GOP Voting Pledge

As the Democrats continue to push a unified statist message in opposition to the GOP, they are also increasingly successful in painting the GOP as a house divided...and they're right. My Twitter timeline is full of "RINOs" and "Tea Party crazies" - all of whom want to defeat the Democrats - but who cannot agree on policies and strategy.

It's simple; if the GOP is continuously divided, the Democrats win. That doesn't mean that either the RINOs or the Tea Party must give up and give in so the other side can take over. The two groups can still fight to be heard, but we have to agree to be unified in our fight against progressivism. In an attempt to work around the difficulties presented by a divided party, I present this voting pledge, which is intended for anyone who considers him/herself to be a Republican - or at least sympathetic to the GOP.

GOP Voting Pledge

I, _______________________________, officially pledge to my fellow Americans that I will observe and keep the terms of the agreement below.

RECITALS

WHEREAS, progressivism is destroying the United States of America,

WHEREAS, the Republican Party - even with its faults - is the most powerful vehicle currently in existence for fighting against progressivism,

WHEREAS the Republican Party has hitherto been divided by well-intentioned ideological groups (who refer to each other as "RINOs" and "Tea Partiers" or some variation), which has resulted in Republican candidates losing to beatable Democrat candidates,

WHEREAS, even a "RINO" is better than a "Liberal progressive",

WHEREAS, the Republican Party will continue to suffer defeats unless its candidates and voters UNITE,

TERMS

NOW THEREFORE in consideration of stemming the tide of destructive progressivism, I pledge  to exercise my voting rights as follows:

I will vigorously and respectfully support the primary candidate(s) with whom I agree and will encourage others to do the same;

I will vote in ALL Republican primaries in which I am legally able to vote and will accept the results of such primaries;

I will put my full support behind whichever Republican primary candidates are chosen, even if my candidates lose and even if I continue to have issues or concerns with the nominee(s); 

I will cast my vote for Republican nominees in ALL races - local, state, and national - in which I can legally vote, as long as I objectively believe that the Republican nominees are at least as desirable as the Democrat nominees;

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have executed this Pledge by signing my name in the comments section. 

_________________________________

ALTERNATIVE AGREEMENT

If I do not agree to the terms stated above and if I choose not to exercise my voting rights because I am not satisfied with a particular Republican candidate, I agree to waive my rights to criticize, attack and/or complain about the newly elected or re-elected Democrat politicians in races in which I could have voted. 

_________________________________


BONUS VIDEO:

"Anyone that is willing to stand next to me to fight the progressive left, I will be in that bunker. And if you're not in that bunker because you're not satisfied with this candidate; more than shame on you...you're on the other side." - Andrew Breitbart, CPAC 2012

Obama's Strategy For Next Debate

Obama: "Give it to him, Big Bird!"

Answer the Question (Part 2)

Here is my follow-up to the first part of this post, in which I examined Barack Obama's non-answer to a question in the 2nd Presidential debate.  Here I look at John McCain's non-answer.

QUESTION:

Since World War II, we have never been asked to sacrifice anything to help our country, except the blood of our heroic men and women. As president, what sacrifices -- sacrifices will you ask every American to make to help restore the American dream and to get out of the economic morass that we're now in?

McCAIN's "ANSWER”:

“Well, Fiorra, I'm going to ask the American people to understand that there are some programs that we may have to eliminate.”

So, he is going to ask us to understand stuff.  Is that one of the sacrifices?  I don’t know, John; that is a lot you’re asking of me.  I simply don’t want to understand stuff.  I have a Constitutional right to not understand or to not even attempt to understand.  That’s a tough one.

“I first proposed a long time ago that we would have to examine every agency and every bureaucracy of government. And we're going to have to eliminate those that aren't working.”

Sacrifice #2 is that we the American people will have to do without government agencies and bureaucracies that aren’t working.  Hmm.  That also won’t be easy.  We have all grown accustomed to our useless agencies and bureaucracies.  Is it really a “sacrifice” to give up something that isn’t working?  Many people don’t even know we have certain agencies.  Is it a “sacrifice” to give up something we don’t know we have especially when it isn’t doing anything to help us? 

“I know a lot of them that aren't working. One of them is in defense spending, because I've taken on some of the defense contractors. I saved the taxpayers $6.8 billion in a deal for an Air Force tanker that was done in a corrupt fashion.”

