Where Are My Keys?

Still wondering if having Clint Eastwood at the convention was a good idea?

If Eastwood didn't work on some level, why is the President of the United States "punching down"?

Quite the reach, Ed..

First, watch this short clip:

 

Schultz feels that by using the word "American", Romney is suggesting that Obama isn't one.  Of course Mr. Schultz isn't telling us the full context of the Romney sentiment.  Let's see what Romney actually said, shall we?

Tonight that American flag is still there on the moon. And I don’t doubt for a second that Neil Armstrong’s spirit is still with us: that unique blend of optimism, humility and the utter confidence that when the world needs someone to do the really big stuff, you need an American.  That’s how I was brought up.

Romney was obviously speaking of American exceptionalism.  The United States has always lead the way in "big" stuff.  Space programs.  Innovation.  Medicine.  Technology.  When things need to be done, the entire World looks at us.

It's unfortunate that Schultz lives in a world where all he can see is nonexistent racism, and is unable to see the glory and greatness of the very Country that has made him a rich man.  Schultz (and the rest of the MSM Left) really need to understand that words matter.  Look, there is still racism out there.  I believe it exists on a much smaller scale than in the past, but it does still exist.  When race-baiters like Schultz actively search for racism everywhere, it significantly devalues its overall existence.  Call out racism when it happens, but don't try and attach it to everything you see.  It's like the Little Boy who cried "Wolf"!.  Eventually people stop listening when they need to hear it the most.  Expose racism when it is really happening, not just to try and score a cheap political point.

All this week, the RNC had a diverse parade of folks that shared their unique and compelling stories of how the American Dream is still alive and kicking, and needs to be preserved for others to have the same opportunities to benefit from. 

I'm interested to see the DNC speeches next week.  They have a tough hill to climb.  The RNC showed a deep and exciting bench, filled with people from different backgrounds and beliefs, working within the system to make their dreams reality.  If the DNC answers with negativity and fear, this election is over the first week of September.  Based on the early list of DNC speakers, it's not looking good.  The RNC offered young, fresh faces and ideas.  The Democrats are countering with Kerry, Pelosi, Reid, Rahm, and other tired Democrat lifelong politicians.  Quite the contrast.

Obama proved in 2008 that people want to believe, they want to make changes, they want to succeed.  The RNC showed this week that those things are possible with hard work and drive.  With the Democrats countering with the likes of Pelosi and Reid, whom will younger swing voters connect with?

 

Compare and contrast..

Compare this:

 

With this:

"The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that 'an unjust law is no law at all.' Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust."--Martin Luther King, Jr., Letter from a Birmingham Jail (1963).

There is a great comment that hits the nail on the head:

No, Toure...those natural rights don't come from Government. Government force can only take them away. That's what the Civil Rights struggle was all about. To STOP Government force from denying you those natural rights.

The 1st Amendment doesn't give you the right of free speech. It simply says Govt cannot take it away. It restricts Govt.

Very well said, and spot on.

 

"The Poster"..

 

Devils start off with a win..

Sure, it was only NAU, but a 63-6 beatdown in a new coach's debut is never a bad thing.

It was a nice start for Graham, who wasn't the most popular choice to lead Arizona State after Dennis Erickson was fired.

The high-octane Texan has been a winner nearly everywhere he has gone, but has a penchant for not sticking around, including a one-year stint at Pittsburgh before moving on to ASU.

Graham soothed concerns about his commitment with an all-out charm blitz, shaking hands and speaking with as many ASU and supporters as he could. He gave the entire program a makeover, from the style of play to the look of the football offices.

Graham also infused Arizona State with a much-needed jolt of discipline, turning what had been a freewheeling program into a yes-sir, no-sir operation. He stuck to his my-way-or-don't-play guns for the opener, sitting top receiver Jamal Miles and running back James Morrison for ''not meeting a team standard.''

