About Me

Name:Young Republican
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Search

Clear To Take Off

                                                            
 
 Should our military get the best equipment and does America believe that monopolies should rule our economy or that competition breeds better results? By now the outrage has simmered down a little bit but many are angry at the Air Force for giving a contract for fighter jets to Northrop Grumman, which gave the military a much better plane for a much better price. Boeing was initially given the contract a year or so ago in deal so corrupt that it brought many of the people who participated in it to jail.

When hearing this, John McCain, current Republican nominee for President, continued his fight for cleaner government and pushed hard for ethics reform. When looking to award the contract, again only Boeing put in a bid. McCain, angry at the monopoly of it all, helped push Northrop Grumman to compete with a bid. Northrop Grumman came to win, with cost saving planes that provided overall better security and a better plane for our troops.

Democrats and a few of the new "populist" Republicans, noticeably Todd Tiahrt of Kansas, screamed foul because Northrop Grumman is a US/European joint company as opposed to Boeing which is just a US company, ignoring the fact that the planes would be assembled in Alabama. Now many are trying to get rid of the deal, wanting to put delays on new jets to our soldiers, making sure they get planes of less quality and making sure taxpayers pay more for it.

All objective observers believe that while Washington State has been hurt by this development, the Air Force was helped. Even The New York Times, which now regularly slimes John McCain (you knew it was going to happen) concedes that McCain help push for a more fair and ethical government and was absolutely right during this situation.
 
The Air Force only has one duty, to get the best plane to our men and women in uniform for the best buck for taxpayers. They did their job. Maybe it's time for those in Congress to do theirs and stop being a legislative arm for a major corporation.
 
Note To Readers: I now have a new blog format for those tired of Townhall techinical glitches. It's ayoungrepublican.wordpress.com , feel free to visit me at either blog and I will continue blogging at Townhall as well. Again this is just a new format, pick which ever you like.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Love-Hate 08: March Edition

Another month has passed and now is the time to tell who has recently become an icon and who is ruining the media one show at a time.
 
Love
 
Geraldine Ferraro
Geraldine Ferraro
 
Ferraro has done something liberals are never suppose to do, tell the truth. She simply pointed out that if Obama were not a young, good looking black man he would not be the front runner for the Democratic nomination. And for those that say, Hillary Clinton would not be who she is without being a woman, I agree. If Hillary was a white man, she'd be Bill Clinton. Regardless what Ferraro said was pointing out the obvious, with blacks only voting for Obama because of his color. These are the same people (liberal black militants) who voted for Jesse Jackson. Oh, did I have a Bill Clinton moment?
 
What really made me admire Ferraro though is that she gave her true account about her 1984 nomination saying that she was picked only because she was a woman, and that while she felt she was qualified she knew she was being picked because of her gender. To add to the fact that she has not relented and continues to be an Obama truth teller calling his pastor a racist bigot. To speak about that is it just me or is Obama the first person to say he is a good Christian by pointing to his poor attendence in church?
 
Geraldine Ferraro, the person I love this month.
 
Hate
 
 
How could they cancel their best show? Recently MSNBC bid farwell to "Tucker" the most interesting show on television featuring Tucker Carlson. They replaced it with "Race to the White House with David Gregory". David Gregory. Don't they already have Keith Olberman and Chris Matthews? How many asses do they need? Something I've noticed with all three network news channels, CNN, FOX, and MSNBC is that they are getting rid of their hour centered shows and replacing them with just news. Maybe we are better off for it but losing Carlson was a dumb decision. Eventually people like King, Matthews and O'Reilly are going to die (is Larry King even mortal?) and if you don't invest in young talent don't be surprised if they don't invest in you.
 
For stupid programming and a hideous decision, MSNBC is the worst television channel in the world. Take that Olberman.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why Can't We Be France?

                                                               
Why, oh why, can't politicians just take Nancy Reagan's common sense to heart? She only wants the best for them with her immortal "just say no" saying. Mocked by the elites as naive, over simplistic and full of false nostalgia what was lost on them was the fact that she was dead right. And while she was talking about drug use, the saying also applies obviously to a vice of any kind. With names just recently like David Vitter, Larry Craig, Mark Foley, Elliot Spitzer (today's addition), Bill Clinton (within the last five minutes adding to his resume) and well known in my hometown of metro-Detroit Kwame Kilpatrick, just to name a few, the list of politicians who haven't mastered the art of zipper control grows longer.

