4 Days to Go - Take it to the Wire

Gut check time.

We can debate all night as to whether the poll results are predictive. Certainly, history abounds with anecdotal evidence that they are anything but infallible. At the same time, reviewing the current state by state status on REAL CLEAR POLITICSis a sobering exercise. It has long been predicted that this election will be decided by the Electoral College. The focus has been on "toss up" states such as Florida, North Carolina, Missouri, Indiana, Montana and Georgia. In blue New England, it was thought for a time that the Republicans might capture New Hampshire's four electoral votes, but the tea leaves and the polls are raining on that parade as well. Even if all the toss ups states go red, McCain will need a number of major upsets to win the day.

At the same time, this is no time to throw in the towel. The difference between the two candidates could not be drawn more sharply. John McCain may not be a great orator, but a MCCain presidency would be a reaffirmation of the principle of limited government and personal liberty, the encouragement of personal achievement that has been the prime mover in America's greatness. Obama is promising to take the left path to a society controlled by a socialistic paternal government that promises the solution to all our ills but will provide, instead, sluggish mediocrity, at best. Obama's redistribution of wealth will draw the fruits of labor from those who excel and provide them, not just to those in true need, but also to those seeking a free ride.

This is not the time to give up the fight and sit out the next four days. The polls have been wrong before. The popular media, in many cases promoting its own agenda, is providing their own slanted version of reality. This is the time to rally like-minded voters and encourage them to join us at the polls, even, and especially, in those "solid" blue states. If this election turns out, as many think it will, to be much closer than advertised, then, like no time before, every vote will count. Make sure that your vote is included.

7 Days to go - Judgement Day

Beneath the mystic umbrella of "Change", among the scatterings that provide, as do the entrails of sacrificed animals, the true meaning of Obama's campaign platitudes, lies a nugget of clarity with respect to his intentions for appointments to the federal judiciary. Speaking to a Planned Parenthood meeting in July, 2007, Obama SAID:

"And we need somebody who’s got the heart—the empathy—to recognize what it’s like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it’s like to be poor or African-American or gay or disabled or old—and that’s the criteria by which I’ll be selecting my judges. Alright?"

This attitude constitutes a very significant "change" away from the legal principle that has guided the American judiciary for over two centuries, a principle that calls for a government of laws, not of men, a system of justice symbolized by the blindfold on Lady Justice that ensures equal treatment of all who come before the courts without regard to their social status. The touchstone here is the United States Constitution, upon which is built the vast accumulation of case law and the guidance provided by the accumulated precedents as courts over the years have continually striven to interpret the constitution so as to apply it to modern concerns and circumstances.

What Obama would have us do, as a nation, is throw away this procedural bedrock and rely, instead, on the empathy and feelings that a particular jurist might have for the parties in a particular case. Thus, Lady justice would remove her blindfold and have the courts consider the circumstances of those appearing before them. Thus, for example, criminals would receive punishment for their crimes, not in terms of the laws that they have broken, but rather based upon the empathy that a particular judge might have. In addition, the decisions of a jurist with an interest in Obama's desire to redistribute the wealth, could badly damage the country's economic underpinnings. Does anyone, other than Obama die-hards, really think that this is desirable change?

When the next president is inaugurated, six of the nine sitting Supreme Court Justices will be at least seventy years old, which leads to the prospect that the new president will appoint a number of new Justices. In addition, there are certain to be ample opportunities for appointments to also be made to the United States Court of Appeals, which acts a feeder system for the Supreme Court, not only in terms of legal decisions, but also for prospective Supreme Court Justices. And while a president may only serve a term or two, federal judges, once appointed, enjoy lifetime tenure. The effects of an Obama presidency, even if it lasts only one term, will truly be "a gift that keeps on giving", long after he leaves office.

Voters, especially independents, and those conservatives, miffed at the Republican Party's failings in following a strict conservative agenda, must think long and hard before pulling the lever for Obama. The disastrous effects of an Obama presidency would last long after he leaves office. This damage to the legal system is too high a price to pay for "teaching the Republican Party a lesson."

As president, John McCain has promised to appoint strict constructionist judges who value the law over personal attitudes and would not bring personal legislative agendas to the bench. In many ways, this issue is important enough to decide the election on its own. Don't be fooled.

