Two days ago, I read on the Drudge Report that Newt Gingrich is rumored to be seeking the RNC chairmanship. This excited me to no end, then today I discovered that Congressman Michael C. Burgess, MD (TX-26) is seeking the House Republican Policy Committee Chairmanship, and now my joy runneth over! Should Newt and Burgess receive these posts we can be sure the GOP will be heading in the right direction.
Newt will serve the Party and the country best as the chairman of the RNC. His books Winning the Future and Real Change put forth a plan for this country that will rebuild America. They are solidly conservative, and place government squarely in the place that it belongs. The policies Newt focuses on in these books are overwhelmingly popular with the American people, and if pursued with the help of a Burgess Policy chairmanship could propell the GOP back into the Majority.
I know Congressman Burgess both personally and professionally. I am proud that I spent 2006 -2007 helping Burgess represent the people of the 26th District, and I know that if given the chance, Dr. Burgess can heal the Republican Party. His courage underfire (which I have seen first hand) and leadership is the exact prescription the GOP needs. Dr. Burgess is a conservative's conservative, and knows exactly how to fix America's healthcare woes, energy crisis, and has the moral fortitude to stand up to the special interest, and give the American people the medicine they need for recovery.
With Burgess and Gingrich at the helm, the future of the Republican Party looks strong, however, this future can dim should the moderate and liberal Republicans dominate the GOP. That is why we need to inform our representation that we want the real leadership of Burgess and Gingrich.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Friday, September 19, 2008
U.S. News Media: 1776 - 2008
Listening to Conservatives bemoan about the "bias in the media" has grown as common place in today's society as hearing Liberals decry the actions of the Bush Administration, or declare that their President is an idiot. Yet, one only needs to be paying attention to current events to realize that Conservatives cries of bias are not baseless. Conservative talk radio host Sean Hannity, has often referred to the death of the U.S. news media in 2008, and I believe he may be right.
In a country were the media is more free to print or say what they want than the common citizen, the U.S. media has begun to abuse their privilige, and are beginning to overtly use their power to forward a political agenda the half of America does not agree with. This is no surprise, when you look at a Gallup poll conducted in 2006, where over 80% of reporters polled said they were financial contributers and members of the Democratic Party.
The 2008 Presidential Campaign has, if anything, been very exposing to the bias the liberal media has often tried to hide, and often ouright denied. When Saturday Night Live is parodying the cult up coverage of Sen. Barak Obama, and showing reporters as stalkers and psychofants of the Illinois Senator, we have a real problem. A little more solid evidence is a Rassmuesen poll conducted last week that showed 73% of the American people believed that the political news coverage favored Obama, and Media Matters said that the number of reports of the Obama campaign outnumbered the McCain Campaign 2 : 1. The bias towards Sen. Obama has been so great, and the public outcry so loud that MSNBC was forced to remove their veteran political news commentator, Chris Matthews, from further direct coverage of the campaigns because of his inability to contain his political motivations.
For many Americans, watching the news has become too nausiating to sustain, and they have chosen to remain either uninformed or limit their news to sources they know to be credible; however, this is proving to be harder to do as the bias towards Obama becomes more brazen. Even the once respected Charlie Gibson of ABC News has fallen victim to his own bias when he unfortunately chose to take on the task of "grand inquisitor" of Governor Sara Palin, who is seeking the Republican Vice Presidency.I believe very strongly that if media icons such as: Edward R. Murrow or even the very partisan Walter Kronkite would disapprove of the current state of our nation's news media. The news media is to be an unbias relayer of the news, not an attack wing of a political party or ideology.
In a free society we are rightfully limited to the regulations we are able to put on our media, because we believe in the freedom of speech, but in a free market society we do have a recourse to such abuse of the freedom of press, and that is turning the channel or walking past the news stand and not buying a paper. In a free society with free markets such overt bias is not a sound business move, and if continued could lead to the ruin of many media outlets' reputation and bottom line. Yet, many who benefit from this bias wish to use stifling measures (i.e. the Fairness Act) to prevent coverage that is less beneficial, but more popular. (That is a topic for another column.)
My dear reader, do what many of us "bitter" Americans do and turn the dial, and if you still don't like what you see or hear, then turn the whole thing off and find something that lives up to the true journalistic ethics that should be predominate in our media. Boycott is not the answer, but taking your business elsewhere is. This is the only way we will ever see the resurection of legitimate news coverage.
In a country were the media is more free to print or say what they want than the common citizen, the U.S. media has begun to abuse their privilige, and are beginning to overtly use their power to forward a political agenda the half of America does not agree with. This is no surprise, when you look at a Gallup poll conducted in 2006, where over 80% of reporters polled said they were financial contributers and members of the Democratic Party.
The 2008 Presidential Campaign has, if anything, been very exposing to the bias the liberal media has often tried to hide, and often ouright denied. When Saturday Night Live is parodying the cult up coverage of Sen. Barak Obama, and showing reporters as stalkers and psychofants of the Illinois Senator, we have a real problem. A little more solid evidence is a Rassmuesen poll conducted last week that showed 73% of the American people believed that the political news coverage favored Obama, and Media Matters said that the number of reports of the Obama campaign outnumbered the McCain Campaign 2 : 1. The bias towards Sen. Obama has been so great, and the public outcry so loud that MSNBC was forced to remove their veteran political news commentator, Chris Matthews, from further direct coverage of the campaigns because of his inability to contain his political motivations.
For many Americans, watching the news has become too nausiating to sustain, and they have chosen to remain either uninformed or limit their news to sources they know to be credible; however, this is proving to be harder to do as the bias towards Obama becomes more brazen. Even the once respected Charlie Gibson of ABC News has fallen victim to his own bias when he unfortunately chose to take on the task of "grand inquisitor" of Governor Sara Palin, who is seeking the Republican Vice Presidency.I believe very strongly that if media icons such as: Edward R. Murrow or even the very partisan Walter Kronkite would disapprove of the current state of our nation's news media. The news media is to be an unbias relayer of the news, not an attack wing of a political party or ideology.
In a free society we are rightfully limited to the regulations we are able to put on our media, because we believe in the freedom of speech, but in a free market society we do have a recourse to such abuse of the freedom of press, and that is turning the channel or walking past the news stand and not buying a paper. In a free society with free markets such overt bias is not a sound business move, and if continued could lead to the ruin of many media outlets' reputation and bottom line. Yet, many who benefit from this bias wish to use stifling measures (i.e. the Fairness Act) to prevent coverage that is less beneficial, but more popular. (That is a topic for another column.)
My dear reader, do what many of us "bitter" Americans do and turn the dial, and if you still don't like what you see or hear, then turn the whole thing off and find something that lives up to the true journalistic ethics that should be predominate in our media. Boycott is not the answer, but taking your business elsewhere is. This is the only way we will ever see the resurection of legitimate news coverage.
Friday, August 8, 2008
The Real Change America Needs
During my brief stint in Washington, I got to see how laws are really made, and I got to see what most Americans don't. What troubled me more than anything was the lack of real effort being put into fighting for the conservative ideals espoused by many Republicans on the Hill. Instead, a lot of wounds were being licked, a lot of regrouping took place and appeared the leadership went into playing the minority game instead of working on reclaiming the majority.
Granted I arrived in Washington the January 2007, which followed the spanking the GOP received in 2006. Yet, what was the real reason for this disciplinary action? Simple, the American people were disgusted with the GOP leadership, or lack thereof, and the complete abandonment of the conservative ideals that brought them to power in 1994. Today, we are seeing a resurgence in the old Conservative wing of the GOP with the protests taking place on Capitol Hill concerning the Energy Crisis, and the American people are paying attention.
America's attention is on the few patriots decrying the "tryanny" of the despotic rule of Speaker Pelosi, who is so beholden to her fringe enviromentalist base that she could not even allow a vote to allow this country to provide energy relief for its poor and lower middle class citizens. With America's attention squarely fixed on Congress, the GOP needs to sieze the moment and offer real ideas to help those citizens whom Speaker Pelosi and the Democratic party claim they represent. These same citizens who this day are suffering under the weight of high energy prices, and will suffer even greater come winter. These Americans are listening, but what is the message they need to hear?
