What's New

by Brandon Kenig
Forum and Social Media Director

Recently, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was asked for her opinion on the raging controversy over the decision to approve the building of a mosque just mere blocks from the devastation of the 9/11 attacks at Ground Zero.  Pelosi responded:

“In America you have the right to build a mosque anywhere you want, or to protest it,
or to be investigated by the Federal government for protesting it."

Excuse me?  Since when does the government have the right to investigate law-abiding citizens peacefully protesting?  The 1st Amendment to the Constitution guarantees the right to assembly, i.e. the right to protest.  Pelosi's words signal a dangerous attempt to stifle free speech and intimidate those who dare exercise their rights, but sadly, this is par for the course for the modern Democratic Party, which has now filed complaints to open a series of investigations into Americans for Prosperity, a non-profit conservative organization that advocates for low taxes and less spending.  The group had the audacity to run radio and TV ads criticizing Democratic candidates around the country and tying them to Obama's policies in Washington, so now they are being targeted and scrutinized at a level unseen by most similar advocacy groups, including liberal groups like MoveOn.org and Moving America Forward,
which are lavishly funded by billionaries like George Soros and contain a shadowy network of donors and related affiliate groups.

I recall Hillary Clinton in 2003 shouting, "I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration." 

Where is Hillary's outrage now?  Apparently, dissent is only patriotic and in-vogue when Republicans are in charge.  The hypocrisy and arrogance of Democrats who cried foul and claimed that dissent was discouraged under the Bush administration but are now ready to unleash threats and government investigation onto their critics is stunning.

Thankfully, the backlash is coming this November and no matter how prepared Democrats are, they won't know what hit them.

Posted by: Brandon Kenig, Forum and Social Media Director, RIGHTWING.COM

The future of Obamacare is unknown and while complete repeal is unlikely, major reforms to the law seem much more possible now thanks to a vote in the Show-Me state that sent shockwaves throughout Washington and the ruling political class.

Proposition C was a largely symbolic measure reaffirming the right of Missourians to choose their own healthcare or not have healthcare at all, sharply challenging the federal government’s infamous mandate in the new healthcare law that forces all Americans to buy health insurance or face steep criminal penalties.

Missourians not only rejected Obamacare in the August primary vote—they made their feelings heard with landslide margins.  Over 71 percent of Missourians voted for Proposition C, expressing their opposition to the healthcare law, versus only 29 percent who support the current law.  And a sign of the intensity of the opposition to the new law is the number of people who voted on the ballot question statewide: 942,570 Missourians, 40,000 more than who voted in the expensive and closely-watch Democratic and Republican primaries for the high-profile U.S. Senate race this fall.

Arizona and Oklahoma are already crafting similar measures to give their populations an opportunity to opt-out of the government mandate.  And you know the mandate is in trouble when former Democratic presidential candidate and liberal Dr. Howard Dean is blasting the mandate and predicting it will be found unconstitutional.  

Never before in the history of our great republic has the federal government mandated that Americans buy a good or service or face criminal penalties in the way of fines or incarceration.  Liberals like to compare the health insurance mandate to auto insurance mandates, but this comparison is insufficient because #1: No one is required to own a motor vehicle, and auto insurance can be correctly seen as part of the cost and responsibility for purchasing a car, just as a physician is required to carry liability insurance to practice in their field and an attorney is required to maintain an active law license, and #2: auto insurance is a state mandate—not a federal mandate.  

Traditionally, in our federal system of governing, states have been afforded more power to compel citizens to adhere to certain regulations and requirements.  Our Constitution does not endow the Federal government with this same authority to compel and coerce.  So unlike auto insurance or any state mandate, under the new healthcare law, Americans, by virtue of just being born and alive in this country would be forced to carry health insurance irrespective of any other factors.

Americans still retain some of that rugged individualism passed down from our ancestors, the first colonists and settlers of this country, and we really do not like being told what to do.  With approval polls showing over 50 percent of Americans still in opposition to the healthcare mandate and favoring appeal, you can be sure that Americans will soon express their disapproval with their own “mandate” to the federal government—a mandate for change this November, the first step to repeal of the most onerous and heinous provisions of the new healthcare law.

