I recently read an article by Mr. John Chapman at American Thinker.com. Mr. Chapman believes that the campaign of Senator-elect Scott Brown offers such a perfect roadmap for Republicans in 2010 that it is worth deconstructing his campaign to draw the key lessons for the next nine months. Those Republicans thinking about running for congress might consider his thoughts.
“First, the stakes are huge. The potential for a radically different course for American history thanks to Scott Brown's senatorial win is quite real. Consider the magnitude of Mr. Brown's achievement: His capture of the march toward universal health care in the United States, which Kennedy himself described as the seminal cause of his life. And it was a fight which seemed destined to fail: Twelve Senate elections had occurred since a Republican last won a Senate race in Massachusetts (in 1972). Mr. Kennedy averaged more than 66% in his six election wins since then, including 69% of the vote in 2006; John Kerry, meanwhile, won 66-31%over his Republican opponent just fourteen months ago on the same day that Barack Obama won the state 62-36% over John McCain. Further, Martha Coakley, Brown's opponent, carried 73% of the vote in her statewide contest for Attorney General in 2006.”
“In a state where, according to the Rasmussen polling organization, 53% of voters self-identify as Democrats compared to 21% as Republicans, the prior history made this Senate seat all but impregnable for Democrats. Indeed, the outcome seemed so foregone that well-known Republicans in the state such as Andrew Card begged out of the race, leaving Mr. Brown to his sacrificial fate. And the public polling done in November and December affirmed this: Mr. Brown trailed Attorney General Coakley by 20-30 points throughout the fall, in a state where 56% of all voters considered Mr. Obama's signature issue, health care reform, to be the most important current challenge.”
“Further, in an irony matched only by the race being for Kennedy's old seat and dominated by his issue, the Massachusetts Democratic machine is so powerful that they had changed the election rules for U.S. Senate races twice in recent years on short notice: first to protect the seat in case John Kerry vacated it in 2004, and then again in 2009 to ensure representative continuity after Mr. Kennedy's death.
Democratic Party power in the Bay State is close to invincible, and in an unusually high turnout for a special election (over 2.2 million voters versus 2.8 million in November 2008), there could be no rational expectation of Republican victory. Truly, Massachusetts is the "bluest of the blue" states, as established by being the only state in the union carried by George McGovern in 1972.”
Against gale force winds and seemingly insurmountable odds manifested by the huge democratic behemoth in the state, Mr. Brown worked diligently. “Brown crisscrossed the state in the finest traditions of retail politics, showing himself to be a genuine person” in an age of political phonies populating the political class. “Brown evinced a dogged determination to carry a simple message to voters, starting most prominently with the promise to be the 41st senator for procedural checks on the Obama agenda. That resonated with voters, along with his support of tax and spending cuts, total transparency and honesty in governing, and common sense in defense policy. (Mr. Brown is also against harmful carbon energy taxes, against illegal immigrant amnesty, tough on crime, and takes a states' rights approach on social issues.)”
“Brown campaign insiders say his numbers turned dramatically after airing television ads, beginning December 30th, touting the benefit of John F. Kennedy's 1963-64 tax cuts. Further, he scored well in three debates between January 5-11, making his intention to check Obama's spending and government expansion designs clear to viewing voters. Also a factor were many helpful endorsements, from popular Boston radio host Howie Carr to the Boston Herald and other local print media, as well as national media exposure in the final two weeks of the campaign.”
“As a result of this media exposure and Mr. Brown's simple, repetitive, and highly effective messaging -- well-suited to a truncated campaign period after early December primaries -- Massachusetts voters were highly informed by election day of the contrast he presented to the Obama agenda.
As such, Brown's victory -- again, in Massachusetts, of all places -- is a stunning repudiation of the thesis that Obama's win in 2008 represented any sort of sea change in what is still essentially a center-right American electorate. Indeed, Mr. Brown raised $13 million in the final eighteen days of the campaign, and a nationwide telephone poll conducted by Rasmussen on election day cut 49%-34% in favor of Brown, with 17% undecided.”
“Rasmussen's post-election analysis revealed the crux of Mr. Brown's victory: near-parity on health care and decisive margins on most other important issues. For voters who regarded health care as the seminal issue at the moment, Ms. Coakley carried the vote 53%-46%. Yet this was only due to the intensity of Obama supporters in the state: of those supporting the president on health care, Coakley won 97% (yet 51% of Massachusetts voters oppose health care plans before Congress). For those who regarded the economy as the top issue, Mr. Brown won 52% of their vote. Where tax levels were most worrisome, Brown won 87% of the vote, and for those regarding national defense as the top issue, Brown carried 67%.”
“Given the foregoing, the following are key lessons and implications from Scott Brown's improbable win:
a). As Senator 41, and more importantly, coming from Massachusetts, Mr. Brown has upset the political calculus inside the Beltway even before being seated. The Obama agenda is now substantially stalled, and confirmation of this is nowhere more on display than in the words of pundits or politicians sympathetic to Obama: blame is variously assigned to a weak Coakley campaign, to sexist voters in the Bay State, to voter anger over "Washington" or, from the President himself, over "the last eight years" of failed policies. Psychologists call that denial, a phenomenon last seen starkly in American politics in 1994.
b). Again, the fact that this was Massachusetts ;indeed,Teddy
Kennedy's seat, in a rigged-rules election and not Kansas or South
Carolina, along with the fact that Mr. Brown was a candidate who
unambiguously succeeded in drawing a sharp distinction between the
Obama/Coakley worldview and his own, represent details of capital
importance. These are a potential dagger in the heart of the entire Obama enterprise. And Mr. Brown's effective communication of his message along with his points of contrast with Obama reaffirm a political truism reiterated by Republicans from Ronald Reagan to Rush Limbaugh: when Republicans effectively differentiate their platform in favor of free enterprise, limited government, economic growth, and strong defense, they win elections over statist Democrats.
What President Nixon called the "Silent Majority" is today the center-right core of the body politic, and this is where elections are won. To say this differently, the difference between Mr. Brown and Ms. Coakley was stark and clear in voters' minds; the difference between Messrs. Obama and McCain a year ago was less so. That is to say, Mr. McCain did not lose because he was "too much like Bush", so much as he was not different enough from Mr. Obama, to the center-right core (which at the time was also, admittedly, rattled by a financial market meltdown that the incumbent had only stoked).
c). Mr. Brown, in a de facto sense, nationalized this election. Though (brilliantly) left unspoken, his opponent was not Ms. Coakley, for Massachusetts voters; it was Barack Obama. Again, it is crucial for Republicans to understand this, and ominous for Democrats that, so far, they do not.
d). Mr. Brown's genuine authenticity, and his ability to show this in his communication style, is a competitive advantage in modern politics precisely because it is so rare. Ms. Coakley carried the high-income precincts surrounding Harvard, in the Berkshires, and in Provincetown, but Mr. Brown won the middle class vote, and came close among union members, losing 52-46%. Additionally, Mr. Brown is the antithesis of an elitist, and the embodiment of American values: on election night he electrified the crowd with such common-sense lines as his preference to pay for weapons to stop terrorists, rather than lawyers to defend them.”
Time will tell, but it is possible that Scott Brown's election will prove to be highly consequential. As President, Mr. Obama has been a failure. He has pursued a statist agenda which guarantees higher taxes, sluggish growth and job creation, more financial and monetary troubles, and a declining standard of living. He has engendered a level of fear and uncertainty in the investor and job-creating entrepreneurial classes not seen in this country since the 1930s. And his seemingly unremitting apologies for past American transgressions, as well as inane decisions such as a $250 million criminal trial in New York City of an already-confessed jihadist combatant like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, are intensely unpopular with a center-right core electorate steeped in middle-class values.
Mr. Brown, in contrast, represents an effective antidote to Obama's
demagoguery and failed leftist paradigm. His capture of Ted Kennedy's seat of 47 years, in Massachusetts, in an election dominated by the promise (or threat) of universal health care, is as historic as it is ironic. For Republicans, there could not be a clearer roadmap to electoral success this fall.
Mr. Chapman is an Adjunct Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. Contact him at john_l_chapman@yahoo.com.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Friday, February 5, 2010
JUST A RETIRED THINKER!
I recently had a chance to read the REPUBLICAN HEALTH CARE PLAN that was presented in the U. S. House of Representatives. The
Republicans’ Common-Sense Reforms Will LOWER HEALTH CARE COSTS!
Americans want a step-by-step, common-sense approach to health care reform, not Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s costly, 1,990-page government takeover of our nation’s health care system.
Republicans’ alternative solution focuses on lowering health care premiums for families and small businesses, increasing access to affordable, high-quality care, and promoting healthier lifestyles – without adding to the crushing debt Washington has placed on our children and grandchildren.
Following are the key elements of Republicans’ alternative plan:
• Lowering health care premiums. The GOP plan will lower health care premiums for American families and small businesses, addressing Americans’ number-one priority for health care reform.
• Establishing Universal Access Programs to guarantee access to affordable care for those with pre-existing conditions. The GOP plan creates Universal Access Programs that expand and reform high-risk pools and reinsurance programs to guarantee that all Americans, regardless of pre-existing conditions or past illnesses, have access to affordable care – while lowering costs for all Americans.
• Ending junk lawsuits. The GOP plan would help end costly junk lawsuits and curb defensive medicine by enacting medical liability reforms modeled after the successful state laws of California and Texas.
• Prevents insurers from unjustly cancelling a policy or instituting annual of lifetime spending caps. The GOP plan prohibits an insurer from cancelling a policy unless a person commits fraud or conceals material facts about a health condition. It also prohibits insurance plans from instituting annual or lifetime spending limits.
• Encouraging Small Business Health Plans. The GOP plan gives small businesses the power to pool together and offer health care at lower prices, just as corporations and labor unions do.
• Encouraging innovative state programs. The GOP plan rewards innovation by providing incentive payments to states that reduce premiums and the number of uninsured.
• Allowing Americans to buy insurance across state lines. The GOP plan allows Americans to shop for coverage from coast to coast by allowing Americans living in one state to purchase insurance in another.
• Codifying the Hyde Amendment. The GOP plan explicitly prohibits all federal funds, whether they are authorized funds or appropriated funds, from being used to pay for abortion.
• Promoting healthier lifestyles. The GOP plan promotes prevention & wellness by giving employers greater flexibility to financially reward employees who adopt healthier lifestyles.
• Enhancing Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). The GOP plan creates new incentives to save for future and long-term care needs by allowing qualified participants to use HSAs to pay premiums.
