Garden State Patriot

On ‘Hannity’ last night, Sean compared the meek response of Obama vis-a-vis Iran to Reagan’s strong and principled stand against communist oppression in Poland. Check out this telling video here. Now if only Mr. Hannity would take my calls!

By the way, here’s what I wrote back in January regarding the Obama approach to Iran:

Herein lays the problem with Obama’s approach toward Iran. One can not engage in diplomacy – which entails negotiation, finding common ground and compromise – when the ‘partner’ at the table is an opponent of the convictions and values your nation stands for. To do so would be pacifism. And as history has taught us pacifying enemies of freedom only leads to more violence, war and tyranny, not less. One can only hope that history isn’t about to repeat itself.

Proven right? Pretty much, I think. Although the one thing that has become more clear to me now is that Obama has also completely ceded our moral authority as the leading promoter of freedom and democracy in the world. With his constant apologizing for America and willingness to cut deals with dictators he’s boxed himself in. He put himself in a position of not being able to support the Iranian protesters for fear that it would damage future negotiations with the evil mullocracy. In essence, his approach legitimized an evil regime.

Well, we can’t say you weren’t warned.

Yesterday, the newly formed National Council for a New America (NCNA) held its first conference. The meeting consisted of numerous prominent Republicans including Mitt Romney, House Whip Eric Cantor and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. Richard Ross reported here on CWA! last week regarding this effort aimed at ‘rebranding’ the party and ‘updating’ its message.

After the meeting, though, Jeb Bush had this to say:

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said Saturday that it’s time for the Republican Party to give up its “nostalgia” for the heyday of the Reagan era and look forward, even if it means stealing the winning strategy deployed by Democrats in the 2008 election.

“You can’t beat something with nothing, and the other side has something. I don’t like it, but they have it, and we have to be respectful and mindful of that,” Mr. Bush said.

The former president’s brother, often mentioned as a potential candidate in 2012, said President Obama’s message of hope and change during the 2008 campaign clearly resonated with Americans.

“So our ideas need to be forward looking and relevant. I felt like there was a lot of nostalgia and the good old days in the [Republican] messaging. I mean, it’s great, but it doesn’t draw people toward your cause,” Mr. Bush said.

Now, I understand to some extent what Jeb is saying. The party can not rely on nostalgia alone to win elections. This is true. But the problem has not been that the party has done this. The problem is we are no longer the party of Reagan. We haven’t been the party of Reagan, arguably, since Bill Clinton used the government shutdown to kill very bit of momentum built up by the 1994 victories.

And the drift away from Reaganism started before 1994 with Jeb’s dad. The minute Bush #41 took over he left Reaganism behind by supporting tax increases and employing a softer tone - think “thousand points of light” and a “kindler, gentler America.”

The 1994 elections certainly signaled a step back towards Reaganism. For about 4 years we saw the kind of vision Reagan had for America being implemented by Republicans in Congress led by Newt Gingrich and the ‘Contract with America.’. Tax cuts, balanced budgets and returning power back to the states were several of the hallmarks of this movement.

When George W. Bush came onto the scene and announced his candidacy for the Presidency, you may remember many in the media saying that he was more conservative than his father. In retrospect, “W” was only slightly to the right of his father. As they say, the acorn doesn’t fall far from the tree. In fact, “W’s” use of the term “compassionate conservatism” drew the ire of conservatives even back in during the 2000 campaign. 

George W. Bush, of course, ultimately did not govern completely like Reagan. “W” was indeed a proponent of a strong, tough foreign policy in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, but his domestic agenda was hardly Reagan-esque save tax cuts. “W” sanctioned excess spending and inexplicably signed into law the prescription drug benefit entitlement. He also promoted and signed into law No Child Left Behind which only increased intervention of the federal government in the area of education, rather than devolving that power to the states. On illegal immigration, “W” also was right there with the pro-amnesty crowd until conservatives put a stop to it (amnesty did occur under Reagan but he would later say that it was a mistake).

So, to some extent I do agree with Jeb. The party does need to update its message. But it should do so by taking the principles of Reaganism and applying them in a personal and relevant way to the problems the nation faces today.

The approach, though, that needs to be tossed in the trash and be forgotten is the “Bush” approach for it is the one that has crippled the Republican Party.

Cross-posted at Conservatives with Attitude!

Saxby Chambliss has won the run-off in Georgia which will prevent the Democrats from attaining a filibuster-proof Senate. To say this is important is an understatement. This keeps the Democrats from pursuing their radical, socialist agenda without opposition. They now will need Republican support to get anything done.

That said, there will be immense pressure on several of the GOP’s more moderate Senators – including Senator McCain – to toe the party line. In fact, McCain had best put the Maverick away for at least 2 years.

A New Jersey attorney is challenging Obama – and McCain’s – citizenship and right to be President. I have  refrained from reporting on the question of Obama’s birth certificate as it was more speculative. But this case appears to have more merit. Judge for yourself here.

In case you missed it, here’s Obama caught on tape saying he wants to bankrupt the coal industry. He goes on to say that, as a result of his plan, “electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”

How the McCain campaign did not discover this before is beyond me. But it just gets right to the heart of it with Obama: say anything to get elected, conceal what you really believe. And what he really believes in is socialism.

By the way, “Cap and Trade” is a topic I will need to re-visit in coming months. If Obama gets elected this will be part of the liberal agenda. And what it will mean is more taxes, more government power, more infingements on our liberty, and less economic growth all in the name of the hoax of global warming.

The Bergen Record today endorsed Barack Obama for President. This comes as much as a shock as George Steinbrenner rooting for the Yankees to win the World Series. Surely no one really cares what The Record has to say in this respect, as they are just another fading newspaper. But indulge me if you will for taking issue with the esteemed editors of The Record.

Certainly, the current administration has not been perfect. The voter’s appetite for change is understandable. George W. Bush has never had the support of those on the Left who have vilified him since “hanging chads” became part of the public vernacular. Conversely, W has managed to even alienate his base with a less than conservative approach to governing, particularly on the domestic front.

Yet, The Record charges:

Whatever history makes of the Bush presidency, its immediate legacy is an administration that turned budget surpluses into deficits, launched a pre-emptive war in Iraq and left us divided by politics, ideology and economics.

It seems The Record forgets that the nation has been politically and ideologically divided since well before George W. Bush arrived on the scene. I have no idea what economically divided means, but I do know this: whatever divisions we have in this respect are just as, if not more so, the fault of the extreme elements that run the Democrat Party these days.

Moreover, The Record seems to have little sense of history. Change for changes sake can be highly detrimental, if not downright dangerous, for the nation. We don’t need to look too far back in our history to understand this. Jimmy Carter ascended to the Presidency with similar traits and abilities attached to him – and just as little experience. The country subsequently saw the economy worsen dramatically and Iran fall into the hands of religious fanatics; a foreign policy nightmare with which we are grappling with to this day.

One of the more ironic and ridiculous components of The Record’s endorsement is their view regarding Sarah Palin and her “tone” on the campaign trail:

…we abhor the tone of her rallies and rhetoric. To suggest that Obama is a “pal” of terrorists, as she has, or to remain silent when some people at rallies spew anti-Arab and anti-Muslim hatred, is not acceptable.

Amazingly, The Record feels that Sarah Palin ought to repudiate a few unruly people at her campaign rallies (of which there have not been many as far I can tell). Yet, the fact that Barack Obama sat in Jeremiah Wright’s pews for some 20 years and undoubtedly was privy to some of the vilest anti-American hatred is dismissed. When Obama finally repudiated Wright, it only was only for political expedience, and not in the least credible.

The Record also entirely dismisses Obama’s ties to William Ayers. It would be one thing if Obama and Ayers had a passing connection, but this clearly was not the case. The two served closely on a board together. Obama “blurbed” Ayers’ book. Certainly, if John McCain had similar ties to an abortion clinic bomber, The Record’s attitude would not be so dismissive.

Senator Obama’s past remains murky. He has no accomplishments to speak of. He possesses less experience in government than Sarah Palin. Yet The Record takes issue with Governor Palin’s limited experience:

McCain repeatedly has said he has the seasoned judgment of a president, but he chose a running mate who is unprepared to assume the presidency.

Just how is Obama prepared for the Presidency? By being a skilled orator? Because he is composed? So, it seems according to The Record.

The Record also is critical of the McCain campaign for a confusing and inconsistent message:

We understand political realities — the need for Republicans to “play to the base.” However, McCain — and he is accountable for what his surrogates do and say — has been incapable of maintaining good control over his own campaign. His message has been inconsistent and confusing.

We can only assume that the editors’ memory banks were erased around June. Because I can assure you, if you want to see inconsistency and confusion, all you need to do is review Senator Obama’s positions in the primaries against the positions he has taken during the Presidential campaign. Take public financing of campaigns for one thing; a dead-set date to leave Iraq for another.

The remainder of The Record’s endorsement is superficial, unconvincing and not well thought out. It does not touch on the clear leap to the Left an Obama Presidency, coupled with a very partisan, very left-wing Congress, will take the nation. Despite the electorate’s dissatisfaction with the status quo, this remains a center-right nation. Obama, Reid and Pelosi most assuredly will pursue an agenda of Big Government the country will not like.

We are still living in consequential and dangerous times. 9/11 was not that long ago, despite the fact that many seem to forget too easily. We need a man who understands the realities of today’s world, not a man who exudes naiveté. The right man is John McCain, not Barack Obama.

Lord knows we are bombarded with enough talk and punditry about the Presidential debates. Therefore, I refrained my providing my two cents regarding yesterday’s debate. However, I think it’s important to know that Obama flat out lied when he claimed someone said ‘kill him’ at a McCain rally. (Little Green Footballs has a good post on this.)

And for what it’s worth, I found it utterly hypocritical that Obama had the gall to tell McCain to repudiate an individual who supposedly yelled out something offensive at a rally. Not when he sat in the pews of Jeremiah Wright’s church for over 20 years, no doubt heard his despicable, hate-filled rants about America (Can you say “US of KKKA”?) and never spoke up to repudiate him until he ran for President. Amazing.