The Liberal Lie, The Conservative Truth

Exposing the Liberal Lie through current events and history. “Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July, but the democrats believe every day is April 15.” ****** "We will always remember. We will always be proud. We will always be prepared, so we may always be free." RONALD REAGAN

My Photo
Location: Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, United States

Two Reagan conservatives who believe that the left has it wrong and just doesn't get it!

HISTORICAL QUOTE OF THE WEEK - "Always bear in mind that your own resolution to succeed is more important than any other." ABRAHAM LINCOLN

Friday, June 30, 2006


Freedom of speech as found in the Constitution reflects the wisdom of the Founding Fathers to instill as one of the freedoms of our nation the right of anyone to voice their dissentiion to the government. Freedom of speech is just as it is stated the freedom to speak freely without the fear of arrest or the censure of the government for voicing ones opinion. The United States Senate defeated by one vote an amendment to protect the flag from burning or other forms of destruction other than the burning of a flag in respected retirement of that flag. Those who opposed this amendment state that the flag is just a symbol and that freedom of speech means the right to burn the flag to exercise that freedom. I totally disagree. Though the flag is a symbol of this nation it is not just a symbol that has no meaning. Wherever Old glory flies it symbolizes what this nation stands for. As the flag waves in the breeze those who gaze at the Stars and Stripes realize that it represents the land of the free and the home of the brave. Is it freedom of speech to desecrate a symbol that embodies the very principles for which this nation stands ? There are many ways of expressing ones freedom of speech and flag burning does not have to be that expression. Those who consider us an enemy burn our flag because of what it stands for as an affront and insult to every American. Is that the meaning of freedom of speech for those who burn the flag in protest? Yet this symbol that has flown over countless gravesite of fallen hero's, has lead thousands of brave Americans into battles for freedom, has been the last honor of recognition for the ultimate sacrifice as the flag is lifted and folded in respect for a fallen hero, this symbol of liberty deserves no protection from desecration ? I think not. If the flag is just a symbol and deserves no protection then why not paint graffiti on the Lincoln Memorial after all it is only a symbol. Why not chip a piece of granite off of the Capitol Building because it too is just a symbol. Of course this would be considered vandalism yet the premise of desecration to a national symbol is no different. When the flag is flown is deserves and receives our respect because of all who have died to insure that it continues to fly. It receives our respect because of the embodiment of the nation that we love that it represents. For something that encompasses all of this to not receive protection from desecration is wrong. We protect the documents that gave birth to this nation yet the flag which flew over the very buildings that those precious documents were forged in deserves no protection ? Yes the flag is a symbol. A symbol of the United States of America and all that she stands for. A symbol of the men and women who have fought to keep the flag waving. A symbol of great sacrifice for liberty and freedom. A symbol of the light of liberty throughout the world. A symbol of the freedoms that we all have as Americans. A symbol that deserves the protection and respect of the people and the government of the very nation for which this symbol represents. This amendment will come before the Senate again. The House has already past it and the Senate will have another opportunity because it only failed by one vote. There are many who will say that there are more pressing issues that the Senate should occupy their time with. Yes there are more pressing issues but the protection of the flag and the insurance that it can fly without threat of destruction for lack of another form of protest is also important and should be legislation that the Senate passes and an amendment to the Constitution.

Ken Taylor

Wednesday, June 28, 2006


I realize that there has been quite a lot of posting and commentary on the NY Times revelation of the terrorist financial surveillance program but this story somewhat takes the cake. The Times in defending themselves for printing the story now saying that the, "Terrorist groups would have had to be fairly credulous not to suspect that they would be subject to scrutiny if they moved money around through international wire transfers." Yeah and a thief knows the police suspect that he may be robbing someone and a murderer may think that he could get caught. This is the most ridiculous defense possible. I'll call it the five year old whining defense. "But they knew it all the time so we didn't do anything wrong, wha, wha, wha." Of course terrorist knew we were tracking their money, but until you morons at the NY Times revealed the details they did not have a clue as to HOW we were doing it. Now they can redirect the financing or launder it in a way that will take a different avenue thus making it more difficult to find. Why don't you offer a free subscription to your buddies in the terrorist business while your at it NY Times ? The Times editorial then goes on to take the opportunity to once again reveal their true intent of publishing this story about the program stating that the program reveals a pattern of creating an, "extraordinarily powerful executive branch," that bypasses the checks and balances in our government, which contradicts their own story in which they admitted in the original story that the financial program was legal and Congress had been informed. Once again the Times proves that their agenda is liberal and designed to attack the President. The NY Times the greatest ally that terrorism has. That is defiantly something to be proud of. Hey but its freedom of the press, but need I remind the Times that the Founding Fathers in their wisdom instilled all of our freedoms in the Constitution but did not remove personal responsibility with that freedom. Freedom of the press means just that freedom WITH responsibility, which is the one aspect of that freedom that the Times lacks!

Ken Taylor


I found this over at Mike's America, ( ), borrowed from the Peoples Cube. One of the best discriptions of the NY Times I have seen to date. I'll bet that Bin Laden even has home delivery at a post office box somewhere. It would not surprise me to see Bin Laden's next statement found as an OPED in the New York Times.

Tuesday, June 27, 2006


The Drudge Report reported today on a Powerline article quoting an editorial that appeared in the New York Times September 24, 1001 just 13 days after 9/11. The editorial which was not an OPED but and editorial from the Times itself criticized the Bush administration for NOT tracking terrorist funding. The editorial mentions the need for, " stricter regulations, the recruitment of specialized investigators and greater cooperation with foreign banking authorities. There must also be closer coordination among America's law enforcement, national security and financial regulatory agencies. " The Times editorial complains that terrorist financing made 9/11 and other terrorist attacks possible and that disabling their financial network will greatly hamper the ability of terrorist such as Al Qaeda to operate. At the time the NY Times was not aware of the program that had been started by the Bush administration to do just what the editorial criticized. Flash forward to 2006 and the current trouble that the NY Times has caused in revealing the financial surveillance program and the fact that now that this program is compromised its continued effectiveness is now in question. The hypocrisy of the Times is evident. In 2001, to condemn the Bush administration, the Times complained that such a program did not exist. Now in 2006 the very same Times reveals the existence of the program they called for in 2001, again to condemn the Bush administration, and virtually end its effectiveness. Additional hypocrisy would occur if a well funded attack took place in this country for which I am confident that the NY Times would be the first to condemn the President for not doing enough to protect this country. When in fact it is the NY Times among many other liberals and liberal organizations who have damaged the ability to protect the nation. The Times explicitly so for now they have compromised one program that enabled the tracking of terrorists and the ability to track funding along with those providing and receiving the funding. One has to wonder if the Times is a front organization for Al Qaeda considering that single handedly this liberal rag has assisted terrorism and those who perform these murderous acts through their irresponsible, treasonous reporting. With rags like the Times who needs enemies ?

Ken Taylor

Monday, June 26, 2006


Representative John Murtha, (D PA), who has been in the news and caused a great deal of disgust because of his lies and false charges concerning out troops the war and lately the accusation that the Pentagon was covering of the Haditha incident and stating that troops were guilty before the investigation was complete has crossed yet another line. Murtha has now stated the the United States presence in Iraq is a greater threat to world peace then the Nuclear confrontation in Iran and the possibility of a missile launch in Korea. In Murtha's feeble liberal mind the nation that he was elected to serve and in whom he pledged allegiance as a United States Marine now is the greatest threat on the planet to world peace. Murtha deserves at the least censure for this as well as his other statements but especially in accusing his own country for destabalizing the world and counter to peace of the same. He is a disgrace to the office that he serves and a disgrace to the uniform that he once wore. Murtha with his liberal disgusting rhetoric is betraying the constituents that elected him to office and has become an embarrassment to the Pennsylvania 12th district for which he represents. I have placed a phone call and e-mail both to my Representative Henry Brown and the Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert calling for the censure of John Murtha. I urge each of you to contact your Representative and the Speaker calling for the same. Murtha's mouth must be shut and censure would take him out of the spotlight because through censure he will lose many of his privileges and responsibilities as a Congressman. Call and e-mail today!

