New Hampshire, what shall become of thee

Mark Steyn's column in the Washington Times is a must read.

He is right about Obama. Anyone who tells you they support Obama because they want change is either an idiot or hiding something. Obama voters are not voting for change, they are voting for a black man. That is all. Obama is serving up the same liberal government knows best schemes that voters have rejected in the past. He is a new face for the old orthodoxy.

He is also right on Huck and his supporters. I agree that what threatens America is cultural and spiritual and not economic. They West itself is in a profound moral and spiritual crisis. We have imported the nihilism of Europe and called its practitioners realists.

No-Go Zones in Britain

Reverend Michael Nazir-Ali, a Bishop in the Church of England, is calling attention to the fact that parts of England are being taken over by Islamic radicals.

I'm actually quite impressed. The Church of England, and its American offshoots, are normally pretty spineless when it comes to dealing with threats to Western civilization.

Nazir-Ali is from Pakistan so he knows how minorities are treated under Islamic rule. He can see through the pie-in-the-sky, we-are-all-brothers-under-the-skin brainwashing of the Western Left. He knows that the Koran (it flushes ever so well) allows no compromise with those who will not submit to the will of its evil.

Of course the good Muslims of Britain are calling him a Nazi and accusing him of whipping up anti-Islamic sentiment in England. As if more could exist after practitioners of the "Religion of Peace" detonated themselves on the London subway. I find it funny that a Muslim would accuse anyone of acting like Nazis. They support the goals of the Nazis: killing Jews and destroying Christianity.

The Muslims also pull out the old canard that it is the policies of the United States and Britain in the Middle East that are fueling Islamic extremism. Isn't it funny that Muslim radicals and Leftists are always reading from the same script.

It is obvious to anyone who reads what our enemies say to us and to each other that this is about Jihad. It is not about securing better working conditions for textile workers in Mosul or a reaction to Western aggression. Imperialism is also a shallow excuse. The only imperial power in the Middle East for most of the second millennium was the Islamic Ottoman Empire.

In fact, Christians can lay claim to be the victims of Muslim imperialism with more creditability than vice versa. Ask the people of Greece and the Balkans if they feel bad about Western imperialism against Muslims. They will look at you like you have lost your mind. The people of Europe have been the victims of Muslim depredations for centuries. Islam has cast a shadow over Europe ever since that pervert Mohamed and his savages Arab tribesmen rode out of the wilderness to spread their blasphemy.

The West needs a spiritual renewal badly, but I am afraid that it will come with burkas, tyranny, and the primitivism of the Middle East.

WordBearer's election primer

Well now that we are a few days out from the Iowa Caucus, the political equivalent of a circle jerk, I think it is time I weighed in with my opinions on the Republican front runners.

The candidates will be ranked on a scale of 1 to 10. 10 means that I would burn down the house of anyone who criticized the guy. 1 means that I would rather be raped by a grizzly bear with AIDS and then set on fire than vote for this person.

Mike Huckabee - I really dislike Mike Hikeafee. I feel that he is the easiest Republican to beat because of his poor record on taxes and immigration.

I also find Huckabee supporters insufferable. They do not want to talk about real issues, just how Huck is a Christian. Great, that is wonderful but I want to talk taxes not theology folks.

Score: 3

Mitt Romney - I like Mitt. That being said, there are real trust issues. It is natural for a conservative like me to distrust the former governor of Taxachusetts. Mitt has answered many of these questions, but I still want to see more. From what I am hearing, he seems pretty committed to the War on Terror and to the social issues that are important to the conservative movement.

My real problem with Mitt is trust. He seems very polished and slick. In fact he seems almost Clintonian.

Score: 6

Fred Thompson - I love Fred. He is on the ball in dealing with Islamofascism and on taxes. He also has said all the right things when it comes to social issues. Fred is my choice right now and I hope he will win.

Score: 8

John McCain - I am ambivalent when it comes to McCain. I distrust him more than I distrust any candidate in the Republican race. He has made his bones in Washington by being a "maverick." Mavericks are loved by the media and are always hailed as "bi-partisan" and "independent" but when push comes to shove and the maverick needs that support of the party faithful, they come up short.

McCain really has no chance because the rank and file Republican base see him for what he is: a man willing to say and do anything to be loved by the media and to get elected. He seems to forget that the Republican base distrusts the media.

McCain has been a stalwart on foreign policy and deserves credit for that, but he is opposed to renewing the Bush tax cuts and is soft on immigration. Additionally, McCain-Feingold was one of the worst ideas in history and significantly hampers freedom of speech.

Score: 4

Rudy Giuliani - I'm still on the fence with Rudy. The most important issue of our times is the threat from Islamic fundamentalism and Rudy seems to get that better than any other candidate. Still his social liberalism is a concern, but he governed as a social conservative in New York.

Score: 5

All in all, I am very happy with the Republican field this year. There are a variety of opinions represented and we are having real dialogue about the future of the conservative movement and the Republican party.

The media portrays the Republican party as the monolithic, homogeneous, machine in which all independent thought and disagreement are prohibited. This could not be further from the truth. The Republican party is intellectually diverse in ways that the Dims could not possibly ponder. The Republican party is not made of single issue constituencies like the Dims. One can not pander to the Republican base by addressing just one issue which is why Huck will probably not win.

I would offer this advice to the candidates: Look at someone like me. I am a typical conservative. I am not a single issue guy. I base my decision by aggregating the positions of the candidates on national security, economic/tax policy, and social issues. I need to hear about more than your Christianity or thrilling life story. Tell me you are going to kill terrorists, cut taxes, and appoint good judges and you have my vote.