Just as Barack Obama overestimated his, which saw him helpless to prevent yesterday’s GOP landslides.
(Page 2 of 3)
Perhaps the only disappointment for Republicans yesterday may be (as of this writing) the results from the 23rd Congressional District in New York, which Barack Obama did carry last year. Readers of this column are no stranger to Conservative Party nominee Doug Hoffman, who I first rang the bell for in this space weeks ago.
The Republican nominee Dede Scozzafava was way too far out there for any Republican to support. She ran on the ticket of the Working Families Party just last year, an extremist socialist front group. She had ties to ACORN and the SEIU. She was endorsed by the far left extremist Daily Kos. She had a voting record in the state Assembly that was so pro-tax that the Democrat, Bill Owens, was running ads against her on her tax increase votes.
Scozzafava’s true colors were obvious long ago, but she rubbed it in the faces of those Republicans who supported her nomination by conspiring with the Obama White House to endorse the Democrat in the race after withdrawing, blasting Hoffman’s middle America supporters as the extremists. What this reveals is a fundamental problem with the New York State Republican Party, and its very viability. Scozzafava was nominated at four local nominating conventions by local party bigwigs. Any Republican who thinks the best way to win is to nominate ACORN, SEIU, union-puppet Republicans needs to become a Democrat. There is no role or function for such people in the Republican Party. If that is what the New York State Republican Party thinks, then it should just shut down and let the Conservative Party carry the fight against the Democrats.
But apparently some of Scozzafava’s local Republican supporters would rather vote for a Democrat than see an upstart, conservative, Reaganite challenger win. So as of this writing, the Democrat Bill Owens is ahead of Hoffman by a couple of thousand votes. To those small-minded locals who insist on loyalty to a left-winger like Scozzafava, I say what Reagan said in his famous 1975 CPAC speech: let them go their own way. As Reagan showed, for reasons of practical politics as well as principle, Republicans need to fly under banners of bold colors, not pale pastels. If that offends some badly confused nominal Republicans, then let them join the socialist party, as Scozzafava did. A Republican tent big enough to include Republicans with Scozzafava’s record can’t stand of its own weight. The rest of us need to fight for what we believe in, and win on what works, as we did in Virginia and New Jersey.
This race would have been won if the state party hadn’t been so foolish as to nominate someone as far left as Scozzafava to begin with. RNC Chairman Michael Steele needs to get involved here and bust some heads in the New York Republican Party, including Al D’Amato’s head. This sort of foolishness by the New York party is discrediting Republicans nationwide. It is encouraging counterproductive third party movements nationally that will just divide the anti-Obama vote, and break an emerging, conservative, Republican, Reaganite majority into two competing minorities, with the Obama left-wing extremists remaining dangerously in power.
The Democrats’ New World Government
Let me give you an example of the left-wing extremism that is causing voters to flee the Democrats already this year, and will only get geometrically worse every year through 2012. Next month, the world is scheduled to meet in Copenhagen to sign a new global climate change treaty. Lord Christopher Monckton, who served as a legal advisor to former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher accurately explains the draft of the treaty, saying: “I have read the treaty and what it says is this: That world government is going to be created. The word, government, actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity. The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to third world countries in satisfaction of what is called, coyly, a climate debt….” Lord Monckton notes that the words election or democracy or vote or ballot appear nowhere in the treaty.
The treaty specifically establishes a new international body called The Conference of the Parties (COP), which holds authority to administer and enforce the treaty. As the Washington Times explained on October 27, the treaty establishes a “global carbon budget” for each country, with authority for “the treaty’s governing bodies to limit manufacturing, transportation, travel, agriculture, mining, energy production and anything else that emits carbon” within any country party to the treaty.
The enforcement arm underneath the COP is the Copenhagen Climate Facility, which the treaty says is necessary because in order to save the planet, “the way society is structured will need to change fundamentally.” The Facility will consequently hold as enforcement powers, “such legal capacity as is necessary for the exercise of its functions and the protection of its interests.” If a country is found in violation of the agreement, the Facility will have the power to “undertake the measures necessary to bring the country back into compliance,” as the Washington Times explains.
The Washington Times explains further:
The Facility will be run by an executive committee, the membership of which “may include representation from relevant intergovernmental and non-governmental stakeholders.” So left wing pressure groups, animal rights fanatics, tree huggers, Al Gore or any other part of the environmentalist fringe would be eligible for executive committee membership.
This new world government is going to require a lot of funding. So the United States and other countries are required under the treaty to provide financing of $800 billion over 5 years to COP, with additional funding requirements to be assessed as needed. Indeed, the COP will have explicit world taxing authority over all treaty signatories, which would include the U.S. if we ratify the treaty. Moreover, once ratified, the treaty provides that a country cannot withdraw from it without consent from all the other countries under the treaty. Since America would be the biggest paying country, and most others would be drawing on that money, such consent will never be given even if a future President and Congress want to withdraw.
Is President Obama going to sign this treaty on behalf of America? Is he going to stand up to the world’s leftists and refuse?
Signing the treaty would effectively be a violation of the oath of office, because it would turn ultimate governing authority over America to an international governing body, disenfranchising American voters, and suspending their constitutional rights. This is so ridiculously and utterly extreme that any Democrat Senator that supports ratification of it, from Chuck Schumer in New York to John Kerry in Massachusetts to Carl Levin in Michigan to Barbara Boxer in California, will have no prayer of re-election. But are the Democrats going to desert the international left and say no to the climate change treaty, just when the rest of the world is lining up behind it? What will the environmentalists say?
Lyndon Baines Johnson
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?