Nothing Is Certain But Death And The FairTax by Dr. Mike Adams

The movement is growing! Despite what naysayers and negativists are parroting in their misguided criticisms about the FairTax, this is becoming a bigger and bigger issue and soon, Congress and the American people are going to have to seriously study and consider it.

Read what Dr. Mike Adams has to say in his latest column from TownHall.com:

The idea comes to me from a former student who was waiting on me the other night at the bar of a seafood restaurant in Wilmington. I had a beer in one hand and my copy of FairTax: The Truth in the other when an Obama supporter asked the following: “Why do you support the FairTax? We just need to change the tax code to punish corporations that are sending our jobs over to China.” Armed with FairTax: The Truth, I responded with the following: “I’m from Texas as is Representative Bill Archer. He testified in front of Congress about the results of an interesting study of 500 companies in Japan. When asked what they would do if the U.S. abolished its present tax system and went with a consumption tax, 80% said they would build their next plant in America. The remaining 20% said they would relocate to America altogether. Now that’s change you can believe in!”

Yes, it is. But I still find it amazing that there are educated people out there who still believe that a more punishing tax code will bring jobs back to the U.S. You might as well believe that more anti-semitic laws would have brought more Jews back to Nazi Germeny.

And how does it compare to the proposed Flat Tax? Dr. Adams looked at that too in another conversation:

Supporter of the Flat Tax of Yesterday (SOFTY): Sorry, I support the flat tax. Adams: How often do you change your underwear? SOFTY: What? Adams: I assume you change your underwear every day? SOFTY: Yes, what the hell does that have to do with it? Adams: That means you’ve changed underwear 8036 times in the last 22 years. SOFTY: And? Adams: And the I.R.S. has changed the tax code 16,000 times in the last 22 years. They change the tax code twice as often as you change underwear. How long do you think a flat tax would remain flat? SOFTY: (Silence) Adams: Would you like to borrow my book?

While the Flat Tax is far superior to what we have now, I don't believe it goes far enough in addressing the issues that our income tax system has produced.

What does the FairTax do? It replaces the entire Federal Tax Code with one simple, easy to understand and completely visible national sales tax on new goods and services. No more income tax, no more hidden taxes, no more death tax, no more any tax on personal wealth or income.

The FairTax:

• Enables workers to keep their entire paycheck
  
• Enables retirees to keep their entire pension
  
• Refunds in advance the tax on purchases of basic necessities
  
• Allows American products to compete fairly
  
• Brings transparency and accountability to tax policy
  
• Ensures Social Security and Medicare funding
  
• Closes all loopholes and brings fairness to taxation
  
• Abolishes the IRS
  

Additionally, the FairTax is the only Tax Reform plan that addresses the three following end-goals:

1) The plan must remove from the IRS any power to intrude on the private lives of American citizens.
2) The plan must remove from the K Street lobbyists any power to influence Congressional votes.
3) The plan must not allow hidden taxes to be passed along to the consumer at any time.



You can access Dr. Adams' complete column online here:

Nothing Is Certain But Death And The FairTax
Dr. Mike Adams
TownHall.com
May 12, 2008

Democrats' Energy Plan: Tax, Sue, And Investigate by Sen. John Cornyn

Over at TownHall.com, Sen. Cornyn's column cuts right to the chase about current energy policy and the effects such policy has had on us:

More than two years ago, now-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her Democratic colleagues promised what they called a “common sense” energy plan to bring down prices at the gas pump. Since that time, the average cost of a gallon of gas has soared from $2.33 to $3.62, an all-time high.

That's it in a nutshell. That is the grand result of what a Dem-controlled Congress has brought to the American people.

So, what are the new plans? Read on:

A central component of the Democrats’ energy bill is to increase taxes on U.S. energy companies. This is almost bizarre. Democrats have clearly not learned the lesson from the 1980s when the windfall profits tax—a tax on oil produced in the U.S.—was first enacted. We know now as a matter of certainty that this tax had the opposite effect than what was intended. It led to lower domestic oil production—not lower prices at the gas pump. In fact, the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service estimates the windfall profits tax decreased domestic oil production by as much as 1.2 billion barrels between 1980 and 1986.

Not only did it result in decreased production, but the taxes were simply passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices. Further, if these new taxes are enacted, anyone who has a 401k with investments in Oil Companies will see the size of their retirement checks reduced as a result.

