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

and

A Note To Republican Delegates

Counting 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 Presidential 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.

Surprising 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.

And 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.

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

In 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.

Yes, 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 Hillary

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.

For 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.

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.

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!

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.

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

Needless 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 War

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.

The 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

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.
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.

Why 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.

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.”

To 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.

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!

Can’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 Possible

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

Choices 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:

• The Truth About Brokered Conventions

-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.

• Have We Ditched Democracy? Was the Colorado Primary Rigged?

-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.

• Battle of Wisconsin Results

– 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.

• The Battle of Wisconsin

-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.

• Election 2016 – the Elephant in the Room

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

• Presidential Nominees -Who Gets to Choose Them? or What’s a Delegate to Do?

  – which outlines the dillemma faced by Republican delegates on “binding,” Mitt Romney’s Rule changes, and the question of whether RNC rules trump State legislation passed by Democrats.

   

   

   

Elections 2016 (and 2014)

or

Taming the Black Swan

or

Selling Out vs Sticking to Principles

Back to Politics

Despite the fact that this blog was originally established for the purpose of discussing and defending traditional ethics and morality in our modern culture, we keep digressing into politics.

This may be fitting, since what is politics, after all, if not the interaction of human beings on an organized group level; an interaction that certainly ought to be subject to the same rules of morality and decency that apply to individual human interactions?

And since what goes around comes around applies to our personal lives, guess what?  What goes around comes around applies to politics as well.  (The expression means that bad things you do come back to bite you later, and the good things you do come back to reward you later.)

Readers Demand Political Philosophy

Readers seem to know this, and as elections approach, they keep returning to those old articles here which discuss political philosophy, which explore the crucial interconnection between morality and the State (i.e., interconnection between Church and State).

Such discussions are not commonly available in the public arena in the present political atmosphere, which is so often controlled by fear of political bullies like the Freedom From Religion Foundation and their ilk, who attempt to eradicate all mention of right and wrong from the public forum. These bullies who attack religion are effectively advocating the absence of all morality from government, from law, and from public life.

So after a hiatus following the ethically dubious 2012 Presidential election in which Barack Obama purchased votes by bribery with Obama-phones and other lollipops, and in which conservatives tossed the vote by staying home in disgust, this blogger returns again to discussion of politics, of coming elections, and of election strategies for Elections 2016.

Why the Hiatus?

The results of the 2012 Presidential election made clear several important facts, which required some time to resolve:

• The people had spoken, and the Obama administration now had four more years to deliver on its campaign promises.  The United States is, after all, a democracy.  The fair loser steps aside gracefully and lets the wheels of democracy turn.
• Those people who were foolish enough to vote for Obama needed to experience more Obama consequences, to experience a rise in personal misery index, before they could be persuaded to vote for someone more responsible who does not promise lollipops and who does not lie.  And 2013/14 certainly provided ample rise in personal misery index generated by government; now even Democrats are calling Obama incompetent and are distancing themselves from him before the 2014 elections.  Meanwhile, we conservatives take an imposed rest and simply watch the inevitable  and painful implosion. We don’t enjoy it any more than parents enjoy watching their teens making painful mistakes.
  What goes around comes around. But it takes time.  We all hurt, we all suffer, but nothing can be done to circumvent some suffering in this life.
• The Republican establishment, which was foolish enough to cheat in order to change Republican convention rules so they could nominate their favorite Compromise Candidate, Mitt Romney, needed to figure out that there is a limit to the degree of compromise their conservative supporters will tolerate before they rebel.  There was great surprise and shock in November 2012, when 4 million registered Republicans failed to come to the polls, handing the election to Barack Obama.

So now two years have passed, and we have experienced some of the consequences of the 2012 election.  We have experienced more of Obama’s administration, ObamaCare failures, VA scandals, IRS scandals, implosion of Iraq, border crises, and numerous other debacles.  Establishment Republicans have experienced 4 million registered Republicans staying home from the polls, and losing the election.
During all of which, Nero fiddled as Rome burned.
Political puzzle pieces have been falling into place.
We need to redefine how we approach politics. 

So now it’s time to end the hiatus and time to address the future.
Back into politics!

Confusion Reigns

First observation on returning to politics in 2014: confusion reigns.

Democrats are suffering from the deluge of scandals befalling President Obama as the fruits of his erroneous policies and his lies mature. Today, 58% of Americans, including 30% of Democrats, say that the Obama administration is incompetent at managing the government.  Now, even New York Times correspondents are saying that the Obama administration’s ebola response is another example of Obama not running a competent government.  Liberals have begun to acknowledge Obama’s incompetence.  

Republicans are suffering from highly disfunctional infighting, seemingly incapable of choosing between continuing moral compromise with the opposition, and their fear of unpopularity if they choose responsible conservative policy.

000

Support is at an all-time low for both parties, and nobody seems to know how to attract the independent voters from the middle.
Only 24% of American voters identify as Republicans, 31% as Democrats, and a whopping 43% identify as Independents.

This bears repeating: a whopping 43% of Americans identify as Independents!
There are way more independents than Democrats.
There are way more independents than Republicans.

THE LEADING POLITICAL FACTION IN THE UNITED STATES TODAY IS INDEPENDENT.

What does it mean to be Independent?
Being Independent means that nobody tells these voters what to think; they think for themselves, and they owe allegiance to neither party.
If Independents could only agree on a candidate, there would be a landslide election and an Independent victory!

Potential Strategies

How can the two major parties recruit from the 43% of  uncommitted electorate in the middle?
With more lollipops and promises?
With an offer of responsible tough government appealing to those who have suffered enough in this economy?
Will a third party succeed in stealing the election?
Is the time ripe, with broadening disgust with both major parties, for the introduction of a third party?

Birth of the Republican Party

Looking at history, the founding of the present Republican party occurred under similar conditions, and resulted in the election of Abraham Lincoln to the Presidency.

The Whigs seemed incapable of coping with national crisis over slavery, so the Republican Party was established (in Wisconsin!) with the primary goal of opposing slavery. (Yes, contrary to what today’s progressives want you to think, the Republican Party was the first to oppose slavery!) The Whigs lost power, and Abraham Lincoln, a Republican, was elected.

So there is historical precedent for the birth of a third party; provided the nation is sufficiently disgusted with the two existing parties.

Are we sufficiently disgusted with the two existing parties today?

Can a third party rise to the occasion in present divided times and succeed in election 2016?

Or would a third party simply divide the conservative vote and hand victory to Democrats?

The Republican Split Today

The Conservative Dilemma

With four factions advocating four different approaches, the solution to this conservative dilemma is not obvious.
The above four approaches are mutually exclusive, and getting conservatives to agree on one approach would pose quite the obstacle.

• Those favoring the Buckley Rule would nominate someone like Mitt Romney or Chris Christie again.
• Those favoring the Limbaugh Rule would nominate someone like Scott Walker or Ben Carson.
• Those favoring the Third Party Option would replace the Republican Party by a group like the Tea Party.
• Article V supporters, if successful, would provide an opportunity for radical change and decentralization of government, returning much power to the states and reducing the power of the federal government.

The first option (Buckley Rule) has already been tried and failed in Election 2012.

Many conservatives favor the second option (Limbaugh Rule) right now. Stick to your principles an nominate the most conservative candidate in the primaries.

But as discontent with Washington continues to grow, it becomes more and more likely that some Americans may abandon business as usual and may opt for the more startling last two options- third party or even overriding Washington DC via Article V.

One thing is certain- the 4 million disgusted registered Republicans who stayed home in November of 2012 are not likely to change their minds and get back on board with John Boehner and the Buckley Rule.

It is much more likely that an additional 4 million will join the first 4 million in boycotting the Republican establishment’s cowardly and ever-compromising path towards defeat.  Yet staying home OR voting for a third party can hand the election to Democrats, even if they do not have majority support.

So What’s a Conservative to Do in 2014/2016 ?

There will be much discussion, much angst, and

much disagreement among conservatives over which of the above four approaches should be followed in 2016.
There will be even more anxiety over whether the guaranteed lack of unity will defeat us, handing victory to progressives.

But an examination of history, an examination of the forces that determine the fate of nations and of elections, reveals that perhaps we need not worry.
There is a simple and practical approach that may reassure those so very worried about the future.
Hint: it involves simply sticking to your principles and not selling out.
-The approach the Almighty might suggest if anybody bothered to ask Him.

The Determinants of History

What determines history?
What determines the fate of a nation or the fate of an election?

It may surprise some to hear that the determinants of history, the elements that identify or determine the nature of events or that fix their outcome, are not usually voters, nor are they politicians.

Many historians acknowledge that much of history is determined not by careful planning and strategy, but by fluke events called Black Swans.

Black Swan theory is taught at universities, and Black Swan theory was discussed by the New York Times in connection with the  9/11 Commission, which sought “to provide a ‘full and complete accounting’ of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 and recommendations as to how to prevent such attacks in the future.”

Black Swan theory is not a joke; it’s a sobering and probable reality.

So when we talk about the 2016 election, it is wise to consider whether a Black Swan event will be the determinant of the election, and to ask whether it is possible for us or for our politicians to influence that Black Swan event.

What IS a Black Swan?

How do we define a Black Swan?

The Cambridge Japanese Journal of Political Science refers to these unpredictable big events that shape human history, or Black Swans (emphasis mine):

The nonlinear dynamical process of self-organized criticality provides a new ‘theory of history’ that explains a number of unresolved anomalies: Why are the really big events in human history usually unpredictable? Why is it impossible to anticipate sudden political, economic, and social changes? Why do distributions of historical data almost always contain a few extreme events that seem to have had a different cause from all the rest? Why do so many of our ‘lessons of history’ fail to predict important future events? As people, organizations, and nations become increasingly sensitive to each other’s behavior, trivial occurrences sometimes propagate into sudden changes. Such events are unpredictable because in the self-organized criticality environment that characterizes human history, the magnitude of a cause often is unrelated to the magnitude of its effect.

Nassim Taleb is a Black Swan specialist.  He is a scientist, essayist, businessman, mathematical trader and scientist-philosopher who studies the epistemology of randomness and the multidisciplinary problems of uncertainty and knowledge, particularly in the large-impact hard-to-predict rare events called “Black Swans”.

Taleb seeks to create a “platform for a new scientific-minded public intellectual dealing with social and historical events — in replacement to the ‘fooled by randomness’ historian and the babbling journalistic public intellectual.”

(Nassim Saleb feels morally bound as a professional philosopher and historian to acknowledge that history is driven by Black Swan events.)

In his book Learning to Expect the Unexpected, Taleb defines the Black Swan like this:

A black swan is an outlier, an event that lies beyond the realm of normal expectations. Most people expect all swans to be white because that’s what their experience tells them; a black swan is by definition a surprise. Nevertheless, people tend to concoct explanations for them after the fact, which makes them appear more predictable, and less random, than they are. Our minds are designed to retain, for efficient storage, past information that fits into a compressed narrative. This distortion, called the hindsight bias, prevents us from adequately learning from the past.

“Much of what happens in history”, he notes, “comes from ‘Black Swan dynamics’, very large, sudden, and totally unpredictable ‘outliers’, while much of what we usually talk about is almost pure noise. Our track record in predicting those events is dismal; yet by some mechanism called the hindsight bias we think that we understand them. We have a bad habit of finding ‘laws’ in history (by fitting stories to events and detecting false patterns); we are drivers looking through the rear view mirror while convinced we are looking ahead.”

So when it comes to elections, whether they be 2014, 2016, or any other election, it would be wise to remind ourselves that Black Swans are often determinants of the outcome.

That’s why nobody can predict election results.

By definition, a Black Swan is an unexpected and surprising historical event that plays a giant role in altering the course of history, yet could not have been predicted, and is not pre-planned by politicians or governments.

Role of the Black Swan in History

Historians and economists both acknowledge the role of Black Swans in human history.

There are many examples of Black Swan events in history, recent and ancient.
Remember the definition: nobody saw it coming, nobody could have seen it coming, it could not be planned for.

Some examples of Black Swan events:

• Terrorist attacks of 9/11
• Victory of American colonists against Imperial England in the Revolutionary War
• Outbreak of World War I (as a result of Archduke Ferdinand of Austria’s driver taking a wrong turn)
• Unexpected rise of Hitler
• Dissolution of the Soviet Union without a single battle in 1991
• Recent spread of Islamic fundamentalism
• Internet bubble
• Housing bubble
• Stock market crashes
• Arab spring
• Surprising defusing of the Syria situation in 2013
• Christianization of Europe by Constantine
• Battle of Lepanto victory (which prevented the conquering of Europe by Muslims against terrific odds)
• Attack on Pearl Harbor

Biblical examples of Black Swan events:

• Moses
• The Exodus
• Crossing of the Red Sea,
• David’s victory over Goliath
• Conversion of Nineveh
• Conversion of Nebuchadnezzar (see also)
• Life, death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ
• Conversion of St. Paul

Aside: The Bible is a valuable source of political instruction for those who realize the wisdom contained in it.

The above examples of Black Swan events occurred against all odds, were so unlikely that they could not previously be imagined, and they changed the course of human history dramatically.

Black Swans- Good or Bad?

Black Swans can be either good or bad.
To qualify as a Black Swan, an event simply has to lie beyond the realm of normal expectations.
The Christianization of Europe was good.
The terror attacks of 9/11 were bad.
Both were Black Swan events.

Black Swan events can occur not only in politics and in global events, but in our personal lives as well.  One unexpected event frequently steers the subsequent course of a person’s entire lifetime.

Taming the Black Swan

Once one accepts the existence and powerful role of Black Swan events in human history, the next logical question becomes- can we possibly prepare for these events and/or influence these events?

By human reason, no.
By definition we cannot expect and prepare for the unexpected.

However, in a nation like ours, in which 80% of citizens believe in God, 80% of citizens pray daily and believe that God answers their prayers, in a nation whose government has been founded on the inalienable rights given to man by God, in a nation structured after Christian morality, it is not unreasonable to bring into this discussion the interaction between God and History, and the interconnection between Church and State.
And this changes the picture dramatically.

In fact, when we acknowledge the interconnection between God and the world, Black Swan events become more easily understood as the intervention of God and of Satan in human affairs.

This view does not refuse to discuss the battle between of Good and Evil battle in our world.  In times of history like the present one, while ISIS mercilessly terrorizes Europe without intervention,  events becomes less mystifying when viewed in their proper light.

Back to Who Is In Charge?

Does this mean that we are helpless pawns at the mercy of warring supernatural forces of Good and Evil, much like the ancient Greeks who believed they were subject to the capricious whims of their warring and jealous gods?

No!
Unlike the ancient Greeks, we have the ability to steer supernatural events indirectly through our personal choices of good and evil and through our prayers.  We have a direct line to God via saintly lives and prayer, through which we can access the most powerful forces in the universe.  This is the power God has given to human beings. A power, incidentally, resented tremendously by Satan.

Unfortunately, some of us also choose to have a direct line to Satan. The Enemy is unleashed and empowered whenever we shun God’s directives and defy God, particularly when we try to be little gods ourselves.

And so, through moral choices and through prayer, we humans do have great influence on the war between Good and Evil.
Why do you think that Pope Francis’s reaction to the crisis in Syria was to call for global Adoration?
The holy man kwows how to fight spiritual warfare.

Satan always baits us with promises and with lies, but ultimately he delivers misery to all human beings, particularly to those who fell for his ploys.  But God limits Satan’s power, and teaches us how to chain the Evil one, by following the guidelines left to us first by the Ten Commandments, and then by Jesus Christ.

And so the mysterious struggles of Good and Evil are played out in our world, while many of us are unaware that victory is really within our grasp and that we have much more power over world events than we realize.

The Solution

or

Taming the Black Swan

The solution is simple;

• Stay close to God through prayer
• Trust God with patience
• Play by God’s rules, even in the face of impossible odds (God does the rest)

Simple formula for Elections

The formula for victory is simple- vote for the wisest and most moral candidate, whether you are voting in elections or in primaries, and forget about arguments on capturing independents in the middle by making moral compromises.

Follow the Limbaugh rule, not only when voters are fed up with liberalism, but ALL the time.
It worked for Abe Lincoln, it worked  for Ronald Reagan, and it worked for Saint John Paul II in the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

Most of America (Independents) needs to reclaim a political party and make it our own.
Both existing parties have failed us abysmally.
Democrats have completely sold out Christian values by promoting abortion and redefining marriage.

In 2014, Independents should go to the polls and vote for Republicans, because they oppose abortion (killing over a million citizens each year), and represent fiscal responsibility as well.
Perhaps the Republican party might be willing to shift to the right.

Do your homework; use a neutral source like BALLOTPEDIA.

In 2016, if the Republican establishment resists a shift to conservative values and if the field is littered with numerous conservative candidates who split the vote up as they did in 2012, conservatives should not fear a brokered convention in which many conservatives are pared down to a few with numerous rounds of ballots.
We should not let the Republican establishment force the Buckley Rule, as they did in 2012, forcing the nomination of Mitt Romney against the majority of their party, who supported conservatives.

A message to the Republican establishment: don’t sell out your base and your ethics in some misguided attempt to capture some Independent votes from the middle.
Most Independents want a shift towards conservatism, reality and responsible behavior.

In 2016, if the Republican establishment tries to force liberalism and the “Buckley rule” as they have in the past, we move to a third, more moral and more conservative party.

Independents think, they admire justice, and they rally behind upstanding candidates.
Independents come in riding on black swans.

Reporting History

Most historians separate history and philosophy/theology into distinct and separate compartments, and only rarely do they acknowledge that human beliefs exert a powerful influence on human behavior and on human history.

It is even more rare for an historian to acknowledge that those humans actions which stem from religious belief (such as prayer or such as heroic action) can actually be effective in dealing with a global or political problem.
The political correctness of today does not permit the inclusion of God, moral choices, or prayer in any analysis.

But those who take their heads out of the sand and realize that this nation was founded on Christian principles and that this is still a nation of God-fearing and freedom-loving people in both parties, will realize that this nation’s history has been and will continue to be be steered by ethics, by prayer, and by God.
Unless the minority, the radical progressives who want to eradicate any mention of God from our lives and from our history, are allowed to intimidate the rest of us into inaction and into silence.

The reading of history cannot be partial and biased to exclude the fact that this nations was shaped by Christians, still consists of Christians, and that it’s history has been guided and protected by a very good God.
The role of the supernatural must be acknowledged, if Truth is to be known.
The secularization of human history neglects to consider man’s strongest motivations, denies his noble struggle between the Truth and the Father of Lies, and dismisses his most powerful ally – the Almighty.

Col 2:8 See to it that no one captivate you with an empty, seductive philosophy according to human tradition, according to the elemental powers of the world and not according to Christ.

Interconnection Between Church and State

The interconnection suggested here between Church and State is not the top-down dictation of moral values by Executive Order that is being attempted by President Obama, dictating what newly invented progressive morality the citizens of the United States must follow.  Nor is it a government-imposed State Religion imposed from above.

The interconnection is a democratic one.

When it comes to refining the relationship between government and religion, or between Church and State, the key is for ethical values to flow from the bottom up, not from the top down.

Nobody wants a specific government-imposed religion. But people clearly do want a code of morality and ethics on which most reasonable citizens can agree.

Instead of eliminating morality altogether from public life, and instead of government (King Obama) dictating his own brand of morality, citizens need to vote their personal religious moral beliefs into law.
The Constitution provides the mechanism by which this fundamentally Christian nation, still identifying itself as 80% Christian, can choose representatives in government who reflect their ethical beliefs.

An Optimistic Future

When the interconnection between Church and State is implemented, not from the top down, but  from the grass roots up,
when we all pray and go to the polls and vote for what is right and what is moral, our nation will heal and will get back on the right track.

David will slay Goliath, and Red Sea will part.

That power is in our hands.
We can marshal powerful forces into play that could never be predicted or imagined on a human level alone.

We can steer the Black Swans- provided we don’t throw away the reins.

Related Posts:

The Missing Link – Redefining How We Approach Politics

Pope Francis Takes On Obama

Political Puzzle Pieces Falling into Place

Enjoying the Progress? Join the Prayer

Global Adoration- Say What?

The Presumptive Nominee

0r

The Secret Insurrection

Mitt Romney, Presumptive Nominee

Presumptive: based on presumption or probability; affording reasonable ground for belief.

Presume: take for granted, assume, or suppose; assume as true in the absence of proof to the contrary; undertake with unwarrantable boldness; undertake without right or permission; take something for granted; act or proceed with unwarrantable or impertinent boldness; go too far in acting unwarrantably or in taking liberties.

The Point: Presumptive  is a pretty loaded word.

Mitt Romney is the Republican party’s Presumptive Nominee for President of the United States.

Romney as Presumptive Nominee: Reasonable Status or Unwarranted Supposition?

The questions must be asked: is Romney the clear front-runner?  Does Romney have a sufficient lead to gain the nomination at the Republican Convention at the end of August?

On the surface, Romney does appear to be a pretty clear front-runner.  He does, after all, have 52% of the popular vote from State primaries at this point, according to Wikipedia’s count, which is based primarily on the Associated Press count.    And the Republican Party “establishment” has recognized Romney as the Presumptive Nominee.

Finally, the mass media, with a few exceptions, certainly seems to be on board with calling Romney the presumptive nominee.
Doesn’t that make Romney a clear winner?
The fact that the conservative Wall Street Journal and Drudge Report did not jump to presume Romney to be the nominee gives us a clue that there may be some doubt about the security of Romney’s position.

Problems with Counting Chickens Before They Are Hatched

There are a number of reasons why Romney should not count his chickens before they are hatched, particularly in this 2012 election:

• In 2012, a huge conflict is going on within the Republican Party between moderate “establishment” Republicans and the new more conservative “tea party” members, and has motivated a number of conservative groups to attempt unseating Romney, who is way too liberal for their taste.  There is a secret insurrection going on.
• In 2012, there seem to be new strategies emerging that involve changing delegates’ minds after the primaries, effectively nullifying the results of the primaries and challenging the concept of “bound” candidates.
• Probability tells us that presumptive candidates are often displaced during the Republican convention– about 43% of the time.  Romney is not immune to this possibility.
• History also shows us that whenever the presumptive nominee was displaced in the past, the replacement nominee was more likely to be successful in defeating the Democrats in the general election.
• Delegate votes at the Republican Convention do not reflect the popular vote directly, so delegate votes at the convention may surprise us despite Romney’s 52% of the popular vote.
• Delegate counts such as AP’s are only estimates, and these have been challenged, the media has been accused of misrepresenting them, and the numbers are under constant change, particularly in 2012.

The Republican Internal Conflict: Why Romney Might Be Challenged

Romney has struggled to inspire a passionate following among conservatives because of his liberal leanings, and much of his early success in primaries was attributed to his campaign’s prolific spending.

Romney’s early struggle in primaries

Prior to his eventual accumulation of 52% of the popular vote in the primaries, Romney struggled to compete with the conservative candidates opposing him.  Lean economic times often cause more voters to be conservative.  Most people have the common sense to realize that during a shortage one must conserve, not spend or waste. Conserving is the root of conservatism.

It has become pretty clear that now in 2012, the Republican “base” includes an increasing number of voters with conservative fiscal and social philosophies, who are not at all happy with Mitt Romney, author of RomneyCare, previous supporter of abortion, and present supporter of gay Boy Scout leaders  and gay adoption.  Some have even challenged Romney’s commitment to one set of values and have accused him of shifting his values in accordance with political advantage.

Although Romney was the front-runner during the primaries, he was also the only liberal candidate.  Since the conservative vote was split among numerous conservative candidates, Romney appeared to be leading, but in actual fact, the total number of conservative voters was outnumbering Romney supporters.  Many of these conservative supporters voted for Santorum in the primaries.  When Santorum suspended his campaign due to his daughter Bella’s illness, these voters were left with nowhere to go other than Romney or Ron Paul.  And Ron Paul’s extreme attitude towards foreign policy, defense budget, and legalization of drugs scared many voters off.  Many voted for Romney because their favorite conservative candidates had suspended their campaigns.  They voted for Romney despite their lack of enthusiasm for Romney.  Romney was the not-Obama.

Ron Paul – Mitt Romney

Things were also complicated by the fact that Ron Paul has refused all along to withdraw from the campaign, and still remains in the race, so Romney cannot claim victory officially.  According to Convention rules (and depending on who is counting or estimating the delegates), Ron Paul still has a plurality of delegates in five states, and his name can be presented for nomination at the Convention.  Romney is still taking this threat very seriously; his supporters are still attempting now in August, to unseat Maine’s Ron Paul delegates – Maine Public Broadcasting Network.  Romney supporters would not be wasting their time if no threat existed.

In fact, three candidates have enough delegates (a plurality of delegates in five states) for their names to be presented for nomination: Paul, Romney, and Santorum.   This opens the door for at least several people to challenge Romney.

What About Paul Ryan? Isn’t He Going to Save the Romney Team?

Paul Ryan joins the Romney ticket

Romney was lagging in some polls against Obama, making establishment Republicans nervous about his ability to carry the election against Obama.  A rightful concern, with so many conservatives still unhappy with the “un-Republican” Romney, who has in the past virtually admitted himself that he was Republican in name only (RINO).: “My R doesn’t stand so much for Republican as it does for reform.”

Many conservatives, particularly in the wake of Obama’s recent abysmal failures to keep his word, are very nervous about the reliability of Romney’s new promises, particularly considering Romney’s previous flip-flop or Etch-a-Sketch reputation.

Republlican Party energized

So Paul Ryan was added to the ticket.  The addition of such a bright, energetic conservative to the ticket has energized the Republican Party dramatically.  The initial reaction has been one of enthusiasm, new focus, strength, and has led to success in changing the agenda; from one of defense against Obama’s fallacious attacks on Romney, to one of challenging Obama on his policies and on his shameless dishonesty.  The addition of Paul Ryan has been very positive, very beneficial, and has been very fruitful in the fundraising department.

Paul Ryan is Too Good

However, something will eventually dawn on people- that if Paul Ryan is so noble in character, intelligent in policy and charismatic in personality that he can transform Romney’s campaign overnight, why is Romney, and not Paul Ryan at the top of the ticket?

It would be tempting for conservatives to rearrange the ticket, putting Paul Ryan at the top, if that is at all possible at the convention.  As Vice President, Paul Ryan’s position and power are not secure.   Ryan could swiftly be demoted by Etch-A-Sketch master Romney into a powerless and peripheral position immediately after the general election.  Already, Mitt Romney is distancing himself from Paul Ryan, claiming that he, Romney, has an economic plan that is “not Paul Ryan’s.”

Mitt Romney would be naïve not to realize that Paul Ryan is a threat to him; not by design, but by Ryan’s inherent likeability, charisma and character; characteristics Romney is lacking.

The fact of the matter is that numerous conservatives like me, who have never committed to one political party, yet who are devoted to unseating the anti-colonialist Barak Obama, are sitting out the Republican internal insurrection to see who wins.  We will support any candidate produced by the GOP convention by virtue of his/her being not-Obama, including Mitt Romney.  But we do have our favorites, and Romney is not one of them.

Is Paul Ryan Enough to Placate the Republican Insurrection?

Many non-Republican conservatives (such as the Tea Party) are not sitting out the insurrection as I am.  They are actively trying to unseat Romney as the presumptive nominee.  (More on specific efforts below.)

Ryan has certainly energized Romney’s campaign, and will help Romney do better in polls against Obama, but Ryan may have little effect on internal Republican battles before the convention, because people realize the “demote-ability” of a Vice President.

If Romney survives convention attempts to unseat him, then Paul Ryan’s presence on the ticket will definitely help Romney against Obama in the general election.  Let’s just hope Ryan does not get demoted to a position of little power and influence after the election, as some Vice-Presidents have been in previous administrations, including George Washington’s, who did not include John Adams in cabinet meetings. The current Vice President, Joe Biden, has virtually been assigned the role of court jester.  In this case, however, his own behavior has contributed to his undignified position; presumably Paul Ryan would fare better than Joe Biden has.

The Case for Nominating Romney Versus Not Nominating Romney

The Republican Party has found its success during previous increasingly liberal decades by compromising repeatedly with liberals.  They have thus slowly drifted away from staunch conservatism.  The seasoned “establishment” Republicans want to continue this trend with the nomination of Mitt Romney, arguing that he will help to capture moderate votes, and perhaps even some liberal votes, helping Republicans to unseat Obama in the general election.

However, the tide of history can change, and has changed in the past.  The Tea Party movement is one indication of a possible change of heart in the American people, driven by economic problems and by the need to face reality.  Economic austerity often motivates philosophical corrections and a shift toward conservatism.  The Republican establishment agenda of compromise and of seeking moderate votes will not attract votes when Americans are drifting towards conservatism.  Instead, it will frustrate people who want true change. When the base gets alienated, they will not go to the polls, and the reduced voter participation will cancel out any gain that was made by compromising to get moderate votes.

Do We Court the Moderates, or Do We Go For a Bold Course-Correction?

The History of Republican primaries and conventions also indicates that the nomination of moderates or liberals (like Romney) often disappoints the Republican base, and leads to defeat in the general election.  Republican Convention historian Dr. Barbara Haney, a RNC convention delegate from Alaska herself, discusses the surprising history of Republican conventions, a history which seems to indicate that the unseating of a lukewarm presumptive nominee by a more conservative alternative during a convention actually improves the chances of winning the general election against the incumbent Democrat.

The enthusiatic rally of support observed this week for Paul Ryan indicates that America might be ready for such a course correction towards conservatism.  A moderate candidate like Romney gets half-hearted, lukewarm support, while a strong, principled conservative like Paul Ryan reenergizes the Republican party overnight.

What Hands Can True Conservatives Still Play?
Can We Learn from History?

The new energized conservatives, including evangelical Christians and the Tea Party, may play any hand available to them at this convention, to nominate a true conservative in place of Mitt Romney.  This might actually be a good idea, based on Barabara Haney’s historical analysis, which showed an 88% chance of success in unseating an incumbent Democrat following the vetting process of a brokered convention, compared with a paltry 31% chance of success in unseating the Democrat incumbent following an uneventful first-ballot nomination of a presumptive nominee like Romney.

Lincoln and Reagan, products of the “brokered convention;” NOT “presumptive nominees.”

Ronald Reagan and Abraham Lincoln are examples of the 88% successes, which illustrate Barbara Haney’s historical analysis and theories, on the beneficial nature of brokered conventions.

So it boils down to: do you play chicken, compromise, court the moderate vote, and risk having only a 33% chance of defeating Obama, or do you boldly embrace the uncertainty of the brokered convention, nominate a candidate capable of energizing the general election (like Reagan or Lincoln), and go for the 88% chance of defeating Obama?  And do you put your energizing candidate in the Vice President slot, or in the President slot?

“Establishment” Republicans are making a fallacious assumption in promoting Romney; they are assuming that a conservative candidate of strong character will not attract liberal votes.  Abraham Lincoln disproved that fear, Ronald Reagan disproved that fear, and, incidentally, Paul Ryan has already disproved that fear in his home district of Janesville, Wisconsin, which is liberal, yet has elected conservative Paul Ryan for seven consecutive terms, because of his integrity, his character, and his reliably.

Jim Thorpe testimony on Paul Ryan’s character and popularity:

Incidentally, Paul Ryan is not the only Republican with the character and integrity capable of attracting liberal and moderate votes; add to that list Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, and Michelle Bachmann, among others.

The UK Guardian offers the following analysis:

The Romney campaign chose him (Paul Ryan) to deliver the Republican base vote amid fears that die-hard conservatives could cost him the White House by staying at home on election day rather than turning out for a candidate they are ambivalent about….

But that strategy was not working. The US is so polarised that there are, according to the polls, few undecided voters left. Compared with 2008, when about 25% of the electorate had still to make up their minds at this stage in the election, only about 5% are undecided. Both the Democratic and Republican strategists have concluded that the winner on 6 November will be the campaign that fires up its own supporters, that gets its base out, rather than the one that wins over the independent swing voters….

Larry Sabato, professor of politics at the University of Virginia, said: “It is base v base. There are hardly any independents.” At the cost of winning over a percentage of that small group in the centre, the campaigns risked alienating their core support, he said.

This analysis supports my arguments and the historical findings of Barbara Haney; that a conservative candidate may secure more votes than a moderate at certain times in history.  2012 is one of those times.

Is It Too Late To Change Our Minds?
Aren’t Delegates Committed to Voting for Romney?

Apparently, it’s not too late to change our minds, and Republican historian Barbara Haney indicates that in the last 21 Republican conventions where the nominee, like Romney, was not an incumbent President, 43% of presumptive nominees were unseated at the convention.  Romney, too, can be unseated.  There is historically a 43% probability of that.

How Can Somebody Who Has Over 51% of the Delegates be Unseated?

Here comes the next surprise:  RNC convention rules contain some surprises.

Whether it is by the wisdom of our predecessors or by fluke, RNC convention rules appear to allow for delegates to change their minds about candidates between the primaries and the convention.  Although there has been some dispute over this, the 2008 convention raised this issue for a delegate from Utah, and the RNC Legal Counsel Jennifer Sheehan  upheld the freedom of delegates to change their minds, writing:

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.
and
The national convention allows delegates to vote for the individual of their choice, regardless of whether the person’s name is officially placed into nomination or not.

More details on this controversy on Rule 38 at Rule 38.

Why would the architects of democracy allow such uncertainty and reversibility in RNC primary and convention rules?  Presumably they assumed that delegates will be honorable and will not to change their minds frivolously; that they will make a serious effort to vote (in the first ballot) for the candidate they were “bound” to by the primaries. But ultimately, they are allowed to consider events and developments prior to the Republican Convention, and are allowed to change their votes, or to abstain from voting, if they feel it is in the best interests of their constituents.  It could be argued in 2012 that the majority of primary voters wanted a solid conservative to represent them, and Mitt Romney is not that solid conservative. We have the unusual case where delegates could honestly believe that they will be more faithful to the wishes of the people if they abandon Mitt Romney.  It is such an eventuality that would motivate the architects to include some flexibility into the system.  After all, our elected Representatives and Senators are not bound to vote the party line after their election either, and are allowed to use their best judgment in response to developing events.

What Could Motivate a “Bound” Delegate to Change Their Vote or to Abstain?

Internal tension within the Republican Party is undermining the security of Romney’s projected 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, The Liberty Movement (conservatives who support Ron Paul) is taking over the GOP. 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. Some claim that Ron Paul may have recruited as many as 1,000 delegates going into the Tampa convention, reducing the support Romney thinks that he has:
Ron Paul’s not-so-secret plot for the GOP convention– ABC News

Fox Reality Check is not alone in their suspicions.  Newt Gingrich also acknowledged that Ron Paul is the “biggest danger” for Romney in Tampa.  As Ron Paul wins over delegates Romney thought he had, it becomes difficult to make any projections about the convention at all.  For example, 1,144 delegates become only 144 delegates if somebody wins over 1,000 of them.  Extreme example, but illustrates the point.

Very recently, a conservative movement has surfaced issuing an appeal to 20,000 RNC members and delegates at the Convention called DumpRomney.   They propose that dumping Romney would be accomplished by “bound” delegates conscientiously abstaining from voting in the first ballot.  When Romney does not get the required 1144 votes in the first ballot, then all delegates are released to vote their conscience in subsequent ballots, and new candidates can be added to the list of contenders.  Not only can previous contenders like Santorum, Gingrich, Ron Paul and Michelle Bachmann be added, but new names can also be added.  Sarah Palin? Scott Walker? Paul Ryan?  Anybody’s guess.  DumpRomney does not advocate any particular candidate; they simply advocate the dumping of Romney at the RNC convention.

Ron Paul’s campaign has claimed to have won over 500-1,000 delegates. The DumpRomney folks may or may not have success in persuading delegates to abstain in the first ballot.  This split in the Republican Party makes Romney’s nomination in the first ballot very uncertain.

The Battle Is Still On

The present battle for delegates is (not surprisingly) not covered by the mainstream media, who would love to see liberal Romney as the Republican nominee.

The Republican Party is also not advertising the conflict.  Public show of division is rarely wise.

But the battle rages on:

Battle of Gettysburg by Currier & Ives

• Battle over Maine delegates
• Maine Governor threatening to boycott convention
• Battle over Oklahoma delegates 
• Republican activists challenging 20 Ron Paul delegates from Maine 
• 160 convention delegates sued the RNC to be freed from voting for Romney
• Louisiana’s GOP delegate count is being challenged (8-13-12)
• Arguments continue over GOP convention delegates

Why Haven’t We Heard This in the Media?

• Most of the Media is liberal and would love to run against Mitt Romney, who would be challenged to offer anything different from what Obama has offered.
• “Establishment” Republicans are not in a rush to advertise disunity to their opposition.
• Conservatives hoping to make a course correction in the Republican Party are not in a rush to advertise their plans and their tactics.

But now, for those of us who are rooting for a brokered convention, for a replacement of Mitt Romney with a true conservative, for the election of the next Ronald Reagan or Abraham Lincoln, this, 1 week before the Republican Convention, when the plans have been laid and the agenda is set, is a good time to remind everyone to have an open mind and a positive attitude toward the possibility of a brokered convention.

This Convention is Bound to Be Very Exciting

There is no question that this Republican Convention is bound to be very exciting.
It also holds the potential to alter the course of history dramatically.
Let’s presume little: historically speaking, Mitt’s odds are 57:43.
Much is going on behind the scenes that the media is not telling us about.
However, if Mitt does get the nomination, our chances of beating Obama are reduced by a factor of about three.

Can Romney Still Redeem Himself?

Can Mitt Romney convince Republican conservatives that he is capable of the kind of leadership that the fiscal and moral challenges of 2012 demand?

Mitt Romney has already pledged to repeal ObamaCare (which 2/3 of America opposes) and to oppose abortion.  He claims that he will balance the budget, something that is high on American list of priorities.

Romney could also pledge to uphold the values that close to 2/3 of Americans hold:

• Life: 2/3 of Americans oppose federal funding of abortion
• Liberty: more Americans support religious leaders on upholding religious freedom than those who support Obama’s trampling of religious freedom, and 2/3 of Americans want reduced government control of our daily lives
• Marriage: 2/3 of American states have passed amendments protecting traditional marriage.

Mitt Romney could sign the Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life Pledge. He is one of the few Republican candidates who have refused to sign the pledge so far.

Mitt could promise to uphold religious freedom, a freedom that is under threat for the 25% of Americans who are Catholics.

Would Promises Be Believed?

There was a time when political promises carried more weight.   But a new era of political dishonesty has been inaugurated with Obama’s demonstrated ability to about face, and to thumb his nose at his own previous promises.

The lies, reversals, security leaks, and imperial mandates characterizing the Obama administration have led many into shock and disbelief that so much could transpire in less than four years.  Obama rules by issuing mandates each time Congress and the Senate fail to approve the legislation he wants.  No FBI, police, or security force has materialized to challenge Barack Obama on his actions, to label him a traitor, or to drag him off in chains.

The head of the Department of Justice, Eric Holder, panders to Obama’s wishes, fails to protect and enforce the Constitution of the U.S. and it’s laws.  He has been held in contempt of Congress, yet the Department of Justice refuses to prosecute him.

The Department of Homeland Security similarly neglects it’s duties, and seems to be headed by a “liberal sisterhood of plundering hacks” who are consumed in an Animal-House style sexual harassment scandal.

In the past, the news media would also have kept presidents and politicians accountable for their promises.  In 2012, they don’t.  The media clearly has a political agenda, an extremely liberal one not shared by the majority of Americans,  an agenda which 2/3 of America opposes, and the media misuses their profession to misinform the public, attempting to steer them towards liberalism.  Liberal Presidents and politicians get away with more and more lying.  No behavior on the part of liberals shocks the media; neither lies (Obama) nor incompetence (Biden) shock anyone.  Media now actively covers for the liberal politicians whom they favor. They excuse any behavior by candidates who continue to advocate lower and lower standards of morality and accountability in our society.

In this atmosphere, it will be difficult for Romney to acquire the credibility to energize the Republican base and to get them to the polls.  His recent statements in support of gay adoption and gay Boy Scout leaders do little to improve his credibility as a conservative or as a Republican.

Previous to 2012, Romney might have had a better chance to redeem himself.

But today, an alternate, more principled nominee with a history of strong character is more likely to be believed, and would serve both the Republican Party and our nation much better in 2012.

May God Bless, Help, and Direct America!

May God bless, help, and direct America… starting with the Republican Convention on August 27- 30, 2012.
Numerous moral and ethical leaders have indicated that this election is the most important election of a lifetime, an election which will determine the future character of America; strong, responsible and autonomous nation, or bankrupt dissolute welfare state.  The movie 2016 predicts disaster for America if Barack Obama is re-elected on November 6^th.

What’s at Stake: Can the People (2/3 of America) Be Highjacked by Media and Politicians (Democrat and Republican), or Does Our Democratic System Still Work?

Related Subsequent Articles:

The Missing Link – Redefining How We Approach Politics  

AND

Elections 2016 or Taming the Black Swan or Selling Out vs Sticking to Principles

Auspicious June?
Auspicious: “of good omen”

The November 2012 Election is Approaching

With the approach of the November 2012 election, things are really heating up.
This promises to be so much more than the usual incumbent election.
Since before 2000, America has been closely divided on some crucial issues, and elections seem to be intensifying in passion.

Divisions are deepening and polarizing, not only between left and right, but are deepening and polarizing within the two major parties, Democrat (Liberal) and Republican (Conservative).

Division

In 2000, we fought over chads.
In 2008, Democrats were floored by Obama’s displacement of Hillary.
In 2010, Wisconsin went Republican, and Governor Walker took charge of making some conservative fiscal changes.

Democrats rebelled; in March of 2011, unions converged on Wisconsin to show their displeasure.
Now, on June 5, 2012, Wisconsin faces the potential recall of a Governor– not for high crimes and misdemeanors– but for fulfilling the conservative fiscal promises he made during his election.
Many view Wisconsin as a preview and as a test of the ability of conservative fiscal policy to solve budget problems while retaining the support of voters as difficult yet responsible sacrifices are shared. What “goes down” tomorrow in Wisconsin is thought to be predictive of the direction soon to be taken by many other states, as well as by the coming Presidential election.

In 2011, President Obama took charge of implementing some liberal fiscal policies, including stimulus and ObamaCare.

This time, Republicans showed their displeasure; not through massive demonstrations, but through the filing of massive legal challenges.

In 2012, as the two groups prepare to face off in the coming election, there is conflict within the Republican Party. There is also conflict among Democrats.

Both parties are split between moderates who wish to continue attempts at compromise with the opposition, and those who are less compromising and believe that the time for stalemate and delay has expired.

The ultimate conflict will be resolved in November, when Americans vote either to keep or to discard President Obama.  So far, historically, incumbent Presidents have been unseated by a challenger 10 times.

Division Over What?

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.

Historical Election

With the intensification of divisions in the United States, and with escalating pressure for action by elected officials in place of rhetoric,  many forecast the coming election to be historically decisive in determining the future direction of the United States.

Conservative Perspective

An increasing number of Americans, myself included, are turning more and more toward conservative approaches for the solution to the nation’s fiscal problems.  Gallup polls indicate a rise in conservatism, as did Wisconsin’s “going Republican” in 2010.
Some would like to cast the trend towards conservatism as a panicked regression towards old and foolish policies.  Of course, these would be Liberals, or Democrats, who view conservatism with such a negative spin.
Others would argue that the meaning of the word conservative (to conserve, or to save) is the no-brainer solution when resources, including economic resources, are in short supply, as they are today. Of course, these would be Conservatives, or Republicans.

Why Might June be Auspicious?

Few would argue that in times of famine food should be consumed at an increased rate instead of being saved and rationed.  For this reason, a shift towards conservatism can only be good in tough economic times.
Generosity to the point of wastefulness characterizes prosperous times, while austere measures, and shared sacrifice characterize austere times.
See Conservative is the New Liberal for a historical discussion of the liberal-conservative shift.

And there do seem to be a number of signs of shift towards conservatism in the works, coming up right now:

• Americans are praying in increasing numbers for solutions to our crises and our divisions.  Individuals and groups are banding together in interfaith prayer (e.g. the Interfaith Novena to Stop the HHS Mandate) to implore God’s direction and assistance towards justice and wisdom.

• Edward Klein’s new book The Amateur has just come out, describing the chaos reigning in the present White House.  And no, Edward Klein is not a conservative; he is a liberal career journalist.

• New York Times’ Pulitzer Prize winning Op-Ed liberal columnist Maureen Dowd has just turned on President Obama with statements like “The president who started off with such dazzle now seems incapable of stimulating either the economy or the voters.“

• There are claims that Bill Clinton has questioned the competence of Barack Obama, calling him an amateur.

• June 5, 2012, tomorrow, marks the Wisconsin Recall election, which shows some promise of retaining the tough-love Governor Walker, thus influencing the rest of the country to embrace conservative reforms.

• Throughout all of June, including June 5 in California, Republican primaries continue.  Ron Paul continues to make progress toward collecting staggering numbers of delegates after the primaries, with controversial tactics called “delegate strategy,” which is certain at least to shift the Republican Party platform towards more conservatism than a Romney nomination would imply, if not actually threaten the nomination of Mitt Romney.

• June 8, 2012 brings the Religious Freedom Rally, with participants gathering in 140 cities across America to demand the reversal of the Obama administration’s contraceptive and abortifacient mandates added to ObamaCare.

• Thoughout June, lawsuits by 43 Catholic organizations are being considered against the Obama administration’s violaton of Religious Freedoms.

• The Movie 2016, based on the NYTimes best seller by Dinesh D’Souza and produced by Gerald Molen, producer of Schindler’s List, which projects the devastating effects of President Obama’s economic policies on America, and documents Barack Obama’s anti-American anti-colonialist philosophy, will be released in June. America will get a remarkable new perspective on Barack Obama, and what his (until now) baffling agenda might actually reflect.

• The end of June (or early July) is the projected release date of the Supreme Court Decision on the Constitutionality of ObamaCare.  This decision has the potential for nullifying ObamaCare, which many regard as a fiscal and moral catastrophe.

We Are in the Third Act

Act III comprises the final segment of a classic three act play. It is in the third act that the climax occurs, as well as the denouement, a period of calm at the end of a play where a state of equilibrium returns.

The suspense and the drama are building towards determining America’s future direction as we approach the November 2012 election, and we are in for an exciting June.
Of course, it is my optimistic hope and prayer that June will bring auspicious events, not catastrophic ones.
Time will tell.

What Can We DO?

• Pray constantly- for Governor Walker, for the Republican Convention in August, for the General Election in November, and for America’s future. Join a group prayer, such as the Interfaith Novena to Stop the HHS Mandate.  Also the ‘Fortnight for Freedom’ Observances in the Diocese of Madison.

• Vote on June 5 for Governor Walker and for Lieutenant-Governor Rebecca Kleefisch.

• Attend a Religious Freedom Rally at lunchtime on June 8th, at a location near you.

• See the movie 2016, and invite friends.

• Read the book, The Amateur, and suggest it to friends.

• Read the book The Roots of Obama’s Rage, and suggest it to friends.

What We Do (or Don’t Do) these Coming Months Determines the Conclusion of this Drama

We Are Making American History
Our Children Will Live with the Results

Inaction Will Have Consequences, Too

Now that Obama’s Buddy (Putin) is Back

or

Putin Sworn in as Russia’s President Amid Protests

or

“Attempts to shut people’s mouths with the help of a police baton are senseless and extremely dangerous.”

My photo op with Vlad Vladimirovich Putin

Putin Summarized

Putin’s Recent Power

Putin sworn in

Putin was President of Russia for two consecutive terms, from 2000 to 2008.  Due to constitutionally mandated term limits, he could not run for a third term.  His right-hand man Medvedev ran instead, and appointed Putin as his Prime Minister for the past 4 years.  Now, after “sitting out” one term, Putin is again eligible for two more terms, this time 6-year terms, through 2024. This “election” has effectively put Putin (and his right-hand-man Medvedev) in control of Russia for up to 24 years.

Protests Against Putin – “For Fair Elections”

Moscow Rally, December 2011

Crackdowns Continue

Helmeted police clubbing demonstrators

Today, May 7, 2012, about 1,000 protesters  tried to protest along Putin’s  motorcade route to the Kremlin.
Putin’s response was unprecedented security measures in the center of Moscow, where streets were closed to traffic and passengers were prevented from exiting subway stations.  Over 700 people have been detained.

The Passing of the “Nuclear Suitcase”

Putin's "Nuclear Suitcase" (1999)

The Kremlin ceremony of passing the “nuclear suitcase” from outgoing leader Dmitry Medvedev to Mr Putin was overseen by Russian Defence Minister Anatoly Serdyukov, news agency Interfax reported.

Widely seen as a relic of the Cold War stand-off between Moscow and Washington, the suitcase accompanies the Russian president on all his foreign trips. – The Australian

“Back in the U.S.S.R.”

USSR flag

In the light of above facts, how can anyone call Russia a democracy today?
We are back in the USSR.

I come from a Lithuanian family displaced by Soviet (U.S.S.R.) occupation, annexation, deportation of 120,000 people in 1940, followed by attempted sovietization of Lithuania.

I can only hope and pray for the Russian people today, as well as for the rest of us. An old Soviet brand of autocracy seems to be creeping back into the government of Russia, against the wishes of the Russian people, and under the guise of democracy.  Putin continues to quote democracy, while defying all democratic principles shamelessly.

Attempts to shut people’s mouths with the help of a police baton are senseless and extremely dangerous. –  Gennady Zyuganov, Communist Party leader.

Lithuania’s Take on Putin

Lithuanian Flag

Lithuania, previously a small, trampled neighbor of Russia’s,  now an independent  sovereign nation, has had much experience living at the foot (and at times under the foot) of  Russia.  For Lithuanians, watching developments in Russia is essential for survival.
The Lithuania Tribune has an interesting analysis, Now that Vladimir Putin is back, by Girnius.

Girnius points out:

Girnius

The ex-state security officer (Putin was in the KGB) is inclined to see hidden enemies and conspiracies where others only see coincidences. The level of suspicion of Putin and his supporters will only increase. Now that the opposition has become more active, it will not stop, maybe even get stronger, especially if the opinion of some observers happens to be true that the protests in response to the fabricated election results showed to the Russian people that the king was naked, that, despite the talks about the ruthless government of Putin and their own qualms, the Kremlin was vulnerable.

Even in the most favourable conditions it is naive to expect good relations with Russia. The imperial mindset is rooted so deeply in the ruling layers that Moscow simply doesn’t know how to communicate normally with its neighbours, especially the post-Soviet countries.

The caution expressed by Girnius towards Putin is not evident the the US.
As President Obama continues to pal up with Vladimir Putin behind out backs, half of America naively continues to support Obama.

.

Obama and Putin

America is Asleep

More Tyrants

Putin is not the only autocrat taking over and expanding powers of government in 2012.

The number of autocratic tyrants is increasing.

• France just elected a socialist, first time in 20 years. President Obama was among the first to congratulate Hollande for his victory, and has already  invited him to the White House.
• Anti-austerity (pro-spending) sentiments ousted the incumbent in Greece.
• Anti-austerity  candidates are leading in Italian local elections.
• At home, Obama continues to expand his own executive powers, issuing mandates and trampling and pressuring the other branches of government, both legislature and Supreme Court, to the point were some accuse him of greater tyranny than that of King George III in the 18th century. Obama’s most recent “crimes and misdemeanors” (violations of the U.S. Constitution, many pending court appeals) are staggering.

Election 2012;
Stay Tuned!

The November 2012 election will determine whether the United States reverses Obama’s present path toward expanding government power and increased spending.  Many interesting events are coming up very soon, which will determine America’s future:

• The Wisconsin recall election June 5, 2012 – will determine on a State level whether expanding government or austerity will be chosen by the American people.  Wisconsin’s election will influence similar battles coming up soon in other States.
• The Supreme Court decision on ObamaCare is also coming up in June — will President Obama’s largest attempt at expanding government control and mandates be upheld, or will it fail?  ObamaCare is also President Obama’s largest attempt at expanding Planned Parenthood and abortion.
• The Republican Primary nominee should also crystallize in June; by June, Mitt Romney may have the 1144 delegates needed for the nomination.  If not, there could be a very unpredictable and exciting convention.
• June also brings the release of the movie 2016, a movie produced by the producer of Schindler’s List, based on the New York Times best-seller by Dinesh D’Souza.  The movie documents theories of Barak Obama’s anti-colonialism (and his resulting hatred for America).  If this movie becomes a box office hit, it could landslide the election.
• Finally, November brings the actual election, which will determine whether Barak Obama remains President of the United States.

One Less Tyrant

Obama's Flexibility

Let us hope, work, and pray that Election 2012 is a fair election, that Americans realize what is at stake, and that Vladimir Putin’s buddy Obama loses the traitorous “flexibility” he promised Vladimir Putin after the election, because Obama has been removed from office.

.

The world needs one less tyrant. The world needs a model for responsible spending, a negation of the self-destructive abortion agenda, and a new and serious model for self-governance.  America, originally based on Judeo-Christian principles, still has the option to return to those Judeo-Christian principles and to provide that model for the world again.

.

May God Continue to Bless and Guide America!