Men and women are equal, but different in “design” and created to work together. To pretend that all women want to forsake the traditional God-given roles of homemaker and mother equated by feminists to weakness, or subservience to men is patently absurd. Nothing could be further from the truth or more counterproductive for the advancement of women. Women just want a fair shake in the workplace.

My mother worked at a bank and a soda fountain to pay for her education at Kansas State University. Nursing school rejected my mother because she was two inches too short. (She insisted I learn to walk in high heels with a book on my head to give the illusion of being tall. Tall people have an edge in hiring, dating, even politics. A 2009 study in Australia reported some tall people make as much as $800 per inch more than their shorter counterparts.)

With an Accounting degree in hand, Mom headed west, alone, to work in remote Lovelock, Nevada. She wanted to “see the world first” before she married. My mother worked hard with my dad in the family business, raised four children and did bookkeeping for Abbot Supply.

While changes removing some barriers for women in the workplace can be attributed to top-down policy, most change happened organically out of the increased economic necessity for dual incomes within the family. Nearly 30% of working moms earn more than their husbands, but they need not stop being ladies.

In everything she did, my mother was a lady. She never used crude language. “Always be a lady. It takes no brains at all to say vulgar words. Good vocabulary and grammar are the marks of a good mind.” Mom told me, “Be careful how you use the word lady; it does not apply to every woman.” When Joy Behar called me a b—– on national television, it spurred over $150,000 in one-day online giving to my campaign. Mom would have been proud that I sent Joy flowers and a thank you note.

Mom’s advised, “People will be drawn to someone with character who is kind, patient, truthful, reliable, and has a sense of humor, especially about themselves.” The California Senator who demanded a Brigadier General use her title, gained no respect for herself, nor any other woman. She sounded petulant and shrill.

Most Americans want the leadership that the nation’s Founders demanded from each other—leaders with character, like Lady Margaret Thatcher.

There should be no doubt, as well, that the White House and President Obama were immediately informed that this was a terrorist attack.  Everyone at the top echelons of the U.S. Government, including Obama, Clinton and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta knew this was a terrorist attack on the evening of September 11, 2012.

There are many different and separate elements and questions about this entire affair, all of which have come under some scrutiny.  Some of these are:

• What was the level of security at the Bengazi site and was it sufficient to protect the Ambassador and his staff?
• What was the extent of the requests for additional security at this site and what happened to those request?
• After the reported death of Ambassador Stevens, could the U.S. Military have sent help to the Consulate to prevent further deaths and injuries during the 2nd wave of the attacks?
• Why was a team of special operations personnel under the command of Lt. Colonel Gibson told to not fly to Benghazi to support the Consulate personnel?
• Why did U.S. Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, state in sworn testimony to Sen. Lindsay Graham that the military gave no such order to Lt. Colonel Gibson to “stand down”?
• Why did U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice announce to the world, 5 days after the attacks at Benghazi, that the whole episode was the result of an “anti-Muslim video produced in the United States”?
• Why did the President persist in this ridiculous anti-Muslim video story for weeks following the attacks at Benghazi?
• Why did the U.S Intelligence Agency’s assessments of what happened, in the form of unclassified media talking points, get re-written by White House and State Department political operatives to totally mislead the American people?

There are many more questions about Benghazi, but to me, the most important questions are: 

• Why did the President of the United States and the Secretary of State consistently deliberately lie to the America people about the substance and nature of the Benghazi attack on America?
• Why does the American media to this day still refuse to characterize all of the presidential statements made in the days following the Benghazi terrorist attacks as blatant lies by the President of the United States?

What Should Congress Do Now?

The United States Congress now has an important duty to the American people to organize and appoint a Select Committee to further investigate the unanswered questions surrounding the Benghazi affair.  This committee should call on everyone from the White House, the State Department and the Intelligence agencies to testify and provide all the answers to the unanswered questions about the Benghazi affair.  The Republicans in Congress, and especially Speaker John Boehner must take the lead on this.

This is speculation on my part, but I have no doubt that the Select Committee will ultimately find out that:

• President Obama gave the military orders to “stand down” in Benghazi because permitting the military to move on Sept. 11 would have been tantamount to admitting that a major terrorist attack was underway.
• Obama then blatantly lied to the American people on numerous occasions about what really happened at Benghazi.
• Obama’s lies were told because he did not want to admit, during the course of a presidential election campaign, that Al Qaida and worldwide terrorism were alive and well.
• Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was deeply involved in the conspiracy of lies, partly to protect Obama’s election narrative that “GM is alive and Osama is dead” and partly to protect her incompetence in providing adequate security for overseas State Department personnel.

Should Obama be Impeached?

No American President should be able to lie to the America public and get away with it.  Richard Nixon and his close advisors lied consistently about the Watergate break-in and he was impeached in the House and very likely would have been convicted by the Senate, except for his resignation from office.  Bill Clinton was impeached by the House for perjury and obstruction of justice related to his affair with Monica Lewinski, but was spared conviction by the Senate because his lies were “only about sex”.

Barack Obama’s actions and orders shortly after hearing about the terrorist attacks in Benghazi on the night of Sept. 11 should prompt House Republicans to establish an Impeachment Committee to draw up articles of Impeachment.  The House of Representatives should be able to pass an Impeachment Bill and move the matter to the Senate.

In today’s partisan political world, it is not likely that the Senate would ever convict Barack Obama of anything, including misdeeds in office and lying to the American people just to win an election.  However, the lies and misdeeds of Obama, Clinton and others surrounding the Benghazi terrorist attacks and the deaths of the four Americans should never be forgotten.  A House of Representatives Impeachment Bill and a Senate trial against Obama will ensure that won’t happen.

The global-warming film “An Arctic Tale”, shown in their second grader’s class, prompted them to challenge the teacher, who responded, it is “part of the Common Core Standards which our curriculum is based upon.” Research revealed that parts of the curriculum were produced by “The Committee for Children”, which has a website page dedicated to LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender) issues.

When the poem, “Earth Day” by Jane Yolen, was taught to their 1^st grader, the parents explained, “The statement “I am the Earth…And the Earth is me”, capitalizing “Earth”, is subtle earth worship or Pantheism a ‘view that everything is part of an all-encompassing immanent abstract God; …or nature, and God are equivalent.’ It is idolatry, in direct opposition to mainstream Christianity (and Judaism).”

“The school responded by banning me from classroom volunteering for being ‘negative.’ My children cried and so did I,” said the mother.

By having 45 states “voluntarily” adopt Common Core standards, Washington circumvented Federal laws prohibiting nationalized education, offering incentives like $435 billion “Race to the Top” dollars and waivers from No Child Left Behind. The Feds write the Common Core test. Common Core test questions require no public notification for content. Textbook manufacturers write the content and teachers use the textbooks to teach to the test. Controlling the test controls the curriculum.

States accepting 2009 Stabilization Funding are required to collect data for a national Student Data Longitudinal System (SDLS) database. Health care history, disciplinary records, family income range, political and religious affiliation, student test scores, nicknames, extracurricular activities, bus stop times and psychological evaluations transmitted without parental consent to any governmental or private “authorized representative.”

Common Core’s “lead architect,” David Coleman, believes education is “the engine of social justice.” His self-proclaimed “mentor,” David Sherman, is Consultant to AFT (American Federation of Teachers), President Local 94 outside Chicago, and on Teachscape’s board of directors. Teachscape is partners with AFT, McGraw-Hill textbook publisher, and The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS). Connect the dots.

But, states like Indiana, Alabama, South Dakota and Georgia are pulling back. Educators complain. Professor James Milgram, mathematician, concluded American students would be two years behind their peers in other countries. Ze’ev Wurman, math-advisory expert, said, “I believe the Common Core marks the cessation of educational standards improvement in the United States.” Yong Zhao, associate University of Oregon Education dean said, “…American education may end in 2014, when the Common Core”  marches “into thousands of schools …” Parents are “opting” their children out of testing. Sen. Grassley (R-IA) wants to eliminate federal funding.

Reversing Common Core won’t be easy because states have already spent millions of dollars. It will require bold strokes, provoking hard-fought battles. The key is: Do not hesitate. Be proactive. Become a warrior for our children.

On December 30, 2012, I viewed three Emails requesting donations. One was from my alma mater Florida Atlantic University (FAU), the other from Hillsdale College, and the third from our home town heroes, Institute for Policy Innovation. I clicked on the donate tab for two of the three. The events of the past month reinforced that I made the correct decision.  My email below was sent to the President of my alma mater: 

As an alumnus of FAU, I am repulsed with the contempt and hostility of Professor Deandre  Poole as he attacks our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and the Judeo-Christian values on which the United States was founded. His claim that commanding students to write JESUS on a piece of paper and then stomping on it is an exercise for discussing the importance of symbols in culture, insults the intelligence of a rational populous. By violating the First Amendment Rights of student, Ryan Rotella, when he was suspended for noncompliance, Poole demonstrates his contempt for the Constitution. Our Constitution is the protector of our God-given, not government granted rights.

FAU reinstated Mr.  Rotella only after the threat of legal action.  You claim to be centers of tolerance and a venue for free exchange of ideas and thought.  Your definition of education appears to be nothing more than parroting whatever propaganda spews from your radical faculty.

1 Timothy 1: 3-7 is worthy of your consideration. “As I urged you….command certain men not to teach false doctrines….nor to devote themselves to myths. These promote controversies rather than God’s work – which is by faith.  The goal of this command is love, which comes from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. Some have wandered away from these and turned to meaningless talk. They want to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm.”

William T. Lawson, BS 1968 

IPI and Hillsdale College have more than earned my support.  Walter Williams absolutely nailed it with the following: “Wealthy donors ….give large sums of money to institutions that are contemptuous of donors’ values, such as enlightened racism, anti- capitalism, and Marxism. Wealthy donors who care about the fraud of higher education should recognize that there’s nothing like the sound of pocketbooks snapping shut to open the closed minds of college administrators.”  The charade above at Florida Atlantic University ( FAU), masquerading as enlightened higher education, illustrates Walter Williams’ analysis.

Defenders of Liberty- Hillsdale College

Hillsdale College, America’s leading institution dedicated to studying the meaning and history of the Constitution, maintains institutional independence by rejecting any form of federal or state taxpayer subsidy. This independent education is essential for the defense of our constitutional liberty, as Hillsdale trains our next generation of leaders. They are sharing their passion for our founding values free of charge,   with lessons on The Constitution taught by The Constitution’s most prominent scholars.    If we are going to win the battle of ideas we need to be grounded in the fundamentals that are the bedrock of our society.

Home Remedies from Texas by IPI

The Institute for Policy Innovation, celebrating their 25^th Anniversary, advocates lower taxes, fewer regulations and a smaller, less intrusive government. By fostering the intellectual ammunition for conservative principles, they help shape innovative policy from its conception.  Based in Lewisville, Texas, their finger is on the pulse of freedom loving Americans everywhere, uncorrupted by the clinking cocktail glasses of the liberal elites in Washington, D.C.  Statists attempt to break our spirit with antigrowth policy and burdensome oppressive regulations that decimate job growth, while championing reckless government spending that will plunder our currency.  By creating chaos and a sense of desperation, they hope we will vote according to government inflicted needs and not our intellect. President Tom Giovanetti and his colleagues cut through this maze of deceit and fraud, unmasking the duplicity of this hostility and contempt. IPI’s optimistic, inspiring common sense solutions reveal that solutions do exist to our government created dilemmas. Just imagine if we could balance the budget in 18 months!  IPI ‘s  logical, painless  solution  of   freezing  spending at 2012 levels  for two years, only requires political will.

Donations to Hillsdale College and the Institute for Policy Innovation are investments in our nation’s future that will pay dividends for generations to come.

In 2009, talk show host Lars Larson and I discussed this trend using a Constitutional attorney’s term, “Second Amendment remedies”, to describe our right to self-defense and defense of family, property and country. Demonized by the left, these “Second Amendment remedies” in the Constitution are, “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” National and state constitutional documents all affirm that “provide for the common defense” in the Declaration of Independence begins with the people.

The language “Militia,” “security of a free State” and “keep and bear Arms” all contribute to this understanding. By articulating “for the common defense, “the intent was to exclude excuse for disarming the people. In the context of Article I, Section 8 the Congress’ common defense responsibility is limited by the prevalent, recurring theme that self-defense is one of the “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,” existing with or without the Bill of Rights. The framers further secured this right with the text, context and Congressional debates around the Second Amendment explicitly stating or strongly implying the right of self-defense, the right to have arms, the duty to be in the militia, and the danger of standing armies. The Courts ruled that the amendment protects the right to maintain militias, the individual’s right to bear arms, and in District of Columbia v. Heller, an individual right to own and use guns for lawful purposes including self-defense. I emphasize Adams second amendment remedy argument, “Here every private person is authorized to arm himself, and on the strength of this authority,… for their defense, not for offence.” I have always emphasized, like “Patriot’s Day,” 1775, every citizen has the duty to defend themselves and their country and not as a pre-emptive offensive act.

In April 19, 1775 the shot heard ’round the world responded to British troop orders to disarm the population by seizing arms stored at Concord. Cromwell reasoned the standing army provided “for the common defense.” Eyewitnesses said the king’s troops opened fire, killing eight of the parishioners lead by Pastor Clark. In self-defense and defense of country, they returned fire at Lexington Green, directly beside their church.

When tempted to believe we can safely disarm, Thomas Paine warned, to “expect to reap the blessings of freedom.” Americans have to “undergo the fatigues of supporting it.”

Beginning in 1934 with a gun tax, Congress has incrementally attempted to disarm Americans by converting Militias to federally controlled and funded National Guards and passing laws  such as recording names and addresses of gun purchasers. States’ demands further restrict with their own requirements. Specifically, gun control laws did not prevent tragedies in “gun free” zones like Newtown, CT or Aurora, CO.

Attempts toward gun control legislation are classic examples of “activity mistaken for progress.” We need solutions …not political salves

The screaming donkeys use a crisis to manipulate social change. The truth is in short supply but, what difference does it make if they achieve the desired result?

We’ve heard them screaming through their friends (the media) about “global warming” but record cold snaps turned that screaming to “climate change.”

We’ve heard them screaming about the fiscal cliff, the sequestration and they will continue to scream as they create the next economic crisis.

We’ve had to listen to their politically correct screams over the Dream Act, homosexual love, and killing babies.

They politicize the grief of Newtown by screaming for gun control. Harry Reid insinuates the left-wing sequester agenda into the tragic deaths at Hawthorne, NV. When a conservative talks about the women and children who need protection from a rapist claiming parental rights, they scream about the word “legitimate.” Their blog responses, television shows and speeches are filled with screaming obscenities. By design, they reduce a civil society to a nervous culture afraid of, reacting to, or creating the next scream. (Saul Alinsky, who died in 1972, published “Rules for Radicals” outlining power tactics. “Rule number 12—Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it. Isolate the target from support group sympathy. Go after people. They hurt faster than institutions.”

“Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded,” says Dr. Lyle Rossiter, author of the new book, “The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness.” For over 35 years Rossiter, a board-certified clinical and forensic psychiatrist, has diagnosed and treated more than 1,500 patients and examined more than 2,700 civil and criminal cases. Rossiter says the liberalism of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton is a psychological disorder.

Dr. Rossiter says liberalism preys on weakness and feelings of inferiority in the population by:

• creating and reinforcing perceptions of victimization;
• satisfying infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence and compensation;
• augmenting primitive feelings of envy;
• rejecting the sovereignty of the individual, subordinating him to the will of the government.”

OurVoicePAC’s new video showcases the screaming donkeys. It’s a one-minute parody composite of Alinsky’s rule 7—“Keep the pressure on with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose…Take advantage of current events and twist their implications to support your position.” And as Rahm Emanuel boldly instructs, lifting right from the Saul Alinsky playbook, “Never let a good crisis go to waste.”

If you like it, share it and donate to help produce similar videos.

Posted on March 25, 2013 | Sharron

Obama, Reid and Pelosi realize the economy is headed for double-dip recession caused by increased spending and massive regulatory policies. Unemployment is expected to soar and tax revenues are low in spite of huge tax increases (Payroll tax increased $200 billion; income taxes $65 billion; health insurance premiums up 10-20 percent; capital gains taxes 9 percent; home sales tax increased 4 percent, and taxes from Obamacare).

To deflect attention from the “debt elephant in the room,” this is the fifth time Democrats have declared a fiscal crisis in two years.

 Nancy Pelosi, threatened, “What does sequestration mean? Well, whatever it means this is what it equals… sequestration equals unemployment, sequestration equals job loss. And we cannot have a slowing down of our economic growth. We cannot afford losing seven hundred thousand jobs.”

Disingenuously, to avoid political risk before the 2012 election, the Obama Administration in a memorandum instructed Federal contractors not to provide WARN Act notice to employees facing sequestration. (The WARN Act, requires 60 days advance notice of plant closings and mass layoffs from most employers with 100 or more employees. Many employers like defense contractor, Lockheed Martin, who employs 103,000 people needed warnings.)

Defense Secretary Panetta argued sequestration would harmfully affect national security. Spending reductions for defense are $500 billion over 10 years (an average of $50 billion per year) or 43 percent of the sequestration; woefully disproportional given defense accounts for only 11 percent of total spending. To emphasize the Democrat sequestration point, unnecessary pain is scheduled for some military families by forcing them to take unpaid Friday furloughs for five months amounting to a $1000 a month reduction in pay in some cases.

Reid promised gridlock saying, “Those cuts will go forward. They’re all cuts. I think we need some revenue [code for tax hike] to take the pressure off of everybody. The American people agree with me. Until there is some agreement on revenue, I believe we should just go ahead with the sequester,” and transferred blame to Republicans, “I think he [Boehner] should understand who is sitting on their posterior.”

Blaming Republicans is political gamesmanship. The Republican House passed targeted spending cuts to replace the sequester nearly 300 days ago—specifically: $26 billion by eliminating food stamp fraud, approximately $10 billion by eliminating the ObamaCare Public Health Slush Fund, and $12 billion from National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). Reid has refused to pass a budget for over 1,400 days. Expiration of the Continuing Resolution lurks as the next fiscal crisis diversion. This should outrage Americans.

Broken promises, cover-ups, a loose interpretation of truth, and “At this point, what difference does it make?” disclaimers convince us one party has no conscience and the other has no courage. Who are the heroes (usually ordinary folks) born for a time such as this and training to serve in this battle?

Consider some examples from history. The LORD told Gideon to pick his team. “You have too many people on your side… ‘Anyone who is afraid or unsteady may return home ….” Twenty-two thousand people went home, leaving ten thousand. “There are still too many people. Take them down to the water, and I will weed them out for you there… Set aside those who lap the water with their tongues, as a dog laps, from those who bend down on their knees to drink…With the three hundred men who lapped I will rescue you…” That band of courageous, mentally alert warriors defeated armies of thousands.

There was no battle at Valley Forge, but it was the turning point of the Revolutionary War. The Continental army was bloody, beaten, battle-weary, and ready to quit; ravaged by hunger, disease, despair, raw weather, dozens of desertions, and death. General Washington conceded, “If the army does not get help soon, in all likelihood it will disband.”

In February the weather eased. In March, General Nathanael Greene was appointed head of the Commissary Department, starting the flow of food and supplies. In April, Baron von Steuben, a mercenary not a baron, began training the troops into a fighting force. May brought the French Alliance with military and financial support. On June 19, 1778, exactly six months after they arrived at Valley Forge, the American revolutionary forces immerged, transformed from rebels into a mature Army that defeated the tyranny of the elite English ruling class.

During the Korean War personnel from Underwater Demolition Teams (UDT) formed a small, elite force of 300 men. Training commenced with one grueling week designed to eliminate the men from the boys. It is still considered “HELL WEEK.” They were trained to operate on Sea, Air and Land, hence their name. The U.S. Navy SEALs established by President John F. Kennedy in 1962 are the counterpart to the Army “Green Berets.” Navy SEALs are physically fit, mentally sharp, mature and resilient. They conduct on-the-ground Special Reconnaissance and carry out clandestine, small-unit, high-impact missions that large forces cannot.

Who are the brave, tenacious, trained Conservative Commandos? They are the protectors of the grail of freedom who write books and blogs, host talk radio, citizen lobby, and cast lonely “no” votes against spending, taxation, over-regulation and entitlements in local, state and federal governments. In short, “Uncle Sam needs you!”

