Raising the Stakes

At this writing the Presidential race is too close to call.

Polls indicate that Mr. Obama has an ever so slight advantage. Conventional(and perhaps wishful) thinking suggests that the race will a Romney landslide. Here is what we do know. The Democrats' campaign strategy is "class warfare," as predicted.

Mitt Romney in many ways is an enigma. He has never polled well with Hispanics. Florida is a must win state. All of the party elders urged him to select Florida Senator, Marco Rubio as his running mate. He chose Congressman, Paul Ryan of Wisconsin.

Ryan was a courageous choice. A 42-year-old Roman Catholic from a "blue leaning," Midwestern state, excited the conservative base. Republicans firing the opening salvos in the Medicare debate wasn't expected by the Obama camp. Give Mitt credit for throwing the opposition a curve!

The question becomes, "will it be enough?"

The more we learn about the Romney campaign, the easier it is to predict that Marco Rubio may have turned down VP slot. Mitt's campaign team is made up of Russ Schriefer, Stuart Stevens, Anna Herreberg and Andrea Saul. These were Governor, Charlie Crist's campaign handlers. Don't forget that Rubio buried Crist in a savage Senatorial campaign in 2010.

Going into the race, Rubio's chances had been rated as "slim to none." But he won and in doing so, unmasked Charlie Crist as the "Arlen Specter wing of the Republican party." Even with a sizable money advantage, including national GOP funds, the Schriefer and Stevens packaged, Crist lost.

Guess who Charlie Crist recently endorsed for president?

Republicans spent this summer learning how to like Mitt Romney. The bloody days of first quarter are in the rear view mirror. Labels such as "the Massachusetts moderate,  and "Obama lite,"  are fading. Romney's team continues to work behind the scenes in an effort to placate Ron Paul, after snatching some of his delegates.

 Not having Barack Obama in the white house for four more years is sufficient motivation for accepting Mitt Romney.  And there may be enough AWM's(Angry White Men) in rust belt,. "blue" states to eek out victories. This is the reasoning behind Romney's campaign. But, what if they are wrong? What if Mitt comes up short? Then what! Four more years of the Obama nightmare? A lost country?

Obama's strategy is simple. "Haves versus have nots!" For the "haves," tell them that they need to contribute  "their fair share," as in higher taxes. For the "have nots," they are America's "victims." They need more of everything, as in entitlements and "we will get them for you, if you give us another four years in the White House."

Never mind the fact that the deficit continues to grow. Who cares if food prices and energy prices continue to rise. So what if middle class America is forced to pay a hefty tax on health care. It doesn't matter if Medicare, as we know it, goes bankrupt. It shouldn't concern Americans that their country is being downsized on an International level. The important things to remember are food stamps, free cell phones, unjustified disability checks, low income housing, medical cards, A.F.D.C. checks and free college tuition!

When half of the country is paying no taxes, the end result is predictable. This is the Obama strategy. Invoke the politics of resentment. Add Americans to entitlement rolls. Grow the government.When enough people are either feeding at the government trough or on the government payroll, there should be sufficient votes to win re-election. Especially if additional help comes from extremist groups, such as the Environmental movement.

Agenda 21 is real. True, the mainstream media would like to bury it. But, it is as real as Mount Everest! Amazingly, 99.5% of the population couldn't tell you anything about it. Didn't George W. Bush supported it? Therefore, it couldn't be that bad! Right? And, if it were, why aren't Republicans talking about it? Is there something that we aren't being told?

Agenda 21 is not the subject of this post. Nor is the Council of Foreign Relations. Yet both merit intense research and discussion! So does the Federal Reserve. G. Edward Griffin's, "The Creature from Jekyll Island" is a must read for anyone interested in the world monetary system, not to mention the financial welfare of our nation. 

After thorough exposure to all three, it becomes increasingly apparent that to lose this election could be the end of America, as we know it! Which brings me to the next question: "Why is Mitt Romney gambling in the manner that he is?"

Marco Rubio as VP would have "iced" Florida for Romney. While Rubio predicts that the former Massachusetts governor will win Florida, it continues to be rated as a "toss-up." To lose the Sunshine state would be "end game" for Republicans, even if they win both Ohio and Wisconsin!

The "Arizona like" stance on immigration fires up elements of the Tea Party. But it could cost Republicans Hispanic votes. Colorado is a "toss-up." The state is 18% Hispanic. Nevada would have been a "slam dunk" with Rubio on the ticket. Now, it's "leaning blue." New Mexico is now likely out of reach.

Perhaps Romney's camp figures that Pennsylvania's tough voter I.D. law may discourage  Democrat voters. Maybe they believe that Chris Cristie's keynote speech will sway fifty something, Roman-Catholic, Italians who happen to be Eastern Pennsylvania Democrats. Ohio could go either way. It will come down to turnout. Michigan's rural population is solidly behind Romney. But will they be able to out vote the unions, academicians and ghetto dwellers?

There was one poll that indicated that Romney enjoyed a 12-point lead in Cook County, Illinois. That's Chicago. Obama's turf. If there is any validity to that outcome, the election will be a Romney landslide! I wouldn't bet the ranch on it. What is predictable is the a close outcome with multiple cries of "voter fraud." When seven or eight states hold the key, be prepared for anything.

Are we truly prepared for a close Obama victory? The administration is! They have already authorized the Department of  Homeland Security to order one million rounds of ammunition, including hollow point rounds. I thought hollow point bullets were illegal! Evidently not!

In a previous post, I predicted that the Republican party will likely split, if Romney loses. Without rehashing the fine points of that writing, the conclusion was, "at the heart of the split is sectionalism." Nobody mentioned the fact that Rubio is a Southerner. As discussed in a previous post, many outside the South are just now becoming acquainted with the South's more blurred ethnic lines.

The strength of today's Republican party has been in the South, Great Plains and Rocky Mountains. So is the bulk of the nations energy reserves. An unfettered E.P.A. is proving daily that they are the greatest job killing entity the planet has ever known. Obviously, they are a driving force behind the Obama agenda.

The Midwest,  the nation's "breadbasket" is finding more common ground with these three regions! We are enduring a bad corn harvest. 40% of that corn will be used for Ethanol, a measure that has reduced carbon emissions "marginally at best." Yet, due to this misuse of a precious commodity, less will be available for livestock. The result: "Higher beef and pork prices!"  Furthermore, we are learning  about new oil, natural gas and coal finds throughout this region. Indiana recently became a "right-to-work" state. We all watched the Wisconsin recall attempt last summer! Stay tuned!

People are hurting. High priced energy forces families to lower their standard of living. Amazingly, this seems to be the centerpiece of the Obama plan for America. True, he talks about "middle class justice." But higher gasoline, electricity, medical and food prices don't discriminate! When people are educated to what Agenda 21 truly would involve, it all makes sense!

Therefore, we all must get behind the Romney campaign and hope for the best. Right? Well, hopefully he can provide an acceptable alternative! Or, at least, slow down the inevitable! That's what  much of our GOP leadership would encourage. These Republicans would be satisfied with with "slowing down the inevitable!"

 A few of us will not be satisfied with "slowing down the inevitable." In fact, there are some who would be ready to completely "ditch" the president's glorious vision! The alternative:  "a return to real American values and a system that has been the envy of the entire world."

The question becomes, "how?" The die has been cast for this November. We will either have Obama. Or, we will have someone who will likely be a combination of Gerald Ford and Bill Clinton. The Romney campaign is banking on an economy that is so bad and a population that is so weary of it, that they will merely vote against Obama. It might work! If it does, we can sigh with relief and say, "it could have been worse!" But what if Mitt Romney comes close, tallying 220 or 230 electoral college votes, but still loses?
What if there are two or three contested states?  What if final outcomes are disputed?

Pundits would muse that "Romney made a race of it and although he lost, the Republicans will learn from the experience and come back in 2016 wiser." The problem is, "we may not recognize our country in 2016!" Losing this election is simply not an option!

As difficult as it may be for a lot of Americans to grasp, we are approaching a fork in the road. Hopefully, we aren't there yet. But indications are stacking on the side of our ultimate American moment of truth. Which is, "can we as fifty states remain together when we are so divided on several issues?"

