About Me

Name: Georgiaboy
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Note

I just wanted to note that the guy lifting the kettlebell in the post below is not me.  That is Pavel Tsatsouline, a Russian strength coach who besides being a top notch athlete himself has trained Russian and now American special forces. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Building an Effective Blog Community

So, we have all started our blogs here on townhall, we read blogs, and we are hoping that conservative blogging will be a force for good in this country.  Well, it is not as easy as just sitting down and writing whatever comes to mind.  Need I remind you how detrimental to the Democratic cause liberal blogs have been?  So, in other words, what lessons can we learn from the failure of Kossak type blogs?  How can we be different and actually move the Conservative Republican agenda forward?  Here are a few ideas and guidelines I have thought of.
1.  Pursue ideological purity in persuasion, but not in campaigns.  The lefty blogs got their dream candidate in Ned Lamont, but hurt the Democrat party in the process.  We as conservatives should try to pursuade people of conservative principles, but should be willing to make strategic compromises in the political arena.  It doesn't matter if you have a perfect conservative candidate and s/he loses.  Don't get me wrong, a strong conservative candidate is often the strongest candidate, but not always. 
2.  Don't rant too frequently on your blog.  We all need to release frustration, but the unchecked emotions of an impassioned partisan do not convince anyone but the choir.  We don't want to be like the lefty kooks.  Try to keep your blogging logical, reasoned, and sincere.
3.  Don't get a big head...know your limits.  We want to aspire to big things, but not everyone can be a big name, powerline/ michelle malkin/ instapundit blogger.  So write to the best of your ability and realize that your biggest impact can be among your circle of acquaintances.  They respect you and if you present reasoned, factual arguments you should be able to inform and persuade them.
4.  Constantly improve.  Work on your writing and thinking.  We can all get better.

Well, there you have it.  A lecture on blogging from a newbie blogger.  Take it for whatever it is worth.  But the bottom line I want you to think about is this.  What makes liberal blogs so ineffective?  Find your own answer to that and go in the opposite direction with your blog.  Happy blogging. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Congrats to Me!

He He.  The previous post was my first time to post pictures.  It feels great!  I think I'm going to do it more now.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Get Moving

You may not think of it as a political issue, but that makes it no less important.  What am I referring to?  Exercise!  America is soft and we know it.  We sit on our fat butts, chugging our 64 oz. sodas, chips spilled all over our protruding bellies, mindlessly changing channels on the "tube."  
    Here is where it becomes political, a society is only as strong as the virtue and strength of its citizens.  The reason the majority of Americans do not exercise is because their minds are weak.  Exercise hurts.  It's that simple.  It requires exertion and is hard work.  People don't have the mental strength to fight through the pain and complete the next set.  To make it even worse, you can actually stay somewhat healthy just by walking, which most definitely does not hurt.  America needs to get moving.
    There is a best way to get moving, though.  Its name is the Russian Kettlebell.  It will hack the fat off your bones and banish weakness from your body and mind.  But are you brave enough to try it?  I have been using the kettlebell for the last two years and just got the 70 lb kettlebell a few weeks ago.  It is worth the investment if you promise yourself that you will not let it collect dust.  I have laid the challenge before you.  Now go!  Be strong! 

  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Moving up

Georgia is #10 on Forbes list of the best business states.  Notice that Delaware is the only blue state on the list.  Look out #1, Georgia is coming for you! 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Fighting with Spitballs

At the 2004 Republican Convention, Zell Miller gave a speech that many people probably remember.  At one point, he listed all the weapons systems that John Kerry had voted against...practically all our present equipment.  Miller then angrily asked, "What does he want our troops to fight with?  Spitballs?!"  
    I want to ask a similar question.  Liberals do not want us to listen to phone calls and communication by al-qaeda suspects through the NSA program.  They don't oppose tracking their funds, but they don't think that should be secret.  A lot of good it does then.  They don't think we should racially profile at airports and security checkpoints.  So, we should search the white grannies' bag and let Middle-Eastern males go through.  And we most definitely can't "abuse" detainees.  What might that abuse entail?  Loud music, humiliating situations, scaring them, waterboarding them, etc.  Anything that isn't comfortable.  We need to ask nicely, probably use "please," and these killers will tell us their info.  We also can't invade counties that harbor terrorists.  Who cares that they protect them and prevent us from bring them to justice.  And now I ask, how do liberals want us to fight terrorism?  With SPITBALLS??? 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Two questions about the UN resolution

Question #1.  Haven't governments always declared that they do not negotiate with terrorists?  Isn't that what the UN just did?  It negotiated a ceasefire with a terrorist organization.  Israel was not fighting Lebanon, they were fighting Hezbollah.  Thus, from the beginning this is a completely illegitimate resolution because it breaks the rules of engagement with terrorists.  Since this ceasefire thing works so well at pacifying mortal enemies, maybe we should give it a try with bin Laden.

Question #2.  Does anyone think that the UN will actually enforce this resolution?  The one thing that the UN is effective at is being pathetically toothless and laughably weak.  Hezbollah will be laughing their pants off as they rearm with deadlier weapons right under the noses of the UN force.  We had a worthless peacekeeping force in Southern Lebanon before the war, now we will have a large, worthless, peacekeeping force.  More human shields as far as the Hezbozos are concerned.

The second resolution coming up could still salvage some semblance of respectability, but a ceasefire was never the answer; victory was the answer.  The time has come for two shifts.  Israel must stop bowing to US and world pressure and look out for itself.  The US must start treating the UN like what it is...a humanitarian organization.  WE DON'T NEED THEIR APPROVAL! 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Going back to school

I wanted to mention that I am going back to college tomorrow and will not be able to blog as much.  I still hope to write a minimum of two or three times a week, but when tests roll around, guess where my priorities will be :)  Keep on reading, though. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

More on Immigration

A town near where I live has provoked an interesting argument about illegal aliens.  The tiny town of Pendergrass, Georgia has about 2 miles of highway 129, a 4 lane divided highway, in its city limits.  It cracks down pretty hard on speeding and makes a ton of money in fines.  But, it came out that over the last few weeks and months a huge percentage of the motorists arrested are Hispanic--more than 70%.  The local newspaper cried foul, saying the the PD was racially profiling.  The local populace took a different view, the letters to the editors were very supportive of the Pendergrass police.  Their comments ranged from anger that all the illegal hispanics were driving up their insurance by driving without insurance, to pointing out that hispanics are getting arrested because they drive illegally.  When generally law abiding citizens get pulled over, they get a ticket; when Hispanics get pulled over for speeding, they get arrested because they often don't have driver's licenses or insurance.  Just a micro picture of a wider national dynamic, I think; the elites wringing their hands about how to treat all the illegals nicely, while the average person, frankly, doesn't give a $%#*.  Washington, take note. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Principles of Immigration Reform

I want to write this post a little differently.  I believe one of the reason that Republicans (notice I did not say conservatives) disagree on immigration is because we are working from two different set of premises on immigration, what is wrong with it, what is fair to illegals, etc.  So, I want to simply list out a set principles that should guide any legislation that is passed.  If you disagree with any of these principles then it becomes more obvious why you disagree on what legislation should pass.
1. An unguarded border is a threat to national security:  If millions of mexicans can cross it, so can highly trained al-qaeda operatives.  Fencing, virtual and real, should be built and enough border agents should be hired to completely defend the border.
2. Large numbers of unassimilated foreigners pose a threat to national identity.
3.  Amnesty encourages law breaking and will lead to a wave of new illegal aliens.
4. The phrase "undocumented worker" is a pathetic title; the problem is not that they are undocumented, but that they broke the law in coming here, working, driving, etc.  
5.  Amnesty can be defined as failing to sufficiently punish a crime.  A simple way to test if someone has been given amnesty is whether or not they regret their crime.  If illegals do not regret their decision to break our laws to come to the US, then they have been given amnesty.  Under this definition the Democratic "shamnesty" bill in the Senate is obviously amnesty because the only punishment is a meager fine.  Paying back taxes, background checks, and learning english is not a punishment; it is what is expected.
6.  No guest worker program is desireable if it is not temporary.  If anchor babies and paths to citizenship are not eliminated, a guest worker program is undesirable.  Guest workers should also receive no government services.  The last thing we need is more poor workers sucking the welfare system dry.  The guest worker program should only allow as many workers to come as are needed; no artificial quotas.  In an ideal guest worker program, workers come, work for a few years, save some money to pull themselves out of poverty, and then go home.
7.  The process of legal immigration should be streamlined and the number should be increased(not dramatically though).  This reduces strain on our borders.  Besides, America has always asked for the world's tired, poor and hungry...we just want them legally.
8.  If there are no jobs for illegals, they will go home.  The idea that we have to deport 12 million illegals is bogus.  If they cannot find a job anywhere they will go home.  The ones who have been here for a long time are rich enough to move, and the ones who have not been here long do not have deep roots to pull up.                                                                                                               
9.  It does not matter if it is a "burden" or anything else for these illegals to leave.  Maybe they should have thought about that before they broke the law to come into our country.  Anything less is amnesty.
10.  Any illegal stopped for traffic violations, etc. from now on should be deported without fail.  Period.  No questions asked.  Law enforcement should be given the resources to determine whether they are illegal, immigration officials should be given the resources to deport a larger number.  Foreigners thinking about breaking the law and entering our country will know that if they ever encounter law enforcement they will be deported.

