The Tea Party vs Ron Paul

The period leading up to the 2012 Presidential election was an exciting yet confusing time in my life.  The emergence of the Tea Party and Ron Paul’s announcement that he was running for President inspired and gave hope to those that love liberty.  On the surface it seemed the Tea Party and Ron Paul were a match made in heaven.

The Associated Press’ Jay Root described Ron Paul In the following.

“Paul, a native of Pittsburg, is both a spiritual father and actual father in the tea party movement.  His son, tea party darling Rand Paul, won a Senate seat in Kentucky last year and has become an ardent proponent of spending cuts and smaller government.  As far back as 2007, long before people were evoking the fabled Boston Tea Party to symbolize their disgust with an overtaxing central government, Ron Paul was hosting a “Tea Party Fundraiser” aboard a shrimp boat neat Galveston.”

Ron Paul said the difference between Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party was that the protesters of the former are “Scared to death they won’t get their handouts, while the latter are sick and tired of paying for it.  I’m on the side of sick and tired of paying for it.”

So why is it that Tea Party members supported candidates like Newt Gingrich, Michele Bachmann and Mitt Romney over Ron Paul?  It would appear as if the Tea Party would welcome Ron Paul with open arms.  They both wanted limited government and wanted to cut government spending, right?

In October 2010, a Public Religion Research institute study found that more than half of the Tea Partiers say America is a “Christian Nation” and that they are social conservatives on same sex marriage.

Ron Paul believed that government should stay out of marriage altogether.

Another poll conducted in 2011 showed that 60 percent of Tea Party Republicans said the best way to ensure peace was through “military strength.”  One of my hero's, George Carlin, referred to American foreign policy  as “bombing brown people.” 

On the Tea Party website it states that their founders are the “brave souls of the men and women in 1773.”  But didn’t they fight against a massive national military that tried to prevent their freedom?  I would think the Tea Party of today would have learned from the past.  The Tea Party says they want to cut government spending but the poll conducted in 2011 found that 81 percent of Tea Party Republicans want military spending to stay the same.

Ron Paul believed we should cut military spending and quit being the policeman of the world.

The problem was that Ron Paul believed in too much liberty and wanted a government that was too limited for the Tea Party.  Like so many Americans the Tea Party wants liberty in only the areas that they deem fit.  However, in order to be free from tyranny the principles of a free society must be followed and adhered to.  You don’t get to pick and choose which ones you want to follow and which you ignore.

Choosing to follow some and not the others is still tyranny which is what Democrats and Republicans have been doing for a very long time.  Neither party is willing to adopt all the principles but instead turn to their religious beliefs or “American Exceptionalism” as an excuse to violate individual rights.

This is why we need to work within the Republican Party to begin expounding on liberty and use the party as a vehicle to limit government in both scope and strength.  Until this becomes a reality we will continue to allow tyranny to persistently take away our freedoms.

The Real Face Of The Republican Party, or "Its about the people, Stupid..."

Some say the GOP has an image problem.  

Some say the GOP has a messaging problem.   

Well, I can’t speak as to the make-up of other committees and state parties, but if what I saw locally and at the state convention is any indicator, what the Republican Party of Virginia really has is a self-image problem.

You see, the left is masterful with messaging.  While conservatives are generally more analytical in nature and therefore communicate as such, liberals tend to be more emotional and reactionary.  They use this trait to great advantage in their rhetoric towards their political enemies:  conservatives.  If you want to curb the stress illegal immigration is having on our economy, or at least reform the system, you’re a heartless xenophobe.  If you think it would be better to broaden the economic opportunity for poor, black communities as opposed to simply just subsidizing them with other people’s tax dollars, you’re a racist.  If you believe that abruptly ending a prenatal, healthy human life is equivalent to murder and that tax dollars should not subsidize a person’s individual choice to pursue safe sex without the consequences of disease and pregnancy, you hate women.

Liberals have effectively told the masses this for years.   Heck, they’ve even managed to convince the Republican Party itself that it simply doesn’t know how to “connect” with minorities.  Party consultants and strategists have been fumbling over themselves trying to come up with programs, committees and treatises on how to “reach out” to minorities as though their support is some unattainable brass ring.

The picture posted above was taken a couple weeks ago at a local committee outreach event.   If conservatives hate women, then why are there three there?  If conservatives are racists, why is there a black woman standing there?  If conservatives don’t care about immigrant families, then why is there a Hispanic woman and Taiwanese immigrant devoting their time to promote a party that professes to stand for conservative values?

Conservative values are those which teach individual responsibility, individual, freely-given charity (meaning that which is not forced upon an individual through law or tax), and that everyone should have the freedom and opportunity to make a better life for themselves and their families.  The truth of the matter is that those ideals have nothing to do with race, color, sex, or how rich or poor one is.  They resonate with just about everyone.

While I was at the Virginia state convention, I saw people of all ages, colors, and backgrounds.  I would be willing to bet there were just as many women as men, if not more.  I saw a large Muslim family walk off together to pray.  I saw a biker wearing his colors.  I saw two Hispanic children there with their family having the time of their lives as they were introduced to the political process.  I had the opportunity to catch up with Tito and Debbie Munoz, who have been working tirelessly in Prince William County’s Hispanic communities to teach them about the U.S. Constitution and civil rights.  Black conservative Wayne Dupree obviously made a similar observation and spoke about it in this Youtube video.

  

Young, old, middle-aged, and college age conservatives from all walks of life spent thirteen hours inside an uncomfortable building with poor sound and overpriced, lousy food in order to elect a black man as their candidate for Lieutenant Governor.

I would like to go back to the picture for a minute and tell you a little about the women standing there with PWCGOP chairman Bill Card and Dumfries mayor Gerald Forman II.

 Left to right: 

Faith Kinzie emigrated from Taiwan to the United States at age 17.  After becoming a United States citizen, she became more aware of our history and fundamental rights of individual freedom and liberty.  She has been quite the conservative activist locally, attending rallies, organizing events, and recently ran for Secretary of the Prince William Area Young Republicans club.

Brittney Morrett is an Alexandria Young Republican who co-founded the GMU group Students For A Free Cuba and has worked for several conservative policy groups.  She currently works for The Libre Initiative.

Angela Beckles is the chairman of the Potomac magisterial district of the Prince William Republican Party.

Perhaps if party leadership paid less attention to biased media, self-serving consultants and leftist propaganda and paid more attention to the people who actually make up the Republican Party, it would realize that the party doesn’t really have the image or messaging problem so many within the party think it does.   After all, it’s about the people, not just the message.

UPDATE:  I forgot to mention that my friend Terrance Boulden, a black conservative, is running for Woodbridge District Supervisor in 2015.

This is definitely NOT the party of the "Old white men's club."

“The Great American Experiment”

From what I could determine, the phrase “The Great American Experiment” derives from Alexis de Tocqueville’s book Democracy in America, written in the 1830’s.  I’ve asked myself “Why was America considered an ‘experiment?’”  Every individual may answer that question slightly differently.  I, however, believe it was considered an “experiment” because it was based on the idea of the citizen being closely involved with government instead of government being a separate entity that rules independently of the citizens.

Early Americans were a group of people from many different walks of life that came together to fight for a common goal, freedom.

1.       Freedom of religion

2.       Freedom from oppression

3.       Freedom from a tyrannous government.

Just to name a few.

Americans understood that in order to be successful they needed to work together.  But along with that they believed in individual freedom.  They believed in the freedom of each individual to determine the course of their life free from force.  They also understood that having the freedom to choose the course of their life meant that they also had the freedom to fail.  Signers of the Declaration of Independence knew that failing to win their independence might be a death sentence for them and their families. 

So what would cause America, “The Great Experiment” to fail?

