Illegal Immigrants To Get Next Bailout
By IRA MEHLMAN | Posted Friday, November 14, 2008 4:20 PM PT
There are disturbing parallels between the financial crisis and America's illegal immigration crisis. In both cases, the irresponsible acts of the few have become the collective burdens of the majority who behaved responsibly and legally.
During the campaign, President-elect Obama promised to address immigration policy — with amnesty for millions of illegal aliens as its centerpiece — during his first year in office.
Couched euphemistically as "comprehensive immigration reform," the plan we can expect from the Obama administration will have the earmarks of another massively expensive taxpayer bailout scheme. The minority of people who acted illegally and irresponsibly would benefit, while the vast majority who played by the rules would get stuck with the bills.
America's worsening financial crisis was brought about by people who borrowed money they could not afford to repay, and the financial institutions who earned huge short-term profits by making irresponsible loans.
Poor Choices
America's illegal immigration crisis was brought about by people who were drawn to this country by jobs they knew they had no legal right to, and employers who profited handsomely from their low-wage labor.
While the vast majority of Americans who resisted the temptation of easy short-term credit, and borrowed within their means, feel bad for those who were enticed by such offers, they do not believe such irresponsible personal behavior should be rewarded.
The unfortunate consequence of these personal borrowing decisions is that many people — along with their innocent children — will lose their homes.
Similarly, while most Americans empathize with the aspirations of those who violated our immigration laws, they do not believe that illegal behavior should be rewarded. The vast majority of Americans support government steps to enforce immigration laws, especially in the workplace, and understand that it is the illegal aliens themselves who are responsible for any consequent hardships experienced by children and other family members.
While Americans have sympathy for individuals who got in over their heads, they feel nothing but seething anger toward the financial institutions that made irresponsible loans and the executives who enriched themselves in the process.
Similarly, the public has nothing but contempt for the businesses that padded their profits while systematically undercutting middle-class workers by hiring illegal aliens, forcing everyone else to subsidize their low-wage workers.
Morally and financially, an illegal-alien amnesty would be the equivalent of another massive bailout program. The individuals who violated our immigration laws would be eligible for a "restructuring" of their status in this country. With a few minor conditions and penalties they would get to remain in the U.S. and, over time, enjoy the full benefits and privileges of citizenship.
The companies that have been illicitly profiting from hiring illegal aliens would get to keep their workers and have easier access to still more foreign labor in the future. Given their success at lobbying to ensure that laws against hiring illegal aliens are never really enforced, no one would be surprised to find history repeating itself a decade or two down the road.
In the meantime, all Americans would be forced to bear the staggering costs of amnesty for many people who, owing to their skill and educational profiles, are certain to rely heavily on government assistance programs.
As amnesty beneficiaries "come out of the shadows," reunite with family members outside the country and give birth to U.S. citizen children, the costs of providing benefits and services to this population will again fall on the shoulders of the American taxpayer.
Going To Hurt
Much like the financial crisis, America's illegal immigration crisis must be resolved and there are no painless options. The only matter to be determined is who will pay the price for decades of rampant disregard for law and the common good.
The best option for the Obama administration would be to continue, or even accelerate, the Bush administration's recent enforcement efforts. Over time, consistent enforcement of laws against the employment of illegal aliens, elimination of nonessential benefits and services to illegal aliens, and cooperation with local law enforcement will reduce the illegal population of the United States to manageable levels.
For once, law-abiding, middle-class workers and taxpayers would actually benefit instead of being required to share the pain for illegal behavior and negligence that they did not contribute to.
Mehlman is national media director for the Federation for American Immigration Reform.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Friday, November 14, 2008
Cheat.gov
Cheat.gov
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, November 11, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Fraud: Many millions in dubious campaign donations to Barack Obama are going unaudited. Meanwhile, Minnesota's Senate race is ripe for the stealing. When elections lack integrity, the people no longer rule.
We may have found something on which the two most powerful black men in the U.S. government (as of next year) — President-elect Obama and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas — agree.
Thomas differs with the rest of the high court on the issue of public disclosure of campaign contributions. Noting that the Federalist Papers "are only the most famous example of the outpouring of anonymous political writing that occurred during the ratification of the Constitution," Thomas contends that "it is only an innovation of modern times that has permitted the regulation of anonymous speech."
In the age of modern communications, it takes a lot of money for speech to reach enough voters to have the kind of effect the Federalist Papers had two centuries ago. So in Thomas' view, the 2002 McCain-Feingold law, with its spending limits on broadcast ads, "directly targets and constricts core political speech, the 'primary object of First Amendment protection.' "
How could Obama disagree? He took hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of "speech" from anonymous sources and used it to saturate the airwaves. Someone once again drove an armored car right through a campaign finance law loophole. Ironically, it was the author of the campaign law, Sen. John McCain, who was run over.
Having reneged on his pledge to accept public financing, Obama will likely escape an audit by the Federal Election Commission — which the heavily outspent loser, McCain, must undergo because he took public funding. So much for those filthy-rich Republicans taking advantage of a system supposedly skewed in their favor.
What all this means is we might never get to the bottom of who the thousands of fictitious donors were with names such as "Test Person" and "Doodad Pro." We might never know if the next president of the United States intentionally took money that exceeded the limits allowed under law, or money from foreign powers.
We might never know if the more than $800,000 in falsely reported funds the Obama campaign paid an offshoot of the left-wing organization ACORN was a coordinated national scam, although the FBI is reportedly investigating the group.
ACORN filed more than 43,000 new voter registration forms in Minnesota, where the razor-thin margin of victory for Republican Sen. Norm Coleman over former "Saturday Night Live" comedian Al Franken evaporated from more than 700 votes to just 221 nearly overnight thanks to "typos" discovered over a week before a scheduled recount. Fox News reports that much of Franken's mysterious new votes come from one heavily Democratic small town.
That seat could give Democrats an effectively filibuster-proof Senate majority. But if the cloud of voter fraud hangs over both the Senate and the White House — with Obama's untraceable millions in question — the soon-to-be president might want to change the name of his new Web site from "change.gov" to "cheat.gov."
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, November 11, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Fraud: Many millions in dubious campaign donations to Barack Obama are going unaudited. Meanwhile, Minnesota's Senate race is ripe for the stealing. When elections lack integrity, the people no longer rule.
We may have found something on which the two most powerful black men in the U.S. government (as of next year) — President-elect Obama and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas — agree.
Thomas differs with the rest of the high court on the issue of public disclosure of campaign contributions. Noting that the Federalist Papers "are only the most famous example of the outpouring of anonymous political writing that occurred during the ratification of the Constitution," Thomas contends that "it is only an innovation of modern times that has permitted the regulation of anonymous speech."
In the age of modern communications, it takes a lot of money for speech to reach enough voters to have the kind of effect the Federalist Papers had two centuries ago. So in Thomas' view, the 2002 McCain-Feingold law, with its spending limits on broadcast ads, "directly targets and constricts core political speech, the 'primary object of First Amendment protection.' "
How could Obama disagree? He took hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of "speech" from anonymous sources and used it to saturate the airwaves. Someone once again drove an armored car right through a campaign finance law loophole. Ironically, it was the author of the campaign law, Sen. John McCain, who was run over.
Having reneged on his pledge to accept public financing, Obama will likely escape an audit by the Federal Election Commission — which the heavily outspent loser, McCain, must undergo because he took public funding. So much for those filthy-rich Republicans taking advantage of a system supposedly skewed in their favor.
What all this means is we might never get to the bottom of who the thousands of fictitious donors were with names such as "Test Person" and "Doodad Pro." We might never know if the next president of the United States intentionally took money that exceeded the limits allowed under law, or money from foreign powers.
We might never know if the more than $800,000 in falsely reported funds the Obama campaign paid an offshoot of the left-wing organization ACORN was a coordinated national scam, although the FBI is reportedly investigating the group.
ACORN filed more than 43,000 new voter registration forms in Minnesota, where the razor-thin margin of victory for Republican Sen. Norm Coleman over former "Saturday Night Live" comedian Al Franken evaporated from more than 700 votes to just 221 nearly overnight thanks to "typos" discovered over a week before a scheduled recount. Fox News reports that much of Franken's mysterious new votes come from one heavily Democratic small town.
That seat could give Democrats an effectively filibuster-proof Senate majority. But if the cloud of voter fraud hangs over both the Senate and the White House — with Obama's untraceable millions in question — the soon-to-be president might want to change the name of his new Web site from "change.gov" to "cheat.gov."
A Checklist Of Obama's Many Promises
WE WILL KEEP THIS AND DO COMPARISONS OVER THE COMING MONTHS
A Checklist Of Obama's Many Promises
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, November 10, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Few presidential candidates have made more specific promises to American voters than Barack Obama. They came so fast and furious in the latter part of the campaign, you'd be excused for not keeping up. So as a public service, we've put together a handy checklist of some of the biggest Obama promises — culled from his "Blueprint for Change," his campaign speeches and advertisements. Clip it. Save it. And see how he did in four years.
Taxes
• Give a tax break to 95% of Americans.
• Restore Clinton-era tax rates on top income earners.
• "If you make under $250,000, you will not see your taxes increase by a single dime. Not your income taxes, not your payroll taxes, not your capital gains taxes. Nothing."
• Dramatically simplify tax filings so that millions of Americans will be able to do their taxes in less than five minutes.
• Give American businesses a $3,000 tax credit for every job they create in the U.S.
• Eliminate capital gains taxes for small business and startup companies.
• Eliminate income taxes for seniors making under $50,000.
• Expand the child and dependent care tax credit.
• Expand the earned income tax credit.
• Create a universal mortgage credit.
• Create a small business health tax credit.
• Provide a $500 "make work pay" tax credit to small businesses.
• Provide a $1,000 emergency energy rebate to families.
Energy
• Spend $15 billion a year on renewable sources of energy.
• Eliminate oil imports from the Middle East in 10 years.
• Increase fuel economy standards by 4% a year.
• Weatherize 1 million homes annually.
• Ensure that 10% of our electricity comes from renewable sources by 2012.
Environment
• Create 5 million green jobs.
• Implement a cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
• Get 1 million plug-in hybrids on the road by 2015.
Labor
• Sign a fair pay restoration act, which would overturn the Supreme Court's pay discrimination ruling.
• Sign into law an employee free choice act — aka card check — to make it easier for unions to organize.
• Make employers offer seven paid sick days per year.
• Increase the minimum wage to $9.50 an hour by 2009.
National security
• Remove troops from Iraq by the summer of 2010.
• Cut spending on unproven missile defense systems.
• No more homeless veterans.
• Stop spending $10 billion a month in Iraq.
• Finish the fight against Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaida terrorists.
Social Security
• Work in a "bipartisan way to preserve Social Security for future generations."
• Impose a Social Security payroll tax on incomes above $250,000.
• Match 50% of retirement savings up to $1,000 for families earning less than $75,000.
Education
• Demand higher standards and more accountability from our teachers.
Spending
• Go through the budget, line by line, ending programs we don't need and making the ones we do need work better and cost less.
• Slash earmarks.
Health care
• Lower health care costs for the typical family by $2,500 a year.
• Let the uninsured get the same kind of health insurance that members of Congress get.
• Stop insurance companies from discriminating against those who are sick and need care the most.
• Spend $10 billion over five years on health care information technology.
A Checklist Of Obama's Many Promises
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, November 10, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Few presidential candidates have made more specific promises to American voters than Barack Obama. They came so fast and furious in the latter part of the campaign, you'd be excused for not keeping up. So as a public service, we've put together a handy checklist of some of the biggest Obama promises — culled from his "Blueprint for Change," his campaign speeches and advertisements. Clip it. Save it. And see how he did in four years.
Taxes
• Give a tax break to 95% of Americans.
• Restore Clinton-era tax rates on top income earners.
• "If you make under $250,000, you will not see your taxes increase by a single dime. Not your income taxes, not your payroll taxes, not your capital gains taxes. Nothing."
• Dramatically simplify tax filings so that millions of Americans will be able to do their taxes in less than five minutes.
• Give American businesses a $3,000 tax credit for every job they create in the U.S.
• Eliminate capital gains taxes for small business and startup companies.
• Eliminate income taxes for seniors making under $50,000.
• Expand the child and dependent care tax credit.
• Expand the earned income tax credit.
• Create a universal mortgage credit.
• Create a small business health tax credit.
• Provide a $500 "make work pay" tax credit to small businesses.
• Provide a $1,000 emergency energy rebate to families.
Energy
• Spend $15 billion a year on renewable sources of energy.
• Eliminate oil imports from the Middle East in 10 years.
• Increase fuel economy standards by 4% a year.
• Weatherize 1 million homes annually.
• Ensure that 10% of our electricity comes from renewable sources by 2012.
Environment
• Create 5 million green jobs.
• Implement a cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
• Get 1 million plug-in hybrids on the road by 2015.
Labor
• Sign a fair pay restoration act, which would overturn the Supreme Court's pay discrimination ruling.
• Sign into law an employee free choice act — aka card check — to make it easier for unions to organize.
• Make employers offer seven paid sick days per year.
• Increase the minimum wage to $9.50 an hour by 2009.
National security
• Remove troops from Iraq by the summer of 2010.
• Cut spending on unproven missile defense systems.
• No more homeless veterans.
• Stop spending $10 billion a month in Iraq.
• Finish the fight against Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaida terrorists.
Social Security
• Work in a "bipartisan way to preserve Social Security for future generations."
• Impose a Social Security payroll tax on incomes above $250,000.
• Match 50% of retirement savings up to $1,000 for families earning less than $75,000.
Education
• Demand higher standards and more accountability from our teachers.
Spending
• Go through the budget, line by line, ending programs we don't need and making the ones we do need work better and cost less.
• Slash earmarks.
Health care
• Lower health care costs for the typical family by $2,500 a year.
• Let the uninsured get the same kind of health insurance that members of Congress get.
• Stop insurance companies from discriminating against those who are sick and need care the most.
• Spend $10 billion over five years on health care information technology.
Marching Orders OBAMA'S MINIONS
Marching Orders
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, November 10, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Transition: President-elect Obama isn't planning to wait for Congress to pass his agenda. On Day One, he plans to rescind Bush executive orders on everything from embryonic stem cell research to offshore drilling.
When minority Republicans seemed to force congressional Democrats to abandon efforts to extend the legislative ban on offshore drilling that expired on Oct. 1, it was considered a pro-drilling victory. In July, President Bush had lifted an 18-year presidential ban on offshore oil drilling. Soon, it was hoped, it would be drill, baby, drill.
The Democrats knew otherwise. They'd run out the clock knowing that a President Obama and a re-elected Democratic Congress would undo this right-wing mischief. As Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., noted at a Sept. 18 press conference: "Nobody's going to be drilling offshore in the next three months."
Judging by statements made by John Podesta, nobody's going to be drilling anywhere domestically for a very long time. On "Fox News Sunday," Obama's transition chief called the federal Bureau of Land Management's plan to open about 360,000 acres of public land in Utah to oil and gas drilling "a mistake."
"They want to have oil and gas drilling in some of the most sensitive, fragile lands in Utah," Podesta said. Expect Obama to rescind that action and reissue the executive order banning offshore drilling in protected waters.
The Washington Post reports that the Obama transition team has a list of 200 Bush administration actions and executive orders scheduled to be undone with a stroke of Obama's pen on alleged climate change, embryonic stem cell research and other issues.
Expect President Obama to issue an executive order declaring CO2, the basis for all life on earth, a pollutant, and directing the Environmental Protection Agency to formally regulate emissions from your SUV down to your lawn mower. He "would initiate those rule makings," Obama's energy adviser, Jason Grumet, said in an Oct. 6 interview in Boston.
