GreenfieldNOW.com
search all things local
     
Blog Home |  About this Blog       Welcome to MyCommunityNOW - Blogs Sign in | Join
Browse By tag All Tags » McCain 2008 » Conservatives » Elections (RSS)

Related Tags

It made me feel better: PALIN 2012 RYAN

By Kyle Prast
Monday, Nov 10 2008, 11:31 AM

On election eve, I quickly made this campaign button to illustrate my hopes for the 2012 ticket. I wore it to the Waukesha Republican Victory Party.

Barely there 2 minutes, a few women from the Waukesha Republican Party and I started talking. Are you part of the Republican Women's group, they asked? No, I said, although I did work a little on the last 2 campaigns. Why not? I explained it was because Republicans didn't support conservative candidates. Citing Republican State Senator Tom Reynold's 2006 race and the lack of support from the party, I said I now put my efforts into individual races instead of the GOP as a whole. They did not disagree. 

Then they spotted my button, and their eyes lit up. Where did you get that? I said I made it. They definitely liked the idea. These ladies were not alone. In the course of the evening, my humble button received enthusiastic support.

I know many blame Governor Sarah Palin for McCain's loss on Tuesday. But that sentiment shows how little those naysayers understand conservatives. It was very clear to me that fellow volunteers at the phone bank were there only because of Sarah, not McCain. Same with rally attendees.

As Senator John McCain gave his concession speech that night, he took the full blame for his failure to win. Amongst the Waukesha Republican faithful watching on the big screen, there was no murmur in the audience to the contrary.

When McCain thanked Governor Palin, the audience cheered. You would think BBC reporter Ali Reed was there in the room with us. In his What next for Sarah Palin? he reported the same reaction:

The sombre air at Senator John McCain's concession speech was momentarily pierced by cheer as Mr McCain spoke about Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.

The Wall Street Journal would like to see Congressman Paul Ryan become the House Minority Leader. (Ryan is not interested.) But they see Paul Ryan as many of us do, a rising star on the Republican horizon. Ryan for the Republicans, The party needs an economic spokesman:

... the Republican Party faces a choice. It can put the loss down to the country's fatigue with the Bush Administration and the bad luck of running amid a financial panic and shrug it off. Or it can choose a new direction, with new leadership, and retake the high ground it once occupied, especially on the economy.

...Mr. Ryan's economic knowledge and youthful energy make him the best choice [for Minority Leader] to pull his party in a more promising direction.

Sad to say, persona matters in politics. Obama's youth and charisma made him more attractive than McCain's old, tired warhorse manner. It has been said that if radio were around in 1800, Thomas Jefferson would never have won the presidency. Jefferson was brilliant on paper but not a great orator.

Conservatives, imagine a Palin/Ryan or Ryan/Palin ticket in 2012? With Ryan's grasp of economics and practical solutions and Palin being governor of the only state not in or headed toward recession, it could be a winning combination: A ticket with real conservative solutions AND articulate, attractive candidates. 

Sign me up! TeamSarah.org


Please, comment content should relate to the subject of the post. Although I try to respond to many, do not interpret my lack of a response as agreement.

Links: 

 

counter hit xanga

Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Vicki Mckenna, Jay Weber, The Right View Wisconsin, Mark Levin, CNS News

 

Successful Republicans urge: Stand up for what works

By Kyle Prast
Friday, Nov 7 2008, 10:49 AM

It has become a family tradition to attended the Waukesha Republican's "Victory" party at the Country Springs Hotel.  Various local candidates stop in and give a pep talk along with Waukesha Republican leaders. This year most of us hoped for good news but were braced for the bad.

Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner addressed the crowd first. He quipped something to the effect that after 8 years of Democrats blaming President Bush for everything, with them in charge of the legislature and the White House, we'll be able to pin the tail on the donkey. (Donkey being the symbol for democratic party.)

I am not so sure anything will stick, but I enjoyed the imagery.

 

Next up was Congressman Paul Ryan. I think most Republicans in the room see Ryan as the future of the Conservative movement. Ryan outlined a path for the next few years that went something like this: Stand up for what you believe in. Work with Democrats when they are going in the right direction and when they're wrong, propose alternative solutions. (My emphasis) 

Congressman Ryan, if you recall, came up with a plan to reform the entitlement problem of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, called "A Roadmap for America's Future". The Democrats just ignore the impending insolvency of that costly trio.

Last to speak was Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker. He too urged that Republicans present clear, conservative alternatives to liberal tax and spend policy. He is living proof that conservatism, when properly communicated, will sell even in very Democratic territory!  The key was presenting that conservative message in a clear and concise way--something almost everyone in the room knew the McCain campaign never did. 

As John McCain gave his concession speech the room was quiet. Not much disagreement when McCain said "the failure is mine." There was cheering when he thanked Sarah Palin.

The road ahead is steep, very steep, for true conservatives. But Scott Walker is living proof that people will support the conservative message if it is presented clearly enough.

I fear most Republican politicians and party officials still don't get it.

 

These might be of interest: It was a great victory - but not for the Left and

It made me feel better: PALIN 2012 RYAN
 

Please, comment content should relate to the subject of the post. Although I try to respond to many, do not interpret my lack of a response as agreement.

Links: 

 

counter hit xanga

Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Vicki Mckenna, Jay Weber, The Right View Wisconsin, Mark Levin, CNS News

 

What can you expect? We didn't choose our candidate

By Kyle Prast
Thursday, Nov 6 2008, 12:01 PM

Senator John McCain managed to get 56,494,802 votes, which translates to 46.4% of the total. That was 1.9% less than John Kerry received in 2004. Hardly the trouncing Bob Dole took in 1996 with his 40.71% of the vote or Carter's 41.0% in 1980 or Mondale's 40.6% in 1984.

Just for comparison purposes, President Bill Clinton never broke the 50% mark--receiving 43.0% in 1992 (Ross Perot was the spoiler) and only 49.24% in 1996.

I would still call McCain's 46.4% showing respectable, especially since Republicans didn't really choose their candidate.

If you remember the early primary season, Sen. John McCain was the favorite of the media. Talk radio hosts such as Rush Limbaugh or Mark Levin warned that once the nomination was sewn up, that favorite son status would be gone. They were right.

There was much speculation that Democrats crossed over to vote for McCain in the primaries because they felt he was the weakest candidate. They were correct. McCain may have been a Republican, but he was not a conservative in the Ronald Reagan tradition.

It is very difficult to muster enthusiasm for a candidate when he doesn't really represent your party's ideals, and the media knew that. I talked about this back in February:

Another problem I have with the prospect of a McCain nomination is that he very seldom gets the majority of votes in the states he wins. Certainly Mike Huckabee's strong showing in the south was a surprise too. McCain did not even receive over 50% of the votes in his own state of Arizona.

Today GOPUSA Eagle email sent this out: 

The Strange GOP Nominating Victory

Assuming John McCain gets the GOP nomination, it will show how whimsical history can be. It would be the first time in living memory that a Republican presidential nomination went to a candidate who was not merely opposed by a majority of the party but was actively despised by about half its rank-and-file voters across the country--and by many, if not most, of its congressional officeholders. 

Slit a Vein or Vote for McCain?
by Chuck Muth

While the conservative knock against Mitt Romney is that he started out as a moderate and has since moved to the right, John McCain started out on the right but has since moved to the left. Which is worse?

John McCain did a terrible job of articulating his message. Obama was still running ads that McCain would tax your health care the day of the election. McCain never explained that was not true. He never talked about Obama's 7% health care plan payroll deduction. McCain never explained that when the Bush tax cuts expired, most people's taxes would go up.

It took a civilian like Joe the Plumber to finally bring Obama's real stance on spreading the wealth to the forefront. By that time it was really too late. Despite the Drill Here, Drill Now movement, little was said about what an Obama cap and trade/no oil or coal stance would look like.

Republicans and conservatives were angry that McCain didn't talk about the issues. J.T. Harris pleaded with McCain to bring up the real issues. Did McCain ever really nail Carter and Clinton for the mortgage crisis? No.

John McCain was obsessed with his "reach across the isle" fantasy. Every time he talked about that or his campaign finance reform as a selling feature, I wanted to scream. Ironically, it was his own McCain/Feingold that helped do him in.  

When John McCain gave his concession speech on Tuesday night, my husband said, he is a class act--McCain was very gracious. Moments later I think Fox News' Brit Hume said the same.

Many, including myself, saw John McCain as incapable of really fighting for his positions. I've often wondered if his POW imprisonment was the reason. When someone experiences a severe illness or tragedy, their priorities in life change. They no longer can bear a grudge or sweat the small stuff.

Whatever the reason, it was a long shot that McCain would win. The voters that I spoke with who voted 3rd party or sat it out summed it up: the lesser of 2 evils is still evil.

A McCain victory would not have been a conservative victory. (Even during the financial crisis he was still reaching across the isle talking about appointing Obama supporter Warren Buffet as Treasury Secretary--what would be wrong with Mitt Romney?)  

