Was this really "Change" people could believe in?

Before throwing money at something, Congress should conduct a hearing or investigation into root cause. Why not look at the Community Reinvestment Act, conduct of Acorn, and the mark to market and who wrote those pieces of legislation. They should look into what got us here and figure out a way to rectify the situation and undo these arcane pieces of legislation. No, instead it is business as usual. Congress would rather hand over money to big auto and their unions to do... well, nothing in some cases-

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/11/21/automakers-ask-bailout-paying-workers-sit/

Thousands of laid-off auto workers get paid $31 an hour to sit around and do nothing all year under a controversial program that could continue even if American taxpayers bail out the American auto industry.

The program, called "Jobs Banks," has been around for 24 years. Some of the employees at jobs banks choose to do community service, but others do crossword puzzles and watch TV all day -- or just stare at a wall. If you're a laid-off auto worker, it's what comes with your pink slip, thanks to a deal struck in 1984 between the United Auto Workers and the Big Three carmakers.

The program is likely to continue if Congress approves a $25 billion bailout of the industry. But if the automakers go bankrupt, some analysts say, they may be able to eliminate the program, which would abruptly eliminate benefits to the workers in it.

I get the feeling there isn’t any good that will come from the proposed “fixes” to the economy. Bailout money is burning a hole in the Democrats pocket. It seems that we change the intended recipients almost weekly. First, it was to buy out distressed assets. Then it became money for banks who went out on spending sprees. Now, the focus of the bailout is the big three. Next week, I wonder if it will be a bailout for newspapers and the major networks. They aren't doing well either.

It would seem that Democratic leadership has never learned that the WORST time to spend money is when you can’t wait to spend it.

If I changed my mind on what to spend my allowance on as a child this many times, my parents would have told me I didn’t deserve the money. They would have said it was burning a hole in my pocket. Why? Because I would have likely bought something stupid in the store and regretted it before we made it to the car. Then, I’d be stuck with something I didn’t want and be out the money.

Perhaps the Democratic leadership doesn't deserve the hard-earned money of the American tax payers if it is just burning a hole in their pockets.

Why is it so "offensive" to be a Christian or associated with them?

I'm not sure when tolerance became synonymous with intolerance and being a Christian was somehow "offensive" to society. Why is being a Christian and supporting Prop 8 somehow offensive?

Those who supported Prop 8 used a Constitutionally recognized forum for determining law: the ballot box. They didn't break any laws as the votes were legal. Those who did not support Prop 8 have used a tyrant's tactic for controlling political outcome: bullying, ridicule, and harassment.

The recent acts of hatred have spread throughout the country after Proposition 8 was passed in California. Regardless of whether people were for or against the proposition, we don't live in a third world country where folks unhappy with a ballot initiative have a right to protest at the expense of others. Protests have gotten ugly and people are forgetting that part of disagreeing in America means having respect for others- even if they don't share our ideas.

Respect for others and agreeing to disagree peacefully epitomizes tolerance. Last I checked, tolerance and inclusion was one of the founding pillars of our Constitution.

Attending another person's church service for the sole purpose of making a mockery of their beliefs is not something to be proud of. Protesting peacefully is legal while defaming a church is not- those acts seem to mirror hate crimes. What some of the Prop 8 opponents are doing is not part of the Civil Rights movement. What these folks are doing is shameful and sets the true Civil Rights movement back in the eyes of society. Tolerance must go both ways. In as much as one side wants respect- they must also give it. Demeaning others to get a point across isn't demonstrative of of being a tolerant person.

On to the bigger subject. When did being a Christian be a bad thing? I remember reading that those who followed Christ would not have it easy. They would be ridiculed and cursed for His name.

Early Christian had to practice their rights is hiding during the Roman Empire. One of the only safe paces was the catacombs. I have had the privilege of seeing catacomb walls that read "Pray for Peter, Pray for Paul" dating back to the death of Christ when early Christians found refuge among their dead.

I feel as though these times press a Christian to hide his or her beliefs in the name of tolerance. No one wants to hear that someone is a Christian. We'd rather talk about kids, vacation, and even politics- yet as these are important, why is God off limits? We can't say Merry Christmas and City Hall can't wish us one.

We can talk about diversity all day long- but we aren't walking the walk. We must as a society move past this. We have to stop removing religion and embrace it. All of them.

As a Soldier, I took an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies. Seems like intolerance of Christian faith is one of them.

Democrats Move To Bail Out Big Auto... And Determine What Gets Built In The Process

The Democrats want to bail out the big three... they just want the deal to include dictating what vehicles get made. Get the feeling we are headed for a Soviet-style America, where the government picks which cars are made each year?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,450298,00.html

"Before adjourning for last Tuesday's elections, Congress passed legislation providing for $25 billion in government-backed loans to the automakers to prod them to retool their factories to make more efficient vehicles."

I'm not a fan of a no strings attached approach, but history has shown that a public/private venture can work... so as long as the government lets business do what it does best: make money using basic economic principles such as meeting the needs of the market.

Take CONRAIL for example. This was a company formed from the remains of the Pennsylvania, New York Central, Delaware and Hudson, Reading, and other northeast railroads in the early seventies. Much like big auto today, the railroads were driven to bankruptcy through terrible labor contracts, a declining demand in the industry, and a host of excesses such as enormous physical plant and aging fleets. Sounds eerily familiar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conrail

With Conrail's increasing success, two eastern rail competitors of Conrail engaged in a takeover battle to control the railroad and expand their systems. In 1997, however, the two railroads, CSX Transportation and the Norfolk Southern Railway, struck a compromise agreement to jointly acquire Conrail and split most of its assets between them, with Norfolk Southern acquiring a larger portion of the Conrail network via a larger stock buyout. Under the final agreement approved by the Surface Transportation Board, Norfolk Southern acquired 58 percent of Conrail's assets, including roughly 6,000 Conrail route miles, and CSX received 42 percent of Conrail's assets, including about 3,600 route miles.

Conrail was cut into two and sold to CSX and Norfolk and Southern, as a victim of its success! Congress NEVER told Conrail how to run their business. They just told them to get profitable!

Pelosi and the Democrats are looking at this as a golden opportunity to sink environmentalist legislation into the deal. They want Detroit to produce cars that support their agenda.

It incenses me to see that government wants to take on the role of decision maker for product development. These types of policies written into "help" will result in the failure of the free market.

At least President Bush doesn't want to go along with this...

We Need to Stop Whining, Stop Being Spoiled, And Learn How Government Works

Change.

We were so miserable that we decided to take a chance on a green, inexperienced wanna be leader. Don't get me wrong- it is a proud moment for the US. We can finally put the notion to rest that an African American can get elected. I think we can drop the feeling of malaise though.

We have made great strides in medicine, technology, and innovations that have shaped the world. From Ford and his assembly line to putting an R/C rover on Mars- no one does it better than us.

But why the feeling of loss? Simply put, we have become spoiled. Yes, we are drunk on a self-centered philosophy of materialism and don't know how our government is supposed to work. Instead, young people get bombarded with messages about products and have their heads filled with indoctrination instead of education.

More than a year before the election, a survey was given to folks 18-35 at NYU. Most of the young people said they'd trade their vote for an iPod.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1107/6892.html

"Two-thirds say they'll do it for a year's tuition. And for a few, even an iPod touch will do.

That's what NYU students said they'd take in exchange for their right to vote in the next presidential election, a recent survey by an NYU journalism class found.

Only 20 percent said they'd exchange their vote for an iPod touch.

But 66 percent said they'd forfeit their vote for a free ride to NYU. And half said they'd give up the right to vote forever for $1 million."

Several years ago, Jimmy Kimmel and Adam Carolla decided to have a little fun and signed people up on a petition to end Women's suffrage. People these days just don't know the importance of understanding how their government works. I think people forget how government works when ABC stopped playing the "How A Bill Becomes a Law" after school special.


It's really sad.

Great Warfighers Learn Much From Their Opponents

As a young Armor Lieutenant in the US Army, we often discussed the tactics of the great Desert Fox- Field Marshall Erwin Rommel.

For those of you not familiar with Rommel, he was arguably the most formidable opponent the Allies faced in World War II. He was in charge of the 5 and 15 Panzer divisions. He held Axis terrain in North Africa, Libya specifically, and kept it under their control in the face of Allied blockages, supply shortages, and overwhelming forces. He led the enemy to believe his forces were far larger than they were, raided enemy supply lines and used them to sustain his troops, and He was a brilliant tactician and maneuver warfare students in the US military still read about him today. Rommel is a legend- even today.

So, where do we as conservatives go from here? I think we have much to study about how the opposition candidate won- and to learn from it. We should as a party adopt the same tactics... community organizing, raising private funds, and finding a common enemy to unite against.

Who should the common enemy be? In the last election, it was Bush. It could be argued that the Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader in the Senate should be targeted and to use the election as a referendum on their policies. I know- that is straight out of Saul Alinsky's rules for radicals... but if the shoe fits- wear it. It seems a little too much Tsun Tzu, but it is a direction we'll have to go if we want to win.

I think the Republicans lost their "community" organizers- the Evangelical Christians. Yes, I'm referring to the base. When conservatives unhinged themselves from the base under media pressure, it spelled less voters. Less voters meant less of a chance to win. Remember, the Obama campaign started running two years before the election. John McCain really started running back in March as his campaign gained speed. McCain would have been the better president. Unfortunately, his inability to get his message out and his decision to stick to his principle on staying with public financing cost him a lot of air time and impressions on people.

Not to get too far off topic, but the staff of the McCain camp may have perhaps benefited from a non-disclosure agreement. The current media storm about how Sarah cost John the election is being fed by some staffers. Bad idea- staffers should NEVER fight in front of the kids (the American public). You'd think that with the number of military officers who were involved in the campaign this would have been obvious. Leaders never fight in front of those they lead- it is disastrous because it breeds contempt among the troops. Yet another military lesson in leadership.

I'd like to see taxes, the deficit, earmarks, and big government being moved center stage. All of which has been brought to us by the Pelosi-Reid alliance. We are just now seeing a glimpse into the future with a tax cut that seems to help less and less Americans weekly, banks being forced to take bail-out dollars, and talk of the fairness doctrine.

Regardless, I hope the post-mortem on Campaign '08 gets people together within the GOP. People from the party were calling the election a loss before it happened. Not good. It became a self-fulfilling prophecy. This sort of behavior need to stop. Now is the time to build the vision, start engaging those who can make it happen, and to celebrate hope- the hope for a return to true conservatism and classic party ideals.

Let the brand campaign begin...

Why Red Elephant?

A college archaeology professor of mine once said "tools have meaning imparted by their creators." The users of tools establish the purpose and value of them. In the tradition of the Federalist Papers, I'm making my intent clear to highlight conservative issues through this format- the blog.

The case for a name
In 1874, a political cartoon by Thomas Nast cast the die that forever connects conservative Republicans to Elephants. It wasn't until the election of 2000 that the color red was associated with conservative voters. True, it was the mainstream media that associated the color red with the GOP as opposed to the GOP deciding for itself- but the association remains and is a part of how I identify myself as a conservative.

Why now?
Life is tough these days. Policies have failed and the perfect storm has hit the nation and we are all wading through the infested waters of the credit crisis, joblessness, and a global economic down turn that may result in not only a protracted recession- but a modern day depression.

Alas, all is not lost. We are not lining up as a nation looking for bread or canned goods yet. We must be cautious though. We don't want to be there again.

There must have been scars that remained long after the depression. Anyone who has a relative that survived the depression will tell stories of saving everything from KFC buckets to plastic butter cups. People truly felt as though they didn't trust the government or Wall Street enough with their money. They felt as though they had to be resourceful and not depend upon anyone but themselves.

Lessons of the past
The post-depression era mentality was to be self-reliant. This stands in sharp contrast to the current mindset of today's America facing a recession. These days, some- perhaps even most- people expect the government to bail them out. They expect government to solve their problems. In too deep on the house? Call government. How about gas prices? Call government. No healthcare? Call government. Government will come to the rescue- but at the cost of Liberty and Freedom.

This is disturbing as it appears we are headed for a womb-to-the-tomb society where government takes care of all our needs... big and small. It is a vision of government that perfects our lives through legislation and redistribution. This is the ultimate sacrilege of Liberty: trading freedom for micromanagement.

We are "here" the map says. But where is that?
In the midst of all of this is something most disturbing: our conservative leadership is in a state of disarray. We've suffered a defeat. We are trying to blame ourselves.

We should come to grips with the fact we lost. We should also acknowledge the fact we lost our way. We jumped on the train to bail out business before we looked at root cause and shored up the reason why we are here. The reason in my mind is bad legislation that allowed companies to create risk that would never be mitigated. Wall Street had it's hand forced by congress in the form of CRA, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the sub-prime mess, short selling, speculation, terrible energy policies, poorly negotiated contracts with unions, and the list goes on.

What folks fail to realize is that government got us here in the first place. Government gave us this legislation. Most of it was created by liberal, fiscally irresponsible Democrats. Yes- the same people who led us to this place are now claiming to have the solutions. These are the same people that have promised big and delivered small- yet never are held accountable.

Don't get me wrong- Democrats have done some great things. Managing the checkbook is not one of them. Then again, neither have the Republicans as of recently.

This is why we need to return to a government that provides opportunity and stops trying to ensure outcome. A government should protect liberty- not raise taxes and attempt to personally create the solutions. That is what the private sector is for.

Americans don't trust Wall Street right now. We need to build confidence in Wall Street by holding the government accountable. We need to hold government accountable by holding ourselves accountable. We need to take a look in the mirror and live within our means, have realistic expectations of what wealth is, who can have it, and why each of us should work hard to get it and stop expecting that if we didn't get it that it isn't government's responsibility to take it from someone else.

Wall Street operates with the government's guidelines. If they fail it is because government has failed. If government fails it is our fault.