Justified Right

Hillary’s Battered Secretary of State Syndrome

Smack!  Mexico President Felipe Calderón put one right on the cheek of U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

 

“Thank you sir may I have another.”

 

Sitting before their relationship counselor and life coach, that was Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s response to Mexico President Felipe Calderón after it was noted that the Mexican drug wars are spilling over onto American soil.

 

The rest of the conversation follows:

 

Life coach:  Hillary, what are your thoughts on the violent Mexican drug war threatening American borders?

 

Hillary:  8000 dead in two years.  It’s pretty bad down there in Mexico.

 

Calderón:  Smack!

 

Hillary:  I’m sorry I meant to point out the murder rate in New Orleans is higher than in peaceful Mexico!

 

Life coach: Why are the Mexican drug lords fighting each other?

 

Hillary: Each drug lord wishes to monopolize the Mexican drug market.

 

Calderón:  Smack!

 

Hillary:  I’m sorry, I meant to say this is America’s fault for buying drugs.  We smoke the pot Mexicans won’t smoke.  Even if some of us don’t inhale.

 

Life coach:  But Hillary why is there so much violence in Mexico against law enforcement?

 

Hillary:  The drug lords are trying to control whole areas of Mexico to gain political power.

 

Calderón:  Smack!

 

Hillary:  I’m sorry, I meant to say this is America’s fault for having guns, particularly the ones we manufacture that only fire when pointed at a Mexican police chief.

 

Good grief.

 

I thought Hillary was supposed to be tough?  The “blame America first” crowed is truly in power, and they are blaming America first.  She needs Dr. Phil.  Or Super Nanny.

Radio Clip of Me and Andy Caldwell In California Talking Obamanism=Fascism

Funniest Part of Obama's Speech Last Night

I chuckled a bit while watching the so-called great speaker stutter when his teleprompter/tv screen stalled, but that wasn't the funniest part.

I laughed when I heard him complain about the size of the deficit he inherited while trying to rationalize that he is giving much larger deficits, but that wasn't the funniest part.

I rolled on the floor laughing when he tried to convince us of his respect for capitalism, but that wasn't the funniest part (in some sense, that was kind of sad).

Here was the funniest part:

At 8:00, I heard my 15 year old daughter yell this in front of the television:  "Barack Obama has postponed American Idol!?  He has the power to DO THAT?!"

That's funny.  He's losing support at every turn.

More Corporatist Calamity - More Journalists Wrongly Calling It Socialist

I hate to sound like a broken record, but no one else in media is smart enough to call President Obama's Administration Corporatist, which is the economic system of Fascism.

Sorry for the use of the words "smart enough" but journalists, particularly conservative journalists, are being so irresponsible it's aggravating me.

Look, I'm a Reaganite myself, having had my political awakening during his administration.  That means I too spent a good deal of my life worried about Socialists, particularly the Communist form.

But when a government seizes control or partial control of the means of production in an economy (as Obama is doing), that shouldn't be an excuse to be lazy and just call it Socialism. I know that is the knee-jerk reaction but it's wrong.

Other forms of government operate by government control of production through direct ownership or heavy regulation of business.  Monarchies control production.  Fascists control production.

I've been arguing since November that President Bush started us out on the Fascist road with the first $700 billion bailout by taking ownership and control interests in banks. President Obama has seized the current mood in the country to push away from Capitalism toward Corporatism (Fascism) where he gets to control production in the American economy.

Read about that here and here.

This week Obama jerks toward Fascism with even greater force.

President Obama is going to send a bill to Capitol Hill that will allow him to seize businesses.  Much like banking regulators in conjunction with the FDIC have the power to seize banks and wind them down, President Obama wants his administration to have the power to do that to other businesses.

Read about it here.

This the power President Obama wants over business:

"Besides seizing a company outright...the Treasury Secretary could use a range of tools to prevent its collapse, such as guaranteeing losses, buying assets or taking a partial ownership stake. Such authority also would allow the government to break contracts..."