In addition to other idiotic ideas such as bringing back the Federal Tax Commission, the Dems have this little gem in store for us:

The final component of the Democrats’ energy plan is to sue OPEC to force them to release more oil in the market. This is clearly an exercise in futility, and I suspect my Democratic colleagues know that. The idea of threatening foreign governments, and particularly our Middle East allies, is particularly ironic coming from the same Democrats who have routinely accused the Bush Administration of damaging our relationships with other nations. It is also ironic to sue other countries in an effort to get them to produce more oil, while at the same time preventing production here at home and making us even more dependent on foreign oil.

Whoo boy! I wish all Republicans and Conservatives had the cojones to tell it like this.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Democrats' Energy Plan: Tax, Sue, And Investigate
Sen. John Cornyn
TownHall.com
May 7, 2008

Barack Obama Sacks Adviser Over Talks With Hamas

If this little "incident" doesn't make you stop and think about the consequences of an Obama Presidency, then you should do the rest of the country a favor and not even show up to vote in November.

Here's the timeline of some very current events:

1. The terrorist group Hamas endorses Barack Obama for President. (This is no hoax. It really happened.)
2. Senator McCain noted that a major terrorist group endorsed Barack Obama and said that the voting public should be able to "make judgments accordingly."
3. Senator Obama accuses Senator McCain of "losing his bearings."
4. Senator Obama fires his Middle East Policy advisor for being in talks with Hamas.

Obama claims that he did not know that one of his advisors was speaking with a vicious terrorist group and yet, he feels it's okay to make the ridiculous claim that John McCain is somehow lost? If this obvious double-standard weren't the reality of the 2008 Democrat Presidential Campaign, it would probably sound like the plot to a really bad "B" movie.

Disregarding the John McCain angle for the moment, what does this say about the Democrat front-runner who had absolutely no idea that one of his advisors was in communication with known terrorists? Advisers are the people who will have the President's ear in the Oval Office. Shouldn't the President be aware of who is advising him and why?

If anyone has "lost his bearings," it is Barack Obama.

From the Times of London:

One of Barack Obama's Middle East policy advisers disclosed yesterday that he had held meetings with the militant Palestinian group Hamas – prompting the likely Democratic nominee to sever all links with him. Robert Malley told The Times that he had been in regular contact with Hamas, which controls Gaza and is listed by the US State Department as a terrorist organisation. ... Mr Obama, who has been trying to assuage suspicion towards him among the influential Jewish and pro-Israel lobby, spoke at a Washington reception marking the 60th anniversary of Israeli independence on Thursday when he promised that his commitment to the country’s security would be "unshakeable." However, Mr McCain has high-lighted the Democrat's pledge to negotiate directly with nations such as Iran – whose leaders talk of wiping Israel off the map – and a statement from Hamas saying that it hoped that Mr Obama would win the presidency. This was denounced as an offensive smear by Mr Obama.

So, stating facts is an "offensive smear?" I wonder what the Democrats call it when they tell lies about John McCain's POW experience or tell lies about the fire aboard the USS Forrestal?

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Barack Obama Sacks Adviser Over Talks With Hamas
Tom Baldwin
Times of London
May 10, 2008

BTW, have you noticed that this story is not being picked up and played over and over by American Media outlets? If Obama had been a Republican candidate, this would have been front-page news for the next three months.

Petronomics 101

I am almost amazed that there has been no major outcry from the American consumer about the price of gasoline. After all, it is the life blood of our economy.

But the price keeps going up and up and up. Not because of any "greedy" oil companies (their profit margin is a lowly 6%) but because of two reasons:

1) Increasing Global Demand
2) Decreasing Supply

Either one of these by themselves will drive prices up, but a combination of both will be like launching prices with JATO packs. What we have is a combination of both. The global demand is something that is out of our control. We simply cannot tell India and China that they have to stop using so much oil as it is the life-blood of their economies too.

The decreasing supply on the other hand, is something we could do something about, if only the leftist Dems (and a few Republicans) in Congress would get off of their high horses and join the rest of us in reality.

Lt. Col. Oliver North's most recnt column deals with these topics. From TownHall.com:

While Washington's political elites in both parties have debated and dithered, the price of crude oil has risen to $123 per barrel -- nearly double what it was at this time last year. The average cost of a gallon of gas at the pump is approaching $4 per gallon. Some analysts now are predicting that the price of a barrel of oil could approach $200 in the next two years -- and that gasoline could be $6 a gallon. An equal amount of diesel may cost truckers as much as $7.50.

