I’ve strained trying to find a somewhat diplomatic title for this post. But it’s pretty hard since it is about a newsletter I received in my email last night that left me feeling like there needs to be something said about it… Because it’s … Well, read it for yourself and you might understand:

1.  Us vs. Them

The United States Chamber of Commerce, already in the tank for amnesty, is now in the tank for Common Core. The Chamber of Commerce will be funding Republican candidates to beat conservatives.

The New York Times recently ran an article on the corrupt and entangling alliances within the Mainstreet Partnership. This group of liberal Republicans, funded by an alliance of Wall Street and Labor Unions intends to defeat both conservative incumbents and challengers to Republicans.

Both of these groups are working with the Republican Establishment, including the National Republican Senatorial Committee, whose staff, when not hanging out with questionable souls, is attacking conservative talk radio hosts.

Friends, the battle lines are stark and clear. Conservatives will beat the GOP or the GOP will go left. It will go left toward amnesty, left toward common core, left toward Obamacare, left toward abortion rights, left toward gun control, and left toward tax increases and even bigger spending.

You may think you can sit it out. You may not want to get dirty. But you do not have a choice. You will either stand with the labor unions and crony capitalists funding the establishment, or with the conservative fighters funding freedom loving candidates. . . . please click here for the rest of the post

It’s one of those letters that arrives in HTML format and the synopsis has been edited since I first laid eyes on it in the wee hours of the morning. Toward the end, it mentioned that “If you not with us, you’re with them.”

It’s not that I don’t think Mr. Erickson has a point. He does, at least on economic policy. But I hardly think that mass deportation and government regulation of personal relationships is necessarily “freedom loving” as he uses to describe his preferred candidates. Sure, you’re free to be just like him or be relegated to living in the shadows – and if you’re not with his version of “we” you are no better than Larry Summers. And I think that if he were put into a room with Larry Summers to talk about monetary policy, there would be perhaps only a ray of sunshine between them. Maybe that’s why they just do not get along very well. They are too much alike, only with different aims. So I suppose the question is, do I want Mr. Erickson’s brand of statism or Mr. Summers’? Or is it, as he says, I’m not with them so I must be a crony capitalist.

This is the way to to make friends and win votes?? There is just something about the angry visage that is off-putting. And I was amazed on election night in 2012 that these angry, anxious people were quite disappointed that the Republicans lost. Maybe the truth of the matter is that I’m not a crony capitalist. I’m not a statist. I’m all for economic freedom – we need much more of it. But I simply won’t vote for angry, anxious protectionists with social policy recommendations that are so conservative, they are not much better than  the Islamic equivalent. As my mom used to say – “You can catch more flies with honey than you can with vinegar.”

PS: And to think – I used to be diarist (another term for blogger) at his site.  I must have evolved – or maybe just grew up.