Lord help us.  This mirrors exactly the power Mussolini assumed over business when Fascists took control of the economy in early 20th Century Italy, and the same power Hitler assumed at the same time in Germany.

The problem is people are afraid to bring up the names Mussolini and Hitler because of their racism and vengeful nationalism.  They have difficulty remembering that Fascism was also an economic system. So fearful are journalists of being mistaken for calling Obama a racist (I'm not) that they shy away from the obvious parallels between Obamanism and Fascism.  I talked about this problem at CPAC with Fred Smith of the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

So journalists this week will continue to beat the "Socialism" drum when in fact this is Fascism.

For that I impeach them, I indict them and I accuse them for their negligence in failing to properly identify the enemy and his attack on Americanism.

Particularly the conservative pundits.  They should know better.

Most Educational Video on Government On The Web

This should be required viewing from grade school through college.

TEA PARTY SONG!!!!

YEA BABY!!!!

Playing Into Obama’s Hands

The cult of personality arises not from stable societies but those in turmoil.  Such leaders rise in times of “change.”

 

The cultist leader does not gain strength from offering false hope alone.  If the people are left to ask for details of hope, the ruse falls apart.

 

What the self-anointed one needs is distraction.  Distraction comes by demonizing a minority in the eyes of the larger majority who seek any answer to their perceived problems.  The cultist sets himself up as the “good king” who promises in exchange for power the he will use his power to care for the people wisely.

 

The cultist in all cases has one goal – to take over economic production in society.  Everything else the cultist stands for is secondary to the ultimate goal of taking control of a nation’s resources.

 

In China Chairman Mao demonized the more Western and capitalist KMT government, and eventually took control of the economy when he prevailed.

 

Fidel Castro caused a fear of influence of American capitalism.  When he assumed power, he assumed complete control of economic production.

 

The goal of Che Guevara was to wrestle control of economic production away from people (capitalists) all over the world and put production in control of government.  He demonized everything capitalist.

 

In Germany Hitler demonized Parliamentary Democracy, Marxism and Jews.  His National Socialist party took control of the economy when he took control.

 

Joseph Stalin was a master of cult of personality.  His name was included in every cultural aspect of Russia, including the new National Anthem.  As soon as he took control, he introduced the command economy, where he controlled the nation’s production.

 

Where applicable, they also suspended constitutional protections to take control.

In America today, President Obama has his demon – the producing class – those who make money.  The personification of that class is taking shape as the workers of AIG.

 

A report in the New York Times today gives a frightening account of how fellow American workers are being targeted as evil by the media and their neighbors.  The House of Representatives yesterday ignored various constitutional protections of substantive due process by targeting just those workers for a confiscating 90% income tax.

 

Conditions are in place for Barack Obama to follow other personality cult leaders.  He is demonizing the bourgeoisie, the producing class, he is ignoring constitutional protections and is taking control of production in the economy with public/private business cartels, massive spending, huge taxes, heavy regulation and cap and trade laws.

 

America is literally playing into Barack Obama’s hands.

So A Politician Comes Into My Law Office...

He tells me he is an elected official.  He said he did some bad things.

He gave huge sums of cash to the head the State's largest union.  That union head and the union itself endorsed his candidacy.  He's worried about bribery and vote-purchasing charges.

To make matters worse, he and the union head then negotiated a deal for the union involving public money.  There are a large number of emails they exchanged on the subject, and their nefarious plans are detailed in those emails.   He is worried about conspiracy and misappropriation of public assets charges.

"What should I do?" he nervously asked me.

"Relax."  I said.  "This is easy.  Just have sex with the head of the union.  That makes the whole thing a personal matter and no one is allowed to even consider what you've done."

While the story about the conversation is parody, the underlying facts of the politician's case are real. 

My advice to him worked.  Read how the story ended here.

Good grief.

