Two utterly opposite candidates

Mirroring this extraordinary political year the conventions of both parties were unusual, unpredictable and given to striking twists and surprises. Aside from the continuing guerrilla warfare between the Clinton and Obama camps - a media delight - the truly remarkable aspect of the Democratic convention was the stunning spectacle of the nominee’s acceptance speech. Probably not since the Roman Coliseum mounted extravagant triumphs for the return of victorious emperors has the world seen such spectacular pageantry revolving around one man.

Without question the Obama nomination is a historic milestone which certainly justifies a reasonable degree of grandeur. Oddly however despite Obama’s well-deserved reputation for spellbinding oratory, informed opinion concluded that the show was better than the speech.

Throughout the campaign John McCain has struggled to avoid being eclipsed by his opponent’s money, media dominance, and sheer star power. Occasionally his efforts have been rather weak - visiting a German restaurant in Ohio to counter Obama’s entertainment of 200,000 Berliners - but most of his quick-release counterpunching ads have been effective, and they have clearly drawn blood -- notably the brilliant enlisting of Paris Hilton and Charlton Heston to tag Obama as a celebrity lightweight.

McCain, however, surpassed himself with his vice-presidential announcement. The “leak-free” timing - barely a dozen hours after Obama’s acceptance speech - was masterful, and the selection -“surprise” would be a gross understatement - of Sarah Palin turned the whole news cycle upside down and caused a jaded and chronically self-congratulating national media to scramble and rework countless assumptions about the state of the campaign.

Beyond stepping all over any “bounce” from the Obama speech, the Palin selection, when contrasted with the weak and defensive choice of Washington “lifer” Joe Biden, recasts the whole question of who is the real “candidate of change”.

The Republican convention - truncated by the sudden eruption of the hurricane season - sharply contrasted with the doings in Denver. While the Democrats put on a sound and light spectacle - unburdened by any substance - the GOP event was by comparison muted, and even drab, but redeemed by its Spartan brevity and the arresting acceptance speeches of its candidates.

So, in the wake of the two conventions, what can be said about this contest for the world’s most important job?

The dominant reality is the closeness of the polls. Historically Democrats have exited their convention with leads ranging from 16 (Kerry) to 25 (Dukakis) points and then drifted downward. Today the race is virtually dead even. Despite economic distress at home and an unpopular war abroad that had Democrats plausibly dreaming of a 1964-type sweep Obama’s numbers have consistently underperformed what voter identification and generic matchup numbers suggest they should be doing.

There are two reasons for this. The lesser is that in McCain - despite the heartburn he has given conservatives over the years - Republicans ended up with the one and only candidate who could effectively compete in that ocean of independent and weakly partisan voters who decide every Presidential election.

The greater reason however is the continuing mystery that is Barack Obama. Despite unprecedented albeit not-too-probing media focus, Obama remains essentially an unknown commodity. Moreover a significant slice of the electorate harbors abiding suspicion that he is very different from what he claims to be.

Evidence revealing Obama’s true identity is not hard to find. A close reading of his 1995 autobiography - written before he entered politics and therefore surprisingly candid - his associations as a community organizer (ACORN and the Gamaliel Foundation), his record as a state legislator, notably his acquiescence and participation in the notoriously corrupt practices of the Daley machine in Chicago, and various unguarded public and private utterances (e.g. “clinging to guns and God”) unmask not just the Senate’s most liberal member, but rather an extreme radical deeply alienated from and contemptuous of the mainstream culture and value system of the country he seeks to lead.

Only the relentless determination of the national media to hear, see, and speak no evil regarding the “Chosen One” have sustained this stealth candidacy and prevented the American people from discovering the unpalatable truth about Obama. To date only Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers have tumbled out of Obama’s dark closet -- and not even the full story about them.

The truth is that never in our entire history have we had two presidential candidates so utterly opposite in their character, experience, vision, and values. The election will turn on whether this reality is revealed or remains concealed.

William Moloney’s columns have appeared in the Wall St. Journal, USA Today, Washington Post, Washington Times, Philadelphia Enquirer, Baltimore Sun, Denver Post, and Rocky Mountain News.

Photos from RNC St. Paul

Wow! Here are some of the pictures I took during the RNC, where I was one of Colorado's alternate delegates. [photopress:RNC_all_103.jpg,thumb,pp_image] Convention hall at the XCel Center in St. Paul

[photopress:RNC_all_117.jpg,thumb,pp_image] Kathleen LeCrone on the floor of the RNC. Notice the "red phone" of power!

[photopress:RNC_all_133.jpg,thumb,pp_image] Sarah Palin from a ar! She was dynamic! Words cannot express how she wowed us!

[photopress:RNC_all_073.jpg,thumb,pp_image] Cindy McCain and family.

[photopress:RNC_all_052.jpg,thumb,pp_image] Kathleen LeCrone - speaking into the Colorado microphone.

Left disdains democracy

Regarding this week's violence outside the Republican convention perpetrated by left-wing groups: there is no constitutional provision for rioting and violence! These groups should be grateful I am not in charge! This week we also have the left wing bloggers and Democratic operatives releasing Sarah Palin’s Social Security number, making known their goal to destroy this woman as the Vice Presidential candidate, in a matter of days if they can!

The public should understand in both instances how clearly this demonstrates the left’s disregard for the democratic process. The extreme left wing, funded by George Soros et al, considers the democratic process like a street car. Once you get to where you want to go, (getting your hands on the levers of power) you get off. You change the rules and stay there forever! After all, once “the people" are in power, such formalities are unnecessary. Hugo Chavez in Venezuela is the precedent.

This should be a warning to those who are unhappy with the “Maverick” John McCain, thinking they will sit out this election and wait until next time. In every sense, there may never be a next time if the progressives have their way!

Warning: 'Green Can Be Mean'

Editor: Are the Dems ready to fracture down the middle if attacked on the fault line between labor and environmentalists? New contributor Bob McBride thinks so. His message to union members suffering in the paycheck and cost of living from enviros' policies boils down to a cheeky bumper sticker: "Green Can Be Mean." Maybe McBride is onto something. See what you think. Bob McBride writes:

It has been correctly determined that the Democrat Party is a coalition…some say of nitwits and misfits, but an effective coalition nevertheless. For years this coalition approach worked well, the various segments could support each other’s single- focus interest because there was no conflict by and between them. “You vote for my constituent’s interests and I’ll vote for yours” was the way to play along, get along and stay along.

The two primary groups that give substance and strength to the Democrat coalition are organized labor and organized environmentalists. Labor unions not only have and offer money, the mother’s milk of politics, but also provide direct votes and actions influencing other voter activity. The teachers' union for example, is in an excellent position to influence parents' voting activity, by making available yard signs and other literature for school children to take home to their parents. There is no stated penalty for not supporting the teachers’ union election objectives, but there are anecdotal instances of suggestion.

The environmental segment has been incredibly successful in globally positioning itself above mere mortal standards and has cloaked itself in a holier-than-thou attitude toward clean air and clean water. The fact that their current interests and intrusions go far beyond these basics, and negatively impact many areas of economic importance and individual rights, is never given the attention it deserves. The media, either through ideological sympathy or fear of reprisal, never negatively present environmental causes when it is deserved.

What could be worse for a business or an individual than to be branded, constantly and contemptuously, as anti-environment with the emphasis on clean air, water and children? One could spend a lifetime and a fortune trying to disprove the slur.

Both organized labor and environmental organizations are critical to Democrat election victories, for the both are suppliers of funds and feet on the ground. If the Republicans develop a strategy to break the back- scratching relationship between the two, and cause a defection of either from the Democrat party, the result will be electoral victories for decades. The opportunity to do so exists.

Let’s dispense with the myth that organized labor is still run by a bunch of people on or from the factory floor, as in its inception. Organized labor is big business and it’s run as a business by MBA’s. Running a business requires tough decisions and Labor has made such a decision in its strategy for growth.

A union can grow revenue in either, or both, of two ways; raise the dues or increase the membership. Needless to say raising the dues is not looked upon favorably by the union’s customer base, the rank and file. In the past increasing membership in major union- target industries were fairly easy, using restrictive work rules as the instrument. However globalization and world outsourcing has made that much more difficult. Therefore the focus now is on the growth opportunities by organizing employees in new and different industries, and as we have seen, particularly with government workers. As a result Big Labor is spending millions in support of Democrats with the objective of getting legislation that makes organizing much easier and simpler, with little interest in the existing union member’s needs, as we shall see.

The chosen instrument at the moment is the Employee Free Choice Act which is not only a noxious euphemism but action contrary to the core principles of the labor movement… private elections and secret ballots with federal board oversight. The unions want to change the historic rules so that organizers need only 50% of employees to get it done, with individual workers forced to declare in the open. This is known as card check. The opportunity for coercion and intimidation is obvious. This change is so onerous to any right-thinking person that even George McGovern, a noted union supporter and staunch Democrat, railed against this subversive objective in an article for the Wall Street Journal.

The real point is Big Labor has abandoned the long-time union members and the industries in which they work. Where is Big Labor’s wrath at the environmental zealots and their political handmaids that have caused so much hardship and misery with the workers in the heavily unionized airline, automotive, and trucking industries? Why isn’t big labor exercising their leverage with the Democrats to get them to stop inhibiting oil drilling? Where are their efforts to stop the idiotic use of food as fuel, thereby driving the cost of living up for all workers?

Labor has chosen to ignore the past and chase the promise of the future. To labor leadership it is more important to keep the coalition in place, to ensure a Democrat victory and then pressure the winners for favorable organizing legislation, than it is to speak up on their member’s behalf and demand the Democrat Congress pass legislation for tapping our country’s energy assets. As mentioned above, in major industries hundreds of thousand of union members are out of work due to the price of oil and their unions are doing nothing about it.

Union thinking seems to be that the current unionized industries are probably not going to grow, so disregard them and use their organized members as the cash cow to fund the pursuit of greener pastures by the union leadership. So much for how sincerely the unions and the Democrats care about the worker. And that presents the opportunity for the Republicans. Here are the steps I would recommend.

The objective is to cause a fracture in the coalition within the Democrat party with a focus on the conflicting goals and objectives between labor and the radical environmental obstructionists. For the first time this conflict is real and very important .It must be made dramatically important to union rank and file.

First develop an advertising campaign that highlights the fact that union member dues- funds are being spent by the big shots at labor to buy prestige and votes from Democrat lawmakers and the presidential candidate, as well as to party at the recent convention. This ad should talk in real terms about union expenditures on behalf of Democrats and the fact that it is the Democrats that are holding up legislation on domestic and offshore drilling. It should also present the real number of people out of jobs by industry that is the result of the price of oil and its refined products. These ads should feature real people in real hurt. Pristine tundras don’t put reasonably priced food on the table or create paycheck jobs. It is the environmental extremists and their stranglehold on the Democrat party that is causing this misery and strife

In battleground states and particularly hard hit areas use as much local focus and facts as possible. The bumper sticker is “Green can be mean”. Ask the question of the union member: why should your dues be used to keep the party in power that has caused your job loss? Is that what a union that looks out for its membership does, or is the union leadership far more interested in feathering a future nest and cozying up to powerful politicians?

Too late now for this next little gambit --but what fun it would have been to look at the number of United and Frontier airline employees either out of work or soon to be out of work in Denver, and try and mount a picket line of union members at the DNC the final week of August, calling attention to their plight at the hands of Democrats. That could have been a show stopper.

We missed that one, but all sorts of other opportunities to dramatize the contradiction and drive the wedge will come along. The larger point is simply this: We need an incessant drumbeat that pits “enviros” against organized union workers. This should cause the permanent fracture of the coalition. It will be interesting to see which side the party hacks cling to. Will the Democrats choose labor or enviros? Create the atmosphere that they can’t have both.

.

Why did the Dems go Euro?

The elitists who dominate the Democratic Party have embraced the New Europe and its world view. The fawning reception of Barack Obama in Europe illustrated this. They see him as the anti-Bush, their best bet ever to lash “rambunctious” America to the collectivist chariot of Europe’s “Brave New World”. [So writes Bill Moloney in his overview of liberalism's trans-Atlantic convergence and its significance for Election 2008. Here's the piece in full. - Editor]

The Europeanization of the Democratic Party

In the 19th century Americans took very seriously Washington’s warning against “entangling alliances” which might interfere with the country’s unfolding “Manifest Destiny” of dynamic growth and expansion. A corollary to this belief was that the “Great American Democracy” was a unique-perhaps even divinely inspired-form of political organization vastly superior to the Old World’s tired regimes of aristocratic privilege and downtrodden masses.

In the 20th century America entered upon the world stage powerfully and decisively coming to the aid of embattled European democracies and leading them to victory in two World Wars and the Cold War. Launching these extraordinary interventions were three memorable Democratic presidents- Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman.

Though American actions in the two centuries were starkly different- isolationism in the 19th, and intervention in the 20th-one compelling theme was constant: American Exceptionalism- a general notion that foreigners were a source of problems and Americans were a source of solutions. This attitude was often naïve, and jingoistic, but it provided a sturdy foundation for American patriotism through most of our history.

This enduring national consensus, however, collapsed during the “perfect storm” of the 1960s when a toxic brew of social, military and political convulsions tore gaping holes in the fabric of our national life-self-inflicted wounds that remain unhealed to this day.

Out of this turmoil there emerged a powerful body of left wing opinion and activism that turned the old national consensus upside down. Rejecting Henry Clay’s “my country-right or wrong”, the left substituted “my country-always wrong”. More extreme elements declared their country to be the most oppressive society in history- racist at home and imperialist abroad-while discovering sublime virtues in genocidal tyrants from Mao Tse-Tung to Pol Pot.

While this raging ideological virus infected in varying degree a wide range of American institutions-e.g. media, academia- its principal victim was the national Democratic party.

In less than a decade the party that boldly sponsored the Berlin airlift, the Marshall Plan, and the NATO alliance went from the confident activism of the hawkish John Kennedy-“pay any price, bear any burden to assure the success of liberty”- to the “Blame America First” defeatism of George McGovern-who aptly themed his 1972 acceptance speech as “Come Home, America”.

Betraying allies in Viet Nam, ignoring genocide in Cambodia, accepting communist aggression from Angola to Afghanistan, and bowing to humiliation in Iran, America’s defense of liberty abroad was reduced to Carter’s pathetic gesture of boycotting the Moscow Olympics.

The sorry Democratic mismanagement of both economic and foreign policy led to a series of landslide Republican Presidential victories and finally a decade of GOP Congressional dominance. Yet, amazingly none of these severe reality checks halted the Democrats steady leftward drift.

To understand this hostile take-over of the Democratic Party it must be seen in the context of what happened to all “parties of the left” in Europe in the second half of the 20th century. Traumatized by the shocks and dislocations of World Wars and Cold War the entire European political spectrum moved decisively leftward. While the Socialist parties led this progression, the parties of the Center and Right- shaken by their own crises of confidence- succumbed as well. European Capitalism and Nationalism was decisively weakened and the door opened to a continent-wide shift to collectivism and the trans-nationalism represented by the United Nations, and the European Union.

Today the elitists who dominate the Democratic Party have embraced the “New Europe” and its world view. On virtually every issue- Iraq, taxes, abortion, global warming, energy, hostility to religion, suspicion of Israel, regulation, U.N. worship etc. etc.-difference are only of degree not kind.

The fawning reception of Barack Obama in Europe illustrated this perverse harmony. Clearly Obama’s view of the future fits with Europe’s. They see him as the anti-Bush, their best bet ever to lash “rambunctious” America to the collectivist chariot of Europe’s “Brave New World”.

While heir to Western Civilization, America has always stood apart in the degree of its faith, patriotism, individualism, opportunity, and vitality. Most basically the Presidential election will decide whether this American Exceptionalism will endure or not. The Democratic Party has already given its answer. In November, ordinary Americans will give theirs.