But, when Congress tried to do something about it, this happened:

Ethanol: The Side Effects
84rules
April 29, 2008

And this:

Big Corn And Ethanol Hoax
84rules
March 13, 2008

And Lt. Col. North continues:

The cost of crude oil is out of sight and climbing. Petrodollars are funding a radical Islamic jihad being waged against us. Here at home, the cost of everything from fuel to food is going up, and we're sending out of the country capital needed to resuscitate an economy that is, at best, sluggish and, at worst, foundering. The majority in Congress has responded by proposing tax increases for domestic energy production, suggesting new mandates on producers, demanding that coal-fired electric plants be shut down, and whining that foreign governments need to increase oil production -- while opposing exploitation of reserves here at home. In a news conference two weeks ago, President Bush criticized Congress for blocking efforts to expand domestic oil production in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. And this week, in a noteworthy understatement, White House spokesman Scott Stanzel observed, "We have here, in this nation, resources that we are not utilizing." No, really? The newest oil refinery in the United States was built by Marathon in Garyville, La., in 1976. Since then, every effort to construct new facilities has been thwarted by protests and lawsuits from "environmental" groups and government red tape. It has been 12 years since the last nuclear reactor came on line to generate electrical power in the United States.

But not all in Congress are so blinded by PC idiocy:

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas has proposed a realistic solution: the Domestic Energy Production Act of 2008. Her bill would permit exploitation of more than a trillion barrels of U.S. territorial oil and nearly 600 trillion cubic feet of natural gas -- more than the combined hydrocarbon reserves of Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Nigeria, Venezuela, Libya and Iran. The measure also would streamline the process for building new refineries and clean, safe nuclear power plants, as well as funding to develop alternative fuels. But none of that -- and the consequent reduction in energy costs -- ever will benefit American consumers, unless Congress acts.

The longer we wait to get a comprehensive energy plan, the higher gas prices will go and the less money we will have to research and convert to alternative sources later on.

Please write to Congress and ask them to stop being so short-sighted and to support the Domestic Energy Production Act of 2008.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Petronomics 101
Lt. Col. Oliver North
TownHall.com
May 9, 2008

McCain's Former Hanoi Cell Mate Describes Character In Deplorable Conditions

Colonel George "Bud" Day, USAF (Ret.) is currently the most decorated American Veteran alive with more than 70 medals and citations. But he will probably be most remembered for one thing: He was John McCain's cellmate at the North Vietnamese POW compound known as the Hanoi Hilton.

From Fox News:

"They told me we were gonna get a roommate and it was gonna be the prince. The Vietnamese called him the prince so I asked my nurse what was his name? They said John McCain," Day told FOX News. Both he and McCain were taken captive in 1967, and held until their release in 1973.

Anyone who knows even a little bit about the conditions the POWs endured at the hands of the Communists knows how inhumane the North Vietnamese were. Colonel Day describes the conditions that he and (then) Lt. Commander McCain were forced to live in:

The U.S. soldiers were held sometimes five to a cell, barely big enough for two. "He had this gimpy knee where he'd busted his knee, this arm had been fractured in a couple places, he'd been bayoneted in the leg, this arm was out at the shoulder and, in fact, during that time it was out at the shoulder so long it wore a hole in this bone," Day said. During captivity, they were tortured mercilessly, Day said, describing one tactic that McCain has also recalled. "They roped me under the arms, tied my hands behind my back, ran another rope to that, got me up on a chair, threw that rope up over a rafter and jerked the chair out from under me and your own weight just tears your body apart," he said. Day’s broken arm was re-broken during torture so he would never fly again.

But John McCain became an ad hoc doctor and physical therapist:

"John said, 'Well we'll gather up some bamboo,' and he was in a bandage on his leg at that time. So I got some strips of bamboo, smuggled them into the room, John put his foot in my arm pit and pulled on my wrist 'till we could get the bone forced back down … it wasn't exactly perfect but it worked out he got it back to where it was functional," Day said. But nerve damage was extensive — his crushed hands were useless. Meanwhile, McCain was treated no better than the trash they were fed in the form of a soup. "I mean you could smell him for 25 feet. Bunch of food and nasty stuff in his hair, and down his neck and inside his cast. The cast was not lined so every time he would move inside this cast, it was just eating a hole in his arm or his elbow or someplace, and he was just in — he was in pain," Day recalled. Yet McCain, now 71, made efforts to help Day recover from his own injuries, Day said.

