Maggie_T
07-15-2003, 06:25 PM
DISCLAIMER: You will not find a link to this article for the simple reason that it was e-mailed to me by the Assistant Director of Communications of the The Patrick Henry Center for Individual Liberty. I have asked for, and was kindly granted, permission to print their Gary Aldrich articles in Free Conservatives.
These articles will appear in the Political Forum and after some time will be moved to the Op-Ed forum. Enjoy.
[ QUOTE ]
The Left Grows Stronger
By Gary Aldrich
My new book, Thunder on the Left, describes how Hard-Left elements in this country grow stronger and push their agenda forward unceasingly each year. It may seem odd to make such a claim when Republicans own the White House and majorities in both the House and Senate, but it’s true.
Don’t believe me? Name one significant Conservative agenda item that has received the attention it deserves in our supposedly conservative government. So-called tax cuts are paltry, while the size and influence of the federal government grows at an astonishing pace. The government spends your money whether you send it in or not – while other costs of government are merely transferred down to the state and local levels.
In other words, you’re paying more, but you think you just got tax relief. Think again.
Today’s “political center” is far left from where it should be, given recent Republican gains. Isn’t it ironic that I wrote about the Democratic shift many weeks before the Post discovered the Dems’ leftward lurch?
In fact, recent reports on the Democratic presidential hopefuls continually confirm this Leftist trend. Experienced Post political analyst David Von Drehle is the latest to acknowledge the growing Hard-Left as a force to be reckoned with, as he tries to explain the popularity of Howard Dean, Vermont’s left-leaning governor and the current presidential front-runner.
Democrats’ centrist leaders, including Al From and Bruce Reed, of the Democratic Leadership Council, have complained publicly that the Hard-Left will bring certain defeat in the 2004 elections. The Hard-Left has become very bold. They now prefer the label “Progressive” and don’t want to be called “Liberal.” Most honest political historians would agree that a “progressive” is really a Communist or hard-Socialist.
From and Reed may be complaining because they sense pending doom, but the DLC may be the wrong place to look for true centrists. Indeed, the DLC was complicit in the rise of Bill Clinton, and the many liberal Clinton administration policies. True centrists such as Democratic Senators Zell Miller and Evan Bayh were never really happy with Clinton. DLC’s Reed was Clinton’s domestic policy advisor, but did Reed work for Bill, or did he actually work for Hillary? It’s a fair question.
Any serious examination of domestic policy initiated by the Clinton Administration reveals Hillary’s fingerprints. In fact, several well-documented books written about the Clinton Administration by liberal-leaning writers reveal that Hillary Clinton was in charge of the domestic policy decisions made during their eight years in office.
You can’t go much further Left than Hillary Clinton, whose proposed socialization of medicine would have been the largest expansion of federal government in history. Hillarycare was nothing if not classic hard-socialism, but fortunately most Americans saw it for what it was, ensuring its eventual defeat. Hillary’s power-grab attempt revealed her true political ideology to be anything but “centrist.”
How is it, then, that “centrist” Al From was taken in by this Socialist power couple? Even the most cursory examination of Bill Clinton’s rise to power would have proven how strong Hillary’s influence was, not only in orchestrating his victories at the polls, but also in his day-to-day activities as governor of Arkansas.
Did Al From actually believe Hillary would fade into the background and bake cookies, leaving her bumbling, womanizing husband to run the White House? Perhaps, but there is another possible explanation: there is only one way for Hard-Left, or “Progressive” Democrats to win national office. They must hide their true Hard-Left agenda and pretend to be something else.
This is exactly what happened in 1992. While Bill Clinton campaigned as a centrist Democrat, Hard-Left Hillary planned the implementation of Socialist policies and programs, gleeful at the possibility that her husband might win.
On her own, Hillary knew she was not electable as a national candidate, so she used Bill to help propel her into power, knowing that the charismatic, friendly, good ol’ boy from Hope, Arkansas actually stood a chance. Once elected, Hillary moved her chess pieces into place, playing a major role in the administration, amounting to a co-presidency.
Hillary managed to win the Senate Seat in New York and seems politically self-sufficient outside Bill Clinton’s shadow. That they do not live as husband and wife, or even live in the same state, reveals the naked political symbiosis that characterized their relationship. Today, Hillary’s independence from Bill certainly enhances her credibility among leftist feminists whose support will be crucial in future Democratic primaries.
Many of my political associates have studied the Clinton Administration and are convinced it was a “Trojan Horse” presidency. Bill Clinton was the apparent candidate, while Hillary Clinton was Bill’s political advisor and planner. There is plenty of evidence to prove that Hillary was the real power behind the throne. Are we to expect that Al From and his successor, Bruce Reed will now confess that in order to elect Hard-Left Democrats to national office, you must first cloak them in “centrist” garb?
Don’t hold your breath. Democrats must cover their agenda because Americans do not like their policies. If Hard-Left Democrats want to win, they know they will have to lie. Heartland Americans cherish their freedom and love this country. They are not about to knowingly travel the road toward hard-Socialism. However, eight years of Clintonian lies prove that Heartland Democrats are hopeless saps when it comes to recognizing the truth about their own leaders.
[/ QUOTE ]
These articles will appear in the Political Forum and after some time will be moved to the Op-Ed forum. Enjoy.
[ QUOTE ]
The Left Grows Stronger
By Gary Aldrich
My new book, Thunder on the Left, describes how Hard-Left elements in this country grow stronger and push their agenda forward unceasingly each year. It may seem odd to make such a claim when Republicans own the White House and majorities in both the House and Senate, but it’s true.
Don’t believe me? Name one significant Conservative agenda item that has received the attention it deserves in our supposedly conservative government. So-called tax cuts are paltry, while the size and influence of the federal government grows at an astonishing pace. The government spends your money whether you send it in or not – while other costs of government are merely transferred down to the state and local levels.
In other words, you’re paying more, but you think you just got tax relief. Think again.
Today’s “political center” is far left from where it should be, given recent Republican gains. Isn’t it ironic that I wrote about the Democratic shift many weeks before the Post discovered the Dems’ leftward lurch?
In fact, recent reports on the Democratic presidential hopefuls continually confirm this Leftist trend. Experienced Post political analyst David Von Drehle is the latest to acknowledge the growing Hard-Left as a force to be reckoned with, as he tries to explain the popularity of Howard Dean, Vermont’s left-leaning governor and the current presidential front-runner.
Democrats’ centrist leaders, including Al From and Bruce Reed, of the Democratic Leadership Council, have complained publicly that the Hard-Left will bring certain defeat in the 2004 elections. The Hard-Left has become very bold. They now prefer the label “Progressive” and don’t want to be called “Liberal.” Most honest political historians would agree that a “progressive” is really a Communist or hard-Socialist.
From and Reed may be complaining because they sense pending doom, but the DLC may be the wrong place to look for true centrists. Indeed, the DLC was complicit in the rise of Bill Clinton, and the many liberal Clinton administration policies. True centrists such as Democratic Senators Zell Miller and Evan Bayh were never really happy with Clinton. DLC’s Reed was Clinton’s domestic policy advisor, but did Reed work for Bill, or did he actually work for Hillary? It’s a fair question.
Any serious examination of domestic policy initiated by the Clinton Administration reveals Hillary’s fingerprints. In fact, several well-documented books written about the Clinton Administration by liberal-leaning writers reveal that Hillary Clinton was in charge of the domestic policy decisions made during their eight years in office.
You can’t go much further Left than Hillary Clinton, whose proposed socialization of medicine would have been the largest expansion of federal government in history. Hillarycare was nothing if not classic hard-socialism, but fortunately most Americans saw it for what it was, ensuring its eventual defeat. Hillary’s power-grab attempt revealed her true political ideology to be anything but “centrist.”
How is it, then, that “centrist” Al From was taken in by this Socialist power couple? Even the most cursory examination of Bill Clinton’s rise to power would have proven how strong Hillary’s influence was, not only in orchestrating his victories at the polls, but also in his day-to-day activities as governor of Arkansas.
Did Al From actually believe Hillary would fade into the background and bake cookies, leaving her bumbling, womanizing husband to run the White House? Perhaps, but there is another possible explanation: there is only one way for Hard-Left, or “Progressive” Democrats to win national office. They must hide their true Hard-Left agenda and pretend to be something else.
This is exactly what happened in 1992. While Bill Clinton campaigned as a centrist Democrat, Hard-Left Hillary planned the implementation of Socialist policies and programs, gleeful at the possibility that her husband might win.
On her own, Hillary knew she was not electable as a national candidate, so she used Bill to help propel her into power, knowing that the charismatic, friendly, good ol’ boy from Hope, Arkansas actually stood a chance. Once elected, Hillary moved her chess pieces into place, playing a major role in the administration, amounting to a co-presidency.
Hillary managed to win the Senate Seat in New York and seems politically self-sufficient outside Bill Clinton’s shadow. That they do not live as husband and wife, or even live in the same state, reveals the naked political symbiosis that characterized their relationship. Today, Hillary’s independence from Bill certainly enhances her credibility among leftist feminists whose support will be crucial in future Democratic primaries.
Many of my political associates have studied the Clinton Administration and are convinced it was a “Trojan Horse” presidency. Bill Clinton was the apparent candidate, while Hillary Clinton was Bill’s political advisor and planner. There is plenty of evidence to prove that Hillary was the real power behind the throne. Are we to expect that Al From and his successor, Bruce Reed will now confess that in order to elect Hard-Left Democrats to national office, you must first cloak them in “centrist” garb?
Don’t hold your breath. Democrats must cover their agenda because Americans do not like their policies. If Hard-Left Democrats want to win, they know they will have to lie. Heartland Americans cherish their freedom and love this country. They are not about to knowingly travel the road toward hard-Socialism. However, eight years of Clintonian lies prove that Heartland Democrats are hopeless saps when it comes to recognizing the truth about their own leaders.
[/ QUOTE ]