The Far Left & The Disconnect Between Reality & Promises

Several conclusions that I came to a few years ago are that far left always claims the moral high ground for their programs and policies, they always claim to be helping some victimized or powerless group, and nine times out of ten, they are actually putting the screws to the group for their own benefit. The only winners are the far left and a few cronies who play their game.

The penultimate example of this is that of the racial grievance industry and the black community - a community beset by horrendous problems of broken families, violent crime, poverty, and substandard education. The far left does not do a single thing towards addressing these problems. Worse, it is a cause when it comes to education. The far left perpetuates the substandard education of blacks by brazenly placing the interests of moneyed unions over those of inner city blacks. And yet, the far left claims to be the sole guardian of blacks in our nation. Blacks are but one example of this dynamic. Virtually everything the left touches runs on the same dynamic. What led me to revisit these conclusions was an article in the WSJ by Arthur Brooks on how Obama claims to champion the middle class while pursuing policy after policy that accretes power to the government while screwing the middle class and the ever increasing number of poor in this country:

. . . Census Bureau data show that in 2006-11, real annual income for the top 20% (quintile) of Americans fell by about 5% but rose almost 2% in 2010-11—and shows signs of continuing an upswing. For the bottom quintile, income fell by over 11%, and there was no upswing.

In 2011, workers in households earning between $40,000 and $60,000 had a 7.8% unemployment rate. In households earning under $20,000, unemployment was 24.4%. The unemployment for households earning more than $150,000 was 3.2%

In other words, high-income households were at or above full employment. Meanwhile, the lowest-income households looked at an employment landscape resembling the worst years of the Great Depression.

"Growing inequality isn't just morally wrong," Mr. Obama said on July 24 in Illinois. "It's bad economics." That is abundantly true, but not in the way he intended. He meant income inequality. But the real problem—and crisis—is declining opportunity. The Federal Reserve Bank of Boston has shown that in 1980, 21% of Americans in the bottom income quintile rose to the middle quintile or higher by 1990. Those who started off in the bottom quintile in 1995 had only a 15% chance of becoming middle class in 2005. That is a one-third decline in mobility in under a generation.

The key to increasing opportunity is simple: real jobs for adults and good education for children. The president's speeches disappointed on both counts.

In Tennessee on Tuesday, Mr. Obama said: "A job is a source of pride and dignity—the way you support your family, the proof that you're doing the right thing." Exactly—which is why it is so distressing that work has been collapsing in the past five years, with the poor hardest hit.

In 2008, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that total nonfarm seasonally adjusted employment was 138 million workers. Today, it is fewer than 136 million. Meanwhile, the number of Americans has grown by 12.8 million. In many areas of the country, more than one in five adults who want full-time employment can't find it.

Where are the policies that will actually help Americans at the bottom regain the dignity of real, value-creating jobs? I don't mean the high-skill workers who would benefit from high-tech innovation, biofuels, electric vehicles and other favored industries of the administration, but rather the people left behind.

Again and again, the president offers a higher minimum wage as a solution. Yet as the overwhelming majority of economists have argued for decades, the minimum wage actually harms the poorest and most marginalized workers—those with the most tenuous grip on their jobs. In January, a study from the National Bureau of Economic Research surveyed the most recent studies and concluded: "The evidence still shows that minimum wages pose a tradeoff of higher wages for some against job losses for others."

The story for strivers and entrepreneurs is no better. Scott Shane of Case Western Reserve University has shown that business formation fell by 17.3% between 2007 and 2009. Launching a business is never a walk in the park, especially given the explosion of red tape at all levels of government. While it is still possible for the educated and comfortable, government bureaucracy can crush entrepreneurship entirely for those at the bottom of the income scale. As a pro-poor rule of thumb, I suggest this: If you want to start a landscaping business, all you should need is a lawn mower, not an accountant and a lawyer to help you hack through all the red tape before setting up shop. Imagine if President Obama fought for such business-friendly simplification.

Perhaps the president's proposals on education are better for the poor. Sadly, no. Mr. Obama, on his speaking tour, talked about subsidizing college loans—a policy that largely does relatively little for those at the bottom. . . .

What I find both inexplicable and depressing is the seeming complete inability of conservatives to articulate these realities in an effective manner to the vast majority in our nation who are not of the far left.

Tweet

Read More...

Summary only...

Gingrich, Communications & The GDS-Suffering Republican Elites

. . . for years now, I have been screaming that the failure to communicate and respond to these endless [leftwing] attacks was the greatest failing of the Bush Administration - and Republicans generally in all situations. I am convinced that McCain lost the election because of his failure to aggressively attack Obama in the debates and the failure of the entire Republican Party as a whole to respond to the left's outrageous charge that the right was responsible for our financial nightmare. . . .