This speaks volumes about the character of John McCain. I seriously doubt that Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton would have attempted anything even close to what McCain was doing for his fellow POWs. In fact, I think it would have been more likely that if put in the same situation, Hillary and Obama would have been cutting selfish deals for special treatment, something that McCain absolutely refused to do:

Day said by any humane standard, McCain would have been a good candidate for early release from the camp, but that wasn’t in his playbook. "It also wasn’t in his playbook to die. In fact he quickly became a leader." Day said he asked McCain if he would be one of his preachers. "He said sure. He had a great handle on the Episcopalian liturgy, he could just repeat it verbatim," he said. But repeating what he went through during his incarceration is something McCain almost never does as a presidential candidate. Day said he thinks he should. "I've never seen any shortcomings or any shortfall out of him talking about that, but he just doesn’t trade on that. I think he feels that it’s wrong to trade on being a hero, but he is," Day said.

Whereas Vietnam Veterans quickly let the world know of their disdain for the back-stabbing John Kerry, these same Vietnam Veterans know who kept the faith.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

McCain's Former Hanoi Cell Mate Describes Character In Deplorable Conditions
Carl Cameron
FoxNews.com
May 8, 2008

Right Solution To Lower Gas Prices By John Cornyn

Here is a Senator with some Common Sense:

I like to describe Washington as 68 square miles of logic-free environment surrounded by reality. But the antics of Congress this month make that appear an understatement. Gas prices are now hovering near $4 per gallon. High fuel costs are causing disruption in our society, prompting layoffs in some industries. Yet Congress is doing virtually nothing to address the problem. In fact, it’s talking about ways to make the problem worse. In my view, the solution is straightforward. We need more energy. Government should get out of the way, let the free market work and allow more domestic energy production. This would reduce gas prices even in the near-term, expand job opportunities in Texas—a world energy leader—and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. But earlier this month, the Senate actually considered a massive climate tax bill that headed in the exact opposite direction. This massive $6.7 trillion Rube Goldberg scheme proposed by Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., would undermine our economy and likely lead to $10 per gallon gasoline. It could well eliminate some 330,000 Texas jobs, sending them to places with limited regulation like China and India. How can this be explained? After blocking American energy production and oil independence, Congress pursues bigger government, added taxes and higher energy costs—with no guarantee of actually improving the world’s climate. It is vital that we be the best possible stewards of the environment. Fortunately, improved technology has enabled us to take advantage of America’s own abundant natural resources in an environmentally sensitive way. Yet the U.S. remains the only country in the world that refuses to develop many of its natural resources. America is aggressively moving from fossil fuels to more diverse energy sources, including wind, nuclear, solar and clean coal. We need all of this supply. The government and private industry are both investing to promote and expedite this transition, and using steps such as increasing vehicle fuel-efficiency standards. In the short term, however, oil, gas and coal will remain our dominant sources of energy. The free market could provide significant additional supplies—but Congress continues to prevent that. Some of my colleagues are pushing a novel plan to address the energy crisis. They want to tax, sue and investigate our way out of it. But boosting taxes on American companies and pursuing phony price gouging inquiries are proven losing strategies—and might even make the situation worse. These approaches would not produce a single drop of additional oil and would actually increase our dependence on countries like Saudi Arabia and Venezuela. As demand for energy increases, prices go up. Congress cannot repeal the law of supply and demand. But it can repeal the unnecessary government restrictions that prevent exploring additional American energy supplies. I will continue advocating for removal of government barriers to increasing the supply of energy, from traditional to alternative sources. There is no instant solution to the problem we’ve helped create. But we should not wait any longer to take the first steps to provide Texans relief at the gas pump.

