Welcome, if you're new here, you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed or subscribe to our email newsletter. Thanks for visiting!

From a letter recently sent to The Warrior: Marquette’s Independent News Source:

“Dear Editor,

My husband is a graduate student at Marquette, and recently brought home a copy of “the Warrior.” I was so impressed with it as a student organized publication that I just had to both congratulate and thank you. It is so refreshing to see a student-led publication that desires to be faithful to the Catholic Church and notes the authority of the magisterium. Despite the failings of some Marquette administration and staff to be consistently faithful to the church due to the dominating ideologies of relativism, you seek to present the blessed voice of truth. Well-done, and keep up the great work!

“Dear young people, do not be content with anything less than the highest ideals! If you have an ardent desire for the Lord, you will steer clear of the mediocrity and conformism so widespread in our society.” -Pope John Paul II”

The Warrior has already raised $143 for their “Warrior Free Press Fund” in order to purchase new equipment and support the growth of the only independent, student-run voice on Marquette’s campus. There is a long ways to go towards their goal of $3000. If you can support the cause, click on the ChipIn button (on the righthand sidebar) to make a secure credit card donation or click here.

If you are an undergrad who enjoys The Warrior, consider a $5 gift or click here to send this post to friends and family who could support the cause.

With the ratio of liberal to conservative professors in some university departments reaching as high as 30 to 1 these days and blatant instances of bias in the classroom coming to light, an independent, free-market voice on campus is more important than ever. The Warrior is that voice on Marquette’s campus.

The Warrior is a completely student-run, biweekly publication on Marquette University’s campus that in 2007 earned more Milwaukee Press Club Awards than the official school-funded paper. It is a 501(c)(3) organization incorporated in the state of Wisconsin that supports it’s publishing with advertising revenue.

The most important thing about The Warrior though, is its values. Posted on the wall of the office and used everyday, these values are central to The Warrior’s voice on campus.

Warrior Goals and Values:

1. MU-student centric
2. Hold student government accountable
3. Expose academic abuse
4. Encourage meritocracy
5. Rally for administrative transparency and efficiency
6. Preserve the free market and diversity of ideas
7. Exercise and promote fiscal responsibility
8. Cherish Marquette’s Catholic Identity
9. Project a vision of a great Marquette

The Warrior is going strong but, it is in need of new equipment and supplies to continue to promote these values on campus and share knowledge with other independent papers across the country. They have launched The Warrior Free Press Fund campaign to raise $3,000 by May 14th and, with new technology, you can see the difference your donation is making through a progress bar their site, http://www.thewarrior.org. If you’re an undergrad, consider a $5 donation and click here to send this post to your parents. Every little bit helps!

Please make your tax-deductible donation (by credit card, debit, or Paypal) today by clicking on ChipIn button above or clicking here.

P.S. Your donation will immediately push the status bar closer to our goal of a stronger independent voice on campus!

P.S. If you are interested in advertising, making a special gift or sponsoring a specific purchase, please email The Warrior’s Business Manager, Katie, at business@thewarrior.org.

So usually I would just write a post about something like this myself especially since I was present at the occurrence, but Dr. McAdams has already done so on his MU Warrior blog. His post is a summary and an analysis of what happened in Dr. Snow’s Philosophy of Crime and Punishment class on Thursday, April 3. That class is a prime example of the viewpoint discrimination that is extremely prevalent at Marquette and at other institutions of higher learning around the country, which is why I wanted to link his post here.

I was present in Dr. Snow’s class when my classmate, Greg Karge, was intellectually assaulted in class based on his comments on race and the police. Overall, this class is very discussion-based, which I really do enjoy; however not all viewpoints are equally respected.

As a side note, I wanted to support Greg, but I was afraid that my opinion would also be unreasonably criticized and suppressed. So after the class, especially when I saw the professor pulled Greg aside afterwards and after receiving his “apology” email, I felt that I had not only let Greg down, but I also had failed to stand up against viewpoint discrimination.

The Warrior, Marquette’s Independent News Source has unveiled it’s new and improved website design in time for March Madness, the end of the school year and eventual graduation reminiscing.

Improvements include:
- Better search functionality
- Improved category management
- Most popular articles lists, comments and tags
- New ad spots (contact business@thewarrior.org if you’re interested)
- Better RSS feeds
- Email subscriptions are now available
- More pictures, better organization

They are still loading in all the the archives but, be sure to check it out!

Founder of the conservative commentary magazine National Review and one of the most influential leaders of the conservative movement, William F. Buckley, Jr., died today in his home in Stamford, Connecticut while working. From the breaking news release on Fox News Online:

William F. Buckley Jr., the erudite Ivy Leaguer and conservative herald who showered huge and scornful words on liberalism as he observed, abetted and cheered on the right’s post-World War II rise from the fringes to the White House, died Wednesday. He was 82.

Political junkies, both from the left and right, cannot underestimate the influence Buckley had in shaping the conservative movement and making it a dominant intellectual and political force in America.

I was personally extremely saddened when I learned of the news. I think Edwin J. Feulner, President of the Heritage Foundation, puts it best in his official statement:

Without Bill Buckley there would be no National Review. And without National Review, there would be no conservative movement, no Heritage Foundation, no President Reagan - or an America that’s recognizable today.

It’s impossible to overstate the importance of National Review. It offered powerful conservative opinion against communism, big government and liberal culture at a time when no one else had the courage to do so.

Here are some other statements from contributors and editors of National Review, from the blog The Corner:

From the Editors of NRO:

If ever an institution were the lengthened shadow of one man, this publication is his. So we hope it will not be thought immodest for us to say that Buckley has had more of an impact on the political life of this country — and a better one — than some of our presidents. He created modern conservatism as an intellectual and then a political movement. He kept it from drifting into the fever swamps. And he gave it a wit, style, and intelligence that earned the respect and friendship even of his adversaries. (To know Buckley was to be reminded that certain people have a talent for friendship.)

He inspired and incited three generations of conservatives, and counting. He retained his intellectual and literary vitality to the end; even in his final years he was capable of the arresting formulation, the unpredictable insight. He presided over NR even in his “retirement,” which was more active than most people’s careers. It has been said that great men are rarely good men. Even more rarely are they sweet and merry, as Buckley was.

From Kathryn Jean Lopez of NRO:

I’m devastated to report that our dear friend, mentor, leader, and founder William F. Buckley Jr., died this morning in his study in Stamford, Connecticut.

He died while at work; if he had been given a choice on how to depart this world, I suspect that would have been exactly it. At home, still devoted to the war of ideas.

As you might expect, we’ll have much more to say here and in NR in the coming days and weeks and months. For now: Thank you, Bill. God bless you, now with your dear Pat. Our deepest condolences to Christopher and the rest of the Buckley family. And our fervent prayer that we continue to do WFB’s life’s work justice.

From Jonah Goldberg, Editor at Large of NRO:

I’m stunned. He will be greatly missed. But we should also remember this was not a life cut tragically short (no matter how much we wish he were still with us). His accomplishments were almost incalculable. As George Will once said, “before there was Ronald Reagan there was Barry Goldwater, before there was Goldwater there was National Review, and before there was National Review there was William F. Buckley.” As conservatives — and as Americans — we are all standing on his shoulders.

From John Hood, President and Chairman of the John Locke Foundation:

I am shocked and dismayed by the news. The conservative movement and American politics were forever transformed by this brilliant, principled, and multi-talented man. I’m sure that there will soon be a flood of such stories, but I’ll have to say that a well-timed, gracious letter from Mr. Buckley in 1987 or so to a then-stressed student-magazine editor helped cement my own choice of conservative journalism as a career.

My thoughts and prayers are with his family and friends.

It is remarkable to see how one person could mean so many to so many and could have such a tremendous influence on American political discourse.

I will post more on him later, but I just wanted to get the word out. Check out CNN, New York Times, Washington Post, and the Drudge Report for updates and their official press releases.

He will be greatly missed.

RIP WFB.

And vote smart on Tuesday.

My wonderful conservative friends, do the intelligent thing and vote in the Democratic primary, not the Republican primary. McCain has the GOP nomination in the bag. Voting for Ron Paul or Mike Huckabee (gag) might give you more ideological satisfaction, but having someone like Barack Obama as president could prevent a solid conservative from being in the White House for a long time. Your vote would mean a lot more by voting for the weaker of the two Democratic nominees. This is code for: VOTE FOR HILLARY.

There is method to this madness. Barack Obama is clearly a more formidable candidate and would have a greater chance, I think, to win the presidency against a Republican like McCain. Obama is a lot more liberal than Hillary and is crazy enough to think he is “above politics.”

I have become convinced that an Obama presidency would be far worse than another Clinton one. If Hillary does get the nomination and the presidency, I don’t think she would change all that much despite some of her rhetoric. She has an agenda and I think will be forced to negotiate. Of course she will stump for socialized medicine and universal health care but I do not think she could push it through if people really urged Congress to vote against her proposals. I also think this could give the GOP an opportunity to put a better conservative candidate up in 2012. And I’m sure many of you know who I have in mind!

Hillary is such an extremely divisive figure that I think she could get trounced in the general election. So many people have such a visceral reaction to her that they would never vote for her no matter who the opponent was. She would lose the women vote. In Iowa, the only women group she won was the 60+ years bracket. So for those of you who can’t stand the idea of her in the White House can maybe rest easier. McCain is more popular among moderates, independents, and Democrats and is a less polarizing figure. I think he has a great chance of being elected over Hillary, and less so than if he were put up against Obama.

Finally, as a side note, John McCain does not stand for conservative values or governance. He is on the wrong side of a few very key issues (immigration, poltiical speech, etc). I personally would rather have four years of crappy Democratic policy via Clinton than four to eight years of pseudo-crappy McCain policy and then have liberal Democratic administrations for the next four election cycles.

For several of you, I have already pitched this proposal and a few of you are already doing what I plan to do. For those I haven’t talked to, hopefully you consider this option. But of course the most important thing to do is just vote on Tuesday!

Mark Steyn had a great article on Barack on Saturday. Read it - hopefully it gives you a better idea about what Barack is about.

As many of you may recall, among my many hats is my continuing column at The Warrior, Marquette’s independent student newspaper. We have a new issue out today (awesome cover story on Marquette students with significant others serving in our nation’s military), and my column is pasted below for all yall who won’t see a paper copy of the paper:

The Division of Student Affairs has a new “Diversity Advocates” program by which faculty and staff can declare their offices “safe spaces.” Professors invite students from vulnerable populations, such as racial minorities or LGBT students, to a “safe space” from the hostility on campus to discuss their feelings. Such a “safe space” will be denoted by a particular placard on the faculty member’s door.

Perhaps this is a logical extension of the much-ballyhooed “Hate Free Community” signs in the dorms. I have my doubts about that whole endeavor too.

My point here, though, is to discuss the discriminatory impact of the program amongst the faculty, staff and administrators of Marquette. Essentially, this placard becomes the sign that says, “I am on board with the Administration’s diversity efforts. I am part of the politically correct coalition.” In short, it says, “Promote me. You can trust me to push the liberal agenda.”

Conversely, when a faculty member fails to put up the “Diversity Advocates” placard, it also communicates a message. “I am NOT on board with the politically correct agenda.” While some professors may already be “out” as conservatives within the University community as a whole or just within their own departments, it may not be so in all cases, and it may not be so in a formal way.

But if these placards become popular, to the point where all professors but the conservatives have them, watch out. When it comes time to select department chairs, vote on tenure or appoint people to committees, expect retaliation from leftist elements of the Administration and faculty.

You may wonder, “Who but an intolerant bigot would refuse to be a diversity advocate?”

Well, someone who believes the teachings of the Bible and Church on homosexuality mean that they cannot affirm the homosexual lifestyle.

Or someone who feels that the Great Commission calls them to share the good news of the Christian Gospel rather than to affirm non-Christian beliefs.

Or someone who believes that University policies should be grounded in principles like merit and equality and not liberal theories of race consciousness or white/heterosexual/male privilege.

Of course, these are precisely the professors certain left-wing elements of the faculty and administration would like to identify.

Gop3.com is often very critical of Marquette University, not because we don’t appreciate the education we have received but because we believe constructive criticism is a very effective way to promote change.

However, when my Alma Mater does something that makes me proud, especially in the face of popular liberal sentiment, I like to share it with anyone who will listen. In this light, I would like to highlight that despite past protests from hippies on campus and the new “Center for Peacemaking“, our university is showing it’s support for our Marines. It’s very encouraging to see even a small demonstration of support like this from Marquette University while UC Berkley is kicking out it’s Marine recruiting station and shunning our troops. Here is Marquette’s annual drive to buy tickets to the Louisville game for our Marines:

Jan. 31, 2008

Once again this year Marquette fans will have an opportunity to support those who keep our country safe by purchasing tickets for the families of Marines stationed in Iraq.

With just $10 you can purchase a ticket for the Fox Company Marines for the Louisville game on February 4, 2008 at 6 PM. Marquette will be bringing out the families onto the floor prior to the game for the national anthem and will be recognizing all military personnel during the game.

To make a ticket donation click here.

For more information on Fox Company click here

The following is an article about the University of Michigan’s plan to eviscerate the First Amendment right to free speech on its campus (this article is reproduced with the consent of Michael O’Brien, Editor-in-Chief of The Michigan Review):

The College of Literature, Science, and the Art’s Facilities and Operations Department is considering adopting regulations that could seriously affect the ability of student publications to distribute their products on campus, according to various interviews and documents obtained by The Michigan Review. (A copy of the draft policy can be found by clicking here.)

According to preliminary drafts of the proposed policies, distribution of publications would be limited to those governed by the Board of Student Publications (which includes The Michigan Daily and humor magazine The Gargoyle) and student organizations approved by the Michigan Student Assembly. The policy also forbids distribution of materials between April 14 and September 15. The Michigan Daily currently distributes a weekly summer issue on campus.

Robert Johnston, the Director of Facilities and Operations for LSA, said that this policy has been under consideration for the last two years, and is intended to minimize the amount of clutter and litter associated with publications being scattered around LSA buildings. The policy additionally seeks to limit access to outside publications, specifically commercial publications distributed in University facilities.

“We want to provide a place that publications can be distributed from, and still allow them to attain access,” said Johnston, adding that LSA is considering constructing what he called “nodes,” similar to the cubbies in the Michigan Union, for publications.

According to the draft policy, to gain access to these nodes, publications would have to apply on a “first-come, first-serve” basis. To accommodate all publications, though, the policy says, “LSA reserves the right to limit the number of times per academic term and/or per year in which a recognized student organization will be granted permission to distribute publications in LSA facilities.”

“What we need to do is determine which publications are distributed in which buildings,” said Johnston, “because we can’t accommodate everyone everywhere.”

The latest draft was presented to the Board of Student Publications Monday, raising the concern of some in attendance. Samuel Offen, the Student Publications General Manager, said he had concerns about the policy when it was first introduced.

“I just don’t like that they can decide who gets to distribute and who doesn’t get to distribute,” said Offen. “Even though I understand their need regards safety or security or financial-having to pay for additional custodial work-anytime anyone determines who gets to distribute publications, I think that’s a concern.”

Maya Kobersy, the Assistant General Counsel for the University, said the regulations are permissible as “time, place, and manner” restrictions under the First Amendment. Kobersy, who helped develop the distribution policy, said the University is “concern[ed] about the disruption to the educational nature and character” of its facilities posed by extraneous materials in LSA buildings.

LSA buildings, she asserted, are not “public” venues under the Constitution, and the entire facility– even the hallways and commons areas accessible after-hours– are encompassed by that policy. She concluded that the regulations pass muster.

“We are limiting things only in terms of there being so many racks,” said Kobersy. “That addresses the clutter issue.”

“I don’t have any knowledge of an intent to change the policy,” said Kobersy, when asked if the University will back off of this policy which could be challenged on legal grounds.

There could be other significant constitutional issues associated with the proposed guidelines, Adam Goldstein, an Attorney Advocate with the Student Media Law Center said.

“On rational basis, the amount of approvals [for distribution] given is not at all related to how many issues are handed out,” said Goldstein. “It doesn’t even address the problem. It does not approach the level of First Amendment compliance required of any state in the country.”

Though there are a few schemes where pre-approval can limit free speech, Goldstein said that this is not one of those cases for the University.

The process regarding violations to this policy gives power to the LSA Facilities as well as the Michigan Student Assembly (MSA) to assess violations. The policy states that organizations in violation “may be denied future opportunities to distribute or display publications in LSA facilities, or may be subject to other disciplinary action.”

Central Student Judiciary Chief Justice Alex Edelson said that he has not been informed of the policy.

“We have not been made aware but that’s not something that is offensive. It may be standard operating procedure,” said Edelson. Edelson said that CSJ has been given new powers by the administration during his tenure. ”

CSJ has evolved a lot over the last few years. It has just developed its source of power. There are moredetails we are still trying to work out regarding where CSJ fits into dispute resolution on campus,” said Edelson.

Edelson said CSJ’s purpose is to review violations to the MSA Constitution and to the Student Code of Conduct. University officials can choose to enlarge CSJ’s power. While Edelson did not comment directly upon the proposed policy, he said that CSJ involvement in similar issues only arises when a compliant is brought before CSJ.

“If you wanted to challenge the policy, that might require that you go to someone higher up in the administration,” said Edelson.

While CSJ had not been informed about the development of the policy, Jennifer Garfinkle, the business manager for The Gargoyle Humor Magazine, said her organization had been made aware of the policy. Garfinkle said that Cynthia Alexander, an LSA Facilities Manager, informed her of the policy proposal when she requested information about placing new stands on campus. Garfinkle expressed concerns about the policy’s impact on publicity.

“One of the main problems we have is recognition on campus, having a limited amount of time to have our publications in racks will severely limit the exposure that we do have on campus,” said Garfinkle. While Garfinkle said the policy would negatively impact The Gargoyle, she could not see how The Michigan Daily could follow the policy.

“Basically, just from the two week limitation at the start and the end of the semester, The Daily prints on the first day of the semester and on the day the semester ends and so it does not make sense for them” said Garfinkle.

Garfinkle, who was not aware of an updated proposal that enlarged the role of the Board of Student Publications, also criticized the role of MSA.

“My only real concern with MSA is if they had to approve materials that get put into racks,” said Garfinkle. She also said that The Gargoyle has scheduled meetings through Offen to provide input on this policy.

According to incoming Michigan Daily Editor in Chief Andrew Grossman, the Michigan Daily also has plans to meet with university administrators.

“We’re going to sit down with someone from LSA and talk about the policy, but I think its wrong to restrict publications,” Grossman said. Grossman continued that the Michigan Daily has always been an avodacte of first amendment rights.

“The first ammendment supports our right to distribute our publication, and we fully support the right of aohter publication to distribute theirs,” said Grossman

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) issued a statement Thursday blasting the proposal.

“Restricting student speech by excessively tight control on distribution of printed material is a dangerous step for a public university to take,” said Will Creeley. Creeley, an Associate Director for Legal and Public Advocacy at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, held that while the policy under consideration by the University may pass constitutional muster, it seems “strikingly harsh.”

In e-mail correspondence, Creeley took issue with the need for publications to apply, the regulation of display stands, the limitations on the number of distributions per term, and the possibility of internal judicial sanction. Creeley said that, while attempts by universities to regulate the distribution of student-produced print materials are not new, U-Ms proposal goes to greater lengths than most.

“Indeed, the University seeks here to institute a far more labyrinth process for distribution than FIRE normally sees, particularly at public universities,” said Creely.

Goldstein echoed Creely’s sentiment.

“This is either insincere or a monumentally ineffective way to do this,” said Goldstein. “Generally speaking, employees of the state are more sophisticated than this.”

After watching parts of the Youtube/CNN Republican debate last night, I again was reminded how disappointing the field of candidates is. A. Mark Steyn pretty much summed it up for me in his recent New York Sun article:

If I could just sneak out in the middle of the night and saw off Rudy Giuliani’s strong right arm and John McCain’s ramrod back and Mitt Romney’s fabulous hair and stitch them all together in Baron von Frankenstein’s laboratory with the help of some neck bolts, we’d have the perfect Republican nominee. As it is, the present field poses difficulties for almost every faction of the GOP base…So if you’re a pro-gun anti-abortion tough-on-crime victory-in-Iraq small-government Republican the 2008 selection is a tough call.

Fortunately, my dad forwarded me a certain email this morning, which eased a bit of my disappointment. To some this may be familiar. The following is the text of a full-page age in the October 20, 2004 Washington Post, just a few weeks before the 2004 presidential election. Businessman George J. Esseff Sr. ran a $104,655.60 ad in the Washington Post in response to Howard Dean’s comment that many Republicans hadn’t done an honest day’s work in their lives. People have been saying this about Republicans for years, but I guess Dean really pushed him over the edge.

Maybe you’re a Republican?

In today’s America ask a growing number of high school and college students, their teachers and professors, the self-anointed media elite and/or hard working men and women of al l ethnicities the question, “What is a Republican?” and you’ll be told “.. a rich, greedy, egotistical individual, motivated only by money and the desire to accumulate more and more of it, at the expense of the environment, the working poor…and all whom they exploit…”

I am a Republican - And I am none of those things…and I don’t know any Republicans who are!

WHAT I AM first and foremost, is a loving husband of some 72 plus years, the father of four and an American who’s proud of his country…and his country’s heritage

WHAT I AM is the grandson of immigrants who risked every-thing, including their lives and those of their children, to escape tyranny in search of freedom.

WHAT I AM is a man who grew up during the Depression and witnessed first hand the effects of the Stock Market crash and the soup lines that followed. I watched as both my parents and grand parents, who had very little themselves, share what food they had with a half dozen other families, who had even less.

WHAT I AM is someone who worked his way through college by holding down three and four jobs at a time and then used that education to build a better life.

WHAT I AM is a husband who at age 24 started his own business for the “privilege” of working 60, 70 and 80 hours a week, risking everything I had including my health, in search of a better life for myself and my loved ones.

WHAT I AM is a businessman whose blood, sweat and tears and plenty of them…, made it possible for me to provide a secure living not only for my family and myself, but also for literally hundreds of my employees throughout the years. Employees who in turn were able to buy their own homes, raise their own families and give back to their communities and their country.

WHAT I AM is a man who believes in God; a God who has blessed this country… and all for which it stands.

WHAT I AM is someone who knows, if you doubt miracles exist in today’s world, you need only to look into the face of those who received them….and the eyes of those who give them.

WHAT I AM is an American who’s proud that his President embraces a belief in God; proud of a President who understands, as “politically incorrect” as it may be, there is evil in this world and for the security and safety of all freedom loving people everywhere, it must be confronted…and it must be defeated.

WHAT I AM is an American who takes comfort in the knowledge that our President refuses to allow decisions concerning the very safety and security of this nation, to be governed by the political whims of foreign governments.

WHAT I AM is tired of hearing from leading Democrats who see only negativity in America; racism in her people; class warfare in her society and “political incorrectness” in her character.

WHAT I AM is a former democrat who now understands that it is the soldier and not the reporter that guarantees us our freedoms of press, speech and dissent.

WHAT I AM is a man who believes in the sanctity of life. A man who is repulsed by the pandering of the political left for votes, at the expense of the unborn.

WHAT I AM is a husband and father who believes in the sanctity of marriage and the preservation of the family unit.

WHAT I AM is an ex-movie goer who is repulsed by those insecure, socially inept, elementary thinking, ego-inflated “entertainers” who have appointed themselves “experts” in the fields of national security and geo-politics and then use their forum to attack this nation, its leaders and its actions….much to the delight and encouragement of our enemies.

WHAT I AM is an American who understands the difference between “censorship” and “choice.” Evidently, these individuals do not, because when these same “celebrities” receive public ridicule for their offensive actions, the first thing they yell is “censorship.” What they seem incapable of understanding is…the right of free speech and dissent is shared equally by those offended…as well as those who offend. I support and will continue to support those films and performers whom I choose to and refuse to support those I don’t. It is my right as an American a right I will continue to enthusiastically exercise.

WHAT I AM is a voter, tired of politicians who every time their voting records are subjected to public scrutiny, try to divert attention from their political and legislative failures by accusing their opponents of “attack ads” and “negative campaigning”….and the news media who allow them to get away with it.

WHAT I AM is a Catholic who loves his God and his Faith and who’s been taught to respect all religions whose teachings are based in love, peace and charity. As such, I am embarrassed and ashamed of those individuals in both private and public life whose decisions and actions are devoid of any sense of character or morals; individuals who are only driven by what’s best for them….rather than what’s right… often times at the expense of many…. including our national security.

WHAT I AM is a realist who understands that the terrorist attack that murdered hundreds of innocent Russian children could have occurred here, in our heartland. That’s why I sincerely believe America needs now, more than ever, a President who sees with a clear and focused vision and who speaks with a voice when heard by both friend and foe alike is understood, respected and believed.

WHAT I AM is eternally grateful to Ronald Reagan for having the bravery to speak out against Communism and the courage of his convictions in leading the fight to defeat it; and George W. Bush for the vision, courage, conviction and leadership he has shown in America’s war on terrorism amidst both the constant and vicious, personal and political attacks both h e and his family are made to endure.

WHAT I AM is a human being, full of numerous faults and failures, but a man nonetheless who though not always successful has continually strived to do “what’s right” instead of “what’s easy.” A man who is challenging the religious leaders of all faiths, to not only preach to their congregations the fundamentals of “what’s right” and “what’s wrong,” but to also then hold them accountable for their actions in both the public and private sectors.

WHAT I AM is disgusted with the Courts who on one hand call the murder of a pregnant woman a “double homicide,” but then refer to the abortion of her baby as “pro-choice”.

WHAT I AM is someone deeply troubled by a political party which embraces a candidate whose primary “leadership” qualities center around his protesting of the Vietnam war and his labeling the honorable men and women who fought in it, (50,000 of whom gave their lives in that action), as rapists, and war criminals (John Kerry). That same political party then stepped forward this year to block the appearance of a true Vietnam war hero, retired Admiral and former United States Senator, Jeremiah Denton, (a man who spent seven years and seven torturous months in a North Vietnam prison), from speaking before an open session of the California legislature as pa rt of that state’s 4th of July celebration. The reason Democrats gave for refusing to allow this American hero to speak before their state legislature was because of the “conservative” nature of his views. As an American, that troubles me deeply….as well it should you. (Are you listening Mr. D?)

WHAT I AM is a man who feels the need to spend, ONE HUNDRED & FOUR THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED & FIFTY FIVE DOLLARS ($104, 655.60, tax paid) of his own money, to purchase this advertisement, in order to set the story straight. Some may say this money would have been better spent feeding the world’s poor. At the risk of soundi ng self- serving, as an American and as a Republican, for the last six decades of my life, I have done exactly that…and more. Following the examples of my parents and grand parents, I have used my earnings to feed the poor, shelter the homeless, provide housing for the elderly and medical care for the sick….. and continue to do so…and I’m not alone in that work.

WHAT I AM is someone who is paying for this announcement at my sole expense in hopes of opening the eyes of those led blindly by ill-informed elements of our great nation, who, through either ignorance, or malicious intent, repeatedly attack and belittle those of us who belong to a political party that holds true to the belief, “The rights of the governed, exceed the power of the government.” For those interested, I am speaking only as a tax-paying individual who is in no way associated with the Republican National Committee, nor with any of its directors, or delegates.

WHAT I AM is a man who understands, “the American way of life” is a message of self-empowerment for all.

WHAT I AM is an American who is grateful that our nation gives each of us the opportunity of self-determination and the right to benefit from the fruits of self achievement.

WHAT I AM is an American who wants to preserve that way of life for all who seek it.

WHAT I AM is blessed to be an American…. and proud to be a Republican.

Anyway, even though this was published over three years ago, it is always nice to read some common sense and true conservatism, two characteristics lacking in all of the Republican candidates, the Republican Party, and in the nominee selection process. So now why can’t the GOP find a candidate who thinks like Esseff? On Brian’s recent post on Mike Huckabee (well done, Brian!), loyal reader, Kat, Brandon’s cousin posted: “Actually, I think the bigger question here is this: are there any REAL conservatives left in the Republican Party? I highly suspect the answer is no. Barry Goldwater is spinning in his grave.” I couldn’t agree more!