Tag Archives: new york

CD-9 New York Special Election: Udpdated Results

Bookmark and ShareHere you wil find updated election results for the CD-9 special election in New York. Updates will be provided at least every 10 minutes

 Based on the districts that are reporting in and projections that indicate there is not of enough of a vote to come in from the remaining districts White House 2012 and Politics 24/7 is calling this race for Republican Bob Turner

U.S. House – District 9 – Special General

442 of 512 Precincts Reporting – 86% 

 

Bob Turner                          —   GOP                32,212  — 53%

David Weprin                     —   Dem              27,460    — 46%

Christopher Hoeppner    — SWP                     277        –  0

Bookmark and Share

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

Intentional Incompetence Disenfranchises Military Voters

Bookmark and Share    It was recently disclosed that New York State had not mailed out absentee ballots to its 320,000 military servicemen and women and overseas voters. The failure to do so puts New York in clear violation of the MOVE Act. But New York is not the only state denying our service members the right to vote. A number of Democrat leaning counties in Alabama, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Indiana, New Mexico, and Nevada have also failed to comply with the MOVE Act which requires states send out their military and overseas ballots 45 days prior to elections.

The situation reveals a number of political injustices that strike a direct blow at democracy in America and highlight the entrenched abuse and indifference that has become commonplace in politics. Disenfranchising voters is one of the most egregious acts of any democracy and it is especially damning when the very men and women who are at this very moment risking life and limb as they fight the American cause on foreign fields of battle, are the ones being effected. These are the people who are defending democracy, yet they are the same ones being denied the opportunity to participate in one of its most intrinsic rituals.

The situation becomes even more offensive once you understand that the reason for this denial of the most basic right to vote, stems from a mix of both intentional and incompetent political decisions. The total collapse of the system as it pertains to guaranteeing that our military’s vote be counted, is something that can not be ignored. In fact it is just the opposite——–it must be actively defended.

Yet states like New York, have failed to insure that its active duty military members have a say in their government.

It would be bad enough if that was just the result of incompetence. If that were the case, it would be tragic and another example of just how inefficient government is. But if incompetence on the part of local and state election agencies was the only problem here, the situation could be none the more intolerable, but at least believable. However, if incompetence alone was the reason that states failed to send military ballots out in a timely manner, why then was it not caught by the federal Department of Justice?

The DOJ has entire divisions which are charged with insuring that our laws, including election laws are adhered to. They have entire divisions which are suppose to be monitoring the process and insuring that things like the MOVE Act are being abided by.

Yet here we are, little more than 20 days away from Election Day 2010 and many states are still in violation of the MOVE Act.

Are we actually expected to believe that incompetence on every level of government ranging from county, state and federal agencies was the sole reason for the complete breakdown of the system that would allow our military to have their ballots counted? Or could it be that intentional oversights of a partisan nature chose to allow timelines and deadlines to pass so that military ballots would quietly be ignored and left out of the final certified results of some of the more close elections that are being held?

It is no secret that military ballots usually break in favor of Republicans. That factor could have figured in to the violation of the MOVE Act by several Democrat led states and counties. In a state like New York, while statewide races like those of it two senate elections and its gubernatorial race, military ballots are not likely to sway the results towards the G.O.P.. But in New York, there are several close races for the House which could be determined by a handful of votes.

The same is the case in Alabama, Arkansas, California, Indiana, New Mexico, and Nevada.  And in Connecticut and Nevada, like many House races in those states, the statewide race between Linda McMahon and Democrat Richard Blumenthal and Sharon Angle and Harry Reid is close enough to be decided by a few extra votes………maybe by military votes……..the military votes that will now not be counted in the final results.

Perhaps that is why the Obama Justice Department failed to detect any problems. Perhaps that is also why the DOJ still has not filed a suit that would help correct this clear violation of federal voting rights.

It is quite hard to believe that so many different levels of government which are controlled by Democrats all simply became incapable of doing their job at the same time, involving the same group of voters. It is also hard to believe that Democrats have not said a peep about this most horrendous violation of American citizenship.

Instead of actually insuring that government works, people like President Obama have been trying to accuse those out of government of sabotaging America. Instead of a war time President showing some anger over the nerve that there are those whom would deny our warriors their right to vote, President Obama is trying to accuse the United States Chamber of Commerce of laundering foreign money to sabotage his policies. But what of his Administrations willingness to let the mandate of the people be sabotaged by intentional incompetence? Instead of trying to heat up racial tensions and accuse Republicans of wanting African-Americans to stay home on November 2nd, why isn’t the Commander-in Chief trying to insure that his troops are guaranteed a voice in the way our nation is governed and by whom it is governed?

But the cover-up goes even deeper than the political regimes that are temporarily and very tentatively controlling government. The left leaning, drive-by media is also participating. The field of journalism, both broadcast and print journalism is one that is suppose to be noble. According to the Society of Professional Journalists;

“….public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist’s credibility.”

Yet today we are in a news cycle and mentality that is more focused on whether or not Christine O’Donnell is an actual, true to life, cauldron stirring witch, but few headlines blare the bold headlines which contain the words “Government Disenfranchises Military Voters and Does Nothing About It”.

The media is just as guilty a participant in the game of political driven, intentional incompetence as those who are responsible for it in government. The media could take a stand that states, be this done by Republicans or Democrats, it is wrong, intolerable and in need of an immediate resolution that guarantees the votes of our fighting men and women are counted before any votes are certified by any local, state or federal boards of elections.

As Americans, unless we all take a stand and do something, each one of us are just as complicit in this tragic injustice as are those responsible for allowing it to happen and those unwilling to give it the coverage and importance that it deserves. We must all send a note to our representatives and a letter-to-the-editor to our media outlets and our local weekly and major daily newspapers. We must all let it be known that we find it unforgivable that our government is willing to have our men and women take a bullet for democracy but refuses to take their votes into consideration when it concerns our democracy.

Bookmark and Share

 

<!–911c00d7c9824b11af88fd4a24d714d8–>

1 Comment

Filed under politics

Republicans Can’t Let Voters Forget the Other Issues in 2010

Bookmark and Share    The economy is not the only issue Republicans must raise as we embark on the closing weeks of the 2010 midterm elections.

While it is the most important issue of the day, we would be remiss to ignore that which will be important to people tomorrow. President Obama is aware of the many pitfalls that he and his Party have created and they hope to keep some seats by intentionally allowing issues other than the economy to stay on the back burner and out of everyone’s view.

For instance, not long ago President Obama’s Justice Department under the inept leadership of Attorney General Eric Holder, was suppose to hand down a decision on whether or not the 9/11 five which included Khalid Sheik Mohammed, would be tried in New York City courtroom, a different federal court or in a military tribunal, the forum appropriate for such a trial of enemy combatants.

For weeks the issue raged on. New Yorkers protested against the trial being held in NYC and pundits and voters clamored about in rage over how the Obama Administartion was trying to prosecute the War on Terror. But the Obama Administration decided to run out the clock at least until the halftime buzzer went off. They have refused to make a decision and instead have joyfully allowed other issues to push it off the front page until the midterm elections are over..

The same situation exists surrounding the prison at Guantanamo Bay, a prison that President Obama promised to close down three years ago.