11 Days to Go - Dueling Fiscal Policies

While it is tempting to join the finger-pointing Olympics, let's just agree for a moment that there is enough blame to go around for the financial crisis which continues to wreak havoc throughout the world economy. In the context of the fast-approaching presidential election, what fiscal policies can we expect from the new president?

John McCain represents the voice of sanity with a fiscally conservative approach that would attempt to rein in government spending for earmarks as well as ineffective programs, including marginal defense spending. proponents of fiscal stimulation might bear in mind that $700 billion in government funds slated to bail out the financial markets, is going to soak up a lot of spending capacity. Moreover, holding the line on tax increases provides fiscal stimulus. If anything has been learned over the past thirty years it has been the capacity for lower taxes to spur economic growth; or, as some would say, to grow the pie.

McCain's opponent advocates a much different approach. It is difficult, if not impossible, to discern within his rhetorical flourishes, just what he proposes for the fiscal policy. Fortunately, there are analysts skilled in cutting through the smoke screens. The National Taxpayers Union Foundation estimates that Obama would raise spending by $611.5 billion over the next five years, and $1.4 trillion over ten. And these exclude cost estimates for his health care proposals! Read more HERE in an article by Alan Reynolds in this morning's WSJ. And listen very carefully when you hear Obama speak of tax cuts. In his parallel universe, a refundable tax credit, which basically involves the government sending a check TO people, many of whom don't pay taxes in the first place, is called a tax cut.

Stealing a page from Hillary's book, Obama claims he has laid out how he will "pay" for every dime of his proposals. The usual suspects are closing corporate loopholes and tax havens. The fact is, it can't be done. Moreover it can't be done even if they stick it to the top income folks. You can grab each of the top 5% of taxpayers and hold them upside down by the ankles and shake all of the money out of their pockets, and there will still not be enough tax revenue to fund his Utopian proposals. The tax bite will extend significantly lower on the income scale as many successful middle class tax payers begin to learn just what he means when he talks about re-distributing the wealth. Maybe if the economy were booming, we would have some breathing room to take a flyer on some of these ideas. But the stock market, and other economic indicators are projecting very difficult economic times for the next several years. With the government committed to funding the financial bailout, this is no time, if there ever is one, to elect a president committed to full scale socialistic makeover of the American economy.

12 days to Go - Local/County/State Politics

A few days ago, the Massachusetts G.O.P. launched an initiative aimed at providing financial support to state legislative candidates. With the the state legislature 88%Democratic, the need to support Republican candidates speaks for itself. The View supports this effort. For more information click HERE for Rob Willington's letter as posted on Red Mass Group.

At the same time, there are several local races where Republican candidates can use your support and your vote.

Vinny deMacedo is running for re-election as Mass. State representative in the First Plymouth District. As one of only 18 republican House members, and as one of the most effective members of the Legislature, Vinny has earned our support. For more on this, Click HERE to read The View/s recent endorsement.




Jeff Beatty is running a very tough uphill race to unseat Senator John Kerry. While an impressive candidate in his own right, Beatty has been severely handicapped by Kerry's deep pockets and high visibility. Getting out the vote for Jeff Beatty will send a message regarding Kerry's thin record of accomplishment. Learn more about Jeff by clicking BEATTY.



Marshfield's Ed O'Connell is running a strong campaign for Plymouth County Treasurer. Visit his WEBSITE to review Ed's plans for improving county government and to see why Ed deserves your support at the polls.






Ron Davy, long active in Plymouth County as well as in his home town of Hull is running for Plymouth County Commissioner. He brings impeccable credentials and a strong Republican ethic to the task. Click DAVY to learn more about Ron Davy and why he deserves your vote.



Given the low number of Republicans holding, or running for, office in Massachusetts makes it clear that these are not the best of times for the GOP. At the same time, The coming Tsunami of cutbacks in State government will highlight the abject failure of one-party Democratic rule that lacks the checks and balances needed for effective government. Support of these candidates and contributions to the GOP Farm Team are important first steps, but the need to do more is obvious.

As we move beyond the election, the Republican Party must reach out beyond its immediate constituency to conservatives and moderates with concerns about the dangers of a one-party system. It must convince purists, and others, that while not perfect, the GOP is the only party with the organization and resources to lead the fight to regaining the balance in government that strives to treat all citizens fairly.

13 Days to Go - Electing a Commander-in-Chief

In less than a fortnight, American voters will determine who will lead the country for at least the next four years. While many of us are well into campaign fatigue, there are many voters who are just waking up to the fact that, in a few weeks, they will be facing an important decision. Given the stakes in this election, it is hard to credit such widespread ennui. But hey, the World Series starts tonight and should be over in time for at least one long week end of soul searching. The polls would have us believe that the race is virtually over, but while this election has been ongoing since at least 2004, it is only now getting down to business. I'm sure many voters have long made up their minds, but here are a few points for the famously undecideds to ponder:

The world can be a nasty place with more than a few fanatic regimes that would love to bring the United States to its knees. If you think that the world could evolve into one big happy family if we could all just play nice, I recommend some intense reality therapy. Who should we chose to serve as our Commander-in-Chief? John McCain brings a wealth of experience both as a Naval officer and governmental oversight to the table and espouses policies that recognize the dangers in stark realities of the modern world. He would strive to achieve world peace and strong mutually-beneficial international relationships, but also sees the importance of working towards these goals from a position of strength. His opponent, whose experience lies mostly in the vagaries of community organization and Chicago politics is as much a cipher in this regard as any other facet of his proposed presidency. Moreover, what insights we are able to glean from his speeches, which are high on oratory but lacking in specifics, also indicate a preference for pandering and appeasement. Moreover, his conflicting statements on the Iraq war and wavering support of the U.S. forces reflect not only his inexperience in military matters, but his ambivalence, if not outright disdain for the U.S. Military.

When it comes to choosing the next Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces, the choice is clear. John McCain is the man for the job. His opponent would constitute a reckless gamble on an inexperienced senator who seems to be emotionally and philosophically unsuited for the job.

Of course there are a number of other major points that should be considered before one goes to the polls on November 4th. The View will be dealing with these over the next several days.

Message From a Democratic Friend

The View is posting the message below because it raises an issue that has been bothering us for some time. There is so much that is not known about Barack Obama, who has emerged on the national political stage, seemingly from nowhere. Where did this guy come from? As a first term senator (and he has been running for president for most of that term), he lacks a record that would help voters discern just what it is he might do as president. I have listened to his speeches, watched the debates and read countless articles, all of which shows me a glib orator who provides little beyond broad generalities and platitudes, all designed to portray him as a moderate. Barack Obama is no moderate. He is one of the most liberal members of the senate.

The Obama campaign is bristling with indignation over what it terms "personal attacks." This is merely an attempt to deflect investigation into Obama's association with people like Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright and Tony Rezko. Then there's the Acorn connection that links him with this radical left-wing organization with no reluctance to break the law in order to advance their socialist agenda. The message below also looks at Obama's shady Mid-Eastern connections. Given the dearth of information about his background, it is essential to examine these associations to determine just what ideas he would bring to the presidency.

During the final debate last evening, there was one small glimmer of insight when Obama was quoted as he talked about the re-distribution of wealth, a classic socialistic concept. I think that anyone who takes the time to learn the truth about Obama will realize that his history of left-wing activism makes it extremely unlikely that he would govern as a moderate, but would become the most liberal president in modern times. And while this may actually appeal to our liberal friends, they might think again about the meaning of his links to Islamic extremism.


Email message From a Democratic friend ...


This election has me very worried. So many things to consider. About a year ago I would have voted for Obama. I have changed my mind three times since than. I watch all the news channels, jumping from one to another. I must say this drives my husband crazy.
But, I feel if you view MSNBC, CNN, and Fox News, you might get some middle ground to work with. About six months ago, I started thinking" where did the money come from for Obama". I have four daughters who went to College, and we were middle class, and money was tight. We(including my girls) worked hard and there were lots of student loans.

I started looking into Obama's life.

Around 1979 Obama started college at Occidental in California. He is very open about his two years at Occidental, he tried all kinds of drugs and was wasting his time but, even though he had a brilliant mind, did not apply himself to his studies. "Barry" (that was the name he used all his life) during this time had two roommates, Muhammad Hasan Chandoo and Wahid Hamid, both from Pakistan. During the summer of 1981, after his second year in college, he made a "round the world" trip. Stopping to see his mother
in Indonesia, next Hyderabad in India, three weeks in Karachi, Pakistan where he stayed with his roommate's family, then off to Africa to visit his father's family. My question -Where did he get the money for thistrip?

Neither I, nor any one of my children would have had money for a trip like this when they where in college. When he came back he started school at Columbia University in New York. It is at this time he wants everyone
to call him Barack - not Barry. Do you know what the tuition is at Columbia? It is not cheap! Where did the money come from for tuition? Student Loans? Maybe.

After Columbia, he went to Chicago to work as a Community Organizer for
$12,000. a year. Why Chicago? Why not New York? He was already living in New York.

By "chance" he met Antoin "Tony" Rezko, born in Aleppo Syria, and a real estate developer in Chic ago. Rezko has been convicted of fraud and bribery this year. Rezko, was named "Entrepreneur of the Decade" by the Arab-American Business and Professional Association". About two years later, Obama entered Harvard Law
School. Do you have any idea what tuition is for Harvard Law School? Where did he get the money for Law School? More student loans?

After Law school, he went back to Chicago. Rezko offered him a job, which he turned down. But, he did take a job with Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland. Guess what? They represented "Rezar" which is Rezko's firm. Rezko was one of Obama's first
Major financial contributors when he ran for office in Chicago. In 2003, Rezko threw an early fundraiser for Obama which Chicago Tribune Reporter David Mendelland claims was instrumental in providing Obama with"seed money" for his U.S. Senate race. In 2005, Obama purchased a new home in Kenwoood District of Chicago for $1.65 million (less than asking price). With ALL those Student Loans - Where did he get the money for the property? On the same day Rezko's wife, Rita, purchased the adjoining empty lot for full price. The London Times reported that Nadhmi Auchi, an Iraqi-born Billionaire
Loaned Rezko $3.5 million three weeks before Obama's new home was purchased. Obama met Nadhmi Auchi many times with Rezko.


Now, we have Obama running for President. Valerie Jarrett, was Michele Obama's boss. She is now Obama's chief advisor and he does not make any major decisions without talking to her first. Where was Jarrett born? Ready for this? Shiraz, Iran! Do we see a pattern here? Or am I going crazy?

On May 10, 2008 The Times reported, Robert Malley advisor to Obama was "sacked" after the press found out he was having regular contacts with "Hamas", which controls Gaza and is connected with Iran. This past week, buried in the back part of the papers, Iraqi newspapers reported that during Obama's visit to Iraq, he asked their leaders to do nothing about the war until after he is elected, and he will "Take care
of things".

Oh, and by the way, remember the college roommates that where Born in Pakistan? They are in charge of all those "small" Internet campaign contributions for Obama. Where is that money coming from? The poor and middle class in this country? Or could it be from the Middle East?

And the final bit of news. On September 7, 2008, The Washington Times posted a verbal slip that was made on "This Week" with George Stephanapoulos. Obama on talking about his religion said, "My Muslim faith". When questioned, "he make a mistake". Some mistake!

All of the above information I got on line. If you would like to check it - Wikipedia, encyclopedia, Barack Obama; Tony Rezko; Valerie Jarrett: Daily Times - Obama visited Pakistan in 1981; The Washington Times - September 7, 2008; The Times May 10, 2008.Now the BIG question - If I found out all this information on my own, Why haven't all of our "intelligent" members of the press been reporting this?

A phrase that keeps ringing in my ear - "Beware of the enemy from within"!!!

Re-Elect Vinny deMacedo

For ten years, Vinny deMacedo has represented the First Plymouth District in the Massachusetts House of Representatives. At present, he is the ranking Republican on the powerful Ways and Means Committee. The View wholeheartedly endorses deMacedo for re-election.

First and foremost, Vinny deMacedo is a family man with deep roots in the local Plymouth community. As a small business owner, he experiences firsthand the impact of the laws passed by his colleagues on Beacon Hill. He knows the demands of providing for a family and meeting a payroll. Vinny also understands the workings of state government. He was voted Legislator of the Year by the Massachusetts Town Clerk's Association at its annual meeting in June, 2008.