Posted by:  Ross Vogel

The polling numbers indicate the rock star status of President Obama has almost completely vanished.  I have friends----probably many more than I know or I’d like to admit---who actually voted for Obama.  Interestingly, I’ve had several of those friends fess up in the past few months.  At that time, they both admitted they had voted for Obama and admitted it was an error they wished they hadn’t made.  What happens to these former Obama voters in 2012? Well it’s too early to know….unfortunately memories are much too short.  

First, some of you will assume this is Pro-Obama.  Let me say I am opposed to Obama’s policies and politics.  Tax increases and increasing the size of government are not the answer no matter what the economic conditions happen to be.  Obama, his administration and the people he has surrounded himself with are true believers in hard left leaning viewpoints.  In their mind government and government programs are the answer.  The free market, and those of us attempting to create in the private sector, could not possibly provide services in a way that a government program is capable of doing.  Obama believes this, and that can’t be described as anything but his political principles.  

Look at it this way, President Obama has been on the wrong side of public opinion on Arizona Immigration and healthcare reform (of course, we regular folk just weren’t sophisticated enough to understand the complexities of healthcare).  Both of these stances are political errors to most of us, but, given Obama’s politics, not a surprise.  Obama’s recent Ground Zero Mosque comments were the final straw for me, however.  They left me scratching my head.  There are conflicting reports as to whether he was forced to comment on the situation, but it appears he didn’t have a compelling reason to comment.  He, his team, or both obviously wanted to make the statement.  

All of us appreciate the support of the 1st Amendment.  Read the following words, unfortunately entangled with Obama’s support for the Ground Zero Mosque, “This is America.  And our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable.  The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country and that they will not be treated differently by their government is essential to who we are.  The writ of the Founders must endure.”  Obama was addressing religious freedom and equality and his words are in fact beautifully elegant.  It’s unfortunate these comments will never be appreciated because of the context in which they were stated.

I t baffles one to think that intelligent political people, the President included, could make the decision to air their beliefs about the Ground Zero Mosque publicly.  You could go on as to the reasons why the Mosque shouldn’t be built near Ground Zero, but very simply, a large majority of the families and friends who lost loved ones are completely against a Mosque being located near the site.  Enough said for me, the sensitivities of those affected most should prevail.  Surely someone said, “Mr. President, I don’t think we should go here.  If nothing else you speaking out about this could hurt a Democrat in an election this Fall.”  Obviously, this didn’t occur.    

Let’s assess the options. Obama didn’t think about it or no one within his inner circle mentioned how sensitive this subject might be to many Americans---Politically Inept!!!  Obama and his team recognized the potential political fallout and didn’t care---wrong, but Incredibly Principled.  Perhaps another more politically sinister answer lurks.  Let’s face it, the economy may or may not be better by 2012.  No question, the Republicans may take back the House and possibly could take back the Senate in the November mid-term elections.  As much as we hope the Republicans will sweep, neither of those are guaranteed.  So consider this: perhaps the view of the Obama team is that they have a much better chance of winning re-election in 2012 if they can create legislative gridlock because the Republicans control one or more Chambers of the legislature.  Additionally, it would be very nice not to have to see himself next to Nancy Pelosi in every Republican presidential ad in 2012.  

Perhaps we’ll not know the real answer, but one guarantee is a large majority of the moderate folks who have now disavowed their original support for Obama I mentioned earlier will not remember the Ground Zero Mosque gaffe in 26 months during the media-created Obama the Rock Star 2.0 in 2012.

                  

Posted by: Brandon Kenig, Forum and Social Media Director, RIGHTWING.COM

To hear supporters of the new law and some folks who are just ignorant of the law itself tout the healthcare law as healthcare reform only infuriates those of us who know what it truly is:  it may be referred to as health insurance reform (although, reform in a positive sense is not what the law does at all) but the law is certainly not reform of the healthcare industry.

The law’s provisions deal exclusively with health insurance:  the mandate to purchase insurance, the requirement that insurance providers cover pre-existing conditions, new regulations mandating that employers provide health insurance or pay a fine—the list goes on.  The law, however, does not address the immediate and growing dilemmas with the healthcare industry itself: exponentially-increasing costs for healthcare goods and services; the shortage of qualified doctors and nurses to meet the growing demand of the American population, especially as baby boomers retire; the lack of portability of insurance coverage across state lines; barriers to entry and stifled competition for the emergence of new insurance carriers willing to compete for consumers; the lack of standardization and centralization of medical records; and the roadblocks to implementing new technologies for patient records and for streamlining treatments.

Most believe this watered-down takeover of the health insurance industry is only a first step towards a government-run single payer system.  If so, we could learn well from other countries dealing with the consequences of government care.

I recently visited Sydney, Australia earlier this year and had the opportunity to witness a session of the New South Wales Parliament, the state legislative body governing Australia’s largest state and it’s most populous city.  The main issue being debated: access to healthcare.  Australia has a hybrid public-private healthcare system.  Free healthcare is guaranteed for all 20 million Australians through a government-run scheme, but private healthcare facilities are also allowed to operate and Australians can patronize these physicians and facilities at their own expense.

The parliament session was led by Premier (similar to the governor of a U.S. state) Kristina Keneally, of Australia’s leftist, Labor Party, acknowledged that the federal government had not followed through on its promises to the states, and New South Wales was experiencing critical shortages of hospital beds, vaccines, and medical equipment, along with complaints from citizens about long wait times for procedures and appointments.  Australia’s right-leaning Liberal Party leaders in the Parliament argued for decentralization of healthcare decision making and allowing individual states and cities to allocate budget dollars for healthcare, with decision-making shifting to doctors, nurses, and hospital administrators rather than bureaucrats in Canberra, Australia’s capital city.  

Keneally, alarmed that New South Wales residents may be inclined to support some of these common-sense policies in light of the failure of the leftist, federal leadership on the issue, immediately accused her political opponents of favoring…wait for it…privatization.  She also said that New South Wales “would not return to the big business, privatization schemes of the Howard government.”  John Howard was the former Prime Minister, a conservative member of the Liberal Party and the favorite bogeyman of Australia’s left since he lost his last election.  Sound familiar?

The session quickly turn cantankerous as members of parliament shouted each other down and personally attacked one another over this extremely intense and volatile issue.  The barrister had to quiet down the legislators several times for being out of line.

I found it ironic and revealing that these problems with centralized, government-run healthcare, which are happening in Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom—are largely ignored by the U.S. media, but incite intense and fierce debate in those countries over whether policy should move towards privatization and local control.  The United Kingdom has already taken the first step: under Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron, Britain’s National Health Service will be downsized with most authority and decision-making devolved to the level of town councils and similar bodies.

Even in Australia, healthcare was a major issue in their most recent election this past week.  Labor lost its majority in the federal parliament, and fared extremely bad in New South Wales, home to Sydney and Australia’s most populous state, a liberal-leaning bellwether for the entire country.  Pundits down-under are now predicting that Keneally will lose her premiership in the upcoming state spring elections and that the conservative Liberal Party may gain control of the New South Wales Parliament for the first time in decades.

The irony of ironies is that as Europeans move away from their socialized healthcare schemes to patient-centered healthcare based on choice and access, the United States, long the world’s bastion of individual freedom and liberty, will be moving further away from its own ideals and the trend of European social democracies.

RIGHTWING.COM has named Brandon Kenig as Forum and Social Media Director.  In his new role Kenig will spearhead all social media marketing for RIGHTWING.COM and serve as chief forum moderator on the Right Wing Forum.  Kenig began working for RIGHTWING.COM in April 2010, giving the company a presence on Facebook and Twitter.

Brandon Kenig graduated from Creighton University in 2008 with his Bachelor’s degree in Marketing and a co-major in Political Science.  While still in college, Brandon interned for Sen. Sam Brownback in DC in 2006, served as statewide volunteer coordinator for Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman's successful 2006 election campaign, and has since assisted with several federal and state legislative campaigns.  A Kansas City native, Brandon continues to be extremely active in Kansas politics, currently serving as chairman of the Johnson County Young Republicans and an elected Republican precinct committeeman.  Brandon also works as an account manager for a software technology firm and writes for his own online political blog, the Kenig Konnection.

After months of planning and re-design the new Right Wing website is set to launch! Thanks to the design assistance of MyModernWeb (Joplin, MO) many new enhancements have been made to the site. In addition to an entirely new visual layout of our online store, visitors will enjoy the ability to easily find information for each product and additional product images showing much greater detail.

Most anticipated is the new "Right Wing Forum."  Registered users will enjoy the ability to participate in the much improved forum and share their opinions and comments with world.