-
Obama’s Unaffordable Act
June 19, 2013 | 56 comments
-
Curbing the IRS
June 12, 2013 | 70 comments
-
Can We Get It Back?
June 5, 2013 | 39 comments
-
The Ronald Reagan of Virginia
May 29, 2013 | 72 comments
-
Time to Go for the Kill
May 22, 2013 | 67 comments
A Further Perspective
The New American Supermajority
The road from Arthur Brooks to Glenn Beck.
(Page 3 of 3)
Knowing as we do that earning success is the key to happiness, rather than simply getting more money, the goal of our political system should be this: to give all Americans the greatest opportunities possible to succeed based on their hard work and merit [Beck’s word again]. And that’s exactly what the free enterprise system does — makes earned success possible for the most people. This is the liberty our founders wrote about, the liberty that enables the true pursuit of happiness.
The Equality of Liberty
Included among the moral foundations of liberty is the principle of equality. “But for the large majority of us, this means equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome…. If this leads to income inequality — above some acceptable floor — so be it.” In other words, the 70% supermajority accepts safety net programs for the truly needy, to ensure that no one suffers in deprivation. But they do not support going beyond this to income redistribution, taking from the successful to give to the less successful just to achieve more income equality. That is just stealing. This is a fundamental, rock bottom principle that we should all promote with more awareness and fervor. As Brooks explains:
The majority believes government should protect the returns for hard work and merit. The 30 percent coalition effectively wants to penalize success…. [But] equality of income is not fair. It is distinctly unfair. If you work harder than a coworker but are paid the same, that is unfair. If you save your money but still retire with the same pension as your spendthrift neighbor, that is unfair. And if you stay in your house and make the mortgage payments even when its value drops but your neighbor walks away from his without recourse, that is unfair.
What most helps the poor, moreover, is not government programs, but free market opportunity and prosperity. Brooks further explains:
Only free enterprise truly addresses the root causes of poverty. Our solutions are not based on a reslicing of the existing economic pie by government officials and bureaucrats, effectively taking money from the well-off and giving it to the poor through punitive taxation and growing welfare. They are based on an expansion of the pie in ways that will increase everyone’s share through policies and a culture that creates incentives for Americans, allows them to tap into the generative power of entrepreneurship, and ultimately lets them earn their own success.
In contrast, “Because they do not strengthen culture and reinforce values, American welfare programs have spectacularly failed to end poverty.”
Consequently, let us not forget either the broad public appeal of economic growth and empowerment as a political and policy theme, and the common sense appeal of incentives in explaining how that works. Martin Luther King III told the Huffington Post on the day of the Beck rally that his father in 1967 and 1968 “was focused on economic empowerment….We have made great strides, but somehow we’ve got to create a climate so that everybody can do well, not just some.” That is a tailor made theme for the 70 percent Supermajority as well, as the late Jack Kemp demonstrated during his political career.
Moreover, blue collar labor union activists are really just after prosperity for their families as well. It’s just that they don’t recognize yet that general free market economic prosperity is the best way to achieve their goals. Better explaining how that works could vault the 70 percent Supermajority into the 85 percent Consensus.
A broad explanation of the appeal of free market economics seems to be necessary to win the votes of the whole 70% coalition. Adding the economic growth theme to Reagan’s traditional conservative themes seemed to be what promoted the Republicans from the mid-40s in their share of the vote to a long term governing majority. Because of the workings of the British political system at the time, Margaret Thatcher focusing on consistent conservative themes was able to dominate British politics for a record time with only that same mid-40s share of the vote.
This is not a prediction. But with perceptive leaders like Glenn Beck and Arthur Brooks lighting the way, I am expecting to see an authentic American political giant who truly understands the 70 percent Supermajority liberate America in 2012 with their record setting votes. I just note that authoring the introduction to Brooks’ book was Newt Gingrich.
About the Author
Peter Ferrara is Director of Entitlement and Budget Policy at the Heartland Institute, General Counsel of the American Civil Rights Union, Senior Fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, and Senior Policy Advisor on Entitlements and Budget Policy at the National Tax Limitation Foundation. He served in the White House Office of Policy Development under President Reagan, and as Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States under President George H.W. Bush.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (65) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Peter Ferrara
More Articles From A Further Perspective
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/09/01/the-new-american-supermajority
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Current Wisdom
- There’s Something About Cambridge
- How Not To Buy a Fighter
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 6.18.13
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
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.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
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?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Ken (Old Texican)| 9.1.10 @ 6:48AM
Peter,
Once again, you hit it out of the park.
Fascinating juxtaposition with Beck and Brooks.
Brian Mc| 9.1.10 @ 7:12AM
Ah...the Beatitudes, the Ten Commandments, the Bill of Rights...these are things we can build a great Republic on, a sound foundation that is being undermined by our public indoctrination centers labeled as public education. If we aren't teaching these in our homes, the Republic is doomed.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 9.1.10 @ 7:31AM
In some public high schools, a great majority of students are learning that there is such a thing as a free lunch, and a free breakfast. Even in the vaulted suburb of D.C., Montgomery County, Maryland, as many as 70% of students at some high schools are in the subsidized (Free or greatly reduced) lunch programs.
Those same students have high drop out rates in many cases and one would have to wonder about attitudes bred by the cultural acceptance of free lunches on such a wide scale.
There are millions of Americans in that 30% crowd who figure they are entitled to whatever they can get and are always on the lookout for more in the form of hand outs from the government.
Can that group ever be herded back into the pens of responsibility?
With free health care on the way, it's highly unlikely.
1FreeMan| 9.1.10 @ 10:56AM
Woah there,
Just a minute on the free lunch thing. I was a recepient of those very free lunches back in Texas from 1970 through 1975. I am an Afghanistan veteran (2007-2008), have a Ph.D., Was on faculty in a large midwestern university before going on active duty and am a Regan-conservative. Values begin at home. My single Mother preached values and that the free lunch was not our way of life. I worked my way out of poverty. Children can learn to fight for themselves. It is the culture of victimization that is the problem, not a free lunch program. Smaller children don't see a hot meal as government enslavement.
We need to care for children when we can but we need to never again bend to liberal enslavement.
Thom Burke| 9.1.10 @ 12:18PM
Re-reading O'Stalin's post, it's seems apparent he was not condemning the whole "free lunch program" per se, rather the sense of entitlement that comes along with it. What if your mother had not "preached values and that a free lunch was not our way." What if she had instead taught, "take everything they'll give you. You're entitled" ?
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 9.1.10 @ 3:50PM
We're all happy you turned out well 1FreeMan. However, I would be willing to bet that when you received the free lunches that those receiving them were in the minority. At this time in our history the number on the free lunch program has never been higher.
It's all due to a misapplication of government authority and the belief by many that somehow this is all good.
I personally believe it's only a question of time before a service comes along which offers high school courses on line to take home schooling up a notch.
In the meantime, you can defend the concept of the free lunch all you want but the entitlement mentality that many develop go right along with it.
In essence, 1FreeMan is telling us he didn't catch the disease. To which I respond, you are lucky and one of the few.
The second point was how free lunches may in fact lead to failure in the school system. If you ask little of students, they will give little. If you lead them to believe everything is easy, it's little wonder many drop out when things get difficult.
I'll lay you odds on something else too.
I would be willing to bet that after they drop out of high school they don't miss the education, they miss the free lunch.
Any takers?
R Martin| 9.1.10 @ 4:47PM
I'll be your huckleberry. They drop out of high school precisely because they know they will not miss the free lunch. They know that education they've abandoned is unnecessary in a society which provides free or heavily subiszed housing, food, medical care and child support. Quite a large segment of our society is happy with that standard of living, especially when they know someone else is paying for it. The free lunch continues.
I win, right? You live in N. Virginia; I'm in Wilmington, DE. How about soft shell crabs somewhere in Baltimore. You buy the lunch and I'll help you sort-out your misconceptions about Wall Street.
CantGetRight| 9.1.10 @ 5:43PM
A large majority of high school drop outs are actually pretty smart, and high school becomes boring to them so they start dabbling in other things that cause them to stray away.
To say that people drop out of school because they know someone will take care of them is idiotic at best and shows how little republicans think of their fellow Americans.
carnot| 9.1.10 @ 7:47PM
ok....we'll take your word for it!
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 9.1.10 @ 9:22PM
To: Can'tGetRight: Thanks for you generalities which not only don't make sense, they prove you missed the logic class. Presumably, smart people know they need a high school diploma. However, your generalities do not stand up to the facts.
Seventy percent of all prisoners are high school drop outs. In fact, a report released in 2008 indicated that if the graduation rate was increased only 10%, there would be 3,400 less murders and 174,000 fewer assaults.
There are other side effects to the free lunch program which indicates that students are being used as social guinea pigs and perhaps they know it.
http://reason.com/archives/2001/08/01/free-lunch
Federal free-lunch data, however, are used as one of the main poverty indicators for school districts and are linked to many other local, state, and federal funding streams. So any fraud in the free-lunch program is quickly multiplied. And rest assured that school districts recognize the program's multiplier effect and work hard to sign up students. Consider this typical account from the St. Petersburg (Florida) Times last summer: "When Gulf High School assistant principal Pat Haynes sees needy children lunching on cookies or a bag of chips, she knows the kids are jeopardizing more than just good nutrition. Those kids are also cutting into their school's ability to cash in on its share of millions of dollars in grants and government rebates designed to benefit low-income schools."
The result of such incentives is both soft and hard abuse of the free-lunch program and, by extension, many other programs designed for students from low-income households. Many school districts offer free ice cream and other tokens to kids who return their forms, even if the students aren't eligible for the program. Schools have mailed multiple enrollment forms to parents and some have even taken to calling families at home to ask them to enroll.
For example, in October 1999 The Baltimore Sun reported that the principal of Patterson High School took to the intercom and announced: "Guess what is coming? Pizza Party! Everyone connected with the school from parents to staff members will eat pizza, get a free T-shirt, and listen to a disc jockey if poor students can get their parents to fill out an application for free and reduced-price school lunches." In 1999 about 50 percent of Patterson High School's 2,200 students qualified for free meals. By using the pizza party strategy, school principal Laura D'Anna increased that to more than 70 percent of students in 2000.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 9.1.10 @ 9:12PM
R. Martin: You're simply proving my point as they trade one free lunch for another type of free lunch.
R Martin| 9.2.10 @ 10:30AM
That's a wiggle worthy of your namesake. Your proffered wager was that they (dropouts) would miss the free lunch. Now you say they won't because they'll get another one. Aren't you proving my point...they won't miss the free lunch. OK, if you're willing to resort to such contortions, I'll let you off the bet.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 9.3.10 @ 8:16PM
It was simply rhetorical. However, the fact that they accept your freebies does not mean they don't miss the free lunch or it made an indelible impression in their minds that you don't have to try hard, i.e., the free lunch.
However, thanks for your comment
scotchieguy| 9.2.10 @ 1:29AM
They drop out of school because they don't give a damn. They are not calculating about free housing, or lunches, or free anything. They are simply bored and restless, and if you doubt that, show me evidence to the contrary. You obviously have never met these drop-outs.
chalkdust| 9.1.10 @ 3:28PM
Whoa again:
Montgomery County, Maryland along with being liberal to the point of triggering your gag reflex, is one of the top three counties in America in per capita income. How is it that 70% of the attendees of some schools fall below the minimum family income to qualify for a free lunch program?
Personally, I don't give a fig how people in some counties choose to spend their local tax dollars as long as they don't hit up the state or federal government to make up their shortfall.
kerry| 9.1.10 @ 3:34PM
I think there is a huge population of both legal and illegal immigrants in Mont. county....
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 9.1.10 @ 3:52PM
Kerry is correct. If you don't believe it call the school system and ask. I was doing some research there and was given those figures at several schools.
By the way, those illegal aliens are also receiving food stamps, free health care and housing.
Spyder308| 9.3.10 @ 11:02AM
Here is how Montgomery Co. MD can have a high per capital income and 70% of the children qualifying of free lunch. It happens when 10% of the population has 50% of the income. If you are in the middle class hang on because with all the wealth being redistributed up you will be sliding int0 poverty soon.
Deborah D | 9.1.10 @ 8:03AM
Wow! Thanks for this, Mr. Ferrara. How refreshing to read something positive about the free enterprise system, Glenn Beck and America and Americans all in one excellent column.
In response to Bill Hussein above -- I catch your drift. When one is brought up in a welfare state mentality, it truly is difficult to think or believe that you can do something on your own. It is a wicked system that zaps the entrepreneur out of a person. That's why we must stop this now or we might well never get back to the real America. That's what Beck's rally was all about -- starting to plant the seeds of a rebirth. We certainly must continue our "can do" spirit -- defeatism is a self-fulfilling prophesy.
Louis Jenkins| 9.1.10 @ 8:56AM
Dear Deborah D:
"When one is brought up in a welfare state mentality, it truly is difficult..."
These people may have to be left behind. They have been inbred into the system and for the most part will continue. Ashamed to say, but when the only skills you have are drug deals, knifings, shootings, prisons, etc., or laying around all day, then there's not much you can do. Honor! The moral foundations of Liberty and Free Enterprise, now we can sink our teeth into that. I'm dubious, though, on the welfare mentality.
Oh, bye the way, good article Ferrara.
Nancy in NC| 9.1.10 @ 2:41PM
I don't see much chance of leaving them behind, as they breed more (at taxpayers expense).
Unfortunately, many cannot even spell honor, other than honor killings.
Very disheartening situation, however we can't give up the fight.
Spyder308| 9.3.10 @ 11:06AM
Why is it that many of those terrible socialist welfare states in Europe have healthier economies that we have.
Rmm| 9.1.10 @ 9:14AM
As my wife cogently points out, if you truly want to help those in need, instead of handing them the fish you teach them how to catch the fish. This lesson goes a long way toward getting this nation back on track and away from the progressive mantra that Big Government ia all powerful.
Nancy in NC| 9.1.10 @ 2:44PM
Many prefer not to learn to fish a long as someone else catches, cleans and prepares the fish.
I long for a statesman with the strength of character to stand up for honor and decency, and say "enough already".
Fredrick Ward| 9.1.10 @ 5:27PM
I would be very curious to know the ethnic demographics of the Gallop polls that are mentioned in this story. Anyone know where that might be found?
CantGetRight| 9.1.10 @ 5:47PM
The problem with fishing is that there isn't fish everywhere you go. It's not about what you get for free it's more the people in their lives that steer them to something better. People that live in poverty only know poverty, is that their fault?
Willis| 9.1.10 @ 6:59PM
In this country, Yes!
Appleby| 9.2.10 @ 11:34AM
Sure there's fish everywhere. All you have to do is find out who has it, hit him over the head and take it away from him.
Mike Rogers| 9.1.10 @ 9:33AM
Peter, Another great article - economics or politics, you're always right on the money - the next president needs you!
With the wailing from the left about it being all about God, or all against Obama - neither true, and the wailing from some "Christians" that Beck's the Devil achieving some secret Mormon goal, it's great to get a thoroughly balanced article.
Personally, I call Beck an Edu-tainer, because that is what he does - educates us about parts of our past that have been ignored, while entertaining us with theatrics and clownishness.
I record all his programs and watch most of them.
Mike Rogers| 9.1.10 @ 9:36AM
Should also add that the wailing by some "Christians" should be measured against the extent to which they embrace "Collective salvation" or "Social justice", as opposed to Beck's emphasis on individual rights, responsibilities and salvation.
Siegfried X| 9.1.10 @ 4:26PM
Yes, the Bible teaches that stealing is wrong, and taking money from one part of country to give to someone else is stealing.
Of course, private, voluntary charity is good and biblical, but that's not "social justice".
Mimi| 9.1.10 @ 1:07PM
Heh Mike....I second it!!! The next President would be well served with the likes of PETER FERRERA.!!
martin j smith| 9.1.10 @ 10:30AM
I strongly suspect that the "70%" majority icludes many moderates,independents, and Democrats who see the "overreach of the Democrat Left and Obama.
For this group of people--who are NOT idemntified as conservative, yet Not at all Socialists--what they want is a mixture of Bill Clinton and George W Bush in terms of economic policy. ( forget other issues ) with the proportion leaning greater to the GWB side . That want growth,jobs and be happy in their life and do not want misery as in say a "misery index". One other thing I would say about this group: They do not want to apolgize for this country--they want to be proud just as much as anyone else. They do not buy the blame America first idea. And, they want to be in control of their lives. Not the government.
Ted| 9.1.10 @ 10:34AM
So we have a 70% super-majority that supports free enterprise and is unsupportive of big government... So maybe I just don't get it. Could someone please explain to me then why our nation keeps voting into office leftists that increase the size of government? And raise our taxes to unsustainable levels?
Sheila| 9.1.10 @ 11:01AM
The answer is simple, Ted: Ferrara is cherry-picking his polls and ignoring demographics. Huge swathes of America are no longer white, Christian, capitalist, or working. Plenty of surveys (depending on how the question is worded) have 50%+ support for Marx, various forms of socialism, and nanny-statism. Tribalism + democracy + stupidity = racist idiocracy. For those who don't seem to understand what I mean by this, here's a simple translation: Multiculturalism and balkanization plus universal suffrage plus public education = black and elite-run America, i.e. Obamanation. Decline and fall.
Andrew| 9.1.10 @ 11:35AM
You are depressingly accurate. You can see the signs at the US open tennis ceremonies - it's all about the multiculturalists stepping forward to their moment in the sun. They could care less about the economy.
Derek Leaberry| 9.1.10 @ 1:48PM
Sheila and Andrew are correct. Due to the 50 million + Third World immigrants(legal and illegal) since Ted Kennedy's 1965 immigration law, the old America is being submerged. Witness Orange County, California, home of the Brady Bunch, Disneyland, Richard Nixon and John Wayne. It voted 75 % for Reagan against Carter and Mondale in 1980 and 1984. It was a county that was over 80 % white. Today, the county is 45 % white and only narrowly supported McCain over Obama. And the Big Business Republicans, Wall Street "conservatives" and neo-"conservatives" look the other way. The future is bleak and most conservatives don't even understand.
Nancy in NC| 9.1.10 @ 2:36PM
And absolutely no one has what it takes to say that aloud in our PC culture, regardlesss to the truth.
Meanwhile, the rest of us (the working stiffs) wring our hands in despair as we see the country going bankrupt, financially, spiritually and morally.
Glenn has the answer, but I don't see the majority of the do and know nothings embracing hiswise philosophy. On the left we have the Olbermanns of the world ridiculing Glenn, while focusing on their idea of Mormanism not being Christian. I am amazed at their open disdain for all that is good and decent.
Thank God there are many Americans, aside from those that were in Washington on Saturday, that believe in hard work, morality...faith, hope and charity. Hopefully, they will teach their children about the fundamentals of this country, and by a miracle we will be able to save the Republic from the onslaught of degenerate Marxists.
