The hippie-dip social juicebox wanking of the Millennials is maybe… *maybe*… not rubbing off on their little brothers and sisters.

People now in their mid-teens are much more cautious about drugs, transgender rights and same-sex marriage, and are even sceptical of tattoos than those a few years older than them.

59% of young people responding to the survey said their opinions on same-sex marriage, transgender rights and marijuana was either “conservative” or “moderate” – a drastic swing from Millennials and members of “Generation X”, more than 80% of whom said their opinion was either “quite liberal” or “very liberal”:

Unfortunately, if they are in their mid-teens, it means they still have 4 – 8 years of indoctrination ahead of them via the Leftist–controlled education system.

Congratulations to Daryl Glenn, a conservative African-American who won the GOP Colorado primary for Senate.

The GOP reaction: The NRSC has decided not to provide funding for his campaign. Glenn beat Republican Establishment’s preferred candidate, and Glenn openly supports the removal of McConnell from Leadership.

Republicans just nominated a candidate who says Donald Trump is a ‘patriot,’ thinks Ted Cruz should be the next Supreme Court justice, and believes the real problem with Washington is that there is too much bipartisanship between Republicans and Democrats.

That was the description provided by Glenn’s Democrat opponent. It’s intended as an attack, but it sounds right to me. Our country’s $20 Trillion National Debt is a monument to bipartisan cooperation.

Hunter Baker is a university professor running a longshot campaign for the open congressional seat in the 8th District of Tennessee. He is very clear-eyed about his challenges. In explaining why he chose to run, a lot of it has to do with the gay left’s bullying, anti-American behavior. He cites the hate campaigns against Brendan Eich, Atlanta Fie Chief Kelvin Cochran, Christian florists and bakers, and the left’s all-out-war on Religious Freedom in general as his motivation.

When Dan Cathy of Chick-fil-A affirmed traditional marriage, a media storm followed. Mayors of Boston and Chicago said the company shouldn’t be allowed to do business in their cities. But instead of leaving Chick-fil-A vulnerable, millions of people rallied to its support. A huge show of solidarity and the company’s simple dignity changed the story.

Houston Mayor Annise Parker tried to silence pastors in the city by issuing subpoenas demanding they turn over their sermons so they could be examined for any mention of a controversial local equal rights ordinance. The response was overwhelming against such a move. Parker backed down.

These two examples show we can stand up to those who demand conformity to the corporate/DC/Hollywood party line. We deserve to have rights of faith and conscience protected. But every time a Republican office holder runs scared, the task becomes that much harder. We need people in office who are able to offer a simple, reasoned defense of religious liberty.

I wish him well. Without him and people like him, the future is going to look like a pair of Birkenstocks tramping on a human face forever.

Providing a reason for doing what you do is, in politics, almost as important for doing the thing. Instead of their lame, inside-baseball rationale of “we just don’t confirm Supreme Court Justices in an election year, here’s how Republicans should clarify their opposition to Obama’s Supreme Court nominee:

We cannot, and will not, confirm any Justice to the Supreme Court whose vote would imperil important Constitutional Rights such as the Right to Bear Arms and the Right to Practice Religion.

This would clarify why Obama’s nominees need to be opposed in a manner that reaffirms commitment to Constitutional Principles and resonates with key constituencies of the Republican base.

But, instead, they will probably just stick with that “We’re not going to confirm anyone in an election year” thing that makes them look like a bunch of yammering, out-of-touch, politicians.

The Media/Establishment consensus seems to be that losing two major issues at the Supreme Court (Obamacare and Gay Marriage) was actually *good* for Republicans. If the SCOTUS had held Obamacare to the actual language of the law and struck down the subsidies, Republicans would have quickly restored them; all the while trying to pretend that they weren’t really saving Obamacare. Gay marriage is now “off the table,” the “know-betters” tell us, and this is also good for Republicans.

No, it isn’t. Here’s why.

Imagine there were two restaurants in town, the Democrat Bistro and Cafe Republican. Imagine that the two restaurants were basically the same, except that Cafe Republican serves red meat and Democrat Bistro removed it from their menu back in the 90′s and has become increasingly vegetarian ever since. Cafe Republican has been told for years it needs to stop serving meat to be competitive with the Democrat Bistro. In fact, the Yelp reviews for Cafe Republican are filled with bad reviews, mostly from customers of the Democrat Bistro, most of them attacking Cafe Republican for serving red meat.

