pulls the hackneyed stereotype off the shelf . . . "Legitimate Black Republican" is an oxymoron. Here's the main quote:

Strong black GOP candidates remain something of a novelty, and national Republican strategists are thrilled when they can find an appealing black to run for a high-profile office.

That assertion was only a paragraph after stating that nationally there were four Republicans (three of whom had the GOP nomination) vying for statewide office who happened to be black.

You know what is truly a novelty? A Democrat candidate for a statewide office; but I guess that didn't fit with the article's thesis.

Here's another post about a racism-mongering article.

Republicans "soft[ening] on crime"?

Zack McMillin in today's Commercial Appeal is incredulous that Republican candidates for Memphis DA and sheriff (both of whom won convincingly last Thursday) spoke during their campaigns about "root causes" of crime and seeking "comprehensive" answers to soaring crime rates.

This is where the Left misses the boat on Conservatism (particularly so-called Social Conservatism) . . . I have a very comprehensive view of crime issues, but I believe (as do a majority of Americans--these two Conservative candidates won by 62% and 63%, respectively) that most Liberal "solutions" actually exacerbate the problems. I don't think that poverty leads someone to crime; I don't think that amoral education is the key to eradicating poverty or crime; I don't believe that gov't policy of punishing success (through confiscatory tax policy) and subsidizing irresponsibility will encourage responsibility; and on and on and on.

Don't you wish the Left would stop legislating it's failed morality?

"History" in the making . . . certainly for the Dems

In today's Tennessean Dwight Lewis opines on the "history" in the making in Tennessee's U.S. Senate race. Ironically, I learned from a Democrat acquaintance who attended the rally that the "1500" folks who paid $150 to stand on the asphalt parking lot in the August afternoon heat didn't even have water available to them. So much for "the little guy."

And it should probably be noted that an african-american U.S. Senate candidate is more of an oddity in the Democrat Party than in the Republican Party. For too many decades, the Democrat Party has done more talking than delivering on promises of helping blacks in this country.

Unfortunately, like Clinton's and the Democrat Party's talk about advancing race relations, Ford, Jr. is more about appearances than realities.

Darwinism Dogmatists

And I thought we non-Darwinists were supposed to be the dogmatic and disingenuous ones . . . David Klinghoffer writes about dishonest Darwinists and their state-by-state politically correct blitzkrieg.

Jonah Goldberg steps on some steel-toed boots

Here's an insightful op/ed about farm subsidies in America.

Great comic about stem cell research (and abortion, sort of)

Check this out, from Glenn McCoy at TownHall.com:

Legal costs we all share

John Stossel rocks. Here's another of his instant classic columns on the cost of trial lawyers gone wild.