Syte Reitz

The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world…….

Browsing Posts tagged Judeo-Christian morality

 

Don’t Count Chickens When Deluged with Hatching Black Swans!

and

A Note To Republican Delegates

swans-733723605Counting chickens: This phrase comes from the saying “Don’t count your chickens before they’re hatched!” which means do not conclude that you have something before you actually have it in hand.

Black swans: This is a political science concept based on the fact that most swans are white, and black swans were thought not to exist at all.  In actual fact, black swans do exist, but are very, very rare.  The political phrase refers to Black Swan events as very rare events that are completely unexpected, yet they transform history as we know it and make history completely unpredictable.

Don’t Count Chickens!

So today, in the very unpredictable political climate that seems to change direction radically by the day during this 2016 Slide1Presidential election, we should not be concluding or forecasting anything at all until all the rare, unpredictable events have finished arriving.  We should not count chickens when we are in the midst of a cygnet (baby swan) hatching explosion!

So what should we do? Nothing?

What should we do faced with one political shocker after another? Nothing?
No, we can soak in events, analyze them logically, and see if they fit into a pattern or frame of reference that we can make sense of.
You probably say- good luck doing that, analyzing or understanding anything in the present political climate!
By definition, black swan events cannot be anticipated, or prepared for.
.
Yes. Good luck doing the impossible!
That is, unless you remember to include the interconnection of Church and State, a politically incorrect and taboo topic which we have been exploring on this website in recent years.  A concept that actually provides the key to understanding – and to steering or taming– the seemingly out-of-control events we are witnessing today.

Slide1Surprising and Stunning Events

Events shaping this presidential election political season have certainly surprised and stunned us all from the very start.

Who expected 17 Republican candidates? Who expected Donald Trump’s candidacy? Who expected socialist Bernie’s challenge of Hillary to amount to more than a hill of beans? Who expected Trump’s phenomenal success and his following? And who expected Cruz to drop out of the race as and when he did?

Here we might add the observation that Cruz’s exit speech on May 2nd at the conclusion of the Indiana Primary sounded more like a rallying speech, and opened the possibility, at least in my mind, that the “suspension” of Cruz’s campaign was not so much the waving of a white flag as a shift to a different, clandestine game plan. There is, after  all, more than one clandestine war going on behind the scenes, not controlled by and not on the radar of those of us who devote only 15 minutes every 4 years to entering a voting booth.  (More on the clandestine wars later.)

Black Swan Political Theory

The collection of unexpected, unprecedented events we have witnessed in the primary season so far this year indicate an outcome that could never have previously been imagined, and is presently hard to imagine. It is a classic example of a Black Swan political event.

Slide3And not only are we witnessing a Black Swan event in this election, but we have scores of Black Swan events occurring one after another.  They are stunning political professionals and pundits, and violating all laws of political probability!

What Can We Learn from Black Swan Theory Today?

So let us sit back and make some stabs at analyzing what is going on, what the future might hold, and whether we are powerless pawns in the unfolding of history, or whether we have at our disposal some secret weapons that could steer events.  (Via one of my favorite topics, the Interconnection between Church and State!)

When things seem dismal and all seems lost (incidentally, this is precisely the moment in time that most of us fall to our knees in prayer), some pretty remarkable things begin to happen.  We begin to include faith and God in our politics, and the Goliaths begin to fall.  It’s described in the Bible (David and Goliath), and it’s happened in recent history – including the recent collapse of the Soviet Union.  When people start praying and putting ethics first, that’s when we get to see the  successful and productive Interconnection of Church and State.

Religion is powerful, and the Interconnection of Church and State is powerful. There is a reason why despots, and why many in our present government and culture (also despots!), try so hard to eliminate God from public life.  With God included, despots have no chance, and the people win.

Church and State

So Where Are We Right Now?
Trump versus Hillary?

.

If you believe much of the media,  it’s going to be Trump versus Hillary, isn’t it?

Not quite so simple.
It very well may be Trump versus Hillary, but there are many reasons why it might not be.

.

The Secret War Most of Us Missed in 2012

Slide2In 2012, it really looked like it would be Mitt Romney versus Obama. But those who followed this closely could see there was a clandestine war for delegates going on and Mitt Romney only made it by the skin of his (very polished) teeth.

Mitt Romney and Ron Paul had BOTH satisfied the conditions for entering the convention (plurality in 5 States) in 2012, and since delegates were only thought to be bound on the first vote, Ron Paul supporters were working on getting delegates to exercise their freedom of conscience. Delegates could prevent Romney’s nomination in the first vote of the Tampa 2012 Convention by abstaining, and thus they could trigger a brokered convention.  This would give Ron Paul a chance to compete for the nomination, and would allow the introduction of additional candidates.

Slide126-e1346270884172Yes, in 2012, we were headed for a brokered convention – but it turns out that Mitt Romney had had enough clandestine foresight to seed the Republican Rules Committee with delegates who were loyal to himself ahead of the convention — delegates who then changed Rule 40(b) on the eve of the Convention in such a way as to exclude Ron Paul, and to allow only Mitt Romney into the Convention.  A brokered convention was avoided, and Mitt Romney got the nomination.

But Ron Paul came very close to winning a clandestine war against Mitt Romney, something that most Americans did not know then, and do not know to this day.

And we might add that this was not a gentleman’s war, but a dirty battle, during which Over 400 Republican delegates filed a Federal lawsuit against the Republican National Committee and Reince Priebus the Chairman, alleging that violence and intimidation were used against delegates in an effort to control how they voted.  These delegates refused to be bound and insisted on their right to vote their conscience in 2012. Today, it has been clarified that delegates do indeed, have the right to vote their conscience in all votes at the Convention. As it turns out, binding is not binding!

Note also, that it’s the progressives in the Republican Party (yes, there are some!) who are being accused of violence and intimidation– NOT the conservatives!

Are We in the Midst of More Clandestine Battles?

So, where are we today?
Today, we are on the brink of another brokered convention.
The same cultural war is raging, we have the same division in the nation and in both parties, and the same clandestine political struggles are occurring behind the scenes.
Not to mention criminal investigations that may impact the presidential race.

This time, the struggles have intensified, the media has publicized them, and more Americans know about the situation.
So make no mistake, there are plenty of clandestine battles going on, and there is no guarantee yet that it’s Trump versus Hillary.

Threats to HillarySlide2

Because our primary focus here is on the Republican nomination, we raise only briefly the possibility that Hillary Clinton may be charged with criminal charges and may soon be disqualified from candidacy for President.  Charges against Hillary Clinton include tampering with and destruction of documents, and espionage.  The results of FBI email investigations and Bengazi investigation results (five House committees, two Senate committees and a bipartisan Select Committee on Benghazi) could lead to FBI indictment and serious federal charges against Hillary Clinton.  Needless to say, such charges would remove Hillary from any race for Presidency.  Unless, of course, Obama has the gall to issue a pardon.

In the event that Hillary is disqualified from the race on legal grounds, more black swans will arrive- are we to consider a socialist, possibly communist Presidential candidate in the United States?  Will there be attempts to introduce Joe Biden?  Someone else?

Threats to Donald

Back to Republicans – Donald Trump has just won 1237 estimated delegates, due to Cruz’s suspension of his campaign.  But that number is just that- ESTIMATED.
Nobody can know the true number until the first vote occurs at the Republican Convention in Cleveland in July.

Slide1For a while it seemed like NO candidate would clear the Rule 40(b) bar that Mitt Romney changed in 2012, which now requires a candidate to clear a majority (51%) in 8 States to enter the convention – a very difficult thing to do, and something that Donald Trump was in doubt of accomplishing before Ted Cruz’s unexpected suspension of his campaign.
Plans were even under way in the Republican Party to change Rule 40(b) on the eve of the Convention, so that Republicans would not have ZERO candidates meeting the requirements to enter the Convention.  The proposed change would have admitted all  candidates who “won” at least one delegate in the primaries (that would be about half of the original 17 candidates) to enter the convention for the first vote.

So now, with Cruz’s suspension it’s looking like Trump has cleared Rule 40(b), and the 1237 estimate, and will be the only candidate estimated to qualify for nomination.

Slide1

Since the outset, 2/3 of Republicans voted for “Social Conservatives” (i.e. Judeo-Christian morality), while the more liberal Trump was only able to summon up 1/3 of the vote. Bankrupting your opposition may not be the best way to represent the will of the people!

However, Trump’s victories so far have been in the primary arena, an arena that is primarily money-driven, and not driven by the ideology of Republican voters. It is an arena which is tainted by the Democrat-driven legislation which allows non-Republicans to vote in Republican primaries in 24 States.  It is NOT an arena that represents  Republican voters, Republican ideology, or the Republican Platform.

It is not an accident that the Rules of the Republican Party provide delegates at the Convention a veto power over the Primaries. Delegates are active Republicans in 50 States and territories, are not from Washington, and they represent American citizens who are Republican better than the primaries now do. The delegates just may not reproduce the results of the Primaries.Slide2

What happens if the delegates actually represent the affiliation of American Republicans, who seem to lean conservative by 2/3, instead of representing the Primaries, in which Donald Trump collected his victories after bankrupting his 16 more conservative opponents?

Complicating the Already Complicated Mess

To make matters even less certain than usual, it has become clear this year that delegates are not bound by primary results, and can “change” their votes.  They are even free to vote their conscience in the first vote of the convention, and do not have to feel “bound” by the primary/caucus results. This information has just surfaced in this primary election season.  So Donald Trump is in serious danger of not getting his estimated 1237 votes in the first ballot of the convention, despite feeling that he has 1237 estimated votes based on Primary results!
Slide1

In spite of Democrat and media efforts to portray this as a massive violation of democracy, it has become clear that delegates who ignore primary results would actually be restoring democracy, and would actually be protecting the right of the Republican Party to nominate it’s own conservative candidate– rather than handing that privilege to their opponent, the Democrat Party, who has surreptitiously succeeded in passing “binding” legislation in 24 States in recent decades.

These recent Democrat efforts to steer the Republican nomination have been trumped (no, not by Trump) by the Rules of the National Republican Party, a careful reading of which makes it clear that the rights of Republicans to nominate their own Republican candidate have been preserved, despite Democrat attempts to hijack their process.Slide1

Rogue Delegates or Patriots?

So this year, Republican delegates have finally been made aware of the fact that they hold the legitimate and legal power to restore the conservative face of the Republican Party to match it’s conservative platform.  They do not have to bend to legislation passed by Democrats in 24 States, who were trying to subvert the functioning of their opponent Republican party.
The Rules of the Republican Party have specifically exempted their delegates from such interference by State legislation.

So guess what?
Thousands of Republican delegates will be deciding this July  where to place their allegiance- to the Republican Party Platform, or to primary results (which were massively tainted by the participation of non-Republican progressives, even by progressives bussed in from neighboring States– in the 2016 New Hampshire primary— to hijack the Republican nomination).

Worth repeating: For the first time, delegates are highly likely to go rogue, on a massive scale.  And they’re not Republican “establishment” cronies.  They’re more likely very conservative patriots.

More Layers of Chaos

Here Come the SwansNeedless to say, if the delegates Donald Trump thinks he has won (because of legislation in 24 States that “binds” delegate votes), if those 1237 delegates instead follow their own conscience, because they just learned that they are exempt from this legislation which was pushed through by Democrats in 24 States, more chaos will result.

The delegates might either abstain, depriving Donald Trump of 51% and forcing a second vote, in which additional candidates can be proposed, or delegates might vote for someone other than Trump (depending on who is on the ballot, which depends on what rules have been changed by Rules Committee the week before!!!).
As you can plainly see, massive numbers of Black Swans may be arriving to stun us, and there is little way of predicting which way it will go.

Particularly for us normal people who don’t have any of the pertinent clandestine details, and who are limited by the very limited and biased information offered to us by the press.

The Underground WarSlide1

The players battling for control in this underground war which may or may not succeed in ousting Donald are not necessarily  RINO “establishment” delegates who want Mitt Romney to be President (although there will be some of those, too).
This is a multi-faceted war with an outcome impossible to steer, except by prayer and adherence to Judeo-Christian ethical principles.  (That’s the only way we can tame or steer Black Swans.)

The players will include:

  • Trump & his associates
  • Conservative Republicans who have been felt betrayed by the actions of increasingly progressive Republican leaders since the 2014 elections
  • RINO “establishment” members who want to maintain the status quo, even if it means handing the election to Hillary. Incidentally, Donald Tump’s lumping of all Donald opposition under a common umbrella of “establishment” is vey misleading.   In actual fact, Donald is lumping two warring factions together – conservatives and RINOS – who are war with each other, and who each have very different reasons for opposing Donald Trump.
  • Evangelical and Catholic citizens who are fighting to maintain Judeo-Christian values (religious liberty, pro-life and traditional marriage) in the Republican Platform
  • Ted Cruz, who could be continuing an unpublicized yet legitimate behind the scenes effort to win delegates ideologically, as he did in Colorado and in North Dakota.
  • The “Never Trump” group, which may overlap with some of the other groups mentioned.
  • Tea Party Members who emphasize conservative economy over conservative ethical “social” values
  • Libertarians, who often line up with Republicans in areas where their interests overlap. This year, some are even discussing Libertarian success as a third party, feeling they have a better than usual chance because so many voters want simply “not Hillary” and “not Trump” this year.
  • Progressive infiltrators of the Republican Party who have been trying to steer left for quite some time.
  • Mitt Romney, who has been rumored to be thinking of an Independent candidacy.  Mitt Romney?  No longer a Republican?  Now an Independent?
  • Will there be two Independent candidates? A Libertarian and Mitt Romney?
  • Or even a third Independent candidate? Bernie Sanders, who has been encouraged by Donald Trump to run as an Independent.
  • …  there may be other factions that have not occurred to me, naive and out of the loop in politics as I am.
  • And, most important, there is a invisible player, God.  And God has a wicked sense of humor.
    I am watching political developments with great anticipation, as America continues to pray.

