California, Wisconsin, And You

Posted on June 6, 2012 by


Although two California cities, San Diego and San Jose, held their own public-employee union trimming sessions yesterday, the brunt of attention has, of course, been focused upon Wisconsin, where public-employee union thugs poured some $21 million into their effort to remove Governor Scott Walker – and failed.Rifle-scope-3Unsurprisingly, the goons and their drooling Leftist pals have unleashed a torrent of death threats toward Walker for having the unmitigated audacity to win (for the second time in two years). Many of these fine folks, naturally, were solemnly calling for “civility” while blaming the shooting of Rep. Giffords on “racist, violent teabaggers” (even when they call for civility, they can’t help but engage in name-calling; it’s in their DNA). By now, it should be apparent that efforts to “reach across the aisle” and to compromise with these inDUHviduals is a fool’s errand; there is no “working with” them, because there’s nothing there to work with. They must, quite simply, be destroyed as political forces.

And although public employee unions fought hard against the California measures, they couldn’t overcome two fundamental truths that resonated among voters: the pensions and benefits to which public unions have become accustomed are, to use one of their favored bureaucratic buzzwords,unsustainable, and more generous than those in the private sector. Between these victories and the more publicized Wisconsin battle, the stage is set for similar confrontations across all levels of government in the near future.

While conservatives, and in particular, those identifying with the TEA Party movement, have been widely reviled in mainstream US media and among the Left in general, the gains that they’ve made toward expanding liberty and reducing the scope of government are undeniable. Bluntly put, their approach works – while those of the public employee unions, the far Left, and the “occupie” crowd have increasingly met with failure. Two factors appear to explain much of this dichotomy: conservatives and the hated TEA Parties spring from true “grass-roots” values; public employee unions, the “occupie” types, and in fact most Leftists are organized and led by people who are in polar opposition to the values that most Americans and immigrants hold dear. The other factor seems to involve the composition of the competing forces: the TEA Parties, after all, are composed of folks who have banded together because they believe that they are Taxed Enough Already; a perspective that meshes well with traditional conservative values of limited government and an emphasis upon the Rights set forth in the Founding documents of the USA. By contrast, the far Left and their friends in the “occupie” crowd consistently appeal for expanded government and ever-increasing entitlements; desires which perfectly complement the public employee union vision of ever-expanding government, ever-increasing pay, ever-increasing pensions, and Cadillac health care.

Taken together, these two factors hold dire implications for the public unions and their organized Leftist friends when considered in light of the results of elections in Wisconsin and California: the wheels may be falling off the gravy train. Their reaction, though vulgar and occasionally violent, is completely understandable: they’re in a state of fear.

Fortunately, they appear unable to internalize the fact that their threats, their vulgarity, their vandalism, and their periodic descent into assault and other violence have the effect of alienating their intended target audience; despite characterizations of conservatives and TEA Party affiliates as “racist”, greedy, mean, etc., Americans increasingly note that they’ve never seen those people smash windows, set fires, nor issue threats against others. The pendulum of public opinion is not only swinging back toward center-right, it’s being pushed  in that direction by the ongoing tantrums of the Left.

Many have claimed that the Wisconsin results constitute a bellwether of sorts, but such conjecture is premature. Mitt Romney, although long favored by the Republican establishment (you know, the ones who get elected and then immediately start behaving like little Democrats), has never been regarded with great favor by conservatives and TEA Party affiliates, and he did himself no favors in this regard by selecting a RINO to lead his transition team, should he be elected. If he is to achieve that goal, he’ll need conservative support.

One thing in his favor is that conservatives realize all too well what an Obama victory means: given the groundwork that his administration has laid during the past three and a half years (and the extensive damage already done in that time), it is clear that if given a second term, the Obama administration will execute its original promise to fundamentally transform this country. That transformation is likely to involve a more or less imperial rule by executive order and administrative regulation, which both Congress and the Supreme Court will be powerless to constrain.

That alone may be sufficient to mobilize conservatives toward Romney. And for the sake of this country, it had better be.