Saturday, August 13, 2011

GOP 2012 - Look to Texas For Rick Perry News – Texas Pride Belies National Press - Perry Expected to Announce GOP Bid Today – Poll Obama Loses NY

Rick Perry, 10 Year Texas Governor, Dog Lover, Job Creator, Private Sector, Government Reducer - image Dallas Morning News

As Texas Governor, Rick Perry is expected to make a formal announcement of his candidacy for the GOP Presidential Nomination in 2012 today, the media, both local Texas and National, appear to vary in each assessment of the 10 year Governor. A review of a few articles, of the many now available, both opinions from the “mainstream media”, as well as news from local community newspapers, one finds a slight discrepancy on how Perry is viewed. In all articles, criticism is from the “professional left”, by which one can categorize as College Professors, journalist, and those posters commenting on articles that are avowed Progressives. Therefore, a short comparison is in order:

From: KTXS, Texas: “As Perry Prepares For Presidential Run, His Big Country Roots Remain In Paint Creek” , an article that gives an overall perspective of the young Rick Perry and how he has failed to irritate his neighbors over this lifetime.

From: The Corpus Christi Caller Times: “Love him or hate him, Rick Perry's track record shows he's tough to beat”, an article that includes the obligatory “local professors” assessment, however, it paints a picture of the type of relentless campaigns the Governor has undertaken, and won.

Contrast, that with the national CBS and CNN Articles on Perry’s record (fiscal) during his 10 year term:

From CBS Evening News: “How Rick Perry created the "Texas Miracle", speaks to the fact that Texas has incredible job growth in the private sector, however, the Governor has cut state positions! The problem, Rick Perry reduced the size of Government: the obligatory Teacher, who received a pink slip – she’s taking it personally. (However, teacher’s contracts are not on the state level, rather the local level, and although local government is subsidized by the state, one must merely look at the nation’s educational scorecard to understand that having more teachers does not necessarily translate into a better education. (Search blog for articles on Teachers Unions, Test Scores and the National Report card for full statistics.)

From CNN Money: Rick Perry's Texas jobs boom: The whole story” follows approximately the same “theme” as the CBS article, complete with “teachers”, however, adds the new twist, that yes, Perry has increased private sector jobs, he has lured corporations into Texas with tax breaks, and he has lured workers in the same manner, which apparently is a problem, now that those unemployed from across the nation head to Texas, the article questions: can Perry keep up with job growth?!

Seriously, taking everything into context, and noting that most of the articles written are about Perry’s accomplishments on the one hand (local) and his potential for failure, specifically for government employees on the other hand, he sounds as if he has a handle on the way things should be done on a Federal Level, based on the Constitution, with the States carrying individual burdens, and the reduced Federal Government in charge of very little. (There were other subjects, more than a few Right-Wing Religious jabs thrown in for good measure – and one article (which one can assume there are more of the same – touting his average grades in College). (Those average grades in college, at least Perry has released them, or the individual who was not arrested for obtaining them (unlike those that tried to obtain the current occupant of the White House grades), tell us that Perry is not one of the “elite” – a plus in most voters minds).

To recap: Perry was able to maintain the respect of his neighbors, go onto college, win every election by campaigning hard, and while Governor of Texas, grew jobs, cut the size of the government and put people to work so much so that Texas is attracting people from other states (who lost congressional seats due to people fleeing the State – see Massachusetts).

Although a few articles does not research make, especially about how Texan’s view their Governor, a pending trip to Dallas at month’s end, will allow for a small amount of polling, on which this blog will report, both negative and positive, from people that work and live in Texas.

Just a side note: vis a vis, the Carteresque Presidency of Barack Obama:

New York State voters disapprove 49 - 45 percent of the job President Obama is doing, a huge drop from his 57 - 38 percent approval June 29 and the first time the president ever has had a negative score in New York, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

Democrats approve 75 - 19 percent, down from 82 - 12 percent in June. Disapproval is 86 - 10 percent among Republicans, compared to a 74 - 23 percent disapproval in June, and 58 - 36 percent among independent voters, compared to a slightly positive 49 - 45 percent in June, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University poll finds.

Included in the article, and not surprisingly, as a result, Democrats congressional districts are also polling lower, which is looking more like an opportunity for Fiscal Conservatives to pick up a few extra seats in the House, and one cannot discount the Senate races, most of which must be defended by Democrat incumbents. This sets up a likely scenario where, one again, the country is faced with one-party rule, however, in this instance, the one party has two factions that are fiscally conservative, the Republican and the Tea Party running as Republican.

Friday, August 12, 2011

GOP Debate Review – Route between Bachmann & Pawlenty, Romney Looking Like Leader, and Human - Gingrich Fires at Press – Missing: Perry and Palin

The GOP Field at Iowa - image

Watching the GOP debate sponsored by Fox News and the Washington Times provided the public (which should have been watching given the increasingly clear indication that one of those standing on that stage in Iowa, will, unless Perry of Texas and Palin of Alaska jump in, be the next President), with an insight into how these candidates respond to the “hard” questions thrown by Fox’s Chris Wallace.

The beginning of the debate was as expected, each candidate giving their view of how they might fix the economy, while dismissing President Obama’s non-efforts, in the correct “red-meat”, pre-primary language that is necessary to pump up the base. What was most noticeable with the opening questions was the similarities rather than the differences between all of the candidates on the stage – They all appeared to be in complete control, all looking, more or less, presidential, and extremely polite.

Then Chris Wallace started to ask questions that were pointed and directed at each candidate regarding a particular media story, while at the same time, inviting individual candidates to comment on the one standing at the next podium, or the one down – basically all Hades broke loose, and this is what one could take away from the ensuing brouhaha: Michelle Bachmann can hold her own, no matter how base the charge, she fires back and has the ability to look at her detractor, and the audience, as if they were somehow less than (choose any adjective).

Tim Pawlenty was the most contentious of the debaters, going after Bachmann with gusto, and a little less gusto when it came to Romney. Wallace, when asking a round of pointed questions at Answer Man, Newt Gingrich, was probably most shocked when Gingrich turned on him, literally. One thing about Newt Gingrich, the soft-spoken Virginian can deliver cutting barbs, with wit and sarcasm while refuting an accusation, all in a lecture. Romney and Cain were also asked the “hard” questions, deflecting them with ease, while Wallace continued to pit one against the other, looking quite gleeful. He should have been gleeful. He engineered a shouting match between Rick Santorum and Ron Paul that was of interest, surprisingly, Santorum appeared to give his best, while Paul had a virtual meltdown. Usually Paul is composed, but the Wallace method of creating debate brawling, got to the good Congressman. Unfazed: Herman Cain, Mitt Romney and Michelle Bachman, who stood up for themselves, without taking the bait (unless it came to Pawlenty and Bachmann, in which case, she clearly “let him have it”.

Of Particular interest was the question posed to Bachmann by Wallace, regarding a comment she made (era unknown) regarding the Christian concept of being submissive to a spouse. Wallace, asked pointedly if she would continue that “submissive role” if elected, implying Bachmann’s husband would be calling the shots. She then gave Wallace a bit of religious education regarding the biblical meaning of submissive, taking into account that most American’s don’t read their Bibles, (most notably the press): simply stated the particular verse and use of the arcane language translates into respect, and charges both the husband and the wife to literally listen and support one another. She shorted it to “paraphrasing” it means “respect”. She handled that well, if, and only if, someone understood the true meaning, however, that the majority would not, can be taken to the bank.

What this blog learned from this debate: The majority of the candidates took Wallace’s’ bait and acted like children, (it’s easy to see who the tattle-tale of the group might be) or petulant old men, with glaring exceptions: Mitt Romney, although also fired up at times, maintained his cool, also note: Romney appeared more tousled, less neat, more human, and more right (on issues), more gracious (with his fellow candidates) and therefore, more Presidential. Herman Cain, give credit where credit is due, although inexperienced in the political realm gave pound for pound, without coming across as a hot head, or someone whose temper could easily be riled. Bachmann, who was put directly under the spotlight, with hard barbs from Pawlenty and Wallace, made her points, without sounding off base, rather, using a knowing look (translated - I feel sorry for you – you idiot, now stand back) and then stating her case, without scratching anyone’s eyes out or breaking down in tears – she stood up for herself, and did so as graciously as possible, given Pawlenty’s barbs. It was as if by design, Wallace, pointedly started the mix up, in order to make certain candidates trade verbal barbs and others, to well, become unhinged. He shook the wheat from the chaff. From this perspective, Romney was clearly the winner, not on content, but on the sheer fact that he escaped the Fox/Washington Times Debate the least ruffled, followed by Cain and Bachmann.

Who was missing? Governor Rick Perry who will announce this weekend, and Governor Sarah Palin, who, one would like to see up against Wallace and his playful incitement of what can only be called a “GOP Debate Riot”. One would hazard to guess, that neither would take the bait, like Romney, it would be beneath them.

This brings up an interesting personal revelation, never having been a fan of Mitt Romney, he was actually likeable, presidential, and although accused of being “like Obama”, as was Gov. Huntsman, Romney rose to the occasion, with each leading question and pointed barb, even straying from his talking points! Romney needs to be Romney more often – the tousled, and quick witted, sarcastic Romney, that points out the worth of Candidate Cain, calmly and with reason.

One can therefore, see an Iowa straw poll that gives Romney, Bachman and, Cain credit for their performance, and as for the rest, a thank you note for the entertainment. Of course, this all depends upon what happens when the Texan rides into Iowa, and Palin drives in with her bus next week. One would like to see both announce, and give the GOP stage a real advantage for continued entertainment with a purpose, to this mind, qualified candidates are those that want the job, believe they can fix the mess, and have some resume that suggests that they can play both sides of the aisles (or use persuasion mixed with persistence), and only one was on that stage last night – Romney. The other two, would round out the field nicely, and the rest, as history notes on these debates, will be relegated to the obligatory 2 questions per debate for Candidates that don’t stand a snowball chance in Hades.

Predicating, which is dangerous, and assuming (which everyone knows what that stands for) the next debate should feature Romney, Bachman, Cain, Palin and Perry – giving the nation an opportunity to view the persons that, in this option, appear to have a handle on the dire straits were in, and are not afraid to take on the task. (Adding one Donald Trump to the mix would just be the icing on the cake!).

Although the press as we know it today, would continue to live in the fantasy land where the President wins reelection handily because not one of the GOP candidates is suitable (to them). What this blogger saw was the absolute potential in the aforementioned that were on that stage, and as a moderate, choosing a candidate that will lead our nation, without taking months to deliberate, have the background and history of making decisions (or in Bachmann’s case, standing up and fighting in the trenches for the people and fearlessly, one might add) and most importantly – lead, both the on the U.S. stage as well as globally.

Closing: Although much is made of Romney’s involvement in “Massachusetts Care”, which morphed into Obamacare, read this article: From the Examiner: Romneycare-a-revolution-that-basically-worked”which talks about Governor Romney’s original intent, and where the Massachusetts Legislature mandated it to the point that made it appeal to Obama.

Thursday, August 11, 2011

Criticism Mounts from both the Far Left and the Far Right – Bizarre Questions Arise About Texas Gov. Rick Perry – Timed for Iowa Announcement?

Comedian Colbert's PAC Released Iowa Ad - Image CNN

There has been a lot of hype surrounding the Governor of Texas, Rick Perry, and his pending entrance into the 2012 GOP Race, with several polls showing the Texas Governor to come in second to Mitt Romney, whose unsuccessful run in 2008, compelled him to seek the nomination a second time to the maxim: “If at First you don’t’ succeed, try, try again.”. From a Bay State perspective, Mitt Romney’s popularity among conservatives is mind-boggling, of course, they did not live in Massachusetts while he was Governor, therefore, they might want to ask the “man on the street” so to speak.

The poll that appears most conflicted in this projection is the Gallup Poll released August 9th, 2011, with Romney as Front Runner, and Perry coming in Second without having made a formal announcement. In viewing the poll graphic (Below) the projection was based on a combination of two factors; the favorability and unfavorabilty of the candidate minus name recognition. The Candidate who appears to have the highest name recognition, but does not perform overall in the poll is Sarah Palin, who also has not announced. The methodology and questions, however, available here from in pdf apparently leave Palin off the main questions – included on question five (presumably after the demographic questions: From Gallup PDF: [RANDOM ORDER: Minnesota Congresswoman, Michele Bachmann; Businessman, Herman Cain; Former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich; Former Utah governor, Jon Huntsman; Texas Congressman, Ron Paul; Former Minnesota governor, Tim Pawlenty; Texas governor, Rick Perry; Former Massachusetts governor, Mitt Romney; Former Pennsylvania senator, Rick Santorum].

poll restults graph from Gallup

Now Rick Perry, who is a third term Governor of the State of Texas (no mean feat),( and who was brought back from the precipice during the 2100 primary by one Sarah Palin, in his bid for a third term against Republican Establishment and Texas staple, Kay Bailey Hutchinson) is under attack – from the right and from the left, and these “attacks” can leave someone conflicted.

The left brings out the clowns:


Certainly there are more examples, but these two take the proverbial cake.

From the right:

A brouhaha developed in Tennessee , when an endorsement from a State official of Perry drew fire, not necessarily for the content, but the fact brought forth in defense of Perry as he is a reformed Democrat, and in fact, had been the Texas Campaign Manager for Al Gore’s Presidential campaign. Again, Al Gore!!!

From Politico comes a piece by former Congressman Tom Tancredo (seriously, writing for Politico), who outs Perry as overly sympathetic to our neighbors from the South -
The Title: “Rick Perry not true conservative” is vintage Tancredo – he makes Rick Perry sound like – Good Golly – Mike Huckabee (in part) for some of the stances Perry took regarding the Border and In-State Tuition for children of Illegal Immigrants.

Given the aforementioned, it is quite possible that Perry, according to Maddow, is the next Obama, (rather Perry is backed by crazy right-wing preachers rather than crazy old socialists and hippies). In addition, what one gets’ from Colbert’s ad is that Perry with an A, (ad running in Iowa), uses guns. (Obviously, this as is not to be taken seriously and is one of Colbert’s jokes (hopefully). As anyone knows, those Iowa Republican’s know every name there is both on and off the ballot, and no where on earth can one find that many political junkies in one geographical area.

The message sent by these two aforementioned clowns: Perry is a right wing, gun toting, evangelical nut who thinks he’s the second coming. Then from the right, Perry is “soft" on illegal immigrants and he is a “Former Gore Democrat!!”

If nothing else, Perry’s entrance into the race is at, the very least, entertaining, and with his Perry’s Gubernatorial “Savior” heading into Iowa with her Bus Tour this week, Perry’s purpose in the GOP Presidential fray may finally become clear. Perry is to Romney as Thompson was to Romney/Huckabee in 2008 – the question is; which candidate that has not yet announced will be able to capitalize at this late date? That will be left as an open-ended question for readers to ponder.

Of course, that blatantly hinted scenario would give Rachel Maddow hours of endless conspiracy theory speculation, while providing Tina Fey with employment for a few more years.

Wednesday, August 10, 2011

Verizon’s Union’s (CWA and IBEW)Sabotage to Death Threats – Professional Union Members vs. The Rank and File - (Op-Ed)

The Irony! Verizon Union Strike Facebook Page uses Ben Franlin "Join or Die" Image - Image from: Sumpter South Carolina Tea Party!

"Unions" - Utopian Progressive Ideals Versus the Realty of the Economy and Decades of Change - The Verizon Strike August 2012

Verizon’s Unionized Landline Division, has seen its share of down’s with the economy and the reality of progress, as more clients shift to wireless and drop landline services. This division is unionized with approximately 45,000 members; the unions, CWA (Communications Workers of America), and the Interational Brotherhood of Electrical Workers decided to call a strike over contract disputes, as Verizon met 75% of demands, and the contract expired. When calling a strike, the “professional” union managers, literally put the rank and file out of work with no financial resources. The fact that the decision to strike by these so-called “union bosses”, who are degreed professionals, paid by the union, not Verizon, at salaries that would make the rank and file blush, one has to ask what the motivation might be?

The rank and file are typical everyday neighbors, they go to work, and hope to make the best of it, and they literally have no choice in certain states, if one wants the job, one must join the union – period. The “union dues” go towards lawyers and professional labor’s salaries, for contract negotiations and rabble rousing in order to “protect” the rank and file. Therefore, as union workers hit the picket line, out of fear of repercussions from the “professionals”, they also lose income, they are not eligible for benefits such as unemployment, they cannot cross the picket line for fear for their lives, and they are stuck. These families are stuck in a time where the economy in the United States is not in the best of shape, as utopian Progressive Economic policy has repeatedly failed. With the prospect of being out-of-work for a prolonged period of time, without the ability to earn a paycheck, both the “professional” and the “rank and file” may grow desperate and try to force the company (management) to capitulate and grant every concession – they use sabotage.

From Massachustts to Maryland, Verizon strikers cut and sabotaged fiber optic cables meant to supply phone and internet service to both private homes and businesses (businesses such as hospitals, clinics, police and fire). These fiber optic cables are sometimes wildlife and now apparently by “distraught” union members.

In addition, workers who are on the ‘line’ are growing desperate, reports in New Jersey show a man who was willing to put his child in front of a Verizon truck, , and then took a video (which was summarily removed, after multiple reports surfaced).

How does this happen in an economy that is not in the best of shape? Do these Union Bosses have the rank and files best interest in mind, or is it more of their own best interest? After all, it is the blood, sweat and tears of that rank and file that pays for the salary and perks that these degreed professionals are accustomed. That is the question that each and every member who will eventually lose their job at Verizon must be asking now – Do they want to continue to be represented by individuals who don’t know when to ‘fold em’?

Where does one go to become a “professional” union thug? (Use of popular term) They enroll at the ”Verison to Begin Advertising $50,000 Rewards to Stop Vandalism”

Facebook threats from Verizon Union Strikes : See Screenshot

Facebook Page with Union Threats

Google: Verizon Strike Sabotage and for historical perspective

Google: (or Dogpile, or Bing, or Yahoo): The Red Menace, Chicago Unions

Tuesday, August 09, 2011

Palin’s Alaskan Politics leads to AAA Credit Rating for State – Shock - NOW Defends Bachmann over Newsweek Despicable Cover

Newsweek Cover - the epitome of bad taste - image Newsweek

Not for nothing, but Sarah Palin, the fiscally conservative, aisle crossing, whistle blowing regardless of Political Party, former Govenor of the State of Alaska, has another point in her favor, according to the Atlantic Blog – Palin’s policies, in place now in Alaska, contributed to the states AAA rating, which is slightly better than the one the current administration managed to achieve for the nation.

Palin in a post to Facebook (using Social Media to the Best Possible Advantage) ”lashed” out at Obama for his handling of the nations’ debt. She can do that with some authority given her prior experience – the fact that she called the President “clueless” is interesting, as that has been bandied about by Donald Trump as well (Palin met with Trump in NY on her bus tour) – as well as, alarmingly ad apparently correct. The President, for perhaps all his good intentions, has no idea of when to throw in the towel, and stop blaming everyone from the Tea Party to S&P and his family dogs (made that up- but, let’s face it, they may be next), for policies he has continued, policies he has put into place in order to bring us past the Jimmy Carter precipice. Worth repeating: Run, Palin, Run!!

Michelle Bachmann, the only other member of the GOP with any gumption (jury out on Rick Perry), and GOP Presidential Candidate currently leading Mitten’s Romney in the Iowa Straw Poll, was recently depicted on the cover of Time Magazine, al la Sarah Palin, or as one would put it more reasonably, in a sexist display of abject hate for the Conservative Female politician – this from a weekly paper that has been sold for $1.00, which, from this perspective that may have been a bad investment.

The cover, with headlines “The Queen of Rage”, is a less than complementary, obviously over photo shopped headshot of the GOP 2012 Iowa Frontrunner. It is blatant in its sexism and it is blatant in plain bad taste. Set aside this blogs conservative leanings, the covers of Newsweek, have had a history of painting women who dare to aspire to higher office than say, typing pool, are all of the same ilk. If it were my buck, I’d demand my money back.

What is most amazing in this particular bad taste story, is the Los Angeles Times Report

But even the National Organization for Women chimed in:

"It's sexist," NOW president Terry O'Neill told conservative news site the Daily Caller. "Casting her in that expression and then adding 'The Queen of Rage,' I think [it is]. Gloria Steinem has a very simple test: If this were done to a man or would it ever be done to a man – has it ever been done to a man? Surely this has never been done to a man."

Knock me over with a feather.

Of course the LA Times appeared to have been in agreement with the Times and could not understand why Conservatives would be offended – seriously. The Palin documentary, “The Undefeated”, exposes the media and the professional lefts’ attacks on Conservatives (granted Palin), therefore, although the documentary sets the record straight on Palin, what it also does is show the disparity in reporting, the twisting and ability to outright lie, when it comes to favoring one political party over the other – and generally either teaches or reinforces an extreme distrust of any “mainstream” media. Newsweek just adds another nail in the proverbial coffin.

This is not to say that other women have not take a beating by those whose agenda’s don’t allow for a female to have power, and also apply for higher political office: Geraldine Ferraro and Hillary Clinton were both skewered by the media, however, the collective mind of the aforementioned has risen to new heights when it comes to Conservative women running for higher office. This blog, putting feminism aside, and placing events into historical perspective, believes that it is time for the nation to elect a woman to higher office, as historically strong female leaders have led their nations into prosperity (even when they had to disguise themselves as men to do so.) However, as the historian’s in the past (and perhaps today) tend to be male-centered, one finds that even the most outstanding monarch, tribal leader, President, if they were female, were spoken of in terms one could only describe as sexist and derogatory, overlooking the resounding themes of accomplishments. One would think as a people in this particular nation founded on liberty that one would be able to take the individual as a hole, instead of by gender or race or religion, and determine a vote and or an article based on policy differences, while giving credit where credit is due.

Governor Rick Perry Makes the GOP Primary Rounds, SC, IA and NH - He Can Play in the South, He Can Play in the West, How will he Play in NH?

Rick Perry, Looking like anyone's Next Door Neighbor, not the Typical Poltiican - image sodahead

Yesterday, Politico , among other news outlets, broke that Texas Governor Rick Perry will head to South Carolina and confirm that he is, indeed, running for the GOP nomination. From South Carolina, Perry will then head to Iowa, then to the Granite State, or Mitt Romney’s backyard. The South Carolina announcement will come during the Red State blog Conference. The last to know? Red State Blog! Red State’s Conference does have Perry scheduled as a guest speaker, however, the media, who is closely following the charismatic Texan, noted that he would be letting the cat out of the bag during this conservative conference.

One thing of note: Perry, who recently led a day of prayer for our nation in Houston, which included the “heavy hitters” of the evangelical Christian churches in attendance. Should Perry have their blessing, which it appears he may, that will cement the South, Midwest and West in a primary and general election.

However, according to national news reports, Perry will have trouble with Hispanics , which make up a huge voting bloc in Texas(and elsewhere) This defies the fact that he has served three terms as Governor of Texas, where, one would need the Hispanic vote in order to achieve that goal. One has to ask: Is Rick Perry, who speaks fluent Spanish, not unlike George Bush in regards to being derided in the Press for having no connection to Hispanics, while on the other hand, gaining the Hispanic vote in national elections?

Perry then heads to New Hampshire (after a stop in Iowa). The Union Leader has the details of his visit, and the Boston Globe, in its usual bunched pathyhose mode - is running with Associated Press Content, which uses “anonymous sources” noting that the Texan Governor is still on the fence, and has not secured donors. Of course, the main photo on the article about Perry? One of Mitt Romney! (Who is not necesarrily held to high esteem at the Globe, nor is anyone who is Tea Party, Repbulican, or simply: Not a Progressive Democrat.

Perry should do well in New Hampshire; it was New Hampshire activists that flew to Texas to convince Perry to run. Perry, who should easily take the more conservative states (and that may well include New Hampshire), would easily knock out Romney in the primary process by mid-February with Romney holding Michigan and Utah (no guarantees for Massachusetts). That said, there are two very strong Conservatives, one in the race, and one not yet committed who may give Perry a run for his money. The problem apparently is that these two in particular, are women. Which, it has been argued, that, with the media beating these women have taken (simply because they stood up and spoke their minds), makes them somehow less electable. Point of order.

Note: Fox News’ GOP debate scheduled for this Thursday, the 11th, which will include Michelle Bachmann, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Herman Cain, Rick Santorum, Tim Pawlenty and (Newt Gingrich and Jon Huntsman). Without Bachmann and Cain,(or a last minute insertion of the Candidate Perry) the debate would prove to be a snoozer, however, future debates, with the addition of Perry, and possibly Palin, would make for excellent political discourse.

Monday, August 08, 2011

John Kerry (D-MA) Continues to Blame Tea Party for Fiscal Crisis, World View Different – Major Political Parties Fail to Deliver – Seek Scapegoat

One view of Massive Tea Party Protest in D.C. U.S.Citizens engaging in Activism - image

Suddenly, a group of parents, grandparents, Independent Voters, disenfranchised Republicans, Democrats, and those generally in favor of the U.S. Constitution and Fiscal Sanity, known as the Tea Party, is the target of professional politicians who’s got their back up against the proverbial wall of a sinking ship – the U.S. economy. In a nutshell, U.S. government spending, which has been over the top since the 1990’s (The last time there was a balanced budget, brought about by President Bill Clinton, a Republican controlled House and Senate, and a reduction in social programs, especially welfare reform.) – the spending has increased exponentially when President Obama took Tarp several steps further, and spent with abandon, on everything from social programs such as the massive Health Care Reform ACT to a auto bailouts, and stimulus programs that failed to produce other than “government jobs”, which have not, in the long run, increased revenue for the Federal Government (it’s like stealing from Peter to pay Paul).

The President, if not, of course, responsible for all of the unimaginable debt that the nation faces, although one has to realize, blame rolls uphill, and the old “buck stops here” applies regardless of true guilt. Those responsible include members of both major political parties, Republicans and Democrats, who rely heavily on discretionary spending, are tied to lobbyist and special interest groups who hold more sway than constituents, and generally run the nation as they would never run their own household budget. There were, prior to 2010, a few fiscal hawks among Republican politicians as well as those “Blue Dog” Democrats, who have a fiscal conscious, yet vote religiously with the Democrat Caucus, which has had the nations credit cards since 2006.

When individual tax payers across the nation started to become a bit suspicious over the amount of spending, starting with Tarp under Bush, and ending with Obama’s midnight run on the Congress to sign a the fiscal nightmare known as “ObamaCare”, a movement began to take shape, a movement which was not specifically organized, had several different “hubs”, and was made up of American’s of every stripe – they were concerned, and they were angry at their elected officials who failed to adhere to the basic principles of economics when it comes to overburdened taxpayers – when the government spends with abandon, taxes and fees rise, to compensate. There’s more to this of course, the misery of sustained high unemployment, (failure to understand that free market economics drive job growth, including tax cuts) the rise in the costs of food and fuel, which is squeezing the middle class to the breaking point (and affecting those who can least afford, fixed income families. These loosely knit groups communicated, they marched on Washington, and they warned Republican’s especially that they would be replaced if they did not adhere to the Constitution and long-held Republican standards of fiscal responsibility. The subsequent 2010 elections saw incumbents from both parties, being booted and replaced by “tea party” congressional representatives, governors and senators, a phenomenon that shook the establishment politicians. These “Tea Party” members of Congress, doctors, business owners, the guy who lives down the street, have managed to stand on principal and the promises they made to their constituents, however, the rest of the group: both Republicans and Democrats, forgot November of 2010, and looked to business as usual.

When both major party politicians, ignoring the warnings from both Standard and Poor’s and Moody’s to significantly cut the budget, well in advance of the artificially created debt ceiling crisis (see Timothy Geithner), made a “deal” to raise the debt ceiling, and worry about cuts later (see bi-partisan Debt Commission), those “Tea Party Members refused to go along for the ride – they voted their conscious, they said no to the debt ceiling increase without substantial cuts in spending. They were ignored, and the resultant deal made by both Replicas and Democrats blew up faster than the Hindenburg. Immediately following the “deal” (touted as a big deal “we saved Washington” fundraising piece by the NRC), the S&P downgraded the U.S. Credit Rating, and they may do so again. Simply, what this does, is impact the cost of doing business, across the board, interest rates will rise (a la President Carter) and no one actually knows how much more damage those who run our nation without a thought to the will of the people have caused. We’re in unknown financial territory – and there is a need for a scapegoat.

The Tea Party! Of course! The group of individuals who admire the constitution, and want a return to fiscal sanity – they are not calling for an end to all taxes; they are, as their moniker suggests: “Taxed Enough Already”.

John Kerry, Democrat and Sr. Senator from the State of Massachusetts, has called out the Tea Party as responsible for the downgrade, all twenty or so members who voted no on a bill that was passed and agreed to by both houses of Congress and both parties, and signed by the President. Kerry, who might be best referred to as a professional leftist politician, (kindly one might add), has gone so far as to call for the media in general not to give equal time to anyone that is a “Tea Party” member. In other words, silence any opposition, or anyone cognizant of the truth of the matter. In today’s Boston Globe, the tirade against the Tea Party by Kerry continues; continues to “fault Tea Party in U.S. Credit Rating Drop.”.

Of course, Kerry is not alone in his finger pointing rant of ages, but he is a high ranking member of the Senate, with perhaps, the closest ties to the President of any politician serving. How well this plays in Massachusetts is one thing, considering that the Tea Party was mostly responsible in 2010 for the election of Scott Brown to the Senate, and in November, ran 1st time politico’s against the heavy Democrats heavy hitters, Barney Frank (MA4th) and Richard Neal (MA2), forcing them to spend money otherwise intended for endangered districts outside of the state of Massachustts. One might call that a fairly strong presence in the Bay State, if one were honest or, in the case of John Kerry, and other professional politicians, aware.

What is most interesting is that outside of the U.S. the Tea Party is given what can only be called as fair treatment (see New Zealand national blog), apparently, those who love a nation’s Constitution and are fiscally sane, do not appear under the heading “terrorist” outside of the Washington DC Beltway.

Speaking of which, CNN’s latest Public Opinion Poll appears to be a warning to those politician’s who are a)name calling, or b) dismissive, of the “Tea Party”. It notes that the Tea Party has seen a rise in unfavorable, 47% of the populace does not care for the “Tea Party”, a rise of 16%, however, they are on a par with and treated as Republicans and Democrats, who both enjoy a 48% unfavorable rating in this poll. In addition, what this indicates is that the Tea Party is seen by those American’s surveyed, on equal footing with both major parties (i.e. Trouble in D.C. Paradise).

In addition:

This is the first time that a CNN poll has shown the tea party's unfavorable ratings as high as those of the two major parties,” says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. “It looks like the rise in the movement's unfavorable rating has come mostly among people who make less than $50,000.”

Those who see the tea-party movement in a favorable light has fallen to 32%, but that is only five percentage points since December. That means that the movement still has a hard core of support of about one-third of Americans, indicating that the type of anger that sloshed through the American political system last year will continue to be a political factor as Congress tries to deal with a range of budget and fiscal issues.

Examine those that find the Tea Party "Unfavorable", are also lower income, and one could further make the case, that traditionally, those are individuals who, working two jobs, or possibly on the state “dole” (which if one lives in Massachusetts is approximately equal in terms of real dollars), may not have the time or the wherewithal to have access to unbiased reporting on the aforementioned. They may see the protests spread across the states, and continuing, mind you. The Gadsden Flag, flying proudly next to the Stars and Stripes, with signs varying from State to State, Congressional District to Congressional District, placing blame where blame should be placed. They are, shockingly, even producing “newsletters” and “pamphlets” which are printed (not emailed) and distributed to neighborhoods (yes, John Kerry, there is a Tea Party in Massachustts).

Therefore, to the professional politician one can see why these normal, everyday, American’s who have finally understood that standing up to the system is possible, that by holding protests, informational sessions (complete with Harvard Economic Professors), and by voting and especially informing other voters, they might be considered “political terrorists” as these long entrenched politicians careers are on the proverbial line.
It does not go without some notice, that the “Tea Party As Terrorist line” coming specifically from the Democrats (but not without some help from their Republican counterparts, in effect saying nothing to stand up for those who are sincere in following the Constitution and bringing the house in order, before it collapses, which is a fairly transparent and cowardly approach.) that any possible connection to one individual who may draw large crowds, or speak at Tea Party events and have an inclination to run against President Obama, are tagged first in articles by major newspaper outlets, as “Tea Party”. For example, Rick Perry is now being held responsible for “starting the Tea Party”, Michelle Bachmann is a “Tea Party Darling” and Sarah Palin: well, we know Sarah Palin was responsible for insuring the election of a majority of those Tea Party congressional representatives, and, incidentally, the reelection of one Rick Perry (who now is being called a Republican Insider, and had faced a challenge by Republican Insider Kay Bailey Hutchinson).

Therefore, the greatest fear is that the Tea Party will put forth a candidate and that candidate, will not run as a Republican or as a Democrat, but as an Independent, and at this juncture, with the views of the individuals who vote towards elected officials, the unthinkable may happen. In one scenario, an independent takes a small percentage of the national vote and Obama is easily reelected (see Massachusetts model and Axelrod’s theory of what happens in Massachusetts can happen nationally – when applied to Obama.). On the other hand, as other Democrats are seeing this play out, the voters against against both major parties, might see an historical Presidential election of neither, but a well-financed Tea Party Candidate.

Of note: on a recent edition of Fox’s Hannity program, Liberal Pundit Pat Caddell, almost blew a casket over the looming debt crisis: His point, while pounding the text top and passionately explaining in no uncertain terms the consequences of continued spending with abandon by both Republicans and Democrats, that (paraphrasing) “If they aren’t careful, someone like someone like, Donald Trump, could be President!!”
Professional poll readers, understand the implications far better than those who casually observe and or read the parroted pieces coming from the wire services (when a publication or broadcast house, picks up an article and quotes it verbatim). The people continue to be fed up, and since trust in politician’s continues to be at an all time low (See Gallup’s: Trust in Institutions), will Kerry’s deriding of the Tea Party, or any network that repeats, and reports the same, including Fox, do nothing more than endorse those members they intend to deride - perception being what it is.

What those politician’s need to do, from the White House, throw both Houses of Congress, including Republicans and Democrats, is to own the problem they created, and stop casting blame where there is none.

Sunday, August 07, 2011

“The Undefeated” – Plainville CT – Review and Commentary

After having read reviews from several sources on Stephen K. Bannon’s, documentary, “The Undefeated”, and being able to watch the film today at the AMC Lowes theatres in Plainville, CT at the 1:00 PM show, there was only one phrase that comes to mind – Game changer.

The fact that the film itself is not cinematically perfect, with a great deal of hokey imagery, the content of interviews, and historical film footage is gripping. The final stages of the films narrative, with Andrew Brietbart, Tammy Bruce and Mark Levin, is compelling, so much so, that when the theater erupted in applause at the end, it was not surprising. What was surprising? At 1 pm in the afternoon, at a theater in Plainville (which is New Britain/Hartford, CT, which, upon arrival, my seventeen year old noted that there was a handful of “older people”, would end up almost full.

By any stretch of the imagination, this blogger is no film critic, and obviously, a conservative feminist who would, naturally, be in favor of the subject, however, it was the film’s content specifically, the news footage that one came out of Alaska, pre-McCain which made this individual a “believer”. As a Reagan Democrat, Sarah Palin is no Ronald Reagan, despite the fact that perhaps, more than any other politician of our time, she deserves the comparison – she is – simply – Sarah Palin and one can envision, thirty years hence, other politicians trying to out-Palin one another.

Pay Careful Attention to Rick Perry, Governor of Texas – Texas, the “Religious Right” and Influence over Presidential Politics

Palin Endorsement of Governor Rick Perry in 2010, a potential "merger" - image LA Times

Governor Rick Perry of Texas has, in recent weeks, become the most talked about GOP potential Presidential Candidate. He has been given that moniker for several reasons: he's a fiscal conservative who has run one of the largest states in the Union with fiscal sanity; they are working in Texas. In addition he's an avowed evangelical, causing a bit of a stir in liberal circles (the press), and it is fairly certain according to those same sources that he will announce his candidacy in a few short weeks. The brouhaha is his Christianity - refer to the Washington Post quotes below - and the fact that he has all but been given the Presidency prior to even entering the national spotlight.

From 10 a.m to 5 p.m., attendees are expected to pray, abstain from eating and listen to a series of speakers at Reliant Stadium. Organizers said Friday that Perry will address the crowd, as will major Christian conservative figures such as Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council and James Dobson of Focus on the Family.

Back in April of 2008, this blogs Headline read: a Republican President in 2008 against all odds” based on the following premise:
Evangelical leaders such as James Dobson of Focus on the Family were refusing to back any Republican running for the office, to the point where, they were actually “hoping” for (a Democrat) Obama to be the next president.

The reasoning was stunning, simple, and beautifully executed – elect someone like (Hillary) Obama, things would get so bad that the nation would overall reject not only that man, but anyone who was remotely like him. It was an interview with Sean Hannity of Fox News – Hannity was begging, cajoling and basically close to tears, as he, better than anyone behind a news desk, fully understands the power of over twenty million voting evangelicals and what they can do to an election. The video is below: These individuals met in Colorado and made those decisions, they were leaders of the various churches.

Watch here:

Meeting with Christian Leaders is, in and of itself, nothing new – both Democrats and Republicans tout faith as part of their personal “identity politics”, from Barack Obama’s Christian Roots, Richard Nixon’s Mormon roots, and John F. Kennedy’s Catholic Roots; the bigger the voting bloc, the better. It is why Congressional Leaders such as Nancy Pelosi (D-CA8) and Senator John Kerry are often seen entering churches (Catholics) with news crews in tow, to insure the “Catholic Vote”. (Which, the majority of Catholics, tend to vote Democrat regardless – with some exceptions in national elections?

However, the “Religious Right” and Rick Perry – is summed up quite nicely in a TIME piece (with obvious left leaning, “run it’s a Christian” adjectives) : ”Behind the Scene Christian Right Leaders Rally Behind Rick Perry read it, the date: July 5th, 2011.

However, Perry is not the first to meet these influential Church Leaders: from the Examiner: October 10, 2010 “Sarah Palin Meets with 50 National Conservative Leaders….”

Among the conservatives in attendance, president of Americans for Tax Reform Grover Norquist and Evangelical Christian activist Ralph Reed.

The assumption continues that Palin is running for President (being a tad more moderate than Perry, and well, this blog’s Title gives reason for obvious bias), however, if Perry has the nod from the so-called Religious Right, this early in the game, then it is a given that he will be the nominee, regardless of who the Beltway Republicans (see Mitt Romney) think will be the nominee.

Although at this moment all is speculation, but, within the coming weeks, as Perry announces, watch for specific endorsements from those very same “beltway Republicans” that would, in effect seal that deal.

At this point, it is all speculation, but what this nation needs at this point is leadership that will inspire, not frighten, and leadership that has experience in running a microcosm of the Federal Government, regardless is that State is Rhode Island! Therefore we welcome the Governor of Texas to the debate table, and it is hoped that Governor Palin will join her Texans counterpart - it would bring the best of what the GOP can offer to the debate arena.

RE: Rick Perry, from this perspective, one can appreciate the fact that he carries a firearm, shoots coyotes and protects his dog. On the other hand, one would like an explanation prior to offering even minimal support, on Rick Perry’s decision as Governor to mandate that all female teens be inoculated with the controversial Gardasil Vaccine: From Real Clear Politics:

In January 2007, Gardasil was put on the "recommended" immunization schedule issued by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Control. Merck immediately mounted a massive lobbying effort of state legislatures around the country to get Gardasil added to their respective lists of state-mandated vaccines.
But in Texas, Gov. Perry chose to bypass the legislature and on Feb. 2, 2007, he issued an executive order making Texas the first state in the country requiring all sixth-grade girls to receive the three-shot vaccination series (which cost about $120 per shot). The move generated a fierce public debate. Conservatives slammed Perry for promoting what they saw as an intrusion by the state into private health decisions of parents and their children. Some also complained that the mandate would encourage promiscuity among teenagers.
Many doctors, including Bill Hinchey, the president of the Texas Medical Association at the time, questioned the wisdom of rushing to mandate a drug that had been on the market for less than a year.
"We support physicians being able to provide the vaccine, but we don't support a state mandate at this time," Hinchey told the Houston Chronicle. "There are issues, such as liability and cost, that need to be vetted first."
The controversy over Perry's decision deepened as it came to light that his former chief of staff was a lobbyist for Merck and that his chief of staff's mother-in-law, Rep. Dianne White Delisi, was the state director of an advocacy group bankrolled by Merck to push legislatures across the country to put forward bills mandating the Gardasil vaccine for preteen girls.

Therefore, to this mind, the Governor has some “explaining to do” – as to why he would mandate in the first place (regardless of what the mandate was medical mandates are contrary to personal liberty, and against most Conservative principles.

That said Mitt Romney mandated Health Care for all Massachusetts Residents.

Palin as Governor, mandates agasint personal liberty.....anyone?

Although: The LA Times sees things a bit differently making the case for a Perry Palin ticket in 2012, which is a ticket that at this point in time, would sweep in all but possibly 10 states.

Amazon Picks

Massachusetts Conservative Feminist - Degrees of Moderation and Sanity Headline Animator

FEEDJIT Live Traffic Map

Contact Me:

Your Name
Your Email Address