So, finally, Cafe Republican relents and takes meat (i.e. Social Conservatism) off the menu. And they won’t replace it with anything else, they’re just taking it off the menu.

If you were customer at Cafe Republican and meat was your main reason for eating there, why would you keep eating there?

And suppose Cafe Republican kept promising you that they would replace the meat on its menu with something you would like just as much, but instead they just copied stuff off the Democrat Bistro menu; claiming it was necessary to bring in Democrat Bistro customers.

If you were a customer at the Democrat Bistro, why would you switch to Cafe Republican?

Is the metaphor obvious enough?

The GOP has a very discouraged base because their Senate and House majorities have done little but advance the Democrat agenda; fully funding Obamacare, fully funding Executive Amnesty, confirming all of Obama’s appointments, and granting Obama unlimited trade authority. A Democrat Congress would have done exactly the same thing.

Further, the social conservative segment of the base may well decide “why bother?” It’s bad enough fighting for a lost cause; but when a former ally becomes neutral, there’s no point in being on their team.

So, social conservatives abandon the GOP. The GOP thinks this isn’t a problem because they’ll be replaced with moderates and maybe some Democrats. So far, in the northeast and California, it hasn’t worked out that way.

Ace of Spades is a great blogger. I’m a fan. Although perhaps he hasn’t been as cynical about our two-party system, all this time, as I’ve been. He may be changing his mind. See his recent piece, titled Jay Cost: The Republican Party Is Not Your Friend. Ace begins:

I have long argued against a third-party split and the Nightmare Option of simply conceding the country to the liberals for 20 disastrous years.

I am no longer confident in such arguments.

At some point — and that point is coming soon and hard — the Republican Party must be treated as what it is, a second enemy party dominated by corporate liberalism. [sic; meaning leftism]

He gives his reasons, which you can go read. I’m not sure I agree with Ace’s conclusion:

I am not only ready, but eager to ditch the corporate class — and, frankly, the wealthiest 1% generally, which largely supports liberal policies — and begin taking a very, very agnostic view on whether or not their taxes should be raised until it hurts.

And then, once it does hurt, and they are begging relief, we can…insist that corporate interests serve the conservative agenda, rather than, as it has been forever, that the conservative agenda be made a slave to corporate interests.

First, I don’t think the libertarian-conservative movement can control the situation so finely as that, anytime soon. Ace may just be fantasizing.

Second, I’m all in favor of rejecting corporate leftism (let’s have no bailouts!); but we must always be ready to lower taxes, on moral principle. High taxation is theft; it just happens to be legal theft (since the government is doing it). It’s wrong. Doing the right thing should be a person’s first response in life, not a bargaining chip. Thus, lowering government spending and taxes should be our basic position; even automatic.

Your thoughts?

Not because you’re gay; don’t be a frickin’ drama queen. No, Republicans don’t give a damn about you if you’re in the middle class, if you’re in the working class, or if you care about fiscally responsible Government.

John Boehner and the GOP leadership will not go to the wall to protect your jobs and income from illegal immigrant labor; they claim they don’t want to risk “shutting down the Government.” But they will totally go to the wall, and risk shutting down the Government, to protect corporate welfare for big bankers.

The provision would no longer require that big banks separate trades in financial derivatives from traditional bank accounts, which are backed by the government through the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). The derivatives played a key role in the financial collapse.

The Provision is strongly opposed by extreme-left Democrats, led by Democrat Elizabeth Warren. But, just because Democrats hate it doesn’t mean it’s a bad idea for taxpayers to be backing up the risky investments of multibillion dollar megabanks.

(Also, I am open to Jeff slapping me upside the head and telling me I got this wrong.)

It’s just telling whom Republicans will fight for, and whom they won’t.

First off, we here at GayPatriot are in favor of legal immigrants and controlled, legal immigration from other countries. We simply oppose *illegal* immigration because of the importance of border security in the age of terrorism; and because it’s illegal. The people who have done it began their American journey by consciously breaking America’s laws.

