An interesting take on the GOP

Hmm…interesting take. Why The Hell Should Anyone Vote For The Republican Party? – John Hawkins http://m.townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2013/02/19/why-the-hell-should-anyone-vote-for-the-republican-party-n1515125?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

 

Huffington Post

I just read a commentary (at least I think it was commentary and not a news article) on the Huffington Post. There is so much to say about the article that I decided just to say: Are you kidding?

What bugs me about the debate over the debt ceiling (and most other political issues) is that we aren’t talking about the differences at the root (or at least not in a way that is helpful for discussion). When we focus too much on the symptoms, we ignore the disease. That is why Republicans, as the de facto representatives of conservatives, keep losing the debate and losing ground in the fight to shape America as it was envisioned. Republicans would do well to push past the hyperventilation about the debt ceiling “details” and keep hammering at the causes of it (that is if they really do care about the country and the people who live here).

A debtor is a slave to the lender, and raising the debt ceiling only serves to submit more of our freedoms to our lenders.

 

Cartoon of the Day

 

Canvass Shows Conservative Incumbent Wins Wisconsin Supreme Court Race

Tallies from each of the state’s 72 counties show Justice David Prosser defeated challenger JoAnne Kloppenburg by 7,316 votes. State election officials said they will wait to declare an official winner until the deadline for Kloppenburg to seek a recount passes. She has until Wednesday to call for one.

via Canvass Shows Conservative Incumbent Wins Wisconsin Supreme Court Race – FoxNews.com.

I think this is a good thing for Wisconsin. I also hope that Unions and their political partners, the Democrats, will not pursue endless litigation on the matter of so-called collective bargaining “rights”. I say so-called, because I don’t believe that bargaining collectively is a right.

I hope that they can publish this new bargaining law soon and move on with the matter. If the voters are unhappy with it, elect a new crew in the next election cycle. I doubt that this new collective bargaining law will be impossible to rescind or revise.

Three cheers for common sense!

 

FOX News: Wisconsin Senate Votes to Strip Collective Bargaining Rights From State Workers

This is getting interesting…

Wisconsin Senate Votes to Strip Collective Bargaining Rights From State Workers, http://fxn.ws/fgdyc0 – Sent via the FOX News Android App. Check out the FOX News Android application. To learn more and download the app, go to http://www.foxnews.com/android

Posted from WordPress for Android

 

Pink Elephants

This strikes me as an accurate representation of the GOP of the past couple of years.

First, when wound up the elephant plays the Brahms Lullaby melody.  Appropriate for those Republican members of congress who had been lulled into largess while sitting in the halls of power.

Second, this elephant is pink.  Now, I don’t have anything wrong with the color pink but traditionally speaking pink implies a feminine character.  Today’s GOP has definitely been emasculated (or feminized).

Third, notice that the head and the body are no longer attached.  Yeah, the (proverbial) head started coming unglued some time after the 2000 election of George W. Bush, but in the campaign leading up the 2008 election, the head actually fell off.  The conservative element of the party (the head, I believe) failed to successfully lead the party and as a result was torn asunder in the nomination of John McCain.  The remainder of the body (the heart, the legs, the *ahem* bottom) were left to wander aimlessly in search of validation from the mainstream media.

The analogy ends there (unless there are phoenix-like elephants of which I am unaware).  Draw your own conclusions, this is just a simple bit of analysis using my children’s stuffed pink elephant.

 

Circling the wagons

When the liberal establishment circles the wagons to defend one of its own it hurts everyone.

Clearly there is crime in politics.  We’ve seen it time and time again.  It happens on both sides of the political spectrum and everywhere in between (or maybe especially in between).  Typically, it is the Republican, or conservative politician, who gets the most air time for crimes committed.  When a Democrat commits a crime, it may get reported, but it certainly doesn’t attract too much attention on the national stage.  Additionally, it doesn’t matter what the crime may be, the Republicans are always vilified and run out of office if at all possible.  Conversely, whatever the crime a Democrat commits is easily brushed aside and typically has no bearing on whether or not they should stay in office.

No big deal, right?  Well, from the perspective of a sin-sick human nature, this is all par for the course.  From the perspective of keeping our country great and on solid and stable ground it raises some concern. 

A quick aside.  If you believe that the human race is infected with an incurable illness called sin, then you have to recognize that crime will happen and criminals will do their best to get away with it.  Defeating crime is a matter of much debate, but the best you’ll ever be able to do is diminish its pervasiveness here on earth through various measures of deterrence.  If you believe that human nature is basically good, then you think that crime in the political arena is related to the political ideas held by a politician and the nurturing that a particular politician received along their path to office.  I don’t intend to argue about Original Sin, but it is important to note that those two different lines of thinking are going to be at odds when it comes to solving the problem of crime in politics.

Now, why is the covering up, whitewashing, or ingnoring of crimes committed by Democrats and other liberal politicians bad for our country?  It stifles constructive debate on the ideas and ideals that direct the course of our nation.  Making it hard for criminals to continuing in public office is great as long as it is applied to everyone without prejudice.  When it tends to tilt toward one end of the ideological spectrum it cheats a whole set of ideals and their proponents from their ability to engage in political contests.  The guilt of association becomes a large stick with which to suppress serious discussion.  The smearing of character of an entire party, or ideological position, is a quick way to close the mouths of would be dissenters in a public forum.  By keeping the pressure on Republican crimes while largely ignoring Democrat crimes, it erodes the balance of political thought found in the marketplace of ideas.

Politics is often referred to as a game.  Fine.  It’s a game that most citizens find despicable, both in their own work place scenarios or the world of public office.  But with every game there are rules to be followed.  Rules that should be sacrosanct and difficult to change have become very malleable and the real contest of modern politics seems to be who can change the rules of the game in order to outmaneuver their opponent.  The shifting nature of the rules of politics has undermined the integrity of our country and even though it is still the greatest country in the world it faces a serious challenge from those whose only passion is power.

The lack of an absolute set of rules by which we monitor our public officials, we practically invite people with sub-standard scruples who are only interested in becoming more powerful to participate in the political arena while making it nearly impossible for anyone with a genuine interest in public welfare to get their foot in the door.

The behavior of the Left is this regard is not only unfortunate, it is often willfully destructive to the ideas set forth at the founding of this country.

MW

 

Personality Politics, IV

The Democrats have a distinct advantage when an election is boiled down to which personality is more electable (especially on a national stage).  Not because Democrats are inherently more like able (not really knowing the candidates on a personal level, I don’t dare even speculate).  No, because for the Democrats its all about personality.  Without going into an in depth study (because postulating on politics is a hobby, not a profession for me), a case in point would be this year’s Democratic primary battle between Clinton and Obama.

Hillary Clinton was a personality darling because she was a trailblazer for women in politics and other high-profile careers.  It helped (mostly) that her husband was the President of the United States.  Enter Barack Obama.  Now, here is some one who is a minority race in America.  He is affable, articulate, and new to the national political stage (a change in politics-as-usual in Washington is something that Democrats often say they want without ever being able to deliver because in their version of politics necessarily involves seniority – eerily similar to teachers’ contracts in the country’s public schools).  This Obama guy could deliver us from our own malaise, not to mention he has many (if not all) of the characteristics of a victim that we fight so hard to elevate in our cause.  Sorry, Hillary, you’re just not what the cult of personality ordered for the Democratic Party.

Fast forward to the last few weeks before the election.  Obama (with the aide of his many popular personality allies) continues to chip away at McCain’s personality as unsuitable for the presidency.  His tactic is not unsuccessful, but nor is it particularly honest.  By using the measure of personality as a qualification for being president, there are number of outstanding citizens that we know in our own neighborhoods that would beat both of the men running for president.  By focusing on Obama’s personality the Democrats have invited the current attacks on his associations with Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, and others.  The good news for Obama is that the Democrats are very well-equipped to distract the public from those personality flaws. 

McCain, and any Republican, faces an uphill battle any time they enter into a contest for a national position.  A Republican candidate actually has to be perfect, while a Democratic candidate only has to be like able.

MW