The American citizen needs to hear more than just empty promises, or empty policies like "inflate your tires". (Marie Antionette could not have come up with a better policie initiative.) What they need to here are real plans that move our economy forward. Plans such as the bill introduced by Congressman Michael C. Burgess (R-TX)this Congress that would open our military bases to oil refinery construction and distribution. This simple fix would provide a quick answer to America's supply issues, while providing greater security for our energy infrastructure.
Another great idea is that of energy tycoon T. Boone Pickens, who wishes to use the vast wilderness of Texas and the midwest to raise a wind energy farm that could provide 20% of the Southwest's energy needs, and could free up much needed natural gas that could be used to convert 100% of all government vehicles to clean energy, and free up a considerable amount of gasoline and deisel for the free market.
One more interesting idea is one that I have heard from many great thinkers such as Newt Gingrich. This idea is to use the closed military instillations in the U.S. to build nuclear reactors for energy production. This is smart useage of uninhabited property, which help create even more clean energy production. How could the environmentalists argue with that? (Wry Smile)
All of the above ideas are energy policies that could be voted on immediately, and could have a dramatic and quick effect on energy prices and subsequently the economy. Yet, for environmental idealogues, these policies would help instead of hurt those industries on which they have a idealogical vendetta waged, and they just don't care about the rest of use who are hurting at the pump.
The American people are demanding something be done! I believe that if more of the same crud oozes from the DNC's "Do Nothing Congress", and the needs of the American people are not met, there will be a lot of incumbents updating their resumes.
Granted I arrived in Washington the January 2007, which followed the spanking the GOP received in 2006. Yet, what was the real reason for this disciplinary action? Simple, the American people were disgusted with the GOP leadership, or lack thereof, and the complete abandonment of the conservative ideals that brought them to power in 1994. Today, we are seeing a resurgence in the old Conservative wing of the GOP with the protests taking place on Capitol Hill concerning the Energy Crisis, and the American people are paying attention.
America's attention is on the few patriots decrying the "tryanny" of the despotic rule of Speaker Pelosi, who is so beholden to her fringe enviromentalist base that she could not even allow a vote to allow this country to provide energy relief for its poor and lower middle class citizens. With America's attention squarely fixed on Congress, the GOP needs to sieze the moment and offer real ideas to help those citizens whom Speaker Pelosi and the Democratic party claim they represent. These same citizens who this day are suffering under the weight of high energy prices, and will suffer even greater come winter. These Americans are listening, but what is the message they need to hear?
The American citizen needs to hear more than just empty promises, or empty policies like "inflate your tires". (Marie Antionette could not have come up with a better policie initiative.) What they need to here are real plans that move our economy forward. Plans such as the bill introduced by Congressman Michael C. Burgess (R-TX)this Congress that would open our military bases to oil refinery construction and distribution. This simple fix would provide a quick answer to America's supply issues, while providing greater security for our energy infrastructure.
Another great idea is that of energy tycoon T. Boone Pickens, who wishes to use the vast wilderness of Texas and the midwest to raise a wind energy farm that could provide 20% of the Southwest's energy needs, and could free up much needed natural gas that could be used to convert 100% of all government vehicles to clean energy, and free up a considerable amount of gasoline and deisel for the free market.
One more interesting idea is one that I have heard from many great thinkers such as Newt Gingrich. This idea is to use the closed military instillations in the U.S. to build nuclear reactors for energy production. This is smart useage of uninhabited property, which help create even more clean energy production. How could the environmentalists argue with that? (Wry Smile)
All of the above ideas are energy policies that could be voted on immediately, and could have a dramatic and quick effect on energy prices and subsequently the economy. Yet, for environmental idealogues, these policies would help instead of hurt those industries on which they have a idealogical vendetta waged, and they just don't care about the rest of use who are hurting at the pump.
The American people are demanding something be done! I believe that if more of the same crud oozes from the DNC's "Do Nothing Congress", and the needs of the American people are not met, there will be a lot of incumbents updating their resumes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)