The Conservative Edge

Leonard Pitts, a columnist for the Miami Herald, recently commented on the driving forces behind the Tea Party movement. He referred to MSNBC hack Keith Olbermann, who insinuated that the Tea Party members “haven’t made peace with the fact that their president is black.” Spoken like a true demagogue—the Sharptons, Jacksons, and Olbermanns of this country continually stir up racial strife so they can remain in the news.

Pitts, however, doubts that Tea Partiers hate Barack Obama just because he is black. Indeed, Obama’s race is a minor issue. It wouldn’t matter which prominent Democrat held the office of President. The results would be the same, whether Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, or any other liberal occupied the White House. As proof, one only needs to recall Bill Clinton’s first year in office. Among his top priorities were health care reform and the issue of gays in the military. In Barack Obama’s first year, he too has pressed for health care reform, addressed gay rights in the military, and has beat up on car companies and fat cat bankers to boot.

Instead, Pitts asserts that the Tea Partiers are upset about the changes in American society. He writes, “We are witness to the birth cries of a new America,” and that everyone like him “embraces and celebrates that,” and “looks forward to the opportunity and inclusiveness it promises.” Pitts might do well to check his eyesight. It is hard to see opportunity with a real unemployment rate of about 16 percent. It is hard to celebrate a government that keeps getting bigger, with government workers earning twice the salary of the average blue collar employee. It’s also hard to fault people who see their individual rights subordinated to the power of government, and, like the Whos living on the clover in “Horton Hears a Who,” are screaming “We are Here!”

Perhaps the Tea Party members can be faulted for not being vocal enough in recent years. I have a feeling that many of them thought that just believing in a set of morals or principals was good enough, and that there would always be sufficient numbers of like-minded people who would vote against the liberal candidate. They are now realizing that they might be doing too little too late.

Let us hope that there is still enough time to keep America from sinking into the quicksand of collectivist ideology. It’s going to take more than the Tea Partiers to make it happen. Every conservative in America needs to band together to resist the liberal juggernaut that threatens to turn America into a socialist has-been of a country.

This past Thursday marked the annual gathering of the Conservative Political Action Conference (CAPC). Apparently, the conference was not a typical meeting dominated by Republican themes. Rather, many previously small and insignificant groups became more vocal and influential during the day’s proceedings.

The backlash against the big-government machine being piloted by the Obama administration has given voice to smaller, grass-roots organizations that are less concerned with typical moral issues like abortion, and more focused on runaway government spending and tax increases. This is probably beneficial to the conservative movement as a whole, and should be part of the Republican Party’s overall vision. The idea of a smaller, efficient government that primarily concerns itself with protecting the country, the country’s currency, the American economy, and the rights of individuals should be embraced by the GOP.

But somehow, the Republicans have forgotten how to emphasize the goodness of those principles, and have chosen instead to hack away at certain pieces of Democratic legislation, or at certain members of the Democratic Party. They have presented themselves to the public as being just as partisan and dogmatic as their opponents.

Hopefully, the voices of the various organizations that participated in Thursday’s conference can help refocus the sight of the Republican Party. Ned Ryun, founder of an organization called American Majority, observed that “The conservative movement has been stuck for so long in this idea that good ideas will win out. But good ideas won’t implement themselves without effective organization. Bad ideas with good organization will always win out over good ideas with bad organization.”

This is the major failing of the Republican Party. They have many of the right ideas, but can’t communicate them to the American people. Ronald Reagan was the last great Republican speaker; he was able to associate himself, his ideas, and his party with the things we envisioned as good about America. That is what the Republicans need right now; someone that can eloquently present the virtue of their form of governing, not just some adolescent attack on a Democratic straw man. Maybe the CPAC gathering can be a new beginning for the Grand Old Party.

There are a couple of words that have become more prominent in my vocabulary, and I would like to introduce them to readers of this blog. The words are statists and collectivists. Both words actually refer to the same group of people. You might otherwise know them as socialists, Marxists, and liberals. Not coincidentally, most of these people belong to the Democratic Party.

