Is the Republican Party dead?

Is the Republican Party dead? The one that I knew certainly is. As a 42 year old Hispanic I embraced Ronald Reagan as the Republican Party's greatest champion. It was Ronald Reagan that made the Republican Party the party for average Americans as well as intellectuals, moral conservatives, young and old, whites and minorities. He made us feel proud to be an American first and then to be proud to be a Republican. He brought us the greatest economic expansion in our country's history, not Bill Clinton as he loves to take credit for. Remember there is a lag period before economic policy is felt at every level of the national economy. It wasn't Bill Clinton, it was Ronald Reagan's sound economic policies from his trickle down economics to its strict fiscal responsibility that brought about economic prosperity to the country during the nineties.

In case our current administration forgot, reducing taxes is good policy if government spending is kept in check, reducing taxes and letting government spending run uncontrollably allows for severe budget deficits. Ronald Reagan taught us that. It is very simple mathematics; when our outflows exceed our inflows, we experience losses, deficits. There has never been a greater champion of the free enterprise system than President Reagan. His trickle down economics model was designed to successfully drive our free enterprise system. And he understood that the closer we got to a free enterprise system without government interference the greater the payoff. However, he also understood that being imperfect beings we were incapable of a perfect system so some intervention was needed. By intervention I mean regulation. He understood that the greater the payoff the greedier we would become and therefore the need to have a certain amount of regulation was imperative. This is where George W. Bush and Bill Clinton failed. Both deregulated almost every industry in our country. And what has happened, greed led us to our prodigious economic prostration since the Great Depression. Ironically, our supposed most capitalistic president we have ever had, George W. Bush, has brought us closer to socialism than any other president in our history. We now have 700 billion dollars of state owned enterprises. Why the economics lesson? We need to discern what the Republican Party represented during its most successful era and what it represents today during its most unsuccessful era.

The Republican Party used to stand for fiscal responsibility, smaller government, strong defense, patriotism and moral conservatism, not what it is today, giant government, budget deficits, Christian fanaticism, strong offense and turning on fellow Americans who have even the slightest difference of opinion and calling them traitors, unpatriotic or Anti-American. So who hijacked the Republican Party from its Reagan roots?

Joe Six Pack hijacked the Party, that's who. Less educated Evangelical Christians that have little understanding of the Party's core principles. The ones that listen to Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and believe that Barack Obama will abolish the First Amendment and the Second Amendment and will replace the Bible with the Koran and will only allow schools to teach the Muslim religion and on and on. The ones that failed to pay attention in American Government class in high school when the teacher taught that there are two additional bodies of government that serve to keep the Executive Branch in check. In the event that it wants to abolish the First and Second Amendments. The ones that believe that evolution is false and Earth is only 12,000 years old irregardless of proven scientific fact. What I am getting at is that these silly issues have taken precedence, abandoning the core principles that Ronald Reagan helped the Party re-adhere to, such as small government, fiscal responsibility, strong defense (not offense) and moral conservatism (not radical Evangelical Christianity). And a Party that had room for everyone from Joe Six Pack to the intellectual moderate right to the staunchest conservatism without labeling any segment of its own Party as unpatriotic. This also included tolerance for the left in terms of an America that was made up of the whole political spectrum not just one side because it was far more important to transcend beyond political parties to protect her truest quality, Democracy.

Reaganites please stand up and introduce yourselves so we can turn over the reigns to you and you can make us proud to be Republicans again and to continue on the path that President Ronald Wilson Reagan set out for us as a country and that gave us our greatest economic prosperity in our history. Jose Six Pack go back to drinking cheap beer and repenting during Sunday services.

Hard to Form the Words, "President Obama"

Yes, it hurts the lips to form those two words, "President Obama." But get used to it because it seems inevitable even without a few factors that have been hard to predict and I bet are very underestimated. The young voters (18 to 35 years of age) have been an unreliable factor in past elections even when strong efforts have been made to bring them to the voting booths. Most notably the campaign of Al Gore was confident it was going to have a significant edge with the young voters, but that edge failed to materialize and many experts argue that was his ultimate demise. Now, once again, the young voter is in center stage with the Obama campaign cautiously optimistic that this group will give him the landslide some in the national media have been touting.



