2008 elections

Looking for Obama Republicans

Here's to hoping that a few election cycles from now, pundits are on TV predicting the turnout of "Obama Republicans" the same way in which they discussed "Reagan Democrats" this year.
As many of you know, the phrase "Reagan Democrat" refers to those voters who consider themselves Democrats, and usually vote that way, but in 1980 and/or '84, they voted for Ronald Reagan.

Right now, there's no way to know for sure if first-time voters, disaffected Republicans and others will vote for the Grand Old Party in the future, but I wonder if we can work backwards.  I wonder if we can get them to vote Republican in the future and MAKE them "Obama Republicans."  And being a former Luntzian, I can't help but wonder if we can just communicate to these swing groups better.

Here's my take on two groups of potential "Obama Republicans"...

We Will Be Back In Strength

We welcome Governor Huckabee to the front page on this important night. -Patrick

I'm very proud to have supported Senator McCain and the only regret is that more Americans didn't share my conviction that he would have made an outstanding President. I not only recognize, but respect that we are a nation in which the people choose and tonight they have chosen Senator Obama. He was not my choice, but he will be my President and I will pray for him to lead this great nation with God's help and grace. He will face serious challenges to lead our country and he will need all Americans to give him a chance.

The campaign is over and now is the time for governing and leading. The Republican Party must now reassess where it is and where it is going. Our problem is not that our views aren't acceptable, is that many in our party have abandoned the very principles that once drew Americans to trust us. Our party will be back with strength, but tonight we should all celebrate the historic nature of this election and put our country ahead of our party.

As disappointed as I am that we have lost the election, I can't help but feel that many courageous leaders of the civil rights movement look down from heaven tonight with a smile that the day has come when a man is elected without regard to his color. I salute President-elect Obama for his discipline and tenacity that has given our country the opportunity to witness this significant event.

Politics is not an event but a process. We sometimes lose the events but it never gives us the right to stop being faithful to our principles that enlisted us in the process. We shall live to fight another day.

This blog is cross-posted at www.HuckPac.com.

 

McCain Admits to Larry King that Obama is NOT a Socialist

Well, once again the Grumpy Old Politician has to eat his words.

The only thing consistent about this man is his inconsistency (or is incontinence).

That we have to suffer through this weekend and listen to his blizzard of drivel - along with his sidekick who is clueless as to what the Constitution is never mind what it says - is just the price we will have to pay to finally get some competent management in DC.

 <!--StartFragment-->McCain Admits Obama Not A Socialist<!--EndFragment-->  

In an interview with Larry King that aired last night, John McCain admitted that he doesn't think Barack Obama is a socialist, which runs counter to most of his campaign rhetoric for the past week. The admission is reminiscent of when McCain, after days of hammering Obama about a supposedly sexist remark, finally conceded that Obama probably wasn't calling Sarah Palin a pig when referencing "lipstick on a pig" at a campaign speech. Video below, with transcript: Transcript, via CNN:

KING: You don't believe Barack Obama is a socialist, do you? 


MCCAIN: No. But, I do believe -- I do believe that he's been in the far left of American politics. He has stated time after time that he believes in "spreading the wealth around." He's talked about courts that would redistribute the wealth. 
He has a record of voting against tax cuts and for tax increases. And I don't think there's any doubt that he would increase spending and he would, sooner or later, we would be increasing taxes. There is no doubt in my mind that that's what his record -- 94 times he voted to cut taxes -- against tax cuts and for tax increases. He voted for -- and that's what matters. Not rhetoric. To raise taxes on individuals making $42,000 a year. 


KING: Concerning spreading the wealth, isn't the graduated income tax spreading the wealth? If you and I paid more so that Jimmy can get some for him, or pay for a welfare recipient, that's spreading the wealth. 


MCCAIN: Well, that's spreading the wealth in the respect that we do have a graduated income tax. That's a far cry from taking from one group of Americans and giving to another. I mean, that's dramatically different. 
Sen. Obama clearly has talked about for years, redistributive policies. And that's not the way we create wealth in America. That's not the way we grow our economy. That's not the way we create jobs.

Her Inner Barracuda

Any questions about Governor Palin's ability to be in the big time spot light were put to rest last night. Gov. Palin succeeded in turning the tables on the main stream media's assault on her qualifications. Moderator Gwen Ifill, with wary eyes on her for not disclosing to the debate commission her forthcoming Obama book conflict of interest, behaved herself.

As I was watching the much heralded debate which was supposed to end the presidential election, at least according to many in the Obama camp, I wondered, is Sarah Palin's television appearance going to matter so much? After all, this would be the VP not the Presidential candidates debating. With all the hype though, I knew that the left was just waiting to pounce all over a potentially tongue twisted and uncertain, nervous looking new comer to the political arena. The Olbermans and Matthews and Couric crowd had already written their talking points. "She's unqualified" "Biden looked Presidential" "No comparison" "The Senator demonstrated his experience and she her lack of experience" "She didn't seem knowledgeable".

Thankfully, all those notes went into the shredder after the first few questions. It was obvious that after the Governor's first answer the debate was not going to resemble the scenario the Obama camp had prognosticated.

PALIN: Thank you, Gwen. And I thank the commission, also. I appreciate this privilege of being able to be here and speak with Americans.

You know, I think a good barometer here, as we try to figure out has this been a good time or a bad time in America's economy, is go to a kid's soccer game on Saturday, and turn to any parent there on the sideline and ask them, "How are you feeling about the economy?"

And I'll bet you, you're going to hear some fear in that parent's voice, fear regarding the few investments that some of us have in the stock market. Did we just take a major hit with those investments?

Fear about, how are we going to afford to send our kids to college? A fear, as small-business owners, perhaps, how we're going to borrow any money to increase inventory or hire more people.

The barometer there, I think, is going to be resounding that our economy is hurting and the federal government has not provided the sound oversight that we need and that we deserve, and we need reform to that end.

Now, John McCain thankfully has been one representing reform. Two years ago, remember, it was John McCain who pushed so hard with the Fannie Mae (NYSE:FNM) and Freddie Mac (NYSE:FRE) reform measures. He sounded that warning bell.

People in the Senate with him, his colleagues, didn't want to listen to him and wouldn't go towards that reform that was needed then. I think that the alarm has been heard, though, and there will be that greater oversight, again thanks to John McCain's bipartisan efforts that he was so instrumental in bringing folks together over this past week, even suspending his own campaign to make sure he was putting excessive politics aside and putting the country first.

APRPEH wrote about the Palin factor in http://aprpeh.blogspot.com/2008/09/no-second-guessing-israel-sarah-palin.html No Second Guessing Israel - Sarah Palin and  http://aprpeh.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2008-09-11T10%3A50%3A00-06%3A00&max-results=7" Desperate Times Call for Desperate Democrats. The APRPEH posts discuss the connection Gov. Palin makes with the American heart and soul. Gov. Palin made a point to speak to America last night. Her words were directed to the folks who never will be on a stage in a national debate but who nonetheless have the common sense and decency to serve in the highest offices of the land. This common sense is what is being vied for in this election. Obama is trying to sell the American people that their common sense is what permits him to offer socialistic policies crowned with the righteousness of fairness. This is the core of the argument that Biden was trying to make. Gov. Palin was offering no none sense, traditional American values. She connected with the people at home. Gov. Palin unleashed her inner barracuda. Gov. Palin's last few weeks had been difficult ones. Her positive media and polling was reversed. People were questioning her. But like a serious athelete after a couple of bad games, innings, or quarters, Saracuda came fighting back, shaking off the negativity and rising to the occassion. As as the oft quoted Gen. George Patton supposedly said 'true Americans love a winner and hate a loser', Saracuda ignored the press and came started the debate with every intention to win. Yes, Americans do love a winner but will not tolerate fake claims winning. Gov. Palin's debate performance was the real thing, the real Sarah Palin, the real barracuda.

Despite Senator Biden's attempt to appear down home mentioning bars in Wilmington, an impossible to make case after three decades in the Senate, Palin looked straight at the camera and talked to the American people as if she were sitting at their kitchen table, neighbor to neighbor. Americans will respond favorably when they perceive that someone has been attacked unfairly. This is possibly why Frank Luntz's focus group and CNN's post debate poll both concur that Gov. Palin beat expectations. But to conclude she merely beat expectations does not do justice to the fact she stood on stage with a very seasoned US Senator, on an internationally broadcast VP debate, and not only held her own but went toe to toe with the Senator and landed a few really good jabs at him too. Gov. Palin was able to through direct contradiction and implied remarks make legitimate criticisms of Sen. Biden's career without looking angry and dis-respectful. Sen. Biden despite his efforts was not able to respond decisively or convincingly to this criticism. He is a career politician and looked the part. What Gov. Palin was able to accomplish was to represent a broad sweep of Americans who would like to say the same things to their Congressmen but never have the chance to say them. Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska, did not represent the nation's governors, she represented Main Street, USA. This will resonate strongly over the next few weeks.

