With the midterm elections having come and gone, CFIF’s Renee Giachino takes us on a trip down memory lane to the way things were under liberal rule. 2009-2010: In their own words.
Today, the Labor Department announced that the unemployment rate remained at 9.6% for the third consecutive month. When President Obama signed his nearly $1 trillion “stimulus” in February 2009, the unemployment rate stood at 8.2%. In the 20 months since that date, the rate has increased to 9.6% despite White House projections that it would top out at 8% fully one year ago.
Once again, a comparison to the Reagan recovery is profoundly instructive. In the same 20 month span following the effective date of the Reagan tax cuts in January 1983, unemployment plummeted from 10.4% to 7.3%. Also instructive is the following headline from today’s Wall Street Journal: “European Central Bank Parts Ways With U.S. on More Stimulus.” It is a sad state of affairs when even the spendthrift Europeans are providing economic guidance to Obama.
Liberal Keynesians have had almost two years to prove the validity of their economic agenda. It has failed, their rationalizations have grown stale, and their desperate efforts to resist corrective action will only prolong the nation’s misery.
Interview with Belgian-born author Joseph M. Callewaert, Knight of the French Order of Merit, on his book, Lights out for Freedom: Four Years under the Nazi Boot, a personal account of growing up among the upheaval of war and the fear, hunger and oppression suffered by so many during the Nazi occupation of Belgium.
Listen to the interview here.
Whether or not you think he’s a viable presidential candidate in 2012, there can be little doubt that — on his best days — former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich is one of the most intelligent, articulate defenders of conservative thought around (full disclosure: I used to write radio spots for the Speaker). Last night Newt delivered a tour de force performance on Fox News’ On the Record with Greta Van Susteren, analyzing the midterm elections and their effects on President Obama. Some video highlights can be seen below. Newt’s best line of the night, however, didn’t make it into the highlights reel. Scroll down beyond the video for the line that had the Fox camera crews cracking up on air:
VAN SUSTEREN: But I just don’t get it, I mean, because he did run on change. And he delivered change. And now the American people — and they told him almost from day one they didn’t like his change, and he didn’t even notice it, and he’s still (INAUDIBLE) and so now he comes (INAUDIBLE) today — I don’t get it!
GINGRICH: Greta, Greta, Greta, Greta, if somebody offers you a chance to go to Disney World and you get all excited, and they promise to take you to Disney World, and then they didn’t quite tell you that, by the way, the way they’re going to get there is they’re going to crash the plane into the park…(LAUGHTER)
GINGRICH: The fact that they were going to take you to Disney World may not have been quite as attractive as you thought. Nobody in America thought we were going to elect a president who would be this far to the left, pass this much spending, build up this big a deficit, try to impose Washington on every doctor’s office, every hospital, every medical decision in America. And the American people now said, Got it. If that’s the change you meant, we’re going to send you a signal that that’s the wrong change.It’s all right to be for change, but you ought to be for the right change, and he didn’t get. Now, what worries me is with two more years, I wonder what it’s going to take for him to begin to realize it’s not about us, the American people, it’s about him.
If ever anyone deserved the title “the speaker” …
Laying out his interpretation of California’s electoral decisions on Tuesday, Governor-Elect Jerry Brown is hinting that his third term in office may not be all tax-and-spend.
Brown headed a Democratic ticket Tuesday in blue-leaning California, where voters resisted the “red tide” of Republican victory sweeping the nation. He added that the message from voters was clear: “The voters last night turned down a mere $18-a-year (car) tax by about 60 percent, so I would say that the electorate is in no mood to add to their burdens.”
He said Californians passed Proposition 25, which ends the two-thirds legislative majority for passing a state budget, while also approving Proposition 26, which calls for a two-thirds vote to pass fees.
“The taxpayers gave – and they also took away,” he said. “On the one hand, people said, ‘by majority give us a budget’ and on the other, they said, ‘don’t pick my pocket.’
“What we have to do is win the confidence and trust of the people of California,” he said. That, he added, will require competing groups – Republicans, Democrats, labor unions and business – to “push toward a common interest.”
If California does get a reformed liberal as a budget trimmer, it will be more than the state deserves, and a tentative step in the right direction.
H/T: San Francisco Chronicle
In this week’s Liberty Update commentary “2012 May Be Even Brighter for Conservatives Than 2010,” we note that there are reasons why 2012 might bring even more conservative change than this week’s results regardless of the political climate two years from now. In the Senate, Democrats must defend 23 seats, many of those in red states like Montana, whereas Republicans need only defend 10 (most of which are in red states like Wyoming, Utah and Texas). And in the House, post-census redistricting in states that elected Republican governors and legislatures this week may add even more seats to the 60+ they won two days ago.
Here’s another encouraging (and related) factor for conservatives. The same post-census realignment that will facilitate more conservative wins in the House will also alter the Electoral College, thereby affecting the 2012 presidential race. How significant that effect will be one cannot yet say, but every point will count if that White House contest is as close as two of the previous three have been.
One of the selling points for “universal” health care is the notion it carries of making treatment available to everyone. That’s (somewhat) true, but when government-run health care displaces private companies, something else gets tossed out too: privacy.
According to a notice published in the Federal Register last month, President Barack Obama’s Office of Personnel Management (OPM) will be launching a new health-related database that adds to new data sets to one representing federal workers: private citizens who report pre-existing health conditions or use one of the newly created regional exchanges for pooled health insurance. That information will be made available to any government agency, law enforcement group, or third party researcher that shows a need for it.
What gives OPM the right to collect and disseminate such sensitive health records? The passage and implementation of ObamaCare.
Charles Krauthammer’s recent column heralding the demise Obama’s legislative agenda contained a paragraph that deserves mention:
Over the next two years, the real action will be not in Congress but in the bowels of the federal bureaucracy. Democrats will advance their agenda on Obamacare, financial reform and energy by means of administrative regulation, such as carbon-emission limits imposed unilaterally by the Environmental Protection Agency.
No doubt, there will be many battles to fight in Congress against enactment of more freedom-killing policies, but voters, activists, and politicians should remember that the threat to liberty only accelerates once the federal bureaucracy gets involved. OPM is just the most recent example.
Below is one of the latest cartoons from two-time Pulitzer Prize-winner Michael Ramirez.
View more of Michael Ramirez’s cartoons on CFIF’s website here.
Politico usefully rebukes the conventional wisdom about money in politics with a look at this year’s self-financing candidates:
…
The one winner in the group is Republican businessman Ron Johnson, who beat Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), one of the Senate’s most ardent champions of campaign finance reforms that would limit the role of big money in federal races.
In Connecticut, Republican Senate nominee Linda McMahon spent $47 million of her own money. In Florida, Jeff Greene dropped $24 billion attempting to get the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate. In California, Carly Fiorina invested $5.5 million out of her own accounts for a shot at the upper chamber, though that number paled in comparison to the $143 million ponied up by the GOP gubernatorial nominee, Meg Whitman. What do they all have in common? They all lost.
For the professional fretters who rent their garments in support of McCain-Feingold and gnashed their teeth over the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, there’s a valuable lesson here: money buys you the means to make your case, not the right to have that case accepted by the voters. Big money in political races can be just as much a drawback as an advantage. And if you don’t believe that, just ask the organized labor establishment, whose investment in this year’s races turned out to be a toxic asset.
Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) offers some great advice to newly elected conservative colleagues like Marco Rubio and Rand Paul: stay true to your campaign promises of less government and more freedom. Here are the highlights:
(1) Don’t request earmarks – they obligate you to take bad votes
(2) Hire conservative staff – they help you avoid mistakes
(3) Beware of committees – in the Senate, all members can legislate from the floor
(4) Don’t seek titles – every Senator has the privilege to speak and be heard, regardless of seniority
(5) Don’t let your reelection become more important than your job – breaking campaign promises for the sake of being reelected ensures you won’t be
DeMint’s brief column should go on the wall of every incoming Senate conservative’s office as a reminder of why they are in Washington, D.C.
H/T: Wall Street Journal
With Election Day turning into Election Night, early exit polls are being touted to proclaim winners and losers in a host of contests. As we wait for the dust to settle the Washington Post has a terrific piece on why it’s better to wait awhile before declaring victory.
By all accounts, American voters have regained sobriety and will deliver resounding victories for conservatives today. This date in history, however, provides a cautionary tale for anyone even thinking of not voting because they assume that victory is in the bag.
Today in 1948, political pundits were so certain of a Thomas Dewey victory over Harry Truman that the Chicago Tribune prematurely published its infamous “Dewey Defeats Truman” headline. Need another cautionary tale? How about the 2008 Minnesota Senate race between Norm Coleman and Al Franken? There, Franken and his election attorneys somehow contorted an election night deficit into a narrow recount victory, possibly with the help of felon voters. Nobody’s laughing now that the chronically unfunny Franken routinely makes a mockery of his Senate seat.
So don’t take anything for granted. Too many people have fought and died to protect your right to affect this nation’s course, and too many people have worked too hard to provide alternatives to the bland “same ol’, same ol'” choice. You don’t want to be kicking yourself tomorrow.
Below is one of the latest cartoons from two-time Pulitzer Prize-winner Michael Ramirez.
View more of Michael Ramirez’s cartoons on CFIF’s website here.
So says John Steele Gordon in a characteristically insightful post on Commentary’s Contentions Blog. Per the G-man:
Wilson was, at heart, an academic, the author of several books, (including Congressional Government, still in print after 125 years). He thought and acted like a professor even after he entered politics. Wilson always took it for granted, for instance, that he was the smartest guy in the room and acted accordingly. Does that sound familiar? Wilson was a remarkably powerful orator. (It was he who revived the custom of delivering the State of the Union message in person, a custom that had been dropped by Thomas Jefferson, a poor and most reluctant public speaker.)
… Both Wilson and Obama were the subjects of remarkable public adulation, and both won the Nobel Peace Prize for their aspirations rather than their accomplishments. In Wilson’s case, at least, it only increased his sense of being God’s instrument on earth. Although the Republicans had won majorities just before Armistice Day in November 1918, in both houses of Congress — and the Senate’s consent by a two-thirds majority would be necessary to ratify any treaty — Wilson shut them out of any say in the treaty he went to Paris to negotiate with the other victorious powers. Obama, of course, shut the Republicans out of any say in both the stimulus bill and ObamaCare.
Lest conservatives get too excited, we should remember that Wilson was a two-term president. Lest liberals get too cocky, his name has also been something of a political epithet ever since.
Join CFIF Corporate Counsel and Senior Vice President Renee Giachino today from 4:00 p.m. CDT to 6:00 p.m. CDT (that’s 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. EDT) on Northwest Florida’s 1330 AM WEBY, as she hosts her show “Your Turn.” Today’s star guest lineup includes:
4:00 p.m. CDT: Dr. Laurence Hunter, President of Alliance for Retirement Prosperity Association
4:30 p.m. CDT: Colleen Pero, Attorney/Consultant, Author of Justice Hijacked
5:00 p.m. CDT: Florida Senate President Jeff Atwater, Balanced Budget Referendum
5:30 p.m. CDT: Quin Hillyer, Washington Times and American Spectator, Eve of Elections
Please share your comments, thoughts and questions at (850) 623-1330, or listen via the Internet by clicking here. You won’t want to miss this!
After publishing today’s denunciation of President Barack Obama as the reincarnation of Richard Nixon, self-professed liberal Democrats Pat Caddell and Doug Schoen don’t need to guess if they’ll be getting a White House Christmas card this year. The duo doesn’t break new ground with their criticisms of the president, but they do enlarge the chorus of commentators disturbed by Obama’s style. From the section recounting Obama’s sins against campaign decorum:
Indeed, Obama is conducting himself in a way alarmingly reminiscent of Nixon’s role in the disastrous 1970 midterm campaign. No president has been so persistently personal in his attacks as Obama throughout the fall. He has regularly attacked his predecessor, the House minority leader and – directly from the stump – candidates running for offices below his own. He has criticized the American people suggesting that they are “reacting just to fear” and faulted his own base for “sitting on their hands complaining.”
Is it possible that the man who ran the longest presidential campaign in history is already looking to extend the record? If so, 2012 can’t arrive soon enough.
If former GOP House Rep. Tom Tancredo can overcome his current 5 point gap to become Colorado’s next governor, we’ll all need to brush up on the principles and policy preferences of his new political home: the American Constitution Party.
As would be imagined, the ACP is in-line with Tancredo’s stance on border security, and regulating the number of immigrants. The party also seemingly provides a home for Christian libertarians. If Tancredo pulls off the biggest surprise of the 2010 midterm elections it will be fascinating to see whether the ACP can get any of its platform through Colorado’s soon-to-be Republican legislature.
Oh, the sub-plots this election cycle!
In an interview with the Wall Street Journal’s John Fund, retiring Rep. Brian Baird (D-WA) shares some thoughtful insights about what went wrong for Democrats the last two years. From appallingly bad advice from so-called strategists (e.g. “voters don’t care about deficits”) to an “authoritarian” leadership that demanded blind loyalty from members, Baird’s interview could be read as a warning to the incoming Republican majority. Common sense in rules and policy is a non-partisan winner.
Most revealing are the ideas Baird has for tackling entitlements:
In his new book, “Character, Politics and Responsibility,” Mr. Baird argues that in order to afford caring for the needy, liberals will have to challenge “unsustainable entitlements.” “I would eliminate the concept of entitlements and move to needs-based social insurance,” he says. “The key is to both promote personal responsibility while lowering expenditures by not promising or giving money or other benefits to those who don’t need it.”
Too bad Baird won’t be around to make that case inside Congress.
Wondering what some liberal icons will be wearing this Halloween? CFIF’s Renee Giachino presents you with a speculative guide on what House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Vice President Joe Biden and others with be posing as this October 31.
A group calling itself the “Progressive Change Campaign Committee,” which sounds so 2008 and even employs the same font and shade of blue as Obama’s “Organizing for America” page, is attempting to portray a false consensus in favor of new federal Internet regulation.
The group trumpets its success in getting 95 Democratic House and Senate candidates to sign a pledge favoring Internet regulation via so-called “Net Neutrality.” But notice an interesting thing about those 95 candidates. Namely, not a single one is in a race labeled “Solid Democrat,” “Likely Democrat” or even “Lean Democrat” by the Cook Political Report. Not one. Of the 95, 79 are in races labeled “Solid Republican,” with 11 in either “Likely Republican” or “Lean Republican,” and only five in races even labeled “Toss Up” by Cook.
In other words, this pledge is a “Hail Mary” by desperate candidates and Internet regulation advocates. It also reflects the fact that significant majorities of Americans surveyed oppose new Internet regulation by the federal government. The last thing the Internet needs right now is for the federal government to turn it into the tech version of ObamaCare, and voters shouldn’t be deceived by this sort of silly season antic.
 CFIF Freedom Line Blog RSS Feed CFIF on X CFIF on YouTube |
