Ted Cruz and Sarah Palin: CPAC 2013 will determine America's future

What happens at CPAC 2013 will divide the past from the future. Conservatives will chose between nostalgic pleasantries or a dynamic horizon. Conservatives will consolidate one way or another. In my view, conservatives will choose the future and they will choose Ted Cruz and Sarah Palin.

There is a division today in what is called conservatism, although it should be called something else. It has been forming for several years and will come to clarity and decision in CPAC 2013. The new directions — states’ rights, sound money and constitutional government — of what might be called the gnarly conservatives will come to clash with traditional or what might be called "nice" conservatives (“the establishment”). The nice: Jeb Bush, Chris Christie and Dr. Ben Carson. The gnarly: Ted Cruz, Sarah Palin and Ted Nugent.

Since last week, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz has moved from participant to key speaker at the CPAC conference. Cruz will take leadership, and a rising conservative movement will begin to form and will run the century.

The Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin writes this morning: “The Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) is taking a lot of guff, rightly so, I think, from conservatives over excluding New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) and groups like GOProud from its gathering. When the newest conservative hero, Dr. Ben Carson, tells you you’ve screwed up, maybe it is time to rethink the strategy of systematically shrinking the tent.”

Your comments are dead on as far as my observations and experience would be evidence. However, a question that must be recognized/dealt with is ‘How and when did this voting become so skewed, even corrupt?’. I believe it had it’s genesis in the times when the USA was living high on the hogs. The populace was so concerned with ‘the good life’ that all matters of responsible governance was given to the government and it’s lackeys, appointed and elected’. The Nation still has this attitude. People are still more interested in seeing that ball players are very well compensated. People are still more interested in seeing that Hollywood buffoons live the life of necessary entertainers and are willing to pay for such. People deem rock stars as societal conscience makers and are more willing to pay for such than to honest, dedicated medical professionals; throw in the administrators as money vultures. Yes, we the people have gone a long way down the path of frivolous use of resources and livelihood. Having gone this far it can only be guessed as to a viable societal recovery.

GBA, the problem is enormous because legislators are likely aware that what was done to keep the dangerous Allen West from office can as easily be applied to them. The legislature, the “Peoples Congress”, is almost helpless to act. Congrssman cannot but help noticing how quickly IRS records were scoured to charge Georgia's Nathan Deal when he had the cajones to ask the White House for some written verification of Obama's eligibility. The House Ethics committee brought charges based upon a previously allowed deduction to a relatie of Deal, eight years earlier. They would have bankrupted Deal, who was literally forced to resign, and is now Governor of Georgia.

Other obvious difficulties are that the such a secret operation 1) cannot be explained in sound bites; 2) cannot be conclusively proved because the evidence has been destroyed - that is fundamental to to the crime; 3) pundits who cannot prove anything - if West and the Minnesota senate candidate who lost to the SNL comedian - cannot find data to build a case. Media commentators will only be ridiculed (Alinsky’s 5th rule) if they try.

The only two approaches that come to mind are”: 1) use media to explain a “proof by contradiction” - show that without an audit trail such as the one we used to have based upon locally counted paper ballots, which ended gradually from the late 1960s, voting is irrelevant because it is not verifiable; 2) Organize, perhaps through tea parties, voluntary paper ballots for candidates who convince us that The Constitution must be honored, defended, and protected, and is our foundation. Those who participate are trusting the “Tea Party Precinct” to preserve their identities, but know that without having their votes counted they are losing their freedoms. This would provide an audit for a subset of voters.

Many Democrats share concerns about auditable voting, and might participate. If I didn't like lattes I might suggest a “Latte Party” of liberals who share our belief in representative government. Many liberals are beginning to understand that Sharia law and a bankrupt nation will not help them them promote their favorite causes; to the contrary.

Having some audit trail would provide data to demonstrate the impossibility of reported vote counts in many precincts, and require legal action. The courts, most of whose members are political appointees, are also captive, and can only be brought to account when the stranglehold on representation is loosened, or broken.

A compliant media filled with paid explainers of trends created by those dictating votes must be overcome, and that depends upon the preservation of the 1st Amendment. We see the battle against free speech being waged. We see pundits who know the truth, like Mark Levin, whose Liberty and Tyranny cites Madison explaining why there are not definitions in the Constitution, but who won't dare address the topic, not even in the context of his own writing (pg. 37, Liberty and Tyranny).

We must address truths carefully, and try to act. Our voting system is designed to provide no audit trail. We once had that protection, with ballots secured after being counted; the local count was the legal count. Today there is no local count. The SEIU controls the machines and counts the absentee ballots, except for military ballots which are often not counted at all, thanks to SEIU recalcitrance and our employees' willingness to ignore the law guaranteeing the right of soldiers and DoD overseas employees to vote. Is it any surprise that some of those who are elected have been scorned in their local communities? Is it any surprise that Romney, who drew crowds wherever he spoke while Obama had to hire rock stars to attract audiences sufficient to provide photo ops?

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.