Photo Credit: duckcommander.com
It is interesting watching, reading and listening to all the fervor surrounding Phil Robertson and A&E. The aged redneck said something less than flattering about gays and the GLAAD community went high and to the right… or left shall we say. A&E, an extreme leftist, over the top, pro-gay network, then indefinitely suspended the Robertson family patriarch for openly expressing his opinion that homosexuality was a sin. This, perceived as a gross constitutional violation of 1st Amendment rights, caused conservatives to circle their wagons in defense of Robertson. Think Progress, a progressive website, published an article further stating that Robertson not only hates gays but also, is an avid racist who feels Blacks were better off before Jim Crowe Laws. Interesting.
Okay, before we get too deeply into this, I must confess that I am partial to rednecks – to say that, “some of my best friends are rednecks,” would be a gross understatement. Of course growing up as a youth in the poor, Black, northern inner city, I was taught that rednecks were almost a different species altogether. They were a bizarre and racist people that hated all things beyond that of their own. It is the way this new Modern Liberalism works – it preys upon ignorance. Chances were that I would never evolve beyond that of the street life I was born into, let alone run into a redneck in order to be able to make any self-determinations. And so, it was to be.
A few novella sized chapters of my life ago I joined the Navy and was shell shocked by the types of different people I met during training, but the true awakening came when I was sent to Millington, TN. There is where I had my first true redneck encounter with a young man named Allan Stuart from Tyler, TX. (If memory serves me correctly.) You must remember that at this time Allan and I both were only months removed from our homes. I still had far more Philly street in me than I did military bearing and Allan was far more country than he was a Sailor. Shortly after check-in, which was befouled by my own “misconduct,” I was assigned to watch on the Naval Hospital’s Information Desk. There, I was teamed with a young, skinny kid whose accent was so strong I thought he was speaking a different language. (For those of you who know him, yes, Allan was skinny once upon a time).
Allan’s personality is larger than life and he was quick to share stories of his youth in a colloquial dialogue of idioms that could rival that of Samuel Clemens himself. Conversations at first were difficult, not only was his accent thick, I had yet to be exposed to true southern lingo. I could barely understand a word he said often interrupting with untimely, “huhs?” and “whats?” Of the first stories he shared was when he once took his father’s bullwhip and was heading off to play with it. My liberal oriented mind quickly made a predetermination of where he was going with this story. As it turned out, I was wrong. His father caught him running off with the bullwhip and stopped him. “Give that too me Allan.” His father said before directing him to run across the yard. No sooner than Allan hit full speed, a lesson teaching lightning bolt and thunderous crack ripped into his back. His father, to teach him a firsthand a lesson about what the bullwhip actually represented, gave him a little taste. And so, the stories continued to flow between the two of us for years to come. Though worlds apart, and perhaps in the minds of most, an unlikely duo, especially in the Memphis area of TN, we found more similarities than differences in not only how we were raised, but also who we were as individuals and a true unbreakable friendship was born. We would both leave Millington and go our separate ways to pursue different military opportunities. When I arrived in Yuma, what was to be my final duty station, I was recognized by Allan’s wife; even though I had never met her… or knew she even existed for that matter. A friendship forced apart by military needs had endured a career’s worth of separation. Allan had not changed. Still bigger than life, deceivingly smart, rudely determined, hyper opinionated, highly driven, brutally honest and still his own person in spite of a liberal world that was determined to prejudge him and his type of people – Allan was still the same Allan I had met so many years earlier. Now adult sized, but still enjoying a bizarre sense of individuality that allowed him to drive up to morning PT in a canary yellow Mustang GT blasting old school Chaka Khan and talking in Stu’s unmistakable southern drawl. You cannot help but to love him once you meet him. Allan, though a redneck in his own definition, yields but one accurate marker of what most think a redneck is; his accent - that while being most obvious, was least defining.
Nothing about Allen was or is how a redneck was described to be in the uber-liberal Philadelphian inner city. Liberalism and its soft racisms of predetermination feed and perpetuate themselves vested largely on the stubborn ignorance of devout followers. Chances were that I would have never made it off the streets and come to know the likes of Allan and so many others like him. Had this been the case and I remained confined to the self-limiting liberal la la land, today I would likely take the words of Phil Robertson and based them on the misconceptions that liberalism deliberately ascribed to me. What was omitted from those early conversations was the sometimes brutal honesty, loyalty and sense of faith driven integrity many people possess – some of which happen to be rednecks.
Little different, I would later learn, than southern Blacks whose faith derived influences live on in even the most secular on northern inner city families were these so called rednecks. While Allan I were quite different demographically, we were far more similar in terms of value systems. Separated again by the changing tides of life, if I were to stumble across Allan today and he were down and out – without question he would be taken in and my home would be his. As unlikely as we were said to be back in the day has little to do with who we, and people in general, actually are. It is this loss of personal understanding coupled with a greater loss of our sense of humanity that contrives such predetermined and prejudicial disdain being levied against Robertson by GLAAD.
This is why I detest not the GLAAD agenda, but GLAAD’s methodologies. What GLAAD now demands through such protests against the individual right to disagree, is that everyone embrace homosexuality. Those who do not are now being attacked as GLAAD seeks to aggressively force their agenda of homosexual acceptance upon all people over the individual right to uphold their own personal beliefs. The crime, to GLAAD, is simply to not support the homosexual community. This overly aggressive position by GLAAD has forced them to continually misstep when seeking to persecute solely because someone within, or the gay community in general is not held in the highest of regard.
In the “Stop the Hate, Free Kate” campaign, GLAAD sought to demonize all those who stood against Kate Hunt, a 17 year old high school teenager who was having sexual relations with a 14 year girl. What GLAAD and the LGBT community advocates saw was a young gay person facing charges for “being gay,” but willfully overlooked her continued violations of court placed restraining orders and even tried to use politicians to legalize same sex relationships involving minors to circumvent statutory rape laws in the state of Florida.
Continually we are told by GLAAD, its advocates and its moronic spokes people like Wilsin Cruz that conservatives “hate” and fail to possess constitutional understanding in ill-fated attempts to advance their own, and now clearly biased and even prejudicial, agenda. Their recent attack on Chik-Fil-A not only resulted in record sales for the Christian oriented fast food chain, but GLAAD again tried to use leftist political entities to block Chik-Fil-A businesses from opening in areas that were controlled by liberals. Yet, their insistence is that they, as liberals, support American freedoms and concepts of constitutionality – until someone disagrees with them that is.
The fact of the matter is gays wish to be accepted for being gay, which is fine. The trouble arises when the community chooses to force their acceptance on all others and refusing to respect differing opinions even when those who choose to not support homosexuality wish no harm, nor act in a discriminatory manner against gays.
Here is an interesting piece of trivia. We as a nation, demand that immigrants seeking citizenship bear the responsibility to “Respect the rights, beliefs, and opinions of others.” It is a concept deeply vetted by the First Amendment’s protection of free speech and religious freedom. Unfortunately, the most enshrouded Americans, American communities and American subcultures demand that their rights, beliefs and opinions be respected, but too often now, they refuse to bear the responsibility of respecting the same of others. It is a dichotomy that the American progressive and liberal factions embrace to the highest and most absurd proportions. Inasmuch, through their perverse sense of entitlement, GLAAD and many members of the otherwise rational LGBT community have taken giant steps backwards while only advancing the right to refute their belief system among those who tend to be impartial to their way of life, which is actually the majority of Americans.
When you are content to be simply yourself and don't compare or compete, everybody will respect you.
OK, the government shutdown. So what! If Congress were to shut down; at least then we could rest assured the federal government was finally acting with some semblance of competence. But of course, in true Obama fashion, the shutdown is the Republican’s fault – and he and his fellow Democrats are completely innocent and not in the least bit culpable. The shutdown, driven by Republican anti-ObamaCare sentiment has left federal employees temporarily out of work and has been made out to be the ultimate American partisan Armageddon. Ignorance abounds.
The “defund ObamaCare” line in the sand is not what it is being made out to be. The Republicans want “changes” to ObamaCare – not to cast it into the depths of the sea as Obama has been saying… yes, your beloved presidential messiah, is a liar. The bigger question people should be asking is what “changes” are being sought. Before that, the Right needs to grasp the concept that the Republican political elite SUPPORT health care mandates and “taxed” socialized medicine models. Hell, Gingrich, who many Republicans supported on his presidential run supported health care mandates
as Speaker of the House. Never mind the Republican Nixon era push
, or how “Conservative” organizations like The Heritage Foundation spearheaded Republican based support
. At least this supported existed when health care mandates were a Republican ideology. As Democrat ideology, the Republican Party has developed a public oriented façade that the Party despises the concept. If this were the case, why then would the Republicans have started the resistance with “repeal and REPLACE?” If the Republican Party cherished constitutional authority over political agendas of tax revenue, there would have been no need to replace ObamaCare for another insurance mandate model. Because Republican support is what is, socialized health care in its current ObamaCare form is never going away. Get over yourselves already. ObamaCare was largely based on RomneyCare and despite years of fussing about ObamaCare, the Right lined up in mass and voted for Romney. If the Right truly stood against ObamaCare and its founding unconstitutional conceptualisms, Romney’s name would have never found its way to a single ballot. It is continually that the Republican political elite say one thing while doing the opposite, yet the Right’s constituent response is only reflective to what their leading Republicans are saying – not to what they are actually doing. This leaves the Right arguing against their own Party’s agenda because they insist upon themselves with a perverse sense of denial about the larger Party’s actions.
Since we can reasonably establish underlying Republican support for ObamaCare, we can then focus on what the Republicans actually find wrong with ObamaCare and in the least would like its start-up delayed. Here is what you don’t know.
Perhaps the single largest problem with ObamaCare, beyond its blatant betrayal of constitutional authority, is the enrollment process. Forced upon the states and grossly underfunded by the federal government is the enrollment process itself which is managed by “Navigators” and “Assisters.” These individuals are hired to assist citizens in enrolling in ObamaCare in order to stay out of jail and or avoid being additionally taxed by the federal government for not enrolling. Due to ObamaCare’s excessive complexity, it was determined that Navigators and Assisters will need a minimum of 20 to 30 hours of training to effectively enroll potential candidates. Despite the training concern that was generated by the Obama Administration, they have allowed Navigators and Assisters to enroll citizens into ObamaCare with as little as five hours of training despite having no prior health insurance training or experience.
To complicate matters with enrollment, Navigators and Assisters will not be held accountable for providing misinformation about ObamaCare plans that cause the enrollee to undergo financial hardship as are other professionals such as accountants and financial planners that disenfranchise their clients through either malicious intent or professional incompetence. Long story short; the Obama Administration recognized the high probability of enrollment errors and rather than seek to correct the issues before these problems occurred, the Obama Administration has granted Navigators and Assisters “immunity” AFTER SETTING THEM UP TO FAIL the public. This will assuredly result in enrollment errors, cause enrollees to pay for services in which they have no need and have enrollees be refused access to care because they will not be enrolled in the correct plans. Sadly, those doing the enrolling will be provided federal protections for the harm they will undoubtedly cause.
This immunity however, stretches a bit further than one might imagine. Navigators and Assisters will have direct access to the enrollee’s Personal Identifying Information such as SSN, date of birth, household income and even this same information of other adult individuals living within the same residence. During the rulemaking session HSS conducted for ObamaCare, this concern led to a discussion to determine the feasibility of conducting background checks before hiring Navigators and Assisters to mitigate the high risk of identity theft. One government official serving as a board member who was said to be “well versed” in Human Resources questioned whether the federal government held the authority to conduct background investigations as a condition of employment. The discussion was then curbed citing background checks would hinder enrollment in that many areas where ObamaCare is in need. Potential Navigators or Assisters in these areas were described as being unwilling to submit to a background check and thus would not qualify for employment by default. This, according the HHS rulemaking board, would then leave gaps in where ObamaCare could be accessed and background checks were not included as a condition of employment. Again, the Obama Administration identified a risk with the enrollment process and ignored it because it was deemed more important to launch the program by a specified date than it was to protect the American consumer enrolled in the program. Sadly, this not where the enrollment issues end, it is where they begin.
The HSS was also advised against paying Navigators and Assisters on a per enrollment basis. They ignored the warning and have now set in place Navigators and Assisters who are grossly under trained, many of which have criminal backgrounds to include crimes of identity theft and have incentivized them to enroll the highest number people possible for the most expensive plan available while further granting them federal protections for misrepresentations of the program that cause financial harm to those seeking ObamaCare. This system of dysfunction immediately led to ObamaCare scams where individuals and organizations sought to exploit the easily compromised program. The HSS, once informed of the fraudulent activities refused to certify legitimately sponsored programs in order to protect the consumers. This simply means there is little to differentiate the real program from a fraudulent program until such a time as the IRS seeks action against an individual who is actually not enrolled in ObamaCare. In such a situation, it is the consumer who lacks protections and it is stretch to think the IRS will suddenly be forgiving when owed money when it has already abused its power
enforcing its own interpretation of the new health care law. Least we not forget, despite the misinformation and misrepresentations, ObamaCare IS NOT FREE. The majority of enrollees will have to pay for their mandated insurance plans. Because of this, the IRS now has unprecedented access to an individual’s financials that they will forcefully police. Failure to comply will bear results that are hardly unpredictable considering the IRS’ enforcement tactics
The problem here is that issues such as immunity for those enrolling individuals into ObamaCare, the gross lack of training, failure of the government vetting these employees for consumer safety reasons and the IRS’ power grab have not seen the light of day in the media and WILL bring direct harm to those who have been forced into ObamaCare. The ideology behind the program was that it was for the good of the people, yet those implementing the program have not done a single thing to protect the people from the problems that ObamaCare is guaranteed to cause. The “Republicans who have shut down government” as Obama likes to refer to them, want things like this fixed BEFORE implementation of the program. While there are a few who would completely defund and do away with ObamaCare in the name of constitutionalism, they are not the driving force behind the current budgetary debates.
To delay ObamaCare gives government the opportunity to correct the highly faulted program and protect the interests of the consumer who under ObamaCare are forced by law to figure out how to pay for their share of the law’s mandates. The majority of those who do not have health insurance do not have it because they cannot afford health insurance and pay for things like groceries and rent (see RomneyCare complications for an example of how this will affect most Americans enrolled in ObamaCare). The law forces that decision on their behalf at rates that have now been determined to be more expensive than pre-ObamaCare health insurance rates
. More specifically, Obama promised to decrease the average family’s health insurance by $2,500 per year, while it will actually surge some $7,450.
The truth, as painful as it may be, is not what the highly partisan banter has been about. What Obama supporters need to understand is that the program’s implementation is far more important to Obama than the protection of consumer interests that are clearly compromised by the program. The Right needs to accept the fact that the Republican political elite are now completely out of step with their constituent base. On both sides, Americans simply want to believe it is the other side that is wrong. Unfortunately, neither understands what is actually happening. Democrats have been duped, by their own over-abundance of ignorance, into believing Republicans are harming them by blocking ObamaCare while they (the Republican political elite) are in fact the only entity within the federal government attempting to protect them from the certain ill effects of ObamaCare. Republicans, in an attempt to protect the secrecy of their support of ObamaCare have used the denial of the Right to poise a defense of defunding the program. In doing so, they have lost the only position of integrity to be found within the entire debate. Republicans birthed the ideology of mandated health care models in America. They have wanted “ObamaCare” (or the like) for no less than 40 years and have pushed for it on several fronts since 1974. Supporters of the Republican Party must come to terms with this in order to understand what is really happening in America today and within their own Party.
Amazing is the deafening impact of denial when coupled with ignorance. Of course, the Left will never acknowledge that their great one is perhaps the single most deceptive president in US history and Right will never realize their political elite have long since abandoned them and their conservative values. In the end, we are left with exactly what we have here today. We now live in a land where rhetoric has replaced reality.
It is not that I am “anti-Right” or anything like that, though I have matured enough politically to see the gross republican failings. Hell, that would make me a Liberal… or even worse – an Independent! “A far Right Conservative,” a very good friend more recently called me. It was to say that I tend to be a bit unbending in my political perspectives; rigid and unforgiving – extreme even (which is what “far Right” means anymore). Consider it a “slight of compliment” that was both fitting and at times appropriate.
It was a comment that made me think
Place the emphasis of “far Right Conservative” on Conservative; i.e. not Republican is what was being stated. (I like the sound of that – “Not Republican!” It would make a good blog or website theme these days). I like Republicanism and the associated political ideologies, but before that, the political values of fiscal responsibility, individual freedom, constitutional rights, personal accountability, personal responsibility and limited government must be upheld. Looking at my little checklist: Where do Republicans really fit in to my political value system? In my opinion, Republican officials represent these values in terms of rhetoric only, not in practice. They DO exist in Republican philosophy and mantra, but both current and more recent Republican leadership refuse to practice them. Moreover, I see the Party for how it practices the art of American politicking, not how they wish to be perceived as practicing them. And this is where I simply veer course from the “establishment Republican” – they either do not find such values as important as myself, or they simply refuse to see and accept the truth about what their Republican political leadership is actually doing. It is not that they are bad people; it is just that I see things differently and am accordingly not blinded by party affiliations over personal values and common sense. (Ahem, Not that all Republicans are).
I just don’t get it
Practically, everyone on the Right is fuming over Obama’s Executive Order essentially granting amnesty to illegal immigrants – and rightfully so. What I don’t get is why the actively elected Right has called upon an out of office, professional President wannabe (with no active political decision making authority what-so-ever) to take the lead on the immigration issue. Rather than effect active legislation, those HIRED TO SERVE IN OFFICE BY THE RIGHT have taken a roll of passivity while further relying on a moot political figure, solely because he is running for office. Simply put, Romney is not in a position to right the unilateral wrong committed by Obama, nor is Romney in a position to dictate immigration policy. Elected politicians, inept in their own individual political ability, have hid from the issue behind a Romney shield instead of taking action as they were hired by the people to do. Yet, no one really seems to notice.
For purposes of personal amusement, let’s take a quick glimpse on Romney and the Latino vote.
Romney’s presidential bid needs no less than 31% of the Latino vote AFTER Obama just rolled over, smiled and swallowed and secured the Latino vote in a monumental way. When pressed on whether he [Romney] would strike down the EO if elected President, he ducked, dodged and avoided answering. [Should probably insert a note here that Romney’s avoidance means he will do nothing if elected]. Romney however, is not dumb, but he may be making a very stupid move to resolve the “immigration” conundrum he faces.
More of the same old thing
Have you noticed how the media consistently covered how “Obama deported more illegal Mexicans than Bush;” all while AZ was attacked for enforcing the same standard Obama was being given credit for? Perhaps you may have noticed when Obama deportation numbers were being dropped in public view; ICE was granting amnesty. This Democrat hypocrisy exists because MOST DEMOCRATS SUPPORT IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT, NOT AMNESTY. Obama pandered to both sides of Liberal immigration temperament and then sealed the deal favoring the Latino vote over national sovereignty. Suckers.
Here’s another little immigration conflict for ya! Asians now stand to overtake Mexicans in immigration to the US. If they (both Republicans and Democrats) have sold national sovereignty for the Latino vote to this extent; can you possibly imagine what they will be willing to do for the Asian vote once politicians decide to make Asians the next American race issue? That is how they get the votes you know. They make it look like anyone not of a specified race is wrong and racist for not being of that race and then promise they will make things different and better. The whole time making it worse to have something to actually fix, then walking away - after the given ethic group has given them their blind loyalty that is. If you are Black like me, that should sound all too familiar. If you are Mexican, I hope you have been watching closely; you’re next.
Republican vetting against constitutionalism
Rubio is currently being vetted for the coveted VP slot. Not a bad choice in terms of political perspectives, but one cannot help but wonder if this is merely a “Hey! I like Latino’s too!” move to counter traditionally low Latino support for Republican politicians in a time where the Latino vote could well be the deciding factor in the 2012 Presidential race. Though obvious, this is not what makes it a potentially disastrous and stupid move.
Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, has something in common with the good old Prez. Rubio’s parents “held off” on become US citizens until such a time Marco had already earned dual citizenship. (In case you have not noticed, the commonality is not the Cuban parent part….) Please allow me to digress even further.
The Right hosed the “Birther” issue by attacking it the laziest way possible. Challenged was “where Obama was born” because the Right felt that if it proved Obama was born in Kenya, it would be an open and shut case; WRONG! They almost completely ignored the true issue in that Obama’s father gave him dual citizenship because he [Obama] was born of a father that claimed citizenship to a nation that extended its citizenship to those children of their citizens born abroad. You see, it never matter “where” Obama was born per se, because the dual citizenship is where the constitutional argument lies; an argument more difficult in constitutional terms than that of Obama being born in a foreign nation. Had Republicans taken the higher ground, the “birther” conspiracy would have held the merit it truly deserved. The average American of course, does not know this and the majority of those whom do possess the apathy of those worthy of following only. Be that as it may, constitutional eligibility has been brought back to the forefront by Republicans; incorrectly, but nonetheless by Republicans – and constitutionally minded Republicans at that.
