Today's news

A departure for me as I will offer brief(ish) comments on current stories in the news rather than my normal lengthier piece.

David Cameron and the EU
It seems like Cameron has decided to get a little serious with his negotiations for Britain's continued membership of the European Union.  He is apparently going to tell our EU partners that if he can't get what he wants, for Britain, then he will campaign for Britain's exit, the so called Brexit.

Before you jump up an exclaim 'about time!' consider that Cameron isn't really asking for much.  And his partners will hold firm on their core desire for 'ever closer union' and pull Britain further and further into their orbit.  This is what the Euro-elite want.  Not the people of Europe, or more accurately the European Union (note to the BBC Europe and the European Union are not same thing) but for those folks, democracy is an over-rated luxury.

If Cameron really wants to demonstrate that he means business, here is a tip.   Have the UK Civil Service start a process of planning for Brexit.  I can't think of a better way of showing that you mean business, than showing you are prepared for all outcomes.  Have Civil Servants start negotiations with the UK's key trading partners - those outside the EU.  Start with China and India and then other Commonwealth countries.  The upcoming Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting, in Malta, would be the perfect launchpad!  Develop and publish the replacement for the Common Agriculture Policy.  Same for the Fisheries policy.  Start to withdraw from cooperation on the ludicrous European Union Foreign Service.

Does anyone think that this won't concentrate the minds of the EU bureaucrats and the so-called political masters.

Obama and Keystone
So Obama decided to pay back his big financial sponsor - Warren Buffet.  This was entirely predictable.  Buffet's Burlington Northern Santa Fe railway is booking an alleged $2 billion a year in profits from transporting oil, at $30 a barrel from Canada to the southern US versus the $10 a barrel that it would cost to send it down via the Keystone XL pipeline.

The US Presidential race

As a non-US voter, can I say - enough already.

Let's start with the Democrats - surely this can only be seen as a fight between Clinton and Saunders?  I appreciate that this is a most unpalatable choice but let's get real.  Without Biden, there is no one else.  Unless of course, some of the RINOs show their true colours, and change parties?  Jeb, Marco?
So will the other Democrat candidates please leave the stage.  Then we can have 'looney-Left tunes' Saunders slug it out with the not so much Teflon coated as media-untouchable Hillary.   Then we just might see the Dems and their media supporters having to choose between the spend like crazy Saunders and the make no hostages to the future Clinton.  Things might get interesting!

Now the Republicans.

'Elephant in the room time' - make that elephants.  Jeb, Marco, Kasich and the others, except for Ted Cruz, Donald Trump and Ben Carson, need to leave the field.  George Dubya needs to take his brother to one side and say 'save your money and give it up'!

The GOP needs to focus on the real candidates.
Carson may have been wounded by the latest revelations concerning West Point, or he may brush past that.  To me it sounds like the media trying to make a story out of next to nothing - so Carson bragged a little, haven't we all?

Trump will I think, start to fade.  He has done the GOP a great service by daring to say things that some others, like the ones who should now bow out, have steered away from.   While he is a populist, I think that he has to have something more substantial in his policy pocket than just being anti-immigration.  Plus he has had past cosy relationships with the Dems.

That just leaves Ted Cruz.  Most say that he is by far the best qualified, intellectually but perhaps more importantly, he has displayed a rare consistency in his following truly Republican policies.  Some say that this tars him with a Tea Party brush but he would be the most formidable opponent against Hillary.  Who knows, if he chose Trump as his running mate, then he might get some of that Donald magic!

Refugees 
Too late for me to say too much, tonight, I will come back on this tomorrow.  I sense that this issue will still be in the news!

Have a good night!

America's next President

This is principally aimed at the candidates that are vying for the highest office in America.  In fact, it is directed towards those seeking the Republican nomination.  Maybe think of it as as kind of 'what's needed' list.

First and foremost - integrity.  Under the previous Clinton Administration, America and the world became accustomed to disingenuous and evasive answers to straight-forward questions.  Under the Obama regime, the spineless American media mostly hasn't even bothered to ask questions.  They have accepted the froth pushed out by the mendacious White House.  Given the close familial ties between senior White House staffers and media personnel, that is perhaps, not too surprising.  So the next President needs to be honest (examples are below) and to actually talk to the American people and those in the rest of the world - not read scripted lies and half-truths from an autocue.

Secondly, have a plan to tackle the deficit.  Here is where some of that honesty is required.  The next President needs to tell America that it has to stop living beyond its means.  Americans must be told that it is not acceptable to impoverish their children, grand-children and great-grandchildren.  They need to know and understand that America must not only eliminate its deficit but must also reduce its debt.  That means a budget that matches revenue from taxes, with expenditure.  On the expenditure side, some of that money must go towards paying down the US National Debt.

This is where a GOP led Congress comes in.  The House and Senate must put the national interests ahead of those of their own district's/State's.  Many of these Republicans have been elected - some repeatedly so - on a ticket of being 'fiscally prudent and responsible'.  Well there isn't much prudence or responsibility in stuffing the US Budget with your own pork-barrel wants.

Of course, any President or even any nominee, telling Americans that they need to tighten their belts will face strong, even rabid opposition.  The choice though is simple and stark - rein back spending now or sit back and watch America's continued decline, on all fronts.  Sit back, do nothing and see more and more Americans on food stamps - more than 49 million, at the moment (and climbing) and they are not all immigrants!

Part of this also requires addressing the immigration issue.  How, when America is broke - and believe me, a country with the debt levels that America has, is broke - how can America afford to bring in more and more immigrants? Legal or illegal is doesn't matter, America just doesn't have the resources to fund these people.  The biggest part of this problem lies with illegal immigration.  It sounds crazy to have to say this but the in-coming President must understand that when he or she swears the oath of office, part of protecting the US Constitution means upholding the laws of the United States.  So the southern border must be closed and such closure must be enforced by appropriate forces - military, Homeland Security and local law enforcement, until such time as primary security devices - otherwise known as a very high wall and such - are in place.   Allied to this must be the expulsion of illegal immigrants already in the USA.  Absolutely no amnesty.  Let me say that again, No Amnesty  - it is so very wrong to reward law-breaking.

Consider, for a moment.  The Department of Homeland Security has a budget in excess of US$38 billion.  A significant part of their brief is to 'secure and manage' the border.  Does anyone think that they have done a good job on that, in recent years?  They have effectively facilitated the invasion of illegal immigrants.  Does anyone really think that Daesh and Al Qaeda have not managed to slip terrorist murderers across the border, when it has been so porous?  As with politicians and the media in Europe, Obama and the press would have you ignore the evidence of your eyes and instead believe that all of the invading force are women and children!

Immigration brings thoughts of foreign relations.  I don't want to be too radical but America's next President needs to remember that the USA's allies are friends.  Ignoring them, bypassing them is not the way to treat them.  How did it come to pass that America finds itself allied itself with Iran?  A country that immediately after ending its dancing on the streets of Tehran, following the so called 'Iran Agreement' , then has its leader, the war-monger Khameni, calling for 'Death to America'.  How can America abandon Israel, simply because its Prime Minister doesn't suck-up or kow-tow to the narcissistic Obama?  Isn't it enough that Obama abases the USA with his bowing down to the terrorist supporting Saudis and Qataris?

In addition to remembering which countries are America's friends the next President should also bring basic negotiating skills to the table.  Giving nuclear weapons to Iran will surely be Obama's true legacy but so will abandoning millions of Cubans to continued servitude under the oppressive Castro regime.   The next President needs to remember that Iran's development of inter-continental missiles does not represent a threat to Israel.  They are aimed at the USA!

The next President will have a full domestic agenda, clearing-up the mess that is ObamaCare and the socialistic Common Core programme but he or she should not ignore foreign affairs.  North Korea, like Iran has become emboldened under Obama - indeed it is hard to think which enemy of the USA hasn't - but the next President cannot afford to further alienate ~America's traditional allies.

The next President needs to have a sense of proportion.  John Kerry and Obama might consider Climate Change, or whatever it is being called this week, to be the greatest threat to national security but the true greatest threat is terrorism in all its guises - the state-sponsored variety from Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Qatar and the enemy within.  This fifth column, which seeks to impose shariah law in America, is led by the Council on American Islam Relations (CAIR).  These people are falsely recognised as 'moderates'.  The regularly cover-up for what the media then calls ' the excesses ' of Islamic behaviour.  The truth is that these are not 'excesses'.  They are the realities of Islam.  These media fools, and their fellow-travellers in Washington, think that one can coexist with Islam.  They ignore the plight of Christians in the Middle East, who, as I write  are being eliminated, every hour of every day (if that comes as a surprise to you, blame the media's blindness!)    Homosexuals are thrown off of buildings - the media and Obama says nothing.  Women are stoned to death for adultery because they 'allowed'  themselves to be raped and America's President says nothing.

