Thursday, December 27, 2007

R.I.P: Benazir Bhutto

Rest in Peace

Benazir Bhutto

Benazir Bhutto of Pakistan was assasinated while at a campaign rally in Rawalpindhi, Pakistan. The attack occurred just after Ms. Bhutto left the rally, where she had given a campaign address to party supporters in the run-up to the January 2008 parliamentary elections. She died at 6:16 pm local time at Rawalpindi General Hospital. There seems to be plenty of confusion as to what exactly happened - but it has been confirmed by spokespersons from Ms. Bhutto's party and the BBC that Ms. Bhutto was shot in the neck and the chest before the coward gunman proceded to blow himself up.

Benazir Bhutto, who was born in 1953, was Prime Minister of Pakistan twice. She was educated at Harvard and Oxford and was the first female leader of a Muslim nation in modern history. She returned from exile in October of 2007 in an effort to become a voice for the restoral of democracy in Pakistan.

She was by no means a perfect politician, as we can expect she had her foibles - both times she was PM, she was sacked due to corruption and mismanagement. However, she always worked for the democracy in Pakistan, and was an ally to the United States in the fight against terrorism. It is very likely that it was Al-Qaeda, and not Pervez Musharraf as some may think, who perpetrated this vicious and cowardly attack upon a woman who was working actively to bring democracy to Pakistan and fight against Islamic extremists. She was the last best hope that Pakistan ever had to restore democracy. This is a very sad, sad day for democracy.

This attack should serve as a reminder to moderate and secular Muslisms everywhere that Al-Qaeda is committed to the destruction and savage murder of those leaders that are committed to democracy - this should serve as a reminder to them that Al-Qaeda must be fought, and that it is still armed and dangerous, ready to deal a severe blow to the efforts of any country to democratize. We have seen it in Iraq, we have seen it in Afghanistan and now - we see it in Pakistan. This should be a wake-up call, and should make the Islamic world realize that fighting these extremists is the right thing to do.

As we all begin to point fingers, I think we should really think about who could have been behind this cowardly and vicious attack. The Musharraf government could not have provided any more security for Ms. Bhutto, it provided riot police as well as bodyguards and policemen to protect her. Not to mention the PPP (Pakistan People's Party, the party Bhutto was leading) was also providing plenty of security in itself. I seriously doubt that President Musharraf had ANYTHING to do with this horrendous murder. I think that by doing so he would risk losing support of the United States and further risk alienating himself from the people of Pakistan. He would trigger horrendous consequences, and perhaps the end of his regime by authorizing an assasination of Ms. Bhutto. Why would he risk the destabilization of the country he rules to get rid of Bhutto?

This is the work of none other but Al-Qaeda and/or the Taliban, who are strong in the Baluchistan/Northwest regions of Pakistan that border with Afghanistan. It's time that something is done and that the Pakistani government, with the support of the US and NATO, cracks down on the cowardly murderers in this region.

If we do not, what will be their next target? We risk allowing democracy to go down the drain in the Islamic world.

May she rest in peace, and may God bless her family, her supporters and the nation of Pakistan as they grieve her death.

[If you have any questions or are curious about this event or the implications it has for the world and for Pakistan, the BBC has a really good Q&A article in its website.]

Monday, December 17, 2007

The Capitalist Approach to Global Warming

I’ve done a lot of thinking about a lot of issues. I like to think that any issue I have a strong opinion on is an issues that I’m fairly well informed on. Yet, I still come across new ideas from others wiser than myself. I had such an experience at WMU when we went to see John Stossel speak on Capitalism.

Someone asked Mr. Stossel for his thoughts on global warming. The first part of what he said is basically an average of conservative opinions on the issue. That is to say he believes there is some evidence for it, but not nearly on the scale that the dems are talking about. He was careful to mention that Greenland is called that because it used to be green. We are so worried about the glaciers receding there, yet they weren’t there to begin with. He also touched on the fact that concerns like this are almost like fads and seem to come and go. This is very good information, though I had heard much of it before.

Mr. Stossel then went on to say something that had never occurred to me. If global warming is happening, then there is probably nothing we can do to stop it, but there is a lot we can do to adapt to it. He mentioned that much of the Netherlands would be underwater due to rising water levels if not for the dikes they have built there. This is great information, but how can we adapt to the climate? Wealth! We need wealth to be able to fund the great projects which may be required to keep us safe.

That wealth saves lives is easy to demonstrate. In third world countries, hundreds or thousands die whenever there is a major disaster such as an earthquake or tsunami. In America, virtually no one dies in floods. The reason is that we have the wealth to protect ourselves. We can fund the projects that protect thousands of lives. Isn’t it ironic that the Democrats, who talk the most about our environment, are the ones who will make it harder for us to deal with it?

Despite the vast wealth of information offered to us by Mr. Stossel, this will probably be our last post on him. Feel free to ask either Chaz or myself about the speech or even leave a comment here and we’ll tell you more. Even better, join us in going to other speeches. We are planning events right here at GRCC, so keep watching and we’ll let you know what’s happening. Also, if you want to know more about our meetings, find our group on Facebook: “Grand Rapids CC College Republicans”

Sunday, December 9, 2007

How the Liberals Respond to Capitalists

They’re really nice and friendly and say “Let’s agree to disagree” right? Ha! I wish. Perhaps some of them do, but there is a lot of nastiness from liberals toward those who disagree.

Last post, I mentioned that John Stossel spoke at WMU about capitalism. Well, the liberals were aware he was coming, so they spray painted “Capitalism Kills” on the office of the professor who invited him. Aside from the fact that there is no basis for such a crude statement, vandalizing property is inherently destructive, accomplishing nothing. I am reminded of the speech given by the ex terrorist at Calvin in that virtually all of the questions asked were of a nasty confrontational nature. At WMU the liberals weren’t even that polite. Only one or two liberals asked pointed questions (which Mr. Stossel answered intelligently and gracefully). Apparently they believe that vandalism is a better way to get their message across.

Mr. Stossel mentioned that he has gotten a great deal of hatred from his fellow reporters in the media. He’s gotten nasty messages and overall people there tend to just not like him because of his beliefs. What he said was most puzzling about this is that he’s not even a true conservative, but rather libertarian. He listed many issues on which he takes the liberal stance. Many liberals in the media do not see what they have in common but only what they disagree on.

Obviously, that liberals tend to act like this is sad, but what do we have to learn from it? I’m not just democrat bashing for no reason. So far, I have not seen this level of nastiness from Republicans. Yes, some Republicans are nasty, but I haven’t seen it on the same scale as with the Democrats. We need to maintain this. Indeed, let’s take it further. Let us live lives that demonstrate our enlightened attitude. When a Democrat comes looking for an argument, let’s remain calm as Mr. Stossel did, and not throw insults like the Dems. It may be very discouraging that the Democrats don’t want to work with us, but we must never sink to their level. A good attitude goes a long way.

Guess what? There’s still more I have to share from John Stossel’s speech.
Next post: The capitalist approach to the Global Warming issue

Tuesday, December 4, 2007

John Stossel at Western Michigan University

Last week on Wednesday, four of us from the GRCC College Republicans went down to Kalamazoo to see John Stossel speak on Capitalism. The speech was absolutely incredible. Mr. Stossel had a great wealth on information to share with us, and he had done his research on all of it. He made no end of good points, and I would like to repeat some of the topics here to encourage our Gentle Readers to look into these issues.

Mr. Stossel began my mentioning his original set of beliefs which included the belief that big business is bad. He thought that they were out to screw us and only serve themselves. As a result, he wanted to see more government regulation to keep the evil businesses in line. It did not take him long to notice that these rules come at a great cost. There’s the cost to taxpayers to enable the government to employ the people checking up on businesses, and there’s the enormous cost to businesses to comply with all the rules. Now here’s the ironic bit: It didn’t stop the crooks! Those few businesses that were evil minded, continued to be and simply found ways around the rules.

So what do these regulations do if not stop crooks? They strangle our economy. Businesses can’t grow because they’re spending all their money keeping themselves compliant with the rules. If they slip up and break a rule, they get huge fines which hinders them further. Whereas capitalism encourages economic growth, socialism and high regulations discourage it.

But what is to keep the evil businesses in line? Surely no one denies that there are some businesses out there who are less than honest. Mr. Stossel had an answer to this too: our freedom! That we are a free society, and that we have freedom of the press, means that there will be people to make a big deal out of any scams they find. Evil schemes always make the news. It’s simply good business thinking to not allow corrupt practices in your company because you will be found out eventually. Mr. Stossed also noted that there are almost never any nation-wide business scams. Scams almost always get found out long before the business is able to make it big.

It seems too perfect that we can just allow a capitalist market to run itself without government intervention. Do we really expect to just leave it alone and see it flourish? I’ve heard these arguments. I have to admit it is amazing that we can basically do this, but somehow it works. It only works in a free society, but it does work. Captialism isn’t perfect, and Mr. Stossel stressed that it’s not perfect, but it is by far the best system out there.

There is so much more from the speech that I want to share with you, so keep watching. Next post: “How the liberals respond to capitalists”

Monday, November 26, 2007


Before I begin the post I would like to mention that on Wednesday this week, we at GRCC are heading down to Kalamazoo to witness a speech by John Stossel at Western Michigan University. Everyone is invited to come. Contact Chaz for more information.

It’s no secret that taxes are necessary for a nation to survive. One cannot have a government at all without at least some taxes. Democrats understand this well. What they don’t understand, however, is that taxes are inherently harmful to whatever they are levied on. Anything taxed is something that will be used less. Tax imports and imports will suffer. Tax small businesses and small businesses will suffer. Tax profit and profit will suffer.

Due to Lansing’s refusal to consider budgeting their money effectively, our state government felt compelled to raise taxes. Of course, they had to come up with creative ways of doing this. First they started a service tax, which will seriously harm our service oriented companies (who provide jobs by the way). Still, this tax was not enough so the Dems thought they would continue with their favorite scheme of “taxing the rich” which always leads to a burden on the poor. We now have a tax on investments in Michigan. If anyone makes more than a certain amount of money through investments, this money will be taxed.

Now the Dems set this number pretty high so as to convince the poor that they are not affected, but we must remember that the overall strength of the economy affects the poor far more seriously than the rich. If we have a weak economy, the rich will have a bit less money, while the poor starve and die. But the economy doesn’t survive on handouts to the poor. The economy thrives on big business creating jobs for the poor to feed themselves. This tax on investments means that any rich man with any bit of sense will invest in any of the 49 other states without such a ridiculous tax. This devastates our economy, and makes the poor starve and suffer. The rich will be fine. They just move away and make profit in another state. But if we had been kinder to the rich, then they could have provided jobs to the poor here in Michigan rather than in Florida.

The rich are not obliged to help the poor. We can make no commands to them. But if we provide a good place for their business the rich will be the best thing the poor ever saw in this state. When will we ever give them the respect they deserve for giving us all jobs and health care and wealth that we may one day make it big ourselves? If we continue to tax all the rich out of our state, we will continue to bankrupt ourselves and ensure a dismal future for all citizens in Michigan, rich or poor.

Wednesday, November 7, 2007

Speaker on Terrorism

Earlier this week, several members of the GRCC College Republicans joined the College Republicans at Calvin College to listen to a speaker on the topic of radical Islam. The speaker was one Kamal Saleem, and had been a PLO terrorist before converting to Christianity and abandoning his terrorist ways.

Saleem had many good insights into Islam, particularly in its radical forms. He did not speak at length of the 85% of Muslims who are not radical much because his point was that we must be prepared to deal with the radicals. He was careful to mention, however, that only 15% are radicals who want to kill us. Saleem detailed his youth and upbringing in violent ideology as well as his time in America, which he spent converting people here to his version of Islam.

His message was that we must understand Islam and that we must as Christians, show love to Muslims. He stressed that returning hatred with hatred will solve nothing. Now clearly, not all those who agree with his views on Islam are Christians as he is now, but he spoke in a Christian context because not only is he a Christian, but he was speaking to a Christian school.

Saleem’s twofold message of the need for readiness to deal with a bloodthirsty enemy and the need for love for our enemies was particularly impressive. He was not telling anyone to despise Muslims or even that all Muslims are radical. He was simply exhorting us to deal with a dangerous situation appropriately.

