More Thoughts on the Election

Throughout the bruising, relentless primary season I had many battles with other conservatives over who would be the best “ABR” (Anybody But Romney). Although we might have supported different candidates from Bachmann to Gingrich to Santorum to Paul, we all agreed that handing “next in line” Mitt Romney the nomination would have disastrous results in the general election. And as I said on the air last night, to my surprise I actually grew to like Mitt Romney during the course of the general campaign. Policies and record aside, he is a decent, generous, capable and accomplished man who would have made a much better President than the one we’re stuck with for another four years — even if I would have inevitably disagreed with him on some issues. I was resigned to the fact that we as conservatives would first have to oust Obama from the White House, then continue to reform the GOP and hold a President Romney accountable. All things considered, at least he loved the USA as founded and understood our exceptional nature.

Looking back at the debates in particular, it is astonishing that over 50% of the electorate could deliberately ignore the stark contrast between a respectful, intelligent and amiable businessman and a smug, arrogant man-child ostensibly holding presidential office but presenting himself as anything BUT presidential — especially in the first and last debate. Obama was petulant, petty, mean-spirited and just plain wrong in many of his accusations (e.g., bayonets) but by taking the “gentlemanly” route and allowing these unfounded insults and character assaults to go unanswered, Romney did himself and the USA a huge disservice.

Then again….I am reminded of why I fought so hard against his candidacy. As I noted months ago, sending the purveyor of Romneycare to go up against the inflictor of Obamacare was a losing proposition. Is it any wonder Romney never attacked his opponent on Obamacare’s onerous business-destroying provisions such as the 50-employee mandate, not to mention its inevitable rationing as evidenced by the IPAB — Independent Payment Advisory Board — 15 unelected bureaucrats who will determine who is “worthy” of necessary medical procedures?

Somehow I doubt a Rick Santorum, a Newt Gingrich, a Michele Bachmann or a Herman Cain would have made the same fatal mistake.

And as expected, with Obama’s victory all but ensuring full implementation of this disastrous socialized medicine scheme, the lay-offs have already begun. Those of us who never bothered to read the bill are now finding out what’s in it — and it’s not pretty. Too bad we didn’t have a Republican nominee who possessed the credibility to hang this albatross around Obama’s neck simply by informing the public.

Speaking of which, in his desire to be a “nice” guy while frequently referring to the statist in the White House in the same way, Romney refused to attack him over his dereliction of duty with respect to Benghazi — which led to the deaths of four upstanding Americans who served their country with honor and dignity. Michelle Malkin was 100% correct when she urged Mitt Romney to get the “nice guy” talking point out of his mouth when referring to Obama. Too bad he didn’t listen. Not even after we found out the President watched the Benghazi attack unfold in real time, denied them help and then jetted off to Vegas for a fundraiser.

Which brings me to another critical point: RINOs.

In one sense, I completely sympathize with the three million Republicans who sat home on Election Day. They are sick to death of being “good soldiers” for the Republican machine that hates conservatives and conservatism, and only tolerates them in order to win elections. When Romney and the GOP snubbed Palin, refusing her a prime-time speaking slot at the RNC because she was too “extreme”, I knew we were doomed. Not only was it a slap in the face to Palin’s supporters, it was a complete repudiation of limited government principles. Ditto for their equally dismissive attitude toward Ron Paul. Then the final blow: awarding Chris Christie the keynote, which turned out to be one of the worst convention speeches in history. Instead of extolling the virtues of the Republican nominee, Christie made it all about him. No wonder he gushed all over Obama in a Hurricane Sandy photo-opp — he sees the same narcissistic impulses in our president that he himself possesses. Much like Obama’s Chicago thuggery and chameleon accent that changes according to the crowd he’s addressing, Christie’s Tony Soprano act wore thin a long time ago, along with his RINO impulses (e.g. support for cap and trade and gun control, belief in manmade global warming and refusal to acknowledge the threat of radical Islam without and within).

