ACTION

http://www.freedomworks.org/publications/2010-year-in-review

records the highlights of a mixed but, on balance, quite positive year 2010 for those of us who value and are willing to speak up and act to maintain America’s freedoms. Among the seven negative events mentioned, the three biggest lowlights of the year are clearly the signing into law of Obamacare; the one-year anniversary of the Obama stimulus with negative results on the jobs front at a cost to the taxpayers of $787 Billion; and the passage of the Dodd-Frank financial overhaul which, like Obamacare has the potential to prove itself one of the least principled government boondoggles in history.

            Among the thirteen positive events FreedomWorks listed, the top five arguably were these:

A.     The one year anniversary of the Tea Party protest movement championing fiscal- and Constitutional-conservativism and smaller, more competent government was celebrated.

B.    The Defeat of the Disclose Act (which even the ACLU was against) was a huge step for freedom of expression.

C.    The Election Day shift in paradigm from government-as-usual to government by the people.

D.   The Sound Money Panel was held on Capitol Hill.

E.    A Virginia judge has declared the mandated requirement of taxpayers to buy health insurance “Unconstitutional.”

Other lowlights listed by Freedomworks included Elena Kagan’s nomination and confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court; Ben Bernanke’s Quantitative easing which threatens to exacerbate inflation concerns; the “mini-TARP” Small Business and Credit Act became law; and the International Monetary Fund (The IMF largely financed by America) agreed to bail out Greece. The FreedomWorks site also ran . . .

http://www.freedomworks.org/publications/top-10-ways-the-obama-budget-wastes-taxpayer-money

their top ten ways Obama’s been wasting taxpayer money. Rajjpuut strongly agrees with the first four items on this FreedomWorks list; generally sees the strength of their position on items #5-9 and thinks they missed the boat altogether on item #10 which he’d regard as vital for technological breakthrough and national defense. The reader is advised to visit the site and make up his/her own mind.

Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,

Rajjpuut

Liberal Yahoo and the ultra- liberal Associated Press have both shown great insight and generated greater incitement (stimulus to action) for the opposing parties in the November elections and outlined how they’ll probably play out . . . .

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100705/ap_on_el_ge/us_nationalized_election

In the excellent article linked just above, Charles Babington of the AP says that “Democrats and Republicans are framing the elections in starkly different terms, with GOP strategists painting it as a national referendum on President Barack Obama and the party in power, and Democrats working feverishly to make all politics local.” Rajjpuut who, in his school teaching days could boast of coaching several Colorado State Chess Team Champions, agrees whole-heartedly because the art of politics should be successfully conducted as a strategic magic act for the have nots; and a strategic trench warfare for the haves. Just as the Democrats were in most people’s eyes, the haves in 2006 and 2008 (they were perceived as having the issues on their side); in 2010, clearly conservatives have the issues favoring them. In a larger sense, however, this strategic view clearly underlines the failings of the Republican Party to represent the needs of the nation and of its conservatives over the last 109 years as Progressivism^^ has progressively brought the country more and more evil and closer and closer to utter ruin.

When good men fail to act effectively, evil gains a toe-hold. When good men fail to understand their cause, evil makes its case. When good men fail to act, evil comes to power. When good men fail to act and to understand, evil comes to dominate. When good men act wrongly either by failing to act or failing to understand or both evil WINS. This short paragraph outlines why and how the Republican Party has failed conservatives and the country in the past, is failing them now, and will (unless serious change occurs) continue to fail conservatives and America in the future. More on this later

. . . .

When coaching his scholastic champion chess teams, Rajjpuut made a point of hammering away at tactics as a blended-subsidiary to strategy so that whether elementary, middle school or high schoolers were involved . . . the big picture always stood out stark and clear: own the center, develop and coordinate your pieces, before you touch a piece or pawn (touch-move rule in championship events) prefer attack to defense; then stop, ask yourself the question “What could go wrong?” If nothing could go wrong, you’ve selected your move and except for finding a better one which also has no downside . . . you’re moving toward victory. Throw in good tactics and knowing how to crush in the endgame and victory was virtually assured.

This approach was gained from studying management principles at Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas via the Kepner-Tregoe Management System . . . clearly the Republican Party could benefit from understanding and complying with good management principles, the basic economic and constitutional imperatives of Republicanism, and the underlying common sense fundamentals of free market economics.

Our neighborhood was recently plagued by a Democratic campaign worker for the more liberal of that party’s senate candidates (Ex-speaker of the state house Romanoff who was running against semi-moderate Bennett. Romanoff had been considering running for governor but didn’t wish to contest the seat against popular ex-Denver mayor and the whole nation is, thanks to Obama’s efforts to influence Romanoff to drop the race against Bennett as well as the Sestak issue in Pennsylvania, aware of this particular race). The fellow was a polite and curious sort and discussed politics with Rajjpuut for roughly 25 minutes. Here’s what impressed him – our progresive opposition -- the most:

1. That our $13 TRillion national debt was the least of our problems.

2. That the $110 TRillion in unfounded liabilities (Social Security, Medicare and the federal side of Medicaid) were not being addressed by either party.

3. That congress had recently done a great thing with its Pay-Go law requiring that before any new spending measure can be passed a way to pay for it either by instituting a new tax or by cutting spending be found . . . . but that congress had since passing that law refused to use Pay-go even once since, just as it had failed to honor the set-asides for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and thus since 1934 has built up that $110 TRillion in unfunded liabilities.

4. That Obama has told the nation his energy policies will “necessarily make the price of electricity skyrocket” and that he’s told the San Francisco Chronicle his policies will “bankrupt the coal industry.”

5. That Obama has promised (threatened?) to create five million new green jobs when green technology is NOT yet viable. That Spain in 1997 led Europe with a booming economy and only 3% unemployment before they turned to green jobs and today Spain has 21% unemployment and is, next to Greece, the weakest economy in Europe. That according to a Spanish study each green job required $667,000 in subsidies which cost the real economy 2.2 jobs. And because only 10% of the green jobs proved permanent (the vast majority lasted from three months to eighteen months) that meant that IF Obama instituted his five million green jobs it was likely that only 500,000 of them would prove permanent at the cost of eleven million jobs in the real (unsubsidized) economy a 22/1 ratio that perfectly explains why Spain’s economy went south.

6. Yes, green tech would be ideal, but green tech is not yet viable. So it would make much more sense instead of subsidizing $677,000 for one green job . . . to subidize instead $6.77 Billion for research for the top hundred winners in green-tech viability from a national contest judged by the best scientists available and seeing if that stimulus can get us a green-tech Edison and a highly desirable green-tech future based on independent American innovation.

7. And tah-dah! more than anything else the following information impressed the Democrat and he took down the particulars to research later on his home computer:

A. This crucial website (the most famous brief essay in ecomics and the simple and utter refutation of Keynesian approaches such as Obama’s stimulus-stimulus and more stimulus approaches) explains what free markets are and what their strengths are:

http://www.econlib.org/library/Essays/rdPncl1.html

B. Information about this site:

http://jim.com/econ/

and after hearing the “one lesson” (from “Economics in One Lesson” by Henry Hazlitt, linked just above) he too realized that: when you look at economic situations which present themselves you must get the whole picture not just the supposedly desirable government spending stimulus plan. And then illustrating the one lesson with the briefest of fables: “The Broken Window Parable,” which utterly and totally caught him by surprise and clearly delighted him (both linked right here) . . .

http://jim.com/econ/chap01p1.html

A. Republicans have failed to understand who and what the enemy is. That enemy is and has been Progressivism and Progressives since Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican, became the first notable Progressive. Not saying that Teddy Roosevelt didn’t do any good . . . just that he was the first president to champion Progressive causes which later in the hands of Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Jimmy Carter and to a lesser extent Bill Clinton and George W. Bush led us to our present disastrous economic collapse. Republicans haven’t been able to effectively oppose progressivism and get support against progressivism from would-be conservatives because they don’t understand it themselves.

B. Most Republicans do NOT understand Republicanism (the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution is the most Republican document in the history of the world; and the 10^th Amendment of the Bill of Rights taken in conjunction with the doctrine of Separation of Church and State are by far the most important parts of the Bill of Rights the spark plug for all the other Amendments) and . . . because they do NOT understand Republicanism, they cannot and do not explain Republicanism well and thus educate liberal, Democratic-conservative and independent-conservative voters.

C. Many Republicans continuously and deliberately violate Republicanism by opposing Separation of Church and state in Public Schools. The Founding Fathers (virtually all of them Christian) did NOT set up a Christian nation, they deliberately set up a nation where ALL religions would be welcome but in which no one particular religion could dominate (remembering the problems with England's state supported church) and endanger our freedoms. If you want one reason why Independent and Democratic conservatives are more likely to abstain or to vote Democtat, this is the one.

D. Two isues here, Republican corruption as shown in sexual and business scandals on the one hand and the simple fact that most Republicans have ceaselessly been UNTRUE to fundamental Republican principles such as fiscal conservativism; limited federal government; adherence to the Constitution; protection of our borders; and balanced budgets. Most Americans are conservative on these issues and have been routinely disappointed by Republican candidates promising to adhere to these principles and then abandoning them once in office. ALL Americans are conservative on political integrity.

E. Anti-abortion and even Anti-contraception are linked in much of the public’s collective mindset as Republican values. History has linked the Republican Party to this stance and it is why many women vote for Democrats. If Republicans had a stance that the Independent voter could buy into that would be one thing, and it would probably NEVER cost even one vote. However, Republicans have adopted a losing argument and paraded it before the public as the most visible aspect of Republicanism.

That losing argument is that abortion should be denied to victims of incest; victims of rape; mothers whose health is endangered; very young girls; and other victims in extraordinary cases.

Americans pride themselves on rooting for the underdog and the victim and consider old Republican opposition to contraception and family planning as totally unjustified state interference (10^th Amendment again) into their personal lives.

Because that old Republican stance is so unwieldy, progressive opponents have made the Republican Party look outdated and uncaring. Abortion (unfortunately abortion virtually on demand), has been the law of the land for thirty-eight years now. One could argue that abortion (freedom over one’s body in exigent circumstances like those named above) and contraception and the resulting freedom to plan one’s family size and spacing are actually Republican causes, but in any case, because the Republican Party deliberately adopted the losing argument outlined in italics above . . . for most voters abortion on demand by contrast to the obdurate Republican stand seemed preferable. For women, in particular, this hardened Republican anti-victim stand has made the Republican Party a political destination to avoid.

To sum it up: politics is a game of strategy and tactics. The United States Constitution is the greates winning political game plan ever created. The U.S. Constitution is a decidedly conservative document designed to protect state, county, and local freedoms as well as individual freedoms against the ever-present tendency of centralized governments to expand and become more expensive and more intrusive. We are now in big trouble because for roughly 109 years, the Republican Party, the standard-bearer for conservativism has not stood strong against progressivism. In all strategic encounters, the basic rule of victory is this: find a strategic and tactical path that makes your own strengths the single most important consideration at issue and your opponent’s strengths of negligible import, while effectively managing your own weaknesses and exposing your opponent’s weaknesses and making them them of paramount importance. So let it be written, so let it be done . . . .

Right now and for all the foreseeable future, only overt and honorable conservativism (fiscally and Constitutionally) can save us. The Republican Party needs to re-invent itself in light of and in line with the party’s original conservative, Libertarian values (fiscal and Constitutional conservativism, strong borders and strong national defense, and largely a live-and-let- live social** agenda). No single election has been more crucial in the history of our country and the Republican Party must deliver or the nation is quite likely LOST!

Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,

Rajjpuut

Republicans are also “edgy” about the future created by this new activist force. Blogs are springing up all over conservative websites saying some version of this . . . “The tea party seems to be thinking they can pick our candidates for us, and they openly prefer candidates that are not incubents or not already “part of the establishment . . . of course, they’ll want us to fund the campaigns for these newcomers. This doesn’t make any sense to me . . . “ Republicans are treating this situation as a quagmire when they should be embracing it as raw opportunity. If Rajjpuut were named Head #1 Republican Honcho tomorrow here’s how he’d approach the “problem.” It’s been said, there is none so blind as he who will not see. It seems that Republicans canNOT see the future clearly because they don’t know their own history? Allow Rajjpuut to refresh some memories . . . .

Sixteen years after the Dixiecrats walked out (at the Democratic National Convention that nominated Harry Truman) during Hubert Humphrey’s speech in favor of civil rights legislation, they found a home in 1964 favoring Republican conservative Barry Goldwater. To be blunt, they were about the only truly enthusiastic voters for Barry. Four years later, Nixon courted them as the “Silent Majority” and the Republican Party stopped being the “Party of Lincoln” in the eyes of many minorities and that condition still exists today. Times have changed, but perceptions haven't. For example, Obama received more White votes and a higher percentage of White votes (almost 48%) than either Kerry or Gore, but McCain only received 4.3% of the Black votes . . . so the Democrats could fairly be excused of having the most racist party. In any case, politically there was an enormous plus for Nixon and many Republicans . . . the G.O.P. was now a much more conservative party and since in any given year, 65-70% of the voters describe themselves as “fiscal-conservatives” Republicans since Nixon’s days have had a natural advantage that has led them to winning seven of the last eleven presidential elections.

With those numbers in their favor, Republicans are a natural “slam-dunk.” Frankly, however, the G.O.P., from the standpoint of Conservative Democrats and Independents (a good percentage of the 65% fiscal-conservatives in America) especially, has gone so far out of the way to make itself UN-attractive that in local, state and national elections they have largely squandered their birthright and continually snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. Four key perceptions in many voters’ eyes have cemented inside them the picture of numerous Republicans as Racists, Old-Fashioned, generally intolerant and an even “ugly” group because . . . .

• They believe that the party is “wagged” by its tail, that is, they believe that former Dixiecrats control the party to this day and they are still racists.

• They disagree with the party’s UNcompromising Stand on abortion even when the woman’s life is in danger, or in cases of rape and incest or for retarded mothers.

• They abhor demands for teaching Creationism in public school science classes and teaching Christian songs in public schools. This is why God created private schools . . . and the founding fathers created Separation of Church and State! This is the TEA Party’s only constitutional beef with Republicans but it is a big one. However, they believe that the Democrats are trying to destroy the Constitution.

• Their perception is that the Republican Party is a sectional (southern) party and not really involved in national issues . . . even for people who don’t regard the G.O.P. as “racists” this view is widely-held.

(Setting aside the detractions mentioned above perceived as “Republican” weaknesses,) here’s what observation and common sense tell us about the TEA Party movement. It is a fiscally-conservative movement. It is a constitutionally-conservative movement. The members of the TEA Party are somewhat older, somewhat wealthier, and somewhat better educated than the average Republican and much moreso than the average Democrat. In short, the TEA Partiers are naturally aligned with the Republican Party, but oooops -- there is that “Republican ugliness” to contend with. So they are definitely an anti-Obama group; anti-progressive group; anti-socialist group and much, much more likely to vote against a Democrat than for one. The problem Republicans are really worried about, however, is that many Republicans feel as threatened by the TEA Party as the Democrats do. They could split the conservative vote for many years to come and ensure a long continuation of Democrats in power nationally and on the state and local levels as well.

Let’s bring our history lesson up closer in time: three potentially great things have happened relatively recently:

1) the TEA Party came into existence and is threatening to hold ALL incumbent politicians’ feet to the fire . . . and isn’t that about time? Big spending irresponsible Republicans should face the same ignominious fate as big spending irresponsible Democrats. Our nation is in a constitutional and fiscal crisis and the voters must solve the problem.

2) The Republican Party finally wised up. They abandoned their old ugly-right “litmus testing.” Instead they took to heart Ronald Reagan’s words, “If a fellow votes with me eight times out of ten, I regard him as a friend.” They created the “Republican Purity Test”:

http://uscommonsense.net/blog/2009/11/25/republican-purity-test/

You’ll remember that the need for such a test arose when the Republican Party chose a candidate to run for a seat in Upper New York and funded her with over a million dollars. It was a conservative region and the locals had not wanted her and were hopping mad. Their ire increased when it came to light that this was a candidate possibly to the left of Barak Obama and that the Democrat running against her was far more conservative. A real conservative entered the race as an Independent Conservative against them both and almost won after the TEA Party money and fury; and national contributions forced the FAKE Republican to withdraw with only about 7% of the voters committed to her. Her parting shot was to ask her supporters to support the Democrat who won by roughly 2.5%. Unfortunately, the G.O.P. as a whole has not acknowledged the purity test and as far as I know has not enforced the purity test before the primaries. So it appears that this very good idea is just lying dormant.

3) The TEA Party released its “Contract From America” as part of their rambunctious “Tax Day” protests on April 15th:

http://www.contractfromamerica.com/Idea.aspx

Looking closely at the two documets with Reagan’s jelly beans over his eyes, Rajjpuut suggests that if the G.O.P. Purity Test rates an 8.2 on a scale of ten, then the TEA Party document deserves an 11.0!

So, in answer to the worries about the TEA Party. How exactly does the Republican Party respond to their presence and even exploit the common ground between the two political entities?

Rajjpuut (as #1 Head Honcho Republican would suggest the following ACTION PLAN for exploiting the common ground existing between the TEA Party and the Republican Party. What should the nominees and candidates do?

1. Ignore the TEA Party. Don’t kowtow to them; don’t treat them as special. Don’t go out of your way to welcome them as likely-Republican-voters or to exaggerate the commonalities. In other words, don’t be political at all. Treat all voters and all campaign contributors the same (with respect but without debasing yourself).

2. Look over their “Contract From America” and see if 8, 9 or 10 of these items can be adopted/adapted for the G.O.P.

3. Look over the “Republican Purity Test” and seriously consider leaving items #9 and #10 out of the picture. 9 is redundant and 10, while important, is about 30th on any sensible list of crucial items for dealing with the crisis year 2010.

4. Using the phraseology of the “Republican Purity Test” modify and combine the two lists and with big drumming and fanfare announce the “Finalized Republican Purity Test” of about fifteen items. Then see which Republican primary candidates meet the purity test and which do not and let the party faithful know who had 15/15; who had 14/15/; who scored 13/15; who had 12/15 and who did NOT pass the test.

5. Ignore the TEA Party and set about fielding a slate of true statesmen and true stateswomen who meet the new Republican standards at least 12/15 and emphasize the key fifteen points at every step of the campaign.

6. Impress the TEA Party and all voters by seeking NOT to impress anyone, but steadfastly and seriously approaching the challenge ahead without pause until voted into office (Then take a break for about three weeks to refresh body, mind and spirit. Read the Constitution and start planning for your swearing in and beyond).

7. Defeat every possible Obama sycophant across the board and start repealing all his garbage. Consider impeaching the communist SOB for not upholding his oath of office and constantly attacking the U.S. Constitution.

Ya’ll live long, strong and ornery,