I may update with a few more points, but as you can see a slightly toughened Pence-Hutchinson bill would be acceptable to me.  I do not want compromise for the sake of compromise though, the Democrat's senate bill is a worthless piece of trash and should be completely discarded.  Basically, the conference committee needs to move forward with the toughest bill that 51 republican senators will vote for or possibly the toughest bill that will not get filibustered.  Forget the Democrats; they have their future hispanic votes in mind, not the good of the country.  

UPDATE: 11.  Illegal aliens can never be given the right to vote.  How can we let someone make the laws who did not respect them in the first place?  If some sort of permanent residency is given to illegals, I can live with that (if it meets my amnesty rules, which would be hard), but no citizenship.                         

  

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

McKinney loses...and the people rejoice!

Well, Georgia has finally rid itself of the cutest little jihadist in Congress.  Cynthia McKinney has lost...big.  I talked about the race in a post below.  I have always loathed McKinney for her insane comments, racism, and being Georgia's second worst politician (after Jimmy Carter).  An interesting dynamic shook my thinking up a bit at the end though.  Neal Boortz wanted McKinney to win.  He said talk radio and the Republican party needed McKinney in Congress making a fool of herself and embarrasing Democrats.  Besides she is completely ineffectual.  It's a good point, but I don't buy it.  She is just to crazy to trust with a seat in Congress...especially if the Democrats win the majority.  Besides, I firmly believe that the voters of Georgia owed justice to that Capitol policeman.  He was accused of racism just because he was doing his job.  The Justice system failed miserably and it was up to the voters of Georgia to ensure that justice was served for McKinney's crime.  Furthemore, I haven't been able to confirm this, but if Hank Johnson really is for the Fairtax then the choice is simple.  A word to EX-congresswoman McKinnney: Enjoy your pouting. 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Happy Republicans

It may be old news to some of you, but Republicans are happier than Democrats.  It's been that way for a long time too.  Pew Research has been measuring the happiness of Americans for years and what they have found is that people who are wealthy, Christian, married, non-black, and Republican are happier than other people.  I'm feeling pretty good right now because even though I am not married or rich yet everything else fits me perfectly.  Also, don't count on retirement or a dog to make you happy, neither of them affected happiness in the study.  One thing that the study points out about money and happiness is interesting.  
 "But there is also a way to look at the long term trend in happiness that sheds a different light on the question of whether it is tied to money. As noted above, about a third of the public has been reporting they are very happy ever since 1972, when the General Social Survey (sociological surveys funded largely by the National Science Foundation) started asking the same happiness question that Pew posed in its survey. But during these past three decades, the average annual per capita income in this country has more than doubled in inflation adjusted dollars. Thus, in the aggregate, Americans have more money now than they did a generation ago. But in the aggregate, we're no happier.
So was grandma right after all - money doesn't buy happiness? Well, no. The trend data also show that what matters on the happiness front is not how much money you have, but whether you have more (or less) at any given time than everyone else." 
    Pretty interesting.  So, if any unhappy Democrats out there are reading this, happiness can be yours.  You just need to become a Republican.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Media and WMD's

     The AP came out with a story about WMD's today, "Half of U.S. Still Believes Iraq Had WMD."  Notice from the beginning the phrasing, "still believes," clearly implying that we should no longer believe.  The piece begins by announcing that recent polls show that half of Americans believe that Iraq had WMD's and then talks about expert's views of why people believe this.  But then it declares the "reality" that Iraq had no WMD's.  
    