FeaturedImage-battlefield-heroesThe battlefields will include:

  • Media- press, social, advertising
  • Wooing delegates behind the scenes- both honest ideological wooing and potential dishonest manipulation and bribery.
  • Alteration of the Rules of the Republican Party by the Rules Committee at the eve of the Convention.
  • Alteration of the Platform of the Republican Party in the Platform Committee at the eve of the Convention
  • … numerous other mechanisms that this politically naive citizen struggles to imagine
  • And, most important, the hearts, souls, prayers and churches of America, where good people continue to pray for a restoration of Judeo-Christian morality to American government.

 

Possible Outcomes

The Outcome WILL Be a Black Swan

Davids can slay Goliaths

Davids can slay Goliaths

The outcome of this Presidential election season is likely to be a Black Swan not possible to predict at this point in time. We should not place too much confidence in the outcome being Donald or Hillary.

A Good Outcome Is Quite Possible

We should remember that Black Swans, although unpredictable, can be good – like the collapse of the Soviet Union without war in 1991.

We could, if we play our cards right (actually, if we talk to God right), end up with a restoration of Judeo-Christian values and an Abraham Lincoln or Ronald Reagan emerging as our next President. That person could even be Donald Trump, provided his “conversion” to conservatism is legit.  And the conversion would have to be in all areas, particularly the ethical ones.

Violence May Be Involved

The outcome of this Presidential election season could include violence at conventions – both Republican and Democrat.Slide1
Donald Trump has forecast, even before he became the lone candidate following Ted Cruz’s withdrawal, and before Trump had the Mitt Romney-2012 rule-required majority in 8 States (which only a lone candidate could possibly acquire), Trump (very unprofessionally and very undemocratically) has forecast riots if he is not elected the Republican nominee on the first Convention vote.  Is Donald Trump considering encouraging the use of  Alinsky tactics, previously employed primarily by progressives?

There are reports of violence instigated by paid professional protesters at some recent Trump campaign events- protesters sent by Clinton and Soros. Several protesters admitted answering a Craig’s list ad paying $16.00 an hour for protesters.

There are even reports of Democrat on Democrat violence – between Bernie and Hillary supporters.   At the Nevada Democrat State Convention, Senator Boxer claimed that Bernie supporters made her fear for her life.

Even conservatives, albeit far right conservatives, have now made the mistake of hinting at the use of violence.  Glen Beck was just suspended from his show for comments hinting at the assassination of a President Trump in the event that he is elected and becomes dictatorial, following the Presidential present precedent.

Slide1Why All This Violence?

People most often turn to violence when they feel cornered.

The left has been fighting an uphill battle against Judeo-Christian morality and has been using violent and crooked Alinsky tactics now for years.

But now more and more “Independents” are turning to violence as a solution to our increasing problems.
This may explain the wide support now seen for Donald Trump’s aggressive rhetoric- people seem to think that it takes a bully (Trump) to subdue a bully (Obama).

But that attitude is very short-sighted, and I am personally hoping that Trump’s rhetoric is theatrical, not literal.
It is hard to say whether Donald Trump is a patriot or just another bully.
Introducing bully #2 into the White House could be very dangerous, and could boomerang in our faces, as do most violations of Judeo-Christian ethics.
Slide1

We really do need to figure out exactly what page Mr. Trump is on.  Is he a legitimate convert to conservatism and the solution to America’s problems, is he a naive liberal who thinks he can win the Presidency by adopting a couple of conservative positions and hijacking the Republican Party, or is he actually a liberal plant, an infiltrator,  who is about to blow the Republican Party apart?
This blogger truly has NO idea. (Hence the increased need for prayer and for more GOOD Black Swans.)

Violence Not Too Surprising From Alinskyite Progressives- But Will Trump Encourage Joining In?

The practice of  Alinsky tactics  by Democrats is not too surprising, considering Obama and Hillary were students (and teachers!) of Alinsky tactics. These aggressive tactics were well illustrated during the circus staged by Democrat union protesters in Madison Wisconsin, to fight Governor Scott Walker’s financial reforms in 2011. I witnessed and experienced those “non-violent” tactics myself, at the hands of Madison, Wisconsin progressives.

But the possibility of violence and Alinsky tactics among Republicans is truly disturbing. So far, it’s only talk, and actual disruptions have been limited to progressive and paid “activists.”

Slide1To Win A Battle, We Must Be Prepared to Engage in It

A positive outcome of this Presidential election, with a victory for Judeo-Christian values, is still possible.   But such an outcome  will definitely require courageous action and fervent prayer on the part of conservatives.
The outcome will not be favorable if we do not engage in the battle and stick to our guns.
Goliath would never have been slain if David had not stepped up to the challenge.
The Soviet Union would never have collapsed if Ronald Reagan, Polish Solidarity and Pope John Paul II had run away from the problem or cowered.

We will be facing some Alinksyites and some primitive mobs.
But with God in our corner, we will not be facing them alone.

2016 – a Pivotal Election

This election represents a very major battle with the potential to reclaim the soul and the morality of America.
It may be the pivotal battle that determines whether America is Great again, or whether America falls into decline and ethical collapse.  A nation that kills it’s children at the rate of 1 million per year cannot thrive- either morally, or economically.Slide1

And making America Great Again is not a reference to Trump- on whom the jury is still out.

America will not be made great solely through economic strategy.
America will be made great by returning to the Judeo-Christian values on which America was established.

Whether America returns to those founding values, and whether that return is headed by a converted St. Donald (analogy to St. Paul the Evangelist) or by a different ethical conservative leader, remains to be seen.

In 1571, Christian Europe was under threat of Muslim domination, and prayer of the Rosary to Our Lord, through the intercession of his Mother of Good Counsel, led to a very surprising (Black Swan) victory  for Christian forces against terrific odds.

Christian Europe was saved from annihilation.
.xx
The inscription on the image of Our Lady of Good Counsel reads “Mater Bonii Consilii, Ora Pro Nobis Jesum Fillium Tuum,” or “Mother of Good Counsel, Pray for Us to Jesus your Son.”
You don’t have to be Catholic to pray the Rosary, a meditative prayer on the Life of Our Lord.
Praying the Rosary today is as pertinent and as effective as it was in 1571.

One Way to Win

One possible mechanism for a positive outcome could include delegates using their freedom to pressure Donald Trump into supporting the present Republican Platform.
Donald Trump is just beginning to back up his claim of conversion to conservatism with action- with the announcement of his Supreme Court picks.
Let’s hope he continues by supporting other important ethical issues, like pro-life, religious freedom and traditional marriage.

Can We Dispense With the Moral Issues?

Some think that we can dispense with the “social” or “moral” issues and focus on the economic.
Rush Limbaugh has actually suggested that the Republican platform is optional or dispensable.  This implies that the mission statement describing what the Republican Party represents and has represented for decades, and which assures voters of exactly what they are voting for, need not be followed.  It’s dispensable, said Rush Limbaugh.  Nobody follows the platform any more.  Really?  How did Mitt Romney fare in the 2012 election when he failed to follow the platform?  How did that work out for Mitt and for the entire Republican Party?  Has Rush Limbaugh now abandoned conservative values?

When a conservative icon like Rush Limbaugh begins to waffle on conservative principles we can be sure that events have become truly baffling.  They are only baffling, however, when someone gets scared by all the black swans that have been arriving.  Rush needs a reminder on the role of Black Swans in history and their steerability via  some serious prayer and some serious adherence to Judeo-Christian ethical principles, no matter what!

Slide1Can’t We Just Compromise?

Some suggest that a middle of the road outcome, in which Donald Trump, with the appointment of a relatively liberal Vice President, possibly even a Democrat, would “solve” the political tug-of-war that has existed for decades now between the right and the left.

This national ideological split, characterized by tug-of-war elections which are won by the slimmest of margins, has produced almost random election outcomes in recent years.

The formation of a “hybrid” merger, a middle-of-the-road party through a mechanism involving Donald Trump could serve the purpose of eliminating the established political system and the current players who have much invested in continuation of the system.  The resulting elimination of lobbyists, entrenched politicians and self-interested parties, often using political correctness to force their agendas, would be replaced by a more rational system, more accountable to the electorate.

Although this possibility is theoretically attractive and is aimed at producing policies that benefit all Americans, it does not address the resolution of some major problems, for which compromise does not seem possible.

A wagon pulled in two directions simultaneously by two different horses gets nowhere.

Where Compromise May Not Be PossibleSlide1

There are many areas in which it is not possible to compromise, in which one side must win:

  • It is not possible to take both roads when you reach a fork.
  • We cannot aim for individual freedom and for governmental control of personal life and personal thought at the same time.
  • We cannot outlaw and allow abortion simultaneously.
  • We cannot both allow and forbid guns.
  • We cannot preserve traditional marriage and allow homosexual marriage at the same time.
  • We cannot respect religious freedom and require all doctors to perform abortions concurrently.
  • We cannot enforce immigration law and simultaneously have open borders.
  • We cannot build up military defense and reduce military defense at the same time.
  • We cannot base our Constitution and Bill of Rights on God-given rights, yet forbid the public mention of God and of religion.
  • We cannot respect Judeo-Christian values and delete Judeo-Christian values from our laws concurrently.
  • We cannot have a Supreme Court which decrees national law and policy without regard to the beliefs of the American population- most of the above mentioned issues have involved decrees by Supreme Court and by Executive Action which are in disagreement with the beliefs of most Americans.
  • We cannot have a Democratic Republic in which elected Representatives of the people do not represent the wishes of the people and in which politically appointed Supreme Court Justices overrule the will and the religious beliefs of the people.

Choices Must and Will be Made

choicesChoices must be made, and laws must be enforced.
This election is likely to determine whether the United States steers right or steers left.
We’ve been waffling too long and getting nowhere.
Actually, no.  We have been very rapidly drifting left- not by the will of the people, but by manipulation by the Presidency and by the Supreme Court.  And Congress is NOT doing their job of checking those out-of-control branches of government.

There is no way to predict or to influence the outcome of this very complex situation except through sticking to our ethics, praying, and watching the Black Swans as they arrive.

Personally, I think it’s high time somebody corrected the damage done by the Obama administration, which is ramping up affronts to morality and to religious freedom by the day.
There is a major spiritual battle going on, and we need to engage in it.

Citizens must support the most ethically conservative candidates and must vote.
Delegates must follow their consciences and make sure that the candidate elected, whether it is Donald Trump or not, sticks to the Judeo-Christian ethics outlined in the present Republican Platform.

May God Bless and Help America!

 

 

See also:

-which explains why the brokered convention has been totally misrepresented by media and by campaigns, and why the brokered convention could be the Black Swan that saves America, as it has done in the past- with the election of Abraham Lincoln and of Ronald Reagan.

-an explanation of why delegates having the power to reverse primary results may not be a ditching of democracy at all, but the reverse- a protection, or check and balance built into the system against infiltration of primaries by the opposition or by monied interests.  Also why “rogue” delegates may not represent the Republican “establishment” at all, but may represent the reclaiming of the soul of the Republican Party.

– which reflects the conservative leanings of most of America.

Aside: Wisconsin Primary results reflect the conservative will of America, which could dominate the Presidential election if Conventions are allowed to play their intended role of checking the money-driven Primary results, in which 16 (mostly conservative) Republican candidates were out-maneuvered financially by Donald Trump, but still represent the will of two thirds of America.

-which describes why Wisconsin is a great model for the whole United States, our war between right and left, and why Wisconsin offers successful solutions for all of America.

  • Election Infiltration and Here Comes Paul Revere!

    -which discusses the conflict between Primaries and Convention, between State legislation and RNC Rules, and the recent legal developments that give Republican delegates complete freedom to “trump” Primary results – and why they might not be traitors, but patriots if they do so.

-which discusses the politically awkward questions that are being evaded, yet which are steering this Republican primary season.

 

Is It Over?

Romney’s Got the Nomination, Right?

 

The Texas Primary

On Tuesday, May 29, 2012, Texans held their Republican primary.
Voter turnout was low, about 10%.
Associated Press (AP) announced a projection indicating that Romney had secured at least 97 delegates, bringing him up to the 1144 delegates needed to win the Republican nomination.
Romney made an acceptance speech.
President Obama telephoned Romney
to congratulate him.

Assocciated Press Projected a Romney Win; Most Media Sources Parroted the Report

The picture from AP's perspective: Orange=Romney, Green=Santorum, Yellow=Paul, Purple=Gingrich. However, this map neglects the delegates reclaimed recently by Ron Paul's "delegate strategy."

The mainstream and liberal media flocked to repeat and report the AP projected result:
Associated Press
Yahoo
ABC news
USA Today

CNN news
made an independent estimation (independent of the Associated Press report) indicating a similar conclusion, using the words “unofficially clinched the Republican presidential nomination”
Huffington Post 

Even some Conservative News sources such as Fox  and The Blaze  proclaimed the AP estimate, indicating a Romney win.

Other Media More Cautious

The Conservative Drudge Report was strangely silent.
Wall Street Journal reported cautiously that “Mitt Romney Tuesday night claimed (my italics) his win in the Texas primary gives him the requisite number of delegates to clinch the Republican presidential nomination.”

Some Reports Question Romney’s and Associated Press’ Claims of Victory

Ben Swann, a Fox News anchor from Cincinnati, Ohio, produced a segment of Reality Check, explaining why he believes that internal tension within the Republican Party may be undermining the security of Romney’s projected victory.

According to Ben Swann’s Reality Check from last week, The Liberty Movement (conservatives who support Ron Paul) is taking over the GOP.   On Tuesday, a new segment of Reality Check suggests that the Republican Party might be winning the Texas battle at the moment, but could actually be losing the primary war to conservatives.
More details on Reality Check’s claims will be discussed below; some claim that Ron Paul may have as many as 1,000 delegates going into the Tampa convention, compared with Romney’s present 1,081 delegates (the number of Romney delegates is under dispute, more below).

Fox’s Reality Check is not alone in their suspicions.

Newt Gingrich

Newt Gingrich also acknowledged just last week that Ron Paul is the “biggest danger” for Romney in Tampa.   Gingrich pointed out that Paul supporters have gathered an unexpected number of delegates at state Republican conventions recently in Alaska, Colorado, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Missouri and Nevada.  Apparently, the number of delegates acquired by a candidate continues to change after the primary, with delegates changing allegiance, and Ron Paul is raking them in.

Ron Paul’s Supporters’ Claims

Ron Paul’s supporters, too,  claim a majority of delegates for Ron Paul in as many as 11 states already.

My Calculations

My previous calculations, based on Associated Press data (obtained from Wikipedia through USA Today), indicated that Mitt Romney could not  possibly claim the nomination before the Texas primary, and even then, he could only claim it if he got almost all 155 delegates.

Since then, quite a few things have changed, including the fact that Ron Paul is converting delegates who were previously committed to Romney to his own side.

According to present Wikipedia delegate counts (based on month-old AP projections, plus Texas numbers from a website called The Green Papers) , Mitt Romney is still short of 1144 delegates.   He has only 1081.  The Wikipedia report also neglects the reduction in Romney delegates that would result from Ron Paul’s amassing of delegates.

Where is AP getting it’s most recent numbers from? Why are the new numbers contradicting AP’s numbers from one month ago?
What are AP’s most recent numbers? Wikipedia does not use AP numbers for its Texas update; it is using The Green Papers numbers instead, and AP’s numbers are not in evidence.
How is it possible that Ron Paul seems to be reversing primaries that are already over, and seems to be wining delegates who were previously counted as Romney voters?

Conflicting Reports; Who’s Right and Who’s Wrong?

Media Research Center's Times Square Billboard in New York City

So which is it?

  • Are Associated Press (and the mainstream media quoting them) and CNN wrong in their projections?  Are they trying to influence the election by bluffing?
  • Does Ron Paul pose a serious threat to Romney as indicated by Fox’s Reality Check, Gingrich’s interview, Wall Street Journal’s caution, Drudge Report’s silence, and my humble calculations?
  • Is somebody lying and spinning, or is the primary election system so complex that nobody can project results accurately?

The Associated Press and “Mainstream” Media

Associated Press has been a frequently cited source of news in the United States since 1845.   But media in the United States, originally priding itself in objectivity, has drifted toward  slanted reporting to the point where organizations such as the Media Research Center  have been established to neutralize the recent left-wing bias in the news media.

Media Blackout

One of the most shocking examples of liberal bias in the media today includes their failure to report on the biggest story in several decades – the barrage of concerted lawsuits launched by the 43 Catholic organizations on the Obama administration, over violations of the United States Constitution’s protection of religious liberty. An appropriate headline would have been the one used by CNS News: Catholic Church Unleashes Legal Armageddon on Obama Administration, So Media Ignore and Distort the News.

Catholicism is the largest religious denomination in the United States.  25% of Americans are Catholic.  The Catholic Church has accused the President’s administration of violating the First Amendment.  Yet the mainstream media is silent.  Most Americans do not know that this has happened.

Stand Up For Religious Freedom Rallies to Be Held in 140 Cities June 8, 2012. Will the media report?

This news blackout included total silence by ABC and NBC, and only one 19-second report by CBS, covering the historic “Legal Armageddon.” Instead, the mainstream media focused on smaller events in an attempt to damage the Church’s image, such as dated stories on “predator priests” and reports on the Pope’s valet leaking documents to the press.  Twenty Catholic and evangelical leaders joined the Media Research Center (MRC) this week in calling out the networks for ignoring the Obama administration trampling on the First Amendment.

The news blackout appears to be aimed at protecting the Obama administration, while continuing attempts to discredit the Catholic Church.

Aside: Thus continues the now decades-long misrepresentation of the Catholic Church abuse sandal.  In actual fact, the Catholic Church has the lowest frequency of offense towards children on earth.  Children are at greater risk of abuse in their own homes and in public schools than they are, or have ever been, in the Catholic Church.

Credibility of the Mainstream Media

Back to the point – should we be considering an Associated Press and mainstream media attempt to spin reporting on the Republican primary?

  • Do liberals have a preference for running against Romney, versus running against one of the more conservative alternative candidates?
  • What is AP’s history on the Republican primary?
  • Has AP been wrong before?

The answer to all of these questions is yes.

  • Liberals do have a preference for running against Romney, they believe he is easier to defeat than the other candidates.
  • AP has called results prematurely in the Republican primary
  • AP has been wrong before

Most importantly, the media has even shown a willingness to participate in a news blackout, when that is advantageous to the far left and to the Obama administration.

Now, the Associated Press is making projections that do not jive with the estimates of others, nor with their own previous estimates.  They seem to be favoring Romney.

Fox’s Reality Check (quoted below) seems to believe that AP estimates of Romney’s delegate counts are wildly misleading.

Even Wikipedia’s charts of delegate counts  don’t seem to be updated to reflect conservative changes that have occurred during the past month.  Additions to Romney’s delegate count acquired in Texas are updated on Wikipedia, quoting the amateurish The Green Papers website’s numbers, but whole state majorities acquired by Ron Paul and acknowledged by Newt Gingrich are absent from the Wikipedia charts.

Considering the total news blackout last week, in which ABC and NBC failed to mention the story of the decade (concerted legal attack on the Obama administration by Catholic organizations), the mainstream media can no longer be relied upon to give unbiased facts on the 2012 election.  We, as citizens, are back to knowing very little about what is going on in our nation—two hundred years ago this was limited by the speed of the pony express; today, this is due to intentional news blackouts and manipulation of information by radical media.

Fox’s Reality Check, Gingrich, and Ron Paul’s people – Ron Paul is Still Collecting Delegates at a Striking Rate

The fact is, this is a remarkably unusual election.  Our nation is divided, not by economic status, not by gender or by race, but we are divided by philosophy.
Liberal versus Conservative.
And the balance between liberals and conservatives is changing.
This trend has been evident for a very long time.  The closeness of the 2000 election with counting of chads, as well as the unexpected unseating of Hillary Clinton by Obama were indications of division and of close competitions which are full of surprises. Wisconsin’s going Republican in 2010 was an indication that shift toward conservatism may be occurring.  Recent Gallup polls confirm this shift.

The two positions, Liberal and Conservative, are stalemated on several issues for which it is difficult to imagine any compromise:

  • Economy: the liberal solution, spending, is not compatible with the conservative solution, cutting spending.   A compromise, doing nothing, would (duh) do nothing while we watch our economy go down the tubes.
  • Abortion cannot be legal and illegal at the same time.  It cannot be a “right” and murder at the same time.
  • Marriage cannot be between one man and one woman, while also being between two men or two women.  A choice has to be made.
  • There are numerous additional issues on which now polarized liberal and conservative positions would struggle to find a middle ground.

According to Reality Check , even the Republican Party is now divided.  There appears to be struggle between Republican National Committee (RNC) leadership and a collection of conservatives whom it is difficult to label, but who seem to be rallying behind Ron Paul.  Ron Paul is amassing the support of delegates at a striking rate; there is reason to believe that Ron Paul has 1,000 delegates supporting him already.  Reality Check calls these Ron Paul supporters the Liberty Party, but I suspect that this group includes a much wider spectrum of conservative people.

Ron Paul Supporters

Ron Paul

Ron Paul’s supporters have been dismissed in the past, because of his minority following and because of some extreme policies.  But now the numbers of supports that Ron Paul is claiming are growing, and the RNC seems to be evading the obvious question; where are all these Ron Paul supporters coming from?

Previously, I was never a Ron Paul supporter. As a conservative I now support some of Ron Paul’s policies, but consider some of his positions as dangerously naïve; particularly his attitudes towards foreign policy, defense budget, and legalization of drugs.

However, the more I learn about Romney, I begin to see myself rallying behind Ron Paul in preference to Romney, when my top two preferences seem unlikely to be available (Santorum and Gingrich).

I believe that the Republican National Committee (RNC) would have more success moderating Ron Paul’s controversial policies (foreign policy/defense budget/drug positions) than they would have moderating Mitt Romney’s controversial policies (recent endorsements of embryo destruction, allowing gay adoption, and his fundraising associations with pharmaceutical companies which manufacture abortifacient drugs.

Romney’s Record

Why don’t some trust Romney?
Romney has no established philosophy driving his politics.  His philosophy, if any, appears to be utilitarian; it changes according to convenience and to circumstances.  His commitment to truth or to Judeo-Christian morality is not clear.

Here is Wikipedia’s analysis of Romney’s political positions:

Journalist Daniel Gross sees Romney as approaching politics in the same terms as a business competing in markets, in that successful executives do not hold firm to public stances over long periods of time, but rather constantly devise new strategies and plans to deal with new geographical regions and ever-changing market conditions. Political profiler Ryan Lizza notes the same question regarding whether Romney’s business skills can be adapted to politics, saying that “while giving customers exactly what they want may be normal in the corporate world, it can be costly in politics”. Writer Robert Draper holds a somewhat similar perspective: “The Romney curse was this: His strength lay in his adaptability. In governance, this was a virtue; in a political race, it was an invitation to be called a phony.” Writer Benjamin Wallace-Wells sees Romney as a detached problem solver rather than one who approaches political issues from a humanistic or philosophical perspective. Journalist Neil Swidey views Romney as a political and cultural enigma, “the product of two of the most mysterious and least understood subcultures in the country: the Mormon Church and private-equity finance,” and believes that has led to the continued interest in a 1983 episode in which Romney kept his family dog on the roof of his car during a long road trip. Political writer Joe Klein views Romney as actually more conservative on social issues than he portrayed himself during his Massachusetts campaigns and less conservative on other issues than his presidential campaigns have represented, and concludes that Romney “has always campaigned as something he probably is not.”

 Romney has changed his positions on abortion and on government health care.  Both of these are major issues in this election, and both have a huge impact on the economy.  Whether Romney’s changes in philosophy are genuine and permanent, or whether they reflect a willingness to alter his beliefs pragmatically over time, remains to be seen.

After four years of President Obama’s drifting and reversals, I would consider the choice of a Presidential candidate who has a history of flip-flopping, evolving, etch-a-sketching, or whatever you want to call it, simply irresponsible.  There is a chance that Romney’s conversions (on ObamaCare and on abortion) are genuine, but the risk that they are not genuine is too large to take.  Mitt Romney is still the only Republican candidate on the ballot who has refused to sign the Susan B. Anthony Presidential Pro-Life Pledge.

If we elect Romney, we could have another Obama on our hands, who promises one thing, then delivers something quite different.

Reversals on ObamaCare and on abortion by Romney would be catastrophic – not only on the “social” front, but on the economic front as well.  Socialized medicine and the killing of future citizens by abortion would have an equally devastating effect on the economy of the nation as they would have on the nation’s morality.

Flip-flopping, evolving, and etch-a-sketchingare not the marks of a candidate for President of the United States.

Flip-flopping, Evolving, Etch-a-Sketching: not good marks of a President

They are the marks of confusion at best, and the marks of a liar, at worst.

Who Would Support Ron Paul over Romney?

Above were the reasons why I would support Romney only after every other possibility has been exhausted for Republican nomination.  All three, Gingrich, Paul and Santorum, have established a more consistent conservative record of supporting Judeo-Christian morality (and the economic prosperity which this morality fosters) than has Mitt Romney. And I don’t think that I am so unique.  In fact, although I have never joined the Tea Party or participated in their functions, I typify quite closely the average Tea Party member.

Many conservatives, whether fiscal, social, or religious conservatives, could conceivably be persuaded to support Ron Paul, or Newt Gingrich, or Rick Santorum for these reasons over Romney. Tea Party, Evangelicals, and Catholics are just a few of the conservative groups who might likely support Ron Paul over Mitt Romney.

If the eccentric and perseverant Energizer Bunny calling himself Ron Paul, the medical doctor who opposes abortion and who has personally delivered over 4,000 babies in his lifetime, continues to amass delegates to support him, and if he makes it to the Republican Convention in Tampa in August, there could be some big surprises occurring at that convention.

My knowledge of the very complex electoral process is not sufficient to forecast whether Santorum or Gingrich will go to the convention and be listed on the ballot as well as Ron Paul.  But Ron Paul is now almost sure to be there.  In fact, his supporters have already organized a massive 3-day party, to be attended by 40,000 to 100,000 people, including as much as 1,000 delegates supporting Ron Paul, in Florida immediately prior to the Tampa convention.

The RNC is Worried

Delusional speculations, you may be thinking?
Well, the RNC appears to be worried about these possibilities, too.

The Massachusetts RNC leadership is apparently sufficiently worried about Ron Paul’s growing popularity that it is threatening delegates that they must sign an affidavit that they will vote for Romney on the first round of the Republican National Convention in Tampa, or be charged with perjury.  They would not be threatening delegates and creating last minute busy-work if there was no danger to their RNC establishment’s agenda.

Governor Romney is also concerned, and is creating a shadow party in some of the states at issue.

This does not make it look like Ron Paul is a harmless eccentric, or that Mitt Romney has the nomination bagged.

How Can Delegate Counts Be Reversed?

How can Ron Paul be reversing primary election results, and why is the media failing to acknowledge recent reversals?

Apparently, Ron Paul has discovered a strategy that circumvents the Republican establishment, and endeavors to facilitate a conservative takeover of the Republican party.  The strategy is called the “delegate strategy,” it seems to be working. It involves focusing campaign efforts on the ability to win over state delegates, rather than winning the popular vote.

Instead of focusing on getting the votes of voters at primaries, Ron Paul focuses on getting the votes of the delegates who are elected at state conventions and caucuses, typically a couple of weeks after the primary.

Ron Paul supporters use an extensive grass roots campaign network to influence local officials, who then influence higher-up officials.  Basically, delegates are persuaded to switch their vote to Ron Paul weeks after the popular vote at the primary, and this essentially reverses the effect of the primary.

For example, Benn Swann of Fox News reports :

For example, take the state of Massachusetts.  Just like in Texas tonight, Romney won the popular vote there.  But in the congressional district caucuses, where the delegates are actually chosen, Mitt Romney, despite having been Governor of that state, was embarrassed, when during the district caucuses, Ron Paul supporters took 16 of 19 delegate slots.  In doing so, the Boston Globe reports that those Paul supporters, they beat out major names in the Massachusetts Republican Party.  Including state house minority leader, Bradley Jones Jr.,  Kerry Healey, the former Lieutenant Governor, Sheriff Frank Cousins of Essex County, and Republican’s most recent nominee for governor, Charles D. Baker.

This strategy is discussed further by Chris Miles at policymic.  Chris Miles concludes: “Boom, Ron Paul’s system looks like it is working.”

How Many States and How Many Delegates Does Ron Paul Now Have?

.

Ron Paul supporters claim to have as many as 11 states so far.
Ron Paul may have as many as 1,000 delegates so far.

 

Embeddable map at runronpaul.com:

.

Click each red state above  for reference and further information on Ron Paul’s claimed delegates.

 

Is the “Delegate Strategy” being used by Ron Paul Crooked or is it Legitimate?

The media has failed to inform people of  two main points.

  • The Republican race is not won through a series of state primary contests. It’s won by accumulating delegates at state conventions, which typically occur a few weeks after the state primary contests.
  • In the states where the primaries are over, Ron Paul is winning large numbers of delegates, leading to massive fights at State Conventions across the country.  It’s also leading to many new people taking over the GOP leadership in these states, and those people happen to be Paul supporters.   That has also led to Governor Romney creating a shadow party in some of these states.  This reflects the intensity  of the competition that is raging in the Republican Party,  all the while unreported by the liberal Mass Media, who would love to help push Romney as the candidate Obama will oppose.

What are the rules?
Are delegates in the Republican Party bound to vote for a specific candidate, as determined by the popular vote of the Primary?
Or is the popular vote an advisory one?

This question of whether Republican delegates are “bound” is actually under dispute at present.

  • According to the 2008 Rules of the Republican Party, 25% of delegates are unpledged and are free agents at the convention (this year in Tampa) These include party officials such as the party chair or national party committee members.  But 75% of delegates are pledged delegates, indicating that they are “bound” by the popular vote from the primary.
  • However, the Legal Counsel for the RNC made a ruling in 2008 that ‘The RNC does not recognize a state’s binding of national delegates, but considers each delegate a free agent who can vote for whoever they choose.’”  This statement allows all delegates to be free agents, voting for whomever they choose.

So there is a contradiction.
It is not clear how this dispute will play out.

For comparison, Newt Gingrich’s delegates are still bound to vote for Gingrich in Tampa.  Newt has the option to release his delegates to vote for Romney as he wishes.  But his delegates will be bound to vote either for Gingrich or for Romney in the first two ballots of the Republican convention in Tampa. If there are more than two rounds, they are free to vote for any candidate.  Incidentally, Newt Gingrich has not yet released his delegates to vote for Romney in Tampa.

SO: the rules are not yet clear.  This is going to be an exciting summer and an exciting convention.

Has This Ever Been Tried Before?

I’ve discussed the Harding election previously, in which Harding went into the Convention with only 20% as many delegates as his opponent had.  However, since no delegate had the required 51% (1144) at first, several rounds of voting took place.  Eventually, Harding ended up winning the nomination and then winning the election to become President.

I am not sure how the details of the primary worked out, but the fact is that when candidates do not have the requisite 51% (today 1144) delegates before the convention, a brokered convention is held, and some big surprises can surface after several rounds of voting.
This system was wisely put in place to create a process of elimination, so that when there are numerous candidates, as there are in 2012, and not one of them gets 51% of the vote, a minority leader does not end up leading the United States as President.  A “brokered” convention steers a process of repeated voting and elimination, which culminates in a candidate who is supported by at least 51% of the U.S.

At present, Romney is still short of 1144 delegates by many estimates.  Even AP’s estimates make assumptions and guesses about delegates who are not bound (at least 25% or more of them are not bound), and then even bound delegates are no longer bound after two rounds of voting if more than one candidate enters the convention.  With Ron Paul’s number of delegates rapidly growing (and thus Mitt Romney’s number of delegates rapidly shrinking, something that AP does not seem to have acknowledged yet), the numbers are in such a  flux in 2012 that it is difficult to make any projections at all.

How Many Delegates Still Up For Grabs?

According to the Wikipedia charts (from USA Today, AP and The Green Papers), this is the present estimated delegate count:

Candidate Wikipedia (AP) Delegates Ron Paul’s claims
Gingrich 142
Paul 143 1,000
Romney 1,105 ???
Santorum 242
Still available 537

Primaries Remaining :

Date State Nuber of Delegates
June 5 California 169
New Jersey 50
New Mexico 20
South Dakota 25
June 10 Nebraska 32
June 16 Montana 23
June 26 Utah 40
Total 359

Note: If Ron Paul continues to succeed in winning delegates who were previously though to be “bound,” all of the above AP numbers become meaningless.  Note also, that the total of delegates still to be determined by the primary votes from the above table is 359, while the AP estimates from table before that listed 537 as still to be determined.

The Final Outcome

The outcome of this primary – Romney versus a much more conservative candidate like Gingrich, Paul or Santorum – could have a powerful impact on the future of the United States.  There is reason for concern.  Romney is not similar to the other 3 remaining candidates, and a Romney presidency could be much different than what the conservatives who elect him might imagine.   In some ways, Romney has the potential to “evolve” or to reverse himself almost as badly as Obama has done during the course of the last four years.

If all this speculation by Fox’s Reality Check, by Newt Gingrich, by Ron Paul and his supporters, and by me turns out to be mistaken, Mitt Romney will have the nomination, and he will run against Obama for President.  In that case, he will have my vote.  That is the highest probability scenario.

But if reports of a power struggle in the RNC between moderates and conservatives are correct, there is not only a good chance that Ron Paul’s name will be on the ticket at Tampa, but there is also a good chance that a large number of conservative delegates (previously Santorum and Gingrich supporters) might join him.  If Ron Paul’s “delegate strategy” turns out to be legitimate and successful, Ron Paul could even defeat Romney.

With the present NEWS BLACKOUT orchestrated by the liberal media, this primary may not be over until the Republican Convention in Tampa (August 27 – August 30, 2012) is over.

 

Is the Republican Primary Over?
No, it’s Not Over Yet

Does Mitt Romney Have the Nomination?
No, Mitt Romney Doesn’t Have the Nomination Yet

 

Gay Marriage and Homosexuality

 

Homosexuality is a hot topic that was bound to make it onto this cultural values blog at some point.
The Catholic Church’s position on homosexuality (which I support) is not popular in Madison, where I live. Madison is a very liberal– no, radical place. Home of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, and numerous other radical groups.

I have delayed discussing homosexuality on my blog in the past.  Primarily because I would rather focus on the “wooden beam in my own eye” before pointing out “the splinter in my brother’s eye.” Matthew 7:3   In other words, I am in no rush to discuss the sins of others.  I am also no expert on this subject.

Why do you notice the splinter in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye?
How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove that splinter from your eye,’ while the wooden beam is in your eye?
You hypocrite, remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother’s eye. – Matthew 7:3  

 However, recent events in the news have brought the subject of homosexuality to the forefront of public discussion again, and perhaps it is time for me to weigh in with some thoughts.  I will defer to experts on the subject and provide some useful references below for those who are interested in understanding why the preservation of traditional morality and of traditional marriage is so important to so many Americans.

Recent events:

Vice President Biden announced five days ago that he was ‘absolutely comfortable” with homosexual marriage, thus putting President Obama on the spot regarding Obama’s position on homosexuality.

Obama "evolving"

Most recently, President Obama had said that his position on homosexual marriage , although he was opposed a few years ago, is “evolving.”  So now President Obama was placed on the hot seat regarding this issue.
Three days ago, North Carolina approved and amendment banning gay marriage, and banning same-sex civil unions as well.

Yesterday, President Obama announced his personal support of gay marriage, after statements in the past opposing gay marriage.  He attributed this change to his “evolving stance” on gay marriage.

The other two Presidential candidates (Mitt Romney and Ron Paul), mirroring the values of the majority of Americans, still stick to the traditional definition of marriage as one man- one woman.  And no, the Republican primary is not yet over!  (Updated post coming soon.)

.

.

.

.

Where Does America Stand on Gay Marriage?

Some data indicates majority support of gay marriage

.

Gallup results indicate that half of Americans support legal gay marriage.
The results seem to be hovering right around 50/50, within the margin of error, within the last two years.

CNN polls indicate that a slight majority of Americans support gay marriage (50% support, 48% oppose).

.

Some data indicates majority opposition to gay marriage

North Carolina’s passage of a state constitutional amendment legally preventing gay matrimony yesterday makes North Carolina the 30th state to implement a ban on same-sex marriage.  30 States out of 50 is 60%.  This implies that 60% of America opposes gay marriage. continue reading…

Santorum Equals Sanity

or

The Cap Times Published My Letter

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

The Cap Times Published My Letter

The Cap Times Published My Letter, which reads:

Santorum Family

Santorum Equals Sanity

Dear Editor: President Obama is out of control.

He is plagued by spending illness, and now it seems by delusions of grandeur, palling around with Russians in defiance of his electorate.

Mitt Romney is a giant question mark. “A political and cultural enigma,” according to Neil .Swidey.

Rick Santorum represents all the values most Americans have grown up with and admire: responsibility, thriftiness, honesty, truthfulness, faithfulness, and he’s a devoted .family man.

No wonder America is flocking to Santorum against all campaign spending predictions. If . Santorum wins, it will be proof that the Founding Fathers constructed a system that does . allow the people to control their own destiny.

Syte Reitz
Madison

.

Why did the Cap Times Publish a Conservative Letter?

When a liberal newspaper like the Cap Times, which is called the Progressive Voice of Madison, WI publishes a conservative letter endorsing Rick Santorum,  something is up.
  • They could be filling a quota of “conservative” items to prove how “balanced” their reporting is.
  • They could be setting up the conservative author for ridicule (a favorite pastime for Madison’s radical liberals).
  • Or, they could actually be reporting in earnest, reflecting the fact that President Obama has really gone too far, and even the progressives of Madison are scratching their heads.
.

Unlikely?

Not according to the Wall Street Journal, in an article entitled Not-So-Smooth Operator, in which Peggy Noonan states that Obama is increasingly coming across as devious and dishonest.  She reports that the “broad, stable, nonradical, non-birther right” is starting to dislike President Obama personally.  A dislike that is arising solely from Obama’s own behavior, that of an “operator who’s not operating in good faith.”
.
According to Noonan, this shift toward disliking President Obama started with his devious behavior over the contraception mandate, and continues to be fueled with recent events such as the open-mic conversation with Russian President Medvedev and with his personalization and manipulation of the the tragic death of Trayvon Martin.
.

Some of My Best Friends are Liberal

I am surrounded with liberals in Madison, WI, home of the University of Wisconsin, Madison.
I am surrounded with liberals among my relatives, many of whom are products of University propaganda machines.
I myself was a product of a University propaganda machine quite similar to UW Madison; the State University of New York at Stony Brook.   And yes, the propaganda worked at first.
.
I am aware of the fact that most liberals are very nice and well-intentioned people.
But I am also aware of the fact that a radical element has taken over leadership among liberals, an element that is extreme and dangerous, and which is leading the Democrat Party, a party which used to be equally good/bad as the Republican Party, to ridiculous and dangerous extremes.
.
I have confidence in the good people of this country, the majority, the non-radicals, on both right and left.  We have more in common with each other than we do with our respective far rights or far lefts.
80% of us pray regularly.  80% of us are broad, stable, and non-radical. 80% of us look for logic and for reason.
.

Broad, Stable, Non-radical, Right and/or Left

Caught in own snare

My fondness of, and my confidence in my “broad, stable, non-radical, non-Marxist left” friends, has led me to blog on conservative issues, laying out the logic and explaining some of the foundations of  conservative thought which I have unearthed during my recovery from my University brainwashing.  Confident that truth and logic wins over reasonable people, I chip away at the misinformation spread by conniving radical leaders like Pelosi and Obama.

.
Now, based on Peggy Noonan’s argument, Obama is actually doing the job of dismantling his agenda himself.  Much faster than we could dismantle the lies the left has been spreading.  Obama is shooting himself in the foot; he is stepping into his own snares.  I do not enjoy watching a man self-destruct, any man.  But it does give me hope for the non-radical, normal and healthy future of America; a future determined by the people, not by a radical dictator.
.
.

Back to Reality

Back to my Cap Times letter.

Democrats Voting in the Republican Primary?

.
I know that the editors of the Cap Times are not likely to be broad, stable, non-radical left types like my neighbors, friends and relatives.
.
Yes, I know, there’s a fourth possibility, the most likely one: that the Cap Times decided that support of Santorum would be most damaging to the upcoming Wisconsin Primary, and that by publishing my letter they would influence voters, both conservatives and also the liberals who plan to sneak in to manipulate the primary as well, to vote for Santorum.  They think that Santorum will have a lesser chance of defeating Obama in November.
.
But they, too, will soon be stepping into their own snares.
That’s what radicals do best.  Set snares for others, but get caught in them themselves.
.

An Invisible Player

And, most important, there is a invisible player, God.  And God has a wicked sense of humor.
I am watching political developments with great anticipation, as America continues to pray.
.
It would be wickedly satisfying to see the Constitution of the United States, which was based on the Ten Commandments and on Judeo-Christian morality, and which was written by the Founding Fathers centuries ago, still allowing us, the people, to take charge of our own destiny and to defeat the efforts of power-mongers on both sides.
.
The broad, stable, non-radicals of both right and left who value Christianity over Marxism, and who value real tolerance over imposition of radical values, could back a man like Rick Santorum, who does not advocate imposing his views on others, but advocates hands-off government.
.
Some think that Rick Santorum is too conservative.
But good, broad, stable, non-radical conservatives such as Rick Santorum (and such as me) do not try to legislate their views onto others.
They are tolerant.
Tolerant with limits: the Constitution of the United States defines the limits.
And that’s a very good thing.
.

Constitutional Limits

McNaughton: One Nation Under Socialism

The limits of the Constitution are Judeo-Christian limits.
These are the limits that radicals want to test and to reverse.
.

.

.

.
All Posts