I know she likes to wear her belts a tad high, but compare these recent photos -

And this picture from back in April.

I am just saying – no bump in April, bump now.

I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.

We have seen political correctness on the race issue evolve. Is overt racism the endgame? A bit too cynical perhaps, but food for thought if nothing else.

Consider that simply not discriminating on the basis of race is the standard by which we should judge all such transactions. How far have we deviated from that standard?

Consider that ½ a century or so ago, liberals tacitly and legally approved of the notion that preference for minorities was acceptable as a means to correct the present impact of past discrimination. In other words, the disparate treatment of minorities in the past made it difficult to create a level playing field without some temporary reverse discrimination. Even many non-liberals would agree with the logic of this argument, assuming a temporary preference for minorities to level the playing field a bit.

Decades ago the liberals pushed a new form of affirmative action whereby Diversity of Race was a goal in forming communities. An inherent value was attributed to diversity that didn’t really exist. Thereby universities and employers should consider diversity as a goal in filing their rosters. Here, while there may be some modest benefit to diverse communities, the importance given to this new moral imperative was grossly disproportionate to its rationale, or logical underpinnings. For decades liberals have been indoctrinating society through higher education, takeover of corporate responsibility departments, hollwyood production, and media complicity into believing that failure to achieve diversity is akin to rape and murder. During this time the community goal of diversity has gradually justified increasingly disparate impact on non-minorities. In the beginning diversity may be the deciding factor for two equally footed prospects. Gradually, the minority would achieve a minority bonus so that he or she could overcome even those non-minorities who were objectively superior to them.

But the natural evolution from the non-discrimination standard, to the corrective standard, to the community benefit standard, must lead us to the superior race standard which could be what we are now embarking upon.

Consider Roland Burris. It was made to appear racist to question Burris on his non-race related weaknesses, such as participation in scandal. It was sworn that no appointee from the corrupt governor would be seated by the Democratic controlled Senate. However, because Burris was a minority, any objective reason for refusing to seat him had to be overlooked. In that regard Burris proves that on the criteria of race, he was superior to any white man who would have been roundly rejected.

Now if we consider Obama’s statement that he wants a judge with “empathy” and we consider Soto’s great weakness, her racism. We see that it is not just that it is considered racist to question the racist statements of Soto because of her race. That is part of it of course, just like Burris, Soto’s sins must be forgiven because of her race. But it is more than that. It is because minorities are actually superior to White’s just as Soto puts forth. What if her statement is a strength to liberals instead of a liability? The rhetoric of diversity has evolved and minorities should be understood to be superior to Whites. Why? They have empathy that a White man simply cannot understand. What if Obama believes Soto’s statement not to be racist, but to be true. It could be that he knew the statement was there all along and that this whole national dialogue is a designed test balloon to shift to radical racism against Whites.

Why suddenly is empathy a qualification for a justice of the SC of the US? Empathy is to a person what diversity is to a community. A community is superior if it is diverse. A person is superior if he or she has empathy. Empathy defined as being a minority that is. For only a minority, as Soto points out, can have true empathy.

One might also ask why the justice department just dropped the charges against the Black Panthers who were intimidating voters during the election. Perhaps the White voters shouldn’t have been allowed to vote in the first place. Isn’t empathy a requisite for informed voting? Weren’t the Panthers merely purifying the voting process?

We are now at real racism, not just corrective quotas or false benefits of diversity – but real honest to goodness belief that minorities are superior because of the color of their skin. If you think about it, this is the only way that racism can come full circle. Whites must be viewed as inferior to minorities.

Now even though this new racism is based on race, it is also based on ideology, so that it will be palatable to the liberal white male. The characteristics that make one superior are 1) being a minority, and 2) holding liberal beliefs. Liberals believe that if you have 1 and 2, you are superior to whites. If you have only 2 of course you are also superior, but not if you only have 1. When Soto says she will make better decisions than white males, it is implied that she means “conservative white males” and not liberal white males. Why? Because liberal white males who live in diverse communities and understand the inherent virtue in being empathetic are almost as superior as minorities who understand the inherent virtue in being empathetic. And liberal white males have their own bonus. You see it is liberal white males who have concocted most of this rubbish and therefore they can at least feel superior in that it is their wish that is being carried out. They can also feel superior in that the whole thing cannot be accomplished without their assistance. Further, the liberal white male who allows him to be degraded because of his white maleness, has that grand superiority of false humility. Which is, put another way – supreme empathy.

So it may be necessary to eliminate white males from power positions BECUASE they are white males. A truly cynical person might point out that there is only one remaining step in the circle of racism for Whites to have experienced all the worst that minorities have had to endure. The good news is that I am confident that a few generations as slaves would give us the requisite empathy to be on equal footing with minorities.

 -The call to citizen patriots in America for unified action against a common threat-

 Introduction

            The proposal that follows is based on the simple belief that by combining forces, those who fight for true American principles, values, and virtues can prevail. We are millions of citizens that fight independently. We are thousands of local organizations that fight independently, and we are hundreds of national organizations that fight independently. The time has come when we must act as one.

            From the local pregnancy center to the National Right to Life, from the small town gun club to the NRA, from groups like Cincinnati’s Coalition Opposed to Additional Spending & Taxes (COAST), to the Club For Growth. Church’s, non-profit groups, political action committees, bloggers, businesses, radio hosts, authors, columnists, and most importantly, individual citizen patriots must come together for this common purpose at this time of America’s need. 

“All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.”

• - Edmund Burke

Many of us are thinking a lot about the above quote. Suddenly we are wondering “what do I need to do NOW, before it is too late, to protect America and the ideal she represents?” “What do I need to do to protect my children from Tyranny?” There are millions of us realizing we must get involved.

So much is happening so fast, what it will take to wake up enough of us to reach critical mass and unite in ways we have not had to unite for a long time, to organize like our lives depended on it, to sacrifice the comfort of our bread and circus routines in order to put down the rising tide of socialism in America? Most of us know the reasons for grave concern. To go through the list would take a book or two, so for this humble proposal, I mention only one scary thought.

 To even suggest “Marxism” in America seems to smack of fear mongering and gross exaggeration. Yet the Communist Party USA‘s platform for the 2008 presidential election is nearly identical to Barak Obama’s agenda as announced in his campaign, his first speech to the joint congress, and as promoted in his gargantuan budget proposal.

