The Conservative Brotherhood

Today I am reposting a submission I made on Jan.2,2008 entitled "Iowa".
I have some trepidation about doing this for fear of a misunderstanding of my motivation for doing so. I can only ask you to believe I am not doing it to say, "I told you so". Then and now I wish to convey that ideology shouldn't narrow the view of reality. My original point was this nation had fundamentally changed from the lingering ancient racial paralysis that locked hope and potential in stasis, even among some our most intellectually and professionally mobile minds. I was met with various levels of ridicule and disbelief. That was understandable and frankly warranted considering the tendency to use history as a prognosticator relative to difficult transitions. Ok, I was lucky too! But I was amazed at the similarity of Mr. Obama's and my view of the past, the present, and the future. I leave that to your judgement. Here again is "Iowa".

Tomorrow we vote. The marathon campaign of 2008 will end- hopefully. I have a preference, but I don't fear the will of the majority as long as the outcome is perceived as fair and upright. I have lived under the administrations of both major parties, back and forth several times, so I have built immunity to the fear mongering characteristic to political contests. Still, I am relatively sanguine that needed change will result, not derived from the personage of the winner, but from the sheer number of ballots cast. The expected outpouring is documentation that the expectations of the people haven't been met and the roiling masses, heretofore thought to be apathetic and servile, have been paying attention. It seems a significant number have scanned the terrain and have concluded we have been led to a pasture less green than the strategies of the shepherds promised. The fresh reality is the herd, following an ancient instinct, is moving in a new direction and the winner of the election will be he who was quickest to plot the azimuth and rush to the front with his staff. The awakened people have chosen the highway; the new President will simply be driving the bus.

FBI INFORMANT SPEAKS ABOUT TIME IN AYERS’ UNDERGROUND: Says Ayers Present During Meetings In Which Re-education Camps Along With Elimination Of 25 Million People Planned

During 1969 – 1970 the Weathermen, led by William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn had a mole among them. In 1982, FBI informant Larry Grathwohl was interviewed for a documentary in which he detailed meetings in which 25 leaders within Weather Underground plotted the overthrow of the American government and the subsequent need to eliminate 25 million people.

Click here to see that portion of the interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWMIwziGrAQ

Study Shows That Higher Tax Rates Discourage Growth and Expansion of Small Businesses

Washington, DC, October 27, 2008 - Restoring the higher, Clinton-era tax rates on the top two brackets, as Senator Obama and some Congressional leaders have proposed, increasing the 33 and 35 percent rates to 36 and 39.6 percent, respectively, would raise taxes on 45 to 55 percent of small business income, according to a new Tax Foundation study.

In Tax Foundation Fiscal Fact No. 152, "The Effect of the Presidential Candidates' Tax Plans on Flow-Through Businesses," Tax Foundation Vice President for Economic Policy Robert Carroll, Ph.D., explains that because most small businesses are not required to pay the corporate income tax, small business income instead "flows through" to the owners who report it on their individual income tax returns. Carroll explains that with 35 percent of business taxes paid in this manner by the owners of "flow-through" businesses—sole proprietorships, farm proprietorships, partnerships and S corporations—it is important to analyze how tax increases affect the entrepreneurial sector.

I cannot predict the outcome of the upcoming election. The Truman-Dewey example and the "Bradley Effect" signal caution to ersatz soothsayers and those that attribute too much cogency to polls. Still, this campaign season has been transformative for this nation regardless the individual inaugurated in January. An African-American received the nomination of one of the major parties. A woman, widely thought to be the heir apparent of a major party, ran a credible campaign, lost as a politician rather than as a woman, but assuredly de-gendered elite politics. Another woman received the Vice-Presidential nomination for the other major party. And the Republicans, having succeeded a wildly popular Democratic president when they chose a young Governor as their standard bearer retreated to their recent tendency, selecting the next elder statesman in line, in what may be the final catharsis leading to new vision. Our politics have evolved.

RLC Endorses Final 2008 Slate of Candidates!

The Republican Leadership Council today proudly announced our final slate of candidates for the 2008 election.

"While the world waits to see who will be our next President, we are building the Republican Party 'farm team' so that we have the right candidates in place at all levels in future elections," said RLC Co-Chair Governor Christine Todd Whitman. "If we are going to reclaim the word 'Republican', we need candidates like these who will fight for the Republican values of fiscal restraint and local control throughout the country."

We urge you to do all that you can to support these candidates in the final days of the election – we will be updating you on their progress on our website (www.republican-leadership.com) until Election Day.

More hypocracy I see from the liberal side. Whenever the economics of tax cuts comes into discussion, liberal Dems are always dead set against any supply side arguement, insisting that "trickle down economics" never makes it's way down to the middle class. Only "the rich" will benefit, we are scolded. However, when it is government administering the economic remedy, such as the recent $$$trillion bailout, we are assured by those same poeple that stimulus at the top will trickle down to stabilize "Main St". Well which is it? Trickle down economics in the private sector = bad, trickle down government = good? Haven't we been told since Reagan that this doesn't work? And I'm still waiting for either party to suggest the first spending cut to help pay for this. Though, I'm not holding my breath.