Showing posts with label conservative values. Show all posts
Showing posts with label conservative values. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

Bob Graham Stomping All Over Florida House District 91?

by Yomin Postelnik, Republican Candidate for Florida House District 91: Over the past day I’ve received word that after 6 months of indecision, Chip Burpee will be entering the race on the Democratic side. I believe this means that his boss, retired Senator Bob Graham, will be campaigning against me. My reaction is simple: Bring it on. This is exactly what we need to mobilize all South Floridians who want real solutions and who know that the time for lifelong political hacks has long past and that now is the time for real solutions.

Political hacks should satisfy their ambitions by raising money for career politicians and taking whatever cut they want of it. When they decide that they themselves can become legislators, that’s when they become dangerous. It’s because of career politicians that there are so few new ideas in politics. Chip Burpee, a lifelong staffer, hasn’t offered up a single constructive idea in his life and his supposed decision to run is an insult to the District. Our state needs solutions, not blatant power grabs.

It is clear that Bob Graham still wishes to exert influence and control on the political scene. Accordingly, the logical step would be for him to run for office. Having a lackey, one who served him in a very junior capacity until after he retired from office, now run on his behalf is shameful – and no good can come of it for our state.

While Bob Graham may have had a long and diverse career in politics, Burpee is a man who has never dealt with the public that he now wishes to serve. And while Graham’s career has certainly been overrated - after all, as Governor he was best known for his failure to stop the Mariel Boatlift and for his signing of an unprecedented number of death warrants, 153 to be exact - he was always well liked, personable and in touch with the needs of constituents. Burpee is anything but.
Burpee embarked on his path in life as a political hack at the age of 18, serving as a staff assistant and deputy scheduler in Bob Graham’s office. During the six years in which he worked on and off for then-Senator Graham, the only position of semi-importance that Burpee held was for less than five months.

Burpee’s entire experience outside of political hackery was as a manager of an uppity, pretentious restaurant. Yet he calls this “business experience.” He’s currently the “Chief of Staff” for a long retired politician. And he calls that a job!

Even his education was large on style but utterly devoid of substance. Burpee received his education in Paris, France, where he studied “diplomacy.” Those whose sole area of study is “diplomacy” will generally tell you that that’s a nice way of saying “how to lie nicely.” Burpee has no background in education, ethics, business or any experience or first hand knowledge of anything that could be of benefit to his desired constituents. The last thing that Florida needs is someone whose entire field of study centered on mastering the art of political spin.

His latest decision to run after two other members of his party announced months ago and have formulated campaigns is a disservice to his own party. Their supporters must undoubtedly be upset by the intrusion and by Bob Graham stomping all over their primary. One even switched parties just to be able to run in this race. All jokes aside, why South Florida voters would want a representative who, essentially, wasted everyone’s time with his indecisiveness is beyond me. And Senator Graham’s attempt to belatedly insert himself into the race, walking all over two Democratic campaigns in the process, is uncalled for.

Among political hacks, Chip Burpee is among the least creative. He’s a man who has yet to offer up a single idea at any time during his lifelong career as a second rate staffer.

Should Bob Graham wish to tarnish his legacy and recruit political hacks who offer no new ideas for the District and who have never done anything for the people of Florida, then he should rethink his strategy. The recruitment of Burpee is the worst form of political payback and is designed to give Graham power and influence by putting an incompetent in an important position where he will make decisions that affect education, small business and Florida families.

The people of District 91 will not stand for it. We deserve better and we will demand nothing less.


Democrats have long promised that District 91 would be “the largest battle in South Florida.” If by that they meant that this election would finally expose the Jimmy Carter-like incompetence of the otherwise likable Senator and former Governor Bob Graham, then I’ll have no choice but to oblige. It certainly is interesting that Bob Graham’s biggest failure, the Mariel Boatlift, is one that Jimmy Carter is still trying to live down to this day.

I will not attack the puppet. I’ll go after the puppet maker who still controls the strings. People in District 91 know the difference – and no one appreciates a retired politician trying to control his party’s legislative agenda by proxy, through a third rate political hack who has yet to offer up a single substantive idea in 12 years of political machine grinding.

--------------
Visit Yomin Postelnik Campaign Site: A Better Florida Yomin Postelnik offers Florida the opportunity for a solid conservative to work through the critical economic issues facing Florida created by the unfunded mandates of the Obama administration and the declining return of revenue collected by Florida but retained by the Federal Government. The Editor of America's Best Choice and National Political Director Conservative Solutions ("Let's Get This Right"), Dr. Bill Smith, has endorsed Yomin Postelnik as "the best choice for Florida's future in House District 91.
America's Best Choice

Thursday, April 16, 2009

You May Be A Radical Too...