Statists and collectivists believe that the individual is only a part of a greater whole, that is, national or global society. You might view statists as people who think that the State (the Federal government) is all-powerful, capable of directing and controlling all individuals for the benefit of society. The collectivists hold a similar view; they believe that goods and wealth should be collected and redistributed, so that no individual should be more prosperous than another. In either case, the individual essentially has no rights, especially those that pertain to the attainment of wealth, and the procurement of self-defense.

John Holden, science adviser to President Obama, has been quoted as saying that America “must design a stable, low-consumption economy…redistribution of wealth both within and among nations is absolutely essential.” This is why the government has been most active in time of economic crisis. The Obama administration, with cooperation from the liberals, has swiftly implemented laws and regulations that will bring about the desired redistribution. For instance, there is now a cap on the earnings of doctors and corporate executives. The salary of Bank of America’s president is now zero. Furthermore, the government has also displayed its ability to fire private-sector executives, such as Rick Wagoner of GM. It is interesting, too, that GM had at least 8 separate divisions before Obama was elected; but soon, GM will be reduced to only four, as Pontiac, Hummer, Saab, and Saturn will likely be shut down.

Apparently (and unfortunately), the message that capitalism has caused our economic problems is being accepted by American society. In a Rasmussen Reports survey conducted in April 2009, only 53 percent of Americans believed that capitalism was better than socialism; another survey of adults under 30 showed that 37 percent favored capitalism, while 33 percent preferred socialism (30 percent was undecided). The federal government would no doubt like to improve on that 33 percent figure. That’s why President Obama continues to demonize the financial institutions, referring to bankers as “fat cats.” The more that capitalism and free enterprise ideals are discredited, the more likely it is that American citizens will accept a socialist, totalitarian dictatorship implemented by the statists and collectivists of the Democratic party.

It is almost unimaginable that a third of young American adults would prefer a socialist government. Even the mighty Soviet Union collapsed under its totalitarian communist/socialist regime. The American economic system of free enterprise has resulted in a high standard of living for its people that has far surpassed that of any other nation. The men who framed our system of government realized that it was individual rights, not state rights, that would ensure a free and prosperous nation. We should support the economic engine that has secured the rights we do have, secured the country against foreign powers of evil, and virtually saved the world twice in the twentieth century. Long live capitalism!

Religion is a funny thing. It’s sort of like water—it has equal capacity to either sustain or kill any human being. Some people (a shrinking minority of individuals) can develop an acute sense of morality as a result of their particular religious beliefs. On the other hand, far too many people misuse their faith, seeking to control or rule other persons.

This desire to attain supreme authority is not limited to Bible-believing Christians or even jihadists who follow the Koran. Religion takes many shapes and forms, and there are certainly more gods who are worshiped besides the One who created the Earth. We must remember that religion is based on faith, not reality. Faith must also be expressed and preached by someone with enough charisma, skill, and determination so that his ideals might be accepted and, ultimately, never questioned.

I am particularly reminded of one fellow in the Bible, a man named Simon, mentioned in the Book of Acts. He claimed to be some great power of God, and asserted himself so effectively, that he completely controlled the minds and behaviors of the people who lived in his city. The only way his spell could be broken was by the revelation of a new religion that emphasized freedom and healing over mind control. Simon lost his following when the new religion swept through the town.

Alas, Simon still lives. He lives because faith can still be used in this 21st century to control, manipulate, and subdue. The deity worshiped today is Mother Earth, and her disciples are many. High priests like Al Gore demand that we accept his ideals on faith, not reason or careful consideration. Claims are made that a majority of experts agree with him, even though it is entirely possible that a majority can be wrong. We are urged to accept computer projections of earth’s warming instead of proven laboratory tests and concrete evidence. Just as Gore and other liberals might suggest that God cannot be real because He cannot be proven to exist, Gore’s own theory of global warming cannot be proven either.

It has been said that a tyrant’s stated desire to save the world only conceals his true desire to rule the world. The people who would benefit most from a re-engineering of American society are the high priests such as Gore who are already set to benefit from the energy industries they endorse. The citizens of America, meanwhile, will be left with growing energy bills, shrinking transportation freedom, higher unemployment, and a general stranglehold on pursuits of liberty, wealth and happiness.

In the Biblical story about Simon, it is obvious that there was no liberty, wealth or happiness in his town. Religion and faith had been used (misused, one might say) by Simon to achieve a dictatorship. The same thing will happen today if Gore and the other false disciples successfully subdue America in the name of Mother Earth.

President Obama recently hammered the executives of the largest banks/financial institutions, calling them “fat cats” who should stop taking advantage of the American people. It wasn’t enough that Obama appointed a “pay czar” that gets to decide how much corporate executives can earn. Now Obama is calling them names, just to rub some salt into the wounds.

In truth, there are a lot of people who despise the rich bank executives. And it is equally true that many banks have oppressive fees and other regulations. Some mistrust of banking operations is to be expected. However, the American people should be just as upset with the growing size of the federal government and the earnings of government workers.

The USA Today just released its study of federal government pay data. The results show that, during the first year and a half of the economic downturn, six-figure salaries jumped from 14% of all civil servants to 19%. Additionally, in the same time frame, the Transportation Department went from having one employee making at least $170,000 to having 1,690 people earning that amount. This means that those 1,690 people in that department earn at least 287 million dollars. God only knows what the payout is for all of the people employed at the Transportation Department.

The liberals supposedly have such care and compassion for the Average Joe. But it is hypocritical for the Obama administration, and Democratic leaders in the House and Senate, to publicly skewer private sector executives for their pay scales, while government workers get larger salaries. This kind of growth in government is the last thing we need in recessionary times.

I wonder how many bankers it would take to earn $287,000,000?

It’s no wonder the Democrats don’t want us to read the health care legislation being rammed through Congress. If we were allowed time to peruse the hundreds of pages, we might find that gun owners could face higher rates for health insurance, thanks to the Centers for Disease and Control.

That’s right—the CDC is violating a congressional ban enacted during the 1990s, in which Congress forbid the CDC to conduct studies on any kind of relationship between gun-related injuries and health care costs. The reason for the ban was to prevent any taxpayer-funded “research” being done by a government entity that would endorse tighter gun control laws.

Apparently, the Obama administration isn’t too concerned with a government agency acting unethically. The CDC is continuing its “research” on gun violence and its impact on health care costs. The results of the studies are being included in the pending health care legislation that will be debated in the Senate after Thanksgiving. So, even though the Democrats are outwardly concerned with the plight of the uninsured, they are secretly finding new ways to discourage gun ownership by increasing every conceivable cost associated with legally owning firearms. Just think—soon your health insurance applications will have a section asking you how many guns you own, and if so, what kind. If you confess to owning one, you’ll be put into a “high-risk” category.

Is that what health care “reform” is all about? If you don’t like the deceptive tactics of the CDC and Congress, contact your Senators. You can also read more about this issue at the Buckeye Firearms Association website, by following this link. Don’t let our government destroy our constitutional freedoms!

Every once in a while, you read or hear something that goes beyond interesting, and instead either moves you to tears or to action. I recently had the privilege of reading a column written by Thomas Sowell, and published in the November 2 edition of the IBD newspaper. His essay stirred my conscious, but I also felt validated in a way, because I have written several times previously about the danger the current President (and his cohorts) can inflict on our great country.

I wish not to try and quote Sowell word for word. I think each reader of this post should follow the link above and read his column in its entirety. However, I will briefly summarize the main points of the column:

1. An unelected government official has been appointed by the President, with authority to cut the pay of private business executives.
2. A media “czar” may be appointed to subsidize (seize) media outlets, to provide the government with the authority to silence talk radio.
3. President Obama has spoken of creating a national police force.
4. A panel of “experts” may soon decide who gets life-saving medical treatments.
5. Look at the kinds of people Obama has been associated with, and who he keeps putting in positions of power—individuals who flatly reject American values.
6. Obama and the Democratic nest of vipers have tried to force two landmark bills through Congress. Both of them were more than 1,000 pages long, and neither of them were made available for public scrutiny.
7. This administration is showing a dangerous tendency to be nice to foreign thugs, yet ruthless toward American society.

It is amazing that many Americans are still infatuated with the Pied Piper of “Hope” and “Change.” It is inconceivable that people still send the likes of Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, Rangel, and others to Washington time after time. They are the ones sending this country down the road of destruction. We can no longer blame the previous administration for America’s growing maladies.

Sometimes you have to give credit when credit is due. I must commend Jonah Goldberg, a syndicated columnist, for his recent commentary published in the September 6 edition of the Dayton Daily News. His column focused on the media’s tendency to “give Obama as many do-overs as he needs.” Goldberg’s remark was made in light of the fact that Obama’s upcoming speech will be his third prime-time address in three months, and the fifth of his 7-month presidency.

Obama keeps making speeches, but he doesn’t put any meat with the potatoes, so to speak. He obviously enjoys getting TV exposure, and he makes sure the teleprompters are in place for every televised event, so his words will sound sophisticated and smooth. But when it comes to specific reforms, especially about health care, he doesn’t give many details. And when it seems that Congress isn’t acting fast enough on certain issues, the White House claims that Obama will assert himself to speed up the legislative process, and come up with solutions to America’s problems.

The trouble is, the only speedy actions taken by the dominant liberals in Congress have been to either raise taxes or expand government control of certain hated industries. As I’ve said before, the liberals have always despised cars, banks, and tobacco; as a result, the only decisive actions made by the liberals in Congress and the White House have been to raise tobacco taxes, seize banks and insurance companies, and cripple America’s car industry.

Meanwhile, unemployment keeps rising, beyond levels projected by Obama and his advisors. We keep hearing from the Obama administration that they didn’t realize the severity of the recession. But, Obama and other Democrats campaigned on their thorough knowledge of the economy, and what should be done to promote recovery. They can’t lean on the “we didn’t know” crutch forever, especially as millions of Americans are still waiting for the promise of job creation to be fulfilled. Indeed, the Associated Press reported on Joe Biden’s recent efforts to claim victory for the stimulus package: “Biden, Obama’s chief stimulus cheerleader, proudly pointed to more than 2,200 highway projects Thursday funded by the program, but didn’t mention the growing frustration among contractors that infrastructure money is only trickling out and thus far hasn’t delivered the needed boost in jobs.”

Americans may be growing impatient with all the talk, and Obama’s appetite for airtime. Goldberg observed in his excellent column, “Funny how the people who run the most sophisticated communication operation in the history of the presidency keep concluding that their difficulties stem from their inability to get their message out and never from what their message actually is.” I wonder if Americans might be more receptive to health care reform if they first believed that the Obama administration was serious about creating jobs. That was the message of the 2008 campaign, but it’s now a message that can’t be heard above Obama’s prime time noise.

The rush is over. The Cash-for-Clunkers program ended yesterday, August 24. Also known by the acronym CARS, the clunker program was originally planned to be effective through November of this year. Several factors may have contributed to the early termination.

For one thing, the processing duties were overwhelming. The government had to hire hundreds of people to keep up with the flood of paperwork. Additionally, many dealers weren’t getting reimbursed by the government. As a result, dealerships were left with dozens of clunkers on their lots. The dealers could send the vehicles to salvage yards only after receiving CARS money for the trade-ins.

Besides these and other operational hiccups, there might have been another reason the government terminated the program. Sales figures show that many Americans were still buying trucks and SUVs, rather than Priuses and Civics. Lots of folks wanted bigger vehicles; they simply traded in older trucks and 4×4s on similar, more fuel-efficient vehicles of the same size.

This is not what the Obama administration was hoping for. The were two underlying purposes of the CARS program. Firstly, the government hoped to steer people into buying the kinds of cars that the government wanted them to drive (and destroy hundreds of older vehicles in the process). Secondly, the government really wants people to think that only the government can provide for them. In fact, Obama made a statement earlier this year that “the federal government is the only entity left with the resources to jolt our economy back into life.” The CARS program is the first step in convincing the public of that notion.

And now, comes the second version of CARS. The government is going to offer everyone rebates to help purchase more energy-efficient appliances. As described on Yahoo! Finance, “A $300 million cash-for-clunkers-type federal program to boost sales of energy-efficient home appliances provides a glimmer of hope for beleaguered makers of washing machines and dishwashers…Beginning late this fall, the program authorizes rebates of $50 to $200 for purchases of high-efficiency household appliances. Only appliances covered by the Energy Star seal will qualify. The money is part of the broader economic stimulus bill passed earlier this year. Unlike the clunkers auto program, consumers won’t have to trade in their old appliances. ‘These rebates will help families make the transition to more efficient appliances, making purchases that will directly stimulate the economy,’ Energy Secretary Steven Chu said in a statement announcing the plan.”

How nice to have the government taking care of us. For a growing number of Americans, it’s getting so that whenever they get in their car, or open the fridge, they will warmly think of the benevolent government that helped pay for it all. But look at it another way—this could cause some people to assume larger levels of debt in order to purchase these goods through government programs. This may give a short term boost to the product makers, but it will be detrimental to consumers’ financial health.

Americans are aware, by now, of the need to be energy-efficient. We shouldn’t need the government to make product choices for us. Besides, we’re still waiting on the thousands of jobs that the Obama administration was going to create. He campaigned on the idea that Americans would be put to work rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure. But now, he wants us to buy a new fridge. Some of us might do so, if we had good-paying jobs.

I read an interesting article this past week about the rise in the number of militia groups here in America. I’m not surprised that new groups are forming, although I am somewhat taken by the number of people estimated to be involved. Those numbers are likely to increase, perhaps in direct proportion to the federal government’s insatiable lust for power and control over all aspects of our lives.

Following is an excerpt from an Associated Press report published in Yahoo! news:

WASHINGTON – “Militia groups with gripes against the government are regrouping across the country and could grow rapidly, according to an organization that tracks such trends.

“The stress of a poor economy and a liberal administration led by a black president are among the causes for the recent rise, the report from the Southern Poverty Law Center says. Conspiracy theories about a secret Mexican plan to reclaim the Southwest are also growing amid the public debate about illegal immigration.

“Bart McEntire, a special agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, told SPLC researchers that this is the most growth he’s seen in more than a decade. “‘All it’s lacking is a spark,’ McEntire said in the report”.

I’m thinking about what could possibly be that “spark” that would set off another confrontation between the government and a group of supposedly dangerous citizens. Frankly, I’m surprised that more pressure hasn’t been put on some of the rising militia groups. I can only surmise that there is ample political pressure being applied to many of the liberals in Congress who would normally take a stronger stance against gun ownership. Many of the liberals realize that they can stay in office only by supporting law-abiding gun owners.

In 1993, the government’s (Democrats, in particular) hatred and suspicion of its own citizenry was revealed in the standoff at Waco, Texas. A “doomsday” cult, led by David Koresh, had built a defense compound, expecting some kind of apocalyptic end of the world. They did have a cache of arms, but they hadn’t used them aggressively. They were just preparing for the end. The Clinton administration, perhaps the most anti-gun administration in American history, ruthlessly destroyed the Koresh compound, killing many Americans in the process. It was a shameful and egregious expression of the liberal idea that no American should be armed. It’s unimaginable how the Clinton administration could murder those Americans, yet later allow Osama bin-Laden to be extradited to Afghanistan. As the AP report pointed out, “people…became convinced that the government would murder its own citizens to promote its liberal agenda.”

Right now, the Obama administration has been implementing other liberal initiatives. They have expressed their disdain for the tobacco, automobile, banking, financial, and health care industries through excessive taxation, regulation, and “reform.” When this health care legislation has been passed (which will allow federally-funded abortions and assisted suicides), then look for an all-out assault on the interpretation of the Second Amendment, and gun ownership. Then, we will likely see what “spark” sets off the next Waco-style tragedy.