So, we are going to have to sacrifice $6.8 billion on deals that you already saved us because you took them on?  Is it really a sacrifice for the American people to give up deals that are done in a corrupt fashion?  It is hard to see the sacrifice here.  Are you just blowing your trumpet here?  Is this just a chance for you to brag about something you did because it doesn’t really seem to fit with the question. 

“I believe that we have to eliminate the earmarks. And sometimes those projects, not -- not the overhead projector that Sen. Obama asked for, but some of them that are really good projects, will have -- will have to be eliminated, as well.”

Okay, at least you have mentioned something specifically.  Great job.  But, again, I don’t know that anyone in the American public sees earmarks as a positive thing.  I’m quite certain that most citizens are against them.  Therefore, they will gladly give them up without any argument.  So, they will be voluntarily and happily doing away with them; not sacrificing.

“And they'll have to undergo the same scrutiny that all projects should in competition with others.

So we're going to have to tell the American people that spending is going to have to be cut in America. And I recommend a spending freeze that -- except for defense, Veterans Affairs, and some other vital programs, we'll just have to have across-the-board freeze.”

This is better.  Much better.  Cutting spending on certain programs may force some Americans to make sacrifices.  However, many Americans want to see lower spending by the government and if not lower spending, then smarter spending.  So, at least something good will come of it.  In addition, non-vital programs are just that – not vital.  One would ask if a program is not vital, should it be a program at all?  Therefore, freezing spending on that program will be viewed as a triumph.

“And some of those programs may not grow as much as we would like for them to, but we can establish priorities with full transparency, with full knowledge of the American people, and full consultation, not done behind closed doors and shoving earmarks in the middle of the night into programs that we don't even -- sometimes we don't even know about until months later.”

Again, we will be sacrificing things (earmarks) that we don’t want in the first place.  No big deal. 

“And, by the way, I want to go back a second.

Look, we can attack health care and energy at the same time. We're not -- we're not -- we're not rifle shots here. We are Americans. We can, with the participation of all Americans, work together and solve these problems together.

Frankly, I'm not going to tell that person without health insurance that, "I'm sorry, you'll have to wait." I'm going to tell you Americans we'll get to work right away and we'll get to work together, and we can get them all done, because that's what America has been doing.”

Thanks for including another answer to the previous question which you didn’t answer that time and you’re still not answering now.  It is extremely helpful.  How do you propose we all work together on this?  Should we get a huge conference room and talk it out?  The truth is, Americans aren’t going to work together on this.  The politicians are going to work together, or at least democrats and democrats and republicans and republicans will work together.  Also, are you implying that Canadians are rifle shots?  Or that other countries couldn’t do this at the same time?  Are we somehow better than others? 

The truth is, politicians just say words they think people want to hear.  I think they are grossly out of touch, because the people I talk to are sick of these types of "answers" and want more substance.  The real problem is that when we allow them to side-step important questions or just ignore questions, we cannot hold them accountable for the things they say.  How can we hold Obama and McCain accountable for these answers?  We don't even know what they have actually said.  I don't know what they've promised, so I guess I will never know if they have come through on the promises.  I would guess that one of these guys is going to be saying the same things in 4 years and we won't have a clue whether he did anything in the previous 4 years.  

Imagine if you were proposing a a new program to your boss and he or she asked, "What sacrifices will the company have to make in order to incorporate this program?"  What would happen if you said something like, "Well, boss, I'm glad you asked that and I thank you for listening to my presentation.  Over the last few years I have worked hard for this company and I have cut spending in my group.  And we are going to have to start thinking about our budget and some other things.  We will work together and together we will make this program go forward and all employees of this company will see the benefits.  We can do it but we have to start thinking."

Pack your bags and clean out your desk, because you just got canned or demoted!  And yet, the leaders of the greatest country in the world can get away with this when they are dealing with our safety, health care, taxes, etc.  There is something wrong with that.  Since this is a democracy and the politicians should have to answer to us, I say we fire or demote them.  I would appoint Obama to be the National Motivational Speaker and John McCain wouldn't hold office but we would all be his friends.

Answer the Question!!! (Part 1)

If you watched the Presidential debates, then you were probably as frustrated as I was when listening to our two Presidential candidates "answer" questions. It is almost as if they are allergic to answers. Just to give you an example, here was one of my favorite exchanges. The "answers" are long, so I will start with Obama's "answer" and then will post McCain's "answer". Also, I could not resist commenting on various paragraphs, so I put the "answers" in italics and my comments in plain font.

QUESTION:

Since World War II, we have never been asked to sacrifice anything to help our country, except the blood of our heroic men and women. As president, what sacrifices -- sacrifices will you ask every American to make to help restore the American dream and to get out of the economic morass that we're now in?

OBAMA's "ANSWER":

“You know, a lot of you remember the tragedy of 9/11 and where you were on that day and, you know, how all of the country was ready to come together and make enormous changes to make us not only safer, but to make us a better country and a more unified country.”

You know when an "answer" starts like this, you are in for a very long, answer-free tangent.

“And President Bush did some smart things at the outset, but one of the opportunities that was missed was, when he spoke to the American people, he said, "Go out and shop."

“That wasn't the kind of call to service that I think the American people were looking for.”

Alright, straw man arguments. I love these. Is that what he said? Is that all he said? I'm pretty sure that was one of his suggestions about how to get the economy moving again. And actually, Bush said a lot of things around that time and had the highest approval rating (85%+) of any President ever. So, the straw man doesn't work here. But, I digress, because the question was about sacrifices and we haven't heard anything about that yet.

“And so it's important to understand that the -- I think the American people are hungry for the kind of leadership that is going to tackle these problems not just in government, but outside of government.”

Is that a sacrifice? Are we going to have to sacrifice our hunger for leadership for actual leadership that will give us the results that we crave? Wow. I don’t know about that. You ask hard things of us.

“And let's take the example of energy, which we already spoke about. There is going to be the need for each and every one of us to start thinking about how we use energy.”

Whoa, whoa, whoa…Do not bring up the “T” word. That is a huge sacrifice and I just don’t think Americans are ready to do it. What good ever came of "thinking"? But, as long as we only have to think about how we use energy, I might be okay with that. As long as I don’t have to do anything about it, I guess I could think about it a little bit. I'm fine with thinking about sacrifices as long as I don't have to make any.

“I believe in the need for increased oil production. We're going to have to explore new ways to get more oil, and that includes offshore drilling. It includes telling the oil companies, that currently have 68 million acres that they're not using, that either you use them or you lose them.”

Sacrifices?

“We're going to have to develop clean coal technology and safe ways to store nuclear energy.”

Please tell me there will be a sacrifice somewhere in here.

“But each and every one of us can start thinking about how can we save energy in our homes, in our buildings. And one of the things I want to do is make sure that we're providing incentives so that you can buy a fuel efficient car that's made right here in the United States of America, not in Japan or South Korea, making sure that you are able to weatherize your home or make your business more fuel efficient.”

I'm glad he backed off of the "thinking" sacrifice so that now we only have to "start thinking". That means we get a little bit of pre-thinking time where we can warm our brains up a little bit before we do some actual thinking. At the same time, he mentioned Incentives, fuel efficiencies, and saving energy…these are the kinds of "sacrifices" I can live with.

“And that's going to require effort from each and every one of us.”

Effort? What effort? Is the effort in thinking about how we save energy in our homes? To be honest, that really doesn’t require much effort. I think it will come pretty easily. Now, it may require effort for energy companies to invent new ways of saving energy, but the question asked what Americans will have to do. I think that implied the general population.

And the last point I just want to make. I think the young people of America are especially interested in how they can serve, and that's one of the reasons why I'm interested in doubling the Peace Corps, making sure that we are creating a volunteer corps all across this country that can be involved in their community, involved in military service, so that military families and our troops are not the only ones bearing the burden of renewing America.

I think this is actually the first point you are making. And, in all honesty, it's not really a point. I’m not bashing the idea, but how does this have anything to do with the actual question? Doubling the Peace Corps – thus creating jobs – to help Americans is not a sacrifice to Americans. It could very well be a blessing.

“That's something that all of us have to be involved with and that requires some leadership from Washington."

Don’t try to tell me that we are all going to be down in the trenches doing this together. Politicians are going to be doing this and if their ability to answer questions has anything to do with their ability to work we are all in big trouble.

Did you hear a real sacrifice in there? Did you hear something like "Well, Americans are going to have to be realistic when applying for a home loan. And if they don't qualify for a loan, they are going to have to sacrifice home ownership until they can afford it." Or perhaps, "The rich are going to have to sacrifice some of their hard-earned money to help the poor."


There is nothing like that. Is this for real? This is really a guy who might be running our Country and he can't even answer a simple question? It just baffles me. For those who might think I am picking on Obama, wait until I post my rant against McCain's "answer".