Tea Party protesters won a victory today as the mainstream media could not ignore their protests like they have in the past. As expected some of the media described the protesters as radicals (ever-classy and most-trusted Anderson Cooper of CNN used an obscene joke to describe the attendees) despite the pictures showing peaceful gatherings of people of all ages in attendance. Yet media logic dictates if you don't love Obama, you must be crazy.

Yet it's not just the media searching for crazy. A report was leaked by DHS on "Rightwing Extremism." To quote the report,
Rightwing extremist chatter on the Internet continues to focus on the economy, the perceived loss of U.S. jobs in the manufacturing and construction sectors, and home foreclosures.

Dang it, I'm a radical. There were signs, once in high school I got a detention for a overdue library book; even back then I was bad. My internet chatter about obscene government spending has all been a clever ploy to manipulate my readers to take radical action like, 'vote the bums out,' or 'tell your representatives what you think.' I tell you I'm bad, and if I didn't have a job or a cold I would have been one of those crazy tea party animals too. You need further proof that I'm a radical? How about this...
Rightwing extremist views bemoan the decline of U.S. stature and have recently focused on themes such as the loss of U.S. manufacturing capability to China and India, Russia’s control of energy resources and use of these to pressure other countries, and China’s investment in U.S. real estate and corporations as a part of subversion strategy.

Well there you have it. I'm concerned that China owns us, and all our debt, I must be a radical. Granted, I'm a centrist on guns and immigration, and lean a bit left on the social issues discussed in the report, but imagine my surprise to find out that I've been cavorting with other radicals over the past 2 years by volunteering for the McCain campaign. Pro-life, pro-second amendment, high concentration of veterans, don't let the good humor, sarcastic wit, family values, and helpful manner fool you - we were all a big bunch of radicals, just ask MSNBC.

Now I know there is a serious side to this report. Every group in every country has its nutballs, and its the governments main job to protect its citizens from radicals of all sorts. Yet this seems like a veiled attempt to blur the line between staunch conservatives and radical Klan-like groups, when in reality that is a very clear and distict line. Veterans in particular are owed an apology for their less than flattering portrayal in this report. As for me, I'm going to keep chattering about the economy, and take pride in the fact that someone out there thinks I'm radical.

You May Be A Radical Too...

Sunday, October 19, 2008

Obama's Plan to Spread the Wealth

Despite the Obama campaign's and media's attempt to discredit 'Joe the Plumber', a fellow who simply asked Senator Obama a question at a campaign event, his question remains valid, and Obama's response proves insightful. Obama's $250,000 a year tax increase provides a barrier to success for the middle class, particularly for entrepreneurs and small business owners. For these people on the bubble there is a penalty for growth. Consequently, this puts the brakes on the growth of many small businesses, which are responsible for a large percentage of new jobs. Raising taxes in a struggling economy on any economic bracket is a terrible idea. Tax increases slow economic growth, and that hurts people across the board. If jobs dry up, it's not the $250,000 plus crowd that will be hurt the most, it will be the middle class.

Senator Obama's response to Joe is interesting. 'Spreading the wealth' is a principle of socialism. This combined with Senator Obama's plan to reduce taxes for 95% of the people, when 30-40% of the people don't pay federal income tax has all the hallmarks of a socialist policy. Senator Obama has never addressed whether people who don't pay taxes would receive a government check. Either his numbers are off or he is creating a welfare class is his plan. Subsidizing low income is the perfect way of encouraging people not to achieve. Why work harder if the government will pay you not to. Why start a new business if the government will penalize you for your success. This is the perfect plan to deaden the economy; penalize success, reward mediocrity, and limit the growth of new/small businesses.




Obama's Plan to Spread the Wealth
Obama's Plan to Spread the Wealth

Tuesday, October 7, 2008

Obama, FactCheck.org, Ayers, and the Annenburg Foundation

There is a disturbing link between Barack Obama, FactCheck.org, and William Ayers. National Review reports that William Ayers and Barack Obama both served as co-chairs of the Chicago Annenburg Challenge. Obama called for an $3.5 million dollar earmark for the Annenburg Foundation that sponsors FactCheck.org. Several FactCheck articles have been viewed as promoting the Obama campaign line instead of truly acting as a fact checkers. Controlling the ‘facts’ is a hallmark of a totalitarian regime, and this is a truly unsettling connection.

Mission statement from FactCheck.org.
The Annenberg Political Fact Check is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. The APPC was established by publisher and philanthropist Walter Annenberg in 1994 to create a community of scholars within the University of Pennsylvania that would address public policy issues at the local, state and federal levels.
The APPC accepts NO funding from business corporations, labor unions, political parties, lobbying organizations or individuals. It is funded primarily by the Annenberg Foundation.

Requested Annenberg Earmark from Barack Obama - Citation from Answers.BarackObama.com
Obama Requested $3.5 Million For The USC Annenberg Research Network. In 2005, Obama requested $3.5 million for the USC Annenberg Research Network on International Communication, in partnership with the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, to support the deployment of pervasive broadband for education and economic development.Funding was for the construction of a large-scale broadband wireless systems in two communities—one in South Los Angeles and the other in small-town Illinois. In each community, broadband network coverage will be provided over a minimum of about a half-square mile area, utilizing leading edge wireless technologies. In Los Angeles, this will include the five schools in USC’s immediate neighborhood, with about 8,000 K-12 students. USC also will provide wireless equipment and access to every family with a student entering the first grade of a new Science Center School, and in Illinois, a similar group of students will be selected to receive wireless equipment and access within the coverage area. The impact of these technologies on the students and their families will be tracked. [Obama Request Letter to the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, HHS, Education, 6/7/05]

Obama’s Challenge from the National Review
Let’s first review CAC’s [Chicago Annenburg Challenge] initial setup. In the first year, 1995, Obama headed the board, which made fiscal decisions, and Ayers co-chaired the Collaborative, which set education policy. During that first year, Obama’s formal responsibilities mandated close cooperation and coordination with the Collaborative. As board chair and president of the CAC corporation, Obama was authorized to “delegate to the Collaborative the development of collaborative projects and programs . . . to obtain assistance of the Collaborative in the development of requests for proposals . . . and to seek advice from the Collaborative regarding the programmatic aspects of grant proposals.” All this clearly involves significant consultation between the board, headed by Obama, and the Collaborative, co-chaired by Ayers.

Hat Tip to Death by 1000 Papercuts for first reporting this in their article Obama, Bill Ayers, and FactCheck.Org: All Have Ties To Annenberg Foundation

Clarification: The connection between Obama and Ayers is through
the Chicago Annenberg Challenge that received money from the Annenburg
Foundation, but the Chicago Annenburg Challenge Challenge and the
Annenburg Foundation are not directly connected philosophically.  The
earmark Senator Obama requested was for the Annenburg Foundation, which
funded the Chicago Annenburg Challenge and also funds FactCheck.org. 
Obama is tied to both groups one via earmark, the other via direct
participation, however, Ayers is not directly connected to
FactCheck.org.


Obama Controlling the Facts

Thursday, September 18, 2008

Protest The Media’s Melt Down Over Sex-Ed Ad

In the National Review article On Sex-Ed Ad, McCain Is Right, Byron York not only points out how the media bought the Obama campaign's rhetoric about the sex-ed ad, but they then added a large portion of their own self-righteous outrage.
“The kindergarten ad flat-out lies,” wrote the New York Times, arguing that “at most, kindergarteners were to be taught the dangers of sexual predators.” The Washington Post wrote that “McCain’s ‘Education’ Spot is Dishonest, Deceptive.” And in a column in The Hill, the influential blogger Josh Marshall called the sex-education spot “a rancid, race-baiting ad based on [a] lie. Willie Horton looks mild by comparison.”

Even factcheck.org presented the Obama campaign's view point, adding their own interpretation, "Obama, contrary to the ad's insinuation, does not support explicit sex education for kindergarteners." The ad is a series of sourced quotes which factcheck.org does not deny are legitimate. Insinuations are not a facts, and factcheck.org bases their critique of the ad off the insinuation that Obama supported 'explicit' sex education for kindergarteners. However, that is not a claim of that ad.

Factcheck and the media felt compelled to express outrage at this ad, but never relayed the substance of the bill. As Byron York reported, "The fact is, the bill’s intention was to mandate that issues like contraception and the prevention of sexually-transmitted diseases be included in sex-education classes for children before the sixth grade, and as early as kindergarten. Obama’s defenders may howl, but the bill is what it is."


As noted in a previous article CNN continued to call the McCain ad a lie even after the National Review article was published. They clearly had not read the text of the bill, but expressed their outrage anyways. Please contact CNN at Election Center and/or Headline News to demand a retraction and an apology for falsely claiming the McCain campaign lied, and please urge others to do the same.

Also, contact factcheck.org at Editor@FactCheck.org and let them know they got his one wrong by interpreting the ad and judging intent, and not reporting on the content and purpose of the bill.


Protest The Media’s Melt Down Over Sex-Ed Ad