• Allowing dependents to remain on their parents’ policies. The GOP plan encourages coverage of young adults on their parents’ insurance through age 25.
If you would like to read this Republican Health Care Plan then please go to my NEWS SECTION on my website.
Republicans’ Common-Sense Reforms Will LOWER HEALTH CARE COSTS!
Americans want a step-by-step, common-sense approach to health care reform, not Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s costly, 1,990-page government takeover of our nation’s health care system.
Republicans’ alternative solution focuses on lowering health care premiums for families and small businesses, increasing access to affordable, high-quality care, and promoting healthier lifestyles – without adding to the crushing debt Washington has placed on our children and grandchildren.
Following are the key elements of Republicans’ alternative plan:
• Lowering health care premiums. The GOP plan will lower health care premiums for American families and small businesses, addressing Americans’ number-one priority for health care reform.
• Establishing Universal Access Programs to guarantee access to affordable care for those with pre-existing conditions. The GOP plan creates Universal Access Programs that expand and reform high-risk pools and reinsurance programs to guarantee that all Americans, regardless of pre-existing conditions or past illnesses, have access to affordable care – while lowering costs for all Americans.
• Ending junk lawsuits. The GOP plan would help end costly junk lawsuits and curb defensive medicine by enacting medical liability reforms modeled after the successful state laws of California and Texas.
• Prevents insurers from unjustly cancelling a policy or instituting annual of lifetime spending caps. The GOP plan prohibits an insurer from cancelling a policy unless a person commits fraud or conceals material facts about a health condition. It also prohibits insurance plans from instituting annual or lifetime spending limits.
• Encouraging Small Business Health Plans. The GOP plan gives small businesses the power to pool together and offer health care at lower prices, just as corporations and labor unions do.
• Encouraging innovative state programs. The GOP plan rewards innovation by providing incentive payments to states that reduce premiums and the number of uninsured.
• Allowing Americans to buy insurance across state lines. The GOP plan allows Americans to shop for coverage from coast to coast by allowing Americans living in one state to purchase insurance in another.
• Codifying the Hyde Amendment. The GOP plan explicitly prohibits all federal funds, whether they are authorized funds or appropriated funds, from being used to pay for abortion.
• Promoting healthier lifestyles. The GOP plan promotes prevention & wellness by giving employers greater flexibility to financially reward employees who adopt healthier lifestyles.
• Enhancing Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). The GOP plan creates new incentives to save for future and long-term care needs by allowing qualified participants to use HSAs to pay premiums.
• Allowing dependents to remain on their parents’ policies. The GOP plan encourages coverage of young adults on their parents’ insurance through age 25.
If you would like to read this Republican Health Care Plan then please go to my NEWS SECTION on my website.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
JUST A RETIRED THINKER
I recently read a Blog written by Mr. Justin Blackman on the American Thinker website called "Giving ground to the left". Or as I would have titled it "THE SERFDOM ON THE HORIZON". In the article Mr. Blackman states that the continuous road to serfdom has been lead by Democrats and opposed by Republicans. However, Mr. Blackman indicates that although there have been short pauses in the movement toward the abyss the Republican’s have failed to change the course of the nation toward serfdom!
Mr. Blackman went on to say “American freedoms have been given just such a respite with health care legislation at an apparent standstill, but Democrats can be counted on to regroup and continue their efforts. The Republican Party should take a cue from Democrats and use this pause as a time of reflection, because a century of abysmal political setbacks should be a deafening alarm that their method of defending and maintaining a free society cannot hope to succeed in the long run”.
“Many of the advances toward statism in the United States have been perpetrated by Republican presidents: Hoover's Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act in response to the Crash of 1929; Eisenhower's enlargement of Social Security beneficiaries as a "safety net" in times of future economic depression; and price controls on key domestic goods such as oil under Nixon. The legacy of the Republican Party has been a slew of contradictory policies that, in the final analysis, creates a net gain in the size and scope of government. In some cases these were bold and deliberate gestures; in others, capitulation and compromise with Democrats. In either case, the party's major flaw has been its failure to adhere consistently to the principles of a free society”.
“Republican politicians tend to run on the platforms of decreased government intervention and increased personal freedom. In reality, their platform should read: "We support individual rights, except when we choose not to." Republican departures from free society principles are almost always a reaction to a difficult problem or crisis; the party's leaders are capable of mouthing the words that can win them support from freedom-minded citizens, but when it comes to facing reality, they do not apply these principles systematically or consistently. It is absolutely not the case that free society principles are incapable of dealing with crisis (for proof of this, one need simply refer to the volumes of philosophy that has been written on this topic); it is that Republican leaders choose not to apply them”.
“The power to accomplish any goal lies in the ability to analyze the problem at hand, determine its nature, and devise a working solution. This process demands that we use our rational capacity and act according to complex, abstract principles that are ultimately grounded in reality. It makes no difference whether the problem lies in the field of engineering, medicine or politics. How accurately a theory takes the facts of reality into consideration is the measure of its practicality”.
“The fact that Republican leaders do not consistently adhere to individual rights necessarily means that they do not actually believe in the workability of free society principles. Because a free society cannot be built on the foundation of contradictory policies, the net result of Republican actions will be the continued march toward bigger and bigger government with each emerging crisis. In other words, when a difficult problem arises; Republican leaders will turn off their brains and act like Democrats”.
“Hope is not lost” and we need to thank the people of the great state of Massachusetts, where the original tea party members helped start the first movement toward freedom! “The freedom-loving individuals of this nation are surely making their voices heard, and we are proudly demonstrating our refusal to march willfully along the Road to Serfdom. Mere protest is not enough, however; those who love freedom and wish to defend individual rights should arm themselves with the powerful arguments of this philosophy’s many great thinkers, and communicates these ideas in no uncertain terms to leaders in the Republican Party. Our nation can be free again, but representatives must begin to take a principled stance in favor of individual rights, and held accountable when they do not”.
I plan to do my part by attaching a prepared statement with every future donation to the NRC that unless Republicans begin to act like conservatives my donations will stop and will be given to those candidates, supported by the Tea Party, that are prepared to take actions in congress that will reduce the size of government, balance the budget, and follow the will of the people!!!!!
Mr. Blackman went on to say “American freedoms have been given just such a respite with health care legislation at an apparent standstill, but Democrats can be counted on to regroup and continue their efforts. The Republican Party should take a cue from Democrats and use this pause as a time of reflection, because a century of abysmal political setbacks should be a deafening alarm that their method of defending and maintaining a free society cannot hope to succeed in the long run”.
“Many of the advances toward statism in the United States have been perpetrated by Republican presidents: Hoover's Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act in response to the Crash of 1929; Eisenhower's enlargement of Social Security beneficiaries as a "safety net" in times of future economic depression; and price controls on key domestic goods such as oil under Nixon. The legacy of the Republican Party has been a slew of contradictory policies that, in the final analysis, creates a net gain in the size and scope of government. In some cases these were bold and deliberate gestures; in others, capitulation and compromise with Democrats. In either case, the party's major flaw has been its failure to adhere consistently to the principles of a free society”.
“Republican politicians tend to run on the platforms of decreased government intervention and increased personal freedom. In reality, their platform should read: "We support individual rights, except when we choose not to." Republican departures from free society principles are almost always a reaction to a difficult problem or crisis; the party's leaders are capable of mouthing the words that can win them support from freedom-minded citizens, but when it comes to facing reality, they do not apply these principles systematically or consistently. It is absolutely not the case that free society principles are incapable of dealing with crisis (for proof of this, one need simply refer to the volumes of philosophy that has been written on this topic); it is that Republican leaders choose not to apply them”.
“The power to accomplish any goal lies in the ability to analyze the problem at hand, determine its nature, and devise a working solution. This process demands that we use our rational capacity and act according to complex, abstract principles that are ultimately grounded in reality. It makes no difference whether the problem lies in the field of engineering, medicine or politics. How accurately a theory takes the facts of reality into consideration is the measure of its practicality”.
“The fact that Republican leaders do not consistently adhere to individual rights necessarily means that they do not actually believe in the workability of free society principles. Because a free society cannot be built on the foundation of contradictory policies, the net result of Republican actions will be the continued march toward bigger and bigger government with each emerging crisis. In other words, when a difficult problem arises; Republican leaders will turn off their brains and act like Democrats”.
“Hope is not lost” and we need to thank the people of the great state of Massachusetts, where the original tea party members helped start the first movement toward freedom! “The freedom-loving individuals of this nation are surely making their voices heard, and we are proudly demonstrating our refusal to march willfully along the Road to Serfdom. Mere protest is not enough, however; those who love freedom and wish to defend individual rights should arm themselves with the powerful arguments of this philosophy’s many great thinkers, and communicates these ideas in no uncertain terms to leaders in the Republican Party. Our nation can be free again, but representatives must begin to take a principled stance in favor of individual rights, and held accountable when they do not”.
I plan to do my part by attaching a prepared statement with every future donation to the NRC that unless Republicans begin to act like conservatives my donations will stop and will be given to those candidates, supported by the Tea Party, that are prepared to take actions in congress that will reduce the size of government, balance the budget, and follow the will of the people!!!!!
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Just A Retired Thinker
I found this blog online by John Gaski and discovered that it answered many questions for me! Apart from the troubling question of intent, or whether Obama-Pelosi-Reid just have a novel view of the public interest, the national Democrats are unnaturally and mysteriously gleeful despite growing backlash by the American people. Why? One reason: The Dems don't believe they will ever have to face a real election again. Is their plan not becoming obvious? It is very straightforward:
(1) Grant amnesty to the illegal aliens.
(2) Between ACORN and the SEIU, the Democrats will be stealing all the elections they really need anyway.
(3) As if they need it, the Dems will be secretly encouraging (maybe even hiring) third-party candidates wherever they need them, because they know that is the way to split the opposition vote. It almost always happens that way to the Democrats' benefit. If people such as Lou Dobbs and Glenn Beck don't realize this soon, instead of talking up the third-party route, they will only help to ensure a permanent Democrat stranglehold on Congress and the presidency!
(4) What do we suppose the extra trillion dollars of "stimulus" money to be spent from 2010 to 2012 is really for? Just a coincidence, or a ready-made election slush fund? How much has already been committed to ACORN and SEIU?
(5) Then there is the "universal voter registration" plan that the Wall Street Journal's John Fund has spotlighted, granting automatic voting privilege to anyone who has ever registered for practically anything, anywhere, anytime.
(6) When you become dependent on the decision of a Democrat bureaucrat for crucial medical treatment -- after the health care takeover -- how much power does that give the Democrats over you? Elderly voters tend to vote more conservative than younger voters, so letting the elderly die because care is "too expensive" can reshape the political profile of the electorate.
Chilling, isn't it? But not extreme: Obama himself has notoriously displayed his disregard for human life by the stated willingness to sacrifice "grandma" to a pain pill and his coarse support for unrestricted abortion -- even opposition to the Infant Born Alive Act, which he has tried to obfuscate.
When the Democrats achieve literal death-grip power over the lives of all our citizens, that's when they also achieve their long-cherished dream of absolute power in a virtual one-party state. Now is it becoming transparent (so to speak) what the real scheme behind their mania for "health-care reform" is? Now does it all make sense? This is not your father's Democrat party. This issue is not about health care, ultimately. It is about raw political power and the long-promised radical takeover of the United States. For anyone who hasn't thought of all this before, I guarantee that Obama and his party's other Socialist leaders have.
No wonder the national Democrats aren't concerned about having to face the electorate again. Pity the naive, hapless Republicans who actually imagine they have a fair chance later this year and in 2012! The only way to defeat this horrible plan is to get out the conservative vote. That means that all local republican voters must vote and make sure everyone in their family,along with friends and those that they work with,vote in 2010. Otherwise the NEW DEMOCRATS (socialists and thugs) will win and we will become serfs in the New America!!!!!
John F. Gaski, Ph.D. is Associate Professor, Mendoza College of Business, University of Notre Dame, and is author of the recently-published Frugal Cool:How to Get Rich-Without Making Very Much Money (Corby Books). He is also a specialist in social and political power and a long-time registered Democrat.
(1) Grant amnesty to the illegal aliens.
(2) Between ACORN and the SEIU, the Democrats will be stealing all the elections they really need anyway.
(3) As if they need it, the Dems will be secretly encouraging (maybe even hiring) third-party candidates wherever they need them, because they know that is the way to split the opposition vote. It almost always happens that way to the Democrats' benefit. If people such as Lou Dobbs and Glenn Beck don't realize this soon, instead of talking up the third-party route, they will only help to ensure a permanent Democrat stranglehold on Congress and the presidency!
(4) What do we suppose the extra trillion dollars of "stimulus" money to be spent from 2010 to 2012 is really for? Just a coincidence, or a ready-made election slush fund? How much has already been committed to ACORN and SEIU?
(5) Then there is the "universal voter registration" plan that the Wall Street Journal's John Fund has spotlighted, granting automatic voting privilege to anyone who has ever registered for practically anything, anywhere, anytime.
(6) When you become dependent on the decision of a Democrat bureaucrat for crucial medical treatment -- after the health care takeover -- how much power does that give the Democrats over you? Elderly voters tend to vote more conservative than younger voters, so letting the elderly die because care is "too expensive" can reshape the political profile of the electorate.
Chilling, isn't it? But not extreme: Obama himself has notoriously displayed his disregard for human life by the stated willingness to sacrifice "grandma" to a pain pill and his coarse support for unrestricted abortion -- even opposition to the Infant Born Alive Act, which he has tried to obfuscate.
When the Democrats achieve literal death-grip power over the lives of all our citizens, that's when they also achieve their long-cherished dream of absolute power in a virtual one-party state. Now is it becoming transparent (so to speak) what the real scheme behind their mania for "health-care reform" is? Now does it all make sense? This is not your father's Democrat party. This issue is not about health care, ultimately. It is about raw political power and the long-promised radical takeover of the United States. For anyone who hasn't thought of all this before, I guarantee that Obama and his party's other Socialist leaders have.
No wonder the national Democrats aren't concerned about having to face the electorate again. Pity the naive, hapless Republicans who actually imagine they have a fair chance later this year and in 2012! The only way to defeat this horrible plan is to get out the conservative vote. That means that all local republican voters must vote and make sure everyone in their family,along with friends and those that they work with,vote in 2010. Otherwise the NEW DEMOCRATS (socialists and thugs) will win and we will become serfs in the New America!!!!!
John F. Gaski, Ph.D. is Associate Professor, Mendoza College of Business, University of Notre Dame, and is author of the recently-published Frugal Cool:How to Get Rich-Without Making Very Much Money (Corby Books). He is also a specialist in social and political power and a long-time registered Democrat.
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
Just A Retired Thinker
Many are puzzled that Democrats persist in ramming unpopular and destructive legislation down our collective throats while seemingly unconcerned by their plummeting poll numbers. A widespread belief is that the Democrats are committing political suicide and will be swept from one or both houses of Congress with unprecedented electoral losses next November. But since Democrat politicians rarely do things that will not ultimately benefit themselves, one can ask: "what do they know that we don't?" We may have found out and it's called Universal Voter Registration.
The Wall Street Journal's John Fund described the Democrat plan recently at a David Horowitz Freedom Center forum. Fund describes the proposal as follows: In the middle of January, Chuck Schumer and Barney Frank will propose universal voter registration. What is universal voter registration? It means all of the state laws on elections will be overriden by a federal mandate.
The feds will tell the states: 'take everyone on every list of welfare that you have, take everyone on every list of unemployed you have, take everyone on every list of property owners, take everyone on every list of driver's license holders and register them to vote regardless of whether they want to be...'
Fund anticipates that Congress will attempt to ram this legislation down our throats like they have been with the "healthcare" bill. What a surprise! Fund covers the vote issue at greater length in his book, How the Obama Administration Threatens to Undermine Our Elections, a very good read.
Leftist groups are already arguing that universal voter registration will solve all the problems with our voting system. But the left created most of these problems. The radical leftist Nation magazine, for example, absolutely loves the idea of universal voter registration. This is the same magazine, however, that advanced Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven's Manufactured Crisis strategy. The Cloward/Piven strategy was designed to undermine government institutions by overwhelming them with impossible demands for services. Cloward and Piven focused on welfare, housing and voting as the main targets of this strategy, and the radical group ACORN was specifically created for the purpose of executing it.
The Nation article enthusiastically lists Cloward/Piven-inspired organizations like Project Vote, the ACORN group where President Obama cut his teeth. It also discusses the left's efforts to push enforcement of the Motor Voter law, and explains how universal voter registration could assist in these efforts. Cloward and Piven were the ones who crafted Motor Voter legislation in the early 1980s and pushed for it's enactment until 1993, when President Clinton signed it into law. Cloward and Piven considered Motor Voter to be their crowning lifetime achievement.
The left has predictably launched vicious smear attacks against John Fund for bringing universal voter registration to our attention. A Google search of the issue brings up any number of nasty ad hominem attacks. Most notable is Media Matters, the leftist group whose sole purpose seems to be smearing Republicans and defending the left's indefensible policies. They put up this gem: "Right-Wing Ass Weasel John Fund Doesn't Like Universal Voter Registration because of ACORN." Media Matters, what a class act!
The problems with universal voter registration are numerous and obvious. Many state lists include vast numbers of illegals, including some states which allow illegals to obtain driver's licenses; because many homeowners have more than one home there will be duplicates; because so many people are on so many separate federal and state government agency lists, there will be duplicates, and because so many lists exist with little or no cross-checking capability these duplicates are likely to go uncorrected. Add to this the fact that Dems hope to extend voting rights to felons and the whole thing begins to look like a nationwide Democrat voter registration drive facilitated by taxpayers.
Universal voter registration will create massive vulnerabilities to systemic voter fraud nationwide, and if Democrats have proven anything in recent years, it is that they can win elections that way. The George-Soros-funded Secretary of State project (SOS) was designed to take advantage of such vulnerabilities and may have been developed in anticipation of the universal voter registration plan. Al Franken's stolen election in Minnesota was a trial run for the SOS project. Longtime ACORN friend Mark Ritchie was elected Minnesota Secretary of State in 2006 with Soros's SOS and ACORN money, and what followed in Norm Coleman's Senate runoff election was a frighening demonstration of just how far Democrats will go to win. Franken won the runoff and the Democrats got their filibuster-proof sixty vote Senate majority.
The Motor Voter law was correctly identified as a facilitator of vote fraud. One of the few legal issues Barack Obama actually participated in as a lawyer was a 1995 suit against the State of Illinois, which he brought on behalf of ACORN. Then Republican Governor Jim Edgars saw the newly passed Motor Voter act as creating the potential for massive vote fraud and refused to implement it. With the assistance of the Clinton Justice Department, Obama's legal team won that suit. Obama himself actually participated very little, a strategy that seems to have served him well in life. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, after identifying himself in court proceedings, Obama sat back and let "the heavy-hitters at the Justice Department make the arguments..."
It is not surprising that the Democrats are now choosing to push this new initiative, for universal voter registration will be Motor Voter on turbochargers. And who better to sign it into law than the President from ACORN.
The Wall Street Journal's John Fund described the Democrat plan recently at a David Horowitz Freedom Center forum. Fund describes the proposal as follows: In the middle of January, Chuck Schumer and Barney Frank will propose universal voter registration. What is universal voter registration? It means all of the state laws on elections will be overriden by a federal mandate.
The feds will tell the states: 'take everyone on every list of welfare that you have, take everyone on every list of unemployed you have, take everyone on every list of property owners, take everyone on every list of driver's license holders and register them to vote regardless of whether they want to be...'
Fund anticipates that Congress will attempt to ram this legislation down our throats like they have been with the "healthcare" bill. What a surprise! Fund covers the vote issue at greater length in his book, How the Obama Administration Threatens to Undermine Our Elections, a very good read.
Leftist groups are already arguing that universal voter registration will solve all the problems with our voting system. But the left created most of these problems. The radical leftist Nation magazine, for example, absolutely loves the idea of universal voter registration. This is the same magazine, however, that advanced Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven's Manufactured Crisis strategy. The Cloward/Piven strategy was designed to undermine government institutions by overwhelming them with impossible demands for services. Cloward and Piven focused on welfare, housing and voting as the main targets of this strategy, and the radical group ACORN was specifically created for the purpose of executing it.
The Nation article enthusiastically lists Cloward/Piven-inspired organizations like Project Vote, the ACORN group where President Obama cut his teeth. It also discusses the left's efforts to push enforcement of the Motor Voter law, and explains how universal voter registration could assist in these efforts. Cloward and Piven were the ones who crafted Motor Voter legislation in the early 1980s and pushed for it's enactment until 1993, when President Clinton signed it into law. Cloward and Piven considered Motor Voter to be their crowning lifetime achievement.
The left has predictably launched vicious smear attacks against John Fund for bringing universal voter registration to our attention. A Google search of the issue brings up any number of nasty ad hominem attacks. Most notable is Media Matters, the leftist group whose sole purpose seems to be smearing Republicans and defending the left's indefensible policies. They put up this gem: "Right-Wing Ass Weasel John Fund Doesn't Like Universal Voter Registration because of ACORN." Media Matters, what a class act!
The problems with universal voter registration are numerous and obvious. Many state lists include vast numbers of illegals, including some states which allow illegals to obtain driver's licenses; because many homeowners have more than one home there will be duplicates; because so many people are on so many separate federal and state government agency lists, there will be duplicates, and because so many lists exist with little or no cross-checking capability these duplicates are likely to go uncorrected. Add to this the fact that Dems hope to extend voting rights to felons and the whole thing begins to look like a nationwide Democrat voter registration drive facilitated by taxpayers.
Universal voter registration will create massive vulnerabilities to systemic voter fraud nationwide, and if Democrats have proven anything in recent years, it is that they can win elections that way. The George-Soros-funded Secretary of State project (SOS) was designed to take advantage of such vulnerabilities and may have been developed in anticipation of the universal voter registration plan. Al Franken's stolen election in Minnesota was a trial run for the SOS project. Longtime ACORN friend Mark Ritchie was elected Minnesota Secretary of State in 2006 with Soros's SOS and ACORN money, and what followed in Norm Coleman's Senate runoff election was a frighening demonstration of just how far Democrats will go to win. Franken won the runoff and the Democrats got their filibuster-proof sixty vote Senate majority.
The Motor Voter law was correctly identified as a facilitator of vote fraud. One of the few legal issues Barack Obama actually participated in as a lawyer was a 1995 suit against the State of Illinois, which he brought on behalf of ACORN. Then Republican Governor Jim Edgars saw the newly passed Motor Voter act as creating the potential for massive vote fraud and refused to implement it. With the assistance of the Clinton Justice Department, Obama's legal team won that suit. Obama himself actually participated very little, a strategy that seems to have served him well in life. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, after identifying himself in court proceedings, Obama sat back and let "the heavy-hitters at the Justice Department make the arguments..."
It is not surprising that the Democrats are now choosing to push this new initiative, for universal voter registration will be Motor Voter on turbochargers. And who better to sign it into law than the President from ACORN.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Just A Retired Thinker
A recent Blog by B. York asks why democrats are pushing forward on healthcare when they know that it is not liked by the American people?
The question was put to a Democratic strategist who asked to remain anonymous. Yes, Democrats certainly understand that voters don't like the current bills, he said, and they are fully aware they will probably pay a price next year. But they have found a way to view going ahead anyway as the logical thing to do, at least in their eyes. He said that you have to look at the issue from three different Democratic perspectives: the House of Representatives, the White House and the Senate.
"In the House, the view of [California Rep. Henry] Waxman and [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi is that we've waited two generations to get health care passed, and the 20 or 40 members of Congress who are going to lose their seats as a result are transitional players at best," he said. "This is something the party has wanted since Franklin Roosevelt." In this view, losses are just the price of doing something great and historic. (The strategist also noted that it's easy for Waxman and Pelosi to say that, since they come from safely liberal districts.)
"At the White House, the picture is slightly different," he continued. "Their view is, 'We're all in on this, totally committed, and we don't have to run for re-election next year. There will never be a better time to do it than now.'"
"And in the Senate, they look at the most vulnerable Democrats -- like [Christopher] Dodd and [Majority Leader Harry] Reid -- and say those vulnerabilities will probably not change whether health care reform passes or fails. So in that view, if they pass reform, Democrats will lose the same number of seats they were going to lose before."
All those scenarios have a certain logic (even if the Senate calculation undercounts the number of potentially vulnerable Democrats). But each scenario is premised on passing an unpopular bill that hurts the party. Even if there's a strategic rationale for doing it, why are Democrats dead-set on hurting themselves?
"Because they think they know what's best for the public," the strategist said. "They think the facts are being distorted and the public's being told a story that is not entirely true, and that they are in Congress to be leaders. And they are going to make the decision because ___dammit, it's good for the public."
Of course, going forward has turned out to be harder than many Democrats thought. And now, with various proposals lying wrecked along the road, the true believers are practicing what the strategist calls "principled damage control."
But still, does it make sense? In the end, perhaps the most compelling explanation for Democratic behavior is that they are simply in too deep to do anything else. "Once you've gone this far, what is the cost of failure?" asks the strategist.
At that point -- Republicans will love this -- he compared congressional Democrats with robbers who have passed the point of no return in deciding to hold up a bank. Whatever they do, they're guilty of something. "They're in the bank; they've got their guns out. They can run outside with no money, or they can stick it out, go through the gunfight, and get away with the money."
That's it. Democrats are all in. They're going through with it. Even if it kills them.
Byron York, The Examiner's chief political correspondent, can be contacted at byork@washingtonexaminer.com. His column appears on Tuesday and Friday, and his stories and blog posts appears on ExaminerPolitics.com.
The question was put to a Democratic strategist who asked to remain anonymous. Yes, Democrats certainly understand that voters don't like the current bills, he said, and they are fully aware they will probably pay a price next year. But they have found a way to view going ahead anyway as the logical thing to do, at least in their eyes. He said that you have to look at the issue from three different Democratic perspectives: the House of Representatives, the White House and the Senate.
"In the House, the view of [California Rep. Henry] Waxman and [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi is that we've waited two generations to get health care passed, and the 20 or 40 members of Congress who are going to lose their seats as a result are transitional players at best," he said. "This is something the party has wanted since Franklin Roosevelt." In this view, losses are just the price of doing something great and historic. (The strategist also noted that it's easy for Waxman and Pelosi to say that, since they come from safely liberal districts.)
"At the White House, the picture is slightly different," he continued. "Their view is, 'We're all in on this, totally committed, and we don't have to run for re-election next year. There will never be a better time to do it than now.'"
"And in the Senate, they look at the most vulnerable Democrats -- like [Christopher] Dodd and [Majority Leader Harry] Reid -- and say those vulnerabilities will probably not change whether health care reform passes or fails. So in that view, if they pass reform, Democrats will lose the same number of seats they were going to lose before."
All those scenarios have a certain logic (even if the Senate calculation undercounts the number of potentially vulnerable Democrats). But each scenario is premised on passing an unpopular bill that hurts the party. Even if there's a strategic rationale for doing it, why are Democrats dead-set on hurting themselves?
"Because they think they know what's best for the public," the strategist said. "They think the facts are being distorted and the public's being told a story that is not entirely true, and that they are in Congress to be leaders. And they are going to make the decision because ___dammit, it's good for the public."
Of course, going forward has turned out to be harder than many Democrats thought. And now, with various proposals lying wrecked along the road, the true believers are practicing what the strategist calls "principled damage control."
But still, does it make sense? In the end, perhaps the most compelling explanation for Democratic behavior is that they are simply in too deep to do anything else. "Once you've gone this far, what is the cost of failure?" asks the strategist.
At that point -- Republicans will love this -- he compared congressional Democrats with robbers who have passed the point of no return in deciding to hold up a bank. Whatever they do, they're guilty of something. "They're in the bank; they've got their guns out. They can run outside with no money, or they can stick it out, go through the gunfight, and get away with the money."
That's it. Democrats are all in. They're going through with it. Even if it kills them.
Byron York, The Examiner's chief political correspondent, can be contacted at byork@washingtonexaminer.com. His column appears on Tuesday and Friday, and his stories and blog posts appears on ExaminerPolitics.com.
Friday, December 4, 2009
JUST A RETIRED THINKER!
December 4, 2009
Propaganda is in full mode by the Obama government and his henchmen, with the aid of the adoring liberal media who refuse to print the whole truth for the public. They are masterful in their various uses of propaganda. In order for America to understand what is going on citizens must become efficient in looking through the fog of propaganda to see the real story. Therefore, I am going to start printing on this web site a primer on Propaganda so that you will see the tricks that the Obama administration and the liberals in congress with the aid of the liberal news media are using to pull the wool over the publics eyes.
The Healthcare bill, cap and tax, and all the huge spending plans are all part of the big plan for America. This plan was stated by President Obama while campaigning for the office of president. During that time Obama stated that there would be a huge change for America and he is now attempting to put that plan into operation. However, a lot of that plan is hidden from view while vast amounts of propaganda is placed into the media so that citizens will be confused and under control while this plan is put into place by the liberal congress.
Citizens must stay alert because we will not recognize America after the socialists are finished with their plan!!! We must get out the vote in 2010 and make sure that the socialist democrats are not in office after we all vote. This means that we have to organize groups and educate ourselves about the various techniques of propaganda and use these along with the techniques that were used by the community organizers.
Tea party groups are meeting in our city watch the paper for those meetings and make plans to attend. Remember if we set and do nothing then we will not win this battle for our country. The socialists have the means to turn this country into a modern day serfdom so make plans to get out the vote in 2010. Please contact me if you need help and tell people to check my web site.
Propaganda is in full mode by the Obama government and his henchmen, with the aid of the adoring liberal media who refuse to print the whole truth for the public. They are masterful in their various uses of propaganda. In order for America to understand what is going on citizens must become efficient in looking through the fog of propaganda to see the real story. Therefore, I am going to start printing on this web site a primer on Propaganda so that you will see the tricks that the Obama administration and the liberals in congress with the aid of the liberal news media are using to pull the wool over the publics eyes.
The Healthcare bill, cap and tax, and all the huge spending plans are all part of the big plan for America. This plan was stated by President Obama while campaigning for the office of president. During that time Obama stated that there would be a huge change for America and he is now attempting to put that plan into operation. However, a lot of that plan is hidden from view while vast amounts of propaganda is placed into the media so that citizens will be confused and under control while this plan is put into place by the liberal congress.
Citizens must stay alert because we will not recognize America after the socialists are finished with their plan!!! We must get out the vote in 2010 and make sure that the socialist democrats are not in office after we all vote. This means that we have to organize groups and educate ourselves about the various techniques of propaganda and use these along with the techniques that were used by the community organizers.
Tea party groups are meeting in our city watch the paper for those meetings and make plans to attend. Remember if we set and do nothing then we will not win this battle for our country. The socialists have the means to turn this country into a modern day serfdom so make plans to get out the vote in 2010. Please contact me if you need help and tell people to check my web site.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)