MY BOOKLET WILL SOON BE AVAILABLE!

As the Jewish New Year approaches it is a time for personal reflection and repentance.  I have much for which I regret and every year I hope/commit to do better, to be better but I am mortal and therefore, prone to fall short. I do not blame GW for my shortcomings.

With respect to these memos, I would like to spend a few words addressing some of the issues they raise and what I constantly hear.

First of all, my wife berates me for spending too much time at the computer - guilty - for repeating myself - guilty - and for their length and wave like frequency- guilty and guilty - and for frequent generalizations and often poor taste - again guilty and guilty.

I write them for several reasons:

a) I enjoy writing.

b) Being outspoken is in my DNA. I am my father's son.

c)  It is my hope that, in a small way, they will make those who choose to read/peruse them to think, to re-think and to become  better informed.

d) Finally, they force me to keep alert, challenge me to read and  think as well.

At the present time, my memo list numbers over 900 plus recipients.There are those who re-send what I write, on occasion, so I reach an expanded  audience but have no way of knowing how many, even using Google Analytics as a tracking  method.

I do not profess to be a better citizen than anyone else.  Though, I care very much about my country I know  there are far more who have made, and will continue to make, the ultimate sacrifice to protect our nation. There will always be those externally seeking to take away our freedom.

What concerns me most, however,  is that I believe our nation, as with all nations before, is more likely to fall from within than without.  Therefore, and I repeat, it is my hope that those who choose to read/peruse what I write might become better informed and give more thought to matters that threaten our freedoms, ie. our declining social values, our declining educational values, our governance by those whose ethical values are questionable and finally our growing intolerance of the other person's viewpoint and religious beliefs.

That I am biased and more prone to support conservative thinking, approaches and policies is a fact but I also believe I am willing, at some point, to be objective and to acknowledge not everything  conservative is the 'holy grail.'

That said, I do not, as one must know by now, believe the current president,  by any objective measure, has met and passed  the test and deserves a second term. In fact, I  believe his re-election will evoke further tragedies. Neither am I naive enough to believe Romney and Ryan have all the answers. I simply submit they are more qualified, at this juncture in our history, to re-direct and set us on a better course.
---
As I recently noted in a previous memo, I have written a 40 page booklet entitled: "A CONSERVATIVE CAPITALIST  OFFERS PARENTS ELEVEN LESSONS AND A BONUS LESSON FOR RAISING AMERICA'S YOUTH  BORN ANS YET TO BE BORN."

I did so for two basic reasons:

a) It is my fervent view that the survival of our Republic rests on the foundation of a strong  and informed family unit and particularly the resilience of America's youth

I believe our family unit is under attack, is weakening and that children have a responsibility to our nation, to themselves to be good citizens.  In order to carry out this responsibility they must be exposed to some 'eternal verities' and I have listed those I believe are a minimum and to which I tried to expose my own children.

b) Second, and no less important, half the proceeds of any sale of this booklet goes to "The Wounded Warrior Project." There are many causes in this nation worthy of support and my wife and I contribute to a variety but, in view of recent events, I believe this one deserves special consideration.

This booklet will be available shortly and  I will do my utmost to see that it receives prominent exposure. I hope you will support my modest effort on behalf of a worthy cause.  Stay tuned!
---
Star Parker sees an opening for Republicans but will/can they rise to the occasion and fill it?  (See 1 below.)
---
First there was the Eastwood empty chair and today we have Obama being bear hugged by a hulk in a tavern.

This picture could win the election for Obama because because it hearkens back to  Mencken who coined the phrase - Boobus Americanus. In other words, Romney may be infinitely more qualified to be president and  is more likely to do what needs to be done as I stated above. Are truly what America needs at this tragic and vulnerable time in our history.  But the problem is that  far too many Americans,  who vote,  are incapable of discernment and looking beyond the facade.  That is partly why Obama won in the first place; not that McCain was a worthy opponent.

So the picture of Obama being bear hugged and his toothy reaction and willingness to lend himself to it resonates and is what might/will sway many voters, and maybe  enough for Obama to eke out a victory.

Since TV entered the picture the 'eyes have it.' A tank ran over Dukakis and a windsurf sank Perry.

Romney, when set against Obama, just does not resonate in the same way and thus,voters, who  are likely to go with surface rather than depth, emotion rather than what common sense they may have left, will find this photo appealing.

Yes, Boobus Americanus may win and I could be wrong because bear hugs trump stiff competency (See 2 below).
---
Dick
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1)Republicans Must Offer Alternative to Democrat Moral Bankruptcy

• 
 
• Star Parker 

Maybe Democrats have some slick salesmen, like Bill Clinton and our current president, who can sell you swampland and have you convinced that you’ve bought choice beachfront property.

But the omission of any mention of God and recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital from the Democratic Party platform, which were in it in 2008, and then the almost failed attempt to add them after the fact, showed the clear truth about the 2012 Democratic Party.

It took three boisterous floor votes to add these principles to the platform and listening to the ayes and nays in the third vote, it is questionable that they actually got the two thirds that were needed.

The omission of these key principles from the Democratic platform was the party equivalent of what journalist Michael Kinsley calls a political gaffe – when a politician inadvertently says what he really believes.

Democrat party operatives panicked when they realized that the platform, as initially drafted, showed today’s Democrats exactly for who they are – the home base for the nihilism, radical moral relativism, and welfare statism that defines today’s far left.

But the Democrats are the party of the entertainment industry. They know how to create fiction and appeal to fantasies.

So the party of the radical left brands Republicans as extremists.

The United States is still a religious nation.

According to a 2010 Gallup poll , 43 percent of Americans attend church regularly. However, just 39 percent of Democrats and 27 percent of liberals do.

The alignment of the culture of the Democratic Party with that of bankrupt European welfare states provides a powerful hint where they are taking this country.

In a Pew Research Center survey last year, 50 percent of Americans said religion is “very important”, compared to 22 percent in Spain, 21% in Germany, 17 percent in Great Britain, and 13 percent in France.

Of the 50 percent of Americans who said religion is very important, 67 percent were conservative and 29 percent liberal.

Regarding Israel, in a Gallup poll done this year, 61 percent of all Americans - 78 percent of Republicans and 56 percent of Democrats - said their sympathies lie with the Israelis rather than the Palestinians.

Back in 1965 , when President Johnson signed Medicare and Medicaid into law, 30 percent of federal spending consisted of payments to individuals. Today it’s almost 70 percent.

At the beginning of the Johnson presidency in 1965, 24 percent of black babies and 3 percent of white babies were born to unwed mothers. Today 73 percent of black babies and 29 percent of white babies are born out of wedlock.

More than half of births today to women under 30 are outside of marriage.

Unfunded liabilities of Medicare, plus those of Social Security, are $63 trillion according to their trustees’ latest report. But underlying the fiscal bankruptcy is a moral bankruptcy.

But you wouldn’t know it, listening to la la land Democrat liberals.

Not only are we killing the goose that lays the eggs, but with 50 percent of Americans now living in a household getting government benefits, we’re losing perspective that you even need a goose to get eggs.

God-fearing, family and church centered American values created the American prosperity that opened the door to entitlement programs.

Now Democrats brand those traditional American values as cruel and “on your own.”

If you think debt, government dependence, broken families, and moral relativism is the path to a strong and prosperous America, sign on with the Democrats.

But Republicans need to do a better job embracing and articulating the alternative.

Republicans need to step up to the plate and start talking about our nation’s real crisis – our moral crisis. The nation’s searching middle class will understand the truth when they hear it.

But they need to hear it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) So, Mitt, what do you really believe?

Too much about the Republican candidate for the presidency is far too mysterious

WHEN Mitt Romney was governor of liberal Massachusetts, he supported abortion, gun control, tackling climate change and a requirement that everyone should buy health insurance, backed up with generous subsidies for those who could not afford it. Now, as he prepares to fly to Tampa to accept the Republican Party’s nomination for president on August 30th, he opposes all those things. A year ago he favoured keeping income taxes at their current levels; now he wants to slash them for everybody, with the rate falling from 35% to 28% for the richest Americans.

All politicians flip-flop from time to time; but Mr Romney could win an Olympic medal in it (see article). And that is a pity, because this newspaper finds much to like in the history of this uncharismatic but dogged man, from his obvious business acumen to the way he worked across the political aisle as governor to get health reform passed and the state budget deficit down. We share many of his views about the excessive growth of regulation and of the state in general in America, and the effect that this has on investment, productivity and growth. After four years of soaring oratory and intermittent reforms, why not bring in a more businesslike figure who might start fixing the problems with America’s finances?

Details, details

But competence is worthless without direction and, frankly, character. Would that Candidate Romney had indeed presented himself as a solid chief executive who got things done. Instead he has appeared as a fawning PR man, apparently willing to do or say just about anything to get elected. In some areas, notably social policy and foreign affairs, the result is that he is now committed to needlessly extreme or dangerous courses that he may not actually believe in but will find hard to drop; in others, especially to do with the economy, the lack of details means that some attractive-sounding headline policies prove meaningless (and possibly dangerous) on closer inspection. Behind all this sits the worrying idea of a man who does not really know his own mind. America won’t vote for that man; nor would this newspaper. The convention offers Mr Romney his best chance to say what he really believes.

There are some areas where Mr Romney has shuffled to the right unnecessarily. In America’s culture wars he has followed the Republican trend of adopting ever more socially conservative positions. He says he will appoint anti-abortion justices to the Supreme Court and back the existing federal Defence of Marriage Act (DOMA). This goes down well with southern evangelicals, less so with independent voters: witness the furore over one (rapidly disowned) Republican’s ludicrous remarks about abortion and “legitimate rape” (see article). But the powers of the federal government are limited in this area; DOMA has not stopped a few states introducing gay marriage and many more recognising gay civil partnerships.

The damage done to a Romney presidency by his courting of the isolationist right in the primaries could prove more substantial. He has threatened to label China as a currency manipulator on the first day of his presidency. Even if it is unclear what would follow from that, risking a trade war with one of America’s largest trading partners when the recovery is so sickly seems especially mindless. Some of his anti-immigration policies won’t help, either. And his attempts to lure American Jews with near-racist talk about Arabs and belligerence against Iran could ill serve the interests of his country (and, for that matter, Israel’s).

Explore our interactive guide to the 2012
presidential election

Once again, it may be argued that this will not matter: previous presidents pandered to interest groups and embraced realpolitik in office. Besides, this election will be fought on the economy. This is where Manager Romney should be at his strongest. But he has yet to convince: sometimes, again, being needlessly extremist, more often evasive and vague.

In theory, Mr Romney has a detailed 59-point economic plan. In practice, it ignores virtually all the difficult or interesting questions (indeed, “The Romney Programme for Economic Recovery, Growth and Jobs” is like “Fifty Shades of Grey” without the sex). Mr Romney began by saying that he wanted to bring down the deficit; now he stresses lower tax rates. Both are admirable aims, but they could well be contradictory: so which is his primary objective? His running-mate, Paul Ryan, thinks the Republicans can lower tax rates without losing tax revenues, by closing loopholes. Again, a simpler tax system is a good idea, but no politician has yet dared to tackle the main exemptions. Unless Mr Romney specifies which boondoggles to axe, this looks meaningless and risky.

On the spending side, Mr Romney is promising both to slim Leviathan and to boost defence spending dramatically. So what is he going to cut? How is he going to trim the huge entitlement programmes? Which bits of Mr Ryan’s scheme does he agree with? It is a little odd that the number two has a plan and his boss doesn’t. And it is all very well promising to repeal Barack Obama’s health-care plan and the equally gargantuan Dodd-Frank act on financial regulation, but what exactly will Mr Romney replace them with—unless, of course, he thinks Wall Street was well-regulated before Lehman went bust?

Playing dumb is not an option

Mr Romney may calculate that it is best to keep quiet: the faltering economy will drive voters towards him. It is more likely, however, that his evasiveness will erode his main competitive advantage. A businessman without a credible plan to fix a problem stops being a credible businessman. So does a businessman who tells you one thing at breakfast and the opposite at supper. Indeed, all this underlines the main doubt: nobody knows who this strange man really is. It is half a decade since he ran something. Why won’t he talk about his business career openly? Why has he been so reluctant to disclose his tax returns? How can a leader change tack so often? Where does he really want to take the world’s most powerful country?

It is not too late for Mr Romney to show America’s voters that he is a man who can lead his party rather than be led by it. But he has a lot of questions to answer in Tampa.

-------------------------------------------------------------------