Monday, November 10, 2008

It's Over, and Republicans for Obama Helped Push it Over!

Obama won by a substantial popular and electoral majority. It is clear from exit polls as well as the massive numbers of Republicans who told me they voted for Obama that RFOs were more than anyone predicted in number.

I won't gloat, I'll just sign off this blog for now with a Yes We Did! and come back some day if the need arises.

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Time for a New Third Party Offshoot from the Republican Party

The Republican Party is dead. Yes, I'm saying this before the election. Even if McCain wins, which could happen if Obama supporters stay home thinking the election is in the bag, the GOP still has lost its way along with a substantial number of members. While high-profile Republicans like Susan Eisenhower and Frank Schaeffer have made the headlines, the real exodus is on Main Street.

Contrary to popular belief, a large percentage of Republicans are unhappy not because of the Bush administration itself, but because of the recent clear revelations of what direction the Party is heading. Actually, we've started realizing the problems began all the way back in Reagan's presidency, and the only thing that has remained "Republican" has been the talking points. Let's quickly review the Republican Principles listed on the GOP site itself.
Republican Principles

I'm a Republican Because...

I BELIEVE the strength of our nation lies with the individual and that each person's dignity, freedom, ability and responsibility must be honored.

I BELIEVE in equal rights, equal justice and equal opportunity for all, regardless of race, creed, sex, age or disability.

I BELIEVE free enterprise and encouraging individual initiative have brought this nation opportunity, economic growth and prosperity.

I BELIEVE government must practice fiscal responsibility and allow individuals to keep more of the money they earn.

I BELIEVE the proper role of government is to provide for the people only those critical functions that cannot be performed by individuals or private organizations, and that the best government is that which governs least.

I BELIEVE the most effective, responsible and responsive government is government closest to the people.

I BELIEVE Americans must retain the principles that have made us strong while developing new and innovative ideas to meet the challenges of changing times.

I BELIEVE Americans value and should preserve our national strength and pride while working to extend peace, freedom and human rights throughout the world.

FINALLY, I believe the Republican Party is the best vehicle for translating these ideals into positive and successful principles of government.
Does the current Republican leadership represent these values? An honest assessment will reveal that there is a new set of principles at work within the leadership.
2008 Republican Principles (Chuck Lasker's perception)

I'm a Republican Because...

I BELIEVE the strength of our nation lies in military might and God's help, as long as we do His Will and make this a Christian nation while supporting Israel until the day Israel is destroyed and Jesus returns.

I BELIEVE that each person's dignity, freedom, ability and responsibility must be honored unless we can encroach on these in the name of safety or other short-term excuse that the idiot populace will accept.

I BELIEVE in special rights and justice for Republican politicians, Christian leaders, the extremely wealthy and lobbyists, regardless of cause as long as the money is right.

I BELIEVE in equal justice and equal opportunity for everyone else, regardless of race, creed, sex, age or disability, unless we're talking about lazy black people, illegal Mexican people, uneducated women, homosexuals, or, if justice and opportunity for disabled people costs businesses money.

I BELIEVE large corporate profits, stock market wealth and protection of monopolies will bring this nation opportunity, economic growth and increased prosperity for the upper one percent of incomes.

I BELIEVE government should talk about fiscal responsibility and allowing individuals to keep more of the money they earn, but should actually borrow and spend recklessly and place the full burden of taxes on those with lower and lower incomes and future generations for short term gain. Any taxes on the rich are socialism.

I BELIEVE the proper role of government is to advance Christian evangelical morals through tax code, control of education, judicial appointments, privatization and the proper Christian philosophies of wealth and warfare.

I BELIEVE the most effective, responsible and responsive government is government run by those who know best, and all means necessary must be used to work against poll access by the lowly, the lazy, the stupid and the poor.

I BELIEVE the Republican Party was founded by America's founding fathers to fight Roe vs. Wade, to protect "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance they wrote, to put "Under God" on our money, and to keep the Ten Commandments in our Courtrooms and government buildings.

I BELIEVE that we must never speak to our enemies, unless they're very big enemies with money and cheap labor agreements.

I BELIEVE in free trade with lower nations that provide cheap labor and higher profits and any attempt to induce labor or environmental equality on these nations is liberalism.

I BELIEVE you're either with us or you're with the terrorists. If you do not have the same beliefs we do, you are un-American and worthy of derision, abuse, vandalism, placement on no-fly lists and investigation.

I BELIEVE anyone labeled "liberal" is a socialist, which is actually communist, which is actually Marxist, which means evil.

I BELIEVE abortion must be made illegal, but stopping extramarital and teen sex is more important than reducing abortion rates, so I support abstinence-only education, blocking of access to birth control by teens, and punishing poor people for being lazy by blocking access to health care to those women who want to keep their babies.

I BELIEVE Americans must retain only those principles that we consider important while developing new and innovative ideas for bringing power to a Republican executive branch and reducing the power of the annoying Congress and the activist Courts.

I BELIEVE Americans value and should preserve our national strength and pride while working to extend peace, freedom and human rights to good Americans only, and to create international opportunities throughout the world to develop inexpensive manufacturing for American companies.

FINALLY, I believe the Republican Party is the best vehicle for translating these ideals into positive and successful principles of government, and I believe we must use any means necessary, including lies, smears, voter suppression, federal police, the Secret Service, warrantless spying, even the destruction of lives and reputations, to progress our God-endorsed agenda.
Frank Schaeffer, author of the memoir that explains his (now regretted) part in helping the evangelicals take over the Republican Party titled "Crazy for God," describes our current Party well in his Huffington Post blog. The Republican Party has been taken over by The Religious Right, The Neoconservative Movement, and Corporate Business Interests.

Susan Eisenhower, granddaughter of President Dwight D. Eisenhower, has also left the Republican Party with a scathing indictment of the McCain campaign and the current GOP leadership.

Many moderate Republicans still do not realize what has happened. They believe the Republican Party is still the same. They follow the Republican rhetoric of today because they haven't stopped to see the hypocrisy, the contradictions, and the slowly-changed priorities. Those moderate Republicans still supporting McCain are unwitting participants in an entirely new agenda.

This is why you have middle class Republicans screaming that there should be more tax breaks for the rich, but tax breaks for the middle class are socialism. This is why, after 40 years of Republicans doing nothing to reduce abortions, pro-lifers are still voting for Republicans with the insane hope that this time they'll do something. This is why Christian Republicans are supporting a Christian-in-name-only (McCain) against a fellow brother in Christ (Obama). And this is why a completely unqualified hockey mom can be touted as the "future of the Republican Party," simply because she spews out the proper talking points and wants to use courts and police forces to end abortion while eliminating programs that reduce unwanted pregnancies that lead to abortions.