Ken Taylor


Two very distinct accusations have emerged toward the NY Times concerning their reporting of the financial surveillance program despite the insistence by the Bush administration to kill the story. First the President, ( ), blasted the leak and then the Times for printing the story. President Bush sited the damage that it has done to intelligence gathering and the security of the nation stating that, "Congress was briefed and what we did was fully authorized under the law," and that, "The disclosure of this program is disgraceful." Another even harsher criticism of the Times came from Representative Peter King, (R NY - . There have been a number of times in the past that I have disagreed with King because of his stance on certain issues but this time I believe that King has hit the nail on the head as he calls for an investigation of the NY Times for treason. "We're at war, and for the Times to release information about secret operations and methods is treasonous," King told the Associated Press. King, the Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee stated that he was contacting the Attorney General to, "begin an investigation and prosecution of the New York Times - the reporters, the editors and the publisher." My concern now is whether a deaf ear will be turned toward this act by the NY Times as has been the practice in the past. I stated yesterday in the Sunday Commentary that I believed that an investigation will take place and will meander through whether the program was legal or not as happened with the NSA program and add today that it will be used by the Democrats for a political spotlight in an election year while fully knowing that the program is legal and that the Congress was briefed just as happened in the NSA terrorist surveillance program. Senator Arlen Spector the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee has already indicated that he favors a more wait and see attitudee to investigating the Times for treason showing his usual weak backbone. I hope the Attorney General takes a much harder stand. This time the investigation demands to center around a criminal act of treason for revealing state secrets both by the Times and a deeper investigation to discover who has been leaking this vital intelligence information to the press with criminal prosecution for both the leaker and the responsible parties at the Times. It is time for this liberal rag to pay the consequences for the damage that the paper, its reporters, editors and publisher have caused while following their liberal political agenda with the country and our security suffering for their acts. We are at war and this liberal rag has a policy of sensationalized headlines, promoting their liberal agenda and hindering the War on Terror all for an opportunity to play Woodward and Bernsteinn, (the Watergate reporters), and bring down a President. Mr. Attorney General now is the time to end this treasonous and destructive practice of the New York Times!

Ken Taylor

Sunday, June 25, 2006


Article III, Section 3 of The United States Constitution: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to the Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."

Why do I begin this commentary by quoting the treason clause of the Constitution ? The distinct possibility of treasonous acts now exists by the New York Times and The Los Angeles Times with the continual reporting and revealing of secret programs that are being used by intelligence agencies in the War on Terror. There is a very fine line between the Constitutional right of freedom of the press and the Constitutional charge of treason when it pertains to revealing of state secrets. Have the two well known liberal newspapers crossed this line? The latest revelation reported by the two Times is the disclosure of a national security program that tracks global financial transfers to discover patterns that have revealed money transfers of terrorist organizations which has allowed the freezing of millions of dollars of terrorist funds. The contention of both newspapers is whether the programs have sufficient protections within the framework of the surveillance to protect citizens. Vigorous requests by the Bush administration not to print the story for obvious national security reasons were denied by the papers, despite assurances that sufficient protections for ordinary citizens are in place within the program. If you will recall this same scenario happened in December of last year when the two papers reveal the NSA terrorist surveillance program. At that time the President stated, "the unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk." The revelation of this financial surveillance does the same security damage to the nation as the revelation of the NSA program in December. How do these two papers expect the intelligence services to discover terrorist activities when they continually reveal the successful programs that are in place to aid in the fight against terrorism ? Could it be that in order to promote a particular political agenda, namely the downfall of President Bush, that these two papers are willing to threaten the security of the nation in order to promote that agenda ? That is why I believe that these two papers are bordering on treason since the revelation of both of these vital and necessary programs have now damaged the effectiveness against terrorists and as such given aid and comfort to the enemy.

In 1962 the United States and the Soviet Union were on the brink of nuclear confrontation during the Cuban Missile Crises. The Soviets were installing short and medium range nuclear missiles in Cuba which threatened the entire United States. Intelligence surveillance discovered the missles and the Kennedy administration was in the process of preparing the countries response which developed into a blockade of Cuba. One of the keys to the success of this blockade was being able to prepare and execute the military response without the for-knowledge of the Soviet Union. Just prior to the President's address to the nation concerning the crises and the nations response to it the New York Times discovered the story and were prepared to break the story the morning before Kennedy addressed the nation which would also reveal this nations knowledge of the missiles to the Soviets. The President contacted the publisher of the Times and for national security reasons requested that the paper hold the story until after his address. In the best interest of the country the Times held the story and as history shows the crises ended successfully. Would that ending have been the same if the Times had revealed the story before the Kennedy administration could prepare the nations response to the Soviets ? Possibly not for it is definite that had the story been revealed before the preparations were complete it would have caused an escalation which may not have been able to be diverted and war would have been the result. The press has always been involved in military functions of this country and have been privy to a considerable amount of secret information. Using discretion and common sense the press throughout many conflicts in the past have protected America's secrets and the country has been the better for it. Would D-Day have been successful if the press had reported about their knowledge of the Overlord plan before the landing at Normandy? Would MacArthur have landed successfully at Inchon in Korea if the press had leaked his plan before its execution ? These are but a few examples of media discretion which has been vitally important to the security and protection of this nation. Today's press seems to have forgotten this and choose to report anything regardless of the consequences to the security of this nation.

Just as with the NSA surveillance program there will be Congressional hearings and investigations about the financial surveillance program revealed by the NY and LA Times last week. And just as before the investigation will follow whether the program is legal or not rather than investigating first WHO leaked the existence of the program which IS treason and the press for revealing it contrary to national security interests. Just as before there will be questions and arguments about the program which will reveal more of the process of this intelligence gathering. Once again the press and those who have leaked the existence of vital national security programs will get off the hook and once again the security of the nation will be at risk and terrorists will regroup and find new ways to hide their funding setting back intelligence gathering which will again hinder the War on Terror. The ACLU will be happy, the left will be giddy, the NY and LA Times will congratulate themselves for , "great journalism," and the nation will BE LESS SAFE!!!!

Ken Taylor


This week the Blog of the Week is, "Murtha Must Go." First let me state that I agree with the title and premise of this blog! The blog was started in May by a parent of a soldier stationed in Iraq and is dedicated to defeating Murtha in the 12th Congressional District in Pennsylvania in November. There are revelations and information about Murtha and the misinformation campaign that Murtha is conducting against the war and out troops. Additionally you will find a link to the web site of Diane Irey the Republican who is running against John Murtha. Very informative and necessary site who has this blogs support. I have joined the Murtha Must Go Blogroll and urge you to do the same.

Thursday, June 22, 2006


Senator Rick Santorum, (R PA), and Representative Pete Hoekstra,( R Mich), reported in a news conference aired in part during Special Report with Britt Hume on Fox News last night that according to a report declassified yesterday, since 2003, "500 chemical weapons, " containing serin and mustard gas have been found in Iraq. The report issued by the National Ground Intelligence Center, a Defense Department intelligence unit went on to say that it is highly probable that Iraq WMD have been sold on the black market, more weapons exist and that Iraq was not a WMD free zone as had been previously reported. This declassified material is only a portion of a much more extensive report in which Representative Hoekstra, Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee stated that he will be seeking further declassification. This is a very significant report especially considering that just a small portion of serin gas has the capability of killing thousands, not to mention the danger to our troops the Iraqi people and the whereabouts of other WMD that have made it to the black market. Additionally because of the flak that has been raised concerning the claimed, " absence, " of Iraq WMD by the left and other anti-war organizations and individuals this also ends any factual argument that they have concerning one of the many reasons stated by the President for invading Iraq. Remember too that although there were several stated reasons why Iraq was a threat and the necessity for the invasion, when initial claims of no WMD started shortly after the removal of Saddam Hussein according to the left and the anti-war crowd WMD became the only reason that the invasion took place. Add to this the fact that when the President stated the case for war in 2003 not only did those who have been opposing ever since vote in favor of invasion but they also seeing the very same evidence came to the same conclusion as the President. With all of this in mind one would think that this report would be a major or at least a second tier story in the, "mainstream, " media outlets. I searched the most prominent and found the story MIA. My search included CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, The New York Times, The LA Times and The Chicago Tribune. I considered researching further but seeing that the story did not appear in any form at any of the above mentioned sources, I figured it would be a futile effort. The story ran as the third story on Special Report last night and is located on the CNS news ticker, Newsmax, World Net Daily and The Drudge Report. Also , "strangely, " absent from commenting on this report and it significance in not only the Iraq debate but the impact that it has on the war and terrorism are the anti-war Democrats who have been touting the claimed absence of WMD as the primary, "lie, " that led us into war and one of their most steadfast reasons for pulling out of Iraq. Of course I did not actually expect the mainstream media to report this story for it is further proof that most of their reporting concerning Iraq over the last three years has been tainted and specifically chosen to only report the negative and anything that would tend to make the President and the war look bad in the eyes of the American people. As far as the anti-war Democrats and other such factions expecting them to make a comment concerning their misrepresentation of what are again proving to be correct pre-war intelligence would be like expecting a starving dog to turn away from a fresh piece of steak. If they say anything concerning this report it will be to only down play its significance and once again stretch the truth concerning the facts with statements like, "this report was submitted by the Pentagon so it is questionable, " or, " the amount found is insignificant compared with the numbers that were thought to be in Iraq and doesn't change the lie that took us to war." As far as its significance, one of these shells has the capability of killing thousands in a densely populated area such as NEW YORK! As far as the number found, once again the report stated that the entire country was an ammo depot and that in most conventional weapons stashes WMD were also found and more weapons stashes are still being found not to mention the WMD sold or shipped out of Iraq as has been reported by high ranking former Regime personel and Husseins chemical and biological weapons specialists. This fact and the further declassification will never be reported by the mainstream nor will the left ever admit the truth about the report nor admit that it justifies along with other stated reasons the invasion of Iraq. Why ? If they were make this admittion or report the truth then their lie would be exposed and their true nature would be revealed and they could not have that could they ? Of course we already know the truth and also their true nature which is why they are in the minority and look to remain so.

Ken Taylor

Wednesday, June 21, 2006


Last week both the House and the Senate went on record and defeated resolutions calling for a timeline for a pull out from Iraq. Despite the fact that in both chambers the resolutions were soundly defeated, Senators John Kerry and Russ Feingold are introducing a resolution calling for a complete pull out from Iraq by July 1, 2007. This resolution has minimal support while still another resolution supported by Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid and has larger support with the Democrats calls for a phased redeployment of troops beginning this year. What part of no do these political leftist not understand. This attempt to rewrite a resolution that has already been soundly defeated is absurd. While the United States has not and will never set a timeline nor a date for an Iraq pull out the administration and all of the top military personnel have made it perfectly clear that a timeline is dangerous and that we will not be in Iraq one moment longer than is necessary. Setting any type of timeline whether a dated pull out as the Kerry resolution states or a phased pull out with a start date as the Reid resolution states would be like a bank taking out an advertisement in the news paper that says the following: " First National Bank would like to tell our customers that we have only the most advanced and technically superior security system in the world." Then placing the following tag at the bottom of the add: " If you are thinking about robbing First National Bank, the security system will be off and the back door open on Friday night at help yourself!" I realize this was a rather lame attempt to illustrate my point but the truth is that the left for perceived political expediency continually raise the issue of putting some sort of timeline on Iraq. Even the most inept individual in the world has to realize that by placing any type of timeline on the pull out or redeployment of our troops is an open invitation for the terrorist and the terrorist insurgents in Iraq to sit back and wait for us to leave then move in full force to take over the country and set up their terrorist society and base of operations. Even if we redeployed to Guam as John Murtha has suggested the time it would take to get back into Iraq with a large enough force not to mention the additional loss of American lives taking back the country is unfathomable. Finishing the mission, giving the government and the Iraqi Security Force the time necessary to have the ability to control their own fate and protect their own country is the only logical and intelligent idea for Iraq. In any military situation revealing your strategy to the enemy is asking for defeat. Allowing a set timeline for pull out is a strategy for defeat and a prescription for disaster!

Ken Taylor

Tuesday, June 20, 2006


First things first. Pfc. Kristian Menchaca, 23, of Houston, Texas, and Pfc. Thomas L. Tucker, 25, of Madras, Oregon bodies were recovered today in Iraq. It is with great sorrow that this is the outcome of the kidnapping of theses two brave Americans who gave their life in defense of this nation. God bless Pfcs. Tucker and Menchaca and their families and a nation pledges our collective gratitude for their sacrifice. With the discovery of the bodies of theses two heroic Americans I feel a sense of out rage from the reports that our soldiers who were kidnapped by those with whom we are at war and as prisoners of war they were tortured and killed. Major General Abdul-Aziz Mohammed of the Iraqi Defense Ministry, said the bodies showed signs of having been tortured. "With great regret, they were killed in a barbaric way," he said. An Iraqi insurgent group that earlier claimed responsibility for kidnapping the soldiers posted a Web statement Tuesday that said the soldiers had been killed by the new leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq. Where is the out cry by the left and human rights organizations through out the world for the violation of the rights of our prisoners and the brutal torture and killing by the enemy of these two brave Americans ? For months even years we have heard complaints concerning the way the United States treats prisoners in Gitmo and a tremendous out cry was heard for the treatment of prisoners in Abu Ghraib. Many on the left have tried to claim that out soldiers are torturing Iraqi women and children with no proof or substantiation of any manner. Groups from the ACLU to the United Nations are condemning the United States for , "violations, " which have yet to be proven at Gitmo and in every instance the, "torture, " that the U.S. has been accused of consisted of sleep and food deprivation, threats by dogs under control on a leash, not allowing them access to the civil liberties granted by our Constitution, for which I might add are for citizens NOT prisoners of war. Even the Geneva Convention states that terrorist prisoners fall under a different category than military POW's. Yet despite this the United States has given prisoners humane treatment in accordance with the Geneva Convention. The soldiers who over stepped their bounds at Abu Ghraib have been dealt with in accordance to military law. So where is the vast out cry of the treatment of our soldiers by Al Qaeda. The hypocrisy is so evident it is disgusting. I realize that complaints about the treatment of our soldiers by Al Qaeda would mean nothing to theses thugs and murderers but the point is that the hypocrisy of the left and human rights groups show that each have a political agenda against the United States and against our military. Theses two heroes were brutally tortured to death and there have been reports of beheading. Their bodies were tossed by a road side and the world is silent about their treatment. The ACLU is silent about their civil rights. The United Nations and other organization who have condemned the U.S. are silent about their human rights. The very same Senators and Congressmen who rushed to the cameras about Abu Ghraib and Gitmo have said nothing about the brutal treatment of our soldiers by the enemy. The liberals in Hollywood who cry for those at Gitmo are silent about our very own who were brutalized. It gives the distinct impression that those who complained so loudly against the United States and are silent about Al Qaeda truly view this country as the evil one and Al Qaeda as the victim who acts in justification against the , "evil great satan!" It would not surprise me to hear of one of these leftist groups or individuals actually claiming that our soldiers received there just rewards and that the United States deserved this type of treatment.

This brutal act by our enemy is yet one more reason why they must be defeated and their Islamic fascism erased from the face of the earth. Why do we fight ? To destroy theses brutal monsters and prevent the murder and desecration that we have witness today from continuing to happen. We fight to stop these terrorist from fulfilling their Jihad to destroy western civilization and killing millions of innocent men, women and children. Pfcs. Tucker and Menchaca gave their lives for this purpose and the thousands of men and women in uniform on the front lines in the war against terrorism are sacrificing daily to do the same. Whether that sacrifice is the ultimate sacrifice or the daily job of performing their duty in defense of this nation. God Bless our soldiers and their mission.

Ken Taylor

Sunday, June 18, 2006


In the weekly radio address that is given by the Democrats as a rebuttal to the one given by the President, Nancy Pelosi the House Minority leader laid out the Democratic agenda named, " New Direction For America." Pelosi stated several ideas for this ,"new, " plan which include some of the usual Democrat proposals, raising the minimum wage to $7.25, the old Social Security kick, prescription drugs, affordable health care and education except that this time education was narrowed to lower interest rates on tuition. About Iraq besides stating that, "2006 must be a year of significant transition, " and " a new direction, " which they have been saying for the entire time we have been in Iraq nothing significant came out. Now that I have shown the basic outline of the, "New Direction For America, " my first response if, "yawn, " and my second response is, "so what else is new!" This is either the third or fourth, "new agenda, " since the first of the year. There have been so many this year and extending into the latter part of 2005 that one tends to lose count of the Democrats , "new plan for America." This particular plan is basically a rehash of the rehash of the rehash, etc., etc. and so forth! The base and party supporters continually cry for an agenda and the Democrat leaders when they find a cold reception in their polling data rewrite the usual Democrat talking points with some fresh wording and no new ideas. Then the leadership wonders why there is not a tremendous out pouring of support for their , "agenda." The reason is simple, there is no agenda. Even when they state certain platforms that are basically no different that any previously presented, they always fall back on the same political rhetoric. The President lied about Iraq, the war is a failure, Republicans have a, "culture of corruption, " and the economy stinks. Why then do they not get a rally of support for their ideas ? Because they basically have none and the people see this and the left has spent so much time and energy trying to destroy President Bush with an agenda of political attacks and the bitter hatred that stem back to 2000 that they are blind to the truth and the facts which leaves them with nothing else.

Don't get me wrong I have absolutely no problem with this form of political hacking that has been the Democrat agenda. As long as they continue on this path they will never find the support from the voters that is necessary to gain the House, the Senate or the Presidency. Where they do cross the line is that in their attacks they twist and falsify so much information and adding to this are the accusations that not only damage the country but hamper the prosecution of the war. The largest obstacle that this nation has had in successfully prosecuting the war on terror in Afghanistan and especially in Iraq is the Democratic attack machine that has hindered the war by falsely portraying much of what is and has happened. Additionally stating falsely that our troops are terrorists, (John Kerry), and murderers, (John Murtha), and other like falshoods as well as continually dwelling on only the negative and never even mentioning the positive and the tremendous accomplishments has hurt the support of the war at home and effected troop moral because of their fear that while winning the war they are losing it on the home front.

Domestically the constant moaning by the Democrats on the economy has also hindered a very robust economy because the constant complaining has given the impression that we are in economic turmoil. Recent polls actually state that while individuals believe that they are doing well in the economy there is also concern that their neighbors are not. Now how does this make sense ? Yet it is a fact and the reason is because the negative out look that is portrayed by the Democrats causes people to believe that though they may be doing well because of the bleak out look by the left someone else has to be doing bad. This despite the lowest unemployment figures in years and continual large job creation, almost non existent inflation, a housing boom, a strong stock market, a steadily rising GNP, family income also on the rise and this despite high energy costs that if not present would show figures nearly twice what they are. Yet to hear the Democrats all is gloom and doom.

There is a very good reason though for the Democrat out look of failure and doom. If that out look were not there then the Democratic Party would have nothing to hang their political hat on. When this country is prosperous and successful the left loses. Whe things are on the downfall then the left gains. The problem that they face now is that the only gain that they can make is the false portrayal of doom and failure. This is precisely why they cannot find a foot hold with the voters. Despite their political attacks and their continual negativism about the war and the economy, the majority of Americans know the truth and are not buying into the perceived downfall of America that is being touted by the left. They may reword their, "agenda." They may whine and cry about how bad things are. They may falsely portray the war as lost and unwinnable but facts are facts and truth is truth. The American people are not controlled by three networks and a Democrat political machine that for years told everyone how to think and believe. With the new media of talk radio, blogging and outlets such as Fox News and similar internet news sites the average voter is more astute to what is true and what is false and the truth is getting out and winning the voters. The left does not and most likely never will understand that their control over the mind of the voter through the mainstream media and the power that they once had no longer exists which is why their, "New Direction for America, " brings yet another , "yawn, " and , "Ho, Hum," from the voting public!

Ken Taylor


This week the Blog of the Week is, "The Nose On your Face." A Very interesting site with a ton of links and information that combines good writing with great conservative political and news satire. Great reading with a unique twist. Worth your time and adding a link.

Saturday, June 17, 2006


Yesterday in a 256 - 153 vote the House went on record concerning not setting a timeline for an Iraq pull out. Thursday in a similar move forcing the resolution designed by John Kerry the Senate voted overwhelmingly not to set a timeline for pulling out of Iraq. The interesting note in the Senate is that with all of the pull out rhetoric that has been screamed before the cameras when Senators were asked to put up or shut up by voting on the Senate resolution only six Senators, Harry Reid the Minority Leader, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Barbara Boxer of California, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Tom Harkin of Iowa and Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts voted for the pull out. In the House 42 Democrats voted with the majority while only 3 Republicans voted against. Though neither vote is binding in the sense that it does not actually set a specific policy it does place House members and Senators on record concerning their stance on Iraq and whether they are truly supporting the troops and their mission, (although I believe that many on the left voted as they did because they were afraid of the political fall out with voters rather than truly supporting the troops and the war). Both of these resolutions speak to the troops in a loud and clear voice that as they are winning the situation in Iraq they are not losing at home. Many of you on the left see this only as a political move which it is in a sense but the largest accomplishment made by both the House and the Senate resolutions is to prove to the troops and the Iraqi people that the United States will complete the mission and support from the legislative branch is strong. Staying the course does not mean that the situation will not call for change and adaptation during the final stages of the mission. Staying the course means just that, that the United States will continue until the Iraqi government and Security forces have the full and complete capability to govern and protect themselves. There are some on the left that claim that the President is, "staying the course, " because Iraq has become such a quagmire that we are , "stuck, " there now and have to stay. I counter with the following questions. If Iraq has been such a failure then why and how has Al Qaeda in internal memos that were captured when Zarqawi was killed discussed that they are losing the battle ? Concerning Al Qaeda and the isurgency, if we set a timeline with an end date doesn't it make sanse that both will just wait until we are gone to make a move ? If Iraq is such a failure then how did they manage a Constitution ? If Iraq is such a failure then how have they established a free government that is NOT as has been claimed a theocracy ? If Iraq is such a failure then why did 80% of the people vote for both the Constitution and the government ? If Iraq is such a failure the why do our troops continue to return willingly to complete the mission ? If Iraq is such a failure then why do liberal politicians who are so willing to criticize and rebuke on camera for publicity vote against a pull out and continue to vote to fund this, "failure ?" If Iraq is such a failure then why have we not seen the country dissolve into anarchy as many have claimed is really actually happening ? Could it be that the reason that the left wants to claim that Iraq is a failure is because if it is not then the President is proven right in invading Iraq ? If Iraq is such a failure then why are enlistments up once again in the military ? The simple answer to all of these questions is that Iraq IS NOT A FAILURE. The left will never admit this because if they do then they will have nothing to complain about other then the usual complaints about abortion, a poor economy and raising taxes that have not worked for them for more than 30 years. Most of the country is against abortion, the economy is booming and the majority of Americans favor less taxation. So I guess we will have to put up with the , "Iraq failure, " whining since the left has nothing else to offer.......but we don't have to believe their rhetoric do we ?!?!?!

Ken Taylor

Thursday, June 15, 2006


For those of you who read this site daily or occasionally you know that I am a Bush supporter who does not support blindly and has a number of disagreements with the President. I disagree with much of his immigration policy. I disagree with the entitlements that he has introduced and have become active. I disagree with some of his domestic spending because it has been excessive and also along with the entitlements has actually increased the size of government and as a conservative I am against big government. To his credit he has started to come around fiscally though his immigration stance still remains the same. With that said it is high time to give the President credit where credit is due. I am mainly speaking of Iraq and the rest of the War on Terror. There have been numerous calls by Democratic leaders like, Nancy Pelosi, John Murtha, Harry Reid and John Kerry for an immediate pull out from Iraq thus abandoning this theater of war even as progress which has been taking place all along but is now become so evident that the press can no longer hide this truth. The President after making his surprise and unannounced visit to Iraq this week stated that the calls by the left for a pull out are political grand standing in an election year. I agree. To leave Iraq now because of the great success that has taken place in the last weeks with the death of Zarqawi and the crack down that has and is taking place as a result of information acquired from Zarqawi would be one of the largest military and political mistakes that this country has ever made. We made a commitment to the Iraqi people and the new government to stay the course until Iraq could govern and protect herself completely. This is happening and the end game is near but the full mission is not complete. To his credit, despite pressure from the left and the misinformation from the media which has caused popularity of the Iraq situation to fall, President Bush has stayed the course and stood steadfastly to insure that the mission is completed. More and more evidence is coming forth as documents from the Hussein regime are being translated that not only prove the President correct in moving against Iraq but Hussein's involvement with Al Qaeda, and other terrorist groups shows he was sponsoring terrorism though not directly involved with 9/11. This combined with the documented revelations concerning the whereabouts of the hiding and dispersal of Iraqi WMD again proves that Iraq was a danger to the world. People seem to forget that the United Nations and the previous U.S. administration created the policy of regime change in Iraq due to the WMD threat and Iraq's continual lack of cooperation with the world community. President Bush because of the after effects of 9/11 and the way that the attacks changed our view of terrorism and those who sponsored terrorism moved in a war status on both Afghanistan and Iraq based on certain policies that were already in place before he took office and upon military and policy evaluation after 9/11. War is not an exacting science. In every conflict throughout history wars are fought with a plan in place that requires continual changes and correction which in most cases are learned by blunders and mistakes that have taken place in planning and execution on the battle field. Iraq and Afghanistan are no different. Both theatres in the war on terror have had blunders and great success. Accomplishments far out weigh the mistakes. Yet with the continual help of the media and the critics from the left, the mistakes are all that are viewed and reported. Yet despite this both countries have freely elected governments and Constitutions. Both countries are defeating and over coming the terrorist and sectarian violence within their land. And both countries are experiencing freedoms that they never thought possible in the past. Staying the course does have it set backs but its accomplishments are far more evident because of what these two nations have and are becoming. It takes a considerable amount of character and stubbornness to stand firm when most are crying retreat. When one is standing for what is right then being stubborn is an attribute and not a detriment. President Bush and the men and women of the United States military have displayed this attribute to their credit and to the betterment of the world and especially the security of the United States and the lives of the people of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Ken Taylor

Tuesday, June 13, 2006


As I fully expected the special prosecutor has announced that Presidential Advisor Karl Rove will not be indicted concerning the Valerie Plame case and for obvious reasons. There is no case thus there is no evidence! From the very beginning this has been a case that has existed only in the media and the liberal political hacks who were seeking scandal in the Bush administration and especially against Karl Rove because he has been so successful in defeating Democrats. The indictment of Scooter Libby had nothing to do with Valerie Plame and was only an invented charge consisting of perceived inconsistencies in Libby's testimony, for which I believe he will be full acquitted. Now that this is over where then does the, "culture of corruption, " that the left has continually charged actually exist? This will of course anger the libs and those who have been observing from the Democratic Underground, but the , "culture of corruption, " very plainly exists within the Democratic Party! The only politician that is currently under investigation that has merits and actual proof of illegal activities, (there has thus far been no proof found for those investigated with the Abromoff situation), is Louisiana Democrat William Jefferson, who is being investigated and has been caught on video for accepting bribes. To their credit the House Democrats have been asking for Jefferson to step down from his seat on the House Ways and Means Committee for which he has refused. Compare this with former House majority leader Tom DeLay who not only stepped down from his leadership position but gave up his House seat because of the fraudulent indictment that he is facing. Scooter Libby also voluntarily stepped down as the Vice President's Chief of Staff and both Delay and Libby's indictments are very much in question and have all the indications of being politically motivated rather that having actual legal basis. William Jefferson on the other hand has a great deal of actual evidence that is consistent with the accusations of corruption against him yet he refuses to step down. So to the members of the Democratic Party who have been so quick to point the finger of corruption against Republicans, take a look in your own back yard before you continue to place allegations against the GOP. Additionally the false charges that have been leveled at the President which have no basis in truth are also beginning to be proven otherwise as Iraq is in the midst of turning around and the documents from the Hussein regime are showing the Taliban and Al Qaeda connection prior to the war and also revealing locations and disbursement outside of Iraq of the WMD. The confidence by the left that 2006 is the year of the Democrat seems to be more a pipe dream than a reality. I realize that November is still several months away and quite a lot can take place during that time, but all the eggs in the Democrat basket of accusation that they believed would sweep them into the majority are turning into rotten eggs !

Ken Taylor

Monday, June 12, 2006


The number of participants in my current web poll concerning the effect the death of Zarqawi will have on Iraq has an unusually inflated figure that appeared , "magically," in just over an hour. Upon investigation I discovered that the URL was from the Democratic Underground web site. It would seem that this liberal site has been viewing the web for Zarqawi polls in order to try and skew the results to their liberal way of thinking. Before the Underground site skew of my poll the response for , "No, " was only 2 ! Now at the last check during this writing it was up to 55 and growing! Democratic Underground is a far left ultra liberal site that expresses the extreme liberal view of everything. While I feel honored and a sense of accomplishment that my conservative thoughts and views are such a threat to this very liberal site and has struck such a nerve that they must attempt to skew the poll numbers, it is an insult to readers to think that their liberal attacks really make any type of difference! If you would like to see how they play the game, click on the title of this post to go to the page concerning my poll. You will get a good laugh.

Ken Taylor

Sunday, June 11, 2006


Since the announcement of the death of Al Qaeda terrorist leader Abu Musab al Zarqawi, there has been considerable speculation as to what will happen now that he has been eliminated. Additionally certain opponents to the war have called for specific action since the threat Zarqawi held by his leadership and the terrorism that he planned and executed has been obstructed by his death. Namely the opponents are suggesting in their usual rhetoric that we leave Iraq now regardless of what that leaving will cause or allow. Looking at the full picture in Iraq there are some interesting observations that can be made from an historical perspective concerning the establishment of the Iraq government, the insurgency and the death of Zarqawi. Though some will disagree with the following statement this fact still stands clear and true, The United States military and our coalition partners have made tremendous accomplishments in Iraq that are not being reported as they should. The Iraqi people have gained a country that just a few short years ago was a dictatorial regime that offered only oppression and not the first hint of freedom or liberty. Today Iraqis are free and have voted for and established a Constitution and a freely elected representative government that even as Zarqawi was meeting his just demise appointed the final two governmental positions making a fully established functional government. The United States military has performed exceptionally well despite set backs and problems that always exist in a war situation. They have also performed their duty despite critics who at times accused with falsehoods and attacks that were not in the least way supportive while claiming support for the men and women who bravely serve this country. Every war has its critics and every war has problems and being an opponent to any war is a freedom that we have in this country that should never be taken for granted nor taken away. Yet when the critics use the opposition platform to attack the men and women who fight for the very freedom that allows their opposition then it is taken to far and this applies to the media as well who refuse to report the progress and choose for political reasons to dwell only on the negative. With that said let us now look at Iraq in an historical perspective.

The Insurgency - Though there was a form of insurgency from the very beginning mostly through terrorist attacks performed by Al Qaeda and Zarqawi, the escalation began because of the Al Qaeda sponsored and Zarqawi planned attack on a mosque designed to play the different factions in Iraq against each other. His plan succeeded and the insurgency escalated with the expressed purpose of preventing the establishment of a free government. As he died, Zarqawi's plan failed as the government became fully established. Will the insurgency immediately end? No, because there are those that still want Iraq to fail become anarchy and a base of operations for international terrorism. Has Zarqawi's death hampered their efforts? Yes, because he was the mastermind and propagandist that recruited for his Jihad. Has this type of insurgency existed before? Yes, many times but I will use one example. At the end of WWII in Europe as Nazi Germany was crumbling an insurgency group call the Werewolves was established with the expressed purpose to continue the war by terrorist attacks to attempt to re- establish the Third Reich during the allied occupation. The insurgency lasted for several years after the surrender and required a large amount of allied troops to seek out and end the attacks. The first method used in the insurgency was the assassination of members of local provisional governments. They then used the bombings of churches in an attempt to rally the people behind them as they blamed the bombings on allied forces and other German factions in Germany at the time as well as attacking allied troops and German police forces to create chaos in the ranks. The terrorist tactics used by the Werewolves are similar to those used in Iraq by insurgents and Al Qaeda. Ultimately the insurgency ended with the establishment of a free government supported by the German people. Had allied troops left Germany before the government was strong enough to protect itself, the insurgency might have succeeded. The same holds true for Iraq.

The Iraqi Constitution and government - It has been just over three years since the invasion of Iraq and the end of the regime of Saddam Hussein. From an historical view point that is a drop in the bucket and an extremely quick amount of time for the Iraq people to have a Constitution and a fully established freely elected functional government. Never before in history has this much taken place this quickly. Yet in this age of sound bites and fast food, to listen to the media and the war opponents one would think that this is dragging out without any success or accomplishment. Using our own Revolution as a comparison Iraq, despite the problems has been a relatively quick and smooth transition. The Revolutionary War lasted seven years. During most of the war the majority of the people both before and after the Declaration of Independence in 1776 were not in favor of separation from British rule just an end to the disagreements between the colonies and the Crown. Most wanted to continue as they were and not in favor of the war. At one point were it not for the strength and persistence of General George Washington and the loyalty the the Colonial Army had to him and the cause the Revolution would have ended because even the majority of the Congress favored seeking a negociated settlement and remaining under British rule. When the war ended it was still another eight years before the establishment of our Constitution and the beginning of a fully functional free government and this with what most consider some of the most brilliant men ever born on this earth. I realize that our Founders were establishing something never before experienced by man, a free government by the people which laid the groundwork for all free governments that follow. Yet just three years after the invasion Iraq has a Constitution supported and voted upon by the majority of the people and a freely elected functional government.

The death of Zarqawi - Zarqawi's death though a great victory and a devastating set back for Al Qaeda and the insurgents in Iraq does not signal an end to the violence nor the terrorism within the country. The best example that I can recall from history is Admiral Yamamoto of the Imperial Japanese Navy if WWII, though not a terrorist a very important factor in the Japanese Empire and its conquest before the war and it actions during. Admiral Yamamoto was the mastermind behind the attack on Pearl Harbor and the strategic mind behind the Japanese Navy. Throughout the first two years after Pearl Harbor there was a concentrated effort by the allied forces to find and eliminate Yamamoto. In April, 1943 and opportunity presented itself discovered by military intelligence through the breaking of Japanese code. An air strike was launched to take out Yamamoto while he traveled on an inspection tour of Japanese front line bases. The air strike shot down his plane and eliminated Yamamoto. The war against Japan continued until August, 1945. Just as Zarqawi in Iraq, the loss of Yamamoto had a great impact on Japan so much so that they hid his death for more than a month, yet the Japanese continued to fight as will those who followed Zarqawi. The difference being that with Zarqawi's death his ideology of murder and terror ends where as Yamamoto was a military leader and strategist. Will Zarqawi's followers continue his ideology? To a certain extent but replacing him will not be a simple task for he followed this ideology of murder for more than 25 years.

There remains a considerable amount of work to be accomplished by both our troops and the Iraqi government. The death of Zarqawi will curtail at least temporarily some of the violence that is taking place in the country. With the intelligence information gathered in the additional 17 raids that occurred on the night of Zarqawi's death the U.S. and coalition forces should be able to capitalize on this set back for Al Qaeda creating further set backs which will be advantageous for our troops and the Iraqis. I believe that the worst is past and with the further continuing training of the Iraqi Security Forces the U.S. will continue to exercise a more supportive role. Iraq is far from finished but the light is shining brightly at the end of the tunnel.

Ken Taylor


This week the Blog of the Week is, "Political Pistachio." Very interesting site with a clear conservative view point covering today's pressing issues. As a Pistachio lover I thought his title interesting and especially the explanation for it creation. "Pistachios are nuts, but not technically nuts, mostly found in Iran, U.S., Syria, & China. Politics are nuts, but not technically nuts, and revolves around Iran, U.S., Syria, & China. Global politics are nothing more than political pistachios, and this is my take on it all. God Bless America!" Well worth reading and adding as a link.

Friday, June 09, 2006


Zarqawi is dead and for this the vast majority of America and the world are rejoicing. In the midst of the news that has come out about the attack that took out Zarqawi is the news that when Iraqi security forces followed by U.S. troops found him under the rubble he was alive and placed on a stretcher then died moments later from his wounds. It would seem to me that how he died is pretty much insignificant, just the fact that he is dead and that his reign of terror is over which is a great victory in the war. Now enter the media. Once word had been reported by General Caldwell that Zarqawi momentarily survived the bombing and died of his wounds after U.S. troops had arrived the media attempted by their questioning to scandalize the event and almost making our troops out to be the bad guys and Zarqawi the victim. Following are few examples of the ridiculous questioning that met General Caldwell concerning this revelation.

BARBARA STARR, CNN: "You can confirm that US troops themselves saw that Zarqawi was alive, would you describe that as an attempt to escape at that point? Was he strong enough for anyone to have to resecure him? Did US troops try and render medical assistance?
BOB BURNS, AP: Could you give us the rationale for choosing to take Zarqawi out, kill him outright rather than try to capture him?"
JIM MIKLASZEWSKI, NBC: "Will there be an autopsy performed? Was Zarqawi able to speak? Did he say anything either to the Iraqi police or the American soldiers? How possibly could he have survived after two 500-pound bombs were dropped on that facility? Was he thrown clear? Is there any visibility on why he was able to survive those two bombs?"
PAM HESS, UPI: "What's going to happen to Zarqawi's body after the autopsy? Does he get returned to his family?"
TONY CAPPACIO, BLOOMBERG: "In the planning that went into this, was there any going-in assumption that you would try to take Zarqawi alive rather than kill him?"
JEFF SCHOGOL, STARS AND STRIPES: "How can you be sure that Zarqawi died as a result of the wounds without a formal autopsy? When you were cleaning him up, did you have to Photochop his face? Did you have to digitally enhance the photos at all to clean him up, to show him to the world?"
WILL DUNHAM, AL-REUTERS: "How long, how many minutes was Zarqawi alive after the bombing and before he eventually expired, and had he been shot?"

What is the problem?!?!?! Zarqawi is dead, period. Does it matter how or that he actually died after the blast ? The fact that the most wanted man on the face of the earth is no longer a threat and his influence is gone does not seem to matter to the press yet this same media celebrated this death yesterday and now he has almost become a victim of the, "evil, " United States military and the media are even questioning the rational for killing him. Well for you morons in the press here is that rational. Zarqawi was a terrorist responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent people and hundreds of our own military not to mention coalition partners. He was the personification of evil and his death was not only justified but well deserved and necessary! He is not a victim nor a martyr but an enemy who has met his just demise. Instead of questioning the reason and the attack your reporting should consist of a pat on the back for a job well done. Then again why should anyone expect the very biased media to actually seek to report the truth and hail any accomplishment by our military ?

Ken Taylor

Thursday, June 08, 2006


Al-Zarqawi is dead and justice has been served! Of course this is today's number one news report that Al Qaeda leader al-Zarqawi was killed last night in an air strike by United States forces. Everyone from Arab papers to Al Qaeda to world leaders to Middle East specialists have all stated some type of response to Zarqawi's death. The response has ranged from claims of martyrdom to exuberance or cautious joy to blaming the U.S. for his presence in the first place although it has been proven that Zarqawi was harbored by Saddam Hussein after he fled from Afghanistan and was treated for injuries before the U.S. led invasion. In a twist of irony the USS Cole was deployed to the Middle East theatre today for the first time since repair from a terrorist strike that was planned and executed by Zarqawi. Additionally the very government that Zarqawi was trying to prevent from taking hold in Iraq with the use of murder, bombings, beheadings, etc. at the same time as his murderous life was coming to an end established the last two remaining governmental positions making a fully established free government in operation in Iraq. Many speculate that his death will signal an escalation of attacks in Iraq and the region which is quite possible and though he is but one man he is the top man for Al Qaeda second only to Bin Laden and his influence was very powerful in the terrorist destruction that has taken place in the region. He has in every sense of the word been the operational head of Al Qaeda and the main propagandist for Al Qaeda on the web and other avenues of terrorist recruitment as well as through his actions, even more so than Bin Laden so this is a significant blow to Al Qaeda. His death of course does not bring an end to security problems in Iraq nor does it end the presence of coalition forces in Iraq. What it does signify once again is that there has and continues to be tremendous success in this theatre of the War on Terror and the death of Zarqawi is large enough that the biased press could not hide it as they have other successes in the war especially in Iraq. Additionally this was an intelligence victory as Zarqawi was hunted down from information gathered from his own people and by following his deputy until he led those searching for him to the man himself. Zarqawi's death was described by General Caldwell as a very extensive and detailed intelligence operation and military action. Congratulations to the individuals who took part in this attack, intelligence gathering and the hunt and to the men and women in our Armed Forces who are stepping with an additional dose of pride in accomplishment for a job well done. The task is not complete but Zarqawi's death and the full establishment of a government in Iraq prove that we are on the right track despite set backs from the past and set backs that as in any war situation will come in the future. The Iraqi people are breathing a sigh of relief today as are freedom loving people throughout the world as this twisted and dangerous murderous animal and leader of Al Qaeda has met his justifiable and well earned demise.

Ken Taylor

Wednesday, June 07, 2006


Yesterday Republican Brian Bilbray defeated Democrat Francine Busby. On the surface this five point margin of victory may not sound like much but to the Republican Party this victory is a loud and very clear wake up call from the GOP electorate concerning what is expected from the Party and GOP elected officials and candidates. In case you have been under a log Bilbray and Busby were running to fill the seat in the House vacated by GOP Congressman Randy, "Duke, "Cunningham. Cunningham as you may recall was convicted on several corruption charges and is currently serving a jail sentence as a result of that conviction. From a political stand point regardless of the party affiliation, when a sitting Congressman or Senator is convicted of a crime especially one that involves influence within the office that they held, it usually creates a death sentence for retaining that seat by the party of the convicted representative. Needless to say this made for a considerable up hill climb to win Cunningham's seat for Bilbray and a distinct advantage for Busby since she already had a platform to run on because of Cunningham's conviction. Bilbray then presented his platform a strict Reagan conservative platform calling for strong defense, smaller government, a tough stance on illegal aliens and immigration, border security and less taxation. Though the district up for grabs is traditionally one of the few California districts that leans GOP the conventional thinking was that this would be a Republican loss because of the Cunningham stigma. Yet Bilbray stood strong on his conservative platform and gained a GOP victory. How then does this election pave the way for the November mid terms ? The answer to Republicans is obvious. If Bilbray can overcome a tremendous challenge to gain victory by standing on conservative ideals in dealing with current issues then the Republican Party and the leadership within the beltway should follow suit! Conservatism is what gained the GOP majority status and the Presidency and conservatism will win the day in November. The question is whether the GOP leadership will heed this wake up call or continue with business as usual. Personally after observing the actions of the leadership lately I cannot be sure if they have listened to this obvious call from the electorate. I can only hope that someone in Washington and at party headquarters has and will adjust GOP tactics accordingly as well as the direction of this current Congress. Time will tell but the voting trend in the GOP throughout the country is following the voice of the California district that elected Bilbray. To the leaders in my party and in Congress all I can say is that it is past time to wake up and smell the coffee. Conservatism put you in office and conservatism is what the electorate demands!

Ken Taylor

Tuesday, June 06, 2006


Why is the media so afraid to call a spade a spade when it pertains to Muslims and terrorism. The recent arrests in Canada for the terrorist plot that was thwarted in that country is but another example. The politically correct press and even the Canadian and U.S. politicians as well as law enforcement personnel who have been quoted about the arrests side step the truth that every individual arrested was a Muslim. It is as if mentioning who they are will bring down the , "wrath of Allah," on those who say it. The political correctness is so obvious that at times those interviewed or reporting almost stumble over themselves to keep from saying Muslim. This post is not a racially based attack to Muslims as a whole, for many are law abiding peaceful individuals, just a fact that Muslims and terrorism seem to go hand in hand and know one wants to say it and avoids this truth. If any other ethnic group including WASP were to instigate such an attack or even rob a bank or murder someone the press and, law enforcement, etc. would not hesitate to state the ethnicity or the nationality of those involved but that is never the case when it comes to Muslim sponsored terrorism. Could this political correctness come from the general idea in much of the media and the radical left, (mind you not all liberals just the extreme radicals), who tend to have sympathy for Muslim terrorists and actually blame we in the west and especially the United States for actually causing Muslim terrorism and as some even charged in the wake of 9/11 the United States actually got what we deserved ? Could this politically correct and accusatory line of thinking actually be why there seems to be a fear of calling a spade a spade when terrorism is involved and its association with Muslims? Law abiding and non-fanatical Muslims actually condemn Muslim terrorism and realize that it is an affront to their religion and to civilized people of the world. Yet to those who suffer from the disease of political correctness the denial of the truth in reporting the relation of Muslims and terrorism when no other ethnicity gets this free pass is absurd. I know that the majority of the world realizes the correlation of fanatical Muslims and terrorism but to publicly avoid the truth when a terrorist act occurs does nothing but placate those who participate in these murderous and disgusting acts against humanity. Has anyone thought that if a spade is called a spade and whenever any terrorist act is thwarted or carried out and it is reported as it is a fanatical act of terrorism by Muslim extremists could this possibly raise enough attention within the Muslim community and the placating world as a whole to actually rise up and address terrorism not only within the very communities where it finds it recruits and its fervor but in the seats of government that have the capability to destroy this threat. We are in the midst of a war that is addressing terrorism in a military fashion and accomplishing the destruction of cells and individuals who perform these acts. If calling a spade a spade would cause other nations who are not participating in this war to eliminate terrorism especially those in the Muslim world who are as against it as we then quite possibly this war would find and end much earlier and terrorism find its death.

Ken Taylor

Sunday, June 04, 2006


What is happening in the United States Congress? Both the House and the Senate have come completely ineffective and are so disconnected with the people that it has become obvious that the citizens of the nation have no true representation in Washington. This disconnect is not confined to one party, it crosses all political boundaries and ideologies and unfortunately seems to effect the majority of those elected to Congress regardless of party affiliation. In recent weeks it has taken on the appearance of lunacy and pandemonium with the disconnect from the American public. The Senate has passed an immigration bill that not only ignores the will of the people but will allow untold millions in this country over the next 20 years and the bill is UNCONSTITUTIONAL ! The bill calls for the levying of taxes to illegals as part of their amnesty program and the Constitution clearly states in Article I, Section 7, "All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives." The Senate according to the Constitution cannot legislate any bill pertaining to the raising of revenue yet that is exactly what they have done. The House has its problems also. Congressman Jefferson, (D, LA) is under investigation for taking bribes and corruption. The FBI with a legal warrant raided his office where they were tipped that he was hiding evidence. Did the House members stand by this legal raid ? Absolutely not ! Instead they collectively expressed their anger about a member of Congress having his office searched by the FBI. I thought that in this country no one regardless of their stature was above the law. Yet according to House members including the Speaker, when it comes to their own they rally around protecting a fellow Congressman rather than seeing that justice is accomplished. These are but two examples of the total disconnect that all of Congress has with the American people and with the reality that this nation is governed by the will of the people. The atmosphere inside of the Washington beltway has isolated Congress to the point that even when confronted with the voice of the people that they supposedly represent they ignore our pleas and continue with business as usual acting as though they know better what is best for the nation than we the people. This is not what this country was founded on and it is certainly not what the framers expressed in the Constitution. The very introduction of this greatest of documents attests to the fact that the people of the United States are her voice and those who govern are answerable to the people and not to special interest groups, political hacks and financial backers whether corporate or Political Action Committees, (PACS) or even the 527's that were created in direct response to legislation, (the McCain/Feingold Campaign Finance Bill), that also went against the will of the people. What happened to the ideology and principles that made this country great and used to be expressed by our elected officials ?

I was watching, "Mr Smith Goes to Washington, " last night, the great Frank Capra film staring Jimmy Stewart as a simple man who believed in the very principles and values that this nation was founded upon and because of his belief was elected to the Senate to serve with a long standing Senator from his state who was a family friend and whom Jefferson Smith, (Stewart), idolized from childhood because he believed that this Senator stood for Smith's values. After serving in the Senate for a time he realized that this Senator and many others were controlled by political machines, (similar to today's PAC groups), that manipulate legislation to their financial advantage. When Smith stands up for American principles against the machine that runs his state, with the help of the Senator that Smith idolized the machine with false charges attempts to destroy Jefferson Smith and to turn public opinion against him. Smith stands before the Senate in a true filibuster and expresses the truth and the principles that this nation was founded upon which at the end of the movie finally effects the conscience of the Senator from his state that falsely accused Smith into revealing the truth. I realize that this is just a movie but the massage of this film is powerful. The principles that this nation was founded upon are what keep this land that we love free and the shining beacon of liberty to the world.

When the world views the Congress of the United States today, one has to wonder if the light of liberty is dimmed to the world because of the disconnect with the people of the country. I know that the people of this nation are questioning whether those principles mean anything to those that we have elected, for by their actions it would seem not. President Abraham Lincoln once said, "America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Is this what we are witnessing because of the actions of the Congress? Do the principles and the values that this nation was founded upon still truly exist ? Yes they do. Many of those principles are expressed daily throughout the blogosphere as we who write express what we believe and know is the true meaning of being an American and the principles for which this nation stands. It is also found in the lives and dedication expressed through service by the brave men and women who wear the uniforms of freedom in the United States military. The founding principles of this nation are also found in the hearts and minds of the voters who through their vote express to this disconnected Congress that we the people still are the voice which governs this nation. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin and yes Abraham Lincoln still exist within the hearts of we the people who still believe that the blessings of freedom and liberty are not expressed by the oppression of government and the disconnect of elected officials but by the will of the citizens who live and work in the nation, "of the people, by the people and for the people." We are still the voice of this nation and we are still the conscience of the liberties for which it stands. I will end this commentary with yet another quote from Lincoln for it is most appropriate in its expression. "Our safety, our liberty, depends upon preserving the Constitution of the United States as our fathers made it inviolate. The people of the United States are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."

Ken Taylor


This week the Blog of the Week is, "American And Proud Of It." Excellent commentary and views on issues from a conservative stand point. Additionally the author is a conservative from Riverside, California so you know he is out numbered! Great reading and well worth adding as a link to your site.

Thursday, June 01, 2006


I discovered an interesting site that I would like to share with you and in which I will be linking to as soon as this is posted. The name of the site is, "Send a Brick, " and it takes an interesting twist to get the point across to the boneheads in Congress concerning the nations irritation over the border issue. A recent poll indicated that 80% of Americans are in favor of a fence along the border and strict border security. This web site offers an opportunity to not only express to the Congress how you feel about securing the border but actually gives an opportunity to assist in providing materials to actually build the border fence! The premise is to either purchase from the site or send on your own a brick, (yes an actually bone - a - fide mortar ready brick), to Congress either as is or painted with your thoughts or a saying expressing your concern for border security. As of this writing more than 10, 000 bricks have been sent and that is just a start. Hey they have to do something with them, why not build the wall. Having visited the Capitol several times I can only imagine how aggravating this has to be to the Capitol Post Office and they in turn expressing their irritation to members of Congress who over see the Post Office. Personally the bricks that I will send will be addressed to House members for they have much more at stake concerning listening to the American people in an election year. Senators run for re-election once every six years. During any given election cycle only one third of the Senate is up for grabs which gives the remaining Senators an election buffer to do what they darn well please regardless of what we who elect them think. Which is precisely what they have been doing. Now the House on the other hand runs for re-election every two years and as the House of the People in order to get re-elected they have to pay closer attention to the voters. This has been indicated by the tough stand of the House version of the immigration bill. So in my thinking sending bricks to House members would have a greater impact than the Senate. That is unless the Senators during one of their heated debates would use the bricks as projectiles against one another which might not be a bad idea! Leave it to the ingenuity of the American people to devise a way of political activism that makes the point in a way that cannot be ignored! Send your brick today!

Ken Taylor

website hit counters
Provided by website hit counters website.