Republicans don't need to pander to Hispanics

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/04/27/Hispanics-Don-t-View-Gay-Marriage-And-Abortion-As-Their-Primary-Social-Issues?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Since Romney lost the election, all we've heard from political strategists is that Republicans have to reach out to Blacks and Hispanics. Republicans are also told they need to reach out to women and gays and all the special interest groups which form politically to lobby government to favor their groups. Marco Rubio is busy working on immigration, because the pundits say Hispanics are the key to power going forward.

Zeroing in on one group, Hispanics, this whole idea of pandering in order to gain political power should insult honest Hispanic Americans, and those Hispanics who wish to be Americans. Instead of finding ways to provide political favors to buy Hispanic votes, like Democrats have done for a long time, Republicans should talk to Hispanics like the adults they are.

The future of America depends on a free market and a government that's prevented from giving out political favors for votes. And if Hispanics don't want America turning into something like Mexico, then they should start verbalizing a desire to join the effort to implement a free market and limit government power. Republicans should speak straight up to Hispanics and welcome them to the battle for economic growth and prosperity, challenge them to help innovate and create. Of course Conservatives and Libertarians and honest Liberals want individuals who desire to shake off oppressive government chains, live in freedom, produce and enjoy prosperity. Let's find a way to make that happen. I think most Americans who aren't Progressives would love to see the American economy take off and grow so that there are enough jobs for any Hispanic who wants a job. What we don't need is for Progressive government to promote dependence and promise government goodies to immigrants for their votes, and Hispanics should spit on this offer as well.

More on transcending the political

As liberalism and Marxism competed against one another for hearts and minds during the 20th century, they both had something in common -- a disdain for the political route. Original liberalism relied more on economic means than political means and believed government shouldn't intervene in the economy. Marxists believed that economic forces and the harmonious result of class struggle would eventually kill off the State, making it unnecessary when no classes need be suppressed anymore.

The reaction to classical liberalism and Marxism was, what was called in Europe, social democracy, the third way which embraced political means as a way of managing the economy and preventing the unjust consequences of unfettered capitalism. I suppose in America this political force has been called Progressivism or Modern Liberalism, but calling this political force liberal is no longer justifiable. Modern Liberals in America must distinguish themselves from social democracy by supporting real limits on government power and supporting economic means over political means, or else they don't deserve to be called or considered liberal.

Social democrats didn't necessarily want to transition from capitalism to socialism, when it became evident that socialism proper couldn't generate real wealth, and they saw no ineviitability in the transition, thus, their split from Marxism was based on a third way in which capitalism could be used to create wealth, but government would control and distribute the wealth for the greater good through political means. This is how social democrats became allied with nationalist socialists and fascists during WWII -- they joined in reaction to the anti-statist tendencies of both liberalism and orthodox Marxism.

This reactionary movement manifested itself in the US in the Democratic Party, and the two party system, shared with statist Republicans on the Right, has worked much like the social democratic and fascist system in Europe in the 20th century in opposition to liberalism/modernization and Marxism.

The battle has been a timeless battle seen throughout history when the forces of liberty are attacked and subjugated by the forces of domination. The forces of domination have many justifications for control and management -- the social democratic justification was to do what's best for the collective, and not simply what's best for individuals. We can see where this force of domination has led us -- to great State power, over-regulation, violations of the Constitution, a mountain of debt, high unemployment, failed education system, an out of control Fed, a crony-infested military/industrial complex, a protected power eilte, mideast entanglements in which men and women on both sides are dying and suffering needlessly, small businesses squashed by government-favored Big Corporations, an impotent congress and an imperial presidency. 

I say it's time for another round, a permanent condition, of anti-statist liberalism -- real liberalism. Liberals of America wake up and be counted or admit that social democracy is a more appropriate label than liberalism.

The Democratic Party is screwed if they win or lose

If Democrats lose, it won't be like it's been in the past where Big Government Republicans bring them in to compromise on bigger government schemes. If the GOP wins, the base is going to hold their feet to the fire -- no more acting for the public then working together behind the scenes in statist clubbiness. Enough people started paying attention around 2006-2007 so that when 2008-2010 hit they had a good understanding of what has happened to the nation. They blamed Bush and they started blaming Obama for not changing anything and making it all much worse through his influence getting healthcare through and then Dodd-Frank, plus the trillion dollars on wasted "stimulus" that was a payoff to his supporters and the bailouts that when everything is said and done will be seen as government overreach that creates unintended consequences. The contrast will be stark if Republicans do the right think and allow economic liberty to gradually create a recovery that is significant.

If the Democrats win, they'll be emboldened to carry out the remainder of the progressive agenda and the economic consequences will be horrendous. All the wishful thinking in the world can't create success out of the tax and spend methods Democrats always apply. Economic laws are not amenable to political manipulation of the economy, and with the global situation as it is, we could be part of gigantic collapse like the world has never seen. At least one large industrial country has to get their act together and adhere to reality. Greece isn't and France isn't and it's unlikely Spain or Italy will do what's necessary long enough to turn around their economies. China's bubble could burst at any minute -- it will happen, if they continue to prop up their economic on stimulus that's not real production or real creation of wealth. Building cities which sit empty is not wealth creation -- it's smoke and mirrors.

Of course, the Democrats could be spared if the GOP does what it always does and continues the crony/statist policies of the status quo. But I don't think the base is going to allow the GOP to revert to its old ways. Here's to Hope and Change.

Before giving up on Republicans

I will throw one more bit of advice out into cyberspace which no one but a handful of faithful readers will see -- so spread the word -- it's the final chance we have for one party to rise to the challenge.

The Democrat base is not filled with evil supporters out to destroy the country, but the base is dependent on government solutions, and, thus, they will support a statist system set on automatic to collapse. Unless there are major systemic changes which truly limit government power, cut spending, remove our military from bases around the world, and release economic growth, then there is little hope we will avoid the fate of Greece. The US is much more economically powerful than Greece, and we can last on the international stage longer, with the help of China and India and emerging economic powerhouses, but because we are so big, we have more to lose and a much greater fall. The fact is that America can fail, and if we don't change, we will fail.

Rather than whining about Mitt Romney being unexciting, too rich, too Big Government, ect., the GOP base that truly believes in limited government and a free market, and independents who want a strong economy, low taxes, a compassionate private sector charity effort that takes pressure off a failing welfare state, innovative educational offerings, energy independence, peace, free trade and good jobs, should add the excitement, the Great Ideas, the Large Ambition, the Vision, the Creativity as we go into the 21st century, and start the process of making Republican/Democrat practically meaningless. The American private sector can become the driving force that transforms the nation and beomes the leading light to prosperity, justice and greater happiness. It's time to realize that dependence on government to fix the economy and create social justice was never wise, and now it's dangerously foolish.

Up with Chris Hayes 3/17/2012 -- Ezra Klein's form of propaganda

Chris Hayes was missing this morning, and Ezra Klein substituted for Hayes. Klein is a clever partisan hack, but his propaganda doesn't hold up well against smart grownups who know the issues. I've seen Klein become prickly as a guest on other shows when his clever partisan tricks don't work against someone armed with facts and the intellectual power to make Klein look silly.

The panel started out discussing Afghanistan and the history of war strategy in that country, with Spencer Ackerson and Elise Jordan leading the conversation. Surge or no surge, concentrating on al Qaeda or the Taliban, focusing on inner cities are cities on the Pakistan border, the real issue is that we should never have spent 10 years in Afghanistan, and we should leave right away. Until we raise the conversation to the level of inteventionism versus non-interventionism, all this smart insider talk about the wars is nothing but chatter which avoids the fundamental problem -- out role as police in  international affairs. The idea that we're still trying to prevent another 9/11 is ridiculous.

Next, Klein talked about his recent NYT's article regarding the failure of presidential speeches to influence policies or inspire the public to embrace a particular vision. This is Klein's contribution to the narrative that congress has blocked progress and a president can only do so much. Of, course, media have prepared the public to associate obstacles in congress with Republicans.

The Left has it set up where they can acknowledge some of the Right's complaints, but they claim the Right is using legitimate problems to attack women and Hispanics, and, thus, they are running off independents. Of course, to win, Obama needs women, Hispanics and independents, but it's just coincidental that these are the groups Republicans are attacking. Strange, isn't it?

At least no one was hurt by dangerous ideas being flung about -- there were no dangerous ideas, just boring technocratic management of perceptions in order to convince people that voting for Republicans will be a blow against women, minorities and clear headed independents.