Tag Archives: states rights

News Roundup – Confederate Flag, ObamaCare, Gov. Bobby

Over the last week or so there has been a ton of conversation about the South, Dylann Roof and the Confederate Flag. Just for one second, let’s take a deep breath. What was the Civil War about? Someone will usually say that the Civil War was about States Rights. Okay. That’s a half answer. The Civil War wasn’t about states’ rights to have their own Navy or trade exclusively with Africa or England. The Civil War was about a state’s right to continue slavery as they saw fit. The Confederate Flag is clearly associated with slavery. Then, after the war, the Confederate Flag was most associated with the KKK, a terrorist organization. So for me, as a Black man who grew up in the South, the Confederate Flag is associated with nothing positive. It is associated with terror and racism. Now, I fully understand that there are those Americans who see nothing but positive when they look at the Confederate Flag. They see bravery, honor and dedication to duty. We need to understand that the Confederate Flag symbolizes both. It is like that Batman character – Two Face. You can’t have one without the other. I think that removing the Confederate flag from the state capital in South Carolina is a step in the right direction. Oh, and I should add that Dylann Roof understood the meaning of the Confederate Flag. He clearly understood its link with racism. (Now, before some folks begin to seize, I don’t believe that every Southerner is a racist. On the other hand, I don’t believe that every Northerner is a saint. Look, America is a complex country. Good and evil can be found everywhere. )

ObamaCare (Affordable Care Act) has been upheld by the Supreme Court. I’m a little surprised.  The following is from ScotusBlog:

That, the Court concluded by a six-to-three vote, was what Congress intended when it passed the sweeping overhaul of the health insurance market five years ago.   If the subsidies are not available across the nation, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., wrote for the majority, that would bring about “the type of calamitous result that Congress plainly meant to avoid.”

Had the ruling in King v. Burwell gone the other way, to eliminate subsidies in thirty-four states, at least 6.4 million Americans likely would have almost immediately lost the insurance coverage that many of them have for the first time.  And, given the way Congress wrote an interlocking law, the cascading effect of the loss of subsidies for so many probably would have collapsed the whole arrangement — a point that Roberts embraced in foreseeing the potential for a “death spiral” for the ACA.

 

Bobby Jindel. The GOP needs more candidates. It is like that old disco song – “More, more, more.”

Here are 10 “great” moments from Donald Trump’s announcement speech.

Friday Afternoon News Roundup

Friday Afternoon News Roundup

Remember that Barack Obama is a communist. Or did they say he was a socialist? Whatever. He is bad for business. The Dow Jones industrial average, however, briefly topped 15,000 for the first time ever.

The new job numbers are out for April. The unemployment rate is 7.5%. The economy gained 165,000 jobs in April. The Economic Policy Institute has more.

As long as I’m talking about the economy, I saw this interesting bit of data about home prices skyrocketing in Las Vegas.

For some reason (and maybe you have to be a Conservative to understand it) Conservatives continue to jump up and down about Benghazi. Fox News continues to try to make this into some Watergate scandal, but there’s no therethere.

One of the cool things about tracking down the Boston Marathon bombers is that they stole a Mercedes ML 350 SUV with mbrace technology. This made the car incredibly easy to track and allowed the Boston police department to close in on the suspects. Kind of cool. Continue reading Friday Afternoon News Roundup

What South Carolina means to the GOP

I’m sure that everybody has heard at least 1000 times by now that South Carolina has chosen the Republican nominee every single time dating back to 1980. I haven’t checked the stats, but that’s what the smart people have told us. I don’t know, South Carolina may be the bellwether of the Republican Party again this year. Personally, I think it’s too early to tell. As I mentioned after the Iowa caucuses, this is one mixed-up field. I don’t think we know much more now than we knew after Iowa.

After Iowa we knew that Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum were still in the fray. Some pundits continue to believe that Ron Paul can seriously attract Republican voters, though I’ve never thought that Ron Paul could get over 15% of the GOP vote. He is not a true conservative. He is a Libertarian, an outsider. After Iowa, Herman Cain, Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann were really no longer viable candidates. (Jon Huntsman never caught fire. He could possibly be labeled a moderate Republican, of the variety which has been rejected by the mainstream GOP for the last 20 years. Currently, the moderate Republican is a rare species which should be viewed in the zoo.)

Let’s start with Rick Santorum. From a political standpoint, Rick Santorum simply fumbled the ball. He had momentum out of New Hampshire and simply did nothing with it. It was an epic failure. It is in South Carolina that he should’ve hammered home his religious conservative credentials, but he didn’t seem to do that. South Carolina believes in limiting abortions, states’ rights, not limiting gunowners’ rights, etc. South Carolina is the poster child for these conservative social issues. Rick Santorum should’ve hammered home on these issues. Instead, he tried to appeal to South Carolina voters by hammering Obama on the economy. It’s really hard for Rick Santorum to sell himself as more qualified, on the economy, than Newt Gingrich or Mitt Romney. Looking at exit polls, there seems to be no conservative demographic that Rick Santorum appealed to more than any other candidate. He was a total washout.

Mitt Romney. The problem with Mitt Romney is that he is milquetoast. He has the voter appeal of John Kerry or possibly Al Gore (he isn’t liberal, but voters are have the same reaction – they yawn). He is completely uncomfortable in front of crowds. He doesn’t seem to be all that comfortable in front of a microphone. Therefore, if you’re going to vote for Mitt Romney, you’re voting for him because you believe that he understands how to fix the economy. Unfortunately for Romney, he simply is not exciting and South Carolina voters wanted somebody who’s going to get them excited. His advisers should have told him to begin to hammer away at Newt Gingrich. Instead, he ignored Newt Gingrich and began to hammer away at Obama. The strategy didn’t work. (BTW, where was all of the support that Nikki Haley was throwing Mitt’s way? She campaigned hard for him and it didn’t seem to help at all.)

Newt Gingrich. In spite of all the baggage that comes with Newt Gingrich, South Carolina loved him. When you look at exit polls, Newt Gingrich won both males and females. He won with voters who are 30 and older. (Ron Paul won the younger voters 18- 24, but Newt Gingrich was second in that category.) Newt Gingrich won those who are college-educated and also won those with no college degree. He appealed to single conservatives those who are married (I found this interesting). The only category in which he lost significantly were those South Carolinians who made more than $200,000 or more (approximate 5% of the electorate). This is the Romney class.

For Mitt Romney, South Carolina was a complete and total failure. He placed a lot of resources and money into South Carolina and he came up second. He came up a distant second. His current strategy is failing miserably. He needs to come up with something else or the Republican nomination will slip through his fingers. I smell panic from the Romney camp.

I believe that this nomination process is far from over. I think for the first time in my adult life, the Republicans are going to have a knock-down, drag-out fight over several months. This is going to be fun.