    How in the world could half of Americans be so stupid and disconnected from reality, the article wonders?  "'This finding just has to cause despair among those of us who hope for an informed public able to draw reasonable conclusions based on evidence," Massing (a lib) said."
    
    The story then explains the Santorum report.  But not so fast...they weren't really WMD's. 

"But the Pentagon and outside experts stressed that these abandoned shells, many found in ones and twos, were 15 years old or more, their chemical contents were degraded, and they were unusable as artillery ordnance. Since the 1990s, such "orphan" munitions, from among 160,000 made by Iraq and destroyed, have turned up on old battlefields and elsewhere in Iraq, ex-inspectors say. In other words, this was no surprise.

    "These are not stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction," said Scott Ritter, the ex-Marine who was a U.N. inspector in the 1990s. "They weren't deliberately withheld from inspectors by the Iraqis."

    Really?  Well in that case I will be happy to contribute my share for a plane ticket for Mr. Ritter to go to Iraq and rub the mustard gas from these shells all over his body.  For some reason I don't think he will jump for that offer.
    
    The piece continues by reasserting the "facts" that no WMD's were found.  And wonders if Pres. Bush may have "convinced himself" that there were WMD's. Republicans are just delusional apparently,  "'For some it almost becomes independent of reality and becomes very partisan.' The WMD believers are heavily Republican, polls show." 
    
    Until Michael Moore goes to Iraq and spends some time breathing the mustard gas and sarin in those shells, I'm not buying it.  Maybe half of America believes that Saddam had WMD's not because we are delusional, but because he did.  

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Outbreeding the Liberals

I have always had a strong belief that the easiest way to ensure a conservative majority in America is first through the family and secondly through political activism.  In other words, no matter how many rallies you attend, blogs you write, or donations you make to support the conservative agenda, raising a solid family is a much greater contribution.  Bringing up 3+ kids to know the Lord, fear the government, work hard, and love freedom is one of the greatest contributions to society that one can make.  I come from a family of six kids.  My parents took to heart Psalms 127:4,5 twenty years ago, "Like arrows in the hand of a warrior, so are the children of one's youth. How blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them; They will not be ashamed when they speak with their enemies in the gate."  Let me just say, if my Dad gets in an archery contest with most people, he will win :)
    The willingness of conservatives to have large families instead of fancy cars is having a large impact on the electoral map.  The American Conservative has an article that talks about birthrate and the electoral map here.  One of the major points of the article is that you can practically predict how a state will vote by its white birthrate.  States above a 1.8 fertility rate for white women voted for Bush with only 4 exceptions, those below voted for Kerry with only 2 exceptions.  The trend would have been even more pronounced if you had focused on red vs. blue counties.  Basically, liberals aren't having (or are aborting...there is another article about that) babies.  To make matters bleaker for liberals, birthrates compound.  And the final blow, I don't have any statistics for this, but I am guessing that the farther to the right someone is the more kids they have.  Not a pretty picture for liberals...oh, sorry "progressives."
    Of course birthrate only makes a difference because children overwhelmingly have the same partisan leanings as their parents.  So, one of the major efforts we as conservatives need to be making is to train our children.  Teach them principles, give them facts, train them to think, combat the trash they learn at government schools (or even better pull them out of those worthless places), let em' listen to Rush Limbaugh, and most importantly...start young.  Good luck, now go have another kid :)
                                                                                                                                              
 

 

 

 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

City slickers

A lot of attention on the right is directed at the liberal bias of the MSM.  But, it struck me this morning as the TV happened to be turned to the "Today" show that maybe some of the clash is not liberal vs. conservative, but urban vs. rural.  What prompted this idea was watching the Today show do a segment on state fairs.  They had a video segment, but they also had several popular attractions set up right in Rockefeller plaza.  One of them was the sledgehammer contest to try to ring the bell at the top of the tower.  Campbell (last name?), David Gregory and Al Roker took turns with the sledgehammer while Matt Lauer led the cheering section.  Their awkward swings instantly told the tale that none of them had ever split a piece of firewood, used a sledgehammer, or probably even an axe.  It really was painful to watch.  For those of you who care, David Gregory won.  I couldn't help but think that maybe some of the problems the networks have is that they really don't understand rural, red-state America.  Not necessarily because they are liberal, but because they are city slickers.  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive