The Fix Is In…Again
By Michael Gaddy

In early 2000, many were the conservatives of this country trumpeting the emergence of their salvation from the decadence of the eight-year shenanigans of William Jefferson Clinton. Proud indeed they were of their emerging front running candidate, none other than the man who would bring morals back to the White House, George W. Bush. The conservatives of the country, as well as those who were just fed up with the prevaricating administration of the co-presidents (Bill and Hillary) thought they had discovered the cure.

Now, fast forward to early 2004 and we are seeing a front runner emerge from the ranks of the Democrats as they move to rescue the country from four years of war mongering, empire building, budget busting socialism by the savior of 2000. Does anyone begin to see the pattern here? (Read the rest here)

Gun Control Remains a Loaded Issue for Democratic Candidates
By John Lott, Jr. and Grover Norquist

Everyone seems to believe that Democrats have changed their minds on gun control. Out on the campaign trail, John Kerry and John Edwards and Wesley Clark talk about their boyhood hunting trips. Before the Iowa caucuses, Kerry even took time out to shoot a pheasant. The gun control organization Americans for Gun Safety calls it "taking the gun issue to the political center." The National Rifle Assn.'s leader, Wayne LaPierre, claims that "the center of the party saw that [advocating gun control] was a dead end for the Democrats." And Newsweek spread the word: "At least among the presidential candidates," said an article in January, "Democrats are moderating their stances" on gun control.

If one reads the candidates' public statements on the 2nd Amendment, they certainly seem moderate:

Kerry: "I believe that the Constitution, our laws and our customs protect law-abiding American citizens' right to own firearms…. I believe that the right of gun ownership comes with responsibilities."

Howard Dean: "Law-abiding citizens should have the right to own firearms for hunting and other legitimate purposes, subject to reasonable restrictions related to gun safety."

Edwards: "I believe that the 2nd Amendment protects Americans' right to own firearms for purposes like hunting and personal protection, and that this right is subject to responsible limits like other rights." (Read the rest here)

Politically Incorrect Movie Reviews
The Butterfly Effect
By RadioFree Rocky D

Someone in Tinsel Town likes Ashton Kutcher; or better phrased, someone in Hollyweird thinks they can make money on Ashton Kutcher – someday in the future perhaps; certainly not with this film. This is why Kutcher was cast in Butterfly Effect; a vehicle film if ever there was one. In this flick we get see Kutcher the ahk-tor emooooting all over the screen. We see Kutcher as a low-rent college student; Kutcher as a preppie; Kutcher as a paraplegic; Kutcher as a jailbird; Kutcher as a Kutcher; now ain’t this kid talented, or what, huh? Geez, ya talk about multi-tasking. And throughout all the mutations, the boy never once changes his dopey hairstyle. Butterfly Effect could easily be retitled, “Dude, Where’s My Timeline?” or “Quantum Leap For The Terminally Stoned.” But this is not the movie we the people want to see Ashton Kutcher make; we want him to make this film: “How I Bagged That Old Bag Demi Moore.” Now that’s a ticket seller. . (Read the rest here)

Are We Electing a Military Ruler or a President?
by Jacob G. Hornberger
The Future of Freedom Foundation

Amidst all the hubbub among the Democratic Party candidates for president over who supported President Bush’s invasion of Iraq and who didn’t, have you noticed that not one of them has brought up the Constitution and, specifically, the constitutional requirement that the president secure a congressional declaration of war as a prerequisite to waging war?

No; while some of Democrats are supporting the president’s judgment in attacking a sovereign and independent nation that had not attacked or threatened to attack the United States, and while others are questioning his judgment, none of them is questioning his claim of omnipotent power to send the entire nation into war solely on the basis of his own initiative. After all, don’t forget that even though the Congress enacted a resolution in which it delegated its power to declare war to the president (unconstitutionally, I might add), the president made it very clear that he didn’t need such authorization. While he welcomed congressional support, he consistently said, the decision to declare war was his and his alone.

But isn’t the omnipotent power to send a nation into war traditionally characteristic of societies suffering under dictatorial regimes? (Read the rest here)