-By Chuck Busch
To: Mr. Larry Klayman of Freedom Watch
I just received your recent newsletter in which you related what Glenn Beck said on his Internet Broadcast program concerning inane ideas about “surrender.” I was not aware of his statement as I make it a point to not tune into Glenn on the Internet or on his radio program. Initially, I thought he was doing a service by bringing out controversial information on little discussed subjects that all American’s should be aware of. However after a time, he lost believability, was let go by FOX News and his radio program dissolved into silliness. This is not a time for frivolity and jokes. It is time for a serious effort to educate a misguided populace.
I have been concerned for some time that the host of conservative commentators on radio and TV, with the exception of Rush Limbaugh, have become entirely too harsh and strident contributing to the characterization that conservatives are uncaring and cold-hearted. Anger (and we all have reason to be angry) is too strong of an emotion to sustain over the long term and it is Obama’s strategy to wear us out. Rather than engaging in a personal shouting match with our opponents, we need to meet the challenges to our liberties with a steadfastness, confidence and calmness that will convince people of the soundness of our arguments. The face of conservatism and the Republican Party must attract more listeners and entreat them to consider objectively the major issues of the day. Instead of people reacting to the personality of the talk show host, let them focus on the substance of the debate. (See article on Fox News programming by Michael Reagan titled “New Song, New Singers” March 21, 2013.)
I have already mentioned Rush Limbaugh who founded conservative talk radio and is, without doubt, the master of the trade. He has an uncanny way of being critical of the administration but doing it in a good-natured humorous manner. Ridicule can be a good weapon against these uptight liberals but only if used in a skillful way. Rush, in this post-election cycle, has also made it his objective to connect with the “low information voter” which is a brilliant strategy. The people must be convinced that the supposed benefits of a generous federal welfare state are not only corrupting, but are unsustainable and are not worth the lost of liberties that they entail. They must also learn that this administration does not have their best long-term interests are heart and it’s social and economic policies have produced this ongoing distress in all aspects of American life.
-By Chuck Busch
The “fiscal cliff” negotiations, although they are hugely consequential, are an over-dramatization of a self-imposed crisis narrowly focused on federal revenue policies. The country wouldn’t have to endure these theatrics in the middle of the holiday season during a lame duck session of congress, if our national leaders had made the hard decisions months ago to curb government spending which is the real crisis. The resumption of the Clinton era tax rate increases was known in well in advance and now, as the protections are about to expire, at least one party is doing what it can to preserve the Bush tax rate cuts.
To heighten the political theater, the whole episode is being portrayed as a cataclysmic event as though an immediate precipitous national financial collapse will occur on New Years Day if there is no resolution of the spending and tax issues. Certainly the country will continue its path of decline, but this occurrence will simply be one more step, not off a “cliff”, but down a very slippery slope to the rocky shore of a runaway inflation, massive unemployment, massive federal debt, and national insecurity where the economy will be continually pounded by fierce waves of unfunded spending, a devalued currency, a popular entitlement mentality, and an expansion of government control.
-By Chuck Busch
I want you to know that I greatly appreciate the effort and sacrifice you made in seeking the presidency. I have been a supporter of you since the 2008 election and always believed you had a lot to offer the people of this country. History took a strange turn in 2008 and it would seem that the country got started down a wrong path that will now take extraordinary efforts to reverse. In the final analysis we have to accept that God is still on the throne and he will use whatever circumstance for His redemptive purposes. If I didn’t believe that, we would all have reason for despair.
You were an excellent candidate and ran a superb campaign. It was encouraging to hear someone articulate sound economic and national policies as well as you did. I believe you and Paul Ryan won the debate season hands down with factual and sensible proposals delivered in a confident and professional manner. As you reflect on the last year’s whirlwind events, please do not second-guess your message of limited government or think that you could have done anything different to affect the outcome. The Republican Party should make no change to its 2012 platform or compromise on social, cultural and economic issues. The contrast between the “paths” of the two parties could have not been made clearer.
-By Chuck Busch
Many in the Republican camp were disheartened that Colin Powel, after four years of seeing Barack Obama in action, would again endorse the president as he did in 2008. But none were as imprudent as Governor John Sununu, who suggested race might have been a major factor in his decision. He made this statement during his appearance on CNN’s “Piers Morgan Tonight”, “Well, I think when you have somebody of your own race that you’re proud of being president of the United States, I applaud Colin for standing with him.”
This comment was met with a hostile response from retired Army Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, also a Republican, who once served under General Powel during the first President Bush’s term. He said to Ed Schultz on MSNBC he didn’t “respect” the Governor’s opinion. Not being content to disagree with the Governor alone, Wilkerson went on to trash his own political party stating that “most” of “those people…are still basing their positions on race.” “My party is full of racists, and the real reason a considerable portion of my party wants President Obama out of the White House has nothing to do with his content of his character, nothing to do with his competence as commander-in-chief and president, and everything to do with the color of his skin, and that’s despicable.”
Really? Perhaps Colonel Wilkerson should examine the character and performance of President Barack Hussein Obama a little closer. Powell and Wilkerson and Sununu, all Republicans, are sure making the Democrat’s task of defeating Governor Romney a lot easier. In fact, the Obama campaign, which is no doubt delighting over the misstatements, accusations and infighting in the Republican camp, has just released a new radio ad featuring General Powell endorsing the president. It is time for the RINOS, whose only interest seems to be to conform to the prevailing contemporary liberal consensus of Washington, to choose to get with the Republican platform or get out.
A recent yard sign sighting gave this quip, “If you voted for Obama the last time because he was black to prove you were not a racist, vote for Romney now to prove that you are not an idiot!” (Just for the record, Colin Powel was born in New York City to Jamaican immigrant parents with a link to some Scottish ancestry and Obama is only half black, whose father was from Kenya and his mother from Kansas. Neither has southern slave ancestry.)
-By Chuck Busch
Republican candidates have simply got to define suitable language for their personal views on life at conception according to their own convictions or the biblical standard apart from some legislative or political compromise that cannot be truthfully misconstrued. And Republican party leaders should not make a habit of shunning those candidates such as Todd Akin and now Richard Murdock just because they embrace a rationally consistent view of the sanctity of all life and their statements have been distorted by the opposition.
Holding to the position that God is the author of all life including conception in a rape case, is not a political liability in a nation that espouses, “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among those are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness”. This is especially true considering that the Republican Party’s platform encompasses a very strong pro-life stance not specifying an exemption for rape or incest.
-By Chuck Busch
It is true that Todd Akin’s medical knowledge is mostly wrong about a women’s body “shutting down” in a rape situation. And Todd Akin’s reference to “legitimate” rape was truly an unfortunate choice of words. He might have been suggesting that there are variable circumstances distinguishing a “rape,” including forcible rape (“legitimate” as Rep. Akin described it), statutory rape (consensual) between an adult and a minor, and possibly those occasional uncertain cases when rape is claimed. But this is also lame by inferring that pregnancies resulting from a rape are extremely rare as though trying to mitigate the thorny problem of whether abortion is justified in such cases.
Lessons learned: 1.) Do your homework and verify your scientific facts before opening your mouth; 2.) Rehearse your lines and know your position before you do interviews;’ 3.) Be principled in your beliefs. Say what you mean and mean what you say. If you believe life begins at conception and is sacred, how often a rape situation occurs is irrelevant. A life is still a life no matter how it is conceived. 4.) Distinguish between your personal views and party platforms or current legal standard or proposed legislation. As I understand it, neither the Republican or Democrat platforms are specific about rape cases.
Nonetheless, the Republican Party is wrong to try to ostracize Rep. Akin for his misstatements regarding rape and abortion. Certainly, it is ridiculous for anyone to presume from even Rep. Todd Akin’s terrible wording, that he minimizes rape or is insensitive toward its victims, as some have declared. The Democrats appear desperate to build a whole campaign on just this one incident.
-By Chuck Busch
Again, Joe Lieberman — the Democratic party’s 2000 presidential candidate — said it well on Friday:
The non-binding resolution before us is not about stopping a hypothetical plan. It is about disapproving a plan that is being carried out now by our fellow Americans in uniform, in the field. In that sense, as I have said, it is unprecedented in Congressional history, in American history. This resolution is about shouting into the wind. It is about ignoring realities of what’s happening on the ground in Baghdad.
It proposes nothing. It contains no plan for victory or retreat. It proposes nothing. It is a strategy of “no,” while our soldiers are saying, “yes, sir” to their commanding officers as they go forward into battle.
And that is why I will vote against the resolution by voting against cloture.
-By Chuck Busch
Hillary may not be so smart after all or else she is betting that the rest of us are stupid. Her long anticipated announcement as a serious presidential contender was followed quickly by this revealing bombast against President George Bush and Commander in Chief in the war with Islamofacism. “I think it’s the height of irresponsibility and I really resent it – this was his decision to go to war, he went with an ill-conceived plan, an incompetently executed strategy, and we should expect him to extricate our country from this before he leaves office.”
She also admitted to being fooled into voting for the war before she voted against it. “So he took the authority that I and others gave him and he misused it…And if we had known then what we know now, there never would have been a vote and I never would have voted to give this president that authority.”
She “really resents it!” What she really is unhappy about is the prospect that if she ever achieves the object of her ego-mania, she will inherit a preemptive militaristic foreign policy against terrorist domination of the Middle East.
No doubt she had envisioned for herself another cakewalk administration modeled after the one she had partnered in with her husband where the threat of a brutal warring dictator in Iraq was ignored. For his two terms in office, now remembered as the “holiday from history”, our draft-dodging playboy president office steadfastly and repeatedly chose not to protect this country against terrorist attacks but rather to project the façade of a “peace and prosperity” administration.
-By Chuck Busch
It is completely fair to accuse Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi of refusing to “change course” in Iraq. Unfortunately, the “course” they are stubbornly and steadfastly sticking to is withdrawal of US forces from the Middle East regardless of the tribal maelstrom certain to occur as a result of the subsequent power vacuum left in the region. For the past many months and years, the Democrat leadership has spoken of nothing else but a sudden retreat from the central battlefront in the war with terror, which happens to be Baghdad.
This position was clarified once again in a joint letter by the new Senate and House majority leaders to President Bush expressing their total opposition to the increase of more troops to quell sectarian violence. They wrote, “We, therefore encourage you to reject any plans that call for our getting our troops deeper into Iraq.” Their rejection of a possible new strategy was made public even before President Bush had presented his new plan and explained its many aspects.
Help the Soldiers!
American GeniusOur Founding Ideas
- The Declaration of Independence
- The Federalist Papers
- The U.S. Constitution
- Debates of 1787
- The Anti-Federalist Papers
- The Writing of John Locke
"Governments are instituted among men,deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." Declaration of Independence July 4, 1776
What THEY Say:
Foreign News In English
Contact UsEmail Publius' Forum
Separation of School