I propose that it’s a lack of citizens being closely involved in government.  Citizens who sit back and say, “I’m not getting involved.”  Excuses range from lack of time to being uninterested in politics.  These are the same people that have the time to post pictures of cats on Facebook yet say they do not have the time to educate themselves or they fake having knowledge regarding issues facing their communities and nation.  What they really mean is that they lack the desire to educate themselves. 

It’s difficult to blame them for their frustration.  It’s become increasingly frustrating seeing representatives who promise to vote for more freedom and liberty, but when elected, do not carry through with their promises, They say they will vote against any tax increases yet they do not have the testicular fortitude to stand by that promise.  Because of this, individuals begin to feel as if their vote is a waste of time and energy.

Imagine if we had elected representatives who voted according to the very principles they advocated for.  What if we knew exactly how they would vote on any given issue because of their principles?  Recently I’ve heard various elected individuals attempt to justify why they voted against their principles.  Either you believe in your principles or you don’t. 

There is no excuse for any citizen not being involved in this “experiment.”  Being involved does not mean simply showing up to cast a vote for the usual party.  It means that each of us is responsible to fully understand the consequences of our votes and how they affect freedom and liberty.

Individuals running for office have the responsibility of standing firm on the principles that got them elected. Citizens do not want to hear excuses, just results. 

Let’s continue to reach out to the community and work hard to get those individuals elected who will fight for freedom and liberty.  We do this by getting the word out and then holding politicians accountable for their votes and being unwilling to make exceptions for “politics as usual.”

Let’s make this experiment permanent.

Less Testing: A Good Idea for Prince William Schools

A recent InsideNova article reported that Prince William high schools will be removing their midterm exams, which usually take place in January.  The reason for the removal being that students are already being over-worked when it comes to exams whether it be Virginia’s Standards of Learning (SOLs), Advanced Placement (AP), International Baccalaureate (IB), or Cambridge Programme.  Students just do not need to be overdosing on exams.

All eleven of the Prince William high school principals sent a letter to school officials requesting the mid-term exams be thrown into the waste basket.  The principals were able to avoid the School Board’s approval by classifying the move away from mid-terms as a “pilot program”.

This is absolutely fantastic news.  The time spent focusing on the mid-term exams can now hopefully be spent on preparing students with critical thinking skills, rather than spending a full week memorizing for a fill-in-the-blank exam that the student will forget the minute after they have completed the exam.

Teachers will have more time to explain concepts and address questions students may have with the content.  They will not be rushing to prepare their students for an exam, or potentially incentivizing them to create easy exams or even in some cases giving the answers to students while they are taking their exams!  They will have more time to educate their students and even spend time on certain topics needing a tighter focus.

I fondly remember taking an IB Chemistry course my junior year at Stonewall Jackson High School, we happened to be experimenting with alkaline metals and their chemical reaction with water.  This was a really interesting subject, because what high school boy does not somewhat enjoy a good explosion?  More time could have been spent performing classroom experiments and hands-on work rather than having full day review classes for mid-term exams.

To conclude this short piece I applaud the principals of the Prince William high schools to remove the mid-term exams.  Teachers will be able to more creative with their lesson plans and will have more time to focus on certain issues their students may find interesting or need further guidance on understanding.  Hopefully this will be the result, although there is the potential for some teachers to fill this time with fluff, such as a movie day.  I am optimistic about this change and look forward to the results of the “pilot program”.

A Battle we CANNOT Lose

Within the heart of every man there is an unquenchable desire for freedom and liberty.  It is a fire that can only be subdued for so long until it erupts with forceful rage.  Throughout history we see this repeated over and over again.  There is only so much that man can and will take before he rises up from a tyrannical government to reclaim his rights that all individuals inherently have.

To most Americans terrorism became a reality on September 11, 2001 and we were recently reminded of its devastating effects in the aftermath of the Boston bombings.  The fear that these two events inflicted on Americans is understandable, as is the call for extra security and more government intervention.

Freedom and liberty have always been in a constant battle against man’s desire for “security.”  In America we claim to be the “land of the free” and for so long that has been our identity.  Our freedoms and liberties define us as a country and have set us apart from the rest of the world.  Our forefathers laid their lives on the line fighting for these very principles.  Some of them were wealthy men who were willing to give up the comforts they already had for a chance at true freedom.

So why is it that Americans today are willing to give up some of some of their liberties and freedoms for a little more security?  I believe there are two reasons.

1.       We have forgotten what it is like to be truly free as well as enslaved by government.

2.       Americans believe that security is more important than freedom and liberty.

Since the beginning of our country, especially over the past 100 years, we have been sacrificing our freedoms and liberties for “security.”  We have been bamboozled into believing that government is the answer to all our problems.  We have been told that the Constitution is irrelevant and that we know better than those that were willing to sacrifice their lives for the freedoms that we are able to enjoy.

Americans have allowed government to create a plethora of social programs that take from those who have earned it and give to those who have not.  Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare and Federal Student Aid, just to name a few, in the hopes of creating a society where all our worries and fears are dissolved.  As is evidenced by the inefficiency, fraud, waste and abuse in each of these programs, it doesn’t work.

Instead of helping society, these very programs have driven our nation into over $16,500,000,000,000 in debt, and as some argue, on the brink of bankruptcy.

And now we have the fear of terrorism hanging over our heads and the desire for more security waiting in the shadows, ready to pounce at the chance to destroy our freedoms and liberties.  Some may argue that we as a nation have not yet come to this point.  I would argue that we are way beyond it.

Americans such as me, watched in horror as the full force of government rained down onto Watertown, MA.  The city was on lockdown, police in military type vehicles roamed the streets and SWAT teams searched the homes of private citizens, forcing them out at gunpoint in search of the terrorist suspect.

In spite of the full force of government, what led to the suspect’s apprehension was a concerned citizen contacting authorities because something seemed out of the ordinary.  I believe that is a lesson in itself.  We can solve problems and overcome terror without infringing on the individual rights of American citizens.

Was the Martial Law type atmosphere worth it?  Was it worthwhile giving up our freedoms and liberties for “security”?  I say no and I believe it will become painfully obvious in the future.

Life does not guarantee us security.  We are only guaranteed freedom and liberty as long as we fight for these principles that are contained both in our state and federal constitutions.  Giving into the fear of terrorism  will ensure that terrorism wins and that ever increasing power to limit our rights is given to a government that our forefathers warned us about.

The question each and every one of us needs to ask ourselves is this.  “Do I value liberty and freedom more than I do a little security”?

I’ll leave you with a quote from Benjamin Franklin.  “Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”

Understanding the Office of Attorney General: A Defense of Ken Cuccinelli

Since this is an open forum for the PWA YRs, I would like to defend Ken from the recent wave of criticism he has come under from his position on transportation.  I've been quite vocal in opposing the recent transportation tax hike.  However, it is important to not only educate people on the issues, but also understand how the political process works.

First thing to understand is the Washington Post.  The Washington Post has made a career out of trying to level Virginia Republicans.  George Allen is exhibition number one of this fact.  They intentionally write things in a way to make Republicans look bad.  In 2009, I was contacted multiple times by Washington Post reporters running stories to make Bob McDonnell look bad.  This is standard practice for the Washington Post.  Ken also has one of the most incredible records of any elected official in Virginia.  This doesn't mean he is above critique, however one should keep in mind both his record and the Post's record when criticizing him because of something they read in the Washington Post.  This is why when I read a previous Post article that I was concerned with about two months ago, I waited and asked him and ended up getting a solid response from him.  As Republicans it is important that we understand the Washington Post's tactics this election cycle.  The Post will be going after Ken all year long, and we need to be willing to defend Ken from the Post as opposed to falling for all their attacks on Ken.

