In a previous post, we questioned whether Obama would really make good on his promise of a middle-class tax cut. After all, during his campaign, Bill Clinton had promised the same thing but quickly reneged once he took office.

A few days ago, Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s first appointee for his new administration, stated that “at this juncture” the new administration planned “on giving 95 percent of working Americans a tax cut.” Emanuel went on to focus on middle-class woes:

Over the years, the middle class has been squeezed consistently by rising costs on education, health care and energy, as well as a diminishing income. You must have an economic program that focuses on them. … It was built on the fact that the middle had been hurt. And to have a strong recovery, and a sustained recovery over a period of time means that the middle class must the focus of the economic strategy.

To this, we can only say, amen! Let’s hope that the new administration indeed carries through with these plans.

It’s the day after Election Day. Barack Obama is now President-Elect. The Republicans are licking their wounds—and already beginning to think about their comeback.

What will that comeback strategy look like? And will Sarah Palin be an important part of it? Quite possibly. Here’s why:

Middle America—especially white, culturally conservative, working class Middle America—has been the GOP’s core constituency for at least a generation. This constituency put Nixon and Reagan in the White House. Both George Bushes tried to appeal to it while quietly phasing in a new core strategy for the GOP—a strategy that ultimately didn’t work for either one. As Newsweek explains it,

Karl Rove and his disciples dreamed of a conservative majority that cut deep into traditional Democratic demographic groups like Hispanics and culturally conservative African-Americans. Those fantasy targets are gone. African-Americans will almost certainly remain solidly Democratic in the Obama era, as will Hispanics given the realities of immigration politics in the GOP.

Faced with bleak economic prospects and a Republican candidate whose idea of economic “reform” is a continuation of George W. Bush’s policy of tax breaks for the ultra-rich financed with borrowed money, the “Reagan Democrats” are drifting away.

Barack Obama is welcoming them into his big tent. Like Bill Clinton before him, Obama understands that “it’s the economy, stupid!” He’s focusing on middle-class economic concerns. And it’s working.

Bush/McSame Republicanism is on the verge of colossal failure at the polls. Once that becomes clear, at least some thoughtful Republicans will start looking for an alternative. That’s where Sarah Palin may come in:

Unlike most top-tier Republican candidates, [Palin] owes very little to the party’s business wing and thus would have little to lose by taking an anti-immigration stand. Since joining McCain’s ticket, she has echoed his moderate position on the issue. But she could turn this into a virtue: yet another McCain mistake she had to grin and bear. She could use the issue as a jumping-off point to break the party from business altogether on things like trade, making a protectionist argument from the right. The inexperience that has dogged her this year could help her in the future; without a record of party fealty, she could easily dispose of any party orthodoxy that kept her from marrying pitchfork populism with the ideals of the Christian right.

No telegenic Republican has tried this since Pat Buchanan in the 1990s. No superstar Republican has tried it in history. In Palin’s hands, this strategy could spawn a movement.

Imagine a GOP that was willing to tackle the two single biggest causes of middle class decline: import of cheap labor from Mexico and other Third World nations, and outsourcing of manufacturing jobs to countries like China and India. Throw in a cultural orientation toward traditional Americanism and patriotism rather than globalism and “diversity,” and the stage would be set not just for a Republican, but for an American Renaissance—a rebirth of government “of, by, and for the people.” Such a movement would garner mass appeal on Main Street, but would be deeply loathed by economic, media, and entertainment elites.

Will it ever get off the ground, with or without Sarah Palin? Let’s wait until after the election, and see.

They work hard. They live neither in inner-city slums nor in gated communities. They’re neither rich nor poor, but these days, they’re probably struggling. Their primary goal in life is to provide for their families. They deeply revere American traditions and American values. And because they’ve spent the last few decades watching their standard of living decline and their way of life not only threatened but openly mocked by global elites, they’re hopping mad. They want someone in government, finally, to advocate for them. Call them the Middle American Radicals, or MARs.

They’re wary of the Democratic Party. After all, they are the folks Barack Obama maligned in his “Bittergate” remarks. Since the 1960s, courting them has been a central strategy for Republican presidential candidates.

But once elected, GOP candidates have done little to address the MARs’ real concerns such as mass Third World immigration and the elimination of American manufacturing jobs in favor of outsourcing from overseas. For unfortunately, among elites of both parties, “diversity” and “inclusiveness” trump patriotism, and the profitability of globalization for the few trumps concern for the misery it causes the many.

In a recent commentary, Pat Buchanan—who has always been a stalwart champion of the American middle class—has pointed out that John McCain too is willing to sell out the middle class in order to toe the globalist, elitist line. Most recently, McCain has come down on the side of those who want to shield wealthy investment bankers from the consequences of their own greed while doing nothing to “bail out” beleaguered homeowners who face foreclosure. But even this isn’t McCain’s greatest sin. As Buchanan puts it,

McCain stood with the establishment for NAFTA, GATT, the WTO and the Mexican bailout. Middle America opposed them all.

In the past decade, the MARs have opposed free-trade deals and lost, but won virtually every referendum on gay marriage, affirmative action or welfare for illegal aliens. Invariably, the MARs are portrayed as bigots, nativists, xenophobes, protectionists and isolationists, and their leaders as demagogues. In McCain’s words from 2000, they are “agents of intolerance”…

Could McCain win them back in five weeks? Perhaps. Is he willing to do what is necessary to win them back? Probably not. It would go against his instincts and his image of himself.

The issues that move these folks are not just the $700 billion bailout of Gordon Gekko’s comrades, but the invasion of America from Mexico, the export of their jobs, factories and future to Asia and the gnawing fear that the country they grew up in is being sacrificed for the benefit of an internationalist elite.

How true. And how sad.

I regularly get their updates. Here is the text of a recent one, which, among other things, recommends two candidates who are standing up for the American worker against the onslaught of cheap Third World labor:

With all the focus on trying to clean up the mess that Corporate America created, a few important pieces of immigration legislation almost got lost in the chaos. For the last couple of months, the open borders lobby has been trying to quietly kill E-Verify and import over 500,000 new foreign workers. Thanks to your calls, we let them know they could not get away with these sellouts if they wanted to get reelected, so they punted.

The House Judiciary Committee never took up the bill to flood our country with foreign workers. We were hoping that the Senate would reauthorize E-Verify for at least five years, but we ended up having to settle for six months. What this means is that when Congress reconvenes in 2009, we are going to fight these battles all over again.

This is why it is so important that we get some real fresh blood in Congress who will be ready to take on the establishment. I want to tell you about two candidates we are supporting who we can trust to take on the open borders crowd as soon as they take office.

Tom McClintock: California 4
Tom has been one of California’s most vocal and effective voices against illegal immigration. Way back in 1994 he was instrumental in campaigning for Proposition 187 to deny social services to illegals. In 2003 he led the battle against giving driver’s licenses to illegal aliens in the State Senate. Now Tom is trying to bring his fight to Congress-and boy do we need him. He currently has a slim lead against pro-amnesty Charlie Brown, and with your help we can make sure he keeps it.

David Schweikert: Arizona 5
David is running against freshman Democrat Harry Mitchell. In 2006, our cause suffered a major setback when Mitchell defeated JD Hayworth. Mitchell supported the Bush Amnesty, and JD was one of our most vocal advocates for secure borders. The establishment used this race as evidence that the American people don’t really oppose amnesty. You and I know this is baloney, so this is why it is so important that we kick Mitchell out, and replace him with David Schweikert.

Our friends in Arizona tell me that David is one of us. He is making his get tough stance on immigration one of the top priorities of his campaign. Electing David will send a clear message that Americans are still serious about securing our borders!

To be sure, something must be done about Social Security and Medicare. Both programs are woefully underfunded in the long run. Either they, or the Federal government, or both, are facing disaster within a few decades if the gap between anticipated revenues and anticipated expenses is allowed to grow.

Both programs are also cornerstones of middle class prosperity. Without Social Security and Medicare, the majority of middle class households will face poverty in their old age. If anyone gets sick, that poverty will quickly turn to utter destitution. These programs must be saved.

The problem is referring to them as “entitlements.” American workers aren’t merely “entitled” to these things, they’ve earned, and paid for them. Check out this editorial about the so-called entitlement spending crisis.

If you have been to an emergency room lately, you’ve probably had to stand in a long line. And if you’ve looked at that line, you’ve probably noticed that many people in it are non-Americans. You may have wondered if some, if not most, are illegals. They are. And you’re paying dearly for it: not just in time, but in money, and possibly, with your health and life if services are curtailed because of the rising cost of providing free health care to people who shouldn’t even be here.

I just received a (snail mail) letter from an organization called the Mountain States Legal Foundation that, among other things, is helping American counties fight back: not against the illegals themselves, but against well-funded US-based groups that want nothing more than to permanently integrate the interlopers into American society—at American workers’ expense, of course.

According to the letter,

Mountain States Legal Foundation (MSLF) is assisting Ada County, Idaho in its petition for a rehearing of a case where the county was ordered to pay medical bills for an illegal alien, Javier Ortega Sandoval.

Mr. Sandoval was admitted to St. Adolphus Regional Medical Center in Ada County, Idaho, after he had a stroke while working illegally. He was there for two months and incurred medical bills in excess of $187,000, mostly for rehabilitation services — not emergency care. Ada County refused to pay for Mr. Sandoval’s health care because it believes that illegal aliens aren’t true “residents.”

Unfortunately, the Idaho Supreme Court ruled against Ada County. It issued a ruling claiming that Mr. Sandoval is a “resident” even though he is illegally in this country and subject to deportation. Fortunately, one judge dissented by stating that illegal aliens are “fugitives from justice” and not “residents” in the true meaning of the word. MSLF is supporting Ada County because [it believes] this case has national implications that may affect the quality of your health care.

The letter writer goes on to point out that even as “the government is granting free health care to illegal aliens, it is cutting back services for veterans.”

But while wealthy elites are generally indifferent to veterans’ plights, they rush to fund efforts to “defend” illegal aliens’ “rights,” such as free health care; in states like California, pregnant illegals (who often come to the U.S. to have “anchor babies”) get not just prenatal care and delivery costs paid for, but even car seats and diapers.

The Americans who fought wars for our freedom and pay taxes to keep our country going should have it so good. But they don’t, because they don’t have friends in high places—like, for example, the ACLU, which claims it is “racist” to require voters to show driver’s licenses or other forms of ID before voting.

It’s important for American citizens to understand that this battle isn’t (as the mainstream media portray it) about depriving hard-working people of their “rights” just because they don’t have the right paperwork, or God forbid, because of their “race.” It’s about being a good steward of the nation our forefathers bequeathed to us, and preserving it for future generations.

Being an American means nothing to globalist elites. If it means nothing to Americans, it will soon mean nothing, period. The way of life that our ancestors worked and fought so hard to create and hand down will be lost. We’ll merely be citizens of the world—more accurately, the Third World. We’ll have a Third World health care system; and when we want to use it, we’ll have to take our places at the back of the line. Behind the aliens.

Sound advice for all investing, not just for retirement: don’t panic, don’t make rash decisions, but do become more cautious with your investments.

Carl Feuer, a spokesman for UAW Local 2300, sees it slightly differently. According to him, the real cause of the crisis is the falling standard of living of the American worker.

As prices for food, gasoline, and health care rise even as wages stagnate or fall, many households have been unable to make their mortgage payments. Defaults, and foreclosures, were the inevitable result. The losses suffered by banks and other financial institutions are currently making the biggest headlines, but it’s important to remember where the problem started.

Feuer has a point. If average Americans weren’t in a financial bind they wouldn’t be defaulting on their mortgages. Or at least fewer of them would be in default. Still, a lot of the blame must nonetheless be placed on the financial system. Reckless lending practices made unaffordable mortgages too easy to obtain, which resulted in many unwise home purchases, which drove up real estate prices, forcing even prudent people to spend more on housing then they wanted to, thus creating a vicious circle. Now that the circle has come to an end, we’re all paying the price.

But governmental bailing out of Wall Street firms may ultimately cost a lot of money that would be better spent helping Main Street homeowners and small businesses. It’s tantamount to welfare for the super rich. And according to a recent Dallas News article, even many Republicans are now questioning the wisdom of putting the government on the hook for private investors’ excesses.

Speaking to a crowd of about 1,200 in Langhorne, PA, Joe Biden railed against the Republican party for failing to address issues such as decreasing real wages, job losses, and the increasing cost of gas, groceries, health care, and education. He referred to the Bush administration as “eight years of failure.”

Biden said that if he and Barack Obama are elected, they will seek to give families an extra $1,000 in tax incentives.

Obama and Biden have recently made middle class issues central to his campaign. But according to DelawareOnline, working Americans’ reactions to Biden’s appeals have been mixed. Especially in heavily Catholic areas, Biden’s pro-choice stance has cost him supporters.