THE CONSERVATIVE INFORMER

Real Americans are feeling real pain as a result of high fuel and energy prices and subsequently high food prices, while at the same time starring into the face of a faltering economy and looming recession. The American people desperately need relief and tangible solutions, and sooner rather than later, yet our elected officials in Washington are doing nothing. It's even been suggested that the Democrat majority are using the extraordinarily high oil prices as a sort of choke hold, to force Americans into conserving energy and driving more fuel efficient vehicles.

In response to a push by many Americans to allow for drilling and exploration in ANWR, an oil rich region in Alaska, and along America's continental shelf, many prominent Democrats, like presidential candidate Barack Obama vehemently opposed the idea, saying that the effects of any domestic drilling and oil production would not be felt for at least ten years and that even then it would only lower prices at the pump by a few cents. It seems that Senator Obama, and many other Democrats who share his point of view, are out of touch with the American people, and frankly, lack a basic understanding of Economics 101 and it's most primal law, supply and demand. Any Economist, or Expert on such matters, knows that if Congress announced tomorrow, that they voted to allow domestic drilling, the price of oil would immediately begin to fall, as speculators and OPEC react to the news. Furthermore, domestic drilling sites in ANWR, along our continental shelf, and elsewhere could be producing as much as a million barrels per day within two years, and three million barrels per day within five years, lowering oil prices by as much as fifty percent. The Democrats may lack a basic understanding of supply and demand, however, the American people do not, in a recent poll, 74% of Americans supported drilling along our continental shelf, and 58% supported drilling in ANWR.

Rather than allow for increased drilling and production in the U.S., the Democrats are opting to push for alternative energy sources and so called "green technologies", as a means of reducing our dependence on oil and other fossil fuels tomorrow, which is fine, and most Americans also support. But what about today, the burning question on everyone's mind is why can't we do both, give Americans relief today by lowering prices any way we can, and reducing our dependence on fossil fuels tomorrow with new technologies and alternative energy sources. As a matter of fact America has already made great strides in "Green Technology" and alternative energy development, perhaps more so than anywhere else in the world, the Democrats would have you believe that nothing is being done. There is no magic wand, the conversion to a world fueled by fossil fuels to a world fueled by alternative clean energy sources takes time, and we are already well on our way to that goal. American corporations are responsible for some of the most promising innovations to date, and are pushing the envelope daily, the spirit of capitalism will deliver these technologies quicker than any government ever will.

Democrats often say that they want to end our dependence on oil, which is deceiving, as we could not end our dependence on oil completely unless the world reverted to life as it where in the stone age. That's right, if we could completely do away with the combustion engine, and all vehicles ran on alternative energy and we required no gasoline or diesel ever again, and all of our electricity was provided by non-fossil fuel sources, we would still need oil. We depend on oil in almost every aspect of our lives, like the plastic we depend on everyday, from the packaging of food and other products, to electronics like computers and televisions, to building materials, even the alternative energy automobiles would be composed of over fifty percent plastic including the rubber tires. Regardless of the Democrats desires or plans for America's long term energy policy, the truth is that we will be depending on oil for a myriad of uses, for a very long time to come, and although we must work very hard to find alternatives to all of our uses for oil, as it is a finite resource, it is unrealistic to think that it will happen any time soon. Therefor we must unite and do everything we can to relieve the pain that millions of Americans are feeling due to the crisis at hand, while at the same time moving towards and striving for oil independence in a way that does not destroy innocent people's lives.

Hello everyone, sorry I've been silent for so long, but my hands have really been full lately, as I juggle work, school, and life in general. I recently decided to return to college in pursuit of my BA in Journalism, I am taking summer classes now which takes all my spare time, and that will only worsen this fall as I take on a full load of classes.

I really miss posting and keeping in touch with my awesome MSN Spaces friends, and am currently tweaking my schedule in hopes of creating a sliver of time in which I might be able to post and read your posts, on a regular basis. This being a holiday (4th of July), I have some extra time and am working on an interesting post which I hope to have up by tomorrow, and am eagerly awaiting the chance to catch up on everyone's spaces.

Well, I must be off to my Public Speaking class now, I have a speech tonight, I just wanted to let all my friends know what was up with me, and let you know that I'll be back, and I truly miss reading all of your insightful, interesting, and wonderful posts.

Thank you,

Edward

theconservativeinformer

There exists, within the media, a strict code of ethics which is designed to preserve journalistic integrity, objectivity and impartiality are two of the most primal tenets of that code. The only problem is that the people who work in media are human and it's almost impossible to completely ignore human nature. While it's most Journalists aim to be objective and impartial, they can't help but to sometimes let their bias bleed through into their work. This, however, would not be an issue if there were equal numbers of conservatives to liberals.

There have been numerous polls and surveys conducted detailing the political make-up of the media, and the results seem to always indicate that liberals and people who vote Democrat out number conservatives and people who vote Republican, sometimes as much as twelve to one. Rarely would a Journalist knowingly compromise their journalistic integrity, but with such huge percentages of liberals and Democrats those subtle instances of bias may give an overall impression of media bias.

So far, in the media's 2008 Presidential election coverage, there have been many claims of media bias. Perhaps most notable is Democratic presidential hopeful, Hillary Clinton's charge that NBC is in the tank for Barack Obama, Clinton's rival for the Democratic nomination. Clinton blasted MSNBC, which is part of NBC, for declaring Obama the nominee and suggesting she drop out of the race. The only problem with Clinton's claims of bias is that the comments she is referring to were made during opinion based programing or by paid contributors who's expressed purpose is to give their opinion. That being said, there is a legitimate gripe concerning the usage of openly liberal and Democratic supporter, Keith Olbermann in MSNBC's Presidential debate and in their election night coverage.

One of the most egregious examples of political bias in the media is of course the now famous Rather Gate, in which Dan Rather went on the air with a negative story about George W. Bush, who was running for re-election in the 2004 Presidential campaign. It was later found that the story was false and if Rather had done some basic fact checking he would have known that. The issue was such an embarrassment for CBS, that they forced Rather to resign after being with the network for 44 years, which just goes to show the seriousness of real bias.

While there are occasional instances of blatant media bias, most of the allegations are probably only perceived due to the hyper-partisan nature of American society today. However, The fact that liberals and Democrats are such a huge majority within the media is very real. The question then becomes why is there such a disproportionate ratio of liberals to conservatives in the media, why does it not reflect the ratio in society?

We may never know the answer to that question, but if there is blame to be attached, it should be placed at the feet of the top executives, because they are the ones who make the major decisions such as hiring practices. If the top media executives were to strive for more ideological equality in the newsroom, then at the very least the perception of bias would largely disappear. Although, in theory, as long as every journalist continues to honor the sanctity of their journalistic integrity and the code of journalistic ethics, then ideology is irrelevant.

Which political group is happiest, liberals or conservatives? Conservatives of course, at least according to a survey conducted by Jamie Napier and John Jost of New York University. " Conservatives reported greater satisfaction and well being than did liberals." claimed the survey.

The researchers also found that liberals tend to be unhappy because of social and economic inequalities which conservatives are able to rationalize away.

There have been other studies as well that site conservatives as being happier, in 2006 a Pew Research center survey uncovered similar results. "47% of conservative Republicans in the U.S. described themselves as very happy compared to just 28% of liberal Democrats." the survey found.

The truth is, it's hard to put your personal ideology aside and answer the question objectively. I bet if nine people answered the question and three of them were conservative and five liberal, the results would be five to three in favor of liberals.

There are many other factors that tend to indicate that conservatives are happier as well. Conservatives tend to be optimistic while liberals tend to be pessimistic, a conservative will almost always see the glass as half full and the liberal will say that it is half empty. Go ahead and ask your friends how they view the glass, I think you will be astonished at the results.

Another reason liberals are less happy is the fact that they generally rely on emotion when formulating their opinions, therefor they are more likely to act on emotion when an injustice or inequality is perceived, whereas a conservative tends to rely more on facts which may justify the inequality in their mind.

If you are still unconvinced I recommend you just sit back and, with an open mind, observe people whom you know to be either conservative or liberal, whether on television or in person, and I think you will see that conservatives are indeed happier than their liberal counterparts.

However, just because there may be more happy conservatives, does not mean that all liberals are unhappy, or that all conservatives are happy, I know plenty of miserable conservatives and even more jolly ole liberals. Actually the surveys I cited earlier only reveal a slight lead by conservatives, as a matter of fact both conservatives and liberals have a larger percentage of unhappy people than happy ones, 53% of conservatives are something other than happy and 72% of liberals are likewise.

The real story here is why are so many people unhappy? Life is too short and America too awesome for there to be so many unhappy people, cheer up, tell a joke, look at all the beauty that surrounds us, reach out and help someone in need, and you will find your happiness.

Illegal immigration has quickly become a hot button issue among Americans these days. It used to be only the border states that were affected by illegal immigration, but today the ill effects of illegal immigration have spread like a wildfire from California to Maine. With illegal immigration being so widespread it is difficult for many Americans to keep up with all that is happening, so I have combed over countless news sources and headlines in an attempt to provide a comprehensive review of the week concerning illegal immigration.

I.C.E. and the federal government have stepped up raids on American businesses hiring illegal aliens since 2006, some of the latest roundups include a raid in the Houston area in which government agents from the local I.C.E. office, in an operation ranging four days, arrested some 89 "fugitive aliens". Of those arrested 28 had previous criminal convictions and 77 had been issued orders of removal.

There are two separate incidents to report from out of Arkansas. First, in a raid that took place near Little Rock National Airport, agents arrested 24 illegal aliens on a construction site who were working for a company called Naylor Concrete out of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. According to the Arkansas Secretary of State Naylor Concrete had their license revoked in 2006 and 2007 for undisclosed reasons, the company is under investigation to see if they knowingly hired any of the workers arrested in the raid but as of now no charges have been filled. In an unrelated incident on Wednesday May 7 2008 in Benton county Arkansas, a Benton county sheriff's deputy pulled over a van on Interstate 540. A search of the van revealed 12 illegal aliens in the back, all 12 of the illegal aliens were arrested and will be deported, and the driver, a 19 year old man, will be charged with human trafficking.

One of the most horrific problems resulting from illegal immigration is when someone loses their life at the hands of an illegal alien. this next story, which I read in the Akron Beacon Journal, is sure to anger anyone with an ounce of feelings. Because of the way the laws are written in Ohio an illegal alien, while driving on an Ohio Highway, killed another driver in an auto accident but because the illegal alien never had a drivers license he cannot be charged with a felony. As a result the illegal alien will likely only get six months for killing the other driver who was headed home to his family after work. The law in Ohio says that if your license has not been suspended you cannot be charged with a felony and of course being an illegal alien the driver who caused the accident never had an Ohio drivers license. To add insult to injury, the illegal alien had been charged with a DUI after another wreck in 2006 and never showed up for his deportation hearing and was still living at the same residence when this latest incident occurred. What's worse, two other fatal accidents, both caused by illegal aliens, have happened since the first incident, in the same general area and they too have been charged with only a misdemeanor.

On a more positive note, in Virginia, a U.S. district judge sentenced the owner of a business, who knowingly hired illegal aliens, to 90 days in prison and imposed severe fines. Also in Virginia, the F.B.I. arrested a Guatemalan man who had in his possession hundreds of license plates and auto titles from Mississippi and Tennessee. The man was selling the titles and plates to illegal aliens who could not prove their residency, which the state of Virginia requires.

In other news, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a measure that will require the federal government to repay states for their costs associated with housing and prosecuting illegal aliens charged with a crime. The measure actually only restores the existing State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP) to it's original form which was altered in 2006 so that the federal government would only reimburse states in the event of a conviction.

Last but not least, it seems the A.L.C.U. has teamed up with the Mexican government to form The Guardian Program which will council and provide legal defense to illegal aliens as well as go after immigration agents who abuse illegal aliens and their rights.

In an update concerning the presidential candidates, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, in an interview with Bill O'Riely, said that she would continue to allow sanctuary cities to exist unchallenged. And Republican candidate John McCain has been courting the Hispanic vote of which he feels he needs to get at least 40% to win. McCain has said he will build the fence and improve border security but will provide amnesty for the millions of illegal aliens already here, although he did say that he would deport any illegal aliens with a criminal record.

That wraps up another week in review on the illegal immigration front. Remember stay active in the fight against illegal immigration, our voices are being heard. It may seem as though the federal government is doing very little to enforce the immigration laws, but since American citizens started demanding action illegal alien removals have risen from 178,657 in 2005 to 282,548 in 2007 and are on track to be much higher in 2008. Much much more still needs to be done but we are making a difference, keep up the hard fight.

Sources: Houston Chronicle; Arkansas Democrat Gazette; Akron Beacon Journal; Virginian Pilot; Congressional Quarterly; Newstex LLC.; Fox News (Bill O'Riely , Clinton interview)

I don't know wether Rev. Jeremiah Wright is completely self absorbed or if he is completely self absorbed and purposely trying to sabotage Sen. Obama's campaign. What I do know, however, is that Rev. Wright's recent media blitz is doing harm to Obama's campaign and it's happening while Obama is trying to win the hearts and votes of so called Reagan Democrats. Rev. Wrights reemergence is a significant story on it's own, but it is the media's coverage of this story that I'd like to focus on. Overall I think most of the coverage was fair and rightfully thorough, as Obama himself gave credence to the issue's legitimacy when he said "I have said before and I repeat again that... some of the comments that Rev. Wright has made offend me and I understand why they have offended the American people". That being said, there was some coverage that left me scratching my head in sheer wonderment. Some people in the media tried to spin the whole thing as no big deal, suggesting it may even be a positive for Obama, as Chuck Todd (NBC News Political Director) while appearing on MSNBC seemed to do when he opined how Obama might even turn this into a silver lining by distancing himself from Rev. Wright again. Sorry Mr. Todd nice try but the only one who will turn this into a silver lining will be Sen. McCain, Obama can do some damage control by further distancing himself from Rev. Wright but there is no silver lining. Mr Todd went on to say  "He's (Obama) trying to get rid of this politics of distraction, that he's trying to turn the page, he doesn't want to sort of get killed by shinny metal objects that seem to distract the media, but rather focus on key issues, focus on change". Yes folks there it is again, that empty meaningless word change that's been thrown around more times than Keith Olberman has named Bill O'Riely "World's worst person". Maybe someone should let Mr. Todd know that  this is a huge issue to Americans, perhaps it is he who is awe struck by the pretty shinny objects. At the National Press Club event Rev. Wright remarked " he (Obama) didn't distance himself, he had to distance himself, because he's a politician, that's what politicians do" it's clear that Rev. Wright was insinuating that Obama was simply telling Americans what they wanted to hear, implying that Obama shares his hateful views. Yet CNN anchor Soledad O;Brien tried to spin the remarks saying " he is a Pastor, Barack Obama is a politician, meaning that they, you know, they don't work together.". Later during the same broadcast, which was not commentary or editorial but rather CNN's "Newsroom" at 10:00 am, in a discussion between anchor Tony Harris and contributors Roland Martin and David Gergen, Martin praised Rev. Wright's performance during the Bill Moyers interview which came across like an infomercial for Rev. Wright. Gergen went on to indicate that none of this is important and that those who show the Wright footage over and over do so because they oppose him and wish to hurt the campaign, then both Gergen and Martin tried to paint Rev. Wright as "a good man" and asked why people don't focus on the good he's done. I'll tell you why, because this story is not about  Rev. Wright's good deeds, it's about his hate filled incendiary remarks which insulted and injured many many Americans, would Gergen and Martin argue that we should focus on the good deeds of Hitler. Furthermore when those who show the clips of Rev. Wrights vile remarks over and over, they do so not because they Oppose Obama, but because it's news, and it's important, and it speaks volumes about Obama's character and or his judgement, which determines how he will govern and where he really stands on the issues, not to mention the issue of trust. It seems to me a few people in the media are still blinded by Obama mania. Let this be a warning to Viewers, be ware just because they call it news does not mean it's true.

Edward Penn