Category Archives: Republican Party

Bundy’s beef with BLM is about Federal vs. State ownership of land in Nevada

Battle of BunkervilleCliven Bundy’s son, Ammon, at the standoff against the BLM — the Battle of Bunkerville.

In his long-standing dispute with the federal government over grazing fees, Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy consistently invokes states’ rights as his principle. From Bundy’s blog of April 21, 2012, stating his position:

the State of Nevada owns the lands pursuant to their NRS 321.596 et al statutes (Nevada Public Lands Ownership Act) enacted by Nevada back in the late 1970′s. All the western public lands states adopted this law back when it was called the “Sagebrush Rebellion”. The main component of this law (Public Lands Ownership) has yet to be adjudicated by the courts or by the US Supreme Court. This matter came to the forefront once in the court process and the then Nevada Attorney General filed away this issue by stipulating that the feds owned the public lands in Nevada. The court basically said it had no other choice but to rule in favor of the Feds. (US vs. Nye County). Bundy is following Nevada Law and holds that the 18 year old adverse decision against him that the BLM et al is using does not apply to him because he is not grazing on federal property. The State of Nevada has an obligation to enforce its own law on this matter. Therefore Bundy is not in contempt of any court order since he is not operating on federal property.

Bundy paid grazing fees to the rightful Landlord (Clark County-NV) back in the ’90′s and then they returned that payment to Bundy. […] Bundy still has the county check and he never intended to steal anything and stands ready to pay the rightful Landlord today just like he did back in the ’90′s.

The federal government claims ownership of as much as 80% of the land in the State of Nevada. How did that happen?

Martin Armstrong explains on his global financial markets forecasting site, Armstrong Economics, April 19, 2014:

The current land conflict in Nevada extends back to this event in 1864 and how the territory of Nevada became a state in order to push through a political agenda to create a majority vote. [...]

The “law” at the time in 1864 required that for a territory to become a state, the population had to be at least 60,000. At that time, Nevada had only about 40,000 people. So why was Nevada rushed into statehood in violation of the law of the day? When the 1864 Presidential election approached, there were special interests who were seeking to manipulate the elections to ensure Lincoln would win reelection. They needed another Republican congressional delegation that could provide additional votes for the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment to abolish slavery. [...] Nevada’s entry would secure both the election [of Lincoln] and the three-fourths majority needed for the Thirteenth Amendment enactment.

The votes at the end of the day demonstrate that they never needed Nevada. Nonetheless, within the provisions of the Statehood Act of March 21, 1864 that brought Nevada into the voting fold, we see the source of the problem today. This Statehood Act retained the ownership of the land as a territory for the federal government. In return for the Statehood that was really against the law, the new state surrendered any right, title, or claim to the unappropriated public lands lying within Nevada. Moreover, this cannot be altered without the consent of the Feds. [...]

Republican Ronald Reagan had argued for the turnover of the control of such lands to the state and local authorities back in 1980. Clearly, the surrender of all claims to any land for statehood was illegal under the Constitution. This is no different from Russia seizing Crimea. The Supreme Court actually addressed this issue in Pollard’s Lessee v. Hagan, 44 U.S. 212 (1845) when Alabama became a state in 1845.[...]

The Pollard decision expressed a statement of constitutional law in dictum making it very clear that the Feds have no claim over the lands in Nevada. The Supreme Court states:

“The United States never held any municipal sovereignty, jurisdiction, or right of soil in and to the territory of which Alabama, or any of the new States, were formed, except for temporary purposes, and to execute the trusts created by the acts of the Virginia and Georgia legislatures, and the deeds of cession executed by them to the United States, and the trust created by the treaty of the 30th April, 1803, with the French Republic ceding Louisiana.”

So in other words, once a territory becomes a state, the Fed must surrender all claims to the land as if it were still just a possession or territory.

Sorry, but to all the left-wing commentators who call Bundy a tax-cheat and an outlaw, be careful of what you speak for the Supreme Court has made it clear in 1845 that the Constitution forbids the federal rangers to be out there to begin with for the Feds could not retain ownership of the territory and simultaneously grant state sovereignty. At the very minimum, it became state land – not federal.

~Eowyn

Obama strips State National Guards of their combat attack helicopters

Dr. Eowyn:

The National Guards are state militias and a bulwark against federal government tyranny.

But Obama is neutering the National Guards by turning them into “disaster relief” units instead of the reserve MILITARY force that they are, via:

  • Taking away their Apache attack helicopters
  • Cutting the number of guards down to 315,000.

Call/write your Congress critters that you oppose this and that you support Rep. Joe Wilson’s (R-SC) bill, “National Commission on the Structure of the Army Act of 2014″!

Originally posted on Consortium of Defense Analysts:

National Guard

The National Guardof the United States are state militias — part of the reserve components of the U.S. Armed Forces. It is a reserve military force, composed of National Guard military members or units of each state and territory. All members of the National Guard of the United States are also members of the militia of the United States as defined by 10 U.S.C.§ 31:

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are—

(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National…

View original 936 more words

Victory! BLM Feds back off from Nevada rancher

BLM tases Ammon BundyArmed BLM thugs fire tasers at and set a German Shepherd on Cliven Bundy’s son, Ammon

The Daily Mail reports, April 12, 2014, that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) today said it would stop trying to seize the cattle of Cliven Bundy after militia members, armed with AK-47s and handguns, continue to gather in Nevada in a confrontation with federal agents.

Militias who have streamed into Bunkerville, a tiny town just north of Lake Mead, said violence was imminent as tempers flared in the desert heat. “We want to get ourselves between this family and these federal agents,” said Brand Thornton, of the Southern Nevada Militia. “We have pretty strong feelings that this could erupt in violence. Another militia member said he’s there to support Bundy whether “he’s legally right or wrong.:

A large militia gathering is scheduled for 9am today on the property.

Neil Kornze

Neil Kornze

Neil Kornze, nominated by the POS and confirmed as BLM director only 3 days ago, said: “Based on information about conditions on the ground, and in consultation with law enforcement, we have made a decision to conclude the cattle gather because of our serious concern about the safety of employees and members of the public.”

The dispute that triggered the roundup dates to 1993, when the BLM cited concern for the federally protected tortoise. The agency later revoked Bundy’s grazing rights.

Bundy claims ancestral rights to graze his cattle on lands his Mormon family settled in the 19th century. He stopped paying grazing fees and disregarded several court orders to remove his cattle. BLM officials say Bundy now owes more than $1.1 million in unpaid grazing fees.

On Wednesday, a video emerged of armed feds repeatedly shooting Ammon Bundy, the son of Cliven, with a taser and threatening him with police dogs.

The politicians who have spoken up in support of Bundy include:

  • Nevada’s Republican senator Dean Heller, who says he told BLM head Neil Kornze that law-abiding Nevadans such as rancher Cliven Bundy shouldn’t be penalized by an “overreaching” agency.
  • Nevada’s Republican governor Brian Sandoval said the feds’ actions were leading to an “atmosphere of intimidation.”
  • Congressman Bob Thorpe (R-Arizona) said he and several state Republican lawmakers may travel to Bunkerville to protest what they perceive as government heavy-handedness. Thorpe said the Arizona lawmakers were upset the BLM initially restricted protesters to so-called free speech zones.
  • Arizona Congresswoman and Tea Party-supporter Kelly Townsend told the Las Vegas Review Journal, “Watching that video [of Ammon being tasered] last night created a visceral reaction in me. It sounds dramatic, but it reminded me of Tiananmen Square. I don’t recognize my country at this point.” Townsend said she plans to drive up to Nevada to join the Bundys’ supporters in their protest over the weekend.
  • Nevada state assemblywoman Michele Fiore said “I’m highly offended by the feds coming in as aggressively as they have” and has already made two trips to meet with the protestors in Bunkerville.

BLM spokeswoman Amy Leuders said it was public outrage over the footage of Ammon Bundy being tasered which prompted a change in the federal agents’ orders.

See also:

~Eowyn

Americans who know least about Ukraine, most want U.S. to use military force

Dr. Eowyn:

God help and protect us from the willfully ignorant!

Originally posted on Consortium of Defense Analysts:

Can you locate the country of Ukraine in the world map below?

Click map to enlargeworld map

Here’s a hint:

The southernmost part of Ukraine is the Crimea peninsula (that recently was annexed by Russia). The peninsula juts out into the Black Sea.

If you correctly located Ukraine where the red star is in the map below, you are among a very select minority of Americans — 16% or one out of every six Americans.

world map Ukraine

That was the finding of three political scientists: Kyle Dropp of Dartmouth College, Joshua D. Kertzer of Harvard University, and Thomas Zeitzoff of Princeton University.

As they reported in The Washington Post of April 7, 2014, the trio conducted a national survey on March 28-31 on what action Americans wanted the U.S. to take in Ukraine. The respondents were also asked to locate Ukraine by clicking on a high-resolution world map (see below).

Where's Ukraine

As you can…

View original 404 more words

MASSIVE 2012 VOTER FRAUD: 35,750 with same name & DOB voted in 2 states

More evidence that Obama and the Dems stole the 2012 elections.

More evidence that the United State of America has devolved into a Third World and third rate country.

DeadPeopleVoteBryan Preston reports for PJ Media, April 2, 2014:

The North Carolina State Board of Elections has found thousands of instances of voter fraud in the state, thanks to a 28-state crosscheck of voter rolls. Initial findings suggest widespread election fraud.

  • 765 voters with an exact match of first and last name, DOB and last four digits of SSN were registered in N.C. and another state and voted in N.C. and the other state in the 2012 general election.
  • 35,750 voters with the same first and last name and DOB were registered in N.C. and another state and voted in both states in the 2012 general election.
  • 155,692 voters with the same first and last name, DOB and last four digits of SSN were registered in N.C. and another state – and the latest date of registration or voter activity did not take place within N.C.

The second point is key, as double voting is election fraud under state and federal statutes. Punishment for double voting in federal elections can include jail time.

In October 2012, Project Veritas produced video showing a Barack Obama campaign worker helping a voter register to vote in both Texas and Florida.

The Interstate Crosscheck examines 101 million voter records in more than two dozen participating states.

The findings, while large, leave open the question of just how widespread double voting might be since 22 states did not participate in the Interstate Crosscheck.

In addition to the above, the crosscheck found that more than 13,000 deceased voters remain on North Carolina’s rolls, and that 81 of them showed voter activity in their records after death.

North Carolina officials are now calling for tighter election security.

acorn_vote_fraud

That’s the call to action from NC officials? Pathetic.

What this calls for is a class-action lawsuit to overturn and nullify the 2012 Election’s supposed results — a lawsuit that should be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, only the sound of crickets from the MSM on the massive 2012 voter fraud . . . .

See also:

~Eowyn

America more economically unequal after 5+ years of Obama

Obama said that when he met with Pope Francis last week for nearly an hour, they spoke about “their shared commitment to fighting poverty and income inequality.”

Indeed, like all Democrats, Obama tells voters they must elect him because he fights for the poor and the middle class. Blah, blah, blah.

So why is it that after more than FIVE years of the POS’s presidency, America is MORE economically unequal than ever before?

The Gini coefficient or index is a measure of a society’s economic equality/inequality via a statistical index of its income distribution. Developed by the Italian statistician and sociologist Corrado Gini, a Gini coefficient of zero expresses perfect equality, where all values are the same (for example, where everyone has the same income). At the other end is a Gini coefficient of one (1.0), which expresses maximal economic inequality (for example where only one person has all the income).

As you can see in the Census Bureau graph below, under Obama, the Gini index has increased 2% from when Republican George W. Bush was president, to nearly 0.48.

income gapInterestingly, the Gini index did not increase in the 8 years of Bush’s presidency, but registered a 1.8% in the years of Democrat Bill Clinton’s presidency.

So much for the political trope that Democrats care about poor people whereas Republicans care only about the rich.

From the Census Bureau data, it’s more accurate to say that Democrats so love the poor, they do their best to widen income inequality so as to create more poor people.

An editorial in Investors Business Daily of July 30, 2013 observes that, despite his constant decrying about the gap between rich and poor, Obama’s policies have only produced record levels of income inequality.

Income inequality is a standard trope for liberals, who always use it to advocate more wealth redistribution. And, true to form, Obama is pushing for more federal spending and taxes on the “rich” in coming budget battles.

But what Obama conveniently leaves out of his sermons is that income inequality has grown faster on his watch than any time in the past two decades.

Research by University of California economist Emmanuel Saez shows that since the alleged Obama recovery began in June 2009, the average income of the top 1% grew 11.2% in real terms through 2011. The bottom 99%, in contrast, saw their incomes shrink by 0.4%.

As a result, 121% of the gains in real income during Obama’s recovery have gone to the top 1%. By comparison, the top 1% captured 65% of income gains during the Bush expansion of 2002-07, and 45% of the gains under Clinton’s expansion in the 1990s.

The Census Bureau’s official measure of income inequality — called the Gini index — shows similar results. During the Bush years, the index was flat overall — finishing in 2008 exactly where it started in 2001. It’s gone up each year since Obama has been president and now stands at all-time highs.

It’s worth underscoring that the growing income gap under Obama isn’t the result of the rich getting fabulously richer. Instead, it is the direct result of Obama’s historically weak economic recovery, which has left the rest of the country falling behind while the wealthy have managed to make gains.

This is the Obama economy, as shown in census data:

  • The poorest 20% of families saw their real average income continue to fall each year from 2009 to 2011 — the last year for which the Census has data — while the top 20% recouped losses suffered in the recession.
  • There are 2.7 million more people in poverty and 14 million more on food stamps than there were in 2009.
  • After four years of economic recovery, there are still 4.3 million long-term unemployed.
  • High-paying jobs lost during the recession are being replaced, if at all, largely by low-paying jobs in the Obama recovery.

All this is in stark contrast to previous economic recoveries, which generally saw at least some income gains across the Census Bureau’s income groupings.

Despite this record, Obama’s answer is simply to increase the dose of the very same treatments — more government spending, more taxes, more intrusions into the marketplace in the name of “shared prosperity” — that hobbled the recovery and produced the very misery he now claims he can fix.

Moral of this story:

The policies of Obama and the Democrats are bad for business, which means the poor and the middle class just keep getting poorer.

~Eowyn

Obama’s EPA wants to regulate cow fart to fight “global warming”

cow fartThe Daily Caller reports, March 28, 2014:

As part of its plan to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, the Obama administration is targeting the dairy industry to reduce methane emissions in their operations.

This comes despite falling methane emission levels across the economy since 1990.

The White House has proposed cutting methane emissions from the dairy industry by 25 percent by 2020. Although U.S. agriculture only accounts for about 9 percent of the country’s greenhouse gas emissions, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, it makes up a sizeable portion of methane emissions — which is a very potent greenhouse gas.

Some of these methane emissions come from cow flatulence, exhaling and belching — other livestock animals release methane as well.

“Cows emit a massive amount of methane through belching, with a lesser amount through flatulence,” according to How Stuff Works. “Statistics vary regarding how much methane the average dairy cow expels. Some experts say 100 liters to 200 liters a day… while others say it’s up to 500 liters… a day. In any case, that’s a lot of methane, an amount comparable to the pollution produced by a car in a day.”

“Of all domestic animal types, beef and dairy cattle were by far the largest emitters of [methane],” according to an EPA analysis charting greenhouse gas emissions in 2012. Cows and other animals produce methane through digestion, which ferments the food of animals.

“During digestion, microbes resident in an animal’s digestive system ferment food consumed by the animal,” the EPA notes. “This microbial fermentation process, referred to as enteric fermentation, produces [methane] as a byproduct, which can be exhaled or eructated by the animal.”

It’s not just the dairy industry that the Obama administration is clamping down on. The White House is looking to regulate methane emissions across the economy from agriculture to oil and gas operations — all this despite methane emissions falling 11 percent since 1990.

Methane emissions have largely been reduced because of the incentive for companies to capture it and sell it for monetary gain. Oil and gas companies, for example, have been looking for ways to increasingly capture methane leaked from drilling operations which they can then sell.

“The industry has led efforts to reduce emissions of methane by developing new technologies and equipment, and recent studies show emissions are far lower than EPA projected just a few years ago,” said  Howard Feldman, head of scientific and regulatory affairs at the American Petroleum Institute. “Additional regulations are not necessary and could have a chilling effect on the American energy renaissance, our economy, and our national security.”

“Methane is natural gas that operators can bring to the market,” he added. “There is a built-in incentive to capture these emissions.”

Environmentalists have been pushing the Obama administration to crack down on methane emissions for some time, arguing that they drive global warming and pollute the air and water. Activists have argued that the methane leakage rate from natural gas operations is 50 percent higher than the EPA estimates.

“President Obama’s plan to reduce climate-disrupting methane pollution is an important step in reining in an out of control industry exempt from too many public health protections,” Deborah Nardone, campaign director of the Sierra Club’s Keeping Dirty Fuels in the Ground campaign. “However, even with the most rigorous methane controls and monitoring in place, we will still fall short of what is needed to fight climate disruption if we do not reduce our reliance on these dirty fossil fuels.”

Republicans and the oil and gas industry argue that the methane leakage rate has been estimated to be 50 times lower than the EPA’s estimate. The GOP argues that the EPA’s estimate is simply an attack on hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.

“The EPA has been on a witch hunt to shut down hydraulic fracturing, and yet again the evidence doesn’t back up their excessive claims,” said Louisiana Republican Sen. David Vitter. “All too often we see the Agency using flawed science for political purposes, but this report – partially funded by environmental activists no less – shows EPA’s emissions estimates from hydraulic fracturing are way off.”

H/t Clash Daily

~Eowyn

NH state legislator: Obamas are a made-up family

empty_suit

Harry Accornero is a former Republican member of the New Hampshire House of Representatives, representing Belknap 4 from 2010 to 2012.

He ran for re-election in 2012, defeated Glenn E. Dewhirst in the September 11 Republican primary, but lost to Democrat Beth Arsenault (46.6% to 53.4%) in the general election on November 6, 2012.

This is Accornero’s letter to the editor of the Laconia Daily Sun, March 21, 2014.

Former NH state rep. Harry Accornero

Former NH state rep. Harry Accornero

Who are the Obamas? People, I believe this is a made-up family

To the Laconia Sun,

Who are the Obamas? I for one do not believe the Obama’s are a real family.

Are the Obamas married? Is Michelle really a Michelle or a Michael? Are the girls really their daughters? Why are Obama’s records sealed? Why doesn’t anyone remember him from college? Why is there no original birth certificate? Where are his old girlfriends or boyfriends? People, this is a totally made up family.

The fix was in way before he ran for the Senate. How could this happen? Well, it took many, many people to sell out America and bring this communist into power. In my opinion the media help make him and his made-up family a reality. They made America believe that if we did not vote for a black American we were racist, and we swallowed it hook, line and sinker.

The Democratic leadership, with the help of many in the Republican Party were willing accomplices in this plot to overthrow America. Over the past 40-plus years the progressives/liberals with the help of many in the Republican Party have worked to make this a reality.

America was asleep at the wheel. We never believed this could happen in America, after all we are a free people. We had God on our side. Well, starting in the 1960s we turned our back on God and embraced abortion. We slowly took away parental rights. We took God and prayer out of our schools. We have allowed people who mean to do us harm to enter our country illegally and then we give them legal status and hand out American taxpayer dollars to them and tell our military to go to hell. We have set up a welfare system that rewards people who do not work to stay home and do nothing while working people pay for their way.

Now thanks to the Obama administration and the left wing of the Republican Party we have shredded our Constitution. As bad as this is, what is even worse is that America is still asleep at the wheel. We talk and talk and talk, but are afraid to take action. Our Founding Fathers must be spinning in their graves knowing that the gave their lives to give us a republic and a Constitution, only to have it taken away without one shot being fired.

Harry Accornero
Laconia

In October 2011, while still a state representative, Accornero sent an email to every New Hampshire state representative stating that Obama “has crossed the line, and under Article III section 3 of our Constitution is guilty of treason by giving aid and comfort to the enemy and attempting to overthrow our government from within. We have a President who allows our borders to be violated by illegals of any country while we are at war. He allows them work permits, access to our services and when apprehended by law enforcement refuses to have them jailed or deported.”

See also:

~Eowyn

Sneeringly insulting leftist surprised by “strange revival of Republican America”

There have been predictions of the Republican Party’s demise since at least the 1990s. But to quote Mark Twain, “Reports of my death are much exaggerated.”

In the following essay in the Financial Times (ft.com), Edward Luce describes the GOP’s resurgence. Being a sneeringly superior leftist, Luce can’t bring himself to say it, but the GOP has none other than Barack Hussein Obama to thank for its latest revival.

I was going to critique Luce’s essay — how he conveniently leaves out the post-Sandy Hook gun control and Obama’s many scandals, especially the NSA massive surveillance that has alienated even some “Progressives”. But I decided against it after reading FT readers’ comments because they say it so much better than I could have. LOL

Their comments skewering Luce follows his essay.

Note: I’ve colored the good news in Luce’s essay in green, and his completely biased characterizations and insults in pink.

Enjoy!

~Eowyn

MSM (by Anthony Freda www.AnthonyFreda.com)The strange revival of Republican America

By Edward Luce, Financial Times, March 23, 2014

For years people have predicted the Republican party’s demise. The decline of whites as a share of the US population and the spread of tolerant values, such as support for gay marriage, would gradually snuff out its appeal. Yet the Grand Old Party has a stubborn way of bouncing back. The coming midterm elections in November are unlikely to be an exception, while the Republican field for the next presidential election looks stronger than at any time since 2000. Tomorrow may indeed arrive at some point. But for the time being, today is going pretty well for the Republicans.

Take the fast-approaching congressional elections. President Barack Obama is giving everything he has in terms of fundraising to retain Democratic control of the Senate. The remainder of his presidency depends on it. Even diehard optimists doubt Democrats could regain control of the House. Yet the more Mr Obama throws at the Senate, the lower his poll numbers fall. Last week he hit a new low of 41 per cent approval versus 54 per cent disapproval. History says an unpopular president’s party loses ground in midterm elections. This year is unlikely to buck the trend.

Republicans need to win six seats to regain control of the Senate in November. Twenty-one of the 36 seats up for grabs are held by Democrats and seven of those are in states that were won by Mitt Romney in 2012. In contrast, just one of the 15 Republican seats being contested was won by Mr Obama. Embattled Democrats, such as Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, and Kay Hagan of North Carolina, are essentially running against Mr Obama. They have made it clear they do not want his visible support and they talk of Obamacare – his signature healthcare law – as though it was some kind of virus. Charlie Cook, the veteran forecaster, now gives Republicans better than 50:50 odds they will control both chambers for the rest of Mr Obama’s term. Not bad for a party in decline.

Outside Washington, Republicans are more in resurgence than in decline. In 24 states the party holds the governorship and both chambers of the legislature, against just 16 states where the Democrats are in full control. The remaining 10 are split. All told, 30 states have Republican governors.

In some cases, such as Texas, where the Hispanic minority is about to become a majority, the writing is on the wall for conservatives unless they drop their reflexive nativism. In others, such as California, where Republicans have for years done their best to alienate immigrant groups, the party faces the likelihood of being in a permanent minority. Non-whites dislike being scapegoated for society’s ills. They also tend to be more tolerant of fiscal redistribution than whites. Being a party of “small government, big prisons”, is not a recipe for long-term Republican success.

Yet there is something deep within America’s political DNA that recycles first-generation social democrats into second-generation conservatives. For most of the 20th century, Catholic Italians and Irish were a reliable Democratic voting block. Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan changed that partly by using dog whistles to play on their racial fears and partly by appealing to their upwardly mobile aspirations. There is no rule that says Latinos cannot gradually move into the Republican fold. Of America’s ethnic groups, only black and Jewish voters are unshakeably Democratic. If a Republican-controlled Congress can push through immigration reform next year, it could undo much of the sense of alienation felt by Hispanics. With barely a quarter of the Latino vote in 2012, the Republican performance can only improve.

A lot will ride on who wins in 2016. Democrats have won five of the past six presidential elections, if you include George W Bush’s Supreme court-imposed victory in 2000 (he lost on the popular vote). Demographics suggest it will become a little more difficult with each cycle for a Republican to take the White House. Moreover, conservative activists in places such as Iowa and South Carolina, which have an outsized say in choosing the party’s nominee, are moving ever further from the US mainstream. Evangelism, opposition to women’s reproductive rights and homophobia are increasingly eccentric planks of an elderly, white base. It becomes increasingly difficult for a moderate, socially tolerant Republican to win his party’s crown. Or so theory goes.

Yet there is nothing like the prospect of victory to galvanise a defeated party. In 2012 most talented Republicans sat on the sidelines. The field comprised Mr Romney plus a human freak show. It was obvious which way the winds were blowing. In contrast, most of the big names this time are either throwing their hat into the ring, or flirting with the idea. From the libertarian Rand Paul, to the moderates Rob Portman and Chris Christie, and the dynastic Jeb Bush, Republican talent clearly sniffs an opportunity.

The contrast with the Democratic field is sharp. Only Hillary Clinton is likely to run and her advisers are agonising over how to distance themselves from Mr Obama without risking his support.

As for Mr Obama, the botched rollout of his healthcare law has done more to discredit the case for activist federal government than Republicans could hope to achieve. For the time being, the hope and change wing of the Democratic party is quiescent. It will be hard for Mrs Clinton to rekindle their enthusiasm. That gives Republicans their best chance since 2000 to regain the White House. The party of yesterday may yet have a future.

Here’s a sample of brilliant comments skewering Edward Luce:

FredIsStillDead | March 24 5:04pm | Permalink

It’s not ‘nativism’ to ask that laws already on the books be enforced. I have yet to hear any mainstream Republican ask us to close our borders to legal immigration.

Biased articles like this are part of the reason Republicans are perceived as anti-non-whites. Asking for fiscal responsibility in having social programs we can afford is not anti-non-white, it’s something every family has to do when maintaining a budget.

Asking for states to have the right to be self-deterministic isn’t anti-non-white, it’s asking that the federal government allow states to govern themselves. Our country was DESIGNED to have states with different policies so that we can have many choices to examine and succeed, instead of one large federal failure like Obamacare, Social Security, Medicare, Dept. of Education, and dozens of other federal programs that supersede state’s rights under the lie of ‘the common good’.

City after city, and state after state, have shown us that government programs that restrict liberties and do nothing to reward having a job fail. Yet liberals still clamor at taking more money out of the economy and giving it to people that are better off not working at all thanks to the many social programs available.

Continuing to do the same thing over and over again, expecting different results, is madness. It’s time for a change, and the Republican party, forced to be the Tea Party, is the only one trying to stop the madness of the failed experiment called the ‘The Great Society’

………

User4519931 | March 24 4:43pm | Permalink

“the spread of tolerant values”… “done their best to alienate immigrant groups” … “party of “small government, big prisons” … “using dog whistles to play on their racial fears” … “homophobia” … “human freak show”.

Clearly, Mr. Edward Luce is one of the tolerant and inclusive crowd, respectful of diversity and the differing viewpoints of others! Wow!

………..

Jamesb22 | March 24 3:42pm | Permalink

Since Obama was “elected” – G.O.P ELECTORAL GAINS:

U.S. HOUSE ~ + 56 SEATS (with 10 to 20 more this Nov.)
U.S. SENATE ~ + 2 SEATS (with 6 to 10 more this Nov.)
GOVERNORSHIPS ~ + 9 SEATS (with 5 or so more this Nov.)
STATEWIDE ELECTIVE OFFICES ~ + 750 SEATS.

Only in the sick twisted dreams of the Leftist press is the G.O.P. “dead.” The fluke of a “black” Marxist will only happen once (two terms). The fluke/advent of the “first woman” president will only happen once.

The USA is a center/right country – being hi-jacked by the Leftist media and it’s Hollywood allies. This HORRIBLE Obama economy WILL drive people back to conservative reality.

……………..

DAVEBUC | March 24 3:28pm | Permalink

The problem in this country is the MEDIA. People like you who trash the The republicans while building up the Democrats. Your lies helped the Black Muslim become POTUS and helped pass Obamacare which with 100% certainty result in the END of medical care in this country! The media can and does control presidential elections. The vitriolic lies spewed during the month prior to the last election helped BHO win. However, since state elections are more personal and actually involve issues, it is a lot harder for the media which is primarily national to corrupt the vote!

………………..

DonWilliams | March 24 2:49pm | Permalink

1) I worked as a volunteer for the Howard Dean campaign in 2004, for three Democratic Congressional campaigns, and for the Obama campaign in 2008 (both primary and general). How is it that Edward Luce can discuss this subject and fail to note that the black community has suffered an unemployment rate averaging 15% for the past 5 years?? — their reward for helping to give the Democrats the White House and huge supermajorities in both the House and Senate in 2009-2010. Meanwhile, Goldman Sachs executives divided up $Billions in bonuses handed to them out the back door of the US Treasury via the AIG bailout.

2) 2009-2010 was a once-in-30 years opportunity — and what happened? Nothing. Democratic leaders bleated about the Magic Filibuster –but were happy to nuke that Filibuster when it came to ensuring their buddies got patronage jobs. Just not when it came to doing anything to help the average American.
We didn’t hear about the Magic Filibuster in 2001 when 12 Democratic Senators like Ben Nelson voted to let George W Bush steal $3 Trillion out of Social Security/Medicare and hand it to the Rich as a tax cut. To create jobs — in China.

3) Hillary Clinton voted for an unnecessary war that killed more black men in 10 years than the Ku Klux Klan managed in 140 years — and she is the leading contender for the Democratic nomination in 2016.

We have 25 million unemployed Americans –and yet the Democrats’ signature initiative is a “reform” to bring in millions more of cheap foreign labor to drive down wages and take jobs.

4) In many ways, the Democrats are WORSE than the Republicans –for the same reason that a mole who claims to be your friend only to stab you in the back at the opportune moment is worse than an honest enemy who shoots at you from the front.

The Democrats give lip service to supporting the lower income 99% — in order to take charge of any populist movements for reform so that they can lead those movements over the cliff.

The Party is a fraud — it exists as a Potemkin Village that actively coopts, undermines, subverts and sabotages the very principles, values and goals it publicly proclaims. Because, like the Republicans, it works for a few hundred billionaires. It differs from the Republicans largely in having a much greater degree of deceit and hypocrisy.

…………

And my choice for the Best Comment:

Michael V. | March 24 2:06pm | Permalink

The worst article of the year FT. Congrats!

Ann Coulter – March 12, 2014 – RIGHT-WING MOBS? SAY IT ISN’T SO, CONSERVATIVES!

Ann Coulter makes a very important case for esprit de corps. No army will long prevail if it kills its own wounded. – TD

Ann Coulter – March 12, 2014

anncoulter

When I wrote a book about mobs and group-think a few years ago, I could honestly say that mob behavior existed exclusively on the left in America — unless you count Oakland Raiders tailgate parties, which I do not. As described in Demonic: How the Liberal Mob Is Endangering America, the distinctive characteristics of the mob mentality include:

  • Slogans as arguments (“Bush lied, kids died!” “Keep your laws off my body!” “You can’t hug a child with nuclear arms”);
  • Imperviousness to facts (e.g., the left’s refusal to abandon repeatedly disproved canards about Reagan’s tax cuts causing the deficit, the Aug. 6th PDB (President’s Daily Brief) stating anything relevant about 9/11, and Valerie Plame being an “undercover agent”);
  • Acceptance of contradictions (I haven’t heard a cavil from MSNBC about Obama’s expansion of the Afghanistan war, use of drones and continued operation of Guantanamo — all deemed “war crimes” in the Bush administration); and
  • Extreme emotional attachment to their leaders combined with a passionate hatred of putative enemies (the burning and decapitations of Bush in effigy, books and movies about Bush’s assassination — even as liberals’ publicly discuss their sex fantasies about Clinton and Obama).

To my dismay, some of these mob characteristics can now be found in small pockets on the right.

For months and months, for example, I’ve been demanding facts — not shibboleths or epithets — from the anti-Mitch McConnell brigade.

Here are my facts:

(1) For more than a decade, Sen. Mitch McConnell has stood alone in fighting unconstitutional campaign finance laws, earning him the undying enmity of The New York Times. (The Times is probably the largest contributor to the Senate Conservatives Fund opposing McConnell.)

McConnell took on the entire MSM, as well as members of his own party, principally John McCain and President Bush, who incomprehensibly signed McCain-Feingold into law with the idle musing that the Supreme Court could strike down any unconstitutional parts. (It didn’t — until some of it was finally overturned in Citizens United.)

McConnell was the Ted Cruz of campaign finance laws, leading filibusters to block these outrageous infringements on free speech, writing op-eds and giving speeches denouncing them, and directly suing to have McCain-Feingold declared unconstitutional inMcConnell v. FEC.

As McConnell explained (beautifully):

“(T)he political left has always faced an uphill climb in a country in which there are two self-identified conservatives for every self-identified liberal. … In order to succeed in this environment, liberals have generally resorted to one of (three tactics): obscuring their true intent; pursuing through regulation and the courts what they can’t through legislation; or muzzling their critics.”

(2) As minority leader, McConnell managed to get every single Republican in the Senate to vote against Obamacare — even “Strange New Respect” Republicans like John McCain, Susan Collins and Lindsey Graham. No other Republican leader has ever accomplished anything like that.

For example, under Minority Leader Bob Dole, seven Senate Republicans voted for Clinton’s 1994 crime bill, which contained the assault weapons ban widely credited with Republicans’ sweep of Congress later that year. That’s not merely a reflection of Republicans being worse back then: Among the “Ayes” were conservative John Danforth (Mo.) and William Cohen — as good as you get from Maine.

The importance of a solid Republican vote against Obamacare can hardly be overstated. Thanks to McConnell, there is no confusion about which party is responsible for this widely detested law — and which party you should vote for to get rid of it.

(3) McConnell tricked Obama into accepting the only spending cuts to the federal government in more than half a century.

Obama originally proposed the sequester on the assumption that its provisions were so harsh, Republicans would never accept it. But McConnell called his bluff and, for the first time since Eisenhower’s first term, a bill was signed into law that would impose large-scale spending cuts on the federal government.

Even Ronald Reagan didn’t cut federal spending!

McConnell did — and that was with a Democratic president and a Democratic majority in the Senate. (Imagine what he could do with a Senate majority!)

Unfortunately, that deal was lightly thrown away by Rep. Paul Ryan last month, after he was bamboozled by the stupidest person in America, Sen. Patty Murray. Ryan claimed he jettisoned the spending cuts in order to restore military spending.

I’m sorry, but who cares about military spending as long as Obama is president? At the rate he’s going, Obama might use our military to attack England.

In any event, about a week after Ryan scuttled McConnell’s historic budget cuts, Obama’s defense secretary announced plans to reduce the Army to its smallest force since before World War II. Good work, Paul!

While we’re on the subject, Ryan also supports giving the Democrats 30 million new voters with amnesty. But I don’t see the shyster “tea party” groups or talk radio charlatans trying to take out Ryan. Only the guy who cut government spending for the first time in 60 years is on the hit list of the Senate Conservatives Fund and the rest of the fake tea partiers.

(4) On the most important issue — immigration — McConnell not only voted against Marco Rubio’s amnesty bill, but at the moment, he may be the only thing standing between us and a scheme to import 30 million new Democratic voters. As House Speaker John Boehner works feverishly behind the scenes to push amnesty through, McConnell recently announced that there would be no immigration bill in 2014 (thank almighty God).

There are breathless headlines all over the Internet claiming, “McConnell Supports Amnesty!” but when you click on them, the links don’t work and the claims don’t make sense.

In fact, over the years, McConnell has voted for:

  • preventing legal immigrants from collecting food stamps (1997);
  • a border fence (2006); and
  • English as the official language of the U.S. government (2007).
  • He also voted to block federal funds from being sent to so-called “sanctuary cities” for illegal aliens (2008). The only amnesty McConnell ever voted for was the one signed by President Reagan in 1986.

I know this from looking up McConnell’s actual voting record, as opposed to reading nonsensical jeremiads against McConnell on the RedState blog.

True, McConnell is bad on guest worker programs, but if that’s the test, the only Republican senator worth a damn is Jeff Sessions. I don’t disagree, but I wish conservatives would mention that to their elected representatives once in a while.

Like Ted Cruz. According to The New York Times, Cruz supports “a path to legal status,” with “the goal of allowing (illegal aliens) to stay,” and expressly rejects Mitt Romney’s idea of “self-deportation.” (Cruz Tries to Claim the Middle Ground on Immigration, Sept. 12, 2013.)

McConnell has never said anything that bad on immigration.

Those are facts. Here’s the counter-argument from the anti-McConnell crowd: HE’S A RINO! HE’S AN ESTABLISHMENT REPUBLICAN! HE’S BEEN A TERRIBLE LEADER! MITCH LIED, KIDS DIED!

Ladies and Gentlemen, there you have all the attributes of a mob: Slogans in lieu of logic and evidence, beliefs impenetrable by facts, emotional hatred of the “enemy” and the acceptance of wild contradictions. Isn’t Paul Ryan dreamy? Let’s run Ted Cruz for president! We love Reagan … But we hate McConnell for voting with Reagan!

Nothing good has ever been accomplished by a mob.

COPYRIGHT 2014 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL UCLICK

Ann Coulter – March 12, 2014 – RIGHT-WING MOBS? SAY IT ISN’T SO, CONSERVATIVES!.