Yvonne Dewey writes:
1) So long as it's in the opposition, where should the Republican Party focus its energy?
Speaking out against the bad policies of the administration . One of the things driving tea party demonstrations is that we have no leadership in D. C. representing us and speaking out.
2) What is the most worrisome part of Barack Obama's presidency?
His hurry to gain total control of every aspect of American life. So many decisions have been made under the cloak of darkness, overnight. We feel we are marching toward the end of our liberties without having a chance to catch our breath.
3) There's been a lot of debate about the role that talk radio and cable news hosts should play on the right. Particularly controversial are Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Mark Levin. What do you think about these folks? Do they help the right or hurt it (or is it more complicated than that?) How should Republicans interact with them?
Conservative talk show hosts help the right, I can’t see that any of them have done any harm to the right. They keep us informed, and that is very helpful. Republicans should and do pay them the respect they are due, and support them as they are under fire.
4) One particularly fraught controversy pertains to race in America -- with the first black president in the White House, some conservatives have been criticized as racists for opposing him, and some on the right have accused the Obama Administration or its allies of racism or anti-white sentiments (for example, Sonja Sottomayor's "wise Latina" comment drew fire, as did the Skip Gates incident). As the right thinks about political strategy and policy, how should it approach matters of race?
RACE does not enter into this at all, until the left inserts it. It’s an issue they manufactured. They know that people really do not want to be called racist, so when the right threatens them in some way, leftists yell racism. Sometimes it works, and people back off. The right should not back down. Obama should be treated as a man who was elected President, with no regard to his race.
5) Is there anything you observe locally, or that Republicans in your area of the country care about, that doesn't get sufficient attention in the national media conversation? If so tell me a bit about the issue, and the approach you think the right ought to take.
Texas passed sweeping tort reform in 2003, and it has made a huge difference here. Doctors can practice without too much stress, their malpractice insurance is greatly reduced, and I know of hospitals that have been able to use their malpractice insurance savings for new life-saving equipment or expansions. Keep in mind, though, that all we did was to cap punitive damages. Patients’ rights are still intact. Nobody in DC wants to talk about tort reform, but nationwide tort reform would make health care affordable. Obama’s sympathies are with the trial lawyers, however. And people on the right are not talking about it nearly enough.
6) Traditionally the Republican Party has been a coalition of religious conservatives, libertarians, fiscal conservatives, and national security conservatives. Is that alliance viable going forward? If so, what must be done to hold it together? If not, what alliance should the GOP try to build?
The alliance is viable going forward, we need to concentrate on our conservative roots from this point forward, and ignore suggestions from liberals and moderates that we need to move to the left or center. We need no new alliance.
7) Is there anything I didn't ask about that you'd like the media or the country as a whole to know?
My personal feeling is that Republicans should be allowed to nominate their candidates, Democrats should be allowed to nominate their own, etc. etc. Republicans did not choose John McCain as a presidential nominee. Moderates, independents and Democrats chose John McCain for us, with a lot of help from the liberal media.
TO WHICH I REPLIED...
Thanks so much for taking the time to respond.
And if I may, one followup question. When asked about the most worrisome aspect of Barack Obama's presidency, you wrote, "His hurry to gain total control of every aspect of American life. So many decisions have been made under the cloak of darkness, overnight. We e feel we are marching toward the end of our liberties without having a chance to catch our breath."
I want to be sure that your position is understood, and I fear that this is vague enough that different people might interpret it in ways you don't intend. So if you don't mind, would you give a more specific account of your position? That is to say, what are the particular decisions you're worried by that were made under the cloak of darkness? And which liberties specifically do you regard as under threat?
Thanks again for writing, and have a wonderful Friday.
MS. DEWEY THEN WROTE BACK...
Yes, many people have trouble with my cryptic messages.
I am facing two serious deadlines, no time to do research, but I will try to be a little clearer, then again… Barack Hussein Obama’s decision to send $200 million to Hamas, to relocate those people in this country. Hamas is a terrorist group, their only goals are to destroy everyone who does not agree with them. i.e. Israel. Why bring them here? Has he not been watching Britain and France, their Muslim immigrants are creating real havoc. Despite what he said, this is not a Muslim Country, we do not need a Muslim majority ruling America. This is one decision that was made under the cloak of darkness.
The enormous success of Cash for Clunkers. What success? Car dealers have still not been paid for the $4,500 discounts, we did not reduce the need for gasoline by enough MPGs to make a difference, and the cars that were disabled were still drivable, perfect for the low income worker who is struggling to find a way to get to work.
His health care plan. I am sure you read the so-called Waxman 1018 page report. While parts were ambiguous, there were some definite “shalls” that were disturbing. There shall be periodic end-of-life counseling sessions. Bureaucrats will determine whether or not a procedure will be allowed depending on the value of the patient’s contributions to society, including estimated life span.
Obama wanted it passed right away, without giving anyone a chance to read it, even the Congressmen charged with voting. Why? The only reason Obama wanted it rushed through quickly before anyone could read it was that once it was in the sunlight, there would be too much opposition. What would the bill do if it were to be implemented? Eventually drive all insurance companies out of business to get to Obama’s “preferred single payer plan.” He admitted that to save money he would reduce payments to doctors for Medicare patients. Medicare is already paying too small a portion of the costs. He has said that Doctors would all be paid the same. That is not his call. His plan would drive the good doctors into some other profession and we would be left with mediocrity. His only argument has been that we are spreading misinformation, that the plan has not actually been written. If it has not been written, why are we rushing a vote?
What about the Constitution? Czars are unconstitutional, as are government takeover of car manufacturers or other businesses.
Obama has tried to intimidate the tea party attendees into silence. We are Nazis (odd choice of words for the Pelosi-Obamas); radicals, terrorists,
Cap and Trade we’ll save for another day. Another fiasco.
Obama administration has created a crisis here and there…. And need to act quickly to save the country. The bailout money….TARP funds, the list goes on.
\I have probably done nothing but muddy the waters….. but Obama is rushing to make changes that are unconstitutional, and will weaken our rights and freedoms.