Republicans: still searching for a fight they can win.

Obama signs another IOU as Congressional Democrats applaud

Rep. Frank Wolf (R–VA) and I disagree on term limits. I’m a firm believer in 12 years and you’re out — while Wolf is an advocate of the 30 years and counting philosophy. (Unless Frank doesn’t have any other options, because his family refuses to spend more time with him.)

But based on his courageous vote last week against the payroll tax extension, it’s safe to say we do see eye–to–eye with regard to what the media terms “bipartisanship.”

This is important because in a presidential election year independent voters are going to be bombarded with stories touting the benefits of “bipartisan cooperation” between Democrats and Republicans.

The political calculation in the media is bipartisan = good. Conversely, refusal to compromise principles = bad. So independents should either support “bipartisan” candidates who just happen to vote for liberal legislation or stick with the genuine article and vote Democrat.

Independent voters that are concerned about the country’s continued deficit spending should not meekly accept the media’s definition of political progress, because that definition undermines everything in which they believe.

This is because bills that pass Congress with bipartisan support and media approval in the days of Obama, are bills that increase spending and hasten our descent into drachma–based budgeting. And voting to extend the payroll tax cut is a perfect example.

Usually Democrats believe Americans are under–taxed and only their stubborn greed stands in the way of Nirvana in America. This time Democrats support the payroll tax cut extension because passage improves Obama’s prospects for re–election. What Democrats oppose is making the extension deficit–neutral by cutting spending somewhere else to offset lost revenue.

Republicans don’t like the extension because it undermines funding for Social Security, does not provide any real economic stimulus and will add approximately $100 billion to the deficit.

A genuine compromise would address elements of both positions. A bill that continued the tax cut for the rest of 2012, so Obama can slide past election day, and was offset by spending cuts would give Democrats and Republicans their top priority, while forcing compromise elsewhere.

Yet the “bipartisan” bill the country got extended the tax cuts with zero budget cuts.

To put this in perspective, total federal spending for this fiscal year is estimated to be $3.8 trillion. A cut of $100 billion from that gusher of Chinese–backed indebtedness is less than three cents on the dollar, yet Democrats would not cut a penny.

In fact this bill wipes out the measly $95 billion in deficit reduction “victory” the House GOP leadership sweated bullets to achieve last year.

Wolf describes the bill as, “…shameful. The American people are right to be disappointed that the president and the Congress have walked away from every serious deficit reduction effort. They should be appalled that both sides have joined together to spend more money and weaken Social Security.”

And Rep. Jeff Flake (R–AZ) hit the nail on the head, “Why is it that the only time we can come together and reach an agreement…increases the deficit or explodes spending? That’s enough to make the country cry for more partisanship.” Or if not more partisanship, at least some leadership, but that does not appear to be on the horizon either.

Republican leaders were faced with a choice: defeat the extension because it increases the deficit, moves Social Security another step down the road to a welfare program and is simply irresponsible vote–buying. Knowing full well that Obama will characterize their opposition as refusing a tax cut for the middle class, while protecting the rich.

Or they can choose to crater on the spending cuts offset and vote for a fiscally irresponsible bill knowing that Obama will use the bill’s passage as proof he’s fighting for the middle class, while the GOP is only interested in protecting the rich.

Someone please help me find the victory here. The reality is Republicans face a hostile media that favors spending and an administration that wants to increase spending. Making the case for cuts is not going to get any easier. If GOP leadership is unable to make the case for small spending cuts now, there is no chance they will successfully make the case for major spending cuts we must make in the near future.

Meanwhile, according to the Washington Post, smug Republican House veterans who supported the “compromise” said conservative freshmen “had touched the stove and finally realized it was burning hot.”

The veteran’s advice was the usual: voting for pork is the best insulation.

Advertisements

Judging Presidential Timber at CPAC

In a truly bold move the Gingrich campaign is featuring Callista, The Other Woman 2.0

Friday’s session of the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) was crucial for Republican presidential candidates, but it started with an audition for Vice President.

Our own Gov. Bob McDonnell proved once again if you want a VP candidate who is not teleprompter dependent and has not expressed strong feelings regarding the very poor, McDonnell is just your man.

Much of McDonnell’s speech obliquely stressed his Vice Presidential qualifications by running through his resume and focusing on his administration’s record.

McDonnell characterized the election as choice between Constitutionally limited government and a constantly expanding federal government. McDonnell concluded by saying his family came to the US from Ireland, and 100 years later he sits in the governor’s office holding the same position held by Thomas Jefferson.

Which, come to think of it, also applies to the office of Vice President.

Four years ago Mitt Romney withdrew from the race during his speech at the conference, this year he wanted to use a CPAC speech to revive it. After suffering three consecutive primary losses to Rick Santorum, Romney needed a strong rebound and straw poll victory before an audience filled with many people skeptical of his conservatism and commitment to the cause.

Romney described the Obama administration as the “last gasp of liberalism’s great failure.” And he urged the participants to “reaffirm what it means to be conservative.”

This involves a reverence for the founding document, “Conservatives aren’t just proud to cling to our guns and religion, we are also proud to cling to our Constitution,” Romney declared to enthusiastic applause.

One of the biggest applause lines of the afternoon came when he declared he’s been successful in business and he’s not ashamed to say so. Romney assured the audience, “I’ve served in government, but I didn’t inhale. I’m still a business guy.”

Santorum’s goal was to establish himself as the only viable alternative to Romney and consolidate the ABM (anyone but Mitt) vote. Santorum explained, “Conservatism did not fail our country. Conservatives failed conservatism.” Specifically by adopting the philosophy that winning is more important than staying true to your principles, a veiled reference to John McCain. “We’ve learned our lesson,” Santorum said. “We will no longer abandon and apologize for the principles that made this country great.”

Santorum addressed his chances by downplaying the influence of money, of which he has little, and stressing the power of contrasts. “We aren’t going to win with money. We’re going to win with contrasts, by making Barack Obama and his failed policies the issue in this race.”

For Newt Gingrich the presidential campaign is a four–letter word and that word is BOLD. Bold ideas. Bold plans. Bold solutions. Bold politics.

“When the conservative movement offers bold solutions, it wins decisively. I want to talk about bold solutions to get America working again,” Newt boldly announced.

Gingrich intends for the entire GOP congressional establishment to campaign with him this fall, which will require a large fleet of buses and a huge block of rooms on the cruise ship. And in the few days between the swearing in of the new Congress and Newt’s Bold presidential oath of office, he has a to–do list for Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader (he hopes) Mitch McConnell. Newt expects both houses to pass bills repealing Obamacare, Sarbanes–Oxley and Dodd–Frank.

So by signing these bills in the first 20 minutes of his new administration Newt can expunge 40 percent of the late Obama administration. Then Gingrich can really get to work with Bold executive orders: approve the Keystone pipeline, move the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, reinstate the Mexico City policy banning the expenditure of tax dollars for abortions in other countries and break ground on the moon colony.

Then he plans to pause for lunch.

Gingrich’s speech also included a larger role for Callista, the new wife, who introduced him to a tepid audience response. This probably marks the first time in campaign history The Other Woman 2.0 has been brought out of hiding and used in a prominent role, which really does qualify as Bold.

The result of Saturday’s straw poll was good for two of the three candidates. Romney won with 38 percent of the vote, followed by Santorum at 31 percent. Gingrich was a very poor third, barely beating Ron Paul — who did not attend the conference — 15 percent to 12 percent.

The conclusion is Romney can speak “conservative;” and head–to–head in a setting where ad spending and organization does not matter; Santorum is a viable ABM alternative.

Unfortunately for Santorum those conditions don’t apply in the vast majority of remaining primaries.

Why Democrats Fear Ultrasound and Photo ID

This ultrasound image of an unborn baby strikes fear into abortion supporters.

When Democrats are busy ordering conservatives around for our own good, one of the justifications for their bossiness is they are the party of science. While Republicans are the party of examining chicken entrails.

Yet when it comes to the science of photography, Democrats are the party of schizophrenia.

On one hand various liberals want to place lurid photos of cancerous lungs on the front of cigarette packs, Photoshopped images of diabetic amputees on candy bar wrappers and the skull & crossbones on individual M&Ms — all in an increasingly fanatical effort to prevent individuals from doing potential harm to themselves by exercising free choice.

But when it comes to photos that may prevent individuals from doing actual harm to others, Democrats quickly lose interest in prevention and move to immediate opposition.

In Virginia it appears a law requiring women to view an ultrasound before deciding to execute her baby will finally pass this session and be signed into law. The prospect of women being exposed to more information before the decision to abort has predictably driven the Party of Death into a frenzy.

Sen. Janet Howell (D–Planned Parenthood) was in such an uproar she couldn’t even produce a relevant legislative metaphor. The Senate defeated Janet’s amendment to the ultrasound bill that would’ve required men who wanted a Viagra prescription to undergo a rectal check and cardiac stress test.

Anyone with even a minimal knowledge of equivalency — and not blinded by abortion obsession— would have known the proper sex–specific amendment would have required men in the market to enhance their structural integrity to first buy a copy of American Baby.

That amendment would have had a much better chance of passage and left both sides of the gender divide better informed regarding the consequences of their actions.

The second example of photo–phobia involves requiring voters to show a valid photo ID. Judging by the Democrats response to this bill you would have thought someone was trying to stop an abortion!

NAACP Director Benjamin Chavis screamed that Republicans were trying to “lynch democracy” by instructing voters to show ID. That’s strange. Are hotels trying to “lynch sleep” when they require a photo ID before allowing you to check in?

Is the bank trying to “lynch currency” when you must show a photo ID before cashing a check?

Is 7/11 trying to “lynch parties” when they ask for a photo ID before selling you the MD 20/20?

Yet people check into hotels, cash checks and get hammered every day even with the photo requirement.

Voter fraud in the US is much more real than earthquakes from hydraulic fracking, manmade global warming or Keystone pipeline environmental devastation, yet Democrats will do nothing to prevent the occurrence.

A federal investigation in Chicago estimated that at least 100,000 illegal votes had been cast in the 1982 gubernatorial election and that voter fraud was routine for years. In Atlantic City Democrat campaigns regularly request absentee ballots for the homeless and then cast those ballots fraudulently. And in Louisiana I’ve personally seen the man who carries cash and a .45 to pay the vote haulers.

Before its demise, ACORN was notorious for producing fraudulent voter registrations, which are a precursor to fraudulent voting, just as buying a wheelbarrow of Contac is the precursor to meth.

Still hysterical Democrats claim voter ID laws are designed to prevent students and the elderly from voting.

Is that a fact? When is the last time you saw a student without a driver’s license? When is the last time you saw a senior citizen who had never in their entire lifetime had a driver’s license?

Even if they had never had a license in the past, DMV will issue ID for voting and other identification purposes to seniors and students. I’ll concede grandma may have lost a step over the years, but even the pokiest should be able to get an ID with a two–year lead time.

Anyone who doesn’t place a high enough priority on voting to obtain the proper ID before the election is probably someone who’s input the Republic can limp along without.

The judicious use of photos can preserve life and the integrity of the voting process. In fact, using photos during many decision–making processes can add much to the quality of life in Virginia.

I’m going to contact my legislators and ask them to introduce a bill requiring all potential tattoo customers to first examine a photo of what that tattoo will look like on their saggy old behind when they reach the age of 65, BEFORE they go under the needle.

Gym, beach and public pool customers can only benefit.

Occupying the Lunatic Fringe

Typical Occupy member expressing his views on law enforcement.

Recently outraged Internet theologians took umbrage at my refusal to join the effort to transform Jesus into a big government, liberal Democrat that supports the Occupy squatters.

Most echoed secular interpreters of Christ who claim, “Jesus shares many of the values of those in the Occupy movement.”

I contend Jesus had plenty of time to confront civil authority, yet Christ focused on religious authority. He didn’t discuss politics with the centurion or tax rates with Matthew. In fact the only system of government approved by God was that of the judges, and the Jews disliked that arrangement so much they demanded a king.

Democracy and social justice are not mentioned in the New Testament because it’s not a political science or economics text. The Word is directed at individuals and not Wall Street, corporations, the GOP, Congress or the Koch brothers.

Solutions will come, if ever, from individuals acting on their own and not collectivists like Nancy Pelosi telling us what to do. But I try to keep an open mind. Maybe I haven’t spent enough time with Occupy to form an accurate opinion.

Fortunately, my daughter saved me a trip and reported back on her encounter with those New Testament individuals working to establish the Kingdom here on earth. Last Saturday night Occupy was marching through Downtown DC to block Obama’s appearance at that den of inequity, the Alfalfa Club Dinner. My daughter’s car was stopped at an intersection blocked by Occupy marchers and in no time at all these “Christ–like” crusaders for Justice saw she was a young woman alone.

They surrounded her vehicle and began the spreading their word. Some dropped their pants to expose my daughter to the persuasive message contained in their genitals. Others sat on the hood and pounded their fists. All this took place accompanied by an inspiring soundtrack of curses, vulgarities and sexual harassment.

She wasn’t mistaken for a member of the 1 percent, gloating over the misfortunes of the poor. She drives a rice burner approaching 135,000 miles that’s decorated with dents, dings and rust spots courtesy of dad’s attempt to repair a broken window.

She was singled out because Occupy harbors an increasing collection of gutless thugs who get off on frightening women and the weak.

There were approximately five offenses worthy of arrest: genital exposure, attempted destruction of property, blocking an intersection, disorderly conduct, assault and wearing a mask to conceal identity (particularly ironic since these laws were passed by “progressives” to fight the Klan). Yet the DC cop standing and idly watching did exactly nothing and the media seldom reports this type of outrage.

I’m wracking my brain here, but I can’t find equivalent behavior on the part of the Apostles. Josephus writes of a Roman soldier starting a riot when he mooned Jews from his perch in Antonia Fortress overlooking Jerusalem, but that’s hardly part of the Gospel.

What’s amazing is how Democrats and fellow–travelers in the media demonize the TEA party and romanticize Occupy leeches. When the ugly undercurrent of the real Occupy movement finally makes headlines, the excuse is always these lawbreakers are “fringe elements” and not part of the main movement.

Really? Then why have there been almost 4,000 Occupy arrests? That’s an active fringe. You don’t find that when searching arrests at TEA party events.

But even the TEA party has a fringe, so lets compare.

TEA party fringe believes the Bilderberg Group is a real threat. Occupy fringe defecates on police cars.

TEA party fringe believes the moon landing was faked. Occupy fringe discourages a rape victim from contacting police.

TEA party fringe believes there was a second shooter on the grassy knoll. Occupy fringe smashes its way into Oakland City Hall, vandalizes children’s artwork and burns the American flag.

TEA party fringe believes the US should return to the gold standard. Occupy fringe urinates on food vendors in NYC when they stop giving free food to Occupy parasites.

Law enforcement wizards in DC may finally be noticing a trend. U.S. Park police commanders have decided, after four months of hand wringing, that it might be time to enforce the law against camping in McPherson Square.

Warnings have been issued against camping and its related activity, sleeping. According to spokesman Sgt. David Schlosser officers have been ordered to investigate tents for clues that include “sleeping bags, teddy bears and kitchen equipment.”

After reading that it’s difficult to decide which group is more pathetic. The unfortunate Park Police officers forced to search for binkies and blankets before making an arrest; or the Occupy cheering section that continues to insist this confederacy of creeps is on board with the teaching of Jesus.