I never once heard my parents and their party friends refer to themselves as Communists. They were progressives – and registered Democrats.. . .
The good news is that the bad five years we have just been through have aroused a sleeping giant among Americans who didn’t see it coming and couldn’t imagine that it would. For the first time since the Cold War, people with a public voice are calling socialists by their right name; conservatives are finally organizing at the grassroots to defend their freedom; and at last we have leaders who are willing to stand up to the thuggery of the left and who have the spine not to back down.
As a sometime Jonah freed from the whale let me offer some intelligence about the political forces arrayed against us. Do not make the mistake of thinking that progressives and conservatives are people who merely differ about practical agendas. There are four defining features of the left, which distinguish it as a movement of individuals who approach politics quite differently from pragmatically-minded conservatives.The first of these features is their alienation from country. . .
The second feature of the progressive left that is key to understanding it is its instinctive, practiced, and indispensable dishonesty. . . . The strategy of the lie is progressives’ new gospel. It is what the progressive bible — Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals — is all about. Alinsky is the acknowledged political mentor to Obama and Hillary, to the service and teacher unions, and to the progressive rank and file. Alinsky understood the mistake Sixties’ radicals had made. His message to this generation is easily summed up: Don’t telegraph your goals; infiltrate their institutions and subvert them; moral principles are disposable fictions; the end justifies the means; and never forget that your political goal is always power.
An SDS radical wrote in the Sixties: “The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution.” The Alinsky version is this: The issue is never the issue; the issue is always power: How to wring power out of the democratic process, how turn the process into an instrument of progressive control. How to use it to fundamentally transform the United States of America — which is exactly what Barack Obama warned he would do on the eve of his election... . .
A third feature of progressives that defines their politics is that they regard the past, which is real, with contempt, and are focused exclusively on a future, which is imaginary. . . .Progressives focus on an impossible future, a utopia of promises, and this justifies for them their unscrupulous means. Issues for them are merely instruments for accumulating political power.
Conservatives look to the past as a guide to what is possible and humanly practical, and what is not. Issues for them are problems that need to be fixed, and they take seriously the policies they devise to address them. This puts conservatives at a huge political disadvantage. It causes them to argue policy as though they were debating a party with whom they shared goals and only differed on the means to get there. But that is far from the case. . . .
progressives see themselves as the redeemers, which is why they are so dangerous. Because they regard those who oppose them as the eternally damned. Progressives are on a mission to create the kingdom of heaven on earth by redistributing income and using the state to enforce politically correct attitudes and practices in everyone’s life. They want to control what you do, and who you are, and even what you eat. For your own good, of course.
The fact that they see themselves as saving the world – or “saving the planet” as they would prefer — results in a fourth key characteristic of their politics, which is that they regard politics as a religious war. This explains why they are so rude and nasty when you disagree with them or resist their panaceas (and of course if they had the power, the punishments would be more severe); that is why the politics of personal destruction is their favorite variety, why they are verbal assassins and go directly for the jugular, and why they think nothing of destroying the reputations of their opponents and burying them permanently. And that is why they can perform their character assassinations without regrets . . .
Many people signing up for health care in Florida through the Affordable Care Act have been shocked when they have to give proof of their credit score before they finish the process.
Anne Packham, one of many people licensed by the state to help people navigate the government's website, said on Tuesday that the credit check occurs so providers can make an educated decision about who to insure.
"If someone is defaulting on all of their bills they may not want to have them as part of their health plan," said Packham, the lead Navigator in Florida.
Participants with low credit scores could end up paying higher premiums, according to Packham, who said that ultimately the insurance company makes the call.
Many of you are aware of the
hearings that will be starting next week regarding the repeal of Common Core
State Standards (CCSS).
I had a conference call with some
of the leaders around the state earlier in the week, and would like to share the
Repeal Common Core Postcard Campaign idea we are excited
about.
Needless to say, this postcard
campaign is to supplement, not replace any phone calls, emails, tweets and
Facebook posts that we're already doing.
|
|
The Game Plan
Nothing hits home like a hand written
letter. The problem is, letters take forever to get through the system, but NOT
postcards.
We would like to have our members send a
postcard to the Chairman and the Vice-Chair of the Education
Committee, which is where the first hearing will be held on Wednesday,
the 9th.
Step 1. At your next meeting (or call a special meeting)
make sure every person attending has at least two blank postcards. These
postcards are very inexpensive, include postage, and can be purchased at the
post office. (If you have no meeting(s) to go to, prepare your postcards at your convenience, at home, and mail them one at a time.)
Step 2.
The first paragraph could be written as:
Dear Chairman Stebelton (or
Vice-Chairman Brenner),
I am a taxpaying citizen of Ohio who is writing to express my support of HB237, and the complete repeal of Common Core Standards and any related testing and data gathering.
Heidi Huber, from Ohioans Against Common Core, also sent
me the following documents that could be used to create additional talking
points for these or future postcards:
RNC Resolution and Letter from the US House of Representatives to Arne
Duncan, Secretary of the Dept. of Education.
Step 3: Collect all the cards at the end of the meeting
and mail at one time. This will create a greater impact upon receipt.
Step 4: As the legislation passes through the
committee, House and Senate, we will adjust our focus
accordingly.
|
|
Where Do We Send the Postcards?
Rep. Gerald Stebelton, Chair (R)
Phone (614) 466-8100
Rep. Andrew Brenner, Vice Chair (R)
Phone (614)
644-6711
The
Chairman and Vice Chair have the same mailing address:
77 S. High St
13th Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
Click Here for a Complete List of the Education
Committee members. If your Rep. is on the committee, you may want to also send
a postcard to him or her.
# # #
|
WASHINGTON, October 2, 2013 — Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives may have painted themselves into a corner. They evidently will settle for symbolism to end the ongoing government slowdown. That would leave virtually all of Obamacare intact and more difficult than ever to defund or repeal.
The most-recent House vote lowered the GOP’s demand significantly. The original vote (Plan A) coupled funding for the rest of government with a defunding of Obamacare. The second vote late Sunday night (Plan B) offered to fund all of government in exchange for two things: a) a one-year delay in the individual mandate, plus b) enforcement of the requirement that Congress get its own insurance through Obamacare.
By lowering their goals voluntarily, the GOP has reduced the chance that they will accomplish anything substantive rather than symbolic regarding Obamacare.
Rather than accepting Plan B, the White House is standing back while the media trashes and blames Republicans for what is called a shutdown. (Huge parts of “essential” government remain on-the-job, so” slowdown” is a term that fits much better.) When Obama figures he’s gathered enough election year ammunition, he could pivot. Posturing as magnanimous, Obama would need only minor negotiations to close a deal along the lines of Plan B.
The House essentially has backed down to a mostly-symbolic demand. Under Plan B Obamacare continues to get all its money. Obamacare’s exchanges would still provide coverage, but purchases would be voluntary the first year rather than mandatory. The lighter load of customers would give breathing room for the system that was overwhelmed by the torrent of inquiries on its first day.
Some political gurus will claim that delaying the individual mandate makes it easier to go after the rest of Obamacare. To the contrary, it makes it harder to attack the rest of the law. Plus there already are reports that a dozen or so House Republicans are ready to back down now and support a “clean” funding bill that leaves Obamacare totally alone.
The House’s Plan B permits the vast majority of Obamacare to march ahead unimpeded. After one year the individual and employer mandates would both be back and would be as deadly as ever to companies, workers and our economy. Under Plan B, the problems with the mandates would disappear from public attention—driven undercover for a year rather than being publicized as they are now.
Any time that one segment of major legislation is revised, it protects the surviving portions by reducing the demand for change. Carving out the individual mandate and letting it stay in place (even though delayed a year) lessens the pressure to deal with the rest of Obamacare.
Insurance companies would object to a one-year delay because they want the guaranteed source of new Obamacare customers. Obama’s bureaucrats might create an offset or they might tell insurers to buzz off, just as they’ve so far stiffed some labor union allies.
Thanks to the one-year moratorium, Obamacare would essentially be vaccinated and protected from further attack. That means, for example, that these other provisions would no longer have significant opposion:
- Historical forms of private insurance would be outlawed.
- The provisions of Obamacare would become locked-in for all insurance policies and would continue to be a major cause of skyrocketing premiums (due to guaranteed issue, no pre-existing conditions, etc.).
- The tax would remain on medical devices.
- Employers would still be intimidated by the delayed-but-still-coming mandate on them. They would continue the trend of shifting full-time workers into part-time jobs and holding part-timers below 30 hours a week.
It would become harder than ever to repeal or defund Obamacare if the President and Senate Democrats accepted the House’s Plan B. The President would proclaim he’d compromised enough. The wind would go out of the sails for many champions of the repeal-or-defund effort.
How about the Plan B provision that Congress must get its coverage through Obamacare? Expect to see backdoor maneuvers such as raising staff salaries to compensate for higher costs. For Representatives and Senators, there’s also another avenue. They would increase their use of the boutique health care they receive through the Office of the Attending Physician in the Capitol Building, plus special care through Bethesda Naval Hospital (now combined with Walter Reed).
The Senate might insist that the House go it alone in living under Obamacare. That’s because only one-third of the Senators must face the voters in 2014 (or any election year). Thanks to six-year terms, they enjoy insulation from the public’s wishes.
Once Obama’s team feel the press has pounded Republicans enough, they could posture as heroes rescuing the nation from heartless Republicans. They would use that theme constantly in the 2014 campaigns. By claiming already to have compromised on Obamacare, the White House could insist the law is now off the table, including a refusal to address it during negotiations over an increase in the debt ceiling.
By dropping back to a weaker position, without any concesssions from Obama, House Republicans have undercut their own position. Maybe Obama’s stubborn narcissism will prevent him from taking the deal. Or maybe he’s just waiting for the right moment.
In any event, the Plan B put forth from the House GOP won’t help defund or repeal Obamacare. In all likelihood, they’ve made those goals even more difficult to reach.