Having watched the current crop of Congressional Republicans for years now, I am under no illusion that, come 2012, they will be able to effectively communicate. The backlash we see against Obama's policies and vast overreach today has come from the bottom up, with the Tea Parties and social networking. It has nothing whatsoever to do with Congressional Republicans. That does not bode well for the right come 2012.

That said, as I look out at the field of potential candidates who could possibly communicate effectively - those with the necessary intelligence and aggressiveness to actually call the left on their falsehoods and change our national paradigm - the only one I see today who foots that bill is Newt Gingrich. . . .

16 July 2010, Wolf Howling, Looking Ahead: Obama, 2012 & The Biggest Republican Weakness

Gingrich won South Carolina by 12 points and, going into Florida, he now leads the polling by 9 points. Hysterical dysentery has now afflicted those many Republican elites suffering full blown cases of GDS (Gingrich Derangement Syndrome). The disdain they feel for the voters - i.e., the rank and file Republicans and independents who voted in the S.C. primary - and the grass roots Tea Party movement literally drips from their mouths. It appears that before the Conservative rank and file can take back our nation from Obama, we will first have to take back our party from the Republican elites.

As so many people are today pointing out - Gingrich roars. And when he unapologetically does so with passion and eloquence in defense of conservative values, when he does so in shredding an ill thrown race card, when he does so in calling the media out for their bias, that is what the base of the party wants above all else. It is clear that the base understands that it is precisely what the party has been lacking. And it is clear that the base also understands that progressives - who have, over the past century, changed our nation in so many ways - will continue making fundamental changes to our nation until we can get someone who roars in defense of conservative values.

This is not a sudden catharsis, at least for me. I have been pointing it out as the single greatest failing of Republicans almost from the first day I started this blog. For but a few examples, see:

-  Advice On How To Lose The 2012 Election
-  Looking Ahead:  Obama, 2012 & The Biggest Republican Weakness
-  A New Cold War In America
-  Losing the Message Wars
- Republicans Ponder The Abyss

For the past eight decades, Republicans in government, with the exceptions of Ronald Reagan and then Newt Gingrich, have been fighting a rear guard action, accomplishing little more than minimizing the ever continuing advance of socialism / progressivism in our government and in our society.  As to Reagan as President and Gingrich as Speaker, they actually pushed back against the advance and managed conservative victories.  They did so because they vocally, passionately and eloquently were able to challenge the falsehoods of the left while promoting conservative ideals.

We can see much the same happening today in some of the states. Take New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie for example.  He is a darling of the right today - despite the fact that he is a RINO's RINO on so many conservative issues.  But on the two intertwined issues most effecting NJ, the economy and the power of unions, Christie is firmly on the conservative side of the fence.  And he has been just a shining success in bluest of blue NJ on those issues.  Why?  Because he is an incredibly effective communicator who is vocal, passionate and eloquent in the effort to promote fiscal sanity and an end to the power of NJ's massive public sector unions.

But today, the many Republican elites suffering GDS are telling us that the ability to communicate does not matter and that the voters in S.C. were just dumb.  They now are trying to frighten the base into voting for Romeny by saying that a Gingich nomination will mean that we lose not just the Presidency, but the House and the Senate down ticket.  Let's take a look:

The voters in their infinite wisdom have just given a huge boost to perhaps the only GOP candidate who could shift the spotlight from President Obama to himself, alienate virtually all independent voters, lose more than 40 states and put the House majority in jeopardy.

Jennifer Rubin, The Washington Post

. . .  with Newt Gingrich you get the name calling for the president — very popular with the tea party crowd in South Carolina, not so popular with independents. He won’t put a fence on the border and wants amnesty for illegals. He took $1.6 million from Freddie Mac. But you know, he attacked Paul Ryan’s plan on Social Security. So with Newt Gingrich, you throw out the baby and keep the bath water… I think South Carolina is going back to their Democratic roots.”

Ann Coulter, Fox and Friends (via Gateway Pundit)

. . . Let’s just pray that Barack Obama’s second term didn’t start today. If Gingrich does get the nomination, this may turn out to be a year in which Republicans more or less ignore the presidential race, ceding Obama his second term, and focus instead on trying to hold the House and, if possible, picking up a seat or two in the Senate, along with doing the best we can in state races where the wipeout at the presidential level doesn’t swamp all efforts to elect Republicans.

