Vanity Fair: Opinion- S.E. Cupp: ‘The Conservative Coma’

Source:Vanity Fair– Taking America back to the 1950s?

Source:The New Democrat

When I think of the Grand Ole Party ( and saying that with a straight face anymore is getting very difficult ) I think of a Conservative Republican Party that was hawkish when it came to not just Communists and communism, but authoritarians and authoritarianism in general. That actually believed deficits matter. ( Which night sound crazy in the Trumpian Republican Party today ) That actually believed not only in entitlement reform, but that it was necessary. That if Republicans as a party are going to believe in and support programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid that they should all be on sound fiscal footing and not blow up the deficit.

It was a party that believed that race, ethnicity, and gender didn’t matter. Which why it supported the civil rights laws of the 1960s while opposing affirmative action in the 1970s, because the GOP believed that people shouldn’t be promoted, demoted, empowered or denied simply because of their race, ethnicity or religion. A party that not only believed in immigration, but that anyone regardless of what country or region of the world, regardless of their race or ethnicity should be allowed to come to America legally if they work hard and contribute to America and obey our laws.

A party that was strong on defense, but didn’t believe America shouldn’t try to police the world and try force our values on other countries and tell them this is how they should govern themselves. For the most part this Republican value is still in place with the Neoconservatives thanks to the Iraq War losing almost all influence on Republican foreign and national security policy. A party that still believed in limited government even with the Christian-Right becoming a force in the party, but that still believed in that Barry Goldwater line that said he didn’t want big government in our wallets, bedrooms, boardrooms, or classrooms.

That was the Republican Party that I grew up. I come from a Democratic family, but that’s what the Republican Party use to be and what the Republican Party was when I grew up. And expect for the national debt and deficits, President Ronald Reagan believed in most if not all of those values. He did have his own big government issues with the national debt, deficits, and his expansion of the War on Drugs in the 1980s, but basically he represented and lead what was the Grand Ole Party very well in the 1980s. This is not the Republican Party today and I when I think of RINOS, ( Republicans in name only ) I believe in so-called Republicans who don’t even really believe in the concept of a republic and instead want to create a fundamentalist Christian society where their religious values are not only dominant, but become official government policy.

The GOP is not dead. You still have the S.E. Cupp’s of the world, as well as Republicans like Margaret Hoover, Amanda Carpenter, Tara Setmeyer, Bill Kristol, and a few others at CNN. They’re still some GOP Republicans in Congress like outgoing Senator’s Jeff Flake, Bob Corker, outgoing Speaker Paul Ryan, incoming Senator Mitt Romney once he takes his Senate seat in the next Congress. But the Republican Party today is now the Donald Trump Nationalist Party. That puts groups of Americans against each other and no longer preaches about America being the city on a shining hill. And instead preaches that, “you’re either with us or against us.” Meaning you either support President Donald Trump, or you’re Un-American and a RINO.

The Republican or Nationalist or RINO Party ( depending on how you want to label the modern Republican Party ) is now the party that represents the 1950s that was reborn in this century, but come from the 1950s culturally and ideologically. Where women’s place in the world is at home, African-Americans and other non-Anglo-Saxons are second-class citizens if citizens at all. Gays are either locked in the closet, or locked in prison or some mental institution.

Today’s so-called Republican party is really now an anti-conservative party, because they now believe character and morality doesn’t matter just as long as you either serve, back, or defend President Donald Trump and the people who support the President. And that instead of defending and supporting the status quo and and conserving our individual rights which is what Conservatives are supposed to support, they now want to blow up the system and establishment and create a society and establishment that supports them and what they being the Trump Nationalist movement supports and believes in.

If you read Joshua Green’s The Devil’s Bargain, he reports and argues that the Republican Party Leadership and base got in bed with Donald Trump in 2015-16, because even though they were aware of all of Donald Trump’s faults when it came to his lack of character and civility, that if he became President with a Republican Congress and Judiciary that they would get from a President Trump the things that they’ve been fighting for and wanted ever since Barack Obama became President. Things like deregulation, tax cuts, judicial appointments, a larger defense budget, etc. And that every time President Trump would do something that’s unconventional ( to be kind ) or irresponsible, reckless, anti-conservative like appeasing dictators, they would just chalk it up to Donald Trump not being a conventional politician and new to Washington. Which is exactly what’ we’ve seen the last two years with Donald Trump as President.

The GOP is not dead, but they’re not unfortunately now a small faction of the Republican Party. The never-trumpers are what left of the Grand Ole Party. They’re the Republicans ( not RINOS ) who believe that deficits and the national debt actually do matter, expect for perhaps Bill Kristol who is a Neoconservative. They don’t just support entitlement reform, but believe it’s necessary. They support legal immigration and believe it benefits the country and aren’t worried about America losing it’s European culture because they don’t believe one race or ethnicity is superior to any other. They by enlarge don’t want big government in our economic or personal affairs. I’ve argued for a while now that the Republican Party is no longer a conservative party, but party with a conservative faction and the Donald Trump experiment and his movement make that argument for me perfectly.

Source:CNN: State of The Union- S.E. Cupp: Conservative Movement is in a Coma– CNN political analyst S.E. Cupp 

Read Full Post »

PBS: NewsHour- ‘Five States Move to Restrict Access to Abortion Services’

Source:PBS NewsHour– Ilyse Hogue from National Pro-Choice America.

“The Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) is an American public broadcaster and television program distributor.[6] It is a nonprofit organization and the most prominent provider of educational television programming to public television stations in the United States, distributing series such as American Experience, America’s Test Kitchen, Antiques Roadshow, Arthur, Barney & Friends, Between the Lions, Cyberchase, Clifford the Big Red Dog, Downton Abbey, Elinor Wonders Why, Finding Your Roots, Frontline, The Magic School Bus, Masterpiece Theater, Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood, Nature, Nova, the PBS NewsHour, Reading Rainbow, Sesame Street, Teletubbies, Keeping up Appearances and This Old House.”

From Wikipedia

“Five states have moved to adopt tighter abortion regulations, including North Dakota, which has the nation’s strictest abortion regulation, outlawing abortions as soon as a fetal heartbeat is detected. Jeffrey Brown gets perspectives from Charmaine Yoest of Americans United for Life and Ilyse Hogue of NARAL Pro-Choice America.”

From the PBS NewsHour

All of these abortion restriction laws are coming in red states that like to complain about big government and government interfering in our lives and so-forth and yet they write laws that do exactly that. And interfere with the most personal of decisions that Americans will ever make which get’s to our healthcare.

In this case women’s healthcare and who decides whether women give birth or not after being pregnant. Apparently big government in red states is government they do not like mainly as it relates to the economy. But big government that they do like as it has to do with our personal lives is okay, because: “It’s in our national interest to have government making these decisions for us. Rather than individuals have the freedom and responsibility to make these decisions for ourselves.”

And then you get to the constitutional and legal aspects of this where these laws will be ruled unconstitutional. Because of the rock solid pro-choice majority on it. And you have states defending laws in court with taxpayer funds that will be ruled unconstitutional. Money that would’ve been spent for other things that would not get thrown out.

You can also see this post at The New Democrat, on WordPress.

Read Full Post »

Kathleen Parker: ‘Barack Obama’s Dream: To Run Against Rick Santorum’

Source:The Washington Post– columnist Kathleen Parker.

“Let me be blunt: If Republicans nominate Rick Santorum to run for president, they will lose.

The prospect of four more years of President Barack Obama holds some appeal for many Americans but probably not for most Republicans. It may give doubters among them some comfort, however, to know that Obama and Santorum share the same prayer: that Santorum be the Republican nominee.

It gives me no pleasure to rap Santorum, a man I know and respect even if I disagree with him on some issues. Not that he minds. He’s a scrapper who loves a fight — and he forgives. Bottom line: Santorum is a good man. He’s just a good man in the wrong century.

This doesn’t necessarily mean he’s wrong about everything, but he’s so far out of step with the majority of Americans that he can’t hope to win the votes of moderates and independents so crucial to victory in November. The Republican Party’s insistence on conservative purity, meanwhile, will result in the cold comfort of defeat with honor and, in the longer term, potential extinction.

Increasingly, the party is growing grayer and whiter. Nine out of 10 Republicans are non-Hispanic white, and more than half are highly religious, according to Gallup. This isn’t news, but when this demographic is suddenly associated with renewed debate about whether women should have access to contraception — never mind abortion — suddenly they begin to look like the Republican Brotherhood.

Add to that perception the abhorrent, pre-abortion ultrasound legislation proposed in Virginia, and you can kiss the pope’s ring and voters’ retreating backsides.

The proposed law, temporarily tabled, called for women seeking an abortion to be forced to submit to a vaginal ultrasound. Aldous Huxley’s “The Devils of Loudon” comes to mind, but he was writing about exorcisms in a convent of 17th-century France. When did Republicans, who supposedly believe in less government intervention, begin thinking that invading a person’s body against her will was remotely acceptable?

Skip to main content
Opinions
Editorials
Columns
Guest opinions
Cartoons
Submit a guest opinion
Opinions
Obama’s dream: To run against Santorum

The prospect of four more years of President Barack Obama holds some appeal for many Americans but probably not for most Republicans. It may give doubters among them some comfort, however, to know that Obama and Santorum share the same prayer: that Santorum be the Republican nominee.

It gives me no pleasure to rap Santorum, a man I know and respect even if I disagree with him on some issues. Not that he minds. He’s a scrapper who loves a fight — and he forgives. Bottom line: Santorum is a good man. He’s just a good man in the wrong century.

This doesn’t necessarily mean he’s wrong about everything, but he’s so far out of step with the majority of Americans that he can’t hope to win the votes of moderates and independents so crucial to victory in November. The Republican Party’s insistence on conservative purity, meanwhile, will result in the cold comfort of defeat with honor and, in the longer term, potential extinction.

Increasingly, the party is growing grayer and whiter. Nine out of 10 Republicans are non-Hispanic white, and more than half are highly religious, according to Gallup. This isn’t news, but when this demographic is suddenly associated with renewed debate about whether women should have access to contraception — never mind abortion — suddenly they begin to look like the Republican Brotherhood.

Add to that perception the abhorrent, pre-abortion ultrasound legislation proposed in Virginia, and you can kiss the pope’s ring and voters’ retreating backsides.

The proposed law, temporarily tabled, called for women seeking an abortion to be forced to submit to a vaginal ultrasound. Aldous Huxley’s “The Devils of Loudon” comes to mind, but he was writing about exorcisms in a convent of 17th-century France. When did Republicans, who supposedly believe in less government intervention, begin thinking that invading a person’s body against her will was remotely acceptable?

Saner minds have prevailed, at least for now, but the fact that the bill was ever conceived and taken seriously by at least some legislators gives freedom-loving voters every reason to run the other way.

Informed consent is, in my view, a reasonable goal. Surely removal of a human fetus deserves the same level of awareness we would insist upon in removing, say, a gall bladder. If some women change their minds after viewing the contents of their womb, then they obviously needed more information than they had going in. Still, any procedure should be voluntary, and inserting a probe into a woman against her will is rape by any other name.

Obviously, this is no place for the state.

The Virginia bill and the broader, bogus message often repeated on left-leaning talk shows that Republicans are campaigning against birth control have created a perfect storm for defeat. The math is clear: Sixty-seven percent of women are either Democrats (41 percent) or independents (26 percent); more women than men vote; 55 percent of women ages 18-22 voted in the 2008 presidential election.

Republicans are caught in a nearly impossible situation, none more than the more temperate-minded Mitt Romney. It is important to remember, however, why contraception came up in the first place. Republicans were forced to man their battlements by the Obama administration’s new health-care rule requiring that Catholic organizations pay for contraception in violation of conscience. From there, things spiraled out of the realm of religious liberty, where this debate belongs, and into the fray of moral differences.

Santorum’s original surge was based not on social issues but on his authenticity and his ability to identify with middle-class struggles. He was the un-Romney. But now this appealing profile has been occluded by social positions that make him an outlier to mainstream Americans.

Republicans may sleep better if they nominate The Most Conservative Person In The World, but they won’t be seeing the executive branch anytime soon. It’s too bad this election season got lost in the weeds of religious conviction. It wouldn’t have happened if the Obama administration had simply taken one of several other routes available for providing birth control to women who want it. Instead, Obama aimed right at the heart of the Republican Party and, one can only assume, got exactly what he wanted: a culture war in which Rick Santorum would be the natural point man and, in the broader public’s perception, the voice of the GOP.”

From The Washington Post

“Rick Santorum is a big government, big spending, nanny state “Republican.” He lost his last election by 18 points. He is part of the Republican party that behaved like Democrats in terms of spending and size of government. He voted for the Bridge to Nowhere TWO TIMES and repeatedly voted to protect unions. We need to leave this failed part of Republicanism and return to a true, proven and accomplished small government conservative like Newt Gingrich.”

Source:Mike L– Fox News discussing Rick Santorum for President.

From Mike L

Imagine if President Obama said he wanted more Americans on public assistance instead of in higher education, imagine how the right-wing would’ve reacted. They would’ve called Barack Obama a Socialist: “See, we’ve been right all along: Barack Obama is a Socialist. He wants more people in America dependent on government. Instead of taking care of themselves. He wants to transform America into Europe.”

Rick Santorum and the rest of the right-wing can’t have it both ways and be credible. If you believe higher education and being self-sufficient is the right thing, instead of being dependent on public assistance, something they’ve been saying for eighty years if not longer, then you can’t say well thats a bad idea now, just because someone you don’t like agrees with you.

What the Republican Party should be saying is that: “Government dependence is bad and we need more people working in America paying their own bills, instead of living off of people who do. Even Barack Obama understands this, we’ve been right all along.”

People simply for the most part (unless they are an athlete or entertainer) can’t make it on their own in America, with just a high school diploma. Our economy is just too advanced now. People need higher education and get those extra skills just to have a good chance of getting a good job in this country. Which is something that President Obama was acknowledging and Rick Santorum doesn’t understand.

You can also see this post at The New Democrat, on WordPress.

Read Full Post »

CBS News: President Barack Obama- ‘Ronald Reagan Could Not Win a Republican Primary Today’

Source:CBS News– President Barack H. Obama (Democrat, Illinois) talking about Ronald Reagan and the modern Republican Party. (Not the GOP)

“During a speech at the Associated Press luncheon at the ASNE convention on Tuesday, President Obama said that Ronald Reagan would not be able to get through a Republican primary today based on his acceptance of the need to raise revenue through higher taxes.”

From CBS News

When Ronald Reagan was President of the United States and running for that job, as well as Governor of California and speaking in favor of Conservative Republicans like Barry Goldwater and others, thats what the Republican Party was: and actual conservative party (with a progressive faction) not a religious-theocratic arty as it’s now.

The Republican Party (Republican in name only, now) use to be about individual liberty, limited government, and the U.S. Constitution. And they didn’t put things like national security and their sense of national morality over individual liberty, limited government, and the U.S. Constitution. As they do now, again with a few exceptions like Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Senator Mike Lee, Governor Jon Huntsmen, and a few others.

So when today’s religious and Neoconservatives of the World like Rick Santorum, Michele Bachmann, and others, speak in favor of Ron Reagan, they are not speaking in favor of his politics. Before Reagan became President he described his politics as Libertarian, thats not what today’s Republicans speak in favor of. But they speak in favor of Ron Reagan’s ability to connect with American voters. And want to be associated with that, not Reagan’s politics.

Thanks to George W. Bush and the Christian-Right, the old Conservative Republican and their Leaders were kicked out of power. So someone like Senator John McCain who twenty years ago would’ve been considered a Conservative Republican and one of the leaders of that movement in Congress, today gets called a Moderate Republican, because he doesn’t fit into with todays Christian and New-Right, Ron Reagan like Barry Goldwater, not only couldn’t get nominated for President today, but I believe they would both of left the party.

Read Full Post »

FOX News: ‘Is Michele Bachmann a Constitutional Conservative?’

Source:The Daily Times– U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann (Republican, Minnesota) debating the Patriot Act on the House Floor.

“A closer look at some of representative Bachmann’s recent actions.
Article Used:The Los Angeles Times.”

From FOX News

As a Liberal who actually does love the U.S. Constitution, because American liberalism is based on liberty and the Constitution that we use as our guiding Force, the American Civil Liberties Union is all about the U.S. Constitution and defending it and when I hear so-called Constitutional Conservatives (Michele Bachmann comes to mind) claim to be Constitutional Conservatives, I get this sudden urge to look at their records and then point them out.

The Christian-Right has their version of the Holy Bible as their guiding force. Liberals have something that was actually written in law that governs America.

And when I hear the Far-Right saying how much they love the Constitution but then seem to be against the First Amendment except or political speech, or the Fourth Amendment that protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, the 17th Amendment that gives the people the right to decide who their Senators in Congress are, and unfortunately I could go, but people only have so much time to live, but when I hear them make those claims, I get the urge to laugh my face off (to be clean) into next week.

Christian-Nationalists being in favor of allowing the executive branch to suspend constitutional rights when they feel they endanger the country or against the Equal Protection Clause especially to prevent homosexuals from marrying each other, the Christian-Right trying to bring religion closer to government, so-called Tea Party conservatives trying to prevent workers from organizing and collective bargaining: I mean seriously what Constitution do they believe in conserving?

I think to myself really, because these are fundamental constitutional Rights that these so-called Conservatives seem to be against. Perhaps it’s not the U.S. Constitution they love but only parts of it.

Political conservatism is supposed to be centered around the U.S. Constitution and protecting and defending those basic rights that makes our country great especially in a liberal democracy. Conservatism is not supposed to about authoritarian big government where rights can be suspended if the government feels its in the best interest and doesn’t even have to justify it.

Conservatism at least conservative-libertarianism with Barry Goldwater, Ron Reagan and others is supposed to be about limited government and preventing government from getting big. Because they believed when government got big, the people gave up some of their freedom. Mainstream conservatism is about protecting constitutional rights, not denying that they exist.

Read Full Post »

ABC News: Good Morning America- Rick Santorum: ‘In It To Win’

Source:ABC News– Former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (Republican, Pennsylvania) talking to ABC News about his presidential campaign.

“Former Senator from Pennsylvania declares intention to run for U.S. president. For more on this story, click here:ABC News.”

From ABC News

Is there any point in taking Rick Santorum seriously anymore except for maybe when we need and are looking for a good laugh: I mean this is the guy who’s a devout Catholic who blamed with Catholic Church scandal with their Priests back in 2002, on gays.

Now today Senator Santorum says the reason why American soldiers fought in World War II, so they can have freedom of choice in their health care.

Senator Santorum, didn’t mention the fact that American military personal fought in World War II: number one, to defend themselves, number two, to defend their fellow servicemen, and number three to defend their country. Thats why we fought in World War II. It’s not like guys were telling their wives and families: “Honey, dad, mom etc, I must fight in World War II so we can continue to have freedom of choice in our health care!”

We went to War in World War II to save European Jews from being genocide and two prevent further genocides of Jews. (To state the obvious) It had nothing to do with health care or health insurance.

And for Rick Santorum, by the way how he ever get elected to the U.S. Senate from Pennsylvania: Was the whole state high on marijuana on Election Day in 1994? His statement is complete nonsense. (For lack of a better word)

Rick Santorum who I assume for argument sake means well and I don’t put people down for the fun of it (contrary to popular opinion) is another example of how weak the GOP presidential field of 2012 is.

Senator Santorum is also  another example of how the President Obama’s potential competition is his best asset. And who thirty years ago would’ve been considered a fringe Far-Right presidential  candidate, because of his outrageous statements.

Read Full Post »

Hoover Institution: Uncommon Knowledge With Peter Robinson- ‘Politics With Haley Barbour’

Source:Hoover Institution– Uncommon Knowledge With Peter Robinson.

“In 2003 Haley Barbour was elected governor of Mississippi, becoming only the second Republican governor since Reconstruction. In 2007 he won reelection to a second and final term. Since June of last year, Governor Barbour has served as chairman of the Republican Governors Association.

Will the GOP recapture the House once again this year? The Senate? How many of the 37 gubernatorial races will the GOP win? Haley Barbour offers his political insights on the November elections. He further describes why he believes that Barack Obama represents “the biggest lurch to the left in American political history,” and responds to where he’d like to see the Republican Party stand on issues ranging from Obama Care and immigration to the Ground Zero mosque. Finally, he analyzes his own prospects as a presidential candidate in 2012 and the chances that he will run.”

From the Hoover Institution

Governor Haley Barbour is right for the GOP and I’m not sure he would put it this way and I don’t pretend to speak for him, but for the GOP to have any shot at winning back the White House in 2012, they are going to have to nominate a presidential nominee that at least part of their vast base has issues with. Thats the only way they are going to win the White House in 2012.

This means nominating someone who is yes an economic conservative, but someone who’s probably not a Neo-Conservative, when it comes to foreign policy and national security. And someone who’s not a Christian-Conservative (or any other Religious-Conservative) like in the case of Mitt Romney who at least at one point was pro-choice on abortion and homosexuality and introduced civil unions in Massachusetts to America back in 2003-04.

The problem with Mitt Romney is that economic conservatives don’t like him because of his health Care law that looks a lot like the Affordable Care Act of 2010. So thats why Tim Pawlenty is a viable alternative to Governor Romney because he’s an economic conservative who at least to this point hasn’t pushed a Christian-Conservative agenda in his presidential campaign.

Which is why candidates like Rick Santorum, Michele Bachman, Sarah Palin who has a laundry list of other issues, which is why she’s not a credible candidate, but why these other candidates aren’t serious contenders at this point, because they push the Christian-Conservative agenda real hard and look intolerant. And why they would never beat President Obama in 2012.

Christian-Conservatives in the GOP really belong in their own fringe Far- Right party and not in a major political Party like the GOP.

And if the Republican Party ever gets back to its Conservative-Libertarian roots of limited government and moves away from this authoritarian route they’ve been on for twenty years now, they’ll be a major player in American politics and a ruling majority party that could compete anywhere in the country, not just in the Bible Belt. And compete with the Democratic Party in all racial, ethnic, and religious groups.

Read Full Post »