The theme I speak of in today’s post title is the civil war within the GOP between the Washington establishment and the Tea Party, conservatives, and other grassroot organizations throughout the states. Karl Rove, using his Crossroads PAC, started the war several years ago. He attacked conservatives claiming they couldn’t win. He supported Romney against other conservative candidates.
He was successful. Romney lost in 2012, Obama won.
Karl Rove is still here. He continues to stir up division within the party, supporting McConnell, Boehner and other establishment RINOs against conservatives and attacking the primary opponents of establishment candidates across the country.
The establishment isn’t keeping the war secret. No, they’re proud to be known for supporting the democrat agenda saying, “we don’t want to make waves in an election year.” They ignore the political fact that during an election year is the time to make waves, to score points against the dems, else, what difference is there between the dems and the ‘Pubs if the ‘Pubs continues to support the democrat agenda?
The likely result will be a repeat of 2012 when enough conservatives stay home. When there is no difference between the two parties, what difference does it make who wins? The nation will still continue on the path of authoritarianism, and toward a one-party dictatorship like that of the old Soviet Union.
I’m not the only one who has observed the civil war. IBD, in an editorial this week, agrees.
Posted 01/23/2014 07:03 PM ET
Politics: Republican Party leaders seem willing, anxious even, to walk away from the Tea Party, certain that such bedrock support will brand the GOP as extremist in voters’ eyes. If anything, polls show, the opposite is true.
With 10 months to go before the crucial midterm elections, Republicans understandably will try to avoid screwing up their chances for victory.
Democrats have taken to vilifying any Republican who actually stands for something — such as Texas Sen. Ted Cruz — as a captive of what they’d like to label as the far-right fringe.
This can be seen in the efforts of Sen. Charles Schumer of New York — the Democrats’ top political strategist — to, in the words of The Hill, “poison the Tea Party by driving a wedge between its rich funders and its blue-collar rank and file.”
This kind of hardball has Republicans in a bit of a panic. And in case you’re wondering, it’s a big reason why they supported the pork-filled $1.1 trillion spending bill this month, and why GOP leaders are talking about legalizing millions of illegal immigrants.
But before they sell their souls to political expediency, they might want to look at a few recent polls that suggest the small-government, conservative ideals of the Tea Party are quite popular. To wit:
• A Quinnipiac Poll finds 53% believe the Obama administration has been incompetent at running the federal government. And 56% oppose ObamaCare, the Democrats’ signature accomplishment since 2008.
• In a recent Gallup Poll, almost two-thirds of Americans said the U.S. government has gotten too big and too powerful, and are unhappy with how it works.
• A Fox News Poll found 62% believing income inequality is acceptable “because that’s just how the economy works.” Another 21% agreed inequality was bad, but that the government “shouldn’t get involved.”
Get the picture? Average Americans show a strong preference for smaller, more-accountable government. And which group most closely fits that description in its basic beliefs? Why, the Tea Party, of course.
Republicans would be wise to heed the people’s clear will and not fall for Democrat ploys to make them feel “extreme.” If anything, it’s the Democrats, now a party of the far left, who are the extremists.
Republicans shouldn’t look at them and say, “Me, too.” As a statesman once said, Americans deserve a choice, not an echo.
“Americans deserve a choice, not an echo.” What a closing statement. I wish I could come up with ones of that caliber.
***
Other news today is a reflection on the liberals new attacks against capitalism in favor of “income equality.” Income, whether to individuals or corporations, is dependent on a single statement: Wages and salaries are dependent on the revenue the individual brings to his employer.
Income has no relationship to individual worth. Everyone has worth. Income is driven by the value an employee provides to his or her employer. The more value an individual provides, the more income he should receive. If not, find another job using the skills and training you received from your prior employer. Note: you aren’t likely to gain any marketable skills flippin’ burgers. Choose a job or career, wisely.
January 23, 2014 6:46 PM
NEW YORK (AP) — McDonald’s is losing customers, as the world’s biggest hamburger chain struggles to attract diners with its higher-priced sandwiches and new offerings like Mighty Wings.
“We’ve lost some of our customer relevance,” CEO Don Thompson conceded Thursday on a call with analysts.
The Oak Brook, Ill.-based company reported disappointing sales for its fourth quarter, as fewer customers visited its established restaurants. Guest counts at those locations fell nearly 2 percent globally and 1.6 percent in the U.S. in 2013, according to a regulatory filing. And McDonald’s expects some challenges to persist this year.
There’s more to the article, you can read it here. The point I’m making is this: consider McDonald’s position if the minimum wage is raised to $15, almost twice the minimum wage in most states. How would that increase in the cost of doing business affect McDonald’s plans for more service, more value for the customer’s dollar?
When income, as it is happening to McDonald’s, goes down, the last thing the company needs is more expenses. It matters not if the increased expenses come from higher taxes, federal mandates like Obamacare (when McDonald’s waiver expires) or increased wages, such as would occur if the minimum wage is raised. Increased cost, with little or no improvement in revenue equals reduced or no profits.
McDonald’s employs 1.7 million people around the world. It’s certainly more than those employed in California and the other socialist states in the nation who would rather destroy an employer affecting hundreds of thousands, rather than admit their agenda does not work.
No, what income equality creates is not higher incomes, it is less. Why? Because with the increased employee cost, McDonald’s only choice is to layoff people and reduce their cost of doing business to a level that will allow them to remain profitable. Without profits, there is no McDonalds.
But, that is inconsequential according to the levelers who drive income equality. They would rather see McDonald’s cease to exist than admit income equality, like all such socialist schemes, doesn’t work.
Like this:
Like Loading...
