Politics

Ford vs. Carter again?

Our electoral situation feels like the 1970’s again. McCain is Gerald Ford, Obama is Jimmy Carter with a college kid cool factor. His speech at Invesco will have a JFK-like media aura about it, and even many Republicans, especially in the party hierarchy, will join in the swooning. Conservatives are in the wilderness for the time being, as Churchill, Thatcher, Reagan and every other political great often was.

Don’t give money to the Republican Party. Give it to your church and do what you can to help revitalize Christian faith in the U.S., beginning at home if necessary.

Conservative resurgence will not come without spiritual resurgence; conservatism and the national strength and identity it brings are fundamentally spiritual.

When we find faith again, we will find another Reagan. Not much else to talk about between now and November.

Init. 100 shows potency of immigration issue

Illegal immigration, though it hasn't been in the news much lately, is always a major vote changer. This week voters in Denver -- you know, liberal Denver, that keeps sending Diana DeGette to Washington, and Pat Schroeder before that -- approved Initiative 100, which allows Denver police to seize cars driven by illegal immigrants. The margin was 54% - 46%; imagine what it jwould have been in the rest of the state (not including the People's Republic of Boulder). Below is a short analysis of some things that happened in the state legislature this past spring. How about sending this information to everyone you know? Or copying it and spreading it around? Or bringing the subject up at your next neighborhood barbecue? Or at work?

I believe that if the voters of Colorado knew these things, they would change the composition of the legislature, which last year had a large Democrat majority.

Who wants to do something about illegal immigration?

During the 2008 session of the Colorado Legislature, the following bills were introduced:

1. HCR 1013 would let citizens vote on a measure that would deny bail to persons if they are "in this country illegally" and evidence showed that they had "committed a serious felony or offense involving driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs."

2. SCR 4 would let citizens vote on a measure that would prohibit a court from accepting a plea bargain "from a defendant who is illegally present in the country if the result of the plea would be to permit the defendant to avoid removal from this country."

3. SB 74 would make it a crime for a person who is a citizen of another country to be in the state while in violation of federal immigration law.

4. SB 87 would double the number of officers in the Colorado State Patrol immigration enforcement unit from 24 to 48.

5. HB 1177 would require that a person who applies to register to vote must provide proof of citizenship and would direct county clerks not to register a person as a voter who completes a provisional ballot affidavit until the person provides proof of citizenship.

6. HB 1039 would require that the identification used for elections must contain a photograph of the eligible elector.

The sponsor of each of those six bills was a Republican. And when each of those bills was voted on in committee, every Republican voted FOR the bill, but every Democrat voted AGAINST the bill. And since the Democrats are the majority party, all those bills were killed.

Also during the 2008 session, when the legislators were discussing the 2009 budget bill (HB 1375), an amendment was offered by a Republican Representative that said that "no state funds shall be expended to provide higher education services . . . for persons who do not legally reside in the United States." All 25 Republicans in the House of Representatives voted in favor of that amendment. They were joined by six Democrats, but that was not enough to overcome the negative votes of 33 other Democrats, and the amendment was killed by a vote of 33-31.

On April 28, Democrat Governor Bill Ritter signed the state budget. In doing so, however, he vetoed three specific items that were in the budget, one of them being a provision that would deny state funds to communities that provide state services to illegal immigrants.

So here’s the original question again: Who wants to do something about illegal immigration?

Why did the Dems go Euro?

The elitists who dominate the Democratic Party have embraced the New Europe and its world view. The fawning reception of Barack Obama in Europe illustrated this. They see him as the anti-Bush, their best bet ever to lash “rambunctious” America to the collectivist chariot of Europe’s “Brave New World”. [So writes Bill Moloney in his overview of liberalism's trans-Atlantic convergence and its significance for Election 2008. Here's the piece in full. - Editor]

The Europeanization of the Democratic Party

In the 19th century Americans took very seriously Washington’s warning against “entangling alliances” which might interfere with the country’s unfolding “Manifest Destiny” of dynamic growth and expansion. A corollary to this belief was that the “Great American Democracy” was a unique-perhaps even divinely inspired-form of political organization vastly superior to the Old World’s tired regimes of aristocratic privilege and downtrodden masses.

In the 20th century America entered upon the world stage powerfully and decisively coming to the aid of embattled European democracies and leading them to victory in two World Wars and the Cold War. Launching these extraordinary interventions were three memorable Democratic presidents- Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman.

Though American actions in the two centuries were starkly different- isolationism in the 19th, and intervention in the 20th-one compelling theme was constant: American Exceptionalism- a general notion that foreigners were a source of problems and Americans were a source of solutions. This attitude was often naïve, and jingoistic, but it provided a sturdy foundation for American patriotism through most of our history.

This enduring national consensus, however, collapsed during the “perfect storm” of the 1960s when a toxic brew of social, military and political convulsions tore gaping holes in the fabric of our national life-self-inflicted wounds that remain unhealed to this day.

