"Cantor says it would start with jobs, then go on to promising a level playing field for investments.  Aids say it would be more general than the bill-by-bill roster of the Contract (with America), instead focusing on vaguer principles."

Carrie Prejean and Donald Trump came out today and explained, rightfully so, that her stated position on gay marriage mirrors that of Barack Obama and several members of his cabinet.  That's not going to solve Carrie's problems, though.  Why not?

Because those on the Left know Miss California is sincere in her beliefs, while Obama and the others are not.

The media and activists on the Left expect their politicians to have split personalities.  Publicly, it is expected and accepted that they will have a position on moral issues that resonate with people who cling to guns and religion. 

They know it would be impossible to win broad elections without moderating their socalist positions, but understand that once the office is won, "their guy" or gal will toe the unspoken party line and the media will give them a pass.

This doesn't work if you're a Republican.  Not because of the media or the Left won't let us get away with it, although that is a factor. 

It's because Republican voters place value on core principles and beliefs, and when our politicians say they will support one thing or stand against another, we actually expect them to do it.

That's also the reason why we get so upset:  Compromising on core principles is viewed as a betrayal by many in our party, and betrayed voters simply don't vote.

I view the current efforts by Jeb, Mitt, Huck, and Powell in this same vein.  They're saying we should moderate our views to be more compatible with the leftist point of view so we can win elections and then (wink~nod) we'll do things our way.

Sorry, I don't vote for liars.  Is that harsh?  Outside of the beltway, that's what we call them.  In flyover country, saying one thing and doing another is a lie.  Nuanced positions are fake, phony, and we see right through the BS.

Saying or doing "anything" to get elected or re-elected is viewed as a sign of corruption in the Republican party.  If they actually believe their nuance, they're no better than Democrats in our eyes.

I vote for people who "think like me" and vote the way they said they would, or I don't waste my time.  And I get angry.  I'm not alone.

Jeb said we need to stop being nostalgic, and whether his comments were in-context or not, the headline read “No More Reagan” on Drudge.  The mantra from within the bowels of the Republican Party is that we need to let go of our conservative icon and look to the future.  Well, I’d say that we already have let go, and that’s part of the problem.

There is no more Reagan.   There are no more 49 state landslides for Republican nominees.  Tax cuts are now a social tool instead of a national imperative for rebuilding our economy.  The majorities Newt built on the back of Reagan’s conservative philosophy were sacrificed on the altar of compassionate conservatism.  Reagan's once great philosophy has never been destroyed, it was abandoned.  The tattered remnants of our party prove we are going in the wrong direction:

Americans now identify Democrats as the smaller government, lower tax party in surveys because the leadership of our party is incapable of articulating the conservative message.

Who knew letting go of Reaganomics could be so successful for our party?   By all means, let’s continue.  Keep saying we’d spend as much as liberals, just on different things.   Stop opposing big government because, you never know, we might be in control of it someday and we can use it as a tool to convince the New York Times that we really are compassionate.

And that’s the key, isn’t it?  We no longer aspire to lead our nation; we have become a party of approval seekers. We have a group of people who supposedly represent the future of our party pandering to Americans for help in defining our core principles…  That’s not leadership!  That’s the white flag of surrender.

Well, I’m not surrendering.  The battle to make our country work is far from over, and the sooner we return to the principles Reagan so eloquently articulated, the better off we will be.

Just a thought on Arlen Specter leaving the party:

If polling indicated Arlen would have a tough time in the primary against Toomey, and if Senators are supposed to represent constituents, isn’t it logical that Specter should reexamine his own convictions, rather than challenging ours? 

If those voters he represents disapprove of his efforts, shouldn’t he respond to that?

In the Senator’s “farewell to the big tent” statement, he says that the Republican Party “has moved far to the right.”  He couldn’t be more wrong.  Our party has moved left, left, left, far away from the values of Reagan, just as the Democrats have moved left, left, left towards the values of Stalin and Marx. 

Winning re-election is apparently more important to Arlen Specter than standing on principle.  He wants us to go to the middle, when we should be inviting the middle to come to us.

The main flaw with this perspective is that it is not necessary to “reach out to the middle” to win elections, and getting positive press these days is not a sign of success.  People vote for conviction and character.  People vote for those who represent their views on Capitol Hill.  People vote for those who do not betray our trust. 

Arlen Specter betrayed the trust of those he represents when he voted for Porkulus, and he was not willing to pay the price for that vote.  It's not about "what Pennsylvania got" for his vote...  That's the problem with politicians.  They think we can be appeased by giving us our share of the wasted treasure of the United States.

On the contrary, the bounty of our treasure is in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  Conservatives go to see that Americans of all parties have those basic things, and realize all good things come from them alone.

It isn’t rocket science.  The “center” in our country, those blessed folks who aren’t particularly political until the last 20 days before an election live and love, hope and dream as conservatives.  However, they identify with candidates who seem sincere in their beliefs during that precious time, and they’ll vote for any fool who can tell a convincing lie in 30 seconds or less. 

Any candidate that would do anything to win re-election should be suspect.  Changing parties to avoid the wrath of your base is pure cowardice.  Being a Republican means you stand for our founding principles, even when it seems unpopular, and articulating our founding principles is nothing compared to actually voting for them.

You see, compromising on principle isn’t merely unpopular, it’s a betrayal.  There exists a common opposition between right and wrong that cannot be traded away for favor or privilege.  There are some principles that cannot be compromised away for electoral expediency.  Arlen Specter compromised on those issues with predictable frequency and he now reaps what he has sewn.

For example, some conservatives saw Newt sitting on the couch with Nancy Pelosi as a betrayal, but anyone who knows Newt’s core understands he was there to represent an opposing viewpoint, not as an endorsement of human-caused global warming. 

Newt’s stance was unpopular among conservatives, without a doubt, but inserting conservative principles into the global warming debate was, and is, an important thing to do.  Just saying “no” is not enough when the American People perceive a need.  We can and should provide solutions, and Newt’s objective has always been to articulate conservatism whenever a solution is needed.