I spoke with a young African-American Democrat at an Obama rally last month and he was shocked to learn where the GOP came from and the progressive programs we spearheaded. So, a little history of the Republican Party is in order. Don't skip it if you think you know our history, because you probably don't.

The Republican Party was created in 1854 as an anti-slavery party. Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower created the interstate highway system, worked to integrate black and white public schools nationwide, and expanded Social Security. Republicans pushed through the Civil Rights Act of 1964. President Richard Nixon sat down with Communist China and the Soviet Union "without preconditions" and negotiated new trade and arms agreements, expanded Social Security, tried to pass minimum wage and universal health care plans (unsuccessfully), created the EPA and OSHA, and created The Philadelphia Plan, which was the U.S. government's first affirmative action program. President Gerald Ford pushed through the Equal Rights Amendment, proclaiming, "In this Land of the Free, it is right, and by nature it ought to be, that all men and all women are equal before the law."

Does this sound like the party of Bush/Cheney/McCain/Palin? Is this the kind of progress you hear from Republicans while promoting McCain on the news today? How did our Party get to this point? A little more history is in order, which again will probably surprise (and possibly anger) most Republicans.

President Reagan was the first president in American history to lower the highest tax rate and raise the lowest tax rate, beginning a shift in tax burden to the middle class that has continued through to the "Bush Tax Cuts." Reagan increased the national debt from $700 billion to $3 trillion. Reagan was the first Republican President to truly court the evangelical vote, moving the Republican platform far to the right. Reagan's coalition with evangelical leaders like Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, James Dobson and others began the anti-Democracy tactics of voter suppression of the poor and minorities. Paul Weyrich, a cofounder of the Moral Majority, said,
"Many of our Christians have what I call the 'goo goo' syndrome -- good government. They want everybody to vote. I don't want everybody to vote. . . . As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
Clearly, Ronald Reagan was doing what he thought was best for the country, and had no idea what evil would be wrought by allowing the Religious Right a seat at the GOP table. Reagan ended the Cold War, lead through a prosperous time in America, and made us safer than we'd been since before World War II. But an honest analysis shows that Reagan began the slide to the current neoconservative Party.

President George H. W. Bush attempted to overturn Reagan's borrow and spend legacy but was unsuccessful. Bush also ended the Kuwait-Iraq war quickly as befits Republican principles.

Under President Clinton, even as he balanced the budget and reformed welfare, the Republican leadership accelerated their right wing agenda using Clinton's "liberalism" as fear-based propaganda. By the time George W. Bush won the 2000 Republican nomination by pandering to the evangelicals against John McCain's centrist campaign, the religious right was firmly in control. However, most Republicans, including myself, continued to believe the Party supported the more moderate principles it still claimed to advocate.

Today, the Republican Party is a ghost of its original self. The Bush administration and Republican Congress increased the size of government, increased debt spending, pulled us into an unnecessary war, squandered our reputation internationally, violated our civil rights, reinterpreted the Constitution, attacked a non-threatening sovereign country, tortured prisoners, enabled monopolies and large corporations to crush individual initiatives, gave additional tax cuts only for the rich at the expense of the middle class, and destroyed any remaining trust Americans had in the government. The current GOP campaign is using lawyers to suppress Democratic votes, using hate, lies and smears, and has adopted an "ends justify the means" scorched-earth campaign that is literally destroying our Democratic system.

It's no wonder reasonable, tolerant, progressive Republicans are jumping ship, while new recruits to the Republican Party are diminishing. Why would anyone other than an extreme right wing evangelical Christian or selfish wealthy American even consider joining such a platform?

Some people are trying to fix the Republican Party from the inside, such as the Republican Leadership Council. But I believe this is a lost cause, as signaled by conservative Christopher Buckley's forced resignation from The National Review, the magazine his father founded, for endorsing Barack Obama for President. The "you're either with us or against us" neoconservatives attack any dissenting opinion with violent rhetoric or even actual violence. Frankly, the Republican Party leadership will not allow reform or change.

It is time that we moderate Republicans join together to form a new political party. Moving to the Democratic Party is not an option for most of us, as they have their own issues, with a general move to the extreme left only countered by Senator Obama's centrist policies.

What can we call our new party? The word "Republican" should remain in our name, in my opinion, to affirm our commitment to republicanism. "Progressive Republican Party" sounds great, but it's the name of a party in Turkey. This is not necessarily a game stopper, but "Moderate Republican Party" is acceptable and is only similar to the "Republican Moderate Party of (ironically) Alaska." I've tossed out the humorous names of Orthodox Republicans or The Legitimate Republican Party as being too sarcastic. Whatever the name, here are the principles I propose it be founded on:
The essence of Republicanism, the foundation of our Constitution and Bill of Rights, is that all people have inalienable rights that cannot be voted away by a majority of voters, which is the essential difference between a Republic and a Democracy;

It is the duty of government to be fiscally responsible with the people's money via balanced budgets, efficient administration of duties and programs, and minimal debt;

Government should defer functions to the private sector and community organizations whenever it better serves citizens as long as functions are monitored and regulated to prevent corruption and waste;

The Constitution and Bill of Rights are to be defended in full, regardless of short term popular fears or desires, with special attention to the intent of the original authors and signers;

The government shall respect individual liberty and personal privacy, regulating personal behavior only when directly required for the safety and liberty of others;

No person is above the Rule of Law, especially our elected representatives and their appointments;

Taxes are at best a necessary evil and shall be kept as low as possible for all citizens, based on conservative stewardship and minimal spending;

A strong national defense shall be maintained, with a reluctance to enter into foreign entanglements and a permanent ban on all military activities against American citizens or on American soil;

As an active participant on the world stage, we shall have a planned, consistent, proactive foreign policy that promotes friendship and cooperation, plus full engagement with our enemies;

Government shall work towards total independence from foreign countries in all essential areas, including energy, food, defense, and intelligence;

We shall be responsible stewards of our national natural resources through environmental awareness, including an understanding of our effect on the planet and the planet's effect on our nation;

Free enterprise and innovation shall be promoted, with a focus on protecting individuals and small businesses from monopolies, oligopolies, and unfair competition from large corporations;

It is the obligation of our elected officials and their appointees to reject campaign or other contributions that are meant to influence agendas in any way, and to make all decisions based solely on what is best for their constituents;

Recognizing that we are a union of states, no federal power shall be granted that can better be served closer to the people via state's rights;

The balance of power for all three branches of government shall be maintained, with recognition of the intent in forming our Republic to have representation closest to the people;

The Executive Branch shall execute laws as written by the Congress and will decline to use Executive Orders, Presidential Signing Statements or other tools to thwart the will of the people as indicated by their state's representatives;

The most essential principle is equal rights, equal justice and equal opportunity for all.
Is it crazy for me, just some guy, a "Joe Six Pack" if you will, to try to form a new American political party? Probably. But let me know if you would like to join me, and pass this on to other disaffected Republicans. Let's start the discussion and see where it goes.

Sunday, October 26, 2008

The Obama '08 Historical Research Project

I am starting an archive of this historical election and asking for help. After the election, the site will be at The archive will be made up of stories, photos and videos from Obama supporters sharing their experiences. If you'd like to be kept informed, sign up for our newsletter at

I've also created a Yes We Did! store to help raise funds for the project.

Wednesday, October 8, 2008

Be a Maverick, Vote Obama!

Watching Palin and McCain describe themselves as mavericks over and over and over, even a "team of mavericks," I started to wonder. They brag that they "go against their party" as part of being mavericky. So they honor going against their party.

I am a Republican voting for Obama. I'm going against my party! I'm a maverick! The Republicans should honor what I'm doing instead of calling me names and threatening me with violence. I expect that voting for a Democrat for President is SO mavericky that they should make ME President in 8 years when Obama finishes the greatest presidency in my lifetime.

Tuesday, September 30, 2008

An Open Letter to Barack Obama from a Republican Supporter

Senator Obama, sir. If I may be so bold as to give you some of my thoughts. I believe this election will not be decided by Democratic or Republican loyalists. It will not even be decided by independents and centrists, because these groups mostly sided with John Kerry four years ago and Al Gore eight years ago, and they lost. This election will be decided by how many Republicans cross over and vote for you.

As a Republican for Obama, I've been involved with your campaign all year. I go to campaign offices, I speak and email with every level of Indiana campaign staffers, and I very publically promote my Republican for Obama status. I've held Republicans for Obama meetings, I write blogs and articles and letters to the editor. I've been on multiple local news shows, XM Radio, the New York Times, and on many blogs supporting your candidacy. Even though I'm such a strong supporter, I'm not 100% sure I'm truly included in your "big tent."

Your campaign has embraced the Republicans for Obama movement, and even created a section of dedicated to us. The page highlights several prominent Republicans who are supporting your candidacy, and there's even a little blog on there.

But that's it! Other than that bit of lip service, I have not seen you reaching out to Republicans, even those of us supporting you.

I was at your Terre Haute, Indiana, event last month, covering it for Huffington Post. A Republican asked if you intended to keep us in mind when you're president. Your answer started out fine, but you didn't answer the question. Your basic statement was the, "we are not Republicans or Democrats, we are all Americans" answer you've used before. However, you did not address the fact that a lot of us conservatives are putting our trust on the line here, believing you will not suddenly become a left wing nut.

When you chose Joe Biden as your running mate, you lost a lot of us. I've been a Republican for 27 years, and I've been very unhappy with Biden's liberalism. I was upset with your choice at first myself, but, based on my trust in your leadership, I researched Biden's voting record and looked at his character. I accept your choice now, but many Republicans who were supporting you do not. We need you to tell us how your selection wasn't a super-liberal move.

The polls are showing that possibly 9% of registered Republicans will vote for you in November. Being a resident of the most Republican county in Indiana, and having spoken with literally hundreds of people in this county alone, I believe the number will be more like 20%, giving you a massive victory. However, this will only happen if you reach out to us directly.

Let's be honest. While I'm a true "Obama supporter," most Republicans for Obama are actually "Republicans against McCain." We are all nervous, feeling like we're betraying our party, wondering if we're just enamored by your great speeches, hoping you're truly going to follow through with your centrist platform. But it would not take much, just a little gaffe here, a statement about guns or abortion or Nancy Pelosi there, to lose us by the millions.

So I have a simple request as a Republican for Obama, because I want you to win. Please address us directly. I'd like to interview you with the questions I've gathered from other Republicans for Obama, but I'd accept a speech directed to Republicans. It can be a major speech, unprecedented, like your race speech. Tell us how you'll pick your Supreme Court nominees, that you won't take our guns, how you truly feel about abortion, how you're strong on national security, how you intend to work "across the aisle," and how you'll return the balance of power after Bush's massive power grabs. We're out here, we're waiting, and telling us we're included in your campaign would change a close race to a major sweep similar to Ronald Reagan's second term election that brought in so many Democrats. Ignore us, though, and many Republicans for Obama will probably just stay home on November 4th.

Thursday, September 25, 2008

A Trickle-Down Economics Primer, and Why It No Longer Works

My first presidential vote was for Ronald Reagan’s second term, mainly because I agreed with his “trickle-down economics” philosophy. It’s a term we hear often right now, but many don’t understand what it means. Meanwhile Senator Obama refers to a new economic structure that works “bottom up.”

In its simplest sense, trickle-down economics means the more money the rich have, the more it will trickle down to lower classes when they spend it. So, when the government “lets” the rich and corporations “keep” their money (low taxes), they will use that money to buy American products and services, and invest in American businesses. The expenditures, like new cars, new homes, servants, accountants, a new yacht, and corporate expenses, will create jobs and economic growth. Investment in new businesses, and helping grow existing businesses, also creates jobs. The vast majority of jobs in America are small business jobs, and helping them grow simply helps create more jobs. The money the rich don’t pay into taxes gets spent in America, and everyone benefits.

Does it work? It certainly sounds like it makes sense. And it used to work exactly as explained. But trickle-down economics depends on two things. One, a closed system, where the money stays in America, and two, an investment structure in America that encourages investment in growing businesses to create jobs.

In the 1980s, America was almost a closed system. Worldwide business existed, of course, but in general, when an American wanted to buy a yacht, they bought it from an American yacht company. Even when they bought a Mercedes, they bought it from an American-owned Mercedes dealership, so a lot of the profit stayed here in America. For the most part, the money did trickle down, which is why we were so happy in the 80s. The 90s was a boom, too, because the rich invested in new Internet businesses and the economy grew dramatically, leading to President Clinton taking credit for Reagan’s system that he simply didn’t break. 

So why, when Bush and a Republican Congress forced through the tax cuts to the super rich a couple of years ago, did the economy grow, but the money didn’t trickle down?

The system went wrong because the two legs of trickle-down economics were both broken.