So, that leaves me pondering why a Republican presidential wannabe would venture so recklessly in the deep and murky waters of constitutional eligibility – after making such a big deal about it and all.
What matters is winning the Latino vote, not the constitution. Sound familiar? The system was wrong for allowing Obama to be vetted and consequently seated in terms of constitutional eligibility. Now stay with me here. Yet, because American politicians have failed in the three years since Obama’s election to correct (or even attempted to correct) the failed system that allowed Obama to win the Presidential seat in the name of the Democrats – it is now only appropriate that the constitutional eligibility blind eye now be turned in REPUBLICAN favor. A little quid quo pro if you will. Since when was the constitution relevant anyway? When will we, as Americans, become smart enough to realize that Left versus Right yields no true winner when both are wrong?
When both are wrong; all lose
And that is the underlying theme of all of this anyway isn’t it? Both sides are wrong and they are wrong on all of the issues. When it comes to the political elite; they are of the same agenda, just with different means to their ends. Obamacare was so wrong, yet we nominate its architect for President? Never mind Nixonian Republicans and their attempt, ignore Clinton’s attempts and Gingrich who pushed it while Speaker of the House. Illegal immigration is wrong, but Reagan passed Amnesty; now Obama pens an EO for the exact same reasons Reagan pushed it through. I mean really, with such hypocrisy; who should take the establishment Republican or modern Liberal seriously? When is the last time an administration, albeit Republican or Democrat, effectively reduced government, regulation and spending? Chirp, chirp. (Hint: WWII for those not taking the question with its posed rhetorical intent. BTW, it was the sharpest recession recovery in US economic history – yet today both Republicans and Democrats see it only fit to increase spending in order to provide entitlements in barter for votes). The big difference is that Democrats have arguably done a better job of exposing Republican failures than Republicans have exposed the egregious failings of Democrats. What’s funny is that Americans are ever so bitterly divided – all while their given elected officials pursue a common agenda against the good and freedoms of the people. Well, that’s not really funny is it? Please interject sad, pathetic, pitiful or any other adjective you deem most appropriate lieu of funny.
The problem is that, to an establishment Republican, I maintain an “extremely conservative” political perspective. (The word they are looking for is DIVIANT, not so much extreme – while fully admitting extreme can fit in several places). ;)
It is this deviance that separates Conservatives from establishment Republicans. It is almost as if establishment Republicans have not yet awakened to the fact their political elite do not share their agendas, or at least I hope they don’t (given all the unconstitutional laws passed and what not).
It goes to reason why so many people refuse to follow politics. It is truly a culture of deceit, corruption, hypocrisy and destruction. In not following, you are spared the frustration and don’t have to look like a hypocrite for supporting one side over the other; you win by not playing. What’s better than that?
I hope at this point you realize our problem is not so much what the Left is doing versus what the Right is doing. They are doing the same things and we only find political wrongs “un-American” and unconstitutional when it is the other side penning the legislation. It is as shameful as it is true. Perhaps what is most shameful is supporting this Two Party system solely designed for internal destruction and expecting someone to take you seriously.
OK, I really need all of you on the Right; Conservatives, Republicans, and Conservative Libertarians – and even those on the Left weary of a rouge administration that has forced you to take a closer look at Republican presidential alternatives, to hear me out on a concern that has blossomed into its own school of thought.
A few will remember some of last year’s rhetoric which propelled social networking posts on “generic ballots” that showed how soundly a given Republican would defeat Obama in 2012.
My concern then was that so many on the Right were posting and referencing these polls with a certain cavalier disdain for the overall process.
This of course, was well over a year ago and it fueled an anti-Obama sentiment that rocked the 2010 election goals for the Left.
Clearly, Obama had been deemed a failure by the public and they sought to remove all Obama regime sympathizers from office.
Republicans, then predicted to make a mockery of an Obama re-election bid, were granted the votes to effect change in an administration that turned on the people.
The reality, like Obama, they too have now failed the American people.
The kicker is that they have failed the people for the EXACT SAME REASONS Obama failed!
Polls now show Obama soundly defeating the GOP “front runner
.” Here is an irony that discloses just how bad the republicans have performed in office since elected in 2010. Just a few short months ago, higher and more influential leftist elements were calling for Obama’s acquiescence from the 2012 Democrat nomination. Today, the best Republicans have to offer cannot compete with a President whose only battle is the coveted “Worst president in History” title. How this happened
Well, you may remember some of my Facebook posts as well.
They basically stated, don’t get excited because these polls may not be so favorable when you replace a “generic Republican” with the face and name of a real and more typical Republican.
Not hard to figure out who was right.
It boils down to this; the 2010 newly elected Right never delivered on the fiscal prudence they were elected to implement.
You have to remember the 112th Congress’ first task was to pass a federal budget with sights set on cutting spending.
Delivered to the people was the EXACT OPPOSITE in the very worst way possible.
The budget never got passed and merely saw a series of extensions that directly resulted in MORE spending than the Democrat run 111th Congress ever dared to attempt.
Immediately, the Boehner led Right, capitulated on matters of spending and fiscal restraint as the Obama regime gained spending momentum.
Adding insult to injury, the Right then, after failing to pass the budget, allowed the Debt Ceiling to be increased while pulling a chapter from a Nazi/Communist Manifesto and allowed the creation of a Super Committee – THAT ALSO FAILED resulting in yet ANOTHER extension of spending increases now besting previous overspending levels that were racking up national debt at a rate of 100 billion dollars a month. (No need to mention the Obama Administration has now gone more than 900 days without finding the competence in which to pass a budget).
They did however, point out “cuts” in the spending
in the latest extension; low income families have had their utility subsidies cut some 25 percent in the middle of an already harsh winter.
Yet today, there is still no true and fully implemented budget in place; to find one you must go back in time to the Bush Administration which built the American fiscal coffin preparing for a nation’s interment after a slow, agonizing death at the hands of gross federal over-spending and egregious fiscal irresponsibility.
So, ask yourself this; how has the Republican elected 112th Congress been of positive impact to the American people?
And therein, the problem lies.
From the 2012 voter vantage point (especially for those on the Left), all that is seen is the Republican alternative to the Progressive led Obama Assault on Americanism is essentially more of the same.
What’s worse, the American people have only seen Congress unite to increase future spending further economically imperiling America, and to mount a direct assault on constitutional rights in the form of a National Defense Act that specifically assails the American citizen
As if that is not bad enough for the Right’s chances in 2012; the provisions within the Defense Act that drew so much criticism from Conservatives, Liberals, Republicans and Democrats alike – were written by the RIGHT
, not the Left.
Once the detainee provisions of outrage were included into the Act, the Right, led by Sen. Lindsey Graham, the key architect of the detainee provisions, united with the Left to implement the Act against the people.
When all was said and done, two things happened.
First, Congress was bestowed with the worst disapproval in history making the 112th just that; “the worst in history.”
To the onlooker, this means the Republican solution is WORSE than the problem itself.
The second consequence is a bit more obvious; Romney, the GOP forced “front runner,” is already losing badly to the failure that is Obama
It is hard to believe the Republican Party could possibly be more inept and dysfunctional than it is today. Obama’s scandal ridden cronyism is now the lesser evil Have things really gotten that bad? Is the Republican interpretation of Americanism so distorted, the American people are more willing to surrender the U.S. Constitution to the Obama regime? Is the lesser evil of submitting to full government control really a more promising voter prospect than allowing the Republican political elite to continue their current course of action? Moreover, when will Americans begin to recognize “Republicanism” as the counter intuitive conservative political ideology that today’s Republican elite have turned it into?
Perhaps, it safe to say at this point in time, the Republican alternative to Progressive Liberal rule is just as bad – and in all honesty, now arguably worse, considering their highly ineffective and counter constitutional first year.
It is sad to imagine that the best the Republican Party has to offer has directly resulted in a worsening American condition.
But, it has.
Today, many are perplexed on how to approach the 2012 ballot.
Some Democrats are considering registering as Republicans in order to begin voting against Obama as early possible by using the Primaries to show their resolve to sever the head of the Progressive beast.
This is good, but these individuals are now desperately concerned that the damage caused by their previous votes for Obama will pale in comparison to voting for a Republican in 2012.
Ask yourself this, given the Republican impact in 2012; can you really blame their pessimism?
Personally, I cannot.
To me, their concerns are not only understandable, they are shared.
The GOP is now so far removed from both Conservative values and their constituents, the people, on all sides of the isle, can no longer relate to or trust them.
They [Republican political elite] represent a political interpretation that is best defined by the special interests they are currently in pursuit of – the people are thus inconsequential figures used only exclusively to move them in a position of power over their constituents.
This is what Obama has done and what the GOP is fostering in the likes of Romney, Perry and Gingrich.
While all are considerably different, all represent a willingness to move against the people as they pander to a problematic GOP that is increasingly supporting anti-constitutional concepts and constraints against American’s freedoms. The reality
Republicans supporting Perry, Romney and Newt have just stopped reading this editorial because their echo chamber of “Republicans are just better and always right” is not being supported.
They have moved back to their “elect Newt
” and “elect Perry
” pages to convince themselves that the lies found there, trump the truth they have just read here.
They too are the problem.
When it is all said and done; their calls for a more constitutional America driven by fiscal prudence and individual freedom is mere lip service – deep within, they know these candidates will not deliver on these values.
What they see is only a given Republican replacing Obama.
To them, this will magically make America better even though the GOP’s best have proven, at a minimum, to be as bad as the Obama Administration.
They are calling for change in Congress and in America while fully supporting the system causing the problem by vesting in the likes of the now clearly faulted GOP political norm.
The time has come to stop viewing the Right, in its current condition, as an end-all-be-all answer to the Obama conundrum.
Just because it is Republican, no longer makes it the best solution to a very complex and algorithmic problem.
Republican elite of today simply fail to make the cut.
Americans have settled for far too long – they are the result. Unsubscribe from the American political norm
Thus, the school of thought is self-identifying in its simplicity.
Insist for both more and better when determining your allegiance to the worst our nation now has to offer.
The two party system has come full circle; it has divided a nation’s people to only unite in a bi-partisan elected class agenda against both its citizenry and the Constitution protecting the people from a freedom revoking government.
It is now no longer a matter of Right versus Left, but a sense of Americanism versus the federal government.
We must stop subscribing to the norm and force upon government the very conditions of the Document they have fought so hard to destroy.
While presidential selection drives the 2012 vote, no President can fully effect a sense of constitutionalism without a Congress willing to support it.
Here we have a U.S. Senate that brazenly attacked and defeated the Constitution with only FOUR Senators voting against it.
This should put into perspective the depth of America’s Congressional intent to harm that which is America.
All must go before any benefit for Americans can be found.
Voters want a statesman to deliver them from their past histories of irrational, nonsensical and apathetic voting habits.
Unfortunately, statesmen can only lead and effect change for patriots. In America today, there are simply far too few patriots willing to rebuke both the Progressive agenda to deliver America to a European-like state of social and economic failure and the Republican norm which is now markedly similar to the Leftist agenda killing American sovereignty.
Are you willing to subscribe to the school of thought of a patriot over the desire for a perception of an easier life under the thumb of an ever encroaching government now united against America herself?
We need patriots, real patriots; not apathetic voters subscribing to the American political establishment that has formally deemed the U.S. Constitution as an Enemy of the State. The 112th Congress is now officially classified as the worst Congress in measured history. In my opinion, we cannot charge the 112th as the “worst ever” without fully acknowledging the same of the American voter who have delivered the 112th to existence.
Writing about politics found me; I never really sought it out. It was the most dynamic, fluid, important and meaningful subject to cover. Studying politics just made sense; writing on it just came naturally. Unfortunately, to write, you must first self-educate - and studying politics reveals a truth that no one seems to really want to fully acknowledge, let alone accept it. Living in a world of political truth is a lonely place where all around are essentially lost to their self-insistence of denial.
To many, Barak Obama is a great president. Denial. Mitt Romney for others, represents a return to a better America. Denial. Herman Cain is (somehow) the Tea Party favorite. Denial. Americans, desperate to hide from political truth, use denial to provide themselves with a false sense of security in hopes a better future will magically blossom from blind hope - and the efforts of the more aware and more assertive American. The truth is as obvious as it is a lonely reality.
Voters, both Democrat and Republican alike, have articulated the need for America to return to a nation led first by its constitution, and its politicians second. It is felt that in order for America to prosper in the future, she must again become a
state which is more in keeping with the Framer’s intent. Problem is, little more than articulating the need is being done. Americans say they “want,” but do little to effect the change required to return to a more conservative state where individual freedoms, as prescribed by the Constitution and Bill of Rights, can reign prevalent. Bi-partisan contempt for constitutionalism
Americans live in a world where the most concrete aspects of constitutionalism are subjective at best. Freedom of speech, while the most widely recognized right, has more conditions and restrictions than ever before. The Right blames the Left for this, but
the Right was instrumental in the development of “free speech zones” that serve as designated [restricted] areas where speech of dissent of America’s course can be expressed “freely.” Plainly stated, if American citizens wished to protest former President Bush while he was traveling, they could only do so in areas segregated from the President himself, his course of travel, and out of eyesight and earshot of the mainstream media.
Americans have the right to bear arms; that much is distinctly clear. Yet, Second Amendment rights narrowly survived the SCOTUS in a 5 - 4 vote. Conservative Justice’s ruled in favor of the clearly constitutional right to bear arms while all Liberal Justices voted against it. The Left’s anti-Constitution position grew so fierce local governments like Chicago implemented laws making the right of gun ownership so difficult it was impractical to own a gun and virtually impossible to meet the requirements
to purchase a hand held firearm – in direct defiance of once unquestionable Constitutional rights.
Recently, President Obama has fallen under criticism for “not thanking God” in his giving of rightful thanks. This criticism is driven by the “non-secular” Right which has forgotten the right to not express religion is equaled only by the right to express it
Every right granted unto the people through the Constitution and Bill of Rights is now subject to the interpretations of the nation’s controlling party. Clarence Thomas has recently fallen under attack for this very reason. The weak, unorganized and ill-fated attack was a baneful attempt to remove the Conservative Justice and replace him with a Liberal Justice appointed by an increasingly progressive regime (likely, in attempt to shift the Conservative hold to a Liberal advantage prior to the SCOTUS hearing arguments on the constitutionalism of an increasingly unpopular Health Care Reform Law). Voter denial bests political truth; a snapshot
The Republican Right refuses to acknowledge President Obama is not wrong for his lack of evoking God despite his glaringly obvious right to refrain from religious context; a right based upon the constitutionalism Republicans claim they want back. The Left, also calling for a return to constitutionalism, does not want to accept the fact Americans clearly and unquestionably have the right to bear arms. Both contend they wish a return to a more constitutionally driven nation; neither make an effort to arrive at the fact that both sides only use the Constitution when it suits their needs and agenda at a given time.
Presidential candidates of today represent this exact same set of shortcomings. The Perry’s, Romney’s, Newt’s, Cain’s, Obama’s, and Clinton’s have all, with great detail and very overt expression, defied both the conditions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. In doing so, the Framer’s intent Americans to wish to return to is discarded as irrelevant, unnecessary, and meaningless; yet, these same Americans calling for a return to a better America support them. Disgraceful. The truth behind the denial
It was not until a recent dialog that I realized my own frustrations with Americans support of the un-American President and the un-American Presidential Candidates was out of their own foolish self-denial of political truth. Though, for the life of me, I cannot figure out why any sane American would support President Obama, but they are free to do so. The last thing they actually want is a return to constitutionalism. (Hell, they are not reading this anyway – in that Team Obama has not directed them to do so). Those whom support this laughably incompetent, anti-constitution embracing field of the Presidential Candidates only see them as a means to and end with no President Obama - while none of the aforementioned candidates and political figures are even remotely capable of delivering America to a better place, let alone an America where constitutionalism is relevant. This is to say very directly; if a person supports anyone other than Ron Paul, they do not wish to return America to a nation in which the Constitution governs the land over political agendas. Sorry, but that is the truth and even the most deeply rooted denial must yield to it on order for America to progress healthily as a land reputed for individual freedom. Like versus American need
We like candidates for the wrong reason. Well, perhaps I am applying the wrong usage of the word like. We “select” our candidates because we “like” them. What Americans should be doing is selecting candidates that America needs at a given point in time. It is not a matter of “liking” them per se, it is a matter of fitting the right person into the presidential slot at the right time. It is the economy that is driving electoral support, even though people are calling out for individual freedom and
constitutionalism. Misguided? Not really. The people have long since been duped into the personal favorite game then selecting politicians. The whole idea behind this was to lure voters away from the political truth with the perceived likability of a given candidate! We fell for it and what we have today is its direct consequence! So yes, Americanism has been lost, but its recovery lies in the American people placing the truth before their preferential prejudices of denial.Don’t forget to follow me on Twitter @PJ43033, add me on my personal Facebook , or like my Facebook Fan Page.
I had met Richard once before. He and Kimberly had come into the store wanting to discuss “an issue with Congress woman Giffords.” Both were very cleanly dressed, very nice and seemingly approachable. Until the Giffords comment that was. I had nothing nice to discuss with them about the AZ District 8 Representative.
The discussion started tentatively enough. They were on the verge of getting thrown out of the store before Richard mentioned 2D Amendment Rights.
“Have a seat.” And a relationship was born.
It had been a few months since my last discussion with Kimberly and Richard. Perhaps it was more given Kimberly’s introduction of Richard in last week’s visit. “This is Richard, a Delegate and Constitutional Scholar.” Fortunately, I had known neither about Richard during their previous visit making her miss timed introduction was nothing less than perfect. A Constitutional Scholar sitting before me, sitting on my desk a working copy of the US Constitution that I have been aptly studying trying to make sense of what we have managed to turn America into; what more could a concerned citizen ask for.
I had to ask the obvious in terms of the constitutional bearing of health care reform (Complete text of the Bill is here). How do we deal with a president that passed a law, knowing full well that is was unconstitutional and in retort very cavalierly stated that once legislation is passed and signed, it becomes “Supreme Law.” Which is to insinuate that he knew the protest would be made, but could not be formally pursued until such a time that it was signed – which technically made it too late. Richard’s response was simple. “The US Constitution IS Supreme law.” He went on to rapidly list several articles and amendments that were currently in violation with the signing of the bill. (Far more than my constitutionally novice eye caught). I wanted the discussion to focus on the probable outcome of the law suits filed by the states Attorneys General, but Richard was more focused on dealing with the issue directly; what you and I can do. Moreover, the best and most effective way to ensure we do not take the nation down the wrong path with the precedent set with the reform bill. To put it simply, vote Red and remove as many Democrats from office as possible and insist the program never gets funded – essentially killing it in place.
America has forgotten something. Forgotten are the 28 principles that the Framers based the US Constitution on. Principles like: The Proper Role of Government is to Protect Equal Rights, Not Provide Equal Things. (The 7th Principle). This is woven into the Constitution in a manner that limits government’s involvement in our pursuit of prosperity. Government is limited in this fashion because doing so protects freedom and liberty. Doing so ensures that those who chose to strive have something to strive for. Doing so makes the right to fail a privilege of freedom. These principles that are being violated are solely at the hands of Americans that do not understand Americanism, underestimate liberty and take freedom for granted. Americans that do not understand that limiting government is freeing the people. Politicians who do not want freed people by limited government involvement. Politicians who seek tyrannical control under the guise of directly violating this 7th Principle the Framers insisted upon so that we could prevail as people free of government.
“Governments, in general, have been the result of force, of fraud, and accident. After a period of six thousand years since the creation, the United States exhibit to the world the first instance as far as we can learn, of a nation, unattacked by external force, unconvulsed by domestic insurrections, assembling voluntarily, deliberating fully, and deciding calmly concerning that system of government under which they would wish they and their prosperity should have.” - James Wilson
Done right and going wrong because prosperity is not understood. Prosperity is only measured in terms of what a person does not have and has not accomplished and compared to the reality that someone else has more and has accomplished more. It is a form of greed that has been exploited to grow government’s control over the people as government insists that attaining in life is wrong because not all have. Prosperity becomes punished and turned into a reward for those who have sought not at the hands of those who have sought. A Free People Will Not Survive, Unless They Stay Strong. The 24th Principle was woven by the Framers with the knowledge that enabling success, as difficult as it may be from time to time, is essential for national sovereignty. As we lower the bar for the nation, we weaken the nation. They knew this, we have forgotten it. When a person is rewarded for dysfunction, applauded for not attempting and hailed for not trying; we undermine the fabric of Americanism. In doing so, we only ensure that America will no longer be a nation designed not of force, fraud or accident; but turned into just another nation that was. All because we are too insecure to accept the fact that achieving prosperity is the responsibility of the individual; not the government.