Pennsylvnia Federation of College Republicans

By: Kyle VanDecker, Villanova University 2012

President Barack Obama recently claimed that the incident involving a black Harvard professor and a white Cambridge police officer proves “race remains a factor in this society”. That happens to be one of the few things I’ve heard him say lately that I actually believe. Ironically enough, however, he told the truth unintentionally. The reason race is a factor in this case rest solely with Professor Henry Gates. After reading various news articles from notoriously liberal media sites, I have to say it sure looks like Gates went into the confrontation looking for racism.

Sgt. James Crowley of the Cambridge Police Department was responding to an emergency 911 call by a woman reporting two black men with backpacks were forcing in the side door of her neighbor’s home. The accounts of Professor Gates and Sgt. Crowley differ from then on and you should read both of them (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32122233/ns/today-today_people/). There were a variety of witnesses and the truth will come out sooner rather than later. Still, the fact of the matter is that even if you look at Professor Gates’ story, he cannot be taken seriously. He complains that while he was walking to get his identification, “He (Sgt. Crowley) followed me without permission, I gave him the 2 ID’s and I demanded to know his name and badge number. He wouldn’t say anything. He was just very upset and I said, ‘Why are you not responding to me? Are you not responding to me because you’re a white officer and I’m a black man?”

I have unfortunately had a few personal experiences with police officers and can tell you that how Sgt. Crowley addressed the situation is not unusual. On a routine traffic stop I have witnessed my friend ask a police officer a much more respectable question then demanding “to know his name and badge number” and he did not receive a response. For Professor Gates to follow that up immediately by accusing the officer of being a racist is irresponsible and an embarrassment. Could you imagine in a similar situation if a white professor asked a black officer if he wasn’t responding to him because he’s a black officer and I’m a white man? I’m sure that wouldn’t be tolerated.

Professor Gates concludes his account by him having said, “I want to know your colleague’s name and his badge number” to the officers outside his home and that Sgt. Crowley then said, “Thank you for accommodating my earlier request. You are under arrest.” This is completely unreasonable. At this point the two are in front of a decent amount of witnesses and for Sgt. Crowley to have acted this out would be professional suicide. On top of that, it is completely out of character.

It is worth mentioning that Sgt. Crowley is an expert on racial profiling and has taught a class on the subject for five years. He was specifically chosen to teach the class by former black Police Commissioner Ronny Watson. In addition to that, he once gave CPR to black Celtics star Reggie Lewis. If there is a prototypical white cop that isn’t likely to have race impact his actions, I would have to say Sgt. Crowley appears to be it.

Now, putting the more plausible account given by Sgt. Crowley aside, Professor Gates still has proven himself to be out of line. I don’t think a man like this, with unabashed disrespect for the officer who was initially trying to protect Gates’ home, deserves to be teaching at all. He is currently instructing the brightest young minds in the world, and we trust him to mold them adequately? This case seems cut and dry to me but amazingly the worst was yet to come!

The President of the United States of America addressed the issue, a local arrest, in the midst of a myriad of national problems he has yet to address sufficiently still sitting on his desk. Not only did he comment on it but did so in a disgusting fashion. Immediately after stating he did not know the facts, Obama said, “But I think it’s fair to say, No. 1, any of us would be pretty angry. No. 2, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home.” Are you kidding me? Here is a decorated and respected police officer following routine procedure. He was verbally attacked by the man whose house he was trying to protect, he has seen his mayor apologize for his actions to Gates and now his President is saying he acted stupidly.

Police officers are a major element in the backbone of this country. There is a good chance that almost all of us will have a higher salary then the average police officer, yet they go to work every morning not knowing if their going to come home ever again and they do so in order to keep us safe. I’m not saying that racial profiling and the mistreatment of black Americans is completely over or that racism doesn’t exist. It certainly does and I’m sure in some cases it is unfortunately a factor, however, it isn’t in this one. Professor Gates, Barack Obama and all the others who condemned this man need to be held accountable and it needs to begin with direct apologies to Sgt. Crowley.

By: Kevin Bloomfield, Villanova University 2011

Over the past several weeks Congress has been working on health care legislation that would inevitably lead to a socialist, single-payer system. As usual, the president is saying one thing (the bill will be “deficit-neutral”) while the facts say otherwise (see Congressional Budget Office).

This is difficult to accept for Republicans, we believers in individual responsibility and limited government. And while we seek a better alternative to offer, our party leaders have offered nothing worth rallying around.

However, a persuasive alternative to the Democrat plan to complete the government’s takeover of the health care industry was, in fact, laid out by the great free-market economist Milton Friedman over a decade ago, before his death. His plan would actually reduce costs and expand coverage, as the president claims to seek. If only Republicans in Congress would dust it off and adopt it as their own….

In his study “Input and Output in Health Care,” Friedman identified the two biggest contributors (bearing 70% of the responsibility, Friedman claims) to the spiraling costs of health care:

1. The tax-exempt status of employer-provided health care, which a) leaves medical arrangements in the hands of the employer rather than the individual (who’s gonna care more?) and b) makes health care relatively cheaper than, say, food, which is paid for with income that has already been taxed (this artificially causes patients to demand more medical services)

2. The bureaucracy and regulation of health care that resulted from the establishment of Medicare and Medicaid

Together, these factors have lead to the grotesque distortion of the free market that is our health care system today, in which a third party–the government or an insurance company–both sets the price of and pays for medical treatment. Ideally, the seller (the doctor) and the buyer (the patient) would come together and set to a price that is mutually agreeable.

In order to bring costs down and avoid government control of health care, Friedman argues that we must dismantle our current system, incrementally if we prefer, with the following actions:

1. Abolish Medicare and Medicaid - This would result in huge immediate savings from less bureaucracy  and the restoration of a sane, free market relationship between buyer and seller to set prices. This could be immediately replaced with a program for the poor and elderly under which they would receive money from the government (as much as they currently get, for instance) to use only towards health care; they would keep what they don’t spend on health care, and it would be taxed as income.

Alternatively, to win the support of Democrats, every American could be required to have health insurance geared towards catastrophic illness or injury, akin to fire insurance for a home or car insurance if your vehicle is totaled. All other health expenses would be out-of-pocket. Many Americans would find this coverage sufficient and wouldn’t seek additional insurance.

2. End the tax exemption of employer-provided health care - This would a) make health care relatively more expensive for most Americans, increasing the incentive to keep costs down, b) make the labor market more flexible since workers would be more willing to switch employers, and c) result in a movement towards individuals paying for their own health care, rather than companies managing it for them (this is good, because the individual knows what’s best for themselves and is more likely to try to save money).

3. Remove the draconian regulations on health insurance - This would result in greater choice among insurance options, perhaps leading even to a system under which insurance covers only catastrophic health problems and the rest is paid for by the individual, as noted above.

These reforms would eliminate wasteful spending on health care bureaucracy and send health care back into the arms of the free market. Health insurance would probably be purchased only by individuals, not by companies, resulting in higher wages. And, as Milton Friedman wrote, “The first question asked of a patient entering a hospital might once again become ‘What’s wrong?’ not ‘What’s your insurance?’”

If only our lawmakers had the courage to propose such bold, but beneficial, reforms.

Liberal Democrats and their communications staff in the national media have been telling us since November that conservatism has failed, the Republican Party has fallen, that the best thing we can do is move leftward and gracefully accept life as a permanent minority.
The Rasmussen polling service finds today, however, that a generic Republican congressional candidate would beat a generic Democratic candidate for the first time in the nearly two years that Rasmussen has been tracking this trend.
Today 40% of voters say they will vote for their Republican candidate in the next congressional election versus 39% who will vote for their Democratic candidate.
Only a week ago, 42% said they would support the Democratic candidate, while 28% said they would support the Republican. The last poll taken before November’s disastrous election showed the generic Democrat with a 3-point lead, 43% to 40%.
The generic Republican candidate leads most strongly among independent voters (34-28%), investors (44-35%) entrepreneurs (44-40%).  Meanwhile, fully 12% of Democrats and only 8% of Republican say they would consider voting for the other party’s candidate.
You can see the full results here.

As we all know, recent polls have concluded that Senator McCain is trailing Senator Obama even by double digits in some surveys.   McCain has denied the presumption that his campaign is a loosing cause, and for good reason. With 8 days to go before this election comes to a halt, political experts such as Karl Rove have also disavowed this recent gloomy poll numbers and given McCain a fighting, albeit up hill battle to gain the White House.  Are these pundits and even McCain himself simply delaying the inevitable?  Absolutely not.  McCain’s refusal to give in not only fits into his legendary character, but is reinforced by history.  Perhaps the most famous example, though not exactly recent history was Harry Truman’s victory over Thomas Dewey.  After weeks of polls declaring Dewey the leader by as much at 15 points, newspapers while publishing for the morning after election day, mistakenly published the headline “DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN.”  The newspaper that committed this famous act and is forever enshrined in a picture is none other than the Chicago Daily Tribune. Just remember, this election isn’t over until it’s over. Never assume you know the outcome, because you may end up looking like the Chicago Daily Tribune.

*Note: The following is a collection of live debate reactions from the Friday, September 26th, 2008 debate from Megan Ritter. Megan’s reactions from the beginning of the debate are found at the end of this post, with reactions from the end of the debate at the beginning of the post.*

• Barack Obama: “I’ve got a bracelet tooooooooo!” What could’ve been a moving discussion between the two men, Obama turned into a cheap moment of oneupmanship. I’m not saying he shouldn’t have brought up his paralell story, but is there any coarser, less respectful way in which he could’ve brought it up?

• Something Obama seems to forget when he tries to paint McCain as a warmonger: Both nominees on the Republican ticket have children currently serving in Iraq. It’s difficult to imagine either of them lightly committing troops.

• I’ve lost track of the number of times Obama has interrupted McCain. It’s somewhere north of six. Still waiting for McCain’s first interruption of Obama.

• McCain’s comment about the consequences of defeat is interesting in that historically it is something that the various peace movements have never honestly considered. We didn’t consider it in Vietnam - we left behind what Peggy Noonan describes as “an untold increase in horror for people on that part of the planet.”

• And “we took our eye off the ball” is a very, very juvenile metaphor for Obama to use when discussing such a fundamentally serious issue.

• A Republican who understands that effective defense spending doesn’t mean funding every goofy boondoggle project possible…I like this guy more all the time.

• Obama interrupting McCain count, so far: three times. McCain interrupting Obama count, so far: zero times.

• For all the animus that they’ve earned from the left it would seem that Reagan and then Bush the Younger have changed the nature of the debate so fundamentally that even liberal Democrats have to run on promises to cut taxes. We’re a looooooong way from Walter Mondale promising - promising in no uncertain terms! - that he was going to raise taxes on as many people as possible. Democrats promising to cut taxes is a political problem for Republican campaigns, but a really nice problem to have!

• Obama points out that high gas prices are killing the middle class. Too bad he didn’t realize this earlier in the summer, when he noted that he would’ve preferred that gas prices not rise quite so fast.

• “Earmarking as a gateway drug.” Obama’s asked for a million dollars worth of earmarks per day he’s been in the Senate?!?

• McCain takes a moment for Ted Kennedy. The left keeps calling McCain a right-wing fanatic, and this is why the label never quite sticks.

• Halfway through Obama’s first answer, I still don’t know what he thinks of the bailout.

• The consensus of the Fox News panel starting this thing: the winner is the one who proves himself likable. Since statistically Obama has run 75% negative ads to McCain’s 55%…

Anyone that knows me knows that I am as anti-feminist as it is possible to get.  I hate the idea of breaking up the family unit all in the name of “women empowerment” and abortion on demand.  I hate the “chickification”, as Rush Limbaugh terms it, of the male population because the feminazis take offense at men acting like men.

Recently, however, I have felt like a feminist.  I am almost ashamed to admit it.  Almost…The reason why I can admit that freely and hold my head high is two words:  Sarah Palin. 

(more…)

Over the past few weeks, I have been reading all of the comments on the PACR blog, and I have a few things to say:

1. Please refrain from attacks that are directed toward any particular person. I understand that many of you have strong opinions about certain issues/individuals, but I will not allow this blog to turn into a negative free-for-all. You can properly express your opinions without the use of dergatory speech. A certain decorum is expected on this site, and comments that are considered to be especially distasteful will not be accepted.

2. Please make sure that the comments you are making are actually associated with the post you are commenting on. Questions that have nothing to do with the topic at hand will be removed, as they seem to do nothing but cause trouble and detract from the original purpose of the blog, which is to create discussion around the topic at hand.

3. Please remember that people are busy. If you post a comment and do not receive an immediate response, you are not being ignored; the author of the post is probably just making sure that their school work (which should be the top priority of any college student), is being completed.

All of that being said, remember this: We’re all adults… I shouldn’t even have to post something like this, but I feel it necessary. If you have any questions, comments, or concerns, please feel free to contact the PA Federation of College Republicans at pacollegerepublicans@gmail.com

Sincerely,

Jessica Thompson

2nd Vice Chairwoman

PA Federation of College Republicans

As I write this, it’s just over 75 days until Election Day.

And I couldn’t be more excited and upbeat about how my campaign for the 11th Congressional District seat is going.

To date, we’ve received contributions from people in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. These aren’t the big PAC checks my opponent is receiving (mostly from the subprime mortgage , banking, and insurance industries, which he’s supposed to regulate), but from “average” American citizens. Even more encouraging are the notes and letters that accompany those contributions.

(more…)

I recieved this from a friend a while back!

A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat, and among other liberal ideals, was very much in favor of higher taxes to support more government programs, in other words, redistribution of wealth.

She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Republican, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his. One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the need for more government programs. The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father. He responded by asking how she was doing in school.

(more…)

Even though I am not athletic, I love to watch the Olympics. They are one more reason to make me proud of this country that I call my home.

After winning one of his gold medals, Michael Phelps (when talking about how he did in the race) said, “In the circumstances, not too bad I guess,” he said with a shrug. “I know I can go faster.” When I was first thinking about this comment, I thought to myself, “Shouldn’t he just be grateful for getting the medal?” Then, I realized why he really said that. He wants to push himself to always do better.

(more…)