I mentioned earlier, that the next President needs to restore integrity to the office.  Hand in hand with that is honesty and demanding that of others.  Liberals or Progressives, call them what you will, have mis-appropriated the English language and have, for too long, been allowed to get away with blatant hypocrisy.  The oppose the death penalty for convicted criminals, they oppose racism and then they support the murder of unborn children, which is the largest killer of America's blacks.  They don't just support abortion, they want the state to fund it.  They do this because they believe in it but they don't accept that others are very opposed to it and certainly are against paying for it.  That's the Liberal version of freedom of speech.  You can have freedom of speech, so long as you agree with their views.  If you don't, you are a racist, homophobe or right-wing or a fascist, etc..

To wrap-up, in the same vein, can anyone say what it is that homosexuals want?  By all studies, they represent a small percentage of the population - 3-5% in Western countries.  Initially they wanted to end discrimination that they were subjected to.  This they have largely achieved and yet now they want more.  Don't know what it is that they want  but they want more!  They want to not be persecuted for the sexual choices, that's fair enough, I guess.  Why then do they want to provoke and persecute people that have very deeply held religious beliefs in opposition to homosexuality?  Why is it okay to support homosexuality but not okay to oppose it.  And, fundamentally, why do these very same Liberals that are so pro-homosexuality,  also also silent on the atrocities that are perpetrated against homosexuals, by Muslims, around the world, not just in the Daesh areas of Syria and Iraq..  Hopefully, the next President will 'call-out' these hypocrites and bring honesty to the White House.

America's opportunity

On Friday, many Americans received news that they had long wished for - Speaker John Boehner is to retire his position at the end of October.

This presents the Republicans in the House of Representatives with an opportunity to come outside of the Washington Bubble and elect someone who resonates with Republican voters.  Let's not forget, when considering the candidates, that the Tea Party is Republican.  Indeed, many who follow that group, consider that they are the true keepers of Republican ideals.

The early front-runner, Kevin McCarthy, from California seem to be very much the  'establishment' candidate.  A man who can be relied upon to not rock the boat, to not confront the Obama regime - to be a good ol' boy.  Boehner without the orange perma-tan.

It would be a grave mistake for Karl Rove and Reince Preibus to push and impose 'more of the same' on Republican supporters.  The grassroots, and that doesn't just mean, the Tea Party, need to be brought back into the fold.  The Republican leadership will ignore them at their, and America's peril.

Simply put, America (and, come to that the World) cannot take another 4 years of Democrat mis-management.  There is no time for the dubious luxury of RINOs.

The clear choice should be Rep.Trey Gowdy.  He has stirred the pot by pursuing Hillary Clinton over Benghazi.  He may yet be able to bring her to book for, what was at best a serious dereliction of duty and at worst complicity in the unnecessary death of Americans and then in the reprehensible cover-up  of the background to the events.   Having opposed Boehner's debt limit measures in the past, being fundamentally against Obamacare, which he wants to repeal, wanting to limit the interfering and anti-business regulations that emanate from the Climate Change fools that run the Environmental Protection Agency and strongly in favour of a balanced budget, Gowdy demonstrates all of the characteristics that are wanted by a leader of the Republicans.  He is 'sound', as they say in Britain, on all of the issues that really matter to Republicans and right-thinking Americans.

He does seem to lack the ability to tear-up and bawl at the drop of a hat but my thinking is that this is something America can live without.

The selection of Gowdy should also help to thin out the current crop of those seeking the nomination for Republican candidate for President.  It would send a clear message to America and particularly, the Democrat Party, that the Republicans mean business.  That the Republicans are going to focus on the key issues affecting America:

• The rampant and unaffordable spending of the Obama administration and proposed by the Democrat candidates.
• The swamping of America's cities by illegal aliens.
• The weakening of America's military
• The abandonment of America's traditional allies in favour of nations that seek the very destruction of America.
• The restoration of respect for the rule of law, including the Constitution, and the protection of those that serve and enforce the law.
• Ensuring that veterans, who have loyally served America, receive the medical treatment that they need.
• That terrorism and the evils of Islam are recognised as the truly single greatest threat to the very existence of the United States and not the pseudo-science and doctored-results backed Climate Change. 
• That the education of America's future generations must emphasise the importance of the Judeo-Christian values upon which America was founded.

