Major Political Parties, the Diversity Within, a Stranglehold on the Political Process – Purists vs. the Individualist

An article in the New York Times asking if the Libertarian moment finally arrived (worth the read), brought forward the question of the diversity within the political parties, and how purists is the two major parties, appear to be the undoing of the political process. For example, the GOP is multi-faceted, and as Libertarians (otherwise known as Jeffersonian Republicans) are more closely aligned, they tend to track Republican (or purists, not at all), Social Conservatives, also are part of that party, then the moderates, those GOP members who tend to vote more like a Democrat, rather than a Social or Fiscal conservative. It is those purists to stay home, and refuse to forgive one ‘infraction” of their “code” that splits the party and forces votes from time to time.

The Democrats are much the same, Progressive Socialists won’t budge, neither with the anarchists, or those 99%-ers who rally to the voice of anti-corporatism. There is the rank and file union/loyal Democrats who remain screamingly unaware that Progressive does not mean – Progress. The low-information voters trend Democrat – despite many a degree, advanced or otherwise.

It is this tunnel-vision coupled with an obstinate stance of purity that continues to stymie the system. Rather than moderate and forgive one issue, in order to obtain the brass ring, those who are pure in political ideology will kick a statesman to the curb – i.e. Scott Brown in Massachusetts.

It is the individual that will embrace facets of each, while tending to make peace with their Libertarian belief structure, which is valuable to the nation as a whole, specifically if that individual can bring varied factions of the GOP as well as members of the DNC together. That individual is dangerous to both parties, as that individual will enjoy support from those with Reason.

One such individual, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul is such a one, and that is why he is demeaned by members of his own party, and now, according to an article in the Daily Beast – the #1 target of the Democrats. (Daily Beast) It is due to his ability to reason that all American’s should enjoy liberties, to see both sides of an issue, and although appearing inexperienced to some in the Beltway’s employee, he is genuine, perhaps that is the most dangerous facet of his political persona – it is quite appealing to those tired of the status quo. Would there be a 100 Rand Paul’s – perhaps we would finally see a cohesive government.

Rand Paul and the Libertarian’s – What’s the appeal going into 2016? – Paul wins Maine Straw Poll

Rand Paul recently won the GOP Straw poll at the Maine GOP convention. (Politico). What that means in the most simple terms, is that the activist within the Maine GOP have a majority of Ron Paul supporters giving him both the college grassroots (where he has a good ground) to set up a solid shop for 2016 in the state. Right as of this morning, leading in hypothetical national polls is fine, but without ground troops; one might as well be throwing money into the wind when trying to put together a national campaign.

You need both –

Enter the “Wealthy” Libertarians as they would be dubbed by the New York Times:

“As he has risen in prominence as a Republican presidential contender, Mr. Paul is avidly courting a small but influential cluster of wealthy libertarians. His pursuit offers an intriguing window into an eclectic network of potential donors who have made fortunes in Silicon Valley start-ups and Wall Street hedge funds, a group that could form a vital donor base if he makes a bid for the Republican nomination. A tight-knit tribe of philanthropists and entrepreneurs, they have exerted enormous intellectual influence on conservative policy. But they have historically spent more on nonprofit groups and endowing college economics departments than they have on backing candidates.”

In other words, a Barry Goldwater, who ran as a Republican, and attracted college students and Middle America, including one young Hillary Rodham Clinton.(The Economist)

What is the appeal one might ask when one weighs the differences between the two major parties, and one individual who has a political ideology from a third party? The third party, Libertarians hold a variety of belief’s that appeal to both Conservatives as well as Liberals- they are, for the most part, anti-war, pro-woman’s rights, and complete fiscal conservatives –suggesting that without free-markets (Capitalism) one might as well pack it in. Smart spending versus Big Government wasteful spending has always been a bone of contention with the Libertarian. What Goldwater did not have was timing. Whereas Paul does – today’s millennial are disaffected and disappointed – there are fewer opportunities of the scale that would make younger people more independent and offer more mobility, rather than the current trend of living indefinitely with parents in order to pay off enormous student loans (that industry owned by the Federal Government as well), while finding temp work rather than a career for which they had prepared.

