Photo to Make You Miss Photos of the President Clearing Brush

Remember this stupid article on the front page of the New York Times about how the Obama White House was such a men's club that it intimidated female staffers? Well, ladies, are you still intimidated by all that testosterone?

Oh well, at least he took the training wheels off. How does Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sleep at night? Oh yeah, soundly.

I added this to remember what a real man looks like. Of course, if there's any doubt we can always compare them throwing out the first pitch again.

Oh, and here's President Pantywaist trying to act butch for the red state voters and not quite pulling it off.

But I did find this photo of raw masculinity from the Obama administration.

Somewhere there's a softball-playing Elena Kagan who is jealous.

Donna Campell (TX-25) Lays Out Case Against Lloyd Doggett: "Any Vote for a Democrat is a Vote to Keep Nancy Pelosi"

There aren't many people in Texas who don't want to see Rep. Lloyd Doggett retired outside of Austin (and even Austin is tiring of him). He has proven himself to be a guaranteed "yes" vote for Speaker Pelosi, his disdain for the people has been on display at town hall meetings (which he has even fled, crying to the mainstream media that his feelings were hurt), and he somehow managed to become the third richest Texan in Washington even though he has "served" almost his entire career for the "public good."

Unfortunately, the trial lawyers and unions and Soros-funded MoveOn.org crowd really push the vote out for him every election cycle. But this year he may have finally met his match. Dr. Donna Campbell is a strong candidate with grassroots support, a working mom and emergency room physician running to be our citizen representative, to listen to the people and not be listened to. Her motto? One mom can make a difference. Her main focus is to repeal ObamaCare and restore power to the people.

We all know Lloyd Doggett isn't a man of the people, based on his actions and his words. Two out of three Texans opposed ObamaCare, but Doggett admitted to the Austin Chronicle he voted for it "based just on it's opposition." And if you need more reason to remove the out-of-touch 16 year incumbent, this letter to the editor makes it's own worthwhile case.

But Donna Campbell laid out the best case against voting for any Democrat in this midterm election in a warmly-received piece posted at pajamas media:

"Even in Austin, I have a secret weapon. It’s a nine word sentence that sends shivers down the spines of independent voters and even some Democrats, contorting their face as if they just jumped into the frigid 67 degree water of our beloved Barton Springs. Those nine words are: Nancy Pelosi is third in line for the presidency.

A vote for any Democrat in U.S. Congress is a vote to keep Nancy Pelosi as speaker of the House. This is the same Nancy Pelosi who said we have to pass bills before we can know what’s in them. This is the same Nancy Pelosi who said extending unemployment benefits creates jobs. And yes, this is the same Nancy Pelosi who just last week called for investigating Americans who are opposed to building the mosque at Ground Zero.

That’s not the exactly the strong defense of civil rights most Austinites expect from their elected leaders, Democrat or Republican. Should I stop to talk to one of these freedom-loving citizens, this might be a good time to remind them that our current representative, Lloyd Doggett, has voted with Speaker Pelosi 98% of the time. During his sixteen years in Washington, the national debt has increased by nearly nine trillion dollars. That makes your household’s share of money owed around $46,000. As a member of the House Ways and Means Committee, Mr. Doggett would like to know if you prefer your tax hikes to start this year or the next."

Dr. Campbell is an energetic and passionate conservative who deserves our support. Most importantly, she's not a politican. I encourage everyone to check out her facebook page and contribute to her campaign, even if you live outside the district. It's time to repeal and replace the Al Franken of Texas.

Gay Marriage and the Dog That Was a Horse

Let's suppose I want to keep a horse in my backyard. Not a big horse, but a horse nonetheless. Let's suppose it's against the rules of my Homeowner's Association. They allow dogs. They even allow big dogs like great danes and afghans, but they don't allow horses. Is this fair? After all, they're both mammals and they both have four legs. Both can be easily trained. And certain types of dogs are way more dangerous than horses. I decide I have a case. Now what tact do I take?

a) petition to get the rules changed by convincing fellow homeowners to allow a horse as long as certain requirements are met

b) move to a neighborhood where horses are allowed

c) try to get the federal definition of dog changed to also mean horse.

If you answered a or b, congratulations you are a reasonable human being who respects the democratic process and knows what it takes to love your neighbors. I you answered c, you have shown yourself to be a narrow-minded narcissist who believes everyone must conform to your view. Or you are one of the gay activists in California trying to overturn the will of the people, who despite supporting almost every leftist policy that's come down the pike, still somehow realize deep in their gut that marriage is between a man and a woman.

The truth is the battle for gay marriage in California isn't about gay rights at all. California has civil unions that treat same-sex couples under the law the same as married couples. No one in sunny California is getting kicked out of neighborhoods, losing their jobs, or discriminated against because they are in a gay relationship, and should these couples find a willing pastor or religious leader, they can even hold the necessary ceremony to call themselves "married." What they can't get is the majority of the people to recognize what they have as marriage, because that's never been the definition of marriage. And changing definitions is a lot harder and a lot more absurd than changing rules or recognizing rights.

No, the truth is the battle in California and most of the United States over gay marriage is to make the religious community accept homosexuality by force of government decree, to isolate and silence those with deeply felt religious convictions as intolerant bigots. The message from the gay activist crowd is you are either for gay marriage or you support hate, thus the campaign to call the proposition to define marriage between a man and a woman in California "Proposition Hate." In principle it is the gay left that is so intolerant that they will go so far as to sue photographers and others who refuse to work at their wedding."You must approve of our lifestyle!" they cry.

The Constitution does not give anyone the right to trample over the values of others. Ironically, that's what the gay activists are trying to do. They have been unable to convince a majority of voters in any state that their secular values are better and/or more appropriate than the traditional definition of marriage. So they sue to usurp the will of the people.

Nothing in the Constitution says your lifestyle must be affirmed or approved. For the Left to pretend it does and use this courts in this fashion is to pervert the very essence of our democracy. The effort is as futile as trying to get my horse called a dog.

Gay rights, yes! Gay marriage, no. Not unless you convince the majority of the people that it is in their best interest for the state to redefine the institution. After all, langauge is a living thing and who knows? Over time, you just might.

Summer Sports Drought? Try Shirling!

The reason I loathe the World Cup is because by the time it rolls around every four years, the guy in the cubicle next to you who has never uttered a word about sports suddenly becomes the biggest soccer enthusiast ever. He knows the players, he has a favorite and least favorite team, he somehow manages to find and display a shiny new jersey of the popular pick to win it, which has really been in the bottom of his desk drawer since the last World Cup. Seriously, you don't remember when he wore it two years ago for that paella night? He tries to wow the office with his predictions and grievances and World Cup history factoids. It's all a bit much. In fact, the sometimes passionate, sometimes closeted soccer fan is, in one word, annoying. Almost as intolerable as the Hope and Change kool-aid drinker. Often they are one and the same.

That said, I wish the World Cup was held later in the summer this year, because for the past month there has been absolutely no sporting event to watch or care about on TV. Of course, I'm omitting the Bachelorette. But in such a drought of competitive action (yes, I know Major League Baseball is going on, but can I really be expected to sit down and watch nine innings of America's past time when the modern world has me busy tweeting, blogging, texting, and downloading apps?), it's good to know there's a fictional sport as asinine as shirling. Then again, aren't all Gaelic-Italian sports asinine?

I know what you're thinking. One day shirling will be performed in the Olympics. Perhaps. Until then, I'll be counting down the days to football season. Brett Favre or not.