John Hinderaker, Powerline

On the heels of Newt Gingrich’s trouncing of Mitt Romney in the South Carolina primary, Republican Party brass are privately expressing deep concerns that former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich’s high unfavorable rating in national polls could prove catastrophic to the so-called “down ballot”–the House and Senate races under the presidential race–and may even threaten the Republican Party’s control of the House of Representatives.

GOP strategist Steve Schmidt, who previously served as Sen. John McCain’s senior campaign strategist, told MSNBC commentator Rachel Maddow that if Mr. Gingrich wins next week’s Florida GOP primary, there will be “a panic and a meltdown of the Republican establishment that is beyond my ability to articulate in the English language. People will go crazy.”

Wynton Hall reporting at Big Government

What these GDS-afflicted prophets of Armageddon are relying upon are polls showing that, at the moment, Gingrich has a lot of negative name recognition. Wow, no kidding? It's not like Gingrich suffers from two liabilities - the MSM of the past two decades and now the GDS afflicted right.

Does anyone reading this remember Gingrich's speakership in the mid - 90's, the balanced budgets, the welfare reform, the Contract With America, the good economy, the low jobless rate? I do. And I vividly remember a few other things. The left of the era hated Gingrich with a passion that would not be seen in America again until Sarah Palin came onto the national scene. The MSM of the time was not just as left wing as today, but they had a near complete monopoly on the news. There was no alternative media. They demonized and demagogued Gingrich unmercifully. Indeed, I kid you not when I say I remember the day I looked up the definition of the word "demagoguery" in the dictionary. I had heard the word used by Rush Limbaugh in an interview with the Speaker in response to how the left and the entire MSM was portraying one of his acts.

Update: It appears that my memory of that time - the intense partisan war against Gingrich, the bull shit ethics complaint, and the total war of the MSM declared on Gingrich is accurate. Byron York of the Washington Examiner takes us on a walk back through that time here.

As to when Republican members in the House led a coup against Gingrich, I have no inside knowledge. I do know this. What we got after Gingrich left was a disaster. We got a House that was, for the next decade, nothing more or less than Democrat-lite. There were zero conservative accomplishments, there were zero balanced budgets, but there were huge increases in spending. So was the problem Gingrich's leadership, or the fact that Gingrich took Republicans out of their comfort zone and brought a lot of bad press at the time? I have always believed it was the latter based on what I saw at the time and afterwards.

And now when it comes to negative press, it has been the GDS Republican elites who have picked up where the far left MSM dropped off near a decade ago. As I wrote in Decemeber:

The last two months of flame throwing against Gingrich [by the GDS-afflicted Republican elites] has left me wondering whether we can yet pull defeat from the jaws of victory. Precious little of what is coming from the right leaning pundits has been reasoned criticism. To the contrary, its largely been overheated hyperbole of the ilk used by the left to demonize and delegitimize Sarah Palin.

So when the GDS afflicted right now tells us that a Gingrich nomination would be catastrophe because he doesn't have positive name recognition, that is like the boy who murders his parents then asks the Court for mercy because he is an orphan.

So how are we to evaluate Gingrich's negative name recognition from some earlier national polls when matched up with the most recent polls and with the results of the SC election? First this from Gallup:

The latest Gallup polling shows Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney each trailing President Obama by exactly the same tally — 50 to 48 percent. . . .

. . . Gingrich, in particular, improved versus Obama in the swing states: While he trailed Obama by 6 points overall at that time, he led Obama by 3 points in states that are likely to be hotly contested — a swing of 9 points.

The Gallup poll is not limited Republicans, and it certainly seems that Gingrich is at least as popular as Romney. And then there was the S.C. open primary, where Gingrich not only won running away, but also took the independents.  I am just not feeling the hate . . .

In sum, all of prophecies of total Republican annihilation coming from Republican elites who hold the actual voters in utter disdain is nothing more than fearmongering. Their total immersion in GDS suggests that their problems with Gingrich run far deeper than merely wanting to see the Republican party - or conservativism, for that matter - succeed, and their total disdain for the Republican base shows arrogance unbound. Indeed, it leaves me speechless, though still with a desire to communicate clearly with the GDS-afflicted Republican elites. That said, let's cue the non-verbal response.

Update:  Doug Ross has also addressed the down-ticket argument with a rather amazing historical fact from Rasmussen. You literally have to go back in time to 1860 to see a scenario play out where an incumbent president loses the White House but his party wins "control of either house of Congress from the other party."

Update:  Linked at Larwyn's Linx.

Read More...

Summary only...

Advice On How To Lose The 2012 Election

The Republican National Committee has issued a warning to fellow Republicans:

During the conference call, various Republican affiliates expressed concern that attacking President Barack Obama may prove too dangerous for the GOP. “We’re hesitant to jump on board with heavy attacks” said Nicholas Thompson, vice president of Republican polling firm the Tarrance Group. “There’s a lot of people who feel sorry for him.”

Are these people insane?

My biggest complaint about the Republican party, for the past decade, has been their utter inability to communicate effectively. I've wailed about it on this blog with regularity (for example, see here, here, here, and here). And indeed, it is advice such as that above that has been responsible for Republicans abysmal showing over the past decade.

Perhaps the two worst most destructive instances of Republicans allowing falsehoods to become fixed as facts in the minds of the majority of Americans are the Iraq War and the fiscal meltdown. There was Bush not responding to the left wing attack machine's "Bush lied" meme. Karl Rove came very late to the conclusion that failing to respond was the biggest mistake of the Bush presidency. Then there was McCain not responding to the Democrats' effort to misdirect the blame for our economic meltdown onto Wall St. greed, rather than the actual cause, two decades of left wing government directed social engineering that tore apart credit standards and put Fannie and Freddie on steroids.

And now we have Obama making the most outrageous of claims about the failure of markets and capitalism as well as the supposed sin of the profit motive.  Indeed, IBD has an editorial out today discussing the Five Big Lies In Obama's Economic Fairness Speech. Even WaPo's Fact Checker gave the speech three Pinnochios. Yet the RNC responds by telling Republicans not to attack Obama because he is likable and the electorate feels pity for him? And just how are Republicans to counter this? Their silence would only cede the message to Obama and the left - and we have years of evidence telling us how that works out.

The RNC has it exactly wrong. Republicans need to be passionate and loud - with the caveat that they must be absolutely intellectually honest in their criticisms.

You want to see how to do it wrong - Mitt Romney's ad attacking Obama by taking a quote completely out of context.



That really will engender sympathy for this most destructive of Presidents.

Now to see how it is done right - Newt Gingrich laying out, in two minutes, why Obama is the President of class warfare and food stamps while conservatives are the party of paychecks.


There is a reason Gingrich is leading in the polls. And if he stays there, it will be in very large measure because he will have ignored the craven advice of the RNC.

As a parting gift, here is Rush in high dudgeon over both the idiocy of the RNC's advice to Republicans and the prevarication of Obama in his Kansas speech yesterday.

Read More...

Summary only...

A New Cold War In America

We The Government indeed. Cartoonist Michael Ramirez is certainly one of the most perceptive individuals of our generation. The only thing he missed was the signature block, with Obama's name written in the size of John Hancock's.

Is there anyone on the right who does not realize we are in a zero sum ideological war in America today? It is not only against the progressive left in Congress, but equally against a MSM in the pocket of the progressive left. For instance, this today from MSNBC:

[I]n a week when Democrats are celebrating the passage of a historic piece of legislation, Republicans find themselves again being portrayed as the party of no, associated with being on the losing side of an often acrid debate and failing to offer a persuasive alternative agenda.

The party of "No?" You have got to be kidding me. Republicans were virtually shut out of the health care negotiations. They made attempt after attempt to influence health care legislation, only to be rebuffed.

If you want to see a "party of no," take a look at the left. When Bush attempted to fix a Social Security system clearly destined to fail, changing it from a ponzi scheme to essentially a personally owned, government administered 401k, the Democrats utterly refused to engage in any sort of dialogue or to offer any alternative plans. Everytime someone says the party of no, we should be replaying:




There is your party of "NO."

And this bit about "failing to offer a persuasive alternative agenda" is almost as offensive. Rep. Paul Ryan did precisely that in his "roadmap" for America, posted on line in November. So ignored was it by the MSM that three days before the "healthcare summit" in February, Obama and Gibbs were quoted as calling on Republicans to post something online. It was outrageous.

But it also makes my point - that Republicans are utterly failing at communications. The three biggest things Republicans can do to help their chances are, one, to develop a far more effective communications apparatus, recognizing that the MSM is, but for Fox and the Wall St. Journal, an ideological enemy that will do them no favors. The second thing they need to do is to challenge major misstatements or spin in the press, pointing out the bias and hypocrisy of the press itself. The press likes to pretend to objectivity, so they may not like it, but they will have to run the criticism. Three, stop worrying about decorum and start accurately expressing emotion. If the President is lying to the American people - then damn it, use the word "lie," use it with passion, and then explain why. The left operates to a large degree on pure emotion while the right is far more restrained in expressing it. That has to change if the right is ever going to get its message across and make it stick with the electorate on a visceral level. I am not arguing for adopting the pure emotion and intellectual dishonesty that are the hallmark of today's progressive left, but rather marrying intellectual honesty with emotion.