As President Obama unilaterally suspended deportations of certain illegal aliens in 2012, and then last week expanded it to millions more, he has made clear what his priorities are not:

• Enforcing the law, as passed by previous Congresses and signed by previous Presidents: Not a priority.
• Defending U.S. borders: Not a priority. (Has Obama seriously tried to improve border security? Of course not.)
• Following the Constitution: Not a priority.
• Saving taxpayer money: Not a priority.
• Being true to his own previous statements and promises: Not a priority. Per link above, “In a Telemundo interview in September 2013, for example, Obama said that if he were to broaden the exception he made in 2012…’then essentially, I would be ignoring the law in a way that I think would be very difficult to defend legally.’”
• Racial and/or human sensitivity: Not a priority. Obama publicly reduced the people affected by his order to their supposed roles as people “who pick our fruit and make our beds.” (Guess he never makes his own bed, or cleans his own home? I do.)

Any of the first three points above – and certainly, all of the first three together – are violations of the President’s oath of office and grounds for impeachment. But let’s face it: as V has suggested, impeachment will never happen.

I blame the media because this is what you get, when a biased media covers for an egotistical President relentlessly: Hubris. Lawlessness. Government that is willfully, impeachably unconstitutional. With no accountability.

But speaking of the media, I must give some credit where it’s due. In the past, I’ve often noted that Jay Carney was Obama’s paid liar, and he probably still is, on some level. But even he admits that Obama is “literally” doing what he promised not to do. Also, credit the Washington Post for noticing how Obama’s pretense of innocence happens to be a lie.

So, what do you think Congressional Republicans will do with the illegal-immigration issue, from here? Up to now, GOP leaders have been soft on the issue of border security.

They’ve also been eager to be perceived (in the media, etc.) as pro-Latino. But I’m thinking that Obama just took all of that ground away from them: there is no possible way, now, that GOP leaders can ever be perceived as more pro-illegal immigrant or pro-Latino than Obama.

In that sense, Obama just took away any incentive that GOP leaders would have for compromising with him. I think that will blow up in Obama’s face. And I think he has just proven to the voters that Democrats truly don’t give a hoot about border security.(*)

NB: The first version of this post misquoted Obama slightly; the quote has been corrected.
(*) Again, because of its glaring absence from the Democrats’ real set of concerns.

The left — having the psyche of insecure teenage girls — have to constantly reassure each other that they’re the smartest, the prettiest, the youngest, and the coolest.

So, they are very much invested in the narrative that Republicans are all old, dumb, white (uncool) men.

• Slate: “Revenge of the White Male Voter“
• MSDNC: Republicans are old white people who are going to die one day.
• Southern Political Report: The GOP’s Old Man Problem
• McClatchy News Service: GOP revival: ‘The triumph of old white guys’
• Politico: GOP soul-searching: ‘Too old, too white, too male‘

In fairness, though, the GOP would be a lot better off without septuagenarians like Mitch McConnell, John McCain, Pat Roberts, and the barely animated corpse of That Cochran hobbling around the Senate.

It always feels good to see sanity prevail in an election, yes! And now for some honesty about what isn’t so good, in this election.

Unlike the Reagan wins of the 1980s, or the GOP’s 1994 “Contract with America” win, the 2014 GOP (as a national whole) neither provided nor sold to the voters a pro-freedom, government-cutting vision. The GOP skillfully profited from voter dissatisfaction with President Obama; and little more.

Racial guilt aside, the voters originally bought into Obama because he promised the Impossible Dream: a government which would be Big, but still somehow friendly and American (never mind that oppression is inherent to all Big Governments), and which would look out for them (never mind that socialism serves the elites, undermines the economy for ordinary people, and mathematically cannot provide benefits of much value to most people).

In this election six years later, the voters have repudiated Obama because he failed to deliver on the dream. He promised smooth, cool delivery of the dream. Instead, he gave a string of incompetent, messy disasters that even a corrupt media could not hide: such as the Gulf oil spill (BP’s actions had been approved by Obama regulators), Obamacare (with its expensive and oppressive mandates), Libya war, Benghazi, Syria war, ISIS, Ebola, and a moribund economy where the jobs are part-time, the taxes are higher, the U.S. national debt is doubled and only things that go up are the financial markets and the cost of living. The voters feel “lied to” and for that, they have now punished Obama.

In other words, the voters have not yet learned that the dream itself is impossible. The voters still want Friendly Fascism: a Big Government that somehow (1) works (or, in the famous saying, “makes the trains run on time”); while it (2) maintains a veneer of traditional American freedoms. It is impossible. But voters are hoping now that the GOP can help to correct Obama’s excesses and make the dream work.

The GOP, in this election in 2014, has done little to educate the voters on the dream’s utter impossibility – and thus, little to move America forward.

This is the way to respond to a fundraising letter from the Republican Nebbish Clique (RNC).

Since 2008, I have seen nothing that would make me support the Republican National Party, and much that disgusts me about you. People actively opposed to limiting government have leadership positions; those actively attempting to limit government are removed from leadership positions. When you had several chances to stop Obamacare cold, you have continually refused to take them. And don’t give me “1/2 of 1/3 of government.” The simple expedient of withholding unanimous consent during the “debate” over Obamacare would have ended it- no one was going to sit while 1800 pages were read so that a bunch of old men and women could hear them.

…

Any party of John McCain, Lindsey Graham, John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, and John Cornyn is not a party with which I identify. Perhaps you can hit me up again when you have listened to the likes of Mike Lee, Pete Sessions, and Ted Cruz. Maybe I’ll be more willing to listen when you grow a spine, or testicles, or both. Until then, no, not one red cent.

You wouldn’t know it to read the histrionic protests of low-information voters, but Republicans have largely abandoned Social Conservatism in accordance with the advice given to them by the mainstream media and their well-paid political consultants. Republicans have paid lip-service to Right-to-Life, but done very little, at the national level, to advance a Pro-Life Agenda. (The Democrats, in contrast, have been aggressively advancing pro-abortion legislation, including a new effort to nullify all state-level abortion restrictions.)  And despite a series of scandals, Planned Parenthood still receives a generous taxpayer subsidy. The battle to save traditional marriage is lost.

And despite the national  GOP’s abandonment of Social Conservatism, the promised windfall of moderate voters who supposedly were just itching to vote Republican so long as they backed off on abortion, Teh Gheys, and the “Oogah-Boogah” Christianity stuff   has not materialized.  The social conservative wedge of the Republican base is demoralized, and perhaps that’s why so many stayed home in 2012.

But without social values, what does the Republican Party have to offer? It’s hard to answer ‘Fiscal Responsibility’ when the GOP leadership wrote President Obama a blank check to raise the debt ceiling and undid all of the domestic spending cuts in the sequester.  There is no real pushback on Obama’s Big Gigantic Government  Agenda. The House could defund Obama’s job-killing EPA regulations, but they don’t. They could defund his project to force an Affirmative Action housing plan on American neighborhoods, but they don’t. On Amnesty and Illegal Immigration, they largely embrace the same “Amnesty First/Security Later” Big Lie that Obama and the Democrats do.

Since abandoning Social Conservatism (in deed if not in word), the Republican Party has lost a key part of its identity.  One writer thinks the GOP should re-invent itself along populist, anti-corporatist lines. Given that Republicans are joined at the hip with Big Business interests represented by the US Chamber of Commerce, such a reinvention seems unlikely.

Having abandoned Pro-Family, Social Conservative values, the Republican Party has no clear theme, no clear vision of what it is or what it stands for. The Republicans have a slogan, “Growth and Opportunity” that’s as vapid and meaningless as “Hope and Change,” since they have no real policies or plan to advance even that vague agenda.

It will never happen in this debased Idiocracy of a country, but a man can always dream of a better world. [HT: Director Blue]

(more…)

They’re still claiming that any opposition to leftism could only be motivated by racism. Here, Rep. Steve Israel (D) says it back-hand style:

Candy: Do you think your Republican colleagues are racist?

Israel: Not all of them, no. Of course not. But to a significant extent, the Republican base does have elements that are animated by racism.

They’re still demanding that their failures be subsidized and bailed out. Here, a “green” solar company sues the government for only having dished it $250 million of taxpayer money, instead of millions more.

They’re still using highly questionable statistics to demagogue the issue of equal pay for men and women.

They’re still fighting their ‘war’ on Fox News, and failing – sometimes with hilarious results. The video shows Greta van Susteren cornering an aggressive Democrat into admitting that he lied about his resume.

