Thoughts about the Republican Party

by asmwizardMay 17, 2013May 17, 2013

Approximately as published in the Leavenworth Times Community Blog, May 7, 2013. I added Charles Krauthammer to list of opinion-makers.

As a conservative, I’m hardly objective about Republicans. I see them as well-meaning, sometimes effective but often stupid and incompetent, but I may have gone too far. But, there are some facts to base my criticisms on, and they are obvious and irrefutable. It’s my evaluation of them that people may argue with.

The facts? The Republican Party is a huge umbrella under which many idealist groups come together to act at a national level. The majority of Republicans come from business owners, managers, and the white-collar workforce; present and past members of the military, and well-educated men and women, and Christians of all faiths. These people may be found in all walks of life, but in general a greater percentage of those who work for a living and pay taxes are Republican than are Democrats.

Those who vote Republican range from moderate to conservative to Libertarian. Most believe that capitalism provides the highest standard of living, believe government should allow the greatest personal and economic freedom consistent with public security, want government budgets balanced and don’t like large government debt, and believe in the American way of life and are patriotic. They mostly love America. Unlike most Democrats, who seem to value emotional response over critical thinking, Republicans are more likely to argue using logic and are not as quick to resort to personal attacks on the other side.

Some Republicans, like some Democrats, are fanatic on single issues – the “Pro-life” crowd is an example. Another one issue group are the gun advocates. Republicans often agree on economic issues but there is a much greater range of opinion on social and personal freedom issues. Libertarians (who usually vote with Republicans) mostly favor elimination of laws against mind-altering drugs, prostitution, and abortion.

Republicans contend with Democrats for power in the United States. Political power brings money (in astronomical amounts) and benefits. Republicans endlessly employ certain tactics, such as: constantly trying to cut taxes and government spending, except for spending on national defense. They look for ways to make the government more efficient. They want to reduce costs of entitlement programs, while still providing for the really needy. They want less regulation of business and a strong economy. They try to be moral and ethical and are much harder on their own when lapses are discovered.

Contrary to Democrat propaganda, Republicans couldn’t care less about lowering taxes for the rich, except they know the rich create jobs and taxing them more will hurt the economy. They have a greater understanding of economics than most Democrats, and realize that businesses only succeed when they are profitable. They know that successful businesses employ people and enhance the economy.

Most Republicans believe that helping the poor should be voluntary, and that government should provide a safety net but should not support a huge population of those who are able to work but don’t want to. They are not particularly sympathetic to criminals, illegal aliens, and drug addicts. The majority believe that marriage should be defined as being between a man and a woman.

The Democrat Party’s 2012 platform is much like the Republican Party 2012 platform (download as pdf from here). These were the platforms used with the 2012 elections. Platform planks are promises to follow certain policies if elected. At a high level, the platforms are similar. As always, the devil is in the details.
My evaluation begins here.

Most Republicans have a conscience. They want to do the right thing. But there are so many different folks telling them what the right thing is, including those on the left, so they become confused and go astray. They should be conservative, but often, they ignore conservative principles. Therein lies the problem as I see it.

Republicans, elected or otherwise, are all over the map on issues. Often, they try to be “bi-partisan” and give weak opposition to Democrat initiatives, to the detriment of Republicans and the American People. In my opinion, Republicans should follow conservative principles, but are too often moderate. You can argue that there are “establishment” Republicans and conservative Republicans, and they rarely exist in one body. The “Tea Party” folks are conservative, but are often bitterly opposed by establishment Republicans such as Lindsey Graham, John Boehner, and John McCain. In the 2010 mid-term and the 2012 presidential elections, many less conservative Republicans were replaced, but there are still a large number in office and the Republican agenda is often dominated by them.

Many conservative opinion-makers are largely ignored by the Republican Party as a whole. The most important conservative opinion-maker is Rush Limbaugh, who has been broadcasting since about 1988, some twenty-four years. His enduring representation of main-stream conservative opinion is almost impeccably accurate, and Liberals hate him, which proves his worth. Perhaps the next most important is Bill O’Reilly of Fox News, who claims to be independent, but I rate most of his opinions as conservative, and his is the most highly rated network news opinion program. Other important conservative voices include the Heritage Foundation, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Laura Ingraham, Charles Krauthammer, Michelle Malkin, Newt Gingrich, and Thomas Soul. Important conservative voices in Congress include Paul Ryan, Rand Paul, and Marco Rubio. As each new issue surfaces, these folks analyze and form opinions, many of which are ignored, compromised, or corrupted by establishment Republicans.

At the general level of opinion, Republicans strongly favor a strong economy, and most realize that capitalism is the way. They favor small, efficient government. They favor tax reform, in general. Yet, they often fail to take steps to get there. Why do they fail? Insufficient intellect, ineffective leadership from the party, lack of in-depth knowledge about issues, and poor party discipline are key reasons. They hear the seductive voices of the left.

To sum up, Republicans fail because they aren’t conservative, and they aren’t smart enough to know they should be. When they vote with Democrats, they become part of the problem.

Thoughts about the Democrat Party

by asmwizardMay 9, 2013May 9, 2013

As published in the Leavenworth Times Community Blog, April 30, 2013.

As an outsider looking through the lens of a conservative eye, I’m hardly objective about Democrats. I see them as a pestilence on the Earth, but that may be a slight exaggeration. But, there are some facts to base my criticisms on, and they are obvious and irrefutable. It’s my evaluation of them that people may argue with.

The facts? The Democrat Party is a huge umbrella under which many self-promoting groups come together to act at a national level. State and federal government employees, unions, ethnic minorities, women’s rights advocates (often, these are women), welfare and disability insurance recipients, trial lawyers, environmentalists, Socialists, Communists, Gays/Lesbians, and immigrants (currently or recently illegal) make up the bulk of the party. The less education you’ve had, the more likely you are a Democrat. Strangely, however, a majority of Jews and university professors live on the left and vote with them. I use the word ‘strangely’ because I think they should be smart enough to know better.

Individual Democrat party members range from moderate to liberal to socialist or even communist. Some are more moderate in economic matters than social, or vice versa. Those on the far left may actually hate the United States, or believe that our country does more harm than good. Some are extreme on one issue, such as women’s right to abortion or the environment, and may be moderate on most other issues. In this essay, I’m talking about the party as a whole, rather than individuals.

Democrats contend with Republicans for power in the United States. Political power brings money (in astronomical amounts) and benefits. Democrats endlessly employ certain tactics, such as: They characterize all the groups they represent as “victims” who deserve “rights.” They love to throw money and privileges to their groups. When in power, they employ tax and spend policies: always seeking to raise taxes, and always sending money toward their constituents at the expense of the other party. It’s a way of paying for votes, and it’s very effective.

They falsely and endlessly characterize Republicans as wanting to cut taxes on the rich, and businesses as being huge greedy trolls.

Democrats describe what they do in another way: they are helping the poor and those who can’t (or won’t) help themselves. They are promoting “fairness” (which is whatever they say it is) and “diversity” and “equality”.

Take any plank in the Democrat platform, such as cutting waste, reducing the deficit, asking all to pay their fair share – ???. Meaningless words. That’s the problem: the Democrats are great wordsmiths, but you can’t believe anything they say or any promise they make.

Standing way back, let’s look at what’s really happening, at the most basic level: Democrats want to have the working taxpayers support everyone else. Group A supports or heavily subsidizes Group B. But A is shrinking and B is growing. That’s unsustainable. B is already almost as large as A. Group B includes all government employees as well as those on welfare, Social Security, and Medicare. There are now eleven states with more people on government aid than employed: California, New Mexico, Mississippi, Alabama, South Carolina, Illinois, New York, Hawaii, Kentucky, Ohio, and Maine.

Does the “war on poverty” help reduce poverty? I don’t think so. It just makes more poor people, and keeps them there.

Democrats, the Progressives of this world, refuse to reform anything economic. No tax reform, no entitlements reform, no budget reform, no reduction of the deficit, and ever increasing taxation is the general pattern they follow. In late April, the White House came out in favor of taxing all sales on the internet.

Currently, they’re all excited about gun control and immigration reform. Their gun control legislation wouldn’t have stopped anything. I did agree with more extensive background checks, but in my opinion everything else they wanted was meaningless. Limit clips to 10 bullets? Multiple clips can be carried, and it takes only seconds to change them. The immigration reform has been tried before, but unless the border is really closed, it will never work.

I see the current administration as the most corrupt in history. Money always flows to Democrat supporters, often in the billions. A big payment to Petrobas, the Brazilian oil company George Soros has invested heavily in, the GM settlement which gave so much to the unions while screwing the investors, and subsidies to Solyndra and other failed companies run by Obama supporters are examples.

Obama promised a transparent administration, yet Obamacare was so secretly developed that even the Democrats who voted it into law hadn’t read it and didn’t really know what was in it. The Benghazi affair was deliberately misrepresented by the administration as other than what it was: a terrorist attack on our embassy.

To sum up, I evaluate Democrats as a plague on humanity, whereas they seem to see themselves as saviors. The truth is probably somewhere between those extremes, but a bit closer to my view. To be “fair”, I plan to write a critical and totally unbiased essay on the Republican Party.

People said it didn’t matter . . .

by asmwizardMay 5, 2013

A lot of anonymous material flows through the internet. This is based on such a post I recently received. It’s anonymous, so it’s fair game. I’ll plagiarize it, modify it a bit, and post it.

WHEN – he refused to disclose who donated money to his election campaign, as other candidates had done, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he received endorsements from people like Louis Farrakhan, Muramar Kaddafi and Hugo Chavez, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – it was pointed out that he was a total newcomer and had absolutely no experience at anything except community organizing, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he chose friends and acquaintances such as Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn who were revolutionary Communist radicals, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – his voting record in the Illinois Senate and in the U.S. Senate came into question, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he refused to wear a flag lapel pin and did so only after a public outcry, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – people started treating him as a Messiah and children in schools were taught to sing his praises, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he stood with his hands over his groin area for the playing of the National Anthem and Pledge of Allegiance, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he surrounded himself in the White House with advisors who were pro-gun control, pro-abortion, pro-homosexual marriage and wanting to curtail freedom of speech to silence the opposition, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he said he favors sex education in kindergarten, including homosexual indoctrination, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – his personal background was either scrubbed or hidden and nothing could be found about him, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – the place of his birth was called into question, and he refused to produce a birth certificate, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he had an association in Chicago with Tony Rezco – a man of questionable character and who is now in prison and had helped Obama to a sweet deal on the purchase of his home – people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – it became known that George Soros, a multi-billionaire Marxist, spent a ton of money to get him elected, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he started appointing White House Czars that were radicals, revolutionaries, and even avowed Marxist /Communists, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he stood before the Nation and told us that his intentions were to “fundamentally transform this Nation” into something else, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – it became known that he had trained ACORN workers in Chicago and served as an attorney for ACORN, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he appointed cabinet members and several advisors who were tax cheats and socialists, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he appointed a Science Czar, John Holdren, who believes in forced abortions, mass sterilizations and seizing babies from teen mothers, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he appointed Cass Sunstein as Regulatory Czar who believes in “Explicit Consent,” harvesting human organs without family consent and allowing animals to be represented in court, while banning all hunting, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he appointed Kevin Jennings, a homosexual and organizer of a group called Gay, Lesbian, Straight, Education Network as Safe School Czar and it became known that he had a history of bad advice to teenagers, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he appointed Mark Lloyd as Diversity Czar who believes in curtailing free speech, taking from one and giving to another to spread the wealth, who supports Hugo Chavez, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – Valerie Jarrett, an avowed Socialist, was selected as Obama’s Senior White House Advisor, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – Anita Dunn, White House Communications Director, said Mao Tse Tung was her favorite philosopher and the person she turned to most for inspiration, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he appointed Carol Browner, a well known socialist as Global Warming Czar working on Cap and Trade as the nation’s largest tax, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he appointed Van Jones, an ex-con and avowed Communist as Green Energy Czar, who since had to resign when this was made known, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – Tom Daschle, Obama’s pick for Health and Human Services Secretary could not be confirmed because he was a tax cheat, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – as President of the United States , he bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia , people said it didn’t matter..

