From a Conservative perspective, the election, November 6th, was a disaster. This American, as literally tens of millions of others, spent several days in near despondency, not only over the result, but over a successful methodology employed to distract, undermine, smear & intimidate, to provide victory to a man whose whole adult life has been an exercise in disrespect for our principles, customs, heritage & peoples. Yet the fog cleared, and with it any doubt about the road ahead.
Our first verbalized reaction, an attempt to put initial perceptions into actual words, was sent to a few friends, November 8th:
Tuesday's disaster had multiple causes--some outside our control, some directly related to misunderstanding better ways to project a Conservative message. Among those out of our immediate control would be the changing demographics, in part generated by the open border over the past twenty years & in part by the way the Welfare State promotes the breeding of those most dependent upon Government, at the expense of those who would otherwise be having larger families. Among those relating to misunderstanding would be an over reliance on peppering the airways with sloganized messages & ex cathedra pronouncements, rather than the use of televised addresses, where the candidate, confidently, sincerely & coherently, explains why & how our philosophy works best for any social order; and does so in terms that trip responsive chords in the listeners own consciousness.
Gov. Romney may not be as Conservative as many receiving this note. But I honestly believe that he has been moving to the right; that he is honest & sincere. But instead of his referring listeners to a web site that not even a large fraction of 1% of those, hearing the spot, would ever bother to visit, to back up the assertions of what he might accomplish, the money spent for 1/3 of the spots could have been far better employed by a series of 30 minute addresses, backing up his asserted "knowhow," with sincere expositions of how an economy works; how excess Government shuts down positive motivation, while providing incentive for what does not, what demonstrably cannot, work to a healthy end. The proper technique is not to read off a teleprompter--that greatly diminished the Ross Perot addresses in 1992;--but to speak extemporaneously, using terms of reference that a person with normal intelligence can relate to from their own experiences, from their school days on.
Another major mistake, was not getting together with the Republican Governor of New Jersey, before Obama did, to be televised doing something constructive with Gov. Christie, to aid disaster victims. Yes, it may sound hokie; but we know how the demagogues try to feast on misery; and, however cynical it may sound, you need to counter that--if possible beat them to the punch. Showing up with a couple dozen New Jersey Romney campaign workers, to do something physical to help, might even have worked positively. (An Ex-Governor helping a present Governor of another State, showing that Governors, not Presidents, relate best to bewildered victims.)
Now, where do we go from here? Obama won because he cobbled together a lot of very incongruous special interests. He cannot possibly keep them all in line, if we simply, nicely, politely & persistently, question aspects of what he will be doing to appear to serve such interests. One can use his own imagination to consider how this might be done to best effect, without expressing hostility to anyone, who does not deserve it.
Secondly, we need to focus our policy attacks on those who actually advocate things which conflict philosophically with the fundamental principles of our Constitutional Republic. If you really understand those principles, you will also understand why those principles gave America her greatest pace of economic growth. Grounded in actual experience, the Founders' philosophy grew out of a real understanding of the human potential; as opposed to the philosophy of every Leftist movement, where the advocacy is driven by personal wish lists, never by what actually works.
I know how discouraged most of us are, today. It is not a feeling we can ever be content with. We must all Pray, reflect, regroup & return to action.
After more reflection, we can be more explicit. Consider concepts that might go into those 30 minute telecasts:
We have observed the fundamental ignorance of, and/or hostility to, the American tradition, which Barack Obama repeatedly demonstrates. While he has tried to blame George W. Bush for America's recent problems (frankly, George Bush also fundamentally ignored the American tradition), Bush did not hate that tradition. Obama clearly does. (For instance, see Ethnic Politics--2008.)
There are parallel approaches to our quest: Is the best argument against Obama's policies, that they are flagrantly contrary to the Constitutional intent, or that they will simply undermine every area of human concern that they address? Or should we, rather, combine both lines of argument, to explain why the settler peoples, who produced our written Federal Constitution, relied on actual experience to limit the functions of the Federal Republic to only those that it could actually functionally address; that is, recognizing the logical consistency between what the Constitution authorizes, and what actually works best in every situation.
Administering any Governmental function, requires personnel. If cost/benefit analysis can not affirm an actual benefit, it is obviously not beneficial to undertake the function. The need for a "common defense," requires the recruitment & staffing of personnel devoted to a military purpose, with some of same in centralized administration (an unavoidable bureaucracy). Addressing most civilian concerns leads to a far different conclusion. There is strength in coordinated numbers in defending borders, repelling invasion--or, as Jefferson put it in foreign affairs, "punishing the first insult."
But in civilian concerns, coordinating large numbers may be totally counter-productive--the very opposite of cost-effective problem solving. There is an inherent flaw in a distant bureaucracy's intrusion into unique, intimate & immediate local problems. Worse, yet, such intrusion can only work against the continuity of local traditions & the continuity of the idiosyncratic norms of diverse communities. It is an dangerous step towards the monolithic thought control that distinguished the great totalitarian powers of the 20th Century. It is always a limitation on the freedom of action. But to continue the original point, it is seldom cost effective for the supposed purpose.
Consider education or health care. Could any politically involved function be more inherently local, intimate & immediate, than the relationship of teacher & pupil, or physician & patient? Is there any reason to inject layers of bureaucracy into the delivery of benefits to the student seeking an education, or a patient seeking treatment, that actually addresses the immediate needs involved? Not if the concern is actually those needs! The frenzy to try to pretend (or even force the appearance of) human equality in more aspects of the human experience, is not directed towards the unique needs of the individual pupil or the immediate complications of a particular patient. It is only part of a compulsive war on reality, by those who simply cannot handle the fact that we differ greatly among ourselves in capacity, motivation & other personality traits. (See Egalitarian/Collectivism Sabotages Human Potential.)
Having developed a conceptual argument--based upon a realistic picture of a child interacting with a teacher in a local classroom, where the teacher is not forced by a layered bureaucracy to teach by a decreed check-list; or of a patient being treated by a physician, who is still able to focus his art on a perception of what is unique to a particular patient, without reference to mandates from grasping politicians or bureaucrats;--a candidate, time permitting, can explain the incredible progress Americans made after the adoption of a Federal Constitution, in 1789, which never authorized any interference with such intimate, immediate & local, relationships. A further key, here, is in understanding how much of the imagined progress in the growth of gross domestic product per capita, in recent decades, has but reflected price rises from a 98% devaluation of the dollar, in terms of gold. What we would stress along these lines, would include much that would be useful in other 30 minute broadcasts:
Before the 1913 introduction of "progressive" taxation, we had already witnessed, over & over again, an empirical demonstration: Every ethnic group that had come to America was doing better here, than their ancestral cousins had ever done in their ancestral homeland. We had become the richest people, per capita, on earth; the greatest industrial powerhouse; our peoples self-sufficient in virtually every conceivable category. Has the "progressive" intrusion into the social dynamics over the past 99 years led to greater or lesser achievement? The hand-wringing over our failing educational systems; our dependence upon foreign producers for many of our critical needs, no less than the increasing cultural acceptance of a Blame & Envy mindset, would be answer enough. But the obvious social disintegration--over 40% of births out-of-wed-lock;--a soaring percentage of the population dependent upon one or another form of Governmental subsidy, and the concomitant Federal Deficits, confirm that answer.
One could devote several broadcasts, to the actual effect of some of the more vicious aspects of Federal Tax policy. It is incredible that, with all the discussion, both on the political hustings & broadcast airways in connection with a so-called "Fiscal Cliff," that no one has addressed the confiscatory effect of long-term "Capital Gains Taxes," when coupled with an effective 98% devaluation of the Dollar since 1971. This needs to be better understood, before we truly destroy the "goose that laid the golden egg." Such a broadcast should include a careful explanation of how capital resources, passed down through the generations, provide the essential foundation for an ongoing economy, both mitigating cyclical downsides & providing employment for those, themselves, without accumulated capital. There are millions of Americans, today, who do not have a clue how really self-destructive the class-warfare mentality is to all of us.
Other subjects, for such broadcast development by Conservative office seekers, would be immigration issues & the systematic undermining of established, once cohesive, communities in the name of "Diversity". The link provided will offer a persuasive way to put a subject--grossly confused by Leftist agitators & propagandists--in actual context. Opposing what has been going on, is not an attack on any people; rather a defense of established & constructive American purpose. (Note, October, 2012 Feature, below.)
If you find this, or anything at this web site useful, please download it onto a removable medium, where you can safely store it for future use.
Yours for preservation of the America won on the battlefield of the Revolution & crystallized by the wisdom of the exceptional men, who drafted our Federal Constitution,