Tag Archives: politics 24/7

An Unenthusiastic But Eventful Primary Voting Experience

  Bookmark and Share Today is New Jersey’s primary election day. It’s not exactly one of the most intense primaries on the statewide level that we have ever seen though.

On the presidential side, New Jersey’s nearly last place in the primary lineup essentially made the contest meaningless in the selection of a Republican presidential nominee from the get-go. But to make it even more meaningless, Mitt Romney is the only Republican candidate still actively running for the nomination. However, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Ron Paul were still on the ballot.

So given the largely symbolic nature of the New Jersey presidential primary, as a former regional coordinator for Newt Gingrich, I chose to cast a symbolic vote. I voted for Newt Gingrich as my choice for President, but I voted for the Romney slate of delegates to the national convention. I did so because even though I prefer Gingrich, I am confident in Mitt Romney. He was my first choice for President in the 2008 primaries and I believe that if given the job, he will be an exceptional President. My favoring Gingrich in this now symbolic primary came from my belief that Newt is more reform minded than Mitt and I like that. But with Newt out, I am solidly behind Mitt Romney and if Mitt wins the presidency, I believe he will at least deliver a degree of reform. The type of reform that would be defined by his change in the direction we are headed in under President Obama, ad at the moment, that’s good enough for me. But my symbolic presidential primary ballot was cast the way it was to send a message that will probably not be heard. That message was that I want to see Romney buck the establishment more and be more open to enacting reforms of government and our tax code.

In the other statewide races, New Jersey Republicans got to pick a nominee to oppose incumbent, liberal U.S. Senator Bob Menendez. That race has barely been a contest. It has pitted unknown Republicans David Douglas Brown, Bader G. Qarmout, and Joe “Rudy” Rullo, against long time State Senator and former Republican State Committee Chairman Joe Kyrillos.

The sad fact is that most New Jerseyans didn’t even know there was a primary for U.S. Senate, and the media nationally as well as locally has barely acknowledged that there was a primary because it has been projected from the start, that Kyrillos would be the nominee. Kyrillos has the support of Governor Chrisite and the entire Republican establishment, including Mitt Romney, whose 2008 presidential campaign featured Kyrillos as its State Chairman. Between that lock on the state G.O.P., access to significant fundraising and the combination of all his opponent’s lack of name ID and their own financial resources, made this hardly a race.

I will be supporting Kyrillos over the lesser of two evils, Bob Menendez, in the general election, but I won’t say which of the 4 U.S. Senate Republican primary candidates I voted for today. That was another symbolic vote.

My vote for a Republican nominee for the House of Representatives was however anything but symbolic.

Here I cast my vote against a candidate much more than for the other.

The 4th District congressional primary was much like the statewide U.S. Senate race. It wasn’t much of a race at all. It received no attention because 18 term incumbent Republican Congressman Chris Smith was running for a 19th term and there was no reason to assume that he would not be able to win it the same way he won each of his previous elections. But as for myself, even though it can be said that Chris Smith is a conservative, he is not the best that conservatives could or should offer.

Over the years, Smith has became naturally complacent and on several recent occasions he has voted for such things as federal Cap-and-Trade policies and other liberal oriented schemes. But more than that, after 32 years in the same office, Chris Smith has lost all prominence as a conservative leader. The type of leader who is in the forefront of creating conservative solutions and advancing the conservative ideology. He lacks innovation and has become a fixture of Washington, D.C., just another notch in the belt of Beltway politics. If any T.E.A. movement sentiments ever existed, it needed to exist in this race. But it didn’t and as a result the virtual unknown and under-financed candidacy of Terrence McGowan had no chance. So come November when the ballot will offer me a choice between Republican Chris Smith and the Democrat’s sacrificial lamb, Brian Froelich, I will cast a write-in vote for a conservative Republican. Maybe Terrence McGowan.

At the bottom of the ticket I supported the unopposed Republican incumbents for County Sheriff and Board of Chosen Freeholders who are almost certain to win reelection in my heavily Republican vote rich Ocean County.

All this made for a very blasé voting experience that left me feeling quite unproductive. I knew that each of my votes were not imperative and would not determine who the inevitable nominees would ultimately be. But that does not mean my voting experience lacked any excitement.

As I stepped toward my voting booth, an elderly woman had exited it and she was arguing with the poll workers who did not know what to do with the voting machine because even though the machine was set for her to cast her ballot, she refused to vote. For the befuddled poll workers, this created a problem. If she did not press the button to cast her ballot, they would have to reset the machine and fill out a complex series of forms and file a cabinet filled with red tape to account for the uncast ballot.

While the wayward voter discussed the matter with one of the poll workers who stood aside the voting booth, she stated from behind me, “I’m not voting for Obama. He can go to hell”.

The elderly voter was a registered Democrat. She came out to vote against President Obama. But what she did not understand was that in her Party’s primary, President Obama was unopposed. So when she stepped in to the voting booth, she was offended and refused to vote.

After I cast my own ballot, the voter was still airing her grievance with the poll workers and so I interjected and explained that as a Democrat, she was being given the opportunity to nominate the people she wanted to represent her Party. I further explained that if she was a Republican, she could join me in nominating who we wanted to represent us in the Republican Party and to replace the President with.

We soon took our conversation outside of the polling place where in the parking lot I explained the process to her further and also made her aware of the fact that even though President Obama was unopposed for the nomination, she could have written in a name, a fact that she found much more appealing than just walking away. But she was still quite frustrated and went on to tell me that we have to get rid of Obama.

As we parted ways, I realized that I was much more pleased by my voting experience than I expected. I was unethusiastically set out to cast a bunch of symbolic and protests votes that I knew would ultimately do more to make me feel good than make an actual difference. But in the end what I walked away with was an optimistic feeling about at least the future results in the presidential general election because you know it’s not good for Democrats when a lifelong Democrat voter stands behind you at the ballot box and declares that their Party’s nominee should go to hell.

And if that wasn’t pleasing enough for me, as my partner and i got in our car to leave the polling place, he told me how he voted It turns out that despite any prior discussion about how we would vote, he cast his ballot the same exact way that I did, and for the same reasons. So who knows? Maybe there are more people out their who took the time to cast similar symbolic and protest votes? I know at least a few Democrats did.

Bookmark and Share

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Primaries

Please Excuse Us. Politics 24/7 Is Under Renovation

Site Under Renovation

And being paid for without stimulus money

Politics 24/7 is undergoing a renovation of sorts.

For months now, Politics 24/7 has been dormant.  Most of my attention has been on Politics 24/7’s satellite blog, White House 2012, a blog which has been covering the presidential race.

But now Politics 24/7 is undergoing a transformation.

While White House 2012 focusses on the presidential election, Politics 24/7 is going to discuss politics on a broader scale while also placing on emphasis on the other important races of 2012.

With 33 Senate races, 11 gubernatorial contests, and 435 congressional elections, Politics 24/7 will be a source for news, information, analysis, and opinions on each of these races.  In addition to unique perspectives on each these contests and the ramifications that they will have nationally, Politics 24/7 will provide you with informative links to each of the candidates.  Links that will quickly send you to  everything from their websites to their voting records.

Gathering all this information takes some time, but within a matter of days, Politics 24/7 will be back up and running.  In the meantime, I invite you to visit White House 2012.  You will find it to be one of the most informative resources on the Republican race for White House that you can find on the internet.

Leave a comment

Filed under Miscellaneous

Changing the Liberal Mindset that Americans Have Unwittingly Come To Accept

Bookmark and Share I have spent a lot of time listening to Democrats and President Obama in particular, preach about fairness and making people pay their fair share. I have listened to an endless stream of liberals position themselves as federal cherubs who are trying to be little government sponsored guardian angels who just want to make sure that everyone is treated equally and that everyone gets what they deserve. Sometimes I swear I am listening to Tinkerbell talking to Peter freaking Pan, or listening to Glinda, the Good Witch of the North, tell me that if I click the heels of my ruby red slippers together, I will suddenly find a magical rainbow that will lead me to a government provided pot of gold.

What bothers me the most is not that these liberal leprechaun would try to convince people that their American version of socialism would make everything better, but that there are actually Americans who are really dumb enough to believe them.

But it is evidence of the fact that since the days of FDR, Democrats have come to believe not in strong economic policies for America, but rather in the kind of politics that can keep them in power by offering voters a choice between the truth of reality represented by the self determination which Republicans believe in, and the government fantasy version of reality that the left promotes. It is the kind of politics that is rooted in dependency and it is comprised of a formula which seeks to make people believe that things can be easier if they keep Democrats in power because Democrats will give the people a litany of wonderful things by declaring them rights.

They will give you government provided health care, education, food, salaries, and services, and all these gifts will make our lives easier, and better.

It is a vicious cycle which all began by exploiting dependency, a negative which Democrats now try to perpetuate. For Democrats, their formula for electoral success relies mainly upon making more people, more dependent on government goodies so that come Election Day, the voters will embrace rather than bite the liberals hands that the people have literally come to expect to feed them.

Pursuit of this political formula for electoral success has unfortunately had a big impact on many Americans. Without realizing it, many Americans have been brainwashed and come to embrace the liberal mindset which has successfully change the dynamics of American thinking.

Today, thanks to the left, the American constitutional paradigm which was a citizenry that granted limited powers to a federal government, has been forgotten and replaced with the thinking that starts from the premiss which has us now question how much power the government can give the people. It is really all quite insane.

Today we take taxes for granted so much that the debate is not how much the government should take. It is how much of what we earn can we keep. In this day an age we are grateful when a leader like Chris Christie comes along and proposes an across the board state income of 10%. Thanks to liberal propaganda and decades of liberal training, we actually believe that politicians are doing us a favor by lowering our taxes. But the truth is, that it is no favor! It is the only decent thing to do! Yet we have all fallen victim to a liberal agenda which has forced us to think backwards. Whether we realize it or not, liberal thinking has shifted our mindset and so today we thank a politician for allowing us to keep more of our own money, when what we should actually be doing is reprimanding them for not giving us back more of our own money.

It’s time for people to wake up and realize that in America, the people do not exist because of government, government exists because of the people. Americans need to realize that we should not be grateful for how much the government lets us keep, it is the government that should be grateful for what we the people are willing to give to it. Until we all realize that, we will all remain slaves to our government, and nothing more than the real servants to those who are suppose to be the government servants………the elected officials who we thank for allowing us to keep more of our money, and appreciate for giving us the permit and permission s to build a deck on our own private property or to go fishing or camping.

I recently listened to the elf-like liberal Congressman from Ohio, Dennis Kucinich.

Dennis was discussing President Obama’s State of the Union address and he told the listening audience that he believed “the rich should pay more”. Other liberals phrase it differently. President Obama likes to say that “the rich should be forced to pay their fair share”. But what I need to know is what is fair and beyond that, who the hell has the right to tell us what is fair? Is Dennis Kucinich the Fairness Fairy?

Fairness is arbitrary and our Constitution did not address fairness. And as far as I known there is no twenty eighth amendment of the Constitution which defines fairness and articulates how government is suppose to legislate fairness. But the Constitution of the United States does address government’s place in our lives and in doing so, it clearly states that we are granted our rights from our creator. And just to make this clear, I need to tell you that the federal government did not create you or I. Barack Obama can not take credit for me. Nor can he legally take my rights away, even though several of his policies already have.

Another thing he should not be able to do is tell me how much I can earn, what I must do with my money, and who I must share it with.

Yet that is what the left has essentially lived for since the days of FDR.

They have lived for the opportunity to make me as good as the next guy by making sure that if the next guy is doing well, the government can redistribute his wealth to me. Is that a definition of fairness? Is it fair for me to profit from the work, ingenuity, work ethic, and committment of someone else?

These are the questions that President Obama and his Party have brought to the forefront in this election, more than any election we have seen in generations.

And while the economy is and should be one of the most important issues of the 2012 cycle, what America needs to really do is look at the dynamics behind the economy. Then they must decide if we want to fully invest ourselves in to reconstructing our national foundation in to one that is the world’s preeminent government sponsored welfare state, a state which is the key element to the survival of each individual American. Or do we want to strengthen the founding principles which were designed to get government and the federal bureaucracy out of the way so that we can practice the rights that we were endowed with by our creator and be free to dream well beyond the limits of the government bureaucracy?

That is the framework that this election must waged in. It is the question which the Republican nominee for President needs to condense every interpretation of each of their policies down to.

In 2012, the G.O.P. needs to remind people that dependency is not the American way and that our government was never meant to be the largest source of jobs in America. In fact the purpose of our government is not to create jobs, it was designed to make sure that American people could create jobs.

People must be made to once again learn how things really work in America.

They must be retrained to understand that government created jobs do not generate profits that sustain the costs of the salaries paid to each government employee. They need to understand that an employee of the EPA does not do create wealth, they consume wealth. The American people must be made to once again realize that when the government creates a job, the salary for that job comes not from any federal profit…..it comes from the taxpayers, and in order to keep raising the money required to pay that government salary, the government will need to continue taking taxpayers money.

However, in the free market, profits create salaries and the more profits there are, the more salaries there are.

But there is even more to it than that basic fact.

Voters need to be made aware of the fact that according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, civilian workers employed through the federal government have an average wage of $81,258. Yet at the same time, the average wage of the nation’s approximate 101 million private-sector workers is $50,462.

This means that taxpayers, the people who are making money through jobs that generate profits, are paying federal workers 25% more than they make. Meanwhile, President Barack Obama is increasing federal spending through so-called economic stimulus dollars, that is creating an even larger federal workforce, one that for a while was outpacing private sector job growth. And that is a formula for further disaster.

Paying federal salaries, and more of them, that are higher than the salaries which provide the taxes that pay for those federal pay checks, is a formula that leads to paying out more than we take in. And that is just on government jobs. It has nothing to do with the other more traditional forms of federal deficit spending based on entitlements and federal dependency programs.

All of this presents the next Republican presidential nominee a with a multifaceted challenge.

They must not just provide solutions and frame them in a way that wins people over, they must also educate people. The next Republican presidential nominee must educate people on how America is suppose to work and they must teach them the reasons why the socialist model of contemporary liberal-progressivism does not work and how it is a system designed to keep the powerbrokers in power by making them the people we are dependent for our own survival.

In 2012 we make people understand that government is not a supernatural entity which can wave a magic wand over a problem and solve it without accountability and without there being future repercussions as Peter finally has to Paul.

Once people can be made to realize that, I mean really realize that, half the battle will be won.

Once that is achieved we then need to confront Democrats and tell them that if they want change the purpose of government, they, like President, should come right out and admit it.

When he was running for President in 2008, then Senator Obama declared that he wanted to “fundamentally change America”. But few took him at his word. And those that did, didn’t think he really meant he wanted to fundamentally change the constitutional responsibilities of government. But now it is quite obvious that that is exactly what he meant.

In 2012 we must challenge Democrats to be truthful to the American people and force them to come before voters and admit that they want the federal government to have more control over our lives. We must challenge them to be honest and admit that they do not like the fact that some people can be financially wealthier than others. We must make the left come before the American electorate and let them know the America that liberals envision, is one in which everyone is made equal by lowering the overall quality of life rather than providing the type of environment which creates more opportunities for people to improve their quality of life.

We know for certain that class warfare is the name of the liberal game in 2012. It’s nothing new. But what Republicans must do now is reeducate the American people and make them realize why it is class warfare. And we must then ask the American people to decide once for all, if they believe dependency on the federal bureaucracy is the best foundation for them to build their lives upon and for our nation to grow on, or is the independence behind our reason for being the more solid choice for the future of our nation and its people.

Bookmark and Share

6 Comments

Filed under politics

Obama’s Corrupt Crony Capitalism Extends Far Beyond Solyndra

Bookmark and Share LightSquared is just the latest example of questionable conduct which tears down the façade of transparency as well as the political and legal integrity of President Obama and his Administration. Evidence from the Pentagon in regards to a new wireless project by LightSquared, a satellite broadband company based in Virginia, has been raising questions about a new crony capitalism crime involving the Administration. This latest scandal comes on the heals of the Solyndra scandal which saw Democrat donors with Obama administration ties, secure a $500 million loan for the solar energy firm right before it went bankrupt. In the case of LightSquared, in order to help that corporate intersts, a firm owned by Democratic donor Philip Falcone, it seems that the Obama Administration asked Air Force General William Shelton to alter testimony that he presented in a classified briefing to members of Congress.

The testimony was called for after the Pentagon raised concerns that LightSquared was embarking upon a new wireless project which preliminary tests indicated would create a significant disruptions to the military’s use of critical Global Positioning System technology, which among other things, controls missile targeting.

When questioned extensively by members of Congress, General Shelton admitted that the White House pressured him to alter his testimony in order to make it more favorable for the Democrat donor’s company to move ahead with the project, despite how much it could possibly alter the military’s effectiveness. It is further alleged that the original testimony was leaked to LightSquared in advance of its delivery to the congressional panel it was meant for. Such a leak was a total breach of protocol in a process that only included the White House, the Office Management and Budget, and the Department of Defense .

This blatant attempt to influence Shelton’s original testimony and to involve LightSquared in the process in order to produce biased testimony designed to benefit another Democrat donor, is further evidence of the type of corruption that the Obama Administration is consistently engaged in. This time though, its crony capitalism went so far as to tamper with our nation’s defense capabilities. Such recklessness is more than just unforgivable, it is life threatening. But the Obama Administration seems not to have any regard for anything but its own political survival. And their history of politics before policy and campaign contributors before national concerns is extensive.

Who can forget the strange case of the Deep Water Horizon environmental disaster in the Gulf.?

After the President received more campaign donations from Bristish Petroleum than any other candidate in the nation he granted BP’s Deepwater Horizon a waiver that sheltered them from regulatory requirements. The Administration subsequently honored the Deep Water Horizon with a safety award. Now after hundreds of millions of gallons of oil have spewed into the Gulf of Mexico, the federal government is blaming the operators of the Deep Water Horizon for cutting corners that led to the disaster. Ironically, the Bush Adminstration which was accused of being in the pocket of big oil interests, cited the Deep Water Horizon 6 times for safety violations.

Still though, President Obama likes to wage class warfare and hold oil companies up as greedy enemies of the people, and to claim that the big, bad Republicans are in bed with them. He loves claiming that Republicans are for big business while suggesting that he is not. Yet whose Administration is risking lives, the economy, and the environment for big business in return for big money contributions to his reelection effort?

Until now, President Obama’s Administration has escaped any aggressive scrutiny of its illegal conduct. The Democrat controlled Senate and House that he enjoyed for the first two years of his term, failed to thoroughly investigate any of the many puffs of smoke that indicated the fires of Obama related corruption. President Obama failed to face proper scrutiny in the case of BP. He failed to be properly investigated when his Administration was found to have been offering Pennsylvania Congressman Joe Sestack a job in turn for not challenging Senator Arlen Specter in a Democratic primary, or even when his Justice Department refused to investigate charges of black on white racism. These are just a few of the examples of corruption that has been ignored by the political establishment but this President has been virtually immune from the law in regards to a long list of other illegal activity. Such as:

  • Seizing control of GM and Chrysler without proper authorization from Congress.
  • Firing whistle-blower Gerald Walpin for doing his job as the Inspector-General in charge of investigating corruption, waste, and fraud in government programs.
  • Collecting data on fellow Americans who oppose healthcare reform with flag@whitehouse.gov and now, through a new Obama campaign website, again collecting data on fellow Americans who disagree with the Administration
  • Placing the U.S. Census Bureau under the supervision of the White House Chief of Staff, by law the Department of Commerce.
  • His Justice Department’s smuggling of weapons, that the President signed off on funding for.
  • Manipulating jobs by hiring and rehiring Census workers.
  • Creating false districts and assigning stimulus funds to those districts.
  • Violating tax codes by releasing private tax details to the public when attacking Koch Industries.
  • Creating a taxpayer-funded position, Director of Progressive Media & Online Response, to promote Obama’s incumbent candidacy, in violation of the Hatch Act.
  • Obama’s filming of a campaign ad in the White House in violation of FEC laws.

Now as the 2012 election begins to ramp up, any attempts to investigate the President’s questionable acts and his Adminstaration’s conflicts of interest, will be written off as politically motivated, Republican campaign tactics. In all honesty, such investigations would indeed be a distraction from the issues. But Republicans do not need to try and win in 2012 by creating any distractions from the issues. Right now, on the issues of most importance to voters, Republicans win. That is however a fact that the left will ignore when the “Solyndra” hit’s the fan. It is also a fact that should really not play a role in whether or not questionable conduct by the Obama Administration should be investigated. The law is the law and political considerations should not determine the level of scrutiny that legally questionable conduct is given. Not unless unbeknownst to me, there has been a constitutional amendment passed which grants a Commander-in-Chief immunity from such things as the Hatch Act, or tampering with sworn testimony.

Of course the President will defend his Administration by try to claim such things as being among the most transparent executive branches in history because of new procedures he enacted that releases the White House visitors logs and meeting with lobbyists to the public. But the loopholes in this policy are big enough to fit an undetected army of liberal interest groups though.

First of all, these logs are not made public until four month’s time has passed.

Then there are also reports of Administration officials scheduling meetings in the White House Conference Center which is conveniently not covered by the Worker and Visitors Entrance System (WAVES System) that collects the data for these logs. Furthermore, the White House‘s attempt to achieve “transparency“ through the WAVES System does not include records of meetings with lobbyists in coffee shops and restaurants near the White House. All of this essentially circumvents sincere disclosure laws and policies.

For those reasons, Congress should look into the passage of new lobbying disclosure regulations that have real teeth and are capable of exposing government influence of Congress and the White House in real-time.

In the meantime, President Obama is getting away with murder and while the G.O.P. does not need to take President Obama down via a scandal, they also have a responsibility to not cover-up the White House cover-ups.

Bookmark and Share

5 Comments

Filed under politics

Operation Old TEA Bag: The Democrat’s Hail Mary Pass

Bookmark and Share    The recent special election in New York’s 9th Congressional District did more than just elect a Republican to a seat that  hasn’t been in the hands of the G.O.P. since 1923. It also shed some light on the desperation of Democrats and what direction they will throw the ball in when they try to salvage their 2012 election fortunes with a last minute Hail Mary pass.

In the race that pitted liberal incumbent Democrat Assemblyman David Weprin against retired businessman, Republican Bob Turner, Democrats struggled to find the issues that their candidate could run on to win voters over. Initially they did not even do that. At first it was assumed that as always, whichever Democrat they ran, would sail to victory and succeed sex texting addict Anthony Weiner. But then in August, Democrat polling showed something strange. It showed that Democrat Weprin was not getting the amount of support that Democrats usually get. This then suggested to them that they actually had a real and competitive election on their hands.

So they got to work and started to develop the issues they would campaign on.

What they found was that Weprin and Democrats had no positions on the issues that would excite voters and convince them that Weprin was their man. Even in a relatively liberal district like the ninth, there were no issues which Democrats held a popular position on.

There was the issue of gay marriage which Weprin recently supported the passage of in the New York State Assembly. But with a heavy Hassidic Jewish population in the ninth, legalizing marriage between two people of the same sex was far from popular.

There was the issue of our national debt. On that issue, Weprin held a typical Democrat line which supported big government and big government social programs. But even in a left leaning district like the one that spans the working class neighborhoods of Brooklyn and Queens, voters know that our debt has become a deepening crisis for our nation and as such, they understand that more government spending is not realistic. That left Weprin with the opportunity to use the traditional liberal language of tax increases to pay for all the spending. But in the middleclass communities of NY-9, tax increases, even for those who earn $250,000 or more, doesn’t really go over well. The ninth congressional district is comprised largely of those people in the middle……the ones who get hit from both ends and are not poor enough to benefit from government social programs, but are not wealthy enough to take advantage of the tax loopholes and credits that the political establishment has arranged for. So these people did not want to hear the Obama “make the rich pay their fare share” rhetoric. Many of them are afraid that a liberal definition of “rich” would include them.

There was the issue of immigration. However on that issue, Weprin has a liberal “Dream Act” position that does not solve the illegal immigration issue that impacts on his district’s residents. They do not want their money going to fulfilling the dreams of illegal immigrants. These people, many of which remember seeing the World Trade Center from their windows and worked within its shadows, want our borders secured.

So like many other issues, that was out.

There was Israel. After all, with a population of Jewish voters that is disproportionately larger than in many other districts throughout the nation, as an Orthodox Jew himself, Weprin could certainly and convincingly argue his support for Israel and ride high on the popularity of that point. Unfortunately though, being a Democrat, most voters linked Weprin to President Obama’s unfriendly policies towards Israel. And Weprin’s argument to voters that they should trust him on israel because he would fight for Israel from within, didn’t have wings.

Short of a total condemnation of President Obama by Weprin, the Jewish vote in his district simply viewed Weprin as a congressional rubberstamp for Obama’s polcies.

The further Democrats went down the list of issues important to the middleclass voters of the ninth, the more they realized that there were no issues which allowed them to present a position that they could derrive district-wide support for.

So what is a candidate with a competitive election ahead of him to do?

Why, resort to the liberal playbook, of course!

That meant scare citizens. That meant to try and distort the Republican position to preserve Social Security and Medicare for those on it and those expecting to soon  be on them.  It meant denying the Republican position to preserve those programs for future generation with reforms that will strengthen Social Security and medicare. It meant do your best to make vulnerable senior citizens believe that if a Republican won, they would deny them the money that many seniors have come to rely upon.

That was a good start but Weprin and his Democrat strategists and Washington puppet masters needed something else to attract some voters outside of the senior citizen demographic. That’s when the orders from Washington came down. And that is when the strategy to run against the TEA Party came into play.

So in early August Operation Old TEA Bag went into effect. That is when Weprin campaign spokesperson Elizabeth Kerr first argued the following:

“Bob Turner’s doing anything he can to distract voters from his plan to end Medicare as we know it, which would cost seniors in Brooklyn and Queens an extra $6,400 every year,” .

And from there, the tactics to scare senior citizens began

Then when the news that Standard & Poor’s had downgraded the country’s credit rating because of fiscal uncertainty came out and  dominated the headlines, Weprin’s campaign defined Bob Turner as a TEA Party extremist and charged that because of their “irresponsible demands”, “Republican Tea Party extremists” facilitated the downgrade and the fallout from it.

From that point on, the Democrat campaign for Congress in NY-9 began.

It was a constant barrage of trying to make the TEA Party the enemy that voters had to unite against.  It was a never ending campaign to define Bob Turner as the TEA Party candidate. In Between those lines of attack was tossed in the same old scare tactics intended to frighten senior citizens that predate the Reagan Administration.

For his part Bob Turner campaigns argued;

“Career politicians like David Weprin have taxed and spent this country into a crisis. They have jeopardized the entire social safety network by irresponsibly borrowing 40 cents of every dollar we spend,”

And as one Turner campaign aide put it;

“Businessman Bob Turner is running to protect Social Security and Medicare for every American over 55 years old and to put those essential programs on a sustainable path for everybody younger than that.”

But Bob Turner didn’t just defend himself against Operation Old TEA Bag. He spent most of his time denouncing the Obama policies that even urban, middle-class Democrats have lost faith in. Like the days of Ronald Reagan, Bob Turner found himself addressing a new generation of Reagan Democrats. Democrats who do not appreciate the condition of our nation and do not have faith in the direction their Party is heading in under a liberal President.

Yet as the campaign continued and the polls tightened, D.C. Democrats from the DCCC, DNC, and from the state and local Party apparatus, double-downed on their last hope……Operation Old TEA Bag. Even when only days before the special election was to take and polls showed that Turner turned the tables and was now ahead of Weprin, Democrats found themselves desperately trying to make a success of their fear campaign of senior citizens and their efforts to make the TEA Party the common enemy.

The plan was perfect. It even concluded on a  high note…….a recorded phone call from former President Clinton which tied the TEA Party and Medicare together as he stated “and he’ll oppose the TEA Party plan to destroy Medicare” [see the video below].  But ultimately, what Democrats thought was the perfect strategy, proved to be as unsustainable and useless as their economic policies.

Like driving a car on empty it was a last ditch, desperate attempt to run a camping not on any issues,  just on fear. The only problem is that in the end, senior citizens were less afraid of distortions about Bob Turner than they were of the truth about the current direction our nation is headed. In the end, the voters of the ninth district decided that the TEA Party was not their problem. Democrats were.

Unless  Democrats start singing a different a tune, they will still be the problem in 2012.  And just as Operation Old TEA Bag did not work for them in CD-9,  it will not work for them in the 2012 elections.from the top of the Democrat ticket , to the bottom of the ballot.  However, with little else left in their playbook, I expect the Democrats to do little else but resort to scaring senior citizens and trying to run against the TEA Party. 

Bookmark and Share

2 Comments

Filed under politics

Republican Bob Turner Wins Anthony Weiner’s Congressional Seat in New York Special Election

Bookmark and Share Although it is not officially been declared yet White House 2012 and Politics 24/7 is calling this race and and declaring that Republicans have pulled off an astonishing election win that gives them control of New York’s 9th Congressional District for the first time since the 1923.
 
In what was an unusually hotly contested New York City special election campaign that began after Democrat Congressman Anthony Weiner resigned in disgrace, Republican businessman Bob Turner defeated liberal, Democrat, career politician, Assemblyman David Weprin.

While the heavily Democrat district is normally not contested by Republicans in any meaningful way, ever since incumbent Congressman Anthony Weiner resigned from the seat a few months ago, a confluence of events and circumstance made this a seat a perfect opportunity for a Republican pick up. Between dissatisfaction with the economy, increasing dissatisfaction with the President and a heavily populated Jewish vote disgruntled by President Obama’s treatment of Israel, this special election became less of a referendum on either Republican Bob Turner and Democrat David Weprin and more of a protest vote designed to show the President Obama how unhappy voters are with him.

This forced the traditionally reliable voters of this Democrat district to ignore their usual ideological dislike of Republican policies, thereby eliminating their habit of voting for whoever Democrats run. But it is important to realize that this is not necessarily a referendum on President Obama regarding 2012. With over 14 months before the presidential election and without a Republican presidential nominee to contrast President Obama with, the core traditional base of the President’s Democrat vote is willing to send him a message. But once the presidential campaign heats up, the people who currently comprise CD-9 will still have strong Democrat tendencies that will force many to coalesce around the President’s reelection and the Democrat ticket.

But what this special election does show to be a very real problem for the President is the incredibly large number of Jewish voters who have real problems with the President and even such Democrat agenda items as gay marriage. In addition to being heavily democratic, CD-9 is also heavily Jewish and Democrat David Weprin is an orthodox Jew. Yet his natural constituency in the district still opposed his election as a result of President Obama. Going in to the election, polls showed that the issue of Israel was a significant one for CD-9 voters and the same polls showed that voters were quite dissatisfied with the President’s policies regarding Israel.

Another sign of just how focused the electorate was on the national atmosphere created by President Obama was demonstrated by the issues which dominated the election. Neither candidate campaigned on any of the many local issues. For instance, after Hurricane Irene passed New York, it left a great deal of damage, especially along the Atlantic Ocean beaches in the Queens area of the district. Yet despite the timeliness of the campaign and the storm, it was not once mentioned.

So the electorate was indeed focused on President Obama. Still though, this was just a snapshot of the moment. As mentioned previously, it still may not be a long lasting referendum on the President. However; there is no denying that the President has a great deal of work to do to ensure that the traditionally democratic Jewish vote across the nation, does not vote the same way in the presidential election that they did in New York’s special election.

Meanwhile, the addition of Bob Turner to the existing Republican majority in the House of Representatives will not make any difference in national politics in the sense of being any kind of shift in the balance of power. Furthermore,this congressional seat may not exists after 2012. New York state’s loss of population in the most recent census means that the state legislature will have to erase two congressional districts from its ranks. Ever since Anthony Weiner resigned, CD-9 became an obvious district to eliminate and is likely to remain so when redistricting is completed.

Meanwhile, what this Republican special election victory in the unlikely Democrat stronghold of New York City does do is provide a significant psychological boost for the G.O.P. and a profound sense of dread for Democrats. This defeat will begin to put a great deal of pressure on the President by congressional Democrats who will be counting on him to have some coattails in 2012 that can help to just keep incumbents in office but to also elect enough new Democrats to take back control of the House and to maintain control of the Senate. After the drubbing Democrats because of President Obama in the 2010 midterm election, this 2011 special election serves as good reason for Democrats to be fearful of a 2012 election cycle with President Obama at the top of their ticket.

Bookmark and Share

1 Comment

Filed under politics

CD-9 New York Special Election: Udpdated Results

Bookmark and ShareHere you wil find updated election results for the CD-9 special election in New York. Updates will be provided at least every 10 minutes

 Based on the districts that are reporting in and projections that indicate there is not of enough of a vote to come in from the remaining districts White House 2012 and Politics 24/7 is calling this race for Republican Bob Turner

U.S. House – District 9 – Special General

442 of 512 Precincts Reporting – 86% 

 

Bob Turner                          —   GOP                32,212  — 53%

David Weprin                     —   Dem              27,460    — 46%

Christopher Hoeppner    — SWP                     277        –  0

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

New York’s 9th Congressional District Special Election Tells Us Much Going in to 2012

Bookmark and Share   Today, some of the last waves of the 2010 midterm elections are about to sweep ashore the American political landscape. And much like the original tidal wave of victory that the G.O.P. rode to some of the largest gains of congressional seats in history, this last wave is expected to bring surprises with yet another Republican gain.

In Nevada voters in the second district will be filling the vacancy created by Joe Heller’s appointment to the U.S. Senate following Senator John Ensign’s May resignation. In that special election Republican Mark Amodei looks to be a slam dunk in what was once considered a tight race for Republicans to retain the seat, but is now considered an impossibility for Democrats to pick up.

But the real story of the day is shaping up to be the special election in New York’s 9th congressional district. There, residents of a district which is comprised of portions of Brooklyn and Queens will be electing a successor to disgraced liberal Anthony Weiner who resigned after lying about sending sexually explicit photo’s of himself over the internet. The district has been held by Democrats for nearly a century and it has not even been considered competitive at any point in the last forty years.

Yet while Republicans have not exactly had great success in special elections to fill vacant congressional seats in New York state, NY-9 seems ready to make up for that.

Over the past two years, special congressional elections that the G.O.P. should have won with relative ease, were lost to Democrats due to poorly managed campaigns and a series of assorted Party related political anomalies and blunders. In May, New York’s Upstate 26th Congressional District should have gone Republican but instead was won by Democrat, Kathy Hochul.

In 2009, Republicans lost another Upstate New York congressional seat that they should have retained.

After nominating a disastrous candidate in liberal Republican Dede Scozzafava and seeing a strong Conservative Party candidate take to the field, Democrat Bill Owen won a seat that had been in Republicans for over 100 years.

But today’s special in NY-9 is a case that is quite different. This election is being fought not in the Republican friendly upper portion of the vast Empire State, it is being fought in the Democrat stronghold of two of New York City boroughs.

The ninth spans sections of Brooklyn and Queens and is a middle and lower middle class, blue collar district heavily comprised of Jewish and Italian-American voters as well as union members. It is a district that is ideally suited for liberal candidates, like the man who previously held the seat……Anthony Weiner. Yet despite its Democrat friendly makeup, NY-9 is in the midst of casting what can only be described as a protest vote that is about to elect businessman Bob Turner over long serving liberal Assemblyman David Weprin.

While Turner’s victory is not a sure thing, polls and the prevailing winds indicate that he is a likely winner.

According to the most recent Public Policy Polling survey the race stands as follows:

  • Bob Turner (R) 47%
  • David Weprin (D) 41%
  • Christopher Hoeppner (S) 4%
  • Undecided 7%

But the story here is not merely that a Republican is about to take a seat away from Democrats that hasn’t been in G.O.P. since the 1920’s, but rather that traditional Democrat constituencies are showing their dissatisfaction with President Obama and are sending a protest vote. That story is explained by a deeper look at the most recent PPP poll of the 9th district. Republican Bob Turner has the support of as much as 29% of the Democrat vote, while Democrat David Weprin has only a 58% share. Right there you can see that things are out of whack. Democrats in New York City typically back their Party nominee in numbers approaching 80% or more.

When it comes to Republicans,Bob Turner is receiving 83% of the Republican vote and a mere 10% support Weprin.

But some of the most startling and important stats come from the districts heavy Jewish population and those voters who consider themselves to be independent.

Those results are as follows:

Among Jewish Voters

  • Bob Turner (R) 56%
  • David Weprin (D) 39%
  • Christopher Hoeppner (S) 2%
  • Undecided 4%

Among Independents

  • Bob Turner (R) 58%
  • David Weprin (D) 26%
  • Christopher Hoeppner (S) 7%
  • Undecided 10%

But perhaps the biggest story of all here is that this election is really not between Turner and Weprin at all. As it turns out the vote is between two sentiments,………………. are you happy with the way things are going a dn our President’s leadership, or are you dissatisfied by President Obama and his liberal policies?

The answer to that question is that voters are pissed at the President. And Democrat politicos know it. That is one reason why President Obama’s name is hardly mentioned by the Democrat candidates campaign but it is often brought by Republicans who are labeling Weprin as a rubberstamp for Obama’s failed policies. The reasons for that are made quite clear with the following additional Public Policy Polling data from the same poll that shows Turner ahead of Weprin.

Do you approve or disapprove of President Barack Obama’s job performance?

  • Approve 31%
  • Disapprove 56%

Among Men

  • Approve 27%
  • Disapprove 63%

Among Women

  • Approve 35%
  • Disapprove 49%

Among Jewish Voters

  • Approve 26%
  • Disapprove 62%

Do you approve or disapprove of Barack Obama’s leadership on Israel?

  • Approve 30%
  • Disapprove 54%

Among Democrats

  • Approve 42%
  • Disapprove 40%

Among Republicans

  • Approve 13%
  • Disapprove 78%

Among Independents

  • Approve 13%
  • Disapprove 66%

Among Jewish Voters

  • Approve 22%
  • Disapprove 68%

How important was the issue of Israel in deciding who to vote for Congress: very important, somewhat important, or not all that important?

  • Very important 37%
  • Somewhat important 32%
  • Not all that important 29%
  • Among Jewish Voters
  • Very important 58%
  • Somewhat important 30%
  • Not all that important 11%

To make matters worse, in 2008 President Obama won the 9th C.D. with 55% of the vote to John McCain’s 44% but when asked about the 2012 presidential election, President Obama is obviously in trouble.

2012 Presidential Election

  • Mitt Romney 46%
  • Barack Obama 42%
  • Barack Obama 44%
  • Rick Perry 43%

Among Jewish Voters

  • Mitt Romney 52%
  • Barack Obama 38%
  • Rick Perry 47%
  • Barack Obama 43%

The voters of New York’s 9th Congressional District have not suddenly changed ideologies and gone from believing that government doesn’t do enough to believing that it does too much. They remain largely supportive of Democrat policies but the sentiment among voters here is that President Obama isn’t working and his policies are failing us. As such, they are taking their frustrations out on David Weprin. That is just one of the reasons why Democrats have not brought President Obama into this district. Apparently, they have learned from the 2010 special election to replace Ted Kennedy in the U.S. Senate. In that race President Obama was brought in to energize the base and motivate independent Massachusetts voters to turn out and vote for liberal Martha Coakley. As it turned out, they instead stayed home while the rest of angry electorate came out to support Republican Scott Brown and reject Barack Obama.

Now as we head into the 2012 election, NY-9 is showing us that if anything, that sentiment which swept Scott Brown into office has not changed and may have in fact built even more momentum.

Republican Bob Turner can still lose this race. Special elections usually come down to the Get Out the Vote operation and in that area, Weprin and Democrats have that aspect of the election wrapped up. With quite robust Democrat organization abilities as compared to the meager Republican organization in new York City, combined with the assistance of organized efforts by unions, the Weprin campaign can out organize the Turner campaign. But at the same time anger is a strong motivational tool and the voters of the 9thare angry at President Obama. That could make it so that there are very few voters for Democrat GOTV efforts to make sure go to the polls.

Bookmark and Share

1 Comment

Filed under politics

Ron Paul 2012! A Perfect Example of a Ron Paul Supporter. All Mouth, No Brains.

Bookmark and Share   Don’t miss the Ron Paul Supporter in this Video 
 
It is said that Ron Paul has an overwhelming amount of support in the American electorate. This is a claim mainly made by Ron Paul supporters. Still it is true that the Texas Congressman, a career politician with almost two dozen years in Congress, does have a relatively substantial voting bloc of his own. Yet this voting bloc still only amounts to a total of anywhere from 8 to 14 percent in any given statewide primary or caucus. And in this, his third run for President, continues to produce this small but consistent base vote.

One could say that this loyal following is inspired by Ron Paul’s admirably undeniable and extremely justified respect for the United States Constitution. At least one would be inclined to think so. But if you were to take a look at Ron Paul’s most ardent fans, you will see that it is hardly his respect for the Constitution that is responsible for his often rowdy and boisterous base.

This following video sets the foundation for what I believe is really responsible for Congressman Paul’s loyal following.

As exemplified by the young man seen in the video above, most of Ron Paul’s supporters are men between the ages of 18 and 30. Let me be clear. Not all of his support comes from this demographic, just most of it. While Paul certainly has support from women and people older than 30, the majority of his base are men below that age. And his support among both men and women progressively declines from the age of 27 and up. In other words, most of Ron Paul’s support comes from the very kids that you see on MTV during Spring Breaks specials at Senor Frogs in Cancun, or surrounding a stage on Miami Beach while drinking beer through funnels and flailing their bootie hands about to Fifty Cent’s latest rap about those he deems as bitches and hos. As portrayed by the very civic-minded young man in the video above, this is what accounts for a significant portion of Ron Paul’s support.

The problem is that much like the irresponsible fool in the video, many of the minds in this young demographic are not as inspired by Ron Paul’s respect for the Constitution as they are for the excuses they come with up based upon Ron Paul’s interpretations of the Constitution.

Paul’s mousey toned, but impassioned description of the Constitution helps the typical young rebel who feels invincible and naïvely believes they are of superior intellect, to make excuses for irresponsible behavior. While it is not Ron Paul’s intention to provide the youth of America with an excuse for having a reckless disregard for such things as the law, that is nevertheless what many impressionable youngsters and imature college kids do with Paul’s message. While Ron Paul’s message about freedom and liberty has a certain basic truth about it, the extent towhich he exagerates some of those truths, provides the counter-cultural, anti-authority, impulses of the youngest generations with what they try to make a courageous stand for freedom and a reason to defy authority. What they do with Ron Paul’s message is say “Yeah, that’s right. Government has no right to tell me what to do”. And while Ron Paul does not necessarily mean that government has no control and no authority ata ll, his total lack of willingness to acknowledge many of the proper responsibilities for government, allows for an almost anarchist-like interpretation of his message by those who wish to legitimize their own unfettered conduct.

It is the excuse for defying authority that the youngest generation creates from Ron Paul’s message, which accounts for their support of Ron Paul. The largest demographic supporting Ron Paul likes the idea of freedom but they do not quite grasp the fact that with freedom also comes great responsibility and personal control. And so like the punk kid in the video, they do not respectfully regard the Constitution for the freedom it defends, they instead use it as an excuse for avoiding the personal responsibility that comes with freedom.

This is not to say that Ron Paul intends for such an interpretation and I am not saying that older and more rational and people do not support Ron Paul for his sincere views. There are a few that do. And lately many more are offering support of him as a sign of protest against politics-as-usual. But there is no denying that the majority of Ron Paul’s most vocal supporters, the ones that are always screaming out and calling others dictators or war criminals, are the ones who want to legitimize their own lack of self-control. Can you just imagine if Mr. Constitution in the video above had the ability to legally acquire heroin as Ron Paul would allow? God help us.

I am sure that the Ron Pauliacs will now drink the kool aid and come after me for the conclusion that zi draw from the facts. I will be called a neo-con, a jackbooted thug and much more. I expect nothing less from the Paulbots. But unlike them, I have a perfect exampe supporting my charge. It’s that damn fool in the video who is trying to suggest that the Policie should just assume he was innocent even though he was four times the legal level for intoxication.

Bookmark and Share

3 Comments

Filed under politics

Democrats Must Make A Decision. Tax Relief is Either Good for the Econmy or Bad for the Economy?

Bookmark and Share    Ahead of President Obama’s newest major speech and address to a joint session of Congress, there is much discussion about several solutions to the jobs problem that revolve around taxation. The buzz is that alleviating some of the tax burden will provide incentives for businesses to hire. This talk is not coming from Republicans. It is coming from Democrats, including President Obama. While Republicans are always in support of a good tax cut for all entities, Democrats usually are not. In fact today’s socialist Democrat Party loves to try to claim that Republicans only want to cut taxes for the rich. Then they subsequently stretch what the definition of “rich” is.

But the fact that a large number of Democrats are willing to withhold on any reduced rate of tax collection is an incredibly profound change and although they are unwilling to admit it, it is also a big admission to the success of supply-side economics and the benefits of tax cuts.

The argument is that the economy is so bad that we must relieve some of the tax burden on businesses and offer them incentives to hire. Mind you, this is not what Republicans are arguing, it was Democrats are arguing and even proposing. On Thursday President Obama is said to begin rolling out a job creation program which is a mix of tax cuts and spending that amounts to another stimulus package and is proposing such things as tax relief for businesses.

In fact, today, socialist Democrats all across America are supporting lessening taxes as a means to stimulate the economy. Just this past Summer, many Democrats supported the repatriation of corporate taxes on profits made by them outside of the United States at a lower than normal rate. But one of the liberal objections to this was that companies would not use a tax reparation holiday and the additional money they would make on the lower than normal tax rate of such a tax holiday, on creating jobs here in America. So some liberals wanted to pass legislation that would use the additional funds from a tax holiday, to lower unemployment in the U.S.. But according to liberal California Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez, such legislation is wrong. Back in June she reportedly said;

“I think you should be able to spend your money how you want to use your money,”

She added;

“The last time in 2004 when we did this, corporations used it and bought back their stock. So what? If I was a stockholder in that company, I did well.”

I never thought I would write this, but Sanchez was right. But Sanchez’s thinking here is consistent with her record which is usually a tax and spend mentality that relies on the government taking the money out of the free market and spending it and redistributing it themselves. And such inconsistent liberal thinking is becoming prevalent during the current economic crisis.

Back in July, the bastion of liberalism known as the Commonwealth of Massachusetts signed off on their own holiday. It was a sales tax holiday that lasted set for just two days in August and it gave shoppers a temporary break from the state’s 6.25 percent sales tax. This amounted to an estimated $20 million tax cut for consumers. After a Massachusetts House vote that passed the bill with 123 votes for it, to a mere 23 votes against it, the state’s liberal House Speaker, Robert DeLeo said in a statement;

“The House has once again voted to stimulate local businesses which keep jobs in Massachusetts.”

He subsequently added;

“With folks across the Commonwealth continuing to struggle through the economic downturn, the sales tax holiday will provide relief to consumers while supporting local merchants.”

Such thinking is correct. It is the same thinking that people like Jack Kemp have devoted their lives to. It is the same thinking that till this very day, liberals ridicule President Ronald Reagan for. Yet today, Democrats are embracing the policy as a means to create jobs and stimulate the economy. And this goes for President Obama.

So what’s the problem?

The problem is that if such supply side, tax relief thinking can be applied to getting our nation out of its current economic crisis, why is it not good enough to keep us from entering economic crisis?

Lower tax rates on businesses, corporations, families, and individuals are either good or bad. Republicans contend that a lower tax burden is good but Democrats are trying to tell us that a lower tax burden is only good when the economy is ailing. But you can’t have it both ways. So which is it? Do today’s socialist Democrats accept the fact that lower taxes allow for a stronger economy or do they hurt the economy?

Today Democrats are willing to admit that lower taxes help are good for America. But tomorrow they will once again begin preparing campaign literature and ads that try to wage class warfare and accuse Republicans of being for only the big business and the wealthy. I have long maintained that the liberal socialist ideology of the Democrat Party is an illogical, hypocrisy based ideology. This just helps prove it.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics