2012 Reality Change - Arthur Davis - 2008 Obama Campaign Co-Chair – Joins Romney Team – Jewish Journal Editor – Paul Ryan Courageous - The Moderates

Arthur Davis, Conservative Democrat (Moderate) - image: CNN

From CNN Arthur Davis, the former Obama 2008 Campaign Co-Chair and the Democrat who seconded Obama’s nomination at the Democrat Convention in 2008, has left the Democrat Party and will now campaign for Mitt Romney. CNN (and oddly to date, only CNN) reports that the Democrat Party has swung too far to the left, and that, as a result, Southern Conservative Democrats are less welcome. Davis switched political parties in May of this year (CNN). In addition, Davis is one of a number of Conservative (or, in reality moderate) Democrats who have in recent months have noted they were either supporting or voting for a Republican. This is happening with some frequency in the Massachusetts Senate Race between Scott Brown and Progressive Democrat, Harvard Professor, Elizabeth Warren. Brown’s running ads across Massachusetts featuring high profile state Democrats who are supporting Brown’s reelection.(Scott Brown Campaign Site – Videos)

Although some in the media recently noted the choice by Romney of Paul Ryan as his running mate, has turned the campaign to one of ideological choices, those choices have already been made and Davis is a perfect example. The new sport of extreme mud-slinging on the part of the Obama campaign, and specifically those recently made by Joe Biden, the Vice President and Obama’s running mate, are making those who are in the middle, and more moderate (Conservative) Democrats more than a bit leery of the Obama Campaign. (A definition of a Conservative Democrat is one who is fiscally conservative, maybe pro-life, and is strong on labor and civil rights issues.) Again, from CNN, a report on Arthur Davis and his take on Joe Biden’s recent remarks using a “metaphor” of putting “ya’ll back in chains” (with heavy Southern accent for emphasis) in reference to Mitt Romney at a campaign event, as racial viciousness. The fact that Davis is not alone in understanding that the mantra from the left painting the GOP in general as a bunch of “angry old white men” is no more than hypocritical hyperbole. They apparently excludes the “angry old white man” who is in the number 2 position at the White House and was chosen to be in that position by Barack Obama. The statement was racist, remains racist, and Biden has a history of such remarks – see, again of all places, About.com who calls Biden’s remarks “political humor”, but includes these racist gems:

You cannot go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent.... I'm not joking." --Joe Biden, in a private remark to an Indian-American man caught on C-SPAN, June, 2006
And
"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man." –Joe Biden, referring to Barack Obama at the beginning of the 2008 Democratic primary campaign, Jan. 31, 2007

Davis is right to take umbrage at Biden’s remarks as well as the left of center wing that runs his former political party. What is disturbing, in the extreme, is the fact that Biden’s remarks are regarded by the general media as either excusable and or a “joke”. Of course, most of the media, academia and labor bosses (There is a degree is labor relations at UMASS for wanna-be Union bosses) believe that this is just fine, ignoring Joe Biden, as well as that fact that they’ve got high profile Democrats, those who may be more moderate, jumping ship. If these high profile Democrats are jumping ship, what are the odds that there are millions of rank and file, who may be less than enthused about the march to the left, doing the same?

It is the ridiculous notion that political parties “own” specific ethnic, minority and or religious groups – such as all African-American, Women, Catholics and Jews belong to the Democrat Party, while the Republican Party has those angry old white men, NASCAR fans and right-wing Christian Evangelicals. The aforementioned sounds ridiculous, yet the mantra persist. No one political party owns a vote in this nation and Republican or Democrat, individuals make choices on the person when the policies of a particular elected official seem a bit extreme, or generally not working. In this case, whole “groups” switch their votes to a different party (“groups” for emphasis and media speak) however, the reality is that the individual is voting for the person/party on an individual basis, regardless of race, gender, ethnicity or religious affiliation.

A prime example is the “Jewish Vote”, which has been much discussed in the past month given Mitt Romney’s 4th trip to Israel, as well as his choice of Paul Ryan as V.P.. The Daily Beast (owned by Newsweek), headlined: “Romney Lost the American Jewish Vote by Picking Paul Ryan”. However, that narrative might not fly. An article from David Suissa, the President of Tribe Media, which owns the Los Angeles Jewish Journal, suggested that Paul Ryan is courageous, and will stand up and speak the truth about issues that affect all American’s, regardless of party – an excerpt appears below (Read the entire article: here.)

“Have any of you all met Paul Ryan? I’m telling you this guy is amazing. He is honest; he is straightforward; he is sincere; and the budget he came forward with is just like Paul Ryan. It is a sensible, straightforward, honest, serious budget.”
These words are not from a Tea Party accountant, but from Erskine Bowles, the Democratic co-chair of Obama’s National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility, praising Ryan and his budget plan during a lecture at the University of North Carolina last September.

…In any event, we can’t ignore other Jewish values, like living within our means and confronting difficult truths. You can disagree with Paul Ryan’s budget and ideology, but you can’t deny that this man has the courage to confront difficult truths.
That’s why I have some mud left for commentators who always grumble that politicians are serial panderers who tell us only what we want to hear, but then, when they finally meet a politician with the courage to tell us the truth, all they can say is: Dumb political move!

…Paul Ryan, the man Erskine Bowles calls honest, straightforward and sincere, is sticking his neck out and forcing America to confront its chronic illness.
(Jewish Journal of Los Angeles, 8-14-12)

Both David Suissa and Arthur Davis have individual points of view that reflect realistic values - they believe in the decency of treating those individual public servants who honestly want to put their neck on the line for the nation with respect, and letting those who are “protected” and go to new lows in order to further a political agenda or career, that they are not above board. It is one thing to politely agree to disagree, there should be heated debates, on issues alone, in order to reach the American people, rather than appeal to a “base” of a party that is extreme. To those in the middle or moderates in both major political parties, they know the difference between outrageous mudslinging and an opponent having had enough, fights back a bit. Compare and contrast policy, or ideas, or past political records – fine, but leave the slanderous, racial and ridiculous remarks out of the conversation as well as the news. If one disagrees or agrees with a political party, or individual candidate, then it belongs in an editorial, rather than: sports, lifestyle, main news, the weather, etc. The general public gets this, so do those in certain “groups”.

Romney-Obama 47-46 New CBS/NYTimes poll – Romney Ad Answers Obama’s – “You Did Not Build it” – Strong Rebuttal to President’s Progressive Ideology

An Empty Food Pantry in New Jersey - not uncommon as food prices rise, and household income shrinks - image from northjersey.com (one of hundreds)

From the Hill Blog: ”Romney edges ahead in latest national poll, most blame Obama for economic downturn” – Romney Leads Obama by 1 point, 47/46 – or a statistical tie in the latest CBS/New York Times Poll. Additionally, the majority (64%) believes that Obama is responsible for the state of the economy. The natural inclination for those across the socio-economic spectrum when the economy affects those who have the lowest household incomes to those “middle class” families, is to look at steps taken by the current President and then vote accordingly in the next election. Although one might take umbrage at the comparison between Presidents Carter and Obama, the fact that the economic downturn in Carter’s last year in office, did not improve, rather worsened – it is happening again.

From CNBC Jobless Claims Spike again to Smart Money’s, “Rising Corn Prices and Your Grocery Bill” one does not see a reasonable time-line in which to turn the economy around – even if tomorrow the President decided to cut all corporate tax rates, and repeal all unnecessary spending, while increasing the tax cut, across the board, for all income levels (Federal taxes, not Social Security Taxes) – it would be too little too late. (Granted the act of cutting taxes eludes some, however, the theory goes: (This theory has worked under both Democrat (JFK) and Republican (Reagan, Bush) administrations) when one cuts corporate taxes, that leads to investments and jobs, jobs by the millions not thousands, which in turn increases the taxes paid to the Federal and by the same token, State Department of Revenues. More individuals working and paying taxes makes up for the slight but effective across the board tax cuts – and the Federal Government, without unnecessary spending, can see a vast improvement in income within a relatively short period of time (10 to 12 months).

However, with a draught and the emphasis on use of corn for ethanol (both parties guilty), corn products (including high fructose corn syrup found in everything from salad dressings to cereal to soft drinks) become more scarce, the price rises, and this hits consumers of these products directly. Those prices won’t come into play until the end of summer – early fall- however, there has been an increase in food products over the past three years – inflation caused by rising fuel, labor costs, and other factors including new Federal regulations that affect all businesses.
This scenario sets up a “Romney is looking better by the minute” point of view from every household who goes to the grocery store.

Meanwhile, the President’s campaign is attacking Romney is what can only be classified as “class warfare” – asking for tax returns, after they have been supplied, demanding answers regarding investments (while the President’s tax returns reveal that he also has Foreign Income), going so far as to insinuate that Romney’s leave of absence on several occasion from Bain Capital – a company he built, but then left on several occasions (To run for Senate against Ted Kennedy), 1999 to run the Olympics in Salt Lake City), that was when Romney decided to sever his relationship which in real terms might take years – was criminal in nature. Go figure.

As that tactic appears to be gaining little to no traction (given the polls) a new tactic was conceive - attack business – all business – Romney is, after all, a businessman. Class warfare was begun with the Presidents insistence that no one who built a business did it on their own – it was the Government who helped that person, the government built roads, supplied teachers, and so on. The fact that the person who built the business and hired employees and paid taxes to the government so it could function, and took the risk to begin with – in progressive think, does not matter. (See Elizabeth Warren, Candidate for Senate (D), running against Scott Brown (R-MA), and similar verbiage the President used, brought up by Warren several months ago.

Romney has, to date, not answered the call to supply more than two years of tax returns, (which – there is no rule that a candidate need to submit any tax returns at all), and waited it out – as the calls from the media and the Obama Campaign became more shrill.

However, once the President made the remarks about business as the benefactor of government (not the reality of the other way around), Romney chose that moment to fight back. The ad below is an exemplary political ad, hard-hitting, factual and above all – drawing a distinction between candidate Romney and the President on an ideological plane. Therefore one had a clear understanding between a Progressive Ideology versus the more traditional Democratic Republic – Free Market Ideology – brilliant and effective.



What is most amazing is that the Obama Campaign is pulling out all the stops now, months prior to the election – the only hope they might have is if, and only if, Romney makes an unacceptable choice of running mate – and unacceptable to the “mainstream” media, rather than rank and file Republicans and those Independents that are so pivotal in any election. However, as concerns the choice of V.P. – one would think Romney will consider a logical and statistical choice, based upon the political advantage the V.P. brings to the table, a candidate that will be completely vetted.

Notwithstanding it will, in all likelihood remain in the polls a tight election, however, that said, when individuals are voting with their pocketbook, strange occurrences take place, as happened in 1980 – those who went into the voting booth convinced they would vote for Carter as both the President and the individual were Democrats, came out having voted for Ronald Reagan or Jon Anderson (an Independent), propelling Reagan to a landslide not seen in electoral history.

Of course, the above is conjecture based on the premise that history repeats, and any number of events could take place that would change the course of events – if this were 2010, or even 2011.

The Economic Decline and Escalating Urban Teen Crime – From Chicago to the Northeast - A Rant on the Need for a Courageous Leader

Not a day goes by that news of an “economic” recovery appears to be nowhere in sight – unemployment is back to 9 plus percent, food and fuel inflation is on the rise, and the government is on the brink of writing its last bad check before interest rates are forced upwards - déjà vu 1979.

Those hardest hit by the aforementioned are not the working poor (i.e. those who have a job of any sort, and live paycheck to paycheck, regardless of income), it is those who have never held a job, or have depended upon one form of entitlement or another, in order to survive that are most vulnerable. It does not take a rocket scientist to understand that those living on a stipend, are experiencing the same level of angst, however, in this generation, the reliance on free money, free phones, free cars, free food, all at the largesse of the state or federal government, coupled with a consistent political drumbeat of “tax the rich”, has translated into “take what you want”.

This is nothing new, crime out of poverty – having lived in an inner city setting back in the late 1970’s one watched neighbors on social security benefits purchasing cat food for human consumption, enterprising youth hitting local supermarkets and stocking the trunks of cars with pilfered meats to sell on street corners, it is the crime and consequence of failed economic policies. In the later era, those who profited from larceny also served the public in a twisted sense of a later day “Robin Hood” – the logic: grocery stores had insurance, therefore, taking meat or other food items from these stores, and selling them at pennies on the dollar to those who would go without, was somehow honorable. These were the children that either anticipated having a job during the summer months, fully understanding that they would somehow work at some point.

The further one went into the inner city, however, the less “noble” the criminal behavior became. One driving through Hartford, CT at rush hour was well advised (in the pre-cell phone era) to keep a purse or any valuables hidden under a car seat, or risk an attack and robbery.) Once the economy improved, the rampant crime dissipated, and those who played at “Robin Hood” became respected members of the community. In Hartford, the crime abated, absorbed by the ability of the dollar to go further. In that era, the emphasis in schools and homes was that the individual be self-made, educated and take every opportunity to improve one’s station in life. No-one, especially the government, was responsible for one’s ability to survive, unless, and only unless there was a disaster of sorts.

It is not surprising therefore, that today, as the economy is in the same shape (or worse, as the jury is out), that those who have “checks” that do not cover the “bills”, specifically disenfranchised teens, are now committing crimes that would embarrass their counterparts of only a few decades past. It is the loss of the teaching of self-reliance, the push from parents and peers that would send high school students into tobacco fields, factories, construction any job that paid so that one could contribute and grow. It is the pervasive progressive push that the rich are somehow to “blame” and therefore, those on the bottom rung are “owed” everything they desire to exist. The fact that those factory jobs no longer exit, or the small farms, plays a part in this breakdown – where those who still desire to achieve on their own are hampered by a lack of choices, and must compete for those low level jobs with adults.

The crimes thereof ere, have become more blatant, without apparent concern for consequence. Take Chicago for example: Teen “mobs” are boarding city buses and robbing passengers – NBC Chicago reports that that up to 15 teens boarded buses on two separate occasions stealing cell phones and other items from passengers. Cell phones can be sold on Criagslist for example bringing $50 to $100, depending on the make or model. These are youth that are taking what they feel they “deserve” – the victim may be viewed as having “more money” or even “rich” by their standards, and therefore “deserving” of being robbed.

The civility is gone, as it is no longer taught or expected, regardless of what rung on the ladder one finds oneself, there simply is no incentive.

In the recent earthquakes in Japan, the most startling fact of coming from that disaster was that no looting occurred – neighbors helped one another, the reliance on self-reliance and family and respect deep rooted in a culture, that is reminiscent of the culture that pervaded the U.S. no so very long ago.

In Western Mass, a recent tornado that struck Springfield, resulted in neighbors helping neighbors, but also looting. Taking advantage of those that are struck by disaster, as the haves versus the “have nots” has appeared to become the norm.

The solution therefore, is to teach your children well, to right the wrong dogma that the world owes, that the rich are somehow evil, and that the “state” will solve one’s problems, not the individual.

The rich generally create the jobs, needed to put those roving bands of hoodlums to work. It is time for leadership to step up and stand up for the youth – those teachers, those politicians, those parents who need to instill a sense of hope, self-reliance and yes, industry (invite it by taxing it less), will, over time, bring this nation back to its senses. There is no time like the present to start the conversation. There has never been a time in our history where leadership that will inspire youth to be self-made, generous to their neighbors, and ashamed of base behavior is so badly needed.

Having seen the cycle of poverty and resultant crime and the changes in both over a period of forty odd years, one is convinced that this nation has opportunity aplenty when all children are encouraged, when all are told they are not “this group or that group” rather American’s with equal opportunity to succeed or fail, based on their own merits, and that there will be no government standing ready to sweep their mistakes under the proverbial rug. We need leadership with the moral authority to lead our nation forward, not merely economically but to instill a sense of value in each and every child, a sense of what is right with American that will allow them to become whatever they work hard at to become – to rely on no-one, but to help those in need. That leader may be a man, it may be a woman, but it is with a deep hope that this individual puts aside fears of a hostile media, and a hostile political party (as the individual in mind are considered outsiders), and has the courage to lead us out of this mess.

Congressional District Special Election – The Deep Divisions in the Democrat Ranks Will affect races in November. Analysis

The special election to replace Rep. Neal Ambercrombiehas Republican Charles Djou poised for victory in a heavily Democrat District. As Democrats have an historical advantage in Special Elections (some by running as Republicans – see the Pennsylvania 12th and of import, the New York 23rd, where Gillibrand won the seat by marching straight to the right), the Hawaii 1st, which is far from a swing district, being heavily weighted by a Democrat electorate, is unusual as the Republican is outpacing two Democrats vying for the seat. The two Democrats, Ed Case who is characterized as a moderate, and Colleen Hanabusa, who is a pro-union Progressive, have been fighting it out amongst themselves leading some pundits to believe this scenario gave Djou the advantage.

According to the Washington Post, the DSCC suspended advertising earlier in the month, thereby admitting defeat before a single mail-in vote was cast. The last ballots must be mailed and delivered by 6:00 pm Sunday ; half of the ballots mailed out have been returned, and results should be announced Sunday night.

Although recent losses in Senate and Gubernatorial Campaigns in Massachustts (Scott Brown), New Jersey (Chris Christie), Pennsylvania (Specter will not be returning) and Virginia (Bob McDonnell) indicate that, just perhaps, the general public has had, in a word, enough of Democrat Policies. The special elections won by Democrats in the California 10th, the New York 23rd and the most recent in the PA 12th, are more indicative of local politics, and special circumstances that led to the Conservative in the race, being defeated. The 10th District, alone, was rather ho-hum and a straight Democrat victory in a district that was more heavily weighted Democrat than any others. In New York, the Republican was more in line with the Democrat, and the Conservative Party Candidate, lost by a small margin, after the Republican endorsed the Democrat running for the seat. In Pennsylvania, the Democrat, again, ran as a Republican, Crist placed himself as far from Washington as he could – otherwise, the 12th, not the Hawaii 1st would have been the first to go to a Republican.

What appears to be missed by most analysts is the fact that there is a schism in the Democrat Party that is handing the seat to Djou. The differences between what can be characterized as a Moderate Democrat and the Progressive (i.e. socialist) Democrats has become clear in this particular race, and one can be sure, in every congressional race going forward. Moderate Democrats in 2008 were behind the candidacy of Hillary Clinton, those are the blue collar, working class Democrats, who were not buying the “Hope and Change of the Progressive candidate Obama. The SEIU, which has become a driving force within the Progressives, and has a clear socialist, agenda and appears to take its marching orders from Washington and Chicago. As Progressive (or those identifying themselves as such) are a small but vocal minority, the rank and file Democrats (or moderates), will, in certain cases, be battling each other in the primaries leading up to the November election. The problem arises that the public perception ties the two divergent factors of the Democrat Party together – the outcome, moderates are voting Republican or “Tea Party”, joined by a good percentage of those who indicate no party affiliation.

This scenario is crossing lines, where more moderate Republicans in Conservative districts are also in danger of losing seats (Recent upset in Kentucky primary, by way of example). With every special election, the pundits with the DNC and RNC both claim mandates, noting either that the Democrats are safe, and that the Republicans’ will sweep (later more historically probable), however, the bigger story is the schism with the Democrat Party. This will have a direct impact on the Congressional, and Gubernatorial races taking place in November, and as of now, key Democrats are in danger of losing their congressional seats, including Harry Reid, and, yes, Nancy Pelosi.

Those pesky conservative “Tea Party” people (made up of conservative, independents and yes, moderate Democrats) are everywhere and the organization has grown in leaps and bounds within the last few months. They will have an enormous impact on who goes to Washington in November.
As for Hawaii, the “Tea Party” resides in Maui (of all places), As well as Honolulu, Kauai, Kona, Ewa Beach and Wahiaw . Therefore, what is taking place is not a mandate for any party, rather a mandate against the factions within the Democrat Party. Those Tea Party acticits, regardless of party, will support the candidates who are Constitutionalist (Tea Party or no) - one that is most in line with their philosophy – which is most instances, but not all, is the Republican.