Of course, Gowdy probably won't be elected.  McCarthy will get the role and will continue the obeisance to Obama and in doing so, will cause continued hardship for millions of Americans and will accelerate the decline of America.  This will also cause many Republicans to move ever further away from the Republican Party and to not vote for it in 2016 - why would any Republican vote for the likes of Bush or Rubio, when a true Republican like Ted Cruz is sidelined by the establishment?


 

Republicans - wake up!

President Obama delivered his State of the Union speech this week.

There really wasn't anything surprising in its content.
The usual - the economy is thriving, its all because of Obama's policies, Obama's foreign policy is paying dividends, Obama wants more money for 'programmes', blah, blah, blah.

What I haven't heard though is a robust and concerted response from the Republicans.  Yes, those members of the party that scored resounding victories in the mid-term elections.   Where are they?  Where is the strong line that says:

 "Mr President, you have shown, over and over again, that you do not want to work with Republicans.  We have gotten the message.  We will now do what we were elected to do!  We are going to represent the people of America.  Therefore, we will oppose any, let us say that again, any attempt at any, repeat any, kind of Amnesty Bill.  We will begin steps to defund Obamacare.  Firstly though, we will revoke any and all exemptions from Obamacare.  We believe that if it is as good as you and your supporters claim, then it must be good enough for Congress and all of the other elites that have wheedled exemptions out of the administration"

"We will begin steps to reduce the deficit by rolling back the frontiers of the state.  We will work with Homeland Security and make such cooperation on a clear quid pro quo basis - as in Homeland Security does its job and seals the southern border and we continue to fund them."

"We will work with the foreign allies of the United States.  We have already begun this process by inviting the Premier of Israel to address Congress.  Countries like Israel, Canada and the European members of NATO, as well as places like Kurdistan deserve America's support both moral and materiel and we will aid this.  We put you on notice that we will not support any further aid to organisations representing Palestinians.  We will actively oppose any further rapproachment with Iran.  Actively means that we will link all of the spending that comes out of the State Department with the furtherance of this policy. "

"We will bring forward, as a response to the budget you present, measures to balance that budget plus to include within that budget, a 10% reduction in the overall spending of the US Government.  It is as clear to us, as it is clear to the American people, that we, as a nation, can no longer afford to live beyond our means"

"We will bring forward measures to rein in the ill-thought policies being pushed by the EPA.  In line with this we will halt the plans affecting coal producing areas and we will bring forward a bill to approve the Keystone 2 pipeline."

"Finally, Mr President, we will oppose, oppose and oppose again, you and your attempts to impose Socialism on the American Republic and to show favour, as you have so far consistently done, to those in the Muslim world, who would do us harm"

Any Republicans out there want to take-up the message?  There is no point in winning elections if you don't use the power that the people have given you!

The duty for Americans

I was dining out with friends, last night and one asked me 'what will you blog about, this week?'  My response was that I wasn't too sure because there is a lot going on in the world, right now - stalling or flat-lining economies, ISIS running rampant, allied to this NATO in jeopardy because of Turkey's acts of realpolitik vis a vis the Kurds, Ebola and the rise of UKIP in the UK - all strong contenders but I am opting to return to the upcoming mid term elections in America.

On November 4, the American electorate will go to the polls to elect all 435 members of the House of Representatives and 33 of the 100 members of the Senate.  There are also certain mayoral and gubernatorial races at the same time.

Back in January, I posted here  about the need for Republicans to come together and elect Republicans to office.  To say that this still stands is an understatement.  Possibly more than ever before, America, and I would suggest the world, need  an overwhelmingly Republican Congress to be elected.

Why so?  Well in the last six years America has lost its way.   Or rather America has drifted from the path that made it the 'shining city upon a hill' and has lurched heavily to the Left.  It isn't just about broken promises - though there are enough of them.  It isn't about the corrupt activities of un-elected officials - as concerning as these are, they can be turned around (incidentally, have the Democrats and their union backers ever stopped for one minute and thought 'what happens when the Republicans get back into power and turn the IRS spotlight on us?.  Come to that, have the Democrats and their union backers ever stopped for one minute and thought?)

It is about what America has become.

America under Obama has lost its pre-eminence among nations.  Previously nations would rattle the American cage but would know that the wrath of a great nation would be visited upon them.  Now?

Consider.  Hillary Clinton spoke of pressing the 'reset' button on America's relationship with Vladimir Putin's Russia.  Given what happened in Crimea and continues to occur in the rest of Ukraine, that 'reset' doesn't seem to be working out too well, for those folks!

Consider.  President Obama spoke of approaching Iran with the open hand of friendship rather than the closed fist of aggression.  Does anyone believe that the situation with Iran is anything other than that they are 6 years closer towards the gaining of a nuclear weapons capability?

Consider.  President Obama also talked of a relationship re-alignment - his so called 'pivot to Asia'.   The thrust was to re-position America's foreign policy to be more centred on Asia and less on Europe.  We can see how that has panned-out in Ukraine but look to Asia also.  China is flexing its military muscles and bullying its neighbors  over island territories in the South China Sea  and the US does nothing about it.

Consider.  Obama withdrew troops from Iraq on an accelerated scale and against the advice of military commanders on the ground.  The result is the horrors being visited upon the people of Syria and Iraq by ISIS.

Consider.  Obama and Kerry (and Clinton before Kerry) support the terrorist Hamas organisation over the democratically elected (the only real democracy in the Middle East) government of Israel. Support Hamas who believe it is acceptable to rain down rockets on civilians and then to complain to the liberal world when Israel defends itself.

Consider also (last one, I promise) that Obama and his cohorts conspired to open the southern border of the USA and allow in hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants.  Don't concern yourself with how many of those are terrorists or hardened criminals but just think about this.  How can America call itself a country when it can't even protect its borders?  Mind you, what kind of a 'country' is it that allows its veterans to be treated so shabbily?

I could go on and on.  The simple truth is that America no longer counts for much, in the eyes of much of the world.  Its military is being reduced in numbers and global presence and dissident voices at the top, removed.  Its economy is a basket case with a wildly over-spending government, reliant on the Chinese continuing to buy its debauched currency and Treasury bills.  Its healthcare system in ruins because of  socialist dogma and its welfare system groaning under the weight of so many claimants (it is said that something like 50 million Americans are now receiving food stamps - 50 Million!!)

Today, a decorated US Marine languishes in a Mexican jail.  He took a wrong turn on a border road and found himself in Mexico.  He told this to the Mexican authorities who promptly arrested and incarcerated him.  That was more than 6 months ago.  Close your eyes and think back to the Bush years or the Reagan ones, heavens, maybe even to the Carter days.  Do you seriously believe that any one of those former Presidents would have left Sergeant Andrew Tahmooresi to rot in a Mexican jail for so long, on the basis of a navigation error?  OK, open your eyes.  Truth is that you are in Obamalala land and that country no longer has the 'stroke' to threaten or cajole Mexico.

Is it because the Obama administration allows deserters like Bowe Bergdahl to be swapped for 5 senior Taliban terrorist leaders?  Is it because the same administration allows the traitorous Bradley Manning to undergo a sex-change operation, while serving time for his/her crimes?   Draw your own conclusions.  You can bet though that nations of the world, including the (maybe soon to be former?) allies of the USA know which way the wind is currently blowing.  As do the terrorists.

So back to the main item, today.  The mid terms.

What is needed in November is the election of significant numbers of Republicans by a very large number of voters.  Getting lots of Republicans elected is not enough in itself.  These Republicans need to be elected by very significant numbers of voters.  This is so that a very clear message is sent to Obama that the game has changed.  That 'we the people' as Americans like to say, have had enough.  Also to send a message to the outgoing Democrats - don't you dare try to pass an Amnesty Bill during the time remaining until the new Congress starts in January 2015.  Same for you, Mr President, don't you dare try to pass Executive Orders to circumvent Congress.

Finally, a word for those Republicans  in name only - the so called RINOs.  When you get elected on a tide of anger at the antics of the Democrats and at how they have so swiftly brought a great nation to its knees, consider (sorry, had to do it again) that you now have a chance to be a true Republican and to stand-up for real Republican values.  Think of these elections as like going into the confessional and coming out on November 5th as a redeemed soul.  If you don't, then the tide of true Republicanism might just sweep you away, real soon.

Oh and yes I am a Brit and some might say I shouldn't 'interfere' in American politics.  The real America (not Obama's failing fantasy land) is far too important to the world to be allowed to go under without a fight and it is time for all patriots that believe that the American way is best, to stand-up and be counted.

Get all of the Republican vote out, on November 4th !

Conservative Soul

Sorry music lovers, this isn't a piece about some long lost strain that emanated from a rich enclave in America's South.  This is about the missing soul of conservatism.

Frit is the word used by the late and former UK Prime Minister, Lady Margaret Thatcher to describe someone who is frightened.  That term seems very apposite to describe modern day conservatives in both the UK and the US.  

I have posted here before concerning the lack of focus amongst America's conservatives -  http://bit.ly/1kiLq2r - so, today, I want to concentrate on UK conservatives but I think that there will still be resonance for US ones, as well, so stay tuned!

The UK will shortly be 'celebrating' four years of a Conservative 'led' coalition.  I use the term led because nominally, that is supposed to be the case.  The Conservative Party have the highest number of MPs in the House of Commons and considerably outnumber their Liberal Democrat partners, and yet one regularly comes away with the notion that it is the Lib Dems that are the senior partner.  It isn't just about better press management, by them.  Look at the policies of the Conservatives and see if you can find those that can be called truly Conservative.   Ok, how about just one? 

Europe is always touted by the media, led by the in-thrall BBC, to be a very divisive and electorally damaging issue for the Tories.  We are regularly 'told' that voters don't like to see a divided party and that the factional fighting within the Conservative party will make them unelectable.  And yet, these same voters are also, in large numbers,  said to be skeptical of the whole Euro project.  These same voters want to see a changed relationship between the UK and the European Union.  This is what is 'promised' by David Cameron along with a post the next  General Election, referendum.  I sense though that people just don't trust the Conservative leadership to deliver.  Cameron states that he wants to remain in Europe and will campaign on that basis, in any referendum, which kind of preempts his view of the choice that will be put before the British people -

 "Well we went and had these discussions with the EU and they agreed that, going forward we, the great British people, can have our MPs, sitting in the 'mother of all parliaments' decide on whether or not we retain British Summer Time (or insert some other meaningless non-concession).  Of course, negotiation is about compromise, and so we had to concede that in future, Britain's economic policies will be first approved by our colleagues in the EU, before we put them to the House of Commons, so that we know that they are aligned with those of the other EU states.  Yes we also had to cede control over foreign affairs to the EU but, with my former colleague, Nick Clegg, now the EU High Commissioner, we know we have a friend who will look after British interests and don't forget, while we had to give up the Pound Sterling, as an independent currency, we did manage to get the name of the Euro changed to the Pound"  

 Back to reality:
Why then aren't the Conservatives using their historical opposition to statist/corporatist institutions like the European Union and pushing this as a policy to the electorate?  Providing a real choice on Europe, for a change.  I know some will say, that this is what the UK Independence Party does but I really can't see them making the breakthrough in significant numbers to radically change the political make-up of Parliament. So it has to be the Conservatives that do this.  But first they need to regain their 'soul'.

The name of the Conservative Party in the UK is more properly, The Conservative and Unionist Party.  The Unionist tends to be forgotten by some because of its past associations with Ulster Unionists and their seeming intransigence (imagine! They wanted to remain part of the United Kingdom!!).  However, the party's roots are in maintenance of the whole United Kingdom and yet...
Consider the referendum that will occur in Scotland this year.  Where are the weekly or daily speeches by the Prime Minister and other leading Tories, extolling the virtues of a United Kingdom over a split one?  Where are the monthly ones?  Any speeches?  All we get are minor passing references buried in other keynote addresses.  If the Scottish electorate were some girl that the Unionists were trying to woo, then our apparent indifference will drive her into the arms of the Scottish Nationalist cad, who roguishly offers to take her away from an over-bearing parent and into the bright sunny uplands.  Where is the robust defence of what the 'union' means?  Where are the vigorous attacks on the economic lunacy that is presented as Scotland's future?  The attacks on the ever-encroaching state presence on Scotland's landscape?

If I were a Scot, I would look at the indifference shown by the Conservative and Unionist Party and think that since the Tories 'cannot be bothered with putting up any kind of fight for Scotland, then I cannot  be bothered with them or with the Union.  Maybe Salmond has a point!'

It is though on economics that the Conservative soul is found to be most absent.  

Consider.  At the tail end of the 1980s, communism was in its death throes (thanks in large part to Thatcher and Reagan's policy of confronting communism and showing to all, its inherent flaws).  Its slowly, slowly sister ideology, socialism, was also tainted by its association.  Even now people can look back at communism and see it for the human and economic failure that it was.  Nazism (which incidentally was based on socialism, though socialists and labourites get offended when you point this out), led to the slaughter of many millions of innocents but think on how many millions  Stalin and Mao and  Pol Pot and their communist fellow travelers massacred.

And yet, instead of seeing the adoption of capitalist and small government principles and the retreat of socialism, we have seen that governments of every hue, continued with the creeping implementation of socialism.

The UK's Conservatives have been complicit in this when out of office and we continue to see this with the current government.  The idea of moving the needle on public spending by a meaningfully noticeable amount seems alien to the current Tories.  True conservative values require that the state steps back, that the starting premise is why should the government be involved in doing this at all and why can it not be left to the private sector?  Instead there is no 'rolling back the frontiers of the state' but mere tinkering at the edges.  Does anybody think that Margaret Thatcher or Ronald Reagan would consider the current crop of UK Tories and American Republicans as 'conservative'?  Or would they see them as faintly pink quasi-socialists?  I believe the latter, you will take your own view.

These 'socialist-lite' Tories follow such defeatist policies even when in opposition, such as supporting the UK Labour parties bail-out of over-extended banks.  They wrap-up such an anti-capitalist policy in words that could be lifted straight from the Communist Manifesto and then blindly follow Labour through the division lobbies and support such dangerous and costly legislation.  Again, they allow the Bank of England to devalue currency by simply printing more of it, via Quantitative Easing  and then rationalize the whole thing by saying that there is no alternative and that they are making cuts to public spending.  Even when they know that the cuts that are being made are, despite all of the grandstanding and soundbites from the Labour Party and its mouthpiece, the BBC, tiny, and represent barely a scratch on the surface of the bloated beast that is state spending.

So, if you are a conservative, what can you do?

In the USA, the Tea Party represents a more conservative option.  They are touted as a divisive 'faction' within the Republican Party but I sense that they are actually a far greater influence than the 'old' Republican establishment yet understand.

For UK Conservatives?  I couldn't recommend UKIP, though their policy on the EU - offering a straight In/Out referendum is sound.  Their other policies, seem quite limited and seem to have patches of socialism running through them.  In fact, I would go further on the UKIP EU policy and say that this is the right one.  I don't think that the EU can be reformed, I do not believe there is the political will to do so.  For evidence refer to Francois Hollande's comments last week.  Still though, for me, UKIP is a one-trick pony. 

I think what is needed is a UK Tea Party - or a Tea Party done in the UK style.  That is, Conservative Associations adopting candidates that understand what being a conservative means.  That understand the need for a complete re-alignment of the social contract between government and the governed, with power and responsibility moving from the former to the latter. 

Of course this will take time but when you see people like Tim Yeo being de-selected by his constituency association, one lives in hope.

Please pass this post on to any Conservative Party members that you know and tell them that the future of conservatism lies in their hands.  All of us need to get active and breathe new life into the soul of conservatism and to use every opportunity to roll back the frontiers of the state and state control. 

Must Republicans change?

Following the US Presidential Election, the media, on both sides of the Atlantic is rushing to advise the Republicans that they need to change.  If I was a Republican, I would wonder why people, who are most definitely not my ally (Fox News being the exception), would be giving me friendly advice - what's in it for them?

Maybe I would also think, okay so we didn't win but did we massively lose?  The answer there is clearly no.

I would also look at say the UK and consider the fate of the nominally right of centre Conservative party.  They lost elections, badly, to the left leaning, statist Labour party.  The advice they received was 'you are seen as being too right wing' and 'you are the nasty party'.  So they changed their policies, they moved further to the centre.  Much further than many of their traditional supporters liked or wanted but these people still came out and backed them in elections.

