Blue Collar Muse's blog

For millions of Americans, the results on November 4th were sad but not surprising. They signaled the failure of an ideology which held power for years, promised much and delivered little.

To some, the failure was due to problems inherent in Free Markets, Capitalism, Limited Government, Social Conservatism and the rest of the foundations of Conservative thought. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Barack Obama's message was electing John McCain meant "4 more years" of George Bush. He was right. Unsaid was that electing him would be worse! Apart from the War on Terror and SCOTUS picks, what Bush accomplishments would Obama have problems with?

Bush has grown Government with a GOP controlled Congress for 6 of his 8 years. Obama is unhappy about that? Congress passed the Medicaid spending increase. Obama is unhappy about that? Congress passed Kennedy's Education Bill. Obama is unhappy about that? Social Security Privatization failed. Obama is unhappy about that? Immigration? The Bailout? Obama is even talking about Welfare disguised as Tax Cuts for heaven's sake! One could go on and on.

On too many issues and at too many levels, Conservative principles did not fail, Conservative principles failed to be upheld!

There were bright spots. The defeats of Harriet Meiers' nomination, the Immigration Reform bill and the Dubai Port Deal come to mind. Common to these successes was the grassroots involvement of everyday Americans refusing to allow Government to take the nation in the wrong direction. We did it then, we can do it again.

This morning, the #dontgo Movement gives us that opportunity! #dontgo was founded by Eric Odom and Allen Fuller on a Friday in August when Nancy Pelosi and Democrats turned off the lights in the People's House and went home. Big Government and Democrats didn't have time for you. But many GOP House members believed different! They stayed and told Democrats, "Don't Go! Come back and finish the People's business!" With no cameras or microphones, those voices went basically unheard.

Until Odom and Fuller put up a Twitter hashtag - #dontgo. The word started trickling out. Until Odom and Fuller put up a website #dontgomovement.com so cellphone video, pictures and blog posts could get out. Until the MSM picked up what grassroots, New Media activists were doing and for the next month, the message "Don't Go!" followed Nancy Pelosi from book signing to book signing! Better, tens of thousands of people rallied to one of the most successful grassroots efforts on the Right in years.

That was 2 months ago. While the issue birthing #dontgo is no longer a rally point, people are still looking for a voice to speak to Big Government to foster change! Good news. Odom and #dontgo didn't stop working and growing when the microphones moved on to the next issue. This morning brings us this:

“Center Right Movement Heats up the Internet”
Conservative Bloggers See Netroots As Key To Advancing Policy

On Monday, November 10th www.dontgomovement.com will host an e-launch party to celebrate its fully-functional website and new online radio show devoted to advancing conservative netroots activism.

#dontgo originally began as a simple internet tag that the founders would put on their blog posts while tracking the energy debate by the US Congress on August 1st, quickly it became used by hundreds of activists including members of Congress not just to track the energy bill, but to energize and push conservative values. Soon thereafter the site was created and to date has 30,000 opt-in email subscribers.

The #dontgo Revolution takes web-based strategies and tactics that Democrats used in the last election cycle to advance conservative views and values. The mission is to develop a fifty state strategy of blogs and internet social networks that would get more conservatives active in their communities leading into the 2010 elections.

Communications Director Juliana Johnson states, “As we witnessed in the 2008 elections web-based strategies are imperative. Conservatives have time and time again failed to use the internet to attract voters and get more people active. We hope that with the launch of this website we will be able to effectively wage the battle of ideas with the left in cyberspace.”

Monday’s radio show (online) will air at 5pm CST. In order to listen please go to www.dontgomovement.com and on the right there is a button “listen to #dontgo radio”.

CONTACT: Juliana Johnson, Director of Communications
(312) 575-9500 (office)
(847) 691-9278 (cell)
julianatjohnson@gmail.com

If you're a an eActivist - a blogger, vlogger, podcaster, internet radio host or wiki editor - head to dontgomovement.com and sign up. If you're a traditional activist - a door knocker, phone caller, envelope stuffer, poll watcher or election day driver - head to dontgomovement.com and get involved. You'll be building the state-by-state, city-by-city, block-by-block structure needed to rein in Liberals regardless of Party. And you'll enable the election of politicians who won't just campaign to the Right, they'll govern that way, too!

This is not just a hope! We've seen people work together, they can bring real change. Your passion has moved you in the past. #dontgo gives that passion an effective outlet. Come join us!

Blue Collar Muse

They are also uneducated, out of step with the rest of the country, to be pitied, isolated, suffering in the area of "jobs, education and development", ideologically aligned with the old Confederacy, at odds with the values of the rest of the country, and are getting what they deserve because they won't "... get with the right program." Hat tip to Dan Cleary for making sure I was aware of this.

Or you could ask Dwight Lewis at The Tennessean. Lewis learned all this in a phone interview with "... David A. Bositis, senior political analyst for the Washington-based Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies ..." He felt it true and significant enough to share it with all of us. The Tennessean evidently agreed with him. Why publish his lunacy otherwise?

The Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies is a misleading name for the group. Per Lewis, the politics and economy the JCPES finds worthy of studying are those "... of concern to African-Americans and other people of color ..." The picture at their site includes pictures of Asians and Hispanics. However, reading through the headlines on their site, the only people of color mentioned are either Blacks or African Americans. There is one vague reference to "America's minorities."

This is the environment in which Bositis' claims must be evaluated. And what is Bositis' basis for making such outrageous claims? It's his analysis of who voted for John McCain and who voted for Barack Obama. He has lots of high sounding analysis. I'll save you some time. Anyone who voted for John McCain is all of those things in the opening paragraph. Anyone who voted for Barack Obama is not.

No word on the character of Barr, Baldwin and Nader voters. Words fail to describe how offensive Bositis' words are, or should be, to every man or woman who supported a candidate OBO, "Other than Barack Obama." Obviously, however, Lewis, Bositis and presumably some of their readers and supporters believe this tripe. I would point out the position of Lewis and Bositis are, on their face, far more racist and divisive than that of any of John McCain's supporters of any color. Except, I must be wrong. It's not possible for Blacks to be racist. Jesse Jackson himself told us so.

When people criticize me for declaring Barack Obama is not my President, I'll take comfort in knowing that he is not mine, although he is Mr. Lewis' President and he is Mr. Bositis' President. To all you who want to claim Barack as your own, enjoy their company. Barack forged a coalition he greatly desired to get him elected. It contains a great many fine people who mistakenly believe in the untested, unproven promise of Barack. It also contains a great many craven, twisted racists such as Mr. Lewis and Mr. Bositis. Their bile and ignorance, passed off as lofty and intellectual analysis, is rubbish if for no other reason than it fails to address the rationale for McCain voters elsewhere. That such thinking might be indicative of the actual change and hope we'll see as opposed the empty rhetoric Obama offered ought to terrify Americans.

Men like Lewis and Bositis are destroying Dr. Martin Luther King's dream of integration. They are callously dividing our nation along racial lines for purposes I cannot fathom. How any sane and educated individual in 2008 can believe, let alone put into print in what should be respectable publications, the notion that millions of Americans may legitimately be labled racist and backward based solely on the vote they cast is beyond outrageous.

I've read it in a score of places in the last 48 hours. I cannot help but repeat it here. It's going to be a long 4 years ...

Blue Collar Muse

Tuesday night, Barack Obama spoke to a waiting country and a wondering world. Found in his words are a myriad reasons to reject what he stands for. The election is over and Obama is President. Some say the healing must now begin and we must unite behind Barack. Obama himself appealed "...to those Americans whose support I have yet to earn -- I may not have won your vote, but I hear your voices, I need your help, and I will be your President too."

I say, Obama will be the President; but he will never be my President. Obama wants what he is unwilling to give. To get the job, Obama divided us. Now on the job, he yearns for unity's strength. But leopards don't change their spots. As he ran, so will he govern. I will not be a party to that.

Obama's speech text is here. The video is here. Please read it before reading my comments.

When Obama "wonders if the dream of our founders is alive", I remember what those Founders wrote. They were "dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal." Obama believes some men are more equal than others. When advocating for nonexisent rights or for granting more rights to some than to me, he will be the President, but not my President.

When Obama says he wants to "... renew this nation's promise ... to restore prosperity ... to reclaim the American Dream ..."; when he speaks of "remaking this nation" I must ask, when was the promise broken and by whom; who stole our prosperity; who moved the American Dream out of reach of everyday Americans and who pulled down our nation that it needs to be remade? For a century, it has been the ideological allies of Barack Obama who have done so. When raising our taxes, curtailing our liberty, weakening the defense of our country and bankrupting our businesses and Economy - Obama will be the President, but not my President.

