“We’ve tried it the Republican way, and it has failed”.

Ah, Proglodytes. They always manage to step up and make it easy. I now know why Al Franken wanted to expand government control of the web. Any doofus with a search engine can take the government’s argument apart in a matter of seconds. I mean, earlier this week a famous Constitutional Law professor actually forgot Marbury v. Madison! Ladies and Gentlemen, I am proud to be that doofus.  This week’s little gem came courtesy of the highest office in the land, inhabited by one of the lowest men to ever hold its title. I could not find the exact quote, since it was buried somewhere in the hackneyed rhetoric about taking health care away from weather balloons or some such stuff. (Stuff in this article, even if it is a hyperlink, is a euphemism for what Rick Santorum said the Mainstream Media is constantly guilty of. Yes liberals, congratulations, you found the coded language.)

But the passage, and message, that I want to focus on goes something like this, and stop me if you’ve heard it before: “We’ve tried it your way before, and it didn’t work.” I actually stopped myself in the middle of that phrase because The Baracken Record has said it many times. In fact, he is so good at loading the same speech on the teleprompter that RNC actually finally had the guts to call him on his “recycling”. But I digress. Here’s the President saying something very similar to what he said on Monday and Tuesday back in 2010:

And just to make sure we didn’t forget what he was trying to do, the Imperial Scribes at the L.A. Times actually wrote this on March 30th:

Framing the November election as a defining moment for the middle class, President Obama said voters would have a choice between his policies and Republicans’ “you’re-on-your-own economics” as he sought to energize his most devoted supporters after a deflating week.

In a pair of campaign speeches to supporters, Obama cast the Republican Party as controlled by its most conservative wing and described his own policies as driven by American values.

“You know, if you’re out of work, can’t find a job, tough luck; you’re on your own. If you don’t have healthcare, that’s your problem; you’re on your own. If you’re born into poverty, lift yourself up out of your own — with your own bootstraps, even if you don’t have boots; you’re on your own,” Obama said in remarks before a cheering crowd in Burlington, Vt. “Hey, they believe that’s how America has advanced. That’s the cramped, narrow conception they have of liberty.”
If I weren’t so offended, I’d be amused. So the theme he’s going to run on is the idea that America has tried it the conservative, liberty-driven, free market way, and it failed miserably? Let me decode this for you, as if you couldn’t for yourself, if you’ll permit me. Barack Obama’s re-election message is going to be that it was all George W. Bush’s fault, and Mitt Romney is just another George W. Bush. It’s bigger than that, of course. But to his base, and to the media, (but I repeat myself) the marching orders are out. Already, the comparisons are beginning to trickle down (tee hee), and this one comes from Zbigniew Brzezinksi, a man whom I am convinced was named by Klingons.
But there are two major problems with President Obama’s assertions, and they are not only major, they are 180 degrees out-of-phase with history. First, there were many things George W. Bush did that conservatives didn’t like, such as Medicare part D, No Child Left Behind, signing McCain-Feingold, a pseudo-amnesty proposal, going to war without a declaration, and running up massive debts and deficits. But worse than that is President Obama’s perpetuation of many of these very same policies. Don’t bash Bush when you are a Super Dubya, and far worse on character and love of country. The second is the fallacy outright lie that we have tried free markets and deregulation. This is so disgusting on so many levels, my brain actually struggles to contain it all. Please pardon the following run on sentence: It isn’t just the false idea that we are under regulated, it is also the truth that the increases in the governemnt deficit spending under this man’s administration are such that the real inflation rate is 8% and the printing of fiat currency is driving down consumer spending power so rapidly that pretty soon the entire middle class will be so safely concealed below the poverty line, the President won’t have to worry about who believes his stuff.
The Super Dubya explanation is pretty easy. Well, a more accurate description would be Bizarro Dubya. (Please note, I have plenty of respect for President Bush, I am using Dubya to mock the left, not to demean the man). All the powers of President Bush, but twisted and evil. Afghanistan? Don’t worry, after surging the troops, President Obama calmed down the post Koran-burning situation with his words. A recurring theme of this administration is, “it could have been worse”, but that’s a subject for another post. Iraq? Not done there yet, but let’s make sure not to invite George W. Bush to the victory celebration. Medicare? I see your Medicare, and I raise you Obamacare! Amnesty? He’ll do that through the DOJ, no problem. War without a declaration? Illegal, unless his campaign is looking for the Qadaffi bump. Deficits? Hello? Anybody? Bueller?
But next we have the coup de grace. The campaign message is going to be that we’ve tried it Bush’s way, and it failed. Remember, for their purposes, Republicans = Bush = Rush Limbaugh = Racists = Rich White People. This one is a whopper. First of all, let’s get something out of the way. The definition of a free market (from investorwords.com, an online investment glossary) is as follows:
1. Business  governed by the laws of supply  and demand, not restrained by government  interference, regulation or subsidy.
2. A foreign  exchange market that is not controlled by the government.
3. A security with  sufficient liquidity that its price is not  significantly affected by availability.
Let’s look at that first one. Can you think of a single industry that truly fits that bill? Even the internet benefited from subsidies! That’s why Al Gore took credit for it, and that’s why Franken wants control over it. They think its theirs, plain and simple. Oil companies get subsidies. Money flows into our health care markets at a geometric rate, not to pay doctors, but to pay administrators. And while we cannot put a specific date on man’s first idea to let government penetrate the market, and penetrate is a fantastic word, we can point out a very specific timeframe when this behavior became so codified and second nature: The New Deal.  So with that in mind, I would like to direct you to a list, located here. The list is from a website called FDR heritage, so you know it is unbiased. Did you notice anything about that list? Did you notice how closely the list parallels the achievements of this President, this administration, and the stimulus? Here are some of the more glaring examples: FDR created the FDIC and the SEC, President Obama says they are not enough and creates the CFPB and signs Dodd-Frank. FDR creates The Civil Works Administration (CWA), Public Works Administration (PWA), Works Progress Administration (WPA), Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), and National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA). How many times did we hear “shovel-ready”, “infrastructure jobs”, “job retraining”, and “investing in green energy”?  I mean, even FDR’s own website has to admit in the margins that some of these programs were failures! And the others? Well, FDR created a homeowners loan assistance program, which nobody has ever proposed again. He also created the NLRB, which has done great things for the people of South Carolina and America. He also created Social Security, and as was intended, died before he could collect any benefits. Oh, that’s not what it was meant to do? Then how the hell were they supposed to keep it solvent? Since sharper minds than mine have done great research on these exact failures, I now defer to my favorite economist of all time, not once, but thrice.
Pretty amazing, huh? Wait, it gets better.

Wow. Just. Wow.

Amazing. The period in which man enjoyed the most freedom was the latter part of the 19th, and earlier part of the 20th century. You know, the Old Deal. Mr. President, your argument is invalid. You said when you got elected that we had tried it the Republicans way for eight years, and it failed. Stuff.

The truth is, we’ve tried it your way for the past 80 years, and it has failed us all, collectively.

Joseph Kurt is an individual, and is damn certain of his societal responsibilities.


Rommunism! Dam-Mitt!

There are more Republican primaries today. I’m not exasperated, nor am I disappointed. I’m just surprised at how fast this is going by. Wisconsin, Maryland, and the District of Columbia will give their input as to who will be the nominee. Odds are we will ultimately wind up with Mitt Romney. As a Constitutional Conservative, I don’t like the way that sounds any more than I like being told I am not a “real” conservative by Ron Paul supporters. I don’t like it any more than I like being told I am not a “real” Christian by liberals because Jesus was clearly in favor of social justice. But here’s what I do like: Mitt Romney reciting the Oath of Office next year at his inauguration, when compared to Barack Obama’s second term.

Since I couldn’t find the reference, I will have to go on faith on this one, and I apologize for any inaccuracy. I do not mean to impugn Mitt Romney with this, but I cannot remember to whom this observation should be credited, but I believe it was George Will. Mitt Romney, he said, will have to be moved to the right by force. Not violence, but the force of the popular voice of the right. I concur, since I firmly believe Mitt Romney’s campaign is shaped by the victory of 2010 as much as it is the defeat of 2008. The Republican Establishment, who swears they don’t exist, was broadsided by the “Tea Party Revolution”  in 2010. They are paralyzed with fear that Rick Santorum might win the nomination, since he is a zealot. They fear Ron Paul, since he is a hard-line ideologue, and will cost them much of their “hard earned” power. And they fear Newt Gingrich, since he knows where their bones are buried, and they might not have leverage in the Oval Office with him behind the Resolute desk. So it’s to be Romney, and we Tea Party types will have to drag him to the right, as if we were a team of horses harnessed to pull a deeply-rooted stump out of the ground. So be it.

I can’t see this as an impossible challenge. I’m sorry, I know I should be a little more openly wary of Mitt Romney, and I have. (You can listen to my criticism here) Conservatives, however, are not just trying to pull a single candidate to the right, it is our life’s mission to pull an entire electorate to the right. Compared to that Sisyphean effort, pulling Romney to the right seems like no big deal. The current President, by the way, would have to move dramatically to the right to be classified as a liberal! The Romney pull team, thank God, would ideally not have to be focused on economics, right? A rich capitalist with a “couple of Cadillacs” in the driveway should be as capitalist as any of us, right? No, he’s not. I said I didn’t see pulling Mitt Romney to the right would not be impossible, but I am not so stupid as to believe it will be easy.

So I have my harness on, and I am ready to let the pulling begin. First up, it’s the flip-flops, and they are legion. I could never encompass them as well as an incredibly damning number of videos, compilations, and ads have, so check this out:

Damn it.

I mean, my God. Maybe this will be harder than I thought. But just when I want to give up hope that there is a rightward streak anywhere under Mitt Romney’s coif, along comes the liberal media. Yes, you read that right. Here is what TIME’s Joe Klein had to say about Mitt Romney flips and flops on social issues:

“He was probably far more conservative on social issues like abortion and gay marriage that he professed to be when he ran for U.S. Senator and then Governor in Massachusetts. Stories in both the New York Times and Washington Post this year have revealed that Romney took his role as a Mormon Bishop and President (the ultimate Mormon authority in the Boston area) very seriously–and that he tried to enforce the laws of his church on abortion, homosexuality and premarital sex firmly, although humanely. His flip back toward social conservatism when he decided to run for President was probably a move toward his natural predilections.”

Whew. That was close. Oh, there’s more? The next paragraph of the same article?”

“And he is probably more moderate on policy issues than he’s been pretending to be as a Republican presidential candidate in the past two campaigns. He is a product of the empowerment Republicanism of the 1990s, as is Gingrich–an attempt to achieve progressive ends through conservative means. Hence, his support for an individual mandate universal health care system, which would use a private market to lower the cost of health insurance–an idea that was developed by the conservative Heritage Foundation. Hence, his support for a cap-and-trade program to limit carbon emissions–an idea that George H.W. Bush included in the Clean Air Act of 1990, to (successfully) control Acid Rain. The radical turn of the Republican party has forced Romney to move right on those and a myriad of other issues.”

Damn it.

So here’s the hope: We are seeing, now, the real Mitt. Here’s the fear: In a few months, the polls will shake the etch-a-sketch. Somewhere, deep inside Mitt Romney, is a family man of character. We just don’t know if we are seeing that man, or the suit that man puts on. There’s something I do like about Mitt Romney, though, something I see in him that gives me a little more than just casual hope. It’s around the eyes when he is doing his Ken Doll act while trying not to get angry at the debates or the other candidates. It stems from an instinct that drives a man to success in  a (comparatively) free-market economy, a corporate CEO, or a talented athlete. Somewhere in that perfect exterior, there is a Mitt Romney who hates to lose. Call it a fear of not surpassing his father, call it a lust for power, or call it whatever you will. For every ounce of arrogance that Barack Obama has for thinking that he can’t lose, or conceit he has that he shouldn’t lose, Mitt Romney has a pound of resolve that he has to win. He feels this way because he knows he will never get this close to the office again. This is probably Romney’ s last ride. It angers me that he seems to move with the shifting winds of the polls, of course. And on some innate level, and maybe it’s the level where most politicians disappoint me in some fashion by not living up to their billing, I can see why Romney has done so much, well, let’s just call it “triangulating”. I get it, but I don’t like it, either.

I also keep forgetting the Proglodytes (Progressive + Troglodytes = Proglodytes) “know” they are going to run against this guy. So how do we do a Lazarus on Mitt Romney’s conservative streak? Many would argue that we already have, compared to his term as governer and his campaign for Senate in 1994 against Ted Kennedy. It’s possible, but if that is the case, I do not believe the reversion is permanent. What the hell do we do now? The answer is a little more complex than I want, and maybe a little too late. I want to say that we should vote for Rick or Newt, as we did here in South Carolina, and if that is what you believe, you should. But I think many in our party have fallen for the spell that Mitt Romney looks and sounds like the President out of central casting, and if an electorate is so uninformed as to annoint a novice with the highest political office in the world, then they believe we have to aim beyond “simple party politics”. The recipe is easy enough, give the electorate someone not too far off of their ideological spectrum, and make sure he looks good in a suit. Mitt looks like he was cooked up in a lab somewhere in the Hamptons, so he fits a lot of bills. So what do we do if he wins?

The same thing we do if he loses. We pretend the Romney administration is as bad as the Obama administration, and we unite the way we did during the last four years. Make them prove to us they are different, and don’t let off the gas. The Tea Party rallies continue. The 9/12 groups continue to meet and get results. We continue to publish social media and blogs (You’re welcome). We keep doing excellent radio shows (You’re welcome). Make no bones about it, President Romney needs the Tea Party more than he knows. This fire cannot be quenched by a moderate administration, or we will have taught the GOP the lesson we taught them with George H.W. Bush, and Gerald Ford, and they will place a permanent embargo on the names and ideals of Reagan and Goldwater from future elections in perpetuum. We are in a race to change the future of the country, and to my fellow conservatives, I implore you, do not let the status quo reign over us because we changed the letter in parentheses after the President’s name. If we do that, we might just save Mitt Romney as a President, and the United States as a nation. The stakes are that high, at least.

Damn it.

Joseph Kurt is the Unceremonious Master of Ceremonies, and the host of The Joseph Kurt Show Saturdays at 6pm on NewsRadio 94.3WSC FM, in the Holy City of Charleston, S.C. (Show archives here) He is also the host of the Charleston Tea Party Podcast. He will never, ever give in, not one inch, for this is a matter of honor. Twitter: @JosephKurt1