Free Markets, Free People

The obligatory “here come the midterms” post

Meh.  I’ve come to realize, given the last few wave elections, that if either of the two majority parties are in charge, little if anything will change significantly. Or said another way, for the next 2 years, we’re in for the same nonsense we’re suffering now and the only thing that will change is the name of the Senate majority leader.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m a fan of divided government. I like” do nothing” Congress, because divided government means fewer laws entailing government interference are likely to pass. However, that doesn’t change the fact that both parties are heavily invested in interfering with our lives. They simply have different priorities in that regard.

That said, let’s look at the mood of the country prior to the selection.  POLITICO starts us off with a handy chart:

politico_poll_generic_ballot

Too bad we don’t have the “none of the above option”.  Me thinks the gray wedge would be significantly larger.  As with most recent elections, there’s a large “hold your nose and vote” segment at play here.

However, that particular part of the poll isn’t the most interesting to me.  These results say more about the “mood” than any:

– Terrorism: Eighty-four percent of voters say the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant poses a “serious” threat to the U.S. homeland, including 43 percent who say it poses a “very serious” threat. Just 12 percent said the Islamic State, also known as ISIS, is not a serious concern.

This is an Obama made problem and he and the voters know it.  And if it is an Obama-made problem, then it is also a problem for the Democrats.  But more importantly, it reflects a belief is how poorly this administration has handled the terrorism problem.  They didn’t buy the “JV” wave-off and, it seems, are much more able than our security experts to see the type and possibility of the threat ISIS poses to the US homeland.   When you have an enemy that will go to any extreme to get to you and doesn’t mind if they die doing it, you have a formidable threat facing you.  And while you may have more of a chance of being hit by lightning or winning the lottery than being a victim of ISIS terrorism here, please don’t try to sell these people on ISIS not being a threat here.  This also reflects a tremendous amount of distrust the public in general have for anything this administration puts out there.

– Health care: Most voters believe their health care costs will go up under the Affordable Care Act. Fifty-seven percent said they believe their personal costs will increase, while only 7 percent said they will decrease. A third said their costs would remain the same. (At the same time, support for repealing Obamacare has continued to drop, now down to 41 percent.)

Here’s another huge trust in government issue that has been a disaster for Democrats.  This is one they own lock, stock and barrel.  Thus far they’ve been able to mostly manage the bad news to fall after elections.  But that’s unlikely to help them when 2106 rolls around.  ObamaCare has, for the most part, failed in every way possible.  We now have reports of less people availing themselves of routine health care because the deductibles are so large they can’t afford the visits.  If you don’t think this is a part of the mid-term calculations by voters then you have to believe there’s no reason to withhold the increases for insurance until after the election.

– Presidential management: Voters in the midterm battleground states are evenly split on whether President Barack Obama or George W. Bush was more effective at managing the federal government. Thirty-eighty percent named Bush, while 35 percent preferred Obama. A quarter of respondents said the two men were equally competent.

As hard as the left and Democrats worked to make Bush the poster boy for bad government, this one has to hurt.  All hail the new poster boy, and the GOP hasn’t had to even break a sweat selling this one.  Most, if not all of Obama’s failures have been via self-inflicted wounds.  Will there be a portion of the voters who use the mid-terms as a referendum on the President?  You bet there will.  This guy is about as bad as we’ve ever had, and voters are going to make that point in November.

That brings us to this last issue in this particular poll which pretty well makes an important point I want made:

– Ebola: Only 22 percent of respondents said they had a lot of confidence that the government is doing everything it can to contain the contagious disease. Thirty-nine percent they had some confidence, while a third said they had little or no confidence. The poll concluded Oct. 11, before the hospitalization of the second nurse who treated an Ebola patient in Dallas.

Confidence in government and the competence of this administration are at rock bottom.  I welcome that.  Ebola just happens to be the latest issue to demonstrate both executive and bureaucratic fumbling and incompetence.  The only consistent thing this administration has done is demonstrate that.  The guy whose goal it was to make “government cool” again, has failed miserably.  I welcome that as well.  I’d like to see the point understood by more.  Instead of success, we’ve seen an increasingly intrusive but ossified bureaucracy fail time after time when tasked to do their job.  They may not know it, but that’s one of the reasons, perhaps the main reason, that 64% of Americans believe “things in the U.S. feel like they are out of control right now.” We’ve seen how politics has subverted our public servants into servants of the party in power.  And we’ve also seen various government agencies hold themselves to be above the law in certain instances.  How changing parties at midterm will change any of that remains a mystery.

Usually at this point before an election, analysts have decided who will decide the election.  You remember “Soccer Moms” etc.  Well, this year it’s simply “women”.  Women will decide this.  And the implication is that women have always been more of a Democratic constituency than a Republican one … for various reasons.  Well, that may not pan out for the Dems this year and of all people, Tina Brown explains why:

But, you know, the fact is that Obama’s down with everybody, let’s face it, there’s a reason,” Brown said. “And I think that particularly for women. I don’t think it makes them feel safe. I think they’re feeling unsafe. Economically, they’re feeling unsafe. With regard to ISIS, they’re feeling unsafe. They feel unsafe about Ebola. What they’re feeling unsafe about is the government response to different crises. And I think they’re beginning to feel a bit that Obama’s like that guy in the corner office, you know, who’s too cool for school, calls a meeting, says this has to change, doesn’t put anything in place to make sure it does change, then it goes wrong and he’s blaming everybody. So there’s a slight sense of that.”

If you’re not feeling unsafe with this clown in office, then you have no fear.  Security – safety – is one of the key reasons women consider a vote for a candidate (or so the experts tell us).   If that’s the case and we go with the “women will decide the vote” meme, then Dems are in even worse shape than I thought.

And I welcome that as well.

~McQ

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

62 Responses to The obligatory “here come the midterms” post

  • I am sympathetic, Bruce, but just because gheyre gridlock in Congress doesn’t mean government isn’t growing… consider that most of what we are affected by are regulations, concocted by beauracrats who are not subject to election. Absent a Congress with the testicular mass to reverse *that*…

  • I have to point out one group that has made well with “ObamaDoesn’tCare how much it costs.” Those are the folks withe pre-existing conditions.
    Other than them, it has been an abysmal failure.
    Methinks a small piece of legislation could have handled that problem, like perhaps a “catastrophic fund” like some of the states have.

  • A lot of young, single women have been voting Deemocrat on the basis of the promises of protection given them by the Collective. That is a visceral appeal.

    But there is a visceral fear of ISIS, monsters who behead.

    There is a visceral fear of Ebola, and the terrible death it brings.

    And now there are WAY too many demonstrations that BIG GOVERNMENT is a lover who is short on delivery, tells you stories you can’t believe, and costs WAY too much to have in your life.

  • …if either of the two majority parties are in charge, little if anything will change significantly.

    Um… Politely, HORSESHIT.

    Consider JUST the significant difference control of the Senate would make, and let’s JUST start with ONE power…

    approval of appointments. Do you want Tom Perez for the next AG….?!?!?! If you thought HOlder a criminal AG, Perez would be WAY worse.

    • Rags, that’s small ball.

      On the big questions – what we’re going to do about the coming debt mountain collapse, for example, or how we stop strangling the economy with de-facto dictatorship by regulatory bureaucrats – there just isn’t much difference between the Democrats and today’s establishment GOP.

      • Well, when the crap hits the fan, how will they fix things immersed in gridlock?

        Of course, neither of the parasitic parties will fix it, they’ll “fix” it (i.e., they will ensure they and theirs are protected, insulated, physically secure…).

      • Good, stinking, grief, Billy…!!! We ONLY have a chance in hell of overcoming the regulatory flying monkeys IF we have some ability to pass laws and channel appointments.

        That’s NOT “small ball”. It would mean the difference between two more (at least) years of HYPERDRIVE ruin, and starting to change the course of the ship of state.

        It’s just total crap to say there’s “not that much difference”. Hell, even Mitch McConnell WAS instrumental in standing in the breach on free speech a few years back.

        I get sick to death of the “there’s no difference” bullshit from some of you. Imagine how different things would…or could…look right now if Romney had been elected.

        • Yeah, well I’m pretty sick of the “If we just elect more Republicans…” crowd. I’ve been hearing that crap for decades. It finally worked – Bush II got both houses of Congress when he was elected. So what did that fine combination give us? Expansion of Medicare, federalization of education, and the worst assault on the First Amendment that I recall in my lifetime.

          If Romney had been elected? He probably would have handled Ebola and ISIS slightly better, but he would not have rolled back Obamacare, or done anything substantial about the liberty-eating blob that is the regulatory state, or restructured taxes in any substantial way, or reduced government spending by any significant amount. He would have “managed” our journey to the collapse better. Big whoop.

          It’s not about electing more Republicans – it’s electing people who will actually resist the expansion of government. Sure, there are Republicans who fit that definition, and I support them. But the Republican leadership sure as hell doesn’t. They’re more likely to say nasty things about Ted Cruz, et. al., than they are their “distinguished colleagues in the Senate” or whatever. That is, they care more about what Chuck Schumer and Pat Leahy think than what Ted Cruz and Jeff Sessions think. You don’t hear Mitt Romney out there praising what Ted Cruz has to say, either.

          As long as that dynamic is in place, the changes *will* be cosmetic. Yeah, yeah, slightly better judges, etc. etc. That’s not going to win the battle. It isn’t even going to contribute that much. The change has to come at a much deeper, more fundamental level.

          Now, it may be that such fundamental change is no longer possible, and all we can get is small ball. Very well, but I’m not investing my time in trying to delay the debt collapse by an all too brief period. Your mileage may vary. You may see the benefit in it. I do not.

          • Fraid I have to agree, fast train to hell, slow train to hell.

            Till the electorate stops electing morons like Pelosi or RINOS like McCain and squishes like McConnell and Boehner.

            And I don’t think we old dudes will see that in another 20 years.

            Oh joy.

          • We’ll have to disagree, since you offer nothing to substantiate your “Romney woulda” divinations.

            You can BEGIN changing courses by relatively little moves, and we agree that nothing is going to effect the BIG changes we concur have to come under any scenario I can see in the next presidential election cycle or two.

            Good judges are no small thing, though you discount them. Thousands of individual Americans will be affected by them over their careers.

            And, for the record, it is cheap to imply that I’m for electing any old Republican. I’m most decidedly NOT. But I am decidedly FOR getting Dirty Harry Reid out of the leadership of the Senate. He alone has done immense damage to our country, and he’ll do a lot more if given the power.

          • And, for the record, it is cheap to imply that I’m for electing any old Republican. I’m most decidedly NOT. But I am decidedly FOR getting Dirty Harry Reid out of the leadership of the Senate.

            Do you not even see the contradiction inherent in that statement?

            I loathe Reid as well. But to get Reid out requires electing “any old Republican” examples such as Pat Roberts, Lamar Alexander, Scott Brown, Lindsay Graham, Susan Collins, and Thad Cochran. (Note that two of those could only defeat a limited government opponent with establishment GOP help, even dirty help.) These are not people who will ever help us on the path to limited government. They will line up and support either status quo or more government in every case except symbolic, meaningless ones.

            I don’t think the Senate is any better with those people in it. They are all obstacles to the change we need, while shrewdly, disingenuously masquerading as supporters of conservatism. In essence, the are only slightly better than Democrats, and are dishonest about it to boot. At least the Democrats are honest about their intentions.

          • Billy… I wrote a piece a couple years back stating my rather strong objections to Romney. The party as a whole suffers from the same problems.http://bitsblog.theconservativereader.com/2011/12/romney/

          • I doubt I am much less astute than are you, Billy.

            I very often see contradictions in the choices life hands us, but don’t consider that a bug so much as a feature. A company commander’s job is the safety and welfare of his subordinates, until he puts them in harm’s way deliberately. We could sit here and catalog such contradictions all day. I don’t expect life to be so simple and formulaic that I can reduce it to “no contradictions”.

            I HAVE supported Dr. Wolf with my money. He lost, though he was the going-away best candidate in Kansas. Nothing I can do to change that, but I will not support the incumbent with a dime of mine. Still, if I lived in Kansas, I’d vote for him over the liar who pretends to be what he’s not, not being confused for a moment that Roberts is the lesser of the evils.

            The valid points I raised above remain valid.

          • Never said your points were not valid. Just that, as far as I’m concerned, they are not nearly as important or relevant as you seem to think.

          • They’re pretty important to individual Americans. They are VERY important to those of us who care about critical issues like free speech, the right to bear arms, property rights, etc.

            All “small ball” to you, perhaps…

          • hardly small ball, Rags.
            We agree as to the import of those items…. else, I suppose we’d each not be here.
            But read my notes on Romney (above) and tell me… do you really think electing such morons is going to help the cause?
            I say again… please consider the validity of any group claiming conservatism, involving such as McCain… the one who told us we have nothing to fear from Obama.

            I say the GOP leadership has rendered the party of Reagan indistingushable from the party of Obama. You really think giving such people the power of government is going to help?

          • I say the GOP leadership has rendered the party of Reagan indistinguishable from the party of Obama.

            I say that is one of the stupidest things I’ve heard this week!

            This should NOT be hard…WHICH party sought to pass an amendment that would gut and replace the 1st Amendment only days ago?

            Don’t let your rhetoric make you look loopy, Eric.

          • Uh huh.
            Tell me, Rags, which of the GOP leadership stood up and denounced the propsal, and the ones making it?

            Untill the GOPs leadership is made up of conservatives, voteing Rs wont do any good.
            and its not like this issue is something new….http://bitsblog.theconservativereader.com/2012/08/the-value-of-a-real-conservative-vs-the-gop-establishment/

          • It’s coming down to whether or not you think a holding action is worth making- or if you’re at the point where you think hastening the downfall will ultimately result in an improvement.
            Unless of course you’re a liberal, and then it’s all moon ponies and flowers.

        • “We ONLY have a chance in hell of overcoming the regulatory flying monkeys IF we have some ability to pass laws and channel appointments.”

          And we only have a chance of that if people who are not Establishment GOP or Democrat are in charge of it. The Establishment GOP plan is that they will arbitrage for votes and graft this fact, the Democrats getting everything they want 10 to 20 years later. if the Est. GOP is temporarily in charge.

          The Establishment GOP’s plan has gotten us where we are today.

          Before the election I will donate $100 to the opponents of Mitch McConnel and Thad Cochran.

        • “We’ll have to disagree, since you offer nothing to substantiate your “Romney woulda” divinations.”

          I offer his whole history in Massachusetts.

          “You can BEGIN changing courses by relatively little moves”

          And even that won’t happen to go by history. It didn’t happen when Bush had all the cards, it didn’t stay “happened” the time before that (Newt), and it didn’t stay happened from the time (Reagan).

          Exactly one goal towards to moving back to constitutionally limited government has been achieved on a foreseeably permanent basis, national level gun control has been reversed in the sunsetting of the AWB ban. Whether the Dems in CT and NY will fish or cut bait on their non-compliant population post Sandy Hook remains to be seen.

          Unless we’re going to have a revolution, that’s pretty small potatoes.

          The Dems have had everything else they want their way, and frequently the Est. GOP under Boehner has given it to them without a fight.

  • There’s a movement to re-define mysogyny, sexism and rape. To empower them with the same weight as the accusation of racism. Guilty until proven innocent and instantly toxic for anyone accused of any of the above and anyone who even looks like they might try to defend them. This may not roll around in time for 2014 but by 2016, you will see Republican = mysogynist = rapist. And before then they’ll pretty much say republicans want men to be able to rape women and force them to carry the unwanted baby to term.

    The 2014 voting results will be used to validate these fears, “they’re coming to get you”. Turning a loss into an asset. There always is a moron or two who will give them the necessary quotes, in context or out of context, it won’t matter.

  • Hmmm, I think voting Harry Reid into opposition and making Obama actually have to veto stuff is worth it.

    Ignore what will be accomplished. We’re in a post-performance world.

    Consider instead the popcorn value. Yes, I want to see Obama vetoing bills that are the exact same as his own changes Obamacare.

    I want to see budgets getting vetoed. Remember during those “shutdowns” the GOP couldn’t show the public that they had passed alternatives because Reid would hide them, and then the media would go “Congress obstructs.”

    Harder to do that when its “Obama vetos budget offer.”

  • – Terrorism: Eighty-four percent of voters say the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant poses a “serious” threat to the U.S. homeland, including 43 percent who say it poses a “very serious” threat. Just 12 percent said the Islamic State, also known as ISIS, is not a serious concern.

    —– in related news, 84 % of voters want something done about ISIS but if we did the only effective thing and put boots on the ground then 84% of voters would turn viciously on the whole thing and demand we pull out within months, so 84% of voters can cram it.

    • http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/isis-poll-americans-want-boots-on-the-ground

      Other polls show a clear majority understand that American troops are necessary. Which is just common sense.

      Now, would they prove fickle in the moment, and under Mushroom Media narratives? Dunno.

      • “Other polls show a clear majority understand that American troops are necessary. Which is just common sense.
        Now, would they prove fickle in the moment, and under Mushroom Media narratives? Dunno.”

        Under Obama the narrative would be glittering victories even if we (God forbid) suffered a defeat like the Battle of the Wabash.

        We’re talking about the same media that tried to drum up the base’s hysterics over Iraq’s old stockpile of gas shells and the ‘secret’ kept by the Bush administration without bothering to note the open and fully transparent Obama administration has had a full 6 years to, uh, mention the ‘secret’ but hasn’t till now, still trying to hang it on Booooooooooossssshhhhhhhh.

        Then throw in Hillary leading several of our assaults against ISIL firing a SAW from the hip while the (whichever) shirtless bandanna wearing VP candidate provided covering fire (which if it was Elizabeth Warren is something I’d rather not imagine).

  • Dunno where I read it, but:

    “The party that calls itself “Republican” is filled with Democrats who are lying to you.”

    Pretty much sums up my viewpoint.

    Yes, I’ll vote “R” to try to undercut the “D”s a little bit, but I’m not holding out much hope that anything’s going to change. Plus, I wouldn’t be surprised (should they manage to lose big-time) if the “D”s might just decide to stop trying to keep the economy inflated — letting everything go to hell on the “R”s watch. A major Depression might be useful propaganda for the NEXT election in 2016. (Cloward-Piven for the win!)

    • If you understand history, you know that some of the most prominent and successful Progressives were Republicans.

      Richard Milhouse Nixon was the last of the “great” Progressive Republicans, and he believed in fascist economics just like Barracula.

      CONSERVATIVES and/or libertarians can be identified within the Republican herd. You won’t find any among the Deemocrats.

      • “he believed in fascist economics just like Barracula.”
        What?
        Phase I? Good Lord, federally mandated wage and price freezes! whaaaaaaaaaaaaat?
        Executive order 11615 & the ‘Economic stabilization act of 1970’.

        It’s like that all never happened ain’t it.

      • “If you understand history, you know that some of the most prominent and successful Progressives were Republicans.”

        But do you understand that wasn’t good?

        The Establishment GOP is either Progressive or, just wants to feed at the trough. They are not an alternative to the Dems, to people who want a course reversal.

        • When did you decide you could talk down to me, Tom?

          You’ve said some remarkably stupid things here today, and you seem inclined to DO some remarkably stupid things. If you’re donating to Deemocrats, you should bring all your conduct into line and vote for them, too.

          • Yes, yes, we’re all remarkably stupid when we disagree with you. We get that.

          • That would really depend on the contents of our disagreement, Billy. I disagree with you, and with McQ sometimes, and I’ve never seen you say things that were objectively stupid.

            I have seen you both do a little bully turn occasionally when I butt heads with you, as here.

  • Ah, predictable! I just posted a blog entry, inspired by the American Conservative’s piece on Obama being really a Republican, considering why an administration that by any objective measure is centrist, competent and successful, gets so pilloried by the partisans of the right wing. I even noted that some make absurd claims like blaming Obama for ISIS. After posting, I thought I’d check here and see…and sure enough, you’re doing exactly that, locked in your weird counter-reality. Hilarious! Thanks for the laugh. *eyes rolling* Here’s hoping that the next two and a quarter years continue to anger and frustrate you 😉

    • “Here’s hoping that the next two and a quarter years continue to anger and frustrate you ;-)”

      I’d like to point out, *eyes rolling* Skippie, this is a classic example of why you are considered a liar when you pretend you want to engage people in honest debate, along with all the other tripe you sling about what a swell guy you are and why you are puzzled that people react to you the way they do.

      Just sayin, cuz.
      .

      • Precisely.

        Pretending to be objective or sincere is just a ploy to create a time suck for his political enemies. His objective is to get you to waste your time bickering with him so you spend less time addressing substance, such as critiquing his leftist allies.

    • “why an administration that by any objective measure is centrist, competent and successful”

      Any. Objective. Measure…… labels them competent and successful.
      Bwaaahahahahahahahahahahahahah

      Competent and Successful. You are just too funny man.
      Why don’t you tell us again how he’s going down in history as one of the greatest Presidents evah.

    • ah, how predictable.
      Erb claims penmanship for an idea passed along by The American Conservative.
      http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/obama-is-a-republican/

      You’ve never had an original idea in your miserable life, Erb.
      Oh, and for the record? All that idea expressed in those writings…. either one will do… does, is to prove the point I’ve been making all along…. what’s wrong with the GOP.
      Erb, its time you got it through that thing on top of your neck…. Republican does not equal conservative. Never did.

      now you will pardon me…. these laughing fits are making it hard to type.

      • “…what’s wrong with the GOP.”

        Indeed. How many people at Q&O are GOP cheerleaders?

        The only blind party man here is Scott Erb, who does a drive-by comment every few weeks to gush about Obama. He knows it’s all nonsense, but he is just trying to disrupt the rational, substantive discourse here.

    • Here’s hoping that the next two and a quarter years continue to anger and frustrate you 😉

      To our sane commenters, always remember who you are dealing with.

      Trolls truly enjoy making you feel bad. To quote the authors once more (because this is a truly quotable article): “Both trolls and sadists feel sadistic glee at the distress of others. Sadists just want to have fun … and the Internet is their playground!”

      The next time you encounter a troll online, remember:

      1. These trolls are some truly difficult people.

      2. It is your suffering that brings them pleasure, so the best thing you can do is ignore them.

      • A troll? Nah….That’s too easy an answer, Billy.

        I think Erb honestly thinks himself doing the world a service, by advancing the socialist agenda. Do not mistake me… youre quite correct when you suggest by your link that Erbs arguments tend to change both frequently and dramtically, as various realities erupt to defeat his older arguments. and those are the earmarks of a troll.

        Yet, what socialist, including Saint Barry, hasnt been noted as doing exactly this? Erb, like any other socialist, never lets himself be swayed by reality in terms of his ultimate goal of socialism. He discards arguments like broken tools, and picks up new ones that look suitable to the task of scoring points to that ultimate goal.

        • He’s a clown. Whenever he detects an audience member looking too closely at the magicians hands, he pulls out all the stops to get the observer to look at him and stop looking at the magician.

          He isn’t very smart, so it remains an open question how aware he is of his role. I suspect he’s more of a wind-up robot who was sent on his way by people more clever than he.

        • I think Erb honestly thinks himself doing the world a service

          Well, THAT is the essence of trolling behavior. They are condescending, self-righteous pukes who swerve by to do all the rest of us a HUGE favor by jacking up their own unearned moral superiority while stooping to bestow on us their false, delusional bullshit.

          It is a PROFOUND pathology, and Erp is one of its leading exponents.

        • I wouldn’t swear I do not believe, that he feels he is not supporting socialism.

    • The anger and frustration will be all yours after the beating in November. Just keep pretending it doesn’t bother you. We all know it does. 🙂 *chuckle* 🙂

    • Blaa, blaa, blaa, Scottie. Now shoo like the annoying buzzing pest that you are.

  • “I like” do nothing” Congress, because divided government means fewer laws entailing government interference are likely to pass.”

    This is someone who has given up on improvement not following abject catastrophe.

    • No, it doesn’t. Has a deadlocked congress prevented new regs from being passed and government from growing? You know it hasn’t.

      As for the rest of you, I say the issue is described best by Bill Buckley, in his very first NATIONAL REVIEW publication…. and these notes are from an article I wrote for PJ Media some years back…

      It is the job of centralized government (in peacetime) to protect its citizens’ lives, liberty and property. All other activities of government tend to diminish freedom and hamper progress. The growth of government (the dominant social feature of this century) must be fought relentlessly. In this great social conflict of the era, we are, without reservations, on the libertarian side.

      The profound crisis of our era is, in essence, the conflict between the Social Engineers, who seek to adjust mankind to conform with scientific utopias, and the disciples of Truth, who defend the organic moral order. We believe that truth is neither arrived at nor illuminated by monitoring election results, binding though these are for other purposes, but by other means, including a study of human experience. On this point we are, without reservations, on the conservative side.

      The century’s most blatant force of satanic utopianism is communism. We consider “coexistence” with communism neither desirable nor possible, nor honorable; we find ourselves irrevocably at war with communism and shall oppose any substitute for victory.

      The largest cultural menace in America is the conformity of the intellectual cliques which, in education as well as the arts, are out to impose upon the nation their modish fads and fallacies, and have nearly succeeded in doing so. In this cultural issue, we are, without reservations, on the side of excellence (rather than “newness”) and of honest intellectual combat (rather than conformity).

      The most alarming single danger to the American political system lies in the fact that an identifiable team of Fabian operators is bent on controlling both our major political parties (under the sanction of such fatuous and unreasoned slogans as “national unity,” “middle-of-the-road,” “progressivism,” and “bipartisanship.”) Clever intriguers are reshaping both parties in the image of Babbitt, gone Social-Democrat. When and where this political issue arises, we are, without reservations, on the side of the traditional two-party system that fights its feuds in public and honestly; and we shall advocate the restoration of the two-party system at all costs.

      The competitive price system is indispensable to liberty and material progress. It is threatened not only by the growth of Big Brother government, but by the pressure of monopolies(including union monopolies. What is more, some labor unions have clearly identified themselves with doctrinaire socialist objectives. The characteristic problems of harassed business have gone unreported for years, with the result that the public has been taught to assume (almost instinctively) that conflicts between labor and management are generally traceable to greed and intransigence on the part of management. Sometimes they are; often they are not. NATIONAL REVIEW will explore and oppose the inroads upon the market economy caused by monopolies in general, and politically oriented unionism in particular; and it will tell the violated businessman’s side of the story.

      No superstition has more effectively bewitched America’s Liberal elite than the fashionable concepts of world government, the United Nations, internationalism, international atomic pools, etc. Perhaps the most important and readily demonstrable lesson of history is that freedom goes hand in hand with a state of political decentralization, that remote government is irresponsible government. It would make greater sense to grant independence to each of our 50 states than to surrender U.S. sovereignty to a world organization.

      The GOP’s platform needs to be based on the principles of limited government laid out above. Republicans as a party shouldn’t be, as they have been, focused on the idea that we need to change in order to be relevant. We need to show that our principles are already relevant and should never have been relinquished.

      Its quite clear to me the GOP needs new leadership to get us back to that goal.
      With the glaring exception of Reagan, we have had 100 years of center, left, center, left. The damage caused, then, will not be repaired by half measures.

      • You left out Coolidge. He was every bit as good as Reagan in a lot of respects.

        One of the things we seem to be missing here as we talk about “leaders” is that politicians are seldom “leaders”, but ARE elected by people. Our real problem is that we have not managed to bring our fellow Americans to our point of view. There are very good reasons for that, including the extremely effective control of the popular culture by the Collective. Still, those are not really excuses, nor do they explain the failure.

        I’ll also just mention in passing my objection to the use of the term RINO. It is cardinal stupidity, since Republicans are NEVER presumptively conservative. As I pointed out (above) many of the leaders of the Progressive movement were Republicans. There is no litmus test for being permitted to call yourself a Republican, and there never has been.

        • That depends.
          Are we talking about the position of the rabk and file or the far more liberal “leadership”?

          As I’ve been saying for years, the rank and file, in Toto, (and, I think the electorate as a whole) is far more conswrrvative than the GOP leadership

  • It’s the Leninists and their ridiculous dupes who try to frame Obama as a centrist. Indeed, from the point of view of the Soviet Russian Politburo, Obama might look like a centrist Marxist, whatever that might mean.

    Tom Perkins is right about the Republicans. They’re the cleaners, the janitorial socialists who get the American milking cow back on the milking machine after the Marxists have left it gasping by the roadside. George Bush was blamed for everything, but I blame him for one thing. I blame him for Obama.

    Also, Obama wants the Republicans to take the Senate, y’all get that, right? He now has command of the permanent government and thus the regulatory state and cares not a whit about the supposed limits on his powers. He’ll continue to lay in more and more damage his last two years and shift blame to the hapless Republicans for everything that goes wrong. This paves the way for a Party resurgence in 2016.

    Everyone around here is clear, I assume, that the Republicans live in fear of Obama, which is why investigations of these malicious scandals, particularly the IRS attacks on conservative groups, never seem to get anywhere. Darrell Issa makes noises from time to time, but he was compromised going way back now.

    • I see you making the same mistake a lot of people do. They imbue Issa with powers and abilities he simply doesn’t have.

      Perhaps this analogy is useful: often a junior lawyer conducts depositions. There are NEVER determinative of a litigation issue. They DO nail down the deponent’s positions, and they do provide some facts for illumination at trial. They also give a very good idea of the strength or weakness of witnesses.

      The “nailing” is done by the actual trial attorney. Issa is not the trial attorney.

      • Issa makes a lot of noise from time to time, to show he’s “on the case,” but he’s a political figure whose real job, if he were to do it, is to produce political momentum in exposing such egregious criminal activity in the Executive Branch. Everyone knows this goes back to the White House, the IRS case, and yet it’s lost in the wash. And that is because Issa has a past that the Party has already partially exposed. They want him in charge, they expect him to make occassional noise, and they know he will never follow through.

        The Republicans, Issa being a good example, fear Obama, and not just what he can do to their lives as far as their careers and reputations go, but *for* their lives as well. And Obama loves to mock them, laugh at them, and deride them, as well.

        That is the state of politics in Washington since Obama took power. You can see that especially through its reflection in Holder and the Justice Department, which is not just politicized, but is ideological beyond the frontiers of criminality. As I said almost from the beginning, any attempt to grasp Obama within the normative terms of America politics cedes to him ground he does not hold.

      • But, he WAS, and that’s an important distinction.
        Ponder…. who do the Democrats have the biggest trouble with?
        Former procecutors, who are not themselves Democrats.
        Christie, as an example. He is at best a centrist. Yet the left goes after him like he’s the next Hitler.