The Illustrated Road To Serfdom

Here at Justified Right you can find the chronicling of America's slip into Fascism first under President Bush and now to a greater degree under President Obama.  Journalists are failing America because of their refusal to learn the difference between Socialism and Fascism.

Journalists today are "cold-war babies" so Socialism (particularly its rarefied form of Communism) is an easy boogey-man.  What they fail to realize is that while Socialism is bad, Fascism is worse.

Friedrich Hayek's book "The Road To Serfdom" is a classic political work that details how a nation slips into Fascism by accident, even against the will of the people.  It starts with a charismatic leader convincing the people that there is a problem in the nation so severe that it can only be solved by transferring control of production in society (and therefore great power) to the government.  Sound familiar?

In the 20th Century when America was struggling with nations in Europe and elsewhere choosing Fascist, Communist and Socialist economies over Capitalism, it was very important for the public to know the difference in the systems. 

General Motors reproduced Hayek's "The Road To Serfdom" as a short illustrated booklet.  It was reprinted in Look Magazine.

Since today America is revisiting the idea of Fascism, starting with the Bush bailouts and expanded under Obamanism, you will find The illustrated Road to Serfdom below.

 

 

  

 

  

  

  

  

  

 

  

  

  

 

  

  

  

  

 

Beware of Obama's Road To Serfdom

President Obama is taking over production in the American economy.

 

President Bush admitted to doing the same with the banking, real estate and insurance industry bailouts, proclaiming he "Abandoned the free market to save the free market."  Besides being oxymoronic, he was admitting he moved from a system where people control production (Capitalism) to a planned economy where government controls production (there are three main types of planned economies - Fascism, Socialism and Communism).

 

While refusing to similarly label his own actions, President Obama at least admits he is following what President Bush did first.

 

I have been arguing since last November that the type of planned economy we are moving toward is most like Fascism, not Socialism.

 

President Obama is creating government/business cartels, he has limited compensation, he is attempting heavy government regulation, he wishes to tax profits on an increasing scale, he challenges the Constitution's Contract Clause and wants political control of the census so he can direct spending on the state level. 

 

Those efforts pale in comparison to President Obama's largest power grab to control production:  The proposed Cap and Trade program.  If that passes, the President will have the power to close down your business mid-year if you don't have enough money to pay a huge tax on carbon emissions.  He will put himself in direct control of American production.

 

These are the hallmarks of early 20th Century European Fascism.  We know by Italian and German example that civil rights fall after the government assumes economic production.

 

Fascism never announces itself as a totalitarian regime.  To the contrary, European economic Fascism convinced the people it was a problem solver.  When first proposed, economic Fascism, or "Corporatism" was heralded as good. It was considered a "third way," reducing the classes caused by Capitalism without the burdens imposed on the merchant class by Marxism.

 

For proof of its initial popularity, read this glowing endorsement of Fascism made in 1927:

 

“I was charmed by his [Mussolini's] gentle and simple bearing and by his calm, detached poise in spite of so many burdens and dangers. If I had been born an Italian, I am sure I should have been wholeheartedly with you from start to finish on your triumphant struggle against the bestial passions and appetites of Leninism. The Fascist Movement has rendered service to the whole world."

 

 Who said it?  Winston Churchill. Ironically Churchill would serve his first tenure as Prime Minister defeating the Fascism he lauded; Fascists who bombed London for 57 consecutive nights in The Blitz.

 

The economic Fascism put together in Italy - a hybrid of direct control of production by government purchasing interests in banks and manufacturing and indirect control through strong regulation, created a political philosophy that elevated the importance of government and business above the individual and his civil rights.

 

Consider these two quotes from Benito Mussolini:

 

"The maxim that society exists only for the well-being and freedom of the individuals composing it does not seem to be in conformity with nature's plans. If classical liberalism spells individualism, Fascism spells government."

 

 

"Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism, as it is the merger of corporate and government power.”

 

This theory of government/corporate importance above the individual is what the Bush administration  accepted when Henry Paulson changed the purpose of the bailout from buying troubled assets to help people out of foreclosure, to recapitalizing banks to continue foreclosures.

 

 

The economic theory of government intervention in business employed by Mussolini is precisely the theory employed by Barack Obama today: 

 

 

"State intervention in economic production arises only when private initiative is lacking or insufficient, or when the political interests of the State are involved. This intervention may take the form of control, assistance or direct management." - Benito Mussolini

 

 

"At this particular moment, with the private sector so weakened by this recession, the federal government is the only entity left with the resources to jolt our economy back to life." - Barack Obama

 

 

This quote from Mussolini I fear may be prescient:

 

"Democracy is talking itself to death. The people do not know what they want; they do not know what is the best for them. There is too much foolishness, too much lost motion. I have stopped the talk and the nonsense. I am a man of action. Democracy is beautiful in theory; in practice it is a fallacy. You in America will see that some day."

 

 

In the face of President Obama's policy similarities to Fascism, American journalists continue to mistake Obama's policies as Socialism, despite the glaring absence of socialized profits as direct public services.

 

 

The mistake is excusable.  Many in Europe wrongly believed that Fascism was where a Capitalist ran when he saw socialism coming (like Churchill, above).  That notion was disabused by perhaps the greatest economist and philosopher of the 20th Century, Friedrick Hayek. In his book The Road To Serfdom Hayek points out that  both the Fascist and Socialist economies well-spring from the idea of controlling production, and the failure of the producing class (bourgeoisie) to stop it:

 

What, then, caused these views held by a reactionary minority [Fascists] finally to gain the support of the great majority of Germans and practically the whole of Germany's youth? It was not merely the defeat, the suffering, and the wave of nationalism which led to their success...On the contrary, the support which brought these ideas to power came precisely from the socialist camp. It was certainly not through the bourgeoisie, but rather through the absence of a strong bourgeoisie, that they were helped to power.

 

Friedrich Hayek's award-winning work on Free Market Capitalism and the importance to the preservation of individual freedom that is the classical liberalism of Jefferson and Madison should remind us of what worked in America for 233 years. 

 

 

Hayek's book The Road To Serfdom, a warning about how Fascism sneaks up on a country,  should be revisited today to caution us against our current push toward Fascism by way of Obamanism.

Catholics and Muslims Form New Posse

An extended meeting between the top pops of both religions ended with a joint declaration called "A Common Word.

Read about it here.

One of the themes is to stop violence around the world in the name of God.

To me that seems to be a current problem with only one of those religions.

It's an honorable thing to do on the part of both religions, but will the Islamofascist wing of Muslims listen?  I doubt it - killing non-believers IS their religion, according to their literal interpretation of the Koran.

Will Obama Enforce The Monroe Doctrine?

Read the scary Russian plans to uses bases in Cuba and Venezuela here.

The commies are coming.

China Premier Tells Obama To Show Me the Money

If Mitch McConnell in the Senate and John Boehner in the House can't stop Barack Obama's Keynesian scramble away from Capitalism, guess who can?

Wen Jaibo, that's who.

The Chinese premier expressed concern today about America turning deadbeat and not paying what she owes.  Jaibo sounded like a landlord who just found out his tenant lost his job.

Many Americans still don't realize that the spending spree Barack Obama is on (in one month he has spent as much money as we have on the Iraq and Afghan wars combined) doesn't come directly from our taxes, it comes from Chinese businessmen.

We sell them Treasury bills backed by nothing more than our promise to pay the principal and the interest in a certain period of time (it's an IOU).  That means we are using the money now and letting our kids pay it back later. Every child born in America today owes $35,000.00, and Obama is adding to that number at a radical rate.

Obama is so careless with the amounts that the Chinese are starting to worry whether our kids can pay for Obama's spending.

How ironic - even Communists think Obama is making the government too big.