The result?  The UK has a coalition government that is supposedly led by a centre-right Conservative party.  Supposedly?  Well yes, look at the agenda of the UK government - 40 years ago that would have been a dream for the socialists and would be unrecognizable to a  Conservative from that era.  In short, the Conservatives have 'sold their soul' for no real political gain.  They are in bed with the Liberal Democrats who know that they are a minority party and know that they always will be and so they act like one, all the time.  Their whole policy in government is to push their agenda and frustrate and block any truly Conservative policies. 

Recent polls suggest that the Lib Dems have now slipped into fourth place in the UK and are now trailing the anti-EU UKIP party.  The platform of UKIP is the most natural territory of the Conservative Party but the ' modernizers' that have David Cameron's ear shy away from showing any courage on Europe and instead think that pussyfooting around and making empty threats is going to impress either our European partners or the UK public.

So, my advice to American Republicans is hold true to your principles and beliefs.  Resist the siren calls from the leftist media - their motives at least, are clear.  Remember that there is still an incredibly high number of Americans who value free enterprise, pride in country, faith and other Republican values.  Remember also, on November 6, 2012, America elected a President that doesn't have a plan, one that is facing the 'fiscal cliff' without a clue how to solve it or address America's fiscal debt and deficit or to define America's role in the world.

If you ditch and run from your principles, simply for supposed electoral gain, on what do you stand?

The American Election of 2012

So through this primary process, Mitt Romney emerged as the winning Republican candidate.  Not a popular candidate with many, including in his own party, but he managed to outspend and outgun his opponents.

I have my reservations about him and some of his prior policy activity but  his inspired choice of running mate, Paul Ryan, gives America a really great opportunity to elect a real no-nonsense conservative.  The key will be how the partnership between Romney and Ryan will function.

If Romney is foolish enough to restrict Ryan to the largely ceremonial role normally reserved for VPs, then he will miss a great opportunity to exploit a great mind and a person recognised for his integrity and common sense approach and for his 'right-thinking' ways as regards taxes and the US deficit and debt.

I wonder if there is any restriction on Ryan serving in a dual capacity - VP and Treasury Secretary?  Starting off with a cost saving measure - two jobs for the price of one - wouldn't hurt!

So what about Obama? Will he ditch Biden (or will Joe stand down) and then pick Hillary as a running mate?

Reading the partisan and widely pro-Obama press, one gets the idea that the Romney-Ryan ticket has got the Obama campaign rattled.  Romney was pushing Obama but now that Ryan is on-board, I think that the Republican ticket will start to pull marginally ahead.

Obama can't look to the economy for help.  While US Federal spending remains high and, if Obama has his way, goes higher still, the only solution is to raise taxes - and we are not talking about on rich people, we are talking about on the huge swathe of middle class Americans  - that's the only place where the revenues raised can start to make any kind of impact on the deficit numbers.

Then there's Obama's failed foreign policy initiatives and promises - what did he say about troop levels in Afghanistan?  They are higher now, than when Bush left the White House.  Dialogue with Iran? How did that work out? I still don't get how this 'leading from behind' is supposed to work.  Don't recall seeing Obama being feted in Tripoli!  Can see him (and America) being castigated for inaction over Syria, where the Assad regime and their Iranian backers pursue a 'slaughter of the innocents' policy.  Meanwhile China is flexing its muscles in the South China Sea and angering neighbours in Vietnam, Japan and the Philippines and where is America?  And all the time, Chavez and the 'loco lefties' in Latin America nip and pinch at American interests, with impunity.

To go back to the start of this post, it is perhaps a measure of Romney's previously shaky support, that the Republicans are not 'streets ahead' in the polls, given the idealistic incompetence of Obama and his team.  Let's hope for Romney's sake and especially for the sake of America (and right thinking folks, everywhere) that the addition of Ryan, to the ticket, brings political and economic competency to the White House to allow the world to see that fine words and speeches a la Obama don't amount to much if they are not backed-up with action.

Here though is a question for Democrat party supporters.  Okay so Obama got his health care bill through and he continues to suck-up to Public Service unions but in your heart of hearts, in the dark of night, when you are alone and quietly thinking, do you not see that the last 4 years have been a wasted opportunity?  Be honest now!