They’re still racially divisive with amazing double standards. Here, a Democrat belittles her African-American GOP colleague for being only “half” black. Which, remember, happens to be what President Obama is.

They still have amazing double standards on the issues of Islam, free speech and women’s rights. Last week, leftists hit a triple (the wrong positions on all three) when Brandeis snubbed Ayaan Hirsi Ali after considering her for an honorary degree.

They’re still screeching “McCarthyism!” to deflect attention from their misconduct, as Rep. Elijah Cummings (D) did last week, when questions arose over his own staff’s collusion with the dangerously out-of-control IRS.

UPDATE: At least there’s hope for Wisconsin:

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker has had a good run lately. He signed a major tax relief package into law, his controversial budget reforms have put the state back in the black…A new poll from Wisconsin Public Radio suggests that voters are appreciative of the governor’s accomplishments. Walker leads Democrat Mary Burke by 16 points in the survey (56/40), with Walker’s approval rating soaring to just shy of 60 percent — an all-time high in the series. (President Obama’s job approval is underwater at 48/50 in the poll). Walker’s lead is fueled by a 19-point advantage among independents…

The “Do Nothing” strategy seems to be bearing fruit.

Republican David Jolly narrowly defeated Democrat Alex Sink on Tuesday in a Tampa-area House race largely seen as a critical test for ObamaCare.

The Democrat, Alex Sink, a former candidate for governor, was heavily favored in the Democrat-leaning 13th CD. The Democrat Party sank millions into her campaign, some of which went to hire complete nitwits to steal David Jolly campaign signs and then brag about it on Twitter. The Democrats also ran a phony libertarian in hopes of siphoning off GOP votes; a strategy that worked very well for them in Virginia. Unless they “find” a few thousand ballots in the trunk of a car (the Franken maneuver), the Democrats will not pick up this seat this time.

So, while this election will not affect that status quo in any way, at least we are spared the obnoxious spectacle of Democrat gloating.

As Jeff has noted, President Obama has no interest in addressing the country’s fiscal problems. (Lefties: “He cut the deficit in half, you wingnuts!” Reality: “$600 Billion deficits are nothing to brag about, even if they used to be $1.2 Trillion.”) But the truth of the matter is the Republicans don’t have a plan to deal with the debt either; and those who have proposed even modest reforms, like Ted Cruz or Rand Paul, are derided as dangerous, radical “whackobirds.”

The Repblicans also aren’t proposing any reforms to deal with IRS abuses. They also don’t have a compelling plan for economic growth; aside from some vague notion of cutting taxes. On Amnesty, they’re as bad as the Democrats. As far as the administration’s abuse of executive power, corruption, and lies go the Republicans whine, but do nothing.  And they won’t even talk about regulatory reform or entitlement reform.

The entire GOP strategy for 2014 is to count on Obamacare remaining unpopular; but in reality, they don’t plan to repeal it anyway.

The question is, can they run on nothing and still win? Do voters hate Obamacare so much that they’ll vote for Republicans who are presenting no alternative vision to the status quo? The Party Leadership is so confident in the “Do-Nothing” strategy that they are actively attacking the party’s conservative base voters.

Amy Otto at Pocketful of Liberty explains some of the less obvious disadvantages to being a Republican (apart from the obvious disadvantage of having 99% of media and academia engaged in Total War against you 24/7/365).

For one thing, Republicans and people inclined to vote for them do not live consumed with politics their leftist rivals are, and less forgiving of… personnel issues.

Registered Republicans often rate character, principle and values above politics. … This often makes a Republican less attuned to doing what needs to be done to win because they’re too busy managing their own lives  to worry about politics.

Republicans kicked Mark Foley to the curb for sending creepy text messages to interns. Democrats re-elected Gerry Studds 9 times after he molested an undererage intern. Sometimes, having standards is a big political disadvantage.

For another, the RNC is always asking for money, but never giving you anything in return.

Just so we have this straight: You want my money so some person in Congress can draw a salary at a minimum of $179,000 /yr for life (also my money) and in return they might fight for a smaller increase in the amount of spending (again, my money).

Sounds like a smart investment! Here’s a check!

The Democrats have a slick value proposition, “Vote for us and we’ll take money away from other people and spend it on you,” that is easy to understand and, for a significant portion of the electorate, impossible to resist. The Republican alternative value proposition is, “We’ll do the same thing, just not as much,” it doesn’t really inspire anybody. Then, the GOP Establishment calls you a “purist nutjob” for actually expecting them to fight for the principles they ran on.

There’s four or five other things in there: The Republican belief in fair play that’s a huge electoral disadvantage when Democrat machines are turning out 120% of registered voters and finding hundreds of votes for Al Franken in the trunk of a car. The way Republicans get blamed for Democrat failures. (e.g. Even though Obamacare was passed without a single Republican vote, it’s still Republicans’ fault it doesn’t work). It’s worth a read.

Christy Waters at the Conservative Report Online makes a compelling case that Karl Rove is doing more to advance the progressive agenda than the entire evening line-up at MSDNC.

• Under George W. Bush, undertook a massive expansion of the regulatory and welfare state in the name of “Compassionate Conservatism.”
• Used Republican Party resources to support Arlen Specter, Lincoln Chaffee, and Charlie Crist against more conservative primary challengers; all three of those gents left the party, two becoming Democrats.
• Advised Republicans to support another unpopular foreign war (Syria).
• Supports an Amnesty plan that will drive down the wages of American workers and flood elections with 10-20 million new Democrat voters.
• Is actively seeking to drive a third to a half of the Republican base (Tea Party conservatives) out of the party.

If Karl Rove and the Republican Establishment have their way, the party will be diminished to what it was in the pre-Reagan Era: a permanent minority of ineffectual moderates content with whatever crumbs the Democrats toss them.

They are perfectly fine with this, as long as the crumbs are big enough.

Granted, this is only a burning question to the “Whackobird” wing of the electorate that really cares about controlling unsustainable Government spending and getting the Government out of where it has no business being.

Jeffrey Lord at the American Spectator makes the case that the Anti-Tea Party, Establishment wing of the GOP (e.g. John McCain, Lindsey Graham, John Boehner, Karl Rove, Chris Christie) are just pale blue Marxists who don’t really care about all that freedom, liberty, and free enterprise stuff.

The Republican Party can control every last seat in Congress after 2014 and the White House in 2016 — and it will not make a lick of difference. Because just as occurred when Rove was a man with clout in the White House and John Boehner was on an earlier ladder of the GOP House leadership passing No Child Left Behind with Teddy Kennedy — the Washington GOP Establishment will do everything they can to fight efforts to limit the size and growth of the federal government.

You have to read the whole thing to get to his conclusion, but he makes a compelling argument: What’s the point in electing Republicans if all we can get is a slightly watered-down Democrat Agenda? Did Republicans reduce Government *at all* when Bush was President and they held both Houses of Congress? Did even one Department’s budget get cut?

It feels as though the USA, with our monstrous debt and out-of-control Government is the Titanic, and a few alert passengers and crewmen have spotted the iceberg ahead. But the Captain and his officers insist that changing course is “too radical,” and “too extreme.” The Democrat officers are oblivious to the iceberg and want to pour more coal into the boilers. The Republicans officers are aware that some of the crew are concerned about the iceberg, but are only willing to negotiate with the Democrat officers for a 2% reduction in the amount of additional coal shoveled into the because that’s “realistic.”

This is why I have a “Let.It.Burn” bumper-sticker in the rear window of my car.

So, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner (and Paul Ryan) have declared War on the Tea Party because they say that people concerned about Big Government represent a crazy, ‘whackobird’ fringe and supporting fiscal restraint and limited Government will lead to electoral oblivion because Big Government is, like, uber-popular (the New York Times says so and Rachel Maddow agrees) and what Americans really want is $63Billion in new spending, a replacement for Obamacare that still puts the Government in charge of health care, more NSA surveillance, and Amnesty.

According to Gallup, however, the ‘Whackobird’ fringe is now 72% of the population. i.e. 72% of Americans say Big Government is the biggest threat the USA faces.

That’s a big fringe.

And yet John Boehner, after his victory in blowing up the Sequester, has now turned his sights on Amnesty. Because that’s what Big Business wants. By the way, Big Business, who the Republicans are jumping into bed with, was ranked as the Biggest Threat by 21% of Americans. The GOP establishment is going against 93% of the public.

The Stupid Party, indeed.