The other factors to that could have a significant impact are Hispanic voters and disenfranchised moderate Republicans (the bulk that are now considered independents). Hispanic voters will of course affect the outcome of important western swing states such as Nevada, Colorado and even Arizona, Senator McCain's home state. Just prior to 9/11, during the 2000 election, the Republican party began to make significant inroads with the Hispanic electorate, appealing to these Hispanics with conservative social values and support for small business. Unfortunately, 9/11 changed the way middle America viewed immigrants in general and a new wave of tough immigration reformers were born that have alienated Hispanics ever since. This minority group is now flocking to Obama with the hopes for what they believe needs to be a more tolerant immigration policy.



The new independent which I will label as the neo-independent are ex-patriat Republicans or currently disenfranchised or simply confused Republicans that no longer fit with the new direction the neo-cons have taken the party; can become a major factor also in electing Obama with a landslide victory. These neo-indies make up surprisingly large segments of the electorate in the West and even in parts of the South and Midwest. Some statistics show them above 20% of registered voters and as much as 33%. It is important to clarify that these independents are not all former Republicans. Traditionally, independents made up anywhere between 10% to 20% depending on the region of the country we may be looking at. But to be safe it made up an average of about 12% of the electorate. The rise in independents are these neo-indies that primarily come from the Republican Party and social conservative Democrats. These neo-indies are the moderates from both parties that have been alienated by the extremes of both parties. The interesting question to answer is why if these neo-indies are made up of the moderates from both parties are they leaning towards a more extreme candidate, Barack Obama, than one that better fits the description of a moderate, John McCain?



It is pretty clear how lost the Republican Party's identity has become. How could it have alienated these many people and worse yet have driven them whether reluctantly or not into the arms of an extreme liberal. And it will be these factors that will determine whether Obama wins with a landslide or he squeaks a win on November 4th. And it is no one Else's fault than the ruling elite of the Republican Party. No, this really won't be McCain's fault altogether.



John McCain can certainly be blamed for picking a horrible choice in Sarah Palin as VP, he can be blamed for his at times erratic behavior and its not because he is old but because he is John McCain. He tends to be erratic at times. Stunts like suspending his campaign as though he was Mighty Mouse "Here I come to Save the Day." Or his increasingly angry and self demeaning negative campaign. Choosing to attack Obama on his silly ties to William Ayers, than to hammer him on his tax policies and belief in big government (something that has been causing the race to tighten in the last few days). Unfortunately to little to late. But these are things that happen during a Presidential campaign and the loser gets dissected and blamed for things like this.



This time however, his loss is the final nail on the coffin of the Republican Party as we know it today. It doesn't mean forever, just what it means now, the present, November 2008. Let's face it, the Republican Party is going to be blown to smithereens come November 4th if Barack Obama does in fact win (and I will bet my left testicle that he will win, I'm married so I don't use it anymore). Do I mean John McCain or the entire Republican Party? Get out your dark suits gentlemen, and ladies you need to dress in mourning, yes for the big funeral. We can bury McCain later, we are going to the funeral of the Republican Party. The Party that will now only have 40 seats in the Senate, only have 40% of the seats in the House of Representatives, will lose the majority of governorships. Lose the White House to the most liberal Senator in the US Senate. The Party that will shortly lose any conservative influence in the Supreme Court. The party that created the neo-indies that with their staggering numbers are going to help Obama get his landslide. The party that once had the young vote, when they voted in droves for my hero Ronald Wilson Reagan. And yes the party that because of the Hispanic vote got George W. Bush elected in 2000.

NEXT POST

In my next post I will analyze why the Republican Party has died and must now figure out how to resurrect itself and what it will take to do so.

Technical Difficulties

I apologize that this blog is having technical difficulties. More than half of my postings have disappeared. I hope to have them online very shortly. Please come back soon. A new posting will appear later this evening with final observations on the Presidential election and its expected outcome on Tuesday.

McCain's Voting Record: Voting with Bush 95% of the Time

The Democrats primary attack and slogan against John McCain's campaign is that he voted 95% of the time with Bush's policies and "McCain More of the Same." There is no doubt that this is a sound political strategy. President George W. Bush's popularity ratings at an all time low in the upper to mid 20's. That makes him about the least popular president in the last 30 years if not more. So it doesn't take a great political mind to figure out that tying McCain to Bush gives you a political platform to run against when you have made yourself out to be the candidate of "change."

Has it been a bad thing to have voted in favor of Bush's policies 95% of the time? If you ask your average liberal to name 3 of Bush's policies to use their percentage 95% of them will not be able to name but one, yes the Iraq war. When you press them to name two more is when they begin their psycho babble and attempt to deflect the question because they simply don't know. They are like cattle, once one of them chooses a course they all follow not knowing why but that one of their own decided to move westerly so there they all go. So let's address their one and only answer, the Iraq war.

Let us Republicans not make the same mistake and begin our own psycho babble trying to justify a completely stupid and badly managed policy. Let's admit it was one of the dumbest decisions he could have made. He was so interested in being the cowboy that Ronald Reagan (greatest president we Republicans have had in modern history) brilliantly pulled off. When he flew in on the fighter jet to declare "mission accomplished," I thought he had gone mad. That very moment I knew this would blow up in his face. And here we are today.

This decision and this decision alone has been the root of all the evils we are encountering. He went into this war with no preparation and no contingency plan in case it dragged on more than his inner circle of trusted adviser's believed. Forget the fact that he used bogus and unsubstantiated intelligence that Hussein had WMDs. He made the executive decision to attack and attack he did. Freshly recovering from 9/11 everyone gave him the go ahead, their bad judgement to bare as well. The true war was in Afghanistan and all resources should have been put there until the leader of the billion crazy Muslims was brought to justice, Osama Bin Laden. Yes you liberals can begin you attacks now about how I am a Muslim racist and that most Muslims are not extremist. I ask, how many came out and publicly denounce the attacks and insist that the wrath of God be brought down upon them for the attacks on 9/11 on our homeland? A hand full? Yes, at most a hand full and that was much later after the rise in anti-Muslim sentiment was on a rise in the US and many other parts of the world.

Getting back to the decision to go to war in Iraq and how it was an obvious mistake that is now the root cause of many of the countries problems. The economy has suffered because of the high cost of the war. One thing is to have a deficit that is manageable but when it reaches unprecedented levels as it is now, it will affect the economy. Oil prices have skyrocketed because of the instability in the area because of the war. Though the recent increases are really due to speculators, the war has given them the opportunity. Again, the war is undoubtedly at the root of the federal deficits. The broken immigration system has been brought to the forefront because of the war and Congress's inability to deal with it is tied to wars debate. And a laundry list of effects can be attributed to the war and its failed management of it.

Now that we are in the war and there is no easy solution to it. Bringing our troops home sounds easy and it certainly appeals to the anti-war movement that continues to grow, as the polls show, that isn't the best solution either. This will only energize the lunatic Islamists to continue their jihad. President Bush having decided to put the country into a silly war in Iraq and having realized that "mission accomplished" wasn't the end he needed to send holy hell into Iraq until the insurgents begged for mercy. You can not run a compassionate war! If the surge has been successful imagine what a total annihilation would have done. This war would have been long over. Instead we are in the midst of another Vietnam war.

Other than that, have Bush's other policies been bad? He has advocated a trickle down economic policy similar to the brilliant one that Ronald Reagan gave us. By the way, and I am going to say his over and over again, THE GREATEST ECONOMIC EXPANSION IS BECAUSE OF RONALD REAGAN, NOT BILL CLINTON. IN AN ECONOMIC POLICY LIKE REAGAN'S THERE IS A LAG PERIOD FOR ALL SECTOR OF THE ECONOMY TO FEEL THE BENEFITS. THIS OCCURRED DURING CLINTON'S EIGHT YEARS. IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH CLINTON, HE WAS LUCKY ENOUGH TO BE PRESIDENT WHILE REAGAN'S ECONOMICS BROUGHT THE GREATEST EXPANSION EVER.

Many might argue that we are feeling the effects of Bill Clinton's failed economic policies because those have lag periods as well. President Bush other than the Iraq war has had many good policies, many that have been stalled or rejected by the Democratically elected majority in Congress. So McCain's 95% voting record of supporting George W. Bush's policies show good judgement despite what Obama's campaign and the herd of liberal cattle want you to believe.

McCain's VP Pick Brilliant Strategy But Very Irresponsible

My first reaction was, "is he out of his mind?" But after listening to the Republicans that were interviewed not only on Fox but CNN and MSNBC I realized why he made the choice. This was not really his decision. This came from the most brilliant political strategist of our lifetime, Karl Rove. There is no one that the Democrats hate more than Karl Rove, not even Dick Cheney. So that should tell you what kind of threat Karl Rove is to the Democrats. He made this decision and convinced our candidate McCain to do this. Why? Because she is almost bulletproof and it takes their only shot they can take and turns the gun around and aims it at themselves. “She is too inexperienced!” And their first statement was exactly that and why did they have to retract it? Because every Republican spokesman said, “she’s no more inexperienced than Obama.” BRILLIANT POLITICAL STRATEGY. That is why Obama had to retract the statement that Bill Burton his main spokesman made. Every time they mention the inexperience which is all they can say about her, they hit the Obama camp right between the eyes. She does not have enough history to attack her any other way. There is one issue however that could sink them and that is that she is under ethics review for having pressured to fire her sister’s ex husband, read the article; http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26458400/.

However, there is one major BUT, and that is, this choice is terribly irresponsible. The truth is that as the Democrats say, it puts a virtual newcomer to politics within an earshot of the presidency. If something happened to McCain, who turned 72 yesterday and is a reasonable concerned based on that age and his continued struggle with Melanoma, would put someone that has been governor of a state that has less people than the city of Austin, Texas. This makes his decision a very irresponsible one that puts his candidacy first and the good of the people second. I understand that there is no prize for second place, but ideologically speaking running for president is the most important public servant job in the entire world. A man fit for the job is one that holds the utmost integrity and always without exception puts the good of the people first. Of course we know that is not always the case. We had the most corrupt individual a country could have with Bill Clinton for 8 long years. And we almost had an even more corrupt person with Hillary Clinton.

The bottom line is that I am disappointed with McCain that with 67 days to beat Obama fair and square with good judgement chose to make a desperate move as brilliant as it may be, this early in the race.

University of Arizona Gay & Lesbian Affairs Director

This past week the University of Arizona proudly announced how it is the first university to assign a gay & lesbian affairs director to its roster. So once again, a special interest group takes our hard earned money (our taxes) and uses it to force their own liberal bias down our throats. Not only is it a serous waste of our taxes but it immediately condones a lifestyle that is perverse in order to make it mainstream and give it legitimacy.

And yes it is perverse. Let's argue this point further. Let's take away religious views and morality out, and only looking at it stictly in nature's terms. Mother Nature in her infinite wisdom divided all of us complex multi-cell organisms into males and females. And she gave us reproductive abilities in order to flourish as species in order to fulfill the purpose of life. Life is her purpose and ours. She created reproductive organs in order for us to flourish and grow as species. These are very specific and the two divisions, male and female each have one set of reproductive organs and glands which must work together in order to in fact reproduce (flourish and grow).

Any deviation from these specific natural requirements to reproduce or to utilize our reproductive organs and glands that Mother Nature bestowed on us is not-natural. Now taking from the thesarus' synonyms for not-natural, we come up with: abnormal, aberrant, twisted, deviant and ah yes, perverted. Remember now we haven't brought in the religious or moral perspective into the debate. This is strictly a biological argument. But does the religious or moral perspective have a different set of reasons to also determine homosexuality as perverse? These two schools of thought also use the same biological standard to make the deduction that homosexuality is in fact a perversion. The religious and moral community just substitute God for Mother Nature when making the same argument.

Now that I've explained what makes homosexuality a perversion we can come back to the University of Arizona taking valuable tax dollars and wasting them on hiring a campaign manager to lobby the community and its donors in accepting this perversion as mainstream. And let's not kid ourselves that she isn't assigned to that position to be anything other than a campaign manager promoting the legitimacy of homosexuals in society. She is also there to make sure that conservative freedoms of speech are quashed. Anyone that is against homosexuality must be silenced and it will be her job to do it.

We have covered one side of the coin let's talk about the other side of the coin which is fair representation. Since the university hired a gay and lesbian affairs director and it has a Latino, Black, Women's, Muslim affairs directors, shouldn't they also appoint a White Christian Male Affairs Director? Oh and while they are at it, they should not leave out the Sado-masochist affairs director, and the beastiality affairs director and the pornography affairs director and the cats and dogs living together affairs director and the list can go on and on. But why should gays and lesbians get their own affairs director? They only represent 3% of the population while the white Christian males make up a far greater percentage of the population. Since white Christian males make up a far greater percentage of the population they are making a far greater contribution to tax dollars, much, much more than homosexuals. Why shouldn't their greater tax dollars go towards their own representation at universities than say the homosexual community?

This is once again a perfect example at just how bias the liberal minority is and how un-balanced our representation has become. This country continues to take steps backward instead of forward. It can no longer afford to bow down to minority activists that have no interest in the community as a whole but only to protect their own interests at the expense of a majority of people that do not condone their lifestyles or would find them to be a part of mainstream America. The right thing for the University of Arizona and any other universities to do is eliminate these special interests groups at the expense of hardworking Americans that would rather see their tax dollars used on programs that benefit the vast majority of Americans and not a twisted 3% of the population.

Blacks and Latinos in Jail versus College

This week a report came out based on census data that alarmed many minority interests groups. The report raised the statistic that there are more Blacks and Latinos in prison cells than there are in college dormitories. Headlines read "Latino and African American groups surprised by new statistics by census bureau." My question immediately was "why," why are these groups surprised?

These statistics are in line with other statistics as to education level, economic level and in the case of Latinos, assimilation into the general society. Of course, the immediate thing to do by these groups is to blame "The Man," in crude terms. It's someone Else's fault but their own. It's the minority groups socioeconomic level that leads them to a life of crime. How could it be their fault? Blacks have been free men since the late 1800's and Latinos are going on their 4th and 5th generations here in this country. In all of this time, they've managed to have made no great advancements as races. The only reason they have political and economic impact is because of sheer population numbers. Both minority groups are nearing 40 million people respectively without counting definitively the number of illegal immigrant Latinos in the country.

With these statistics should we be surprised that there is a growing backlash against illegal immigration? The answer should be no. We should not be surprised that this country is moving closer to a racial war. The Anglo Saxon majority is growing tired of being blamed for the failures of these two major ethnic groups. It is growing tired of continuously having to carry these two races along by giving them preferential treatment, by letting them off because of their socioeconomic stagnation and underdevelopment. And it is about time that the Anglo majority is demanding a stop to the avoidance of responsibility by these two ethnic groups.

Until blacks and Latinos start to take responsibility for their shortcomings, their failures and their ultimate realities such as this statistic, this will continue to spiral out of control and we will see more and more blacks and Latinos in jail. It is up to them to progress as a people through education, assimilation, ambition and a sense of social responsibility. Why should it be up to the Anglo majority to continue to provide the crutches by not forcing them to compete evenly with whites. No one buys the argument that it's the "man" that is holding them back. It's the "man" that puts a gun in their hands as they walk into a convenience store and rob it. It's the "man" that forces them to stand on a street corner and distribute meth for a living.

This government needs to immediately eliminate affirmative action,and to significantly reduce social assistance such as welfare and force these ethnic groups to work hard and seek higher educations in order to progress. In fact, there should be a shift towards the other extreme and begin to hold them more accountable because they have for many decades now gotten preferential treatment and have chosen to waste it. They want to change these statistics then they have to change them for themselves.

Recently, a local report in Tucson, Arizona showed that high school graduates from school districts that have minority majorities can not read beyond a 5th grade level and perform math beyond a 3rd grade level. Yet you continue to hear the screams from minority interests groups and civil rights activists that more midnight basketball programs need to be implemented and paid for by the tax payers in order to keep young blacks and Latinos off the streets and from committing crimes. Other groups like the Urban League and Chicanos Por La Causa attribute these realities to the fact that blacks and Latinos tend to live in impoverished communities where schools have less qualified teachers, less demanding curriculum's and lower expectations. But who's fault is it that they live in these conditions? Who is setting these lower expectations? The "Man?" After 5, 6 or 7 generations there can only be one people to blame, themselves.

This country was built by impoverished immigrants that came from England, Ireland and other European countries. Many of these initial immigrants had little to no education yet they had the ambition, the drive, the desire to succeed in the New World. They were able to defeat a much more powerful kingdom and were able to draw up the greatest constitution in the world's history that to this day gives anyone an opportunity to succeed if they work hard and abide by the right side of the law.

Blacks and Latinos have to stop expecting a free lunch just because they are minorities. Their future is in their control and within their reach. White Americans would welcome the rise of these two minority groups into a much higher socioeconomic stature if they strive to do it on their own merit. It is only to white Americans' self interests to welcome that. The more any group contributes to the economic growth of this country the more income there is for greater services, greater technology, and greater quality of life. Unfortunately, until these groups take responsibility for their actions and their unwillingness to make it on their own, white Americans will be forced to accept less of a quality of life because they have to foot the bill for the shortcomings and failures of these ethnic groups. It's not cheap to feed these many prisoners.