Any Republican in the 90s remembers getting into an argument over the Clinton impeachment. They played on Republican moral ADD, bringing the conversation back to defending immorality instead of that little matter of perjury. It worked. In Detroit, for those outside the Motor City let me fill you in.

It seems our dear Mayor had an affair with his female chief of staff, Christine Beatty. The city found out because it seems that the famously young Kilpatrick instead of sending love notes texted his beloved mistress. Did he do it on his own phone? No, he used the city phone where all text messages are stored by the city. Silly boy, text messages are for kids. Regardless, the affair leaked and Beatty resigned. But just a year before, the city had a whistleblower lawsuit, involving two police officers who said they were fired for finding out about the mayor and his girlfriend. So under oath, Beatty and Kilpatrick both said that neither of them had an affair. They now both say they did. They were asked if they text messaged each other, regarding their sexual relationship under oath. They said no, they now say they did. Both of them have not even denied they have committed perjury, a nice change.
 

But Kilpatrick, who's list of ethic infractions grows with every headline, some related to the "Sex and Text" scandal others not. His press secretary got arrested for domestic violence and then was paid with tax money for a position that did not exist. Additional texts show him giving government contracts to friends purely because they donated to his campaign. An exotic dancer who "preformed" on the Mayor, and was slapped by his wife at the Mayor's never confirmed ghetto version of a Gatsby party was killed by someone placing a hit on her. Shot over forty times, she was killed by a police issued firearm.

And what about the whistleblower suit? The mayor then agreed to an out of court settlement giving the two officers, $8.4 million dollars in tax money as long as they turned over the text messages. Not only did he use hush money, he used taxpayer money from the citizens as his hush money. This all sound like some grand conspiracy theory, right? What if everything could be confirmed with court transcripts? Yes, we now have the court transcripts that confirm everything about the affair and the hush money with an on going investigation with the murdered dancer.

Kilpatrick who has always been hated by the white suburbs is now hated by a vast majority of minorities outside and inside the city. The Wayne County prosecutor will decided on charges within the week, with back room deals being worked on as I write this. The city council will vote on whether to seek Kilpatrick’s dismissal early next week and our Governor can fire Kilpatrick at any moment, while he stubbornly says he won't quit.

All of this makes for great reading and horrible leadership. Kilpatrick's story seems to be the most colorful (although Spitzer's is sounding competitive) but all of this leads to one last person who needs to be talked about, Nicolas Sarsoky, president of France.

Sarsoky and his wife, Cecilia were widely reported to be estranged on the campaign trail, with her out right saying she wasn't going to perform any of the duties of first lady. France elected him over Segolene Royal (who incidentally spilt with her husband about the same time due to his infidelity). After a few months the Sarsokys divorced and he later courted and married Carla Bruni. While the tabloids were happy about the event, the French people replied, "Come see, comme say". Rather bored by the event, almost all accepted it. Which brings to me to this, if one can't say no, simply say yes to a full relationship like Sarsoky did. Don't cause this scandals, simply divorce and remarry and while morally you may look less the stellar simply accept who you love and honor the one you don't by being honest with them in all manners. And the challenge to us as citizens is to accept when a politican comes out either with their sexuality or their relationship with another. It really then, is none of our business. Scandals oui, relationships non.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Let's Play Jeopardy! Question 2

Hello players, let's take a look at today's final jeopardy question.
 
 
The Catergory Is: Obama Haters
 
This person has written the following "Obama's gyrations on Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran are not the actions of one imbued with superior intuitive judgment, but rather the machinations of a political opportunist looking to avoid having his fingerprints on any issue that might be controversial, and require real judgment, while preserving his freedom to bludgeon his adversary for actually taking positions as elected office demands. It is hard to discern whether Senator Obama is a man of principle, but it is clear that he is not a man of substance. And that judgment, based on his hollow record, is inescapable." They also calls Obama's performance on the Senate Foreign Realtions Committee a "dereliction of duty". Finally of Obama's style the write "Obama willfully encourages and plays off falsehood."
 
Who is this person? Click the comment section for the answer.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »