“One of the things about Herman Cain is, I think that he makes that white Republican base of the party feel okay, feel like they are not racist because they can like this guy,” Finney said. “I think he giving that base a free pass. And I think they like him because they think he’s a black man who knows his place. I know that’s harsh, but that’s how it sure seems to me.”

Hmmm. Then there is this:

“I think when [members of the Tea Party] can vote for a Herman Cain and hear him say the things that he says they feel like, ‘Well, you know, I can, I support this guy and…so it shows that I’m not racist and I’m supportive,’” Cummings told host David Gregory.

Gee, that’s weird. Especially coming from liberal Democrats. You know, the same liberal Democrats who, years ago, did not believe that all men were created equal but that black men and women and children were put on this Earth to serve them? The same liberal Democrats who rather than grant equal constitutional rights to blacks threw a hissy fit and tried to run away from the Union so that they could continue to oppress them? The same liberal Democrats who after they lost the Civil War resorted to forming roving bands that ran around and lynched blacks? The same liberal Democrats who, once they got the reigns of power back in the South, undid all the gains of blacks in that region and returned them to oppression. The same liberal Democrats who formed the KKK. The same liberal Democrats who fought tooth and nail against civil rights for blacks in the early 1900′s. The same liberal Democrats who called blacks human weeds and set up abortion clinics specifically for the purpose of controlling their population.

Sounds to me like it was liberal Democrats who in 2008 supported a black man, named Barack Obama, to try and purge themselves of their own feeling of guilt if you ask me.

Me on the other hand? I voted for Alan Keyes. Not because he was black. But because he was the best man running for the Presidency. There is no way, not with all the spin in the world, that you can make the argument that an arrogant, racist, community organizer from the streets of Chicago who was raised by Marxists and palled around willingly with communists then thugged his way into the Senate had anywhere near the qualifications of Mr. Keyes.

Thus, I rest my case. Liberals are indeed projecting once again. Conservatives on the other hand? We vote on merit.

Harry Reid, chief moonbat in the Senate, is actually calling for Rep. Eric Cantor to be cut out of the talks about how the country is going to deal with its overwhelming debt and rampant spending.  Cantor, a Republican, clashed with President Obama apparently and hurt The One’s feelings by not rolling over and giving the Messiah whatever he wanted.  So Mr. Reid rushes out to do what liberals always do and have a temper tantrum.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says House Majority Leader Eric Cantor should not be part of the debt limit negotiations. He’s calling the Virginia Republican congressman “childish.”

Reid says Cantor’s conduct during the sensitive White House talks have shown, in Reid’s words, “he shouldn’t even be at the table.” Reid says other congressional leaders are negotiating in good faith as an Aug. 2 deadline approaches for raising the debt limit.

That’s right Harry, can’t have any dissenting opinions right?  Hey Comrade Harry, might I remind you that you are not in the land of one party rule anymore where you can do whatever you want no matter how unconstitutional it is?  Might I remind you that there is another party, as liberal as they are at times, in control of the House of Representatives and that no deal that will not pass the House will become law?

There is gridlock in Washington.  And that is a good thing.  Come August 2nd, if there is no deal and liberals refuse to stop demanding economy killing taxes and spending more than we have to spend the government will be forced to go on a diet and prioritize its expenditures.  That will be all on President Obama’s head.  He will have to decide what liberal special interest groups suckling at the government teat get cut off.  Oh, he’ll blame Republicans and the Tea Party, but one thing you won’t see is him and his fellow liberals dipping into their own wallets and writing checks to the government to cover all the programs that are going to get whacked.

Of course, this assumes that the limp-wristed Republicans don’t cave.  Odds are high that they will.  And woe be to them if they do.

On the one hand we have the devil named John McCain. He has spent his career in Washington doing what he calls “reaching out” to liberals on the other side of the isle in Congress. The reality is that he has spent a career in Washington compromising on what we are supposed to believe are his conservative principles.

He has worked hard to actively promote liberalism and the destruction of our Constitution with bills that proudly bear his name from McCain-Feingold to McCain-Kennedy to McCain-Lieberman and which covered every idiotic issue from amnesty for illegal aliens who violated our laws to come to the United States and steal the identity of U.S. Citizens to do so, to fretting over the fallacy of man-made Global Warming, to the outright repeal of the first amendment by Congressional mandate.

On the other hand we have the devil named Barack Obama. He has spent many years soaking up hate America rhetoric in his former church (which he left only for political expedience after defending them as long as he could) and nodding his head with each and every word. He has surrounded himself with every conceivable reprobate one could find who hates capitalism, the free markets, our inalienable rights and even some that have actually committed terrorist acts against America and her citizens. He has said that he would appoint liberal justices to the Supreme Court like Justices Ginsberg and Souter who have a long track record of casting aside the Constitution.

Neither will do anything serious about the rampant spending on unconstitutional social programs that burden the taxpayers year after year to enrich chosen groups of people and buy votes in every election. Neither one of them will lift their veto pen if elected and stand up to a renegade Congress bent on spending every last dime they can force from the hands of the American public. Neither has the courage or the conviction to support America.

So our choice boils down to the devil we know or the devil we know. Either will give us an ever spiraling debt and the ever increasing death grip of the present welfare state.

My, we certainly have fallen down the hill from where we once lived and the shining city that once stood there. It is now a shell of its former self. Its glimmer has dimmed and resembles more of a Section 8 housing project these days where everyone has their hands out looking for their piece of the pie which has been taken from the window sills of those still industrious enough to bake them.

Politicians bicker about everything under the sun while the American citizens suffer because of policies that are strangling us and preventing us from accessing our own lands and our own resources. And we, the citizens of the once shining city, are letting our politicians get away with it.

We have gone from a nation of people that fought and died for independence, to a nation of people that are electing year after year those that promise to keep us safe from the trials and tribulations of life’s uncertainties in exchange for our dependence on them.

The other night I sat on the bed watching my daughter, who is now just ten months old, play with our phone. I think she is quite smart. Already she knows which button to press to turn it on and then holds it up to her ear to listen to the dial tone. She smiles each time she accomplishes this task, doing this over and over again. She looks at me with her big brown eyes and giggles with a mouth containing only six teeth as I ask her who on Earth she is calling.

She knows so little but she learns so fast. She learns so fast that I am afraid that she is going to learn the wrong lessons in life. Oh, not from myself or my wife, but from other people she is going to meet. And I wonder what kind of nation I am going to set her loose in.

I fear that it will be a nation full of devils; devils that we know all too well and that will consume her soul and convert her independent spirit and intelligence into dependence on their will.

With God as my witness, that shall not happen while I live and breathe.

Michigan and Florida knew about these rules. But they chose to ignore the rules anyway and move their primaries up in the election cycle.

Now, with Hillary Clinton trailing Barack Obama in delegates the inevitable outrage over the “disenfranchisement” of Michigan and Florida voters has arisen. The fact that Hillary also won both states (even though Obama wasn’t even on the ballot in Michigan because it wasn’t supposed to count) is of course just a mere coincidence. Riiight. Want to buy a bridge in Brooklyn?

You even have empty headed Democratic Party hacks running around television and talking to the media trying to blame the Florida problem on the Republican legislature. They are trying to misplace blame even though the plan to move the primary was introduced by a Democrat and approved by the Democrats in the state legislature. How is that the Republican Party’s fault exactly?

The battle lines have been drawn and once again the Hillary Clinton sexists (who think she is the superior candidate because of her womanhood) are slugging it out with the Barack Obama racists (who think he is the superior candidate because of his skin color). And as is quite typical with liberals we see how they really view rules.

The rules are ok as long as they favor them. But the rules are not ok when they do not favor them. Hillary Clinton’s minions are calling for the delegates to be seated. Barack Obama’s legions of apostles are calling for the rules to be upheld and the delegates not to be seated. And while I don’t agree with Obama on much of anything, he is in the right.

The rules were set. Everyone knew them going in. Both sides even agreed to them. But now that there is political power at stake and the Queen is not on the verge of being coronated, people who support her have changed their minds quite conveniently on the issue of who should and who should not get a seat at the table.

Some have offered a potential compromise where these states could hold new primaries, but that they would have to do so at their own expense. This has of course ticked off the taxpayers of those states. They don’t want to carry the burden of a new election and, especially Republicans, don’t see why they should foot the bill for the Democratic Parties tit for tat political bickering and rules violating.

A vote by mail option has also been suggested. But to listen to the Democrats, they are making it sound like such an option wouldn’t allow hordes of their voters to participate because they are apparently so transient that they don’t live at the same address very long.

Others, mostly Hillary Clinton supports, are saying the results should be counted as is. Gee, how unexpected. Yes, that was sarcasm and yes, it was intended.

But none of these solutions is tenable because each of them change the rules that were agreed to by all sides at the beginning. You have Hillary Clinton out there talking about how she is going to preserve the Constitution? Heck, she can’t even preserve the rules of her own party!

Just to warn you, this is what you can expect from any of the liberal Democrats if they should ascend to the White House this November and retain their majorities in Congress. How do you like the idea of having people like this in power where on a whim they can just negate or change the rules?

If the shoe was on the other foot and it was Barack Obama needing the delegates of Michigan and Florida to win he would be doing the exact same thing and calling for the delegates to be seated or, at worst, new primaries. Hillary would then find herself in the position that Obama is in right now and she would be fighting tooth and nail to keep that from happening.

When it comes to liberals the rules need not apply. They’ve been showing us that this is true for years with their selective reading of the Constitution which is the “Supreme Law of the Land”. For years they have been proposing violations of the Constitution (the rules) and Democrat voters have accepted such violations as long as they were benefiting from them.

We also saw this philosophy in action in 2000. Remember when liberal Democrats tried time and time again to rewrite the election rules in Florida in what was a downright hilarious attempt to find enough votes to give Al Gore the presidency that eventually failed?

Rules? They don’t need no stinking rules! They’re liberals!

If however you are surprised by any of this, you haven’t been paying attention. And that means you are dangerous and should really reflect on whether or not you are informed enough to cast a ballot come November.

We don’t need people heading to the polls who think that rules are made to be broken on a whim or when their political power is at stake. It’s hard to have a nation founded upon all men being created equal before the law and unalienable rights when the rules about what is equal and what is a right can be simply changed after the fact.

As a prime example I need point no further than incumbent Senator Rick Santorum in my home state of Pennsylvania. He is running against Bobby Casey Jr. who I suspect is easily distracted by shiny objects considering he has not stopped running for some political office using his father’s name since 2000. I’ve heard local and national pundits talking about how “conservative” Rick Santorum is in an attempt to drum up additional support for his floundering campaign. And I laugh.

Come on. Let’s be honest!

The truth is that if Santorum is a “conservative”, the conservative movement is in deep, deep trouble. He certainly is better than the only alternative on the ballot but come on, let’s at least be honest.

Many people are not going to like that I am going to point out all the outright unconstitutional (or at best questionably constitutional) acts Senator Santorum has participated in. And no doubt some will like his propensity for hanging on to social welfare programs and pork barrel spending with white knuckles. But if you open your pocket constitution to Article I and especially Section 8 as well as refer to Madison’s dissertation in Federalist 41 you will clearly see that not a single one of these actions are under Congress’ authority. And that like it or not, I am right.

Rick Santorum has engaged in unconstitutional behavior including supporting:

- the continuation of unconstitutional programs such as Social Security, Food Stamps and even the expanding of Medicare to cover more things such as prescription drugs
- the use of federal funds to build power plants
- the establishment of Health Savings Accounts regulated by federal statute
- tax laws designed to interfere with the free markets like the Telework Incentive Act, the Milk Income Loss Contract (MILC) program and benefit programs such as the Association Health Plan legislation
- funding for medical research and Lyme Disease
- laws governing how citizens may petition government under the auspices of lobbying reform
- federal funding for Pennsylvania’s public schools, special needs children and Headstart
- medical benefits to laid off workers through “Fair Care”
- redistributing of tax payer money to low income families in the form of matching savings accounts and the “Low-Income Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)”
- interference with non-profit organizations working with the homeless and drug addicts
- the “Pet Animal Welfare Statue”
- farm land conservation projects under the “Farmland Preservation Program
- chasing “price gouging” phantoms with the “Gasoline Affordability and Security Act”
- price and wage regulations by supporting an increase to the minimum wage
- money to fire companies in the State
- funding healthcare facilities that are not able to turn a profit and compete in the real world
- interfering with private family matters such as family finances and the failure of individuals to plan for emergency situations including long term care of a loved one
- interference with the Executive Branch’s authority and control over the military by suing to stop to the closure of military bases in Pennsylvania

Each of these claims are proudly touted by Senator Santorum in his pamphlet “50 things you may not know about Rick Santorum” which should be more aptly titled “Many things conservatives wish they did not know about Rick Santorum”.

Now like I said, you may actually like some of those things. And you may even support Santorum on these actions. But it does not mean that he and the federal government have the power to engage in these activities.

Rick Santorum is certainly a man of spiritual convictions, has finally come around on immigration to support defending America from invasion by illegal aliens and has been pretty good on reducing taxes and some other issues we conservatives hold dear. But rather than puffing Mr. Santorum as a real “conservative” as many others do, I am compelled to tell you the truth. And that truth is that Senator Rick Santorum, while certainly more conservative than his opponent, is no real conservative.

This does not mean that I am encouraging conservatives not to vote for Rick Santorum. I cannot in good conscious do that because the only other options are not to vote or vote for Bobby Casey. And the thought of Senator Bobby Casey is even scarier.

I’m sick and tired of the lesser of two evils. I really am.

But if you do vote for him and other so-called “conservatives” like him understand when you pull that lever what you are voting “for”. Because usually beneath that “conservative” facade lays a big government demon that will need to be kept in check by we the people. And you can bet your bottom dollar that no matter which candidate wins November 7th they will need to be watched over like a 4 year old in a candy store.

Conservatives are outraged because there is simply certain behavior that is unbecoming of our elected officials. Using their position of power as a dating service regardless of the age of their targets or the sexual orientation of the official is reprehensible. You’re in Washington to do a job, not get some action. Targeting minors and people under their tutelage just makes it all the worse.

Republicans are outraged because Mark Foley is a black eye to their party and they still have enough conservative bones in their bodies (for the most part) to at least take offense as your average conservative would. Plus they know who their “base” is.

Democrats are “outraged” over the Mark Foley affair because Republicans have shown that they can clean up their own house while Democrats like William Jefferson (caught red handed taking bribes), Cynthia McKinney (caught red handed battering a cop), Barney Frank (who allowed a prostitution ring to be run out of his office) and John Murtha (who took bribes in ABSCAM) always seem to be allowed to continue on with their service and stay in good standing with the party. Liberals are likewise “outraged” because every time something happens that they can use to avoid talking about what they believe (i.e. raising taxes, wage fixing, impeaching Bush, socialized medicine, etc) it is a good thing for them. But at least we’re all “outraged”. That’s a start.

Liberals have fired both barrels at the Republicans this past week. Perhaps it was done prematurely – time will tell. And as the left are scrambling to find more ammunition they have resorted to running around wildly and waving their hands in the air screaming like an irate Howard Dean. Now that the “shock” is dying down and there is no “awe” to be had, let the “confusion” begin!

We’ve progressed passed the facts of the case which were that the parents of a Congressional page asked that Foley stop contacting their son because of “overly friendly” emails. That was promptly done. Even the family has admitted that saying “we asked (Alexander) to see that Congressman Foley stop emailing or contacting our son and to otherwise drop the matter in order to avoid a media frenzy. He did so.” and “If we had had any other knowledge or evidence of potential impropriety, we would have asked for the matter to be treated differently.”

But since being “overly friendly” is not a crime no other action was taken at the time.

Then more lurid instant messages mysteriously popped into existence. And before Dick Durbin, Nancy Pelosi or Howard Dean could even rush to the microphones to make a statement and grandstand, Foley was gone quicker than a bottle of Chivas Regal at the Kennedy Compound.

No evidence to show that anyone of consequence knew of or had seen these instant messages has been presented. Although there certainly are a lot of accusations being hurled to that extent. And some have even been shown to be between Foley and an 18-year-old; not a minor. At least at the time.

What’s more, despite the attempt by journalists and the media to keep Mark Foley on the front page and provide cover fire for the left, it seems that the claims of “warnings” about Mark Foley from Congressional pages may be overplayed. Especially when Bryce Chitwood who was president of the 2002 class of pages said “He was just a very friendly man and was always willing to befriend a page. It was something we appreciated. You find yourself very low on the totem pole of the congressional power scale. For a congressman to act like he was interested in a person and cared about us was something pretty special and pretty important.” (emphasis mine)

What? I thought that this was some huge scandal here? I thought it was something that EVERYONE knew about! I thought from the sound of things Congressional pages were running for their lives like young women from a drunken Ted Kennedy with car keys!

In fact the San Francisco Chronicle went looking for more cases and even admitted in their article House pages were warning each other about Foley in “˜95 “None of those interviewed said they had received a sexual or suggestive overture from him during their time on Capitol Hill.” (emphasis mine). Huh? So much for the rampant warnings about Foley and his sexual preference! While I am certain there were incidents, I am seriously beginning to doubt the size and scope of them.

Well, I guess when you cannot “awe” them, you might as well try to “confuse” them with as much babble as you can spout in as short of a time as possible

Foley’s gone (as he should be), Bush is not on the ballot and liberals are still trying to figure out what to talk about this election year. Oh, they’ll gain seats in both the House and Senate. They may even win the House. But not because of their own ideas, plans and visions.

I am glad however to see the left has finally found sexual behavior that they find abhorrent. It’s been a long time coming but at least we know what it takes – a gay man with an alcohol problem (so he claims) chasing young boys. Just watch out for the gay mafia you guys. Oh, and don’t drop the soap.