It is not enough to stop the progressives at this point - to have a static trench warfare, to use military terminology. This is a new Cold War. And as were their socialist progenitors, our modern progressives must be fully delegitimized, defeated and sent to the dustbin of history.

Update: Having looked at Doug Ross's blog, perhaps it would be better to call this a newly hot war - as a civil war graveyard tells us that Democrats have been at war with our country for a very long time.





Welcome: Smart Girl Politics readers.

Read More...

Summary only...

Losing The Message Wars

For every ten Democrats I have heard baldly blame the Republicans for the subprime crisis, and for every Democrat I have heard speak against McCain's presence in the negotiations, I have heard maybe one Republican speak to the contrary. Some of the worst was last night, listening to CNN, listening to Paul Begala heap scorn on Republicans for the subprime crisis while the token Republican on the panel remained silent in the face of complete falsehoods. Further, I just listened to Harry Reid and Chris Dodd - two people up to their eyes in direct responsiblity for this subprime crisis - hold a news conference giving their CYF (Cover Your Fannie) story on all of this, including with blame for McCain, with no corresponding attempt by Republicans to respond in kind.

The Republicans are pristine in comparison to Democrats as regards the subprime crisis that has brought our economy to the brink of depression. Republicans also have good reason to revolt against Democrats - and their enablers such as Tennessee Senator Bob Corker - who have turned this bailout not into protection for consumers, but into a continuing funding resolution for the most corrupt of Democratic progressive advocacy organizations. For Republicans to cede the narrative on this is the height of incompetence. Unless and until they become absolutely vociferous in getting out their message, the left will ever increase their stanglehold on America, much to America's detriment.

Other posts related to Subprime Crisis (from oldest to newest):

McCain, The Fannie and Freddie Crisis, and Obamafuscation - Obama and the entire Democratic Party are trying to blame Republicans for the subprime crisis. But this crisis was created by Bill Clinton and protected against Republican efforts to reign it in over a decade – until it failed, nearly pulling out entire economic system into a depression.

A Washington Post Front Page Hack Job - The Washington Post does a hit job on McCain, grossly distorting his record on regulatory matters and ignoring his cosponsoring of legislation to establish much stronger regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Dodging a Depression - The NYT and WSJ document just how serious is the subprime crisis. Quite literally it brought us to the point of a complete and catastrophic stoppage of our financial systems as institutions lost confidence in their fellow institutions. This was not a stock market crash, it was a lending and credit crash. The WSJ describes the events of the week leading up to the crisis point.

Obama & The "Family" Of Fannie Mae - Documenting Obama’s relationship to Fannie Mae.

The Origins – And Foreseeability – Of the Subprime Crisis - A 1999 article in the NYT describes the Clinton Administration forcing subprime loans onto America and also forecasts that this will create a house of cards that will fall apart in a down market.

Covering The Left’s Fannie - The NYT tries to play up old ties of a McCain campaign worker with Fannie Mae while minimizing the fact that McCain himself, in 2005, co-sponsored legislation that may well have prevented the fiscal crisis we are in now.

The Left’s Subprime Meltdown - A post by the Anchoress discusses this subprime crisis as a creation of the left and a system that was protected to the end by the left. She adds additional sites, quotes and links to explain the mosaic.

Fannie & Freddie, McCain & Obama, Subprime & Wall St.The WSJ discusses both how the subprime loan market came about and how Democrats, including Obama, were both the cause of the problem and the roadblock to a solution that would have averted this catastrophe. Dafydd at Big Lizard's explains how Mortgage Backed Securities worked on Wall Street.

A Doddering Fool & Charlatan - Chris Dodd is up to his ears in the subprime crisis. With our economy teetering on an actual depression due to the Fannie/Freddie/subprime loan crisis, it was not merely surreal to watch Senator Chris Dodd chair an emergency hearing of the Senate Banking Committee to evaluate the Treasury's proposed rescue plan, it was obscene.

Finally – Oversight - The FBI has finally announced criminal investigations at Fannie and Freddie.

When Will They File As A 527 – The NYT continues its wholly biased reporting on the subprime crisis, refusing to report on the genesis of the crisis and instead, reporting on the relationship between Fannie Mae and Rick Davis of McCain’s campaign team.