  • Leg 1, a closed system. President Clinton passed NAFTA, opening our system. If a rich American wants to buy a yacht, they are just as likely today to buy from Italy, France, Egypt, New Zealand, or Germany as in America – actually more likely because they’re cheaper in some of these countries due to cheap labor, and they avoid American sales tax. If a rich American wants to buy a Mercedes now, they can just as easily order it directly from Germany. And cheap labor? Undocumented workers send billions of American dollars to their relatives in Mexico. The rich vacation in Dubai or Italy instead of California or New York City. With so many products being manufactured in other countries, even basic purchases don’t benefit America’s economy. All of this is “trickle away economics,” as the money is trickling out of America, not down to Americans.
  • Leg 2, an investment structure that encourages investment in growing businesses. President Bush oversaw massive deregulation of financial institutions creating a casino-level structure on Wall Street. Instead of investing in new and growing businesses directly, investors started putting their money into large groups which invest in commodities (oil, coffee, pork bellies) and large corporate stock in a short term profit methodology so they can show quick profits and sell more shares. Commodities investments do not create jobs, they are just ways that the rich pass money back and forth. The demand for short term stock profits from corporations actually eliminated jobs as layoffs and exporting jobs were perceived as positive actions so corporations were rewarded for increasingly pushing more work onto the lowest levels to show ever-increasing productivity. A company could not simply maintain and pay dividends, which benefit long term investors. Instead, it’s either increase productivity or die. Therefore, with the new system, there is zero trickle-down to the middle class, and even more trickle away to other countries.  

In other words, instead of buying American products and services, instead of direct investing in business growth, the rich, the large corporations and the investment groups have been playing games, spending outside the U.S., and keeping their investment monies outside growth-creating areas. And the result is today’s economic crunch. The middle class is holding the majority of the tax burden due to tax cuts for the rich, and the rich are keeping the money instead of trickling it down.

The current economic crisis is the death of the trickle-down economics philosophy, living proof that it has failed. While homeowners are being blamed for buying houses they could not afford, nobody is stating that the reason they can’t afford them is a combination of high inflation and stagnant salaries. The mortgage industry would be fine if trickle-down economics had worked. If the Bush administration had created a tax cut system that benefited the middle class instead of the rich, such as Barack Obama’s plan, and had regulated the lending industry more closely, home owners would be able to afford their mortgages, and the rich would not need to be bailed out. 

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

The Heart and Soul of the Republican Party

Only once during this election have I agreed with Mitt Romney. During the primary, Romney criticized the McCain campaign's lies, saying,

I think Senator McCain was called out for what everyone has said was a false accusation. "The New York Times," "Washington Post," "Time" magazine, Bill Bennett, everybody has said what he said was simply wrong and reprehensible. I think it was a huge mistake on his part. He wants to stick with it. So he got to take the shots for it, as long as he's doing that. I think people are going to really say, what's the heart and soul of the Republican Party going to be going forward?
This quote would fit perfectly today regarding McCain's sleazy ad campaign against Senator Obama.

I've been a Republican for 27 years. I've voted straight Republican in every presidential election. This year I'm supporting Barack Obama, but I remain a Republican, and continue to support local Republicans who haven't gone the way of the neocons. But I've been wavering between remaining a Republican to try to change things from the inside, and leaving the Party until they return to their roots. I also want to know, "what is the heart and soul of the Republican Party going forward?"

Susan Eisenhower, the granddaughter of President Dwight D. Eisenhower, is a political consultant who has been a Republican her entire life. Recently she left the Republican Party and registered as Independent. In her press release she said,

As an independent I want to be free of the constraints and burdens that have come with trying to make my own views explainable in the context of today's party. Hijacked by a relatively small few, the GOP of today bears no resemblance to Lincoln, Roosevelt or Eisenhower's party, or many of the other Republican administrations that came after. In my grandparents' time, the thrust of the party was rooted in: a respect for the constitution; the defense of civil liberties; a commitment to fiscal responsibility; the pursuit and stewardship of America's interests abroad; the use of multilateral international engagement and "soft power"; the advancement of civil rights; investment in infrastructure; environmental stewardship; the promotion of science and its discoveries; and a philosophical approach focused squarely on the future.
Even the most extreme Republicans are beginning to question McCain's tactics. Karl Rove, who is credited with taking negative attack campaigning to the lowest levels in the past 8 years, said, "McCain has gone in his ads one step too far, and sort of attributing to Obama things that are, you know, beyond the 100-percent-truth test." That's like Barry Bonds being critical of steroid use by other baseball players.

So what do I believe the heart and soul of the Republican Party should be? Truth, honor, and a respect for American voters. I've come up with a list of core Republican principles that the Party needs to return to. This will only happen by expelling or marginalizing the radical evangelicals and corporate interests that have turned the Party towards fascism.
  • Fiscal responsibility (balanced budgets and no long term debts);

  • Limited government;

  • A commitment to, and defense of, the Constitution and Bill of Rights;

  • Individual liberty with a respect for personal privacy and keeping government out of our personal lives;

  • Rule of law, with no American above the law, especially our elected representatives and their appointments;

  • Low taxes for everyone based on conservative stewardship and minimal spending;

  • A strong national defense, with a reluctance to enter into foreign entanglements;

  • A planned, proactive foreign policy that promotes friendship and cooperation, plus full engagement with our enemies;

  • Responsible stewardship of our national natural resources through environmental awareness;

  • Free enterprise, with a focus on protecting small business from monopolies, oligopolies, and unfair competition from large corporations;

  • States' rights over federal consolidation of power;

  • Maintenance of balance of power for all three branches of government;

A quick review of this list shows the current Bush/McCain/Cheney Republican Party is completely off the path, leading to member defections to the Democratic Party and hangers-on like me who are voting for Obama. This movement has some interesting bedfellows.

One group that is trying to change things from the inside is the Republican Leadership Council. As their site explains, "Inspired by a drive to get back to the fundamentals of the Republican Party, Senator John Danforth, Lt. Governor Michael Steele, and Governor Christine Todd Whitman created the political organization the Republican Leadership Council, which advocates for the historic Republican principles of liberty, individual responsibility, and personal freedom." They further state, "RLC-PAC's vision is a Republican Party that is unified by the basic tenets of fiscal responsibility and personal freedom, but that allows for diverse opinions on social issues by its members."

We are also seeing attempts to bring diversity to the mostly white Republican Party by groups such as Hip Hop Republicans. Per their site, a "Hip Hop Republican" sees that "...for far too long, urban areas have been controlled by a Democrat monopoly and ignored by head-in-the-sand Republican leaders..." and works to change that paradigm. Site founder, Richard Ivory, explained to me, "In so many ways the Obama campaign has forced this party to recognize that we have to change. My focus and mission is to bring more blacks into the Party and other minorities into the party. I am a Republican but a realist. My question is, does the policy work?" Ivory adds, "A more diverse party will be a more sane party." Republican Ivory sees four concepts that must be followed to meet the goals of addressing urban issues: "economic empowerment"; "educational choice"; "access to information"; and "empowering the potential of the individual."

Even poker players are urging the GOP to return to core values. "My point is simple. Is the Republican Party no longer the party of personal freedom and individual responsibility? Why has this party, that used to protect my rights, now become the party that wants to create a Nanny-state? Stay away from issues of personal liberty, except to remove old laws that restrict these liberties," professional poker player and 2004 World Series of Poker champion Greg Raymer posted to the GOP Platform site while it was open for comments.

During an interview with XM Radio POTUS '08, host Adrienne Mitchell asked me, "Has anyone from the McCain campaign contacted you to try to say, 'hey, hey, come back?'" The answer is that they have not. Instead, I have been maligned at every turn by Republicans. The Hamilton County, Indiana, Republican Party Chairman, Charlie White, said about me, "Anyone alleged Republican who is for Obama, is either not a Republican, but they are into more form than substance.[sic]" Regardless of the poor grammar, the message is clear, "you're either with us or you're against us." This is the current heart and soul of the Republican Party, and it must change for the Party to survive.

On November 5th, after Senator Obama has won the election, I hope some Republican Party leaders come back to this post and start considering the future of our Party, whether it will be the Party of lies, smears, anger and intolerance, or return to the Party that freed the slaves, spearheaded the civil rights movement, and brought America respect from every part of the world.

I'll be waiting.

UPDATE: I found this on the GOP Web site. It closely aligns with my list that others have said was off base. What I DON'T see on this list is making this a Christian nation, making abortion illegal, suspending Constitutional rights to people suspected of terrorism, drilling offshore and in ANWR, tax cuts only for the rich, smearing opponents and questioning their patriotism in order to win an election, free trade agreements, war with non-threatening countries like Iraq, increasing Executive Power including warrantless wire tapping, not talking to our enemies until they surrender, or defining marriage as being between a man and a woman. In fact, I don't see "safety before liberty" anywhere in there that would cause the support of the Patriot Act or any other power grab. Even the GOP's own site shows how far the Party has fallen.

Monday, September 15, 2008

A letter from a fellow Republican for Obama

Dear Chuck:

You have done a superb job of marketing the GOP’s power to change peoples’ hearts when responding to the change in our country’s present leadership. Your successful hospitality has been highly publicized throughout Indiana and all the way to The New York Times. Do not presume that good people who are Republicans are going to accept the lack of caring for our country’s people, the embarrassing downfall of our reputation internationally, a war waged for all the wrong reasons and an energy crisis that has no more time to resolve. I am a Republican for Obama and I am sharing my story with you, Indiana’s leader of Republicans for Obama.

I was born and raised in a Republican family. I believe that when times and values change, people do also. I am sure that there are many more Republicans for Obama than anyone realizes. Doctors feel part of the middle class today and many are voting Democratic for the first time because they believe Senator Obama’s vision for America must be implemented. I’m sure someone is working with them.

My adult Republican years included volunteering for Donald Bruce for Congress. That grew into my serving as a Wayne Township Precinct Committeeman and Vice Ward Chairman where we used to live. Everything was so important. There were Lincoln Day Dinners, picnics and every kind of occasion you can imagine to market GOP candidates at all levels. Barry Goldwater was the presidential candidate. No one said “presumptive” back then!

My first government job was in the secretarial pool in the House of Representatives. Governor (Dr.) Otis Bowen, from Marshall County Indiana asked me to handle his office when he was Minority Leader of the House of Representatives and then again when he was elected Speaker of the House. 

After winning the nomination and general election, the Governor and his staff become truly busy with planning the Inauguration, Inaugural Balls and other festivities. Governor Bowen was fortunate that he had served in the House of Representatives and knew from personal experience many effective, honorable men and women to fill his department head and senior staff rosters. I worked along with him and lead the effort to hire competent and loyal administrative staff members.

Governor Bowen began and continued for years a splendid service to the people of Indiana. During those years Republicans had a different approach for assisting people meet their legitimate needs than Democrats, but they never presumed the needs were not there and that government did not have an appropriate role in addressing them. Many times both parties worked together to effect significant assistance to Indiana’s citizens.

Watching the last seven years of President Bush’s administration, Republicans, Democrats and Independents have been appalled to watch and feel an environment of dishonesty, provisions favoring only the wealthy, an astonishing disregard for the victims of Hurricane Katrina, sending our young soldiers to an unjustified war in Iraq, no protection for mortgage holders or bank depositors, no interest in the safety of imported goods, the use of interrogation methods that do not follow the Geneva Convention and other egregious public behavior. Honest, decent Republicans have no place to go within their party to feel good about themselves and their country.

Senator Obama offers hope for all Americans that the economy and ethical reputation of the United States will be mightily improved. He offers hope that our people will once again participate in their government because they will be heard. He offers improved living standards, education and health care. He offers fairness in taxes and job opportunities. He will make sure that our brave soldiers will be treated with respect and any needed assistance when they come home. Obama offers an environment of honesty and pride which we are presently lacking. Many of us feel disappointed, unprotected and embarrassed about our own country…how incredibly sad that is. Wouldn’t it be truly important to our daily lives to feel excited about being an American?

This is not Democrat or Republican. It is a wish for a return to ethical and humane standards for Americans.

Viola Walker

(Thanks, Viola!!)

Saturday, September 13, 2008

Taking the Republican Party back

I still consider myself a Republican. I believe in the founding principles of the Republican Party, and the modifications based on embracing of progress that have lead to a truly progressive Party up through President Eisenhower. Unfortunately, as the evangelical right wingers and corporate interests took over (see Crazy for God), the Party has become a neoconservative, almost fascist, Party.

So what are the Republican principles of which I speak?
  • Fiscal responsibility (balanced budgets and no long term debts);
  • Limited government;
  • A commitment to, and defense of, the Constitution and Bill of Rights;
  • Individual liberty with a respect for personal privacy and keeping government out of our personal lives;
  • Rule of law, with no American above the law, especially our elected representatives and their appointments;
  • Low taxes for everyone based on conservative stewardship and minimal spending;
  • A strong national defense, with a reluctance to enter into foreign entanglements;
  • A planned, proactive foreign policy that promotes friendship and cooperation, plus full engagement with our enemies;
  • Responsible stewardship of our national natural resources through environmental awareness;
  • Free enterprise, with a focus on protecting small business from monopolies, ologopolies, and unfair competition from large corporations;
  • States' rights over federal consolidation of power;
  • Maintenance of balance of power for all three branches of government;
President Eisenhower said it best:
“As we peer into society’s future, [we] must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.”
- President Dwight D. Eisenhower
There are many Republicans fighting to bring the party back to its roots, but so far we're failing. The future of the fight is based in diversity, cooperation (fighting for what we agree on instead of against each other on what we don't agree on), coordination, and outright punishment of the current leadership through our votes. Here are some sites that show how this movement is taking shape: (not affiliated with Obama campaign)

Finally, the Obama campaign has recognized our disaffection by the Republican Party leadership, and has embraced us with their centrist platform that actually better represents our principles at this time.

If you are a Republican that also feels the Party has moved away from your principles, please read more of my posts on this blog and consider a crossover vote for Obama in this presidential election. And help us fight to return the Republican Party to it's founding principles so we can again support a true Republican for president.

Thursday, September 4, 2008

Read This Now! Sarah Palin: It's The Abortion Debate Stupid

Many Republicans know who Frank Schaeffer is. For those who don't, he's the son of Francis Schaeffer, the evangelical Christian author of wildly popular and influential Christian apologetic books "Escape from Reason" and "The God Who Is There." A best selling author in his own right, Frank wrote one of my favorite books, "Crazy for God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right, and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back."

The selection of Sarah Palin as Republican VP candidate has brought to the fore the pro-life/pro-choice debate once again. Thirty five years after Roe versus Wade, and 4 pro-life presidents who have done nothing, pro-lifers still think their selection of president should be based on this one issue at the exclusion of all others.

Mr. Schaeffer has an excellent article that we all need to read. It's longer than a quickie post, but it's the beginning of a conversation we MUST have. Please read it, comment on it, Digg it, pass it along, and converse.

Monday, September 1, 2008

10 Things I Wonder Regarding God, Obama, McCain and Pumas

1. Is Focus on the Family Out of the Will of God?

They asked their members to pray for rain at the Denver Democratic Convention. It was sunny the entire time. Is this an indicator that Focus on the Family is outside the Will of God, or is this God's endorsement of Barack Obama?

2. Is John McCain Unpatriotic?

I searched Google Images for an image of John McCain with a flag pin. Twenty five pages later, not a single picture with a flag pin! So I went to his site's photo album. Still no flag pin! Is he unpatriotic? Does he hate the flag?

3. John McCain, POW?

With John McCain's pro-war rhetoric, war in Iraq, war in Iran, war in Afghanistan, war in Georgia, war in Poland, does POW stand for Politics of War?

4. Drill Here Drill Now?

What does John McCain mean when he says to "drill here drill now?" Does he mean the spot he's standing on, and does he want them to start right away? Why aren't they drilling in all those spots yet?

5. Is McCain ready to lead? You sure?

The Republicans talk a lot about experience. John McCain has been only one of a hundred Washington Senators for 26 years. He's never been President or even a Governor, so he hasn't been a leader of anything. What experience does he have that prepares him to lead our nation? Lobbyist relations experience?

6. He earned it? Really?

Mitt Romney said John McCain "earned" his 7 mansions, his wealth. But I can't find anything in McCain's biography that shows he's held a high-paying job or started a company or succeeded in financial investing to earn his wealth. Does Romney consider McCain's marriage to wealthy heiress Cindy McCain a job? If it is a job, is it only legal in Nevada?

7. Is a PUMA an ugly Cougar?

There are supposedly Hillary supporters who are now supporting McCain. Some of them have organized and named their group after a shoe company. Didn't they trust Hillary's judgment? If so, is her judgment now bad when she says, "Barack Obama is my candidate?" Seriously, did they support Hillary for Hillary, or because she has the same kind of body parts they do?

8. McCain chooses.... who?

McCain chose Alaska Governor Palin as his VP choice. She's three years younger than Obama. Her "career" includes being a mother, PTA membership, city council member and then mayor of a city of 8,000 residents, then governor of Alaska, population 670,000 (about the same as Charlotte, NC), for a year and a half, about long enough, apparently, to get embroiled in a corruption probe. She shoots and eats moose, she's fighting protection for polar bears, she's admitted to using federally illegal marijuana while an adult but wants to put you in jail if YOU use it, and her husband works for BP, a foreign oil company. I don't even have to come up with a clever joke here, the facts are funny enough.

9. Is Palin qualified to be VP?

Sarah Palin apparently has some Vice President level experience. She was 1st runner up, number 2, second in line, first loser, for Miss Alaska in 1984. I'm not sure what the duties were for the Miss Alaska runner up, but a week ago Palin said she doesn't know what the US Vice President does everyday, so I assume the duties were very different. Will she talk about this experience in her debate with Joe Biden?

10. Palin supports home schooling, does that including schooling McCain in computers?

McCain says he's computer "illiterate," and that he looks at a few blogs with the help of his daughter and wife. In the greatest technological era in history, maybe he chose Palin as his running mate because she knows how to use the Internet and a Blackberry. Was she chosen to be the Presidential Secretary?

Bonus! The Republicans and their ground breaking VP choice! It's a first, right?

The Republicans are excited about their "glass ceiling shattering" choice of a woman for Vice President. However, the Democrats had a female VP candidate in 1984 (remember Ferraro?). Just like the McCain campaign to be 25 years behind the Democrats. What next, one of them Internets sites on that new Information Superhighway?

Wednesday, August 20, 2008

My New Republicans for Obama Newsletter

I've created my first Republicans for Obama newsletter and sent it out today. If you have not signed up, there's a signup form on the right.

Every email has an unsubscribe link in case I start boring you.

Click here to see the newsletter in your browser.


Excellent interview on Hardball

Two representatives of Obama for America's Republicans for Obama program joined Chris Matthews on Hardball. They make some of the best points yet made for Republicans to consider Obama for President:

Watch it. Bookmark it. Spread it around.

Thursday, July 31, 2008

Barack Obama and Health care – a Republican Perspective

The Republican idea that health care shall remain private, untouched by the government, and that people should all figure out ways to get their own health care was developed when the vast majority of Americans had employer-based health insurance, and health care costs were a fraction of what they are now. To continue this policy flies in the face of reality, as the number of uninsured Americans reaches over 47 million, and the majority of the insured have been seeing huge reductions in their benefits while their premiums rise 4 times faster than wages. The system needs to be fixed.

Senator Obama's “universal health care plan,” a term demonized by Republicans under President Clinton, is not a handout, nor does it replace current private health care plans. For the majority of Americans, nothing will change except lower premiums and better coverage under their current plans. However, Obama's plan will stop the disgusting methods of insurance companies of cutting off care for high-cost patients, denying health care for “preexisting conditions” that keep profits high by pushing those patients into public funding, and giving ridiculously inflated prices to continue in a group plan after losing a job. The Obama plan is simply a very large group plan – the same plan government employees enjoy – available to every American, with subsidies for the very poor. The government does not become the insurer, so it's not socialized medicine like Canada, nor do you have to worry about “going to the doctor will be like going to the license branch.”

As a Republican, I do wish there was a way to fix the system without another entitlement program. But the Republicans simply ignore the issue, and even encourage insurance company immoral behavior, so Obama's plan is the only practical plan available.

Barack Obama and Foreign Policy – a Republican Perspective

Senator McCain touts “experience” in foreign policy, while continually making massive informational errors. He mixed up Sunni and Shiite on several occasions, talked about the “border of Iraq and Pakistan,” and even referred to a country that no longer exists (he referred to Czechoslovakia twice in 2 days, even though it split into The Czech Republic and Slovakia in 1993). Senator Obama, on the other hand, has shown tremendous knowledge of the world.

