Secret Service

The Loopy Gun Control Legislation Begins

by Bill O'Connell on January 13, 2011

Share and Recommend:

Long Island’s own Peter King (R) plans to introduce legislation that would make it illegal for someone to knowingly carry a gun within 1,000 feet of certain high-ranking federal officials, including members of Congress.  Before I take on the nuttiness of the law itself, I have to ask, “What makes them so special?” 

  Click to read more

Share and Recommend:

Republicans Beware

by Bill O'Connell on May 31, 2009

Share and Recommend:

Republicans: Don't Fall Into This Trap

Republicans lose elections when they act counter to what people expect of them.  When President Clinton was undergoing impeachment, too many Republicans focused on what happened in the Oval office, leading Democrats to tut tut, “Republicans are just a bunch of prudes.”  In France, where taking a mistress and siring a brood is a way of life, were baffled at the commotion over here.  The argument should have focused on women’s rights and how Clinton, by his lying, was denying Paula Jones her day in court on a legitimate claim of sexual harassment.  If that was the gravamen of the discussion, the Republicans would have one on either the impeachment claim or by discrediting the left wing of the women’s movement by starkly painting them as choosing abortion as the sine qua non of their existence, rather than supporting the rights of a solitary woman against a powerful man.  Alas, the Democrats successfully dragged the fight into the mud, smearing everyone in the process.  When it was all done, you couldn’t tell a muddy Clinton, from a spattered Ken Starr, from a slime covered Republican Congressman.

Take the High Road

Today there was a news release from the Republican National Committee trying to make hay out of President Obama taking his wife to a Broadway play on the eve of GM filing bankruptcy, the state of the economy, etc., etc.  PLEASE!  Let the man take his wife to a play.  Barack Obama will have the Secret Service following him for the rest of his life.  It costs money to protect him.  What do we expect our President to do, stay home and bowl for the rest of his term?  The man still has very high approval ratings.  Trying to make these kinds of points is counterproductive and will probably raise his numbers and the Republicans negative numbers at the same time.  Instead of asking why he was doing that, ask him how he liked the play.

With the confirmation hearings approaching for Judge Sonia Sotomayor, the Republicans have to be on guard for the same things.  Get off the “she’s a racist” bandwagon.  You’re playing right into the Democrats hands.  They are the party of class warfare and nothing would please them more than ad hominem attacks on a Puerto Rican woman.

Treat it just like any job interview.  Is she qualified to do the job? Don’t bring up any questions about race, sex, age, disabilities, or anything else you couldn’t ask on a job interview.  Instead of saying she is a racist for saying a Latina woman would arrive at better decisions than a white man, ask her to explain her thinking behind the statement and then follow it up with a line of questions about judicial activism.  On the Ricci case, ask her what would be the remedy that would pass muster in her court.  How many blacks would have to pass the test to allow the promotions to go through?  How many Hispanics? How many Asians?  Ask her if a white male wanted to sue the National Basketball Association because whites are disproportionally represented in the NBA, what would she rule?

Set the Table

Judge Sotomayor probably has the votes to make it to the Supreme Court.  At the same time most Americans are opposed to judicial activism.  If the Republicans stay on message and take this as an opportunity to point to another instance of this Administration taking away more and more of our liberties, they can head to the production studios and start making the commercials for 2010.  If they accept the left’s invitation to step into the mud pit, then when it is all over all anyone will see is the mud dripping from every participant.  Just say no.  No ad hominem attacks.  No inflated claims on small points.  Just a steady, consistent focus on whether on not Judge Sotomayor is an activist judge.  Here is the speech that we should hear from any Republican senator when the nomination comes up for a vote:

“Judge Sotomayor has a great American story.  It is a story that all Americans should admire.  She seems like a truly warm and caring individual, which are qualities than anyone should embrace.  However, in her judicial philosophy she doesn’t seem to be able to separate her personal feelings from the law.  Her passion would make her a wonderful legislator, but a judge does not make the rules.  Like an umpire in a baseball game, the judge calls balls and strikes, safe and out.  The umpire doesn’t directly influence the outcome for one team or the other, neither the underdog nor the favorite.  Justice should be blind.  Judge Sotomayor doesn’t believe that.  Therefore, regretfully, I will be voting against her.”

Share and Recommend:

When is a Death Threat Not a Death Threat?

by Bill O'Connell on October 19, 2008

Share and Recommend:

The old adage goes, if a tree falls in the forest and there is no one there to hear it, does it make any noise? I guess today you could say, if a death threat is made toward Barack Obama at a McCain rally and the Secret Service agents who were present neither heard it nor can find anyone who did, did the threat really happen?  If you are holding a deck full of race cards, apparently so.

Race has overshadowed this campaign from the moment Barack Obama won his first caucuses.  The interesting twist is that those assumed to be the real racists in America, conservatives and by extension all Republicans, have scrupulously avoided any discussion of race whatsoever.  The ones who can’t stop talking about race are those on the left.

By continually bringing the subject up and the keeping the whiff of racism in the air, they hope to force those who fear being called racist to vote for Obama just to prove they are not racists!  Has John McCain given any speeches that brought up Obama’s race?  However, after the Reverend Jeremiah Wright blew up in his face, Barack Obama went on to give a major speech in Philadelphia on race in America (A More Perfect Union).

What prompted the speech was the anti-white, anti-American sentiment expressed by Obama’s minister.  In that speech Obama said that despite the positive and historic start to his campaign, race crept in.  “We saw racial tensions bubble to the surface during the week before the South Carolina primary.”  Wasn’t that Bill Clinton, a liberal Democrat, who was accused of that?  He went on to describe his candidacy as seen by some as, “the desire of wide-eyed liberals to purchase racial reconciliation on the cheap.” it’s pretty self-explanatary who’s talking about race here.  In another speech Obama talked about how he looked different than the Presidents whose faces were on our currency.

Congressman John Lewis, a hero of the Civil Rights movement, compared McCain and Palin to George Wallace.  Based on what?  Personal attacks, of course.  What were the nature of these personal attacks?  Well the Republicans said that Barack Obama was lying about his relationship with Wiliam Ayers.  I fail to see that as a personal attack.  Obama has hardly been forthcoming about his relationship with Ayers and only reveals another piece of the puzzle when he is forced to do so.  At first Ayers was just a guy in the neighborhod, but as more and more facts were revealed about the extent of their relationship, Obama would release another “clarification” such as, yes they served on the same board, but seldom met.  How is calling Obama on this considered a personal attack and where is the racism?  If you want to know what a personal attack feels like, ask Sarah Palin.

Now Sarah Palin is being attacked as a racist because she uses the terms “Joe six-pack” and “Hockey Mom.”  Apparently because blacks don’t play much hockey or drink six packs of beer, it is really a code word for “whites only” rather than meaning average Americans.  I guess to be politically correct she should should say, “Hockey Moms, Basketball Moms, Football Moms, Cricket Moms, Soccer Moms, Badminton Moms…”  and I don’t even want to get into the favored adult beverage of minorities for fear of that being a racist stereotype in and of itself.  I’d rather listen to a speech that has a good cadence and is well written and delivered than something leaden that touches all the politically correct bases.

The latest race card drawn from the bottom of the deck is the death threats at McCain and Palin rallies.  The U.S. Secret Service was unable to corroborate anyone shouting out “kill him”.  But that hasn’t stopped the Obama camp from playing it for all it is worth.  Why would they do that?  One reason would be to get some independents to move his way out of sympathy and guilt.  Another would be to keep those who are in his camp who are getting cold feet to stay in his camp rather than going over to the racists.  I thought the term was Commander in Chief, not Manipulator in Chief.  How do you feel?

Share and Recommend:
© 2011 Liberty's Lifeline. All Rights Reserved.