Kuhner: The conservative revolt

Insight Magazine ^ | 3/21/2007 | Jeffrey T. Kuhner

[etlib]

The article talks a lot about Michael Savage who I know many of you dislike but makes some cogent points about the problems of ignoring all conservative issues along with a synopsis of the problems with the three major candidates.

[Chani]

for later

[stockpirate]

We do care, about conservative issues, it is just every time we elect someone that says they will vote our way.

We are mislead and used just to get them elected.

We need a real champion.

Not these wanna a be's

[TAdams8591]

Marking.

[rmlew]

It wopuld be more helpful to have 5 million supporters go out for a real candidate like Hunter or Tancredo.

[flynmudd]

What about Fred?

[goldstategop]

I don't particularly care for Michael Savage. Truth be told, I'm not all that excited either by the current crop of GOP presidential candidates.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[padre35]

. Unless Republicans repair the growing breach, they will lose again in 2008. This time the cost to the country may very well be a Hillary presidency.

No No No, people are not "getting it", the reason "why" we are beign swamped by Rudy etc is because there isn't a dime's worth of difference between Either Rudy or Hilliary.

Does anyone serious think that a President Guiliani would be all that different from a President Hilliary?

The deck looks like it is stacked folks, instead of "repairing the breach" they merely are offering whitewash for the hole in the form of choose lib A or choose lib B or stay home allowing A or B to win the Oval Office.

[dynachrome]

ping. Though a lot of the article is about Michael Savage, some interesting nuggets on some of our faves.

"their support among voters is thin. Rudy Giuliani, John McCain and Mitt Romney have not caught fire with the Republican base for one simple reason: They are liberals masquerading as conservatives."

...

[x]

And this is precisely the problem not only with the GOP’s leading candidates, but with Republicans as a whole: They no longer believe in the core principles of the conservative movement. They long ago stopped caring about shrinking the size of government, securing the country’s borders, defending basic Judeo-Christian values, restoring civilized decency to our culture or winning the war in Iraq. They pay lip service to conservative principles. Yet they care only about power, perks and privileges.

A very long time ago. A lot of people made the same complaints about both George Bushes.

It can be hard to separate out what the public wants from what the elite wants. On some issues, like immigration, it's pretty clear, but big government conservatism wasn't something the elites thought up by themselves.

[Dick Bachert]

Years ago, Congressman and medical doctor Larry McDonald was working late in his Capitol Hill office when an old friend from medical school knocked on his door. Larry rose and greeted his guest and, after exchanging the usual pleasantries, looking a bit dejected, his friend slumped into a chair.

Larry asked him what was wrong.

With a little sigh, his friend said “Every few years, a group of us have to take time away from our practices and jobs and come all the way up here to meet with our representatives and senators to try to head off some new effort to trash the Constitution. And I often get the feeling that these guys up here just aren’t listening.”

Laughing, Larry offered, “You do know, don’t you, that there’s a better way?”

“What’s that, Larry?”

“You and your friends ought to get together at home and find a House candidates who shares your values and get behind him with support and resources and REPLACE those guys who aren’t listening. And if there is no candidate with those qualifications, go out and CREATE one – maybe even run yourself! And if, down the road, the new guy stops listening to you, work to replace HIM. The beauty of the House of Representatives is that the Founding Fathers designed it so that these folks have to come home every 24 months to get their tickets punched by the voters. And as we both know, the taxing and spending occur in the House. If the lower house refused to fund some liberty destroying or unconstitutional agency or program, it just won’t happen.”

“But, Larry, how do we convince the rest of the voters that the incumbent needs to be replaced?”

“That used to be a real challenge since poll after poll asking folks what they thought of congress usually got very negative answers. But when asked how they thought THEIR guys were doing up here got responses indicating that THEIR guys were doing a good job. There’s a new program called Tax Reform Immediately (TRIM) that uses only one yardstick for its quarterly rating of every member of congress – the United States Constitution.” (http://www.trimonline.org)

“Does it work, Larry?”