Without a Jimmy Carter we probably wouldn't have had a Ronald Reagan. But Carter inflicted a lot of damage in his 4 years, and Obama makes Carter look appealing.

President elect Obama already hinted he wouldn't be able to do it all in his first term. I hope he is right. In the meantime, Republicans, you better get your act together.  

 

 

PS Speaking of Class Acts, Brit Hume is stepping down "for a quieter life, spending time with his grandchildren and following his Christian faith."

 

Wisconsin Department of Transportation OPEN HOUSE: Proposed changes to Bluemound Road (east of Moorland Road, west of Sunnyslope Road), Thursday, Nov. 6th, 7-9pm
 

Please, comment content should relate to the subject of the post. Although I try to respond to many, do not interpret my lack of a response as agreement.

Links: 

 

counter hit xanga

Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Vicki Mckenna, Jay Weber, The Right View Wisconsin, Mark Levin, CNS News

 

Forget the Bradley effect, what about the Bush effect?

By Kyle Prast
Monday, Nov 3 2008, 02:58 PM

I've been wondering about this for some time. Are some independents reluctant to voice support for John McCain because they don't want to take flack for supporting the Republicans? Democrats have incessantly talked against George Bush during this election cycle, as if they are running against him, even though George isn't running.

Amongst African Americans, I think there is a Bradley effect. Remember J.T. Harris telling McCain that he was taking a ...whipping for supporting McCain? J.T. continues to feel the heat.

The Investor's Business Daily poll isn't as hopeful for McCain today as it looked yesterday, but Obama still isn't 5% points ahead of McCain or above 50%. There are still 9.5% not sure. Are they really not sure or are they just not saying?

One interesting sidebar, there is another segment obsessed with George Bush. al Qaeda wants Republicans, Bush "humiliated": (Hmm, I wonder who they want to win?)

DUBAI (Reuters) - An al Qaeda leader has called for President George W. Bush and the Republicans to be "humiliated," without endorsing a party in the upcoming U.S. presidential election, according to an Internet video posting...

Terrorism monitor SITE Intelligence Group said in a report on Wednesday that militants on al Qaeda-linked websites have for months been debating the significance of Democratic presidential candidate Barak Obama or Republican John McCain.

...Others say his [Obama's] planned phased withdrawal from Iraq would be a boon to al Qaeda's affiliate and give it a base for Middle East expansion.

The only real poll that matters is the vote tally on election day. Go out and vote.

PS From Drudge: Interesting question: Can Obama win popular vote but lose election? And do remember that the early exit polls favored Kerry in 2004.

Sure, chances of Republicans retaining the White House are remote.

But some last-minute state polls show the GOP nominee closing the gap in key states — Republican turf of Virginia, Florida and Ohio among them, and Democratic-leaning Pennsylvania, too.

If the tightening polls are correct and undecided voters in those states break McCain's way — both big ifs — that could make for a repeat of the 2000 heartbreaker for Democrats that gave Republicans the White House.

 

Please, comment content should relate to the subject of the post. Although I try to respond to many, do not interpret my lack of a response as agreement.

Links: 

 

counter hit xanga

Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Vicki Mckenna, Jay Weber, The Right View Wisconsin, Mark Levin, CNS News

 

 


 

The elitists don't like Palin...they didn't like Reagan either

By Kyle Prast
Sunday, Oct 26 2008, 04:11 PM
I've been to 2 McCain Palin rallies. Believe me, Republicans and conservatives adore Sarah Palin. Many of them would never have braved the crowds and long lines for John McCain. But for Sarah? Yes. The question, Can we reverse the ticket? (Palin, McCain) is more than a light hearted joke. 

Yet, there are those supposed Republican elitists who look down their noses at her with disdain. Some go as far as throwing their support to Barack Obama. Can someone who says they are a conservative or Republican really be for Barack Obama? Does that ring true?

Well, to put it in local context, it rings about as true as former Republican Mayor Kate Bloomberg and husband Frank Urban* endorsing Democrat Jim Sullivan for State Senate over incumbent Republican Tom Reynolds in 2006. From my Bloomberg's endorsement shows her true "blue state" colors:  

... in Bloomberg and Urban’s opinion, the Democrat they are endorsing is running to serve and represent the people of the 5th district effectively, “whether they are conservative, liberal, or somewhere in between”. Think about that. How is that even possible? On every major issue, I disagree STRONGLY with that candidate’s position.

How is it I would be satisfied with him [Sullivan] representing me? How could a pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, believer in lower taxes, pro voter photo ID, anti-benefits to illegal aliens, fiscal conservative like me ever be represented by someone whose platform is pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, opposed to voter photo ID, opposed to requiring welfare recipients to prove their legal US status, and pro-taxation?

Any Republican espousing those liberal values would be an "embarrassment" to the Republican Party. But then, I asked myself, how well did Mayor Kate reflect my values? Not very well. So, why would I give any credence to her endorsement now?

And so, I give the same credence to these elitists' criticisms of Gov. Sarah Palin and endorsements for Barack Obama. Come to think of it, Obama's platform is much the same as Sullivan's--so just substitute the elitists names for Bloomberg and Urban and Obama for Sullivan. The issues are the same.  

There was a great editorial in Investor's Business Daily Friday, Palin and the Elitists. It contrasts those "Republicans" who don't approve of Palin with others who do and the reasons why.

They [the elitists] all seem to no longer connect to either the heartland or a new kind of leader who didn't make her way up through elite colleges or through a husband's or father's connections. Maybe that's too hard to absorb for those who inhabit the stratified, elitist political ecosystems of New York and Washington.

Those who say she isn't ready haven't bothered to "gather evidence of her 'unreadiness' ." "Their dismissiveness sharply contrasts to others [such as Bill Kristol, Victor Davis Hanson, and Mark Steyn] who've tried to find out who Sarah Palin is.  They find it impossible to dismiss her."

The editorial concludes with, "Maybe Palin's straightforwardness and promises of reform threaten some among the conservative commentariat. Bad news: If John McCain and Palin win this vote, they're in for a long four years".

The Republican elite didn't like Ronald Reagan either. When he ran, they dismissed him as nothing more than a B movie actor. History proved them wrong.

 

*I was unaware that Frank Urban passed away on Saturday when I posted this piece. My sympathies to his wife Kate and family. 

Please, comment content should relate to the subject of the post. Although I try to respond to many, do not interpret my lack of a response as agreement.

Links: 

 

counter hit xanga

Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Jay Weber, Mark Levin,  Vicki Mckenna



 

Canada just elected new Prime Minister, will US follow suit?

By Kyle Prast
Thursday, Oct 16 2008, 08:23 AM

Our race for the White House seems like it has gone on forever. Canada just got the job done in less than 2 months. (Lucky them!)

Who did Canadians elect? The Conservative or the Liberal?

The Conservative.

Canada's new Prime Minister is Stephen Harper and according to the Wall Street Journal, Conservative Canada, John McCain take note: (My emphasis)

...Harper and his Conservative Party coasted to an easy victory in national elections on Tuesday, winning 38% of the vote and 143 seats in parliament. Mr. Harper's closest competitor, Liberal Party leader Stéphane Dion, managed only 26% of the popular vote for 76 seats.

Though he did not win the 155 seats he needed to secure a majority, Mr. Harper did pick up 16 new members of parliament, while the Liberals lost 19 seats. In other words, in a time of great economic uncertainty, Canadians by a large margin went with the tax cutter over the tax raiser.

The WSJ suggested that Harper hoped to secure a parliament seat majority but his response to "the global financial panic" that critics said was "too casual" might have kept him from it. 

So what prompted his victory? His pro NATO role, funding military, and troops in Afghanistan to fight terrorism platform.

Mr. Harper restored Canada's important role in NATO and revived Canadian pride in playing a role on the world stage. He reversed a pattern of parliamentary neglect of Canada's armed forces and made proper funding for the troops a priority. Rather than flee Afghanistan as Mr. Dion wanted to do, Mr. Harper's Canada is playing a crucial role in the international effort to defeat al Qaeda and the Taliban.

Domestically, Harper "promised to cut corporate taxes to further attract capital and grow the economy."

What was Harper's closest challenger, Liberal Mr. Dion's platform? "To levy a new carbon tax on business" and "flee Afghanistan."

What Americans will do on Nov. 4th remains the mystery. Will they be like their Canadian neighbors to the north and vote for the true tax cutter--especially on corporations--and pro military presence man John McCain? Or choose the wealth/income redistributor (remember Obama wants Bush Tax Cuts to expire) and abandon Iraq candidate Barack Obama?

Please, comment content should relate to the subject of the post. Although I try to respond to many, do not interpret my lack of a response as agreement.

Links: 

 

counter hit xanga

Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Jay Weber, Mark Levin,  Vicki Mckenna

 

McCain goes to La Crosse Friday, Palin not willing to give up Michigan

By Kyle Prast
Wednesday, Oct 8 2008, 09:13 AM

On the news yesterday, I heard that John McCain and Sarah Palin will go to La Crosse Friday after their stop in Waukesha on Thursday. I think that is a good move. McCain will also be in Mosinee, WI, and Palin in Wilmington, OH later on Thursday.

