In his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention last
Thursday, GOP nominee George W. Bush made an appeal to Democrats to help
him overcome “the politics of fear” and to, essentially, help lead the
country as political partners.
Call that political naiveté. Fat chance liberal Democrats are
going to respond favorably to that otherwise very civil appeal.
In fact, considering what Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Janet Reno and a
host of other Democratic miscreants have done to the integrity and honor
of serving this nation, for my money the last people I’d want helping me
“run things” are Clinton’s brand of liberal Democrats.
Nor should Bush have to appeal to liberals, if he is
victorious Nov. 7. As Clinton apologists told Americans multiple times
after the Senate failed to convict the president for known and
documentable crimes, a Bush victory would mean a Bush “mandate”
to govern, not a liberal mandate.
If the amicable Texas governor wins the fall election, there will be
no more scorned animal than a New Democrat. As a group they will be
resentful, spiteful, and more determined than ever to undermine a Bush
Jr. administration, as well as the legislative agenda such an
administration would have a right to push.
Also, no amount of appeals to “reason” will do much of anything to
entice Dems to be civil; they don’t “reason” well in the first place and
aren’t likely to change much, especially if Gore loses. Conservatives
are the liberals’ mortal enemies and there is no room for “strategic
Besides, Clinton-Gore haven’t much cared what Republicans have
thought about legislative priorities. Gore may be less prone to scandal
than Clinton (though Gore already has those skeletons), but he’ll be no
more amenable to conservative ideals, you can bet on that.
Instead, Americans under Gore will continue to suffer from high
taxes, poor foreign policy, worsening domestic division, and the
“politics of fear” made so famous by Democrats to begin with.
I’m not standing in George W. Bush’s shoes, so I suppose my thoughts
don’t necessarily count for much within the Bush campaign.
But the fact is, Democrats aren’t interested in sharing power with
Bush or any other conservative.
Where are the indictments?
Robert Haas. Sandi Golas. Sheryl Hall. Kathleen Gallant.
Who are these people?
Northrup Grumman computer contractor employees who have all testified
that the White House, via its “Project X” e-mail “problem,” has
conspired to hide incriminating communiqués from investigators — e-mail
that has long been subpoenaed by a court of law.
WND Washington Bureau Chief Paul Sperry has written so many articles
detailing this scandal it has all the makings of a hit Hollywood movie
(hopefully starring Helen Hunt, one of my personal favorites).
Someday, it probably will be a hit Hollywood movie; Sperry,
naturally, won’t get a dime — or any credit — for it, however.
More importantly, however, is this: with so many witnesses who have
come forward and told virtually the same story — that the White House
is conspiring to hide or get rid of all of this subpoenaed,
incriminating email — why are there no indictments yet?
Sperry even provided details
Friday that one of Justices’ own attorneys has conspired to hide evidence.
Good grief; is anyone in charge of this out-of-control branch of government?
No, and that includes the chief co-conspirator, Attorney General Janet Reno.
Critics may not believe this, but personally I could care less if this were going on in a Democratic or Republican administration; the point is, there is so much obviously wrong with a Justice Department that is incapable of performing its duties that all Americans ultimately could suffer.
With such a poor enforcement track record involving the very halls of power in Washington, the department is losing the last vestiges of credibility it has with the American people. That’s a dangerous precedent; de-legitimizing the federal justice system will lead to conflict down the road as more and more people refuse to abide by decisions made by courts they view as automatically, inherently corrupt.
Greenies make Californians feel the heat
It’s a shame what is happening to California’s power supply. Simply put, there isn’t enough power to meet the demands of the population, even as summer heat becomes increasingly cruel and unforgiving.
But whose fault is it? Blame the environmentalists — those “greenies” who have made it so expensive and difficult to build the needed power plants in the country’s most populous state.
For years environmentalist wackos have done all they could to encourage federal (and state) regulation of the power and oil industry. Besides California’s now-chronic power shortages, such “Clean Air Act” regulations have also stifled oil exploration and made this country dependent upon greedy and ungrateful Middle Eastern oil sheiks — who wouldn’t even have oil to pump were it not for U.S. military power (and commitment). Result: high gas prices.
Now, the “left coast” state is feeling the “heat” — literally — of all this regulatory hoo-ha.
Regulations and mandates, as conservatives have tried to warn for years, is what makes doing business in this country so expensive. Compliance issues thought up by faceless bureaucrats sitting in (air-conditioned) offices with round behinds 3,000 miles away (unless the regs came from Sacramento) have long made it economically unfeasible to build much-needed new power plants in California. Nuclear-powered plants — the most efficient and powerful plant possible — are history because of such nonsense.
In the end, the greenie minority has made millions of Californians suffer for environmental wacko-ism.
Such environmental extremism is rooted in lefist politics — Democratic politics. The kind embodied by Vice President Al Gore.
Californians now, at least, know why they’re sweating their hind ends off and who is responsible. What they do about it is up to them.
Oh, this just in: because of the regulatory process, reports say new power plants won’t be online until 2002.
Better get some iced tea in the meantime. If you can find any ice.