This is not a centralized, state-directed strategic plan.  Instead, it proposes some ideas which can be applied to the "situation on the ground" at the state and local level.  It's a counter-insurgency strategy to awaken local leaders to the threat of the liberal insurgency in America, and take local action to stop it.  We the people need to stand up and be heard locally to stop it.  It's not just the problem of distant politicians and bureaucrats in Washington DC.  We are the solution, not them.

Conservative leaders in each area of the country are the local commanders who need to work out their own local strategy and tactics according to the "facts on the ground" in their own locations.

The key isn't to organize a national network of drones to do the bidding of the leaders at the top, nor to lobby them for favors.  That's the liberal model.  The focus needs to be on empowering many individuals to take responsibility for success in their own communities.  Stand up for what we believe.

This is not an ideological struggle of conservative versus liberal ideas, or about what is "fair".  It's about what works.  History is very much on our side in that regard.  Liberalism is still the road to serfdom.  We didn't become the envy of the world as a global economic superpower through government social programs and manipulation of our economy.  We the people have achieved great things in spite of the growing burden of a government which has become too arrogant, costly, and powerful despite the intended limits imposed by our Constitution and the principles of our Declaration of Independence.

Executives may find these tools to be helpful when planning business growth projects.

Conservatives are still in the majority in many parts of the country.  To stay that way in the face of a very determined and well-funded liberal insurgency network, we need to organize locally and deliver demonstrably better government performance.  We need to defend what we already hold, rather than be complacent about it.  That includes having a very visible local presence which accomplishes tangible improvements in these communities, and upholding the highest standards of personal conduct.

This may seem intuitively obvious, as in the "swing state" focus in national elections, or national political party focus on specific House or Senate or Governor elections in which change seems to be possible.

The point, however, is that this isn't simply about concentrating campaign resources at election time on the places where victory may seem to be within reach.  Instead, the focus needs to be on what can be done month after month, and year after year, to ensure that conservative leaders in these areas are demonstrably delivering better results for their communities.  That doesn't mean more earmarks for federal pork spending.  As the minority party in Washington, that game is largely over, and it was never a wise one for conservatives.  That was playing by the liberal rules, and it obviously backfired.

Instead, conservative leaders in these areas need to really focus on what can be done within the constraints of state and local resources to better address their local issues.  The idea that solutions and resources need to come from the top in Washington needs to be defeated.  On the contrary, state and local officials who are putting their own house in order need to apply pressure upward on the federal government to do the same thing - and to show fiscal restraint to avoid harm to their economies, instead of expecting a federal "bailout" for everything they want but can't afford.  The state and local leaders - and voters - should be exposed to the ideas which are working better in the "Red Zones".

We can't simply ignore a large swath of the country.  We need to take the fight to their territory, and demonstrate success in a few places which can then be replicated in others.

We can't really expect to win the hearts and minds of the most hard-line liberal insurgents.  They are still a relatively small minority.

Instead, we need to find other local leaders who are more pragmatic and dissatisfied with the outcomes achieved by government in their areas, most likely among local business leaders rather than politicians.  We need to respect their community leadership roles, and work with them.  There may also be roles in local government which are in such obvious need for change that voters will risk crossing party lines.

Barack Obama has launched a new "Organizing for America" initiative, which is described as "a parallel organization to the Democratic National Committee and an independent force to lobby for Obama's goals."  It is intended to to build on the estimated 13 million e-mail addresses gathered during his campaign, and is "a re-election campaign-in-waiting".

It is expected "to install community organizers around the country".  This goes beyond the Change.gov initiative of the transition team, because there are legal and privacy constraints on the direct use of the campaign list in the White House, such as to lobby directly for his initiatives by appealing to all his supporters to apply political pressure.  Instead, it will be a "parallel" but independent entity which keeps that social network under his effective control.  Think of it as a youth movement of liberal activists.

We need to be even better organized as conservative activists in a peaceful counter-insurgency.

Take a look at House Joint Resolution 5 of January 6, 2009, proposing an amendment to the Constitution to repeal the Twenty Second Amendment.  That's the one which limits a President to two terms in office  - as passed after Franklin D. Roosevelt served for four terms.  Jose Serrano of New York (D) had the audacity to introduce this bit of absurd theater as soon as the new Congress started work.

Or how about House Joint Resolution 7 of January 7, 2009, which proposes an amendment to the Constitution to abolish the Electoral College system in favor of direct election by popular vote.  Gene Green of Texas (D) proposed this as his comic contribution.

What about House Joint Resolution 16 of January 8, 2009, which proposes an amendment to the Constitution to repeal the Sixteenth Amendment - the one which authorized a federal income tax?  Steve King of Iowa (R) proposed this.  This reflects his sincere advocacy of the "Fair Tax" alternative, but in this Congress that has about as much chance of passage as a balanced budget.

Even if this stuff never survives the Judiciary Committee and has no serious hope of passage, it is an absurd waste of time.  Is this really what we expect of our Representatives at such a time of "crisis"?  The federal government is becoming a three ring circus full of clowns competing for media attention and funding of their political careers, rather than acting as serious professionals who have temporarily been given the trust of the public to serve them well and achieve progress on important governance issues.

What business would ever waste time and resources working on things which even the most casual observer would recognize as completely futile?  This is just the tip of the iceberg - the political part which shows above the surface if one is watchful.  Most people have neither the time or inclination to pay close attention to such things.  They shouldn't.  We actually have to pay for this circus by working.

The real danger, however, is in the large federal bureaucracy below the surface.  That's what can sink our prosperity.  There is even less transparency and accountability for what happens there.  Unfortunately, however, it doesn't melt away as a threat.  On the contrary, it grows through creeping mandates and new ideas which expand the powers of the bureaucracy until it does some serious damage.

Of course, the fault then doesn't lie with the iceberg.  Everybody was doing their job as expected.  The problem is that they didn't control enough of the ocean yet.  They need more power to avoid future collisions. 

Google Groups - SurgeUSA

Plaxo Surge USA Group

Search: Americas

Custom search tools include:

US states and cities

Global Commercial Real Estate

Architects and Engineers

Strategy Consultants

Risk Consultants

HR Consultants

International Business Law

Taxes and Incentives