You can access the original column on-line here:

Right Solution To Lower Gas Prices
Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX)
June 6, 2008

McCain Castigates Obama For Voting Against Chief Justice

Seems like Sen. Obama is everyone's favorite target these days. But this article by Libby Quaid from the Asssociated Press shows a track record that seems all but unspoken about the presumptive GOP nominee:

McCain promised to appoint judges who, in the mold of Roberts and Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, are likely to limit the reach of the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion. "They would serve as the model for my own nominees if that responsibility falls to me," McCain said . ... McCain often is viewed as an independent because he antagonizes fellow Republicans and likes to work with Democrats. Some conservatives dislike his decision to join the "Gang of 14," ... who averted a Senate showdown over whether filibusters could be used against Bush judicial nominees. On Monday, McCain told reporters he didn't know whether conservatives would forgive him for that decision. "You'll have to ask them, but I think I was right to do it; we got all but two of the president's nominees through the Senate," McCain said. ... McCain has repeatedly voted against federal funding for abortion ... He also has cast conservative votes on judges. In fact, McCain has never voted against a Republican nominee for the Supreme Court or federal courts, the Democratic National Committee pointed out.

I guarantee that neither Sen. Clinton nor Sen. Obama has a track record or a Presidential platform like this one.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

McCain Castigates Obama For Voting Against Chief Justice
Libby Quaid
Associated Press via GOPUSA.com
May 6, 2008

A Reality Check

The following facts and figures never get reported on the nightly news and are among the reasons why I do not trust Old Media and you shouldn't either.

This post is in three parts:

Part 1: Economy

In just one year. Remember the election in 2006? Consider the "change" a Dem controlled Congress has presided over.

A little over one year ago:

1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.

Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we have seen:

1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3.50 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% ( 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.

America voted for change in 2006, and got it!

Remember, Congress makes the laws not the President. He works with what's handed to him.

Barack Obama's campaign slogan is: "Change we can believe in."

Well, we've seen the change that Barack and the Dems have in store for us. It is not good.


Part 2: Taxes

U.S. Federal Individual Income Tax Rates History, 1913-2008

Taxes under Clinton 1999
Single making 30K - tax $8,400
Single making 50K - tax $14,000
Single making 75K - tax $23,250
Married making 60K - tax $16,800
Married making 75K - tax $21,000
Married making 125K - tax $38,750

Taxes under Bush 2008
Single making 30K - tax $4,500
Single making 50K - tax $12,500
Single making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 125K - tax $31,250

Both Democratic candidates will return to the higher tax rates

It is amazing how many people that fall into the categories above think Bush is screwing them and Bill Clinton was the greatest President ever. If Obama or Hillary are elected, they both say they will repeal the Bush tax cuts and a good portion of the people that fall into the categories above can't wait for it to happen. This is like the movie The Sting with Paul Newman; scam people out of money and they don't even know it.


PART 3: Illegal Aliens vs. Funding The War on Terror

You think the war in Iraq is costing us too much? Continue reading.

We have been hammered with the propaganda that it is the Iraq War and the War on Terror that is bankrupting us. The data shows that to be RIDICULOUS.

Feel free to forward the following 14 reasons until they are read so many times that the reader gets sick of reading them. URL's have been included for verification of all the following facts.

1. $11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year by state governments.

Verify at: Immigration and Welfare

2. $2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens.

Verify at: The High Cost Of Cheap Labor

3. $2.5 Billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens.

Verify at: The High Cost of Cheap Labor

4. $12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English!

Verify at: The Debate Over Immigration & Border Security Continues

5. $17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies.

Verify at The Debate Over Immigration & Border Security Continues

6. $3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens.

Verify at: The Debate Over Immigration & Border Security Continues

7. 30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens.

Verify at: Bureau Of Justice Statistics

8. $90 Billion Dollars a year is spent on illegal aliens for Welfare & social services by the American taxpayers.

Verify at: The Debate Over Immigration & Border Security Continues

9. $200 Billion Dollars a year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.

Verify at: The Debate Over Immigration & Border Security Continues

10 The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that's two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens. In particular, their children, are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US.

Verify at: The Debate Over Immigration & Border Security Continues

11. During the year of 2005 there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our Southern Border also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from Terrorist Countries. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroin and marijuana, crossed into the U. S from the Southern border.

Verify at: Homeland Security Report: A Line in the Sand:
Confronting the Threat at the Southwest Border

12. The National Policy Institute, 'estimated that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period.'

Verify at: National Policy Institute

13. In 2006 illegal aliens sent home $45 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin.

Verify at: Migrant Remittances From The United States To Latin America To Reach $45 Billion In 2006, Says IDB

14. The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly One Million Sex Crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants In The United States.

