Archive for November, 2009

There is a troubling story unfolding in Queens, New York, in which school officials and local Democrats have charged College Republicans with stoking racism and xenophobia.

Siraj Wahhaj, a radical Muslim cleric who authorities in 1995 identified an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, was last week invited to Queens College to speak on the subject “How Islam Perfected Thanksgiving.”

Wahhaj testified in 1996 for convicted terror plotter Omar Abdel Rahman, who was charged with attempting to bomb New York’s Lincoln Tunnel and the United Nations. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg was recently assailed–justifiably so, considering the imam’s history and inflammatory rhetoric–in the press for inviting Wahhaj to an event with local Muslim religious leaders to discuss the Ft. Hood tragedy.

Despite Wahhaj’s altogether sordid and troubling past, the imam was invited with open arms to campus of Queens College by the Muslim Student Association (MSA), whose members just days before attended a College Republican film screening event of an anti-radical Muslim film and reportedly laughed and muttered “good” as beheading footage of American businessmen and the collapse of the World Trade Centers aired.

At a debate following the film, one MSA member said, “If I had enough money I would be part of the jihad army, I would kill all the Jews,” according to one College Republican present. Another spoke of getting a “bomb.”

Following the events of the debate and the invitation to Wahhaj, the Queens College chapter of College Republicans demanded the school’s administrators defund the MSA on the grounds the group espoused radical, anti-American ideology. School officials defended the organization, telling reporters it was a matter of constitutionally-protected free speech.

The MSA “definitely should not be funded by the taxpayers,” Queens College Republicans Vice President Ryan James Girdusky told the New York Post.

But despite the school’s protestations, the Queens College Muslim Student Association has a history of associating with extremist elements of the Muslim community. One of the group’s most committed members, Adis Medunjanin, was last month arrested by the Federal Bureau of Investigation with Najibullah Zazi in New York City as a prime suspect in a terror investigation called “one of the most serious terrorist threats to our country since Sept. 11, 2001” by Attorney General Eric Holder.

Medunjanin, a respected member of the Queens College MSA, was a common fixture in the group’s prayer room, “where he came to worship two or three times a week,” according to the New York Times.

But the most alarming aspect of this is the College Democrats’ conspicuous silence on the matter. Wahhaj’s record of destructive and divisive rhetoric is such that, in an ideal world, both parties would be compelled–out of simple respect for the victims of September, 11th, if by nothing else–to condemn the imam’s radical brand of Islam and the group who so willingly extended an invitation.

Of course, we don’t live in an ideal world.

College Democrats’ are complicit in Wahhaj’s troubling anti-American rhetoric by failing to condemn his presence and ideology, a particularly tone-deaf position as disconcerted New Yorkers cope with the Obama Administration’s reckless decision to award enemy military combatants civilian trails in their back yard.

While school administrators’ insistence that the MSA is a run-of-the-mill student organization may be the politically expedient thing to do, it’s certainly not the right thing to do.

- James Richardson, Communications Director

Cross-posted to Redstate.com.

Oh there’s no place like home for the holidays,
‘Cause no matter how far away you roam -
If you want to be happy in a million ways,
For the holidays – you can’t beat home, sweet home

There really is no place like home for the holidays. But that assumes you’ve got somewhere to go after the festive season has passed. Unfortunately, as unemployment continues to worsen, and the current administration continues to do nothing about it. many young adults are finding they will be home much longer than just the holidays. As Wendy Chang and Rich Morin of the Pew Research Center said in their recent study of the recession’s effect on young adults,

“Instead of traveling across country or across town, many grown sons and daughters will be coming to dinner from their old bedroom down the hall, which now doubles as their recession-era refuge.”

The Pew report finds that the proportion of 18-29 year olds living on their own declined from 7.9% to 7.3% since 2007. The fall in the number living alone is largely a result of “boomerangers” – young adults who are forced to move back in with their parents after living on their own away from home. The Pew survey found that 13% of parents have had an adult son or daughter move back in with them in the past year. The reason for the homeward migration is clear: only 46.1% of 16-24 year olds are currently employed – the lowest percentage the Bureau of Labor Statistics has ever recorded.

The ongoing recession has caused other serious impacts on young adults’ lives. Among the other trends from the Pew Research Report:

• 15% of those under 35 say that they have postponed getting married
• 14% of young adults have delayed having a baby
• 12% have been forced to take on a roommate
• 10% cannot afford to live alone and have moved back in with their parents

The data shows that young adults, more than any other age group, are being forced to put their lives on hold because of the recession. More discouraging is that we cannot see the light at the end of the tunnel. The unprecedented number of young people entering college and graduate school threatens to create a glut of young workers competing for a limited number of jobs. The Obama administration has done nothing to assuage our generation’s fears. The stimulus has been anything but stimulating and he has presented no additional ideas on how to get our economy back on track. Simply put, this has been a failure of leadership, and young adults are paying for it.

- Brandon Greife, Political Director

Follow @Brandon_Greife and @CRNC for Twitter updates from the CRNC team.

The College Republican National Committee today launched a new online petition, “Hands Off Our Jobs!”

The petition reads:

While President Barack Obama and reckless Congressional Democrats gamble away our future on an unprecedented expansion of government through health care legislation that promises to mortally wound small business, young voters concerned with the Democrats’ job-killing approach to health care reform are standing up and saying “Hands off our jobs!”

Will you stand with us in telling the President and Congress that our jobs–our very livelihoods–are not collateral in his dangerous gamble with the nation’s health care system?

Join the growing chorus of Americans in saying, “Hands off our jobs,” Mr. President. Sign the petition, forward to friends and consider making a donation to the CRNC.

Sign it, Digg it, Tweet it.

- James Richardson, CRNC Communications Director

On Wednesday, I appeared on MSNBC opposite Adam Serwer of The American Prospect to debate President Barack Obama’s failure to make good on a campaign pledge central to his shallow promise of “change:” the closure of Guantanamo Bay and the ‘necessary’ dismantling of the Bush-era detention policies.

Despite Serwer’s protestations, there is very little question that President Obama has a Gitmo problem.

This Administration is battling significant headwinds on a number of fronts, the greatest of which perhaps is that Americans by more than a 2-to-1 margin in a recent USA Today/Gallup poll oppose the closing of Guantanamo Bay. Coupling this with the fact that many in the President’s own party demand an immediate closure of the controversial detention facility, and the President is forced to do some difficult political calculus that likely leaves the progressive wing of his party out in the cold.

It’s really no secret that this White House’s policy initiatives are almost exclusively poll-driven, particularly defense-related issues. President Obama has been quietly moderating his position on a series of Bush policies since assuming office in January, including the suspension of extrajudicial military commissions and the release of torture photos.

But while these new polls are certainly damaging to the President’s agenda, what is most damaging is the hemorrhaging of Administration officials who have abandoned their posts after disagreements with White House political brass.

Phillip Carter, who was formerly a fierce critic of the Bush administration’s detention policies, abruptly resigned Tuesday from his Pentagon Post, launching speculation from all sides that the White House was further hedging on its promise to close Gitmo.

Carter’s statement read that he was resigning for “personal and family reasons,” but most astute observers recognized this as typical Washington parlance for internal disagreements. This speculation of ideological growing pains and internal friction was compounded by the fact that Carter resigned only days after President Obama confirmed to Beijing press that the White House would miss its self-imposed January 22nd Guantanamo closure deadline.

Obama’s transition advisors floated the notion that then-President-elect Obama would begin symbolically dismantling the Bush-era detention policies by issuing a closure of Gitmo on Day One of his Administration. It’s now nearly twelve months later and Gitmo is still open.

The image Obama cultivated over the course of last year’s campaign was such that then-Senator Obama was an idealist, a civil libertarian, and a constitutional law professor. As it turns out, as President, Mr. Obama is far more concerned with political expediency than idealism. And that’s certainly been a tough pill for many dewy-eyed Democrats to swallow.

- James Richardson, Communications Director

Follow @JamesRichardson and @CRNC on Twitter for updates from the College Republican team.

Breast cancer and early detection are synonymous with women’s health issues and have been for years. The American Cancer Society said that in 2009 that 192,370 women would be diagnosed with invasive breast cancer, and 62,280 would be diagnosed with a non-invasive early form of breast cancer. Further, the report shows that early detection is key to improving the health outcomes of affected women. When found early, the survival rate for women with breast cancer is 98%; if found at a more advanced stage, the survival rate plummets to 27%. The solution? In one word…mammograms.

Recently the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force announced that all the methods of early detection were no longer as crucial as once promoted. The Task Force no longer recommended routine mammograms for women between 40 and 49. Why you ask? Well because the Task Force found that mammograms do reduce the risk of death but not enough that they should be screened. Makes perfect sense right? Yes, until you realize that this age group accounts for one out of every six diagnosed breast cancers. Or perhaps that, breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in women ages 40 to 49.

Among the other stunning finds of the Task Force:

• We should discourage women from perform self breast examinations because it either “has no net benefit or that the harms outweigh the benefits”
• Starting at 50 a woman should only get a mammogram every two years, not the one per year that is currently recommended.
• They recommend against teaching breast self examination in all women

Criticism is coming from all over. Chief Medical Officer of the American Cancer Society, Otis Brawley, in an article for the Washington Post, writes that,

“the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force took a step backward in the fight against breast cancer” and chides them for “behav[ing] though we lack a tool with proven benefits to women’s health.”

Even Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius dismissed the report saying,

“Mammograms have always been an important life-saving tool in the fight against breast cancer and they still are today. Keep doing what you have been doing for years – talk to your doctor about your individual history, ask questions, and make the decision that is right for you.”

This is the danger of a health care reform bill that puts the government between you and your doctor. As it stands today, most insurance plans will cover one mammogram a year. If you choose to ignore medical advice and not receive one, that is YOUR choice. Under the new healthcare reform plan, guidelines will be written by the government on the recommendation of some faceless (and apparently heartless) panel. Under a government plan, there will be limited dollars in the system and cuts must be made somewhere. Do we really need the government deciding that 1/6 of women with breast cancer are not worth saving?

This healthcare rationing is taking the decisions away from you and your medically educated doctor about what is best for your own personal health, just to cut the cost of what it will take to pay for the entire country to have health insurance. The estimated cost for national health insurance for a decade is over 1.2 trillion dollars.  This is merely the first example of where they plan to cut costs. If the single most important contributing factor to detecting breast cancer and having a higher rate of survival is the first thing to be rationed then what will be next? Maybe it will be prostate screenings in men, or Insulin for the diabetics, or perhaps the coverage of cesarean sections that could save a baby and mother’s life. It’s a slippery slope we should all be loathe to go down

Buy! Buy! Buy!

Democratic Majority leader Harry Reid is now willing to buy your senators health care reform vote for the ridiculous price of $300 million dollars! All you have to do is get your senator to sell out their vote and the people of this country in support of Harry’s impossibly expensive health care reform bill.

Hey Arizona! Are you looking for extended health care to cover the pains that come with those aching sunburns? Harry Reid can do take care of that.

Alaska! Are you tired of the anguishing sting of frost bite? Well Harry can add a provision for you too.

How about you New York? Are you tired of being suffocated between two disproportionately large individuals who reek of old street vendor hot dogs on the subway? Well Harry has a provision to take care of that as well.

Detroit! Does a disappointing football franchise have you down in the dumps? Well Harry can provide a health care provision to turn that frown upside down just for you!

There’s room enough to put pork in for everyone!

Just have your local senators sell their vote in support of Harry’s $849 billion health care plan and easy as that Harry can give you hundreds of millions of dollars in tax payer funded earmarks to take care of whatever it is that’s got you down.

Don’t believe me? Just ask Louisiana’s Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu. For the low price of her vote she got her state $300 million in additional Medicare subsidies. It’s being dubbed the new Louisiana Purchase and it makes the original look like a steal. The French sold the equivalent of 14 states for the measly sum of $15 million. Now, a single Senate vote is worth $300 million. This Harry Reid is dealin!

For immediate results to what ails ya contact Harry now. And for the small price of your Senate vote we can make a pricy provision that bankrupts the United States possible for you too!

Warning. All sales are final. Funding for the provision will not be assessed . There are possible side effects, including bankruptcy, inflation, national debt, and increased bureaucracy. Please contact your constituents before buying this product.

For the first time since taking office, Obama’s job approval has fallen below the 50% mark. So what, almost all presidents drop off in popularity after taking office. But Obama, living up to his promise to “represent a clean break from business as usual” has fallen off in style. Obama began his presidency at 65% popularity, but seemingly not content to slowly trickle down the popularity scale, he fell below 50% in the third shortest amount of time since World War II! Quicker than even Jimmy Carter!

Of the 54% registered voters who disapprove of the job Obama is doing, 42% strongly disapprove. There is far less passionate support for the President in that of the 45% who approve, only 27% strongly approve.

The dip in support could have serious ramifications for the Democratic agenda. As Politico senior political writer David Paul Kuhn explains,

The fall below 50 is a fraught milestone for any president. In legislative terms, a president is only as powerful as he is popular. Public approval rating is the metric of that popularity.

Below 50, a president can no longer claim the majority’s support. His political arsenal depletes. A president’s political opposition has powerful, though nebulous, new ammunition.

There is little reason to expect President Obama to rebound. The economy has shown little signs of improving and the jobless rate continues its upward ascent. But while only 17% of voters believe the top issue facing the country is health care it continues to be the primary focus of the administration. As Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, says,

The CNN poll also shows that in addition to health care, a majority of Americans disapprove of how Mr. Obama is handling the economy, Afghanistan, Iraq, unemployment, illegal immigration and the federal budget deficit. Put simply, there isn’t a critical problem facing the country on which the president has positive ratings.

There is no doubt that the fall in approval will have a negative impact on the Democratic agenda. Political capital is the currency that gets things done in Washington and Obama’s stash is depleting. This could spell trouble for unpopular legislation such as health care and cap and trade as the White House no longer has the political pull to pressure wavering Democrats.

The political landscape continues to look better for Republicans in 2010. Conservatives were already winning the war on the issues. Take away the popular and strong liberal figurehead and there is little for Democratic candidates to run on.

For all of you unfortunate enough to have survived the recession with a  little change in your pocket, don’t worry, the government is creating new ways to take that off your hands.

The Democrats latest proposed tax increase is being dubbed the “Share the Sacrifice Act.” These guys are really getting good at euphemisms! In reality it’s a war surtax in which middle-class households earning between $30,000 and $150,000 will be asked to pay an extra 1% on top of their current tax liability. Example number 7,586 of how Obama has broken his oft cited pledge that,

“If you make under $250,000, you will not see your taxes increased by a single dime. Not your income tax. Not your payroll tax. Not your capital gains tax. No tax.”

Democratic Congressmen are attempting to make this sound fiscally responsible. Trying to make it appear as if they are saving the budget. Dave Obey (D-WI), Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee has said,

“The only people who’ve paid any price for our military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan are our military families. We believe that if this war is to be fought, it’s only fair that everyone share the burden. That’s why we are offering legislation to impose a graduated surtax so that the cost of the war is not borrowed.”

But the logic is simply flawed. What are our current taxes being used for if not to fund the government’s operations? Under this type of thinking, anytime the government wants to tack on a new expense, they can simply jack up taxes to pay for it. That’s not fiscally responsible. Imagine if you tried to do the same thing. You want a bigger house, the money the bank loaned you was more than enough to afford it, but you already blew it on eight new cars. You can’t ask the bank for more money, you’ll get laughed (or yelled) right out of the building.

The government must learn to use what we pay them. It cannot constantly fall on the backs of middle class Americans to subsidize the government’s waste. If they need to pay for the troop increase, then they must learn to make cuts to other programs that have demonstrated their ineffectiveness. Normal Americans, who make tough financial decisions every day have a name for this…balancing the checkbook.

We simply cannot let the Democrats paint themselves as the party of fiscal responsibility. There is no end to the cycle of increased spending leading to increased taxes. Somewhere Democrats must learn to spend what they have.

The Maryland Federation of College Republicans Monday issued a statement condemning anti-Israel comments of their campus counterpart, who at a recent debate maintained that Palestinians were suffering religious persecution under Israeli-rule.

“Israel is oppressing the Palestinian people,” said Michael Besser of the University of Maryland College Democrats.

Americans concerned with our already-strained relations with Israel will find little solace in the knowledge that the Democratic leaders of tomorrow maintain today that Israel is “oppressing” Palestinians, if for no reason other than their religion.

College Republicans nationally are committed to holding Democrats’ feet to the fire like never before. No longer will they sit idly by while President Barack Obama, reckless Congressional Democrats, or the always-naive College Democrats gamble away our future on dangerous rhetoric — both here and abroad.

Maryland Federation of College Republicans Chairman Evan Lazerowitz said in a statement yesterday:

“The views of the College Park Democrats are far outside the mainstream of American politics and should be condemned. Sadly, these views are all too prevalent on many college campuses across the nation, where Israel is unfairly vilified.

“At the national level, President Obama has been the least supportive President when it comes to Israel since Jimmy Carter. Supporting Israel should be a bipartisan issue, and College Republicans across the state of Maryland are proud supporters of our greatest ally in its fight against terrorism and extremists.

We stand with Jewish and Pro-Israel organizations on campus, such as Hillel, in condemnation of the College Democrats’ actions. We call upon the College Park Democrats’ Board to do the right thing and resign and issue an apology to the entire campus.”

- James Richardson, CRNC Communications Director

The holiday season is upon us. In just a few days we’ll sit down with family and friends to give thanks for the blessings in our lives. But one thing Americans are not thankful for is the Democratic health care reform proposals.

A new poll by Rasmussen out today shows that a mere 38% of voters now favor the health care plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats. This represents the lowest level of support since Rasmussen began tracking the issue in June. What was once a 2% point gap between supporters and opponents as ballooned in the last week to an 18% fissure.

Support for Democratic Health Care Reform Plans

So what has changed? One of the key drivers behind the growing gap is independent voters. While Republican voters oppose the current health care reform plan 83% to 13%, independents aren’t polling much different, opposing the current plan 70% to 23%. The desertion of independent support should caution the Democrats swept in with the Obama wave to moderate their approach lest they be cast back into the political sea come 2010.

While a majority of America opposes the bill, one demographic maintains its support…18-29 year olds. The latest poll shows that 51% of young adults either strongly favor or somewhat favor the health care reform plan. Taking a closer look at the poll, things get a little weirder. For instance:

• By a 52% to 19% margin young adults believe the quality of health care will be worse if reform passes
• By a 48% to 13% margin 18-29 year olds believe that the cost of health care will go up rather than down

To sum it up: young adults think that if the reforms pass we will pay more money for a worse product…but they want it anyway. Admittedly this is a hard trend to decipher. On the one hand, it appears they are educated about the likely effects of having a government run health care plan. On the other hand, they support it, warts and all. The only thing I can think of it is a question of ideology. It has been engrained in them that it is a moral imperative that everyone must have health care, even if it means worse treatment at a higher cost.

Our mission then becomes slightly different. We have done a good job tackling the specific issue of health care. We must now go deeper, to explain how the conservative ideology can solve problems, without the attendant disadvantages of a large and intrusive government. This is a longer and harder battle, but it carries with it long term rewards.

Reach out to those around you on campus. New media affords us unlimited opportunities to connect with our peers and educate them about the true meaning of conservatism. If we succeed, the momentum now being seen in the health care polls will be carried over into the 2010 exit polls.