Posts Tagged ‘Tea Party’

Florida Votes For Four More Years of Obama, Obamacare

Tuesday, January 31st, 2012

Florida Primary Victor

On November 7th, when we look back on the Florida primary, it will be in knowing recognition that today may have been the day on which the die was cast.  We will cry over our breakfast plates, and Barack Obama will come to rule with an iron fist, unrestrained by worries over future electoral defeat.  The fact that none will consider as they vote for Romney on the phony basis of his alleged “electability” is that he cannot and will not defeat Barack Obama for a number of important reasons, and while this fact is well-known to those who support him, that’s simply part of the plan.  The dirty secret of the Republican establishment is that they don’t want Obama-care repealed, because for two years at least, they’ve been figuring out how to profit from it.

Obama-care is the issue Mitt Romney is unable to address, and without it he will have nothing, because the leftist administration now in power is rigging the statistics, and pushing cash into the market in order to help people feel more comfortable and not so thoroughly inclined to oust Barack Obama in November.  In short, they’re placing camouflage over their failures, because they just need to hang on through re-election, and then the true crises will begin.  If Obama is re-elected, America as you have known it is over, but the dirty secret is that Romney will not make more than a token challenge to him.  He will not outspend Obama five-to-one in any way like he has done in Florida in pursuit of the nomination.  He will not have the resources, and you can expect his SuperPAC funds to become more skimpy once he clears the convention.

This is because the core of Romney’s support in this primary season are liberals in Republican clothing, who do not wish to repeal Obama-care.  It’s part of the progressive vision to which they adhere, but more importantly for them, it’s going to be a profit center.  The GOP establishment is filled with heavy-hitters who will get all sorts of government contracts in the short run to help run the health-care exchanges at the state level, and will be among those who profit most from Obama-cares implementation.  Obama bought them off, if you’ll remember, during all of those closed-door meetings with medical and pharmaceutical companies, and a few information technology companies too.  If you thought the people in league with Obama-care are all Democrats, you’re in for a shock.  No, the establishment wing of the GOP is waiting in the wings to cash in, and they already are so doing. You wonder why they want Obama-care? Examine where so many implementation dollars are now going.

This is the problem with Romney, when you boil it all down, and apart from the fact that he’s not supposed to win, there is the problem that he cannot. The one issue on which a wide majority of Americans agree is Obama-care, but this is the issue he will yield, because of Romney-care.  This is thoroughly damning to Romney’s campaign, but we will not confront the fact that without this issue, Republicans cannot win in 2012.  Mitt Romney cannot motivate the base, and they already know that. The Tea Party will not hold its collective nose in 2012, and the establishment already knows this.  If the GOP had wanted to win, they would have selected almost anybody else.  No.  Anybody else will not be beholden to the establishment, and will not easily do its bidding.  What do these masters of the party desire?  Power and money.  That’s power over you, and thereby the control over your money.

The biggest smiles on this last day of January 2012 will not be at Romney’s campaign headquarters, nor even in Obama’s, although they’ll be grinning from ear to ear in both. Instead, the smiles will be widest in the halls of the establishment’s seat of power.  Obama-care will go forward along with its namesake, and this will permit the final undoing of America, and if you don’t like me pointing it out, you may be part of the problem.

Advertisements

Will The Establishment Follow It’s Own Urgings?

Monday, January 30th, 2012

Will the Establishment Back Our Candidate?

I’ve heard it said at least one-thousand times in the last six months from various sources, day in, and day out, that we must support the Republican nominee whomever it is.  I’ve expressed to you my general misgivings about this thesis, but were I to accept it, and follow along, having watched the behavior of the GOP establishment over the last two weeks, I am now beginning to wonder:  If a non-establishment candidate were to prevail and win the nomination, how would the establishment behave?  I realize they would make a show of supporting the nominee, but remembering what was done by Romney’s crowd in 2008, I have no confidence that they would reciprocate in earnest.  So my question for the GOP insiders, and for you my readers is this: If somebody other than Mitt Romney wins the nomination, will you fight for that nominee as diligently as you would fight for Mitt?

I realize there are those in media who hate this entire line of discussion, but when I think about what has been done to Allen West by the machine in Florida through aggressive redistricting, I can’t help but wonder how serious the commitment is among establishment Republicans to do as they say we should do in supporting the nominee of the party.  I know there exists an element within the GOP establishment that doesn’t mind losing, and won’t mind if we go down to defeat, for various reasons of their own nefarious intentions.  There’s substantial evidence that they’ve sabotaged us before.

We are told we should support the GOP nominee, those of us who are of the grass-roots, either as part of the conservative base, or the Tea Party crowd, and we’re told we shouldn’t hold a grudge or seek to punish the establishment as they circle their own wagons and seek to close us out.  I don’t know if I can agree with this thinking, because I know as with any wayward child who thinks he’s in charge, you must occasionally deliver the punishment or your threat to do so loses all credibility.  I realize that there is a great force against this sort of thinking, and I hope not to have need to consider it, but I’m one who will not take this off the table.

With the ridiculous behavior of the establishment in this campaign season, particularly over the last two week, I think we should always bear this option in mind even if we would rather not exercise it.  With all due respect to those who think this is the topic we must not mention, I believe if we are to ever take back our party, we must consider it in earnest.  I’ve heard commentaries in which there is a frantic insistence that the willingness to withhold one’s vote in the general election over the ascension of another GOP establishment nominee would merely constitute a vote for Obama, and yes, I’ve been castigated here for mentioning the idea, but I must tell you that this is not the case. One of the things I’ve heard repeatedly is that we shouldn’t withhold our votes out of some sense of our own moral consistency, but that too is nonsense.

Where is the morality consistency of those who say Obama must go, but would put up another GOP establishment flunky?  Where is it? If they know the base may abandon them, why do they insist on shafting us with Romney anyway?  Those of you who believe you will be able to motivate the base to support Romney with sufficient diligence and vigor to defeat Barack Obama are every bit as mistaken as those who believed the same about McCain in 2008.  Meanwhile, we must ask the establishment: “Will you support the nominee even if it’s not your guy for a change?”  The media loves to ask conservatives and Tea Party folk this question, but you won’t see them ask it of Norm Coleman, or Ann Coulter, or Chris Christie.  They won’t.  You have every right to wonder why.

Call to Action: Conservatives, Tea Party Must Make Stand in Florida

Sunday, January 29th, 2012

Conservative Stand?

The media is so completely in the tank for Romney in Florida that I must admit I have never seen anything like this in a GOP primary.  Certainly, we have seen it in a general election, as we need go no further than 2008 to see these tactics being used, but this time, the Republican establishment is pulling out all the stops while rank and file conservatives and Tea Party folk are fighting for their survival.  Make no mistake about it, ladies and gentlemen, as more is at stake in Florida than the Republican nomination. If the establishment is able to push or drag their boy Mitt over the finish line, they will claim “it’s all over” and that the Tea Party and the conservative base of the party is irrelevant.  If you haven’t noticed already, all of this is being pushed by insiders who want to retain the control of the party, and to wrest it from you.

I realize that as Sarah Palin pointed out recently, Newt Gingrich is a “flawed vessel” like any of them, but the truth is that at the moment, he is the only hope for staving off a Romney victory, and while I don’t usually make a vote with a negative end in mind, this may be one of those exceptional cases when the alternative is worse.  For that reason, and that reason alone, I am asking Floridians to consider what will become of their Tea Party and their conservative values if Mitt Romney prevails. How will you have a seat at the table if the establishment can claim you hadn’t been relevant in victory or defeat.  You scared the living daylights out of them in South Carolina, because in the space of four days, your brethren to the North rose up and told the establishment to pound sand.

In Florida, where sand is in plentiful supply, Floridian conservatives and Tea Party folk shouldn’t hesitate to tell Romney and his dirty-tricksters to pound it.  Mark Levin pointed out the problematic revelations this week has raised about Mitt Romney’s character. You deserve a seat at the table, and the fact that Romney has been actively and purposefully ignoring you should say everything about his intentions that needs to be said.  I know some of you are leaning toward Santorum or Paul, and I understand your basic objections to what I’m proposing, because in fact I share similar reservations, but unless you want a Romney victory in your state to be used to justify the contention that conservatives and Tea Party folk no longer matter, I don’t see a choice.  You must make a stand, if not for Gingrich, then at the very least against the establishment in this winner-take-all primary in which your voice as conservatives is truly at stake.

Flash: Florida Tea Party Coalition Goes Newt

Saturday, January 28th, 2012

Meeting Tea Party Patriots in Florida

In another setback in relations between Mitt Romney and Tea Party folk, news now comes from Florida that a coalition of Tea Partiers has endorsed Newt Gingrich, first to beat Mitt Romney, and then to beat Barack Obama in November.  This is another repudiation of Mitt Romney among Tea Party patriots, and it’s important to note that Mitt has largely brought this on himself.  A candidate seeking the GOP nomination simply cannot afford to belittle, disparage, or ignore the Tea  Party.  They are a bold and refreshing, rejuvenating segment of the conservative electorate, and it’s been clear all along that Romney has been ignoring them at his own electoral peril.  On Tuesday, we’ll get some indication of their relative electoral strength in Florida, but indications are that Tea Party folk are tending to break in Gingrich’s favor, much as was the case in South Carolina one week ago.  It’s tight, but we’ll know for sure Tuesday evening.

Note to Tea Party Folk: Mitt Romney Doesn’t Want Your Support

Saturday, January 28th, 2012

Tea Party?

As we’ve known for some time, Mitt Romney hasn’t exactly been courting Tea Party support, and Florida’s primary campaign trail is no different.  According to Investors  Business Daily, Romney has basically ceded the Tea Party support to his competitors. I don’t understand what sort of winning campaign strategy sets out to ignore what may be one-third or more of the electorate.  Romney has never been a favorite among Tea Party folk, but it seems foolish to ignore such a large segment of Florida’s voters. Romney is currently leading in Florida, but what is remarkable is the question of “how,” if he is going to ignore the Tea Party. From the IBD article:

“Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Gary Johnson have reached out to us, but not the Romney campaign,” said Everett Wilkinson, chairman of the South Florida Tea Party. “I’ve had someone in my organization dedicated to working with the Romney campaign, but we have not heard back.”

Meanwhile, another Florida Tea Party group has apparently endorsed Gingrich. This doesn’t bode well for the candidacy of Mitt Romney. If he continues to willfully ignore Tea Party folk, not just in Florida, but around the country, even if he wins the nomination, you must ask yourself: What is he really winning?  If winning the nomination comes at any cost, but he’s not willing to talk to the Tea Party patriots, what attention will he pay them if he managed to get elected as President?

The Tea Party patriots in this country seem to be wising up to the fact that Romney’s strategy is to win without them.  There’s only one or two reasons to do so, and one of them is to avoid an association with Tea Party in a general election campaign, and the other is to be able to deal them out if he should manage to prevail.  In other words, folks, he’s either embarrassed to be seen with you, or he has no intention of letting you have a seat at the table if he becomes president.  Or both!

We all know Mitt looks down his nose at Tea Party and conservatives.  It’s the nature of the beast. He’s an establishment guy, and they really just don’t like the Tea Party. There’s no reason Tea Party should like him.

 

What Will Our Surrender Mean?

Friday, January 27th, 2012

Ready to Join Them?

I wonder about some of my fellow conservatives, who at the first sign of trouble, abandon the candidate who they supported only a week ago, particularly since the charges against him were largely out-of-context fabrications drummed up by supporters of the candidate he defeated last Saturday.   In abandoning Gingrich so easily, for those who have openly supported him, what does it say about the state of conservatism that when smeared, rather than fighting the smears, we tuck tails and run away?  Thankfully, those rare leaders such as Governor Sarah Palin won’t take that approach, and while she and the few others willing to stand against the establishment try to rally conservatives and Tea Party folk to understand the true nature of the assault launched against them, we shouldn’t run away from this fight.  We, who say it is our party, and not the party of the establishment, should for once and all times deliver an unrelenting statement of who exactly runs this party.

By heading off for the tall grass in search of a place to hide, since “when elephants fight, only the grass suffers,” we ought for once to realize this is our fight, and this is our time. While Newt was not my first choice, he’s better by far than the apparent leading alternative, and if we don’t rally behind him at this point, that alternative is likely to prevail.  We like to point out that the GOP establishment consists of “RINOs,” but my question for you is this:  If we bow out of this struggle because it has become a little messy, or because dis-entangling the truth from all the lies is too tedious, are we not in fact surrendering the party to them?  Who then are the RINOs?

We conservatives who value our independence of judgment, and our devotion to principle first before party ought not abandon so easily when it becomes clear our conservative candidates are being torpedoed.  I hung in there with Cain until the bitter end, not because I was a big Cain proponent(I had my issues with him on several things,) but because I was unwilling to let the obvious take-down win the argument. On substance, by all means, take on Herman Cain, but I’ll be damned if I’m going to let the mudslingers acting on behalf of others carry out such a demonic hit.  I’ll not support that, whatever I may think of Cain’s policy ideas.

I remember when the pictures of Bachmann and others were used to bring her down, with a magazine cover portraying her as a wide-eyed, unblinking loon.  That wasn’t fair, but that was the way in which she was butchered.  What about Sarah Palin, and the non-stop three years-long smears of her person, and as I’ve reported, not all of it going back to leftist sources?   I would still walk over Alaskan glaciers barefoot to vote for her, but I’ll be denied that opportunity because even before the McCain defeat of 2008, she was being set up and smeared, but not only by Democrats.

Some have asked me why I am so opposed to Romney, and while some may not have known, and others may have forgotten, I haven’t let loose of the betrayals that began even before there had been a single ballot marked on election day in November of 2008.   You should remember too, since “elephants never forget.”  Those who don’t follow party inside-baseball politics can be forgiven, but the truth is that the Romney machine was angry about not getting the nomination in ’08, and they decided to make sure from the earliest moment that there would be no serious opposition to him in 2012.  In truth, there were some in the Romney camp who would have been happy for McCain to lose in ’08, because had he won, we wouldn’t be talking about a Romney nomination in 2012.  Get it?  Got it?

Clearly then, Newt Gingrich is not my favorite politician, and you, my friends know well who is, but she’s not in the race, and in lieu of that, I am willing to look at who is out there.  Ron Paul remains unacceptable to me, if only because I worry about our nation’s security, coming from a military background as I do.  Rick Santorum has gone home, not officially suspending his campaign, but now completely underfunded and effectively unable to continue irrespective of the official status of his campaign.  This leaves Romney and Gingrich, and while there are a few who suggest there’s little difference, I cannot but decline to agree with that sentiment.

People forget that if not for Newt Gingrich’s Herculean efforts through the late eighties and nineties, we might have had “health-care reform” in the shape of Hillary-care in 1994.  Instead, he used the issue to make the difference that led to the first overturn to Republican control since more than a decade before my birth.  Whatever else you might say about him, this remains an unchallenged fact, and what it implies is that Gingrich has the intellectual wherewithal to create or build upon a movement, rather than simply a candidacy.

In contrast, Romney enacted a health-care fiasco upon which much of Obama-care is modeled, and in fact, which was written in large measure by the same people.  Do you really want to take one of the few issues off the table that has substantial bi-partisan support on your side of the argument for a change?

Ladies and gentlemen, there is one more matter in all of this, and it really gets to the core of why I cannot support Romney, along with the more obvious issues:  Do we really wish to reward a man with victory who has employed the dishonest tactics of every left-wing Alinskyite, in undermining his competitors through smear, distortion, and outright lies, but worst of all through various surrogates who are carrying his water?  I don’t know what you think about this, but in my book, he has become Obama.  If you wonder what has happened to your party, or more importantly, your country, you have no farther to look than this, and there is every reason to state not only in words, but also with your votes and your open advocacy that this is not the kind of candidate who represents us.  If we wish to take back the Republican party, we must do it.  When we run into these sorts of characters, we must be smart enough and wise enough to discern among them, but most of all, we must have the courage to fight them, openly.  I’ve talked about my prospective willingness to walk away, but for now, I have resolved to fight.  Will you?

I hope so, most earnestly. We may not have four more years to reform our party. We must do it now.

The Grass-Roots Revolt Begins Anew

Friday, January 27th, 2012

Virtual Pitchforks...So Far

It’s beginning.  Florida’s grass-roots Republicans and Tea Party folk have begun to figure out what is going on with the GOP establishment, and as the fact-checking and refutations of the Romney machine begin in earnest, the question is now: Do they have enough remaining time to turn the corner?  With just four days until the Florida primary, there’s a new sense of outrage among conservatives who believe they’re being snookered by Romney, and all his various and sundry surrogates in the establishment and in media.  There’s no doubt but that Gingrich has been set up again this week, and the base of the party is sensing it too, and reacting vociferously against it.

Nobody likes to lose, but to be sabotaged by one’s alleged allies is something else again, and to be undercut by one’s own party is simply no longer acceptable.  The base of the party is getting the word out via Twitter and Facebook and email, and almost any form of social media.  You can observe the disgust that characterizes their messages, as they explain how they will refuse to be manipulated in this way.  Here’s a sample from Twitter:

Pointing out the obnoxious hypocrisy of Romney in castigating Gingrich over retail politics Thursday night:

@byronyork: Romney tells FL space coast crowd he’ll consult really smart people and come up with a mission for the space program.

Then a word on the change of support by the Latino community:

@josh_painter: Latino Republicans Withdraw Support For Romney, Endorse Gingrich – http://bit.ly/wBDcu1

Over the attempt to manipulate the party:

@sistertoldjah: NEW from ST: Memo to the GOP Establishment: STOP trying to manipulate conservative voters bit.ly/yv9Ao5

Over Romney’s bullying of a reporter:

@rosethistleart: Romney bullies a reporter legitimately questioning the lobbyist on Romney’s team http://youtu.be/zG7c7m37geI

On the hypocrites in media who once called Romney unelectable as they now kiss his backside:

@LegInsurrection:Remember when @jrubinblogger said Romneycare rendered Mitt all but unelectable?

On Newt being the heir to Reagan contrary to the Romney surrogates’ claims:

@politiJim: Newt Isn’t Reagan Enough? Would Ronald Reagan Saying So Convince You? (Via Nancy, He Did) ~ PolitiJim’s Rants | http://t.co/EzvWn9mF

On the servile behavior of Ann Coulter:

@Common_Sense4U: The Embarrassing Coulter Meltdown on The Factor – What or Who Was Behind It? tinyurl.com/7evrzor

More on the NRO trashing of Newt:

@joebrooks:NRO’s Newt trashing exposed as FALSE dlvr.it/17dcyX

Another revelation on ANOTHER issue on which Newt Gingrich was trashed by Connie Mack(on behalf of Mitt):

@desertgardens: Miami Herald: Freddie Mac attack boomerangs on Connie Mack tinyurl.com/7rsrvbh

On Romney’s Romney-care lies:

@checktothepower:  Romney’s Big Healthcare Lie redstate.com/dhorowitz3/201…

On the GOP establishment:

@maxcua: Mark Levin: Looks Like The Entire GOP Establishment Is Out To Stop Newt = 100% w/ NEWT fb.me/LinmdEaL

Of course, this is just a small sample, and if you use Twitter, you’ll quickly discover that there’s a revolt against the GOP establishment brewing. This is the only hope we have, and I’d urge all of those of you who use twitter to do the same.  If you have contacts in Florida, they need to know the truth, and it’s up to you to deliver it, because we already know the media will not.

Drudge Distort: What Will Be the Reaction to the War on Gingrich?

Thursday, January 26th, 2012

The State of Dis-Union

Matt Drudge is making a lot of hay over Gingrich’s alleged anti-Reagan speech, that we know know wasn’t, and he’s clearly sympathetic to Mitt Romney, but why is it that conservatives are reacting badly against this?  The answer is simpler than most will admit, and it comes down to just two things.  First, the conservative base and Tea Party folk in the GOP are beginning to doubt media altogether, and they’re seeing through the obvious anti-Gingrich bias, but more importantly, I believe it comes down to this more than any other thing:  They are sick to death of the media and the GOP establishment selecting the Republican nominee.  I think this explains everything you need to know why conservatives and Tea Party folk look at these exaggerated, out-of-context headlines and stories, and just say “No.”

If you wish to know how dishonest Matt Drudge has been on this story, up in the top-left of his site all morning Thursday were three stories agitating against Gingrich’s alleged anti-Reagan sentiments, but the third of these, from 1988, has already been debunked. Why didn’t Drudge take this down?  No, he waited until it was thoroughly debunked, but the damage of the lie was done. He left it up in exactly the same way he allowed his anti-Newt stories of last Wednesday and Thursday to remain up most of the day, despite the fact that it had been revealed most were over-hyped re-hashings of old stories.  Drudge has relocated this a bit, but this is how it appeared just more than an hour ago:

NEWT FLASHBACK 1983: REAGAN RESPONSIBLE FOR NATIONAL ‘DECAY’…
NEWT 1986: ‘The Reagan administration has failed, is failing…
NEWT 1988: ‘If Bush runs as continuation of Reaganism he will lose’…
VIDEO…

How do I know this is dishonest?  The link to the video is a Youtube link to a highly edited clip, taken out of context, and therefore made to look as though Gingrich was anti-Reagan.  When you watch the whole video selection, in its complete context, the lie becomes obvious.  Drudge is doing this purposefully, and if he will lie to you in this instance, there is no doubt he will lie to you in others.  I don’t really care what his motive is, or why he’s doing it.  This moved his recent activities from “suspicious” in my view, to reprehensible.  Thanks to Dan Riehl for exposing the truth, and providing a link to the original, full-length C-SPAN video, with the interesting portion beginning around 2:30.

Limbaugh talked about this extensively on his show today, saying the following, among other things:

“It was everything you wish was happening today, is all I can tell you. It was everything you wish the entire Republican Party was doing today. It was led by Newt Gingrich, and what was he doing? He was defending Reagan. Now, all of this stuff that hit Drudge and everywhere else last night about Newt telling everybody the country goes to hell if they continue Reaganism and that Newt insulted Reagan and that the Reagan administration failed and Iran-Contra… I never heard any of that. I started doing this particular program in Sacramento in 1984, and I was just as immersed in national politics then as I am now, and I could honestly tell you this.”

There’s a reason Rush can’t remember it the way Drudge is broadcasting it:  It didn’t happen the way Drudge’s site would lead you to believe, and this is simply a desperately disgusting attempt to do to Gingrich what has been done to others with the distortions.  A year ago, if you had told me Drudge did things this way, I would have scoffed at it, but now…

I’m clearly coming to see Drudge in a different light.

I realize that many people have many reasons to be unhappy with Gingrich on one issue or another, and I’m inclined to be annoyed with him too, but this has gone too far, in my view, and I’m not inclined to suffer it any longer.  If Drudge is going to be a media participant in this smear-fest, let him, but I won’t be adding much to his page-view statistics any longer.

The simple truth is that American conservatives and Tea Party folk are tired of the media and the GOP establishment leading them around by the noses.  It’s not that people are so infatuated with Gingrich so much as it is that they are disgusted by these tactics, and they’re simply disenchanted with the GOP establishment controlling the outcome of our primary system.

The Grizzly Bear in the Room

Monday, January 23rd, 2012

Will The Roar Grow?

I want to take a moment to address in more detail that which I have watched from afar, and only commented on briefly as what had been more or less a bullet point in a larger story, but if you really want to know what elevated Newt Gingrich to a runaway victory in South Carolina, it goes back to one moment. Although she appears on Fox News regularly, particularly now that the primary season has begun, Governor Sarah Palin’s hat-tip to Gingrich on Sean Hannity’s television show was the key moment.  Looking at the polling data, it was clear that Gingrich’s big night in the Fox News debate on Monday cracked the door open, but when Palin declared to Hannity that she would vote for Gingrich were she a voter in South Carolina, that little mention, surely not a full endorsement, shoved open the door and sent many thousands of the Mama Grizzly’s most ardent supporters and friends out in the pursuit of that end. If you had wondered what a Palin campaign might have resembled, you have witnessed now only a sample.

In an effort made of devoted pursuit, across South Carolina, Tea Party members heard Palin’s words as the signal, and to the polls they went and beat back Mitt Romney, by lifting up Gingrich.  The breaking of the news of an ongoing struggle inside ABC’s executive suites over the Marianne Gingrich story was launched with the intent of arresting this movement, the idea being to head it off quickly.  A story that had been intended to destroy Gingrich in the last moments of the week(despite the official story at ABC,) was instead brought into the light and exposed for the slimy bit of manipulation it had been.

Across the Internet, people dug through old stories, and dug up old information, and before the story had festered six hours, it was already being put directly to bed.  ABC moved it up, first to Friday night, and then to Thursday, but the obvious nature of the ploy was something that the Tea Party, and particularly those known as “Palinistas,” had seen and witnessed many times before.  Repeatedly, over the last three and one-half years, supporters of Palin have watched as similar attacks were launched in Palin’s direction, but with much less scandal behind it.  Part of the scheme they had learned to notice had been the way timing was always employed to maximum effect. None who saw the flashing light on Drudge Wednesday evening had any illusion about the nature of the attack.

On Thursday morning, when  Rick Perry announced the suspension of his campaign, he made a powerful statement about the fallibility of all mankind and the redemption possible to any who seek it.  He stepped forward boldly, in the midst of the continuing theme of attack against Gingrich, and endorsed the former Speaker of the House in spite of the media.  This small moment of confirmation made it clear to many who followed his speech that he was clearly rejecting the media narrative and timing.  A little while later, Governor Palin tweeted her respect and admiration for Rick Perry’s patriotic message, and this served as confirmation to many that the Newt train would leave the station on schedule.  After that, almost nothing else mattered except for Gingrich’s own rebuke of the media on Thursday night, so that when the interview aired of Marianne Gingrich, the few who sat through it were Romney supporters looking for a new source of dirt.

While all of this went on, through the night and into the morning, Tea Party folks in South Carolina rose to make a stand.  They began to volunteer for Gingrich, and they got out the vote for him in epic fashion.  One could hear the faint echos of the roar drifting down from Wasilla, Alaska, but more importantly, one could see it in the frenzy of activity around Gingrich’s campaign operation.  There was only one source of this momentous surge, and Gingrich acknowledged it thankfully, and well he should have, because while he might have managed a victory without Palin’s shout-out, the truth is that he would never have accomplished it under such a withering and well-timed assault without all of the Palinistas and Tea Party folk who responded to her call.  Seven in ten people who voted for Gingrich said they were Tea Party, or Tea Party-aligned.  As Romney campaigned, mostly ignoring the Tea Party, Palin’s small hat-tip in Newt’s direction sealed the fate of the Mittster.

The injection of this sort of impetus into a race is almost unprecedented, but for her own previous engagements.  Her ability to guide and shape the outcome is a phenomenon of which every other politician in the country is now unhappily aware.  They saw the effectiveness of her campaigning and endorsements in 2010, and they noticed that she carries elections at least twice as often as she doesn’t, even in tough regions.  They also know now the terrible force of her slimmest positive mention in favor of their rivals.  What this points out most of all, however, is how quickly the Palin-inclined Tea Party can muster when they see a clear choice.  Palin simply provides the clarity, and since they know her record of earnest reform, they tend to give greater weight to her judgments.

There is one more thing about all of this that I haven’t seen mentioned, but it’s noteworthy, and I offer it to you as evidence of my thesis:  I believe that even at this late date, if the Mama Grizzly decided to do her own roaring, she would quickly dominate the field. I know that’s wishful thinking, and I realize the likelihood is something less than the discovery of a warm personality in Mitt Romney’s suit, but it bears repeating outside the confines of my narrow skull. The effective nature of Palin’s influence in South Carolina should offer you a hint of what she could bring to bear on this or any campaign, and I look forward to seeing her in full support of the growth of the House majority, and the overturning of the Senate, but most of all her committed and forceful leadership in the matter of “sudden and relentless reform.”  Our country desperately needs it, and even if she will not have seek an office, her leadership will be needed more than ever.  In Washington, they’re fearful, and the GOP and media elite are listening intently for the sound they dread, should the Mama Grizzly begin again to roar.

Ann Coulter Flails; Implies Conservatives, Tea Party Stupid

Sunday, January 22nd, 2012

Ann Coulter Loses Mind

Another so-called conservative lost her mind in public again today, this time on Fox and Friends. It’s funny to see Ann Coulter attempt to pass herself off as a mainstream Republican.  In New York, maybe.  She puts forward a pair of contradictory premises.  On the one hand, she says that the voters who Republicans need to attract for the general election are those who trend more to the center, or even a little left, but on that basis, Gingrich isn’t the best choice.  Then she attacks Gingrich for being to the left of Romney.  The fact that Coulter can’t see this contradiction before she proposes it is all the evidence you need to know that she has now become completely unhinged.

The war against Newt continues to escalate.  The GOP establishment is clearly terrified.  Here’s the video:

The fact that Coulter dismisses the plurality of the South Carolina electorate who voted for Newt, or the vast majority that didn’t support her guy, Mitt Romney, is a key to understanding that Coulter has now left us.  I’m certain there will be future instances in which she will say something conservatives and Tea Party folks like, but in the main, Coulter has demonstrated repeatedly throughout the last year that she is now irrevocably committed to the GOP establishment.  She’s grown comfortable among them, and is now one of theirs. Of course, as she offers you her contradictory premises, she assumes you’re too stupid to notice, so her dismissal of conservatives is not surprising.

New Establishment Media Themes Emerge

Sunday, January 22nd, 2012

Making Newt into the Devil

In light of Newt Gingrich’s victory in the South Carolina primary on Saturday, two new themes have emerged that I am certain we will hear and read in the news throughout the the remainder of the week, and they’re both constructed to diminish Gingrich.  The first is that his personal favorability is low, and that people generally don’t have a positive impression of Gingrich, but the second is important only to those who are inside the Washington DC cloakrooms, who are not happy that Gingrich might win the primaries, and possibly win the Republican nomination. Plans have begun to hatch all over Washington DC on how to derail Gingrich, particularly if he does well in Florida, and you can count on the GOP’s establishment types to be hustled before the cameras with fresh endorsements of Mitt Romney. The insiders just don’t like Newt, and they don’t think he can defeat Obama, but more, they don’t like the fact that he may undo some of their favorite things if he were to win not only the nomination, but also the general election.  The hew and cry will go out as the establishment will say “Newt must now be stopped!”

It’s bad enough that they have concocted a theme regarding Newt’s “unreliability” and “zany” behavior, a charge often made of his public expressions of ideas that may be off-key, novel, or simply outside the conventional wisdom.  Now they are going to press forward with the idea that because people don’t like him, on a personal level, that prevents him from rising to electoral viability.  These are the same people who can’t wait to tell you how well-liked President Obama has been throughout his presidency. I can imagine the Gingrich retort, and it should be simply this: “People like to point out that my personal favorability is low, and that Barack Obama’s is high, but these same people fail to mention that the well-liked President is leading us off a cliff.  Does the elite media want the American people to believe that they should choose well-liked but incompetent over competent but not so well-liked?  This is typical of how out of touch Washington DC’s elites are with the real world Americans face.” Or something like that.

On the matter of the Washington elite not liking Gingrich, it’s very nearly the best selling point about Gingrich that you could raise in this election. In a similar fashion, I expect this theme to be destroyed as quickly as it is set up, but that won’t change the fact that behind the scenes, the elite in the GOP will continue to work to undermine him as best they can. The insiders took a bit of a drubbing in South Carolina when you consider the other scorecard, so now they will focus on the notion of Gingrich “electability.”

In the South Carolina primary, there were some winners and losers not tallied on the screen, but you should know them just the same. Among the not-so-obvious losers were Governors Chris Christie and Nikki Haley, whose endorsements seemed not to have made much difference to voters.  The biggest unlisted winner was former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, whose push to vote for Gingrich probably made the turnaround happen earlier this week. The other big winner from the Gingrich victory was Governor Rick Perry, whose endorsement of Newt came at just the right time to sustain him through dark hours. The last of the unlisted big winners was the Tea Party, which rallied for Newt, and this accounted for the boots on the ground that pushed him over the top.  Clearly, the Tea Party’s loyalties run more deeply to Sarah Palin and Newt Gingirch, than to Nikki Haley and Mitt Romney.  It’s a force with which the establishment has yet to effectively reckon.

Of course, as I reported on Friday, there is other blow-back for which we have yet to account, and it may yet show up in the form of some chicanery if Romney continues to falter in Florida.  It now seems that after some pressure was applied, Romney is back on for both of the debates scheduled next week in Florida, but if Gingrich should prevail in Florida as in South Carolina, you can expect the stuff to hit the fan among the establishment wing of the Republican party.  They might fetch out somebody else altogether, and you might see all sorts of infighting erupt.  Gingrich was never well-liked among DC insiders primarily because he had a tendency to foment real passion, a sort of a “loose cannon,” because they see him as an obstacle to business as usual.

Now, it’s not entirely fair to consider Gingrich an outsider, but he was never part of Washington’s “in crowd,” so if he manages to pull off a win in Florida, there will be bedlam in the party.  A Gingrich victory in Florida just might be the catalyst for a catastrophic boil-over within the party that has only been on simmer for the last several months.  It may just be the medicine we need to shake their endless grip loose from things, and possibly bring true reform to the party.  Myself, if it shakes up the party, I am prepared to endure it, and if a Gingrich win in Florida will make that happen, I will be only too happy if the voters there instigate this battle.  It’s something the party has needed for a generation, really since the exit of Reagan, and the word has gone out that Jeb Bush may not endorse Romney now after all, instead deciding to remain neutral.  That may be the best indicator yet that things are going to get nasty in the GOP, because it means the Bush clan may be preparing to dump a new ringer into the fight.

All things taken together, Saturday’s events in South Carolina have re-shaped this race, and that’s a good thing for the Republican party.  A little revolution is good now and then, but the prospect of a Gingrich presidency is more than the establishment GOP can stomach, so the long knives will now come out from every corner.  It’s also true that the left lives in terror of a debate stage with Gingrich facing Obama, and they will now push any theme at all to convince you to choose another direction.  They and the GOP establishment will become allies because “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” in their usual expedient manner.  Bank on it.

Inevitable?

Thursday, January 19th, 2012

Inevitable

After having ridden the wave of the media meme that he had won Iowa and New Hampshire in unprecedented fashion, Mitt Romney’s “inevitable” nomination may not be.  We have the news Thursday morning that Rick Santorum actually won in Iowa, and while the media continues to spin that Santorum’s win is a “virtual tie,” they did not say that about Romney when it was thought he had won by a smaller margin.  Meanwhile, Newt Gingrich continues his surge in South Carolina, perhaps mostly unharmed by the seemingly old allegations by an ex-wife that are being pushed in the media.  It’s been announced that one hundred Tea Party leaders in from around the country will be supporting Gingrich, and with the classy, respectful exit of Rick Perry, and his subsequent endorsement of Gingrich, suddenly Romney no longer looks so inevitable, and we can expect this to have serious blow-back in the remaining days of the run-up to the South Carolina primary on Saturday.

What all of this should tell you is what a paper tiger Mitt Romney’s aura of invincibility had been.  Don’t misunderstand, as Mitt is hardly out of the running, but what this shows that his path to the nomination is going to be much more difficult and lengthy than many had assumed.  You also shouldn’t expect any less vigorous a campaign by Romney, while his superPACs will go after Gingrich with guns blazing now.  The next two days will consist of virtual bloodshed, as Romney and his surrogates are going for the throat in all parts of the media.  As I reported Wednesday, the Romney camp will try to push the mantra of Newt’s unreliability, but I don’t think that apt to take hold, because what the public has noticed that despite some anger over his treatment by Romney surrogates in Iowa, Gingrich has apparently returned to his form of November and December, focusing on a more positive message.

On Thursday afternoon, Sarah Palin talked with Sean Hannity on his radio show, and she said she thought the story aimed at Gingrich is perhaps in the process of back-firing, because the base of the Republican Party is tired of the media and establishment choosing their candidates.  This characterizes one of Romney’s problems:  He is widely seen as the GOP establishment’s candidate, and that is a big turn-off for the rank-and-file conservatives and Tea Party folks in the GOP.  This threatens to overwhelm all of this “inevitability” talk, and if as Palin suggests, there is a backlash against the media’s Gingrich attacks, Romney may well find additional trouble with his ongoing campaign based on smearing the former Speaker’s reliability.

Despite all of the external factors, Mitt’s largest obstacle remains his own record.  He hopes to capture this nomination by default, letting the others self-destruct (with timely help) while he simply survives.  Unfortunately, he has a well-established track record of vacillation on a variety of issues that makes him unacceptable to many.

Update: Here’s the Hannity/Palin radio interview from Thursday:

[vodpod id=ExternalVideo.1010638&w=425&h=350&fv=me%3Ddc_exec_ooplayer%26embedCode%3D43OWtiMzr0OZdSbr1KWsZTnMmTrb2FMP%26width%3D640%26height%3D360%26callback%3DreceiveOoyalaEvent%26video_pcode%3Dk4Nmw6Cri746xA2OsoSlngyrIudg%26contactServer%3Dplayer.ooyala.com%2FQ2HGKJ-PryQsG7CT%26text%3DgnzraFfihknm-CWmolfSMxo74jl4T0KOvVJWyEYyaSmN4pWUQhdPvDgnyJn_-Xc7MAs56JrCGjUIwsOUxGzfW6RI7nWx2YNaw6qtc3zXmwIIhezjJhftHWgluTnMD1-xwzzxsC4FL5S7AMk9xqB_ytl_B6x4EG3qndPtQWkbBBNxYSgVncyJHV80LxccSSpV9j-RtAfQta0UL8Lu4dTMhlmfs4QNAeeEy_NMiTbuJ-RWIbOYivtHhfrCI8p9lzKP2Vm5HsC0yWjRpgg5LJ6HvlkwMYj5nY8w-iB6o58a_Zxx2qtoU6vdGksNXKmCyrhBvgPDRR72RTIlxk3et0qquKqy34KHOTNNHZg_OMwZyuO7ggxVlG1ZCH3SHsFAc2_O_ZA1kCSFPmANQxY0fgVuvLzuvAwGO8hQG8LDWsT7yuc4FF24MDevO1e4yx4PYeNsk_AU6Yemqlk0Etyv5SWmnw-hBoAyXk30NaQU0OOYULVJUfO6FRWSBs62icbe0a_zELhXmRxOqVBcWihAs_FejERzujQn3DZbGv-pp3dDQEQWxRh6RTkwcuiVFmexCgK-W3u4mwtWiefapWXA0bWF9keO9AKE_MrYzWm-csfOcl-LPslhQZbRMuiEfr7v5_sH6-lV7rSX9B6e9E9r1i4QnYpEZijw9AR0IHtgavb2KcTzMRnJPctKFLmCkTCTWbNQIpOV_ZKgGRw6iMHC4uWndEEvKM4luS1_YKXXTEnosOjbyG4VvkhSbzO1bJibaf9VNXaB8OtGMrh4mMUql9TnvlXBzzEyGDafCj7f4mpGrWiujN1_GxSAnhpDGUT3mvYdhRQklLjsvozUygLi8Y4mF3sINBdqkxNAMUHrLPtzDWOFtPOp87Ixq3ywwhjIZjv-QXPaJ3AzfQJYR1bl7Czn1W3Tq-OScgNiNm1IcOVDI2Y8Nrfc_dPb6XYgVnoDIdxHxWHUQB6Kw8HeiBIcgREeWfPRKKB4bSKy2usbjcQwptaOT5lIh1dpNo-mejvtAhwR9mCN7QizCBE-qL9ZncoLF35mbxveZi-F3WlYkDnkbDq7V8HMRG81HvyIIorYrKHSCpZoBBB_jn_qN3K6CNyPVgVEdCf6LuGIRBNk60SAitXSqaP_CaRhTH_bBH4aNUyo9TDHHD83PvVO2_4jTFygWSPW3DQNnRMZe7yoGYscPWibChoWvG9XNLyXKWevWsHzkknVV0Kl9yDIo2YDB6OuJ_CxwM5LgTQ9zMqROjX0vwA2wTrtfLKyq8SREG8jQ6v-s0-uILGGON57ONSlXWXO-AeWSBpyrOqC6zSd4j6W6ahO4XAe7DIx5pij2DKcPV2Yf1csVeR__PhiFM8e6xcEfLPQ3JJZ6BG5Mwrt0NvQp8cF7TSFUyIRlU3i3s1ZrxBeph2zgoQbiL0LG8Kg_1mHZjnlYfg_kzWbo1JzJ_ydb0bKrhUyDearOYWn1J6DyHkyLeuj5c8qlLdy3yCsemcRCbSCmGsibFc7JNpDUh2CzDoV89fKDf4ngqr2hUvKVTIuotS9QfZ3RCk8jtjO6Q1UlsdpoPEL7G0xcAxtjZEnGHc9Vaba8nX73rzFu8XzKTCcCKW0hN7vtL2WCqST4AUFgRWIb8n6IAww2GXaZBxkUlM5hU0jxvo56qfHKWMDEFZ7tkpg26SFvVzVmymjC6zd_lEhBlEIXyn7IHW03wrntvsOnVJtvUYLXYw-hIEYcma4e3tlHcJ7g0kII4oV97xmeIILmge6cbae6X0U-8VL5gpGs3PAWG-4Yo8ugea8KSQ9AcYQzuaP94zrfSiA7N8u5faGJK06bXGzBPaSAEqqo3_ByP7NghEu2yQnkcpiAa7VhW1Pp1xMgQM09zJvRo45E8ON5e_j1jB_nbIMyhm12fkUwahFXtVXZlKh3ZZJ3uETEoeuoS7OBIZb1KJbZSW2Nn6K1ZRypEnzSLLJiR3z6UAWEmPjSA71JgG-G5m5cJRZuHo3qC_UM5JE39Gnnb7YIM-8z9lag0P_CZDokpwUQnOeDQdHJmXfn843MreZqckdmY-g8WfQjutdLdI_E0mcjQCnXHRg9aKSXLhNssH-2cz-U6BzdDDBYqrXyNZOYsP96cUTic8ZOkRyL4UYIT_P9UcA-hDddqt8F7DTOKPdBgsKYT9TvE3LWSMsaznttJ_QGR2GgJ9U0JKxOAHIPmjPkyLio5Y5hhPG9hwYsDNnD_XQZT-xbdDP81jAgCM7bpHC9-LROers2f1ragcaeSoD0NE1UkRtBM0HueTeflFhaPhDAqFNZIxs3wvvHLN7G1eO_ycIbg-_kKaqNHCigSy7jlPTD7zslAIWTUJW5u73Mi956_BwIRDQn14J3O8Q5uMPuQWh_NoPJFhLhpdhjz8fzkIUDILSVESgEOsDwta-3YDgAQ4oH85GfrUzGO4fg5QlAMh6pDy54dYFSLjeHaHxp8Vys9UWxegG54Zg5YbBgTXBw9aBJKMsaWN84MPqA21XQXGRHQBASzz9T9HvNMMZXV22INbJJzeYv04wRkXkMaRSExDZyQdeef_hUQrU1PCYNBgmOwhyXEmOvzK9CWb120TEjFVFa0apG05831Wjzi4x3XpGSj7-_9imOYH389er0GZJiZgCoWTWMoLoYdQHsNl4-ItLNQF88mdnqiNeihBjb91GLE3aV9VUBWcRh702Ao8lDim6G0MXSPn3VNjPTx-K3s4poUywxtUPIKaKxZo-JXWmuGjWBa23iurqJCfEO3UlSMCWwKwZ1xRU-jpsLDCzz2EkJr-POFhx_7ideHsL3iXq-L8kfp1mJ3S79YUXl0A7H8Q1snmCK2gpEg02juU4l6kyOfvnNKl4CnR7Hmy_ew6qkFFzPPKBj5E3Nv7fwwfvkT_mY-SzpP_Ao2cGkR5t27EpnNbyPsIyb1tfzDsQR3cuU-i5kC_46Rob_FQYwkH13S2WEjA8zZVZmIEXXfCH9z1i5rXEsqTjX58MbQMF0oPKQEaI2cr5C4zDea9i5WdGPyq4Hd26LxGPHiqsjGSFvgz_hlQEc5O0LI8NBldHczgRD9_d3XVaQLUMPYBj5_NhBg1zzKgBXxU30g6CMZWLpMLqlJKm_qTbxu7KnVxpY853TT1JAc1F4HyS9rgzQqDcchTUpzbynsFXzGfvjmKDw87wj9K5tdV-q60lCLvNEn62GkQmpLAc3VVYBKcduMbehU19EJu2SNnFKhH5B4NQ9zcq-_4_1RDgHqXEUk_RNcGhuy9bSDUBa_PToywLgZ49EwqxUgHso5y2PusRy2FskiVdXoDPoxbygLbmKZRHZTqA9OmlXSaEkCCPdzb0aPH3AO5ADX3ywTWw8_4kTTxDSQnHFpb3L7JvF5aRZ8Dw2Sk7R4Q9LOdM7WEuhGCyu22WRcxKsNj11CoK45FqjXoTytKIA3KnDzKV-UN86t1ZSpnBT-Ohj8wxYoQ2DuxBhsyFnnSaIBOp-tEz4hzIryJQU9rfWOndm_i6GGZnKsbOfypcoHawOoL82ZcHJzQ1EGaF3sM4elCFgEOqM8chrvfzNzk_z5lbL3JADC0hKcRYcoFwS3UUmSmUALPPE0BNt_Sz2cWWyu5M_DnF7tPCn6nMFQ8hd-z5TioIWSVJAYTVwvjiqm2hGY0aBEI3wg6rVzwZ4OOgef43XQhZZEmFoCsKfYRtxRQ9eKbAxsNKYDCm0gytAsPO1UOqP_OF-WpZfkU5GmplQuG346yxu80e6s3Zxv19vRkJhjGXOD-xgNIzVS0rCNLv3YbmaJV_ARAKcggI_yRwieoM3UcbCeCHekLa7kNc6sZtF85cZ331kTqRmM7UNmwNh4qy-gM54zvxkeY75TKlRn_2XHAVG1c7Lh2o7DePmgh3CPEdyVny8P1bHq4PwMoj–zxaveqb7j1MiIEv-Y7Gnv0rb4cYHYo2H_xCMl2nQeGcM4GGv9_AnhJMCgM-T8acZqbV-SGevznQuvm8ehisBTA_G0dbLs7N-jbGq0dQl8cf93Uzje4WB9NiazzPJ_H6f7L2vDuBmcReS7MbHracfL2S1t98qL68NRR8T1lcMkyQMFFk0kNakqLpazqKX5OZJYzxB4Fpcv5KoaWjPntBkVOCfsRLcpNExpoLJhIwuo8jkzV37tLD6iDojwGFd2o2SmCYTVCq6LiH0pfrTW6hgbxypqSbz89XDzYk09tTzXSVHqEUoO54x03u5CfsB02nSD-EXC5T9JOoqhkLzlba1hF8CLUhOCi_YaGWXw9QZKwhqX_hD0iT8nkf3NaxQKE41m6HvOpCg_Euqw_aF21YjngkhTHsXYWwMN6ERZpswue-7Uy3DD-otQXLjW8u1Deff2JmTIrsct0P0w6NLKw493Ya9FDvqfKMiFsbFHy2NKRRDmB4wuPsI5tWLAnEwXmBrvOgkM9CnSn2VY6vbngEOHijlkbSVq1MpjivgtBxDuBosHA0Lmtc71lsX-xozqXGk-7LBcxDPtPgHUhSUGSWe50wiLZaM1NHViVK-x9YnQUhnzHY3cHpBnmYKy5_vlnCBa4zec_HbKWQ0Un1Vt7G–ogBKyJ2M5VGIqujaDjQ0zDOi5Szp7wV8DLlxXqqqPBGEZUU_KJBFbfqQ5sivXA_txWEStYWm7HXGzHOdZdq4KdFqZa79MXGYzMQY175WsaGtkFAJ1KYzWM6BgkdhgC7cQNQew_evao1TFPyslJQit2QgApGjl-fypjlR2M7PwZWGRCEugh1O4UeYfxVeTR4sp3QfqOkvUz27uqViOMsm_Ur8kAj9bkL4o7bgB8zRn1N6gpvT8TeE1StyWwK2_4fKnoW2t02CCM6fSB8FC9MoOnjxiuKiU-s-VVYMRsHMZJ5bwO4CA5tbSJ2D6HlWxLl93MQUq3-ALBwzbwXVOVYLL-WsddBpT9aXc-xSXwSy3y7XoR-QDUqnYyMfGn2OU4gHsEwPSufbNp8HutiKJPfODUl0YCaBdcSgIprM6eZhoALCVVdnhly_K-ZJ44-t6rBV3NJ3Eg0PezEvr2i3BnsAG3jlXAT1gCnFY5zGvVmGyRCujmXd9cgE9mGNw7LAif1prg7Y5-_Frd0s103DdUr2SwvMLKLZ2YRQUiQLlZ0PSOiRWOcSMTwdWwtfbvm8tNwC6DsgbrjGhQMpx-F2smpr5qcnGgvyll6PbqUmhG6h9YY43syrhpn9MVsdvhObBnGKefXE7Rhcf49TPMI96vsHrG2vyp8pZdO6JhuEmYJ7aZOEgZbIBY_0d1YUT26r_O1VX2ONdwuX_WfrhR6nw_zl55EOPOs_vBtLgidY9OSrFtTmf_UuBlP3TAPkCvN7QMIoJjo8EQAjeQrleyYecruRl1xwAJ5N292yssss-h-CXsklciXVlvMdw8SLABpSNdUYXC5g-sZnbS6J4UC-RvQGbirR_8fdaNntr89zgT6lzxBemagZ9egDunJ4G1jscO3zQvvSSleiCrg8CQhTGxyRculUNsqUnLrMF_lAZr59dL4VyZO0FV3OMqO6yicLN9rJQq5ihH9Job_hJXXV4VSI0YQ2_LBfptqNBplPUgcAFITKn_Nenbbt9tSZzkYFNdBzpDX_Mvx9ydCEgG9iON2buNDM9pCCGdnQJDsGS10iviZ9f3hhyKPYNkf1286etj1QUTAFQJTYh4W9Etbv6Cni1swEZucYlk3OoRAmjYJx9bwy_1mJQgsvStvYtGJqeqmPkLp_d0bGzjjH7Gpx2voBNxFuIzaatQg91O6I4E6aqdGsBw8EwOl6nzGUphUObXNWNBFg_o9H_wW4sOC02JxQmyCTHHhyj1pcPduq49asIUd616Sr0sz9_ghg_NmdlGn1hxqSh7JTG0zp8cP2-LiZkKMt6i4JMIorQnmh9Me6p1j5wXSCITror6BlfopkiltGd7tHWz4blXeofbo2_5cBKrSUXkLpf2ncPg9E-brgAdrhet_zBAbhBvBUCiHcvLZf1ZZZvM1_tyhUVoxADVXitZelt1mBuxwNR6za6G-oGw1iBRdP5N5zDTM6hictb3y5YEdpLRJL4Fi5Z0iYCQe7YdyNoEF31dXyKUDRTO_4vy-eaiXqrVaDLT3Kxv8Nb9NS9ELUsHMnh8xICZtRslNBc1JrAliREB-MprMC4_TUtvEEXNgW-KQkNpxUZfAVhK8iVYkITJ0C-S9BjP2W3eR_UzExO6h_cW5vxlTCyvlFFJ0N7Uyl7nQC0wwhBj3hNydZM6dCZmwl2pVjUolzw-6mM3WPTSZf0mC67zgs2J0DiXnIcGlOPfII_UdzpXJBxFPfNC6-x85w0sRpQpLbjmI41PMd13XJnlu355YcDcXo_mt_QIpIhl-zxg70yE4KXc4ZP3OIhYg-5ssIMfO_-qadzCphxdp1Gkw2ICwWcXgZOVWa9S2B5L21wzRTpbCh37TQH4aMwH807J0gC1_s5pmzbpWSE8zyzFWhJR2tLCgRpKH0IeLahKJzvcraLO6dWQMtgvqukYPVsY6v2n5gqytLkhd0ZJPaE9L8ZzUoziQdBuYEQdwn48jI2AF0RiuacS96U8MefOxg24icLCcl0MdCPkYmuSnxSCHaKwcr6hUyq7cpeNoiZ-RhzeaLzdLjhGgh8FAWNHh08cjXynR08619WEpKwUWG2SmqyTrqqWvjttl3dcgi8jJlT7pV7bLgKxrdij24su7VA-U0r6OYiZ47dI90-P3uUdGV2kwID1JFtnoN4ZYzY7UHCaLphL85UwYD3cHksAnyBE0StiX10txGu4a-WSsLjjQQAkefooIPSJ6RQYqxtlszC5114CC5Za_CEb-z41VacQxNPWraIzdAidqXzN1R8Of2FtItxld3D_XpRtoak6SZy-kI0HdJfV3IFcyxqmBVppllreDGwE7BZtIDBDu_kUp8MJ7hBhkeLhCikvMZvhXdxgepOu707n58GzjvxD91vmzj-ptZKtAUVe-azZSZ9chQJE0925r2DSGsmGQWOCAC054_cmBmVaFFJz9qz1xyitrTyR6qzrBF5srlHdsJohiYyCIws06bF__Uu1DOWEZQ8QzlAFQUZU5MMFOTZ0jhO9HrkDHvBrkwK2BMZ_vQDik4OBXmzB733Rx21OB4CIA_iC_3SGlxE5HE_lul7oxQgiHol808Zs6yzDrtjk6ZLD_cHhVsbcwEFQ1spBjXb412Bao2pqq3wmuKk3Xg7fngq539Nf5MM5VZF3hA09Tb4itJzvO8fuwfLnoPLHe6g4rqp8_kg6kO0weJBLgQHAlD0lDocPaUvVQMs1n4bqtQwKSWg_QD02Q9024oo-PErAssQ_A_O4cfBABBKYXYBO7VIdT3ZMZa38AppiYccV1A_QRyV6VelCBKannTJwideDo-WUsmWIfXU2rYAQExydCOpxcOYw1OFxK9pNzEuiJ-hH6BKYVlMl4_RSC_kGvSJMKnkcWcEtQGblgZgxc4Zlp37zllVer7TlyhGmnXpXXyhUjmUWVm3yvhnWoX998Zq2rIiuWupaOzFDp-J9agQrLfPMT9k-SONLid1H0Lbd9cg1iORVNY0zsUT5kwI0g4rJGTDLBkg3MzqqR5vN-GtE8peqOdvadcG2UixUXmzb04FPS-q_oPELIlXdXaE8ueS2_9EGM_u9_iSdGc2i76lY-15EGSY95x5rs1CRO97OXjesbDgHsjkLW3_05HyzvuUSUQBedpyJpIcD5f5CcU6HVkc0wkb3Vu9dU36nH30KREblljpRoZW620zF63rz3Gq1A9swOsMzHKyE1q7rHOTIrQ5hchrEP5oGajCCDkAtuQ-z9EKydloWfc2k3DfB3MfgPhGpV7f9_cgDQLd1AFgRNaz4e76cR90BTEkJ4SpwPO6-jSVtTfP7gQhWp00NvKof6pkOzr3ibNs7VzyQuOpbPvaupMjHLh7hbBhIe12G2Vk838yr7Ra7md_LYDEr7g_GvPeuSUwMNMpcWTAX33C-c2QbiWWCQZv3fqAh3Q9vL2IfoT61jj5YFM5RWVjPUiBxeu-Sz3IbNuUSbxMLGnv9h9jmPDqsTUTUSXOsGYflcmyy9iVTyQsjHP2Fr_Q-z-dYeyKqLCMz5SM4aDs6ob558oDOamhEG2N1C4KW0WL1EJeZ0-OYfdErqU_zU0gpezmY1Foao1-5JVjoWplnToXCqfAj3cZ3gt9ZsaZJNRwCwEhHEcVokI6Smj_MyC82y89UQnocIF2lp67iq2RfP3z0rPy8StiPN–11zN2rAR862-_66jJh_B5QcWXirX7ksyfUGn0_sYZHX2cIivZEOJKEBMEDy4XVzvJ7w5Ab2g-khEkPs%2A%26docUrl%3Dhttp%253A%2F%2Fdailycaller.com%2F2012%2F01%2F19%2Fpalin-dumb-arses-in-media-overplayed-their-hand-with-gingrich%2F%2523ooid%253D43OWtiMzr0OZdSbr1KWsZTnMmTrb2FMP%26loadStartTime%3D1327017113317]

Daily Caller: Tea Party Coalescing Around Newt Gingrich

Thursday, January 19th, 2012

Tea Party to Dump Mitt in Harbor?

The Daily Caller is reporting that in South Carolina, the Tea Party seems to have begun to coalesce around Newt Gingrich.  That’s an amazing change of things, and this further demonstrates why Mitt Romney is becoming desperate, and the leftist media that wants him to be the nominee for easier defeat by Obama in November is now conducting an all-out war on Newt Gingrich.  For Gingrich, this is great news, and for the forces of anti-Romney, it may be even better news, because as I reported late Wednesday night, one poll is now showing Gingrich in a clear lead in South Carolina, but until the votes are tallied, it may be too close to call.

What remains to be seen is what effect the bogus non-story story pushed by Drudge and ABC News on Wednesday evening will have on these numbers, or the Tea Party’s support, but I suspect there may well be a backlash against this garbage underway.  From the article:

“My sense is there is a growing coalition behind Newt Gingrich,” said Dugan, who organized a state tea party convention last weekend that both Gingrich and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum attended.

Mitt’s in trouble in the Palmetto state, and this story explains it well.  The thing to remember in all of this is that it’s terribly fluid, with as many as 40% or more of South Carolina Republicans still undecided, even at this late date.  Hold onto your hats, because with all the shenanigans already ongoing, it’s likely to be a very wild ride.  If the Tea Party continues this trend through the remainder of the week, it may just tip things in Gingrich’s favor.  The probability of a backlash against media sleaze is increased, as I think voters are catching on and no longer seem willing to let the media choose their candidate any longer.

The Politics of False Unity

Saturday, December 31st, 2011

So They Say...

An idea I’ve begun to hear and read with greater frequency is that conservatives must abandon the divide between they and the GOP establishment, in the name of “saving the country from Barack Obama.”  It’s no secret that this is being pushed by the Romney camp, and by the establishment media, but I reject it outright.  The divide between conservatives and the party establishment is real, and it’s not going to be patched-over by a lot of happy talk about unity.  The problem is that while the establishment denies its own existence, those who comprise it are continuing a campaign aimed at convincing conservatives they’re merely being stubborn at the expense of victory.  What conservatives know is that you can’t build a victory on the foundation of a false unity that paints over meaningful divisions in the party, and while it is true that the conservatives could surrender for the sake of expedience, they don’t seem inclined to do so in this election cycle.

If we are to accept the argument of the establishment, nothing is more important than to defeat Barack Obama, but the problem is that the tool they’ve selected for this chore isn’t up to the job.  Their strategy has been simple: Divide the conservative base among a number of somewhat more conservative candidates, and then knock them off one at a time, always leaving just enough of a residual support to ensure the division among conservatives.  The strategy seems to be working, and what it has revealed is that the party establishment merely used Tea Party support in 2010 to make gains for the Republicans they really hadn’t deserved.  With the absence of Palin from the field, the Tea Party is either divided or at least uncommitted.

This false unity being proposed by the establishment is the siren’s song they offer as consolation: “Come join with Mitt Romney, and together we’ll defeat Obama in November.”  Poppycock.  This sort of vacuous sloganeering is what has produced such thorough losers as John McCain and Bob Dole.   The very notion that Mitt Romney can fire up a conservative base and Tea Party support in any way at all is preposterous.  Obama won’t be beaten by merely running against him.  The opponent who faces Obama will need to present a clear alternative, and Romney simply is merely a less virulent form of statist.   There’s not much to differentiate, in truth, because what Romney has done is no better than Obama in terms of policy.  Tallying the scorecard, the differences are so few and so superficial that I can already see the race-card play from here:  “Admit it,” they’ll say, “the only reason you oppose Obama is that’s he’s a black man.”  You’ve already seen this card played once before, by Glenn Beck (of all people) against Newt Gingrich, but if Beck will use such a rationale against Gingrich, you can bet the Democrats will use it against Mitt Romney, and frankly, they wouldn’t need to embellish much on Romney’s record to make the policy-based end of the argument.

The main reason they will use this false idea of party unity is the same reason they’re scrambling even now to undo the mess they’ve made in Virginia:  The danger is that given the only choices of Mitt Romney and Ron Paul, you might pick Ron Paul if your contempt for the establishment is as great as they fear.  While I’m not a fan of Ron Paul, I find it almost comical that after putting the Virginia GOP in this position, first they responded with a requirement for loyalty oaths, and then when that was scorned almost universally, they trotted out their AG to propose changes that would permit others on the ballot.  The problem had been, of course, that they didn’t see Ron Paul as a real threat, so they were happy when only he and Romney made it onto the ballot.  They thought it guaranteed a Romney win, until they thought about it, or were reminded of the other possibilities in a two candidate race in which Democrats would be unencumbered by their own primary and thus free to participate, and dare I say “meddle” in the GOP primary.  Up until that moment, “rules were rules,” but when they realized what might happen, the “rules” were no longer so  important.

The real problem for the Republican Party lies in the fact that they have so thoroughly compartmentalized their base that they have made it difficult for them to really unify around a moderate-to-liberal establishment candidate.  The pro-life voters won’t go with Romney very easily, despite his latter-day renunciation of his earlier and long-held pro-abortion position.  Fiscal conservatives will not easily go along with him because he’s a big-spender and he is of the Northeastern blue-blood crowd which likes its inflationary monetary policy and its deficit spending.  He won’t do well with those who dislike the welfare state or the encroachments on individual liberty, because they see in him all of those things in the form of Romneycare to which they are fervently opposed.  Cultural conservatives won’t support him easily because of his actions as Governor of Massachusetts on gay marriage.  Tea Party types will look at him as just another all-around part of the larger problem, and those who are generally suspicious of big government will not have failed to note how indecisive he’s been, or how much he’s been in favor of secrecy and concealing his official records.  His past claim to be a social moderate and a fiscal conservative is a contradiction in terms.  One can’t be both, simultaneously.

This is why they must create this false idea of unity.  Mitt Romney has nothing else to offer, except the claim that “he can beat Obama.”  It is for all the reasons above that I know he is not likely to win, but I also don’t mind saying that if he does manage to win, he’ll have done so without my support.  People don’t want a leader who follows, but that’s all Mitt ever really does.  He’s simply not a conservative, and that’s not good enough for me. I don’t buy into contrived unity, because I know where it inevitably leads:  Betrayal, defeat, and disaster.  In truth, but without respect to calls for a false sense of unity, these are all that Mitt Romney has to offer, and I’m not interested.

The 2012 Betrayal of Conservatives(Updatedx2)

Friday, December 23rd, 2011

Bearing Down on 2012

Ladies and gentlemen, if you’re a conservative, or a Tea Party patriot, your worst fears are being realized even now.  Rather than selecting a candidate who fully supports your values, you are being force-fed a shrinking field of diminishing candidates who will be destroyed, one after the other until only the GOP establishment candidate remains.  This has been the aim of the party from the outset. We’ve been told since at least 2009 that the only practical method by which to save the country would be to first salvage the Republican party.  In fact, we’ve been told this same idea many times before. It sounded plausible enough, and after all, many were naive enough to believe that we could manage such a change, but the problem has been what it always winds up being:  The party is stronger in dollars and influence than our grass-roots efforts can overcome.  The party is intent upon leaving you a single choice in 2012, and that will be between an establishment candidate, whether you like it or not.  They told you to fight to salvage the party, but what they really did was send you off on a wild goose chase.   You won’t be salvaging this party with the slate of candidates now running, and you surely won’t save the country.

If this sounds terribly pessimistic, let me apologize in advance, because it’s going to be somewhat worse before I’ve finished.  There is no mitigation strategy remaining that does not saddle you with Rove’s chosen candidate, whomever that may turn out to be, with Obama as your only alternative.  Right now, that might seem to be Romney, and that’s a fair bet, as they’ve managed opinions all year long by pushing his opponents up, and then unceremoniously tearing them down, each in turn, until all that will remain at the end is a single candidate who they firmly control, whether it’s Romney or somebody as yet unannounced, like Jeb Bush, for instance.

Many of you may have looked over the field of entrants and thought, as have I, that if you could only take this part of one, and another part of the next, and so on through the field, you could build a composite candidate who was perfect in the aggregate of such a combined records and stances.   There’s a reason for this:  These candidates were picked to present you with precisely this devil’s choice of incomplete candidates.  You might think that your candidate is best, whomever it may be at present, but let me suggest to you that the whole slate of them has been picked for you.  Each was intended to get the support of one sub-group of the Republican base or another, and each has played his or her role perfectly.  Consider them with me, each according to their groups:

  • Michele Bachmann was to appeal to Tea Party folks inclined to vote for a woman.
  • Rick Santorum was to capture the cultural and religious conservatives.
  • Herman Cain was slated to win over the tax reform/fair tax crowd and those who values ‘outsiders.’
  • Ron Paul exists to get the libertarian strain.
  • Jon Huntsman is there to appeal to liberal republicans.  (You can see how many of those there are.)
  • Rick Perry is in the race to appeal to the more bombastic, tough-guy crowd.
  • Newt Gingrich is there to appeal to those who like more intellectualism.
  • Gary Johnson was sorted out as a redundancy to Ron Paul.
  • Mitt Romney is there to capture the lot of you in the end, if nobody else happens along.

I know, you’ll tell me: “Mark, you’re crazy, they can’t all be in on it.”  I will respond that they needn’t all be in on it.  All that needs to be true is that they possessed an ego common to those who seek high office.  Most of these people have monumental egos, so it really wouldn’t take much to get them to jump in.  Secretly, these people have all wanted to be president for a long while, and it didn’t take much to get them to follow their ambitions.  They needn’t be “in on it.”  Once encouraged to enter the race, they merely continued being who they are, because that’s all that was required of them.

I know, it still sounds like a conspiracy theory, and in part, I suppose it is, because it’s difficult to demonstrate that the same people pulling the strings are always the same people who’ve been pulling the strings in the GOP since two minutes after John Hinckley Jr. nearly succeeded in his assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan in 1981.  Reagan clearly regained control for a time, but by mid-way through his second term, the establishment had found inroads into every part of the administration, and were beginning to undermine Reagan at every possible turn.

The GOP establishment’s view of managing people in the political sphere is  much like a rancher managing a herd of cattle.  The one thing they don’t want is an uncontrolled stampede.  A directed stampede is useful, and that is what the Tea Party has come to be.  They couldn’t control it directly, so instead, they shaped it, molded it, and directed it.  The GOP establishment is not merely “liberal.”  They are communitarians, which is to say that they are merely communists of a different feather, who claim to revere some forms of individual liberty, but who if they get their way, wind up destroying them all.  These are the same people responsible for the notion of “smart growth” or “sustainable development” plans and schemes that fall under the general umbrella you have come to know as Agenda 21.  The Bushes are communitarians. Bill Clinton accepted many communitarian principles. To a certain extent it could be argued that Obama shares some of these ideas.

There are differences in the communitarian philosophy, with one group preferring a religious ethos, and the other wanting a purely secular moral base.  What they both offer is what might rightly be termed a “kindler, gentler” or even “compassionate” communism.  Their view has been slowly switched-in, to take the place of the “conservatism” your grandparents had known.  This is why they push a form of statism that is remarkably similar to that of the open leftists, but is disguised behind appeals to compassion or political expedience, but to the largest extent, you’ve accepted them as slightly less conservative, when in fact, they aren’t conservatives at all.

Their most important tool is the art of public relations, and they are experts in it.  If you want to see them in action, watch how Karl Rove seems to invade every show on Fox News.  After all, Ailes is one of theirs, and this is his network.  Of course, you needn’t be in their pocket to be used by them, and to the ends they have in mind.  Even your opposition can be useful to them, as I’m certain you’ve figured out already.

This primary season has increasingly caused divisions among conservatives, but it hasn’t particularly worsened the relationship between the establishment and the conservative base, which has always been rough.  Instead, the division now appear between subgroups as outlined above, and as the preferred candidate of each group has been dismissed, eliminated or minimized, the war in the party has been largely between these factions.  This is precisely what the establishment wants and needs.  Santorum supporters are too busy fighting for much of the same philosophical ground with Bachmann.  Bachmann did battle with Perry.  Perry battled Cain. Cain was shuffled out.  Gingrich steps up, and of course, the establishment goes after him with abandon, but more importantly, gets the rest of the factions to do most of their dirty work.  At the end of it all, the goal is to leave you with Romney, and if that still doesn’t work, they’ll fetch a savior like Jeb Bush or Mitch Daniels or somebody else from the Bush crew to step in.  They know that they have thoroughly marginalized Ron Paul, in part by merely getting out the way, and letting him be who he is, so that they will now try to leave him as the only other alternative.

As we now know, it’s hard to consider Bachmann, Huntsman, and Santorum serious candidates, since they could not be bothered to (or simply couldn’t) gather enough signatures to get them on the primary ballot in Virginia.  Perry and Gingrich will also be close, since they have barely enough, but by the time they begin disqualifying signatories to the petitions, they may well lose 10% or more of their totals, which would finish Perry and threaten Gingrich.  These have each been front-runners, remember?  The ones who haven’t been front-runners are now going to be sent packing by their inability to get on the ballots in various states, starting with Virginia.

I have been one of those who had long hoped that the Republican party could be reformed, and that with the input of the conservative base, be made new again, and avoid the planning and scheming of the communitarian wing.  When in 1991-, Ross Perot made noise about running, and launched a campaign, I was careful because I suspected his candidacy was a trap.  When he withdrew, when it seemed he might win, only to re-emerge once his hasty exit had tamped down enthusiasm for his candidacy sufficiently, I realized his was a spoiler candidacy.  Do you remember the ‘volunteers’?  I remember them creating a short-lived party that lasted the length of two Presidential campaigns, each time garnering just enough support to permit Bill Clinton’s election despite twice failing to achieve 50% of the popular vote.

Fast forward past the decidedly un-conservative presidency of George W. Bush, and what you find is the McCain campaign that did much the same thing when it looked like the addition of a wildly popular VP selection might indeed push them over the top.  No, McCain suspended his campaign just when it seemed it might be gaining traction, and just like Perot’s in 1992, it never recovered.  There are those who view these facts and wonder if the two parties aren’t really a multi-headed beast, like the hydra of fable and lore, but whether that’s true or simply a conspiracy theory, one must admit that the establishments of both parties seem frequently to function in concert to the detriment of the American people.

The Tea Party offered many of us new hope, giving us an outlet for that belief in constitutional government we had believed would restore the Republican party, and with it, the nation at large.  While the Tea Party has been effective in a number of ways, what has happened in the main is that they’ve not organized to the degree that would be necessary to wrest control of the GOP from the establishment.

Where does all of this leave us?  Frankly, it doesn’t seem possible that we will arrive at election day with any conservative choices, and certainly none who satisfy the criteria over which the embattled factions now fight.  As this post goes to press, Donald Trump has essentially repudiated his association with the Republican party as many of us suspected he would.  He seems destined to be the Ross Perot of 2012, and now that Mitt has George HW Bush’s endorsement, we look set for a repeat of 1992.

Let’s be blunt about it, and tell it like it is: Unless something unexpected happens to dramatically change the course of this election, or people decide that putting up with Ron Paul’s oddities is a price they are willing to pay to avoid another establishment subversion of the party, we’re going to get the latter.  We’re being left with choices about which none on the conservative end of the spectrum are particularly happy, whether they’ll admit it or not.  Apart from the Paulites and the Romneyites, most people now supporting one of the other candidates is a migrant to that support either from another candidate, or a candidate who never materialized.  What’s a conservative to do?  In 2012, it appears the answer may be: “Lose.”

Update: Perry has also been DQ’s in Virginia.

Update 2: Gingrich has also been DQ’d in Virginia.

Gingrich Wins Tea Party Patriots Straw Poll

Monday, December 19th, 2011

CNN is reporting that Newt Gingrich is the winner of a Tea Party straw poll in a conference call including over 23,000 participants.  He won it by roughly 3 percentage points over runner-up Michele Bachmann.  According to the CNN piece, “An overwhelming number of activists from around the nation showed they are serious about electing a candidate who advances tea party principles,” said National Coordinator Jenny Beth Martin.

Here is the complete breakdown direct from Tea Party Patriots:

  • Newt Gingrich 31%
  • Michele Bachmann 28%
  • Mitt Romney 20%
  • Rick Santorum 16%
  • Ron Paul 3%
  • Rick Perry 2%
  • Jon Huntsman 0% (.34%)

That’s a pretty clear win over such people as Rick Perry, once thought to be a front-runner, and it’s a handy move upward for Rick Santorum.  With Mitt Romney finishing a distant third, it invites discussions of other possible late entrants as have circulated at least twice on Monday.  Still, 31% for Gingrich may not be enough to seal the deal, but considering that the Tea Party is expected to have a significant impact on the nomination process, it’s one cannot discount this straw poll.  After all, 23,000 is a rather large sample when compared to most polls, so this may well be indicative of the state of the race, at least in states where the Tea Party is thought to be stronger.

H/T to Dawn Larson for the breakdown on the vote!

DNC Anti-Gingrich Ad Backfires!

Sunday, December 11th, 2011

Political Backfire of the Year?

I am sure that Newt Gingrich is laughing, wherever he may be.  The Democrat National Committee has just released an anti-Gingrich ad that Newt should have to count as an “independent expenditure” under FEC rules.  The ad starts out with the premise that Newt is the “Original Tea Partier,” and goes on to highlight how he wanted to reform Medicare, or even replace it by giving senior citizens a better choice, and then on to his proposals for slashing capital gains taxes and corporate income taxes.  The ad is clearly aimed at rallying the Democrats’ base, but it’s having a different effect.  Call it the “unintended consequences.”  Instead of hurting Gingrich, this ad is actually helping him, not necessarily with Democrats, the intended audience, but with Tea Party folk.

You can watch the ad for yourself:

This ad, rather than hurting Gingrich, may actually help him among independents and Tea Party folk, as well as conservatives who worry that the former speaker is too progressive for their tastes.  It actually highlights some of Gingrich’s more conservative positions over time, and certainly his current economic proposals.  In spite of what Democrats had hoped in putting this ad out there, they may have actually succeeded in giving Gingrich a boost after a debate in which his fellow Republicans tried to undermine his conservative credentials.  You can bet Mitt Romney won’t like this ad, because it succeeds in making the case to those from whom Romney must win support.

How long do you suppose it will be before the DNC announces they meant to do this, since, they will tell us, they’d rather face Gingrich in 2012?

Why Is John Boehner Sabotaging the Conservatives[Again]?

Thursday, December 1st, 2011

Embracing Obama: John Boehner Sells Out

It’s become more and more difficult to believe that John Boehner isn’t representative of some sort of progressive fifth column in the Republican party. The longer this goes on, the more obvious it becomes that Boehner and his lackeys in the House Republican leadership are simply giving away anything and everything, while sabotaging their conservative members and their legislative goals.  This time, they’ve tucked some anti-abortion provisions into the spending bill in order to push conservatives to join in approving the bill.  The basic idea is cynical DC-insider garbage: Bring in the pro-life lobby to harangue conservative members on behalf of this bill in order to get their votes, and thus pass the spending bill to which they are otherwise opposed.  Yes, it’s a damnable dirty trick, and it is brought to you by John Boehner.  This is the sort of cynical ploy common to DC politics, and it’s precisely the sort of thing to which so many of us are fervently opposed.  This is one more reason John Boehner must go.

Rather than unite his party by affirmative measures they can all support, he instead weasels his way out of that by putting this off on members, leaving them to choose between support of the anti-abortion lobby and the anti-spending lobby. In short, it’s another sick attempt to split conservatives and Tea Party types.  Why would John Boehner do this?  Why would he set his own party up for defeat and electoral disaster?  The answer is either that he is the most incompetent Speaker of the House in my lifetime, or he is intentionally sabotaging the conservatives in his party.  Why would he do that?  What would motivate him in this way?  I have only one answer:  John Boehner is an establishment sell-out whose political career consists of more crying than legislating, and more surrendering than victory.

It really doesn’t matter what his intentions may be, but if you don’t understand anything else about what he’s doing here, you must understand this:  What John Boehner is now doing will ultimately guarantee that we will not win the elections, we will lose control of the House, and have no prayer of retaking the Senate.  Obamacare will become a done deal if this happens, and you must know that there will be no repeal, no overturning, and no recovery. Ever.  You may wonder how this would be, and the answer is quite simple: Conservatives in his party promised to cut spending, and to cut the growth of government.  They promised it. Loudly. Often. Regularly.  In 2010, they appealed to the Tea Party on this basis.  The Tea Party showed up to support them, by and large.  Now, having secured their votes, and the majority in the House, the leadership is leading those conservatives to sell out their promises, or squeeze them into so doing as with this latest ploy.  What will happen to the Tea Party folk who supported them in 2010?  In November 2012, just as in 2008, and 2006, they will stay home in perfect disgust.  Who could blame them?

When the people who you place in power turn on you, and undercut you, you’re hardly to be blamed if you decide no longer to lend your support to such people.  Call a dog to you, with a firm “Come,” and then whack his nose with a rolled-up newspaper, and you’ll quickly see the dog learn to cringe and balk at your call.  This is what the Republican leadership is doing to the Tea Party and conservatives, but worse, the leadership is setting them one against the other.  That’s why Boehner’s tawdry ploy is destined to lead the GOP to defeat in 2012.  Obama is weak, but Boehner continues to improve his position by compromising endlessly with the Democrats.  How does this win support for victory?

It cannot.  If we’re to see Barack Obama replaced, and Obamacare repealed, we must discharge John Boehner and those like him from leadership.  They are a walking advertisement for the statists, because they don’t really care about the direction of the country, but only maintaining power, and lately, one would be right to wonder if they care even for that. The burdens of leadership are many, and John Boehner is incapable of or unwilling to bear them.  It is my recommendation that in the name of the Republic, never mind the Republican party, that we send him home, or at least to the back benches with all due dispatch.

Establishment Hack Colin Powell Criticizes Tea Party

Monday, November 28th, 2011

Generally Wrong

Sunday, in an interview by Christiane Amanpour on ABC’s This Week, Colin Powell was led into answering questions by Amanpour, and these were the sort of puff questions that suggest the interviewer knew the interviewee’s answer, and was merely a propaganda attack on the Tea Party.  Powell has always been a DC insider since being a National Security Adviser in the Reagan Administration, and his elevation to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff was seen by many as a cynical bit of affirmative action by George H.W. Bush.  In his service as Secretary of State under George W. Bush, Powell repeatedly demonstrated his elitist tendencies but also his commitment to the progressive movement.  His endorsement of Barack Obama in the eleventh hour of the 2008 campaign season was simply the straw that broke the camel’s back in terms of his relationship with conservatives.  This statement suggests the antipathy runs both ways:

“They compromised — the Founding Fathers compromised on slavery. They had to in order to create a country. They compromised on the composition of the Senate, of the House, of the Supreme Court, of a president — what are the president’s powers? Can you imagine more difficult compromises today?”

“Compromise is how this country was founded, and unless two people in disagreement with each other don’t find a way to reach out to one another and make compromises, you don’t get a consensus that allows you to move forward.”

“But the Tea Party point of view of no compromise whatsoever is not a point of view that will eventually produce a presidential candidate who will win.”

This is nonsense.  The founders compromised on the issue of slavery, and we are still dealing with the blow-back.  This nation engaged in its deadliest war because they compromised on that issue.  Abraham Lincoln did not compromise on the issue.  The founders may have compromised in formulating the structures of our government, but they did not compromise in whether we should have our own country, or Colin Powell would never have been Secretary of State, or Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for the United States, since it wouldn’t exist.  This is the sort of half-witted, dishonest argument I have come to expect from Powell.  He’s an establishment hack who serves himself, and official Washington DC, but not the nation at large.

The other thing concealed by Powell’s attack on the Tea Party is the question: If the Tea Party is supposed to compromise, with whom is that compromise to be made?  It’s not surprising that Powell doesn’t indicate who that might be.  Compromises are made between entities.  If Tea Party is one entity, who is the other? This is typical Washington-speak, because if Powell was really interested in seeing the Tea Party compromise on an issue, he’d tell you which issues, and with whom.  Instead, he’s simply hurling insults.  Sadly, instead of providing something constructive, Powell simply laments the uncompromising nature of the Tea Party.

With whom has Powell compromised?  He’s not willing to compromise with anybody, having secured his lifestyle as part of the establishment.  He’s not willing to see the DC establishment give any ground to the American people.  I might have been willing to accept his arguments if he’d shown even the first indication of honesty in his arguments, but as is all too clear, Powell simply wanted to smear the Tea Party.  Amanpour was only too happy to give him the opportunity.  If, as Douglas MacAurthur reminds us, “old soldiers never die, they just fade away,” I think conservative Americans will be just as happy if Powell begins to fade sooner rather than later.  Until he learns to speak honestly on politics, he’s not performing a service for the American people, a thought that prompts me to wonder: Other than vanity, whose interests is he serving?

Reagan Honored in Former Soviet Bloc Countries While Defaced in US

Friday, November 25th, 2011

In Tbilisi, Georgia

Twice in the last week, nations that had once been slaves of the Soviet Union honored Ronald Reagan with statues.  As a statue of Reagan was being defaced in our own capital, first in Hungary, more recently in Poland, and now in Georgia, “the Gipper” is still remembered as the man whose vigilance and willingness to call evil by its name caused the Soviet Union to wither and die of its own grotesque weight.  He’s cited as the man whose firm stance against the “evil empire” brought the USSR to its end, and with it, the nearly half-century long Cold War.  How stunning it is that while his statue isn’t safe in this country even in his home state, across the region of Europe that had once lived under the tyrannical iron fist of the Soviet Union, he’s afforded more honor and reverence than he receives in some quarters here at home.  None can convince me that this irony isn’t symbolic of the disease that afflicts our nation.  When a man whose efforts liberated millions and whose policies lifted a nation to the pinnacle of its success at home and abroad cannot find respect he deserves at home, it’s time to question the culture that permits such an absurdity to endure.

Most Americans remember Reagan fondly, even some of his opponents at the time.  He was an optimistic leader who thought that the efforts of the people, and their simple values ought to prevail upon their leaders to provide the liberty that has been America’s great promise.  His memory is truly cherished among the great body of the American people, but to doctrinaire leftists, both his political success and his philosophical foundations are occasions for disdain and discontent.  The left simply hates Ronald Reagan.  The simple truth is that he offered a thorough refutation of leftist ideology.  He didn’t need a ten-dollar vocabulary, and it didn’t matter to the American people that he was in his seventies throughout his presidency.  He told it like it was, and still is today.

I find comfort in the fact that while freedom is withering in the US at the hands of Reagan’s opponents, in the eyes of a majority of the American people, he’s still supremely popular.  As his detractors hurl insults at him, in Eastern Europe, leaders whose nations were freed by his efforts are remembering him with statues, and saying plainly what the left has spent two decades trying to pretend hadn’t been so:  Ronald Reagan defeated the Soviet Union.  Others deserve some credit, but theirs were ancillary roles.  Only Margaret Thatcher and Pope John Paul II deserve any mention among western leaders along with Reagan. Let’s consider what others have said recently.  From Tbilisi, Georgia:

In Tbilisi

Georgia’s pro-Western president has unveiled a monument to Ronald Reagan in the capital of the ex-Soviet state praising the 40th U.S. president for “destroying the Soviet Empire.”

Mikhail Saakashvili, whose government has for years had tense relations with Russia, also lambasted Moscow’s attempts to “restore” the Soviet Union by creating an economic bloc with other ex-Soviet nations.

He said Wednesday that the bronze statue that depicts Reagan sitting on a bench “deserves a place in the heart of Tbilisi, the heart of Georgia.”

In Warsaw, Poland, Lech Walesa:

In Warsaw

“Let us bow before Ronald Reagan for the fact that our generation was able to bring an end to the great divisions and conflicts of the world,” Mr Walesa said in a ceremony in the heart of the Polish capital Warsaw.

“What happened seemed impossible or unthinkable. The older generations still remember,” the Nobel Peace laureate said.

“In Poland, we had more than 200,000 Soviet soldiers. Across Europe, there were more than a million, as well as nuclear weapons. Major changes without a nuclear conflict seemed unlikely,” he added.

In Budapest, Hungary:

In Budapest

Prime Minister Viktor Orban and former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice helped unveil the statue Wednesday.

Reagan was remembered for the aid and encouragement he gave Hungary and other former Soviet satellite states in Eastern Europe to gain back their freedom.

Reagan “changed the world and created a new world for Central Europe,” Orban said at the unveiling ceremony. “He tore down the walls which were erected in the path of freedom in the name of distorted and sick ideologies.”

 

In Newport Beach, CA

This is simply astonishing.  While the people who had lived under the oppressive Soviet boot understand and remember what they have gained, too many in this country have spent the intervening years lying about the nature of the Soviet Union and the philosophy on which it had been based, and little is taught in our schools that would explain the importance that an honest retelling of history demands.  Look at the “Occupiers,”  our modern day iteration of the Bolsheviks.  Their historical understanding is so frightfully narrow, and their philosophical underpinnings so atrociously bankrupt, they believe, with the crude indolence of club-wielding children that the are some sort of “freedom-fighters” while they agitate on behalf of ideas refuted before many of their births.  They tell themselves they aren’t anti-capitalists, as if some sort of self-delusion will prohibit to the rest of us the view of what they’re really preaching.

I don’t think they have any idea what it is for which they now agitate, and as history repeats as the Occu-pests cry out for the United Soviet States of America, I cannot imagine a more fitting spectacle than to see that while these misguided brats rant about the inequities of the markets, they nevertheless don’t realize that what they’re demanding will only make things infinitely worse.  Perhaps it is better that statues of Ronald Reagan are erected and unveiled in Eastern Europe, because at least there, it seems the people will have some reason to remember the reasons for which his memory is honored.  These Occupiers don’t have a clue, but thankfully we have conservatives and the Tea Party who can yet teach them.

Tea Party Opposes Occupy Black Friday with BUYcott

Thursday, November 24th, 2011

Now They Have Opposition

In an interesting development sure to finally put the lie to the notion that the Tea Party and the Occupy Wall Street crowds are similar, one Tea Party group has decided enough is enough with all the “Occupy” nonsense, and is planning to support stores by encouraging the public to shop like crazy on Friday in opposition to the “Occupy Black Friday” boycott aimed at publicly traded retail outlets.  The Occu-pests don’t want you to buy from corporate America, but the truth is that they’re actually trying to stall economic recovery in order to foment revolution.  It’s a maniacal plan, but it tells you a good deal about the motives of the two groups.  The Occupiers want to use the economy for political purposes, and they wish to make it worse rather than better.  Meanwhile, the Tea Party, largely a conservative-minded, guided by a generally pro-capitalist philosophy, is trying to help the economy recover.

One of these groups is concerned with the economic hardships the American people are enduring under Obama, while the other intends to make things worse in order to inflame the situation and further empower Obama.  If it wasn’t clear to you before, it certainly should be after this debacle.  According to the cynical politics of Washington DC, the Tea Party should be trying to make the economy worse in order to hurt Obama at the polls next year,  but that’s not what drives the Tea Party.  Instead, they are sincere Americans who want to create a rising tide that will lift all boats.  The Tea Party is not a destructive organization, but is instead made up of Americans who believe in creating wealth because they understand that to create jobs, you must create wealth, and you must aggregate capital.  The Tea Party wants the country to rise, and to do that, people must engage in commerce.  The group Liberate Philadelphia/Liberate America put out a statement on their BUYcott. From their statement:

“At a time when our economy is most fragile and ratings agencies are talking about another downgrade of the U.S. credit rating, it’s completely irresponsible for Occupy Wall Street to attempt to bring the U.S. economy to a halt on the busiest shopping day of the year,” says Liberate organizer, John Sullivan, spokesman for the Cherry Hill Area Tea Party.

Meanwhile, the Occupiers now intend to punish the economy.  They are focusing on Malls and also on Corporations, claiming to make a distinction between small businesses and publicly traded firms, but the problem with this argument is two-fold:  First, many of the shops and stores in any mall are small businesses. Second, corporations provide jobs to millions of Americans.  What sort of lame-brain pretends otherwise?  Black Friday often causes those retailers to spend more money on employees, hiring seasonal workers, and paying additional overtime to current employees, almost all of which is converted into spending in the economy.  Particularly at this time of year, anything that boosts employment and wages in the private sector can only be considered a positive thing, unless you’re a ne’er-do-well Occu-Pest or leftist, and these anti-capitalists (despite their disingenuous claims to the contrary) are intentionally setting out to wreck the biggest shopping day of the year.

There’s no doubt that we have a serious problem in the economy, and on Wall Street, but most of that problem originates from Government’s tinkering in the free market, and from grotesque cronyism.  If the Occupiers want to make a real difference, they’d Boycott Obama.  They’d help the Tea Party Occupy the White House.  Unfortunately, they’re not that kind of movement, and their intentions are clearly anti-free market, anti-capitalist, and anti-liberty.  I agree with the Tea Party organizers who wish to have a BUYcott tomorrow:  Let us elevate ourselves without the government.  If the government and their shills in the media intend to flat-line this economy, and they’ve cooked up the Occu-pests to help, I say we oppose them.   I’m not ordinarily the sort to go Black Friday shopping, but tomorrow I will, because I believe in the free market, and I’m going to damned-well engage in it irrespective of, and in spite of the Occupiers, Obama, and all their miserable cronies.

Occupy Wall Street Versus Tea Party: Are They Similar?

Saturday, November 19th, 2011

Can You Tell The Difference?

The left wing media is doing its level best to portray the Occupy Wall Street movement as being the younger version of the Tea Party.  Their assertion rests on the notion that the OWS folk are “really all about the same things.”  This is a lie.  The two groups have nothing in common; not in tactics, conduct, mindset or intentions.  The truth is revealed by the fact that the Democrat Party couldn’t wait to denounce the Tea Party, but they can’t wait to embrace the Occupiers.  Had even a handful of Tea Party folks behaved in a manner akin to what we’ve seen from the Occupiers, the media would have spent even more time defaming them.  Remember the lies: “The Tea Party is a bunch of angry, old white people motivated by racism who hate the government.”   These had been the basic talking points in media.  Oddly, there is no media caricature of the Occupiers, although one has developed among Americans without media assistance: “Occupy Wall Street is a bunch of anti-capitalist ne’er-do-wells, revolutionaries, and they are dominated by antisemitic and leftist thugs.”  The American people see the difference even if the media deny it.

The Tea Party arose out of a frustration with runaway government spending under the one-party domination of the Democrats, who in 2009 found themselves in control of all branches of government.  The Tea Party consists of people from all walks of life who are indeed a bit more mature on average than the Occupiers.  It shows in their conduct as well as in their stated goals.  Their intention has been to elect people who will respect the constitution and its limitations on government.  Their rallies have been entirely peaceful, and police have never had to arrest them.  They filed for and received permits, they observed local ordinances, and they otherwise conducted themselves in a manner aimed at avoiding becoming an inconvenience to the communities in which they were protesting.  When their events completed, they picked up the grounds, and they left every venue cleaner than they found it.  Their organizers generally had made accommodations for sanitary purposes available, and there was no trail of filth left in their wake.  When their protests and rallies were concluded, they went peacefully back to their lives as Americans.  While many of them have serious disagreements with the cronyism in Washington DC that spreads its tentacles into the private sector, they nevertheless believe in the American Republic as established, and the great boon to humanity that is capitalism.  They have been self-funded, self-organized, and self-directed.  Let’s be clear:  The Tea Party is a real political organization, if a bit diffuse, but nevertheless aimed at actual political change, and they’ve had some substantial success.

Contrast this with the Occupiers who are younger on average, have no electoral goals to speak of, and instead seem to be vague in their ideas about what it is they are after.  There is a mix of ideologies present, but the main body is decidedly leftist, and decidedly anti-capitalist.  The only part of the constitution they seem to value is the First Amendment’s protections of free speech and peaceful assembly, while they test the legal limits of those rights at every turn.  They seem not to have noticed that somebody is funding their activities, and that those food deliveries are coming from somewhere.  They seem not to realize that they’re being directed and organized by people who aren’t present, and never will be.  In their encampments, there have been rapes, beatings, stabbings, shootings, widespread drug use, every possible form of public lewdness, and a general disrespect for law, private property, and the communities in which they have taken up their occupations.

Their ideology is so vague on its surface that all you can discern is that they’re unhappy about something, and it seems to arise from a sort of general hatred of big businesses, banks, and their executives, but they can’t tell you anything about which they’re upset in concrete terms.  Instead, they whine about millionaires and billionaires while some people of that precise description send them lunch.   They don’t have a goal, but their leadership is going to give them one:  Anarchy and revolution.  The Occupy Wall Street movement has been nothing but a sham and a front for anti-American, anti-Capitalist, anti-freedom Marxists, and these poor dolts, most of them educated since the fall of the Soviet Union, don’t have any clue what that really means.  If they have any interest in elections, they haven’t indicated it.  I have seen no talk of electing “Occupiers to Congress.”  They’re not capable of that.

The glib leftists in the media now tell us: “Well, both groups are anti-establishment.”  Really?  Which establishment?  The Tea Party is against the political establishment in Washington DC, the unofficial institution that has corrupted the US Constitution.  They’re against a DC establishment that spends their money like water.  They’re against the Republican establishment, that too often dominates that party with its interests.  The Occupiers oppose a different establishment:  The establishments of private property as expressed in corporations, profits, earnings, and business.  In short, the establishment that the Occupiers oppose is the establishment created by the US Constitution.  Neither can they redistribute wealth nearly so well as they would like, nor can they steal by law so easily as long as the establishment of the civil society and the rule of law remain in place.  The establishment their leadership hopes to undo is the that bulwark of law that our founders erected.  The establishment the Tea Party opposes is the corruption of government and capitalism intended to destroy the Constitution.

Following the aims of the Occupiers would lead us to overthrow the US Constitution.  Following the goals of the Tea Party would permit us to uphold and defend it and even to restore it.  This is no small distinction, and it’s key to the left’s endless propaganda in favor of the Occupiers:  They want an end to this country as you have known it, and they are working diligently to bring it about.  The Occupiers have almost nothing in common with the Tea Party except in the most superficial sense:  They’re both protest movements, and they both oppose some establishment, but the character of their protests and the nature of the establishments against which they rally are very nearly perfectly and diametrically opposed.  They couldn’t be more different.  After spending the last three years hammering the Tea Party, you might now ask why the media is trying to link the Occupiers to them.  The answer is simple: They’ve done their polling research and found that the American people have more positive regard for the Tea Party, but have very rapidly realized the Occupy Wall Street movement is nonsense.  They’re also trying to create a false equivalence for another purpose:  To make the two interchangeable in the minds of Americans.  Thankfully, the vast bulk of the American people are not that stupid, and that notion simply will not sell.  The American people have seen the difference.  It’s too late to pretend otherwise.

The Culture of Surrender

Sunday, November 13th, 2011

Are We Tom Paine's "Summer Soldiers?"

One of the more disheartening things I encounter on a day-to-day basis is the increasing number of Americans who have simply given up.  They view the political divide in this country as insurmountable, and they see themselves as fighting their way to an inevitable defeat.  Demographers might support their conclusion too, as in so many ways, the culture that had built America is slowly being stolen from us.  Illegal immigration and the welfare state are two particular aspects of statist America that seem to guarantee that there will be no reversal within our lifetimes, if ever.  One entire party, and the elite minority of the other are apparently committed to reducing the United States to just one more failed historical civilization.  Some of them, particularly the left, wants the  country to fall, as we have known it, and the elites in the GOP seem quite satisfied to let it happen, merely slowing the collapse to prevent a revolutionary uprising.  Many ordinary Americans have simply quit on America, and they’ve gone off in search of whatever temporary relief they can find from the mounting failures that now characterize our culture.  The simple truth is this:  We are slowly submitting to a culture of surrender.

“I can’t do anything about it, anyway,” is the common refrain.  “Why pay attention to politics? They’re all crooks, and none of them care for the interests of the people…”   This sentiment is now so widely held that it spreads as a contagion, not merely among ordinary citizens, but also among those who have extraordinary talents for leading.  With the Thanksgiving, Hanukkah, Christmas, and the New Year approaching, many seek refuge in the momentary pleasures of these traditions, and the family-centered comfort they offer.  It’s not an ordinary year, and none should let their attention on our nation’s condition be diminished.  This isn’t 1995, or 1983, but as I’ve explained before, it’s 1859.  We linger on the brink of a civil war that will cast this nation into chaos for generations, and few seem willing to notice.  It’s not that the evidence is unclear, and it’s not that people don’t know it, but that they have made the conscious decision to ignore it.

“Maybe it will go away,” or maybe “it will work itself out,” are common too. “It’s too big and too complex,” is among my favorites, precisely because it is the size and complexity of the machine that leverage in favor of reform.  In our point-and-click, plug-and-play world, many have lost the patience and self-discipline to see things through.  It isn’t easy maintaining one’s focus against the tide of media outlets, and popular culture, all of which offer that siren’s song of avoidance.  It’s a real problem we conservatives face, because too often, we see the most stunning developments in our political world, and look around us to realize that only a relative handful have noticed. Dis-spirited and demoralized, it’s little wonder the American people look for distractions, but the sad truth is that we permit it.

People fall prey to this constantly, good and decent people who share our conservative values, but they’re mostly detached from the world of politics.  They’re very much engrossed in their day-to-day lives, and with the current prevailing economic conditions, they’re struggling to make ends meet, raise their kids, and keep a roof over their heads.  I was down at the local gun store the other day, buying some shells, and got into a little talk with the owner and two others who were just talking over issues.  One complained: “This darn school district is raising taxes again.”  The others grumbled in agreement.  “Why don’t we just elect somebody else,” I offered.  One nodded agreement, but another said something much more telling: “What’s the use?  They get into office, and ten minutes later, they all think they’re King George III… No sir, it will collapse eventually.”

I’m guilty of this thinking from time to time myself, if guilt there is, but to tell you the truth, I don’t think we can just wait it out.  The way things are going, if this all collapses, it’s likely to come down on our heads.  I’m not finished yet, and I know many who aren’t, so while it’s frustrating and maddening, we really must become more involved.  In the end, we really may have no recourse, but I think that so long as we do, we must fight for our values, and that we must continue to spread the word on the events of the day.  Like so many of you, I don’t miss the opportunity to speak out very often, but the problem is that much of our intended audience has tuned out.  It’s as though the nation is waiting for that collapse, but seldom do nations simply fall.  Corruption in governments goes on with or without the consent of the governed, and whether or not people are willing to notice.  They continue to gather more power, more authority, and more control until there is nothing but government.  Our founders warned us against failing in vigilance, because they knew all too well the predatory reflexes of those who would rule over us.

Statists come in various forms, and on the basis of varying excuses, but they all share the same underlying belief:  It is theirs to rule, and yours to serve the interests of the state, which always really means them.  They claim the interests of the public are met by fulfillment of the interests of the state.  This is the reason they can take multi-million dollar vacations, with you picking up the tab.  The interests of the public are served, they say, because in carting Michelle Obama all over the globe with her platoon of friends, the interests of the US are advanced in the name of its prestige, and as a matter of good will.  I think I’ll try that on my boss next time I want a pay raise:  “Boss, it’s in the interests of this organization to pay me better so that I will be a happier and thus more effective ambassador for the organization.”  My bet is that if he didn’t fire me on the spot, he’d probably call paramedics, certain that I had flipped my lid.

This is the problem with our government, and it’s not going to vanish by pretending it away.  No growing tyranny ever does, because in truth, the kinds of people who seek to rule are also the sort of people who are always looking for “one more postponement,” as Ayn Rand once noted.  Isn’t it true?  Look at the budget, the debt ceiling, and the intransigence of both parties in tackling this issue.  Their answer is to create a super-committee, that will effectively do nothing of consequence except perhaps to increase the misery of every working American.  look at the impending meltdown of Europe.  It’s born of the same thing: Juggle things as long as possible, and once it collapses, blame somebody else for the problem.  In this context, it’s easy to understand why the American people are demoralized.

Consider the case of the Tea Party:  Here had been a real grass-roots movement, but from the outset, they were treated as pariahs, their motives were impugned, they were falsely and repeatedly called racists and terrorists, but with millions having attended various Tea Party events, none of the were arrested, there were no acts of violence(except against them,) and they left every venue cleaner than they had found it.  They observed local ordinances, filed for and received permits, and observed the rule of law they said they cherished.

Contrast this with the bizarre and chaotic spectacle of the Occupy protests.  The media actually sympathized with them, and even that was not enough to conceal the illegal behavior, the unbelievable messes they’ve made, and the crime that has accompanied virtually every one of their major assemblies.  Combine this with violence, the expressions of antisemitism, and all of the focused hate they have spewed for two solid months, and what you realize is that the American people ought to be a bit dis-spirited.  They have watched the mobs of ne’er-do-wells make a mockery of the notion of peaceful, law-abiding protests, and yet they have only lately begun to garner some negative attention in the mainstream media.

This has been done with precisely this end in mind:  Tell the Tea Party “you’re irrelevant,” and with any luck, the Tea Party will believe it.  I’m here to tell you that there’s no reason to surrender, and that we cannot yield only because the media tells us to do so.  We cannot avert our eyes from the crimes being committed openly by this government, or the criminal intent of those running it.  We cannot pretend that these things are not happening, nor should we seek a momentary escape from this battle.  It’s our battle precisely because it is our country.  It’s our fight because we know what is being lost.  It’s our engagement because we know the virtues this nation must practice to prosper and thrive, because after all, by and large, we exercise them in our own lives.

Clear the cobwebs.  The season of family and friendship is upon us, and we mustn’t neglect the opportunity that offers.  On average, you will see more of friends and family, and more of your congregations than you see throughout the rest of the year.  You’ll share their company.  Share what you’re feeling.  Share what you’ve seen.  Tell them that for the next 12 months, it’s okay to focus on damned little else, because that is what you’re going to do, in the name of your country, and all that you love.  No retreat.  No stalemate.  No surrender.

“These are the times that try mens souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.”  Thomas Paine – The Crisis No. I

Fighting Among Themselves: Squatters Occupying Wall Street

Friday, October 28th, 2011

Squatting On Wall Street

It seems that at least some of those who are Squatters Occupying Wall Street(That’s SOWS) are intent upon provoking fights, and utilizing violence.  As USAToday is now reporting, there are elements within the greater body of protesters in Zuccotti Park who have made some parts of the park so dangerous that some among their own number won’t venture there.  That’s a stunning development, and it may indicate that either the protest is breaking down and losing momentum, or that there are now more dangerous elements operating with the specific intention of causing violence, or exploiting the environment for criminal activities.  Earlier today, FDNY removed generators and lantern fuel, along with other items that might pose a public hazard.  It may be that the cold air is magnifying the poor conditions, and contributing to the divisions among the sub-groups.  There are certainly those with a vested interest in creating the outbreak of violence, and they have every intention of provoking it.

In related news, Glenn Beck has made an episode of his GBTV available for free on his website, exposing the truth about the squatters On Wall Street.  You might want to check it out, as it runs two hours in its full length.  The Arizone Counter-Terrorism Information Center has posted a bulletin because they discovered posters at Occupy Phoenix telling protesters to kill anybody who violates their rights, and it’s titled: “When should you shoot a cop?”  This makes it clear that these people are not all peace-loving protesters as they have claimed and advertised.  Instead, as I suggested earlier, there is an element trying to agitate and provoke violent confrontations between protesters and police. As The Blaze has discovered, the author seems to be a leftist named Larken Rose.  He’s another agitator intent on creating violence as the pretense for greater mob actions.

At the same time, other signs of division among the squatters of Occupy Boston are showing, as they have removed two members of the finance committee for improper expenditures of an undisclosed nature.  Sadly, the case of injured former Marine Scott Olsen, injured during a skirmish with police in Oakland earlier this week, is now being used as a tool to try to engage other Marines to the Occupy cause.  Posters claiming to be Marines are reacting badly, but I wonder how genuine their outrage would be if they realized the true nature of the man whose cause they are championing.

This is turning into a three-ring circus, with clearly divided segments of the Occupy crowd seeking distinct ends.  There are the hard-core leftists who are organizing the movement, funded by Soros and his various henchmen and sub-groups; there are the mass of useful idiot leftists who are the borderline anarchists spoiling for a fight; there are the other Americans of a more libertarian sort who have permitted themselves to be pulled in on the side of the worst elements.  One might feel some sympathy for the last group, but the truth is that we must realize that this is the goal of the organizers, and it is this group who will bear the brunt of the worst violence that will erupt.  The military is being actively infiltrated by gang elements, but now also by leftists.  The idea is simple: If they can capture control of the military, they have their army for violence against the civilian population, including civil authorities like the police.

Lastly, it’s fitting that I’ve decided to label these protesters as SOWS, because  the behavior they’ve been engaging in at Occupy Madison certainly is that of pigs.  Apparently, they’ve at least temporarily been denied an extension due to public masturbation.  Yes, that’s right: Public masturbation. Hotel guests from across the street complained of this behavior in full view of the public. We knew these people were uncivilized, but this is pathetic.  Nobody will be permitted to complain if the SOWS are hereafter called “jag-offs.”

Ladies and gentlemen, we should acknowledge that these people are doing things the Tea Party never did, and that they have seditious goals and objectives that most Americans cannot and should not endorse.  In short, they represent a fringe element intent on overthrowing our Constitution.  These SOWS must be opposed, and their benefactors and leaders must be exposed.