Mitt Romney gave everyone a lesson this week on what conservatism should be all about.  It should be about the country and not self.  

It has been extremely disappointing to hear the rantings of some of the “spokesmen” for the conservative cause.  Their irresponsible and shocking statements since John McCain has become the presumptive nominee, have demonstrated that they are not true conservatives, for why would a real conservative vote for Senator Obama or Clinton, or not vote at all thus allowing one of them to win?

There are some things that are certain and undeniable.  For example, as a conservative I am concerned about "the issue of life."  President Bush has given us two conservative Supreme Court Justices.  Why would I now decide that this issue no longer matters, and be fine with the idea of Obama or Clinton appointing the next two?  If one feels this way, then I would submit that they are not a true conservative and care nothing about abortion.  I would submit that they have become so dedicated to self and their own views, that what happens to the country no longer matters.

Conservatives should look at Romney’s example of selfless conservatism, and realize that in spite of  all of our differences, it is our country that matters to us most of all.  

May God bless America.
                                        
Sandra Lea Wise
 

The evidence speaks for itself.  Rush, Laura, Hannity “et all” have been neutered.  The endless talk about Reagan, the non-stop referrals to the party of Reagan, the tantrums over Bush’s nomination of Miers and so on, have proven to be irrelevant.  The silent majority is now speaking.    

Listening to these sore losers today, makes one realize that it was all about them all the time.  They don’t care about the Republican Party, unless they can run it.  They thought for a while that they did run it.  Rush now has even suggested that he might not support the Party’s nominee, and then whispered: “It took Carter to get Reagan.”

The “loud voices” have tried to destroy Bush because he isn’t Reagan.  Now they are attacking McCain, the current front runner.  If Romney and Rudy move ahead, they won't be Reagan either.  They can’t face it.  The candidates that are left standing are not far-right, they are moderate-right.  If the voters had wanted a far-right candidate, they had several from which to pick. 

I think that Reagan would be extremely disappointed that this has become his legacy.  The President who brought so many into the Republican Party is now used by some to destroy it if they can't get their way.

Sandra Lea Wise    

I was very impressed with Mike Huckabee, until I saw his interview on Fox News Sunday last week.  The first 15 minutes were spent on ethics issues, while he was the governor of Arkansas. 

I couldn’t believe that I hadn’t heard any of this!  Huckabee resorted to the “there is a vast left wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against me since I became the Republican Governor of Arkansas,” defense. 

That excuse only works for the Clintons.  If Huckabee is the Republican nominee, the main stream media will unleash on him.  So far they are quiet and hoping that the “values voters” will propel him to front runner and then to the nomination. 

How will social conservatives defend Huckabee’s ethics problems?  Will it suffice to say that "he shares our values on abortion, guns and gay marriage?  Or, maybe, “they all did it in Arkansas.” 

Huckabee and ethics

Sandra Lea Wise

To listen to Hillary and the Democrats, we have no friends left in the world.  Hillary is running saying that she will return America to the respect and standing that it had during her first administration.

The visit this week from France’s new president is an astounding turnabout.  France is our new best friend!  How did this happen?  The French have hated America for years.  Certainly the evil George Bush couldn’t have had anything to do with France and America becoming friends again!  

Could it be that France has seen that a partnership with America could help them fight terrorism, that working with the United States would be in their best interest?  

I’m sure that the French love the Clintons.  They are great party buddies.  The Clintons share their values.   However, when it comes to fighting terrorism, the Bush administration is the one to cozy up to.  Missile defense would be a great thing for Europe.  Bush wants this for Europe and the Democrats don’t.

What an irony.  France finally loves America and the Democrats continue to hate America.  What will it take for Democrats to join France and finally be on our side?

Sandra Lea Wise             

Yesterday the news was all bad.  The stock market was down, oil prices were up, inflation was looming, people were jobless, blah, blah, blah.

Today we hear that jobless claims are at an all time low.  More people own homes than ever before.  The stock market is going back up.  Deaths in Iraq are down, etc., etc., etc.  Of course you don’t hear this from the MSM.  

Enough of the glass half empty!  After the worst attack on our soil, the country has rebounded and is robust and we have been kept safe.  Yet Bush’s disapproval ratings are at an all time high. 

To quote Gore from 2000,  “what should be down is up and what should be up is down!”  

Sandra Lea Wise

I’m sick of hearing about whether water boarding is legal or illegal.  I don’t care what we do to terrorists!  They have no rights as far as I’m concerned.  

When Democrats win, the terrorists win.  These merciless killers of women and children must be laughing their heads off at Senators, who are holding up nominations over the issue of water boarding.  They must be dancing in the streets, watching the Democrat candidates discuss pulling out of Iraq, especially now that we are finally winning.  

Hold on, terrorists, help is on the way!     

I’m not the only angry person out here.  You may already have seen this letter, but it’s worth reading again.  Letter from a housewife from N. J.

Amen, sister!  I doubt that you will be voting Democrat.

Sandra Lea Wise

For 30 years Dr. Dobson has shown up before each election, to denounce the Republican nominee for not being pure enough on abortion.  He wants the candidate to say that he believes Roe v. Wade is wrong and that it must be overturned.     

Last night I saw an interview with him on Hannity and Colmes.  He is not backing any of the top tier candidates and suggests that if either Giuliani, Thompson, Romney or McCain gets the nomination, that he would be in favor convincing someone to run in a Third Party.  

Hannity asked Dobson if he realized that this would assure a Hillary win, who is for all abortion, including partial birth abortion.  Dobson’s answer was one we hear all of the time from conservatives:  “I have my principles that I have to stand by.”

What kind of principles would cause a person to take an action which would assure the victory of a candidate who will never appoint Judges that will overturn Roe v. Wade?  Especially at a time when we have four conservative Supreme Court Justices!

Has Dobson become like the Reverends Jackson and Sharpton, who simply want to hold on to an issue, and by doing so stand in the way of progress?

Sandra Lea Wise
  

After watching Fox News Sunday today, I am relieved to hear that the Speaker is praying for the President and the children.  She prays that he will make the right decision and reconsider his veto of the expansion of the Chips program, to cover adults and include eligibility for middle class families who already have health insurance for their children.

Who knew?  Speaker Pelosi is a compassionate socialist!

Sandra Lea Wise

    
 

When conservative talk radio, bloggers and the conservative media began attacking President Bush over the Mier’s nomination, immigration, etc., it was clear that the result would be a Democrat return to the majority.

Now they are in the majority and Hillary is marching ahead to her party’s nomination and probably the Presidency. And who is getting attacked now? Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, Mike Savage... the list goes on.

In the Senate they are asking for an apology from Rush, who they claim has attacked our troops. This is just the beginning.

It is never good for the country nor for conservatism to let Democrats win. When will conservatives ever learn?

Sandra Lea Wise

The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) is convinced that it is time take back the classroom on behalf of academic freedom. They are concerned about the recent trend in which conservatives have begun to question the liberal one sided education that students are exposed to in our institutions of higher learning.  

"Conservative ideologues (whose names escape me at the moment) have tried, in recent years, to redefine “academic freedom” as a shield that protects conservative students from the opinions and convictions of their professors; they have introduced bills in state legislatures that would mandate “intellectual diversity” in college courses and curricula — presumably to give conservative interpretations of The Rise of Silas Lapham and White Noise a fair hearing, or perhaps to require the assignment of texts more congenial to the conservative world view." Read more: Freedom in the classroom

The problem is that conservative teachers are not able to express conservative ideas in the classroom. I believe that Hannity and others who are exposing liberal professors are getting some traction. We need to keep focusing on this. It's time to take back the classroom from the liberal educators who are brainwashing our youth.

Sandra Lea Wise

 

The other day I was surfing channels and had to stop on Hardball, which I never watch. By the look on Chris’ face I thought that something major had happened, perhaps another terrorist attack.

Matthews and a group of panelists were having conniptions over a statement that Bush made in a recent interview. When asked what he was looking forward to in retirement, he said, "making money from speeches." Chris and his guests were accusing the President of planning to profit from the deaths of our soldiers in Iraq.

I’m familiar with Bush’s sense of humor and imagine that he was cracking a joke. But let’s say he was serious. I’m very sorry to break it to you, Chris, but ex-Presidents do make money from speeches. Bush will not be an exception because he sent troops to war.

So, Chris, take a deep breath and repeat after me: "Bush sent troops to war, people lived." Another breath and exhale, "Bush killed terrorists, people lived." Now picture yourself lying on a beach, "Bush wiretapped terrorists, people lived." Get the picture? These meditations might keep you from having a heart attack at the thought of Mr. Bush being paid for speeches in the many years to come.

The fact is that "W" will be an ex-President, with all the perks, no matter how much you and the Democrats wish it weren’t so.

Sandra Lea Wise

How dare Mr. Schumer stand on the Senate floor and attack our troops? His statement that our brave soldiers are not the reason for the successful surge in Iraq is a complete betrayal of our military.

While Republicans are focused on Craig’s resignation, the Democrats are getting away with lies that could cause us to lose the War in Iraq.

Where is the outrage over a Party that will betray our country and our military just to win an election? Who is going to have the courage to stand on the Senate floor and speak the truth about the cowardice and lies of the entire Democrat Party?  Who is going to call on Schumer to resign for his treasonous statement? 

Sandra Lea Wise

The Republican Party is the party of family values and morality. Therefore every Republican in office or running for office must be without sin.

The Democrats will be watching. If you are a sinner, beware. There is no place you can go to hide. Even the suggestion of impropriety is evidence of guilt. If there is no smoking gun, you must be investigated until one is found.

If you are guilty, no apology will suffice. You are a hypocrite, for you stand for morality yet were unable to live up to it in your own life.

Republicans, resign from office now if you are guilty of any sin!

Sandra Lea Wise

Killings are rampant in New Orleans.  Many of the local leaders are corrupt and not able to get things done.  We still have National Guard Troops in the city to protect innocent citizens from brutal murderers.

Is it time to send a message to the Democrat leaders of New Orleans?  Should we pull our troops out to force them to do their jobs?

Sandra Lea Wise

This morning, Mark Davis, a local radio talk show host brought up the subject of Romney’s religion. He referred to an article that he had written on Real Clear Politics. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/08/a_religious_time_bomb_only_rom.html

About Romney’s religion Mark states: "It has not been addressed well by the candidate, and it has not been handled honestly by pundits. Until it is, it lurks as a torpedo that could spell the doom of his promising candidacy."

He continues: "There are a number of beliefs in Mormonism which directly contradict mainstream Christianity, and which challenge objective history. The question is: how many people will learn of these things and run in the direction of other candidates?"

Mark played an interview that he had with Romney last week. He asked: "If an entire society existed in North America for centuries before and after the birth of Christ, planting crops, worshiping in a Judeo-Christian fashion, using an Egyptian-Hebrew hybrid language, riding chariots and smelting iron, wouldn't there be archeological evidence of it?"

Romney answered: "I really don't think it's productive for me to say 'let me tell you about this doctrine or that doctrine,'" he explained. "I'm not a spokesman for my church."

I have mixed feelings on this. Should candidates be asked questions about the teachings of their particular faith? For example, should a Christian be asked, "Do you believe that the Earth is 5,000 years old and that the Biblical account of the creation is accurate? What evidence can you point to?" Or, perhaps, "Do you believe that God is three people, the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost?" To some that might sound a bit strange.

I called Mark’s show with the above arguments. I mentioned also, that Romney might not believe literally in all of the teachings of his Church. Romney has stated publicly that he believes that Christ is his Savior. Would that not suffice?

Mark's answer was that Romney needs to state exactly what he believes and doesn't believe.  Is that fair?

Sandra Lea Wise