A Conservative's Musings on All Things Political

Reflections on American Politics and the Republican Party from a Libertarian Conservative Perspective

As Christmas approaches, the minds of all conservative political junkies move to visions of a Republican taking the oath of office on January 20th, 2013. And with the New Hampshire primary just 13 months away, it’s time to start the Presidential beauty contest. To those who love the art of politics, one of the biggest questions looming over the 2012 race is can a fat guy with a southern drawl win the presidency?  Behind that question sits one of the most formidable contenders in the Republican field, Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour.

His resume is may be the most impressive of the expansive field of GOP contenders in 2012. After serving as a political aid in the Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush White Houses, Barbour was the chairman of the Republican National Committee from 1993 to 1997, the period that saw GOP majorities take control of congress for the first time in more than half a century. His sense of politics may be as keen as any conservative in the country.

As Governor of Mississippi since 2004 he has validated his conservative bona fides’ with an impressive record in a state which faced many challenges. In the wake of the devastation of Hurricane Karina, the incompetence of the state and local response in Louisiana was in stark contrast to the disciplined and effective reaction by Barbour in Mississippi. His crisis leadership was again demonstrated this past year during the Gulf Oil Spill. Barbour, along with his Republican counterpart in Louisiana Bobby Jindal, demonstrated competence and strength of leadership that was sadly missing from the national response. After assuming the Chairmanship of the Republican Governors Association in 2009, he led the GOP to gains at the state level (and a pocket full of GOP IOU’s for Barbour) that may overshadow even the gains made in the house.

If Governor Barbour were to be the Republican nominee, the left will attack him for his years in Washington and work as a lobbyist. He would bring no geographic advantage to the ticket; Mississippi is safely a red state. However, Barbour is as solid a conservative as any in the race and when combined with this national republican leadership, his ability to unite the GOP coalition is unmatched.

Barbour brings one thing to the 2012 race in quantities unmatched by other contenders, competent leadership. Barak Obama came to the presidency 4 years out of the Illinois state senate and was propelled by a media who were enthralled with the idea of electing the first black president. Since becoming president, Obama has abdicated the defining of his agenda to the Democrats on Capitol Hill, his foreign Policy to his Secretaries of State and Defense and focused on reading speeches twice a day from the white house teleprompter. Two years of on the job training seem to have been lost on this White House. We live in very challenging times, dangerous times and what America needs is competent leadership. With this one issue a republican can win the White House and realize those visions of a republican taking the oath of office on January 20, 2013.

Yet the question remains, will voters pass over the photogenic Ken dolls, the give good speech crowd or the fools who live in the echo chamber? Haley Barbour will be mocked by the liberal elite on GEDNC (truth in ownership of MSNBC), his record trashed by the HuffyPost. There will be further proof that liberal compassion and political correctness ends at the doors of their own meeting halls. Yet after the emptiness of the preceding 4 years, the voters in 2012 may well be willing to actually do what they profess to desire, elect a president of strength and substance. While it is too early to be making picks or endorsements, Haley Barbour may be a man whose time is at hand.

Today, the Federal Communications Commission approved new rules on “network neutrality” along a straight party line vote. What in the world can be wrong with net neutrality, the requirement that all content on the internet be treated equally and none should be given preference? Doesn’t this sound like sound action in the best interest of the people on behalf of their government? Well not so fast. First let’s look at why the FCC took this action, which the congress has conspicuously not acted upon despite much debate, and what might happen if this regulation is allowed to stand.

By this regulation the FCC had given itself the power to take action against any traditional Internet Service Provider (“ISP”) in the event they provide any advantage to any specific content over another, or in extreme cases blocking certain content provided by competing creators. WOW, is this kind of manipulation actually going on? Well, to date there are not many instances of this type of tearing of content. The reality is consumers are offered many competing providers of internet services and means of connecting. Competitive pressures have effectively prevented ISP’s from denying content to their subscribers. If your ISP was blocking content you desired, wouldn’t you just dump them and access the internet through another means?  So why the need for FCC action?

The FCC has to date failed to define for itself a role in regulating the internet. Now for any bureaucracy, failing to be central to life within its realm is unthinkable. This is made whole orders of magnitude worse when the area of human activity is the fastest growing element of modern society. Thus, the FCC has found its role. In doing so we may also have seen the future of the Obama Administration at work. For the past 2 years since he was inaugurated on January 20th 2009, the Obama administration has been frustrated in its ability to force through policies and regulations it has sought by its inability to get congressional action despite its party controlling both houses of congress by historically high margins. The results of the November Congressional elections provide little hope for the Administration to achieve its goals through legislative actions, so we have seen calls for the Administration to act by executive authority. It seems funny how such actions were decried by the left during the final years of the Bush Administration, but are now seen as virtuous and efficient means to an end. With this ruling we have seen a major intrusion of government into the private sector without any legislative authorization or authority. We should expect to see this modus operandi across the executive branch over the next couple years as the first term of the Obama Administration continues.

Still, why is this important to anyone and why should you care? Is the concept of Net Neutrality not a good one? Here is where unintended consequences take hold. Allowing the government to regulate the way in which ISP’s administer the flow of traffic on their systems will created a significant uncertainty to new investment. Creating the infrastructure which has enabled the explosion we have seen in internet use and penetration into our daily lives has not been without significant cost. Even if accessing the internet is for the most part free, operating it is not. By defining the relationship between users and suppliers, the FCC has created a significant potential deterrent to future investment in infrastructure expansion. Thus competition may well be reduced and development slowed. But of course the FCC has considered this, haven’t they? History has shown us government rarely has the vision or insight as to the future of any sector of our economy, let alone the internet to trust the future of the internet to this unelected administrative body.

In the end this is simply a government body forcing a solution to a problem which did not exist and in doing so inserting itself squarely in the middle of the one part of our economy which appears to be doing just fine thank you. It seems the message the internet community from the FCC is “we are from the Federal Government and we are here to help”. Somehow I am not reassured.

… another political blog! And with this post, A Conservative’s Musings becomes the 7,393rd right wing political blog. We can sleep at night to know the 1st Amendment is safe. What will make this one unique? The words here will be those of the author alone and will reflect my view on the issues that interest me. Mostly political, hopefully interesting and always straight from the heart. If you don’t like them? Get your own blog! Rest assured nothing posted here will ever be intended to be of harm to any individual. At the same time The Writes Guide to Political Correctness was passed through the shredder and in unavailable for reference. For those who seek political correctness I refer you to The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States (YES you should actually read it!) and suggest you reflect upon its meaning. Comments will be subject to approval (remember, this is my blog) but a hint, I do like thoughtful and respectful dissent (it is the fruit of democracy).