Out of this turmoil there emerged a powerful body of left wing opinion and activism that turned the old national consensus upside down. Rejecting Henry Clay’s “my country-right or wrong”, the left substituted “my country-always wrong”. More extreme elements declared their country to be the most oppressive society in history- racist at home and imperialist abroad-while discovering sublime virtues in genocidal tyrants from Mao Tse-Tung to Pol Pot.

While this raging ideological virus infected in varying degree a wide range of American institutions-e.g. media, academia- its principal victim was the national Democratic party.

In less than a decade the party that boldly sponsored the Berlin airlift, the Marshall Plan, and the NATO alliance went from the confident activism of the hawkish John Kennedy-“pay any price, bear any burden to assure the success of liberty”- to the “Blame America First” defeatism of George McGovern-who aptly themed his 1972 acceptance speech as “Come Home, America”.

Betraying allies in Viet Nam, ignoring genocide in Cambodia, accepting communist aggression from Angola to Afghanistan, and bowing to humiliation in Iran, America’s defense of liberty abroad was reduced to Carter’s pathetic gesture of boycotting the Moscow Olympics.

The sorry Democratic mismanagement of both economic and foreign policy led to a series of landslide Republican Presidential victories and finally a decade of GOP Congressional dominance. Yet, amazingly none of these severe reality checks halted the Democrats steady leftward drift.

To understand this hostile take-over of the Democratic Party it must be seen in the context of what happened to all “parties of the left” in Europe in the second half of the 20th century. Traumatized by the shocks and dislocations of World Wars and Cold War the entire European political spectrum moved decisively leftward. While the Socialist parties led this progression, the parties of the Center and Right- shaken by their own crises of confidence- succumbed as well. European Capitalism and Nationalism was decisively weakened and the door opened to a continent-wide shift to collectivism and the trans-nationalism represented by the United Nations, and the European Union.

Today the elitists who dominate the Democratic Party have embraced the “New Europe” and its world view. On virtually every issue- Iraq, taxes, abortion, global warming, energy, hostility to religion, suspicion of Israel, regulation, U.N. worship etc. etc.-difference are only of degree not kind.

The fawning reception of Barack Obama in Europe illustrated this perverse harmony. Clearly Obama’s view of the future fits with Europe’s. They see him as the anti-Bush, their best bet ever to lash “rambunctious” America to the collectivist chariot of Europe’s “Brave New World”.

While heir to Western Civilization, America has always stood apart in the degree of its faith, patriotism, individualism, opportunity, and vitality. Most basically the Presidential election will decide whether this American Exceptionalism will endure or not. The Democratic Party has already given its answer. In November, ordinary Americans will give theirs.

Another gold for Coffman

As my guy, the young phenom Wil Armstrong, lost soundly in Tuesday's GOP primary for the 6th congressional district, he and his disappointed supporters had the consolation of knowing they were beaten not by just any "career politician" -- an allowable but less than ideal bit of campaign shorthand -- but by this decade's Mr. Republican in Colorado, Mike Coffman. Coffman has won three times statewide, twice for Treasurer and once for Secretary of State, before prevailing this week over Armstrong's big money and VIP endorsements to step into retiring Congressman Tom Tancredo's shoes. Democrat Hank Eng will battle Mike in the fall campaign, but this is a very safe Republican district.

Despite occasional disagreements with Coffman, I admire his tough conservatism and superb military record. He will be a fine congressman for the south suburbs, and as far as election medal count from the 1980s to the present is concerned, it's fair to call him the Michael Phelps of GOP competitors in our state.

Congratulations on your latest gold, Major Coffman.

Endorsements for Aug. 12 Primary

Coloradans of both parties will choose their candidates in Tuesday's primary election. Backbone America recommends the following on the Republican side. Wil Armstrong Congress, 6th District Best equipped to shake the place up, a political outsider like Pence and Flake, Coburn and Demint.

Carol Chambers District Attorney, 18th District Disliked as too tough by criminal defense bar and the media; what else do you need to know?

Lauri Clapp State Senate, 26th District Reliably conservative. My frequent ally when she was in the House and I in the Senate, 1999-2005.

Doug Lamborn (Incumbent) Congress, 5th District Solid freshman term since winning the seat in 2006. GOP won't regain the offensive by eating our own.

Douglas Bruce (Incumbent) State House, 15th District Makes up in principle and guts what he lacks in charm. Again, purges are no way to party-build.

Joshua Sharf State House, 6th District Impressive resume, understands liberty, loves America; his opponent talks like an Islamist mole.

Mark Scheffel State Senate, 4th District Seasoned and trustworthy, from the first family of Douglas County Republicans.

If you have a vote in any of these races, or know someone who does, please join me in supporting these good Republicans. I respect your choice if it differs from mine. But by all means, participate!