Furthermore; as the economy continues to frustrate people and throw many into poverty, the issue of immigration is once again losing some of the punch that it packed just a few weeks ago. Aside from a last ditch effort to entice the minority community to vote for Harry Reid with his “Dream Act”, the Obama Administration itself will not act on immigration issues during these closing weeks of the 2010 elections. They hope that voter anger the Administrations handling of illegal immigration will wind down and that people will forget how Democrats gave a standing ovation to the President of Mexico when he came to America and denounced the state of Arizona during a joint session of Congress.

President Obama and Democrats hope that you will forget about Obamacare as much as possible. That is why you will see no Steven Spielberg-like commercials produced that have inspirational music playing over scenes of Democrats triumphantly passing a government takeover of healthcare and 1/6 of the economy.

Right now Democrats are facing the fact that the economy is killing them and they are doing their best to stop the hemorrhaging based on that issue alone. But they would not be able to handle other issues that they have affected over the past few years too.

They could not withstand commercials that show the people of Arizona being sued for prosecuting immigration laws, while illegal immigrants run across the American border. They would not be able to effectively respond to ads that demonstrate how terrorists are being granted rights that they do not have by risking the lives of the people whom we are suppose to be protecting.

The opinion that social, legal and moral issues should not be a part of the existing debate in the closing weeks of this campaign season is dangerous. All of these issues are intertwined with the economy and the positions of Democrats and the Administration of President Obama. They all have a common denominator, they are all examples of freedom being taken away.

So while the G.O.P. should not lose focus on the economy, they would be doing us wrong by not explaining that the economic war on free enterprise that the President’s policies have created, are just one example of the many policies which demonstrate how out of touch Democrats are.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

Normally Liberal Friendly Northeast Is Not Looking So Friendly To Democrats in 2010

Bookmark and Share    Throughout its recent history, the Northeast has not generally been friendly to Republicans but in recent years it has been downright unfriendly to them, and in Congress, Northeastern Republicans are now almost extinct.

Comprised of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and the six New England states of Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Rhode Island and Vermont, the Northeast sends a combined total of 83 representatives to Congress, or about 20% of the total representation that the country has in the House of Representatives. Of those 83, only 13 are Republican. States like Connecticut, New Hampshire, Maine, Massachusetts and Rhode Island have not even a single Republican representing them in the House.

It was not always that way.

Much more political parody did once exist, but over the course of the last two decades, all parody was lost. Coincidentally, this decrease in Republican representation correlated with a decreasing growth of population in the Northeast. The region has been losing many residents to the South and to the West and as a result, not only are their fewer Republican representatives in that corner of the country, with less population, there are fewer congressional districts as well.

Between the 1980, 1990 and 2000 censuses, states like New York lost 10 congressional districts. In 1980 they lost five seats, in 1990 they lost three more and in 2000 they lost another two. The declining growth of population took the Empire State from 39 seats in 1980 to 29 seats in 2010.

New York was the hardest hit but most all the of the Northeast lost seats. New Jersey has lost 2 seats and Pennsylvania saw a decline of 6 seats.

Now with the region already having one of its lowest ever percentages of representation in the Capitol, after the 2010 census figures come out, they are expected to lose even more representation.

But another change may also be sweeping the region.

As resentment towards the Democrat controlled government increases, the anger is even seeping into the normally liberal friendly Northeast.

In states like Pennsylvania, not only are Republicans likely to maintain their hold on the six seats they currently occupy, but they are on the verge of picking as many as six new Republican seats. While in New York, in addition to the paltry two Republican seats that are in their column now, they are looking at picking up as many as 8 new Republican seats.

But the gains are not limited to the states with the largest delegations.

Rhode Island which has two seats could see a seat change in the district currently held by Senator Ted Kennedy’s son, Patrick.

After representing his Rhode Island district, now for eight terms, Patrick Kennedy woke up one morning to a WPRI-News 12 poll that stated the results showed him to be in for the race of his life with only 35% of the voters saying that they would vote for Patrick Kennedy again.

Since then, Patrick Kennedy has announced that he is retiring and not running for a ninth term in Congress.

South of the Ocean State, Connecticut is spicing things up with more than just nutmeg as they find two seats heavily in play and likely to swing in favor of Republicans. And North of the Ocean State, the Bay State of Massachusetts which sent a wave change sweeping through the nation after Republican Scott Brown won Ted Kennedy’s old Senate seat, they may elect two new Republicans to Congress.

Of the two congressional seats occupied by Democrats in the Granite State, New Hampshire voters are looking to likely replace incumbent Democratic Carol Shea-Porter and pick up the Democrat seat that is being vacated by Congressman Paul Hodes, who is seeking the US Senate seat that is held by retiring Republican Senator Judd Gregg.

In New Jersey, one seat looks likely to change hands and go to the G.O.P. but as many as two more could follow.

The changing face of the congressional makeup of the Northeast is a powerful sign of things to come nationally. It is the strongest region for Democrats in the country but in the 2010 midterm elections it will produce some of the weakest results possible for Democrats. They are results that put the fear of God into them when they look at Republican strongholds such as the South and the West.

Add to that bad numbers and lagging prospects in the Midwest and Mid-Atlantic states and what you have is a Democrat Party that is running for cover. Unfortunately for them, it looks like the leader of their Party, President Barack Obama, won’t be able to provide that cover. In fact, it would seem that he is why they need it in the first place. Just ask Creigh Deeds of Virginia, Jon Corzine of New Jersey and Martha Coakley of Massachusetts. All of them used Barry in their campaigns but now after sound defeats at the hands of the voters, they will all probably be among the first to tell you that if you want any chance of winning, keep the President as far away as possible.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

Scandal Plagued New York Times Said To Have Expose of Scandal On Governor Paterson

Bookmark and Share    The New York Times is said to be coming out with an exclusive expose on New York Governor David Paterson. According to sources , the details are so troubling that Governor Paterson will be dropping out of the race for Governor, if not also stepping aside as Governor.

Governor Paterson has denied that he is doing either. He also claims that that wild rumors swirling around any bombshell revelations that the New York Times may have or is rumored to have on him are scurrilous and untrue.

What those revelations in this New York Times, so-called expose are, is unknown but the blogosphere has been abuzz with suggestions ranging from heavy drug abuse while serving as Governor, involvement in a prostitution ring, or funneling state money to himself, to bribing Eliot Spitzer to take him on his Lt. Governor or taking a bribe to appoint Richard Ravitch Lt. Governor.

The only thing that is known for sure is that three Times reporters are collaborating on a news story that most likely deals with Governor Paterson’s character, or lack their of.

If while describing Paterson’s character, some sordid details arise, is not clear. For all we know Kirsten Gillibrand, the obscure Congresswoman he appointed to to the US Senate, has produced a blue dress of her own that contains the personal DNA samples of Paterson.  Which would help explain why Kirtsen Gillibrand is now Senator Gillibrand. Or it could be something as  innocuous as Paterson having not returned a neighborhood friends baseball cards back when he was a little boy in Manhattan.

I will say this though. If there is something explosive here, I would look to see if President Obama and his Chief of Staff, Rham Emanuel, have their fingerprints on the origins of the story. The President has made it clear that he and the Party do not want David Paterson running for Governor. They see his earth shattering unpopularity as a very high risk for Democrats in New York during the crucial midterm elections.  Instead, they want the son of former Governor Mario Cuomo, Attorney General Andrew Cuomo to be at the top of the ticket in November, not Paterson.

But Paterson has not bowed down to President Obama’s wishes, and such an act of disrespect for the Democrat messiah is bound to have repercussions. Especially if the President’s right hand man, “Rhambo” Emanuel is involved.

Emanuel is ruthless. He has mailed dead fish to legislators who have opposed the side he is on and even been the key figure in stories told about a dinner during the Clinton campaign where Emanuel sat at the table and began repeatedly stabbing a knife into the table as he stated the names of people who were not on the side of the Clinton campaign and adding the word, “dead”, once their name was said.  ‘So -and-so, DEAD!’….. Thump. “So-and-so, DEAD,’ thump………

So digging up dirt on David Paterson and leaking it to the New York Times is not out of the realm of possibility for the President’s Chief of Staff and head “get-it-done” guy.

But all of the speculation about  the Times story is based upon innuendos and guesswork . Which when you think about it is all that the New York Times is really based on.  I mean, ever since Jayson Blair and Harold Raines, the New York Slimes has had the credibility of The National Enquirer, which by the way was the first periodical to brake the story about the John Edwards affair.

So who really knows what will be said about Paterson in the New York Slimes?  No one believes that rag anymore and no one likes David Paterson either.

Next scandal….I mean next story.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

The Week’s Best & Worst In Politics-Winners & Losers

Politics 24/7 Winners and Losers

 

LOSERS

Politics 24/7 Thumbs Down

Loser ScozzafavaDede ScozzafavaPhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucket

The NY State Assemblywoman and Republican nominee for Congress in NY’s 23rd CD, was outed as closet liberal, crashed, burned and decided to take everyone out with her.  She withdrew from the race on Saturday & endorsed the Democrat nominee over the Conservative candidate, Republican Doug Hoffman.  He lost in a narrow race and gave Nancy Pelosi an extra seat in Congress.  This woman is not just an Assemblywoman, she’s an ass& come next year, someone better get her ass out of the New York State Assembly.

 cao 

Joseph Cao  PhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucket

The freshman Republican Congressman from Louisiana was the only, “the only” Republican to support the Democrat’s big government takeover of health care and insurance.  What he saw in it which 215 other Republicans didn’t, is hard to say.  Perhaps you see something else when looking from the left.  But to look from the left you have to be on the left and that’s where this guy belongs.  If he fails to find the faults in this 2,000 page, 111 bureaucracy creating, 1.3 trillion dollar costing, freedom steeling, job costing, tax hiking, care rationing novel, than he is a Democrat or he is missing a chromosome.  Either way……….Ciao, Cao!

corzinesmall

 Governor-reject Jon CorzinePhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucket+

This man was to New Jersey, what Katrina and Governor Kathleen Blanco were to New Orleans.  This golden parachuted, wealthy Wall Street wizard purchased a senate seat only to turn around and buy the governor’s mansion so that he could use the same kind of financial expertise as Bernie Madoff.  He had nothing to run on, so he tried to turn the election into a referendum on President Obama.  But in the end, voters knew that a vote for Corzine, was like buying a ticket on the Hindenburg.  This despicably deplorable Governor should be punished, not just voted out of office.  Good riddance!!!!

creigh

Creigh DeedsPhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucket

Creigh Deeds?  More like crepe paper.  This loser was blown away like tissue paper in a wind tunnel.  His liberal ideas fell flat, his campaign never got off the ground and he cost Democrats all across Virginia dearly.  This guy wasn’t as bad a candidate as New Jersey Governor-reject, Jersey Jon,  but he practically chalked up a negative vote total.  He was an embarrassment, but most Democrats are.  Virginian’s just didn’t want to let this one do to their state, what Corzine did to New Jersey.  Still so pathetic was Deeds, that he should be forced to pay a fine to the DNC for defamation of Party.

RedWhiteBlue.gif picture by kempite

WINNERS

POLITICS 24/7 Thumbs Up

Bob McDonnell Governor-elect Bob McDonnellPhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucket

He ran a good campaign, made people believe in him, never miss-stepped and had coattails so big that he swept in a Republican Lieutenant Governor and Attorney General as well as 5 new Republicans in the Virginia House of Delegates.  If Republicans aren’t coming back, someone has to tell Bob McDonnell and the voters of Virginia that.

Governor-elect Chris Christie

Governor-elect Chris ChristiePhotobucketPhotobucket

He didn’t win so much as he didn’t lose.  42% of those who pushed the button by Christie’s name, said they really voted against Jon Corzine, not for Chris Christie.  Still, after blowing a double-digit, Bob McDonnell-like lead, he won the election and becomes the first Republican to win statewide office in New Jersey since 1997.  The people may not have thought he was the greatest thing since sliced bread, but they are behind him and hopeful that he will be able to clean up the wreckage that Democrats and Jon Corzine have strewn across the state.

President ObamaPresident ObamaPhotobucketPhotobucket

Election Day was a setback for him.  Virginia and especially New Jersey were a referendum on the President and his Party, but after Saturday night’s landmark vote for the government takeover of health insurance and care that he wants, he ends the week up.  The President put a lot into this vote.  So much political capital was spent by him, that his reputation was on the line.  Had this not passed the House, the President would have been severely wounded and Democrats would not have wanted anything to do with him as they approach the midterm elections.  He lucked out by 2 votes.  This week he must be seen as a winner.

nancyleftSpeaker Nancy PelosiPhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucket

She delivered!  It took a strong hold over her minions and on power to keep the legislative loose cannons in line.  Pelosi would have liked to get more votes and she failed to convince many who were not Democrats of the merits of her health care takeover , but she said she would get it passed and she did. Getting the vast majority of her conference to stand with her on a vote as contentious and questionable as this, took a masterful sense of politics——closed-door  politics,—- to pull this off——and Pelosi did.  She is a lying con artist but she is a good one.

Bookmark and Share

 

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

Will Eliot Spitzer Challenge Kirsten Gillibrand For New York’s Senate Seat?

Bookmark and Share  Reports claim that disgraced former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer can’t shake politics out of his corrupt blood.

spitzrGILLIBRANDSources state that Spitzer is looking at challenging interim U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand for the Democrat’s nomination for the senate seat up in November of 2010.

Failing to decide to run for that office, Spitzer is said to also be looking at a run for New York State Comptroller.

Neither would be wise but both one or the other are not out of the question.

Even though the Governor was never found guilty or charged with the misappropriation state or campaign funds, he did break a public trust. His illegal hiring of a prostitute and failure to remain faithful to his wife do indeed tarnish the trust that a public official should have from the public that they seek to lead.

Now you can claim that Spitzer has the right ideological approach to government and policies for the people, you can, I don’t, but what you can’t say is that Eliot Spitzer can be trusted.

As a former Attorney General and then Governor who was suppose to uphold and enforce the law, Spitzer broke them and acted irresponsibly. You can claim that he was never charged as such but if you do, you must then ask why was it necessary for him to resign from office?

As for the marital infidelity aspect of this story, yes, that is a personal aspect but public officials are held up to a higher standard than most people and rightly so. So under that higher standard even though Spitzer’s extramarital extracurricular activities may indeed have been private, the fact that he broke promises and failed to fulfill his commitment to his family and wife forces anyone with a scintilla of decency to ask how we can expect him to hold to his promises to the public and his commitment to them?

Personally I do not think Spitzer will challenge an incumbent Democrat for the nomination to the job that they currently hold. Kirsten Gillibrand may be a totally inconsequential figure with little power, influence and credibility but she has not had to defend herself against cheating and illegal conduct. Spitzer could try to minimize the impact of his resignation from office and try to ride a New York wave of enthusiasm for healthscare reforms and other Obama policies but so can Kirsten Gillibrand. But on top of that, President Obama will likely be supporting both senator Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand in the races.

Chuck Schumer’s regular six year term is up and Kirsten Gillibrand was appointed to fill the unexpired term of Hillary Clinton after she became Secretary of State until next years special election. The winner of that election fill out the rest of the original term that Clinton was elected to in 2006 and expires in 2012.

So President Obama is more than likely going to be on the stump for both Schumer and Gillibrand. If not he will still be in New York to support Chuck Schumer but the most Spitzer could hope for would be that President Obama remain neutral in a primary between Spitzer and Gillibrand.

In addition to that, Spitzer would at some point in time have to answer to his poor selection of a Lieutenant Governor in David Paterson.

When Spitzer resigned, his number two man took over and proceeded to destroy what stability New York had left after Spitzer‘s brief time in office. This will inevitably be another factor to hurt Spitzer on the issue of judgment. His judgment left New York in the hands of Paterson and now New Yorker’s are looking forward to ridding them of Paterson.

All of these factors do not make a compelling case for electing Eliot Spitzer to statewide office again. Besides who really wants to send Spitzer back to Washington, D.C. where he conducted the clandestine rendezvous with prostitutes that led to his resignation from Governor in the first place.

So I do not personally believe that Spitzer would actually try to run for statewide office any time soon. But what I see as logical is rarely seen rational by liberals like Spitzer. I also know that politics is like an incurable disease that once you have, you can never get rid of. That being said, Eliot Spitzer is sick and by trying to make a comeback he is simply showing all the symptoms of someone afflicted by politicitus.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

After Winning His Freedom Lockerbie Bombing Terrorist Recieves Heroes Welcome

Bookmark and Share    I still remember where I was when news of the Clipper Maid of the Seas went missing. I was heading home from work to wrap some Christmas presents and trim the tree as the holiday approached .

ter4By the time I got home, scenes of an entire town engulfed in flames with shattered homes and rubble strewn throughout.

On its way to New York’s JFK, shortly after leaving London’s Heathrow Airport, Pan Am Flight 103 was blown apart as it flew over Lockerbie Scotland. The falling, flame engulfed wreckage of the Boeing 747 fell down on and crashed into the tiny Hamlet  killing 11 of its residents. All 243 passengers that were on the plane and its 16 crew members were killed immediately.

With 270 people dead, investigators began to piece the plane together as well as the puzzle of how this happened.

Years of discovery disclosed that what brought the plane down was a wireless transmissions that triggered explosive plastics packed in luggage within a cargo hold of the plane.

In time the makers of the bomb and conspirators behind the plot were discovered but in In 2001, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi, a Libyan, was the only person actually captured and convicted for his involvement in the bombing. He received a life imprisonment sentenced for his actions and a certain degree of closure was achieved.

But yesterday, 8 years later, Al Megrahi was diagnosed with terminal prostrate cancer. For most such a diagnosis means death. But thanks to the Scottish judiciary and its representative in this case, Secretary Kenny MacAskill, for this terrorist, terminal prostrate cancer meant freedom.

In a powerful statement MacAskill stated that while the courts must dole out justice they must also demonstrate compassion and they believe that the fatal cancer that Al Megrahi has warrants their compassion.

I suggest that the families of those 270 who were killed by Al Megrahi’s actions deserved some compassion. I believe that the 270 who were killed could have used a little compassion. I also believe that justice has a role in securing the safety of all those who were fortunate to be spared an untimely death at the hands of terrorists.

Call me heartless if you wish but I am glad that fate dealt Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi prostate cancer. He deserves it. In this case, fate provided a deserving man with a debilitating disease that could provide him with the pain and suffering that a civil society has no right to apply themselves. Furthermore, I believe the legal authorities had no proper justification for altering the sentence that this terrorist deserved simply because he has become ill.

Prostrate cancer does not exonerate one of murder and it should not be a get out of jail free card.

Having been freed, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi received a heroes welcome upon his return to his Libyan homeland. Many fellow countrymen cheered his triumphant return home.

Freeing Megrahi was not compassionate. It was stupid. What is to prevent this man from repeating his dastardly deeds before his well deserved cancer renders him to weak?

Yesterday, by freeing Megrahi, justice was denied and society as whole was victimized.

We have the Scottish judicial system to thank for it because while they sought to be compassionate to one murderous terrorist they allowed themselves to be callous to the safety and security of everyone else.

Call me heartless if you want but I can only hope that, now free, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi’s cancer progresses so fast that he dies quickly because now that he is free, his death is the only way to keep us safe from him.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

For Republicans Only: Rebuilding and Reinvigorating the Nation and Party-PART II

Bookmark and Share    In the first part of this series we pointed out that the devastating losses of 2006 and 2008 and the loss of the White House produced a severe shortage of prominent Republican figures on the national stage. reprebrand1Without an individual whom can be that face and without the party putting forth cohesive policy paths, on all levels, the G.O.P. is adrift in a turbulent sea of waves created by a torrent of liberal initiatives.

This situation led us to establish a few things.

First we must get everyone on the same page and identify the problems that face the nation and their causes and then paint a picture of those problems that can be depicted in the form of a common enemy. It was determined that we could easily call that enemy “the government” and show it to be the common antagonist in our lives that all Americans can rally with Republicans against.

We also established that we need a figure who without being a threat to any other Republican’s presidential ambitions, can provide the national voice for the message that the G.O.P. needs to get out.

That person was suggested in Part I, but putting aside exactly who is best suited to be the messenger, let us focus on the message.

Under President Obama, and the Democrat led Congress, it is quite apparent that a significant portion of society is finally beginning to question just how much control they want any American federal government to have over their lives.

This thinking is not new. Such sentiments have been eroding at the popularity of both the Republican and Democrat parties. It also accounts for the fairly significant and deep rooted, loyal base, of national support that Dr. Ron Paul, a Texas congressman has. Even though Ron Paul caucuses with Republicans and runs as one, he is at heart, a libertarian and it is to the libertarian party that we have lost many Republicans.

We must get them back and we can do so if we combat the government enemy by stressing less government, less government fiats upon the people that limit their freedoms, more economic and educational opportunities and more ethical political leaders.

As previously mentioned, this approach, as it was under Ronald Reagan, describes government as the enemy……the common enemy that the G.O.P. can inspire the American people to rally behind in the fight against the enemy.

By making it clear that while we are not proposing that there be no government, we must make it understood that as government is creating more problems than it is solving and spends more than it ever takes in, it must be curbed. It must be reduced in size and scope in order to stop costing the American people more than it is worth and to be effective in those areas which it should and could be effective.

With the government now owning financial institutions, car companies and getting more and more into the business of business, people are becoming increasingly skeptical. This encroaching government control is made even more threatening with the liberal passage of such things as Cap-and-Trade and now socialized medicine. Even senior citizens are beginning to oppose the administrations attempt to control their treatment and coverage in the face of aging and declining health.

All of this will not only begin to deteriorate our national quality of life, it will also start costing more. The more control that government has, the more money it needs to implement and maintain those controls

This message must and can be conveyed in many different ways and in regards to just about every issue that comes up. But in our message, as we unite Americans in combating our “common enemy”, we must also produce alternatives. To gain the peoples trust and recapture the majority in Congress, we must offer policy alternatives that flow from principles. Those principles are the same ones found in the Constitution and they are the principles of freedom. They are also the principles which many former Republicans who are now libertarians have come to realize we are drifting away from with increased speed as everyday passes by.

