Wall Street Journal

It is, obviously, self-referential to quote yourself, but I do it to make a point. I wrote the following on New Year’s day, 1994. America 16 years ago was a relatively content nation, though full of political sparks: 10 months later the Republicans would take the House for the first time in 40 years. But beneath all the action was, I thought, a coming unease. Something inside was telling us we were living through “not the placid dawn of a peaceful age but the illusory calm before stern storms.”

The temperature in the world was very high. “At home certain trends—crime, cultural tension, some cultural Balkanization—will, we fear, continue; some will worsen. In my darker moments I have a bad hunch. The fraying of the bonds that keep us together, the strangeness and anomie of our popular culture, the increase in walled communities . . . the rising radicalism of the politically correct . . . the increased demand of all levels of government for the money of the people, the spotty success with which we are communicating to the young America’s reason for being and founding beliefs, the growth of cities where English is becoming the second language . . . these things may well come together at some point in our lifetimes and produce something painful indeed. I can imagine, for instance, in the year 2020 or so, a movement in some states to break away from the union. Which would bring about, of course, a drama of Lincolnian darkness. . . . You will know that things have reached a bad pass when Newsweek and Time, if they still exist 15 years from now, do cover stories on a surprising, and disturbing trend: aging baby boomers leaving America, taking what savings they have to live the rest of their lives in places like Africa and Ireland.”

I thought of this again the other day when Drudge headlined increasing lines in London for Americans trading in their passports over tax issues, and the sale of Newsweek for $1.

Our problems as a nation have been growing on us for a long time. Their future growth, and the implications of that growth, could be predicted. But there is one thing that is both new since 1994 and huge. It took hold and settled in after the crash of 2008, but its causes were not limited to the crash.

The biggest political change in my lifetime is that Americans no longer assume that their children will have it better than they did. This is a huge break with the past, with assumptions and traditions that shaped us.

The country I was born into was a country that had existed steadily, for almost two centuries, as a nation in which everyone thought—wherever they were from, whatever their circumstances—that their children would have better lives than they did. That was what kept people pulling their boots on in the morning after the first weary pause: My kids will have it better. They’ll be richer or more educated, they’ll have a better job or a better house, they’ll take a step up in terms of rank, class or status. America always claimed to be, and meant to be, a nation that made little of class. But America is human. “The richest family in town,” they said, admiringly. Read Booth Tarkington on turn-of-the-last-century Indiana. It’s all about trying to rise.

Parents now fear something has stopped. They think they lived through the great abundance, a time of historic growth in wealth and material enjoyment. They got it, and they enjoyed it, and their kids did, too: a lot of toys in that age, a lot of Xboxes and iPhones. (Who is the most self-punishing person in America right now? The person who didn’t do well during the abundance.) But they look around, follow the political stories and debates, and deep down they think their children will live in a more limited country, that jobs won’t be made at a great enough pace, that taxes—too many people in the cart, not enough pulling it—will dishearten them, that the effects of 30 years of a low, sad culture will leave the whole country messed up. And then there is the world: nuts with nukes, etc.

Optimists think that if we manage to turn a few things around, their kids may have it . . . almost as good. The country they inherit may be . . . almost as good. And it’s kind of a shock to think like this; pessimism isn’t in our DNA. But it isn’t pessimism, really, it’s a kind of tough knowingness, combined, in most cases, with a daily, personal commitment to keep plugging.

But do our political leaders have any sense of what people are feeling deep down? They don’t act as if they do. I think their detachment from how normal people think is more dangerous and disturbing than it has been in the past. I started noticing in the 1980s, the growing gulf between the country’s thought leaders, as they’re called—the political and media class, the universities—and those living what for lack of a better word we’ll call normal lives on the ground in America. The two groups were agitated by different things, concerned about different things, had different focuses, different world views.

But I’ve never seen the gap wider than it is now. I think it is a chasm. In Washington they don’t seem to be looking around and thinking, Hmmm, this nation is in trouble, it needs help. They’re thinking something else. I’m not sure they understand the American Dream itself needs a boost, needs encouragement and protection. They don’t seem to know or have a sense of the mood of the country.

And so they make their moves, manipulate this issue and that, and keep things at a high boil. And this at a time when people are already in about as much hot water as they can take.

