Shoulda Been Biden his Time

Soul
of a liberal

Oops!

Biden Unwraps His Bid for '08 With an Oops! - New York Times: WASHINGTON, Jan. 31, 2007. In an era of meticulous political choreography, the staging of the kickoff for this presidential candidacy could hardly have gone worse.

Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, who announced his candidacy on Wednesday with the hope that he could ride his foreign policy expertise into contention for the Democratic nomination, instead spent the day struggling to explain his description of Senator Barack Obama, the Illinois Democrat running for president, as “the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.”

The remark, published Wednesday in The New York Observer, left Mr. Biden’s campaign struggling to survive its first hours and injected race more directly into the presidential contest. The day ended, appropriately enough for the way politics is practiced now, with Mr. Biden explaining himself to Jon Stewart on Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show.”

Racism

I think a liberal leader has gotten caught for exactly the attitude that is felt but unspoken among their ilk.






The disclaimers are coming hot and heavy that he didn't really mean it the way it sounded. Au contraire. Liberal leaders are the true racists at this time in history. Exactly as Bush has said for years, they harbor in their hearts the soft bigotry of low expectations, patronizing blacks and Hispanics and marveling when they just show up.

click to show/hide the rest of the post

The Obama Halo

I have nothing against Barack Obama. I agree with some of the hype that he is a potential star. And yes, to be honest, as this is what this blog is all about, part of the mystique is that he is black. I yearn for a black candidate that can put an end to the unfair charge that America is still racist. So I find myself rooting for Obama, because he is black, and because he is articulate, and because he has captured the imagination with some charisma, and all this means he has a chance.

I have to watch myself, though. I have this tendency to put a halo around Obama. When I look at his voting record, he is a pure liberal. Liberals are not good for the country at this time. Ergo, Obama would not be good for the country. Still, and I am being dead honest, I sense something more in him, aside from his race, and aside from his ill-chosen liberalism. I detect some common sense in him. Common sense can steer a person away from nonsense. Sometimes, away from the nonsense of his party.

Take Away the Halo

Let's put it this way. I desperately don't want a liberal to win the presidency in '08. I fear our country is veering fast towards socialism and a crippling weakness in the face of terrorism and other threats. But if a liberal has to win, then I'd fear Obama less than any other Democrat who has a chance in this race. Even taking away the halo, Obama has something solid about him.

Advice for White Liberals

I have some advice for liberal whites, though, and this is good for the rest of us too. The best way to honor African-Americans, or Hispanics for that matter, is to treat them as your equals. Don't patronize them. Catch yourself when you want to surround them with halos, good or bad; which means treating them with discrimination, positive or negative. Both are dehumanizing.

Treating people as equals means being honest with them, and judging them fairly. Obama, for example, needs to be considered on the content of his character, by his words, and by his deeds. I'll give you an example of what I mean. My opinion of him as a presidential candidate is that he doesn't have the heft yet to be president. He is bright and articulate, and I'd love that in a president, but he needs to understand the world more. I wouldn't trust him yet with Iraq.

Of course, I wouldn't trust any Democrat with Iraq except Joe Lieberman.

Still, my earlier statement stands. If I have to trust a liberal with Iraq, other than Lieberman, I fear Obama less than the others, because of his common sense, and his ability to learn quickly.

Democrat equals Demagogue

Democrats have chosen, over the last fifty or so years, not only to patronize blacks, but to demagogue them. This means they communicate with them by playing to their fears. The underlying assumption is that blacks are not bright enough to see through this. Unfortunately, the strategy has worked. Blacks vote overwhelmingly Democratic. What a crock. The party that uses them has gained their confidence. The party that preaches what could lift them up, the Republicans, is scorned.

click to hide most of this post

Bring on the Gaffs!

One day, through gaffs like Biden's, maybe blacks will see through the Democratic hypocrisy, and realize that a good economy, effective policing, a strong defense, and family values are good for them, as opposed to the welfare state that Democrats promise.

Biden did us a favor. He allowed us to look into the soul of the white liberal.

Disclaimer

There probably are a small number of true progressives and true classical liberals among the Democratic and leftist leaders of today. This post of course does not apply to them. They represent an honest disagreement with the right, unlike the corrupt demagoguery of the mainstream Democratic Party leadership.

Plus, I realize that not all liberal leaders are racists; and that those who are racists do not see themselves as such. Their racism is hidden even to themselves, and it is a racism without malice. It is just as harmful, though, as deliberate persecution.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post: Joe Biden, Democrat, liberal, conservative, racism, Barack Obama, the soft bigotry of low expectations, George W. Bush, progressives, classical liberalism

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

Unperky Ratings for Couric

Couric
rashes

Gender Bias?

