Recently in Presidential Races Category

From Townhall.com - Paul Jacobs:


Is there any governmental goofiness Democrats won’t support?

Having abandoned limited government, Democrats are left with mere prejudice as a guide: As long as a program uses the power of the federal forces in Washington, and, in at least some backhanded way, increases that power, it just “must” be good.

There’s one exception, I guess — when Republicans think of it first.

So, what’s next?

Charity. Governments now duplicate a lot of charitable efforts. But charities remain somewhat independent. For too many politicians, that’s a bug, not a feature.

When Alexis de Tocqueville visited American shores on his 19th century sociological survey, he was astounded at how vibrant Americans were regarding charity and social betterment. See a problem? Then do something. Americans formed committees. Societies. Projects. They went to work. They accomplished things.

Now, though, after years of government usurpation of many of those causes, and the creation of a vast Leviathan state that Tocqueville did not witness this side of the Atlantic, our voluntary community sector seems weak. But that may be an optical illusion, in comparison with the old days . . . and with that very same federal government. In any case, it is said that Americans increasingly “bowl alone”; and, alone, become increasingly disengaged from their communities, their neighborhoods, etc.

The solution?

Join a local group, take to the soapbox, ring doorbells, hold festivals and bake sales and seminars? Publicize your cause using the new tools of the Internet . . . or that retro mimeograph machine you bought for 50¢ at the flea market? Raise money, and direct it to specific goals? Lead by example?

No. That wouldn’t do. Can’t have anything like that! Why, such techniques might actually smack of good ol’ American can-do-edness.

What we need, apparently, is more government.

Why? Well, ask Barack Obama, the Democrats’ presumptive nominee for the presidency.

His solution is to bureaucratize charity.

Good Afternoon

I just wanted to give you an update on some happenings with Team McCain and the Victory 08 effort. If you can make a phone bank of the town hall meeting please contact the individuals listed below.





                                            Suite 3007




 




 

Democrats claim the world hates America because President Bush has behaved like a global bully. But we don't recall him ever ordering an ally to rewrite an existing agreement on American terms -- or else.

Yet that's exactly what both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are now promising to do to our closest neighbors, Mexico and Canada. At their Ohio debate on Tuesday, first Mrs. Clinton, followed ever so quickly by Mr. Obama, pledged to pull America out of the North American Free Trade Agreement if the two countries don't agree to rewrite it on Yankee terms. How's that for global "unilateralism"?

Democrats sure have come a long way from the 1990s, when Bill Clinton pushed Nafta through a Democratic Congress. And the truth is that both Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama have spoken favorably about Nafta in the past. Yet now they are sounding the loudest protectionist notes by a potential President in decades. More dangerous, neither is telling the truth about the role of trade in the U.S. economy. If either one makes it to the White House, he or she will carry the weight of this campaign protectionism while trying to lead the global economy.

(H/T: Dissecting Leftism)

From RedState:

Rasmussen NH:

Clinton 43
McCain 41

Obama 49
McCain 36

SEN:
Shaheen (D) 49
Sununu (R) 41

FAVs:
Obama 62/36 (+26)
McCain 58/40 (+18)
Clinton 48/51 (-3)

Shaheen 55/41 (+14)
Sununu 47/47 (+0)

NH is a swing state. It was one of the closest states in 2004. And in 2006 it become a solid Democratic state with both state chambers switching from R to D and both R Congressmen were defeated. McCain runs ahead of most Republicans in NH and could help the Rs there. Nevertheless, the Obama approval numbers are huge and he could take this off the competitive map.

SEN Sununu is one of the most endangered Senators this cycle and being down 49-41, while not a death sentence, is a really bad place to be in a re-election bid.

This can change but only if the ground work starts now and in earnest.  Will you decide it will be "all for one and one for all" and get motivated?  Or have to say "President Obama"  or "President Clinton" (again???) or "Senator Shaheen"?

You can make THE difference....time to get to work.

“Senator Clinton said she would support our troops in Iraq, but then she voted against critical funding. Senator Clinton says she’s fiscally responsible, but she’s proposed nearly a trillion dollars in new government spending, and says she wants to quote ‘take things away from you on behalf of the common good.’ How can we trust Senator Clinton to lead America?”                                                                   



“Barack Obama was elected to the US Senate just three years ago and has had his eye on the White House ever since. Now he’s calling himself an agent of change, but what kind of change? He voted against funding our troops, he voted in favor of the largest tax increase in history, and he wants new government bureaucracies to play a greater and more expensive role in our health care system. That’s not the kind of change voters are looking for and it’s further proof that Barack Obama is not ready to be Commander-in-Chief.”                            



“It looks as if the Democrats may take weeks or months to choose their nominee, but the American people have already made their decision clear. They’re going to support principled leaders who support our troops, keep taxes low, and keep government out of their hair. Unfortunately, Senators Clinton and Barack Obama both voted for the largest tax increase in America, attempted to choke off funding for our troops, and proposed massive government spending increases. That’s not principled leadership.”