Scott Brown as the”Carpetbagger”, Politico Asks – “So What?” – Valid – Are you listening New Hampshire?

Politico’s article on Scott Brown, Republican running for Senate in New Hampshire, offers some valid points as to his “residency” in the state, and the moniker of “carpetbagger” that some have attempted to attach to Brown. The article states what anyone living between the Granite and the Bay State understands – we travel. Most of the Massachusetts residents living on the border or near the border of New Hampshire, have, over the years, moved next door, over the state line, escaping the extreme liberalism that is the Bay State. Friends have gone over the border, no excuses, for better schools and nicer real estate options, and all were, to the point, conservative in nature, although most “unenrolled” or independent minded. Scott Brown, therefore, has a lot of company in New Hampshire that is extremely like minded.

Never mind that the State flipped houses, that was due to those tax-hating liberals who thought nothing of going over the border as well – short commute to Boston and all. One might think that there were enough of them that would not appreciate Brown as an alternative; however, one might be wrong in that regard.

When Brown broke on the political scene in Massachusetts, weeks before he announced his run in 2009 for the Senate, he was a curiosity as a State Senator - with many wishing their state senator would be so attentive to constituents needs. That was the big reason Brown was so popular in MA – he was genuine. He did not work for one group or the other, he was not a brand X and that is what got him into some hot water with the Political “you own me” groups. Let alone, once elected, those who were “late to the campaign dance” declared their victory in getting Brown elected (State Republican Party, for one, Tea Party for two). Brown, with the help of a few trust aides, did it himself.

Yes, guilty, a Scott Brown fan, because is actually is a legislator. One might not care for everything Brown suggests, or the way he votes, however, since all of us, (the State in question), are not of the same political mind set, or share the same needs, one would think a legislator who walked the walk for all of their constituents would be welcome. One hopes the residents in the State of New Hampshire recognize what they have in Brown giving himself over to a race, to represent them.

Very rarely are there those who will not vote a party line, one way or other, just visit Thomas.gov, the congressional record, and look up ones Representative or Senators and find a party line state of mind. It is “us versus them” that get’s nothing accomplished. Brown manages to straddle the middle ground without comprising his principles or his constituents, and plays to no particular group.

It cost him the Massachusetts election - simply because he was accused on one side of being party line, and on the other – no so much. One might hope the New Hampshire streak of independence would allow them a tad more intelligence than their taxing neighbors to the south.

In a word this former constituent is jealous – look at what Massachusetts has to offer in its senators – both progressives, one running for the 2016 nomination (although denying) – Senator Warren, and the other – invisible in most of what he does – Ed Markey. Think long and hard, New Hampshire, you too could be just like your neighbors, which may not be the most envious position to achieve.

Then read the article at Politico to find how many real “carpetbaggers” are in the Senate, State House, et al –it might surprise.

Scott Brown – Compared to Daniel Webster – Ted Cruz – Heads to Liberty – The Natural Order of Politics and the U.S. Constitution

There is much ado about Scott Brown, former Senator from Massachusetts now living in New Hampshire and potentially seeking the Senate Seat in the Granite State. A piece in the Concord Monitor suggests that this maybe the natural order of all things political in the states that made up the beginnings of the United States – the article entitled “Daniel Webster Scott Brown - Can you tell them apart”? is chock full of Brown’s quotes – and one sees the resemblance in the thought process of a thoughtful Senator . (Concord Monitor) The problem with Brown is the lack of support for anyone in politics who happens to run contrary to the standard Political Party dogma, the left-media dogma, and happens to have a bit of Constitutionalism in mind. Darn, someone is seeking a seat, who believes in doing the will of the people!

Similarly, Ted Cruz, the much maligned by his party, the media, the other party, also a Constitutionalist, is headed for Liberty University – shocking to some who believe that Liberty U, the Christian University in the U.S., is a right-wing bastion of all things socially-morally acceptable to the status quo(Washington Post). With a long history of conservatives of all strips giving speeches, commencement addresses and the like, Liberty is yet another spot on the college trail for politicians doing outreach to the youth vote. In today’s society, however, anything that isn’t secular is obviously odd. This given the interpretation of the 1st amendment as meaning “no religion allowed” rather than its intent, giving citizens freedom to choose any religion they please, without fear of a state religion overruling their religious beliefs. Therefore, the media can now brand Senator Cruz as both a “Tea Party” and Religious Right” individual, who is in no-way qualified (due to the aforementioned) to hold public office.

The problem both of these very different individuals have is that they share a common denominator – a belief in the constitution and the role given to the Citizenry and governing – as it was written, rather than how it is interpreted for convenience of one political school of thought. The same may be said of Rand Paul, the 2016 Presidential front-runner (according to polling at the moment), who is wedded as well to the Constitution but from a Libertarian point of view. In this Commonwealth, those holding the Constitution in the same regard, are considered “Jeffersonian Republican’s” a growing segment of the Party, none too pleasing to those who would prefer – a more moderate approach, let’s say.

Good for these men, and good for anyone holding the same core ideologies and good for the country, overall, were we fortunate enough to have more leaders of the same ilk.

Dem’s Downplay Loss of Florida 13th – a Swing District – Portents of 2014

From ABC News Republican candidate David Jolly bested his Democrat opponent in a special election yesterday in a Florida Gulf Coast Congressional District Race. ABC news suggests that Democrats believed this District an easy win due to Obama winning in both 2008 and 2012, and began to downplay as the race neared its finish.(ABC News) Jolly a Tea Party candidate, won on the issue of Obama care (Tampa Bay Times). One might suggest that this is just a special election, yet is obliged to recall 2010 when special elections in Virginia, New Jersey and then Massachusetts saw Republican candidates win handily – with the landslide coming in 2010 with Tea Party and Libertarian candidates pushing the Republicans into a majority in Congress.

The fact that the ABC news article suggests it is the Republican’s who have used Obama care and their opposition to the health care act, as a vehicle in the primary may be a bit off base – yes the Issue is part of the problems facing the voters today, but not the only one. From privacy issues that are key in the younger demographic, to the high cost of living due to inflation on food and necessities, as well as the stagnant job market, all demographics are now looking for alternatives. One might also suggest those alternatives do not include individuals who are heavily wedded to a Washington Lifestyle, and that crosses party lines.

If 2010 was a wake-up call to both major political parties that was ignored on the one-hand and demonized by both on the other – one might suggest that in 2014, the tide will turn against the “establishment” and one might see a different face, politically, in both Chambers of Commerce. It’s about time. Apparently, all the dogma, hard sell, lack of transparency, and two parties with leadership that makes it difficult to tell who is who, the nation appears to have had enough of the same old. Divisions within parties are there for a reason, and that reason is to redefine the political party, up to and including schism which will generate new parties. With the Democrats, one has the Progressives, and with the Republicans’ the Tea Party and Libertarian wings. As Americans reject big government as it has played out to be exactly what many feared, it will be a swing towards Liberty. Nothing was more apparent, considering the messaging from CPAC – leaning States Rights, Constitutionalist, Free Market and Liberty. That message is more appealing that it has ever been, and one believes it will carry forward into the Mid-terms and the General Election.

Cruz & Paul - The Original Intent – Non-intervention in times where growth is required – Self-Defense only

One may say what they like about “political parties” and ideology, either Democrat or Republican, right or left, however, to break ranks on occasion, in the vein of George Washington seems proper. Referring to the brouhaha surrounding certain Libertarian and/or Tea Party Senators preferring to stay out of foreign frays, running against the grain of the commonly held belief of what has become known as either Republican aggression or Democrat aversion to intervention, both Ted Cruz and Rand Paul have come under fire for their views on foreign policy issues. It is the wrong approach to pigeon hole either as self-serving and or off the holy grail of current events and political party lines – they are merely asserting the original and very smart foreign policy recalling the first President, George Washington.

The founders put little stock in political parties, as they felt that the focal point would be taken away from the business of a limited government and put upon a bureaucracy of the few. In this point of view, taking away of the common United States allegiance and placing it squarely in one political camp or the other, doing the good of the Party before doing the good of the nation.

Politicospeaks to Cruz walking a Reaganesque line when it comes to the Ukraine – strength through peace, and he comes under not a little criticism (view the political party comments). One might recall that peace through strength was also one of the tenants of Washington. Build up the defense, when the treasury was on the low side.

As to the piece by the Washington Post’s , Rubin, on Rand Paul being the “odd man out” in the GOP on foreign policy, she may have a point, as far as the body politic is concerned, however, again, in the vein of what is proper, Paul is doing what is right for the nation, not the GOP in all instances.

Or perhaps both articles are reflecting a concern by those who like the status quo, and the rising appeal of both Senators to a fairly wide range of independent minded individuals. There comes a time when one should look back at the history of the nation, rather than hold fast to the popular stance, and should one agree with a member of another political party, for the good of the nation, then so be it. The fact that there is much mud-slinging and finger pointing as to which Party is correct is somewhat bothersome, when the individual who is standing alone makes more common sense. The nation is buried in debt, cutting the armed forces, and investing (or attempting to invest) in major social programs, which may make this the perfect time to sit back, build a nest egg and enhance the military while using diplomacy. This allows for time to build back the treasury and the military and further prosperity the outcome of which would, indeed be one similar to Reagan’s. Which, recalling, a nation building from within both financially and militarily, is one which enjoys a bit of peace and prosperity, and the ability (which is key) of protecting itself should the need arise.

Elites versus the working man – a schism in American Politics and the rise in popularity of the anti-incumbent

A Tea Party Protest at the Capitol - from the teapartytribune.com

An article in Salon on the political landscape in Kansas by Thomas Frank almost hits the nail on the head – almost. His piece entitled: “The matter with Kansas now: The Tea Party, the 1 percent and delusional Democrats”, suggests that the Tea Party (and independent parties) fueled by the Christian right, in Kansas, is responsible due to a populists movement of the elites versus the common working man. In the later he is correct, and perhaps for Kansas, the Christian right appears to fuel this divide, however, if one were to export the theory nationwide, one might find a rejection of all things “elite”, specifically as it applies to those in Washington D.C., and statehouses and City Councils around the country.

Perhaps, just perhaps the liberal dogma that suggests there are class systems in the United States (First Estate, Second and ad naueaum), is being rejected by those who, not specifically lacking in education, and able to understand the Constitution and Bill of rights, understands that the United States was not founded on the principles of class – rather than every individual had the ability to make their own way.

It was not to elect a king, or a body of respresentative who would be kings (and queens), it was modeled as a Republic in order to prevent that very scenario from occurring. Therefore, as elections come and go, one might find the incumbents out in the street, and those who are running for office too far left and yes, too far right, abandoned for a candidate that may not necessarily be considered viable by those who would be kingmakers (the professors (elite), the media (elite) and the political class (notice that’s common) who are – elite).

From Red State an article on Macon, Georgia, local politics, where the NPR station concluded that due to the fact that a white Republican won in an overwhelming African American district, the candidates being Democrats, that race must be a factor. Although concluded by centrist Democrats and Republicans that it was not. It was the same litany of “race” that stems from the liberal theology, that is part of the problem, and may actually lead to a choice that would be, not racist, but anti-establishment.

How so? When those who sit in ivory towers lecture on “institutions” (isms), the magpies in the media suggest this to be “fact” rather than what is contrary to the principles on which the country was founded. Therefore, all things being political, there is a rejection of those that would be part of the body politic. It is indeed a populist uprising against those who consider themselves part of a specific class, due to a degree, or lineage, by those who disagree that blind allegiance to a party, or ideology has led the nation down the wrong path.

Simply put, the revolution has begun to take place at the ballot box and there is no turning back. Those that may be considered “safe” are those that break rank with their particular political party –that condemn those in Washington as “elite”, and, with libertarian principles strongly grounded in the Constitution, will appeal to those who are no longer trusting of the lot of them.

The recent shock election in San Diego may be worth a second look, a Republican, “Kevin Faulconer won a decisive victory over Democratic Councilman David Alvarez in the San Diego mayor’s race Tuesday, signaling a new chapter for the city after the scandal-plagued tenure of former Mayor Bob Filner. Faulconer had 54.5 percent compared to Alvarez’s 45.5 percent of the vote with all precincts reporting. (UT), a race that was considered a toss-up by Reuters.

San Diego was not so usual in this election cycle (2013-2016), the same scenario played out in small and mid-sized cities, even those with political machines in place, across the country in 2013. In some instances, even fiscally proven Democrats lost seats, while incumbent Republicans (on the “establishment side) were also defeated. It is a non-partisan rejection, and there is that danger of throwing the ‘baby out with the bathwater” but – call it the unfortunate casualty of the ballot box revolution.

The Tea Party, as so often maligned as racist and full of ignorant, even right-ring Christian individuals, is more a conglomeration of all ideologies, specifically those who reject the elitism of the “ruling political class”. It is the economy and it is the infringement on rights guaranteed under the Constitution and the abuse of the same Document that has driven the working man and women to rethink blind political allegiance to one political party (or the other).



Tea Party Poster from 2009 - the beginning - from southchicagoan.blogspot.com

This will bring those “elites “who recognize the climate, to join ranks, be less party centric, and take advantage of the movement, yet, there will be, one can hazard to guess, few of those. The low information voter, a coveted prize by on party or the other, is no longer the uninformed, and therein lays the hope for the nation.

2014= In with the New – Out with Everything Washington – the wrath of the American Taxpayer.

A Morning’s Musing – or Rant

In a recent conversation regarding politics in the U.S., it was brought to my attention that those that know, and understand the Washington circles are obviously insulated, but not to the point where they have lost the ability to see the forest through the tree’s – in other words, something’s afoot, they just can’t quite get their fingers on it. It appears that those old stalwarts in the Senate, regardless of Party are facing challengers and polling in areas that they certainly should not. That would be the case if the public were perfectly happy with those that are sent to do the people’s bidding. but by appearing not to do what they were sent to do, it is also appearing they may be retiring early.

Kentucky and Mitch McConnell for instance – a “safe seat “for the most part, except McConnell is facing deficit in his race against a Democrat , in not one poll, but all polls(politicusa). That would be fine and dandy except that the tea party candidate bests all of them.

And they aren’t taking it lightly – that’s the Tea Party – They are, according to the New York Post mounting challenges to both McConnell and Grahamand not a moment to soon.

Where else does one find a race that may be worth keeping an eye on? Not yet declared Scott Brown does something for charity –which is usual for Scott Brown, but since he’s in New Hampshire and a hypothetical poll shows him in a dead head with Jean Sheehan (Democrat Senator), those in the Granitite are hoping he will run, to push that along the Washington Post is reporting that Brown appeared shirtless on the cover of the Union Leader – of course, that was due to the fact that he wasn’t about to plunge into the icy bay with a wetsuit, so, he appeared san shirt –the Union Leader, is just trying to stir the pot.

Being a MA resident who saw Brown as the best Senator the State (Bay) had in eons, as he actually got things done, he wrote bills, eh got them passed, and he did most of what the people sent him there to do, always with an eye on his State and all of the people in it –New Hampshire could do worse, it is MA’s loss.

If one thinks this will stop at the borders of Kentucky, the Carolinas, or New Hampshire, think again. It is a way of the public, even those low information voters, suddenly getting interested in “throwing the bums out!” – Regardless of which bums happen to be warming seat – and it defies party rules. Publicly not so much but privately –they’ll vote anyone in who isn’t currently sitting in Washington.

Those that want to stay in their seat, should be home in their districts and pumping it up by denying the following: I had zero to do with Obamacare, I had zero to do with that harebrained immigration bill, I had zero to do with the farm bill, and a host of other things that are costly and do nothing to help the middle class. (Or what is left of it.) One might want to point fingers at Obama, but he’s literally yesterday’s news. He’s got two years left, and in that time, he’s about as relevant as Hillary Clinton. Who to watch, the darling of the left – Elizabeth Warren for the DNC nod – she’s got about as much experience as Obama did in 2007-2008 – therefore, she makes sense.

On the side of the Elephant, of which there is a rather larger one In the room – chaos reigns on paper –but, as the dust settles and those who are serious stand up –one will find that the old guard, that moldy old bunch of bum crowners, will have their hands full. All it will take it one of those new Jeffersonian Republicans’ to stand up and take it to the folks, because no one is waiting for the next Reagan, they are waiting for the guy who will lead, without a lot of ridiculous promises but with common sense solutions. Finally it would not hurt a whit if that person could care less about how his party feels about him and or how the press feels about him –that would be the icing on the cake. The taxpayer isn’t looking for shiny new or women or hyena of what have you – they are looking for stability and a little crazy thrown in for good measure.

Harry Reid (D-NV) – Brings Partisanship to New Heights – Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) – works with Coburn (R-OK) on Bill – Sick of it All Yet?

An article in the New York Times speaks to the power plays by the Majority Senate Leader, Harry Reid and his “uncompromising” position on anything Republican. Apparently, there have been bills brought forth by Republicans which Democrats of like mind might have voted for or against (with dialogue), yet Senator Reid stops all from being brought to a vote on the Senate Floor(New York Times). Reid, the Majority Leader, has the job of traffic cop when it comes to legislation and whose legislation is brought forth, voted upon and sent to the President’s desk for signature. When he blocks one party entirely, he’s playing partisan politics, which, one might suggest, will not turn out well for the current party in power (Democrats, which Reid leads by the nose).

Playing nice, at the moment, is the newly elected Progressive from Massachusetts, Senator Elizabeth Warren, with of all people Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK). Apparently they have co-written legislation on transparency with corporations specific to tax breaks, and the people’s money (both personal and tax) when it comes to banking. The referring article by the Huffington Post notes Coburn as an arch-conservative. - Coburn releases the annual government waste book available here, at www.coburn.senate.gov From this point of view, it’s a reasonable match, as Coburn is shouting government waste from the rooftops, and Warren is shouting corruption and waste as well. The bill will be on the Senate Floor, but the question remains, with Reid’s inability to allow anything with a Republican Label go to the floor, what happens to Warren and Coburn’s noble quest?

Reid is now in a position to play this either way – for example: He may shut it down entirely as it would appear that a Republican has something to offer and to be bi-partisans should it go to the Senate floor for a vote or, he can allow the vote – giving the one most likely to run for the Democrat Nomination for President (Elizabeth Warren), a leg up so to speak.

Meanwhile, all the worthwhile and the worthless legislation that both parties are writing (as that is the job they are hired to do), sits and nothing gets done – and Reid rules over a do-nothing Senate – if he were slightly less moral, one might liken him to the mad ruler of Rome, Caligula (referring to the madness of Power).

As the general voting public on both sides including rank and file Democrats and Republicans as well as Tea Party and Progressive, are growing more leery by the day of the partisanship shown on both sides. It is as if two big bullies are running the nation – into the ground. Which brings up a point – if one of each of what is seen as the more radical factions of both parties, actually makes a run at the Presidency and or any office for that matter, and avoids the general label of D or R – it follows that that individual would endear themselves to the public – the voting public.

A perfect example of such is the recent brouhaha over Chris Christie and his Turnpike Scandal. Not a fan of the Governor on some points, the level of partisan rhetoric coming from the Democrats, and stony silence from the Republican’s is ridiculous. The man took responsibility for something he was unaware of, and that shows leadership. Of course, the Republicans have some grievances with Christie as they felt he should not have embraced the President during the crisis of Hurricane Sandy, while Mitt Romney, the second worse candidate in recent memory, was trying to unseat the worst President since Jimmy Carter. Blaming Christie is ridiculous, as Romney was not supported by either the right wing evangelicals as well as the Tea Party! – When 20 million voters stay home, it’s time to change strategy. Not likely as they are having Bush delusions (Jeb Bush) and the Democrats are currently in love with Hillary Clinton. One might suggest that none of those mentioned in the preceding, will actually make it through the nominating process.

Which point, one of the most progressive individuals one might meet, suggested, who cares about Christie, why is this even news? This is referring, of course, to the labels - again.

Keep it up Harry, the DNC and the RNC and soon we will have new parties develop which are long past due. The public is becoming increasingly aware and increasingly Independent (or not affiliated with any political party)

As we Close 2014 -CNN Outlines Why It Might Have been a bad Year for Obama –They missed a few!

In an effort to figure out why the President’s poll numbers have been less than stellar these past few months, CNN has suggestedsix reasons why: Obama Care tops the list, the polling is number 2, the Snowdon Leaks at 3, number 4 – the IRS targeting, Number 5 is the Presidents “stalled agenda”, and rounding out the list: the “selfie” snap shot at Mandela’s funeral.(CNN)

They may have two of them correct, specifically the Obama Care rollout – which, due to the hyper-partisanship in the Senate (between Democrats and McCanian Republicans and the Constitutionalist), has come to fruition and is now laying waste to the lives of millions, while bits and pieces of the legislation are picked away – all without Congressional approval. The second woe that stands out in CNN’s list is the IRS Targeting of Conservative Groups, specifically Tea Party, during election cycles.

The balance are on the order of personal, or out of context: The Snowdon Leaks – although the buck stops at the top of the heap (i.e. with the President) – Snowdon’s filching of state secrets as a contractor hired by an agency that works for the Federal government is so far removed from the President it might as well be the moon. In this instance it is a case of general incompetence and little oversight of the hiring process associated with the contractors, coupled with the same as far as the government agencies are concerned. Agree or disagree with Snowdon, the point is – like other spies, one is either caught or not and this was not personally a pervue of the President.

(The contents however…)

The Stalled agenda, considering Obama Care, may be a plus rather than a minus for this particular President. The polling was bound to happen, historically, second term Presidents rarely have high poll numbers, given the degree with which the public interest is waning and looking for the next best President. A second term gives one’s detractors an ability to trash the daylights out of the guy sitting in the throne room, in a political move to swipe Congress and the Senate for their Party. Suffice it to say: Clinton, Bush, Gorge W (although Clinton’s numbers were unusually high for second term Presidents).

If, however, the polling goes to Carter levels, the one might want to find a good fictional – historian to set the record straight.

Lastly, the “selfie” – one must give the guy a break. In many instances, especially state affairs, the President has been criticized, however, since the public should be used to gaffes at this point, and since it as a funeral of a former head of state and icon, perhaps the length of the ceremony was too much to bear, and there was a need for a bit of levity, and sharing the moment, no better way to capture that amongst heads of states, than – the selfie.

What CNN did not mention: the level of incompetence in the administration is mind-boggling, unfortunately the President, or is aid in charge of hiring staff including appointments, needs to take a long vacation.

Benghazi, although part and parcel of the State Departments’ purview, the President’s Cabinet members hound have played this one straight instead of blaming some grossly ridiculous cartoonish video – while not demanding that whoever gave the orders to stand down while a U.S. ambassador was murdered should have been hung out to dry.

Lastly, it is the high partisanship displayed by the President that has caused the problem he’s faced with now. Either that or he was working with the wrong Republicans’ (i.e. the McCain’s, etc.), as had he actually listened to those who were newly elected (similarly to himself, less to no experience in legislation) tea party, and tried to work with them rather than investigate and harass them – maybe, just maybe in a utopian world – Obama Care would have become the signature legislation known as – you can now afford insurance, we’ve opened up the state lines and all carriers can go anywhere, no mandates on every single policy (which had he looked at Massachusetts, he would have avoided all the mistakes that are breaking the budget in this Commonwealth) and finally those who have no insurance and cannot afford it, will be given the option of Medicaid – simple.

He would have made new friends and a ton of enemies on the left, but would have had skyrocketing poll numbers.

Of course, first he would have had to muzzle Harry Reid.

What can possibly go wrong in 2014? -

Ted Cruz speaks to personal beliefs, takes heat – Texas Editorial bemoans competition from the “right”.

Senator, Ted Cruz, on the passing of Nelson Mandela was respectful, and spoke to the true measure of the man and his struggle to end Apartheid in South Africa -for which he apparently took some heat from Tea Party activists who are fans on Facebook. Cruz, along with a contingent of 20 Democrats, will be going to South Africa to say farewell to Mandela. (CNN). Understanding that there are those who we may be in political disagreement with on some points, the fact that he man himself, was fighting diligently for his people, at great personal risk, and succeeded in ending a system that was so far from equitable, speaks to his measure- rather than any Communist trends that he may have adhered to. The problem with the right, as with the left, is those members of both sides that allow for no compromise, regardless of any situation. Good for Cruz for showing understanding.

In Texas, as elsewhere in the nation, there are multiple challengers to incumbents, and that has two of the Dallas Morning News crew with their panties in a bunch Although placed under “Political News”, it is truly editorial in format, suggesting that challengers to Congressional offices, from the Tea Party or far right, should not be taking place, as these individual s have “no experience”, at all. Funny how both sides of the aisle, Republican and Democrat value “experience” in Washington which was not the general intent of the founders. The general intent for the House specifically, was to have a multiple of individuals serve, be they merchants, farmers or doctors of the day, when the term was up – they returned home, and someone else took their place. Additionally Congress was only in session for a few months (another plus in the past). Forgetting a moment that the challenger offers no experience, what they do offer, is a choice for the voter. The problem with having choices is that one might choose someone not to the liking of the two over at the Dallas Morning News. They, along with others in the industry and in politics may be in for a bigger shock than expected when the dust settles in 2014.

The anti-incumbent sentiment has grown, and for both sides of the aisle, so one might anticipate should this hold (and since Congress nor the Senate, show any signs whatsoever of changing their ways), the 2014 elections may turn into a free-for-all. By that, one might anticipate changes to the right, center and yes, far left, in all forms, in all districts. It is the distastes for all things Washington that has produced an opportunity for those who have never served, to go to D.C and put in their two cents.

If one thought the 2010 elections were specifically historical – then one might want to hold that thought for something that in theory and perhaps in practice, may trounce the records.

With the news holding slightly better approval ratings that said Congress, one might wonder if media news, as well as celebrity, etc., would hold any sway for a very angry and disgusted group of Americans – the Voters. It will be interesting to say the least.

Virginia’s Governor’s Race – The Dependence on the Moderate (Romney/Christie) Candidate by the GOP – to the Detriment of the Republican Party.

A Morning rant on the idiocy of the National GOP, leadership, the need for a new Party et. al.

One might say that the national Republican Party is more in tune with winning elections based on popularity and how well a chosen candidate might resemble a Democrat, and Democrats are now Progressives, and in no way resemble the old Democrat guard who were, if judged by today’s political standards – Tea Partiers!

The power concentrated in DC has had enough of those “Tea Party “Conservatives who, for all intents and purposes are a mix of old GOP and DNC think – and, by rights, should be a political party on their own – dumping all together the GOP and those that think they rule, rather than legislate. But, an ideology is not a political party – yet.

This is no more apparent than in the Virginia 2013 Governors race, where the Republican Candidate, Ken Cuccinelli, is about to (by polls and the media) get “trounced” by one “carpet bagging” , Terry McAuliffe – rascal Democrat, whose seen his share of scandals. Public Policy Polling, a Democrat leaning firm, suggests that McAuliffe is leading Tea-Party Cuccinelli by 7 points with a margin of error (it could go either way) of 4 –There is a third party candidate, Libertarian, that is pulling 4 points on this particular poll.

There are a lot of if’s that could change Cuccinelli’s fortune’s, including the recent visits by high-profile Democrats, President Obama and V.P. Biden who flocked to McAuliffe’s side the past two days - with no mention of Obama Care, the focus, most likely on Women’s rights – here we go again. One has to factor in the growing resentment towards Obama Care as a negative for McAuliffe, however, when it comes to women (and minorities) the Democrats count on the ridiculous mantra of either a GOP War on Women – which does not exists, or Reproductive Rights – (i.e. a combination of abortion on demand, birth control, and who knows what else) to frighten the little ladies into voting for the Democrat. – What’s embarrassing as a woman is they do – in droves.

(Just as aside, economic rights should be more important than any so-called threat to Reproductive rights, which, politically has never been at issue since Roe vs. Wade, regardless of whether or not the winning candidate was Democrat or Republican, and no matter the office won. – Therefore, it should economics – but for some reason in the past eight years, the vote has been for the candidate who promises that a women’s reproductive rights – the right to abortions on demand will be their priority – and those women wonder why they have no leg to stand on economically.)

The possible, yet not probable outcome if certain factors come into play in Virginia today.

Cuccinelli could win if – the turnout is lower in the higher population areas of Virginia closest to D.C – and there is a larger turnout in the rest of the state – which has remained Conservative. It will rely on whether or the Virginia voters have had enough of politics as usual and especially identity politics – should that occur, a 3 or 4 point deficit may be easily overcome.

The problem occurs when GOP Standard Bears, or the national GOP, decide they’d rather lose a governor’s race than help the individual Tea Party Candidate, which is occurring in Virginia, and one might suggest will occur nationally. That, and that alone, will win the race for Terry McAuliffe. Not the President, nor the Women, but the GOP members who align themselves with the Romney/McCain moderates. (NBC Politics).

Therefore, barring some miracle of a change in voter sentiment, with a lower than average turnout in the high population areas, with a higher turnout in rural and conservative Virginal, plus women caring more about their pocketbooks than the fairy tale of losing reproductive rights if a Republican is elected to the position of dogcatcher, then McAuliffe will be the next Govenor of Virginia.

In recalling the 5 point lead that Martha Coakley had over Scott Brown going into the Massachusetts 2009 special election, yes, polls can be wrong, larger blocks of Democrat voters can stay home, and a Republican can win as an underdog - even in Massachusetts, but not for long in Blue States. Virginia is not yet, a Blue State, that and that alone gives Cuccinelli a bump of sorts.

As to the national GOP sinking the Tea Party and foisting the likes of Chris Christie on the nation, they are setting themselves up for yet another loss. Those who might be more on the independent side, tend to vote based on an individual’s performance, if they cannot do the job, or react badly in a crisis, then the nod goes to the new candidate, regardless of party. If however, that individual has done a stellar job, regardless of party, they deserve the vote. Christie, under the pressures of Hurricane Sandy showed an amazing lack of leadership, rather appearing on national television as weak, and in need of help from the Federal Government and especially the President. That would be fine and dandy, if there was no other elected official to which to compare the New Jersey Governor, but in this case there are many.

One in particular comes to mind as Western Mass goes to the polls today to elect local and state leaders. There was a larger than average and extremely devastating snow storm three years ago, October. One which crippled the Western Mass and CT – In the City of Chicopee, the Mayor, a Democrat, did everything in his power to get the small city of 80,000 back on line. He did so communicating with the residents, and as he is also a fiscal conservative and the City has ample rainy day funds - He called for companies from other states not affected to plow, repair power lines, and get everyone in the City back up on line and fast. In less than 12 hours from the onset, the Electric (City Owned) had power restored to the main “drag” allowing gas stations, atms, grocery stores and other services to operate. The only City in both MA and CT to do so and quickly. It was leadership - which is why that mayor, who has an opponent, will receive a vote – based on performance. One should rather have a Democrat or Tea Party or whichever, as a President who might handle a crisis, rather than one, who apparently, cannot.

Yet because Christie is a moderate, and may win NJ in a landslide – (where he should stay), the National GOP considers him suitable as a Presidential candidate. – Go figure – it’s why they lose elections and why the Tea Party members should perhaps train their eyes on running as Independents, it might surprise them, even with all the “hate” from the media and the left, how many Democrats and former Republicans would come to their aid. The Standard GOP is no longer Reagan’s Party, no more than the Democrats Today resembles my father’s party. Time for a shakeup.

Massachusetts – The Tea Party, Past Presidents, and Identifying with Independent, Fiscal Conservatives – From the National to the Hyper-Local – People’s Political Minds are Changing.

Image The Atlantic – article Why a Democratic Tea Party is the Best Hope for Fixing Corrupt Govenrnment

Watching the massive grass-roots, tea-party, people’s movement towards electing candidate, Scott Brown, to the U.S. Senate, on the ground one could feel the determination of those political neophytes who had never picked up a phone, or knocked on doors in the past to get anyone elected. It was refreshing to see so much more involvement by the people of the Commonwealth. That feeling, it appeared, had all but dissipated as Massachusetts appeared to be drifting further and further left with the election of Elizabeth Warren and then Ed Markey to the U.S. Senate.

That said, a recent op-ed on the Springfield Republican’s, site, does give one a bit of hope. The Letter entitled “Tea party Republicans embrace principles of nation's founders”speaks to the thoughts of a man who is just laying out what he sees in the Tea Party, rather than what is the general “talking points” provided by the left. (, which includes most editorial boards and journalists). The 74 comments included below the piece show a stark contrast between the Tea Party members, general individuals and those hard-line progressives thought to make up all of Massachusetts.

On an even more local level, one email chain from an individual whom one might characterize as Tea Party- Republican with the emphasis on the Tea, is urging residents to help reelect a City Counselor - a Democrat. The Democrat is a fiscal conservative, or what today would be called Tea Party, but in reality and 40 years ago, would have been called a Democrat – in other words, not the hard line left Democrat who is only concerned with Reproductive rights, taxing billionaires, and socialized everything. Rather the type of Democrat in the JFK mold, who is more concerned with how the people will grow by self-determination, how the people who have will support those that have not, and how the people will support a Federal government’s role is as stated in the Constitution – in other words – today John F. Kennedy, might be considered a Tea Party Member.

Therefore, Tea Party – as some have suggested is more politically philosophical in nature, than any group with aspirations of becoming a third party. Which, one also suggests that those that identify with the Tea Party might include individuals from any political party. A recent Rasmussen poll on political identify taken October 29, 2013, suggests just that – with 42% of the nation identifying with President Obama’s political ideology and 42% of the nation identifying with Tea Party ideology. There balance of these polled were on the fence, not sure if they preferred the President’s ideology (one which on surface, one must agree, is moderate) or that of the Tea Party.

If this is, indeed the case, this early in the 2014 and 2016 election cycle, and should there be continual problems with the Health Care System, branded as Obama Care, one can imagine those numbers should increase, and not for the President, or anyone associated with his “Brand”.

That is evident as the New York Times reports that the roll out for Obama Care has Democrats feeling anxious and they should.

As the figure bandied about as to how many individuals the White House knew were going to lose their health insurance as the plan took hold was upwards to 93,000,000, should that be the case, those Republicans and Democrats will be facing primary challengers and election challengers from – Independents or Tea Party Democrats and Tea Party Republicans.

Yes, Virginia, there are Tea Party Democrats, call the JFK Democrats, my father’s Democrats but never-the-less Democrats who will be unfairly damaged – they might as well campaign with either Obama or John McCain, as it would have the same effect, or they could run under a different banner, on less…suddenly distasteful to the general voting public.

That is what the major parties fear, sharing power with a third party, or having members that are not going to “tow the party line” (See Republican Leadership and their Tea Party Members).

Which brings one back to local Massachusetts, if there are Conservatives with Tea Party credentials or ideology in Massachusetts – surely that means that other states with a lesser makeup of Progressives, are more inclined to favor a third party or independent run. Should this political mindset shift across the nation and include even the bluest states, within four to ten years, one will see a new political party, or two rise from the ashes of the once powerful. This would make our present and future decade the most politically-historically interesting time in at least a century and a half.

US Chamber of Commerce - Washington Lobbyist Team with GOP to Unseat Tea Party – The changing of the Party Guard.

Inside the beltway of Washington D.C. are those who make up the government, the elected officials and the lobbyists/special interest groups who determine legislation, regardless of the impact it may have on the nation. It is a way of doing business that has developed, one which can change the tone of political discourse in a heartbeat, given the right amount of cash. Lately, the exploration of a need for a third political party to end the apparent stalemate in D.C. has put those lobbyist in the driver’s seat on edge, so much so that one particular group has decided to invest in a strategy with the national GOP to stop those who would be more constitutionally prone – the Tea Party.

An AP article in the Gadsden Times entitled: “Business, GOP establishment: Tea party is over” speaks of the alliance of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National GOP to spend millions in an attempt to move the Republican’s in Congress from Tea Party to “Center-Right”. The AP report notes that the group is halfway to its 8 million dollar goal to build a “war-chest” to fight Congressional races. The usual Democrats are thrilled that there is such a schism in the GOP, and plan to take advantage in these races. Two races are highlighted in this article, both in Michigan.

There are two important aspects to consider, the U.S. Chamber is a lobbyist group, in DC. Who represents the interests of Chamber Members across the U.S., but being in D.C. can be lucrative, and, as the group is Bi-partisan in nature, similar to Unions, those at the head tend to make decisions more in keeping with Washington politics rather than the universal interests of the group (See ThinkProgress.org’s article on the Chambers help in winning and losing elections in 2010, very few were Democrats, mainly Republicans). Secondly, raising eight million dollars in D.C. should not be that difficult of a challenge, especially for the GOP and the U.S. Chamber, so what gives?

The Tea Party according those in the media, pollsters and the National GOP and DNC, are somewhat “Dangerous”, but to whom? Why is the National GOP so leery of the group that brought them the possession of the House of Representatives? Simply put, it is the attachment of the National GOP to the Tea Party (which is, when on weighs all points, Independent in nature), which ended, not in obedience by those Tea Party members as anticipated, once safely surrounded by those more senior members of the Houses, it was the fact that they stood alone, opposed their “own party”, and shut down the government for fifteen days. A shut-down that very few, outside of the media, knew or even cared about, that had more to do with the debt ceiling and finance, which fewer understood.

The Tea Party is less of a political party and more of a political ideology, with various fractions, that could, if members so desired, form an actual political party. Instead, those members tend to run under the Republican brand, in order to get elected, a rather disingenuous way of getting around the fact that they do not have a political party per se, to stand upon. Not unlike the Progressives who have run successfully as Democrats, and have successfully unseated those Tip O’Neil Democrats, the Tea Party members are doing the same with the GOP. It is a change in the two major political party’s makeup, one to the very left and one to the very right, with little room in the middle.

There are enough of these members to hold the lien on both sides of the political aisle – they are less of a third political party and more of a coup. That’s the danger and why those who would maintain the status qua (the moderates such as the McCain’s, Graham’s, Boehner’s, etc.) are having conniption fits and calling names.

It’s just that simple. If it were in the true nature of the political party formation (Libertarian’s, Green Party, etc.) there would be little material support for that group to say, best a standard Republican or Democrat, or so that’s the school of thought – Not enough cash from fewer members to oust one of the major party players. Therefore, those that wish to change from the right and from the left, do so by aligning themselves with a major party. The most astounding outcome in this whole process is, using one example; both the Tea Party Members and the Standard GOP are surprised when there is a disagreement. If the founders of this nation had their way – one would imagine more of a mixture of ideals and political parties, rather than two large political parties holding sway over the states. It is, one would imagine what those grassroots activists, progressive and tea party, would dream about. To this mind, it is nothing more than – bluffing. To unseat two Conservative (Tea Party) Republicans’ in Michigan, by running Center Right (Moderate) Republican’s in a primary against said Conservatives, should the moderate win, then the seat would go to the Democrat – it is what the National GOP does best – especially in general elections. The DNC, to be fair, has had more practice with their Progressives, who now are in full control of the party, but it took decades to reach the point where they are today. To wit, this is just the beginning, and it is doubtful that those in the GOP have the ability to turn back the tide at this point in the game. That will mean more losses for standard GOP elites and more wins for those Tea Party type insurgents. It is taking time, but they need only look to the Progressives to see the end in sight.

Would it be better to have four, five or six major political parties? Of course, more would get done for the people as there would have to be more compromise, and the lobbyist would have to spread themselves thin, having less influence overall on the outcomes of legislation. It is changing the Major Political party from the inside out that is the preferred route for those who fear the deep pockets, rather than rely on the trust of the American People and build as best they can, over decades a third party.

A Hillary Clinton Presidency – No So Fast to Gaze Into the Crystal Ball of the Presidency of the U.S. 2016

There’s an article in the Huffington Post today that was a bit on the interesting side - Although the piece, written by Sean McElwee, suggests it is one which brings a “Case Against Clinton 2016”, it is more of a rehash of her critics, and then a resounding conclusion that suggests there is no other candidate for President and, yes, Virginia, the Democrats will win the White House in 2016. There are also a few, perhaps to believe that a John McCain run for the Presidency may occur(Washington Post), however, even those without a crystal ball find it a bit ridiculous at this point to announce either Clinton or McCain as one a “done-deal” and the other even a remote possibility.

Hillary Clinton in 2008 was the strongest available candidate – at the time. This was comparing her to both Barack Obama (experience, and look where that has led), and McCain (who was, and remains, somewhat clueless when it comes to foreign policy, and or making decisions that would benefit everyone, not just the GOP inside D.C.) If it was Clinton vs. McCain, to this mind, it would have been a run, not a walk to the polling booth to choose the first woman President. There were several reasons, none of which had to do with gender, or the fact that as a Libertarian/Conservative, the natural reasoning would be to align oneself with whichever body the GOP put up for the job. Clinton had a record to stand on in the Senate, one which was her own – she was on the fiscally conservative voting side, took care of the Veteran’s and was a bit hawkish but in a protect the homeland vein – cautiously casting votes, rather than being brash – or casting a political vote. She had a darn good plan for the health care system, which would have been much more reasonable than either Romney Care or its derivative, Obama Care. (That can be said with a little authority living in Massachusetts.)

That said, there have been divisions in both political parties – in 2008 one saw the real rise of the Progressive Democrat, whereby a solid candidate for the blue-collar American Worker, Clinton, was cast aside for the ideologue, who looked great on camera, but continues to lack substance – a second coming of Jimmy Carter, which, through no fault of his own, apparently is in over his proverbial head. These particular brand of Democrats (not the New Deal democrats that are referred to in the McElwee piece) is deeply entrenched in the party, and will hold sway over elections until diminished – there is something in the word Progressive – move forward – that sounds right to the “uninformed” voters who are more than likely generational party members. Therefore, Clinton would have a rough primary against an inflated, mao-Barbie in the form of one Junior Senator from MA, Elizabeth Warren. Although polling near dead last at this moment, Ms. Warren one can predict will rise like a Phoenix, similarly to the President.

The GOP is now in the same predicament that the DNC appears to have itself – instead of Progressives (which to some conservatives appear to reside inside the GOP, as well as the DNC), there is the Tea Party – that much maligned group of agitators who are just too darn tied to the Constitution. They did not disappear after 2010, despite the harassment by a certain branch of the government), they fared poorly to some in the 2012 election, but to be fair, they did not have a dog in that hunt, neither did rank and file conservatives, or evangelicals. If one wants to think hard and long about why Romney failed so miserably when all the stars were aligned just perfectly – then think about the evangelicals who would not vote for someone whose religion was anathema (despite reports to the contrary) – that’s 10,000,000 votes (a conservative estimate). Add to that the Tea Party members of conscious who could not vote for someone who had been the harbinger of Obama Care – add another 2,000,000 or more voters who either skipped the Presidential choices on the ballot and/or just stayed home.

Therefore, one has to have a balance – a Constitutionalist who would appeal to the rank and file GOP (those generational party voters will go along to get along), conservatives, tea party libertarians, and yes, the evangelical right wing. Without all of those forces aligned, the GOP will lose another election, even if, as one might suspect, the candidate would be another “first” who would, indeed, lack experience.

To say at this point, that the nation would go one way or the other is ludicrous. There will be characters of interest, no doubt, and the usual suspects will occur from both parties, but one might suspect that a stronger candidate will prevail. The question remains, which candidate in 2016 will appeal to all facets of their particular party brand. Perhaps one can afford a few million voters –staying at home, or voting with caution by avoiding the top of the ticket, but to the candidate that has the majority of his or her base in their back pocket, as well as cross over and generational party voters, that individual will walk into the White House – in a landslide. It will be the one candidate that does not tow the Party line, nor willingly invest themselves in the Washington party –one suspect that this time around, it will be the real hand-shaker, with some intellect that may rule the day. As to which candidate will capture the hearts of the voting public, that remains to be seen.

The Two Party System Leaves Something To be Desired – Nation weary of both Democrats and Republicans – Time for Tea to Brand – Stand alone - Essay

There have been more polls done recently regarding the two party system, or more specifically the members of Congress and the way American’s respond to those two parties as they work, or don’t work in concert with one another. There is the content refusal to negotiate on behalf of the American People, be it ego or arrogance on the side of one Party, while the other party pushes back – yet so terrified that the public will “dislike” them, while doing exactly what they are supposed to do. Polling pushes policies ad politicians – therefore, Congress needs to be watchful of the American people.

A poll released recently by Rasmussen Reports, finds that 47% percent of the American public believes that neither party represents them.; Further the questions: used in the polling here leave no room for error on this one point, the public, or the majority if one did have a third party – would (in theory) kick the current Congress to the curb and bring into national focus a Third Party

If it were one poll that suggested this trend, one could pooh-pooh it easily; however, there are more, in fact several more. At www.pollingreport.com/politics: Although few changes have occurred in the level of individuals who feel they are members of the “Tea Party movement”, (ABC Wall Street Journal – ongoing poll), Gallup’s ongoing poll on Third Parties has reach the 60% mark Other polling to suggest a shift away from the two-party dual, and dueling system, yet the Tea Party Movement – is not identified as particularly well-known or inviting.

It is branding perhaps, or the constant harassment form the media, or even more so – the tie between Tea Party members and the GOP – which, are, in essence, akin to having apples and oranges in the same study.

Although the formal formation of a political party is a rather long and arduous proposition, taking years, if not decades to complete – the groundwork for the Tea Party is well established, and registering in each state would, if pressed, take perhaps a year or more. One might hypothesize that were voters at this juncture and in this time, see the Tea Party – (not movement), as an alternative to either the Standard GOP or the Standard Democrat, the nod would go to the least objectionable party - Cup of Tea, please.

It is the fear of funding, and having allies in both houses, one might presume that keeps the Movement from breaking ties with the standard Republican Party – However, as of late, one finds high-profile members, who are of Tea Party origin, bucking the system, while trying to appears at least modestly simpatico with the Rank and File GOP members of whichever house that member belongs. One finds that the media sees this as a bad break for the GOP, however, surely they did not miss the break between the centrist Democrats and the more radical Progressives during the 2008 Presidential Primary Season – one might not be familiar with PUMA – an acronym that was widely used in protest of the Super-Majority vote (Supermajority are members of a party in positions of elected officials or former elected officials) for Barack Obama to be the 2008 Presidential candidate, and not Hillary Clinton who had, at that time, the popular vote of the Democrat primary. PUMA – Party Unity My Ass – apparently fell by the wayside for simply Lack of Coverage by the media.

Therefore both parties had problems, yet dissimilar, within the Democrat Party there was an actual schism, in the case of the Republican Party – one finds invaders for lack of a better word, or wolves in sheep’s clothing, running as Republican’s, yet – being Libertarian or Conservatives of a different brand. Having gone to a handful of Tea Party Meetings in their original state, one found, contrary to media hype, few Republicans. The majority were “other party” designations, with a smattering of disenfranchised (PUMA) democrats, and Republicans who would take no more RHINO’s – which suggested an organization based on ideology from multiple sources, allowing each voice to be heard – In other words, or for lack of a better turn of phrase, a “People’s Party”.The “Tea” is simply symbolic of the anti-tax movement began in the nation, before it was formally a nation.

The strategy by those members, regardless of the political ideology has been to run in the party closest to their ideology – and one might guess that they have members with some experience in all levels of government, from the local, to the state, to the national stage – which, if those members were to be organized into one party – would certainly replace our current system in say one election.

As 2014 approaches, and the tie-in between Republican-Tea Party becomes more urgent by the press, with perhaps, a bit of help from some standard long entrenched McCainian style GOP members, the fear of losing the comfort of the two party system rears.

There was nothing the nations rejected more than the two-party system, if one were versed in the letters and arguments taking place pre and post Constitutional Convention – it would be clear that it was greatly feared, that the Federal Government would end up with more power than intended – based on an elite society made of up – the two political parties. How prophetic!

It is, indeed, time for a Cup of Tea, or a similar matrix, regardless of the time it takes, one hopes it is getting off the ground now, as there appears that the American people need a third choice more than ever.

What is a Libertarian and What Does the “Tea Party” Mean to the Current Political Parties? Why Not become Unaffiliated!

There’s been a dust-up and a battle brewing these past few years, put the date the real awakening began circa 2009, possibly before. This divide as some call it, wrongly, is the difference of political ideology between those “Tea Party” groups and the GOP. The reason it is not a divide is that the Tea Party and the GOP or standard Republican Party are not one in the same and never have been. The Tea Party is comprised of people of all political ideologies, most of which could be categorized as Libertarian in nature. The Libertarian is a stalwart defender of the Constitution, generally anti-war, and non-interventionist, a self-made philosophy when it comes to free-markets, and the true purpose of the Federal versus the State Governments as outlined by the Constitution of these United States. Some Republicans, lately, have referred to themselves as Jeffersonian Republican’s or, in essence, Libertarians who are working on the Republican side, mainly as the two-party political system has left, in the past, little room for the formation of a larger, robust and politically competitive Libertarian Party.

The Tea Party, which, again comprised of so many variances, is an anomaly as it is not yet, emphasis on yet, a true, separate political party, but more of a movement born of frustration and the lack of disconnect between Washington DC (the Elite) and the people they represent. It began over the growing tax burden and national debt in 2009, and with nationalized health care on the table in the House and Senate, the movement exploded. The reaction from the Political Class and the Media was one of instant hostility on one political side, and the other saw an opportunity to “cash-in” on similarities. That would be the GOP, but there was and still exists a deep schism between the two.

The question is why? The standard GOP politicians is not that much different than the standard Democrat – while going about the day to day business of Washington B.S., in the end, they tend to agree on most everything. Case in point – Obamacare.

Ted Cruz, the Senator from Texas is being much maligned in the media and by member of the GOP, especially John McCain of AZ, simply because he wanted to bring attention to the multiple issues. One might read about how the Senator is positioning himself with the “base” or the “extreme right wing” base of the Republican Party – or the “Tea Party”. Now recall, the Tea Party is not the Republican Party, and never has been. That “Tea Party” label attached to Cruz and other politicians and the Party is meant to be a warning bell for the potential voter to “stay away” – It is synonymous with “crazy”, but is that truly the case? It is the same as calling Ted Cruz an opportunist for standing 22 plus hours on the well of the Senate Floor, passionately asking his fellow Senators to do their job. He railed against Obamacare, which will, in the end, lead to socialized medicine and will destroy the economy. That is an opinion based upon some research on the Bill, and its continued growth, both lack of freedom to choose and economics.

Cruz, for his part, is appreciated by members of the Tea Party movement, he is also, one would easily guess, appreciated by Libertarians, and by voters who, may not care for the way Politician’s have risen to a “royalty” status, whiel the people mainly pay the various “Lords” their dues through taxes – with little return. A bit of a feudal system has developed. There are few Knights and no round table. What happens next with Obamacare? It goes into effect, with the help of John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham and those Republican’s where, without the GOP label, one might think they were Progressive Democrats. John McCain and others of his ilk, feel that there is simply no hope – the Best thing to do is to let the bill start, and when the people are so much more oppressed economically, they will turn around and love the Republican Party, the bill will self-destruct and all will be well – That is what is called, in most circles – gutless.

Men and Women, like Ted Cruz, believe that one might have fought to stop the process known as “cloture” – which allows a vote to go forward on a piece of law as is. The reasoning: he wanted to have a debate, and possibly add amendments to the Affordable Health Care Act. That Act might be salvageable, but not in its present form, and not without debate.

Yes, John McCain, spoke of the many Republican Amendments to the bill and how they worked to smooth it out, a bill a large percent of the American People did not want – in other words, John McCain and those GOP Senators in the 2009 Senate, were responsible for Obamacare, just as much or if not more than the Democrats.

What Cruz was pointing out was that with a bit of debate, and some quick fixes (of which many have been suggested in the house that make sense, but were summarily kicked to the curb), that would have benefitted the public and the government as a whole, but due to his brassy attack on members of his “own party”, he was maligned, by both those members and the media, and especially the democrats.

Therefore the lesson this sends is that no one individual who has been sent to Washington to represent their state, or district, should step outside the boundaries of their Political Party, and do what their conscious dictates – abide by what the individuals who sent them to Washington ask of that Senator or Congressional Representative.

That, in essence is why our founders were so dead set against the formation of political parties. They felt that the political parties would cause a divide in the people, and allow a very few to rule over the “masses”, in grand style.

That is what has happened, unfortunately. If one thinks about the political party they are affiliated with for a moment – it that party truly a membership. To be a Democrat or Republican is nothing more than a label, and guarantees on no special privileges than any other citizen. If one is a Democrat, does one even know his or her representative, and how they are working in Washington on their behalf, or a Republican? The same would apply.

There is an option for those who are fed up with the two-party systems that is choking the life out of this nation – become an unaffiliated voter. By doing so, one is liberated from the label, and one is not bound (mentally) to vote for someone based solely on a party membership that has zero value in the real world.

Listen to what the individual is attempting to say – not the slogans, but where they stand on the issues, and if one agrees, regardless of whether the candidate is a Democrat, Republican or – shock, Tea Party, Libertarian, or otherwise, then vote for that individual.

Don’t’ send a dime, red cent, or nickel to any political party. If one has a candidate one likes, give to that candidate directly.

What Cruz was doing was begging his colleagues of all political affiliates to-do their job. He was disgusted with the disconnect between those who rule over us in Washington, and what we, as a nation, truly need.

What this nation needs is 400 more Ted Cruz’s, Democrat, Republican, Unaffiliated, Libertarian (especially Libertarian), Green Party, etc. Take the social issues out of the equation. One has to understand that the social issues are thrown into the political mix purely for emotional effect – and have little to do with what happens either pro or con on any social issue once those two political parties meet in D.C. After the dust has settled, there is still abortion, there are still injustices and there will always be until – the parties are not two, but three or four or five, with the capital of this Republic filled with the voices of the people it represents. That is what the founders envisioned, and the plan was a fine one, it is the law of the land in its truest sense. It would allow true representation, rather than a ruling class.

Those members of the Tea Party get this concept. This is why there is a divide in the GOP – which again, truly does not exist – as these are two separate political entities, one is a party (GOP) one is a movement (TEA) and they are not simpatico.

It is true that members of the Tea Party have run on the Republican Ticket – mainly became it is a simpler way to gain access to party funds and to find a way to break the barrier against alternative ideologies. This is also true of the Progressive Socialists, who run as Democrats and are now in the Political Class. There is little written or discussed on that scope, but it exists. The lines between the two parties are so blurred, that one has to step back a moment and think now about the individual. Unaffilate. There is no membership in any party that is worth the cheap paper card one’s name is printed on.

Imagine in the message it would send, if the nations voters shed the political party image and actually voted for the individual who made sense, to them personally, it would be chaos – for the political class.

Note: if you read it on the internet, or in the paper or hear it on the evening news, unless it’s a train wreck, with 8 X 10 color glosses and live video providing proof, have a bit of skepticism, its healthily. Who to believe? Attend a meeting, a political meeting – either a Democrat Party Meeting, or a Republican Party Meeting, or better yet, find a Tea Party Meeting or Libertarian meeting and see which one of those groups most closely align with your own personal beliefs. The experience might surprise you.

Tea Party – Forming PAC’s and Growing Membership – so much for the Death Knell of the Tea Party. Op-Ed mixed with Activism

Photo from a Cincinnati, Ohio Tea Party Rally in 2012 - image wn.com

As of late there’s a lot of vitriol aimed at the “Tea Party” – (That’s a loosely framed moniker for the multitude of groups within groups that are prevalent in every single state in the Union.) There are articles such as Rob Quinn of Newser’s “Weakened Tea Party Changes Focus”, which discusses the national Republican’s blame of the Tea Party for losses in 2012. There is an interesting article from an “international watchdog group” ”What to Expect from the Tea Parties in 2013 - And How to Stop it”which said article starts with the “fact” that John Boehner is a Tea Party Republican.

Which, from the outside looking in, one might more believe the Tea Party, which has never claimed to be a political organization, rather, more of a “movement”. That movement, which began with a few national groups, and morphed into individual “Tea Party” groups around the country, was more “educational” in nature, then something changed. The more they learned, the more members of individual groups became aware, the more they wanted to effect change. What occurred next was a push on a huge grassroots level in 2010 to get members elected to Federal Office. They ran on the Republican Ticket, trounced incumbents that were more Democrat than Republican, and became neatly affiliated with the Republican Party. That Political Party was thrilled, as it saw a chance to expand its power base, however, when push came to shove, the differences between strict Constructionists and any Washington Republican, got in the way of the perfect Washington DC order. What’s a major party to do? Blame those insurgent Tea Party members.

Herein lays the problem. There are a lot of Tea Party Members. More than one can shake a stick at, and if one believes they have no clout, think again. As in fledgling organizations there is always a risk that power plays would get in the way of progress (See Dick Army and his Republican Get Out the Vote efforts while working with the Tea Party.) The fact that Army was paid off by those members to get the heck out of Dodge (contracts), speaks volumes about the integrity of those who are running one of the groups – Freedom Works. There is a second group, The Tea Party Patriots, who are about to start their own P.A.C. (TheHill Blog) What we have, therefore, are two organizations that both are “Tea Party”, a “movement’, which are looking more like a political party by the minute. In forming a Political Action Committee, they are a political organization. If they can break from the Republican Party and take the time and energy to form their own party, what a boon that would be for the American People. If that appears to difficult and they have the P.A.C. to garner funds to elect Tea Party Members, then they may be able to fund those members who run as “Tea Party” Independents.

They are the only Independent options in the foreseeable future as regards candidates; it’s a question, therefore, of whether or not they will unit to become one political party. In the meantime, if one is looking for an alternative. The following are the two major organizations with links to local and regional Tea Party Groups.

Tea Party Patriots

And

Freedom Works

Ironically most of the local groups are affiliated with both organizations.

This gives them a huge voting bloc. One might not think of the “Tea Party” as anything but extreme. They are the people standing on street corners, and holding signs, when there isn’t even an election! What this does, however, is plant the seed. There are the activists, and they are the only political organization (call it what it really is) that would make our framers proud.

Niki Haley’s Choice to Replace DeMint - Tim Scott (R, SC) – Independent Tea Party Conservative - Media weighs in

Tim Scott - Tea Party Comfortable - image from Earlcapps.blogspot.com - read article.

Niki Haley’s decision to choose Tim Scott, a Congressman who along with dozens of other like-minded individuals, were elected to the Congress in 2010, was in keeping with the character of the Tea Party. The media is, of course, is searching for words to explain the fact that Scott just happens to be a Republican and an African American, which is out of context with the left’s narrative of the Tea Party as White Racist (or the Republican Party for that matter – see previous election and Joe Biden’s remarks, or pick any Democrat – it was certainly about race.) The New York Times article has given an fairly reasonable portrait of the man, and acknowledges his Tea Party background, while bringing up the fact that he is the 7th African American to serve in the Senate, and goes on to point out the lack of diversity in the Republican Party! Frankly, the fact that he is African-American is not of import to those Tea Party members, who, contrary to the national narrative, is a diverse and welcoming movement, candidates for public office are chosen on their abilities, rather than on the need to include or diversify.

The Washington Post, in the overview on Scott is , for the most part, a history of African American’s in the Senate with some biographical data of Scott included. Apparently, something has happened at the Post, for more on Scott, they linked to an article from the The National Journal: “House GOP Favorite Tim Scott is Ready for What Comes Next” - No kidding.

What is most disturbing is the fact that there have been so few African American’s who have served in the U.S. Senate – understanding that the two party system, on both sides of the aisle are pretty “white”, and that one of those political parties, feel s it owns the minorities (and considering the last election, that may be a case in point). That said, it is not race that disqualifies or qualifies someone to hold an elected office, it is competence and desire that should be the factor (and yes, obviously like-mined political ideology). That is where the much maligned Tea Party takes a left turn from the main political parties – in not recognizing race first, rather ideology and accomplishments. We are all American’s, and we all are “something else”, in the greater scheme of things, we are Spanish, African American, Asian, Polish, French, or a combination of any of the aforementioned – but we are all Americans. That should be the only criteria, the balance should be secondary . We are here in this nation, given the opportunity, all of us, to either rise or fall on our own merits. This is unique in the world, where these are nations (Pakistan for example) if one is born a street sweeper, then one is destined to become a street sweeper, and nothing more. The governments in some nations choose one’s career, or one is pigeonholed as having a propensity to be this or that, and there is no other course for their lives. Here, in the U.S. we are able to change outlives on a dime, we enjoy the freedom to take chances, change careers, or move freely from one state or another. The constant focus on race as a factor in any of the aforementioned , may have been true 100 years ago, or perhaps further back, prejudice exists in all forms, between race, ethnicity and yes, class and cash, but from individuals, not from the collective that is the nation. That may be why the Tea Party, and it’s representatives are who we truly are, the good and yes, the bad, but overall American’s who see the opportunity provided by the Constitution, without worrying much about someone’s race, or how diverse they might be.

One can hazard to bet that Senator Elect Scott will be an independent, conservative, voice in the Senate, and we, as a nation, are lucky that he has accepted Governor Haley’s nod.

Most important: Tim Scott as a Congressional Representative – From his Congressional Website: Sponsored Legislation, and His voting record, unusually forthcoming for an elected official.

GOP 2012 Update: Perry enters Race Takes Lead in Polls, Criticisms Heat up on Perry’s form of Dress, Diction and Straight Texas Talk

For all the brouhaha from MSNBC over Perry's Hat, one finds few photos, if any of Rick Perry near a hat! (unless being worn by someone behind him - that said, he would at the very least appear authentic in a cowboy hat - image mtv.com.com



Texas Governor, Rick Perry, entered the GOP race for the Presidential nomination this past weekend, and is now leading the field by 10 points in a new Rasmussen poll, Rasmussen poll. In addition, the critique on Perry from the media has been ramped up a bit:
From Chris “My legs are tingling for Obama” Matthews comes this gem:

"He looks like a clown," Matthews said. "He dresses very fancy. There's something about the way that he puts himself together that doesn't look authentic. He looks like, I don't know, a wax figure pretending to be governor. There's something about him that doesn't add up to me. Maybe it's this Texas B.S., this boots and tuxedo thing they do down there. Why does it work? Outside of Texas it doesn't travel very well."

Apparently, Chris Matthews might think Obama is the "height of fashion" in this attempt at fitting in - while visiting Texas - of course, not terribly authentic, now is he? image:rickperryme.com




Apparently Matthews has never travelled to Texas, or for that matter, out of the studio – it is Texas, Big Texas, Big Hats, Big Boots – Matthew should at least try Nashville first, where they do wear cowboy boots, and there’s country music and all – to at least dim the culture shock of leaving the studio prior to going onto Texas.

Of course, not to be outdone, the AP now has a charming way of insinuating that those that live outside of the bubble that is the east coast elite (and those that consider themselves elite elsewhere – headlines ”Perry's colorful tongue takes the national stage”. Apparently, authentic local colloquialisms do not belong in politics – to whit – you sound funny, you talk funny, you have “Perryisms”, why, even the President is being magnanimous.

Obama said Tuesday he was inclined to cut the governor "some slack" since it was so early in his run. The president was asked on CNN about Perry's suggestion that military members would respect the Texan more than him because Perry served in the military and he didn't.
"I think that everybody who runs for president, it probably takes them a little bit of time before they start realizing that this isn't like running for governor or running for Senate or running for Congress," Obama said. "You've got to be a little more careful about what you say." AP Source


This from a man who held one term as a community organizer, one term in the Illinois Legislature and half a term in the U.S. Senate – seriously – The President uses “Chicago Gang” colloquialisms when on the stump, what scares the U.S. Public more? A straight talking and shooting (see coyote/dog) Texan or a smooth talking hipsters that will bring a gun to a knife fight?

Not to be outdone by the President, the RNC inner circle is in a tizzy:

"Inappropriate and unpresidential," tweeted Tony Fratto, a Republican who worked at the Treasury Department and in the White House under President George W. Bush.
That was his quick verdict after Perry said at a campaign appearance Monday in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke would be committing a "treasonous" act if he decided to "print more money to boost the economy." Perry said such action by the Fed would amount to a political maneuver aimed at helping President Barack Obama win re-election.
(What Perry Said:)
"If this guy prints more money between now and the election, I don't know what y'all would do to him in Iowa, but we would treat him pretty ugly down in Texas," Perry said, responding to a question from the audience.AP Source

This refers to the print of money by the Feds, a bad plan in some economists as well as a growing percentage of the American Public, who votes, and has a say in all of this (witness the 2010 election where historic gains were made in the Congress by “Republicans” of Tea Party Philosophy – many an incumbent Republican and Democrat were replaced by those rabble rousers. To which many in the nation were quite pleased. The other note to those who are clueless (Press, RNC, DNC) "Treat Pretty Ugly"in Texas is not a threat, it's a fact, it's like being shunned, or laughed at, or basically voted out of office, or confronted with strong verbal scoldings) Where's the disconnect? Look to the East!!

Therefore, Rick Perry stands up, and doesn’t back down, he’s not from Massachusetts, or New York or Washington, he’s from Texas. He speaks like a Texan, he dresses like a Texan, and he loves this nation like a Texan.

How long will it take the Photoshop maniacs over at Newsweek to slam Perry on a cover in looking like a Texan? (But with their usual creative twist) See other’s who have scared the left and the mainstream media and the Republican hierarchy: Palin and Bachmann come immediately to mind.

What’s wrong with Rick Perry – He’s authentic – that’s cause for concern in a political landscape where authentic is not the norm – illusion is all that counts, and business as usual, should stay that way – Not this time: Perry, Palin, Bachmann are not the usual suspects, (Although Palin has yet to announce her “intentions” – she has the time of Ronald Reagan on her side). The national debate should be a focus on who is most qualified to lead the nation. It is about leadership and frankly, if a tough talking, gun tooting Texan, a former Governor of the State of Alaska, that upended the Republican Party, the Democrats and Big Oil, in favor of her States Constitution, or a Tax Attorney, Congresswoman from Minnesota, who had stood firm in her conviction not to raise the debt ceiling, are on the ticket for the GOP, one might be surprised at how much the resonate with the individual – not Washington, or Debbie Wasserman Shultz harping on about whatever, on the local Sunday Talk Shows.

Fact of the matter is, one of those aforementioned will be the next President; none of them are out of the question, it is that the American voting public has had it with “the usual” and are looking for leadership in the form of someone who embodies the American Spirit of can do, must do, and must do it on your own, especially when that candidate has done exactly that.

Of course, this is one opinion, but when the President is holding steady at 39%, taking a bus tour in a glorified and armored greyhound bus into Iowa to tell the folks that he’ll have plan in September to fix the economy, it comes off more than a little disingenuous and somewhat insulting to the public who has heard the same line time and again. I addition, he’s lost his swagger, his sense of humor and appears to know he’s in over his head, with no way out, but for the gift of a general election – and that Tea Party that is much maligned and feared by the media, the elite and those sitting at the RNC headquarters in Washington, will be the ones to help make it happen. Those darn terrorist mothers, fathers, grandfathers, grandmothers, teens, working men and women who pay too much in taxes (combined federal and state) and support those yahoos in office (along with the fifty percent of the nation that does not pay taxes), those who prefer to follow the constitution, democrats, republicans and independents all, and they prefer that their politicians are straight talking, shoot from the hip, men and women. The hue and cry about evangelicals, tea party support, and well, just about anything the left thinks will scare the average Joe and Jane from the morning news to the eleven o’clock even news (running snippets on national news), with the catchphrases: Tea Party Candidate, Evangelical Right Wing Christian (emphasis on Christian), are only doing those candidates a favor. Those just happen to be the qualities that the American Public is seeking now, after having tried Carter II (or as some pundits who had worked in the Carter administration have noted – their worst nightmare since Carter (Pat Caddell) (paraphrased).

Richard Neal (D-MA2 – (for now – Redistricting) and Nancy Pelosi (D-CA8) Will be Up for Re-election in 2012 – A Public Service Announcement

Both Richard Neal and Nancy Pelosi (along with all members of Congress) will be up for re-election in 2012. In Neal’s case, the fact that Massachusetts has lost a house seat, and redistricting is not yet complete, it is unclear if he will retain his seat as the Massachusetts 2nd District may be merged with another. Although, this is an unlikely scenario, in this opinion, due to both John Olver (D-MA1) and Neal’s clout within the Democrat Party – it would be more sensible for Democrats (who are the majority Major political party within the State, and therefore have a free hand with redistricting – as unenrolled voters, the clear majority, are not a “political party”) to merge the 4th and 10th in order to protect Barney Frank (MA4th).

As of this writing, there are no clear challengers to any of the Congressional House Seats, and this is due to the redistricting. In 2010, all but 2 of the 10 MA Democrats faced a challenge at the ballot, and both Neal and Frank had to spend millions, call in former President Bill Clinton, and locate 30,000 voters in less than 13 hours to insure that they remained in Congress. They were re-elected with the narrowest margins of their careers, however, this fact will most likely not weigh in the decision to eliminate a district, again due to both having held positions within the Democrat Party from 2006 to 2010.
Nancy Pelosi, (D-CA8) former speaker of the House, will be also be up for reelection along with all members of Congress. Pelosi, who also faced a challenge in the CA 8 the district, fared much better than her Massachusetts counterparts in the 2010 rout, which saw the Republican’s with historical gains, ousting many entrenched Democrats as well as a few Republicans. Although faced with a Challenger, the Progressive Pelosi, was in fairly safe territory, as San Francisco, makes up the entire district, and is known as the epicenter of the counter-culture of the 1960’s – little has changed. It remains to be seen if she will face a challenger in 2012; however, as with all members of Congress, at this point, the only members who appear to have “gotten the message” from their constituents are the much maligned (in the press) Tea Party Caucus members. Therefore, as the American Public is fed-up with business as usual (the pre-school sandbox that is Washington), it is likely that both Republicans and Democrats will face the wrath of the American people, it is however, likely that those on the side of fiscal responsibility will win over the more Progressive policies of spend, spend, and spend, creating government jobs, while unemployment has continued to rise under the watch of the current Administration.
As the dust begins to clear and challengers become available, information and biographies will be available on this blog.