Many people misunderstood his message as a message of hate, or a message that Islam is evil. Perhaps part of this is that he was speaking in a Christian context to a Christian school, but mostly I think it is a misunderstanding due to his emphasis on the radicals among the Muslims who are the ones we need to worry about most. There is a lesson here. When someone speaks for any cause, we must see the true motive and discern very carefully whether it is a message of hate, or rather something else. We must be wise and unbiased when we listen to people

Thursday, November 1, 2007

The Red Scare Revived

Many people may remember their history well enough to recall the “Red Scare” during the Cold War. The fear at the time was that the communists were infiltrating America, so anyone who was even implicated as a communist was blacklisted. If someone was blacklisted, then his life was destroyed. He lost his job, the world hated him, and sometimes he was prosecuted as a traitor.

Does any of this sound familiar? It sure does to me! I never experienced the Red Scare but I have seen an almost identical. I am referring to the endless accusations of racism happening right now. Just recently, Dog the bounty hunter has been accused of being a racist. As a result, his show has been stopped and he has been ridiculed by the world. But this begs the question: does he have the right to be racist? The answer is, he does. Should his life be destroyed for having offensive views? Of course not. In America, the right to believe what you truly believe is sacred. We don’t necessarily agree with Imus, or Dog or others who hold racist views, but in America, we have no right to persecute them. Dog’s life will probably now be destroyed just as that of Imus was, but this is a great injustice.

We have seen other faces to this problem of liberalism. Those who do not support gay marriage are also said to be bigots. Those who believe that it’s okay for a woman not to work are called sexists. Everyone who does not hold to a liberal view of the world is being demonized. If we hold that women aren’t men and that we have serious moral problems with homosexuality, then our right to believe these things is void. How many men will stand up for our rights? How many will demand that our thoughts and beliefs are ours to have? Will we stand up for justice and fight this “Bigotry scare” which persecutes all those who make a slight mistake?

Tuesday, October 23, 2007

More Hypocrisy From Hilla the Hun

It’s not news to anyone that Hillary Clinton is a hypocrite. She was one of those who voted for the PATRIOT act, though she then encouraged a filibuster of the same act when it came time to renew it. Also, she voted to give the president power to declare war on Iraq, though she has been abundantly condemning of his decision to use that power, even leading personal attacks on General Petraeus, which were entirely irrelevant to his presentation to congress about our work in Iraq.

Now we have another most interesting event to add to the list. A new book came out, which has not been factually disputed, which states that she listened in on political opponents during Slick Willy’s presidential campaign in 1992. Apparently her opponents were discussing another woman who might come forward about her affair with Willy.

I would state my thoughts but an unnamed GOP official said it better than I could. “Hillary Clinton ’s campaign hypocrisy continues to know no bounds. It is rather unbelievable that Clinton would listen in to conversations being conducted by political opponents, but refuse to allow our intelligence agencies to listen in to conversations being conducted by terrorists as they plot and plan to kill us. Team Clinton can expect to see and hear this over and over again over the course of the next year.”

My only concern is that the media will try to hide this fact. It is up to us conservatives to make sure the truth gets out. Don’t let Hillary get away with her anti-American hypocrisy.

Thursday, October 18, 2007

Words from a Marine Sergeant serving in Iraq

“We get a little info from higher about what's going on in Al Anbar but the Marines that came before us did such a good job we haven't dropped hardly any ordnance. [i.e. Bombs and missiles] The general word about the war is that we're winning and the Iraqis are getting better at standing on their own.”

A Marine I know, who is a Sergeant in the Marine Corps serving in Iraq, said that in a message to his family and friends. How many people know that about Iraq? We’re hardly fighting anymore in Anbar, because there are precious few terrorists to kill in some areas. Let’s face it. Al Anbar is pacified. That’s right. Pacified. (Remember, people, that Anbar was considered a lost cause as recently as a year ago. That’s how much things have improved) Now did you hear that on the News? I’m willing to bet you didn’t. Bush gave a speech to that effect on Labour day, but precious few people even know he gave a speech, much less know what he said. The media refuses to tell us.

