Skewed Horizon

Christopher G. Adamo

By: Christopher G. Adamo

Immediately on the heels of last November’s elections, the “me too” wing of the Republican Party saw an opportunity to reassert its watered down liberalism as the wave of the future. Before the final numbers were even tallied, America was being carpet bombed with seemingly contrite Republican analysts relentlessly preaching that the nation has swerved unquestionably to the left, and that Republicans must follow the crowd if they are to shun the path of political irrelevance. Of course this advice ignores the obvious premise that such a party makes itself irrelevant by virtue of pandering and chasing the touted trends of the day rather than leading out of principle and conviction.

During the “fiscal cliff” circus, and later in the debt ceiling debate, the Republican hierarchy exemplified such wisdom by essentially caving to all of Obama’s demands, while reaping no tangible concessions in return. Now, the topic of critical importance is “immigration reform” which, when one wades past all of the flowery rhetoric from both sides of the political aisle, amounts to amnesty for between twelve and twenty million illegal aliens presently in the country.

Once again, and to nobody’s real surprise, Barack Obama has correctly interpreted the willingness of Republicans to “reach a deal” on this issue as unconditional surrender. So of course Obama is going to milk the situation for all of the political gain it is worth. Not content to merely destroy the integrity of America’s borders, gaining millions of new Democrat “voters,” and expanding the rift between the conservative grassroots and the GOP, he is adding further conditions that will perhaps fatally fracture that connection.

According to ABC News, Obama wants provisions included in any “immigration” measure that would guarantee spousal “rights” to same-sex immigrant pairs. In essence, he would require the predictable GOP acquiescence to include an abandonment of the party’s former stance in support of traditional values. As with the defining issue of taxes, Obama and his team of political strategists know that if Republican “moderates” take this bait, he will be driving an enormous wedge into the GOP, and perhaps a stake through its heart. But, just to be sure that his intention is unconditional surrender by the Republicans, he made abundantly clear in his Tuesday Las Vegas photo-op that border security as part of the deal would be out of the question.

As if Americans needed any more evidence, Barack Obama and his Democrat minions prove once again that they are as sincerely interested in the well-being of illegal immigrants as are they concerned about children’s safety in schools, preserving workable Social Security and Medicare programs, or averting national insolvency. Obama smells blood in the water, and is not about to let another golden opportunity for the consolidation of his political power slip through his fingers. This is the modus operandi of a community organizing bully, and will continue to be until he is stopped.

In response, Republicans are expressing increased frustration over his strong arm tactics and flagrant insincerity when dealing with these defining issues. Responding to Obama’s reprehensibly partisan and vitriolic inauguration speech, Republican House Speaker John Boehner asserted that the Administration is working to “annihilate the Republican Party,” and to “shove us into the dustbin of history.” While Boehner is absolutely right, conservatives outside of the Beltway have been infuriated by his unwillingness to recognize this obvious point since Obama made plain his tactics starting in 2009.

With the deck stacked so steeply against them, do Republicans have any options as they attempt to go forward as a political force? The unsurprising answer is that they have a single avenue to their party’s restoration. Unfortunately, it is the one that they have not been predisposed to undertake for many years, perhaps decades. Yet they ignore this option to the ultimate demise of the GOP. To all but the most severely myopic D.C. insider, it is apparent that Barack Obama, abetted by his lapdog House and Senate leaders, is indeed engaged in an all out war on America. To assert anything less is to go into battle with one’s armament holstered and stowed, which is a guarantee of defeat.

Furthermore, his venomous claim that those House members who oppose him come from “sharply gerrymandered districts that are very safely Republican,” and references to their supposed fear of being “punished on Fox News or by Rush Limbaugh” exhibit the mindset and tactics of a would-be tyrant who cannot fathom the need to accommodate the interests or concerns of others. While Obama remains in office, political discourse will be vicious, contentious, and personal. The end goal of Democrats is to win the debate by any means necessary. In the face of so much irrefutable evidence, Republican expectations of anything less is inexcusably naive.

The repeated calls by so-called Republican moderates for “finding common ground,” “working together,” and “putting partisanship aside” are as fanciful and disastrous now as they have ever been. Whenever Democrats offer such things, they are merely dangling the bait which belies a hidden snare. And nobody can honestly point to any example of political debate during the past four years in which the circumstances have been any different. It is beyond ridiculous to expect that, in the wake of what Obama interprets as voter reaffirmation of his agenda, he will happily give ground at this juncture.

In stark contrast to the continually failed approach of Republican capitulation, any promise of a future for the party must be buttressed by efforts to advance an agenda that is truly in the best interests of the American people. Rather than taking polls by which to decide what the party claims as its core principles, or even worse, responding defensively to those clearly biased network polls, Republicans must remain devoted to conservative positions proven as the basis for workable solutions to the problems facing the nation. And this course must be undertaken with complete indifference to the vicious demagoguery and distortions which will inevitably come from the Obama White House and its media minions.

Republicans do not need to repackage their platform or adjust their image in a misbegotten effort to appeal to those segments of the populace that would never support them. Rather, they need to take on the challenges facing them as if the fate of America, and not merely their party, hangs in the balance. For this is precisely the precipice to which the nation has been dragged. Politicking according to past practices will not save it. Only the reaffirmation of strong and principled conservative leadership can stall the liberal onslaught, and eventually drive back its sinister forces. Voters of the conservative grassroots have become painfully aware of this and are no longer willing to accept anything less.

Christopher G. Adamo is a resident of southeastern Wyoming and has been involved in state and local politics for many years. He writes for several prominent conservative websites, as has written for regional and national magazines. His contact information and article archives can be found at www.chrisadamo.com, and he can be followed on Twitter @CGAdamo.

Christopher G. Adamo

By: Christopher G. Adamo

It is somewhat ironic that Barack Obama’s inaugural speech is receiving scrutiny from some conservatives over its general lack of honesty and forthrightness. Of course, those characterizations are completely accurate. Any of his sanctimonious mentions of bolstering the national economy, cutting federal deficits, or promoting national unity are laughable, given his unbroken track record of eagerly doing exactly the opposite. Yet his most dishonest deed by far was to place his hand on a Bible and swear an oath by Almighty God to “preserve, protect, and defend” the Constitution of the United States of America.

Reciting those three dozen words, as stipulated for America’s chief executives by our national charter, may sound profoundly inspiring and will likely play well in front of sycophantic network cameras. However, the political agenda of Barack Obama has been built almost entirely on a strategy that circumvents, rather than upholds, that great document. In his twisted world, the Constitution is a collection of what he derides as “negative liberties” on government, meaning that it prevents him and his kind from doing those things which, in their beneficence, they know to be for the greater good of America.

It was just such a self-absorbed mindset that the founders understood and reviled. Having known too well the devastation it could inflict upon a people when augmented with the fearsome power of unfettered government, they diligently endeavored to thwart the ambitions of such narcissists. The founding of these United States was undertaken not on the premise of enshrining the State, but in maintaining proper limitations on its inevitable excesses and the dangers they posed to the common citizen.

Let the Democrats spew their sanctimony about the “need” to dismantle the Second Amendment in vain and fanciful hopes of reducing “gun violence” on the nation’s streets or in its schools. Throughout the entirety of human history, all combined instances of injury to one citizen at the hands of another pale in comparison to the horror that unfolded during just the last eight decades, exclusively inflicted by governments holding a monopoly of lethal force.

The record of the current administration is a burgeoning list of patently false promises, governmental overreach promoted through fraud and distortion, and criminal abuses of power. >From Obamacare, with its ludicrous assurances of providing “affordable healthcare” to Americans, to the propagation of agenda driven government controlled business disasters, to the systematic strangulation of the nation’s reliable and plentiful energy reserves, Barack Obama has clearly embarked on a program of destroying traditional America and remaking it in his sordid image.

Of course the latest such effort is his attempt, in the wake of the Newtown massacre, to advance the process of disarming Heartland America. He reassured the nation when delivering his twenty three point edict of January 16 that it would not infringe on the Second Amendment in any manner. And certainly nobody expects him to travel over to the National Archives, remove the Bill of Rights from its viewing case, and strike a red line through the offending text. Yet his end goal would essentially amount to the same thing. The glaringly inconvenient fact is that all of his proposed decrees would do less to prevent school shootings than his trillion dollar “stimulus” ever did to revive the economy.

The entire matter of that awful tragedy in Connecticut is, apart from its potential political value, an irrelevancy to this cold and heartless administration. Therefore having been exposed as another flagrant liberal overreach, predictably lacking in any benefit to society, his flailing grab at lawful gun ownership is clearly intended to serve another purpose.

Still bursting with confidence after having beaten the odds in his 2012 reelection, and believing that the national outrage over the Newtown horror would give him the momentum he needed, Obama shamelessly seized the moment to turn the tide on the Second Amendment. Much to his dismay however, the American people are rallying at the grassroots in an increasingly organized effort to fend off the onslaught of liberal gun grabbing. A multitude of events has underscored a monumental resolve among the American people to maintain their guns as a final assurance of the freedom that is the promise of America.

In Wyoming, Texas, and Missouri, legislative measures have been introduced that would reaffirm the right of the people to own and bear arms, while imposing criminal penalties on any federal agent within the borders of those states who might attempt to infringe on those rights. And the list of states considering similar measures continues to grow. Reasserting an almost forgotten institution of local authority, county sheriffs in some states are publicly vowing to not enforce any unconstitutional intrusions on gun ownership. Interestingly, a direct correlation can be drawn between those jurisdictions expressing such sentiments, and the relative safety of their citizenry.

Nevertheless, Heartland America should be wary of Barack Obama’s other underhanded motive for directly engaging the formidable power of the gun lobby. As an obsessive political strategist, he is fully aware of the enormity of the battle he has undertaken, and he has absolutely no intention of it becoming his Waterloo. Obama absolutely intends to continue his methodical dismantling of the America that once touted freedom, prosperity, and greatness. The assault on the Second Amendment is merely a single front in that conflict.

While Obama and the Democrats most likely underestimated the scope of residual pro-Second Amendment sentiment in the immediate aftermath of Newtown, they still believe they can relentlessly continue to make their case, invoking every isolated incident of gun-related crime as further proof of the inherent rightness of their cause. And, as has unfortunately been the case on too many occasions, they have good reason to expect their scheme to be validated and thus bolstered by the timely and predictable acquiescence of “Republican” moderates.

So far however, this dangerous ruse is not working. Gun purchases have skyrocketed, and in many locales, store shelves are empty of ammunition, not from any embargo on sales, but because “we the people” are stockpiling available supplies. Liberal efforts to shame their opposition, while appallingly effective on Republican invertebrates inside the Beltway, are summarily rejected on Main Street.

Nevertheless, with so much at stake, the shrillness of liberal/Democrat condemnations will only increase. Unless the American people remain fixed in their determination to preserve their rights and their heritage, the enshrined security of the Second Amendment, along with every other precept of individual liberty, will eventually cease to be anything but a forgotten scrawl of ink on an antiquated piece of parchment.

Christopher G. Adamo is a resident of southeastern Wyoming and has been involved in state and local politics for many years. He writes for several prominent conservative websites, as has written for regional and national magazines. His contact information and article archives can be found at www.chrisadamo.com, and he can be followed on Twitter @CGAdamo.

Christopher G. Adamo

By: Christopher G. Adamo

The liberal Democrat political machine has been in high gear seeking restrictions on gun ownership ever since the December 11, 2012 massacre of twenty young children and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown Connecticut. According to the left, that hideous event constitutes inarguable proof that America needs to rescind the Second Amendment. For the good of everyone, and particularly “the children,” the guns must go.

It might seem difficult to surpass such phony liberal sanctimony. Yet during the last days of 2012, as the contrived “fiscal cliff crisis” reached its do or die moment, the same old class envy diatribe spewed forth from the predictable cadre of leftists, starting with Barack Obama, and parroted by his trusty minions.

Meanwhile, the people on Main Street remain in shock over the grim transformation of their country that has been ongoing since 2009, with no end in sight. How could America have become such an alien place, where bedrock principles of the Constitution face imminent threat and the nation’s finances careen towards implosion, with Washington oblivious to the scope of the problem? How could an event as horrendous as the Sandy Hook shootings be so shamelessly exploited by politicians who clearly have no interest in addressing its root causes or achieving workable solutions, yet are happy to wield it as a means of bludgeoning their political opposition?

It is as if this nation, fittingly characterized by former President Ronald Reagan as the “shining city on a hill” and “last best hope of mankind,” is being systematically dismantled, and in its place a far less promising or hopeful society put into place. Yet no marauding army from across the sea can claim credit for this transformation. As humanity has been warned on too many occasions, a nation as great as the United States once was cannot be overcome from without until it has been destroyed from within. And on multiple fronts, our once great United States is proceeding down that desolate course, and has actually been doing so for some time.

Prominent Democrats jubilantly trumpet the ongoing debt crisis and mass tragedy in Connecticut as proof that America needs an ever greater dosage of their liberalism. This of course is primarily driven by their willingness to callously exploit any crisis (Never forget the words of Rahm Emanuel) in service to their political cause. But although the issues are admittedly tied to each other, it is for reasons that the left would not want America to contemplate. In many ways, the hysterics from liberal Democrats during the past four weeks have been motivated by an intense fear that the nation might ever reawaken to the real root cause of its escalating problems.

Tuesday, January 22 2013 marks the fortieth anniversary of the infamous “Roe vs. Wade” decision by which the United States Supreme Court concocted a “constitutional” provision legalizing human abortion across the nation. Intellectually honest legal scholars must concede that the court’s decision was a blatant departure from its proper role of maintaining the integrity of constitutional principle in the nation’s governance. Nevertheless, the moral implications of that horrendous episode of judicial activism vastly eclipse any mere concerns of an overreach by one branch of the federal government.

By virtue of that single cataclysmic moral failure, the entirety of the U.S. Government at its highest levels rendered the priceless “right to life” enumerated in the Declaration of Independence inconsequential. In the wake of that official sanctioning of indescribable evil, should anyone now be surprised that “liberty” and the “pursuit of happiness” would not long withstand the onslaught of a soulless and self-serving state?

Of course liberals and the counterculture have skillfully avoided full disclosure of their unconscionable denigration of all human existence. Invoking such terms as “choice” and “reproductive rights” to give their gruesome cause a veneer of legitimacy, they hysterically attack and accuse any who would dispute the worthiness of their cause.

The latest such effort is to deceitfully mischaracterize pro-life efforts as a “war on women.” If, according to pro-aborts, “war on women” mean slowing the rate at which expectant mothers exterminate their unborn children, then conservatives are indeed guilty. But if that “war” is defined as a concerted government effort to destroy the opportunities of all citizens, including women to live a better life and access open doors by which to provide for the children they do have and raise, then it is clearly the statist Democrats who have waged a cruel and incessant war on women, minorities, and all of Middle America.

Long before Roe, the time-honored ideal of private property ownership had also been under assault. It was during the administration of Franklin Roosevelt that the concept of one citizen being legally entitled to sap the earnings of another became popularized. And to the degree that America accepted the notion, it began its long, expensive trek down the slippery slope of socialism and the “nanny state.” Eventually, as forewarned by numerous historians, the consuming masses, rife with the sanctimony of their “entitled” status, are demanding more than can be produced to satisfy them. The economic doldrums of the past four years are only a harbinger of something much worse to come.

Nevertheless, the ethical downfall represented by America’s drift into collectivism under Roosevelt must be considered in conjunction with the wholesale societal annihilation of traditional morality undertaken by the American left during the 1960s, which has only worsened since. It is the dismal repercussions of these societal changes that have become so glaringly apparent in recent weeks.

An alarming portion of America’s youth no longer possess any remnant of conscience. And although the actual number who will resort to violence is much smaller, focus groups and discussions amongst the nation’s young reveal a frightening departure from any true understanding of right and wrong, since those concepts have been supplanted by the perverse and disjointed premises of “political correctness.” Concern for “the environment” and minimizing ones’ “carbon footprint” have replaced the quaint notions of kindness or compassion. Similarly, expectations that the state will ante up on “entitlements” thoroughly obscure any concern for the burden such programs may place on others.

Thus the nation slips ever further from its high place of justice, opportunity, and freedom on the world stage. In response, the political left deflects blame by intensifying the tone and shrillness of its accusations against those who, with a firm dedication to the Judeo-Christian ethic, once forged this nation in its greatness, and whose work and principles made it a bastion of optimism for the rest of civilization.

For unless such noble achievements are expunged from the nation’s collective memory, Americans might recognize the dire cause and effect relationship between the empty promises offered by liberals, and the disasters that have actually ensued from their policies. If that day arrives, the American people will reject the bitter poison that has brought down so many nations throughout history, and has demeaned them to this current sad state of affairs.

Then they can commence the rebuilding of their tattered nation on the bedrock of goodness that was bequeathed to them from its founding.

Christopher G. Adamo is a resident of southeastern Wyoming and has been involved in state and local politics for many years. He writes for several prominent conservative websites, as has written for regional and national magazines. His contact information and article archives can be found at www.chrisadamo.com, and he can be followed on Twitter @CGAdamo.

Christopher G. Adamo

By: Christopher G. Adamo

Apparently Republican career politicians inside the Beltway have a collective death wish. Faced with what they believed to be political impasse, they opted to completely abandon their conservative base and give their full support to the abhorrent and fiscally reckless policies of Barack Obama and the Democrats. Of course Republicans would argue that since Obama won reelection in November, they must acquiesce to his uncontested leadership. Sadly, they give no thought to the possibility that perhaps it is their constant inexcusable capitulation to the liberal establishment which has, more than any other factor, empowered the left as the dominant political force in Washington.

The grim reality of the nation’s current financial debacle is that each and every year the government spends in excess of a trillion dollars more than it can afford. And while deficits have been a fact of life since the nation’s founding, the current levels are unsustainable, and portend an eventual economic implosion if the situation is not shortly corrected. But rather than addressing the real needs of the nation, and weighing them against its inability to continue operating on the current basis, liberal politicians see an opportunity to bolster their dominance in Washington by promising even larger handouts to favored constituencies.

Such reprehensible behavior by Democrats reveals a complete abandonment of their constitutional responsibilities, and should result in thorough censure from the right. To the ongoing shock and dismay of the conservative grassroots, nobody in the Republican “leadership” appears willing to carry that torch. Hence, liberals continue their devastation of the nation’s finances with total impunity for their corrupt actions. In fact they publicly laud themselves as the saviors of Middle America while they systematically plunder it.

Such blatant and shameless liberal propagandizing, makes it difficult to comprehend the actuality of the “fiscal cliff” situation. Yet for that very reason, the present degree of distortion and misrepresentation needs to be addressed by recalling the original premise of this whole debate, and holding to account everyone on both sides of the aisle who have allowed it to be so flagrantly distorted.

Throughout 2009 and 2010, as Americans grew increasingly concerned with the profligate squandering of the nation’s resources by the Obama Administration, the people demanded that his reins be tightened before he was able to completely bankrupt the country. In 2011, with the nation approaching its $14.3 trillion debt limit, mechanisms were ostensibly put in place to ensure that the criminally irresponsible spending spree would be brought into line. The imaginary “fix” to which Republicans agreed mandated federal spending cuts in exchange for Republican relaxation of the debt limit. This was the essence of naive GOP expectations for good faith Democrat reciprocation when Republicans caved on that occasion.

Now, with the arrival of that deadline, congressional Republicans are amazed to find themselves once again on the defensive, facing an intransigent Obama White House and blind partisanship in the Democrat controlled Senate. Instead of sincerely addressing the raging excesses of government spending, Obama continually upped the ante, imposing tax hikes that will punish the so-called “rich” (his most disfavored constituency) while bolstering his redistributionist schemes for those who worship at the altar of “the state.”

In his latest exhibition of brazen fraud, Obama advances a statist ploy as his “fix,” while challenging his critics to “do the math.” However, even a cursory examination of the numbers inarguably proves that he and his cabal of political supporters are in no way interested in factual accounting. The advancement of their anti-capitalist agenda is simply too important to be bothered with the inconveniences of reality.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, the bogusly named “American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012” contains $600 billion in tax increases, while conceding a mere $15 billion in “cuts.” Even if these figures were genuine, they would represent a fiscal atrocity. Yet even the occasional mention of reducing expenditures is once again only a cruel mirage. Liberals regularly “cut” their financial outlays by initially proposing deliberately inflated numbers, and then claiming to do some token “trimming” of those amounts.

With deficits projected to exceed four trillion dollars in the next ten years (a number that will be vastly exceeded), absolutely no effort to reduce the depredation of America’s pocketbooks will be attempted. In short, from both sides of the aisle, Washington disclosed an intention to continue its rapacious spending, with no end in sight.

Not surprisingly, House and Senate Democrats jubilantly supported Obama’s sinister plan, exhibiting callous indifference to the collateral damage it inflicts on our once-great nation. Just as abhorrently however, the Republican acquiescence and compliance that ultimately made it a reality constitutes a wholesale betrayal of the American people. The seditious strategy of the Obama Administration and its leftist collaborators is based on the perpetual expansion of the government and a relentless encroachment on the private citizenry. Yet Republicans abetted this effort. No longer is either side of the political aisle concerned with steering the nation away from the true fiscal pitfall that it faces on account of its inexorable lurch into socialism.

Many among the conservative punditry claim that Obama will enjoy a significant political windfall from this debacle since the Republicans, by abandoning their core principle of opposing tax increases, are once again alienating their conservative base. However, to any who have observed flailing attempts by the philosophically bankrupt GOP Establishment to posture and pander its way into a position of leadership, this latest treachery comes as no surprise. With the exception of a few conservative stalwarts in its midst (many of whom Speaker Boehner vindictively purged from leading positions) the core of the Republican Party inside Washington is made up of morally and ethically rudderless political players.

Real conservatism has too often been squandered, even after such significant grassroots victories as the 2010 mid-term elections, because its key players were persuaded to align themselves with those they believed kindred in the GOP. In the wake of the “fiscal cliff” fiasco, and the needless and cowardly Republican acquiescence to Barack Obama, it has become painfully clear that conservatism must be unabashedly established and advanced as its own force for societal change if it is ever again to be taken seriously in the political world.

The primary stronghold of liberalism lies within the modern Republican Party. Until it is dismantled, attempting to turn the tide on the leftist onslaught will prove an exercise in futility.

Christopher G. Adamo is a resident of southeastern Wyoming and has been involved in state and local politics for many years. He writes for several prominent conservative websites, as has written for regional and national magazines. His contact information and article archives can be found at www.chrisadamo.com, and he can be followed on Twitter @CGAdamo.

Christopher G. Adamo

By: Christopher G. Adamo

If Conservative America has any real intention of ever making an effective stand against the onslaught of liberalism, now is the time to take note of the Republicans who remain firmly committed to principle, as opposed to those who will completely sell out the moment they believe the political winds to be shifting. And of the latter group, no belated apologies or election season reawakenings to conservative ideology should ever be accepted. Betrayal at this critical time must be recognized in its true light, and never again excused or overlooked.

On each occasion that the nation appears to lurch left, opportunists within the GOP are quick to exhibit their true feelings of disdain for conservatism, seeking to ingratiate themselves to the prevailing powers while betraying the voters on the right who put them into office. The political and societal upheaval of the past few weeks bears grim proof of the ongoing prevalence of this phenomenon.

Of course these same politicians are loud and insistent that they are the valiant gatekeepers of conservatism during those periods when grassroots America enjoys a resurgence of energy at the ballot box. In 2010, when stunning Republican gains in the House of Representatives put that body under the leadership of the GOP, everyone was a conservative, and all who jockeyed for dominance within the movement made claims of being the new incarnation of Ronald Reagan.

It was not long however before newly chosen Republican House Speaker John Boehner began to waffle and capitulate. By the time the 2011 Debt Ceiling debate reached its crescendo, Boehner was in full retreat, essentially giving Barack Obama everything he wanted. Boehner concocted a skirt to hide behind, lamenting that his realm was “only one half of one third of the government” as a means of justifying complete capitulation to Obama’s demand for trillions more in spending. In the process he abdicated the constitutional directive which placed him in complete control of the federal budget. Worse still, many congressional and Senate Republicans defied their 2010 electoral mandate and acquiesced to the debt ceiling hike, likewise seeking refuge in Boehner’s gutless assertion.

Now, in the wake of Barack Obama’s reelection, Speaker Boehner is once again looking to sufficiently grovel and capitulate, in vain hopes of avoiding blame for the ongoing disasters of the Obama agenda. Unfortunately, by trying so determinedly to find politically “safe” ground instead of holding fast to conservative principle, Boehner is indeed making himself complicit in the fiasco, along with the members of his party who abandon their principles and accommodate the bankrupting policies of Democrats.

Regardless of how venomously Democrats demand their pound of flesh from “the rich” as the contrived cornerstone of debt reduction, enormously increased taxation would merely represent a token effort at deficit reduction. The only road to fiscal recovery is to drastically cut spending. And Democrats regularly make it clear that they have no interest in this approach, since they have no intention of actually addressing or averting the debt crisis.

Unfortunately, Boehner has so far agreed to “close tax loopholes” (read: eliminate deductions), raise rates, and defer spending cuts until some unknown future date, which means never. In short, Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner has become a primary advocate of the Obama agenda. Once again Boehner makes the claim that he has no alternative which, properly translated means that he cannot find a political option that does not involve facing the media onslaught, and weathering venomous attacks from his Democrat opponents. Perhaps he should have considered these factors before accepting the post of Speaker.

Sadly, Boehner’s total philosophical and moral retreat has greatly emboldened liberal Democrats, who are increasingly aware that while conservative America remains firmly opposed to them, the Republican Party is completely imploding politically. Even before the Newtown disaster, the Republican budget surrender appeared as a signal for liberals to press forward with other essential components of their statist agenda.

Now, as the nation reels in the aftermath of that unfathomable tragedy, the left gleefully perceives it to be a window of opportunity and believes it may possess sufficient momentum to take out one of the biggest obstacles to its agenda, the Second Amendment. And once again, rather than delivering the political body block that such a seditious effort deserves, too many Republicans are attempting to “find common ground” (another euphemism for caving) with liberal demands that citizens be stripped of their time honored right to bear arms.

The evidence is overwhelming that disarming law-abiding Americans is the surest road to increased murder and mayhem. Only last week in an Oregon shopping mall, and at a Casper Wyoming hair salon, potential mass killings were decisively thwarted the moment perpetrators realized that they would face opposition from legally armed citizens. Of course the news media has completely suppressed coverage of these events, since their lessons thoroughly undermine the gun-grabbing goals of the left.

Perhaps a few irredeemably uninformed liberal politicians actually believe that they could make society safer by taking guns from the people. If so, those individuals should be removed from office on the basis of their sheer incompetence. However, a far more sinister political cabal invokes these empty claims and exploits tragedies such as Newtown, in service to the ominous cause of amassing uncontested governmental power.

In a manner wholly reflective of the bogus “fiscal cliff” debate and the liberal non-answers to it, gun control advocates demand that the American people be rendered totally defenseless and vulnerable. They blindly maintain that debasing the people to such a condition would somehow improve the safety of school children whenever the next mindless monster decides to make them his quarry.

Far from being held accountable for the fiscal and societal damage that their policies have spawned, liberals continue to claim the moral “high ground” from which to enforce further conformity to their twisted ideology. Republicans who are unwilling to oppose their abhorrently flawed policies are ultimately guilty of enabling them. Both groups must be identified and their true motivations characterized, so that they can be removed from the political system if it is ever again to function to the betterment of the American people.

Christopher G. Adamo is a resident of southeastern Wyoming and has been involved in state and local politics for many years. He writes for several prominent conservative websites, as has written for regional and national magazines. His contact information and article archives can be found at www.chrisadamo.com, and he can be followed on Twitter @CGAdamo.

Christopher G. Adamo

By: Christopher G. Adamo

Barely a week after the disastrous November 2012 election, Bobby Jindal, the Republican Governor of Louisiana, came down hard on his party, chastising it for poor public relations, and exhorting it to “stop being the stupid party.” Few among the conservative base would dispute such a characterization of the GOP. Yet a more thorough examination of Jindal’s comments reveals that he is falling into precisely the same trap that over time has garnered such a demeaning moniker for the party.

It is particularly ironic that Bobby Jindal would lament that “we had a number of Republicans damage our brand this year with offensive, bizarre comments.” In offering such an assessment, he joins the chorus of the shell-shocked on the right who were manipulated into overreacting to the occasional gaffe or mischaracterization uttered by campaigning politicians. Such occurrences are a fact of life, and a party will ultimately be crippled by fear and self-doubt if it obsesses on the prospect of avoiding every possible circumstance in which a comment can be hysterically overblown by an unscrupulous opposition. The real travesty is that Jindal and his accomplices reacted not to some horrendously indefensible ideology, but to the phony outrage of those on the left who, in lieu of a reasoned discussion of the issues, direct their entire efforts on finding the slightest error, in order to make it the central focus of a campaign.

Worse yet, Jindal’s defensive posture lends credence to the liberal Democrat strategy of contriving faults and engaging in personal attacks against any aspiring candidate on the right who could eventually pose a threat to the liberal agenda. And no incident of liberal character assassination is as illustrative of this tactic as was the manufactured derailing of Bobby Jindal himself, in the wake of his 2009 official Republican rebuttal to Barack Obama’s State of the Union message.

Jindal’s presentation was perhaps a bit bland and scripted, though his message was powerful and substantive. However, as a rising star within the conservative movement, he constituted a real threat to the Obama juggernaut. From the moment it was announced that he would give the official Republican response to Obama, a coordinated effort was put together to take him out politically. It would not have mattered if he had delivered the soaring oratory of Winston Churchill and combined it with the vision of Ronald Reagan, the canned liberal obituary of Bobby Jindal’s political career was already penned and distributed amongst liberal media types who then incessantly barraged the airwaves with pronouncements of Bobby Jindal’s implosion in front of a national audience. And if such a campaign can be effectively waged against Bobby Jindal, it can be done to anyone.

The lesson is simple, yet apparently wholly illusive to the political insiders on the right. Regardless of how strenuously conservatives seek to put forth their message while avoiding the abundance of pitfalls on the public stage, liberals will find fault with something, anything, to criticize in the most extreme terms. Thereafter, they will relentlessly deride those conservatives as “damaged goods” and wholly “unelectable.” Perhaps Bobby Jindal has since forgotten this. But let him throw his hat in the presidential ring in 2016, and he will immediately be reminded of his former unforgivable sins and thereafter mercilessly ridiculed on account of them.

To be sure, as Governor of Louisiana Bobby Jindal has been outstanding, and were he ever to ascend to the White House, America would be far better for it. His handling of the Gulf oil spill, especially in consideration of the numerous federally crafted obstacles he faced, was stellar. Nevertheless, he now seeks to put a good face on the principles of conservatism while staying within the boundaries set forth by the liberal media machine (itself a mere extension of the Democrat party). At best this endeavor is an exercise in futility. At worst it may foretell of an eventual wholesale philosophical surrender.

It is understandably tempting for Republicans to go along with liberal assaults on conservatives who stumble. Prominent voices on the right gleefully piled on to Missouri Congressman Todd Akin over his misuse of the phrase “legitimate rape” to differentiate between actual rape and bogus accusations of such. Yet it quickly became clear that the first priority of Akin’s conservative critics was to ensure that they avoid becoming targets themselves. In the process, they gave credence to the liberal attack machine, which is fraught with the hypocrisy of selective outrage and convenient myopia. Worst of all, by feeding this monster, conservatives unwittingly emboldened it and made themselves more vulnerable to it.

Of course candidates must be ever vigilant to avoid inadvertent statements that can be taken out of context, blown out of all proportion, and used against them. But when the party of Debbie Wasserman Shultz (D.-FL), Elizabeth Warren (D.-MA), and Joe Biden can deride Republicans for gaffes, and the GOP responds in full agreement and immediately reverts to introspection mode, its real problems go much deeper than occasionally inadequate public speaking skills.

Meanwhile, after their own frequent missteps, liberals merely issue themselves a “get out of jail free” card. They shamelessly engage in the most venomous attacks, are caught in the most glaring lies, and occasionally reveal the most abhorrent of ideologies (Who can forget “You didn’t build that.”?) and yet are allowed to get back to their seditious business after offering the most transparent disclaimers. Sadly, Republicans and conservatives (the two groups sometimes overlap) feel constrained from directly confronting these lapses among liberals merely because the media and punditry deny them any permission to do so.

It has become inarguable that Barack Obama is the quintessential statist. And statism is tyranny in progress. Yet neither Mitt Romney during his campaign for the presidency, nor the Republicans in the Congress feel they have the latitude to accurately characterize him in this manner. Consequently, Romney was hamstrung from bluntly addressing this contrast between himself and Obama. And now, as Obama moves boldly ahead with his plans to completely bankrupt America, no Republican in the House of Representatives will make a stand against him.

The Alinsky tactics by which Barack Obama and the Democrats on Capitol Hill now completely dominate political discourse, rely solely on the collective cowardice of their targeted adversaries. Therefore, while they can be extremely effective they are nonetheless vulnerable to a principled rebuttal. Unfortunately, in its current state, the Republican Party is ever more assuming the role of the ideal victim. Its political fortunes will not turn around until it recognizes the true nature of the battle it faces, and resolves to ignore the caterwauling from liberal propagandists as it pursues the proper course for America.

Christopher G. Adamo is a resident of southeastern Wyoming and has been involved in state and local politics for many years. He writes for several prominent conservative websites, as has written for regional and national magazines. His contact information and article archives can be found at www.chrisadamo.com, and he can be followed on Twitter @CGAdamo.

Christopher G. Adamo

By: Christopher G. Adamo

Americans are currently being inundated with panicked talk of the looming “fiscal cliff,” though the specific threats posed by this apocalyptic event are not always clear. And while an impending financial catastrophe should be cause for serious concern, its realities need to be recognized if they are to be properly confronted and the disaster averted. Unfortunately, the Obama administration and its media cronies are operating in their standard mode, and ignoring the real risks while doing their best to play the situation for all the political gain they can reap from it. Meanwhile, the fate of the American people is of no more concern to them than the hapless Embassy staff in Benghazi.

For too long, the federal government has been playing a dangerous game of “buy now, pay later,” amassing an unfathomable debt in the process. But rather than admitting the nation’s dire condition and redirecting it onto a path of responsibility, Barack Obama caused the crisis to escalate from the moment he assumed the reins of power in 2009. Significantly diminished revenues, the predictable result of a stagnated economy, along with a madcap spending policy that clearly abandoned all reason, combined to give the nation a four year run of deficits that vastly exceeded the trillion dollar mark.

Meanwhile, the unprincipled wheeling and dealing that occurs inside the Beltway created a doomsday scenario set to commence at the beginning of 2013, in which taxes significantly increase and dangerous cuts are imposed on the national defense budget. The inevitable consequence of these circumstances will be a significant economic slowdown which, we are told, neither party desires. Yet a closer look at how the nation was brought to this precipice, and more importantly, how each side is playing its current hand, reveals some disturbing truths about the actual motivations of those in power.

Nevertheless, few are asking how exactly the United States of America was brought to this point. The distasteful answer is that during the last major fiscal impasse, the 2011 Debt Ceiling confrontation, both political parties reverted to their standard fall back positions. Democrats stubbornly refused to consider any real reductions in spending, leaving Republicans with the only options of either holding their ground or kicking the can down the road. Sadly, but very predictably, they opted for the latter.

So now that the day of reckoning is arriving, the duplicity of the Democrats is being brought to bear against the tendency of the GOP establishment to back-peddle and capitulate. A real opportunity exists for Republicans to simply stand their ground, refuse to embrace economically devastating leftist policies, and highlight the enormous chasm that exists between the free market society that has historically prospered this nation, and its current careening course down to third world status. The stark contrast that exists between the economic worldviews of left and right have never been more apparent, and should be unabashedly trumpeted by those Republicans who have the courage to do so.

Consider the unpardonable “deals” Barack Obama continues to offer as he obsessively seeks to force Republicans to accept tax increases on the American people. Claiming that his policies will gain between $800 billion and $1.6 trillion in new revenues over the next ten years, he somehow fails to mention that at current rates, the nation will spend more than $40 trillion during that time. In other words, his “solution” could at best only shrink new debt by about five percent. Reducing the fiscal cliff from ten miles to nine and a half miles would do little to diminish the crash at the bottom.

Furthermore, that minuscule decrease in new debt presumes that the crippled economy does not worsen during that period. Yet all history and experience indicate that bleeding such an enormous sum of money from an already anemic national economy would only further contract it. Despite the flagrantly falsified accounts of innumerable economic recoveries beginning in the summer of 2009 and repeated on the nightly news every few months ever since, America remains in dire straits. So a financial engine that is already this sluggish will very likely stall completely if any further burden is placed upon it, thereby completely negating any expectations of enhanced tax receipts, while causing enormous devastation on Main Street.

Someone should be asking the difficult questions. Why would Obama be so consumed with raising taxes, when this action will do nothing to avoid financial implosion? Clearly, his real intention is only to stoke vindictiveness and venom from the liberal base which has been steeped in class envy, and poisoned with its craving to punish wealth and success. Sadly, its members are totally blinded to the harmful repercussions this course has yielded, and will continue to yield to themselves, and all of America.

More specifically, conservatives across the nation should be asking some hard questions of the “Republican leadership” in the House of Representatives, and its speaker, John Boehner who is quickly replacing John McCain as the poster boy for GOP dysfunctionality. Why does Boehner insist on giving Barack Obama’s charade credence, by continuing to negotiate such absurdities? And why does he tacitly legitimize the concept of tax increases as a necessary part of the fix, when the enormous monetary shortfalls result entirely from spending excesses?

Nor should Republicans validate the false premise that “closing loopholes” can somehow contribute to an improved fiscal outlook for the nation. Tax hikes, whether through rate increases or the elimination of deductions, still constitute the increased taking of private property by the government. Accepting the premise that the federal government should confiscate more from “rich” Americans solidifies the notion that it must take more from all Americans. And while federal coffers reap a minimal gain from this approach, its impact on available funds in the private sector will be severe, with a “ripple effect” reaching far beyond those individuals against whom it is ostensibly aimed.

Ignoring all of Obama’s political grandstanding for the moment, the situation is far from complicated. If the government continues to spend at its current rate, the nation will very soon face a horrendous day of reckoning. Increased leaching of funds from the people, regardless of their place on the financial ladder, will only worsen the condition. Few citizens on Main Street honesty believe that America is currently in a healthy and secure condition. And those political figures who refuse to honestly address the current crisis, or who offer false alternatives to the necessary fix should be held accountable for their complicity in the disaster that will shortly ensue.

Christopher G. Adamo is a resident of southeastern Wyoming and has been involved in state and local politics for many years. He writes for several prominent conservative websites, as has written for regional and national magazines. His contact information and article archives can be found at www.chrisadamo.com, and he can be followed on Twitter @CGAdamo.

Christopher G. Adamo

By: Christopher G. Adamo

While conservatives are painfully aware that Barack Obama did in fact win on November 6, the grimness of the current situation is only enhanced by the manner in which the Republican Party has responded to his reelection. It is not surprising that though Obama’s margin of victory was considerably smaller this year than in 2008, Democrats and their media minions are claiming their victory as a mandate to transform America into a sorry imitation of those failing European socialist states. What is appalling however is that establishment Republicans are almost exuberant in their efforts to characterize the election as a mandate to capitulate to the left while jettisoning virtually every precept of real conservatism.

Assessments of the event, both by Republican Party insiders and defeatist conservative pundits, are so far-reaching and absolute as to give the impression that the thrashing Democrats suffered at the polls only two years ago never even happened. A thorough perusal of this year’s post-election analyses reveals that most commentators perceive an opportunity to spin the unfortunate circumstances to their own benefit, or to a particular cause which they support. Supposed reasons are all over the board, ranging from the conservative aversion towards amnesty to the notion that Republicans only favor “the rich,” to the mere presence of Church going Americans who uphold tradition and believe the Bible.

Despite dire pronouncements of America’s irreversible shift to the left, those 2010 mid-term elections strongly indicated exactly the opposite. But while at first glance it may seem completely inconsistent for the nation to dump Democrat office holders in 2010 and then reelect their worst offender in 2012, the emerging picture of exactly what transpired on Election Day may yield valuable insight as to the overall mood and concern of American voters. It now appears that 2010 was a well defined referendum on conservative America versus socialist America. Unfortunately, that was not the nature of this year’s race. Governor Romney’s political past, which was less than stellar from a political perspective, when combined with the overall nature of the Romney campaign, suggests that this year’s contest was ultimately a referendum on committed liberal Democrats pitted against the likely prospect of business as usual from the GOP.

Admittedly, the Obama camp did a far better job of getting its voters to the ballot box. In some districts, turnout was as much as 157% of those registered, a feat not likely to be matched by Republicans. In over a hundred and sixty voting districts between Ohio and Pennsylvania, Obama received 99% or better, while Romney did not receive a single vote. These outlandish numbers are virtually unseen outside of third-world dictatorships. Nevertheless, the liberal media has appraised the situation, and concluded that such phenomena are completely understandable, thus ensuring that in the long run, the entire matter will be dropped.

Meanwhile, the Romney campaign allowed itself to be hamstrung by a crippling fear of actually confronting Barack Obama with his abhorrent track record. Having accepted the twisted absurdities of “political correctness” over the years, “mainstream” politicians, including that vaunted GOP establishment, allowed its premises to become virtually codified as a framework for legitimate political discourse. As a result, the nation has now reached a dangerous milestone where merely speaking the truth is itself no longer allowable.

Thus, every mention of the Benghazi disaster, and the flagrant deceit of Barack Obama and his UN Envoy Susan Rice regarding its root cause, are shamelessly but easily deflected as “racism.” Likewise, discussions of Obama Attorney General Eric Holder’s “Fast and Furious” fiasco were handily consigned to the realm of the conspiratorial and thus off limits during debates or campaign ads. Operating under such restrictions, is it any wonder that the Romney campaign found it nearly impossible to deliver a worthwhile message of its own? And operating from such flawed reasoning, did anyone expect to gain significant numbers of crossover voters by essentially offering the Obama Phone lady a cheaper phone?

It is futility to conduct an effective campaign with so much energy being focused on the avoidance of pitfalls concocted by the liberal media. Though the entire inner circle of the GOP insists that such decorum must be strictly observed, its track record of success is, in retrospect, abysmal. Since 1988, Republican presidential candidates have garnered a majority at the ballot box on exactly one occasion, which was the 2004 reelection of George W. Bush. Clearly, a milquetoast campaign strategy achieves as much as does a bland and insipid political strategy in the halls of Congress.

So, how are entrenched Republicans choosing to respond to the results of November 6? In far too many instances, they are obsessively seeking futile avenues by which they expect to pander and capitulate their way back to leadership. Discussions of amnesty for illegal aliens are rampant, though that course would leave Republicans with an additional deficit of at least four million voters with which to contend. And that number presumes absurdly high proportions of the Hispanic community magically switching parties in the wake of this massive influx of new “citizens.”

Of course the latest minefield into which those hapless Republicans are inexorably being drawn pertains to the budget. Here again, blunt and undiluted assessments of the current budget situation are clearly warranted yet extremely unlikely. Ever eager to find “common ground” with a regime that has criminally exceeded its constitutional charter, increasing numbers of Senate Republicans, led by John McCain (R.-AZ) and Lindsay Graham (R.-SC) are breaking the “no tax” pledge and making plans to allow tax hikes in exchange for spending cuts.

If any single situation exemplifies the manner in which the Republican Party can successfully deflate and undermine its voting base, this is it. Republicans will once more cave, as they have done in the past, in return for yet another iteration of the empty Democrat promise which has never been kept. Every Republican politician who pins hopes on these accompanying cuts is a proven incompetent. They simply will not happen.

Herein is the beauty of bipartisanship, at least from the liberal perspective. Democrats will dictate the agenda to the delight of their dependent base, and when the inevitable economic catastrophe ensues, Republicans will have to accept their share of responsibility, having been willing participants in the mismanagement of the nation’s finances.

A truly principled and conservative Republican Party does indeed face a difficult road ahead, given the duplicity of the Democrat opposition, the propagandistic nature of the “mainstream” media, and the apparent inability of the dependent class to recognize the real nature of those who perpetually enslave it. Nevertheless, it is crucial for Republicans to recognize that their only option is to remain committed to the greatness of America as the land of the free, not the land of the free ride. Watered down conservatism will only guarantee the continued ascendancy of the political left.

Christopher G. Adamo is a resident of southeastern Wyoming and has been involved in state and local politics for many years. He writes for several prominent conservative websites, along with AMAC Advantage, the quarterly publication of the Association of Mature American Citizens. His contact information and article archives can be found at www.chrisadamo.com, and he can be followed on Twitter @CGAdamo.

Christopher G. Adamo

By: Christopher G. Adamo

The latest scheme by establishment Republicans to undermine the conservative groundswell of the Tea Party and its stunning victory in the 2010 elections is to flaunt last week’s exit polls as proof that America rejects real conservatism and is now willfully shifting to the left. In this they are abetted by the Democrat propagandists as well as the “mainstream” media. Yet an understanding of those exit polls, interpreted in their proper context, is essential to an accurate assessment of the current political landscape. And so far, the “experts” are determinedly avoiding any presentation of the big picture. Doing so would simply not be advantageous to their agenda.

First, it must be clearly understood that exit polls are not the reflection of the entire mood and sentiments of the nation, but only of those who bothered to visit the polling places and then answer the queries of the pollsters. And while these numbers are significant, and have determined who will lead the nation in the next four years, they do not accurately reflect the attitudes of those who were too frustrated or disillusioned with the candidacy of Republican challenger Mitt Romney to make the effort to vote for him. Even a cursory analysis of the election returns offers a glimpse of something much more significant than the trite appraisals coming from the network talking heads.

Barack Obama received ten million less votes in 2012 than he did in 2008. Amazingly however, Romney received three million less than did Arizona Senator John McCain. So although Obama’s popularity fell significantly from the days when he was going to lower the sea levels and bring unity to America, Romney fared even worse. He did a poorer job of connecting with his base than McCain, the so called “Senate Maverick” who has made an entire political career of cozying up to liberals and betraying conservatives in his own party.

Fears among the conservative base that Romney would abandon them once in high office were the basis of his struggles to gain momentum during the Republican primaries. And though most Republican voters decided to support him once he clinched the nomination, a sufficient number could not bring themselves to do so, resulting in his poor showing on November 6.

Now, those same establishment Republicans who insisted that the party nominate a convincing “moderate” in order to broaden its appeal are seeking desperately to distance themselves even further from conservatives in the wake of his loss, in hopes of gaining acceptance from the left. The inanity and futility of this effort has been painfully proven on countless occasions, yet that reality is flatly rejected inside the Beltway. Instead, the usual suspects are working overtime to pander their way back into the good graces of their enemies.

Their latest ruse is to resume the push for amnesty for the twenty million illegal aliens now residing within our borders. The fact that this effort will only ensure that a greater number of disenfranchised conservatives will be driven from the party, and that the bulk of those new voters will move decidedly into the Democrat fold, is apparently of no great significance to GOP elitists. They must ignore the concerns of their base, accept the premise of their ideological foes, and proceed to commit national suicide under the misbegotten premise that somehow, this will miraculously improve their political fortunes.

Had these traitorous politicians trumpeted their intentions to betray America on the amnesty question prior to November 6, conservative disaffection would have been far worse, with no accompanying offset from Hispanic voters. Consequently, Republican numbers would have been even lower. And those vaunted exit polls would have been held up as evidence of an even more severe national movement to the left.

Unfortunately, many among the supposedly “conservative” punditry are shell-shocked, and likewise jumping onto the capitulation and pandering bandwagon, accepting far too many flawed and dangerous premises of the left, and disparaging the foundations of true conservatism. While this behavior is always a ticket to condescending nods of concurrence from liberals, in the long term its consequences always do far more harm than good.

The entire debacle of Missouri Republican Senate candidate Todd Akin stands as a deplorable testament to liberal success at manipulating and exploiting willing pawns on the right. Had Akin merely invoked the word “actual” instead of “legitimate,” when contrasting between real and falsified claims of rape, he may have been able to stay on message, contrasting his conservative track record against the liberalism of his opponent. Yet the Democrats saw a single Akin misstatement as an opportunity to create a horrendous ruckus and thereby derail his candidacy. Worst of all, the shrillness of their contrived hysteria was sufficient to spook a number of conservatives into dutifully joining the fray like a line of chorus girls. In the end, Akin was decidedly beaten by his Democrat opponent in a state that Romney carried by nearly ten points.

Had Akin’s attackers on the right been willing to redirect even a fraction of the energy with which they castigated him against Democrat Claire McCaskill instead (her own gaffes and dubious record certainly warrant such a response), he might have fared better. But that course required the courage to stand against a concocted media tsunami. Now, in the wake of his defeat, the situation provides fodder for those who would see Republicans abandon their principle in a futile quest to become indistinguishable from the Democrats.

If this appraisal sounds harsh, consider the senate race nobody is willing to discuss, Scott Brown versus Elizabeth Warren in Massachusetts. By all accounts of those inside Washington, “Republican” Scott Brown did everything properly from the moment he took the seat previously held by the late Ted Kennedy. Brown regularly sold out the conservatives who had elected him, opting instead to accommodate the liberals who would then enthusiastically work to upend his political career. Yet nobody expresses remorse over his duplicity or his squandered opportunity to elevate the standing and discourse of the Bay State. Worst of all, Democrat Elizabeth Warren to whom he lost, has a record of spewing absurdities that vastly eclipses anything ever uttered by Todd Akin. Nevertheless, both sides treated her far better than Akin.

Republican “moderates” (read: liberal Trojan Horses) regularly wreak havoc on the conservative agenda, yet any outcry from the grassroots is immediately shouted down on the grounds that the GOP must not impose “litmus tests” on its candidates. But let a true conservative stumble, even a single time, and suddenly litmus tests are the order of the day. While the Republican Party would never consider holding Scott Brown to even the most rudimentary political standard, in the case of Todd Akin the party elites were quick to be judge, jury, and executioner. And still conservative analysts wonder why the GOP cannot muster the resolve to effectively confront the problems facing the nation.

Republican Party losses on Election Day resulted from its willingness to conduct its campaigns, and ultimately to govern, within a framework dictated to it by the Democrats. Post election, “We the People” are only getting more of the same.

Christopher G. Adamo is a resident of southeastern Wyoming and has been involved in state and local politics for many years. He writes for several prominent conservative websites, along with AMAC Advantage, the quarterly publication of the Association of Mature American Citizens. His contact information and article archives can be found at www.chrisadamo.com, and he can be followed on Twitter @CGAdamo.