An Open Letter to All Democrats

Dear Democrats,

Lately, I’ve begun to sense an increased feeling of animosity in your tones as you address me and my ideas. You call me judgmental, call my views “un-useful”, and even wish for my death (person has since protected their tweets so the “@lgoddard I hope you die…” tweet isn’t accessible). But while you continue to attack me personally, I want you to know where I stand.

Even though we may disagree on issues, I do not hate you. I’ll still wish you a happy birthday, cheer for the same sports team, joke about your follies, enjoy your company, and congratulate your successes. We are, after all, both human beings. You’re not any better than me and I’m not any better than you. We both face life’s ups and downs. We both know joys and heartaches. So I aim to treat you as a fellow human being, not an illogical idiot.

Now, despite what view you may have of me for being a Republican, please put that aside. I know some people in my party have shown you a fanatical, ugly side of partisanship, but rest assured, you won’t get that from me.

I will warn you though that I’m not a compromiser—I’ll stick to my beliefs. I won’t back down from my ideas, but I would expect nothing less from you. The beauty of America is that we can have opposing views and still live peaceably.

So I reach out to you in a civil discussion of ideas, and while you’re not obligated to return the favor, I would appreciate a calm debate rather than hateful remarks. If you want to discuss something, I’m game. But please don’t threaten me to make a point.



Who Are The Intolerant Ones?

The Day of Silence was a day that children were encouraged to remain silent the entire day at school in honor of their LGBT classmates. Rather than encouraging this, Executive Director of Capitol Resource Institute’s Karen England encouraged parents to keep their children home from school rather than allow a day to be wasted in non-teaching. As a result, Mrs. England was threatened and extra security had to be placed at Capitol Resource Institute. The following is a video of some of the emails, voicemails, and communication she received as a result of her suggestion.

And I ask you, who are the ones who are intolerant here?

Why I Oppose SB 572—Establishment of a Day of Recognition for Harvey Milk

California Senate Bill 572 as proposed by Senator Mark Leno would establish a day of recognition for Harvey Milk, a homosexual activist. As the bill states, “This bill would provide that the Governor proclaim May 22 of each year as Harvey Milk Day, and would designate that date as having special significance in public schools and educational institutions and would encourage those entities to conduct suitable commemorative exercises on that date.”

Harvey Milk’s life was characterized not by contributions to this state, but by contributions to the LGBT movement. Therefore, dedicating a day to him would be dedicating a day to the LGBT movement, not to honoring a man who helped California. And as of right now, there are 16 student-led days honoring the multi-sexual movement (everything from Day of Silence, Gay Pride Day, to the festivities surrounding Martin Luther King Jr Day). Do we really need to take another day away from school to teach about Harvey Milk?

If it’s just about the fact he was brutally murdered, why not have a Mayor Moscone Day? They were both killed for the same reason—they did not want Mr. White to have his position back as supervisor. Mr. Milk was not murdered because he was gay, so why are we even considering a state day of recognition for him that would promote the LGBT lifestyle?

There are more deserving people who should receive a day of recognition before Harvey Milk. What about Walt Disney who brought billions of dollars of revenue into our state and who continues to encourage children to hope, dream, and achieve great things. What about Ronald Reagan who was a California governor who went on to become President and essentially, end Russia’s control of Germany?

If we really want to designate a day of recognition to someone who did nothing for our state but was a civil rights leader, what about Jackie Robinson? He broke the color barrier in baseball here in Los Angeles. His courage has had more impact on our state and our nation than Harvey Milk has.

Side Note: I am not in favor of a Walt Disney Day, a Ronald Reagan Day, or a Jackie Robinson Day. I believe we should allow the teachers to teach their curriculum without taking time out for special interest days. As it is, our children rank as some of the poorest educated in the nation. Last year 69% of 8th graders were not proficient in reading skills. 23% couldn’t do basic math and writing exercises. We need to focus on educating our children who are suffering from a lack of education already.

What it comes down to is Harvey Milk is a local figure who, as Governor Schwarzenegger has said, should be and has been honored locally. There are several schools named after Harvey Milk, recreation centers and parks bear his name, local clubs and organizations honor him, a movie has been made about his life, and a bust of him was introduced in front of San Francisco City Hall not long ago. We don’t need a state mandate to honor Harvey Milk.

Mr. Black recently said that it would cost nothing to have this day of recognition but it would cost much to not have it. He alluded to the fact that many children face name-calling and bullying based on their sexuality. If that is happening, then schools are not obeying the law. Law already states that children are not allowed to be discriminated against based on race, sexuality, or any ethnic diversity. That’s something that Harvey Milk Day wouldn’t help, but schools enforcing state law would help.

In the end, I think we can all agree that our children’s primary focus at school should be learning. Learning the basics of reading, writing, arithmetic, and science so they have a better chance of succeeding in the world. Since we’re obviously failing in those areas, it’s time we got back to focusing on schooling rather than politicking in the classroom.

The Truth about the “Hate Crimes Bill”

H.R. 1913—the “Hate Crimes Bill”—passed the House of Representatives last week and is up soon in the Senate, even as soon as this week. This “Hate Crimes Bill” would make it illegal to not only commit a hate crime against someone but also “cause” a hate crime through your speech. It protects lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual (LGBT) people along with pedophiles and 30 other sexual orientations from being spoken against in public.

The reasoning for this bill is said to be a “hate epidemic” against LGBT people in America. But is there really a rash of people murdering LGBT people? Let’s examine the facts in the following article put out by this website.

There is no epidemic of hate against LGBT persons in America.

FBI hate crime statistics prove our point: FBI statistics on “hate crimes” against a person’s sexual orientation from 2007 (the latest available) reveal the following: In 2007 there were 1,521 victims of “sexual orientation” bias (Table 7). However, the breakdown of these crimes is listed as:

* 335 were crimes of intimidation (shouting or name-calling)

* 448 were crimes of simple assault (defined as pushing or shoving without physical injury)

* 242 were crimes of aggravated assault (defined as bodily harm)

* 9 bias murders were committed.

(Source: FBI statistics 2007)

In short, there were only 242 crimes against a person’s sexual orientation that could be considered “violent.” And, twenty-seven of these bias crimes were directed against heterosexuals! All together, there were 9,535 victims of bias crimes in 2007. This includes bias against race, religion, sexual orientation, ethnicity/national origin, disability, or multiple-bias incidents.

The FBI statistics do not indicate how many of these “violent hate crimes” were committed by homosexuals against other homosexuals – or what provoked the violence.

Out of a total number of 855,856 cases of aggravated assault in 2007, only 242 were directed at LGBT individuals. This is only 0.02827578411446785% of all aggravated assaults! This is not an epidemic of hate against LGBT individuals.

So, in a nation of 300 million people, there were only 242 “violent” crimes against homosexuals, bisexuals or drag queens in 2007. This is no epidemic of hate and local law enforcement does not need intrusive federal intervention to deal with such a miniscule number of crimes.

TAKE ACTION: Contact your two U.S. Senators immediately and ask them to vote NO on S. 909 or any variation of H.R. 1913.

Presidential Legal Counsel Sees Pregnancy as Slavery

With [the President’s] appointment of Dawn Johnsen, a former NARAL [National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League] attorney, as the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of the Legal Counsel, pro-life advocates already know they are getting an abortion advocate in the position. But Johnsen goes further and views pregnancy as slavery.

Johnsen is a professor at the Indiana University School of Law, but she is also a longtime abortion advocate and worked for one of the leading abortion advocacy groups. Johnsen was the legal director for NARAL from 1988-1993.

In an article at National Review, Andrew McCarthy says that Johnsen’s view of pregnancy as slavery wasn’t just an off-the-cuff remark. “It was her considered position in a 1989 brief filed in the Supreme Court,” he explains, and the legal papers she filed concerned a Missouri law banning taxpayer funding of abortions. In the papers, Johnsen said that any restriction that makes abortion less accessible is, in her view, tantamount to “involuntary servitude” because it “requires a woman to provide continuous physical service to the fetus in order to further the state’s asserted interest [in the life of the unborn].”

American First, Republican Second

This is an article R. Patrick Murphy and myself have been working on for a few days. The original post can be read here at TheNextRight.

EDIT: The post can now also be seen on The Dana Report’s blog. Thanks Alan and Ari!

Americans have sent a clear message that must be reflected upon: As Republicans, we are not trusted to lead this country. After the results from eight years of a George Bush Presidency and six years of a Republican Congress, voters decided it was time for change. Who can blame them?

Democrats promised voters they would deliver the essential functions of government, such as a dependable economy and consistent national defense, while acting responsibly and effectively. Their promise of post-partisan politics was appealing as well, considering the growing desire among voters to elect representatives who will work for all Americans, not just a political party.

This remains a center-right nation, ideologically, but the last two election cycles demonstrated that Americans are willing to look past differences on the major issues and take a chance on candidates who have promised to be more productive and competent than their predecessors. This represents a shift in the political landscape, away from ideology and towards pragmatism.

To move this country forward, Republicans and Democrats must work together to develop the best solutions for the serious problems our country faces. Just as Republicans and Democrats allied after the disasters of September 11th, both parties must join together to guarantee America’s  problems are resolved. As Americans, we must demand that our elected representatives cooperate to solve the very serious dilemmas in America right now.

Some question the conservative credentials of Republicans willing to work with Democrats, but it should be stated that the goal is never to dilute conservatism via compromise. Republicans must never acquiesce or waver in defense of our core conservative principles: strong national defense, free market capitalism, freedom and liberty for individuals, decreased tax burden for all taxpayers, and limited waste in government. While Republicans will not win each battle, we must always be prepared to defend and promote our principles. If not, both Americans and Republicans will lose.

Delivering on the promise of good bipartisan government requires that liberal and conservative tenets are represented in every discussion. Unfortunately, when Republicans offered conservative additions to a very liberal stimulus plan, they were swiftly rejected by Congressional Democrats and President Barack Obama. We should all support Republican Congressmen in their fight to protect capitalism and lower taxes on middle and low-income workers.

Regrettably, vocal conservatives derided their actions as traitorous, instead of rallying support. This criticism is not only juxtaposed to the economic interests of the country, but also inhibits Republican efforts to rebuild our damaged credibility. As a party, we cannot afford to become marginalized reactionaries who simply oppose for the sake of opposition. The outcome of such mindless opposition would be legislation without input from Republicans, robbing Americans of conservative principles that will help in these difficult times.

With Democrats controlling the executive and legislative branches of government, they will undoubtedly advance a liberal agenda. Because of such control, Republicans have only two clear choices of action-fight Democrats in futility or collaborate to ensure our conservative principles are represented. But be forewarned, trading insults back and forth will not stall overtly liberal plans.

Once both political parties acknowledge the benefit of collaboration, they will be able to provide the most needed improvements for our nation. Republicans will also receive an invaluable opportunity to reassert credibility and narrow the trust gap with the American people. When this is combined with expanded outreach to young and minority voters, Republicans will enjoy a vastly improved electoral outlook.

In the end, it doesn’t matter to most Americans if something comes from a Democrat or Republican. Everyone desires a government that works. Americans must demand that both Republicans and Democrats place America ahead of partisanship. It’s imperative that we are all Americans first, partisans second.

Lauren is the Head Editor at The New Republicans and a Senior at West Coast Baptist College in Los Angeles. Patrick is the Chairman Emeritus of the Texas Federation of College Republicans and a Sophomore at Collin College in Dallas. Both are experienced campaign staffers.

Would You Like Some Taxes With That Change?

We tried to tell you…