The introduction to the Communist Party USA’ 2008 platform says, in part,

…There is a crisis in every critical area of national life…Working people want bold new policies to end war, restore democratic traditions and create green living wage jobs, affordable housing, healthcare and quality education for everyone.

http://www.cpusa.org/article/archive/147/     (then click to download the .pdf)

And we know, universal health care, green jobs (and green taxes), and universal free through college education, are the centerpieces of Barak Obama’s agenda (along with his selective use of the word “crisis” to jam through un-American legislation). But it does not stop there, take the time to read the entire CPUSA platform, and you will be astounded at how little it differs from the Obama agenda. Now, I am not saying that Obama is Lenin, Stalin, Mussolini, or Hitler, or even a communist. But the near perfect alignment between the CPUSA and the Obama agenda does not help one sleep at night. It is to say that the administrations vision of government is very similar to the Communist Party USA’ vision. 

What might be scarier, even than a Marxist in the Whitehouse, is that the vast majority of Americans don’t know it, or don’t care. Our media doesn’t give us the truth about current events and our schools don’t give us the truth about history. If we knew our history, we would know that Lenin started with much the same ideology of hope and change for the betterment of the people as Barak Obama has. Lenin’s rhetoric which inspired the revolution included modernizing Russia with massive improvement in infrastructure, empowerment of the worker (unions), and plans for national healthcare. Of course his actual governance provided nothing but famine, as “equality” came to mean mass intimidation, terror, and the execution of millions who disagreed with the Bolshevik revolution. Surely, we are not going down that road, yet somehow, this model of brutal ironfisted totalitarian rule has played itself out over and over again. Are we are about to be fooled again, here in America, the beacon of democracy, freedom, and prosperity?

If our history teachers and our media refuse to acknowledge the lessons of history, perhaps we can learn something from the White Russians, who lost out to Lenin and the Reds. The White Russians loss is commonly credited to three fatal flaws. First, they were not centrally organized as an army, but rather many generals or leaders were fighting their own factionist little wars. Second, they were not unified as to even basic ideology, other than that they opposed the Reds. Some were Monarchists, some were for a Republic, and there were varieties in between. Third, the fact that the White’s did get some support from other countries was used against them in the propaganda wars and they were portrayed as the tools of foreign interests. The White’s lost because they had no centralized organization, and no unifying philosophy or value system of their own, which opened them up to propaganda attacks, while at the same time made them impotent to counter the soaring Rhetoric of Lenin and the Bolsheviks.

We resemble the White Russians. Together we make up the majority of this country, but have no unifying voice. We are; promoters of small government and fiscal responsibility, we are second amendment supporters, we are pro-lifers, we are protectors of the family, we are the advocates for liberty, we believe in a strong national defense and we honor instead of vilify our men and women in uniform, we support our Constitution, we want to be the land of opportunity, but we also want to protect our borders, and we want truth from leaders. We are citizen patriots of a hundred different hues. We have differences, but we mostly agree. Yet we do not have a centralized organization, we do not have a unifying philosophy, and we fall victim daily to coordinated propaganda about us and our beliefs.  

We are also often too busy to be well organized. We are too focused on the causes which are most important to us. We have too much faith in our political party to bring us together and to fight for us in the end. We have no central plan to promote our principles and values. Precisely because we believe in the sovereignty of the individual in most things, we find it difficult to come together against a common threat. Out of charity and respect for others opinions, we have allowed our schools and our media to demonize us for too long, and to glorify that we which we know will do us harm. In some ways we are the victim’s of our own virtues. Even though we support local action wherever possible, we also realize that in the area of national Defense, we need a powerful national military. We must carry that concept into our defense of the American ideal, and create a powerful national movement.

The following quote from a Russian, who survived the gulag, sums it up nicely;  

Justice is always naive and self-confident; believing that it will immediately win once recognized. That is the reason why the forces of Justice are so poorly organized. On the other hand, the Evil is cynic, sly and fantastically organized. It never ever has the illusion of the ability to stand on its own feet and to win in a fair competition. That is why it is ready to use any kind of means without hesitation. And of course it does – under the banners of the noblest ideas.

-Vladimir Bukovsky

If we now recognize the extent to which the Socialist movement has been orchestrating a quiet revolution in America for many decades: If we now recognize that at the same time we were celebrating the fall of the Berlin wall, the tip of the sword of Secular Humanistic, Socialistic, and possibly even Marxist ideologies was being thrust into the heart of the United States of America: If we now recognize that we were naively overconfident that our way of life, and our system of self-governance could not be subverted: Then we must act – together – now.

            “The advancement and diffusion of knowledge is the only guardian of true liberty.”

“A popular government without popular information or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce, or a tragedy, or perhaps both.”

- James Madison, primary author of the U.S. Constitution

            The fact is that despite seemingly insurmountable odds, we are still very nearly in the majority, and we have truth on our side. Of course, if we have truth on our side, then we should be in the clear majority. So why aren’t we? To greatly simplify a very complicated society, we are the informed minority being governed according to the policies of a largely uninformed majority. If this society were made up of people who were 100% informed of the truth, then we would be in a very commanding majority.

For example, a majority of people believe we need to do something about global warming. Yet, if 100% of the people were informed on the actual science behind the global warming issue, then they would be against doing something about global warming. The problem here is misinformation about the existence of and the severity of the problem of global warming. Furthermore, if 100% of the people were aware of the consequences of some of the proposed solutions to global warming, they would be against those solutions. This is a problem of misinformation about the consequences of legislation. Perhaps most significantly, if 100% of the people were fully informed regarding our Constitution, the supreme law of our land, then most of them would be against the proposed solutions to global warming. This is a problem of misinformation regarding the role of the federal government.

            So, it would seem that all we need to do is correct the misinformation that exists in American society. This proposal sets out a plan to do just that. The broad purpose of this proposal is as follows.

Statement of Purpose

To unite the millions of American Patriots and whose voices are no longer heard amidst the cacophony of the leftist government/media/higher education/Hollywood complex that currently dominates the public discourse in our great nation. 

To unite those American Patriots who still believe that we are endowed with certain inalienable rights by our creator, among them; life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness – and the right to self-governance.

To unite American Patriots for the purpose of educating ourselves and all Americans on our core principles and values.

To unite American Patriots for the purpose of electing political leaders, who share our core principles and values and who demonstrate the virtue and integrity to act in accordance with our core principles and values. To unite American Patriots, to oppose those politicians of whatever party, who oppose our core principles and values or who lack the virtue and integrity to act in accordance with them.

To unite American Patriots to watch our elected officials, our media, and our educational systems, and make the truth of their actions known to the American people. 

To unite American Patriots to prevent the spread of, and to eradicate the Secular Humanist, Socialist, and Marxist movements in the United States of America.

To unite American Patriots to develop a communications network that will relentlessly shine the light of truth on the deceptions of these evil ideologies.   

Principles

If you are so far convinced, you are also asking the question: What exactly is it that we are uniting around? The Constitution has primacy of course, but its purpose is broader than our purpose and its susceptibility to misinterpretation is well documented. Therefore please consider the six guiding principles below.[1]

• 1. THAT foremost among the transcendent American values is the individual’s use of his God-given free will, whence derives his right to be free from the restrictions of arbitrary force.

• 2. THAT there exists an enduring moral order, or a natural law that is made for man and man for it. Man in his imperfect human nature should always strive to increase his virtue and align himself and his communities and governments with the unchanging moral order.

The twentieth-century world has experienced time after time the hideous consequences of the collapse of belief in a moral order. The ruin of great nations in the last century shows us the pit into which societies fall that mistake clever self-interest, or ingenious social controls, for pleasing alternatives to an oldfangled moral order. The ideologues who promise the perfection of man and society have converted a great part of the twentieth-century world into a terrestrial hell.

In America ideologies or values such as political correctness, moral relativism, and secular humanism, seeks to supplant the moral order. These gateway drugs of the intellectual and ideological world are the intellectual pawns of the socialist, and socialism is the gateway drug to Marxism, or Communism, and Marxism and Communism are the gates of hell.

The first principle exhorts free will; the second requires the forming of the will, through the intellect, by the love of virtue. The second principle does not diminish the first, and the first does not diminish the second. A free man is limited in the ability to exercise his free will, by the impact it will have on others. Only a free society can foster authentic virtue, yet because it is a free society, it is limited in the extent to which it can achieve rigorous virtue from its citizenry and its government. The recognition of a moral order does not justify the abrogation of free will, but neither does free will justify the failure to recognize, teach, and expect virtue.

As James Madison put it, “To suppose that any form of government will secure liberty or happiness without any virtue in the people, is a chimerical[imaginary] idea.” Consequently, a free society cannot be restrained from demanding that its education system foster virtue, when virtuous citizens are a requisite to a free government.

• 3. THAT the protection of the right to private property and the free market economy are the foundations of a free and prosperous society.

The market economy, allocating resources by the free play of supply and demand, is the single economic system compatible with the requirements of personal freedom and constitutional government, and that it is at the same time the most productive supplier of human needs.

Private property-has been a powerful instrument for teaching men and women responsibility, for providing motives to integrity, for supporting general culture, for raising mankind above the level of mere drudgery, for affording leisure to think and freedom to act. To be able to retain the fruits of one’s labor; to be able to see one’s work made permanent; to be able to bequeath one’s property to one’s posterity; to be able to rise from the natural condition of grinding poverty to the security of enduring accomplishment; to have something that is really one’s own-these are advantages difficult to deny.

This combination creates the equality of opportunity that is guaranteed in our Constitution and which represents the most prosperous economic systems the word has ever known. Equality of outcome is not a guarantee, and we recognize that the utopian dream of equality of outcomes not only produces the least prosperous economic systems the world has ever known, it also produces the widest gap between rich and poor. As with most socialistic ideas, the implementation of the idea, causes the severest form of the exact problem the idea was meant to solve.

• 4. THAT our liberty is indivisible, and therefore a nation based on liberty is inconsistent with a large and active central government. The purpose of government is to protect our freedoms through the preservation of internal order, the provision of a strong national defense, and the administration of justice; and to provide only those necessary public works that the people and free enterprise cannot effectively provide. When government ventures beyond these rightful functions, it accumulates power, which tends to diminish order and liberty.

The significance of this principle cannot be overstated. If there is religious liberty, how can my government justify the confiscation of my income to support that which is opposite to my religious beliefs?  If I have the liberty to bear arms, how can my government decide which arms I may bear or which hoops I must jump through in order to bear them? If I have political liberty, how can my government justify confiscation of my income to support political affiliations opposed to my political beliefs? If I have economic freedom, how can my government justify confiscating my income to give to the charities of the government’s choosing? 

• 5. THAT the Constitution, of the United States is the best arrangement yet devised for empowering government to fulfill its proper role, while restraining it from the concentration and abuse of power.

• 6. THAT the bill of rights and especially the 10^th Amendment to the Constitution require the following line of authority with respect to governance. The individual or the family has sovereignty in all circumstances and the preservation of this sovereignty is tasked to the community, the state, and the federal government. The community has sovereignty over itself in all circumstances and the preservation of this sovereignty is tasked to the state and the federal government. The state has sovereignty over itself in all circumstances and the preservation of this sovereignty is tasked to the federal government. The federal government has sovereignty over itself in all circumstances and the preservation of this sovereignty is tasked to the people.

Absolute individual liberty is anarchy, and absolute governmental power is totalitarianism. A community whose primary function is the protection of the individual’s right to self governance, will necessarily prevent anarchy, but will necessarily lack sufficient power to oppress the people. While this principle is easy to write, it is the challenge of all mankind to implement with prudence. It simply cannot be maintained without the constant vigilance of the citizen patriot who is well versed in the natural moral law, and the truth about his government.

            If we can, at least in large measure, support these principles, then we can support each other in a united effort to re-assert their prominence into the fabric of the American experiment. How do we begin?

Steps to Implementation of the Project

1.          PHILOSOPHY: Define our core American principles and values. 

2.          GRASSROOTS COHESION: Recognize that the seriousness of the times requires the unification of our efforts. Re-educate ourselves on our core American principles and values. Accept that consensus on these principles and values may not be achievable, but that our individual action groups cannot achieve long-term success by fighting in factions. We must unite around generally agreed upon American principles and values, or our causes will die separately.

 For now I begin to be a disciple, and I speak to you as fellow-disciples with me. For it was needful for me to have been stirred up by you in faith, exhortation, patience, and long-suffering. But inasmuch as love suffers me not to be silent in regard to you, I have therefore taken upon me first to exhort you that you would all run together in accordance with the will of God. 

- St. Ignatius of Antioch

3.         APPLICATION: Analyze all political issues by the application of our principles and values. Define and seek to implement solutions consistent with those principles and values, and seek out leaders who will do the same.

4.          EDUCATION: Educate the nation on our core principles and values and why these are vital to the United States of America.

5.          RADICAL INTEGRITY: Recognize that the corruption of Washington is our ally, if we are able to expose it, and find leaders who will honestly admit the mistakes of the past, make amends for them, and seek true reform.  

6.          CONFRONT ALL SOURCES OF CORRUPT THOUGHT: Recognize that the corrupt thinking of a substantial portion of our media, entertainment industry, university and public education is our greatest enemy and cannot be ignored or dealt with passively any longer.

7.          CIRCUMVENT THE SOURCES OF CORRUPT THOUGHT: Develop a communication strategy that defines the errors of these institutions, reduces their credibility, circumvents their influence on the public, and offers the public the truth.

            The natural organization of this project is web-based, with direct solicitation of like minded groups. In this manner, individuals could begin to join, while at the same time organizations are joining. The project is not meant to supplant the individual groups, but rather to increase the leverage of each group, increase each other’s knowledge, and allow for projects on the scale that is required to counteract the coordination of the left. It is only the work of the individual that creates the knowledge and success of the groups, and it the groups that will create the knowledge and success of this project. The project simply recognizes the need for economies of scale for maximum impact.

            Furthermore, the project is not about creating a new party, but it is also not about blindly supporting a party who doesn’t support us. In every aspect discussed above, both parties have gone far astray from true American principles and values. One would have thought that after running a very liberal republican for president in 2008 and losing by a large margin, the Republican’s might have returned to our principles and values, but it has become abundantly clear that they will not: At least not without a very firm push. 

            To visualize the potential impact of unified action, imagine the power of 20 or 30 million Americans, who commit to turn off all network news shows for 90 days (or longer), while at the same time distributing to their neighbors a high quality and well documented DVD or pamphlet outlining the corruption and bias of the mainstream media. This type of campaign would be a collaborative creation, utilizing the expertise of many different groups to show the bias and corruption in the media, and it would only be effective because of a unified effort of so many groups. Imagine if the power of the media to distort, divide, and demonize our common principles and values could be dramatically diminished in only a few short months.

            As another example, suppose there are several explemplary candidates from a particular party in a national (or even state) election. Candidates that are not afraid to state the truth, that have integrity and that truly place principles over politics. These candidates could be highlighted on a nationwide scale, by the same 20 or 30 million people involved in the project, who could support those exemplary candidates. The power to circumvent the media, and even in some cases the political parties themselves could have immediate and lasting affect. 

            The possibilities are endless, but it should be at once apparent that unification under our common American principles and values should begin without haste. It is important to remember that the VFP is not singularly focused on electing public officials. It is not merely an educational project meant to inform citizens and voters. It is not merely a mass campaign to bring together like minded people for peaceful protest, prayer, and good works. It is all of those things. It is about creating a unified and ongoing effort to take our country back, and to put in place a structure that will ensure we don’t lose it again.

            This proposal is in the concept stage, and more work needs to be done to lay out the step by step implementation, but the implementation of a project like this would also, by its nature, be very organic, fluid, and flexible. The key is that the events have already occurred that have awakened millions of us to the need for unified action. Many of us have felt that if Obama got elected, the silver lining could be the rejuvenation of citizen patriots into a movement that would bring back true American principles and values. Well here we are, and there is no Calvary coming. We are it.

These are times that try men’s souls; the summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.

Thomas Paine, from The American Crisis, which Washington ordered his men to read days before their crossing of the Delaware on Christmas day, 1776.  

 [1] Much of the language in these principles comes from two sources. The 1960 “Sharon Statement” of the Young American’s for Freedom, and Russell Kirk’s “Ten Conservative Principles.”

Specifically, considering the call in relation to diaries about the awful Request for Proposal (RFP) that the RNC has put out there to build their website. (Sorry I can’t find the diaries anymore).

Also in conjunction with the multitude of diaries regarding the need for the RNC to assert basic conservative principles, such as here.

and also in a tangential relationship to the diary comparing Obama’s agenda to the Communist Party USA’s platform, here.

Finnally, in conjunction with diaries decrying Mr. Steele’s inability to articulate much of anything, and his gaffe’s,  apparently one today stating he thinks abortion is a woman’s choice, here.

The first point is that Chairman Steele was very aggressive in his demands that all the grassroots organizations needed to get up to speed on technology ASAP, and he was really a little condesending in his tone, as if the RNC was light years ahead of all the hick grassroots organizations and we all needed to catch up like yesterday. Now, I cannot fault him too much for this and this pitch was probably warranted. Furthermore, I know zip about these things. But, hearing the absolute ridicule of the RFP that has occured here on RS as well as at least one other conservative site, I was unable to take the chairman seriously and his message was completly undercut by the apparent incompetence of the RNC’s RFP. 

Next, in regard to the basic need to assert conservative principles, It was almost as if I was listening to a redstate charicature of the RNC. First, I did not detect a single conservative principle that was actually discussed, other than perhaps a very passing mention. Second, the most time spent discussing principles, was simply to say that we are not for the democrats principles. He highlighted three or four things that we are not for – socialized medicine, etc. It was like a cruel mimic of the critique that the Republicans have no ideas of their own. Now I relate this to the diary about Obama and the Communist party for one tangential point. That diary inspired me to review the history of Russian communism a bit, and a couple things struck me as I did that. First, are the similarities between Lenin and Obama. Some examples being Lenin’s original plans to modernize Russia with improved infrastructure, his empowerment of the Unions, and his plan for national healthcare. But, these interesting facts are not really central to this post. 

The really significant point was from the Wikipedia article on the White Russians who opposed the Communist Bolsheviks, and of course lost their battle and their country for a little over 60 years until Ronald Reagan, Margret Thatcher, Lech Walesa, and Pope John Paul II got together and defeated Communist rule of Russai and the Soviet Union. 

The article blames the White Russians loss on three flaws of the same nature. First, they were not centrally organized as an army, but rather many generals or leaders were fighting their own little wars. Second, they were not unified as to even basic ideology, other than that they opposed the Reds. Some were Monarchists, some were for a Republic, and there were varities inbetween. Third, the fact that the White’s did get some support from other countries was used against them in the propoganda wars and they were portrayed as the tools of foreign interests. In essence, the White’s lost becuase they had no leader and they no philosophy or ideology of thier own, which opened them up to propaganda attacks. One wonders for instance, what would have happened if the White’s had been organized enough to convince labor of the true fate that awaited them under Lenin’s rule? 

Now I suggest that the Republican Party looks an awful lot like the White Russians at this time, and the RNC does not seem inclined to correct the problems. I maintain that this may not be Chairman Steele’s fault, and I pray for him, and I sincerely hope he gets out of this rut. But my fear is that the powers that be are delusional about the party, and are so politicized that they cannot see the forest for the trees. This fear suggests that they will fail to commit to any philosphy of conservatism for fear of losing the ”moderate” voter, all the while failing to see that commiting to a philosopy of conservatism and then defending that philosophy vigorously is the best and only way to win over the “moderate” voter. That fear suggests to me that integrity in Washington has become so unimportant and so easily sacrificed, that those in Politics fail to see that simply having integrity will win elections.

It might very well be up to us to articulate and defend conservatism, demand it from our leaders, and mobilize the grassroots in an effective organized way.

Finnaly, there is the statement from Chairman Steele that could be mildy positive, but could be very scary. As I said, very little was discussed about actual policy or ideals. But one thing was mentioned, and my recollection of the quote was this:

On social issues, we are not going to focus directly on social issues, but we are going to integrate our social philosophy into other areas, such as …, and … and the environment.

Now there is a possible positive spin on this because it is easy to see that the party has done a horrible job defending its social issues positions in recent years. For goodness sake, McCain waited until the last debate to finnally even mention the fact that Obama was the most radical pro-obortion candidate we have ever seen. One knows that a little bit of ingenuity could produce a very strong tie to being pro-life and being ethical and being pro-abortion and being unethical. When no one trusts Washington, it should be argued that you shouldn’t expect integrity from someone who is willing to throw innocent babies under the bus, and that kind of integration of social issues would be a welcome sight.

However, by the mention of the environment specifically (I was so focused on environment, I cannot recall the other issues he mentioned), my fear tells me that the RNC is not only going to continue to push the scam of global warming on us, but that they are going to use the same moral relativist argument that the Democrats have used to make global warming a moral issue. The roots of this argument stem from the social justice movement which in turn has its roots in marxist thought. Government responsibility to feed the poor, save the planet, equalize incomes – all in the name of morality. The pervasivness of this insideous argument is why so many evangelicals and Catholics voted for Obama. They have been convinved that promoting the government’s duty to save the planet is a higher calling than saving the lives of innocent babies slaughtered in the womb. They fail to recognize that there is zero redemptive value to stealing people’s money and spending it in ways that you see morally fit.

If this is the direction of the RNC we are lost no matter who wins. If this is the direction of the RNC, we must do all of the work, and we must hi-jack the organization of conservatives either for or against our party. Reagan had a coalition of Republicans, conservatives, libertarians, old school Liberals, independents, and even a good percentage of Democrats. He did not build this coalition detached from any principles. In my estimation, his rise and success was based on some very articulate principles known as the Sharon Statement. The Young Americans For Freedom’s 1960 statement is as valid now as it was then. They may need tweaked, they may need some minor updating to account for the loss of an objective media, and the change of threat from an external communist superpower, to an internal communist superpower. But they would be a good place to start re-building the movement on. If we have to.

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: It is on the record — thanks to Politico.com — since last fall, the White House, led by Rahm Emanuel, the chief of staff to Barack Obama, has been targeting me, your host, your harmless, lovable little fuzzball.  Their standard operating procedure: they need a demon to distract and divert from what their agenda is.  They need a demon about whom they can lie so as to persuade average Americans that they’re the good guys, the benevolent good guys, and the mean SOBs are their enemies trying to stop this great young little president from doing miraculous and wonderful things.  Here is a new ad that this union bunch is running in Washington, DC, ladies and gentlemen.  And, of course, it’s been picked up all over the Web.  You guys, if you haven’t done so, you gotta go to RushLimbaugh.com.  The DNCC, whatever it is, they have a questionnaire up there.  It’s hilarious.  I have to give ‘em credit.  You can see it right now at RushLimbaugh.com.  It is a form letter where any Republican can send a note of apology to me.  The note is an apology note to me, and you can fill in your name and the reason you’re apologizing.  It is funny.  I had to laugh when I saw it last night.  I instructed Koko, just put it up there, ’cause it’s hilarious.  It’s as good as the old Saturday Night Live stuff back when Saturday Night Live was actually funny.  But there’s a new ad targeted at your lovable, harmless little fuzzball host from that union bunch.  It starts today in Washington, DC, which means it’s going to be all over the cable networks pretty soon. ANNOUNCER:  Who is the leader Republicans hailed as a hero last weekend?  Was it Sarah Palin? PALIN:  Nope, nope, nope. ANNOUNCER:  Bobby Jindal? JINDAL:  No, no, no. ANNOUNCER:  Michael Steele? STEELE:  No, no, no. ANNOUNCER:  Mitch McConnell? MCCONNELL:  No, no, no. ANNOUNCER:  Then who?  Not Rush Limbaugh? RUSH ARCHIVE:  Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. ANNOUNCER:  Call the Republican leadership.  Tell them to just say “no” to the politics of Rush Limbaugh. RUSH ARCHIVE:  I hope he fails. ANNOUNCER:  Paid for by Americans United for Change.

RUSH:  That’s the union bunch. Can you just see…? (laughing) “Call the Republican leadership and say no to Limbaugh.”  (laughing)  Now, ladies and gentlemen, the Politico story today.  I got an e-mail last night from the writer of the story, Jonathan Martin, who did not tell me the full details of what the story they were working on was.  He did not tell me that they have discovered that there is a team inside the White House targeting me and that they’ve been doing this since last fall, when they went out and did some polling data and found out I’ve got very high negatives among certain groups. So they thought, “Well, this is the guy to demonize! Since Bush is leaving, we need somebody,” and so this is being led from the White House.  There is an orchestrated attack, daily drumbeat on me from the White House.  The participants here are James Carville, Paul Begala and Rahm Emanuel.    But make no mistake about it. Emanuel is the leader of all of this. Carville and Begala are just trying to ride my fame into their fortune and become relevant again.  Begala and Carville, don’t confuse them with the power brokers that are managing this.  It all Emanuel.  Begala and Carville are second-rate talking heads on CNN.  CNN has no audience.  Rahm Emanuel is the power behind the throne — and don’t let his effeminate nature and his ballerina past mislead you on this.  He may look effeminate (he was a ballerina at one time) but he has the feral instincts of a female rat defending its young.  Well, take a look.  When Emanuel and Carville and Begala are together (and I’ve seen pictures) it looks like a reunion of the Village People. (singing)  Y! M! C! A!  They are really the official greeters in Roswell, New Mexico, in Area 51 where Carville was born.    My point here is that these are really odious, empty, nasty people who are feasting on their own arrogance.  They are power hungry.  But, you know what?  They’ve never had a serious debate over ideas.  Their goal is to destroy opponents, which is what they’re trying to do now.  They don’t want to engage opponents.  Their idea of victory is the destruction of the opponent.  They’re not for a level playing field.  They want to clear the playing field so that their ideas do not have to undergo any scrutiny.  So what do they do?  They leak stories to The Politico intended to create impressions about their own importance and their brilliance, when in fact they aren’t even bit players on the nation’s stage.  This is Emanuel, and this is Obama.    But I have an idea.  If these guys are so impressed with themselves, and if they are so sure of their correctness, why doesn’t President Obama come on my show?  We will do a one-on-one debate of ideas and policies.  Now, his people in this Politico story, it’s on the record.  They’re claiming they wanted me all along.  They wanted me to be the focus of attention. So let’s have the debate! I am offering President Obama to come on this program — without staffers, without a teleprompter, without note cards — to debate me on the issues.  Let’s talk about free markets versus government control.  Let’s talk about nationalizing health care and raising taxes on small business.    Let’s talk about the New Deal versus Reaganomics.  Let’s talk about closing Guantanamo Bay, and let’s talk about sending $900 million to Hamas. Let’s talk about illegal immigration and the lawlessness on the borders. Let’s talk about massive deficits and the destroying of opportunities of future generations.  Let’s talk about ACORN, community agitators, and the unions that represent the government employees which pour millions of dollars into your campaign, President Obama.  Let’s talk about your elimination of school choice for minority students in the District of Columbia.  Let’s talk about your efforts to further reduce domestic drilling and refining of oil.  Let’s talk about your stock market.  By the way, Mr. President, I want to help.  Yesterday you said you looked at the stock market as no different than a tracking poll that goes up and down.   There’s no “up and down” here.  We have a plunge.  The president yesterday suggested “we’re getting to the point where profits and earnings ratios are approaching that point where you want to invest.”  Uh, Mr. President? There is no “profits and earnings” ratio.  It’s “price and earnings” ratio.  He’s the president of the United States. He doesn’t know anything about the stock market.  He’s admitted it before.  Let’s talk about it anyway.  You want to maintain it’s a tracking poll? I’d love to talk to you about that.  Let’s talk about all of these things, Mr. President.  Let’s go ahead and have a debate on this show. No limits.  Now that your handlers are praising themselves for promoting me as the head of a political party — they think that’s a great thing — then it should be a no-brainer for you to further advance this strategy by debating me on the issues and on the merits, and wipe me out once and for all!   Just come on this program. Let’s have a little debate. You tell me how wrong I am and you can convince the rest of the Americans that don’t agree with you how wrong we all are.  You’re a smart guy, Mr. President.  You don’t need these hacks to front for you.  You’ve debated the best! You’ve debated Hillary Clinton.  You’ve debated John Edwards.  You’ve debated Joe Biden. You’ve debated Dennis Kucinich. You’ve debated the best out there.  You are one of the most gifted public speakers of our age.  I would think, Mr. President, you would jump at this opportunity.  Don’t send lightweights like Begala and Carville to do your bidding — and forget about the ballerina, Emanuel.  He’s got things to do in his office.  These people, compared to you, Mr. President, are rhetorical chum. I would rather have an intelligent, open discussion with you where you lay out your philosophy and policies and I lay out mine — and we can question each other, in a real debate. Any time here at the EIB Network studios.  If you’re too busy partying or flying around giving speeches and so forth, then send Vice President Biden.  I’m sure he would be very capable of articulating your vision for America — and if he won’t work, send Geithner, and we can talk about the tax code. And if that won’t work, go get Bob Rubin. I don’t care. Send whoever you want if you can’t make it.  You don’t need to be leaking stories to Politico like this thing that’s published today.  You don’t need to have your allies writing op-eds and all the rest.  If you can win at this, then come here and beat me at my own game, and get rid of me once and for all, and show all the people of America that I am wrong.

In fact, Mr. President, you know what, I know these are tough economic times, and you’re trying to convince people that you’re “saving” the taxpayers money, that you’re cutting spending, that you’re cutting the deficit.  In that vein, I, Mr. President, will send my jet, EIB One, to pick you up and bring you here and take you back to wherever you want to go.  You’d love it.  It’s not as big and luxurious as your jet, but it’s got enough seats for your Secret Service detail.  But it is something to behold.  I’m very proud of it, Mr. President.  I worked for it.  I paid for it.  Taxpayers pay you for your travel.  Nobody pays me for mine.  I pay for it.  I pay for the airplane.  I pay for the travel.  I pay for practically everything I do.  We can talk about that, too.  I could tell you what that’s like. And once you land, by the way, I have a fleet of SUVs because I have guests here all the time.  I have four or five SUVs.  I can send a caravan to pick you up.  I’ll even put you up at The Breakers.  It’s a five-star resort.  I’ll do it all on my dime.  We don’t want the taxpayers footing any of the bill for this — and my jet burns a lot less fuel than your two and your C-130 to bring your limousine and SUV caravan here.  In fact, you know what, Mr. President? I’ll tell you what I will do, if you will do this. I will promise to order some Wagyu Kobe beef at $100 a pound, just like you serve at your cocktail parties and your Super Bowl parties. I’ll get it from Allen Brothers in Chicago, since you like that. I know you like $100-per-pound beef. You serve it at the White House. But I’ll cover the cost.  I will cover the cost, Mr. President, so that the taxpayers do not have to pay for it, as they did your Super Bowl party, and as they do your Wednesday afternoon cocktail party.  So you have no excuses.  Your flunkies are demanding this debate. Your flunkies are targeting a private citizen with an enemies list that so far has three or four names on it: Mine; Rick Santelli; Jim Cramer at CNBC; and let’s not forget Joe the Plumber, who your allies in Ohio also tried to destroy.  The difference is that Joe the Plumber does not have his own microphone every day. They’re shutting Santelli up at CNBC. They’re going to shut Cramer up pretty soon, too, but he’ll go down with a fight. That isn’t going to happen here, to me. I’m calling.  I’m ready.  I’ll do everything I can to facilitate it.  You’re a very courageous man, Mr. President.  I am, after all, just The Last Man Standing.  If you take me out, if you can wipe me out in a debate and prove to the rest of America that what I say is senseless and wrong, do you realize you will own the United States of America? You will have no opposition.  You have America’s media in your back pocket.  It’s amazing. In 1972, Richard Nixon had an enemies list, and the media was outraged by this.  They were outraged. At the same time, those who weren’t on it were a little jealous.  But they were outraged that a president would engage in this kind of behavior toward the media.  Now they go after a private citizen. Rahm Emanuel is leading the team going after a private citizen, and the Drive-By Media applaud, get on board and help further the mission.  We live in different times.  So if you can wipe me out — and, by the way, Mr. President, and Mr. Emanuel: Don’t make the mistake of assuming I’m wiping myself out here in the process.  I want to thank you guys for elevating me beyond the stature I already earned and achieved, because now more and more Americans have the opportunity to learn who you really are, what your ideas will really accomplish, and what damage and harm I think your policies will bring for a very, very long time to them and to this country.  So I want to thank you for the opportunity.  Obviously, it’s a threat targeting me.  I’ve extended the invitation.  I’m looking forward to hearing back from whoever in your cabal one way or the other on accepting my offer.

]]> http://www.redstate.com/jerry38/2009/03/04/too-bad-he-isnt-head-of-the-rnc-this-is-brilliance/  

“Yes, what Rush stands for by and large are conservative values and that is what we stand for. He is not a politician or leader of the party in that sense, but he is a leader in communicating the truth of conservative values. Both he, and I want the country to succeed despite Obama’s attempt to drag us into socialism, Marxism or communism. But we do not want Obama to succeed in remaking America into a socialist Marxist or communist state. We don’t want him to succeed in spending more taxpayer money than we have spent in the entire history of our country, We don’t want him to succeed in dumping trillions of our dollars into bottomless pits, like bailouts, education beurocracy, carbon trading, and nationalized health care. We don’t want him to succeed in gaining government control of our businesses. Even the mere mention of another Obama policy sends the market down another hundred points. Of course we want him to fail in his efforts to destroy our stock market. We don’t want him to succeed in reviving partial birth abortion so that babies who are perfectly formed and viable can be ripped apart by people like the abortionist George Tiller, the great supporter of Obama’s choice for secretary of Health and Human services. Who by the way is so extreme in her denial of rights to the unborn that she cannot even receive communion in her own church. We don’t want him to succeed in sacrificing national defense for a little cooperation from Russia. We don’t want him to succeed in spending billions to help our enemies rebuild a territory that they destroyed by terrorist activities against our allies.

We don’t want him to succeed in restricting the liberties of every American to go the schools of their choosing, to bear arms, to drive the cars that they choose, to give to the charities of their choosing, to get the health care that they and their doctor agree to, to know if their 13 year old daughter is being statutorily raped and having an abortion, to listen to the radio show of their choice, to buy gas without a 400% government imposed tax, and perhaps most importantly at this time, not to have their money confiscated by the force of law to be redistributed to those who curry favor with the President. The Obama plan is theft on a grand scale, theft of our money, our savings, our ability to choose, our futures, and our children’s futures and our God given liberties. Liberty that our ancestor’s have already died for time and time again as greater men than our current President tried to snatch them from us. And to the extent that Rush Limbaugh is hoping for the failure of these polices, then you are darn right that I agree with him. And as the American people come to realize the depth of the Obama deception, despite the mainstream media’s complicity in that deception, they, The American People, will want him to fail too.”

Why should he say this? The mistake being made by the gutless RNC is the fear that Rahm’s plan will work. That is believing that by agreeing with Rush, they will alienate the center. This is false. Think Howard Dean. Not exactly a centrist head of the DNC. He fired up the base, which in turn fired up the centrists. The only way we win is to communicate conservative values. The base must lead us out of the wilderness, or we will never get out. Now is not the time to pander to the middle. The only way to show the severity of the crisis that Obama and Pelosi are attempting to impose upon us, is to demonstrate the validity of the polar opposite. Who is impressed by saying we only want to spend 2 trillion compared to the White House’s 4 trillion? Who is impressed by saying we want cap and trade, but we want to wait a few years to impose it. Who is impressed by saying we want to bail out the Banks, but we don’t want to nationalize them?

The left wing media will always overestimate their ability to demonize conservatism, and members of the party will always overestimate their ability to be demonized – because they all live in a sheltered world of lefties. If the RNC can’t answer tough questions about conservatism, it is because they don’t know conservative principles. For goodness sake, have them listen to old Reagan speeches, watch Milton Friedman’s decimation of Phil Donahue, the old Bill Buckley show – read a book about it, something. LEARN CONSERVATIVISM. THEN DEFEND CONSERVATISM.

The chairman needs to take the free publicity of the conservative message and run with it. Steele, and members of congress and governors, and everybody else should shove it right down their throats. Watch how fast Rush stops getting negative publicity if those who can articulate conservative values defend him at every turn.

Unfortunately, the cat is out of the bag, and real damage has been done. Steele should resign and let somebody else come forward and say these things.

What I am saying is it seems dumb to insult Ron Paul fans or libertarians or psedo-libertarians, or independents who lean libertarian, when RS rhetoric is 90% in line with Ron Paul’s ideas.

I also think we need to get a bit radical. Yes I probably would prefer a Jindal or a Palin over a Ron Paul twin. But RP had two huge problems. 1) He was a horrible debator, and 2) The entire RNC and its lapdog Fox News was gunning for him. His ideas lit many people afire becuase they could be distingushed from the rest of the field. We need that badly. We need the ideas and somebody who can present them well. I don’t care how bad the ecomony gets, if our only response is tax cuts and keep guantanamo open – we will keep getting killed.

You think we win with a moderate to liberal like Guiliani or McCain? A preacher like Huckabee? A morman with perfect hair? An actor who doesn’t quite know how to speak publicly? I don’t.  A bunch of guys who couldn’t jerk their hand up fast enough in support of man-made global warming?

We need our own BO. A hard righty who makes it sound good. Ron Paul is not that guy, to be sure. But I don’t think the Ron Paul fans want Ron Paul to be that guy, they know he can’t win. But they are going to follow somebody, and they might do it with passion and zeal and dollars and groundwork – if that somebody can capture the essense of the ideas they saw in Ron Paul. We better embrace that. Much as I love to admit I am a gun and bible clinging pro-life jesus freak – we need more. The beauty is that a RP type allows us to be gun and bible clinging pro-life jesus freaks, but doesn’t completly alienate all those who aren’t gun and bible clinging pro-life jesus freaks. Ron Paul introduced the most common sense pro-life legislation know to man – and yet he got almost zero traction. Why because the RNC tends to use the pro-life issue only at election time. Multiple states are introducing legislation that asserts their 10th amendment rights. You think people are going to be turned off by Ron Paul’s radical 10th amendment position?

You wanna thow RP’s grassroots under the bus because some of his fans collect gold, go ahead. But if we can’t bridge the gap with RP conservatism and RS conservatism – we may be doomed to see the ghosts of primaries past again in 2012. Is there one more octagenarian liberal to moderate Republican with a crippling war injury (to his hand) in the house?

Just remember, it was the “conservative” George W Bush that opened the door for BO’s 900billion giant leap for socialism. All our angst about the spendulous bill rings a bit hollow when we consider that most R’s voted for the 750billion bank bailout not a month before the election. Just rememeber George W. opened the door for health care monitoring, and other scary things with the Patriot Act. Anybody else wondering what happens if terrorism is redefined slightly? I know I have seen a few comments that could justify eavesdropping under the patriot act, if the LIBS choose to weed out those discussing “revolution.”

I could go point by point, but the point is we need to get radical about liberty. Maybe not Ron Paul radical – but damn close.  Sure it may be impossible to eliminate the income tax, and it may be impossible to bring all the troops home – but then again, half of everything that BO said on the campaign trail was either impossible or a lie. We will need our own hope and change campaign in four years (and 2 years). We  need to place our hope in liberty, and we need to change our attitude to allow for everyone who loves liberty to join us. Insinuating that anyone who doesn’t believe in the Bush Doctrine is trailer trash, will not forward the cause.

Think 4 years down the road. More debt by probably double than ever before. Probably highest taxes in a generation. Throw in a better than average chance of hyperinflation and continued high unemployment. I know we all hope that bad times alone will be enough to win with another republican that campaigns 1 degree to the right of the democrat. But will that really inspire anybody? Throw in the election corruption that will be tipping close to the Chavez scale after Acorn gets billions of our tax dollars and BO uses the census to create a federally funded ground game. There will never be a time to push for rabid conservatism like there will be in 2012 (2010). Assuming of course that conservatives are still allowed to run a campaign without running afoul of the fairness doctrine.

My new name for anybody who feels the need to alienate Ron Paul supporters is “Fredutard.”

Step 2: We Issue bills to every country we have issued aid to over the past 10 years including the entire cost of the Iraq war. We assign the proceeds of these bills to those countries we owe. Let China collect from Iraq.

Step 3: We put an immediate freeze on most foreign aid.

Step 4: Get out of the United Nations and take our building back.

Step 5: We announce federal govt. loans to homeowners all current homeowners at 4.25% interest and to new all homebuyers (new buyers must qualify) for a 90 day window begining Ocotber 1 and ending December 31. 

Step 6: The Fed will offer discounted rates for those banks who dollar for dollar buy back the morgtgage.

Step 7: Stop bailing companies out (especially banks) but we insure all deposits. We let bankruptcy courts do what they are supposed to do.

Step 8: Destroy the treasuries printing presses after buying the mortgages.

What this does do? Saves a boatload of money, ruins our credit, ends the housing crisis, stimultes the heck out of the ecomony (except for the banks -which need to learn a lesson anyway), and get us out of the UN. Ruining our credit is the key to long term fiscal responsibility, because we surely have no hope of congress doing it on their own. Can’t fund a deficit when no one will lend to you. I am convinced that bad credit is the only way to return to fiscal responsibility.

This also gives every other country in the world a chance to sit and think for a few years about all the good we have done for them. Kind of like taking the x-box away when your Kid goes on a 1/2 hour rant about not having an i-phone. Teaches gratitude.  In the meantime, Israel can blow Iran to kingdom come and it wont be on our watch becuase we are taking a break.

Banks will hopefully extend 4% loans to existing homebuyers ahead of the October 1 window and the Fed. Govt. will not have to take all these loans. If it does, then the banks will have to buy it back in order to get cheap money. We stop throwing money down the rat hole of bad banks and we let those banks fail, but we protect the deposits. New banks or good old banks can recapitalize while taking loans paying them 4.25%, which is probably the best game in town. People who cant pay 4.25% will be the beneficiaries of government sloth and will by nature have time to work out their mortgages. If they can’t work them out, they will ultimately be foreclosed on.

Just a thought