CPAC – From the Outside Looking In – the Rise of the Libertarians, Tea Party Conservatives – Anti-Beltway – Populist Leaders

C-SPAN- Coverage of CPAC2013 - image C-SPAN - visit CSPAN Video for additional coverage

The coverage of the annual CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) was as expected – with the media calling this event akin "to going to the land before time" – (Matthew Dowd – ABC News). There was a bit of the old Republican’s in chaos – but…those watching from a distance (C-Span) saw the event from a slightly different angle. For one, the Conservatives are not necessarily “Republican”, as in the “brand”, rather they are a mix of Moderates, Conservatives and Libertarians – new faces and old faces – and they are, for the most part – young – between 18 and 25 years of age. They are, in effect, ordinary people who believe strongly in fiscal conservatism – as a combination of a moral and pragmatic objective. What was most interesting was the emphasis by those who were speaking, on what’s wrong in Washington D.C. and the power vacuum that exists between the Capital and the balance of the nation – there is a great disconnect between the elites in Washington and the people who send them. (Although there were plenty of those “Republican’s in the mix.)

This was made apparent by Sarah Palin, who lashed out at the “elite” in D.C. and the Machine that is the GOP establishment – picking winners and losers, and then ultimately losing elections. There was a not so subtle jab at Karl Rove, one time GOP political strategist under George W. Bush, who had a virtual melt-down on Fox News election eve, when they called key states for President Obama. Rove, in his passion as a Republican, could not concede that yet another election was going towards the opposition party. What Rove, and one might suspect, the other lobbyists, strategist etc. in D.C. as well as the media (who plays to both sides of Washington politics as it is basically, one group that is the same, both Democrats and Republicans, by virtue of their control over events. In the last two elections, the choice by the party controllers, of what is considered a moderate – has failed. The reasoning is usually a jab at the “mainstream media”, who is somewhat culpable, however, with a 26% trust (or thereabouts) polling for all news media (Gallup), one has to wonder, is the media being given too much credit? Rather one might suggest that when a candidate it pushed forward, and the “base” which is varied, cannot abide one or the other of these candidates – they stay home, and they don’t vote. There were problems’ with Mitt Romney’s candidacy that is not being discussed – for one, the nonsense that is one if at the top of the ticket, Republicans and Republican leaning voters will simply vote for that individual. Nothing can be further from the truth. Ron Paul’s two million strong army, Rick Santorum’s devout followers, those evangelicals who could not see a path to voting for a man who’s religion was considered a “cult” – would have been, each one alone, enough to change the course of the election. Therefore, it is the changing face of conservatism, the populist, Libertarian and Tea Party rising, that needs the support, rather than the derision of those who would be kingmakers, lest they see themselves on the outside looking in.

Therefore, enter the new (and some older) faces of Conservatism – the brand of Conservatism that appeals to those from both “traditional” parties – in other words, not the hard-line social conservatives, of which there are millions, rather an individual who was not so repellant to their core beliefs – and someone who was not part of the permanent political class, rather a fresh face – and there were many at CPAC.

They are all worth listening to – without the “haze” of opinion – and all segments are available on YouTube: at the ACU CPAC playlist for CPAC 2016 Here

There are the keynote speakers, (Palin, most notably), those who one might not recognize, Dr. Ben Carson, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, names one might recall hearing as of late, and a host of others that speak to the heart of American rather than the black hole that is Washington.

What one finds most entertaining is the numbers of individuals who are ready to dismiss a speaker (such as Sarah Palin) based upon what they have heard through media, or professors, and when confronted with a written snippet of a speech, find that individual to be somewhat brilliant. Therein lays the crux of the matter – those who would be holding onto their power in Washington, even losing an election does not change their status, may finds themselves, going into the 2016 general, a bit on the outs. The potential candidates, especially Dr. Ben Carson and Rand Paul, deliver messages that cross the great personal political divide – Not surprisingly, Ran Paul won the annual straw poll – although it was suggested that he did not win by a huge percentage due to the exclusion of libertarian groups at the conference. However, when Rand Paul took to the floor of the Senate to filibuster, those following Twitter understood he was attracting individuals both conservative and liberal, who all took a “standwithrand”. Therefore, one might not want to discount this particular win, just because his father had won in years past. They are, of note, different men, wedded to the same ideology of Libertarianism.

Watch, listen, learn – although there may be some differences, and points of order to be called, one might find that there is hope for a return to the principles that guide American forward, with less government focused in D.C., and more power to the individual states. Perhaps that is why a politically connected D.C. journalist (who’s very power is derived by those connections), would rant about a “land before time” – as it threatens, should those very conservatives take back Washington in its original intent, it would be a personal game-changer.

Now, 2016 begins in earnest – the die is cast, and although one might see the return of the Bush Dynasty, as well as a Clinton to oppose, one might be heartened that the people will be drawn to a different type of Leader –or leaders, (Senators, Congressional Representatives), one who is not going to go along to get along, or worse, continue the dogma and rhetoric that keeps those 501C’s in business, and the Senator, Congressional Representative or President for that matter, in power for multiple terms – one rather is going to change minds and hearts, lead all people. At this point, there are several who can fit that bill. That fact alone, gives those who are tired of the constant bickering, and political chicanery in what is D.C. – hope.

Obama – Is War With Iran to be His Final Conflict? – President cites need to retain Iran’s nuclear capabilities – The Not So Obvious Hawk in the White House

President Obama, weighs strike on Iran - image CBSLocal DC

President Obama is heading to Israel – and has noted in a recent interview “Right now, we think it would take over a year or so for Iran to actually develop a nuclear weapon, but obviously we don’t want to cut it too close,” he said. “So when I’m consulting with Bibi (Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu) as I have over the last several years on this issue, my message to him will be the same as before: `If we can resolve it diplomatically that is a more lasting solution. But if not I continue to keep all options on the table.” (Washington CBS News)

It is time for that “red line in the sand” to be taken more seriously – and apparently, with the statement “all solutions on the table” (should a year of diplomacy fail), conjures up images of a yet another potential U.S. engagement overseas – one which might have been avoided. First, it goes without saying that diplomacy and Iran are not usually residing the same hemisphere – and secondly – “all options on the table” is a hawkish term – generally meaning military use of force. One might then be able to add Iran to and increased incursion into Afghanistan to the Obama Presidential Legacy at some point in the future. However, it remains to be seen if Iran will be challenged by this administration, or, more to the point, in conjunction with the UN – together - with more than strongly worded memo’s telling those that would blow up the world, starting with Israel, to cease and desist.

A missed opportunity. Over the course of months in the uprising in the state of Iran over elections in 2009 – A general strike, which was peaceful, resulted in the death, imprisonment and torture, of Iranian’s who had peacefully taken to the streets – in one stunning incident (there were many) –the Iranian forces refused to fight those who were peacefully protesting, so the Ayatollah’s called in mercenaries from outside Iran, who, on motorcycles, used axes and other means chop through the crowds – it was a state of barbaric control, and throughout - there was little coming from the national media or the Whet House – one could have heard a pin drop. The screams for help from the Iran’s (Persians) being persecuted, went largely ignored. A hint from the newly minted President Obama that there was support for the uprising, apparently materialized 3 weeks into the slaughter, when the window of opportunity was long gone.

Had there been a hint early one, while nations such as Canada and Italy were doing their utmost to protect individuals by bringing them into embassies on the ground, perhaps, just perhaps, the regime might have taken notice,. Moreover, with some indirect aid – having troops on both borders of Iran (Iraq/Afghanistan) – aid in the form of weapons, electronics, etc., would have changed the course of history. Yet, there were crickets

Now, as Iran has exceeded exceptional in nuclear arms development, the crisis is upon Western Leaders, and something must be done (not to mention the son of Sam who’s running N. Korea. Should the U.S., perhaps send over a few drones to strike at known nuclear targets (they can borrow Intel from the Israeli’s, if need be), that would set off a direct conflict between Iran and the west (as they threaten the entire Western World, and it would put North Korean on notice, that there is yet another “cowboy” in the White House.

The Israeli’s believe President Obama has this intent: that he will strike Iran if diplomacy fails this year (Times of Israel)

However, the press is somewhat dismissive of the intent of the President to strike, taking a more pragmatic approach in passing the less than vied threat form President Obama (See Reuters’ article)

It is this opinion, In no uncertain terms, the President is a Hawk, one who has involved the U.S. directly and indirectly in geopolitical conflicts over the past few years (Libya, Egypt), therefore, the Iranians cannot be dismissive of President Obama – and if so, their failure to understand will be their undoing.

One might call the President a Paper Tiger, or critique his foreign policy as somewhat erratic, hwoever; he has been consistent in sending both troops and military aid (in real goods, or cash) to those nations that are seeking a chance in government.

Massachusetts Special Senate Election Update – Gomez, Sullivan, Winslow – first debate. Gomez Releases Letter to Governor – All Hades Breaks Loose

Mass Special Election GOP Candidates during Debate - image Boston Globe

The Massachusetts Special Election primary to fill the vacant U.S. Senate seat (John Kerry), will take place this April, with both major political parties offering choices of 2 to 3 candidates in a closed primary. One is only able to vote in the primary if one is unenrolled and declares a party, or one is registered as either a Republican or Democrat. The Democrats have offered up two U.S. Congressmen, Ed Markey and Stephen Lynch. While the Republican race offers three; Dan Winslow, (State Representative), Michael Sullivan (former U.S. Attorney) and Gabriel Gomez (political neophyte). The three Republican’s met in a debate on Tuesday where the issues of the day were discussed, along with trivial, humanizing questions such as a favorite junk food. (NECN - video)

During the debate, the subject of a letter written by Gomez to Governor Deval Patrick, asking the Governor to consider Gomez for an interim replacement to fill the Senate seat until the election took place, has apparently become somewhat of a sticking point. Gomez vowed to release the letter to the public during the debate (Boston Herald). The contents of the letter were summarily touted by the by the Boston Globe as Gomez reaching across the aisle They also included a handy PDF which can be downloaded and shared here.

In the letter, Gomez informs the Governor that he is a “moderate” Republican, one who supported Barack Obama in 2008, and also is supportive of the Presidents Gun Ban as well as his Immigration Reform policies. In a nutshell, while on the campaign trail, it appears that Gomez, is much like Kerry in his ability to “flip-flop” on issues, as noted in several GOP activist emails flying through cyberspace (with the PDF attached.)

Understanding that the actual Massachusetts GOP is diverse, made up of those moderates, those country club Republican’s, those Libertarian, those Right-wing Conservatives and yes, Tea Party Members, one might have burned that letter and taken back all copies before releasing it prior to a primary.

On the flip side, Gomez, a father of four, may have had a reaction to the sudden screaming for Banning Guns by those who legally own them (i.e. the 2nd Amendment), or he may have been attempting to jump ahead of the curve, by sounding like a progressive Democrat (i.e. extreme moderate), in order to stand a chance of getting into a position without the need for a primary. The previous is, of course, sheer speculation.

In any event, the race, as it stands, appears to be exciting the national media, and of course, the state media, as Lynch and Markey are about as exciting as watching paint dry. One might want to take early bets on either Winslow or Sullivan to pull out of this primary, to face either (most likely) Markey or Lynch in what will be the most boring election in Massachusetts history. Gomez, at least garnered some excitement, given his youth and compelling story, and may have given either of the two Bay State Congressmen a run for their money, however, that may be less likely at this point.

With approximately a month before the primary, the situation may change, and Gomez may be “forgiven” his stance on gun control. However, one must remember, in the land of Smith & Wesson, in a state that is seeing an increase in a call for new gun permits, and a lack of supplies at area gun shops, it may have behooved the political newcomer to choose another topic in an attempt to ingratiate himself with the Governor.