Get trained or send a team to train at the BattlebornBootcamp May 3-5 in Reno, NV.

Determining one’s mental health to purchase or own a firearm would depend upon your answers to a list of questions formulated by the government.

The spiritual and political mindset of those formulating the questions would be strictly subjective.

If your answers would be of like-mind, spiritually, socially, and politically with the examiner who formulated the questions, then you would pass. Otherwise, you could be declared ‘unfit’ to own a gun and be ordered to turn over to the government any gun you may already have.

How would you answer these Questions:

• Are you a Christian?
• Do you consider non-Christians a threat to the First Amendment right to freedom of worship and speech?
• Do you believe Muslims in America should be permitted to enforce Sharia Law rather than abiding by America’s laws?
• Do you favor same-sex marriage?
• Do you believe the Constitution should be interpreted in keeping with the modern-day culture?
• Do you believe global warming is caused by greenhouse gases?
• Do you believe Americans should be bound by United Nations resolutions and treaties?
• Do you believe a woman’s right to abortion supercedes the unborn child’s right to life?
• Do you agree that women should serve in front-line combat alongside men?
• Do you believe America should welcome those who cross our borders illegally?
• Do you believe governmental regulations on your choice of food and drink is in the best interest of your health?
• Do you believe the federal government’s Affordable Health Care plan is the best answer for providing good health care for all Americans?
• Do you believe America’s present foreign policy is the way to bring peace to the world?
• Do you believe the carrying of firearms should be prohibited in schools, shopping malls, public buildings, and hospitals?

How would you like to have some person, who holds political views contrary to yours, grading your answers to determine if it is safe for you to own a firearm? 

Good Ways to control gun violence on university campuses and in public schools: 

1) Gun Free Zone signs should be removed from school zones, shopping malls, hospitals, and public buildings.. Gun Free Zone signs might as well read, “No defense against killers in this gun free zone.” 

2) Qualified school teachers should be permitted to carry their guns in public schools and on university campuses. This is less expensive and more effective than having a uniformed security guard who could be taken down first. No shooter would know which teachers are armed. The more the better! 

3) Parents need to store guns away from childrens’ reach, teach them gun safety and monitor the video games they play. 

4) If older children show signs of drug use or mental problems, keep guns away from them and do not teach them how to shoot.

If you believe our founding fathers, in their wisdom and experience with authoritarian governments, wrote the Second Amendment to protect the right of the people to keep and bear arms as a means of personal defense and as a defense against a tyrannical government, then you need to flood the offices of our U.S. Senators and Representatives to VOTE NO ON ANY NEW GUN REGULATIONS.

The Senator Feinstein gun ban bill is a first step toward ultimate gun confiscation and must be defeated!  

Check out: and use these links:

 http://www.grassfire.com/978/images/bannedfirearms.jpg

http://www.grassfire.com/978/petition.asp?Ref_ID=19183&CID=978&RID=37821275;

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

If phone lines are full, use a Senator’s web form to send a message.

But, PLEASE DO IT!

It should be clear from the election results that large numbers of Americans now approve of the president’s position on the fiscal cliff and these same numbers strongly disapprove of John Boehner’s and the Republican’s position on this critical issue.

Essentially, the president’s position on the fiscal cliff can be summarized as follows:

• Raise taxes on the most successful Americans (Not the rich, but hard working higher wage earners and small business owners).
• Maintain lower tax rates for middle class Americans (for now).
• Provide no spending cuts whatsoever and continue to claim that the cuts agreed to in 2011 are sufficient.
• Increase spending on new government giveaway and bailout programs with the new revenues from higher taxes.
• Give the president complete authority over the debt ceiling so he can raise the ceiling whenever federal spending requires it.
• Show no concern for the increasing federal debt or national deficits in excess of $1 Trillion for the foreseeable future.

Incredibly, a majority of the American people support the president’s position and are blaming the Republicans for being so recalcitrant in not coming to an immediate agreement with the president.  That is clearly shown by the recent Rasmussen generic congressional ballot poll among likely voters which has the Democrats now leading that ballot by 10 percentage points.  This poll clearly shows that if a Congressional election were to be held today, the Republicans would lose about 50 to 60 House seats.

Public Support For the President’s Position

The interesting question is why do Americans appear to support such an unreasonable position that the President is offering on the fiscal cliff.  I believe that the following reasons are paramount:

• Americans re-elected president Obama and now all of his supporters and many of his former opponents feel that he should be given the opportunity to execute the program on which he ran.
• Most Americans have no real understanding of the fiscal issues involved with massive debts and unsustainable entitlement programs.
• A majority of Americans are now somewhat dependent or totally dependent on government handouts and will not tolerate changes or reductions in any of these programs.
• America has been changing demographically for many years, with lower income minorities continuing to grow in population by high birth rates and excessive immigration while the birth rate for the white population continues to diminish at an alarming rate.  The net result is that the minority population along with poor whites now dominate the political strength and discourse in America.

Why did the Republicans Win the House in November?

We should clear up the fiction that since Obama won the presidency and Republicans won the House therefore Republicans should have an equal shot at setting the terms for a fiscal cliff agreement.  Nothing could be further from the truth.

Most voters have little or no idea who the down ballot candidates are in any election.  Most of them know the basics about the presidential candidates, something about the gubernatorial and senate candidates and practically nothing about down ballot candidates.  The result usually is that most voters just vote their party or the party of the person who gets their vote for president or governor.  Republicans won the House because some voters were familiar with their current Republican congressman and through name recognition were willing to split their votes between their presidential vote and the House member from their district.  In addition, there is some gerrymandering that goes on in House districts and it is fair to say that most Republicans win their rural districts by smaller margins than Democrats win their urban districts.  These two factors were largely responsible for a slim majority for House Republicans.

The current small Republican House majority certainly doesn’t mean that there is any great support for the current House Republican position that federal spending cuts must accompany any tax increases.

What Should the House Republicans do About the Fiscal Cliff?

Currently, the Republican position on the fiscal cliff is losing in the public polls by at least 60 to 40.  Republicans are in an extremely bad position and it gets worse every time Speaker John Boehner gets before a microphone and attempts to justify the Republican position of spending cuts, entitlement cuts and no rate increases for the top wage earners.  Boehner keeps up this no tax increase mantra by claiming that he is concerned about more job losses if we increase tax rates on what he calls “the small business job creators”.  Regardless of whether Boehner is right or wrong, the public is not buying his discourse.  Adding to that problem is that Boehner comes across as an angry and mean politician who is attempting to protect the “rich” in America at the expense of the poor and downtrodden.

So what should the House Republicans do?  My advice would be simply this:

1.  STOP TALKING!

2.  We don’t need Boehner out there every day pleading with the president to “please negotiate with me” when the president has no need to negotiate.

3. Do nothing!  Leave the current Republican offer on the table and wait around for the president to come forward with something that Republicans can accept.

4. In the interim, prepare a House bill with the following terms:

• Provide a smaller tax increase than Obama wants on high wage earners.
• Add in a few caps to tax deductions for very high wage earners.
• Put nothing in the bill about the debt ceiling.
• Send the bill to the Senate and go home

5. At the eleventh hour, pass the above House bill and send it to the Senate to deal with.  If it passes the Senate, the president would be in a difficult position if he didn’t sign a bill that gave him essentially what he asked for, without necessarily the exact figure for tax increases.

Essentially, Republicans have lost the battle with the current electorate.  It seems to me that when you have lost a war, it’s time to stop talking, stop fighting and to figure out how to regroup.

Republicans, and especially House Republicans, need to understand that they lost the election.  The right thing to do now is to stop talking, pass a minimal bill acknowledging that the Democrats did win the election, and move on to fight the next battles which will be coming up shortly.  The 2014 elections are not that far away, and Republicans are in great danger of losing the House this time and possibly losing even more Senate seats.

Republicans also need to plan for the upcoming elections in Virginia and New Jersey n 2013.  Republican losses in these elections will foreshadow major losses in 2014 just as the Virginia and New Jersey elections in 2009 led the way to big Republican gains in 2010.  Let’s not throw away our chances for holding on to what we have in 2013 and 2014.