Verify at: Violent Crimes Institute

The total cost is a whopping $338.3 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR. Yet the Dems and certain Congressional Republicans think the Iraq War is what is costing us!

Are we THAT stupid?

Pass this data along to as many people as you can for as long as you can. We need to get the job done that Old Media and the Democrats won't do.

All McCain Will Need Is A Broom

The Time For Complaining Is Over! The National Campaign Is Now!

My God! Here it is! May! And there are still several sore loser types who refuse to accept the fact that John McCain is going to be the GOP nominee for President in 2008!

Just who are these people? Well, they claim to be Conservatives. Many of these self-styled Conservatives are hoping for a Dem victory in November in the mistaken belief that somehow a stronger, more energized Republican Party will come out the other end. Some are even suggesting that at the Convention, John McCain should step aside and allow someone else to run for President. Sorry, but that is the lamest idea I've heard yet.

What really irritates me about these self-styled Conservatives is their extreme short-sightedness and their inability to accept responsibility as a group.

What would happen if the Dems win the White House in November? Alot, and most of it bad. Not only would we see our economy get beaten down by higher taxes and a full scale retreat from the terrorists, we would see massive appointments of leftist judges to Federal benches and at least two leftists appointed to the Supreme Court. That is the short-sightedness of those who believe a Dem win will result in a stronger GOP. The exact opposite is true. It will weaken the position of the GOP and we won't be able to re-strengthen it for another 30 to 40 years. Those Republicans who want to see a McCain defeat would do well to look beyond 2008 and 2012 and see what they are really pushing for.

And then there are those who say they would vote for Republican Congressional candidates while leaving the door open for a Dem White House. The idea here is that by retaking the Senate, it would force a Dem President to appoint more Conservative jurists to SCOTUS. Well, let's look at historical precedent on that issue.

In 1994, the Republicans gained control of the U.S. Senate through "good, Conservative leadership." That good leadership failed to stop the confirmation of Ruth Bader-Ginsberg to the Supreme Court, despite a GOP majority. Even though Republicans had more than enough votes to stop the seating of an uber-liberal to SCOTUS, she was seated anyway. Now, imagine what would happen with a Dem-controlled White House and a Dem-contolled Senate (which is looking more likely than a GOP-controlled Senate at this point). That is why we need to look beyond 2008 and 2012 and contemplate the consequences of our actions today. Anyone out there who still thinks that a Dem winning the White House would be good for the GOP needs to go get their head examined. It would be a disaster for Conservatives everywhere.

Now, what about this "group responsibility" thing? I asked about this in a blog posting back on February 12, 2008 and no one ever bothered to answer my question. Here it is: Where was the Conservative Base of the Republican Party on Super Tuesday and during the primaries and campaigns prior?

I don't know where they were, but I do know where they were not. They were not in the voting booths nor were they out campaigning for candidates with solidly Conservative credentials.

Think I'm joking? Look at the combined support of Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter and Tommy Thompson. The three of them didn't equal the support enjoyed by Rudy Giuliani. Where was the Conservative Base of the GOP? I was a supporter of Tom Tancredo and I was doing everything I could to support his campaign. I blogged, I donated money and I participated in polls to support him right up to the day he announced he was dropping out.

But I don't feel like the GOP let me down. I feel like my fellow Conservatives abandoned me. And yes, I am referring to those same Conservatives who were conspicuously absent on Super Tuesday and before.

So, now these same Conservatives who were nowhere to be found prior to John McCain winning the GOP nomination are getting energized. I'm sorry but their energy is coming several months too late for me to seriously listen to anything they have to say. The energy with which they disparage John McCain today would have been better spent rallying around Tancredo, Hunter or Thompson back in December of 2007. In other words, the vaunted Conservative Base is just a little more than a day late and a dollar short.

So, the time for complaining is long since over. If you are one of those self-styled Conservatives who wants to see a McCain defeat in November, before you complain to me about my support for the Senator from Arizona, please explain to me the conspicuous absence of the Conservative Base during the Super Tuesday voting and during the months before. I'd love to read that excuse.

P.S. Please don't try the lame excuse that the media picked McCain. I refuse to believe that 8.6 million GOP voters allowed themselves to be swayed by a left-leaning media rather than thinking for themselves. If that were true then it wouldn't matter who the GOP nominee was at this point.