Can Germans vote in American elections? If not what the hell is he doing in Germany? I am of course talking about under qualified but highly egotistical Barack Obama. After eighteen minutes in Iraq where he decided it would be best to put General Petreaus in is place he headed to Germany to try and deliver the sausage vote to the Democratic party. Oh I forgot about the wiz round through the wailling wall where his campaign hung Obama banners. Class.

He found time to address the German people not as a candidate apparently but as an American citizen. I suppose this means on my next trip to Berlin I can address 200,000 Germans. Other than Oktoberfest I don't see that happening. He found time to work out, shoot some hoops and pause for more photos than Paris Hilton.

You wouldn't think he would have had enough time to accomplish all this. Well he wouldn't have if he didn't cancel his trip to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center. No big deal really. That's just where wounded American soldiers are recovering. Now Chancellor Obama's explanation is simple. He thought it would be inappropriate on a campaign-funded journey. So let me get this straight he believes the taxpayers are fine with him massaging his ego in Germany, France and Britain. Wasting 10 minutes in Baghdad and hanging Obama banners all over the site of the Wailing wall but we would draw the lines at visting the troops wounded in battle?

SO there was is in full Bundesrepublik Deutschland splendor grandstanding for 200,000 non voter yet he couldn't spend 20 minutes camera free to thank the people that have made his candidacy possible. It's all becoming clear folks. Keep watching.

-The New Stereophonic Bert Spivey

What exactly is about Democrats that possesses them to work really hard to lose. Is it chemical? Biological? Genetic? I don't know. I do know that this was supposed to be a year where the Democrats win the White House and expand their leads in Congress. So what do they do? They hand the nomination to a three year Senatore who has been on the wrong side of every issue, has a racist background, and dislikes blue collar people. And those are his good points.

The GOP on the other hand nominated John McCain and the silence was deafening. After 12 years of a Congressional majority that was as effective as a condom full of pin holes the Conservative base wanted a true Conservative. Senator McCain was not what they had in mind. (To be honest I don't think anyone comes to mind).

Needless to say the Republicans were as enthusiastic as a senior citizens home after bingo. The only saving grace for the GOP these last 20 months is the fact that the Democrats are even less effective than that pin hole laden condom I mentioned in paragraph two. Mitch McConnell has whipped Harry Ried like a Soho pervert on every issue. Add in the success of the Iraqi surge and it's effects on the war and the Congress is as popular as your mother-in-law at your Bachelor party. Things were so bad that their approval rating was nine percent. Still the Republican base continued to sit on the front porch and yell at passing candidates walking their platforms.

Then a funny thing happened. The Republicans noticed that the American people were upset about the rise in gas prices. The Democrats were demanding that the oil executives tell them why they are making a record profit. This is not to say they heard the cries of the public. They always investigate any private company that makes money. Anyway once again the cries for exploration and extraction of our own resources grew louder and louder. As usual the Democrats dismissed these demands with the usual tired and disproved talking points. except this time the GOP rallied around it and found a true cause they can unite behind.

Meanwhilr the Democrats ever changing positions on the issue simply bolstered the Conservative calls for more exploration. First it was the oil companies themselves. this seemed to be an annual event for the past few years. Gouging was the accusation, nothing was proven, more demands for taxes on their profits were heard and the public seemed almost satisfied. This year things were a different. With 4.00 dollar gas and the realization that we get more than 70 percent from other countries the demand for drilling here at home gained momentum. So with the oil CEO's outright declaring their need for more exploration and drilling the Democrats were finally forced to change tactics. Now it gets interesting.

While the Republicans called for domestic drilling the Democrats countered by switching blame from the oil companies to the speculators. It was them they claimed were responsible for the strident up tick in oil prices. They have never bothered to explain how they were able to shift the blame from the companies themselves. Anyway now it is the speculators and in a way they are right.s long as supply cannot keep up with demand the speculators will speculate (quite rightly) that the price of oil will continue to increase. This is basic economics. of course the liberal approach has not been basic economics but cries of foul play. One of the main arguments against drilling by the left is that it will not lower the price by more than a few pennies. SO we are to believe that Speculation works only to drive up prices but not the reverse? If our oil supply is greatly increased why would the Speculators speculate the price of a barrel of oil will continue to go up? That makes no sense at all.

Meanwhile we have team of Congressional Republicans heading west to an alternative energy plant in Colorado and then Alaska where there is (GASP!) oil. It's a clever move by the Republicans because it does two things. Firstly it will demonstrate the Conservatives dedication to alternative energy. In doing that it also proves the Democrats wrong that the GOP's only answer is more drilling. Secondly the trip will highlight the fact that we do indeed have oil, oodles of it, and the Republicans hear your demand for more drilling and are ready, as is the President to what you ask.

Does this help John McCain? Yes it does. Republicans always win the National Security issue. Yet this year the main issue with voters is not security but Domestic issues, McCain admits his knowledge of economics is as solid as Obama's knowledge of foreign policy and he may not be able to win the battle over healthcare, tuition, and the housing slump. He will however win the on the issue of oil prices for the simple fact that he advocates action now. Real action not investigations, and accusations, legislation, and press conferences. Boosting domestic alternative energy development, lifting congressional ban on drill on the Outer Continental Shelf, and recovering all the natural gas we can get our grubby little hands on. And he has the majority of the Republican party behind him. and straggling behind the mob are a few Democrats trying not to be noticed. They know this can be a campaign killer and they want to make sure they are on the right side of the issue. This time around the GOP is in fact on the right side. Barack Obama is in Europe.

-The New Stereophonic Bert Spivey

 Seriously folks. How dumb can our Republican representatives be? The Democrats have become so brave since they swept into power last November they have let their guard down and are acting like the Socialists that they are. When was the last time you heard a Democrat actually talk about taxes before an election? Hillary Clinton wants to attempt income distribution. Less popularly known as Socialism. Meanwhile John Edwards does not believe there is war on Terror and plans to use every tool available to fight said war that he previously said did not exist. And then railed against all the tools he said he would use in the fight of this imaginary war. I feel safe.

Every Democrat candidate is competing to see who can surrender first. So far Dennis Kucinich is in the lead promising to make the surrender retroactive in 1975 if elected president. Everyone wants socialized healthcare and only John Edwards has admitted he would need to raise taxes to pay for it.

At this point we should be expecting a republican win of Mondale proportions. Yet the GOP has decided to make things interesting by supporting a Immigration bill devised by Ted Kennedy. When will they learn never to support any bill by a Kennedy. Especially immigration. This is his third attempt at immigration which means he is already 0 for 2. I sense a pattern here.

What is really bizarre is that it seems the people of this increasingly illegal country know more about the immigration bill then those supporting it. I make this assumption because the only other possible answer is that they do not care about the financial ramifications.

What is even more bizarre is that the GOP decided now is the best time to commit political suicide of epic proportions. Instead of exploiting the Democrats as the communists they are the Republicans are trying to be the largest body of socialists since the Vladimir Lenin interpretive Dance troupe debuted in 1918. Every Conservative and their Uncle Ronnie are begging for Fred Thompson to get into the race. Translation: Every Conservative and their Uncle Ronnie want Fred Thompson to slap the GOP with Barry Goldwater.

Liberalism does not win elections. Republicans shooting themselves in the right foot loses elections for the Democrats. And this time they have the barrel aimed at the big toe. Take John McCain for example. (Or just take him if you want) His campaign needs help. it's showing less life than Larry King. Yet instead of pointing out that a week prior to Hillary Clinton not voting to fund the troops she vowed she would indeed fund the troops. But he decided to instead lock his presidential aspirations in darkened room with Mexico's version of Jack Kevorkian.

Candidates like Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani are on the side lines slapping their foreheads in incredulous fashion. The battle is being fought for them. How can you be pro security and yet back a bill that will not stop the influx of illegal? George Bush tried it and it doesn't work.

-Bert

 Poll numbers released in the last day or two show President having higher poll numbers than the current Democratic lead Congress. The Lefts numbers are holding steady at an anemic 29 percent. Since this was released I have heard nothing from the media regarding Bush's numbers. either way this begs the one question that no one on the left will answer...

How do these number mean that Congress is doing the will of the American people?

The Democrats ran campaigns promising a new direction in Iraq and a bi partisan work environment. Not too mention there weak "6 for '06". Six months on none of their 6 bills has made it to the presidents desk. Their promise to clean up the congress resulted in a secret vote where  the House passed a bill to fund our intelligence operations. This bill was loaded with earmarks  added at the last second. In all 26 unclassified earmarks were included totaling a tidy sum of $97 million. $23 million going to Murtha for a drug rehabilitation center in his district. A center the GAO called an unnecessary use of taxpayer dollars. The hypocrisy here has apparently not gone unnoticed.

What have they accomplished in five months. It seems since their 100 hours expired they have dedicated their time to undermining the President on the war.

The people spoke in November. The GOP had let them down. Well the people are speaking again and they are not happy with the new congress. There are some bills in the House that are getting some attention. The fairness Doctrine which will silence dissent on the airwaves and various bills to impeach the president. If the polls are as important as the media makes them out to be then these bills which will soon be on the front burner could very easily put the Democrats back in the minority next November.

-Bert

 

Debates hosted by MSNBC. Well, anything involving MSNBC really. Poor Tucker Carlson. Destined to mediocrity thanks to a third rate public access-esque network. Joe Scarborough? He whines to much to be heard or seen by anymore than 9 persons sentenced to house arrest.

There has been some "outrage" on the right regarding Chris Mathews attempts to marginalize the candidates. The Irony here is that the Candidates were marginalized. just not by Mathews. More people watched FOX news talk about the debate than those who actually watched it. So any attempt by Mathews to sabotage the debate was all in vain.

The questions Mathews asked led me to believe I had suddenly entered the realm where cartoon characters live. Out of left field come this gem "Would you hire Karl Rove?". Now this is the first GOP debate 18 months before the election and Mathews expects them all to have their cabinets picked out? Besides that Mathews biggest downfall in life is he thinks he is smarter than the rest of us. He's not. Although no one saw that one coming because not even Chris Mathews could get so desperate, they easily brushed it aside with the obvious "No". Not knowing when to stop he asked a question about Scooter Libby. Now last I checked none of these people had anything to do with the man.

Then the gnome from politico asked what might be the dumbest question since Joan of Arc asked "Do you have a light mate?". "What do you dislike most about America". Now what was the gnome expecting Mitt Romney to say? "Well I really hate all them Jews" Maybe Mathews was hoping he could catch Rudy in some off handed remarks about "Darkies".

I was however disappointed when Mathews refrained from asking each candidate their sign. He refrained from asking Ron Paul anything because he fell asleep.

Mathews goose stepping around the stage like a bleached blonde Georg Von Trapp shouting Zeit! Turned the debate into a musical version of the Nuremburg Trials. Rudy Giuliani playing the part of Martin Bormann was hammered for his poor answer to the Abortion issue. Mathews However was beating a dead horse with an even deader llama. everyone knows Rudy is pro choice. Plenty of Conservatives have already announced they will not be voting for him. Chris Mathews is attempting to reveal something everyone already knows. That's how news is done at MSNBC?

Mathews decided to avoid asking tiresome questions about the economy, moral values, immigration. The sort of questions that usually stump the Liberals. Instead he focused on important issues such as their fave on American Idol and who has the best potato recipe.

The most disturbing part of this spectacle was the post debate recap where everyone used their time to express how brilliantly Mathews moderated the debate. Joe Scarborough was in full sycophant regalia literally drooling all over himself. Maybe he wants Mathews' Hardball timeslot so he can have the extra 5 viewers for his own show.

All that was missing was Jack Cafferty asking the candidates "Ona scale of 1 to 10, how big of a loser is George Bush"

-Bert

It's amazing what the left in this country considers skill or prowess. The Chicago Tribune said today in a column that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi demonstrated considerable prowess this week. She and her aides whipped Democrats into line to pass a bill in the House that would bring U.S. combat troops home from Iraq by no later than Sept. 1, 2008.

Tom Delay was known as "The Hammer" during his tenure in the House. he could negotiate backroom deals and keep the party together. That was prowess. Nancy Pelosi has seen here party fracture into several factions. All with their own idea of when we should surrender in Iraq. Where is the prowess.

She enticed conservative Democrats, who fear such a deadline would tie the hands of U.S. commanders, largely by loading the bill with billions in pork-barrel spending.

To the rest of the world this is known as a bribe.... A 24 billion dollar bribe. A 24 billion dollar bribe of taxpayer money. This bill was so popular Pelosi needed to bribe Democrats to support it.

$25 million for spinach. Now unless you can use spinach as body armor this will not help the troops at all.

$74 million for peanut storage. Now let me see if I have this correct. The troops in Iraq are so inundated with peanuts that they no longer have anywhere to store them so they need 74 million to build sheds to put the peanuts in....

$120 million for shrimp. I suppose shrimp may be an effective tool against the terrorists if they all have allergies to shellfish...

One of the lefts talking points for the anti war argument is the troops in harms way are not sufficiently protected. This bill was to directly address such things as body armor, tanks, logistics, training, all the things that make a war run smoothly. Yet the Democrats sought to bog down the passage of the bill with earmarks and provisions that will make it impossible to pass. So much for having the soldiers well being at heart.

In a comical twist to this sad story New Hampshire Representative Paul Hodes defended the bill in the Democrats weekly radio address with this little gem..

 Well they did it. They finally turned their backs on the Troops in Iraq, and the military in general. The Democrats narrowly passed a military spending bill with more pork attached to it than Rose O’Donnell’s thighs. The bill is also loaded with benchmarks that were designed to be impossible to meet. The bill also sets a date for withdrawal without regards to conditions on the ground.

let's look at what the Bill really is because it is not a bill to finance the troops in Iraq. It's about the total disarray and moral vacancy of the Democratic party.

The AP reports that the passage of the bill is a triumph for Nancy Pelosi. How so? She had to bribe, threaten, and twist arms to get this bill passed and she only got it passed by 6 votes. She had to bribe her party to get the majority on an issue the majority does not believe in. She had to bribe her party to secure defeat. 24 billion in pork to bribe her party to stab the troops in the back. This was not a win. This could be however the turning point on the Democrats. Just two months into their majority. Even the Washington Post is writing and publishing scathing article on their conduct.

One other interesting little nugget is this...The Liberals have been saying for years that the battleground for the war on Terror is in Afghanistan. We should be there not Iraq. . The Democrats are trying to secure defeat in both countries because this bill also provides funding for the troops in Afghanistan.

So Pelosi was able to bribe the bill to passage. What about the Senate? Harry Ried has been schooled by Mitch McConnell for two months. This will never pass as it is written. Ried does not have the power Pelosi seems to wield.

George Bush has promised to VETO the bill. Too many attachments, too many earmarks. The bill needs to be approved by April 8th to avoid the suspension of training new soldiers, and the training of Iraqis. Upgrades to current military units already deployed will be suspended as well as repairs to vehicles. Now The Democrats are banking on the April 15 deadline to pass so they can blame the president for the stoppage in funding because he vetoed it. This won't fly with the American people. The people want the troops protected. They expect a bill for funding to be passed on it's own merits without any strings attached. The people want the bill to be about funding. Nothing else. They will pay the price. Not the President. Spinach subsidies and Shrimp subsidies have noting to do with protecting the troops in Iraq. Yet several vacuous Democrats changed their position and voted for this bill for monetary gain. And they squeal when we claim they do not support the troops.

 I hope this does not insult or enrage any of the military that have served and survived war but I want to bring the Liberal position into perspective for the liberals. We have to force them to look at their own positions because deep down they know they are wrong.

The left needs to judge the progress of the Iraq war by the number of body bags that arrive in the US every month.

Time after time I have called the left on this and as always the counter with 'Have you served?" "Do you know what it is like?" Having received this reply from actual Vets I decided to play ball within their rulebook...

We lost Vietnam. We lost big. Our military, supposedly the finest in the world failed to do it's job. You guys failed to defeat a third rate enemy. You lost and communism won. 47,378 of our soldiers died for nothing. Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon are war criminals for sponsoring an illegal war amongst a free and sovereign nation.

Our soldiers went into Vietnamese homes and raped and pillaged and generally terrorized the population not unlike Genghis Kahn. 15 years of utter violent futility...

How do I know this?

Well, if Iraq is a loss after three years and 3000 casualties (1000 casualties a year average), then Vietnam (3158 casualties a year average) was an even worse defeat.

Why are we losing? Well George Bush of course. He an idiot. He's dumb. He doesn't have a plan. We also do not think his plan (which he does not have) is working. 3000 dead soldiers told me so...

We need to leave Iraq now because we have lost 3000 soldiers. Don't tell me about the consequences, I don't want to know. We lost 3000 soldiers. The evacuation of Vietnam set off a virtual genocide but it does not matter. We lost 47,378 casualties. Yes Victory was in grasp in Vietnam but it did not matter. We lost 47,378 soldiers and there is no way those 47,378 would want their sacrifice to be vindicated because....we lost 47,378 people. Defeat is a must. We deserve it. We earned it.

Since we have set a precedent someone needs to grab a shovel and dig up George Washington. We may have gained our independence from the United Kingdom but we lost 4435 men. That's more than Iraq. Go to any pub in the UK and you my over hear "Sure they got their independence but they lost 4435 soldiers." Washington needs to be impeached. Where's John Conyers?

So what do we do now? Iraq is 80% secure. Do we surrender that 80 percent to the 20 percent that have been successful at hiding in mosques and behind women? Or do we fight on and finish the job? The left says we surrender because we have lost 3000 political talking points. the right says we've had three elections, we've formed a government, and the Iraqi army is taking the lead. Let's finish. It's what we do best when left alone to do what we do best.

-Bert.

 

I love Joe Biden. He's good for at least one "Kerryesqe" sound bite every six months. They're usually race related. Last time it was something about Indians and 7-11. I never understood that one. This time it is about black people. Or to be more specific Barak Obama. To be even more specific it was about the clean, articulate, sharp Barrack Obama.

Now Joseph Biden is not a racist by any means. Racially insensitive maybe but not a racist. He is a person whose mouth works faster than his brain. This is all exacerbated by his belief that he is the smartest thing since Hermann Einstein who came up with the idea of creating an Albert Einstein. Just look at his performance during the Samuel Alito nomination. He had 20 minutes to question Judge Alito and spent 19 minutes of it telling him how he should answer the questions. Trouble was there were no questions. He seems to think that everything that comes out of his mouth is absolute gold.

What do the Indians think about that?

So instead of spending the day talking about his announcing he is running for president he spent the day trying to play down his remarks about Barak Obama. Obviously he has shot any chance of the Democratic nomination in the proverbial left foot. This has to be some sort of record. He lost any chance of getting the nomination on the day he announced he was running.

Ironically if he said this 20 years ago no one would have paid it any attention.

In 1988 the Democrats realized they could blame their election losses on Race. The Willie Horton ads the Bush team ran were unfairly accurate. Coupled with Michael Dukakis and his ego which was curiously taller than he was, the American public decided they did not need a commander in chief that insisted on releasing non parole inmates into the free world every weekend.

By the new millennia they had expanded it from using race to explain why they lost an election to using race to prevent losing one. By the time Strom Thurmond realized he was retiring years after he died they figured out how to use race to kill a Republican's political career.

It's all about race with them. The latest victim is George Allen. If you listen to them Senator Allen laid awake at nights thinking of an obscure word that demeans a foreigner. (I'm not even sure what nationality the guy was). George Allen will always be connected to the word "Macaca". Does anyone believe George Allen would stare into a camera and hurl racial slurs at an opponents staffer a few weeks before an election?

Republicans never get a pass when they say something dumb. Democrats pounce on each and every one of these gaffes with a zeal we wish they reserved for the terrorists. Meanwhile when a Democrat does a Biden the mainstream media simply ignores it or excepts a really weak excuse. (Sandy Berger was simply unorganized. He's messy and Chris Mathews is okay with that).

So what is happening now is Republicans jump on every minor infraction. outraged not necessarily because the remark was wrong or obscene but because if it was one of them they would have been strung up.

So in a sad twist of Irony Joe Biden who is always at war with his own vocal chords is the victim of his party's own need to create a racial situation out of nothing. Other than the now (in)famous quote he said some pretty intelligent things about John Edwards and Hillary Clinton's plans for surrendering in Iraq.

But what did he say anyway? He said Barak Obama was articulate. Well he is. Senator Obama never really says anything but he says it so well. Was Biden saying it's nice to see a black man run for president that something other than Ebonics? Perhaps Biden expected Barak to sound like Snoop Dog. I just don't know.

He also said Barak was clean. How often Senator Obama takes a bath I do not know. I'm also not aware of any unusual hygiene habits of Senator Biden. Biden claims he meant Obama is clean cut. Well if you are comparing Obama to other black Presidential candidates like Al Sharp ton and Jessie Jackson then Senator Biden was spot on.

Joe Biden is probably safe until the election heats up and he is forced to make several statements a day. Lord knows what he will say next. I'm waiting for the Clinton camp to fabricate a story about John McCain's family owning six slaves and a Peruvian butler.

-Bert

 

This weekends rally on the Mall in DC was just the spectacle I thought it would be. A pathetic display of aging hippie Dinosaurs, rabid Socialists, and Tim Robbins. It was cheesy chants, bizarre rallying calls, badly worded protest songs and a trumpet.

This was not your parents Vietnam shindig.

First of all this war's Walter Cronkite, Bob Scheifer listed the total attendance at over one hundred thousand. In reality it was just shy of 9,000. this wasn't San Francisco. This was recreation time at the retirement home. Let's do some math. If 9,000 aging hippies showed up that means 91000 aging hippies checked into reality after 1970, got jobs and became productive members of society. Jane Fonda's contribution to Society has been Ted Turner and "Barbarella"

We had the hip hop caucus. They had trouble getting their show off the ground and asked to start over in mid Rap. They were a bit miffed when they were not allowed to give speeches. I'm not surprised. They couldn't get their rap organized there wasn't enough time to let them get their speeches together.

Of course there were the 'Aging Grannies". What rally is complete without them. These are someone’s grandmothers and they are out there singing this Country Joe McDonald type stuff...badly.

Then there was this Mexican guy. In pulverized English he explained the we need to get all the "Gringos" out of Iraq. He didn't seem to worried about the American troops. He apparently said we need to "stop the funding in the Iraq" and "get the Gringos out of Iraq". I say apparently because it sounded like he said "stop the fun in Iraq" and "Get the Gringos our Iraq"

Of course Tim Robbins was there. It's not like he has any movies to make. Jane Fonda made an appearance saying she had not attended an anti war rally in 35 years. Translated she meant she had not spat on a Military Vet in 35 years.

John Conyers spoke. He again called for Bush's impeachment. I thought Ms. Pelosi said impeachment was off the table. they should have coffee. Anyway I wonder if Conyers took notice of who he was celebrating anti Americanism with. These are the people the Democratic party is beholden to. Fat enraged hippies who struggle to get into their bellbottoms. These are the people who sit behind their keyboards and give credence to the far left websites. This is the moveon.org crowd.

What should have been more telling is the total number in attendance. 9,000. In the late 60's and early 70's every rally attracted hundreds of thousands. Vietnam was a different scenario. By exiting Vietnam we did not put ourselves at immediate risk. Americans know Iraq is a different story. Not being careful how we leave Iraq we will put ourselves at greater risk. Sure the majority of Americans want the troops home now but they don't want an immediate withdrawal if it will make things worse.

In other words the Democrats are afraid of a small percentage of the left that has moved farther to the left. These people were spitting on Iraqi Vets that attended the rally to offer a different point of view and these are the people that John Conyers and most of the Democratic party feel they need to represent. A small but fanatical minority.

Nobody listens to stupid people. Why do the Democrats? This group trashed the Capital steps and trashed the FOX news van. I thought they were for peace. They're anarchists. They defaced the Capital steps by spray painting anarchist symbols while John Conyers and Maxine Waters looked on. Is this what the Democratic demographic wants in their party?

-Bert