Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Each time I vote I wonder IF I am voting for the right candidate. Part of what causes this confusion is the fact that usually I feel I'm simply voting for the one candidate that is/was not as bad as the other. The one candidate that I thought was not as bad as the other candidate often lost the election and that was the end of it….. BUT on a few scattered elections I felt I has some choices. If the candidate I voted for won I thought I made the right choice and felt I had done a good thing. On those rare occasions where I voted for the person who got elected they went to Washington and cast votes against every belief I hold. Not all the time, not on every bill, but often.
There have been occasions, like this last election, where I supported a candidate I really knew little about other than hearing some of his campaign speeches. His name is Ted Cruz…. (I'm sure everyone got tired of me talking about him in The Oxford Tea Party articles…) He won. Went to Washington and haven't heard much about him since he has been there. It often takes the first six months for the newly elected to find the cafeteria, rest room , and their offices. So I really don't expect much from them early own.
However, as it turns out Mr. Cruz is doing 'something' and has been since day one. The metrics that I use as a measuring rod is the New York Times. (Confession: I get RSS feed daily from NY Times.) When the Times writes about and attacks a newly elected person it means they are truly conservative. He/she is walking, talking, and voting conservative values. Acting like a conservative human being in a sea of liberal go-along-to-get-along good old boys and girls.
Gosh, NY Times says Cruz is confrontational like the Tea Party. Not only that but he was one of thirty four members to vote against raising the debt limit. One of nineteen who voted against selling military arms to Egypt and to top it off voted against John Kerry for secretary of state. Last noted by the Times he filibustered against Chuck Hagel for secretary of defense. Given the tone of the Times' article Cruz is one bad dude….. (I'm sure Hagel, who has been a part of this august body, will be confirmed even without Cruz's vote.)
All of us who supported Ted should pat ourselves on the back. Drop him a note, send him an e-mail, and call his office and say, "Thanks." The pressure on these newly elected by their own party is relentless. (i.e. Mitch McConnell)
Most GOPs in the House are not conservative GOPs. They are not the Tea Party GOP. (Many, I am sure, are Dems in disguise.…. Well, maybe not.)
Here is a short list of guys we need to write and call giving them our support:
Rand Paul, (Kentucky) Macro Rubio,(Florida) Pat Toomey, (Pennsylvania) Jeff Flake, (Arizona) Mike Lee, (Utah) Tim Scott (South Carolina) and Ted Cruz.(Texas) Stick these names on the bathroom mirror. These men are conservative in word and deed. All seem to be men of principles. This is a core conservative group that we need to help grow. The next election is only sixteen months away.
We must find a way to send as many support messages as we can to these newly elected. It the right thing for us to do and if do it consistently he/she will not forget for a moment who sent them there and why. Also, they may end up paying more attention when we send our 'don't vote for this or that bill' message. (What do you think.?)
Here is a copy of e-mail I sent to NY Times: Just a quick note on the article you wrote concerning Ted Cruz and his voting record…. What is most important for you to note is he works for me and a goodly number of people I know and many others I don't know. We hired him and we pay him to do what he is doing. Get it? He is our employee…..At no time did we consult with you or any of the staff at the NY Times concerning this job or the best person to fill this position.
The editorial staff at the NY Times seems to have a biased view of America as well as Orwellian view of how government should be. In an effort to save you time and effort we want you to know we will not buy into your writers' notions and evolve into a "Robin Hood thievery nation." Our forefathers didn't, our parents didn't, and we won't either.
By espousing this socialist agenda your group of writers has destroyed one of the greatest newspapers the world has ever seen.
(I don't think this e-mail has been read by any of the Times staff writers. I really don't care. Also, I don't think I have fully confessed that when I was twenty years old, I lived in New York, was a liberal democrat, and read the New York Times everyday. Just like a liberal democrat should.)
Posted by Docnick at 5:52 AM
Saturday, February 9, 2013
Below is a link to a speech that Dr. Carson gave at the national prayer meeting a few days ago. I suspect many of you did not see him speak. also, I assume many do not know him nor what he has done and is doing.
This speech is over twenty minutes so set aside time to watch.
I seldom, if ever, send out a link like this.
I think you will need to copy this in your browser. This will become a google search and at the top of the search you will see the link to Dr. carson speech at the national prayer meeting.
Posted by Docnick at 10:24 AM