Obama has said he'd sign a presidential waiver that Bush refused to sign letting California regulate carbon dioxide emissions from cars. California sought to mandate that cars achieve a fuel economy average of 36 miles per gallon in eight years and that emissions be cut by 30% between 2009 and 2016.
The auto industry may need an even bigger bailout than Democrats plan.
Aside from job- and growth-killing environmental executive orders guaranteed to bankrupt the coal industry, cause domestic energy production to shrivel away and, as he promised during the campaign, electricity and fuel prices to "skyrocket," Obama plans to venture into social issues and remove restrictions on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research (ESCR).
Bush, the first president to spend any federal dollars on ESCR, in August 2001 limited federal funding to existing stem cell lines. He said no federal dollars could fund research into embryos newly created for destruction.
Private research was never restricted in any way, and we have argued that if ESCR was as promising as proponents claimed, investors would be lining up in droves. Adult stem cell research has resulted in actual treatments and therapies as well as astounding discoveries. Obama will open the federal spigots for ESCR, reviving the moral controversy in a tight economy.
"There's a lot that the president can do using his executive authority without waiting for congressional action, and I think we'll see the president do that," Podesta said. That he can, and has won the right to do. But is it change we need? We have our doubts.
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, November 10, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Transition: President-elect Obama isn't planning to wait for Congress to pass his agenda. On Day One, he plans to rescind Bush executive orders on everything from embryonic stem cell research to offshore drilling.
When minority Republicans seemed to force congressional Democrats to abandon efforts to extend the legislative ban on offshore drilling that expired on Oct. 1, it was considered a pro-drilling victory. In July, President Bush had lifted an 18-year presidential ban on offshore oil drilling. Soon, it was hoped, it would be drill, baby, drill.
The Democrats knew otherwise. They'd run out the clock knowing that a President Obama and a re-elected Democratic Congress would undo this right-wing mischief. As Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., noted at a Sept. 18 press conference: "Nobody's going to be drilling offshore in the next three months."
Judging by statements made by John Podesta, nobody's going to be drilling anywhere domestically for a very long time. On "Fox News Sunday," Obama's transition chief called the federal Bureau of Land Management's plan to open about 360,000 acres of public land in Utah to oil and gas drilling "a mistake."
"They want to have oil and gas drilling in some of the most sensitive, fragile lands in Utah," Podesta said. Expect Obama to rescind that action and reissue the executive order banning offshore drilling in protected waters.
The Washington Post reports that the Obama transition team has a list of 200 Bush administration actions and executive orders scheduled to be undone with a stroke of Obama's pen on alleged climate change, embryonic stem cell research and other issues.
Expect President Obama to issue an executive order declaring CO2, the basis for all life on earth, a pollutant, and directing the Environmental Protection Agency to formally regulate emissions from your SUV down to your lawn mower. He "would initiate those rule makings," Obama's energy adviser, Jason Grumet, said in an Oct. 6 interview in Boston.
Obama has said he'd sign a presidential waiver that Bush refused to sign letting California regulate carbon dioxide emissions from cars. California sought to mandate that cars achieve a fuel economy average of 36 miles per gallon in eight years and that emissions be cut by 30% between 2009 and 2016.
The auto industry may need an even bigger bailout than Democrats plan.
Aside from job- and growth-killing environmental executive orders guaranteed to bankrupt the coal industry, cause domestic energy production to shrivel away and, as he promised during the campaign, electricity and fuel prices to "skyrocket," Obama plans to venture into social issues and remove restrictions on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research (ESCR).
Bush, the first president to spend any federal dollars on ESCR, in August 2001 limited federal funding to existing stem cell lines. He said no federal dollars could fund research into embryos newly created for destruction.
Private research was never restricted in any way, and we have argued that if ESCR was as promising as proponents claimed, investors would be lining up in droves. Adult stem cell research has resulted in actual treatments and therapies as well as astounding discoveries. Obama will open the federal spigots for ESCR, reviving the moral controversy in a tight economy.
"There's a lot that the president can do using his executive authority without waiting for congressional action, and I think we'll see the president do that," Podesta said. That he can, and has won the right to do. But is it change we need? We have our doubts.
Obama Told Paper He Attended Trinity Church ‘Every Week’
Despite Campaign Claim, Obama Told Paper He Attended Trinity Church ‘Every Week’
Thursday, November 13, 2008
By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer
President-elect Obama prepares to board his plane at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport, Monday, Nov. 10, 2008, en route to Washington where he will meet with President Bush at the White House. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)(CNSNews.com) – President-elect Barack Obama said in 2004 – while he was a state legislator running for a U.S. Senate seat – that he attended services at Trinity United Church of Christ every week.
This is in contrast to what Obama, as a presidential candidate, said this year after controversial anti-American remarks by the Rev. Jeremiah Wright surfaced. Obama then told news outlets that he did not attend the church frequently and was not aware of Wright’s comments.
The comments from Obama about his church attendance appeared in the transcript of an interview posted Tuesday on the religious news Web site Beliefnet.com. The interview was conducted on March 27, 2004 by Chicago Sun-Times religion writer Cathleen Falsani for a story on Obama’s faith, but the interview was not released in its entirety until now.
“One of the churches that I became involved in was Trinity United Church of Christ,” Obama said in the interview. “And the pastor there, Jeremiah Wright, became a good friend. So I joined that church and committed myself to Christ in that church.”
Obama began attending the church in 1988 and formally joined Trinity in 1992. Falsani asked, “Do you still attend Trinity?”
Obama answered, “Yep. Every week. 11 o’clock service. Ever been there? Good service.
I actually wrote a book called ‘Dreams from My Father,’ it’s kind of a meditation on race. There's a whole chapter on the church in that, and my first visits to Trinity.”
That is in direct contradiction to what he has said throughout this campaign year.
After the controversy over Wright and Trinity United erupted, Obama gave an interview to the Fox News Channel that aired on March 17. One of the questions that reporter Major Garrett asked was, “As a member in good standing, were you a regular attendee of Sunday services?”
Obama answered: “You know, I won't say that I was a perfect attendee. I was regular in spurts, because there was times when, for example, our child had just been born, our first child. And so we didn't go as regularly then.”
In a July 21, 2008 Newsweek article, Obama explained that he stopped going to church as often after he and wife Michelle had children.
“As young marrieds, Barack and Michelle (who also didn't go to church regularly as a child) went to church fairly often—two or three times a month. But after their first child, Malia, was born, they found making the effort more difficult. ‘I don't know if you've had the experience of taking young, squirming children to church, but it's not easy,’ he says.
“‘Trinity was always packed, and so you had to get there early. And if you went to the morning service, you were looking at—it just was difficult. So that would cut back on our involvement.’
“After he began his run for the U.S. Senate, he says, the family sometimes didn't go to Trinity for months at a time. The girls have not attended Sunday school.”
The Wright controversy threatened to be a stumbling block in Obama’s quest for the Democratic presidential nomination. On March 14, he released a statement on the matter that said he was not in church when Wright made his inflammatory statements about the United States and 9/11.
“The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation,” Obama said in his statement. “When these statements first came to my attention, it was at the beginning of my presidential campaign.
“I made it clear at the time that I strongly condemned his comments. But because Rev. Wright was on the verge of retirement, and because of my strong links to the Trinity faith community, where I married my wife and where my daughters were baptized, I did not think it appropriate to leave the church,” Obama added.
Obama’s first interviews on the matter came in March when video clips of Wright’s sermons were being aired. The clips showed the pastor refer to America as, “the U.S. of K.K.K. A.”
In another sermon Wright said, “No, no, no. Not God bless America. God d--- America. It’s in the Bible for killing innocent people. God d-- America for treating us citizens as less than human. God d--- America as long as she tries to act like she is God and she is supreme.”
A clip of a sermon Wright delivered after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks shows him saying, “We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought to our own front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost.”
Also in the Sun-Times interview posted on BeliefNet.com, Obama speaks of another controversial clergyman when Falsani asked him, “Do you have people in your life that you look to for guidance?”
Obama answered: “Well, my pastor [Jeremiah Wright] is certainly someone who I have an enormous amount of respect for. I have a number of friends who are ministers. Reverend (James) Meeks is a close friend and colleague of mine in the state Senate. Father Michael Pfleger is a dear friend, and somebody I interact with closely.”
Pfleger, a white Catholic priest, made news earlier this year when he delivered a sermon at Trinity mocking Obama’s Democratic primary opponent Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York.
Pfleger told the Trinity congregation that Clinton apparently was thinking, “‘I’m Bill’s wife. I’m white and this is mine.’ … And then out of nowhere, ‘Hey, I’m Barack Obama.’
“And she said, ‘Oh damn. Where did you come from? I’m white. I’m entitled. There’s a black man stealing my show. … She wasn’t the only one crying. There was a whole lot of white people crying,” Pfleger added.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer
President-elect Obama prepares to board his plane at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport, Monday, Nov. 10, 2008, en route to Washington where he will meet with President Bush at the White House. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)(CNSNews.com) – President-elect Barack Obama said in 2004 – while he was a state legislator running for a U.S. Senate seat – that he attended services at Trinity United Church of Christ every week.
This is in contrast to what Obama, as a presidential candidate, said this year after controversial anti-American remarks by the Rev. Jeremiah Wright surfaced. Obama then told news outlets that he did not attend the church frequently and was not aware of Wright’s comments.
The comments from Obama about his church attendance appeared in the transcript of an interview posted Tuesday on the religious news Web site Beliefnet.com. The interview was conducted on March 27, 2004 by Chicago Sun-Times religion writer Cathleen Falsani for a story on Obama’s faith, but the interview was not released in its entirety until now.
“One of the churches that I became involved in was Trinity United Church of Christ,” Obama said in the interview. “And the pastor there, Jeremiah Wright, became a good friend. So I joined that church and committed myself to Christ in that church.”
Obama began attending the church in 1988 and formally joined Trinity in 1992. Falsani asked, “Do you still attend Trinity?”
Obama answered, “Yep. Every week. 11 o’clock service. Ever been there? Good service.
I actually wrote a book called ‘Dreams from My Father,’ it’s kind of a meditation on race. There's a whole chapter on the church in that, and my first visits to Trinity.”
That is in direct contradiction to what he has said throughout this campaign year.
After the controversy over Wright and Trinity United erupted, Obama gave an interview to the Fox News Channel that aired on March 17. One of the questions that reporter Major Garrett asked was, “As a member in good standing, were you a regular attendee of Sunday services?”
Obama answered: “You know, I won't say that I was a perfect attendee. I was regular in spurts, because there was times when, for example, our child had just been born, our first child. And so we didn't go as regularly then.”
In a July 21, 2008 Newsweek article, Obama explained that he stopped going to church as often after he and wife Michelle had children.
“As young marrieds, Barack and Michelle (who also didn't go to church regularly as a child) went to church fairly often—two or three times a month. But after their first child, Malia, was born, they found making the effort more difficult. ‘I don't know if you've had the experience of taking young, squirming children to church, but it's not easy,’ he says.
“‘Trinity was always packed, and so you had to get there early. And if you went to the morning service, you were looking at—it just was difficult. So that would cut back on our involvement.’
“After he began his run for the U.S. Senate, he says, the family sometimes didn't go to Trinity for months at a time. The girls have not attended Sunday school.”
The Wright controversy threatened to be a stumbling block in Obama’s quest for the Democratic presidential nomination. On March 14, he released a statement on the matter that said he was not in church when Wright made his inflammatory statements about the United States and 9/11.
“The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation,” Obama said in his statement. “When these statements first came to my attention, it was at the beginning of my presidential campaign.
“I made it clear at the time that I strongly condemned his comments. But because Rev. Wright was on the verge of retirement, and because of my strong links to the Trinity faith community, where I married my wife and where my daughters were baptized, I did not think it appropriate to leave the church,” Obama added.
Obama’s first interviews on the matter came in March when video clips of Wright’s sermons were being aired. The clips showed the pastor refer to America as, “the U.S. of K.K.K. A.”
In another sermon Wright said, “No, no, no. Not God bless America. God d--- America. It’s in the Bible for killing innocent people. God d-- America for treating us citizens as less than human. God d--- America as long as she tries to act like she is God and she is supreme.”
A clip of a sermon Wright delivered after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks shows him saying, “We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought to our own front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost.”
Also in the Sun-Times interview posted on BeliefNet.com, Obama speaks of another controversial clergyman when Falsani asked him, “Do you have people in your life that you look to for guidance?”
Obama answered: “Well, my pastor [Jeremiah Wright] is certainly someone who I have an enormous amount of respect for. I have a number of friends who are ministers. Reverend (James) Meeks is a close friend and colleague of mine in the state Senate. Father Michael Pfleger is a dear friend, and somebody I interact with closely.”
Pfleger, a white Catholic priest, made news earlier this year when he delivered a sermon at Trinity mocking Obama’s Democratic primary opponent Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York.
Pfleger told the Trinity congregation that Clinton apparently was thinking, “‘I’m Bill’s wife. I’m white and this is mine.’ … And then out of nowhere, ‘Hey, I’m Barack Obama.’
“And she said, ‘Oh damn. Where did you come from? I’m white. I’m entitled. There’s a black man stealing my show. … She wasn’t the only one crying. There was a whole lot of white people crying,” Pfleger added.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
U.S. TAXPAYERS TO FUND ABORTIONS ABROAD
INDER OBAMA US TAX PAYERS WILL FUND APORTIONS ABROAD.OW IST'T THATA CUTE ON THE PART OF OBAMA??
CNSNews.com
Obama’s ‘Change’ Likely to Include Funding Abortions Abroad
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
By Penny Starr, Senior Staff Writer
President Bush and President-elect Obama walk along the West Wing Colonnade of the White House in Washington, Monday, Nov. 10, 2008, prior to their meeting in the Oval Office. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)(CNSNews.com) – The “change” that President-elect Barack Obama promised on the campaign trail will likely include overturning President George W. Bush’s 2001 executive order to prohibit the use of federal tax dollars for performing or advocating abortion as a means of family planning in foreign countries, Obama’s transition team has said.
“There’s a lot that the president can do using his executive authority without waiting for congressional action, and I think we’ll see the president do that,” John Podesta, head of Obama’s transition team, said when he appeared on “Fox News Sunday.”
One of those executive orders is the Mexico City Policy, or as critics call it, the “global gag act,” a U.S. policy first put into place at an August 1984 Conference on Population in Mexico City by President Ronald Reagan.
The Reagan policy required all non-governmental agencies, or NGOs, that received population aid dollars from the United States to agree to not perform or actively promote abortions.
In what has become a partisan tradition in the first days of both Republican or Democratic administrations, President Bill Clinton removed the order shortly after taking office in 1993, and Bush reinstated it on Jan. 22, 2001.
Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee, told CNSNews.com that Obama has backed the pro-abortion agenda throughout his political career.
“And when he’s in the oval office he will nullify (the Mexico City Policy), and the result will be hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars going to organizations in developing countries that promote abortion,” Johnson said.
Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, has publicly criticized the policy, saying it limits abortion counseling even in countries where the procedure is legal.
In the 1980s, International Planned Parenthood-London, and Family Planning International Assistance tried but failed through court challenges to reverse the policy.
As a U.S. senator, Obama has backed proposed legislation to reverse the Mexico City Policy. After he is inaugurated on Jan. 20, his advisers are predicting the swift reversal of this and many other Bush executive orders, including the ban on medical research that creates and then destroys human embryos to harvest stem cells.
Viewer Comments
The following comments are posted by our readers and are not necessarily the opinions of either CNSNews.com or the story’s author. To be considered for publication, comments must adhere to the Terms of Use for posting to this Web site. Thank you.
Showing 1-5 of 10 Comments 1 2 Next Loading...
Ned Reck at 08:33 PM - November 11, 2008
I am going to look at this from a pure, pragmatic point of view. "President-elect Obama, are you going to use my hard-earned money, confiscated in the form of a criminally harsh tax-burden, to spend on promiscuous people in foreign countries, who will gladly terminate their unborn to continue to indulge in their irresponsible and undisciplined life-styles?" If so.... NOT WITH MY MONEY.
HuldahPost at 06:01 PM - November 11, 2008
All Pro-lifers were humbled and devastated by the results of the election. I, for one, just didn't understand why God would not give us one more chance to change the direction of the Supreme Court to overturn Roe, and how He could allow such a deadly minded man to elected. But, today, maybe after 4 hours of sleep, I realized we have been asking God to stop abortion. We have been asking God. So, when does God reveal His hand? After taking out those who do not want to fight, those who lap up water verses those who use their hands, and when those He helps ARE IN THE MINORITY and it would take a MIRACLE to achieve the objective. Pro-lifers unite again--Tell God this is unacceptable to us and we will fight the fight if HE GOES BEFORE US-not john mccain, or sarah. Give thanks and praise for His VICTORY for life. Give the house, the senate, the SCOTUS, the white house, all into His hands, to do according to HIS will. So Be It. Thank you, Father.
dixieedd at 05:54 PM - November 11, 2008
the bible says that you can tell a tree by the fruit it bears,and if this guy is a true christian i am from the planet jupiter!
wileysnakeskins at 02:07 PM - November 11, 2008
Obama claims to be Christian, but a true Christian following Christ would and could never take part in the factual murder of millions of unborn human beings as have done all those who claim to hold so much love for their fellow man as do the democratic party leaders and advocates of a woman's choice in the person of her bodily functions. MURDER, MURDER no matter how accomplished is still MURDER, even it you do it to your own offspring. I wait for the judgment day when Jesus will ask of those who voted for it, took part in it, and advocated it, what have you done? The great blessing of his election being proclaimed right now will soon stick in the throats of those who were too blind to see the truth when it was everywhere for them to discern how false his proclamations were all along. God watch over us in this time of trial and the biggest mistake the country and it's voters have ever made; let not our culture, peace and democracy fade away in this time of trial.
stebbe at 01:53 PM - November 11, 2008
Dear Obama and those who voted him in, "It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." Consider strongly and repent before you further declare 'Open Season' on the unborn.
CNSNews.com
Obama’s ‘Change’ Likely to Include Funding Abortions Abroad
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
By Penny Starr, Senior Staff Writer
President Bush and President-elect Obama walk along the West Wing Colonnade of the White House in Washington, Monday, Nov. 10, 2008, prior to their meeting in the Oval Office. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)(CNSNews.com) – The “change” that President-elect Barack Obama promised on the campaign trail will likely include overturning President George W. Bush’s 2001 executive order to prohibit the use of federal tax dollars for performing or advocating abortion as a means of family planning in foreign countries, Obama’s transition team has said.
“There’s a lot that the president can do using his executive authority without waiting for congressional action, and I think we’ll see the president do that,” John Podesta, head of Obama’s transition team, said when he appeared on “Fox News Sunday.”
One of those executive orders is the Mexico City Policy, or as critics call it, the “global gag act,” a U.S. policy first put into place at an August 1984 Conference on Population in Mexico City by President Ronald Reagan.
The Reagan policy required all non-governmental agencies, or NGOs, that received population aid dollars from the United States to agree to not perform or actively promote abortions.
In what has become a partisan tradition in the first days of both Republican or Democratic administrations, President Bill Clinton removed the order shortly after taking office in 1993, and Bush reinstated it on Jan. 22, 2001.
Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee, told CNSNews.com that Obama has backed the pro-abortion agenda throughout his political career.
“And when he’s in the oval office he will nullify (the Mexico City Policy), and the result will be hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars going to organizations in developing countries that promote abortion,” Johnson said.
Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, has publicly criticized the policy, saying it limits abortion counseling even in countries where the procedure is legal.
In the 1980s, International Planned Parenthood-London, and Family Planning International Assistance tried but failed through court challenges to reverse the policy.
As a U.S. senator, Obama has backed proposed legislation to reverse the Mexico City Policy. After he is inaugurated on Jan. 20, his advisers are predicting the swift reversal of this and many other Bush executive orders, including the ban on medical research that creates and then destroys human embryos to harvest stem cells.
Viewer Comments
The following comments are posted by our readers and are not necessarily the opinions of either CNSNews.com or the story’s author. To be considered for publication, comments must adhere to the Terms of Use for posting to this Web site. Thank you.
Showing 1-5 of 10 Comments 1 2 Next Loading...
Ned Reck at 08:33 PM - November 11, 2008
I am going to look at this from a pure, pragmatic point of view. "President-elect Obama, are you going to use my hard-earned money, confiscated in the form of a criminally harsh tax-burden, to spend on promiscuous people in foreign countries, who will gladly terminate their unborn to continue to indulge in their irresponsible and undisciplined life-styles?" If so.... NOT WITH MY MONEY.
HuldahPost at 06:01 PM - November 11, 2008
All Pro-lifers were humbled and devastated by the results of the election. I, for one, just didn't understand why God would not give us one more chance to change the direction of the Supreme Court to overturn Roe, and how He could allow such a deadly minded man to elected. But, today, maybe after 4 hours of sleep, I realized we have been asking God to stop abortion. We have been asking God. So, when does God reveal His hand? After taking out those who do not want to fight, those who lap up water verses those who use their hands, and when those He helps ARE IN THE MINORITY and it would take a MIRACLE to achieve the objective. Pro-lifers unite again--Tell God this is unacceptable to us and we will fight the fight if HE GOES BEFORE US-not john mccain, or sarah. Give thanks and praise for His VICTORY for life. Give the house, the senate, the SCOTUS, the white house, all into His hands, to do according to HIS will. So Be It. Thank you, Father.
dixieedd at 05:54 PM - November 11, 2008
the bible says that you can tell a tree by the fruit it bears,and if this guy is a true christian i am from the planet jupiter!
wileysnakeskins at 02:07 PM - November 11, 2008
Obama claims to be Christian, but a true Christian following Christ would and could never take part in the factual murder of millions of unborn human beings as have done all those who claim to hold so much love for their fellow man as do the democratic party leaders and advocates of a woman's choice in the person of her bodily functions. MURDER, MURDER no matter how accomplished is still MURDER, even it you do it to your own offspring. I wait for the judgment day when Jesus will ask of those who voted for it, took part in it, and advocated it, what have you done? The great blessing of his election being proclaimed right now will soon stick in the throats of those who were too blind to see the truth when it was everywhere for them to discern how false his proclamations were all along. God watch over us in this time of trial and the biggest mistake the country and it's voters have ever made; let not our culture, peace and democracy fade away in this time of trial.
stebbe at 01:53 PM - November 11, 2008
Dear Obama and those who voted him in, "It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." Consider strongly and repent before you further declare 'Open Season' on the unborn.
Obama Will Push His Pro-Abortion Agenda
Abortion Groups Confident Obama Will Push His Pro-Abortion Agenda
Monday, November 10, 2008
By Matthew Hadro
Obama at Planned Parenthood event. (AP Photo)(CNSNews.com) - The leading abortion rights organizations in America say they are confident that Barack Obama will push for their full agenda, including passage of the Freedom of Choice Act, comprehensive sex ed and “reproductive rights” that include “affordable" birth control.
Planned Parenthood, NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action League) Pro-Choice America, and the Center for Reproductive Rights have each publicly congratulated the new president-elect on his victory.
“NARAL Pro-Choice America worked hard for our slate of pro-choice candidates across the country, including pro-choice Sen. Barack Obama, and that hard work resulted in the reaffirmation of our commitment to the values of freedom and privacy,” Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America said in a statement.
She added: “I’m proud that NARAL Pro-Choice America was the first major pro-choice PAC to endorse Obama for president.
Obama was the most pro-abortion presidential candidate in history.
In a speech to Planned Parenthood on the 35th anniversary of Roe v. Wade -- the Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion – Obama said: “Throughout my career, I’ve been a consistent and strong supporter of reproductive justice, and have consistently had a 100 percent pro-choice rating with Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America.”
Obama also pledged to push for the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) as president. FOCA was introduced in 2004, “to prohibit, consistent with Roe v. Wade, the interference by the government with a woman’s right to choose to bear a child or terminate a pregnancy, and for other purposes.”
The proposal would overturn all existing state regulations on abortion and partial-birth abortion, if enacted.
Now it is up to the president-elect to make good on his promises, the abortion groups say.
In a three-page letter, the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) asked the president-elect to pursue other specific items on the abortion-rights agenda:
1. To stop funding abstinence-only education programs as part of the in the Title V Maternal-Child Health Block Grant and the Community-Based Abstinence-Education programs. CRR also wants the new administration to appoint agency heads “who will not allow politics to trump science.”
2. To appoint federal judges "committed to supporting established constitutional rights.” Specifically, the letter emphasizes the importance of judges who will preserve “reproductive rights.”
3. To send representatives to the U.N. who will promote abortion and “reproductive rights."
The center also wants Obama to repeal what it calls the “Global Gag Rule” – also known as the Mexico City Policy, a Reagan-era policy that forbids U.S. funding going to support abortion overseas – and to begin again to fund the U.N. Population Fund, a program which the Bush administration stopped funding because it supported forced abortion and sterilization programs overseas.
The abortion rights group asked that the administration direct the new Health and Human Services Secretary to reassess the FDA’s policy restricting over-the-counter access to so-called “emergency contraception.”
Planned Parenthood's agenda, meanwhile, is simple, its Virginia affiliate told CNSNews.com.
"Planned Parenthood Advocates of Virginia feel he (Obama) will improve access to quality healthcare for women, support and protect a woman’s right to choose, support comprehensive sex-education to keep our young people healthy and safe, and invest in prevention programs including family planning services and breast cancer screening.”
Monday, November 10, 2008
By Matthew Hadro
Obama at Planned Parenthood event. (AP Photo)(CNSNews.com) - The leading abortion rights organizations in America say they are confident that Barack Obama will push for their full agenda, including passage of the Freedom of Choice Act, comprehensive sex ed and “reproductive rights” that include “affordable" birth control.
Planned Parenthood, NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action League) Pro-Choice America, and the Center for Reproductive Rights have each publicly congratulated the new president-elect on his victory.
“NARAL Pro-Choice America worked hard for our slate of pro-choice candidates across the country, including pro-choice Sen. Barack Obama, and that hard work resulted in the reaffirmation of our commitment to the values of freedom and privacy,” Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America said in a statement.
She added: “I’m proud that NARAL Pro-Choice America was the first major pro-choice PAC to endorse Obama for president.
Obama was the most pro-abortion presidential candidate in history.
In a speech to Planned Parenthood on the 35th anniversary of Roe v. Wade -- the Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion – Obama said: “Throughout my career, I’ve been a consistent and strong supporter of reproductive justice, and have consistently had a 100 percent pro-choice rating with Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America.”
Obama also pledged to push for the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) as president. FOCA was introduced in 2004, “to prohibit, consistent with Roe v. Wade, the interference by the government with a woman’s right to choose to bear a child or terminate a pregnancy, and for other purposes.”
The proposal would overturn all existing state regulations on abortion and partial-birth abortion, if enacted.
Now it is up to the president-elect to make good on his promises, the abortion groups say.
In a three-page letter, the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) asked the president-elect to pursue other specific items on the abortion-rights agenda:
1. To stop funding abstinence-only education programs as part of the in the Title V Maternal-Child Health Block Grant and the Community-Based Abstinence-Education programs. CRR also wants the new administration to appoint agency heads “who will not allow politics to trump science.”
2. To appoint federal judges "committed to supporting established constitutional rights.” Specifically, the letter emphasizes the importance of judges who will preserve “reproductive rights.”
3. To send representatives to the U.N. who will promote abortion and “reproductive rights."
The center also wants Obama to repeal what it calls the “Global Gag Rule” – also known as the Mexico City Policy, a Reagan-era policy that forbids U.S. funding going to support abortion overseas – and to begin again to fund the U.N. Population Fund, a program which the Bush administration stopped funding because it supported forced abortion and sterilization programs overseas.
The abortion rights group asked that the administration direct the new Health and Human Services Secretary to reassess the FDA’s policy restricting over-the-counter access to so-called “emergency contraception.”
Planned Parenthood's agenda, meanwhile, is simple, its Virginia affiliate told CNSNews.com.
"Planned Parenthood Advocates of Virginia feel he (Obama) will improve access to quality healthcare for women, support and protect a woman’s right to choose, support comprehensive sex-education to keep our young people healthy and safe, and invest in prevention programs including family planning services and breast cancer screening.”
The Election Is Not Over
The Election Is Not Over
Tuesday, November 11, 2008 4:14 PM
By: Dick Morris and Eileen McGann
Barack Obama has been elected president, but the Senate has not been fully chosen.
Hanging in the balance is, perhaps, the fate of the center-right free market system that has brought America decades of success and prosperity.
The Democrats now have 57 senators, having gained open seats in New Mexico, Colorado, and Virginia and having defeated Republican incumbents in New Hampshire (Sununu), North Carolina (Dole), and Oregon (Smith). But races in Minnesota and Alaska will be decided by recounts.
Republicans are leading in both but, particularly in Minnesota, the margin is too thin for comfort. And, in Georgia, Republican incumbent Saxby Chambliss was forced into a runoff against his Democratic opponent, Jim Martin.
We can’t do much about Minnesota and Alaska, but we sure can do a lot to hold onto the seat in Georgia. And it just might be that seat that marks whether or not we will be able to sustain a filibuster of Obama’s socialist legislation.
If the Democrats prevail in Minnesota and Alaska, they will have 59 seats. Chambliss’ could be the 60th.
If there is one lesson that is plain from the election, it is that conservatism is too important to trust to the Republican Party! A runoff election is a get-out-the-vote contest, and the Republican Party has proven woefully inept at such matters. In the election, the proportion of the vote cast by Republicans dropped from 1.3 percent above the Democrats to 2.6 percent below them.
The Democrats won the election of 2008 because they got their vote out and the Republicans lost it because they did not.
The same thing can happen in Georgia.
Conservatives should go online, right now, and donate to www.GOPtrust.com.
Only a group like this one, The National Republican Trust PAC, which sponsored the Rev. Wright ads that delivered all the undecided vote to McCain in the election, has the flexibility and focus to do what the Republican Party should be doing on its own. And we cannot sit back and let complaisance and over confidence lead us to another election day debacle.
Georgia went for McCain, of course, but it is ominous that even though the Republicans carried the state by 6 points, Chambliss fell short of the vote he needed to avoid a runoff.
To assure that the Democrat — a liberal named Jim Martin —doesn’t win this seat, too, we have to mobilize to get Georgians to see Martin for the liberal he is. Martin is a straight party-line Democrat who can be counted on to do Harry Reid’s bidding. It is time to discard to lame approach Republicans so often take and come out swinging.
That’s what www.GOPtrust.com plans to do if they get enough in voluntary donations.
The Obama victory really started with the organization of MoveOn.org in the bitter climate of Clinton’s impeachment. Since then, the left-wing cyber-roots groups have amassed millions of e-names, piled up hundreds of millions in contributions, and mobilized and expanded their base.
It is through groups like www.GOPtrust.com that we, conservatives, must rely on if we are to take our country back.
But right now, the key battleground is Georgia, and we have to hold the line there.
© 2008 Dick Morris & Eileen McGann
Tuesday, November 11, 2008 4:14 PM
By: Dick Morris and Eileen McGann
Barack Obama has been elected president, but the Senate has not been fully chosen.
Hanging in the balance is, perhaps, the fate of the center-right free market system that has brought America decades of success and prosperity.
