The Conservative Responsibility (Duty Mandate)
As Congress reaches the tipping point in favor of the Liberal agenda --- no I won’t bore you with the rhetoric. The people have spoken as loud as they can about the corruption of the democratic process and let us know their faith in the conducting of their business by “elected” representatives has reached an all time low.
The voters know that old saying in their hearts about power corrupting and the more power is concentrated the more it corrupts. Even before the new governing majority can get its feet wet, nay before they are even in office there is an abundance of pessimism about their ability to actually change anything for the better.
The voters are coming more and more to the conclusion that there is little difference between the two parties and an ever increasing divide between the classes. Talk about wedge issues. This class warfare can lead in our ever increasingly insecure society to anarchy.
Without any difference between the major parties in their philosophy of governing, there is little reason for the voters to vote, except for personality traits in individual candidates.
History is ripe with societies that have relied on putting their trust in individuals. Examples from Ghengis Kahn thru Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot come to mind. Few benevolent ones come to mind. These leaders corrupted or totally reinvented their “parties” to fit themselves then their country and eventually tried to remake the world in their image. It should be the other way around.
The responsibility, nay our duty we Conservatives face is to offer a true choice to voters. A real difference in a governing platform. We did that and won with that once but couldn’t keep our philosophy intact. We soon became just another rubber stamp for the bureaucratic behemoth we call government.
Conservatives have the responsibility to offer a way out of this morass. We have to get rid of the deadwood, the ones without any Conservative convictions, the “election time candidates”. Then quit our childish bickering and get to work. We need to continually ask our selves. How can we govern better. We need to define better as to how can we better help our citizens obtain the necessary freedom to choose how they want to live their lives, how can we govern to help them achieve their liberty and how can we govern to help them gain the necessary freedom to pursue their happiness?
Yes this includes getting rid of a lot of unnecessary regulations. Yes this means getting rid of unnecessary programs. But before any of that we need to get true to our convictions. Then we need to start at the bottom and begin instituting local programs and events that proclaim louder than rhetoric our goals and philosophy.
Of course we need to let people know who we are when we are doing this but we need not hit them over the head with it. Just let our actions speak for themselves.
Mainly we should focus on helping people help themselves. I know that sounds almost as old fashioned as love thy neighbor; perhaps this could be the new “retro” thought 2 years from now. Could just be the new saying on a protest sign from a pissed off youth as they see their future has been bankrupted by liberals.
We need an ironclad philosophy to help drive us to power in the upcoming elections. Not more of the wishy washy poll driven garbage of our recent elections. People still love to see an underdog rise up, they just hate to back them until they are on the rise. We need to do the work I’ve talked about above to get on the rise again. We need not find another rock star politician as much as we need proof positive that our common sense ideas are real, that they work, and that we offer a difference.
Our mandate was given to us by the people that didn’t vote this time and the ones who changed their vote to the other side. That mandate is simple. We have the mandate from the people to issue in an age of “Iindividual Freedom”.
Do you not think that if we offered a way to let Individual Freedom Ring people wouldn't follow?
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Ps. To see a more specific plan of action, go to
-----link-----
http://bottomuppolitics.blogspot.com/2008/12/conservative-duty.html
--------------
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
The Marines Still Have the Best Idea
Thomas Sowell in his article in Townhall, linked below, highlights Malcolm Gladwell’s new book “Outliers”. Sowell states Gladwell makes the case for the importatnt role that "special circumstances" play in creating “Outliers” or special achievers. To the dimmishment of personal merit, or I would say personal achievement. In fact the whole idea seems to diminish the role of personal achievement.
-----quote from article-----
The theme running through this book is that spectacular individual achievements-- outliers-- are not simply a matter of personal merit but come out of a background of special circumstances that enable outstanding individual ability to lead to performances far beyond the norm.
-------------------------------
-----link to article-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2008/12/30/outliers?page=1
--------------
As with the case of the Hockey players Mr. Sowell highlighted, the cut off date plays a definite role both in the physical and the mental makeup of the players. This I would counter is just another of the factors that separate the wheat from the chaff. Any time averages are used, by definition, some are more susceptible to success or failure than others. Laws or in this case restrictions in competition based upon age require these types of things shortcomings if you will.
The best defense against the reality of that is to educate yourself to that reality. To accept it and use it as a tool. If you were born in November and find yourself on the short end of the stick, pun intended, you can use that as a tool and not a crutch. I would like for example next to see how some "November Wonder" overcame that shortcoming to rise to the top. I wonder if that hockey player would think it would have been useful to know his shortcoming ahead of time? Perhaps it would of depended upon the how the player personaly viewed that fact. Whether they viewed it as an excuse (shortcoming) or as an edge (oportunity). Talk to any coach with a team that is considered to be an underdog. They will tell you which "vision" is acceptable to them in their players no matter which Month they were born in.
When I stop to think and study why some people are successful, I find myself perhaps trying to find reason why in fact I am not. In other words excuses for myself. For example, if I was a failed Hockey player who was born in November, Gladwell’s book would appeal to me. I wonder why no one writes a book about why all the other Hockey players, that were also born in January didn’t make the all star team. Even those with good genetic make up.
I know it’s just common sense that they were not good enough due to any number of reasons. To know one of the reason we succeed (out date of birth) can be useful if used judicially along with all the other factors. Also when publicized as with Gladwell’s book, the decision makers in this case coaches and anyone picking players will do well to head the message. And the sub message. Go ahead and pick the Jan. players because they are bigger, but inspire the November players with the truth of how they will soon catch up to the Jan. stick handlers. In other words give them the tools to cut down the mental advantage of the older players.
The Coaches in this example need to be the facilitators of the players by being the conduit of all the true information available to help the players to perform to their best. That is how I see the government’s role. Not to bring everyone down to the lowest common denominator but to let everyone have access to the tools they need to be the best they can be.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
-----quote from article-----
The theme running through this book is that spectacular individual achievements-- outliers-- are not simply a matter of personal merit but come out of a background of special circumstances that enable outstanding individual ability to lead to performances far beyond the norm.
-------------------------------
-----link to article-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2008/12/30/outliers?page=1
--------------
As with the case of the Hockey players Mr. Sowell highlighted, the cut off date plays a definite role both in the physical and the mental makeup of the players. This I would counter is just another of the factors that separate the wheat from the chaff. Any time averages are used, by definition, some are more susceptible to success or failure than others. Laws or in this case restrictions in competition based upon age require these types of things shortcomings if you will.
The best defense against the reality of that is to educate yourself to that reality. To accept it and use it as a tool. If you were born in November and find yourself on the short end of the stick, pun intended, you can use that as a tool and not a crutch. I would like for example next to see how some "November Wonder" overcame that shortcoming to rise to the top. I wonder if that hockey player would think it would have been useful to know his shortcoming ahead of time? Perhaps it would of depended upon the how the player personaly viewed that fact. Whether they viewed it as an excuse (shortcoming) or as an edge (oportunity). Talk to any coach with a team that is considered to be an underdog. They will tell you which "vision" is acceptable to them in their players no matter which Month they were born in.
When I stop to think and study why some people are successful, I find myself perhaps trying to find reason why in fact I am not. In other words excuses for myself. For example, if I was a failed Hockey player who was born in November, Gladwell’s book would appeal to me. I wonder why no one writes a book about why all the other Hockey players, that were also born in January didn’t make the all star team. Even those with good genetic make up.
I know it’s just common sense that they were not good enough due to any number of reasons. To know one of the reason we succeed (out date of birth) can be useful if used judicially along with all the other factors. Also when publicized as with Gladwell’s book, the decision makers in this case coaches and anyone picking players will do well to head the message. And the sub message. Go ahead and pick the Jan. players because they are bigger, but inspire the November players with the truth of how they will soon catch up to the Jan. stick handlers. In other words give them the tools to cut down the mental advantage of the older players.
The Coaches in this example need to be the facilitators of the players by being the conduit of all the true information available to help the players to perform to their best. That is how I see the government’s role. Not to bring everyone down to the lowest common denominator but to let everyone have access to the tools they need to be the best they can be.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Pass On The Buck, How About A Helping Hand ???
Being a carpenter/builder/handyman by trade or at least previous trade, I felt some empathy for the subject of Jackie Gingrich Cushman’s last article. She talked about one of the lessons she learned from this last year was to have the right tool. She prefaced the idea of having the right tool by saying {"Things turn out best for people who make the best out of the way things turn out."—Basketball Coach John Wooden }
This being so close to my own idea of “Make Do, Make It Now, Make It Work”, that I was hooked. Below is the link to Jackie’s article in Townhall.com.
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/Columnists/JackieGingrichCushman/2008/12/28/if_not_all_great_in_%e2%80%9908_%e2%80%93_how_about_just_fine_in_%e2%80%9809
---------------
Everybody who does anything knows this. For various reasons from ignorance to sloth we seldom bother to have the right tool at hand when the need arises. Common sense tells us to think and act ahead, few of us do, None of us do all the time.
With the 2008 election over, I can not claim ignorance of what we lacked: what was needed in that election and we didn‘t have. We lacked the “get out the vote” tool, the “register new voters” tool, the “organize the party” tool, the “let‘s have fun doing something good” tool.
Our party lacked the enthusiasm, the comradely synergistic togetherness of an effort with a common cause behind it.
Those tools we lacked to achieve this were volunteers. The tool needed to get the volunteers and to have them working together is to have a common cause. We need spirited volunteers doing things to inspire others etc. What are the tools we need to get those volunteers? What is that common cause.
We in this Patty of ours are the tools. We need to have that common cause.
This could get real philosophical with lists of Rights and rules etc. but we already have a Constitution so I want to look at the practical. I want to win elections, with energetic people talking real common sense ideas.
We need to change the focus of the party in general away from what we demand from the party level below us, to the idea that the level above us is there to help “facilitate” the level below. We need to make the volunteers, the precinct workers the township candidates a focus of our efforts.
If our meetings were about how to help start local efforts, how to recruit local people as volunteers, how to make our party something people might think worthy to join, to make our party something that helps the community in which we live, perhaps then we would get more volunteers with better, less selfish motives to run for office. From the Township on up through the ranks to National.
Simple concept but an incredibly time and labor intensive effort. We have tried trading money for time and found something lacking; call it the personal touch. Actually meeting a candidate to getting an email or letter.
If at the state level whoever wins the State Chair, their job needs to be split evenly between raising money and raising volunteers. We need a cadre of people well trained in the real ability to help local parties set up local efforts that will attract volunteers. Norm Shinkle is a proven man with that ability, now that he has dropped out of the race for the State Chair, he would make a great person to head up and direct that effort.
That whole effort would have to be redesigned to be a one on one type of effort. The fundraising would be separate and should help this effort not be the focus of it. As I volunteer my time I don’t want to be bombarded as I am by pleas for money. I remember telling my daughter some words of wisdom. Be true to and don’t take advantage of the ones you’re closest too; even though they are the easiest to do that too. Well the same should hold true in politics. Let’s take advantage of the Democrats for a change and not ourselves. We have cannibalized this thing of ours till there is little left.
As an active County Party person, who is trying to organize the township and precinct base, I can use not so much money as a mentor to help me interact better with the people. Someone to show what needs to be set up that will function as a base for my party’s efforts to get people interested in joining. To recruit and build an energetic base. I’m talking a mentor that knows specifics, on what type of fundraisers will work, what type of structure will work, not only for the money but to energize the volunteers. (and those specifics will very with neighborhoods)
Think back to the teacher in school that helped you the most. In my case it was the one that took that little extra time to teach me a specific backed with their enthusiasm for their cause. (education). Those were the ones I remember and the ones that had the biggest effect on me. They are rare, they are the ones we need to recruit.
If I may use myself as an example? I will connect with a certain type of person. Someone else will appeal to another and on and on. If we really are serious about the “Big Tent” idea then we should not worry so much about teaching one way but let the selection from “the Market Place of Ideas” prevail.
Myself and our party will, each and together, then have a chance to grow. What Democracy is all about, that synergy between people having the freedom to interact to create new ideas will be able to flourish.
As a party we need to regulate this freedom least of all.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
PS As our new leadership at the County level evolves, I hope to not just be a whiner about what isn’t, but become a part of what will be. Think how nice it would feel to actually get some help in achieving that.
This being so close to my own idea of “Make Do, Make It Now, Make It Work”, that I was hooked. Below is the link to Jackie’s article in Townhall.com.
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/Columnists/JackieGingrichCushman/2008/12/28/if_not_all_great_in_%e2%80%9908_%e2%80%93_how_about_just_fine_in_%e2%80%9809
---------------
Everybody who does anything knows this. For various reasons from ignorance to sloth we seldom bother to have the right tool at hand when the need arises. Common sense tells us to think and act ahead, few of us do, None of us do all the time.
With the 2008 election over, I can not claim ignorance of what we lacked: what was needed in that election and we didn‘t have. We lacked the “get out the vote” tool, the “register new voters” tool, the “organize the party” tool, the “let‘s have fun doing something good” tool.
Our party lacked the enthusiasm, the comradely synergistic togetherness of an effort with a common cause behind it.
Those tools we lacked to achieve this were volunteers. The tool needed to get the volunteers and to have them working together is to have a common cause. We need spirited volunteers doing things to inspire others etc. What are the tools we need to get those volunteers? What is that common cause.
We in this Patty of ours are the tools. We need to have that common cause.
This could get real philosophical with lists of Rights and rules etc. but we already have a Constitution so I want to look at the practical. I want to win elections, with energetic people talking real common sense ideas.
We need to change the focus of the party in general away from what we demand from the party level below us, to the idea that the level above us is there to help “facilitate” the level below. We need to make the volunteers, the precinct workers the township candidates a focus of our efforts.
If our meetings were about how to help start local efforts, how to recruit local people as volunteers, how to make our party something people might think worthy to join, to make our party something that helps the community in which we live, perhaps then we would get more volunteers with better, less selfish motives to run for office. From the Township on up through the ranks to National.
Simple concept but an incredibly time and labor intensive effort. We have tried trading money for time and found something lacking; call it the personal touch. Actually meeting a candidate to getting an email or letter.
If at the state level whoever wins the State Chair, their job needs to be split evenly between raising money and raising volunteers. We need a cadre of people well trained in the real ability to help local parties set up local efforts that will attract volunteers. Norm Shinkle is a proven man with that ability, now that he has dropped out of the race for the State Chair, he would make a great person to head up and direct that effort.
That whole effort would have to be redesigned to be a one on one type of effort. The fundraising would be separate and should help this effort not be the focus of it. As I volunteer my time I don’t want to be bombarded as I am by pleas for money. I remember telling my daughter some words of wisdom. Be true to and don’t take advantage of the ones you’re closest too; even though they are the easiest to do that too. Well the same should hold true in politics. Let’s take advantage of the Democrats for a change and not ourselves. We have cannibalized this thing of ours till there is little left.
As an active County Party person, who is trying to organize the township and precinct base, I can use not so much money as a mentor to help me interact better with the people. Someone to show what needs to be set up that will function as a base for my party’s efforts to get people interested in joining. To recruit and build an energetic base. I’m talking a mentor that knows specifics, on what type of fundraisers will work, what type of structure will work, not only for the money but to energize the volunteers. (and those specifics will very with neighborhoods)
Think back to the teacher in school that helped you the most. In my case it was the one that took that little extra time to teach me a specific backed with their enthusiasm for their cause. (education). Those were the ones I remember and the ones that had the biggest effect on me. They are rare, they are the ones we need to recruit.
If I may use myself as an example? I will connect with a certain type of person. Someone else will appeal to another and on and on. If we really are serious about the “Big Tent” idea then we should not worry so much about teaching one way but let the selection from “the Market Place of Ideas” prevail.
Myself and our party will, each and together, then have a chance to grow. What Democracy is all about, that synergy between people having the freedom to interact to create new ideas will be able to flourish.
As a party we need to regulate this freedom least of all.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
PS As our new leadership at the County level evolves, I hope to not just be a whiner about what isn’t, but become a part of what will be. Think how nice it would feel to actually get some help in achieving that.
Saturday, December 20, 2008
As Clear As,
The Nose On My Face.
Phyllis Schlafly wrote: in her Eagle Forum.
“In the period from 1976 to 1980, grassroots conservatives and Ronald Reagan learned from each other. That's the model conservatives should follow now and educate new leaders.”
-----link to article-----
http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2008/nov08/08-11-28.html
--------------------------
Mrs. Schlafly goes on to show what it took for Reagan to win. How he spent 4 years getting in touch with and learning from the grassroots. He did that by getting out of Washington and traveling the country. She goes on to say that Republicans should do the same thing. Leave Washington DC.
To take that a step further perhaps we should re-educate or Home School ourselves as to what the people really want.
Peggy Noonan wrote in an article sub sub titled “the Age Of The Empty Suit”, in the WSJ about what she feels this country needs
“The return of the suit inhabited by a person. The return of the person who will take responsibility, and lead.”
-----link to article-----
http://online.wsj.com/article/declarations.html
--------------------------
She also writes of our current state of the union. “It's a void that's governing us.”
Tying the two writers together seems simple. Our elected officials have become so out of touch with those they represent that they can no longer govern with our best interests in mind. They don't even know what those interests are. For the most part they have become “empty suits” or mouth pieces for interest groups and more and more simply for the “government” bureaucracies.
We lost recently a great voice of the people, Paul Weyerich. This was a person who knew the grass roots. He was not an empty suit. He was a leader. He also was one of those rare people who could seamlessly combine theory with action on the ground. As the link below shows Paul Weyerich was the force behind many of the Conservative institutions we take for granted today.
A Tribute to Paul Weyrich
by Morton C. Blackwell
-----link-----
http://www.leadershipinstitute.org/resources/?pageid=speeches&s=26
---------------
I bring Weyerich into the discussion not because he was so much of a person who listened to the people but was the person who could put together the people necessary to form coalitions of groups of “The People” along with the money people to back them. I think the article shows what made him remarkable. His unbending and consistent belief in the Conservative Cause. If you backed him you knew what you were getting, and better yet you knew that his beliefs were not going to be changed, that they were not poll driven.
Perhaps it is obvious, but we not only need the grass roots, we need the organizers of those roots. The whole point is that those organizers have to have a message that is clear strong and above all consistent.
How can we be consistent. What is the thread that allows all the different groups we need to find common ground.
Phyllis Schlafly writes in her Eagle Forum an article titled “Some Change Is A Big Improvement” the following in her Eagle Forum.
-----link-----
http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2008/dec08/08-12-05.html
--------------
“North Star Academy has a waiting list of 2,000. North Star's principal, James Verrilli, points out that providing a good education is "the new civil rights movement of our era."
What is “Civil Rights” all about? Simple, it is about Freedom. The Freedom we are guarrenteed in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The Freedom to pursue happiness along with life and liberty. Happiness is found in a parent who is helping their children to a better life through Education. Lately this has not been happening to those who we as a culture make the most promises to. The poor.
Those very same people are now taking matters into their own hands. As Schlafly points out from Uniforms to same sex classes and schools, it is not the rich or even middle class that has bucked the status quo. It has been the inner city schools doing the deeds. It is the schools in the inner city that feel the blunt of the failed Liberal policies. She points out a quote from a headmaster at an inner city "Boys School" and then point out how the PC Harvard elite wouldn’t stand for it.
{Kerry Brennan, headmaster at the all-boys Roxbury Latin School (founded in 1645) observed that "it is well known that boys and girls develop differently and at different rates." It's a good thing he doesn't work at Harvard where the feminists ousted President Larry Summers for a similar type of comment.}
Schlafly points to the idea that this isn’t a Republican or Democrat idea. Freedom is bipartisan. Also she points out that the Feminists are really opposed. This is one issue where common sense seems to rule the day. If we as a party can’t get behind and facilitate common sense and the pursuit of Happiness, then we don’t deserve to get any power back.
It as clear as the nose on my face.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Phyllis Schlafly wrote: in her Eagle Forum.
“In the period from 1976 to 1980, grassroots conservatives and Ronald Reagan learned from each other. That's the model conservatives should follow now and educate new leaders.”
-----link to article-----
http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2008/nov08/08-11-28.html
--------------------------
Mrs. Schlafly goes on to show what it took for Reagan to win. How he spent 4 years getting in touch with and learning from the grassroots. He did that by getting out of Washington and traveling the country. She goes on to say that Republicans should do the same thing. Leave Washington DC.
To take that a step further perhaps we should re-educate or Home School ourselves as to what the people really want.
Peggy Noonan wrote in an article sub sub titled “the Age Of The Empty Suit”, in the WSJ about what she feels this country needs
“The return of the suit inhabited by a person. The return of the person who will take responsibility, and lead.”
-----link to article-----
http://online.wsj.com/article/declarations.html
--------------------------
She also writes of our current state of the union. “It's a void that's governing us.”
Tying the two writers together seems simple. Our elected officials have become so out of touch with those they represent that they can no longer govern with our best interests in mind. They don't even know what those interests are. For the most part they have become “empty suits” or mouth pieces for interest groups and more and more simply for the “government” bureaucracies.
We lost recently a great voice of the people, Paul Weyerich. This was a person who knew the grass roots. He was not an empty suit. He was a leader. He also was one of those rare people who could seamlessly combine theory with action on the ground. As the link below shows Paul Weyerich was the force behind many of the Conservative institutions we take for granted today.
A Tribute to Paul Weyrich
by Morton C. Blackwell
-----link-----
http://www.leadershipinstitute.org/resources/?pageid=speeches&s=26
---------------
I bring Weyerich into the discussion not because he was so much of a person who listened to the people but was the person who could put together the people necessary to form coalitions of groups of “The People” along with the money people to back them. I think the article shows what made him remarkable. His unbending and consistent belief in the Conservative Cause. If you backed him you knew what you were getting, and better yet you knew that his beliefs were not going to be changed, that they were not poll driven.
Perhaps it is obvious, but we not only need the grass roots, we need the organizers of those roots. The whole point is that those organizers have to have a message that is clear strong and above all consistent.
How can we be consistent. What is the thread that allows all the different groups we need to find common ground.
Phyllis Schlafly writes in her Eagle Forum an article titled “Some Change Is A Big Improvement” the following in her Eagle Forum.
-----link-----
http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2008/dec08/08-12-05.html
--------------
“North Star Academy has a waiting list of 2,000. North Star's principal, James Verrilli, points out that providing a good education is "the new civil rights movement of our era."
What is “Civil Rights” all about? Simple, it is about Freedom. The Freedom we are guarrenteed in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The Freedom to pursue happiness along with life and liberty. Happiness is found in a parent who is helping their children to a better life through Education. Lately this has not been happening to those who we as a culture make the most promises to. The poor.
Those very same people are now taking matters into their own hands. As Schlafly points out from Uniforms to same sex classes and schools, it is not the rich or even middle class that has bucked the status quo. It has been the inner city schools doing the deeds. It is the schools in the inner city that feel the blunt of the failed Liberal policies. She points out a quote from a headmaster at an inner city "Boys School" and then point out how the PC Harvard elite wouldn’t stand for it.
{Kerry Brennan, headmaster at the all-boys Roxbury Latin School (founded in 1645) observed that "it is well known that boys and girls develop differently and at different rates." It's a good thing he doesn't work at Harvard where the feminists ousted President Larry Summers for a similar type of comment.}
Schlafly points to the idea that this isn’t a Republican or Democrat idea. Freedom is bipartisan. Also she points out that the Feminists are really opposed. This is one issue where common sense seems to rule the day. If we as a party can’t get behind and facilitate common sense and the pursuit of Happiness, then we don’t deserve to get any power back.
It as clear as the nose on my face.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Thursday, December 18, 2008
New Thoughts From an Old Hand
Richard Viguerie writing for Reason on line
-----link------
http://www.reason.com/news/show/130562.html
---------------
Viguerie’s quote.
When talking about the Religious Right, or as he calls them the “value voters” says the following.
-----Quote-----
so. It’s the only part of the Republican Party where there really are ground troops. The Left has different minority groups, unions, any number of groups that serve as ground troops and Republicans don’t, other than the religious right leaders, [who are] the only ones with any troops out there. Economic conservatives don’t have troops on the ground and are not organized in the way values voters are.
-----------------
Viguerie calls the religious right value voters probably to help break up the stereotypes. Whatever he calls them I agree with the above assessment of the power of “troops on the ground”. During the last election it was quite apparent that what the Republicans lacked was a base of volunteers on the ground.
Last night at our County Executive Committee meeting Holly Hughes spoke a long time about why we lost the election. How it was a lot of complicated things that all got together and caused our defeat. She is right. The reasons why people lose election or win them for that matter are many and complicated. But let us not obfuscate the obvious.
Our loss was NOT a fluke.
In his insightful answerers to the interviewer from Reason, Viguerie reasons that we as Republicans need to form our own self financed autonomous power groups, such as the Left has; ie Unions, Minority groups of all kinds from Black to Hispanic thru Gay. They have in the past and now used many others. Viguerie talks of a need for Conservative groups to form independently outside of the Republican structure. Be more narrow in their scope and aid the Republican Party in it’s need with their specific expertise on issues and troops on the ground when elections roll around.
I draw from the conclusion that with enough of these groups, each focusing on a particular issue, when combined with the continuous drumbeat from ten different drums, a more or less cohesive picture or brand for our Party will emerge. It is our job to keep that message within the parameters of a Republican platform.
------quote below to back up the above-----
It’s critical for conservatives to also operate independently of the GOP and launch thousands of new organizations at the national, state, and local level, dealing with narrowly focused issues, public education, or maybe in your local community it might be property rights, it could be taxes, whatever the issue might be, work on those issues wherever your abilities and talents lead you to. In my lifetime the most successful public policy issue has been the state of Israel. It’s so successful it’s off the table: Everyone supports Israel. The issue did not get tied to a political party, and any time you tie an issue to a party, your grandchildren will be fighting that issue.
--------------------------------------------
Viguerie has within his construct planks that include limited government, fiscal restraint, and the Religious or values voter.
Today I need to figure out how to transpose that to the local or County and Township and precinct level. So often Republicans get carried off into the big picture when talking about local stuff. One of our local group is trying to do that with a local issue about a parking garage. The difficulty Republicans have with issues is that we start trying to look 20 years down the road. That is our “responsibility” talking and that is a good thing.
We need however to try to also focus on how this issue will effect the everyday person. We have to also make it personal. Along with the facts and figures we have to continually make the effort to transpose those facts and figures into the effects they will have upon the individual people.
As with most things a two sided approach seems needed. The big and little pictures if you will. I don’t pretend to know the answer, but that could be one of the “thousands of new organizations at the national, state, and local level, dealing with narrowly focused issues, public education, or maybe in your local community”. From above quote by Viguerie.
Either way Richard Viguerie's new ideas seem grounded in Old ways and at least point out what is needed in general. It is up to us to teach ourselves how to apply those ideas to the specific and make it happen. It is up to us to take that responsiblity for our actions or lack of actions to secure and make flourish that Freedom so generously given to us.
Everyday on a Personal Level.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
-----link------
http://www.reason.com/news/show/130562.html
---------------
Viguerie’s quote.
When talking about the Religious Right, or as he calls them the “value voters” says the following.
-----Quote-----
so. It’s the only part of the Republican Party where there really are ground troops. The Left has different minority groups, unions, any number of groups that serve as ground troops and Republicans don’t, other than the religious right leaders, [who are] the only ones with any troops out there. Economic conservatives don’t have troops on the ground and are not organized in the way values voters are.
-----------------
Viguerie calls the religious right value voters probably to help break up the stereotypes. Whatever he calls them I agree with the above assessment of the power of “troops on the ground”. During the last election it was quite apparent that what the Republicans lacked was a base of volunteers on the ground.
Last night at our County Executive Committee meeting Holly Hughes spoke a long time about why we lost the election. How it was a lot of complicated things that all got together and caused our defeat. She is right. The reasons why people lose election or win them for that matter are many and complicated. But let us not obfuscate the obvious.
Our loss was NOT a fluke.
In his insightful answerers to the interviewer from Reason, Viguerie reasons that we as Republicans need to form our own self financed autonomous power groups, such as the Left has; ie Unions, Minority groups of all kinds from Black to Hispanic thru Gay. They have in the past and now used many others. Viguerie talks of a need for Conservative groups to form independently outside of the Republican structure. Be more narrow in their scope and aid the Republican Party in it’s need with their specific expertise on issues and troops on the ground when elections roll around.
I draw from the conclusion that with enough of these groups, each focusing on a particular issue, when combined with the continuous drumbeat from ten different drums, a more or less cohesive picture or brand for our Party will emerge. It is our job to keep that message within the parameters of a Republican platform.
------quote below to back up the above-----
It’s critical for conservatives to also operate independently of the GOP and launch thousands of new organizations at the national, state, and local level, dealing with narrowly focused issues, public education, or maybe in your local community it might be property rights, it could be taxes, whatever the issue might be, work on those issues wherever your abilities and talents lead you to. In my lifetime the most successful public policy issue has been the state of Israel. It’s so successful it’s off the table: Everyone supports Israel. The issue did not get tied to a political party, and any time you tie an issue to a party, your grandchildren will be fighting that issue.
--------------------------------------------
Viguerie has within his construct planks that include limited government, fiscal restraint, and the Religious or values voter.
Today I need to figure out how to transpose that to the local or County and Township and precinct level. So often Republicans get carried off into the big picture when talking about local stuff. One of our local group is trying to do that with a local issue about a parking garage. The difficulty Republicans have with issues is that we start trying to look 20 years down the road. That is our “responsibility” talking and that is a good thing.
We need however to try to also focus on how this issue will effect the everyday person. We have to also make it personal. Along with the facts and figures we have to continually make the effort to transpose those facts and figures into the effects they will have upon the individual people.
As with most things a two sided approach seems needed. The big and little pictures if you will. I don’t pretend to know the answer, but that could be one of the “thousands of new organizations at the national, state, and local level, dealing with narrowly focused issues, public education, or maybe in your local community”. From above quote by Viguerie.
Either way Richard Viguerie's new ideas seem grounded in Old ways and at least point out what is needed in general. It is up to us to teach ourselves how to apply those ideas to the specific and make it happen. It is up to us to take that responsiblity for our actions or lack of actions to secure and make flourish that Freedom so generously given to us.
Everyday on a Personal Level.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Delusional Times, or REVOLUTIONARY ???
John Gapper of the Financial Times wrote the most convoluted piece I’ve had the oncoming headache to read in a long time
-----link-----
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f9d8af36-c6ec-11dd-97a5-000077b07658.html
---------------
Of course I read Gaper’s article after I read the piece in Townhall.com by Robert Duncan called “The GOP Has Some Fight Left” so I already was feeling a bit lost in “Wonderland”.
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/RobertMDuncan/2008/12/10/the_gop_has_some_fight_left
--------------
Both writers are missing the point of their stories. Both seem to be conjuring up visions of why the obvious should be discounted for the complicated only they understand. Perhaps it is they who are obtuse and the public (readers and voters) who are being obtuse. In the best sense of the elites of the world let’s obfuscate the obvious from the obtuse.
I hope you think that was some silly writing. That was the point. The elites will always write in glowing terms littered with big words to try to confuse the reader and detract them from the obvious message.
Since given an alternative to Mass Media, the public has chosen the alternative be it Talk Radio or the Internet. They have chosen substance over style. They decided they want to decide what news is fit to read not someone else.
I agree that I’m not going to open a Baghdad office, I’ve been know to seek out blogs out of Baghdad and tend to trust their opinions more.
As far as Duncan and his vaunted NRCC……What can I say about the condescending clap trap that entirely misses the point??
When Duncan says ----- “the voters of Louisiana embraced the conservative values of fiscal responsibility, strengthened national security and increased domestic energy production” ------ or “Mr. Cao's commitment to preserve the dignity of public office by championing comprehensive ethics reform, keeping taxes low, and providing greater accountability for Congressional spending.” Man O Man.
It only goes to show the obvious. Duncan doesn’t have a clue. I sure didn’t hear much about the efforts of Cao and his volunteers, just about the NRCC and their new and better efforts. He seems only interested in buying new computer programs and trying to phone more people than they did last election. He seems to lack the concept that people voted for Anh Cao because he did what was anathema to the “Duncans” of the world.
Cao actually did some things in the district that made people take notice because the things Cao did were helping them. Just like Bobby Jindal, Cao made a real difference in the lives of people living in his area; and like Jindal the people voted them both into office, in spite of Duncan’s effort. I think he and the voters could care less about the talking points Duncan was making.
For Duncan to think otherwise is as delusional as bailing out The Big 3 or bailing out the Mass Media. If you think the Mass Media or at least the large newspapers don’t want to be bailed out, I think Mr. Gapper in his defense of the Elites having a right to spew their snobbery wrote the following.
-----quote-----
My working assumption, in more ways than one, is that consolidation – or, more accurately, eradication – of local newspapers will strengthen the editorial position of the remaining elite: The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg, the Financial Times etc.
I also assume that this elite will find some way to cover its costs. Here’s hoping, anyway.
----------------
What better way to cover it’s cost (and rear end) than a bailout??
Perhaps I’m delusional, but then again it looks like we are going through a delusional time. I'm hoping that this is the last gasp of a bureaucratic system that doesn't work and will finally let the common sense of the people make some changes to it, WITHOUT starting a revolution to do it.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
-----link-----
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f9d8af36-c6ec-11dd-97a5-000077b07658.html
---------------
Of course I read Gaper’s article after I read the piece in Townhall.com by Robert Duncan called “The GOP Has Some Fight Left” so I already was feeling a bit lost in “Wonderland”.
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/RobertMDuncan/2008/12/10/the_gop_has_some_fight_left
--------------
Both writers are missing the point of their stories. Both seem to be conjuring up visions of why the obvious should be discounted for the complicated only they understand. Perhaps it is they who are obtuse and the public (readers and voters) who are being obtuse. In the best sense of the elites of the world let’s obfuscate the obvious from the obtuse.
I hope you think that was some silly writing. That was the point. The elites will always write in glowing terms littered with big words to try to confuse the reader and detract them from the obvious message.
Since given an alternative to Mass Media, the public has chosen the alternative be it Talk Radio or the Internet. They have chosen substance over style. They decided they want to decide what news is fit to read not someone else.
I agree that I’m not going to open a Baghdad office, I’ve been know to seek out blogs out of Baghdad and tend to trust their opinions more.
As far as Duncan and his vaunted NRCC……What can I say about the condescending clap trap that entirely misses the point??
When Duncan says ----- “the voters of Louisiana embraced the conservative values of fiscal responsibility, strengthened national security and increased domestic energy production” ------ or “Mr. Cao's commitment to preserve the dignity of public office by championing comprehensive ethics reform, keeping taxes low, and providing greater accountability for Congressional spending.” Man O Man.
It only goes to show the obvious. Duncan doesn’t have a clue. I sure didn’t hear much about the efforts of Cao and his volunteers, just about the NRCC and their new and better efforts. He seems only interested in buying new computer programs and trying to phone more people than they did last election. He seems to lack the concept that people voted for Anh Cao because he did what was anathema to the “Duncans” of the world.
Cao actually did some things in the district that made people take notice because the things Cao did were helping them. Just like Bobby Jindal, Cao made a real difference in the lives of people living in his area; and like Jindal the people voted them both into office, in spite of Duncan’s effort. I think he and the voters could care less about the talking points Duncan was making.
For Duncan to think otherwise is as delusional as bailing out The Big 3 or bailing out the Mass Media. If you think the Mass Media or at least the large newspapers don’t want to be bailed out, I think Mr. Gapper in his defense of the Elites having a right to spew their snobbery wrote the following.
-----quote-----
My working assumption, in more ways than one, is that consolidation – or, more accurately, eradication – of local newspapers will strengthen the editorial position of the remaining elite: The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg, the Financial Times etc.
I also assume that this elite will find some way to cover its costs. Here’s hoping, anyway.
----------------
What better way to cover it’s cost (and rear end) than a bailout??
Perhaps I’m delusional, but then again it looks like we are going through a delusional time. I'm hoping that this is the last gasp of a bureaucratic system that doesn't work and will finally let the common sense of the people make some changes to it, WITHOUT starting a revolution to do it.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
"Doers of Deeds"
I’ve been following Bobby Jindal from his Katrina days. He seemed to epitomize what I’ve been trying to say in my blogs. He’s been an example of doing what I’ve been trying to say.
Whether he or I were right or wrong, what I admired was that he was a “doer” of the deed. My main point in my blogs has been based on the idea best summned up in a quote attributed to Tip O’Neal; “Politics is Personal“.
The fewer layers between politics and the people the more the people like it. The more personal it is. The better chance the voters have of seeing not only what a politician stands for; but how well he can put that into practice. The more connected to the process the People feel--Are.
Bobby Jindal had a chance to practice what he preached in the aftermath of Katrina. Remember a lot of other politicians with a lot more power had the same chance and better resources to work with but didn’t. Bobby Jindal just rolled up his sleeves and started helping people. When everyone else who should of stepped up was busy covering there backside and doing the Beltway shuffle; he leveraged what political power he had in the vacuum and started assuming leadership and got things done.
Guess what? The citizens of Louisiana made him Governor because of that.
I’ve said all this before, but one thing I missed was that during Katrina there was another “doer of deeds” who jumped in and started organizing aid and help while everyone else from Mayors to Governors to FEMA bureaucrats were being PC and covering their butts. This guy flew under my radar as well as most others’.
From an article in Politico by JOSH KRAUSHAAR & ANDY BARR |
-----link------
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16336.html
---------------
From that article the following quote
-----quote-----
After Hurricane Katrina, Cao’s rebuilt law office became a hub for community organizing and assistance to hurricane victims. His experience helping to rebuild New Orleans also has important symbolic value for the GOP, which was stigmatized — particularly among minority voters — by the Bush administration’s failed response to the disaster.
-----------------
Well that “doer of deeds” was just elected in a heavily Democratic area. It was a stunning upset. By the way after Katrina, Jindal appointed Cao to a government position, I assume as a kindred spirit and later the people elected him.
All well and good. As the article pointed out, Newt Gingrich has been touting Bobby Jindal for a long time now.
The article was enlightening in what it didn’t say about the Republican efforts to recruit minority members. It didn’t say it had been a top down procedure. An example of the best of the leadership within the party trying to pick a candidate using the best methods available. Then they all got together and picked a candidate. Like the Democrats picking a popular comedian, Al Franken, to run and are hoping next to snare a well know “talking head” in Chris Matthews. We picked a football player Lynn Swann. Swann lost, Franken is losing. Matthews hasn’t lost because he hasn’t run yet.
No offense to these candidates, just to the way they are picked.
It just seems like this top down process does not connect with the people we are claiming to be recruiting. If so it is only those that will only think the way the leadership thinks. All well and good for the leadership perhaps, but for the party and the people the “bottom up” approach seems to be resonating a lot lately.
We have a chance here to beat the Dems at their own game. If we facilitate the local candidates who are proving to be the “doers” instead of supplanting them with people “we” think better represent the people then we will start letting the Cao’s and Jindal’s rise to the top.
One last thing. I’ve always liked John Boehner. He was slow in the uptake on the idea of changing the Republican message. But once he started changing he has become a real leader of the opposition. He has show cased the young conservative talent that we have in the House. He has dare I say it facilitated the fresh young minds instead of being just another obstacle to them. The above article shows again his ability to use his “bully pulpit” to advance the up and comers in our ranks. To make sure we all can see who the “Doer of Deeds” are.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Whether he or I were right or wrong, what I admired was that he was a “doer” of the deed. My main point in my blogs has been based on the idea best summned up in a quote attributed to Tip O’Neal; “Politics is Personal“.
The fewer layers between politics and the people the more the people like it. The more personal it is. The better chance the voters have of seeing not only what a politician stands for; but how well he can put that into practice. The more connected to the process the People feel--Are.
Bobby Jindal had a chance to practice what he preached in the aftermath of Katrina. Remember a lot of other politicians with a lot more power had the same chance and better resources to work with but didn’t. Bobby Jindal just rolled up his sleeves and started helping people. When everyone else who should of stepped up was busy covering there backside and doing the Beltway shuffle; he leveraged what political power he had in the vacuum and started assuming leadership and got things done.
Guess what? The citizens of Louisiana made him Governor because of that.
I’ve said all this before, but one thing I missed was that during Katrina there was another “doer of deeds” who jumped in and started organizing aid and help while everyone else from Mayors to Governors to FEMA bureaucrats were being PC and covering their butts. This guy flew under my radar as well as most others’.
From an article in Politico by JOSH KRAUSHAAR & ANDY BARR |
-----link------
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16336.html
---------------
From that article the following quote
-----quote-----
After Hurricane Katrina, Cao’s rebuilt law office became a hub for community organizing and assistance to hurricane victims. His experience helping to rebuild New Orleans also has important symbolic value for the GOP, which was stigmatized — particularly among minority voters — by the Bush administration’s failed response to the disaster.
-----------------
Well that “doer of deeds” was just elected in a heavily Democratic area. It was a stunning upset. By the way after Katrina, Jindal appointed Cao to a government position, I assume as a kindred spirit and later the people elected him.
All well and good. As the article pointed out, Newt Gingrich has been touting Bobby Jindal for a long time now.
The article was enlightening in what it didn’t say about the Republican efforts to recruit minority members. It didn’t say it had been a top down procedure. An example of the best of the leadership within the party trying to pick a candidate using the best methods available. Then they all got together and picked a candidate. Like the Democrats picking a popular comedian, Al Franken, to run and are hoping next to snare a well know “talking head” in Chris Matthews. We picked a football player Lynn Swann. Swann lost, Franken is losing. Matthews hasn’t lost because he hasn’t run yet.
No offense to these candidates, just to the way they are picked.
It just seems like this top down process does not connect with the people we are claiming to be recruiting. If so it is only those that will only think the way the leadership thinks. All well and good for the leadership perhaps, but for the party and the people the “bottom up” approach seems to be resonating a lot lately.
We have a chance here to beat the Dems at their own game. If we facilitate the local candidates who are proving to be the “doers” instead of supplanting them with people “we” think better represent the people then we will start letting the Cao’s and Jindal’s rise to the top.
One last thing. I’ve always liked John Boehner. He was slow in the uptake on the idea of changing the Republican message. But once he started changing he has become a real leader of the opposition. He has show cased the young conservative talent that we have in the House. He has dare I say it facilitated the fresh young minds instead of being just another obstacle to them. The above article shows again his ability to use his “bully pulpit” to advance the up and comers in our ranks. To make sure we all can see who the “Doer of Deeds” are.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Dominos Anyone?
Chambliss and Jindal Together?
I noted along with every one else about the Chambliss victory as being the result of two things.
1. Obama wasn’t on the ballot and a lower voter turnout favored Chambliss.
2. The Conservative message won over the liberal message of proven failure.
While the first was obvious. The second could be argued.
Now off Drudge I pick up this from My Way
-----link-----
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081207/D94TPC680.html
---------------
This seems to add some fuel to the thought that the conservative message works. Also the lack of the Obama effort to get out the vote played a part. Although as in the Chambliss victory, Obama did a telephone voice recording in another losing effort. Also the terrible deeds of Jefferson had to of played a large part.
What makes me comfortable in claiming the Conservative message was as big a part in Cao’s victory will be found in the following quote from the article.
-----quote-----
“Greg Rigamer, a New Orleans political consultant, said his analysis showed turnout in predominantly white sections of the district was double that in black areas. He said that helped push Cao to victory over Jefferson, who became Louisiana's first black congressman since Reconstruction when he took office in 1991.
"This is quite a feat," Rigamer said of Cao's victory.
-------------------
Granted the Obama effect wasn’t there, but something turned out the base “double” normal. I’m saying it was the message as much as anything.
The Jindal message (I’ll paraphrase in my own terms as I understand Bobby’s) Make Do Make It Now, Make It Work. In other words, get something done. Anyway Jindal appointed Cao and endorsed him. Cao won. That alone should be enough. The conservative message was there. All the negatives of Jefferson and Nobama of course helped but without the POSITIVE conservative message, Cao would of lost. That seems apparent.
Anh Cao’s story is one of such difficulty in pursuing happiness, few Americans need face anymore, but most remember being told by their forefathers similar struggles in achieving the American Dream.
Take a look also at this link to see the scope of what the Conservative common sense get it done message will do, will resonate if it is backed by actions equal to the rhetoric.
-----link-----
http://www.lanewslink.com/
--------------
Well I’m curious not to see how the Media and the Dems will dismiss this I’m really interested in how our party big shots will join ranks and probably call it a fluke or something.
It it walks like a Ducks and quacks like a Duck, well I’m willing to call it what it is. A Republican landslide in Louisiana. A state headed by one of the “doers” of conservative deeds in America today.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
I noted along with every one else about the Chambliss victory as being the result of two things.
1. Obama wasn’t on the ballot and a lower voter turnout favored Chambliss.
2. The Conservative message won over the liberal message of proven failure.
While the first was obvious. The second could be argued.
Now off Drudge I pick up this from My Way
-----link-----
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081207/D94TPC680.html
---------------
This seems to add some fuel to the thought that the conservative message works. Also the lack of the Obama effort to get out the vote played a part. Although as in the Chambliss victory, Obama did a telephone voice recording in another losing effort. Also the terrible deeds of Jefferson had to of played a large part.
What makes me comfortable in claiming the Conservative message was as big a part in Cao’s victory will be found in the following quote from the article.
-----quote-----
“Greg Rigamer, a New Orleans political consultant, said his analysis showed turnout in predominantly white sections of the district was double that in black areas. He said that helped push Cao to victory over Jefferson, who became Louisiana's first black congressman since Reconstruction when he took office in 1991.
"This is quite a feat," Rigamer said of Cao's victory.
-------------------
Granted the Obama effect wasn’t there, but something turned out the base “double” normal. I’m saying it was the message as much as anything.
The Jindal message (I’ll paraphrase in my own terms as I understand Bobby’s) Make Do Make It Now, Make It Work. In other words, get something done. Anyway Jindal appointed Cao and endorsed him. Cao won. That alone should be enough. The conservative message was there. All the negatives of Jefferson and Nobama of course helped but without the POSITIVE conservative message, Cao would of lost. That seems apparent.
Anh Cao’s story is one of such difficulty in pursuing happiness, few Americans need face anymore, but most remember being told by their forefathers similar struggles in achieving the American Dream.
Take a look also at this link to see the scope of what the Conservative common sense get it done message will do, will resonate if it is backed by actions equal to the rhetoric.
-----link-----
http://www.lanewslink.com/
--------------
Well I’m curious not to see how the Media and the Dems will dismiss this I’m really interested in how our party big shots will join ranks and probably call it a fluke or something.
It it walks like a Ducks and quacks like a Duck, well I’m willing to call it what it is. A Republican landslide in Louisiana. A state headed by one of the “doers” of conservative deeds in America today.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Saturday, December 6, 2008
A Happy Friend $20,000 --- A Happy Party Priceless
A Happy Friend $20,000 --- A Happy Party Priceless
I have recently written about how a personal connection with real people is more important and lasting than electronic or snail mail attempts. The old standby “Politics is Personal” is something I believe in. In that vein I was talking about spreading the message of the Republican Party.
There have been some studies and books I have used in the past to show some factual credibility to that statement. David Brooks and “Gross National Happiness” come to mind.
I just saw an article, link below, that points this out anew.
-----link-----
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081205/hl_nm/us_happiness
---------------
In this article, Maggie Fox of Yahoo News points out scientifically how a happy friend is worth $20,000 worth of happiness. A $5,000 pay raise is worth only $5,000 towards happiness for example.
Another conclusion from the study was to my amazement that it is easier to
“catch” happiness than unhappiness. As with most things today, this conclusion is inescapable if we use our own minds and our own experiences instead of “learning” from the talking heads on TV.
After all people I know or at least most of them keep the things they like and try to get rid of what they don’t.
The percentages were around 2-1 in favor of Happiness. (15%-7%).
Recently I rang a Salvation Army Bell and some of my stereotypes of people were changed. The amount of happiness I saw in people was unrecognizable from what I saw in the News.
Putting 2 + 2 together I come up with the idea that as a Party, we need to always focus on the good that is in people and the good that they do. If as a Party we “facilitate” that good we will be ahead by 100% than if we concentrated on the bad.
We must convince some of our own that “Happiness” is not a bad thing in our country. The Declaration of Independence uses the Pursuit of Happiness as one of the three inalienable rights we have and is the justification for setting up our own new government because we weren’t getting those three rights. Our Founders must of thought of Happiness as something good.
Then we need to go out and practice what we preach. Show how our ways and programs will actually lead to more happiness for the individual than the oppositions.
I know bribes are very tempting to individuals as well as CEOs. Free handouts and services are the Dems stock in trade. But as the article by Maggie Fox points our, at best a $5,000 hand out will buy only $5,000 worth of happiness but a happy Party can be worth $20,000 times the number of people we facilitate to imbibe our message.
If we will shower individuals with $20,000 worth of happiness each, soon our Party will become valuable indeed. How can this be?
Robert Green Ingersoll
"Happiness is not a reward - it is consequence. Suffering is not a punishment - it is a result."
Hence in the Declaration we talk of the Pursuit of Happiness. We as a Party need to show the actions, policies necessary to achieve the results that define happiness.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
PS (EDIT) see this link. I think we posted at the same time. Great minds and all that. lol
-----link-----
http://michiganrepublicanpartywatch.blogspot.com/2008/12/mrp-watch-endorsement.html?showComment=1228597920000#c8791675190826243919
--------------
Check out the rest of their posts.
I have recently written about how a personal connection with real people is more important and lasting than electronic or snail mail attempts. The old standby “Politics is Personal” is something I believe in. In that vein I was talking about spreading the message of the Republican Party.
There have been some studies and books I have used in the past to show some factual credibility to that statement. David Brooks and “Gross National Happiness” come to mind.
I just saw an article, link below, that points this out anew.
-----link-----
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081205/hl_nm/us_happiness
---------------
In this article, Maggie Fox of Yahoo News points out scientifically how a happy friend is worth $20,000 worth of happiness. A $5,000 pay raise is worth only $5,000 towards happiness for example.
Another conclusion from the study was to my amazement that it is easier to
“catch” happiness than unhappiness. As with most things today, this conclusion is inescapable if we use our own minds and our own experiences instead of “learning” from the talking heads on TV.
After all people I know or at least most of them keep the things they like and try to get rid of what they don’t.
The percentages were around 2-1 in favor of Happiness. (15%-7%).
Recently I rang a Salvation Army Bell and some of my stereotypes of people were changed. The amount of happiness I saw in people was unrecognizable from what I saw in the News.
Putting 2 + 2 together I come up with the idea that as a Party, we need to always focus on the good that is in people and the good that they do. If as a Party we “facilitate” that good we will be ahead by 100% than if we concentrated on the bad.
We must convince some of our own that “Happiness” is not a bad thing in our country. The Declaration of Independence uses the Pursuit of Happiness as one of the three inalienable rights we have and is the justification for setting up our own new government because we weren’t getting those three rights. Our Founders must of thought of Happiness as something good.
Then we need to go out and practice what we preach. Show how our ways and programs will actually lead to more happiness for the individual than the oppositions.
I know bribes are very tempting to individuals as well as CEOs. Free handouts and services are the Dems stock in trade. But as the article by Maggie Fox points our, at best a $5,000 hand out will buy only $5,000 worth of happiness but a happy Party can be worth $20,000 times the number of people we facilitate to imbibe our message.
If we will shower individuals with $20,000 worth of happiness each, soon our Party will become valuable indeed. How can this be?
Robert Green Ingersoll
"Happiness is not a reward - it is consequence. Suffering is not a punishment - it is a result."
Hence in the Declaration we talk of the Pursuit of Happiness. We as a Party need to show the actions, policies necessary to achieve the results that define happiness.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
PS (EDIT) see this link. I think we posted at the same time. Great minds and all that. lol
-----link-----
http://michiganrepublicanpartywatch.blogspot.com/2008/12/mrp-watch-endorsement.html?showComment=1228597920000#c8791675190826243919
--------------
Check out the rest of their posts.
Friday, December 5, 2008
Save The Children, Our Country, Ourselves
Re-brand This, YOU %##%% *&%&%
Having spent a good part of my life back in the day carousing then working my way up the bar scene from janitor through bouncer to manager; there is one thing I know.
When you get hit you hit back. Your image or brand will take care of itself. Those who don’t hit back are the ones who are always worrying about their brand, as well they should.
The Dems didn’t regain their position by trying to re-brand themselves. They didn’t sit down in front of their computers and type ad-nausea about how they needed to change their brand. How they had misbehaved. They knew from experience that was not the thing to do.
Instead, they re-branded us as evil child hating bigots. They didn’t worry much about their brand. What a waste of time that would be when instead they could be pointing out how terrible we were? Their brand would take care of itself.
What I’m talking about is who actually re-brands us. It’s the People in the end who decide. They decide by what we do. If we sit around sniveling and crying and feeling sorry for ourselves; even if we eloquently and (nobly in that condescending way) point out all the bad decisions we made and errors of judgment we made in the election and elsewhere--How The *?%#% is that going to convince people that we are leaders and that they should trust us?
What I’m trying to say is let us not lose sight of the fact that people (voters) do the re-branding based upon what we do.
Much like a steer with a brand. The meat from that steer will taste the same no matter how many brands we decide to burn into its hide. No matter how much the same old leadership decides to “re-brand” itself the meat is still the same. I hear it at the State and National Party level. The leaders have all of a sudden become tech savvy. The internet will save the day for us. With the internet the “grass roots” will flock to us. We needn’t actually go out and mingle with the masses of those “grass roots” or stoop to their “gut” level, by attacking the Dems and hurting our gentile sensibilities. If everyone buys a lap top then all will be merry. The donations -- donations -- donations -- donations -- will skyrocket. With that money we can generate more computer lists. So what of the fact we have no volunteers to make those calls, with our new found tech savvyness we can afford robocallers. Gee sounds like an echo from a couple previous elections. GEE HATE TO SHOUT.
N O T
We do not need to have beautiful award winning web sites designed by Cisco and a bucnh of tech savvy liberals. We need ugly web sites designed by us attacking the Dems. Those web sites have to give the People things they can do themselves to actually become a part of the solution to help correct what the Dems have done to us our children and our country.
We need to stir the pot to get an even boil, let the “bottom up” to keep it from getting burned on the bottom. Get the People (not some tofu PC sounding esoteric abstracted Grassroots) get them involved and invested so that they will be fighting to get “up”. Get the condescending wagon circling leadership back to the bottom where they can lick their wounds and make excuses in private because the People don’t care, and I for one am really getting sick and tired of hearing it.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Having spent a good part of my life back in the day carousing then working my way up the bar scene from janitor through bouncer to manager; there is one thing I know.
When you get hit you hit back. Your image or brand will take care of itself. Those who don’t hit back are the ones who are always worrying about their brand, as well they should.
The Dems didn’t regain their position by trying to re-brand themselves. They didn’t sit down in front of their computers and type ad-nausea about how they needed to change their brand. How they had misbehaved. They knew from experience that was not the thing to do.
Instead, they re-branded us as evil child hating bigots. They didn’t worry much about their brand. What a waste of time that would be when instead they could be pointing out how terrible we were? Their brand would take care of itself.
What I’m talking about is who actually re-brands us. It’s the People in the end who decide. They decide by what we do. If we sit around sniveling and crying and feeling sorry for ourselves; even if we eloquently and (nobly in that condescending way) point out all the bad decisions we made and errors of judgment we made in the election and elsewhere--How The *?%#% is that going to convince people that we are leaders and that they should trust us?
What I’m trying to say is let us not lose sight of the fact that people (voters) do the re-branding based upon what we do.
Much like a steer with a brand. The meat from that steer will taste the same no matter how many brands we decide to burn into its hide. No matter how much the same old leadership decides to “re-brand” itself the meat is still the same. I hear it at the State and National Party level. The leaders have all of a sudden become tech savvy. The internet will save the day for us. With the internet the “grass roots” will flock to us. We needn’t actually go out and mingle with the masses of those “grass roots” or stoop to their “gut” level, by attacking the Dems and hurting our gentile sensibilities. If everyone buys a lap top then all will be merry. The donations -- donations -- donations -- donations -- will skyrocket. With that money we can generate more computer lists. So what of the fact we have no volunteers to make those calls, with our new found tech savvyness we can afford robocallers. Gee sounds like an echo from a couple previous elections. GEE HATE TO SHOUT.
N O T
We do not need to have beautiful award winning web sites designed by Cisco and a bucnh of tech savvy liberals. We need ugly web sites designed by us attacking the Dems. Those web sites have to give the People things they can do themselves to actually become a part of the solution to help correct what the Dems have done to us our children and our country.
We need to stir the pot to get an even boil, let the “bottom up” to keep it from getting burned on the bottom. Get the People (not some tofu PC sounding esoteric abstracted Grassroots) get them involved and invested so that they will be fighting to get “up”. Get the condescending wagon circling leadership back to the bottom where they can lick their wounds and make excuses in private because the People don’t care, and I for one am really getting sick and tired of hearing it.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Who's That Knocking ???
I’m starting to see it everyday. Opportunity. I read an article such as this one by Thomas Sowell on Townhall.com and instead of focusing on the main idea which is excellent and as well thought out as always by Mr. Sowell, I see Opportunities in which there is an opening to attack the left with common sense Conservative ideas. Hopefully this evolution? In my thinking will lead to finding and getting practical alternatives started when presented with these “Opportunities”
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2008/12/02/freedom_and_the_left
---------------
The article is an expose against the idea of “community service” which is a requirement in some High Schools. Mr. Sowell asks two questions.
1. Who should have the right to “commandeer young people’s time”, the schools or the parents?
2. What gives the schools the right to decide what constitutes “community service”?
His is a well reasoned article about the how the left as Thomas Sowell points out, defines freedom as its ability to impose their will on others.
We see it all over the place, from Biden saying it is “patriotic” to pay taxes, thru the idea of redistributing wealth favored by his boss.
No where in this article is there any mention of a way to fight this? What is the alternative to the encroachment upon our freedoms by people who make a living enhancing their own freedom by imposing their will upon us by taking what we make through our own sweat and toil.
These alternatives are the “Opportunities” of which I speak.
Thomas Sowell asks why is even “…voluntary military training in high schools or colleged,…..” not considered as “community service” and why those who feel feeding the poor is more of a service than helping those that defend the poor and the rich alike?
As in all my thinking, the way to make change happen is at the local level. There we are freer to try different approaches we can limit the losses of failure, and we can try another fix and keep learning from our mistakes.
A specific example I can think of is to get on the school board and if community service comes up offer an alternative that does not enable destructive behavior but encourages constructive behavior. The military one is as good as any. Others may be showing people how to grow gardens, how to cook real food, how to sew. How to get a low paying job and start to climb out of the hole.
Again I see opportunities because the system is so stacked against anyone doing just that few have the chutzpa to manage. It is our opportunity to suggest and fight with thought out plans that system. Change it in ways that enable those in the worst need can obtain the basic food and shelter then be able to learn the gardening sewing and et all to help them get out of the cellar.
Let’s start with the idea that if we already have a program let’s use it and make it as efficient and productive as possible. Then we can actually learn what is good and what is not about the program. At the same time that we are showcasing our conservative core ideas such as taking responsibility for our actions. The benefits of controlling our own lives and the idea that we have the inalienable right and the abilities to do so.
Let us come up with alternatives that showcase our desire to help “facilitate” people to nurture those abilities so they can better enjoy the pursuit of those rights.
Simple programs that teach “how to” things that people on the edge can actually use are a step in the right direction. When people understand that just giving a meal to someone only teaches that person to become dependent upon the meal giver, they will also start to learn that the work it takes to actually get a person to change their ways to something that can give that person more freedom to create their own destiny is not child‘s play but something done with care and knowledge. Devotion and dedication. A student will benefit more and the one we help will be helped more if they both learn the concept along with where to go for the next meal.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Imagine a bird that is on the ground with a broken wing. Throwing it bread crumbs may make you feel good, but does little except to help fatten it up for the next cat that comes along. We learn more about ourselves and the bird if we make room in our lives to do the job of taking in that bird and fixing or letting the wing mend itself along with feeding it. That is another story altogether. A story that works. A story we can all learn and enrich ourselves from. As in all things, it works best if it is voluntary.
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2008/12/02/freedom_and_the_left
---------------
The article is an expose against the idea of “community service” which is a requirement in some High Schools. Mr. Sowell asks two questions.
1. Who should have the right to “commandeer young people’s time”, the schools or the parents?
2. What gives the schools the right to decide what constitutes “community service”?
His is a well reasoned article about the how the left as Thomas Sowell points out, defines freedom as its ability to impose their will on others.
We see it all over the place, from Biden saying it is “patriotic” to pay taxes, thru the idea of redistributing wealth favored by his boss.
No where in this article is there any mention of a way to fight this? What is the alternative to the encroachment upon our freedoms by people who make a living enhancing their own freedom by imposing their will upon us by taking what we make through our own sweat and toil.
These alternatives are the “Opportunities” of which I speak.
Thomas Sowell asks why is even “…voluntary military training in high schools or colleged,…..” not considered as “community service” and why those who feel feeding the poor is more of a service than helping those that defend the poor and the rich alike?
As in all my thinking, the way to make change happen is at the local level. There we are freer to try different approaches we can limit the losses of failure, and we can try another fix and keep learning from our mistakes.
A specific example I can think of is to get on the school board and if community service comes up offer an alternative that does not enable destructive behavior but encourages constructive behavior. The military one is as good as any. Others may be showing people how to grow gardens, how to cook real food, how to sew. How to get a low paying job and start to climb out of the hole.
Again I see opportunities because the system is so stacked against anyone doing just that few have the chutzpa to manage. It is our opportunity to suggest and fight with thought out plans that system. Change it in ways that enable those in the worst need can obtain the basic food and shelter then be able to learn the gardening sewing and et all to help them get out of the cellar.
Let’s start with the idea that if we already have a program let’s use it and make it as efficient and productive as possible. Then we can actually learn what is good and what is not about the program. At the same time that we are showcasing our conservative core ideas such as taking responsibility for our actions. The benefits of controlling our own lives and the idea that we have the inalienable right and the abilities to do so.
Let us come up with alternatives that showcase our desire to help “facilitate” people to nurture those abilities so they can better enjoy the pursuit of those rights.
Simple programs that teach “how to” things that people on the edge can actually use are a step in the right direction. When people understand that just giving a meal to someone only teaches that person to become dependent upon the meal giver, they will also start to learn that the work it takes to actually get a person to change their ways to something that can give that person more freedom to create their own destiny is not child‘s play but something done with care and knowledge. Devotion and dedication. A student will benefit more and the one we help will be helped more if they both learn the concept along with where to go for the next meal.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Imagine a bird that is on the ground with a broken wing. Throwing it bread crumbs may make you feel good, but does little except to help fatten it up for the next cat that comes along. We learn more about ourselves and the bird if we make room in our lives to do the job of taking in that bird and fixing or letting the wing mend itself along with feeding it. That is another story altogether. A story that works. A story we can all learn and enrich ourselves from. As in all things, it works best if it is voluntary.
Monday, December 1, 2008
A "SHADOW" Of an Idea
I have been talking a long time in this blog about the British Political System and about the British Conservative re-birth under David Cameron. See my sidebar for lots of stuff about that.
One of my ideas has been to (as the British do) have the out of power party form it’s own alternative to the party in power. They call it a "shadow government". It is complete not only down to the policies they want to enact, but to the cabinet leaders they will use to enact them. I always thought it a wonderful way to let the people see what they will be getting ahead of time. BEFORE they have to vote.
As a tool to help Republicans refocus themselves it could prove exceedingly efficient.
Since the Republicans have lost power in All branches, they have been casting around for a way to change their message, to give out a more cohesive message. A message that means something to more people. I don’t know how it could be technically done, but some sort of “shadow government” would go along way towards unifying our message.
Obama must sense this as he unlike Clinton is gathering his “ministers” ahead of time so he will hit the ground running. Imagine if we had, through the crucible of competition at our last Convention picked our President and Vice along with who they would have as cabinet members along with a platform of their own making. (Not the generic platform we create separately now).
I’ve always said that we not only have to copy what the Dems have done, but to actually get back ahead where our ideas belong, we have to do them one better. This would do just that.
That "one better" as I’ve said would be to create a "shadow government"; at the latest going into the Primaries. Have a build up to that concept starting now. Build the idea into a workable convention feature. Perhaps as we now vote in convention for a team of President and Vice President, let us vote also for a slate of their choosing who would be their “shadow cabinet”. Each slate would create their own “shadow policies” or platform.
I may never happen but can you imagine the excitement it could generate in the media. A whole new type of election process. We could have the Dems playing catch up to us. We have 4 years to do it; 2 conventions to work it out.
I think you can see the benefit to the voters. Before the election the voters would have more to base their vote on than whimsical promises such as Change or “I’m a Maverick”. They would have a chance to see who that person would have as their choice as Sec. of State, and Sec. of Defense and all the rest. The voter would then have a clearer picture of the results their vote would create.
The voters would be intrigued and the media would have a whole new "thing" to cover.
Just a warm fuzzy thought as I look out at our new six inches of snow. The shoveling will keep me from thinking of the whooping we just took at the polls.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
An edited PS. My favorite term from the British is the word Facilitate. The State and Society are two seperate entities. A State should not overpower a society but enable, help or "facilitate" that society in achieving it's goals. In the above "shadow government" concept, the Party through this system would "facilitate" society in making a wiser more informed choice at election time as to which party will better facilitate it in achieving those goals.
One of my ideas has been to (as the British do) have the out of power party form it’s own alternative to the party in power. They call it a "shadow government". It is complete not only down to the policies they want to enact, but to the cabinet leaders they will use to enact them. I always thought it a wonderful way to let the people see what they will be getting ahead of time. BEFORE they have to vote.
As a tool to help Republicans refocus themselves it could prove exceedingly efficient.
Since the Republicans have lost power in All branches, they have been casting around for a way to change their message, to give out a more cohesive message. A message that means something to more people. I don’t know how it could be technically done, but some sort of “shadow government” would go along way towards unifying our message.
Obama must sense this as he unlike Clinton is gathering his “ministers” ahead of time so he will hit the ground running. Imagine if we had, through the crucible of competition at our last Convention picked our President and Vice along with who they would have as cabinet members along with a platform of their own making. (Not the generic platform we create separately now).
I’ve always said that we not only have to copy what the Dems have done, but to actually get back ahead where our ideas belong, we have to do them one better. This would do just that.
That "one better" as I’ve said would be to create a "shadow government"; at the latest going into the Primaries. Have a build up to that concept starting now. Build the idea into a workable convention feature. Perhaps as we now vote in convention for a team of President and Vice President, let us vote also for a slate of their choosing who would be their “shadow cabinet”. Each slate would create their own “shadow policies” or platform.
I may never happen but can you imagine the excitement it could generate in the media. A whole new type of election process. We could have the Dems playing catch up to us. We have 4 years to do it; 2 conventions to work it out.
I think you can see the benefit to the voters. Before the election the voters would have more to base their vote on than whimsical promises such as Change or “I’m a Maverick”. They would have a chance to see who that person would have as their choice as Sec. of State, and Sec. of Defense and all the rest. The voter would then have a clearer picture of the results their vote would create.
The voters would be intrigued and the media would have a whole new "thing" to cover.
Just a warm fuzzy thought as I look out at our new six inches of snow. The shoveling will keep me from thinking of the whooping we just took at the polls.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
An edited PS. My favorite term from the British is the word Facilitate. The State and Society are two seperate entities. A State should not overpower a society but enable, help or "facilitate" that society in achieving it's goals. In the above "shadow government" concept, the Party through this system would "facilitate" society in making a wiser more informed choice at election time as to which party will better facilitate it in achieving those goals.
Sunday, November 30, 2008
The Human Creative Process
Enjoying The Human Creative Process
As things in life get bigger faster and more complicated; is there any alternative to letting ourselves become bigger, faster and more complicated? Is it even legal to do so?
Think about it, before you think I’m being silly.
What if I wanted to live out in the woods and build a small structure to live in and live off the land as much as possible. Just because I want to, could I? It becomes nearly impossible unless I have enough money that I don’t have to live off the land etc. Kind of like going to a bank and proving to them exhaustively that you really don’t need their money in order for them to loan you some.
Let’s say I want to build a 12’x20’ building say the size of a 1 stall garage. Let’s say I’m the only one who will be living in it. Let us say it is in the middle of 10 acres of land. My land. Further I sign a promise to tear it down if I move and have nobody else live there, and padlock it to protect the homeless in case they try to live there in my absence.
By the time I satisfied the building codes and plumbing codes and all the other codes, and hired everyone and their brother to do the things I could do myself, I would have an easy 30-40 grand into it and probably twice the size would be the smallest I could get away with. Not to mention a huge headache, untold wasted time and gas going back and forth to the inspection dept. I would of also lost half the reason for doing it which is that I would enjoy overcoming all the challenges the government is protecting me from.
The codes were set up on the concept of protecting the public. Over the years they have morphed into protecting myself from myself. A lot of the other reasons for codes have to do with the environment and protecting it from me. They draw out the repercussions of my actions through generations to make sure I’m not hurting someone or something in the future.
That whole idea that a butterfly fluttering its wings half way around the world has consequences on my side of the world forgets to mention that the best way to stop those consequences from happening is to kill the butterfly, or at least to stop the one thing that make it so unique. The thing that lets it fly and be beautiful. Clip it’s wings. To hobble animals is wrong, but they charge us to hobble the human spirit.
All of this big government regulation on all levels as this country turns into a giant bureaucracy: has the same effect upon the one thing that is the most remarkable of human traits. Our individual creativity. The driver of that creativity is the simple enjoyment we get from using it - from exercising it - from watching it grow.
All the great “light bulb” ideas of course are included. Relativity, Alternating Current, and the Silicon Chip. But I’m mainly speaking of the reinventing of let me say from experience, heating my house with a wood stove. Of learning how to do what has been done for centuries and then trying to take it a step further, to put my own stamp on it.
From this I now go to the creativity of an individual “hands on” approach of helping out another human being. It is not a new idea helping others. It is more like discovering the hidden joy within our selves in so doing. Then wanting more of that joy, we exercise that practice and invent new creative ways to do it.
I was driving down the street Sat. when I saw somebody going slow in the right lane of a 5 lane road without much traffic. He then started turning sharply to the left and I had to change my lane to safely go around. Well it dawned on me that he was out of gas. I guessed he didn’t have enough momentum to get him off the road. I was right. Someone else saw the same thing and thought the same thing. We both parked illegally and got out to help push the guy out of the way. We both turned away and left. I heard a thanks behind me. I got to my truck then looked back at the guy and he was just standing there. I knew the look. I usually carry a can of gas as I run out now and then too. I got out with the can and I saw the guys eyes light up. I just walked over and poured the gas into the tank. He said thanks and I nobly got to say “Pay It Forward”. He said “is that why you carry the gas around?” I was tempted in saying yes, but I said no and told him the truth. He then asked me if he could pay me. I was happy not to be paid but I could tell he would be happier if he did. So I told him $2 as I only gave him a gallon. He reached into his pocket and gave me 4 crumpled up ones. I said thanks and felt good. He said you’re welcome and he felt good as he started up his car.
I then got creative and now I make sure to keep that can filled in case I get to help someone else. It felt good, It was free, it was easy. They should put a tax on it. It’s lucky I have an approved container, I’d hate to break the law.
Big anything interferes with this individualistic process. It takes money to be “Big”. Government collects more and more taxes to satiate it’s hunger. Those permit fees are taxes, don’t forget. “Big Business” gets in line also, backing the regulations on itself and its market. It sees “Big Government” as the enforcer that not only keeps the customers in line but the small entrepreneurs out of their market because they lack the wherewithal to put in place all the restrictions and regulations to compete. But I digress.
What brought this all on was an article Jackie Gingrich Cushman freelanced and Townhall.com picked up titled “The Good Samaritan”
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/JackieGingrichCushman/2008/11/30/the_good_samaritan
---------------
This part is what jumped out at me, and started this train of thought.
-----quote------
This parable does not ask us to help millions, just the one person we see in need of assistance in our life’s path. The transfer of assistance, support and hope from one human being to another is the core of the story. It is the human touch, the interaction between people, which makes it so important and real to us today.
------------------
Equally impressive to me was the idea that it isn’t the money so much as it is the individual interaction and the reason to do it. I could of given the guy out of gas two bucks to buy some gas or fifteen so he could buy an approved container to put it in but actually helping him gave us both a better appreciation of each other. Hence ourselves.
-----quote-----
When life seems to speed up – we need to slow down, and refocus on people rather than events, and value rather than money. Creating value for people is what life is all about.
-----------------
To be honest the first thought I had upon reading this was what a mentor of mine told me after I passed the hat to come up with $30 to help the Young Republicans buy some pizza. I only wanted $30 and said so. I also said I wanted some people to volunteer on the phone bank the thing was set up for in the first place.
Well I got $135 in the hat and no volunteers. My mentor when asked about it simply said. “Same Old Republican Bullshit”.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
As things in life get bigger faster and more complicated; is there any alternative to letting ourselves become bigger, faster and more complicated? Is it even legal to do so?
Think about it, before you think I’m being silly.
What if I wanted to live out in the woods and build a small structure to live in and live off the land as much as possible. Just because I want to, could I? It becomes nearly impossible unless I have enough money that I don’t have to live off the land etc. Kind of like going to a bank and proving to them exhaustively that you really don’t need their money in order for them to loan you some.
Let’s say I want to build a 12’x20’ building say the size of a 1 stall garage. Let’s say I’m the only one who will be living in it. Let us say it is in the middle of 10 acres of land. My land. Further I sign a promise to tear it down if I move and have nobody else live there, and padlock it to protect the homeless in case they try to live there in my absence.
By the time I satisfied the building codes and plumbing codes and all the other codes, and hired everyone and their brother to do the things I could do myself, I would have an easy 30-40 grand into it and probably twice the size would be the smallest I could get away with. Not to mention a huge headache, untold wasted time and gas going back and forth to the inspection dept. I would of also lost half the reason for doing it which is that I would enjoy overcoming all the challenges the government is protecting me from.
The codes were set up on the concept of protecting the public. Over the years they have morphed into protecting myself from myself. A lot of the other reasons for codes have to do with the environment and protecting it from me. They draw out the repercussions of my actions through generations to make sure I’m not hurting someone or something in the future.
That whole idea that a butterfly fluttering its wings half way around the world has consequences on my side of the world forgets to mention that the best way to stop those consequences from happening is to kill the butterfly, or at least to stop the one thing that make it so unique. The thing that lets it fly and be beautiful. Clip it’s wings. To hobble animals is wrong, but they charge us to hobble the human spirit.
All of this big government regulation on all levels as this country turns into a giant bureaucracy: has the same effect upon the one thing that is the most remarkable of human traits. Our individual creativity. The driver of that creativity is the simple enjoyment we get from using it - from exercising it - from watching it grow.
All the great “light bulb” ideas of course are included. Relativity, Alternating Current, and the Silicon Chip. But I’m mainly speaking of the reinventing of let me say from experience, heating my house with a wood stove. Of learning how to do what has been done for centuries and then trying to take it a step further, to put my own stamp on it.
From this I now go to the creativity of an individual “hands on” approach of helping out another human being. It is not a new idea helping others. It is more like discovering the hidden joy within our selves in so doing. Then wanting more of that joy, we exercise that practice and invent new creative ways to do it.
I was driving down the street Sat. when I saw somebody going slow in the right lane of a 5 lane road without much traffic. He then started turning sharply to the left and I had to change my lane to safely go around. Well it dawned on me that he was out of gas. I guessed he didn’t have enough momentum to get him off the road. I was right. Someone else saw the same thing and thought the same thing. We both parked illegally and got out to help push the guy out of the way. We both turned away and left. I heard a thanks behind me. I got to my truck then looked back at the guy and he was just standing there. I knew the look. I usually carry a can of gas as I run out now and then too. I got out with the can and I saw the guys eyes light up. I just walked over and poured the gas into the tank. He said thanks and I nobly got to say “Pay It Forward”. He said “is that why you carry the gas around?” I was tempted in saying yes, but I said no and told him the truth. He then asked me if he could pay me. I was happy not to be paid but I could tell he would be happier if he did. So I told him $2 as I only gave him a gallon. He reached into his pocket and gave me 4 crumpled up ones. I said thanks and felt good. He said you’re welcome and he felt good as he started up his car.
I then got creative and now I make sure to keep that can filled in case I get to help someone else. It felt good, It was free, it was easy. They should put a tax on it. It’s lucky I have an approved container, I’d hate to break the law.
Big anything interferes with this individualistic process. It takes money to be “Big”. Government collects more and more taxes to satiate it’s hunger. Those permit fees are taxes, don’t forget. “Big Business” gets in line also, backing the regulations on itself and its market. It sees “Big Government” as the enforcer that not only keeps the customers in line but the small entrepreneurs out of their market because they lack the wherewithal to put in place all the restrictions and regulations to compete. But I digress.
What brought this all on was an article Jackie Gingrich Cushman freelanced and Townhall.com picked up titled “The Good Samaritan”
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/JackieGingrichCushman/2008/11/30/the_good_samaritan
---------------
This part is what jumped out at me, and started this train of thought.
-----quote------
This parable does not ask us to help millions, just the one person we see in need of assistance in our life’s path. The transfer of assistance, support and hope from one human being to another is the core of the story. It is the human touch, the interaction between people, which makes it so important and real to us today.
------------------
Equally impressive to me was the idea that it isn’t the money so much as it is the individual interaction and the reason to do it. I could of given the guy out of gas two bucks to buy some gas or fifteen so he could buy an approved container to put it in but actually helping him gave us both a better appreciation of each other. Hence ourselves.
-----quote-----
When life seems to speed up – we need to slow down, and refocus on people rather than events, and value rather than money. Creating value for people is what life is all about.
-----------------
To be honest the first thought I had upon reading this was what a mentor of mine told me after I passed the hat to come up with $30 to help the Young Republicans buy some pizza. I only wanted $30 and said so. I also said I wanted some people to volunteer on the phone bank the thing was set up for in the first place.
Well I got $135 in the hat and no volunteers. My mentor when asked about it simply said. “Same Old Republican Bullshit”.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Thursday, November 27, 2008
Happy Thanksgiving
Give Thanks For What ???
As I read the news, it is filled with specific and obvious reasons why the last thing on my mind should be to give thanks for the world we live in. Social, Political, Religious, and Financial upheaval. Should I give thanks for that?
But then I look at myself. My own situation and I see a microcosm of the same story. My house should literally be condemned. My income has gone from little to almost non existent. I’m divorced. I see my two children rarely. My political party has been thoroughly trashed in the last election in my County.
I heat with wood and each day I’m splitting or hauling wood into the house. Each morning my house is close to freezing and I have to huddle over my wood stove to keep warm and have my first cup of coffee.
I live in constant worry that the city will shut me down and condemn my house forcing me out into the streets. Onto the Dole. I just continue to do what I do, and paying my property taxes has become over the years my first priority. Without a house all the freedom I have to do what I want disintegrates into the freedom to live in another’s world with out the wherewithal to do anything I want.
The reason I give thanks today and everyday is that I have the ability to hope, to see past life. I have as we all do an imagination. The blessing, the gift comes in my ability to imagine the beautiful side of life. This blessing is a learned behavior.
It can be taught by people who have been beaten down and risen above their struggles. Much as a runner “hitting the wall” and has to dig deeper, to find their inner strength, and in so doing find a peace of mind from the doing. So too have I taught myself inner peace and contentment by taking satisfaction in overcoming the obstacles to freedom in my life. Heating with wood gives me that sense of freedom to control my life that few have even considered.
Nor do I suggest it. I simply suggest that we teach ourselves to look for and appreciate those things in life that we have control over and find the peace of mind from doing them, instead of letting others do them for us. Learn to give thanks for the freedom of mind that the work of “doing” accomplishes as nothing else quite does.
What is Thanksgiving but a re-enactment of our ancestors reveling in the bounty of overcoming all their hardships, through long hours of hard arduous work. Work I might add that only amounted to enough food to get them through the winter. The work they had to do was work that “Americans won’t do” anymore. At least the work bureaucrats in Washington won’t do. Then again I imagine peace of mind there is in short supply.
A sense of self worth has to be earned in this world.
It is hard to explain the “warmth of mind” I feel every morning in the winter as I become toasty warm from, then the bounty I realize I have created as I have to move further away from my wood stove, to stay comfortable. This is a direct in your face daily affirmation of the choice I have always in front of me, as to whether I will embrace freedom and use it to create my own self worth or give it away to others to let them feel important.
Happy Thanksgiving.
Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
As I read the news, it is filled with specific and obvious reasons why the last thing on my mind should be to give thanks for the world we live in. Social, Political, Religious, and Financial upheaval. Should I give thanks for that?
But then I look at myself. My own situation and I see a microcosm of the same story. My house should literally be condemned. My income has gone from little to almost non existent. I’m divorced. I see my two children rarely. My political party has been thoroughly trashed in the last election in my County.
I heat with wood and each day I’m splitting or hauling wood into the house. Each morning my house is close to freezing and I have to huddle over my wood stove to keep warm and have my first cup of coffee.
I live in constant worry that the city will shut me down and condemn my house forcing me out into the streets. Onto the Dole. I just continue to do what I do, and paying my property taxes has become over the years my first priority. Without a house all the freedom I have to do what I want disintegrates into the freedom to live in another’s world with out the wherewithal to do anything I want.
The reason I give thanks today and everyday is that I have the ability to hope, to see past life. I have as we all do an imagination. The blessing, the gift comes in my ability to imagine the beautiful side of life. This blessing is a learned behavior.
It can be taught by people who have been beaten down and risen above their struggles. Much as a runner “hitting the wall” and has to dig deeper, to find their inner strength, and in so doing find a peace of mind from the doing. So too have I taught myself inner peace and contentment by taking satisfaction in overcoming the obstacles to freedom in my life. Heating with wood gives me that sense of freedom to control my life that few have even considered.
Nor do I suggest it. I simply suggest that we teach ourselves to look for and appreciate those things in life that we have control over and find the peace of mind from doing them, instead of letting others do them for us. Learn to give thanks for the freedom of mind that the work of “doing” accomplishes as nothing else quite does.
What is Thanksgiving but a re-enactment of our ancestors reveling in the bounty of overcoming all their hardships, through long hours of hard arduous work. Work I might add that only amounted to enough food to get them through the winter. The work they had to do was work that “Americans won’t do” anymore. At least the work bureaucrats in Washington won’t do. Then again I imagine peace of mind there is in short supply.
A sense of self worth has to be earned in this world.
It is hard to explain the “warmth of mind” I feel every morning in the winter as I become toasty warm from, then the bounty I realize I have created as I have to move further away from my wood stove, to stay comfortable. This is a direct in your face daily affirmation of the choice I have always in front of me, as to whether I will embrace freedom and use it to create my own self worth or give it away to others to let them feel important.
Happy Thanksgiving.
Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Stealth Conservatism
I’m Not Running For President in 2012
There I said it. There’s a certain freedom in saying that. Now I don’t have to worry so much about what I say and dive into the local political scene. I can talk about conservative ideas and solutions, and not be worried about anything other than the message. At this point I’m not making any money either way; so the freedom I feel in expressing my message is great.
How can our leaders feel that same freedom to express the message? To actually relearn how to be creative and spontaneous.
I have a proposal for all the political pundits, prognosticators and political leaders and other gurus of note. Commit to going out to a precinct level activity pro bono with no fanfare and minimum warning to help fire up the “grassroots“, which everyone talks about and is saying needs firing up. If some of the “Big Shots” in the conservative movement could organize others to do this, there could be a real education going on. Not only from the top down but the “Bottom Up”.
I don’t think this is a novel concept.
Are we capable of learning from the past?
Phyllis Schalfly points out some good historical examples, in her recent article in Townhall.com.
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/PhyllisSchlafly/2008/11/25/time_to_follow_reagans_example
---------------
She pointed out that Ronald Reagan honed his skills and message by going out and speaking and talking to anyone who would listen for four years. She suggests that the process of doing that is how Reagan learned to adapt the Conservative message to what the people wanted.
-----quote from article-----
By 1980, Reagan had sharpened his conservative philosophy in sync with what Americans want from their leaders.
--------------------------------
Schalfly then concludes
-----quote from article-----
In the period from 1976 to 1980, grass-roots conservatives and Ronald Reagan learned from each other. That's the model conservatives should follow now and educate new leaders.
--------------------------------
To follow her example, her conclusion needs to put more emphasis on the education of Reagan by the people. In Reagan’s case the conservative education came in his early conversion from a liberal Democrat to a Conservative Republican. His conservative “punditry” was already there. It began to mean something when to paraphrase Peter F. Drucker: Reagan became effective when his punditry “degenerated into work”, the work of meeting the people and making the solutions work on a local level. The whole 4 years of Reagan campaigning and honing his message and skills was not about conservatives educating a new leader about conservatism;
but a conservative getting educated by the people about how conservatism can be used to help them.
How conservative leaders are best at facilitating the solutions to the problems that the people want and need.
I think our leaders, pundits and prognosticators, myself included need to get back to the rightway not the beltway. Working pro bono and almost incognito is an excellent way of doing this. Let’s get personal again with our base. Let’s connect. Let’s get real. All the other clichés like putting our money where our mouths and computers are.
Remember the untold thousands who still volunteer for no pay. They who give some of their time and their money to the Party. They also have families, careers or jobs and commitments etc. I think a little humble pie wouldn’t taste so bad if our leaders thought they were giving something back to the base. They might think it tasted pretty good once they found out where it’s being served, and how easy it is to find.
Bill Bennett was interviewed by Bill Steigerwald in an article again in Townhall.com.
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/BillSteigerwald/2008/11/24/bill_bennett_to_gop_lets_get_to_work
---------------
I quote Mr. Bennett about how he thinks the message is best put forth. He talks of “Pragmatism” as the method to best put forth our message. A “judge us by our deeds” type of thing. A “Jindal, Cantor, Pawlenty” type of thing.
-----quote from article-----
We're not blinded by ideology. We believe in the American dream. We believe in individual enterprise and individual responsibility. That's an amalgam: That's partly values, partly business ethic.
------------------------------------------
We must learn how to show the people how our message works at the local level. Bill Bennett mentions the young leaders. He talks of the Republicans needing to hone our message and our messengers.
We can do that best if we let the people tell us what they want. We can find that out best when we see and hear it first hand unfiltered by fame fortune and all the rest. Perhaps the best of us can then learn to not only articulate it better but create pragmatic solutions that actually help. If we can do that we will be building a real foundation on which we can win again. I know that sounds pretty simple. You know what? The sound of simple and doable is refreshing for a change.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
There I said it. There’s a certain freedom in saying that. Now I don’t have to worry so much about what I say and dive into the local political scene. I can talk about conservative ideas and solutions, and not be worried about anything other than the message. At this point I’m not making any money either way; so the freedom I feel in expressing my message is great.
How can our leaders feel that same freedom to express the message? To actually relearn how to be creative and spontaneous.
I have a proposal for all the political pundits, prognosticators and political leaders and other gurus of note. Commit to going out to a precinct level activity pro bono with no fanfare and minimum warning to help fire up the “grassroots“, which everyone talks about and is saying needs firing up. If some of the “Big Shots” in the conservative movement could organize others to do this, there could be a real education going on. Not only from the top down but the “Bottom Up”.
I don’t think this is a novel concept.
Are we capable of learning from the past?
Phyllis Schalfly points out some good historical examples, in her recent article in Townhall.com.
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/PhyllisSchlafly/2008/11/25/time_to_follow_reagans_example
---------------
She pointed out that Ronald Reagan honed his skills and message by going out and speaking and talking to anyone who would listen for four years. She suggests that the process of doing that is how Reagan learned to adapt the Conservative message to what the people wanted.
-----quote from article-----
By 1980, Reagan had sharpened his conservative philosophy in sync with what Americans want from their leaders.
--------------------------------
Schalfly then concludes
-----quote from article-----
In the period from 1976 to 1980, grass-roots conservatives and Ronald Reagan learned from each other. That's the model conservatives should follow now and educate new leaders.
--------------------------------
To follow her example, her conclusion needs to put more emphasis on the education of Reagan by the people. In Reagan’s case the conservative education came in his early conversion from a liberal Democrat to a Conservative Republican. His conservative “punditry” was already there. It began to mean something when to paraphrase Peter F. Drucker: Reagan became effective when his punditry “degenerated into work”, the work of meeting the people and making the solutions work on a local level. The whole 4 years of Reagan campaigning and honing his message and skills was not about conservatives educating a new leader about conservatism;
but a conservative getting educated by the people about how conservatism can be used to help them.
How conservative leaders are best at facilitating the solutions to the problems that the people want and need.
I think our leaders, pundits and prognosticators, myself included need to get back to the rightway not the beltway. Working pro bono and almost incognito is an excellent way of doing this. Let’s get personal again with our base. Let’s connect. Let’s get real. All the other clichés like putting our money where our mouths and computers are.
Remember the untold thousands who still volunteer for no pay. They who give some of their time and their money to the Party. They also have families, careers or jobs and commitments etc. I think a little humble pie wouldn’t taste so bad if our leaders thought they were giving something back to the base. They might think it tasted pretty good once they found out where it’s being served, and how easy it is to find.
Bill Bennett was interviewed by Bill Steigerwald in an article again in Townhall.com.
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/BillSteigerwald/2008/11/24/bill_bennett_to_gop_lets_get_to_work
---------------
I quote Mr. Bennett about how he thinks the message is best put forth. He talks of “Pragmatism” as the method to best put forth our message. A “judge us by our deeds” type of thing. A “Jindal, Cantor, Pawlenty” type of thing.
-----quote from article-----
We're not blinded by ideology. We believe in the American dream. We believe in individual enterprise and individual responsibility. That's an amalgam: That's partly values, partly business ethic.
------------------------------------------
We must learn how to show the people how our message works at the local level. Bill Bennett mentions the young leaders. He talks of the Republicans needing to hone our message and our messengers.
We can do that best if we let the people tell us what they want. We can find that out best when we see and hear it first hand unfiltered by fame fortune and all the rest. Perhaps the best of us can then learn to not only articulate it better but create pragmatic solutions that actually help. If we can do that we will be building a real foundation on which we can win again. I know that sounds pretty simple. You know what? The sound of simple and doable is refreshing for a change.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Jackie Cushman Gingrich
I have discovered a new to me, gifted writer that I really enjoy. Her name is Jackie Cushman Gingrich. That is correct, she is Newt Gingrich’s daughter.
Her style of writing, if I may be so bold, reminds me of my other favorite writer, Peggy Noonan. While Peggy Noonan has the knack and skill to draw her own unique conclusions on major events and make me wonder why I didn’t think of that: Jackie Cushman Gingrich has the knack and skill to do the same on the ordinary happenings in her life. As a Conservative, I agree with the slant of each spin weaver.
While I give Peggy the edge in eloquence, political astuteness and savvy: I give Jackie acclamations for helping me frame my reactions to the occurrences of my everyday life in the sound common sense timber of Conservative ideals. She gives me pause to think about those occurrences. I also find in her writing thankfulness for that framework which shelters me during all times especially the worst of times.
Gingrich in the following link, tells us about her memories of Thanksgiving and what joy and wisdom it has given her over the years. She grounds the Holiday in facts from Washington and Lincoln. Giving us links to each but not bogging us down in historical lecturing; but rather the joys of left over turkey sandwiches. So far it is a nice personal piece , nicely written, warm with nostalgia. Spiced with history, invigorating my imagination.
Her uniqueness comes in her ability to trap the reader (at least me) into wondering just why during times of great struggle, deprivation and fear our leaders asked us to give thanks for what we had. To take a day from battling for survival to enjoy what we have.
She then closes it up beautifully answering that question. Not only that but by means of said turkey sandwich, we can still give thanks after Thanksgiving Day.
-----quote from article-----
By giving thanks for what we have, we will begin to be receptive and open, able to dream of what might be. This optimism will then give way to action and results.
This year, as you bite into your leftover turkey sandwich, give more thanks
--------------------------------
Below is the link to her article in Townhall.com
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/JackieGingrichCushman/2008/11/23/this_year,_give_more_thanks
---------------
Have a Happy Thanksgiving Day.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Her style of writing, if I may be so bold, reminds me of my other favorite writer, Peggy Noonan. While Peggy Noonan has the knack and skill to draw her own unique conclusions on major events and make me wonder why I didn’t think of that: Jackie Cushman Gingrich has the knack and skill to do the same on the ordinary happenings in her life. As a Conservative, I agree with the slant of each spin weaver.
While I give Peggy the edge in eloquence, political astuteness and savvy: I give Jackie acclamations for helping me frame my reactions to the occurrences of my everyday life in the sound common sense timber of Conservative ideals. She gives me pause to think about those occurrences. I also find in her writing thankfulness for that framework which shelters me during all times especially the worst of times.
Gingrich in the following link, tells us about her memories of Thanksgiving and what joy and wisdom it has given her over the years. She grounds the Holiday in facts from Washington and Lincoln. Giving us links to each but not bogging us down in historical lecturing; but rather the joys of left over turkey sandwiches. So far it is a nice personal piece , nicely written, warm with nostalgia. Spiced with history, invigorating my imagination.
Her uniqueness comes in her ability to trap the reader (at least me) into wondering just why during times of great struggle, deprivation and fear our leaders asked us to give thanks for what we had. To take a day from battling for survival to enjoy what we have.
She then closes it up beautifully answering that question. Not only that but by means of said turkey sandwich, we can still give thanks after Thanksgiving Day.
-----quote from article-----
By giving thanks for what we have, we will begin to be receptive and open, able to dream of what might be. This optimism will then give way to action and results.
This year, as you bite into your leftover turkey sandwich, give more thanks
--------------------------------
Below is the link to her article in Townhall.com
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/JackieGingrichCushman/2008/11/23/this_year,_give_more_thanks
---------------
Have a Happy Thanksgiving Day.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Friday, November 21, 2008
Freedom To Compromise
Where exactly is the line between the Protection of Religious Freedom by the government and the government protecting itself from Religion? Let me preface this by saying that there is and should be a line. The struggle to sway that line in our direction is the essence of politics. The problem however, as with most things in life is that the line is ever drifting between one extreme and another.
We all see this ebb and flow in life for example from one party to another in politics and at least at a gut level we understand it and realize it is a necessary thing. Americans also accept that in order for our Democratic Republic to flourish -- for “Freedom” to flourish -- we must allow others to believe what they will and we’ll believe what we will. This seems to be where our brand of Freedom comes from in our country.
As a Conservative I get upset around the Zealots of the Gay Marriage group. This video helps me understand the reason for the 2nd amendment
-----link-----
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yXaPFwBdkA&feature=related
--------------
Wow that was pretty hard.
Well this next one isn‘t quite so physically threatening but I would hate to see that truck in front of my house, and I begin to wonder why the 1st amendment was written.
-----link-----
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PANDqolTRvc
---------------
I know I quit watching, about a minute is all I could take. Dull mainly but you get the drift.
Just saw an article in Townhall.com titled
Defense of "The Oogedy-Boogedy Branch of the GOP"
by John Hawkins
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/JohnHawkins/2008/11/21/in_defense_of_the_oogedy-boogedy_branch_of_the_gop
--------------
Hawkins makes a pretty good case of where that line can be drawn in the Republican Party as it tries continually to straddle the Christine Todd Whitman, McCain liberal in all but finance group and the Social Conservatives or Religious Right.
Hawkins talks of this country being a religious one and that both parties cater to the religious idea whether they believe in religion or not.
To bad there has to be compromises with the other side. To bad we have to think for ourselves where that line is all the time. It’s hard work. We have to think not only of ourselves but of others as well.
On the one side, Stalin knew exactly where the line was, as citizens of the USSR we would have no difficulty discerning where that line was. It was the Party Line.
Conversely, In Iran the Ayatollah takes that burden off our backs too.
The best book I’ve read explaining the compromise that is our American Republic form of Democracy, is Thomas Sowell’s, “Conflict of Vision”
-----link-----
http://www.amazon.com/Conflict-Visions-Ideological-Political-Struggles/dp/0465081428
---------------
He simplifies all the political bickering of 230 some years down to two different “Visions” people use to help them decide how they live their lives. One is as valid or invalid as the other.
In 1776 it was just as hard to compromise one’s “vision” as it is now: but the goal is what clinched that deal. They were setting up a new government and in so doing had put their life on the line when they signed their collection of compromises we call the Declaration of Independence later codified into the Constitution. They knew that their very lives and fortunes were tied up in those compromises and they knew also that those compromises had to be effective or else they would lose all. To put it in modern terms, they had to agree to disagree, but most important they had to get it done.
In the past whenever we as a Nation would get too far to the left or too far to the right we would see the threat to ourselves and swing back more to the center. I hope we continue in that vein.
As far as the current controversy in the Republican Party I think a veer to the Right is what is needed.; as we are in the midst of a veer to the Left. I am starting to fear the loss of the things like capitalism that has made this country great, and allowed the freedom given me and every other citizen. The freedom to not only hope but to actually do what it takes so that we may better ourselves. It is this fear that will unite us, as we battle the opposing ideology. As it gets down into the trenches, any ally is a good ally. We all need the Freedom to Compromise.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
We all see this ebb and flow in life for example from one party to another in politics and at least at a gut level we understand it and realize it is a necessary thing. Americans also accept that in order for our Democratic Republic to flourish -- for “Freedom” to flourish -- we must allow others to believe what they will and we’ll believe what we will. This seems to be where our brand of Freedom comes from in our country.
As a Conservative I get upset around the Zealots of the Gay Marriage group. This video helps me understand the reason for the 2nd amendment
-----link-----
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yXaPFwBdkA&feature=related
--------------
Wow that was pretty hard.
Well this next one isn‘t quite so physically threatening but I would hate to see that truck in front of my house, and I begin to wonder why the 1st amendment was written.
-----link-----
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PANDqolTRvc
---------------
I know I quit watching, about a minute is all I could take. Dull mainly but you get the drift.
Just saw an article in Townhall.com titled
Defense of "The Oogedy-Boogedy Branch of the GOP"
by John Hawkins
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/JohnHawkins/2008/11/21/in_defense_of_the_oogedy-boogedy_branch_of_the_gop
--------------
Hawkins makes a pretty good case of where that line can be drawn in the Republican Party as it tries continually to straddle the Christine Todd Whitman, McCain liberal in all but finance group and the Social Conservatives or Religious Right.
Hawkins talks of this country being a religious one and that both parties cater to the religious idea whether they believe in religion or not.
To bad there has to be compromises with the other side. To bad we have to think for ourselves where that line is all the time. It’s hard work. We have to think not only of ourselves but of others as well.
On the one side, Stalin knew exactly where the line was, as citizens of the USSR we would have no difficulty discerning where that line was. It was the Party Line.
Conversely, In Iran the Ayatollah takes that burden off our backs too.
The best book I’ve read explaining the compromise that is our American Republic form of Democracy, is Thomas Sowell’s, “Conflict of Vision”
-----link-----
http://www.amazon.com/Conflict-Visions-Ideological-Political-Struggles/dp/0465081428
---------------
He simplifies all the political bickering of 230 some years down to two different “Visions” people use to help them decide how they live their lives. One is as valid or invalid as the other.
In 1776 it was just as hard to compromise one’s “vision” as it is now: but the goal is what clinched that deal. They were setting up a new government and in so doing had put their life on the line when they signed their collection of compromises we call the Declaration of Independence later codified into the Constitution. They knew that their very lives and fortunes were tied up in those compromises and they knew also that those compromises had to be effective or else they would lose all. To put it in modern terms, they had to agree to disagree, but most important they had to get it done.
In the past whenever we as a Nation would get too far to the left or too far to the right we would see the threat to ourselves and swing back more to the center. I hope we continue in that vein.
As far as the current controversy in the Republican Party I think a veer to the Right is what is needed.; as we are in the midst of a veer to the Left. I am starting to fear the loss of the things like capitalism that has made this country great, and allowed the freedom given me and every other citizen. The freedom to not only hope but to actually do what it takes so that we may better ourselves. It is this fear that will unite us, as we battle the opposing ideology. As it gets down into the trenches, any ally is a good ally. We all need the Freedom to Compromise.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Thursday, November 20, 2008
YouTube - Citizentube Interview: David Cameron
Please click on the "Web Cameron" heading on the top right of the side bar before you start to read this post. It is a pleasant interactive experiance. (In my biased opinion), anyway give it a shot.
Below is a link to the Telegraph.co.uk It is an article about how David Cameron and his crew of Conservatives in Britain have decided to wage war against the Liberals and Gordon Brown. The ammunition they plan to use to fight this war is the Conservative idea that an unfettered Capitalism is the best weapon to use for reviving the economy.
-----link-----
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/20/do2002.xml
--------------
Near the end of the article the author, Ian Martin sums up the battle quite nicely. He comes up with the idea that what is needed is a Conservative “Moral Compass”. I agree with his well put conclusion of what is at stake in this war. We in the USA are fighting the same war.
-----quote-----
For there is more at stake than is apparent. Markets, and the idea that robust private enterprise are the best means of recovery, are under attack in what is becoming a global culture war against capitalism.
----------------
We in the USA could take a page out of Cameron’s book. Their party after all is making great progress and seems poised to capture the government in 2009 or 2010.
We need to reaffirm the Conservative mantra of Capitalism and the great strides it is capable of when free.
Listen to a down to earth Politician a Common Sense Conservative.
YouTube - Citizentube Interview: David Cameron
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Below is a link to the Telegraph.co.uk It is an article about how David Cameron and his crew of Conservatives in Britain have decided to wage war against the Liberals and Gordon Brown. The ammunition they plan to use to fight this war is the Conservative idea that an unfettered Capitalism is the best weapon to use for reviving the economy.
-----link-----
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/20/do2002.xml
--------------
Near the end of the article the author, Ian Martin sums up the battle quite nicely. He comes up with the idea that what is needed is a Conservative “Moral Compass”. I agree with his well put conclusion of what is at stake in this war. We in the USA are fighting the same war.
-----quote-----
For there is more at stake than is apparent. Markets, and the idea that robust private enterprise are the best means of recovery, are under attack in what is becoming a global culture war against capitalism.
----------------
We in the USA could take a page out of Cameron’s book. Their party after all is making great progress and seems poised to capture the government in 2009 or 2010.
We need to reaffirm the Conservative mantra of Capitalism and the great strides it is capable of when free.
Listen to a down to earth Politician a Common Sense Conservative.
YouTube - Citizentube Interview: David Cameron
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Mitt Romney throws down
Mitt Romney throws down the gauntlet in an op-ed in the New York Times.
-----link-----
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html?_r=2&oref=slogin
---------------
Finally someone with some backbone is willing to talk about what everybody has been wondering about but were too politically correct to say,(at least publicly.)
What will happen if the Big 3 Auto Makers do get bailed out. Mitt’s answer is simple and unequivocal.
-----quote-----
….., you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye.
-----------------
My take on his writing is that unless we let them declare bankruptcy they will not change the infrastructure that got them into the mess in the first place. The article is so blatantly obvious and filled with common sense that I expect that Mitt will soon be called some pretty vile names. Not just by the unions which have a vested interested in keeping the status quo, but the Executives of the companies, who without a bailout might be kicked out. At the least they might loose some of their perks.
I enjoyed the Romney’s op-ed, I enjoyed his logic. I enjoyed his common sense. He was brief and too the point. His quote from Reuther was splendid.
-----quote------
But as Walter Reuther, the former head of the United Automobile Workers, said to my father, “Getting more and more pay for less and less work is a dead-end street.”
-----------------
But then he fires right back at management.
-----quote------
The need for collaboration will mean accepting sanity in salaries and perks. At American Motors, my dad cut his pay and that of his executive team, he bought stock in the company, and he went out to factories to talk to workers directly. Get rid of the planes, the executive dining rooms — all the symbols that breed resentment among the hundreds of thousands who will also be sacrificing to keep the companies afloat
-----------------
I mean, holy cow can that boy write. He obviously is letting the bee out of his bonnet. I wish he had that same fire in his bid for the Presidency. I think this Mitt Romney and Joe the Plumber would enjoy a talk together.
Then he took a page out of David Cameron of Britain and explained the good Conservative Common Sense way for the government to act. Not to bail them out. Rather the government should facilitate the restructuring that will take place with a bankruptcy by helping with the basic research through a massive infusion of grant money to help the universities perfect new technologies for the Auto Makers so they can build a better product. Also the government should pressure other countries to level the playing field.
This was the best and boldest piece of writing I have read on a national level in a long time. I’m amazed they didn’t bury it quicker.
Lastly Mitt gives me a clue about what he thinks of the 700 billion$ bailout. He says the following. Again good Conservative Common Sense
-----quote-----
But don’t ask Washington to give shareholders and bondholders a free pass — they bet on management and they lost
--------------
Those holders of bonds and shares for the most part are banks and the equivalent.
Reminds me of saying no to our children, they do get over it and when they end up getting what they wanted it will of been in the old fashioned way. They will have Earned It.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
PS I would love to have him do another op-ed next month about the public schools and how they should be allowed to go bankrupt. The ever increasing money we pay for less results reminds me of the Walter Reuther quote above. The problem is that a “crummy” car is not near as bad as producing a “crummy” kid. What say you Akindele?
-----link-----
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html?_r=2&oref=slogin
---------------
Finally someone with some backbone is willing to talk about what everybody has been wondering about but were too politically correct to say,(at least publicly.)
What will happen if the Big 3 Auto Makers do get bailed out. Mitt’s answer is simple and unequivocal.
-----quote-----
….., you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye.
-----------------
My take on his writing is that unless we let them declare bankruptcy they will not change the infrastructure that got them into the mess in the first place. The article is so blatantly obvious and filled with common sense that I expect that Mitt will soon be called some pretty vile names. Not just by the unions which have a vested interested in keeping the status quo, but the Executives of the companies, who without a bailout might be kicked out. At the least they might loose some of their perks.
I enjoyed the Romney’s op-ed, I enjoyed his logic. I enjoyed his common sense. He was brief and too the point. His quote from Reuther was splendid.
-----quote------
But as Walter Reuther, the former head of the United Automobile Workers, said to my father, “Getting more and more pay for less and less work is a dead-end street.”
-----------------
But then he fires right back at management.
-----quote------
The need for collaboration will mean accepting sanity in salaries and perks. At American Motors, my dad cut his pay and that of his executive team, he bought stock in the company, and he went out to factories to talk to workers directly. Get rid of the planes, the executive dining rooms — all the symbols that breed resentment among the hundreds of thousands who will also be sacrificing to keep the companies afloat
-----------------
I mean, holy cow can that boy write. He obviously is letting the bee out of his bonnet. I wish he had that same fire in his bid for the Presidency. I think this Mitt Romney and Joe the Plumber would enjoy a talk together.
Then he took a page out of David Cameron of Britain and explained the good Conservative Common Sense way for the government to act. Not to bail them out. Rather the government should facilitate the restructuring that will take place with a bankruptcy by helping with the basic research through a massive infusion of grant money to help the universities perfect new technologies for the Auto Makers so they can build a better product. Also the government should pressure other countries to level the playing field.
This was the best and boldest piece of writing I have read on a national level in a long time. I’m amazed they didn’t bury it quicker.
Lastly Mitt gives me a clue about what he thinks of the 700 billion$ bailout. He says the following. Again good Conservative Common Sense
-----quote-----
But don’t ask Washington to give shareholders and bondholders a free pass — they bet on management and they lost
--------------
Those holders of bonds and shares for the most part are banks and the equivalent.
Reminds me of saying no to our children, they do get over it and when they end up getting what they wanted it will of been in the old fashioned way. They will have Earned It.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
PS I would love to have him do another op-ed next month about the public schools and how they should be allowed to go bankrupt. The ever increasing money we pay for less results reminds me of the Walter Reuther quote above. The problem is that a “crummy” car is not near as bad as producing a “crummy” kid. What say you Akindele?
Monday, November 17, 2008
For The Sake Of The Children
Trickle Down Economics Liberal Style.
For the sake of our children the liberals tell us that we must raise taxes.
The effects of Liberal inspired economic polices of tax and spend are finally trickling down to the states and they will soon have to pass the trickle down to you and your wallet and finally to what you can afford to put under the Christmas tree for your children. That is if you are one of the few hard working minority left that actually make money by having a job or a business. Wish I had a picture of Barney Frank’s Christmas tree and all their presents. I don’t so this reminder of what is coming is linked below.
-----link-----
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/17/us/17fiscal.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
---------------
Heaven help you if you are successful enough to hire workers. That trickle may well turn into a full fledged break in the pipes that could put you out of business. If your are still stubborn enough about wanting to work for a living to try to get ahead, if you are attitude challenged in that way then you can be reeducated through the many government programs or just get up and leave the country. Take your business with you to a more friendly environment.
Next is an enlarged map from above of “deficit challenged” states
-----link-----
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/11/17/us/20081117_budget_graphic.html
--------------
Now compare the above linked map and the election map in the next link. The Liberal States eerily tend to line up with the “budget challenged” ones.
-----link-----
http://www.npr.org/news/specials/election2008/2008-election-map.html#/president?view=race08
---------------
The ULTIMATE BAILOUT is fast approaching.
Just as the Government has seen fit to “Bailout” the financial industry with your tax money, because it’s liberalized lending policies have failed. WE too will have to bail out the government for it‘s failed liberal policies.
You will not hear it called a “Bailout” but rather a necessary raising of taxes on those who make the most to help save the children. In other words just another round of raising taxes. Which as the case of higher business taxes in Michigan proves, will force business out of the state taking jobs (your job) with them.
-----link-----
http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/1357.html
---------------
Nationally business will have to continue moving out of the country, taking your jobs with them. But not you and your family. Before you blame Business, I would look to the government. Does it need all that money.
Do your kids need everything they ask for at Christmas? It may break our heart to not be able to give them everything, but we don’t because we are responsible people. We are also a people that understand common sense. We know that our children don’t need everything they want. If we can say no to our children, bringing a tear to our eyes, why is it so hard to tell the government the same thing? That does not bring any tears to my eyes.
I think it is about time we started doing just that.
For the sake of Our Children.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
For the sake of our children the liberals tell us that we must raise taxes.
The effects of Liberal inspired economic polices of tax and spend are finally trickling down to the states and they will soon have to pass the trickle down to you and your wallet and finally to what you can afford to put under the Christmas tree for your children. That is if you are one of the few hard working minority left that actually make money by having a job or a business. Wish I had a picture of Barney Frank’s Christmas tree and all their presents. I don’t so this reminder of what is coming is linked below.
-----link-----
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/17/us/17fiscal.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
---------------
Heaven help you if you are successful enough to hire workers. That trickle may well turn into a full fledged break in the pipes that could put you out of business. If your are still stubborn enough about wanting to work for a living to try to get ahead, if you are attitude challenged in that way then you can be reeducated through the many government programs or just get up and leave the country. Take your business with you to a more friendly environment.
Next is an enlarged map from above of “deficit challenged” states
-----link-----
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/11/17/us/20081117_budget_graphic.html
--------------
Now compare the above linked map and the election map in the next link. The Liberal States eerily tend to line up with the “budget challenged” ones.
-----link-----
http://www.npr.org/news/specials/election2008/2008-election-map.html#/president?view=race08
---------------
The ULTIMATE BAILOUT is fast approaching.
Just as the Government has seen fit to “Bailout” the financial industry with your tax money, because it’s liberalized lending policies have failed. WE too will have to bail out the government for it‘s failed liberal policies.
You will not hear it called a “Bailout” but rather a necessary raising of taxes on those who make the most to help save the children. In other words just another round of raising taxes. Which as the case of higher business taxes in Michigan proves, will force business out of the state taking jobs (your job) with them.
-----link-----
http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/1357.html
---------------
Nationally business will have to continue moving out of the country, taking your jobs with them. But not you and your family. Before you blame Business, I would look to the government. Does it need all that money.
Do your kids need everything they ask for at Christmas? It may break our heart to not be able to give them everything, but we don’t because we are responsible people. We are also a people that understand common sense. We know that our children don’t need everything they want. If we can say no to our children, bringing a tear to our eyes, why is it so hard to tell the government the same thing? That does not bring any tears to my eyes.
I think it is about time we started doing just that.
For the sake of Our Children.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Friday, November 14, 2008
Fire In The Belly
Without a President in Power to lead our party, we must go elsewhere to seek the guidance we need to present a united front against pretty overwhelming odds. That united front must be set up at the top. It should be united organizationally as well as the core message we represent. Following the party organizational set up, the leadership by default falls to the head of the Republican National Committee. Currently Mike Duncan. Is he the man for the job, should the RNC elect another? Should it be one of their own or an outsider.
Roger Simon at Politico wrote an insightful piece about that and sketched out an in-depth short article about what he could find out as to what the RNC might do. He also points out the structure of the RNC favors (as in most organizations) one of their own. This was an excellent article for the lay person such as myself.
-----link-----
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15563_Page2.html
---------------
I was sorry to read his pessimism as to Newt’s chances backed up with Newt’s near refusal to run. As my readers already know I think Newt Gingrich would make the ideal choice to run and rebuild the party. His essence seems to be as an organizer. My main reason is his experience in doing just that. He also has about the best web presence/experiance not to mention his TV presence/experience. That being said, he may be too visable whereas a Michael Steele would be less so and he does have experience in winning elections using a conservative message.
If Newt isn’t chosen, whoever is would do well to try to get Newt on board to run the web effort of the RNC, give him complete control whatever it takes. A little cooperation at the leadership level would be refreshing for all of us lowly types to see. Especially if it was aimed at benefiting us at the local level. “Facilitate” us, give us the tools to do our job. BTW Newt if you look at his website,
-----link-----
http://newt.org/
---------------
And spend some time there you will learn what he means by a Tri-partisan solution as Simon at Politico quoted.
-----quote-----
. “However, my job as an American first is to develop a tri-partisan approach to developing solutions for the challenges we face. I use the word tri-partisan to designate the concept of attracting Democrats, Republicans, and independents to solutions that unify most Americans
---------------
Republican always claim to champion Free Enterprise, getting the top leadership (government) out of the way to let the volunteers (small free business’ ) try anything they want and let the success bubble up to the top. In other words get out of the way and only help (facilitate) the upward flow of on the ground fire tested good ideas coming from the volunteers up through the County and State.
I’m from Michigan and I cannot back the idea of Saul Anuiz as National Chair. I worked this election out of a smaller tier town that 4 years ago was a victory center, this time it wasn’t. I manned the County HQ the whole time. I went to all the County meetings, I saw no help coming from the state party other than a call center with one director and a staffer which wasn‘t even located in our HQ. It was located in a back room of a candidates office. It was as close to secret in appearance as you could get. That could have been a great visual aid in recruiting the hundreds of people walking into our headquarters. But alas. Other than constant emails I saw no other real effort to enlarge the base or make any significant efforts to gain volunteers and give them a network in which to flourish in. { On Saul’s behalf, he may well have been in the same boat at the state level as I was at the county level. Ie lack of the level above facilitating the lower level. I don’t know the facts, but I didn’t hear anything or complaints for a need to change so I fall back to my idea of if it ain’t broke don’t fix it. I didn’t get any outreach. Well the results in the last two election cycles seem to indicate that something is broke and a change is needed.
If we truly want Real Change, we need someone from outside the organization (RNC) with a track record of building a winning organization. There are plenty of candidates. The Governors convention recently highlighted a swarm of eager bright experienced young governors. The House and Senate has it’s share. These are people that have proven conservative records of making real commonsense solutions work in their states. These people are the future leaders of our party. We need now to pick an RNC leader who can talk their language. Someone who can fire up the base with our conservative message alone, to build the infrastructure for these up and comers to add their style and charisma so we can start to take back some of what we lost at the state level in 2010 then recapture it all in 2012.
We do this by gearing up an internet structure to organize on a National State County and Township and precinct level, so all are invested in the same goals, motivated by common principles.
This should be viewed as a war. As in any war troops on the ground are vital. I would of thought that the Surge proved that to us. The internet is there as a tool to help facilitate the gathering of volunteers. A means to get them on board in the first place. Secondly to show them how to meet locally with others, and thirdly how to make a difference in their community. We all need to cultivate that “fire in the belly” that is mandatory to any type of change from the status quo. That “fire in the belly” in an off election year comes best and most convincingly from our belief in our core beliefs as conservatives, that has already bubbled up and we need it to be proudly proclaimed at the top and I might add believed in at the top.
I think that can only be done by someone outside of the status quo, outside of the RNC, someone with a proven track record of winning elections.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Roger Simon at Politico wrote an insightful piece about that and sketched out an in-depth short article about what he could find out as to what the RNC might do. He also points out the structure of the RNC favors (as in most organizations) one of their own. This was an excellent article for the lay person such as myself.
-----link-----
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15563_Page2.html
---------------
I was sorry to read his pessimism as to Newt’s chances backed up with Newt’s near refusal to run. As my readers already know I think Newt Gingrich would make the ideal choice to run and rebuild the party. His essence seems to be as an organizer. My main reason is his experience in doing just that. He also has about the best web presence/experiance not to mention his TV presence/experience. That being said, he may be too visable whereas a Michael Steele would be less so and he does have experience in winning elections using a conservative message.
If Newt isn’t chosen, whoever is would do well to try to get Newt on board to run the web effort of the RNC, give him complete control whatever it takes. A little cooperation at the leadership level would be refreshing for all of us lowly types to see. Especially if it was aimed at benefiting us at the local level. “Facilitate” us, give us the tools to do our job. BTW Newt if you look at his website,
-----link-----
http://newt.org/
---------------
And spend some time there you will learn what he means by a Tri-partisan solution as Simon at Politico quoted.
-----quote-----
. “However, my job as an American first is to develop a tri-partisan approach to developing solutions for the challenges we face. I use the word tri-partisan to designate the concept of attracting Democrats, Republicans, and independents to solutions that unify most Americans
---------------
Republican always claim to champion Free Enterprise, getting the top leadership (government) out of the way to let the volunteers (small free business’ ) try anything they want and let the success bubble up to the top. In other words get out of the way and only help (facilitate) the upward flow of on the ground fire tested good ideas coming from the volunteers up through the County and State.
I’m from Michigan and I cannot back the idea of Saul Anuiz as National Chair. I worked this election out of a smaller tier town that 4 years ago was a victory center, this time it wasn’t. I manned the County HQ the whole time. I went to all the County meetings, I saw no help coming from the state party other than a call center with one director and a staffer which wasn‘t even located in our HQ. It was located in a back room of a candidates office. It was as close to secret in appearance as you could get. That could have been a great visual aid in recruiting the hundreds of people walking into our headquarters. But alas. Other than constant emails I saw no other real effort to enlarge the base or make any significant efforts to gain volunteers and give them a network in which to flourish in. { On Saul’s behalf, he may well have been in the same boat at the state level as I was at the county level. Ie lack of the level above facilitating the lower level. I don’t know the facts, but I didn’t hear anything or complaints for a need to change so I fall back to my idea of if it ain’t broke don’t fix it. I didn’t get any outreach. Well the results in the last two election cycles seem to indicate that something is broke and a change is needed.
If we truly want Real Change, we need someone from outside the organization (RNC) with a track record of building a winning organization. There are plenty of candidates. The Governors convention recently highlighted a swarm of eager bright experienced young governors. The House and Senate has it’s share. These are people that have proven conservative records of making real commonsense solutions work in their states. These people are the future leaders of our party. We need now to pick an RNC leader who can talk their language. Someone who can fire up the base with our conservative message alone, to build the infrastructure for these up and comers to add their style and charisma so we can start to take back some of what we lost at the state level in 2010 then recapture it all in 2012.
We do this by gearing up an internet structure to organize on a National State County and Township and precinct level, so all are invested in the same goals, motivated by common principles.
This should be viewed as a war. As in any war troops on the ground are vital. I would of thought that the Surge proved that to us. The internet is there as a tool to help facilitate the gathering of volunteers. A means to get them on board in the first place. Secondly to show them how to meet locally with others, and thirdly how to make a difference in their community. We all need to cultivate that “fire in the belly” that is mandatory to any type of change from the status quo. That “fire in the belly” in an off election year comes best and most convincingly from our belief in our core beliefs as conservatives, that has already bubbled up and we need it to be proudly proclaimed at the top and I might add believed in at the top.
I think that can only be done by someone outside of the status quo, outside of the RNC, someone with a proven track record of winning elections.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Dick Morris, Sorry I missed seeing you in Muskegon Mi.
Dick Morris wrote a good article talking about the analysis of the election.
-----link-----
http://www.newsmax.com/morris/election_analysis/2008/11/13/150847.html
---------------
He points out that the youth vote didn’t materialize as expected and ,if I may put my take on his article; most of the excess of voter turnout was from the voter registration efforts of Acorn and the like. The higher African American turnout which was a couple points higher turned the tide.
Another interesting point Morris made was what we all knew, which was that 2.? % more Dems turned out and 2.?% Repubs stayed home.
His conclusion I will let speak for itself.
-----quote-----
The message for conservatives is clear: The focus of Democrats on grass-roots activism, begun in 1998 by MoveOn.org, was crucial to the Obama election.
Instead of relying on the Republican Party to carry the message to the electorate, conservatives must organize their own grassr-oots movements — like GOPtrust.com — and boost turnout and enthusiasm among those who share their worldview. The backbreaking tasks of registering voters and getting out the vote are key to winning elections in the post-media era.
----------------
My own conclusion is that we need to let into the party the other groups such as he mentioned; GOPtrust.com and any others that are willing to do the “backbreaking tasks of registering voters and getting out the vote…..” We must at least get out of their way and at best the regular party apparatus should “facilitate” those efforts as much as possible. Is cooperation too big a concept to handle?
He concludes that the following.
-----quote-----
Today, new groups must move to the fore to fill the void. And they better do it fast!
-----------------
I for one as un-humble and ego driven as it sounds am going to try to do just that. I hope my party doesn’t fight me every inch of the way. I would love to see “some facilitating going on”.
Below is the link to The National Republican Trust. Or GOPtrust.com.
-----link-----
http://nationalrepublicantrust.com/letter_america.html
---------------
Indeed their job isn’t done. If we help them their work is just beginning. I quote them now. “We must start rebuilding the Republican Party today.” The old tried and true ways have failed in 2006 and 2008. A little tweaking we don’t need. A major reshaping we do.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
-----link-----
http://www.newsmax.com/morris/election_analysis/2008/11/13/150847.html
---------------
He points out that the youth vote didn’t materialize as expected and ,if I may put my take on his article; most of the excess of voter turnout was from the voter registration efforts of Acorn and the like. The higher African American turnout which was a couple points higher turned the tide.
Another interesting point Morris made was what we all knew, which was that 2.? % more Dems turned out and 2.?% Repubs stayed home.
His conclusion I will let speak for itself.
-----quote-----
The message for conservatives is clear: The focus of Democrats on grass-roots activism, begun in 1998 by MoveOn.org, was crucial to the Obama election.
Instead of relying on the Republican Party to carry the message to the electorate, conservatives must organize their own grassr-oots movements — like GOPtrust.com — and boost turnout and enthusiasm among those who share their worldview. The backbreaking tasks of registering voters and getting out the vote are key to winning elections in the post-media era.
----------------
My own conclusion is that we need to let into the party the other groups such as he mentioned; GOPtrust.com and any others that are willing to do the “backbreaking tasks of registering voters and getting out the vote…..” We must at least get out of their way and at best the regular party apparatus should “facilitate” those efforts as much as possible. Is cooperation too big a concept to handle?
He concludes that the following.
-----quote-----
Today, new groups must move to the fore to fill the void. And they better do it fast!
-----------------
I for one as un-humble and ego driven as it sounds am going to try to do just that. I hope my party doesn’t fight me every inch of the way. I would love to see “some facilitating going on”.
Below is the link to The National Republican Trust. Or GOPtrust.com.
-----link-----
http://nationalrepublicantrust.com/letter_america.html
---------------
Indeed their job isn’t done. If we help them their work is just beginning. I quote them now. “We must start rebuilding the Republican Party today.” The old tried and true ways have failed in 2006 and 2008. A little tweaking we don’t need. A major reshaping we do.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Peace of Mind and Common Sense With a Sense of Humor
As I’ve said in the past, I’m a political nut. I love the interplay between people with different ideas. I love that I can make some difference in the outcome by DOING something on the local level. Seems like the usage vs. the talking of that freedom encourages me more and reminds others of that freedom which they too have. More importantly by using that freedom always reminds me that to keep it I have to use it.
I just read an article by Bill Murchison
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/BillMurchison/2008/11/12/so_heres_what_we_do,_gang
---------------
I put his book on my wish list. The article has a lot of points I agree with. I too agree that we lost and we need to quickly move on. While we have to look at the reasons why, we need not get lost or bogged down in the details and the blame game. The “vinegar Joe” quote was great.
We need also I think to look at what worked. Look to counties that prevailed and what they did, and more importantly why they succeeded. Right Michigan highlighted one such case in Livingston County. Below is Right Michigan’s link then a link to the “Suburban Voice”
-----link-----
http://www.rightmichigan.com/
-----link-----
http://suburbanvoice.com/2008/11/11/livingston-county--the-life-raft-for-republicans.aspx
---------------
If you think the Dems haven’t made inroads in Mi. the maps on their site put it bluntly. I conclude that the Livingston County group managed to get their base out to vote through some protracted and extensive volunteer efforts. I will contact them and see if I can figure out specifically how they did it. As the Murchison article implied we can and should learn from our mistakes.
I quote the last part of Muchison.
------Quote-----
First come the things of the heart, and the conscience.
7. Laugh anyway. A sense of joy in the face of the worst is the conservative secret weapon. Leave anger to liberals, who rarely get a joke not directed at Bush. They'll go nuts. And you'll laugh even more.
------------------
I think that we need to work on our message and hence on ourselves. Once we are sure of our message then we have the inner peace to be able to face the pogo stick efforts of the Dems with a smile, as Murchison implies. Then we can continue to put forth commonsense conservative solutions that work on the lowest level: the precinct level, the level at which all politics resonates, the personal level.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
I just read an article by Bill Murchison
-----link-----
http://townhall.com/columnists/BillMurchison/2008/11/12/so_heres_what_we_do,_gang
---------------
I put his book on my wish list. The article has a lot of points I agree with. I too agree that we lost and we need to quickly move on. While we have to look at the reasons why, we need not get lost or bogged down in the details and the blame game. The “vinegar Joe” quote was great.
We need also I think to look at what worked. Look to counties that prevailed and what they did, and more importantly why they succeeded. Right Michigan highlighted one such case in Livingston County. Below is Right Michigan’s link then a link to the “Suburban Voice”
-----link-----
http://www.rightmichigan.com/
-----link-----
http://suburbanvoice.com/2008/11/11/livingston-county--the-life-raft-for-republicans.aspx
---------------
If you think the Dems haven’t made inroads in Mi. the maps on their site put it bluntly. I conclude that the Livingston County group managed to get their base out to vote through some protracted and extensive volunteer efforts. I will contact them and see if I can figure out specifically how they did it. As the Murchison article implied we can and should learn from our mistakes.
I quote the last part of Muchison.
------Quote-----
First come the things of the heart, and the conscience.
7. Laugh anyway. A sense of joy in the face of the worst is the conservative secret weapon. Leave anger to liberals, who rarely get a joke not directed at Bush. They'll go nuts. And you'll laugh even more.
------------------
I think that we need to work on our message and hence on ourselves. Once we are sure of our message then we have the inner peace to be able to face the pogo stick efforts of the Dems with a smile, as Murchison implies. Then we can continue to put forth commonsense conservative solutions that work on the lowest level: the precinct level, the level at which all politics resonates, the personal level.
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Gingrich vs Steele ???
Gingrich vs. Steele.
If this was a primary for who should run as President, I would pick Steele. This is not an us vs. them type of thing however. It is for leadership of our party. As a Conservative I see it as a no brainer. I would choose Newt in a heartbeat.
Newt has previously set up the mechanism of GOPAC and led it. He took that and drove the GOP to a governing majority. He failed when he caved into the compromise of the other leadership of his party.
I believe he has learned from his mistake. His wisdom on how to push the Conservative Core ideas is by far and away heads above any other public figure. Go to you tube and look at all his speeches. They are coherent and honest and on track. Above all you can not only understand clearly his points but you believe them. Below is a link that if you listen to the last 4 minutes you will see how he would attack the position, the passion he brings and inspires at least in me.
-----link-----
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfvl6vWZ9FA&feature=user
---------------
He will not just send out continuous thinly veiled pleas for money. He knows as well as any Republican around how to create web active excitement and especially involvement. Go to his site
-----link-----
http://newt.org/
--------------
In that site which he has had up for a long time and has constantly improved it, you will find the “Platform for America” which he polled for and created to try to help the GOP win the election. It wasn’t seriously followed. Look to the bottom of the web site and click “American Solutions” and you will get to see the interactive inclusive, core-principled site that it is. Also why I favor him.
Remember the 1.5 million signatures he got on line for his “Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less” campaign. Think also of how he gave the Republicans some back bone in the Congress and how Boehner remembered how to and became a leader again because of Newt and his energy campaign and how for the first time Pelosi's, Reed's and Obama’s feet were held to the fire forceing them at least temporarily to agree to do some drilling. He wasn’t in the House or Senate when he did that he was just a private citizen albeit an influential one who nearly stopped the government.
For those who may worry about his “Baggage”, Look at the John Dean who Republicans think of as a joke for a Presidential Candidate, but look what he has done to the Democrat Party. Compare the brain pans and imagine what Newt could do. BTW his "Real Change" is a blueprint for what he wants to happen. Read it.
My last point is that without any striking national figure out there on the horizon that will energize the party NOW, so we can start to recoup our losses come 2010, we need to fire up the base and bring new fresh thinking minds to the mix. Just plain expand the base driven by the excitement of our ideas and solutions. By concrete examples of our programs on a local level. Newt is a pro at taking our principles and finding solutions that work because of them and then knowing how to popularize those solutions.
He has been ever stead fast in his principles, yet ever changing in his approach according to the changing landscape. He is constantly learning and willing to always look at all ideas. He also admits when he is wrong.
I for one would feel really energized if Newt became leader of our party. I live in Mi. and another Core Conservative is running for State Republican Party Chair. Jack Hoogendyk.
-----link-----
http://www.jackformichigan.org/core/--------------
This could be the silver lining in the cloud of the recent humiliating defeat at the polls especially in Mi. I’m almost giddy to think that I might start to get help in my local efforts at the precinct level from above instead of computer generated memos and lists, and nice sounding clichéd pleas for money. I’m not talking about getting money help, but idea and inspiration help to keep me working hard at it.
In my words, “I need some Facilitating going on here”
I pray that this will come to pass
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
PS
Newt You Tube Channel. 69 clips.
http://www.youtube.com/user/ngingrich
If this was a primary for who should run as President, I would pick Steele. This is not an us vs. them type of thing however. It is for leadership of our party. As a Conservative I see it as a no brainer. I would choose Newt in a heartbeat.
Newt has previously set up the mechanism of GOPAC and led it. He took that and drove the GOP to a governing majority. He failed when he caved into the compromise of the other leadership of his party.
I believe he has learned from his mistake. His wisdom on how to push the Conservative Core ideas is by far and away heads above any other public figure. Go to you tube and look at all his speeches. They are coherent and honest and on track. Above all you can not only understand clearly his points but you believe them. Below is a link that if you listen to the last 4 minutes you will see how he would attack the position, the passion he brings and inspires at least in me.
-----link-----
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfvl6vWZ9FA&feature=user
---------------
He will not just send out continuous thinly veiled pleas for money. He knows as well as any Republican around how to create web active excitement and especially involvement. Go to his site
-----link-----
http://newt.org/
--------------
In that site which he has had up for a long time and has constantly improved it, you will find the “Platform for America” which he polled for and created to try to help the GOP win the election. It wasn’t seriously followed. Look to the bottom of the web site and click “American Solutions” and you will get to see the interactive inclusive, core-principled site that it is. Also why I favor him.
Remember the 1.5 million signatures he got on line for his “Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less” campaign. Think also of how he gave the Republicans some back bone in the Congress and how Boehner remembered how to and became a leader again because of Newt and his energy campaign and how for the first time Pelosi's, Reed's and Obama’s feet were held to the fire forceing them at least temporarily to agree to do some drilling. He wasn’t in the House or Senate when he did that he was just a private citizen albeit an influential one who nearly stopped the government.
For those who may worry about his “Baggage”, Look at the John Dean who Republicans think of as a joke for a Presidential Candidate, but look what he has done to the Democrat Party. Compare the brain pans and imagine what Newt could do. BTW his "Real Change" is a blueprint for what he wants to happen. Read it.
My last point is that without any striking national figure out there on the horizon that will energize the party NOW, so we can start to recoup our losses come 2010, we need to fire up the base and bring new fresh thinking minds to the mix. Just plain expand the base driven by the excitement of our ideas and solutions. By concrete examples of our programs on a local level. Newt is a pro at taking our principles and finding solutions that work because of them and then knowing how to popularize those solutions.
He has been ever stead fast in his principles, yet ever changing in his approach according to the changing landscape. He is constantly learning and willing to always look at all ideas. He also admits when he is wrong.
I for one would feel really energized if Newt became leader of our party. I live in Mi. and another Core Conservative is running for State Republican Party Chair. Jack Hoogendyk.
-----link-----
http://www.jackformichigan.org/core/--------------
This could be the silver lining in the cloud of the recent humiliating defeat at the polls especially in Mi. I’m almost giddy to think that I might start to get help in my local efforts at the precinct level from above instead of computer generated memos and lists, and nice sounding clichéd pleas for money. I’m not talking about getting money help, but idea and inspiration help to keep me working hard at it.
In my words, “I need some Facilitating going on here”
I pray that this will come to pass
Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative.
PS
Newt You Tube Channel. 69 clips.
http://www.youtube.com/user/ngingrich
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)