Conservative Voice

It’s amazing that Romney is now often referred to as one of the top two Republican candidates for President. Six months ago he didn’t seem to have a chance. But he did have a strategy, and it seems to be working. He’s almost like the Bill Clinton of the Republican Party. He’s hard to classify – very conservative, but formerly pro-choice. Nobody gave Clinton a chance in the early days of the race. And Romney’s obviously very smart, as is Clinton. Romney made millions finding and creating value in companies and organizations where nobody else could. Turn that intellectual power on to a presidential election, and he just may pull it off. And the beautiful difference between Romney and Clinton is that Romney would use that brainpower for the good of the country, rather than for his personal benefit at the expense of the country, like Clinton.

Patrick Leahy is strangely ignorant for a Senator with so much experience. I’m so tired of hearing his tired whining about the new head of the Justice Department and how he had better not be dishonest and do bad things for the President the way that evil Alberto Gonzales did.

First of all, Gonzales didn’t do anything wrong. There is only the appearance of wrongdoing. And of course, that appearance of wrongdoing comes from liberals like Leahy whining about him and the press eagerly echoing the whines. Gonzales may have approved the firings of a few AGs, but he had every right to do that. And if the President thought he should do it, there’s nothing wrong with that either. The US Attorney General is a cabinet-level position that is appointed by the President. He is in the Executive Branch of Government. He works for the President, not Congress. And people under him can be hired or fired by him. Leahy needs to google “three branches of U.S. Government” and try to understand how these three branches work. A little knowledge on this subject might help him understand his job a little better as a Senator and as the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and keep him from making a fool of himself repeatedly.

Time to start writing about the 2008 Presidential race.

Here are a couple interesting thoughts on health care under a potential President H.R. Clinton:

Rudy Giuliani had a great quote: If we institute Hillarycare, where will the Canadians go for health care?

On that point, have you ever had to get a drivers license, or a building permit, or do you already have to work through the Medicare nightmare to get health care, or have you ever had to see a doctor in a foreign country — not third world — I’m talking about countries in Europe or Australia or Canada? Think about the people you had to deal with and the bureaucracy you had to put up with. Is that really what you want your health care system to be?

Don’t post some comment about how everyone is covered there. Everyone is covered here too. My nephew just had brain surgery and the only difference between his care and the care of the immigrant kids that were in the hospital at the same time is that his care was paid for by my brother-in-law and his insurance, whereas the immigrant families all got their care for free.

In case you missed it, because it was not reported, the US has achieved victory in Iraq. We came to bring democracy, to give the people freedom to choose their leaders, and to rid the world of Saddam Hussein, a dictator that for many years worked on developing and threatened the world with weapons of mass destruction. All this has been achieved. Iraq has had elections, chosen new leaders, and executed the former murderous dictator.

Now the country has new challenges. Rival religious factions are at war with one another. The influence of the “religion of hate” has caused violence and murder. We may have been naïve or ill-informed when we, the American people, bipartisan leaders in congress, and even the UN authorized the war. We may not have understood how much hatred and culture of murder and revenge lay beneath the surface. But now we have to decide if we will help Iraq through this next struggle. Will we help them solve their domestic civil war and contain those religious fanatics that are causing the most problems? This is a new question. It is a question we would not have had to ask if we hadn’t gone there in the first place, but it does not diminish the fact that we achieved what we set out to achieve.

Among the hysterical news releases emanating from the UN conference on the Environment was the report that global warming is already resulting in increases in malaria and other tropical diseases that are sensitive to increases in temperatures that may or may not be caused by man. Malaria is a serious disease responsible for 2.2% of of worldwide deaths per year according to the World Health Organization (WHO).

But as Bjorn Lomborg, the “Skeptical Environmentalist” has pointed out, too many environmental observers like to focus only on the “dark side of life”. The same 2003 WHO report that ranks malaria the 8th highest cause of global mortality also ranks lower respiratory infections as the 3rd highest cause of mortality. This includes diseases such as pneumonia that are more common when it’s cold.

Where is the UN scientific study outlining the benefits of global warming on reducing the incidence of pneumonia and other cold weather diseases?

If cold weather diseases could decrease with global warming, what would result in a decrease in warm weather diseases such as malaria? Global cooling? Actually, malaria occurs in areas that are warm, but the main cause of malaria is the lack of economic development. In warm areas with strong economies, malaria is not a problem. Singapore’s malaria death rate is .00003%, compared to Liberia, with a similar latitude but weaker economy with a rate of.21000%.

Therefore, if the so-called scientists at the UN conference wanted to really reduce warm weather diseases, they would focus more on economic development.

And what does the US complain is the main flaw with the Kyoto protocol? Besides that it’s useless in terms of saving the environment, it will damage the economies of the countries that adhere to it. I guess the US is on the right track regarding the environment after all!

Just another example of the misguided, negligent, and even deceitful news generated by the global warming kool-aid drinkers.