Not only that, but they blatantly lied about General Patraeus’ speech to Congress. I watched the speech he gave and he basically said Iraq is just about won. But the next day on the today show, they were showing just the right clips of the dems speaking to make it appear that we’ve lost. It’s not just misleading anymore. It’s lying. Now I don’t mean to rant about the media. I’m sure conservatives do enough of that without my help. But the point is, we need to get our objective information. We know the media lie, so we need another source. My source is the warriors serving in Iraq. My Marine friend is there, so I can ask him. Previously I had a friend serving there as an MP so I asked him and he said that the situation was endlessly getting better, though it was still a lot more violent when he was there. Even that shows the great amount of improvement.

Now I’m not saying that we’ve won yet. Bagdad has yet to be pacified, and they still need our help, But the situation is endlessly improving. That Sergeant isn’t even that far from Bagdad and his area is pacified

It is also worth mentioning that after Bush gave his speech there, Terrorists tried to counter him by stepping up the violence in Anbar. They failed. They simply could not do their job where they have no influence. Don’t let the media confuse you. We’re winning in Iraq.

PS: I used the term pacified, but the Marine I was talking to said that word was not valid. His complaint was that it implied that the people do not trouble us for we have forced them not to, which is not accurate. He prefers to explain that the Iraqis are choosing to work with the Americans and that terrorists are simply not welcome in Anbar

Saturday, October 13, 2007

The Nobel Peace Prize

Here’s a good joke for you. A man, desperate for attention after pathetically losing the presidential election makes a movie about global warming. He gets the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts. I can’t believe it’s true but it is. The idea of giving a peace prize to someone for an issue that has not a thing to do with peace is my first objection. Even if global warming were really happening (which is quite debatable), it has nothing to do with peace.

Today our world is at war. This war is quite global. The religious extremists of the Middle East are determined to destroy the West. They fight us at every turn. They don’t much care for the Iraqis, but they fight us in Iraq (they endlessly murder the Iraqis for the sole purpose of hurting Americans). Much of the Middle East is dedicated to the genocide of all Israelis; many of them want the same for the Americans because we support Israel. They will do everything in their power to destroy us even at the cost of annihilating their own people.

And yet, instead of a man helping us to end the war (which we can only end by winning it as to lose would mean our destruction), they choose to give the award to Gore and the UN Intergovernmental Panel. The UN has actively fought world peace by endlessly conceding to the terrorists. They fight Israel in their struggle for survival, and demand that we do nothing to protect ourselves from our enemies. They embolden the evil-minded dictators of the Middle East just as Europe emboldened Hitler in the 30’s.

If we want peace, we must fight the terrorists. They will fight to the last man to destroy us, and are in the process of murdering countless innocent civilians in their quest to do so. We must end this war. We must win this war. If any man were to deserve the Nobel Peace Prize, it would be a man who could subdue the terrorists (or at least give us a much greater advantage over them), not some nut parroting pseudo-scientific scare tactics.

Friday, October 12, 2007


The Bible has a lot to say concerning unity. In fact, Jesus goes so far as to explain that if the church were unified, then the whole world would know that Christianity is from G-d. Of course, we have seen that Christians are not unified, but just imagine that they were. Nothing would be able to stop them! Indeed, when the entire Roman Empire was Catholic, they conquered most of Europe. (At least in the religious sense.) Just about everyone in Europe was Christian for a long time.

But why am I talking about religion on a political blog? The answer is that we can learn from the lesson of unity. Because the Church is no longer unified, people can stand up to the Christians and indeed they seem to be falling from prominence. There is a lesson for us Republicans here. Our views, of course, are not primarily religious. They are political. We believe in capitalism, in the right of a nation to defend itself militarily when necessary, in the right to life, in low taxes alongside low government spending and more. Now we don’t all support all of these issues but they are common to most of us.

But now we get to the problem of some of these issues. While many of us believe that we should stay in Iraq, others believe we should leave immediately. While some of us believe in laws governing morality others believe that morality should be left more or less unlegislated. We are not identical. We are not uniform. Fortunately, unity does not mean that we are uniform. It means we do not attack one another. It means we share many common goals, even if not all of them.

Now, Democrats aren’t uniform either, but they don’t know how to handle this fact. They fight each other endlessly. If anyone does not match the party platform, the others attack them as wolves. My personal favorite example of this was when Lieberman lost the primary for his seat in the Senate. Despite being liberal, he was rejected for thinking for himself on the issue of the war in Iraq. This infighting is devastating to the Democrats.

We Republicans should be wiser. Despite our wide ranging opinions, we need not attack our own party for differences. There are a couple Republican presidential candidates whose policies I do not care for. I think they might do us a lot more harm than good in some ways, but I don’t attack them. I don’t fight with them, and I don’t protest their campaigns. I won’t necessarily vote for them in the primary, but I see that they are at least better than the Democrats running for office. In any contest between either of them and Hillary or Obama, I would definitely vote for the Republican, because overall they are still better.

Democrats are masters of lies and propaganda. They are good at getting fools who don’t know better to vote for them. Republicans are more likely to tell the truth and we don’t win over the idiots with that method. Our advantage must be in unity in addition to our logic and wiser positions. If we can support each other, we can accomplish much, including keeping the white house.

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

‘One-State Recession’

Dearborn, Michigan –yesterday Fred Thompson joined eight other Republican Presidential candidates in a GOP debate. With Jenny running jobs out of our state and raising taxes on the hard working Michiganians, no wonder the main theme for the debate focused upon economic issues.

Mitt Romney said it best when describing Michigan’s economy, “It’s inexcusable that Michigan is undergoing a one-state recession. … And, in some respects, what Michigan is seeing, the entire nation is going to see, unless we take action now to get Michigan stronger.” Romney went on to joke that he was surprised that Granholm did not tax the debate!

According to the Michigan Labor Market, Michigan’s unemployment rate is the highest in the United States at a staggering 7.4%. That even puts us behind the District of Columbia who has an unemployment rate of 5.7%. While George W. Bush has created an atmosphere for our markets that has had 49 consecutive months of job growth, Jenny has scared jobs and people away from Michigan. “Our real problem continues to be that an American company is having to pay an extraordinary high tax. … That’s why people in Michigan are going, looking for something to do,” Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee.

With Jenny raising taxes on Michigan businesses is it any wonder why we are loosing jobs? As Representative Duncan Hunter explains, “1.8 million jobs…have moved to communist China from the United States, including over 54,000 jobs from Michigan.”

All I have to say is, “thanks Jenny.”

Monday, October 1, 2007

Propagated Propaganda

First of all I want to apologize for any misunderstanding that may have been caused. The use of Trevor’s name was meant as a joke and in no way was it perpetuated because of Matt Hall nor Justin Zatkoff nor Chuck Yob. The mere suggestion there of is pure propaganda promoting political partition.

We as conservatives may have our minor differences from one another but I encourage all to lay aside their egos and become a humble people. Take the advice of Ronald Regan, “He who agrees with me seventy percent of the time should not be my enemy but my ally” (paraphrased). We as conservatives need to put aside our differences and focus on the goal of uniting against liberals.

Now let’s discuss the Ninth Commandment:

Thou Shall Not Bear False Witness

When this situation came up I immediately thought of the Ninth Commandment. Through this I want to stay transparent and keep my witness number one priority.

What came to mind is the term of falsification. We have to, and in fact we are commanded to, be careful not sow or receive doubt about someone without the facts. In this case, facts were (here’s the big word again) falsified. I urge everyone, myself included, to be careful not to assume and jump to conclusions.

“The tongue also is a fire, a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole person, sets the whole course of his life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell.” James 3:6

The tongue can lie and like a poison can damage a reputation. Be careful of the lies and falsehoods you spread for God knows the truth. Once a lie is out, it is difficult to catch.

I am not saying this to condemn or judge but to educate through the Word of God.

Again I urge everyone to set aside your differences. Complaining about the past will not change the future and continuing to attack each other is ungodly.

Chaz Oswald

Thursday, September 27, 2007

Mackinac Conference 2007

Well last weekend the Grand Rapids CC College Republicans had a great opportunity to volunteer for Chuck Yob and John McCain at the annual Mackinac Conference. It was a huge success. Not only did most Republican Presidential candidates show up [including the possibility of Newt Gingrich] but more than 3000 Conservatives were on the Island as well.

We not only spent time passing out stickers, placing signs throughout the Island, and making sure Trevor Pittsley did not tamper with the straw-poll, but we also spent time at party after party where we saw many politicians.

Here is a short list of who we saw last weekend:
-Dick DeVos
-John McCain
-Chuck Yob
-Holly Hughes
-Ron Paul
-Mike Cox
-Terri Lynn Land
-Fred Thompson
-Rudy Giuliani
-Duncan Hunter
-Peter Seccia
-Saul Anuzis
-Mitt Romney
-Barb VanderVeen
-Newt Gingrich
and many, many more...

Granholm happened to be on the Island too, of course she didn't show her face, but the flags were flying high outside the Governor's Mansion on the Island.

Here are some pictures from the weekend:

Us guys standing with Dick DeVos (the man who should have been our Governor)

Myself (Chaz) with John McCain

Rudy Giuliani

Juli working at the Conference (right)

Our College Republican Group (where is Jordon?)

Juli with Fred Thompson

A few of the guys after our dinner at the Grand Hotel

It was a great opportunity and a great conference. We are looking forward to and planning on attending the Mackinac Conference again next year. I hope you can come as well!

Wednesday, September 19, 2007

The Reality of the Democratic Majority

So, it's been almost one year since Election Day 2006, when the Democrats gained a handsome majority in the U.S House and Senate. The 110th Congress was given a mandate by the people of America to begin making drastic changes - in particular, changes in the Iraq war. The Democratic majority, led by Nancy Pelosi in the House and Harry Reid in the Senate, unveiled a "Six for '06" agenda of what the new majority planned to do in its first 100 days.

Let me reiterate one more time - it's been almost a year since then, and what does the Democratic Congress have to show for it? Abysmal approval ratings and a track record of doing nothing.

The whole Pelosi-Reid show in Congress has become a failure. What have they got to show for their first year? Nothing!

Anyone remember the good old days of the "Contract with America"? Not only did the Republican Party pass nine out of ten goals [which is a lot more to say than the Democrats' "lofty" six point program] but it went on to produce balanced budgets and have higher approval ratings than the current Democratic majority.

Friday, September 14, 2007

Family Friend to Run for State Rep.

This press release was given to me by Jordon Gilleland. Jordon is a member of The College Republicans of Grand Rapids Community College and Bob Genetski is a family friend of his!

Press Release
September 14, 2007

Genetski to declare for State House
by Kristen Lark – 616-836-5425

DATE OF EVENT: Saturday, September 15 TIME: 10:30 AM

LOCATION: Holland, Michigan - 146th Ave. between Waverly & M-40 in the field across from the closed Life Savers factory

Bob Genetski will announce his candidacy for the Republican nomination for State Representative for the 88th district (Allegan County-excluding Watson & Otsego Township and the city of Otsego) on Saturday in Holland. Genetski will declare his intent with the closed Life Savers factory as a backdrop, making the Michigan economy a strong focal point of his platform. (note to editor- Life Savers moved to Canada, taking 600 jobs from Michigan)

In his announcement, the Saugatuck native will call for an elimination of income taxes for Michigan seniors. With Money Magazine’s naming of Holland as one of the top towns in the U.S. to retire to in 2006, Genetski feels the elimination would help our state compete for the many retirees who want to avoid deadly weather of some southern states and enjoy the hospitality of the heartland. Furthermore, he believes the influx of out-of-state money will help bolster home sales and reduce the state budget deficit. “The additional retirees will bring a lot of disposable income,” Genetski will note.

The candidate’s speech will strongly oppose new taxes and call for an end to the personal property tax, which he calls, “a ball and chain hindering Michigan’s businesses and costing thousands of jobs.”

Genetski, who teaches at-risk high school students, will call for a restructuring of the state university system. He will recommend the state’s 15 universities to be brought under one board of regents “so that they compete against each other and not the taxpayer.” The educator will call for the current 15 university presidents and boards of trustees to show accountability to working families and develop plans to “cut tuition rates or leave their positions for others who will do so.”

The conservative Republican will also call for an end to prevailing wage laws that he believes forces taxpayers to overpay for public projects, noting a recent study by the Mackinac Center that taxpayers for one school district in west Michigan recently paid $2.5 million more for a project than they would have without state mandated prevailing wage laws.

Genetski is proud of his life long pro-life stance and staunchly opposes embryonic stem cell research.

Three students who recently graduated from Orion Alternative High School, where he teaches, will introduce Genetski. Each credits the teacher for his efforts in helping them graduate against the odds.

Prior to teaching at-risk students, Genetski taught and coached soccer at Otsego high school in Allegan County. Genetski is a member of the Allegan County GOP Executive Committee. He earned a master’s degree in education from Grand Valley State University in 2004. An avid writer, Genetski has penned guest editorials critical of Michigan universities for their lack of fiscal responsibility. These appeared in the Holland Sentinel and Grand Rapids Press. The educator also wrote a piece for the Mackinac Center’s Michigan Education Report that slammed the teacher certification process, calling it ineffective and wasteful.

Ronald Reagan cites Genetski’s father in the book In His Own Hand for a study the elder Genetski did on the damages state and local taxes do to an economy. The campaign is hopeful for an endorsement from a former Reagan cabinet appointee. Bob Genetski, when he is not teaching, plays ice hockey with his Saugatuck-based team Wally’s Whalers. He and his family attend church at St. Peter’s in Douglas.

(note to editor- there should be some good photo opportunities at this event. Bob’s former students could be quite passionate. We will send a standard headshot, but if you would like any shots from the announcement we would be happy to send some- Kristen)

Wednesday, September 12, 2007

Clear Matt Hall's Name

On Monday, September 10, 2007, the 'Turn Michigan Red' blog, by Justin Zatzoff, released a statement regarding the misinformation presented by the 'The Michigan Conservative Dossier.' I wanted to pass along the article in my full support of Matt Hall.

Conservative Dossier gets it wrong again!
An article posted on "Conservative" Dossier stating that "Matt Hall pulls endorsement of Chuck Yob" is completely false.

Here is the type of evidence this blog uses to fabricate a story...

This is the email that was sent out that the story is refering to...

Original Message-----
From: []
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 5:39 AM
To: Hildenbrand, Gerald W USA Mr USA US NCE
Subject: rnc man/woman race


Not sure if you're still in the State's or back in Iraq - either way Ihope this email finds you safe (matter of fact - I'm not sure if youstill use this email).

I'm emailing you just to touch base and get your thoughts about theNational Committeeman's race. I noticed your congressman endorsed Chuck, but I wasn't sure if that means you're going to follow his lead.

Currently I'm "keeping my powder dry." I'd be happy to fill you in onwhat went down at the last state committee meeting but essentiallyChuck/Holly and company sold the McCain campaign up the river forpersonal reasons (to protect the national committeeman/woman seats).Regardless of if you're with McCain or not - Chuck just proved thatthere is a trend in how he operates - internal republican politics comebefore external republican v. democrat politics and that's somethingthat is not good for the party.

Anyhow, I thought we had not talked in a while and this might be a goodtopic of conversation :) just wondering what you're thinking, which wayyou're leaning, etc.



It has been confirmed that the email address this was sent from "" has been used by 11th District Chairman Matt Frendeway in the past, and therefore it is definitely not from Matt Hall.

Reportedly when Matt Hall asked Joe Sylvester to remove the post, Joe refused."Conservative" Dossier using an email from Matt Frendeway to attack Matt Hall? Unbelievable!

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

The GRCC Conservative

First of all, we need to remember 9/11. Six years ago today, tragedy struck the United States. On that day four planes were hijacked, the Twin Towers were destroyed, the Pentagon was hit, and 2,997 innocent civilian lives were lost.

Now six years later, we remember what those terrorists tried to accomplish. We must continue to fight the War on Terror in order that an attack on U.S. soil will be prevented in our future. We must support our troops who fight across the world in order that we may live freely in the U.S.

God Bless the United States.

We will never forget 9/11.