About Me

Name: Post Script By...
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 
Uncategorized

Obama is no Jackie Robinson

Posted by Post Script By Phil Stanley on Saturday, September 27, 2008 11:03:21 AM
Obama is no Jackie Robinson.
As difficult as it is for the left to believe, many of us with a conservative bent would rejoice at the prospect of a African American as President, Just not this African American.
When Branch Rickey and the Brooklyn Dodgers sought to integrate Major League Baseball they knew their selection of which man would be the first black big leaguer was critical. 
If the Dodgers chose correctly their bold action could serve as a spring board to rapid integration of America's game, if they chose wrongly their bravery could flounder as an unfortunate experiment for which the country was not yet ready.
The Dodgers made the right choice and America was changed for the better, and for good.
The success of the Jackie Robinson story was as much, or more, a result of the depth of the mans character as it was his prodigious skills as a ball player.
Compare Obama.
His association with reverend Wright, William Ayers, Tony Refco, and the Chicago political machine, do not support  the theory that Obama is a man of sound character.
Neither does his inexperience, inefficiency, and Machiavellian approach to politics do much to recommend him for the job he seeks.
I would doubt that even the most ardent Obama supporter would argue that he represents the best and brightest of the African American community.
 Obama's shortcomings would undoubtedly be magnified in the role of President of The United States, and his certain failures could, ironically, set back the cause of African Americans.

Jackie Robinson was a perfect choice.
Barack Obama is not.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

On Thompson-Huckabee and Baseball

Posted by Post Script By Phil Stanley on Sunday, October 21, 2007 11:34:00 AM
Fred Thompson is like the famous, highly paid, jaded veteran that jogs to first base on the ground ball and the Texas leaguer pop fly, sits out game 2 of the double header, and avoids the diving catch in favor of playing the ball on a safe hop.

Mike Huckabee is the hungry, grateful rookie, playing for the league minimum salary, who slides head first into first base on a dribbler to the mound, stretches a single into a double, and dives into the stands for a foul ball 4 rows up.

It is the differance between Barry Bonds and Troy Tulowitzki. (the Colo Rockies SS, and likely rookie of the year).
It is the difference between the New York Yankees and the Colorado Rockies.

Thompson appears only marginally interested in his own campaign, he seems distracted, unfocused, and often just plain bored.
Huckabee comes across as delighted by the prospect of service, grateful to be in "The Show", highly skilled, and intent on giving it his all.

Of course Bonds has undeniable hall of fame statistics, he has great name reognition, and boy does he have money.
Tulo has only one big league season, he was almost unknown outside Colorado until 2 weeks ago, and his salary wouldn't qualify him for a home loan on a fixer in Bonds neighborhood.

Still if you had to pick one player on which to build a winning team for next year would anyone that knows baseball choose Bonds over Tulowitzki? 
I think not. 
If you had to pick one true conservative as the Republican standard barrer for 2008 is it Thompson or Huckabee?
The choice seems obvious.
It is October and Bonds is looking for work, the Yankees are out of the chase.
 Troy Tulowitzki. and the Colorado Rockies are in The World Series.
Go Tulo!
Go Roxs!
Go Huck!
Phil Stanley for Post Script
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The Rise of Schools as drugstores

Posted by Post Script By Phil Stanley on Friday, October 19, 2007 2:00:37 PM
The issue of drugs at school has taken a new twist.
This week in Portland Maine a school board has approved the delivery of birth control pills to students as young as eleven. This same school has been dispensing condoms, apparently to insufficient effect, since 2000.
What can we expect if the pills are no more effective than the condoms?
 Morning after pills are a small step. How about an on campus abortion clinic?

Now that the school is in the drug delivery business there are so many possibilities.
What about the severe problem of youth obesity? Should the school be giving out amphetamines and other diet pills?
Perhaps an  out patient liposuction surgical suite would be useful. Other cosmetic proceedures could also be offered. We all know of the severe self-esteem problems adolescents face when plagued by a large nose, thin lips or weak chin. Surely this too is a matter for school intervention.
Since we all know that some students will engage in illegal drug use, shouldn't the school provide clean needles, and quality controlled cocaine, marijuana, and opiates?

Of course some would argue that medical, moral, and health care decisions regarding ones own children should be within the realm of parental authority, responsibility, and control. Then too there is the issue of cost associated with such a far reaching government program. 
 I am quite certain that Hilary and the democrats can concoct a plan to pay for these health care programs.

Maybe they already have.

Phil Stanley for Post Script
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Can a Pro-Choice Republican Win

Posted by Post Script By Phil Stanley on Friday, October 12, 2007 11:29:46 AM
The Republican party is acting like the high school girl who abandons the boy that brought her to the dance, and goes home with the  flashy stud.
It is inarguable that the Conservative Evangelical Christian (CEC) vote was instramental in the election of George Bush.
 It is undeniable that one (probably the) major issue within this group is the right to life for the unborn.
A republican nomination of a pro abortion candidate is at least a slap in the face to this core constituency, more like a kick in the pants. 
The warning issued by James Dobson in his recent op-ed piece will, if ignored,be done so at  severe peril to the chance of a Republican victory in 2008.
But will the CEC really opt out of the election, or back a third party? -That would be irrational and only serve to assure the election of the Democrat; surely our reliable , forgiving, dependable, rational Christian friends won't go there. 
Wrong.
As to irrationality, what about the irrationality of the Republican party in its flirtation with the nomination of a candidate who holds a position that is not just distasteful , but abhorrent to a large and important constituency.
To rely on the CEC to come around and support a pro abortion candidate on the basis of rationality shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the depth, and the source of their commitment to life.
As difficult as it is for some to understand many CEC voters hold some values ahead of rationality. To many within the CEC there are matters of greater importance than the identity of the next president. 

Would anyone consider going to an African American and urging him to support a candidate with whom he agrees on every issue but one; that issue being that the candidate favors the impossition of slavery for Black Americans. This is analogous to asking a pro life republican to support a pro abortion candidate.

To understand this world view it may be helpful to recall the tragedy at Columbine high school in Colorado.
 Was it rational for the young lady at Columbine to forfeit her life when she could have survived by a simple denial of Christ?
Was it right?
Is the young women viewed as a fool by fellow Christians?
The same question may be ask of the actions of Christian martyrs throughout history. Clearly, rationality and political expediency are not necessarily the primary driving forces behind Christian behavior.

To some, perhaps many within the CEC electorate a vote for a candidate who supports abortion is tantamount to a denial of Christ. This is the line these voters will not cross, be it irrational, inexpedient, or politically nieve.

Someone needs to talk to the high school girl before she leaves the dance with the wrong guy. She needs to know that her date loves her and wants to be with her. She also needs to know that her rejection of him will hurt. The boy may not call back, the boy may go to the next dance with someone else.
Of course , maybe she can rely on the fancy stud for prom, maybe she can go with a conservative cross-over Democrat.
Maybe not. 
Phil Stanley for Post Script
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why is Mike Huckabee ignored?

Posted by Post Script By Phil Stanley on Thursday, October 11, 2007 12:08:27 PM
It is like the corny movie where the girl wearing glasses is ignored by the handsome hero until she takes off the glasses and viola, a ravishing beauty is revealed who captures the heart of the prince charming.
Mike Huckabee is the girl in the glasses.

Mike Huckabee shines at the debates,he is credentialed, and, in the words of his campaign an authentic conservative.
His ideas are innovative, he is articulate, personable, oozing integrity,and humorous.
Huckabee does not suffer from the personal and idealogical deficiencies that have left many republicans luke warm about the big 4. (Romney, Rudy, McCain, and Thompson)
Despite all the Huckabee strengths, and the other candidates shortcomings our hero (the media) only has eyes for the flawed non-myopic girls.
It is no surprise when the liberal media at the Michigan debate virtually ignored Huckabee. (Could it be liberals sense his potential power and want to avoid pitching to him). More troubling, and discouraging is the marginalization of the Huckabee campaign by conservatives.
The Fox news commentators were trumpeting McCain after the New Hampshire debate. The analysts seemed genuinely surprised when the public vote came in showing significant support for a Huckabee debate victory.
Conservative opinion leaders like Hannity seem intent on urging an early exit from the campaign by Huckabee. Is it possible that Hannity sees Huckabee as a legitimate threat to his "Homey" (Rudy G.).
Of course there is the  issue of electability, the last thing any of us want is a candidate that results in the horror of a Hillary or Obama Victory.
But remember;
in the bad movie the girl with the glasses was attractive to the movie viewers from the start. It was only the cast of the movie that failed to see the underlying beauty.
Give Huckabee a fair shake.
 Take a closer look at the girl in the glasses.   
Phil Stanley for Post Script 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »