International Republican Institute

Score One for the First Amendment

by Bill O'Connell on January 22, 2010

Share and Recommend:

The Incumbent Protection Act, aka McCain-Feingold, took a big hit yesterday from the Supreme Court.  It is particularly timely with so many incumbents nervously eying the exits.  The McCain-Feingold bill prohibited corporations and unions from “electioneering communications” within in 30 days of a primary, or 60 days of a general election.  Those time limits probably match pretty nicely with when most people start paying close attention to elections.  So if this kind of communication is cut off, who is left with the power of name recognition?  That’s right, the incumbent and that is probably why 90% of incumbents are re-elected.

Outrage on the Left

President Obama immediately came out swinging saying it was a victory for “big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies, and other special interests.”  He somehow overlooked the SEIU union whose president topped the list of visitors to the White House.  Unions will have unfettered communications as well.  Chuck Schumer promises hearings and the Naderite Public Citizen group is proposing a constitutional amendment banning free speech for “for-profit” corporations.  I’ll give you a moment to ponder that; a constitutional amendment to eviscerate the First Amendment.

The Momentum is Building

On April 15 it will be the first anniversary of the Tea Parties that were held across the country.  Let’s raise a cup of tea, that the Ship of Liberty that was foundering on the rocks may at last be turning it’s guns on the enemy and turning the tide of battle.  Virginia, New Jersey, a close loss in NY23, Massachusetts, the First Amendment, the momentum is building.  But let’s not forget the words of Churchill:

Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning. — Winston Churchill

Don’t let up until we have our country back.

Share and Recommend:

Halloween Fright for Liberals

by Bill O'Connell on November 1, 2009

Share and Recommend:

There is panic in the ranks of the left this Halloween.  In today’s Times, Frank Rich, does his level best to whistle past the graveyard, but the fear is clear.  He astonishingly titles his piece, “The G.O.P. Stalinists Invade Upstate New York.”  I guess they feel the Hitler moniker has lost its zest, so the leftists resort to calling those on the right, Stalinists.  Their disorientation could not be more palpable.

What has them in such a tizzy?  It centers around the special election in New York’s 23rd Congressional District.  The local Republican party bosses chose a candidate, Dede Scozzafava, who would never be mistaken as a conservative, although Mr. Rich actually called her, “a mainstream conservative by New York standards.”  That’s like saying David Letterman is chaste by liberal standards, as if these things are measured on a relative scale.  But that’s the way liberals and statists think.  If your neighbor is more promiscuous than you, then you must be celebate.  If you want to make Nancy Pelosi a moderate, move her to Cuba.

Ground Shift

What has Mr. Rich and his cohorts nervously clearing their throats, is that the uprising against the entrenched statists, led by the Tea Parties, actually delivered results.   Ms. Scozzafava is pro-abortion, pro-same-sex marriage, pro-Obama stimulus package, pro-card check to make it easier to form a union without a secret ballot election, and supported by ACORN.  This is what Mr. Rich calls a conservative, “by New York standards.”  What sticks in his craw is that the election was a win-win, for him and his friends.  Elect the Republican or the Democrat and it doesn’t matter much, they both hold the same basic views.  Then along came Doug Hoffman.

Doug Hoffman threw his hat in the ring on the Conservative Party line.  By this Saturday, with support pouring in all across the country from true conservatives, Hoffman was in a dead heat with the conservative and the Republican Scozzafava was fading fast.  So she decided to suspend her campaign, and Mr. Rich and company hit the panic button.

So how does Mr. Rich frame his argument?  Well he starts by saying Hoffman has no grasp of local issues.  Uh, the position is United States Congressman, not city alderman.  He well understands the issues at the national level and how the policies of the Obama Administration are bankrupting the country.  Those policies will negatively affect the people in his district.  But leave it to Mr. Rich to scoff at Hoffman, because he doesn’t know how much pork barrel spending the district needs. A true patriotic Congressman, like John Murtha, finds a way to build an airport in the district that nobody uses and hands the bill to people in other districts like, well, New York’s 23rd.  He’s going to Washington to fight those who are bleeding the Treasury dry.  So Mr. Rich fights that by calling Fort Drum, home to the U.S. Army’s 10th Mountain Division, a “pork-dependent military base.”  Hmmm…the last time I read my copy of the Constitution, it specifically required providing for the national defense.  I couldn’t find in my copy where it required building airports no one needed so that John Murtha could get re-elected in perpetuity.  I understand it is a fine distinction, but I would have thought someone employed by the New York Times would be able to make it.

Frank Rich’s Happy Talk

Mr. Rich oddly calls the developments in New York as good news.  With a recent Gallup Poll, showing that for every self-described liberal there are two self-described conservatives, Mr. Rich says the ideologues that brought about the events in New York’s 23rd, may then start picking off other conservatives and destroy the party.  Does he mean conservatives like Arlen Specter, Lincoln Chaffee, Olympia Snow, Susan Collins, Charlie Crist, oh my!  With 73% of GOP voters saying that Congressional Republicans have lost touch with their base, this is not good news for Mr. Rich and company.  What he believes is that a small cabal of conservatives will put unelectable candidates on the ballot that voters will reject and the Democrats will gleefully reap the rewards.  In reality, the GOP leadership has for too long put weak candidates on the ballot that Democrats easily beat because the Republican base cannot get excited about them.  McCain is a war hero and worthy of our admiration, but just look at his signature legislation:  McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy.  He was not a conservative on many fronts. 

Nixon was a conservative, Ford was not.  Reagan was a conservative, Bush 41 was not and  Dole was not.  George W. started more conservative than not, but then drifted to become a big spender.  McCain was not a conservative.  Do you see a pattern here?  Conservative Republicans win.

With Obama’s approval rating going down in a virtual straight line, Mr. Rich confidently proclaims that the only politician Obama has to fear is Hamid Karzai in Afghanistan.  By all means, Mr. Rich, you keep telling your pals that.

Share and Recommend:

Wobbly Republicans

by Bill O'Connell on May 27, 2009

Share and Recommend:

Wobbly Republicans

The drumbeat is starting.  The Democrats are gleefully opening their playbook to the right page and holding it open for the weak kneed Republicans to see.  “If you vote against Judge Sotomayor, the Hispanic vote will go against you and make you pay.”

Ah, the politics of class warfare.  Republicans fall for it almost every time.  That’s why we got John McCain as our nominee.  The news analysis will point out how fewer Hispanics voted for McCain than for Bush, with Bush getting 40% and McCain only 31%.  Maybe it was because McCain was a weak candidate?  Bush put forward Miguel Estrada for the Supreme Court, he appointed Alberto Gonzales as the first Hispanic Attorney General, McCain and Bush were both for open borders.  Boy, did that pay off!

Bush appoints Colin Powell as the first black Secretary of State, followed by Condoleezza Rice as the first black woman Secretary of State.  So how did the black vote turn out for Bush?

So let’s get over copying the Democratic practice of appealing to groups and get back to our conservative principles of appealing to individuals.  Don’t worry about the black vote, the Hispanic vote, the gay vote, the union vote, the Catholic vote.  Worry about doing the right thing for all Americans.  The Democrats want us to worry about all these blocs so that they can get us to meekly wave through their nominees.  But when the tables are turned (e.g., Clarence Thomas, Michael Steele, Miguel Estrada, et. al.) they will be vicious, slanderous, mean and ugly.  They don’t give a damn about offending the black or Hispanic vote because they think they own them.  And when we put up candidates that are a weak imitation of the Democratic candidate, they do.

We need to stand for Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness and not back down from that.  The votes will follow.

Share and Recommend:
Share and Recommend:

Some insights into the inner workings of the Obama campaign from someone who says she’s seen enough to vote for McCain.  She says she became a strong Hillary supporter.  Interesting… and frightening

What do you think?

Share and Recommend:

You’re gonna do WHAT?

by Bill O'Connell on October 14, 2008

Share and Recommend:

I read the article with great concern and disbelief, that yes, Christopher Buckley, son of William F. Buckley, Jr., was going over to the Obama camp.  His father was the man who founded National Review at a time when socialism was advancing unchecked.  In the mission statement for the new magazine he wrote, “It stands athwart history, yelling STOP, at a time no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who so urge it.”

The younger Mr. Buckley reiterated that he remains a conservative, so there must be a strongly compelling argument for his decision.  I braced myself to be knocked down by a wave of reason and swept out to sea, only to be fished out of the water by a passing Obama skiff, and hustled off to the voting booth where, I too, would vote for change I could believe in.  What happened next was anticlimactic. 

 Mr. Buckley begins by throwing Sarah Palin over the side, dismissing her as an error in judgment by McCain.  He’s entitled to that opinion, but this election has been chock full of misjudgments by all parties.  What about the top of the ticket?  Buckley goes on to extol the virtues of Senator McCain, and he speaks as someone with first hand knowledge.  However, all of his praises are in the past tense.  He says the campaign has made John McCain “snarly.”  As the final thrust of the argument he quotes McCain as saying, “We came to Washington to change it, and it changed us.”  Et tu, Christo?

Buckley thus made a plausible argument to stay home on Election Day, but I was waiting to learn what pushed the needle all the way to the other side.  The main points of the pro-Obama case were that Obama has a “first class temperament,” that he is intelligent and he writes his own books.  With these attributes, Buckley reasons, he will soon discover that liberalism won’t work; he’ll change his ideas and we will once again live in Camelot, saying that if he doesn’t, “he will almost certainly reap a whirlwind that will make Katrina look like a balmy summer zephyr.” 

It seems that Mr. Buckley is willing to go “all in” on that bet.  I’m not.  In the 20th century only one President came right out of the Senate, with no executive experience.  That was John F. Kennedy, to whom Barack Obama is often compared.  Shortly after Kennedy took office we had the Bay of Pigs fiasco, a major embarrassment to the Kennedy administration.  Later that year, Kennedy met with Khruschev, without preconditions, by the way.  Does that sound familiar?  Kruschev mopped up the floor with him for two days, prompting Kennedy to say, “He just beat the hell out of me.  I’ve got a terrible problem if he thinks I’m inexperienced and have no guts.  Until we remove those ideas we won’t get anywhere with him.”  Two months later the construction of the Berlin Wall began, and the following year brought the Cuban Missile Crisis, where we came closer to nuclear annihilation than ever; after that began our greater involvement in Viet Nam.  Hope, Change, Charm, Temperament, Intellect, Harvard.  I’ll pass.  If for the first time in nearly fifty years we have no choice but to elect someone from the Senate with no executive experience, I’d rather have someone whose been around the block a couple of times, no matter how surly the old salt is.

Share and Recommend:
© 2010 Liberty's Lifeline. All Rights Reserved.