 |
|
|
|
|
11-Feb -
Professional fundraising |
|
|
To win against the incumbents we despise, candidates who haven't run for office before need to urgently learn how to do effective fundraising and run successful primary and general election campaigns. The time to do fundraising for victory is now - not in October.
If you know of professionals with strong credentials from fundraising work on successful Republican campaigns in the past, please share that information so that I can share it with others.
Bruce Donnelly admin@surgeusa.org www.SurgeUSA.org
This was one of the topics we discussed at the National Tea Party Convention in Nashville, where I introduced Joe Walsh to attendees. Joe just won the Feb 2 primary for the Illinois 8th District in a six-way race as the first successful "Tea Party" candidate in the 2010 primaries.
He will be running against incumbent Melissa Bean, who represents Pelosi's agenda to us rather than representing us in Congress. The last time that she faced a strong challenge, the DNC spent $1.2 million attacking her opponent in the final weeks to keep the seat, and drew in money from outside the district and state to help her. We need to be ready.
If you're looking for a good conservative to support, www.WalshforCongress.com
Several other conservatives won their contested primaries here (10th, 11th, and 14th). There were also some disappointments. We need to get better organized and more unified for victory in November - but we're working on it.
Happy birthday, Sarah Palin! Great speech in Nashville.
|
|
|
|
|
29-Dec-09 -
Illinois primary - Feb 2 - Victory starts here |
|
|
The Tea Party movement must pivot quickly in 2010.
In 2009, we needed to attract attention to what was being done to us.
In 2010, we have our chance to put a stop to it. We must work our precincts to turn out the vote for better candidates, and to ensure the defeat in November of the liberal incumbents who have perpetrated so many legislative atrocities in 2009.
If we don't do the hard work at the primary stage to find better candidates in every state and support their victory, voters will be left with a "Hobson's choice" in November in many places, rather than candidates who they can enthusiastically support.
This is not the job of your local Republican precinct committeemen. It is your job. If you want to take your country back, don't trust the same people who have given you lousy candidates for so many election cycles. Get out there and get involved.
You may be lucky and live in a precinct where the local Republican organization is effective and worth actively supporting. If so, great. Help them to improve. If not, don't let their weaknesses be your excuse for failure or cynicism about the results in 2010. Get out there and see to it that better candidates win the primary and the election, even if your local Republican organization is completely useless, lazy, or even corrupt.
Work directly with candidates as volunteers, and organize through Tea Party or 9/12 groups to ensure that more voters know the candidates, and what differentiates them. Don't let the news media and polls drive their perceptions of candidates. Organize local events such as independent town hall forums or debates which expose the candidates directly to voters.
Vet them yourself. Ask tough questions. Get them off script, and take the measure of their character. Do you trust this candidate, or is the candidate just trying to echo back whatever seems likely to please at the time? Are there solid convictions tied to fundamental American principles and values, or is this just another person seeking a career in Washington or your state capitol by saying whatever will help to attract votes?
If you don't have a Tea Party yet in your town, organize one - not to hold protest rallies as in 2009, but to work towards victory as volunteers in 2010 campaigns. If you get together with your friends, you will probably dwarf the local Republican Party organization in both reach and energy.
Become the network of volunteers and donors who will swing the elections to better candidates, regardless of what the party leaders are doing or saying. This is not about what "leaders" in Washington think. You are "We the People". You are the ones in charge here - at the local level. Get organized. Turn out the vote for better candidates in every primary, state by state, between now and November. That will already send a powerful message - Illinois in February, Texas in March, Indiana, Ohio, etc. in May. Show that you are already organized and ready to take your country back in November. The primary is a chance to test your capabilities, and then improve your impact in the months that follow, so that the election victory in November is assured long in advance.
Make all of 2010 a nightmare for the incumbents who have mocked and scorned the people of this country who had the audacity to stand up and question their mandates. Make it clear that you are already organized and ready to defeat them in November. Prove it in one primary after another. Don't vent your anger in street protests. Get even by electing better candidates in more House and Senate races across this country than the political "experts" ever thought possible. Dump them all like tea in the harbor. |
|
|
|
|
01-Nov-09 -
Republican Renaissance Project |
|
|
Perhaps, now that he has reversed his NY 23rd endorsement after Dede Scozzafava withdrew and showed her true colors by supporting the Democrat rather than Doug Hoffman, Newt would like to show his support for a similar challenge facing voters in Illinois.
http://www.championnews.net/gop/
The Illinois Republican Party leadership keeps pushing specious liberal candidates at voters, too. Repeated election defeats in what used to be Republican districts seems to have no impact on the logic of the leaders. The focus is on who has the power deals and money in place, rather than who actually shares basic Republican principles and values.
This would be a good next target for the Tea Party movement. |
|
|
|
|
25-Oct-09 -
Organize donors for voter accountability |
|
|
Organize local groups of independent donors who want to promote greater political accountability to voters.
Keep control of the money in the hands of those individuals, but network such groups to coordinate action in strategic situations.
Think of it as political shock and awe to shatter the illusion of party leaders and elected officials being able to ignore voters with impunity between elections.
http://www.surgeusa.org/actions/money.htm
Action plan suggestions at
http://www.surgeusa.org/actions/donors.htm
For example, consider the NY 23rd race.
Instead of backing the controversial Republican nominee, such a network could help a conservative such as Doug Hoffman to win.
The time to get the money of principled independent donors organized for a greater impact on the 2010 races is now. Then, stay organized and keep saving up for 2012. |
|
|
|
|
04-Sep-09 -
Get Schooled by Obama |
|
|
The White House is still trying to spin their way out of the controversy created by having him try to do a direct broadcast into every classroom in America on September 8.
Look at the original lesson plan proposal from the Department of Education to see the intent behind this.
http://www.surgeusa.org/actions/sept8.htm
Note the "Get Schooled: You Have The Right" program being launched on TV that evening, which has been in the works for months. Coincidence? I think not.
This speech sets a horrible precedent. The fact that Reagan and Bush Sr. made videos with encouraging messages available to any schools which wanted to use them to reinforce their own messages to kids is completely different than an uninvited attempt at direct reach into every classroom in America
It is also soon after the stimulus program was used to dole out tons of money to schools. Would that give administrators pause about rejecting such a request from Arne Duncan?
No TV or radio network could give Obama such unchallenged reach into every household in America with kids. School is a trusting environment where impressionable kids may readily perceive him as a father figure. Note the related ad campaign that he has been doing at fatherhood.gov
Regardless of any good intentions, this is an abuse of power and a bad precedent.
Incidentally, as the White House tries to spin their way out of this now, consider this. One of three people featured in the "Get Schooled" TV program next Tuesday as a role model for kids is a speechwriter for Obama.
Subtle example of how you can grow up to help the president push his agenda, too. Go back and study the original lesson plans in the context of some of the radical advisors around Obama, including some who clearly see "transforming education" as a way to push their agenda to future generations of Americans and influence parents politically.
Obama will probably deliver an apparently harmless speech on Tuesday now that he is facing strong criticism, although many schools will not show it now, but this was still an abuse of the power of the White House. This was unpredented. It should stay that way. |
|
|
|
|
08-Aug-09 -
Homecoming Welcome for Congress |
|
|
This fall, whenever your members of Congress return home and make a scheduled public appearance, be there to welcome them. Whether it is a "town hall" event or something more exclusive, such as a fundraiser or a meeting with a special interest group, show up.
Don't just write to them or call their offices (but do so). Their staff will just tabulate the mail or call flow, and give perfunctory responses. You need to get in their face personally.
Tell them what you think of their performance, including timely issues such as health care or cap and trade.
If you approve, thank them respectfully, and actively support their re-election.
If not, don't mince words. Express your concerns. Challenge them to defend their actions.
Ask if they share the DNC's and Obama's view that any opponents are just an unruly and misinformed mob of gullible sore-losers who are responsible for all the problems in this country, or are just being manipulated by others. Should we keep quiet while a radical new social agenda is rammed quickly through Congress without serious debate?
Ask if they support the intimidation of their constituents, or ignoring their questions and concerns.
Ask whether they believe that they are in Washington to represent their political party, or their constituents. Were they elected to use their own judgment to represent all of their own constituents on critical issues, or to simply follow their party leadership like drones?
Tell them that you will work hard in 2010 to ensure that they don't return to Washington again. If they would prefer a quieter reception at home, make it happen for them in 2010.
Invest in their early retirement. Find better candidates now, and actively support them.
That money will be better spent than than higher federal spending and taxes for decades.
Don't keep these clunkers. Invest in a new Congress now. Money talks. Speak up.
They will only change their behavior if they fear the loss of their power and careers.
This fall is the turning point. Give them a chance to listen directly to you. Listen to them. Then decide whether this is somebody who you can support, or must actively oppose.
|
|
|
|
|
16-Jul-09 -
What if Republicans win in 2010? Veto. |
|
|
Suppose that Republicans miraculously get their act together and, with the advantage of disastrous Obama policies and a terrible economy next year, manage to reverse Democratic control of the House and maybe even eliminate the filibuster-proof Senate.
What then?
Even if they win enough votes in the House and the Senate to actually pass legislation, and try to reverse whatever damage they can, Obama will still be in a position to veto it. That sets up a chaotic power struggle scenario, somewhat like California.
It will be almost impossible to get enough votes to override a veto, even if there is a Republican landslide in 2010. Obama will be able to stall until 2012 and blame the Republicans. Republicans may not have the votes to reverse his policies until at least 2012 - by which time much of the damage will be done and very hard to reverse.
The point is that it isn't enough for Republicans to passively wait now for Obama's policies to fail, and then hope to pick up some votes from frustrated voters.
To reverse the damage, they need to achieve such a stunning victory in 2010 that they can actually get some Democrats ("Blue Dog" or not) to cross over and override vetoes, or else persuade Obama to not use his veto authority. So far, there's no evidence that the Republicans are even getting their act together for 2010.
If Republicans win in 2010, Obama seems more likely to defend his agenda through vetoes or any other means at his disposal (activist pressure groups) rather than seek "bi-partisan" common ground in the hope of re-election in 2012 (like Bill Clinton). He and the DNC will go on the attack from 2010 to 2012 if they lose control. A defeat won't suddenly convince him to abandon his agenda. He'll remain determined to defend his legacy, rather than admit failure. He'll blame Republicans for trying to make his programs fail.
For anybody who is hoping that the economic catastrophe which Obama is inflicting on us all will end in 2010 if the Republicans win, think again.
If we don't manage to stop this legislative nightmare now by organized public pressure, despite the lack of votes in Congress, then we're screwed until well after 2012.
Even Reagan couldn't fix Carter's mess quickly, and Obama is worse than Carter. We're facing a real disaster - and Obama can sustain it with his veto authority. Simply winning a few more Republican seats in Congress in 2010 won't be enough to avert this disaster.
|
|
|
|
|
13-Jul-09 -
Congress: A threat to human intelligence |
|
|
The Democrats in Congress are still trying to distract attention from their latest legislative atrocities by attacking the CIA through vague and unsubstantiated allegations of Bush-era misconduct.
While they ram through their agenda, they're looking to distract Americans and Republicans in Congress by going on a witch-hunt comparable to how third world tyrants use their power to attack any potential rivals.
This got out of hand when Nancy Pelosi alleged that the CIA had lied to members of Congress in briefings about prisoner interrogation. Whether the CIA lied or not, her decision to take this matter up with the news media in a press conference rather than privately with the President and his national security team, including Leon Panetta, was despicable partisan political grandstanding. Regardless of what the CIA may or may not have done in the past, her actions directly harmed our intelligence capabilities.
More on this as reported previously (at the time of Pelosi's allegations) at
http://www.surgeusa.org/global/humint.htm
The gist is that those people who live under tyranny or have potentially useful contacts with our enemies will have less reason to trust the CIA because of fear that any member of Congress who has a political axe to grind may choose to expose their activities.
While that may cause some CIA officials to hunker down in CYA mode to protect their own careers, the more important point is that useful intelligence sources will be afraid to help us. That includes fear of cooperation with the CIA among foreign intelligence services, where their officials and sources will also fear exposure through any CIA connections.
If foreign sources of critical "human intelligence" become afraid to trust the CIA because of the political games which are being played in the Congressional oversight process, then we will be exposing America to the same sort of risks as led to 9/11/01 and prior attacks.
The latest news accounts (linked at the bottom of the above page) are now making new allegations against the CIA and Bush administration as the Democrats try to ram through their health care agenda and other initiatives prior to the August recess. This is just the latest media and political distraction in Washington, but it endangers us all in the future.
Do the Democrats really want to expose the alleged Bush administration efforts to target al-Qaeda leaders soon after 9/11/01? Do they really think that Americans, who already justifiably distrust the Democrats on national security issues, want such a partisan witch-hunt and mud-slinging?
If they actually wanted to solve whatever problems they may perceive, then they would do it quietly behind the scenes. After all, they are in charge now, so they have the power and responsibility to act differently if they believe that the Bush administration made mistakes. The public attacks on past Bush decisions serve no purpose other than partisan politics.
Let the historians argue over the merits of Bush decisions in 30 or more years from now. If they want to do something different now, then do it, and take full responsibility for it.
These attacks on the CIA by Democrats in Congress will just help to ensure their defeat in 2010, but the more important issue is the lasting damage which they will do in the process to the CIA and our other intelligence capabilities and national security - just as the Church Committee did in the Carter era. That's how Congress set the stage for 9/11/01. |
|
|
|
|
13-Jul-09 -
The irony of Obama's Ghana speech |
|
|
Full text of the Ghana speech with editorial comments at
http://www.surgeusa.org/global/ghana.htm
The AP predictably missed the irony of Obama's speech in Ghana, as did other media outlets which praised it as some sort of bold initiative to speak truth to power in Africa.
"Obama declares to Africa: End tyranny, corruption"
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D99CC0T00&show_article=1
The irony is that Obama is the closest America has come to a charismatic, populist "big man" tyrant such as the ones who have helped to destroy Africa.
He talks as though he thinks Africa needs more community organizers teaching people how to feed at the government trough of larger and more "just" or "fair" social programs in order to succeed.
He wants to shift foreign aid away from corrupt central governments to corrupt local organizations. This is progress? Where has foreign aid successfully brought a previously less "developed" country out of poverty in the last 50 years? Government programs generally don't spread prosperity. They grow beyond their real economic value to perpetuate and expand misery despite good intentions.
At best, they can focus the resources necessary to address a temporary problem. Beyond that, like the UN, they focus on perpetuating the bureaucracy involved, That means not solving the problem, but rather accepting that it will take more time and resources to solve, or is more complex than they foresaw, while allowing the scope of their mission to creep beyond the original mandate. This rationalizes failure by constantly finding new excuses for it.
Note that his remarks focused on encouraging young Africans to get more involved in government and "civil society" - not capitalism.
It is individual responsibility and commitment to achieve personal, family, business and community progress which creates a stronger "civil society", including the resources to support voluntary social services to help care for those less fortunate or less able to help themselves. That is very different than creating a culture of government dependency, which feeds tyranny and corruption.
Even the references to the importance of trade made it sound as though the main obstacle was that we need to open our markets to them. The implicit message was that they have all been victims, but can get organized to overcome that - through government programs.
There was almost no reference to the importance of creating a social environment which welcomes and supports competitive businesses, rather than reliance on government favors.
There was just a brief reference to "capacity building" - a popular euphemism for the UN and World Bank initiatives of recent years to drive change through government programs.
Good governance is certainly important, but successful countries are not created by government bureaucrats or politicians with big new ideas for spending other people's money.
Businesses drive progress - not "big men" in government. Businesses are profitable by successfully organizing people to work together effectively and efficiently to meet real market demands. Unfortunately, some businesses grow by feeding very successfully at the government trough, whether through open competition or corruption.
Our success was driven by leaders with the vision to impose tight limits on the role of government - not unchecked power for themselves and their supporters. That seems to have been forgotten recently in Congress and the White House. |
|
|
|
|
04-Jul-09 -
Happy July 4 from Sarah Palin |
|
|
Great news out of Wasilla yesterday!
Now Sarah Palin should be free to support other governor races in 2009 (Virginia and New Jersey) and 2010 (many important elections) instead of just concentrating on a campaign in Alaska.
It also leaves her free to selectively support Congressional races anywhere. That could make a huge difference for Republican candidates - including state primaries and fundraising.
While everyone in the media is focusing on whether this helps or hurts her chances to run for President in 2012 or the future, she may well be focusing on the challenge of winning back a strong Republican position in the House and Senate in 2010 as well as key governor races, rather than just running for herself.
Dare I say it? That sounds like a Newt Gingrich move. Stand up for what is perceived to be the right thing to do for the country at this time. Go on the offensive. Get out there and stand up for what you believe so that there is a real debate, rather than tyranny. Don't let the Democrats define you. Show them what you can do.
Does anybody else remember what Reagan did from 1964 to 1980? He tirelessly worked at building up the party so that, when he ran in 1980, he had a huge base of support. It wasn't just about him as a charismatic figure. People got to know that he actually stood for something far greater than personal aspirations for political power. When he finally got to Washington, he also had built up a very capable and trusted / trustworthy team around him, plus the friendships in Congress and around the states to be an effective leader.
This is like watching Michael Jordan as he went for the basket, slipping effortlessly around defenders and leaving them all gaping as he made it look so easy. That included knowing when to make the dazzling pass instead to the open player on his team to secure victory.
Great opening shot, Sarah! Brilliant move. They never saw it coming.
More ... and links for Palin supporters, at
http://www.surgeusa.org/party/palin.htm
|
|
|
|
|
30-Jun-09 -
The Obama Doctrine in Honduras and Iran |
|
|
The White House and friends in the media are trying to spin the Obama response to the coup in Honduras as a bold new approach to Latin America.
They aren't even asking the question of whether active support for Zelaya's return now is in our national interests, even if we don't like the general idea of military coups and didn't encourage or support this one.
Why was Obama silent for so long about the repression in Iran, but swift to denounce the coup in Honduras? Aren't we meddling in the internal affairs of Honduras by insisting that Zelaya be returned to power?
Think about it. If the military in North Korea were to launch a coup to oust Kim, even though we had nothing to do with it, would we insist on the restoration of Kim as the legitimate ruler?
Likewise, suppose that the Revolutionary Guards in Iran switched allegiance from Khamenei to Rafsanjani or maybe even brought back Montazeri by surprise. Would we insist on restoration of Khamenei and Ahmedinejad as the legitimate rulers of Iran, since we have obviously avoided making any official statements to acknowledge the apparent election fraud (now and in the past)?
Zelaya was trying to perpetuate his own power by changing the constitution of Honduras (as his buddy Chavez has done in Venezuela). In this scenario, why wouldn't Obama take a similar line to the one he had for Iran, and say that it's an internal affair in which we have no intention to meddle? Let the Hondurans sort this out.
Why are we meddling on behalf of the restoration of Zelaya? Do we really want to set a clear precedent in Latin America that regime change by military coups (even ones in which we did not encourage such a regime change) will never be accepted as legitimate, even if the new government is more respectful of their own constitution, or more popular than the one removed by the military, and perhaps even more favorable to our interests?
What signal does this send to opponents to tyranny? Their military can never help them?
As shown in many countries, sometimes the repressive power of a government can only be stopped by their military refusing to continue to support it.
Think back to the rigged elections in Zimbabwe as another example. Mugabe's military might be very unlikely to risk giving up their patronage status, but if their role is to crush any opposition rather than to defend the rights of the people of Zimbabwe to free and fair elections, should we really be sending a signal that no coup by domestic leaders (not foreign intervention) will be legitimate, even if it has the effect of quickly restoring a constitutional democratic process by removing a tyrant?
Note that this Honduras coup wasn't designed to put the military in charge forever. On the contrary, it removed a leader who was unwilling to accept his constitutional term limit.
To put this in perspective, suppose that Obama initiated a populist campaign to ignore the amendment which limits him to two terms in office, and used all the power at his disposal to persuade party leaders in Congress to do this. Would this violate his oath of office to defend and uphold our Constitution? Should he have the power to easily change it to his own liking? That may seem absurd to us, but that's because our Constitution is - by design - not easy to change. We still have the power to stop such abuses of power.
Some countries make it far too easy for tyrants to simply change the rules to suit themselves. Should we really be defending all "legal" tyrants?
Why not let the Hondurans sort this one out? Obama chose to not make legitimacy an issue in our relations with Iran after the recent election protests. Instead, Susan Rice asserted that we had larger interests at stake, such as their nuclear program. Why are the rules different in Honduras?
Why are we, and the Europeans and others, meddling in their internal affairs? Is is just because Honduras doesn't pose a direct threat to us? Are we willing to not only do business with strong tyrants, but also to defend the weak ones?
That's a pretty weird new Obama doctrine for American foreign policy. Tyrants of the world, rejoice. You have nothing to fear from this president. He's on your side. |
|
|
|
|
25-Jun-09 -
Green ribbons for Iran this July 4 |
|
|
On July 4 (or starting today), please display green ribbons as a symbolic gesture of support for the Iranians who are struggling for their freedom from decades of tyranny.
Before the latest rigged election in Iran, green was the symbolic color of the Mousavi campaign. After the election, it became the symbol of the protesters - and eventually the symbol of resistance to the barbarous repression by the regime and the Basij militia.
This July 4, as we celebrate our independence and participate in Tea Party protests against what our own government is doing to us, let's remember the Iranian protesters and the 30 years of ruthless tyranny which they are fighting. In addition to the usual red, white, and blue decorations and flags we wave, use green to show solidarity with the people of Iran against the atrocities which are being perpetrated by their government.
We know that, in our 2010 and 2012 elections and by our individual initiatives to get more involved in our political process, we can alter our future political direction without fear. We don't risk being shot for peaceful assembly and exercising our right to express dissenting views. We aren't clubbed into submission, or to death. We aren't attacked with axes and other weapons by our own government, or those zealots who support them, just for the crime of gathering to protest their actions. Even the rare violent protests in this country are not met with such ruthless barbarity as has now become routine in Iran. This is not the first time that such opposition has been mercilessly crushed by the Khamenei regime.
Will these protests bring that regime to an end? Perhaps, but probably not soon enough. Tyrants don't give up their power without a fight. This regime has proven that repeatedly. Those who choose to resist it are making enormous sacrifices. They are literally risking their lives every day, and may face even more reprisals in secret after the public protests are visibly crushed. The prisoners may face worse torture than Americans can imagine.
Obama may feel that his best option is to avoid being perceived as "meddling" in such Iranian affairs, even if he has finally decided to actually criticize the violence. He finally withdrew his invitation for Iranian diplomats to attend July 4 celebrations at US embassies for the first time since the seizure of our US Embassy hostages in Tehran in 1979.
During that crisis, ordinary people in towns across America showed they symbolic support for the "Free the Hostages" effort by putting yellow ribbons on their clothes, cars, trees, telephone poles, street lights, etc. Candlelight prayer vigils were held outside the Iranian Embassy in Washington DC. We were united in determined opposition to such tyranny against our American diplomats, regardless of any perceived Iranian grievances which the zealots involved used to rationalize their actions. Regardless of how poorly Carter handled the situation, ordinary Americans showed their firm solidarity with the hostages.
Today, we can finally turn the page on that legacy. Americans can see that ordinary Iranians have the guts to stand up to such tyranny. We may not agree about how Iran should be governed, or what policies that government should follow, but that is their decision to make, not ours. The point is that the Iranian people deserve our support, even if just through the symbolic gestures of ordinary Americans, for taking the risks necessary to create a better future than the tyranny of the last 30 years in Iran.
We don't support any candidate or faction in Iran. We the people support the aspirations of the Iranian people to determine their own destiny, rather than to be intimidated and abused by the power of their own government.
This July 4, as we celebrate our own legacy of liberty and personal responsibility for the future of our country, our communities, and our families, let's show that we still support the aspirations for liberty in Iran and other countries where tyrants still reign.
Display green ribbons, wear green, and let your local Iranian-Americans know that we care about the people of Iran, regardless of any past differences. Iran has a great legacy as a civilization dating back thousands of years - long before the spread of Islam. This latest tyranny shall pass, regardless of what eventually replaces it. Until it does, let green be the symbol of hope for a better future in Iran, and better relations with Americans again. |
|
|
|
|
28-May-09 -
Beware new taxes - VAT or sales tax |
|
|
A May 27 article in the Washington Post seems to have attracted remarkably little news media or political pundit attention:
"Once Considered Unthinkable, U.S. Sales Tax Gets Fresh Look"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/26/AR2009052602909_pf.html
For more background and views on this topic, see
http://www.surgeusa.org/national/vat.htm
The gist is that Congress is already starting to look for new ways to raise lots of tax revenue without committing political suicide in the process.
A national sales tax or VAT scheme (Value-Added Tax), as in Europe and many other countries, may seem innocent enough at first if they keep the initial rate low or package it with other special tax breaks to favor some of the groups which such taxes would harm.
The obvious point, however, is that it doesn't achieve the basic objective unless it dramatically increases the total federal tax revenues in order to offset the out of control spending and debt, and thereby make it possible to keep spending even more on healthcare, alternative energy subsidies, and every other item on their social agenda.
The cap and trade tax met enough resistance to pare down the initial cost of it somewhat, thus reducing the immediate revenue impact while still establishing this new bureaucratic nightmare. The same approach may now be expected to apply to other ideas for new taxes. They will be wolves disguised as sheep.
Buyer beware! As the Tea Party enthusiasts already figured out, the money has to come from somewhere, and the Democrats can't squeeze enough out of the "rich" alone to pay for all their ambitious plans. California has already shown where this leads. Europe has already shown where VAT regimes lead - to unchecked growth of government spending. That may scare conservatives, but it appeals to liberals who can always rationalize their latest noble plans to spend more of somebody else's money.
This idea needs to be nipped in the bud. It's not a "fair tax" or "flat tax" proposal to reduce or simplify federal taxes and create greater transparency about our total tax burden, but rather a strategy to divide and confuse opposition to new and rising taxes.
|
|
|
|
|
06-May-09 -
From "listening tour" to action |
|
|
Republican leaders have indicated that they want to listen to Americans.
Here's a suggestion to pay attention to what the Tea Party enthusiasts were saying.
http://www.surgeusa.org/actions/limited.htm
In short, it shouldn't take long to get from listening to action.
If if does, that will just reinforce the irrelevance of the Republican Party.
The Tea Parties already showed that Americans are impatient to defend their American Dream against the liberal insurgency which is launching daily assaults on our liberty.
Local volunteers quickly mobilized 600,000 - 800,000 "reluctant activists" in 800+ cities in every state in just 8 weeks.
Meanwhile, the Republican Party "leaders" made some speeches at CPAC and debated how to come back to power someday. Hello? Is anybody really listening?
The "big tent" is America, and the American Dream that is for everybody in this country. The Constitution was intended to protect us against tyranny by our own government, foreign powers, or those among us who might want government to take their side and give them favored treatment over the interests or objections of others.
We're not looking to find which Republican "leaders" to support in 2010 or 2012. We're wondering when Republicans will support "we the people" again so that we can lead the difficult state and local work to take our country back from these liberal insurgents. |
|
|
|
|
28-Apr-09 -
Break out the pitchforks and torches |
|
|
When something really controversial emerges in local politics, such as at a village board meeting or school board, it's not unusual for lots of people to suddenly show up who otherwise would rarely pay any attention to what their elected officials are doing.
Getting in the face of those officials has an impact. It's far more significant than sending a letter or email, or making a phone call. It demonstrates a commitment to stand up and be heard, and to demand that they defend what they are doing. That doesn't mean that the crowd always wins the argument at the end of the day, but it certainly puts the officials on notice that many people may remember and stand up against them again at election time. If they want to continue their political careers, they can hardly treat their constituents with arrogance and scorn in public, regardless of what they may think in private.
We are at such a turning point today in Congress. The Democratic leaders have just decided to ram the Obama budget through this year under rules which are intended to block any Republican filibuster or amendments. This is statist tyranny - disenfranching the millions of Americans who did not give Obama a blank check to do as he and his friends in Congress please, with no effective limits on their power to impose changes on us.
We tried, through the Tea Party movement, to get their attention in a respectful and principled way. Hundreds of thousands of people stood up to express their concerns. They were mocked and ignored. Even if we rally millions of people to this cause, there is no sign that this arrogance will change. Tyrants fear nothing except defeat.
It is time to mobilize locally to defeat them. We need to have protesters in their face every time that they show up in their home districts for a speech or fundraiser. More importantly, we need to find better candidates and start organizing and fundraising to make sure that the incumbents soon recognize that they are on the verge of defeat.
This will not be easy - but there are already hundreds of thousands of volunteers and supporters in hundreds of communities nationwide with the power to make this happen in their own districts. This is no longer about holding big national rallies to get the attention of the donkeys and elephants. We already got their attention, and they declared war on us by pushing ahead with this statist agenda as if we didn't matter. We now need to organize locally to directly oppose and defeat them. |
|
|
|
|
20-Apr-09 -
Next steps for the Tea Party movement |
|
|
It's about "we the people" as responsible individuals. It's not about any one interest group or specific political leaders or parties - for or against. This is about grassroots organization to find the leaders of tomorrow among us for local, state, and federal elected offices and other roles in public service, including voluntary organizations. In short, what sort of country do we want to create - rather than what our political leaders think should be imposed upon us in their infinite wisdom with our money.
We're not trying to spark a revolution. We already had one. It eventually led to a remarkable Constitution and system of limited government power which has served us very well for over two centuries in a very competitive and often hostile world. We need to stand up for America, not apologize to the world for it. It's one of the few refuges in the world from political and bureaucratic tyranny of those in government over individuals and businesses according to whatever the few "leaders" in power at the time want to do.
Stand up proudly with your local veterans this Memorial Day. Wave flags in the parades. Sing the service anthems and other patriotic songs. Make it the biggest turnout which any of them can remember. Make sure that all the children (and parents!) understand that this isn't just a long weekend, nor is it a day for protest. It's a day to celebrate those who have voluntarily stood up for all of us over the centuries, even at great personal sacrifice.
Go to the cemetaries with the veterans for their memorial services. Thank them for their service. Thank and applaud them in the parades - along with the firefighters, police, and others - including the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and other young people who need to see and understand that we are very proud of this country, and our veterans. We don't regard them as potential right-wing extremist threats. We honor them as patriots.
We resolve to advance that great unfinished task before us to ensure that government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish from this earth. That doesn't mean that we want more from our govenment. It means that we will expect more of ourselves, and work together to keep making this country stronger rather than weaker. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bruce Donnelly |
|
|
|
|
Personal |
|
|
| Gender |
|
Male |
| About Me |
|
Management consultant, former US Foreign Service Officer (Department of State) in the Reagan years. Specialist in referrals for local economic development and business location selection for direct investment projects as companies grow in new places. |
| Hobbies |
|
Tea Party movement |
| Personal Interests |
|
empowering conservatives to collaborate and visibly stand up for what they believe, and to defend America against the liberal insurgency |
Contact |
|
|
| Email |
|
admin@surgeusa.org |
| Phone (home) |
|
847-304-4655 |
Address |
|
|
| Country |
|
United States |
| Region |
|
Illinois |
| City |
|
Fox River Grove |
| Street |
|
PO Box 439 |
|
|
|
|
|
Monday, April 20, 2009 |
|
|
http://newt.org/tabid/97/pid/2136/Default.aspx
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|