Compounding this problem is the divide in the Republican party. The conservative base is slowly concluding that Northeastern Republicans are more akin to Democrats. The base was severely antagonized by a Romney primary campaign that held no punches. At best 25% of the party base listed Romney as their first choice. For Romney to lose the election, would accelerate a probable divorce!

That's why  a "peaceful separation" of the states should be on the table in the event that Obama is re-elected. New Englanders wouldn't see this. New York City dwellers would think it insane! But what about the energy states? What about the farm states? What about the states opposing Obamacare? What about states that are seeking a return to a more literal interpretation of the 10th amendment?

As in 1861, it wouldn't happen all at once.  States with Republican Governors would start the procession. Then would come energy states that might have Democrat governors. It is conceivable that some states might divide. In the end, look for 60% to 90% of the states to abandon Barack Obama's America.

Unlike 1861, we are not living in the "age of innocence." Nobody is going to relish a shooting war. True,  some militant groups, such as the Black Panthers might try to seize the moment.  But, don't count on the United States armed forces to fire on it's own citizens. It has been suggested that an Obama on the ropes might appeal to the United Nations for help. Good luck! He would be inviting them to participate in their own suicides!

There are a lot of Americans willing to introduce this potentially apocalyptic scenario, as an alternative to a continued Obama presidency. Without question it would raise the stakes of the election. And, in doing so, it would unleash a myriad of hypothetical options! Some of these "options" would become increasingly attractive as the discussion lingered.

Could such talk make a difference in the November election? Probably not. Like Agenda 21, it would be buried by the mainstream media. Since it would propose moving the nation's sphere of influence from New York City to another locale, the concept of a "New Republic" would be ridiculed and chastised by media moguls. They would be the biggest losers, since foreign ownership of broadcast properties is prohibited.

What about Wall Street and the banking interests? The "Outside Wall Street" movement was initially a protest to a large wealth transfer that began in 1997. It later became "freebies for rabble." However, the original intent could easily wrap it's arms around a "peaceful separation" of states. If, repudiation of mortgage and student loan debt became part of the discussion!

The status quot hopes that Romney will win a decisive victory November 6th. Then, the Keynesian's will have their polished product in place. They might just get their wish; assuming the economy stays sour and Romney makes no more mistakes!

Obama scares people. His is a history of disturbing and disquieting tidbits of not so normal associations and experiences. Fabians are patient. Obama seems anything but that. The last thing needed is an extremist awakening a sleeping giant.



   


   

Understanding the South's "Perfect Society" Theory

Recounting the South's "perfect society theory" is something that most revisionist historians consider "best forgotten." While revealing, it painfully exposes both an ugly side and a profoundly beautiful secret of 18th and 19th century America.

During this period of Europeon settlement, nationalities were merged. In the north, this was a more deliberate process. It was quite common to see Italians, Irish, Polish, Swedish and Germans congregating to the same neighborhoods, churches, stores, taverns and livery stables because they shared a common language. Gradually, they assimulated and in doing so, intermarried. Yet, deeply ingrained prejudices persisted.

In the South, things were slightly different. While it's true that more immigrants came from England, Scotland and Ireland, there was strong representation from non-English speaking countries.  French, Spanish, Dutch, German and Italian immigrants were sometimes the majority in their counties. But, acceptance by the English speaking majority came as quickly as their learning the language.

Why was this?

Former Louisiana State University Boyd Professor, William Cooper described the South as having "a perfect society." In short, "no matter where you came from, no matter how rich or poor that you were, you were always a rung above the slave."

This included native Americans and people of color. Even when slavery ended the practice of "blurred if not non existent ethnic lines" continued to be the norm.

For those who have spent time in Texas, it can be observed how Mexican Americans are considered, "Texans first." You don't observe the same connection  in California, a state that was largely settled by northerners.

Southerners urged President, James Buchannon to purchase Cuba from Spain in 1857. Not because they wanted to exploit the island! Southern politicians recognized Cuba's agrarian economy and plantation culture. They were eager to welcome Cuba into the American family, as a state will all of the privileges that accompanied statehood.

Buchannon, a Pennsylvanian knew that Kansas and Nebraska were on tap for statehood. He understood that the added representation of two new "free" states could be offset by allowing Texas to split into two states and admitting Cuba.

While the focus has been traditionally on the slavery issue, little is mentioned about what would have amounted to  "immediate acceptance of Cuba's Spanish speaking population."  English would have been taught in Cuban schools. But, it would have been similar to Louisiana, where most of the Southern part of the state continued to utilize French as it's primary language well into the 20th century.

Most significantly, there was not a "class system based on whether you were English, Spanish, French or whatever!" You were simply Americans and Southerners. Everyone wanted to learn English because it was practical and gave them access to more information.

There was never the same level of religious prejudice in the south. This included a lesser degree of anti-semitism. Many are astounded to learn that Jefferson Davis' Attorney General and most trusted advisor was Judah H. Benjamin of Louisiana, an orthodox Jew. Benjamin was touted as the "finest legal mind in the south." He was seen as a Southerner first and while some disliked him, it had more to do with his personality than his religious preference.

There are writings about the Normalacy Klansmen in the South who were openly antagonistic to Jews and Catholics. But this came much later.  In the 19th century, the standard prevailed. It has since returned.

Ethnic groups are all but non-existent in the south. Even in heavily Spanish concentrated areas such as South Florida and South Texas, it is simply a matter of time before natives assimulate and become Texans and Floridians. Most native Southerners see this as the norm.  There has never been anything close to the ethic prejudice seen in the North.

Can the nation follow the Southern example?

I think they will. English, as the official language makes ethnic desegregation easier. Once we are all speaking the same first language, we start the quick process of dismissing our differences and accensuating our commonalities. We become more sensitive to issues that effect us all.

A prime example was the Texas out-of-state tuition waiver for children of illegal aliens. This surfaced in the 201l Republican presidential debates and contributed to Mitt Romney's nomination.

Texans overwhelmingly voted to extend it. Not because they wanted to reward lawbreakers or promote amnesty! It was simply the practical remedy to a failed national immigration policy. And, it was a matter of compassion! 

Northerners,  Rick Santorum, Michelle Bachman and Mitt Romney didn't see it that way! They made it clear that the Texas approach was the wrong approach. Texas Governor, Rick Perry was demonized for his defense of a Texas legislative vote of 177 to 4 in favor of the waiver!

One key difference that must be noted! Perry is a Southerner. He is a fifth generation Texan. He didn't see these children as liabilities. He saw them as assets. Above all, he saw them as Texans.

This is where the general misunderstanding of Southerners is most manifested. Did anyone believe that the children should be denied the waiver because they were mostly Hispanic? No. In fact, the nationality of the parents hardly entered anyones' mind! It was more a question of "what would be the most constructive way to fix a problem that the federal government created?"

Are we suggesting that Northerners all hold deep rooted ethnic prejudices? Not really. But we are acknowledging that ethnic differences are more readily highlighted in the north. To Southerners, it didn't bear the same level of importance.

There was also the deep rooted Southern reverence for the 10th amendment. As Governor Perry correctly phraised, "under the constitution, in accordance to the 10th amendment, this is Texas' decision." In the thinking of Bachmann, Santorum and Romney, those students had broken the law. It was beyond their comprehension that some good might actually come from developing them, as opposed to punishing them. In the eyes of Texas' legislature, "two wrongs didn't make a right."

It goes back to the fact that these students had been accepted as Texans. They weren't Hispanics or Latinos. They were simply Texans.

History has always attempted to paint the Southern states as "racist or anti-black." One detail that is often overlooked is the fact that on April 2nd, 1865, the Confederate Congress approved the drafting of slaves for military service, with the promise of freedom upon honorable discharge. Symbolically, this confirmed the intention of the South to welcome slaves into the Confederate nation as Southerners.

In short, the South is a society largely unfettered by ethnic differences. This could be a critical factor in the event that the states decide to separate. Could this actually happen? It happened in 1861! The nation is arguably as divided today as it was in 1861. There is one key difference.

In 1861 the North was fighting to preserve the Union. In 2012 there is no slavery issue. But preserving the Union as we know it, is on a lot of minds. In the end, the South's "perfect society" may be the nation's salvation. In it's reasoning comes triumph over the "diversity cultists" who will make every attempt to "balkanize" America.

Identity Theft Prevention- A Winning Issue for Mitt Romney

Where oh WHERE are Mitt Romney's advisors?

An economy that rivals America in 1934, gasoline prices headed out the roof, jobs leaving our shores daily and there seems to be no end to the madness! Yet, the President still continues to pound on his opponent's liabilities. Amazingly, some are actually buying it!

Common sense dictated that Mitt Romney would face a class warfare campaign if nominated. This blog had predicted as much last summer. The politics of resentment are strong. Especially when a lot of folks aren't doing so hot! Fortunately for Romney, there is an issue that neither side has picked up on. Maybe it's time he enlightened America.

Identity theft is the fastest growing crime in America. As a business man, Romney is in an ideal position to point it out to everyone, including the President. Better yet, he can introduce a solution that crosses party lines and  rubs salve into a visable and growing sore.

If you are looking for an issue to unite the country look no further than "offshore outsourcing." Americans are furious, genuinely livid over the practice. Companies contend that it is the result of high corporate taxes and excessive regulation. This is true. Yet, neither side wants to find a middle ground.

Most Democrats favor a tax on offshore outsoucing. But few are ready to seriously cut the corporate tax rate. Never mind that it is now the world's highest!

I am certain that Nancy Pelosi, Henry Waxman and Ed Markey would readily vote for an outsourcing tax. But would they do it if it meant returning E.P.A. jurisdiction to the states in accordance to the 10th amendment? No way!

Where does Mitt Romney stand? We expect him to be more business friendly than Obama. But will it be enough? And will he tell business that they must bring the jobs home or else? Probably not. However, it's predictable that he will push for a corporate tax reduction. And so it goes.

This kind of discussion typically leaves Americans with the conclusion of "same old, same old." A little here. A little there. Perhaps some marginal improvement. But we are still evading the issue.

That issue is privacy. Statistically it's fact that identity theft has mushroomed with the increase of offshore oursourcing. Where and why?

The "where" is easy! Look at the banks, credit card, and debt recovery industries. Have you noticed how many are employing help from beyond our borders. Call Trans Union. Call Equifax. Guess what! You will be talking to "Jerry from New Dehli, John from Taiwan or Pricilla from Manilla." Not to impugn these fine people! It's just that we can't check them out like someone stateside.

Here is where Mitt Romney can hit a home run with the American people; in the name of knowing and understanding business. Unlike his counterpart, a "nice guy but clueless where business is concerned," the former Massachusetts Governor can offer a sensible solution. "Let's make it unlawful to outsource offshore any job utilizing all or part of an Americans social security number."

Wow! Mitt magically introduces legislation that will return tens of thousands of jobs to our shores. Talk about a "grand slam home run!" Yes, we're talking about tens of thousands of jobs that would pay less than $10 per hour. In fact, a lot of these positions would pay $7.25 per hour. Without question, the banks and collection agencies would howl! $7.25 may be minimum wage in this country. But the majority of their offshore help is fortunate to be paid one-third of that rate!

Romney's argument would evoke Patriotism. It would go like this: "Many of the recipients of these jobs would be sixty years of age and older. These workers are dependable, punctual, loyal and have no issues at home. They will be happy to work for $290 per week. Because,  they will gain access to their employers group health insurance plan. Best of all, they will not compromise their social security entitlement!

A strong case could be made that these older workers will be three times as efficient as "Jerry from New Dehil, John from Taiwan or Pricilla from Manilla." It would begin with their superior English language skills.

Many offshore employees have only "some working use" of English. In other words, they can read an English script, but can't answer questions in English. Some have accents so think that it practically takes a translator to understand them. It adds up to inexpert, inefficient and unqualified help.  Not to mention a potential compormise of an Americans' privacy!  

In the end, Romney makes a sound argument that creates jobs while attacking a growing problem in America. In the meantime, he positions Barack Obama as "the nice guy who is clueless about real problems because he has never worked in the private sector." In other words, "why didn't YOU think of this great idea, Mr. President? Don't answer that! I already have!