McCain The Chessmaster - Opining on the potential risks and rewards of McCain's decision to cancel campaigning, return to Washington to take part in negotiations over a response to the subprime crisis, and tentatively cancel the Friday debate.

The President Addresses The Nation - Bush explains the stakes involved for America with the subprime crisis.

McCain The Chessmaster Part II - McCain was responding to a 3 a.m. phone call in returning to Washington. He is given political cover and support by Bill Clinton.

A Spotlight On The Left's Subprime Crisis - A video summary of the origins of the subprime crisis with lots of footage of Rep. Barney Frank and others protecting Fannie Mae from regulation by the Bush Administration and McCain.

WaMu Swallowed Up In The Left's Subprime Swamp - Washington Mutual goes under because of toxic mortgage debt.

Great Moments In Leadership - Obama phones it in on the subprime crisis.

The "No Deal" - McCain Responds - The left is blaiming McCain for failure of a deal on the subprime crisis. McCain answers in a memo.

Dodd, ACORN, and the Penultimate Screwing of the Taxpayers - The left, the people responsible for the subprime crisis, proposed a deal that would have used the return on rehabilitated investments not for the benefit of taxpayers but to fund progressive advocacy organizations that are fundamentally corrupt.

Krauthammer On The Subprime Crisis: Time For A Return To Public Executions - America is livid over this fiscal crisis and wants a pound of flesh to satiate its cravings before beginning the job of putting our financial house back in order. Krauthammer things we should give it to them and suggests a return to the auto de fe, this time as a reality show.

Read More...

Summary only...

Republicans Ponder The Abyss

. . . All our yesterdays have lighted fools the way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle! Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more: it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

MacBeth, Act 5 Scene 5

One could well imagine our Republican Congressmen quoting MacBeth as they ponder the fates and stare into the abyss that draws ever closer as November approaches. It is a fate that they have brought upon themselves by their choices over a period of years, straying ever farther from conservative values. The solutions are simple, their delusions phenomenal, and the leadership nonexistent. There is indeed every reason to be as pessimistic as MacBeth.
__________________________________________________

About a week ago, on the eve of the third special election in a safe Republican district, House Republicans huddled to ponder their fate. We do not know what was said in the meeting but Rep. Tom Davis, coming out of the meeting, blamed Republican troubles on Bush and things such as his opposition to SCHIP – the Democratic plan to spend billions to create nationalized health care for children. And in that one event, all was summed up.

Congressional Republicans are both deaf to their constituents and delusional about the causes of their problems. If there is a single Republican who thinks emulating the left and embracing SCHIP or some other huge new socialist program is the way forward for the Republican party, they are insane. What in God’s name is wrong with these people? Bush certainly has to take a major share of responsibility for all of the above problems, but let there be no doubt that our Congressional Republicans and the RNC all shoulder an equal share of the blame.

That said, November does not have to be the rout it portends. Victor Davis Hanson took the time to remind our misguided elected leaders about the key issues of a conservative plank. Suffice it to say, there were no surprises. But it really is even simpler than that. Republicans have two key national issues they can run on and win. The first, the pocket book issue, is the price at the pump. The second is national security. But they will only win on those issues if they accomplish two prerequisites. One, they need to embrace fiscal responsibility like it was just written on stone tablets by fingers of flame emanating out of a burning bush. Two, they need to adopt an effective communications strategy.

The engine of our economy and our modern lives is energy, whether it come from oil or some other form. The prices of everything we buy are effected by it. If it now costs three times more to get an orange from California to a market in Baltimore, that cost gets passed on to the consumer. The people hurt the most by high oil and gas prices are those who can afford it the least.

The cost of oil is determined by supply and demand, not the oil companies, not Opec (other than OPEC regulates how much oil they supply - still, OPEC has not really pinched the supply since the '70's.) It should not be hard to explain the basic concepts of supply and demand to the American people. Nor should it be hard to explain that every attempt to drill for oil in the U.S. and off our coastline has been stopped by Democrats. We have China taking oil from the sea floor 70 miles off our coast line, yet we cannot get that oil and use it to reduce our prices compliments of Democratic obstructionism. Indeed, that should be the concluding sentence to every speech given by a Republican between now and November, much like in days long past Cato ended every speech calling for the destruction of Carthage. And when Democrats such as Speaker Pelosi say all Republican's want to do is "veto and drill," there should be a line of Republicans heading towards microphones to announce that they just heard Nancy Pelosi make the first honest and accurate remark she has made during her tenure as speaker.

Over the past 30 years, Democrats have blocked drilling off the coast of Florida, drilling off of the east coast, west coast, the Alaskan coast and ANWR. Within the past month, the Democrats have voted against even allowing exploration of oil-shale formations in Colorado and Utah. Democrats are wedded to radical environmentalists who could care less about this nation’s economic development, nor for that matter, the effect of oil prices on Joe Sixpack. Indeed, the cleanest, greenest and cheapest form of energy is nuclear, yet there our Democrats have also placed roadblocks that prevent any new nuclear plants being built.

The Democrats have yet to propose a plan that will add one drop of oil to American pumps. Not one. This is utterly insane. Indeed, Democrats propose the opposite. Oil company profits get ploughed back into exploration as well as R&D. Yet the Democrats have proposed a plan to strip oil companies of their profits and to sue OPEC, two moves that could not be more suicidal. The energy argument should be a supremely easy one for conservatives to win – if they communicate it effectively.

The other key issue for Republicans is national security. Obama is fatally flawed on this issue. He has put support of the tort bar over our nation’s intelligence gathering capabilities. Moreover, he sees Iran as apparently little threat and has all but completely refuted the threat of force against Iran.



All of this speaks of a complete lack of any understanding of the nature of Iran’s theocracy, its violent and virulent history since its inception, its refusal to moderate, the amount of blood on the theocrat's hands, and the theocracy's role in insuring that there is no peace in the Middle East. It ignores the the extensive diplomatic efforts made by the U.S. and the EU over the past decades to establish relations with Iran and convince it to moderate its course - all of which have been for naught. It is also is suicidally delusional about the danger Iran pose's while they are enriching uranium and creating other by-products of the fuel cycle that can be used in terrorist acts.

And it seems Obama does not care that Iran is in the midst of a proxy war against both the U.S. and the Iraqi government. I have outlined the threat posed by Iran on several occasions, including here and here. Add to this that Obama wants to pull defeat from the jaws of victory in Iraq – a move that really would strengthen Iran – and that he believes both Hamas and Hezbollah, both proxies of Iran, have "legitimate grievances." What you have is a Presidential candidate who is so fundamentally flawed and weak on national security as to be dangerous.

Those two issues, more than any other, are winners for the Republican Party on the national level. That said, it all matters for naught unless Republicans in Congress embrace fiscal discipline – including renunciation of earmarks and out of control spending. That requires both leadership and discipline which our Congressional Republicans do not have. Mitch McConnell has done all he could to scuttle earmark reform, and John Boehner in the House has not led on this issue at all. And just a few days ago, Republicans joined with Democrats to pass a bloated, veto-proof Farm Bill that is an utter atrocity. Fiscal discipline is one of the three long poles in the conservative tent – which means it's non-negotiable with the base. Republicans lost in 2006 because of their lack of any fiscal discipline. And it is doubtful that the base will listen to any arguments until this gets fixed on a national level.

And then there is the final issue, lack of an effective communications strategy. The silence from our elected Republicans on every issue is deafening. Democrats under Clinton perfected the art of immediately responding to any and every Republican attack with multiple speakers responding through multiple outlets. And it’s a practice they have continued through this day. A shining example is the President’s speech the other day in Irsrael, wherein he spoke of the dangers of appeasement. Within hours of that speech, you had Obama and at least six other Democrats in the news responding to the President. Some of their responses were outrageous. Obama himself relied wholly on nothing but rhetorical devices to preclude any debate. Rahm Emanuel, for his part, attacked the President by saying that "politics stops at the water’s edge." The hypocrisy of that statement was jarring, given the historical roots of that phrase. Yet with only one exception, not a single elected Republican pointed out either the hypocrisy or the artifice of the Democrats, nor discussed whether Obama's proposed meeting with Iran was suicidally naive. Indeed, over the past several days, the only Republican in the news responding to this tsunami from the left is McCain.

This is one incident out of thousands over the past decade where Democrats have won the battle of communications by issuing unanswered attacks which they then repeat ad infinitum. They have, by sheer repetition regularly managed to turn non-sequiters into accepted fact. For instance, how many people now believe Bush lied about WMD in Iraq or that he twisted intelligence in his "sixteen words" speech. Neither of these claims have substance, but they have been repeated so often and so loudly by the left, and with so little response and no outrage on the right, that they have become accepted as fact by many, if not the majority of Americans.

I realize the MSM is in the left’s pocket, but to concede the echo chamber is simply ludicrous. Indeed, Republicans need to be responding with twice the energy and number precisely because of the incredible MSM bias. Moreover, to allow the Democrats to repeat untruths or half truths without responding with cold outrage shows a party that lacks any leadership - let alone confidence in their message. Indeed, I firmly believe that if the RNC or the Republican leadership in Congress took a much more proactive stance in responding in at least equal number to each and every attack, the party would not be fighting a rearguard action for its very existence today.

Unfortunately, I do not believe the current Republican leadership cable of meeting the prerequisites of either embracing fiscal discipline or challenging in the communications battle. To the contrary, for this iteration of Republicans, I think the words of MacBeth to be right on target. "All our yesterdays have lighted fools the way to dusty death." We are in for a long ride on the right, compliments of electing fiscally irresponsible and incompetent Republicans over the past decade.

Update: One hundred and three Republicans House members just joined with Democrats to pass an "energy bill" that gives no energy but attacks oil companies and asks the Justice Dept. to sue OPEC. Both the bill and Republicans voting for it are utterly suicidal. Those Republicans voting for this bill are trying to emulate the left to save their skins. They are cowards and fools moving in precisely the wrong direction. Let the massacre commence.

Read More...

Summary only...

Victor Davis Hanson on Unmoored Republicans

Republicans in Congress are leaderless, silent, paniced and delusional. They have lost there bearings since the end of the Regan era. They have no fiscal conservatism and seem to think the answer to their woes may be emulate the left. Its not. Victor Davis Hanson weighs in at PJM with his own statement for a Republican platform:

___________________________________________________

This from VDH writing at Pajamas Media:

. . . What mystifies is the paralysis of Republicans and their impotent protestations that “Bush did it”. The truth is that Congressional Republicans, responsible for turning principles into governance, deserve to lose—unless they craft clear positions that won’t be compromised and then offer them as alternative choices to the voters this fall. Here are some examples:

Spending: a balanced budget, no exceptions. Voters are tired of hearing that this or that projection assures a balanced budget in 2, 3, or 5 years. Revenues continue to soar after the tax cuts, so the problem is too much going out, not too little coming in. Surpluses are preferable to deficits, since we want to retire, not add to out foreign debt. . . .

The War: Afghanistan and Iraq have radically improved. Anti-war hype and slurs are a year out of date. We are finally on the edge of having done the impossible: removed the most odious regimes in the Middle East and fostered constitutional governments in their places. Spending on general defense and the war still run at only 4% of GDP, not high by historical levels. The reforming Petraeus army is stronger and wiser, despite the toll of war, for our ordeals in the Middle East. As troops slowly begin to come home next year, let everyone take credit for it.

Energy: Drill, explore, conserve. The answer does not lie in any one area, but in the willingness to produce more energy in all of them. We must ensure more oil, coal, and nuclear power, conserve more energy as we produce more—to prevent going broke while we transition to next-generation fuels.

Why should others abroad, who are far less careful, extract oil for us in areas of the world more fragile than our own? We must end the notion that ANWR only yields a million barrels a day, or the coasts only 2 million, or tar sands or shale only a million, or nuclear power and coal only so many megawatts of power. To paraphrase, Sen. Dirksen—‘a million barrels a day here, a million there, pretty soon it adds up to real production.’

Economy: We are in a natural down cycle, not the Great Depression—interest rates, unemployment, economic growth, and stock prices do not reflect a recession. Use this downturn as a warning not to spend what we don’t have when things rebound.

Immigration: Close the border, and then, and only then, argue over what’s next. Stop illegal entries, while we promote assimilation, the English language, integration, and education in American civics. Do that and most of our seemingly insurmountable problems will shrink as we endlessly bicker over amnesty, guest workers, and legal quotas.

Trade: free and supervised trade creates more jobs, makes us more competitive, and fosters alliances. Protectionism does the opposite. Americans like to compete and usually win—when they know the rules of the contest are fair and clearly explained to them.

Foreign Policy: Neither provoke nor talk to our enemies in the Middle East, Asia, or South America. Instead, cultivate our allies, build our defenses—and be ready for anything.

Homeland Security: the framework is in place. Let the Democrats try to repeal it. Let them make the argument that the Patriot Act and Guantanamo haven’t made us safer.

Ethics: Warn Republicans that in matters of sex, influence peddling, and graft, the Party of family values suffers the additional wage of hypocrisy. So the tolerance level for these sins is zero.

If Republicans could adopt such a simple message, stick to it, and find the most articulate spokespeople, they could still win.

. . . The In short, the Republicans’ problem? They forgot who they were and can’t explain what they might be. They need to go back to basics, adopt conservative principles to confront new challenges, and then find the most effective spokesmen they can to explain their positions—hourly.

Read the entire article.

Read More...

Summary only...