southchild

Neal Boortz is my main man, but he really got this one wrong. Boortz says:

Something spectacular is going to have to happen in the next four weeks or so to salvage the Republican control of the House. Things change, but right now I expect the Democrats to take control of the house — but not the Senate — in next month’s elections. Republican leadership inaction on Mark Foley set the stage. Stand by for Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

I know this is heresy for some of you, but remember … I’m not a Republican. I’m a card-carrying Libertarian. If I voted in a state where you registered your political party, my registration would be Libertarian. Obviously, though, I’m far more aligned with the alleged goals and aims of the Republican party than I am with the socialist, big government, tax-and-spend Democrats.

That having been said I would suggest that some good might come out of a Republican defeat. Which scenario would you prefer? Would you rather have the Republicans gloating over another victory over the Democrats? Or would you rather have the Republicans in exile for two years wondering where they had gone wrong, and developing a plan to regain the support of the voters?

The choice is becoming increasingly clear.

Neal is pissed at the arrogance and lack of fiscal conservatism shown by the Republicans. I totally understand and am likewise furious at the Republicans for the same reasons (and more). However, one thing is crystal clear: If the Democrats regain control of government, it will be a disaster. There are a million reasons why this is the case, but for Neal Boortz’ benefit, I’ll list three biggies:

1. The War on Islamic Fascism

This is simply the most important priority that our country must confront. Nothing less than the survival of Civilization depends on it’s success. Not only would the Democrats cut-and-run from Iraq, but they also don’t even believe that we’re fighting a War on Islamic Fascism! Many of them believe that 9/11 was an inside job, for crying out loud!

If the Democrats regain power, the message will be sent to the terrorists to just hold out for two more years until President Bush is out of office. The message will be sent to terrorists around the world to start planning more attacks on the United States because the Americans have lost the will to fight. In short, everything that we’ve managed to accomplish since September 11, 2001 would begin to become unravelled, and further attacks on our country — ones that might kill thousands of citizens — would be inevitable.

Boortz, don’t let your rage at the Republicans blind you to the fact that the Democrats will not go after the Islamic Fascists who want to, and will, kill us.

2. The Economy

Yesterday the Stock Market hit an all-time high. Thanks to the Republican tax cuts, the economy is going gangbusters just five short years after the 9/11 disaster. If you want to see the economy tank, just put the Democrats back in power. Boortz, didn’t you hear what Charlie Rangel said in just the past couple of weeks?

Rangel’s accession to the chairmanship of the committee would likely end six years of tax cuts by the Republican- controlled Congress. He said he “cannot think of one” of President George W. Bush’s first-term tax cuts that merit renewal. He also said no discussion would be possible on overhauling Social Security until Bush dropped a plan to create individual accounts funded by payroll taxes.

The moment it becomes clear that Nancy Pelosi will assume the House leadership, just watch the stock market decline. Come on, Boortz, you know this will happen. When Rangel and the Democrats repeal the Bush tax cuts, you know it will sink the economy. It’s like having a crystal ball it’s so obvious. Do you really want to achieve this effect because you’re pissed at the Republicans?

3. The Attacks on Free Speech — the Fairness Doctrine and Campaign Finance “Reform”

Finally, Boortz, consider what the Democrats will do to talk radio and blogs if they regain power in Washington. Hell, you were discussing this on your radio show (with Jamie Dupree) earlier this week! The Democrats simply cannot compete with Conservatives when it comes to ideas, so the Democrat’s strategy is to shut down the debate, and if they regain power that is exactly what they will do. Remember what George Will pointed out in the latest Newsweek?

Oct. 9, 2006 issue – SEATTLE—As the comprehensive and sustained attack on Americans’ freedom of political speech intensifies, this city has become a battleground. Campaign-finance “reformers,” who advocate ever-increasing government regulation of the quantity, timing and content of political speech, always argue that they want to regulate “only” money, which, they say, leaves speech unaffected. But here they argue that political speech is money, and hence must be regulated. By demanding that the speech of two talk-radio hosts be monetized and strictly limited, reformers reveal the next stage in their stealthy repeal of the First Amendment.

When the state’s government imposed a 9.5-cents-per-gallon increase in the gas tax, John Carlson and Kirby Wilbur of station KVI began advocating repeal by initiative. Proponents of repeal put up a Web site, hoping to raise 1,000 volunteers and $25,000. In two days they had 6,500 and $87,000. Needing 224,880 signatures to put repeal on the ballot, they got 400,996.

Appalled by this outburst of grass-roots democracy, some local governments, which stood to gain many millions from the tax, unleashed a law firm that would gain substantially from handling the bond issues the tax would finance. The firm set out to muzzle Carlson and Wilbur, using the state’s campaign regulations.

It got a judge to rule that the broadcasters were not just supporters of the repeal campaign, they were agents of it. Why, they had even used the pronoun “we” when referring to proponents of repeal. Their speech constituted political advertising, and their employer was making an “in-kind contribution” to the repeal campaign. The judge said a monetary value must be placed on their speech (he did not say how, he just said to do it that day). The law says reports must be filed and speech limits obeyed or fines imposed.

State law restricts to $5,000 the amount a single giver can contribute in the three weeks before an initiative. If Carlson’s and Wilbur’s speech were monetized at radio-advertising rates, they would be silenced for all but about 15 minutes in each of the campaign’s crucial last three weeks. They continued to talk (the repeal campaign, outspent almost five to one, lost 54.6-45.4) and, aided by the libertarian litigators of the Institute for Justice, have taken the issue to the state Supreme Court.

What has happened in Seattle prefigures what a national Democratic administration might try to do—perhaps also by reviving the “fairness doctrine” (an “equal time” regulation)—to strangle conservative talk radio. And what has happened here—the use of campaign regulations as weapons of partisanship—is spreading.

Boortz, come to your senses. Yes, the Republicans have been a terrible disappointment, have spent money like drunken Democrats, have passed idiotic, nanny-state legislation like banning Internet gambling, have ignored the illegal invasion of this country, yes, yes, yes….I know, I know.

But, if you care about fighting Islamic madmen, continuing to see the economy grow, and exercising free speech, well, there is no way that you can hope for the in-denial, pro-taxes, open-borders Democrats to win. It’s that simple.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 4th, 2006 at 2:15 pm and is filed under General, politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.