To take just one example from the past 10 days, the federal government continues its standoff with the state of Arizona over how to handle illegal immigration. The point of view of our thought leaders is, in general, that borders that are essentially open are good, or not so bad. The point of view of those on the ground who are anxious about our nation’s future, however, is different, more like: “We live in a welfare state and we’ve just expanded health care. Unemployment’s up. Could we sort of calm down, stop illegal immigration, and absorb what we’ve got?” No is, in essence, the answer.

An irony here is that if we stopped the illegal flow and removed the sense of emergency it generates, comprehensive reform would, in time, follow. Because we’re not going to send the estimated 10 million to 15 million illegals already here back. We’re not going to put sobbing children on a million buses. That would not be in our nature. (Do our leaders even know what’s in our nature?) As years passed, those here would be absorbed, and everyone in the country would come to see the benefit of integrating them fully into the tax system. So it’s ironic that our leaders don’t do what in the end would get them what they say they want, which is comprehensive reform.

When the adults of a great nation feel long-term pessimism, it only makes matters worse when those in authority take actions that reveal their detachment from the concerns—even from the essential nature—of their fellow citizens. And it makes those citizens feel powerless.

Inner pessimism and powerlessness: That is a dangerous combination.

Greta Montes Scriboni

July 4, 2010

…I would like to share some sobering statistics regarding the impact of illegal immigration on our nation’s economy: 

• Currently it is estimated that there are over 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States, which equates to illegal immigrants holding 1 in every 20 jobs. 
• Illegal immigrants fill:
  • 25% of all agricultural jobs.
  • 17% of all office and house cleaning positions.
  • 14% of construction jobs.
  • 12% of food preparation positions.  (1)

It is time for grown-up leadership in Washington and in Philadelphia regarding the issue of illegal immigration.  In his recent speech, President Obama stated that the immigration system is broken.  And he called for a “pathway to citizenship” for the millions of “undocumented workers” in the U.S.  But does anyone believe that providing a pathway to citizenship, also known as amnesty, is going to stop illegal immigration?  I believe providing amnesty to over 11 million illegal immigrants is only going to encourage more illegal immigration!  

Even in our own city of Philadelphia,  Mayor Nutter is refusing to make the tough decisions and to follow the rule of law.  Mayor Nutter wants to block U.S. Immigration and Custom Enforcement officials from having full access to arrest records for fear of discouraging illegal immigrants from coming forward to report crime.  Mayor Nutter believes that illegal immigrant informants will fear deportation.  Mayor Nutter, it is not leadership to kowtow to illegal immigrants for fear that they will not report crime.  Pockets of crime should be rooted out and perpetrators arrested and when appropriate deported, on a routine basis.  Mayor Nutter’s approach does not demonstrate leadership, but rather it is the continuation of complacency and neglect in the enforcement of immigration laws.   

Over 1 million immigrants enter the United States legally each year.  They know that to live the immigrant experience is an honor and a tribute to our Republic, for it is a chance to live the American Dream.  Legal immigrants do not take freedom for granted.  They do not feel the government was created to take care of them.  They believe it is their honor and duty to care for our country.  Like anything that requires great effort to achieve, it is greatly valued and cherished.

 My parents and four of my siblings were legal immigrants from Honduras, Central America.  It was their dream to become naturalized citizens.  In order to achieve this dream they were required to do the following:

• Wait their turn to enter the United States, through the quota system
• Post a bond to ensure they would not be a financial burden to taxpayers
• Go to classes to learn about American history and the US Constitution

Our family wanted to assimilate into the American culture, by speaking English,  participating in boyscouts and girlscouts, playing football and baseball, trying out for cheerleader, making the honor roll, and working summers to buy our first car.

From my conversations with many legal immigrants, I believe they think it unwise and unfair to give amnesty to the millions of illegal aliens living in our country.  They understand that our immigration system and its laws were developed to assimilate immigrants into our American culture, not to change our culture or accommodate special interest groups.  Our immigration laws protect our economy, our society and our national security.  Legal immigrants do not believe in politicizing this issue.  They understand that amnesty is just an expedient way of buying votes.  They support following and enforcing the rule of law!

And so, in closing, I ask you to stand with Conservatives like Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, who believe in defending the laws of our country.  Please send this message to Washington and to City Hall:

 “Do your job, secure our borders!”

(1) Number of Illegal Immigrants Hits 12M Mar 7 02:38 PM US/Eastern
By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER
Associated Press Writer published on Breitbart

It will be a great opportunity to speak to local residents about Conservative values and discuss the upcoming elections.  To volunteer at the table for any amount of time, whether 30 minutes or 3 hours, please email info@paconservativecouncil.com.  Or just stop by and join us!

PACC MEMBERS AND SUPPORTERS:

Christian Callahan
Sean Carpenter
Tania Ciolko
Kathy Hartman
Paul Linkmeyer
Marian McGrath
Cathy McNamara
Paula Stiles
Cynthia White

Jason Cann

Diana Cann

Bob Knecht

COALITION FOR ADVANCING FREEDOM:

Jamie C. Cox
John Emmons
Donna Ellingsen
Gwen F. Galligan
David T. Galligan
Harry L. Cochran III
Jane G. Ladley
Susan Hancock
D. William Hovis
William Spicher

If there are other election updates or any corrections, please notify us at info@paconservativecouncil.com. Thank you.

“This is a great opportunity for PACC members as well as others from the community to hear from state representative candidates for these three primary races.”  said Ms. Hartman.  “The candidates will speak directly to the audience who will have the chance to ask questions of them regarding their voting history, political experience and position on critical legislative issues.”

When:  Saturday, May 8, 2010

Time:  9:30 AM to 10:30 AM 

Where:  West Chester Borough Hall – Council Chambers  401 E. Gay Street,  West Chester, PA  19380

Confirmed:  Dan Truitt, Kendrick (Ken) Buckwalter, Warren Kampf, Tim Hennessey, Jonathan Jenkins

Invited: Drae McComas

(Please note:  The monthly PACC meeting will be conducted from 9:00 AM to 9:30 AM with the

Meet the Candidates forum beginning at 9:30 AM)

 156th District

Municipalities include the Borough of West Chester; Townships of East Goshen and West Goshen; part of East Bradford Township (South 1 and South 2 precincts). School Districts.

Candidates:

Drae McComas – Recommended

Website: http://www.draemccomasforstaterep.com/

Dan Truitt – Recommended

Website:  http://dantruitt.com/

157th District

Municipalities include part of Chester County consisting of the townships of Schuylkill and Tredyffrin and the borough of Phoenixville and part of Montgomery County consisting of the township of Lower Providence and West Norriton.

Candidates:

Kendrick (Ken) Buckwalter – Recommended

 Website: http://buckwalterforpa.com/clients/buckwalterforpa/index101.htm?twindow=Default&smenu=101&mad=No

Warren Kampf – Recommended

Website:  http://www.warrenkampf.com/

26th District  
  
Municipalities include Coatesville, East Coventry Twp, East Nantmeal Twp, East Vincent Twp, Elverson, Honey Brook, Honey Brook Twp, North Coventry Twp, Spring City, Valley Twp, Wallace Twp, Warwick Twp, West Caln Twp, West Nantmeal Twp 

Candidates:

Tim Hennessey – Endorsed and Incumbent

Website:  http://www.rephennessey.com/

Jonathan Jenkins

Website:  http://www.vote4jenkins.com/

The Pennsylvania Conservative Council is a grassroots organization promoting conservative ideals, such as individual liberty, self-reliance, limited government, strong national defense, lower taxes, personal responsibility, and the rule-of-law.

The Pennsylvania Conservative Council (PACC) has it’s roots in the Chester County Victory Movement of West Chester PA. In 2008, after a year of Saturday morning Support the Troops rallies in downtown West Chester, American Sheepdog members began to think about taking their action to the next level and the PACC was born.

Urbanization of the surrounding Philadelphia area has resulted in an erosion of conservative voter majorities. Recognizing the key roll these suburban areas hold in state and national elections the PACC embarked on a mission of information and education on issues important to conservatives on a local, state and national level. To this end we sponsor lectures, seminars, forums and debates in the Philadelphia suburban counties. On our website are found articles that range from humorous to scholarly and covering issues from GLSEN activism in local public schools to national defense.

Polls show time and again that the majority of Americans consider themselves as more conservative than liberal. As liberalism continues it’s slide into leftism the PACC believes it’s nonpartisan educational approach will lead to strengthening conservative majorities in Southeast Pennsylvania.

Visit our website at paconservativecouncil.org and join us

at our membership meetings on the first Saturday at the West Chester Borough Hall

Please print this page and take with you to the polls on Tuesday, May 18th:

PACC MEMBERS AND SUPPORTERS On the Ballot for Republican Committee Person:

Christian Callahan

Sean Carpenter

Kathy Hartman

Fred Fonseca

Paul Linkmeyer

Marian McGrath

Paula Stiles

Cynthia White

In addition, the following groups have submitted names of members and supporters on the ballot for Republican Committee Persons: 

DELCO PATRIOTS

159 TH DISTRICT consists of city of Chester, Chester Twp., Lower Chichester Twp., part of Upper Chichester Twp., Eddystone, Marcus Hook, Parkside, part of Ridley Twp., Trainer, and Upland

 Lisa Pelurie

 Steve Remenyi

160 TH DISTRICT consists of part of Aston Twp., Bethel Twp., Chadds Ford Twp., Chester Heights, part of Upper Chichester Twp., Concord Twp., and part of Chester County

 John Boehmler

 Beth Ann Boehmler

161 ST DISTRICT consists of part of Aston Twp., Brookhaven, part of Marple Twp., part of Newtown Twp., part of Nether Providence Twp., part of Upper Providence Twp., part of Radnor Twp., part of Ridley Twp., Rutledge, part of Springfield Twp., and Swarthmore

 Lisa Esler

 Frank Calamita

163 RD DISTRICT consists of Aldan, Clifton Heights, part of Darby Twp., part of Upper Darby Twp., Lansdowne, and part of Ridley Twp

 Scott Howell

164 TH DISTRICT consists of part of Upper Darby Twp., East Lansdowne, and Millbourne

 Vicki Thompson

 Joe Spurio, Sr.

165 TH DISTRICT* consists of part of Marple Twp., Morton, part of Radnor Twp., part of Springfield, and Haverford Twp

 Bill Recktenwald

 Mary Ellen Jones

 *Republican State Committee representation for the 165th and 166th Districts have merged into the 165th

COALITION FOR ADVANCING FREEDOM:  Committee candidates cover Elk, Franklin, New London, London Britain, East Nottingham, Upper Oxford, West Sadsbury, Uwchlan 2

Jamie C. Cox

John Emmons

Paul Michael Peterson

Susan W. Pizzini

Donna Ellingsen

Daniel J. Leo

Gwen F. Galligan

David T. Galligan

Harry L. Cochran III

Jane G. Ladley

Susan Hancock

D. William Hovis

William Spicher

Please notify us at info@paconservativecouncil.com if you are running for committeeperson and would like to be added to this list.

April 8, 2010

On Friday April 16th the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network (GLSEN) will sponsor an all day “action event” called “Day of Silence” at WCASD high schools. The GLSEN organizing manual explains: “Day Of Silence is designed to draw attention to the bullying and harassment faced by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender students… participants take a vow of silence and distribute or wear speaking cards with information about anti-LGBT bias and ways for students and others to end the silence.”

At East H.S. this will be the fourth annual “Day of Silence” event yet many parents are still unaware. If you are concerned enough to call your school, officials try to spin the event as being about bullying in general. They also disingenuously claim participation is voluntary. Students sitting in a room for 40 minutes while the teacher conducts class in silence become unwitting participants in the protest. With a table set up at the main entrance, signs posted throughout the building and teachers remaining silent, a student attending school on April 16th cannot avoid this day long demonstration.

The GLSEN with assistance from the ACLU has been successful in setting up a nation wide network in high schools. Through Gay Lesbian Straight Alliance clubs the GLSEN exerts pressure on school officials to permit a “Day of Silence”. Inspired by these successes, the GLSEN is organizing an additional action event for schools called “Transgender Day of Remembrance”. The group is also hard at work on “Day of Silence” for middle schools and preparing “educational” programs for elementary schools.