We must demonstrate that the Democrats are trying to play God by creating a centralized government power structure that overrides state’s rights and individual’s rights and has a hand in every single aspect of our lives.

But before Republicans oppose any action of the President or the Democrat controlled congress, they must have their policy alternative to offer at the same time.

This must be done in such a way that everyone from Republican Governors, and state legislative leaders, members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives are all on the same page and speaking the same policy message and theme. To coordinate this, our Republican Senate Leader, Mitch McConnell and our leader of the House, Republican Minority Leader John Boehner must work together. Coordination must also be made with the state Republican organizations and the Republican Governors Association and its mayoral counterparts. The RNC would be the perfect entity for such coordination and through them the RGA, NRSC and NRCC could all be on message and pushing for the same policies. Policies that could be a part of what Republicans could call “The American Agenda”.

In shaping that American Agenda the G.O.P must also politically incorporate other objectives into it.

They must rebrand themselves and capitalize on the displeasure with Democrat overreach, and their corporate welfare and dependency politics. This can be done by showing that the new GOP is smarter, younger and more diverse and more in touch with the founding principles that have to date made America great. In addition to having that one trusted, proven and articulate face of the party conveying our national message, allow the Sarah Palins, Eric Cantors, Bobby Jindals, Aaron Schocks, Michelle Bachmann’s, Cathy McMorris Rodgers‘, John Thunes and a host of other vital young Republicans to be in the forefront. Flood the market with fresh faces that have a clean slate and smart, succinct messages. Then deliver the fresh, smart and forward looking message that will be contained in our “American Agenda”.

That agenda should contemplate the adoption of some policy risks and give thought to making some changes that demonstrate our faith in freedom, attracts young voters and changes the national conversation.

Such can be done by crafting our American Agenda with the following directions:

A). – Consider the legalization of certain drugs :

-Demonstrate that we know that freedom means people have a right to do what they like with their bodies whether it is good or bad so long as it does not take the lives of others or infringe on the rights of others.

B). – Support Domestic Unions :

-Shake everything up and get the state out of the marriage business by allowing churches, mosques and temples to marry those they choose. That is the business of their God, not the federal government.  At the same time, do not seek to have government redefine marriage.  Allow the government to preserve the religious sanctity of marriage while also preserving its constitutional civic responsibilities and perform Domestic Unions that ensure that people who unite contractually are treated equally before the law, as the Constitution requires.

Aside from “shaking things up”, we must  address healthcare and present a renewed commitment on some of those issues the party is traditionally strongest on and implement policy solutions that demonstrate our convictions to our nations Constitution.

An approach to the issue of healthcare should be one that is not based on the failed socialist policy initiatives that our nation has shunned and fought against. That would lead us to adopt some of , but not the only, following constitutionally driven approaches into our “American Agenda”.

C). – HealthCare Opportunities :

-Offer the type of “change” in healthcare that we can live with and have the federal government adjust what it can and should change on the issue. For instance (1) .-Tort Reform.   It will have a drastic effect on the rising cost of healthcare in America. (2).- Portability. The current lack of portability prevents people from keeping their coverage when they change jobs or relocate and often they can not continue with the same coverage they have throughout their lives as other changes in their lives occur. Federal action that would allow for the portability of health insurance would solve this problem and help to stabilize insurance markets, reduce costs and ultimately reduce the fluctuating number of uninsured in America.  ( 3). – Enact a policy toolbox of federal initiatives that states could include and federal funding to the states would be linked to success in reaching the goals. With federal legislative guidelines and financial support, state experimentation would produce a myriad of various solutions and in time the best solutions for each state will evolve into better and stronger healthcare availability options for all states. (4).- Incentivise good health and fitness by offering limited tax credits for gym memberships and fitness equipment.

On those issues that the G.O.P has consistently been strong on, the new “American Agenda” must reinforce those strengths with the following items:

D). – Means-test Everything :

-If any federal social programs are to exist, they must be designed to help those whom are truly needy. Government welfare programs like Medicare for the rich are unreasonable and unacceptable ands we need to make that clear. For those who will rightfully point out that constitutional grounds for any “federal social programs”, are at the very least questionable, they must understand the need for compromises that can help begin to change attitudes and minds. This is one such compromise. If we are to have such programs they must not be abused or overextended.

E). – Taxpayer Bill of Rights & Balanced Budget :

-After the current massive expansion and growth of government by Democrats, people will want government to shrink. By creating a Taxpayer Bill of Rights that will lock government revenues in at population plus inflation as measured by acceptable cost of living indices we can assure people that we will be at the very least stop government from growing. Then add limits on national debt that would force cuts and stop passing the national credit card and its bill to future generations.

F). – Environmental Security not Global Warming: “More Obvious Conservation Methods, Not More Taxes” :

-Call it environmental security and dedicate ourselves to protecting and preserving our environment by funding such things as geo-engineering and sequestration technology but not by sucking the finances of the American people during times of economic hardship for an Al Gore hypothesis that can only be conclusively proven through the evidence produced by the passage of another million years. The G.O.P. must highlight the undeniable, rational pro-environment record that we have extending as far back as Theodore Roosevelt and we must get in the forefront of the issue by demonstrating that the historic Cap-and-Trade measure adopted by liberals is more than irrational, it is dangerous, ineffective and another example of overreaching control that taxes us on air while destroying the long-term health of our economy and individual’s economic prosperity.

G). – Enforce Our Fundamental Belief In National Sovereignty and Freedom :

-The administrations “globalization” policy is a threat to us on many levels. It puts our security, sovereignty, economy and national heritage at risk. We must therefore (1). – Implement an Open Arms-Secure Borders Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill that welcomes and protects legal immigrants, secures our borders and eliminates the tolerance for illegal immigrants who weigh heavily on our law enforcement capabilities, emergency services and economic prosperity. (2). – Declare our united support for an English First, Not English Only Bill. (3).- Make it clear that our government will not excuse, or make excuses for, those enemies of freedom who hinder progress in areas of our interests or seek to inflict harm on us or our allies. The electorate must be clear on the fact that Republicans do not buy in to the Democrat approach to foreign policy which leads us to believe that Americans should feel guilty for defending our nation, the cause of freedom or our national sovereignty, heritage or interests. (4).- Seek to curtail the use of Eminent Domain abuses by eliminating federal funding for any state or municipal projects that use eminent domain to acquire land.  It must be made clear that the constitutional right to property cannot be abrdged.

H). – Energy Independence :

-The government must take advantage of all available sound domestic energy sources while promoting the independent study of advanced uses for clean, renewable energy technologies.

I). – Reform How Government Does Business And Limit Election Spending

-Demonstrate that we not only acknowledge the political culture of corruption and shady tactics but that we stand against it with reforms to prevent it. (1).- Eliminate the public financing option for federal elections. Make it clear that we do not want taxpayers spending money for politicians to lie us in attempt to get our vote. (2.) – At the same time, place a spending limit on all elections for all federal offices. (3.)- Adopt the Enumerated Powers Act which forces all legislative initiatives and federal spending to be supported by the clause in the Constitution that proves it to be a proper measure for the federal government to undertake. (4.) – Pass a bill drafting amendment that prohibits spending measures and regulations that are unrelated to that bill from being tacked on to it.

The Republican Party needs to rebuild itself with an agenda that includes of all the above points.