Graham's grand plan created a buzz in the desert, giving the Sun Devils a profile they haven't had in a while.

Nice to see ASU have some discipline, and for the defense to play so well.

I guess I should toss in my prediction for the season here.  ASU has a fairly tough schedule for 2012.  I think they will be 2-1 as they enter Conference play, but wouldn't be overly surprised with a 3-0 record either.  I see Utah, Colorado, Washington State and Cal as definite wins, the toss up games are UCLA, Oregon State, and Arizona, and most likely losses to USC and Oregon.

I'm looking at 8-4 or 7-5, and a bowl berth.  I'm leaning more towards 7-5.

 

Weekly IUC at 374,000..

There was a small bump upwards on last week's number, but holding fairly steady:

It's not the size of the dog in the fight..

...but the size of the fight in the dog:

 

But I thought the Republicans had a "War on Women"..

Of course the MSM will yawn, and ignore the allegations:

By their accounts, Mr. Lopez, 71, a Brooklyn Democrat, told some women not to wear bras to work. He requested they wear short skirts and high heels. He gave them cash to buy jewelry and complimented them on their figures, giving special attention to those he called “well endowed.”

He asked about their personal lives, urging them to break up with boyfriends, and berated those women — all of whom were new to politics — who did not compliment him effusively enough, according to several of the women interviewed.

One of the women, Stephanie M. Friot, spoke on the record, while the other four spoke on the condition their names not be used. Ms. Friot, 28, said that Mr. Lopez never directly harassed her but that “there was a certain culture where behaviors like that were permissible.”

Another woman described “an atmosphere of intimidation,” an environment where she and other former staff members said Mr. Lopez veered between crude jokes and fierce tirades.

“He would comment on a shirt I was wearing and say ‘I’d like it better if you didn’t have a bra on,’ ” said one of the former staff members. “That was something he brought up quite a bit.”

The sexual harassment scandal that has been roiling New York’s political world began last Friday, when the Assembly’s ethics committee substantiated claims that Mr. Lopez harassed two women. The Assembly released a letter censuring Mr. Lopez, one of the city’s last powerful political bosses, taking away his committee chairmanship and barred him from employing interns or anyone under the age of 21. The letter described “pervasive unwelcome verbal conduct” and found that Mr. Lopez verbally harassed, groped and kissed two of his staff members without their consent.

Over the next few days, The New York Times reported that Sheldon Silver, the Assembly speaker and one of the state’s most powerful Democrats, authorized a secret payment of $103,080 in June to settle prior allegations against Mr. Lopez from two other women — allegations that were never referred to the ethics committee. The settlement has sparked numerous calls for investigation into the Assembly’s handling of the matter. Mr. Silver has conceded he made a mistake.

 

Hey, give Obama a break..

He was probably golfing that day.  Or fundraising.

Awful pictures from Louisiana..

I don't understand why people stayed behind.  I can somewhat understand that behavior prior to/during Katrina, but for folks to stay put a mere 7 years after suffering through that disaster, didn't they learn anything?

I'm not going to do a comparison between Bush response and Obama response.  The fact is the Federal Government (FEMA) is slow to move into action.  One cannot simply snap their fingers, and make generators, boats, and personnel appear.  Even when 100% ready for action, it still takes a few days to get the help to where it needs to be.

I will ask if the people that blasted Bush for "only" flying over the devastation post-Katrina, if they feel it's appropriate for the President to be on the stump while people are suffering and dying in Louisiana.  I certainly don't expect President Obama to be in NOLA at this very minute (he'd be in the way, and taking resources away from helping victims), but does he really need to be on Reddit today? 

I will give the current leadership in LA all the credit in the World over the folks that were in charge during Katrina.  Bobby Jindal has done a great job preparing for the event, getting all the paperwork in ahead of time, massing the National Guard, and trying to get people out before the hurricane hit land.

I'm confident we wont be seeing images like this under Jindal: