Obama: Good Times Are Here Again

On Friday, Obama touted the jobs report as great news. As if we just don’t know how good the economy is. He took the opportunity to remind us because we dummies don’t understand too good. He has to explain it, over and over, until we get the message.

He told us how the unemployment, now below 5%, is excellent news. He talked up the economy, while at the same time the stock market was going south. It’s all good.

“The United States of America right now has the strongest, most durable economy in the world. I know that’s still inconvenient for Republican stump speeches as their doom and despair tour plays in New Hampshire. I guess you cannot please everybody,” Obama said.

The unemployment rate supposedly dropped below 5%, but 51% of people still see economic conditions as poor. Must be a tough sell, not just to Republicans.

When you fill in the voids and blanks in Obama’s rhetoric you come to some strange conclusions. We know that when people’s unemployment runs out or they can’t find work and come off the roles, they don’t count.

From the Heritage’s Daily Signal:

The “real” unemployment rate in January remained unchanged from December at 9.9 percent. Almost six million Americans worked part-time in January but would have accepted full-time jobs if they could have found them, according to the bureau.

So is Obama saying that when their unemployment runs out, and they still can’t find work, that it’s a good thing? Yes. He boasts about the decline in numbers when more people are not counted. Way to go, Obama.

It’s no surprise, Obama can ignore the undercurrent in America that is not happy with his job performance or the effects his policies have on America. Now he whistles past the unemployed and underemployed people in a similar fashion. Then he calls it good news.

RightRing | Bullright

Debate summary

In NH Republican debate, they ask what would you do about Syria, ISIS, Libya, Iran?
And interesting that all are products of the Obama administration.

Dems debate, by contrast, is who is more progressive than the other socialist?

Haven’t we seen enough results and consequences of progressive government?

RightRing | Bullright

Debate theatrics? Live or Memorex

I held off and thought about the last debate and let it soak in, but I just wanted to throw this out there.

Now I still wonder if maybe that performance by CNBC may have been planned that way? I mean it is sort of odd that it was supposed to be on the economy, which happens to be Republicans strong suit. Taxation and budget as well. I can almost hear someone say “we don’t want to make them look good.”

It was on the heels of the Benghazi hearing with Hillary. Paybacks you know. Then I wonder if they’d stoop that low to create an ordeal over it and have theatrics so they could blame it all on Republicans? Well, I never put anything past the Left or the media.

Would they think it through to consider hurting themselves and counting it worth it just to attack the Republicans? They still got the ad revenue, either way. Is it possible this thing was planned? Maybe not our whole reaction it got but in a way I am starting to think there was some premeditation there. No candidate in particular, but toward Republicans generally to set them back.

They knew there would be another NBC debate, and this could have been a setup for that? I can’t say for sure but it is a question I consider. A hit job or a mishap? Either one take your pick, same result.

Organized chaos

The description coming out of the media about Republicans is utter “chaos” or fractured body. Well, Chris Wallace described it as chaos when just last Sunday he lampooned Jason Chaffetz, who is one of the candidates for speaker. He hit him with every bomb-throwing question he could think of, namely government shutdown. Sure it was an attempt to skewer McCarthy’s competition. It was obvious to me anyway.

Now that McCarthy withdraws his name, they call it chaos and fractured. Most of the conservatives know the establishment does not give up any ground without a fight. And it has to be a formidable resistance to make that fight effective. That’s just the way it is. So these can be seen as significant but small victories for conservatives. Does it look chaotic? Does it look pretty? No, but it is what it is. I’d worry more if things were going smooth as butter — that would send a message.

I’d call it constructive chaos, if anything. Even if we haven’t seen real positive results yet, I still see it as constructive. If you want to believe in the process, you could say that.

So McCarthy steps aside and withdraws his name, to conservative applause. He then tweeted his kudos for Ryan, who also supported him. The last thing to do is: if we don’t want him, we don’t want him endorsing anyone else. (that’s the part establishment usually don’t get.) Now McCarthy tries to hang on to salvage his majority leader job.

So it’s only really chaos or turmoil — “in complete disarray” according to Chris Wallace — to media and to Democrats. Dems don’t like not knowing something, or not being able to choose for Republicans. Nor do they like this many candidates in the presidential race to confuse them.

The big problem, of course, is when you announce the person who succeeds Boehner, they will descend like vultures on him. Then the person’s 2016 election suddenly blows up into a mega race, with mega money. You have to wonder if any congressman wants that to happen as he is rolls into the campaign? Boehner ran from a safe seat in Ohio. Still it makes one’s race a target for the Democrats — something they are good at.

Virginia Congressman, Dave Brat, has initiated some general principles as something a new leader should sign on to. (facebook)

With that in mind, here are some key commitments that new leadership should be willing to make to ensure the American people are given a seat at the table, and that we are serving their best interests – not the wishes of Washington’s political class.

— Oversee a budget process that leads to a balanced budget, and enforce it through regular order.
— Facilitate free market reforms that replace Obamacare and get the federal government out of the health insurance mandate business.
— Make border security a top priority, and ensure that amnesty for illegal immigrants is off the table.
— Promote a limited government agenda, and encourage committees to look for ways to get government out of the way.
— Rein in presidential overreach and enforce the Constitutional separation of powers.
— Require bills brought to the floor have the support of the majority of the Republican conference.
— Ensure that members are allowed to vote in line with their conscience and with their constituents without fear of retaliation by leadership.

Now that is a start. What they call chaos can be a good thing, the way it works in markets.

Common Core word games coming soon

We probably cannot expect much change in Common Core policies, but it seems we can expect them to play word games about Common Core. This new poll survey was released describing different nuances in results depending on the wording of the questions. The wording was regarding varied substitutions that replaced Common Core like “standards”.

And guess what they found? Yes, they could fool some people into supporting it. A small amount, but hey. So what do you think they are going to do? You guessed it. I guess it was not a very tough question, or answer. And it’s not a tough decision for big-government elitists.

Republicans hate the words ‘Common Core’ more than they hate education standards

By Jason Russell • 8/18/15 | Washington Examiner

How much do Republicans hate Common Core? It depends how you ask them.

The results of the 2015 Education Next Poll were released Tuesday, with three groups of respondents answering questions about Common Core.

One group of respondents was asked simply whether they support or oppose Common Core. Half of the Republicans in the group opposed Common Core, with 30 percent in favor. Before asking if respondents support or oppose Common Core, the question explained, “In the last few years states have been deciding whether or not to use the Common Core, which are standards for reading and math that are the same across the states.”

Continue reading

Actually the emphasis seemed to be not in winning people over to it, which is practically impossible, but in toning down the fierce opposition to it. So they know we don’t like it but can they make us not like it less, based on careful wording they use? They’ll be going for the gold on that, I’m sure. You can bank on that change until Common Core is hardly recognizable, in speech at least, dumbing down the name They didn’t poll it for nothing.

What I’d like to know is just who are these 30% of people who always seem to support or sympathize with this stuff, no matter how bad it is? If it were a disease we would have mapped the dna of it by now — and probably had some treatment for it. We are already used to our politicians playing word games with us. I guess anything Federal Government related just naturally follows suit. As the article said, they cannot reverse the opposition to it based on removal of the word. But if your thing is bureaucracy, get what support you can and let progressives do the rest. Sounds like their plan.

Hillary trails on campaign trail

This should make hillary spew her morning coffee. Oh, should but like Obama she’s too arrogant and in denial. Perhaps if her voters, the ones who don’t trust her either, wake up to say this is not what we were promised and what we signed on for?

Poll: Hillary Clinton in trouble in three key swing states

By Kelly Cohen – 7/22/15 | Washington Examiner

Hillary Clinton is trailing three leading Republican candidates in three key swing states.

In Colorado, Iowa and Virginia, the former secretary of state trails former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker in hypothetical general election matchups, according to new Quinnipiac University polls released Wednesday.

Against Bush, Clinton trails 36 percent to 41 percent in Colorado, 36 percent to 42 percent in Iowa and 39 percent to 42 percent in Virginia.

more Washington Examiner

Commentary from the gallery

What we need with Hillary is something like the misery index for the economy. My theory was the Dems didn’t care about the trust factor. They vote for them anyway, almost in spite of it — maybe because of it. So I don’t hold my breath for distrust to take her down, alone. Must be more.

The Dems must be made to feel as depressed and pathetic as they really are for the country to get anywhere. But it is quite hard to give people a conscience when they have none. If they can just see the pile of manure they put in the middle of the room, and take in the aroma, maybe just maybe we can get some reaction out of them.

This is sort of like chem trails on planes. You can make all kinds of explanations or theories about them but one cannot deny seeing them with their own eyes. Seeing Hillary flounder in the polls is obvious to us. Can Dems make a good enough explanation for the cause to shake their confidence? Trustability does come to bear, but there is much more with Hillary. She is as polarizing and disconnected from normal, working class people as possible. It’s obvious. But she tries to mock CEOS and all while she is virtually in bed with them.

Will Soros pull the plug on Heiress Hillary at some point? Will he leave her to whither in the vine? Will the very support she is tied to finally say Basta Hillary, enough?

A case against her run.

Another question on Hillary remains. Why would she really want to run anyway? I’m being serious. She and Bubba — the Tookie of the charity world — have a pretty good racket er operation. Why does she really need to run? The answer of course is, you know, power and influence. The influence racket requires the power center to really have massive affect.

It worked great when she was Sec of State. If not for running for president, and her aspirations for the White House, they could be very comfortable. No hassles, raking in their piles of doe from all their connections. It is the influential political connection they need. But they still have that, Bubba has proved hugely popular, so is Hill for that matter. They could do well outside, like most institutionally connected liberals. And they would/do make it a family business. It crosses political lines. So why not just be happy in that high life they’ve extorted and built on the backs of America and its politics? (or the little people)

It’s a very lucrative racket for the grifters.

They also have their media connections and influence. What is lacking? Not much. No, the only possible reason — take altruism out — is that she wants access to the reins of power to get the greatest possible bang for the bucks. She really doesn’t care about people or anyone else. She thinks as long as she (or they) are at the center, then everyone else will be happy. Or as long as she is eating on the right side of the mushroom — like Alice in Wonderland — everything else automatically falls in place. Life will be good, people happy, the world comfortable in its chaotic bliss. Long as they benefit personally, what’s not to like?

Dear Jeb Letter

Dear Jeb,

I thought you had that nomination process all under control? You raised all that money and timed your announcement right. So what if you had to drown out other announcements of lesser candidates. I thought you were right on schedule, according to plan. Dubya is so looking forward to your run. You even have Mama Bush on your side now, after initially saying no more Bushes.

So what happened? A little billionaire came out and stole your thunder? But you were looking so good, even lost some weight. You raised tons of money. And yet you let a little old rich guy wreck your bandwagon on the beltway? I thought you were a little smarter than that. Now you are going to have to work and spend some of that money to defend yourself against attacks. Hey, that wasn’t part of the plan, now was it? Your Radio Flyer wagon got stuck in a traffic jam. How’s that going to look at the family reunion? You won’t be having the carefree wind in your hair photo-ops in daddy’s speedboat this summer. You might have to defend yourself. Do you think you can… I mean without getting ticked off the way you do?

Heck, you can hardly plan early how you are going to contrast yourself with Hillary when you got this train wreck to deal with right now. You still have to figure out all those differences. I know there are a lot of people that really would like to help you right now but, frankly, we are a bit concerned about your prospects — what with your waffling and positioning and such. You didn’t want to have to run in the current issues, and thought yourself above getting mired and drawn into recent political debates on issues. I guess you were surprised, uh? You didn’t want to get down into the fray on important events and say weaken your chances, but it looks like you did. Your nose was so far up in the air you didn’t see what was going on right in front of you.

So all that in mind, remember the big donations your were expecting? Well, maybe don’t count on all those just yet. Let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Besides, you haven’t even done the first debate yet. That’s right, Jeb, only the first one with plenty more. I don’t know about you but a lot of things can happen in debates. You might want to compare notes with Rick Perry on that. In fact, a lot can happen between debates too, depending on what you might say. It might be best if people hold off on, you know, rushing into the deep end too fast. Let’s all just take our time here, maybe take some time to think about things, clear the air.

Look on the plus side, Jeb, how many more people could possibly jump into this race? And say hello to Christie for me.

Your friend still,

Con-science.

 

PS: maybe go get yourself a pint of Chunky Monkey and do some soul searching.
I’ll be in touch.

RightRing | Bullright

Can’t eat your lunch and hate it too

Racist Republicans Hate Children

By Nate Jackson · Jul. 8, 2015| Patriot Post

“GOP has knives out for school lunch rules,” headlines The Hill. “First lady Michelle Obama’s signature school lunch regulations are … a pillar of the first lady’s initiative to curb childhood obesity in the United States,” The Hill informs us. And who could be against healthy kids? Or the first lady? Evil Republicans, that’s who. Never mind that top-down regulation virtually never works, or that kids universally hate the new lunches to the point that schools are dropping them and/or demanding changes. The bottom line is that the 2010 Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act (HHFKA) expires on Sept. 30, and Republicans are holding hearings to determine if it’s worth more than the $3 billion already spent to dump unwanted food in the trash. In 2014, Michelle lectured, “The last thing that we can afford to do right now is play politics with our kids’ health.” But playing politics is the name of the game. The first lady — an honorary and not official position, by the way — can’t federalize school lunches and then insist it’s not political.

Someone tell them that anything with the word free in the title is going to be very expensive…3 billion. Like the Affordable Health Care Act had nothing affordable about it. Even getting it passed was expensive without the cost of defending it to SCOTUS.

I realize it is “hunger-free,” and the hunger explodes when kids hate the food. See everything is backwards from their claims. It’s the law of opposite effects. The Lunch Czar never learned about that before usurping the school lunch program.

“The last thing that we can afford to do right now is play politics with our kids’ health.” But playing politics with it is what she and they are doing, the first thing they did.

The Hope Block

From of all places, the Daily Beast is reporting the distrust within the black community in one of the most traditionally Democrat areas, Chicago’s O Block.

A pastor on the South Side is asking Republicans to talk to his flock after what he says are 50 years of disappointment from the other party.
CHICAGO — It is difficult to imagine a less likely GOP presidential campaign stop than O Block.

After all, it’s the most dangerous stretch of Martin Luther King Jr. Drive in Chicago and one of the toughest territories in the city.

But if Republicans stand a chance of chipping away at Democrats’ dominance over the black vote in this city and elsewhere, it might be something to consider. (More>)

And its hard to imagine this report coming from a more unexpected source. Their disenchantment can no longer be swept under the rug?

So far Rand Paul is the only one taking them up on the offer to Republican candidates to campaign there. What is interesting is the source. Maybe it is cause for hope in areas Democrats consider Republicans persona non gratae? Seems worth a shot to Rand Paul.

Could the community be finally getting tired of the same old meat-grinder politics that leave them wondering what they are supporting long after the elections? With the conditions of the city and the recent crime waves, it would make sense to look for different leadership.

Even more interesting than the message is the messenger, a pastor in the community. Is there a chance for some change? Some will call it wishful thinking but maybe political dysfunction and plantation politics do have limits after all?

Maybe they are really getting fed up with Democrats’ hit-and-run politics?

Presidential posturing: candidates and gene pools

It seems like the last presidential election just ended, or maybe never ended, and we are all supposed to be lining up for another take on it.

Anyway no time like the present to run for president, I guess. All aboard!

Then there is Hillary Clinton who never stopped running. She’s been president-in-waiting since about ’97. That’s almost a 20 year-long campaign.

Not to be outdone, Republicans have a third incarnation of Bushes. Yea, keep the Bush fire burning even after getting burned by the first two Bushes. No offense to perpetual burning bushes.

Gee, isn’t there at least another family gene pool we can consider? Why yes, as a matter of fact, how about Mitt Romney again? His father ran and failed so that makes it his job to succeed. Then all bets are off. Have you looked at his family tree lately? The Bushes’ pale in comparison. And anyone carrying the Clinton name is guaranteed a run in the future.

Ron Paul didn’t make it but also started another family tradition. America it seems is full of genetic lines to the oval office.

Then we have Mike Huckabee who never can say no to running. So we have a nation littered with perpetual candidates, all ripe for the picking — at least according to them. It’s our greatest national resource it seems.

If it sounds pretty cynical, just consider all the details. We were once called the “New World”. Then consider Pogo’s theorem, “We’ve met the enemy and he is us.”

Jeb Bush has announced that he is considering a run, and I’m considering taking a shower. Of course he’s running, he’s had years to think about it.

Now Mitt Romney jumps up again to say he wants to run. He says he is the only person who can take on and beat Hillary. Where have I heard that? Isn’t it kind of presumptive to say Hillary will be the Democrat candidate? So the fun begins. Mitt just illustrates how it is so predictable. We knew before the midterms that Hillary was running, actually most of us knew it after last election.

Not to cheat the Jeb Bush verses Clinton prospect. This is a presidential election not Hatfields vs. McCoys. What’s Mitt going to say: “We don’t want to elect another Bush, we should nominate someone fresh and new”? Mitt’s usual arguments don’t seem to apply to Bush. What can Jeb say about Mitt?

Read my lips: No dynasties.

So if that sounds sort of depressing that’s because it is depressing. Even worse, most of us say that’s just the way it is and how our process works. Maybe that’s the problem. And before its over some smart person will say “we really don’t have any choice, either ____ or doom and gloom”. But wasn’t that the idea?

Now I didn’t even mention Christie who had his eye on running for years. We could hope Christie gets in. Maybe there is a spec of good in all this. If they get a three-way establishment race, that creates more opportunity for a real conservative to win. How many ways can they split the vote for us? Conservatives would have to line up to support a real conservative, that’s all, against the backdrop of Rinos’ whining “this just shows a conservative can’t win” mantra.

RightRing | Bullright

Circa ’70, John Wayne, and Playboy

Take a guess where that combination leads? A crash course on how far we’ve come.

In 1971, Playboy had an interview with John Wayne. (excerpts)

Last fall, Wayne’s first television special—a 90-minute quasi-historical pageant dripping with God-home-and-country hyperbole—racked up such a hefty Nielsen rating that it was rebroadcast in April. At year’s end, Wayne was named one of the nation’s most admired entertainers in a Gallup Poll. Assigned by Playboy shortly afterward to interview the superstar, contributing Editor Richard Warren Lewis journeyed to Wayne’s sprawling (11-room, seven-bath) $175,000 bayfront residence on the Gold Coast of Newport Beach, California, where he lives with his third Latin wife—Peruvian-born Pilar Pallete—and three of his seven children.

Too bad that “God-home-and-country” touches a spot in people, even years later. Those are just the ideals and values the Left detests. It’s the same M/O today.

Here is an excerpt from the interview in which Wayne was defending the types of movies he made verses the realism of gore that was gaining popularity. He claimed their new direction left little to imagination. But then he said something about what is not left to the imagination, commenting on the current culture — circa ’71.

PLAYBOY: But isn’t your kind of screen rebellion very different from that of today’s young people?
WAYNE: Sure. Mine is a personal rebellion against the monotony of life, against the status quo. The rebellion in these kids—especially in the SDSers and those groups—seems to be a kind of dissension by rote.

PLAYBOY: Meaning what?
WAYNE: Just this: The articulate liberal group has caused certain things in our country, and I wonder how long the young people who read Playboy are going to allow these things to go on. George Putnam, the Los Angeles news analyst, put it quite succinctly when he said, “What kind of a nation is it that fails to understand that freedom of speech and assembly are one thing, and anarchy and treason are quite another, that allows known Communists to serve as teachers to pervert the natural loyalties and ideals of our kids, filling them with fear and doubt and hate and down-grading patriotism and all our heroes of the past?”

PLAYBOY: You blame all this on liberals?
WAYNE: Well, the liberals seem to be quite willing to have Communists teach their kids in school. The Communists realized that they couldn’t start a workers’ revolution in the United States, since the workers were too affluent and too progressive. So the Commies decided on the next-best thing, and that’s to start on the schools, start on the kids. And they’ve managed to do it. They’re already in colleges; now they’re getting into high schools. I wouldn’t mind if they taught my children the basic philosophy of communism, in theory and how it works in actuality.

You have to say, in so many ways, John Wayne had his finger on the pulse of the country and he knew the direction it was headed. At least in the Left, academia, and in movies — even if prophetic. I think I’ll just let the Duke’s words speak for themselves.

john wayne photo: John Wayne (1907 - 1979) JohnWayne1907-1979-7.jpg

RightRing | Bullright

America speaks is anyone listening?

The American People Have Spoken… Again

Some good might be done short term, but God will not bless a nation whose leaders have turned their backs on Him.
David Fiorazo — November 7, 2014 | Western Journalism

Now what? A tidal wave of victories by Republicans in the 2014 Midterm elections only matter if those in power will stop the radical transformation of the United States of America. Voters are overwhelmingly unhappy with the direction of the country.

The Obama agenda must be thwarted; reckless spending must be stopped, the Constitution must be upheld, Planned Parenthood must be de-funded, families must be strengthened, marriage must be protected, ObamaCare must be repealed and replaced, Common Core must be eliminated, and the borders must be secured and laws enforced.

There is much work to do; and to whom much is given, much will be required. A great responsibility comes with this historic victory. Republicans have been given marching orders from fed-up citizens demanding to be heard. Stop compromising and return to conservative principles. The country must be given back to the people who sent a clear message to both political parties: liberalism, Marxism, and socialism won’t cut it in America! […/]
Read more at  http://www.westernjournalism.com/american-people-spoken-2/

The lady sings the blues

‘Too close to call’ was not the verdict for leadership in Congress.

Said outgoing Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat, ” The message from voters is clear: They want us to work together.”

Dingy Harry could assume such nonsense after being obstructionist-in-chief. Only he can read those tea leaves.

Maryland and Massachusetts went to Republican governors. Republican Bruce Rauner won in Illinois and Quinn would not concede defeat. “We will never yield until all the votes are in,” Quinn said

[AOL] After years of a sluggish economic recovery and foreign crises aplenty, the voters’ mood was sour.

Nearly two-thirds of voters interviewed after casting ballots said the country was seriously on the wrong track. Only about 30 percent said it was generally going in the right direction.

Someone send out a search party because 30% of the electorate are seriously lost.

And Kay Hagan lost. Oh my, those testy voters.

RightRing | Bullright

Poor pitiful Obama…pathetic

Obama’s ‘woe is me’ attitude

By Michael Goodwin \  (excerpt)
June 29, 2014

Facing a horrific expansion of terrorism in the Mideast, a meltdown of public support at home and major rebukes by the Supreme Court, the president remains fixated on No. 1.

“I’m finding lately I just want to say what’s on my mind,” he told a Minneapolis audience Friday, and then ticked off a series of complaints about — surprise — Republicans.

“They don’t do anything, except block me and call me names,” he said. “If they were more interested in growing the economy for you and the issues that you are talking about instead of trying to mess with me, we would be doing a lot better.”

He wasn’t finished: “The critics, the cynics in Washington, they’ve written me off more times than I can count. But cynicism doesn’t invent the Internet. Cynicism doesn’t give women the right to vote.”

There you have it: the presidential mind in Year 6. Don’t cry for Argentina — cry for me!

Great article. Read full

 

What about the entire nation of Obama’s victims? What of the poor pitiful citizens of the country he victimized. But we are supposed to feel sorry for him? All that he has done to benefit himself at the public trough, and yet seems so miserably unhappy.

Enjoy the song in honor of the real victims and this country.

I have the solution. Since he is such a victim, let’s stop it and impeach him now. Save him and ourselves further angst and insufferable damage. Save him from his mental torture, paranoia and further instability, for his own good.

Then explain to him that no matter what he believes, this is not about him. I know that is quite hard for his brain to fathom, since the world revolves around his existence.

The truth is this is about the office of the Presidency, not you Obama, and about the future Presidents to come – be they black, white, orange, male or female. It’s about the preservation of America. That will be a shock to you that there is something in this world bigger than your ego.

Do Obama a huge favor…and we will be blessed for it.

RightRing | Bullright

Another one in the breach for the GOP House

Cantor sabotages conservatives in quest for speakership

FEE! Fie! Foe! Fum! I smell the blood of a speaker.

04/08/2014 | The Daily Caller

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor is intentionally sidelining one of his own Republican committee chairmen — and the chairman’s attempts to pass conservative reforms — in order to better secure his own path to the speakership.

Informed sources in the House, Senate and outside groups tell The Daily Caller that a shift in leadership is going to come sooner than expected, and Cantor is fighting hard for the new spot.

Speaker of the House John Boehner will likely step down if the Republicans fail to take the Senate in 2014; and even if Republicans do win, the rumor is Boehner isn’t interested in sticking around in the unpopular gig for too long anyway. This leaves his top deputy, Cantor, in a strong position to succeed Boehner at the helm in the next two years, and Cantor’s aspirations for the speakership are obvious.

Cantor’s alleged target, House Financial Services Committee Chairman Rep. Jeb Hensarling, poses a rare threat to Cantor’s rise: He has strong conservative bona fides, once heading the conservative Republican Study Committee and often fighting for conservative reforms. He has also been around long enough – including serving as chairman of the House Republican Conference – to earn the respect of more moderate, “establishment” Republicans.

It’s not certain Hensarling even wants to be speaker, with sources close to him playing coy, but it’s clear to conservatives that Cantor sees his colleague as a threat to his rise.

“Hensarling appeals to conservatives, with maybe a slight apprehension that he’s not fire breathing anymore, but still a principled, trustworthy conservative,” a leading conservative Republican, who worked closely with Hensarling, told TheDC. “He also appeals to moderates, and is reasonable in how he runs his committee — he reaches across the aisle.”

Cantor’s strategy to sideline Hensarling begins with killing his policy initiatives, and robbing him of political successes. When Hensarling suggested reforms to flood insurance, Republican leadership bypassed him. His attempts to abolish Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have also been ignored — despite overwhelming outside support from conservative juggernauts like Heritage Action and Club for Growth.

“This is all 100 percent coming from Cantor,” one ranking Senate source with ties to the situation told TheDC, “and this is all angling for Boehner’s job. The case Cantor’s going to make is ‘I’m next in line.’ Hensarling may [otherwise] say ‘You’re next in line, but who’s doing all the work? Who’s the one passing all the bills? Who do you want to lead you, a conservative doing reform or a guy with wishy-washy bills?’”

Cantor, sources say, can and is neutering his career threat – especially the “passing all the bills” bit.

“That’s how I see it, personally,” the Hill officer who previously worked with Hensarling told TheDC. “That’s how a lot of folks in the Hensarling office see it.”

More The Daily Caller

Almost too sickening to read the play by play. There’s an ongoing battle. Cantor would not be happy if he is not the golden anointed one — if Boehner goes. And it looks natural that Boehner is going, one way or another. Not if but how soon?

Can We Talk ?

Some things need to be said but the right people are not always listening.

I was commenting on Necessary and Proper Gov’t and saw things that inspired this. The subject there was the shape conservatives are in, and where it’s going. And Jeff suggested a David Horowitz article. It’s fairly long but if you check it out, you won’t be disappointed. Horowitz always brings a good perspective few others do.

David says it is time for a different dialogue. I agree. Some on the right mean well in zealously arguing for conservative ideas. That’s fine, but is it enough? I don’t think so, not even close. Here’s a hint, I know many conservatives get in the trenches and actually read articles. But Progressives do things different. Talking points are spoon fed to the left, from the top,  so Libs don’t have to read or decide.

We are up against a talking point battle. The public often only hears soundbites. It’s not their fault that is the way politics are on the left. Like Horowitz said: we hear about the war on women, on the poor, racism etc. It doesn’t matter that it is not true, people hear those soundbites  and Democrats  repeat them like parrots. Sure we are tired of hearing them. If you hear it, then other people hear it too. You have to know your enemy.

Long arguments are nice but don’t win the war. They have no impact on the Left.  No one except maybe loyal conservatives reads them. And this battle is a political campaign not a dissertation. I’m convinced we must boil concepts down to simple terms. Also, as Horowitz says, our tactics must change.

Who is going to take the time to read arguments, the liberals we are trying to convince? That ain’t going to happen. Liberals try not to read conservatives. On Townhall, they bash away without even reading it, or maybe a few lines just to aim their talking points at. We give them too much credit thinking logic and reason will work on them. What does work are political campaign soundbites.  That someone will convince them is an overrated goal. They do hear soundbites because that’s what everyone hears.

The problem, as Horowitz states it, is conservatives talk in business language. My idea is to use some biz-lingo on our leaders. Tell Boehner and McConnell to ‘listen up’:

We decided your services are no longer needed. Nothing personal… no, actually it is personal. Your job has been eliminated. The decision is final. That is the job as you define it, doing your own thing doesn’t cut it. You fashion yourselves as deal-makers but guess what, fellas? In case you hadn’t noticed, there is no one out there to make deals with. Do you see anyone? Progressives don’t deal. If they want to they know where to find us.

If an opportunity did come up, there are others capable of making a deal. You have become obsolete. We’re going in a different direction and your particular services are not part of that paradigm. Now if you want to stay on in some reduced capacity, then you will have to get with the program. The old way of operating is  over, do you understand? Form follows function now. This movement is much bigger than you guys and your silos.

This  is inevitable in business. Do you want to be a team player or freelance? Your choice. But if it’s doing your own thing… there’s the door. If you think you can handle being on the team, then its going to be a lot different than you are used to. This is not a top down thing. You guys aren’t our boss, quite the opposite. Your positions, as you know them, have been eliminated. Got it? And we’re not going back to that “business as usual” model. This is only the beginning, we’ll keep you informed if you stay on. “

Here’s what else will change: Mitch, you said we are going to crush the Tea Party:

“I think we are going to crush them everywhere,” … “I don’t think they are going to have a single nominee anywhere in the country.”

What’s the “we” stuff?  See, it is just the opposite, there’s a new crew in town — just in case you and Boehner missed the last few elections. I know you were both busy doing your own things. And the guys that stepped up are those Tea Party people. They’re already here.  You don’t talk to the other side that way. We have to “crush” Liberals not the Tea Party, except I don’t hear that spirited passion toward progressives. No one is bigger than everyone else.

If power and self-survival were your motives, bury it now.  Your power is limited by the people, like the rest of the Federal Government.  We stand for unlimited individual opportunity. They are the Party of unlimited government. Our “enemy”, the enemy of the country,  is the other side. And that’s exactly how we’re going to treat them. Progs are the antithesis of freedom and individual opportunity. Are we all clear?

By the way, Mitchster, the reason we are taking such a personal  interest in you is because that is where most of the problems are.

Reference:

Why Republicans Need the Tea Party

The movement provides an answer to the Left.

Teaser:

“You might ask yourself this question: What would have happened if the Republican party and the Tea Party and the big PACs run by Rove and Koch had funded a $30 million campaign to put the blame on Obama and Reid, where it belonged? There was no such campaign. All the parties on our side failed to take the fight to the enemy camp. The finger-pointing that followed is just another example of the circular firing squad that we on the right are so good at and that continually sets us back.”

I endorse attacks and defining progressives for what they are. But Rove or Gingrich frown on “harsh tone” as a ticket to loss. What do they base that on? No one will pay attention to subtle, half-hearted, apologetic critiques just to avoid a harsh tone. The Left is begging to be branded, so give them what they want.

Newt told CPAC:

“If we spend the next three years being primarily anti-Hillary, we will virtually guarantee her election … “ Gingrich said. “To make sure that doesn’t happen, we must stop being the opposition movement, and we must become the alternative government movement that will help make the life of Americans better so that they understand what we would be doing that is right, not just what the left is doing that is wrong.”

We must define the Left. Horowitz knows that as an intellectual. All the right “ideas” don’t get the job done. Amazing, Newt lectured CPAC and the Tea Party on that.

RightRing | Bullright

The Other Problem

I’m going to try something different. I’m a little tired of talking about Obama, the greatest threat to freedom and the Constitution this century. He gets his share of time, and everybody can’t seem to stop complaining about his daily assaults on the country.

So today I’m making an exception. I want to talk about the other major problem, the one who gets almost as much criticism as King Barry. Well, its not one person but a group. No, I don’t mean the Islamic Jihadists. It is even a greater target of criticism than that.

This time I want to talk about that group that is always in season. No matter how much criticized, there can not be enough time or energy focused on them. It never gets old attacking them. It is a daily if not hourly task and there still can’t be enough said about the subject. I know you are getting real warm now and ready to boil.

Okay, pardon the generalities and don’t mind my broad-brushing them because who cares about them anyway? I know I’ll be granted wide berth here. It is simply those regular folks out there. Yea, your stereotypical conservatives, regular Joe’s, libertarians, Republicans, the evangelicals, Christians, right-wingers, cultural conservatives, social conservatives, value voters, Black conservatives, moral majority, white conservatives, vast right-wing conspirators, homophobes, Tea Parties, neo-cons, business owners, on and on, activists et al. I know I left some out. I want to refer to all of them by one label. What shall it be? I’ll just generically call them “the problem”, when I’m referring to their whole lot.

Now, I started by asking myself some central questions: Why is it always an opportunity to criticize or attack the “problem”? Why can there never be enough animosity or scrutiny directed toward this group? Why do their actions and motives always deserve the toughest scrutiny we can muster? Why is what they do always suspect even if they explain their motives? Why do we need to probe any differences between sub groups? Dice, sort, and compare them any way you like.(no rules)

And no matter what they do and say, why do they need to be examined under a microscope using the toughest standards? No, I don’t attempt to answer these questions, nor should you. Suffice it to say that is just the way it is. Let’s just agree on that. And that is the starting point. It doesn’t demand volumes of proof. It’s just the way it is…. an established phenomena. Why do these toughest standards only apply to the “problem” group. And why aren’t they routinely granted some benefit of the doubt, like others?

See you won’t get disagreement that they deserve serious scrutiny, and they do get it. Even within the “problem” group, many of its members will take them to task any time they see a good opportunity. The “problem” is a universal target for anyone.

Moderates, RINOS and liberal Republicans are also part of “the problem” –fodder for critique based on association with the whole — but the same standards do not apply, and they are not subject to the same results in the end. We can be less critical of that sub group. They must be included for relative criticism of others.

Remember Reagan and his 11th commandment?

While popularized by Reagan, “The Eleventh Commandment” was created by then California Republican Party Chairman Gaylord Parkinson. In his 1990 autobiography An American Life, Reagan attributed the rule to Parkinson, explained its origin, and claimed to have followed it:

“The personal attacks against me during the primary finally became so heavy that the state Republican chairman, Gaylord Parkinson, postulated what he called the Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican. It’s a rule I followed during that campaign and have ever since.” – Reagan

The goal was to prevent a repetition of the liberal Republican assault on Barry Goldwater, attacks which contributed to Goldwater’s defeat in the 1964 presidential election. East Coast Republicans like Nelson Rockefeller labeled Goldwater an “extremist” for his conservative positions and declared him unfit to hold office. Fellow Republican candidate for Governor George Christopher and California’s liberal Republicans were leveling similar attacks on Reagan. Hoping to prevent a split in the Republican Party, Parkinson used the phrase as common ground. Party liberals eventually followed Parkinson’s advice.

Autopsy

Picture an Autopsy

It is not a new phenomena either. There’s been a feud among Republicans for many decades. It plays out frequently, in campaigns, primaries, conventions, among Republicans, on the airwaves, and in news media. Now it is just a given fact, like gravity. It is accepted and anticipated by every political pundit and strategist, even trying to play/use it to their advantage however they can. It’s a favorite pass time to examine the right.

Better yet, its a game everyone can play. It is called smack the right. Left-leaning and liberal Republicans love to play it, even right-wing conservatives indulge. (also contagious) It’s a group sport or an individual one, whatever your preference. It’s something like whack-a-mole. But anything is fair game. Whatever comes up, as long it is in any way part of that “problem” group: attack it, probe it, question it, hold it to any level of accountability you want. No rules, really, just do it – the more the better. Make a career over it. Really, who cares? Yes, the Left can play right along side the Republicans, conservatives, and moderates. Attack, attack, get the message? Question anything at all as often as you can. Compare and distort, who cares?

Many Republicans and the “problem” group repealed the 11th amendment long ago, if it was ever ratified to begin with. So they do the same.

Now I’m not a fierce adherent to the 11th commandment myself. I take my shots when justified. But for some of us with wiser scrutiny about it, our justified complaints are depreciated by the mountains of attacks or criticism from everywhere nowadays. You can do it wherever and whenever the urge strikes. Don’t worry, you will never be out of place or shunned for it. It is acceptable across the spectrum. Scrutinize the “problem” — and the problem with anything always comes back to this group, somehow.

Why is it that, no matter what the current problem/issue, this group deserves blame or is labeled the real “problem”? Again, no answer, its just the way it is. All problems are directed back at them because, somehow or another, they are the problem. And conventional wisdom is you cannot deal with any issue without dealing with them, or taking aim at them. So they are dragged into every issue and every battle like a hostage. Who else gets the ire, the criticism, suspicion, and sheer attention this problem group gets? What other segment demands that treatment?

They’ve turned the process (for lack of a better word) into a self-fulfilling prophecy. Through all the blame and critique of the “problem” group, they have really become the one universal problem. Only not in the way that all the critics see it. It has so divided the “problem” that no one within it can unify and agree. You have to believe that was a chief ojective by some all along. If there is no unification, then there can be no unified action coming from them. Thus, they are not a unified political threat either. This is contrary to what we see in the left. They will always unify over the worst, leftist positions. Its a natural habit for the cultural Marxists.

Just to contrast all this with the progressive Left. It operates on what I call the Gestalt principle, meaning the effect or momentum is greater than the sum of its parts. On the right, the effect or momentum is only as great as any of its smaller parts. Even where several of the parts agree, the differences are emphasized. And the strength thereof lasts only as long as the differences do not win. The left could unify over a crap sandwich, and often does. (…for the sake of it)

Gestalt (Webster) – psychology : something that is made of many parts and yet is somehow more than or different from the combination of its parts; broadly : the general quality or character of something

[Photo – painting Author:Rembrandt; Title: The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp]

RightRing | Bullright

Two’s company… Three’s a Party

Majority of Americans Support Creating a Third Party

Heather Ginsberg | Oct 13, 2013 |Townhall

With the recent government shutdown it’s no surprise that many Americans are dissatisfied with the government. But in a recent poll from Gallup, it seems clear that the disapproval has reached a new level.

It is well known that the American government is based in a two-party system, but it now it looks like many are not so sure that is the best way to go. 60 percent of Americans now say they would support the formation of the third party. Democrats and Republicans are no longer cutting it. Since Gallup began asking this question 10 years ago, this is the highest percentage they have measured. Only 26 percent believe the two major parties are accurately representing their constituents.

Since the shutdown began we saw a rise in negative opinions of the parties, so it is no surprise that when given the option of a third party, many Americans are willing to look into that option. And this is not even a party specific finding. Both Democrats and Republicans are equally likely to see a third party as a good alternative; however, independents are much more likely to think a third party is necessary.

Clearly the dissatisfaction over the government shutdown is affecting several different areas of the American political spectrum. Perhaps this would be a good choice in order to avoid this kind of situation happening again in the future.

Those numbers an attitudes speak loud and clear, for themselves.

The return of Obamastein: the cliffhanger sequel

 

Obama’s thought process: I think I’ll attack Republicans like I dd the Supreme Court and call them names… just before I mention my sterling bipartisan record.

WSJ: Obama Threatened Boehner With Using Inauguration, SOTU Address To Blame GOP

 

By Philip Klein

President Obama has threatened House Speaker John Boehner that if no deal is struck on the “fiscal cliff,” he will use his Inaugural address and State of the Union speech next month to blame Republicans, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Excerpt From The Wall Street Journal:

Mr. Obama repeatedly lost patience with the speaker as negotiations faltered. In an Oval Office meeting last week, he told Mr. Boehner that if the sides didn’t reach agreement, he would use his inaugural address and his State of the Union speech to tell the country the Republicans were at fault.

At one point, according to notes taken by a participant, Mr. Boehner told the president, “I put $800 billion [in tax revenue] on the table. What do I get for that?”

“You get nothing,” the president said. “I get that for free.”

Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/obama/2012/12/22/wsj-obama-threatened-boehner-using-inauguration-sotu-address-blame-gop#ixzz2FwBbs83w
 

 
What better place to plot it than in Hawaii? It will be the first attack on Capitol Hill from Hawaii — he’s so full of firsts.