<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>FrontPage Magazine &#187; Democratic Convention</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/tag/democratic-convention/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 16:20:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>McGovern&#8217;s Legacy</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/arnold-ahlert/mcgoverns-legacy/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=mcgoverns-legacy</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/arnold-ahlert/mcgoverns-legacy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2012 04:25:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Arnold Ahlert]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[1968]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[1972]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[death]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democratic Convention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Election]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George McGovern]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nixon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=159959</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Democratic icon nurtured a leftism that polarized America.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/arnold-ahlert/mcgoverns-legacy/mcgovern11/" rel="attachment wp-att-159964"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-159964" title="mcgovern11" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/mcgovern11.gif" alt="" width="315" height="238" /></a>On Sunday, Democratic icon George McGovern, who served the state of South Dakota for more than twenty years in the House and Senate, passed away at the age of 90. Despite an accomplished <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/21/us/george-mcgovern-dead/index.html">record of service</a> during WWll that included 35 combat missions as a B-24 bomber pilot in Europe earning him the Distinguished Flying Cross, McGovern was best known for his anti-war stance with regard to Vietnam, and his overwhelming defeat in the 1972 presidential election. Since his passing, McGovern has been rightly eulogized for his personal affability and agreeableness, but what must not be airbrushed over is the true nature of his influence on the political landscape. As unfortunate as it is, McGovern helped lead the transformation of the Democratic Party into a coalition of leftists distinct from the previous generation of liberals in the Kennedy mold. As a result, the country has never been the same.</p>
<p>It was McGovern himself who <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/22/us/politics/george-mcgovern-a-democratic-presidential-nominee-and-liberal-stalwart-dies-at-90.html?pagewanted=all">planted the seeds</a> of that divisiveness. As the <em>New York Times</em> notes in its obituary, McGovern &#8220;became the chairman of a Democratic Party commission on delegate selection, created after the fractious 1968 national convention to give the rank and file more say in picking a presidential nominee.&#8221; As a result, the McGovern-Fraser Commission &#8220;rewrote party rules to ensure that more women, young people and members of minorities were included in delegations. The influence of party leaders was curtailed. More states began choosing delegates on the basis of primary elections. And the party’s center of gravity shifted decidedly leftward.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;Leftward&#8221; is somewhat inaccurate. Democrats established a de facto quota system informed by identity politics, where people were encouraged to first think of themselves as members of sub-groups identified by race, class, ethnicity and sexual orientation. Nothing has changed to this day, as California&#8217;s 2012 <a href="http://www.cadem.org/admin/miscdocs/files/Final-2012-Delegate-Selection-Plan-11.3.11.pdf">Delegate Selection Plan</a>, for example, reveals. Goals for representation at the Charlotte convention included dividing Californians into six subgroups with the &#8220;proper&#8221; percentages relative to the general population&#8211;as in 16 percent African-American, 29 percent Latino, 1 percent Native American, 10 percent Asian/Pacific Islanders, 12 percent LGBT, 10 percent Disabled Persons, and 18 percent Youth-Under 30.</p>
<p>In 1972, the Democrat convention in Miami turned into a circus. When party activists <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2012/daniel-flynn/how-mcgovern%E2%80%99s-radical-party-polarized-america/2/">offered</a> up selections such as migrant-worker organizer Cesar Chavez, Yippee Jerry Rubin, anti-corporate crusader Ralph Nader, Communist dictator Mao Zedong, and sitcom character Archie Bunker for Vice President, all the shenanigans did was push McGovern&#8217;s acceptance speech well into the next morning. Furthermore, the party platform with which Democrats emerged was anathema to middle America. Aside from the staunch anti-war position, they advocated amnesty for war resisters, the abolition of the draft, deep cuts to the military, a $1,000 grant to every American, a guaranteed family income well above the poverty line, prisoners’ rights, federal funding for local food cooperatives, the adoption of an Ethnic Studies curriculum bill, and a host of other leftist initiatives.</p>
<p>Yet it was McGovern&#8217;s opposition to Vietnam that <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/21/us/george-mcgovern-dead/index.html">resonated</a> the most with his supporters. &#8220;Let us resolve that never again will we send the precious young blood of this country to die trying to prop up a corrupt military dictatorship abroad,&#8221; he said at the convention.</p>
<p>The convention turned out to be the high point of McGovern&#8217;s campaign. Soon after, it was revealed that McGovern&#8217;s running mate, Senator Thomas F. Eagleton (D-MO), had been hospitalized for nervous exhaustion and undergone electroshock therapy. Despite McGovern&#8217;s promise to back Eagleton &#8220;1000 percent,&#8221; he was replaced by Kennedy in-law R. Sargent Shriver. The election was a rout. McGovern carried Massachusetts and the District of Columbia, earning 17 electoral votes, while Nixon carried 49 states and won 520 electoral votes.</p>
<p>McGovern reflected on that defeat as recently as a month before he died in a <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/george-mcgovern-on-his-1972-presidential-defeat/2012/09/28/dded48fc-f78c-11e1-8398-0327ab83ab91_story.html">piece</a> for the <em>Washington Post.</em> &#8220;The loss is there, an old wound never fully healed,&#8221; he wrote. &#8220;My disappointment was certainly personal, made deeper by the awareness that many thousands of young Americans, and far more Vietnamese and other Asian citizens, were going to and did lose their lives with the Nixon administration’s continuation of the war.&#8221;</p>
<p>For McGovern, like so many liberals, the war in Vietnam remains a one-sided telling of history to this day. It was another liberal icon, JFK, who <a href="http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/kennedy_vietnam.htm">escalated</a> America&#8217;s presence in Vietnam, because he believed in the Domino Theory: if Vietnam fell to Communism, the entire Southeast Asian Peninsula would follow. In fact, that&#8217;s exactly what happened, and 2-3 million Vietnamese, Cambodians, and Laotians were slaughtered in the ensuing bloodbath. It was a bloodbath caused not only by our troop withdrawal, but the <a href="http://militaryhistory.about.com/od/vietnamwar/a/VietnamEnd.htm">passage</a> of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1974 by a Democratically controlled Congress, cutting off all aid to Saigon. One year later, Communists gained control of the entire country. That leftists calculatingly omit these details when trumpeting the success of the anti-war movement is nothing short of appalling.</p>
<p>That 1974 vote arguably marked the point where the New Left effectively took control of the Democrat Party. The classical centrist Democrat liberals who had vigorously opposed Communist totalitarianism would thereafter become rarer and rarer within the party. Add the emergence of identity politics to the mix, and the resultant party was no longer &#8220;liberal,&#8221; but leftist.</p>
<p>It is a leftism that has polarized America. That polarization is best explained by the <em>Wall Street Journal&#8217;s</em> James Taranto. While conceding the prevailing meme promoted by leftist obituaries that McGovern was above all else a &#8220;decent man,&#8221; he challenges New Republic writer Rick Perlstein, who <a href="http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/108938/george-mcgovern-decent-and-doomed-liberal-icon">laments</a> that McGovern&#8217;s death reminds us of  &#8220;this space between the longing for unapologetic good-government liberalism and its decimation in a fallen political world&#8211;in which the decent and honorable simply get crushed.&#8221; Taranto contends that leftists labor under the delusion &#8220;that left-wing politics and decency are one and the same thing.&#8221; &#8220;This moral vanity leads the left to excuse, or even not to notice, indecent behavior on the part of their own. It is the reason Obama&#8217;s re-election campaign has been less McGovernite than McCarthyite (and we don&#8217;t mean Gene),&#8221; Taranto concludes.</p>
<p>That vanity also explains the evolution of Democrats since 1972, and why that evolution is so detrimental to bipartisanship: there is a great deal of difference between challenging conservative ideology on the basis of political or intellectual differences, and completely dismissing it as fundamentally indecent&#8211;as well as unworthy of serious rebuttal. It is telling that a substantial portion of leftist rebuttal can be reduced to single words like &#8220;racist,&#8221; &#8220;misogynistic,&#8221; &#8220;nativist,&#8221; and &#8220;homophobic&#8221; or simple catch-alls, such as &#8220;cruel&#8221; and &#8220;uncaring.&#8221;</p>
<p>All of this plays into president Obama&#8217;s current campaign, where the focus has been far more on demonizing his opponent than laying out a vision for America. Yet even when Obama lays out a vision, it is marinated in a stew of &#8220;us against them&#8221; grievances that can be traced back to the radicalism that has been mainstreamed into the Democratic Party of today.</p>
<p><strong>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Adavid+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank">Click here</a>.</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/arnold-ahlert/mcgoverns-legacy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>19</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Hispanics That Democrats Love to Hate</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/humberto-fontova/the-hispanics-democrats-love-to-hate/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-hispanics-democrats-love-to-hate</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/humberto-fontova/the-hispanics-democrats-love-to-hate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2012 04:08:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Humberto Fontova]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[assimilation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Castro]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cubans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democratic Convention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hispanic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mexican]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Convention]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=143292</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Reflections on the Democratic and Republican conventions. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/cubans2.gif"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-143395" title="cubans2" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/cubans2.gif" alt="" width="375" height="254" /></a>“<em>My</em> Hispanic can beat up <em>your</em> Hispanic!” pretty much captured the convention kick-offs.</p>
<p>“Republicans chose Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, a Cuban-American, to introduce Mitt Romney,&#8221; reported the AP. “Democrats picked Mayor Julian Castro of San Antonio, a Mexican American, as keynote speaker. Both are considered rising stars.”</p>
<p>Ah! But what fun the Republicans missed. Given the era’s political correctness, politics in the U.S. get pretty boring nowadays. No present-day politician or their slick consultants could possibly publicize what’s forthcoming in this article. So please stick around, because I belong to neither profession.</p>
<p>Most immigrants arrive in America poor (especially by U.S. standards). Some arrive destitute. Almost all Cubans arrived destitute. The Castroites stole everything they owned. Yet in his classic work, <em>The</em> <em>Spirit of Enterprise</em> George Gilder titled a chapter, &#8220;The Cuban Miracle.”<em> “</em>No other immigrant group so quickly and successfully transformed a city, while achieving such multifarious business breakthroughs as the fugitives from Castro&#8217;s regime who made Miami their home after 1960.”</p>
<p>More infuriating still (for the Democrat-Media Complex) the 2000 census showed that second-generation Cuban-Americans have educational and income levels higher &#8212; not only than most ethnic groups who dutifully punch the clock at the Democratic plantation &#8212; but also higher than <a href="http://www.hfontova.com/fidel.html">the U.S. population in general.</a></p>
<p>But according to the Center for Immigration Studies 75 percent of Mexican immigrant households receive government checks of one form or another. This percentage perfectly matches their Democratic affiliation.</p>
<p>In fact, the most <a href="http://newsroom.ucr.edu/1922">lopsidedly loyal Republicans</a> in the modern history of our Republic are a genuinely (meaning descended from inhabitants of the Iberian Peninsula) Hispanic group. You read right: Back in 2006 Senator Tom Tancredo complained that Cuban Americans “refused to assimilate.” He took a lot of heat for the quip &#8212; but in fact he’s correct.  To wit:</p>
<p>While a healthy majority (56 percent) of their countrymen voted for Obama in 2008, a miniscule portion (33 percent) of Cuban Americans did so. While a majority of their countrymen register with the Democratic Party, a minuscule (20 percent) of Cuban-Americans do so. Cuban American votes for Obama represented the tiniest percentage of Obama voters of any ethnic group and Cuban American party affiliation marks the smallest Democratic registration of any ethnic group in the U.S. These percentages clearly show Cuban American disdain for the political folkways of their adopted country.</p>
<p>A 2009 Gallup poll found that only 34 percent of Americans found the ideology of the Republican Party <a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/121307/more-americans-see-democratic-party-too-liberal.aspx">“about right.” </a>But over double that percentage of Cuban Americans find it “right.” These exotic Cuban Americans are clearly thumbing their nose at the political norms of the nation that so graciously accepted them!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/humberto-fontova/the-hispanics-democrats-love-to-hate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Undemocratic Party Platform</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/arnold-ahlert/the-undemocratic-party-platform/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-undemocratic-party-platform</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/arnold-ahlert/the-undemocratic-party-platform/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Sep 2012 04:15:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Arnold Ahlert]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[boo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[change]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democratic Convention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DNC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[God]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jerusalem]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[platform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ted Strickland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Villaraigosa]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=143151</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A vote to put God and Jerusalem back in the party platform takes an Orwellian turn.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/0906-DNC-Villaraigosa-platform.jpg_full_600.gif"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-143155" title="0906-DNC-Villaraigosa-platform.jpg_full_600" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/0906-DNC-Villaraigosa-platform.jpg_full_600.gif" alt="" width="375" height="250" /></a>On Wednesday afternoon, in one completely unscripted convention moment, the Democrat Party not only defined who they are, but how they choose to govern.</p>
<p>The story begins when Los Angeles Mayor and convention chairman Antonio Villaraigosa recognized former Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland. Strickland is an ordained minister, and he offered up an amendment to the party platform, addressing two &#8220;omissions&#8221; Barack Obama and his party suddenly realized were political liabilities. In short, the Democratic platform was one in which all references to God had been deleted, along with the idea that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.</p>
<p>According to <em>Politico,</em> Obama knew nothing about this until Wednesday morning, when he saw media coverage of the omissions and undoubtedly realized what a public relations disaster it would be for his party. He then ordered both items restored to the platform because, according to his campaign handlers, the amended version is “consistent with the president’s own positions.”</p>
<p>The task of amending the platform was then handed to Villaraigosa. He introduced Strickland, who got the ball rolling. &#8220;Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This summer I was proud to serve this party as the platform drafting committee chair,&#8221; said Strickland. &#8220;As the chair I come before you today to discuss two important matters related to our party&#8217;s national platform.&#8221;</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s pause. What Strickland is essentially saying is that everyone involved in formulating the original platform signed off on it&#8211;meaning no one had a problem leaving God out, or tossing Israel under the bus&#8211;until Wednesday.</p>
<p>Strickland continued. &#8220;As an ordained United Methodist minister I am here to affirm and attest that our faith and belief in God is central to the American story, and informs the values we&#8217;ve expressed in our party&#8217;s platform. In addition, president Obama recognizes Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel, and our party&#8217;s platform should as well. Mr. Chairman, I have submitted my amendment in writing and I believe it is being projected on the screen for the delegates to see. I move for adoption of the amendment as submitted and shown to the delegates.&#8221;</p>
<p>The amendment was indeed projected on a big screen for all the delegates to see. Then it was Villaraigosa&#8217;s turn. &#8220;A motion has been made. Is there a second?&#8221; he asked. The crowd &#8220;seconded&#8221; the motion. &#8220;Is there any further discussion?&#8221; he continued. &#8220;Hearing none, the matter requires a two-thirds vote in the affirmative.&#8221;</p>
<p>At that point things took a stunningly revealing turn. &#8220;All those delegates in favor say &#8216;aye,&#8217;&#8221; commanded Villaraigosa. A fairly loud &#8220;aye&#8221; was heard in response. &#8220;All those delegates opposed, say &#8216;no,&#8217;&#8221; continued the Chairman. &#8220;No,&#8221; the crowd responded &#8212; in <em>equal measure.</em> Villaraigosa was totally flustered. &#8220;In the opinion of the….let me do that again,&#8221; he stammered. &#8220;All of those delegates in favor, say &#8216;aye,&#8217;&#8221; he repeated. A little louder level of response was heard. &#8220;All those delegates opposed say &#8216;no,&#8221; re-interated Villaraigosa. The same equally louder level of nay votes&#8211;again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/arnold-ahlert/the-undemocratic-party-platform/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>18</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 465/481 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-31 13:52:56 by W3 Total Cache -->