With a day left until the results are posted for the Hawaii 1st, one can listen to excuses by the Democrats about an “isolated” incidence of a rift between two candidates, but make no mistake, the implications go far beyond a mandate for the Republicans.

Poll: Growing Majority Believe That Majority Members in Congress Should be Sent Packing in 2010

According to a new poll out byRasmussen Reports, 63% of respondents believe the country would be in better shape if incumbents were given the boot in 2010. Additionally, those who feel that Congress should be turned over, have a decrease in confidence in their own Representatives.
Rasmussen defines two classes in the report: The Political Class, or voters that trust political leaders, and Mainstream voters (or the rest of us).

This growing discontent is, perhaps, most noticeable in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, known first as the cradle of liberty, and lately as the Bluest State in the Union. That has changed, however, over the past two years, as Conservative candidates began to emerge to challenge entrenched Democrats. Although little notice was given, this snowballed when one Scott Brown defied the alleged odds, and managed to take back the “people’s seat”.

That said, as Brown was considering his run, individuals across the Bay State were doing the same – considering a run against those entrenched politicians who have held sway over Beacon Hill and Washington for decades. For the first time in memory, politicians such as Barney Frank, Richard Neal and Nikki Tsongas (to name but a few) are facing opposition from Conservative candidates – and, in most cases, there are multiple candidates who had launched campaigns - and most importantly – prior to Brown’s Senate win. What this tell us about the change in political think of those who are dubbed “the masses” by Progressive thinkers (i.e. some, not all, Democrats who hold an office), have had enough.

Surely, if the long suffering, over taxed, and citizens of what has been fondly called “The People’s Republic of Massachusetts, are seeking alternatives to Congress with a palpable enthusiasm, then it must be happening elsewhere. One may see those Rasmussen poll numbers increase over the next few months, and going forward into 2010, the energy on the part of the “average citizen” to get involved and facilitate change will increase – be it direct involvement in a political campaign, or heading straight to the voting booth – with gusto. For all the pundits, and what it is worth, the recent wins in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and most startling perhaps, New Jersey (for those on the inside of the Commonwealth looking out), was not an anomaly of any sort – it appears to be the beginning of a new “norm”.

Health Care Stalled Until Fall in Both House and Senate – Obama continues to Blame “Republican’s”, Democrats control the vote.

The Senate and the House have declined to vote on the Administration’s Health Care plan until after the fall recess. This despite a visit to the Congress from Rham Emanuel, who failed to deliver – Emanuel is being criticized by left of center, Maxine Waters (D-CA), for recruiting the Blue Dog Democrats responsible for stalling the bill in committee. Therefore, Rham is caught between a rock and a hard place – the left (which is pushing this legislation), would not be in a position to do so had Emanuel found more like-minded socialist-progressive Democrats, who would have lost in 2008, leaving the Democrats without a majority.

Now Obama is faced with a major defeat for his administration yet continues to take to the road, hawking a plan that is far from perfected, and one which the majority of American’s now feel the nation could do without. In order to gain sympathy from the general public, Obama continues to blame “Republican’s” and go with the “Sky is Falling” approach. In a recent press conference, he insisted that without his health care plan, premiums would skyrocket, while in town hall meetings with Seniors (AARP), he had this to say to those who depend on Medicare: “As costs balloon, so does Medicare's budget. And unless we act within a decade -- within a decade -- the Medicare trust fund will be in the red.” He is also blaming “Republican’s” for derailing his plans , specifically, Senator Jim DeMint (R) who, spoke about the possibility of this particular plan being Obama’s political Waterloo. This later transformed into his recent mantra of, “Republican’s who want this to fail for political reasons”, which the nation, apparently is not buying.

It's about Freedom of Choice.

From the leftist blog the “Daily Kos” come the final blow in the article “The Dems lost this debate once Single Payer became Public Option”. Understanding from a progressive point of view, that private health insurance should be eliminated in favor of a government run universal health care plan, this article is interesting in that choice is viewed by Progressives (the President , Obama, is a Progressive), as unhealthy, that the American people (i.e. “masses), don’t know what’s good for them.”

Obviously, when the extremist Daily Kos is throwing in the proverbial towel, there is “trouble in River City.”
With the 2010 elections taking the stage and Obama’s poll numbers continuing to slide south,( Gallop’s latest has him at a has him at a 53% approval, while Rasmussen has him hovering at 50% (note these approval ratings include those who “somewhat approve”.) the Democrats most likely to retain their jobs are those same “Blue Dogs” who are centric. With the Stimulus failing to provide much needed jobs, rising State Taxes, and one more “rush” this program though without reading it because the sky is falling” bill, the President has lost credibility, and those numbers have nowhere to go but down. This will, of course, cause a “Bush effect” for those who were in lockstep with the Democrat party.

Joe Lieberman – Introducing the New Independent Republican Party.

Last night Joe Lieberman addressed the Republican Convention and made a direct appeal to moderates across the nation, regardless of party lines, to take a long look at McCain and cast their vote in November for a Republican. Although the party faithful Democrats are up-in-arms about Joe’s speech, those Progressives who would have replaced him in a heartbeat with an Obama clone two years ago, one can’t be sure how that appeal affected the likely voters that are on the fringe - moderate Democrats as well as Independents. In contrasting the speech given by Zell Miller in 2004, which was a fiery lecture regarding the basic values that Miller felt had been abandoned by his party, Lieberman looked to history and gave a spot-on analysis of what the first President felt was wrong with party partisanship and how one-day it that partisanship – putting party first - might lead to a division within the nation that would cripple the government. His references to Barrack Obama were polite, yet they pointed to the lack of experience and the partisanship shown in Obama’s short time in his national Senate seat.

Lieberman is being called “Brave by some for crossing the aisle and incurring the wrath of his party. Threats have been made, by the likes of Harry Reid, that Lieberman could face the loss of a coveted Committee Seat should he not blindly follow the party. The fact that anyone would think a place of prominence in a given political party should concern an American or hold a Public Servant hostage is mind-boggling. When one compares the various “Party” experiences of both McCain and Palin with those of Joe Lieberman - a theme of true independence occurs. Many in the within the rank and file of the Democrats feel, and rightly so, that their party has been hijacked by Progressives (Socialist-Communists), turning the once inclusive party into a elite machine (See DNC Reform and PUMA), while most within the Republican party have been Independent (the rank and file and those outside of the Beltway), and the party, although much maligned, was the original party of inclusion and has historically, done more to promote those who may by gender or ethnicity, be targeted as “owned” by the other party.

Now that Joe Lieberman has thrown down the gauntlet, so to speak, and invited independents, rather those who care more about the country rather than a political party, to join with him in what amounts to a reform movement, a movement not only for the country but a movement within a party for the good of our nation.

As the far left members of the Democrat Party (or more appropriately the Progressive Democrat Party by virtue of its leadership), has, in recent days, shown that fascism and fanaticism know no bounds. In the past few days, Democrats have released the SS number and Home Address of VP Nominee, Sarah Palin, sympathetic media outlets such as Move-on.org, The New York Times, the Daily Kos (who works for Howard Dean, disclaimer on Home page), and the Huffington Post have placed unusual amounts of emphasis on Palin’s family personal matters – and Howie Carr, WRKO Boston, reported that one that had gone so far as to offer a reward to anyone who can come up with dirt on the family. Fascism anyone?

There has always been party rivalry, but that has been tempered with decency – within recent years, decency has fallen by the wayside, in favor of any tactic, including slander, in order to place the Democrat ticket at the top. As an independent minded American who, granted, leans conservative, the choice has become increasingly clear – there simply is no alternative to a McCain-Palin ticket – it is the New Independent Republican Ticket that offers real change that is backed up by the players resumes - not an empty “Yes we can” (borrowed from a Massachusetts governors campaign), that does not offer a resume or any certainty that there will not be four more years of the same partisanship that our first President, George Washington, predicted.