WSJ/NBC Poll – Obama Confidence Low - Approval Sinks – Nation Rejects Both Major Political Entities

Most American's having difficulty telling DC Democrats or Republicans apart - image toonrefugee.com

The latest WSJ poll is out and according to NBC News the nation is no longer divided on President Obama’s capabilities; they are disapproving by the widest margin to date. In the same poll analysis by NBC, they note that the Republicans in Congress are doing worse than the President – and nearing the end of the article, note that most voters would rather not see their incumbent in office any longer (NBC News).

That was made evident last week in the stunning (to D.C.) defeat of Eric Cantor to College Professor, David Brat. One might suggest that that scenario will play out in coming primaries, regardless of which Party flavor, in the ensuing months. When it comes to the general, one might predict 40-50% of the seats will changes hands, which is not, by any means a conservative figure, however, when one looks closely at the 2013 local elections (yes, this anti-incumbent fervor had a trickle-down effect) – the incumbent lost in large numbers, in cities small and large.

As the leadership of each major political party has been called into question as of late, the 2016 prospects of those Libertarian Leaning politicians is looking up.

In the past weekends IA GOP convention Rand Paul (K), spoke to a room that decidedly changed their minds regarding the Senator, having previously been committed to other potential candidates, they came away deciding that Paul was the better choice, or at the very least, someone they would vote for .(U.S. News)

At the Massachusetts Democrat Convention Martha Coakely and Steve Grossman will face off in primaries against two others who made the ballot, according to the Boston Globe , the winner of which will face Charlie Baker for the Bay State corner office. Normal Massachusetts politics generally has a solid candidate going into the general, with either little or no primary challengers.

One might see both major political party fractioning in the ensuing years, as well as shifts, the Democrats becoming decidedly Progressive Socialist while Republicans more Libertarian in nature. Voter angst against the status quo will undoubtedly ensure that this scenario plays out either in whole or in part.

Who is Elizabeth Warren – Former Republican turned Democrat?

Not knowing much about Elizabeth Warren, other than the fact that she was caught with her hand in the cookie jar, claiming a bit of Indian Heritage to qualify for a Harvard slot, and bested, on Obama’s coattails, one Scott Brown, not a great deal. For starters, one might associate the Jr. Senator from Massachusetts as being a rubber stamp for the Democrat Party, a lifelong Democrat, who frankly, would be another guaranteed vote for the Progressive left. However, a few recent articles, and not much research on a Tuesday morning revealed a bit more that just made Elizabeth Warren a lot more interesting. She is, based on the Democrat Party and its proclivity to come up with the next shiny new toy, projected to upend Hillary Clinton in the 2016 Democrat primary, similar to the upending that Clinton sustained under Barack Obama. Warren is less known, and that unknown quantity can be remodeled, so to speak, to fit the “everybody” mold and then walk under the banner of the “First” right into the White House. The funny thing is, the Progressive left adores her, perhaps for her angst against big banks, and the legislation that allows them to run rampant, the brouhaha over high interest rates and student loans, and of course, the middle class, a group that is fast becoming extinct.

That said, she may just be one of those evolving politico’s who cannot quite find what’s right, or wrong, with a particular party, and has a bit of an independent streak. Here’s where that line of thought comes from:

Think Progresshas a piece in “Why Elizabeth Warren Left the GOP”, which was somewhat of an eye opener, and first thought was: Hillary Clinton, former Goldwater Girl (Goldwater – a Libertarian-Republican). The first note was about her GOP history, she was a registered Republican from 1991 through 1996, with no mention of previous party affiliation. Therefore, she was a registered Republican when the Clinton’s held the White House and the GOP both Chambers of the House – interesting schematic. She left due to what she perceived as a GOP affiliation with the big banks, but has since argued with the Obama administration as well. Think Progress.

In the same Think Progress article she refers to herself as an Independent, so one just had to look at the Congressional Record to see how well she played across the aisle.

Apparently, quite well, given the fact that on a quick review Warren sponsors and cosponsors, what appears to be equal amounts of legislation written by both Democrats and Republicans.

One has to be honest, if she was a free-market, Libertarian leaning Independent, she’d be perfect.

Of course, no-one is, and the obvious quick review does not answer questions on reliable voting with a certain party, or what ambitions Senator Warren holds regarding the 2016, that said, she is worth watching. It may be she sees the writing on the wall, and will wait until the following general election, but that’s and all this is speculation for the most part. As there is no mention of her party affiliation prior to 1991 (and she was of an age to vote, one would hazard a guess in the 1980’s), one might hold out hope that a pattern may develop – shopping parties like a thinking woman. If she were more “Liberty-minded”, and for the middle class, while hanging out with say, Ted Cruz, Mike Lee and Rand Paul, alternately with Bernie Sanders and throw in a few Democrats, and be able to campaign on that – she would sail into the White House – no problems. Perhaps she should take another look at the upheaval in the GOP – should it change (historically) to a re-branded Liberty Party – it might be time for her to re-up. Just a thought.

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.

CNN – Opinion Speculates on Why Obama is Losing the Millennials' –the reasons - and what that means for the 2014-2016 election.

A young CPAC attendee - standing with Rand - the image from genprogress.org - asks "...but do conservatives stand with his generation?". Note: CPAC attendees are conservative activists.

An opinion piece on CNN by Julian Zelizer, a CNN Contributor, suggests that Obama, besides his best efforts, is losing the Millenials (18-24) due to a lack of jobs, however, there may be more to the distance than that alone. There is a growing trend in that particular age group , like so many generations before them, that casts a pall over those in positions of authority, specifically government, and the real or perceived injustices of the particular time. They are concerned over jobs, no doubt about it, but also the skyrocketed costs of borrowing money for student loans, an industry that has been placed squarely in the hands of the government, a government they no longer trust due to the NSA data mining of civilians. In addition, they are more self-reliant than the generations before, although much has been made of a few who made headlines recently, those are the exception, not the rule. They know that the costs of the Affordable Health Care Act/Obama Care has increased premiums and has become cost-prohibitive to their parents, and in many cases, some have lost their coverage entirely. In the age of instant information through multiple social networks, making “friends’, is no longer confined to one’s home, state or campus, but includes the nation, therefore, knowing several people who are suffering due to a government program is not out of the question. A growing trend toward self-reliance, entrepreneurial spirit and a desire to partake in the original concept of the founding fathers is fairly amazing – they read the Constitution and are prone to prefer free markets, no taxes and peace through strength. They are not racist and they are not prone to any particular party affiliation – they are, if anything - Libertarians.

Which explains a lot of the appeal for Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, and of all parties, the Tea Party – they are a conundrum – many of whom did not vote in the 2012 election and if they did, are regretting their vote based on advice from teachers , professors and yes, parents.

They speak of having no future and t hey are sick of it, which will play out in one of two ways politically. In the first instance, although fed up – they may also retain the lack of interest in voting as in the previous election (those old enough at the time) and simply not vote. On the other hand, they may join their fellows from Berkeley, and campuses, tea houses, pizza shops, fast-food restaurants, and the like, and get out the vote for the individual who offers them what they want to hear and has done something about attempting to fix any number of the their grievances, someone who appears younger, and in tune with what is currently happening in their lives. They will support the candidate that has never held office, approves of free markets, and lower taxes, in 2014 and in 2016.

The President, like so many before him, has aged, and in the continued drumbeat about his actions or inactions from all sources, he is old and authoritarian to one who is a Millennial. He has also painted the party in the same vein. It is these old men and women, from both parties that are the perceived problem –reminiscent of the 1960’s mantra: “Don’t’ trust anyone over 30”, this generation prefers not to trust anyone over 50 who is currently a politician and a repeat offender (i.e. multiple terms).

The big “if” is at issue – “if they vote”, they could propel the modified Libertarian-Republican party to the forefront of history.

Note: Based on opinions of male and females 18 to 24 years old in random selection partaking in non-scientific interviews from campus and non-campus locations throughout Massachusetts and Connecticut. The particular blue of these areas and the answers of the majority (89.5%) were exceedingly surprising.

Rand Paul Goes West – to Berkeley – Greeted with Standing O – Dares to Cross Lines!

Rand Paul Speaks at Berkeley - image LA Times

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) went to Berkeley and, as the San Jose Mercury News headlined: “found support”…”of all places”! It is not without some humor and irony that the headline reads – “of all places”, simply due to the fact that Republican’s don’t generally stump and fundraise in the California Bay Area. San Francisco, the home of Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), is not the area one would anticipate any Republican to dare to tread – why bother, really the entire state is lost, along with Massachusetts. However, Paul is not your run of the mill, standard Republican, as he leans more Libertarians, which is an appealing prospect to a wide-range of voters – from the left to the right, men and women, young and old. Not only did he receive a warm welcome at UC Berkeley, he also received a standing ovation – which, knock one over with a feather!” (Daily Caller).

Outside of a very few articles on the success of the visit, most of the “Mainstream” media are treading carefully on coverage – The New York Times article on the Berkeley visit “Rand Paul, Warning About Spying, Faults Obama” doesn’t really speak to the oddity nor the implications of what Paul has accomplished., rather about a small portion of the speech he made to the students (who then applauded and stood).

The real implications are that a Libertarian, albeit, Republican is gaining more traction than any other candidate at the moment, given the articles rather than the polls, and the schematics of who will and will not vote in a mid-term or general election. The implications are, to this mind, that there is real change in the wind, not a slogan, nor a hypothetical, but a change in the hearts and minds of a populace who are tired of the same “party” lines, and are seeking a breath of fresh air. This air comes with a penchant for piece, individual liberty and common sense as far as social and fiscal issues are concerned, and are tied, hook, line and sinker to the Constitution.

This makes Rand Paul the frontrunner across the political spectrum and one should bet the house there is a proverbial “target” on the man, as he is upsetting the general party (and that is literally and figuratively) that is Washington D.C. entrenched politico’s and their sycophants.

One might see more venom develop from both the RNC and the DNC as they fight to maintain the status quo –a losing battle with the Libertarian minded Paul. For one, he is not shy about speaking out and correcting the press, which is a plus, and second, he does not come across as the politician, more like the family doctor/college professor/guy who eats snickers on the run who has a message which is on point.

Not since casting a vote for Anderson (Libertarian leaning Republican) in the 1980 election, has the prospect of an opportunity to cast one for another in 2016 been more appealing. Anderson did not even make a dent in the bucket – running against Reagan and Carter, however, it was the first time one can recall seeing a national third party candidate, period…or a decent choice between two behemoths, when one does not particularly embrace either “grand party”. Therefore, to have one Libertarian leaning Republican run under the banner of the “grand party”, with a cadre of like minded Constitutionalist (be they Tea Party or Libertarian) growing in the same party, would be historical and personally exciting. It has been centuries since either party truly rebranded as a national party that would allow for a crossover of opposition party members, as well as those who are more independent minded, and Paul, in this time and in this place is the one to carry that water - reminiscent of Washington, George. What more can one nation ask for?

The Libertarian-Conservative Prison Reform Platform Makes Bi-Partisanship Possible

An article at KSDK, on the united Democrat and Republican unity on prison reform is an interesting read – following the 2014 CPAC – (read the story here.

Worth watching is the video of a CPAC conference, including Texas Governor Rick Perry and his opposition to stiff mandatory sentences for first offenders, and tales of justice gone haywire in too many cases. The video link at www.youtube.com or below, is a discussion that will, in essence, change hearts and minds. It is through the combined efforts of Libertarian Conservative (Republican in most cases, the arm of the Party that is apparently growing in leaps and bounds) that would reform a system that is badly in need of financial and moral restoration.

The Resurgence of Liberty – CPAC - a Winning Message

In the years that one may or may not have paid a great deal of attention to the annual CPAC Convention, it has appeared mainly centric GOP – something has changed and that change is an overwhelming rejection of the status quo by those speakers who may or may not have Presidential aspirations.

The speeches by Paul, Palin, Cruz, Perry and several other keynote’s were impressive and inspiring to those who have always been to the side of Libertarian, one heard the word Constitutionalist quite a bit.

The individual who appears to have won most of the hearts and minds is one Senator Rand Paul, winning the straw poll handily. (Boston Globe) One thing is certain, he is a stronger candidate for 2016 than his father – appealing to a wide range of liberty minded individuals, from Jeffersonian Republicans to those on the left of center who appreciate someone who is not a fan of Government overreach – especially into one’s private life.

Further indication of Paul’s intention was the recent defection of the Iowa State GOP chair to run his PAC while noting that there has been a shift in the Iowa GOP – away from the mainstream GOP(WFMZ – CNN Article)

Should one think that these Liberty minded individuals have not caught the rank and file GOP of the Washington elite, one might pick up the WaPost, Jennifer Rubin’s musing on CPAC , although she does not, obviously, suggest Cruz, Paul or Palin, she does not wail about a disconnect, and notes that the three she does mention (Christie, Rubio and Perry) were speaking to a more liberty minded group and, in her opinion, had done very well. Oddly the Washington elite favor Christie, most likely for his ability to be more Democrat at times than Republican, that said, the model, will no longer “fly”.

Suffice it to say, that as the mid-terms near, and as Palin reminded the establishment of which party brought them the majority (Tea versus GOP), the same fervor of 2010 is alive and kicking, with apparently little allegiance to the standard Washington elite. She was brilliant in her speech, as was Perry, Cruz and especially Paul.

Although it is too early in the political process, and straw polls, being paid participant polls are not exactly bellwethers, it is a first where the appeal of the players is more broad than in the past – to those disenfranchised Democrats and especially Republican’s who lean towards Libertarian roots.

About time.

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.

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 if there was A Government Shutdown and No-one really noticed? – A Lack of Discretionary Funding Does not Shut Down the Entire Government. – The rise of the Jeffersonian Republican (i.e. Libertarian)

From the website: Whitehouse.gov - courtesy of Harry Reid - don't forget to send thank you note!

If one were to ask the rank and file people on the street how they have been affected by the “government shutdown” – one might get the query – “What government shutdown”? – Or the statement - “They should shut it down”. The media and certain members of both major political parties have their proverbial panties in a bunch – and they are screaming from the rooftops that rascally Ted Cruz, Senator from Texas is the root of all evil and the problem that caused this “horrible government shutdown.” Obamacare – now being called the Affordable Health Care Act (its actual name) opened as scheduled, with massive inefficiency – which is the one thing the general public has come to understand is how the Federal Government operates.

The GOP (or better known as the Elephant in the Washington Room), is more concerned with how the media perceives their political strategy than the people that had voted them into office. That goes for the Democrats as well, to a lesser degree, as the media generally doesn’t mention the Democrats with the exception of platitudes so noxious; one wonders if it is a new perfume on the market.

There is this new (or recent more to the point) bandwagon on the schism in the Republican Party – oh my, those Libertarian leaning Republicans are really muddying up the water as they wish to play by the Constitution – rather than to kiss the feet of the Republican leadership, the media and the opposition party. Of course, memories are short, in the present age – if something did not occur last week, its history so deep that it is not worth noting – recall the 2008 Democrat Convention – where the Progressive wing of the Democrat Party – supermajoritied one Barack Obama to the nomination while the individual who received the majority of the popular votes – one Hillary Clinton, was kicked to the proverbial curb – thus the organization –PUMA – Party Unity My Ass – developed. The brouhaha did settle down, some of those PUMA’s did vote for the party choice, while others…not so much – they became unenrolled, or independents, or green party and yes, even Tea Party. But...there was little news, and the history of the hiccup in the perfect lives of Democrats according to the media – simply went away

Yet, now with Peter King, the Republican Congressman from New York is screaming to the Media that the “conservatives” are trying trying to hijack the GOP!!! - Ted Cruz Conservatives, grab your pitchforks!! (Seattle Post Intelligencer) He’s been complaining all along, anytime a conservative criticizes the way the rest of the GOP is operating - of course, King could do the decent thing and switch parties - which he may have to come 2014. That may also be the case with those erstwhile GOP lifers - who, nameless (McCain, etc.) in a Politico article on their ambush of Cruz and the many downright nasty statements made, including the fact that Cruz did not have a strategy –are also a little upset with the fact that they are being targeted by Conservative groups! – 19 of the 45 Republican Senators, the article notes, were on the side of Cruz – that leaves 26 open seats in the upcoming election.

If those Senators and Congressmen on both sides of the aisle believe that Cruz is the problem, they had better grab a mirror and take a long hard look at their districts and states and, especially, who they are going to face in their next primary – that person will most likely be Conservative (or on the flip side – Progressive) and will be heavily armed with cash from those who want to shake up D.C.

Perhaps they should stop listening to local news broadcasts about how angry individual are over the government shutdown, where the local anchor finds one or two people to say it’s just horrible!! – Or perhaps they should understand that in marketing terms Affordable Health Care doesn’t sound as bad as ObamaCare – so ObamaCare has been stricken from the Media Lexicon – yet –people still call it Obama Care.

Speaking of which, as the President’s numbers are tanking – (as is the nature of Presidents in their second term as the nation begins to grow weary should the economy not be going screamingly well) – those congressmen and Senators might be best served by hoping he stays away when they are home on the stump. (See Bush 2008).
One Senator whom the President should hang on to like a life preserver is Harry Reid, the real power in Washington, one might hope that there are challenges to the King of the Senate, from both the Progressive side and the Conservative side – of course, he will along with the rest of those who have, played to Washington rather than the 99% - in 2016. In the meantime, should the Congress (both branches) find themselves faced with a bunch of new senators and congressmen in 2016 that just seem a bit too much like Cruz, Lee and Paul, then the writing will be on the wall – and Reid will be left to sit and yammer with self-importance in the chamber – heck he may even filibuster a time or two.

There is an awakening in the nation – if one cannot feel it, then one is living in a bubble, those are the people, regardless of race, ethnicity, or social stature who have had enough – on both sides, and as is the case with history, there is the shift in fortunes that will take place – not overnight- but over time and at those who are fighting for the people, with sincerity rather than the usual platitudes and BS, will prevail, and those that are not - well, they may go back to whence they came.

Therefore, as the powers that be continue to make life inconvenient for the people (see shutting down the memorial so that the WWII vets could not visit - that came from the White House, as that memorial is part of discretionary spending), over the ridiculous Obama-Affordable Health Care Act – then perhaps, with common sense, they should listen to the people, fix the darn thing, and debut it when it is going to go off without more than a few glitches, not legions of glitches (especially on live television). The art of compromise, or the call for Compromise is now seen as extreme – what a sad day for the American Public – when the rulers of D.C are so power hungry-blind that they cannot grasp what is taking place outside of the beltway – so beholding to Party Power and Special Interests that they are no longer recognizable. Then there are those darn libertarian minded few, who are actually (literally) shouting form the rooftops – these few are showing the rest of the nation, what functioning senators and congressional representatives are supposed to do – whether one agrees with them or not, one must be a tad jealous that their Democrat or GOP Congressional Rep or Senator is doing – nothing but crying about somebody who is doing something.

Of course, that’ not about the shutdown that no one seems to care about – it’s about that Affordable Health Care Obama Act – or the Drones that could have been used on the American People, or the fact that the Government wants to spend even more money and go further into debt – again, instead of finding way to relieve the tax burden on those who are employed and the employers who would like to employ a whole lot more people.

This is the math – the more people that are working the more people pay taxes, and the Federal and State Governments have more money to spend. One would think that reducing tax burdens across the board, to allow more hiring, would be the smart way to go – John Kennedy thought so, Ronald Reagan thought so, George Bush thought so, yet, Jimmy Carter didn’t think so and neither did Barack Obama – who is now on track to be a great president in the ilk of James Carter. What the nation needs is a Kenney-Reagan-Bush – or heck a Libertarian - conservative – that’s the ticket.

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.

A March Towards the Mainstream – Liberty Minded Candidates Scaring Both Major Political Party Establishments.

A Cartoon worthwhile - from the site The Rightly Guided

Watching the debate in the House and the Senate over debt ceiling and defunding the Behemoth Obamacare that, frankly bothers both Democrats and Republicans of reasonable minds, one begins to find not a legislative battle as one would suppose, but a battle for the minds and hearts of the general public, rather than those who would stay the status quo for the sake of “Good press”.

To wit, speaking of that rascally Senator from the State of Texas who has the Republican Main Guard (otherwise known as pundits from the Bush Administration and multi-term Senators who prefer to retain, a go along to get along, ergo, reelected, positions, in an uproar.

When it was mentioned that Cruz was to appear on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace, those stalwart defenders of their own best interest within the GOP sent opposition research on Cruz to Wallace, the host – who then deferred to Karl Rove for an explanation! Apparently Rove has suggested that both Cruz and fellow Senator Mike Lee, did not consult the McCain’s of the world, before going about the business of the people. (Politico). When one thinks rationally about the situation, what it boils down to is simply: Cruz is doing what he promised to do – uphold the constitution, and vote and defend in the Senate what his constituents asked. McCain and his ilk –whom Cruz refers to as greybeards, are doing their upmost to sabotage this type of Libertarian behavior, as it disturbs their balance between the “gentlemen’s club” of the Senate that is in favor of whatever the polls are suggesting one week to the next, rather than take one for the American public. Not so Cruz. McCain, most likely to retire shortly, might not have read the Tucson Citizen who are lauding Cruz for keeping up the good fight.

The gist, Cruz wants to gather the likeminded Senators, in an effort to pass a spending measure that funds everything but – Obamacare – a bill that was written so badly, it needs time to tweak – if it was such a wonderful bill, Congress would be the first in line to sign-up –but they granted themselves waivers, the AFLCIO, also wanted out – along with a variety of states, both Republican and Democrat, who understand that fewer individuals will be covered, and the cost to employer will result in unemployment – one Democrat referred to it as a “train-wreck”. Therefore, on a bi-partisan basis, not many support the bill, but, the power play that Cruz is making is upending the get along to go along playbook.

Therefore, everyone is screaming about (media and congress) the looming government shutdown. The Whitehouse is scaring the elderly regarding a loss of income – as no social security checks will be mailed, the essential services of the federal government will shut down, ad nasueam – The Republicans are looking at decades old polling and worrying out the public point of view – so they cast aspersions on those that would defund the program.

Enter the shock of it all as explained is good measure by the AP via the Detroit News and Free Press - there simply is no truth to a government shutdown- actually shutting down the government. – The article goes on to describe the variety of shutdowns, especially during the Carter Era, followed by the Reagan Era, and so on – before popularity was the main objective of those erstwhile senator like McCain, and co. – Senators and Congressional reps behaved like – Ted Cruz!

The big problem with a shutdown is the “Debt Ceiling” – which they need to raise yet again, or face default.

That’s the gist of it – Should the forces of sanity – Cruz, Lee and company, succeed in forcing their hands, and the president refuses to sign off – or the House (which holds the purse strings), then the only thing that is threatened – is Wall Street – Therefore, Cruz, Lee and those of like mind are interested in helping the people, and the McCain’s, and stalwarts such as Harry Reid, are worried about the return on their investments.

On another Liberty Minded note- “Blow me over with a feather” – The New York Magazine, with Frank Rich, of all left of center trumpeters – has lauded, with a caveat, (the word Republican), none other than Rand Paul, the Senator from Kentucky – the title of the article: ”It’s Hard to Hate Rand Paul” is worth the read –(New York Magazine), not because it approves of Paul’s stance, but because it shows that there is grudging admiration for those of Libertarian bent in both parties and the middle.

Should Cruz hold fast, regardless of what the Senate does in the end, and the disaster he is suggesting strikes (and it will), those holding the blame will be those Republican Senators and those Democrats who let this monstrosity go on as scheduled (which it is not ready to be implemented) – imagine the backlash by the voting public in 2014-and 2016 – It will not be against Cruz, or Paul or Lee or any others who were thoughtful enough to fight on the basis of the Constitution and their constituent – it will fall on the heads of those Greybeards, and that is from both parties –those Clintons, and Biden’s and Pelosi’s, and McCain’s and Grahams. In either scenario the future of American political parties hangs in the balance – there may well be a third, more independent and liberty minded party that ends up besting them both – or at the very least, those who hold those same principles, holding sway neither of the

As the GOP Turns – The Old Guard and New Guard – Nothing More than Evolution

There’s that old adage: “history repeats itself”, that should be taken into account prior to ringing death knells on political brands, or “rebranding” if one prefers to parse words. The fact that, as we age, younger individuals move up the ladder, so to speak, bringing with them a “new” (or old, as the case may be), political point of view – one that fits neither of today’s establishment parties. Therefore, of one individual in that generation tends to lead in the political arena, it is what it is, a changing of the guard and with that a whole can of worms opens. Suffice it to say, that there has always been a right and a left, liberal and conservative thought, which those in power generally use to divide and conquer – some to their own demise (consider the French revolution). The Old Democrat party has been long gone for decades, only no one apparently noticed. The brand is there – the dutiful “D” printed on each ballot – but the formerly fiscally sound, social justice fighters, working class party – is now the party ruled by academic elitist, who have little experience outside of a classroom, and a philosophy that is decidedly socialist. The Democrat brand was co-opted by the rise of one Ronald Reagan, who, at the same time, rebranded the Republican Party – leaning on the tax cuts of John F. Kennedy, and challenging the establishment GOP, he embodied the working man - he drove the party elites and the media crazy. Over the following decades the two parties appeared to meld into the ebb and flow of partisan politics, with rare exceptions, one was either a “Democrat or a Republican” – there was no challenge to the status quo, and the political dynasties emerged – the Bushes, the Clintons, their respective allies in the Senate and the Congress and on K Street (where the lobbyist and political action committees reside.) Reagan was the last reformer, otherwise the Republican Party, like the Democrat Party, has been the dutiful “R” on the ballot.

Suddenly the media and Washington are on high alert, as a group of individuals who are not necessarily Republican, as in “rich old white men” (as opposed to the “rich old white men” that run the Democrat Party.) are suddenly calling themselves “conservatives” running as “Republicans” and winning elections, hearts and minds. There is about to be a shift – one would hope that the scenario of three or four (optimal) parties emerging from the two old behemoths would emerge, yet, the common approach would be to co-opt one or both of the established parties. Enter the “libertarians”.

Libertarians follow a political thought process based on personal liberty, with a strong emphasis on the U.S. Constitution. Those millions of Tea Party Strict Constructionists are also likely to lean “Libertarian” – so are most 18 to 25 year olds, a demographic that rarely votes, but if, as a group, they find someone relatable, they will vote in droves. (An unintended consequence seen under Reagan.)

Although the dutiful academics, installed in the schools across the nation, from kindergarten through one’s Doctorate, have been preaching the message of “progressive” philosophy for the past 40 years, it has become stale in its practice. The economic impact of the progressive Congress under Nancy Pelosi, followed by the election and reelection of President Obama, and the consequences of “bigger, more encroaching, government”, has begun to wear thin. For some it is the lack of opportunities, for others, it is the obvious installation of a “class system” – those who have, those how have not. Those who would promise to make everyone equal, everyone wealthy, and everyone on the same playing field, by virtue of the all important government - apparently cannot deliver on that promise.

Therefore, the sudden emergence and popularity of Rand Paul and Dr. Ben Carson are seen by the media as upheaval in the Republican Party – as dutiful “Democrats”, they report on the demise of the GOP, or the “upheaval” within the GOP – it is nothing more than growing pains, or an evolution – of a more centric, inclusionary political party, one that is based upon a fiscal policy that is morally sound, while holding the 10th amendment sacrosanct.

Therefore, one might suggests, that those that would be king, the McCain’s, the Clinton’s, will have to make way for those Doctors who will stand up for both fiscal sanity and humanity, but most importantly individual liberty and responsibility – the opportunity to become a success (rather than one of the “masses” – yes, Libertarian, and/or Conservative – but appealing to those who are sick and tired of the “old brands” that have run the nation with little differences between the two political parties since Reagan left office.

Governor Mike Huckabee – “Do The Right Thing” – Cultural Conservatism and the 2008 Campaign

Mike Huckabee latest book, “Do the Right Thing”, offers a candid, behind-the-scenes, view of one of the most interesting campaigns of the 2008 general election. Huckabee, former 2-1/2 term Governor of the State of Arkansas, takes the reader through the campaign, which serves as a context and background on where the conservative movement needs to go. As in other books by Governor Huckabee, he addresses and then offers common-sense solutions on the challenging issues facing American’s today.

“Do the Right Thing”, releases today, the 18th, and last evening Governor Huckabee took the time to talk about the book as well as issues facing the Republican Party and conservatism in general. One of the first questions asked was if he would run again is 2012 – a question he’s been fielding since November 5th – he duly noted it was “too early” to make that decision. Most of the questions asked were about the 2008 general election and the role of cultural conservatives in the Republican Party. A brief (abridged) transcript follows:

The Conservative Movement

On the conservative movement and where it needs to go, Huckabee feels that it’s not about what’s wrong with the past, but what needs to be right – from economics to values issues. When asked how to get voters focused on the message, in a political atmosphere that remains highly partisan, Governor Huckabee noted that one problem Republicans’ face is that “we’ve expounded upon the what, not the why”. “If we focus on the why, and carry it out to its logical conclusion – on issues such as health care, national election reform - why they are serious - and here’s how we can fix them – that’s what people are looking for in politicians – what can we do to fix it (the problem) and really fix it”

On Cultural Conservatism

Governor Huckabee also believes that cultural conservatives kept John McCain as close in the race as he was. He went on to explain that Four years ago, George Bush won by a margin of 49 to 51 percent, and the pundits called it a slim victory while in 2008 Obama’s margin was only one point higher, 52 to 48 – Cultural conservatives didn’t lose the election because they are pro-life, they (Republicans) started to loose elections when “we acted like it didn’t matter”. Those people that didn’t see the different between the two parties went ahead and voted for a Democrat for a change.

On Campaign Strategy: Why he went to Michigan with South Carolina in the balance?

“We went to Michigan briefly – two quick trips – one of the things that was happening was that there was a perception that we were only able to play in the evangelical areas of South Carolina and Iowa – what we needed to demonstrate that we were viable outside of the evangelical world, and there was a growing interest in Michigan, the national media was following this, and so we knew we needed to play there – and we had to challenge that philosophy.

On the Division in the Conservative Base: (Those that voted for McCain because they felt they had to and those that just couldn’t)

“It’s easy to second guess tactical or strategic issues, the truth is, this was a tough climate – it would have been tough – McCain was a better candidate than Barack Obama - as to what I believe and what I stood for – it was largely that we did not take the strong stands, on economic policy an the values issue, should have come out against the bailout, be adamant about how crazy that was, get the word out how the Democrats stonewalled. We often got so caught up in the issues that didn’t resonate with the people, a lot of people didn’t care about Reverend Wright - they are worried about getting a paycheck.”

On His Support of Chip Saltzman for the RNC Chair

“The chairman’s race is easy to comment on, obviously I’m supporting Chip Saltzman because I saw his ability to operate a good organization – secondly he has a good understanding of using technology and trying to take our party into the future – on our campaign, it was the creative use of the Internet that got us to where we were – Chip understands the power of new media forms, and I’m convinced that if we don’t get in that game, we’re going to keep getting beat.”

On the Somewhat Negative Book Review in Time

“If people read the book, rather than just read a review, they will realize the reviewers took the most controversial pieces and reduced it down to a paragraph – I do name some names in the context of the campaign, specifically issues that we had with Mitt Romney and I could not tell the story about what’s going on in the party, without some candor, so I talk about it, I was very specific, It was for a purpose, because if I had just said, Mitt Romney didn’t represent a certain position, it could be challenged, but when I talk about times, dates, places and specific comments, it comes to a point where if someone has to challenge it would be a fact not an opinion but that’s not the focus of the book, it’s by intent somewhat provocative, what I try to do is point out that some present themselves a pure conservatives when they aren’t , they are more libertarian”

What Governor Huckabee hopes is that this book “causes discussion, even those that hate it, that’s fine, I want them to show me where I’m wrong, show me how I’m wrong, how there is no connection between the way we live and the cost that it results in. So I think that’s why you’ll find this book provocative but it will be the basis for quite a bit of discussion.”

Having followed the Huckabee campaign from 2006 onward, and having read other books by Governor Huckabee, he gives readers solutions in language that makes sense – common sense. There are hundreds of lengthy tomes, by those “Washington elite” that do the same thing – geared towards members of both parties, in minute detail - and although critically acclaimed they also act as a “sleep aid” - they reach an intended audience, not a general audience. Huckabee, on the other hand, writes so that “we the people” are able to see his vision of the future, as well have a chuckle or two (his humor is part and parcel of his books), and feel that, yes, there is a place in politics for those “outside the Beltway”. His ability to reach people, without preaching dogma, (yes, he was Baptist Minister), is what took him from the Governors’ office in Arkansas, to a serious contender for the Republican nomination in 2008 – on a shoestring budget, bolstered by people who felt they were understood, by a man who does understand, and who explains his positions, not in rhetoric, or canned party phrases (pick a party, we’ve heard them all), but by connecting to those who want to see the party of Lincoln returned to its roots – those roots are as viable today as they were when they party was founded – a unique blend of inclusive, cultural and fiscal conservatism.

To learn more about Governor Mike Huckabee visit: MikeHuckabee.com
Also Suggested: “From Hope to Higher Ground – 12 Steps to Restoring America’s Greatness”