WHEN – he traveled around the world criticizing America and never once talking of her greatness, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – his actions concerning the Middle East seemed to support the Palestinians over Israel , our long time ally, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he took American tax dollars to resettle thousands of Palestinians from Gaza to the United States , people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he upset the Europeans by removing plans for a missile defense system against the Russians, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he played politics in Afghanistan by not sending troops early-on when the Field Commanders said they were necessary to win, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he started spending us into a debt that was so big we could not pay it off, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he took a huge spending bill under the guise of stimulus and used it to pay off organizations, unions, and individuals that got him elected, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he took over insurance companies, car companies, banks, etc., people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he took away student loans from the banks and put it through the government, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he designed plans to take over the health care system and put it under government control, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he claimed he was a Christian during the election and tapes were later made public that showed Obama speaking to a Muslim group and ‘stating’ that he was raised a Muslim, was educated as a Muslim, and is still a Muslim, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he set into motion a plan to take over the control of all energy in the United States through Cap and Trade, people said it didn’t matter.

WHEN – he finally completed his transformation of America into a Socialist State , people woke up— but it was too late. Add these up one by one and you get a phenomenal score that points to the fact that Barrack Hussein Obama is determined to turn America into a Marxist-Socialist society.

BUT – it did matter. All of it.

What happens if . . .

by asmwizardOctober 18, 2012October 18, 2012

As a habitual pessimist, I sometimes have horrible thoughts. This morning, I woke up with a pair of what ifs?

What if the president-elect dies after the election but before inauguration?

What if the candidate dies after the convention but before the election?

I didn’t know the answers to these questions. I thought it might be covered in the constitution. The answer to the first is found there: article two, section 1, and amendments XII and XX.

I googled the question, and came up with http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_pvp.html

Here’s the way I interpret what the website tells me:

Say the president-elect is Obama and he dies of accident, illness, or assassination before inauguration. This is a no-brainer. Biden takes over as both president and president-elect. If it’s Romney, then the constitution says that Ryan becomes the president-elect and will be inaugurated. If it’s both, then the members of the Electoral College select a president and vice-president.

If the candidate dies before election day, his name may remain on the ballot, if it has already been printed. If not, the party in each state can substitute another name. The voters may end up voting for a dead person, but they are really voting for the electors from the state, who will cast their votes for whoever they see fit in December.

So, it’s all covered. Let’s hope these things never happen, but it’s good that procedures are in place.

The 1st presidential debate of 2012

by asmwizardOctober 4, 2012October 4, 2012

I’ve written on all the Republican primary debates, so I might as well do the presidential ones.

October 3, in Denver, Jim Lehrer presiding. The subject was domestic issues. For the first time, I liked the format: six very general questions to be asked the whole evening of 90 minutes, Lehrer acting more as a timekeeper than anyone else. For once, the moderator didn’t ask loaded questions designed to embarrass one candidate or give the other guy an easy ride.

I took notes, but anything I report they said is necessarily paraphrased – my version, which only gives a general idea of some of what was said.

The first question was on their differences on creating jobs. The second, differences on the deficit. Third, differences on entitlement reform. Fourth, differences on federal regulation. Fifth, entitlements, and finally, what would they do as president to resolve partisan gridlock.

The discussion was polite, at times friendly, but neither man pulled punches. Both cited statistics and provided detail. There were no major gaffes, as far as I know. I don’t believe there were any memorable lines, although Romney addressed Obama’s investment in renewable energy something like: “You don’t pick winners and losers, you just pick losers.” I may have gotten this wrong, but it’s the general idea.

Obama kept telling Romney about his (Romney’s) plans, such as “you plan to raise taxes by 5 trillion dollars”. Romney repeatedly came back and said that was inaccurate, and said what his plans really were. These exchanges made Obama look bad, I believe.

When they talked about health care, Obama struggled. Romney never did, looked presidential, and looked right at Obama when he spoke. Obama looked at the camera when he spoke, and looked down a lot when Romney was speaking.

I can’t cover much of what was said. Here are some selected tidbits from my notes:

Creating jobs:

O – 4 years ago, I inherited a big depression; much work to do; we need a “new economic patriotism”. (That last means people must be willing to pay more in taxes.)

R – Need a different path, balanced budget, energy independence. The president wants a “trickle down government.”

O – Mentioned need to improve education. He began a program called “Race to the Top”. Wants to hire 100,000 math and science teachers. He would cut tax on business, he said.

R – described O’s economic record. Said he would not do a tax cut that adds to the deficit.

O – claims to have cut taxes on middle class by $3600 per family. Said R wants to cut taxes by 5 trillion dollars (over 10 years?) and the only way this could be done is by raising taxes on the middle class.

and so on.

Deficit:

R – there are 3 ways to cut the deficit: raise taxes, cut spending, or grow the economy. He’ll cut spending and grow the economy. His criteria for federal program is: will we have to borrow money from China to pay for it? He’ll cut the size of government by attrition.

O – claims to have cut 18 govt. programs, went after Medicare fraud. Claims to have a 4 Trillion dollar debt reduction plan – that requires tax increases.

R – Spain spends 42% of GDP on government, we’re approaching that.

O – brought up subsidies to oil companies, about 5 billion/year. He said budgets reflect choices. Medicaid block grants to states would be a 30% cut.

R – You subsidized green energy by 90 billion/year, 15 times the oil companies. He dropped the “you just pick losers” line. He said the Medicaid block grants would be what each state got last year plus 1 per cent. He said the governors would be delighted.

Entitlements:

O – said his and R’s policies on Social Security are similar. He said his Medicare savings would come from cutting overpayments to insurance companies and providers – hospitals and doctors.

R – said O will cut 716 billion (over 10 years? Dammit, they never mention the time frame), and cutting payments to hospitals and doctors would make them drop Medicare patients.

There was a lot of further discussion on Medicare. O – didn’t like Ryan’s voucher program for Medicare (insurance payment subsidy).

Federal Regulation:

R – regulations are necessary, but can be excessive. Cited problems with Dodd-Frank. It makes some banks too big to fail, kills smaller banks.

Health Care:

Obama defended, said R didn’t have details on his plans. R – attacked, said he’d repeal it but keep some of the features. O struggled here, didn’t do well.

Role of Government:

O – keep people safe; create framework where people can succeed.

O – hit a homerun here; said it was to follow the constitution.

Partisan Gridlock:

R – as governor, I had a legislature which was 87% Democrat, yet succeeded.

O – I will take ideas from anyone (and ignore them).

============================================================

Obama didn’t mention Bain Capital or Romney’s 47% remark. Romney didn’t seize on any of Obama’s gaffes or lack of producing credible budgets.

Overall, Romney won. Some liberal talking heads conceded that and were angry about it, thinking Obama didn’t make his case. So, Obama took strike one, as Romney did a superb job. However, there are two debates left. Obama likely will be tougher in the next two, and he’d better be. If Romney dominates the second debate, I believe he will win the election.

People ignored warnings

by asmwizardJune 1, 2012June 1, 2012