Tag Archives: Republican Party

Should All Political Parties Embrace Liberal Values? The Left Seems To Think So.

donkey and elephantThe concept that the whims of public opinion, the fads of the moment, or the opinions of an ideological opponent should fundamentally alter what a particular political party stands for has always seemed rather odd to me. It is an argument I see trotted out in articles from Left leaning sites on a regular basis. The argument is always, without fail, that the Republican Party needs to become more like the Democratic Party. Yet the reverse is never suggested for consideration. Great “concern” is showed time and time again by often very radical and liberal writers, as well as general media types, that the Republican Party will fade away into oblivion and cease to be relevant if it doesn’t reject the “extremist” factions and beliefs that it currently contains.

As if they really care.

A healthy and robust representative government has political parties that represent different views and positions in that society, not ones that are merely pale shadows of one another. Now it would be nicer if we weren’t constricted by the two-party system and had more ideologically pure and clear parties to choose from, but in reality we do not. So the two political parties we do have should, in general, reflect different views and positions so that people have an actual choice between differing political philosophies when they go to polls.

If I was interested in voting for political candidates that are for bigger government, the redefinition of marriage, higher taxes, abortion on demand, a decadent popular culture, socialized medicine, gun control, amnesty and open borders I’d vote Democratic. I’m not, so I vote for the most conservative Republican candidate that I have the opportunity to do so.

Such appeals to turn Republicans into “Democrat lites” are little more than a crude attempt at reverse psychology. The fact that liberals and progressives are so “concerned” about the future of the Republican Party that they’ve decided to offer free and supportive advice for its future success is rather touching. Aren’t Republicans both lucky and fortunate?  Of course, the advice offered is simply to become more like them and to adopt their particular political positions. The argument seems to be that to succeed in running against liberals then one should just simply become more liberal. So in effect you end up with a liberal running against a slightly different shade of liberal which inevitably ends with virtually no real choice for the average voter and little difference in political governing views or policy in the long run.

There should be no shame in continuing to advocate for constitutional governance, protecting the traditional marriage and family structure that has been the foundation of society and civilization for thousands of years, or advancing the concept that the rights that come with personal freedom (ordered liberty) are inherent natural ones, not mere privileges bestowed or removed at will by the powers of government. In fact, these are tried and true timeless principles that have shown their worth through the ages. That is their strength and why they are seen as a dire threat to those who advocate the various isms of the Left. Marxism, fascism, National Socialism, and anarchism all have at one time or another been the inevitable political ism championed by  the young, the masses, and a culture at large and yet were ultimately proved to be riddled with weaknesses and incorrect beliefs. And the inability of enough people and institutions to stand against them has caused an immense amount of damage to human civilization.

Color me unimpressed that yet another ideology arising on the left side of the political spectrum once again seeks to smash the traditional rituals, traditions, morals, values and cultural institutions that came before it so that it can lead us all into an age of utopia. The words and phrases have changed in some instances but the motives and desired outcome in many ways have not. The attempt to water down the Republican Party is just one aspect of their attempt to conquer and capture academia, entertainment, mainstream media, the military, the courts, voluntary private entities like the boy scouts, and the political process all in the name of the common good. Words and phrases like privacy, women’s rights, tolerance, equality, diversity, tolerance, and multiculturalism are all used with great effectiveness by the Left which has shown an amazingly effective ability (think 1984) to twist and redefine all of these concepts into Frankenstein versions of what should be acceptable and logical. We, as a society, are faced with a discomforting and distorted reality as constructed by the Left where right is wrong, good is evil, and the right to not be offended is the greatest right of all.

There are those who believe that there are no differences between the two parties anyway and claim that none of this even matters. But anyone who actually pays attention to the realm of politics and ideological warfare understands that this is not truly the case in reality and, while it may be moving in that direction, it certainly has not yet arrived at that destination. Just try to sell that line to a very frustrated, often stymied, and perpetually complaining Barack Obama who has had to contend with a Republican opposition that to a member voted against his health care plan and has refused to play nice with his administration since the very beginning. Try telling him there is no difference between the political parties. I’m afraid he’d beg to differ. And if there were in fact no significant differences that really mattered, the constant plaintive calls for the Republican Party to become more like them would not be echoing across the fruited plains from our Democratic friends. They would have no need to do so.

It is a sad truth that there are always those in the GOP who are willing to sell out and play along with the progressive agenda and that they exist in important and influential positions within the party. But at the same time it must be remembered that there are significant numbers that do not. That is worth noting and remembering.

One should always be very suspicious any time there is a systematic push to impose the principles and views of one political party onto another. There is a reason and agenda at work when you see that happening. All the platonic, friendly “warnings” from the Left, and the media in general, about how the Republicans are self-destructing, or losing their way, or radical, or leaning too far to the right, or are too extreme, or out of touch with the American people is actually revealing to us the fact that they are still very worried about the conservative Republican message. If they were not, they would be far less concerned about the internal affairs of the Republican Party and instead be focused on spending a little more time getting their own abysmal act together and putting their own house in order.

The Left would desperately love to see a de facto one-party state, and one way for them to do that is to help turn the Republican Party into a subservient, 2nd tier mirror image of the Democratic one  that’s just barely alive and effective enough to maintain the illusion of a two-party system of government. They hope, pray, and are at hard at work hoping to achieve that day.

“Rendition”, Fact or Fiction? Totalitarian Government is Here

RenditionI watched the movie “Rendition” a few nights ago and began thinking about the situation in our nation today.  The movie is about an Egyptian man who has lived in the United States for 20 years, moving here when he was 14. He is a college educated chemical engineer, married, with a young son and a pregnant wife.  He has some relatives who have the same last name as a known terrorist so he is kidnapped by the CIA upon his return to the United States from South Africa.  When questioned by the CIA counter terrorism branch he denies any knowledge of terrorists, past terrorist attacks, or plans for future attacks.  As a result of his denial he is put on a plane and taken to a country in the Middle East (which I surmised to be Egypt) and is given to the nation’s secret police for questioning.  He is subjected to beatings, water boarding, and electric shock torture.  He finally gives up names of “co-conspirators” and is thrown back into a very small cell.

An American intelligence analyst who survived a terrorist bombing that killed his companion replaces the dead man as part of the interrogation team.  After days of torture the prisoner gives a list of names to his interrogators.  The American runs the names of the people given up by the prisoner through various intelligence agencies, including Interpol.  What he finds is that the names given are the members of the Egyptian National Soccer Team in 1990, the year the prisoner left Egypt for America.  In the meantime, the wife of the prisoner has contacted an old friend who is the chief of staff for a prominent Senator.  The friend is stonewalled and when he is faced with losing his job if he pursues the matter further he tells the wife that he can do nothing to help.   The analyst goes to the Minister of the Interior in this foreign country, shows the information he has found, and gets the man to sign an order for the release of the prisoner.  The American then arranges clandestine travel for the man to get home.

After September 11, 2001 I bought into many of the steps taken to find terrorists and stop them in their tracks.  I agreed with the Patriot Act at the time, when I knew only talking points about it.  Much has changDept Homeland Security Logoed in light of thirteen years of wars that have not really made our nation any safer from outside attack, but have certainly made the nation much more of a police state.  Today the story line of this movie is more than just a story about Moslem terrorism; it is much closer to home.

When I first heard Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Charles Schumer, and others call me a homophobic, Il Duce Obamaislamophobic, hate mongering, bomb throwing Nazi TEA Party “potential domestic terrorist” I took offense.  And frankly, they drove me deeper into the Republican ranks of voters.  But in the years since the 2010 elections, and especially in the last few months, I have begun to hear Republicans speak the same rhetoric as life-long Marxist Democrats.  John McCain, Mitch McConnell, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Peter King, and others begin to call people like me the same names and refer to patriotic citizens in the same vein as the Obama/Pelosi/Reid/Schumer crowd.

This is alarming to me.  When I see the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) allow for the indefinite detention of American citizens without charge, without trial, and without probable cause I begin to wonder.  I hear  those in both political parties call me and other patriots  “potential domestic terrorists” for having the temerity to staBi-partisanship logond up and demand our government follow the Constitution.  I wonder when they will subject me to the same treatment as this innocent man in the movie.  All that is necessary for me to be arrested and held indefinitely is for someone, anyone, to denounce me as a terrorist for my political beliefs and my rights under the Constitution are gone, just like that!!!! Call me crazy but this sounds like a movie right out of Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, Communist China, East Germany, North Korea, and countless Moslem countries.  Of course, politicians in both parties who are calling for these NDAA provisions say they will never abuse the Constitution and subject We the People to these provisions.   If that is the case then why even have those provisions in the bill?????

Our nation has lasted long past any form of government since the Roman Empire because the Constitution provides for “unalienable rights” given by God and guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States of America.  Those currently in charge of our government have already trampled on those rights.  The 1st Amendment, written to protect religious organizations FROM government, is constantly under attack where Christianity is concerned.  Atheists, agnostics, and Moslems aren’t attacked by those who are so concerned about the “separation of church and state”.  Only Christians are subjected to the restrictive decisions by activist judges.  The Secret Service now has the option of declaring the 1st Amendment  provision of “the right of the people to peaceably assemble” null and void if they decide they want to.  No justification is needed other than the President or other high level official will be present.  So they can prevent any dissent from being voiced by a gathering of protestors when it suits them.  I know what that sounds like to me, and it isn’t a free Republic!!!!!

Our civil rights under the 2nd Amendment are constantly under attack by local, state, and federal governments, despite the amendment very clearly stating that  ”the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”.  New Feinstein Veterans mentally illYork City and the State of California are using registration lists to confiscate the firearms of people who have done nothing to violate the law, and other states are not far behind.  This video is from Canada but it is coming here:

Some Senators are saying all veterans are mentally unstable and therefore should not be allowed to own firearms.  Colorado state legislators are being recalled by state voters for passing gun control laws that stand against the Constitution and the will of We the People because citizens are fed up and taking action.  Obamacare has provisions for the search of citizen homes without probable cause and without a warrant, violating the 4th Amendment.  The 9th and 10th Amendments are being rendered irrelevant by federal bribery and/or bullying of state governments who are so dependent on federal tax dollars that they refuse to stand on those provisions of the Constitution.  Add the fact that the political machines own most politicians at the state level, and many at city and county level also where do We the People go for redress of our grievances?

New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg, before he left office, outlawed what was it; salt, pepper, any soft drink over 16 ounces, among a host of unconstitutional actions.  The Federal Food and Drug Administration is about to outlaw trans-fats, and the EPA has now outlawed the use of wood burning stoves, just to name a few instances of government bureaucratic over-reach.  Wood burning stoves?????  I can’t eat what I want to eat now?????

Does anyone really believe these same people won’t subject We the People to the FEMA camps when push comes to shove and citizens have reached their limit of toleration of tyranny?  What have federal agencies, unconstitutional onesBarbed Wire at that, done to ensure that We the People will not be subjugated and led to the slaughter as were the Jews and others in Nazi Germany?????  It looks to me like they are doing exactly the opposite.

This is not a Democrat vs. Republican battle here.  This is, good vs. evil, right vs. wrong, ruling political elite vs. We the People, the working class American; and finally the Constitutional Republic vs. dictatorship.  From a practical aspect this is what we are facing, like it or not.  The Republican Party as currently controlled is as much a danger to liberty as the Democrat Party. They have teamed up to enslave We the People, and they are doing just that!!!!!

I submit this in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, in faith, with the responsibility given to me by Almighty God to honor His work and not let it die from neglect.

 

Bob Russell

Claremore, Oklahoma

December 20, 2013

A fractured party is a losing party

sodahead.com12346

Why is it that when Democrats govern like Socialist dictators they win, but when Republicans govern like Democrats they lose? The sad part is that both parties govern in such a similar capacity that it is hard to tell them apart these days. Both parties have an insatiable appetite for spending; and fiscal discipline in Washington is as rare as a snowstorm in Phoenix.

Neither party has shown the ability to govern the American people the way our Constitution originally intended. One could argue that we technically have not had a Democratic President in office since John F. Kennedy; or a true Republican President since Ronald Reagan. What we have had are a bunch of elitist globalists from both parties hell bent on relinquishing our sovereignty and leading us down the path to a New World Order.

Make no mistake about it, the Republican Party is still head and shoulders above the Communist sympathizing Democratic Party of 2013. Our current occupier of the White House creates a clear and present danger to the very survival of our nation; a Marxist law professor with enough common sense to fill the head of a pin.

This article is not intended to bash Democrats and the President; although that certainly is a favorite past time of mine. I will show my readers how the Democratic Party divides and conquers the Republican Party by pressuring the political class in Washington to go along with their agenda knowing full well it will anger the base of the Republican Party and help create long lasting divisions between the party brass.

Here is how it works.

The Republican Party has three distinct ideological wings. It is made up of social and fiscal Conservatives, social Libertarian and fiscal Conservatives, and socially Liberal and fiscal Conservatives.

The Democratic Party also has three distinct ideological wings. It is made up of social Conservative and fiscal Liberals, socially liberal and socially fiscal Liberals, and outright leftist Socialists; who never met a tax that was too high or an expenditure that was too low.

Each party has a political or establishment class and an activist grassroots class. The establishment classes for each party also tend to operate in very different ways.

For example, establishment Republicans tend to be much more moderate than the more conservative activist base they represent. The establishment Democrats tend to be more liberal than the people they represent too; however sadly that is changing.

America has always been considered a center right nation. Most people are fiscally conservative and socially liberal. This is why the share of Independent voters has increased in every election. The truth is 40% of America will vote Republican and 40% will vote Democratic. That leaves 20% of voters with the fate of the nation in their hands every four years.

Democrats understand this much better than Republicans and win elections because they know how to fool these voters with a false sense of security. The Democratic Party knows that most voters are socially liberal and fiscally conservative. That is why they continue to run on tax cuts for the middle class and abortion on demand. They understand class warfare and identity politics much better than Republicans do. They also know how to overwhelm Republicans in Congress and get them to submit to their iron will.

The definition of bi-partisanship in Washington is when a Republican checks their morals, convictions, and principles at the door in order to sign onto leftist legislation so they can tell their constituents they accomplished something. When establishment Republicans go over to the dark side they get an earful from their more conservative constituents. We let our so call republican representatives know how disappointed we are in their decisions by not contributing to their reelection campaigns and ultimately protesting them by staying home on Election Day.

This is how the Democratic Party wins.

A Democratic Candidate could run for office with a criminal record and strangle a live kitten on national television and because they have a D before their name could still win an election. The reason is it’s not about the person; it’s about the party. It is about the promise not the delivery. It is about the artificial safety nets they claim to spring; not the harsh reality of how government bashes you in the face and slams your head against the pavement. It is the romanticism, fairytale, and utopian vision of equality, prosperity, and shared responsibility that most voters fall for.

Republicans see their party much different. They are looking for something that does not exist in politics, and that is purity. There is no such animal in politics and it is about time Republicans finally realize and more importantly except this. We definitely want our representatives to align with us and be our advocates rather than our adversaries; however our first objective needs to be winning elections first.

The difference is that if Democratic voters do not agree with their candidate on the major issues it is not a deterrent for them to sit home on Election Day. The reason for this is they would rather vote for a Democratic candidate they disagree with rather than a Republican candidate they vehemently oppose.

Generally speaking, the Democratic Party has become an unprincipled, unscrupulous, and immoral party. The Republican Party has drifted so far to the left that it is getting harder to tell them both apart. There are still a few Republican members left in Washington that will put their principles before their party but unfortunately their numbers are dwindling.

From a purely strategically speaking standpoint, Republicans, Conservatives, and Independents need to start voting like Democrats. Our number one goal must be to win elections and wrestle away control of the purse strings from the tax and spend liberals in Congress.

This means we need to start voting for all Republicans regardless of what spectrum on the ideological wing they may be on. Once we gain power than we can start replacing the Republicans that do not support the ideas and values of the party. If we continue the infighting and the division we will continue to be in the minority for years to come.

We need to run candidates that will take bold but electorate friendly positions. Positions that are center right like term limits, auditing the Federal Reserve, and making Congress part time.

When it comes to wedge issues like abortion and Gay Marriage we need to understand that the Democratic Party is always going to try to use those issues to divide and conquer us. We need to start exposing the left on all the lies they have perpetrated on the American people. Healthcare is sky rocketing, the economy is in a constant downward spiral, and taxes and spending are at the highest levels in history.

There is so much for Republicans to use against Democrats that I could write an entire strategy guide myself. Why the Republicans in Congress have decided to remain silent is a mystery. They have become a disgrace and you would think they would be doing everything they could to expose this administration but they’re not.

In order to change the party we need to be back in the majority. You cannot change the party from a position of weakness. We will never get an opportunity to change the party from the inside out while we are looking from the outside in. A fractured party is a losing party, the Democrats know this and it is about time Republicans figure it out too.

Suggested by the author:
www.joshbernsteinpoliticalwriter.com
Dismantling Washington
Obama’s DHS: Drones, Hollow Points, and Secrecy
Obamacare is bad for business and your health
How the left uses identity politics and fear tactics to influence voters

GOP Adopts 95% of the ‘Freedom Platform’

While the Republican Party and the Tea Party are still two vastly different factions, the Republicans Party is beginning to accept some of the grassroots ideals of the Tea Party. For the first time the Republican Party is accepting official party planks from grassroots organizations.RNC 2012

Last week, it was released that the GOP had accepted 11.5 of 12 planks which were part of the Freedom Platform, a platform developed straight from the people and the grassroots organization, FreedomWorks. The Freedom Platform embraces all forms of Conservatism and limited-government.

FreedomWorks asked their activists to go online and participate in a survey. In that survey they were asked to choose between two randomly selected policy-based questions. From the selections of close to 1.2 million people, and town-hall meetings with activists across the country, the Freedom Platform was developed. This ensured that the platform would include all of the policies that represented the grassroots.

Matt Kibbe, President and CEO of FreedomWorks, in a recent FoxNews column:

The GOP platform will include almost every plank of the crowd-sourced Freedom Platform. In
other words, 95 percent of the grassroots’ top priorities are being adopted as priorities for the
Republican Party.

Thanks to the efforts of an engaged fiscal conservative constituency, Republicans have
committed to repeal ObamaCare and pursue patient-centered reforms that return the decision-
making power from the government back to doctors and patients. The Republicans are
also committed to stopping the impending tax hikes, reversing the Obama spending spree,
implementing accountability for balancing the budget, and restoring fairness to our tax system
by pursuing a flatter tax.

Mirroring the Freedom Platform, the GOP platform strongly rejects cap-and-trade, protects
small businesses from the Environmental Protection Agency’s costly over-regulation, and
commits to unleashing America’s vast domestic energy potential. The Republican platform also
pledges to institute an annual audit of the Federal Reserve.

The only element of the Freedom Platform the GOP didn’t accept was the proposal to eliminate
the Department of Education. This proposal was actually a major plank of the Republican
platform from 1980 to 2000, until then-Gov. George W. Bush had it removed. Even so, the 2012 platform contains good language on the need for local control of education, as well as a very strong endorsement of school choice, both of which are key reforms supported by grassroots conservatives nationwide.

The 2012 GOP platform isn’t perfect by any means, but it represents significant progress within
the Republican Party in recognizing the importance of embracing bold, fiscal conservative
solutions for our nation’s myriad problems. While the Republican Party’s new platform reflects
well on its willingness to take a stand for principled policies, it also says a lot about how the Tea
Party has grown in lasting political influence.

No longer “just” a massive protest movement or even a well-oiled “Get out the Vote” machine,
the Tea Party has matured into a strong, focused policy powerhouse. The success of the Freedom Platform should forever put to rest the ridiculous notion that Tea Party conservatives
are incapable of engaging in the mainstream political arena without compromising their
principles. Grassroots conservatives stood firmly behind principled policies, and the Republican
Party listened.

This victory doesn’t mean the bottom-up campaign of individuals for sound economic policy
is over. Tea Partiers are still wary of the establishment, and no political party can ease the
grassroots into complacency with platform promises.

Finally the time has come that the Republican Party, a party which by all accounts in full of Progressive-lites, has finally taken a major step toward true fiscal and social Conservatism by adopting 95% of the Freedom Platform. While we should be excited that the GOP has adopted these planks, we shouldn’t let our guard down. We must make sure that the GOP and the Republican leaders follow through.

Follow Chris on Twitter

Libertarians Claim Romney Cannot Appear on the Ballot in November

On August 15th, the Libertarian Party in Washington State petitioned to have Mitt Romney’s name removed from the Republican ticket in November. They are claiming that the GOP is no longer ‘significant’ enough to qualify as a major party under Washington law.

2012 Republican Candidate for President Mitt Romney (AP)

Chapter 29A of the Revised Code of Washington defines a major party as:

a political party of which at least one nominee for president, vice president, United States senator, or a statewide office received at least five percent of the total vote cast at the last preceding state general election in an even-numbered year.

The lawsuit by the Libertarian Party claims that Republican Dino Rossi, who received 48% of the vote for the U.S Senate in 2010, was not officially nominated by the GOP. Therefore, no Republican nominee qualifies to be on the November ballot, because no Senate candidate reached the ‘magic number’ of votes.

Much to no one’s surprise, the GOP disagrees. Per the Associated Press, the Republican-led state election committee points to an administrative code that essential repealed the rules cited above. Chairman of the committee, Sam Reed, argues that the enacted election regulation of 2004, defines a major political party as, “a party whose presidential candidate received more than five percent of the vote in the last white house vote”.

Using this standard, both the Republican and Democrat party qualify as major political party, and should both be represented on the presidential ballot come November.

But whose definition is the correct definition?

John Mills, the attorney representing the Libertarian Party, calls for a separation of powers. He argues that laws passed by the state legislature carry more weight than regulations passed by separate government agencies.

“As a legal matter, that’s kind of a frivolous argument,” Mills said. The Legislature hasn’t repealed the old laws, and an effort to make those changes a few years ago failed.

State Republican Party Chairman Kirby Wilbur is calling the lawsuit “silly.”

However, does any of this really matter? If you know anything about the Electoral College and how states lean, you know that Washington state is almost a guaranteed Democratic state every presidential election. So does it even really matter if Romney is on the ticket? Some say no, but Republicans in Washington will make sure Romney is on their ticket, that I am sure of.

 

Follow me on Twitter: @chrisenloe

Is Gary Johnson the New Ross Perot?

The Former Governor of New Mexico and current Libertarian Party candidate for president Gary Johnson isn’t likely going to become the next president, but that doesn’t mean he won’t have an effect on the outcome of the election come November.

Johnson briefly participated in the Republican primaries and debates before switching over to the Libertarian ticket, and per Fox News, Johnson is polling about 5% nationwide, which isn’t particularly bad for a third party candidate. Despite his low numbers, Johnson isbeginning to show a little pull in a few battleground states out west which includes New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, and Colorado.

Libertarian Party Presidential Candidate Gary Johnson

According to the same poll, he is polling at about 9% in Arizona and 13% in New Mexico – it’s not enough to win, but it could certainly be enough to hand out a disadvantage to the major party candidate that he is taking votes away from.

Earlier in the week, the Libertarian Party had this to say about Gary Johnson, “Libertarian Presidential Candidate Gov. Gary Johnson Could Deprive Mitt Romney of 5 battleground states, 74 Electoral Votes, 27% of the Electoral Votes needed to win in 2012.”

No one can be certain on what kind of effect Gary Johnson will have on the outcome in November, if any, but he wouldn’t be the first ‘monkey to throw a wrench in the machine’.

Twenty years ago in the 1992 presidential election, third party candidate Ross Perot collected an astounding 19% of the popular vote. Some have come to think that Perot’s influence aided Bill Clinton into the White House with just 43% of the popular vote, and disadvantaged incumbent George H. W. Bush.

However, Ross Perot had a large amount national support, something of which Johnson is currently lacking. But with the race between former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and President Obama being so tight and within the margin of error, Johnson’s influence could likely turn a state red or blue.

To add, some think that Johnson might not just hurt one side of the aisle, but both. While most think that Johnson will pull votes away from Romney, the Liberal PPP (Public Polling Policy) believes that Johnson could hurt Obama in Colorado.

“He’s going to be a problem for somebody, somewhere,” writes political strategist and Fox News contributor Joe Trippi. “We don’t yet know which candidate he might harm the most … both campaigns should be looking over their shoulders at that guy almost nobody is talking about.”

All of the numbers and opinions aside, Gary Johnson is a legitimate candidate for presidency, and shouldn’t just be thought of as a ‘vote stealer’. Johnson is the third party alternate in an election where the two major candidates are thought to have a lot of similarities. Johnson stands for a lot of what the other two candidates won’t stand for, simply because of political ramifications.

 

Follow Me on Twitter: @chrisenloe

Barack Obama and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Presidency

When we all heard his speeches during the 2008 campaign, it was something akin to the Lesley Gore’s Sunshine, Lollipops, and Rainbows. He promised more transparency and a return of civility in politics.  He was everything George Bush wasn’t, which provided the hot air that led him to the presidency.  Bush did run deficits and the orgy of spending and corruption scandals that plagued Republicans in 2006, that were not forgotten in 2008, allowed Democrats to control the narrative on a key Republican issue: Taxes and Spending.  The “tax and spend label” that usually sinks liberal candidates, or at least makes the race a competition, faded away.  Obama vowed to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term and that was music to the ears of independent voters sick of Dubya.  However, when the ballots closed that miserable day in November, Barack Obama rode that wave of “hope and change” into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue on a flawlessly executed campaign that ushered in our first black president.  However, after a $800 billion dollar stimulus, a trillion dollar new entitlement program, stagnant economic growth, a volatile job market, and high unemployment, the banner of hope and change is looking more like a Kafka-esque nightmare.  We’ve all transformed into beetles.

As for the so-called “stimulus,” we should thank the president.  He finally and irrevocably proved that government spending doesn’t spur economic growth and, therefore, killed the cornerstone of Keynesian economics.  We’ve had eleven recessions and recoveries in the past sixty years and, as Harvey Golub wrote in the Wall Street Journal yesterday:

This recovery is near the bottom of all 11. Cumulative nonfarm job growth is just 1.9% 34 months into recovery, the ninth-worst performance and well below the average job growth of 6.5%. Cumulative GDP growth is just 6.8% 11 quarters into this recovery, less than half the average (15.2%) and the worst of all 11…fiscal policy, under the control of the president and his party, increased expenditures by about $700 billion per year since 2008 and launched a spending package of about $800 billion (along with various “targeted” temporary tax reductions), all of which resulted in an increase in national debt of over $5 trillion. In other words, we borrowed $5 trillion, for which we will pay interest for who knows how long, in order to stimulate the economy now.

Moreover, Obama’s concerted effort to pass health care reform at the expense of job creating-centered policies, only created more uncertainty in the economy. Furthermore, Obama’s cornerstone of his health care reform is that it would curb costs and save trillions over the long term.  However, the $940 billion dollar price tag for this monstrosity actually has doubled to $1.76 trillion over the next ten years.  In all, the cost of this bill will incur $3.5 trillion dollars in deficits through 2022.  For liberals, this is the apotheosis of fiscal discipline. Moreover, for this bill to be SLIGHTLY palatable, Democrats would need to cut Medicare by $500 billion, institute the Medicare Doc Fix, and tax union “cadillac” health care plans by 2014.  None of which was expected to happen on The Hill. It was nothing more than a surreptitious expansion of the state and quietly edge away individual rights and liberties.  Concerning transparency, that pledge was hastily broken during the Obamacare negotiations.  Talk about changing the culture in Washington.

When this bill is fully implemented in 2014,  20 million Americans would be dropped from their coverage, while another 49 million will be dependent on government run health services.  This comes after reports show the Dependency Index, which decreased under Ronald Reagan, has increased 23% over the last two years. That’s an additional 67 million Americans dependent on government services.  Lastly, since the beginning of this year, 1200 companies have received HHS waivers highlighting Obamacare’s crushing costs and regulatory arduousness.  Sadly, I think the President missed what  George Will stated on This Week some two years ago that eighty-five percent of Americans had health insurance and ninety-five percent of the insured liked their insurance.

Concerning the unemployment rate, the Obama team promised if the stimulus was passed we would have robust economic growth and unemployment never to rise above 8%.  As the events played out, unemployment has been over 8% for the past thirty-eight months.  Treasury Secretary Geithner considers it a success, but I digress.  No president has been re-elected with unemployment above 7.2% since FDR and with an additional $5 trillion in new debt and nothing, but anemic growth to show for it; Barry should be updating his resume.  In fact, Jeffrey H. Anderson of The Weekly Standard wrote

Over the past quarter of a century (a total of 300 months), dating back to May 1987 and the Reagan administration, here are the 30 worst months (that is, the bottom 10 percent) for the employment-population ratio, along with the president who happened to be in office at that particular time.

1. (tie) July 2011, 58.2 percent, President BarackObama
1. (tie) June 2011, 58.2 percent, Obama
1. (tie) November 2010, 58.2 percent, Obama
1. (tie) December 2009, 58.2 percent, Obama
5. (tie) August 2011, 58.3 percent, Obama
5. (tie) December 2010, 58.3 percent, Obama
5. (tie) October 2010, 58.3 percent, Obama
8. (tie) April 2012, 58.4 percent, Obama
8. (tie) October 2011, 58.4 percent, Obama
8. (tie) September 2011, 58.4 percent, Obama
8. (tie) May 2011, 58.4 percent, Obama
8. (tie) April 2011, 58.4 percent, Obama
8. (tie) February 2011, 58.4 percent, Obama
8. (tie) January 2011, 58.4 percent, Obama
15. (tie) March 2012, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) January 2012, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) December 2011, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) November 2011, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) March 2011, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) September 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) August 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) July 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) June 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) March 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) February 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) January 2010, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) November 2009, 58.5 percent, Obama
15. (tie) October 2009, 58.5 percent, Obama
29. February 2012, 58.6 percent, Obama
30. (tie) May 2010, 58.7 percent, Obama
30. (tie) April 2010, 58.7 percent, Obama
30. (tie) September 2009, 58.7 percent, Obama

Interestingly, the 30 (or 32, including ties) worst months for employment in the past 25 years have all come after the most recent recession ended, in June 2009.  In other words, they’ve all come during the Obama “recovery.”

Yes. Let’s go Forward.

As the election draws closer, we have a president who simply cannot run on his record.  He is trying to strike it rich with this narrative of fairness. A political tactic that is not gaining traction with the independent voters, of which 57% think that American society is fair. As Alexis Simendinger wrote on Real Clear Politics, “these voters care about the size of government and debts and blame Congress more than Wall Street and special interests for gridlock and policy myopia.”  Issues that don’t necessarily favor the political left.  It gets even more bizarre with Obama’s position about private equity.

He bashed Romney in a rather apocryphal ad that showed how Bain Capital, the private equity firm Romney founded, closed down a steel plant, GST Steel, in Kansas City, Missouri.  What is interesting about this two minute exercise in inaccuracy is the fact that Romney left Bain in 1999 and GST Steel closed in 2001.  The managing director for Bain at the time was Jonathan Lavine who happens to be an Obama bundler and raised between $100-200,000 for the president.  This guy was still around when GST Steel was shut down.  Yet, the president accepts money from him.  Additionally, Anderson Cooper commented on the hypocrisy when Obama attended a fundraiser hosted by Tony James of Blackstone Group, a private equity firm, on the very same day the Bain attack ad was released.  Can you smell the cynicism?

As a result, many on the left have flocked to the support of private equity, including some of the president’s staunchest supporters.   Not the result you want in a time where you’re fighting for your political life.  This makes the second political blunder, the first being the Life of Julia that detailed the sixty-five year presidency of Obama, by what was thought to have been an inerrant political campaign.  One that has rapidly lost its luster.  I think we can safely say that Obama’s political acumen was not gauged properly four years ago.

A student of the far left, Barack Obama’s presidency is marred by high unemployment, increased debt, sky high deficits, a new trillion dollar entitlement that failed to curb costs, and a government sponsored recovery package that is painfully anemic.  He failed in his promise to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term and has peddled a dependency agenda that is inherently dangerous to the socio-economic health of the nation.  He has prevaricated at every event to tackle our debt and deficit responsibly by nixing Simpson-Bowles and creating a “Super Committee” in the fallout of the debt ceiling debacle last summer to avoid taking on the issue personally.  We cannot afford another $5 trillion in new debt.  We cannot afford Obamacare.  We cannot afford another four years of Barack Obama. It’s 2012 and I’ll do everything I can to see that Mitt Romney is elected.   I look forward to saying goodbye to this terrible, horrible, no good very bad presidency.  Game on!

 

The Republican Party Must Restore its Legacy of Expanding Freedom

The Republican Party must reclaim its mantle as the party that expands freedom. The GOP has a deep history of promoting liberty, both at home and abroad, and it must draw on this legacy to gain moral strength and clarity of vision. The party should thus distinguish itself from the progressive Democrat Party if it wants to regain the trust of the American people.

Since its inception, the Republican Party has broadened the empire of liberty and has enabled millions of people to escape from the bondage of tyranny. The party itself was formed in the raucous twilight period prior to the American Civil War. An abolitionist movement was spawned and gained momentum as a coalition of Radical Republicans, carved from the carcasses of the defunct Whigs and the transient Free Soilers, who committed themselves to opposing slavery and its expansion into the new territories. The Republican president Abraham Lincoln dispatched a Union army and guided it to victory against the secessionist states, thereby helping to institutionalize the founding truth expressed in the Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal.

The Radical Republicans moved assertively to ensure the southern states complied with the outlawing of slavery, accruing to its credit as an anti-slavery party. Black political activists noticed: the first black politicians to deliver addresses at a party convention were Republicans, the first black representative was Republican John Willis Menard of Louisiana, and the first black Senator was Republican John R. Lynch of Mississippi. The Fifteenth Amendment, passed under Republican control, formally acknowledged that blacks had the right to vote. Yet it took the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, both passed nearly a century later, to remove impediments to voting such as literacy tests and poll taxes. The bills were disproportionately passed by Republicans, despite a lengthy filibuster of the Civil Rights Act, which was led by Democratic Senator and former Klan leader Harry Byrd.

The Women’s Suffrage movement was spearheaded by the Republican Party as well. In 1870, the Massachusetts Republican State Convention made the suffragettes Mary A. Livermore and Lucy Stone its delegates. Famous women’s right advocate Susan B. Anthony persuaded Republican Senator A.A. Sargent in 1878 to introduce the Nineteenth Amendment. Passed in 1919, the amendment acknowledging women had the right to vote had been defeated four times by Democrat-controlled legislatures.

But one should not confuse the right to vote with the protection of one’s individual rights as a citizen. Voting in-and-of-itself is a practice designed to help citizens protect their rights by holding politicians accountable in free and fair elections. The Democrat Party’s modern success is based on the false perception that it had worked assiduously to give blacks and women the right to vote; meanwhile, it has subtly conflated this popularly held distortion with the party’s “progressive” drive towards supposed economic emancipation.

What the Democrats are actually driving at is to progressively undermine the lynchpins of all Americans’ freedom, as articulated in The Constitution and The Bill of Rights. The Democrat Party seeks to ensnare all men and women with the seductive allure of government dependency. Its economic policies are as unmistakeably destructive to the national economy as they are to the families of all racial and ethnic backgrounds. What the Democrat Party has to offer is not freedom; it is some temporary comfort on the road to ruin.

Throwing light on the Democrat Party’s insincere homages to freedom is its history of belligerence and sympathy for socialist dictators.  It should not be controversial to point out, while paying tribute to the consistent heroism of our American soldiers, that President Woodrow Wilson led us into a primarily unnecessary war in Europe. The dire situation in Europe, brought about by the decay of empires and the inflammation of national passions, was not one that demanded the country’s intervention.  And it is no small irony that Woodrow Wilson, both an internationalist peace advocate and an irrefutable racial bigot, exacerbated tensions in Europe following the war with his naive handling of the Paris Peace Conference and his quixotic Fourteen Points.  Wilson would also sow the seeds of future corruption and partisan volatility by overseeing the income tax amendment, the establishment of an unaccountable central bank, and the democratization of the U.S. Senate.

The Great Depression would see the promulgation of the notion that the Democrat Party was the place for the working man, the poor, and the oppressed. It is a stubborn myth that persists that Roosevelt was a great man of history whose steady hand rested on the shoulder of every down-on-his-luck laborer in that dark period. But without a doubt, the man’s policies lengthened and worsened the depression, as even his Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau, Jr. later admitted.  As Morgenthau confessed, “No, gentlemen, we have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. …I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started.”

Morgenthau was right. In 1938, unemployment was near twenty percent, worse than what it was in 1931, which was before the government began meddling in earnest. A sharp contrast to FDR’s policies were those of Calvin Coolidge, whose relatively laissez-faire approach following the sharp deflationary depression of 1920-21 helped the country return to its economic moorings in short order. No two depressions are exactly alike; but suffice it to say, Coolidge showed faith in the American people, while FDR showed faith in himself, his technocratic planners, and big government. The historical record bears out whose esteem was better founded.

World War II effectively rescued Roosevelt from the annals of infamy. The war was initiated by a perfidious attack on the United States carried out by Japan. The invasion provided the Roosevelt administration with a unified national goal that temporarily made central planning more rational; but the goal of the war, lest anyone should forget, was killing others overseas, and not creating goods and providing services to satisfy individual wants and needs. Yet it is exposed throughout recent history even unto today that the Democrat Party consistently craves the kind of national control conducive to war-time, even in periods of peace.

We should thus not be surprised to find the Democrat Truman getting us into the Korean War, and General Eisenhower pulling the majority of troops out while maintaining the peace.  Or JFK getting us entrenched in Southeast Asia in the 1950s, leading to the Vietnam War; which was in turn mainly carried out by Lyndon Johnson, and ended by Nixon.  It is a deliberate omission by the Democrat Party, despite its image as a party of peace and compassion, that the Vietnam War was ended on unfavorable terms due largely to radical activism in the press and unrelenting pressure by the Democrat Congress. In 1975, when the bill came up to provide military aid to South Vietnam and Cambodia to stave off the communists, the Democrats refused. The South Vietnamese would be run into the sea by the vengeful North and over two million Cambodians would die at the hands of the merciless Khmer Rouge.

But the Democrat Party would not learn its lesson, and it unwaveringly clung to the view that socialist dictatorships could bring economic justice to the people. But the only things socialism ever brought to ‘the people’ have been poverty and misery. President Ronald Reagan understood that. His morally principled confrontation with the Soviet Union was remarked upon by dissident intellectuals as dealing a fatal blow to the communist regime, even more than his increased defense spending put pressure on the USSR’s military industrial complex. It was Reagan’s “peace through strength” posture, not just in military but in moral terms, that would secure the nation for eight years, while seeing through the beginnings of the collapse of the Soviet Union.

The Democrats desperately tried to blemish President Reagan’s record, which not only discredited socialist ideology, but overturned in practice the disastrous Carter malaise by re-establishing the personal economic freedom to renew national prosperity.  The Democrats contrived the Iran-Contra scandal, which ultimately saw military aid go to the Nicaraguan Contras after the Democrat Congress voted to ban aid to the rebel organization. The Contras opposed the socialist Sandinistas, noted human rights abusers who even tortured political prisoners. The record of the Democrat Party siding with dictatorships calling themselves socialist, even at the expense of defying realpolitik as well as innocent people’s safety and freedom, continues uninterrupted to today. This was most vividly seen with the Obama administration’s handling of the Honduran people’s removal of socialist dictator Manuel Zelaya.

For all the Democrats’ caterwauling about the wars in the Middle East, which they voted to authorize, let there be no mistake; they serve the purpose of expanding freedom and theoretically, stabilizing a region through the means of democratic accountability. Yet the Democrat Party never lauds the military or its mission in such terms; its spokesmen rather convey that the wars serve no purposes at all. If the Republicans’ faith in freedom burns over-bright to the extent that we at times become burned, that is the price to pay for our convictions. If there be any lesson to be had from our national experience during the wars, it is that freedom a stubborn value to enshrine in the midst of bloodshed wrought at the hands of fanatics. That is understandable. What is less understandable is how a political party in this country does not value freedom, even though our nation’s historical prosperity and happiness depend on it. The onus is on politicians in the Democrat Party to prove such a sentiment wrong by their actions, and not just through sophistry.

The Republicans’ success is inextricably bound up with that of the American people; as one goes, so goes the other. The Democrat Party thrives on misery, which is the ineluctable product of its unrepentant desire to micro-manage others. We who desire to support the GOP should draw a sharp contrast between those Americans who love freedom and those who love control. Whether that line of demarcation runs between the two major parties, through the GOP itself, or between the government and the American people, is left to us.

Could Thomas Friedman Be Right?

Thomas Friedman

It’s really amazing that Thomas Friedman gets paid to write. Really. How come I can’t find someone to pay me for ridiculous opinions?

His article, “We Need a Second Party“, laments that the Republican Party has become radicalized and is no longer in touch with it’s “conservative” base – creating an inability to settle on a candidate and therefore, the Republicans should consider sitting out the 2012 election. Seriously?

How convenient that Mr. Friedman forgets that the Democratic primary of 2008 stretched into early June with candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama happily bashing each other month after month. That was fun to watch.

The reason why Mr. Friedman believes that the Republican Party is no longer relevant, is because it has devolved into “conflicting ideological bases”. Really? I’m quite sure what the party stands for – a smaller, limited, Constitutionally based government, lower taxes, fewer regulations destroying business, pro-gun (aka self-defense), pro-life, and marriage = one man & one woman. I’m not sure what’s unclear about this, or how these ideas are “conflicting” or “radical” as he likes to say.

Considering the fractured nature of the Democratic Party, his thesis is in serious need of revision since the Democratic Party is mostly focused on identity politics – everyone needing for their hyphenated group to be heard over the cacophony of competing interests.

Two competing groups within the Democratic Party that made the news lately were the environmentalists and big labor. Remember the Keystone XL Pipeline from Canada? That pesky project that would have created (not saved) thousands of jobs – yeah, that one. Labor wanted that project, the environmentalists did not… ergo, no pipeline, no jobs, no energy independence. Talk about conflicting ideas. I’m so glad the President has his priorities straight.

Friedman seems to be desperate to have a reformed Republican Party – someone the Democrats can work with.

What we definitely and urgently need is a second party — a coherent Republican opposition that is offering constructive conservative proposals on the key issues and is ready for strategic compromises to advance its interests and those of the country.

Without that, the best of the Democrats — who have been willing to compromise — have no partners and the worst have a free pass for their own magical thinking.

It seems that Friedman has some magical thinking happening in his own mind. He believes that the Democrats “have been willing to compromise”. News to me. ObamaCare ring a bell for anyone? The monstrosity that is already trampling on religious freedoms in the name of the public “good”. I vaguely remember that being jammed through Congress without the support of one Republican. Pass it so we can find out what’s in it – to paraphrase Nancy Pelosi. Gosh, I have a master’s degree in political science, but I don’t remember learning that we read bills only after they’ve become law.

It seems that whenever Republicans have ideas – conservative ideas – the Democrats don’t like them. Among these ideas is how to deal with that annoying 16 trillion dollar deficit. Republicans came up with the Ryan Plan – a conservative plan created to save our security net for those who need it and reduce the deficit so we don’t end up like Greece and the rest of Europe heading down the financial toilet. Surprisingly enough, the Democrats didn’t like it. Did they put forward a plan of their own? Of course not.

I’m sure that Friedman’s issue with the Republicans isn’t that they aren’t being conservative. Understandably, it’s more along the lines of frustration with the Republicans that they aren’t willing to go along to get along with the Democrats and give them a free pass on spending.

Let’s take the payroll tax cut that was being debated until this morning. Both the Democrats and Republicans wanted to extend it – however, the money collected from that tax goes to the Social Security fund (already in trouble). The Republicans originally wanted like to know how the shortfall was going to be paid for. Seems like a reasonable question. But it seems that instead of standing on the “conservative” ideals that the party is supposed to stand for, and Mr. Friedman is so concerned about, the Republicans decided to “compromise” with the Democrats and add a chunk more money to the Federal deficit. I don’t hear the Democrats complaining that the Republicans aren’t being conservative enough.

But, you know, the more I think about Thomas Friedman’s article calling for a second party, the more I think he may have a point. Perhaps it is time to call for a second party, a reasonable party that realizes the financial straights we find ourselves in. Perhaps it is time to find a party to discuss big ideas with. Perhaps the Democrats would like to step up and volunteer to be that 2nd party?

Republicans ARE Discouraging Voter Turnout

It’s a dream come true for hysterical liberals and their fellow travelers in the ‘unbiased’ media. Pesky Republicans ARE actively working to discourage voter turnout in the 2012 Presidential election!

Unfortunately, in typical GOP fashion, the party is busy suppressing its own vote.

Thanks to a decision by the Virginia Republican State Central Committee, voters who may want to participate in the Commonwealth’s Republican Presidential Primary will be forced to sign a loyalty oath before the commissars allow them to cast a ballot.

Members of the Electoral College, who actually choose the President, are not Constitutionally required to swear a similar oath, but the committee — like Southern Baptists who frequently add qualifications for church office not found in the Bible — feel this is a vital improvement to the system.

The oath is brief and to the point: “I, the undersigned, pledge that I intend to support the nominee of the Republican Party for president.”

Prince William County Virginia’s redoubtable conservative Republican, Del. Bob Marshall strongly objects to requiring an oath, “Virginia’s Republican leadership wants to mandate a loyalty oath when Virginia’s Republican officials are in court fighting the Obamacare mandate? This sends the wrong message.”

I’m not sure I’m in agreement with Marshall’s analogy, since Obamacare is mandatory, while voting for the GOP is optional. (An option I fear many will choose not to exercise if it means signing this pledge.)

The oath manages to offend two groups that are key to winning in November: the conservative base and the independent. Longtime Republicans will be insulted by the presumption they are so fickle an oath is required to remind them of their loyalty.

Besides, as Marshall points out, Virginia’s Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli and Speaker of the House William Howell, have not always voted for the Republican nominee in November. Both supported an independent in an earlier race for Henrico County Commonwealth’s Attorney.

Equally important, the Presidential election in November will be won among the 40 percent that considers themselves independent — voting for the man and not the party. What a shock it will be to the commitment–phobic independent who decides to participate in the GOP primary, only to be hit with a contract that requires him to swear an oath to a November candidate who might not even be on the March 6th primary ballot.

Which brings us to another problem. Although nationally we currently have a fluctuating total of approximately ten GOP candidates, in the Virginia primary the ballot will resemble the inventory of a Soviet supermarket with only Mitt Romney and Ron Paul to choose from.

It seems that organizing a petition drive to get his name on the ballot is the latest entry on the lengthening list of things Rick Perry can’t do.

Perry, who does have someone on staff who can file a lawsuit, and Virginia resident Newt Gingrich are attempting to gain access by judicial means — a particularly ironic move for Gingrich who blasted federal judges last week proclaiming “Judicial supremacy is factually wrong. It is morally wrong, and it is an affront to the American system of self–government.”
Unless, of course, you can find a judge who will overturn Republican rules and get you on the ballot.

The fact is if the yang and yin of presidential politics can get on the ballot under the existing rules, then the rest of the candidates should be able to clear the same hurdle, too.

This whole affair reeks of Paulophobia. Evidently the fear is that Ron Paul voters can’t be relied upon in November to support the Republican nominee if it’s not Ron Paul. It would make more sense to have Paul himself sign the oath as a condition of appearing on the ballot, since a third–party run on his behalf would only serve to re–elect Obama.

So naïve central committee members believe signing this worthless piece of paper is going to persuade a herd of black–helicopter Libertarian paranoids that they have to toe the line in November.

Fors Fortis, as the Romans say.

The other fear is wily Democrats voting for Paul in an effort to sow dissention in Republican ranks. The way to prevent this is to post a large sign informing Democrats their name will appear on Republican mailing lists and their mailboxes stuffed full of GOP direct mail and fund–raising appeals for the next four years.

My wife, Janet, still rues the day she voted for Hillary Clinton in one of those fruitless crossover voting schemes.
In the meantime, GOP Chairman Pat Mullins has scheduled a special meeting on January 21st. The only agenda item is the “loyalty oath.”

Oklahoma’s Republican Party: How Do We Stop The Corruption?

I have been actively involved in the political spectrum for about 3 years now. Thirty-five years ago I tried to get involved, but when I saw how corrupt and self-serving the process was, I gave up. I registered as an Independent with the hopes that being an Independent would insulate me from the corruption, self-serving politicians, and the evil that pervades both parties. I was sadly mistaken. In that 35 years nothing has improved. Now, 35 years later, I find our Republic in the death throes of dictatorship and people in both political parties working together to enslave We the People. Sadly, much of this is my fault because I chose to ignore it in the hope it would go away. It didn’t go away, but instead has become much more of a problem and much more of a danger. I re-registered as a Republican just after the 2008 elections that saw John McCain, and the Republican Party machine, surrender my nation to the most radical thing that has ever sat in the White House.

I have seen the Republican Party sacrifice my freedoms on the altar of the party machine interests time and again. I have seen congressional Republicans cave on issue after issue and “go along to get along”, be “bi-partisan, civil, and agreeable” , and “reach across the aisle” to work with their “friends in the Democrat Party” until they no longer stand for the ideals our founding fathers espoused in the Constitution. Republicans have done this in spite of the promises they made to get elected in record numbers. I have found the Republican Party does not represent me any better than the Democrat Party.

In 2010, voters in the State of Oklahoma swept Republicans into office in unprecedented fashion, much as was done in the national elections. We also passed state referendums opposing Sharia Law and Obamacare. The first thing the newly elected Republican governor, President of the Senate, and Speaker of the House did upon taking office was begin a plot to implement Obamacare in the State of Oklahoma. They tried 3 different stealth approaches to slip this into law in spite of the overwhelming, and by overwhelming I mean 70% of the voters, opposition to Obamacare. They were looking at the $54.5 million that would come from the federal government for them to spend, particularly with their allies in the insurance business.

Governor Mary Fallin, State Sen. Brian Bingman, and State House Speaker Kris Steele were the authors of this dastardly plot to subvert the wishes of 70% of We the People of the State of Oklahoma. All of their attempts were thwarted due to the dogged work of OKSAFE, an organization dedicated to defeating Obamacare, and dedicated to being a watch-dog on Oklahoma politicians. I have been told, but cannot verify at this moment, that they are hatching new plots to implement Obamacare in the next legislative session. They seem to be determined to sneak this through when they think We the People aren’t looking. They want that $54.5 million for their cronies, not for We the People.

I was astounded that Republicans would behave in this fashion. I don’t know why it surprised me, but it did. Maybe it is because I have followed the TEA Party movement and seen how Republicans have seemed to step right into what We the People want done in government. Once again, I have seen the duplicity and self-serving nature of politicians rear its ugly head and have begun to realize none of them can be trusted. I have seen the “tell voters what they want to hear and do as we please once elected” attitude alive and well within the Republican Party.

In 2009, I got involved in a campaign for the 2nd Congressional District of Oklahoma. Dr. Charles Thompson nearly upset a long time Democrat, coming close enough that Rep. Dan Boren has decided he won’t run again. Since that time I have become actively involved in my local county party group with the intent of cleaning the corruption and “insider trading” out of the system. I have been elected, by my county peers, as the State Committeeman representing Rogers County in the Oklahoma Republican Party.

Everything was rolling along fine until we began the primary race for the 2nd Congressional District. I won’t go into details, as the details will be very plainly evident in this letter that I sent to the state chairman, district chairman, and the county chairwoman responsible for the issue at the district meeting held in October 2011 in McAlester, Oklahoma. The last 3 names on the list of recipients are there because I discussed it with them to get their input on how I should approach this matter. We were working together to organize a candidate forum and I felt I owed them the courtesy of letting them know how I wound up handling this matter. The e-mail I sent follows:

November 1, 2011
Mr. Montgomery,

I am writing about the fiasco involving the straw pole at the McAlester meeting of the Oklahoma 2nd District Republican Party. It has come to my attention that Holly Gerard and the other people running the straw pole were wearing George Faught t-shirts and stickers. The rules were changed several times and some people who were in line to vote were told the voting was over at the specified time in spite of your announcement that those in line at the cut-off time would be allowed to vote.

I find this troubling on several points. My first problem is with having partisan campaign workers running what is supposed to be an objective voting process. Another issue is the changing of the rules as it went along. You can’t have an objective voting process when one candidate’s operatives are running the vote. You also can’t have a fair and balanced vote if the rules change to suit one candidate or the other. This is what is done in Third World banana republics, not in The United States of America. Whether this was the reason or not is immaterial, the appearance of impropriety is enough to call the entire process, and the people administering it, into question.

Those looking potential straw voters up in voter vault seemed to be totally incompetent and/or the records woefully incomplete. They could not find the name of Linda Lepak, the Rogers County Chairperson. I am sure Linda is a Republican yet she was nearly denied the right to vote over a failure to find her in Voter Vault. She was only allowed to vote after she argued vigorously. I have also been told by some of the candidates that they were not notified that the straw poll was going to be held. Once again, whether that is an oversight or a direct omission is beside the point.

I find the involvement of Holly Gerard in George Faught’s campaign to be in conflict with her duties as an officer of the 2nd Congressional District. I submit that she and any other party official should immediately resign their position to clear up any conflict of interest, or the appearance thereof.

Their involvement in a campaign when they are supposed to be working for the good of the entire district is a conflict of interest that cannot be resolved by them suddenly stating they are not a part of that campaign any longer. Their objectivity has been tarnished and they must step down from any state, district, or county position immediately.

I became involved in the Republican Party two years ago because of my disgust at the graft and corruption I have seen in politics. I realize that I am new here and not terribly aware of “how things are done” but I am aware enough to know that the current system is corrupt. One of the reasons I became involved with the party is to remove these tactics and the people that employ them, those as candidates, those as elected officials, and those as party officials. The American public is totally disgusted with the way politics is handled in this country and the only way to regain the confidence of We the People is to remove the corruption and be totally above board. That is my goal, to clean up a process so vile and corrupt that it needs a good disinfecting by honest and fair people.

Ms. Gerard and the others involved in this may be wonderful, honest people but these circumstances bring into question their judgment at the very least, and their ethics as well. We can no longer afford to tolerate this kind of behavior, innocent or not. The only way to regain the confidence of the American people is to remove those with questionable ethics or judgment from the process and to ensure that everything is done properly and with the utmost propriety.

We are on the verge of losing our Republic and it is partially because of this kind of activity. American citizens have lost their confidence in the political parties and see them as only looking out for the best interests of party insiders and not the well-being of the citizenry as a whole. This must be reversed if we are to have any hope of restoring the confidence needed to preserve our nation and our freedom.

I am not casting aspersions on any of those involved because I don’t know them. I don’t know what their motives were but I do know that their actions, even if totally innocent, were unacceptable. I am saying that the perception of impropriety is enough to bring the ethics and character of those involved into question and that cannot be allowed to fester. If we are to continue on as a free and prosperous nation we must take the steps necessary to restore the confidence of the American people.
I hope to be a part of leading the Republican Party back to being a party of the people, a party that the average American citizen can depend on to look out for the best interests of all not just party insiders. I hope you will be a part of this goal. It is imperative that we succeed in regaining the trust of the citizens of America.

Copies of this letter are going to: Matt Pinnell, Tom Montgomery, Holly Gerard, Linda Lepak, Jo Rainbolt, and Bob Brown.
I submit this in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, in faith, with the responsibility given to me by Almighty god To honor His work and not let it die from neglect.

In God We Trust,
Bob Russell
Rogers County State Committeeman

To date, I have received one response to this e-mail. Matt Pinnell, Oklahoma State GOP Chairman, called me one afternoon and told me that Ms. Gerard was contemplating stepping down from her county president position and that this is behind us. I don’t know that anyone has stepped down and the problem wasn’t addressed, only swept under the rug. It might be behind him but it isn’t behind me.

I subsequently made a request that I be allowed to speak at the next Republican Party District 2 meeting and at the next state committee meeting. So far, Mr. Montgomery e-mailed me that Ms. Gerard was doing the planning for the District meeting and that he would get back with me on the matter. That was November 16, today is December 27. I have yet to hear any response at all from the state level. My purpose in speaking at these meetings is to make others aware that this happened and remind them that We the People must step up to tell the political operatives who they represent, and who they work for. I also desire to let others as appalled as I am know that they aren’t alone and need not fear standing up for what is right and just.

State Representative George Faught is playing the old game of self-serving political opportunism. I believe that if he is our next congressman he will do whatever he is told to do by party leadership. He will do what he has to do to improve his own position, power, and benefits in Congress. In addition to this little game, he has his campaign staff, one of which is the Vice-Chair of Rogers County, going around to speaking engagements of the other 5 candidates and recording everything they say. This might be good politics, but to this voter, it is unethical and shows a lack of confidence in his own message. I don’t need to know what others are saying about issues, I can make the case for my views. A good candidate should be able to make the same statement.

Bringing this to the public is painful, as I have no desire to hurt the Republican Party. My desire, or more accurately my responsibility, is to stop the corruption and turn the party back into “the party of the people”. It is up to citizens to get involved and have the courage to take whatever steps are necessary to save our nation for future generations. The only way to defeat evil is to fight it, to bring the back room deals into the light and under the table bargaining above the table. The only way to stop the party insider dealing is to get outsiders involved, outsiders who value the Constitution more than the party.

Bob Russell
Rogers County Oklahoma State Committeeman
December 27, 2011