"Gender" Blamed for Katie Couric's Low Ratings: Tuesday, Jan. 30, 2007

CBS News and Sports President Sean McManus says that gender bias may play a role in the disappointing ratings Katie Couric has been getting on CBS Evening News.

"I think it is a fact there are probably people, both men and women, who are perhaps uncomfortable having a woman anchor the news," McManus told the media industry publication Broadcasting & Cable.

"The way she is scrutinized, I think sometimes unfairly, quite frankly, I think a lot of that has to do with gender."

McManus maintained that as a woman, Couric has to be concerned about 'a lot of things the male anchor doesn't have to worry about, like how she looks or what she is wearing."

The Real Reasons for Couric's Low Ratings

With all due respect to Mr. McManus, I believe the reason Couric's numbers have fallen is not because she is different, ala being a woman, but that she is the same. She is the same old touchy feely liberal bias wrapped up in a new gender and new clothes.




Despite her attempts at being objective, with her Free Speech segments, her underlying sympathies show through loud and clear. What makes FOX so appealing on cable is that they give voice to a side that has been neglected by the other media. The same can be said for talk radio. When the people have a choice, they go for Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity over Air America, Al Franken, and even Alan Combs any day.

The networks have never used a conservative anchor. They ought to try it. They might like it.

The Stiffness Factor

One problem with finding a conservative for the job is the stiffness factor. Several conservatives are less fun than liberals. They are wrapped up in righteousness and act like they have a stick up their rears. Some conservatives who are enjoyable are too radical. Ann Coulter is more fun than a barrel full of puppies, but she'd be a poor choice for a news anchor.

Find the Doppelganger Plus of Katie Couric on the Right

I suggest the networks find a conservative female who is not overly religious, and not overly stern, but who has gravitas on the major issues of the day. This would be a more serious version of Katie Couric, but on the right. Not too religious. Not too dogmatic. But with a conservative bent. Able to smile, and laugh, and joke; but with a real interest and understanding of world issues.

One Girl Who Could Do It

Do I have suggestions? It's a difficult task.

Surprisingly, even to me, is one person that pops into my head as perfect for the job, Democrat Tammy Bruce. Of course, she would have to abandon her combative side and adopt a more sober demeanor, but she is an example, to me, of the kind of woman who could present the news with a depth of understanding and draw ratings too.

click to show/hide the rest of the post

About Ms. Bruce

Tammy Bruce (born August 19, 1962) is an author and political commentator. Bruce hosts The Tammy Bruce Show, a radio talk show broadcast on over 160 stations in the United States. The show broadcasts six days a week, including Saturdays. Each episode is three hours long. NewsMax.com Magazine's "Top 25 Talk Radio Host" list selected Bruce as the twenty-fourth most influential host in the nation. She is described on her website as "an openly gay, pro-choice, gun owning, pro-death penalty, voted-for-President Bush progressive feminist". Bruce is a self-described classical liberal.

For seven years, Bruce served as president of the Los Angeles chapter of the National Organization for Women (NOW) from 1990 to 1996, the longest continuous tenure in the chapter's 30-year history. She mobilized activists locally and nationally on a whole range of issues, including women's image in media, childcare, health care, violence against women, economics, and domestic violence. She also served two years on the board of directors for NOW, which she heavily criticizes in her last book.

Tammy, while remaining a Democrat, has taken a decided right turn in her outlook in the last several years. She is highly supportive of George Bush and the Iraq War, and holds now several conservative positions on national issues. She does remain liberal on many social issues, but she is tolerant of opposing views. She takes her Democratic Party to task on their demagoguery, as I do.

Her Books

The New Thought Police: Inside the Left's Assault on Free Speech and Free Minds

The Death of Right and Wrong: Exposing the Left's Assault on Our Culture and Values , (Random House, 2003).

The New American Revolution: Using the Power of the Individual to Save Our Nation from Extremists (Morrow, 2005)

Her newest book is The New American Revolution, How You Can Fight The Tyranny of The Left's Cultural and Moral Decay

Pigeonholing Tammy

Ms. Bruce is an anomaly, and the left doesn't know what to do with her. She still stands tall as a hard-driving, reasonable feminist, and wants to remain a Democrat, but she is disgusted where her party has gone. Sound familiar? That's my line. She is a classical liberal. That's how I see myself. Which translates into today's jargon as conservative, or even neo-con. But it's really just classical liberal—the same beliefs on many issues that great Democrats have held, like FDR, Truman, and Kennedy. Strong on defense, patriotic, pro-business. Believing in God, but not overly religious. Tolerant.

click to hide most of this post

Ms. Bruce as Anchor

Anyway, off my soapbox and back on topic. Ms. Bruce is one example of a female, I think, who could hold her own as a news anchor. Why would she succeed where Couric is failing? Ms. Bruce is pretty, like Couric, but more so; intelligent, far more than Couric; and has gravitas, far more than Couric. She is passionate about world issues, much like the men—Brokaw, Williams, and Gibson. Plus, she is basically conservative, without being stiff.

Let's face it, Couric is a lightweight. She is not passionate about world events. She is not well informed. Her politics are liberal, and based on feelings. Who will turn to her for her views on the world?

Get a woman like Tammy Bruce, and you've got a chance for an audience.

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post:
Katie Couric, Tammy Bruce, gender bias, news anchor, major network news, Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Alan Combs, Al Franken, Air America Radio, Ann Coulter, progressive, classical liberal, conservative, NOW

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture, society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth

Chastising the Pope, Gerald Ford, and Vicious Liberals

The Gift of Truth Excels all Other Gifts (Buddha)

Milestone

Before starting this post, I want to do a bit of self-promotion, which also means I thank you my Readers, who have been so kind and forthcoming in some cases, and so brutally honest in others.

I can now say that when you do a Google search for "politically incorrect", my site will come up on page 6. No big deal.

Yet, if you do a Google search for "no spin", my site will come up on page 1.

Plus, if you do a Google search for "truth no spin" or "politically incorrect spin", my site will come up in the number 1 spot on the number 1 page. Top of the whole Web!

My goal of course would be to arrive at the number one spot on the Web if you do a Google search of "truth".

Thank you all.

Rock

Out of Whack: Imbalance in Our Country and the World

Balance is what we need.

The Pope

The Pope evidently just condemned the death sentence of Saddam Hussein. I think the Pope is wrong. I also believe the Catholic Church, my former church, is mistaken about at least a few more things—like birth control, abortion, the war in Iraq, and war in general. With regard to yesterday's post, the Pope lacks yang. Remember, Pope Benedict XVI, Your Holiness, respectfully, there is a time for peace and a time for war. Please read your Bible (Ecclesiastes, 3:1-8, see the end of this post). When 3,000 of our innocent civilians are murdered, it is a time for war.

Gerald Ford

Gerald Ford evidently thought it was a mistake to invade Iraq. This is another reason why I'm glad he wasn't re-elected, even though we got the disastrous Jimmy Carter in his place. Ford was a good and decent man, who did heal our nation after Watergate. Yet he was not a great geo-political thinker, as Nixon was.

We are a Country out of Balance

Speaking of yin and yang (yesterday's post), another way of putting this concept is to speak of things like the Feminization of America. There is nothing wrong with females nor the female point of view. There is nothing wrong with progressives nor progressivism. What is wrong is imbalance.

Let's take concepts like the death penalty, war, revenge and terrorism. On all these issues the United States is about evenly split. The radical liberals are against the death penalty, all war, all revenge, and oppose tough measures to protect us from terrorism. The conservatives are on the opposite pole. Does this mean we are balanced in this country, for and against these concepts? Not exactly. We are balanced like in a civil war, with polar opposites hating each other. We are not balanced as in politely disagreeing. We are polarized, with passion; and this passion is not friendly. We are balanced like the hot and cold air in a tornado.

Vicious Liberals

There is no meaner nor more vicious human being on the face of the earth now than a passionate liberal (except for the passionate liberals who read and comment on this blog! :). Of course, I am exaggerating, but not much. Saddam Hussein and terrorists are worse than liberals. Whereas Hussein and terrorists are assassins, liberals are character assassins. Liberals are assassins of everything decent and good and right, including the survival of America.

click to show/hide the rest of the post

Where is my proof? the liberals will say. My proof is what I see and hear. For example, go to Media Matters to witness the character assassination of every conservative on the planet. Defenders of this garbage website will say that they are just quoting what conservatives really say, and just showing video clips of conservatives actually speaking.

What they don't reveal, and never will, is that everything they publish is taken out of context. It's like what the press did to Gerald Ford, repeatedly showing him stumbling down the airplane steps and labeling him forever as clumsy. The man was an all-star football player, and was offered a contract by the Green Bay Packers. He was not clumsy. Plus, Media Matters only goes after conservatives. There is nothing good to say about any right-winger. Bush is evil. Cheney is dark. Rumsfeld was a war-monger. Conservatives are corrupt. This is presented as watchdog journalism. I think watchdog journalism is fine, but it should be balanced. Watchdog both sides and then we can talk. Otherwise, it is the opposite of watchdog journalism; it is really what they call lapdog journalism—the presentation of only one side. Media Matters therefore equals liberal lapdog journalism. Their "reporters" are liberal lapdogs.

Brain Challenged Liberals

Even purveyors of untruths like Media Matters would be all right if people didn't take them as gospel. Liberals just don't seem to have the brainpower to distinguish truth from propaganda. They listen to Letterman, Jon Stewart, the liberal news media, Hollywood nitwits, and our corrupt teachers who preach liberal mantras to our vulnerable children.

Propaganda versus Truth

I will repeat, any website, any blog, any news show, or any classroom which teaches only one side of things is fostering propaganda, not truth. Media Matters has one message—conservatism is bad. This is propaganda. Jon Stewart and David Letterman have the same message. They are propagandists. Contrast them with Dennis Miller, who criticizes both sides.

Great Journalism

The only answer for truth in America has been talk radio, Fox News, Christian broadcasting, and the blogosphere. There are no great journalists in America anymore, except for conservatives like Charles Krauthammer and George Will. What I mean by a great journalist is one who seeks the truth. Instead, we have hacks like Dan Rather who manufacture evidence against conservatives. Even Walter Cronkite has lost his moral authority as far as I am concerned. In his day, he was seen as a great symbol of the free press. Now, he has revealed himself as a raging liberal, and I can't stand to even listen to him anymore. The same goes for Bill Moyers.

Liberals are stuck in the 70's. They saw Woodward and Bernstein get all that acclaim after exposing Watergate, and they think good journalism means showing how corrupt government is, especially conservative government. That's not what made Woodward and Bernstein successful. What made them resonate was truth. They exposed the truth. Even Woodward and Bernstein believe their own hype and fame. Now they too have revealed themselves as raging liberals, and cling to their 70's philosophy of anti-conservatism. That's why they are no longer great. They have stopped seeking truth. They are merely imitating themselves.

Krauthammer and Will are great because they seek the truth. Yes, they are conservative, but they don't hesitate to criticize conservatives if they think they are wrong, and praise liberals if they think they are right. Media Matters and other garbage sites will never do this. Their agenda is to destroy conservatism, not expose the truth.

Great Liberals?

Am I being biased myself? Am I against all liberals? Are there no great liberals? Yes, there are. FDR, JFK, Truman, Patrick Moynihan—I could go on and on, but not about anyone in the public eye today. Edward Kennedy is a disgrace to his brothers. John Kerry is a joke. Nancy Pelosi is a vicious communist. John Edwards has grown a bit, but he still wages his class warfare propaganda. Hillary is a Lady Macbeth. Clinton—yes, Bill does have some greatness about him, despite his undermining our government with perjury. I don't care about his sex life; I do care about his lying under oath and looking me in the eyes and lying. Yet, he did govern effectively in many ways; he was a great communicator; and he took the Democratic Party to the center.

click to hide most of this post

This is Balance

For everything there is a season,
And a time for every matter under heaven:
A time to be born, and a time to die;
A time to plant, and a time to pluck up what is planted;
A time to kill, and a time to heal;
A time to break down, and a time to build up;
A time to weep, and a time to laugh;
A time to mourn, and a time to dance;
A time to throw away stones, and a time to gather stones together;
A time to embrace, And a time to refrain from embracing;
A time to seek, and a time to lose;
A time to keep, and a time to throw away;
A time to tear, and a time to sew;
A time to keep silence, and a time to speak;
A time to love, and a time to hate,
A time for war, and a time for peace.
Ecclesiastes 3:1-8

Rock

(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)


Click here to get a button link to this blog:

<br /><br /><a href="http://truthrock.blogspot.com/"><img src="http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/668/cooltext38806293hm4.gif" alt="Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone"></a><br /><br /> <br /><br />

Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!


Subscribe to my feed
                                          

Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.

Technorati Tags for this post: Pope Benedict XVI, Ecclesiastes, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Watergate, yin and yang, Feminization of America, progressivism, Media Matters, watchdog journalism, lapdog journalism, David Letterman, Jon Stewart, Dennis Miller, Charles Krauthammer, Dan Rather, Walter Cronkite, Bill Moyers, Woodward and Bernstein, Patrick Moynihan, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, John Edwards, Hillary Clinton, Lady Macbeth

Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture,. society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth