Listen

Spectacular. That’s the only word I can come up with for the question posed by CNN contributor Will Cain when he was a guest on Don Lemon’s program the other day (this clip is a little dated, but I just came across it). Lemon, a man who has self-identified as a participant in homosexual behavior, was hosting both Cain and another CNN contributor who apparently practices homosexuality as well, and turned to the topic of the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. Lemon played a clip of WHCD host Jimmy Kimmel chiding Keith Olbermann while taking a shot at the perceived homosexual mannerisms of Dr. Marcus Bachmann (Michele Bachmann’s husband).

Kimmel’s quip was something along the lines of, “Keith Olbermann has more pink slips than Marcus Bachmann.” When the clip ended, Lemon forced laughter for what was an uncomfortable amount of time – past the point that any normal human being would laugh at that joke whether they found it funny or not (perhaps he was trying to fill time on a slow news day) – and then asked his guests what they thought about the joke.

That’s when Cain delivered a knockout blow to Lemon:

KEEP READING

Listen

One of the questions I’ve always had for liberals who argue for a hike in the minimum wage is, “Why stop at ‘x’ amount of dollars?” In other words, if they are advocating that the government raise the amount of money they demand that businesses pay their workers to $10 an hour, I ask, “why stop at $10?” After all, the idea is that workers need that raise to be able to keep up with cost of living expenses. So, why not make it $20 an hour and give them a little more cushion?

At first, some liberals misunderstand where I’m going, and they agree. But I keep raising the price. Why not $30? $40 an hour? At some point, they recoil and say something like, “Well, let’s not be ridiculous or go overboard.” Hmmm. Why is saying that I want workers paid $40 an hour “going overboard?” Do these liberals have something against working men and women making a good wage like that?

If you push them on this, they will eventually relent and acknowledge that the laws of economics make it both unfeasible and unwise for government to place such demands on businesses. Precisely.  Now, why? Because when you artificially inflate the wage system, you are only going to drive up costs in other areas to offset the “new money.” Not to mention the fact that many businesses could not afford that kind of jump in wages for their workers. Instead of employing 4 men (providing 4 salaries and supporting 4 families) at $10 an hour, now the business will be employing 1 man. That’s 3 families without an income. In other words, those fighting on behalf of the “working middle class” would be destroying 75% of their jobs and livelihoods.

KEEP READING

Listen

Since Dick Lugar bit the dust in the Indiana primary, liberals in both the Republican and Democrat parties have been having a field day. They’ve been using the Senator’s defeat as more evidence of their claim that Republicans have moved so far to the right that they can’t even identify the middle anymore. This, to them, is unconscionable. They can’t fathom why any political party would choose to embrace such a radical ideology so far from the mainstream.

Look, I don’t want to burst anybody’s bubble here because I know these folks that say this nonsense are really proud of themselves. They think they’ve got a winning campaign slogan, and they are loading their rhetorical bombs as fast as they are launching them in the press. But stop and think about it: this “dangerously rightward shift” took place beginning in the 2010 election cycle with that dastardly tea party. That’s when, we are told, that the Republican Party moved so dangerously away from mainstream America that they imperiled the country. Uh-huh. Could someone refresh my memory as to how “mainstream” America reacted to this outrage? Oh yeah, they elected historic numbers of these Americans.

KEEP READING

Other "don't miss" segments of the radio show today:

• David Letterman has moved from perverted sex jokes about the preteen kids of Sarah Palin to outright campaigning for Barack Obama.  He gets angry that silly Americans don't just appreciate the Benevolent One, Barack Obama, for all he's "done" for them. Sheesh.  (listen)
• Labor union workers can be thrilled to know that their bosses spent millions of dollars of their dues money trying to recall Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin - a prospect that looks so grim now that the DNC isn't going to waste a dime there.  Unions: standing up for the working man.  Yeah. (listen)
• Once again, Barack Obama's budget proposals don't garner a single vote from any Democrat in the U.S. Senate.  That's how serious this president is when it comes to financial stewardship of your tax dollars - he can't even get a single member of his own party to support him. (listen)

Listen

I get why conservatives have been, and remain uncomfortable with Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee. His record as governor of the liberal state of Massachusetts is very concerning, and his flip flops on critical issues leave many of us more than just a little apprehensive about his commitment to pursuing a staunchly conservative agenda from the White House.

But there is one point that I want to make very clear in terms of my position. Mitt Romney is no Barack Obama. Is he closer ideologically to Obama than Santorum or Bachmann? Yes. But he is still worlds apart from Obama’s ideals. The silly “Obamney” monikers are just that: silly. I’ve always felt that way, but never more so than after reading bits and pieces of Romney’s speech to the graduating seniors at Liberty University. These lines of Romney that follow (along with the follow-up commentary of columnist and radio host Dennis Prager) are a clear indication of a guy who sees the world, and America much differently (as in night and day differently) than our current President:

KEEP READING

Listen

I think the biggest challenge facing the Obama re-election campaign crew these next few months may not be what everything thinks it will be: finding a way to distract the electorate to the sorry state of the economy under Obama. I think it may actually be finding a way to keep Vice President Joe Biden away from a microphone. The list of gaffes has become too long in recent years to keep track of (though Jonah Goldberg’s annihilation of Biden’s “intellect” and “gravitas” in his recent book is as good – and hilarious – an attempt as any I’ve seen), but they seem to be causing the administration bigger and bigger headaches, even on policy matters.

If you haven’t heard the latest, Biden managed to put together a speech to college kids that both insults previous generations of Americans, unnecessarily declares the greatness of an unproven generation, fails grammatically, and slips on a fairly touchy policy subject. Behold:

KEEP READING

Listen

It’s May. Six months before the election. That’s an important thing to note before starting any analysis of where the race for the White House now stands because so very much can change almost instantaneously depending on national and international events. Six months is an eternity in politics, so no political analyst – no matter how wise and experienced – can truly make an accurate prediction of what will happen in November with any certitude. With that caveat established, here’s the truth: right now, Obama’s fortunes are not looking as rosy as what his team would have you believe.

If you want proof, just totally ignore Mitt Romney, totally ignore a reenergized tea party following the Mourdock win in Indiana, totally ignore the polls, and watch Obama and his surrogates only. That will demonstrate to you how confident they are about their current prospects. Two specific examples recently speak the truth that this will be no cakewalk for the president.

First, President Obama speaking at his second LGBT event in recent days (which in and of itself could be interpreted as a sign of desperation) blasted the Republican strategy that is annoying him:

KEEP READING

Other "don't miss" segments of the radio show today:

• ABC calls it quits with their Christian-bashing, porn-promoting, Scripture-mocking TV drama GCB.  You have to wonder how many programs that mock mainstream America and family values have to fail before Hollywood gets the picture. (listen)
• Here's a shock: top universities invite far more liberals to be their commencement speakers than conservatives.  We're talking a 7-to-1 margin.  And why not?  What better way to cap off a four year program of liberal indoctrination than with a rousing liberal speech? (listen)
• Back in the world of the Trayvon Martin exploitation, reports are now being released that not only did the shooter Zimmerman have a broken nose and two black eyes, but Trayvon's autopsy revealed bruised knuckles.  Nevertheless, Zimmerman may still be charged with a "hate crime" by FBI. (listen)

Another day, another set of primaries. Another story the media’s not covering. First, the primary news: Tuesday’s primaries should be mostly uneventful…except for the possible upending of yet another establishment candidate in a competitive U.S. Senate race. In Nebraska, a three-way Republican primary appeared ho-hum even a week ago with heavy favorite, Nebraska attorney general, Jon Bruning holding a commanding sixteen point lead. But a late surge in the polls coupled with a key endorsement from Sarah Palin has resulted in a reversal in challenger, Deb Fischer’s fortunes. What makes this race particularly interesting is the power players backing the candidates. Aside from Palin’s endorsement of Fischer, Bruning holds a nod from Rick Santorum and Jon Stenberg received support from both Rand Paul and Jim DeMint. Bruning has held a tremendous money edge and held a solid lead through nearly all of the primary season but faces the prospect of flaming out in the last week before the election. Fischer has jumped from third to first in a matter of a weak and is in position to pull off a May surprise. The winner goes on to face former Senator Bob Kerry in what promises to be a prime target seat for Republicans in November.

What else is big in the news today (or not in the news in this case)? How about the fact that Mitt Romney has pulled ahead of President Obama among women? Yes, the women vote. Often cited as the Achilles heal for Republicans (after all, women voters are somehow more valuable than men voters), Romney’s “war against women” was supposed to be the latest surge in the Obama candidacy that would prove fatal to Romney’s chances in November. After a brutal primary, and unpopular stances on “women’s issues”, Romney was in danger of losing women entirely. So what isn’t in the news today? How about the fact that Romney is now leading among women voters in the most recent CBS/NYT Poll? I’m not sure which is more humorous at this point: the fact that the media is utterly silent on the issue or the fact that team Obama is trying to spin a New York Time poll as biased.

Listen

The fallout continues over Barack Obama’s call for the people of America to rebel against God’s Word. And Robert Knight’s recent column may be the most damaging for Obama yet. Why? Because unlike many other columnists who dodge it for the sake of focusing on political consequences, Knight specifically calls out Obama for dragging Jesus into the fray and misrepresenting him for the sake of his mad scheme. Knight correctly concludes that by doing so, Obama has far more serious consequences to consider than political ones.

After having done everything in his power to undermine marriage, President Obama has come out of the closet, so to speak, with his announcement that he’s now for brideless or groomless “marriage.” But he didn’t come out alone. He brought Jesus with him, citing Christ as his inspiration for directly attacking God’s moral order. It’s one thing to be a hypocrite, which Mr. Obama has been for years. Since he began pretending to oppose the redefinition of marriage but refusing to defend the federal Defense of Marriage Act while homosexualizing the military. It’s quite another thing, however, to invoke Christ when doing the devil’s work.

Forget the voters. Mr. Obama’s going to have to answer to God for this one. Wednesday’s announcement even might sober up the people who voted for Mr. Obama simply to show that America has overcome racial division. Someone should survey pastors who support Mr. Obama and ask: Which is more important - electing a man on the basis of race or upholding the integrity of the faith and what the Scriptures say about marriage? Citing Genesis 2:24, Jesus said in Matthew 19:5: “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”

It is always interesting to hear liberals complain about bringing Jesus (or faith) into political discussions. They maintain that we must rigidly toe the line separating church and state – a line that they have merely constructed in order to apply when it benefits them and trample when it does not. That, in and of itself, is rather odd. The left will talk about faith when it comes to the environment and the redistribution of wealth. But on issues of sexual morality, they want faith to be silent in the public square. That’s peculiar given the fact that Biblical history doesn’t record a single civilization (that I’m aware of) incurring the wrath of God for their pollution problem. But there are plenty that incurred it for their sexual sins.

KEEP READING