As one of only nineteen Republicans, out of a total of 160 House members, Vinny provides the crucial leadership for the continuation of a two-party system in Massachusetts. Dominated by the other party, state spending has grown disproportionately as more and more expensive tax-payer supported programs are created, without adequate, or possibly any, concern for the cost side of the ledger, pushing the state budget to unsustainable levels. This extremism is also carried over to non-financial issues where government-initiated social changes have been pushed through without regard for the traditional values being trampled. While lacking the power to act unilaterally, Republicans like Vinny deMacedo are the sole voice of reason. As William F. Buckley, Jr. might have said, they are standing athwart history yelling "stop".

On October 30th, a birthday celebration for Vinny deMacedo will be held at the John Alden Club in Plymouth from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m.. Click HERE for more details. All are invited to come down to show support for Vinny deMacedo. If you are unable to attend, but would like to make a donation, please send a personal check to The deMacedo Committee P.O. Box 882, Plymouth, MA 02362

An American Carol

With the financial markets giving us fits, what better way to forget about one's troubles for a few hours than to head over to the cinema and buy pricey popcorn. This trip is now especially worth while and, for some of us, timely, as the movie, AN AMERICAN CAROL is now playing at a theatre near you. What sets this film apart from the usual Hollywood-produced drivel is that it champions a politically conservative point of view. No, this is not a typo. Have no fear, however, the mindless story line and slapstick antics are clearly aimed at the low end of the dumbed-down movie-going public. All the same, it's great fun, especially for conservatives.

Directed by David Zucker, of Airplane and Naked Gun fame, stars Chris Farley as movie producer (albeit documentaries) Michael Malone who undergoes a Dickensian experience that attempts, and to some extent succeeds, in convincing him to change his ways from left wing wacko. The cast also includes, among many others, Leslie Nielsen, playing himself, Kelsey Grammer as a fairly convincing General George Patton and a poignant moment where Jon Voight, as George Washington, delivers a sobering lesson to the clueless Malone, a very thinly-veiled stand-in for lefty, Michael Moore. There are also a bunch of cute kids who get all the best lines, even if they are curses.

So pry yourself away from watching CNBC's endless scrolling of those numbers preceded by an upside down red triangle and go see An American Carol.

The Debate Revisited

We turned in to the great debate to see the sage old Senator take on the young, relatively-inexperienced governor. As it turns out, however, Old Joe was the one who had the most problem with the facts. The lead editorial in today's WALL STREET JOURNAL, looks at Joe's statements and points out all that posturing and smarmy smiling didn't help his veracity. Not only did Joe have his facts wrong about who, if anyone, actually kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon, or just what General McKiernan said about appropriate tactics for Afghanistan, he was also off base when he invited people to meet him at Katie's Restaurant, which closed sometime in the 1980's. Forget about foul balls and home runs, we need instant replay for the debates.

Who won the debate? I guess the tip-off came when the MSM rushed to belittle Palin's folksy expressions. But as the WSJ concluded:

"Mrs. Palin may not know as much about the world as Mr. Biden does, but at least most of what she knows is true."


Joe Biden plays the role of the sage statesman very well. I don't know about you, but my appreciation for the stereotypical legislator is not selling at a high multiple right now. Always carefully-coiffed and well-tailored, and with the requisite long-faced-furrowed brow, they make proclamations in a stentorian, self-important voice crafted to make the most mundane statement sound like wisdom handed down from on high. After watching the legislature, over the past week, struggle ineffectively to deal with what may yet be the financial crisis of our time, I begin to question how our form of government can survive with these clowns in charge. After days of blaming everyone but themselves for the financial meltdown of the mortgage market, they pass a massive "rescue" package which seems to contain almost as much pork as it does financial aid. Who elects these people?

Blunt Ax Economics

Many observers would like to dismiss the referendum to appear as Question 1 on the November Massachusetts ballot, as crazy talk. Among the choices facing the voters Question 1 will be an up or down vote on eliminating the state income tax. In round numbers, income tax revenues for fiscal 2009 are expected to provide $12.5 billion against total budgeted expenditures of $28 billion. It doesn't take a fiscal analyst to envision the disruption that such a change would cause. Out-of-state readers must be scratching their heads to learn that Question No.1 is garnering increasing support. Writing in today's GLOBE, house conservative, Jeff Jacoby does an excellent job of tracing the ongoing frustration endured by Massachusetts voters seeking lower taxes. Not only has the state government ignored previous voter initiatives to lower taxes, but the rate of growth in the state budget continues unabated:

"Just last week, Governor Deval Patrick's office promised "hundreds of millions of dollars" in reduced outlays this fiscal year. And yet, somehow, the state budget continues to bloat: It was $22 billion in 2005, $23 billion in 2006, $25 billion in 2007, and $26 billion in 2008. The fiscal 2009 budget adopted in July - the one Patrick now claims he will cut unilaterally - totaled $28.2 billion. But if anything in Massachusetts is certain, it is that when the books close on the current fiscal year, state spending will have gone up by hundreds of millions of dollars, not down."


The Greek chorus of Politicians, public employees and others with a stake in the continued flow of income tax dollars have been sounding the alarm, citing the litany of crucial services that would fall victim to the passage of Question 1. Rather than reflecting taxpayer ignorance, however, the growing support for Question 1 may show the limits of taxpayer patience.

The Rock Unveiled

Just in time for the busy winter tourist season, the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation announced the completion of the renovations to the portico covering one of America's most enduring landmarks, Plymouth Rock. All summer, glimpses of the Rock have been available only through a cloudy Plexiglas window as the almost ninety-year-old portico has been shrouded with scaffolding. The project missed its July 4th completion date apparently due to the lack of availability of authentic ceiling tiles. To everyone's relief, the tiles have been acquired and installed and the $500 thousand project is now completed.

As many as a million tourists a year visit Pilgrim Memorial State Park to see the historic piece of stone commemorating the point at which the first settlers of the New World, aka, the Pilgrims, in 1620 stepped on what would become American soil. To gaze upon the Rock as the simple beginnings of our great country is clearly a thought-provoking and inspiring experience. Now, thanks to the re-hab, the experience won't be interrupted by falling ceiling tiles.

In honor of the event, the View is adding a new photo to its masthead showing, what else, the view from Plymouth Rock.

The Massachusetts Bailout

While our attention has been riveted on the Congress and its struggles with the enormous proposed bailout for the nation's financial markets, the federal Department of Health and Human Services has quietly approved a three-year renewal of a Medicaid waiver for the Massachusetts health care program. Remarkably, amid intense concern for the impact that massive amount of bailout funds would have on the federal government's budget, the three-year renewal also included a $4.3 billion increase over the next three years!

The Massachusetts program essentially follows a dual track to achieve the goal of universal coverage: Most employers are mandated to provide health insurance for their employees or face stiff penalties; while, individuals must buy health insurance on the market, unless they qualify for subsidized coverage from the state. To date, roughly two-thirds of the 650,000 formerly uninsured have secured coverage. While the View is not a big proponent of this program, we will acknowledge that the coverage is provided primarily by private insurance companies, which, at least, prevents the birth of a whole new bureaucracy. Unfortunately, that is about the limit of the good news.

Governor Patrick speaks of "our commitment to affordable, accessible, high-quality health care for every man, woman and child in the commonwealth." A very noble pronouncement, but what is missing is any reference to the growing costs of the program. If any of you have had to purchase individual health insurance, you are well aware of the cost of these programs, driven by the high cost of our health care system.

The state's way of dealing with this expense is to provide free, or subsidized coverage through its Commonwealth Care program. One of the issues during the renewal negotiations was the fact that Commonwealth care provides subsidized coverage for people making up to three times the poverty level, while the federal limit is two times. This means for example, that a family of four making less than $63,500 per year qualify for subsidized coverage. No wonder people are rushing to enroll. Well over half of the new enrollees have signed up for free or subsidized coverage.

It's not clear at this point how the federal government justifies this this renewal, especially without getting a reduction to the income eligibility threshold. Maybe the folks at Health and Human Services have been too busy to tune into C-Span and its coverage of all the dire predictions for financial ruin. Oh and by the way, many commentators have pointed out that provisions of the Massachusetts health plan bears a strong resemblance to that being proposed by Barack Obama for the whole country.