Tag Archives: tea party

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
Advertisements

2 Comments

Filed under politics

Obama Rally Turns Ugly as Jimmy Hoffa Threatens GOP: “Take These Son Of Bitches Out”

Jimmy Hoffa with President Obama

Bookmark and Share   Labor Day is quickly becoming a legalized commemoration of totalitarianism and socialism. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t have anything against “labor”. I often participate in it myself. So I have nothing against a day commemorating the social and economic achievements of American workers. But I do have a problem with the holiday being used by big unions to change the day’s meaning and turn it into celebration of totalitariansim  and  as a tool in the proiferation od their socialist agenda. I also don’t appreciate the day being used by extremists to essentially declare war on those who disagree with their socialist agenda.

Yet Jimmy Hoffa, Jr. did that when he warmed up a crowd in Michigan before President Obama addressed them. In his own words, Hoffa roared;

“We got to keep an eye on the battle that we face: The war on workers. And you see it everywhere, it is the Tea Party. And you know, there is only one way to beat and win that war. The one thing about working people is we like a good fight. And you know what? They’ve got a war, they got a war with us and there’s only going to be one winner. It’s going to be the workers of Michigan, and America. We’re going to win that war,”.

He then declared;

“President Obama, this is your army. We are ready to march. Let’s take these son of bitches out and give America back to an America where we belong,”.

Had Sarah Palin, Rand Paul, Mitt Romney, John Boehner,  Newt Gingrich or any other Republican made such public, or even private remarks, not only would they be forced to walk those words back, they would forever be labeled as violent extremists.

But if you notice, it is only the right that has an extremist wing. The left does not seem to have one accordin to Democrats or the lamestream media. You never hear Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, an admitted and committed socialist, or Nancy Pelosi being called an extremist by Chris Matthews, Wolf Blitzer, Jonathon King, Candy Crowley or any of their comrades. But Michele Bachmann sure is an extremist according to them. You never hear socialist organizations such as La Razza , or the SEIU being called extreme, but you sure hear those in the TEA movement being called extreme.

Yet today we heard a perfect example of liberal extremism (which amounts socialism), from Jimmy Hoffa, . Today we heard the leader of a wing of the extremist left call those who disagree with his totalitarian beliefs, “sons of bitches” and told his thuggish minions to take those who disagree with him “out” and rid the nation of any differences of opinion in an attempt to take the America for themselves. Be they spoken figuratively or literally, these are words you would expect to have been spoken by Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler, Idi Amin,  Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden  and Maxine Waters. They are not the words of an American leader and they are not the words that should be representative of any American political ideology.

But somehow these words are acceptable because they are spoken by the leader of an overwhelmingly Democrat dominated union and in celebration of Labor Day. And our President simply went along with those words without rejecting any of them. That in essence was an endorsement of Jimmy Hoffa’s divisive and provocative language and call to arms. Yet just a few short months ago President Obama said the following in the wake of the horrific shooting spree in Tuscon that killed and maimed nearly two dozen people, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords;

“But at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized – at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do – it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.”

Since then, union thugs have beaten on  TEA party members, Maxine Waters has told the TEA Party to go to hell, Jimmy Hoffa calls upon union members to take out the opposition, and an endless array of hate filled, disrespectful, rhetoric has been randomly thrown around by the left, against those who have a different opinion than them. It’s time for President Obama to either put his extremist buddies, from Bill Ayers, to Jimmy Hoffa, in their place and demand that they adhere to the advice he offered in Tucson, or he needs to take credit for the war that his friends and allies are calling for and that he is participating in.

For if it is war that the left wants, I am more than willing to give it to them, and so are tens of millions of other Americans,……….. Americans who do not appreciate being held hostage to the whims of big unions and federal czars. Americans who are tired of seeing the government take their wealth and use it to enslave the people to the federal bureaucracy through agencies like the E.P.A. or legislation like Obamacare. If it is war that the left wants, bring it on! Because to tell you the truth, I am just looking for an excuse to wage a battle against them. I am tired of being the victim of the Democrat Party’s double standard and having to be politically correct to avoid being called a right wing radical. I am tired of the failed liberal ideology that is turning America into everything that it was designed not to be. And I am tired of Democrats from the President on down, not taking responsibility for their words, their deeds, and the devastating results of their policies.

In the meantime, to take a tone similar to Jimmy Hoffa, Jr., I hope and suggest that he follows in his father’s footsteps and disappears. I also prepare myself for the battle Hoffa, President Obama, and the Democrat Party wishes to wage. Hopefully it is a battle fought at the ballot box and not with the bats that union thugs and anti-TEA Party Democrats typically use.  But either way, I’ll be ready. And for those of you who will now tell me that this is not the right attitude to have………don’t tell me. Tell it to our President! Maybe after nearly three years in office, he should start showing some leadership and set the proper tone?

On a final note, I would just like to add that if Jimmy Hoffa thinks he’s tough, he should come ‘on over here to Jersey.  I got a Governor who’ll kick his ass and throw his considerable weight around to  the res of the goon union bosses out there in their place.

Bookmark and Share

1 Comment

Filed under politics

Freshmen Republicans to Watch in the 112th Congress

Bookmark and Share    The freshman class of Republicans in the 112th Congress is one that could and should hold a lot of sway. Not only is it one of the largest classes, it was also elected on one of the clearest messages that voters ever sent. That message is to stop business as usual and to cut spending and the size and scope of government. This freshman class was elected to change Washington, D.C., not be changed by Washington, D.C., and for many voters this is the Republican Party’s last chance to get things right. And so, given the sentiments that swept these new lawmakers in to office, they must establish themselves by bucking both Party politics and the political establishment. They must demonstrate that they understand fiscal responsibility, limited government, states rights and a willingness to not tow the Party line when its leaders wander off path.

This will at times be hard to do. The old boy’s political network will tempt them to go along to get along and the desire for power can consume them if they forget what they were sent to Washington for. But considering the extremely strong message that sent these men and women to D.C. they will all be wise to not cave in to the traditional trappings of insider politics and Washington.

Given the caliber of many of the new faces on the Hill, there is a vary good chance that they will in fact have a dramatic, positive, impact on the 112th Congress and the legislation it produces. But of this class, I suspect that some will stand out more than others. The following are the names that are most likely to do so.

        GOPElephantRight.jpg GOP Elephant Right image by kempite Stars01.gif picture by kempiteGOPElephantLeft.jpg GOP Elephant Left image by kempite

  Justin Amash, MI-3:

This 30 year old Michigander has made a name for himself in the Michigan House of Representatives as a leading advocate for government restraint and his consistent commitment to limited government, free markets, and individual liberty. As a state representative, Amash set new standards for transparency and accountability. And was one of the first state legislators to list his office expenses, staff salaries, and legislative benefits online. He has also earned a wide following among Michigan voters for posting all of his votes, with explanations and an opportunity for interactive discussion, on his official face book page. Amash understands that we live under the rule of law and not under the rule of men and he has a command of the issues effecting our economy and liberty.

Lou Barletta, PA-11:

Lou Barletta comes to office after serving as Mayor of Hazleton, PA. There he demonstrated his expertise on economic matters and budgets but he became most known for his fight against illegal immigration. Hazleton had become ravaged by an illegal immigrant population that helped the small town’s crime rate skyrocket. Barletta went into action. In 2006, he created an ordinance that made it illegal for employers to knowingly hire illegal aliens and for landlords to knowingly rent to illegal aliens. The measure passed the Hazleton City Council but was subsequently challenged in the courts. The case still drags on to this day but in the meantime, the number of both violent and non-violent crimes in the City of Hazleton continue to decrease. Barletta is a hard nosed but cordial gentleman who is sure to take the same kind of grit and determination that he had as Mayor of Hazleton, to Washington as a Congressman.

Cory Gardner, CO-4:

Gardner is a quick witted, high energy legislator. The Denver Post calls Gardner “the GOP Idea Man,” and he has been recognized as one of the Top 40 young Republican lawmakers in the country by Rising Tide, a publication of the Republican National Committee. As a member of the Colorado State House of Representatives, Gardner was a leader on issues such as economic development, healthcare, and education. In 2007, he created the Colorado Clean Energy Authority, which has helped to bring millions of dollars in development to Colorado. With a focus on limited government, Cory Gardner believes strongly that reducing taxes is the best way to grow the economy and provide jobs. As a former leading conservative voice in the Colorado state legislature, he promises to be one in the 112th session of Congress too.

Adam Kinzinger, Il-11:

32 year old Adam Kinzinger is a Captain in the Air Force who has served in the Special Ops, Air Combat Command, Air Mobility Command, and the Air National Guard. Before his military career, at the age of 20, he challenged a twelve-year Democrat incumbent for the McLean County Board and in a campaign that focused on bringing local government back to the people, he became one of the youngest county board members in McLean County history. Today, Kinzinger has proved that he understands the value of American freedom and is committed to protecting and serving the nation both in uniform and elected office. He has the skills and drive to rise above the political noise, bring government back to the people and to create a lasting positive impact on Congress.

Allen West, Florida-22:

Lieutenant Colonel Allen West (US Army, Retired) is a Bronze Star winner who has also been awarded three Meritorious Service Medals, three Army Commendation Medals (one with Valor), and a Valorous Unit Award. With twenty years of distinguished military service, West now aims his fight on Congress where he intends to curb out of control Government spending, work for across the board tax cuts, and combat our economic woes by getting back to basics and transitioning to a flat tax system for both individuals and businesses. West is an aggressive and articulate voice for conservatism and has a deep rooted concern for the proper education of America children. Allen West knows that their opportunities can be endless with the right education and that our nation’s future depends on their ability to take advantage of those opportunities. Allen West is sure to be a thorn in the side of liberals and you can be sure that he will not sugarcoat his opposition to the left side of the aisle.

Photobucket

Those are five freshmen members of the House whom you can expect to stir things up. They will be joined by several veteran G.O.P. House members who are also worth watching; incoming House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, New Jersey’s Scott Garrett, Michelle Bachmann of Minnesota, Mike Pence of Indiana and Virginia’s Eric Cantor. These five individuals are probably the best chance Republicans have when it comes to keeping to the much touted, conservative pledge to America that Republicans took during the campaign of 2010. But now these five have five exceptional new voices on their side.

In the Senate, things are quite different than in the House. The rules of the Senate allow for one member of that chamber to make more of an immediate difference than House members can. Here, although Republicans remain in the minority, their increased numbers will be made quite formidable as strong conservative voices like Jim DeMint and John Thune join with the following five freshmen senators.

GOPElephantRight.jpg GOP Elephant Right image by kempite Stars01.gif picture by kempiteGOPElephantLeft.jpg GOP Elephant Left image by kempite

 

Marco Rubio-FL:

 Marco is a standout among any group of people. He is a personable, bright, innovative, energetic, passionate and articulate young conservative who went through one of the toughest and longest campaigns of 2010. For much of the race he was the underdog and not the establishment choice. But patience and perseverance allowed him to prevail as he convincingly persuaded fellow Floridians to the commonsense, conservative cause. A son of Cuban exiles, Marco is an important voice in the Republican Party for Hispanic voters and his ability to attract voters of all persuasions is going to continue to make him an important player in national politics, especially national Republican politics.

Pat Toomey-PA:

This former leader of the Club for Growth is probably going to be one of the most ardent deficit hawks the senate has ever seen. He will be a perfect partner with South Carolina’s Jim DeMint in the cause of fiscal responsibility and limited government. Toomey will most definitely be a strict constitutionalist who will have no problem standing up to his fellow Republicans and most definitely not any Democrat, including President Obama.

 

Ron Johnson-WI:

Johnson was one of those TEA Party backed candidates who came out of nowhere to slay a liberal giant—Russ Feingold. His campaign was not the best but voter sentiment in Wisconsin was so soured by the direction that the country was going in that they wanted a definite change. Politically unencumbered, fresh faced, conservative, businessman Ron Johnson proved to be the man that Wisconsin voters saw fit to deliver that change. Expect Johnson to take some time getting his feet wet in Washington, but very soon he will be demonstrating a hard-line on budgetary matters and a very valuable independent streak.

Rand Paul-KY:

Rand Paul is another candidate whose race was particularly hard fought. He was also not originally the establishment choice but strong conservative support and energetic TEA Party backing pushed Rand Paul over the top in the end. Rand has many of the more appealing libertarian tendencies of his well known father, Texas Congressman Ron Paul but is a bit more pragmatic. Rand believes in a strong national defense and understand that the defense of the nation is the federal government’s number 1 priority. He insists that funding of the United Nations becomes voluntary, thereby demonstrating a true and accurate level of commitment of individual member states to the U.N.’s success. He also believes that the United States should withdraw from and stop funding those U.N. programs that undermine legitimate American interests. On the economy, Paul is a true free marketer who views the World Bank and International Monetary Fund as having “outlived their usefulness” and harmful to global economic development. Rand Paul is a staunch proponent of spending cuts, balancing the budget, and lowering taxes. Expect Rand to be a very loud voice and major critic of both Parties and the process they often abuse.

Rob Portman-OH:

Like Marco Rubio, Rob Portman is made of presidential timber. He is an experienced legislator and previously served in two separate presidential cabinet offices—–U.S. Trade Representative and Director of the Office of Management and Budget. During his tenure at OMB, the deficit was cut in half. Portman is experienced, accomplished, and when it comes to the federal budget, he is a persistent hawk who has proposed balanced budgets, the creation of new federal spending transparency laws, and fought hard against irresponsible earmarks. In the senate, expect Rob Portman to be a go-to guy on fiscal matters and a leader in the budget process that is growing in importance as well as debt.

Stars01.gif picture by kempite

Only time will truly tell how well these 10 incoming legislators will really do but if they show the same kind of stamina, values and sincerity that they have in the past, they will go a long way in bringing the type of real change that Congress and the nation needs.

 Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

Big Differences Between Socialist Rallies and Conservative Protests

Bookmark and Share    This past weekend the left held what was considered a reactionary rally in Washington D.C. that was viewed by many as a response to the more than year long trend of TEA Party rallies which were held throughout the nation and seem to be culminating in a Election Day that will ignite the establishment of a conservative rebirth of sorts. The entity behind the rally was actually an umbrella group of left wing organizations and radical socialist affiliations combined with the leadership of many big unions, most notably, the SEIU and NEA.

National Mall After A TEA Party Rally

The speakers were a grab bag of obscure self described revolutionaries and Democrat loyalists of the most liberal persuasion. They included people such as New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez, NAACP President Ben Jealous, the Rev. Al Sharpton, MSNBC commentator Ed Schultz, Rev. Jesse Jackson, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka, rapper Black Ice, NEA President Randy Weingarten, Urban League President Marc Morial, United Auto Workers chief Bob King and president of the Service Employees International Union, Mary Kay Henry.

National Mall After the Liberal One Nation Working Together Rally

In a strange hypocritical twist though, Democrats did not accuse the thousands of people who joined their rally by taking busses paid for by unions and liberal entities behind the Democrat Party, of being “astroturfers”. For some reason, the union paid and organized energy of the left is real, but the independent efforts of conservative thinking people are described by Democrats as fake .

For months the left has tried to define the TEA movement as a Republican attempt to exaggerate disenchantment with Democrat policies. But the vast majority of the hundreds of thousands that attended last year‘s, 9/12 rally in D.C. were not paid for by the money of the big union CEO’s, or national liberal propaganda machines. Those who attended the 9/12 rally from places like San Diego, California and Helena, Montana or Clearwater Florida and Roanoake, Virginia, packed their own cars or paid for their own bus tickets with the money they earned.

But the hypocrisy of the left aside, there were several important differences between the character and ideological thinking of the TEA movement and liberal activists.

While the professional politically organized One Nation Working Together rally heard speaker after speaker call upon the federal government to answer all our problems, the citizen organized rallies of the TEA movement heard speaker after speaker discuss the need for accountability, personal responsibility, and for the federal government to stop causing all our problems.

The different approaches help highlight my reason for equating today’s liberal dominated Democrat Party with socialism, a political system that would have production and distribution controlled by the government in the name of the people but without actually being done by the people. And few events helped prove my point more than the one Nation Working Together, big union gathering we saw this past weekend.

In many ways, the event and its participants celebrated and promoted one thing—–socialism. And not just indirectly. As evidence in the video below, it was proudly and blatantly promoted in blunt, straightforward language. But aside from the extreme ideological differences in the crowds of the One Nation rally and the TEA Party protests, were the size of the crowds and the character of those in attendance.

Despite the union paid busses and organized drive of The One Nation Working Together get out the vote rally, all of the TEA protests in D.C. since 9/12 of last year, produced incredibly larger numbers than did the One Nation event. This exemplifies the enthusiasm gap that exists between the left and right as we approach Election Day. But another telling detail was the condition that the left wing One Nation rally and the conservative TEA protests left the respective locations of their events when they were done.

In the case of the much larger TEA events, it has actually been said that when the crowds at each one of their events left, the locations they gathered at were left cleaner than they were before the TEA activists arrived. Not so for the liberal rally though. After their small group of dedicated socialists left the Mall, it was strewn with litter ranging from hate filled pamphlets calling for socialist revolution, to hand written signs blaming the President of two years ago for the Obama economy of today.  (See below)

The difference here measures the mindset of the two different groups. The conservative based TEA activists who want less government control, took it upon themselves to be clean and clean up after themselves. The union based liberal establishment which is demanding that government do more and control more of our lives, disrespectfully discarded their waste on the ground of wherever they stood and left it behind to be cleaned up by ‘government‘. But what these callous, careless and thoughtless group of paid, hypocritical hacks neglected to realize was that the mess they were leaving for the government to clean up was actually being done so by their fellow workers of America and unionized public service workers.

The situation exemplifies the thinking behind each ideology. One ideology seeks to be respectful and decent as they act responsibly. The other side acts with irresponsible disregard for others and a despicably disrespectful . One side, the conservative side, cleans up, while the other side, the liberal side, leaves a mess behind. For me, the symbolism is a powerful reference to not only how divergent the Democrat and Republican ideologies are, but of which one offers a better model for success in America.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

The 2010 Midterm Elections Will Be Worse For Dems Than Expected

"Republican Party Elephant" logo

G.O.P.

Bookmark and Share    This November is going to be quite a dramatic reversal of fortunes for Democrats and while some on the left are trying to claim that the Republican hopes for retaking the House are unwarranted and deny that we are in a wave election, there is actually no realistic basis for such claims. The surging force behind Republicans in 2010 is undeniable.   As indicated by Gallup, the Republican Party is polling incredibly well among voters on a number of factors including  party identification, voter preferences among independents, and even candidate preferences, and the G.O.P. has also retaken the lead on the generic ballot.

Furthermore; Republicans are now either comparable with, or surpassing Democrats on everything from voter enthusiasm and an increased online presence, to fundraising and a growing number of boots on the ground, grass root volunteers. For one of the first times in recent history, young Republican voters are expected to turn out in larger numbers than young Democrat voters. College Republicans have even jumped to a point in popularity and fundraising that is allowing them to go national with ads and target several key states on 2010.

When it comes to the large gap in internet presence and fundraising that existed between the left and right in 2008, in 2010 the trend has totally reversed. The first signs of this became evident 11 months ago when Scott Brown raised nearly $10 million online in all of 18 days. Now, we have seen other examples of internet success in such candidates as Sharron Angle and Christine O’Donnell who raised more than $1 million online in the 24 hours after their primary wins. All of this is a sign of two things. The G.O.P. has finally gained parity with the Democrats in the use of the internet and that the collective strength of the G.O.P.‘s grassroots is becoming increasingly more important than any strengths of particular candidates or their campaigns.

All of this points to a shifting of the political earththat is far greater than we saw in 1994.

Rarely has a political Party comeback as quickly as the Republican Party is poised to do this November. Normally, it takes much more than two years to bounce back from the type of  losses that they suffered first in 2006 and then again in 2008.

It is accurate to say though, that the climb back to power for the G.O.P. is based less on the voters goodwill towards Republicans and more on the ill will that they have come to feel towards Democrats. Which leads me to wonder about something.

 Between 2006 and 2010, neither Party seemed to be held in any great esteem, yet why was there not any great move to finally create that perennially promised, almighty, and perfect third Party that we always hear dissatisfied voters talk about?

Although there has so far been a strong ripple of anti-incumbent sentiment out there,  we did not see the rise of that much hoped for third Party alternative. We did however see a powerful anti-big government movement infiltrate the process and greatly influence the field of Republicans running in 2010.

I believe that this is all largely due to the efforts of the Democrat Party more than the Republican Party.

The Party in power has overreached the mandate they thought they had in 2008. They even misread their significant wins in 2008 and assumed that the nation was actually desirous of an aggressive big government agenda. But in fact, they weren’t. The reason for the 2008 victory, led by the top of Democrat ticket with Barack Obama, was a phenomenon similar to the one that is giving rise to the Republican resurgence of 2010. Voters were voting against the Party in power.

This is what happens when voters are dissatisfied. They seek change……..the very same theme that candidate Obama successfully banked on in ’08.

Another key to the Democrat victories of 2008 was the excitement over the novelty of the historic chance to elect the nation’s first partially black President.  And last but not least was the fact that the G.O.P. ran a weak nominee at the top ticket who failed to energize the base and failed to prove that republicanism under him, would be any different from the republicanism seen under G.W. Bush and the existing Republican leadership in Congress.

So change was born. But as we have come to see, the change that Democrats have run with, is not the change that Americans are satisfied with. As a result, the political pendulum is now swinging back in the opposite direction. But it is swinging with a vengeance. Between incredible Democrat overreach, and an explosion of exaggerated government growth, spending and deficit increases, Democrats have polarized the electorate far more than did the Republicans who after a few years in power, slowly but surely forgot their commitment to limited government and less spending.

But it is clear now that most Americans believe in the basic Republican ideology of less government, less taxes and less spending. That is why rather than seeing a surge for third Party candidacies, you have seen a rush towards cleaning out the Republican Party of those whom have drifted away from those principles and failed to stand up for them responsibly and consistently.

We are now seeing one of those rare occasions when a large majority of voters are actually pushing an ideology more than a candidate. That is what the TEA Party movement is all about. They are pushing a cause more than Party politics and as such they are helping to return the G.O.P. back to its true conservative roots by ridding it of so-called RINO’s.

But if the G.O.P. is to continue its rise back to power into 2012 and beyond, they will have to prove to the voters that some lessons have been learned. 

Given that President Obama will still be President on the morning after November 2, 2010, and that the Senate will likely still be in Democrat control, albeit with a new Majority Leader, the G.O.P. House will have to hold firm in rejecting any compromises that err on the side of increased spending, and increased government overreach.

This will prompt charges of being obstructionists and cries that attempt to describe Republicans as the “Party of no” by those on the left, but it is important to remember that those initiating such remarks are not likely to ever support Republicans anyway. But if the G.O.P. aggressively offers solid alternatives while rejecting the President’s, and the Senate’s big government, liberal agenda, people will maintain faith in the new face of the G.O.P. and that ‘Party of no” description will continue to fall on deaf ears.

When the G.O.P takes back the House, they will have to prove that they are actually ready to fight for the values that are providing them with the momentum that they currently have behind them. This will especially be the case in matters of spending and the budget, since the House, more so then the Senate controls the purse strings of the federal government.  If they flinch, and if they fail to keep their noses clean and deliver on their promised commitments, their will be little enthusiasm from the grassroots to maintain the level of support that they are currently placing behind the G.O.P..

Republicans will also have to remember a few things. First they must make sure that each issue is connected to government’s role in the everyday lives of Americans. They need to consistently demonstrate how big government is expanding its control over our personal lives but at the sake of properly dealing with its actual responsibilities such as providing a secure border and finally developing comprehensive immigration reform or balancing the federal  budget. And they must keep each of these messages simple. The same way Ronald Reagan did in both 1980 and 1984, as demonstrated in the following 1984 Reagan campaign campaign ad:

 

Keeping it simple brings it home and in 1984 Reagan brought it home with a sweep of 49 states to Mondale’s 1.

But before we get to presidential politics as it pertains to 2012, we have to establish the point from which the G.O.P. will start from after 2o10.  At the moment it looks like Republicans could far surpass the expectations of many in both the House and the Senate .

Based upon the circumstances that exist today and my own estimation of how things will play out in the individual landscapes of several hotly contested states, I see the senate tied at with 50 Republicans and the 48 Democrats plus the two left leaning Independents who caucus with the Democrats.  This includes Retaining seats in Alaska, Arizona, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Idaho,Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Utah while picking up seats in;

  • Arkansas   (John Boozman over Blanche Lincoln)
  • Colorado    (Ken Buck over Mike Bennet)
  • Illinois       (Mark Kirk over Alexi Giannoulias)
  • Indiana      (Dan Coats over Brad Ellsworth)
  • Nevada       (Susan Angle over Harry Reid)
  • North Dakota    (John Hoeven over Tracy Potter)
  • Pennsylvania     (Pat Toomey over Joe Sestak)
  • Washington     (Dino Rossi over Patty Murray)
  • Wisconsin      (Ron Johnson over Russ Feingold)

However; there are several possibilities which increase the likelihood of a Republican takeover of the Senate.

Any one of three races could keep Joe Biden from breaking any tie vote.  Delaware, West Virginia and/or California could very easily go Republican. 

With the surprise win by a rather large margin of Christine O’Donnell over heavily favored Mike Castle, it is not of the question to believe that under the existing anti-left atmosphere and prevailing momentum,  O’Donnell could pull off another surprise and take the seat away from the media annointed frontrunner Chris Coons.  But even more possible than a Republican upset in delaware are the possible ones that are in the making inCalifornia and surprisingly, West Virginia.

In West Virginia, popular Democrat incumbent Governor Joe Mancin was originally seen as a shoo-in. He is one of those truly rare relative moderate Democrats and as a long serving Governor of the state he has done well by its voters and bonded with them extensively. Especially after a string of mining disasters that hit this coal mining state pretty hard and very personally. But it would seem that winds of disenchantment with anything relating to Democrats are blowing so strongly against them that even Mancin’s personal relationship with voters is being severely curtailed when it comes to sending him to Washington, D.C.. For that reason, his Republican opponent John Raese went from nearly 33% at the end of July to 48% at the end of September while during that same time period, the popular Mancin went from 54% to 46% where he currently stands 2% behind underdog Raese.

The race is sure to be close and right now it can easily go either way but I believe the Republicans can pull this one off and at the moment I believe they will squeak it out.

In California, I can’t underestimate Barbara Boxer.

In her last race for the Senate, back in 2004, she beat her Republican opponent by 20% and became the holder of the record for the most popular votes in a statewide contested election in California. But this time around, things are not so easy and she wont be breaking any records with her popular vote this time around.

She currently has a disapproval rating higher than her approval rating, one of the largest newspapers in the state has refused to endorse because they believe that after 18 years in the Senate she has failed to distinguish herself in any meaningful way and that they see no reason to believe that she will do with another 6 years in office.

But this is California, a state that President Obama won by 24% or more than 3.2 million votes. But in addition to that, something else that could work in Boxer’s favor this time around is a statewide proposition to legalize marijuana. That ballot question could draw many Democrats who otherwise were not interested in voting this time around, to the polls and while there, they just might push the button for Boxer.

For her part though. Republican Carly Fiorina is holding her own, has all the money she needs to keep pushing her message and pulling out her vote and at the moment, while she is behind Boxer, by less than 6 percent, Boxer is still under the 50% mark, a place that no incumbent should be in this close to the election.

Anyone of these three seats could easily break for the Republican and give control of the Senate back to the G.O.P. and the possibility of this happening increases each day that we get closer to Election Day. But even if neither Delaware, California or West Virginia fail to Republicans, with a 50/50 split it is quite conceivable that any one of handful of Democrats could switch Parties or in the case of Independent Joe Lieberman, decide to causcus with the Republicans instead of the Democrats.

On the House side, Republican victories are even more lopsided than they are in the Senate.

In the House of Representatives Republicans could possibly end up with the largest number of seats they have held since 1946 when the GOP won 246 seats. Currently it looks like the G.O.P. can actually win at least 62 seats, thereby breaking the House down to 241 Republicans and 194 Democrats. This projection is much higher than most estimates being publicly announced which, for the most part range in the 40’s. But my projection still falls below that of Patrick Ruffini a reputable and leading G.O.P. strategist who has been in the trenches for quite some time now. Ruffiini believes that the figure will certainly be somewhere over 50 seats but believes a 70 seat gain is not out of the question.

No matter what, the results of the midterm elections will produce profound changes in the direction of policy and at the very least change the pace of the Obama agenda .

But there remains an aspect of the 2010 midterm elections which is being overshadowed by the anticipated turnover in Congress and it could have an more even more important long term effect on politics.

That is the 37 gubernatorial elections being held throughout the nation. Of them Republicans are expected to pick up at least 8 new statehouses bringing them from 23 where they are currently at, to 31, leaving Democrats with Governors in only 19 states.

That number is profoundly important because in 2011 the once every decade census data is poured over by the states and with they draw the new the state legislative a congressional districts lines from which Americans will elect their representatives for the decade to come. Having Governors in 31 states, will give the G.O.P. an advantage in drawing districts that it will be easier to elect Republicans in.

But in addition to that, Governors can play a crucial role in presidential elections.

There ability to coordinate their states for national candidates is invaluable and having that advantage over Democrats in almost a dozen states, will give whomever the Republican presidential nominee is a leg up over President Obama in 2012. Of course if 2010 proves to be as devastating for Democrats as it is looking, President Obama may not be the Democrat nominee. I feel that if Democrat losses are as profound as they are shaping up to be, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will resign her post and in time declare that she will offer a primary challenge to President Obama in order to save the Democratic Party and the nation from him.

Of course it only takes one world event to turn things around and in politics 5 weeks is an eternity. But if things continue going as they are right now, Democrats are going to descend into the political wilderness for years to come and President Obama is going to be a one term President who Republican can thank for bringing them back to power and whom Democrats will blame for squandering their opportunity to maintain control of Washington for years to come. 

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

The G.O.P.’s Last Chance & The Republican Pledge To America

Facsimile of the original draft of the United ...

A New Contract

Bookmark and Share    Congressional Republicans have finally adopted a message to stand behind in this November’s mid-term elections and beyond.  I personally believe it lacks the type of specific legislation action that Americans can truly wrap their heads around.  But the Pledge To America is strong and with the use of  somewhat broad strokes, hopefully it is a pledge that will not be lost on deaf ears, for as a whole, the Republican Party has failed to live up to the principles of the ideology that differentiate them from today’s liberal-Democrats. 

That failure has given rise to the TEA Party movement.

Now with Republicans seemingly having finally understood why they lost control of Congress and the White House, they have drafted a pledge that directly fulfills the desires of the TEA movemnet.

Many months ago, I proposed a  pledge which outlined specific legislative goals, I called it the Pledge of Committment.  I felt it was neccessary then to rally behind a set of goals that would help nationalize the election and turn the wrongly defined “Party of No” into the Party that has a mission and that stands for something more than more government.  The pledge the G.O.P. has settled upon now is late in the game but it is a solid one, one that conveys a sense of understanding by Republicans, unde4rstanding of what the people want.

Now the only question is, will the G.O.P. live up to the committment?  Will they remain as unwavering in their pledge as the TEA Party members who helped give rise to that pledge?  Will Republicans remain unwavering in the face of a President whom opposes all that the people want?  Only time will tell, but this is probably the last time Republicans will have a chance like this again, so they better not blow it.

The pledge is powerful and it strikes the emotional and constitutional chords that a vast majority agree with, but if the collective actions of Republicans who hold office betray these powerful words over the next two years and prove that these words are hollow political points, than Republicans will be lost in the wilderness for decades to come.

party_republican.jpg picture by kempite

The Republican Pledge To America

America is more than a country.

America is an idea – an idea that free people can govern themselves, that government’s powers are derived from the consent of the governed, that each of us is endowed by their Creator with the unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. America is the belief that any man or woman can – given economic, political, and religious liberty – advance themselves, their families, and the common good.

America is an inspiration to those who yearn to be free and have the ability and the dignity to determine their own destiny.

Whenever the agenda of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to institute a new governing agenda and set a different course.

These first principles were proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence, enshrined in the Constitution, and have endured through hard sacrifice and commitment by generations of Americans. In a self-governing society, the only bulwark against the power of the state is the consent of the governed, and regarding the policies of the current government, the governed do not consent.

An unchecked executive, a compliant legislature, and an overreaching judiciary have combined to thwart the will of the people and overturn their votes and their values, striking down long-standing laws and institutions and scorning the deepest beliefs of the American people.

An arrogant and out-of-touch government of self-appointed elites makes decisions, issues mandates, and enacts laws without accepting or requesting the input of the many.

Rising joblessness, crushing debt, and a polarizing political environment are fraying the bonds among our people and blurring our sense of national purpose. Like free peoples of the past, our citizens refuse to accommodate a government that believes it can replace the will of the people with its own. The American people are speaking out, demanding that we realign our country’s compass with its founding principles and apply those principles to solve our common problems for the common good. The need for urgent action to repair our economy and reclaim our government for the people cannot be overstated. With this document, we pledge to dedicate ourselves to the task of reconnecting our highest aspirations to the permanent truths of our founding by keeping faith with the values our nation was founded on, the principles we stand for, and the priorities of our people. This is our Pledge to America.

We pledge to honor the Constitution as constructed by its framers and honor the original intent of those precepts that have been consistently ignored – particularly the Tenth Amendment, which grants that all powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

We pledge to advance policies that promote greater liberty, wider opportunity, a robust defense, and national economic prosperity. We pledge to honor families, traditional marriage, life, and the private and faith-based organizations that form the core of our American values.

We pledge to make government more transparent in its actions, careful in its stewardship, and honest in its dealings.

We pledge to uphold the purpose and promise of a better America, knowing that to whom much is given, much is expected and that the blessings of our liberty buoy the hopes of mankind.

We make this pledge bearing true faith and allegiance to the people we represent, and we invite fellow citizens and patriots to join us in forming a new governing agenda for America.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

O’Donnell Over Castle Hits The Establishment Hard

Bookmark and Share    Christine O’Donnell’s win in Delaware has got to be the most remarkable event of the 2010 midterm election to date.  

Christine O'Donnell

It is certainly one of the most pivitol events to date.  And it actually could be the determining factor that costs Republicans the majority in the U.S. Senate.  That is not something to celebrate, but what is worth celebrating is the ideological integrity of the next generation of Republicans that hold office in the G.O.P. 

It is clear that the establishment of both major Parties, but especially the Republican Party, are no longer satisfying voters.  But unlike Democrats who renominated scandal plagued Charlie Ragel in New York, Republicans are  proving to be the true Party of change after nominating conservative Christine O’Donnell over liberal RINO Mike Castle.  And while Republican are abandoning the establishment, voters have not abandoned the core beliefs of the Republican Party.  They have simply abandoned  the stewards of the Party who between 2000 and 2008, strayed away from the principles that differentiates Republicans from Democrats . Republican voters still believe in lower taxes, limited government, personal and economic freeedom and personal responsibility.   They have just lolst faith in the G.O.P. establishment.   That is why we are seeing several historic political phenomenons take  place in 2010.   

One of them is that for the first time since the 1930’s, Republican turnout in the midterm primary elections is far exceeding that of the turnout in Democrat primary races.  A similiar imbalance in voting patterns between Democrats and Republicans were seen in the 2008 presidential primaries when Democrats were fired up and enthusiastic about their candidates.  Now, two years later, and the Democrat vote is supressed by a lack of enthusiasm, wherereas; Republicans are motivated by two things, anger and enthusiasm, two emotions that are making Republicans turn out in droves with two stated purposes.  One to throw out the  Republican establishment and, two, to put an end to reckless spending and tha nanny state that is controlling and ruining our lives. 

Part of this phenomenom is another surprising trend.  

While the Republican establishment continues to run with rich, white men, the new generation of more conservative Republicans is electing a litany of anti-establishment candidates who are women and minorities. 

In South Carolina there is the American Indian women who, TEA Party patriots helped to make the Republican nominee for Governor.  In Nevada TEA Party backed candidate Sharon Angle won the nod to run against Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Republican women were nominated for the U.S. Senate in California, and Connecticut, not to mention the nomination of Republican Meg Whitman for Governor of California and now  conservative Christine O’Donnell for the senate in Delaware. 

 Then there are the Republican African-American nominees.  

 At least 32 Republican African-Americans have been running for Congress this year , the biggest surge since Reconstruction, and of them, at least 5 have excellent chances of winning.  Most notable is TEA Party backed Tim Scott, who after  defeating one of the biggest names in South Carolina politics,  Paul Thurmond, son of the late Strom Thurmond, is now on track to become the first black Republican in Congress since 2003 — and the first from the deep South since Reconstruction. 

His was a victory for conservative Republican insurgents and just another sign of the out with the old and in with new trend in politics today, a trend that is scaring the beeejeezus out of Democrats.

O’Donnell’s 6% victory over former Governor and 12 term Congressman  Mike Castle was merely further proof that change is in the air.  As a result, the standard talking points out of Democrats will be that that radicals have hijacked the G.O.P..   And even the establishment  of the G.O.P. will lament over the loss of candidates like Bill Bennet in Utah and now Castle.  They will complain that voters have failed to nominate the most electable candidates.  But both sides will be unable to counter the most important point which is that voters are doing something that neither the Democrat or Republican are doing……creating not only the change that we need, but the the change we want.

If there is a lesson to be learned here, it is this. Voters want clear choices, not Republicans that vote like Democrats or Democrats that sound like Republicans but vote like liberals. 

 

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

The NAACP Pot Calls The TEA Kettle Black

Bookmark and Share The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People has today proven itself to have turned its back on its cause and those who their cause was once for.

In considering and passing a resolution that in essence condemned the national TEA movement by declaring it to be comprised of racist components that must be denounced, the NAACP has done nothing less then create a fan in which the ever present embers of racism can be inflamed and used to fuel African-American participation in the upcoming, critical midterm elections.

By declaring the limited government, constitution promoting, less spending, low tax,  movement  as a movement with dangerously divisive racist affiliations, the NAACP has completely removed themselves from the category of respectable civil rights organization and flung themselves into the category of illegitimate Democrat political front group.

While the NAACP is all about race, the Taxed Enough Already movement has nothing to do with race. And while the TEA movement believes in a Constitution that represents all  people and stands for our being free from the oppression of an overreaching federal government, the NAACP exploits race to promote race based economic and social policies that induce more government and more taxes. But are these differences enough to play the race card?

And is it not hypocritical of the NAACP to demand that a political movement which they oppose, denounce a false charge of of racial hatred when the NAACP themselves promote racism and neglects to condemn racist elements that thrive within their own ranks?

If the NAACP is truly sincere in their mission , I believe that they themselves would denounce racism in all its form, including the forms of reverse racism being practiced by the Obama justice department or the intimidation tactics of militant racist elements like the Black Panthers who are loosely connected to the NAACP.

Short of making their own official denunciation of such race based improprieties, the NAACP has no ground from which to launch their own attacks and make their own demands from others to do the same regarding unproven and unfounded accusations that they make of a movement which opposes the NAACP’s political agenda.

The truth is that is that the difference in political agenda’s is what lies at the heart of the NAACP resolution regarding the TEA movement. As the midterm elections approach, the predominantly liberal membership’s NAACP  agenda relies upon a strong Democrat majority remaining in Congress .  Yet as President Obama and Democrats continue to plummet in the polls and the people lose confidence in their leadership, as a front group for the DNC, it behooves the NAACP to do all that is possible to incite the African-American electorate and motivate them to vote through the powerful emotion of anger.

By painting the members of the TEA movement as racist the NAACP is also  suggesting that its ideology ideology  is racist, and in doing so, the NAACP is helping to insure a certain amount of anger from the community that they need to show up in big numbers in November.

In 2008, African-Americans turned out in higher percentages then ever before and Democrats took the White House and both branches of Congress. The dramatic increase in African-American turnout was compounded by the nearly unanimous 94% of their vote which went to Democrats. The vast number of black voters and their nearly universal support for Democrats was in large part prompted by the candidacy of the first partially African-American, major Party, presidential candidate in history.

But now that the novelty of the perception has worn off and support for the policies behind the color and rhetoric of the candidate Obama has dwindled, African-Americans are not showing up at the polls in the same record numbers that produced record victories for Democrats in 2008.    This fact was made evident when attempts to use President Obama in the statewide elections of New Jersey, Virginia and Massachusetts, failed to bring out the large number of African-American voters that they had hoped for and in all three cases, the Democrat candidates involved in those races, failed miserably.

The need to do anything possible to turn that trend back around is what lies at the heart of this racially divisive resolution which has forced the NAACP pot to call the TEA kettle black.

Leaders in the TEA movement do condemn racism and they shun it in all it quarters and the TEA movement includes all races and religions. Unlike the NAACP, the TEA Party is a political movement for fiscal responsibility for all, not for a single race of people. Unlike the NAACP, the TEA movement is not using race to advance its cause. In the TEA movement, people are looked at not for the color color of their skin, but listened to for the content of their views.  Unlike the way it is in the NAACP, in  the TEA movement, black conservatives are commended for their beliefs, not placed at the back of the bus and mocked as Uncle Tom’s because of their political opinions.

Over a hundred years ago, the NAACP was founded for a sincere purpose, out of a sincere need and with motives of pure intentions. A hundred years later and it is clear that the organization’s sincerity of purpose has been lost and that it has come to represent the same type of racism that it was originally meant to combat.   And in truly hypocritical fashion, they have become a shill for the Democrat Party that exploits race, promotes reverse discrimination and ironically, promotes policies that enslave their fellow African-Americans to a federal government and bureaucracy that does its best to institute an permanent culture of dependency on a liberal led federal government.

In the mean time, like the new Black Panther’s, the new NAACP is doing little to advance colored people and much to advance racial divisiveness and Democrat Party politics.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

Dismissing the Tea Party & Mischaracterizing the Revolution

Bookmark and Share    There is nothing new about people’s dissatisfaction with government. It is almost as old as civilization itself. Throughout the world’s history, a form of the term ‘revolution’ has seeped into almost all societies of most every nation. Revolution is a natural result of the people’s dissatisfaction with their living conditions and the prospects of their future. Even if the angst that produces a society’s revolt does not quite reach the level of revolution, the words uprising, riot, or strike, often come in to play.

To one degree of severity or another, these are all simply the governed demonstrating their dissatisfaction with the ruling class. It is natural. But today in America, the word “revolution” has seen a revival of sorts. For the political right the word is one with positive connotations that represents the desire to bring about a shift in the current policy direction that the government taking us in. For those on the political left, the word revolution has negative connotations. It means a retreat from the policies that they prefer. But political savvy has the left taking things a step further.

Liberals are trying to do all they can to take the right’s use of the word “revolution” out of context and portray conservative’s desire for political revolution as one of physically violent change. Any honest observer and sincere activist understands, and deep down, knows, that such an interpretation is at the very least disingenuous and ultimately a blatant lie.

This is coming from someone who is a Republican dissatisfied with the leadership of his own Party and who joined in protest with those who call themselves part of the Tea Party movement. Having on several occasions, joined with crowds of Tea Party patriots in Washington ranging from as many as nearly a million to as few as 10,000, I can honestly tell you that participants in these events were among the most civil, thoughtful and nonviolent citizens our nation has to offer. I have never before been in the midst of hundreds of thousands of strangers who could allow a woman to leave her purse lying on a lawn, unmolested by the endless array of perfect strangers who gathered together in one place from all corners of the nation. These are people who understand and value honesty and civility. Integrity means something to them and they respect the rights of others as well as be among the first to lend a helping hand to those in need.

Recent reports studying the makeup of those who are part of the Tea Party movement, indicate that, contrary to liberal descriptions, they are better educated and have median to above average incomes. This is a stark contrast from the poor, uneducated, redneck, hicks that liberals and their media outlets make tea partiers out to be.

But the liberal mischaracterizations go well beyond that. They have joined together in an attempt to dismiss these people as irrational right wingers, hell bent on toppling government by any means possible. Democrats have taken it upon themselves to incorporate any violence against government into the roots of Tea Party or conservative activity. Nothing can be further from the truth but this does not stop the liberal propaganda mill from rolling out its attempt to discount the undeniable dissatisfaction that a large portion of our society has with the liberal led government of Democrats Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and President Obama.

Ironically, this politically motivated liberal description of the current right of center movement taking root in our nation is one that the left itself needs to answer to far more than the conservative entities that they accuse of violence.

A look at recent American history from the sixties to the eighties and even the current decade, is strewn with predominantly liberal based acts of political violence. From university riots and campus sit-ins to violence coordinated and sponsored by groups like the Black Panthers to the FALN, the Weather Underground, along with the antics of liberal affiliates like Code Pink, PETA, the Animal Liberation Front, and the hippy fests of liberals and anarchists who riot in any and every city where a G-8 summit is held, radical liberal elements have been the preeminent purveyors of widespread acts of violence in the name of political activity that our nation has known over the last 50 years.

More recently, there have been well documented cases of liberal leaning union thugs who have staged and even started violence at Tea Party events. In one case a teacher was found using Board of Education computers to send out messages urging fellow liberals to infiltrate Tea Party gatherings and produce inflammatory sights and sounds. And just a few days ago, in Louisiana, Allee Bautsch, chief campaign fundraiser for Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, and her boyfriend Joe Brown were brutally beaten after leaving a fundraising event for the Governor in New Orleans French Quarter. Police confirm nothing as of yet, but while Alle lies in the hospital with a leg that has been broken in 5 places, there are reports that the couple were targeted because of their conservative political affiliation. One report even claims that the couple was attacked after the youths involved yelled “Let’s get them, they have Palin pins on”.

From bombings and riots to kidnappings and assassination plots, liberal radicals have written the book on political violence.

Of course, a fair observation would be that none of these ad hoc entities are representative of the Democrat Party or the liberal political ideology. They are just the acts of violent fiends with no decency, respect or understanding of how civil discourse need not involve hate and violence. It could just possibly be that the reprehensible responsibility for violence in the name of politics is seen as actually being carried out by radical elements that may align themselves to an ideology but that no ideology legitimately aligns itself with. That logic would eliminate the ludicrous attempts at discounting the validity of either sides beliefs because of the out of bounds behgavior of a few.

Which brings us back to the propaganda of today.

Democrats from Nancy Pelosi, Bawney Fwanks, Harry Reid, Charlie Rangle and the countless others who are playing this blame game and trying to write off a movement that is so angry that they are striving for peaceful revolution, would be wise to not be so quick to dismiss and belittle the Tea Party movement.

The mere fact that enough angry voters have brought the thought of political revolution in America to the forefront is a cause for serious consideration.

For as much as the left despised all eight years of George Bush’s presidency, the concept of revolution was never part of the national debate. Change, yes, buy revolution no. Why is that?

First of all, despite all the noise from riotous anti-Bush protestors who largely demonstrated against the issues of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, their numbers were not as great as those dissatisfied by the intended permanent transformation of American domestic policy that the electorate is presented with by the Obama Administration.

The domestic policy direction of President Obama is such a drastic departure from previously held interpretations of the American Constitution that tens of millions of Americans have begun to feel that the constitutional foundation of government is being undermined. Nothing makes people strive to keep something more than when they are confronted with losing it and such is the case with the Constitution of these United States under the current Administration.

From the sleights of hand in the legislative process and the countless appointments of unelected and unaccountable czars and the federal governments control and ownership of General Motors, takeover of healthcare and socialist designs on control of vast aspects of the American economy, to a White House that once asked citizens to report opinions that opposed President Obama to fishy@whitehouse.gov, Americans have seen shades of freedoms lost.

The changes and proposed changes of President Obama and his liberal-Democrat Party are so extreme that millions of once inattentive Americans have been shaken to the point of seeing an America that is quite different from the one that the U.S. Constitution intended and are accustomed to. It has forced many to stop taking things for granted. Even the U.S. Constitution.

Part of the existing problem is not change itself but rather the type, number and extent of change that this Administration is attempting to deliver. Many have come to believe that Democrats are doing exactly what White House chief of staff Rham Emanuel once described as the Democrat’s desire to never miss an opportunity to take advantage of a crisis. They view such things as the passage of “urgent” legislation that have not been read as examples of that philosophy and they do not trust these actions.

Combine that and the continued lack of employment and economic growth, with a perceived arrogance of what is often described as the liberal elite who feel they know what is best for the people, despite what the people want, and you have a lack of faith in our leaders and a lack of trust in the direction they are taking us in.

Such a lack of confidence is not new but the seemingly endless amount of drastic reforms to every aspect of traditional life in America has created such a profoundly dramatic lack of faith and confidence that now, more than ever, the word “revolution” is becoming increasingly popular in the lexicon of contemporary American politics. And the popularity of the word’s use can not be credited to Republicans. The G.O.P. has lost too much trust to be the inspiration behind the average citizens to desire for political revolution.

The credit, or blame for all the talk of revolution falls solely upon the liberals in control and President Obama.

And they would be wise to not dismiss those who they inspired to peacefully revolt, as violent and dangerous radicals without merit. That type of disrespect and insincerity will only strengthen the opposition to the change President Obama seeks to institute.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

Liberals To Tea Party Activists “Drop Dead”

Bookmark and Share   One week after highly demonized former Republican Vice Presidential nominee, Sarah Palin was featured at a Tea Party rally in Harry Reid’s backyard, the politically ailing Majority Leader of the U.S. Senate, has begun to kick his Nevada reelection campaign into high gear. But the two events had very different moods. Despite the lefts desire to paint Palin as an unpopular and undesirable figure, at her rally there was an enthusiasm and energy that emanated from the approximately 10,000 anti-Reid protestors in attendance. Yet in one of Reid’s first rallies, there was a sense of desperation from the near 100 hundred people in attendance.

Such small and unenthusiastic turnouts are the best that one can expect when they possess a nationwide approval rating that CBS reports stands at 8%. That’s 3% behind Speaker Nancy Pelosi! Nancy Pelosi……3% behind her! Imagine that. So the small turnout for Reid’s campaign event is no surprise and it is also indicative of his own state polls which have him behind all of his possible Senate opponents by anywhere from 7% to as much as 15%.

These numbers are a reflection of Reid, his leadership, his policies and the process which, as the leader of the Senate, he has manipulated. People are not pleased by any of it and so the polls show it. And in Reid’s case, they are more than dissatisfied, they are angry. All except for the handful of Reid’s loyal supporters.

These supporters are a dedicated portion of the liberal-Democrat base.

These are people who are devout liberals, believe that the federal government is a service industry and rely heavily on the government for their survival. They are people who believe that we need more government, not less. They are largely Democrat forced union voters and they are essentially those liberals who vote the Party line no matter who is on the ballot.

But they are something else too.

These liberal Reid-supporting Democrats are also angry, and they are dangerous, violent, extremists.

How does one reach this conclusion?

Well, at Harry Reid’s campaign event, he began his remarks by referencing Sarah Palin and the anti-Reid crowd in attendance at the rally the week before. As he began those remarks in a way that was meant to belittle them, one of the loyal Reid supporters yelled out “let them drop dead.”

Clearly such a contemptuous outcry from Reid’s followers reflects a deep hatred for those who oppose them and their beliefs. One could say that it is similar to the terrorists of radical Islam. They too harbor the same feeling as the liberal Reid voter who called for those who think differently than her to “drop dead”.

Or is that in and of itself an extreme characterization of all liberals like those who support Harry Reid?

Personally, I think it is extreme. But by the standards of Democrats, it is not.

Last summer when lawmakers went home to their districts and met with constituents who were truly angry with the liberal agenda and how Democrats were ramming it through Congress, Nancy Pelosi stood before the Washington press corps and said that the anger out their worries her and in a reference to the assassination of Harvey Milk, the first openly gay man to be elected to public office in California and San Franciso Mayor George Moscone in 1978, claimed that she fears reliving such a climate again.

Then of course you have people like scandal embroiled Congressman Charlie Rangel who claimed that those protesting the government healthcare takeover reminded him of those who protested against civil rights in the 60’s. There is also Bawny Fwanks, who claimed that the people opposing the healthcare scheme spit at him because he is gay. Where he came up with that one bugs the hell out of me because I for one know that given the opportunity, I would not spit on Bawny because he is gay. I would spit on him because he is a disgrace to gays and a despicably corrupt, socialist member of Congress.

But between Pelosi, Rangel, Fwanks and Democrats et al, and those sectors of the media that is biased in their favor, all these conspiratorial concoctions are invented and exaggerated in a way that makes for great theater and is meant to marginalize those who disagree with their agenda.

But when is enough, enough?

If the media maintained any semblance of objectivity, they would have been reporting on the Reid supporter who interrupted the Senator at his campaign event to yell out “let them drop dead” and they would have done so with the same vim and vigor that they display whenever Democrats try to depict conservatives or Tea Party members as violent racists.

The truth is that, from the sound of it, the women who yelled out her crude remark at the Reid event, was an elderly women. Granted, she was probably not your typical blue haired, church going grandmother or Mayberry’s “Aunt Bea”, but she was a relatively harmless senior citizen who is not likely to be running with a bat in hand and breaking skulls and windows. But she did call for those who disagree with her to “drop dead”.

That said, should that woman’s remark be swept under the rug as Democrats and the media have done? Had they not tried to falsely paint conservatives and Tea Party protestors as dangerous radicals, I would say “yes”. It should be ignored. However, unless one supports double standards, the remark can’t be ignored.

To apply the left’s standard to this situation, one would have to suggest that Reid voters and the liberal base that make up those supporters are “calling for violence”. You could say they are full of hate and contempt and that they are dangerous extremist who must be stopped.

Furthermore; should we ignore the fact that as the leader of the senate, Reid failed to put an end to that type of conduct and language?

There is no denying the fact that Reid heard the old biddies raspy and shaky voice as she yelled her uncalled for remark. So why did not this leading figure of the Democrat Party pause to say something like, “Now, now. There will be none of that. These are fellow Americans who simply disagree with us and such uncivil and untoward language has no place in political discourse”?

But no, not Harry. In fact you could say that his negative remarks about Sarah Palin and the people in attendance at the protest rally she spoke at, incited the aggressive reaction that he got from the bitter, decrepit spinster who wants all of those who disagree with her to “drop dead”.

The outrageous remarks of some bored old lady who was enticed to come to a Harry Reid campaign event because of free coffee and cookies, should not change the political landscape. It should not have a bearing on how much more debt our nation accumulates, how many I.R.S. agents it should take to implement healthcare or how we can prevent sworn enemies from obtaining the nuclear capacity to wipe sections of society off of the map. And the same should hold true of a handful of malcontents who may infiltrate a crowd of 50,000 or more people who come together to oppose some of the most transformative pieces of legislation we have ever known.

If this cycle of demonizing one another is to ever stop, perhaps liberals should stop printing labels and stop trying to pit white against black, rich against poor, men versus women, gay versus straight and all the other division that they pin their hopes for future success on. And perhaps it is time for them to live by one standard, not a double one. For if you think about, do you really think that a remark for the opposition to drop dread coming from an audience gathered to hear Dick Cheney would have gone unnoticed? Imagine for a moment, how many days such a remark would have grabbed the headlines if it was yelled out at an event featuring Michele Bachmann or Newt Gingrich?

The remark spoken to Harry Reid at a campaign event is less a statement than how it was handled. The fact that the right is not labeling the left as vicious and dangerous because of it, says something pretty decent of them but the fact that the media hasn’t hung it around the left’s neck like they do with Republicans and that Harry Reid did not denounce the remark says volumes of substantially negative political nuances.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics