Tag Archives: political parties

Some Thoughts on Culture

Posted on by
Reply

I had some words on the subject of culture the other day.    Another man weighed in on the subject last Tuesday; maybe you’ve heard of him: ex-Governor and Republican Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney.  He offered these thoughts on culture and its role in a society’s freedom and prosperity.

[W]hat exactly accounts for prosperity if not culture?  In the case of the United States, it is a particular kind of culture that has made us the greatest economic power in the history of the earth.  Many significant features come to mind: our work ethic, our appreciation for education, our willingness to take risks, our commitment to honor and oath, our family orientation, our devotion to a purpose greater than ourselves, our patriotism.  But one feature of our culture that propels the American economy stands out above all others: freedom.  The American economy is fueled by freedom.  Free people and their free enterprises are what drive our economic vitality.

The linkage between freedom and economic development has a universal applicability. One only has to look at the contrast between East and West Germany, and between North and South Korea for the starkest demonstrations of the meaning of freedom and the absence of freedom.

Israel is also a telling example. Like the United States, the state of Israel has a culture that is based upon individual freedom and the rule of law. It is a democracy that has embraced liberty, both political and economic. This embrace has created conditions that have enabled innovators and entrepreneurs to make the desert bloom. In the face of improbable odds, Israel today is a world leader in fields ranging from medicine to information technology.

I visited three lands—Israel, Poland, and Great Britain—which are defined by their respective struggles for freedom….  I am only strengthened in my conviction that the pursuit of happiness is not an American right alone.  Israelis, Palestinians, Poles, Russians, Iranians, Americans, all human beings deserve to enjoy the blessings of a culture of freedom and opportunity.

What he said.

Some More Thoughts on the Campaign

Posted on by
1

This time in the area of moral equivalence.  Governor Mitt Romney, Republican Candidate for President, said this in Israel the other day:

As you come here and you see the GDP per capita, for instance, in Israel which is about $21,000 dollars, and compare that with the GDP per capita just across the areas managed by the Palestinian Authority, which is more like $10,000 per capita, you notice such a dramatically stark difference in economic vitality….  And as I come here and I look out over this city and consider the accomplishments of the people of this nation, I recognize the power of at least culture….

The Palestinians, of course, objected.  Saeb Erekat, a senior aide to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said

It is a racist statement and this man doesn’t realize that the Palestinian economy cannot reach its potential because there is an Israeli occupation.

Of course, he carefully elides some salient facts, for instance, the cheers of the Palestinians after 9/11 and the support expressed for suicide bombings thereafter.  Nor did he mention the reason for the occupation: Palestinian terrorism in the form of random rocket fire into Israel for the sole purpose of killing women and children.  At that, villages like Bethlehem and cities like Jerusalem are targets of terrorist attacks, and that random rocket fire still comes from unoccupied Gaza.

And there’s the American Left, that purports to see no difference between a Jewish culture that is a central part of our own heritage and a vibrant, freedom loving, and tolerant culture on the one hand and a Palestinian culture that thinks terrorism, the butchery of innocents, and the subjugation of women—to the point of condoning (mild) beatings of them by their husbands under Sharia law—on the other.

No, the two cultures are morally equivalent, so it’s wrong, you see—just wrong—to criticize one and praise the other.

Some Thoughts on the Campaign

Posted on by
Reply

There are some campaign emails going out from the Democratic Party’s side, and the subtext in their texts is interesting.  This one is from Al “The Internet—I built that” Gore:

From: Al Gore [mailto:dccc@dccc.org]
Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 10:14 AM
To: Hinderaker, John H.
Subject: disaster

John –

The last thing we want is the Republican Party — a party that’s been hijacked by an extremist fringe — to win the White House and tighten its grip on Congress.

That would spell disaster for our economy and our environment.

That’s why I’m helping the DCCC raise the $2 million they need to have on hand by tomorrow’s midnight fundraising deadline. This deadline is so important that a group of Democrats have agreed to match your contribution 2-to-1, tripling your impact.

24 HOURS TO GO: Donate $3 or more to elect a strong Democratic majority for President Obama >>

Three things about this one: one is why are the Dems dunning the known conservative blogger John Hinderaker for money for their campaign?  Don’t they read anymore?  Oh, wait….  The second is what Hinderaker pointed out: those Dems providing the matching $2 for every $1 are the rich folks that James “It’s the economy, Stupid—ain’t that ironic?” Carville in another fund-dunner, sent out over his signature, heavily disparages.  The third thing is this: why don’t those $2-matching Democrats donate their money directly?  They’d get two-thirds the impact just from that.

Another dun is from Stephanie “He’s a felon” Cutter:

From: “Stephanie Cutter, BarackObama.com”
Date: July 29, 2012 2:13:24 PM EDT
Subject: Romney defeats Obama?
Reply-To: info@barackobama.com

When you read the news 101 days from now, that might be the headline you see.

Those few words will tell us whether we fought back hard enough against Romney and the Republicans’ massive special-interest fundraising machine — or if we didn’t do enough, maybe because we got complacent or thought that we had this one in the bag.

Donate $3 or more today — and don’t leave this one up to luck, chance, or anything else.

Don’t let anyone convince you that this is a sure thing — our opponents have almost unlimited resources at their disposal, and we already know they’ll outspend us by a good amount.

What we do now decides the headlines on November 7th.

We’re facing a huge fundraising deadline. Please donate now, and have a hand in the outcome of this election:

Thanks,

Stephanie

Stephanie Cutter
Deputy Campaign Manager
Obama for America

There’s just panic in this one.  Gotta have the money now, by a deadline whose sole value is as an arbitrary FEC intermediate reporting deadline?  And the implicit acknowledgement that ordinary Americans are donating more heavily to conservative and to Republican campaigns than they are to progressive and to Democratic campaigns.  The folks seem to be putting their money where their mouths are, and the Democratic Party has its collective panty in a twist.

 

h/t Power Line

A Town Understands Frivolous Costs

Posted on by
Reply

In at least one town, it costs up to $30k to add extra police, fire, and so on for a Presidential visit.  Those hosting towns generally suck up and pay those costs when the President comes a-calling on official business, but who pays when it’s a purely campaign visit?

Durham, NH, says the President’s campaign team should pony up.  The city government’s press release said

Community leaders do not believe that costs associated with the campaign should be borne by local taxpayers.

And Town Manager Todd Selig added

Community leaders have taken the position that the campaign, regardless of party affiliation, should absorb the added local public safety costs rather than local taxpayers.

A carefully anonymous Obama campaign official told CBSBoston,

The campaign will follow all rules and pay for the portion of travel that relates to political events, as has been true for previous incumbent presidential candidates.

Frankly, this just sounds like more Obama weasel words to put another fund-raiser on the taxpayer’s nickel.  Entirely.

It’s moot for now, though:  Selig said on Sunday that an anonymous donor—who Selig says insists that the town is doing the right thing by declining to pay for a campaign stop—has donated $20k to the town for the incremental costs related to the President’s campaign stop.

When the Shoe’s on the Other Foot

Posted on by
Reply

Progressives spent $741 million on their 2008 Presidential campaign, and President Obama announced a goal of $1 billion for his spending on the current campaign.  Candidate John McCain spent all of $228 million on his.

Today the Republicans are competing on even ground—even leading the Progressives in some areas—in campaign funding, while Obama’s $1 billion goal is at risk.

The Progressives’ response?  They’ve petitioned the Federal Election Commission with a formal complaint, demanding that the Republican donors to those SuperPACs that don’t side with the Obama camp be revealed; in particular, they’ve complained out the Crossroads GPS SuperPAC.

Never mind that Crossroads, and the other SuperPACS, is organized under a section of the tax code that allows it, and all SuperPACS—conservative and liberal—to keep its funding sources private.

Robert Bauer, a lawyer for the Democratic National Committee, wrote in the complaint to the FEC, in all seriousness

There has never been any doubt about its true purpose: to elect candidates of its choice to the presidency and Congress.  Crossroads has tried to shield its donors—wealthy individuals, and corporations who may be pursuing special interest agendas that are not in the national interest.

They make this complaint even though there’s no requirement for donors to SuperPACs to lose their anonymity.  Never mind what the law says.  The law is what Progressives say it is, as Obama has already made clear in another matter.  Never mind what the national interest is.  The national interest is whatever the DNC says it is.

That this is simply a dishonest attempt to stifle campaign donations by the wrong side (in the manner of the KeepingGOPHonest Web site, among others), and so to stifle the political speech of those who are saying things of which the Progressives disapprove.  That there is no legitimacy at all to this beef is demonstrated by the Progressives’ decision to file their “complaint” first with a newspaper (The New York Times) and only after that with the Federal Election Commission.

Oh, yeah—the Progressives have Priorities USA, which is organized under the same tax code section as is Crossroads.  And whose donors are carefully kept secret, as is entirely appropriate under the law.  But Priorities isn’t having the same fund-raising success as Crossroads.

It’s no fair the other side is doing well—we’re supposed to win, dammit!