DNC

Freedom…It Doesn’t Mean What You Think It Means

Last week, the Democrats held their Winter Meeting at the Capital Hilton, where Emperor Obama, Slayer of Insurance Companies, Defender of the Poor (and making more every day), the Duke of Deficits, addressed his faithful assembled minions, dispensing tidbits of propaganda like an imperial Pez dispenser, reeling them in with promises of endless supplies of government candy, assuring them it is oh so good for them.

Obama declared that “[a]s Democrats, we’ve let the other side define the word ‘freedom’ for too long…freedom for ordinary Americans to honestly pursue their dreams, that’s what we believe.” He went on to define freedom as the power of government to protect you from any adverse circumstance that may arise in your life, and as the ability for government to provide for your health care, your retirement, food, housing, and so on and so forth.

To quote the inimitable Inigo Montoya, the glorious Spaniard from one of my all time favorite movies, The Princess Bride…Mr. Obama, “You keep using that word [freedom]…I do not think it means what you think it means!’” What Obama is describing is not freedom; it is lifelong dependency on the gargantuan Nanny State, with promises of cradle-to-grave nurturing no matter how irresponsible the decisions you make in your life. Of course, the only way for government to protect you from your own mistakes is by forcing others to pay the price for you. Every action has a consequence, and just because you don’t suffer does not mean that someone does not suffer. Someone has to pay the piper. There is no free lunch.

The (DNC) Circus Comes to Charlotte

For the most part, political conventions today are carefully scripted affairs, the platform hammered out in advance, the nominations a foregone conclusion. More than anything it is a festive gathering for thousands of partisans being rewarded for years of financial contributions, door-knocking, and phone-banking. Rarely do we see such drama as the contested Republican nomination of 1976 between Ford and Reagan, and certainly nothing like the 1912 Republican convention where the Roosevelt and Taft contingents were so bitterly divided that barbed wire lined the stage under the bunting.

The 2012 GOP convention was meant to let voters see the personal side of Mitt Romney, a man tight-lipped about his private life, religion, and charitable endeavors, painted as a ruthless businessman who cares only for profits. While toned down, it largely succeeded in its goals. Beyond that, Republicans lauded the greatness of the American entrepreneurial spirit that built this country, and rejected the idea that government gets credit for all we have.

The Democrat National Convention, on the other hand, turned into a freak show of radicals panting breathlessly about evil Republicans and the coming holocaust if Romney gets elected. It was a celebration of taxpayer funded abortions, government dependency until death, calls to steal more from the producers to give to the slothful, plus a tribute to their messianic figurehead, Barack Obama.

Despite economic struggles, Democrats place emphasis on social issues

DNC debt cartoon

Over the last couple of years, libertarians have complained about the emphasis conservatives, particularly the Rick Santorums and Mike Huckabees their movement, have placed on social issues. We’ve noted that conservatives should focus their message on issues where they can attract agreement — such as repealing ObamaCare, lessening regulation on businesses, cutting spending, and reducing taxes.

While I support same-sex marriage and have grown increasingly pro-choice within reason, the Republican National Convention was a largely a breath of fresh air from this perspective . That’s not to say that I agree with everything said on the budget, economy or foreign policy, but the discussion of social issues was relatively mild with Republicans choosing instead to place a heavy focus on the economic record of President Barack Obama.

But watching the Democratic National Convention off-and-on for a couple of days, one can’t help but notice the heavy emphasis on social issues. There is certainly a discussion and defense of President Obama’s economic record, but abortion, same-sex marriage, and labor unions been featured heavily.

Of course, this is really isn’t surprising. Democrats have tried to change the narrative at several points since the beginning of the year; usually by complaining that there is some supposed “war” being waged against a segment of the American public.

Missing from the 2012 Democratic Platform: Civil Liberties


Courtesy of http://bit.ly/OViBY6

In 2008, then candidate Obama appeared to be a strong defender of civil liberties. At least his speeches indicated so. He assured us that a President Obama would be vastly different from a President Bush on this issue (and many others). President Obama would close GITMO, stop torture and renditions, scrap the Patriot Act, etc, etc.

Yet, for those of us who care deeply about the issue of civil liberties, the current president has turned out to be a nightmare. GITMO is still open, torture and rendition have been outsourced to foreign governments (in a clever sleight of hand by the Obama administration), civil liberties on US soil are more curtailed after the President signed off on indefinite detention (after initially threatening to veto such measures), and the Obama drone program is four times larger than Bush’s (one of the reasons he’s called “Bush on Steroids”).

Democrats to Propose Increasing Unemployment at Convention?

Written by Mark A. Calabria, Director of Financial Regulation Studies at the Cato Institute. Posted with permission from Cato @ Liberty.

Rumor has it that Democrats will include, at their up-coming convention, a proposal to increase the minimum wage.  As documented in a recent Cato study, such a policy is likely to increase unemployment, especially as I noted elsewhere among teenagers.   One would think that given how a weak economy is undermining Democrats’ chance to keep the White House, they’d actually make proposals to reduce, rather than increase unemployment.

Democrats have found their scapegoat, and it’s not Barack Obama

Debbie Wasserman Schultz

President Barack Obama’s approval rating is falling faster than Usain Bolt can run. The latest poll from The New York Times and CBS News shows his foreign policy numbers in the tank, dropping to the lowest point of his presidency. His numbers on the economy haven’t really moved much this year, either. Meanwhile, the GOP’s favorability rating — once in the cellar — has almost pulled even with Democrats.

Yet, Democrats seem to be looking for a scapegoat who isn’t named Barack Obama. Sure, many party faithful will concede that this White House is a drag on Democratic House and Senate candidates. And they acknowledge that President Obama’s approval ratings could cost them control of the upper chamber.

But, in politics, everything rolls down hill. And, according to a recent report from Politico, it appears that a scapegoat has been identified in Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), who has led the Democratic National Committee since May 2011:

Today in Liberty: Obama still avoiding border visit during fundraising trip, Ted Cruz is really not happy with the NRSC

“There is something fundamentally unfair about a government that takes away so much of people’s money, power, and personal control while telling them that life will be better as a result.” — Steve Forbes

— Obama will discuss border crisis in Texas, but won’t visit the border: Facing increasing political pressure over the “humanitarian crisis” (his words) at the United States’ Southwest border, President Barack Obama will meet with local officials and church leaders to discuss the issue today in Dallas. But he still won’t visit the border during the two-day swing in which he’s set to raise money for the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC). “The roundtable discussion in Dallas is seen by the White House as a way to address the immigration issue while avoiding awkward optics at the border,” the Associated Press explains. “Tens of thousands of unaccompanied children have arrived there in recent months, many fleeing violence in Central America, but also drawn by rumors that they can stay in the U.S. White House officials say most are unlikely to qualify for humanitarian relief and will be sent back to their home countries.” The meeting is going to provide more fodder for congressional Republicans as well as Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX), who has asked President Obama to visit the border during his trip to the Lone Star State. Pundits on MSNBC’s Morning Joe suggested on Wednesday that President Obama could offend the Democratic Party’s base if he visited the border.

Wasserman Schultz stumped when ask about Obamacare fixes

Debbie Wasserman Schultz

DNC Chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) says “there’s no specific bill” that would “fix” the issues with Obamacare. In fact, she says there are no glaring problems with the law that come to her mind.

In a segment yesterday on MSNBC’s The Daily Rundown, host Chuck Todd asked Wasserman Schultz for an example of problems she would address legislatively, or, as the host said, “Give me a bill right now you would introduce to address a problem.”

“Well,” the DNC chair said, “there’s no specific bill, actually, right now that I would [introduce].” Todd followed up asking, “You don’t view, there’s a legislative problem, do you, that needs to be fixed?”

Wasserman Schultz claimed that the issue with addressing problems with the law is because Republicans won’t sit down at the table with the Obama administration and congressional Democrats. That’s an ironic comment. Democrats passed Obamacare without Republican support in both the House and the Senate.

Obama donor heading up IRS scandal investigation

The Justice Department’s appointee to lead the IRS scandal investigation donated several thousands of dollars to President Barack Obama campaigns, raising concerns from two House Republicans that she may have a conflict-of-interest.

Barbara Bosserman, the Justice Department attorney leading the investigation into the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups, donated a total of $6,100 to Obama’s 2008 and 2012 campaigns, according to FEC records. She also donated $400 to the Democratic National Committee in October 2004 and $250 in November 2008.

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Regulatory Affairs Subcommittee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) have sent a scathing letter to Attorney General Eric Holder, in which they demanded that Bosserman be removed.

“By selecting a significant donor to President Obama to lead an investigation into the inappropriate targeting of conservative groups, the Department has created a startling conflict of interest,” wrote Issa and Jordan in a letter to Holder. “It is unbelievable that the Department would choose such an individual to examine the federal government’s systematic targeting and harassment of organizations opposed to the President’s policies.”

The Republican lawmakers requested that Holder “immediately remove Ms. Bosserman from the ongoing investigation,” adding that the Justice Department “should take all necessary steps to ensure that the DOJ/FBI criminal investigation is thorough and unbiased.”

DNC to donors: Give us money or Republicans will impeach Obama

Staring down the possibility of a building GOP wave in the 2014 mid-term election, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) is trying to raise money before the end of the year by highlighting comments made by a handful of Republicans about impeaching President Barack Obama:

DNC blog post that was emailed to donors on Saturday features quotes from Republican members of Congress talking about impeaching Obama.

“We can have an impeachment hearing in the House and in my mind, the president has committed impeachable offenses,” Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.) is quoted as saying.

“If we were to impeach the president tomorrow, you could probably get the votes in the House of Representatives to do it,” is another quote, from Rep. Blake Farenthold (R-Texas).

The blog then concludes with the message, “Show these Republicans that they are way, way off-base, and give President Obama a Congress that has his back.”

It asks for donations for Democrats running in 2014 before midnight on Tuesday, the end of the year. It notes Democrats “only need to win 17 Republican seats to win back the House of Representatives.” Political observers generally do not expect Democrats to win back the House. The president’s party usually loses seats in the House in midterm elections.

Well, it’s not like they can fundraise off the great year President Obama had. After all, he faced scandal after scandal and watched Obamacare, his signature domestic achievement, unravel before his eyes.


The views and opinions expressed by individual authors are not necessarily those of other authors, advertisers, developers or editors at United Liberty.