“One of my favorite stories about that is the 16 year-old paperboy out in the Midwest who every quarter paid to have 10,000 TRIM Bulletins printed and threw them on his route and in another 9,500 lawns in his district – FROM HIS BIKE! After 3 quarters of that, the incumbent was ousted for someone who more closely represented the views of the voters. On election night, the red-faced loser was interviewed on TV and, waving a TRIM Bulletin, sputtered that it was a right-wing plot to “get him.” It was GREAT TV.”

“A ‘plot’ by a 16 year-old paperboy.” Larry and his guest laughed.

“And it’s happening all over the country – even in my state, Georgia. My supporters down there are keeping the voters in the 7th informed about my votes up here. Since my only standard is the Constitution, they keep sending me back. So it works both ways: The good guys get reelected and the bad guys get sent home – or hang around as lobbyists.” Another chuckle.

“But what about the presidential election?”

“While important, if we had 300 or so decent representatives up here on the Hill, they’d take back much of the power they’ve shipped down to 1600 over the past years and the 4 year beauty contest would become far less important than it now is. A metaphor for these elections for president, representatives and senate is a 3 card Monte game: While everyone is focused on the card marked with the “P,” the “R” and “S” cards are largely ignored.”

Larry’s friend returned home, got his friends and neighbors up to speed with TRIM – and within a year, had a new and improved representative.

[nickcarraway]

Is that why we have so many great representatives now?

[Dick Bachert]

No, it's because the dumb masses (say it fast for maximum effect) -- depending on their economic station -- won't turn off ET/VHI/MTV, American Idol or come off the golf course or off the boat to BECOME INVOLVED in the process scores of thousands died to TRY to leave us.

Larry also often told us that if this country COULD be saved, it would be saved by truck drivers and waitresses 'cause the folks who have the MOST to lose -- who have benefitted most from the system being dismantled before our very eyes -- typically do the least because their equally foolish and jaded friends would think them not "cool."

[mugs99]

The deck looks like it is stacked folks, instead of "repairing the breach" they merely are offering whitewash for the hole in the form of choose lib A or choose lib B or stay home allowing A or B to win the Oval Office.

You're right on.
.

[WOSG]

It's simple: our leaders and our base are like members of a basketball team that are not on speaking terms. HOW CAN WE WIN THE GAME IF WE DONT PLAY TOGETHER WELL?

Forget about blaming one side or the other side ...
- if Michael Savage and other mouthpieces start bashing the leaders
- if our leaders dont deliver on the positions we care about
- if the grassroots activists go 3rd party
etc.

Acts of divisiveness create division. Division creates a smaller number and a nonfunctional team. if all that happens how can we expect to win in 2008? A smaller number creates a losing team. Democrats win. WE LOSE.

I have come to some conclusions:
#1) BASHING PRESIDENT BUSH IS COTNERPRODUCTIVE AND FUTILE. Don't join that game. He needs our support and going along with the Bush-haters now is just an invitation to say "President Hillary Clinton"

DONT ATTACK THE PERSON. IF YOU DISAGREE WITH A POLICY, FIND THE PERSON AND POLICY THAT YOU *DO* SUPPORT AND FOCUS ON HIGHLIGHTING THAT.

#2) STOP TELLING ME WHAT YOU ARE AGAINST, TELL ME WHAT YOU ARE *FOR*! We have let ourselves get into a reactionary rut because our own leaders lack vision. Screw that. Tell me what you are for, get a positive agenda and positive energy out there about what we should be doing.

#3) ALIGN YOUR THOUGHTS, ACTIONS, VOICE AND VOTE. The 4-fold path to save America - Think right, act right, speak right, vote right!

#4) THE MEDIA REMAINS THE REAL ENEMY/CHALLENGE. Change media bias and we can change the calculus of our culture and politics. Fight media bias!

You can defend conservative values without tearing down Republican leaders (and thereby doing what the democrat liberals want to see - a 'divide-and-conquer' strategy to destroy the Republican coalition; note for example that some 'fiscal conservatives' have bought the liberal koolaid about social conservatives being the enemy of fiscal conservatives; hogwash but some believe it.)

[omnivore]

I don't see how the "establishment wing" of the Republican Party has any use for conservatives. Conservatives are bad for business. Business wants cheaper labor. Illegals for farm (agribusiness) workers. Outsource to China, where happy happy people living under communism work for happy happy capitalists much cheaper than no-good-nik Americans will. What has to be done within America, bring in H1-B visa people from foreign countries to do, instead of hiring Americans, they're much cheaper and easier to get rid of later.

I don't see much that an establishment Republican would like about conservatives, they're just pains in the butt, with all their moralizing and weird obsession with "freedom" and the "Constitution," their strange fear of gun control, and the other stuff they're constantly going on about. The conservatives never seem to want to crush their own wages down to less than a dollar an hour, say, or anything else that would help business make more profit. They whine about McCain-Feingold, instead of being enthusiastic about censoring politics off the Internet the way the Chinese do, to help stamp out negativity toward the Party. They just don't get it. So the Republican party has no use for them.

Specter or Toomey? Who to back? That was a pretty easy choice for the Republican Party to make. The reliable stooge or the guy who thinks for himself? The party establishment will always prefer the reliable stooge. If they can't get a reliable stooge, throwing the election to the Democrats such as Hillary is probably preferable, from their perspective, to giving a conservative a chance.

Follow the money. Watch the headcounts at those $1000/plate fundraisers, see who has the big cash thrown at them, and who gets the rocks.

[itsahoot]

A very long time ago. A lot of people made the same complaints about both George Bushes.

And they were absolutely correct.

[Calpernia]

bumping that

[Calpernia]

One more problem there.

It is not the truck drivers and waitresses watching ET/VH1/MTV. They are juggling extra hours and probably have another job to handle the bills.

The ones that benefitted from the system have the lobbying money.

We are out dollared.

[Dick Bachert]

And being "out dollared" is a REAL part of the problem.

Now that the state has the ability to create all the "dollars" they need without even asking US, they have no reason to ask our opinion.

See below for more that you ever wanted to know about how bad things REALLY are and why some of the Founding Fathers would be in the streets with guns were they still here.

---

(I wrote this a number of years ago when things were NOT going well with the economy. Trust me: They WILL get ugly once again as man -- or certain men -- cannot resist playing God. We continue to violate the universal, immutable laws of economics at our great peril.)

Despite the apparent economic strength of the American economy, history proves that EVERY house of cards eventually comes down. And the higher the card house, the harder the fall when it finally comes. And when it does, the more freedoms we will voluntarily surrender to "restore order." It was the Founders' concern about this historically valid problem which prompted their attempt -- now ignored -- to keep American "money" sound and honest.) Dick Bachert 1998

* * * * * * * *


The Forgotten History of Money
This is the fascinating story of the efforts by certain of the Founding Fathers to prevent the economic distress we find all about us today. It is also a sad story on the basis that modern, "sophisticated" Americans have abandoned the corrective institutional mechanism that remains in place to this day. As you read it, think about a world with many fewer S&L, banking and political scandals and economic problems now considered the norm.

"Blood running in the streets. Mobs of rioters and demonstrators threatening banks and legislatures. Looting of shop and home. Strikes and unemployment. Trade and distribution paralyzed. Shortages of food. Bankruptcies everywhere. Court dockets overloaded. Kidnappings for heavy ransom. Sexual perversion, drunkenness, lawlessness rampant. The wheels of government are clogged, and we are descending into the vale of confusion and darkness. No day was ever more clouded than the present. We are fast verging on anarchy and confusion. (George Washington in a 1786 letter to James Madison, describing the effects of fiat paper money inflation then ravaging America in the pre Constitutional period.)

"The annihilation (of the paper money) was so complete that barber shops were papered in jest with the bills; and sailors, on returning from cruises, being paid off in bundles of this worthless money, had suits made of it, and with characteristic lightheartedness, turned their loss into frolic by parading through the streets in decayed finery which in its better days had passed for thousands of dollars." (Contemporary writer, Breck, 1786)

"Paper money polluted the equity of our laws, turned them into engines of oppression, corrupted the justice of our public administration, destroyed the fortunes of thousands who had confidence in it, enervated the trade and husbandry, and the manufactures of our country, and went far to destroy the morality of out people." (Peletiah Webster, 1786)

At the drafting of the U.S.Constitution, there were many "Friends of Paper Money" present. On August 16, 1787, when the discussion arose on Article 1, Section 8, the proposed wording was this: "The Legislature of the United States shall have the power to...coin money...and emit bills of credit of the United States."