Having my children spend their entire day immersed in a protest orchestrated by the GLSEN goes beyond school safety and is not what I bargained for when I enrolled them in public school. Many of us have gay friends and family members who we love dearly, but homosexuality remains a controversial and complex social issue. Imposing gay activism on the captive audience of students struggling through their teen years is unfair and unacceptable.

No student should be subjected to harassment or bullying for any reason. Parents expect schools to take action whenever such behavior is suspected. Schools must have programs designed to prevent bullying, but these programs should not single out specific groups of students. Furthermore, schools should be teaching students how to become good citizens not activists.

To make your voice heard, please contact:

Superintendent Dr. Jim Scanlan @ jscanlon@wcasd.net or call 484-266-1001

East High School Principal Dr. Richard F. Dunlap, Jr. @ rdunlap@wcasd.net or call 484-266-3801

West Chester Area School Board  c/o Pauline Bachtle, Board Secretary@pbachtle@wcasd.net or call 484-266-1125

or by Traditional Mail

West Chester Area School Board  c/o Pauline Bachtle, Board Secretary

Spellman Administration Building

829 Paoli Pike

West Chester, PA 19380

TO SEE ACTIONS BEING TAKEN BY OTHER ORGANIZATIONS VOICING THEIR OBJECTION TO ACTIVISM IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS, PLEASE VISIT  http://www.doswalkout.net/

On Tuesday, November 3rd, we, the people, will again head to the polls to vote. On the ballot are the often-overlooked judicial elections.

Although I rarely advocate electing a single-party slate, I think that this year presents an important case for electing the Republican judges at all levels.

Our individual freedom and autonomy, the very heart of Constitutional limited government and free markets, is under unprecedented attack by Leftists now dominating the Democratic party. The same Leftists control the U.S. Congress, with a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate giving one-party rule to the furthest-left administration in history.

While I disagree with many of the established politicians of both parties, the difference between the Republican and Democratic parties is that within the Republican Party are conservative reformers dedicated to Constitutional limited government, economic freedom, individual accountability, individual autonomy, and American exceptionalism. There is no viable reform movement within the Democratic Party; in fact, is is being led by Union organizers implacably committed to monopoly control of a collectivized workforce and statist Leftists advocating consolidated government control and coercion.

This is where the Republican party, at this time, is different, through its viable and principled reform movement. This is highlighted by the campaign of Pat Toomey with his themes of Constitutional limited government and individual and economic freedom. Examples can also be found in Peg Luksik’s campaign and the work of State Senators John Eichelberger and Mike Folmer.

These reformers, along with the Constitutional limited government/individual liberty/economic freedom movement entirely, are threatened by one-party rule, where dissent is simply ignored. I don’t want some “know-it-all genius” adjucating from Olympus; I want someone competent and careful. I want a judge with depth of experience in criminal law; someone who has shown persistence; someone who understands that decisions in the courtroom impact the lives of real people; someone willing to work for a better Republic; someone dedicated to the rule of law. Knowing the law is indespensable; yet there is more than simply this to be a judge.

For Commonwealth Court, the Republicans have two complimentary candidates in Judge Patricia McCullough and Kevin Brobson. Winning the primary despite not getting party endorsement, Patricia McCullough is independent and principled on Constitutional limited government. She is thoughtful and understands the philosophical and moral implications of her decisions. Kevin Brobson’s thirteen years’ of practice before the Commonwealth Court qualifies him as the most technically knowledgeable of all the candidates. Combining Kevin Brobson’s technical skills with Patricia McCullough’s philosophical and Constitutional focus will benefit us all.

For the Superior Court, there are four Republican candidates: Temp Smith, Sallie Mundy, Judge Judy Olson, and Judge Paula Ott. Judge Ott is from West Chester and has an outstanding reputation among politically active Chester Countians.

Finally, Judge Joan Orie Melvin is heading the judicial ticket for the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Judge Orie Melvin is impressively smart and her presentation is stunning. I have no question of her commitment to public service and to the integrity of the Constitution.

There are also local judicial races across each county. This year, more than any other, presents a compelling case to vote for the seven Republican judges highlighted above as well as Republican judges at the local level. Voting for the Republican slate supports the Constitution and its ideals of limited government and individual and economic freedom; failure to do so will only bolster the one-party rule and make the reformer’s job that much more difficult.