The question is whether “experience,” which in McCain's case is 24 years as one of 100 Senators (which is NOT international executive experience) versus judgment, which Obama has shown over and over with his opposition to the Iraq war, and recently his time line to leave Iraq that the Prime Minister of Iraq endorsed. John McCain even agreed on July 25th that Senator Obama's 16 month timetable for withdrawal from Iraq is "a pretty good timetable," showing Obama ahead of the curve as McCain tries to catch up.

The current administration's policy of “punishing” enemies by not talking to them is new and completely ridiculous. McCain has stated he will continue this “head in the sand” policy. As President Kennedy said, "We should never negotiate out of fear, but we should never fear to negotiate." Ronald Reagan dealt with “the evil empire” directly. Richard Nixon normalized relations with Communist China. Dwight D. Eisenhower met with North Korea. Only until this administration has that become defined as “appeasement.” Here is an excellent history of “appeasement” by Republican and Democratic presidents:

Senator Obama's European popularity is seen as a bad thing amongst the "God Bless America and no one else" crowd, with one pundit saying he's "popular with socialist Europeans" and FoxNews actually claiming that European people liking Barack Obama is a “red flag” against him. I am not sure at what point it became good for our allies to hate us. Is EVERYONE our enemy now? I only know that free trade will only work if we're trading with friends, and the world hating us for our arrogance does not help our bottom line. We are supposed to be world leaders, not bullies.

The true Republican principles of foreign policy are to engage our enemies, support our friends, only use military might if necessary for our safety, and do not try to build nations. We also believe we should never spend money we don't have, right? So borrowing a trillion dollars from Communist China to fund the Iraq war seems quite unRepublican to me.

The world is excited about Barack Obama's presidency. That is a good thing. With Barack's massively successful Middle Eastern and European tour, showing he can stand with world leaders as any president could, the choice is clear for the best president to manage our foreign policy. That choice is Barack Obama.

Wednesday, July 30, 2008

"Father of Reaganomics" blasts Republicans

In a piece that does not take into account the large numbers of progressive Republicans, like the Republicans for Obama movement I'm a part of, Paul Craig Roberts gives a biting commentary on the Neocon Republicans' mismanagement of our economy. In more detail, he agrees with my statement that "trickle down economics" no longer works as the money is being spent in foreign countries and invested in non-jobs-creating investments. I call it "trickle away economics," which I hope catches on. Here is the article from Mr. Roberts:

I responded to Mr. Roberts with the following email:

I enjoyed your article titled The Mother of All Messes at, not because it is entertaining, which anything so blunt could hardly be said to be entertaining, but because it is so true. However, I am a progressive Republican, one of many who agree with you, but that you have said you can't find. I'm probably not "bleeding heart," but I am socially progressive and care deeply about the issues you talked about. Here is my testimonial, in which I say many of the same things you've said:

(Note: what do you think about my new phrase, "trickle away economics?" I hope it catches on.)

As you can tell, I am part of a movement known as Republicans for Obama, having held events and gotten media attention. We are Eisenhower/Reagan Republicans who reject the current Party takeover by the neocons and desire a return to the true Republican principles of our Party founders. We had a get together last week written about here:

A well known Republican for Obama is Susan Eisenhower, granddaughter of Dwight D. Eisenhower, whom I spoke with last week and still considers herself a Republican but does not like where the Party is right now. The way she put it, "we were here first."

So, we do exist, and most likely in greater numbers than will admit in polls. I hope that our existence might stem some of your anger towards Republicans in general, and focus it more on the new neocon Republicans who have temporarily destroying the GOP.

Yours in Hope,

Chuck Lasker

Tuesday, July 29, 2008

Barack Obama and the Pro Life Issue – a Republican Perspective

What issue is more Republican than pro-life? Of course, the term no longer applies to the groups that call themselves part of the “pro life movement.” The movement has been reduced to overturning Roe vs. Wade and fighting premarital and teen sex.

In the 35 years since Roe vs. Wade, pro-lifers have spent billions of dollars, and hundreds of thousands of man-hours, trying to overcome the Supreme Court ruling. However, since 586,760 abortions were reported in the United States in the year prior to Roe vs. Wade, clearly overturning Roe will not create realistic reductions. Additionally, in today's visual media-centric country, do you really believe Americans will accept seeing doctors and mothers sent to jail, and women forced to have babies against their will? Using legal means to force women to have babies is not a valid method of reducing abortions in 21st Century America.

John McCain has stated that he plans to continue the failed path of trying to use Supreme Court justice stacking, and, ultimately, the police force to reduce abortions. His belief in the value of human life is also suspect based on his continued support of the Iraq war, where it is estimated that over 1 million Iraqis have been killed. When asked about American exports of cigarettes to Iran, he replied, "Maybe that's how we can kill them." He then said he was joking, but joking about the deaths of an entire nation of people is not acceptable. Pro life is a base moral value, not just for the lives of babies, but all humans of any age and nationality.

Senator Obama is pro-choice, but understands the life issue is truly to reduce the number of abortions. Period. Senator Obama's plan is to reduce unwanted pregnancies, and therefore abortions, as well as to promote programs that help women keep their babies through health care, adoption programs, and education. Here is a quote from

Senator Obama is an original co-sponsor of legislation to expand access to contraception, health information and preventive services to help reduce unintended pregnancies. Introduced in January 2007, the Prevention First Act will increase funding for family planning and comprehensive sex education that teaches both abstinence and safe sex methods. The Act will also end insurance discrimination against contraception, improve awareness about emergency contraception, and provide compassionate assistance to rape victims.

Therefore, the TRUE life candidate, the candidate who will work to reduce the number of abortions instead of just paying lip service to “moral issues,” is Senator Barack Obama.

UPDATE: Some people believe Obama's vote against the "partial birth abortion ban bill" was a sign that he is for abortions up until the day of birth. In reality, this bill did NOT have any exception for the life of the mother. In other words, if a pregnant woman came into an emergency room after a car accident, and it came down to whether the mother or the baby survived, this bill REQUIRED that the doctors kill the mother to save the baby, even if the mother had an 80% chance of survival and the baby had a 5% chance of survival. That is unacceptable, and a ridiculous restriction on doctors' triage options. It was not designed to pass, it was designed to force a NO vote from the Democrats so the Republicans could use it during campaigns. This is an example of my main point, that Republicans USE the abortion issue as a political wedge, and do nothing to reduce the number of abortions.

My video testimonial as a Republican for Obama

I am making a video for YouTube, and here's my script.

I'm Chuck Lasker, and I'm a Republican for Obama. My favorite president was Ronald Reagan. I loved him. He put country before self, as no other president has since. The economy was strong. Americans could travel the world with heads held high, feeling safe, and rich from the strong dollar. If we'd had candidates like Ronald Reagan since then, the Republican Party would have remained in full power.

Since then, however, the Republican Party leadership has pulled the Party off course. The extreme right evangelicals and the corporations have taken over. From Bush Senior's New World Order to the current administration's free pass for monopolies and conglomerates that crush small businesses and innovation, the Party is barely recognizable.

Do you remember how upset we Republicans were when Clinton wrote executive orders? Now Bush rules with them everyday. Remember the Republican phrase, “we are not the world's police” when Clinton sent our troops to fight foreign wars? Remember how Bush Sr. had us out of Iraq in 100 days? Remember how pro-life meant reducing pregnancies and abortions, not failed attempts at discouraging premarital sex for moral reasons that have nothing to do with abortion? Do you think pro-life Reagan would support killing over a million Iraqis in order to “free them?” And at what point did it become Republican to believe safety is more important than liberty – after 9/11 or when the public started disagreeing with the Bush administration?

Remember when the War on Drugs was about arresting drug kingpins, not drug users? Do you think Reagan would approve of us having a higher percentage of citizens in prison than China, mostly being people who smoked a little weed? And prisons being private companies owned by judges, prosecutors and sheriffs? That doesn't fit with smaller government and keeping government out of our personal lives, does it?

Remember when trickle down economics worked because the rich would spend their money in America and invest in small businesses? Today they spend their money overseas and invest in oil and foreign investments, so it's trickling away, not down. That's why Bush's tax cuts for the rich have not helped our economy at all, but has created a debt to China it will take generations to repay. There's another one Reagan would love, a trillion dollar debt to The People's Republic of China.

So, my fellow Republicans, I put it to you. Is the current Republican leadership truly Republican, the Party of Lincoln, the Party of Eisenhower, the Party that created the civil rights movement, the Party of Ronald Reagan who attracted people from both parties to his campaign?

No, the Republican Party – at least the national leadership – has betrayed us. They've sold out to mega-corporations, lobbyists, the far right, and the military industrial complex. The economy is in the tank, our military is stretched to the limit on an unnecessary war, and our Constitution has been shredded with government spying, free speech infringement, and more Executive Orders than all previous presidents combined. Heck, Americans now claim to be Canadians when they travel oversees because the world hates our arrogance. But FoxNews actually claimed that European people liking Barack Obama is a “red flag” against him, as if it's a Republican desire for our allies to hate us. How does that fit with the Republican free trade agenda?

And the maverick John McCain? He is not even recognizable from the John McCain of 8 years ago, since he lost the primary in 2000 and realized he needed to pander to the new Ultra-Right Republican leadership so they'd give him a chance to be president. His voting record of 95% yes votes on Bush initiatives last year shows he's not a maverick anymore, and his recent reversals on so many issues shows he'll do and say whatever it takes to win the presidency, where he'd be completely beholden to the corporations who funded his campaign. As an example, McCain reversed his opinion on new drilling for oil, and his donations from oil and gas companies increased ten fold immediately. His current hateful personal attack ads against Obama that question Obama's patriotism and support for the troops show a do-anything-to-win moral vacuum that he claims to be above with his "Straight Talk Express." McCain 2000 would simply hate McCain 2008.

There is an alternative to blindly following the orders of the Party leadership. The alternative is Barack Obama. Just as Reagan's non-partisan, big tent agenda attracted Democrats in both of his elections, Senator Obama is attracting Republicans like me, who feel betrayed and ignored by the current leadership, and who don't believe John McCain represents us.

Do I agree with Obama on everything? No. Do I believe he loves this country before self, and do I trust him, and believe he's a brilliant leader? Yes I do. I am voting for Obama, not against McCain because I truly believe nobody can better get us out of the horrible situation we're now in. It's time for a new direction – not just any new direction, but one that pushes against special interests, Washington corruption, and the pork barrel status quo.

If you're feeling disaffected, like me and thousands and thousands of other Republicans throughout the country, please read “The Audacity of Hope” by Barack Obama. Go to an Obama event, especially if he'll be speaking. Go to and read up on the issues. If your mind is open, you'll see that he is not a “tax and spend liberal,” that he's not an elitist or leftist, but instead, is a centrist with amazingly nonpartisan ideas. Then, join us in our nonpartisan effort to clean up Washington and bring back the freedoms we've lost in our misguided attempt at making us “safe.”

Sunday, July 27, 2008

Links of Interest

Article about some Republicans for Obama

Republicans for Obama national site

Same group's Facebook site

RFOs tell their stories

An RFO blog

Chuck's Republicans for Obama Cafepress store with county and state customizations

YouTube Videos about issues

Article about Obamacans (or go to and search “Mr. Right?”

Article: "Obamacon Has Questions for the Senator "

A quick blog about being an RFO

A great article from a prominent RFO

A good response to "Obama hasn't done anything as a Senator," a typical Republican argument

Campaign is coordinating a blitz by the ‘Obamacans’

Wish TV Channel 8 Interview with Chuck Lasker

Indianapolis Star article about the Lasker RFO social event on July 24th, 2008

Another article about a Republican for Obama,0,2715710.column

Another gathering of RFOs

Thursday, July 3, 2008

New Blog similar to Republicans for Obama

I'm a Republican for Obama, although "conservative for Obama" might be more accurate. I'm conservative in that I want a smaller government who taxes less and stays out of our personal lives.

So, how does that mesh with supporting Barack Obama for President? Haven't we heard he's a typical tax-and-spend liberal, the most liberal member of the Senate? Haven't we heard he wants to tax everyone to death, and create more social programs than Mussolini? Well, that's simply not true.

Yes, Senator Obama is a little more liberal than I would prefer. But he is honest, caring, and loves this country more than his own power. It's about trust. His new campaign method of positive, supporter-funded campaigning is profound, and worked great in the primary. Obama wants to transform the government from a corporate-sponsored fleecing of Americans to a truly transparent servant of the American people. That, more than any other issue, is most important today.

Compare that to John McCain. His campaign staff is filthy with lobbyists, including lobbyists who have and still represent foreign governments, including groups listed as terrorist groups. McCain and Bush have borrowed-and-spent trillions of dollars for their programs that make anything Senator Obama supports look like kid's play. Remember the Medicare Drug Program? It's the largest entitlement program ever created - and it was created by Republicans as a way to push even more government money to their pharmaceutical friends. Iraq? That's going to cost us at least one thousand billion dollars, or one MILLION million dollars. What for? Freedom for Iraqis? Our safety? Nah, it was so American companies can get the oil contracts, which is exactly what has happened. The past 8 years have been the largest fleecing of Americans in American history, and it has to stop.

You can read the rest of my story here: