10 reasons the Democratic Party faces a tough election cycle this fall

It must be getting close to election time. With emotions boiling to the surface for those who care about the outcome on November 4th, I have been subject of late to more criticism than usual.

These allegations include charges of, “lacking of knowledge of local Democratic Party politics,” character flaws for being shallow and simplistic, plus suffering from a bad case of Adult Attention Deficit Disorder.

Despite this, I remain sound of mind these days. It’s just that in the weeks preceding Election Day, things tend to get a little more personal than normal.

Most of this venom is coming from the left side of the political ledger where “progressives” have become hypersensitive of those who question the domestic and international policies of the Democratic Party. With all that has occurred in the first term and a half of the Obama administration, it is getting more difficult for the Left to entice their faithful and others to vote for their usual wedge issues that include:

  • A women’s right to choose, gay marriage, and females being mistreated by sexist bosses in the workplace.
  • Claiming inequality for minorities by playing the race card with voter registration, police misconduct, and discrimination against minorities
  • Placing responsibility on Republicans and Fox News for their failed policies around the globe.
  • Using the prosperity of Wall Street to explain the poor performance of the U.S. economy

As opinion polls indicate, the electorate is angry. It is no longer believable to blame George Bush, the Koch Brothers, or the Republican majority in the House of Representatives for the woes of the country.   People want answers from both Parties (especially in the U.S. Senate) to earn their votes.

For Democratic Party members who have triumphed in last 2 presidential elections, victory this election cycle may be a daunting task. In order to avoid a total collapse, they must defend 10 vulnerable areas listed below in order for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid from having to move his office location next January to accommodate triumphant GOP leadership in the Senate:

10 reasons members of the Democratic Party face a difficult election cycle

1. Explain the reason for failure to approve the Keystone Pipeline.

With its passage, thousands of jobs would be created including coveted high paying union positions. It is understood that safety concerns are a non-sequator in this equation. Pipelines are much less prone to accidents than moving product by rail where derailments and human error come into play. This dispute is really about the objections of Progressives to fracking and how it affects their Green Energy policies. The natives are beyond getting restless with the delays that have ensued during the approval process.

cost of living

2. Trying to impress voters that job creation exemplified by a lower unemployment rate (5.9%) is indicative of an economic recovery from when Obama was first elected in 2008.

This is total B.S. and everyone knows it. These glossy figures don’t reflect those who have given up looking for work or the quality of the jobs being produced. Traditional manufacturing plants are moving overseas and environmental gridlock has held back economic development. Job creation has been reduced to producing low paying often part time work in service industries such as fast food and retail. This has largely contributed to the gross income of American families declining about $4,000.00 per year.  Increased government entitlements to make up for this shortfall has not convinced most folks that things are “AOK at the KOA”.

3. The Affordable Care Act is not a major success story.

Aside from Progressive zealots and Democratic Party operatives, a majority of Americans are apprehensive about this program. With the Veterans Administration (VA) and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) scandals, along with problems with the roll-out of Obama Care, over half the population are concerned with the ability of the Federal government to make good decisions in an area that comprises over 10% of the GNP. Problems with those currently covered having to re-enroll prior to 2015 and less than anticipated participation in the program by private industry is not going to make matters easier.

democratic-party-foreign-policy

 4. Frustration with the news media for not being forthcoming with important issues.

Americans are becoming fatigued with news coverage by left leaning news organizations among the major networks, cable and newspapers.In a time when foreign policy failures in the Middle East, Ukraine, Libya, and Africa along with mounting domestic scandals, there is a growing perception that the fifth estate is not properly doing its job. Rachel Maddow spending 3 months coverage of a 4 hour traffic jam on a bridge no one outside of New York cares about is not a subject that arouses much interest nationally.  Her dismal ratings on MSNBC and those of other leftist news outlets reflects how much people care about this type of non-issue.

5. Concern with ethics and performance of the Justice department.

Aside from some Progressive ideologues, the recent resignation of Eric Holder as Attorney General has not brought a lot of tears from Middle America. As the chief law enforcement officer in the Country, Holder’s politically motivated, hands off approach with the IRS and NSA/CIA scandals, along with The Justice Departments intervention in the Ferguson incident, make many people uneasy. Sending a perceived bigot like Rev. Al Sharptin as your ears on the ground does not help either. The comparison of Holder’s reign in the Justice Department to Richard Nixon’s Attorney General John Mitchell is nothing to be proud of.

 6. The Obama Administration’s lack of transparency in telling the truth to its constituents.

The pledge of being honest to the American people, which helped propel the Democratic Party to victory in 2008 and 2012, has fallen short of expectations. From “Drawing a line in the sand” in Syria, to “If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor,” Obama’s credibility and by association, the Democratic Party, has been damaged. Obama’s failure to own up to foreign policy failures including the Benghazi incident and ignoring the threat of ISIS, has only made matters worse. As leader of the Democratic Party, Obama’s current low approval rating, which is comparable to that of George Bush’s second term, reflects a growing disconnect between his administration and those he governs.

7. Hilary Clinton, Leon Panetta and numerous Military leaders jumping ship from the White House.

These political stalwarts among others have separated themselves from policies of the Obama Administration, especially in the area of foreign policy. These are all well respected figures who have crossed party lines to express their displeasure with a President who they feel is a leftist ideologue who has consistently ignored advisors to the detriment of his country.

8. Increasing entitlements for the poor hasn’t worked in lifting them from Poverty.

This is a difficult pill for the Obama Administration and their predecessors to swallow.The strategy of pushing welfare, food stamps, and subsidized housing has not done a very good job of assisting low income people reach their aspirations in life. It seems apparent that residents of ghetto environments personified by the frustrations in Ferguson Missouri would prefer job creation to government hand-outs.

9. A perception that the President is not working very hard and taking his duties as Chief Executive seriously enough.

obama-golfFrequent golf games, unrelenting fund raising and low attendance to National Security briefings has lead many Americans to believe their leader is “mailing it in” during his second term. Whether these allegations are valid makes little difference to a growing number of Americans who view Obama as being more interested in creating photo opportunities than being a real leader.

 10. Problems at the border:

The American people are fed up with a President and a Democratic Party that has not protected the Southern boundary with Mexico. They want this problem fixed. Few see providing those who cross our borders without permission free government paid attorney services to avoid or stall deportation. With this said, however you dress up the pig, undocumented immigrants are still illegal aliens who do not belong in the USA under existing laws. Most Americans of all political parties prefer Congress settles this complex problem rather than threatened Executive Action by the President.

Bonus Vulnerability Problem:

Please tell the leaders of our country that Islam extremists are not a few bad apples or God fairing Moslems who are trying to get extra credit in Koran Bible Study Class by beheading innocent civilians. At the same time those people who wish to destroy Western civilization are not rebels or insurgents but rather scum bags who need to be terminated.

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Hobby Lobby at the Supreme Court

Hobby-Lobby-Conestoga at Supreme Court IFRA analysisOn March 25, the US Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Woods challenges to the HHS contraceptives mandate. The Christian owners of these two businesses claim that it is a violation of their religious pro-life convictions, and a violation of the moral standards of their respective companies, to be required to include four of the mandated contraceptive services–the contraceptive drugs and devices they (and many) consider to be abortifacients.The transcript of the argument is available here. The audio is here.A decision in the two cases is not expected until the end of June. Predicting how the court will rule based on how the questioning went is akin to reading tea leaves to predict the future. Still, at least three aspects of the discussion inside the Supreme Court are particularly noteworthy:

Hobby Lobby key arguments

(1) Although many commentators on these cases, and the federal government itself, have said that the big question is whether a corporation or a profit-making entity can have any religious exercise rights at all, this was not the crucial part of the discussion at the Court. This should not be a surprise: an amicus brief authored by church-state authority Douglas Laycock shows that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) was not designed to exclude corporations from its protections.

(2) Some of the questioning–and a great deal of the commentary outside the courtroom–has focused on a supposed slippery slope, a parade of horribles: if the Supreme Court upholds Hobby Lobby’s decision about those four contraceptive methods, then, predictably, various companies will plead religious conscience to strip blood transfusions or vaccinations or other medical procedures out of their insurance plans, or maybe even cynically plead religious conscience to strip out some procedures or drugs that they just object to because of cost.

And yet for a corporation (or person or nonprofit) to have the protection of RFRA gives it no free pass for decisions based on religion! It only makes the company (or person or ministry) eligible for a test in court. A court has to determine whether the company has a sincere religious belief in the matter and that having to bend to the government’s requirement would in truth impose a substantial burden on the company’s religious exercise. And the court has to decide whether the government has, as it claims, a compelling interest in imposing the requirement and also that it has no less restrictive way to achieve its interest. The government might well win–and if the claim is frivolous or the government’s interest heavy (preventing a public health disaster, saving a life), it should win.

On the other hand, if the company wins, then its religious exercise is not part of any “parade of horribles”–no matter how much many others might think the company wrong. Instead, the company’s win is an authentic victory for religious freedom–a fundamental American value that enables us to live together in mutual respect.

(3) When the 84 amicus briefs in the Hobby Lobby case had all been filed near the end of January–most of them supporting Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Woods–the estimable and essential Supreme Court blog, SCOTUSblog, took special note of only a single amicus brief. Which one?–the one filed by church-state scholar Marci Hamilton arguing that RFRA is unconstitutional and that it is a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to allow a corporation to deny on religious grounds rights or benefits that its employees otherwise would be able to enjoy. But her novel theory seems to have carried no weight with the justices.

If nothing else, all of this is just a sobering reminder: public debate about justice and the law often has very little relationship with actual constitutional principles or legal analysis.

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Obamacare Phase in has been clownish and full of lies

obamacare-phase-inPresident Obama, liar and clown in chief, has made a mess of the Obamacare phase in. The first law of medicine—and implementing grand plans doomed to fail—is “Do no harm”. Having already broken this natural law, the President proceeded to proclaim, as some grand avuncular gesture, that he had decided to let everyone keep their existing health insurance plans if they wanted to. For one whole year! Gee, thanks Barack. Continue reading “Obamacare Phase in has been clownish and full of lies”

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Federal Government: living under “omnipotent moral busybodies”

watch-president-obama-promise-23-times-that-you-can-keep-your-health-plan-under-obamacareThe greatest attribute of Capitalism is the voluntary nature of free markets. Two or more free people deciding on their own accord to complete a transaction in which they each receive some benefit. “The most important single central fact about a free market”, said Economist Milton Friedman, “is that no exchange takes place unless both parties benefit”.

This thought has crossed my mind frequently in the past several weeks. It seems that every time I use my smartphone the thought crosses my mind: I researched and bought this phone. I decided what price I could pay and what features I wanted and needed. AT&T willingly sold the phone at a price they believe they will make a profit and meet my expectations.

What a country!

Then I turn on the evening news and this thought collides with Barak Obama. The President, speaking on this week’s defense of “ObamaCare”, or the laughably entitled Affordable Care Act, is telling us that he did not lie when he said “if you like your current health plan, you can keep it”. No, he and his aides now tell us millions of us local yokels stupidly bought “substandard” or “shoddy” insurance from “bad-apple insurers”.

Thank God, they are telling us; they are here to tell us what we need and are mandated to buy. We each need that Lexus of a plan, not that Civic we had; even if we don’t know it, we are craving “free” preventive services and are in dire need of mental illness and maternity coverage, even though we may be in our sixties and doing well.

We will all feel good about this in the morning. And, they remind us, it is for the “common good”; the Federal government knows what is best for us. Or as Hillary Clinton, in her husband’s presidency (or “their presidency” as she likes to recall) said in referring to Social Security, “We can’t afford to have that money go to the private sector. The money has to go to the federal government because the federal government will spend that money better than the private sector will spend it.”

Novelist C.S. Lewis, the Christian author of books such “The Chronicles of Narnia” and “The Screwtape Letters” perhaps said it best about authoritarians such as Mr. Obama (as quoted recently in the Wall Street Journal):

“My contention is that good men (not bad men) consistently acting upon that position would act as cruelly and unjustly as the greatest tyrants. They might in some respects act even worse. Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies.

The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be ‘cured’ against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.”

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •