Conservatives, do not lose heart.  Tea Party people, stand firm.  Like many great turning points in history, they often involve an historic battle that is lost.  The Alamo. Remember the Maine. Dunkirk.  Pearl Harbor.  9/11.  What they do instead is rally the troops, get them fired up and motivated.

The Battle

In New York’s 23rd Congressional District, the aloofness of the professional pols came to a head.  It was the epitome of a recent Rasmussen poll that said 74% of Republicans said their elected leaders were out of touch with the base.  On the Democratic side, the opposite was the case were most Democrats felt their elected leaders held similar views to their own.  So what happened in the special election in New York’s 23rd district?

Republican party bosses chose Dede Scozzafava to defend a seat that has been Republican since the Civil War.   Ms. Scozzafava is pro-abortion, pro-”reform in workers ability to organize”, pro-gay marriage,  pro-Obama stimulus package, and endorsed by the Working Families Party, an ACORN front group.  That was more than conservatives could stand.  Doug Hoffman threw his hat in the ring, conservatives from around the country rallied to him, and Scozzafava eventually dropped out of the race and threw her support behind…the Democrat!!

So the race was between a Democrat and a Conservative, with the Republican candidate a footnote.  The Democrat prevailed by about 5% and picked up a seat for Nancy Pelosi.

The Talking Heads

The liberals started rubbing their hands and crowing over the Republican party self-destructing.  I see it differently.

In a Gallup poll, 40% of Americans considered themselves conservative, 20% described themselves as liberals.  That leaves 40% in the middle.  The prevailing wisdom among the Republican Party leadership is that we need to run “moderates” and have a big tent to win elections.  I say, do the math. 

If you need 50% to win the election, and many times you don’t, then run a conservative candidate.  You will start off with the 40% that call themselves conservative, and then you only need to win 25% of the middle to put you over the top.  (40% in the middle x 25% = 10%; 40% conservative base plus this 10% = 50%). 

Liberals have the tougher job.  Starting out with only a base of 20% self-described liberals, they need to win 3/4 of the middle to get to 50% and win.  It’s even tougher for them because they typically have to go hard left to win the primary and then try to swim upstream to get back in the middle without anyone noticing.

Putting Elections on a Platter

So what has been the strategy of the Republican Party leadership?  Run moderates, because “we can’t win elections with the conservative base alone.”  That’s true but neither can the Democrats win with just their liberal base and as I just proved, theirs is the tougher job.  But when you run moderates, here’s what happens.  A good portion of the conservative base stays home, disgusted.  So from starting with 40%, you maybe now have a 20% base.  You just let the Democrats pull even.  Now you have to win not 25% of the middle but half of the middle.  Let’s say the middle is a continuum from almost conservative to almost liberal.  If Republicans keep their base, then they can just go after the middle group that is “almost” conservative.  If they alienate their base then they have to get every vote in the middle that is the least bit conservative and maybe some liberals.  On the flip side, if they keep their base by running conservative candidates, that forces the Democrat to get all the liberals, all moderates, and some who lean conservative, to capture 3/4 of the middle.  After going hard left to get nominated, that is an almost impossible task.

Don’t Let Obama Fool You

Obama’s election had an historical element to it that we are not likely to see again.  He is an incredibly good speaker, that is, until you realize that is all he is.  Put up a moderate like McCain, and it was no contest.  The only time it became interesting was when McCain picked Palin, which got the base energized.  But the McCain campaign completely mismanaged bringing Palin on board, and the moment was lost.

Remember the 23rd!

So, conservatives have to rally and the Republican leadership has to pay attention.  As Margaret Thatcher used to say, “Don’t go wobbly.”  Start putting conservatives on the field and turn the tide of the battle. 

The next battle is Florida where Charlie Crist…better update his resume, there is a new kid in town, named Marco Rubio and he’s a conservative.

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.

You have to wonder.  Now that the election is over you would think that the focus would be on the president-elect and his transition.  That is newsworthy and is being covered, but the continuing focus on Sarah Palin is surprising.

Finishing Her Off?

Could it be that the left is so fearful of Sarah Palin and her ability to energize crowds that they feel they must finish her off, so she does not come back stronger and more popular?  Could it be that they can’t imagine facing her with four more years of experience under her belt?

Do the Attacks Pass the Smell Test?

A Fox news story said that the McCain campaign became increasingly disenchanted with Palin toward the end of the campaign.  It said that her lack of knowledge of the most basic facts about civics and geography were alarming.  This raises some interesting points:

1. In vetting Sarah Palin, no matter how quickly or superficially it was done, how could they possibly miss issues so allegedly glaring?
2. The opposition, which included the main stream media, descended on Alaska from north to south to dig up dirt on Sarah Palin.  Bill O’Reilly reported that the National Enquirer went up there checkbook in hand, to get any good story they could.  What did they come up with? Nothing. The only thing that came close to a story was Troopergate.  Try as they might to make it a big story and even an October surprise, it flopped.  She was later completely exonerated by the proper investigative authority in Alaska (not the Democrats in the legislature).  Interestingly, the vindication didn’t make much of a news splash even though the findings were released before the election.
3. Her approval ratings as governor were the highest in the nation.  Could a complete dunderhead be so widely approved of?

Just How Thin Was Her Experience?

Ironically, in an article that was used to sandbag Sarah Palin in a CNN interview, Byron York wrote in National Review (“Sarah Palin, Governor”):

… a look at Palin’s 20 months in power, along with interviews with people who worked with her, shows her to be a serious executive, a governor who picked important things to do and got them done — and who didn’t just stumble into an 80 percent job-approval rating.

She took on her own party when she saw ethics problems.  How many Democrats can say that?  The typical Democratic response to scandal is circle the wagons, stonewall, and counter attack.  Just think Bill Clinton, Gerry Studds, Tim Mahoney, the Keating Five, et al.

She renegotiated a pipeline project with major oil companies that was originally negotiated by her predecessor on terms unfavorable to Alaska.  She overhauled the state ethics laws, working with both Democrats and Republicans in the Alaska legislature.  She also vetoed spending on things that she determined were not a state priority, for such things as “dealing with killer shrubs and Zamboni blades.”

Byron York distilled how she approached governing with three points:

1. She hires well.  “There was a pretty good team of people assembled right away to come in and start with her big-picture principles and develop a process and legislation to carry that out,” says Joe Balash, the governor’s oil and gas advisor, “I would say that her management style is to give her staff, her cabinet, a pretty long leash, but with very high expectations — and she’s not afraid to tell you that you didn’t get it right.”
2. She is involved in details in big things but not on everything.  In other words, she doesn’t get lost in the weeds.  She keeps focus on the the important things.
3. She is dead set on fulfilling campaign promises.  Imagine that! A politician who actually cares about what they say on the campaign trail and says what they mean and means what they say.

Sarah Barracuda

Sarah has shed the muzzle of the second fiddle in a presidential race.  She no longer has to pull her punches so as not to conflict with the top of the ticket.  She is back to being governor and the chief executive of Alaska.  So she can now set the record straight and she should do so enthusiastically.  She should take advantage of media outlets that are fair and balanced, rather than lying in wait for her.  She should come out swinging and really let the left know that if they were frightened of her before, they have awakened a sleeping giant.

Apologies to Yogi Berra, but it appears that Barack Obama will be the 44th President of the United States.  He displayed extraordinary political skill on par with Bill Clinton.  As commentator Juan Williams put it on Fox News, Obama was the stealth candidate.  He spoke in platitudes about hope and change, but he was flexible on the details.  In a period of just a few weeks his famous claim of a tax break for anyone making under $250,000, became $200,000 and through other allies it continued to decrease to $150,000 (Biden) and then $120,000 (New Mexico governor Bill Richardson).

Obama campaigned furiously against George W. Bush, despite Bush not being in the race.  McCain was no match for him as far a political skill was concerned.  McCain refused to mention Reverend Jeremiah Wright in the campaign, he failed to explain how his involvement during the bailout debate got the Republicans back in the game when Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid effectively shut them out of the discussions until McCain got involved.  Where else did he fall short?

• He failed to adequately explain his health care plan leaving him open to attacks from Obama which went largely unchallenged.
• He took a pounding from Obama and Biden who said he voted with Bush 94% of the time, but he failed to tie Obama to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi when Congress had an approval rating about half of what Bush had

The Next Four Years

As the loyal opposition we have to be on guard and speak out against the radical positions that Obama has espoused, but are out of sync with the American people, only 27% of whom call themselves liberal.  What to watch for:

1. The Fairness Doctrine — this is an effort to squelch our voice.  The Fairness Doctrine which was set aside by Ronald Reagan, required that a broadcaster provide equal time to present opposing viewpoints whenever a political position was expressed.  This would mean that if a radio station broadcast a popular show like Rush Limbaugh, they would have to broadcast three hours of an opposing viewpoint such as was heard on Air America, the liberal network that failed for lack of listeners.  Faced with this, many broadcasters would drop talk radio and go back to playing Top 40s.  Liberty under attack — The First Amendment guarantee of free speech
2. Card Check — Right now if a union wants to organize a workforce there are two methods that can be used:  a secret ballot, or by having the potential members fill out a card and give it to the union.  They choice of which method is to be used is up to the company, many of whom choose the secret ballot.  Unions want that choice to be theirs and they favor the card system.  This would allow the union to apply pressure to workers at home and other places off the job.  This is even opposed by none other than George McGovern, who has run commercials opposing the union’s position.  (McGovern Interview on YouTube) Liberty under attack — the secret ballot.
3. Redistribution of Wealth — Obama has spoken extensively, although not recently excepting the Joe the Plumber slip, about the redistribution of wealth.  Joe “Buck-a-Day” Biden, which represents how much this multimillionaire gives to charity, says that paying more taxes is our patriotic duty.  Obama scoffs at descriptions of him as a socialist, by saying that if he gave half his peanut butter sandwich to a schoolmate, he’d be called a socialist.  But sharing your peanut butter sandwich with a schoolmate is charity, having your teacher take away your peanut butter sandwich, your cell phone, and your Legos, and give them out to your schoolmates and maybe, maybe, give you half of your peanut butter sandwich back, that’s socialism.  Liberty under attack — The Fourth Amendment right to be secure in your person, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.
4. Bankrupting the Coal Industry — The United States generates 49% of its electricity through coal.  With more and more focus on electric cars and other alternatives to using foreign oil.  Obama has said that “If someone wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can.  It’s just that it will bankrupt them.”  We are the “Saudi Arabia” of coal, with an estimated 200 year supply.  To take coal off the table, would be very dangerous and increase not decrease our dependence on foreign oil.  Liberty under attack — our economic freedom.
5. Crisis — According to Joe Biden, we have about 6-8 months before we will have a crisis to test Obama.  Many liberals point to the budget surpluses of the Clinton Administration as proof of the prudent fiscal leadership of the Democrats.  However, they accomplished those surpluses mainly by gutting the military.  This led to some of the disasters of 9/11/2001 and what followed.  At a time like this and with Obama’s plans for massive increases in government spending, what will happen to our military and as a result what will happen to our ability to deal with a crisis.  Liberty under attack — providing for the national defense

This is an historic moment in American history with the election of the first African American as President of the United States.  As the loyal opposition, it is our duty to make clear whenever he and his followers stray from the principles on which this country was founded, those of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. We must make sure we fight any challenges to the First Amendment and we must preserve our ability to raise our voices and speak our mind.

God Bless the United States of America

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?

This Sunday morning brought the news that Colin Powell had endorsed Barack Obama.  This was deemed as anywhere from a major setback for the McCain campaign to the final nail in his political coffin.  However, to most people paying attention to Powell’s career this is not really a surprise.    Colin Powell’s is a great American story.  Someone who rose through the ranks to the top of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.  He wasn’t a West Point graduate, but rather went to City College in New York and joined the Army Reserve Officers Training Corps.  His service is worthy of our admiration and gratitude.

Politically, Colin Powell is not a conservative.  He is an advocate of Affirmative Action and he is pro-abortion.  He didn’t campaign for black conservative candidates like Michael Steele in Maryland or Lynn Swan in Pennsylvania.  He didn’t speak out about the treatment of Clarence Thomas in his Supreme Court hearings and the way those hearings where conducted by Joe Biden.  So his endorsement of Obama should neither be surprising or earth shattering.

In his Sunday interview he “expressed displeasure with the direction of the Republican Party.”  This, according to the New York Times, was “another dispiriting setback to Republicans.”  Really?  When do Republicans win elections and when do they lose them?

When Republicans remain true to conservative principles they tend to win elections.  When they move to the center to appeal to moderates they tend to lose.  Why is that?

A Battleground poll taken this past August shows it quite clearly.  When  asked the question, “When thinking about politics and government, do you consider yourself to be…”

1. Very Conservative
2. Somewhat Conservative
3. Moderate
4. Somewhat Liberal
5. Very Liberal
6. Unsure or refused to answer

The poll results were:

• Very Conservative — 20%
• Somewhat Conservative — 40%
• Moderate — 2%
• Somewhat Liberal — 27%
• Very Liberal — 9%
• Unsure/Refuse to Answer — 3%

What is most interesting is that only 2% consider themselves to be moderate, and yet conservatives are being repeatedly counseled to reach out to moderates.  Why put forth all that effort for 2% of the population?  If you combine the first two categories, those who consider themselves to be conservative or very conservative, it totals 60% of the population.  Republicans should be able to win elections all day long with those numbers.

The Battleground Poll is a well respected bipartisan poll jointly conducted by a Democratic polling group and a Republican polling group.  What is even more interesting is that they include this question in every survey, and the results have been very consistent over time.  In the thirteen Battleground polls taken between June 2002 and August 2008, those who consider themselves conservatives have ranged from a low of 58% to a high of 63%, pretty consistent indeed.

When Republicans stick to core conservative principles they generally win elections.  When they took control of Congress for the first time in forty years it was because they ran on Newt Gingrich’s Contract with America.  It advocated smaller government, personal responsibility, tort reform and term limits among other things.  This resonated with people who are fed up with Washington and a government that grows without bound.  When they got in power and started spending like liberals, they got tossed out on their butts, as well they should.  If the choice in the voting booth is between a professional liberal (Democrats) and the amateur liberal (moderate Republicans) most folks are going to go with the pro.

Reagan, the truest conservative won the Presidency twice, and easily.  George Bush senior won his first term and then raised taxes breaking his “Read My Lips” pledge.  Out he went.  Clinton won two terms and neither time garnered a majority of the popular vote.  George W. Bush ran as a conservative and won two terms, but they were close races.  Why?  He talked about being a “compassionate conservative” which many took as a code word for being a moderate and not that great a difference from the Democrats.

The untold story is that a significant majority of Americans consider themselves conservative and the closer the candidate adheres to conservative principles (e.g., Reagan) the larger the margin of victory.  The further they move a way, the closer the final tally.

After reading Christopher Buckley’s piece on why he is now an Obama man, I had to read Kathleen Parker’s piece on Sarah Palin, which he referred to.  It has been a whirlwind the past five or six weeks since Sarah Palin was named to the ticket and from that first moment the fusillade from the mainstream media began.

It’s hard to tell where lies the true Sarah Palin.  Throw in Tina Fey’s extraordinarily dead on caricature (Palin Watches Tina Fey) and you have to work double time to see if you are watching a comedy sketch or an interview.  The interviews were clearly not her best moment, and I can’t say if the McCain camp, by sequestering her and force feeding her briefing material about McCain’s positions turned Palin into pâté.

However, I can’t get past the fact that as Alaskan governor she has a stratospheric approval rating of 60+% and in 2007 it was in the 90s.  Compare this to the current Democratic Congress whose approval rating has been in the teens to low 20s, during the same time frame.  Are the people of Alaska uniformly obtuse?

She also took on corruption in her own party and won.  For a relatively new politician that is courageous to say the least, even if she wasn’t successful, but she was.  What tough stands has Obama taken against his party?  Heard any criticisms of Barney Frank or Christopher Dodd from Senator Obama lately?

So Sarah Palin may not be able to dodge a question as smoothly as Barack Obama, or maybe she was just trying to square her personal opinion with what was most in tune with the McCain campaign, and was playing defense rather than offense, while the cameras rolled.

Just before the Vice Presidential debate, McCain’s two top aides took over prepping Palin and the cry from the conservative base was to just let Sarah be Sarah, and when they did she seemed to do extraordinarily well in the debate.

Did the interviews go badly?  Yes.  Now was that because she was out of her league, or because she was trying to serve too many masters and not just be herself?  In this campaign McCain seems to be overly cautious while Palin seems eager to bring it on.  Let her.