Corie Whalen

I’m pleased to announce that I’ve accepted a new full time position! I’m the Political Director for the Alliance for Self-Governance (ASG) based in Houston. ASG is a new, nationally focused organization, and given its objective, my prior liberty oriented political work fits perfectly. A brief note about ASG and our goals:

“The Alliance for Self-Governance (ASG) is not just another lobbying group. None of our leaders are professional politicians, and we don’t seek to advance any partisan political agenda. We accept no funding from the Republican or Democratic parties.

Our objective is to reverse the accumulation of power in Washington, D.C. and to restore that power to the people, where it rightfully belongs. The way to maintain “good and safe government,” Thomas Jefferson said, “is not to trust it to one, but to divide it among the many.”

I’m excited about the prospects of working to devolve power away from the political class and back to the people. If you aren’t familiar with an innovate way to do so, the concept of interstate compacts, I suggest you learn more about them and their infinitely positive potential. For a fantastic perspective on the matter, check out this great piece by Ted Cruz and Mario Loyola from the Texas Public Policy Foundation. The health care compact, the first of many that will be no doubt be on the table in the future, passed in Texas this past legislative session, and it also has already seen success in Georgia, Oklahoma and Missouri.

While interstate compacts are part of the agenda ASG is looking to support, our big project moving into 2012 is The Campaign for Primary Accountability. As many of my fellow activists have learned and more need to be made aware of, the most effective way to force positive change in government is to challenge incumbents in primaries. Part of the reason the system is broken is that politicians simply aren’t held accountable, and incumbents in both parties are rarely challenged. This reinforces their focus on beltway lobbyists and further centralizing government rather than working for the people.

A note about The Campaign for Primary Accountability:

“In November 2010, the approval rating for Congress was at 17% (it is now at 9%). That same month, no less than 86% of congressional incumbents were re-elected. How is it possible that politicians who are viewed so unfavorably continue to return to office?

Here’s how: The overwhelming majority of districts are one-party districts, meaning either the Republican or Democratic party enjoys an overwhelming advantage in registered voters. Fully 77% of House districts have not changed party hands since 2002. Most incumbents face no primary challenge. In 2010, 62% of incumbent members of the U.S. House of Representatives had no primary opposition.

The outcome of the November general elections is really determined during the primary elections – and by only the 10% of the American electorate that votes in primaries. In 2010, 396 incumbents ran for re-election. Only four were defeated by primary challengers; 63% ran unopposed. Because incumbents are so easily re-elected, they are not held accountable for their actions.”

This needs to change, and ASG wants to work with activists across the spectrum to make sure that politicians, regardless of ideology, feel the pressure. DC politicians need to know that We the People are watching and will take the action necessary via primary campaigns to restore our nation’s prosperity and elect accountable statesmen.

From my perspective, one of the greatest primary success stories was Senator Mike Lee’s challenge to 18-year incumbent Bob Bennett in Utah last year. Lee, who has turned out to be a great Senator in my opinion, beat Bennett in a three way primary. However, the great thing about this project is that it’s bipartisan. While I personally prefer electing liberty Republicans, ASG has people from all sides of the aisle on staff, and will be building field teams accordingly. I’d love to see liberals organize to take down unaccountable incumbents who ignore their philosophy just as much as I’d like to rid of establishment Republicans. After all, we’re all in this together.

That’s precisely why I’m excited that we’ll be actively working to challenge long-term, unaccountable Congressmen from both parties. The reality is that many districts inevitably go either R or D, and to affect change, turning engaged voters out in primaries is key. I hope you’ll sign up at the bottom of the page to stay in the loop at Alliance4SelfGovernance.org.

We’ll need motivated volunteers ready to take back our government from the political class that exists to serve itself rather than us. I hope you’ll join me and countless others as the self-governance movement gets off the ground. I truly believe that the reason we have the government we do at this juncture is because the American people fell asleep at the wheel. But lately, many have awakened. According to Rasmussen, only 15% of Americans think we’re on the right track. That’s staggering, and I truly believe that the Campaign for Primary Accountability and interstate compacts can make a positive difference for this nation. I know I’m excited about the prospects – and you should be too!

As I write this, a story is developing about what appears to be a thwarted attempt at setting off a car bomb in the middle of Times Square. Luckily, no one was hurt, and an NYPD bomb squad seems to have successfully diffused whatever device was in the SUV.

…. And all over my twitter feed,  there are people who feel an immediate need, having no facts whatsoever regarding who did this or what their motive was, to blame Obama and his administration for their supposed incompetence when it comes to national security issues.

This type of unfounded, politicized assumption making coming from many on the right is just as unbecoming as what I saw from the left (for example, Fire Dog Lake), regarding the horrible oil rig accident that occurred on April 20th off the Gulf Coast. The unfortunate mishap killed 11 people, and dumped 200,000 gallons of oil into the ocean; and the folks at FDL seem to think it’s perfectly appropriate to use the tragedy as an excuse to throw around anti oil company rhetoric. While it’s quite possible that they have some valid points worth considering about the merits of conservation, why offshore drilling might be a bad thing, or the shady practices of companies like BP, I can’t help but find it cheap, if not insulting, to treat tragedy as a reason to push politics.

The exact same thing can be said of the claims that the right’s foreign policy hawks are making regarding Obama’s national security incompetence. While they might put forth claims worth considering about the President’s weaknesses on the issue, doing so as an immediate reaction to a bomb plot where the motive remains a mystery seems far too blindly ideological; weakening the potential strengths of any argument that could be made in favor of the hawk’s views. (Side-note: I’m also seeing tweets about MSNBC hosts speculating that the bomb plot relates to right-wing home grown terrorism; equally as inappropriate and factually weak as hawkish assumptions that it’s a Muslim jihad).

Why do so many people feel the need to both immediately and irrationally politicize disaster?

(more…)

(Cross-posted at Red Mass Group)

Hi everyone,

I wanted to provide you with information about the upcoming “Post Party Summit” activist training at the Fercroft Sheraton in Danvers, May 7th – 8th. The event in our area is one in a series of many being held nationwide. Local talk radio favorites Michael Graham and Todd Feinburg will be joined by conservative commentator and author S.E. Cupp as the summit’s featured speakers. Here’s what the group primarily responsible for these summits, American Majority, has to say:

Government Has Failed You.

We are in a fascinating time. One in which rising deficits, bigger government, and the threat of new taxation when there is clearly no representation threaten to divide and ruin our country. Yet, these injustices have fueled a revival of the new conservative movement. Millions of Americans are engaging in the political process for the first time, brought to protest over the injustices in government at all levels. While protests bring us together in passion, they are not a strategy for meaningful reform. Let us take the next step together.

Now Is Your Time.

The Post-Party Summits represent the beginning of the new American Revolution, one in which we organize for liberty and take back our communities from the political class. Each event is designed to maximize your time and provide you with real-world strategies and tactics that you can apply immediately. We have brought together some of the country’s best in messaging, political organizing, leadership training, new media, etc. to offer each of you the opportunity to move beyond protest to implementing freedom. Now is your time, what will you do with it?”

(more…)

From the far left “Fire Dog Lake” PAC:

For almost the entirety of the health care debate, the Obama Administration has relied on economist Jonathan Gruber to make the public case for its idea of reform – even the most unpopular parts. But as Firedoglake revealed on Friday, the Obama Administration has failed to disclose that it paid the same economist more than $780,000.

http://action.firedoglake.com/gruber

Take action, my friends. Any enemy of the corrupt is our friend. When it comes to calling out the frauds, we must band together, regardless of ideology. It’s clear that Obama is a tyrant, even to the “progressives” who invested so much faith in him.

Here is what I wrote:

I am actually a libertarian, and disagree with what the majority of Fire Dog Lake espouses. However, when people of good conscience see corruption, regardless of their ideology, they need to come together and put a stop to it. You, President Obama, are clearly corrupt. Frankly, I feel bad for the people who call themselves progressives and put faith in you. You and all of the Democrats are a joke. True liberals and progressives should be just as mad at you as true libertarians and conservatives are at the Republicans. All the members of the DC political class don’t have the interests of the people in mind. It’s a huge joke when Democrats claim to be against insurance companies and big pharma. Give me a break – you are playing right into their hands.

I, like many of my other fellow policy wonks, have been following the procedural aspects of this health care debate for quite some time now. The days following the recent 1 AM cloture vote, however, have been the most intense.

After a great deal of analysis yesterday, and some discussions with Red State’s Erick Erickson – the only person I know who follows all of this more than I do, I’ve decided that our literal last hope is to make sure Bart Stupak’s (D-Michigan) bark is as big as his bite. Now, of course, I’m not necessarily thinking that it WILL be (Ben Nelson showed us that most politicians have their price), but it’s a small ray of hope, and the area we need to focus our attention on.

Anyone who knows me will attest to the fact that I have libertarian sentiments, and think voting based on social issues when it comes to federal policy is a bad idea, because it’s, A: not the federal government’s business and should be dealt with on as local of a level as possible, and B: completely pales in comparison to economic issues in my humble opinion.

However, that always fun debate aside, at this point, from a procedural perspective, the abortion issue happens to be the best possible saving grace for those looking to defeat this piece of tyrannical legislation. Luckily, it’s not a futile aspect of the abortion debate either – the point at issue is whether abortion should be funded by the federal government, which, quite predictably, I happen to be very much against.

So without further adieu, here’s the situation we’re in:

(more…)

Can you actually believe that this language is part of the health care bill? Every American, regardless of their ideology, should be horrified:

“It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection”

Say goodbye to our Constitutional Republic, folks. This is an action that King George III would be proud of. Harry Reid, and anyone supporting this bill, including Republicans Kay Bailey Hutchinson, Olympia Snowe & Susan Collins, who, in choosing to end debate at points are complicit (and Snowe especially for voting it out of committee). Then, of course, we have to include the President of the United States in the list too. Each and every one of them are elitist, authoritarian and anti-American.

Mitch McConnell and the rest of the GOP also have blood on their hands for refusing to put out all the stops in fighting this. I could go on, but Erick Erickson of Red State does a superb job of explaining how McConnell and Alexander screwed the American people by rolling over and allowing this, for fear of being degraded by their Establishment buddies in the Beltway.

Regardless of any feelings I may have on the issue substantively, from a purely political standpoint, I sort of love watching President Obama escalate wars. Remember in 2007 during the primaries when the MoveOn.org folks were shaking with pleasure over the thought of The One? Conservatives (from the anti-war contingent up through neoconservatives) can’t stand the President for their own respective reasons. Now, he’s alienating his base even further, while, for a host of other reasons, still managing to piss everyone else off. Why bring terrorists to New York City and try them in our courts with American constitutional rights while simaltaneously escalating foreign wars that you PROMISED as a candidate you’d end immediately upon being elected?

The major contradictions will end in EVERYONE disliking him – which is why, even if it’s all a bit tragic, I think it’s somewhat, in an ironic and pathetic kind of way, entertaining to watch. It’s almost like some sort of old school literary classic – you know, the kind you read in English class your senior year of high school, with the charasmatic tragic hero. The man of the hour has risen to great heights, he’s in the spotlight – but is just a bit too naive; slightly too egotistical; and while he’s valiantly attempting to balance the world on his shoulders, he, in an utmost dramatic fashion, comes crashing down; his previously unsubstantiated but rhetorically appealing status of grandeur with him.

Barack Obama might just be Icarus.

I’d say that my high school English teachers would be proud of me for that analogy – but then again, they were complicit members of the Massachusetts Teacher’s Union, so I have a hard time believing they’d appreciate it from a political perspective.

The ultimate moral of the story? Go big or go home, Mr. President. Pick your principles and stand with your base. All of this indecisive, contradictory nonsense will get you nowhere. Which leads me to the question, who is Obama’s Karl Rove? I’m sure there are many people who fit the bill; David Axelrod, Rahm Emmanuel – and hosts of others. Frankly, however, whoever’s advising him is a moron. At least Karl had the sense to tow a specific philosophical line and stick to it. Even if one disagrees with a certain intellectual approach to a situation, you can at least respect a man who has a certain set of values and stays true to them. What Obama is currently doing reveals him for what he is – an empty political hack with a few decent rhetorical tricks up his sleeve.

I don’t know about you, but I think the honeymoon is over.

The notion that a public option can compete with private insurers is logically asinine. How can an entity indefinitely subsidized by taxpayers compete with a company that needs to actually yield a product worthy of consumer patronage? The government run option not only has the benefit of being financed despite all obstacles, but it also will crowd out private insurers, and the number of them in existence will eventually lessen because companies will simply stop offering health plans since the good ole’ government will take care of the matter.

All talk of this public option being competitive by crafty politicians like Martha Coakley is so transparent; it’s an intellectually dishonest but rhetorically pleasant way of tricking moderates into thinking that it’s somehow a capitalist measure simply because they throw in the word “compete”. Any person who employs logic, however, will recognize the eventual end of a public option – and it’s the end the “progressives” want; it’s just saddening that they have to intentionally decieve the populace in order to achieve their goals.

President Obama is treading on dangerous territory by calling out talk radio and FOX. Yes – they lean conservative in their reporting. But, if as the POTUS you’re going to express public disdain for certain networks (which is a bad idea in the first place), be consistent and treat MSNBC the same way you do FOX. What Obama is doing by outwardly favoring one network while speaking negatively about another has a dictator-esque flavor. Calling for fairness in reporting is one thing; being ideological about the press is another. As my favorite founding father, George Mason put it, “The freedom of the press is one of the great bulwarks of liberty and can never be restrained but by despotic governments”.

My very liberal friend sent me a clip from a Rachel Maddow segment -

And this was my response:

CONGRATS, Rachel, for noting the obvious – that when there is political activity of any kind, monied interests are there, waiting to take advantage.

Because there is dissent and people are expressing it, the usual suspects want a piece of the pie. How is that shocking? It certainly doesn’t mean that the anger isn’t real. I know for certain that it is, despite the fact that apparently, the individuals who are behind these corporate interests feel the same way (as if the two are mutually exclusive). What I see in someone like Rachel Maddow is a person who doesn’t like the message, intentionally distorting cause and effect in an attempt to discredit the movement because she finds it philosophically threatening.

Personally, I think that’s an intellectually dishonest move, and a cop out. Debate the merits of your own views instead of attempting to “expose” the fact that certain corporations and/or political parties have an interest in tapping into the very real anger that exists regarding the federal government’s rapid attempt to socialize our nation’s health care industry. OF COURSE they do – that doesn’t mean the real grassroots anger that they have an interest in is manufactured!

Furthermore, it’s rather ironic that Rachel is out there “exposing” the monied interests when Big Pharmaceutical companies are paying for the pro-government health care ads that air during the commercials on her show. When government grows, the game changes from the monied interests operating in a free market where to survive, they must provide services that individuals are willing to pay for; that’s called peaceful competition. Given the way things are headed now, the evil monied interests that you hate so much will simply lobby the government for taxpayer money instead, where the Congress and the President pick and choos winners instead of the people. Welcome to Bailout Nation.

What this comes down to, as it always does, is our diametrically opposed views of good versus evil. You see corporations and “monied interests” as evil, whereas I see the government and concentrated power as evil. In fact, I see the government as evil because like you, I recognize that corporations and monied interests have one thing in mind: profit. The difference is that in a socialist system, they will lobby the government for taxpayer money and Our Glorious Leader(s) will pick and choose winners, whereas in a free market, the people pick and choose who survives based on which company has the best products and services.

By the way, an additional comment about the Recess Rallies against the health care bill.

While the rallies are apparently supported by a variety of “evil” interests, the true fact of the matter is that each and every rally is organized by local, individual people.

I emailed the American Liberty Alliance and became the Massachusetts State Coordinator for the rallies, and have had, get this, AVERAGE AMERICANS emailing me, asking how they can organize rallies in their Congressional districts. For example, this email:

Hello,

Best Regards,
Janine Izzo