When Obama says his Presidency was launched in "the living rooms of Concord" and financed "by working men and women who dug into what little savings they had to give ... to this cause" I marvel at his deception. When he enters the Oval Office it will complete a journey begun in the living room of William Ayers' and which traveled a path financed by thousands of people Obama will not identify, many of whom are not even Americans. He will enter the office of the President, but not my President.

When Obama says "... the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime ..." and references our military and families worried about tomorrow, I recoil in horror from the cavalier exploitation of those about whom he is ignorant. My son is in the military he will command and I have four more children at home to care for. When he sends my son into harm's way but threatens not to support him while there; when he takes money for which I labor and which I need to support my family to give to families he decides need it more he will be the President, but not my President.

When Obama calls for "a new spirit of patriotism", I struggle to find something wrong with the old one. When Obama gives away our sovereignty and national interests to our enemies and those who would weaken us he will be the President, but not my President.

When Obama calls for us to "look after not only ourselves, but each other" and to believe "that we cannot have a thriving Wall Street while Main Street suffers" I marvel at his hypocrisy. Under the old spirit of "service and responsibility" he would replace, Americans were the most generous and industrious people on earth. When Obama decides who it is I must sacrifice for and brings suffering to Main Street via higher taxes for the Wall Street Bailout he will be the President, but not my President.

Obama’s words are empty. His promise is hollow. His dreams are nightmares. To be my President, he must deny everything he confesses to believe in. He must repudiate his stated policies. He must realize the paradise he seeks is found in the principles and promises of others. As the President, he may invoke the imagery of Lincoln, King and Kennedy but his appeal to their memory defiles their legacy.

He says he will be my President. But he will not because he cannot. To expect me to believe otherwise insults me. And that, too, is something my President would not do.

Blue Collar Muse

While I'm unwilling to concede just yet that Barack Obama will be the next President of the United States, it would be foolish to deny that possibility. Even if John McCain wins, the status of Conservatism in the GOP and politics generally is troubling at best.

Politicians and The People, with few exceptions, seem determined to abandon sound, proven truths for the warm, fuzzy rhetoric of the Economic and Social policies of "Hope!" and "Change!" It's difficult to blame The People. They gave the GOP a shot at letting Conservative ideology work it's magic on the country for years. Turns out the Pols weren't as Conservative as advertised.

The years after the Reagan era are defined by a GOP wanting more to breed and less to lead. GOP strategy was "What must we do to increase our power and get re-elected?" instead of "What must we do to serve the people and earn our re-election?"

The nominations of Bob Dole, W and now John McCain coupled with the strategy of many GOP House and Senate candidates has reinforced that approach. A notable exception, AZ Representative John Shadegg, says even at the height of 1994's Republican Revolution the GOP's advice was his most important job wasn't to represent his district or promote his constituents' values; it was to get re-elected.

This approach has tainted Conservatism in the minds of the people. It has become identical to, or at least wed to the GOP. Thus the sins of the Party become the sins of the Principled. Even if Conservatives object, pointing out they never countenanced bad behavior by the GOP (The Bailout, No Child Left Behind, Medicare Reform) The People still see them as part of the problem and not the solution. How else to understand what happened to Rick Santorum, George Allen and others?

Such losses make the Democrats' job easier. Each defeated Conservative frees up time, energy and moneyto defeat those remaining. Squishy GOP members voted with Democrats enough to permit them to establish portions of their agenda and to regain solid Congressional majorities. Two things will follow: those who believe the Left can be reasoned with and appeased will be rudely awakened and the country will suffer. To date, only the second is happening.

GOP snubbing of Conservatives has produced much soul searching. The choices are stay in the GOP and work internally for change or leave to found or join a third party. I'm not advocating either choice. But enabling the status quo is not an option. We each must decide what the best use is of our time and talents. To decide, regardless of who wins the White House, a few things should be influential.

Christopher Arledge at Red County has written 'The End of American Conservatism?' and at The Minority Report, Civil Truth has penned 'A Time for Choosing: Even Truer 44 Years Later'. They are as good a starting place as any for Conservatives asking where they go from here. I commend them to you. If you find, or if you have written, posts with similar themes, let me know and I'll aggregate them here as a resource.

It is impossible to predict the consequences of next week's election. It is, however, quite possible to predict what will happen if Conservatives do nothing. Surrender and chains being unacceptable options, regrouping and fighting on will have to do for now ...

Blue Collar Muse

Sitting in airports most of yesterday, I got an earful of CNN's coverage of Colin Powell's endorsement of Barack Obama.

It effectively undercut two of the most damning truths about Obama. Particularly galling was the interview with Claire McCaskill. Grinning like the Cheshire cat, she gushed Obama must be the best choice since Powell, a military man, would never support someone unqualified to serve as CinC or who trafficked with terrorists. This despite the fact Powell's endorsement included nothing addressing the validity of those two points. Even afterward, General Powell did not address with specificity his rationale for endorsing Obama.

By far, however, the most disappointing aspect of Powell's endorsement was his contention that, despite his decision, he still considers himself a Republican. I do not know the General nor have I ever spoken to him. I believe he is a good man and his skilled service to our country as a military man is beyond exemplary. But I cannot accept his contention that he is a Republican. It is not because he endorsed the nominee from the other side. It is his stated reasons for doing so.

Over the last 8 years, three prominent Democrats endorsed the GOP nominee; Zell Miller, Democratic Senator from Georgia; Ed Koch, former Democratic Mayor of NYC and Joe Lieberman, former Democratic Senator from CT and 2000 Democratic VP nominee. When these Democrats endorsed the GOP nominee, they did so deliberately and with specificity. They did so while remaining Democrats. With the exception of Zell Miller, they did so while disagreeing with Republicans on almost every other point except the War on Terror. Concluding aggression against the US was the greatest threat to the nation and that Democrats could not or would not see that, these men broke with their party to support a GOP nominee. Miller's endorsement followed in the well established DixieCrat tradition of Conservative southern Democrats. There was nothing that demanded these men be excluded from the Democratic Party.

There was a fair amount of criticism from the Left directed at these men for their decision. Like Powell, however, they maintained they were still Democrats while breaking with the party on the war. That break cost them. While Miller retired shortly after his endorsement, he was villified by Leftists. Lieberman was actively opposed by the Democratic Party in his bid for reelection to the Senate. These men remain Democrats in all things except for their endorsements. Ed Koch is supporting Obama and thinks Palin is scary. Joe Lieberman still caucuses with Democrats and votes with them on virtually all matters not related to the war. It is clear, whether or not you agree with their assessment of the war, that was the reason they supported the nominee from the GOP.

Colin Powell's rationale isn't even close to as specific. It's filled with nebulous and meaningless platitudes. Obama brings a fresh set of eyes to the problem. Well, so does Sarah Palin. Obama is inclusive. This is simply laughable as there is literally zero evidence for that. If inclusiveness is the criteria by which we are to judge, McCain is the hands down winner. Powell is uncomfortable with the rhetoric coming out of the McCain camp regarding Obama's association with terrorists, both foreign and domestic. Evidently he is OK with the rhetoric coming from the camps of terrorists, both foreign and domestic, that support the Illinois Senator.

In short, Powell's objections to McCain aren't policy based. They aren't ideologically based. They seem to be based in personality. That is not to say personality has nothing to do with how to evaluate a candidate. But it ought to be last on the list and certainly not a basis for abandoning party policy and ideology. Unless, of course, your policy and ideology is more akin to the other guy's than to the one you are generally associated with.

Colin Powell, when asked if he was still a Republican, responded that he was. With all respect to the General, I must disagree. There is little evidence from his speech that he is. His endorsement of Obama ignores that Obama is for bigger Government, higher Taxes, decreased personal Liberty, weaker national Defense and a host of other anti-GOP notions. Powell does not list a single issue or policy with which Obama is at odds with the GOP and which he considers paramount beyond all considerations for the safety and security of our nation. Instead, he gives a general and sweeping endorsement of the man and his policies which are unquestionably Left of center.

If you can explain to me how this is a Republican view, I'm willing to listen. But from here it sounds like a Democrat in GOP clothing standing up for what he believes in. I have no issue with the good General if he wants to hold Democratic views. I would appreciate, however, the intellectual honesty to admit the same and make the announcement that he cannot, in good conscience, remain in the GOP any longer and that he was endorsing the Democratic agenda.

That's an endorsement I could respect.

Blue Collar Muse

Tuesday, my post 'ACORN's 15 State Strategy for Voter Fraud' provoked a great deal of response across the Interwebz. I don't believe it alone was responsible for the Left's development of talking points but said points were clearly in evidence. Discussion at The Next Right was most brisk with Leftist memes posted in abundance.

The short version? ACORN is the victim, not the criminal, so it can't be involved in vote fraud! ACORN has never been convicted of vote fraud so it can't be involved! ACORN reported its own fraudulent registrations so it can't be involved! ACORN cooperated with the investigations so it can't be involved! Real vote fraud only happens while casting a vote at the polls so ACORN can't be involved. Statements to the contrary are based on isolated incidents so ACORN can't be involved! ACORN isn't responsible for the actions of a few bad eggs who make them look bad so it can't be involved. It's the start of a multi-state victim strategy.

Of course this only works if the protests are legitimate. Let's take a look.

"Vote fraud can only happen at the polls!" would seem the most exonerating objection. But this is a straw man. After all, ACORN is an organization, not a person, so it cannot vote at all, fraudulently or otherwise. Yet ACORN is being investigated for vote fraud. How can that be? Because the law does not confine vote fraud to merely voting behavior.

While I've not spoken with all of them, I called election officials for the 13 states from Tuesday's post asking about vote fraud definitions. Those I spoke with agreed "vote fraud" was best seen as a single, general term covering several, specific crimes. Actually voting fraudulently is vote fraud as are any number of actions, including fraudulently registering voters, fraudulently registering to vote and more. Investigations of such behavior by ACORN, its employees or agents are vote fraud investigations.

Ditto for convictions. One ACORN apologist, Timothy, has continually asked me to produce a single conviction of ACORN for vote fraud. The Wall Street Journal says it happened in Wisconsin and Colorado. Timothy says he followed my links. Perhaps he missed the one for Washington state. Rotten Acorn notes in this case, "Three ACORN employees pleaded guilty, and four more were charged, in the worst case of voter registration fraud in Washington state history." ACORN settled the case. The settlement agreement is here. It's all about what ACORN agrees to in order to avoid getting hammered.

ACORN's agreement addresses the next objection: ACORN isn't the bad guy; their self-policing makes them a good guy!. As with any such claim, the devil's in the details. King County gave ACORN a pass if they self-reported problem registrations within 14 days. Self-reporting from 15-30 days earned them a $250 fine per incident. Over 30 days brought a $1,000 per incident fine. The question isn't so much does ACORN self police as when. The WSJ's John Fund has some insight into the answer out of Kansas City.

Finally, in the King County settlement ACORN agreed (as did all the election officials I asked about this) they can be held liable for the actions of their employees. No longer can they hide, as they have before, behind the excuse a few bad eggs ruined their reputation. Prosecutors may, for reasons of their own, choose not to prosecute the organization, but it's a real option.

Washington state found ACORN's personnel oversight to be "virtually nonexistant." Their training seemed little better. King County demanded the same solution to the problem I suggested; change your business practices! Train and supervise your employees well. Tell them what breaking election law can mean. The King County case was last year, 2007. Why, then, is ACORN still having problems if all they are really committed to is, as Timothy says, conducting "... a very successful effort to register voters."

There are major elections every two years and scores of lesser ones every year. With all that's at stake, there will always be charges of fraud. But when one group routinely attracts accusations of wrongdoing, perhaps it's time to look at them. Regarding ACORN, I say, "Democrats, perhaps it's time to wash your hands of them." No voter registration organization has a track record even remotely close to ACORN's. And a rotten acorn can't produce a healthy tree.

It really is as serious as I make it out to be. Including the 13 states with ACORN problems this year, since 1998, the following states have had problems with ACORN. Beyond their 15 state vote fraud strategy, ACORN now has a 19 state victim strategy. And ACORN only operates in 38 states. This is big and getting bigger. If mighty oaks truly grow from little acorns, there's no surer proof than this. I think a call to the arborist is in order!

Arkansas / Colorado / Connecticut / Florida / Indiana / Louisiana / Michigan / Minnesota / Missouri / Nevada / New Mexico / North Carolina / Ohio / Pennsylvania / Texas / Virginia / Washington / Wisconsin.

Blue Collar Muse

Promoted. -Patrick

Much has been made of the Democrats 50 state strategy to win the election.  Who knew there was a fall back 15 state strategy to steal it if they couldn’t win it?

Americans who haven’t heard about ACORN and voter fraud haven’t been paying attention. Some have been hearing about it for years. Others are just now hearing after waking up to find elections upon us once again. Seems like every couple of years there’s an election and whenever there is, there’s talk about people trying to steal it.

This year is no different. But for the first time, the fraud seems massive and everywhere.  And most all the fingers are pointing at ACORN.  They are political activists, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. According to Wikipedia, ACORN ” … is a community-based organization that advocates for low- and moderate-income families by working on neighborhood safety, health care and other social issues.” Wikipedia has frozen further edits to ACORN’s page because people can’t agree; according to others, ACORN is a Liberal group committed to electing Democrats by any means possible, legal and illegal.

Prior to 2008, while ACORN was a player in terms of voter fraud, there wasn’t much to report.  My first memory is South Dakota from 2002. This year ACORN is under scrutiny in over a fourth of America’s 50 states.

I don’t remember first hearing the term “9/11 Conservatives” to describe those with post 9/11 epiphanies. Realizing Liberal degradation of the US was destroying it in people’s minds, 9/11 Conservatives abandoned the Left in droves. I do remember I didn’t need the term explained to me. Its meaning was instantly grasped. The concept has been applied to different specifics over the years but it’s still clear. A big enough event can break through indifference, and even opposition, forcing us to deal with it and its consequences. Given that, perhaps it’s possible to learn something from attacks on other American institutions.

Free Market Capitalism is clearly under attack in the wake of recent financial woes. Listening to Democrats, and more than a few Republicans, Capitalism and Free Markets produced those problems. They were so bad, Government had to put Socialist bandages on Capitalist wounds. The Truth is otherwise. An objective evaluation show Government Market meddling and Watergate style Government cover-ups behind the current financial ravaging. The same is true of the subsequent bailout.

People are not as stupid as the Left needs them to be. Citizens will see Big Government, not Free Markets, caused the problem. They’ll understand the Government’s solution, as in 1929, made the situation far worse than it would have been had it let the Market work. They’ll recognize a prime Government weakness is needing to be seen doing something, even something bad! And they’ll realize one can’t eliminate Bear Markets if one also wants Bull Markets. Uninterrupted growth is unrealistic. There will be Market corrections and they are healthy. Public understanding of Governmental responsibility for the problem as evidenced by the bailout, the Community Reinvestment Act and more will ultimately push more people towards fiscal conservatism than towards centrally planned Socialism. Call them CRA FisCons.

Equally large is the assault on the sanctity of the voting process. We have peaceful transitions of power due to public confidence in the electoral process. While there have been many charges of vote fraud over the years, in the last decade, Democrats have stepped up efforts to destroy confidence in the system in order to acquire legislative power. In 2000 Al Gore retracted his concession, forcing the Florida recount nightmare on the country. Eight years later I still see “Bush was selected, not elected!” bumper stickers. The Left refused to accept a certified vote because it showed them losing. This obsession fueled efforts to ensure it never happens again, even if they need to cheat.

Ask Democrats if the GOP engages in vote fraud and twenty minutes later you might get a word in to ask for evidence. There is, no doubt, evidence of GOP vote fraud available if one looks hard enough. But the truth is the GOP behaves better than Dems in respecting the sanctity of the process. John Ashcroft didn’t demand the special election to which he was entitled following his loss to a dead man in 2000. In 2002, John Thune refused a recount to which he was entitled by South Dakota’s Constitution despite significant evidence of vote fraud by Democrats.

Ask Democrats about New Jersey illegally putting Frank Lautenberg on the ballot in 2002. Ask them about ACORN being investigated and charged with vote fraud across the country. Ask them about ACORN execs fired, resigned in disgraced or fined for vote fraud. And if you ask why Democrats continue to support such a tainted and disgraced organization, you’ll get non-answers delivered with a straight face.

Reliance on and allegiance to ACORN will ultimately cost them. The Democratic Party and individual Democrats should denounce ACORN. They should demand investigations to produce confidence in the process. They should vote to end public funding accounting for 40% of ACORN’s budget and advise private donors putting up the other 60% to cut ACORN off. Democrats should call for trials and harsh sentences for those convicted of manipulating the voting process to disenfranchise others. But they don’t and they won’t. ACORN is doing exactly what Democrats want them to do. They want distrust of the process in the public mind.

Once again, Americans are not that stupid. The Left cannot spin ACORN as part of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy or even the Right in general. ACORN is clearly both intentionally engaged in vote fraud and an obvious Democratic tool. As Americans grasp this truth, look for ACORN Republicans to make themselves known.

Finally, it never ceases to amaze how Democrats spin relationships. GWB was in the oil business so he must be a shill for Big Oil. Dick Cheney served on Haliburton’s board so the GOP must be funneling no-bid contracts their way. Yes, some Government decisions benefit Big Oil. Yes, Haliburton gets some Government contracts. But are these events in the natural course of business or is the GOP linked to them in nefarious ways? No evidence exists that it is anything other than the simple natural course of things.

Democratic relationships and connections are, however, demonstrably contaminated. Bill Clinton had more than a little baggage heading into the White House. There were bimbo eruptions; Whitewater and his wife’s part time day-trading job; questions about misuse and abuse of state troopers under his authority and more. This was all known before Clinton was elected. It either didn’t matter to Democrats or it didn’t get enough press to make a difference before election day. After the election, even more misdeeds came to light and it got worse. 16 years later, it’s happening again.

Well before election day, Barack Obama’s association with terrorists, foreign and domestic, is being revealed more clearly. Obama’s connection to ACORN and its crimes is being reported more widely. His support for Socialist regulation is becoming more widely known. The questions about Obama have been answered.  He’s a known quantity.  If demonstrable past performance is an indicator, Barack Obama will damage this country in ways my worst nightmares can’t foresee. Fraternizing with our enemies, championing destructive economic plans and ignoring illegal acts for personal benefit combine to make Barack Obama more than dagerous to our country. He could destroy it altogether.

Obama dismisses these truths. He even paints them as positive. I’m not in bed with terrorists! But what’s wrong with talking to people? I didn’t push ACORN’s radical agenda, I was a community organizer trying to involve more people in the political process! I’m not a Socialist! But shouldn’t everyone be able to own in a house? Can’t a nation as great as America make that happen?

For Bill Clinton to be right, scores of people had to be branded as liars. Democrats took up that challenge. For Barack Obama to be the President Democrats claim he’ll be, thousands must deny they saw what they saw and heard what they heard during the campaign. Thousands more must suffer from Obama policies as disastrous tomorrow as they were in a thousand yesterdays. No matter, Democrats still rally behind him.

However, sooner or later, just as 9/11 moved folks from Liberal to Conservative, the CRA will move folks from Socialism to Free Markets, ACORN will move folks from Democrats to Republicans. Like Jimmy Carter gave the country Ronald Reagan, an Obama presidency will illustrate the lie and curse that is Liberalism and reveal the Truth and the blessing, howevermuch discomfort it produces at times, that is Conservatism. The Left may argue things like Individual Liberty, Free Markets, Conservatism and the like aren’t perfect. I agree. But they are also far superior to any other option available.

Remember this when you step into that booth over the next few weeks.  There’s no need to wait until 2012 to show you’ve made the move from Left to Right.

Blue Collar Muse

<!-- Begin Google Adsense code -->

New technology overcomes old challenges. It also raises new ones. Nuclear plants generate the most electricity but have cleanup questions. The Internet has overcome and created challenges, too. Howard Dean used the internet to raise money at unheard of levels. Ken Timmerman reports Barack Obama’s campaign raised $427 million dollars, much of it coming via the internet.

Almost half of the $427 million came from donations of less than $200. Campaigns don’t have to identify donors until their aggregate giving exceeds $200. When giving was by check or cash, it was harder to cheat; cash deposits had to be accounted for and checks left paper trails. Credit card internet giving is the new way around the law.

Timmerman writes about an Obama donor, “Good Will”, who gave $17,375 in over 1,000 donations under $200, far exceeding the limit for individuals. The FEC has ordered the campaign to return the excess money, and they’ve started to. They’ve got thousands to go! Warner Todd Huston writes of testing the foreign donation firewalls of both Obama and McCain. Only one campaign had any checks on the process in place.

Complicating matters, current monitoring and regulating mechanisms are outpaced by technology. The FEC didn’t find “Good Will”. Activists did. Giving is at T1 speeds. Enforcement is stuck on dialup.

“While FEC practice is to do a post-election review of all presidential campaigns, given their sluggish metabolism, results can take three or four years,” said Ken Boehm, the chairman of the conservative National Legal and Policy Center.

If Presidential campaigns have these issues, what of lesser publicized and scrutinized down-ticket races?

Now that our Representatives in DC are done abasing themselves before political logic at the altar of "Being seen doing something, no matter how destructive, is better than being seen doing nothing!", let's take a look at what just happened.

Stripped to essentials, you and I are being forced to buy something the current owners don't want and which destroyed individuals and companies which owned even some of it. Government believes the magic pixie bailout dust which will ensure success is assuming responsibility for all of it.

Wall Street holds a bag full of bad mortgages. So bad, owning them has already destroyed companies with even a mix of good and bad ones. Government is going to buy just the bad ones! But Government has no money with which to purchase mortgages, good or bad, that doesn't come from taxpayers. Your Government is buying, in your name and with your money, mortgages the mortgage experts know are bad, don't want and wish they had never made.

"Unknown" is the best description for the prices taxpayers will pay for these mortgages. It is currently unclear how the value of the bad mortgages will be determined. Wall Street will want as much as possible to reduce their losses. Government has little incentive to realistically assess their value. This would seem to assure a good deal for Wall Street and a lousy deal for Main Street. The Director of the Congressional Budget Office, Peter R. Orszag, told Congress that in plain terms in a recent hearing. (Orszag's comments appear between 22:30 to 23:00)

Government believes it will perform better than the Market. 337 legislators with nothing at stake but re-election feel better qualified to risk taxpayer's money and future than the 200,000,000 taxpayers either opposed to or unsure of the plan. By what measure are they more qualified? By virtue of being able to ignore the people and impose their will on them. But being powerful doesn't make one right.

Bailout opposition drops dramatically if one assumes Government is making a sound investment. Tell taxpayers they'll get their money back when the homes they're buying are re-sold and many more favor the deal. But will that actually happen? All we have are assurances on that point. Government doesn't know it will work out well, they hope and assume it will.

There are some great ideas for Private Sector involvement. That few investors are clamoring to be let in on the action is telling. However, if profiting from bad mortgages was the sure thing Government needs it to be to garner public support, we wouldn't need the Bailout. The Private Sector would be lined up to do it. That they're not undermines the Government's contention this is a low cost, no cost, or even profit making venture.

Interestingly, the Bailout isn't about the Housing Market at all. It's about the Credit Market. Holding bad mortgages is a threat to financial health. In today's volatile market, even the hint of weakness spells disaster. No one knows how much in bad mortgages anyone else is holding so no one is extending credit. The borrower may be destroyed in mere hours by a loose word or a breeze on their house of cards. The Government solution is to buy up all the bad mortgages. Freed from worry about risk, lenders will begin extending credit again. This is exactly the solution the Market would have imposed had it been allowed to with some differences in implementation.

The Market would not make taxpayers responsible for the sins of others. It would have relaxed tension in the Credit Market by making those responsible for bad lending decisions endure the consequences. This would dump bad loans on the market at a low price for investors to see as good investments which they then begin buying. As the Market cleansed itself confidence between surviving lenders, demonstrating unquestionable financial soundness by virtue of their survival, would increase and the Credit Market would loosen. This is essentially identical to Government's plan while taking a little longer. Government is underscoring the soundness of Market principles without being willing to permit Market processes.

By far the worst result of the Bailout is deeper Government intrusion into the Private Sector. The crisis was not a failure of the Market. The Market expects there will be downturns, corrections or cutbacks at times. No one likes them, but only certain forms of Government abandon responsible behavior to avoid them.

We used to have wise and responsible Government; limited and small, it taxed little and meddled less. That allowed a Free Market in a truly Private Sector to transform a wilderness into the world's richest economy in mere decades. The inertia of that Economy carried us forward despite the low speed, high drag baggage of Woodrow Wilson's Socialism, FDR's New Deal and LBJ's Great Society.

But even that powerful engine is not immune to the braking action of constant friction. Today Government spends hundreds of billions monthly in unconstitutional entitlements. Crying that a minority will fail in their quest for success, it impedes the majority's quest, ignorant that a single success does more than a single failure can wipe out. Left alone, we would provide far more for the least of us than the pittance Government doles out for votes. But that garners no power for Government.

Barack Obama and Democrats have already told us what they intend if elected. They plan even more Government regulation and control, weakening even further the economic engine that is Capitalism. They won't be satisfied until the engine stops altogether.

I'm not convinced we've reached the point of no return in our rush to self destruction at the hands of Socialists and Central Planners. But neither am I convinced we have not. The bailout is a huge step in that direction. Granting Democrats control of all 3 branches of Government would be another. And I'm not sure Americans and the GOP is up to the challenge of stopping it. For now, work like it all depends on you and pray like it all depends on God. In the final tally, it does.

Blue Collar Muse