Liberalism - Now or Never?

There is a fascinating editorial in the Wall Street Journal by Arthur C. Brooks called The Fertility Gap. The basic thrust of the piece is that conservatives have significantly more children than liberals. Here is the breakdown:

But the data on young Americans tell a different story. Simply put, liberals have a big baby problem: They're not having enough of them, they haven't for a long time, and their pool of potential new voters is suffering as a result. According to the 2004 General Social Survey, if you picked 100 unrelated politically liberal adults at random, you would find that they had, between them, 147 children. If you picked 100 conservatives, you would find 208 kids. That's a "fertility gap" of 41%.

While the liberal education establishment (elementary, secondary and college-level) works feverishly to brainwash our youth toward the progressive path, according to Brooks:

Given that about 80% of people with an identifiable party preference grow up to vote the same way as their parents, this gap translates into lots more little Republicans than little Democrats to vote in future elections. Over the past 30 years this gap has not been below 20%--explaining, to a large extent, the current ineffectiveness of liberal youth voter campaigns today.

Brooks goes on to lay out the Democrats worse nightmare by showing in vivid detail that the trend is GROWING:

Consider future presidential elections in a swing state (like Ohio), and assume that the current patterns in fertility continue. A state that was split 50-50 between left and right in 2004 will tilt right by 2012, 54% to 46%. By 2020, it will be certifiably right-wing, 59% to 41%. A state that is currently 55-45 in favor of liberals (like California) will be 54-46 in favor of conservatives by 2020--and all for no other reason than babies.

So conservatives having more kids than liberals, and that the vast majority will become conservative adults is both promising and enlightening. I would assume that these facts come as no surprise to most Democrat strategists. This would explain some strange behavior surrounding the near term elections of '06 and '08 that goes beyond Bush Derangement Syndrome.

The broken grip of liberals on the media bolstered by Talk Radio and the Internet must truly strike fear into the Democrats. Their only hope of countering these expressions of free speech is to legislate an environment where they will decline in influence. This becomes less likely if voting trends favor conservatives. In order to be in a position to create an environment that offsets the Fertility Gap, Democrats must regain power NOW. They must regain the House and at least attempt an impeachment against Bush. They must get the Fairness Doctrine reinstated to replace the current market driven basis for radio programming decisions. They must get back control of redistricting so they can do what they have accused the GOP of doing (and worse). They must at all costs resist the trend of requiring voters to have a photo ID, and resist any kind of absentee ballot reform. They must above all get back the Presidency in '08 so they can get more liberal justices appointed that will continue their intrusion on the separation of powers.

The Fertility Gap is also a driving force in the liberal prevention of any meaningful immigration reform. (It does not explain why the GOP is also reluctant to enforce the borders). Illegal immigration and the subsequent free giveaways (from your checkbook and mine) are critical in the liberal plan to offset the Fertility Gap. It will help in the short term, and that may be all they need. The ultimate goal is to relinquish our sovereignty to the United Nations and submit to both the Kyoto Protocol and a global income tax. Once that is accomplished it will be too late. They will be pushing hard now and in '08 to position themselves to meet their goals. The must mitigate the Fertility Gap before '12 or it will likely be too late. It is truly NOW or NEVER.