Irish Democracy Victorious Over EU Elitists
[ Daniel Hannan, a Conservative MEP, hailed the apparent rejection of the treaty as a "victory for Ireland and for Irish democracy". ]
That came from the following source.
-----link-----
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/13/eu.ireland
--------------
IRELAND VOTED AGAINST THE NEW CONSTITUTION OF THE EU
I think that is great news. Is David still a match for Goliath?? My earlier thoughts about it were of a negative character. Those thoughts hinged on the assumption of who needs a larger government to head the already too large governments of the individual countries. On top of that under the proposal the new leader of the EU would not be an elected leader but rather an appointed one by the Commission which would be made up of far less members than the whole. Set up a new “EU Supreme court”.
Ireland had been making great strides in fixing their government by cutting business taxes, and other conservative reforms. The results have been astonishing. They have turned their country around and into a prosperous leader in business and their economy competes with the larger ones on the Continent.
Previously I found that there had been veiled threats by the EU as to what they would do about that with the new powers the new constitution would give the EU.
-----link-----
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article1270793.ece
---------------
Threats that having the lowest tax rate in Europe was not a responsible thing in relation to the effect it would have on the other countries. Sound familiar? The tentacles of the collective reaching out to strangle individual initiative. If you don’t understand what I’m saying rent out the movie “Fountainhead”.
The article at the top of my post shows how the Conservatives who have been battling to get a referendum on the same thing in England have been buoyed in their efforts. A shadow cabinet member said the following about Liberal leader Brown and what he should do.
-----quote from the article-----
Grayling said that the referendum had killed off the treaty, adding: "It's certainly the case Gordon Brown should abandon the bill that's coming through the Lords at the moment and should commit to holding a treaty for the people in this country."
--------------------------------------
It’s the British way of saying that he wants a referendum. Then the last quote I’ll bracket from the article seems to come from a labor person agreeing. Poor Brown must find himself in a pickle. [Bob Crow, the general secretary of the RMT transport union, said that the constitution would have undermined the rights of working people to defend their jobs.
"The Irish referendum result is a massive victory for democracy and the constitution is now dead in the water, despite our own government's attempt to railroad it through without the referendum the British people were promised," said Crow.]
British Conservative leader David Cameron has been leading the charge to get the British Labor leader to let the British people vote on the treaty as he had promised on the other similar treaty.
-----link-----
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7044443.stm
--------------
In all the reports I hear from the opposition that it seems unfair that the little country of Ireland with such a small percentage of the European population could effect the whole by voting no. They seem to forget that they said that the treaty had to be passed by all the members. In the previous attempt at a constitution for the body in 2005 two countries voted no overwhelmingly and the attempt at that constitution was scuttled. The other countries passed the constitution in their legislatures. Same as now. The only three votes that were held all went down to defeat despite support from the media and the governmental apparatus. The people knew better. They will have to find a better way to stifle the voice of the people.
The Irony is that the new French leader Sarkozy ( a conservative) will become in July the head of the EU. The EU Presidency serves on a rotating basis. Sarkozy is a conservative. Perhaps he is more of a big government conservative. Check out the following link.
-----link-----
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/2123816/EU-Treaty-Nicolas-Sarkozy-plans-to-bypass-Irish-no-vote.html
--------------
The big hope is that the British conservatives can force a vote on their end. It seems late in the game, but the voters seem to be waking up I think there is hope yet. From the “Bottom Up“, the EU looks like a bunch of elite bureaucrats. So say the voters in all elections they have had since it’s inception.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
Saturday, June 14, 2008
Friday, June 13, 2008
US House Guerilla War (Petition)
After my blog yesterday, I was home turned on the TV and cspan had the Senate on, it was about 6:00pm and 3 guys were starting to discuss the Republican plan to make us less dependent on foreign energy. Now I know (almost) that Newt is behind the coming ground swell in the House.
Newt is from Ga. Two of the three were from Ga. Lynn Westmoreland and Dr. Tom Price the other was Dan Burton from Indiana.
The main part of the 1+½ hr talk was to showcase the plan Lynn Westmoreland was putting for to cut our energy dependency. This wasn’t pie in the sky talk with vague promises. The program was very simple based on the notion that yes we can do something about the problem. Congressman Westmoreland revealed a large nearly 4 ft tall petition, listing all the congressmen in alphabetical order by state with a box next to their name as to whether they would sign the petition that simply asked if they supported increasing American oil production to lower prices.
Along with that the three keys to doing that included: 1, increase on shore drilling 2, increase deep water drilling 3, Build new refineries. That’s it.
Simple enough to understand hard to say no too. I believe it was Mr. Westmoreland that stated he got the inspiration from all the petitions going around to do just that on line. He specifically mentioned “American Solutions” and their website which is one of Newt’s websites, which is where Newt has his petition I mentioned in the previous post. Westmoreland mentioned ½ million signatures last night before I went to bed there were 607,000. Newt has seized on the internet with both hands. He is head and shoulders ahead of anyone else. Congress I’m happy to see is willing to learn from his experiences. I learned a lot about the debate to come from this informal discussion on the House floor. These three were well versed in the solution to the problem. Their’s was the common sense approach. The Dems argue that the oil companies have 48 million acres under lease. These guys point out that 48 million is only 3% of the off shore land available. I wish I can find a transcript, most of what I’m posting is just off the top of my head.
There were plenty of facts I’m not sure of from memory but I did remember that the Shale oil deposits were put at 2 trillion and the total oil used in the world since the first oil well was only 1 trillion. The logic is ; we have it let’s use it to buy us time to put all our ingenuity in to alternative energy which indeed will take a long time. Let’s buy that time by drilling now.
There were some good one liners such as “We can’t conserve our way out of this”, That Jay Leno joke about people 10 years ago were complaining that it would take 10 years before we would see progress. He said something like today that doesn’t seem so long. Like I say I wish I had a transcript. It looks to me like there is finally a full court attack on our current do nothing course in the House. Other House bills were mentioned in passing as coming up in the near future. I had alluded to that happening and that it looked like Tim Walberg’s Discharge pettition was the opening volley. I hope that is right. I hope Republican keep the high ground on this. I hope the thoughts expressed by these three and especially by Dan Burton about being willing to sit down with the other side to work out what is the best policy. “help facilitate the best results”. I can already see one area of possible common ground and that would be on the idea the Dems had of putting a time limit on leasing land by the oil companies for a short period of time and losing that lease unless it was used to get oil from it. That sounds as if it would work to let other companies compete for the leases.
The dirty little secret is that for this to happen regulations will have to be cut back and the Dems will have a knee jerk reaction to that. This media barrage put out in guerilla fashion with Newt and his web sites and his constant appearances on FOX and other networks, plus this new barrage from the House through such out of the way places as CSPAN. Eventually the media picks up on it. It start with that then other more mainstream places pick it up like Drudge and other major blog sites, then it starts to dribble into the mainstream news. If the truth is stated simply and consistently and continually in a way not condescending but in a common sense way. The media cannot ignore it. I just checked and there are 647,000 signatures on Newt’s site.
As I get more I will post it. I hope I can get a text. If this heats up I’ll put a site on my side bar for xtra links. I would like to get a better sense of the different fronts this battle will be waged upon. Who the players are. This discussion on CSPAN was great but I wish I could teach them one word I picked up from the British effort and that word is facilitate. I believe it was Mr Westmoreland that near the end alluded to the fact that this plan would help the companies get the oil out, refine it and lower the prices. I look at it as the legislators facilitating the lowering of the gas prices for the people through working with all involved in the debate. The oil companies, the environmentalists , the bureaucracies, they all need a 3rd bipartisan party to sit them down and hammer out a compromise that is good for the people. A bottom up solution.
Westmoreland then listed the three part plan how all the parts put together could lower the price by around $2.00 a gal. The key was that the government wouldn’t be standing in the way but rather helping. Then he listed the Democrat’s plan which involved forcing the companies to drill on the leases they already had, suing OPEC, taxing the oil companies. All three of those did nothing to lower the cost of a gal. of gas.
I wanted to scream the word facilitate, it is such a useful and pretty word. Seems to help describe a conservative people friendly policy. A more bottom up policy, a policy driven by the actual results rather than vague philosophical discourse.
------link to American solutions------
http://www.americansolutions.com/
--------------------------------------
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
PS. During the discussion Norway was in a list of the top exporters to America of oil. We buy a lot of oil from them. The link below is from a trip Newt and his wife took to Norway. Off shore drilling and producing 1.6 Billion barrels @ year off shore doesn’t seem to bother the ecology of Norway at all. Notice too their commitment to wind and solar. Sounds like too much common sense going on for Americans to handle. lol
Newt is from Ga. Two of the three were from Ga. Lynn Westmoreland and Dr. Tom Price the other was Dan Burton from Indiana.
The main part of the 1+½ hr talk was to showcase the plan Lynn Westmoreland was putting for to cut our energy dependency. This wasn’t pie in the sky talk with vague promises. The program was very simple based on the notion that yes we can do something about the problem. Congressman Westmoreland revealed a large nearly 4 ft tall petition, listing all the congressmen in alphabetical order by state with a box next to their name as to whether they would sign the petition that simply asked if they supported increasing American oil production to lower prices.
Along with that the three keys to doing that included: 1, increase on shore drilling 2, increase deep water drilling 3, Build new refineries. That’s it.
Simple enough to understand hard to say no too. I believe it was Mr. Westmoreland that stated he got the inspiration from all the petitions going around to do just that on line. He specifically mentioned “American Solutions” and their website which is one of Newt’s websites, which is where Newt has his petition I mentioned in the previous post. Westmoreland mentioned ½ million signatures last night before I went to bed there were 607,000. Newt has seized on the internet with both hands. He is head and shoulders ahead of anyone else. Congress I’m happy to see is willing to learn from his experiences. I learned a lot about the debate to come from this informal discussion on the House floor. These three were well versed in the solution to the problem. Their’s was the common sense approach. The Dems argue that the oil companies have 48 million acres under lease. These guys point out that 48 million is only 3% of the off shore land available. I wish I can find a transcript, most of what I’m posting is just off the top of my head.
There were plenty of facts I’m not sure of from memory but I did remember that the Shale oil deposits were put at 2 trillion and the total oil used in the world since the first oil well was only 1 trillion. The logic is ; we have it let’s use it to buy us time to put all our ingenuity in to alternative energy which indeed will take a long time. Let’s buy that time by drilling now.
There were some good one liners such as “We can’t conserve our way out of this”, That Jay Leno joke about people 10 years ago were complaining that it would take 10 years before we would see progress. He said something like today that doesn’t seem so long. Like I say I wish I had a transcript. It looks to me like there is finally a full court attack on our current do nothing course in the House. Other House bills were mentioned in passing as coming up in the near future. I had alluded to that happening and that it looked like Tim Walberg’s Discharge pettition was the opening volley. I hope that is right. I hope Republican keep the high ground on this. I hope the thoughts expressed by these three and especially by Dan Burton about being willing to sit down with the other side to work out what is the best policy. “help facilitate the best results”. I can already see one area of possible common ground and that would be on the idea the Dems had of putting a time limit on leasing land by the oil companies for a short period of time and losing that lease unless it was used to get oil from it. That sounds as if it would work to let other companies compete for the leases.
The dirty little secret is that for this to happen regulations will have to be cut back and the Dems will have a knee jerk reaction to that. This media barrage put out in guerilla fashion with Newt and his web sites and his constant appearances on FOX and other networks, plus this new barrage from the House through such out of the way places as CSPAN. Eventually the media picks up on it. It start with that then other more mainstream places pick it up like Drudge and other major blog sites, then it starts to dribble into the mainstream news. If the truth is stated simply and consistently and continually in a way not condescending but in a common sense way. The media cannot ignore it. I just checked and there are 647,000 signatures on Newt’s site.
As I get more I will post it. I hope I can get a text. If this heats up I’ll put a site on my side bar for xtra links. I would like to get a better sense of the different fronts this battle will be waged upon. Who the players are. This discussion on CSPAN was great but I wish I could teach them one word I picked up from the British effort and that word is facilitate. I believe it was Mr Westmoreland that near the end alluded to the fact that this plan would help the companies get the oil out, refine it and lower the prices. I look at it as the legislators facilitating the lowering of the gas prices for the people through working with all involved in the debate. The oil companies, the environmentalists , the bureaucracies, they all need a 3rd bipartisan party to sit them down and hammer out a compromise that is good for the people. A bottom up solution.
Westmoreland then listed the three part plan how all the parts put together could lower the price by around $2.00 a gal. The key was that the government wouldn’t be standing in the way but rather helping. Then he listed the Democrat’s plan which involved forcing the companies to drill on the leases they already had, suing OPEC, taxing the oil companies. All three of those did nothing to lower the cost of a gal. of gas.
I wanted to scream the word facilitate, it is such a useful and pretty word. Seems to help describe a conservative people friendly policy. A more bottom up policy, a policy driven by the actual results rather than vague philosophical discourse.
------link to American solutions------
http://www.americansolutions.com/
--------------------------------------
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
PS. During the discussion Norway was in a list of the top exporters to America of oil. We buy a lot of oil from them. The link below is from a trip Newt and his wife took to Norway. Off shore drilling and producing 1.6 Billion barrels @ year off shore doesn’t seem to bother the ecology of Norway at all. Notice too their commitment to wind and solar. Sounds like too much common sense going on for Americans to handle. lol
Thursday, June 12, 2008
DISCHARGE THIS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DISCHARGE THIS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I’m starting to be reminded of an old song, that’ll let you guess my age.
“Something’s happening here, what it is ain;’t exactly Clear”
The House Republicans are starting to use an eminently conservative tactic, playing within the rules, a tactic that actually will call upon legislators to vote on an issue. Kind of using the law and Democracy for an in your face approach that I’m loving. Gee imagine forcing legislators to vote on something. Kind of a Put up or Shut up approach. As Newt would say either help us fix the problem or get out of the way. But I digress. Here is the strategy.
From Tim Walberg’s site
-----link-----
http://walberg.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=93524
---------------
Walberg on the radio
-----link-----
http://walberg.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=93524
---------------
US House Republican Whip Roy Blunt is leading a charge on gas prices and energy. A charge to do something not just talk about it.
-----link-----
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20080610/pl_usnw/blunt__no_longer_willing_to_wait_for_democrat_leaders__republicans_take_the_lead_on__commonsense_plan__to_bring_down_price_of_g
-------------
In the article
------quote-----
NOTE: Blunt and House leaders announced last week that Republicans will seek to lower energy costs by filing discharge petitions on a series of supply-oriented bills - circumventing the roadblocks erected by Democratic leadership, and bringing bipartisan legislation to the House floor. Each of the seven bills are specifically crafted to lower the price of gas and other energy sources by increasing American-made energy, decreasing our dependence on foreign oil and creating jobs here at home in the process.
------------------
Other bills and other discharge petition. A Discharge petition definition from Wikipedia
-----link-----
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:LA4__vGZYYYJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discharge_petition+Discharge+petition&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us
---------------
As Congressman Tim Walberg mentioned in his interview above that a discharge petition is a way to take a bill out of committee regardless of what the leadership thinks, the kicker is that it takes a majority of House members (218). Mr. Walberg explains how because of the need to vote some extra votes will happen to switch because some of the Congressmen don’t want to be seen as voting against the bill. Because this bill is about lowering gas prices and doing something immediately Walberg feels there is a chance. Whether or not it happens, I feel it is important to let the people know that the Republicans are fighting a good fight for them. And that they are getting back to their roots and the future will tell if they stick to their guns.
I had posted earlier about the Congress coming out with an action plan. At the time though I hoped for some action, I really didn’t expect anything much. I’m hoping this is the start of a concerted effort to hold the Democrat’s feet to the fire. Force some bipartisan efforts.
From John Boehner, more pressure for the Dems to live up to their words.
-----link-----
http://www.republicanleader.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=93513
--------------
More from Boehner, also see the bottom of the article for more links. Notice the idea of a continuing fight over this.
-----link-----
http://www.republicanleader.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=93528
---------------
Really a groundswell going on here. Look back, how and who really got the ball rolling? Newt Gingrich whether you like him or not has done all the ground work on this one. He did the polling he found this issue because he listened. He has set things up nicely. He warned the Republicans about the coming disaster if they didn’t do anything. They didn’t so he did. His “Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less” petition is at 500, 000 signatures. And piling up as we speak. His site is Newt.org. Go there you will find a wealth of information about a lot of other issues that are equally resonant with the American people. Go to the link below to find out about the “Drill Here” effort. Watch the you tube stuff. This man if people will let him will drag the Republican into the online age single-handedly.
-----link-----
http://www.americansolutions.com/actioncenter/petitions/?Guid=54ec6e43-75a8-445b-aa7b-346a1e096659
---------------
I’m a big fan of Newt and have been for a long time. I hope that Newt and Boehner are working together on this. There seems to be some energy coming out of the Republicans for a change. Young turks like Walberg from Michigan are being given their head and they are chomping at the bit.
Don’t know if it’s related but after Newt gave a warning to the leaders that some form of unity had to be achieved and quickly, then others came out with their warnings, Then May 20th the RSC came out with this plan of attack
-----link-----
http://www.house.gov/hensarling/rsc/doc/rsc_action_plan.pdf
---------------
Perhaps the new Turks of the Republican party can help move the party into it’s more traditional role of fighting big government and help make government more user friendly by following and holding leadership to the provisions in the plan above.
I’m looking forward to the election now with some more hope. It takes leadership to drive the car but in a democracy its the followers that sometimes tells the captain where they want him to drive the car too.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
PS. A link from Newt showing that to be green and energy independent can look beautiful indeed.
-----link-----
http://newt.org/tabid/102/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/3487/Default.aspx
---------------
PPS. Just found this early this morning. Anti Fairness doctrine being pressed for a vote through, yup you guessed it a “discharge petition” The Republicans wrote a bill to get the “Fairness Doctrine” off the books and it was stuck in committee and forgotten about by the Democrat leaders. We are trying to get it out of committee through a discharge petition. 194 of the 218 signatures already obtained. If attained then there has to be a vote to pass the bill.
I’m starting to be reminded of an old song, that’ll let you guess my age.
“Something’s happening here, what it is ain;’t exactly Clear”
The House Republicans are starting to use an eminently conservative tactic, playing within the rules, a tactic that actually will call upon legislators to vote on an issue. Kind of using the law and Democracy for an in your face approach that I’m loving. Gee imagine forcing legislators to vote on something. Kind of a Put up or Shut up approach. As Newt would say either help us fix the problem or get out of the way. But I digress. Here is the strategy.
From Tim Walberg’s site
-----link-----
http://walberg.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=93524
---------------
Walberg on the radio
-----link-----
http://walberg.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=93524
---------------
US House Republican Whip Roy Blunt is leading a charge on gas prices and energy. A charge to do something not just talk about it.
-----link-----
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20080610/pl_usnw/blunt__no_longer_willing_to_wait_for_democrat_leaders__republicans_take_the_lead_on__commonsense_plan__to_bring_down_price_of_g
-------------
In the article
------quote-----
NOTE: Blunt and House leaders announced last week that Republicans will seek to lower energy costs by filing discharge petitions on a series of supply-oriented bills - circumventing the roadblocks erected by Democratic leadership, and bringing bipartisan legislation to the House floor. Each of the seven bills are specifically crafted to lower the price of gas and other energy sources by increasing American-made energy, decreasing our dependence on foreign oil and creating jobs here at home in the process.
------------------
Other bills and other discharge petition. A Discharge petition definition from Wikipedia
-----link-----
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:LA4__vGZYYYJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discharge_petition+Discharge+petition&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us
---------------
As Congressman Tim Walberg mentioned in his interview above that a discharge petition is a way to take a bill out of committee regardless of what the leadership thinks, the kicker is that it takes a majority of House members (218). Mr. Walberg explains how because of the need to vote some extra votes will happen to switch because some of the Congressmen don’t want to be seen as voting against the bill. Because this bill is about lowering gas prices and doing something immediately Walberg feels there is a chance. Whether or not it happens, I feel it is important to let the people know that the Republicans are fighting a good fight for them. And that they are getting back to their roots and the future will tell if they stick to their guns.
I had posted earlier about the Congress coming out with an action plan. At the time though I hoped for some action, I really didn’t expect anything much. I’m hoping this is the start of a concerted effort to hold the Democrat’s feet to the fire. Force some bipartisan efforts.
From John Boehner, more pressure for the Dems to live up to their words.
-----link-----
http://www.republicanleader.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=93513
--------------
More from Boehner, also see the bottom of the article for more links. Notice the idea of a continuing fight over this.
-----link-----
http://www.republicanleader.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=93528
---------------
Really a groundswell going on here. Look back, how and who really got the ball rolling? Newt Gingrich whether you like him or not has done all the ground work on this one. He did the polling he found this issue because he listened. He has set things up nicely. He warned the Republicans about the coming disaster if they didn’t do anything. They didn’t so he did. His “Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less” petition is at 500, 000 signatures. And piling up as we speak. His site is Newt.org. Go there you will find a wealth of information about a lot of other issues that are equally resonant with the American people. Go to the link below to find out about the “Drill Here” effort. Watch the you tube stuff. This man if people will let him will drag the Republican into the online age single-handedly.
-----link-----
http://www.americansolutions.com/actioncenter/petitions/?Guid=54ec6e43-75a8-445b-aa7b-346a1e096659
---------------
I’m a big fan of Newt and have been for a long time. I hope that Newt and Boehner are working together on this. There seems to be some energy coming out of the Republicans for a change. Young turks like Walberg from Michigan are being given their head and they are chomping at the bit.
Don’t know if it’s related but after Newt gave a warning to the leaders that some form of unity had to be achieved and quickly, then others came out with their warnings, Then May 20th the RSC came out with this plan of attack
-----link-----
http://www.house.gov/hensarling/rsc/doc/rsc_action_plan.pdf
---------------
Perhaps the new Turks of the Republican party can help move the party into it’s more traditional role of fighting big government and help make government more user friendly by following and holding leadership to the provisions in the plan above.
I’m looking forward to the election now with some more hope. It takes leadership to drive the car but in a democracy its the followers that sometimes tells the captain where they want him to drive the car too.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
PS. A link from Newt showing that to be green and energy independent can look beautiful indeed.
-----link-----
http://newt.org/tabid/102/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/3487/Default.aspx
---------------
PPS. Just found this early this morning. Anti Fairness doctrine being pressed for a vote through, yup you guessed it a “discharge petition” The Republicans wrote a bill to get the “Fairness Doctrine” off the books and it was stuck in committee and forgotten about by the Democrat leaders. We are trying to get it out of committee through a discharge petition. 194 of the 218 signatures already obtained. If attained then there has to be a vote to pass the bill.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Back To The Wilderness ????
Back To The Wilderness ??
Are Republicans facing another time when we find ourselves wandering around the halls of power with out any of our own other than what the Democrats gave us. I believe we probably are. There was once such a time for us. During that time the public would tire and allow a Republican president usually to help get the country out of the mess the previous president and congress had put us in. But the party had no real direction that resonated with the public. We tried tweaking the message, more conservative then more liberal, and usually the liberal factions would come out ahead because they could get the message to resonate enough to at least get people not to vote for the Democrat because they could point to something like “ They believe in the same liberal things and I want a change. With Reagan we found a voice that not only resonated with the people but resonated for the Republican ideas, with conservative ideas. People voted for Republican ideas because they were put forth in a way that they could understand and see how they would make a difference in their lives. Plus they were put forward by someone they could trust. On the other hand, in an election on such a scale that the presidential elections are, it is nearly impossible to have a message out resonate a charismatic leader. As we are trying now, the Democrats from Reagan on tried valiantly to get their message across, but they had no one who could “resonate it”. They blamed it on different parts of the message not the messenger. Is this right? Absolutely not. So? So what? Bill Clinton finally came around and out resonated his opponents in any way he could. Some say he out “conservatived” the conservatives. He didn’t, he simply resonated with the people far better. People knew what he was but put up with him because they liked him. They also finally got tired of him because he had no real message.
Try to understand what I’m saying. I’m not comparing Reagan to Clinton, only in their charisma.
We as conservatives have to come to grips with that reality. What can we do? We still have to get other voters to trust the message we‘re trying to sell. To do that we need a messenger that people can trust. People trust McCain. Only when he acts like a politician do they not. We also need a candidate that people want to listen to. We are in a quandary because John McCain has great ideas as evidenced by the text of his speech, but nearly a total lack of “resonance” as evidenced by his oration of that same text. All politics is personal. When we fail to put a personal face on our ideas on our platform, It becomes just a wooden structure, the paint and landscaping gives the public what it needs to envision themselves at home within it, within the Republican Home. We need to make the Republican House a Home.
I’ve come up with a solution. Lol. John McCain needs to give few speeches and when he does just make them short and business like. Let Obama ramble on about all those fuzzy things he rambles about. John needs to give Highlights only. Then the key will be to have a staff or shadow government set up around him with charismatic cabinet members that can sell his different ideas. To put the paint on his structure. Kennedy surrounded himself with top notch people, he had the other problem, he needed a message he was a good messenger. Actually this way if McCain chooses it would highlight the successful business model where the executive is actually not expected to know each and every nut and bolt of a business. He is there to pick the direction they are headed and is judged by the people he chooses to be around him who actually turn his ideas into progress. He is not considered a bad leader if he lets someone he’s picked explain the intricacies of an individual program. Hold themselves more aloof. Obama holds himself aloof, he is tainted with elitism not because he is aloof but because he lacks the message other than change, but won’t admit it. John McCain is more down to earth and ordinary than any other national politician I could think of. Obama is not, again the elitism charge.
McCain needs the straight talk express to step up and admit that even about his strong point national security, he would not make any decisions without finding out all facts first. Admit that he doesn’t know everything about everything. “But he would damn well find out” before making a decision. Then in the simplest terms he could sketch out the parameters framing his decision. Then let his subordinate give the details.
Keep the “parameters” firmly in place. Keep the message resonating through his actions, not so much his talk. Earn the voters trust with actions. Newt’s Drill Here, Drill Now comes to mind. Get out in front of the issues bring on board some one specific to detail the programs. Someone different for each, let the public see you delegate power to exceptional people with programs that will resonate with them. Let them give you the credit for doing that. Let them see that you are running the ship, that you are the captain firmly in charge of all the other people you choose to help run the ship.
Will this happen, will John McCain find a way to win?? I don’t know. The opportunities are there. Can he get the people to believe in his message and trust him as the messenger? I hope so. I haven’t seen the change come across yet. With charisma Obama says change without anything to back it up and people can see it. Without charisma McCain has to let the message resonate. He has to have a great and simple message and keep hammering it home. Force Obama to fight it by trying to explain what his alternatives are. People will then see. But I’m not seeing that yet.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Are Republicans facing another time when we find ourselves wandering around the halls of power with out any of our own other than what the Democrats gave us. I believe we probably are. There was once such a time for us. During that time the public would tire and allow a Republican president usually to help get the country out of the mess the previous president and congress had put us in. But the party had no real direction that resonated with the public. We tried tweaking the message, more conservative then more liberal, and usually the liberal factions would come out ahead because they could get the message to resonate enough to at least get people not to vote for the Democrat because they could point to something like “ They believe in the same liberal things and I want a change. With Reagan we found a voice that not only resonated with the people but resonated for the Republican ideas, with conservative ideas. People voted for Republican ideas because they were put forth in a way that they could understand and see how they would make a difference in their lives. Plus they were put forward by someone they could trust. On the other hand, in an election on such a scale that the presidential elections are, it is nearly impossible to have a message out resonate a charismatic leader. As we are trying now, the Democrats from Reagan on tried valiantly to get their message across, but they had no one who could “resonate it”. They blamed it on different parts of the message not the messenger. Is this right? Absolutely not. So? So what? Bill Clinton finally came around and out resonated his opponents in any way he could. Some say he out “conservatived” the conservatives. He didn’t, he simply resonated with the people far better. People knew what he was but put up with him because they liked him. They also finally got tired of him because he had no real message.
Try to understand what I’m saying. I’m not comparing Reagan to Clinton, only in their charisma.
We as conservatives have to come to grips with that reality. What can we do? We still have to get other voters to trust the message we‘re trying to sell. To do that we need a messenger that people can trust. People trust McCain. Only when he acts like a politician do they not. We also need a candidate that people want to listen to. We are in a quandary because John McCain has great ideas as evidenced by the text of his speech, but nearly a total lack of “resonance” as evidenced by his oration of that same text. All politics is personal. When we fail to put a personal face on our ideas on our platform, It becomes just a wooden structure, the paint and landscaping gives the public what it needs to envision themselves at home within it, within the Republican Home. We need to make the Republican House a Home.
I’ve come up with a solution. Lol. John McCain needs to give few speeches and when he does just make them short and business like. Let Obama ramble on about all those fuzzy things he rambles about. John needs to give Highlights only. Then the key will be to have a staff or shadow government set up around him with charismatic cabinet members that can sell his different ideas. To put the paint on his structure. Kennedy surrounded himself with top notch people, he had the other problem, he needed a message he was a good messenger. Actually this way if McCain chooses it would highlight the successful business model where the executive is actually not expected to know each and every nut and bolt of a business. He is there to pick the direction they are headed and is judged by the people he chooses to be around him who actually turn his ideas into progress. He is not considered a bad leader if he lets someone he’s picked explain the intricacies of an individual program. Hold themselves more aloof. Obama holds himself aloof, he is tainted with elitism not because he is aloof but because he lacks the message other than change, but won’t admit it. John McCain is more down to earth and ordinary than any other national politician I could think of. Obama is not, again the elitism charge.
McCain needs the straight talk express to step up and admit that even about his strong point national security, he would not make any decisions without finding out all facts first. Admit that he doesn’t know everything about everything. “But he would damn well find out” before making a decision. Then in the simplest terms he could sketch out the parameters framing his decision. Then let his subordinate give the details.
Keep the “parameters” firmly in place. Keep the message resonating through his actions, not so much his talk. Earn the voters trust with actions. Newt’s Drill Here, Drill Now comes to mind. Get out in front of the issues bring on board some one specific to detail the programs. Someone different for each, let the public see you delegate power to exceptional people with programs that will resonate with them. Let them give you the credit for doing that. Let them see that you are running the ship, that you are the captain firmly in charge of all the other people you choose to help run the ship.
Will this happen, will John McCain find a way to win?? I don’t know. The opportunities are there. Can he get the people to believe in his message and trust him as the messenger? I hope so. I haven’t seen the change come across yet. With charisma Obama says change without anything to back it up and people can see it. Without charisma McCain has to let the message resonate. He has to have a great and simple message and keep hammering it home. Force Obama to fight it by trying to explain what his alternatives are. People will then see. But I’m not seeing that yet.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Monday, June 9, 2008
My Personnal Piece of Conservatism
I have labored with my tortured thoughts as to why conservatives cannot regain power and in fact seem to be losing it. Peggy Noonan was who I first looked to and as far as I’m concerned she was spot on. On top of that as always she put it in elegant terms.
-----link-----
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/party-house-republicans-2046890-republican-bush
---------------
Then came Alex Costelanos, who wasn’t quite as elegant but every bit as accurate.
-----link-----
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Njg0ZjliNmIyNzdlODBkNDQ3MjFmNGQ1ODExNDBlMzU=&w=MA==
---------------
Alex Costelanos talked of David Brooks writing about the British Conservative movement.
-----link-----
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/09/opinion/09brooks.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
---------------
I had been blogging my brains out as the news kept coming out of England. Brooks alluded to the fact that the British had got their losing in early and spent their time coming up with a new approach, a “bottom up” vs. a top down approach to government.
Alex Costelanos called it embracing government. I think however that the lesson to be learned from the British conservative success, is that the voters think that the system is broke and that is why we have this cycle of voting out the bums. No matter which party. I have a little different slant. I’ve blogged before about how all politics is personnel. The problem with national politics is that it is not personnel. Our leaders, as the British leaders are doing now, have to come up with real change that affects people directly. Democrats have always claimed to be for the little guy. During the Reagan elections the majority didn’t believe that anymore now they do again. Their primary warfare however showed how the voters are still of a mind that the government is broke. And that bigger government will only mean bigger failure.
Newt’s on the right track with the Drill Here, Drill Now, campaign. Simple direct and to the heart of the problem. Gas prices affect everyone. Newt is setting up networks online to come up with solutions to problems, all across the spectrum. He is building it hoping that they will come. He is building a data base from which winning ideas can be taken from which to get involved. The only problem is at the local level we have to come up with our own ideas. Or translate them into local politics. At the local level we have to walk the walk. All of our high minded philosophical sophistry amounts to nothing, if we are afraid to wade into local politics and practice what we preach. Actually do the mental hard work of translating our glorious philosophy into something that will make the public notice that they are better off because we are here. Not in some esoteric way but because their interface with the monster went smoother because we rolled up our sleeves and changed the bureaucracy in some small way. It’s not that hard if your ideas are set and you are truly trying to help others. If we fail the first times, be of good hope for the public is always on the side of the underdog if they trust them. Trust is what it’s all about. It’s what makes politics personnel and local.
Peggy talked of getting our ideas back. Brooks talked of the British ideas, They both are right because we had the ideas and lost them, while the British ideas are creative they are just basic conservative ideas made to work in a modern bureaucracy. Made to relate to modern people. Can we change as a party? Now? We seem so entrenched as a party that I think it nearly impossible right now right away. I can change my little corner of the party though in my precinct. Maybe not overnight but that is good because first I need the time to listen to what the voters want and only then channel the solutions to their problems through the Conservative Vision. That vision will be made up of using what is at hand and making it work better. Not make it bigger, and not necessarily make it smaller. Just make it work. The secretary of state in Michigan got my vote when the lines at the license bureau got quicker not because she wrote a blog about starving people around the world. She got personnel, because of that she earned my trust. We have the ideas, they will sell themselves. Our work is to get them in place in the system; we have to prove to others that they will work and that we truly mean and believe in what we say. We have to earn their trust. We have to become the doers, and not the talkers.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
-----link-----
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/party-house-republicans-2046890-republican-bush
---------------
Then came Alex Costelanos, who wasn’t quite as elegant but every bit as accurate.
-----link-----
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Njg0ZjliNmIyNzdlODBkNDQ3MjFmNGQ1ODExNDBlMzU=&w=MA==
---------------
Alex Costelanos talked of David Brooks writing about the British Conservative movement.
-----link-----
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/09/opinion/09brooks.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
---------------
I had been blogging my brains out as the news kept coming out of England. Brooks alluded to the fact that the British had got their losing in early and spent their time coming up with a new approach, a “bottom up” vs. a top down approach to government.
Alex Costelanos called it embracing government. I think however that the lesson to be learned from the British conservative success, is that the voters think that the system is broke and that is why we have this cycle of voting out the bums. No matter which party. I have a little different slant. I’ve blogged before about how all politics is personnel. The problem with national politics is that it is not personnel. Our leaders, as the British leaders are doing now, have to come up with real change that affects people directly. Democrats have always claimed to be for the little guy. During the Reagan elections the majority didn’t believe that anymore now they do again. Their primary warfare however showed how the voters are still of a mind that the government is broke. And that bigger government will only mean bigger failure.
Newt’s on the right track with the Drill Here, Drill Now, campaign. Simple direct and to the heart of the problem. Gas prices affect everyone. Newt is setting up networks online to come up with solutions to problems, all across the spectrum. He is building it hoping that they will come. He is building a data base from which winning ideas can be taken from which to get involved. The only problem is at the local level we have to come up with our own ideas. Or translate them into local politics. At the local level we have to walk the walk. All of our high minded philosophical sophistry amounts to nothing, if we are afraid to wade into local politics and practice what we preach. Actually do the mental hard work of translating our glorious philosophy into something that will make the public notice that they are better off because we are here. Not in some esoteric way but because their interface with the monster went smoother because we rolled up our sleeves and changed the bureaucracy in some small way. It’s not that hard if your ideas are set and you are truly trying to help others. If we fail the first times, be of good hope for the public is always on the side of the underdog if they trust them. Trust is what it’s all about. It’s what makes politics personnel and local.
Peggy talked of getting our ideas back. Brooks talked of the British ideas, They both are right because we had the ideas and lost them, while the British ideas are creative they are just basic conservative ideas made to work in a modern bureaucracy. Made to relate to modern people. Can we change as a party? Now? We seem so entrenched as a party that I think it nearly impossible right now right away. I can change my little corner of the party though in my precinct. Maybe not overnight but that is good because first I need the time to listen to what the voters want and only then channel the solutions to their problems through the Conservative Vision. That vision will be made up of using what is at hand and making it work better. Not make it bigger, and not necessarily make it smaller. Just make it work. The secretary of state in Michigan got my vote when the lines at the license bureau got quicker not because she wrote a blog about starving people around the world. She got personnel, because of that she earned my trust. We have the ideas, they will sell themselves. Our work is to get them in place in the system; we have to prove to others that they will work and that we truly mean and believe in what we say. We have to earn their trust. We have to become the doers, and not the talkers.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Sunday, June 8, 2008
Academic Fraud
In the following link from the Mackinac Center the author shows how when there is a question of whether there was financial fraud in the Detroit Public Schools there was a remedy in the courts. The author wonders why when promises were made and not followed through with in the education of the students, that the academic fraud had no immediate remedy.
-----link-----
http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=3315
--------------
The article goes on to show one possible solution made by a local school board. My “bottom up” award to the Rockford school board, headed by Dr. Michael Shibler.
-----quote------
At least one Michigan school district is taking a new approach to address the problem of academic fraud. Over a decade ago, Rockford Public Schools in Kent County recognized the need to guarantee that its graduates possess basic skills. If a student does not attain a certain level of competency, the district provides, and pays for, remedial education. In this way, Rockford seeks to ensure its diplomas are representative of academic achievement. Dr. Michael Shibler, superintendent of Rockford, recently challenged all public school districts in Michigan to adopt similar accountability measures.
------------------
I googled Dr. Michael Shibler and found this interview of him. I found it instructive as to his management style. He basically listened to everyone to come up with the needs of the community. He calls the people stakeholders in the educational system. They will be the ones paying the taxes and are the ones who will be directly affected by the policies. Next he makes all the people responsible for the implementation accountable for it’s success by applying consistent metrics to measure those results, and importantly by holding public meetings on the progress or lack thereof. The article is long but worth the read. Not being familiar with the politics of how a school system operates, I learned quite a bit.
-----link-----
http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:VByzav4-hcsJ:www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-17446933_ITM+Dr.+Michael+Shibler&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=35&gl=us
---------------
Kent county followed the lead of Dr. Shibler in 2006
------link-----
http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:zmUS-QHLVCUJ:www.educationreport.org/7622+Dr.+Michael+Shibler&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=50&gl=us
----------------
I like his approach. I really like the idea of individual school trying their own ideas, of having the freedom to try what they think will work. The Mackinac Center’s study asked what was the way for students to get satisfaction when faced with academic fraud. I think that having the threat of charter schools will help give the necessary incentive to public schools to try and cure themselves. Perhaps along the lines of the methods above. I hope they can as I also believe in the economies of scale the large schools can give. I like the idea of giving as many options to students as possible. As Dr. Shibler relates, a large school can cull enough students interested in a small subject that a smaller school could not. Maybe a Chinese language class, an art class, or perhaps an involved tech type class. I don’t know the answer, I know what I want and it is nice to think that a Dr. Shibler might be out there willing to listen to what I want then have the chutzpa and integrity to carry it out.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
-----link-----
http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=3315
--------------
The article goes on to show one possible solution made by a local school board. My “bottom up” award to the Rockford school board, headed by Dr. Michael Shibler.
-----quote------
At least one Michigan school district is taking a new approach to address the problem of academic fraud. Over a decade ago, Rockford Public Schools in Kent County recognized the need to guarantee that its graduates possess basic skills. If a student does not attain a certain level of competency, the district provides, and pays for, remedial education. In this way, Rockford seeks to ensure its diplomas are representative of academic achievement. Dr. Michael Shibler, superintendent of Rockford, recently challenged all public school districts in Michigan to adopt similar accountability measures.
------------------
I googled Dr. Michael Shibler and found this interview of him. I found it instructive as to his management style. He basically listened to everyone to come up with the needs of the community. He calls the people stakeholders in the educational system. They will be the ones paying the taxes and are the ones who will be directly affected by the policies. Next he makes all the people responsible for the implementation accountable for it’s success by applying consistent metrics to measure those results, and importantly by holding public meetings on the progress or lack thereof. The article is long but worth the read. Not being familiar with the politics of how a school system operates, I learned quite a bit.
-----link-----
http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:VByzav4-hcsJ:www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-17446933_ITM+Dr.+Michael+Shibler&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=35&gl=us
---------------
Kent county followed the lead of Dr. Shibler in 2006
------link-----
http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:zmUS-QHLVCUJ:www.educationreport.org/7622+Dr.+Michael+Shibler&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=50&gl=us
----------------
I like his approach. I really like the idea of individual school trying their own ideas, of having the freedom to try what they think will work. The Mackinac Center’s study asked what was the way for students to get satisfaction when faced with academic fraud. I think that having the threat of charter schools will help give the necessary incentive to public schools to try and cure themselves. Perhaps along the lines of the methods above. I hope they can as I also believe in the economies of scale the large schools can give. I like the idea of giving as many options to students as possible. As Dr. Shibler relates, a large school can cull enough students interested in a small subject that a smaller school could not. Maybe a Chinese language class, an art class, or perhaps an involved tech type class. I don’t know the answer, I know what I want and it is nice to think that a Dr. Shibler might be out there willing to listen to what I want then have the chutzpa and integrity to carry it out.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)