I remember rhetorically battling it out with my Dad who, although an ardent admirer of Palin, bought into the GOP nonsense that this was somehow the best strategy to win over the independent voters we needed to win. “We gotta get this guy out,” he’d implore me urgently, meaning Obama.

As I told Dad, independents wouldn’t matter if a large chunk of the base stayed home. And Palin had single-handedly done more for the cause of Constitutional conservatism than any political figure in recent history — even with the left and her own party waging war on her since 2008. And while I am not a fan of Ron Paul’s foreign policy and his naivete with respect to jihad, Sharia Law, Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood, I do agree with him on economics. Regardless, he and his followers deserved to be heard at the convention; the Republican Party was wrong to slight them, and as expected, it came back to bite them in the butt.

For as much as they kvetch about the need for a “big tent” it seems that only applies on a superficial, identity politics (female, Hispanic, etc) level; certainly not on an ideological one. Otherwise, all voices would have been given an opportunity to be heard.

As expected though, the GOP hasn’t learned the real lesson and is now admonishing us that the answer is to pander even more to specific voting blocs like Hispanics, apparently to out-amnesty the Democrats and reward more criminal behavior (yes, breaking the law is criminal, regardless of motive). Amazing when you consider 1.) our cratering economy and 2.) our already unsustainable entitlements.

Where do we go from here?

I tend to agree with Glenn Beck when he urged his listeners to strengthen their families and communities, act on a local level and if at all possible, get the hell out of the Northeast and move south. Fortify the red states to shore up electoral votes. Let the liberals suffer the consequences of their failed policies. And somehow the Right has got to get into the cultural and educational arenas because culture is politics. As much as I despise the Left, I must give credit where it is due: they patiently dismantled public education, pop culture, media and academia and infiltrated it with progressive propaganda, successfully dumbing down the electorate to the point where they have no understanding of history, no appreciation for the Constitutional Republic bequeathed to us by the Founding Fathers and no more belief in the “quaint” concepts of hard work, personal responsibility, self-reliance and rugged individualism. They have indoctrinated a new generation to believe it is the government’s job to assist those who fall on hard times rather than incumbent on individuals. And the results are frightening.

None of this will be solved overnight and as Tuesday’s results suggest, things will have to get a whole lot worse before they get better. In addition to what’s in Obamacare, we’ll soon find out what Obama meant when he told the Russian president he’d have more “flexibility” after the election. We’ll feel the full effects of sequestration. We’ll suffer through four more years of unemployment, underemployment and economic stagnation. We’ll live in a world where America no longer stands up to the world’s most brutal dictators but instead embraces them — while simultaneously betraying our allies like Israel.

All for “free” birth control, abortion on demand, welfare checks, food stamps and Obamaphones. God help us.

Share

The Hope and the Change: A Review

HopeandChange

Two weeks ago Steve and I interviewed conservative film maker Stephen K. Bannon on his newly released film, The Hope and the Change, after having had the privilege of screening it early.

I honestly didn’t know what to expect, as someone who was raised in a politically engaged, conservative household and saw through Obama the second he burst onto the scene, because this film’s sole focus is on everyday, hard-working Democrats and Independents who did believe in Obama’s promises in 2008. Enough to vote for him enthusiastically:

Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign was a cathartic moment in American history that promised the electorate “Hope” and “Change.” Citizens United Productions’ latest film, The Hope and The Change, examines the journey of forty Americans – Democrats and Independents – who supported and voted for President Obama four years ago.

This 60 minute documentary follows the daily lives of hard-working Democrats and Independents through unscripted and unrehearsed interviews. Our diverse cast encompasses a broad cross-section of America’s racial and socio-economic spectrum and comes from seven swing states that experts say will decide the 2012 presidential election. Viewers will see how their nation’s economy and society has changed over the past four years under the policies of President Obama.