If it can get everyone on the same page, rebrand itself with fresh faces and trustworthy policy directions and a unified message in 2010 then they can at the very least make inroads to a strong eventual comeback.

With the right people, policies and message we can demonstrate that by trying to be like European nations with unfunded liabilities and the bureaucratization of everything we may actually become like them and spend decades enduring 10 percent unemployment rates and trying to maintain our national identity. We must use our policies and messages to capitalize on the dissatisfaction that Democrats are creating and demonstrate that raising taxes and spending other people’s money is not the best way for our country to go.

Now is the time for us to offer up a second revolution that is made up with ideas that puts an end to bureaucratic governmental licentiousness and unleash entrepreneurship all while offering leadership with a view towards freedom, pragmatism and common sense, all of which the left has abandoned.

But as is the case with any good strategy, its success lies in its implementation and the methods and tactics needed to see it through. In the next part of this series we will address those plans and reveal the logistics needed to grow the seeds of a political revolution to restore freedom to the freest people the world has ever known.

Bookmark and Share

Click the image below to read Part I of this plan

Click the image above to read the first part of For Republicans Only 

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

For Republicans Only: A plan for rebuilding and reinvigorating a down and out party.

Bookmark and Share     It may seem a shame or insincere to have to be political and develop political strategies to get anything done in American politics. But when you plunge into the sea of politics you better be willing to swim. This does not mean that repboatayou can’t be sincere about the issues and their effects on the American people but it does mean that if your gonna swim with the sharks you’d be wise to put on your flippers instead of your running shoes. And that is what this article deals with. It is meant to discuss the political reality behind the Republican Party’s ability to get back into the game and the tools and the political strategies it must utilize to lead again.

As we look ahead you do not have to be a rocket scientist to see that the G.O.P. cannot afford a third consecutive election cycle where they lose another 20 or more seats in congress or any more governorships or state legislative chambers. To do so in 2010 will be lethal.

That is when the census takes place and redistricting begins. By losing more congressional seats we will be making it that much harder to reach a majority in 2012. And to lose any more sway in the states will mean that Democrats will have the opportunity to gerrymander Republicans into minority status for a decade or more.

So Republicans can’t wait for the presidential election of 2012 to help them increase their numbers. They must make their gains now and 2010.

In 2009 it looks like Republicans will do well and pick up Governors in New Jersey and Virginia. But for 2010, the G.O.P. needs to get on message and into gear now.

But how do we expect to make a significant run towards majority status when we will be needing it most in 2010?

Sadly, I do not see signs of a national Republican strategy and message shaping up. After supporting Ken Blackwell for

Mike Steele

Mike Steele

 RNC Chairman, I am not privy to the leaderships plans but from the outside I see no movement in the direction that we must take.

We could just sit back and allow the Democrats to get comfortable. That is how the G.O.P. lost control of things in the first place. After the first four years in control of both congress and the White House, complacency and the lack of a need to get the power that they had, allowed many to stop keeping their noses clean and to cease going that extra mile to make our case.

The same fate will eventually come of the current liberal ruling regime in Washington, D.C..

To a degree, Democrats understand this and that is why they are rushing , at a breakneck pace, to consolidate their power immediately by entrenching some of the most expansive and extensive socialized programs we have ever seen into government. They want to do so before the tide turns on them.

But to regain control of congress essentially by default will not make for a meaningful reason for Republicans to be in control or for an enduring leadership role that will last for any significant length of time.

So what are Republicans to do?

For that answer we should look back to a similar time. A time when Republicans were down and out. It was 1980 and much like now, we had a President who on the national stage spoke softly and carried a very small stick. He was a President who also saw government as the solution to all our problems but had policies which essentially drained every dime out of the American economy and made it so that the government and its people could not afford to do anything about anything.

To counter the Democrats and the “days of malaise” that they had us in, the G.O.P. revamped their image in the eyes of the people and became the innovative and anti-establishment, anti-government party. And they did so by presenting easily understood alternative solutions to those being bandied about by the left. They were also able to focus a spotlight on a common enemy that most Americans related to. This common enemy became something to rally against with Republicans.

Common enemies are a very powerful source of unity and support.

President George H.W. Bush spent the first four and a half years of his eight years in office riding a wave of support because terrorists proved themselves to be an undeniably severe threat to Americans and therefore a common enemy to rally against. This was not some political creation. It was a national reality and while terrorists still remain a collective concern, the lack of thousands of Americans falling victim to them again all at once, has made them a less powerful rallying cry these days but hopefully not any less of a concern.

arepleader10In the 80’s, the Reagan Revolution successfully united a majority of Americans by condensing all the problems that we were facing into a different enemy. Reagan successfully defined government as the enemy. And who was in total control of government? The Democrats.

This theme, this rallying cry, allowed Americans to see that government was not the solution, it was the problem. Over time, the approach increased Republican numbers at every level. From city councils, to state legislatures and governors mansions, slowly but surely, Republicans increased in numbers until a clear majority of state houses and state executive offices were dominated by Republican majorities.

But this message was not just meant for the purpose of having majority control. It was also meant to make a beneficial difference. It was meant to use that power to reduce the size and scope of the government enemy. To reduce government’s tax burden on the people. To eliminate the barriers to economic growth, job opportunities and entrepreneurial expansion. It was also used to rebuild our military capabilities and restore America’s role on the international stage. Defeating the communist enemy was another reason.

With Republican control came the change America needed and that is exactly what the G.O.P. must demonstrate to Americans again. We must convince them that we are currently headed down a road that our nation once ran away from. The road that was plotted for our nation under Jimmy Carter whose increased regulations, increased taxation and government interference created both a deficit of personal economic empowerment and of national morale.

That same Carter-like approach to our federal government is taking place today under President Obama. And at a time when we are again experiencing tough economic times, the liberal tax and spend approach is again making things tougher for all of us.

This case must be made to the people but it cannot be effectively made with an algebraic equation or Ross Perot bar graph. It must be made through a concise, everyday translation that everyone can relate to.

In 1980, during one presidential debate, Ronald Reagan discussed the historic and disastrous inflation rate that the Carter administration brought to bear on us. He spoke of a little girl who when shopping with her mother saw a doll that she fell in love with and desperately wanted. She pleaded with her mother to buy it for her but her mother told her that she had to earn it and with her allowance she must save for it. The former Governor and soon to be President continued to explain that the little girl saved her money until finally she had enough to buy it. But when she went back to the store, the price had increased and she did not have enough money after all. So, disappointed, she went back home hoping to save enough money to buy it the following week. When that next week came, she went back to the store with enough to cover the new purchase price only to discover that the price of that same doll went up again. Reagan described how this disappointing cycle repeated itself for a month and he further explained that this was the effect of inflation and the misery index which was created during the Carter years.

He stated that this was the result of the economic condition that we got ourselves into under the Carter administration and that as hard as we tried to keep our heads above water, the rushing tide of rising costs was a never ending cycle that kept on putting everything out of our reach and like that little girl whose so desired doll was always out of reach because of inflation, so too was the American dream becoming out of reach for all individual Americans.

Reagan helped people to relate to our troubles by encapsulating all of our nation’s problems down to the face of an innocent little girl. And in doing so he made Americans believe that he understood them and their problems.

It allowed him to capture the hearts, minds and votes of the American people.

This is the approach that we again need. Republicans must reconnect and demonstrate that they relate to those not in the political class.

But who is to be the messenger and where are the innovative approaches to come from?

Eric Cantor

Eric Cantor

In looking for such a person we can easily see that the House of Representatives is hardly a place where such a face of national stature can be easily be created. The few promising figures in congress who have the innovative minds and anti-establishment mentality that we need must rise to a higher level of prominence before they have a realistic shot at being the right national messenger. Congressmen like Eric Cantor of Ohio, Mike Pence of Indiana and Paul Ryan of Wisconsin are perfect examples of the type of capable, competent leaders we need. But until they are in a position of greater power and prominence like that of a Governor or Senator, there is little chance for them to command the amount of attention that they need to effectively and properly deliver a nationally captivating message

Mike Pence

Mike Pence

For Cantor, Ryan and Pence, the G.O.P. would be wise to start making room for them as Senators or Governors in the coming years. But that still wont fill the void we have right now.

In looking at the United States Senate, prospects there are thin.

Of the forty Republicans remaining, few have the persona, gravitas and ability to capture the nation’s imagination and trust. McCain is over and was over even before he ran for President. The Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell, lacks any significant attraction in speech or persona and ideas.

Judd Gregg

Judd Gregg

Among the most promising, somewhat conservative figures, whose personalities and abilities can fit the bill, are possibly Bob Corker of Tennessee but more likely Judd Gregg of New Hampshire and John Thune of South Dakota. Both of these men are consistently strong, sound voices that could emerge as potential standard bearers in 2012 and they could start carrying the banner now by coalescing the party together under the type of “get government out the way” policy alternatives that we could make a message out of.

Gregg though seems always prepared to hang up his hat and return to a quiet life of retirement in the hills and mountains of New Hampshire.

So that leaves Senator John Thune.

He is young, the youngest of them all and I have always appreciated him. In his first run for the Senate, he lost by almost 500 votes that were illegally obtained for incumbent Senator Tim Johnson through a Democrat scheme that involved cash for votes and falsified registrations from two South Dakota Indian registrations.

John Thune

John Thune

But two years later, Thune made history when he defeated the Senate’s Democrat leader Tom Daschle.

Since then, Thune has been a relatively strong conservative influence and he has command of the issues, an energetic and confident charisma and clean record.

After sifting through the ranks of federal office holders, the only other obvious place to find the leader we need is from within the ranks of state leadership.

The governors.

It is here where we also find the most innovative and beneficial ideas in government.

The majority of Republican governors are handling things far better than most Democrat governors like those in New York, New Jersey, Michigan, Pennsylvania,

Donald Carcierie

Donald Carcieri

 Ohio, Washington and others. But here too, the right captivating figure is hard to find out of the 22 existing Republican governors.

Mark Sanford was a promising option. His potential was not for any command of communication skills, which he lacked, but because of actual strong policy positions and administrative qualities. That was of course all before he ran off to Argentina and abandoned his state and family for a romp with his “soul mate”.

Donald Carcieri happens to be the most unique of all governors.

He is the Republican governor of Rhode Island, one of, if not the most, liberal states in the most liberal region of the nation, New England.

What makes him most unique there is the fact that he is actually a centrist with a propensity towards conservative positions. He is often in opposition to his Democrat dominated state legislature on such things as the obligations of state workers, separation of powers and illegal immigration. He has even vetoed more than 30 pieces of legislation that they have presented to him. Yet he has still been elected twice.

But we are talking Rhode Island here and Carcieri lacks any great innovative leadership qualities and national appeal.

Haley Barbour

Haley Barbour

I would hope to see Carcieri eventually take one of the two Democrat U.S. Senate seats, like Sheldon Whitehouse’s seat, but I hardly expect him to capture the national imagination.

Of those remaining, the brightest gubernatorial lights are those of Louisiana’s Boby Jindal, Minnesota’s Tim Pawlenty, Mississippi’s Haley Barbour, and the best of all of them, Mitch Daniels of Indiana.

Daniels won reelection to a second term as governor by as much as 60% while at the same time, Indiana voters elected Barack Obama for President. In some cases he even got 20% of the African-American vote. That is an unusually high percentage for any Republican anywhere. He clearly has crossover appeal.

He can also be an inspiring speaker who conveys his message with conviction and in a way that makes people trusting of him and confident in him. As a conservative he has refrained from the wholesale selling out of the ideals that many in the G.O.P. have done over the past five or so years. Just one example can be demonstrated by the size of Indiana’s government.

While governments in most other states has increased in size, Mitch Daniels has shrunk both the size and cost of government. Currently the state has about 30,000 public employees. That is the smallest number of state employees since 1983.

Another area of distinction for him is in the area of government budgets.

When first coming into office Indiana had an $800 million deficit but Daniels turned it into a surplus of $1.3 billion. Much of this was helped by his reducing the growth rate of state spending from 5.9 percent to 2.8 percent.

The only problem is that Mitch Daniels has stated that he will not ever run for president. That puts a damper on national hopes for him but they have also been the same words uttered by a few people who are now former presidents

Bobby Jindal

Bobby Jindal

As for Jindal his record in Congress proves him to be an ideally strong conservative. On issues like abortion, immigration, national security, healthcare, energy, education and on just about every other issues he is right where the right wants a leader to be.

As Louisiana‘s Governor he has maintained his conservative credentials and even reigned in Louisiana‘s state budget problems.

On the downside, Jindal has only been in office since 2007 and during that time, his first, and to date, only appearance on the national stage was a response to President Obama’s State of the Union. In it, Governor Jindal put forward the right message but its delivery fell flat and received rapid fire shots aimed at claiming he was done.

Such is not the case but even Bobby Jindal has admitted that he is a little green and needs more seasoning.

That leaves Minnesota’s Tim Pawlenty and Mississippi’s Haley Barbour open for discussion.

Tim Paelenty

Tim Paelenty

Both of these men have produced for their states and both of them are more qualified than President Obama was when he was elected President of the United States.

In Pawlenty we have a strong messenger and practitioner of what he himself has termed, Sam’s Club Republicanism, a combination of social conservatism with working family economic appeal.

He has governed well, put spending under control and geared state government more towards that which it should be dealing with such as responsible infrastructure planning, maintenance and construction.

If Pawlenty can raise money and attract some of the top tier consultants which Mitt Romney has already attracted to his camp. And if he can raise enough money to insure that his campaign for the presidential nomination is not under funded, thaen Pawlenty’s record, populist approach and appeal could be quite successful. But to get to that point, he should really start reaching for more national exposure now.

He should start interpreting his alternative policies to the Obama administration and allow himself to become the natural face of the G.O.P.. In him is the ability to not only shape the message that we as a party need to get out but he also has the ability to shape the policies that we can center that message around. If Tim Pawlenty were to take the lead now on issues like healthcare, taxes, the bailout, energy and job growth, many others will line up behind him as they begin to see that Pawlenty is the figure who can part the seas for the rest of them.

The same applies to Haley Barbour of Mississippi.

He has a folksy, “get’er done” way about himself and an appealing record of accomplishment for his state on budgetary control.

Before, during and after the ravaging of the Gulf Coast by Hurricane Katrina, Barbour effectively prepared his state for it and efficiently dealt with its aftermath. Louisiana was the only state to be hit as hard or harder by Hurricane Katrina and in Louisiana’s case it was prepared for and handled so horrifically that its Governor, Kathleen Blanco was practically forced out of office and ultimately rejected even for consideration to a second term in office.

Both Pawlenty and Barbour have the perfect opportunity to step up and become the leader and messenger that we need. Both of them have the unique ability to convincingly demonstrate to Americans that with the right policy direction, rather than being in our way, government can get out of our way and be an effective tool for insuring opportunity, independence and an enduring quality of life with economic freedom and growth.

Mitch Daniels has the ability to do so too and probably better than any of them………….if he wanted to.

Jeb Bush

Jeb Bush

Of course three, now former governor’s have this same ability and opportunity. Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney and dare I say it, Jeb Bush of Florida.

Jeb has put off any attempts for the White House for now. After two Bush’s in the Oval Office over the course of sixteen years, the obvious notion that the nation is Bushed out is a pretty safe bet.

As the most conservative member of the Bush family to have served in office, Jeb has been a truly effective leader and one that Floridians would have never let go if they had the chance to reelect.

Palin has promise but after resigning from office early she also now has problems. None of which can’t be overcome. Her chances to be the national face and voice of the party is fifty-fifty, much like her standing among Americans. They either love her or hate her.

Sarah Palin

Sarah Palin

Now out of office, Palin must walk a very careful line that seeks to diffuse those that hate her and broaden the numbers of those who love her. She will also have to make sure that she is taken seriously at all times. There will be no room for her to flub on any issue and while using her appealing folksy ways, she must convey a command of the issues and demonstrate a breadth of knowledge and competence that can in no way be denied by anyone who hears her. If she can deliver her small government, Washington outsider, equal opportunity, freedom based policy messages, she could out shop Tim Pawlenty when it comes to being a Sam’s Club Republican.

The largest elephant in the room though is Mitt Romney.

Mitt Romney

Mitt Romney

He is definitely running for President and he is by all measures the current frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012.

In addition to being a successful businessman in his own right, Romney is also a managerial genius. He took the once derailed, scandal ridden, over budget and chaotic build up of the Salt Lake City Winter Olympics and turned it into a smooth running, ethical and profitable display of organizational perfection.

Beyond that credit is Romney’s term as Governor in a liberal state that is called home by such liberal giants as Michael Dukakis, John Kerry, Barney Frank and Ted Kennedy. The liberal bastion of Massachusetts is no place for a conservative Republican to sprout out from but Romney played politics and outmaneuvered his Democrat opponent.

However; in doing so Mitt created a few problems.

A now long past conversion from pro-abortion rights to pro-life has left many right-to-lifers wondering if he is sincere on the issue. Why right-to-lifers find it hard to believe that someone would agree with them after witnessing a personal family struggle with the issue, itself is hard to understand. But so be it.

On gay rights, previous statements made when Mitt ran against Ted Kennedy for the U.S. Senate and in his actions as Governor during Massachusetts first in the nation “Gay Marriage” fight have critics claiming that on that issue, Romney experienced another political conversion.

The two issues together give Romney naysayers the opportunity to call him a flip-flopper.

But that charge only adds height to Mitt’s biggest hurdle. Obamacare.

As Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney was a central figure in the creation of a state run healthcare program that made the purchase of health insurance by state residents mandatory. The concept was based on the principle that if everyone was covered, healthcare costs would be less expensive. The problem is that such a law of supply and demand doesn’t reconcile when a government bureaucracy is over seeing it.

It would be easy to suggest that Romney did the best he could with a liberal state and an overwhelmingly liberal dominated state legislature and that is true to an extent. However Mitt’s fingerprints are allover this one and to make matters worse he was the first governor to implement a plan of this type anywhere. The episode does make the case for the federal government to avoid the creation of a socialized healthcare program. It also makes a case for allowing experimentation within each individual state until an efficient model is found and emulated by all the states. But when it comes to Massachusetts, this episode proves that socialized medicine is not the way to go and for Romney the problem now is that it was his plan which demonstrated why it is not the way to go.

There are other factors involved though.

The state legislature and Romney’s successor, Governor Deval Patrick did tinker with the original program. They tinkered with it a lot and many of the healthcare reforms made in the original plan have changed from what Romney had influenced. Nevertheless the issue is Romney’s to defend against and explain. It exposes his Achilles heal in any 2012.

Romney’s best defense against possible Republican opponents who were or are governors would probably be “I tried and it failed and I learn from mistakes, whereas my fellow governors up here never even tried to make healthcare more accessible and affordable.”

This assessments of Republican leadership prospects leaves us with the following conclusion.

As it looks now, the most likely and promising of likely individuals to choose from will be a field that consists of Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin, Tim Pawlenty, Haley Barbour and John Thune.

Others will run and some from the above mentioned group may not. But if the six that I bring up were to be the field of candidates for the Republican nomination, it would indeed be a hotly contested race that will also undoubtedly inject a great many substantial policy models and directions that will help to fuel the conservative movement.

But that isn’t till 2012.

What will become of 2010?

Short of any of the possibly convincing figures discussed being ballsy enough to attempt to become our national voice right now, as it currently stands, there is no one person who can do it while also having the ability to enjoin all of the party leadership including the senate and house in a national strategy.

Newt Gingrich

Newt Gingrich

Someone needs to be able to bring all levels of leadership together and get them all on the same page to push one strategy.

It must be a strategy similar to Newt Gingrich’s “Contract With America”.

Critics can malign the “Contract With America” all they want but it worked.

After forty years in the wilderness, Newt Gingrich, along with the help of a faltering Clinton administration, brought Republicans in to the majority in the house. And the new generation that came into power with that “Contract” actually adhered to it, at least for as long as Newt Gingrich was Speaker of the House.

As for who can be both the voice of the party and the unifying force for a national Republican strategy, politics being

Mitch Daniels

Mitch Daniels

 what it is will prohibit everyone from getting behind any potential Republican candidate for President. Each camp and their supporters will not permit any one of them to get the attention and credit for bringing us back.

So this role must be played by a neutral party. It must be someone who is not going to run for President in 2012 and who will not put the momentum of the popularity that will come with this role behind any potential nominee until they have won the nomination.

This person must also have the persona we need to effectively be a persuasive point man. They must be respected with a proven record and untarnished by any of the negative stereotypes that the left can easily pin on Republicans.

All of this points to one man. One man who, if he really means what he says, fits all of the qualities that are required for becoming the coalescing figure that wont be a threat to any single Republican’s presidential ambitions or be a threat to any senate or house leaders power over their Republican conference.

That person is Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels.

If he truly has no desire to run for President, he is the person that can help Republicans deliver a national message which counters the overspending, over controlling liberal government enemy.

With him as the face of the party that delivers a Reagan-like message dealing with the Republican alternatives to the Obama-Pelosi-Reid agenda, the party can rebuild and have a shot at winning more seats instead of losing more seats in 2010.

The stars would be aligned perfectly if Republican National Chairman Mike Steele could get representatives of the Republican Governors Association and of the house and senate together and onboard, hammer out what could be generally be called “The American Agenda” and let Mitch Daniels be the national point man for it.

This would allow for the type of cohesive leadership plan that, with accurate precision, can get Republicans back on message and working together while the message is being delivered loud and clear through what would be a voice from the heartland. A governor’s voice. One with crossover appeal who has been an effective leader with a proven record, cut state budgets, reduced the size and scope of government, practiced a true commitment to both family and conservative values and whom, if he seriously will not run for President himself, is no threat to any other potential candidate. Daniels is the best man for the job and one of the only people who could do that job as well and as convincingly as him.

With whom that messenger should be established, in Part II, we will deal with exactly what that message must be and the Republican organizational plan to deliver and implement it.

Bookmark and Share

2 Comments

Filed under politics