Tag Archives: Classical Liberal

The election cycle the GOP died


Over the past six years I have questioned the Republican Party’s national leadership.  It began with the nomination of Senator John McCain as the party’s nominee for President of the United States. Yes, Senator McCain is a national hero and served his nation during a time of war when that particular war was extremely unpopular.  Yes, Senator McCain is a former prisoner of war and is someone to be honored.  Yes, he has served in the Senate for a number of years and no doubt possesses an understanding of the legislative processes of our national government. Yet with all those “qualifications” heralded by the Republican National Committee establishment he was unable to defeat the most inexperienced president the United States has had in modern times.

In the mid-term elections of 2011 something exciting happened within the halls of Congress – conservative candidates selected by a growing grassroots movement were sworn into their respective positions in the House and Senate. These candidates were not hand selected by the establishment within the Republican and in some cases, did not have the financial backing of the vast financial resources of the Republican Party.  Listening to the political commentary originating from the party establishment, it was obvious that they did not believe true conservatism had a chance at winning elections.  The establishment pointed to “grassroots” candidates such as Christine O’Donnell and others as being politically too weak to win elections and even gloated  when she lost, highlighting that the Republican National Committee alone knew how to pick candidates that would be able to beat Democrats.  They ignored grass-roots selected and elected members of Congress such as Representatives Ted Cruz, Sandy Adams, Dianne Black, Bill Cassidy, Jeff Duncan and thirteen others that brought with them a mandate directly from the people and not from the Republican establishment.

Karl Rove, Reince Priebus, and other career politicians that are the core leadership of the GOP establishment have moved the Republican Party away from its traditional political base and with no debate, have shifted to a platform that appears to be a Democratic Party Lite version.  Gone from the national GOP platform are the demands for smaller national government, less taxes, development of domestic energy sources, pro-life (both from an abortion and euthanasia stand) and determination to bring industry back to the nation.  In its place is a new agenda that is more progressive with the only real difference between it and the Democratic Party platform is who would be in charge of implementing the numerous progressive ideas.  The party establishment appears to support the concept of a larger, more intrusive national government (among these supporters was President George W. Bush), the acceptance of higher personal and corporate taxes, a commitment to maintaining a bloated national government, an unwillingness to address welfare reform, and immigration reform that appears to offer everything as a means to gain votes.  The Republican Party, under the leadership and influence of Karl Rove, appears to be interested in being in control of a progressive agenda instead of being opposed to it.

48 Days Personality Profiles

The upcoming midterm election should be a sure-win for the Republican Party; however, the party bosses have declared war on the Tea Party – the part of the Republican Party that allowed the ascension of Congressman John Boehner to Speaker of the House.  The establishment, however, has already indicated that grassroots Tea Party candidates could cost the Republican Party the control of the House and more than likely assure that the Senate remains in the hands of the Democrats.  Instead of having an honest dialogue to address the concerns of the Tea Party movement, the GOP establishment sees them as a political threat. In a recent article on Breitbart, it was noted that political contributions to the GOP establishment Super PACs amounted to nearly $7 million with contributions to Super PACs lead by Karl Rove bringing in another $6.1 million. The top three major conservative PACs were able to raise a combined total of nearly $20 million; a smaller conservative Tea-Party PAC, the Tea Party Patriots Citizens Fund, was able to raise roughly $6.4 million, eclipsing the financial contributions of the three Rove-oriented Super PACs.

The fear mongering being used for the sole purpose of building the party establishment war chest shows how out of touch the national party leadership is with its base.  Over the past few election cycles, the base of the Republican Party has asked for a national discussion on conservative real world solutions to problems faced by the nation.  The conservative base has wanted the Obama administration to answer the tough questions on Fast and Furious, the Benghazi attack, the IRS scandal, the apparent racial double standards of the Department of Justice, the icy diplomatic relations with Great Britain and Israel, behind closed-door agreements with China, Russia, and the apparent decline in prominence in America’s role in the United Nations.  Instead of holding an honest dialogue, the conservative base has been painted as out of touch with mainstream society and has been accused of being radical by both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party establishment.  By demonizing the conservative base, the establishment hoped to win the support of moderates under the premise that Republicans need the moderates to win elections.

The 2011 midterm elections was the beginning of a war within the Republican Party to see who will control the defining elements of the party.  If the establishment is successful in expelling the Tea Party faction from its base, a third-party will form with conservatism at its center.  It will become the new opposition party to the Liberal leaning Democratic Party machine and will overtake the Republican Party as espousing the ideals that made this nation great.  If the establishment loses and the Tea Party does manage to take control of the Republican Party, the two-party system will remain with the Republican Party again being an opposition party to the Liberal agenda (I doubt this will happen as the leadership seems bent on destroying the party rather than to allow conservatives to win control).  Either way, the current party establishment will lose because the base has demonstrated since the 2011 election that if the party leadership will not listen to its conservative base, the base will take its money, its efforts, and its political support somewhere else that will.  The Republican Party needs its conservative base more than that base – the Tea Party – needs the establishment.

The ongoing transitioning of America


When I was stationed in Europe in the early 1990s, I spent a great deal of my leave time travelling around to various places in that I had heard about or studied.  One of the places I visited was Athens, Greece, and was amazed at the number of classical Greek ruins still visible as a testimony to the greatness of the Greek empire and later Roman domination of the region.  These buildings were (and am presuming still are) the focus of many various projects to maintain them for future generations to enjoy and to be inspired as I have.

As a historian and with an academic background in the study of sociology and psychology, I believe that one of the things that led to the collapse of both the Greek and the Roman Empires was that of a transitioning culture.  What past generations once held as dear and as being the bedrock of their society.  What had been built by the older generations was neglected by the next generations; by the time the younger generations began their rise to power, there was a disconnect from the traditions and customs that had allowed Greece, and later Rome, to rise to prominence as a Mediterranean power.  All that remains as a tribute of those empires’ greatness are ruins, legends, and other intellectual achievements.  Outside of education, most people never think of the impact of those people from so long ago have on our world.

In the twenty-first century, the United States is undergoing a transition of its own. Beginning in the 1960s, the “new” American Left, wrapped in the ideas of free speech and the rejection of “traditional” mainstream values began making its way on the college campuses across the United States.  Learning from the lessons of the Civil Rights Movement, the New Left focused on delivering its message to those in society that had become disillusioned with the demands of the American capitalist system.  It is during the 1960s, specifically the Lyndon B. Johnson years, where the New Left and the Democratic Party will claim the victory for the Civil Rights Movement – something that the Democratic Party had actually been in opposition to since the late 1860s (there was absolutely no Democratic Party support for the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, or Fifteenth Amendments, the Civil Rights Acts of 1866, 1875; had it not been for Republicans and the wide base of Republican support, the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1968 would not have passed).

There were a lot of things that the New Left claimed that needed to change in the United States; there were issues that did need to be addressed such as the racial and sexual discrimination and inequality that had become the standard. However, the assault against American society did not end there but continued to assault the things that had made America different from the rest of the nation. The free market system was one of the first things to come under attack; it was claimed that the capitalist system in America had created an unjust distribution of wealth and had left out a large percentage of the citizenry.  Also under attack was the role of the church – both as a public institution of the community and as an influence within that community. Besides the structure of the economy and religion, they also targeted the concept of the American nuclear family.  The New Left adopted a tone that not only discouraged other points of view from being expressed, they also began to craft the notion that any attempts to defend those social norms were attempts to enforce conformity of a minority to the will of a majority – and that this concept was distinctly – anti-American.

The current generation of publicly educated youth and college students have now grown up without an objective education about our nation.  Instead of teaching of how this nation was founded by a generation facing odds that many believed at the time was hopeless, they ventured out into the danger.  Through the blood and sweat of Americans of every socio-economic status and every race, they fought and won independence for a nation that the political theorists of their day deemed folly – no common people had ever governed themselves successfully.  Governance was reserved for the crown and the aristocracy, not the common man.  Anything else was deemed to be against the natural order of mankind.  Instead of focusing on the achievements of those men, the modern college history course and textbook teach that it was a group of white men who had no concern for the fates of women, free blacks, slaves, or even American Indians.  The textbooks discuss that it was a revolution that had to be sold to the common American colonist by the merchant class.  The “New Left” revisionist history of the United States not only denies the odds that generation faced, it also disregards the social norms of European society of that era (no nation allowed the common woman to take part in politics nor did any nation allow slaves or others outside the prescribed citizenry any sort of rights), but it also ignores that the American Revolution was truly unique – it was the first time that the entire strata of a society shared a common vision.

Continued on next page.

48 Days Innov48 Live Event

What the Virginia governor’s race means to conservatives


Last night, I like a number of other conservatives, watched the poll results for the Virginia governor’s race with great anticipation. The election was much larger than the two candidates, Terry McAuliffe (D) and Ken Cuccinelli (R), for several reasons.  For the mainstream media, it had been billed as a referendum on the Affordable Care Act and as a showdown within the Republican Party between the extreme right and the more moderate Republican Party leadership.  Within the Republican Party, it was a wake-up call for grass roots conservatives  – the party leadership sent a message that it would rather lose elections than to support a conservative “Tea Party” leaning Republican than an establishment selected Republican candidate.

The election results were pretty close considering that Ken Cuccinelli had very little support from the national Republican Party.  After the final count last night, there were only three percentage points separating the two candidates – a far cry from the landslide that had been predicted for a McAuliffe easy victory (McAuliffe 48%; Cuccinelli 45%); McAuliffe, an Obama and Clinton campaign bundler, had access to a huge war chest of funds and the support of the Obama administration, but still should have been easily defeated had the Republican Party leadership provided the campaign support needed to assure a Cuccinelli victory.  Make no mistake about it, had the GOP leadership gone after Terry McAuliffe with a determination to defeat him, Cucinelli would have easily won; McAuliffe’s personal and political record speaks for itself.  Several websites chronicle the shady character of the now Governor-Elect of Virginia:

  • Terry McAuliffe Caught in Another Scandal – this article lists three separate scandals – one stretching back to the Clinton administration involving McAuliffe.

  • Do you really want this corrupt scam artist as governor? – not only does it provide additional documentation to the scandals reported in the above article, it links to three other articles citing McAuliffe’s numerous failed businesses and how he literally walked away with millions of dollars of investor funds and federal dollars in those business dealings.
  • Pro-Life Ken Cuccinelli Trails Pro-Abortion Terry McAuliffe by 7 in Virginia – although not exclusively focused on the scandals, it ties McAuliffe to the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton as her leading choice for vice president.
  • Scandal Watch: Another Choppy Week for Terry McAuliffe in Virginia – This article states that in August 2013, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) began an investigation into one of McAuliffe’s failed business ventures, GreenTech.  The company was to begin production of low cost alternative fuel vehicles and had actually rented industrial space along the Mississippi Gulf Coast to construct the cars. After taking millions in Chinese investments and a generous grant from the Obama Administration, the company ceased “production” and became insolvent.  Involved with the plan was Hillary Clinton’s brother and to some extent, the State Department under then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

There are literally hundreds of sites  that include a combination of “traditional” media sites and blog sites that have fully explored the background of Terry McAuliffe.  If organizations like Reutuers, MSNBC, and even Fox News can report on his questionable ethics, ties to corruption, and SEC investigations, then this should have been an easy victory for the Republican candidate and the Grand Old Party.  As I watched the poll results last night, I immediately started asking myself why the party walked away from this election and left another Republican candidate to lose an election to an opponent that not only lacks the experience necessary to be a governor, but has serious moral and ethical questions about his conduct.

48 Days Personality Profiles

Continued on next page.