Compare that to the litany of actual betrayals by the RINO's in our party and the picture becomes clear:  We are better off without them.

Senator Specter leaves behind a legacy of good and bad, and his departure marks a turning point in our nation.  His candidacy as a Democrat is horrible news for the Dems and great news for Republicans.  It means we, as conservatives, are winning the battle at the kitchen table, and people like Specter are seeing the writing on the wall. 

We are about to take back this country in 2010 and we’re going to do it by eliminating the dead wood within our own party.  I say to Specter and to you that 80% agreement is not enough anymore, unless it’s on the right 80%.  The right 80% includes judges, climate change, property rights, earmarks, the war on terror, bailouts, borders, language, culture, and national security.  Withou those things, we cannot enjoy our principle freedoms.

If Senator Specter can’t stand in support of those things; those logical, common sense things that are at the root of our founding principles, we are blessed to have him working for the competition.  From that position, it will be difficult for him to stab us in the back, yet again.

Vote Pat Toomey for Senator in 2010.

I'm writing this response to David Frum's Newsweek cover story titled "Why Rush is Wrong" and, for the record, I hope David Frum fails, too.  Read it here.

Paraphrasing Frum, notice that I did not say: "I hope the RINO's self-serving attempts to appease the Left fails."  Or (better): "I know the RINO's attempts to appease the Leftists in Washington will fail."  Or (best): "I fear the RINO's self-serving attempts to win praise from the mainstream media by bashing a revered figure in our party will lead to the further Balkanization of our base, as the best intentions of RINO's have done for the past 25 years."

David Frum, like other well-meaning people, focus on simple sound bytes while discarding the entire premise and context of an idea because it serves their purposes.  This article gives David exposure he could never hope to get by toeing the company line.

Where David gets it wrong, and where Bush got it wrong for 8 years, is that the Republican Party does not need to "reach across the aisle" to broaden our base, or compromise on principle to get things done, or "modulate" our platform to win elections.  

When we, as a party, live and act as conservatives, people come to us in droves.  That is not even arguable.

"Reagan Democrats" were attracted to Reagan in 1980, producing a 48 state landslide.  They supported us again 1994 because Republicans flew bold colors that attracted people to our message.  We did not reach out to them with freebies and giveaways.

Reagan and Newt told us that returning to our conservative roots would be a hard road to travel but the journey would be worth the pain.  And it was.  When Reagan's dust settled, the Soviet Union was dead.  Newt saw to it that welfare was reformed, and balanced our budget for the first time in my lifetime.

The People re-elected Reagan in 1984 and the Republican majority in 1996 because those leaders kept their word:  they did what they said they would do, did not compromise on principle, and worked to deconstruct the liberal machine in Washington.  Only when our President and party strayed from those principles did our majority evaporate.

Mr. Frum leaves the reservation when he states, "The conservatism we know evolved in the 1970s to meet a very specific set of dangers and challenges," meaning the evils of the Jimmy Carter era.  He couldn't possibly be more wrong.  We've always been here.

The conservatism we know evolved in a harbor in Boston, Massachusetts on December 16, 1773.  It wasn't a calculated effort to win elections; it was (and still is) the belief that all men are created equal and should never be shackled by a tyrannical government.

It is also the time-honored tradition of adherence to limited government, even when people cry out for the government to "save them."  It is the wisdom to know that accepting help from the government gives power to the government, and that we're better off saving our own skins than having skin in the game.

Conservatives recognize that a government big enough to save them is also big enough to destroy them.  We can't buy freedom.  We can't earmark liberty.  We can't socialize the pursuit of happiness.

Frum's entire article is laden with out of context snippets and 4-word sound bytes that define the modus operandi of the Left: misrepresent, feign outrage, condemn, and then try to sound reasonable.  All the hand wringing and faux concern about what other people might think about what amounts to a misrepresentation taken out of context just flat sickens me.

But sadly, the tendency these days is for people like Frum to pronounce the end of the Reagan era and then quote or misquote other like-minded individuals who have said something similar to back up the assertion.  I recognize this tactic as the "echo chamber" that exists on college campuses and in newsrooms across the country, and see it for what it is: the end of critical thought and the death of the arena of ideas.

Frum dissects the decline of the Republican Party using points on the timeline popular among the neo-cons.  He observes that Ross Perot "led an exodus of the college-educated out of the GOP in 1992," but forgets to mention that the Perot candidacy only had legs because the base of our party can read lips:  The "Reagan Democrats" began leaving our party because our party left them, starting with Bush 41s broken promise of "no new taxes." 

In 1994, we shifted focus from the Presidency, finding a new refuge in Congress.  The hope was that we could reshape Washington from inside the Beltway, and we did for a while.  When Newt left Washington after a steady stream of false accusations and probably growing tired of the nonsense, that marked the beginning of the end for Republicanism.

When Congress and Bush 43 began to "modulate our social conservatism," We The People abandoned the remnants of the Reagan Revolution because it had been bastardized into a Laissez-faire, also-ran party that was barely distinguishable from the cradle-to-gravy train the Democrats offered.

Denny Hastert, Bill Frist, and George W. Bush caused our defeat in 2006 and 2008, not Rush Limbaugh.  "It was the spending, stupid."  It was the complete lack of honesty, integrity, and morality regarding the stewardship of the purpose of our founding documents.  

It was the non-stop barrage of lies and outrage from the Left being answered with capitulation after surrender after compromise on the right that increased the size of the bureaucracy more in just 6 years of a Republican President than after 8 years of Clinton.

The gang of 14?  Harriet "unqualified" Myers?  Randy Cunningham?  Open borders and prescription drugs?  Katrina?  Any of this ringing a bell?  None of that is remotely connected to Rush Limbaugh, but (as Bush 43's speech writer), it's all over David Frum.  He should have written a departure speech for G.W. titled "the Axis of Weevils."

Our party does not need to evolve, it needs to remember the reason it was founded.  We have become a rubber stamp for the Leftist agenda and our base is simply refusing to participate.  We allow the Left to steal our message and hawk it as their own!  Ask a voter which party believes in lower taxes and smaller government and they'll say it's the Democrats.  The Democrats!!!

Conservative values are the only values that win elections outside of Marin County, California and the Northeast coastline of America.  Hell, the Democrats talk bad about Rush Limbaugh now, but at election time they pay him to write their speeches.  If Rush is the problem and conservatism is a tired old cultist mantra, WHY ARE OUR OPPONENTS BEATING US WITH THAT MESSAGE?!?!  Get real, and get off my back. 

Ask a Democrat politician a direct question about raising taxes and they will twist themselves into a pretzel to get out of it, but put them into office and they'll vote for every tax increase that comes along.

In fact, I have a solution for our energy crisis:  ask any Democrat virtually any question regarding their stance on almost any core value of Ronald Reagan, on camera.  The energy they expend trying to obfuscate, deflect, squirm, wiggle, and worm their way into an answer that won't expose their hypocrisy would supply a large neighborhood with power for a year.

The problem with our party, Mr. Frum, is not Limbaugh.  It's not because Rush wants Obama to fail, and it's not because he didn't say the words politely using politically correct terminology.  The problem is simply that milk toast Republicans have become corrupted by the lure of social democracy.

They fail to recognize the slippery slope that big government represents, and wrongly believe that our focus should be centered on enlarging our coalition by giving in, just a little, to the forces that want the government to take something from a producer and give it to a consumer in the hopes that will be enough to buy their vote.

What RINO's and liberals just do not understand is that you can never give them enough.

Frum says Dittoheads (Limbaugh listeners) are cult-like, instantly and irrevocably insulting 22 million people in the process.  Well, maybe not.  Newsweek only has 135,000 subscribers.  Woopty-doo.  

But if we take that accusation seriously, we're forced to ask Mr. Frum: was Thomas Jefferson was a cultist when he wrote the Declaration of Independence?  When he wrote that it is our right, our duty, to stand up to tyranny and tyrants, was Jefferson misguided?  No, and neither is Rush.

Rush Limbaugh is much like the character William Wallace in the movie Braveheart when he said:  "There's a difference between us.  You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position.  I think your position exists to provide these people with freedom.  And I go to make sure they have it."   Amen.

Mr. Frum is just the latest Tool-(R) of the Leftist propaganda machine.  Whenever an (R) slams a conservative, especially Rush or Sean, they are anointed for their wisdom, lavished with praise, and given a spot on the morning show circuit so they can talk about themselves for a while.  I'm sure that's great for his career but how many jobs did that create?  How many children does that feed?

Wait a second...  Now I'm sounding like a Democrat, too.  Can't we all just get along?  This is getting rediculous.

I want to toss in my 2 cents on the Rush/Newt/Obama/Failure flap before the IRS taxes it away from me.

In my 40 years of existence, I've never seen anything like this but I believe it is by design.  There is some quirk of human nature at work here that drives us to be defensive and act like puppets on a string..

Barack Madoff Obama is proposing and implementing policies that have been proven to fail, historically.  His policies are far, far left but his speeches could have been written by Newt.  Who wouldn't want his policies to fail as soon as possible so we can move on to rational policies that will actually solve the problem?

It is not irrational to want the President to fail in this light, but it would be irrational to want our nation to fail.  The two are not mutually exclusive.  Wanting Obama to fail does not mean you desire the country to fail.  Any student of history can tell you that defeating Obama's policies are the best way to ensure America does not fail.

The full context of Newt's Meet the dePressed comments reflect this poignant fact, but with all the recent flack Limbaugh has been taking on behalf of the Republican party, everyone is on the defensive.  I suggest we get over it and move on.

Rather than combining our forces to defeat a common enemy in the arena of ideas, we have become a house divided as we fight over the scraps of the former majority Newt built.

Are we done here?  It is plain to see that the Obama camp is playing us for fools and we're falling all over ourselves to go along with it.  You don't pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel, and you don't refer to a man with 22 million CONSERVATIVE listeners as an entertainer.  Rush is entertaining, but he is no entertainer.

My core beliefs are etched in stone by my father, but confirmed by the logic of Limbaugh, Reagan, Gingrich, and Rand.  I am who I am because of my own hard work and diligence but I identify with these pillars of consequential thought.  Attack any of them and you attack me, personally.

As a side note, I am constantly reminded of the uncommon wisdom of a father who raised me as a Democrat but unwittingly programmed me to be a Conservative.  His natural common sense, honesty, integrity, and virtue help me to identify those same qualities in my heroes today.  Attack any of them and you also attack my father.  Why is this so difficult to understand?

I think Limbaugh's position is that comparing him to a politically handicapped person like Chris Matthews is demeaning to his audience, not to him personally.  I understand Newt's analogy and agree with it in principle, but a lot of casual listeners see it as a slapdown.  Remember the 11th Commandment in the future and we should be fine.

Two seconds of thoughtful logic would reveal the Democrat's agenda in this.  Any Conservative should be able to see that the answer is to stay on message, provide alternatives, and refuse to participate in this reckless and dangerous shift to the left.  Newt is doing that.  Rush is doing that.  We all need to do that..

If things get as tough as some are predicting, we will all have to become leaders to find our way back to the shining City on the Hill.  We will, but not if we play their game.

President Obama is using all this money to build a time machine. Yup, it's true.

Instead of transporting us all forward in time to a gilded utopian society, his time machine works in reverse.  Our destination?  1775.

Read the Declaration of Independence, the part about the sins of King George.  Obama's administration either has, or is, repeating many of the grievances Thomas Jefferson (D - Virginia) listed.  I'll just list a few to make my point:

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.  How many of his appointments have tax issues, yet he plans to heap taxation and debt upon us at a time we can least afford it.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.  Immigration?  Marijuana?  They're not going to enforce the law.  "Real" stimulus for the economy?  "I won," he says.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.  Well, they don't have to send hither swarms of Officers anymore; they just use welfare and taxation to do devour our substance on their behalf.

There's more, but you get the idea.  We are on course to see tyranny again, in our lifetimes.  It is the only logical conclusion.

Let me see if I’ve got this straight:

(1) People are fleeing California in record numbers, so we doubled vehicle licensing to compensate.

(2) Businesses are laying tens of thousands of people off, so we raised income taxes to make up for the lost revenue.

(3) People are not buying as much as they used to, so we increased the sales tax to fill the gap.

Was the goal of this budget to fix the problems that got us where we are today?  No.  Obviously not.  California has more debt and higher taxes than almost any other state in the union and things have only gotten worse because taxing and spending is the problem.  Taxing and regulating kills prosperity.

California is a bad investment, and it just got worse.

How do we make it a better investment?  Create a climate that attracts businesses and people!  Do the opposite of what Sacramento just did and things will turn around.  Lowering taxes and reducing government spending has worked every time it has been tried, by Republicans and Democrats alike.  Raising taxes has failed every time it has been tried.

 

"As late as 1976, the richest 1 percent of the country took home about 9 percent of the total national income. By 2006, they were pocketing more than 20 percent. But the rich don't spend as much of their income as the middle class and the poor do -- after all, being rich means that you already have most of what you need. That's why the concentration of income at the top can lead to a big shortfall in overall demand and send the economy into a tailspin. (It's not coincidental that 1928 was the last time that the top 1 percent took home more than 20 percent of the nation's income.)"

Regardless of your political beliefs, you must admit we stand upon a precipice that is without equal in the last 40 years, and some say longer.  Economically, we are challenged, but we have been challenged before.  Morally, we have issues; in media, business and politics, but we have seen worse and perservered.  We are a nation of survivors who continue to live and breathe the American Dream regardless of race, color, or creed, and we are special among the world for our propensity to adapt, to assimilate, and to change. 

We do need change.  Change!  A clean break from the past that will define our role in the future for generations yet unborn who need to see how we rise to the challenges ahead, who will read of our struggles in history books yet unwritten and understand that the struggles of Generation X were no different and no less important than the struggles of the Boomers who came before us.  We are not unique, but we are uniquely American.

The world will little note nor long remember what we say here...  Abraham Lincoln, one of the greatest Presidents in our nation's brief history spoke those immortal words with the total conviction that his role in history was irrelevant, that his actions were insignifican't in the greater scheme of Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.  For a man who did so much, so right, how could he have been so wrong?  We will forever remember the words of the Gettysburg speech, and we will never forget its sentiment: that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.  He was not unique, but he was uniquely American.

Seven score and five years later, our nation has harvested the seeds planted by a man whose only goal was to preserve the Union, endowed by our Creator to preserve the rights of men of all colors, from all nations.  We have elected the son of an immigrant, a man "of the people."  For better or worse, he will be our President for the immediate future, and the decisions he makes will have an impact on us that will be remembered for as long as the words of Lincoln, for better or for worse.  As a first generation citizen, he is not unique, but he is uniquely American.

So much is at stake, so much in peril, yet we, as a nation, have taken a monumental leap of faith towards a man with little experience and few discrnable convictions, other than those few things he dared cast a vote for, or against.  It matters not if our media has done its part, Constitutionally, to ferret out the content of Obama's character, only that his character can withstand the coming storm on all of our behalfs.  We have moved beyond partisanship, although loyal opposition has its place.  He is not unique, but he is uniquely American.

The invigorating autumn of last November has brought forth a new nation, conceived in a freedom and an equality unmatched by any generation before ours; a new beginning, rather than a bitter end.  Dr. King's dream has been fulfilled, and the valley of despair is no more.  But we cannot rest here, for we are not done.  Dr. King's vision included a prosperous America filled with true opportunity and real hope, not a dead-end welfare state controlled by uncaring, inefficient bureaucrats, and his dreams of equality included liberty and justice, for all Americans.  He was not unique, but he was uniquely American.

On January 20th, 2009, we take another small step for man.  Let us pray that this step lasts longer, and has more significance for the future of America, than the one taken by Neil Armstrong so long before, for if America ever needed a unique American, it would be at this moment in our history.  Like Washington, Lincoln, Kennedy, and Reagan before him, Barack Obama has inherited an opportunity for greatness, and he must rise to the occasion of his own accord.  With our without our support, he is ultimately responsible for the outcome of his version of history, and he alone will be accountable for his success or failure. 

Yes, each paragraph of this story contains a snippet of greatness from a past moment in our American journey.  I am no plagiarist, but I recognize the attempts to canonize this historic moment by the media, and cannot help but to use history to put that rhetoric in its place.  Much has been made of the potential of our next President, but potential has its limits.  To be truly great, Obama will have to rise above even the lofty standards set by those who idolize him and actually become more than even they think he can be.  The bar has now been set that high, and nothing less will do.  Even though Obama and I disagree on fundamental ideologies, I see his challenge as unique, and guarantee you his record will be, for better or worse, uniquely American. 

As I gaze upon this mess of politics gone so awry, I must confess that even I am blown away that Blagojevich or any guy would stoop so low to sell a Seat, by hook or crook or lie.  It's nice to know a Senate seat is only worth three hundred grand a year, a pack of smokes and a couple of beers!  Is it too late for Ross Perot to give them all a pile of dough to make a seat for all us Volunteers? Six millioin bucks is really cheap if you ask me, and we could watch it on TV like some survivor show, or on the Wii, then you and me could write the bills.  Oh how that doth give me chills!

Oh, what weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth!  A Democrat swallowed up whole by the jaws of defeat!  No need to fret, no need to frown, Rod may be out but they'll find some other clown to take his place, and when the dust settles they'll all save face.

Oh how we despise the crooks and corrupt!  Gather a posse and round them all up!  Get to them quick before they go deep, or they'll get us again when we go back to sleep.  Stand on high ground, keep your backs to the wall, Rezco and Rod only the first to fall prey to the network that they helped to build, their glass now half empty when once over-filled with your cash and my cash and everyone's "due," a bounty of taxes they call revenue.

Well, I for one have had my fill.  I can't believe you Illinois schills who keep falling for this, time and again!  Three people you've elected are now in the pen! Can't you see how you're bought and sold?  Will you get smarter as you grow older or will you give up and move away to someplace warm where you might have a say in how it's all spent and how it all goes?  I won't be holding my breath but let me know how it goes.

Until this is over, whenever that is, I'll be writing and fighting for better ideas.  Someone should pinch me, if this is a dream.  It's more like a nightmare, know what I mean?  Make politics clean, or all corrupt, hurry and scurry before I give up! 

Honest Abe Lincoln is rolling around in his grave!  Maybe we'll wake up while there's still stuff to save?  "It will either be all one thing, or nothing at all."  Words like that make me feel so small I could shed a tear for this mess that we're in, but I stand up straight and force a grin because that's what's required in this day and age.  Doing nothing at all would be a terrible wage.

To all you turkeys far and wide, who fill my heart with so much pride

I pen for you this witty rhyme, to lift you from election grime

The holidays are for good cheer, for laughs and smiles and quaffing beer!

No sulking, moping, whining here, just good friends, ideas, and cheer!

Let’s put the past behind us now and forge a brighter day

Two Thousand Ten approaches and we have to find a way

To beat them at the ballot box, it takes effort, thought, and spunk

Nutcrackers for the acorns too, who’d have ever thunk?

Let’s give our Thanks and eat our bird, enjoy our holidays

And let this time remind us there are always better days

When the Left takes over, they do the darnedest things

They tax and spend and bring malaise, which only gives us wings!

So let Barack be Santa clause, the Left can’t help themselves,

Nancy, Barney, Harry too, his pompous little elves

Take comfort in the knowledge as they beg, borrow, and steal,

Most adults knew long ago that Santa isn’t real.

Be thankful for the time we have, and for posterity

Rise above our challenges to defend our sacred Liberty.

Tomorrow’s Thanks belong to Him, and all tomorrows hence

The only thing that’s left to do is practice common sense.

Happy Thanksgiving Y’all!

While the Conservative Resistance Movement gets under way, I thought I'd blog a bit upon my return from a land far, far away, and pass along some good cheer regarding the holiday.  What will you be doing over the 4 day holiday?  After finals, I have no classes until January, so I'll be reading and spending time with relatives, catching up on some Issues here at Newt.org, and maybe getting my sleep patterns back in order.  Maybe.

First, my reading list for the weekend.  Amazon promised to deliver these books by Wednesday, just in time for my R&R plans:

The Failure Factory ,  How Unelected Bureaucrats, Liberal Democrats, and Big Government Republicans are Undermining America's Security and Leading Us to War, by Bill Gertz. 

Matt turned me on to Gertz, and for that I give my thanks.  Gertz is the non-fiction equivalent of Tom Clancy when it comes to government.  He says more in one article than most State Department people say in a year.  The subtitle says it all, and those who have followed my postings here know that I feel exactly the same way.

The Forgotten Man , a New History of the Great Depression, by Amity Shlaes. 

The title of this book attracts me.  It is the same title as a 1940's book on New Deal economics of the 1940's, and also from a William Graham Sumner essay, circa 1883 that inspired the book.   Both are prophetic, and at times I could not distinguish between their present and my own, and a future that looks likely.  I hope Amity's book is as informative.

As I read up on history (I'll be challenging that credit to graduate early), I am finding something that bothers me deeply:  We are blind to the past, no matter how recent.  Here is the forward from The Forgotten Man (Samuel B. Pettengill, a member of Congress), penned by writer Douglas Johnson on behalf of the author.  The emphasis is my own.

In the year 1932 the American people faced a crisis of the
first magnitude. For three years economic conditions in the
country had been going from bad to worse and the worse
was very bad. What the worst might soon be, people dreaded
to contemplate. Millions of Democrats were ready to support
any leader able to repulse those forces of ruin threatening to
overwhelm the nation with disaster. Samuel B. Pettengill was
one of those Democrats. Millions of Republicans, utterly dis-
couraged by the short-sightedness of party leaders who clung
obstinately to policies morally and politically bankrupt, were
ready to vote for any man who would lead the country to
safety. The writer of this foreword was one of those Repub-
licans.

If you would like to be able to tell your friends and neighbors where we'll likely be in 4 more years, click the link above and read the rest.  The entire book is available online.

With that, take care to enjoy your Thankgsgiving holiday.  Remember those who are less fortunate in your prayers, and/or by volunteering at or donating to the local groups who care for those less fortunate than you and I.  Continue to demonstrate the true meaning of compassion, and that it happens in spite of government, rather than because of it.

It has been a bumpy road over the past eight years. 

What began in late 2000 as an exhausting triumph over Clintonism and a perceived escape from the black cloud of scandal and shame that seemed to drape Washington, the Age of Bubba yielded the Era of Dubya. 

In like a lamb, that period quickly came to an end on September 11, 2001.

We handled that crisis, working within the Republican party to get tough on terrorists and cut taxes to stimulate the economy.  Once the threat had passed, we rested for a while and things started to get out of hand.

We blocked Harriet Meyers and amnesty (multiple times), but lost on prescription drugs and spending in general.  I think prescription drugs was the beginning of conservative malaise, but I could be wrong.

The governing majority Newt had built in 1992 evaporated in 2006, breaking its hull against the rocks of an unpopular war, corruption, and a lack of fiscal discipline.  Evaporated or squandered the result is the same, but prior to 2007 Bush 43 had not vetoed a single spending bill and conservatives could not overcome the negative image our party had been painted with.  We lost our message as people now think Democrats are for lower taxes and smaller government.  Nice!

With the nomination of the Maverick, our fate in 2008 was sealed.  Over.  Kaput.  Finis.  So here we are.

But where do we go from here?

Conservative blogs overflow with outraged conservatives desirious of forming new coalitions.  Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity are doing what they can to rally conservatives into a coherent group.  Some are calling for the formation of a third party.  Our voices may be scattered, but our message should be coherent

What I think:

1.  We need to reign in the country clubbers that run the RNC.  If a governing body had ran a business as poorly as they have run our party, refusing to fund conservative Republicans while bathing "moderates" in our donations and much worse, they would have been fired or replaced.  We should replace them as soon as possible.

2.  Republican primaries are for Republicans only.  No more "independents" and "moderates" picking milk-toast betrayors from the other side of the aisle.

3.  We should work to establish a voting block to strengthen our voice.  No longer should we allow ourselves to be divided and conquered as we were in the 2008 primaries.

Do those things and our fortunes will improve.  Do them not and we will continue down the road to perdition.  But there is always more to be done, as freedom isn't free.

Join a group like American Solutions or the Heritage Foundation.  Get active in your party. 

A note to the whiners and crybabies complaining that the party has left them: You ARE the Republican party...  Start acting like it.  It isn't going to get better by itself.  It isn't going to change unless you demand it.

If you're a conservative, why not run for office?  There are 513,000 elected seats in this country that are SCREAMING for conservative leadership.  Just do it.  Infiltrate your local Republican party headquareters and take it over if public office isn't right for you.  Just do it.  What do you have to lose?

Everything. 

I wanted to toss this out before someone smarter than me who has a 3 hour radio show gets to say it... 

Zhirinovski, the man who lost to Medvedev in Russia is in exile in France saying that Obama is America's Gorbachev, that he will destroy America, and America will not be rebuilt.

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5h1YZUgwFtD0oP6f0PzefBPd_WA4Q

First, Mr. Zhirinovski, Mr. Obama is MY president now, so kindly refrain from saying bad things about him.  That's my job. 

Second, Obama will not be America's Gorbachev, presiding over the destruction of all we've labored to build in the last 230 some-odd years.  Obama will be the Gorbachev of the Democrat party.  You mark my words, you heard it here first:  January 20, 2009 will mark the beginning of the end of Democrat political dominance for decades to come.

The socialists in the Republican party are also coming out against Palin today, blaming her for this loss.  Not true at all.  If not for Sarah, it would have been a 48 state landslide.  Listen up, Country Clubbers:  We've tried it your way since 1988 and it's gotten us nothing but 8 years of Bubba, 8 years of Bubba-Light, and now at least 4 years of Bubba Gone Wild.  Thanks for nothing.

No, I'm glad to say that things will be better after today, my friends.  Today marks the day that a lot of Conservative eyes have opened.  The day a sleeping giant has been awakened from a long, refreshing slumber.

And that's always bad news for the Left.

If Ohio does not get a handle on Acorn vote fraud, and soon, the validity of American elections are done.  In my opinion, all of the ballots cast prior to the election are easily considered suspect.  They are tainted and worthless.  Toss them out now.

Violate the sanctity of this great system one time and its credibility is damaged forever.

This makes the $700 billion heist of the American People pale in comparison.  This is an attack on Democracy itself.  While voter fraud may have been going on for years, here and there, this is wholesale fraud, an undermining of the entire election process on a national scale.  It must be stopped.

In light of what we already know to be true, a federal judge should immediately issue an injunction against Acorn, barring them from any and all business activities until a proper investigation can be done.  They cannot be trusted, and our society cannot allow the foundations of democracy to be so undermined.  Further, all suspect votes should be tossed out, with those effected allowed to vote provisionally, provided they have proper identification, such as a state driver's license or government issued identification.

Where is the outrage?  Where are the pitchforks?

We are in trouble, and if this fraud is allowed to stand, God help us all.

Last night's debate was not scintillating, but neither was it "boring" as the headline on Drudge so boldly announces.  What do you want?  McCain to whip out his cane and beat Obama about the head for 45 minutes?  Get real.

Where were the questions on immigration?  Who cares, neither you nor I wanted to hear THAT question answered by either of these candidates anyway.  The economy is front and center in this election like it is in all Presidential elections, so get over it.

Where was the support for McCain from our side?  Romney didn't have any problems getting behind McCain on Hannity and Colmes, but from everyone else comes this big lament that McCain didn't score any points....  Did we watch the same debate?  I'm no fan of John McCain's "maverick" history, far from it, but he is what he is and has done what he has done, and is currently the only thing standing between us and Jimmy Carter's second term.  Get serious.

This is what was missing, and it's time someone said it in regards to the financial "bailout," the AIG MORONS who spent 400k AFTER the bailout on a junket, and the politicians who made it all possible:

What was the line in American Treasure?  "Someone has to go to jail."  America is SCREAMING to hear one of these candidates say, unequivocally, "we'll get through this, but someone has to go to jail, and I'll make sure they do", and I would bet all that I have that the first man to say them will win this election.  They've danced around it, teased us with it, now someone just needs to say it. 

Anyways, get a grip and start acting like Republicans.  Whining and moaning because McCain isn't Sarah Palin isn't going to get you anything but 4 years of a socialist administration, 4 more years of Jimmy Carter, and 4 more socialists on the Supreme Court. 

Boring?  You must be joking.

I spent my $12 on the matinee showing and took my wife to see American Carol, the Zucker flick / conservative lampoon of Michael Moore, and discovered something I already knew:

Liberalism isn't funny.

I enjoyed the movie, but that's only because I got all the jokes.  I laughed my tail off several times even though I'd seen the film's best material in the previews, and a lady to my front left kept looking back at me in mock horror, as if to say "what's so funny?"  I could tell that she either had no funny bone at all, or obviously hadn't been paying attention to the news lately.  Apparently, she didn't find it plausible that anyone in the Left would try to ban the 4th of July...

Conservatism isn't funny either.

Don't get me wrong, seeing Bill O'Rielly, Kelsey Grammar, and some guy playing JFK standing in a porta-poddy slapping Michael "Malone" is funny.   Seeing Michael "Malone" get hit in the face with an anvil is funny.  Seeing a 5 year old refer to Uncle Mike as a fat a-hole was kinda lame, but I laughed at that too.  Shame on me.

However, conjuring up Washington, Patton, or "the angle of freakin' death" to give the conservative viewpoint as they try to save Malone's patriotic soul brought people back to reality, which isn't too humorous these days.  Personal responsibility is no laughing matter.  Patriotism is something handed down genetically, too large a subject even for the big screen, and too complex to be truly funny. 

Jeff's rating?  2.5 out of 4 Jeffies for this one.  It's an HBO flick, although I doubt seriously it'll ever see the light of day on that channel.

First, my apologies for the assertions of my previous post.  Gwen Ifill did an excellent job moderating this debate, keeping the focus on the candidates and away from any perceptions of bias on her part.  Now, about that debate...

I'd have to say the dogfight on Fox News after the debate between Colmes and Dick Morris was almost as entertaining and enlightening as Sarah Palin sending a shout out to 3rd graders in Wasilla...  I've been waiting for someone to take a swat at Allan for years, and am only saddened that after finally getting my wish, I think it could have been done with more class.  Now seriously, about that debate...

Biden

According to Google Trends, which lists the hottest search terms for the day, the biggest news story of the day that everyone will probably miss is the massive fact-check going on about what McClellan said today, who Talabani is, what happened to Bosniaks, and the definition of exceptionalism.  Oh, and "joebiden.com" came in at #8, since he asked people to check out his previous comments there.  Make no mistake:  If Biden were a Republican, tomorrow's headline would be thus...

AFTER 35 YEARS IN THE SENATE, BIDEN FLUBS CONSTITUTION ANSWER

Article I deals with the Legislative branch, Joe.  The one you're in now.  Anyway, don't expect that, or the heavy, impatient sigh to become an issue, nor Biden's several 'distortions' of reality...  On mainstreet America, we still call those things lies, btw.  He did as well as one would expect an entrenched bureaucratic stooge to do, even though he was just plain wrong on so many things.

Conversely, he spoke well to people who have been trained to look to the government for solutions.  He used class warfare rhetoric to his advantage and at some points came across as human, and knowledgeable about the things he should be knowledgable about (except for that Constitution thing), but a little angry and maybe even bitter. 

Palin

Vindication is the word that comes to mind.  What she lacked in depth was made up in charm, but I would have liked to have heard her go after some of Biden's misstatements.  To a lot of Biden's answers, she could have done a lot more "say it ain't so, Joe" without breaking a sweat, but it was obvious she was on a mission to deliver certain talking points and missed several opportunities.

Every time Biden spoke on the economy, I would have mentioned that the only time in history that Obama's economic plans have been tried were under Jimmy Carter...

When asked what she lacked for the VP spot, I'd have said "a 35 year record in the Senate that has earned a 14% approval rating, an incumbent's attitude, and a lot of political baggage that smells like the underbelly of a lobbyist."  But that's just me...

I could have done with a lot more conservative values, like a reminder that raising taxes on anyone lowers revenue to the government, or as Hannity pointed out to some dimwit after the show that the bottom 50% of taxpayers pay a very small fraction of the overall tax burden...  But, her record shows she understands those principles, so she gets a pass from me.  I certainly could not have stood on that stage and gone to to do with Joe as she did, certainly not with a smile on my face.

I am encouraged by her performance but fully realize there are two more debates in the coming weeks that will determine the outcome of the election, as well as this bailout thing.  I am confident that Palin will make an excellent VP, if so elected.  I think America shares that view after tonight, and that a lot of journalists have egg on their faces.

I called the last one for Obama, and I was right.  This one was Palin by an Alaskan mile.

C2

UPDATE:  In one of those "I should have seen this coming" moments, I was researching stories for the On The Issues section when this headline on Drudge caught my eye....  I hereby rescind my prediction that Palin will do well.  I am saddened that PBS fails to see this as a conflict of interest, and hope that one day, members of Congress have the foresight to defund this neo-political activist organization.  C2

VP DEBATE MODERATOR RELEASING 'AGE OF OBAMA' BOOK ON INAUGURATION DAY

***********

After the last debate, I declared Obama the winner, although many news-types said otherwise.  Many Republicans said otherwise as well.  The polls prove it, nuff said.

For the VP debate, I'm going to go on the record here: 

• Thursday's VP debate will be watched by more than 50 million people
• Joe Biden will do better than expected
• Sarah Palin will do better than expected
• Unless Governor Palin physically whips biden with the jawbone of a moose, not a single story will appear on the Friday nightly news shows about the debate, unless it is negative about Palin
• Joe Biden will stick his foot in his mouth (duh, that was an easy prediction) and it won't be reported at all past 11pm that night.

I'll live-blog the debate again, but I'm just going to give my opinion as the show rolls.  It is very difficult to watch, think, type, post, rewind, fast-forward, and edit thoughts on the fly... 

This story in the Wall Street Journal details the last week of haggling over how best to socialize capitalism. Besides $700,000,000,000, what did it cost us to get to this point?

A weeks worth of worry, with the drama queen Paulson saying Americans should be scared...

A presidential campaign put on hold.

This crappy petition full of pomp and promise.....  What was that all about?

Multiple speeches, all warning of the dire consequences we face because of the ineptitude of people who aren't going to be held accountable for their actions.

A lecture by Hugo "the thorn" Chavez, who said capitalism had failed.

And all that for what?  For this betrayal by those people we relied upon to stand up for what is right and good and just, to save the American taxpayer from the lunacy of this deal that amounts to extortion: 

By 11:30 p.m., there was a breakthrough. The administration would be required to submit a plan to Congress "to recoup those losses from the entities that benefited from this program," according to a summary circulated among House Republicans

That "requirement" and a dollar will get you a cup of coffee at a Denny's.

This is a breakthrough?  A requirement to submit a plan that is voted on after the fact?  Yeah, whatever.  I've been down this road before.  You might as well make a deal with Iran, have them promise not to build nukes in exchange for lifing all sanctions; it would be no different.  Thanks guys.  Thanks for bending over and taking one for the team.  Thanks for nothing.

Welcome to the United Socialist States of America, where the government now carries the paper on the American dream, controls the salaries of executives on Wall Street, and owes China more than our yearly tax receipts.

Thomas Jefferson is rolling over in his grave tonight.

Question 7

Russia:  Potential enemy or Potential Partner?

Obama bounces around on this a bit, touching on NATO and proliferation of Russia’s nukes, but I’m not sure he really hits the issue.  McCain distanced himself from Bush on this, “I looked into Putin’s eyes and saw three letters: a K, a G, and a B.”  Obama showed a broad general knowledge, McCain went much deeper.  Obama wants to send money to Georgia, which we don’t have.

My Take:  

This is an important topic we’ll likely face over the next few years.  McCain is painting a picture for Putin under a McCain administration that Putin cannot do what he is doing.  Obama is sending a message of weakness, that we’ll try to negotiate for the freedom of states like Georgia, and even turned the question into a debate on alternate energy at one point.  Both men are showing that they’re Senators, droning on and on at times.

Question 5ish

Afghanistan – Should we send more troops to Afghanistan, how and when?

Obama chooses the best answer here, saying yes, then quoting commanders on the ground and using military words like “brigades,” which makes him sound more Commander in Chief-ish.  Towards the end he began stumbling around a bit for his next 5 point plan…  He references the poppy trade, and moved on to dealing with Pakistan.  He wants the US to deal more with Pakistan to rid the northern areas of that country of terrorist strongholds.  His follow up sounded reasonable, but had no meat.  He studdered awkwardly over the name of the soldier he is supposed to be honoring with a bracelet.

McCain shot back at Obama’s inexperience, describing how diplomacy would work and what it would look like under his administration.  He filled in the blanks Obama left about the strategy in Afghanistan in a solid way.  His follow up was a trip down Misty Lane, again trying to shore up his experience, which nobody doubts.

My Take

I’m still left with the feeling that Obama is winning this debate, mostly because McCain won’t look at Obama or acknowledge his presence.  He has good points, but they’re not the best, and constantly remind us that he’s been around a while.  Obama sounds topical, accurately glossing over the issue without actually stating what he’d do.  If Obama truly is winning, as I think, it is only because I fear people aren’t as familiar with these issues as they should be to be able to understand the lack of depth displayed by Obama.  Where’s the beef?  It isn’t in lecturing McCain.

Question 3

As president, after whatever solution comes about with the financial crisis, what would you have to give up to help pay for the bailout?

Obama – Hard to anticipate what the budget will look like, but have to do some things:

1.  Energy independence – increase production at home but mostly alternative energy and vehicles
2.  Fix our healthcare system – deductibles up 30%
3.  Have to compete in education, science and technology, China spacewalk, affordable college
4.  Rebuild our infrastructure
5.  New electricity grid

My take – he never said how he would do any of those things, and if he did tell you, you’d freak out.  A populist answer, but "where's the beef?" 

McCain went after Obama’s liberal record and defense spending, cost + contracts, but focused on reducing government spending, and government efficiencies.

My take –  Weak and off topic, but part of McCain’s theme.  By now, I’m wondering if people may be tuning out to vote for Obama as McCain takes notes.  I’m starting to comment at the TV as I type, rather than about what’s on it.

Lehrer hit it on the head:  Neither candidate is answering the broader question.  McCain suggested a spending freeze, Obama suggested more spending, charging Iraq for the cost to defend it.  McCain countered with an excellent point about energy, including nuclear power and also introduced the environment.  Maybe this wasn’t as bad as I thought, but geez, I just noticed that Jim Lehrer is older than McCain, so that’s a positive thing

My take –  Weak and off topic, but part of McCain’s theme.  By now, I’m wondering if people may be tuning out to vote for Obama as McCain takes notes.  I’m starting to comment at the TV as I type, rather than about what’s on it.

Lehrer hit it on the head:  Neither candidate is answering the broader question.  McCain suggested a spending freeze, Obama suggested more spending, charging Iraq for the cost to defend it.  McCain countered with an excellent point about energy, including nuclear power and also introduced the environment.  Maybe this wasn’t as bad as I thought, but geez, I just noticed that Jim Lehrer is older than McCain, so that’s a positive thing

Question 4 was a follow up to question 3

Obama doesn’t understand the fundamental reason tax cuts work, which is that they free up the economy and increase revenue to the government.  McCain points out that tax cuts are most likely the best way to get our economy back on track, although he keeps going back to the pool shed to reiterate his success at cutting waste…. *sigh*  Obama seized the opportunity but sounded contrite.  The best thing though:  McCain referenced his new sidekick, Palin, but not by name.

Question 4.5?

Compare the lessons of Vietnam to our mission in Iraq

McCain is strong on this issue, giving a measured rundown of the topic, sounding very reasonable and intelligent (finally).

Obama tries to debate whether we should have gone or not, a tired argument at best.  He does bring up some populist points, then starts in with the body count.  Again he points out that Iraq has a big surplus while we’re spending $10 billion to defend it.  He makes the point that he’ll

McCain nails it:  The next president won’t decide whether we should have gone there or not, but how to finish the job with honor.  He nailed Obama on his NATO committee that has never me, who immediately had to go to Joe Biden to get him off the hook.  McCain needs to look at Obama as he’s being lectured about things that have gone wrong in the past, while Obama completely misses the boat on what he’ll do about it in the future.  Obama looks like he’s getting mad now, very uncomfortable.

Obama admits to voting to not fund the troops and I go to the fridge for a well earned Diet Pepsi….