A hot argument ensued on the power to emit bills of credit, which is another way of saying "printing paper money".

Here are the actual words James Madison wrote describing the debate in his diary: "Mr.G.Morris moved to strike out *and emit bills of credit.* If the United States had credit, such bills would be unnecessary; if they had not, unjust and useless.

MADISON: Will it not be sufficient to prohibit the making them a tender? This will remove the temptation to emit them with unjust views. And promissory notes in that shape may in some emergencies be best.
MORRIS: Striking out the words will leave room still for notes of a responsible minister which will do the good without the mischief. The monied interest will oppose the plan of the Government, if paper emissions be not prohibited.
COL.MASON: Though he had a mortal hatred to paper money, yet as he could not foresee all emergencies, we was unwilling to tie the hands of the Legislature [Legislature = Congress].
MR.MERCER:(A friend to paper money) It was impolitic...to excite the opposition of all those who were friends to paper money.
MR. ELSEWORTH thought this was a favorable moment to shut and bar the door against paper money. The mischiefs of the various experiments which had been made, were now fresh in the public mind and had excited the disgust of all the respectable part of America. By withholding the power from the new Government, more friends of influence would be gained to it than by almost anything else...Give the Government credit, and other will offer. The power may do harm, never good.
MR.WILSON: It will have a most salutary influence on the credit of the United States to remove the possibility of paper money. This expedient can never succeed whilst its mischiefs are remembered, and as long as it can be resorted to, it will be a bar to other resources.
MR.READ thought the words, if not struck out, would be as alarming as the mark of the Beast in Revelation.
MR.LANGDON had rather reject the whole plan than retain the three words *and emit bills*".

The motion for striking out carried.

Historian George Bancroft later wrote: "James Madison left his testimony that *the pretext for a paper currency, and particularly for making the bills a tender, either for public or private debts, was cut
off.* This is the interpretation of the clause, made at the time of its adoption by all the statesmen of that age, not open to dispute because too clear for argument, and never disputed so long as any one man who took part in framing the constitution remained alive."

ROGER SHERMAN(1721 1793)should be a name familiar to every American. As familiar as Washington, Madison, Jefferson and Adams. He is the only man to have signed all 4 documents surrounding the formation of the United States of America: The Continental Association of 1774, The Declaration of Independence, The Articles of Confederation and The United States Constitution. He was a Judge of the Superior Court in New Haven, Connecticut, serving that office with distinction from 1766 until 1788. He served as Treasurer of Yale University from 1765 to 1776. He was renouned for his high intelligence and unswerving honesty and was described by John Adams "as honest as an angel and as
firm in the cause of American independence as Mount Atlas." He served in the U.S.Senate from 1791 until his death in 1793.

Why is Roger Sherman*s name unfamiliar? HE WAS AN ENEMY OF PAPER MONEY!! In 1751, Roger Sherman and his brother William sued James Battle for paying a debt to their shop in New Milford, Connecticut, in depreciating paper currency. Over a period of 15 months, Battle had charged "divers wares and merchandizes" amounting to 129 pounds of what
Sherman assumed were pounds of Connecticut "Old Tenor", a stable currency whose value were well preserved by taxation taking it out of circulation. But Battle assumed the debt was denominated in pounds of ever depreciating Rhode Island currency, tendered in same, and the Shermans took a beating in the payment and sued for recovery of loss by depreciation. The Shermans lost when Battle argued that he was merely following the accepted custom of the day. In 1752, Sherman wrote his book "A Caveat Against Injustice or An Inquiry into the Evils of a Fluctuating Medium of Exchange" indicting UNBACKED PAPER MONEY.

It was this experience that Sherman brought to the Constitutional Convention and prompted him to rise on August 28,1787 and propose new, more restrictive wording to Article 1,Section 10. The standing version under consideration was worded this way: "No state shall coin money; nor grant letters of marque and reprisal; nor enter into any Treaty, alliance, or confederation; nor grant any title of Nobility." (From Madison’s Notes of the Convention) "Judge Sherman and Mr. Wilson moved to insert the words *coin money* the words *nor emit bills of credit, nor make any thing but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts* making these prohibitions absolute, instead of making the measures allowable with the consent of the Legislature of the U.S. Mr. Sherman thought this a FAVORABLE CRISIS FOR CRUSHING PAPER MONEY. If the consent of the Legislature could authorize emissions of it, the friends of paper money would make every exertion to get into the Legislature in order to license it." Mr. Sherman*s and Mr. Wilson*s motion was quickly agreed to and became the supreme law of the land.

Some additional quotations to ponder:

"All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise not from defects in the constitution or confederation, nor from a want of honor or virtue so much as from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation" (John Adams in a letter to Thomas Jefferson, 1787)

"I deny the power of the general government to making paper money, or anything else, a legal tender." (Thomas Jefferson)

"You have been doubtless been informed, from time to time, of the happy progress of our affairs. The principal difficulties seem in great measure to have been surmounted. Our revenues have been considerably
more productive than it was imagined they would be. I mention this to show the spirit of enterprise that prevails." (George Washington in a letter to the Marquis de LaFayette, June 3, 1790 AFTER the United States Constitution prohibited unbacked paper money at Article 1, Section 10)

"Since the federal constitution has removed all danger of our having a paper tender, our trade is advanced fifty percent. Our monied people can trust their cash abroad, and have brought their coin into circulation." (December 16, 1789 edition of The Pennsylvania
Gazette)

"Our country, my dear sir, is fast progressing in its political importance and social happiness." (George Washington in a letter to the Marquis de LaFayette, March 19, 1791)

"The United States enjoys a sense of prosperity and tranquility under the new government that could hardly have been hoped for." (George Washington in a letter to Catherine Macaulay Graham, July 19,1791)

"Tranquility reigns among the people with that disposition towards the general government which is likely to preserve it. Our public credit stands on that high ground which three years ago would have been
considered as a species of madness to have foretold." (George Washington in a letter to David Humphreys, July 20, 1791)

"It is apparent from the whole context of the Constitution as well as the times which gave birth to it, that it was the purpose of the Convention to establish a currency consisting of the precious metals.
These were adopted by a permanent rule excluding the use of a perishable medium of exchange, such as certain agricultural commodities recognized by the statutes of some States as tender for debts, or the still more pernicious expedient of PAPER CURRENCY." (Andrew Jackson, 8th Annual Message to Congress, December 5, 1836)

DESPITE WHAT YOU WERE TAUGHT IN SCHOOL, THE HISTORICAL RECORD IS CRYSTAL CLEAR: AMERICA WAS TO HAVE BEEN SPARED THE DESTRUCTIVE EFFECTS OF AN UNBACKED PAPER MONEY SYSTEM. MOST OF THE PROBLEMS WE FACE TODAY CAN BE TRACED TO WHAT ANDREW JACKSON CALLED "THE PERNICIOUS EXPEDIENT OF PAPER MONEY".

HISTORY TEACHES THAT AN "ARTIFICIAL" MONEY CREATES AN "ARTIFICIAL" WORLD WHERE THE PRICE FOR SOME ITEM...EVEN OUR MOST POPULAR WELFARE "PROGRAM"...CAN BE DEFERRED TO FUTURE GENERATIONS (OUR $11 TRILLION
NATIONAL DEBT) OR PAID WITH A "MONEY" CREATED OUT OF THIN AIR WHICH ROBS THE VALUE FROM THE MONEY WE MIGHT BE UNFORTUNATE ENOUGH TO HAVE IN OUR POCKETS AT THAT MOMENT (INFLATION). AND ONE THING YOU MUST REMEMBER ABOUT INFLATION IS THAT IT IS NOT AN "EQUAL OPPORTUNITY" DESTROYER: THOSE FIRST IN LINE TO GET THEIR HANDS ON THE NEW MONEY ROLLING OFF THE PRESSES (THE MODERN FRIENDS OF PAPER MONEY) HAVE A CHANCE TO SPEND IT BEFORE IT LOSES ITS VALUE. THE LITTLE PEOPLE (THAT’S US, FOLKS!) FARTHEST DOWN THE LINE ARE THE ONES WHO FEEL THE FULLEST EFFECTS OF THIS DESTRUCTIVE PROCESS.
filename:$history

Dick Bachert