BLOG.THEMEMPHISTEAPARTY.COM

MTP Action Alert - NFC Elect Super PAC

The Memphis TEA Party — Wed, 28 Dec 2011 15:35:37 GMT

Having trouble viewing this email?
Click here
http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?llr=ltvhmfdab&v=001qNmFLvMdRPDFeIAJxFR1Hx5rWFBoQf6UNEwX4LVybPTuvAHxJazwQ48GUm0dl0PaTkCju-Wo_l_rfIWmbyVBXlArYTykxnoPe-aIqMMPANjH7cRvZoX8SYRsxBDG2J23jxHqqcNtGuoBi89VU-E1wWemFq9Myi5Hj6hUkKqQgwDybq-PjeUpRe4YhhtX_g2F

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NFC Elect Super PAC
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NFCPAC [http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=ltvhmfdab&et=1109015273446&s=1199&e=001Bu_ztvQQgaOifPDXOhYRTqeMnR2xnzZU2Ldqd9ht_cXnqbiGthRxVS50pKSDlyf9kRqwte9Q9rcUCjFVme6uAHhbcVwr73P0yfC53_-QQy4MBv-Axuock8BORHul4Eit]

All,

I wanted to tell you about a new Super PAC that I have joined as a director. NFC
Elect, the super PAC, was formed by Mr. William Hemrick. He is Founder and Chairman
and has been active in the tea party movement along with national politics for a
number of years.
The NFC Elect super PAC is focused on supporting the eventual Republican nominee
for president in the 2012 election cycle. Funds raised by the PAC will be used
to support the nominee and counter the left through direct mail, radio and TV advertising.
In addition, the PAC will focus on the key swing states where Obama & McCain contended.
I hope you will take a moment to read the attached talking points and consider your
involvement. I believe the approach to transparency and clarity of mission are
important elements in the formation of NFC Elect. I hope you will agree.
Feel free to contact me or Bill Hemrick with any questions or comments. I thank
you in advance for your consideration. You can read the talking points at the
website link below.
NFC Elect - Our Approach [http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=ltvhmfdab&et=1109015273446&s=1199&e=001Bu_ztvQQgaO56R8R_BkERcJgWHxX8YJMrEtuVrj507oXeiZ-BjXtlokrYEFTVJQq2N-fA6AW0De2HJAnAJsLMeYjUG7rlwSv1e5LTz7rgoG75lEaEyOPGYEE0bmvk51B]
Thank you again for your consideration and we would very much appreciate your feedback.
Sincerely,
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mark A. Skoda
mark@memphisteaparty.com [mailto:mark@memphisteaparty.com]
The Memphis TEA Party
www.memphisteaparty.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Forward email
http://ui.constantcontact.com/sa/fwtf.jsp?llr=ltvhmfdab&m=1102913459819&ea=blog.thememphisteaparty.com@myqbc.mobi&a=1109015273446

This email was sent to blog.thememphisteaparty.com@myqbc.mobi by mark@thememphisteaparty.com.

Update Profile/Email Address
http://visitor.constantcontact.com/do?p=oo&mse=001pj6W7ke0zftnM7aVGIOljs4Trn9I88uH&t=001H9MXgvBfPyjcTvvTr5Zy-Q%%&llr=ltvhmfdab

Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe(TM)
http://visitor.constantcontact.com/do?p=un&mse=001pj6W7ke0zftnM7aVGIOljs4Trn9I88uH&t=001H9MXgvBfPyjcTvvTr5Zy-Q%%&llr=ltvhmfdab

Privacy Policy:
http://ui.constantcontact.com/roving/CCPrivacyPolicy.jsp

Online Marketing by
Constant Contact(R)
www.constantcontact.com

The Memphis TEA Party | 9245 Poplar Avenue | Germantown | TN | 38138

Can Gingrich Make it to the Nomination?

The Memphis TEA Party — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 13:12:17 GMT

Newt Gingrich is surging on the basis of his strong debate performances and his turn in the box. But his momentum is different from some other candidates who have found themselves in this enviable position. First, Newt is a seasoned campaigner with a long history in government. Second, he has a strong intellect and can synthesize complex issues for the electorate. And finally, he is not Mitt Romney.

So why is the anybody-but-Mitt conservative base so enamored with Newt and so antagonistic to Romney? Surely Newt Gingrich represents Washington insiders like no other candidate. Certainly his cantankerous and checkered past is obvious for anyone who wishes to look at the record. And how is it that social conservatives and others deem Mitt Romney's character a problem when Newt Gingrich has enough baggage to fill a two-hundred-pound rucksack?

The answer may lie in a bifurcated Republican party. Conservatives, including me, are fond of pointing out that the liberal left is a consortium of African-Americans and Hispanics, the socially liberal, the Hollywood-types, environmentalists, and the elite intelligentsia of the university crowd. However, when looking at the conservative movement, we don't see the number of sub-groups making up that movement, but more of a center-right and far-right coalition.

Within these two groups, there is a trend of thought that suggests that the moderate Republicans are detrimental to the party and that only purists can fully represent the conservative movement. While I tend towards social conservatism, I am pragmatic about the current political environment in which we find ourselves. This is not to suggest that I wouldn't prefer to see a strong and charismatic conservative leading the party and the country; it's just that the nation won't agree with me or those who embrace that very candidate. It is nearly thirty-two years after Reagan's revolution, and we find that the nation is a very different place.

But what explains the fact that Romney, a seemingly competent if technocratic leader, is so opposed by many in the conservative movement? And what if, under the new rules for proportional delegates being awarded to candidates through April, we find ourselves in May with no real winner? This last point is critical to the thesis. The longer Newt stays in play, the more likely "bad Newt" may show his face. Romney doesn't need to come out of Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina with compelling wins, nor does any other candidate. This process of apportionment was a substantial rules change and allows even the nominal candidates to stay in the race.

So will Mitt Romney eventually win over the anybody-but-Mitt crowd? Perhaps, but it's unlikely to happen before May. Over time, his experience, campaign organization, and donations will begin to grind away at Newt Gingrich. However, this trajectory could rapidly change by March if Gingrich's armada of newly minted supporters begins to examine his record. The enthusiasm he now enjoys will begin to ebb as people begin to reflect on his history and current events. That is not to say that Gingrich will be subdued by his own ego. It's just that so many know him from so many years and carry resentment toward him that few resources will be offered to help him succeed. His is a candidacy familiar to many in Congress. In fact, a tally of congressional endorsements indicates that Gingrich gets the support of six of his congressional colleagues versus the forty-four enjoyed by Romney.

So how does this all play out in January? First, Newt's rise will enable him to enjoy a strong showing in the early states. Mitt Romney will need to play a stronger hand if he is to stop Gingrich's rise to the top. Secondly, the electorate will begin to coalesce around the two candidates through the caucus and primaries during those first few weeks of the new year. However, the big if for Newt is whether or not he can translate his grassroots enthusiasm and the frontrunner status into donations and support from the establishment. Or does his two-hundred-pound rucksack begin to weigh on his campaign? In all likelihood, it's a little bit of both. Newt blows hot and cold, and his temperament is well known in Washington along with his personal foibles. While Newt has gained steam after nearly obliterating his campaign earlier in the year, it is far from clear whether he can maintain the discipline to finally contend for the presidency.

However, as the electorate begins to look at both campaigns more clearly and the real campaigning begins toward Super Tuesday, the Newt Gingrich gap with Mitt Romney will begin to close. This is not to say that Romney can play a waiting game. He must begin to show the bolder stroke and counter the effervescent mind of Gingrich. And while Romney can rely on his money, organization, and rules changes in the early part of the primary season, he must begin to craft a reason for voters to overcome the anybody-but=Mitt problem which faces his candidacy. He can and will respond to changing conditions, as he has demonstrated throughout this campaign season.

On the other hand, the Democrats and the mainstream media would love to run against Gingrich. They understand Newt's history and will use it with devastating effectiveness. In this context, Romney has the lighter load to carry, and he can and will continue the marathon that is the presidential election. Newt's rucksack, on the other hand, would tire even the fittest candidate. So as we approach 2012, the electorate, which has seen its favorites come and go, will have to decide. In the end, it will come down to anybody but Obama!

The Conservative Paradox – Romney the Competent

The Memphis TEA Party — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 17:20:55 GMT

Conservatism, Reaganism and 1980 they shout! RINO’s and off with their heads. And in the case of Mitt Romney, no core convictions, plastic and a flip-flopper. And that’s the nice stuff.

So where is it that the conservative movement wants to go in context of the race for 2012? During my daily radio show and through my tea party activism, I have heard many of the concerns and the often visceral reaction to the ascendancy of Mitt Romney to the Republican nomination. At times, it seems that Mitt Romney was the anti-Christ of the conservative movement. Somehow his life’s experience, changes in viewpoints along with his private and public life have all been in vain according to the charter of the movement.

As I wrote in my May article, Why Hire Romney, he is also a studied and well prepared candidate who has honed his skills while seeking the highest office in the land. And it also seems that it is that very preparedness and competence that results in labels which are derogatory at best and destructive at worst. Recently, I had a caller who discussed the implications of the Herman Cain controversy. She said that while she was concerned she did not believe the accusations. In fact, it was this lack of political skill that also made him seem normal, just like everyday people and that Romney was too prepared, too scripted.

I pointed out that Romney is indeed a competent candidate who has developed an excellent campaign and used his charisma and intelligence to differentiate himself from the rest of the crowd. The question I posited related to heart surgery. While I appreciate the fact that a new surgeon must build experience, I would rather have a really good surgeon who is prepared, competent and skilled when doing a delicate procedure. We don’t look for average or “human” when life hangs in the balance.

Mitt Romney has continually suffered the screeds from the purists in the conservative movement and the tea party. I find it problematic in that most of these pundits are trying to tear him down while flitting between every other candidate in the roster of what seems to be daily dose of crash and burn. In fact it is in this candidate rotation that I find the conservative paradox. On one hand, conservatives were looking for “anybody but Romney”. As I stated in my previous article, this lack of grounding resulted in wishful thinking and lots of emotion without much progress. And with the current crop of declared candidates, these same conservatives moved from Gingrich to Bachmann to Perry to Cain and now likely back to Perry? Doesn’t sound much like firm grounding in support of a real conservative to me!

So now we have the article by Erick Erickson of Red State, who I have met and for whom I have a good deal of respect. However, his missive is anything but fair or appropriate given the stakes for America in 2012. You may disagree with Romney, but he is hardly Obama and his competence and cool approach to running a national campaign are critical to beating the president in 2012. It will be difficult enough with incumbency, the MSM and the locked in African-American vote. Therefore, while I applaud a thorough and complete assessment of the candidate, I also find that only conservatives seem to eat their young!

Thirty-one years ago, the nation was whiter, more educated, and less secular with the traditional family as a focus of the community. We had more manufacturing and less global competition and the majority of our citizens were paying taxes. The Cold War was in full swing and we had just experienced Jimmy Carter, the oil shock and the Iranian hostage drama. America sought solace in a man who was the great communicator and who could not only focus on those core principles of conservatism, but of American exceptionalism.

Today, we have complexity the likes of which we’ve never seen. In 1980 the US had a budget spend of $590B, experienced a deficit of $74B and had accrued debt of $712B. We now spend $3.6T, have a deficit of $1.3T and accrued debt of $15T. And this current state is before the impact of entitlements begins to erode our budget further along with an increasing interest carry on our debt.

So, I would hazard to guess that even a “principled” Ronald Reagan would find today’s America complex and challenging to the great platitudes and commitment to conservative principles that worked so well over thirty years ago.

America has given up so much liberty for so much government a long time ago. The apparatchiks who inhabit the various agencies at the federal, state and local level control many of the levers of power and preclude any quick rooting out of their mischief. To be sure, we need a principled leader who can draw the country together, make the case to the electorate and begin to reign in the size, scope and scale of government. However, the nation is more polarized than ever and only 17% of the nation believes that Washington governs with the consent of the governed.

In amongst all of these machinations, Romney continues to prosecute a national campaign with only Obama in mind. He has prepared himself, firmly established his organization and nurtured mainstream Republican and other activist relationships. He shouldn’t have a cakewalk to the nomination. But to denigrate his competence and his effort in context of his perceived lack of being conservative enough amplifies the ineptness and clumsiness of others who have entered this race. And for conservatives who continue to change horses in mid race to get on a perceived winner, I ask, where is your core?

The rotation we have seen during this year’s contest is remarkable in that these avowed conservatives have been unable to settle on their 2012 Reagan. It may be a testament to the sorry state of affairs in modern politics or simply that they need to look at the man who has been steadfast, competent, organized and without drama. And while you may argue with his human foibles, they pale in comparison to those who would contend and especially the current occupant of the White House. And paradoxically, that is reason enough to hire Romney!

The Central Bank – Perry, Bachmann and Paul, Oh My!

The Memphis TEA Party — Wed, 17 Aug 2011 17:10:08 GMT

The left has gone crazy again. Newly minted (no pun intended) presidential candidate Rick Perry was chastised for his remarks about the Fed and Ben Bernanke. Apparently, he came to close to calling the Fed Chairman a traitor. Michele Bachmann has been a keen voice in auditing and controlling the clandestine efforts of the Fed. But it has been Ron Paul alone who has made it a key tenet of his policy to audit and eventually abolish the Federal Reserve Bank and its tentacles.

And frankly, these three people might just be onto something good for America. To be sure, in defense of the Fed, someone has to print the country’s currency. Just not so much of it! And then to become the lender and borrower of last resort seems to concentrate too much power into one very secretive and unaudited agency, our national bank. So when Perry mouthed off, he was rightly suggesting the politicization of the Fed’s actions in previous elections would not be tolerated now. And Bachmann and Paul both understand that an independent bank which is so secretive in its finances as to preclude any oversight by the people, is a problem for our liberty.

For those of you who are interested in the history of the Federal Reserve and our national bank, check out the timeline below:

Timeline of central banking in the United States

1791–1811: First Bank of the United States
1811–1816: No central bank
1816–1836: Second Bank of the United States
1837–1862: Free Bank Era
1846–1921: Independent Treasury System
1863–1913: National Banks
1913–Present: Federal Reserve System

So what are we to think about this very vocal and very political debate? In my opinion, the Federal Reserve erodes our liberty through its unprecedented printing of the national currency, the dollar. Debasing the dollar through this printing binge causes inflationary pressures at home and destructive monetary policies abroad. And worse, as the US dollar declines, begins to reduce the power and prestige of the United States. Now to be sure, the Euro is likely in bigger trouble. The Yuan is artificially controlled and no other currency in the world will likely supplant the dollar for some time.

However, imagine if we were to move to some form of gold standard where the dollar is once again backed by something of value in addition to the “full faith and credit” of the United States. There is no question this restriction would control the uninhibited behaviors of the Fed in context of monetary policy. Over time, this national private bank could go the way of it predecessors (And as Ron Paul suggested, forgive the US its $1.6 trillion in debt). Given that the dollar would be tied to gold, printing for sake of politics or some hair brained stimulus program would be precluded. And we also wouldn’t have to listen to all of these “sage old men” who know so much more than any of us regular citizens!

So the next time you hear “ban the Fed”, take a moment to contemplate what America would look like without a central bank. And you need look no further than the founding of this country, give or take a few years!

America - Where Are The Bold Ideas?

The Memphis TEA Party — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 20:27:15 GMT

America sits at a crossroads. The country, while not bankrupt, is reeling from the financial meltdown of 2008, the implosion of home equity, trillions in spending with nothing to show for it and a jobs picture which is bleak at best. On top of that, we have been downgraded by S&P with Moody’s and Fitch evaluating the country’s debt further in context of their own ratings. And finally, we see an administration which has divided the electorate, vilified businesses and business leaders all the while proposing the growth of new regulations and an ever expanding federal bureaucracy.

As the president sought to calm the markets on Tuesday, we saw a steep sell off. And in closing his speech, we heard that we need to extend unemployment benefits while also maintaining the withholding tax holiday on paychecks.

Americans, for their part, believe that the rich should be taxed more, even while 51% of all Americans pay no income tax. And somehow, they see the entitlement picture as being their right. In the end, our problems are driven not only by the enormous budget deficits and debt but by the immorality of the generational theft that few Americans will admit.

So where are the bold ideas? Where is the declaration that we will reach the moon within a decade? Where are the leaders who would call for real change while addressing jobs, budgets and entitlements? If you listen carefully, you will likely only hear the chirping of crickets.

A new Rasmussen poll states that 17% say U.S. Government has consent of the governed. Worse, Congress now holds a 10% approval rating. In considering our tenuous economic and moral situation, what are we to do? What could help move America out of this fiscal and social morass while creating the opportunity for America’s best days being ahead of us? I have a few prescriptions for change. They are bold, actionable, yet not without challenge. Let’s see what “king for a day” would do to move us forward.

How can we create jobs?

First, roll back regulations and restrictions on coal, oil and gas exploration and mining. Fast track opening of tar sands, shale oil, gulf drilling, ANWAR and the artic. The industry employs directly or indirectly over 10 million jobs. Forget the nonsense about global warming. We have over 14 million people unemployed. The fast tracking of exploration and development of these resources not only creates high paying jobs and ancillary opportunities, but begins to really address our dependency on imported energy. Source: Where Does Our Fuel Come From

Not only would the aforementioned initiative create one million jobs by industry analysts, but the Federal government would receive fees for leases, permitting and other related activities as well as new tax revenue. Source: Oil & Gas Industry Creates Jobs

Second, fast track approval of refinery development and power generation, including coal, gas and oil, will create construction jobs, technical jobs and support hiring while also making sure the United States has sufficient energy for the 21^st century and beyond. We must dispose of the notion that we need to worry about global warming now while our people suffer. There is no excuse for allowing these restrictions to continue. These jobs don’t move to India or China! Source: Coal Is No Longer On The Front Lines

Third, reverse Sarbanes Oxley (the last financial legislative act that was supposed to make sure a meltdown didn’t happen again), terminate Dodd-Frank and kill Obamacare, although with the 11^th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling, we may just have to indicate DNR on the chart! Also, reign in the EPA, OSHA and the NLRB which have become regulatory nightmares for any and all businesses in the US. Why would you want to deal with these regulatory bodies when it’s much easier to go elsewhere with fewer restrictions, even in Communist China! Source: Sarbanes-Oxley Failed

These actions could easily reduce the estimated $1.75 trillion in regulatory costs to the economy while making it easier to create new business, deploy that capital in productive investment and renew the United States’ position as a country in which it is easy to do business. Again, this effort would actually save the government money by reducing the bureaucracy necessary to maintain the enforcement of this regulatory regime. Source: Red Tape Rises Again

How do we address our deficit/debt?

First, require all non-military federal employees, including the legislative and executive branches, to pay at least fifty-percent of their health & welfare in matching contributions for those benefits. Not only will this approach have a profound impact on costs to the federal government and therefore taxpayers, but it will deal with the impending shortfalls in funding these public sector plans in the future.

Second, move the country to the Fair Tax. With nearly seventy legislators co-sponsoring this bill, we need to aggressively make the change to allow for a reasoned and reasonable approach to taxation. Not only will this save billions in preparation and compliance, but it will deal with the operational needs of government, incent business behavior while also allowing people to control their taxes through their purchasing habits and big ticket buys. Most of all, eliminating the complex tax system under which we now labor would also largely eliminate the extensive lobbying efforts to modify and obtain various benefits for businesses or other constituent organizations. Source: Debating the Pros & Cons of the Fair Tax

Third, pass the Cut, Cap & Balance Act. Reduce the size of government and move towards a cap on spending as a percent of GDP. The Congress and the President of both parties simply won’t resist the desire to grow government while increasing their spending. Source: Cut, Cap & Balance Act

Fourth, rationalize the Federal government. The Department of Energy, Department of Education, Commerce Department, Health & Human Services, Agriculture Department along with the EPA, OSHA and the NLRB represent a 19^th century model, not a 21^st century administration.

Why is it that these agencies and departments continue to grow? Why do they have overlapping authorities and objectives as detailed in the government’s own budget summaries? And how in a modern economy should they behave to reflect global competition and a global workplace? Eliminating the Department of Education and pushing dollars back to the local school systems is perfectly logical. The federalization of our educational system simply doesn’t add value. The federalization of our education system does not allow for innovation or adaptation to local demographics. And as SAT scores continue to drop, what is the DOE doing? Source: SAT Scores Continue to Fall

This is only one example of many along these lines of reasoning that we should take in making the changes to the federal bureaucracy.

What about Social Security & Medicare and the social welfare net for our neediest?

First, Chile provides a good example of moving social security to a private model. We don’t eliminate those in the program but move to the private model over time. The current approach is simply unsustainable in context of the baby boomers hitting retirement and the current IOU status of $2.5 trillion dollars in social security funding from the federal government. Source: The Chilean Experience

Second, Paul Ryan has provided a good model for modifying Medicare. Again, no one in the current system moves out of that system. We really need to have a debate about a modified voucher system allowing for individuals to control their own purchase decisions based on their requirements. The Ryan budget approach certainly provides food for thought. We buy home, auto and life insurance. Why would we be any less able to acquire the appropriate health insurance as we get older? The argument is of course emotional, but if we cannot afford the projected costs of fifty percent of our federal budget for the current program, what’s the use? We can choose to modify the program or be forced to modify the program by bankrupting it when failure is imminent. Source: Top 10 Reasons to Support Ryan’s Medicare Plan

Third, use block grants to move Medicaid funds to the states. Allow them to address their local needs within the context of their demographics and deal with the actual healthcare requirements of their poorest citizens. This approach not only allows the states to innovate but to also address the problem with “one size fits all” that typifies federal programs. Source: Medicaid Block Grants

And what about society generally?

Ok, now here comes the one bit of social policy I will prescribe. No amount of money is going to correct for the amount of single parent families and the poverty and developmental problems this creates in educational outcome. This does not mean that all single parent families are failures or that children from single family households can’t succeed. It is simply a fact that the research finds that these households are at greatest risk in terms of poverty, lower educational success and delayed emotional development in general. Source: Living Arrangements & Child Social Outcomes

While mixed families and transitional arrangements tend to see improved outcomes, the traditional mother and father working with their children has the greatest propensity for success. The current report on births in the USA stated that 4.5 million children were born in the country last year. Over 40% were to single mothers! While some choose to have children and simply live together (think Hollywood), most are out of wedlock births. Source: Four In Ten Born Out of Wedlock

So with such staggering statistics evident in our society, what is my prescription? Well, first, get the message out and share the statistics. Second, continue to invest in outcome based education such as the “No Child Left Behind Act”, but do so through the local school board where approaches can be tailored to the student population. Third, encourage marriage and the family – stop accepting the current behaviors and promote the traditional family as a source of benefit to children. Divorce is too easy and men are too eager to ditch their responsibilities. For until we unite financial, moral and spiritual elements of education and family development, these trends will result in further degradation to our children’s lives and their success – at school and in their adult life!

So there it is – my domestic agenda and my specific actions if I were king – I mean president. It is an alternate vision to this country over the current track President Obama is taking us. Each of these ideas can be personally felt, determined in the household and evaluated in context of your own life and outcomes. There is little ambiguity here and it is a transparent approach to those things that have motivated the American dream for centuries – self-worth, self-action, collective creativity and a unified nation through its traditional family structure. Would it work? Can’t tell you for we not even get to try. But ask yourself this one question, if these recommendations took place immediately, would you do better financially, would job opportunities in energy, manufacturing, health care increase, would your family be better off financially, would you feel more secure about your future and would you appreciate the value placed on your family and its values?

The Downgrade - Why Should You Care?

The Memphis TEA Party — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:23:09 GMT

The current condition of the federal balance sheet makes it nearly impossible to pay off the debt of the United States. With the current increase in the debt ceiling, we will be approaching $17 trillion dollars by the end of 2012. So we hear the president today state he is appointing another committee with the "full weight and authority of the White House". Are you kidding? How long are we going to listen to this nonsense and actually think he has a plan. Let's look at the tax issues and where we get the revenue to pay for his programs and those of all the preceeding administrations who promised Americans everything!

In a report from the Internal Revenue Service found that the rich — 8,274 people with incomes of $10 million per year or more — earned a total of $240 billion in 2009. Even of you confiscated every dime they earned, you would barely have enough money to cover government spending for 24 days. Of course, about a quarter of that money already goes to the federal government for federal income. So make that 18 days.

Another 227,000 people earned $1 million or more in 2009. Millionaires averaged taxes of 24.4% of their income — up from 23.1% in 2008. They, too, did not earn enough money to come anywhere close to covering the annual deficits that are $1.5 trillion a year.

Barack Obama was the first president to sign a budget with a $1 trillion deficit into law.

In fact, all the taxpayers — including the ones who get a refund check bigger than the withholding taxes they paid — have the money.

From Reuters: “Total adjusted gross income reported on tax returns, measured in 2009 dollars, was $7.626 trillion, down from $8.233 trillion in 2008 and $8.989 trillion in 2007. Total adjusted gross income was up only slightly from the $7.475 trillion reported in 2001, when there were 10 million fewer taxpayers. Adjusted gross income is the amount on the last line of the front page of a Form 1040 tax return.”

In the end, 51% of all Americans pay no income tax. You could confiscate all of the income of anyone making $1 million or more a year and you still don't close the budget gap. In fact, individual tax collections totaled $1.175,422,000,000 in 2009 - or 15.4% of all income. Doubling federal income taxes for everyone would still leave us $400 billion or so shy of balancing the budget. Of course, this does not even consider the likely increase in the cost of our debt carry which, if based on historic norms of 6.2%, would increase our debt service by over $800 billion per year.

On this basis, there is no possibility to cover the current deficit, increasing costs of entitlements and of course the rampant debt accrued under Barack Obama. So, get your food, get your silver and stock up on lead! You need to be prepared to defend your home and your family. And if we're wrong, you've lost nothing more than peace of mind. Make no mistake, S&P is simply the canary in the mine. America under Obama, succeeding Bush, has created a disaster of Biblical proportions. But like the Bible, you must read, study and internalize the message to act. Game on!

Why Hire Romney – Activism And Pragmatism Do Mix!

The Memphis TEA Party — Tue, 17 May 2011 19:23:00 GMT

Merry Christmas from The Memphis TEA Party

The Memphis TEA Party — Mon, 20 Dec 2010 20:51:01 GMT

Having trouble viewing this email?
Click here
http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?llr=ltvhmfdab&v=001qcrdJaeP7TbwfzHAHeQxv7FJEqdYa6pjlGGunKdbmYkMt4njQCPHFU0wTMUUmmllta5YHCLTCUrXrvZgcwNq2LxiP5TwBuR-LHFJAoYG44_xItYPTrtLcyyt6vl-h_tJIRoA40Z8mJU1Yuk14KRuM3ro2K6icUnptRo9hk-56JoXzbqb3TumH29F71aGYAQ8

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Greetings from the Memphis TEA Party!
The past year has been full of challenges, disappointment, exhilaration and joy.
We spent much of the year battling what seemed insurmountable odds, fought many
legislative battles and turned out those who would lord over us in Congress..
But all of this pales in comparison to the commitment and honor of our soldiers.
They battle a real enemy and put their lives and families on the line for the
benefit of our country.
During this Christmas season, I would ask that you buy a cup of coffee or lunch
for one of our service members should you come across them while you are traveling.
Take a moment of silent prayer to lift them up and thank God for their heroic generosity.
When your sitting at the table enjoying your Christmas dinner, thank God for the
sacrifice of all who have served and are serving. For it is their gift that we
enjoy this season.
And please enjoy this poem as you think about this year. For as we celebrate the
birth of Jesus Christ, who was born, lived and died for our salvation, the soldier
is often called to give his life for our right to praise Him and freely choose those
who would govern us!
And may God bless you and yours during this Christmas season and my God bless America!
Sincerely,
Mark A. Skoda
Chairman, The Memphis TEA Party
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A Soldier's Christmas Poem
The embers glowed softly, and in their dim light,
I gazed round the room and I cherished the sight.
My wife was asleep, her head on my chest,
My daughter beside me, angelic in rest.
Outside the snow fell, a blanket of white,
Transforming the yard to a winter delight.
The sparkling lights in the tree I believe,
Completed the magic that was Christmas Eve.
My eyelids were heavy, my breathing was deep,
Secure and surrounded by love I would sleep.
In perfect contentment, or so it would seem,
So I slumbered, perhaps I started to dream.
The sound wasn't loud, and it wasn't too near,
But I opened my eyes when it tickled my ear.
Perhaps just a cough, I didn't quite know,
Then the sure sound of footsteps outside in the snow.
My soul gave a tremble, I struggled to hear,
And I crept to the door just to see who was near.
Standing out in the cold and the dark of the night,
A lone figure stood, his face weary and tight.
A soldier, I puzzled, some twenty years old,
Perhaps a Marine, huddled here in the cold.
Alone in the dark, he looked up and smiled,
Standing watch over me, and my wife and my child.
'What are you doing?' I asked without fear,
'Come in this moment, it's freezing out here!
Put down your pack, brush the snow from your sleeve,
You should be at home on a cold Christmas Eve!'
For barely a moment I saw his eyes shift,
Away from the cold and the snow blown in drifts.
To the window that danced with a warm fire's light
Then he sighed and he said 'Its really all right,
I'm out here by choice. I'm here every night.'
'It's my duty to stand at the front of the line,
That separates you from the darkest of times.
No one had to ask or beg or implore me,
I'm proud to stand here like my fathers before me.
My Gramps died at 'Pearl on a day in December,'
Then he sighed, 'That's a Christmas 'Gram always remembers.'
My dad stood his watch in the jungles of 'Nam',
And now it is my turn and so, here I am.
I've not seen my own son in more than a while,
But my wife sends me pictures, he's sure got her smile.
Then he bent and he carefully pulled from his bag,
The red, white, and blue... an American flag.
I can live through the cold and the being alone,
Away from my family, my house and my home.
I can stand at my post through the rain and the sleet,
I can sleep in a foxhole with little to eat.
I can carry the weight of killing another,
Or lay down my life with my sister and brother..
Who stand at the front against any and all,
To ensure for all time that this flag will not fall.'
' So go back inside,' he said, 'harbor no fright,
Your family is waiting and I'll be all right.'
'But isn't there something I can do, at the least,
'Give you money,' I asked, 'or prepare you a feast?
It seems all too little for all that you've done,
For being away from your wife and your son.'
Then his eye welled a tear that held no regret,
'Just tell us you love us, and never forget.
To fight for our rights back at home while we're gone,
To stand your own watch, no matter how long.
For when we come home, either standing or dead,
To know you remember we fought and we bled.
Is payment enough, and with that we will trust,
That we mattered to you as you mattered to us.'
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The poem above has often been circulated via email and attributed to a soldier in
Iraq. The truth is that this poem was written by one Michael Marks. The attribution
along with his comments are listed below:

In loving appreciation of the countless Americans who have, and continue to serve
in the Armed Forces and those who gave their life for their country. Your sacrifices
will never be forgotten. We look forward to the day you come home. God bless and
keep you always, and God Bless America.

A Soldier's Christmas was the first in this series of patriotic writings, drafted
on Pearl Harbor Day 2000 when in the wake of the 2000 Presidential Election our
nation saw the right of US Armed Forces personnel openly questioned and debated.
I felt it unconscionable that at the onset of the Christmas season, those serving
to defend our nation would hear anything but our love and support. It is our challenge
to stand for their rights at home while they stand for our lives and safety overseas.
This poem went out and quickly spread around the world in emails, letters, and
magazines. I received letters from Marines in Bosnia, soldiers in Okinawa, from
a submariner who xeroxed a copy for everyone on his sub. Moms wrote, dads, brothers
and sisters. I have saved and cherish every letter and set out to continue writing
throughout the year.

Michael Marks

Â©Copyright December 7, 2000 by Michael Marks

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Forward email
http://ui.constantcontact.com/sa/fwtf.jsp?llr=ltvhmfdab&m=1102913459819&ea=blog.thememphisteaparty.com@myqbc.mobi&a=1104106032621

This email was sent to blog.thememphisteaparty.com@myqbc.mobi by mark@thememphisteaparty.com.

Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe(TM)
http://visitor.constantcontact.com/do?p=un&m=001kXARqX7dosm4fSH5K3lxYw%%&se=001T5rgzZck27o%&t=001DWrpDmL_nfcOl11Zvdu07g%%&llr=ltvhmfdab

Privacy Policy:
http://ui.constantcontact.com/roving/CCPrivacyPolicy.jsp

Email Marketing by
Constant Contact(R)
www.constantcontact.com

The Memphis TEA Party | 9245 Poplar Avenue | Germantown | TN | 38138

It's Conservatives Stupid - Why the Forty Year Reign Fizzled

The Memphis TEA Party — Wed, 03 Nov 2010 16:03:00 GMT

Wow, what a night! It was historic in any way you measure the outcome. And we're still not done with a number of races too close to call and late ballots influencing others. To be sure, the national picture was remarkable. With a pickup of five senate seats, sixty house seats, eleven governorships and over five hundred state legislative seats, the Republican tsunami was complete. In fact, Republicans took control of at least eighteen state chambers making the event even more compelling. While all of the interest was on the balance of power in the House and Senate, the seismic shift at the state level will reverberate for the next ten years due to redistricting in 2011.

It seems that just a short time ago, James Carville was predicting a rule by the Democrats of forty years! While he might have been using the number forty in biblical context, forty being used to represent enlarged dominion and extended rule, it also represents probation, trial and chastisement. In either case, he was off about thirty-eight years.

And like Moses, who disobeyed God and never entered the promised land, the Democrats disobeyed the will of the people. In this context, Carville might be better served writing his new book on wandering in the desert!

No, the people of America made a decision last night. They got back to their conservative roots and the heartland spoke. And that voice was even heard in New England and New York with significant pickups there as well. Only California seems to be going back to the future with the election of Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown and the return of Barbara "I've worked hard for the title" Boxer to the Senate. The nation will need to be mindful of the fact that California, with its fourteen percent unemployment and $10 billion dollar debt, will likely come to DC begging for a bail out! We must say no - tough love for the liberal mind - but the only correct outcome while other states must maintain their fiscal discipline.

Much has been made of the whipsaw effect of a move to the right and the rejection of Obama and the Democrats in such swift fashion. The pundits suggested that the 24/7 news cycle and the anger of the American people were the reason for the quick shift in loyalties. Others made the point that the party in power lost in 2006 and 2008. Still others commented that this was not a shift to Republicans but a repudiation of both parties. And finally, many counted the Tea Party out due to the loss of key Senate seats that had been backed by the likes of Tea Party Express.

But let me offer a different view. The historic sweep and move to the Republican party was due to the confluence of three critical factors. First, there was already an undercurrent of dissatisfaction during the Bush presidency that fomented the tea party movement and conservative activism generally. This manifested itself in the election of a smooth talking Barak Obama and his promise to focus on the economy during his 2008 campaign. The fact that he moved left upon assuming the presidency simply allowed this dissatisfaction to burst forth in the form of the tea party movement.

Second, the grass roots activism by conservatives in 9/12 groups, the tea party movement and other patriot groups was critical to lighting the fire under the electorate. We co-opted the left's tactics, did them better and animated the electorate like few movements before it. The convergence of this activism and technology allowed for a truly democratic process of organizing that is still not well understood by pundits of the Democrat leadership.

Third, the state of the global economy, the invasion of our daily lives by government regulation and its playing to the lowest common denominator and the realization that progressive policies do not solve modern problems, gave lift to the wave that overtook the Democrats.

The fact that the sweep was to place Republicans in power again was not so much a love of the party as an expectation that the party would be able to refocus its actions on the core planks that embrace the conservative message of the tea party and America's heartland. In their 2008 Platform document, the Republican party stated their conservative bona fides. The ability to field third party candidates being a non-starter, the grass roots activists will hold them accountable to their representations. And while there has been some suggestion that the country will just as easily move left again, should the Republican party govern in a contrary manner, this outcome is less likely given the aforementioned redistricting and control of the state houses where the real work gets done.

Nonetheless, there is a desire to blunt the activism of the tea party movement. My sources suggest that Bill Clinton continues to work with Democrats to tamp down this energy by moving Obama to the center and tendering small "chits" to the Republicans early in their ascendancy to power.

Specifically, there will be a "bi-partisan" call to extend the Bush tax cuts to show the largely conservative movement that Democrats are listening.

There is likely to be a fix in the healthcare bill to include cross state pooling and some level of tort reform, critical issues that animated some of the anger during the bill passage earlier this year.

There will be a focus on a real investment tax credit to create jobs. This tax credit will go directly to small business enabling them to take advantage of a friendlier tax regime and therefore be somewhat contented by yet another bi-partisan response to their concerns.

These few initiatives in conjunction with other outreach by Obama will be focused not on moving the dial as much as attempting to reduce the anger of the electorate by seeming to be responsive to their demands. And of course it will present the idea that Obama is moving more towards the center as a result of "hearing the great middle" after this election.

Now to be sure, Obama can't hire enough people in the Federal government to reduce unemployment and so these actions are not only about tamping down tea party activism. But as a strategy, they will be used as crumbs from the table to an electorate energized by these wins and as an attempt to placate those activists who may think some is better than none. However, being forewarned is forearmed. And while the Democrats continue to try to play this game, the reality is that this headless movement will continue to focus on the work at hand by holding these newly elected legislators accountable. The real work begins now and the change of the Republican party is underway. In fact, with 2012 looming and the presidential elections forthcoming, the tea party will be one gate that any candidate will need to pass through to be successful.

So as we continue to analyze this historic election, much will be made of the success and failures, of seats won and lost and of the mood of the electorate pre and post election. But in the end, it will be apparent that it's conservatives stupid! We have been fooled once and will not be fooled again. The changes voted upon at the state and federal level are so profound as to indicate that America rejects both the liberal Democratic party and the business as usual in Washington. The Republicans have been provided a solemn vote and offered the opportunity to govern as the people would have them. They must respect the planks of the party, listen to the people of this nation and reduce government's size, scope and spending. But most of all, they must regard the American people as their superiors. The real work begins!

Of Porches Large & Small - Black Women Who Run

The Memphis TEA Party — Mon, 25 Oct 2010 01:11:00 GMT

I wondered which pejorative term Wendi C. Thomas, of the Commercial Appeal, was referring to in her article Bergmann More of a Blip than a Threat. The article is a pure diatribe against the Charlotte Bergmann campaign. Wendi Thomas is known for her racist leanings. However, in this article, she has shown the light of her views upon liberal racism like few before her. In liberal circles, if you're not the right kind of black, you need to "get back on the porch" as she concludes in her article.

So in reading the phrase, I searched out the etymology of her inference. The phrase, in its contextual history, was a pejorative way to describe African-Americans. In fact, the context was "porch monkey" or "porch Negro (sic)". The Urban dictionary defines porch monkey as ”a derogatory term for a person of African or African-American decent. But it could also mean a generally lazy person." It further defines porch negro (sic) as "an African-American that is fond of sitting on the front porch for extended periods of time."

So I wondered if the pejoratives that were strewn throughout the article would be sufficient for NPR executives to call for the dismissal of Wendi Thomas. But alas, she doesn't appear on Fox News.

I questioned whether the liberals who are so fond of Steve Cohen proudly cheer her column on. And not to my surprise, many of those liberals did with comments on the newspaper's website.

But alas, I move too quickly. We need to go back to explore her article in context of the "wrong kind of black" and recognize that liberals will excoriate minorities who don't fit their profile of the Democrat victimology. So they call the FBI when an apology is requested by Ginny Thomas, they fire Juan Williams when he expresses his emotions, and they tell an up and coming black candidate to get back on the porch when she has the temerity to stand for office as a conservative.

Thomas' article criticizes everything about the Bergmann campaign, from the picture on her signs:

"The words on the white signs, with Bergmann's oval picture, were so tiny they could barely be read from a passing car. (Just FYI: Oval pictures are appropriate only when the photo is of the dearly departed on the front of a funeral program. As you were.)"

To her ability to win her audacious campaign;

" One version of the red-and-white new signs, declares boldly: Charlotte Bergmann Can Win. This could be true. Bergmann could win the lottery. Or prom queen. Or a trip to the moon. But winning enough votes to beat the incumbent? Not in a million years. The 9th Congressional District is as blue as the sky."

To her views of expanded government:

"Instead, she recites worn Tea Party rhetoric, including the one about fighting off Speaker of the House Rep. Nancy Pelosi who, contrary to what Republican TV ads might have you believe is not on the November ballot.

Earlier this month, Bergmann, described as another Mama Grizzly, went on the Web-only "Sarah Palin Radio" show.

When asked what's the biggest difference between her and the incumbent, Bergmann replied that Cohen "believes that the people in the community should live off food stamps and unemployment," while she believes in free enterprise.

To her opinions in reversing the policies of Obama, Reid and Pelosi (and Cohen too!):

"Her legislative priorities include a desire to "turn back the hands of time" but that could be problematic. Some of Bergmann's Tea Party brothers and sisters would turn it back so far, they'd repeal the constitutional amendments that allow Bergmann to vote, both as a black person and as a woman.

So, thank you, Bergmann, for the entertainment. You may now join Tinker on the porch."

You see, the Thomas hypothesis is that all blacks are blue, that all blacks cannot think for themselves and all blacks are beholden to the Democrats. Well maybe the folks in the 9th District will consider whether they like the "Willie Herenton School System", the "John & Ophelia Ford Ethics in Government" or the "Cohen Economy" as they vote on the 2nd of November.

Recently, the NAACP published its report on the racist and radical elements of the Tea Party. Using a left wing enterprise to "discover" the covert relationships to white supremacists and militia groups, the NAACP was quick to condemn those sinister elements of the Tea Party. I wonder if Ben Jealous would simply like to read a Scripps Howard newspaper to find those racists in his own liberal back yard or should I say porch, to turn a phrase? It's doubtful.

Memphis politics has always been racially charged. But with the ascendency of conservatives and the Tea Party movement, and the likely tsunami that is overtaking Democrats everywhere, it appears that "Bush Derangement Syndrome" is once again setting in on the intelligencia of the liberal press. So as I ponder the vitriol so apparent in this piece of journalism, I am struck by how the Commercial Appeal and the Scripps Howard News Corporation could allow this article. And to that extent, I am calling for the termination of Wendi C. Thomas and her editor, Otis L. Sanford, for allowing this racist drivel to be printed.

And unlike the Tea Party, which has firmly rejected racism and removed any leadership who would write or represent these disgusting and small minded attitudes, it is unlikely that the Commerical Appeal, Scripps Howard News or the NAACP will weigh in on this matter. For you're only a "good" black if you're not running as a conservative. And any conservative blacks need to be "back on the porch". Now which porch would that be? Perhaps Wendi can provide her insights to such a rhetorical question.

Note to readers: Wendi C. Thomas is a staff writer at the Commercial Appeal. You can contact her at 901-529-5896 or Send Wendi C. Thomas an email.

The Pledege: Lose the Decade

The Memphis TEA Party — Sun, 26 Sep 2010 03:00:00 GMT

The GOP has launched their Pledge to the American people. The night of the release, I received a call from CBS radio asking me to comment. I stated that while I appreciated the effort, this new "pledge" was insufficient in its stated goals and objectives. It seemed to me to be a muted effort to somehow show that Republicans were responsive to the aspirations of the Tea Party and at the same time create a politically safe statement of how they might lead. While I had not read the details of the plan, I was able to review the highlights. In the end, I came to the conclusion that this was a timid effort at best.

In fact, it was clear that much of the "pledge" would not be passed into law due to the veto pen being in the hands of President Obama. And in this context, it seemed nothing more than a rallying cry for the November election. This was not a bold strategy, an aggressive approach or an attempt to radically reform government. None of those things would be achieved within the pledge as written. And it certainly did not capture one's imagination!

Looking at this another way, we can consider how America has performed through the last decade. And we'll reference those very "conservative" organizations, like the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Federal Reserve and the Washington Post! Oops, well, maybe not the Washington Post, but we can thank them for the graphic. As we can see, it is apparent that across all measures, our country has "lost the decade" in terms of the economy and individual economic performance.

As we consider the implications for America and our government, we can begin to imagine a far more aggressive pledge that captures the mind and heart, that provides a call to arms and which is above and beyond the imagination of our leadership. To be sure, this pledge will be criticized as "unrealistic", "radical", "impossible" and "out to lunch". But consider the following; nearly as many businesses start each year in the US as close.

Source: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Census Bureau; Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts; U.S. Dept. of Labor, Business Employment Dynamics (BED). Estimates based on Census data and BED trends.

And in this recession alone, over 6 million jobs have been lost! And all the while, government has grown, spending has increased, departments have expanded, our deficits and debt have ballooned. Would it be so radical to assume that government begins to look like the general economy? Departments come and go, legislators come and go, regulations come and go while layoffs occur, downsizing takes place and spending is reversed. Just like in the private sector - just like real life in America. So in evaluating this proposed pledge, one can only look at it as being reasoned and appropriate. And what would this new pledge look like? Read on and consider that like the American people, the federal government needs to lose the decade.

The Pledge: Lose the Decade

The people of the United States have experienced a lost decade by measures of financial wealth, economic development, job creation, security and freedom. The Pledge, offered by the Republican leadership is insufficient in reflecting this reality while also addressing the key concerns of the Tea Party movement. In this context we are proposing - Pledge: Lose the Decade.

Lose the budget: All budgets cut back to 2000 levels
Lose the earmarks: Eliminate any use of earmarks in any legislative action
Lose the bureaucracy: Repeal or remove those departments created during the decade that expanded the federal bureaucracy, including Homeland Security, which has become too large
Lose the departments: Terminate the Departments of Energy, Commerce, Education, National Endowment for the Arts while reducing the EPA and the IRS
Lose the wages: All federal workers would be cut back to a basket of private sector salaries and benefits, within + or - 10%
Lose the taxes: Keep all Bush tax cuts in place and eliminate the capital gains tax while reducing corporate tax rates
Lose the regulations: Repeal and replace the Healthcare bill, simplify the tax code, EPA regulations and the Financial Reform Act to include repealing the provision “no funding repeal” of the newly created consumer advocacy department
Lose the ignorance: All bills will be read by the Congress and signed as being read, under threat of perjury; all bills will be certified as to their constitutionality
Lose the control: No further erosion of personal rights through new regulations, acts, laws that create greater control over the lives of our citizens
Lose the power: Those seeking executive and legislative office will agree not to join or consult to any lobbying group for five years after their departure from their elected or appointed offices

The people of the United States have lost a decade. They have lost their jobs, their wealth and their security. All the while, the federal government has grown and created further complexity. This intrusion into our lives demonstrates a lack of fiscal responsibility, Constitutionally limited government and reduces the functioning of free markets. We, the people, expect government to reflect the realities of our lives through an aggressive change in that government’s power and spending. To do less would continue to sustain the arrogance of our leadership and their power over our lives.

In conclusion, this "unrealistic, radical, impossible and out to lunch" proposal might just result in a stronger America, a responsive and responsible federal government and a return to the kind of pragmatism our founders understood, government of, by and for the people. And once again, we might just find our American values in that lost decade renewed. The monster that government has become would be slain, the people who represent us held accountable and the renewal we want be realized. In contemplating the adoption of such a pledge, I am reminded of a stanza in the hymn Amazing Grace which states, ...once was lost but now am found, was blind, but now I see.

Stephen Bannon - Visual Conservatism

The Memphis TEA Party — Mon, 20 Sep 2010 20:32:00 GMT

We're broke! When I first met Stephen (Steve) Bannon at the National Tea Party Convention in Nashville, Tennessee in February, I had never heard of his work in the writing and directing of conservative films. He has worked with various investor groups but more recently with Citizens United and David Bossie. It was here that he launched his latest project, Generation Zero.

As I learned, Steve is a passionate conservative born out of his experience on Wall Street and the country he served during his military duty. His staccato style gives you the sense that the mission he is on requires immediate action with no time to stand still. He is at the same time, affable and intense yet conveys the expectation that you do something more than just talk about the problems facing this nation. And in that sense, his first engagement with the Tea Party movement fired up his own passion for working with the leadership and the grass roots members of this political force.

I found out that Steve Bannon is actually more familiar with conservative subject matter than Generation Zero, the film he debuted and which discusses the reasons for our spectacular and almost catastrophic failure of the financial system. It's no accident that his experience and his own "baby boomer" upbringing offers a keen insight into the "me generation" and the lack of ethical focus of those running Wall Street. But more importantly, the film explores the cultural leanings of a post war United States, the separation from failure of our young in the wake of those wars and the concurrent movement towards a liberalizing society while experiencing the break in the social contract so critical to binding one to the other. It was not capitalism's failure but a failure of the culture!

In addition, he wrote and directed the film, Face of Evil: Reagan's War in Word and Deed and was the executive producer of Border War: The Battle Over Illegal Immigration. As I wrote in an earlier blog, Steve Bannon has now released the movie Fire From the Heartland, which explores the role of women in the conservative movement. This film, considered the second in his trilogy beginning with Generation Zero, will be followed by the as yet announced, Battle for America with Dick Morris. The film will conclude this conservative trilogy by exploring what we must do to take back this White House, ensure the success of conservatism in our politics and begin to reverse the damage done by the leftist and redistributive policies of this administration and progressives.

In fact, “Battle for America” features Dick Morris offering his insight and clarity on issues important to the conservative movement and the actions required to overcome the progressive agenda and take America back. The documentary provides actionable requirements to make a difference in this election cycle while sustaining the re-born conservatism that is flowing across the country.

To be sure, it appears that Bannon is becoming the "go to" filmmaker and writer for the conservative genre. And for those who have taken the time to watch these films, the comment is nearly universal - they rock! Bannon's style and perspective shines through these three films in particular and he connects the dots so very effectively. And while they are not really documentaries and not really infotainment, they succeed on both fronts. As I watched the three films in succession, I found that they were deeply intertwined in the message of responsibility, action and hope. These films were not simply "emotional hyperbole". They worked at the intellectual level and the emotional level while examining the real problems this nation faces.

When I asked Steve why he decided to do these three films this year, his response was clear. "Now is the time to take action and to effectively beat back the leftist policies of this administration. We no longer have the luxury of taking our time and so I felt compelled to bring this message to the big screen through what I hope people will find informative and entertaining."

In the end, these three films produce a visual context for conservatism that is unmatched in the dramatic perspective, details and facts and the overarching premise that we must do more than simply complain. We must take action. Steve Bannon points out that while he is passionate about making movies, he is more passionate about moving the electorate to action. After having watched these three films, I am inclined to believe even he underestimates the power of this message. Taken together, this "trilogy" represents the raison d'être of the Tea Party and the conservative movement.

Conservative Women - Fire From the Heartland

The Memphis TEA Party — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 20:02:00 GMT

Unelectable! Unelectable! The headlines blared. No, this wasn't the day after the Tea Party win by Christine O'Donnell in Delaware. It was the stated conventional wisdom discussing the ascendancy of Marco Rubio, who is also running for a US Senate position, but this job is in Florida. And now we find the turncoat, former governor Charlie Crist, nearly out of the running with Rubio leading the independent by 14 points! And as Rubio has ascended, can O'Donnel do the same?

While Rubio is on the sea, women are making the waves! So what's going on here? How is it that political upstarts like O'Donnell and Rubio are suddenly thrust upon the national stage? How is it that women like Meg Whitman, Carly Fiorina, Sharon Angle, Nikki Haley and of course, Sarah Palin, are taking the political world by storm and seemingly carving out a position as leaders of the re-born conservative movement?

Simply, it is women, who bear our children, raise our families and "bring home the bacon and fry it up in a pan", that lead this new resurgence. Women, who have always been a catalyst in our families are now taking the reins of power at the local and national level in politics. The newly released film by director Steve Bannon, Fire From The Heartland, explores some of the women in the conservative movement, their association with the Tea Party and of course their life stories.

The film is the second in a trilogy exploring the issues leading up to the financial debacle of 2008 (Generation Zero) to the current activism by these average but noteworthy women. Their stories look like a page out of Americana, from immigrant families to generations having fought in the War of Independence, to native American roots. They bring forward their perspectives in a way that the left cannot understand or recognize. They slay the stereotypes of feminism and put the power, expressed by those feminists thinkers who purported to know, into conservative terms, comfortable with their femininity, their motherhood and their roles as leaders.

But this is more than a film about women. The fundamental premise is explored in context of our American dream, opportunity and the Founder's view of what it is to be a citizen. Not only are these women intelligent, attractive and remarkably forthcoming, they share an intimacy in their views that is seldom heard in the shrillness of the main stream media. And it is this power of persuasion, told through their personal stories, unremarkable in the telling, that brings you to the conclusion that America can be restored if these women lead!

It is not by chance that these women, their actions in the Tea Party movement and the re-birth of conservatism, are making the case for the vast majority of Americans, men and women, sons and daughters. The clarity of such an expression is further contextualized through the film and current events. To understand these women is to understand where America is going. To understand these women is to understand how unremarkable their lives have been until they stepped forward to take on issues that affect their family, community and this nation.

It is no accident that this film, so well done, exemplifies what is taking place across the nation. The luck of the draw is the coincidence of the film's release and the sea change that is taking place at the voting booth. Nonetheless, their views are not anecdotal but indeed represent the direction of the nation, reeling after policies which have threatened its very existence. And this fire from the heartland will burn brightly throughout this election cycle and into the foreseeable future. It has been stoked by their passion and love of God, country and community. And in the end, this journey will be far better with them making their mark than if we left it to all the "professionals". They are the pulse of a nation, the heartland and our history.

You can explore more about the cast and film at www.firefromtheheartland.com .

Midterm Meltdown - Republican Tsunami

The Memphis TEA Party — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 14:20:00 GMT

Gallup released polling that indicated the Republicans hold a 10 point advantage over the Democrats in the midterm election. The generic polling and the largest ever spread in polling by Gallup suggests a major meltdown for the Democrats. However, what is more telling in the numbers is the swiftness in the change of views by the electorate. There are a number of reasons for this change and all of them point to greater activism by the electorate and the instantaneous capabilities of the internet in disseminating information.

The calculus of the Democrats in opposing the American people was that any change in political attitude would be blunted by an expected upturn in the economy and the ensuing benefits of job creation by the stimulus. The stimulus package was passed along party lines without consideration for the Republican position in the matter and has now clearly been demonstrated, without any basis for the expected success. In fact, the conjunction of the new activism generated through the Tea Party movement and the recognition by conservatives that they must do more than "write checks" has fundamentally changed the political environment for the foreseeable future. I have argued that people are now off the couch and in the streets.

However, without the social networking tools, shareware, low cost web-based tools and the sheer energy of the conservative movement - read Tea Party - this awakening would likely not have pivoted so quickly. The Tea Party movement has demonstrated its capacity to organize, hold major rallies, support candidates, get out the vote and sustain interest over the last twenty months. And with the challenges facing America, it is unlikely to wane over the next several election cycles. This is due to the fact that these leaders, developing and growing in their capabilities and sophistication, are networked and organized in a fashion that would have been previously impossible without the internet.

This is not to say that the internet is the reason for success of the movement, however, it engenders the truly democratic processes of activism that would have been impossible through any other vehicle. Could the Tea Party have created the organizational structure and communication vehicle with simple snail-mail, radio, TV or even email? Hardly likely. The time lag in communications, the cost and the overall control by the left would have diminished the effort.

When looking at any initiative, be it business, politics or social movement, two elements must be present. Does the organizing effort have the necessary and sufficient capacity to execute its vision? In the vernacular of marketing, necessary and sufficient capacity to serve. The Tea Party movement certainly had the vision for its actions, however, no one group had major funding and so the viral element of the movement would have been impossible through the aforementioned technologies. No, in fact, the Tea Party movement was able to accomplish so much in so little time because it had the necessary infrastructure - the internet - and the capacity - the leadership and activists - to develop and deploy resources throughout the country.

And what is uniquely "Tea Party" about this action is the fact that it originated from a bottom up process of "grass roots" activists. Most of these activists had never even participated in the political process and many had always thought it was someone else's responsibility. However, they now find themselves at the nexus of a movement that is poorly understood by the left and dismissed by the mainstream party machines. It functions more as a rogue state rather than a chummy club. And it is this very nature of perceived "anarchy" that gives power to the movement. The reality is that while the Tea Party movement has focused on key fiscal issues and the Constitution, it is also comprised of a large degree of social conservatives who view their role in society as a positive and powerful responsibility.

Conservatives try to build up rather than tear down. They look at the world, our society and their community as something worth fighting for, not against. And they see any infringement on that worldview as being out of step with their aspirations. And it is this emotional energy which has propelled the movement to center stage! And in considering these facts we can see that this emotional energy is fully released through the medium of the internet and the technologies it puts in the hands of these activists. So whether or not Obama watches the Glenn Beck rally or the administration dismisses his questionable positions on faith, the war or America generally, they have the power to influence the debate.

And this is where we begin to realize that the new conservative movement is not a party-based movement but driven by people who will associate with the party that represents their worldview. For now, that is Republicans. However, this same energy and innovation will turn on a dime should they not govern as they purport to in context of their representations during their campaigns. The tsunami that is expected in November is controlled by these same activists and, unlike nature's indiscriminate destruction, is capable of rising up at any time to wash away those who would rule with the same impunity as the Democrats now in power.

Bill Haslam: Can We Count on Governor Haslam

The Memphis TEA Party — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 18:23:40 GMT

I wanted to provide an update on my meeting with Bill Haslam. We met here in a Memphis last week and his wife and West Tennessee campaign manager were present. I had several people from our Memphis TEA Party group along with our 9^th District Congressional Candidate, Charlotte Bergmann. The meeting lasted about 50 minutes due to a commitment he had in Nashville with Ron Ramsey.

The meeting was extremely friendly and open. I asked him to address four key issues: His participation in Mayor Bloomberg's effort "Mayors Against Illegal Guns" http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/home/home.shtml ; a TN state income tax; his disclosure of his interests in Pilot Oil; and his views of addressing the Healthcare Freedom Act and the expansion of the Federal government.

He offered a substantial defense of his views and was unequivocal in the right to keep and bear arms as defined by the 2^nd Amendment. He indicated that he, along with 700 other mayors, had joined Bloomberg's coalition when it appeared to be focused on fighting crime and ensuring that guns didn't get into the hands of criminals. He reiterated his views that the coalition was going in the wrong direction and that he did indeed remove himself when it appeared to be detrimental to his 2^nd Amendment views and those of Tennessee. And while the political reality was clear, he again reiterated his views that he would support fully our rights and would not abridge the Constitution in any way.

In the matter of the state income tax, he again stated he would not support and indeed would oppose any efforts to establish a state income tax. I pointed out that the stimulus dollars would expire at the first of the year and that TN would be in a terrible hole from the point of view of our budget. He recognized that and stated he felt we could reduce the size of government while focusing on growing jobs and therefore the tax base. He saw no other way, given our state requirement to balance our budget. His business experience and the realistic perspective about the budget allowed for no other alternative. And he understood that he would work with Ron Ramsey to accommodate the reduction of the budget to meet the balance budget requirements of our state. However, without growth, the state would need to make some difficult choices to meet those reductions in spending.

On disclosure, he pointed out that he has disclosed more about his personal financial position than others in the past and which is required by law. He also stated that his interest in the family business is the source of his wealth and he was not hiding anything relating to this fact. And indeed, while many attempted to make an issue of this, he was of the opinion that he had been forthcoming in this matter.

Finally, he was most explicit about the need to reject the expansion of the Federal government. The need to push back on healthcare, immigration and Federal largess were all points he brought forward in the discussion. I pointed out that the next governor would need to be absolute in resisting the enticements of the Federal government and the expansion and control of Tennesseans. He understood this fact and was adamant that Washington was broken and that the governors needed to take a stand. He also pointed out that being a part time legislature, our state government was already functioning more efficiently than most.

I told Bill that I appreciated sitting across the table from him with his wife present. She being from Memphis, I was also pleased that she could hear from Charlotte Bergmann who pointed out the problems facing our county and our city. I believe that both he and his wife recognized the emotional turmoil of this campaign and the need to meet their political rhetoric with actions that reflected his promises. He was direct, unapologetic and most friendly. At no time did I feel that he was condescending or placating me and my team. This was a business discussion and a heartfelt defense of the issues.

In closing, I can say that at the very least, he reiterated his official positions. He did so with honesty and forthrightness. He is an extremely charming man with a clear vision for the state and a recognition that he will need to prove out his positions over time. However, he was absolute in affirming those positions and his conservative bonafides. I told him we would be there holding him and our other legislators accountable. I closed by thanking him and indicating I would publish this note of our meeting. However, I have to say that being able to look across the table and have a direct and forthright meeting of the minds was most heartening.

I will not say that one meeting makes the case. However, for me, it went a long way to moving me from sitting on the sidelines to becoming an advocate for Bill Haslam and the changes necessary to achieve success in our state. I believed him and will work to hold him accountable to his representations. In that context, I will also support him during November and will ask my members to do the same. And in the end, each person and Tea Party leader will need to make their own assessment and take decisions accordingly. I am not asking you to support him from your respective organizations. I did however tell Bill that I would share my views with the group and the perspectives from this meeting.

In this, I have done what I promised. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions or wish to discuss this further.