Siegfried X| 9.1.10 @ 4:20PM
Hollywood = television and movies is a big part of it. Since Americans spend 5 hours a day watching TV, television controls our morality.
For example in 1997 the networks began broadcasting "gay" programs, partially in response to passage of the Defense of Marriage Act which had been passed 6 months earlier. A Hollywood executive said something like "They'll learn that homosexuality is normal in the same why they learned it was not -- by endless repetition".
Within 10 years of "gay" broadcasting there was a massive shift in the polls about homosexual rights.
At the same time, probably because the Religious Right hurt the Democrats so badly in the '94 elections, the left-wing attack machine launched a full-scale attack on religion. Besides Hollywood, Democrats like Soros launched a bunch of imposter, left-wing "churches" and evangelical organizations. They preached the so-called "social gospel", which is just the beliefs of the Democratic Party. Anyone who searches the web can find these.
Meanwhile the Republican "leadership" decided to go neutral on all these issues, not taking sides unless they were absolutely forced to. Instead they run totally on spin and tactics, painting themselves as "not Democrats".
The surrender by the Republican leadership becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. When only one voice is talking, they win the debate. That swings even more people to the Democratic side, setting things up for the next round of defeat.
So the bottom line is that we would need to attack the progressive culture everywhere in order to defeat it, not just wait to make futile goal line stands once the Democrats get the ball to the one foot line.
Siegfried X| 9.1.10 @ 4:30PM
It's because we basically have a one-party system. Many of the Republican politicians are "progressive" or at least don't believe in fighting the Democrats. So no matter which party has a majority, the progressives = (Democrats + RINOs) have a working majority.
We've seen it a million times: 5 RINOs ignore the rest of the Republican Party in order to vote with the Democrats to pass something.
Since Republican leaders like Cornyn recruit mostly RINOs, they are deliberately handing the Democrats legislative victory.
Margie| 9.2.10 @ 12:49AM
To Sheila & Derek,
The problem with White Nationalists is that they view reality by race. It isn't a matter of race though. There are many blacks that I'd rather call my friend than some whites. It's all in the attitude. Yeah, there are lots of blacks that like the "Obamanation." But so do plenty of whites. It's Liberalism that's the problem and the disease, not race.
Texas Mom| 9.1.10 @ 1:54PM
You can thank the redistricting process that allows politicans to gerrymander districts that do not accurately represent all the people and over represent some groupsover others.
Jeremiah| 9.1.10 @ 1:01PM
Does anyone remember this?
http://img21.xooimage.com/file.....4ddb2c.jpg
And to think it came from a liberal rag!
John II| 9.1.10 @ 2:45PM
I remember it well. And note the date: it is inconceivable that, politically, the artist could have been anything but a flummoxed Hillary supporter.
No surprise, then, that it came from a liberal rag. I still think there's a good chance that, after the sea-change in November, the old harridan will resign from her feckless post at Foggy Bottom early next year to prepare a primary challenge to the Professor for 2012.
Tim*| 9.1.10 @ 3:24PM
First , seize control of Congress on November 2nd .
Second , harass and hammer The Lame Duck Congress until The New Congress is seated in January .
Third , bankrupt The Mainstream Liberal Media Agendists .
Fourth , Stop the Economic Bleeding and Cut The Deficit Spending .
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Escalating .
We Can See November From Our Houses .
Alan Brooks| 9.1.10 @ 4:12PM
The God Beck worships is a Swine-God, and Beck will someday be cast down into Hell, to be nibbled on by rats and scorpions.
Martin Treptow| 9.1.10 @ 5:27PM
Wow! Really? Tell me more! I am fascinated by your obvious sociopolitical acumen. I could learn so much from you.
Alan Brooks| 9.1.10 @ 5:58PM
More?:
okay: Beck is a demon from the very pit of Hell,
send to deceive even the Elect, if he could
Beck has been sent by Beelzebub himself
to prepare America's own Abomination of Desolation, wherein Palin (the Whore of Babylon),
drunk with the blood of saints, appears with a cup filled with unclean residues from her fornication with the kings of the Earth.
Want yet more?
David Williams| 9.1.10 @ 7:17PM
You really should seek professional help...immediately.
Martin Treptow| 9.1.10 @ 7:36PM
I doubt seriously that St. John the Divine had Gov. Palin in mind when he was scratching on parchment in that cave on Patmos. Armageddon is a place, not an occurence. It's in the Jezreel Valley in Israel. Perhaps a battle will be fought there. Perhaps soon. If I were a betting man, I would wager it will be a battle between Christians and perfected Jews and... hang on... I gotta get a map...
Tim*| 9.1.10 @ 6:20PM
Brooks gets upset with the Mormon Beck .
Alan Brooks| 9.1.10 @ 6:26PM
A faith founded by polygamists?
Tim*| 9.1.10 @ 6:42PM
And just how does that affect your religion Brooks ?
Hmmmmm ?
Alan Brooks| 9.1.10 @ 10:20PM
It doesn't. But Rush would never stoop to being a Mormon; Mormons are good businessmen, but that's it. Having then in politics is like having Scientologists in politics. Can you imagine if L. Ron Hubbard had been elected president?
Tim*| 9.2.10 @ 5:17AM
Your bigoted words say more about you than they do Beck , Brooks .
David| 9.1.10 @ 5:49PM
Hillary will not challenge Bam Bam in the primary. Do you think the black will turn out to vote for her in the general election if she challenges and beat the 1st black president? It ain't gonna happen. She couldn't win without a huge black turnout.
Bam Bam will make her his VP choice, with Biden to Sec of State.
Alan Brooks| 9.1.10 @ 5:52PM
So you agree Obama will be re-elected.
Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 9.1.10 @ 7:19PM
Alan: From your comments above ("Beck has been sent by Beelzebub himself"), I can see that you haven't gotten your medication for September just yet. It's a bitch coming down, huh? So my advice to you Alan is, just say "NO" to drugs!! I'm living proof, that it works (10 years C&S)!! Now Nancy Reagan came up with that slogan, back in the day (which was a Wednesday by the way). But back then, when I saw her commercial, I used to take a hit instead, and tell Nancy to go "F" herself (I thought that I was being funny). But looking back now, I've just got to say, that Old Nancy was right, and I wish I had just listened to her instead. But alas, I had to continue traveling down my own road, for several more years, which went nowhere by the way. But today, I've adopted her slogan as my own, and I'll repeat it again to you Alan, just say "NO" to drugs!! Things get better, but you've got to take it one day at a time my friend. Then and only then, will your road lead somewhere, and you'll stop believing those voices in your head, that keep telling you, that President Obama will be re-elected in 2012. Those voices are lying to you Alan, because he won't be re-elected, unless everybody across the Nation starts taking whatever it is you're taking now.
NavyBrat | 9.1.10 @ 10:15PM
Hell, I know stoners that are A LOT smarter than Mr. Brooks.
Capt G| 9.2.10 @ 4:35AM
There's an implicit assumption in the Mr. Ferrara's article that the Republicans will not screw up this new found mandate. While I have my doubts about the actuality of such a mandate's existence, I have none about the Republican's ability to screw it up.
Sarbo| 9.5.10 @ 3:21AM
One should try to de-construct that 30%. I have no statistics, but from personal experience of the political landscape in India, i would hazard a guess that one-third of that 30% in America are hard-core leftwingers with totalitarian and authoritarian traits bred into their genes. No amount of logic will sway them. Another third would be fellow-travelers and sympathisers of Marxism, but not fully committed. The final third would be those who feel genuine anguish at poverty and want the govt to do something.
The conservatives should target that final third and some of the middle third. Let the commies stew in their morbid hearts.