Therefore, as the timing is one which would welcome a state’s rights, free market thinker in the political arena, it may take some doing for the left (including the media) to scare the voter away from Senator Paul. Although odds are better than average that the Democrats will include a woman at the top of the ticket – the timing for that maybe off a bit. With a brand damaged by the Affordable Health Care act, among other lesser publicized “scandals” – the 2014 and 2016 elections will be held in the hands of Barack Obama, much in the same way as the 2006 and 2008 elections were credited to George W. Bush. (Note on that front, the RNC’s ability to front the weakest candidate possible in a given year where by any counts they should win handily, confounds logic. In the case of Bush, some blame has to be placed on the candidacy of John McCain, a Bob Dole for the present age. Romney is another RNC pick, and they are seriously dragging out the political dynasty of Bush once again, with Jeb. One can only hope that they play their cards correctly this time out and stay out of this General Election. It is time for a shift to Liberty minded “Jeffersonian Republicans” to take the reins. Paul is that person, it remains to be seen if his broad appeal to multiple factions opens the eyes of those in DC that cannot see beyond the beltway.

With the Affordable Health Care Act (DBA/Obama Care) Imploding, Harry Reid, D-UT, most Powerful Man in the Country – destroys 225 years of Senate precedence to give Democrats Supreme Power – Reaping what one sows.

Image and article from: The Democracy Chronicles

The Affordable Health Care Act (named so in an attempt to hide the fact that it is Obama Care and or Romney Care on Steroids), apparently is going so poorly that even Time has spoken out on the entire fiasco – let alone the disastrous roll-out, the President’s lying eyes and tongue hast caused his perfect “likability” and “trust” polls to plummet. Read Time Article (see cover) here at time.com to get the full taste of the problems that are facing a very lame duck President.

To combat his inability to get things done and inability to con the American Public, he called on the most powerful man he knows, Harry Reid, Democrat Senator from Nevada, otherwise, the Majority Leader of the Senate. Regardless of the reasoning, whether to further another agenda of the President’s, or take the headlines and the heat off the Affordable Health Care/Obama Care Act, the move to block filibusters under a “Nuclear Option” puts the Democrats firmly in the driver’s seat. The action stops any dissent from the minority party and basically breaking rules that are two hundred years old can oftentimes have consequences.

What makes one shake their heads in wonder are multiple – however, should the Democrats not be reading the tea leaves for 2014, and believe that they will continue to hold both the House and the Senate in 2014 – then that may explain Harry Reid’s actions – either than or it was a Kamikaze move in desperation of support for a Presidency in failure.

To understand completely what has taken place, the party in control of the Senate now has the option to shut out the opposition party and just pass whatever pleases them. The problem lays in the fact that should things change in 2014, and the Republican’s regain control of the Senate, then that move just set the Democrat party back – centuries. Harry Reid and his army of partisan pygmies might as well return to the pro-slavery south from which they came, and just retire - those old shortsighted fools. One might also guess that although the Republican’ are equally as popular as the Democrats (which is not giving them a whole lot of traction) they can at the least say they had little or nothing to do with Obama care – which at this point, with no fix in sight, and trust and liability an issue, then one might suspect 2014 will not go the Democrats way – especially if they are campaigning with the President to gain reelection outside of MA, HI, IL and DC.

Obama now has George Bush Syndrome, yet Bush took the sidelines, while Obama’s ego won’t allow it – that’s going to cost the party the Seats in the House – it’s already costing them the credibility with their constituents who are not progressive far left.

If there should be a group of like-minded Cruzian or Pualian new legislators in the Senate and the House, one can anticipate a whole different nation by2016- one which would give the nation a taste of Liberty on steroids.

That would ensure a third party and a balance capitol at last. Suffice it to say, if one is as student, it is time (or past time) from the formation of a new party to reduce an older party to dust. At first, one might think it would be the Republicans, yet, one believes more and more, that it may be the Republican’s survive (as the newest party – The Democrats being the oldest coming from the Slave states of the Civil war and pre-dating the Republican Party – who gave the U.S. Lincoln. Therefore, faced with moderate conservatives and hard-line constitutionalists, and a marginalized group of Democrats In a tight corner, the die would be cast for a return to prosperity, and accountability.

This is indeed a great time to watch events unfold, and one would probably pick up a good deal of spare change at the moment by playing chess with any Democrat, with an eye towards winning repetitive checkmates.

The Colorado Gun Restrictions – Dem’s Loose two Seats – Is it About Guns or Civil Liberties?

In a recent upset during a recall election in Colorado, two Democrat state reps lost their seats at the table, when the supported strict gun control legislation. According to the New York Times article – both Angela Giron of Pueblo and John Morse of Colorado Springs lost seats to Republicans in their respective districts. The Times points out the money spent by both sides of the gun control debate, as well as one of the districts voter registration make-up, being slightly less Democrat than the other – there was no other explanation of what the resounding defeat in an otherwise Democrat state might have been the cause (New York Times)

Colorado has passed more “liberal” leaning laws, including lifting restrictions of the use and sale of Marijuana (and then promptly taxed it to the extent that there are now protests! (Huffington Post). Seriously, what did they expect? In a state where the Democrats control the legislature, one might anticipate a tax on just about anything that moves – (See Massachusetts – tax on Dogs) – therefore, the legalized marijuana offered an opportunity for more – taxes, to fund more schools, ebt cards, programs, programs, programs.

That said, in such as state it is more than being outspent on advertising that ousted two Democrats who were in sync with the party line of “control the guns” – It is a growing distaste by the American Public for one more rule to follow and one more tax to pay. Little by little there has been an erosion of our economy, big-brother is constantly watching, fishing is regulated down to the recreational level, and one might pick any other subject that interferes with Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to find it has been taxed, removed or trampled upon.

That might be the reason why there is a sudden interest in those who are more “Libertarian” in nature, a growing sense that neither major political party has the “right stuff”, nor perhaps, just perhaps, it is time for something new. In cases where one sees the opportunity to vote the individual who’s party represents the remove of rights, (the Democrats), then they look to the opposition. If that happens to be a Republican (most often in DC, one can’t tell the difference between the two), then so be it – if that individual is a Jeffersonian Republican (i.e. Libertarian) all the better.

The Libertarian’s scream Liberty – it’s in the name, thus truth in advertising – and for all the common sense about throwing a vote away in favor of a party that has dose not stand a chance at a national office – (thinking 2014 and 2016), then one might look towards those Libertarians who are co-opting the Republican Party. They are Tea Party and Progressive at the same time, and a bit difficult to figure out for most that have to neatly stick a politician under one or the other category – left or right – they are – more – Independent.

This is why the media tags Senators Rand Paul (R-KY) and Ted Cruz (R-TX) with the “Tea Party” label as often as possible lately – knowing they are both potential 2016 candidates. The “Tea Party” label may have been the “kiss of death” in 2012, but..that was then and the entire nation is not as narrow minded or gullible as the east and west coast elites and especially the political class.

In the gun debate, it is not the right to shoot whomever one pleases or own tanks that is at issue, it is the concept that drives individuals to the polls, even those who never intend to own a gun, are now looking at the issue as ever increasing Federal encroachment – even at the State level. One cannot otherwise explain the rush for gun permits by thousands upon thousands of individuals in the wake of the announcement that Gun Control was part of the national spotlight.

Background checks are always on the table; one might be insane to think that would not be reasonable. If one is looking to carry concealed, then surely a fingerprint test at the local PD would be sufficient to determine if that individual was – oh – dangerous. To reduce the number of bullets one might put in a magazine does nothing – one bullet, one knife, on baseball bat is all it takes to kill someone, therefore, the over the top reaction to “keep the children safe” (while adding more regulations and of course, taxes and government jobs (even more taxes), and licensing) may have been partly well meant, but a simply crafted legislation on the state level modifying any loose ends as far as identifying who might be buying a gun (i.e. the simple background check) would have kept those two Democrats safely in their seats.

The panic over Obama care – now evident on both the right and the left, allowed a small group of Liberty minded (Libertarian) lawmakers to postpone voting on the budget apparently, there is a split in the GOP, according to USA today, but they fail to mention the Democrats who have become increasingly reluctant to go forth with the law. (USA Today) This is simply because it has reduced our liberties – nothing more, nothing less. It has costs jobs in the private sector, and increased jobs at the IRS, it does include those darn death panels, and restricts access to health care, especially for seniors. It was a badly crafted bill from the get-go – and now individuals are growing increasingly aware and they are not happy.

From fraud and abuse by those on entitlement programs, to the increasing costs of food and fuel, to the general malaise that has settled like the ghost of Jimmy Carter’s presidency upon the formerly fruited plains – something has to give. It started in Colorado, and one might suggest it will not end there.

Stockton CA, Bankruptcy – State of California 127 Billion in Debt – Highest Tax Rate in Nation – Comparison on States – Texas on Top, Budget Excesses, No Program Cuts – Find Your State to Compare

for



Some residents are fleeing California for Texas - images: calisscreaming and daydreamtoy.

The City of Stockton, California has court permission to file bankruptcy according to the Los Angles Times The City is one of “a half-dozen” that are currently seeking bankruptcy protection, creditors were fighting to have Stockton cut its payments to the State Employee Pension plan, which had to be funded under CA state law. “The $900 million Stockton owes to the California Public Employees Retirement System to cover pensions is its biggest debt -– as is the case with many cities in California.” Ruling on the case, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Klein, suggested to creditors that the state’s employees pension plan may also end up on the chopping block This may set a precedent for other cities that are under water with public employee pensions and benefits, allowing cities in California and elsewhere to restructure under Federal bankruptcy laws.

Meanwhile, the state of California has a negative net work of 127 Billion dollars. A negative net worth equates to 127 billion in the red Not included: the States “much-disputed unfunded liabilities for state employees' future pensions, nor the $60-plus billion in unfunded liabilities for retiree health care.”(Sacramento Bee).

Since the State of California has the highest State Sales Taxes, Gasoline Taxes, Personal Income Taxes, Corporate Sales Taxes and even property taxes despite proposition 13, (California Tax Payers Association), why it is that they are in the red, with cities that are filing under bankruptcy protection? California bought and sold the concept of higher taxes on Millionaires – therefore, they should have a boatload of cash – unless of course, when a State levies burdensome taxes on corporations and individuals, added to the taxes on Obama care and Federal Income and Corporate taxes, those individuals tend to move to less taxing environments. As do corporations that employee individuals who would then become taxpayers. Therefore, with the highest tax rates, one would think California would have an excess.

Compare Texas with California : NASBO, (THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE BUDGET OFFICERS), survey of states (in PDF) Texas at year end 2013, had a “rainy day fund” of over 6 billion, second only to oil rich Alaska, at 14 Billions. The chart on state general funds is found on page 4; California has a negative balance, the only state that has that distinction. On page 12 are enacted budget cuts for 2013, showing states with possible cuts in K-12 Education, Higher Education, Public Assistance, Medicaid, Transportation Corrections and Other. With this table one sees both Texas and California cutting programs, however, moving to the next table on Page 13, one finds that in the Case of Texas and California, the cuts are negative (an increase in those programs). In the case of Texas, this is across the board, while California has actual cuts in Higher Education and Other, but budget increases for other programs. Check your state by clicking anywhere in this paragraph.

The reasoning behind this particular comparison is the fact that Texas has one of the lower tax rates nationwide, is right next door to California and finally, many of those Californian’s earning and hoping to keep at least a portion of their paychecks, or wishing to find a job periods, are moving to – Texas.

This overview of the State Governments, and the size of the State Governments (not unlike the current size of our Federal Government) suggest that state where the tax rates have been cut or are lower for individuals and corporations, create a climate of prosperity, whereas, those that have high tax rates for both simply do not.

Other factors for states in the black with surpluses, not surprisingly, are those where the State’s government tends to be run by fiscal conservatives, have right to work laws (Non-Union), and actively court new business and residents with the promise of lower taxes.

State employees according to Government Executive Magazine, out-earn private sector peers by 6%. How do states compare? Governing, the State and Localities, “By the Numbers”, offers a chart here comparing states based on which offers Public employees the highest percentage above the Public sector: California is the Highest differential of the 50 states, while in Texas, the private sector earns slightly more. (Other states that offer a competitive edge (even slightly) to the private sector are: Alaska, Louisiana, North Dakota, and New York (which includes Upstate).

The proof as they say is in the pudding. If one were to restructure the public sector employees’ salaries and pensions to those of the private sector, offer realistic corporate and personal tax rates, the states, like Texas, might find themselves out of the red and into the black.

One might also suggest that if the Federal Government budgeted similarly to the states (specifically Texas, (based on the size, population density, industry, ports, and natural recourses’), the nation would experience growth. John F. Kennedy realized this, so did George W. Bush - more money in the hands of Washington DC does not make for national prosperity. One need only examine the States to see where success may be had, and note that programs do not suffer as a result. This is a classic Jeffersonian philosophy of moving the power to the States rather than the Federal Government. (See Jefferson on States’ rights at www.loc.gov/exhibits/jefferson.jeffed.htm