If tomorrow China says enough is enough, Obama's spend spend spend government could be curtailed considerably.  That's why Hillary went to China and told them we are happy to ignore their human rights abuses so long as they send us our money fix (we sound like a desperate junkie).  If China cuts us off we have to find another pusher.

Maybe it's a good thing if China shows us some tough love and cuts us off. 

My grandchildren my thank them some day.

Will Everyone Named McCain Please Leave the Republican Party

   

Back in early 2007, about 20 months before the last Presidential election, I wrote a post called “Why I can’t trust John McCain.”  I wasn’t alone.  A Google search on “I don’t trust McCain” reveals a couple thousand hits.

 

I grew tired of McCain fighting our agenda, voting against tax cuts, bowing to global warming loons, insulting Christian leaders, ganging against us with his liberal “Gang of 14” and passing useless laws with liberals like Russ Feingold.  Not to mention his ignoring of CPAC.

 

The Press rewarded him with the name “Maverick” for bashing the Republican Party (if a Democrat bucks his party, like Lieberman, the Press paints him as a traitor, not a maverick).

 

Let’s face it – he only won the Republican primary because he was the only face we recognized.  Obviously we didn’t fully support him in November.  Years ago I wrote columns asking that he switch parties, but like the drunkest guest at a barbeque he just won’t leave.

 

Now comes his daughter Meghan McCain. Proving the old adage that the poop doesn’t fall far from the pig’s rear-end, Meghan has joined her father in the Republican bashing business.

 

Writing on an Internet blog, she takes on Ann Coulter.  She says she “straight up doesn’t understand” Coulter (probably all those big words Ann uses).  She calls Ann’s followers a “cult”  (Meghan must be reading the papers – that’s how media refers to the whole of our party).  She takes a swing at CPAC, too (chip off the old block, that Meghan).

 

What bothers me now is that media will hence forth roll out Meghan McCain as a Republican and a conservative, when she is really nothing more than nepotism mixed with “hot-blondedness” – the two actual reasons she is getting on TV.  The media has discovered its latest straw man to make Republicans look bad.  Prepare too see a lot more of Meghan McCain.

 

Check out some of these comments from John’s mini-me Meghan in her Coulter column.  She doesn’t just bash Ann, she goes after the rest of us:

 

“Coulter could be the poster woman for the most extreme side of the Republican Party. And in some ways I could be the poster woman for the opposite. I consider myself a progressive Republican…” Progressive Republican?  Meghan the opposite of patriot Ann Coulter would be terrorist and Obama bff Bernardine Dohrn, you dope.

 

“I have been a Republican for less than a year.”  Oh, well then clearly you are the one to define us, aren’t you? Good grief. No wonder liberals are putting you on TV to represent us.

 

“The GOP should be happy to have any young supporters whatsoever, even if they do digress some from traditional Republican thinking.”  Well Meghan, if you and your Dad would come to CPAC, you’d meet thousands of college Republicans who agree with us.

 

“Many say I am not “conservative enough, which is something that I am proud of.”  You should be ashamed of yourself, not proud.  By the way three more main-steam media outlets just called you for an interview to define Conservatism.

 

“I am often criticized for previously voting for John Kerry…” What were you expecting from us, a medal?  Maybe Kerry can give you one of his that he didn’t throw away after his 3 months in Viet Nam.

 

Meghan closes her screed with this:

 

“I love the Republican Party, but if it turns out I am somehow not conservative enough to please its leaders, it makes me wonder—am I then not worthy of even being a member?” 

Let me answer you – no you aren’t worthy enough to be a member, Meghan.  Now get lost and take that crotchety old curmudgeon with you.

 

Or, as Ann might say to you – it’s time to extend your 15 minutes of fame with a spread in Playboy.

President Obama’s Weird Fetish For Killing Babies

Fetish – noun; any object, idea, etc., eliciting unquestioning reverence, respect, or devotion.

 

Presidents create a legacy by their commitment to an issue.  Some want to be the Education President.  Others, the Jobs President.  Barack Obama wants to be the Dead Child President.

 

In his first 50 days in office, Obama has attacked no other issue with as much violent force as he has the cause of killing children.  Equal rights be damned and to hell with compassion – Obama judges the weak, the innocent and the dependant as worthy of death.

 

1. The Mexico City Policy.  This American policy was announced in 1984 at a UN conference on population in Mexico City. It held that no American money would be used in foreign nations to have or promote abortions. Let other countries use their own money to kill their children. It was started by Reagan, repealed by Clinton and reinstated by Bush.

 

With the American economy now circling the drain, one would think that despite the warmth and awe Obama feels when a little girl’s skull is crushed that he would not wish to spend our tax money overseas on it.  Showing not just a commitment but also a bizarre fixation for killing boys and girls, it took Obama less than 72 hours as President to repeal the Mexico City Policy. It was so important to him that he couldn’t wait before killing children worldwide.

 

2. Forced Abortions. An attempt was made to append to the most recent Spending Bill a law that would not allow American money to be used in countries where abortions are forced on women against their will.  With no support from President Obama or the Democrats, the measure failed.

 

In psychology a fetish becomes a problem when it interferes with other normal function.  Barack Obama will normally claim a commitment to women’s rights, but his fetish for killing children so overwhelms him he won’t protect women from forced abortions. He suffers a sickness of longing to have children die.

 

3.  Embryonic Stem Cell Research.  While the word “person” is a legal construct, changeable by statute, the word “human” is scientific. Embryos are human.  To kill an embryo is to kill a human.

 

If Barack Obama was sick and I brought him a 6-year-old girl and told him if I killed her I could cure him, he would tell me to kill her.  That’s what we do when we kill an embryo.  Embryos are human – she IS the 6-year-old girl – just younger.

 

President Bush never outlawed Embryonic Stem Cell Research (he should have).  His policy (extending President Clinton’s policy) was simply that tax dollars not be used to destroy embryos (with limited exception).  Any scientist who thought they could cure disease by killing embryos was free to try it over the last 8 years, and quite telling it is that private firms, who would make billions of dollars from the cures, haven’t bet their own money on it. They will now have the opportunity to bet your money on it and get rich not from cures but from “experiments” with your money, thanks to President Obama.

 

If you’ve heard of “snowflake children” then you know that frozen embryos are often adopted and the children are saved.  Instead of protecting the lives of those children, President Obama wasted no time in using tax dollars to kill them, in the name of finding medical cures.  There is no difference between that work and Dr. Josef Mengele’s work.  No difference – they both kill cute little girls in their medical experiments.

 

4.  Repeal of ‘Conscious Protections’ for Doctors and Nurses.  Christian doctors and nurses, Catholics in particular, hold dearly that life is sacred and to kill is a mortal sin, punishable by damnation. Barack Obama doesn’t give a damn.  He plans to repeal protections and force Christian doctors and nurses to kill children and refusal to do so will cost them their careers.

 

As a matter of ethics, the doctor’s Hippocratic Oath states: “I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy.” 

 

We live in a nation whose military shows the compassion of transferring conscientious objectors to non-combat duty when they wish not to kill the enemy in war.  Yet President Obama’s fetish for the death of young boys and girls so governs him that he will force Christians to kill innocents against their consciences.

 

In 50 days Barack Obama has made clear that his contempt for children, life and equal rights is not just his policy but also his vicious obsession. In this I judge him a bad person, and state with verve that I indeed hope The President fails.

Will Be On Radio In California with Andy Caldwell Monday at 6:30 pm Eastern

UPDATE:  MONDAY'S SHOW WAS CANCELED!  WILL BE ON TONIGHT, TUESDAY, SAME TIME.

 

Andy wants to talk about my thoughts on the bailouts being fascism, not socialism for a half hour on Monday.  In particular, he took notice of this post I did about Ron Paul at CPAC.

I've been writing about the bailouts being fascism since November.  I was thrilled when I heard Dr. Paul say it at CPAC.

You can listen to a live stream of Andy and me at 6:30 Eastern, 3:30 Pacific, by clicking here.  That's the website Andy streams from, and you can click on a link to listen live on that page.

Hope you listen and enjoy!

Everyone Against Abortion Please Raise Your Hand

Why Not Charge This Abortion Clinician With Murder?

Sorry to sicken your Friday, but America needs to come to grips with killing humans.

A woman goes to an abortion clinic.  While waiting for one, she went into labor and gave birth instead.

What did the clinician do?  First she "accidentally" knocked the baby off a chair.  When the baby didn't die (great little fighter) she scooped up the baby, placed him/her in a plastic bio-hazard bag, and threw the baby in the garbage.  The baby was found dead 8 days later.

All they charged the clinician with was practicing medicine without a license and tampering with "evidence."

Why not murder?  This baby was born.  This baby was alive.  This baby had all the rights that every other human in America is supposed to have.  The prosecutor in this case has reduced the child to "evidence."

The clinician killed a born baby.  Why?  In her mind, the baby was "marked for death" (by his or her mother, of all people).

This baby was judged summarily; this baby was denied human rights, due process and protection of laws, all because another person said this baby was marked for death.  This is no different than the marking of Juden given out by National Socialists in Germany.  Those people were marked for death and exterminated too.  Someone tell me the difference.  Humans are humans and all are equally valuable, no matter how old they are.

Why we tolerate the killing of any innocent human in America escapes me.

No Love For Coulter & Me In Tennessee

LIberals have no sense of humor.

George Will Can’t Define Conservatism, But We Can

Considering how the Republican Party had its clock cleaned in the 2006 and 2008 elections, this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Washington D.C. was particularly important.  If Conservative ideas are better than Liberal ideas but people aren’t voting for our candidates, then we must be doing a poor job of letting people know what Conservatism is.

 

The purpose of a 3-day event like CPAC is to hone Conservatism into a message for people. 

 

There were plenty of sub-issues discussed at CPAC, from taxes to guns to fundraising.  In fact, I couldn’t help but notice that if there were 8,500 attendees at CPAC, there were 9,000 different issue groups to join.  I was handed pamphlets offering me to join efforts to kill the Federal Reserve, to save Israel and to learn to play Poker (was that last guy at the right convention?  Check his calendar).

 

Issues don’t move the masses; they move parts of the masses. 

 

Conservatism needs an umbrella description that covers it all. Conservatism needs to be defined in brief.  Our candidates need to have a definition of Conservatism at the ready, and it must be clear, understandable and sharp.  We need the worker on the assembly line and the guy at the lunch counter to repeat it and believe it.

 

So while at CPAC, I conducted a one-question survey. The question presented was as follows:  “Being as brief as you can be, and as understandable as possible, offer a definition of: Conservatism.”

 

As it turned out, this isn’t as easy as it sounds.  Despite being at a convention with thousands of people so dedicated to the concept of Conservatism they left work and school for three-days to support it, upon reading the question most presented furrowed brows, struggling to give an answer.  Many said they couldn’t.

 

Many other people did write down their definition of Conservatism. There were 25 different ideas raised in their answers.  I’ve analyzed them and recorded the results from the most frequent idea offered to the least.

 

The most frequent idea raised was that Conservatism is Freedom or Personal Liberty.  That was followed by Small Government and Self Responsibility, with Individual Rights and Morals/Ethics rounding out the top five.

The next five were National Defense, Free Markets, Lower Taxes, Belief in God/Religion and Traditional Values.

 

The results were recorded specific to what was written by each respondent, however I’m cognizant that some of the ideas could be combined in the mind of the writer.  For instance, Respect for Life could be combined with Freedom.  Federalism could be combined with Small Government.  National Identity/Strong Borders could be combined with National Defense.

 

That of course is the purpose of the exercise – to assemble the ideas as compactly as possible to form an inclusive, but simple, definition.

 

The high point of the survey came when I spotted columnist George Will walking through the lobby of the Omni-Shoreham Hotel.  I asked him if he would take my survey.  He hurried along and said, “I’m meeting my children for dinner.”  I walked with him and pleaded, “But it’s only one question! Let me ask as we walk.”  “Fine,” he said.  “What’s the question?”  I asked him for a short definition of Conservatism, to which he replied, “It can’t be done – the answer is far too complex.”

 

That, Sir, is why we are losing.

 

The Liberals pushed their philosophy into two words – Hope and Change.  Meaningless?  Yes.  It’s completely devoid of content. Yet friend and foe of President Obama can repeat it.  Our message?  I don’t recall what it was.

 

Conservatives pride ourselves on our political philosophy requiring deeper thought than liberal philosophy, thus attracting deeper thinkers. Which is probably why we are attracted to the often tough read that is George Will. That, however, should not be an excuse for our inability to make the complex understandable.

 

George Will has dedicated his life to writing books and columns about Conservatism, but if he is resigned to the idea that one must master his books to understand it, he renders himself less than helpful to our current situation.

 

This is not your father’s political battlefield Mr. Will, fought in books and broadsheets. You may not be able to communicate Conservatism in the lobby of a hotel, but yes, we can. We must.

 

The definition of Conservatism, encompassing all its ideas put in its simplest form, is this: 

 

“Conserving the rights of the individual against the trespasses of government, and the trespasses of others.”

 

Test it.  Every idea is covered.  From rights supernaturally endowed to the rule of law, from the free market to low taxes, from national defense to respect for life, there it is.  Anyone can say it.  Anyone can understand it.

 

Below are the full results of the survey:

 

-Definition of Conservatism-

Survey Data Analysis

25 Ideas Offered

Idea	Frequency
Freedom/Personal Liberty	**************************
Small Government	***********************
Self Responsibility	**************
Conserving Individual Rights	***********
Morals/Ethics	**********
National Defense	********
Free Markets	*******
Lower Taxes	****
Belief in God/Religious Liberty	****
Traditional Values	****
Vision of the Founding Fathers/Documents	***
Constitutionalism	***
Respect for Life	***
Undefinable	***
Equality	**
Federalism	**
National Identity/Strong Borders	**
Less Spending	*
Family Values	*
Fiscal Responsibility	*
Sharing	*
Freedom from Forced Sharing	*
Ordered Justice/Rule of Law	*
Social Structures (Church, School, Government)	*
Virtuous Reaction	*

Paul Mulshine Wrote A Column About My Column

Paul Mulshine, columnist for the Star Ledger and a standard-bearer for Political writing in New Jersey, wrote a critique of my column on Steve Lonegan's CPAC speech, which I published both here and on Fox News.

Here is where you can find Paul's words.

CPAC Photos Day 3

  Ann Coulter cracking on the libs.  So smart and so funny.

The line to talk to Ann at her book signing was so long it seemed like all 300 million Americans were there.  So I cut to take this photo with her.  That's how I roll.

  Each year at CPAC they put on the Conservative version of "The View" except the women are smart.  Unlike TV which has 3 commies vs. 1 patriot, this one has 3 patriots vs. that rare but not yet extinct level-headed Democrat.  Pictured are Kellyanne Conway, MIchelle Malkin, Jeri Thompson and Mary Anne Marsh.

  Me with actor Robert Davi.  A conservative in Hollyweird.  That's one tough guy.

Senator Fred Thompson on Pajamas TV.  If that other photographer jumped in my frame one more time I was gonna have to pin him.

MACHO SAUCE! Me with Internet star AlfonZo Rachel.  You've NEVER seen Christian Conservatism like this! Here is his site: http://www.machosauceproductions.com/index.html or just search him on YouTube.