Merry Christmas to all of our readers. Enjoy the holiday.
As the 2014 election cycle moves along the Tea Party Movement needs to make a critical choice. Is it more important for Republican candidates to be ideologically pure or do we want a majority in the Senate?
During the 2010 and 2012 election cycles Tea Party-favored candidates like Christine O’Donnell, Sharon Angle, Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock underperformed and cost the Republican Party control of the Senate.
Elections have consequences and last week Harry Reid used the so-called :nuclear option” in the Senate. It allows him a clear field to confirm all of Barack Obama’s judicial nominees by a 51-vote majority rather than the former 60-vote threshold.
All of the losers above were ideologically pure but in every case they defeated a candidate who would have done considerably better in the general election. What’s more important, a 100% agreement on every issue or 80% agreement and a Senate seat?
The Democrats are salivating to defeat the Tea Party-endorsed Republican candidates and turn back the conservative tide. But if we don’t win with viable candidates the Democrats will continue pass laws like the Affordable Care Act and confirm extreme judicial appointees.
Not every Republican is a believer in the Tea Party philosophy. Not everyone is as pure as the driven snow when it comes to ideology. Some are pragmatic, problem solvers who simply never was endorsed by the Tea Party movement.
If they’re in favor of limited government and low taxes, then I will vote for them every time rather than see a Democrat win that seat.
So what’ll be: victory with 80% purity or defeat with 100% purity. It’s your choice and understand like the poem says: the fate of the nation may be depending on your vote.
Here’s a video from MRCTV.org that gives you the full flavor of liberals justifying the rollout of ObamaCare so far. You’ll notice that one respondent said that he wanted a single payer system all along so he’s not too concerned about this disaster.
Others deny knowledge of the current events in the face of wall to wall coverage of the rollout. One guy said that the “wealthier classes” didn’t want poor people to have healthcare. Doesn’t he understand that no one in America is denied healthcare?
This video was shot in Greenwich Village, the most liberal neighborhood in Manhattan.
This post has been reprinted from allthingspoliticaltoday.com
At last, the Democrats have arrived at their plan to explain the the failure of the ObamaCare website to function properly: it’s all the Republicans’ fault. Starting with Todd Purdum on Politico the Democrat echo chamber has tried to lay the blame for the failure to launch on the Republicans. The first paragraph in Purdum’s post on Friday says it all until he gets to the last line:
To the undisputed reasons for ObamaCare’s rocky rollout — a balky website, muddied White House messaging and sudden sticker shock for individuals forced to buy more expensive health insurance — add a less acknowledged cause: calculated sabotage by Republicans at every step. READ MORE
Over the last several months the mainstream media has been on fire over the differences within the Republican Party. Rinos are pointing fingers at the tea partiers, conservatives and libertarians accusing them of destroying the party with their actions.
Democrats have called the tea partiers anarchists (Harry Reid), incendiaries, racists and even Confederates (Charles Rangel). The media has mostly joined this Greek chorus of vituperation, piling on with vicious accusations.
The left and their accomplices in the media believe that the Republicans should go along to get along in budget talks. After all, why would the conservative Republicans want the Federal government to watch its spending while the Obama administration has skyrocketed the national debt by almost 70%?
Meanwhile, its strangely quiet in the Democrat Party, particularly in the Congress. Everyone quietly goes along with the party line and supports most anything that the Obama administration puts forward, with minor exceptions.
Why is that? Well, if you recall the Democrat Party had a rather strong and active “Blue Dog” wing that included many conservative Democrats. These were members who believed in a strong national defense and fiscal conservatism.
But today there are only a few “Blue Dogs” residing in the Congress. They were swept away over the last two election cycles. They were elected from districts that did not support Barack Obama and eventually the voters preferred Republicans to Republicans-light.
When the Democrats jammed through the money-wasting stimulus package and ObamaCare without a single Republican vote, the “Blue Dogs” voted for them along with the rest of the Democrats.
Well, actions have consequences and the conservative Democrats were voted out and into the dustbin of history. The Congressional Democrats are now basically a liberal/progressive party, except at election time.
The once-diverse Democrat Party, the party of John F. Kennedy and Henry “Scoop” Jackson, no longer exists. It now belongs to George Soros, Moveon.org and the far-left environmentalists.
Nancy Pelosi, their House majority leader, represents the most liberal district in the United States and that pretty much says it all. There is no counterbalance to their extremist policies.
Obama’s War on Coal, they’re all in. Obama’s cut-and-run, lead-from-the rear strategies in the Middle East and North Africa, the Democrats are marching in lockstep with him. The Keystone pipeline, don’t build it and let the Chinese buy that oil. In fact, make it difficult to drill anywhere in the United States.
In order to have an internal civil war in a political party you need to have differences of opinion that promote discussion. The Democrats have none of that. They’re like the faceless automatons from George Orwell’s 1984.
Talking points are distributed and everyone reads along. Watch them on television. Each says that exact same thing. Take the ObamaCare website fiasco.
Every Democrat says that the website that took 3 1/2 years to build will have complete functionality by the end of November. I doubt that any of them know a thing about web design. They just believe everything on that sheet of talking points. After all it came from Barack Obama, their fount of all wisdom.
Of course, around election time the Democrats who are from red districts or states try to morph into “Blue Dogs” taking about national defense, lower taxes and reining in the government. But it’s only talk. Actions speak louder than words and almost all of them still vote as their leaders instruct them. Don’t be fooled next year.
In 2010 the Democrat Party was shellacked according to none other than Barack Obama. The Tea Party Movement boosted Republican turnout by between 3 and 6 million additional voters.
Realizing the power of the new political movement it appears that the Internal Revenue Service ramped up its persecution of the Tea Party in order to suppress its turnout in the next election.
According to a new study by the American Enterprise Institute — “Do Political Protests Matter? Evidence From The Tea Party Movement” found that the movement brought out millions of additional voters but was then stalled by the IRS’ tactics.
According to co-author and AEI economist Stan Veuger: “The founders, members, and donors of new Tea Party groups found themselves incapable of exercising their constitutional rights, and the Tea Party’s impact was muted in the 2012 election cycle.”
He added: “The data show that, had the Tea Party groups continued to grow at the pace seen in 2009 and 2010, and had their effect on the 2012 vote been similar to that seen in 2010, they would have brought the Republican Party as many as 5 to 8.5 million votes compared to Obama’s victory margin of 5 million.”
Given all of the evidence Veuger says that we need to be suspicious of the government’s story about the IRS and its penchant for blaming “rogue” agents and mistakes. It appears that the IRS set out to suppress the Tea Party Movement.
I’m not one for grand conspiracy but allow me to present my hypothesis. The Democrats were well and truly beaten by the Republicans in 2010 losing 60 seats in the House and two seats in the Senate. In addition, over 700 Democrat state legislators were defeated.
The Republicans took control of a majority of state legislatures in a year when reapportionment was occurring. This meant that the Republicans gained an institutional advantage at the local and House level.
It appears that bureaucrats either with or without White House direction decided to make life tough for the Tea Party. They made them jump through hoops to get a non-profit certificate that allowed contributors to make tax-deductible contributions to their organizations.
With the delay of this status, the effectiveness of the Tea Parties was severely curtailed to the benefit of the Democrat Party and the Obama campaign. In the end Obama was reelected after using a bagful of dirty tricks to increase his advantage.
This is a reprint of a post from my site http://wastefraudandabuse.org.
While Senators Ted Cruz, Mike Lee and their allies are waging what appears to be a hopeless fight in their attempt to defund ObamaCare, many of their Republican colleagues are stabbing them in the back in the anonymity of leaks and character assassination in the cloakrooms of the Senate.
All of these attempts to allow ObamaCare to be funded, if successful, will unleash a program on the American people that will be rife with waste, fraud and corruption.
Ever since their founding in 2009, the mainstream media and the left have prophesied the tea parties demise. Endless articles in the mainstream press and the blogosphere of the left have said that the tea parties were fading in relevance. The tea parties were characterized by the mainstream press as extreme, bigoted and simply ignorant.
They looked at the downturn in tea party activity in the quiet times of political activity and immediately rushed out with their latest prognostication of the death of the movement. When Michelle Bachmann recently announced her retirement, it was seem by some as a sign that the tea parties were done. Neither the press nor the left understood the essence of the loose group of organizations that make up this patriotic movement. READ MORE
The burgeoning IRS scandal is a clear example of a government agency abusing its power and repressing organizations that disagree with the party in power. This incredible abuse of power by an unelected bureaucracy is a serious threat to American political thought.
First they came for the communists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.
Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Catholic.
Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.
It is incumbent for us to correct this situation swiftly and forcefully. Any and all individuals who were in any way involved should be removed from the IRS and either terminated or transferred from this sensitive agency.
In Friday’s hearing, outgoing IRS chief Stephen Miller testified that he didn’t think that agents had any political motivations in their involved questioning of conservative organizations.
However, Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, ripped the tax-collecting agency over the practice at the start of the hearing. “Now we know the truth — or at least some of it,” he said. “We also know that these revelations are just the tip of the iceberg. It would be a mistake to treat this as just one scandal.”
As the IRS scandal unfolds I expect that we will find further abuses of their authority. There may be instances of singling out political opponents for unnecessary audits. We have seen instances of that recently.
Prominent Republicans have been audited coincidentally during and after the recent general election after they had played a role in the Romney campaign.
We already have had several individuals come forward with their suspicions that they were audited due to their political stances.
Frank VanderSloot, an Idaho businessman who donated more than $1 million to groups supporting Romney, told ABC News he believes he may have been targeted for an audit after his opposition to the Obama administration.
So did Hal Scherz, a physician who started the group Docs4PatientCare to lobby against President Obama’s health care initiative, and became a vocal critic of the president on cable news programs.
Franklin Graham, the son of the evangelist Billy Graham, said he believes his father was a target of unusual IRS scrutiny as well, according to published reports Wednesday.
If the IRS took this types of politically motivated actions what other federal agencies dis the same thing against any number of conservative organizations? Only the appointment of a special prosecutor with a wide-ranging mandate will get to the bottom of this scandal.
Reprinted from http://allthingspoliticaltoday.com
In the classic movie Casablanca, Captain Renault utters a classic line, “I’m shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!” just before he is handed his winnings. Much the same thing is occurring in Washington and New York, where the mainstream media is discovered that the Obama administration has been circumventing the Constitution from almost the start.
The latest revelations that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has been singling out tea party organizations for audits when they applied for tax-exempt status have exploded like a bombshell in the media. In fact, it appears that the revelation by a mid-level manager of the tax-exempt group of the IRS was an attempt to get in front of this week’s release of an Inspector General’s report that will reveal that high level officials of the IRS were aware of the practice for almost two years. READ MORE