The Democrats now have 57 senators, having gained open seats in New Mexico, Colorado, and Virginia and having defeated Republican incumbents in New Hampshire (Sununu), North Carolina (Dole), and Oregon (Smith). But races in Minnesota and Alaska will be decided by recounts.
Republicans are leading in both but, particularly in Minnesota, the margin is too thin for comfort. And, in Georgia, Republican incumbent Saxby Chambliss was forced into a runoff against his Democratic opponent, Jim Martin.
We can’t do much about Minnesota and Alaska, but we sure can do a lot to hold onto the seat in Georgia. And it just might be that seat that marks whether or not we will be able to sustain a filibuster of Obama’s socialist legislation.
If the Democrats prevail in Minnesota and Alaska, they will have 59 seats. Chambliss’ could be the 60th.
If there is one lesson that is plain from the election, it is that conservatism is too important to trust to the Republican Party! A runoff election is a get-out-the-vote contest, and the Republican Party has proven woefully inept at such matters. In the election, the proportion of the vote cast by Republicans dropped from 1.3 percent above the Democrats to 2.6 percent below them.
The Democrats won the election of 2008 because they got their vote out and the Republicans lost it because they did not.
The same thing can happen in Georgia.
Conservatives should go online, right now, and donate to www.GOPtrust.com.
Only a group like this one, The National Republican Trust PAC, which sponsored the Rev. Wright ads that delivered all the undecided vote to McCain in the election, has the flexibility and focus to do what the Republican Party should be doing on its own. And we cannot sit back and let complaisance and over confidence lead us to another election day debacle.
Georgia went for McCain, of course, but it is ominous that even though the Republicans carried the state by 6 points, Chambliss fell short of the vote he needed to avoid a runoff.
To assure that the Democrat — a liberal named Jim Martin —doesn’t win this seat, too, we have to mobilize to get Georgians to see Martin for the liberal he is. Martin is a straight party-line Democrat who can be counted on to do Harry Reid’s bidding. It is time to discard to lame approach Republicans so often take and come out swinging.
That’s what www.GOPtrust.com plans to do if they get enough in voluntary donations.
The Obama victory really started with the organization of MoveOn.org in the bitter climate of Clinton’s impeachment. Since then, the left-wing cyber-roots groups have amassed millions of e-names, piled up hundreds of millions in contributions, and mobilized and expanded their base.
It is through groups like www.GOPtrust.com that we, conservatives, must rely on if we are to take our country back.
But right now, the key battleground is Georgia, and we have to hold the line there.
© 2008 Dick Morris & Eileen McGann
WHERE ARE OUR VALUES AND ETHICS
AS MANY OF YOU KNOW I HAVE OVER THE PAST YEAR WORKED AT GETTING LEGISLATION PAST IN THE FEDERAL LINE TO CEASE PAYING PENSIONS TO THOSE "CONVICTED FELONS". THESE ARE JUST A FEW OF THEM. ROSTENKOWSKI, CUNNINGHAM, JUDGE HASTINGS (NOW DRAWING A JUDGES RETIREMENT THO HE IS NOW IN CONGRESS) AND THERE ARE OTHERS.
THE IRONY OF THIS EFFORT IS THIS. I PURSUED CLOSURE TO THE PROBLEM BY WRITING AND HOUNDING MY SENATOR TED STEVENS OF ALASKA. I FELT THAT I HAD A CHAMPION IN MR. STEVENS, AS HE FAITHFULLY ANSWERED MY QUERIES AS TO THE STATUS OF THE BILL GOING THROUGH CONGRESS AND SENATE.
ON FEBRUARY 11 2008, I RECEIVED A LETTER FROM MR.STEVENS ADVISING ME THAT THE CONGRESSIONAL PENSION ACCOUNTABILITY ACT IS TITLE IV OF S.1. THIS LEGISLATION APPLIES TO LAWMAKERS CONVICTED OF A CRIME AFTER THE BILL BECAME LAW. ARTICLE I. SECTION 0 OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION PROHIBITS "ex post facto" LAWS, THEREFORE, THIS LAW DOES NOT APPLY PUNISHMENT RETROACTIVELY.
I MENTION IRONY IN THIS CASE FOR AS I WAS COMMUNICATING WITH THIS SENATOR OF MINE, THIS WEASEL WAS IN THE THROES OF CRIMES AT THE VERY TIME HE WAS SUPPOSEDLY PUTTING A STOP TO THE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ($126,000. PER YEAR TO ROSTENKOWSKI) PAID TO CONVICTED FEDERAL FELONS ANNUALLY. HE WAS CONVICTED IN FEDERAL COURT OF SEVEN FELONY COUNTS. OF COURSE AS ANY MISCREANT THE DENIALS WILL LAST FOR EVER. THE FACTS REMAIN HE WAS CONVICTED.
THE BITTER PART OF THIS IS THAT THE SLIMES IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MUST HAVE A LAW TO BREAK AND APPARENTLY BE SPECIFIC AS TO THE TYPE OF CRIME BEING BROKEN BEFORE THERE CAN BE THE TYPE OF PUNISHMENT METED TO THEM IN THE VALUE OF OR WORTH OF THE CRIME. THUS IF ONE TAKES MONEY OR FAVOR FOR MISGUIDED DEED AND IS CONVICTED ME/SHE/IT MAY GO TO JAIL BUT THE PENSION MONEY REMAINS WITH THEM.
THIS A TRAVESTY THAT CAN BE HANDLED, AS I SEE IT, VERY QUICKLY. IT IS CALLED 'ANSWER TO YOUR OATH'. MOST OF US IN OUR WORKING LIFETIME HAVE HAD TO ANSWER
OR FACE THAT 'ANSWER TO YOUR OATH' AT ONE TIME OR ANOTHER.
MOST OATHS PROCLAIM THAT THE MAKER OF THE OATH WILL OBEY THE STRUCTURE (LAWS OF, CONSTITUTION OF, OR OTHER MANIFESTO OF) MAKING UP THE STANDARD BY WHICH ALL EMPLOYEES
FUNCTION. THIS IS CALLED 'STANDARD OF ETHICS' FOR THOSE NEEDING HELP.
WITH THIS IN MIND THEN THE FOLLOWING WOULD BE TRUE. BE CONVICTED OF A CRIME(CURRENTLY OKAY TO TAKE GIFTS OR MONEY) AND GET A LITTLE JAIL TIME BUT, BUT, BUT, YOU STILL GET TO KEEP YOUR MILLION DOLLAR PENSION. REMEMBER THAT JAIL TIME FOR MOST OF THESE SLIME BAGS IS LESS THAT 36 MONTHS. EVEN I CAN DO THAT STANDING ON MY HEAD.
MY NAME IS DAVE ANDERSON AND YOU CAN REACH ME AT oad@alaska.net I ASK YOU TO JOIN ME IN PURSUING AN HONEST END TO THE CORRUPTION RAMPANT IN THE CAPITOL CITY
THE IRONY OF THIS EFFORT IS THIS. I PURSUED CLOSURE TO THE PROBLEM BY WRITING AND HOUNDING MY SENATOR TED STEVENS OF ALASKA. I FELT THAT I HAD A CHAMPION IN MR. STEVENS, AS HE FAITHFULLY ANSWERED MY QUERIES AS TO THE STATUS OF THE BILL GOING THROUGH CONGRESS AND SENATE.
ON FEBRUARY 11 2008, I RECEIVED A LETTER FROM MR.STEVENS ADVISING ME THAT THE CONGRESSIONAL PENSION ACCOUNTABILITY ACT IS TITLE IV OF S.1. THIS LEGISLATION APPLIES TO LAWMAKERS CONVICTED OF A CRIME AFTER THE BILL BECAME LAW. ARTICLE I. SECTION 0 OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION PROHIBITS "ex post facto" LAWS, THEREFORE, THIS LAW DOES NOT APPLY PUNISHMENT RETROACTIVELY.
I MENTION IRONY IN THIS CASE FOR AS I WAS COMMUNICATING WITH THIS SENATOR OF MINE, THIS WEASEL WAS IN THE THROES OF CRIMES AT THE VERY TIME HE WAS SUPPOSEDLY PUTTING A STOP TO THE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ($126,000. PER YEAR TO ROSTENKOWSKI) PAID TO CONVICTED FEDERAL FELONS ANNUALLY. HE WAS CONVICTED IN FEDERAL COURT OF SEVEN FELONY COUNTS. OF COURSE AS ANY MISCREANT THE DENIALS WILL LAST FOR EVER. THE FACTS REMAIN HE WAS CONVICTED.
THE BITTER PART OF THIS IS THAT THE SLIMES IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MUST HAVE A LAW TO BREAK AND APPARENTLY BE SPECIFIC AS TO THE TYPE OF CRIME BEING BROKEN BEFORE THERE CAN BE THE TYPE OF PUNISHMENT METED TO THEM IN THE VALUE OF OR WORTH OF THE CRIME. THUS IF ONE TAKES MONEY OR FAVOR FOR MISGUIDED DEED AND IS CONVICTED ME/SHE/IT MAY GO TO JAIL BUT THE PENSION MONEY REMAINS WITH THEM.
THIS A TRAVESTY THAT CAN BE HANDLED, AS I SEE IT, VERY QUICKLY. IT IS CALLED 'ANSWER TO YOUR OATH'. MOST OF US IN OUR WORKING LIFETIME HAVE HAD TO ANSWER
OR FACE THAT 'ANSWER TO YOUR OATH' AT ONE TIME OR ANOTHER.
MOST OATHS PROCLAIM THAT THE MAKER OF THE OATH WILL OBEY THE STRUCTURE (LAWS OF, CONSTITUTION OF, OR OTHER MANIFESTO OF) MAKING UP THE STANDARD BY WHICH ALL EMPLOYEES
FUNCTION. THIS IS CALLED 'STANDARD OF ETHICS' FOR THOSE NEEDING HELP.
WITH THIS IN MIND THEN THE FOLLOWING WOULD BE TRUE. BE CONVICTED OF A CRIME(CURRENTLY OKAY TO TAKE GIFTS OR MONEY) AND GET A LITTLE JAIL TIME BUT, BUT, BUT, YOU STILL GET TO KEEP YOUR MILLION DOLLAR PENSION. REMEMBER THAT JAIL TIME FOR MOST OF THESE SLIME BAGS IS LESS THAT 36 MONTHS. EVEN I CAN DO THAT STANDING ON MY HEAD.
MY NAME IS DAVE ANDERSON AND YOU CAN REACH ME AT oad@alaska.net I ASK YOU TO JOIN ME IN PURSUING AN HONEST END TO THE CORRUPTION RAMPANT IN THE CAPITOL CITY
Monday, November 10, 2008
Obama's 'Change': Appointing Beltway Has-Beens
Obama's 'Change': Appointing Beltway Has-Beens
Sunday, November 9, 2008 4:46 PM
By: Dick Morris & Eileen McGann Article Font Size
What's with Obama's choice of old-time Clinton cronies and recycled Washington insiders to run the transition to his new politics of change?
Can't the anti-Washington-insiders and the president-elect find anyone who isn't a Beltway has-been?
Judging by the appointments to his transition committee and leaks about possible top staff and Cabinet choices, Obama appears to be practicing the politics of status quo, not the politics of change.
Obama based his innovative campaign on an emphatic and convincing commitment to change the culture of Washington and bring in new people, new ideas, and new ways of doing business.
But now, Obama has definitely changed his tune. As president-elect, he's brought back the old Washington hacks, party regulars, and Clinton sycophants that he so frequently disparaged. Like Jimmy Carter, the last president who ran as an outsider, Obama has reached out to the same old folks who dominate the Democratic Party and represent the status quo.
His transition committee looks like a reunion of the Clinton administration. No new ideas of how to reform the system there. The chairman, John Podesta, was Clinton's chief of staff. He presided over outrageous last-minute pardons and his style is strictly inside-the-Beltway and make-no-waves.
Then there's Carol Browner, Clinton's competent former EPA administrator who became the consummate Washington insider. She's Madeline Albright's partner and recently married mega-lobbyist and former Congressman Tom Downey. During the uproar over Dubai taking over U.S. ports, Browner brought Downey to meet with Sen. Chuck Schumer to plead Dubai's case. Downey was paid half a million dollars to push Dubai's position. He's also a lobbyist for Fannie Mae, paid half a million to try to cover their rears on the subprime mortgage mess. Is this change?
Federico Pena was Clinton's secretary of transportation and of energy. The president felt he was unduly soft on Air Florida after a crash and lost confidence in him. Now he's back as a transition committee member.
Bill Daley, Clinton's former secretary of commerce and the brother of the mayor of Chicago, is the epitome of the old Democratic establishment. Clinton appointed him to the Fannie Mae board and his son worked as a lobbyist for the agency. Aren't these the kind of folks that Obama ran against?
Larry Summers, president of Harvard and former Clinton secretary of the treasury is not exactly an outsider either. He's also alienated more than a few with his bizarre suggestion that women may be genetically inferior to men in math and science.
Susan Rice, assistant secretary of state under Clinton advised John Kerry and Mike Dukakis. Does that tell you enough?
Obama has named one of his big bundlers -- Michael Froman, an executive at Citigroup. Is this supposed to symbolize change?
Obama's choice of a spokesperson for the transition is also surprising; she is definitely not the face of reason and new politics. Stephanie Cutter is the brash and combative former Clinton, Kerry, and Ted Kennedy mouthpiece. The liberal DailyKos.com once described Cutter as "a moron to the nth degree" when she tried unsuccessfully to force The New York Times' Adam Nagourney to treat her unsolicited e-mail criticizing Howard Dean as "background" without mentioning her name.
Speaking of brash, Rahm Emanuel, the new White House chief of staff, makes Cutter look timid. Rahm is also a former Clinton White House staffer -- and a very obnoxious one. He spent his White House years leaking to The Washington Post whenever he didn't like what the president was doing. Even Bill Clinton stopped trusting him. Any hopes of Obama keeping his commitment to reach across the aisle would go right out the window with Rahm's appointment. Instead of extending a hand to the opposition, it would be like raising just one finger. And Rahm's strident demeanor laced with the 'F' word in every sentence will do little to elevate the bipartisan dialogue in Washington.
Christopher Edley, another member of the transition team, is dean of the Berkeley Law School. He was a member of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission under Clinton, and his wife, Maria Echaveste was Clinton's deputy chief of staff.
Transition committee staffer Christine Varney was a federal trade commissioner under Clinton and worked in the White House.
Throughout the early debates, Obama criticized Hillary Clinton as part of the inside-the Beltway establishment that needed to go. But now he's reaching out to these exact same folks. Some change.
© 2008 Dick Morris & Eileen McGann
Sunday, November 9, 2008 4:46 PM
By: Dick Morris & Eileen McGann Article Font Size
What's with Obama's choice of old-time Clinton cronies and recycled Washington insiders to run the transition to his new politics of change?
Can't the anti-Washington-insiders and the president-elect find anyone who isn't a Beltway has-been?
Judging by the appointments to his transition committee and leaks about possible top staff and Cabinet choices, Obama appears to be practicing the politics of status quo, not the politics of change.
Obama based his innovative campaign on an emphatic and convincing commitment to change the culture of Washington and bring in new people, new ideas, and new ways of doing business.
But now, Obama has definitely changed his tune. As president-elect, he's brought back the old Washington hacks, party regulars, and Clinton sycophants that he so frequently disparaged. Like Jimmy Carter, the last president who ran as an outsider, Obama has reached out to the same old folks who dominate the Democratic Party and represent the status quo.
His transition committee looks like a reunion of the Clinton administration. No new ideas of how to reform the system there. The chairman, John Podesta, was Clinton's chief of staff. He presided over outrageous last-minute pardons and his style is strictly inside-the-Beltway and make-no-waves.
Then there's Carol Browner, Clinton's competent former EPA administrator who became the consummate Washington insider. She's Madeline Albright's partner and recently married mega-lobbyist and former Congressman Tom Downey. During the uproar over Dubai taking over U.S. ports, Browner brought Downey to meet with Sen. Chuck Schumer to plead Dubai's case. Downey was paid half a million dollars to push Dubai's position. He's also a lobbyist for Fannie Mae, paid half a million to try to cover their rears on the subprime mortgage mess. Is this change?
Federico Pena was Clinton's secretary of transportation and of energy. The president felt he was unduly soft on Air Florida after a crash and lost confidence in him. Now he's back as a transition committee member.
Bill Daley, Clinton's former secretary of commerce and the brother of the mayor of Chicago, is the epitome of the old Democratic establishment. Clinton appointed him to the Fannie Mae board and his son worked as a lobbyist for the agency. Aren't these the kind of folks that Obama ran against?
Larry Summers, president of Harvard and former Clinton secretary of the treasury is not exactly an outsider either. He's also alienated more than a few with his bizarre suggestion that women may be genetically inferior to men in math and science.
Susan Rice, assistant secretary of state under Clinton advised John Kerry and Mike Dukakis. Does that tell you enough?
Obama has named one of his big bundlers -- Michael Froman, an executive at Citigroup. Is this supposed to symbolize change?
Obama's choice of a spokesperson for the transition is also surprising; she is definitely not the face of reason and new politics. Stephanie Cutter is the brash and combative former Clinton, Kerry, and Ted Kennedy mouthpiece. The liberal DailyKos.com once described Cutter as "a moron to the nth degree" when she tried unsuccessfully to force The New York Times' Adam Nagourney to treat her unsolicited e-mail criticizing Howard Dean as "background" without mentioning her name.
Speaking of brash, Rahm Emanuel, the new White House chief of staff, makes Cutter look timid. Rahm is also a former Clinton White House staffer -- and a very obnoxious one. He spent his White House years leaking to The Washington Post whenever he didn't like what the president was doing. Even Bill Clinton stopped trusting him. Any hopes of Obama keeping his commitment to reach across the aisle would go right out the window with Rahm's appointment. Instead of extending a hand to the opposition, it would be like raising just one finger. And Rahm's strident demeanor laced with the 'F' word in every sentence will do little to elevate the bipartisan dialogue in Washington.
Christopher Edley, another member of the transition team, is dean of the Berkeley Law School. He was a member of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission under Clinton, and his wife, Maria Echaveste was Clinton's deputy chief of staff.
Transition committee staffer Christine Varney was a federal trade commissioner under Clinton and worked in the White House.
Throughout the early debates, Obama criticized Hillary Clinton as part of the inside-the Beltway establishment that needed to go. But now he's reaching out to these exact same folks. Some change.
© 2008 Dick Morris & Eileen McGann
Sunday, November 9, 2008
ANSWERS THANK HEAVEN FOR ANSWERS
When I was a young lad one of my first jobs was that of 'printers devil'. It was an ideal job for a skinny eight year old, and since skinny also came with agile I filled the spot of 'devil' to a 't'. I was able to shinny under the presses and other type setting machines and smear the nasty black grease over the cogs and
spindles of the mighty machines of knowledge.
And over the years of being the 'devil' I gleaned several views that have stuck with me.
Not every printed word is from the angle of truth, for we have seen in the past how the word has been bastardized to fulfill a certain agenda or focus, more often than not, to a focus not of our wont, but rather to subjugate those with no means of fighting back.
we have often seen where the preception of truth can be most hurtful in its final chapter.
These examples are which we will be ever depending upon. We seek the truth from every venue available. We will always keep to these simple precipts and hope that we can acheive your good will as we dedicate ourselves to the most precious of all,
Our God, Our Country, Our Rights and Our Families.
spindles of the mighty machines of knowledge.
And over the years of being the 'devil' I gleaned several views that have stuck with me.
Not every printed word is from the angle of truth, for we have seen in the past how the word has been bastardized to fulfill a certain agenda or focus, more often than not, to a focus not of our wont, but rather to subjugate those with no means of fighting back.
we have often seen where the preception of truth can be most hurtful in its final chapter.
These examples are which we will be ever depending upon. We seek the truth from every venue available. We will always keep to these simple precipts and hope that we can acheive your good will as we dedicate ourselves to the most precious of all,
Our God, Our Country, Our Rights and Our Families.
parte dui Answers part two.
THE FOLLOWING IS A COPY OF A EM TO SOME FOLKS WHO HAVE ON OCCASION CONTRIBUTED TO OUR OLD BLOG, AND WITH THEIR PERMISSION I AM PRINTING THEIR ANSWERS, ONLY USEING THEIR FIRST NAME,
******************************MY EMAIL ***********************************
ALTHOUGH WE HAVE NOT MET IYI TO EYE I FEEL I CAN ASK EACH OF YOU TO GIVE ME A BIT OF YOUR INSIGHT OR OUT LOOK DEPENDING ON YOUR VIEW. NO PLAY ON WORDS INTENDED.
AS YOU KNOW I AM THE EDITOR OF NEWSSHOPPE, SINCE THE ELECTION OF OBAMA I WILL ADMIT THAT I AM NOT TOO HAPPY, THUS I AM AT YOUR DOOR STEP WITH HAND OUT AND MIND READY TO ACCEPT THAT SOLICITED HAND UP.
I NEED SOME DIRECTION, DO I TURN STRAIGHT OUT AGAINST OBAMA, DO I WAIT AND SEE AND ALWAYS REMEMBER BOTH WHAT HE SAID HE WOULD DO AND WHAT HE ACTUALLY DOES.
THEN THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY THAT YOU SUGGEST I FORGET THE WHOLE BUSINESS? SEE HOW I AM LOST AT THIS JUNCTURE?
THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP AND ABOVE ALL FOR THE CONTRIBUTIONS YOU BOTH HAVE KINDLY SHARED.
GOD BLESS THANKS
GOTT BE MITT DANKE
DAVE
********************************* ANSWER *******************************
Hi Dave,
After some thinking, actually quite a bit of thinking, I have to admit along with you, that I am not that happy either. I honestly think, under the present circumstances, I would not, at this time turn right out against this guy. Myself, I am going to wait and see if anything he REALLY promised us, will become reality. Right now I am praying this "new guy on the block" will make things happen for us. If just half of the promises will come true, I will be happy. Of course more would be better.
Thank you for asking my opinion.
Gardner
************************************* ANSWER **********************************
, Dave,
I have not met you but I can tell you are definitely for America as so many of us. At this juncture I am very disappointed in the Republican Party because they do not stand together, they cut each other down and now they are treating your wonderful Governor as a traitor or non-person.
I do not think that being against anyone is good. We need to see what direction things will take and then stand up and be counted if we don't like it or it goes against America.
Personally, I am against Socialism for this country. There is no need for anyone to take over 401Ks, IRAs, etc. We can handle our money on our own and it IS OUR MONEY!! As we have recently found out - this country is broke!!! And, it had nothing to do with what we did with our money. The government mishandled our money. SO, we are going to have to take it upon ourselves to be very critical from here on out as to what is going on in Washington DC. We all need to read, listen and know what these politicians are doing all the time. We have been too lax in keeping up with the comings and goings of our elected and appointed government officials.
I am a senior citizen and am thankful!! I am also very patriotic and have been here long enough to know wars are sometimes necessary. I am also very proud of our military and cannot tell you how distasteful it is to hear people put them down for any reason. We should all be for America and if someone does not like America then they should leave and go someplace else. We have the best Nation in the world bar none.
So, let's all stick together and try to get this country back to where we can all be proud to be Americans.
Georgia Allison
P.S. I also want to say that Governor Palin did this country proud. Alaskans can be proud to have her as a governor and I just bet we have not heard the last of Governor Palin. I hope she kicks a few butts.
******************************MY EMAIL ***********************************
ALTHOUGH WE HAVE NOT MET IYI TO EYE I FEEL I CAN ASK EACH OF YOU TO GIVE ME A BIT OF YOUR INSIGHT OR OUT LOOK DEPENDING ON YOUR VIEW. NO PLAY ON WORDS INTENDED.
AS YOU KNOW I AM THE EDITOR OF NEWSSHOPPE, SINCE THE ELECTION OF OBAMA I WILL ADMIT THAT I AM NOT TOO HAPPY, THUS I AM AT YOUR DOOR STEP WITH HAND OUT AND MIND READY TO ACCEPT THAT SOLICITED HAND UP.
I NEED SOME DIRECTION, DO I TURN STRAIGHT OUT AGAINST OBAMA, DO I WAIT AND SEE AND ALWAYS REMEMBER BOTH WHAT HE SAID HE WOULD DO AND WHAT HE ACTUALLY DOES.
THEN THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY THAT YOU SUGGEST I FORGET THE WHOLE BUSINESS? SEE HOW I AM LOST AT THIS JUNCTURE?
THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP AND ABOVE ALL FOR THE CONTRIBUTIONS YOU BOTH HAVE KINDLY SHARED.
GOD BLESS THANKS
GOTT BE MITT DANKE
DAVE
********************************* ANSWER *******************************
Hi Dave,
After some thinking, actually quite a bit of thinking, I have to admit along with you, that I am not that happy either. I honestly think, under the present circumstances, I would not, at this time turn right out against this guy. Myself, I am going to wait and see if anything he REALLY promised us, will become reality. Right now I am praying this "new guy on the block" will make things happen for us. If just half of the promises will come true, I will be happy. Of course more would be better.
Thank you for asking my opinion.
Gardner
************************************* ANSWER **********************************
, Dave,
I have not met you but I can tell you are definitely for America as so many of us. At this juncture I am very disappointed in the Republican Party because they do not stand together, they cut each other down and now they are treating your wonderful Governor as a traitor or non-person.
I do not think that being against anyone is good. We need to see what direction things will take and then stand up and be counted if we don't like it or it goes against America.
Personally, I am against Socialism for this country. There is no need for anyone to take over 401Ks, IRAs, etc. We can handle our money on our own and it IS OUR MONEY!! As we have recently found out - this country is broke!!! And, it had nothing to do with what we did with our money. The government mishandled our money. SO, we are going to have to take it upon ourselves to be very critical from here on out as to what is going on in Washington DC. We all need to read, listen and know what these politicians are doing all the time. We have been too lax in keeping up with the comings and goings of our elected and appointed government officials.
I am a senior citizen and am thankful!! I am also very patriotic and have been here long enough to know wars are sometimes necessary. I am also very proud of our military and cannot tell you how distasteful it is to hear people put them down for any reason. We should all be for America and if someone does not like America then they should leave and go someplace else. We have the best Nation in the world bar none.
So, let's all stick together and try to get this country back to where we can all be proud to be Americans.
Georgia Allison
P.S. I also want to say that Governor Palin did this country proud. Alaskans can be proud to have her as a governor and I just bet we have not heard the last of Governor Palin. I hope she kicks a few butts.
Campaign Contributions from Wall Street
CNSNews.com
Obama’s Chief of Staff Pick Took Campaign Contributions from Wall Street
Friday, November 07, 2008
By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer
Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) with Sol Schatz of the VFW, Thomas Lonze of the State of Illinois, James O’Rourke of the American Legion and Sen. Dick Durbin discussing the Welcome Home GI Bill. (Photo courtesy of congressional website)(CNSNews.com) – President-elect Barack Obama’s choice for White House chief of staff is one of the biggest recipients of Wall Street money in Congress, according to a Washington, D.C.-based “money-in-politics” watchdog group.
The Center for Responsive Politics has issued a report highlighting millions of dollars in campaign contributions that Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) has raised from individuals working in the hedge fund industry, private equity firms, and large investment firms.
Emanuel has raised more money from individuals and political action committees in securities and investment businesses than from any other industry.
This comes after a presidential campaign that saw Obama frequently criticize Wall Street and blamed lack of government regulations for the economic crisis that hit the country in mid-September.
Emanuel, a former Clinton White House aide, is chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and received much of the credit for the Democrats winning a majority in the House of Representatives in 2006 – the first time in 12 years.
For his own 2006 re-election campaign, where he faced no serious opposition, Emanuel raised $1.5 million from the investment industry. His other sources of contributions came from lawyers, who gave $682,900, while people working in the entertainment industries gave $376,100.
Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) (Photo courtesy of congressional website)Though Obama did not accept contributions directly from lobbyists during his campaign, Washington lobbyists have given Emanuel $136,640 since he was elected.
Emanuel is a member of the House Ways and Means Committee, which overseas tax legislation, making him “a popular industry target,” the report said.
Employees from private equity firm Madison Dearborn Partners contributed $93,600 to his various campaigns since he was first elected to Congress in 2002.
Emanuel, who worked as an investment banker after President Bill Clinton left the White House, was elected to Congress in 2002. He has a net worth of between $5 million and $13.2 million, according to his 2007 financial disclosure form.
Other top contributors to Emanuel’s campaigns have been employees of UBS, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Citigroup and Morgan Stanley, also financial sources for Obama’s presidential campaign.
Viewer Comments
The following comments are posted by our readers and are not necessarily the opinions of either CNSNews.com or the story’s author. To be considered for publication, comments must adhere to the Terms of Use for posting to this Web site. Thank you.
No Comments Loading...
Post New Comment
You must be logged in to leave comments! Click here to log in.
Obama’s Chief of Staff Pick Took Campaign Contributions from Wall Street
Friday, November 07, 2008
By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer
Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) with Sol Schatz of the VFW, Thomas Lonze of the State of Illinois, James O’Rourke of the American Legion and Sen. Dick Durbin discussing the Welcome Home GI Bill. (Photo courtesy of congressional website)(CNSNews.com) – President-elect Barack Obama’s choice for White House chief of staff is one of the biggest recipients of Wall Street money in Congress, according to a Washington, D.C.-based “money-in-politics” watchdog group.
The Center for Responsive Politics has issued a report highlighting millions of dollars in campaign contributions that Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) has raised from individuals working in the hedge fund industry, private equity firms, and large investment firms.
Emanuel has raised more money from individuals and political action committees in securities and investment businesses than from any other industry.
This comes after a presidential campaign that saw Obama frequently criticize Wall Street and blamed lack of government regulations for the economic crisis that hit the country in mid-September.
Emanuel, a former Clinton White House aide, is chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and received much of the credit for the Democrats winning a majority in the House of Representatives in 2006 – the first time in 12 years.
For his own 2006 re-election campaign, where he faced no serious opposition, Emanuel raised $1.5 million from the investment industry. His other sources of contributions came from lawyers, who gave $682,900, while people working in the entertainment industries gave $376,100.
Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) (Photo courtesy of congressional website)Though Obama did not accept contributions directly from lobbyists during his campaign, Washington lobbyists have given Emanuel $136,640 since he was elected.
Emanuel is a member of the House Ways and Means Committee, which overseas tax legislation, making him “a popular industry target,” the report said.
Employees from private equity firm Madison Dearborn Partners contributed $93,600 to his various campaigns since he was first elected to Congress in 2002.
Emanuel, who worked as an investment banker after President Bill Clinton left the White House, was elected to Congress in 2002. He has a net worth of between $5 million and $13.2 million, according to his 2007 financial disclosure form.
Other top contributors to Emanuel’s campaigns have been employees of UBS, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Citigroup and Morgan Stanley, also financial sources for Obama’s presidential campaign.
Viewer Comments
The following comments are posted by our readers and are not necessarily the opinions of either CNSNews.com or the story’s author. To be considered for publication, comments must adhere to the Terms of Use for posting to this Web site. Thank you.
No Comments Loading...
Post New Comment
You must be logged in to leave comments! Click here to log in.
Leaders Meet With or Without Republicans
Leaders Meet, Plan to Battle Obama’s Agenda – With or Without Republicans
Thursday, November 06, 2008
By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief
L. Brent Bozell III, president of the Media Research Center, the parent organization of CNSNews.com(CNSNews.com) - A group of about 20 conservative leaders met in the Virginia countryside Thursday to begin planning the fight against the liberal agenda of President-elect Barack Obama – with or without the Republican Party.
The meeting was seen as the first in a series of gatherings that conservative leaders will be holding in the coming weeks to plan the development of new organizations, new fundraising efforts and new strategies to deal with what they expect to be a series of momentous battles over significant issues of public policy.
The leaders said they foresee battling Obama and the Democratic Congress – and most likely moderate Republicans, too – over issues including taxes, sanctity of life, marriage, judicial nominations, secret ballots for union organizing and the Fairness Doctrine, which they see as a threat to freedom of speech on the radio.
The group included L. Brent Bozell III, president of the Media Research Center, the parent organization of CNSNews.com; Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council; Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform; Al Regnery, publisher of the American Spectator; longtime conservative activist Richard Viguerie and conservative pollster Kellyanne Conway.
There was a consensus among the group that conservative ideas and principles had not been defeated in Tuesday’s election, but a Republican Party that walked away from these principles had been defeated.
“This was a campaign between the moderate wing of the Republican Party and the Democrats,” said Bozell.
“Conservatism did not lose – big government Republicanism lost,” said Viguerie.
The participants generally agreed that new national conservative political leaders will emerge from the major public-policy battles that they anticipate.
Conway said conservatives will be looking for the candidates and elected officials who fit the movement’s “job description” – meaning that they are with the movement on the core issues at stake in these battles and are in the thick of the action when those battles begin.
Viewer Comments
The following comments are posted by our readers and are not necessarily the opinions of either CNSNews.com or the story’s author. To be considered for publication, comments must adhere to the Terms of Use for posting to this Web site. Thank you.
Showing 1-4 of 4 Comments Loading...
shelbyradio at 04:14 AM - November 07, 2008
I think its great that conservatives meet to discuss the future of the movement. You can count on me and Shelby Radio to continue this effort at grassroots level. Shelby Radio is an internet only radio station in Shelby, North Carolina. I am ashamed of my state for throwing their votes to the Democrat Party. When I first registered to vote I was in the U.S.Army in the 1960s When Ronald Regan came along, I realized that I was in the wrong party and switched to the Republican Party. With this election, I was beginning to wonder if the Republican Party had left me as well. After reading this article, I can say that it was not the party as a whole who left me. Only those moderates who gave the election away to the Democrats. Again, you can count on me to continue to talk about, promote and push the conservative principles and ideals at grassroots level. Van "Austin" Hoyle http//www.shelbyncradio.com
Warthog at 11:36 PM - November 06, 2008
Well,that sounds really good, but a little late in the game. Where were these people when the Republican primaries started and their ideas might have had a beneficial effect. So instead of being distracted by relatively petty religious concerns; i.e., "Oh, we don't want Romney, he's a Mormon!" or "Huckabee's TOO evangelical!", etc, we ended up with the liberal McCain. Unbelievable! Articles and blogs that are mainly read by conservatives anyway don't influence the everyday sheep in this country. I believe a Mormon would be preferable by far than someone who is a Marxist/socialist and plans to change this country and the world (for the worse)!
Peted at 10:02 PM - November 06, 2008
The Republican party and the Democrat party are both infested with Liberals and are incapable of living up to the Conservative ideals. It is time to craft a new Conservative party that will attract people that will defend the constitution, traditional family values, individual rights, and limited government.
Hanna at 09:18 PM - November 06, 2008
This sounds like a good thing. I would like to ask what your position is on immigration. And I don't mean to offend anyone, but I have to ask. Are you people doing this for yourselfs, your interests and careers or for America and her people?
Post New Comment
You must be logged in to leave comments! Click here to log in.
Thursday, November 06, 2008
By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief
L. Brent Bozell III, president of the Media Research Center, the parent organization of CNSNews.com(CNSNews.com) - A group of about 20 conservative leaders met in the Virginia countryside Thursday to begin planning the fight against the liberal agenda of President-elect Barack Obama – with or without the Republican Party.
The meeting was seen as the first in a series of gatherings that conservative leaders will be holding in the coming weeks to plan the development of new organizations, new fundraising efforts and new strategies to deal with what they expect to be a series of momentous battles over significant issues of public policy.
The leaders said they foresee battling Obama and the Democratic Congress – and most likely moderate Republicans, too – over issues including taxes, sanctity of life, marriage, judicial nominations, secret ballots for union organizing and the Fairness Doctrine, which they see as a threat to freedom of speech on the radio.
The group included L. Brent Bozell III, president of the Media Research Center, the parent organization of CNSNews.com; Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council; Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform; Al Regnery, publisher of the American Spectator; longtime conservative activist Richard Viguerie and conservative pollster Kellyanne Conway.
There was a consensus among the group that conservative ideas and principles had not been defeated in Tuesday’s election, but a Republican Party that walked away from these principles had been defeated.
“This was a campaign between the moderate wing of the Republican Party and the Democrats,” said Bozell.
“Conservatism did not lose – big government Republicanism lost,” said Viguerie.
The participants generally agreed that new national conservative political leaders will emerge from the major public-policy battles that they anticipate.
Conway said conservatives will be looking for the candidates and elected officials who fit the movement’s “job description” – meaning that they are with the movement on the core issues at stake in these battles and are in the thick of the action when those battles begin.
Viewer Comments
The following comments are posted by our readers and are not necessarily the opinions of either CNSNews.com or the story’s author. To be considered for publication, comments must adhere to the Terms of Use for posting to this Web site. Thank you.
Showing 1-4 of 4 Comments Loading...
shelbyradio at 04:14 AM - November 07, 2008
I think its great that conservatives meet to discuss the future of the movement. You can count on me and Shelby Radio to continue this effort at grassroots level. Shelby Radio is an internet only radio station in Shelby, North Carolina. I am ashamed of my state for throwing their votes to the Democrat Party. When I first registered to vote I was in the U.S.Army in the 1960s When Ronald Regan came along, I realized that I was in the wrong party and switched to the Republican Party. With this election, I was beginning to wonder if the Republican Party had left me as well. After reading this article, I can say that it was not the party as a whole who left me. Only those moderates who gave the election away to the Democrats. Again, you can count on me to continue to talk about, promote and push the conservative principles and ideals at grassroots level. Van "Austin" Hoyle http//www.shelbyncradio.com
Warthog at 11:36 PM - November 06, 2008
Well,that sounds really good, but a little late in the game. Where were these people when the Republican primaries started and their ideas might have had a beneficial effect. So instead of being distracted by relatively petty religious concerns; i.e., "Oh, we don't want Romney, he's a Mormon!" or "Huckabee's TOO evangelical!", etc, we ended up with the liberal McCain. Unbelievable! Articles and blogs that are mainly read by conservatives anyway don't influence the everyday sheep in this country. I believe a Mormon would be preferable by far than someone who is a Marxist/socialist and plans to change this country and the world (for the worse)!
Peted at 10:02 PM - November 06, 2008
The Republican party and the Democrat party are both infested with Liberals and are incapable of living up to the Conservative ideals. It is time to craft a new Conservative party that will attract people that will defend the constitution, traditional family values, individual rights, and limited government.
Hanna at 09:18 PM - November 06, 2008
This sounds like a good thing. I would like to ask what your position is on immigration. And I don't mean to offend anyone, but I have to ask. Are you people doing this for yourselfs, your interests and careers or for America and her people?
Post New Comment
You must be logged in to leave comments! Click here to log in.
Time for New Republican Leadership,
CNSNews.com
Time for New Republican Leadership, Conservatives Say
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
By Susan Jones, Senior Editor
U.S. Capitol (AP Photo)(CNSNews.com) – Voters on Tuesday did not reject conservatism, a longtime conservative activist said. “They rejected Big Government Republicanism in all its forms, including the Bush administration and the Republican leadership in Congress.”
Richard A. Viguerie, chairman of ConservativeHQ.com, said the Republican defeat in 2008 “can and will be laid at the feet of the Big Government corporate Republicans who abandoned the Reagan coalition, massively expanded government, and ignored the needs and values of regular, grassroots Americans. They protected Wall Street and K Street and forgot about Main Street."
According to Viguerie, Republicans will make a comeback only when they return to their conservative roots.
“That process starts with the replacement, with principled conservatives, of all of the Republicans' elected Congressional leaders, as well as most members of the Republican National Committee and most state party officials. It's time for new leaders, from top to bottom."
New leadership
Republican Conference Chairman Adam Putnam (Fla.) already has announced his intention to step down.
“I have enjoyed every minute as Conference Chairman, he wrote in a Nov. 4 letter to colleagues, “but I believe it is time to step off the leadership ladder and return my focus to crafting public policy solutions for America’s generational challenges – the very reason I ran for Congress in the first place.”
Putnam admitted he came to the decision “reluctantly.”
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), also is calling for a change of command at the highest levels of the Republican Party.
“Republicans suffered very serious setbacks in the last two years in both the Senate and the House. We have got to clean up, reform and rebuild the Republican Party before we can ask Americans to trust us again,” DeMint said in a news release.
"Americans have again rejected the Democrat-lite strategy of higher spending and bigger government, and it's time for Republicans to chart a new, more principled course. Federal spending must be reduced and that starts with ending wasteful earmarks.
“Republicans must admit the Wall Street bailouts were a trillion-dollar bust, and immediately fight for free-market solutions that create jobs and increase freedom. We must get serious about reforming our complicated tax code that is destroying jobs, and finally reform Social Security and Medicare before they take us over a fiscal cliff. We must fight to secure our borders and keep our military strong, and we must boldly defend our values for life and the family.”
DeMint said the 2008 election reflects a failure of Republicans to keep their conservative promises.
“Our party must start today to admit our mistakes, fight for our convictions, and encourage new conservatives to run for office,” DeMint added.
"The battle for the heart and soul of the Republican Party begins now," Viguerie said.
Time for New Republican Leadership, Conservatives Say
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
By Susan Jones, Senior Editor
U.S. Capitol (AP Photo)(CNSNews.com) – Voters on Tuesday did not reject conservatism, a longtime conservative activist said. “They rejected Big Government Republicanism in all its forms, including the Bush administration and the Republican leadership in Congress.”
Richard A. Viguerie, chairman of ConservativeHQ.com, said the Republican defeat in 2008 “can and will be laid at the feet of the Big Government corporate Republicans who abandoned the Reagan coalition, massively expanded government, and ignored the needs and values of regular, grassroots Americans. They protected Wall Street and K Street and forgot about Main Street."
According to Viguerie, Republicans will make a comeback only when they return to their conservative roots.
“That process starts with the replacement, with principled conservatives, of all of the Republicans' elected Congressional leaders, as well as most members of the Republican National Committee and most state party officials. It's time for new leaders, from top to bottom."
New leadership
Republican Conference Chairman Adam Putnam (Fla.) already has announced his intention to step down.
“I have enjoyed every minute as Conference Chairman, he wrote in a Nov. 4 letter to colleagues, “but I believe it is time to step off the leadership ladder and return my focus to crafting public policy solutions for America’s generational challenges – the very reason I ran for Congress in the first place.”
Putnam admitted he came to the decision “reluctantly.”
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), also is calling for a change of command at the highest levels of the Republican Party.
“Republicans suffered very serious setbacks in the last two years in both the Senate and the House. We have got to clean up, reform and rebuild the Republican Party before we can ask Americans to trust us again,” DeMint said in a news release.
"Americans have again rejected the Democrat-lite strategy of higher spending and bigger government, and it's time for Republicans to chart a new, more principled course. Federal spending must be reduced and that starts with ending wasteful earmarks.
“Republicans must admit the Wall Street bailouts were a trillion-dollar bust, and immediately fight for free-market solutions that create jobs and increase freedom. We must get serious about reforming our complicated tax code that is destroying jobs, and finally reform Social Security and Medicare before they take us over a fiscal cliff. We must fight to secure our borders and keep our military strong, and we must boldly defend our values for life and the family.”
DeMint said the 2008 election reflects a failure of Republicans to keep their conservative promises.
“Our party must start today to admit our mistakes, fight for our convictions, and encourage new conservatives to run for office,” DeMint added.
"The battle for the heart and soul of the Republican Party begins now," Viguerie said.
Political Battle Under Way Within GOP,
Political Battle Under Way Within GOP, Say Conservative Leaders
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer
President Bush at a graduation ceremony for new FBI agents at the FBI Academy in Quantico, Va., Thursday, Oct. 30, 2008. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)(CNSNews.com) – Facing the most liberal president and Congress in a generation, conservative stalwarts do not blame the GOP’s disastrous election performance solely on Republican nominee John McCain or on President George W. Bush. The ultimate culprit, some say, has been big government Republicanism.
Long-time conservative activist Richard Viguerie thinks the Republican Party’s problem this year is not unlike its problem in previous election cycles.
“Moderate and liberal have not done very well,” Viguerie, the chairman of ConservativeHQ.com, told CNSNews.com. “Both Bushes had problems, and Bush the son nearly destroyed the Republican Party. People are looking for a clear conservative choice.”
Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, said this is not the first time Republicans have had a bad election cycle.
“We will get the same advice from the establishment press, which will advise the party to move left,” he said. But when that was tried, it did not work, Norquist told CNSNews.com.
He said Republicans win by running on President Ronald Reagan’s ideas and lose when they move left. He cited President George H. W. Bush’s failed reelection campaign in 1992 after running successfully as a Reagan tax-cutter in 1988, as well as Bob Dole in 1996 who had previously opposed the Reagan tax cuts, and now McCain, who has supported legislation on campaign finance reform and global warming.
Though President-elect Barack Obama has the most liberal record in the U.S. Senate, according to the National Journal rankings, Norquist said Obama did not run as a liberal but rather as a tax-cutter.
“He may be able to govern as a left winger … but if he tries to move the country too far left, that will lead to the Republican coalition coming together,” Norquist said. He added that former President Bill Clinton “united the Republican coalition when he was a threat to taxpayers, gun owners and Christians.”
Do not count on the Republicans uniting, said Michael Tanner, a senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute and author of “Leviathan on the Right: How Big Government Conservatives Brought Down the Republican Revolution.”
Tanner expects to see a battle between three factions of the conservative movement: the big-government Republicans that support using free market ideas to promote universal health care and higher wages; populists who are culturally conservative, oppose free trade and support tougher border enforcement; and the traditional, small-government conservatives who want to shrink the size of government.
The prominence of big-government Republicans has presented less of a clear choice to voters, delivering a bigger opportunity for Democrats, Tanner said.
“The Republican party likely needs all three factions to win,” Tanner told CNSNews.com. “They had the Reagan coalition until George W. Bush. Before, they had disparate ideas, but all were against a massive federal government. Under Bush, they lost that.”
Those opponents of expanded government should brace themselves, Tanner said.
“This is no doubt the most liberal Congress and president since Lyndon Johnson,” Tanner said. “The next couple of years will not just see big government but enormous government, with no checks and balance.”
It is important to separate the Republican Party from the conservative movement, said Lee Edwards, a senior fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation. He cited a recent poll that said 57 percent of Americans identify themselves as “very or somewhat” conservative. He thinks the conservative movement is strong, on many fronts such as alternative media and a consistent philosophy.
“The area we are lacking is principled and charismatic leadership,” Edwards told CNSNews.com.
But clinging to Reagan is part of the problem for the conservative movement and the Republican Party, said David Frum, a former speechwriter for the Bush White House and now a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.
“It was different in 1980 and now,” Frum told CNSNews.com. “The Democratic Party was more economically left wing than now. If those conditions occur again, maybe we could see a repeat of Ronald Reagan. But we need to make our plans that Democrats are going to bring their best game. We need to expect them to govern like Clinton, Rubin and Greenspan -- not like Carter.”
He also faulted a poor strategy by the GOP.
“Republicans have lost minorities, the young, and have increasingly lost educated voters,” Frum said. “The Republican strategy that has been intensifying is extracting votes from a dwindling category: the middle class, lower-educated people. That’s why ‘Joe the Plumber’ was so popular among Republicans.”
Viguerie, with ConservativeHQ.com, scoffed at Frum’s analysis.
“The Republican Party folded under the neoconservatives and created a monstrosity, now they are trying to disavow their parentage,” Viguerie said. “Frum was part of that, whether domestic policy or foreign policy, advocating big government. America is rejecting them. Congressional Republicans have not governed as Reagan.”
He added, “Obama is a socialist. He has a strong left-wing majority. Bill Clinton governed the way he did because he had a Republican Congress. He overreached with gays in the military and national health care when he had a Democratic Congress.”
This is no time for Republicans to bury the Reagan legacy any more than Democrats would try to bury the legacy of Franklin D. Roosevelt, said John Berlau, director of the center for entrepreneurship at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a free market think tank.
With the Bush administration, conservatism was murky, Berlau said, but a Democratic government could make the choice more clear.
“McCain was ahead of Obama in the polls until he backed the bailout,” Berlau said. “With Democrats, at least the battle lines are clearly drawn.”
Viewer Comments
The following comments are posted by our readers and are not necessarily the opinions of either CNSNews.com or the story’s author. To be considered for publication, comments must adhere to the Terms of Use for posting to this Web site. Thank you.
Showing 1-5 of 9 Comments 1 2 Next Loading...
GOPSteve at 11:42 AM - November 06, 2008
As a middle class conservative, I am often mistaken as being for big corporations and not for average Americans. Coming from a union worker family, Republicans have been painted as the enemy to middle America. We have not shaken the rich Republican image as a bunch of fat cats smoking cigars. I'm more of the "Sam's Club" type Republican than the stereotypical one I described above. I think most of us are really the Sam's Club type. Maybe it is time to consider a third party, a conservative party that consists of God loving, family oriented, smaller government, lower taxes, pro-life, and fiscally responsible members who really are the conservative base of the current Republican party. Until then, whether fairly or not, much of America will continue to see the brands "Republican" and "GOP" in a negative way, much like "Ernon" and "Exxon-Mobil."
kenb at 11:13 PM - November 05, 2008
McCain was the choice of the current leaders of the GOP. As far as I am concerned, if these SOBs have anything to do with the next election (of any election)I plan on staying home and relaxing. This election showed their expertise (none). McCain was a flawed candidate to start with and when the idiots finally got some idea of what to do (add Sarah Palin) they were so far in the hole they couldn't get out when the liberals gave them the four or five opportunities. If conservatives want to regain the country, get back to REAL conservative values. The liberals are NOT going to reach across the isle, so don't be fools and reach the other way. They don't think we can solve our problems without taxing the sh*t out of those making a living, now the sobs will tax everyone that has a job, Wht most people don't realize is that if you have income (Social Security, IRA, Estate Tax,...anything,)you have taxable income. And if you sit on your sorry ass and don't do anything, you owe them.
Concerned Conservative at 09:54 PM - November 05, 2008
Richard, I appreciate your optimisim about salvaging the GOP. I'm, however, a bit more cynical. The GOP started slipping away from conservatives several years ago. The Reagan Revolution gave conservatives a renewed hope that they still mattered. Then came the "Contract with America" and another false hope that conservatives had a home in the GOP. I've watched, in horror, as the Democrats have moved farther and farther to the left. The Republicans have rushed in to fill the void by moving that direction as well. I considered a third party vote this year. Realizing that we were down to only 2 viable candidates I voted for McCain. Now that this election is behind us I'm wondering if a third party isn't just the avenue for conservatives to explore ! We have 4 years to build our coalition. We'll need to settle on an over all theme but come together in a common cause to re-claim our Government as "We the people".
Granny in Georgia at 09:51 PM - November 05, 2008
Truth, goodness and beauty. WOW! That will really pay the bills of our government. Try driving a vehicle on truth, goodness and beauty. Try buying food with truth, goodness and beauty. Get a life. Government cannot operate on truth, goodness and beauty. I remember you. You're on of the 60's flower children! Get real/
ricon at 07:22 PM - November 05, 2008
Hey, orator, my mind is still in a fog after the past two weeks and last night. But, my question to you is: Huh?
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer
President Bush at a graduation ceremony for new FBI agents at the FBI Academy in Quantico, Va., Thursday, Oct. 30, 2008. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)(CNSNews.com) – Facing the most liberal president and Congress in a generation, conservative stalwarts do not blame the GOP’s disastrous election performance solely on Republican nominee John McCain or on President George W. Bush. The ultimate culprit, some say, has been big government Republicanism.
Long-time conservative activist Richard Viguerie thinks the Republican Party’s problem this year is not unlike its problem in previous election cycles.
“Moderate and liberal have not done very well,” Viguerie, the chairman of ConservativeHQ.com, told CNSNews.com. “Both Bushes had problems, and Bush the son nearly destroyed the Republican Party. People are looking for a clear conservative choice.”
Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, said this is not the first time Republicans have had a bad election cycle.
“We will get the same advice from the establishment press, which will advise the party to move left,” he said. But when that was tried, it did not work, Norquist told CNSNews.com.
He said Republicans win by running on President Ronald Reagan’s ideas and lose when they move left. He cited President George H. W. Bush’s failed reelection campaign in 1992 after running successfully as a Reagan tax-cutter in 1988, as well as Bob Dole in 1996 who had previously opposed the Reagan tax cuts, and now McCain, who has supported legislation on campaign finance reform and global warming.
Though President-elect Barack Obama has the most liberal record in the U.S. Senate, according to the National Journal rankings, Norquist said Obama did not run as a liberal but rather as a tax-cutter.
“He may be able to govern as a left winger … but if he tries to move the country too far left, that will lead to the Republican coalition coming together,” Norquist said. He added that former President Bill Clinton “united the Republican coalition when he was a threat to taxpayers, gun owners and Christians.”
Do not count on the Republicans uniting, said Michael Tanner, a senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute and author of “Leviathan on the Right: How Big Government Conservatives Brought Down the Republican Revolution.”
Tanner expects to see a battle between three factions of the conservative movement: the big-government Republicans that support using free market ideas to promote universal health care and higher wages; populists who are culturally conservative, oppose free trade and support tougher border enforcement; and the traditional, small-government conservatives who want to shrink the size of government.
The prominence of big-government Republicans has presented less of a clear choice to voters, delivering a bigger opportunity for Democrats, Tanner said.
“The Republican party likely needs all three factions to win,” Tanner told CNSNews.com. “They had the Reagan coalition until George W. Bush. Before, they had disparate ideas, but all were against a massive federal government. Under Bush, they lost that.”
Those opponents of expanded government should brace themselves, Tanner said.
“This is no doubt the most liberal Congress and president since Lyndon Johnson,” Tanner said. “The next couple of years will not just see big government but enormous government, with no checks and balance.”
It is important to separate the Republican Party from the conservative movement, said Lee Edwards, a senior fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation. He cited a recent poll that said 57 percent of Americans identify themselves as “very or somewhat” conservative. He thinks the conservative movement is strong, on many fronts such as alternative media and a consistent philosophy.
“The area we are lacking is principled and charismatic leadership,” Edwards told CNSNews.com.
But clinging to Reagan is part of the problem for the conservative movement and the Republican Party, said David Frum, a former speechwriter for the Bush White House and now a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.
“It was different in 1980 and now,” Frum told CNSNews.com. “The Democratic Party was more economically left wing than now. If those conditions occur again, maybe we could see a repeat of Ronald Reagan. But we need to make our plans that Democrats are going to bring their best game. We need to expect them to govern like Clinton, Rubin and Greenspan -- not like Carter.”
He also faulted a poor strategy by the GOP.
“Republicans have lost minorities, the young, and have increasingly lost educated voters,” Frum said. “The Republican strategy that has been intensifying is extracting votes from a dwindling category: the middle class, lower-educated people. That’s why ‘Joe the Plumber’ was so popular among Republicans.”
Viguerie, with ConservativeHQ.com, scoffed at Frum’s analysis.
“The Republican Party folded under the neoconservatives and created a monstrosity, now they are trying to disavow their parentage,” Viguerie said. “Frum was part of that, whether domestic policy or foreign policy, advocating big government. America is rejecting them. Congressional Republicans have not governed as Reagan.”
He added, “Obama is a socialist. He has a strong left-wing majority. Bill Clinton governed the way he did because he had a Republican Congress. He overreached with gays in the military and national health care when he had a Democratic Congress.”
This is no time for Republicans to bury the Reagan legacy any more than Democrats would try to bury the legacy of Franklin D. Roosevelt, said John Berlau, director of the center for entrepreneurship at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a free market think tank.
With the Bush administration, conservatism was murky, Berlau said, but a Democratic government could make the choice more clear.
“McCain was ahead of Obama in the polls until he backed the bailout,” Berlau said. “With Democrats, at least the battle lines are clearly drawn.”
Viewer Comments
The following comments are posted by our readers and are not necessarily the opinions of either CNSNews.com or the story’s author. To be considered for publication, comments must adhere to the Terms of Use for posting to this Web site. Thank you.
Showing 1-5 of 9 Comments 1 2 Next Loading...
GOPSteve at 11:42 AM - November 06, 2008
As a middle class conservative, I am often mistaken as being for big corporations and not for average Americans. Coming from a union worker family, Republicans have been painted as the enemy to middle America. We have not shaken the rich Republican image as a bunch of fat cats smoking cigars. I'm more of the "Sam's Club" type Republican than the stereotypical one I described above. I think most of us are really the Sam's Club type. Maybe it is time to consider a third party, a conservative party that consists of God loving, family oriented, smaller government, lower taxes, pro-life, and fiscally responsible members who really are the conservative base of the current Republican party. Until then, whether fairly or not, much of America will continue to see the brands "Republican" and "GOP" in a negative way, much like "Ernon" and "Exxon-Mobil."
kenb at 11:13 PM - November 05, 2008
McCain was the choice of the current leaders of the GOP. As far as I am concerned, if these SOBs have anything to do with the next election (of any election)I plan on staying home and relaxing. This election showed their expertise (none). McCain was a flawed candidate to start with and when the idiots finally got some idea of what to do (add Sarah Palin) they were so far in the hole they couldn't get out when the liberals gave them the four or five opportunities. If conservatives want to regain the country, get back to REAL conservative values. The liberals are NOT going to reach across the isle, so don't be fools and reach the other way. They don't think we can solve our problems without taxing the sh*t out of those making a living, now the sobs will tax everyone that has a job, Wht most people don't realize is that if you have income (Social Security, IRA, Estate Tax,...anything,)you have taxable income. And if you sit on your sorry ass and don't do anything, you owe them.
Concerned Conservative at 09:54 PM - November 05, 2008
Richard, I appreciate your optimisim about salvaging the GOP. I'm, however, a bit more cynical. The GOP started slipping away from conservatives several years ago. The Reagan Revolution gave conservatives a renewed hope that they still mattered. Then came the "Contract with America" and another false hope that conservatives had a home in the GOP. I've watched, in horror, as the Democrats have moved farther and farther to the left. The Republicans have rushed in to fill the void by moving that direction as well. I considered a third party vote this year. Realizing that we were down to only 2 viable candidates I voted for McCain. Now that this election is behind us I'm wondering if a third party isn't just the avenue for conservatives to explore ! We have 4 years to build our coalition. We'll need to settle on an over all theme but come together in a common cause to re-claim our Government as "We the people".
Granny in Georgia at 09:51 PM - November 05, 2008
Truth, goodness and beauty. WOW! That will really pay the bills of our government. Try driving a vehicle on truth, goodness and beauty. Try buying food with truth, goodness and beauty. Get a life. Government cannot operate on truth, goodness and beauty. I remember you. You're on of the 60's flower children! Get real/
ricon at 07:22 PM - November 05, 2008
Hey, orator, my mind is still in a fog after the past two weeks and last night. But, my question to you is: Huh?
Conservative Movement ‘Will Rise Again,’
Conservative Movement ‘Will Rise Again,’ Veteran Activist Pledges
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
By Pete Winn, Senior Writer/Editor
A 1980s meeting of President Ronald Reagan and Phyllis Schlafly at the White House. (Photo courtesy of the Eagle Forum Archives)(CNSNews.com) - Phyllis Schlafly was around for the beginning of the modern conservative movement. Now, in the aftermath of yesterday’s sea change election, the president of Eagle Forum and veteran conservative activist says the movement needs to start over again – from the beginning.
“The conservative movement will rise again, just as it re-rose in 1964 and nominated a little-known senator named Barry Goldwater, and rose again with the nomination and election of Ronald Reagan in 1980, and then, after (Bill) Clinton’s victory rose again and elected a big majority of Republican congressmen in 1994,” Schlafly told CNSNews.com in an interview.
1994 was the year Newt Gingrich and others developed the Contract with America, which inspired the election of a class of conservative Republicans, who took control of Congress.
“The conservative movement knows how to rise from the ashes, and we need to pick up the pieces of the movement, which was so badly dismantled and put in disarray by the George W. Bush administration. But we can do it. And we’ve got to get started immediately,” she said.
Schlafly lays the blame for Tuesday’s defeat of the McCain-Palin ticket – and a decline in the fortunes of the conservative movement – at the feet of the Bush administration.
“The disarray of the conservative movement is the fault of George W. Bush and his advisor Karl Rove,” Schlafly said. “I guess it turned out that he was not a conservative after all. He was a big government, big spending, globalist, ‘New World Order’-type of Republican.
Among other things, the long-time conservative leader said, the financial bailout bordered on socialism.
“A lot of people stuck with him beyond the time that they should have, when it became apparent that he did not espouse real conservative principles,” Schlafly said.
Schlafly rejected any suggestion that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin split either the GOP or the conservative movement.
“Sarah Palin is certainly a rising star – she was a breath of fresh air, and a lot of excitement to the conservative movement. I think she is a genuine conservative,” Schlafly added.
“I think that most of us are interested in rebuilding the conservative movement. She will have a role to play in that,” she said. “If we want to split off anybody (from the GOP) I would say that it is the multinationals who have given us this economic disaster, and who told us that globalism is the wave of the future. If you want to split them off, that’s OK with me.
“But I think we’re going to be looking for new leaders who express conservatism across the board – whether its sovereignty, limited spending, limited government, cuts in spending, cuts in taxes, the social issues – to simply reject these groups who are trying to muscle into the driver’s seat of the Republican Party, such as the multinationals with their ‘free-trade globalism’ agenda,” Schlafly added.
Does anybody come to mind?
“No,” she said, laughing, then adding, “We have about 30 very good members of Congress who are destined to become good leaders.”
Schlafly expressed confidence that the movement she had a hand in building will come back. But she’s no Pollyanna.
“Of course, I’m optimistic. I’m a Ronald Reagan optimist. But there’s a big job to do, and a lot of it is in the public schools, because so many people have been taught the wrong things about America and about politics and about what’s important in life and how things are done in the American constitutional system. I think we’re going to have to rebuild from the grassroots up,” she said.
Viewer Comments
The following comments are posted by our readers and are not necessarily the opinions of either CNSNews.com or the story’s author. To be considered for publication, comments must adhere to the Terms of Use for posting to this Web site. Thank you.
Showing 1-5 of 11 Comments 1 2 3 Next Loading...
RiverKing at 08:49 AM - November 06, 2008
I take issue with Ms Schlafly blaming our recent defeat entirely on George W Bush and the liberal "education" of a couple of generations. I believe the largest reason for our defeat is the liberal bias of most "news" organizations and the blanket of silence surrounding conservatives. We know we're here and what we mutually believe but only because of the Internet, talk radio, and a very limited number of other sources.
floridaconservative at 09:00 PM - November 05, 2008
I am interested in knowing if there is a Conservative Party being started in Florida?
websmith at 06:00 PM - November 05, 2008
Republicans need to get back to the concept of Republicanism. This country was formed as a constitutional republic that placed individual rights and liberties above all including the will of the majority. What came out of the formation, the Constitution, if followed, would have prevented most of the problems that we are facing today. A republic is a nation of laws that are implemented to protect the rights of the individual, not a nation of regulations that try to run business. http://ewebsmith.com/bus/wrongbusiness.html
ronricesr@hotmail.com at 05:37 PM - November 05, 2008
It has been my privilege to meet many evangelicals, and main line Christians during the last 30 years. Both are effective as God' children. I have enjoyed two Sunday School classes in Plains, GA the last 10 years, and I voted for Regan in 1984. My first vote went to Goldwater in 1964, my first Democratic vote went to Carter in 1976. Yes, Phyllis, and many wonderful men and women like her, will help to restore a strong Christian core to our culture. Let's be mindful of people of all ages as we structure our story, the wonderful story of our Lord. Seniors, we honor....middle age adults, we respect, and young people under 30 we nurture their passions, passions that seek a country that is less cunning, and condescending to their generation. In Philadelphia, 1955, Percy Crawford has a successful ministry...."YOUTH ON THE MARCH". He was keenly aware of the importance to nurture youth in the 1950's.
MrBill at 02:59 PM - November 05, 2008
I try not to be the pessimist however that sounds like an impossible task beginning with the "reeducation" of the teaching community and their unions. How would you even begin and what could motivate such changes?
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
By Pete Winn, Senior Writer/Editor
A 1980s meeting of President Ronald Reagan and Phyllis Schlafly at the White House. (Photo courtesy of the Eagle Forum Archives)(CNSNews.com) - Phyllis Schlafly was around for the beginning of the modern conservative movement. Now, in the aftermath of yesterday’s sea change election, the president of Eagle Forum and veteran conservative activist says the movement needs to start over again – from the beginning.
“The conservative movement will rise again, just as it re-rose in 1964 and nominated a little-known senator named Barry Goldwater, and rose again with the nomination and election of Ronald Reagan in 1980, and then, after (Bill) Clinton’s victory rose again and elected a big majority of Republican congressmen in 1994,” Schlafly told CNSNews.com in an interview.
1994 was the year Newt Gingrich and others developed the Contract with America, which inspired the election of a class of conservative Republicans, who took control of Congress.
“The conservative movement knows how to rise from the ashes, and we need to pick up the pieces of the movement, which was so badly dismantled and put in disarray by the George W. Bush administration. But we can do it. And we’ve got to get started immediately,” she said.
Schlafly lays the blame for Tuesday’s defeat of the McCain-Palin ticket – and a decline in the fortunes of the conservative movement – at the feet of the Bush administration.
“The disarray of the conservative movement is the fault of George W. Bush and his advisor Karl Rove,” Schlafly said. “I guess it turned out that he was not a conservative after all. He was a big government, big spending, globalist, ‘New World Order’-type of Republican.
Among other things, the long-time conservative leader said, the financial bailout bordered on socialism.
“A lot of people stuck with him beyond the time that they should have, when it became apparent that he did not espouse real conservative principles,” Schlafly said.
Schlafly rejected any suggestion that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin split either the GOP or the conservative movement.
“Sarah Palin is certainly a rising star – she was a breath of fresh air, and a lot of excitement to the conservative movement. I think she is a genuine conservative,” Schlafly added.
“I think that most of us are interested in rebuilding the conservative movement. She will have a role to play in that,” she said. “If we want to split off anybody (from the GOP) I would say that it is the multinationals who have given us this economic disaster, and who told us that globalism is the wave of the future. If you want to split them off, that’s OK with me.
“But I think we’re going to be looking for new leaders who express conservatism across the board – whether its sovereignty, limited spending, limited government, cuts in spending, cuts in taxes, the social issues – to simply reject these groups who are trying to muscle into the driver’s seat of the Republican Party, such as the multinationals with their ‘free-trade globalism’ agenda,” Schlafly added.
Does anybody come to mind?
“No,” she said, laughing, then adding, “We have about 30 very good members of Congress who are destined to become good leaders.”
Schlafly expressed confidence that the movement she had a hand in building will come back. But she’s no Pollyanna.
“Of course, I’m optimistic. I’m a Ronald Reagan optimist. But there’s a big job to do, and a lot of it is in the public schools, because so many people have been taught the wrong things about America and about politics and about what’s important in life and how things are done in the American constitutional system. I think we’re going to have to rebuild from the grassroots up,” she said.
Viewer Comments
The following comments are posted by our readers and are not necessarily the opinions of either CNSNews.com or the story’s author. To be considered for publication, comments must adhere to the Terms of Use for posting to this Web site. Thank you.
Showing 1-5 of 11 Comments 1 2 3 Next Loading...
RiverKing at 08:49 AM - November 06, 2008
I take issue with Ms Schlafly blaming our recent defeat entirely on George W Bush and the liberal "education" of a couple of generations. I believe the largest reason for our defeat is the liberal bias of most "news" organizations and the blanket of silence surrounding conservatives. We know we're here and what we mutually believe but only because of the Internet, talk radio, and a very limited number of other sources.
floridaconservative at 09:00 PM - November 05, 2008
I am interested in knowing if there is a Conservative Party being started in Florida?
websmith at 06:00 PM - November 05, 2008
Republicans need to get back to the concept of Republicanism. This country was formed as a constitutional republic that placed individual rights and liberties above all including the will of the majority. What came out of the formation, the Constitution, if followed, would have prevented most of the problems that we are facing today. A republic is a nation of laws that are implemented to protect the rights of the individual, not a nation of regulations that try to run business. http://ewebsmith.com/bus/wrongbusiness.html
ronricesr@hotmail.com at 05:37 PM - November 05, 2008
It has been my privilege to meet many evangelicals, and main line Christians during the last 30 years. Both are effective as God' children. I have enjoyed two Sunday School classes in Plains, GA the last 10 years, and I voted for Regan in 1984. My first vote went to Goldwater in 1964, my first Democratic vote went to Carter in 1976. Yes, Phyllis, and many wonderful men and women like her, will help to restore a strong Christian core to our culture. Let's be mindful of people of all ages as we structure our story, the wonderful story of our Lord. Seniors, we honor....middle age adults, we respect, and young people under 30 we nurture their passions, passions that seek a country that is less cunning, and condescending to their generation. In Philadelphia, 1955, Percy Crawford has a successful ministry...."YOUTH ON THE MARCH". He was keenly aware of the importance to nurture youth in the 1950's.
MrBill at 02:59 PM - November 05, 2008
I try not to be the pessimist however that sounds like an impossible task beginning with the "reeducation" of the teaching community and their unions. How would you even begin and what could motivate such changes?
Republicans Will Emerge Stronger Than Ever
Republicans Will Emerge Stronger Than Ever
Thursday, November 6, 2008 4:28 PM
If ever there was an election that was not worth winning, it was the contest of 2008. While it was hard-fought on both sides, had McCain won, it might have spelled the end of the Republican Party. As it is, the party is well-situated to come back in 2010 and in 2012, if it learns the lessons of this year.
Simply put, all hell is about to break loose in the markets and the economy.
The mortgage crisis will likely be followed by defaults in credit card debt, student loans and car loans. We will probably be set for two years of zero growth, according to economists with whom I talk. And the federal efforts to protect the nation from the worst of the recession will probably lead to huge budget deficits and resulting inflation. We are in for stagflation that could last for years.
Had McCain won, he would be the latter-day Hoover, blamed for the disaster that unfolded on his watch. Now it is Obama's problem. With the Republicans suffering a wipeout in congressional elections (although not as bad as they feared), the ball is now squarely in the Democratic court. Good luck!
If Obama raises taxes, the situation could get even worse. With a liberal Congress on his hands, he will be constrained to move to the left, if he needs any pushing.
When Clinton was elected in 1992, the Democrats in control of Congress gave him a clear message: Either you govern within the four walls of the Democratic Caucus or you won't get our support. Crossing the aisle to get Republican votes, even including the GOP in negotiations, was a no-no for which the president would pay dearly if he transgressed.
The result was predictable. Moderate initiatives like welfare reform were scrapped, the Congress passed tax hikes and legislation became festooned with liberal amendments.
Faced with the need to round up every last vote in the Senate and House Democratic caucuses, Clinton had no choice but to load up conservative bills like an anti-crime measure with liberal pork (like a provision for midnight basketball courts in urban areas) to get unanimous caucus backing.
Obama will have to move left to appease his caucus. He will become their hostage, and they his jailers.
This dynamic will produce extreme-left-wing governance, which the Republicans can blame for the continuation of the recession and for any worsening. The party will recover, fed by anger at Obama's policies, and will emerge from this defeat stronger than ever.
But the Republicans must learn the lesson of MoveOn.org. Founded in the bleak days of the Clinton impeachment, MoveOn developed a grass-roots Internet base. Building up its e-list of activists and contributors, MoveOn laid the basis for the incredible Internet appeal of the Obama campaign. At last count, Obama has 4.5 million donors, most online.
Conservatives cannot count on the Republican Party to fight their battles for them, and certainly cannot count on them to win. The right needs to develop cyber-roots conservative organizations to rival the power of groups like MoveOn.org.
The stellar efforts of Newsmax.com and its ally, GOPtrust.com, illustrate the power of such efforts. Together, these groups raised $10 million for an independent expenditure on media in swing states featuring the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's anti-American bombast.
And their efforts worked.
Virtually all the polls agreed that Obama would win 52 percent to 53 percent of the vote, but the surveys varied in the amount of undecideds they found.
On Election Day, virtually every undecided voter went to McCain, and Obama's final vote share was no more and no less than the 52 percent to 53 percent the surveys had predicted. This unanimity among undecided voters is attributable to the endgame of groups like GOPtrust.com and Newsmax.com.
These groups have to lead the way in running media to battle against the leftist legislation that will undoubtedly emanate from the Obama administration and the liberal Congress America has just elected. Then they can become the basis for a Republican resurgence, just as MoveOn.org was this year for the Democrats.
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Thursday, November 6, 2008 4:28 PM
If ever there was an election that was not worth winning, it was the contest of 2008. While it was hard-fought on both sides, had McCain won, it might have spelled the end of the Republican Party. As it is, the party is well-situated to come back in 2010 and in 2012, if it learns the lessons of this year.
Simply put, all hell is about to break loose in the markets and the economy.
The mortgage crisis will likely be followed by defaults in credit card debt, student loans and car loans. We will probably be set for two years of zero growth, according to economists with whom I talk. And the federal efforts to protect the nation from the worst of the recession will probably lead to huge budget deficits and resulting inflation. We are in for stagflation that could last for years.
Had McCain won, he would be the latter-day Hoover, blamed for the disaster that unfolded on his watch. Now it is Obama's problem. With the Republicans suffering a wipeout in congressional elections (although not as bad as they feared), the ball is now squarely in the Democratic court. Good luck!
If Obama raises taxes, the situation could get even worse. With a liberal Congress on his hands, he will be constrained to move to the left, if he needs any pushing.
When Clinton was elected in 1992, the Democrats in control of Congress gave him a clear message: Either you govern within the four walls of the Democratic Caucus or you won't get our support. Crossing the aisle to get Republican votes, even including the GOP in negotiations, was a no-no for which the president would pay dearly if he transgressed.
The result was predictable. Moderate initiatives like welfare reform were scrapped, the Congress passed tax hikes and legislation became festooned with liberal amendments.
Faced with the need to round up every last vote in the Senate and House Democratic caucuses, Clinton had no choice but to load up conservative bills like an anti-crime measure with liberal pork (like a provision for midnight basketball courts in urban areas) to get unanimous caucus backing.
Obama will have to move left to appease his caucus. He will become their hostage, and they his jailers.
This dynamic will produce extreme-left-wing governance, which the Republicans can blame for the continuation of the recession and for any worsening. The party will recover, fed by anger at Obama's policies, and will emerge from this defeat stronger than ever.
But the Republicans must learn the lesson of MoveOn.org. Founded in the bleak days of the Clinton impeachment, MoveOn developed a grass-roots Internet base. Building up its e-list of activists and contributors, MoveOn laid the basis for the incredible Internet appeal of the Obama campaign. At last count, Obama has 4.5 million donors, most online.
Conservatives cannot count on the Republican Party to fight their battles for them, and certainly cannot count on them to win. The right needs to develop cyber-roots conservative organizations to rival the power of groups like MoveOn.org.
The stellar efforts of Newsmax.com and its ally, GOPtrust.com, illustrate the power of such efforts. Together, these groups raised $10 million for an independent expenditure on media in swing states featuring the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's anti-American bombast.
And their efforts worked.
Virtually all the polls agreed that Obama would win 52 percent to 53 percent of the vote, but the surveys varied in the amount of undecideds they found.
On Election Day, virtually every undecided voter went to McCain, and Obama's final vote share was no more and no less than the 52 percent to 53 percent the surveys had predicted. This unanimity among undecided voters is attributable to the endgame of groups like GOPtrust.com and Newsmax.com.
These groups have to lead the way in running media to battle against the leftist legislation that will undoubtedly emanate from the Obama administration and the liberal Congress America has just elected. Then they can become the basis for a Republican resurgence, just as MoveOn.org was this year for the Democrats.
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
OUR NEW SIDE WELCOME ABOARD
I CAME TO THE REALIZATION THAT FOR THE PRESENT I MAY BE IN THE MINORITY AS FAR AS THE GOVERNMENT IDEOLOGUES GO BUT FOR MY FRIENDS AND READERS OF OUR PREVIOUS BLOG, NEWSSHOPPE, WE ARE THE WINNERS.
IT IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS,NEWS TRACK, TO HELP KEEP THE FEET TO THE FIRE OF THOSE WHO GAINED OFFICE THIS LAST ELECTION, WHERE THEY FULFILL A PROMISE MADE TO THE GENERAL POPULATION AND FOR ITS BENEFIT, THEN THE APPROIATE ACCOLADES WILL BE GIVEN. WHERE BROKEN PROMISES COME ABOUT THEN WE SHALL JOIN WITH THE MANY OTHERS TO BRING THE MISGIVING TO THE PUBLIC VIEW,
REMEMBER, THIS IS YOUR PAPER AND THOUGHT ALSO AND AS ALWAYS WILL BE RESPECTED FOR REPUBLISHING HERE, FOR THE MORE DIVERSE THE INPUT THE BETTER THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROBLEM.
I CAN STILL BE REACHED AT (OLD AS DIRT) oad@alaska.net
IT IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS,NEWS TRACK, TO HELP KEEP THE FEET TO THE FIRE OF THOSE WHO GAINED OFFICE THIS LAST ELECTION, WHERE THEY FULFILL A PROMISE MADE TO THE GENERAL POPULATION AND FOR ITS BENEFIT, THEN THE APPROIATE ACCOLADES WILL BE GIVEN. WHERE BROKEN PROMISES COME ABOUT THEN WE SHALL JOIN WITH THE MANY OTHERS TO BRING THE MISGIVING TO THE PUBLIC VIEW,
REMEMBER, THIS IS YOUR PAPER AND THOUGHT ALSO AND AS ALWAYS WILL BE RESPECTED FOR REPUBLISHING HERE, FOR THE MORE DIVERSE THE INPUT THE BETTER THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROBLEM.
I CAN STILL BE REACHED AT (OLD AS DIRT) oad@alaska.net
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)