As I watched the spontaneous interviews, I was struck by how earnestly these folks believed in President Obama, for example, his campaign promise to cut the deficit in half, which of course never happened. These good people described in earnest their utter disappointment and confusion when shortly after taking office, instead of working to improve our ailing economy, Obama passed a second stimulus and auto bailout and rammed a massive government-run healthcare scheme down the throats of the American public.

Although part of me shook my head at their surprise, another part of me felt genuine sympathy for these voters who truly felt “duped” by the President. As one of them states, President Obama pulled a “bait and switch”.

Yet inexplicably, Stephen Bannon notes in our interview that none of them ascribe nefarious motives to the President, viewing him as a nice guy who is just in over his head. Although his policies may scream “socialist”, these disillusioned voters do not see him that way, partially because these are people who are engaged in civic society in their local communities, but not in the political process. In short, they comprise some of the “bitter clingers” derided by Barack Obama in 2008 but because they are low-information voters and/or not listening to or reading new media talk shows or blogs, they are still getting their news through an extremely biased legacy media.

Listen to internet radio with CRF MEDIA on Blog Talk Radio

In the interview, I note some of the absolute filth and viciousness spewed by the left against conservatives, Republicans and everyday Americans, incredulous that decent people could possibly align themselves politically with such degradation. Bannon noted that conservatives “don’t rub their noses in it enough” to wake them up to the realities of the left and today’s Democrat Party. Indeed, he goes on to say that none of the voters featured in the film are going to change their registration to Republican anytime soon.

But none will be voting for Barack Obama, even if not all will be casting a vote for Mitt Romney, which is certainly a “hopeful” development. After speaking with Stephen, I became more determined to get out of the echo chamber and start reaching out to the fence-sitters and moderate Democrats in my life. There aren’t many, but they need to be informed. These are good people who work hard, pay taxes, raise families and basically live conservative lives — it’s simply mind-boggling that they are unwittingly falling for liberal lies.

The biggest lesson I came away with after watching this film is that we are doing voters such as the ones featured in The Hope and the Change a huge disservice by withholding information that can help them make better voting decisions for themselves, their families and the country. Time to toss out the old adage about not discussing religion and politics and start conversing with swing voters who determine election outcomes.

If you’re struggling to understand the mindset of these citizens, I highly recommend watching The Hope and the Change and sharing it with every voter you know. You just might save the country in the process.

Share

Governor Palin Talks To Eric Bolling

PalinRallyCruz

Loved this interview today in which Palin and Bolling covered a wide range of topics, including the stunning Ted Cruz victory last night and the upcoming RNC convention. One of the things that always strikes me about Sarah Palin is her humility; she never takes credit for her formidable influence over the outcome of a race. Instead, she gives all credit to grassroots activists who are working hard to elect authentic constitutional conservatives to the US House and Senate.

Every time I see her in an interview these days, I understand more clearly why she declined to run for the presidency. It’s obvious that Governor Palin views her role in this 2012 campaign season as a champion of good candidates for US House and Senate — an effort that’s of vital importance. Based on the relentless attacks on her perpetuated by certain members of the GOP over the past eight months, it’s also pretty obvious that the fix was in. Whether she articulates it or not, my opinion is that she was all too aware of the lack of support and possible outright sabotage the GOP machine would inflict upon her. Of course, this is just speculation on my part but the more events of this campaign season unfold the more I believe she made the right decision (although nothing would make me happier than calling her “Madame President”).

We didn’t get into this mess overnight, however, and it’s going to take numerous elections to get us back on track. If Palin can assist in a conservative Republican takeover of the Senate and significant gains in the House, we’re that much closer to restoring the republic.

Listen also for her gracious comments regarding Mitt Romney, along with her artful response to the question about the RNC and a potential speaking engagement. In spite of the venom spewed at her by members of her own party, Palin remains a class act.

For all of her critics on the right and the so-called “moderate” Republicans, I wonder if you could tell me why former GOP office-holders haven’t lifted a finger to assist in any of these races, yet continue to take potshots at a woman who devotes her time and energy traveling the country to promote constitutional candidates? While they trash her to the Obama Lapdog Media, she’s focused on what truly matters — winning elections for We The People.

Anyway, thanks to C4P and Barracuda Brigade, here’s the video:

Share

Gary Jackson: ‘For Dick Cheney and His Ilk, John McCain’s Brilliant Choice of Sarah Palin was Bad News!’

PalinMadison

Gary Jackson has a fabulous rebuttal to Dick Cheney’s unnecessary, reprehensible (given the hostile media climate) and flat-out FALSE attacks on Sarah Palin. Unlike Cheney, Palin’s supporters know and appreciate her long record of achievement and reform — a record that stands to threaten the status quo and the ruling political class:

Evidently the Republican Elite™ are concerned that Mitt Romney may give Sarah Palin a speaking role at the convention or, God forbid, might actually be smart enough to consider her as his running mate. Enter Dick Cheney.

Cheney was on ABC News on Sunday. He did the old “she’s a nice girl … but …” insult.

Cheney claims choosing Sarah Palin as VP was a mistake. Now I’ll give him some credit, at least he didn’t pull out the lie that she cost McCain the election, but what he did say implies it. Cheney rightly says there is only one real test to see if a candidate for vice president is acceptable: Can they be president? Cheney claims Sarah failed that test. The man is an idiot.

There were four people on the 2008 presidential ticket: John McCain, Sarah Palin, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden. Out of those four, only one person had Executive experience, and plenty of it.

John McCain has been in Congress seemingly forever, but he’s never run a city, never run a state. He was a Navy man, a fighter pilot, a prisoner of war, a hero, and then went to Washington. Nothing on his resume qualified him to be president. Now one can say he had plenty of experience dealing with foreign policy, and he was right on the Iraq war, when Cheney and others were dead wrong. But face it, as far as decision making experience, at an executive level, he had none.

Then you have Barack Obama. He was a “community organizer” with ACORN. That meant he trained rent-thugs to go out and intimidate people, often by violent means. He was an attorney, and worked with terrorist Bill Ayers on a couple of Ayers’ foundations that were set up as fronts to advance Marxism. He became a state Senator, and other than championing legislation that would allow doctors to murder babies that survived an abortion attempt, was of little consequence.

In 2008 the Mayor of Wasilla credited Sarah’s 75 percent property tax cuts and infrastructure improvements with bringing “big-box stores” and 50,000 shoppers per day to Wasilla. She left office in 2002. That’s some serious and lasting impact for one person to have.

Last time I looked, Dick Cheney had never run a city. Certainly never turned a dirt road town into a highly successful one with a bustling economy.

Sarah’s time as the Chairman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission is the stuff of legends. Not so much for what she did as a regulator, which by all accounts was top notch, but for what she did to unwind the massive corruption lawmakers and many oil company executives were engaged in. By the time she was done, the state’s Attorney General was forced to resign in disgrace, as was the Republican Party Chairman. [From his job as a fellow AOGCC commissioner] He was also forced to pay the largest civil fine in Alaska’s history.

Sarah was just getting started, as she would take down the sitting Republican Governor, in a landslide, and go on to pass sweeping reforms once in office, as the FBI was still raiding lawmakers’ offices and hauling people off to prison.

Washington may be one of the most corrupt places on earth, and I’ve never, EVER heard Dick Cheney address it’s corruption in any manner whatsoever.

Stacy Drake and Whitney Pitcher put together an extensive listing of Sarah Palin’s accomplishments as Governor. No one in Washington has accomplished anything near what she has. In fact, you’d be hard pressed to find any elected official in the country who got as much done, has a better record on fiscal issues, or maintained a higher approval record among their voters. Sarah Palin had a sustained approval rating in the 90s as Governor of Alaska.

She’s the real deal.

Somebody out to tell Bill O’Reilly and Brit Hume. Although Hume defended her pick as the 2008 GOP VP nominee, like so many others who appear on Bill’s show to discuss Sarah Palin, he too missed the mark in terms of articulating her many accomplishments — not simply her ability (important as it is) to fire up the base (an ability that’s owed to both her impressive resume and her engaging retail political skills and personality). And what a surprise that a former Bush speechwriter, Marc Thiessen, would effectively agree with Dick Cheney while also failing to note Palin’s remarkable resume:

I think he was effectively right,” Thiessen said of Cheney. “He was not trying to denigrate Sarah Palin…. John McCain didn’t lose because of Sarah Palin … I think what he is trying to say is that Romney needs a VP like Dick Cheney. He needs someone who is going to have instant credibility with conservatives and is going to be seen as one of their own but also somebody who has the gravitas and seen as ready to take on the presidency on the first day and first day in office.” Thiessen added that the “somebody” who could energize the base with gravitas would be Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI).

Credibility with conservatives? Is this guy serious?

In addition to the 2008 campaign, Sarah went on to solidify her “credibility” by “breathing more life” into the Tea Party movement, redefining the debate against Obamacare, garnering an impressive record of endorsements in the November 2010 midterms and fearlessly taking on Obama’s socialist policies in every interview on radio and television. She’s also traveled the country in support of strong constitutional conservative candidates, who enthusiastically welcome her endorsement because it always leads to an uptick in the polls.

Funny, no one on The Factor last night mentioned Deb Fischer, Richard Mourdock or the surging Ted Cruz whose election is today.

I have had it with these ruling class types who continue to mock her, ignore her accomplishments and by extension, denigrate every American who believes in the United States Constitution and appreciates Palin’s relentless efforts to help us take back our country.

Can’t wait to hear their spin when Ted Cruz emerges victorious today.

Via Conservatives4Palin, here’s Mark Levin on the matter:

Share

Andrew McCarthy on the Wages of Willful Blindness

AndrewMcCarthy

Andrew McCarthy has hit another one out of the park today in a piece for Pajamas Media:

This is the crossroads at which we now find ourselves. On one side are national security conservatives, myself included, who reluctantly accept the stubborn fact that Islamic supremacist ideology is incorrigibly hostile to America and the West. We take the Muslim Brotherhood at its word that it is seeking to destroy the West and destroy Israel, and that it is doing so based on a divine injunction that is easily traceable to Islamic scripture. We understand that there are other ways of interpreting Islam, and we wish those other ways were predominant. But we believe American national security requires grasping that Islamic supremacism is the predominant Islam of the Middle East; it is the Islam of the Muslim Brotherhood throughout the world, very much including its organizations operating in our own country. We understand that Islamic supremacist ideology inspires not only violent jihad but also non-violent campaigns to supplant Western culture with Islamic culture — such as, for example, the campaign waged by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and the Brotherhood to restrict free speech; their campaign to have sharia-compliant finance broadly accepted in the West; and their campaign to delegitimize Israel as a “racist occupier” while recasting Hamas, the Brotherhood, and even Hezbollah (a Shiite terrorist organization) as “political parties” and “resistance” movements.

On the other side of the divide are the Obama administration and the Republican establishment. They insist that there is nothing inherently supremacist about Islam, which is an ur-tolerant “religion of peace.” Violence, they maintain, not only has nothing to do with Islam but is, in fact, “anti-Islamic.” They see the Muslim Brotherhood not as a threat but as a political organization. You are to understand that the Brotherhood has nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism. To the extent it supports Hamas, that is because Hamas is engaged in resistance, not terrorism. To the extent Brotherhood leaders unabashedly proclaim that they will “conquer Europe” and “eliminate and destroy” America by “sabotage,” in what they brazenly call a “civilization jihad,” such rhetoric is to be expected and excused because Islamic culture is steeped in hyperbole and religious imagery. They don’t really mean it the way it sounds, you see, and, once we all understand each other better, that unfortunate rhetoric will fade away.

Please read the entire article at Pajamas Media, which concludes with a timely and important question: Why should liberty lovers even bother with the Republican Party at this point?

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Share