It is also important to understand the role of the Attorney General.  Attorney Generals are much more like judges than legislators in terms of their ability to talk about policy issues.  See, the Attorney General's job is to advise the state on constitutional issue and defend state legislation if it is challenged in the courts.  As a result, he legally can not argue for the repeal of legislation he may have to defend in court this summer.  Anyone who has talked with Ken about various subjects over the last four years has run into topics where he has been limited about saying certain things because of his position as Attorney General.  Ken did all he could on the transportation bill.  When asked for an opinion, he released one that thew a monkey wrench in the process.

Ken also has been one of the most elected officials when it comes to taxes and spending.  Shortly after he was elected to the state senate, he lead the opposition to Gov. Mark Warner's tax referendum out of his house.  As a state senator he fought against anything that smelled of a tax.  He's opposed one of the biggest wastes of state funds in NoVa, the expansion of metro into Fairfax and Loudoun.  Honestly, anyone who has heard Ken talk about the recent tax increase quickly realizes it is not a bill he loves.

As conservatives we need to pressure our politicians to stay true, but we also need to understand how the process works.  Attacking one of our finest for what his opponents say about him, simply plays into the Democrats hands.  Like it or not, Ken is our nominee and we should work hard to support him.  Playing up fears that he isn't really a conservative will only reduce energy from the base, and hinder volunteer turnout.

As someone who has supported Ken since his 2007 reelection to the state senate, I am excited to see him as our nominee, and look forward to helping turnout the YRs to make Ken the next Governor.

Yard Signs Encroaching on Your Property Rights

The yearly and very American tradition of yard sales is under attack.  An article in the Potomac Local mentions a Virginia state law making it illegal to “place signs in the right-of-way of all public roads.  These include signs placed on traffic signs, staked in the medians, tacked on utility poles and nailed to fences.”  According to the Virginia code if you paint, print, place, put or affix a sign or advertisement within the limits of any highway you will be assessed a civil penalty of $100.  But that is not all.  The Commissioner of Highways may also charge you the cost of removing or obliterating the “public and private nuisance”.  It does not mention what the cost will be.

But all is not lost!  You can still place a sign for your yard sale on your own property!  You read that right, you can advertise the yard sale with a sign on your property because otherwise people passing by will not be able to determine you are having a yard sale.  But wait, Prince William County has enacted regulations on the size of sign you can place on your property.  No sign greater than two square feet shall be erected without a sign permit being issued by a zoning administrator.

According to the Prince William County municipal code, an individual requesting a sign permit must place a deposit or guarantee of at least $50.  They must provide a “scale drawing of the sign showing all dimensions, height, copy, colors, type of material, structural and architectural supports or backgrounds, method and hours of illumination, and a scaled location plan of the site.  In order to advertise your yard sale with a sign larger than two square feet you must call up the zoning administrator (hope he answers), send him all of the details of the sign and then have him perform a site visit to approve of the sign.

The most shocking part of this regulation, it is not even enforced.  Upon a phone conversation with the sign inspector, I was informed the regulation is only enforced if someone reports the violation (highly unlikely as most people probably do not even know about the regulation) and then the sign inspector will be dispatched to inspect the disturbance call.  Upon arrival the sign has already been removed and there is nothing for the inspector to do.

This leads me to ask whether this regulation is even necessary.  My view is the regulation is absolutely pointless, but also unjust.  The government is infringing on your property rights by telling you what you can put on it and even how you can put it up if they do approve of letting you put it on your property.  The government should step away and allow individuals to do what they want with the property they own.  Because after all if the government is allowed to tell you what to do with your property is it really yours?

A quick note from the PWAYR Chairman

Good morning,

One of the central planks I ran on to become Chairman of the PWAYR is to have an open forum of ideas, where people should not be afraid to say what they believe, even if they think their opinion may be unpopular or in the minority. As a holder of many opinions in the minority of the Republican Party, this is something that I feel passionately about.

I want to hear from all viewpoints, and I believe the Republican Party would benefit from the same policy. Because we accept, and in fact encourage, differing viewpoints, nothing that is posted on this blog or any other social media outlet represents the opinions of the Prince William Area Young Republicans as a group, including posts indicating support, opposition, endorsement, or denunciation of any candidate or politician.

I also ran on the idea that if you believe strongly enough in an idea, you should put your name next to it and stand to defend it. As such, every post represents the opinion of the person posting it, and that person alone. If you have any questions, please email me at stephen.spiker@gmail.com. If you want me to censor a controversial opinion, kindly shove off.

Cheers,

Stephen Spiker
Chairman, Prince William Area Young Republicans
stephen.spiker@gmail.com

The Need For Political Pressure From the Grass-Roots

By John Bonich

I don’t like flip-floppers. 

 
I hate the way they slip off your feet so easily and quite frankly, wearing open-toed shoes tends to leave me feeling naked and self-conscious.  Certainly not a pretty sight and definitely not a pretty thought.

 

Neither do I like politicians who say they stand for one thing then turn around and do the opposite.  Even if I disagree with their politics, if their actions stay consistent with their views I am far more willing to support a moderate in compromise than someone who proclaims they are fiscally conservative and then in actuality goes on to support unnecessary spending and tax increases.

I have defended Ken Cuccinelli against attacks for not being “moderate” enough when he stood his ground against the Prince William Chamber Of Commerce’s desire for more subsidies and I have defended him against attackers declaring him too socially conservative when he was simply just doing his job as Attorney General.  But I was quite dismayed when I read this recent Washington Post article.  Not necessarily the part about him recognizing the pragmatism of not being able to repeal McDonnell’s folly, (though I do believe a symbolic attempt a-la the House’s attempt to repeal Obamacare would make a strong statement and cement his place as a fiscal conservative), but this particular piece of information:

But in the same opinion, Cuccinelli provided a roadmap for resolving those constitutional issues by basing special taxes on not geography, which he said is not allowed, but on other criteria, such as population. Cuccinelli’s campaign has since taken credit for playing a role in saving the bill.

 

Basing them on population?  Really?  I had a hard time believing the staunch fiscal conservative AG would use such a flimsy loophole to help pass one of the highest tax increases in Virginia’s history.  Sure enough, on March 26^th, The Cuccinelli campaign released a press statement in which the Attorney General said he “was honored to work with members of the McDonnell Administration in making sure the legislation was able to move forward without the threat of any legal challenges.”

I believe the presumed Republican nominee for Governor owes his grass-roots supporter base a more elaborate explanation than “I remain committed to working to fix Virginia’s transportation problems, which will create jobs and ease the congestion across the Commonwealth.”  They have put in a lot of hard work to get him this nomination over the last couple years, and continue to work hard to put a fiscal conservative in the Governor’s mansion.  I was door knocking for the campaign last week and spoke to a gentleman who said he would be happy to volunteer for Cuccinelli, as he is pushing to lower taxes.  This was a huge issue for him, and he had no kind words for McDonnell or the transportation bill.  I can’t help but wonder if he would be willing to do so knowing that Ken Cuccinelli opposed the enormous tax hike in words but supported it and helped it become law in action.  That’s at least one man on the ground, perhaps even one voter, Cuccinelli could lose.

Republicans politicians have a tendency to move to the left when they get lambasted by the media and special interest groups for being “too conservative.”  It is the job of the Party and their grass-roots supporters to remind them it is we who will be putting in the leg work to get folks out to the poles, not a left-leaning media or special interest lobbies.

Many folks believe there is little difference between the Republicans and Democrats.  Our job as Young Republicans is to define the next generation of the Republican Party.   A big part of this is holding Republican candidates and politicians accountable for their actions, and making sure they do what they say and say what they do.

I hope more Republicans and fiscal conservatives put pressure on Ken about this.  Because based on his actions, the only pressure he’s feeling is that from the left and center-left to conform to their big-government, tax-and-spend dogma.