Yesterday, Gov. Sarah Palin said she wanted to go back to Michigan--she wasn't giving up on that state. That is good news for Michigan since The GOP in Michigan is still trying to "boost efforts" in the state.

I just heard about this PAC group, Our Country Deserves Better. They aren't willing to give up Michigan either. In fact, they are holding a 2 day web-a-thon to raise $500,000 by Thursday morning. In their first day, they raised a little over half of it according to their CONTRIBUTE NOW page.

Their logic is that if McCain just gives Michigan up, Obama won't need to spend any time or money there.

The 17 electoral votes will be lost to Obama/Biden.  Down-ballot races of candidates sympathetic to McCain will lose.  And Obama will be able to take money he had intended for Michigan and put it into other swing states such as Nevada, Virginia, Florida, Ohio and Missouri.

We might be focusing on the presidential race, but the president isn't the only candidate on the ballot. The entire House is on the Nov. 4th ballot, and 36 Senators are up for election too.

The thought of an unbridled Democrat majority House and Democrat majority Senate with a Democrat President is enough motivation for citizens to shell out $254,000 (so far) to help Michigan. 

 

Please, comment content should relate to the subject of the post. Although I try to respond to many, do not interpret my lack of a response as agreement.

Links: 

 

counter hit xanga

Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Jay Weber, Mark Levin,  Vicki Mckenna

 


 

Obama ad misleading about McCain stem cell research stance

By Kyle Prast
Tuesday, Sep 23 2008, 10:33 PM

What if I had a cure for Parkinson's, leukemia, diabetes, or paralysis caused by spinal cord injury? All you would have to do is take an infant, remove all of its stem cells (sorry, the infant dies), tweak the cells, and transfer them to the ill patient.

Would you do it?

Most people wouldn't and would consider that murderous act barbaric. Yet those who favor embryonic stem cell research are in effect doing just that in the eyes of those who are pro-life.

If you believe that life begins at conception, then even using an embryo for research purposes is an act of murder.

President Bush has been adamantly opposed to federal funding for embryonic stem cell research for that very reason. (The Bush stance only opposes federal funding--not outlawing private research.)

McCain has voted for existing embryonic stem cell research in the past, but those measures failed. John McCain is opposed to embryonic stem cell research that would encourage growing embryos for the purpose. The Republican platform is against any federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, but THEY ALL, BUSH, McCAIN, and PALIN FAVOR FEDERAL FUNDING FOR ADULT STEM CELL RESEARCH! 

The outrageous Obama radio ad that distorts McCain's position includes a woman talking about her diabetic daughter. She says that John McCain is opposed to stem cell research. It goes on to say that medical research, benefiting millions, shouldn't be held hostage by a few.

So why do the Democrats constantly tell people that McCain and Bush are against stem cell research?

Two reasons: One, they want to portray the Republicans as heartless cretins, too stuck on religious principal to care about the ill. Two, if the Democrats can get people to buy into the necessity for embryonic stem cell research, it will dilute the anti-abortion/sanctity of life position of conservatives.

The issue should become moot in time, according to CNS, which is consistent with what I have seen reported*,

Stem cells obtained from adult humans have been widely acclaimed for their ability to promote human health and stave off dreaded illnesses. Stem cells obtained from human embryos, however, have not been successful in yielding results in scientific research thus far.

It will be wonderful to cure some of these diseases in the near future. McCain and Palin are in favor of curing these diseases too, just not at the expense of another individual! Remember that next time you hear an Obama ad saying they aren't.

PS Nick Reed (substitute for Vicki McKenna) called the mother, Jody Montgomery, from the ad to ask if she knew she was telling a complete lie. Turns out, this is the same woman who used the same type ad against Mark Green 2 years ago. Listen to the podcast from the 10am hour on Sept. 24th to hear more.

*Nick Reed just name some of the 73 benefits to human patients obtained from ADULT stem cell research on the same radio program. He continued the stem cell discussion into the 11am hour. He mentioned the 73 benefits at about 11:20am if you were listening to the podcast. See Stemcellresearch.org 

Brookfield District 7 Info meeting, Wed., Sept. 24, 2-3pm or 6:30-7:30pm City Clerk Kris Schmidt will be in attendance to answer questions or concerns regarding recent news about the Van Hollen lawsuit against the state elections authority.

Please, comment content should relate to the subject of the post. Although I try to respond to many, do not interpret my lack of a response as agreement.

Links: 

 

counter hit xanga

Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Mark Levin,  Vicki Mckenna

 


 

McCain & Palin in Cedarburg: so close, yet so far away + pictures

By Kyle Prast
Sunday, Sep 7 2008, 12:26 AM

The phrase so close, yet so far away was never more true for me than yesterday. A friend asked on Thursday night if I was interested in going to Cedarburg Friday, That was just the nudge I needed. I said, yes!

Neither of us had ever gone to one of these campaign stops before, so we were greenhorns. We did manage to get there by 8am, but we could see by the crowd, that was not nearly early enough.

After waiting for a long time to get through security, something I should have anticipated, we finally were allowed through. Unfortunately, we were on the north side of the podium--the wrong side of town. We did have an excellent view of the backside of the press bleachers though! (Photo courtesy of another attendee.)

From JSOnline: Police said there were at least 12,500 who were admitted to the secure area and another 5,000 who did not fit.

The rumor was that when this Cedarburg stop was originally set up, they were expecting a crowd of 2,000. I think there is little doubt about what Palin and the convention has done for the ticket. (I think many people saw a new side to John McCain through his convention speech.)

Whitney Clapper sang the National Anthem and did an outstanding job. Dr. Ferry from Concorida University provided the invocation--not just some wimpy little generic prayer, this was a meaty prayer. (I should have taken notes but my eyes were closed.)

We could hear the speakers fine; we just could not see a thing. While Congressman Sensenbrenner was speaking, the guards permitted a crowd of attendees to flood the street, allowing them to get much closer to the bleachers, while we were kept back on the sidewalks. Many started booing near me. Poor Sensenbrenner! The boos quickly died down when the sidewalk crowd realized the street group could see no better.

We decided that we might as well leave our spot to see if we could get a better glimpse on the south side of the crowd. The guard informed us we would have to go through security on the other end of main street if we left, but we really did not care. It was pretty worthless where we were.

It was an interesting walk down the alley to the east of the main street.We could see the news vans,.sign distribution area (picked up a few), campaign "stuff" vendors, and of course...protesters.

 
I purchased a fabulous pin, featuring Lincoln (birth of the Republican party), Reagan, and now McCain.


We then headed to Tomasos Pizza where we could watch the coverage on the TV screen. There we met William, who told us he was right up front! He showed us some of his pictures on his camera and promised to email. (Many on the slideshow are courtesy of Bill and another friend.)
                                                                                                       Other people on the street had various signs, McCain face cut-outs, and some had elephant shaped auction paddle style signs. The paddles we learned were courtesy of John Murphy (left) of Mequon's BetterBidders auction paddle company. We met up with him later and he told us a similar pair, from the 2004 election, now resides in the Smithsonian! 

The crowd was very up-beat, despite 1,000s being turned away. People were friendly and ready to share or trade their McCain/Palin goodies. Even though we were not able to see the candidates for ourself, it still was a fun experience. The weather was great and the mood even better.

No doubt about it, the Republicans are energized!

 

Bits and pieces

A funny tid-bit:

"After speaking, McCain and Palin ducked into The Chocolate Factory to greet people. "I've got to get the moose tracks, please," said Palin at the counter. "Moose tracks, you know, near and dear to my heart. I can't go wrong with it." She was given a waffle cone with a giant scoop. McCain ordered sorbet; Cindy McCain ordered a brownie.

Interesting note: When an important person is in town, such as the president of the United States or presidential candidate, don't count on going to Froedert hospital's emergency room without calling first. Friday they diverted patients to other hospitals while the VIP were in town. (Learned this by experience.)

What to, and not to bring: My advice is that it is best to think of these events in terms of airport security. While waiting in line to pass through security, we heard you needed ID (didn't.) Also heard umbrellas were a no-no, so were American flags if the stick was too long. I think beverages were out too. Weapons of course are verboten and I think a scissors, letter opener, pocket knife, or anything else the guard might think could be used to hurt someone. The guard next to us was ripping the flags off the sticks and keeping the sticks, but my guard let me take mine in. My very short collapsible umbrella was OK (they did feel it though.)

Favorite homemade sign: This lady told us she came all the way from Tennessee!

 

Please, comment content should relate to the subject of the post.

Links: Lots more pictures on my McCain Slideshow 

counter hit xanga

Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Mark Levin,  Vicki Mckenna


 

Palin on difference between hockey mom and Pit Bull dog

By Kyle Prast
Wednesday, Sep 3 2008, 02:33 PM

Evidently Sarah Palin was warned about the potential for vicious attacks from McCain's opponents. She is no shrinking violet though. William Kristol posted this:

"A nervous young McCain staffer took it upon himself to explain to Palin the facts of life in a national campaign, the intense scrutiny she'd be under from the media, the viciousness of the assault that she'd be facing, etc." Here is what she had to say,

Palin: "Thanks for the warning. By the way, do you know what they say the difference is between a hockey mom and a Pit Bull?"

McCain aide: "No, Governor."

Palin: "A hockey mom wears lipstick."

You have got to say she has chutzpah!

I am eagerly anticipating her speech tonight. Will we see the same confidence we saw in her on Friday?

Links: 

counter hit xanga

Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Mark Levin,  Vicki Mckenna

 


 

MSNBC crossed the line

By Kyle Prast
Saturday, Aug 30 2008, 12:02 PM

Last night, Bill O'Reilly was hot under the collar about MSNBC's coverage of McCain's Sarah Palin VP pick. Here is the YouTube clip.

MSNBC really crossed the line by adding the caption, "How many houses does Palin add to the Republican ticket?" under their breaking news bulletin of the event. I also agree with O'Reilly that Tom Brokaw and Brian Williams bear some responsibility here too. By appearing on MSNBC, they lend credence to this type of snide reporting.

Any wonder MSNBC isn't watched by conservatives?

I used to get all my news from NBC; I've watched ever since the Dave Garaway years! The Today Show used to be the first thing I turned on in the morning and I prepared dinner with Tom Brokaw. But over the years, NBC became so biased (and fluffy), I couldn't take it anymore.

In Googling this topic, I came across a new acronym for NBC: New Barack Channel 

By the way, I think it's odd that MSNBC would even raise the house question since Sarah Palin seems so very mainstream American and working class. There doesn't appear to be an elite bone in her body--she loves moose stew and probably doesn't even know what arugula lettuce is! 

 

UPDATE: Sept. 8, 2008 MSNBC just demoted their anchors Olbermann and Matthews to commentators. "The change reflects tensions between the freewheeling, opinionated MSNBC and the impartial newsgatherers at NBC News."

Links: 

counter hit xanga

Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Mark Levin,   Vicki Mckenna

 

 


 

Our VP's nickname was Sarah Barracuda

By Kyle Prast
Friday, Aug 29 2008, 10:01 AM

"She's a female Teddy Roosevelt" a caller told Jay Weber today, as I was listening for the latest VP news. That sums it up well.

Sarah Palin seems a perfect complement to McCain: Young, energetic, a governor, pro-marriage, passionately pro-life. She is a life long member of the NRA, hunts and ice fishes.

McCain and Palin have the potential to get our budget under control and end waste. Palin's nickname was the barracuda in high school.

I heard she cleaned house in Alaska, leaving a trail of bodies in her wake. (Many of them good ole boy republicans!)  It sounds like she won't tolerate corruption or waste regardless of whose party it comes from. That is what we need.

I think Ronald Reagan would be pleased. I know I am breathing a sigh of relief. I will feel even better when I hear John McCain say it himself. (I am a bit of a Doubting Thomas at times.)

Links: 

counter hit xanga

Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Mark Levin,   Vicki Mckenna

 


 

Holding my breath in preparation for holding my nose

By Kyle Prast
Thursday, Aug 28 2008, 04:09 PM

(See updates at bottom of post)

The word is, John McCain will declare his running mate tomorrow. I have come to terms with voting for McCain. To quote a colorful little saying of my father's, "He's a little better than the average...but the average ain't so good these days." The more I find out about Obama, the better McCain looks.

I think as long as he doesn't pick a real loser of a running mate, most conservatives like me will take a deep breath and vote for McCain on election day. The fact that a number of pro-choice candidates have been hinted at however, such as Tom Ridge and Joe Lieberman, to me destroys all the positive ground McCain gained since he became the Republican's candidate.

If McCain picks Lieberman or any other pro-choice running mate, I guess I will need an oxygen tank to keep me going on Election Day!

There is one V.P. possibility that excites me: Alaska's governor Sarah Palin. She is young, energetic, pro life, pro gun, pro small business, very pro oil...what's not to like? I doubt Democrats will bring up her lack of foreign policy experience because that would just point to Obama's lack of experience too. She's a mother of 5, her oldest son enlisted in the Army; her youngest was born with Down's Syndrome. So unlike Romney, who has changed his position, she truly believes in the sanctity of life and has demonstrated that by her actions. (Just so you know, I would be just as excited by her if she were male.)

Mitt Romney would be OK with me too. His speech on faith and his concession speech last spring were outstanding. He is pro-life enough for me and I know he would defend our freedom of religion, even though I don't share his faith. Many people do not see Romney in a favorable light however.

Tim Pawlenty's name has been out for a while. He would be good. He is young, pro life, and fairly conservative, but he is hook, line, and sinker an ethanol promoter. (What can you expect in Minnesota?) He comes from humble roots, so that would be a nice contrast. Since Pawlenty was for McCain all along, there would not be the 180 degree flip flops on McCain being a good president as Biden has had to do with Obama.

Another name tossed out there is Kay Bailey Hutchinson, Senator from Texas. She does not excite me, but at least she isn't a Lieberman or Ridge.

Paul Ryan or Bobby Jindall would be great too, but they are just a little on the young side for most people. (Next time?) 

Any of the above would be better than a pro-choice pick.

What I don't understand is why McCain would even flirt with the idea of a pro-choice running mate? It is pretty obvious that the pro-life issue is important. To many voters it is the #1 criteria.

Eyebrows are still rising over Obama's vote on the Infant Protection Bill. Others agree that a Pro Choice Veep Equals Political Suicide, (My emphasis)

I hate to rain on John McCain's parade right after he trounced Barack Obama at Rick Warren's Saddleback Church forum, for which I heartily applaud him, but McCain's trial balloon consideration of a pro-choice running mate demands a response.

The prospect of an Obama presidency is so horrifying that many conservatives have temporarily put aside their misgivings about McCain to focus on defeating Obama.

They hold their noses on McCain's immigration record, his campaign finance reform zealotry and his newfound acquiescence to the propaganda narrative of environmental extremists. But they are profoundly appreciative of his tougher stance against tax increases and mindful of his undeniable superiority over Obama on foreign policy and national defense. Recent world events, including Russia's naked aggression against Georgia, magnify this already-glaring contrast.

But while national defense necessarily occupies the front burner, McCain would make a fatal mistake to assume that social issues, especially abortion, are ever off an equally blazing front burner for an inestimable number of social conservatives, the Republicans' most reliable voting bloc over the past three decades.

The pro life issue still has traction. Why give it away?

Because of McCain's age, the running mate becomes an even more important issue. Plus, wouldn't it be great to have a strong V.P. candidate that could step up when McCain fulfilled his term/s? 

In the meantime, I'm holding my breath and thinking, don't make a colossal blunder, McCain! 

UPDATE: After Barack Obama's speech tonight, the word on Fox News was that Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, and Tim Pawlenty would be meeting with McCain in Ohio tomorrow. Other sources had a longer list of VP possibilities. Ugh, I hate waiting.

Friday morning UPDATE: Mitt Romney will be in Ohio, Tim Pawlenty is not the pick and is not coming to Ohio, Mike Huckabee said he was not vetted (phew), but there is mention of a private charter flight to Ohio from ALASKA! (Jay Weber) Drudge has a campaign button mock up with McCain Palin on it big as life. 

2nd Friday update: Fox News says it is not Mitt Romney. 

3rd Friday update: My hopes are dashed. Rumors of Palin being in Ohio are said to not be true. ABC says she is in Alaska and set to visit their state fair today. I suppose she could still be the pick? They could be wrong? I hope? There are other rumors that Palin has been spotted in Ohio--that a woman and 2 teens got off that Alaskan charter flight last night. The announcement will come at 11am today--at least I can exhale then.  

Links: 

counter hit xanga

Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Mark Levin,   Vicki Mckenna


 

Ugh, McCain and Huckabee? Say it aint so

By Kyle Prast
Tuesday, May 13 2008, 09:08 AM

Just when I finally think I can stomach a McCain presidency, John goes and does something else that makes me shake my head in disgust.

McCain just joined 23 other senators in asking the EPA to reconsider some pollution standards. Good, I thought. Then right on the heels of that positive action, McCain still is talking Cap and Trade.

Oh well, he is still better than the alternative. But now this. The possibility of a McCain/Huckabee ticket.

Reason? To woo evangelical voters like me. With the Huckster? Ugh. McCain just alienated me again!!!

If McCain wants to woo the greatest number of evangelical voters, all he has to do is pick a true social and fiscal conservative as a running mate. Someone we would like to see as the next president in 2012. That is NOT Huckabee. 

First rule in picking running mate: First, do no harm.

Possible running mates better than Huckabee: J. C. Watts Jr. (He was even a Southern Baptist Youth Minister for 7 years),  Bobby Jindal, Paul Ryan, hey, even Haley Barbour is looking good compared to Huckabee.

If the conservatives squash Huckabee like they did Harriet Miers, McCain might come to his senses. Let the squelching begin. 

Links:

counter hit xanga

Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield
Vicki Mckenna

 


 
More Posts