I’m allowing the above comment from “Cho Chin-Midori” so that everyone can see the level of thinking and pseudo-clever ad hominem coming from discussion boards. Someone on the board in question posted a link to my blog, and this person decided to pay me a visit and tell me off. For the record, I frequently sign my name “LB” on my own blog.

He/she implies that I’m a journalist, which I am not, and that my views aren’t based on facts. Rather than demonstrating what’s non-factual, he/she prefers to come onto my blog with the same old tripe I read about myself everyday. Nothing original, fresh or creative. To this person, I’m a panderer with a hustle. That’s an opinion. Fine. But he/she (I suspect this is a woman) fails to offer a “for example” or otherwise provide a basis for his/her opinion. But this is what happens when you’re running a high profile blog and promoting unpopular and politically incorrect opinions. I long for the day when my critics actually demonstrate why I’m wrong, and more importantly, why they’re right.

More important that all of that, I wish I had the power to prevent my URL from being posted on profanity-laced discussion boards in the first place.

I did see your cowardly “LB” signature at the end of your post. It confirms my opinion of you, and since your currency is opinion, not fact or journalism, I’m sure you can understand that my perception of you has not changed.

You’re a new jack, and although you seem to know better but promote ideas that are irrelevant, but I respect your hustle. You’ve seen a way to get a little light by pandering to what you perceive as the powers that be. That you see me as a groupie is simply HYSTERICAL, and actually dishonest, but if it works for you to hide behind a label, then that’s your choice. I chose to disagree with you, and I think for myself. That’s as far as it goes. I have a right to disagree with you, and you know this.

Sensenbrenner was a holdout for immigration language, but I suspect president Bush’s announcement a day after the bill was agreed to in conference about pushing for immigration & border reform at the start of the next congress was the result of a deal for the Senator to pull his opposition.

Bush has the right values, but he is still a big government conservative. Conservatives will do well to realize that the days of small government are over never to return. The battles of the future will revolve around what aspects of people’s lives big government should govern.

He’s an outspoken Christian pushing values they don’t have.

This contest is at the very least a good way to visit other blogs that one would have probably never visited.

I did notice that you did not endorse anyone in the South American section (well, there is a lot of sections you did not endorse which is an honest recognition that you only endorse where you usually thread and know what is going on).

Now check my section. If it is mostly conservative blogs, mine sounds conservative although I am not one. But see, in Venezuela we are fighting the good fight where real democrats no matter what affiliation we have should recognize their values.

Here we have a tropical wanna-be autocrat advised expertly by Castro using race and other time tested manipulation to stir hate and get on top. With Trans Africa and Danny Glover among other celebrities coming to endorse all the Human Right violations committed “in the name of the people”.

I have no problem convincing conservatives, when they care enough about what goes on outside of the US and Iraq. Many liberals on the other hand have trouble to understand that what is basically at stake is simple democracy. Mind you,many do understand, and support heartily what I fight for as a time when the government is starting its road to muzzle freedom of speech by already banning some forms of news in day time media.

I am not talking lefty nuts here that know nothing, I am talking of you average liberal that should know better but to support Chavez under any form at this point in time.

But I am starting to ramble. I just wanted you to know that sometimes conservatives and liberals are not too far apart when basic freedom is the matter. So please go to my section and learn about us. Who knows, you might even vote!

I think President Bush is, at heart, both fiscally and socially conservative. But he makes a serious attempt at reaching out to the opposition, at “compromise,” and he seems to seek and expect principled responsiveness from many who simply do not possess sufficient principle (Ted Kennedy and the education bill come to mind).

That said, he all-too-often ticks me off — and I am a solid “W” supporter. “Compassionate Conservatism?” I wanted to shake him like a rag doll for that one: “Conservatism IS compassionate, you dolt! Take two equally-sincere and caring people willing to ‘get involved,’ one liberal and one conservative, and point them toward someone who needs help: The conservative will step in with personal assistance, whether a meal, a port in the storm, a bit of cash, employment or job-finding tips, whatever he/she can do; the liberal will draft a petition and collect signatures to start a new govenment welfare program.

And health care? Good Lord, why do so many intelligent people, including President Bush, apparently believe insurance companies are “health care providers?” Insurance is not the solution to medical costs, it’s a big part of the problem! Ditto, prescription drug cards. What is the predictable impact on the (for uninsured) price of medical treatment or prescription drugs, when insurance giants force doctors, hospitals, clinics and pharmacists to honor unrealistic price ceilings for their insured?

Duh! If the person who can’t afford (or doesn’t want) insurance needs medical help, he or she has to subsidize the insurance companies’ profit margins by making up for the negotiated price ceilings’ shortfalls.

The medical savings plan idea, on the other hand, may improve that landscape and provide a path away from the Socialized Medicine cliff we were heading over the edge of.

Taking an overview of the Bush record, this President seems to be a master of subtle incrementalism: Every time he appears to be veering hard left, a conservative goal post suddenly jumps up in front of him.

I think in a lively chess game (or poker), this Prez could teach most of us a bit of humility.

And you’re also correct about morality. I think requiring citizens to support illegal aliens, particularly when there are laws against illegal immigration, is immoral. Fiscally, it is irresponsible.

I guess your blog is so interesting because you EXPLAIN WHY you feel a certain way…

I try, Stephen. Thanks for noticing.

As one of the more socially liberal on the blog, I think your blog offers a spectrum of conservatisim not found often other places. There are those who are to the FAR Right socially, those in the middle, and those who see things clearly (THAT’s a joke, people).

I guess your blog is so interesting because you EXPLAIN WHY you feel a certain way, rather than have your point of view distilled in 20 second bites. Me personally, I like to hear both sides (left and the right), distill politics (you have tended to stray far afield from the party line, thus you have credibility), and make my decision from there.

I guess its an occupational hazzard, but I’m a ‘my side-your side-the truth’ kind of guy.

For example, you have not Blogged about the ‘Declaration of Independance’ guy in Ca. yet, which I like because it seems you are waiting to see what the story is. I appreciate that.