Pictures or Prose

My father has suggested I could increase my blog hits by having less words and more pictures. In response to his feedback, I scrounged up that photo of Tom Daschle. I don't think it's what Dad had in mind. Since I'm more loquacious than vivacious, I'm afraid you will continue to be stuck with a lot of words.

I bring to you this forewarning because I am in the midst of developing a follow-up posting which addresses the details of Daschle's design to reform healthcare. It's not brief. However, reading my blog will be quicker than reading his book, so I am hopeful you will find value in my soon-to-be-published posting.

In the meantime, here are a few photos which provide a snippet of the winter wonderland we're currently enjoying. I snapped the pics from my driveway and yard just yesterday. I hope they will enhance your Christmas spirit.

Dasching Through the Snow

The former Senate Majority Leader from South Dakota will soon be back. This time, Senator Tom Daschle will be the Secretary of Health and Human Services, appointed by President-Elect Obama. Universal health care will be on the top of his agenda.

In 2008 Daschle published a book (“Critical”) which outlines his thoughts on health care reform. Within the 206 pages, it is only among the last 65 that he actually proposes a plan. The first 140 pages are filled with his arguments for how awful things are currently and descriptions of past failed reform attempts. It’s the typical politician’s strategy: proclaim horror so that the people will go along with paying through the nose to end the atrocity.

A great example of this strategy working today is the “economic crisis” and the resulting bailout bonanza. When analyzed objectively, this current recession is no worse than any other we’ve ever had. The political response has been astronomically out of proportion to the situation.

By over-emphasizing that which goes wrong in health care, the new government will be able to do the same thing – scare the people into an over-encompassing, centrally controlled, and expensive health care system. The “expensive” part will be hidden in taxes, so people will not even realize how expensive it truly will be. If Daschle gets his way, this will be accomplished, in part, by establishing the “Federal Health Board”. Hold on to your hat, you’re about to be snowed.

Why I Care

“Gut feel” was the answer. The question, in a nutshell, was “Why did you vote for Obama?” It was a conversation I had with someone who is very dear to me. As we talked about her general disinterest in the campaign or any of the political issues, I had a flashback to my earlier self. I remembered how apolitical and oblivious I was when I myself was in my early twenties.

At that time, I simply didn’t understand politics. A candidate could say a few nice-sounding things and I would shrug my shoulders and say, “That sounds good enough to me!” and pull the lever in that person’s favor. Everything seemed so esoteric to me. Without comprehending the consequences of policies, it was impossible to have any passion about the issues. Instead, I bumped along in the world thinking about things like dating, finding a good job and hanging out with friends.

In 1989 I graduated from college and was getting settled into my first ‘real’ job. While I focused on upgrading from a studio apartment to a one-bedroom apartment, areas of central Europe were upgrading from Communism to democracy. I didn’t realize it at the time, but the Velvet Revolution taking place in Czechoslovakia would have a dramatic impact on my life.

Much changed for me in the following year and by early 1991 I had moved to Czechoslovakia. Although the Communist government had collapsed a year prior, remnants of the system remained. A shift so monumental takes time. When I had first arrived, no privatization had yet taken place. The totalitarian evils of Communism morphed into a softer socialism, and the country’s goal was to privatize the state-owned businesses and embrace the principles of a free market system. Over the course of the next two years, I was fortunate enough to witness the conversion as the country progressed from Communism to democracy and from socialism to free-enterprise.

By being immersed in this historical transformation, I finally felt the significance of politics. Through the stories shared by my Czech friends, and my own experiences during the two years I lived there, I learned about Communism, socialism, democracy, totalitarianism, liberty and oppression in a way that was tangible. For the first time in my life, I felt the weight of the duty we have as Americans to preserve freedom. I began to understand the consequences of policies. I met remarkable people who, with determination and yearning, fought for opportunities I had taken for granted. Finally, politics had been brought to life. By witnessing the oppressive realities of socialism and its degradation of optimism, I realized how invaluable free enterprise and a non-intrusive government are. My understanding became visceral, rather than academic.

By the time I left, Czechoslovakia had divided into the Czech Republic and Slovakia, Yugoslavia was war-torn, and Clinton had been elected President. The spark ignited by my central European experiences has been intensified over the years, to the point where I feel very passionate about certain issues. I now believe political oblivion and ignorance, which I was guilty of, is dangerous. Choosing to pay attention to pop culture instead of politics has its appeal – it’s an escape, it’s easy, it’s a form of relaxation, and it’s something that typically won’t cause heated debates among friends. But ignoring politics is perilous. An uninformed public is a vulnerable public. The more ill-equipped we are in understanding the issues, the more power we are placing into the hands of others. As we walk away from the tough issues, we risk falling into a pit of subjugation.

To many Americans, “a pit of subjugation” seems like hyperbole. This is only because we’ve been graced with such good fortune in the last several decades. It’s hard for people my age and younger to fathom what World War II, and its total estimated loss of human life of 72 million people, must have been like. The Great Depression is only something we learned about in school. Even the energy crisis, high interest rates, and double-digit inflation of the 1970s are not things many of us personally experienced, at least not as adults. Without such times of trouble, it’s easy to slip into a false sense of security and to dance around singing la-la-la.

Half a world away, however, times of trouble were easy to identify. Back in 1991 and 1992, I noticed a remarkable interest in political affairs among my Czech friends and acquaintances, including the younger generation. Having been oppressed, they treasured self-determination and they understood how fragile freedom is. They had suffered in a pit of subjugation to which they had no desire to return. Hence, they recognized that an informed electorate is obligatory if freedom is to be maintained.

It’s easy to believe one person’s attempts at making a difference are futile. After all, the government is a behemoth and those who hold the reigns of the monster seem unstoppable. However, this lack of confidence in ourselves is what those in power are counting on. As long as we believe there is nothing we can do to influence their decisions and behaviors, they will continue to prance around unchecked. The Velvet Revolution began with a peaceful student demonstration in Prague. Prior to the demonstration, there had to be conversations among small groups of like-minded individuals, and prior to these conversations, there had to be simply individuals. These individuals thought about what was important to them and decided to take action. Each person took a risk and ventured into the very dangerous world of discourse. Every-day people spread their thoughts and influenced opinions about there being a better way. This, IN SPITE OF the grave danger such actions posed. Nonetheless, they persevered.

If each citizen in Czechoslovakia had believed any attempt at improving the government was futile, there would have been no Velvet Revolution. It simply is not true that individuals can’t make a difference. Rather, individual action is the only way change can occur. If a nation can overthrow dictatorial rule, we can certainly achieve less monumental tasks such as halting poor legislation.

Just as the students in Prague rallied around Vaclav Havel, we can rally around Bobby Jindal, Newt Gingrich, Jim DeMint and the many others who are fighting the fight for smaller government and free enterprise. Just as students spoke among themselves and spread the word about freedom, we can share the wisdom of conservative principles as we talk with friends and neighbors. Unlike those under the Communist thumb, we will not be jailed for our political activities. (However, the harassment of Joe the Plumber does provide cause for concern.) Unlike the Czechs in 1989, we have endless means of communication and sources of information. All we have to do is tune in and speak up. Doesn’t that seem like a small price to pay? I would much rather have such infringement on my time today than lose autonomy, freedom and optimism tomorrow.

Ixnay on Moola for GM

This Heritage Foundation blog succinctly makes the case against bailing out GM. Since I wouldn't be able to say it better myself, I thought I'd simply provide the link:

http://blog.heritage.org/2008/11/20/morning-bell-the-perpetual-bailout-machine/

Obama Voters

You might have seen a clip from this on Fox News. In case that wasn't enough to get your blood boiling, here's a longer version. The scariest part is ... never mind, it's all scary.

Supporting Saxby

With the announcement today of Daschle as Obama's choice as health czar, (well, at least he's picking NEW people to go along with his "change" theme - ha!) it will be extremely important to be able to filibuster in the Senate. It will be our only defense against nationalized health care and other socialistic evils.

Now that Ted Stevens has crashed and burned, the Dem. and "Independent" talley is up to 58. As I mentioned before, with "Republicans" like Olympia Snowe, the Dems don't really need the full 60. Let's make sure they don't hit 59. Saxby Chambliss needs to win in his upcoming run-off election in order for Republicans to hold that seat. Bill Clinton and Al Gore are in Georgia campaigning on the opponent's behalf and Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney are campaigning on Saxby's behalf, so if you think this isn't an important race, think again.

Here's the link to be able to send some moola Saxby's way. http://www.saxby.org/ The run-off election is December 2, so it's best to act now. With Thanksgiving next week and the election taking place the Tuesday following Thanksgiving, the election really is just around the corner.

Bailout Bill Baloney

I was skimming through HR 1424 (apparently I have no life), when my eyes were drawn to the words WOODEN ARROWS. Since HR 1424 is the “Emergency Economic Stabilization Act” – the Bailout Bill – it seemed peculiar to be reading about wooden arrow shafts. The entry was not about just any kind of arrow. Rather, it was specifically about wooden arrows designed for use by children. I tried to make the connection between children’s arrows and the country’s financial crisis. In so doing, I conjured an image of rogue children holding lenders at arrow-point, demanding sub-prime loans for their parents.

Of course a child’s bow and arrow have absolutely nothing to do with failed mortgages. The fact that our legislators (actually, staffers of our legislators) affix onto bills all kinds of pet projects, which have nothing to do with the main topic of the bill, is a testament to how far we’ve strayed from the original intent of our founding fathers. Yet, there are countless miniscule pet projects which did not make their way into the bill. How in the world did this one, and why?

Section 503 of HR 1424 provides for a tax exemption for these children’s wooden shafts. Apparently, up to now, these arrows have been taxed at 39 cents per shaft. With this all-important amendment to the tax code, “any shaft consisting of all natural wood with no laminations or artificial means of enhancing the spine of such shaft … which after its assembly measures 5/16 of an inch or less in diameter” will no longer be subjected to this tax. Children are rejoicing throughout the country. For all of you adult archery aficionados – sorry, the tax is still in place for your arrows.

Section 4161 of the tax code is where you’ll find not only the imposition of the bow and arrow tax but also the imposition of the fishing rod tax and the tackle box tax. Other sporting goods which suffer from an excise tax include fishing reels, fly-fishing lines, bobbers, sinkers, leaders, snaps, drayles and swivels. These are excise taxes imposed on the sale of articles by the manufacturer, producer, or importer. Of course this cost gets passed onto the consumer and it is a great example of a hidden tax.

I do not know how or why this particular amendment to the tax code wiggled into the Bailout Bill. As petty as it may be, however, it is in fact a tax cut. Given that tax cuts can be an effective way to stimulate the economy I can’t help but wonder: Is the wooden arrows section of the Bailout Bill the only part of the bill which makes sense?

for the PDF version of HR 1424 go to:
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_bills&docid=f:h1424enr.txt.pdf

Three Cheers for Bobby Jindal

What a breath of fresh air Bobby Jindal is! Opposed to large federal expansion programs such as "No Child Left Behind", Bobby Jindal isn’t afraid to speak the truth. By cutting taxes in Louisiana six times, giving students in New Orleans more school choice, including private schools, and cutting state spending by 12% ($4 Billion) over just one year, Gov. Jindal is doing what needs to be done to demonstrate that conservative ideas work. I recently listened to him speak with Laura Ingraham on her radio program. Here are some highlights:

Republicans lost because we didn’t give voters a clear choice. We defended spending and corruption we never would have allowed Democrats to get away with, and pointed fingers at the other side as being even worse. Our actions did not match our rhetoric. We must change this. We cannot defend or tolerate earmarks, out of control spending, and corruption within our own party.

We must stop making excuses, such as media bias. The NY Times is never going to endorse our candidates or policies. Pointing to such issues isn’t going to solve anything and it’s not going to bring people over to our party.

We need to be authentic and unembarrassed to stand up for what we believe in: smaller government, less spending, lower taxes and empowering individuals and small businesses. On Capital Hill, there are young voices and fresh faces of genuine conservatism. Among them are Paul Ryan (WI), Mike Pence (IN), Kevin McCarthy (CA), Jeb Hensarling (TX), and Eric Cantor (VA).

While leaders at the federal level are important, the future success of our party will be determined by what we do at the local and state level, as well as within the private sector. Through competence and solutions which work, we can make a persuasive case for conservatism. Innovative policies which result in solid improvements will lay out the case that conservative ideas work.

One such example of innovation at the state level comes from the 1990s when states successfully reformed welfare programs. A similar opportunity today is health care reform. We can’t just say ‘we’re against a single-payer health care system’. Instead, we must demonstrate at the state level that health care can be made affordable by using competition and choice.

We have the chance to earn the American voters back and to do that, we must act the way we talk. We have to give people a reason to vote for us. We have to show voters how our solutions can work.

Legislator Report Card

Each year the Club for Growth rates those in the House and Senate according to how they voted on measures which would curb wasteful spending projects. The “Anti-Pork Score” of 100% indicates the legislator voted to cut the pork 100% of the time. For anyone claiming there’s no difference between Republicans and Democrats, consider these statistics: The average Republican score in the House was 43% and in the Senate was 59%. The average Democrat score in the House was 2% and in the Senate was 12%.

We’ll have to wait a few more months before the 2008 list is in, but in the meantime we can shine light on those who served us well in 2007. You will recognize some of the names. Many of these folks very well could be part of the answer to the question, “Who is going to lead our party and steer it in the right direction?”

In the House, the following all scored 100%:
Jeff Flake (AZ), John Shadegg (AZ), John Campbell (CA),
Doug Lamborn (CO), Paul Broun (GA), Nathan Deal (GA),
Lynn Westmoreland (GA), Mike Pence (IN), John Kline (MN),
Dean Heller (NV), Scott Garrett (NJ), William “Mac” Thornberry (TX),
Jeb Hensarling (TX), Paul Ryan (WI), Frank “Jim” Sensenbrenner (WI)

In the Senate there were four: John McCain (AZ), Richard Burr (NC),
Tom Coburn (OK), Jim DeMint (SC).

Several other legislators had scores of 90% or higher. For more details and the full lists, go to http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2007/08/the_2007_club_for_growth_repor.php.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (KY) only scored 53%. In the first quarter of 2008 McConnell appointed Richard Lugar (IN) to head up a task force to address earmark reform. I have to wonder how Lugar was the best he could find. Lugar’s anti-pork rating was 67%. Isn’t that a D- kind of grade? Why didn’t McConnell appoint someone like Coburn, DeMint or John Ensign (NV)? (Ensign had a score of 98%.) Then again, he could have chosen Saxby Chambliss (GA), who scored 93%. That’s at least an A-. I guess with his own score of 53%, McConnell figured 67% was good enough. Or maybe, the choice had something more to do with the old boys club. I’m not sure it really matters anyway. After all, why the heck is a task force needed? The solution is quite simple: Stop the earmarks, stop the spending! Was this task force substance, or just show?

House Republican Leader John Boehner (OH) only scored 60%. Toward the end of last year Boehner was quoted by Newt Gingrich as saying, "House Republicans have changed, too. We fully recognize the failure to control earmarks helped cost our party the majority, and dramatic change is needed." Let’s see if his 2008 report card shows any kind of “dramatic change”. I certainly hope so.

Speaking with Liberals

A friend told me she loved McCain’s concession speech and that if he would have tugged at her heartstrings like that during the campaign, he might have gotten her vote. Another friend told me that she would have voted for McCain except that she didn't like Sarah Palin spending $150,000 on clothing. She said the extravagance made her feel like Sarah Palin lacked compassion. She said, "At a time when people are hurting and losing their homes, that was just so over the top." (Never mind that Sarah Palin actually did not buy any of the clothes.)

When speaking with liberals, we must remember to use less of our heads and more of our hearts. Logical arguments are compelling for conservatives, but they aren’t enough for liberals. If we want our liberal friends to understand our way of thinking, we are going to have to frame the logic in a heart-warming and heart-tugging way. I'm not saying liberals aren't smart or that they don't think. However, they do think differently -- I truly believe their brains function in a different manner -- and that means we need to communicate differently when conversing with them.

The McCain campaign’s criticism of Obama’s “spread the wealth” comment didn’t have impact because to the liberal mind, spreading the wealth is a kind and loving thing to do. To spread is to extend widely and to broaden. Who doesn’t want more wealth? And if you want to broaden wealth, how can that be bad? The heart-strings have been tugged. The concept of spreading the wealth has caused a positive emotion, not a negative one.

We conservatives, of course, know the truth. We know how such a scheme works, and we correctly read into the phrase the truthful implication: “Spread” in this case means to deplete, to rob, to exploit, and to disincentivise. But we didn’t properly frame this problem to the liberals! Instead, we just kept repeating the phrase which was music to their ears! Boy, are we dumb. We would say “he wants to spread the wealth” and they would say “Amen!”

It is our job to paint the picture in its true light AND with positive emotion. Obama did not campaign with much substance behind him, but he did make people feel good. He inspired people. He evoked positive emotion. For some people, that carries more weight than anything else. We can’t say, “Why should my hard-earned money go toward someone who doesn’t work?” That creates a negative emotion and we’ll just be labeled as selfish. We have got to remember why Reagan was so successful. It was because he spoke in positive and hopeful terms. Instead, we Republicans have been coming off as grumpy old curmudgeons. Rather than sneering at “spreading the wealth”, we should have explained in very simple terms that we love the idea of increasing the number of people who have wealth and prosperity and that we believe in an even better way to reach that goal. Then we need to do an improved job of presenting our better way.

Supporting the Future of Our Party

Being a citizen in a republic is like being an owner of a condo. You may think you only own Condo Unit 123 on Apple Lane, but the truth of the matter is that you are co-owner of all the condos of Fruit Street Estates. When Peach Street needs to be repaved, it doesn’t matter that you don’t live on Peach Street. You are a part of the complex and you must pony up your share. Similarly, when Sen. Dianne Feinstein votes for pork spending, it doesn’t matter that you are not a resident of California. You will be asked to pay for the extravagant spending of all the legislators, not just the ones from your own state. I realize you already know this obvious fact. So what’s my point?

When considering making campaign contributions, think outside of the state. Living in the very liberal state of Washington and with my Senators being Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray, my “voice”, whether backed by dollars or not, will not get heard. However, I can still make a difference, and that’s by putting my money toward the candidates who ideologically ARE my representatives.

Some people incorrectly view campaign contributions as bribes of some sort. They think that those in congress behave a certain way because of the money they receive from contributors. They think that legislators look at where the money is coming from and then behave accordingly. A better way to look at the process is this: Those in congress receive money from contributors because of the way they behave. It’s a chicken and egg sort of thing. When I give money to a candidate it’s because the candidate has already proven himself or herself as someone who seems to most closely share my beliefs and values. My goal is not to force future behavior, it’s to reward behavior already achieved. When I send money to Jim DeMint of South Carolina, it’s because Sen. DeMint is pro-growth and anti-pork, as am I. And it doesn’t matter that I don’t live anywhere near South Carolina.

Through my contributions to Club for Growth (http://www.clubforgrowth.org/) over the years, I have helped elect men and women who share my goal of having a smaller government, lower taxes and less spending to congress. I am proud to say my money has gone to anti-pork rebels such as Jim DeMint of South Carolina, Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, and John Sununu of New Hampshire. Each of these men has been the type of Republican we need. Unfortunately, Sen. Sununu lost his bid for re-election. In hindsight, I regret not putting more money toward his campaign.

In the next two years, keeping close watch on which congressmen and women champion our cause will help make it easier to recognize those to whom we should open up the checkbooks. One person to keep an eye on is Rep. John Shadegg of Arizona. According to the Club for Growth, Rep. Shadegg “has emerged as a major player in the conservative movement, leading the fight for tax cuts, less regulation, increased domestic drilling and an end to government spending.” In 2007, Shadegg scored a perfect 100% for his anti-pork votes. Others to pay attention to include Rep. Tom McClintock of California, Rep. Scott Garrett of New Jersey, Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, and Rep. Pete Olson of Texas (a Republican pick-up taking over the seat once occupied by Tom Delay but more recently occupied by Democrat Nick Lampson). These folks, along with Gov. Sarah Palin (AK), Gov. Bobby Jindal (LA), Rep. Mike Pence (IN), Rep. Jeff Flake (AZ), Rep. Eric Cantor (VA), and Senators DeMint and Coburn could very well be the future leaders of a Republican party placed back on track.

Keeping an Eye on the Senate Races

In an attempt to be vigilant, I participated in a Club for Growth conference call this morning. If you are unfamiliar with the Club for Growth, take a look at their website: http://www.clubforgrowth.org/. The Club for Growth (as in economic growth) is a PAC committed to the promotion of economic prosperity and economic freedom. When I put my money where my mouth is, I do so through the Club for Growth.

During the call, club president Pat Toomey provided a briefing of the election results and their policy implications. John Fund also provided his analysis of the election outcome.

The biggest take-away message for me was what I consider the answer to the question, “What can WE do?” As you know, in these next two years, the strongest way Republicans will be able to prohibit the worst policies from being enacted is to employ the filibuster. OUR responsibility will be to insist of those in the Senate (and House) to have spines. We will need to keep an eye on who might be wavering when important votes come up, and then make the phone calls to the offices of these key players, regardless of whether or not we are in their district.

There are a few key races which warrant our attention right now. The way things stand currently, the Democrats will have 55 seats in the Senate. They will also count on Independent Senators Sanders and Lieberman to caucus with them, giving them 57 of the 60 they would need to block a filibuster. There are three seats still up for grabs. The first is Alaska Senator Ted Stevens’ seat. While it looks like Alaskans voted for him to be able to hold his Republican seat, the Senate can oust him, or Stevens could deny them that pleasure by resigning. If either happens, one likely scenario is that Governor Sarah Palin (ever hear of her?) would then appoint Alaska Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell on a temporary basis until a special election would take place in the spring. At that time, the contest would probably be between Parnell and Mark Begich (Stevens’ current challenger) and Parnell would most likely win that election. So, the first of the three undetermined seats looks okay, provided the ballot count remains in Stevens’ favor.

The second Senate seat still up for grabs is the one in Minnesota between incumbent Republican Norm Coleman and liberal comedian Al Franken. In this tight race, Coleman has more votes, but Franken is pulling a Gore and is requesting a recount. I’m optimistic Coleman will emerge the victor and that seat will remain Republican. If not, I would have to speculate that God has a very warped sense of humor indeed.

The third race is that of Republican incumbent Saxby Chambliss vs. Jim Martin. In Georgia, if the leading candidate does not have more than 50% of the vote, a run-off election is held within the next month between the top two candidates. Provided this happens, Chambliss should have the edge for a couple of reasons: 1) It's likely he would pick up most of the votes which went to Libertarian Allen Buckley (who got roughly 3% -- see why it never pays to vote for a third-party candidate?) and 2) There may be a lower voter turn-out among Democrats for the run-off election compared to the turn-out sparked by Obama’s candidacy. However, this is an important race to keep an eye on and it may behoove us to contribute financially to Chambliss’ campaign to assure his win in a run-off election. If my calculations are correct, the election would take place December 4, 2008. With so much at stake in regard to a Senate being filibuster-proof, you can bet your bippy Obama will be in Georgia doing all he can to assure a win for Martin. Therefore, we can not take holding this seat for granted. With “Republicans” like Arlen Specter and Olympia Snowe, who aren’t exactly known for their loyalty to the Republican party and who certainly will enjoy the attention of wooing Dems persuading them to help make the Senate filibuster-proof, the Saxby race is a very important race.

Now is Not the Time to Abandon Politics

Liberals and conservatives don't "get" each other. We each think the other is as thick-skulled as all get out and get frustrated by how the other can't understand what seems so clear and obvious. It's like one person is speaking Italian, and the other is speaking Swahili. Out of laziness or cowardice, when faced with someone who has opposing views, I have tried to stay within areas where I think agreement can be found and I have left it at that. Why have I done that? It's not really entirely honest, but it is easier.

However, I'm tired of being guarded with my thoughts and comments. My being too worried about offending others has been the problem, and it's why Republicans have been so pathetic at winning their battles ... because they tiptoe around issues rather than being straight shooters. (Republicans, however, do not have a monopoly on dodging questions.) When Republicans had the chance to lead the cause, they didn't (back when they had the majority). That makes me angry. They frittered away a golden opportunity. So, I guess I'm done being silent.

In spite of mistakes made over the last several years and decades, America is still a country of which we should be proud. We have religious freedom, we have incredible creature comforts and availability of goods, we have opportunity at every turn to do good unto others as much as we so choose and we haven't had another terrorist attack. What's not to love about life?

I do think that Obama's victory is an indication of this country heading in the wrong direction. To me, it means people aren't really thinking. Instead, all they're interested in is "What's in it for me?" "What are YOU (government) going to give ME?" and they liked Obama's lines better. Whatever happened to personal responsibility?

Or, they voted for Obama because he is black. Have you listened to this clip yet? www.bpmdeejays.com/upload/hs_sal_in_Harlem_100108.mp3 Apparently it's okay to be racist if you're racist IN FAVOR of someone because of the color of his skin.

I also think it's an indication of people not understanding how real the threat of terror still is. McCain was clearly the better man for understanding and managing that national threat, but that's not what people focused on. Instead of focusing on one of the few things over which the president does have significant influence (national security), people based their decision on things over which the president has very little influence (the economy).

There’s another contingency which voted for Barack because he made them feel good. He inspired them. Never mind that there was little to no substance behind the inspirational words. The tugging on heartstrings was all that was needed.

Finally, there were people who voted for Obama based on one or two issues which were of premier importance to them, in spite of them knowing that Obama didn't fit the bill in other ways.

Whatever the reason for the folly, I'm disappointed in the American people. I'm sad for our country. We've strayed SO FAR from where our founding fathers intended us to be. This faltering dates back much farther than to November 4, 2008. Obama’s victory points to people apparently wanting socialism without understanding the damage socialism causes. Socialism has nice intentions with lousy consequences. But the largess of our federal government is the fault of both parties and of the constituents who allow the incumbents to play the game for their own self-interests.

Perhaps the American people are about to get their noses rubbed in socialism. Well, that is unless there are enough filibusters to stop the train wreck. Let's hope this election result will give Republicans the guts to go all out and defend what they truly believe in, rather than just defending their house or senate seats. I won't hold my breath. But we do need to hold their feet to the fire.

Now is not the time to abandon politics. Rather, we must demand better. We must be knowledgeable of the facts and spread the truth on all important issues. We cannot be like those who with visceral contempt say they hate Rush Limbaugh but who don’t listen to Rush. Instead, we must keep a close watch on Obama, Pelosi, Reid and all the others. In these next four years, we must expose poor policy as it crops up. We must challenge people on their thinking each time they enter into a touchy-feely mode which sounds noble but is not practical or realistic. We must explain to them why what they think they want to have as policy will not result in anything positive. We must defend conservative ideology with knowledge and facts, not name-calling or demagogy. This we can do, because logic and history support our cause.

To this end, we should keep each other informed of the facts. Let’s utilize the internet and e-mail to communicate with each other about important issues. I’m not talking about slamming “the enemy”. That’s not productive (although I will admit it can be entertaining). I’m talking about arming each other with information we can employ in our attempt to enlighten our liberal friends. It’s easy to despise Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid. However, we all have liberal friends and family who we truly care about and love. Their opinions can be frustrating. How joyful would it be if we could get them to see eye-to-eye with us? And ultimately, how sweet will the reward be when we get the country moving back into the right direction? To do that, we've got to engage. We must have honest and open conversations with people of all opinions.

As people become disenchanted with Obama and the Democrats in the House and Senate, we must help them understand why. We must remind them that they voted for what they dislike … that these are the results that come from liberalism. We must be adamant about the necessity of free enterprise and the virtues of capitalism.

Remember this: A man named Jimmy Carter was President of the United States. Four years later he was not re-elected. Instead, a man who electrified the nation won 489 electoral votes to Carter’s 49. The victor’s name was Ronald Reagan.

Let’s demand of our fellow citizens that they “think” instead of just “feel”. Let’s demand of our country’s leaders (both in and out of office), AND OUR PARTY, that they advocate for the principles our founding fathers envisioned for our nation and that history has proven to be wise and true. And let’s demand of ourselves that we remain informed on the issues and so well-versed in stating the conservative cause that the case is compelling, irrefutable and clear to all. We need to take our message to the liberals and independents. We must find a way to be understood.