Some of Gov. Palin's best lines include:

  • And the American workforce is the greatest in this world, with the ingenuity and the work ethic that is just entrenched in our workforce. That's a positive. That's encouragement. And that's what John McCain meant.
  • Now, Barack Obama, of course, he's pretty much only voted along his party lines. In fact, 96 percent of his votes have been solely along party line, not having that proof for the American people to know that his commitment, too, is, you know, put the partisanship, put the special interests aside, and get down to getting business done for the people of America.
  • Darn right it was the predator lenders, who tried to talk Americans into thinking that it was smart to buy a $300,000 house if we could only afford a $100,000 house. There was deception there, and there was greed and there is corruption on Wall Street. And we need to stop that.
  • One thing that Americans do at this time, also, though, is let's commit ourselves just every day American people, Joe Six Pack, hockey moms across the nation, I think we need to band together and say never again. Never will we be exploited and taken advantage of again by those who are managing our money and loaning us these dollars.
  • We do need the private sector to be able to keep more of what we earn and produce. Government is going to have to learn to be more efficient and live with less if that's what it takes to reign in the government growth that we've seen today.
  • And I may not answer the questions that either the moderator or you want to hear, but I'm going to talk straight to the American people and let them know my track record also. As mayor, every year I was in office I did reduce taxes. I eliminated personal property taxes and eliminated small business inventory taxes and as governor we suspended our state fuel tax. We did all of those things knowing that that is how our economy would be heated up.
  • Now you said recently that higher taxes or asking for higher taxes or paying higher taxes is patriotic. In the middle class of America which is where Todd and I have been all of our lives, that's not patriotic. Patriotic is saying, government, you know, you're not always the solution. In fact, too often you're the problem so, government, lessen the tax burden and on our families and get out of the way and let the private sector and our families grow and thrive and prosper. An increased tax formula that Barack Obama is proposing in addition to nearly a trillion dollars in new spending that he's proposing is the backwards way of trying to grow our economy.
  • He's proposing a $5,000 tax credit for families so that they can get out there and they can purchase their own health care coverage. That's a smart thing to do. That's budget neutral. That doesn't cost the government anything as opposed to Barack Obama's plan to mandate health care coverage and have universal government run program and unless you're pleased with the way the federal government has been running anything lately, I don't think that it's going to be real pleasing for Americans to consider health care being taken over by the feds.
  • And that's why Tillerson at Exxon and Mulva at ConocoPhillips (NYSE:COP) , bless their hearts, they're doing what they need to do, as corporate CEOs, but they're not my biggest fans, because what I had to do up there in Alaska was to break up a monopoly up there and say, you know, the people are going to come first and we're going to make sure that we have value given to the people of Alaska with those resources.
  • There is not. And how long have I been at this, like five weeks? So there hasn't been a whole lot that I've promised, except to do what is right for the American people, put government back on the side of the American people, stop the greed and corruption on Wall Street. {turning a potential liability into an asset}
  • It's a nonsensical position that we are in when we have domestic supplies of energy all over this great land. And East Coast politicians who don't allow energy-producing states like Alaska to produce these, to tap into them, and instead we're relying on foreign countries to produce for us.
  • Barack Obama and Senator Biden, you've said no to everything in trying to find a domestic solution to the energy crisis that we're in. You even called drilling -- safe, environmentally-friendly drilling offshore as raping the outer continental shelf.
  • Your plan is a white flag of surrender in Iraq and that is not what our troops need to hear today, that's for sure. And it's not what our nation needs to be able to count on. You guys opposed the surge. The surge worked. Barack Obama still can't admit the surge works.
  • Now, you said regarding Senator McCain's military policies there, Senator Biden, that you supported a lot of these things. In fact, you said in fact that you wanted to run, you'd be honored to run with him on the ticket. That's an indication I think of some of the support that you had at least until you became the VP pick here.
  • You also said that Barack Obama was not ready to be commander in chief. And I know again that you opposed the move he made to try to cut off funding for the troops and I respect you for that. I don't know how you can defend that position now but I know that you know especially with your son in the National Guard and I have great respect for your family also and the honor that you show our military. Barack Obama though, another story there. Anyone I think who can cut off funding for the troops after promising not to is another story. {talk of cutting off troop funding is homerun rhetoric}
  • Israel is in jeopardy of course when we're dealing with Ahmadinejad as a leader of Iran. Iran claiming that Israel as he termed it, a stinking corpse, a country that should be wiped off the face of the earth. Now a leader like Ahmadinejad who is not sane or stable when he says things like that is not one whom we can allow to acquire nuclear energy, nuclear weapons.
  • No and Dr. Henry Kissinger especially. I had a good conversation with him recently. And he shared with me his passion for diplomacy. And that's what John McCain and I would engage in also. But again, with some of these dictators who hate America and hate what we stand for, with our freedoms, our democracy, our tolerance, our respect for women's rights, those who would try to destroy what we stand for cannot be met with just sitting down on a presidential level as Barack Obama had said he would be willing to do. That is beyond bad judgment. That is dangerous.
  • That's not what we're doing there. We're fighting terrorists, and we're securing democracy, and we're building schools for children there so that there is opportunity in that country, also. There will be a big difference there, and we will win in -- in Afghanistan, also.
  • Oh, yeah, it's so obvious I'm a Washington outsider. And someone just not used to the way you guys operate. Because here you voted for the war and now you oppose the war. You're one who says, as so many politicians do, I was for it before I was against it or vice- versa. Americans are craving that straight talk and just want to know, hey, if you voted for it, tell us why you voted for it and it was a war resolution.
  • And you had supported John McCain's military strategies pretty adamantly until this race and you had opposed very adamantly Barack Obama's military strategy, including cutting off funding for the troops that attempt all through the primary.
  • Just everyday working class Americans saying, you know, government, just get out of my way. If you're going to do any harm and mandate more things on me and take more of my money and income tax and business taxes, you're going to have a choice in just a few weeks here on either supporting a ticket that wants to create jobs and bolster our economy and win the war or you're going to be supporting a ticket that wants to increase taxes, which ultimately kills jobs, and is going to hurt our economy.
  • Say it ain't so, Joe, there you go again pointing backwards again. You preferenced your whole comment with the Bush administration. Now doggone it, let's look ahead and tell Americans what we have to plan to do for them in the future. You mentioned education and I'm glad you did. I know education you are passionate about with your wife being a teacher for 30 years, and god bless her. Her reward is in heaven, right? I say, too, with education, America needs to be putting a lot more focus on that and our schools have got to be really ramped up in terms of the funding that they are deserving. Teachers needed to be paid more. I come from a house full of school teachers. My grandma was, my dad who is in the audience today, he's a schoolteacher, had been for many years. My brother, who I think is the best schoolteacher in the year, and here's a shout-out to all those third graders at Gladys Wood Elementary School, you get extra credit for watching the debate.
  • Education credit in American has been in some sense in some of our states just accepted to be a little bit lax and we have got to increase the standards. No Child Left Behind was implemented. It's not doing the job though. We need flexibility in No Child Left Behind. We need to put more of an emphasis on the profession of teaching. We need to make sure that education in either one of our agendas, I think, absolute top of the line. My kids as public school participants right now, it's near and dear to my heart. I'm very, very concerned about where we're going with education and we have got to ramp it up and put more attention in that arena.
  • But it wasn't just that experience tapped into, it was my connection to the heartland of America. Being a mom, one very concerned about a son in the war, about a special needs child, about kids heading off to college, how are we going to pay those tuition bills? About times and Todd and our marriage in our past where we didn't have health insurance and we know what other Americans are going through as they sit around the kitchen table and try to figure out how are they going to pay out-of-pocket for health care? We've been there also so that connection was important.
  • And we are to be that shining city on a hill, as President Reagan so beautifully said, that we are a beacon of hope and that we are unapologetic here. We are not perfect as a nation. But together, we represent a perfect ideal. And that is democracy and tolerance and freedom and equal rights. Those things that we stand for that can be put to good use as a force for good in this world.
  • We have got to win the wars. We have got to get our economy back on track. We have got to not allow the greed and corruption on Wall Street anymore.
  • And we have not got to allow the partisanship that has really been entrenched in Washington, D.C., no matter who's been in charge. When the Republicans were in charge, I didn't see a lot of progress there, either. When the Democrats, either, though, this last go- around for the last two years.
  • Change is coming. And John McCain is the leader of that reform.
  • You do what I did as governor, and you appoint people regardless of party affiliation, Democrats, independents, Republicans. You -- you walk the walk; you don't just talk the talk.
  • And even in my own family, it's a very diverse family. And we have folks of all political persuasion in there, also, so I've grown up just knowing that, you know, at the end of the day, as long as we're all working together for the greater good, it's going to be OK.
  • But the policies and the proposals have got to speak for themselves, also. And, again, voters on November 4th are going to have that choice to either support a ticket that supports policies that create jobs.
  • You do that by lowering taxes on American workers and on our businesses. And you build up infrastructure, and you rein in government spending, and you make our -- our nation energy independent.
  • Or you support a ticket that supports policies that will kill jobs by increasing taxes. And that's what the track record shows, is a desire to increase taxes, increase spending, a trillion-dollar spending proposal that's on the table. That's going to hurt our country, and saying no to energy independence. Clear choices on November 4th.
  • I want to assure you that John McCain and I, we're going to fight for America. We're going to fight for the middle-class, average, everyday American family like mine.
  • I've been there. I know what the hurts are. I know what the challenges are. And, thank God, I know what the joys are, too, of living in America. We are so blessed. And I've always been proud to be an American. And so has John McCain.
  • We have to fight for our freedoms, also, economic and our national security freedoms.
  • It was Ronald Reagan who said that freedom is always just one generation away from extinction. We don't pass it to our children in the bloodstream; we have to fight for it and protect it, and then hand it to them so that they shall do the same, or we're going to find ourselves spending our sunset years telling our children and our children's children about a time in America, back in the day, when men and women were free.
  • We will fight for it, and there is only one man in this race who has really ever fought for you, and that's Senator John McCain.

Now, I do have some concerns, ones which pale in comparison to Obama-Biden, but concerns still.

A two-state solution is the solution. And Secretary Rice, having recently met with leaders on one side or the other there, also, still in these waning days of the Bush administration, trying to forge that peace, and that needs to be done, and that will be top of an agenda item, also, under a McCain-Palin administration.

Israel is our strongest and best ally in the Middle East. We have got to assure them that we will never allow a second Holocaust, despite, again, warnings from Iran and any other country that would seek to destroy Israel, that that is what they would like to see.

We will support Israel. A two-state solution, building our embassy, also, in Jerusalem, those things that we look forward to being able to accomplish, with this peace-seeking nation, and they have a track record of being able to forge these peace agreements.

They succeeded with Jordan. They succeeded with Egypt. I'm sure that we're going to see more success there, also.

It's got to be a commitment of the United States of America, though. And I can promise you, in a McCain-Palin administration, that commitment is there to work with our friends in Israel.

Our "friends in Israel" are those that know that negotiating with a terrorist in a suit is no different than negotiating with a terrorist in a keifiah. This 'two state solution' talk and wink and nod to Condi Rice does not make me happy. And while this is a debate and Sen. McCain is officially on record supporting a 'two state solution', this talk must be measured against the remarks Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin have previously made concerning the so-called 'peace process'. And this logic goes back to the APRPEH post which examined the two Presidential candidates and their opinions of why they believe Israel is important and why McCain discussing 'two states' and Obama discussing 'two states' is a very different thing. The short version is that Sen. McCain and President Bush justify their support for Israel because it is the morally right thing to do, and religiously correct thing to do. For Obama its about expediency http://aprpeh.blogspot.com/2008/05/mccain-redeemed-rubin-exposed-obama.html McCain Redeemed, Rubin Exposed, Obama Still the Favorite of Terrorists and http://aprpeh.blogspot.com/2008/05/two-campaigns-two-candidates-one-israel.html  Two Campaigns, Two Candidates, One Israel

More debate coverage links below:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YWY5NTRkYjFlZWIwZDBlNWRiMzhjZTQyY2Y0MDZlMWQ= Palin’s Triumph editors-NRO

http://www.nypost.com/seven/10032008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/the_veep_debate__shes_back__131933.htm 
THE VEEP DEBATE: SHE'S BACK! Rich Lowry-NY Post

http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=2150  transcript and video link here

Why "#dontgo" Matters

Saturday's print edition of The Orlando Sentinel featured an AP article with the headline "Stuck on gas, Congress heads home".   At the very end of the article, a whole two sentences were devoted to late Friday's Republican protest on the floor of the house over failure to handle important energy legislation.   Two sentences.  A swing voter in Congressman Tom Feeney's district may not even make it that far in the story, seeing only a headline that Congress has -yet again- done nothing.    

Yet in Washington, the feeling is different.  The Twitterers among us (myself included) are giddy like Chris Matthews at an Obama rally, thrilled that technology was able to give word of the revolution to the masses.  Members of Congress connected directly with "followers".   Drudge made it his top headline.  The whole affair has been given the tag "#dontgo" on Twitter, drawing on the way in which conferences and major events get referenced using the micro-blogging site.  For us political junkies who have watched too much West Wing, the idea of a Congress gone rogue in defense of the American people is too romantic, too fantastic not to spend the weekend gabbing about.

So, then, the question arises - to what extent is "#dontgo" actually going to move voters?  If Congressional Republicans do something exciting and important but nobody really knows about it, does it matter? (If a tree falls in a forest, and all that jazz.)

My answer is an emphatic "yes".

Ending Racial Preferences This November

Ballot Initiative Alert from AZ, CO, and NE:

Three states have certified inititiaves for the November 4th ballot that would ban racial preferences and ethnic discrimination. Arizona, Colorado, and Nebraska have "Civil Rights Initiatives" on the ballot that would end preferential treatment based on race for public employment, public education, and public contracting. Predictably, lawsuits have been filed by affirmative action proponents to keep these measures off the ballot.

The American Civil Rights Institute, founded by Ward Connerly and Dusty Rhodes, have sponsored and helped set up these statewide campaigns in Arizona, Colorado, and Nebraska. They have been similarly successful in California, where it passed with 54% of the vote in 1996, and Michigan, where it passed with 58% of the vote in 2006.

Visit this blog which promotes Super Tuesday for Civil Rights.

A Wall Street Journal op-ed from late April by Harry Stein makes an interesting point:

"Though the racial-preference ballot measures are officially nonpartisan, they stand to make a dramatic impact on the fall campaign. With the question of racial preferences effectively nationalized by its presence on multiple state ballots, neither party's presidential candidate will be able to evade the issue. While this might pose a dilemma for Mr. McCain -- who, like most Republicans, has long shied away from the topic and might worry about jeopardizing Hispanic support -- it could be catastrophic for Mr. Obama. As Mr. Connerly says, 'This is a guy who's tried awfully hard for a long time not to appear what he is -- just another left-winger who supports preferences.'"

I'm not sure that Stein's electoral analysis works. Did the marriage amendments and ballot initiatives create increased social-conservative turnout in certain states in the past to help presidential and statewide congressional candidates? Sure. I'm not so sure that the civil rights initiatives will do the same, because it will probably galvanize both sides of the affirmative action crowd equally. But if Stein's analysis is correct, helping to compete in a swing state like Colorado and securing a traditionally red state like Nebraska where Obama is playing small-ball for it's divided electoral votes.

In response to the multiple posts on racism and Jesse Helms: ending racial preferences is something that could be a galavinizing issue for right the next generation of both "Spring-Aheads" and "Fall-Backers", as described by John Zogby. I believe that the next generation of "super-voters" of all ethnicities, both over- and under-represented, will want to move beyond affirmative action.

Public institutions of higher education have been the focus, but the initiatives go in the right direction by targeting public employment and contracting. When it comes to education, socioeconomically-based preference programs might be the answer. Even some African-Americans are starting to support the end of racial preference programs, like Professor Stephen Carter of Yale, who said the following in a NTY op-ed on Sunday:

"University affirmative action programs, whatever their benefits, are no remedy for the problems of the black poor. Perhaps this is why Barack Obama has questioned publicly whether his children should benefit from them and also why leading voices on the black left — Cornel West comes to mind — have proposed that college admissions programs give preferential consideration based on economic class."

BOTTOM LINE: Support the Civil Rights Initiatives in AZ, CO, and NE. And start thinking about how the next conservative movement can create a broad coalition that moves beyond race.

- MM

Reaching the "Equinox Voters"

Before the Independence Day weekend, I received my emailed version of Campaigns and Elections Maganize, and noticed an interesting article by John Zogby, CEO of the namesake polling firm. Here are some snippets of how he describes swing voters throughout recent electoral history:

We're also working to identify the hallmarks of two new kinds of voters. We call them the Equinox Voters, because they fall into two distinct groups: the "Spring-Aheads" and the "Fall-Backers." The Spring-Aheads are the economic winners in America today, who largely reside in regions that have turned themselves around. These are areas growing in diversity and in the population of the "creative class." And, for the Democrats, these areas are the antidote to other areas mired in economic decline.Those are the areas populated by many Fall-Backers, who have suffered from changes in the U.S. economy over the past 15 years. They have not been able to recover from the movement from a manufacturing to an information economy.

This might be true now, but is it true for past generations? The Spring-Ahead and Fall-Back explanation works with the economy we have now. But what about economic shifts we've seen in the past? Have we seen similar and parallel political shifts? (I haven't started to read the Douthat and Salam book, but so far I've heard that they provide a good historical context. Maybe I'll find the answer there.)

The Equinox voters carry with them a political irony. The Fall-Backers used to be Democrats, because Democrats are supposed to be the party of the people, of the working class. But now, they are identifying in greater numbers with Republican ideas and proposals. Meanwhile, the Spring-Aheads would traditionally be Republicans-entrepreneurs and burgeoning voters on the move.

So what's behind this flip? What's making the Republicans more attractive to the economic losers and the Democrats the party of the economic winners? With an economy that's still in transition, Republicans have still not quite adjusted. In many ways, this is old economy vs. new economy.

I've seen past posts on the pseudo-populism that some politicians like Huckabee and Pawlenty have been making to help transition the Republican Party to attract Fall-Backers, and I've seen other posts that look at the enormous amount of money coming out of Silicon Valley to the Barack Obama campaign and to other Democrat candidates.

In the short term: How can the next conservative movement continue to attract the Fall-Backers? We saw some cues from the Clinton campaign in their late surge of Appalachian state victories, but her campaign was based on the same old liberal rhetoric of trying to stick it to the big guy. I remember Pat Buchannan once saying that the three biggest fears in a democracy are Big Business, Big Labor, and Big Government. Attacking big business has been the M.O. of the Democrats, and attacking big government has been the M.O of conservatives. Attacking big labor has not worked as effectively as we would like. What else can we do?

In the long term: Can the next conservative movement build a coalition of Spring-Aheads and Fall-Backers in an "information economy" or "new economy"? What message can we send, without being inconsistent or "flip-floppy", that will attract both groups?

Or maybe we should critique Zogby's analysis of what he considers the historical swing voters. Maybe it has nothing to do with the economy, stupid. Or does it?

- MM

NRCC Audit: It’s everyone else’s fault

The  National Republican Congressional Committee's internal audit, which was leaked to Politico last Friday, is required reading for anyone who cares about the state of the Congressional GOP.  Politico’s main takeaway was the audit’s advice to “avoid the party brand,” but they missed the deeper problem the audit revealed – that the NRCC’s head is still firmly planted in the sand. 

The NRCC is one of the party’s cornerstone political institutions and it’s badly in need of reform.  After such a disastrous ’06 cycle and the debacle of three straight special election losses in very solid Republican districts it’s clear that the committee needs a serious house cleaning.  The tragedy is that while the NRCC has shown in the past it knows how to win, they're now badly, perhaps fatally, off course.  This audit shouldn't inspire confidence in incumbents or challengers.

The NRCC’s audit makes three key claims…

1)  It’s not our fault, the candidates were flawed!

2)  It’s not our fault, the candidates’ tactics and strategies were bad!

3)  It’s not our fault, traditional Republican messages just didn’t work!

…and none of these claims hold up:

Thank You Father Pfleger

Cross-Posted at Illinois Conservative

If America is spared the devastating effects of a socialist administration presided over by Barack Obama we have the Trinity United Church of Christ to thank.  By now, unless you’ve been on an extended vacation off the planet, you have probably heard and seen the video clip of Father Pfleger’s Sunday morning sermon at Obama’s church often enough to have memorized the content.  

For those who may not be familiar with Father Pfleger, he is a long time social activist and Catholic Priest, and close friend of Louis Farrakhan, Jeremiah Wright and Barack Obama.  He has been Pastor of Saint Sabina Church on Chicago’s south side since 1981.  The Archdiocese has attempted several times to transfer him to other parishes, as is the custom in the Catholic Church.  Each time, he has been able to organize protests by his parishioners resulting in the Cardinal setting aside Church policy and allowing him to stay on at St. Sabina.

In many ways his career has been more entwined with the career of Barack Obama than Jeremiah Wright’s has.  He worked closely with Obama when Obama was a community organizer in Chicago and they have maintained the relationship ever since.  Pfleger has contributed to Obama’s campaigns and Obama has directed “earmarks” to his church programs for years.  Between 1995 and 2001 Pfleger contributed a total of $1500 to Obama’s various campaigns.  In January 2001 Obama announced $225,000 in state grants to St. Sabina projects.

As a guest speaker at Trinity United Church of Christ on Sunday, Rev. Pfleger ridiculed Senator Hillary Clinton, accusing her of feeling entitled to the Presidency because she was “Bill’s” wife and because she was white.  In a performance reminiscence of a “Saturday Night Live” comedy skit, he mimicked Hillary’s tearful response to a supporter’s question at a campaign rally, saying, “"When Hillary was crying, and people said that was put on, I really don't believe it was put on, I really believe that she just always thought this is mine. I'm Bill's wife, I'm white and this is mine…”

In the aftermath of Pfleger’s sermon Obama supporters have been scrambling to moderate the effects on Obama’s campaign.  From accusations of “guilt by association” to drawing a moral equivalency to McCain’s support from Pastor Hagee, they are regurgitating all the excuses used to explain away Obama’s twenty years as a member of Jeremiah Wright’s church.  This episode, however, is more problematic for Obama than any of the others for a number of reasons.

Using a candidate’s religious views or the theological doctrines of a candidate’s church as fodder in a negative political campaign is a dangerous precedent.  So are “cherry-picking” statements from a pastor’s sermons when those statements are based on theology, whether or not they are politically correct by today’s community standards.  If the practice of demanding that a candidate disassociate himself from any pastor or church where politically incorrect language has ever been used in a sermon, it will eventually be impossible for anyone who regularly practices their religion to run for public office.

Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Hindus, Moslems, Buddhists or any other religious group have many doctrines that, when enunciated from the pulpit, could be considered offensive to those outside that religious belief.  Attempting to apply politically correct standards to religious thought is detrimental, not only to the religion involved but to society at large.  Furthermore, when you prevent someone from speaking their mind by political correctness, it is not only contradictory to the American principle of freedom of speech; it also prevents an accurate understanding of other peoples’ true character.

Jeremiah Wright and Michael Pfleger are perfect examples of this point.  Had they not been exercising their freedom of speech or if they had been careful to speak only in politically correct terms we would have no knowledge of their true beliefs.  Having said that let me point out that the sermons under consideration are not theological.  Instead, they are racist and political with little or no valid theological content, unlike those by Hagee and Falwell used as a moral equivalent by Obama supporters.  As unpleasant and ill advised as the statements by Hagee and Falwell may be, they are grounded in the theological doctrine of God’s sovereignty over the affairs of man and nature.  Those by Wright and Pfleger are grounded in racial hatred and a hatred for the American culture and social structure.

It is their right to believe whatever they choose and to share that belief with anyone who chooses to listen.  In fact, I am grateful they shared them with the world.  Now we know where we stand with them and can react accordingly.  In addition, their sermons give us an insight into the character of the man many would like to see as President of the United States.  You might ask, how can that be, since he was not even present and has denounced the offensive remarks by both Wright and Pfleger?

At this point the politically correct comment would be “I’m sure Obama does not agree with their views”.  This is the accepted caveat used by almost all commentators, columnist and talking heads in the media.  The truthful comment, at least for me, is “I’m sure he does agree with the worldviews expressed by these preachers“.

The worldview expressed in their sermons is the motivating factor that underlies the profession of community organizing of which Obama often boasts.   It is the belief that members of a community are victimized by unjust actions and oppression by those in power that forms the basis for community organizing efforts.  It is also compatible with the socialist’s worldview of what they believe to be the universal injustices in the capitalist system.

Furthermore, the enthusiastic reaction from the congregation to Pfleger’s sermon, so evident in the video, indicates this type of message is not unusual for this particular church but rather is the expected fare.  Obama’s twenty-year membership and his continued loyalty to the church should be proof positive to any unbiased observer that he is in agreement with its views.  It does not matter what he says or does at this point.  The opportunity to disassociate himself from Wright and the Church has passed long ago for anyone who is truly concerned.

These latest revelations may affect Obama’s chances in the general election but they are not likely to prevent him from becoming the Democratic nominee.  I heard someone today opine that the Democratic Party’s rules committee meeting this weekend would probably switch their support from Obama to Clinton in response to the growing controversy.  That is not likely.  The socialist dominated base and leadership of the Democratic Party has invested too much time and money in the Obama candidacy to change course now.

This is just the type of bombshell Hillary has been waiting for and it could supply her with the incentive to keep her candidacy alive until the convention.  Whether it will do any good or not remains to be seen.  Obama has been groomed and promoted by the leadership of the socialist movement for most of his adult life for just this moment, and they are not likely to pass up the opportunity to usher in a socialist era in America with his election.

 

If after the Denver convention Obama is still their candidate we will know for sure the Democratic Party is really the Democratic Socialist Party.  If he is elected President in November, we will know the American people are ready for a democratic socialist government.  If he is rejected by the voters we should all be thankful to Unity Church, Jeremiah Wright and Michael Pfleger for waking up the American people.  

 

 

Syndicate content