A Hartford paper’s Sunday edition crackles with a front page
story that asks and answers the tormenting question: Is progressivism dead?
The paper’s emphatic answer is – no, not yet, certainly not
in Connecticut.
The paper notes in passing the whupping progressive
Democrats took in the off year elections, though the account spares the wounded
the most important details.
This year, national Republicans took the U.S. Senate from
the jaws of progressive Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, the toll-master
whose business it was to make sure no worthy Republican bills reached the desk
of “Lead From Behind” President Barrack Obama. In this, Reid was successful,
and Democrats were permitted to claim, without challenge from the left of
center media, that Republicans were obstructionists who had no ideas of their
own beyond declaring war on women such as Sandra Fluke, who insisted that Georgetown
University, a Catholic institution that requires undergraduates to take
theology classes and upholds traditional catholic teaching that forbids
contraception, must pay for her birth control pills.
Ms. Fluke ran for election this year and lost by a two to
one margin. Apparently, people in the United States -- whom Obamacare adviser and
professor of economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Jonathan
Gruber thought too infantile to understand and approve the real provisions of the
increasingly unaffordable Affordable Care Act -- had turned their faces against
the proposition that Republicans were, as Democrats screeched during the
election, concerned only with women’s ovaries. The bulk of U.S. Senator Mark
Udall’s election effort was centered on the notion that Republicans value women
only as unwilling breeding stock. Fifty percent of Mr. Udall’s campaign ads
were devoted to tagging his opponent, Cory Gardner,
as a foot soldier in the Republican Party’s War On Women. But when the votes
were tallied in Colorado, Mr. Udall, whom even pundits in the progressive media
referred to dismissively as Senator Uterus, went down to dusty defeat. Mr.
Gardner had managed to turn the tables on the hapless Mr. Udall.
Nationally, the war on women fell flat – possibly because
Republicans had never declared a war on their mothers, wives and daughters. Mr.
Gardner strongly favored an Over The Counter (OTC) provision that would allow
women to purchase birth control pills without a doctor’s prescription. Planned
Parenthood adamantly opposed the measure because – truth be told – OTC likely would
impact their businesses. Owing to a birth control pill closed shop, Planned Parenthood
has for decades ferried women into their abortion centers where clients later
on could, if they so wished, end the lives of unwanted babies who feel the
doctor’s instrumental interventions after they had been safely nestled in the womb
longer than three months, the point at which fetuses sense pain. Polls
consistently show that women – against whom Republican presumably have declared
their war – oppose partial birth abortion by significant numbers; and, following
the horrific reports on Kermit Gosnell’s late term abortion chop shop,
they also favor by large margins reasonable restrictions on abortion facilities.
The OTC measure supported by Mr. Gardner pulled the fangs
from the always false charge that Republicans wished to deny the birth control
pill to women – they just don’t want to be forced to pay for other people’s
pills -- while at the same time it put Planned Parenthood at a considerable
rhetorical disadvantage. How was it possible that an organization that winked
at partial birth abortion was so adamantly opposed to a measure that would more
cheaply, easily and efficiently provide birth control pills over the counter
without a doctor’s prescription? Republicans in other states – possibly even in
Connecticut, a progressive backwater -- took notes.
The fictional Republican “War On Women” was not the only ideologically
valuable piece of crockery that fell off the Democratic Party shelf in the
national elections. Mr. Obama’s feckless foreign policy has been shattered by
the traditional enemies of the United States, prominent among them Russian
President Vladimir Putin, Europe’s energy Czar.
The United States has had before it, during the presidential
tenure of Obama, the opportunity to shatter the oil and natural gas reliant
Russian economy. If we would but exploit the abundant natural resources of the
North American continent, we could without much fanfare facilitate a severe
drop in the price of Russian oil and natural gas -- which, come to think of it,
was how former President Ronald Reagan, the vanquisher, along with Alexander
Solzhenitsyn and Polish Pope John Paul II, of the former “Evil Empire,” brought
the Soviet economy to its knees: Reagan arranged with Saudi Arabia a severe drop
on the price of oil, after which the Soviet economy teetered on the brink of collapse.
It has become obvious, though not in Connecticut, that Obama’s
accomodationist foreign policy is Reaganism in reverse. Put it this way: If the
fragile Russian economy were to be compromised by a sudden drop in energy
prices, could Putin afford a hot war in Ukraine? If it were possible for the United
States to push ISIS back into Bashir Assad’s Syria, Putin’s client state, would
it be possible for Putin to sustain a Ukrainian Anschluss? Realpolitikers ought
to be asking themselves at every political turnstile “Which way would Bismarck
go?”
Practical geo-political questions of this kind were never
raised by any Connecticut Republican battling to recover from Democrats any of
the seats in the state’s all Democratic U.S. Congressional Delegation. Iran,
yet another of Putin’s client states, is quickly approaching a point at which
it will be able to develop a nuclear weapon; Iraq is swarming with terrorists
who intend to carve a Caliphate out of northern Iraq and Syria; The U.S.
President has declined to supply friendly Kurds in northern Iraq with the weapons
they need to repulse terrorists who have cut off the heads of American
reporters and rescue workers; Russia is sending tanks onto eastern Ukraine;
China is laughing behind its hands at the U.S. President, who has been openly
mocked by Putin. In Connecticut, the U.S. Congressional delegation has been
captured by Democrat progressives who support Obama’s accomodationist policies.
The progressive Democratic president has no coherent foreign policy because he
is incapable, along with the Connecticut U.S. Congressional delegation, of distinguishing
friends – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu is one – from the sworn
enemies of the United States. Hint: If a ruler of a country regards you as “The
Great Satan,” he is your permanent enemy.
Bismarkian hint: If
you don’t fight your opponent, he wins. That is the real lesson of the recently
concluded elections in Connecticut. The short answer to the question “Why did
Republicans in Connecticut lose elections when so many of their compatriots
elsewhere in the nation won unquestioned victories” is – You have to fight to win.
Comments
are like the proud mother watching the parade and declaring, "Oh look, everyone is out of step but my Johnny!"
Republicans (Conservatives) won across the Nation because they ran as Conservatives, not as Progressive Lite.